[Advaita-l] Shankara authenticates Shiva as the son of Brahma

[Venkatraghavan S]

"Please read Shankara's commentary on Brihadaranyaka upanishad, 1.4.11,
before accusing me of superimposing my so-called parochial views on
Shankara. Please do not accuse your opponents without verifying the facts.

Now, regarding your point on Kena upanishad bhashya, I find it speculative."

I did read BU 1.4.11's bhAshya but fail to see where Shankaracharya says
that Shiva is a created entity.

There he is talking about Rudra, an amsha of Lord Shiva. The amshA is
created, not the amshi. That does not mean that he holds Shiva himself to
be a created entity.

I also cannot understand how you can see the Kena bhAshya quote as
speculative. It is well known Shiva (Brahman) and Shakti (MAya) can never
be separated. शिवः शक्त्या युक्तो यदि भवति शक्तः प्रभवितुम् says AchArya in
Soundaryalahiri. When the nirguNa Brahman is associated with his mAyA
shakti he becomes the creator Ishvara.

This is metaphorically presented in the purANas as Uma occupying half of
Shiva's body, and therefore one of the epithets of Shiva is
ArdhanArIshvara. Therefore, when Shankaracharya says in Kena bhAshya is
always associated with him - उमैव नित्यमेव सर्वज्ञेनेश्वरेण सह वर्तते it is
definitive evidence that he is talking about Uma's consort, Shiva, as the
Sarvajna Ishvara.

If you still consider that speculative, then I only feel sorry for you.

I certainly do not consider you, or anyone for that matter, as an
'opponent'.

Regards,
Venkatraghavan