[Advaita-l] Rudra creates Brahmā and Viṣṇu

[D Gayatri]

> There is no rule that an entire text should be quoted by an Acharya to have
> validity. Even if a text were not at all quoted, still that text does not
> lose validity.

By that argument, verses supporting Samkhya or Pashupata or
Pancharatra philosophy in the Mahabharata, will also have perfect
validity.


> The portion from the Harivamsha was highlighted solely to show that the
> bloggers who claimed that 'only Vishnu is allowed by shastras to be the
> upasya for vaidikas.'  You failed to note this.

And you claim that only Shiva is fit for worship. So much for hari-hara aikya!


>
> All the above were also to counter that vaishnava view which has no other
> agenda than to show Shiva as inferior and Shankara as vaishnava. One can see
> their urgency to compose 'vaishnava' commentaries on Rudram, etc

I believe the vaishnava commentaries on Rudram were composed by
Acharyas of Ramanuja tradition. I dont think the bloggers composed
them. You must have noticed that the bloggers follow the sampradaya of
Ramanuja. So there is nothing wrong with them presenting their own
tradition.


There is
> also the campaign of those bloggers to malign the Acharyas of the Advaita
> parampara by showing them as not followers of Shankara. You have also lent
> support to them in other forums before by calling the Kanchi Acharya as
> 'pseudo advaitin'. Why should advaitins take it lying down? To show that all
> acharyas from
> Veda Vyasa onwards are harihara abheda vadins would be the best way to free
> oneself from sectarianism.


As far as I know, Sri SSS also makes the same claim, in a different
context, that many later advaitins have not followed the original
teachings of Shankara. There is nothing new in such sort of claims.
Nor am I asking you to take it lying down. You are welcome to write
whatever you want. But then, if your intentions are beyond question,
so should my intentions be. You see the point? It is called fairness.
And as you must be very well knowing, the blog itself initially
started as a reaction to another Shaiva blog, which has your full
approval. If you have shown your full approval to the Shaiva blog
which makes ridiculous claims on Vishnu, then you must be prepared to
face the Vaishnava blog too.