Namaste,
Not to enter into philosophical debate, but just to clear confusion.
Adi Sankara didnt called Siva as demi-God, or as inferior to viShNu. In siShNu sahasranAma bhASya, 114 rudra, Adi Sankara quotes Siva purANa and says that Siva and rudra are one and the same. Here Adi SAnkara clearly says that 'the supreme cause of all bhagavAn Siva is called as rudra'. The quote from Siva purANa includes the word 'paramakAraNa'
Adi Sankara cites as many as 12 purANA-s including 3 up-purANa-s in his viShNu sahasranAma. This including Saiva purANa-s or say all sAttvika, rAjasika, tAmasika purANa-s. None of the advaita AcArya-s actually consider any purANa-s as sAttvika, etc. They equally revere all purANa-s.
Madhusudan Saraswati wrote 2 commentaries on Siva Mahimna stotra, one praising Siva and other praising kruShNa. madhusudan sarasvatI in while concluding his Gita commentary 'GudhArtha dipikA' on chapter 15 also confirms non-difference between Siva and viShNu.
shaivaH saurashcha gaaNeshaa vaishhNavaaH shaktipUjakaaH |
bhavanti yanmayaaH sarve sohamasmi paraH shivaH ||
I am that supreme Auspicious One in whom get identified all the followers of Shiva, of the Sun, of Ganesha, of Vishnu, and the worshippers of Shakti.
Appaya dikshita, a Saiva advaitin also wrote hymns praising viShNu.
vidyAraNya svAmI in his pancadaSI mentions many forms of God like Siva, viShNu, gaNeSa, etc and says that they are all same. (I am quting form memory, but it is mostly in chapter 7, verses 100-200)
vidyAraNya svAmI has also written a commentary on sUta samhitA, a part of skanda purANa, where it says that all forms are taken by Lord Siva only.
smArta dharma worships 5 forms of god - gaNeSa, Siva, Sakti, viShNu and sUrya as one and the same. Each family member can can pick any one form as main, and keep it in center. That deity is ISTa devatA for that particular person.
From prakaraNa grantha-s it can be concluded that viShNu was the ISTa devatA of Adi Sankara, but from his independent hymns, it can be understood that Adi Sankara didnt considered difference in any form of God. Atleast not between Siva and viShNu
daxiNAmUrty stotra (commented by sUreSavarAcArya 'mAnasollAsa'
Siva pancAxara stotra (commentary by padmapAdAcArya)
In Sankara digvijay, 6.41 Adi SAnkara also praises Lord Siva
दास्स्तेऽहं देहदृष्ट्याऽस्मि शम्भो जातस्तेंऽशो जीवदृष्ट्या त्रिदृष्टे ।
सर्वस्याऽऽत्मन्नात्मदृष्ट्या त्वमेवेत्येवं में धीर्निश्चिता सर्वशास्त्रेः ॥ ६ - ४१ ॥
O Shambho ! from SarIra-bhava i.e. from standpoint of physical body, I am your servant, in that manner, O Trilochana (Lord Shiva) ! from Jiva-bhava I am your part (Ansh) and you are my anshi (whole). O the Atman of the whole jagat (Universe) ! from Atma-bhava, I am not different from you (abhinna, a-bhinna, bhinna = different). In this way, my intellect decides (is determined), in view of all shastras
In simple words:
1. From Sarira Bhava, I am servant of Lord Shiva
2. From Jiva-Bhava, I am part (ansh) and you are whole (anshi)
3. From Atma Bhava, I am not different from you.
---
Arjuna was instructed by kruShNa to meditate on Lord Siva to obtain mahApASupAtastra. After having darshan (divine vision) of Lord Siva, Arjuna in estacy exclaimed -
namah SivAya vishnurUpAya viShNave SivarUpiNe, MBh, vanaparva, 3.39.76
Salutations to Lord Siva who is in the form of Lord Vishnu and Lord Vishnu who is in the form of Siva.
Srila Prabhupada accepts all 108 upanishads. Skanda purana also mentions Siva-viShNu abheda.
---
Even if we do not accept both as same i.e. viShNu appearing as Siva, still we can still respect each other.
I am not in favour of saying someone emanating from someone and the later is a part of the former. I would think that someone appears as someone else. Everything can happen by the Lords Lila
---
The ill informed attempt to make Adi Sankara by separating him from his disciples and then to question his works was mostly done by westerner. Most westerners were paid members of British East India Co, who worked throughout their life to demean our shastras. I seriously doubt whether they even meditated according to sanAtan dharma or not. The name includes Max Muller too. He had two faces. He was paid pound 5 per sheet by British East India Co. Later on this line of thinking was carried forward by other linguists, oncologists and fact finders.
Please do not refer to their conclusions.
OM
Bookmarks