PARABRAHMA SUTRAS (154-156)

154. Ubhayadhaa bhaashyaani stotraanyekadhaa daivaat.

Translation: Since, Shankara was the God in human form, His commentaries simultaneously uplifted atheists and theists by diplomatic style. The prayers composed by Shankara were meant for theists only.

Explanation: The commentaries of Shankara were meant for majority of atheists, which maintain the misunderstanding. Shankara composed several prayers on God referring to the component of the soul in Him for the sake of minority of theists. These theists were expected to view the commentaries as discussions about a specific soul or human incarnation. Thus, the commentaries are diplomatic, serving the purpose of atheists by creating misunderstanding that every soul is God and also serving the purpose of theists by specifying the soul of human incarnation only as God. Hence, the commentaries were carefully composed by Shankara, which uplifted atheists and simultaneously theists also according to the sense of their level. Since Shankara was the human form of God, such intellectual capacity was exhibited.

155. Viparitameke naanye sisapaanaat.

Translation: The theists can take the angle of atheists from the commentary but not reverse. The mistake of theists was rectified by drinking the molten led.

Explanation: When the theists also misunderstood like atheists and started thinking themselves as God, because the angle of atheists can also be taken by theists due to its attraction, Shankara had to clarify the truth. When Shankara told that He is God (Shivoham), some theists misunderstood and started telling the same. The meaning of I was taken as awareness and when Shankara told “I am God”, theists thought that since I exists in them also, they must also be God. Since king is a man, since every one is a man, hence every one must be king! This was their logic! Then Shankara swallowed the molten lead and corrected the statement by saying that He alone was God (Shivah kevaloham). From the diplomatic commentary, even though the theists can take the angle of atheists, vice-versa is impossible, because the atheists can never accept the concept of human incarnation.

156. Ekakonamaatro bhrantah stotranidarshanaat.

Translation: Shankara was misunderstood as the preacher of one angle of monism only through His commentaries. This can be disproved because the second angle of dualism was very clear through His prayers.

Explanation: Shankara is misunderstood today as the author of the commentary pertaining to atheists only and is misunderstood as the preacher of monism, which states that every soul is God. The other angle of commentary that it deals only with the case of specific soul of human incarnation was forgotten. At least, this angle was made very clear in His prayers and these prayers, which show that soul is a servant of God, are now completely neglected. If the commentary had only one angle of monism, Shankara should not have composed the prayers in which the monism is completely absent and dualism is well established. Therefore, the prayers are indication of the second angle of the diplomatic commentary.