In several places in the Bhashya, Shankaracharya has stated that Brahman is not in the gamut of being ‘named.’:

शब्दप्रवृत्तिहेतुजात्यादिधर्मरहितत्वात् । (The factors for ‘name’ being genus, attribute, action and connection are all absent in Brahman.)

न तज्जात्यादिविशेषणवद्ब्रह्म (Brahman is free of attributes based on genus, etc.)

जात्यादिरहितत्वाच्छान्तम् अत एव अद्वयं च तदित्यर्थः ॥ (Because Brahman is devoid of jAti (genus), etc. it is tranquil.)

In the Bh.Gita Bhashya 13.12 Shankara says:

‘गौः’ ‘अश्वः’ इति वा जातितः, ‘पचति’ ‘पठति’ इति वा क्रियातः, ‘शुक्लः’ ‘कृष्णः’ इति वा गुणतः, ‘धनी’ ‘गोमान्’ इति वा सम्बन्धतः । न तु ब्रह्म जातिमत् , अतः न सदादिशब्दवाच्यम् । नापि गुणवत् , येन गुणशब्देन उच्येत, निर्गुणत्वात् । नापि क्रियाशब्दवाच्यं निष्क्रियत्वात् ‘निष्कलं निष्क्रियं शान्तम्’ (श्वे. उ. ६ । १९) इति श्रुतेः । न च सम्बन्धी, एकत्वात् । अद्वयत्वात् अविषयत्वात् आत्मत्वाच्च न केनचित् शब्देन उच्यते इति युक्तम् ; ‘यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते’ (तै. उ. २ । ९ । १) इत्यादिश्रुतिभिश्च ॥ १२ ॥

Translation:
For, every word used for expressing an object, when heard by listeners, makes them understand its meaning through the comprehension of its significance with the help of genus, action, ality and relation; not in any other way, because that is not a matter of experience. To illustrate this: a cow, or a horse, etc. (is comprehended) through genus; cooking or reading, through action; white or black, through quality; a rich person or an owner of cows, through relation. But Brahman does not belong to any genus. Hence it is not expressible by words like ‘being’ etc.; neither is It possessed of any qualitity with the help of which It could be expressed through qualifying words, for It is free from qualities; nor can It be expressed by a word implying action, It being free from actions-which accords with the Upanisadic text, ‘Partless, actionless, calm’ (Sv. 6.19). Nor has It any relation, since It is one, non-dual, not an object of the senses, and It is the Self. Therefore it is logical that It cannot be expressed by any word. And this follows from such Upanishadic texts as, ‘From which, words turn back’ (Tai. 2.4.1), etc. Therefore it is logical that It cannot be expressed by any word. And this follows from such Upanishadic texts as, ‘From which, words turn back’ (Tai. 2.4.1), etc.

Kenopanishat: न तत्र वाग्गच्छति (Words do not contact Brahman)

Taittiriyopanishat यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते…. ‘From which, words turn back’

श्रीमद्भागवतपुराणम्/स्कन्धः ९/अध्यायः ८
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/iye

प्रशान्तमायागुणकर्मलिंगं
अनामरूपं सदसद्विमुक्तम् । (Name, forms are not natural to Brahman)

ज्ञानोपदेशाय गृहीतदेहं
नमामहे त्वां पुरुषं पुराणम् ॥ २५ ॥

Verses that say Brahman is ‘un-namable – avachyam’

Brahmanda Purana:

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/8aq
यद्गत्वा न निवर्त्तन्ते क्षेत्रज्ञं तु निरञ्जनम् ।
अवाच्यं तदनाख्यानादग्राह्यं वादहेतुभिः ॥ ३,३.१०४ ॥

Brahman is not ‘named’ because it is beyond words.
Vayupurana also has this verse.

वराहोपनिषत् Varahopanishat:

वापि त्रिविधोच्चारणेन तु । तैलधारामिवच्छिन्नं दीर्घघण्टानिनादवत् ॥ ६९॥ अवाच्यं प्रणवस्याग्रं यस्तं वेद स वेदवित् । हस्वं बिन्दुगतं दैर्घ्यं ब्रह्मरन्ध्रगतं…

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/wje
Muktikopanishad: No name, gotra for Brahman:

अशब्दमस्पर्शमरूपमव्ययं
तथाऽरसं नित्यमगन्धवच्च यत् ।
अनामगोत्रं मम रूपमीदृशं
भजस्व नित्यं पवनात्मजार्तिहन् ॥ ७२॥

जयाख्यसंहिता/पटलः ५ Jayakhya samhita (Pancharatra):

अनुभूतं न भूयस्त्वं मया वस्तुं हि शक्ष्य(1)से। [ब्रह्ममो दुरवबोधत्वम्] 5-6 अवाच्ये वर्तते कुत्र वाग् वै संवेदनं विना ।। 23 ।। (1. क्यते C. L.) षण्णां यद्वद्रसानां..

मैत्रायण्युपनिषत् – Maitrayanyupanishad:

1. अथ यत्र द्वैतीभूतं विज्ञानं तत्र हि शृणोति पश्यति जिघ्रति रसयति चैव स्पर्शयति सर्वमात्मा जानीतेतियत्राद्वैतीभूतं विज्ञानं कार्यकारणकर्मनिर्मुक्तं निर्वचनमनौपम्यं निरुपाख्यं किं तदवाच्यम् ॥ ७
2. अवाच्योर्ध्वा वा गतिः

Narada puranam:

नारदपुराणम्- पूर्वार्धः/अध्यायः ३५
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4vn

जानन्तिरुवाच
सत्यं सत्यं महाभाग चित्तं भ्रान्तं सुनिश्चितम्
अविद्यानिलयं चित्तं कथं सद्भावमेष्यति ६१
ममेति गदितं यत्तु तदपि भ्रान्तिरिष्यते
अहङ्कारो मनोधर्म आत्मनो न हि पण्डित ६२
पुनश्च कोऽहंमित्युक्तं वेदमाले त्वया तु यत्
मम जात्यादिशून्यस्य कथं नाम करोम्यहम् ६३

(Brahman has no genus, attribute, action, relationship)

अनौपम्यस्वभावस्य निर्गुणस्य परात्मनः
निरूपस्याप्रमेस्य कथं नाम करोम्यहम् ६४
परं ज्योतिस्स्वरूपस्य परिपूर्णाव्ययात्मनः
अविच्छिन्नस्वभावस्य कथ्यते च कथं क्रिया ६५
स्वप्रकाशात्मनो विप्र नित्यस्य परमात्मनः
अनन्तस्य क्रिया चैव कथं जन्म च कथ्यते ६६
ज्ञानैकवेद्यमजरं परं ब्रह्म सनातनम्
परिपूर्णं परानन्दं तस्मान्नान्यदिह द्विज ६७
तत्त्वमस्यादिवाक्येभ्यो ज्ञानं मोक्षस्य साधनम्
ज्ञाने त्वनाहते सिद्धे सर्वं ब्रह्ममयं भवेत् ६८
एवं प्रबोधितस्तेन वेदमालिर्मुनीश्वर
मुमोद पश्यन्नात्मानमात्मन्येवाच्युतं प्रभुम् ६९
उपाधिरहितं ब्रह्म स्वप्रकाशं निरञ्जनम्
अहमेवेति निश्चित्य परां शान्तिमवाप्तवान् ७०
Brahman is to be realized as free of upadhis, is self-luminous, taintless. This is my true nature.)

इति श्रीबृहन्नारदीयपुराणे पूर्वभागे प्रथमपादे ज्ञाननिरूपणं नाम पञ्चत्रिंशोऽध्यायः३५

Thus Atman/Brahman is said to be beyond sound/word as it is devoid of genus, etc. in the Upanishadic lore, Puranas, etc.

Om Tat Sat

Read full Kannada Article on ‘Who is the Buddhist in disguise?’

https://tinyurl.com/3xurx5pe

Shri Krishna, while preaching the spiritual philosophy to Uddhava, says, ‘Variety is an illusion, from which the aparokshajnani comes out’:

श्रीमद्भागवतपुराणम्/स्कन्धः ११/अध्यायः ११

https://sa.wikisource.org/s/apk

वैशारद्येक्षयासङ्ग शितया छिन्नसंशयः।

प्रतिबुद्ध इव स्वप्नान्नानात्वाद्विनिवर्तते १२।

Just as the one who wakes up from a dream realizes that the objects of his dream are not true, the Self-realized man is freed from the illusion of multiplicity, difference, by Aparokshajnana.

एवं जिज्ञासयापोह्य नानात्वभ्रममात्मनि।

उपारमेत विरजं मनो मय्यर्प्य सर्वगे २१।

Diversity is a self-conceived illusion. Sridhara Swamy’s commentary says that the bodies and the outer world are all adhyasa, a superimposition.

The verses also are a paraphrasing of the famous Upanishadic statement: neha nAnAsti kinchana.. नेह नानास्ति किंचन॥ मृत्योः स मृत्युमाप्नोति य इह नानेव पश्यति॥ ..( Brihadaranyaka and kaThopanishad), nAtra kAchana bhidA asti नात्र काचन भिदाऽस्ति नैवात्र काचन भिदाऽस्त्यत्र भिदामिव मन्यमानः….. (Nrsimha tapaniya upanishad).

Om Tat Sat

Access the article here:

https://adbhutam.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/advaita-and-buddhism-sss.pdf

Click to access advaita-bauddha-discussion.pdf

Here is the link to access the article:

https://adbhutam.files.wordpress.com/2020/10/mbtn-verse-vimarsha-r.pdf

https://sanskritdocuments.org/doc_upanishhat/rudrahridaya.html

The popular Mundaka mantra is available in the above Upanishad, teaching the Advaitic identity:

द्वौ सुपर्णौ शरीरेऽस्मिञ्जीवेशाख्यौ सह स्थितौ ।

तयोर्जीवः फलं भुङ्क्ते कर्मणो न महेश्वरः ॥ ४१॥

केवलं साक्षिरूपेण विना भोगं महेश्वरः ।

प्रकाशते स्वयं भेदः कल्पितो मायया तयोः ॥ ४२॥

There are two birds residing together in this body called Jiva and Isvara; of them Jiva eats the fruits of action and Mahesvara does not. He remains there shining Himself, as a mere witness without tasting the fruit of it.

घटाकाशमठाकाशौ यथाकाशप्रभेदतः ।

कल्पितौ, परमौ जीवशिवरूपेण कल्पितौ ॥ ४३॥

The difference between them is attributed by Maya. Like the difference …. the space of the pot and room, is the difference attributed between Siva and Jiva.

तत्त्वतश्च शिवः साक्षाच्चिज्जीवश्च स्वतः सदा ।

चिच्चिदाकारतो भिन्ना न भिन्ना चित्त्वहानितः ॥ ४४॥

In reality Siva is chit (consciousness itself) and Jiva also is always chit. The chit does not differ in its nature. If it does so, it will lose the state of its own nature.

चितश्चिन्न चिदाकाराद्भिद्यते जडरूपतः ।

भिद्यते चेज्जडो भेदश्चिदेका सर्वदा खलु ॥ ४५॥

The chit will not differ in itself as it does not belong to the nature of inert matter (Jada). If it does so, then the difference will be of jada. The chit always is one. (In other words this implies that difference can be there only in jaDa, inert and not in Chit, Consciousness)

तर्कतश्च प्रमाणाच्च चिदेकत्वव्यवस्थितेः ।

चिदेकत्वपरिज्ञाने न शोचति न मुह्यति ॥ ४६॥

Thus the oneness of the chit is established by reasoning and by authorities (Pramanas). By realizing the oneness of the chit, one does not underdo misery nor bewilderment.

अद्वैतं परमानन्दं शिवं याति तु कैवलम् ॥ ४७॥

He ‘attains” Siva-hood, Who is without duality and who is the Supreme bliss itself.

अधिष्ठानं समस्तस्य जगतः सत्यचिद्घनम् ।

अहमस्मीति निश्चित्य वीतशोको भवेन्मुनिः ॥ ४८॥

By realizing Him, who is the support of all the worlds, Who is the sat and chit itself, ‘I am He’, the sage becomes freed from Samsara.

Read more at: https://shaivam.org/scripture/English-Translation/rudra-hridayopanishat/#gsc.tab=0

Read Upanishad Brahma Yogin’s commentary on this entire Upanishad here: https://cloudup.com/cQOnSmANOjO

~ रुद्रहृदयोपनिषत्

Om Tat Sat

Click to access eng-version-objection-and-reply-to-dashashloki-7.pdf

The above is a six page article in English on the topic: Shankaracharya’s Dashashloki verse 7. In Advaita since bondage and liberation are not absolutely real, the Guru, the disciple, the Scripture and the Teaching are all admitted only in the relative realm of samsara.  Objection to such a stand of Advaita is replied with the support of Shruti and other sources.

Here is the Sanskrit version of the article: 

Click to access dashashloki-7-obj-and-reply.pdf

Here is a 7 page article in English on the ‘Sadhana’ of Maharajshri Swami Akhandananda Saraswati of Vrindavana penned by Sri G.Kameshwar

Swami Akhandananda Saraswati (1911-1987) was a venerated sage of Vrindavan. Known fondly as Maharajshri, he was a shrotriya-brahmanishtta, a sadguru, an Advaitin and a Krishna devotee non-pareil.

Download link:

Click to access swami-akhandananda-saraswati-vision-of-god-pdf.pdf

The Shvetashvatara Upanishad says:

‘यो ब्रह्माणं विदधाति पूर्वं यो वै वेदांश्च प्रहिणोति तस्मै । तꣳ ह देवमात्मबुद्धिप्रकाशं मुमुक्षुर्वै शरणमहं प्रपद्ये’ (श्वे. उ. ६ । १८)

I, a Vedantic aspirant, take refuge in that Rudra who in the yore created Brahma and blessed him with the Veda.

This mantra is annotated, upbruhmana, in many puranas.  

Here are the names of Rudra, the creator of Brahma – Shiva, Hara, Parameshwara, Mahadeva, Pashupati, Maheshwara etc. along with the Rudra name.

Rudra who gave birth to Brahma and preached the Vedas to him-  This is said twice in the same chapter.

शिवपुराणम्/संहिता ७ (वायवीयसंहिता)/पूर्व भागः/अध्यायः ०६
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/hyj

ब्रह्माणं विदधे पूर्वं वेदांश्चोपादिशत्स्वयम् ॥ ७.१,६.६८
यो देवस्तमहं बुद्ध्वा स्वात्मबुद्धिप्रसादतः ॥ ७.१,६.६८
हिरण्यगर्भं देवानां प्रथमं जनयेदयम् ॥ ७.१,६.१७

Another chapter from the Shiva Purana:

शिवपुराणम्/संहिता ७ (वायवीयसंहिता)/पूर्व भागः/अध्यायः ०३
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/hyg

In which the Atharva Shikha Upanishad and Shwe.Upa are annotated – Upabrimhana: Samba, Isha, Rudra, Maheshwar, Shambhu, Pashupati, Shiva etc. There are many names of Shiva here:

These three lines are the translation of the Shwe. Up. :

Brahma himself says: Shambhu is the goal of all aspirants of liberation, mumukshus. He had previously created me, the son, and bestowed knowledge on me. By his offering (of that knowledge) I have attained the status  of Prajapati (creator):

सर्वैर्मुमुक्षुभिर्ध्येयश्शंभुराकाशमध्यगः ॥ ७.१,३.४
यो ऽग्रे मां विदधे पुत्रं ज्ञानं च प्रहिणोति मे ॥ ७.१,३.५
तत्प्रसादान्मयालब्धं प्राजापत्यमिदं पदम् ॥ ७.१,३.५

This Upanishad is also annotated in the Linga Purana:

लिङ्गपुराणम् – उत्तरभागः/अध्यायः १८
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/4k3

ब्रह्मणो जनकं विष्णोर्वह्नेर्वायोः सदाशिवम्।।
ध्यात्वाग्निना च शोध्यांगं विशोध्य च पृथक्पृथक्।। १८.४२ ।

This Sadashiva is the creator of Brahma, Vishnu, Agni and Vayu.

उमापतिर्विरूपाक्षो विश्वसृग्विश्ववाहनः।।
ब्रह्माणं विदधे योऽसौ पुत्रमग्रे सनातनम्।। १८.३२ ।।

Umapati, Virupaksha, the creator of the world, created Brahman and imparted self-revealing knowledge:

प्रहिणोति स्म तस्यैव ज्ञानमात्मप्रकाशकम्।।
तमेकं पुरुषं रुद्रं पुरुहुतं पुरुष्टुतम्।। १८.३३ ।।

This is the annotation, upabrumhana of the Atharva Shira Upanishad: In it there is the Vedic Pasupata Vrata.

Here is a collection of the Shvetashvatara Upanishad and other Upanishads:

एतद्व्रतं पाशुपतं चरिष्यामि समासतः।।
अग्निमाधाय विधिवदृग्यजुः सामसंभवैः।। १८.४५ ।।
जुहुयाद्विरजोविद्वान् विरजाश्च भविष्यति।।
वायवः शुध्यंतां वाङ्मनश्चरणादयः।। १८.४७ ।।

In a chapter of the Skanda Purana:

Here the words for Shiva are Sharva, Parameshwara. He is the father and the son is Brahma:

स्कन्दपुराणम्/खण्डः ८ (अम्बिकाखण्डः)/०१
https://sa.wikisource.org/s/fde

पुरा ब्रह्मा प्रजा७ त्वष्टुरण्डेस्मिन्८ संप्रसूयत ।
सोज्ञानात् पितरं ब्रह्मा न वेद तमसावृतः । ।६ । ।
अहमेक९ इति ज्ञात्वा सर्व्वांल्लोकानवैक्षत१० ।
न चापश्यत तत्रान्यं११ तपोयोगबलान्वितः । ।७। ।
पुत्रपुत्रेति चा१२प्युक्तो१३ ब्रह्मा शर्वेण धीमता ।
प्रणतः१४ प्राञ्जलिर्भूत्वा तमेव शरणं गतः ।।८ । ।
स दत्त्वा ब्रह्मणे शम्भुः स्रष्टृत्वं१५ ज्ञानसंहितम् ।
विभुत्वं१६ चैव लोकानामन्तर्धात्१७ परमेश्वरः । ।९ । ।
तदेषोपनिषत् प्रोक्ता मया व्यास सनातनी१८ ।
यां श्रुत्वा योगिनो ध्यानात् प्रपद्यन्ते१९ महेश्वरम् । ।8.3.१ ० । ।
यो ब्रह्माणं विदधे पुत्रमग्रे ज्ञानञ्च यः प्रहिणोति स्म२० तस्मै । (Here is the rephrasing of the Shwe.upa. sentence)
तमात्मस्थं येनु२२ पश्यन्ति धीरास्तेषां शान्तिः शाश्वती२३ नेतरेषाम्। ।१ १ । ।

Thus Veda Vyasa has clearly stated the particular topic of the Shvetashvatara Upanishad in four chapters of three Puranas (Shiva, Linga, Skanda). By doing this Veda Vyasa has confirmed to us the identity of Rudra in these three Puranas.

Thus there is absolutely no room for any doubt at all about the true identity of the ‘Rudra’ who is the progenitor of Brahma as stated in the Shvetashvatara Upanishad.

Only those who hold the Shvetashvatara Upanishad as ‘tamasa’ will admit that the above three puranas are also tamasic. But Vedantins alone do not subscribe to the idea of tamasa Upanishads/Veda.  It is only considering these Upanishads to be conveying a ‘wrong’ message, some have attempted to ‘convert’ the Rudra/Shambhu to Vishnu, to avert the danger to their doctrine from the Veda itself. 

Om