Shankara admits multiple deities as (saguna) Brahman

Shankara admits multiple deities as (saguna) Brahman

In Kenopanishad pada bhashyam, introducing the crucial mantra 1.5, Shankara makes a purvapaksha:

 आत्मा हि नामाधिकृतः कर्मण्युपासने च संसारी कर्मोपासनं वा साधनमनुष्ठाय ब्रह्मादिदेवान्स्वर्गं वा प्राप्तुमिच्छति । तत्तस्मादन्य उपास्यो विष्णुरीश्वर इन्द्रः प्राणो वा ब्रह्म भवितुमर्हति, न त्वात्मा ; लोकप्रत्ययविरोधात् । यथान्ये तार्किका ईश्वरादन्य आत्मेत्याचक्षते, तथा कर्मिणोऽमुं यजामुं यजेत्यन्या एव देवता उपासते । तस्माद्युक्तं यद्विदितमुपास्यं तद्ब्रह्म भवेत् , ततोऽन्य उपासक इति ।

Atma being a samsari, indeed is someone who is fit to perform karma or upasana and wishes to attain to the state of gods or heaven. Therefore the upaasya is different such as Vishnu, Ishwara, Indra or Prana could be Brahman but not the Atma who is only upasaka, since holding the upasaka and upasya as non-different contradicts what practice prevails in the world. Just as others, the tarkikas hold the Atma to be different from Ishwara and just as Mimasakas also meditate/propitiate devatas by sacrifices, holding the devata to be different from the upasaka/sacrificer, that which is known as an object is upasaya can be Brahman but never the upasaka can be Brahman.

Replying to the purvapaksha the Vedantin says this mantra 1.5 of the Kenopanishat is to remove such a misconception of difference between upasaka and upasya and teaches that one should realize Brahman as oneself and not as someone else, upasya.  In the course of the discussion Shankara does not deny the idea of multiple gods such as Vishnu and Ishwara, even Prana, Indra, etc. being meditated as Brahman. For, Shankara has cited another Rg.Veda mantra in the Brihadaranyaka bhashya that also teaches that it is one principle that is spoken of as many gods, thereby endorsing just that aspect of the Purvapakshin’s proposition.

 इन्द्रं॑ मि॒त्रं वरु॑णम॒ग्निमा॑हु॒रथो॑ दि॒व्यः स सु॑प॒र्णो ग॒रुत्मा॑न् । एकं॒ सद्विप्रा॑ बहु॒धा व॑दन्त्य॒ग्निं य॒मं …ऋ. १ । १९४ । ४६) Shankara Bhagavatpada cites this mantra in the Br.Up.bhā.

Sayana says अमुमेवादित्यं एकमेव वस्तुतः सन्तं विप्राः मेधाविनः देवतातत्त्वविदः बहुधा वदन्ति । तत्तत्कार्यकारणेन इन्द्राद्यात्मानं वदन्ति । ‘एकैव वा महानात्मा देवता स सूर्य इत्याचक्षते’ इत्युक्तत्वात्।… सूर्यस्य ब्रह्मणः अनन्यत्वेन  सार्वात्म्यमुक्तं भवति ।

अत्र ये केचित् ‘अग्निः सर्वा देवताः’ इत्यादिश्रुतितः अयमेवाग्निरुत्तरे अपि ज्योतिषी इति मत्वा अग्नेरेव सार्वात्म्यप्रतिपादकः अयं मन्त्र इति वदन्ति ।

He quotes nirukta in support of agni as the subject of the mantra.

In the Kathopanishat 2.4. there is a description of Brahman variously so as to give an idea of Brahman to the seeker.  One such is:

या प्राणेन सम्भवति अदितिर्देवतामयी ।
गुहां प्रविश्य तिष्ठन्तीं या भूतेभिर्व्यजायत । एतद्वै तत् ॥ ७ ॥

किञ्च, या सर्वदेवतामयी सर्वदेवतात्मिका प्राणेन हिरण्यगर्भरूपेण परस्माद्ब्रह्मणः सम्भवति शब्दादीनामदनात् अदितिः तां पूर्ववद्गुहां प्रविश्य तिष्ठन्तीम् अदितिम् । तामेव विशिनष्टि — या भूतेभिः भूतैः समन्विता व्यजायत उत्पन्नेत्येतत् ॥

Para Brahman is called ‘Aditi’ as it is ‘Sarvadevatatmika’, through Prana, Hiranyagarbha. This description echoes the aspect of Purvapaksha that Shankara cites and does not refute in the Kena bhashya cited above. It also gels with the Rg.Veda mantra that Shankara cites and does not refute. His statement in the bhashyas of gods worshiped/meditated upon in images as Brahman also falls in line with this Vedic concept of ‘One entity spoken of as many’.    Advaita alone can truly account for such vedic passages without resorting to apologetic explanations.

Om Tat Sat