Sri ShankarAcharya is not Maniman - 3

In this Video, the Dvaita scholar further continues to establish that Sri Shankara's interpretation of one of the verses of the Chandogya upanishat, is morally degraded:

ಶಂಕರರ ನೈತಿಕ ಅಧಃಪಾತಕ್ಕೆ ಅವರ ಛಾಂದೋಗ್ಯಭಾಷ್ಯ ಸೂತ್ರಭಾಷ್ಯಗಳೇ ಸಾಕ್ಷಿ, ಪರಾಂಬರಿಸಿ!

Here is a high level summary of the above video:

In the Chandogya upanishat, there is a section called Vamadevya Vidya, where it is taught how meditation on God should be done when husband and wife are enjoying their union within the framework of dharma. It is also taught how a dharmic husband should never deny happiness for his wife when she approaches him. Here Sri Shankara teaches that a man should never deny happiness for any women, if she comes to him requesting for one. Vedic dos and donts or samanya dharma, like one should not unite with any women, other than his own wife, is applicable only in normal circumstances. But in special situations as taught in this vamadevya vidya, one should follow vishesha dharma and satisfy any women if she comes asking for one. This is totally Adharmic and goes against Veda, Mahabharata and other codes of conduct. This also provides support to the idea that Sri Shankara is an incarnation the demon Maniman!

In the Veda, Yama does not unite with his sister Yami, even though she openly requests Yama, to unite with her. In the Mahabharata, sage Ashtavakra also does not unite with a devata sthree, when she openly requests him.  Shankara's teaching, therefore is morally degraded and truthful people should avoid following Shankara.

In the Dvaita tradition, the meaning for this Vamadevya vidya is taught that a man should provide happiness to any women, as long as she is married to him within the framework of dharma. He should never unite with any women who is not married to him.

Advaitin's reply:

The Dvaita interpretation is only teaching the samanya dharma of providing happiness to one's own wife or wives. But the Vamadevya vidya is actually teaching vishesha or special dharma. So Sri Shankara's interpretation is still appropriate and valid. But how to justify this apparently non-vedic act of uniting and providing happiness to any women who is not one's own wife? 

It is very simple. In the spiritual sense every jiva is a women and Parameshwara or Paramatma alone is the Purusha. So if any jiva who is like a women, approaches the sadhaka or Guru with the sole intention to attain and enjoy Brahman or Ishwara, she should never be denied, such an experience. The sadhaka should do everything to unite the jiva with Parameshawara who is an embodiment of true happiness or Ananda.

The above interpretation removes all apparent "vulgarity" in Sri Shankara's Chandogya bhashya and proves Sri Shankara is not an incarnation of Maniman

Namaste

Suresh