[Advaita-l] 'VinAyaka' in ShAnkara GItA BhAShyam

[Satish Arigela]

>For the portion प्रेतान् भूतगणांश्चान्ये Shankara has commented: सप्तमातृकादीन् 
>..

Is it not clear then? Do you have a separate list of separate sapta mAtR^ika-s 
then other brAhmI etc?

>One  can easily see the consistency of Lord Krishna and Shankara in the  usage 
>of the words in the verse >and in the commentary.  In 9.25 Shankara  has 
>commented: विनायकमातृगणचतुर्भगिन्यादीनि  यान्ति >भूतेज्या भूतानां पूजकाः |

>So, Shankara is undoubtedly referring to certain ugra devatA-s.  

Undoubtedly? I do not see the word ugra devatAH mentioned anywhere above. Hence 
I said this is a jump

Do you actually intend to say a certain devata by name ugra or devata-s who 
nature is ugra?

>Clearly 17.4 is talking about people of tAmasa orientation and the type  of 
>devatA-s they choose to >propitiate.  Nowhere is the prasiddha  VinAyaka, 
>ambAsuta, is shown / popular as a tAmasa devatA.  >And we have  seen the name of 
>a ugra devatA 'vinAyakA' in the smRti.  
>

In the baudhAyanokta vinAyaka kalpaH we have the following mantra-s: There for 
bali the following mantra-s are used. vighnAya svAhA, vinAyakAya svAhA, 
vIrAya..shUrAya.. ugrAya, bhImAya, hastimukhAya, varadAya svAhA

As we can see the vinAyaka/gaNesha is also called ugra He is clearly hastimukha 
like the popular gaNapati.

The vinAyaka referred to in this kalpa is also called as bhUpati, bhuvanapati, 
bhUtAnAM pati vinAyaka.

>Thus it turns out that there is absolutely no basis for your view:  'Shankara 
>was hostile to (the worship of) >popular deities like  vinAyaka'.  
>

I am afraid it is the other way round. Your view it turns out is the one which 
has no basis when all the pieces are put together
Regards