/lit/ - Literature

>>14490373
>It's a circular argument and a cop out.

Not only is it circular, Shankara's institutionalization of Vedanta (using a Buddhist framework as you rightly state) itself decided what Upanishads are canonical. That was the entire purpose of Shankara's commentaries.

You can't prove the correctness of Shankara's commentaries of the canonical Upanishads by appealing to the fact that Shankara wrote correct commentaries of the canonical Upanishads. The Shankara spammer's devotion to his religion may be admirable from an emotional standpoint, but he mistakes it for logical proof, and when this is denied, he becomes extremely emotional.