Katha upanishhad: verse II.3.9 & 12

[Charles Wikner]

Thu, 15 May 1997, Gummuluru Murthy wrote:
> Obviously, meaning of the line 3 of this verse is most crucial and of the
> word "abhiklpto".
>
> abhiklpto = apprehended [Radhakrishnan] ?
>             well comprehended or well revealed [implied in the other
> two translations.]

It is an interesting word to follow up:

Monier-Williams' dictionary gives: being adequate to, in accordance with.

The word is derived from the dhaatu k.lp (to be well ordered or regulated,
to be well managed, bear suitable relation to, correspond to, in accord with).

Dhaatupaa.tha gives k.rpuu saamarthye (see Paa.nini 8.2.18 for vowel change)

Saamarthya: sameness of aim or object or meaning or significance, belonging
            or agreeing together, adequacy, accordance

"Sankara, in commenting on this passage, describes abhik.lpta as
abhisamarthita and abhiprakaa"sita.

> I think "well comprehended" is more appropriate. Practical Vedic
> Dictionary by Suryakanta translates it to "manifested" with reference to
> this verse.

Com-pre-hend derives from the Latin cum (with) + prae (before) + hendere
(to seize).  It has much the same meaning as your previous word "grasp".

Personally, I prefer to use `reveal', meaning `to make known, `to unveil',
`to draw back a veil', from the Latin re (back) + velum (a veil, from
velare, to veil).  [ The veil in this context being aavara.na. ]

But any word is a poor choice, as you mentioned, for the Truth is beyond
words.  (Tait. 2.4.1)

> References given by Charles give how Atman cannot be grasped [my
> understanding: by mind as we know, i.e. the mind that is subservient to
> the sense organs]. This verse [Katha u. II.3.9] says how Atman reveals to
> a maniisha [manasabhik.lpto] to a purified internally directed mind.

Not so, the references given included Mund. 3.1.8, which states:

    ... ta.m pa"syate ni.skala.m dhyaayamaana.h ||

    engaged in contemplation, one realises Him (Who is) without parts.

And Mund 3.1.9:  ... vi"suddhe vibhavatye.sa aatmaa ||

    in the purified (mind) this Atman appears.
______

To understand that these verses are all saying the same thing,
you need to appreciate that they all refer to a pure and still
mind, in other words the gu.naa.h are in perfect balance.
When the sagu.na has become Nirgu.na, there is no difference
between them.

So the Self "sees" the Self.  There is no "how"; there is no
instrument or means; quite simply, there is nothing else, no
separation, no difference.  Advaita.

When the gu.naa.h shift from their poised state of perfect balance
as it were, there is still no difference, it remains advaita:

   puur.namada.h puur.namida.m puur.naat puurnamudacyate |
   puur.nasya puur.namaadaaya puur.namevaava"si.syate   ||

   That is Perfect; this is perfect; perfect arises from Perfect.
   Having taken perfect from Perfect, it still remains Perfect.

                           [ Invocation to II"sa Upani.sat ]

But when there is identification with some limited manifestation
of the gu.naa.h, then discomfort surely arises.  This is ignorance:
ignoring what you truly are - anantam (limitless).  In this state
of bondage there is nothing that you can directly do to bring the
gu.naa.h into balance; what is required is to stop doing (i.e. stop
identifying with the limited - that is the aavara.na "sakti).  This
is not easy: it requires tapas (austerity), brahmacarya (abstinence),
"sraddhaa (faith), and vidyaa (knowledge) according to Pra"sna 1.10.
Or as you expressed it, a purified internally directed mind.

And good luck with that!

Regards, Charles.