[Advaita-l] [advaitin] Paper on Kenopanishad

[V Subrahmanian]

Many thanks Chandramouli ji, for the effort in giving us a picture of Sri
SSS's views.

warm regards
vs

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 2:30 PM, H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Dear Sri Subrahmanian Ji,
>
>
>
> The book on Kenopanishad by Sri SSS can be accessed at the following link.
> << http://www.adhyatmaprakasha.org/php/bookreader/templates/
> book.php?type=kannada&book_id=090&pagenum=0102#page/7/mode/1up >>.
>
>
>
> However the book is in kannada and not many members may be able to follow
> it. Hence as desired by you I am furnishing the english translation of the
> differences between the pada bhashya and vakya bhashya as compiled by Sri
> SSS in his preface to the translation of the bhashyas.
>
>
>
> 1. Sri Bhagavatpada has not mentioned anywhere else that he has composed
> two bhashyas for this Upanishad.
>
>
>
> 2. The argumentation method employed in vAkya bhashya is unique to the
> same and does  not appear to have been employed by Sri Bhagavatpada
> anywhere else.
>
>
>
> 3. The vyakhyana on these bhashyas by Sri Anandagiri mentions that the
> vAkya bhashya was written after the Pada bhashya. However there is nothing
> in the vakya bhashya to support such a view.
>
>
>
> 4. The vAkya bhashya also includes elaboration on the meaning of  words,
> just as in the pada bhashya. Hence there does not appear to be any special
> justification for terming it as vakya bhashya.
>
>
>
> 5. There are pAtha bhedas also between the two. For example, in the mantra
> 2-1 one bhashya reads नाहम् मन्ये (nAham manye) while the other reads
> नाह मन्ये (nAha manye).
>
>
>
> 6. There are differences in the meaning given to the same words in the two
> bhashyas. For example  इषितम्, प्रेषितम्, वाचो ह वाचम्, यदस्य देवेषु,
> प्रतिबोधविदितम्, इन्द्रः (iShitam, preShitam, vAcho ha vAcham, yadasya
> deveShu, pratibodhaviditam, indraH).
>
>
>
> 7. In some instances the explanations given in the two bhashyas are
> opposite to each other. For example refer to प्रतिबोधविदितम् मतम् ,
> ब्राह्मीम् वाव उपनिषदमब्रूम (pratibodhaviditam matam , brAhmIm vAva
> upaniShadamabrUma).  In vAkya bhashya the सङ्ग्राहक वाक्य (sa~NgrAhaka
> vAkya) at the beginning of the mantras are in a unique style not seen or
> rarely seen in any of the prasthanatraya bhashyas. For example ‘श्रोत्रस्य
> श्रोत्रम्’ इत्यादिप्रतिवचनं निर्विशेषस्य निमित्तत्वार्थम् । (‘shrotrasya
> shrotram’ ityAdiprativachanaM nirvisheShasya nimittatvArtham |),  यदि
> मन्यसे सु वेदेति शिष्यबुद्धिविचालना गृहीतस्थिरतायै । (yadi manyase su
> vedeti shiShyabuddhivichAlanA gRRihItasthiratAyai |).
>
>
>
> 8.While in other bhashyas the sa~NgrAhaka vAkya are no doubt seen to have
> been elaborated upon subsequently, in this vakya bhashya the sa~NgrAhaka
> vAkya in some cases are so crisp and brief  that it is extremely
> difficult even to guess their intent without the help of the explanatory
> notes. Some examples falling into this category are कर्मानारम्भ इति चेत्,
> न (karmAnArambha iti chet, na ), अप्रतिषेधाच्च ।( apratiShedhAchcha |), न,
> अनभ्युपगमात् । (na, anabhyupagamAt |).
>
>
>
> 9.Another difficulty in accepting that the same author has written the
> vAkya bhashya after writing the pada bhashya is that in some instances what
> has been rejected in the pada bhashya has been accepted in the vAkya
> bhashya. For example the interpretation of the word प्रतिबोधविदितम्
> (pratibodhaviditam), अब्रूम (abrUma).
>
>
>
> 10. In addition some of the prayogas in the vAkya bhashya do not appear to
> be grammatically correct (no examples are given).
>
>
>
> These are what have been compiled in the preface to the work by Sri SSS.
> There could be more to be found in the body of the translation.
>
>
>
> Regards
>