[Advaita-l] Kena Upanishad Shankara bhashya- pada, vakya, sanskrit question. (अभ्रूम)

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste.

Laws of grammar are not flouted. The word abrUma itself is not employed to
represent future tense. What is intended is that when the AchArya says
*that* has so far not been told, what he intends to say is that he will
presently be telling that. Hence the word abrUma should be understood to
mean that the AchArya is saying *will tell it now*. Hence the sentence
should be completed by adding *will tell now*.

Regards

On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:18 PM Krishna Kashyap <kkashyap2011 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Namaste,
> My question is "Is this a Vedic usage, where one is allowed to flout the
> laws of grammar?". why would Vedas use past tense to mean future tense
> vakshyamaha?
>
> *Best Regards,*
>
> *Krishna Kashyap*
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:11 PM H S Chandramouli <hschandramouli at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Namaste.
>>
>> When the Acharya says that what has been told thus far is such and such.
>> But we have not covered such and such, the intended meaning is that this
>> will follow now. Hence **abrUma is to be understood as vakshyAmah**.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 4:57 PM H S Chandramouli <
>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Namaste.
>>>
>>> Bhashya itself states as under
>>>
>>> // अब्रूम वक्ष्याम इत्यर्थः //.
>>> abrUma is to be understood as vakshyAmah. vakshyAmah is in present or
>>> future tense.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 4:24 PM Krishna Kashyap via Advaita-l <
>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My follow-up question is:
>>>>
>>>> in vakya bhashya this is given:
>>>>
>>>> तस्मान्न भूताभिप्रायोऽब्रूमेत्ययं शब्दः ॥
>>>>
>>>> is it allowed in Sanskrit to state that a particular word is in the past
>>>> tense, however, it should be taken as future tense?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Best Regards,*
>>>>
>>>> *Krishna Kashyap*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 9:34 AM Krishna Kashyap <kkashyap2011 at gmail.com
>>>> >
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > I have a Sanskrit question. This comes up in Kena Upanishad. The word
>>>> “ ”
>>>> > is used both in past tense and future tense in two bhashyas of kena
>>>> > upanishad “pada bhashya” and "vakya bhashya". It is generally
>>>> accepted that
>>>> > both these bhashyas were authored by Adi Shankaracharya.
>>>> >
>>>> > Here is the pada bhashya portion:
>>>> >
>>>> > •उपनिषदं भो ब्रूहीत्युक्ता त उपनिषद्ब्राह्मीं वाव त उपनिषदमब्रूमेति ॥
>>>> ७ ॥
>>>> > pada bhashya
>>>> >
>>>> > •उपनिषदं रहस्यं यच्चिन्त्यं भो भगवन् ब्रूहि इति । एवमुक्तवति शिष्ये
>>>> > आहाचार्यः — उक्ता अभिहिता ते तव उपनिषत् । का पुनः सेत्याह — ब्राह्मीं
>>>> > ब्रह्मणः परमात्मन इयं ब्राह्मी ताम् , परमात्मविषयत्वादतीतविज्ञानस्य,
>>>> वाव एव
>>>> > ते उपनिषदमब्रूमेति उक्तामेव
>>>> परमात्मविषयामुपनिषदमब्रूमेत्यवधारयत्युत्तरार्थम्
>>>> > ।
>>>> >
>>>> > Here is the vakya bhashya portion:
>>>> >
>>>> > •उपनिषदं भो ब्रूहीत्युक्ता त उपनिषद्ब्राह्मीं वाव त उपनिषदमब्रूमेति ॥
>>>> ७ ॥
>>>> >
>>>> > •उपनिषदं भो ब्रूहीत्युक्तायामुपनिषदि शिष्येणोक्त आचार्य आह — उक्ता
>>>> कथिता
>>>> > ते तुभ्यम् उपनिषदात्मोपासनम् । अधुना ब्राह्मीं वाव ते तुभ्यं ब्रह्मणो
>>>> > ब्राह्मणजातेः उपनिषदम् अब्रूम वक्ष्याम इत्यर्थः । वक्ष्यति हि ।
>>>> ब्राह्मी
>>>> > नोक्ता । उक्ता त्वात्मोपनिषत् । तस्मान्न भूताभिप्रायोऽब्रूमेत्ययं
>>>> शब्दः ॥
>>>> > What is the recension of this अभ्रूम pada in present and future
>>>> tenses?
>>>> > Is this a vaidika pada which has the same form in these 2 sentences?
>>>> > thanks to Advaitasharada.net for text of these bhashyas!
>>>> > *Best Regards,*
>>>> >
>>>> > *Krishna Kashyap*
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>>>
>>>> For assistance, contact:
>>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>>>
>>>