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

[V Subrahmanian]

Here are some more examples for the rule from Shankara himself stating it
explicitly and others too:

कठोपनिषद्भाष्यम्द्वितीयोऽध्यायःचतुर्थी वल्लीमन्त्र १ - भाष्यम्
………; इत्यात्मशब्दव्युत्पत्तिस्मरणात् । तं प्रत्यगात्मानं स्वस्वभावम् ऐक्षत्
अपश्यत् पश्यतीत्यर्थः, छन्दसि कालानियमात् ।

न्यायनिर्णयव्याख्या
………व्यवहारभूमावद्धा साक्षाद्वेद । को वा तत्प्रावोचत । छान्दसो दैर्घ्यलोपः
छन्दसि कालानियमात् । ब्रह्म प्रब्रूयादित्यर्थः ।

न्यायनिर्णयव्याख्या
………मनआदिव्यापारेषु संयोजनान्यथानुपपत्त्याऽपि न क्रियाशेषत्वं
मनश्चिदादीनामित्यर्थः । तेऽग्नयो विदुषा मनसैवाधीयन्ताधियन्ते छन्दसि
कालानियमात् ।

वेदान्तकल्पतरुः
………मृत्योर्वचनम् । कः अद्धा साक्षाद्वेद ब्रह्म को वा प्रावोचत् छन्दसि
कालानियमात् प्रब्रूयादित्यर्थः ।

The past tense in the Upanishad is explained to mean future tense. Or past
tense in the Upanishad is explained in the present tense.

Thanks Krishna Kashyap for raising the question as it helped us discover
this.

Regards
subbu

On Tue, 28 Jan 2025, 10:03 pm V Subrahmanian, <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 6:39 PM Krishna Kashyap via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
>> Thanks, Sudanshu Ji. for the clarification. this panini ashtadhyayi info
>> is
>> useful. I apologize for bringing this up. i use HH SSS to indicate HH
>> Sachidanandendra Swami.
>>
>> //Either there seems to be a mistake in the usage by Vedas, if you take
>> this vakya bhashya view as valid, or the vakya bhashya is itself
>> questionable!//
>>
>> Definitely, I don't have so much knowledge to make any bold statement.
>> this
>> is just a doubt in my mind. I am raising it without fear of a powerful
>> counter-argument so that I can learn.
>>
>> *However, there were other reasons for such a view.* I am not a grammar
>> expert, Veda, or Upanishad expert. I am a student sincerely trying to
>> understand. I have studied almost every sentence of Shankara Bhashya from
>> HH SSS book and I understand some superficial Sanskrit. I have studied
>> some
>> Upanishad bhashyas of Shankaracharya. the style of vakya bhashya seems
>> different. Further see below:
>>
>> there is an interesting note from HH SSS: in his view, this sentence of
>> the
>> vakya bhasya seems inappropriate (as per HH SSS) see below:
>>
>> •। ईश्वरनिमित्ते विजये स्वसामर्थ्यनिमित्तोऽस्माकमेवायं विजयोऽस्माकमेवायं
>> महिमेत्यात्मनो जयादिश्रेयोनिमित्तं सर्वात्मानमात्मस्थं
>> सर्वकल्याणास्पदमीश्वरमेवात्मत्वेनाबुद्ध्वा पिण्डमात्राभिमानाः सन्तो यं
>> मिथ्याप्रत्ययं चक्रुः तस्य पिण्डमात्रविषयत्वेन
>> मिथ्याप्रत्ययत्वात्सर्वात्मेश्वरयाथात्म्यावबोधेन हातव्यताख्यापनार्थः
>> तद्धैषामित्याद्याख्यायिकाम्नायः
>>
>> footnote in HH SSS book•This indicates that agni, vayu, Indra, who are
>> exalted, had dehatma-bhrama to the extent that they did not believe in an
>> atman other than the body पिण्डमात्राभिमानाः सन्तो - this seems
>> inappropriate!!- HH SSS
>>
>
> Here, in the Ishavasya Bhashyam, Shankara says that from a particular
> standpoint, even Deva-s etc. are asuras:
>
> अथेदानीमविद्वन्निन्दार्थोऽयं मन्त्र आरभ्यते —
>
> असुर्या नाम ते लोका अन्धेन तमसा वृताः ।
> तांस्ते प्रेत्याभिगच्छन्ति ये के चात्महनो जनाः ॥ ३ ॥
> *असुर्याः परमात्मभावमद्वयमपेक्ष्य देवादयोऽप्यसुराः । *तेषां च स्वभूता
> लोका असुर्याः नाम । नामशब्दोऽनर्थको निपातः । ते लोकाः कर्मफलानि लोक्यन्ते
> दृश्यन्ते भुज्यन्त इति जन्मानि । अन्धेन अदर्शनात्मकेनाज्ञानेन तमसा आवृताः
> आच्छादिताः । तान् स्थावरान्तान् , प्रेत्य त्यक्त्वेमं देहम् अभिगच्छन्ति
> यथाकर्म यथाश्रुतम् । ये के च आत्महनः आत्मानं घ्नन्तीत्यात्महनः । के ? ते
> जनाः येऽविद्वांसः । कथं ते आत्मानं नित्यं हिंसन्ति ? अविद्यादोषेण
> विद्यमानस्यात्मनस्तिरस्करणात् । विद्यमानस्यात्मनो यत्कार्यं
> फलमजरामरत्वादिसंवेदनादिलक्षणम् , तत् हतस्येव तिरोभूतं भवतीति प्राकृता
> अविद्वांसो जना आत्महन इत्युच्यन्ते । तेन ह्यात्महननदोषेण संसरन्ति ते ॥
> He contrasts those in ignorance with the ones that have transcended
> ignorance by knowing the Atman whose nature is stated in the next mantra:
> यस्यात्मनो हननादविद्वांसः संसरन्ति, तद्विपर्ययेण विद्वांसो
> मुच्यन्तेऽनात्महनः, तत्कीदृशमात्मतत्त्वमित्युच्यते —
>
> अनेजदेकं मनसो जवीयो नैनद्देवा आप्नुवन्पूर्वमर्षत् ।
> तद्धावतोऽन्यानत्येति तिष्ठ—त्तस्मिन्नपो मातरिश्वा दधाति ॥ ४ ॥
>
> Also how about the 'Da Da Da' teaching in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad,
> that Brahma/Prajapati gave out to the Asuras, Devas and humans:
>
> For Asuras - Dayadhvam, be compassionate.  For Devas - Daamyata,  regulate
> your sense-gratification. For humans: Engage in charity.
>
> Here the Upanishad itself implies that Devas who are much above humans,
> are steeped in sense pleasures. Naturally this implies body-attachment. So,
> Shankara's Kena bhashya observation is not out of place. In fact the
> Bh.Gita 16 chapter Aasuri sampat verses can be applied to the condition of
> the Deva-s here.
>
> warm regards
> subbu
>
>
>> Please note: In another Upanishad when Virochana, asura, and Indra went to
>> learn under Prajapati, Virochana had dehatma bhrama, while Indra returned
>> to learn 3 or 4 times and finally found the true answer. He did not have
>> dehatma bhrama.
>> stating that Indra had dehatma bhrama in kena upanishad seems awkward.
>>
>> on the contrary, pada bhasya seems non commital:
>> see kena upanishad pada bhashya which simply indicates *मिथ्याभिमान and
>> nothing more serious than that:*
>> *सा ब्रह्मेति होवाच ह किल ब्रह्मणः वै ईश्वरस्यैव विजये — ईश्वरेणैव जिता
>> असुराः । यूयं तत्र निमित्तमात्रम् । तस्यैव विजये — यूयं महीयध्वं महिमानं
>> प्राप्नुथ । एतदिति क्रियाविशेषणार्थम् । मिथ्याभिमानस्तु युष्माकम् —
>> अस्माकमेवायं विजयोऽस्माकमेवायं महिमेति । ततः तस्मादुमावाक्यात् ह एव
>> विदाञ्चकार ब्रह्मेति इन्द्रः ; अवधारणात् ततो हैव इति, न स्वातन्त्र्येण ॥*
>>
>> *this seems appropriate respect for Indra who saw Uma and had a
>> conversation!*
>> *अथवा उमैव हिमवतो दुहिता हैमवती नित्यमेव सर्वज्ञेनेश्वरेण सह वर्तत इति
>> ज्ञातुं समर्थेति कृत्वा तामुपजगाम.*
>> how many of us can meet face to face Venerable "Parvati"? hence we have to
>> accept Indra as spiritually superior to at least me! if not others.
>>
>> *I am open to being corrected. Please bash me up!!! I will learn more! How
>> can I have ego, since I spent 50 years in search of money and a good life
>> without being dedicated to Upanishads?*
>> Incidentally, i liked the ishwara siddhi arguments in vakya bhashya which
>> is very unique, since nowhere in any other part of shankara-bhashya of
>> dasha upanishads or sutras or gita, is such a long argument for ïshwara
>> siddhi given.
>>
>>
>> *Best Regards,*
>>
>> *Krishna Kashyap*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>