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

[H S Chandramouli]

Namaste.

I have already said that there is difference between the pada bhashya and
vakya bhAshya. They need to be understood independently on a stand alone
basis. Not to be mixed up.

Regards

On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:36 PM Krishna Kashyap <kkashyap2011 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> the important issue in the pada bhashya is - is the upanishad complete as
> said earlier, or is there something more to be said which is connected to
> the upanishad.
> the answer given is yes the upanishad is complete.
> then how should we understand the rest of the upanishad which talks about
> tapas and other angas.?
> here is the answer by the pada bhasya kara:
>
> see details and at the end of the explanation of this sentence:
>
> उपनिषदं भो ब्रूहीत्युक्ता त उपनिषद्ब्राह्मीं वाव त उपनिषदमब्रूमेति ॥ ७ ॥
> ............
> एवमनुशिष्टः शिष्य आचार्यमुवाच — उपनिषदं रहस्यं यच्चिन्त्यं भो भगवन् ब्रूहि
> इति । ...............................................................
>
> ............ ‘मोक्षमिच्छन्सदा कर्म त्यजेदेव ससाधनम् । त्यजतैव हि
> तज्ज्ञेयं त्यक्तुः प्रत्यक्परं पदम्’ ( ? ) तस्मात्कर्मणां सहकारित्वं
> कर्मशेषापेक्षा वा न ज्ञानस्योपपद्यते । ततोऽसदेव
> सूक्तवाकानुमन्त्रणवद्यथायोगं विभाग इति । तस्मादवधारणार्थतैव
> प्रश्नप्रतिवचनस्योपपद्यते । एतावत्येवेयमुपनिषदुक्तान्यनिरपेक्षा अमृतत्वाय ॥
> this last line clearly denies jnana karma samucchaya. no karma of the form
> of tapas and so on are needed for amrita other than jnana.
> hence the ukta, abruma used as past tense makes more sense, from the pada
> bhashya kara view.
>
>
>
> *Best Regards,*
>
> *Krishna Kashyap*
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:29 PM Krishna Kashyap <kkashyap2011 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> the word abruma comes only in लङ् lakara, which is past tense. This
>> cannot be used to indicate "ï will tell it now". 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!
>>
>> *Best Regards,*
>>
>> *Krishna Kashyap*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:27 PM H S Chandramouli <
>> hschandramouli at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>