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

[Krishna Kashyap]

Thanks a lot Subbu Ji.

*Best Regards,*

*Krishna Kashyap*




On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:55 PM V Subrahmanian <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:

> https://tinyurl.com/2n4eap99  MDS Tamil   on Kena Vakya bhashyam 4.7  He
> says: abrUma is used in 'future tense'.
>
> In the Sanskrit class MDS says: छन्दसि कालानियमात् -  Even though abrUma
> is in the past tense, on this rule, it can be given the meaning of future
> tense, in a context.
>
> regards
> subbu
>
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:31 PM Krishna Kashyap via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> 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
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>