Kena-1-2-śrotrasya

English Translation Of Sri Shankaracharya’s Commentary By Swami Gambirananda

।।1.1.2।। Srotrasya srotram, the Ear of the ear. The srotram is that by which one hears, the instrument for the hearing of sound, the organ of hearing which reveals words. He about whom you put the question, ‘Who is the effulgent being who directs the eyes and the ears?’-is the Ear of the ear.

Objection: Is it not incongruous to answer, ‘He is the Ear of the ear’, when the reply should have been, ‘So-and-so, with such and such attributes, directs the ears etc.’?

Answer: This is no fault, because His distinction cannot be ascertained otherwise. If the director of the ears etc. could be known as possessed of His own activity, independently of the activities of the ears etc. just as it is in the case of the wielder of sickle etc., then this answer would be incongruous. But as a matter of fact, no director of ears etc., possessed of his own activity, is apprehended here like a mower possessed of a sickle etc. But He can be known (as existing unmixed with the ear etc.) from the logical necessity that such activities as deliberation, volition, determination, of those very composite things, viz the ear etc., must be meant for some one,s benefit. Just as in the case of a house, so also (in this case) there does exist some one, standing outside the conglomeration of ears etc., by whose necessity is impelled the group of ears etc. Thus from the fact that composite things exist for the need of some one else, a director of the ears etc. can be known (i.e., inferred). [‘Ears etc. are subsidiary to some one different from themselves, for they are composite things, like a house etc.-by this inference the master of the ears etc. can be known. If he, too, should be a part of the combination, then he will be insentient like the house etc. Then we shall have to imagine another master for him, and so also a third for this. Thus to avoid an infinite regress, a Consciousness that is not a part of the combination is apprehended.’-A.G.] Hence the reply, ‘He is the Ear of the ear’, etc. is ite appropriate.

Objection: What, again, can there be in the significance here of the expression, ‘The Ear of the ear’ etc? For just as a light has no need for another light, so in this context the ear can have no need for another ear.

Answer: There is no such fault. The significance here of the expression is this: The ear, to wit, is seen to be able to reveal its own object. This ability of the ear to reveal its own object is possible only when the eternal non-composite, all-pervading light of the Self is there, but not otherwise. Hence the expression, ‘Ear of the ear’ etc. is justifiable. To the same effect there are other Vedic texts: ‘It is through the light of the Self that he sits’ (Br. IV. iii. 6), ‘Through His light all this shines’ (Ka. II. ii. 15; Sv. VI. 14; Mu. II. ii. 10), ‘Kindled by which light the sun shines’ (Tai. B. III. xii. 9.7), etc. And in the Gita, ‘(Know that light to be mine), which is in the sun and which illumines the whole universe’ (XV. 12), and ‘(As the one sun illumines the whole universe), so does He who reside in the body, O descendant of Bharata, illumine the whole body’ (XIII. 33). So also in the Katha Upanisad, ‘the eternal among the ephemeral, the the consciousness among all that is conscious’ (II. ii. 13). It is a commonly accepted belief that the ears etc. constitute the Self of all, and that these are conscious. This is being refuted here. There does exist something which is known to the intellect of the men of realization, which dwells in the inmost recesses of all, which is changeless, undecaying, immortal, fearless, and unborn, and which is the Ear etc., of even the ear etc., i.e. the source of their capacity to act. Thus the answer and significance of the words can certainly be justified.

Similarly, manasah, of the mind, of the internal organ; (He is) the manah, Mind; because the internal organ is not able to perform its own functions-thinking, determination, etc.-unless it is illumined by the light of consciousness. Therefore He is the Mind of the mind, too. Here the mind and the intellect are jointly mentioned by the word manah (mind). Yad vaco ha vacam: the word yat, used in the sense of because, is connected with all such words as srotra (ear) in this way: because He is the Ear of the ear, because He is the Mind of the mind, and so on. The objective case in vaca ha vacam is to be changed into the nominative in consonance with the expression pranasya pranah (the Life of life).

Objection: In conformity with vaco ha vacam, why should not the conversion be into the objective case thus; pranasya pranam?

Answer: No, for it is reasonable to conform to the majority. So in consonance with the two words, (sah and pranah), in sah u pranasya pranah (where they are in the nominative case), the implication of the word vacam is vak, for thus is the reasonable conformity with the majority maintained. Moreover, a thing asked about should properly be denoted in the first (nominative) case. He, of whom you ask, and who is the Life of prana-of that praticular function called life, by Him, indeed, is ensured the capacity of the vital force to discharge its functions of sustaining life, and this is because there can be no sustaining of life by anything that is not presided over by the Self, in accordance with the Vedic texts: ‘Who, indeed, will inhale, and who will exhale, if this Bliss (Brahman) be not there in the supreme Space (within the heart)?’ (Tai. II. vii. 1), ‘Who pushes the prana upward and impels the apana inward’ (Ka. II. ii. 3), etc. Here, too, it will be said, ‘That which man does not smell with prana (the organ of smell), but that by which prana is implelled, know that to be Brahman’ (1.9).

Objection: Is it not proper to understand prana as the sense of smelling (and not life) [The word prana is used in different senses in different contexts. It may mean vital force, exhaling, sense of smell, etc.] in a context which deals with the senses-ears etc.?

Answer: This is true. But the text considers that by the mention of prana (meaning the vital force) the sense of smell is referred to ipso facto. The meaning intended in the context in this: That for whose purpose occurs the activity of all the (motor and sensory) organs is Brahman.

So also He is the caksusah caksuh, the Eye of the eye; the capacity to perceive colour that the eye, the organ of sight, possesses is merely by virtue of its being presided over by the consciousness of the Self. Hence He is the Eye of the eye. Since a questioner’s desire is to know the thing he asks for, the expression, ‘having known has to be supplied thus: ‘Having known Brahman, as the Ear etc. of the ear etc., as indicated before.’ This (addition) is also necessary, because the result is stated thus, ‘They become immortal’ (II. 5), and because the result is stated thus, ‘They become immortal’ (II. 5), and because immortality is attained through realization. From the fact that a man becomes free after getting realization, it follows (that he becomes immortal) by giving up, (through the strength of knowledge), the group of organs beginning with the ear; that is to say, since by identifying the Self with the ear etc. a man becomes conditioned by these and takes birth, dies, and transmigrates, therefore having realized, as one’s Self, the Brahman that is defined as the ‘Ear of the ear’ etc., and atimucya, giving up selfidentification with the ear etc.-(he becomes immortal). Those who give up self-identification with the ear etc. are the dhirah, intelligent, because the selfidentification with the ear etc. cannot be given up unless one is endowed with uncommon intellect. Pretya, desisting; asmat lokat, from this world of emperical dealings involving ideas of ‘I and mine’ with regard to sons, friends, wives, and relatives; i.e. having renounced all desires; (they) bhavanti, become; amrtah, immortal, immune from death. This is in accordance with the Vedic texts: ‘Not by work, not by progeny, not by wealth, but by renunciation some (rare ones) attained immortality, (Kai. 1.1.2।।), ‘The self-existent Lord destroyed the outgoing senses; hence one perceives the external things and not the Self within. A rare, discriminating man, longing for immortality, turns his eyes away and then sees the indwelling Self (Ka. II. i. 1), ‘When all desires that cling to one’s heart fall off, ৷৷৷৷then one attains Brahman here’ (Ka. II. iii. 14), etc. Or, renunciation of desires being implied in the expression atimucya (giving up) itself, asmat lokat pretya means separating from this body, dying.

English Commentary By Swami Sivananda

।।1.1.2।।. This verse is an answer to the questions in the first verse. The preceptor give answer to the worthly disciple who had questioned him. Behind the mind, breath and the senses there is Brhaman or the supreme Self. He who knows this Brahman attains immortality.

Ignorant people identify themselves with the body, mind, prana and senses on account of nescience or Avidya. They mistake these false perishable limiting adjuncts or vechicles for the pure immortal Atman, and so they are caught in the round of births and deaths. But some wise people abandon this false identification, separate themselves from these limiting adjuncts through eniry, discrinination and Anvaya-vyatireka Yukti and practice of Neti-neti-doctrine (I am not this body, I am not this Prana, I am not this mind, I am not the senses), identify themselves with the all-pervading, immortal, pure Brahman, obtain knowledge of Brahman and attain immortality.

Atimuchya-being free; having renounced I-ness in the limiting vehicles such as body, mind, prana, senses; having renounced the false notion that the ear, mind, Prana, etc., is the Atman. Pretya-on departing, having turned away; Asmat-from this; Lokat-world or body.

Some commentators take Asmallokat pretya to mean ‘departing from this world’ or ‘having left this mortal body.’ It may mean also ‘rising above sense-life,’ because they attain immortality as soon as they rise above sense-life and live in the Atman. They become immortal while living in this body. They need not wait till they leave the body or the world to become immortal. This rendering is more appropriate.

Just as the water in a cup borrows its heat from the sun or fire, so also the mind, prana and senses borrow their light and power from the Atman. The Atman is the source for all these organs. The ear hears through the light of the Atman, the tongue speaks through the power of the Atman, the mind thinks through the intelligence of the Atman and prana performs its function through the power of the Atman only. Mind and these organs are inert and non-intelligent. They appear to be intelligent through the light and power of the Atman. Brahman or the Atman gives to the ear the power of hearing, gives to the mind the power of thinking, gives to the tongue the power of speaking, gives the power of life to the first Prana, gives to the eye the power of seeing. It is, therefore, said that It is the ear of ear, the mind of mind, etc.

There is a director of the ear, eyes, tongue, mind, life-force who is distinct from the ear, mind, prana and others. The ears, eyes, mind, Prana, etc., exist for His use, just as the house exists for the use of the owner. The director is Brahman or the Atman.

The Srutis say: “Brahman shines by His own light,” “By His light all this universe is illumined.” “The sun, the moon, the stars, the fire and the lightning shine by His light,” “Who could live and breathe if there were not the self-luminous Brahman.” “He leads Prana up and Apana down.” The Bhagavad-Gita (XIII-33) says: “As sun illumines the whole world, so does the Atman (Kshetri), O Bharata, illumines all the bodies (Kshetra).”

One becomes immortal by renouncing all desires. In this world man talks always ‘my son,’ ‘my wife,’ ‘my house,’ etc. The wise abandon all such worldly talks and worldly desires (Pretya asmallokat) and attain immortality by meditating on Brahman who is the ear of the ear, the mind of the mind, etc. The Sruti says: “Not by works, not by offspring, not by wealth, but by renunciation alone did some attain immortality.” “When all desires are abandoned, here they attain the Brahman.” “Having turned his senses inwards for desire of immortality.”

Links
Various resources on the Kenopanishad
Upanishad Series – Kena Upanishad Commentary by Swami Chinmayananda