TOKEN PROPHECY 1 - reconciliations of duality

—thought is duality, a divisional monotony; manifestation is triplicity, creative mystery——whereas in manifestation, there's always a third, a resolution and outgrowth; in thought, there is always the restrictive two, frustrating——manifestation gets caught in the duality of thought like a ping pong ball bouncing between a rock and a hard place——love is the reconciliation of the thought-assembled person and its movement out into creative consciousness——but unity is always calling the illusion home——the reconciliation of duality may stop manifestation in its tracks: there is no mountain!——or reconciliation of duality may invite the vision there is a mountain and all is brahman moving outward in its own creative triplicity——who am i to say?—

Kena Upanishad : The Complete Verse Half

One

 1

By whom and toward what rebounds the mind?

By whom is first breath of life enjoined?

By whom is willed these words someone recites?

These eyes and ears of what divinity unites?

  

2

The ear of the ear, the mind of the mind,

That voice indeed of the voice is surely the breath of the breath,

The eye of the eye released is wise,

Leaving this world, timeless immediately.

  

3

Not there the eye goes, nor speech goes, nor mind.

Not known nor understood, how can it be taught?

Different undoubtedly is that from the known,

likewise from the unknown, beyond.

Thus we’ve heard from our preceptors who that have declared.

  

4

Which by speech is not expressed but by which the voice is expressed,

That alone, the Absolute, You, know, and not this which they worship.

  

5

Which by the mind is not understood but by which, they say, the mind is understood,

That alone, the Absolute, You, know, and not this which they worship.

  

6

Which by the eye is not seen but by which the seeing is seen,

That alone, the Absolute, You, know, and not this which they worship.

  

7

Which by the ear is not heard but by which the hearing is heard,

That alone, the Absolute, You, know, and not this which they worship.

  

8

Which by the breath is not inhaled but by which the breathing is exhaled,

That alone, the Absolute, You, know, and not this which they worship.

Two

  

1

If thought to be fully understood, then little is it really so.

Certainly you may understand the Absolute appearances

Which are shared between you and the gods indeed.

Meditating only yourself is considered truly understood.

  

2

Not thinking I fully know

Nor not know, it’s thus known.

Anyone among us that knows, that knows.

Not unknown, it’s thus known.

  

3

For whom not conceived, to whom conceived.

Conceived to whom, does not know himself.

Not understood by understanding.

Understood by not understanding.

  

4

Self-realization perceived conceives

Your own timelessness surely attending.

By that Self attends the potency.

By its knowledge attends the eternal.

  

5

Here, if known, then truth there is.

If not here known, great is the loss.

Being of being discerning, the wise,

departing from this world, eternally becoming.

translation by aumdada

Kena Upanishad 2:5 Being of Being

Here, if known, then truth there is.

If not here known, great is the loss.

Being of being discerning, the wise,

departing from this world, eternally becoming.

iha ched avedid atha satyam asti

na ched ihaavedin mahati vinashtih

bhuteshu bhuteshu vichintya dhiiraah

pretyaasmal lokaad amritaa bhavanti

Notes: The tough translation here is ‘bhuteshu bhuteshu.’ Shankara via Gambhirananda says: “in all beings, moving and unmoving.” I suppose it could be some kind of saying. It’s difficult to know as a pure amateur. But other translators say: the Self in all beings, or something accordingly. Again, maybe it’s a saying, but it would seem that Atman would be used here if it was meant to be used here. So I’ve latched onto this and say: being of being as a compromise. And the rest is a play between here and there, departing and becoming.

Kena Upanishad 2:4 and Pre-Existing Conditions

Self-realization perceived conceives

Your own timelessness surely attending.

By that Self attends the potency.

By its knowledge attends the eternal.

pratibodha-viditam matam

amritatvam hi vindate

atmana vindate viryam

vidyaya vindate 'mritam

Note: This was a tough nut. But I feel the clue lay in amritatvam. Amritam alone, without the –tvam (you), means something along the lines of immortality. But add the ‘you’ and you have your own existing immortality. Thus there is a parallel with pratibodha, which most translate as realization, but is seen here importantly as self-realization. In other words, what is seen here is what you always are. Thus the last two lines indicate the process, so to speak. Atman, your Self, provides the potency for it own self-discovery. And its own knowledge is the eternal.

One other note. The word ‘vindate’ is translated by most as ‘attain.’ I’ve used ‘attend’ instead, to emphasize the pre-existing quality not available in the other word. I feel it may be slightly awkward, but I prefer a little clumsiness in the right direction rather than elegance in the wrong one.

summer prophecies 1 - blue

listening to the blue pterodactyl sing—rejoice for the aliens have not forsaken you—i am melting in i am—if you play the big bang backwards, you can hear yourself reciting silence

Kena Upanishad 2:3 & Carefully Chosen Words

For whom not conceived, to whom conceived.

Conceived to whom, does not know himself.

Not understood by understanding.

Understood by not understanding.

yasyaamatam tasya matam

matam yasya na veda sah

avijnaatam vijaanataam

vijnaatam avijaanataam

Note: There are three words here used for the concept of understanding: matam, veda, and vijanatam. Most translators appear to use them all as a single meaning. Sri M chooses ‘know.’ As does Nikhilananda, Manchester/ Prabhavananda, and of course, Gambhirananda via Shankara. On the other hand, Paramananda and Easwaran use a combination of think and know. Only Aurobindo differentiates each meaning: think, know, discern. I lean towards his understanding, but have chosen different translations in ‘conceive’ and ‘understand for 'think' and discern.’ Basically, I didn't agree with the translation: “For whom not thought, to whom thought.” I feel ‘conceived’ offers more depth. As for ‘discern’ rather than ‘understand,’ it’s just a pure sense of appropriate language there. But I could certainly be persuaded by Aurobindo's choice in time.

Also, In this translation, I am continuing to stay with the placement of the words as much as Englishly possible. This is especially noticeable in the translation of the second line. Aurobindo translates this as such: “…he by whom It is thought out, knows It not.” But I find it important that ‘sah’ or ‘him’ come at the end of the line. First, in the first line, that word is not used. Yasya or ‘whom’ is used twice. For me, this indicates that the knowing is not done by the person. Whereas in the second line, the one that wrongly conceives is that 'person.' Moreover, because of that incorrect conception, that person “does not know himself.”

These are the intricacies I feel the Rishi Kena is teasing out in a few carefully chosen words, and exactly what is missing in the other translations.

Kena Upanishad 2:2 and the Invisible Teacher

Not thinking I fully know

Nor not know, it’s thus known.

Anyone among us that knows, that knows.

Not unknown, it’s thus known.

naham manye su-vedeti

no na vedeti veda ca

yo nas tad veda tad veda

no na vedeti veda ca


Note: Although the words 'student' and 'teacher' do not appear in this text of the Kena, it was translated as such by Shankara, who had his own scholastic motivation for doing so. In turn, the following translators keep to Shankara's additive translation and interpretation: Easwaran, Paramananda, Nikhilananda, and even Yeats (Purohit). Aurobindo and Manchester (Prabhavananda) do not. Just saying.

My Kena Upanishad 2:1 and some Others

If thought to be fully understood, then little is it really so.

Certainly you may understand the Absolute appearances

Which are shared between you and the gods indeed.

Meditating only yourself is considered truly understood.

yadi manyase su-vedeti dabhram evapi

 nunam tvam vettha brahmano rupam

yad asya tvam yad asya ca deveshv atha nu

 mimamsyam eva te manye viditam

Note: What appears to be missing in most translations of the Kena is a respect for the play of the Kena. Here, in the first sloka of the second section, there is the first interplay of thinking one fully understands with the fact that little is its actuality. Most translations get this. But the second interplay appears to be glossed over at best. Understanding the appearance of Brahman shared between humans and god is usually given, but playing it against the meditation of only yourself is not.

Some translations of that last line in comparison:

Therefore Brahman, even now, is worthy of your inquiry. ~ Swami Nikhilananda

What is indeed the truth of Brahman you must therefore learn. ~ Swami Prabhavananda and Frederick Manchester

… this thou hast to think out. I think It known. ~ Sri Aurobindo

Therefore I think that what thou thinkest to be known is still to be sought after. ~ Swami Paramananda

Continue, therefore, your meditation. ~ Easwaran

These translations are more like interpretations rather than renditions, although Easwaran, I feel, comes closest. But what’s missing is the comparison of those appearances and forms which are shared between people and the gods with that which is only within yourself, and which must be meditated or inquired. This comparison is key. And although it is only one example of the genius of this Upanishad, it is another example of the lack of intelligent translations. I do not claim that title for my version. It is far from that. But for me, it points to that vedantic method pertaining to all these other translations: not this, not this, not this…

Kena Upanishad 1:6-7-8 (fifth time is the charm)

Which by the eye is not seen but by which the seeing is seen,

That alone, the Absolute, You, know, and not this which they worship.

yac cakshusha na pashyate yena cakshumshi pashyati

tad eva brahma tvam viddhi nedam yad idam upaasate

Which by the ear is not heard but by which the hearing is heard,

That alone, the Absolute, You, know, and not this which they worship.

yac chrotrena na shrinoti yena shrotram idam shrutam

tad eva brahma tvam viddhi nedam yad idam upaasate

Which by the breath is not inhaled but by which the breathing is exhaled,

That alone, the Absolute, You, know, and not this which they worship.

yat pranena na praniti yena pranah praniyate

tad eva brahma tvam viddhi nedam yad idam upaasate

Note: There's not much to say about these, except they continue the Absolute mantra from the previous two slokas (I've decided, for the time being, that 'you' should be capitalized), as well as the concept that the senses cannot detect it but it detects the senses: awareness. I feel the last sloka involving the breath is particularly wonderful in denoting the breath of life not inhaling (smelling) That, but the breath of life being exhaled by That. Nice ending there.

the new sutras 6 - vegas of the universe

the only genius is the genius of love—

the whiches and warlocks melt upon unknowing—

swim in the waters of what you are—

in the heart of the sea of light—

memories not included…

the power of sense perspective is the glitz of yourself—

the rarefied senses combine into a single sense of legitimacy—

a rock of thought revealed to be some mere mirage

upon this contact with attention—appearances

in consciousness, the vegas of the universe…

either surrendering to the inevitable absolute

or resting in the emptiness of this unknowing—

trajectories of an eagle and its prey amen—

costumed chimeras wearing red hats and

hello kitty in the mirror cool…

beneath the story there's the power and

the glory of the indescribable blank page—

once you've seen you're the sky,

you know you're always clearly there,

no matter what the weather writes…