Introduction

This is also called Talavakāra Upaniṣad. In a manuscript in Sārada characters in the Adyar Library, it is called Brāhmaṇopaniṣad. It is called Kena from the first word of the Upaniṣad. It forms according to Śaṅkara, the ninth chapter of the Brāhmaṇa of that name. For a long time the very existence of Talavakara Brāhmaṇa was doubted. But of late a manuscript of it has been found by Dr. Burnell: and so the statement of Śaṅkara that this Upaniṣad forms part of the Talavakāra Brāhmaṇa has been verified. This Brāhmaṇa appertains to the Sāma Veda and is called Jaiminīya Brāhmaṇa also.

This Upaniṣad contains the well known allegory of the victory of the Devas over the Daityas, and the ignorance of the Devas that the victory was due really to the working of the Brāhman through them.

According to Madhva the question is put by Śiva to Brahmā as to who is the real prime mover of mana, Prāṇa and the senses.

The whole of Madhva’s commentary except the last few lines, is an extract from the Brahma-Sāra, a book from which he copiously quotes in other Upaniṣads also. This Brahma-Sāra appears to be a metrical commentary on the Upaniṣads and I do not know whether any manuscript of it is available and who is its author and when it was composed. If it is not the work of Madhva himself, it shows that the doctrines systematised by him were current long before his time and he was its chief and most illustrious exponent.

This Upaniṣad also lends itself to Madhva’s view of Prāṇa. Its very first line uses the epithet prathama “The First” with regard to Prāṇa: and thus shows the great function performed by Him.

Another point which strikes the reader brought up under Śaṅkara’s system is the statement that Brahman as Yakṣa does not appear alone but is accompanied by at least ten shining ones. All the devas did not fall into the error into which Agni, Nāsikya Vāyu and Indra seemed to have fallen. The Upaniṣad expressly mentions that Umā, daughter of Himāvat, taught the true nature of Brahman to Indra. Thus she at least was free from the egoism of Indra and the other devas. If she did not fall into that error, it follows that her consort Śiva was also free from it, as He is higher in the scale than she. Thus there must have been some devas who were free from that error. In Madhva’s system of the hierarchy of gods there are several divinities above Śiva So they also must have been free from error.

This Upaniṣad gives the mystic name of Brahman as Tad-vanam “the all-pervading beloved just as the mystic name of Brahman in the Iśa-Upaniṣad is Aham “I” or “Supreme” and Asmi “I AM.”

S. C. V.

Prayag, August, 1909.