उपदेशसाहस्री (आदि शङ्कराचार्य - गद्य व पद्य भाग)

187-194] ' THOU ART THAT ' 275
190, 191. It is from the sentence only and from noth-
ing else that one knows oneself to be ever free.¹ The
meaning of the sentence is known from the knowledge
of the (implied) meanings of the words ; these meanings
again are surely understood by the method of agree-
ment² and contrariety. Thus one knows oneself to be
free from pain and action.
सदेवेत्यादिवाक्येभ्यः प्रमा स्फुटतरा भवेत् ।
दशमस्त्वमसीत्यस्माद्यथैवं प्रत्यगात्मनि ॥ १९२ ॥
प्रबोधेन यथा स्वाप्नं सर्वदुःखं निवर्तते ।
प्रत्यगात्मधिया तद्वद्दुःखित्वं सर्वदात्मनः ॥ १९३ ॥
192, 193. The right knowledge of Self-Brahman
becomes manifest from sentences such as, ‘Thou art
That’, like the knowledge acquired from the sentence,
‘you are the tenth.’ The (false) conception of pain
with regard to the Self vanishes for ever when the
(right) knowledge of Self-Brahman arises, like all kinds
of pain experienced in dream which come to an end
as soon as one wakes up.
कृष्णलादौ प्रमाऽजन्म तदन्यार्थाऽमृदुत्वतः ।
तत्त्वमस्यादिवाक्येषु न त्वेवमविरोधतः ॥ १९४ ॥
194. The knowledge (that they have been cooked)
does not arise in the case of gold³ particles etc. as
they do not become soft. They are made hot by
boiling them for the purpose of producing an unseen
result (in connection with sacrifices). It is not a fact
¹ I.e., Brahman. ² See verse 96 above. ³ See verse 185.

276 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XVIII
that right knowledge does not arise from sentences
like 'Thou art That.' For there is no such¹ contradic-
tion here.
वाक्ये तत्त्वमसीत्यस्मिञ्ज्ञातार्थे तदसीद्वयम् ।
त्वमर्थे सत्यसाहाय्याद्वाक्यं नोत्पादयेत्प्रमाम् ॥ १९५ ॥
195. The meanings of the two words 'That' and
'art' in the sentence 'Thou art that' are well-known.
It does not produce right knowledge for want of help
when the (implied) meaning of the word 'Thou'² (is
not known).
तत्त्वमोस्तुल्यनीडार्थमसीत्येतत्पदं भवेत् ॥ १९६ ॥
196. The word 'art' is used in order to show that
the two words 'Thou' and 'That' are in the same
predicament.
तच्छब्दः प्रत्यगात्मार्थस्तच्छब्दार्थस्त्वमस्तथा ।
दुःखित्वाप्रत्यगात्मत्वं वारयेतामुभावपि ॥ १९७ ॥
197. (Being in the same predicament with the word
'Thou',) the word 'That' comes to mean the Inner-
most Self. (Similary, being in the same relation with
the word 'That',) the word 'Thou' comes to mean
the same thing as the word 'That'. (Thus in relation
to each other) the two words³ show that the Innermost
Self is not unhappy and that Brahman is not other than
the Self.
¹ As in the case of gold particles. ² See verse 181 of this
chapter. ³ See verse 171 of this chapter.

195-200] 'THOU ART THAT' 277
एवं च नेतिनेत्यर्थं गमयेतां परस्परम् ॥ १९८ ॥
198. Thus both of them in conjunction express the
same meaning¹ as is implied by the sentence, 'Not²
this, not this.'
एवं तत्त्वमसीत्यस्य गम्यमाने फले, कथम् ।
अप्रमाणत्वमस्योक्ता क्रियापेक्षत्वमुच्यते ॥ १९९ ॥
199. Why do you say that the sentence is not
an evidence³ (regarding the knowledge of Brahman)
and depends on an action (in order to produce the
same knowledge) as the result produced by the sentence,
'Thou art That', (is the right knowledge regarding
Self-Brahman ?).
तस्माद्याद्यन्तमध्येषु कुर्वित्येतद्विरोध्यतः ।
न कल्पामोऽश्रुतत्वाच्च श्रुतत्यागोऽप्यनर्थकः ॥ २०० ॥
200. We do not, therefore, admit (the injunction of
an action) in the beginning,⁴ end⁵ or middle.⁶ For it⁷
is contradictory and not met with in the Vedas. Not
only so, we have, in that case, to give up what⁸ is there
in them. And that would be harmful.
¹ A Being, one and indivisible, of the nature of Bliss, Self-
Brahman. ² Br. U., 2. 3. 6.
³ See verses 9, 17 and 18 above.
⁴ At the time of the first teaching of the sentence 'Thou art
That.' ⁵ At the time when direct knowledge of Self-
Brahman has been achieved. ⁶ At the time of understanding
the implied meanings of the words by the method of agreement
and contrariety. See verse 96 of this chapter for the said method.
⁷ See footnote 2, p. 272. ⁸ See footnote 1, p. 273.

278 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XVIII
यथानुभूयते तृप्तिर्भुजेर्वाक्यान्न गम्यते ।
वाक्यस्य विधृतिस्तद्वद्गोशकृत्पायसीक्रिया ॥ २०१ ॥
201. (Objection). The Bliss of liberation is not
obtained by ascertaining the meaning of the sentence.
It is not like the satisfaction which is felt by eating.
Just as boiled milk-rice cannot be prepared from cow-
dung, so, (the direct knowledge of Brahman cannot be
produced) simply by ascertaining the meaning of the
sentence.
सत्यमेवमनात्मार्थे वाक्यात्पारोक्ष्यबोधनम् ।
प्रत्यगात्मनि न त्वेवं संख्याप्राप्तिवद्ध्रुवम् ॥ २०२ ॥
202. (Reply). Indirect knowledge, it is true, is
the result produced by the sentences regarding the
non-Self, but it is not so in the case of those regarding
the Innermost Self. It is, on the other hand (direct and
certain knowledge) like that in the case of the tenth¹ boy.
स्वयंवेद्यत्वपर्यायः स्वप्रमाणक इष्यताम् ।
निवृत्तावहमः सिद्धः स्वात्मनोऽनुभवश्च नः ॥ २०३ ॥
203. Therefore accept the Self as self-evident which
means the same thing as self-knowable. The know-
ledge of the Innermost Self according to us thus be-
comes possible when the ego² vanishes.
बुद्धीनां विषयो दुःखं नो यस्य विषया मताः ।
कुतोऽस्य दुःखसंबन्धो दृशेः स्यात्प्रत्यगात्मनः ॥ २०४ ॥
¹ See footnote 2, verse 3, chapter 12.
² It vanishes when one is taught 'Thou art That.'

201-207] 'THOU ART THAT' 279
204. Pain is a property belonging to the intellect.¹
How can it, therefore, belong to the Innermost Self
which is of the nature of Pure Consciousness and not
connected with pain ?
दृशिरेवानुभूयेत स्वेनैवानुभवात्मना ।
तदाभासतया जन्म धियोऽस्यानुभवः स्मृतः ॥ २०५ ॥
205. The Witness is known by Itself² which is of
the nature of knowledge only. It is the birth of
the modification of the intellect pervaded by the reflec-
tion of Consciousness that is what is known to be
the knowledge³ of the Self.
अशनायादिनिर्मुक्तः सिद्धो मोक्षस्त्वमेव सः ।
श्रोतव्यादि तवेत्येतद्विरुद्धं कथमुच्यते ॥ २०६ ॥
206. How can you speak of the hearing⁴ etc. (of
the Self) on your part which is a contradiction⁵ when
you are (taught to be) the eternally existing Liberation⁶
free from hunger etc. ?
सेत्स्यतीत्येव चेत्तत्स्याच्छ्रवणादि तदा भवेत् ।
मोक्षस्यानित्यतैव स्याद्विरोधे नान्यथा वचः ॥ २०७ ॥
207. Hearing etc. would be necessary if Liberation
were to be brought about. But It would be transitory
¹ I.e., the ego. ² It requires, in order to be known, no other
knowledge. ³ I.e., 'I am Brahman.' ⁴ Br, U., 2. 4. 5.
⁵ For a man cannot be the actionless Brahman and at the same
time the agent of hearing etc. ⁶ I.e., Brahman.

280 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XVIII
in that case. The sentence, therefore, can have no
other meaning ¹ which involves contradiction.
श्रोतृश्रोतव्ययोर्भेदो यदीष्टः स्याद्भवेदिदम् ।
इष्टार्थकोप एवं स्यान्न युक्तं सर्वथा वचः ॥ २०८ ॥
208. The repetition of the idea, ‘I am Brahman’
might be possible if there were a difference between the
hearer (i.e. the aspirant) ² and what is to be heard (but)
the desired meaning ³ would be wronged in that case.
Therefore the sentence becomes unreasonable (i.e.,
loses authority according to that view).
सिद्धो मोक्षोऽहमित्येवं ज्ञात्वात्मानं भवेद्यदि ।
चिकीर्षुर्यः स मूढात्मा शास्त्रं चोद्घाटत्यपि ॥ २०९ ॥
209. Knowing that one is eternally existing Libera-
tion one who desires to perform actions ⁴ is a man of
clouded intellect and nullifies the scriptures.
नहि सिद्धस्य कर्तव्यं सकार्यस्य न सिद्धता ।
उभयालम्वनं कुर्वन्नात्मानं वञ्चयत्यपि ॥ २१० ॥
210. For knowing oneself to be Brahman one has
no duty to perform; nor can one be a knower of
Brahman when one has duties to perform. One deceives
oneself by having recourse to both sides.
¹ E.g., the reiteration of the idea, ‘I am Brahman.’ ² The Self
(i.e., Brahman) Br. U. p. 2, 4, 5. See also verse 111.
³ That the individual Self is Brahman. ⁴ E.g., the reiteration of
the idea, ‘I am Brahman’. For the objector’s contention see
Verses 12 and 18 above.

208-214] ' THOU ART THAT ' 281
सिद्धो मोक्षस्त्वमित्येतद्वस्तुमात्रं प्रदर्श्यते ।
श्रोतुस्तथात्वविज्ञाने प्रवृत्तिः स्यात्कथं त्विति ॥ २११ ॥
211. (Objection).¹ A reality is only pointed to
(but no injunction is given) when one is told 'Thou
art eternally existing Liberation'²; how can the hearer
apply himself to know that he is so (without being
enjoined) ?
कर्ता दुःख्यहमस्मीति प्रत्यक्षेणानुभूयते ।
कर्ता दुःखी च माभूवमिति यत्नो भवेत्ततः ॥ २१२ ॥
212. It is known by perceptual evidence that one
is an agent and experiencer of pain. And then there
is an effort so that one may not remain so.
तद्विज्ञानाय युक्त्यादि कर्तव्यं श्रुतिरब्रवीत् ।
कर्तृत्वाद्यनुवादेन सिद्धत्वानुभवाय तु ॥ २१३ ॥
213, The Sruti,³ therefore, restates the agency etc.⁴
on the part of the people and enjoins duties such
as reasoning etc. in order that they may know and feel
that they are eternally existing (Brahman).
निर्दुःखो निष्क्रियोऽकामः सिद्धो मोक्षोऽहमित्यपि ।
गृहीत्वैव विरुद्धार्थमादध्यात्कथमेव सः ॥ २१४ ॥
214. (Reply). How can one accept a contradictory
meaning⁵ after knowing⁶ that one is eternally existing
¹ Verses 211—213. ² Brahman.
³ Br. U., 2. 4. 5. ⁴ Which people are conscious of.
⁵ That one is an agent.
⁶ From the sentence which is the only right evidence.

282 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XVIII
Liberation which is free from unhappiness, activity and
desires ?
सकामः सक्रियोऽसिद्ध इति मेऽनुभवः कथम् ।
अतो मे विपरीतस्य तद्भवान्वक्तुमर्हति ॥ २१५ ॥
215. (Objection). You should say why I, though
of¹ an opposite nature, should feel that I have desires
and activities and am not Brahman.
इहैव घटते प्रश्नो न मुक्तत्वानुभूतये ।
प्रमाणेन विरोधी यः सोऽत्रार्थः प्रश्नमर्हति ॥ २१६ ॥
216. (Reply).² A question on this subject³ is reason-
able, but it is not reasonable to ask why one is free.
It is only a thing contrary to evidences⁴ that should
be questioned.
अहं निर्मुक्त इत्येव सदसीत्यन्यमानजः ।
प्रत्यक्षाभासजन्यत्वाद्दुःखित्वं प्रश्नमर्हति ॥ २१७ ॥
217. The knowledge that one is free arises from
a different⁵ evidence viz., the evidence, 'Thou art That.'
Arising from fallacious perceptual evidence unhappiness
deserves an explanation.
पृष्टमाकाङ्क्षितं वाच्यं दुःखाभावमभीप्सितम् ॥ २१८ ॥
¹ Of the nature of Brahman. ² Verses 216—228.
³ I.e., why one feels unhappy though one is Brahman according
to the evidence of the sentence.
⁴ E.g., the sentence, 'Thou art That.'
⁵ Different from perceptual evidence and so on.

214-221] ‘ THOU ART THAT ’ 283
218. One should be told what one asks and wants
to know; and the inquirer desires to know liberation,
(the Self) which is free from unhappiness.
कथं हीदं निवर्तेत दुःखं सर्वात्मना मम ।
इति प्रश्नानुरूपं यद्वाच्यं दुःखनिवर्तकम् ॥ २१९ ॥
219. That¹ which removes unhappiness should be
told (by the teacher to the disciple) according to his
question inquiring how his unhappiness might be re-
moved altogether.
श्रुतेः स्वात्मनि नाशङ्का प्रामाण्ये सति विद्यते ।
तस्मादात्मविमुक्तत्वं प्रत्याययति तद्वचः ।
वक्तव्यः तत्तथार्थ स्याद्विरोधेऽसति केनचित् ॥ २२० ॥
220. There can be no doubt about what the Srutis
prove² as they are an independent source of know-
ledge. The words of Srutis, therefore, produce the
conviction that one is free. So it should be said that
such is the meaning of the Srutis, as (it has been proved
that) they do not contradict any other source of
knowledge.
इतोऽन्योऽनुभवः कश्चिदात्मनो नोपपद्यते ।
अविज्ञातं विजानतां विज्ञातारमिति श्रुतेः ॥ २२१ ॥
221. The Knowledge of the Self different from what
has been said before is unreasonable on the authority
¹ Liberation due to Self-Knowledge.
² Br. Sû. 1. 1. 3.

284 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XVIII
of the Srutis, 'It¹ is unknown to those who know It'²
and 'Who³ will know the knower'?
त्वंपदार्थविवेकाय संन्यासः सर्वकर्मणाम् ।
साधनत्वं व्रजत्येव शान्तो दान्तानुशासनात् ॥ २२२ ॥
222. The renunciation of all actions in order to
know the (implied) meaning of the word 'thou' be-
comes the means (to Self-Knowledge) according to
the teaching,⁴ 'controlling the internal and external
senses.'
त्वमर्थं प्रत्यगात्मानं पश्येदात्मानमात्मनि ।
वाक्यार्थं तत आत्मानं सर्वं पश्यति केवलम् ॥ २२३ ॥
223. One should know the Self, the innermost One,
the implied meaning of the word 'thou' in the
combination⁵ of the body and the senses. One then
knows the pure Self to be Brahman, the all-comprehen-
sive principle. And that is the meaning of the sentence,
'Thou art That.'
सर्वमात्मेति वाक्यार्थे विज्ञातेऽस्य प्रमाणतः ।
असत्त्वे ह्यन्यमानस्य विधिस्तं योजयेत्कथम् ॥ २२४ ॥
224. How can one be enjoined to perform a duty
when the meaning of the sentence, viz., one is Brahman,
is known by one according to the right source of
¹ Ke. U., 2. 3. ² To be an object of Knowledge.
³ Br. U., 2. 4. 14. ⁴ Br. U., 4. 4. 23.
⁵ As its witness.

222-228] 'THOU ART THAT' 285
knowledge, the Srutis, inasmuch as no$^1$ other source of
knowledge can then exist for one?
तस्माद्वाक्यार्थविज्ञानान्नोर्ध्वं कर्मविधिर्भवेत् ।
नहि ब्रह्मास्मि कर्तेति विरुद्धे भवतो धियौ ॥ २२५ ॥
225. No actions can, therefore, be enjoined on one
when one has known the meaning of the sentence.$^2$
For the two contradictory ideas, 'I am Brahman' and
'I am an agent' cannot exist together.
ब्रह्मास्मीति च विद्येयं नैत्र कर्तेति बाध्यते ।
सकामो बद्ध इत्येवं प्रमाणाभासजातया ॥ २२६ ॥
शास्त्राद्ब्रह्मास्मि नान्योऽहमिति बुद्धिर्भवेद्दृढा ।
यदाऽयुक्ता तदैवं धीर्यथा देहात्मधीरिरिति ॥ २२७ ॥
226, 227. That one is Brahman is the right know-
ledge. It is not negated by the false conceptions that
one is an agent, has desires and is bound arising
from fallacious evidences. This (false) knowledge (i.e.,
I am an agent), like the identification$^3$ of the Self with
the body, becomes unreasonable when the knowledge
that one is Brahman and not other than It is firmly
grasped according to (the teaching of) the scriptures.
सभयादभयं प्राप्तस्तदर्थं यतते च यः ।
स पुनः सभयं गन्तुं स्वतन्त्रश्चेन्न गच्छति ॥ २२८ ॥
228. A man who tries to remain free from fear after
going to a place devoid of it from one full of fear does
not, if independent, go to a place of fear again.
$^1$ They are then all proved to be unreal.
$^2$ 'Thou art That.' $^3$ The idea, 'I am a man.'

286 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XVIII
यथेष्टाचरणप्राप्तिः संन्यासादिविधौ कुतः ।
पदार्थज्ञानबुद्धस्य वाक्यार्थानुभवार्थिनः ॥ २२९ ॥
229. How can there be the possibility of wrong
conduct¹ on the part of one on whom renunciation
etc.² are enjoined and who is awakened on knowing
the implied meanings of the words³ and aspiring⁴
after the comprehension of the meaning of the sentence⁵ ?
अतः सर्वमिदं सिद्धं यत्प्रागस्माभिरीरितम् ॥ २३० ॥
230. Everything, therefore, that we said before,
is substantiated.
यो हि यस्माद्विरक्तः स्यान्नासौ तस्मै प्रवर्तते ।
लोकत्रयाद्विरक्तत्वान्मुमुक्षुः किमितीहते ॥ २३१ ॥
231. One does not try to attain anything in which
one has lost interest. Why will a man seeking⁶ libera-
tion make any effort at all who has lost interest in
all the three worlds ?
क्षुधया पीड्यमानोऽपि न विषं ह्यत्तुमिच्छति ।
मिष्टान्नध्वस्ततृड् जानन्नामूढस्तं जिघत्सति ॥ २३२ ॥
¹ For objection see verses 12 and 16, chap. 18.
² Including the injunctions of hearing, reflecting and meditating
on the Self.
³ The words, 'thou' and 'that.'
⁴ Therefore wrong conduct is impossible on one's part as one's
mind is occupied with the attempt.
For one again who has rightly comprehended the meaning of
the sentence, wrong conduct is of course absolutely impossible.
⁵ 'Thou art That.'
⁶ Even one seeking liberation is free from desires and efforts;
how much more free is one who has obtained it?

229-233] ‘ THOU ART THAT ’ 287
232. No one likes to eat poison even if pressed
by hunger. So, no one who is not an idiot will
knowingly wish to eat it when his hunger has been
appeased by eating sweatmeats.
वेदान्तवाक्यपुष्पेभ्यो ज्ञानामृतमधूत्तमम् ।
उज्जहारालिवद्यो नस्तस्मै सद्गुरवे नमः ॥ २३३ ॥
233. I bow down to my Teacher, a knower of
Brahman, who collected for us the nectar of knowledge
from the Vedântas like a bee collecting the best honey
from flowers.

अथात्ममनःसंवादप्रकरणम् ॥ १९ ॥
CHAPTER XIX
A CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE SELF AND
THE MIND
प्रयुज्य तृष्णाज्वरनाशकारणं चिकित्सितं ज्ञानविराग-
भेषजम् । न याति कामज्वरसन्निपातजां शरीरमालां
शतयोगदुःखिताम् ॥ १ ॥

1. One does not meet with the distress caused by
   a series of hundreds of bodies, which has its origin
   in a swoon due to the fever of desires if one places
   oneself under the treatment in which medicines are
   Knowledge and dispassion, the causes of the destruc-
   tion of the fever of desires (mentioned before).
   अहं ममेति त्वमनर्थमीहसे परार्थमिच्छन्ति तवान्य
   ईहितम् । न तेऽर्थबोधो न हि मेऽस्ति चार्थिता
   ततश्च युक्तः शम एव ते मनः ॥ २ ॥
2. Oh my mind, you indulge in vain ideas like
   ‘me’ and ‘mine.’ Your efforts, according to others,¹
   ¹ The Sânkhyas.

1-5] A CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE SELF AND MIND 289
are for one¹ other than yourself. You have no con-
sciousness of things and I have no desire of having
anything. It is, therefore, proper for you to remain quiet.
यतो न चान्यः परमात्सनातनात्सदैव तृप्तोऽहमतो न
मेऽर्थिता । सदैव तृप्तश्च न कामये हितं यतस्व चेतः
प्रशमाय ते हितम् ॥ ३ ॥
3. As I am no other than the Supreme Eternal One
I am always contented and have no desires. Always
contented I desire no welfare for myself, but I wish
your welfare. Try to make yourself quiet, Oh mind.
षडूर्मिमालाभ्यतिवृत्त एव यः स एव चात्मा जगतश्च नः
श्रुतेः । प्रमाणतश्चापि मया प्रवेद्यते मुधैव तस्माच्च
मनस्तवेहितम् ॥ ४ ॥
4. One who is by nature beyond the six continual
waves² is, according to the evidence of the Srutis, the
Self of us and the universe. This is what I know from
other³ sources of knowledge also. Your efforts are,
therefore, all in vain.
त्वयि प्रशान्ते नहि चास्ति भेदधीर्यतो जगन्मोहमुपैति
मायया । ग्रहो हि मायाप्रभवस्य कारणं ग्रहाद्विमोके
नहि सास्ति कस्यचित् ॥ ५ ॥
¹ The Purusha, the Self (according to the Sânkhyas).
² (1) Hunger and (2) thirst, the properties of the vital force,
(3) grief and (4) delusion, of the mind, (5) old age and (6) death, of
the body.
³ E.g., Bh. Gîtâ, 10. 20.
19

290 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XIX
5. There is no idea of difference left deluding people
through wrong notions when you are merged.¹ For the
cause of all wrong notions is the perception of (the
reality of) difference. These wrong notions vanish as
soon as one is free from this perception.
न मेऽस्ति मोहस्तव चेष्टितेन हि प्रबुद्धतत्त्वस्त्वसितो
ह्यविक्रियः । न पूर्वतत्त्वोत्तरभेदता हि नो वृथैव
तस्माच्च मनस्तवेहितम् ॥ ६ ॥
6. I am not deluded by your efforts. For I have
known the Truth and am free from all bondage and
change. I have no difference in the conditions preced-
ing the knowledge of Truth and succeeding it. Your
efforts, oh mind, are, therefore, useless.
यतश्च नित्योऽहमतो न चान्यथा विकारयोगे हि भवेद्-
नित्यता । सदा प्रभातोऽहमतो हि चाद्वयो विकल्पितं
चाप्यसदित्यवस्थितम् ॥ ७ ॥
7. As I am eternal I am not otherwise. Transitori-
ness is due to the connection with changes. I am
always self-effulgent and therefore without a second.
It is ascertained that everything created (by the mind)
is non-existent.
अभावरूपं त्वमसीह हे मनो निरीक्ष्यमाणे न हि युक्तितो-
ऽस्तिता । सतो ह्यनाशादसतोऽप्यजन्मतौ द्वयं च
चेतस्तव नास्तितैष्यते ॥ ८ ॥
¹ In Ignorance e.g., in deep sleep.

5-10] A CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE SELF AND MIND 291
8. Scrutinised through the reasoning that reality¹ is
never destroyed and unreality never born you have
no (real) existence. You are, therefore, Oh my mind,
non-existent in the Self. Having both birth and death
you are accepted as non-existent.
द्रष्टा च दृश्यं च तथा च दर्शनं भ्रमस्तु सर्वस्तव
कल्पितो हि सः । दृशेश्च भिन्नं न हि दृश्यमीक्ष्यते
स्वप्नप्रबोधेन तथा न भिद्यते ॥ ९ ॥
विकल्पना वापि तथाद्वया भवेदवस्तुयोगात्तदलातचक्रवत् ।
न शक्तिभेदोऽस्ति यतो न चात्मनां ततोऽद्वयत्वं श्रुति-
तोऽवसीयते ॥ १० ॥
9, 10. As everything—the seer, seeing and the
seen—is a false notion superimposed by you and as
no object of perception is known to have an existence
independent of that of the Self, (the Self is one only).
When this is so, the Self in the state of deep sleep²
does not differ from Itself when in waking (or dream).
Unreal like the circular³ form of a burning torch superim-
position also⁴ (has no existence independent of that
of) the non-dual Self. The oneness of the Self is
ascertained from the Srutis as the Self has no division
within Itself on account of different powers⁵ and as
It is not different (in different bodies).
¹ See Bh. Gîtâ, 2. 16.
² The non-dual Self only exists in deep sleep. See Br. U., 4. 3. 32.
³ When it is moved round.
⁴ Like the seer, seeing and the seen which are superimposed.
⁵ See Br. U. 4. 3. 23—30.

292 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XIX
मिथश्च भिन्ना यदि ते हि चेतनाः क्षयस्तु तेषां परि-
माणयोगतः । ध्रुवो भवेद्भेदवतां हि दृष्टतो जगत्क्षय-
श्चापि समस्तमोक्षतः ॥ ११ ॥
11. If, according to you, souls were mutually dif-
ferent and so·limited (by one another) they would
meet with destruction as all such things are seen to
come to an end. Again, all being liberated, the whole
world would meet with extinction.
न मेऽस्ति कश्चिन्न च सोऽस्मि कस्यचिद्यतोऽद्वयोऽहं
न हि चास्ति कल्पितम् । अकल्पितश्चास्मि पुरा प्रसि-
द्धितो विकल्पनाया द्वयमेव कल्पितम् ॥ १२ ॥
12. There is no one who belongs to me nor is
there anyone to whom I belong as I am without a
second. The (world which is) superimposed does not
exist. My existence¹ being known to be anterior to
superimposition, I am not superimposed. It is duality
only that is so.
विकल्पना चाप्यभवे न विद्यते सदन्यदित्येवमतो न
नास्तिता । यतः प्रवृत्ता तव चापि कल्पना पुरा
प्रसिद्धेर्न च तद्विकल्पितम् ॥ १३ ॥
13. The unborn Self² can never be regarded as
non-existent because there cannot be the superimposi-
tion of existence or non-existence on It. What exists
¹ The Final substratum of all superimposition.
² The Self, the substratum of all superimposition.

11-15] A CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE SELF AND MIND 293
prior to your coming into (apparent) existence and on
which you yourself are superimposed cannot Itself be
superimposed.
असद्द्वयं तेऽपि हि यद्यदीक्ष्यते न दृष्टमित्येव न चैव
नास्तिता । यतः प्रवृत्ता सदसद्विकल्पना विचारवद्द्वापि
तथाद्वयं च सत् ॥ १४ ॥
14. The duality pervaded by you is unreal. That
It is not seen is no reason that the Self does not exist.
That from which the wrong notions of existence and
non-existence proceed¹ (must exist). And just as a
deliberation ends in a conclusion, so, (all things super-
imposed have a final substratum) in the really existing
and non-dual Self.
सदभ्युपेतं भवतोपकल्पितं विचारहेतोर्यदि तस्य नास्ति-
ता । विचारहानाच्च तथैव संस्थितं न चेत्तदिष्टं नितरां
सदिष्यते ॥ १५ ॥
15. If the duality, created by you and assumed by
us to be real so that an investigation of the Truth
might be possible, were non-existent² Truth would
remain unascertained owing to the investigation
becoming impossible. The existence³ of a reality
must be accepted as a matter of course if an un-
ascertained nature of Truth is not desirable.
¹ I.e., are superimposed on It. See verse 16, chapter 16.
² A void.
³ Non-dual existence which is common to all dual phenomena
must be accepted as real. But excluding one another, phenomena
themselves are not persistent in their existence and are, therefore,
unreal. See Sankara's Commentary on Bh. Gîtâ, 2. 16.

294 A THOUSAND TEACHINGS [CHAP. XIX
असत्समं चैव सदित्यपीति चेदनर्थवत्त्वान्नृशृङ्गतुल्य-
तः । अनर्थवत्त्वं त्वसति ह्यकारणं न चैव तस्मान्न
विपर्ययेऽन्यथा ॥ १६ ॥
16. (Objection). What is called real ¹ is, as a matter
of fact, unreal like a human horn as it does not serve ²
any purpose. (Reply). That a thing serves no purpose
is no reason why it should be unreal and that a thing
serves some purpose is no reason, on the other hand,
why it should be real.
असिद्धतश्चापि विचारकारणाद्द्वयं च तस्मात्प्रसृतिं च
मायया । श्रुतेः स्मृतेश्चापि तथा हि युक्तितः प्रसिद्धय-
तीत्थं न तु युज्यतेऽन्यथा ॥ १७ ॥
17. Your inference is wrong (because reality serves
some purpose) as It is the subject-matter of deliberation
and also the source of all duality proceeding from It
under the influence of Mâyâ, according to the Srutis,³
the Smritis⁴ and reason⁵. Thus it is reasonable (that
the Self, though changeless, serves some purpose).
Otherwise (i.e., as a matter of reality) it is not reason-
able (that a thing, either permanent or momentary,
serves any purpose).
विकल्पनाचापि विधर्मकं श्रुतेः पुरा प्रसिद्धेश्च विकल्प-
तोऽद्वयः । न चेति नेतीति यथा विकल्पितं निषिध्य-
तेऽत्राप्यवशेषसिद्धये ॥ १८ ॥
¹ In the Vedas. ² In the opposite case it becomes momentary
according to the objector. ³ Sw. U., 4. 10.
⁴ Bh. Gîtâ., 9. 10. ⁵ Chh. U. 6. 1. 4—6.