Ātma-jñāna

bodho’nya-sādhanebhyo hi sākṣān mokṣaika-sādhanam

bodho’nya-sādhanebhyo hi sākṣān mokṣaika-sādhanam |
pākasya vahnivaj jñānaṁ vinā mokṣo na sidhyati ||
(Ātma-bodha: 2)

“In comparison to other means (sādhanas), certainly understanding is directly the sole means to mokṣa. Mokṣa is not attained without knowledge, which is like fire for cooking [i.e., as cooking cannot be accomplished without fire, so mokṣa cannot be attained without knowledge].”

Read on →

nāsac-chāstreṣu sajjeta nopajīveta jīvikām

nāsac-chāstreṣu sajjeta nopajīveta jīvikām |
vādavādāṁs tyajet tarkān pakṣaṁ kañca na saṁśrayet ||
na śiṣyān anubadhnīta granthān naivābhyased bahūn |
na vyākhyām upayuñjīta nārambhān ārabhet kvacit ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 7.13.7–8; cited in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.2.113)

“[Śrī Nārada to Śrī Yudhiṣṭhira regarding rules for a sannyāsī:] One should not foster attachment to texts related to the unreal (asat-śāstra), one should not subsist on a vocation, one should avoid arguments based on assertions regarding propositions, and one should not take any particular side [in such arguments]. One should not be followed by [many] disciples, one should not study many texts, one should not engage in teaching [many texts], and one should never start undertakings.”

Read on →

anādy-avidyā-yuktasya puruṣasyātma-vedanam

anādy-avidyā-yuktasya puruṣasyātma-vedanam |
svato na sambhavād anyas tattvajño jñānado bhavet ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.22.10)

“Knowledge of self shall not come about on its own for a living being beset with beginningless ignorance. [Therefore,] Another, a Knower of the reality and Bestower of [that] knowledge, shall be [i.e., must exist and also bestow that knowledge upon the jīva].”

Read on →

ātmāparijñānamayo vivādo

ātmāparijñānamayo vivādo
hy astīti nāstīti bhidārtha-niṣṭhaḥ |
vyartho’pi naivoparameta puṁsāṁ
mattaḥ parāvṛtta-dhiyāṁ sva-lokāt ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.22.34; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 1)

“[Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa to Śrī Uddhava:] The disputation on the part of people of mind turned away from me, [their] own domain [i.e., their own shelter], which is fixed [only] on the object of a difference [between their own view and another’s], ‘It is [so]; [no,] it is not,’ and based on incomplete knowledge of the self (ātmā), shall never cease even though it is useless.”

Read on →

śrutau ca jīvo nāmāto’nyaḥ svayaṁ siddho nāsti

śrutau ca jīvo nāmāto’nyaḥ svayaṁ siddho nāsti, parantu tad-ātmaka evety arthaḥ |
(Bhagavat Sandarbha: 19)

“In the Śruti also [i.e., in the statement in Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad: 3.7.23, ‘There is no seer other than him [i.e., than the Para-tattva]’ (nānyo’to’sti draṣṭā), it is shown that], the jīva definitively is not another [entity] self-existent (svayaṁ siddha) apart from him, and rather, is verily constituted of him. This is the meaning.”

Read on →

nṛṣu tava māyayā bhramam amīṣv avagatya bhṛśaṁ

nṛṣu tava māyayā bhramam amīṣv avagatya bhṛśaṁ
tvayi sudhiyo’bhave dadhati bhāvam anuprabhavam |
katham anuvartatāṁ bhava-bhayaṁ tava yad bhrū-kuṭiḥ
sṛjati muhus trinemir abhavac-charaṇeṣu bhayam ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.87.32)

[Translated according to Śrī Śrīdhara Svāmīpāda’s commentary:] “Understanding the ignorance as a consequence of your māyā among these human beings wherefrom repeated birth ensues, the wise foster bhāva [i.e., render service] profusely for you, Non-existence [i.e., you who are the cause of liberation from material existence]. How could your followers have any distress on account of [material] existence, since the furrowing of your brows—time (trinemi)—creates distress perpetually for those who are not in your shelter?”

Read on →

saty api bhedāpagame nātha tavāhaṁ na māmakīnas tvam

saty api bhedāpagame nātha tavāhaṁ na māmakīnas tvam |
sāmudro hi taraṅgaḥ kvacana samudro na tāraṅgaḥ ||
(Śrī Śaṅkarācārya’s Viṣṇu-ṣaṭpadī-stotram: 3; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 8.419; Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Bṛhad Bhāgavatāmārta: 2.2.196)

“Even once the cessation of distinction (bheda) [between you and I] occurs, O Nātha, I am yours, [but] you are not mine. A wave certainly belongs to the ocean, [but] nowhere does the ocean belong to a wave.”

Read on →

tad-aṁśatvāt tad-abhinnatvena tadīyatvena vā svātmānaṁ vijānīyād

tad-aṁśatvāt tad-abhinnatvena tadīyatvena vā svātmānaṁ vijānīyād ity arthaḥ | evaṁ ca sati so’ham iti—saḥ śrī-bhagavad-aṁśaḥ śuddha-buddha-mukta-svabhāvo’ham; yad vā, tad-aṁśatvena tad-adhīno nitya-sevako’smīty arthaḥ |
(Excerpt from the Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā on Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 5.65)

“One should understand one’s self (ātmā) as being non-different from him [i.e., Paramātmā] or as being his own, on account of [the ātmā’s] being a part (aṁśa) of him. This is the meaning [of the aforementioned bhūta-śuddhi meditation]. Since this is such, ‘I am he’ (so’ham) means, ‘I, who am of pure, conscious, and liberated nature, am he, meaning, [I am] a part (aṁśa) of Śrī Bhagavān,’ or alternately, ‘because of [my] being a part of him, I am dependent on him and an eternal servant [of him].’”

Read on →

dṛṣṭaṁ śrutam asad buddhvā nānudhyāyen na saṁviśet

dṛṣṭaṁ śrutam asad buddhvā nānudhyāyen na saṁviśet |
saṁsṛtiṁ cātma-nāśaṁ ca tatra vidvān sa ātma-dṛk ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 9.19.20)

“Having understood the seen and the heard to be asat, one who shall not meditate repeatedly [on] and shall not enjoy [them], knowing that saṁsāra and loss of the self ensue from them, is a seer of the Ātmā.”

Read on →

na yāvad etāṁ tanu-bhṛn narendra

na yāvad etāṁ tanu-bhṛn narendra
vidhūya māyāṁ vayunodayena |
vimukta-saṅgo jita-ṣaṭ-sapatno
vedātma-tattvaṁ bhramatīha tāvat ||
na yāvad etan mana ātma-liṅgaṁ
saṁsāra-tāpāvapanaṁ janasya |
yac choka-mohāmaya-rāga-lobha-
vairānubandhaṁ mamatāṁ vidhatte ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 5.11.15–16)

“[Rendered according to the Bhāvārtha-dīpikā:] O King, as long as the bearer of a body does not cast away this māyā, and, having become completely freed from attachment and victorious over the six co-wives [i.e., the six senses], understand the nature of the self (ātma-tattva) by means of the appearance of wisdom, so long he wanders here [i.e., in saṁsāra], and as long as one does not understand the mind, a guise of the self, to be the field of a person’s suffering in saṁsāra which bears a continuance of lamentation, delusion, disease, attraction, greed, and enmity, and produces my-ness [so long one wanders in saṁsāra].”

Read on →

Scroll to Top