LinuxTurn pages
Upanishads · Śāṭyāyanīya 1
॥
Devanāgarī
मन एव मनुष्याणां कारणं बन्धमोक्षयोः । बन्धाय विषयासक्तं मुक्त्यै निर्विषयं स्मृतम्
Transliteration (IAST)
mana eva manuṣyāṇāṃ kāraṇaṃ bandhamokṣayoḥ | bandhāya viṣayāsaktaṃ muktyai nirviṣayaṃ smṛtam
Word-by-word
SanskritIASTMeaning
मनः एव मनुष्याणांmanaḥ eva manuṣyāṇāṃthe mind of men
कारणं बन्ध-मोक्षयोःkāraṇaṃ bandha-mokṣayoḥis the cause of bondage and liberation
बन्धाय विषय-आसक्तंbandhāya viṣaya-āsaktaṃfor bondage — attached to objects
मुक्त्यै निर्विषयं स्मृतम्muktyai nirviṣayaṃ smṛtamfor freedom — objectless, it is remembered
Translation
"The mind of men is the cause of bondage and liberation: attached to objects — for bondage, objectless — for freedom; so it is remembered."
Version
fedd029d5902 · published Aug 12, 2026, 5:00:00 AM UTC
Available inRUENPage between verses with
The Śāṭyāyanīya-upaniṣad begins, and it is worth saying in advance what kind of book this is, for it does not resemble the earlier ones. It belongs to the saṃnyāsa class, that is, to books on renunciation; but the renunciation in it is Vaiṣṇava, and moreover voiced more directly than anywhere else in this collection. The reader who has come with us through ninety-nine books will find here not a dispute between two readings but the exposition of one; and so it must be examined differently — less by objection than by explanation.
The first verse is a very well-known one and occurs in several books — in the Amṛtabindu (2), in the Brahmabindu, in the Maitrī. It is worth examining it precisely, for one word decides everything. It is said: the cause of bondage and freedom is the mind; and two of its states are distinguished — viṣaya-āsakta, "attached to objects," and nirviṣaya, "objectless."
The non-dual reading takes the second literally: the mind must remain without an object. The Vaiṣṇava reading points out that the word viṣaya in this literature means not "object" in general, but the object of sensory enjoyment: what is made use of. And so nirviṣaya means not "directed at nothing" but "not occupied with tasting."
That this reading is correct is shown by the second line of the next verse, where the same book will say directly: if the mind were attached in the same way to brahman — that is, an object is presupposed, and the only question is which one.