LinuxTurn pages
Upanishads · Dattātreya 3.1
॥
Devanāgarī
य एवं वेद । अनुष्टुप् छन्दः । सदाशिव ऋषिः । दत्तात्रेयो देवता । ओमिति बीजम् । स्वाहेति शक्तिः । द्रामिति कीलकम्
Transliteration (IAST)
ya evaṃ veda | anuṣṭup chandaḥ | sadāśiva ṛṣiḥ | dattātreyo devatā | omiti bījam | svāheti śaktiḥ | drāmiti kīlakam
Word-by-word
SanskritIASTMeaning
यः एवं वेदyaḥ evaṃ vedawhoever knows thus
अनुष्टुप् छन्दःanuṣṭup chandaḥanuṣṭubh — the meter
सदाशिवः ऋषिःsadāśivaḥ ṛṣiḥSadāśiva — the sage
दत्तात्रेयः देवताdattātreyaḥ devatāDattātreya — the deity
ओम् इति बीजम्om iti bījam"om" — the seed
स्वाहा इति शक्तिःsvāhā iti śaktiḥ"svāhā" — the power
द्राम् इति कीलकम्drām iti kīlakam"drām" — the pin
Translation
«Whoever knows thus. The meter is anuṣṭubh, the sage is Sadāśiva, the deity is Dattātreya; "om" is the seed, "svāhā" is the power, "drām" is the pin».
Version
e9343586a5b3 · published Aug 12, 2026, 5:00:00 AM UTC
Available inRUENPage between verses with
The third and final chapter begins, and it is a phala-śruti, “the hearing of the fruit”: a list of what comes to the reader. This passage repeats the viniyoga, and the repetition is not superfluous in such a book: before the list of fruits, whose mantra it is and from whom is stated anew. Let us add what deserves saying about the phala-śruti genre itself, since we have reached the last chapter of this book.
Every upaniṣad ends this way, and the promises in such passages are usually immoderate; we have noted this reading many books. It is worth stating, however, why they were written this way, and how to read them. They were written not as an account, but as an appraisal: their task is to say that the subject of the book matters more than whatever it is compared to.
Hence the comparisons drawn are to what, in that time, was held most weighty: a thousand sacrifices, a million repetitions, the giving away of one's property. They should be read, therefore, as a scale, not as a receipt. The Vaiṣṇava side holds a rule on this, cited reading the Varāha (5.p): the promise holds for one who reads not for the sake of what is promised.
And its argument is simple: one who repeats for the sake of the fruit repeats for his own sake; and one who turns for his own sake turns not to Him, but to his own advantage — and hence the promise does not apply to him.