LinuxTurn pages
Upanishads · Muktikā 2.67
॥
Devanāgarī
अत्यन्तमलिनो देहो देही चात्यन्तनिर्मलः । उभयोरन्तरं ज्ञात्वा कस्य शौचं विधीयते
Transliteration (IAST)
atyantamalino deho dehī cātyantanirmalaḥ | ubhayorantaraṃ jñātvā kasya śaucaṃ vidhīyate
Word-by-word
SanskritIASTMeaning
अत्यन्तम् मलिनः देहःatyantam malinaḥ dehaḥexceedingly impure is the body
देही च अत्यन्त-निर्मलःdehī ca atyanta-nirmalaḥbut the embodied one is exceedingly pure
उभयोः अन्तरं ज्ञात्वाubhayoḥ antaraṃ jñātvāknowing the difference of the two
कस्य शौचं विधीयतेkasya śaucaṃ vidhīyatewhose purification is prescribed
Translation
«The body is exceedingly impure, but the embodied one is exceedingly pure; knowing the difference between the two — whose purification, then, is prescribed?»
Version
1995a186ebd5 · published Aug 12, 2026, 5:00:00 AM UTC
Available inRUENPage between verses with
Here is an argument, put as a question: if the body is impure by nature, and the soul pure by nature, then who is to be washed? The construction is clever, and worth examining what it gives and what it does not. What it gives is this: ritual purity does not reach to the essence; water washes off dirt, not inclination, and this was spoken of at Jābāli (3.2), where Bhāgavatam 1.2.17 was cited with the verb vidhunoti, «shakes off». What it does not give is this: the abolition of bathing.
For from the fact that washing does not reach the essence, it does not follow that one need not wash; and anyone who reads this verse as leave not to bathe reads it to his own advantage. The Vaishnava side holds precisely this, and its rule was cited at Varāha (5.25): an inward interpretation does not cancel the outward; whoever says «my Ganges is within me» and hence does not go to the Ganges interprets to his own convenience. Add what it says of purity in substance, for its own definition is different.
What makes a thing pure for it is not water and not nature, but belonging: what is offered to him is pure, and prasāda was spoken of at Dattātreya (3.4). And hence its answer to the question asked here, «whose purification, then?», is a third: neither the body's nor the soul's, but the relation's; and it is purified by being given up.