Upanishads · Atharvaśiras 38
॥
Devanāgarī
यस्मिन् क्रोधं यां च तृष्णां क्षमां चाक्षमां हित्वा हेतुजालस्य मूलम् । बुद्ध्या संचितं स्थापयित्वा तु रुद्रे रुद्रम् एकत्वम् आहुः
Transliteration (IAST)
yasmin krodhaṃ yāṃ ca tṛṣṇāṃ kṣamāṃ cākṣamāṃ hitvā hetujālasya mūlam / buddhyā saṃcitaṃ sthāpayitvā tu rudre rudram ekatvam āhuḥ
Word-by-word
SanskritIASTMeaning
यस्मिन् क्रोधम् याम् च तृष्णाम्yasmin krodham yām ca tṛṣṇāmin whom anger and craving; in whom wrath and thirst
क्षमाम् च अक्षमाम् हित्वाkṣamām ca akṣamām hitvāhaving abandoned patience and impatience; casting off both forbearance and its lack
हेतुजालस्य मूलम्hetujālasya mūlamthe root of the net of causes; the base of the web of causation
बुद्ध्या संचितम् स्थापयित्वा तुbuddhyā saṃcitam sthāpayitvā tuhaving established what is gathered by the intellect; having settled what the understanding has amassed
रुद्रे रुद्रम् एकत्वम् आहुःrudre rudram ekatvam āhuḥin Rudra they declare Rudra as oneness; in Rudra they name Rudra one
Translation
Having abandoned anger and craving, patience and impatience — the root of the net of causes — and established what is gathered by the intellect, in Rudra they declare Rudra as oneness.
Version
34ca562ec480 · published Jul 29, 2026, 3:17:52 AM UTC
Available inRUENPage between verses with
A second verse in a row, and it is dark in transmission: part of it repeats in the thirty-sixth section, and different editions read it differently.
The general sense, however, is clear, and it concerns what must be abandoned.
Four things are listed: krodha — anger; tṛṣṇā — craving, “greed for”; kṣamā — patience, and akṣamā — impatience.
That the first two should go is plain. But the third?
Here is the verse's whole finesse. Patience is a virtue; and yet it is named among the things let go. Because one is patient where there is still something to endure; and the verse speaks of a state where nothing remains to be endured.
Then — hetu-jālasya mūlam, “the root of the net of causes”: that from which the whole chain of cause and effect is drawn, all bondage by deeds.
And the conclusion: rudre rudram ekatvam āhuḥ — “in Rudra they declare Rudra as oneness”.
The phrase is unusual: not “they merge with Rudra”, but “in Rudra — Rudra”. He who has seen finds in Him Him, and not himself.
This distinction the Vaiṣṇava Vedānta holds firmly, and here it is expressed by the grammar itself: by the locative and the accusative.