Upanishads · Mahā 4.44
॥
Devanāgarī
ऋतमात्मा परंब्रह्म सत्यमित्यादिका बुधैः कल्पिता व्यवहारार्थं यस्य संज्ञा महात्मनः
Transliteration (IAST)
ṛtamātmā paraṃbrahma satyamityādikā budhaiḥ kalpitā vyavahārārthaṃ yasya saṃjñā mahātmanaḥ
Word-by-word
SanskritIASTMeaning
ऋतम् आत्मा परम् ब्रह्मṛtam ātmā param brahma“right”, “Ātman”, “supreme Brahman”; “truth”, “the Self”, “the highest Brahman”
सत्यम् इति आदिकाः बुधैःsatyam iti ādikāḥ budhaiḥ“the real” and the rest — by the wise; “the genuine” and suchlike — by sages
कल्पिताः व्यवहार-अर्थम्kalpitāḥ vyavahāra-arthamare contrived for the sake of usage; are devised for the needs of intercourse
यस्य संज्ञाः महा-आत्मनःyasya saṃjñāḥ mahā-ātmanaḥthe names of that Great Soul; the designations of Him, the lofty of spirit
Translation
“‘Right’, ‘Ātman’, ‘supreme Brahman’, ‘the real’ and the other names of that Great Soul are contrived by the wise for the sake of usage.”
Version
84931f131318 · published Jul 29, 2026, 6:29:20 AM UTC
Available inRUENPage between verses with
A verse about words, and it is honest to the end.
All the lofty names — truth, Ātman, Brahman, the real — are called kalpita, “contrived”, and the purpose is given: vyavahāra-artham, “for the sake of usage”, so that speech may be possible.
This is not a denial of Him of whom they speak. It is an admission that our designations are ours, not His.
Set it beside 4.9, where it was said that even “om” is vain. The thought is one: the word carries to the threshold.
And here it is worth saying how the Vaiṣṇava understanding differs, for the difference is fine and important.
The names listed in this verse are all abstract: “truth”, “the real”, “the highest”. Such names are indeed composed by men: we took a property and named the Owner of the property by it.
But a name given by Himself is of another kind. It is telling that the name of Nārāyaṇa, standing in the first adhyāya of this very book, is nowhere called contrived: what is cancelled is our designations taken from properties, not the revealed name. The difference between them is not in the sound, but in who gave it.