Upanishads · Rudrākṣajābāla 3p16
॥
Devanāgarī
सर्वतीर्थफलमश्नुते । पतितसंभाषणात्पूतो भवति । पङ्क्तिशतसहस्रपावनो भवति । शिवसायुज्यमवाप्नोति । न च पुनरावर्तते न च पुनरावर्तत इत्योंसत्यमित्युपनिषत्
Transliteration (IAST)
sarvatīrthaphalamaśnute | patitasaṃbhāṣaṇātpūto bhavati | paṅktiśatasahasrapāvano bhavati | śivasāyujyamavāpnoti | na ca punarāvartate na ca punarāvartata ityoṃsatyamityupaniṣat
Word-by-word
SanskritIASTMeaning
सर्व-तीर्थ-फलम् अश्नुतेsarva-tīrtha-phalam aśnutetastes the fruit of all sacred fords
पतित-संभाषणात् पूतः भवतिpatita-saṃbhāṣaṇāt pūtaḥ bhavatibecomes pure from conversing with a fallen person
पङ्क्ति-शत-सहस्र-पावनः भवतिpaṅkti-śata-sahasra-pāvanaḥ bhavatibecomes a purifier of a hundred thousand rows
शिव-सायुज्यम् अवाप्नोतिśiva-sāyujyam avāpnotiattains union with Śiva
न च पुनः आवर्ततेna ca punaḥ āvartateand does not return again
Translation
He tastes the fruit of all sacred fords; he becomes pure from conversing with a fallen person; he becomes a purifier of a hundred thousand rows; he attains union with Śiva, and does not return again, does not return again. Oṃ, truth. Such is the upaniṣad.
Version
3adc1b11e909 · published Aug 12, 2026, 5:00:00 AM UTC
Available inRUENPage between verses with
The book ends, and in its last line stands something that cannot be passed over in silence: patita-saṃbhāṣaṇāt pūto bhavati, "becomes pure from conversing with a fallen person." That is, speaking with an outcast is itself a defilement requiring purification. Let us say this plainly and without softening: this cannot be accepted. This is not a prohibition on a bad deed and not a warning against bad influence — here the very act of addressing speech to a person whom society has rejected is declared unclean.
This rule belongs to the same order as paṅkti-pāvana, "purifier of rows," named in the same breath: it concerns the rows in which people sit to eat, and into which not everyone is seated. This whole order rests on the notion that defilement is transmitted by proximity; and what this leads to is not for us to judge from books, but from what still happens even now in Indian villages to those called untouchable. The Vaiṣṇava answer here is not abstract but given in living figures, and must be cited exactly so.
Caitanya called Haridāsa, born among Muslims and thus "fallen" by every reckoning, Ṭhākura, "lord," and set him above others in the repetition of the Name. He accepted Jagāi and Mādhāi, drunkards and killers, after they had broken his brother's head. And at Purī he embraced the leper Sanātana, from whom Sanātana himself recoiled.
The Bhāgavatam speaks of the same thing in a verse that, in this book, would sound like blasphemy: "even an outcaste who eats dogs, with Your name on his lips, is higher than a brāhmaṇa who has performed every sacrifice" (3.33.7). Now let us look back over what has been read and say what is in this book and what is not. It has beautiful things in it: a sign born of the tears of one going to destroy (0p2); a tree that took on immobility for the sake of grace (1.3); the rule of testing an object on a touchstone (1.14); beads in place of the estate-cord (1.17); a sign never removed, not asleep, not having drunk (1.19); the admission that the knowers disagree (2.7); teaching by knowledge and not by birth — "whether a boy or a young man" (3p11); and, finally, a whole earth unfit as payment, next to a single cow given with faith (3p13).
And there is also what cannot be accepted, and we have not softened it: the allotment of seeds by varṇa with a ban on wearing another's (1.10); the promise to remove murder by wearing (2.5); the treatment of disease by an object (2.16); "by mere wearing," which turns a sign into a talisman (2.11); and, finally, this last uncleanness from conversing with a person. Its chief peculiarity is that it contradicts itself, and contradicts itself for the better. Its statutory half divides people by birth; its living half derives the teacher from knowledge and the value of an offering from faith. And that the living half stands at the end while the statutory stands at the beginning is, to my mind, no accident but a property of all such books: they begin with order, and end with what order cannot contain.