Upanishads · Varāha 3.2
॥
Devanāgarī
दृश्यते श्रूयते यद्यद्ब्रह्मणोऽन्यन्न तद्भवेत् । नित्यशुद्ध विमुक्तैकमखण्डानन्दमद्वयम् । सत्यं ज्ञानमनन्तं यत्परं ब्रह्माहमेव तत्
Transliteration (IAST)
dṛśyate śrūyate yadyadbrahmaṇo'nyanna tadbhavet | nityaśuddha vimuktaikamakhaṇḍānandamadvayam | satyaṃ jñānamanantaṃ yatparaṃ brahmāhameva tat
Word-by-word
SanskritIASTMeaning
दृश्यते श्रूयते यत् यत्dṛśyate śrūyate yat yatwhatever is seen and heard
ब्रह्मणः अन्यत् न तत् भवेत्brahmaṇaḥ anyat na tat bhavetis not other than brahman
नित्य-शुद्ध-विमुक्त-एकम्nitya-śuddha-vimukta-ekameternal, pure, free, one
सत्यं ज्ञानम् अनन्तं यत्satyaṃ jñānam anantaṃ yattruth, knowledge, infinite
परं ब्रह्म अहम् एव तत्paraṃ brahma aham eva tathighest brahman — that I indeed am
Translation
"Whatever is seen and heard is not other than brahman: eternal, pure, free, one, undivided bliss, non-dual, truth, knowledge, infinite — that highest brahman I indeed am."
Version
8d2ea3b034f0 · published Aug 12, 2026, 5:00:00 AM UTC
Available inRUENPage between verses with
The definition of the Taittiriya is cited — satyam jnanam anantam brahma (2.1.1) — discussed when reading the Ganapati (2.9); there is no need to repeat the examination. Worth noting is an addition not found in the Taittiriya: param brahmaham eva tat, "that highest brahman I indeed am." That is, a definition standing in the original without a person is turned here into an assertion about the speaker.
We noted this device when reading the Ganapati (1.3), where the utterance "all this is brahman" was inserted into the second person: "you are all this, brahman." The difference between the two devices deserves stating, for it is the whole difference between the two readings. There the definition is addressed to another: "thou art That"; and then two remain — the speaker and the listener.
Here it is turned upon oneself: "I am That"; and then one remains. The Vaishnava side points out that the first form presupposes the second, while the second cancels it; and hence books where the utterances stand in the second person are read by it as its own. Let us add what deserves noting in the first half of the verse.
It says: whatever is seen and heard is not other than brahman. Read as "not other in essence," the Vaishnava side agrees, for this is its abheda. Read as "not other at all," a difficulty arises, discussed when reading the second chapter (2.11): one cannot be distinct from what does not exist; and the book, one line on, will say suffering does not touch it — that is, it will again distinguish something from something.