Upaniṣads · Avadhūta 17
॥
Devanāgarī
विपर्यस्तो निदिध्यासे किं ध्यानमविपर्यये । देहात्मत्वविपर्यासं न कदाचिद्भजाम्यहम्
Transliteración (IAST)
viparyasto nididhyāse kiṃ dhyānamaviparyaye | dehātmatvaviparyāsaṃ na kadācidbhajāmyaham
Palabra por palabra
SánscritoIASTSignificado
विपर्यस्तः निदिध्यासेviparyastaḥ nididhyāselet one who understands wrongly contemplate
किं ध्यानम् अ-विपर्ययेkiṃ dhyānam a-viparyayewhat contemplation is there when there is no wrongness
देह-आत्म-त्व-विपर्यासंdeha-ātma-tva-viparyāsaṃthe wrongness 'the body is I'
न कदाचित् भजामि अहम्na kadācit bhajāmi ahamI never entertain
Traducción
Let one who understands wrongly contemplate; what contemplation is there when there is no wrongness? The wrongness 'the body is I' I never entertain.
Versión
270f0bb12406 · publicado 12 ago 2026, 5:00:00 UTC
Disponible enRUENPasa de verso en verso con
The third step too is rejected — nididhyāsana, "contemplation"; the argument is the same. It is worth noting the definition given to the wrongness: deha-ātmatva-viparyāsa, "the wrongness 'the body is I.'" That is, the whole error is reduced to one thing — identifying oneself with the body; and contemplation is needed only by one who has it.
This definition is common in Vaiṣṇava books and true as far as it goes. The Bhāgavatam says the same: the notion of "I" in the body [composed] of the three principles, and of "mine" in what is attached to it (Gītā 5.18 and Bhāgavatam 5.5.8) — here is the root. But note that here the root is named as one; while our books name two, as discussed when reading the Annapūrṇā (5.11): ahaṃ and mama, "I" and "mine." And the second holds on longer than the first.
Let us add an observation pertaining to the present line. A person fully convinced that he is not the body easily finds himself offended if his body is pushed. So viparyāsa is not merely in a notion, but in a habit; and so contemplation is needed even by one who has understood — for understanding removes the notion, but only time and repetition remove the habit.