यस्याः स्वरूपं ब्रह्मादयो न जानन्ति तस्मादुच्यतेऽज्ञेया । यस्या अन्तो न विद्यते तस्मादुच्यतेऽनन्ता । यस्या ग्रहणं नोपलभ्यते तस्मादुच्यतेऽलक्ष्या । यस्या जननं नोपलभ्यते तस्मादुच्यतेऽजा । एकैव सर्वत्र वर्तते तस्मादुच्यत एका । एकैव विश्वरूपिणी तस्मादुच्यते नैका ऽत एवोच्यतेऽज्ञेयानन्तालक्ष्याजैका नैकेति । मन्त्राणां मातृका देवी शब्दानां ज्ञानरूपिणी । ज्ञानानां चिन्मयातीता शून्यानां शून्यसाक्षिणी
yasyāḥ svarūpaṃ brahmādayo na jānanti tasmāducyate'jñeyā | yasyā anto na vidyate tasmāducyate'nantā | yasyā grahaṇaṃ nopalabhyate tasmāducyate'lakṣyā | yasyā jananaṃ nopalabhyate tasmāducyate'jā | ekaiva sarvatra vartate tasmāducyata ekā | ekaiva viśvarūpiṇī tasmāducyate naikā 'ta evocyate'jñeyānantālakṣyājaikā naiketi | mantrāṇāṃ mātṛkā devī śabdānāṃ jñānarūpiṇī | jñānānāṃ cinmayātītā śūnyānāṃ śūnyasākṣiṇī
«Whose true form Brahmā and the rest do not know — hence she is called the Unknowable. Who has no end — hence she is called the Infinite. Whose grasping never succeeds — hence she is called the Elusive. Whose birth is never found — hence she is called the Unborn. She alone abides everywhere — hence she is called the One. She alone has the form of the world — hence she is called the Not-one; and therefore she is called: the unknowable, the infinite, the elusive, the unborn, the one, the not-one». The Goddess, mother of the mantras, existing as knowledge for the sounds; for knowledges, surpassing thought; for the voids, the witness of the void».
eec9f4882acd · publicado 12 ago 2026, 5:00:00 UTC
Disponible enRUENPasa de verso en verso con
Here is a line for whose sake this small book is worth reading: it is said that she is ekā and naikā — “one and not-one.”
And it is not merely stated, but explained why each is so. One — because she alone abides everywhere; not-one — because she has the form of the world, that is, appears as multiplicity.
Note that both words stand in one list, side by side, without any qualification that one is true and the other merely conventional. The author does not choose between them; he affirms both at once, because he sees both.
This is precisely the position the Vaiṣṇava side maintains against Advaita, and it is called by Madhva and by Jīva Gosvāmī bheda-abheda, or, in its final and most precise formulation, acintya-bheda-abheda, “inconceivable difference-and-non-difference.” The world and the soul are neither identical with Him nor separate from Him; and both are true in their own right, not by concession.
Advaita, at this point, is compelled to say that “one” is the truth and “not-one” mere appearance. But the text gives no basis for this: both halves are constructed identically, both are derived from a property (“because...”), and both are declared to be names.
Worth noting, too, is the last word of the line: śūnyānām śūnya-sākṣiṇī, “for the voids, the witness of the void.” This is stated against every teaching of the void as the ultimate limit: even where there is nothing, there is one who looks, and the void is attested by him, not by itself. A witness is never itself a void, for a void has nothing to witness.