Upaniṣads · Rudrahṛdaya 52
॥
Devanāgarī
स यो ह वै तत्परमं ब्रह्म यो वेद वै मुनिः । ब्रह्मैव भवति स्वस्थः सच्चिदानन्द मातृकः
Transliteración (IAST)
sa yo ha vai tatparamaṃ brahma yo veda vai muniḥ | brahmaiva bhavati svasthaḥ saccidānanda mātṛkaḥ
Palabra por palabra
SánscritoIASTSignificado
सः यः ह वैsaḥ yaḥ ha vaihe, who indeed
तत् परमं ब्रह्मtat paramaṃ brahmathat supreme brahman
यः वेद वै मुनिःyaḥ veda vai muniḥknows indeed, the sage
ब्रह्म एव भवति स्वस्थःbrahma eva bhavati svasthaḥbecomes brahman itself, established in himself
सत्-चित्-आनन्द मातृकःsat-cit-ānanda mātṛkaḥhaving being, consciousness, and bliss as his source
Traducción
"That sage who indeed knows that supreme brahman becomes brahman itself — established in himself, having being, consciousness, and bliss as his source."
Versión
87940b3e7bdd · publicado 12 ago 2026, 5:00:00 UTC
Disponible enRUENPasa de verso en verso con
The book ends with the formula brahmaiva bhavati, "becomes brahman itself"; and it was discussed when reading the Kāṭharudra (12), where the main point was noted: the verb bhavati, "becomes," refutes itself as an assertion of identity, for one becomes what one was not. Let us add here a word standing beside it, absent in other recensions: svastha, "established in himself." It is formed from sva, "one's own," and stha, "standing": literally "standing in one's own." In ordinary speech it simply means "healthy, sane, come to oneself"; it is said of a patient who has grown better.
This meaning, to my mind, is better than the theological one and explains the whole passage. What is promised is not a transformation into a different being, but — to come to oneself; and a person who has come to himself after a long illness does not become someone else, but finally becomes himself. The Vaiṣṇava side interprets these turns of phrase exactly this way: svarūpe sthiti, "establishment in one's own nature," is her usual name for liberation. And it means not dissolution, but the ending of an imposture: to stop considering oneself the body, the name, the rank — and to turn out to be what one is, and whose one is.
Let us look back over the whole book, for it deserves it. It is Śaiva, and begins with the question of who is chief among the gods; and it answers it in a way that makes hostility impossible: whoever bows to Govinda bows to Śaṅkara (6); whoever hates one hates the other (7); Viṣṇu is the eternal self of all beings (13); one form is divided into three for a purpose (15). Then come seven lines of bows, where each time homage is given to two, separately (17–23). Then — the Muṇḍaka, the Taittirīya, and the famous two birds, of which it is said directly: one tastes, and not the other (41).
And then the book declares their difference fabricated (42) and ends with unity. And here lies its value for the reader: it has set both testimonies side by side, smoothing over neither — and anyone who has read to the end can compare them for himself.