Upaniṣads · Rudrākṣajābāla 3p14
॥
Devanāgarī
य इमामुपनिषदं ब्राह्मणः सायमधीयानो दिवसकृतं पापं नाशयति । मध्याह्नेऽधीयानः षड्जन्मकृतं पापं नाशयति । सायं प्रातः प्रयुञ्जानोऽनेकजन्मकृतं पापं नाशयति
Transliteración (IAST)
ya imāmupaniṣadaṃ brāhmaṇaḥ sāyamadhīyāno divasakṛtaṃ pāpaṃ nāśayati | madhyāhne'dhīyānaḥ ṣaḍjanmakṛtaṃ pāpaṃ nāśayati | sāyaṃ prātaḥ prayuñjāno'nekajanmakṛtaṃ pāpaṃ nāśayati
Palabra por palabra
SánscritoIASTSignificado
यः इमाम् उपनिषदं ब्राह्मणःyaḥ imām upaniṣadaṃ brāhmaṇaḥwhatever brāhmaṇa this upaniṣad
सायम् अधीयानः दिवस-कृतं पापं नाशयतिsāyam adhīyānaḥ divasa-kṛtaṃ pāpaṃ nāśayatistudying in the evening, destroys the sin done that day
मध्याह्ने अधीयानः षट्-जन्म-कृतंmadhyāhne adhīyānaḥ ṣaṭ-janma-kṛtaṃstudying at midday, [destroys] that done in six births
सायं प्रातः प्रयुञ्जानःsāyaṃ prātaḥ prayuñjānaḥapplying it evening and morning
अनेक-जन्म-कृतं पापं नाशयतिaneka-janma-kṛtaṃ pāpaṃ nāśayatidestroys the sin done in many births
Traducción
Whatever brāhmaṇa, studying this upaniṣad in the evening, destroys the sin done that day; studying at midday, that done in six births; applying it evening and morning, destroys the sin done in many births.
Versión
c7a04e71aafb · publicado 12 ago 2026, 5:00:00 UTC
Disponible enRUENPasa de verso en verso con
Here the book returns to its old habit, and the word brāhmaṇaḥ, "brāhmaṇa," comes back — three lines after it said "whether a boy or a young man." This wavering deserves noting, for it runs through the whole book. Its living passages know no distinctions of estate; its statutory passages do. And the compiler, apparently, did not notice that one contradicts the other.
The conclusion for the reader is the same as drawn before. In books of this kind one must distinguish where tradition speaks and where the estate custom into which tradition fell speaks; and the first is usually broader than the second. It is also worth looking at the structure of the promise. In the evening — the sin of the day; at midday — the sin of six births; morning and evening — the sin of many births.
The order, as one can see, is arbitrary: why midday should outweigh evening by six lifetimes is not explained. The series is built on increase for the sake of increase, the same device as with the cows. The Vaiṣṇava side, on the question of destroying sin, holds a distinction worth repeating, for it is nowhere drawn in this book. Sin is a deed and a tendency; the deed is removed, the tendency remains. The Bhāgavatam speaks of this with the image of an elephant who bathes and rolls again in dust (6.1.9–10), and concludes that atonement without a change of mind is labor wasted.
Hence reading the book morning and evening is a useful thing — but useful not for what is promised. It does not destroy the sins of past lives; it keeps a person at the object twice a day, and by this, if he is honest, the tendency gradually changes.