Upaniṣads · Jābāladarśana 1.10
॥
Devanāgarī
सर्वं सत्यं परं ब्रह्म न चान्यदिति या मतिः । तच्च सत्यं वरं प्रोक्तं वेदान्तज्ञानपारगैः
Transliteración (IAST)
sarvaṃ satyaṃ paraṃ brahma na cānyaditi yā matiḥ | tacca satyaṃ varaṃ proktaṃ vedāntajñānapāragaiḥ
Palabra por palabra
SánscritoIASTSignificado
सर्वं सत्यं परं ब्रह्मsarvaṃ satyaṃ paraṃ brahmaall that is true is the highest brahman
न च अन्यत्na ca anyatand there is nothing else
इति या मतिःiti yā matiḥsuch is the understanding
तत् च सत्यं वरं प्रोक्तंtat ca satyaṃ varaṃ proktaṃand that is named the highest truth
वेदान्त-ज्ञान-पारगैःvedānta-jñāna-pāragaiḥby those who have gone through to the end of the knowledge of Vedanta
Traducción
"'All that is true is the highest brahman, and there is nothing else' — such is the understanding; and this is called the highest truth by those who have gone through to the end of the knowledge of Vedanta."
Versión
deac86656da5 · publicado 12 ago 2026, 5:00:00 UTC
Disponible enRUENPasa de verso en verso con
The same device as with non-harming: the ordinary rule is raised to its ground, and the highest truth is named as knowledge, not truthfulness of speech. The phrase na cha anyat, "and there is nothing else," is the standard formula of the nondualist reading, and its possible meanings deserve examination. It can be read two ways, and both have support.
The first: apart from brahman, nothing exists; the world is an illusion. The second: apart from brahman, nothing is independent; everything exists, but nothing stands on its own. The Vaishnava side holds to the second, and rests this not on preference but on how the world is described in these same books. The Gita says: "By Me, in an unmanifest form, this whole world is pervaded; all beings dwell in Me, but I do not dwell in them" (9.4).
This verse, which we have had occasion to discuss before, is built so that it tests both readings. Were nothing to exist besides Him, the second half of the verse would be meaningless: there would be nothing to deny. The denial "I do not dwell in them" makes sense only if "they" exist.
Let us add a simple observation about the word satya itself. It is formed from sat, "being"; and hence "the true" here means, first of all, "that which really exists," not "correctly stated." Read this way, the line speaks not of speech, but of being: only That truly is, and everything else is only insofar as it is held by Him. And with this the Vaishnava side agrees fully — it refuses only to take the next step and declare what is held to be nonexistent.