Upaniṣads · Varāha 2.23
॥
Devanāgarī
अनन्ते सच्चिदानन्दे मयि वाराहरूपिणी । स्थितेऽद्वितीयभावः स्यात्को बन्धः कश्च मुच्यते
Transliteración (IAST)
anante saccidānande mayi vārāharūpiṇī | sthite'dvitīyabhāvaḥ syātko bandhaḥ kaśca mucyate
Palabra por palabra
SánscritoIASTSignificado
अनन्ते सत्-चित्-आनन्देanante sat-cit-ānandein the infinite, being, conscious, blissful
मयि वाराह-रूपिणिmayi vārāha-rūpiṇiin me, in the form of a boar
स्थिते अ-द्वितीय-भावः स्यात्sthite a-dvitīya-bhāvaḥ syātestablished, let there be non-duality
कः बन्धः कः च मुच्यतेkaḥ bandhaḥ kaḥ ca mucyatewhat bond, and who is liberated?
Traducción
"In me — infinite, being, conscious, blissful, established in the form of a boar — let there be non-duality: what bond, and who is liberated?"
Versión
5c79e1a31c0f · publicado 12 ago 2026, 5:00:00 UTC
Disponible enRUENPasa de verso en verso con
Worth noting is that non-duality is asserted of the one in the form of a boar: mayi varaha-rupini. That is, the non-dual is called having a form; and the word rupin, "possessing a form," stands directly beside the word advitiya. This combination runs throughout the book and is its distinguishing feature among nondualist works.
The Vaishnava side reads the word advitiya exactly this way, discussed when reading the Ganapati (4.2): it means "incomparable, having no equal," not "nothing else exists." Confirmation is found in this very line: one without an equal can have a form; but one besides whom nothing exists cannot have a form, for a form is an outline, and an outline presupposes something behind it. Let us add the question ending the verse: ko bandhah kash cha muchyate, "what bond, and who is liberated?" This question is rhetorical and means: neither bond nor a liberated one.
It is worth noting, however, that it is addressed to a pupil who asked for the teaching; and if there is neither bond nor a liberated one, then there is no one who asked either, and the teaching has been given to no one. This objection has been raised more than once and can be repeated briefly: a teaching of complete oneness cannot be taught, for teaching requires two; and every book carrying it to the end finishes with a scene in which two remain.