उपनिषद् · Tripurātāpinī 102
॥
देवनागरी
अतो निर्विषयं नित्यं मनः कार्यं मुमुक्षुणा । यतो निर्विषयो नाम मनसो मुक्तिरिष्यते ॥ 1॥ मनो हि द्विविधं प्रोक्तं शुद्धं चाशुद्धमेव च । अशुद्धं कामसंकल्पं शुद्धं कामविवर्जितम् ॥ 2
लिप्यंतरण (IAST)
ato nirviṣayaṃ nityaṃ manaḥ kāryaṃ mumukṣuṇā | yato nirviṣayo nāma manaso muktiriṣyate || 1|| mano hi dvividhaṃ proktaṃ śuddhaṃ cāśuddhameva ca | aśuddhaṃ kāmasaṃkalpaṃ śuddhaṃ kāmavivarjitam || 2
शब्दशः अर्थ
संस्कृतIASTअर्थ
अतः निर्विषयं नित्यं मनःataḥ nirviṣayaṃ nityaṃ manaḥhence let the mind always be made objectless
कार्यं मुमुक्षुणाkāryaṃ mumukṣuṇāby one desiring liberation
यतः निर्विषयः नामyataḥ nirviṣayaḥ nāmafor objectlessness precisely
मनसः मुक्तिः इष्यतेmanasaḥ muktiḥ iṣyateis held to be the liberation of the mind
मनः हि द्वि-विधं प्रोक्तम्manaḥ hi dvi-vidhaṃ proktamthe mind is declared twofold
अ-शुद्धं काम-संकल्पम्a-śuddhaṃ kāma-saṃkalpamimpure — bearing the resolve of desire
शुद्धं काम-विवर्जितम्śuddhaṃ kāma-vivarjitampure — devoid of desire
अनुवाद
«Hence let one desiring liberation always make the mind objectless, for objectlessness precisely is held to be the liberation of the mind. The mind is declared twofold: impure and pure; impure — bearing the resolve of desire, pure — devoid of desire».
संस्करण
c03bcced36eb · प्रकाशित 7 अग॰ 2026, 5:19:24 am UTC
उपलब्ध भाषाएँRUENश्लोक बदलें इन कुंजियों से
Verses begin here, and the first of them is a commonplace of all later literature: the mind must be made nirviṣaya, «objectless», and it is divided into pure and impure by the mark of desire. These verses do not belong to this book. They stand almost word for word in the Amṛtabindu-upaniṣad (1–2), in the Maitrī-upaniṣad, and in the Yoga-vāsiṣṭha; such verses circulated among books as proverbs do, and every compendium inserted them into its own.
The position voiced in them was discussed when reading Adhyātma and Annapūrṇā, and there is no need to repeat the analysis. Let me recall only the substance of the objection. The mind never exists without an object: it is always about something, and this is its structure, not its fault. One who bids the mind be objectless bids it stop being a mind — and usually achieves not freedom, but torpor or self-deception.
The Vaishnava solution to the same problem is different and, in my view, the only feasible one. Not to strip the mind of an object, but to give it an object that does not corrupt it. Desire is here named a mark of impurity; but it is not desire itself that is impure, but its direction — toward what comes to an end. One who has come to desire the eternal desires not less than before, but more — and no torpor is required for this.
Let us add too what this same book itself said when reading the thirty-eighth line: «barely born, the desirer desires desire». There desire was declared innate; and sixty lines on, the mind is bidden to be purified of it. This contradiction is common in compendia of this kind and is explained by the fact that the verses are taken from different places.