उपनिषद् · Rudrahṛdaya 45
॥
देवनागरी
चितश्चिन्न चिदाकारद्भिद्यते जडरूपतः । भिद्यते चेज्जडो भेदश्चिदेका सर्वदा खलु
लिप्यंतरण (IAST)
citaścinna cidākāradbhidyate jaḍarūpataḥ | bhidyate cejjaḍo bhedaścidekā sarvadā khalu
शब्दशः अर्थ
संस्कृतIASTअर्थ
चितः चित् न चित्-आकारात् भिद्यतेcitaḥ cit na cit-ākārāt bhidyateconsciousness from consciousness is not distinguished by the form of consciousness
जड-रूपतःjaḍa-rūpataḥby an inert form
भिद्यते चेत् जडः भेदःbhidyate cet jaḍaḥ bhedaḥif it is distinguished, the distinction is inert
चित् एका सर्वदा खलुcit ekā sarvadā khaluconsciousness is always one, indeed
अनुवाद
"Consciousness is not distinguished from consciousness by the form of consciousness, but by an inert form. If it is distinguished, the distinction is inert; consciousness is always one, indeed."
संस्करण
744d577efc47 · प्रकाशित 12 अग॰ 2026, 5:00:00 am UTC
उपलब्ध भाषाएँRUENश्लोक बदलें इन कुंजियों से
The argument is repeated and sharpened: if there is a difference between two consciousnesses, it is jaḍa, "inert," that is, material; and a material difference does not pertain to consciousness, and so consciousness is one. This must be answered in more detail, for the argument is cleverly built. It rests on a silent premise: every difference is a material property. This premise is unproven and, to my mind, false.
Let us take a difference not reducible to matter: "this one remembers, and that one has forgotten." Memory is not a thing and has no form; but the difference between one who remembers and one who has forgotten exists, and it is not inert. Let us take another: "this one loves that one." A relation is not matter; but the difference between the lover and the beloved exists, and anyone who has loved knows it is not illusory.
It is to such differences that the Vaiṣṇava side points. The Lord and the soul differ not by matter, for neither is material, but by the fact that one eternally remembers, and the other forgets; one holds, the other is held; one contains, the other is contained. The Gītā states the first difference directly: "both of us have been born many times; I know them all, but you do not know" (4.5). The difference here is in memory; and to call memory an inert substance is impossible.
It is worth noting also the word khalu, "indeed, surely," with which the verse ends. This is a particle of assurance, placed where one wants to stress self-evidence. Its use here is telling: where the argument is exhausted, "indeed" is added.