उपनिषद् · Gaṇapati 2.2
॥
देवनागरी
अव त्वं माम् । अव वक्तारम् । अव श्रोतारम्
लिप्यंतरण (IAST)
ava tvaṃ mām | ava vaktāram | ava śrotāram
शब्दशः अर्थ
संस्कृतIASTअर्थ
अव त्वं माम्ava tvaṃ māmprotect me, you
अव वक्तारम्ava vaktāramprotect the speaker
अव श्रोतारम्ava śrotāramprotect the listener
अनुवाद
Protect me, you; protect the speaker, protect the listener.
संस्करण
f25ba37a9bbd · प्रकाशित 12 अग॰ 2026, 5:00:00 am UTC
उपलब्ध भाषाएँRUENश्लोक बदलें इन कुंजियों से
Here is the line for the sake of which the first was worth examining, and it stands only five short sentences away. There it was said: tat tvam asi, "that thou art." Here it is said: ava tvaṃ mām, "protect me, you."
The verb av means "to guard, to favor"; and this request is addressed to the very same one to whom the pronouncement was addressed. Let us set the two statements side by side, for that is the whole analysis. "You are what I am" — and, five lines later — "protect me." The one who asks for protection and the one asked cannot be one; one cannot ask oneself for protection even as a figure of speech.
The non-dual side's objection here is well known, and it must be given in full so as not to argue with a straw man. It runs thus: prayer belongs to the vyāvahārika, the "practical" level, where distinction still holds; the pronouncement of identity belongs to the pāramārthika, the "ultimate" level, where there is no distinction. Both are true, but not in the same sense.
This objection is orderly, and the answer to it is not that it is contradictory, but that it is arbitrary. Both statements stand in one text, side by side, spoken by one voice; and nothing in the text itself indicates which is ultimate and which practical. The division is introduced by the interpreter, not found in the book.
The Vaiṣṇava side does the opposite: it accepts both as spoken in one and the same sense, and is therefore obliged to find a reading under which they are compatible. Such a reading exists, and it is the very one spoken of above: unity in essence with distinction in person. Its advantage is that it need not declare anything conditional. An interpretation that need not declare part of the book a concession to the incapable explains the book better than one that must.
It is worth noting also the order of the request: mām, vaktāram, śrotāram — "me, the speaker, the listener." Not only for oneself; and not only for the one who teaches, but also for the one who attends.