उपनिषद् · Varāha 4.33
॥
देवनागरी
तमेव धीरो विज्ञाय प्रज्ञां कुर्वीत ब्राह्मणः । नानुध्यायाद्बहूञ्छब्दान्वाचो विग्लापनं हि तत्
लिप्यंतरण (IAST)
tameva dhīro vijñāya prajñāṃ kurvīta brāhmaṇaḥ | nānudhyāyādbahūñchabdānvāco viglāpanaṃ hi tat
शब्दशः अर्थ
संस्कृतIASTअर्थ
तम् एव धीरः विज्ञायtam eva dhīraḥ vijñāyahaving known him alone, the steadfast
प्रज्ञां कुर्वीत ब्राह्मणःprajñāṃ kurvīta brāhmaṇaḥlet the brahmin cultivate understanding
न अनुध्यायात् बहून् शब्दान्na anudhyāyāt bahūn śabdānlet him not ponder many words
वाचः विग्लापनं हि तत्vācaḥ viglāpanaṃ hi tatfor that is a wearying of speech
अनुवाद
"Having known him alone, let the steadfast brahmin cultivate understanding; let him not ponder many words, for that is a wearying of speech."
संस्करण
c0e28e46c12d · प्रकाशित 12 अग॰ 2026, 5:00:00 am UTC
उपलब्ध भाषाएँRUENश्लोक बदलें इन कुंजियों से
The verse is taken word for word from the Brihadaranyaka (4.4.21); and it deserves examination, for it is one of the most frequently cited passages. The phrase vacho viglapanam, "a wearying of speech," literally means "an exhausting of the voice": from the root glai, "to tire, to wilt." That is, wordiness is called not an error, but exhaustion; one who speaks much wears out both himself and the word.
Let us add what deserves saying about the applicability of this counsel, for it is often cited out of place. The counsel is addressed to one who has already known: it says tam eva vijnaya, "having known him alone"; that is, first knowledge, then abstention from talk. To cite it to one still learning is to turn it into a prohibition on learning.
The Vaishnava side insists on this, and adds a distinction worth holding onto. It distinguishes prajalpa, "idle talk," and kirtana, "proclamation." The first is counted among six hindrances — Rupa Gosvami places prajalpa in the list of what ruins devotion.
The second is counted among the nine chief activities and is the very first. That is, what is forbidden is not speech, but speech about nothing; and the distinction is drawn not by the quantity of words, but by their subject. Let us add what it draws from this against a literal reading of the verse here.
Had silence been the highest, the Upanishads would never have been spoken, and the Brihadaranyaka would not have reached us; and it has reached us precisely because Yajnavalkya spoke.