na hi duḥkhena viyogo na ca mohādapi muktiḥ
“Separation is not caused by sorrow, nor is liberation from delusion.”
Structure
na hi duḥkhena viyogo na ca mohāt api muktiḥ
na hi duḥkhena (not indeed by suffering) viyogo (separation) na ca (and not) mohāt (from delusion) api (even) muktiḥ (liberation)
Word-by-Word Grammar
| Word | IAST | Type | Grammar | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| hi | hi | indeclinable | — | indeed, surely |
| duḥkhena | duḥkhena | noun | instrumental · singular · neuter | with sorrow |
| viyogo | viyogo | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | separation |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| ca | ca | indeclinable | — | and |
| mohāt | mohāt | noun | ablative · singular · masculine | from delusion |
| api | api | indeclinable | — | also |
| muktiḥ | muktiḥ | noun | nominative · singular · feminine | liberation |
Scholarly Commentary
Advaita Vedānta (Ādi Śaṅkarācārya): This verse, 'na hi duḥkhena viyogo na ca mohādapi muktiḥ,' underscores the non-dual nature of reality by suggesting that neither sorrow nor delusion can cause separation from the ultimate truth, which is the brahman-ātman identity. According to Shankara, the concept of separation (viyoga) is an illusion created by ignorance (avidyā). He argues in his commentary on the Brahma Sutras that the ultimate reality, Brahman, is beyond all attributes, including those of sorrow and delusion. This verse, in essence, points to the idea that liberation (mukti) is not an event but a realization of one's true nature, which is always untouched by the fleeting experiences of sorrow or delusion. Shankara's emphasis on the unreality of the world of distinctions supports the notion that true liberation is the understanding of the identity of the individual self (ātman) with the universal self (Brahman), unaffected by external or internal conditions.
Vaiṣṇava tradition (Rāmānujācārya / Madhvācārya): The Vaiṣṇava tradition, particularly through the lens of Rāmānujācārya, interprets this verse as emphasizing the relationship between the jīva (individual soul) and Īśvara (the Lord). According to Ramanuja, the separation (viyoga) mentioned in the verse refers to the bondage of the soul due to its entanglement with the material world, driven by delusion (moha). Liberation (mukti) in this context is achieved through devotion (bhakti) to Īśvara, recognizing the inherent dependence of the jīva on Īśvara. This verse is seen as highlighting that mere sorrow or recognition of delusion is insufficient for liberation; instead, an active engagement with the divine, through love and devotion, is necessary. Ramanuja's Visishtadvaita philosophy underscores the personal relationship between the individual soul and the Lord, suggesting that it is through this devotional path that true liberation from the cycle of suffering and delusion can be achieved.
Neo-Vedānta (Swami Vivekānanda / S. Rādhākrishnan): Swami Vivekananda and S. Radhakrishnan, key figures of Neo-Vedānta, interpret this verse in a universally applicable and practical light. According to Vivekananda, this verse emphasizes the internal, spiritual struggle of humanity, where true freedom (mukti) is not merely the absence of external suffering (duḥkha) or internal delusion (moha) but a state of consciousness that transcends these limitations. In his lectures, Vivekananda often stressed the importance of recognizing one's true nature, beyond the ephemeral experiences of joy and sorrow, to achieve a state of inner peace and liberation. Radhakrishnan, building on this idea, suggests that the verse points to the universal human quest for meaning and freedom. He argues that liberation, in a contemporary context, means achieving a state of being where one is not bound by narrow, egoistic pursuits, but is free to realize one's full potential, serving humanity with compassion and wisdom. Both thinkers connect the verse to the broader human experience, advocating for a life of service, self-realization, and the pursuit of knowledge as the path to true liberation.