na hi tena brahmā jānāti yena na hi jānāti । ajānataḥ tu yat brahmā tattu na hi na hi ।
“Brahma does not know It by which He is not known; and what Brahma knows, that is not It.”
Structure
na hi tena brahmā jānāti yena na hi jānāti ajānataḥ tu yat brahmā tattu na hi na hi
Brahmā(The creator) brahmāna hi(does) not indeedjānātiknowtenathat (one)yenaby whichna hinot indeedjānāti(he) knowstuindeedajānataḥnot knowingyatthat whichbrahmā(is) brahmātattuthatna hinot indeedna hinot indeed
Word-by-Word Grammar
| Word | IAST | Type | Grammar | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| hi | hi | indeclinable | — | indeed, surely |
| tena | tena | pronoun | instrumental · singular | by him |
| brahmā | brahmā | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | Brahman |
| jānāti | jānāti | verb | √jñā · present · third | he knows |
| yena | yena | pronoun | instrumental · singular | by whom |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| hi | hi | indeclinable | — | indeed, surely |
| jānāti | jānāti | verb | √jñā · present · third | he knows |
| ajānataḥ | ajānataḥ | verb | √jñā · past participle | not knowing |
| tu | tu | indeclinable | — | indeed, but |
| yat | yat | pronoun | nominative · singular · neuter | what |
| brahmā | brahmā | noun | nominative · singular · masculine | Brahman |
| tattu | tattu | indeclinable | — | that indeed |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| hi | hi | indeclinable | — | indeed, surely |
| na | na | indeclinable | — | not |
| hi | hi | indeclinable | — | indeed, surely |
Scholarly Commentary
Advaita Vedānta (Ādi Śaṅkarācārya): This verse from the Māṇḍūkyopaniṣad underscores the non-dual nature of reality, emphasizing that Brahman, the ultimate reality, is not an object of knowledge in the conventional sense. Shankara, in his commentary on the Brahma Sutras, reasons that if Brahman were known through the means of knowledge, it would imply duality, and thus, Brahman cannot be known in the way other objects are known. This verse points to the identity of Brahman and Ātman, suggesting that the Self is not something to be known but is the very essence of the knower. The phrase 'na hi tena brahmā jānāti' highlights the limitations of language and cognition in describing the ultimate reality. Shankara's commentary on this verse would emphasize the need to transcend the dualistic framework of subject-object to realize the non-dual nature of Brahman, which is the true Self. This understanding dissolves the distinctions between the knower, the known, and the act of knowing, revealing the ultimate truth of non-duality.
Vaiṣṇava tradition (Rāmānujācārya / Madhvācārya): In the Vaiṣṇava tradition, this verse is seen as affirming the transcendence of Īśvara (the Lord) and the impossibility of fully comprehending Him through human intellect alone. Rāmānujācārya, in his Śrī Bhāṣya, notes that while Brahman (or Īśvara) is the object of devotion and knowledge, the verse 'na hi tena brahmā jānāti yena na hi jānāti' indicates the limitations of human understanding in grasping the divine. This limitation, however, is not a barrier to devotion but rather an invitation to surrender and faith. The relationship between the jīva (individual self) and Īśvara is one of dependence and love, where the jīva seeks to understand and approach Īśvara through bhakti (devotion), recognizing that true knowledge of Īśvara is a gift of grace rather than a product of human effort. This approach emphasizes the personal aspect of the ultimate reality, highlighting the importance of devotion and surrender in achieving spiritual fulfillment.
Neo-Vedānta (Swami Vivekānanda / S. Rādhākrishnan): Swami Vivekānanda and S. Radhakrishnan, key figures in Neo-Vedānta, interpret this verse as underscoring the universal and the practical application of Vedāntic principles in contemporary life. Vivekānanda, in his lectures and writings, often emphasized the concept of the infinite and the limited, the known and the unknown, drawing from verses like this to illustrate the limits of human knowledge and the futility of trying to grasp the ultimate reality through mere intellect. He advocated for a practical Vedānta, where the principles of non-duality and the pursuit of the infinite are applied in everyday life to foster unity, compassion, and self-realization. Radhakrishnan, in a similar vein, saw this verse as pointing to the distinction between the Relative and the Absolute, highlighting the need to move beyond the confines of the relative to experience the Absolute. This perspective encourages individuals to embrace a holistic and inclusive worldview, recognizing the interconnectedness of all existence and the presence of the divine in every aspect of life, thereby applying the timeless wisdom of the Upaniṣads to modern challenges and aspirations.