Shloka 100
भरतचरितम्—मृगासक्ति-हेतुकः समाधिभङ्गः, जातिस्मरत्वं, रहूगण-जाḍभरत-संवादः
एवं व्यवस्थिते तत्त्वे मयाहम् इति भाषितुम् पृथक्करणनिष्पाद्यं शक्यते नृपते कथम्
evaṃ vyavasthite tattve mayāham iti bhāṣitum pṛthakkaraṇaniṣpādyaṃ śakyate nṛpate katham
O king, when reality is thus rightly established, how can one still speak of “mine” and “I”? For such speech would require a true separation to be accomplished—yet in truth no such separation can be made.
Sage Parāśara (teaching Maitreya; phrased as an address to a king within the illustrative discourse)
Concept: When reality is correctly discerned, possessive and egoic notions ('mine'/'I') cannot stand because they presuppose a separateness that is not ultimately real.
Vedantic Theme: Atman
Application: Practice observing thoughts of ownership and identity as mental constructions, and cultivate non-appropriation in daily actions.
Vishishtadvaita: Negates independent self-ownership while leaving room for the self’s dependence on the Supreme as its inner support (śeṣa–śeṣin orientation).
Vishnu Form: Para-Brahman
Bhakti Type: Shanta
FAQs
The verse critiques egoic ownership and self-assertion, stating that once reality (tattva) is correctly understood, “I” and “mine” cannot be upheld because they depend on an unreal separation.
He implies that claiming “I” and “mine” requires establishing an independent, separate self and possessions; but in the settled understanding of tattva, such absolute separateness cannot be genuinely accomplished.
Even when not named explicitly, the teaching aligns with Vaishnava metaphysics: Vishnu as the supreme ground of being makes all entities interdependent, so ego-based separations are ultimately secondary and misleading.