Previous Verse
Next Verse

Mahabharata — Ashvamedhika Parva, Shloka 133

Mind as Charioteer; Kṣetrajña, Tapas, and Dhyāna-Yoga

Adhyātma-Upadeśa

यथा द्रव्यं च कर्ता च संयोगो5प्यनयोस्तथा । यह निश्चित बात है कि पुरुषके भोगनेयोग्य द्रव्यमात्रकी संज्ञा सत्त्व है तथा जैसे द्रव्य और कर्ताका सम्बन्ध है, वैसे ही इन दोनोंका सम्बन्ध है

yathā dravyaṃ ca kartā ca saṃyogo ’py anayostathā |

Vāyu nói: “Như có sự kết hợp giữa vật chất và kẻ hành động, thì giữa hai điều này cũng có sự kết hợp như thế.” Trong mạch nghĩa, lời ấy làm rõ sự phân biệt theo tinh thần Sāṃkhya: cái được “thụ hưởng” (trường đối tượng của kinh nghiệm) và “kẻ thụ hưởng/kẻ hành động” vốn khác nhau về nguyên lý, nhưng do sự liên hệ mà dường như bị trói buộc; hiểu đúng mối liên hệ ấy để nới lỏng chấp trước và phục hồi chánh kiến.

यथाjust as / as
यथा:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootयथा
Formindeclinable (comparative particle)
द्रव्यंsubstance / thing
द्रव्यं:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootद्रव्य
Formneuter, nominative, singular
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
Formindeclinable (conjunction)
कर्ताdoer / agent
कर्ता:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootकर्तृ
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
and
:
TypeIndeclinable
Root
Formindeclinable (conjunction)
संयोगःconnection / conjunction / relation
संयोगः:
Karta
TypeNoun
Rootसंयोग
Formmasculine, nominative, singular
अपिalso / even
अपि:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootअपि
Formindeclinable (also/even)
अनयोःof these two
अनयोः:
Sambandha
TypePronoun
Rootइदम् (अन-)
Formgenitive, dual (common gender by context)
तथाso / in the same way
तथा:
TypeIndeclinable
Rootतथा
Formindeclinable (correlative)

वायुदेव उवाच

V
Vāyudeva

Educational Q&A

The verse teaches discernment between the objective ‘substance’ (what is experienced/used) and the ‘agent’ (the doer/enjoyer). Their bond is not identity but saṃyoga—an association—so one should not confuse the self with the field of objects or with mere material qualities.

Vāyudeva is instructing the listener in a philosophical explanation, using an analogy: as an agent relates to a material object through contact/association, so two principles under discussion are connected. The point is to clarify how apparent bondage arises and how right understanding supports ethical restraint and liberation-oriented conduct.