जें जें कांहीं साकार दिसे । तें तें कल्पांतीं नासे । स्वरूप तें असतचि असे । सर्वकाळ ॥ १ ॥

Whatever appears with form is destroyed at the time of dissolution; but the true Reality remains, existing at all times.

जें सकळांमधें सार । मिथ्या नव्हे तें साचार । जें कां नित्य निरंतर । संचले असे ॥ २ ॥

That which is the essence within everything, which is not false but real, and which pervades everywhere eternally and without break — that is the true Reality.

तें भगवंताचें निजरूप । त्यासि बोलिजे स्वरूप । याहि वेगळे अमूप । नामें तयाचीं ॥ ३ ॥

That is the very own form of God, and it is called 'Swaroop' (true form). Besides this, it has countless other names.

त्यास नामाचा संकेत । कळावया हा दृष्टांत । परी तें स्वरूप नामातीत । असतचि असे ॥ ४ ॥

A name is given to it only as a pointer, so it can be understood; but that true form itself is beyond all names and remains ever as it is.

दृश्यसबाह्य संचलें । परी तें विश्वास चोरले । जवळिच नाहीसें जालें । असतचि कैसें ॥ ५ ॥

It fills the visible world within and beyond, yet it seems hidden from the world's sight, as if stolen away. Though close at hand it seems to have vanished — but how can what truly exists ever be absent?

ऐसा ऐकोनियां देव । उठे दृष्टीचा भाव । पाहों जातां दिसे सर्व । दृश्यचि आवघें ॥ ६ ॥

On hearing such a description of God, the mind becomes eager to actually see him; but when one looks, all that is seen everywhere is merely the visible world.

दृष्टीचा विषयो दृश्य । तोचि जालिया सादृश्य । तेणें दृष्टी पावे संतोष । परी तें देखणें नव्हे ॥ ७ ॥

The eye's object is only the visible; when something visible resembles what is sought, the eye feels satisfied — but that is not truly seeing the Self.

दृष्टीस दिसे तें नासे । येतद्विषईं श्रुति असे । म्हणौन जें दृष्टीस दिसे । तें स्वरूप नव्हे ॥ ८ ॥

Whatever is seen by the eye is perishable — this the scriptures themselves declare. Therefore whatever is visible to the eye cannot be the true Reality.

स्वरूप तें निराभास । आणी दृश्य भासलें साभास । भासास बोलिलें नास । वेदांतशास्त्रीं ॥ ९ ॥

The true Reality is without any appearance whatsoever, while this visible world is only an appearance. The scriptures of Vedanta declare that whatever is mere appearance is perishable.

आणी पाहातां दृश्यचि भासे । वस्तु दृश्यावेगळी असे । स्वानुभवें पाहातां दिसे । तें दृश्यासबाह्य ॥ १० ॥

When one looks, only the visible world appears, yet the true Reality is different from the visible. Seen through one's own direct experience, it is found to be beyond and outside the visible altogether.

जें निराभास निर्गुण । त्याची काये सांगावी खूण । परी तें स्वरूप जाण । सन्निधचि असें ॥ ११ ॥

What sign can be given of that which is without appearance and without qualities? Yet know this much — that true Reality is right here, ever near at hand.

जैसा आकाशीं भासला भास । आणी सकळांमध्यें आकाश । तैसा जाणिजे जगदीश । सबाह्य अभ्यांतरीं ॥ १२ ॥

Just as any appearance arises within space, and space itself pervades everything within and without, so should the Lord of the world be understood — pervading all things, inside and outside alike.

उदकामधें परी भिजेना । पृथ्वीमधें परी झिजेना । वन्हीमधें परी सिजेना । स्वरूप देवाचें ॥ १३ ॥

God's true form, though present in water, is never wetted; though present in earth, is never worn away; and though present in fire, is never cooked.

तें रेंद्यामधें परी बुडेना । तें वायोमधें परी उडेना । सुवर्णीं असे परी घडेना । सुवर्णासारिखें ॥ १४ ॥

It is present in mud yet never sinks; present in wind yet never flies off; present in gold yet cannot be molded like gold.

ऐसें जें संचलें सर्वदा । परी ते आकळेना कदा । अभेदामाजीं वाढवी भेदा । ते हे अहंता ॥ १५ ॥

Though this Reality pervades everything at all times, it can never be fully grasped. It is the sense of 'I' — ego — that creates division within what is, in truth, undivided.

तिच्या स्वरूपाची खूण । सांगों कांहीं वोळखण । अहंतेचें निरूपण । सावध ऐका ॥ १६ ॥

Now let me give some indication of the nature of this ego. Listeners, be attentive and hear this explanation of the ego.

जे स्वरूपाकडे पावे । अनुभवासवें झेंपावे । अनुभवाचे शब्द आघवे । बोलोन दावी ॥ १७ ॥

When the mind's tendency reaches toward the true Self and leaps forward with experience, it then puts that whole experience into words and expresses it.

म्हणे आतां मीच स्वरूप । तेंचि अहंतेचें रूप । निराकारीं आपे ंआप । वेगळी पडे ॥ १८ ॥

It declares, 'Now I myself am that Reality' — and this very declaration is the form of ego. Thus within the formless, one sets oneself apart as separate from oneself.

स्वयें मीच आहे ब्रह्म । ऐसा अहंतेचा भ्रम । ऐसियें सूक्ष्मीं सूक्ष्म । पाहातां दिसे ॥ १९ ॥

'I myself am Brahman' — this itself is a subtle delusion of the ego. Examined closely, this shows itself to be the subtlest of all subtleties.

कल्पना आकळी हेत । वस्तु कल्पनातीत । म्हणौन नाकळे अंत । अनंताचा ॥ २० ॥

Thought can grasp only what fits its own intent, but the true Reality lies beyond all thought. Hence the limit of the limitless can never be grasped.

अन्वये आणि वीतरेक । हा शब्द कोणीयेक । निशब्दाच अंतरविवेक । शोधिला पाहिजे ॥ २१ ॥

'Anvaya' and 'vyatireka' (the logical method of presence and absence) are, after all, only words. What is beyond words must be sought through inner discernment alone.

आधीं घेईजे वाच्यंश । मग वोळखिजे लक्ष्यांश । लक्ष्यांशीं पाहातां वाच्यांश । असेल कैंचा ॥ २२ ॥

First one takes up the literal meaning of the word, and through it comes to recognize the deeper, indicated meaning. But once that indicated meaning is grasped, what further need remains for the literal word?

सर्वब्रह्म आणी विमळब्रह्म । हा वाच्यांशाचा अनुक्रम । शोधितां लक्ष्यांशाचें वर्म । वाच्यांश नसे ॥ २३ ॥

'All is Brahman' and 'Pure Brahman' — these are stages of the literal meaning. But when the real essence of the indicated meaning is sought, no literal meaning remains at all.

सर्व विमळ दोनी पक्ष । वाच्यांशीं आटती प्रत्यक्ष । लक्ष्यांशी लावीता लक्ष । पक्षपात घडे ॥ २४ ॥

Both positions — 'all' and 'pure' — exhaust themselves within literal meaning. Even fixing attention on the indicated meaning becomes a kind of partiality, since it too is conveyed only through words.

हें लक्ष्यांशें अनुभवणें । येथें नाहीं वाच्यांश बोलणे । मुख्य अनुभवाचे खुणे । वाचारंभ कैंचा ॥ २५ ॥

This is to be experienced only through the indicated meaning, through direct experience itself — there is no place here for mere words. At the very mark of true experience, how can words even begin?

परा पश्यंती मधेमां वैखरी । जेथें वोसरती च्यारी । तेथें शब्द कळाकुंसरी । कोण काज ॥ २६ ॥

Where even the four forms of speech — para, pashyanti, madhyama, and vaikhari — fall away and recede, what use is the craft and artistry of words?

शब्द बोलतां सवेंच नासे । तेथें शाश्वतता कोठें असे । प्रत्यक्षास प्रमाण नसे । बरें पाहा ॥ २७॥

A word, the moment it is spoken, perishes at once — so where can permanence be found in it? This is a matter of everyone's direct experience, and needs no further proof; mark this well.

शब्द प्रत्यक्ष नासिवंत । म्हणोन घडे पक्षपात । सर्व विमळ ऐसा हेत । अनुभवीं नाहीं ॥ २८॥

Since the word itself is plainly perishable, to declare through words that 'all is Brahman' or 'Brahman is pure' is itself a kind of one-sidedness. In true direct experience no such distinction or intent remains at all.

ऐक अनुभवाचें लक्षण । अनुभव म्हणिजे अनन्य जाण । ऐक अनन्याचें लक्षण । ऐसें असे॥ २९ ॥

Now hear the mark of true experience: experience means 'non-otherness' — the absence of any separateness. And hear also the mark of that non-otherness, which is as follows.

अनन्य म्हणिजे अन्य नसे । आत्मनिवेदन जैसें । संगभंगें असतचि असे । आत्मा आत्मपणें ॥ ३० ॥

'Non-other' means nothing else remains, as in complete self-surrender. Even when all association is broken, the Self continues to exist simply as the Self.

आत्म्यास नाहीं आत्मपण । हेंचि निःसंगाचें लक्षण । हें वाच्यांशें बोलिले जाण । कळावया कारणें ॥ ३१ ॥

The Self does not even have a separate sense of 'selfhood' — this is the true mark of being unattached. This, however, has been put into words only so that it may be understood.

येरवीं लक्ष्यांश तो वाच्यांशें । सांगिजेल हें घडे कैसें । वाक्य विवरणें अपैसें । कळों लागे ॥ ३२ ॥

Otherwise, how could the indicated meaning ever be conveyed through mere literal words? Yet through careful reflection on the statement, it comes to be understood on its own.

करावें तत्वविवरण । शोधावें ब्रह्म निर्गुण । पाहावें आपणास आपण । म्हणिजे कळे ॥ ३३ ॥

For this, one must analyze the principles, seek out the attributeless Brahman, and look at oneself by oneself — only then does it come to be known.

हें न बोलतांच विवरिजे । विवरोन विरोन राहिजे । मग अबोलणेंचि साजे । माहापुरुषीं ॥ ३४ ॥

This should be examined without speaking of it, and through that examination one should dissolve into it. Then silence itself becomes fitting for a great soul.

शब्दचि निशब्द होती । श्रुति नेति नेति नेति म्हणती । हें तों आलें आत्मप्रचिती । प्रत्यक्ष आतां ॥ ३५ ॥

There, words themselves fall silent; even the scriptures can only say 'not this, not this, not this.' This has now come as direct, actual realization within the self.

प्रचित आलियां अनुमान । हा तों प्रत्यक्ष दुराभिमान । तरी आतां मी अज्ञान । मज कांहींच न कळे ॥ ३६ ॥

Even after direct realization, to keep on merely reasoning about it is nothing but plain false pride. So now, the speaker humbly says, I regard myself as ignorant — in truth I know nothing at all.

मी लटिका माझें बोलणें लटिकें । मी लटिका माझें चालणें लटिकें । मी माझें अवघेंचि लटिकें । काल्पनिक ॥ ३७ ॥

I am false, and my speaking is false; I am false, and my walking too is false. Everything of 'I' and 'mine' is utterly false, mere imagination.

मज मुळींच नाहीं ठाव । माझे बोलणें अवघेंचि वाव । हा प्रकृतीचा स्वभाव । प्रकृती लटिकी ॥ ३८ ॥

I have, in truth, no place of my own at all; all my speaking is mere emptiness. This is simply the nature of Prakriti (primal nature), and Prakriti itself is false.

प्रकृती आणी पुरुष । यां दोहींस जेथें निरास । तें मीपण विशेष । हें केवि घडे ॥ ३९ ॥

Where both Prakriti and Purusha (nature and consciousness) themselves are negated, how can any distinct sense of 'I' possibly remain?

जेथें सर्व हि अशेष जालें । तेथें विशेष कैंचे आलें । मी मौनी म्हणतां भंगलें । मौन्य जैसें ॥ ४० ॥

Where everything without exception has ceased to be, how can any particular thing remain? Just as saying 'I am silent' itself breaks the silence, so it is here.

आतां मौन्य न भंगावें । करून कांहींच न करावें । असोन निशेष नसावें । विवेकबळें ॥ ४१ ॥

Therefore one should now keep such a silence that it is never broken — doing, yet remaining as though nothing at all were done. By the strength of discernment, one should exist and yet be as though wholly non-existent.