Abhanga 1387
For today: the unreal has been made true-looking; this is unknowable to the dualistic; the jīva must become the witness; ēka contains multiplicity, anēka reveals oneness; Hari is master of make-and-unmake.
The verse
आश्चर्य या वाटे नसत्या छंदाचें । कैसें दिलें साचें करोनियां ॥१॥ दुजियासी तंव अकळ हा भाव । करावा तो जीव साक्ष येथें ॥ध्रु.॥ एकीं अनेकत्व अनेकीं एकत्व । प्रकृतिस्वभाव प्रमाणें चि ॥२॥ तुका म्हणे करूं उगवूं जाणसी । कुशळ येविशीं तुम्ही देवा ॥३॥
Literal translation
I find astonishing — the play of nasatya — how was it given (the appearance of) sāca, having made (it)? To dujā, this bhāva is akaḷa — the jīva must be made the sākṣa here. In ēka, anēkatva; in anēka, ēkatva — by prakṛti-svabhāva-pramāṇa. Tuka says: you know making and unmaking — kuśaḷa in this matter, you, Deva.
मराठी: आश्चर्य वाटतें — नसत्या (असत्य) छंदाचें — कैसें — साचें (खरें) — करून — दिलेलें? दुजि-यासी — तोवर — अकळ — हा भाव — जीव — येथें — साक्ष — व्हावा. एकींत — अनेकत्व — अनेकींत — एकत्व — प्रकृति-स्वभाव — प्रमाणें-च. Tukā म्हणे — करूं-उगवूं — जाणसी — येविशीं — कुशळ — तुम्ही — देवा.
Word-by-word gloss
| Marathi | Meaning |
|---|---|
| आश्चर्य या वाटे नसत्या छंदाचें | "I find this āścarya (astonishing) — the chanda (play) of nasatya (the unreal)" |
| कैसें दिलें साचें करोनियां | "how (kaisē) — given — sāca (true) — having made (it)?" |
| दुजियासी तंव अकळ हा भाव | "to dujā (the other) — tamva (= until) — akaḷa (un-knowable) — this bhāva" |
| करावा तो जीव साक्ष येथें | "must be made — the jīva — the sākṣa (witness) — here" |
| एकीं अनेकत्व अनेकीं एकत्व | "in ēka — anēkatva (multiplicity); in anēka — ēkatva (oneness)" |
| प्रकृतिस्वभाव प्रमाणें चि | "by prakṛti-svabhāva (= the standing-nature of prakṛti) — pramāṇa (standard)" |
| तुका म्हणे करूं उगवूं जाणसी | "Tuka says — karūm-ugavūm (making-and-unmaking) — you know" |
| कुशळ येविशीं तुम्ही देवा | "kuśaḷa (skilled / accomplished) — in this matter — you, Deva" |
What it means
Multiplicity-in-the-one-oneness-in-the-many abhang. Sharp non-dual statement.
The opening wonder: āścarya yā vāṭē nasatyā chandācē — kaisē dilēm sācē karōniyā? — I find astonishing — thechanda(play / rhythm / fancy) ofnasatya(the unreal / non-existent) — how was it given (the appearance of)sāca(true / real), having made (it)? The world's appearance-of-reality is the wonder. The unreal has been given the sāca-appearance; the play has been made-true-looking.
The epistemological claim: dujiyāsī tamva akaḷa hā bhāva — karāvā tō jīva sākṣa yēthē — todujā(theother, the un-merged, the still-dualistic-perceiver) — until then —akaḷa(un-knowable) — this bhāva — thejīvamust be made thesākṣa(witness) here. The dualistic-knower cannot know this; only when the jīva itself becomes the sākṣa-position can the play be seen-through. (Compare 1376 sākṣī hōtōm āpulā.)
The non-dual formula: ēkīm anēkatva — anēkīm ēkatva — prakṛti-svabhāva pramāṇē chi — inēka(the One) —anēkatva(multiplicity); inanēka(the many) —ēkatva(oneness) — byprakṛti-svabhāva(the standing-nature of prakṛti) —pramāṇa(this is the standard). The classical Advaita-paradox: oneness contains multiplicity, multiplicity reveals oneness. The standard is prakṛti-svabhāva — i.e., the nature-of-prakṛti isitselfthis paradoxical-double-structure.
The closing acknowledgment: karūm ugavūm jāṇasī — kuśaḷa yē-viśīm tumhī Devā — making (karūm) andugavūm(un-making / un-winding) — you know —kuśaḷa(skilled) in this matter, you, Deva. Hari is the master-craftsman of this make-and-unmake play. Kuśaḷa — skilled, accomplished — in this matter, no one else.
[T]
For someone today
For today: the unreal has been made true-looking; this is unknowable to the dualistic; the jīva must become the witness; ēka contains multiplicity, anēka reveals oneness; Hari is master of make-and-unmake.
Where this applies
- When the everyday world feels so convincingly solid that you forget it is passing and changeable
- When you are stuck arguing over whether oneness or diversity is more true instead of holding both
- When you are too caught up reacting to notice you could instead step back and simply watch
- When you want to fully explain a mystery with logic instead of trusting the skill behind it