ahaḿ yūyam asāv ārya

ime ca dvārakāukasaḥ

sarve 'py evaḿ yadu-śreṣṭha

vimṛgyāḥ sa-carācaram

aham -- I; yuyam -- you; asau -- He; aryah -- My respected brother (Balarama); ime -- these; ca -- and; dvaraka-okasah -- inhabitants of Dvaraka; sarve -- all; api -- even; evam -- in this same way; yadu-sreshtha -- O best of the Yadus; vimrigyah -- to be considered; sa -- along with; cara -- that which moves; acaram -- and that which does not move.


Texto

Not only I, but also you, along with My respected brother and these residents of Dvaraka, should all be considered in this same philosophical light, O best of the Yadus. Indeed, we should include all that exists, both moving and nonmoving.

Significado

To protect His parents' intimate relationship with Him, Lord Krishna stresses the oneness of all existence in this statement to His father, Vasudeva. Vasudeva had been reminded of his sons' greatness by hearing the sages gathered at Kurukshetra. But his sense of awe was ruining his intimate parental relationship with Krishna, and therefore Krishna wanted to dispel it.

We should not misunderstand the "oneness" Lord Krishna speaks of here. The subtle words of the Upanishads often mislead impersonalists into believing that all existence is ineffably one, without any variety in the ultimate issue. Some Upanishadic mantras emphasize the sameness of God and His creation, while others speak about their difference. Tat tvam asi svetaketo ("You are that, O Svetaketu"), for example, is an abheda-vakya, a mantra affirming that all things are one with God, being His dependent expansions. But the Upanishads also contain many bheda-vakyas, statements that affirm the unique, distinguishing qualities of the Supreme, such as this statement: ka evanyat kah pranyad yady esha akasa anando na syat, esha evanandayati. "Who would there be to activate the creation and give life to all beings if this infinite Supreme were not the original enjoyer? Indeed, He alone is the source of all pleasure." (Taittiriya Upanishad. 2.7.1) By the influence of the Supreme Lord's bewildering Maya, envious impersonalists read the abheda-vakyas literally and accept the bheda-vakyas only in a figurative way. Authoritative Vaishnava commentators, on the other hand, carefully reconcile the apparent contradictions in accordance with the interpretive principles of Vedic Mimamsa and the logically established conclusions of Vedanta.