How do you describe what cannot be described? The Upaniṣads give a startling answer: you say what it is not. "Neti neti", "not this, not this", is perhaps the most economical theology ever devised, and one of the most demanding.
The Source
The phrase appears in the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, the oldest and longest of the principal Upaniṣads. After describing Brahman's two forms, the formed and the formless, the sage Yājñavalkya concludes:
"Now, therefore, the teaching: 'not this, not this' (athāta ādeśo neti neti), for there is nothing higher than this 'not this'." (2.3.6)
It returns several times, most memorably in his teaching to Janaka and to his wife Maitreyī:
"That Self is 'not this, not this'. It is ungraspable, for it is never grasped; indestructible, for it is never destroyed; unattached, for it never clings." (sa eṣa neti nety ātmā agṛhyo na hi gṛhyate, 4.5.15)
Why Negation?
Every description limits. To say Brahman is "large" excludes the small; to call it "light" excludes darkness. The Upaniṣads repeatedly warn against confusing the description with the reality:
"That from which words turn back, together with the mind, not having reached it..." (yato vāco nivartante aprāpya manasā saha, Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.4.1)
"That which is not expressed by speech, but by which speech is expressed: know that alone as Brahman, not what people worship here." (Kena Upaniṣad 1.5)
Negation, then, is not pessimism. It is precision. A map that admits it is not the territory is more trustworthy than one that claims to be the whole country. It refuses to let the mind settle for a concept in place of reality.
Neti Neti as a Practice
Śaṅkara, in his commentary on the Bṛhadāraṇyaka, explains that the double negation removes all superimposed attributes (upādhis) from the Self. This becomes a meditation. One asks: Am I this body? It changes and I observe it; not this. Am I these thoughts? They come and go before me; not this. Am I these emotions, these memories, this role? Not this, not this.
What remains is not nothing. It is the witness (sākṣin), the awareness to which all these appear. Ramaṇa Maharṣi's "Who am I?" uses the same method, discarding body and mind as objects until only the enquirer remains. The process resembles peeling an onion, with the important difference that what you find at the centre is not a smaller onion.
Echoes Across Traditions
Negative theology, the way of describing the Divine by negation, appears in many traditions. The Buddhist philosopher Nāgārjuna's (c. 2nd century CE) tetralemma rejects all four positions of "is", "is not", "both" and "neither". In Christian thought, Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (c. 500 CE) taught that God is beyond every affirmation and negation, and Maimonides argued similarly in Jewish philosophy. These are independent developments, not borrowings, and their differences matter. Yet their convergence suggests a shared human discovery: language reaches a limit, and beyond it something remains.
The Danger and the Balance
Negation can be misused, as a way of dismissing the world, the body or other people as "not real" and therefore unimportant. The Upaniṣads guard against this. The same Bṛhadāraṇyaka affirms that all this is Brahman and teaches ethics: the three "da"s of self-control, giving and compassion (5.2.3). Vedānta later expressed the balance as negation followed by affirmation: "not this, not this" to discover the Self, then "all this is Brahman" (Chāndogya 3.14.1) to see it everywhere.
For Every Reader
- For children: close your eyes and ask, "Am I my hand? My name? My thoughts?" Who is the one who notices?
- For adults: when anxiety says "I am a failure", try neti neti: that is a thought, not the thinker.
- For organisations: strategic clarity often comes by negation: decide clearly what you are not, and what you are becomes visible.
References
- Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad 2.3.6, 4.5.15, 5.2.3; Chāndogya Upaniṣad 3.14.1; Taittirīya Upaniṣad 2.4.1; Kena Upaniṣad 1.5; trans. Patrick Olivelle, The Early Upaniṣads (Oxford University Press, 1998).
- Śaṅkara, Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad Bhāṣya, trans. Swāmī Mādhavānanda (Advaita Ashrama, 1934).
- Nāgārjuna, Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, trans. J. Garfield (Oxford University Press, 1995).
- Ramaṇa Maharṣi, Who Am I? (Sri Ramanasramam).