Linux翻页
奥义书 · Saubhāgyalakṣmī 2.9
॥
天城文
महाशून्यं ततो याति सर्वसिद्धिसमाश्रयम् । चित्तानन्दं ततो भित्त्वा सर्वपीठगतानिलः
转写 (IAST)
mahāśūnyaṃ tato yāti sarvasiddhisamāśrayam | cittānandaṃ tato bhittvā sarvapīṭhagatānilaḥ
逐字释义
梵语IAST释义
महा-शून्यं ततः यातिmahā-śūnyaṃ tataḥ yātithen he goes into the great void
सर्व-सिद्धि-समाश्रयम्sarva-siddhi-samāśrayamthe refuge of all perfections
चित्त-आनन्दं ततः भित्त्वाcitta-ānandaṃ tataḥ bhittvāthen having pierced the bliss of consciousness
सर्व-पीठ-गत-अनिलःsarva-pīṭha-gata-anilaḥwith the wind having passed through all the seats
译文
"Then he goes into the great void, the refuge of all perfections; and having pierced the bliss of consciousness, [he becomes one] with the wind that has passed through all the seats."
版本
a671e9f11435 · 发布于 2026年8月12日 05:00:00 UTC
可用语言RUEN用方向键翻颂
It is worth noting that here one is enjoined to pierce citta-ānanda, "the bliss of consciousness." That is, on this path not only the objective but bliss itself is cut away. This detail occurs in yogic books and is, to my mind, the most consistent point of this whole teaching: if the goal is the absence of everything, then bliss too must be cut away, for it is something.
Let us say plainly what is worth examining here, for this question runs through the whole of Vaiṣṇava reading. If the highest is described as ānanda, "bliss," and on the approach to it bliss is ordered cut away — then either the word is used in two senses, or the construction is contradictory. The school answers with the first: citta-ānanda is the bliss of the mind, that is, an experience, while the highest ānanda is a being, not an experience.
The answer is well-founded; and the Vaiṣṇava side accepts it, but draws the opposite conclusion from it. If the highest bliss is not an experience of the mind, then it is someone's; for bliss experienced by no one is a word without a referent. And its argument, cited when reading the Varāha (2.44) and (3.27), repeats here: the verb "to be pleased" requires two; and the noun "bliss" requires the same — it is always someone's and about something.
Hence its goal is described not as the cutting-away of bliss, but as the change of its object: bliss for oneself is cut away, and bliss from Him appears; and about ātmānanda and premānanda it was said when reading the Jābāla-darśana (6.35).