奥义书 · Mahā 3.40
॥
天城文
त्वङ्मांसरक्तबाष्पाम्बु पृथक्कृत्वा विलोचने समालोकय रम्यं चेत्किं मुधा परिमुह्यसि
转写 (IAST)
tvaṅmāṃsaraktabāṣpāmbu pṛthakkṛtvā vilocane samālokaya ramyaṃ cetkiṃ mudhā parimuhyasi
逐字释义
梵语IAST释义
त्वक्-मांस-रक्त-बाष्प-अम्बुtvak-māṃsa-rakta-bāṣpa-ambuskin, flesh, blood, the water of tears; the skin, the meat, the blood, the tear-moisture
पृथक् कृत्वा विलोचनेpṛthak kṛtvā vilocanehaving separated them, in the eye; having laid them out apart, in the eye
समालोकय रम्यम् चेत्samālokaya ramyam cetlook well whether it is lovely; examine whether there is beauty
किम् मुधा परिमुह्यसिkim mudhā parimuhyasiwhy dost thou delude thyself in vain; wherefore art thou beguiled to no purpose
译文
“Take the eye apart — into skin, flesh, blood and the water of tears — and look whether it is lovely. Why then dost thou delude thyself in vain?”
版本
b51b6e40acf9 · 发布于 2026年7月29日 06:29:20 UTC
可用语言RUEN用方向键翻颂
The device is named outright: pṛthak kṛtvā — “having taken apart”.
The eye is taken — that which in the poetry of all nations serves as the seat of charm. And it is proposed to examine its components: the skin of the lid, flesh, blood, tear-moisture.
The conclusion is obvious: in none of the parts is there beauty.
It is worth understanding, however, what this experiment proves and what it does not. It proves that beauty is not contained in the substance. From this two conclusions can be drawn, and they are opposite.
The first is Nidāgha's: therefore there is no beauty at all, only a beguilement.
The second suggests itself and is not yet drawn by Nidāgha: therefore beauty comes not from the substance, and one must ask whence. A living eye is beautiful, and the same eye an hour after death is not, though the substance is the same. The difference is presence.
On this Vaiṣṇava Vedānta stands: all beauty is a gleam of Him, and therefore to take it apart into pieces is a sure way not to find it.