奥义书 · Bhasmajābāla 2.43
॥
天城文
तदनभ्यर्च्य नाश्नीयात्फलमन्नमन्यद्वा । यदश्नीयाद्रेतोभक्षीभवेत् । नापः पिबेत् । यदि पिबेत्पूयपो भवेत्
转写 (IAST)
tadanabhyarcya nāśnīyātphalamannamanyadvā | yadaśnīyādretobhakṣībhavet | nāpaḥ pibet | yadi pibetpūyapo bhavet
逐字释义
梵语IAST释义
तत् अन्-अभ्यर्च्य न अश्नीयात्tat an-abhyarcya na aśnīyātwithout honoring that, let him not eat
फलम् अन्नम् अन्यत् वाphalam annam anyat vāfruit, food, or anything else
यत् अश्नीयात् रेतः-भक्षी भवेत्yat aśnīyāt retaḥ-bhakṣī bhavetif he eats — he becomes an eater of semen
न अपः पिबेत्na apaḥ pibetlet him not drink water
यदि पिबेत् पूय-पः भवेत्yadi pibet pūya-paḥ bhavetif he drinks — he becomes a drinker of pus
译文
«Without honoring that, let him not eat fruit, food, or anything else; if he eats — he becomes an eater of semen. Let him not drink water; if he drinks — he becomes a drinker of pus».
版本
2fb86c4250af · 发布于 2026年8月12日 05:00:00 UTC
可用语言RUEN用方向键翻颂
The threat is harsh and deserves being spoken of plainly: one who eats what has not first been offered becomes an eater of semen; one who drinks, a drinker of pus. These images are deliberately repulsive; and this is their purpose. Let us say honestly what can honestly be said of such a method.
This method works, and that is why it is used; but it works on the wrong person. A refined person will not sit down to eat without offering first, regardless; but a coarse one is restrained for a week, while the fear is fresh. The Vaishnava side keeps the custom of offering food more strictly than most, and prasāda was discussed when reading Bhāvanā (p39). But its grounding is different, and deserves naming.
The Gītā says: «the righteous, who eat the remnants of the sacrifice, are released from all sins; but those who cook for themselves alone eat sin» (3.13). Here too sin is mentioned; but it is not said what the eater will turn into. The difference between «they eat sin» and «he will become an eater of semen» is the difference between pointing to the substance of the matter and intimidation.
The first explains: one who takes for himself without giving lives at another's expense. The second explains nothing and counts on revulsion; and revulsion, unlike understanding, passes.