奥义书 · Bhasmajābāla 2.51
॥
天城文
एवं प्रयतोऽभ्यर्च्य मम सायुज्यमेति । शतैर्महाप्रस्थैरखण्डैस्तण्डुलैरभिषिच्य चन्द्रलोककामश्चन्द्रलोकमवाप्नोति
转写 (IAST)
evaṃ prayato'bhyarcya mama sāyujyameti | śatairmahāprasthairakhaṇḍaistaṇḍulairabhiṣicya candralokakāmaścandralokamavāpnoti
逐字释义
梵语IAST释义
एवं प्रयतः अभ्यर्च्यevaṃ prayataḥ abhyarcyathus, purified, having honored
मम सायुज्यम् एतिmama sāyujyam etihe attains union with me
शतैः महा-प्रस्थैः अखण्डैः तण्डुलैःśataiḥ mahā-prasthaiḥ akhaṇḍaiḥ taṇḍulaiḥwith hundreds of great measures of whole rice
चन्द्र-लोक-कामः चन्द्र-लोकम् अवाप्नोतिcandra-loka-kāmaḥ candra-lokam avāpnotione desiring the lunar world attains the lunar world
译文
«Thus, purified, having honored — he attains union with me. Having bathed [it] with hundreds of great measures of whole rice, one desiring the lunar world attains the lunar world».
版本
d90201333560 · 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 said mama sāyujyam eti, «he attains union» with me — and in the same line, right after: «one desiring the lunar world attains the lunar world». This juxtaposition is worth examining, for it is not accidental and will recur below. Sāyujya is from sa-yuj, «yoked together», and denotes merging; in the list of liberations it stands last and highest for those who seek merging.
The Vaishnava side knows this list and recognizes all its steps as real: sālokya (being in the same world as Him), sāmīpya (being near), sārūpya (obtaining a form like His), sārṣṭi (equal power), and sāyujya (merging). But its estimation runs the opposite of the usual one. The Bhāgavatam says devotees do not take any of these five, even when offered — na gṛhṇanti (3.29.13); and least of all do they take the last, for merging takes away the very One for whose sake everything was done.
The reason, put simply, is this: one who loves does not want to become the beloved, he wants to be with him. And so sāyujya, the highest for one seeking an end to distinctions, is for one seeking a person not a reward but a loss. Here sāyujya and the lunar world are named side by side, like two goods on the same counter — and this, to my mind, best shows that the book at this point speaks the language of price, not the language of relationship.