奥义书 · Rudrākṣajābāla 2.1
॥
天城文
एकवक्त्रं तु रुद्राक्षं परतत्त्वस्वरूपकम् । तद्धारणात्परे तत्त्वे लीयते विजितेन्द्रियः
转写 (IAST)
ekavaktraṃ tu rudrākṣaṃ paratattvasvarūpakam | taddhāraṇātpare tattve līyate vijitendriyaḥ
逐字释义
梵语IAST释义
एक-वक्त्रं तु रुद्राक्षंeka-vaktraṃ tu rudrākṣaṃbut the one-faced rudrākṣa
पर-तत्त्व-स्वरूपकम्para-tattva-svarūpakamhas the form of the highest principle
तत्-धारणात् परे तत्त्वेtat-dhāraṇāt pare tattvefrom wearing it, in the highest principle
लीयते विजित-इन्द्रियःlīyate vijita-indriyaḥone who has conquered the senses dissolves
译文
The one-faced rudrākṣa has the form of the highest principle; from wearing it, one who has conquered the senses dissolves in the highest principle.
版本
b80d01fafab2 · 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 listing by number of "mouths" begins, and the very first line is the one that those disputing non-duality would come here for: it says līyate pare tattve, "dissolves in the highest principle." Before disputing dissolution, it is worth looking at what stands right beside it: vijita-indriyaḥ, "one who has conquered the senses." This is a condition, and no small one. The promise is not to every wearer, but to one who has already mastered himself; and to master oneself is, in essence, the whole matter the upaniṣads speak of.
The order here, on close inspection, is the reverse of how it is usually read. It is not the seed that produces mastery over the senses — mastery over the senses is presupposed before the seed; and what the seed adds in that case, the book does not explain. This is a constant feature of ritual promises, and it deserves being named for what it is. The promise is given with a condition, but the condition is spoken in a rush, while the promise is in large letters; and the reader carries off the promise and leaves the condition on the page.
Now to the dissolution itself, for here lies the basis for a non-dual reading. It says pare tattve, in the locative: one dissolves in something. This turn of phrase does not by itself cancel duality — "to dissolve in" presupposes both the one who dissolves and that in which.
But the matter is decided not by grammar but by the neighboring line. In the very next line, of the two-faced seed it will be said that Ardhanārīśvara prīyate, "is pleased" by it — and only one can be pleased by another. Here one sees the manner in which the Vaiṣṇava side answers such passages, and it is not by reinterpreting words. If the book in one line speaks of merging and in the next of one being pleased by another, then it must be read so that both statements stand; and this is possible only in a reading where difference is preserved. An interpretation that cancels difference is forced to declare the second line void — and so it explains less, not more.