奥义书 · Jābāladarśana 4.52
॥
天城文
तीर्थानि तोयपूर्णानि देवान्काष्ठादिनिर्मितान् । योगिनो न प्रपूज्यन्ते स्वात्मप्रत्ययकारणात्
转写 (IAST)
tīrthāni toyapūrṇāni devānkāṣṭhādinirmitān | yogino na prapūjyante svātmapratyayakāraṇāt
逐字释义
梵语IAST释义
तीर्थानि तोय-पूर्णानिtīrthāni toya-pūrṇāniholy places, filled with water
देवान् काष्ठ-आदि-निर्मितान्devān kāṣṭha-ādi-nirmitāngods made of wood and the rest
योगिनः न प्रपूज्यन्तेyoginaḥ na prapūjyanteyogis do not worship
स्व-आत्म-प्रत्यय-कारणात्sva-ātma-pratyaya-kāraṇātby reason of certainty in their own self
译文
"Holy places, filled with water, and gods made of wood and the rest, yogis do not worship — by reason of certainty in their own self."
版本
eb1d26de5837 · 发布于 2026年8月12日 05:00:00 UTC
可用语言RUEN用方向键翻颂
A series of lines begins directed against the worship of images; and they must be examined thoroughly, for this is the strongest passage of its kind we have met so far. It is said directly: yogis do not worship either water or wooden gods. Let us first acknowledge that there is truth in this, and not rush to object. An image worshiped as a thing is indeed wood; and a person who bows to wood and is unchanged in anything is engaged in idolatry in the most literal sense of the word.
The Vaishnava side acknowledges this and speaks no less sharply of the same thing. Its books are full of censure of the prakrita-bhakta, the "material devotee," who honors the image and does not serve the living; and the Bhagavatam, as already cited, calls such a one bhakta-abhasa, "a semblance of a devotee" (11.2.47). Now let us say where we diverge, and say it in substance.
The argument of the line is this: an image is made of matter, therefore it is matter, therefore to worship it is absurd. This argument, applied consistently, cancels too much. A teacher's body too is made of matter; the book in which the teaching is recorded is made of a palm leaf; the sound of a mantra is made of air. Four lines further on, this very book will command drinking the water that washed the feet of the knowing (4.56) — and that water is water, and those feet are of flesh.
So the matter is not the substance. The matter is whether someone is present there; and this is no longer a question of material, but of whether He comes to where He is called. And this is precisely the Vaishnava answer. The image is not our invention, so that we might have something to look at; it is archa-avatara, "the descent into an image," that is, His decision to make Himself accessible. The difference between "we invented a form for Him" and "He agreed to take a form" is the whole difference in this dispute.