奥义书 · Pañcabrahma 23
॥
天城文
पञ्चब्रह्मात्मकं सर्वं स्वात्मनि प्रविलाप्य च । सोऽहमस्मीति जानीयाद्विद्वान्ब्रह्माऽमृतो भवेत्
转写 (IAST)
pañcabrahmātmakaṃ sarvaṃ svātmani pravilāpya ca | so'hamasmīti jānīyādvidvānbrahmā'mṛto bhavet
逐字释义
梵语IAST释义
पञ्च-ब्रह्म-आत्मकं सर्वंpañca-brahma-ātmakaṃ sarvaṃeverything consisting of the five brahmans
स्व-आत्मनि प्रविलाप्य चsva-ātmani pravilāpya cahaving dissolved in one's own self
सः अहम् अस्मि इति जानीयात्saḥ aham asmi iti jānīyātlet one know "he am I"
विद्वान् ब्रह्म अ-मृतः भवेत्vidvān brahma a-mṛtaḥ bhavetthe knower, the brahmin, let him become immortal
译文
"Having dissolved everything consisting of the five brahmans in one's own self, let one know 'he am I'; let the knowing brahmin become immortal."
版本
44a6963b0769 · 发布于 2026年8月12日 05:00:00 UTC
可用语言RUEN用方向键翻颂
Again so'ham asmi, "he am I," and it must be examined the same way. But here a word is added that was not there before and is worth noting: pravilāpya, "having dissolved," and moreover sva-ātmani, "in one's own self." That is, an act of the mind is prescribed: to dissolve the fivefold set in oneself.
It is worth examining what practice is meant here, for it is intelligible and requires no belief in the miraculous. A person sees the world as a multitude of separate things, each with its own name. The practice consists in tracing them back to their causes, the causes to their own causes, and so on to the limit; and laya-cintana, "reflection on dissolution," was discussed when reading the Jābāla-darśana (8.8).
There it was also said, and it is worth repeating, that this device brings one to the threshold and does not lead beyond it, for it knows only how to remove. Let us add what this very passage yields. It says "having dissolved in one's own self." That is, the world is reduced not to brahman but to the practitioner himself.
This step is the decisive one, and the Vaiṣṇava side does not take it. To reduce the world to its cause is legitimate; to declare oneself that cause is another assertion, and it does not follow from the first. Her argument here is simple and worth voicing. If I were the cause of the world, the world would vanish when I sleep; but it does not vanish, and in the morning I find it right where I left it. Hence the one in whom it holds is not I.