Bhashya
म पारिशेष्यान्मध्यस्वरव-र्तिगीतिः ; हा सर्वोदात्तात्मिका गीतिः ; प्रथमान्तार्धस्य आद्य-मिति ।प्रथमपादोक्ताक्षरद्वये अन्त्यार्धस्य आद्यस्वरम् आद्य-स्वरयुक्तं साम जानीयात् इत्यनुषज्यते ।र्व पारिशेष्यान्म-ध्यस्वरवर्तिगीति ; तां सर्वोदात्तात्मिका गीतिः ; द्वितीया-न्तार्धस्य आद्यमित्युक्तार्थम् ।ष पारिशेष्यान्मध्यस्वरवर्तिगी-तिः ; णम्, सर्वोदात्तात्मिका गीतिः ; तृतीयान्तार्धस्य आद्य-मित्युक्तार्थम् ।न पारिशेष्यान्मध्यस्वरवर्तिगीतिः ; मा सर्वोदा-त्तात्मिका गीतिः ; चतुर्थान्तार्धम्य आद्यमित्युक्तार्थम् ।सामे-त्यादि गच्छतीत्यन्तम् उक्तार्थम् ।ननु अत्र अक्षरद्वयमध्येअन्तार्धम्येत्यन्तस्य अक्षरस्यार्धं दीर्घादिमात्रा तस्या आद्यस्व-रसंबंधः कस्मान्न विधीयते ? तन्न, षष्ठीतत्पुरुषात्कर्मधार-यस्य बलीयस्त्वात् ।अन्तं च तदर्धं च अन्तार्धं प्रथमापेक्षयाद्वितीयमक्षरम् अन्तं च तदर्धं चेति ; अन्यथा अन्तस्याक्षरस्यमात्रादि अर्धमिति षष्ठीतत्पुरुषः, 'एतया निषादस्थपतिं याज-येत्' इति न्यायात् ।ननु अतितुच्छमेतत्, मात्रायामप्याधा-रापेक्षया कर्मधारयसंभवात् ।सत्यम् ।'द्वात्रिंशदक्षरं साम' इत्यत्र द्वात्रिंशदक्षराणामेव स्वरात्मकसामसंबन्धः श्रूयते, न मात्राणाम्, तस्मादन्तर्धशब्देन द्वितीयाक्षरस्यैव आद्यस्वरसंबन्धो विधीयत इति सिद्धम् ।यस्मात्सामैकदेशोऽपि कृत्स्नफलावाप्तौ क्षमः, किमुत कृत्स्नसामज्ञानम् ।तस्मादिदं सच्चिदानन्दमयं परं ब्रह्म, तादृशनृसिंहप्रतिपादकमूलमन्त्राभिव्यञ्जकत्वात् परं ब्रह्म जानीयादित्यनुषज्यते ।सामाभिव्यक्तमूलमन्त्रप्रतिपाद्योऽयं नृसिंहाकारसच्चिदानन्दं परं ब्रह्मेत्येकः संबन्धः ।यद्वा सच्चिदानन्दमयं ब्रह्मेत्येकः ।प्राङ्गन्त्रवर्णात् ब्रह्माकारता प्रतिपादितापि अदृढा स्यादिति शङ्का, तद्व्यावृत्त्यर्थमिदमुच्यते—सच्चिदानन्दमयं ब्रह्म जानीयादिति ।तं नृसिंहाकारममुम् एवमुक्तप्रकारेण विद्वान् जानन् अमृते क्षीरे 'पञ्चामृतान्यानय' इत्यादावमृतशब्दस्य क्षीरे दृष्टत्वात्, इहैव लोके उत्कृष्टो भवतीत्यर्थः ।यद्वा एवं पञ्चाङ्गन्यासे कृते इहैव जीवन्मुक्तो भवति आनन्दो भवतीत्यर्थः ।यस्मात्साङ्गं साम कृत्स्ननृसिंहब्रह्मविद्याप्रतिपादकमूलमन्त्राभिव्यञ्जकम्, तस्मादिदमित्यादि गच्छतीत्यन्तम् उक्तार्थम् ॥
In plain words
Take the syllable 'ma' — from what is left over, it carries the middle tone. Add 'hā' — a note pitched entirely high. Together they are named: the first piece of the second half of the first line. Here's the rule behind it: in the pair of syllables the first line gives us, take the very first pitch of the second one — build the chant on that note, and you have your Sāman; the same rule applies four times over. Next: 'rva' — again the middle-toned remainder — plus 'tāṃ' — again the high note — give you the same first-piece-of-the-second-half, but now of the second line. Then 'ṣa' and 'ṇam' do it for the third line, and 'na' and 'mā' do it for the fourth. The passage from 'sāma' to 'attains' has already been explained. Now someone raises a question: in this pair of syllables, why not take 'the half of the end' to mean half of the very last syllable — its long vowel, say — rather than what's actually meant? Because, we answer, reading it as a straight apposition is simply the stronger grammar here. 'The end' and 'its half' turn out to be the very same thing: relative to the first syllable, the second one both IS the end and IS the half. Read it the other way and you get 'half of the end syllable' — meaning a fragment of a syllable — a weaker, more roundabout reading, propped up only by a rather thin grammatical precedent. Someone presses further: isn't this whole distinction splitting hairs, since you could apply the same logic to a mere mora too? Fair enough. But scripture itself settles it: it speaks of 'a Sāman of thirty-two syllables' — syllables, whole ones, are what the chant is built from, never fragments of them. So it's settled: the word in question points to the whole second syllable, not a shaving off the end of it. And here is why any of this matters: even a fragment of this Sāman is enough to deliver its full fruit — so what must the whole of it deliver? That's why this chant, carrying within it the root mantra that speaks of a Nṛsiṃha such as this, is to be known as nothing less than the supreme Brahman — being, awareness, and bliss all at once. Read one way, this Brahman disclosed by the mantra takes the form of Nṛsiṃha; read another way, drop the form and it's simply Brahman, being-awareness-bliss, full stop — both readings hold. And in case anyone still doubts that this form truly amounts to Brahman, even after all the mantra has already said, this line settles it outright: know it as the being-awareness-bliss Brahman. Know him this way, in the shape of Nṛsiṃha, and — since the old texts call milk itself 'nectar,' the way a ritual instruction says 'bring the five nectars' — you become the finest in this very world. Or, on another reading, once the fivefold placement is done, you are free right here, while still alive, and bliss is simply what you are. And because the whole of this chant, limbs and all, carries the entire teaching about Nṛsiṃha as Brahman, the line running from 'therefore this' to 'attains' has already been explained.
Close to the Sanskrit
'Ma' is, from the remainder, the melody residing on the middle tone; 'hā' is the melody whose nature is wholly the acute tone; together this is 'the first of the half-of-the-end,' of the first foot — thus it is designated. In the pair of syllables stated in the first foot, by the first tone-syllable of the latter half, namely the Sāman endowed with that first tone, one should know it — this continues from what was said before. 'Rva' is, from the remainder, the melody residing on the middle tone; 'tāṃ' is the melody wholly on the acute tone; together, 'the first of the half-of-the-end of the second foot' — the sense already stated. 'Ṣa' is, from the remainder, the melody residing on the middle tone; 'ṇam' is the melody wholly on the acute tone; together, 'the first of the half-of-the-end of the third foot' — the sense already stated. 'Na' is, from the remainder, the melody residing on the middle tone; 'mā' is the melody wholly on the acute tone; together, 'the first of the half-of-the-end of the fourth foot' — the sense already stated. The passage beginning 'sāma' and ending 'gacchati' has already been explained. Objection: here, among the pair of syllables, why is the relation of the first tone not enjoined instead for the half — the long-vowel mora and so on — of the syllable meant by 'antārdham' taken as 'of the end'? That is not so, because the karmadhāraya reading is stronger than the genitive-tatpuruṣa. 'The end' and 'its half' together form 'antārdha' — meaning the second syllable, relative to the first, is both the end and its half. Otherwise, it would mean 'the half — the mora and so on — of the end syllable,' a genitive-tatpuruṣa, by the maxim 'with this one, the Niṣāda-chief should be caused to sacrifice.' Objection: this distinction is utterly trivial, since a karmadhāraya reading is possible for the mora too, with reference to its substrate. Granted. But in the statement 'the Sāman is of thirty-two syllables,' it is heard that the relation to the tonal Sāman belongs precisely to the thirty-two syllables, not to the morae; therefore it is established that, by the word 'antārdha,' the relation of the first tone is enjoined precisely for the second syllable as a whole. Since even a single part of the Sāman is capable of yielding the complete fruit, how much more so the knowledge of the whole Sāman! Therefore this — being that which manifests the root mantra teaching such a Nṛsiṃha — one should know as the supreme Brahman consisting of being, consciousness, and bliss; 'one should know it as the supreme Brahman' continues from before. This, taught by the root mantra manifested through the Sāman, is the supreme Brahman, of the nature of being-consciousness-bliss, in the form of Nṛsiṃha — this is one construal. Or else, it is simply 'Brahman consisting of being-consciousness-bliss' — this is the other one. Since the Brahman-nature, though taught earlier from the mantra-text, might still seem insecure, the doubt might arise; to remove that, this is said: 'one should know it as the being-consciousness-bliss Brahman.' The wise one, knowing him — that one in the form of Nṛsiṃha — in the manner thus described, becomes excellent in this very world — because the word 'amṛta' is seen used for milk, as in the phrase 'bring the five nectars' and the like; that is the meaning. Or else: thus, when the fivefold limb-placement has been performed, he becomes liberated-while-living right here; he attains bliss — that is the meaning. Since the Sāman together with its limbs manifests the root mantra teaching the entire Nṛsiṃha-Brahman science, therefore the passage beginning 'tasmādidam' and ending 'gacchati' has already been explained.