Gita Saar - A Muslim Perspective Part 1-C: Chapter-II - Unitive Reasoning

Chapter - II

UNITIVE REASONING

(Samkha Yoga)

Chapter II talks of Brahma–sthithi (state of reasoning established in the Absolute).

Talking of this Chapter, Nataraj Guru (NG) says: “When we scan this chapter it is striking to note first of all that Arjuna’s conflict is carried over from the previous Chapter, where we should normally have expected it to terminate. The literary device of a Samjaya talking to a Dhritarashtra is again introduced. Krishna himself tries to arouse Arjuna from his apparent inertia or lethargy by sharp stinging expressions; but Arjuna, instead of being cowed down by them, justifies himself further in a manner that reflects a certain state of abandonment. The metrical change in verses 5 to 8 indicates this. This is usual throughout the work wherever it rises to a pitch of rhapsody, where factors of feeling dominate. Arguments as such are thrown into the background. The rishi (sage-seer) style as found in the Vedas comes into evidence unmistakably.”

NG seems to be agreeing to our understanding of Vedas till here. However, we disagree with him when he says:

“A growing number of Western professors, among whom must be included many of their disciples who happen to be Indians, make the inexcusable error of thinking that the Gita is a theistic religious classic rather than a philosophical treatise, a smriti (code of laws as of Manu, Yajnavalkhya, Parashara, etc.) or dharma-shastra (textbook of social obligations) rather than a shruti (revealed wisdom-utterance) or Upanishad (wisdom-teaching of a Guru (teacher).

“When the discussion or samvada which is a philosophical discourse between Guru and sishya opens properly in this second Chapter, such a view is glaringly belied, for here we see that the discussion enters into the very heart of rationalism which is philosophy and cannot possibly be conceived to be either theological or religious in the plain meaning of these terms. Full examination of the other chapters will enable us to establish firmly the fact that the Gita is first and foremost a philosophical work and that the references to matters of religious practice are only incidental and non-obligatory, covering aspects of applied wisdom only.”

NG will continue to say that Gita is not to be followed and we will continue to deny this. We are not saying that others who have denied NG’s arguments have also done for the same reasons, or have explained Gita the way we are doing. We agree that Gita does not belong to any religion as the word religion today has come to mean several things that the proponents of those very religions never taught or meant. Most of the religions are based on the teachings of the Emissaries of God, who were actually teaching the One and Only Path to God - the way of life - to the people of the region where they were sent. Once the Avatars and Messengers disappeared from the scene, their followers gave a particular name to their teachings - whose content was in most cases glaringly different from the distorted versions of the earlier teachings - and then began to distort the new teachings too, to suit their tastes and requirements.

A vivid example of distortions can be seen in the present beliefs of Hindus regarding consumption of liquor. Several Vedic and Upanishadic verses list consumption of liquor as one of the five greatest sins that a man could commit. Not only this, the fifth of these greatest sins is to keep company with a person who commits the four grave sins. This means that anybody who gives company to a person who consumes alcohol commits a grave sin. Theft, murder and adultery form the other three sins. Chhandogya Upanishad and few other Upanishads have clearly mentioned this. Now see how our society views consumption of alcohol. Generally it is believed that consuming alcohol is a taboo only among Muslims while Hindus have been given sanction. This corruption has its origins in the acts of those very religious priests of yore who not only committed these sins but also tried to give justifications, either by concocting myths around Siva, Indra and others or by simply altering the facts. We have proved in the BOOK that IndraDeva of the Vedas took birth several centuries later as Mohammad. Most of the myths built around him were either product of people’s inability to understand the Vedic hymns or deliberately circulated by the priests for their own material benefits. 

Unable to distinguish between revealed wisdom-utterances and text written by men with selfish interests, the commentators got confused to such an extent that they started viewing the revealed wisdom-utterances with suspicion. To say that Gita is not to be followed is laughable. NG believes that Gita is “revealed wisdom-utterance” but not “code of laws” or “textbook of social obligations”. This will imply that the God has time to show that He is wise, goes out of the way to communicate this to the people through His Emissaries, that too in most unlikely of places like a battlefield, but do not wish to tell His subjects the way to live, something that has always been a point of argument among the people. Right in the midst of battle, with arrows flying haywire, which could even have mortally wounded any of the two involved in discussion, Krishna – the true representative of God - is suddenly realized of the need to impart lessons in philosophy, totally out of place of the situation. Even if it was philosophy, the commentators do not wish to see it as philosophy of the true path to God or the philosophy of the way of life. This is so because by doing so, they will have to first start following that path. As we have said earlier, all this is because of the inability of the commentators to locate a person who fits with the description of the Absolute Man in Gita. They fail to realize that if becoming that Absolute Man had been so easy, there would have been no need to send Avatars and Messengers. Krishna surely must have been that Absolute Man but we know too little about his adult life to verify this. Absolute Man of Gita inevitably leads us to the life of the Ahlulbayt, about whom the more we read the more we find them confirming to the concept of Purushottama or Absolute Men of Gita. We urge and invite you to study their life and upon doing so, commence the endeavour to become like them. 

It is ironical that those people who consider Krishna as god express this opinion, whereby we are only saying that Krishna was an Avatar sent by the Manifest Self of God or an Emissary or Messenger appointed to deliver the message/teachings. Those who express the aforementioned opinion mean to say that Krishna – not the man and Apostle - but Krishna - the god - led Arjuna to the fighting ground, in the midst of flying arrows, and danger to his own life, to give a philosophical discourse on matters remotely connected to Arjuna’s life or his present position. Sorry indeed! In spite of calling Krishna as god, it is evident that they are belittling his great personality.

Chapter II presents a clear proof right in the initial lines that it was Krishna who actually wanted this war to be fought. This Chapter opens with an exhortation to Arjuna to stand up and fight the battle of life:

Yield not to unmanliness, O Partha; it does not befit thee. Shake off this paltry faint-heartedness and arise, O oppressor of foe.

Describing this verse, Swami Vivekananda wrote, “If one reads this one shloka, he gets all the merits of reading the entire Gita; for in this one shloka lies embedded the whole message of the Gita.”

Lal highlights this fact when he writes: “Sri Krishna wants everyone to develop an attacking attitude towards the problems and handicaps of life.” 

Forgetting these core teachings has led followers of various religions astray. The vices that we see in our society are a by-product of this. Even those Muslims who are misusing Jehad for their petty benefits are successful because the remaining Muslims have forgotten their duty to oppose those who are misusing the lofty tenets of Islam. Muslims were supposed to form a vibrant society and since an increasingly large number of them shirked their duty, the present-day Jehadis were able to have their say. 

Likewise, Hindus have forgotten Krishna’s teachings and started worshipping an idol of Krishna, that too of an age when Krishna might not have commenced giving teachings. What’s more, even the scholars began telling people that Gita is not to be followed, while others said that the fighting, from mundane oppositions, difficulties, sorrows and disappointments of life, is being talked about. Both groups have not understood Gita at all. The fighting being talked about is in the path of God, with no self-interest involved and only after distancing oneself from seeking benefits out of the act of fighting. This is to be a continuous process, all through the life and at all times.

Krishna (himself) confirms this by declaring: 

I am the strength of the strong, devoid of desire and passion 

(VII.2)

I am the intelligence of the intelligent 

(VII.10)

I am the victory of the victorious, I am the glory of the glorious 

(X.36)

Fearlessness heads the list of divine properties

 (XVI.1)

And equanimity, one of the recurring themes of the Gita, requires that the challenges of life be met calmly and courageously. Is such a life not desirable for all of us?

Thereafter Krishna mentions several strong reasons why Arjuna should fight. He says:

Further, looking to your own duty you should not waver, because there is nothing more welcome to a Kshatriya than righteous war. 

(II.31)

Happy the Kshatriyas who obtain such a fight that comes unsought as an open door to Heaven. 

(II.32)

[And commentators say that Krishna never propagated the concept of heaven or hell.]

But if you will not wage this righteous warfare, then casting away your duty and honour, you will incur sin. 

(II.35)

People will ever recount your infamy, to one highly esteemed dishonour is surely worse than death. 

(II.34)

Slain, you will obtain heaven; victorious, you will enjoy the earth. Therefore stand up, O son of Kunti, resolved to fight. 

(II.37) 

[Again Krishna is authenticating the presence of heaven. Does this not suggest that in spite of clear wordings talking of going to heaven, as a consequence of waging the righteous war, the learned commentators have deliberately ignored these verses and tried to give a different direction to the verses of Gita?]

Taking as equal pleasure and pain, gain and loss, victory and defeat, engage yourself in battle. Thus you will incur no sin. 

(II.38)

Giving the gist of these verses Sri Aurobindo writes: “Destroy, when by destruction the world must advance, but hate not that which thou destroyest, neither grieve for all those who perish. Do thy work with a calm, strong and equal spirit; fight and fall nobly or conquer mightily. For this is the work that God and thy nature have given to thee to accomplish.”

Arjuna was a warrior by profession and the problem before him was whether to fight or not. So Krishna’s advice to him was given in terms of fighting. But the general import of his teaching should not be overlooked. He has called upon everyone to stand up and do his duty, however hard or depressing the conditions may be. When a man performs his duty to the best of his ability, without fear or favour, unmindful of his own pleasure and profit, his spiritual progress becomes assured; irrespective of what reward he gets immediately from the world.

[1]

Samjaya said:

“To him who was thus filled with tenderness (kripa), whose eyes were filled with tears, and agitated and who was in distress, the Destroyer of Madhu (Krishna) spoke these words:

Arjuna’s state is again described in this verse. He is with Krishna and his teachings but his close affinity with those on the other side has resulted in distress. Also he, either because of accepting Krishna’s teachings or because of his inherent disposition, is against killing of those on the other side. This is in spite of the fact that he is a Kshatriya by birth and was taught that fighting was to be his duty. Hence, he is described as one who is ‘filled with tenderness’ and whose eyes are ‘filled with tears’. 

You have seen Arjuna’s stance till now. Now see whether Krishna approves of this or not. You will yourself realize that Krishna is totally against such a life. He, in fact, makes it obligatory on all of us to fight evil, first inside our own self, then within our family and surroundings. 

[2]

Sribhagavan uvacha [Krishna said]: 

In (the midst of this) difficulty whence comes to you this dejection, typical of non-Aryans (anarya), heaven-barring and disreputable, O Arjuna?

Note that Gita says: “Sribhagavan uvacha” whose translation has been done by commentators as “Krishna said”. Till now, when Krishna is referred to by Arjuna, he is called Madhava, Hrishikesa, Krishna, Kesava, Madhusudana, Janardana, Varshneya on numerous occasions but not as Sri Bhagavan. The usage of the term “Sribhagavan” here shows a shift: the writer of Gita now mentions him as Sri Bhagavan. Why has this been done?

Is Krishna God himself? We have already mentioned that we consider him as representative of the Manifest Self of God. Then why is he being described as Bhagavan. If you have read how Quran was revealed to Mohammad, you will get the answer. As soon as the verse was revealed, Mohammad would utter it for those around him to hear. At other times, there was no verse being revealed, Mohammad used to speak his own mind. From this, it is clear that while there were Divine words that were emanating from his mouth at one point of time, there were times when he was speaking like a normal being. It was upon the people around him to distinguish whether it was Divine word or Mohammad’s own. Since, the entire Quran was revealed over a stretch of 23 years, Muslims had to keep a keen vigil at all times.

The same is the situation with Krishna. Arjuna is asking questions from Krishna – the man that he knew – and answer is coming from the Manifest Self of God, through the mouth of Krishna. Initially Arjuna is unable to realize this but does so towards the end. But Sanjaya who is watching from a distance is unable to understand this difference and it appears to him that Krishna is god. 

There can be no other explanation to this argument than this, because during the course of the narration in Gita itself, Absolute God is described as formless and one that is not manifest. Thus seeing Krishna as god would negate the very teachings regarding God in Gita. 

We have seen in the BOOK how the Absolute God created a Manifest Self or Paramatma (the Superior Spirit). Atma, in Arabic, is rooh. All the spirits of animals and human beings owe their origin to this Superior Spirit. It is apparent that this Superior Spirit is also in the form of Noor. One Noor created several Noors but they were all manifestations of the same Noor. It is these visibly several Noors (who were actually one) which descended in pious human bodies, who became Avatars or Messengers of God. We have explained this from Surah Ghafir, Ayat 15 of Quran which talks of a special spirit that when put on some chosen beings, make that human being the Messenger of God and he starts telling the people about the Day of Judgement. Allama Tabatabai, in Tafseer-e-Meezan, has said that this rooh (spirit) is put inside those chosen as Messengers; otherwise this spirit resides with the Angels in heaven.  Allama has even said that this rooh (spirit) is the basis of life and it was this that was blown into Adam, also a Messenger. Another verse in Quran (Surah Asra, Ayat 84) confirms that there were a lot many secrets as regard to the identity of the spirit but only a little was being told to the people through Quran. The word ‘qaleela’ (little) shows that God knew a lot more about spirit and there were people who had been given more information about spirit and its true identity. Those people who were given greater information about the spirit are the Vedic Aryans. 

Krishna is truly the chosen one who had a direct relationship with this spirit of Paramatma and hence he is called an Avatar. Since he is directly related to the Paramatma or the Manifest Self of God, there are times when it appears from Krishna’s words that God is speaking in the First Person. We have proved in the BOOK that the Noor of Manifest Self of God became fourteen-folded. Thus, it can be safely said that one of the fourteen Devatas had a direct relationship with Krishna and the spirit inside him. Also, this argument also explains why Ali on an occasion said he was remembered by various names among different people, one of which he said was Kishan (Krishan). Those still doubtful are invited to read Ali’s last sermon at Basra in Iraq, better known as Khutbatul Bayaan, about which critics say that this is present only in the books of ghalis (those who present the Imams in higher status than they actually were). 

In this Khubta (sermon), Ali too talks in first person, as though it was he who created all beings and also talks of a direct relationship with several Messengers of yore. He even says that Mohammad and he were joined together as the two fingers are joined. (We have shown that Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad too discusses this subject). Ali even says had Quran not given a verse in this regard, he would have told the people about all that was there in the land and sky, so much so that nothing would have remained hidden from people. He then says that if there were not people among the audience who would have said that Ali had become a magician, Ali would have told them of what they saw in dreams and identified the regions where treasures were hidden. He says that he is the one through whom salvation can be obtained, he is the one who knows all secrets, he is the one who is the writer of Divine Scriptures, he is the one who removes all the obstacles and problems, he is the one who talked to Musa on Koh-e-Toor, he is the one who is revealed through the Prophets, he is the one who will distribute the heaven, he is all the religions, he is the biggest of secret. This is a very long sermon and all cannot be incorporated here. After saying all this and lot more, Ali starts recounting the period in future when the Mahdi (Kalki Avatar) would arrive. If you read this sermon, you will find everything that Ali foretold about the future is now truly happening. This shows that the Kalki Avatar is about to arrive.

It is written at the end of this sermon that when Ali was talking about this, a man rose from the audience and asked whether Ali knew what all he was talking about. Ali stared at him for a moment and the person gave a loud shriek and died. By the time people took that person out of the mosque, parts of his body were following as if he was disintegrating into pieces.

The fact that Ali has talked of writing the divine scriptures, of talking to Musa (Moses) on Toor, of being one who removes obstacles, of having knowledge of what people saw in dreams, of being one who will distribute heaven and the biggest of secret, confirms our view that the Manifest Self had been bestowed the power of creation, preservation and destruction by God. This Manifest Self appointed the Messengers, it was this Manifest Self that was speaking from Krishna’s mouth, it was this which was speaking from the mouth of Mohammad and Ali and it was this that was responsible for writing and sending the Quran. This explains why in Quran wherever creation, destruction, etc. is talked about, the word that is used is plural, for instance ‘We did this, We sent Adam, We created you, etc.’ And wherever the worship has been talked about, the name of Allah has been used in singular. Allah never got involved in the process of sending apostles, formulating rituals for worship, training the Apostles, imparting teaching, etc. It were the Devatas or Ahlulbayt in Noor or Light state (who have direct relationship with the Paramatma (the Manifest Self) who had taken upon themselves the task of having more people worship the Almighty God and therefore whenever mankind deviated, they appointed Apostles to lead people to the right path or at times the Noor itself descended in pious bodies on earth and were suitably called Avatars. 

Let us now return to our explanation of the aforementioned verse. We will have to go back in history to understand this verse. Aryans had subjugated India by grabbing more and more lands. A lot many of the original inhabitants were driven southwards whereas those who continued to live must have led a life of hardship under the new masters. A sense of defeatism or dejection emerged in them, which penetrated even those who had moved to the South of India. 

This dejection must have increased with time, as Aryans gained control over them. It is this dejection that is being equated with the dejection that Arjun was undergoing. The teachings too start from here itself, with the mention of dejection or losing hope instead of fighting adversities as “heaven-barring and disreputable”.

[3]

Give not yourself to impotence, O Partha (Arjuna). It does not befit you. Cast off this base faintheartedness; arise, O Terror of Foes!

Dejection or losing hope instead of fighting adversities is also termed as impotence. Arjuna is talking of his relatives and friends with whom he would have to fight. He feels sorry that he would have to kill them and this repelling thought makes him throw his weapons. Krishna (or rather Manifest Self of God who is doing the talking through Krishna’s mouth) calls this dejection as heaven barring and disreputable and equates it with impotence. He asks Arjuna to come out of this faint-heartedness, arise and fight. Isn’t everything in continuity? And the commentators want us to believe that we should see the earlier part as description of the battleground and the next part as philosophical teachings from a Guru that ought not to be followed. And they have given loads and loads of arguments to prove this. Due to this endeavour, their commentary becomes more and more incomprehensible and therefore they named it philosophy. After all, it was an easy way to silence those who could not understand their interpretations. 

We do not say that all of them did this deliberately. There are surely several commentators who tried their best to come to a rightful conclusion. But failure to discover a few basic links and the confusion due to apparent differences between God’s revealed text and the propagated text by vested interests always came in the way. However, their inability to find the missing links or deliberate overlooking of facts made Gita appear as a book of contradictions whereas truth is that there is not a single contradiction in Gita for those who understand it truly. 

[4]

Arjuna said:

How could I, O Slayer of Madhu (Krishna), encounter with arrows in battle Bhishma and also Drona who are worthy of worship, O Slayer of Foes (Krishna)?

See again Arjuna is still talking to Krishna (referring to him as Slayer of Madhu in this case) and nowhere is Krishna referred to as Bhagawan. Also note that in the earlier verse Krishna referred to Arjuna as the “terror of foes” whereas Arjuna called Krishna as the “slayer of foes”; thereby signifying that if the enemies perceived Arjuna as terror, Krishna went even further to the extent of even slaying the enemies. This is the difference between Arjuna’s level and Krishna’s level. Arjuna is indeed following the path shown by Krishna but there are a few things that he still needs to learn, those that would be told subsequently in Gita. 

The definite and precise reference here by name, first of Bhishma and then of Drona, who enjoy such high position in society that they are “worthy of worship” is a clear indicator that Arjuna is looking at justification to fight against such revered people. NG calls the prefix prati (against) as seemingly absurd. But this is not absurd when viewed from the point that those who were worthy of worship were actually against the true teachings of God. Therefore, it is evident that the Manifest Self of God sees what is in the heart and not what is evident to others; it is not averse to killing even the apparently pious people if they deviate and become a hurdle in preaching or practicing of the desired path, as in the case of Bhishma and Drona.

[5]

Desisting from the killing of the Gurus who are highly honourable, it would be more meritorious in this world even to have to eat of a beggar’s pittance. Choosing (on the other hand) to kill these Gurus as fortune-seekers, I should be feasting even here on bloodstained benefits of life.

Clearly Arjuna is unable to digest that those revered Gurus could be fortune-seekers (men of the world), as told by Krishna and therefore deserved to be killed. In one place the same Gurus are called mahanubhavas (people of great sympathy) and at another place arthakamaha (grabbers of goods). How could Drona and Bhishma, who were revered figures, could be on the wrong? Krishna confirms that this was the case and they had become seekers of material fortune instead of being seekers of divine grace. This is not for the first time that these people are referred to as greedy. Earlier (see I, 38) we have seen Arjuna talking of the opposite camp in these words: “Even if they whose minds are overpowered by greed see no wrong in the destruction of family (and) no crime in treachery to friends”.

The words “even” here suggest that Arjuna will be feasting on bloodstained benefits, not only in the life hereafter, for where the rewards and punishments are reserved, but even in this world.

[6]

Neither is it clear which would be of greater advantage to us: that we win or that they win over us. Killing whom we should no more wish to live, those very persons are standing ranged before us, the progeny of Dhritarashtra.

NG describes this verse by saying: “The confounding of reason and emotion comes out here, each factor having equal force. To add to the vagueness, there is the express use of the plural. He speaks now apparently almost as a representative of both the contending parties – thus indirectly thinking of the evils of war in the most general terms.”

Unfortunately, there is no vagueness here as well, which NG is referring to. Clearly there is the express use of the plural. It is apparent that there are times when Arjuna is speaking the views of the people in general. In the previous chapter too, Arjuna had spoken of this view of the general public who sometimes even said that Arjuna was killing own people for the greed of the pleasures of kingdom (I,45). 

Here too, Arjuna is asking questions on behalf of the common people, as they viewed and interpreted this war. It is apparent that there were several people who had not comprehended the true reason for war. This confusion was also highlighted because of the propaganda machinery of the high priests and king, who must have worked to show that Krishna and Arjuna were fighting for the capture of throne, when the truth was that this war was fought for altogether different reasons.

In this backdrop, if you see the discussion between Arjuna and Krishna right in the middle of the two armies, things will be clearer. This was a last attempt by them to remove all doubts about the cause of war, so that it would become clear for all times that the war was a righteous one and had nothing to do with capture of power. The high priests who fought against Krishna got killed. But surely a lot many of them would have survived. They continued using their position for carrying forth the propaganda, as returning to the worship of Absolute God suited none of them. Consequently, we find that an entire epic, Mahabharata, was written, which did all it could to belittle the cause of the war that Krishna fought. 

[7]

Struck down by the evil of a tender disposition, with a mind confounded in regard to what is right to do, I ask you: that which is definitely more meritorious, that do indicate to me. I am your disciple; do discipline me coming thus for refuge to you.

Arjuna asks a clear and open question as to what is more meritorious, having to eat of a beggar’s pittance or choosing to kill these Gurus. In fact Arjuna refers to the word “dharma” thus saying: “confounded in regards to what is my dharma, I seek to know what is more meritorious”. It is again clear that it was a war where ‘Dharma’ was paramount in the minds of the fighters. Perhaps the response of Krishna that killing of the Gurus is more meritorious is what troubles the commentators so much so that they go on to make vague commentaries. But we ought to accept Paramatma’s words as they are uttered, isn’t it so? So the truth is that Krishna do say in the end that killing of those Gurus, who stood for worldly benefits, is more meritorious than living the life of renunciation. But before coming to conclusions, there is a warning. Krishna gave this opinion after a lengthy discussion on the way of life. Only those who subscribe to that kind of living, who truly follow the path shown by Gita and abide by what God’s representatives have told them, are eligible for fighting in the name of God. And they can do so only after seeking permission from the true representative of God.

[8]

I cannot visualize either what could rid me of this distress which dries up the senses in this way – even should (it transpire that) I obtain unrivalled dominion of the earth’s plenty or overlordship of the gods (read Devatas) in heaven too.

Again we reiterate that heaven is nowhere negated in Gita but for reasons best known to them, the commentators keep on saying that Arjuna and Krishna do not believe in the concept of heaven and hell. Wherever some reference to heaven has come, they say it is of incidental importance only, or of relativist value, or for purpose of methodology. For reasons best known to them, they cling to this view in spite of repeated utterances in this regard. One reason can be that when they read Gita in the light of the background presented by the poem Mahabharata, they are unable to fathom the true reason for the dispute between the two warring parties. Therefore, they have no choice but to coin such differences in beliefs.

We are of the opinion that Gita is talking of making an absolute man, who performs all actions not in the love of heaven or the fear of hell, but because he performs all his actions in life, including eating, talking, or helping others, or even sleeping or fighting, in remembrance of God. 

This verse is also important because of the reference of Devatas made by Arjuna during the course of his discussion with Krishna. We have shown in the BOOK who these Devatas are. We have also proved that the Devatas were supposed to be in heaven at that time and people who knew their true identity were waiting for them to take birth on this earth. Unfortunately, commentators like NG have translated the word Devatas as ‘gods’, thus committing the gross error of changing the entire monotheistic fabric of Gita. It is such translations that prevent readers from reaching the truth about the teachings that Gita impart. Fact is that all through the Gita, you will find that the subject of Devatas is not only endorsed by Krishna but their importance as secondary only to the Almighty God and His Manifest Self is established time and again. 

In this verse too, Arjuna’s words truly indicate that he subscribed to the belief that the Devatas were in heaven. We have said earlier that it was the mode of worship pertaining to the Devatas that became the cause of war. Bhishma and Drona were worshipping the Devatas through rituals like fire worship and Krishna, even though he maintained the importance of Devatas in creation of mankind, in showing us the path and in providing salvation – and also in giving us place in either heaven or hell - criticized those who were worshipping the Devatas as gods. Keep this background in mind and you will find that the entire Gita becomes comprehensible.

[9]

Samjaya said:

Having spoken thus to Hrishikesa (Krishna), Gudakesa (Arjuna) the Terror of the Foe, saying, “I will not fight” to Govinda (Krishna), lapsed finally into silence.

After putting his views, Arjuna wants Paramatma’s view to come out before he finally goes to fight. It is for you to decide whether Arjuna was speaking his own mind or airing those thoughts that were generally coming in the minds of people. A few points present here and there in Gita make us fall on the later argument as more appropriate. Just as earlier “terror of the foes” was used for Arjuna and “slayer of the foes” was used for Krishna, here Hrishikesa and Gudakesa are used for Krishna and Arjuna respectively, which are balancing both in terms of sound as well as meaning, thereby implying that both were on the same path and were merely acting as Guru and disciple.

[10]

On this Hrishikesa (Krishna), with a semblance of smiling, O Bharata (Dhritarashtra), spoke these words to him who was in grief between the two armies:

In describing this verse, NG has once again tried to give logical reasoning about Gita not being obligatory in nature and has gone on to describe his own view about why Arjuna was reluctant to fight. Both these explanations are unable to describe Arjuna’s stance in full. 

NG says: “Further, Arjuna definitely says “I will not fight” which hitherto he has not dared to say to Krishna. It is this brazen attitude which should justify the oft-repeated words of Krishna in later chapters, in which he seems to order Arjuna to fight. Although the Gita is free from obligatory injunctions, this style of speech arises incidentally from Arjuna’s words. To the extent that such an admonition is meant to counteract this obstinacy, it is in place. But the main character of such advice should be understood as permissive and never fully mandatory, because vidhi or mandate is repugnant altogether to an Upanishad which is a shruti (revealed utterance of wisdom) and not a smriti (code of laws).”

See how the commentators have erred. How their arguments are neither logical nor in coherence with Gita’s teachings! This is so because at all times they wanted to interpret Krishna in the manner they wanted him to be instead of trying to understand what he was really trying to convey. That shrutis only talk of wisdom that need not be followed is a classification done by us and not by either Krishna or God. Moreover, if Krishna’s teachings have been categorized as shruti and not as smriti, it is the ‘wise’ commentators like NG and others who have done that classification and not either Krishna or God. Fact is that neither God nor his Messengers have erred at all in conveying the straight path that leads to God. If anybody has erred time and again, it is us mortal humans, who have not been able to understand the true teachings of God’s Messengers, in all probability under the influence of one who is truly the greatest enemy of mankind viz. Zulmat whose manifest representative is Satan.

NG further says: “Those who interpret such expressions as injunctions will find themselves completely in the wrong by the time they reach the end of the Gita, wherein Krishna finally says to Arjuna: “Do as you like” (xviii, 63) which, taken together with “abandon all duties” (xviii, 66) makes the non-mandatory character of the reference to fighting unequivocal.”

It is to be noted that NG is giving these two verses as examples to prove his point that the teachings of Gita are non-obligatory. Fact is that whereas God has lain down the path for us, He has also given a free will to man. This does not mean that we are free to commit all type of crimes. We are free to choose our paths but giving reward or punishment will always rest in God’s hand. There is hell or rebirth in lower life for those who use their will to stray from the desired path. Krishna talks of what the God desires from an Absolute Man, and then leaves it to Arjuna whether he aspires to become an Absolute Man or not. In that case, he is free to “abandon all duties”, but “duties” will remain “duties”, whether man follows them or not is up to him.

It is ironical that even those commentators who see no obligation in Gita have translated the verse with the word “duties”. This indicates that the teachings are obligatory in nature. It is very much like the Indian constitution wherein the duties of a citizen are mentioned. Rewards and punishments are mentioned but the person is free as far as choosing the path is concerned. This cannot be taken to mean that the Indian constitution does not obligate good conduct from him. If he commits wrong deeds, he is liable for punishment. You won’t call it freedom to commit evil when a noose hangs in front as a punishment for not performing what was expected of a person? The noose in the case of religion is the punishment that is sure to be given after death. Krishna elaborated upon the rewards and punishment. He talked of salvation, heaven and hell, and also of lower birth as punishment. After telling of the rewards and punishment, if he says “Do as you like,” it is not with the intention of removing the obligation. Elsewhere, in Gita, Krishna also asks the bystanders to either choose this or that side. As regard to this there is no obligation. But if they choose the side of Krishna, it would become obligatory for them to fight, kill or get killed. 

[11]

Krishna said:

You are sorry for those with whom sorrow is unreasonable. You speak in terms of reason too. Veritable philosophers (pandits) are not affected in regard to those whose breath has gone and those whose breath has not gone.

Note that here again the Sanskrit text says “Sribhagavan uvacha” instead of “Sri Krishna uvacha” but has been wrongly translated as “Krishna said”. We have said earlier that whatever may be the true identity of Krishna, fact remains that the answer to Arjuna’s queries is coming from the Manifest Form of God or Paramatma; whose sole responsibility is to lead us all to the worship of that One Absolute Non-Manifest God. 

More importantly, material life is of no importance! It does not make a difference whether the spirit is in the body or has left it. Real pandits (philosophers) are those who remain steadfast, irrespective of life or death coming to their adversaries or to themselves. 

[12]

Further, never was I non-existent, nor you nor these chiefs of men; neither shall we, all of us, ever cease becoming hereafter.

This verse asserts the eternal existence not only of an individual like Krishna, but of the whole of humanity. The mere birth of a child or the death of a man does not mean life and death. Spirit is eternal. Therefore, man should desist from considering this life as the end-all of all and work on the path desired by the Creator, as this alone will ensure a better life for our spirit, once this body has ceased to function.

Soul in the body, the presence or non-presence of which in the body signifies life and death, is a part of the Manifest Self of God; it has remained forever and will continue to remain forever. Take this example. I take a handful of water from the ocean; use it for washing my face and the water returns to the ocean as water. The water that comes in my hands was water even before it was taken for the purpose of washing, was water even when it was in my hands and will remain water when it gets mixed with the rest of water in the ocean. Now I take a handful of water again, washes so much of dirt that the water changes colour, yet when it goes to the ocean, it becomes water again. A greater percentage of our body is water; all of us together drink huge quantity of water every day yet the water of the oceans remain just as much because all that goes out from our body also returns to the ocean as water. 

Likewise, the Paramatma or the Manifest Self of God (Spirit, as per the Christians) is the greatest power created by God. This Manifest Self is one but for the purpose of this world, its Noor became fourteen-fold. Just as water around us is linked to the water in the ocean; the spirit in our body has a direct link with the Manifest Self of God or Paramatma (the Supreme Spirit). Gita says explicitly that those who recognize this relationship and make their spirit pure enough to unite with its source, they get rid of the repeated cycle of rebirth and attain salvation. Those who don’t will continue to take birth in each creation and will also go through long periods of stay in hell for crimes that they had committed. Once they have faced the punishment in hell, they will be sent again to the world for yet another test of conduct. That is why Krishna says, “never was I non-existent, nor you nor these chiefs of men; neither shall we, all of us, ever cease becoming hereafter.”

[13]

As there is here in the body for the embodied, childhood, youth, old age, so also the passing on to another body in the same manner; those firm in mind are not thereby bewildered.

Just as the physical body undergoes transition, similarly the spirit, which is eternal, goes through various stages. Upon salvation it becomes one with the Manifest Self and therefore permanently dwells in the heaven. If salvation is not achieved, the spirit stays in heaven or hell till it has received the reward or punishment for good or bad acts committed in life. Once the rewards or punishments have been given, the spirit is sent back to earth for yet another test on earth.

[14]

Momentary sense contacts on the other hand, O Kaunteya (Arjuna), yielding cold-warmth, joy-pain, alternately coming and going are transitory. Do you endure them, O Bharata (Arjuna).

Since the spirit, the presence of which distinguishes between beings and non-beings, is indestructible and permanent in nature, the momentary happiness and sorrow of the world is of transitory nature, and has to be endured and dealt stoically.

[15]

That man indeed of firm mind who is unaffected by these, O best of Men (Arjuna), equal-minded in joy as well as pain, he is destined for immortality.

Krishna says that those men who understand the aforesaid point and treat pain and pleasure as equal qualify for immortality. Important point to be noted is that whereas in verse 12, Krishna is saying that all the men were never non-existent and will neither ever cease becoming hereafter, he is talking of immortality only for those who are of firm mind and who treat pain and pleasure of this world with equal grace. Is it a contradiction? No! Earlier, Krishna was talking of the existence of spirit forever and this human body being a temporary abode. Each being, irrespective of whether it performs good or bad deeds, has a spirit that was there since ever and that will continue to remain forever. 

Since the spirit has a permanent existence, it becomes necessary that we give it a permanent abode. That permanent abode, where the spirit gains a permanent stay in heaven and gets freed from the continuing cycle of birth, death and rebirth, is called immortality. Same people in Quran have been referred to as those who die on the path of the Lord or sabeqoon (those who moved ahead). 

We must remember that man has been given a free choice as regard to his actions. Forces of Noor guide him towards worship of God and adherence to His teachings while Forces of Zulmat are trying their best to lead us astray from that Straight Path. Those who do not fall prey to Zulmat’s beckoning and still cling to the right path become immortal. The Absolute Men are immortal as their spirits, instead of going to heaven or hell, get united with the Paramatma directly and thus continue to live even when this creation gets terminated and another Brahma’s Day commences. Brahma’s Day or a Divine Day has been elaborately defined in various Puranas. 

As regard to those who identify God truly, even Quran says that they are shaheeds; they never die (but become immortal) and get sustenance directly from God. Mohammad has even equated this shahadat with the love of Ahlulbayt (the fourteen Devatas) and said that one who dies with Ahlulbayt’s love in heart dies a shaheed. At another instance, he said that if you board the vessel of his (Mohammad’s) progeny - the Ahlulbayt - you would attain salvation. What is salvation? In our view, salvation is freedom from the cycle of rebirth, wherein the spirit acquired enough purity to get united with its source – the Paramatma.

Now put two and two together. We are sure after reading the BOOK, there would have remained no doubt that the fourteen Devatas created from One Noor of Manifest Self are the fourteen Ahlulbayt (Mohammad and his progeny). You have also seen that the Manifest Self of God divided to give birth to these fourteen guardians of the fourteen spheres. These fourteen guardians are actually the fourteen Devatas or Lights. Whereas Mohammad says that salvation is achieved only upon boarding the vessel made of these fourteen, Krishna repeatedly tells in Gita that salvation is possible only when one recognizes the relationship of one’s self with the Divine Self and reaches the Absolute God through recognizing this path. Mohammad and Krishna’s teachings as regard to salvation are one and the same, whether present day Hindus or Muslims, engrossed as they are in deviated understanding of the facts, acknowledge this or not.

[16]

What is unreal cannot have being and non-being cannot be real; the conclusion in regard to both these has been known to philosophers.

Says NG: “If the God would have been unreal it would not have been capable of being everywhere and giving birth to all living beings. Likewise, if He was a non-being, how could it be real?”

Now see what the book Religious Consciousness has to say: “When we examine the structure of individual verses, we find that dialectics or method of juxtaposing counterparts and equalizing them is strikingly employed (in Gita). This verse is a clear example.

“This way of reasoning has its background in the Upanishads and the Vedas themselves. To cite but one instance, we have the famous reference to vidya (science) and avidya (nescience), which are taken up in the Isha Upanishad for dialectical treatment side by side with the parallel example of the two concepts of sambhuti (becoming) and vinasha (extinction). There is reference to ancient philosophers even there who were capable of treating these two counterparts together as implied in the expression ubhayam-saha (bearing both) used here. The expression ubhayam (both) is the characteristic of this rare type of philosophical reasoning employed also in the Gita.”

See how the commentators’ inability to understand the truth has made them reach differing conclusions. Krishna is telling the difference between perceived life and death and the true immortality. Generally it is believed that birth is delivery of the child from mother’s womb and death is ceasing of breath from this material body. This is not real birth and neither ceasing of breath is death, as the spirit continues to remain in existence, both prior to birth as child and consequent of what is seen by us as death. At a later stage, Krishna has called men on the evil path as already dead. This means that if the soul is dead even when the spirit is present in the material body, the person is already dead. Conversely, the real death is the death of the soul. If the soul doesn’t die and the body dies, then it is life and not death.

The same is the view of the Quran. It talks of a stage when soul becomes deaf, dumb and blind and then dead and thereafter no guidance reaches the person. This is the death of a person, even if he walks, eats and sleeps. On the contrary, if the soul is at a certain desired position when the spirit leaves the body, the person is alive and cannot be called dead. 

[17]

Know That to be indestructible by which all this is pervaded. None can bring about the destruction of This that knows no decrease.

The subject of Devatas was initiated by Arjuna himself. When the subject of immortality came, it was but necessary to talk of those things prerequisite for gaining immortality. Therefore, Krishna carries the discussion further and talks of the Manifest Self of God or Paramatma (Supreme Spirit) as ‘That’ by which all life is pervaded. This Manifest Self of God or Paramatma knows no decrease and henceforth it is not possible for anybody to bring about the destruction of this Divine Power. When this Divine Power is not going to die, all those who attain union with this power too are not going to die even when one world gets extinct and another is born. It is for this reason alone that the fourteen Devatas are never going to perish. That is why when the Puranas go on to list the Divine beings that were guardians of various Manvantaras or Creations, we find that same names get repeated again and again. Fact is that the fourteen Devatas of this creation were in existence even in prior creations and would continue to remain so in the creations that would follow. It is sad that we do not know the existence of these fourteen Devatas, who comprise the Manifest Self of God and by whom ‘all this is pervaded’.

[18]

These bodies (however) of the everlasting indestructible and undefinable (One) are spoken of as having an end. Therefore go on with the battle, O Bharata (Arjuna).

We are thankful to NG that he has not changed the actual translations and if he has made any addition, he has kept it within brackets. Our view is that there are several verses that would become more understandable if you do not get influenced by reading what’s there in the brackets and confine yourself only to what Gita is actually saying. 

We have seen how Krishna has talked of the Manifest Self of God in the previous verse. In this verse, Krishna refers to the subject of Devatas, who comprise the Manifest Self of God. He says that these bodies (of the Devatas), which together comprise the everlasting indestructible and undefinable Manifest Self of God, too are spoken of as having an end. The body of each one of us, including the Devatas when their Noor will come in human body, would perish. When all bodies are to perish and when, as it has been previously said, the immortality of the soul is not the immortality of the material body but is directly related to certain beliefs and deeds, then one should not worry about physical death of body but try to gain a permanent life for our souls.

In describing this verse, NG has given an elaborate description lasting into pages, but not of much use. We request the readers to keep their faculty of reason open and you will find that all the existing commentaries done till date are far from truth. 

NG says: “The expression ‘Therefore fight, O Bharata’ which seems to be an order given to Arjuna, deserves our attention because it is perhaps the basis of the greatest amount of misunderstanding in connection with the Gita. Some say Gita wants everybody to fight for their own interests, national, religious, etc. Others, like Sankara, though understanding it as permissive only, think that the advice is legitimate in the case of a kshattriya (warrior). That war takes a very imperative character when we take the particular instance of Arjuna as an individual caught in those necessary circumstances so carefully mentioned in great detail by Vyasa in this and the previous chapter is clear. If, because of its imperative character as applied to the particular Arjuna, the converse generalization leading to justification of violence or war as a guiding principle for the regulation of human affairs could derive support from the Gita teachings remain problematic indeed.”

Let’s give answers to all these questions. Any message from God or His Emissary cannot be for a select few or a confined number of people, unless pointed out otherwise. It has to be a message that can be adhered to equally by those living on hills or plains, in their houses or on voyage, men or women, in times of peace and war. We know from recent events that war is very much a part of this world, and people wage war even in the name of peace and justice. Therefore, if Gita is a universal message, it ought to touch the subject of war.

What is evident though is that Gita never wants people to fight for their own interests, for selfish desires or lust for power, fame or wealth. In fact, Gita is asking Arjuna to fight and even kill all those whose materialistic desires make them oppose the true teachings. Neither does Gita wants only a few people like kshattriyas to fight. In fact, it is addressed to all human beings, as is evident from these verses. All those whose spirit has a linkage with the Manifest Self of God and therefore would remain in existence forever, despite the bodies getting destroyed, ought to take lesson. It is best for each of us to elevate ourselves to a level that we treat life and death, wealth and poverty, heat and cold, pleasures and hardships with equality, so as to become immortal. Any person who has learnt to treat all these things with equality has surely reached such an elevated level that he knows how to control his inner self from getting astray. A lot many other desired characteristics that one should imbibe are described at length in the succeeding verses of Gita. Once the person has won the fight against senses and organs of action, anger, lust, greed, etc., then and then only he reaches the status that allows him to fight others, in the company of the official representative of the Manifest Self of God. 

[19]

He who thinks This as the killer and he who thinks This as killed – both these know not. This does not kill; is not killed.

Unable to understand the apparent duality in the two verses, NG says: “This verse modifies the supposed mandate of verse 18 by stating that Arjuna is not killing at all when he is “asked” to kill there – thus heightening the paradoxical effect, with the object of resolving the ambivalence in more unitive terms.”

Truth is that this verse has to be seen in continuity with the subject under discussion and cannot be seen as a stand-alone verse. Previously it has been said (II,12) that all people including Krishna, Arjuna and the chiefs of men, have been there from eternity and will continue to remain forever. In (II,17), ‘That’ and ‘This’ has been talked about and we have shown how ‘That’ refers to the Manifest Self and ‘This’ refers to the self within us.

In this verse, ‘This’ has been wrongly written with capital alphabet; ‘this’ here refers to this or that person. Krishna wishes to tell Arjuna that he won’t be the killer if some people die by his hands, neither will they be the killers if Arjuna dies fighting them. Mere eliminating of the physical body is not death. The self of a person lives only if it gets united with ‘That’ or the Manifest Self and dies even when the body continues to breathe if self becomes impure beyond a certain level. Ultimate aim is to get united with the Manifest Self and that is possible only if we submit ourselves to Its command. If the Manifest Self or a true representative of the Manifest Self ordains us to fight, we should be ready for it and if the Manifest Self or a true representative of the Manifest Self ordains us to die, we should be ready for that as well. But before we do that, we will have to take our selfs to the purity levels described in Gita.

Those people who come in the way of disrupting the order that the God wishes to maintain need to be removed from this world, but only under the command of the Official Representative of the Manifest Self and only by those who elevate themselves to the level as described in the succeeding chapters. Those who do so and follow the dictate of the Self will be immortals, even if they die in the attempt. Those who are unable to build this relationship of their self with Manifest Self and their self degrades to certain levels of impurity are as it is dead, as per Krishna, even if they breathe and move around in their physical bodies.

[20]

This is neither born nor does This die, nor having once come into being, cease to become any more: Unborn, perpetual, eternal is This Ancient One. It is not killed on the killing of the body.

Thought process continues in this verse as well. The explanation here by NG is apt when he says: “Except for one hidden phrase, the words do not require much explanation. Na yam bhutva bhavita va na bhuyah (once considered existent, it does not become again so). Reincarnation in the popular sense is seen to be ruled out. Eternal life seems to be what is meant here. The Self is never born and never dies. It is pure being in itself, not subject to any process of evolution, flux or becoming.”

Thus, the self has an eternal life and does not get killed upon the killing of the body.

[21]

About him who knows This as the indestructible, the ever-lasting, the unborn, never-decreasing one (of) such a person how could (the questions) ‘whose death he causes’, ‘whom he kills’ (arise) O Partha (Arjuna)?

Those who know what has been said in verse 20 will understand that the soul is eternal and hence cannot be killed. That is why it has been said: “It is not killed on the killing of the body.” Therefore, Arjuna is asked to get up and remove such people from existence from this earth who do not believe in God and who do not follow the path as desired by Paramatma (the Supreme Spirit or the Manifest Self of God). The world, as per the words of the Manifest Self of God here, should be the place where His order is adhered to and it is our duty to work to accomplish that objective. For this, we will have to first make ourselves the true followers of His order. People who do not follow His order are to be left alone; they will be suitably rewarded or punished once this short life comes to an end. But if they themselves come face to face with the forces of truth, forces of truth should not shudder from fighting them. In case this happens, neither getting physically killed means death and nor killing others mean death for them.

We disagree with NG’s comments here as well. He says: “This verse finalizes the position of Arjuna as belonging to a context of wisdom rather than of action – so as to bring the subject into conformity with the major part of the Gita, which is mainly a dialogue of philosophical import. Krishna in effect tells Arjuna here that the question of killing does not obtrude into the situation at all. Arjuna is considered as a contemplative and not as a warrior anymore.”

If Arjuna is not a warrior any more, why did war take place in the end? Did Arjuna disobeyed Krishna or did he wriggled himself out of the contemplative phase and then resorted to war? Unfortunately, the writer treats wisdom different from action, forgetting that it is wisdom alone that governs action – activity or inactivity. Also to say that it is a dialogue of philosophical import is incorrect, as we have repeatedly said. Only through philosophy and wisdom can a person understand his relationship with God and perform actions that will guarantee a permanent life for him in heaven. They cannot be aloof from our actions. 

[22]

As a man casting off his worn-out garments assumes others that are new, likewise casting off bodies that are worn-out, the embodied one takes to others that are new.

What we perceive as death is merely casting off the worn-out garments by the spirit and assuming fresh garments. This process of death has been described as per Islamic traditions as akin to a silken garment being forcefully pulled from around a tree full of thorns. This is so because matter cling on to spirit by force of necessity and it is this that is put aside. 

There is no doubt whatsoever that the subject of rebirth is being discussed here. New bodies are given to the spirits after death. One whose spirit has attained the level of salvation will be given a body in heaven where the person will dwell forever. One who is unable to attain salvation at the time of death of his physical body, his spirit will require new body and the spirit will dwell there till the lifespan of that being, consequent to which it will have to take another body yet again. 

This is so because spirit has been placed in this world with the motive that it will elevate itself, identify the rope (in the form of Devatas/Ahlulbayt) and use the rope to get out of the world. The other way of getting out is to reach the nadir, where the spirit fails the test and is removed. Otherwise, the spirit will have to remain here till the end of this world either in a safe custody (in barzakh, as per Islamic sources) or in other bodies. At all times, it will need bodies, and food, because that is its chief requirement. But all this has not been talked about till this juncture.

[23]

Weapons do not cut This, fire does not burn This and water does not wet This; wind does not dry This:

Again the self or spirit within our body is being described here. This cannot be cut with weapons, burnt with fire, wetted with water or dried with wind.  Even if the body is cut to pieces, the spirit survives. The same discussion continues in the next verse and is self-explanatory.

[24]

Indeed It is uncleavable; It is non-inflammable; It is unwettable and non-dryable also; everlasting, all-pervading, stable, immobile; It is eternal. 

[25]

Undefined is It, unthinkable is It, as non-subject to change is It spoken of: therefore, knowing It as such, there is no reason for you to feel sorry for It.

There is no logic in Arjuna feeling sorry or desisting from fighting for the cause of God, when he knows that the true nature of the self in every human being, which is undefined, unthinkable, non-changeable, cannot be cut with weapons, burnt with fire, wetted with water or dried with wind; it is everlasting, all-pervading, stable, immobile and eternal.

[26]

Or again if you should hold This to be constantly-ever-born or as constantly-ever-dying, even then O Mighty-Armed (Arjuna) you have no reason to regret it.

Rebirth is being clearly referred to here, which is nothing but a spirit casting off old garments and taking on fresh ones. One reason given earlier was that since the spirit is everlasting, one should not worry about death. Now it is being said that there might be some people who believe that the spirit is constantly-ever-born (due to it constantly taking births) or constantly-ever-dying (due to the repeated deaths that it has to undergo). Even if one believes so, he will have to agree that it is an endless process and therefore one should have no reason to regret while performing one’s duty. Therefore, Arjuna should go on and fight.

[27]

In r0espect of anyone born, death is certain, and certain is birth likewise for anyone dead; therefore regarding something inevitable, you have no reason to feel any regret.

People like NG, due to their inability to understand the true meaning say this verse contradicts the earlier verses. We have said earlier that a revelation from God through his emissary or even from two different emissaries, even if they are scattered in time and space, cannot contradict each other. 

Krishna is giving various reasons to convince Arjuna that it is his duty to fight. In truth, Arjuna is acting as a disciple and the reasons being given by Krishna are actually meant for all doubters, on either side of the two warring factions. Truly, many of them must be of the opinion that death is cessation of breath, after which there will be another birth. Even these people were of opinion that death is inevitable. Also, another birth too is guaranteed. Krishna wants to convey that even if you see cessation of breath as death, you are aware that it is inevitable. If this incident has to take place eventually, consequent to which you will have to take another birth, does it matter if it happens a little earlier? Either ways, Arjuna has no reason to feel sorry. 

In short, those who are born are sure to die, and it is equally sure they will be born again. Since death is inevitable, there is no reason to feel any regret from fighting or killing the adversaries, if one is on the right path and acting under the command of the true representative of God. Are there any contradictions left?

[28]

Beings have an unmanifested origin and manifested middle states, O Bharata (Arjuna), and again unmanifested terminations. Where is room for plaint herein?

This again talks of the entire process of creation. It is clearly stated in the various Upanishads that there was nothing but a Non-manifest Absolute God, who created the Manifest Self. This Manifest Self created the Noor (of Brahma or Noor-e-Mohammadi) which divided into fourteen equal parts and these became the fourteen rulers of the fourteen spheres. Thereafter, all the rest of the creations were created through these fourteen Devatas. The fourteen are referred to as the rulers of our organs of senses and action. 

When the last of these fourteen Devatas is killed (as per Vishnu Purana), the world will cease to continue. Subsequently, another creation will be put in stead. This has continued to happen and this is the 994th creation of the 1000 that comprise a Divine Day. Everything will converge into the Absolute. Quran has described this stage with the words that nothing would remain but the face of Allah. Face of Allah is nothing but the Manifest Self of God. The period that follows is called the Divine Night and the period of this Divine Night will be equal to the period of the Divine Day. At the time of the next dawn, the Face of Allah (the Manifest Self) will again create and the duration of this day would again be 1000 creations (Adams), one followed by the other.

The same process is being referred to by Krishna in this verse. All beings were born as spirit. Quran has even referred to the time when the spirits were created and a promise was extracted from them. Thereafter, the spirits will take birth as manifest beings and this is followed by a non-manifest stage for the spirit. If this is the order in which life (of spirit) proceeds, why should we worry about the death of the physical body?

[29]

A certain person sees This as a wonder, likewise another speaks about This as a wonder. Another hears of It even as a wonder, but even hearing no one understands This at all. 

“Sees”, “speaks” and “hears” are three ways of appraising the Absolute. The present life, which can be seen with eyes, is talked about as God’s wonder by few; the life before birth, which everybody has experienced but not seen, is spoken of as a wonder by few; and, the life after this, which is a mystery in itself and therefore not seen or experienced by anyone, too is called a wonder. Despite all this no one understands the true nature of life.

A very significant verse in this regard is mentioned in Surah Baqarah of Quran. Those who are unable to see the manifest proofs (signs of God) around them have been termed as deaf, dumb and blind. It is said that a veil has been put before such people and they would never come to truth. It is clear from Quran too that seeing, speaking and hearing are our tools to reach truth.

[30]

This embodied One within the bodies of all is ever immune to killing. O Bharata (Arjuna). Therefore in respect of any being you have no reason for regretting. 

The Manifest Self of the Non-Manifest Absolute God is actually present inside all of us as the embodied self or spirit. This is immune to killing or destruction. Therefore Arjuna should have no reason for regretting fighting those in the other camp.

[31]

Further having regard also for the pattern of behaviour natural to you (svadharma) there is no reason for vacillation, for there could be nothing more meritorious than war that is right for a true fighter (kshattriya).

Proponents of pseudo-peace would not like to hear this. That is why they go out of the way to give awkward explanations. Their misfortune is they cannot change what has been said? Fact remains that Gita is all for peace and non-violence. But what does a believer of Gita do when evil tries to subdue him by force? What does a true believer do when evil comes face to face, as it happened in the case of Ali and Husain or in the case of Rama and Krishna? Gita’s teachings are for all times and all situations. We know now for sure that in spite of all religions preaching ahimsa or non-violence, himsa or violence cannot be totally obliterated. Evil should not see our penchant for non-violence as weakness. In case the need arise, the followers of truth should be ready to wage a war; they are more likely to be victorious as they are the ones who do not fear death. 

Message is clear: fighting cannot be removed from this earth. Neither is fighting to be removed. Evil has to be removed and, to achieve that, if fighting is the last option left, then let it be.

Arjuna is a kshattriya and it is already part of his natural behaviour to fight. However, wars are right and wars are wrong. In the fight mentioned in Mahabharata, both sides were saying that they were on the right. But claiming to be right and being right is different. Krishna convinces Arjuna that since it is a righteous war in which those in the other camps are merely men of the world, it has to be more meritorious for a true fighter to fight such a war. 

Also, the entire life is a fight, hence everybody is a fighter; first and foremost is the fight against self from falling prey to forces of darkness (represented by Satan). The next stage is to voice resistance against the evil and untruth to the best of one’s capability. Fact remains that there is still no dearth of good men on this earth. But they have ceased to be an active resistance against evil and untruth. They look the other way when they see these. Next stage of development for such people will be to voice their true opinion without fear. And the third stage, which cannot be reached without attaining the first and second stages, is when the war becomes inevitable, as it happened in the battle of Mahabharata. In such a situation, there is nothing more meritorious for a true fighter than to fight this righteous war. 

The word vikampitum, usually interpreted “to tremble”, may be taken to mean more simply “not to swerve” – from the path chalked out for Arjuna. This also shows the extent to which Arjuna wished to refrain from fight and how Krishna had to labour hard to bring him to war. Those who say that Arjuna had sought Krishna’s help in war are clearly on the wrong.

[32]

True warriors (kshattriyas) have reason to be happy too, O Partha (Arjuna) to have the chance of such a war presenting itself unsought before them as an open door to heaven.

Being a kshatriya, it is part of Arjuna’s nature to fight. But seldom are such wars fought, where the fighter has to gain, if he kills or get killed. This is so because it is a righteous war wherein those who consider it their duty to fight would end up in heaven either ways; if they are victorious or if they get killed in the course of performing their duty. 

We invite you to compare this verse with the Quranic statement as per which all those who die while pursuing this struggle (who die as shaheeds) go straight to heaven. Shaheed doesn’t have to die in a mortal fight to attain salvation. Even those who fought with the vagaries of their self and controlled them, and consequently their self was at the desired levels of purity, would attain salvation.

Also note that the subject of heaven is again talked about here. Without mincing words, it has clearly been said that heaven is guaranteed for those who fight a war for upholding the right or destroying the wrong. Also those who say that at a certain stage Gita leaves the subject of battle in Kurukshetra and enters into a mystic philosophy are also requested to take note. Has the continuity of thought broken at any stage? The flow is continuous and the subjects being discussed are all those that will make Arjuna fight a war against Kauravas, which includes fighting against the revered Bhishmas and Dronas of the time. And heaven is being guaranteed just as Mohammad used to guarantee heaven to those who fought on his side. 

Please ponder for moment another point as well! This war has been described as “an open door to heaven”. Can a fight for the throne be described in this manner? Are we not right in concluding that the epic poem ‘Mahabharata’ has been written with vested interests and actually confuses the reader about the true content of Gita? Gita gives no indication whatsoever that the fight was for capture of throne. In fact, all through the text, the highest levels of spirituality have been discussed. If the commentators got confused, it was because of the poem ‘Mahabharata’.

[33]

If, on the other hand, you will not take to this battle which conforms to the requirements of righteousness, then thwarting what is consistent with your own nature and your good repute you will become involved in evil.

The commentators, misled by seeing people of the likes of Drona and Bhishma in Kaurava’s camp, say there was “no absolutely clear line of righteousness discernible.” They forget that on innumerable occasions, Krishna is pin-pointedly calling it a war between right and wrong, good and evil, army devoted to God versus army devoted to materialistic gains. Not only does Krishna calls this battle a battle of righteousness, but also gives a general rule that there is no middle path, where a person can abstain from fighting the war of righteousness. In case he does so, his conduct is equivalent to being on the side of evil itself. Can this be said of a fight for capture of throne? Fighting for truth and justice has been made obligatory on each one of us who chooses the path of Krishna or Mohammad.

[34]

Living beings will also pronounce a never-ending verdict of calumny on you, and to one used to honour, dishonour is worse than death.

Krishna’s wordings imply that it is not honourable to desist from fighting a righteous war. In the succeeding two verses, personal values such as ill-repute and shame are talked about. Dishonour or disrepute as mentioned here comes from the whole world of created beings, as implied in the expression bhutani (creatures). 

A very similar message was given centuries later by none other than AgniDeva of the Vedas in the battle of Karbala. Husain, who is beyond doubt the AgniDeva described in the Vedas, carried these teachings to the sphere of implementation so much so that even today the epithet ‘izzat kee maut zillat kee zindagi se behtar hai’ (death with honour is better than a life with dishonour) is synonymous with Husain. 

[35]

The great car-generals will look upon you as quitting the battle from fear and having been honourably looked upon by them you will be held in derision.

After imparting lessons in necessity of performing one’s duty, Krishna is now trying to woo the kshattriya in Arjuna. Hence this verse! At all times, the message is clear: that Krishna wants Arjuna to fight this righteous war for Arjuna’s own sake.

[36]

Those against you will speak of you in unspeakable terms, scorning your ability; what pain could there be keener than this?

Isn’t it clear from the several reasons that Krishna has given to Arjuna that it is Krishna who desires that this war be fought? We are sure you must have noted there is nothing to suggest this was a war for capture of power. Instead, it is evident that righteousness, truthfulness and justice were the cause of war.

[37]

Dying you will attain heaven or winning you will have the enjoyment of the earth. Therefore arise, O Kaunteya (Arjuna), making up your mind to fight.

Fighting such a war has rewards even if the fighter dies fighting or becomes victorious. All these points are mentioned only to make Arjuna rise and fight.

This line again shows this was not a war for capture of throne. What would be the use of throne when the fighter was already dead?

[38]

Equalizing both pleasure and pain, both gain and loss, both victory and defeat, enter wholly into battle. Thus you will avoid sin.

Look at the thin difference between a sinner and a non-sinner. It’s all there in the mind. A same deed can lead to heaven or hell, depending on what’s cooking in the mind. The person who performs his acts for God would be rewarded whereas the same deed performed with worldly benefits in mind can open the gates to hell. 

Also, there are several levels of virtuosity and faith. First stage is that of people who refrain from committing sin. Then comes the level of people who refrain from committing sin and also perform good acts. A slightly higher is the stage of people who refrain from sin, do good acts but beyond just performing good acts think of the goodness of others before their own. Such persons get upgraded to a level where every act of theirs is devoted to God and His creations. They then start telling others to adhere to the desired path. And in case the opponents come out to fight, they do not desist from fighting. At this level, if they desist from fighting they will be committing a sin. Likewise, if they fail to equalize pain and pleasure, gain and loss, victory and defeat, they will be committing sin. 

This means that after building up merit, a slight deflection or error from obligatory conduct could jeopardize the whole progress made, thus nullifying all merit. 

It is evident that the Absolute Man sits at that pinnacle of humanity where God is so deeply entrenched that there remains no scope for the world to make inroads. Again we are reminded of Husain who showed to us how this Absolute Man ought to live. His wordings ‘Innalillahe wa inna ilaihe rajeoon; rizan be qazaehee be tasliman le amreh’ (We all are from God and we all have to return to God; we are agreeable to whatever fate has in store and supplicate to Him in all our acts.) may seem like any other phrase uttered by famous men, but the true worth lies in the background when these words were uttered.

Husain had not had a loaf to eat or drop to drink for last three days. He was weak and tired under the scorching summer sun, shining hot on the barren rocky land. He was surrounded by an army of several thousand men, who had tried to insult him in all manners they could. On his side, there were merely a handful of loyal friends and relatives, several of whom were not fit to fight as per military norms. From the morning of the 10th of Moharram, these loyal friends were getting killed one by one. His relatives, including brothers, nephews and son, followed them to death. All had died except the 6-month old infant son, Ali Asghar. At this moment, Husain made a last effort to seek water for the child whose mother’s milk too had dried. In return, an arrow was sent that pierced the tender neck of the child. The child died in the hands of his father. Husain was left alone after Ali Asghar’s death with only an extremely sick son in the camps. Historians have narrated Husain already had several hundred wounds on his body at the time. Then, with the dead body of the infant child in hand and his blood dripping on to Husain’s sleeves, Husain had these words to utter (which we have quoted above). The fact that the first part of this couplet is actually a line from the Holy Quran suggests that Husain was fighting only because it was his duty towards his God and all the sacrifices that he gave were due to this reason. If God liked his grand sacrifice so much so that He narrated the events that were to unfold at Karbala, several centuries before, in the hymns of the Holy Vedas (as we have seen in the BOOK), why should we have any doubt?

[39]

What has just been taught is reason according to samkhya; but hear now of the same according to yoga, attaining to the unity of which reasoning you will be able to throw off the bondage of works.

What was discussed till now was from the point of buddhi or reasoning. Now the justification for war will be given from the point of view of yoga i.e. from the point of view of attaining closeness to God.

[40]

In such (a path) there is no forfeiture of any merit nor is there involved any demerit by transgression. Even a little of such a way of life saves one from great apprehension.

Message is clear. The path that Krishna is showing is best for all times. Those who come close to leading such a life are always gainers in life.

[41]

Here, O Prize of the Kurus (Arjunas), the well-founded reasoning is unitive but many branched and endless are the reasonings of them in whom reason is ill-founded.

The basic requirements for buddhi (reasoning) to function in a manner conducive to attain spiritual values are here referred to as being unitive. Such unitive well-founded reasoning is here referred to as vyvasayatmika buddhi (a reason well-founded and regulated and directed to its object). However, there could be certain branches of reasoning that are based on wrong facts.

[42]

yam imam pushpitam vacham

pravadanty avipaschitah

vedavadaratah partha

na’nyad asti’ti vadinah

[43]

kamatmanah svargapara

janma karma phala pradam

kriya visesha bahulam

bhogaisvaryagatim prati

[44]

bhogaisvarya prasaktanam

taya pahritachetasam

vyavasayatmika buddhih

samadhau na vidhiyate

Such flowery speech as uttered by the foolish adhering to the doctrine of the Veda negating any other (transcendental) verity, the self of which is nothing but desire-made, holding heaven for highest goal, offering only birth as the result of works abounding in many special observances which aim at enjoyment and domination:

In the case of those whose mind are under the sway of such teachings, who are attached to enjoyment and domination, a well-founded reason does not come under the sway of the peace of contemplation (samadhi).

Most commentators like NG above are thoroughly confused as regards to the interpretation of these verses. Fact is that verses like this have played a great part in confusing them in their entire interpretation of religious doctrines. Thus the entire commentaries go wayward. On the other hand, you will be pleased to know that these verses too are fully in conformity of the view endorsed and propagated by us.

If you notice, Krishna is not talking ill of those who adhere to the wordings of the Vedas. Instead he is talking of the foolish who adhere to the doctrine of the Vedas, and out of their foolishness negate any other verity, without applying their reason. We have already shown how the Vedic teachings were understood wrongly and Krishna tried to show the true path wherein God is One and Supreme and the Devatas of the Vedas are the highest creations of God to whom God had delegated several of His Powers. People of Krishna’s time called themselves as true adherents of Vedas but had discarded the true teachings of the Vedas. They had exalted the Devatas to the level of demigods and forgotten the Absolute God. How could this be acceptable to Krishna, a representative of none but the Paramatma whose duty, as described in the Upanishads, is to lead the mankind to the worship of Absolute God? 

Krishna says explicitly that people who subscribed to such faith had self that sought the world rather than God. Such people, even if they performed virtuous acts, did so for the desire of heaven. Heaven has been made as a reward for acts performed in the way of God. What would you call those acts, which are performed not because of one’s inclination to adhere to God’s command, but because doing so would guarantee a place in heaven? Hence, Krishna has reasons to devalue heaven but it has been done only when the acts of foolish men are being talked about. And we were foolish enough to conclude Krishna is against the concept of heaven itself.

In this very vein, Ali once said he performs righteous deeds not in the love of heaven or fear of hell’s fire. This does not mean Ali was against the concept of heaven and hell, so elaborately talked about in the Quran. Instead Ali was performing righteous deeds for a far loftier reason.

Unfortunately, foolish men were performing the various rituals blindly because they thought such acts would lead them to heaven; instead it is righteous living and worship of God that guarantees a place in heaven. This foolish approach had made them puppets in the hands of priests. Thus priests were all powerful, so much so that if they said it was IndraDeva who had impregnated a particular lady, even when it was a sin committed by one from amongst them or one of the high princes, people would believe it blindly. Used to such extensive command over the people, it was not easy for priests to let go of these benefits. People clung to these revered priests even when the true messenger from God arrived in the form of Krishna. What’s more, as it had happened with most of God’s messengers prior to Krishna and after Krishna, the priests waged a war against Krishna and his followers. Initially, the war must have been of words, which would have grown in intensity with time. It is evident that various propaganda tools were used. Even Yadavs were wooed against Krishna, which can be viewed in the light of the canard that Krishna remained alone on the side of the Pandava and sent his entire army to fight on the side of the Kaurava. How could Krishna, who does not want bystanders to remain neutral but wants them to take this or that side and who calls all those on the other side already dead and asks Arjuna to fight and remove their existence send his army to fight from the other side. This too is a canard propagated by the epic Mahabharata which does not want us to look at the war as a fight over religious beliefs.

Harassment of the followers of Krishna too can be found, if we view history again with this intention. Yet Krishna’s teachings were of such high order that there were still takers for it. Afraid that their monopoly was at threshold of exhaustion, the priests waged a war against Krishna and his followers. This is why Drona and Bhishma became symbolic of the war against Krishna. And consequent to their flowery speeches against Krishna and his followers, several men devoid of reasoning abilities (referred to as blind by Krishna) rallied around Bhishma and Drona. Several others came to please powerful men like Duryodhana and a mighty army gathered. 

Another evil that had crept in the society at large was “extensive seeking of enjoyment” which too has been mentioned by Krishna in a negative manner. Unfortunately we are again living in a society where priests appear higher than the law and enjoyment or entertainment in life is growing by the day. We know for sure that chess was one such activity of enjoyment during Krishna’s time. Chaucer or dice was another. Music and dance were perhaps other. And we also know that Sun-gods and Moon-gods had begun to father children. This shows that adultery too was common and the blame, if the lady got pregnant, was passed on to these gods. There may be other activities too going on.

That is why Krishna is saying that those whose mind is under the sway of the type of teachings that Drona and Bhishma stood for, and who have become accustomed to enjoyment and domination, a well-found reasoning will have no impact. Therefore, he is asking Arjuna again and again to fight these men and kill them, as they are the culprits of God who have distorted His teachings and altered the Desired Way of Life.

[45]

The Veda treats of matters related to the three gunas (modalities of nature); you should be free from these three modalities O Arjuna; free from pairs of opposites, established ever in pure being, without any yoga (discipline) or well-being (as dual factors but remain) one (unitively) Self-possessed (atmavan).

NG also subscribes to the view that Gita is against the Vedic teachings but is unable to give a proper reason to substantiate his view. NG says: “They (these verses) unequivocally continue a tirade against Vedism. The relativism of Vedic spirituality is here condemned as being non-conducive to the turning of the mind to samadhi (final peace, emancipation, the highest goal).” 

Did you see? Inability to understand Gita has made commentators cast aspersions on the Divine Scriptures – the Vedas. Yet, they are not admitting that it could be due to their lack of understanding. So much so that during these first two chapters of Gita itself, we have seen the commentators criticizing the words used in Gita on more than one occasion. As you read further, you will find several more examples.

Please remember, this attempt of ours is to restore dignity to Gita and the Vedas, something that has been compromised time and again due to various commentator’s attempts to prove themselves more knowledgeable than the rest. At times they appear claiming to be more knowledgeable than the Paramatma Itself!

The subject of fools was being discussed. It is they who had started worshipping the Devatas, without applying their wisdom. They had forgotten the Devatas were those who were to show us the way to God. Final peace or emancipation was to be reached only through reaching God, which ought to be the highest goal of every individual. The foolish worshippers of Vedas had removed God from their rituals, which were being performed to reach heaven or to get the riches of the world. And this mode of worship had been named Vedic worship and it was believed that this knowledge had emanated from God Himself.

Unable to understand this, NG says: “The method of reasoning that Vedic-minded people employ is also here discredited in unmistakable terms. It is usual however, on the part of apologists in the name of Hindu orthodoxy to condone or take away the edge from this forthright condemnation. Here in verse 46, the Vedas are referred to as a useless old well. Condemnation of this kind is further repeated elsewhere in the Gita. The tree that the Veda-knower knows is to be ruthlessly cut down in xv, 1-3.”

To substantiate his view, NG has talked of Vedic spirituality. We invite you to read the existing translations of Vedas. Is there any spirituality present there? You will find that the present translations either talk of steam engines, material fire, rituals by the fire and airplanes or of largely incomprehensible incidents from the lives of Devatas, who are depicted as having lived in heaven long time back. Is this spirituality? When the commentators have been unable to understand true content of Vedas, how could they be right in distinguishing the teachings of Vedas and Gita?

Fact is what we have maintained all through! Krishna fully endorses the teachings of the Vedas but is totally against the kind of religion being followed by those foolish men, who called themselves adherents of the Vedas. They are the ones who have closed their mind to reason. How could this be possible, you may say, that the religion of followers can be different from the scripture that they subscribe to? 

If you have read the BOOK, you will know that the present Hindus too are doing the same. They pride over the lofty teachings of Vedas but they have not understood the Vedas at all. Likewise, Shia Muslims of present can be cited as an example. They claim to be on the path of these fourteen Devatas or Ahlulbayt and remember them in all their congregations. They name their children on the names of the Ahlulbayt and seek all blessings from them. But are they true followers of the Ahlulbayt? Perhaps, no, because the kind of lifestyle that they are adhering to is altogether different from the kind of life the Ahlulbayt wanted us to live. On the contrary, all kinds of deviations have permeated into their society. They cry and beat their chests in mourning but do not imbibe Husain’s teachings in their lives. Ahlulbayt may have wanted their adherents to lead a life higher than merely performing some acts for the love of heaven or fear of hell, but they cry in belief that crying would guarantee them a place in heaven. How sad indeed! 

[46]

There would be as much use for all the Vedas to a Brahmin of wisdom as there could be for a pool of water when a full flood prevails all over.

Writes the author of Religious Consciousness: “The fact that what was dwelt upon in Vedas is not repeated in Gita. Instead the mis-concepts which came to prevail because of misunderstanding or passage of time have been corrected.” 

This author is right in his view even though it is not sure whether he has understood the true content of Vedas or not. The entire mass of literature that we call Vedas merely point out that the Devatas enjoy the highest of place after God and we should follow their footsteps to reach God. All the incidents of future that we find described in the Vedas merely identify those personalities when they would come to live on this earth. A brahmin of wisdom is sure to be aware that all beings, including the self inside us, have a direct link with these Devatas. He knows that all cycle of life and death is under the control of these Devatas. Once the person gets to identify these Devatas as well as their divinely designated role of leading us to the right path, all the Vedic hymns become inconsequential to him, as his next duty is to tread on the right path, every moment of his life and perform each and every act of his life keeping the remembrance of God.  

Sri Aurobindo has come close to accepting this fact and, in his writings, often speaks of the supra-mental power which can descend to manifest itself in actual terms, and there is also the ascent of human beings to the highest status which is also possible and can transform men into superior or divine personalities. He writes:

“It (the Avatar) is the manifestations from above of that which we have to develop from below; it is the descent of God into that divine birth of the human being into which we mortal creatures must climb; it is the attracting divine example given by God to man in the very type and form and perfected model of our human existence.” (Sri Aurobido, Essays on Gita, I series, I. 288).

This writer has not read much of Sri Aurobindo’s writings, but it appears from this view that he is very close to truth. 

Unfortunately, various scholars, knowingly or unknowingly, interpreted Vedas to contain ritualistic sacrifices. This was so because they found the Vedic hymns to be associated with ritual sacrifices. Commentators did not realize that the learned sages of yore had associated the Vedic hymns with rituals because they wanted the true text of Vedic literature to remain unaltered. Initially, the people were waiting for the Devatas to take birth on earth, but gradually this wait became endless and deviations crept, which eventually reached a stage that it was forgotten that the Devatas would take birth in future. People started worshipping the Devatas and forgot about relationship they were supposed to build of their self with the Divine Self (Paramatma). 

Instead of understanding this fact, the commentators tried to interpret the hymns according to the rituals. When Krishna taught of the need to worship the One and Only God, they got further confused. It appeared to them that the Vedas and Krishna talked of altogether different subjects. Verses like this, which talk of Vedic knowledge being like pool of water that is submerged by an ocean further deviated them from the true understanding. Their inability to understand the true content of Vedas never allowed them to reach a true conclusion as regard to the teachings of Gita as well. 

In this regard, Paingala Upanishad states: 

Of what avail is milk to one content with nectar? Of what avail are the Vedas to him who has known his Atma thus? For a Yogin content with the nectar of wisdom, there is nothing more to be done.

The Upanishad further says: 

The myriads of karmas committed in this beginningless cycle of rebirths are annihilated only through the modifications pertaining to Atma. Through proficiency in practice, the current of nectar always rains down in diverse ways. Therefore those who know Yoga call this samadhi, dharma-megha (cloud). Through these (modifications of Atma), the collection of affinities is absorbed without any remainder whatever. When the accumulated good and bad karmas are wholly destroyed, these sentences (Tattvamasi – That are Thou, and Ahambrahmasmi – I am Brahman), like the myrobalan in the palm of the hand, bring him face to face with the ultimate Reality, though It was before invisible. Then he becomes a Jivanmukta [nijaat in Arabic].

It is clear that the Devatas’ role, both as representatives of the Manifest Self (Paramatma) and as Divine Beings sent on earth in human bodies, is to act as intermediaries and show us the path to reach God. Our atma has to attain proximity with the Paramatma in order for atma to become Jivanmukta (attain nijaat or salvation). They have descended to lead us so that we could ascend. Once this fact is identified from the Vedas, the Vedas are of no more use.

[47]

Your concern should be with action (as such) alone, not for any benefits ever. Do not become benefit-motivated; be not attached to inaction (either).

By the time of Krishna, Vedic knowledge was confined to rituals. It was believed that the rituals performed while chanting the Vedic hymns would lead a person to heaven. People who worshipped the Vedic deities had elevated them as gods and removed the real God from life. The wait for Devatas to arrive had become so long that all wrongs were being committed in the name of the Devatas. So much so that rituals were performed as a guarantee to a place in heaven. This was interpreted as Karma. And the people performing the rituals were so blindfolded that they would not leave the ritual even to save the life of a dying man nearby. They would perform these rituals and then commit all the sins that a life full of material pursuits could perform. Ravana, Bhishma and Drona represent those apparently pious men who represented this tribe. Proponent of truth - Rama - waged a war against Ravana for this reason alone. Ravana too was blind to reason and was very much like Bhishma, Drona and others. Opposing their way of life tooth and nail, Krishna talked of performing all actions for God alone, without seeking any benefits in return. Even seeking heaven in return was discouraged. At the same time, not performing any action too was described as wrong. It was told that actions should be performed for God, without seeking any benefit in return. This was the ideal way.

[48]

Engage in activity, O Dhananjaya (Arjuna) taking your stand on the unitive way (of yoga) discarding attachments and capable of regarding both attainment and non-attainment as the same: in sameness consists the unitive way (yoga).

A true yogi engages himself in activity; equally unconcerned he is about siddhyasiddha (attainments and non-attainments). For instance, when in fight with Kauravas, Arjuna will have to discard all attachments like family, friends or colleagues, or attachment to life itself, and fight equally unconcerned of the results, it won’t matter whether he kills others or get killed. Not just in a fight, a person should be equally distant while performing any other activity of life, be it earning a living, doing a favour upon a person, educating his own child, or any worldly activity.

[49]

Far inferior is (the way of) action to the unitive way of reason, O Dhanamjaya (Arjuna); Resort to reason for final refuge; Pitiful are they who are benefit motivated.

Reason is what distinguishes a man from animals. Reason is what gives a man prominence over men in matters related to religious beliefs. This is the view of Krishna. Merely performing actions in the way of God, without resorting to reason, is not advisable. All religious views, all beliefs, all actions should be given the test of reason. True path to God can be reached only through applying one’s reason. 

Thus Krishna has described people like Duryodhana, who were there in the opposite camp for not applying their reason, as blind followers of a religion inherited from their forefathers. Even though deviations had entered with time, they were not aware of it. This is because they never applied their mind. 

After saying so, Krishna also addresses Bhishma and Drona, the revered priests who were opposing Krishna’s teachings. They were those who knew the truth regarding the Vedic teachings, but were seekers of worldly benefits. Such men are described as benefit motivated.

Is it not unfortunate that people of present time have again forsaken the use of wisdom in understanding religion and religious concepts? See for yourself the extent of importance that Krishna has given to this.

[50]

Affiliated to reason one leaves behind here both meritorious and unmeritorious deeds. Therefore affiliate yourself to the unitive way (of yoga); Yoga is reason in action. 

Importance of buddhi (reason) in rationalizing mere action is being referred to. Rationalized action is far superior, as per verse 49, to mere action. The buddhi (reasoning) is one that is pure, not admitting of any extraneous factors such as fruits of action as mentioned in verse 47. The direct bi-polar relation between buddhi (pure reason; contemplative understanding) here with its object, should not be interfered with by other considerations, as when one is end-motivated. Action done for the sake of seeking benefits is wrong. Action has to be done for God alone and as duty towards society. Reason itself should govern action. When one starts applying reason in actions, without seeking any benefits in return, that leads him to realization of God. Hence it is called Yoga.

In the BOOK, there are several instances where the Ahlulbayt and even Jesus spoke of reason. How sad that we have forsaken reason, particularly in religious matters.

[51]

By affiliation to unitive reason wise men, transcending birth-bondage, renouncing benefit-interest, go onwards to a state beyond all pain. 

From here on, there is the description of the state of those who have established or merged themselves with the Absolute. Unitive reason means the reasoning that enables one to get associated with God. Wise men who are able to affiliate themselves to unitive reason, transcends all bondages of birth and from birth, renounce seeking benefit or self-interest and go onwards to a state beyond pain. 

Notice the word “pain” which is reference to this cycle of rebirth. Salvation is the state beyond pain, which is achieved when one reaches God through applying one’s reason. 

[52]

When your reason has transcended the dross of vagueness, then you attain to that neutral attitude both in respect of what is to be learnt and what has already been heard. 

Remember, the background! People were aware the Devatas would take birth in future to impart knowledge and said so on the basis of Vedic knowledge. In this verse, Krishna talks of a neutral attitude developing both in respect of what is to be learnt and what has already been learnt. He uses the word “srotavyasya” (to be heard hereafter) clearly suggesting what has been taught till then by him or his predecessors is not the end of learning. He has come as an Emissary of God to teach a class who has reached a particular stage of learning. But people should be ready for Messengers who are to come later with teachings of the next level, till the final teachings are imparted for the civilized man, by the Ahlulbayt. They should not develop a neutral or negative attitude to such teachings and evaluate them on the basis of reasoning.

Apparently, one’s faculties of reason have various levels too. Upon transcending the dross of vagueness, one reaches the stage that has been talked about in the previous verse. Therefore it is apparent that those who apply reason alone will get rid of the cycle of rebirth. 

Such is the importance of reason. It is pity that most of us do not apply our reason in matters regarding faith and belief.

[53]

When disillusioned respecting the (contradictory injunctions of the) scriptures (Vedas) your reasoning stands steady in samadhi (supreme peace) then you shall have reached yoga (unitive contemplation).

We again request you not to read what NG has put in brackets, as it is product of his own understanding. We have already said that NG and most other commentators have neither understood Vedas nor Gita properly. But our respect for NG is extreme because he is one of the few commentators who have not allowed his own understanding to clout the translation he was doing. He has tried to do the exact translation, unlike many others who have even done translation as per their own wayward understanding.

The confusion that prevailed in the minds of people of Krishna’s period has been misunderstood as confusion within the Vedas by the commentators. NG has interpreted the confusing entanglement talked about in verse 52 as being reference to the Vedas. Further, in verse 53, he refers to Vedic texts as having a distracting effect not conducive to wisdom of yoga. NG says: “The relativist Vedas have to be transcended and got rid of somehow before unitive contemplation can establish itself.”

It is beyond reason how people have accepted such absurd theories put forward by the commentators that belittle the position of the Holy Vedas. 

Minus brackets used by NG in his translation, what Krishna is saying is clear. It is an open invitation to all to apply their reason whenever one gets disillusioned while trying to understand the content of the scriptures. He is sure that reasoning would enable a person to reach definite conclusions as regard to the right path that leads to God. If you have read the BOOK, you must have seen what Krishna was talking about.

[54]

Arjuna said:

What is the way of one whose reason is well-founded; who is established in samadhi (supreme peace) O Kesava (Krishna)? How does he discourse, what his state of being, how does he move about?

Now Arjuna asks a question! What will be the characteristic features of the man whose reason is well-founded, who is established in supreme peace, including the finer points about how he will talk, how he will move, and how he will live life. 

In fact, this question of Arjuna clarifies Krishna’s words in verse 52, when he said: 

When your reason has transcended the dross of vagueness, then you attain to that neutral attitude both in respect of what is to be learnt and what has already been heard.

We have said that the discussion is pertaining to Vedic knowledge. Krishna has also talked of the foolish and how they were interpreting the Vedas. It is clear from this that Krishna was referring to the personality of Devatas and how that had been misunderstood by the people of the time, who had attributed various evils being committed by them to the Devatas. Evils like seeking entertainment in music, dance or drinking or sex were some of them. All these are reflected in the canards that still prevail till this day. Krishna opposed these deviations tooth and nail and said that only through application of one’s reason would one be able to know the truth regarding the Devatas, both from what has already been told and what would be told in future.

Arjuna now asks Krishna to elaborate more on the personality of those who are sometimes referred to as ‘dear’ or sometimes as ‘most dear’ to God. Is there any doubt that the Devatas (Ahlulbayt) are being discussed? Arjuna’s words are clear when he asks how they would talk, how they would look and how they would move about.

Arjuna’s question vrajeta kim (How does he – the contemplative – walk?) clearly indicates that the talk is not just of a theoretical man, but the discussion is pertaining to men whose manner of talking, walking and living their life was subject of discussion. The question itself indicates that none had seen the man or rather men and they would come to have human bodies at a future time.  

It is evident from Krishna’s comments and the question asked by Arjuna that wherever the subject of Purushottama or the Perfect Men have been used in Gita, it is reference to these Devatas or Ahlulbayt, who are ‘dear’ and ‘most dear’ to God. If you have read our interpretation of the Vedas in the BOOK, you won’t find difficulty in tracing these people. After all, they are so dear to the God that He reserved a great percentage of space in the Vedas for them. Vedas are surely revealed scriptures and reading the description of these people in the Revealed Scriptures leave no doubt as regard to their closeness to God. 

[55]

Krishna said:

When one banishes all desires that enter the mind O Partha (Arjuna), satisfied in the Self by the Self alone, then he is said to be one of well-founded reason.

First note that here too, as per the words used in Gita, it is “Sribhagavan uvacha” and not “Krishna uvacha”. 

NG says: “The first thing that happens to a man who begins to tread the path of the contemplative consists in his disaffiliation from the various desires with which he is attached to different grades of relativistic values in everyday life. These are collectively called kamah (desires). Such desires are meant to include all those desires which are capable of entering into or affecting the mind as the word ‘monogatan’ (going into the mind) indicates.

Desires can be said to enter the mind or be “afferent” in character as opposed to “efferent” impulses which may be said to go outwards to each object of desire. Contemplation is primarily concerned with the former – those that enter the mind. Hence their mention here! A man who purposely or actively searches for objects of desire falls outside the scope of contemplation altogether. 

The word ‘prajahati’ – often translated “throws away” – would be better translated “shedding” inasmuch as no activity is implied herein. The analogy of a snake casting its skin, familiar in the Upanishads, is the idea intended here.

The expression atmany eva `tmana tushtah (satisfied in self by Self) seems to be a tall order for a beginner in contemplation, but no contemplative worth the name could be considered so if he was still attached to any value that was outside. This condition is both the alpha and omega of contemplative life. There are no short-cuts or made-easy ways to wisdom.”

We agree with NG’s wordings here with the exception that he has been unable to understand the various meanings of the word ‘self’. Fact is that the word ‘self’ is going to come repeatedly from now onwards and at all times it has not been used with the same purport. 

We have mentioned earlier that the Upanishads as well as the Ahlulbayt at a later time have talked of upper and lower half of self inside us. It is clearly stated that the upper self is directly related to the Manifest Self through the Devatas and the lower self is related to the forces of darkness and leads a person towards worldly pursuits. It has been proved in the BOOK that the Manifest or Divine Self has a direct relationship with the higher self inside us through the Devatas. We have also shown elsewhere how a supplication related to Ali (in Dua-e-Kumayl) talks of the higher portions of all beings filled with the Noor (divine light) of the Ahlulbayt (Devatas). Gita has said later that the modalities of nature affect the lower self and the chief aim of the person is to transcend these modalities and attain union with the higher self. Such a person attains union with God and gets free from the cycle of rebirth. Such a person becomes immortal and does not descend into human birth forever. The same is being talked about here. Desires are the by-product of the working of the lower self. The wise person is one who transcends his lower self and remains one with the power of the Manifest Self inside him. That the Noor of the Manifest Self became fourteen-fold has already been proved in the BOOK. These fourteen Devatas (one of whom is a Devi) too have a role to play inside our body; it has been shown in the BOOK that various Upanishads highlight this relationship.

We all who believe in the presence of one Almighty God believe that prayers are answered irrespective of the language in which they have been uttered. God has the ability to understand all languages as also the thoughts that go on in the mind. Yet we undermine God’s position when we attempt to portray our religion as the best. We forget that the same God who has written the gospel for our faith could also have sent several other gospels of truth for people living in different religions and speaking different languages. For instance some Christian admirers of Gita have compared it with the New Testament but suggesting that it might have borrowed its teachings from the Bible, a notion that is hardly worthy of treating seriously. Why can’t they believe that the same God whom they worship as Almighty could also send a Messenger with similar teachings at another part of the globe? Fact is that very much like their thoughts, they have limited the authority of God whom they worship as All-Powerful and the Creator of the World. On the contrary, they have made their God appear as impotent and incapable of exercising any power in the alien lands that do not follow the same religion or speak the same language as theirs. The same is the case with Hindus of the present. Contrary to the believers of the Vedic period who knew exactly what was the cause of creation of the world and all humans, the present day Hindu does not wish to see beyond a narrow range. And his range is confined to a very small demographic area and a few scriptures that he is yet to understand.

It is unfortunate that even scholars are naïve enough to further the impotency of their god. Does God only know Sanskrit that he sent Avatars only with the knowledge of Sanskrit? Or does God has a particular liking for a particular area of the world that the Avatars were sent in that region alone and nowhere else? Men of Indian subcontinent are equally pious (rather deficient in piety) with the rest of the world. Yet, God who is the Creator of all mankind never bothered to think about His other creations living in other parts of the civilized world, and also those who were cut off from the world till the 15th century, like the Red Indians of America. Unfortunately, most religions including Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and others have confined God to themselves, rather than supplicating themselves in the confinement of God. Only Islam recognizes that 124,000 Messengers were sent all over the Earth, in various civilizations, tribes and groups of people, and Mohammad is the last of them, who completed the religion for all mankind, that was being propagated by prophets and messengers in their respective territories. Krishna, Rama, Buddha, Moses, Jesus and Mohammad were all representatives of the same God.

Before we move to the next verse, we invite you to read this excerpt from the Yogatattva-Upanishad of Krishna-Yajurveda and you will realize for yourself that there is no duality between Gita and Vedas that has unfortunately been proved by nearly all the commentators of these scriptures. Read what this Upanishad says of moksha (salvation):

So I shall tell you the means of destroying (these) sins. How could Jnana (wisdom) capable of giving moksha (salvation) arise certainly without yoga? And even yoga becomes powerless in (securing) moksha when it is devoid of jnana. So the aspirant after emancipation should practice (firmly) both yoga and jnana. The cycle of births and deaths comes only through ajnana (lack of wisdom) and perishes only through ajnana. Jnana alone was originally. It should be known as the only means (of salvation). That is jnana through which one cognizes (in himself) the real nature of kaivalya as the supreme seat, the stainless, the partless, and of the nature of Sachchidananda without birth, existence and death and without motion and jnana.

[56]

He whose mind is unaffected by mishaps, who on happy occasions too evinces no interest, rising above attachment, anxiety or anger, such a sage-recluse is said to be of well-founded reason. 

NG says: “The steady neutrality of a contemplative is described now in detail. Desire, fear and anger form, as it were, a kind of triangle spelling evil as factors working against the contemplative life… The trio are organically related to the subject inasmuch as they make contemplation impossible of being even initiated.”

In our view, this verse is an extension of the wise person described in the previous verse. Such a person has conquered or subdued his lower self and remains unaffected by mishaps. Since pain and pleasure are the two components of desire, this “steady contemplative is unaffected by either – in other words, both are equal to him.” He attains a neutral position to both – pain and pleasure. 

The same person is described in the next verse as well.

[57]

He who remains in all cases unattached on gaining such or such desirable-undesirable end, who neither welcomes (anything) nor rejects in anger, his reason is well-founded.

NG says: “Here the same detachment is brought out in terms of events more generally conceived, as forming the successive personal environments of an individual. The contemplative should not be depressed when he does not have a nice time in society, nor should he be exuberant in gay company. He must be free from such fluctuating moods.

That a general disposition is intended here is indicated by the word sarvatra (in every given situation).

The word anabhisnehah (without outgoing attachments) purposely puts the stress on attachments reaching outwards, rather than on normal interests that flow like rivers inwards to produce that plenitude referred to in II, 70.

The words subha (favourable or good) and asubha (unfavourable) carry a wider range of meaning than just pleasure or pain which were referred to earlier. 

The words tat-tat (that –that) refer to each event being treated separately and not as each event should be treated, as belonging to a continuous process proper to one who has a contemplative attitude. The relation of anger, pleasure and desire are again indicated. This vicious circle is completely described in verses 62 and 63 which follow.”

We invite you to read the life of Devatas or Ahlulbayt when they took birth on earth and you will find all this description to be true. Moreover, for our readers too, there is a teaching. They are requested not to accept this BOOK as well nor reject it in anger, unless they have given it a test of their reason.

[58]

Again as when a tortoise retracts its limbs from all sides the senses are (withdrawn) from objects of sense-interest, his reason is well-founded.

NG says: “The word sarvasah (from everything, from everywhere) is significant. The word shows that not only the limbs of the tortoise, but the head and tail as well are withdrawn. The limbs are withdrawn from the sides and the head and tail, likewise, vertically. Both actual and perceptual causes of distraction are here equally covered and ruled out. That the perceptual is also covered is clear from the opening word of verse 62, ‘dhyayato’ (thinking intently, i.e. on the objects of sense) and from the general statement in III,6 where one who dwells even mentally on the objects of sense while controlling his actions, is described as a ‘mithyacharah’ (a man with wrong notions of living).

This verse draws attention also to the fact that mere transcendence of duality in the sense indicated in the previous verses is not all that is required for contemplation – as the words ‘cha ayam’ (also, this Self) indicate. A wholesale introversion of all aspects of the spirit into a central unitive core of being is here recommended.” 

If you have read the lives of the Ahlulbayt you must have seen the extent to which their senses were withdrawn from objects of sense-interest. It is this life that we must endeavour to lead.

[59]

Objective interests revert without the relish for them on starving the embodied (of them). Even the (residual) relish reverts on the One Beyond being sighted.

NG says: “It would be best for us to get the gist of this verse before entering into the construction, which might read rather involved, especially in the original Sanskrit. If we should think of sex – to take an example – this verse wants to say that mere sex-starvation will not destroy all relish for sex forever. When, however, an interest higher than sex prevails, then such relish is destroyed without the possibility of sex asserting itself any more. Such a dominant interest could be nothing less than a full confrontation, in a strictly bi-polar sense, of the Absolute Itself, as the ‘summum bonum’ of life. Then the return to the Self becomes complete. The rest is clear from the translation.

‘Param’, referring to the Absolute, may also be translated as “the Supreme,” or “the One Beyond” as here. 

The word ‘vishaya’ here covers sensuous interests generally, and does not refer specially to objects of sense as is more usual.

‘Dehi’ (body-dweller) corresponds both to the libido on the one side and to the Self on the other, for the purposes of this verse. 

The word ‘nivartate’ (turns back) comes from the same root as ‘nirvritti’ (withdrawal) and ‘nirvana’ (emancipation, negatively conceived). All these are equally suggestive of the ‘nivrittimarga’ (path of negation) of the Vedanta (or the via negativa of European mysticism, as Sankara has explained in the preface to his commentary on Gita.”

Such a body-dweller does not forbid life or goes to the jungle. He very much lives in the world, does not starve the life, but take a more objective interest in various things, thinking of God alone through each. In short, the Supreme is the objective at all time and he aspires to attain closeness with “the One Beyond”.

[60]

Even with a man of wisdom, O son of Kunti (Arjuna), in spite of his effort, excited sense interests (can) forcibly distract the mind.

The interests of senses in their excited state, like thirst, hunger, pain, anger, hardship can distract even the man of wisdom, says Krishna. But these Devatas would be such they would not get swayed by any of these and at all times they would continue to remain immersed in seeking closeness to God. That is why they have been referred to as Purushottama and it is within reach of each of us to become like them.

Have we not seen examples in the BOOK? The head of the Devata (Ali) got split in two because of the wound from sword but he signalled his son to complete the ongoing supplication prayer to God. The son, also a Devata, was seeing his father lying aside, immersed in pool of blood, but completed the prayers before attending on him. Another of the Devatas (Husain) offered prayers all night, knowing fully well that he would be killed the next day. The noon prayers were performed when several of the friends had already been killed and the enemies were raining arrows. When the time for afternoon prayers came, each and every one from amongst the friends and relatives had been killed and AgniDeva (Husain) was waging the war. As soon as the time for prayer came, the Devata sheathed his sword and got engrossed in prayers, unmindful of the fact that one of the soldiers from the enemy’s camp was approaching with blunt dagger; he was to sever the head of Husain from the body while the Devata was immersed in prayers.

This description however doesn’t mean that at any moment, in between the prayers, any of the Devatas performed any act after forgetting the Absolute; in fact, each of the acts were performed in His remembrance, and for His pleasure.

[61]

Restraining every one of them he should rest unitively established, having Me for his Supreme (ideal). He in whom sense-interests are subdued, his reason is well-founded.

Restraining all the “excited sense interests”, this person establishes himself as one with God. One who is able to subdue the interests of the senses, that person’s reason is well-founded.

Note that the use of word ‘Me’ as in here has made the commentators err into thinking that Krishna is God, something that Krishna is himself denying at various places in Gita. 

NG says: “The difference between the ‘vipaschitah’ (wise man) of verse 60 and the contemplative of verse 61, consists in the latter being ‘matparah’ (having Me for Supreme Goal) – the “Me” here standing for the Absolute of verse 59. The subtle contrast implicit in the two cases of verses 60 and 62 is referred to again in xv, 11. The man of discursive reasoning cannot stand up against temptations, while the contemplative who has established a bi-polar relationship with the Absolute gains this stability. The maximum amount of mechanical or ordinary reasoning does not avail without the bi-polarity implied in all dialectical reasoning. 

The word ‘pramathini’ means “excited” or suffering from exaggeration of values, to the extent of their being a menace to calm reasoning itself. Values tend to be distorted and magnified beyond proportion under conditions described in the verses which follow.

The ‘prasabham’ (by force) meant here can be further visualized from the example of the gale-driven ship of verse 67. It is a force contrary to contemplation and comes near to the idea of concupiscence of Christian theology. Non-theologically, it has a simpler meaning in the Gita. A living being tends to be related to everyday values which could be so exaggerated as to endanger mere happiness, not to speak of contemplative happiness.

In the expression, in verse 61, vase hi (under control indeed) the force of “indeed” is to draw the contrast with the case of a man as described in verse 60. Here the senses do not run away, but are on his side. This makes all the difference which is further examined minutely in verse 64.”

The reader of Gita must read Quran to understand the relationship of ‘Me’ and ‘Myself’ with Krishna. Just as Manifest Self is doing the talking in Gita with words like ‘Me’ and ‘Myself’, Manifest Self is also doing the talking in Quran with words like ‘Me’, ‘We’ and ‘Us’. Words are being uttered from the mouth of Krishna in Gita and from the mouth of Mohammad in Quran. But the Noor in Mohammad alone is not the Manifest Self, just as the Noor in Krishna alone is not the Manifest Self. Interestingly, Almighty God is present both in Gita and Quran and third person ‘He’ and ‘His’ is used for Him. Exactly the same procedure has been followed in the original Hebrew version of Old Testament.

If you wish to read more on this, read “Muslims and the Straight Path”, published by Real Gain Publications.

[62]

Meditating on objects of sense-interest there is born in man an attachment for them; from attachment rises passion; in the face of passion (frustrated) arises rage.

Conversely, if a man is able to control rage, it means he has controlled passion, which further means he has subdued attachment, thereby implying that he is not the person who meditates on objects of sense-interest.

[63]

From rage is produced distortion of values, and from distortion of values memory-lapse, and from memory-lapse comes loss of reason, and from loss of reason he perishes.

Conversely, a man perishes who loses his reason. If he is able to gain reason, there will be no memory-lapse even for a second; he will gain in memory if there is no distortion of values, and if he gains in values, he will control his rage. This writer has even heard men saying that rage or anger is the jewel of men. Such men need to introspect in the light of this verse of Gita.

NG says: “These verses comprise the psychological analysis of a situation in which a man, so to say, “perishes” contemplatively, as stated at the end of verse 63. This is to be taken as a spiritual death only, as it is common knowledge that mere indulgence in sensuality as we see in nature, does not “kill”. Out of natural limits, however, some sort of death also can be implied.

Attachments tend to be strengthened and magnified to the extent that the mind cultivates sensuous propensities. At a given moment the mind through one particular sense attraction, or through a group of sense attractions, establishes a bi-polar relation with an external object of desire, as described in verse 67. The relation then goes out of hand, and the resulting exaggeration of value leads to psychic disturbances like anger, when impediments to the relation become interposed.

Anger adds to the emotional confusion, resulting in ‘sammohah’ (a delusion), which evil invades the memory itself, and memory, or the duration-factor, being important in contemplative functioning, contemplation itself thus becomes impossible. Infatuation thus results in “spiritual death”. Buddhi (reason) here is not mere ratiocination as in verse 60. It is rather the instrument of contemplation. 

Death here may be compared to a kind of short-circuit, going across the path of free contemplation.”

[64]

But he whose Self is subdued, whose attachment and aversion are both within the sway of Self, although his senses still move amidst sense-interests, he wends towards a state of spiritual clarity.

Commenting on this verse, NG says: “The converse case of a man who becomes happy through contemplation correctly applied to actual life is detailed here and in the two succeeding verses. 

A subtle point is to be noticed here. Objective interests, when purified, begin to accord with or go with the corresponding subjective factors of sensuousness, or the “seats” of the different senses, called indriyais. The purification, as indicated here, merely consists of the cancelling-out of attraction and repulsion. The senses are treated neutrally or unitively and the subjective counterparts of the senses go hand in hand without conflict. A bi-polarity is again established, this time of a contemplative order. By virtue of sensuality being atma-vasyair (under the control of the Self) the Self itself as a whole is in effect brought into submission; in other words, there is no remaining conflict between aspects of the Self, subjective or objective. The consciousness of this global unitive Self is conducive to the peace or absence of conflict called prasada, often translated ‘grace’.”

[65]

By spiritual clarity there takes place the effacement for him of all sufferings, and for one whose spirit has become lucid, very soon reason becomes properly founded.

NG says in his commentary: “How consciousness or spirit, when freed from emotional disturbances, gets a poise or a steadiness favourable to contemplation is stated here.”

The purpose of this verse is clear! Spiritual clarity is essential for a well-founded reason. Effacement of all sufferings too is a consequence of this. Let us use our wisdom and pursue the path towards attaining spiritual clarity. All problems that the world is facing will get resolved if mankind is able to do this.

[66]

For one unbalanced there can be no reason, nor is there any creative-intuition for the unbalanced, and for one incapable of creative-intuition there could be no peace, and for the unpeaceful where could there be happiness?

See the stress on reason. It is categorically stated that reason cannot come to one who is unbalanced. Creative-intuition too is missing from the unbalanced, which enables a person to use his reason and deduce conclusions. Without creative-intuition there could be no peace, and without peace there could be no happiness.

NG says: “Normal contemplative thinking takes place when aspects of the Self are harmonized. Bhavana here means creative intuition, the word being derived from the root bhav (to become). Peace results only when intuition comes into operation, along lines of creative becoming, which reconciles opposing tendencies of the mind. Real happiness is the result of a global sense of being where currents and counter-currents are stilled in happiness, which can be said to be the goal of contemplation.”

[67]

Still moving amid sense-interests that (item) to which the mind submits, that very item draws away the reasoning as the wind does a ship on the waters.

NG says: “This verse is to be contrasted with what is said in verse 64 and is meant to recapitulate and sum up the position of a man whose intelligence is carried away by sensuous values. This happens very imperceptibly. The senses are in constant motion like five birds moving on a branch which has five fruits or berries. The mind, which is the more centralized organ of thought behind the moving senses, suddenly finds itself under the sway of some sense-interests in which one or more of the birds above may be involved. Through this frail affiliation a bi-polarity becomes established which brings the disaster indicated in this verse.”

[68]

Therefore, O Mighty-Armed (Arjuna), he whose senses have been in every way withdrawn from sense-interests, his reason is well-founded.

Controlling the senses is prerequisite for reason to find place. This is perhaps the reason why reason is so difficult to gain. NG says: “This is a warning against the calamity referred to in the previous verse. No loopholes can be left in the matter of keeping the senses from getting attached to sense objects. The need for whole-heartedness in this matter is indicated by the word ‘sarvasah’ (in every way).”

Through these conclusions, Krishna hopes to drive in the point that the Devatas would be the most reasonable of all men; they would be the ones who would control their sense-interests to the full; they would be the most balanced; ones with creative-intuitions and also those who would be most peaceful. Remember, Arjuna had asked the question how those persons would look and walk and Krishna is still replying to his question. We invite you again to read the life history of the Devatas when they took birth as human beings. You will realize that Krishna’s words perfectly match their persona.

[69]

What is night for all creatures, the one of self-control keeps awake therein; wherein all creatures are wakeful, that is night for the sage-recluse who sees.

There could be a general meaning that the person being referred to keeps awake in the night offering prayers to God. Another implied meaning is that when the people in general get astray due to sense-interests, he who has kept his senses aloof can still see the truth; his world is the counterpart of the world in which the rest of creation lives.

Thirdly, if this is reference to the Absolute Men who were to take birth in future, then too it befits them truly as history has recounted how the Ahlulbayt used to spend their nights in keeping aloft the remembrance of God, so much so that a verse was revealed in the Quran advising Mohammad not stay awake the whole night, while performing prayers.

[70]

Still getting filled, while fixed firm in immobility, the ocean remains; so too he into whom all interests enter, he attains to peace, not the craver of desires. 

NG says: “The sublime rhapsody together with the vagueness of the similes of this verse are best left without analysis. The ocean is not usually referred to as immovably established, nor as being filled. Its plenitude and over-all changelessness are here compared to the state of mind of a yogi. He is not a ‘kamakami’ (desirer of desirable objects). All relativistic values are small change compared to the gold coin of absolutism which his plenitude represents. Such plenitude brings peace.”

NG has confessed to his inability to understand. Fact is that we have chosen to use NG’s translation because of his sincere attempt to keep the translation as close to the original and his willingness to confess his inability to understand at several places. On the other hand, there are also commentators who have given absurd meanings but never confessed that they couldn’t understand the verses.

The aforementioned verse seems to be further giving the solution to attain peace in life. All interests have to set aside and the person needs to detach himself from all things of worldly interest. And it is clearly stated that the craver of desires won’t attain peace. The very fact that we all are running in pursuit of worldly desires, peace has got eroded from our lives.

[71]

That man who, giving up all attachments, moves about desirelessly without owning anything and without egoism, he goes to peace.

Those who appear to be successful in this world are destined to be losers. At the same time, one who has given up all attachments may not be that successful from worldly point of view. Peace is for man of virtues who has given up all attachments to worldly things and moves about desirelessly without owning anything and without egoism. If you recall, a similar text from Upanishads was quoted by us earlier where Yajnavalkya said that wife, wealth, life, nothing was dear but were dear for the sake of the Self.

It is this reason why Ali once said that he could have become the greatest of politicians but that would have meant leaving the side of the true path. That is why when it appeared to us that the Ahlubayt were losers, fact remains they had wilfully accepted that as dearness with Allah was dearer to them than worldly gains.

[72]

This is the state of being in the Absolute (Brahman) O Partha (Arjuna), on reaching which one suffers from delusion no more. Established in this at the very last moments of life, one reaches that final state of pure being (nirvana) in the Absolute (Brahman).

NG says: “These concluding verses are meant to indicate the culminating results of contemplative reasoning. 

Besides ‘raga-bhaya-krodh’ (passion, fear, anger) the trio already referred to in verse 56, there is the sense of “I” and “mine” on which depends the relation with external objects, from whose attraction or repulsion all the three others arise. Compare the triple gate of hell mentioned in xvi, 21. There the vices attain a further degree of objectivity. Egotism is therefore the root cause and the first enemy of contemplation, whether in this chapter or even in Chapter XVI. It is at the base of the possessive relationship, either personal, ideological or objective.

When reason functions without any trace of such egotism then it may be said to function in a manner in keeping with the Absolute. This is what is referred to as brahmi sthitih (the state – of reasoning – in keeping or according with the Absolute.

Such a reasoning is in tune with the Absolute, if it could be maintained unaffected, even when a man is faced with death, qualifies him for brahmvidya (the science of the Absolute) or to final or absolute emancipation or withdrawal, here called brahmanirvana which is so reminiscent of Buddhist nirvana. This is also in keeping with the science of this rational chapter which gives primacy to buddhi (pure reason) throughout.”

NG is right in his observation except for the fact that he talks of Buddhist and Hindu nirvana as similar. When we see it from the point of view of God, the worldly religions become inconsequential, as we have said there is only one True Path and all religions are deviations of that One Path. Whether we call it nirvana or nijaat or salvation, it can only be achieved when the lower self is totally subdued and it attains union with the Higher Self of the Manifest Self of God – the Paramatma or the Original Noor that divided to have fourteen Devatas or Ahlulbayt. Upon reaching this state, there are no delusions left and one reaches that final state of pure being (nirvana or salvation).

Thus ends in the Upanishads of the Songs of God, in the Science of the Wisdom of the Absolute, in the Dialogue between Sri Krishna and Arjuna, the Second Chapter entitled Unitive Reasoning.