Chapter - XIII
UNITIVE UNDERSTANDING OF THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE ACTUAL AND THE PERCEPTUAL
(Kshetra-Kshetrajna-Vibhaga Yoga)
ACBSP, we have said before, has misunderstood Gita. He writes: “In the first six chapters of Bhagavada-Gita the knower of the body (the living entity) and the position by which he can understand the Supreme Lord are described. In the middle six chapters of the Bhagavad-gita the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the relationship between the individual soul and the Supersoul in regard to devotional service are described. The superior position of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the subordinate position of the individual soul are definitely defined in these chapters. The living entities are subordinate under all circumstances, but in their forgetfulness they are suffering. When enlightened by pious activities, they approach the Supreme Lord in different capacities – as the distressed, those in want of money, the inquisitive, and those in search of knowledge. That is also described. Now, starting with the Thirteenth Chapter, how the living entity comes into contact with material nature and how he is delivered by the Supreme Lord through the different methods of fruitive activities, cultivation of knowledge, and the discharge of devotional service are explained. Although the living entity is completely different from the material body, he somehow becomes related. This also is explained.”
Writes NG: “This Chapter is concerned with one of the most difficult problems, one which has puzzled not only philosophers and psychologists, but even practical men of affairs. Arjuna puts the question under three couples of concepts; one pair being based on the idea of prakriti (nature) of which the counterpart in the Samkhya (rationalist) philosophy is the purusha (spirit); another pair is based on the concept of what is here named kshetra (the field), i.e. actuality, and the kshetrajna (one who knows the field), the perceptual counterpart of actuality; while the third pair which belongs more to a subtler philosophical order, jneyam (that which is to be known) has its counterpart in jnanam (knowledge or wisdom).
In the first place we find that concepts belonging to branches of knowledge which are generally considered widely apart are here seen as brought together for purposes of general treatment of a special kind in keeping with the development of the subject-matter of the Gita.
The field and the knower of the field may be said to belong to the world of action; the concepts of nature and spirit to the duality implied in Samkhya (rationalist) philosophy; and that which is to be known to epistemology, whose problems are to be mixed up with action or nature.
We have found that whole Chapters have already been devoted to subjects such as Samkhya (Chapter II), action (Chapter III) and wisdom (Chapter IV). When such an opportunity has been availed of already for dealing with these subjects in extenso it may be legitimate to ask why these subjects are now taken again in pairs belonging to each context for a juxtaposed treatment together, in one Chapter.
The earlier Chapters referred to these subjects only in a preliminary fashion. The discussion had to be built up step by step, settling initial doubts and silencing critics. We have noticed how, in the middle of the work, in Chapters VIII, IX and X, the Gita enunciated and explained its own version of what is explicitly referred to as adhyatma (pertaining to the Self (atma), the principle of the Self (atma), i.e. Self-science). The peculiarity to these central Chapters, we have noticed, was the perfect neutrality as between the transcendental and the immanent which was maintained in the discussion. The Self was a central value around which the notion of the Absolute was developed.”
Let us now see what this Chapter has to say.
[0]
Arjuna said:
Nature and spirit; the field and the knower of the field; knowledge (wisdom) and what is to be known; these I should like to know, O Kesava (Krishna).
ACBSP’s translation is as follows:
O my dear Krishna, I wish to know about prakriti (nature), purusa (the enjoyer), and the field and the knower of the field, and of knowledge and the object of knowledge.
As in the last Chapter, Arjuna takes the initiative in putting the composite question. It is clear that he is progressing in his pursuit of quenching his thirst for knowledge but certain positive aspects of wisdom are still the objects of his inquiry. Knowledge itself as a proper subject requires to be understood as a systematic whole, as belonging to a definite body of philosophic wisdom. The word jneyam (what is to be known) shows that knowledge is here presented not merely subjectively, but more consciously, positively or objectively.
The reason for treating this verse as verse 0 (zero) is given by NG in the following words: “With a view to conformity between different editions and following the example of some other editions, we are not including this opening verse in the serial numbering, for the reason that the Gita traditionally is supposed to consist of 700 verses. This verse added would make 701. Inasmuch as this verse is of the nature of a title only, and could safely be omitted without interfering with the subject-matter, and as it could have been added as an afterthought by someone other than Vyasa himself, its exclusion can perhaps be justified.”
[1]
Sribhagavan said:
This body, O Kaunteya (Arjuna), is called the field, and he who knows this, thus they call, who know, the knower of the field.
ACBSP translates:
The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: This body, O son of Kunti, is called the field, and one who knows this body is called the knower of the field.
ACBSP further elaborates: “Arjuna was inquisitive about prakriti (nature), purusha (the enjoyer), kshetra (the field), kshetra-jana (its knower), and knowledge and the object of knowledge. When he inquired about all these, Krishna said that this body is called the field and that one who knows this body is called the knower of the field. This body is the field of activity for the conditioned soul. The conditioned soul is entrapped in material existence, and he attempts to lord it over material nature. And so, according to his capacity to dominate material nature, he gets a field of activity. That field of activity is the body. And that is the body? The body is made of senses. The conditioned soul wants to enjoy sense gratification, and, according to his capacity to enjoy sense gratification, he is offered a body, or field of activity. Therefore the body is called kshetra, or the field of activity for the conditioned soul. Now, the person who identifies himself with the body is called kshetra-jana, the knower of the field. It is not very difficult to understand the difference between the field and its knower, the body and the knower of the body. Any person can consider that from childhood to old age he undergoes so many changes of body and yet is still one person, remaining. Thus there is a difference between the knower of the field of activities and the actual field of activities. A living conditioned soul can thus understand that he is different from the body. It is described in the beginning – dehino `smin – that the living entity is within the body and that the body is changing from childhood to boyhood and from boyhood to youth and from youth to old age, and the person who owns the body knows that the body is changing. The owner is distinctly kshetra-jana. Sometimes we think, “I am happy,” “I am a man,” “I am a woman,” “I am a dog,” “I am a cat.” These are the bodily designations of the knower. But the knower is different from the body. Although we may use many articles – our clothes, etc. – we know that we are different from the things used. Similarly, we also understand by a little contemplation that we are different from the body. I or you or anyone else who owns the body is called kshetra-jana, the knower of the field of activities, and the body is called kshetra, the field of activities itself.”
ACBSP is right in his initial observations but from this description, all physicians, who know the human body better than the rest of the human beings, can be called ‘knowers of the body’. Even though science has tried to understand the process of growth, from the state of childhood to old age, there are still a lot many things that need to be known. For instance, we know nothing about the mind and how it functions. Also, we know nothing about spirit inside us. Likewise, our knowledge of the self too is minimal, even though its knowledge has been described as the greatest of all sciences.
It is interesting to note that Arjuna’s question had mentioned nature and spirit first and the field and the knower of the field followed this. In reply, Krishna started talking about the body and the knower of the body first. Body is the field. Unlike what several people would like to believe, the body is a very vast subject of study and includes the study of nature and spirit as well. One who knows this is the knower of the body. Such a person keeps firm control over all his organs of action and senses.
[2]
And also know Me as the knower of the field in all fields, O Bharata (Arjuna); that knowledge (which refers to the knowledge) of the field and the knower of the field, that, in my opinion, is the knowledge.
ACBSP says this in translation:
O scion of Bharata, you should understand that I am also the knower in all bodies, and to understand this body and its knower is called knowledge. That is My opinion.
While discussing the subject of the body and the knower of the body, God says that He is the Supreme knower of all bodies, owing to the reason that He alone is the Creator and knows far more about body characteristics, the nature of individuals and the manner in which each body part functions, including the mind, the spirit and the self, and no human knowledge despite all scientific and social advances can ever equal His knowledge.
One who knows the nature of not one but all the bodies of human beings and all the various species of life can only frame the Perfect Laws for governing of the society. Laws made by man suffer from various discrepancies – man is still in the process of understanding the functioning of the body and its nature fully; each man has certain flaws and is governed by material nature to some levels, laws created by such men for the rest of the society may reflect the flaws of those men who created them; and are made only keeping in mind a limited area, a limited time frame or a limited set of people, whereas God’s laws are universal and have the same modifying effect on the individuals and the society in all times.
Take for instance the cover story in Hindustan Times dated September 27, 2004 titled ‘Diseases have a gender bias’. The story starts with this: “Beyond the tired clichés and sperm-and-egg basics taught in grade school science class, researchers are discovering that men and women are even more different than anyone realized… These discoveries are part of a quiet but revolutionary change infiltrating US medicine as a growing number of scientists realize there’s more to women’s health than just the anatomy that makes them female, and that the same diseases often affect men and women in different ways.
“Women are different than men not only psychologically (but) physiologically, and I think we need to understand those differences,” says Dr. Catherine DeAngelis, editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association.””
Isn’t this discovery far more different to the stand that various bra-burning feminists had been taking till now? Does equal treatment to animals justifies lion and deer being put in the same cage? Are men capable of giving birth to children? If not so, why don’t we accept that men and women differ physically, physiologically, psychologically and hence have different needs; hence equality does not mean equal number of jobs in army? Equal treatment has to be spiritual and psychological in nature than physical. It has to be based on the nature of the personality. And till the time we are not sure about our expertise on knowledge, which keeps changing from day-to-day, let us accept that the best laws can only be made by the Creator and neither by common man, nor by a group of them.
Writes ACBSP aptly: “A citizen may know everything about his patch of land, but the king knows not only his palace but all the properties possessed by the individual citizens. Similarly, one may be the proprietor of the body individually, but the Supreme Lord or Manifested Self is the proprietor of all bodies. The king is the original proprietor of the kingdom, and the citizen is the secondary proprietor. Similarly, the Supreme Lord is the supreme proprietor of all bodies…”
This also confirms that since the Creator is in the best knowledge of our body, it is the Creator who is in best position to give laws for the humans.
ACBSP further writes: “In this Chapter it will also be explained that out of the two knowers, one is fallible and the other is infallible. One is superior and the other is subordinate. One who understands the two knowers of the field to be one and the same contradicts the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who states here very clearly, “I am also the knower of the field of activity.” One who misunderstands a rope to be a serpent is not in knowledge. There are different kinds of bodies, and there are different owners of the bodies. Because each individual soul has his individual capacity for lording it over material nature, there are different bodies. But the supreme also is present in them as the controller. The word ca is significant, for it indicates the total number of bodies.”
That is why the real knowledge is to know the body and the knower in all bodies i.e. the relationship of the Supreme God and the individuals.
We have noticed that at another point in Gita, it has been stated that the real science is the knowledge of the self. We know that till date, despite all advances in science, man has not been able to understand the composition of his self at all. When he has not been able to understand self, he has also not understood the relationship that exists between self in a man, to that of the Divine Souls (atmas) of the Devatas and eventually the Manifest Self and the Absolute God. In such a scenario, it is imperative on human beings to follow the laws given by the God blindly, as God alone knows the nature of body, self, soul and spirit thoroughly.
[3]
(That) hear in brief from Me; what the field is, what it is like, of what it is the modification, and whence, and which (it is), also what he (the knower of the field) is, and what is his specialized resulting expression.
ACBSP writes:
Now please hear my brief description of this field of activity and how it is constituted, what its changes are, whence it is produced, who that knower of the field of activities is, and what his influences are.
ACBSP further writes: “The Lord is describing the field of activities and the knower of the field of activities in their constitutional positions. One has to know how this body is constituted, the materials of which this body is made, under whose control this body is working, how the changes are taking place, wherefrom the changes are coming, what the causes are, what the reasons are, what the ultimate goal of the individual soul is, and what the actual form of the individual soul is. One should also know the distinction between the individual living soul and the Supersoul, their different influences, their potentials, etc.”
There are several Upanishads which make it abundantly clear that the Manifest Self created the fourteen Devatas as rulers of the fourteen spheres. It is believed that these fourteen spheres exist inside us as well. Few other Upanishads give the entire role of the fourteen inside our body. It is said that the higher portions of the self are constituted by the power having direct link to the fourteen and through them, it is possible to attain union with the Manifest Self. This knowledge is extremely important and this is true knowledge, as per verse 2.
Commenting on this, NG says: “When speaking of the attributes of kshetra (the field) the term vikari (having modifications, transformations) is used, while the term prabhava (specialized becoming) is used in reference to the superior value connected with wisdom, which corresponds to the knower of the field. Pure knowledge or wisdom knows no transformations, transmutations, evolution or change, but the actual, represented here by the field, being opposed to wisdom, is subject to necessary change And therefore to various modifications or evolution. Vikari (modifications) further has a deprecatory sense suggesting change for the worse.”
[4]
Sung by rishis (seers) in many ways, severally and distinctly in (different) metres, and also in the aphoristic words of the Brahma-Sutras replete with critical reasonings and positively determined.
This verse confirms the Islamic view that there have been several Messengers from God who brought the teachings and Krishna was one of them. Since God’s creation were not only speaking Sanskrit or confined to the Indian Subcontinent, it cannot be expected that no Messengers were sent in the rest of the regions and in various other languages. The fact that similar pattern of growth of teachings is seen all across the world is a clear proof that the Messengers were working everywhere. Another proof is that all talked about one and only God. Islam maintains that 124,000 Messengers were sent all across the world, Adam being the first and Mohammad the last. Gita is referring to that. Unfortunately, those with narrow vision, say that this is reference to the rishis in a particular region. It is unfortunate that we call Krishna as the Avatar of God and then confine Him to a particular area and language.
We have a feeling here that Gita is again talking about something that Arjuna understood well but the commentators have not been able to understand it. The very fact that Brahmasutra is mentioned here, takes us to believe that he is referring to the manifest form of the God, as we know that the Devatas originated from the one light - Brahma. We also know from Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad that the Non-manifest form of God decided to create a Manifest form and hence the Noor or Light was created, which divided into several Noors or Divinities, from whom, owing to their devotion and worship to God, were created all the moving and non-moving (living and non-living objects) in this Universe (one united verse) of God.
Through this, it is easy to understand that the soul of human beings is linked directly to the Divine Souls of those Beings and through them to the Absolute God. This means clearly that in this world, it must be the Devatas who will fit the description of tadvidah (those who know) as mentioned in verse I. Since Devatas were worshipped much more than present times during the period of Arjuna, and the sages of the period were aware of their mention in Vedas and other scriptures, and singing verses to eulogize them were common, Arjuna knows exactly what the talk is about, whereas we have problems in understanding the real nature of the conversation.
However, description given by commentators like NG itself indicates that they too have a feeling that there is some underlying meaning that continues in these verses, with the only difference being that what NG has seen to be hesitation, is actually a clear indication that the meaning was so clear to Arjuna that no need was felt to elaborate on it. NG writes: “Note here in the first place that while this verse refers to the field specifically, seemingly with a subtle purpose behind it, there is omission of any direct reference by name to the kshetraja (knower of the field). Even in verse I we noticed that there was already some hesitation in naming these two counterparts – the field and the knower of the field, - attributing their recognition vaguely or elusively to other sages or to sages generally. The same sages will be referred to in verse 4.”
As we study the difference between the two counterparts as stated in the verses that follow, we notice also that there is no direct reference to kshetrajna (the knower of the field) in verse II, although it is meant to be implied by the author in the more comprehensive term jnana (wisdom) which is there contrasted with ignorance, thus by-passing the concept of kshetrajna (the knower of the field) altogether. Thus the connotation of the term kshetrajna (knower of the field) in verse 3 has already shifted its own centre with a slightly higher value than what it meant in the initial definition as directly referring to the body. We have already pointed out how, even there, it could not be a body in the sense of a carcass, but something that has a value in the context of contemplation, in however finite terms it might be thought of.
Here we find the field gains its status more by contrast with the ignorance mentioned in verse 11, than with anything fundamentally its own. When we find in verse 6 that the field and its transformations include such factors as intelligence and firmness, the theoretical status that the field gains becomes more accentuated.
We shall see, however, in verses 5 and 6, a very striking difference between the orthodox enumeration of tattvas (principles) as belonging to prakriti (nature) in the Samkhya (rationalist) philosophy, and even from the description of the lower nature of the Absolute as enumerated in VII, 4. We have to look out for a revalued position here wherein a greater unity is established between prakriti (nature) and purusha (spirit) or between kshetra (field) and kshetrajna (the knower of the field) than was understood hitherto, whether by the Samkhya or even in the earlier Chapters of the Gita itself.
The unitively superior status that the kshetrajna (knower of the field) is to gain in this Chapter becomes evident from verse 7 onwards. The enumeration of values there ranges from the simple personal value of humility to wisdom as the highest of absolutist values [these are the qualities that the knower of the field must possess]. The status of kshetra (the field) itself (and its modifications) is also seen slightly promoted in the enumeration of items referring to it in verses 5 and 6, beginning from the gross elements, here slightly glorified by the attribute “great” and ending in the personal quality dhritih (firmness), which quality is here intended to be superior to chetana (vital intelligence). [More qualities that the knower of the field ought to possess.]
When speaking of the attributes of kshetra (the field) the term vikari (having modifications, transformations) is used, while the term prabhava (specialized becoming) is used in reference to the superior value connected with wisdom, which corresponds to the knower of the field. Pure knowledge or wisdom knows no transformations, transmutations, evolution or change, but the actual, represented here by the field, being opposed to wisdom, is subject to necessary change and therefore to various modifications or evolution. Vikari (modifications) further has a deprecatory sense suggesting change for the worse.
Yatah (whence) refers to the field, but we find no direct answer is given, except the indirect suggestion in verse 11, that all that is other than wisdom belongs to ignorance. Hence the field results from ignorance, as Sankara ably argues in his long comment on verse 2. Further, Sankara points out that even avidya (ignorance) is an extraneous factor to the kshetrajna (knower of the field) who represents, in his words Ishwara (God) who in his terminology he interprets as being identical with wisdom or the Absolute. [That is why the Ahlulbayt were the most learned men not only of their own time, but several interesting comments of theirs that were authenticated centuries later due to later day advancement in science suggests that their knowledge far exceeded the knowledge of even the most advanced men of today.]
Ignorance, even as an upadhi (conditioning factor) in so far as it is capable of affecting the ordinary man’s notion of a pure unconditioned Absolute, must remain, on final analysis, as a limiting attribute to the Absolute. To lift the notion of the Absolute too far out of the human context would tend to make of it a mere abstraction which would be of no value. It would be a mere philosophical triviality prejudicial to the cause of wisdom. But if we recognize the Absolute, not abstractedly, but in the sense of a human value however ordinary, this particular form of intellectual difficulty which Sankara had to face could be easily avoided. [See how God had already removed that ‘intellectual difficulty’ as pointed out by Sankara and NG, through creation of its Manifest form, but it was our own fault that we corrupted the knowledge presented by God, so much so that our reason got confounded. Even solution to the ‘argument of the opponent’ that NG talks about in the next paragraph lies in accepting a manifest form of God governing our lives, with two opposing forces - forces of Noor (Light) and forces of Zulmat (Darkness) - continuously working on us.]
To the argument of the opponent that all shastras (revealed scientific texts) would become useless if the knower of the field was already beyond samsara (repeated cyclic existence), Sankara goes as far as to postulate the factor of ignorance as intervening in some sort of figurative or indirect way between the pure absolute God and the ordinary man to whom the shastras (revealed scientific texts) apply, as something intermediate which would make these texts necessary for him, almost as in the case of the dvaitins (dualistic philosophers) who tend to treat kshetrajna (the knower of the field) and kshetra (the field) more realistically. The introduction of such a third factor on the part of Sankara is rather artificial, and to some extent compromises his unitive stand on the primacy of the pure absolutist Ishwara (God).”
Both Sankara and NG are confused, yet closer to truth. Accepting Devatas as originating from the manifest form of God and together comprising the forces of Noor, does not compromise with the unitive stand on the primacy of the pure absolutist Ishwara, as NG points out, and also removes “the factor of ignorance as intervening in some sort of figurative or indirect way between the pure Absolute God and the ordinary man” as Sankara points out.
[5-6]
The great elements, ego-sense, reason, and also the Unmanifest, the ten senses, and the one (mind) and the five conceptual aspects of the senses,
wish-dislike, pleasure-pain, the organic aggregation, vital intelligence, firmness: this in brief, is the field, with modifications named.
Factors such as buddhi (reason) and ahamkara (ego) are directly responsible for our ability or inability to understand the true nature of body (field) and the knower of the bodies (knower of fields). Both NG and ACBSP have given wrong explanation of these verses. We request you to read it, if possible, to verify that their explanations are not comprehensible easily, which is otherwise a marked feature of Gita. This can also be understood by NG’s reasoning that there is no strict agreement between the factors enumerated and it could be due to the requirements of prosody, which cannot be true, because if we believe Gita to be word of God, we will have to believe that not one of the word used is out of context.
NG writes: “If we should try to relate these backwards to the Samkhya (rationalist) philosophy to which at first sight they reveal a general kinship, we find that there is no strict agreement between the factors enumerated. In the first place the order here has been mixed. Whether such a transposition is due to requirements of prosody merely is not quite clear. Moreover, under kshetra (the field) which may be said to correspond to the prakriti (nature) side of the Samkhya system, we have in verse 6 a new set of factors like chetana (vital intelligence) and it is not clear whether they belong to the orthodox Samkhya system or to the Yoga counterparts of the same dualistic school.”
Commentators’ inability to understand these verses lead us to conclude that very much like the previous verses, they have erred in understanding the real meaning of the verses here as well. Tadvidah (those who know) and paramam guhyam (supreme secret) and ‘the ignorance of the real truth about them’ that is being described here in detail, is one whose knowledge will lead us to the ananda (bliss). The same is being said more elaborately here. The same supreme secret has been unearthed by us in the BOOK.
Before we proceed let’s see what Sarvasara-Upanishad has to say about Ananda (bliss).
It is the seat of all sentient beings, like the ocean of the water, is eternal, pure, partless and non-dual, and is the sole essence of Chidananda (consciousness-bliss).
There are ten senses that a body comprises of, which get associated with the outside world. It is through these 10 senses that the material tendencies make their impact felt. Mind is another part of the body or field, which has a tendency to get swayed when faced with an onslaught of materialistic forces. In addition to this, there are usual natural tendencies like the wish-dislike, pleasure-pain, the organic aggregation, vital intelligence and firmness, all of which bring negative effect. The atma (soul), whose role is to show the right path to man, has to fight all these material forces and crush them on a repeated basis, throughout the life of that body.
It is curious to note that the Unmanifest too has been mentioned along with these material forces. The reason is that it is extremely difficult for a man, surrounded as he is by all such material influences, to understand the Unmanifest nature of God. That is why, despite the fact that God sent innumerable Messengers and Prophets from time to time, man had the tendency to forget the teachings about the Unmanifest God. In order to satisfy his desire to have a material god, he created idols and started worshiping them and forgot all about the teachings given by the Prophets.
This is despite the fact that God Himself knew of the difficulties that man would face in believing and worshipping a God that does not confirm with his material likings. Knowing this, He Himself had created a Manifest form of His Personality, which created Brahma as the force of Light and got divided to give birth to the Devatas. This was perhaps done to satisfy the human urge to see material proofs. Vedas had introduced these Divine Personalities of the Devatas and we know from Upanishads that people waited for them and prayed for their early arrival. But when the wait grew long and the Devatas still did not appear, they again got astray, created idols of the illustrious from amongst their forefathers, of demons and even of those very Messengers like Krishna and Rama, who had come to teach them how to reach the Absolute God. This is extremely sorrowful that while Gita talks about no other worship but of the Absolute God, and tries in every possible manner to take us to the God, people worship idol of that very Krishna, with whom Gita is associated.
“The great elements”, we have seen in the BOOK, are none but the Devatas - the guardians of the 14 spheres – who have direct relationship with the higher self inside us. We have also shown that the 5 ‘great elements’ and the two else viz. ego and reason are actually reference to the 7 names of Devatas who are actually 14 in number. After these 7 names, the next word used is ‘Unmanifest’ and then ‘the ten senses’ and the rest of things are described. It is clear there are several things that people of the time weren’t aware of and still there are a lot many things that we are not aware of.
[7]
Freedom from conventional pride, unpretentiousness, non-hurting, non-retaliating forbearance, straightforwardness, loyal support of the teacher (acharya), purity, steadfastness, and state of self-withdrawal;
It is clearly stated earlier in verse 2 of this Chapter that the God is the knower of the fields. From 5-6, it is evident that the God being talked about is the Manifest form and not the Non-manifest state of God, which has confounded an ordinary man’s reasoning ability to reach Him. Man too can become the ‘knower of the field’ by understanding the real relationship between field (body) and the knower of the fields (knower of the bodies). In case, man’s soul emerge victorious in the ongoing fight between the soul and the negative material forces talked about in verses 5-6, then he becomes the “knower of the field” and show the virtues that are being mentioned in verses 7 to 11. Devatas, we are sure, were knower of the fields, since all the animate and non-animate bodies were created from out of their Soul (Atma). That is why all these virtues perfectly fit their personality.
We have also reasoned in the previous verse that it is the various Divine Beings who were created out of the first Noor created by the Manifest Self of God, and it is they who form a link between the body (field) and the Absolute God. Virtues of those Divine Beings, when they will come to live on this earth, are being described here in this verse, so that we can identify them. Vedas had given the incidents of their lives so as to facilitate us in recognizing them, whereas Gita goes on to describe the virtues inherent in their character, which together form the essence of jnanam (wisdom), mentioned earlier.
NG also agrees that this description is that of the knower of the field and talks about their virtues in the following manner: “Verses 7 to 11 form a natural section. Items here range from such factors as lack of pride to that supreme value called wisdom.”
Devatas will be identified in this world from various virtues, the first of which is amanitvam (freedom from conventional pride). The second epithet, adambhitvam (unpretentiousness), implies the same principle of integrity or being true to oneself. As a corollary to the same self-sufficient attitude, they never want to interfere with the happiness of any being around him. A universal generosity here called ahimsa (non-hurting) is implied in this kind of self-sufficiency.
Kshanti (non-retaliating forbearance) is not a leave-me-alone attitude that ignores society, as described by NG, but forbearance while living as an active member of this society. Arjavam (straightforwardness) implies a certain frankness which speaks out without fear or favour, and which also shows independence from popular approbation. This can be clearly seen in the discourses of Ali mentioned in the book called Nahjul Balaghah or Husain’s own lectures, while face to face with the mighty army of Yazid. He is also an acharya (teacher) [remember Ali saying ‘ask whatever you wish to ask before I depart from amongst you’ and if people did not ask serious questions on a regular basis, it was due to their own ignorance. Moreover, written records of Ali saying that he can even teach how to light the houses from the waterfalls or Jafar al-Sadiq’s disciple (Jabir ibne Hayyan) being acknowledged by the world as ‘father of Chemistry’ are available.] Devatas, when they came to live on this earth, are known to have talked about the distance of the sun from the earth, about the distinguishing characteristics of animals that lay eggs and those who don’t and on various other subjects that were only found to be true when their views matched with the observations of latter day scientists, centuries later. Hindus who believe Siva or Rudra to be the ruler of the trilok (three worlds) and the progenitor of all mankind should know that the light or Noor of Siva descended in human body to be called Ali while the Devi was called Fatima. There was a time when there were great differences between the Hindus; some of them were Saivites who worshipped Siva while others were Vaishnavites, who worshipped Vishnu while few others worshipped the Devi. These differences were because of ignorance and their inability to know the true position of these divinities with God and between themselves. Even now Shivaratri is celebrated with great fervour whereas Vishnu, who is higher, is not remembered. Neither are oblations and worship reserved for the Absolute God.
In addition to this, their role in teaching the principles of Jurisprudence, and showing us the way to reach God, is most important as their role as teacher. If anybody understood the real science, i.e. the science of the Atma, they were the Devatas i.e. the Noor that descended in the bodies of Mohammad (Indra), Fatima (Saraswati) and the 12 Adityas. Let us try to understand this science only through them.
Other virtues described here include saucham (purity), which has been described by NG as referring ‘not only to freedom from actual dirt, but from anything tending to depress or tarnish the state of the spirit.’ It is worth remarking here that there is an explicit verse in Quran about the Prophet and his progeny which says that it is the wish of God that He keeps them free from any impurity. This verse has also been described in Hadees-e-Kisa, which clarifies that the Ahlulbayt (of God) and none else is meant by this verse.
Sthairyam (steadfastness or constancy) means he does not change his way of life in favour of values other than the contemplative. This is also clearly reflected in Husain’s stance in Karbala or even Prophet Mohammad saying to his uncle Abu Talib that even if they (the kafirs) were to keep the sun on his one hand and the moon on the other, he was not to distance himself from the true path. People of the time tried everything, including inducing offers of materialistic wealth to torturing or killing them, but never succeeded in their objective of deviating them from the path that they followed.
With steadfastness is mentioned atmavinigrahah (state of self-withdrawal). The fact that this virtue too was present to its extreme can also be noticed by studying their lives.
[8]
detachment in respect of sense-interests, absence of egoism, insight regarding the pain and evil of birth, death, old age, and disease:
This verse continues with describing the virtues of the knower of the fields. A detailed study of the lives of Devatas, when they came to live on this earth, will make it clear that all the seemingly contradictory virtues can be found in a person, without him having to resort to sanyasa (renunciation) from the world. Without reading more about these Devatas, commentators like NG will never understand how such seemingly diverse virtues can fit into one personality.
They are detached from seeking the interests that the senses desire; they are far distant from egoism (ahamkara) and are never inflicted with the dukha (suffering) that comes out of birth, death, old age and disease.
But this does not mean that such characteristics cannot be acquired by us. It is within our capacity of each one of us to become Purushottama (Ashraful Makhlooqat) by acquiring the virtues described above. However, we should know that such characteristics cannot be acquired independently. They are in fact directly proportional to the purity of our atma (self) and the state of its proximity with the Manifest Self.
[9]
without clinging to, (and) without intensely-involved attachment to, (relations such as) sons, wives, (and property such as) houses, and having a constant neutral mental attitude in respect of desirable and undesirable happenings.
NG writes: “This verse reflects an attitude of general neutrality towards happenings as well as towards domestic or family relations, besides not being attracted by common interests such as wealth, etc. The attitude to wife and children referred here does not imply that he is purposely unjust to them or partial either. He takes an impersonal neutral attitude in the matter, balancing justly between the two opposing tendencies that might influence his judgement. He never errs on the side of partiality to his own blood-relations.”
[10]
devotion to Me to the exclusion of everything extraneous, and never straying from the (direct) path, preference to dwell in a place apart, distaste for crowded living;
Such a person is fully engrossed in devotion to the Paramatma, not for a moment gets involved in anything extraneous, and never strays from the direct path. The reference to straying from direct path was also mentioned by Prophet Mohammad, when he said closer to the time of his departure from this world: “I am leaving behind two valuable things – the Quran and the Ahlulbayt – if you remain associated with them, you will never stray from the right path.” The first chapter of the Quran, Surah Hamd, also prays to God to show the right path, the way of those who have been guided and not those who have fallen astray.
It must be noted that ‘preference to dwell in a place apart’ and ‘distaste for crowded living’ have been mentioned in the context of ‘devotion to Me (God) to the exclusion of everything extraneous’ and does not mean the popular concept of sanyasa (renunciation) as practiced by people today. It only reflects that devotion to God is beyond any other purpose of show or self-aggrandisement. Prophet Mohammad used to go to a cave in a mountain to meditate and worship, and then return to lead a normal life, where too God was never to be forgotten. When the Prophet had to migrate to Medina, a place where there was no cave in the vicinity, he found the seclusion of mosque at night for keeping aloft his prayers and worship of God.
Not only this, as per Hadees-e-Qudsi, God says that He was a hidden treasure and when He wanted that the treasure be cognized, He created (the Noor of) Mohammad. This is reference to the Manifest Self of God but Islamic traditions do not give detailed descriptions of various stages, as given by the Vedas and Upanishads, which have named each stage separately. There is a separate name in the so-called Hindu scriptures to the Manifest Self, to the first Noor created by the Manifest Self, different names when this one Noor divided into two Noors and also different names when part of one of the Noors divided with the other half created by the division between the first Noor, and also different names when 7 Noors were created and still different names when 14 Noors were created and made guardians of the 14 spheres. It is this multiple nomenclature which has created confusion so much so that Hindus of today believe there are uncountable number of Devatas.
The Manifest Self created more, so that greater number of creations are there to worship God. This is the reason why the Ahlulbayt spent their lives in showing us the best way to worship God in different situations. Why should it not be since this was the purpose of their creation! This statement amply justifies what has been said in Gita and the Vedas. God created the Manifest Self and Brahma (Mohammad) was created as first of the forces of Noor. But simultaneously, forces of darkness too were created, thus giving both options for created beings, so that they have the choice to opt for either for the two. Rewards and punishments too have been created as a consequence of this test, created as God’s Divine Will.
Mohammad’s Noor was created so that the hidden treasure - God - gets cognized. We should not have any doubts therefore if all the Divine Creations from Manifest Self onwards as well as Brahma, Devatas, Devi and Avatars like Krishna, Jesus, Buddha and Rama ceaselessly tried to lead us to the worship of God. During their life on earth, the Ahlulbayt, ceaselessly showed through example the zenith of supplication to Almighty God, even so underneath the blade of sword or during the process of severing of head from body by a blunt dagger. We must not doubt, therefore, if Krishna orders a fight-unto-death against those who associated others with God and Quran orders a similar fight against those who do so.
[11]
everlasting affiliation to the wisdom pertaining to the Self (atma), insight into the content of philosophical wisdom – this is declared to be wisdom; whatever is other than this is ignorance.
Writes NG: “The wisdom here refers to the Self (atma) as implied in the first epithet, and at the same time is conceived in positive or objective terms as implied in the second epithet. The jnanam (wisdom) referred to in the second line should be taken to be the true knowledge of verse 2 and as substituting the notion of kshetrajna (knower of the field) which has been conveniently forgotten, as we have pointed out.
This culminating wisdom is a unitive factor covering both the field and the knower of the field. It is as it were a central value which may even be said to be implicit in the word antaram (principle of difference, differential) in the last verse of this Chapter and which, as stated there, is to be discerned by the jnanachakshushah (eye of wisdom).
Under ajnana (ignorance), similarly, there is to be implied all those aspects of the field which lead the consciousness away from higher wisdom-values, including both those that tend to do so, and those falling outside the scope of contemplation altogether, such as the decaying aspects of a dead body, wherein no soul-happiness is any more to be enjoyed.
In reviewing the section covered from verses 5 to 11 inclusive, in which both the idea of the field and the knower of the field were covered in a special and unitive way, which we have tried to explain, we find that beginning from the idea of a body which was only superior to a mere carcass by a margin of contemplative principle involved, we have touched in the knower of the field an all-comprehensive wisdom-value which is going to be expounded more finally in verse 12, by way of rounding up the section, as we shall see.”
[12]
I shall declare that which is to be known, which, being known, one gains immortality; the beginningless, having Me as its supreme culminating factor, the Absolute, which is said to be neither existence nor non-existence.
God has already talked of the relationship between man’s body and God by means of the intermediate Manifest Self of God and the Devatas. This is talked about as the Supreme Secret, and the lack of this knowledge has been termed as ignorance.
The term used is Jnana, which has been described by Sarvasara Upanishad as the self-light.
It is that which illuminates all. It is that Absolute Consciousness which is without any obscuration. It is that Consciousness which has no beginning or end, which is perpetual and which is the witness to all modifications and their opposites.
Interestingly, even Quran says that consciousness is courtesy Allah.
The fact that commentators like NG are confounded by the description till this stage is also present in his words, when he says: “From this verse onwards we have a complete picture of the unitive Self or the eternal Absolute or whatever may be designated by tat (That). It is unmistakable from the description that it is not an entity which could be definitely called either matter or spirit. As stated in verse 19, both matter and spirit have to be given an equal status as values and considered as eternal or beginningless. [That clearly means that the spirit of the Devatas or the matter of their bodies when devas came to live in this world – both should be given an equal status as values and considered as eternal or beginningless.] The Absolute implied here in verse 12 is neither sat (existence) nor asat (non-existence), and is of the nature of a paradox, in the same way as in the Eleatic philosophers, Parmenides and Zeno. The one and the many adhere together in this notion of the Absolute, as stated in verse 30.
When it is said that the Absolute participates in both existence and non-existence, and the one and the many, it should not be thought however, that it combines contradictions, reducing the notion to a mere absurdity. It should be conceived rather as valid as a datum of reasoning, or better still as an authentic human value to be intuitively understood, and not as a mere contradiction in terms of bhedabheda vadins (difference-non-difference thinkers) would tend to look upon it.”
Ultimately the worship has to be of the Absolute. Inability to understand how we are related to the Absolute through Devatas and the Manifest Self, some people see contradictions in the description of Gita. The words like anadimatparam (beginningless) and having Me (Manifest Self) as its supreme culminating factor) indicate that atma has to be united with the Paramatma but it is the Absolute which is both sat (existence) asat (non-existence), who is to be known.
This is the secret that is jneyam (what is to be known).
[13]
With hands and feet everywhere, with eyes and hands, and mouths, with hearing everywhere, in the world, That remains, enveloping all.
This refers to the Absolute, whose power is beyond comprehension. We have repeatedly said that the Manifest Self of God is doing the talking here and it is referring to the Absolute as ‘That’.
[14]
Shining by the specific characters of the senses, devoid of all sense (attributes); unattached, supporting all; without qualities, and perceiving qualities.
Again, NG talks of the paradoxical statements in Gita, due to his inability to understand the meaning as meant by God. He says: “This verse contains three paradoxical statements. The first is quite within the range of our own experience, when we think of dreaming, where things are seen without the help of eyes, etc. The second paradox is easily understood if we think of space supporting form. Regarding the third paradox, we know that the pure Absolute is not subject to the modalities of the three degrees of specialization in nature called the gunas (qualities). They act only as conditioning factors, like Shelley’s “dome of many-coloured glass”.”
All these paradoxes will remain no more if we retranslate Gita in the light of relationship told by us.
[15]
Without and within beings; immobile and mobile too; because subtle That is unknowable; That stands far and near also.
Again the word ‘tat’ is used meaning ‘that’. Absolute God is being described in these verses who is the support of all the powers, has hands and feet everywhere and envelopes all. But since people of the period gave greater importance to Devatas, again a relationship of the divine beings is described vis-a-vis the Absolute. The Absolute is without and also within the beings. That is immobile and mobile too; far and also near to us and in subtle state He is unknowable.
[16]
And undivided, yet remaining divided as it were in beings; supporter of existence and That which is to be known; holding back and releasing for expansive becoming.
ACBSP has translated this verse as follows:
Although the Supersoul appears to be divided among all beings, He is never divided. He is situated as one. Although He is the maintainer of every living entity, it is to be understood that He devours and develops all.
This verse again justifies our arguments. In fact, unless you take our argument as true, it is not possible to describe ‘undivided, yet remaining divided’. The Divine Souls are undivided and are actually One Noor created by the Supreme Atma, which Itself was created by God as His Manifest form. This is despite the fact that from that One Supreme Atma were created Indra, Vayu, Saraswati, Agni and the rest, who were born on this earth as Mohammad, Ali, Fatima, Husain and the rest of Mohammad’s progeny. It was perhaps this reason that Mohammad said that despite they being different personalities, they were all Mohammad.
First is Mohammad, middle is Mohammad, last is Mohammad, all are Mohammad.
Moreover, certain Upanishads describe clearly that the Manifest Self became two, which were identical to the original one, these became five and the five became fourteen. All fourteen were identical to each other and also identical to the Noor of Brahma created by the Manifest Self, from where this division started. These divinities have a direct relation with the atma in our bodies.
The ‘undivided, yet remaining divided’ has been taken to mean Supersoul’s presence in all beings by ACBSP. Similarly, Absolute too is the supporter of all existence through it being the creator of the Manifest Self itself and it is ‘That’ – the Absolute God – that is to be known.
The fact that they are beginningless as described in verse 12 in this Chapter can be understood from the fact that they actually owe their origin due to desire of the Unmanifest to have a Manifest form and have been there even prior to the time of Man’s origin. That is why Mohammad said at a juncture, “I was even a Prophet when Adam was being water and sand.” And Husain said that the sun, the moon, the earth, the entire cosmos – owe their origin to them (Prophet and his progeny).
These verses also explain why the God will call for convulsion of the entire universe when the last of the Devatas will be killed, that is why ‘supporter of existence’ is used as description of their virtues. Vishnu Purana explicitly talks about this process of convulsion, after the last of the Avatars will depart. That is why it is said here that all the creation owes its origin from them (Devatas or Ahlulbayt) and it is they because of whom destruction of the world will occur.
Without knowing our argument, NG sees paradoxes in this verse as well which, we are sure, will get removed once the real meaning of these verses become clear to him and others.
NG writes: “Again three paradoxes are implied, two explicit and one hidden. In the first explicit one, the word iva (as it were) is meant to relieve the contrast somewhat. The paradox of the one and the many is meant, although it is expressed in terms of outward appearances.
The second paradox here has the implied opposition between the counterparts bhutabhartri (supporter of existence) and jneyam (what is to be known) which in this Chapter should be understood as an objective philosophical entity to be clearly placed in a circle part, as it were, from jnanam (wisdom), subjectively considered. The opposition between the two counterparts is the same as that between existence and subsistence.
The third pair of paradoxical counterparts is based on the notion that there is a centrifugal and a centripetal principle involved in reality, whether cosmic or psychic. Grasishnu (grasping) refers to the centripetal tendency to hold inwards, and prabhavishnu (releasing expansive becoming) is the centrifugal tendency.”
[17]
The Light even of lights, That is said to be beyond darkness; knowledge, the knowable and what is to be reached through knowledge; particularly located in the hearts of everyone.
The Devatas were created from Light or Noor and hence they are called Devatas. People of the period worshipped these Devatas and were unaware of any higher power. The higher power – the Absolute – is once again being referred to as the Light even of lights (jyotisham api taj jyotis). We have seen that Muslim scriptures too refer to God as Noor al-Noor (Light of Lights).
We know now that Zulmat (Force of Darkness) was created at the same time when the Noor was created. Quran explicitly says God is the creator of Noor and Zulmat. The Absolute was there even when Zulmat had not been created; henceforth it is referred to as ‘beyond darkness’.
Once we are able to subdue the Zulmat within us, cut all connections with it, and align ourselves on the path of ascent towards Noor, we realize that knowledge of the Absolute alone is desired, He alone is ‘the knowable’ and He alone ‘is to be reached through knowledge’.
[18]
Thus the field, and wisdom, and what has to be known, have been briefly told; My devotee, having known this, attains to My state of being.
How the body (field) is related to the Absolute through the media of the Manifest nature of God in the form of Divine Lights (Divine Atmas) and their virtues are what is to be known, whereas these Divine Lights (Divine Atmas), their presence in spiritual and material form, and their relationship with God can only be understood through wisdom as talked about in verse 11. Any devotee of God, as per Gita, who knows this divine secret, becomes one with the Manifest Self.
ACBSP has called this Divine Atma as the Supersoul, which is a manifestation of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Beyond this, we do not agree to most of what that is said.
Rama too, like Krishna, was an Avatar of the Manifest Self or Vishnu. He says in Muktikopanishad to Hanuman:
O son of Vayu! Always worship My Reality that is destructive of pains, without sound, touch, form, decay, taste, destruction or smell, and without name and Gotra (clan). I am that non-dual One (Brahman) that is of the nature of the visible (Jnana), like unto the Akas, supreme, always shining, without birth, non-dual, without destruction, without attachment and pervading all. I am the All, and of the nature of salvation. One should ever meditate upon Me thus: ‘I am of the form of the visible (Jnana), the pure, of changeless nature and have really no objects in Me. I am the ever-full Brahman, traverse and across, up and down.’ Also meditate upon Me thus: ‘I am birthless, deathless, ageless, immortal, self-shining, all-pervading, destructionless, causeless, pure beyond the effect (of the universe) and ever content. When one’s body becomes a prey to time, he gives up the state of Jivanmukti, as the wind attains the motionless state.’
It is clear from this aforementioned description that Paramatma spoke even from the body of Rama, just as he is speaking from the body of Krishna here. This confirms that both Rama and Krishna were Avatars. Rama too is talking of need to worship the Absolute God. It is unfortunate that we started worshipping idols of physical bodies of Rama and Krishna whereas the Paramatma speaking through their bodies is talking of need to worship the Absolute God.
The same relationship is described in the Rig Veda also which confirms that Gita and Vedas are not talking about diverse topics but it is we who understood them differently:
Like the eye which is spread in the Akas (seeking all things without any obstacle), so the wise ever see the Supreme Seat of Vishnu [the Manifest Self]. The Brahmanas that have ever the Divine vision praise in diverse ways and illumine the Supreme Seat of Vishnu.
[19]
Know you that nature and spirit are both beginningless; and know you also that modifications and their intrinsic modalities are born of nature.
After seemingly closing a section with verse 18 in which the answers to the three sets of questions of Arjuna were expressly concluded, we have here another extra section covering verses 19 to 22 inclusive in which, considering the importance that the subject deserves, the Lord again begins to talk about the relationship between the human body, the divine spirit, nature and the Absolute, so as to clear any doubts that may have still remained.
The Absolute created a spirit as His Manifest form. The spirit, as it owed its origin to the Absolute, also had the virtues of the Absolute. Therefore, all the virtues that the Absolute is said to possess also became the virtues of this spirit. The Devatas were subsequently created. They too enjoyed the same virtues. Yet, these virtues were not their own, but owed their origin to the Absolute, just as the Lights (Noor) of the Devatas owed their power to God. That is why God has been referred to as Noor-al-Noor (Light of the Lights).
From this spirit, nature evolved and led to the creation of the entire world, including the living beings and therefore the virtues of the spirit became the virtues of all of these in their uncorrupted form. For instance, a child is born with his spirit being part of the pure Divine spirit. Therefore, certain virtues like truthfulness are part of his spirit, until they are corrupted by external influences of nature. Devatas described as ‘perfectly pure’ possess the virtues in their uncorrupted form.
However, Gita also states materialistic tendencies are due to the natural forces influencing a person. For instance, the need for God to create a Manifest form of Himself was because of the tendencies of man’s materialistic nature. This negative trait is because of the material nature as per which man wishes to see everything in material form, without which it is difficult for him to understand the real truth.
In fact, purusha (spirit) in pure form is fixed and has certain inherent virtues. But modifications and modalities are part of prakriti (nature). Human beings, trees, animals and every living creature passes through the same laws of nature, i.e. they are born weak and susceptible to outside influences, grow into strong and sturdy being and then pass through old age and the consequent death. The world too, we know through Vishnu Purana, is to pass through these stages, and we are presently passing a phase of Kaliyuga, when it is nearing its death. 99.4 per cent of this Divine Day of God (one Divine Day is equal to 1000 creations) is nearly over. Divine Night, equal to the period of the Divine Day, will commence thereafter.
When the Divine Souls came down to live in this world, their body too was susceptible to changes as per prakriti, which is a continuous non-ending process. It is this inter-relationship that is further described in succeeding verse.
[20]
In what concerns agency for cause and effect the motivating factor is said to be nature; in the matter of the experiencer of pleasure and pain, the motivating factor is spirit.
ACBSP has translated this in these words:
Nature is said to be the cause of all material causes and effects, whereas the living entity is the cause of the various sufferings and enjoyments in this world.
The previous verse had said that the prakriti (nature) and the spirit were actually beginningless. The prakriti (nature) and the purusha (spirit) are again referred to here as dual aspects of reality, they both being inter-related and inter-opposing tendencies or forces.
Since the cosmos has been created out of this Divine Spirit, it can be said that the nature that we see present in the cosmos also owes its origin to that Divine Spirit. It is prakriti (nature) that is responsible for all causes and their subsequent effects that we see happening in this world. So much so that howsoever a man dies, whether he dies of cancer, or heart failure, or a particular disease or falling from a height, a cause is there that interfered with nature. Even if his body is pierced with a sword or a knife, there is a certain natural process of cause and effect that can be witnessed.
We have seen that the motivating factor of nature is behind all causes and effects that we see in this mechanistic world. Similarly, in what we know in the everyday world as pleasure and pain, the motivating factor belongs to one who can feel such pleasure and pain, here named purusha (spirit). Thus the thin dividing line that is sought to be explicitly defined by this verse lies between the conscious spirit which is capable of feeling, and the inert matter which is within the domain of causality, and which does not necessarily imply a selective or aesthetic consciousness, yet which continuously interact with the body through its various senses described in verses 5-6, and can even have an overpowering effect on the body as against the spirit pulling towards virtues and righteous deeds.
[21]
The spirit, seated in nature, appreciates the modalities born of nature; association with the modalities is the cause of births in good or evil wombs.
We have said in previous verse that both prakriti (nature) and purusha (spirit) are inter-related and inter-opposing. In the explanation of this verse, NG writes: “This verse is an attempted explanation of the process involved in reincarnation, contributing to the inequality of status between types of men. The subject is not one that directly concerns spirituality in the best sense of the word. But inequality in this world as an expression of injustice touches on sociology and ethics, and can drastically influence politics, as it has done in India in the name of caste, which is a major problem that can hardly be by-passed by an author such as Vyasa, whose figure may said to stand at the very core of Indian spirituality, representing the supreme role of dialectical revaluation, of a superior way of life, individual or collective.
In the theorization implied here, Vyasa is not unlike Plotinus in his graphic description of how the soul enters matter. Bergson’s theories of matter and spirit follow the same lines. Even in the Gita the allusion to birth in good or evil wombs has to be read side by side with xv, 8 and xvi, 19. There is a slight contradiction to be observed when the implication of this verse is read with the implication of verse 31 of this Chapter, where it is said that the Self is not affected though seated in the body, and though touching the body it is not tainted by the body.”
Fact is that there is no contradiction as pointed out by NG. Spirit and matter are different. The spirit in the body does not get corrupted when touched by the material body. If that would have been so, man would have refrained from helping a diseased person, picking up a child fallen in filth or even touching a dead body. Or for that matter, even washing the excretions that come out from his body itself.
Spirit is seated in nature and has the power to appreciate the modalities of nature. If the modalities are negative in nature, they corrupt the purity of the spirit. Whether the spirit takes birth in good or bad wombs depend on the effect on it due to modalities of nature that it had to experience.
Sankara has even suggested “that good wombs are those of Devas (divinities) and bad wombs those of lower animals, which would imply a still wider range which a choice possible outside the human context altogether,” says NG. This too confirms our view to the full!
The fight between spirit leading a man to virtues and auspiciousness and the material nature affecting the purity of the spirit is an ongoing process. Those who allow material nature to govern them are losers and those whose spirit comes out victorious are the gainers. This is the message of Gita.
[22]
Supervisor, and Permitter, Supporter, Experiencer, the Great lord, and also called the supreme Self (is) the supreme Spirit in the body.
NG comments on this in the following words: “The mystery implied in the mode of contact between nature and spirit which was left vague in the previous verse is sought to be further clarified here. Within the limits of the body, the Absolute in its purest implications, suffers from certain conditionings and limitations. The favourite example in Indian philosophy of a colourless, transparent crystal placed on red silk, the latter technically named upadhi (the conditioning factor) explains the contact to some extent. In chemistry we have the example of catalytic agents which themselves suffer no change while being necessary for effecting changes in other chemicals with which they are in contact. If these two examples still do not explain the mystery sufficiently, especially in a contemplative context, we find mentioned here some other functions or qualities of the supreme Self within the body limits, as its modified patterns of behaviour or types of personality.”
God has left the man to act upon his will. He has created the Divine spirit, which acts as a supervisor, permitter, supporter and experiencer. This is talked about as antaratma (the inner atma that shows the way) by people in India! On the other hand, man’s mind is free to respond to the onslaught of material forces in the manner he chooses. If the atma wins this battle, it gets free from the cycle of rebirth and if the mind succumbs to the negative forces, the atma gets corrupted.
The word upadrashta (supervisor) suggests the role of an overseer of works. The Absolute is the supervisor who sees the Devatas leading towards the path of guidance whereas the modalities of nature works on a man. This He does by giving the role of supervisors to the Devatas. That is why He has been referred to in Quran as ‘the judge of the judges.’ An Upanishad even describes the Devatas as the guardians of our organs of senses and action and He is the guardian of the actions of the Devatas (Ahlulbayt), difference being that while we can astray, the Devatas (Ahlulbayt) represent the forces of Light and have been created as pure. They, not even minutely, can digress from the true path. In fact, the path that they showed and lived is the true path indeed.
Likewise anumanta (permitter) can be thought of as a selective and eliminative principle. Certain acts are approved and certain others disapproved depending upon an innate principle derived from the Absolute.
“The word bharta (supporter, one who bears the weight) can in the first place be thought of, not necessarily as supporting from below, but from above as from a hanging lamp. The gross and active aspects of the senses, mind, etc., which form an aggregate in themselves, depend for their intelligent conscious function, on the spirit which is in contact with them, though indirectly. They are like the reflection of a flame on a mirror below, which reflection looks as though the flame were burning downwards, while in reality it is burning upwards. The reflection depends upon and may be said to be supported by the actual flame which represents pure wisdom, although within the limits of the body there is no harm in calling the same wisdom the supporter.
The term bhokta (experiencer) is similarly justified, although in a strict sense absolute wisdom cannot be called an enjoyer. Within the limits of the body it is permissible to refer to the spirit as enjoyer inasmuch as a dead body cannot enjoy anything at all, and whatever enjoyment or experiencing there is on the perceptual side, must belong in principle at least, to the Absolute.”
The expression mahesvarah (great lord) is used for the Manifest yet undivided form of the Absolute God, who is also the Supreme Self (Atma), a part of which is present as the atma (spirit) in each living body. This Supreme spirit has a corrective role to play in a human body, which gets weakened if the person enables materialistic desires to overpower the corrective tendencies.
[23]
He who thus knows spirit and nature, together with the intrinsic modalities, though he may happen to be leading every kind of life, is not born again.
He who knows the role of Divine Spirit and Nature, together with the intrinsic modalities, does not allow material tendencies to overpower his senses. As a consequence the spirit remains pure all through the life. When such a person’s body dies, the spirit gets united with spirit of the Supreme Soul and hence gets free from the cycle of rebirth.
[24]
By meditation some behold the Self (atma) in the Self (atma) by the Self (atma); others by Samkhya-Yoga (unitive reasoning) and others by karma-yoga (action unitively understood).
ACBSP’s translation:
Some perceive the Supersoul within themselves through meditation, others through the cultivation of knowledge, and still others through working without fruitive desires.
As we have repeatedly said, the purpose of the Gita is to take us all to the worship of the Absolute God, who created the Supreme Atma or Paramatma or the Manifest Self. Three modes of reaching the Supreme Self are mentioned here. The first is through recognizing the Supreme Self (Paramatma) in one’s own self (atma) and using the corrective tendencies of the Divine Self inside us, which is the supervisor, permitter, supporter, experiencer and the Great Lord.
Second way to realize the Absolute God is by Samkhya-Yoga or unitive reasoning that is talked about in detail elsewhere in Gita. The third course, Karma-yoga (action without fruitive desires) too has been talked about elaborately elsewhere and there is no need to explain it at the present moment.
It is possible to reach the Absolute God through all these manners.
[25]
But others, not knowing as stated (above) worship, having heard from others; they also cross beyond death, depending on hearsay.
There are still others who have not understood any of the manners to reach the Absolute God. Way is not clear to them but they still wish, with sincerity, to reach God. They might have heard about various ways to reach the Absolute and sincerity endeavour to tread that path. Since God is compassionate and kind to His subjects, he grants salvation to even those who made a sincere attempt based on hearsay, i.e. without being aware of the various paths to reach Him.
[26]
Whatever is produced, the unmoving or the moving, know you, O Best of the Bharatas (Arjuna), that to be from the union of the field and the knower of the field.
ACBSP says:
O chief of the Bharatas, know that whatever you see in existence, both the moving and the non-moving, is only a combination of the field of activities and the knower of the field.
We find here a return to the terms field and the knower of the field, with which this Chapter started. In the course, both these were elaborated upon. Whereas field is the body comprised of material nature and includes the modalities of nature as well, the knower of the field has been described as the spirit in the body that is in alignment with the Supreme Soul of the Manifest form of the God and has certain virtues as inherent characteristics, which acts as supervisor, permitter, supporter and experiencer and prevents the man’s spirit from getting swayed by negative forces. We will know from the next chapter that even field or nature has modalities which could be sattvik, rajasik or tamasik, which determine what kind of material onslaught the spirit will have to face. Those in sattvik or pure mode will remain pure throughout whereas those in tamasik mode will not listen to the supervisory, permitting, supporting and experiencing nature of the Supreme Spirit working inside them and will actually make their own spirit corrupt.
A very interesting comment is given here in Gita, which says that not only the moving but even the non-moving objects are faced with these two opposing tendencies. Therefore, even moon as an object or stone are produced from the union of the field and the knower of the field. Since we have proved that the knower of the field is the spirit or the fourteen Devatas who comprise the Divine Spirit, it amounts to saying that every moving and non-moving object is created through the union of Divine Nature and Divine Spirit, comprising of the fourteen Devatas. Therefore, if Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad states that the moon, the sun and the stars, including the earth and the entire life on it, were created out of the Soul of the Brahma, we should not have any doubts in understanding this statement. Also, we should not doubt when the sun returns for the Ahlulbayt, when the Moon was split into two or when pebbles praised Allah (God) when they came in the hands of Mohammad. Not just the Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad, even Hadees-e-Kisa tells that the sun, the moon, the stars and everything has been created in love of the Ahlulbayt.
[27]
He who sees the supreme Lord abiding (in a state of) equality in all beings, within the perishing as the non-perishing, he sees.
The word samam (equal), as used here, implies the high principle of seeing the Supreme in all entities, which includes animate and inanimate objects according to the previous verse. This is different from the previous verses where the atma was described as the extension of the Manifest form of God, which was created by the Absolute God. But if man starts seeing the Absolute God Himself in all beings, moving or non-moving, he needs no intermediary, as the final goal is to reach the Absolute God himself.
If a person starts seeing God in all moving and non-moving objects, there is bound to be peace on earth, as no man will be innocently killed or harassed, no animal and not even a tree leaf will be plucked unnecessarily.
Also, no distinction will ever be made on the basis of caste, creed or religion. The entities here have the same status as values, each within its own category. As the non-perishing in the perishing, it is the Absolute God Himself that gives a final and equal status to all entities. Inequality of status in value is not conceivable when the value implied in all entities is understood to be that of the Absolute.
[28]
For he who sees the Lord seated equally everywhere, destroys not the Self (Atma) by the Self (Atma); and then he attains the supreme goal.
ACBSP says:
One who sees the Supersoul equally present everywhere, in every living being, does not degrade himself by his mind. Thus he approaches the transcendental destination.
This is an elaboration of the thought mentioned in verse 27. The living entity, by accepting his material existence, has become situated differently than in his spiritual existence. But if one understands that the Supreme is situated in His Paramatma manifestation everywhere, he does not degrade himself by a destructive mentality, and his atma remains pure as ever. The mind is generally addicted to sense-gratifying processes; but when the mind turns to the Absolute God, one does not need to understand the relationship between the body and the knower of the body, etc. and becomes advanced in spiritual understanding.
Says NG: “When the Lord thus understood is equated with the Self, there is no longer any opposition. This principle by which the Self as the Lord can unitively merge in the notion of the Self as the soul or inner spirit, without any implied conflict between them, is explained in VI.6.
The expression hinasti (destroys) refers to the alternative contingency also mentioned in VI.6, which happens when the two Selfs here implicitly referred to for purposes of discussion, are non-unitively or non-contemplatively treated, contrary to the requirements of a yogic way of life. One who can treat them unitively easily reaches the highest goal.”
Is it not clear that NG is confused over the use of self twice? One self is our own self and the other Self is the Manifest Self (Paramatma) working inside us. Our own self gets destroyed when it attains unity the Manifest Self. This is the state of salvation. Manifest Self starts working within our body. Our body starts acting as the office of the Manifest Self. When the body speaks, one hears the Manifest Self speaking from the body.
[29]
He who sees that all actions are done by nature alone, and likewise that the Self is actionless, he (truly) sees.
ACBSP translates:
One who can see that all activities are performed by the body, which is created of material nature, and sees that the self does nothing, actually sees.
This thinking is also talked about in Gita on various occasions. A person who sees that all actions are done by nature alone, surely will not do actions for worldly benefits. He won’t pursue the materialistic benefits from actions and, therefore, will never seek the fruits of actions, when he will commit them. Likewise, he will only perform those actions that are necessary and refrain from performing any action other than these. This is so because in spite of the fact that the Manifest Self is responsible for all actions, all births and deaths, he knows that the Manifest Self does so only because it has been created by the Absolute God to do so.
[30]
When he perceives the disjunct existence of beings established in the one, and from whence also their expansion, then he becomes the Absolute.
The principle of one and the many has been talked about before in this Chapter. This is not the discussion of creation of such a multitude of humanity from one - Adam. In fact, this speaks of the One Manifest Self getting divided and leading to the creation of the fourteen Devatas, identical to each other and also identical to the one Noor created by the Manifest Self. One must understand that all these divinities have source in One Absolute God alone.
If you have agreed to our interpretation of the cause of war of Mahabharata, you will also agree that all this is to clarify doubts as regards to the true identity of the Devatas, in relation to the Absolute. One who understands the true relationship attains union with the Absolute. People who didn’t understand this relationship came to war against Krishna.
[31]
Having no beginning, having no attributes (gunas), this supreme Self, suffers no decrease though dwelling in the body, O Son of Kunti (Arjuna), it neither acts nor is it tainted.
ACBSP translates as follows:
Those with the vision of eternity can see that the imperishable soul is transcendental, eternal, and beyond the modes of nature. Despite contact with the material body, O Arjuna, the soul neither does anything nor is entangled.
This begins the series of four verses in which the status of the One Manifest Self is restored to its full, untainted purity and glory. The word anadvitvam (beginninglessness) refers to the nature-aspect of the Absolute in his non-manifest state and nirgunatvam (attributelessness), further gives evidence to it. This is the same as sat and asat discussed by us before. Both put together and understood unitively gives us the neutral value, which is actionless though seated within the living body.
[32]
As the all-pervading subtle space-principle (akasa) is untarnished by reason of its subtlety, so the Self, seated everywhere in the body, is untarnished.
ACBSP writes:
The sky, due to its subtle nature, does not mix with anything, although it is all-pervading. Similarly, the soul situated in Brahman vision does not mix with the body, though situated in that body.
The point mooted in the previous verse is further elaborated in this verse. Having no beginning, having no attributes, the Supreme Self suffers no decrease and is uniformly distributed in the body. Since the person described here believes it is that Supreme Self that is present in his entire body, he does nothing that would tarnish the self inside him.
ACBSP describes this verse by saying just as sky does not mix with other objects like light or space that are present near it, similarly the atma of a person who believes that it is the Non-manifest God that dwells in the body, remains aloof and unaffected from the material tendencies of the body.
[33]
As the one sun illuminates this whole world, so does the Lord of the field, O Bharata (Arjuna) illumine all the field.
Writes ACBSP:
O son of Bharata, as the sun alone illuminates all this universe, so does the living entity, one within the body, illuminate the entire body by consciousness.
Such a person believes that there is One Absolute God alone who is all-powerful, all-pervading and omnipresent. This One God, even though He is without attributes (gunas), yet He is extremely powerful and illuminates the whole world. Moreover, He illuminates the insides of the body by being present there, irrespective of whether it is the body of a good or a bad person. This is similar to the sun which illuminates good and bad places indifferently, just revealing its aloofness and supremacy as a glorious value. By shining on the field it can even be supposed that the field itself and its visible existence depends on the unitive sun, which would thus include without difference the kshetra (field) and the kshetrajna (knower of the field), fused into one supreme value.
The individual divine entities or the Devatas that might constitute the field, as in verse 3, are overlooked here because “the many is treated as the dialectical counterpart of the one”, and taken collectively to be absorbed unitively in the value that the knower of the field represents analogously to the sun.
[34]
Those who by the eye of wisdom perceive the difference between the field and the knower of the field (its bearing on) elements-nature-emancipation – they go to the Supreme.
Writes ACBSP:
Those who see with eyes of knowledge the difference between the body and the knower of the body, and can also understand the process of liberation from bondage in material nature, attain to the supreme goal.
In this Chapter the most important subject to which the author wanted our attention to be directed was the distinction between the kshetra (the field) and the kshetrajna (the knower of the field). Summing up the discussion, the author says those who see with wisdom (wisdom is described in detail in verse 11) are able to find the link between field and the knower of the field, otherwise a great mystery. Such a person achieves emancipation and becomes one with the Supreme Himself and gets removed from the cycle of rebirth.
Writes NG: “The compound word bhuta-prakriti-moksha (elements-nature-emancipation) gives equal importance to the three sections, while referring to them summarily here. Some translators treat the compound word not as samahara-dvandva (collective-dual compound) but as panchami-tat-purusha (compound in which the members do not lose their independence) by which the word gains the meaning of “liberation of beings from nature”. The object of this concluding verse being one of the reviewing by way of a final resume of the subjects covered in this Chapter, we prefer to treat the compound as a form of samahara-dvandva.”[Note reference to ‘panchami’ meaning the five members.]
Whatever NG says and writes, you know now that the entire description in Gita (and also in the Vedas) is now getting clear if you understand the true personality of Devatas and know the cause of the war that Krishna fought and won. Those who know this relationship between the Devatas (who later took birth as Mohammad, Ali and Fatima and their progeny) with the Manifest Self and the relationship between the Manifest Self with the Absolute God attain union with the Absolute God.
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 Thirteenth Chapter entitled Unitive Understanding of the Distinction between the Actual and the Perceptual.
No comments:
Post a Comment