Summary:
Krishna introduces distinction between the wise (panditāḥ) and the unwise. He places Arjuna in the latter category due to his grief, but acknowledges his openness to wisdom. Krishna then delves into the eternal nature of Atma (self), contrasting it with the temporary body-mind complex. He presents a methodology distinguishing between incidental attributes (tatastha-lakshana) and intrinsic nature (svarupa-lakshana). This leads to the concept of the wise person as one who recognizes Atma as the constant and unchanging observer of changing experiences, unlike the unwise who identify solely with the body-mind conditions. Intrinsic nature of Self (Atma) is Existence (sat) which is of nature of Awareness (cit). Finally, Krishna introduces the concept of jiva, explaining its journey through various bodies and life stages across multiple incarnations, further emphasizing the transient nature of physical existence.
REVISION:
Arjuna first starts overwhelmed, then expresses in that state why doesn’t want to fight. Then waits for response from Krishna. Krishna's response “This isn’t time to think of all this; weakness of heart; do what is to be done”. Arjuna continues his position at higher level, saying “There are gurus on other side, must have reverence”.
Right after that, Arjuna after having analyzed problem, asks two types of questions:
- Situational Question: “Dharma sammudha ceta: I’m confused what is to be done in this situation”. He’s not coming from place of arrogance, but acknowledges despite having analyzed the problem, there’s possibility he might have missed something. “Can I look at this from another situation? Is there more to my thinking?”.
- Existential Question: “How do I gain permanent fulfillment in this life? Because if I win the war, there’s burden of eliminating loved ones. If I walk away, it’s not right as you’re generally supposed to face life”.
Bhagavad Gita answers those two questions:
- Situational problems: What's on your mind is how to live a relatively smooth, prosperous life.
- Fundamental problem: What's on your mind is what does it take to find permanent fulfillment. What is the ultimate end of life. Is life just solving situational problems day after day?
To demonstrate the presence of unresolved fundamental question: Most will say “I’m happy, but ___”. Meaning happiness is based on what happens to you and how others are. Both are unpredictable. Fulfillment seems to escape you most of time, despite accomplishments, because it’s conditional.
As Arjuna asks these two questions, Krishna has smile on face, knowing it’s time for teaching to be imparted due to right context and will survive for centuries.
NEXT VERSE: Krishna points out who is unwise and puts Arjuna in unwise category…
Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2, Verse 11
(Krishna's teaching officially starts — Self-Knowledge Verse 11-30)
अशोच्यान् अन्वशोचः त्वम् प्रज्ञा-वादा च भाषसे ।
गतासून् अगतासून् च न अनुशोचन्ति पण्डिताः ॥ २-११॥
aśocyān anvaśocaḥ tvam prajñā-vādā ca bhāṣase ।
gatāsūn agatāsūn ca na anuśocanti paṇḍitāḥ ॥ 2-11॥
Śrī Bhagavān said: You grieve for those who are not be grieved for. Yet you speak words of wisdom. The wise do not grieve for those who are gone and who are not yet gone.
- Krishna makes two statements in: Panditāḥ na anuśocanti, aśocayān anvaścocastvam:
- Wise people do not grieve for those who are not to be grieved for. This is surprising. Because we empathize with Arjuna grieving for his loved ones.
- Wise ones don’t grieve for those who are gone and who are not yet gone.
- Seems like wise person is not affected by anything. Completely Stoic. No matter what happens, you just watch everything, without being affected. Does this sound human? No.
- Krishna is rather talking about vision of wise person (how look at life, and situations, and understanding of who you are, nature of world and cause of universe). Talking about inquiring into a much bigger reality. “What is purpose of my life? And what am I supposed to accomplish while living?”. So wise person has raised these questions, therefore their vision has undergone a major change. While unwise person hasn’t asked.
- Therefore, this makes Arjuna is unwise (grieving), yet open to becoming wise through Krishna’s words.
- CAUTION: Don’t create category of wise/unwise. Unwise has spectrum from Duryodhana-unwise (confused about everything) to Bhisma-unwise, to Arjuna-unwise (seeking wisdom). Furthermore, not every Arjuna-unwise seeks wisdom.
- QUESTION: How is Arjuna-unwise different from Duryodhana-unwise? Arjuna is seeking.
NEXT VERSE: Has to explain who is a wise person and why doesn’t he grieve? Explains the vision that wise people enjoy. What is the nature of Atma, who are you? A limited individual, or much more.
Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2, Verse 12
न तु एव अहम् जातु न आसम् न त्वम् न इमे जनाधिपाः ।
न च एव न भविष्यामः सर्वे वयम् अतः परम् ॥ २-१२॥
na tu eva aham jātu na āsam na tvam na ime janādhipāḥ ।
na ca eva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ sarve vayam ataḥ param ॥ 2-12॥
There was never a time I did not exist, neither you nor these kings. Nor will any of us cease to exist in the future.
Arjuna’s problem is “I’m going to kill everybody”; this implies understanding that Atman is good as body-mind. Thus Krishna uses this opportunity to show the nature of Atma (“I am, or Self”). And how does he show it? There was never a time that I did not exist, nor will I cease to exist.
Krishna’s statement implies he is talking about his own Atma (self) because he is an Avatara, while the rest of us are mortals. Thus he immediately cancels this assumption by saying, “There was never a time when YOU did not exist, nor will you ever cease to exist”. Same applies to everyone else. Meaning, your Atma is not a mortal entity, but free from limitation of time. Atma is your true nature, it needs to be inquired into because your whole identity is restricted to one body-mind. To undertake inquiry, there is prakriya (methodology) which helps you look into your true nature. There are many methodologies through Gita/Upanishads to help you see different realities.
Methodology to help you understand your true identity:
- Your nature can be divided into your incidental attribute and your intrinsic nature.
- Definitions:
- Incidental attribute: Not-essential to nature of something. It can come-and-go without affecting the essence of something else.
- Intrinsic nature: That which is essential and unchanging. It can never go away. EG: Saltiness is intrinsic to salt. So saltiness is intrinsic to salt.
- Example:
- Is color an incidental attribute or intrinsic nature of the whiteboard? It's incidental because you can replace previous color with another, or erase the colors. No activity of the colored markers affect the whiteboard. The essence of whiteboard remains a non-sticky, unchanging substratum for changing colors to express upon.
- Technical:
- Incidental attribute (tatastha-lakshana / taṭastha-lakṣana):
- Something that doesn’t stick on permanently. It can change. It comes and goes.
- It is always in reference to something else. For example, color is incidental in reference to the whiteboard. Your changing incidental thoughts are in reference to a non-changing Self (atma), as will be explained in upcoming verses.
- It's a characteristic depending on something else. For example, the color (which is a characteristic) is dependent on the whiteboard.
- Intrinsic nature (svarupa-lakshana / svarūpa-lakṣana):
- The substratum on which incidental changes are taking place. The existence on which experiences of your body and mind are taking place. There’s never a time when you can find yourself without it. It is YOU. Something that keeps surviving the incidental attributes. It is equally true while accommodating incidental changing attributes.
- Literally svarupa-lakshana means: “Characteristic of one's own nature” or “indicative mark of one's true form.” For example, intrinsic characteristic of water is liquidity. So liquidity is directly defining water. Or indicative mark of sugar is sweetness. The intrinsic nature of Atma (self) is Existence-Awareness – as discussed below.
- Incidental attribute (tatastha-lakshana / taṭastha-lakṣana):
What does this mean for you?
There is something about you that doesn’t come and go, it’s constant. And something about you that comes and goes.
What is variable in your experience is…
Incidental Attributes:
- BODY: Everything about body is different 1 min ago and now.
- SENSES: EG: Have good hearing, then tinnitus. Far sight in young years, short sight after 40’s. But age 60, sense of taste decreases by 50%.
- MIND: Everyday you have 60K thoughts. Each lasts couple of seconds (unless you build a story around it). Yet something survives the 60K. Mistake is putting identity into one of the 60K, thus miss one’s true nature (the presence which recognizes changing conditions of the mind; which doesn’t come and go; always stays with you).
Then there is…
Your Intrinsic Nature:
Something about you that’s constant, observing changes taking place. Observer has to survive to know what is before and now. Were the survivor not present, you wouldn’t know before and after.
LOGIC: You need a constant to observe a flux. EG: Think of tree. Then elephant. Before tree-thought, I was there. While tree-thought, same I am there. Tree has gone, elephant has come, I’m still there. Etc.
So are you the incidental thought, or presence that observes coming and going of a thought? You are the ever available presence who is there in every thought as “I am”.
And what is the nature of this presence?…
It is of nature of sat-cit. Atma isn’t something away. It’s the most basic, fundamental nature of you. And Krishna is saying, his Atma and your Atma are one and the same. Atma is Existence (sat) of the nature of Awareness (cit) that allows you to observe everything that comes and goes, and is unaffected by anything happening to body-mind. EG: If something got stuck to Self, then when think of elephant, tree would still be there. Same with emotion. And this Atman is your true nature. It’s not subject to death.
Mistake we make is…
- Your identification is put in incidental nature and not intrinsic nature. Therefore undergo all the hardships attributed to body/mind and sense limitations, and their mortality.
- Don’t say, “I’m not the body”. Because as we'll see in future verses, even your body-mind is Atma. Body is your incidental attribute; it comes and goes. It’s not your intrinsic attribute, but incidental attribute.
QUESTION: What’s the difference between wise and unwise person?
- Wise: Understands nature of Atma, never tainted by anything, in whose presence changing world and body-mind are observed. Meanwhile understands, “I have a limited body-mind for a limited time to undergo life journey”.
- Unwise: Incidental body-mind is intrinsic to Atma. Says “I am mortal. Once body-mind goes, I cease to exist”.
NEXT VERSE: Explains difference between Atma and body-mind…
Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2, Verse 13
देहिनः अस्मिन् यथा देहे कौमारम् यौवनम् जरा ।
तथा देहान्तर-प्राप्तिः धीरः तत्र न मुह्यति ॥ २-१३॥
dehinaḥ asmin yathā dehe kaumāram yauvanam jarā ।
tathā dehāntara-prāptiḥ dhīraḥ tatra na muhyati ॥ 2-13॥
Just as, for the jīva, the indweller of this body, there is childhood, youth and old age, similar is the gaining of another body. With reference to that, a wise person does not come to grief.
- This body is given to us to undertake journey of life. It’s programmed that it has to go through different stages which can’t be stopped.
- PERSPECTIVE 1: Your body goes through kaumāram [childhood]), yauvanam [young age], jarā [old age].
- PERSPECTIVE 2: Your body goes through 6 modifications:
- Asti (present in womb of mother), jayate (born), vardhate (grows), viparinamate (matures), apakṣīyate (decays), vinaśyati (perishes).
- If your identity is restricted to these 6 modifications, it severely affects your self-image.
- What is life of a person according to the Vedas? It’s life of a jiva. The Jiva (sentient being) goes through different forms, taking different bodies and minds. What is the jiva made of?
- Sthula-sharira (Physical body): That which has mass, is affected by gravity, requires food and air to survive.
- Sukshma-sharira (Subtle body): EG: Neuro scientist can see electrical impulses, cells — but can’t see your thoughts. EG: Therapist has to depend for you to talk, as they can’t hook up any instrument to see your troubles.
- Karana-Sharira (Causal Body): Next session…
—
Course was based on Neema Majmudar's Bhagavad Gita & Swami Dayananda (Arsha Vidya) home study course.
Recorded 28 July, 2024
Hello Andre,
I am trying to correlate teaching in different lessons. Let me know if my understanding below is correct.
Mind: Thought form in state of in-decision.
Intellect: Thought form in state of concrete decision.
Memory: Stored thought pool (Stored data of past experiences)
Ego: Iness., or the notion that “I am doing”. Isn’t it essentially a thought form?
So isn’t all of subtle body in this methodology, is thought form ?
When we say “I” is placed in body/mind, essentially we are saying Ego which is thought form /notion that “I” is this doer. “I am” is walking or “I am” is talking. Is this correct understanding ?
Now when we say “I” placed in Atma, do we mean getting rid off this notion/thought form, that “I am” is this doer.
Hence placing your “I” in Atma means no new vritti vyapti (not gaining any new thought form / notion about “I” being a doer anymore ) only phala vyapti (direct knowledge). Is this correct understanding ?
Thanks,
Ashish
============
So isn’t all of subtle body in this methodology, is thought form ?
============
Yes, we can say subtle-body consists of 4 types of thought forms. Each distinct from another. Ahamkara (ego) can be considered a thought form that persists a lot longer then the 3 other thought forms. EG: Sense of I is there, even when mind is not thinking/emoting/remembering/recalling.
For example in savikalpa-samadhi meditation, only Ahamkara (ego) is there. The other 3 are dormant. That’s why ignorant person in savikalpa-samadhi (and especially when they get out of it), says, “I (ahamkara) was meditating and was experiencing nothing-ness. I was totally free! I was enlightened”
It shows the thinking of an unwise person (ajnani), genuinely taking Self to be ahamkara. And for them, liberation is nothing-ness (absence of citta/manas/buddhi). Thus the common trap; try to experience nothing-ness again.
================
When we say “I” is placed in body/mind, essentially we are saying Ego which is thought form /notion that “I” is this doer. “I am” is walking or “I am” is talking. Is this correct understanding ?
================
Ego produces two phenomena for every sentient being (including animals):
a) The sense of being a doer/talker/listener/inquirer. Sense of being the role played throughout the day.
b) The sense of being one who is going through pain and pleasure.
When we say “I is placed in body-mind”, what we mean is: “I (sat-cit) am unable to tell self apart from the doer/enjoyer (the two primary experiences generated by the body-mind).”
Another way to say is, “I (sat-cit) am unable to tell self apart from ahamkara (walker/talker/thinker)”.
===================
Now when we say “I” placed in Atma, do we mean getting rid off this notion/thought form, that “I am” is this doer.
===================
I is never not Awareness (atma). So we can’t say “when I (Awareness) is placed in Atma (Awareness)” as it means there’s two Awarenesses.
Better to say: The notion that was turning Me (Awareness) as an object, is gone. For example, all this time, the wave was water. But it was turning itself (water) into a single object (the wave). When in fact it was already the water all along. It just had to remove the notion that it’s not the water. Long as the notion “Water is over there and I don’t have water right now” is true, the wave will continue to have doubts about it’s nature.
=====================
Hence placing your “I” in Atma means no new vritti vyapti (not gaining any new thought form / notion about “I” being a doer anymore ) only phala vyapti (direct knowledge). Is this correct understanding ?
=====================
When I finally own up that I am already the final reality (sat-cit), this owning up does not involve creating a mental image (vrtti-vyapti), but removing (phala-vyapti) the last notion that I wasn’t already sat-cit.
Also I wouldn’t call phala-vyapti direct-knowledge. Because there’s never a moment you don’t have direct knowledge of yourself. Self is evident to all as “I exist. I am conscious”. So it’s already direct-knowledge for everyone. The problem is, this direct-knowledge of self is mixed up with body-mind, thus mistaken as doer-enjoyer.