BhG 2.16

nāsato vidyate bhāvo nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ
ubhayor api dṛṣṭo ‘ntas tv anayos tattva-darśibhiḥ

Update Required
To play the media you will need to either update your browser to a recent version or update your Flash plugin.

analysis

syntax


asataḥ (of the unreal) bhāvaḥ (existence) na vidyate (there is not).
sataḥ (of the real) abhāvaḥ (non-existence) na vidyate (there is not).
tattva-darśibhiḥ tu (by for the seers of the truth) anayoḥ (of these two) ubhayoḥ (both) antaḥ (nature) dṛṣṭaḥ (seen) [asti] (is).

 

grammar

na – av. – not;
asataḥ – a-sant (√as – to be) PPr 6n.1 n. – of the unreal, of the untrue (from: √as – to be; PPr sant – being, existing, true, the essence);
vidyate – √vid (to be) Praes. Ā 1v.1 – there is; or from: √vid (to find) Praes. pass. 1v.1 – is found; or from: √vid (to know, to understand) Praes. pass. 1v.1 – is understood;
bhāvaḥ – bhāva 1n.1 m. – state, existence, nature, emotions (from: √bhū – to be);
na – av. – not;
abhāvaḥ – a-bhāva 1n.1 m. – non-existence, lack of emotions (from: √bhū – to be, bhāva – state, existence, nature, emotions);
vidyate – √vid (to be) Praes. Ā 1v.1 – there is; or from: √vid (to find) Praes. pass. 1v.1 – is found; or from: √vid (to know, to understand) Praes. pass. 1v.1 – is understood;
sataḥ – sant (√as – to be) PPr 6n.1 n. – of the real, of the true (from: √as – to be; PPr sant – being, existing, true, the essence);
ubhayoḥ – ubhaya sn. 6n.2 m. – of both;
api – av. – although, moreover, besides, even;
dṛṣṭaḥ – dṛṣṭa (√dṛś – to see) PP 1n.1 m. – seen;
antaḥ – anta 1n.1 m. – end, limit, settlement, inside, nature;
tu – av. – but, then, or, and;
anayoḥ – idam sn. 6n.2 m. – of these two;
tattva-darśibhiḥ – tattva-darśin 3n.3 m.; TP: tattvaṁ darśibhiḥ iti – by the seers of truth (from: tat – this, abst. tat-tva – truth, reality; √dṛś – to see, darśa – view, appearance, darśin – one who sees, seer);

 

textual variants


vidyate bhāvo → vidyate ’bhāvo (there is non-existence);
ubhayor api → ubhayor aṁtaraṁ (inside of the two);
tattva-darśibhiḥ → vastu-darśibhiḥ (by the seers of things);
 
 


commentaries

Śāṃkara

The key:
an excerpt from the commented verse
quotes from the scriptures
starting polemic

The Real and the Unreal.
For the following reason also it is proper that thou shouldst abandon grief and distressful delusion and calmly endure heat and cold, etc. For,

 itaś ca śoka-mohau akṛtvā śītoṣṇādi-sahanaṃ yuktam, yasmāt –

Of the unreal no being there is; there is no non-being of the real.
Of both these is the truth seen by the seers of the Essence.

 nāsato vidyate bhāvo nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ |
ubhayor api dṛṣṭo ’ntas tv anayos tattva-darśibhiḥ ||2.16||

There is no bhava – no being, no existence – of the unreal (asat) such as heat and cold as well as their causes.

 na asato ’vidyamānasya śītoṣṇādeḥ sa-kāraṇasya na vidyate nāsti bhāvo bhavanam astitā ||

Heat, cold, etc., and the causes thereof, which are (no doubt) perceived through the organs of perception, are not absolutely real (vastu-sat); for, they are effects or changes (vikara), and every change is temporary.

 na hi śītoṣṇādi sa-kāraṇaṃ pramāṇair nirūpyamāṇaṃ vastu sambhavati | vikāro hi saḥ, vikāraś ca vyabhicarati |

For instance, no objective form, such as an earthen pot, presented to consciousness by the eye, proves to be real, because it is not perceived apart from clay. Thus every effect is unreal, because it is not perceived as distinct from its cause. Every effect, such as a pot, is unreal, also because it is not perceived before its production and after its destruction.

 yathā ghaṭādi-saṃsthānaṃ cakṣuṣā nirūpyamāṇaṃ mṛd-vyatirekeṇānupalabdher asat | tathā sarvo vikāraḥ kāraṇa-vyatirekeṇānupalabdher asat | janma-pradhvaṃsābhyāṃ prāg ūrdhvaṃ cānupalabdheḥ |

And likewise the cause, such as clay, is unreal because it is not perceived apart from its cause,

 kāryasya ghaṭādeḥ mṛd-ādi-kāraṇasya ca tat-kāraṇa-vyatirekeṇānupalabdher asattvam ||

(Objection): – Then it comes to this: nothing at all exists.
(Answer): – No (such objection applies here). For, every fact of experience involves twofold consciousness (buddhi). the consciousness of the real (sat) and the consciousness of the unreal (asat). Now that is (said to be) real, of which our consciousness never fails; and that to be unreal, of which our consciousness fails. Thus the distinction of reality and unreality depends on our consciousness.

 tad-asattve sarvābhāva-prasaṅga iti cet, na | sarvatra buddhi-dvayopalabdheḥ, sad-buddhir asad-buddhir iti | yad-viṣayā buddhir na vyabhicarati, tat sat | yad-viṣayā vyabhicarati, tad asat | iti sad-asad-vibhāge buddhi-tantre sthite |

Now, in all our experience, twofold consciousness arises with reference to one and the same substratum (samānādhikaraṇa), as, ‚a cloth existent,’ ‚a pot existent,’ ‚an elephant existent’ – not as in the expression ‚a blue lotus’ – and so on everywhere.

 sarvatra dve buddhī sarvair upalabhyete samānādhikaraṇe na nīlotpalavat, san ghaṭaḥ san paṭaḥ, san hastī iti | evaṃ sarvatra |

Of the two, the consciousness of pot, &c., is temporary as was already pointed out, but not the consciousness of existence. Thus, the object corresponding to our consciousness of pot, &c., is unreal, because the consciousness is temporary; but what corresponds to our consciousness of existence is not unreal, because the consciousness is unfailing.

 tayor buddhyoḥ ghaṭādi-buddhir vyabhicarati | tathā ca darśitam | na tu sad-buddhiḥ | tasmāt ghaṭādi-buddhi-viṣayo ’san, vyabhicārāt | na tu sad-buddhi-viṣayaḥ, avyabhicārāt ||

(Objection): – When the pot is absent and the consciousness of it fails, the consciousness of existence also fails.
(Answer): – No (such objection applies here). For the consciousness of existence still arises with reference to other objects such as cloth. The consciousness of existence corresponds indeed only to the attributive (viśeṣaṇa).

 ghaṭe vinaṣṭe ghaṭa-buddhau vyabhicarantyāṃ sad-buddhir api vyabhicaratīti cet na | paṭād evapi sad-buddhi-darśanāt | viśeṣaṇa-viṣayaiva sā sad-buddhiḥ |
(Objection): – Like the consciousness of existence, the consciousness of the pot also arises with reference to another pot (present).
(Answer): – You cannot say so, for the consciousness of the pot does not arise with reference to a cloth.		 sad-buddhivat ghaṭa-buddhir api ghaṭāntarā dṛśyata iti cet, na | paṭādau adarśanāt ||

(Objection): – Neither does the consciousness of existence arise in the case of the pot that has disappeared.
(Answer): – You cannot say so, for there is no substantive (viśeṣya) present. The consciousness of existence corresponds to the attributive; and as there can be no consciousness of the attributive without that of the corresponding substantive, how can the consciousness of the attributive arise in the absence of the substantive? – Not that there is no objective reality present, corresponding to the consciousness of existence.

 sad-buddhir api naṣṭe ghaṭe na dṛśyata iti cet, na | viśeṣyābhāvāt | sad-buddhir viśeṣaṇa-viṣayā satī viśeṣyābhāve viśeṣaṇānupapattau kiṃ-viṣayā syāt? na tu punaḥ sad-buddheḥ viṣayābhāvāt ||

(Objection): – If the substantive such as the pot be unreal, twofold consciousness arising with reference to one and the same substratum is inexplicable.
(Answer): – No; for, we find the twofold consciousness arising with reference to one and the same substratum, even though one of the two objects corresponding to the twofold consciousness is unreal, as for instance in the case of a mirage, where our consciousness takes the form „this is water.”

 ekādhikaraṇatvaṃ ghaṭādi-viśeṣyābhāve na yuktam iti cet, na | idam udakam iti marīcy-ādau anyatarābhāve ’pi sāmānādhikaraṇya-darśanāt ||

Therefore, there is no existence of the unreal, the fictitious – such as the body and the pairs of opposites – or of their causes.

 tasmād dehāder dvandvasya ca sa-kāraṇasya asato na vidyate bhāva iti |

Neither does the real – the Self (Atman) – ever cease to exist; for, as already pointed out, our consciousness of the Self never fails.

 tathā sataś ca ātmano ’bhāvo ’vidyamānatā na vidyate, sarvatrāvyabhicārāt ity avocāma ||
This conclusion – that the real is ever existent and the unreal is never existent – regarding the two, the Self and the non-Self, the real and the unreal, is always present before the minds of those who attend only to truth, to the real nature of the Brahman, the Absolute, the All. evam ātmānātmanoḥ sad-asatoḥ ubhayor api dṛṣṭaḥ upalabdho ’nto nirṇayaḥ sat sad eva, asat asad eveti, tv anayoḥ yathoktayoḥ tattva-darśibhiḥ |

‚That’. Thou hadst therefore better follow the view of such truth-seers, shake off grief and delusion, and. being assured that all phenomena (vikaras) are really non-existent and are, like the mirage, mere false appearances, do thou calmly bear heat and cold and other pairs of opposites, of which some are constant and others inconstant in their nature as productive of pleasure or pain.

 tad iti sarva-nāma sarvaṃ ca brahma, tasya nāma tad iti, tad-bhāvas tattvam, brahmaṇo yāthātmyam | tad draṣṭuṃ śīlaṃ yeṣāṃ te tattva-darśinaḥ, tais tattva-darśibhiḥ | tvam api tattva-darśināṃ dṛṣṭim āśritya śokaṃ mohaṃ ca hitvā śītoṣṇādīni niyatāniyata-rūpāṇi dvandvāni vikāro ’yam asann eva marīci-jalavan mithyāvabhāsate iti manasi niścitya titikṣasva ity abhiprāyaḥ ||2.16||

 

Rāmānuja

yat tv ātmanāṃ nityatvaṃ dehānāṃ svābhāvikaṃ nāśitvaṃ ca śokānimittim uktam gatāsūn agatāsūṃś ca nānuśocanti paṇḍitāḥ [gītā 2.11] iti tad upapādayitum ārabhate | tat-kṣāntiḥ kim arthā? ity ata āha—nāsata iti |
asato dehasya sad-bhāvo na vidyate | sataś cātmano nāsadbhāvaḥ | ubhayor dehātmanor upalabhyamānayoḥ yathopalabdhi tattva-darśibhir anto dṛṣṭaḥ | nirṇayāntatvān nirūpaṇasya nirṇaya iha anta-śabdenocyate | dehasyācid-vastuno’sattvam eva svarūpam | ātmanaś cetanasya sattvam eva svarūpam iti niṇayo dṛṣṭa ity arthaḥ |
vināśa-svabhāvo hy asattvam | avināśa-svabhāvaś ca sattvam | yathoktaṃ bhagavatā paraśareṇa tasmān na vijñānam ṛte’sti kiñcit kvacit kadācid dvija vastu-jātam [vi.pu. 2.12.43] sad-bhāva evaṃ bhavato mayokto jñānaṃ yathā satyam asatyam anyat [vi.pu. 2.12.45]
anāśī paramārthaś ca prājñair abhyupagamyate |
tat tu nāśi na sandeho nāśi-dravyopapāditam || [vi.pu. 2.14.24]
yat tu kālāntareṇāpi nānyāṃ saṃjñām upaiti vai |
pariṇāmādi-saṃbhūtā tad vastu nṛpa tac ca kim || [vi.pu. 2.13.100] iti |
atrāpi antavanta ime dehāḥ [gītā 2.18] avināśi tu tad viddhi [gītā 2.17] ity ucyate | tad eva sattvāsattva-vyapadeśa-hetuḥ iti gamyate |
atra tu sat-kārya-vādasyāsaṅgatvān na tat-paro’yaṃ ślokaḥ | dehātma-svabhāvājñāna-mohitasya tan-moha-śāntaye hy ubhayor nāśitvānāśitva-svarūpa-svabhāva-viveka eva vaktavyaḥ | sa eva gatāsūn agatāsūṃś ca nānuśocanti [gītā 2.11] iti prastutaḥ | sa eva ca avināśi tu tad viddhi [gītā 2.17] antavanta ime dehāḥ [gītā 2.18] ity anantaram upapādyate | ato yathokta evārthaḥ

 

Śrīdhara

nanu tathāpi śītoṣṇādikam atiduḥsahaṃ kathaṃ soḍhavyam | atyantaṃ tat-sahane ca kadācid deha-nāśaḥ syād ity āśaṅkya tattva-vicārataḥ sarvaṃ soḍhuṃ śakyam ity āśayenāha nāsato vidyata iti | asato ‚nātma-dharmatvād avidyamānasya śītoṣṇāder ātmani bhāvaḥ sattā na vidyate | tathā sataḥ sat-svabhāvasyātmano ‚bhāvo nāśo na vidyate | evam ubhayoḥ sad-asator anto nirṇayo dṛṣṭaḥ | kaiḥ ? tattva-darśibhiḥ vastu-yāthārthya-vedibhiḥ | evambhūta-vivekena sahasvety arthaḥ

 

Madhusūdana

commentary under the verse BhG 2.18

 

Viśvanātha

etac ca viveka-daśān adhirūḍhān prati uktam | vastutas tu asaṅgo hy ayaṃ puruṣaḥ iti śruter jīvātmanaś ca sthūla-sūkṣma-dehābhyāṃ tad-dharmaiḥ śoka-mohādibhiś ca sambandho nāsty eva | tat-sambandhasya avidyā kalpitatvād ity āha neti | asato ‚nātma-dharmatvād ātmani jīve avartamānasya śoka-mohādes tad-āśrayasya dehasya ca bhāvaḥ sattā nāsti | tathā sataḥ satya-rūpasya jīvātmano ‚bhāvo nāśo nāsti | tasmād ubhayor etayor asat-sator anto nirṇayo ‚yaṃ dṛṣṭaḥ | tena bhīṣmādiṣu tvad-ādiṣu ca jīvātmasu satyatvād anaśvareṣu deha-daihika-viveka-śoka-mohādayo naiva santi kathaṃ bhīṣmādayo naṅkṣanti | kathaṃ vā tāṃs tvaṃ śocasīti bhāvaḥ

 

Baladeva

tad evaṃ bhagavatā pārthasyāsthānāśocitvena tat-pāṇḍityam ākṣiptam | śoka-haraṃ ca svopāsanam eva tac copāsopāsaka-bheda-ghaṭitam ity upāsyāj jīvāṃśinaḥ svasmād upāsakānāṃ jīvāṃśānāṃ tāttvikaṃ dvaitam upadiṣṭam | atha yad ātma-tattvena tu brahma-tattvaṃ dīpopameneha yuktaḥ prapaśyet [ŚvetU 2.15] ity ādāv aṃśa-svarūpa-jñānasyāṃśi-svarūpa-jñānopayogitva-śravaṇāt tad ādau saniṣṭhādīn sarvān pratyaviśeṣeṇopadeśyaṃ tac ca dehātmanor vaidharmya-dhiyam antarā na syād iti tad-vaidharmya-bodhāyārabhyate nāsata ity ādibhiḥ | asataḥ pariṇāmino dehāder bhāvo ‚pariṇāmitvaṃ na vidyate | sato ‚ pariṇāmina ātmanas tv abhāvaḥ pariṇāmitvaṃ na vidyate | dehātmānau pariṇāmāpariṇāma-svabhāvau bhavataḥ | evam ubhayor asat-sac-chabditayor dehātmanor anto nirṇayas tattva-darśibhis tad-ubhaya-svabhāva-vedibhiḥ puruṣair dṛṣṭo ‚nubhūtaḥ | atrāsac-chabdena vinaśvaraṃ dehādi jaḍaṃ sac-chabdena tv avinaśvaram ātma-caitanyam ucyate | evam eva śrī-viṣṇu-purāṇe ‚pi nirṇītaṃ dṛṣṭaṃ jyotīṃṣi viṣṇur bhuvanāni viṣṇur [ViP 2.12.38] ity upakramya yad asti yan nāsti ca vipra-varya [?] ity asti | nāsti-śabda-vācyayoś cetana-jaḍayos tathātvaṃ vastv asti kiṃ kutradcid ity ādibhir nirūpitaḥ | tatra nāsti śabda-vācyaṃ jaḍam | asti-śabdavātyaṃ tu caitanyam iti svayam eva vivṛtam | yat tu sat-kārya-vāda-sthāpanāyai tat-padyam ity āhus tan-niravadhānaṃ dehātma-svabhāvānabhijñāna-mohitaṃ prati tan-moha-vinivṛttaye tat-svabhāvābhijñāpanasya prakṛtatvāt

 
 


translations

«
»
Both comments and pings are currently closed.