The opponent does not understand the real drift of the reply and proceeds as follows:— (A)] {Opponent): — Since avidya is the cause of evil, it is a thing that should he got rid of. [So, I ask to know whose is avidya. — (B)].
(Reply): — He who has avidya will get rid of it, [and it can be no other — (A)J (Opponent): — Why, it is I who have avidya, and I should try and get rid of it— (A.)]; (Reply): — Then you know avidya and the Self, its pos- sessor, [so that your question has no meaning — (A)].
(Opponent): — I know, but not by immediate perception « [Hence my question— (A)] > 334 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XIII.
(Reply) '• — Then you know the Self by inference.* How can you perceive the relation between the Self and avidya? It is not indeed possible for you to perceive your Self as related to avidya, at the same moment (that your Self cognises avidya); for, the cogniser (Self) acts at the moment as the percipient of avidya-t Neither can there be a (separate) cogniser of the relation between the cogniser (the Self) and avidya, nor a separate cognition of. that (relation); for then you would commit the fallacy of infinite regress (anavastha). — If the relation between the cogniser (the Self) and the cognised could be congnised, another cogniser should be supposed to exist; then another cogniser of that cogniser j then another of that again; and so on; and thus the series would necessarily be endless. If, on the other hand, avidya — or, for that matter, anything else — is the 'cognised, then it is ever the cognised only. So also the cogniser is ever tne cogniser; he can never become the cognised. Such being the case, t Kshetrajna, the cogniser, is not at all tainted by nescience, misery and the like.
(Objection): — There is in the Self this blemish, viz%y that He is the cogniser of Kshetra or matter which is full of blemishes.
(Answer); — No; for, it is only by a figure of speech that the Self, the immutable Consciousness, is spoken of as the * The inference meant here may be stated as follows:— I must be the possessor of avidya, because I feel the effects of avidya such as misery. If I have no avidya, I should not feel, its effects; for those who have no avidya, as for instance the liberated souls, do not feel the effects Of avidya—(A).
t The Self cannot be both the perceiver and the perceived at the same time.— (A).
X Because the Self cannot be cognised by anything beyond, there is on proof whatever that avidya inheres in the Self. And the Self reveals bimslef in every phase of consciousness.— (A).
2—3] MATTER AND SPIRIT. 335 cogniser, just as, in virtue of its heat, fire is said, by a figure, to do the act of heating. We have shewn how here, in ii. 19, iii. 27 and v. 15 and other places, the Lord has taught that the Self has in Himself no concern with action or with its accessories or with its results, that they are imputed to the Self by avidya, and that they are therfore said to belong to the Self only by a figure of speech. And we shall also -explain how the same truth is taught in the sequel.
(Objection): —Well if the Self has in Himself no ■concern with action or with its accessories or with its results, and if they are ascribed (to the Self) by avidya, then it would follow that the rituals ( karmas ) are intended only for the ignorant, not for the wise.* (Answer): — Yes,t it does follow, as we shall explain when commenting on xviii. 11. And in the section (xviii. 50, st seq.) where the teaching of the whole sastra is summed up, we shall dwell more particularly on this point No need here to expatiate further on the subject; so we conclude for the present.
Summary of the Doctrine.
Here follows a verse which forms a summary of the teaching of the Discourse on Kshetra (i.e., thirteenth Dis- course), which is already contained in brief in the verses xiii. 1, 2; for it is but proper to give beforehand a summary of the whole doctrine to be explained at length in the sequel.
* And this is opposed to the sastra which often says that one should perform the sacrificial rituals with knowledge,— (A).
The Sastra demands from the ritualist the knowledge of the exist- ence of a Self beyond the body, not also the |knowledge that that Self is free from all attributes, such as hunger- 336 THE BHAGAVAD GITA [DlS' XIIL 3. And what that Kshetra is, and of what nature, and what its changes; and whence is what; and who He is and what His powers; this hear thou briefly from Me.
" That Kshetra " refers to what was spoken of as ' this body ' (xiii 1). What that Kshetra is: what it is in itself. Of what nature: what it is in its properties. And whence is what: what effects arise from what causes. 'Who He is etc.: Who He is that was spoken of as Kshetra jna and what His powers (prabhavas, saktis, such as the power of seeing) are which arise from the upadhis or environments (such as the eye> Do thou hear My speech describing briefly the true nature of Kshetra and Kshetra jwa in all these specific aspects: and on hearing that speech, thou wilt understand the truth — The (five) and's imply that one should understand Kshetra and Kshetrajna in all these aspects.
The Doctrine extolled.
The Lord now extols what He has proposed to teach,— namely, the doctrine of the true nature ef Kshetra and Kshetra j«a, —with a view to interest the mind of the hearer.
4. Sung by sages, in many ways and distinct- ly, in various hymns, as also in the suggestive words about Brahman, full of reasoning and decisive.
Sages (Bishis): such as Vasishflaa. ffymns: such as the Bik. The true nature of Kshetra and Kshetrajna has also been taught in the Brahma-sutras, *.e., in the passages treating of Brahman, — such as " Only as the Self, let a man contemplate Him " (BH. Up. 1-4-7,), — in the words through 3—5] MATTER AND SPIRIT. 337 which alone Brahman is known. They are full of reasoning. They admit of no doubt, i.e., they are productive of certain knowledge.
Matter in all its forms. To Arjuna who has, by this praise (of the doctrine), been prepared to bear it, the Lord says: 5. The Great Elements, Egoism, Reason, as also the Unmanifested, the ten senses and one, and the five objects of the senses; The Great Elements (Mahabhutas) are so called because they pervade all vikaras, all modifications of matter. The elements here referred to are the subtle ones (sukshma), not the gross (sthula) elements, which latter will be spoken of as " the objects of the senses."
Egoism (Ahamkara): self-consciousness, consciousness of ego, the cause of ' the Great Elements*. Beason (Buddhi) is defined by determination and is the cause of Ahamfeara* The cause of Reason (Buddhi) is the AvyaUa, the Unmani- fested, the Avyakrita or Undifferentiated, the Energy of the Lord flsvara-Sakti) spoken of in vii 14. So much alone is Prakriti, divided eightfold.* The ten senses are made up of the five *' buddhi-indriyas "» senses of knowledge—such as hearing, — so called because they produce knowledge, and of the five " karma-indriyas," senses of action such as speech and hand, so called because they bring about action. And the one: the manas, which is composed of thoughts and * The Isvara-Sakti here referred to is the root of the insentient matter, spoken of as Maya in vii. 14, not the root of consciousness (chaitanya); i.e, the Mulaprakriti in its eight modifications.— (A).
338 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XIII purposes (sawkalpa) and so on, is the eleventh sense, The jwb objects of the senses axe sound, etc. The Sankhyas speak of these as the twenty-four principles (tattvas).
6, Desire, hatred, pleasure, pain, the aggre- gate, intelligence, courage; — the Kshetra has been thus briefly described with its modifications.
Now, the Lord proceeds to teach that even those which the Vaiseshikas speak of as the inherent attributes of Atman {the Self) are merely the attributes of Kshetra (matter), but not the attributes of Kshetrajna (the knower of matter). — Desire (ichchha) is that which impels a person who has once experienced a certain object of pleasure to seek — on again perceiving an object of the same class, — to get hold of this latter as conducive to pleasure. This, namely desire, is a property of the inner sense (antafc-karana); and it is Kshetra (matter.) because it is knowable. So also, hatred is that which leads a person, who once experienced a certain object of pain, to dislike an object of the same class on perceiving this latter. This, namely hatred, is only Kshetra (matter), because it is knowable. 'Pleasure is the agreeable, the tran- quil, made up of the Sattva principle. Even this is Kshetra, because it is knowable. Pain is the disagreeable j and it is Kshetra because it is knowable. The aggregate is the com- bination of the body and the senses. Intelligence is a mental state which manifests itself in the aggregate— just as fire manifests itself in a burning metallic mass, — pervaded by the semblance of the consciousness of the Self. It is Kshetra, because it is knowable. Courage is that by which the body and the senses are upheld when they get depressed j and it is Kshetra because it is knowable. — Desire and other qualities mentioned here stand for all the qualities of the inner sense (anta&-kara«a). The Lord concludes the present subject as follows: the Kshetra has been thus briefly described, with its modifications such as Mahat (Buddhi).
Virtues coadncive to Self-knowledge.
The Kshetra, of which the various modifications in their totality have been spoken of as " this body " (xiii. 1), has been described in all its different forms, from * the Great Elements to * courage ' (xiii. 5-6).* The characterisiic marks of Kshetrajna will be shortly described. In xiii. 12, the Lord Himself will describe Kshetrajna in detail,— that Kshetrajna through a knowledge of whose powers immortality can be attained. But, now, the Lord prescribes, as means to that knowledge, virtues such as humility, which qualify a person for a knowledge of the Koowable, intent on which a sawnyasin is said to be a jnana-nish^ha, a firm devotee in the path of knowledge, and which are designated as knowledge (jnana) because they are the means of attaining knowledge.
7. Humility, modesty, innocence, patience* 'Uprightness, service of the teacher, purity, stead- fastness, self-control; Humility: absence of self-esteem. Modesty: not pro- claiming one's own virtues. Innocence: doing no injury to. any living being. Patience •* not being affected: when others, have done any injury. Service of the teacher: doing acts of service to the preceptor (acharya) who teaches the means * The cosmic body and the individual bodies (samashtideha and vyashftdehas) have been described here with a view to shew that he alon e who has grown indifferent (virakta) to them is qualified for knowledge.— 340 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DIS. XIII of attaining moksha. Purity: washing away the dirt from the body by means of water and earths, the inner purity of mind consisting in the removal from it of the dirt of attach- ment and other passions by cultivating the idea * that is inimical to them. Steadfastness: concentration of all efforts exclusively in the path of salvation. Self-control: control of the self, of the aggregate of the body and the senses. This aggregate is spoken of as the self, because it is of some service to the true Self, t Self-control consists in directing exclusively to the right path the body and the mind which are by nature attracted in all directions. Moreover, 8. Absence of attachment for objects of the senses9 and also absence of egoism; perception of evil in birth, death arad old age, in sickness and pain; Absence of attachment: for sense-objects such as sound, for pleasures seen or unseen. Perception, etc: thinking of what evil there is severally in birth, etc Thus the evil in birth lies in having to dwell in the womb and to issue out through the uterus. Similarly in death. The evil of old age consists in the decay of intelligence, power and strength, and in being treated with contempt. So also may be seen the evil caused by sichmss such as head-disease or the evil caused by £>ains whether adhyatmika, {.&, arising in one's own person, or adhibhautika, *.«., produced by external agents, or adhidaivika, s.g., produced by supernatural beings.
# The recognition of evil in all objects of senses.— (A).
f There is another reading of the commentary which means that *the aggregate' is inimical to the Self and should therefore be restrained.
7—9] MATTER AND SPIRIT. 341 Or, the passage may be thus interpreted.—Pain itself is evil. Birth, etc., should be regarded as painful, as shewn above. Birth is a misery; death is a misery; old age is a misery; and sickness is a misery. Birth, etc., are all miseries, because they produce misery; they are not miseries in themselves.
From this perception of the evil of pain in birth, etc., there arises indifference to the pleasures of the body and of the senses; and then the senses turn towards the Innermost Self to obtain a glimpse of the Self. Because the perception of the evil of pain in birth, etc., conduces to knowledge, i t is itself spoken of as knowledge.
9. Unattach merit, absence of affection for son, wife, home and the like, and constant equani* mity on the attainment of the desirable and the undesirable; Unattachment; absence of liking for things which may form objects of attachment. Affection is an intense form of ■attachment and consists in complete identification with another, as in the case of a man who feels happy or miser- able when another is happy or miserable and who feels himself alive or dead when another is alive or dead. The like: others who are very dear, other dependants. Un- attachment and absence of affection are termed knowledge because they lead to knowledge. Constant equanimity con- sists in not being delighted on attaining the desirable, and in «:ot chafing on attaining the undesirable- This equanimity aiso is (conducive to) knowledge.
io. Unflinching devotion to Me in Yoga of non-separation, resort to solitary places, distaste for the society of men; Toga of non-separation: aprithak-samadhi, a steady unflinching meditation on the One with the idea that there is no Being higher than the Lord, Vasudeva, and that therefore He is our sole Refuge. And this devotion is (conducive to) knowledge. Solitary places: which are naturally free, or made free, from impurities, as also from fear of serpents, thieves and tigers; such as a jungle, the sandbank of a river, the temple of a God, and so on. It is in solitude that the mind becomes calm; so that meditation of the Self and the like is possible only in a solitary place. Wherefore resort to solitude is said to be (conducive to) knowledge. Society of men: of the ordinary unenlightened and undisciplined people, not of the enlightened and disciplined men, because the society of these latter is an aid to knowledge. Distaste for the society of ordinary men is knowledge, because it leads to knowledge.
Moreover, ii. Constancy in Self-knowledge, perception of the end of the knowledge of truth. This is declared to be knowledge, and what is opposed to it is ignorance.
Self-knowledge: knowledge of the Self and the like* Perception, etc.* Knowledge of truth results from the mature 10—12] MATTER AND SPIRIT. 343 development of such attributes as (humility xiii. 7), which are the means of attaining knowledge. The end of this know- ledge is moksha, the cessation of mortal existence, of saw-sara. The end should be kept in view j for, it is only when one perceives the end of the knowledge of truth that one will endeavour to cultivate the attributes which are the means of attaining that knowledge. These attributes — from ' humility * to ' perception of the end of the knowledge of truth '—are declared to be.knowledge, because they are conducive to knowledge. What is opposed to this— vis., pride, hypocrisy, cruelty, impatience, insincerity and the like — is ignorance, which should be "known and avoided as tending to the perpetua- tion of sawsara.
Brahman the Knowable.
What is it that has to be known by this knowledge P — In answer to this question the Lord proceeds with xiii. 12, etc.
(Objection): — Humility and the like are only forms of self-control (yama and niyama); by them cannot be perceive- ed the Knowable. Never indeed have we found humility and other attributes (mentioned above) serving to determine the nature of anything. And in all cases, it is only the know- ledge or consciousness of an object that has been found to determine the nature of that object of knowledge. And,, certainly, no object can be determined through the knowledge of another object, any more than fire can be perceived through the knowledge of a pot.
(Answer): — This objection does not apply here; for, we have said that humility and the like are spoken of as know- ledge because they conduce to knowledge, or because they are secondary or auxiliary causes of knowledge.
12. That which has to be known 1 shall describe; knowing which one attains the Immortal. Beginningless is the Supreme Brahman. It is not said to be * sat ' or * asat' That which has to be known, I shall fully describe as It is.-— The Lord then goes on to describe what the result of that knowledge will be, in order to call the hearer's attention by way of creating in him a desire to know of It. It, the unsurpassed One, the Brahman, just spoken of as * That which has to be known,' has no beginning.
With a view to avoid tautology * some split the expres- sion l anadimatyaram ' into ' anadi matparam \ and explain it differently; thus: Brahman is beginningless, and I am Its Para-Sakti, the Supreme Energy called Vasudeva.
(But we say)— True, tautology might thus be avoided, provided the given interpretation were possible. But the interpretation does not hold good, for it is intended here to expound the nature of Brahman by denying all specific possessed of a particular kind of energy and at the same time as devoid of all specific attributes. Therefore tautology should be explained as due to the exigencies of the metre.
Brahman is beyond speech and thought.
After saying that He is going to speak of what, as leading to immortality, is worth knowing, and after having thus called the hearer's attention by creating a desire for the knowledge, the Lord says; It is not said to be 'sat (existent)' or m asat (non-existent).* * Tautology involved in taking " anadiraat" as one compound, as the Bhashyakara has done* 12] MATTER AND SPIRIT. 345 (Objection): — After proclaiming very loudly that He is going to speak of the Knowable, it does not become the Lord to describe It as neither ' sat ' nor * asat.'
(Answer):— No; it is quite the right thing that has been said. — How? — Thus: being inaccessible to speech, Brahman, the Knowable, is defined in all Upanishads only by a denial of all specialities, — 'Not thus * (Bn Up. 2-3 6) and 'not gross, not subtle' Ibid, 3-8*8)— in the terms "It is not this."
(Objection): — That thing (alone) exists which can be spoken of as existing. If the Knowable cannot be spoken of as existing, then It cannot exist. And it is a contradiction in terms to say that. It is knowable and that It cannot be spoken of as existing.
(Answer): — Neither is It non-existent, since It is not an object of the consciousness of non-existence.
(Objection): — Every state of consciousness involves either the consciousness of existence or that of non-existence. Such being the case, the Knowable should be comprehended either by a state of consciousness accompanied with the consciousness of existence, or by a state of consciousness accompanied with the consciousness of non-existence.
(Answer): — No; for, being beyond the reach of the senses, It is not an object of cousctousnsss accompained with the idea of either (existence or non-existence). That thing, indeed, which can be perceived by the senses, such as a pot, can be an object of consciousness accompanied with the idea of existence, or an object of consciousness accompanied with the idea of non-existence. Since, on the other hand, the Knowable is beyond the reach of the senses and as such can be known solely through that instrument of knowledge which * If not, you cannot escape the conclusion that Brahman is undefi- nable— (A).
346 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XIII.
is called 'Sabda* (the Word, *•«., Revelation), It cannot be, like a pot, etc., an object of consciousness accompanied with the idea of either (existence or non-existence) and is therefore not said to be * sat ' or ' asat \ Now, as regards the allegation that it is a self-contradic- tion in terms to say that the Knowable is not said to be * sat * or ' asat ', (we say that) there is no contradiction; for, the snati says.
' It is other.than the known and above the unknown '-— * (Kena Up. 2-3) (Objection): — Even the passage of the sruti just quoted is self-contradictory, * just as the sruti is self-contradictory when, after putting up the hall for the sacrifice, it says " (who knows) there exists (any good) in the next world V* (Taittiriya-Sawhita5 6-1-1).
(Answer): — No; the passage which says that " It is other than the known and above the unknown, '* teaches, by itself, something which should be accepted as true, t whereas the passage quoted by the opponent — " who knows if there exist any good in the next world?" — is a mere artha-vada, a statement which, to be understood in its full import, should be read along with the injunction to which it is subsidiary. J Moreover, it stands to reason to say that Brahman cannot be expressed in words such as * sat; * for. every word employed to denote a thing denotes that thing — when heard * If so we do not accept the- passage as authoritative, since that passage alone is accepted as authoritative which contradicts no accepted authority. — (A).
t That is to say. we should not reject the passage as teaching no new truth.; for it teaches this new truth, namely, that Brahman is no other than one's own Inner Self, and it should therefore be accepted as authoritative in itself. — (A).
t Hence it is no authority in itself — (A), 12] MATTER AND SPIRIT. • 347 by another — as associated with a certain gems, or a certain act, or a. certain quality, or a certain mode o! relation. Thus.* cow and horse imply genera, cook and teacher imply acts, white and Hack imply qualities, wealthy and ca&Ze- owmer imply possession. But Brahman belongs to no genus* wherefore It cannot be denoted by such words as ' sat (existent)'. Being devoid of attributes,- It possesses no qualities. If It were possessed of qualities, then It could be denoted by a word implying a quality. Being actionless, It cannot be indicated by a word implying an act. The Sruti says: " It is without parts, actionless and tranquil." (Sveh Up. 6-19)- It is not related to anything else; for It is one, It is without a second, It is no object (of any sense), It is the very Self. Wherefore, it is but right to say that It can be denoted by no word at all; and the passages of the sruti like the following point to the same thing: Whence (i.e., away from Brahman, unable to approach Brahman) all words return,"— (Tait, Up. 2-41.)
Brahman is the source of all activity.
When it is said that Brahman the Knowable is not accessible to the word or thought of * sat * (existent), one may perhaps suppose It to be " asat' or none-existent. To prevent this supposition the Lord proceeds to declare Its existence as, manifested through the upadhis, through the senses of all living beings.
[To explain: Since nothing is found which is devoid of all conditions and quite beyond all speech and thought,— nay, since everything we experience is of a contrary nature,— one may suppose that Brahman as described ajjove must be a * Brahman is described in the sruti as belonging to no class, as possessing no colour, and so on. — (A).
348 • THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XIII.
void or non-entity (sunya). To prevent this supposition, the Lord proceeds to teach that Brahman exists (1) as the Inner Self (Pratyak), (2) as the source of all activity of the senses and the like, (3) as the source whence arises our consciousness of existence with reference to all duality which is imaginary, (4) as Is vara or the Lord of the universe. First of all, here, the Lord proves, by way of inference, the existence of Brahman as the Inner Sel f- consciousness: there must be some self-conscious principle (pratyak-cbetana) behind insen- tient principles in activity, such as the physical body; for, we invariably find self-consciousness lying behind all insen- tient objects in activity, such as a carriage in motion. — (A)] 13. With hands and feet everywhere, with eyes and heads and mouths everywhere, with hearing everywhere. That exists enveloping all.
The Knowable has hands and feet everywhere. The existence of Kshetrajwa is indicated by the upadhis of the sense-organs* of all living beings. Kshetra jwa (the self- conscious principle living behind the sense-organs) is so called because of the upadhi of Kshetra; and this Kshetra is of various forms, such as hands, feet, etc. All the variety caus- ed in Kshetrajna by the variety in the upadhis of Kshetra is but illusory, and it has therefore been said — in the words " It not said to be ' sat ' or * asat '" — that It should be known as devoid of all variety. Though what is caused (in Kshetra- jwa) by upadhis is illusory, still it is spoken of — in the words that { It has hands and feet everywhere' — as though it were an attribute of the Knowable, only with a view to indicate Its * Because there must be self -consciousness at' the back of thei ivity.— * A)- 12—84] MATTER AND SPIRIT. 349 existence- Accordingly there is the saying of the scwi$ra>daya- vids — of those who know the right traditional method of teaching — which runs as follows: " That which is devoid of all duality is described by adhyaropa and apavada" i.e., by superimposition and negation, by attribution and denial. Hands, feet and the like, constituting the limbs of all bodies in all places, derive their activity from the Energy inherent in the Knowable *, and as such they are mere marks of Its existence and are spoken of as belonging to It only by a figure of speech — All the' rest should be similarly interpreted. It (Brahman) exists in the world, in the whole animal creation, pervading all.
Brahman is unconditioned.
The purpose of this verse is to prevent the supposition that the Knowable is (really) possessed of the upadhis — the sense-organs such as hands, feet, and the like,' — which are merely superimposed (upon It).
14. Shining by the functions of all the senses, (yet) without the senses; unattached, yet supporting all; devoid of qualities.
All the senses: the buddhi-indriyas and karma-indriyas, the organs of knowledge and the organs of action. The inner senses,— manas and buddhi, — which alike form the upadhis of the Knowable, are included in the term ' all the senses* Moreover, even hearing and other senses form upadhis only through the upadhi of the anta&-kara*?a» the inner sense- Thus, we should "understand that Brahman manifests- Itself * *.e., they act in virtue of the mere presence" of that Energy.— (A).
350 THE BHAGAVAD GITA. [DIS. XIII.
through the upadhis of external and internal senses, through the functions of all the senses, viz., determination, purposes and thoughts, hearing, speech and the like. That is to say, the Knowable functions, as it were, through the functions of all the senses. The sruti says: *' It meditates as it were» It moves as it were." (Bn. Up. 4-3-7) Why should it not mean that It actually functions? — Says the Lord: It is not possessed of any of the senses. Wherefore, the Knowable does not actually function when the senses are functioning. And as regards the verse, " Without hands and fest He is swift, He grasps;