Knowledge about the soul (Bg 2.12 and 2.13)
The real person is the soul within the body. The body changes through the different stages of life and finally perishes at death, but the soul remains the same throughout all these changes.
« The Song of God—Volume 1, chapters 1-6
Knowledge about the soul (Bg 2.12 and 2.13)
The real person is the soul within the body. The body changes through the different stages of life and finally perishes at death, but the soul remains the same throughout all these changes. Kṛṣṇa also makes clear that individuality is eternal: He, Arjuna, and all the kings existed in the past, exist now, and will continue to exist in the future. Therefore, Arjuna should not lament for the destruction of the body.
Text 12: na tv evāham jātu nāsam, na tvam neme janādhipāḥ
na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ, sarve vayam ataḥ param
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.
Text 13: dehino ’smin yathā dehe, kaumāram yauvanam jarā
tathā dehāntara-prāptir, dhīras tatra na muhyati
As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change.
In his purport, Śrīla Prabhupāda mentions a very famous passage of the Upaniṣads, the verse nityo nityānām, which appears both in the Kaṭha Upaniṣad (2.2.13) and Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad (6.13):
nityo nityānām cetanaś cetanānām, eko bahūnām yo vidadhāti kāmān, tam ātma-stham ye ’nupaśyanti dhīrās, teṣām śāntiḥ śāśvatī netareṣām
This verse is deeply significant, revealing the nature of the soul, the nature of the Lord, the relationship between the two, and the importance of transcendental knowledge.
The verse starts with the word “nityo,” describing an eternal being who is the creator of everything. Everything we can see around us in this material world is temporary, with a beginning and an end. However, this temporary manifestation originates from this eternal being. The word “nityo” describes a single, masculine subject. It can be translated as “the eternal one.” This eternal is a person and not just an object. But who is He?
The next word, nityānām, reveals that this eternal one is not alone. He exists together with many other eternals. Nityānām is in the genitive plural. There is one supreme eternal, who is the principal, and many other subordinate eternals. These subordinate eternals are us, the jīvas, who share the same eternal nature as the Supreme Lord, but are subordinate to Him.
The next word, cetanaś, is in the nominative singular. It indicates that this supreme eternal is conscious (cit). He is conscious and full of knowledge. The word cetanānām (in the genitive plural) indicates that all the other eternals, the jīvas, share this same conscious nature with the supreme eternal.
The word “kāmān” in the second line indicates that all these jīvas possess many desires. However, they alone are not capable of acting on these desires. Eko bahūnām yo vidadhāti: the one supreme eternal provides for all the subordinate eternals. In this way, Kṛṣṇa is defined as the possessor of all the potencies and opulences, the maintainer of everyone, and the support of everything. Everyone else is dependent on Him.
Because we have material desires, the Lord supplies us with material bodies, so we can try to satisfy these desires. These bodies are, however, different from us in nature, just like a car is different from the human being driving it. A person can drive a car, but can’t become a car. A person enters the car and becomes the driver of the car, and when his driving activities are concluded, he may leave the car and continue with his life. Similarly, the soul assumes a material body and uses this body to perform activities, as the controller of the body, but it is incorrect to identify the soul with the body, just as it is incorrect to call a man driving a Mercedes “Mr. Mercedes” or a lady driving a blue car “Mrs. Blue.”
The soul is, however, not alone inside the body. Tam ātma-stham: this supreme eternal (tam) enters the body together with the soul. He is present everywhere as Paramātmā, and all souls are eternally connected with Him, inside or outside the body. Both the soul and the Lord are present inside the heart, just like two birds residing in a tree, but they are not the same. The soul is absorbed in enjoying the fruits of the tree, some perceived as sweet and others as bitter, while the Lord simply observes, as a neutral witness. He sanctions and enables the activities of the soul, yet He is not responsible for the results.
As long as we are absorbed in the body and the material activities connected with it, we remain in anxiety, hankering for material things we are attracted to and desperately trying to hold onto whatever we have, trying to find some kind of stable situation amid the transience of this world. However, when we become sober and wise, we can perceive the Lord inside our hearts and become again connected with our original, spiritual nature; we attain eternal peace (anupaśyanti dhīrās, teṣām śāntiḥ). This eternal peace is, however, not available to others who fail to do so (na itareṣām).
The Bhagavad-gītā offers the conclusions of all the Upaniṣads in a very clear form. In verse 2.12, the Lord explains this eternal nature of the soul as different from the body in very direct words. Kṛṣṇa starts by explaining to Arjuna that the soul is eternal: there is no beginning for the soul, and consequently, there is no end. The soul is simply eternal, ever-existing, just like the Lord. This idea is conveyed in a very beautiful form. He starts by declaring, na tv evāham jātu nāsam.
The words “na tv evā“ form a peculiar construction. In some verses of the Vedas, ideas are intentionally emphasized or repeated so as to not leave any doubt. One similar example is the verse “harer nāma harer nāma, harer nāmaiva kevalam, kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva nāsty eva gatir anyathā”, where the words “harer nāma” and “nāsty eva” are repeated to emphasize that there is indeed no other way to achieve perfection in the age we live in apart from chanting the holy names. The word “na” means not, or never. The word “tu” ordinarily means “however”, but in this case is used to emphasize the idea, while “eva” means “certainly” or “indeed”. In this way, “na tv evā” could be translated as “never, indeed never, certainly never”, excluding any possibility of doubt.
What is this idea that is negated so strongly? Aham jātu nāsam: For Me, Kṛṣṇa (aham), there was never (jātu) a time of nonexistence (na āsam). In other words, there was never a time when Kṛṣṇa did not exist. The second line, na tvam neme janādhipāḥ, extends the same idea to Arjuna (tvam) and all the kings and soldiers assembled on the battlefield (janādhipāḥ). Just as Kṛṣṇa has no beginning, being eternally existent, all of them are equally eternal and ever-existent.
There is no creation for any of them, and consequently, there will be no end. The words “na ca eva” in the third line again strongly negate an idea. It means, literally, “not, never, certainly not”. What is this second idea that is also so strongly negated? Na bhaviṣyāmaḥ, sarve vayam ataḥ param: There will never be a time when we will cease to exist.
As we can see, this verse follows the same logic as the verse nityo nityānām cetanaś cetanānām. Different from material things, which have a beginning, pass through many changes, and eventually come to an end, the soul is eternal, having no beginning or end, and passing through no transformation.
The body is temporary: it has a beginning and an end. Between these two stages, there are many other stages, like boyhood, adulthood, old age, etc., and all these stages are transitory and temporary. The eternal inside the body, however, the soul, does not change, remaining always the same. Because the soul has no beginning and undergoes no change, there is also no death for the soul. We are thus eternal beings temporarily living in temporary bodies.
What happens to this eternal soul when the temporary body comes to an end? This is answered in text 2.13: Just as the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person, someone situated in knowledge, is not bewildered by such a change, seeing himself as the eternal soul, and not the changing body. Just as one changes his clothes as they become old or soiled, such a self-realized soul goes from one body to another without becoming bewildered by the change.
Māyāvādīs interpret these two verses in a peculiar way to fit their doctrine of illusion, arguing that the separate identities of the Lord and the soul are related to the body only. Their opinion is that we become separate individuals while living in different bodies in the material world, but when freed from material contamination, we become one, just as air can be separated in different jars and then again united when the jars are opened.
They forget to consider, however, that in the verse immediately before these, Kṛṣṇa already condemned bodily identification by saying, “While speaking learned words, you are mourning for what is not worthy of grief. Those who are wise lament neither for the living nor for the dead.”
Therefore, the argument that Kṛṣṇa would embrace bodily identification immediately after calling Arjuna a fool for indulging in it is ludicrous. This illustrates an essential point in studying the scriptures: to understand the correct meaning of the verses, we should study them as a set, and not individually. Individual verses can be misinterpreted, but when we study the verses in context, the correct meaning becomes evident.
Main points in the purports of Śrīla Prabhupāda:
“Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.”
a) Both the Kaṭha Upaniṣad and the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad mention that the Lord is the maintainer of innumerable living entities (nityo nityānām cetanaś cetanānām). He is also present in the heart of everyone as Paramātmā.
b) Just as we are individuals now, we were individuals in the past and we will remain individuals in the future, be it in the conditioned or liberated stage, and in any condition we will continue to be maintained by the Lord. Considering that we are not the body and our individuality is never lost, there is no cause for lamentation.
c) Māyāvādīs believe that the souls are individuals only in the conditioned stage, being covered by Māyā. Their idea is that after achieving liberation, they merge into the impersonal Brahman. Kṛṣṇa refutes this argument by emphasizing that individuality continues in the future. This is confirmed in the Upaniṣads.
d) Another argument given by Māyāvādīs is that the individuality mentioned by Kṛṣṇa is not spiritual but just based on the material body. According to them, when we become liberated, there is no individuality. This, however, not only negates the individuality of the soul but also the individuality of Kṛṣṇa. As He insists in the verse, He is an individual in the past, present, and future. He also affirms, in another verse, that the impersonal Brahman is subordinate to Him. Since it is not possible to negate the individuality of Kṛṣṇa based on His words, one has to also accept the eternal individuality of the souls.
e) The Māyāvādīs argue that the individuality mentioned in the verse refers to the body, but such a bodily conception was already condemned in the previous verse. How could we accept that Kṛṣṇa would promote individuality based on the body immediately after condemning the bodily conception of life?
f) If, for the sake of argument, one were to accept that the individuality of both Kṛṣṇa and the jīvas exists only under the influence of Māyā, then there would be no meaning in studying the Bhagavad-gītā, because in this case, Kṛṣṇa would be one of us, falling under the influence of Māyā and accepting a material body. In this case, the Bhagavad-gītā would lose all importance.
g) The eternal individuality of both the Lord and the soul is confirmed by all Vaiṣṇava ācāryas. This can be easily understood by devotees. Those who are envious of Kṛṣṇa, however, can’t understand the teachings of the Bhagavad-gītā. They are like bees licking a bottle of honey from the outside. The Gītā can be understood only by devotees.
h) The Māyāvādī interpretation of the Gītā is misleading. Lord Caitanya warns that one who accepts the Māyāvāda philosophy loses all power to understand the real mystery of the Gītā.
“As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change.”
a) Each soul transmigrates to different bodies, but the soul itself undergoes no change. Bhīṣma and Droṇa were noble souls; therefore, they would achieve celestial or spiritual bodies in their next lives. There was thus no reason to lament.
b) The Māyāvādī theory that the supreme Brahman becomes fragmented into the individual souls depicts the supreme Brahman as something that can be cut into pieces, contradicting the principle that the Supreme Soul is unchangeable.
c) Instead, the Bhagavad-gītā confirms that the souls exist eternally as fragmental portions of the Lord. They are originally part of the spiritual nature but are called kṣara because they have a tendency to fall into the material nature. Once liberated, they live a life of bliss and knowledge in the company of the Lord. Thus, they are always individuals.
d) How is Paramātmā present simultaneously in each and every body while at the same time remaining transcendental? This is explained by the example of the sky being reflected in water. The sun or moon is compared to the Lord, and the stars to the individual souls. In this way, the Lord is present everywhere in the form of His reflection, without ever leaving the spiritual sky.
e) Kṛṣṇa is different from the individual souls because He never falls into illusion. Even when He comes to this world, He remains in His transcendental position. Because He remains free from Māyā, He is fit to instruct us, who are under illusion. If both were under the influence of illusion, there would be no point in such instruction. It is thus accepted that the Lord is superior to the jīvas, represented by Arjuna.
Read the entire book:
« The Song of God—Volume 1, chapters 1-6
This is a publication for thoughtful readers who want to go deeper into Kṛṣṇa consciousness. I publish daily, trying to offer high-quality spiritual content, and all posts are available to free subscribers. If you wish, you can also choose a paid subscription to support this work.
You can also receive the updates on WhatsApp or Telegram.
If you would like to contribute further, you can find the donation links here.