On BG 2.24 - Insoluble/not wettable

[Guest guest]

Haribol,

I was reading verse 2.24 and found that Srila Prabhupada translates 'akledyah'

as insoluble and in the purport he says,

"The theory of monism is very difficult to apply in this case, because the

individual soul is never expected to become one homogeneously." Or in other

words, never expected to dissolve.

But, if the word is taken to mean 'not wettable' as found in Sripad

Sankaracharya's translation, there is no reason to say that philosophy of

monism cannot apply.

In the context of the present verse, the latter translation seems to be more

appropriate. Krishna explains to Arjuna in 2.23 how the different material

elements cannot affect the soul in anyway and reiterates these same points in

2.24 (both Sankara and Prabhupada explain in 2.24 and 2.25, respectively, that

this repetition is necessary for emphasis). In my personal opinion, there is no

reason to invoke the word insoluble unless one wants to condemn the monistic

thought and Srila Prabhupada is compelled to do that.

Interestingly, in 2.23, Srila Prabhupada translates the word 'kledayanti' as

'moistens', which is same as Sankara's translation in 2.24.

Any thoughts?

Further, Krishna clearly says that the 'individual' self is all-pervading (present everywhere),

"This individual soul is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be neither burned

nor dried. He is everlasting, present everywhere, unchangeable, immovable and

eternally the same. "

but Srila Prabhupada takes the plural sense of the word self,

"The word sarva-gata ("all-pervading") is significant because there is no doubt

that living entities are all over God's creation. They live on the land, in the

water, in the air, within the earth and even within fire."

We often accuse Mayavadis of word jugglery, but in these verses, Sankara's

translation seems to be direct. Where is my understanding wrong? Please share

your thoughts.

in your service,

Aravind.

Verse 2.24

acchedyo 'yam adahyo 'yamakledyo 'sosya eva canityah sarva-gatah sthanuracalo 'yam sanatanah

WORD FOR WORD acchedyah -- unbreakable; ayam -- this soul; adahyah -- unable to

be burned; ayam -- this soul; akledyah -- insoluble; asosyah -- not able to be

dried; eva -- certainly; ca -- and; nityah -- everlasting; sarva-gatah --

all-pervading; sthanuh -- unchangeable; acalah -- immovable; ayam -- this soul;

sanatanah -- eternally the same.

TRANSLATION This individual soul is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be

neither burned nor dried. He is everlasting, present everywhere, unchangeable,

immovable and eternally the same.

PURPORT All these qualifications of the atomic soul definitely prove that the

individual soul is eternally the atomic particle of the spirit whole, and he

remains the same atom eternally, without change. The theory of monism is very

difficult to apply in this case, because the individual soul is never expected

to become one homogeneously. After liberation from material contamination, the

atomic soul may prefer to remain as a spiritual spark in the effulgent rays of

the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but the intelligent souls enter into the

spiritual planets to associate with the Personality of Godhead.

The word sarva-gata ("all-pervading") is significant because there is no doubt

that living entities are all over God's creation. They live on the land, in the

water, in the air, within the earth and even within fire. The belief that they

are sterilized in fire is not acceptable, because it is clearly stated here

that the soul cannot be burned by fire. Therefore, there is no doubt that there

are living entities also in the sun planet with suitable bodies to live there.

If the sun globe is uninhabited, then the word sarva-gata -- "living

everywhere" -- becomes meaningless.

 

 

The New with improved product search