Gita Satsangh Chapter 13 Verses 13 & 14

[Guest guest]

Dandavat pranams to all!To listen to Swami Brahmanananda of the Chinmaya Mission chanting this Chapter...

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Gita Satsangh Chapter 13 Verses 13 & 14

Jneyam yattat pravakshyaami yajjnaatwaa’mritamashnute; Anaadimatparam brahma na sattannaasaduchyate. (13)

 

Sankara Bhashya (Swami Gambiranda's Translation and Commentary)

 

 

13. I shall speak of that which is to be known, by realizing which one attains Immortality. The supreme Brahman is without any beginning. That is called neither being nor non-being.

 

Pravaksyami, I shall speak of, fully describe just as it is; tat, that; yat, which; is jenyam, to be known. In order to interest the hearer through inducement, the Lord speaks of what its result is: Jnatva, by realizing; yat, which Knowable; asnute, one attains; amrtam, Immortality, i.e.; he does not die again. Anadimat, without beginning-one having a beginning (adi) is adimat; one not having a beginning is anadimat. What is that? The param, supreme, unsurpassable; brahma, Brahman, which is under discussion as the Knowable.

 

Here, some split up the phrase anadimatparam as anadi and matparam because, if the word anadimat is taken as a Bahuvrihi compound, ['That which has no (a), beginning (adi) is anadi.' Matup is used to denote possession. Since the idea of possession is a already implied in anadi, therefore matup, if added after it, becomes redundant.] then the suffix mat (matup) becomes redundant, which is undesirable. And they show a distintive meaning: (Brahman is anadi, beginningless, and is) matparam, that of which I am the supreme (para) power called Vasudeva. Trully, the redundance could be avoided in this way if that meanig were possible. But that meaning is not possible, because what is intended is to make Brahman known only through a negation of all attributes by saying, 'It is called neither being nor non-being.' It is contradictory to show a possession of a distinctive power and to negate attributes. Therefore, although matup and a bahuvrihi compound convey the same meaning of 'possession', its (matup's) use is for completing the verse. [The Commentator accepts anadimat as a nan-tatpurusa compund. If, however, the Bahuvrihi is insisted on, then the mat after anadi should be taken as completing the number of syllables needed for versification. So, nat need not be compounded with param.]

 

Having aroused an interest through inducement by saying, 'The Knowable which has Immortality as its result is beeing spoken of by Me,' the Lord says: Tat, that Knowable; ucyate, is called; na sat, neither being; nor is it called asat, non-being.

 

[Objection-reply discussion removed]

 

Swami Chinmayananda's Translation and Commentary

 

WHAT IS THAT WHICH HAS TO BE KNOWN BY THE KNOWLEDGE? IN ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION IT IS SAID:

13. I will declare that which has to be "known" knowing which one attains to Immortality --- the beginningless Supreme BRAHMAN, called neither being nor non-being.

After explaining, in the previous section of five verses, the various secondary or auxiliary steps-in-aid for "Knowledge," the Lord promises that He will explain "WHAT IS TO BE KNOWN." There are critics who allege that though Krishna, the teacher, promises that He will explain "WHAT IS TO BE KNOWN," He does not directly do so, but merely gives an elaborate description of what is the RESULT of gaining such a "Knowledge." This criticism is unfair. The glorification of the result of "Knowledge" can create in the hearer a greater desire to realise it.

KNOWING WHICH, ONE ATTAINS THE IMMORTAL --- Mortality is the destiny of matter. Identifying with the finite, the Immortal Spirit Itself is conditioned by matter and suffers the delusory sense of finitude and mortality. To rediscover the Spiritual Nature in itself and to live that glory is to end the fearful concept and experience of death, and to enter into a field of joyous Spiritual Nature. This is the goal, for accomplishing which, our inner-equipments of meditation are to be properly tuned up by the disciplines already described.

WITHOUT BEGINNING, THE HIGHEST BRAHMAN (Anaadimat-param) --- A beginning can be conceived and calculated only with reference to what is the substratum of all, which substratum must be existent even before Time. Thus, the Supreme is always considered as "beginningless." From the Supreme even Time is born.

The Supreme Consciousness, which is the "illuminator" of all experiences and which exists, transcending all realms of experiences, cannot be caught within the web of our perceptions --- It being the very Perceiving-Principle in all equipments. With reference to It, everything else is an "object." It is the one Subject, and since it cannot be perceived, felt or thought of, It is not said to be existent (Sat).

Nor can Truth be defined as non-existent, such as the sky-flower or man's tail, for It manifests as the world. Therefore, Truth can be defined only as "neither sat nor asat." The Supreme Brahman cannot be characterised either positively or negatively.

Shankara says that "Brahman cannot be existent (Sat) as it belong to no GENUS, nor possesses any qualities, but at the same time It shows Itself to be not asat by manifesting Itself through living bodies."

In fact these concepts of "Sat" and "Asat" are judgements of the human mind and intellect. The Consciousness that illumines these judgements is the Self. The illuminator and the illumined cannot be one and the same. Therefore, the one Subject, the Brahman, as opposed to all 'objects,' cannot be either Existent or non-Existent, because 'Sat' and 'Asat' are two types of thought-waves, and the Self illumines them both. That Brahman is "NEITHER BEING, NOR NON-BEING" is all that the scriptures can declare.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sarvatah paanipaadam tat sarvato’kshishiromukham; Sarvatah shrutimalloke sarvamaavritya tishthati. (14)

 

Sankara Bhashya (Swami Gambiranda's Translation and Commentary)

 

 

Since the Knowable (Brahman) is not an object of the word or thought of 'being', there arises the apprehension of Its nonexistence. Hence, for dispelling that apprehension by establishing Its existence with the help of the adjuncts in the form of the organs of all creatures, the Lord says:

 

 

14. That (Knowable), which has hands and feet everywhere, which has eyes, heads and mouths everywhere, which has ears everywhere, exists in creatures by pervading them all.

 

Tat, That-the Knowable; sarvatah-pani-padam, which has hands and feet everywhere-.

 

The existence of the Knower of the field is revealed through the adjuncts in the form of the organs of all creatures. And the Knower of the field is spoken of as such because of the limiting adjuncts of the field. The field, too, is diversely differentiated as hands, feet, etc. All diversity in the Knower of the field, caused by the differences in the adjunct-the field-, is certainly unreal. Hence, by denying it, the nature of the Knowable has been stated, in, 'That is called neither being nor non-being.' Although the unreal form is caused by the limiting adjuncts, still, for the comprehension of Its existence it is said, '(It) has hands and feet everywhere, etc., by assuming this as a quality of the Knowable. Thus, as is well known, there is saying of the people versed in tradition, 'The Transcendental is described with the help of superimposition and its refutation'. Everywhere the hands, feet, etc., which are perceived as limbs of all bodies, perform, their duties due to the presence of the power of the Knowable (Brahman). Thus the grounds for the inference of the existence of the Knowable are metaphorically spoken of as belonging to the Knowable. The others have to be explained similarly.

 

That Knowable has hands and feet everwhere. That which has eyes, heads, and mouths everywhere is sarvatoksi-siro-mukham. That which has ears every-where is sarvatah-srutimat: sruti means the organs of hearing; that which has it is sruti-mat. Tisthati, It exists, remains established; loke, in the multititude of creatures; avrtya, by pervading; sarvam, them all.

 

Swami Chinmayananda's Translation and Commentary

 

DESCRIBING THE ALL-PERVADING SELF CONSCIOUS PRINCIPLE, WE HAVE THE FOLLOWING STANZAS:

14. With hands and feet everywhere, with eyes, heads and mouths everywhere, with ears everywhere, He exists in the world, enveloping all.

WITH HANDS AND FEET EVERYWHERE --- It is easier to describe an unmanifest power for the comprehension of students of lesser calibre, when the unknown principle is defined in terms of the known. Though the hands and legs of the living creatures are made up of inert matter, they seem to be quite conscious and vital in their movements. This Principle of Consciousness, functioning behind them all, everywhere, is one and the same Self, the Supreme Brahman, indicated by the expression "POSSESSING HANDS AND FEET EVERYWHERE."

Every eye, head and mouth functions in the world because of the Life that pulsates through it. Life is one everywhere. Therefore, that Life Principle is described here as "EVERYWHERE POSSESSING EYES AND EARS AND MOUTHS." All activities of perception, feeling and thinking are successively pursued only as long as Life presides over the body, and therefore, the One Life is defined here as "EVERYWHERE POSSESSING EYES, ETC."

THAT EXISTS PERVADING ALL --- If this Principle of Consciousness is defined as functioning through known physical equipments, the student may doubt that Life, like stars studding the sky, expresses itself only wherever equipments function. To remove this fallacious idea, it is rightly said that the Truth, the Principle of Consciousness, "EXISTS PERVADING ALL." This is reminiscent of the famous hymn to the Cosmic-man (Purusha Sooktam) in the Rig Veda. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Hare Krishna!!!

[Guest guest]

Namaste Satsanghis:

 

I am rather surprised to see very little participation from the

members on Gita Satsangh. Please offer your questions/comments and

share your knowledge and share how Gita helps/helped in your life

dealings with others. Such conversations are part of a fruitful

Satsangh.

 

Here are few additional observations from me on verses 13 and 14:

 

The assertion that God has hands on all sides signifies that He is

capable of accepting an offering wherever it is offered to Him.

Similarly, the statement that He has feet everywhere implies that He

accepts the prostration's made at His feet by a devotee wherever he

offers them. For, omnipotent as He is, He can perform the function of

all His senses and other faculties everywhere. His grasping faculty

and moving faculty are all-pervasive.

 

The statement that " He has eyes, head and mouth in all directions "

also shows the all-pervasive character of that which is worth

knowing. Since he has eyes everywhere, there is no space where His

eyes do not function. Inasmuch as He has His Head everywhere,

flowers etc, placed on his foot by the devotees reach His head; there

is no place devoid of His head. Having His mouth everywhere, He can

accept food whenever and wherever and through whomsoever it was

offered. In other words feeding the homeless poor is really an offer

to Him. The statement that " He has ears all round " likewise describes

the all pervasiveness of God. It means that He can hear everywhere.

Wherever His devotees offer Him praises or prayers or make,

entreaties to Him, He clearly hears them all. God is the ultimate

Witness of all, seeing all, hearing all and is capable of accepting

the offerings of all. The concluding assertion that " He pervades all

in the universe " summarizes in a comprehensive sense the all-

pervasive character of that which is worth knowing. Therefore, there

is ONLY God and there is nothing without the support of God.

 

The first half of verse 14 shows that even the qualified aspect of

God, who is the only object worth knowing, is exceptionally marvelous

and transcendent in character. That is to say, the assertion made in

verse 13 above that he has hand and feet and all other senses

functioning everywhere, should not lead one to think that He has

hands and feet and other organs analogous to those of other living

beings. Though altogether devoid of such senses. He is capable of

perceiving the respective objects of those senses. That is why He has

been declared as having all the senses everywhere and yet devoid of

all senses. Sruti also says: " He (God) grasps and rapidly moves

without hands and feet; he sees without eyes and hears without ears. "

(the message of the Upanishads)

 

The assertion that " though unattached, He is the sustainer of all "

shows that, unlike worldly parents who maintain and support their

family out of attachment for the latter, God or the supreme Brahma

sustains and nourishes all without any attachment. That is why He has

been spoken of as the disinterested friend and benefactor of all

beings (V.29). In other words, God, who is all-pervading and the only

object worth knowing, is entirely free from the taint of attachment.

He sustains and nourishes all due to His contact with Prakrti. Herein

lies His transcendence.

 

The concluding statement that " though really beyond all attributes,

God is the 'Though in enjoyer of qualities " also establishes His

transcendent character. The intention is to show that, though

enjoying all qualities or modes of Prakrti, God is never tainted by

the modes Prakrti even as other beings are reality He is entirely

beyond the modes of Prakrti, He is yet the enjoyer of all qualities

by reason of His contact with Prakrti. This is another example of His

transcendence.

 

God the Nirguna Brahman appears as the Saguna Brahman with all the

attributes that the ignorant seeker envisages. Lord Krishna though

appears with the Gopis is a Nithya Brahmachari. There is a story on

Lord Krishna with respect to this quality. See the following link:

http://www.celextel.org/storiesandanecdotes/krishnanityabrahmachari.ht

ml

Possession of a million dollars is never a problem if the possessed

person is completely detached and that is the subtle message.

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin , " Radhe " <shaantih wrote:

>

> Dandavat pranams to all!

>

> To listen to Swami Brahmanananda of the Chinmaya Mission

> chanting this Chapter...

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dandavat pranams to all!

 

-

Ram Chandran

 

Namaste Satsanghis:

 

I am rather surprised to see very little participation from the

members on Gita Satsangh. Please offer your questions/

comments and share your knowledge and share how Gita

helps/helped in your life dealings with others. Such

conversations are part of a fruitful Satsangh.

 

 

Unlearned counsel, AKA Radhe, writes:

 

Although I only scanned a few of the messages which have

appeared in the other threads which have dominated this list

for what seems like an eternity, the message is clear, Shri

Ramji. Talk about " He " and " God " and other such mithya,

is frowned upon here. Even when speaking on the Saguna

Brahma level, I was soundly chastised for daring to inject

such words into my posts. Perhaps it is for this reason that

those who might have responded to offer questions and/or

comments are wary of doing so at the risk of being ridiculed.

 

And those who might have knowledge of this subject may be

uninterested in the Gita sangha, thinking that who is/what is/

when is/where is, a jnani, is more important to them! For

myself, having been an attorney for over 27 years, ridicule

of my position and statements made has been part and parcel

of my life and my illusory skin has thickened considerably over

those years, even to the point where I am amused by such

attacks on myself, although saddened by such attacks on Him.

Quite frankly, I care not whether one is a jnani or an ajnani based

upon some esoteric definitions understood only by those who

are authoring them and perhaps a very limited few who are

reading them. All I care about is whether I am honestly and

truly surrendered in humility and devotion at His Lotus Feet.

All else is in His hands, which as stated in BG 13.13 and

reiterated by you, are all pervasive, everywhere, for in my

world there is ONLY God.

 

So, here I go!!! See below...

-----

 

Shri Ramji wrote:

 

Here are few additional observations from me on verses 13 and 14:

 

....Having His mouth everywhere, He can accept food whenever

and wherever and through whomsoever it was offered. In other

words feeding the homeless poor is really an offer to Him...

 

....The assertion that " though unattached, He is the sustainer of

all " shows that, unlike worldly parents who maintain and support

their family out of attachment for the latter, God or the supreme

Brahma sustains and nourishes all without any attachment. That is

why He has been spoken of as the disinterested friend and

benefactor of all beings (V.29). In other words, God, who is

all-pervading and the only object worth knowing, is entirely

free from the taint of attachment. He sustains and nourishes

all due to His contact with Prakrti. Herein lies His

transcendence... and...

 

....He is entirely beyond the modes of Prakrti, He is yet the enjoyer

of all qualities by reason of His contact with Prakrti. This is

another example of His transcendence...

 

 

-

Unlearned counsel, AKA Radhe, writes:

 

1. Can you explain what you mean by " His contact with Prakrti " ?

Is not Prakrti His very manifestation at that level, for the benefit

of ignorant souls like myself? How can He have contact with

Himself?

 

2. And, can we not offer food to the homeless poor, maintain and

support our families, or offer a ride to an elderly woman walking

home along the road in the cold with her groceries in her hands as

an offer to Him, our only attachment being in the belief that since

there is ONLY God, so too, are not each of these manifestations

none other than Him? Where and what is the attachment of which

you speak? Can you elaborate on this?

 

-

Shri Ramji writes:

 

The first half of verse 14 shows that even the qualified aspect of

God, who is the only object worth knowing, is exceptionally

marvelous. Verse 13 above that he has hand and feet and all other

senses functioning everywhere, should not lead one to think that

He has hands and feet and other organs analogous to those of

other living beings. Though altogether devoid of such senses.

He is capable of perceiving the respective objects of those

senses. That is why He has been declared as having all the

senses everywhere and yet devoid of all senses.

 

-

Unlearned counsel, AKA Radhe writes:

 

My question here, for the sake of argument only and out of

curiosity since I have no trouble accepting it myself, is this:

 

Your words seem to be teeming with dvaitic implications and the

words of Lord Krishna in the Holy Gita, as well. What place has

all of this on an advaita list, where there is no " He " " She " or " It "

and certainly, no " God " to hold us dear in His Saguna Brahma

heart or be the Knower of anything since there is no anything

to be the Knower of, only Nirguna Brahma?

 

In His Service and Yours,

 

Radhe

[Guest guest]

Namaste Radheji:

 

" His contact with Prakrti " is like the contact between the movie

screen and the movie. The projector projects the movie on the screen

and the contact is only in appearance. We the audience of the movie

get affected by the characters and events that happen while watching.

The movie screen on the other hand screen is completely unattached.

The Lord similarly operates like the movie screen, responsible for

all the happenings but at the same time not not affected. That is

total detachment. (See chapter 9 verses 4 and 5 Where Lord Krishna

further illustrates his operational roles and rules).

 

The explanation that you have provided below demonstrates how a

person with wisdom (jnanam) thinks while feeding the homeless. From

the jnani's point of view there is no attachment. What is being

explained in this verse stated was with respect to ajnanis who

identify themselves with BMI. For the nondoer there is no attachment

and for the doer there is always attachment.

 

Finally, We should recognize the fact that Gita is for dwaitans,

advaitins, visistadvaitans and also for those who don't believe in

the existence of God also. For the advaitins, the God doesn't reside

externally and stays permanently within the heart. We all need to go

slowly through the chapters 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18. Let us not

jump into any hasty conclusions before we complete the Chapter 18

Satsangh!

 

With my warm regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin , " Radhe " <shaantih wrote:

>

> 1. Can you explain what you mean by " His contact with Prakrti " ?

> Is not Prakrti His very manifestation at that level, for the

benefit

> of ignorant souls like myself? How can He have contact with

> Himself?

>

> 2. And, can we not offer food to the homeless poor, maintain and

> support our families, or offer a ride to an elderly woman walking

> home along the road in the cold with her groceries in her hands as

> an offer to Him, our only attachment being in the belief that since

> there is ONLY God, so too, are not each of these manifestations

> none other than Him? Where and what is the attachment of which

> you speak? Can you elaborate on this?

>

>

> Your words seem to be teeming with dvaitic implications and the

> words of Lord Krishna in the Holy Gita, as well. What place has

> all of this on an advaita list, where there is no " He " " She "

or " It "

> and certainly, no " God " to hold us dear in His Saguna Brahma

> heart or be the Knower of anything since there is no anything

> to be the Knower of, only Nirguna Brahma?

>

[Guest guest]

Dandavat pranams, dear Shri Ramji:

 

You wrote...The Lord similarly operates like the movie screen, responsible forall the happenings but at the same time not not affected. That istotal detachment. (See chapter 9 verses 4 and 5 Where Lord Krishna further illustrates his operational roles and rules).

 

----

Your reference to BG 9. 4 & 5, took me to what has become one of my favorite quotes from the Holy Gita, one which appears to me on a regular basis, a gift I am sure from the Saguna Brahmalooking after my spiritual welfare in His disinterested and

unattached fashion! And the synchronicity in the connection

elucidated below is not lost on me either :-)In his commentary to Chapter Nine, Swami Chinmayanandaji saysthe following with regard to it... "Ideas have been simplified here,so that they can easily be grasped by Arjuna, the representative ofthe ordinary educated men of his time. However, the same principles will have been found to have been explained again in a later chapter (XIII) under the orthodox terminology of Vedanta as Kshetra, Kshetrajna, jnana, Jneya, Purusha, Prakriti, etc." As part of my effort to fully understand, I do intend to spend some time

reviewing his commentary to BG 9 and to the verses you quoted above.

 

I will post them in the next day or so for the benefit of others

like myself (an educated woman of her time) and Arjuna ( an

educated man of his time), who may be silently folowing the Gita

sangha. If they have been posted before with commentary in this list, a reference to that would be helpful. Also, I am wondering if there is an online text for Swami Gambirananda's translation and commentary to the Gita. I looked last night and could not find one.

All I have is the one for Chapter XIII. Any help in this regard would be most appreciated.

 

 

 

You wrote:Finally, We should recognize the fact that Gita is for dwaitans,advaitins, visistadvaitans and also for those who don't believe inthe existence of God also. For the advaitins, the God doesn't resideexternally and stays permanently within the heart. We all need to goslowly through the chapters 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18. Let us notjump into any hasty conclusions before we complete the Chapter 18Satsangh!

 

 

 

It seems to me that it is not only Advaitins who hold that

"God doesn't reside externally and stays permanently within

the heart" ...I do not know what to call myself and I think that it really does not matter anyway:-) All the pointing fingers are pointing to the same moon, no? How one gets there is less important than getting there.

 

And, may I say this? Slow is good! I will do my best

to stay in my seat as we work our way through to Chapter 18.

Thanking you for this opportunity to learn slowly and

thoughtfully...

 

In His Service and Yours,

 

Radhe

 

 

Hare Krishna!!!

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste Radheji:

 

 

Here is the link to get all chapters of Swami Chinmayananda and Swami

Gambirananda Commentaries. The folder contains other useful

references on Bhagavad Gita:

 

First Click on the link:

 

advaitin

 

Then Click on the link folder:

 

Bhagawad Gita Commentaries and References

 

You and other interested members can download or read the entire

contents.

 

With my warm regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin , " Radhe " <shaantih wrote:

>

> Also, I am wondering

> if there is an online text for Swami Gambirananda's translation and

> commentary to the Gita. I looked last night and could not find

one.

> All I have is the one for Chapter XIII. Any help in this regard

> would be most appreciated.

>

[Guest guest]

Thank you Shri Ramji, for the valuable link, whichI am sure I would never have found through internetsearch! I am only going to post Swami Chinmayanda'stranslation and commentary to BG 9, 4, 5 & 6 (becauseI like that verse so much and because, as Swami Chinmayanandapoints out, Lord Krishna adds it in His infinite but unattachedkindness, to illustrate what He means by the two verses ( 4 & 5)which precede it. You mentioned these verses to helpillustrate what you said with regard to the Lord's "contactwith Prakriti" in your ealier post...Swami Chinmayananda's translation and commentary:4. All this world is pervaded by Me in My Unmanifest form (aspect) ; all beings exist in Me, but I do not dwell in them.ALL THIS WORLD IS PERVADED BY ME IN MY UNMANIFESTED FORM --- The subtlety of a thing is measured in terms of its pervasiveness and therefore, the Subtlest must necessarily be the All-pervasive. As all limited things must have forms, the All-pervasivealone can be Eternal and Infinite. All forms are perishable substances (Dravya). Thus the Self, in its essential Unmanifest nature, must be pervading everything, as the mud pervades all forms and shapes in all mud-pots.If thus, the Infinite pervades the finite, what exactly is the relationship between them? Is it that the finite rose from the Infinite? Or is it that the Infinite PRODUCED the finite? Has the Infinite Itself become the finite, as a modification of Itself, or do they both, among themselves, keep a father-son, or a master-servant relationship? Various religions of the world abound in such questions. The dualists can afford to indulge in such a fancied picture of some relation or other between the finite and the Infinite. But the Adwaitins (Non-dualists) cannot accept this idea, since to them the Eternal Self alone is the ONE and the ONLY REALITY.The second line of this stanza is a classical description of this "relationless-relationship" between the Real and unreal. "All beings exist in Me but I dwell not in them." To a hasty reader this wouldstrike as an incomprehensible paradox expressed in a jumble of empty words. But to one who has understood well the theory of super-imposition, this is very simple. The ghost-vision can come only upon the post. And what exactly is the relationship between the ghost and the post from the standpoint of the post? The innocent post, in infinite love for the deluded fool, can only make a similar statement as the Lord has made here. "The ghost," the post would say, "is no doubt, in me, but I am not in the ghost; and therefore, I have never frightened any deluded traveller at any time." In the same fashion the Lord says here, "I, IN MY UNMANIFEST NATURE,AM THE SUBSTRATUM FOR ALL THE MANIFESTED" chaos of names and forms, but neither in their joys nor in their sorrows, neither in their births nor in their deaths, "AM I SHARING THEIR DESTINIES, BECAUSE I DO NOT DWELL IN THEM."This line sounds a faithful echo of the same idea, perhaps more crisply expressed earlier (VII-12), where it was said "I AM NOTIN THEM, THEY ARE IN ME." In short, it is indicated here that the Self which, through Its identification with the matter-envelopments, has come to "DWELL IN THEM," is the pain-ridden mortal, while the same Self which has successfully withdrawn all Its false arrogations with the matter layers and has come to realise that, "I DO NOT DWELL IN THEM" is the Self, Immortal and Unmanifest.THEN THERE MUST BE SOME SORT OF AN EXISTENCE FOR THE FINITE IN THE INFINITE:5. Nor do beings exist (in reality) in Me --- behold My Divine YOGA supporting all beings, but not dwelling in them, am I My Self, the 'efficient-cause' of all beings.Continuing the strain of His arguments in the previous stanza here He says, "NOR DO THINGS EXIST IN ME," although "I DWELL NOT IN THEM." Now here he says that in the Infinite, never has the finite ever risen! Continuing our example of the post and the ghost this is equivalent to the post declaring that, "in me, the electric post, never has a ghost existed." In Pure Awareness, in Its Infinite Nature of sheer Knowledge, there never was, never is and can never be any world of pluralistic embodiment, just as, for the waker, the pleasures of the dream world ARE NEVERAVAILABLE. In short, at the time of the direct subjective experience of the Self there is no cognition of the pluralistic world, which is born out of the forgetfulness of the Infinite.The Self "BRINGS FORTH AND SUPPORTS ALL BEINGS" just as the ocean gives birth to, supports and nourishes all the waves in it. "AND YET," says Krishna "I, MYSELF NEVER DWELL IN THEM." Just in the same way the ocean can cry that "I am never the waves." The mud is the womb of all pots, the sustainer of their shapes, the nourisher of their forms, and yet, none of the pots, nor all the pots put together, can ever define or give a total knowledge of the mud. Pure Consciousness, Divine and Eternal, is the Substratum that sustains and illumines the entire panorama of the everchanging plurality.The objects of the world conveying their stimuli through the doors of the sense organs create mental waves which are illuminated by the Conscious Principle residing in all forms. If the Awareness is not there, the external world must necessarily fail in giving the mind-and-intellect the concept of its life as a series of unbroken experiences. Just as the cotton is in the cloth, or the gold in all ornaments, or the heat in the fire, so too, the Imperishable is in the perishable. The dreamer can function only in the waker; the waker pervades the dream-experiences, and at the same time, the waker is not in the dream nor in fact, when awakened fully, does the dream ever exist in the waker.KRISHNA FEELS THAT THE LANGUAGE OF PARADOX IS PROVING TOO MUCH OF A RIDDLE TO THE GROSS INTELLECT OF THE AVERAGE MAN IN ARJUNA, AND THEREFORE, IN HIS DIVINE KINDNESS, THE LORD PROVIDES FOR HIS DISCIPLE AN EXAMPLE:6. As the mighty wind, moving everywhere, rests always in space (the AKASHA ) , even so, know you, all beings rest in Me.The confused Prince, trying to solve the riddle, is helped here by the Kingly Teacher in Krishna who gives him a vivid example. To imagine a substance that exists everywhere, allowing everything to exist in it, but at the same time, it in itself not getting conditioned by the things that exist in it, is very difficult, and the ordinary intellect cannot easily soar to comprehend those heights of understanding and appreciation. As a prop for the ordinary intellect, to raise itself up so that it may peep over its own limitations and gain a vision of the unravelling expanse of the Infinite, here is a brilliant example.The gross can never condition the subtle. As the poet sings, "Stone walls do not a prison make," for, even though we may imprison the body of the prisoner, his thoughts are ever free to reach his kith and kin at their hearth. The gross stone walls

cannot limit the flight of the subtle thoughts. If once this principle is well understood the example becomes very expressive exhibiting all its secret suggestions.KNOW YOU ARJUNA, that the winds curl, swirl and whirl around everywhere in space; the space supports and envelopes them everywhere, and yet, they do not ever limit the space. This beautiful example, when meditated upon by any seeker, if he has at least an average amount of intellectual comprehension, will enable him to define, in his own mind, the right relationship that exists betweenthe Self and the non-Self. The Real supports the unreal; the unreal seemingly lives... through its history of misery and sorrows, fleeting joys and passing pleasures... in the Real and yet, the unreal can never condition the Real. When the wind is moving, the space need never move. None of the qualities of the wind is the quality of the space (Akasha). Compared with the outstretching Infinite space, in which the universes keep on revolving, at a speed measured in light years, the atmospheric disturbances are only upto the height of a few miles off the surface of the globe. In the infinitevastness of the Real, the arena of disturbances caused by Its flirtations with Its own assumed self-ignorance, is only a negligible area... and even there, the relationship between the false and the Real is the relationship between the fickle breeze and the Infinite space.These two are stanzas not merely to be explained away by words, however true the commentator may be; they are to be meditated upon by the students, individually.--------------------------Here is the link to get all chapters of Swami Chinmayananda and SwamiGambirananda Commentaries. The folder contains other usefulreferences on Bhagavad Gita:First Click on the link:advaitinThen Click on the link folder:Bhagawad Gita Commentaries and References