Posted by administrator -
-
TEXT 12
na tv evaham jatu nasam
na tvam neme janadhipah
na caiva na bhavisyamah
sarve vayam atah param
SYNONYMS
na--never; tu--but; eva--certainly; aham--I; jatu--become; na--never; asam--existed; na--it is not so; tvam--yourself; na--not; ime--all these; jana-adhipah--kings; na--never; ca--also; eva--certainly; na--not like that; bhavisyamah--shall exist; sarve--all of us; vayam--we; atah param--hereafter.
TRANSLATION
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.
PURPORT
In the Vedas, in the Katha Upanisad as well as in the Svetasvatara Upanisad,
it is said that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is the maintainer of
innumerable living entities, in terms of their different situations
according to individual work and reaction of work. That Supreme
Personality of Godhead is also, by His plenary portions, alive in the
heart of every living entity. Only saintly persons who can see, within
and without, the same Supreme Lord, can actually attain to perfect and
eternal peace.
nityo nityanam cetanas cetananam
eko bahunam yo vidadhati kaman
tam atma-stham ye 'nupasyanti dhiras
tesam santih sasvati netaresam
(Katha 2.2.13)
The
same Vedic truth given to Arjuna is given to all persons in the world
who pose themselves as very learned but factually have but a poor fund
of knowledge. The Lord says clearly that He Himself, Arjuna, and all the
kings who are assembled on the battlefield, are eternally individual
beings and that the Lord is eternally the maintainer of the individual
living entities both in their conditioned as well as in their liberated
situations. The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the supreme individual
person, and Arjuna, the Lord's eternal associate, and all the kings
assembled there are individual, eternal persons. It is not that they did
not exist as individuals in the past, and it is not that they will not
remain eternal persons. Their individuality existed in the past, and
their individuality will continue in the future without interruption.
Therefore, there is no cause for lamentation for anyone.
The Mayavadi theory that after liberation the individual soul, separated by the covering of maya
or illusion, will merge into the impersonal Brahman and lose its
individual existence is not supported herein by Lord Krsna, the supreme
authority. Nor is the theory that we only think of individuality in the
conditioned state supported herein. Krsna clearly says herein that in
the future also the individuality of the Lord and others, as it is
confirmed in the Upanisads, will continue eternally. This
statement of Krsna is authoritative because Krsna cannot be subject to
illusion. If individuality is not a fact, then Krsna would not have
stressed it so much--even for the future. The Mayavadi may argue that
the individuality spoken of by Krsna is not spiritual, but material.
Even accepting the argument that the individuality is material, then how
can one distinguish Krsna's individuality? Krsna affirms His
individuality in the past and confirms His individuality in the future
also. He has confirmed His individuality in many ways, and impersonal
Brahman has been declared to be subordinate to Him. Krsna has maintained
spiritual individuality all along; if He is accepted as an ordinary
conditioned soul in individual consciousness, then His Bhagavad-gita
has no value as authoritative scripture. A common man with all the four
defects of human frailty is unable to teach that which is worth
hearing. The Gita is above such literature. No mundane book compares with the Bhagavad-gita. When one accepts Krsna as an ordinary man, the Gita
loses all importance. The Mayavadi argues that the plurality mentioned
in this verse is conventional and that it refers to the body. But
previous to this verse such a bodily conception is already condemned.
After condemning the bodily conception of the living entities, how was
it possible for Krsna to place a conventional proposition on the body
again? Therefore, individuality is maintained on spiritual grounds and
is thus confirmed by great acaryas like Sri Ramanuja and others. It is clearly mentioned in many places in the Gita
that this spiritual individuality is understood by those who are
devotees of the Lord. Those who are envious of Krsna as the Supreme
Personality of Godhead have no bona fide access to the great literature.
The nondevotee's approach to the teachings of the Gita is
something like bees licking on a bottle of honey. One cannot have a
taste of honey unless one opens the bottle. Similarly, the mysticism of
the Bhagavad-gita can be understood only by devotees, and no one
else can taste it, as it is stated in the Fourth Chapter of the book.
Nor can the Gita be touched by persons who envy the very existence of the Lord. Therefore, the Mayavadi explanation of the Gita
is a most misleading presentation of the whole truth. Lord Caitanya has
forbidden us to read commentations made by the Mayavadis and warns that
one who takes to such an understanding of the Mayavadi philosophy loses
all power to understand the real mystery of the Gita. If
individuality refers to the empirical universe, then there is no need of
teaching by the Lord. The plurality of the individual soul and of the
Lord is an eternal fact, and it is confirmed by the Vedas as above mentioned.
Read More …
Categories: