Gita 02.12 – Spirit is not just eternal but also plural

Audio Link: https://www.thespiritualscientist.com/gita-02-12-spirit-is-not-just-eternal-but-also-plural/

na tv evāhaṁ jātu nāsaṁ
na tvaṁ neme janādhipāḥ
na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ
sarve vayam ataḥ param (Bg 2.12)

Word-for-word:
na — never; tu — but; eva — certainly; aham — I; jātu — at any time; na — did not; āsam — exist; na — not; tvam — you; na — not; ime — all these; jana-adhipāḥ — kings; na — never; ca — also; eva — certainly; na — not; bhaviṣyāmaḥ — shall exist; sarve vayam — all of us; ataḥ 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.

Explanation:
Kṛṣṇa continues to instruct Arjuna about the difference between the temporary body and the eternal soul. In this context, he states:
na tv evāhaṁ jātu nāsaṁ : Kṛṣṇa begins with a negative to emphasize his point. He states that there was never a time when either He or Arjuna did not exist.
na tvaṁ neme janādhipāḥ : The term ādhipaḥ means one who controls or rules, while jana refers to people. Thus, janādhipāḥ are rulers or kings. Kṛṣṇa refers to all the kings assembled on the battlefield, whose impending deaths deeply afflict Arjuna.
na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ : Kṛṣṇa reassures Arjuna that there was never a time when these kings did not exist, emphasizing the eternal nature of the soul.
sarve vayam ataḥ param : Even in the future, the existence of all—Arjuna, Kṛṣṇa, and these kings—will continue, as the soul is eternal.

Here, Kṛṣṇa is essentially telling Arjuna that he is eternal and indestructible—and so is everyone else. Being eternal means existing in the past, existing in the present, and continuing to exist in the future.

Kṛṣṇa will later explain the consequence of understanding this when he states, dhīras tatra na muhyati —”The wise are not deluded by these things.”

The previous verse stated that Arjuna is mourning for things that are not worthy of mourning. The next verse explains that a sober person does not grieve. This implies that the knowledge being described here can make Arjuna a sober person as well.

What does the knowledge that we will all continue to exist imply? Kṛṣṇa will hint at the answer in the next verse when he speaks about the dehī—the soul within the body. He explains that while the body is temporary, the soul inside it is eternal.

In this particular verse, Kṛṣṇa emphasizes the fact that everyone will continue to exist. He does not delve deeply into who or what will continue to exist; rather, he focuses on the certainty of continued existence.

Now, it is evident that the bodies are destined to perish. Therefore, it is clear that Kṛṣṇa is not referring to continued existence at the bodily level. Instead, he is speaking about existence at the spiritual level, which will become clearer in the next verse.

This verse can refer not just to the body but also to the soul. When referring to the soul, it highlights that the soul is eternal, unchangeable, indestructible, and everlasting. Therefore, Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna that all these kings are going to live forever in their spiritual essence, and hence he should not grieve for their deaths.

Our ācāryas, particularly from the time of Rāmānuja Ācārya onwards, have explained that this verse can serve as a refutation of the Māyāvādī idea that all individuality is ultimately an illusion and that we merge into the absolute in an undifferentiated sense. However, if individuality were an illusion, Kṛṣṇa would not have said that in the future, everyone will continue to exist.

Kṛṣṇa does not merely speak of the kings continuing to exist—he also refers to concepts of “I-ness” and “you-ness,” even in relation to himself. Impersonalists argue that such distinctions are illusory. However, if these distinctions were truly illusory, why would Kṛṣṇa use them?

If Kṛṣṇa were under illusion, his philosophical teachings would lack validity. Moreover, if Kṛṣṇa himself were deluded, how could he deliver teachings capable of freeing others from illusion? Hence, Kṛṣṇa is not under illusion—He is fully enlightened. In fact, Kṛṣṇa is the supreme source of enlightenment, and knowing Him enables everyone else to become enlightened.

To claim that Kṛṣṇa is under illusion is a grave misconception with serious consequences. To counter such a misunderstanding, it is essential for Arjuna to recognize Kṛṣṇa’s true nature. This verse underscores the importance of that recognition.

Right at the beginning of Kṛṣṇa’s discussion about the spirit, He highlights the multiplicity of spiritual beings. There is not just one spiritual entity—rather, there are many. He emphasizes that these beings will continue to exist in the future as well. Through this, Kṛṣṇa emphasizes the fact that individuality is an irreducible reality, even in the spiritual realm.

This argument is so important that Kṛṣṇa revisits it in verses 7.24 and 9.11. In those verses, he emphasizes the eternality of His own personality, which also supports the same point. If Kṛṣṇa’s personality is eternal, it means that personality itself is eternal. Consequently, impersonalism is merely a temporary illusion, not an eternal truth.

Here, Kṛṣṇa is telling Arjuna not to think that his loved ones will cease to exist. They will continue to exist, and therefore, there is no need for him to lament for them. They existed in the past, they exist in the present, and they will continue to exist in the future as well.

Let’s quickly recap what Kṛṣṇa is saying. First, He speaks about the plurality of beings and the eternality of their existence. In contrast, the impersonalists focus only on the unity of being, and they speak of it in an impersonal sense. They assert that there is only existence—contentless consciousness.

Normally, whenever we are conscious of something, there is a subject, an object, and the stream of consciousness that links the subject to the object. For instance, if I observe the computer in front of me, I am the subject, the computer is the object, and there is a stream of consciousness linking me to the computer. Therefore, normally, consciousness involves three elements—the subject, the object, and the stream of consciousness.

However, the Māyāvādī argument posits that there is no subject and no object. According to them, there is only pure consciousness, which they describe as contentless consciousness. In this view, pure consciousness does not have a subject or an object. Without individuality and reciprocity, there is no one to be conscious of, and nothing to be conscious of. Consequently, true happiness cannot be experienced in such a state.

However, what Kṛṣṇa is describing here is not contentless consciousness. There is clearly content. Kṛṣṇa says, “I,” “you,” and “they,” indicating that all of us are present. This shows that pure consciousness has content.

In fact, pure consciousness is not contentless; it is contaminationless consciousness. Contaminationless consciousness means that there are no illusions, no material attachments, no lust, anger, greed, envy, pride, or illusion. Because of this, such consciousness delights eternally at the spiritual level in the reciprocation of pure spiritual love.

This revelation will unfold progressively in the Bhagavad-gītā, particularly in verses like 10.11 and others, where spiritual ecstasy will be discussed. However, in this verse, by emphasizing the eternality of various beings, Kṛṣṇa not only refutes materialism but also impersonalism.

Thank you.