Gita 04.40 – Don’t let doubts deprive you of happiness

Audio Link: https://www.thespiritualscientist.com/gita-04-40-dont-let-doubts-deprive-you-of-happiness/

ajñaś cāśraddadhānaś ca
saṁśayātmā vinaśyati
nāyaṁ loko ’sti na paro
na sukhaṁ saṁśayātmanaḥ (Bg 4.40)

Word-for-word:
ajñaḥ — a fool who has no knowledge in standard scriptures; ca — and; aśraddadhānaḥ — without faith in revealed scriptures; ca — also; saṁśaya — of doubts; ātmā — a person; vinaśyati — falls back; na — never; ayam — in this; lokaḥ — world; asti — there is; na — nor; paraḥ — in the next life; na — not; sukham — happiness; saṁśaya — doubtful; ātmanaḥ — of the person.

Translation:
But ignorant and faithless persons who doubt the revealed scriptures do not attain God consciousness; they fall down. For the doubting soul there is happiness neither in this world nor in the next.

Explanation:
ajñaś cāśraddadhānaś ca: One who is ignorant and devoid of faith,
saṁśayātmā vinaśyati: a person who is full of doubts is destroyed.
nāyaṁ loko ’sti na paro: Such a person finds no happiness either in this world or the next.
na sukhaṁ saṁśayātmanaḥ: There is no peace for a doubting soul.

Kṛṣṇa uses the word ‘saṁśayātmanaḥ’ twice in the same verse, just as He earlier repeated the word ‘bhasma’ in verse 4.37:
“yathaidhāṁsi samiddho ’gnir bhasma-sāt kurute ’rjuna
jñānāgniḥ sarva-karmāṇi bhasma-sāt kurute tathā”

Certain words are intentionally repeated within the same verse to emphasize their importance and to underscore the significance of the idea they convey. Similarly, here saṁśayātmanaḥ—the doubting person—is repeated twice to express strong disapproval. As with ‘bhasma’ in 4.37, this repetition appears in both the second and fourth lines, highlighting the seriousness of the condition being described.

Kṛṣṇa is once again using the method of instruction by contrast, a technique He had previously employed in verses 3.31 and 3.32. Verse 3.31 emphasized the value of faith and its auspicious results—just as verse 4.39 does here. Then, in verse 3.32, Kṛṣṇa described the lack of faith and its inauspicious consequences. Similarly, in this context, verse 4.40 focuses on the absence of faith and highlights the destructive consequences that follow.

Let us compare these two verses:
ye tv etad abhyasūyanto
nānutiṣṭhanti me matam
sarva-jñāna-vimūḍhāṁs tān
viddhi naṣṭān acetasaḥ (Bhagavad-gītā 3.32)
Kṛṣṇa says that one who is envious and refuses to follow His teachings becomes deluded despite possessing various forms of knowledge. Whatever knowledge that person may have gets covered or misdirected due to envy. Their consciousness becomes distorted, and as a result, they are ruined.

As mentioned earlier, the focus is on Kṛṣṇa and His instructions. On the negative side, the obstacle is envy—envy toward Kṛṣṇa, because of which one refuses to follow the instructions given by Him or His representative. Kṛṣṇa says that those who, out of envy, do not follow His teachings may possess knowledge, but that knowledge becomes deluded. Why? Because Kṛṣṇa is the ultimate goal of all knowledge: vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyo (Bhagavad-gītā 15.15).

Kṛṣṇa is the purpose of knowledge, and those who do not surrender to Him fail to attain true knowledge. The purpose of their knowledge gets defeated. Such people, Kṛṣṇa says, are ruined—viddhi naṣṭān.

Similarly, Kṛṣṇa says here, saṁśayātmā vinaśyati—the doubting soul perishes. He further emphasizes that such a person will not find happiness either in this world or the next. It is an inauspicious destination. In contrast to those who have faith and attain liberation, these individuals neither attain liberation nor progress; rather, they remain bound in material existence.

In one sense, the conclusion of verse 4.40 echoes the message of verse 4.31, where Kṛṣṇa declared: nāyaṁ loko ’sty ayajñasya kuto ’nyaḥ kuru-sattama—for one who does not perform yajña, there is no happiness in this world; what, then, to speak of the next? Kṛṣṇa says something similar here—there is no happiness either in this life or the next for the doubting soul.

In verse 4.40, in the first two lines (A and B), He refers to three categories of people:
1. Ajñaś ca — those who do not know about Him at all.
2. Aśraddadhānaś ca — those who know about Him but do not put faith in Him.
3. Saṁśayātmā — those who may initially have faith, but allow that faith to be gradually eroded by internal doubts.
Kṛṣṇa says that such people will be lost.

A question may arise—what exactly is the difference among these three categories? Surely, there are some people who are outright atheists (ajña). Then there are others who are exposed to Kṛṣṇa but reject Him—considering Him a mythological figure, merely a historical personality, or perhaps just a sectarian conception of God. These people fall into the category of aśraddadhānaś ca. And then there are the saṁśayātmanaḥ—those who are plagued by doubts. Such people, Kṛṣṇa says, cannot attain any auspicious result.

Doubt in itself is not bad—but doubt that is unreasonable is. Kṛṣṇa offers a reasoned and scripture-based analysis of why karma-yoga is the best process for Arjuna, and He addresses Arjuna’s questions quite candidly. Once a person has received proper scriptural understanding, has had the concepts adequately explained, and has had their questions answered—if even after that, they still refuse to seek spiritual knowledge or live according to it, then such a person is simply ruining themselves. It is like a patient who has been given a clear diagnosis, has understood the prescription, has seen others getting cured, and yet thinks, “Maybe this won’t work for me—what is the need for me to take this medicine?” That is most unfortunate.

Now, if we have doubts, what should we do? We can’t simply wish them away—but we can deal with them in different ways. This is a broad topic in itself, and we won’t go into it in detail here. But briefly speaking, if we have core doubts about the central processes we are following—about the holy name, remembrance of Kṛṣṇa, or bhakti-yoga—then we needs to study scripture, associate with learned devotees, and get our questions properly answered.

On the other hand, if our doubts concern matters that are not directly relevant to our practice—for example, questions about the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam’s Fifth Canto cosmology and how to understand the descriptions of celestial bodies—such doubts are peripheral. We can place them in a “can’t understand right now, but not urgent” box.

Sometimes, in group meetings or management sessions, certain concerns or questions are put in a ‘car park’ to be addressed later. Similarly, we shouldn’t let our practice of bhakti be hindered by questions that are not immediately relevant. We can recognize that some issues are not very important for us at the moment.

It’s just like starting a course of medicine—we don’t need to understand every single detail about the medicine before taking it. What matters most is that we understand the essential aspects that directly concern our situation.

Likewise, when beginning to live according to the scriptures, it is not necessary to grasp every single thing at the outset. With a sound understanding of the basics, we begin practicing those basics. As our study deepens, we will be able to practice more deeply as well. Over time, we’ll also be able to understand the scriptures more, contextualize their teachings, reason through them, and accept them in a more intelligible and meaningful way.

Along the way, some doubts can be resolved through deeper study and discussion with devotees. Other doubts may need to be ‘parked’—acknowledging that we may not be able to understand them in the near future, but recognizing that they are not very important to our immediate practice.

Some doubts, however, may require more focused attention. If we have specific questions on particular subjects, we can approach knowledgeable or specialist devotees and seek their guidance. In this way, by sincere inquiry, study, and association, we can keep progressing steadily in our spiritual life.

We can choose to doubt our doubts instead of doubting our beliefs. To doubt our doubts means to recognize that these doubts have ultimately come from our own mind—and we already know that the mind can often mislead us. Therefore, there’s no need to give undue credence to every thought that arises from it.

Compared to the word of God, whatever ideas the human mind may generate are limited, potentially distorted, and certainly fallible. Hence, it is more reasonable to place our faith in divine revelation than in personal speculation. Gradually, as we become purified through spiritual practice, our mind too will become clearer and start seeing things as they are. When that happens, it will stop misleading us, and we will rise above doubts.

In conclusion, Kṛṣṇa contrasts the auspicious results of having faith with the inauspicious consequences of choosing doubt. In doing so, He brings this section on jñāna closer to its conclusion, and prepares to wrap up the chapter as well. The final two verses will be taken up in our next two discussions.

Thank you.