Gita 06.38 – The problems we perceive reflect our level of consciousness
kaccin nobhaya-vibhraṣṭaś
chinnābhram iva naśyati
apratiṣṭho mahā-bāho
vimūḍho brahmaṇaḥ pathi (Bg 6.38)
Word-for-word:
kaccit — whether; na — not; ubhaya — both; vibhraṣṭaḥ — deviated from; chinna — torn; abhram — cloud; iva — like; naśyati — perishes; apratiṣṭhaḥ — without any position; mahā-bāho — O mighty-armed Kṛṣṇa; vimūḍhaḥ — bewildered; brahmaṇaḥ — of transcendence; pathi — on the path.
Translation:
O mighty-armed Kṛṣṇa, does not such a man, who is bewildered from the path of transcendence, fall away from both spiritual and material success and perish like a riven cloud, with no position in any sphere?
Explanation:
Arjuna continues to express his apprehension about the destination of those who succumb to deviation on the path of yoga. In the previous verse, he asked what becomes of those who begin the practice of yoga but, due to worldly attachments, withdraw from it before attaining perfection. Here, he illustrates their predicament and fate with a vivid example drawn from nature:
kaccin nobhaya-vibhraṣṭaḥ: Does such a person, fallen from both the material and spiritual paths,
chinnābhram iva naśyati: perish like a separated cloud?
apratiṣṭho mahā-bāho: having no resting place or foundation, O mighty-armed Kṛṣṇa,
vimūḍhaḥ brahmaṇaḥ pathi: being deluded on the path of transcendence.
Kṛṣṇa uses the metaphor of a cloud—chinnābhram iva naśyati—a broken cloud. Clouds are generally seen in clusters, drifting together in the direction of the prevailing wind. In the atmosphere, different air currents move in different directions. Suppose a cluster of clouds is moving from east to west, while another cluster is moving from west to east. If a single cloud from the eastward-moving group decides to leave its cluster and join the one moving in the opposite direction, it detaches itself and starts drifting away.
However, a sudden gust of wind may blow it off course, leaving it isolated—no longer part of any cloud cluster. Detached and unsupported, the lone cloud eventually dissipates, losing its form and identity in the vast sky, carried away and destroyed by the restless motion of the winds and the inevitable forces of material change.
Next, Arjuna says apratiṣṭho mahā-bāho. It is interesting to note that the same word—mahā-bāho—is used by both speakers to address each other. Just three verses earlier (6.35), while responding to Arjuna’s concern about the difficulty of controlling the mind, Kṛṣṇa addresses him as mahā-bāho (asaṁśayaṁ mahā-bāho mano durnigrahaṁ calam).
Now, in 6.38, Arjuna uses the very same epithet to address Kṛṣṇa. This is so because “mahā-bāho” is a generic address for kṣatriyas in general. It is not a specific designation like Yadunandana or Kurunandana, which refer to the distinct dynastic lineages of the two speakers. Since their dynastic connections differ, Arjuna cannot be called Yadunandana. However, “mahā-bāho” aptly applies to all kṣatriyas—all valiant warriors who are strong, broad-shouldered, and serve as the martial protectors of society. By addressing Kṛṣṇa as mahā-bāho, Arjuna subtly conveys, “O Kṛṣṇa, since You are mighty-armed, with Your great strength please dispel my doubts.”
Arjuna’s doubt is whether a person who gives up the path of karma-kāṇḍa to pursue jñāna-kāṇḍa, but fails to succeed in either, what becomes of such a person? Kṛṣṇa later clarifies that such a person does not lose out. Instead, he attains a heavenly destination and ultimately receives the benefits of both karma-kāṇḍa and jñāna-kāṇḍa.
At this point, however, what we can focus on is that the kind of problem one perceives reflects one’s level of consciousness. Some people may see something as too much hard work and therefore choose not to pursue it. Others may recognize the effort involved but evaluate it in terms of the potential reward—considering the probability of success and the importance of that success.
For instance, if an uninformed person is driving a vehicle, he may primarily think about how long the drive will take or whether he might get bored along the way. In contrast, an informed person will think about whether the vehicle has enough fuel, if there are refuelling stops along the route, and whether the vehicle is in good enough condition to complete the journey.
Similarly, the kinds of problems we perceive are determined by the level of our consciousness. In the case of the driver, this means how aware the driver is of the actual nature of driving and the challenges involved in it.
Arjuna reveals himself as a fairly evolved individual because he is aware of subtle distinctions. His doubt is not about the existence of God, the reality of the spiritual path, or whether any results will follow. His question is informed and serious: he recognizes that there are valid pathways to attain a materially auspicious destination, swarga (heaven), as well as a spiritually glorious destination, mokṣa (liberation), and he accepts both as legitimate goals.
In today’s culture, many people may not accept the reality of either swarga or mokṣa, believing that this life and this world are all there is. Arjuna, however, is different. He accepts the existence of both destinations but raises a serious question: if someone gives up the path to swarga and is then unable to succeed on the path to mokṣa, what happens to that person? Will he be lost in both ways? Kṛṣṇa will answer this question in due course, from verses 41 to 45.
Thank you.
Leave A Comment