Gita 09.25 – Different paths lead to different goals

Audio Link: https://www.thespiritualscientist.com/gita-09-25-different-paths-lead-to-different-goals/

yānti deva-vratā devān
pitṝn yānti pitṛ-vratāḥ
bhūtāni yānti bhūtejyā
yānti mad-yājino ’pi mām (Bg 9.25)

Word-to-word:
yānti — go; deva-vratāḥ — worshipers of demigods; devān — to the demigods; pitṝn — to the ancestors; yānti — go; pitṛ-vratāḥ — worshipers of ancestors; bhūtāni — to the ghosts and spirits; yānti — go; bhūta-ijyāḥ — worshipers of ghosts and spirits; yānti — go; mat — My; yājinaḥ — devotees; api — but; mām — unto Me.

Translation:
Those who worship the demigods will take birth among the demigods; those who worship the ancestors go to the ancestors; those who worship ghosts and spirits will take birth among such beings; and those who worship Me will live with Me.

Explanation:
yānti deva-vratā devān: Those who worship the demigods attain the planet of the demigods,
pitṝn yānti pitṛ-vratāḥ: those devoted to the ancestors go to the ancestors
bhūtāni yānti bhūtejyā: those who worship ghosts and spirits go to such beings,
yānti mad-yājino ’pi mām: but those who worship Me come to Me.

Here, Kṛṣṇa is speaking about the principle of reciprocity in a much more expanded sense. Earlier, in 4.11, He stated, ye yathā māṁ prapadyante tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham—“As all people surrender unto Me, I reciprocate accordingly.” He has also said in 7.22, mayāiva vihitān hi tān—that when worshipers of the demigods obtain results, those results are ultimately granted by Him alone. Thus, Kṛṣṇa reciprocates not only directly, in various ways, with those who approach Him, but also indirectly through the demigods. This indirect reciprocation is discussed not merely in terms of the immediate fruits one receives, but also in terms of the eventual destination one attains, which is the focus of this verse.

The word “bhūtāni” can have multiple meanings. It can refer to living beings in general, and it can also denote a specific category of living beings—namely, disembodied beings, or bhūtas. Kṛṣṇa uses the word “bhūta” in both senses. For example, when He says, bījaṁ māṁ sarva-bhūtānāṁ (7.10), “I am the seed-giving father of all living beings,” He is using the word bhūta in the general sense of living entities.

However, in the seventeenth chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā, He says, pretān bhūta-gaṇāṁś cānye yajante tāmasā janāḥ (17.4). Here, while discussing worship in the three modes of nature, He uses the word “bhūta” along with the word “preta.” Those who are in the mode of ignorance worship bhūtas and pretas.

Here, in 9.25, Kṛṣṇa uses the word “bhūta” in the sense of disembodied living beings. In common parlance, such disembodied living beings are called ghosts or spirits. The word “spirit,” from a philosophical point of view, is not entirely accurate, because these disembodied beings are not situated on a spiritual level of existence. In one sense, all living beings are spiritual, but disembodied beings are not living in spiritual consciousness; they are still existing at a material level. Still, it is noteworthy that Kṛṣṇa even refers here to the worship of ghosts.

The ācāryas explain that these three broadly refer to worship in the three modes of material nature. Kṛṣṇa also speaks about this later when He says, yajante sāttvikā devān yakṣa-rakṣāṁsi rājasāḥ pretān bhūta-gaṇāṁś cānye yajante tāmasā janāḥ (Bg 17.4). He explains that those in the mode of goodness worship the devatās, those in the mode of passion worship the yakṣas and rākṣasas, and those in the mode of ignorance worship ghostly beings.

Coming back to the present verse, Kṛṣṇa states that those who worship in the mode of goodness worship the devatās, and they attain the abodes of the devatās. Those who worship in the mode of passion worship the pitṛs (ancestors), and they go to the abode of the pitṛs.

It is interesting that the Mahābhārata states that Mahārāja Pāṇḍu, at the time of his death, was thinking of uniting with his wife and was struck by mortal pain due to the curse of a sage. Because of these circumstances at the moment of death, although he had lived as a virtuous king, he did not attain a very exalted destination. Instead of going to Svargaloka, he attained a relatively lower destination. One of the reasons Mahārāja Yudhiṣṭhira performed the Rājasūya-yajña was to elevate Mahārāja Pāṇḍu from the place he had attained—something like Pitṛloka—to Svargaloka.

The essential point of this verse is that all paths do not lead to the same goal. If the Bhagavad-gītā were advocating an absolute oneness, this verse would have no meaning. Not only does this verse refute the idea that all paths are the same, it also refutes the idea that all worshipable deities are ultimately one in the same sense.

According to some schools of thought—the neo-Vedāntists, as they are often called—form is something ascribed to the Absolute Truth by the worshiper for the convenience of worship, and such forms are meant to be ultimately transcended. If that were the case, if forms were merely imposed and ultimately irrelevant, then worship of any form would lead to the same destination. But Kṛṣṇa clearly states here that this is not so: if one worships the ancestors, one attains one destination; if one worships the devatās, one attains another destination.

Clearly, this verse is quite categorical in refuting the idea that there is oneness either in the destination or in the path. There are different paths, and they lead to different destinations. A standard impersonalist rebuttal to this position is to argue that if one says different paths lead to different goals—like a train to Mumbai going to Mumbai and a train to Kolkata going to Kolkata—then one has a very limited conception of the Absolute Truth. They contend that the Absolute Truth is not like Mumbai or Kolkata; rather, it is everywhere, and therefore, whichever path one follows, one will ultimately attain the Absolute Truth.

However, here we are not discussing the pervasiveness of the Absolute Truth; rather, we are concerned with the method of accessing the Absolute Truth. Yes, God is everywhere—God is present even in the heart of an alcoholic—but that person cannot perceive God’s presence. In contrast, one who is prayerfully engaged in meditation can perceive the presence of God. Attainment of God is essentially a process of increasing perception, and that requires purification. Purification, in turn, requires a specific process. The more steadily one becomes purified, the more one is able to attain perception, realization, and proximity to Kṛṣṇa.

That is why it is important not to confuse the nature of the Absolute with the nature of the method for approaching the Absolute. The Absolute is all-pervading, but that does not mean that every path leads to the Absolute. If that were the case, then everyone is already on some path, and we could reasonably ask: if every path leads to the Absolute, why do we need any path at all? If the Absolute is present where I already am, then why is there any need to follow a particular path in the first place?

Hence, the idea that all paths lead to God ultimately implies that there is no need to do anything at all to attain God. Of course, this is not what even those who advocate such a view actually mean, because they too accept that some form of purification is required. The Bhagavad-gītā, however, is categorical on this point: depending on whom one worships, one attains a corresponding destination. Thus, one progresses according to the object of one’s worship, and in the concluding line of this verse, Kṛṣṇa clearly states that those who worship Me will come to Me.

He had earlier hinted in the seventh chapter that the fruits of demigod worship are temporary—antavat (Bg 7.23). In the eighth chapter, however, He states this explicitly by declaring that even Brahmā’s abode is temporary, what to speak of Indra’s abode: ā-brahma-bhuvanāl lokāḥ punar āvartino ’rjuna mām upetya tu kaunteya punar janma na vidyate (Bg 8.16). Hence, when Kṛṣṇa says that His worshipers will come to Him, He is stating that they will attain an eternal destination.

The principle of reciprocation is universal, but the destination is not the same on all paths. Therefore, one must choose the right path in order to attain the right destination.

Thank you.