back to questions
Bhagavad-Gītā with Śaṅkara's bhāṣya · 2.25
avyakto 'yam acintyo 'yam avikāryo 'yam ucyate | tasmād evaṃ viditvainaṃ nānuśocitum arhasi
Translation. This Self is imperceptible; this is inconceivable;
this is said not to be subject to modification.
Therefore, having known it thus,
you ought not to mourn.
Grammar check: 12 words pass / 0 flagged / 2 beyond the checkerPāṇini-verified
Every word's claimed grammar is re-derived with vidyut-prakriya, software implementing Pāṇini's rules. Flags are shown, never hidden; some are the text taking epic or Vedic liberties the classical rules do not generate.
Word by word
| surface | lemma | grammar |
|---|
| avyaktaḥ | avyakta | pass |
| ayam | idam | pass |
| acintyaḥ | acintya | pass |
| ayam | idam | pass |
| avikāryaḥ | avikārya | pass |
| ayam | idam | pass |
| ucyate | vac | pass |
| tasmāt | tasmāt | pass |
| evam | evam | pass |
| viditvā | vid | pass |
| enam | enad | unsupported |
| na | na | pass |
| anuśocitum | śuc | unsupported |
| arhasi | arh | pass |
How the commentary settled it
Where the verse alone is ambiguous, the reading follows Śaṅkara's commentary; the deciding lines are quoted below each decision.
Translate avyaktaḥ as ‘imperceptible’ rather than treating it as a reference to a cosmic ‘Unmanifest.’→ imperceptible
gita [1]avyaktaḥ sarva-karaṇāviṣayatvāt na vyajyata iti avyakto 'yam ātmā |
It is ‘imperceptible’ because, being inaccessible to every instrument, it is not manifested: this Self is imperceptible.
Understand acintyaḥ as ‘inconceivable’ because thought operates upon what falls within sensory range, whereas the Self does not.→ inconceivable because it is not an object of the senses
gita [2, 3, 4]ataeva acintyo 'yam |
yad dhi indriya-gocaras tac cintā-viṣayatvam āpadyate |
ayaṃ tv ātmā anindriya-gocaratvāt acintyaḥ |
For that very reason this is inconceivable. Whatever lies within the senses' range becomes an object of thought; but this Self is inconceivable because it does not lie within the senses' range.
Translate avikāryaḥ as ‘not subject to modification,’ preserving the commentary's distinction between something modifiable, such as milk, and the partless, changeless Self.→ not subject to modification
gita [5, 6, 8]ataeva avikāryaḥ, yathā kṣīraṃ dadhyātañcanādinā vikāri na tathā ayam ātmā |
niravayavatvāc cāvikriyaḥ |
avikriyatvāt avikāryo 'yam ātmā ucyate |
For that very reason it is not subject to modification: milk, for example, is modified by curd-starter and the like, but this Self is not so. It is also changeless because it is partless. Because it is changeless, this Self is said not to be subject to modification.
Take all three occurrences of ayam and the later enam as referring to the Self (ātman), rather than to the body, an unspecified entity, or a preceding proposition.→ the Self
gita [1, 4, 8, 9]avyaktaḥ sarva-karaṇāviṣayatvāt na vyajyata iti avyakto 'yam ātmā |
ayaṃ tv ātmā anindriya-gocaratvāt acintyaḥ |
avikriyatvāt avikāryo 'yam ātmā ucyate |
tasmāt evaṃ yathokta-prakāreṇa enam ātmānaṃ viditvā tvaṃ na anuśocitum arhasi hantāham eṣām, mayaite hanyanta iti ||bhgs_2.25||
The commentary repeatedly identifies ‘this’ as the Self and explicitly glosses enam as ‘this Self.’
Construe ucyate as a passive with avikāryaḥ as its predicate complement: ‘this is said to be not subject to modification.’→ this is said to be not subject to modification
gita [8]avikriyatvāt avikāryo 'yam ātmā ucyate |
Because it is changeless, this Self is said not to be subject to modification.
Take tasmād evaṃ viditvā as ‘therefore, having known it in the manner stated above,’ with enam ātmānam as the object of viditvā.→ therefore, having known this Self in the manner stated above
gita [9]tasmāt evaṃ yathokta-prakāreṇa enam ātmānaṃ viditvā tvaṃ na anuśocitum arhasi hantāham eṣām, mayaite hanyanta iti ||bhgs_2.25||
Therefore, having known this Self in this way—that is, in the manner already stated—you ought not to mourn, thinking, ‘I am their killer; these are being killed by me.’
Let na negate the infinitival complement anuśocitum under arhasi, yielding the modal sense ‘you ought not to mourn,’ rather than ‘you are not worthy of mourning.’→ you ought not to mourn
gita [9]tasmāt evaṃ yathokta-prakāreṇa enam ātmānaṃ viditvā tvaṃ na anuśocitum arhasi hantāham eṣām, mayaite hanyanta iti ||bhgs_2.25||
Therefore, having known this Self in the manner stated, you ought not to mourn, thinking, ‘I am their killer; these are being killed by me.’
Analyze viditvā as an indeclinable absolutive of vid, not as a masculine instrumental singular noun.→ indeclinable absolutive of vid
gita []
The commentary does not define the form; standard morphology and its government of accusative enam require an absolutive.
Analyze anuśocitum as an infinitive of śuc with prefix anu, not as an accusative singular nominal.→ infinitive of anu-śuc
gita []
The commentary does not morphologically define the form; the construction infinitive plus arhasi and the supplied canonical lemma determine the analysis.
Śaṅkara's commentary on this unit
1avyaktaḥ sarva-karaṇāviṣayatvāt na vyajyata iti avyakto 'yam ātmā |
2ataeva acintyo 'yam |
3yad dhi indriya-gocaras tac cintā-viṣayatvam āpadyate |
4ayaṃ tv ātmā anindriya-gocaratvāt acintyaḥ |
5ataeva avikāryaḥ, yathā kṣīraṃ dadhyātañcanādinā vikāri na tathā ayam ātmā |
6niravayavatvāc cāvikriyaḥ |
7na hi niravayavaṃ kiṃcit vikriyātmakaṃ dṛṣṭām |
8avikriyatvāt avikāryo 'yam ātmā ucyate |
9tasmāt evaṃ yathokta-prakāreṇa enam ātmānaṃ viditvā tvaṃ na anuśocitum arhasi hantāham eṣām, mayaite hanyanta iti ||bhgs_2.25||
10ātmano 'nityatvam abhyupagamya idam ucyate ---