back to questions
Bhagavad-Gītā with Śaṅkara's bhāṣya · 2.28
avyaktādīni bhūtāni vyakta-madhyāni bhārata | avyakta-nidhanāny eva tatra kā paridevanā
Translation. Beings are unmanifest (avyakta) at the beginning,
manifest in the middle, O Bhārata,
and indeed unmanifest again at the end—
what lamentation is there over them?
Grammar check: 9 words pass / 0 flagged / 0 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 |
|---|
| avyaktādīni | avyaktādi | pass |
| bhūtāni | bhūta | pass |
| vyaktamadhyāni | vyaktamadhya | pass |
| bhārata | bhārata | pass |
| avyaktanidhanāni | avyaktanidhana | pass |
| eva | eva | pass |
| tatra | tatra | pass |
| kā | kim | pass |
| paridevanā | paridevanā | 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.
avyaktādīni is a possessive bahuvrīhi predicated of bhūtāni: the beings are those whose beginning is unmanifest, not “unmanifest beginnings” as an independent noun phrase.→ Bahuvrīhi, avyaktam ādiḥ yeṣāṃ tāni, agreeing in neuter nominative plural with bhūtāni.
gita [1]avyaktādīny avyaktam adarśanam anupalabdhiḥ ādir yeṣāṃ bhūtānāṃ putra-mitrādi-kārya-karaṇa-saṃghātātmakānāṃ
‘Unmanifest-beginning’: those beings whose beginning is the unmanifest—nonappearance, nonperception.
vyaktamadhyāni is the parallel possessive bahuvrīhi “whose middle is manifest”; its ‘middle’ is the interval after arising and before death.→ Bahuvrīhi, vyaktaṃ madhyaṃ yeṣāṃ tāni, with a temporal relation to the interval between arising and death.
gita [1]utpannāni ca prāṅ-maraṇāt vyakta-madhyāni
Once arisen and prior to death, they have a manifest middle.
avyaktanidhanāni is a possessive bahuvrīhi “whose end is unmanifest”; nidhana is specifically death, after which the beings return to an unmanifest condition.→ Bahuvrīhi, avyaktaṃ nidhanaṃ yeṣāṃ tāni; nidhana means death or ending here.
gita [2]avyakta-nidhanāny eva punar avyaktam adarśanaṃ nidhanaṃ maraṇaṃ yeṣāṃ tāni avyakta-nidhanāni |
‘Unmanifest-ending’ again: those whose end—death—is the unmanifest, nonappearance.
gita [3]maraṇād ūrdhvam apy avyaktatām eva pratipadyante ity arthaḥ |
The meaning is that after death too they attain precisely the unmanifest condition.
avyakta is translated “unmanifest,” in Śaṅkara’s specific sense of nonappearance or nonperception, rather than as an assertion of absolute nonexistence. The three descriptions mark the phases before arising, between arising and death, and after death.→ “Unmanifest (avyakta),” understood phenomenally as not appearing or not being apprehended.
gita [1]avyaktam adarśanam anupalabdhiḥ
The unmanifest is nonappearance, nonperception.
gita [1]bhūtāni prāg-utpatteḥ, utpannāni ca prāṅ-maraṇāt vyakta-madhyāni
The beings are so before arising, while once arisen and before death they have a manifest middle.
gita [3]maraṇād ūrdhvam apy avyaktatām eva pratipadyante ity arthaḥ |
After death too they attain precisely the unmanifest condition.
bhūtāni denotes beings understood as effect-and-cause aggregates exemplified by such relations as sons and friends; it is therefore translated “beings,” not “the five material elements.”→ “Beings.”
gita [1]bhūtānāṃ putra-mitrādi-kārya-karaṇa-saṃghātātmakānāṃ
Of beings consisting of aggregates of effects and causes, such as sons, friends, and the like.
eva takes scope with avyakta-nidhanāni and emphasizes that after death the beings are again precisely unmanifest; “indeed … again” reflects Śaṅkara’s punar and eva.→ “and indeed unmanifest again at the end.”
gita [2]avyakta-nidhanāny eva punar
They are indeed unmanifest-ending, again.
gita [3]maraṇād ūrdhvam apy avyaktatām eva pratipadyante ity arthaḥ |
After death too they attain precisely the unmanifest condition.
tatra kā paridevanā is a rhetorical question: “what lamentation is there over them?” Tatra marks the domain of the question, while kā agrees with paridevanā; Śaṅkara’s ko vā pralāpaḥ confirms the sense “what wailing?”→ A rhetorical question denying grounds for lamentation over beings that appear and vanish like an illusion.
gita [8]tatra kā paridevanā ko vā pralāpo 'dṛṣṭa-dṛṣṭa-pranaṣṭa-bhrānti-bhūteṣu bhūteṣv ity arthaḥ ||bhgs_2.28||
What lamentation is there—what wailing—over beings that are like an illusion: unseen, seen, and vanished? That is the meaning.
Śaṅkara's commentary on this unit
1avyaktādīny avyaktam adarśanam anupalabdhiḥ ādir yeṣāṃ bhūtānāṃ putra-mitrādi-kārya-karaṇa-saṃghātātmakānāṃ tāni avyaktadīni bhūtāni prāg-utpatteḥ, utpannāni ca prāṅ-maraṇāt vyakta-madhyāni |
2avyakta-nidhanāny eva punar avyaktam adarśanaṃ nidhanaṃ maraṇaṃ yeṣāṃ tāni avyakta-nidhanāni |
3maraṇād ūrdhvam apy avyaktatām eva pratipadyante ity arthaḥ |
4tathā coktam ---
5adarśanād āpatitaḥ punaś cādarśanaṃ gataḥ |
6nāsau tava na tasya tvaṃ vṛthā kā paridevanā ||
7[mahā. strī. 2.13] iti |
8tatra kā paridevanā ko vā pralāpo 'dṛṣṭa-dṛṣṭa-pranaṣṭa-bhrānti-bhūteṣu bhūteṣv ity arthaḥ ||bhgs_2.28||
9durvijñeyo 'thaṃ prakṛta ātmā |
10kiṃ tvāmevaikamupālabhe sādhāraṇe bhrāntinimitte |
11kathaṃ durvijñeyo 'yamātmā ityata āha ---