CHAPTER XIII

UNITIVE UNDERSTANDING OF THE

DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE ACTUAL AND
THE PERCEPTUAL
KSHETRA-KSHETRAJNA-VIBHAGA YOGA

See how ACBSP has misinterpreted Gita: “In the first six chapters of Bhagavad-gita the knower of the body
(the living entity) and the position by which he can understand the Supreme Lord are described. In the middle six
chapters of the Bhagavad-gita the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the relationship between the individual
soul and the Supersoul in regard to devotional service are described. The superior position of the Supreme Personality
of Godhead and the subordinate position of the individual soul are definitely defined in these chapters. The living
entities are subordinate under all circumstances, but in their forgetfulness they are suffering. When enlightened by
pious activities, they approach the Supreme Lord in different capacities – as the distressed, those in want of money,
the inquisitive, and those in search of knowledge. That is also described. Now, starting with the Thirteenth Chapter,
how the living entity comes into contact with material nature and how he is delivered by the Supreme Lord through
the different methods of fruitive activities, cultivation of knowledge, and the discharge of devotional service are
explained. Although the living entity is completely different from the material body, he somehow becomes related.
This also is explained.”
Writes NG: “This Chapter is concerned with one of the most difficult problems, one which has puzzled not
only philosophers and psychologists, but even practical men of affairs. Arjuna puts the question under three couples
of concepts; one pair being based on the idea of prakriti (nature) of which the counterpart in the Samkhya (rationalist)
philosophy is the purusha (spirit); another pair is based on the concept of what is here named kshetra (the field), i.e.
actuality, and the kshetrajna (one who knows the field), the perceptual counterpart of actuality; while the third pair
which belongs more to a subtler philosophical order, jneyam (that which is to be known) has its counterpart in
jnanam (knowledge or wisdom).
In the first place we find that concepts belonging to branches of knowledge which are generally considered
widely apart are here seen as brought together for purposes of general treatment of a special kind in keeping with
the development of the subject-matter of the Gita.
The field and the knower of the field may be said to belong to the world of action; the concepts of nature and
spirit to the duality implied in Samkhya (rationalist) philosophy; and that which is to be known to epistemology,
whose problems are to be mixed up with action or nature.
We have found that whole Chapters have already been devoted to subjects such as Samkhya (Chapter II), action
(Chapter III) and wisdom (Chapter IV). When such an opportunity has been availed of already for dealing with
these subjects in extenso it may be legitimate to ask why these subjects are now taken again in pairs belonging to
each context for a juxtaposed treatment together, in one Chapter.
The earlier Chapters referred to these subjects only in a preliminary fashion. The discussion had to be built up
step by step, settling initial doubts and silencing critics. We have noticed how, in the middle of the work, in
Chapters VIII, IX and X, the Gita enunciated and explained its own version of what is explicitly referred to as
adhyatma (pertaining to the Self (atma), the principle of the Self (atma), i.e. Self-science). The peculiarity to these
central Chapters, we have noticed, was the perfect neutrality as between the transcendental and the immanent
Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 1
which was maintained in the discussion. The Self was a central value around which the notion of the Absolute was
developed.”
[0]
Arjuna said:
Nature and spirit; the field and the knower of the field; knowledge (wisdom) and what is to be
known; these I should like to know, O Kesava (Krishna).
ACBSP: O my dear Krishna, I wish to know about prakriti (nature), purusa (the enjoyer), and the field and the
knower of the field, and of knowledge and the object of knowledge.
As in the last Chapter, Arjuna takes the initiative in putting the composite question. It is clear that he is progressing
in his pursuit of quenching his thirst for knowledge but certain positive aspects of wisdom, as already stated in our
preliminary remarks to this Chapter, are still the objects of his inquiry. Knowledge itself as a proper subject requires
to be understood as a systematic whole, as belonging to a definite body of philosophic wisdom. The word jneyam
(what is to be known) shows that knowledge is here presented not merely subjectively, but more consciously,
positively or objectively.
The reason for treating this verse as verse 0 (zero) is given by NG in the following words: “With a view to
conformity between different editions and following the example of some other editions, we are not including this
opening verse in the serial numbering, for the reason that the Gita traditionally is supposed to consist of 700 verses.
This verse added would make 701. Inasmuch as this verse is of the nature of a title only, and could safely be omitted
without interfering with the subject-matter, and as it could have been added as an afterthought by someone other
than Vyasa himself, its exclusion can perhaps be justified.”
[1]
Sribhagavan said:
This body, O Kaunteya (Arjuna), is called the field, and he who knows this, thus they call, who know, the
knower of the field.
ACBSP translates: “The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: This body, O son of Kunti, is called the field,
and one who knows this body is called the knower of the field.”
ACBSP further elaborates: “Arjuna was inquisitive about prakriti (nature), purusa (the enjoyer), ksetra (the
field), ksetra-jana (its knower), and knowledge and the object of knowledge. When he inquired about all these,
Krishna said that this body is called the field and that one who knows this body is called the knower of the field.
This body is the field of activity for the conditioned soul. The conditioned soul is entrapped in material existence,
and he attempts to lord it over material nature. And so, according to his capacity to dominate material nature, he
gets a field of activity. That field of activity is the body. And that is the body? The body is made of senses. The
conditioned soul wants to enjoy sense gratification, and, according to his capacity to enjoy sense gratification, he is
offered a body, or field of activity. Therefore the body is called ksetra, or the field of activity for the conditioned
soul. Now, the person who identifies himself with the body is called ksetra-jana, the knower of the field. It is not
very difficult to understand the difference between the field and its knower, the body and the knower of the body.
Any person can consider that from childhood to old age he undergoes so many changes of body and yet is still one
person, remaining. Thus there is a difference between the knower of the field of activities and the actual field of
activities. A living conditioned soul can thus understand that he is different from the body. It is described in the
beginning – dehino `smin – that the living entity is within the body and that the body is changing from childhood
to boyhood and from boyhood to youth and from youth to old age, and the person who owns the body knows that
the body is changing. The owner is distinctly ksetra-jana. Sometimes we think, “I am happy,” “I am a man,” “I am
a woman,” “I am a dog,” “I am a cat.” These are the bodily designations of the knower. But the knower is different
from the body. Although we may use many articles – our clothes, etc. – we know that we are different from the

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 2

things used. Similarly, we also understand by a little contemplation that we are different from the body. I or you or
anyone else who owns the body is called ksetra-jana, the knower of the field of activities, and the body is called
ksetra, the field of activities itself.”
From this description by ACBSP, all physicians, who know the human body better than the rest of the human
beings, can be called ‘knowers of the body’. Even though science has tried to understand the process of growth,
from the state of childhood to old age, there are still a lot many things that need to be known. For instance, we know
nothing about the mind and its functioning. Also, we know nothing about spirit inside us. Likewise, our knowledge
of the self too is minimal, even though its knowledge has been described as the greatest of all sciences.
It is interesting to note that Arjuna’s question had mentioned nature and spirit first and the field and the knower
of the field followed this. In reply, Krishna started talking about the body and the knower of the body first. Body is
the field. Unlike what several people would like to believe, the body is a very vast subject of study and includes the
study of nature and spirit as well. One who knows this is the knower of the body.
[2]
And also know Me as the knower of the field in all fields, O Bharata (Arjuna); that knowledge
(which refers to the knowledge) of the field and the knower of the field, that, in my opinion, is the
knowledge.
ACBSP translates in this manner: “O scion of Bharata, you should understand that I am also the knower in all
bodies, and to understand this body and its knower is called knowledge. That is My opinion.”
While discussing the subject of the body and the knower of the body, God says that He is the Supreme knower
of all bodies, owing to the reason that He alone is the Creator and knows far more about body characteristics, the
nature of individuals and the manner in which each body part functions, including the mind, the spirit and the self,
and no human knowledge despite all scientific and social advances can ever equal His knowledge.
One who knows the nature of not one but all the bodies of human beings and all the various species of life can
only give the Perfect Laws for governing of the society. Laws made by man suffer from various discrepancies –
man is still in the process of understanding the functioning of the body and its nature fully; each man has certain
flaws and is governed by material nature to some levels, laws created by such men for the rest of the society may
reflect the flaws of those men who created them; and are made only keeping in mind a limited area, a limited time
frame or a limited set of people, where as God’s laws are universal and have the same modifying affect on the
individuals and the society in all times.
Take for instance the cover story in Hindustan Times dated September 27, 2004 titled ‘Diseases have a gender
bias’. The story starts with this: “Beyond the tired clichés and sperm-and-egg basics taught in grade school science
class, researchers are discovering that men and women are even more different than anyone realized… These
discoveries are part of a quiet but revolutionary change infiltrating US medicine as a growing number of scientists
realize there’s more to women’s health than just the anatomy that makes them female, and that the same diseases
often affect men and women in different ways.
“Women are different than men not only psychologically (but) physiologically, and I think we need to understand
those differences,” says Dr. Catherine DeAngelis, editor of the Journal of the American Medical Association.””
Isn’t this discovery far more different to the stand that various bra-burning feminists had been taken till now?
Does equal treatment to animals justifies lion and deer been put in the same cage? Are men capable of giving birth
to children? If not so, why don’t we accept that women are less capable physically and henceforth equality does not
mean equal number of jobs in army? Equal treatment has to be spiritual and psychological in nature than physical.
It has to be based on the nature of the personality. And till the time we are not sure about our expertise on knowledge,
which keeps changing from day-to-day, let us accept that the best laws can only be made by the Creator and not
man, or a group of them.

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 3

 Writes ACBSP: “A citizen may know everything about his patch of land, but the king knows not only his palace
but all the properties possessed by the individual citizens. Similarly, one may be the proprietor of the body individually,
but the Supreme Lord or Manifested Self is the proprietor of all bodies. The king is the original proprietor of the
kingdom, and the citizen is the secondary proprietor. Similarly, the Supreme Lord is the supreme proprietor of all
bodies…
In this chapter it will also be explained that out of the two knowers, one is fallible and the other is infallible.
One is superior and the other is subordinate. One who understands the two knowers of the field to be one and the
same contradicts the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who states here very clearly, “I am also the knower of the
field of activity.” One who misunderstands a rope to be a serpent is not in knowledge. There are different kinds of
bodies, and there are different owners of the bodies. Because each individual soul has his individual capacity for
lording it over material nature, there are different bodies. But the supreme also is present in them as the controller.
The word ca is significant, for it indicates the total number of bodies.” That is why the real knowledge is to know
the body and the knower in all bodies i.e. the relationship of the Supreme God and the individuals.
We have noticed that at another point in Gita, it has been stated that the real science is the knowledge of the self.
We know that till date, despite all advances in science, man has not been able to understand the composition of his
self at all. When he has not been able to understand atma, he has also not understood the relationship that exists
between atma in a man, to that of the Divine Souls (atmas) of the devas and eventually the God. In such a scenario,
it is imperative on human beings to follow the laws given by the God blindly, as God alone knows the nature of
body and atma thoroughly.
[3]
(That) hear in brief from Me; what the field is, what it is like, of what it is the modification,
and whence, and which (it is), also what he (the knower of the field) is, and what is his specialized
resulting expression.
ACBSP translates: “Now please hear my brief description of this field of activity and how it is constituted,
what its changes are, whence it is produced, who that knower of the field of activities is, and what his influences
are.”
Says the commentator: “The Lord is describing the field of activities and the knower of the field of activities in
their constitutional positions. One has to know how this body is constituted, the materials of which this body is
made, under whose control this body is working, how the changes are taking place, wherefrom the changes are
coming, what the causes are, what the reasons are, what the ultimate goal of the individual soul is, and what the
actual form of the individual soul is. One should also know the distinction between the individual living soul and
the Supersoul, their different influences, their potentials, etc.”
There are several Upanishads which make it abundantly clear that the Manifested Self created the fourteen
devas as rulers of the fourteen spheres. It is believed that these fourteen spheres exist inside us as well. Few other
Upanishads mention in detail the role of the fourteen inside our body. It is said that the higher portions of the self
are constituted by the power having direct link to the fourteen and through them, to the Manifested Self. This
knowledge is extremely important and this is true knowledge, as per verse 2.
Commenting on this, NG says: “When speaking of the attributes of kshetra (the field) the term vikari (having
modifications, transformations) is used, while the term prabhava (specialized becoming) is used in reference to the
superior value connected with wisdom, which corresponds to the knower of the field. Pure knowledge or wisdom
knows no transformations, transmutations, evolution or change, but the actual, represented here by the field, being
opposed to wisdom, is subject to necessary change And therefore to various modifications or evolution. Vikari
(modifications) further has a deprecatory sense suggesting change for the worse.”
[4]
Sung by rishis (seers) in many ways, severally and distinctly in (different) metres, and also in
Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 4
 the aphoristic words of the Brahma-Sutras replete with critical reasonings and positively
determined.
This verse confirms the Islamic view that there have been several Messengers from God who brought the
teachings and Krishna was one of them. Since God’s creation were not only speaking Sanskrit or confined to the
Indian Subcontinent, it cannot be expected that no messengers were sent in the rest of the regions and in various
other languages. The fact that similar pattern of growth of teachings is seen all across the world is a clear proof that
the Messengers were working everywhere. Another proof is that all talked of one and only God. Islam maintains
that 1,24,000 messengers were sent all across the world, Adam being the first and Mohammad the last. Unfortunately,
those with narrow vision, say that this is reference to the rishis in a particular region itself. It is unfortunate that we
call Krishna as the avatar of God and then confine him to a particular area and language.
We have a feeling here that Gita is again talking about something that Arjuna understood well but the
commentators have not been able to understand it. The very fact that Brahmasutra is mentioned here, takes us to
believe that he is referring to the manifested form of God. We also know from Brhad Aranyaka Upanishad that the
Non-manifested form of God decided to create a Manifested form and hence the Brahmanda was given birth,
which divided into several Divine Beings, from whom, out of their devotion and worship to God, were created all
the moving and non-moving (living and dead objects) in this Universe (one united verse) of God.
Through this, it is easy to understand that the soul of human beings is linked directly to the Divine Souls of
those Beings and through them to the Absolute God. This means clearly that in this world, it must be the devas who
will fit the description of tadvidah (those who know) as mentioned in verse I. Since devas were worshipped much
more than present times during the period of Arjuna, and the sages of the period were aware of their mention in
Vedas and other scriptures, and singing verses to eulogize them were common, Arjuna knows exactly what the talk
is about, whereas we have problems in understanding the real nature of the conversation.
However, description given by commentators like NG itself indicates that they too have a feeling that there is
some underlying meaning that continues in these verses, with the only difference that what NG has seen to be
hesitation, is actually a clear indication that the meaning was so clear to Arjuna that no need was felt to elaborate on
it. NG writes: “Note here in the first place that while this verse refers to the field specifically, seemingly with a
subtle purpose behind it, there is omission of any direct reference by name to the kshetraja (knower of the field).
Even in verse I we noticed that there was already some hesitation in naming these two counterparts – the field and
the knower of the field, - attributing their recognition vaguely or elusively to other sages or to sages generally. The
same sages will be referred to in verse 4.”
As we study the difference between the two counterparts as stated in the verses that follow, we notice also that
there is no direct reference to kshetrajna (the knower of the field) in verse II, although it is meant to be implied by
the author in the more comprehensive term jnana (wisdom which is there contrasted with ignorance, thus by-
passing the concept of kshetrajna (the knower of the field) altogether. Thus the connotation of the term kshetrajna
(knower of the field) in verse 3 has already shifted its own centre with a slightly higher value than what it meant in
the initial definition as directly referring to the body. We have already pointed out how, even there, it could not be
a body in the sense of a carcass, but something that has a value in the context of contemplation, in however finite
terms it might be thought of.
Here we find the field gains its status more by contrast with the ignorance mentioned in verse 11, than with
anything fundamentally its own. When we find in verse 6 that the field and its transformations include such factors
as intelligence and firmness, the theoretical status that the field gains becomes more accentuated.
We shall see, however, in verses 5 and 6, a very striking difference between the orthodox enumeration of tattvas
(principles) as belonging to prakriti (nature) in the Samkhya (rationalist) philosophy, and even from the description
of the lower nature of the Absolute as enumerated in VII, 4. We have to look out for a revalued position here
wherein a greater unity is established between prakriti (nature) and purusha (spirit) or between kshetra (field) and
kshetrajna (the knower of the field) than was understood hitherto, whether by the Samkhya or even in the earlier

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 5

Chapters of the Gita itself.
The unitively superior status that the kshetrajna (knower of the field) is to gain in this Chapter becomes evident
from verse 7 onwards. The enumeration of values there ranges from the simple personal value of humility to
wisdom as the highest of absolutist values [these are the qualities that the knower of the field must possess]. The
status of kshetra (the field) itself (and its modifications) is also seen slightly promoted in the enumeration of items
referring to it in verses 5 and 6, beginning from the gross elements, here slightly glorified by the attribute “great”
and ending in the personal quality dhritih (firmness), which quality is here intended to be superior to chetana (vital
intelligence). [More qualities that the knower of the field ought to possess.]
When speaking of the attributes of kshetra (the field) the term vikari (having modifications, transformations) is
used, while the term prabhava (specialized becoming) is used in reference to the superior value connected with
wisdom, which corresponds to the knower of the field. Pure knowledge or wisdom knows no transformations,
transmutations, evolution or change, but the actual, represented here by the field, being opposed to wisdom, is
subject to necessary change and therefore to various modifications or evolution. Vikari (modifications) further has
a deprecatory sense suggesting change for the worse.
Yatah (whence) refers to the field, but we find no direct answer is given, except the indirect suggestion in verse
11, that all that is other than wisdom belongs to ignorance. Hence the field results from ignorance, as Sankara ably
argues in his long comment on verse 2. Further, Sankara points out that even avidya (ignorance) is an extraneous
factor to the kshetrajna (knower of the field) who represents, in his words Isvara (God) who in his terminology he
interprets as being identical with wisdom or the Absolute. [That is why the devas were the most learned men not
only of their own time, but several interesting comments of theirs that were authenticated centuries later due to
advancement in science suggests that their knowledge far exceeded the knowledge of even the most advanced men
of today.]
Ignorance, even as an upadhi (conditioning factor) in so far as it is capable of affecting the ordinary man’s
notion of a pure unconditioned Absolute, must remain, on final analysis, as a limiting attribute to the Absolute. To
lift the notion of the Absolulte too far out of the human context would tend to make of it a mere abstraction which
would be of no value. It would be a mere philosophical triviality prejudicial to the cause of wisdom. But if we
recognize the Absolute, not abstractedly, but in the sense of a human value however ordinary, this particular form
of intellectual difficulty which Sankara had to face could be easily avoided. [See how God had already removed
that ‘intellectual difficulty’ as pointed out by Sankara and NG, through creation of its Manifested form, but it was
our own fault that we corrupted the knowledge presented by God, so much so that our reason got confounded. Even
solution to the ‘argument of the opponent’ that NG talks about in the next paragraph lies in accepting a manifested
form of God governing our lives.]
To the argument of the opponent that all sastras (revealed scientific texts) would become useless if the knower
of the field was already beyond samsara (repeated cyclic existence), Sankara goes as far as to postulate the factor of
ignorance as intervening in some sort of figurative or indirect way between the pure absolute God and the ordinary
man to whom the sastras (revealed scientific texts) apply, as something intermediate which would make these texts
necessary for him, almost as in the case of the dvaitins (dualistic philosophers) who tend to treat kshetrajna (the
knower of the field) and kshetra (the field) more realistically. The introduction of such a third factor on the part of
Sankara is rather artificial, and to some extent compromises his unitive stand on the primacy of the pure absolutist
Isvara (God).”
Both Sankara and NG are confused, yet closer to truth. Accepting devas as the manifested form of God from
whom all beings evolved, does not compromise with the unitive stand on the primacy of the pure absolutist Isvara,
as NG points out, and also removes “the factor of ignorance as intervening in some sort of figurative or indirect
way between the pure absolute God and the ordinary man” as Sankara points out.
[5-6]
The great elements, ego-sense, reason, and also the Unmanifest, the ten senses, and the one
Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 6
 (mind) and the five conceptual aspects of the senses,
wish-dislike, pleasure-pain, the organic aggregation, vital intelligence, firmness: this in brief,
is the field, with modifications named.
Factors such as buddhi (reason) and ahamkara (ego) are directly responsible for our ability or inability to
understand the true nature of body (field) and the knower of the bodies (knower of fields). Both NG and ACBSP
have given wrong explanation of these verses. We request you to read it, if possible, to verify that their explanations
are not comprehensible easily, which is otherwise a marked feature of Gita. This can also be understood by NG’s
reasoning that there is no strict agreement between the factors enumerated and it could be due to the requirements
of prosody, which cannot be true, because if we believe Gita to be words of God, we will have to believe that not
one of the word used is out of context. NG says: “If we should try to relate these backwards to the Samkhya
(rationalist) philosophy to which at first sight they reveal a general kinship, we find that there is no strict agreement
between the factors enumerated. In the first place the order here has been mixed. Whether such a transposition is
due to requirements of prosody merely is not quite clear. Moreover, under kshetra (the field) which may be said to
correspond to the prakriti (nature) side of the Samkhya system, we have in verse 6 a new set of factors like chetana
(vital intelligence) and it is not clear whether they belong to the orthodox Samkhya system or to the Yoga counterparts
of the same dualistic school.”
Commentators’ inability to understand these verses lead us to conclude that very much like the previous verses,
they have erred in understanding the real meaning of the verses here as well. Tadvidah (those who know) and
paramam guhyam (supreme secret) and ‘the ignorance of the real truth about them’ that is being described here in
detail, knowledge of which will lead us to the ananda (bliss), is being described here more clearly. But before we
proceed let’s see what Sarvasara-Upanishad has to say about Ananda (bliss). “It is the seat of all sentient beings,
like the ocean of the water, is eternal, pure, partless and non-dual, and is the sole essence of Chidananda
(consciousness-bliss).”
There are ten senses that a body comprises of, which get associated with the outside world. It is through these
10 senses that the material tendencies make their impact felt. Mind is another part of the body or field, which has
a tendency to get swayed when faced with an onslaught of materialistic forces. In addition to this, there are usual
natural tendencies like the wish-dislike, pleasure-pain, the organic aggregation, vital intelligence and firmness, all
of which have negative effect. The higher atma inside a body shows the right path to man and make him fight all the
material forces, if only man is able to subdue the lower atma that leads him to material pursuits and seeking selfish
gains. This has ot an ongoing process all through life.
It is curious to note that the Unmanifest too has been mentioned along with these material forces. The reason is
that it is extremely difficult for a man, surrounded as he is by all such material influences, to understand the
Unmanifest nature of God. That is why, despite the fact that God sent innumerable Messengers and Prophets from
time to time, man had the tendency to forget the teachings about the Unmanifest God. In order to satisfy his desire
to have a material god, he created idols and started worshiping them and forgot the teachings given by the Prophets
and Messengers.
This is despite the fact that God Himself knew of the difficulties that man would face in believing and worshipping
a God that does not confirm with his material likings. Knowing this, He Himself had created a Manifested form of
His Personality, which got divided to give birth to the devas, again a material form. Vedas had introduced these
Divine Personalities of the devas and we know from Upanishads that people waited for them and prayed for their
early arrival. But when the wait grew long and the devas still did not appear, they again got astray, created idols of
the illustrious from amongst their forefathers, of demons and even of those very Messengers like Krishna and
Rama, who had come to teach them how to reach the Absolute God. This is extremely sorrowful, that while Gita
talks about no other worship but of the Absolute God, and tries in every possible manner to take us to the God,
people worship idol of that very Krishna, with whom Gita is associated.

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 7

 [7]
Freedom from conventional pride, unpretentiousness, non-hurting, non-retaliating
forbearance, straightforwardness, loyal support of the teacher (acharya), purity, steadfastness,
and state of self-withdrawal;
It is clearly stated earlier in verse 2 of this Chapter that God is the knower of the fields. From 5-6, it is evident
that the God being talked about is the Manifested form and not the Non-manifested Absolute God, which has
confounded an ordinary man’s reasoning ability to reach Him. Man too can become the ‘knower of the field’ by
understanding the real relationship between field (body) and the knower of the fields (knower of the bodies). In
case, man’s soul emerge victorious in the ongoing fight between the soul and the negative material forces talked
about in verses 5-6, then he becomes the “knower of the field” and show the virtues that are being mentioned in
verses 7 to 11. Devas, we are sure, were knower of the fields, since all the animate and non-animate bodies were
created from out of their Soul (Atma). That is why all these virtues perfectly fit their personality.
We have also reasoned in the previous verse that it is the various Divine Beings who were created out of the
Manifested form (Brahmanda) that form a link between the body (field) and the Absolute God. Virtues of those
Divine Beings when they will come to live on this earth are being described here in this verse, so that we can
identify them. Vedas had given the incidents of their lives so as to facilitate us in recognizing them, whereas Gita
goes on to describe the virtues inherent in their character, which together form the essence of jnanam (wisdom),
mentioned earlier.
NG also agrees that this description is that of the knower of the field and talks about their virtues in the
following manner: “Verses 7 to 11 form a natural section. Items here range from such factors as lack of pride to that
supreme value called wisdom.”
Devas will be identified in this world from various virtues, the first of which is amanitvam (freedom from
conventional pride). The second epithet, adambhitvam (unpretentiousness), implies the same principle of integrity
or being true to oneself. As a corollary to the same self-sufficient attitude, they never want to interfere with the
happiness of any being around him. A universal generosity here called ahimsa (non-hurting) is implied in this kind
of self-sufficiency.
Kshanti (non-retaliating forbearance) is not a leave-me-alone attitude that ignores society, as described by NG,
but forbearance while living as an active member of this society. Arjavam (straightforwardness) implies a certain
frankness which speaks out without fear or favour, and which also shows independence from popular approbation.
This can be clearly seen in the discourses of Ali mentioned in the book called Nahjul Balagha or Husain’s own
lectures, while face to face with the mighty army of Yazid. He is also an acharya (teacher) [remember Ali saying
‘ask whatever you wish to ask before I depart from amongst you’ and if people did not ask serious questions on a
regular basis, that was due to their own ignorance. Moreover, written records of Ali saying that he can even teach
how to light the houses from the waterfalls or Jafar-e-Sadiq’s disciple (Jabir ibne Hayyan) being acknowledged by
the world as ‘father of Chemistry’ are available. Devas, when they came to live on this earth, are known to have
talked about the distance of the sun from the earth, about the distinguishing characteristics of animals that lay eggs
and those who don’t and on various other subjects, that were only known as true by the later day scientists.]
In addition to this, their role in teaching the principles of Jurisprudence and showing us the way to reach God
is most important as their role as teacher. If anybody understood the real science, i.e. the science of the atma, he will
know that the atma inside us is lin control of the fourteen atmas and cannot separate itself from it. It was this reason
why a mere stare by Ali not only led to the death of the person but also the disintegration of his body in various
parts, signifying thereby that Ali not only controlled the atma inside that person but was also in control of the
elements which the body comprise of.
Other virtues described here include saucham (purity), which has been described by NG as referring ‘not only
to freedom from actual dirt, but from anything tending to depress or tarnish the state of the spirit.’ It is worth
remarking here that there is an explicit verse in Quran about the Prophet and his progeny which says that it is the
Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 8
wish of God that he keeps them free from any impurity. This verse has also been described in Hadees-e-Kisa and
makes it explicit as to who are the people who are referred to here.
Sthairyam (steadfastness or constancy) means he does not change his way of life in favour of values other than
the contemplative. This is also clearly reflected in Husain’s stance in Karbala or even Prophet Mohammad saying
to his uncle Abu Talib that even if they (the kafirs) were to keep the sun on his one hand and the moon on the other,
he was not to distance himself from offering prayers to God or praising His bounties. People of the time tried
everything, from inducement to torture or even murder but never succeeded in their objective of deviating the
devas from the path that they followed.
With steadfastness is mentioned atmavinigrahah (state of self-withdrawal). The fact that this virtue too was
present in their lives to its extreme can also be noticed by studying their lives.
[8]
detachment in respect of sense-interests, absence of egoism, insight regarding the pain and
evil of birth, death, old age, and disease:
This verse continues with describing the virtues of the knower of the fields. A detailed study of the lives of
devas, when they came to live on this earth, will make it clear that all these virtues can be found in a person, without
him having to resort to samnyasa (renunciation) from the world. Not aware of the personality of these Masooms,
commentators like NG will never understand how such seemingly diverse virtues can fit into one personality.
They are detached from seeking the interests that the senses desire; they are far distance from egoism (ahamkara)
and are never inflicted with the dukha (suffering) that comes out of birth, death, old age and disease.
[9]
without clinging to, (and) without intensely-involved attachment to, (relations such as) sons,
wives, (and property such as) houses, and having a constant neutral mental attitude in respect of
desirable and undesirable happenings.
NG writes: “This verse reflects an attitude of general neutrality towards happenings as well as towards domestic
or family relations, besides not being attracted by common interests such as wealth, etc. The attitude to wife and
children referred to here does not imply that he is purposely unjust to them or partial either. He takes an impersonal
neutral attitude in the matter, balancing justly between the two opposing tendencies that might influence his
judgement. He never errs on the side of partiality to his own blood-relations.”
[10]
devotion to Me to the exclusion of everything extraneous, and never straying from the (direct)
path, preference to dwell in a place apart, distaste for crowded living;
Such a person is fully engrossed in devotion to the Absolute God, not for a moment gets involved in anything
extraneous, and never strays from the direct path. The reference to straying from direct path was also mentioned by
Prophet Mohammad, when he said closer to the time of his departure from this world: “I am leaving behind two
valuable things – the Quran and my progeny – if you remain associated with them, you will never stray from the
right path. The first chapter of the Quran, Surah Hamd, also prays to God to show the right path, the way of those
who have been guided and not those who have fallen astray.
It must be noted that ‘preference to dwell in a place apart’ and ‘distaste for crowded living’ have been mentioned
in the context of ‘devotion to Me (God) to the exclusion of everything extraneous’ and does not mean the popular
concept of samnyasa (renunciation) as practiced by people today. It only reflects that devotion to God is beyond any
other purpose of show or self-aggrandizement. Prophet Mohammad used to go to a cave in a mountain to meditate
and worship, and then came back to lead a normal life, where too God was not forgotten for a moment. When the
Prophet had to migrate to Medina, a place where there was no cave in the vicinity, he did not leave the world and

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 9

returned to live in a secluded place. Instead, the secluded nature of the mosque at night was used for prayers and
worshipping God.
[11]
everlasting affiliation to the wisdom pertaining to the Self (atma), insight into the content of
philosophical wisdom – this is declared to be wisdom; whatever is other than this is ignorance.
Writes NG: “The wisdom here refers to the Self (atma) as implied in the first epithet, and at the same time is
conceived in positive or objective terms as implied in the second epithet. The jnanam (wisdom) referred to in the
second line should be taken to be the true knowledge of verse 2 and as substituting the notion of kshetrajna (knower
of the field) which has been conveniently forgotten, as we have pointed out.
This culminating wisdom is a unitive factor covering both the field and the knower of the field. It is as it were
a central value which may even be said to be implicit in the word antaram (principle of difference, differential) in
the last verse of this Chapter and which, as stated there, is to be discerned by the jnanachakshushah (eye of wisdom).
Under ajnana (ignorance), similarly, there is to be implied all those aspects of the field which lead the
consciousness away from higher wisdom-values, including both those that tend to do so, and those falling outside
the scope of contemplation altogether, such as the decaying aspects of a dead body, wherein no soul-happiness is
any more to be enjoyed.
In reviewing the section covered from verses 5 to 11 inclusive, in which both the idea of the field and the
knower of the field were covered in a special and unitive way which we have tried to explain, we find that beginning
from the idea of a body which was only superior to a mere carcass by a margin of contemplative principle involved,
we have touched in the knower of the field an all-comprehensive wisdom-value which is going to be expounded
more finally in verse 12, by way of rounding up the section, as we shall see.”
[12]
I shall declare that which is to be known, which, being known, one gains immortality; the
beginningless, having Me as its supreme culminating factor, the Absolute, which is said to be
neither existence nor non-existence.
God has already talked of the relationship between man’s body and God by means of the intermediate Manifested
form of God. This is talked about as the Supreme Secret, and the lack of this knowledge has been termed as
ignorance.
The term used is Jnana, which has been described by Sarvasara Upanishad as the self-light. “It is that which
illuminates all. It is that Absolute Consciousness which is without any obscuration. It is that Consciousness which
has no beginning or end, which is perpetual and which is the witness to all modifications and their opposites.”
The fact that commentators like NG are confounded by the description till this stage is also present in his
words, when he says: “From this verse onwards we have a complete picture of the unitive Self or the eternal
Absolute or whatever may be designated by tat (That). It is unmistakable from the description that it is not an entity
which could be definitely called either matter or spirit. As stated in verse 19, both matter and spirit have to be given
an equal status as values and considered as eternal or beginningless. [That clearly means that the spirit of the devas
or the matter of their bodies when devas came to live in this world – both should be given an equal status as values
and considered as eternal or beginningless.] The Absolute implied here in verse 12 is neither sat (existence) nor
asat (non-existence), and is of the nature of a paradox, in the same way as in the Eleatic philosophers, Parmenides
and Zeno. The one and the many adhere together in this notion of the Absolute, as stated in verse 30.
When it is said that the Absolute participates in both existence and non-existence, and the one and the many, it
should not be thought however, that it combines contradictions, reducing the notion to a mere absurdity. It should
be conceived rather as valid as a datum of reasoning, or better still as an authentic human value to be intuitively
understood, and not as a mere contradiction in terms of bhedabheda vadins (difference-non-difference thinkers)
Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 10
would tend to look upon it.”
The fact that it does not refer to the Absolute is clear because words like anadimatparam (beginningless and
having Me as its supreme culminating factor) indicate that it refers to something else that has the Absolute God as
the supreme factor. Clearly, what is meant is the Manifested Self of God, whose asat (non-existence) is the period
of their stay in heavens prior to their birth on earth and sat (existence) is the period when they took birth in human
form. Sat and asat are actually matter and spirit respectively. There is no paradox in this, which NG and others have
felt. They all have the Absolute as the supreme culminating factor who is neither sat (existence) nor asat (non-
existence).
The one or the many, all are joined with the Absolute in the same manner. As Prophet Mohammad used to say:
“The first of us is Mohammad, the middle of us is Mohammad, the last of us is Mohammad – all are Mohammad.”
This is the secret that is jneyam (what is to be known).
[13]
With hands and feet everywhere, with eyes and hands, and mouths, with hearing everywhere,
in the world, That remains, enveloping all.
This refers to the Absolute, whose power is beyond comprehension. We have repeatedly said that the Manifested
Self of God is doing the talking here and it is referring to the Absolute as ‘That’.
The devas are the only uniting link of our souls with the Absolute God as we owe our origin from them. The
Absolute God, as a result of their devotion and worship to God, has bestowed this power on them. At other places,
it is clearly indicated that the soul gets united with the Divine Soul, if it remains pure at the time when the body that
had carried it dies. In such a scenario, it gets free from the repeated cycle of rebirth.
Apart from this relationship, we are bound to concur that there is surely a relationship that exists between the
soul, when it is still in the body of a living being, and these Divine Souls. It is this relationship that has been
mentioned as the best of the sciences (knowledge) in Gita. If this is not so, why is that the soul obediently leaves,
when order comes from somewhere for it to depart.
It is believed that each and every action of ours, whether done in public or private, during day or night, is
recorded and we will be given reward or punishment on the basis of these, on the Day of Judgement. How will it be
possible unless there is some foolproof system to record all our acts? The verse clearly states that the Divine Atmas
have “hands and feet everywhere, with eyes and hands, and mouths, with hearing everywhere, in the world, and
remains, enveloping all.
If the entire Universe has been created out of their souls, and the root of all the energy and souls that exists in
this world, lies in the souls of these Divine Beings, is it difficult to conjecture that they envelope all, hears all and
sees all? If a supercomputer, installed at a particular place can record the work being done on lakhs and lakhs of
computers all across the world that are connected to it, is it difficult to understand a Super Soul recording the
actions of all the souls, wherever they are? Remember again, Gita says that this knowledge is the loftiest knowledge
that a man should possess and there are some divine secrets that are yet to be unfurled.
[14]
Shining by the specific characters of the senses, devoid of all sense (attributes); unattached,
supporting all; without qualities, and perceiving qualities.
Again, NG talks of the paradoxical statements in Gita, due to his inability to understand the meaning as meant
by God. He says: “This verse contains three paradoxical statements. The first is quite within the range of our own
experience, when we think of dreaming, where things are seen without the help of eyes, etc. The second paradox is
easily understood if we think of space supporting form. Regarding the third paradox, we know that the pure Absolute
is not subject to the modalities of the three degrees of specialization in nature called the gunas (qualities). They act

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 11

only as conditioning factors, like Shelley’s “dome of many-coloured glass”.”
We request you to replace the Absolute with the meaning that we give and all paradoxes will disappear. Isn’t it
proof enough that what we are saying is the true meaning of Gita?
[15]
Without and within beings; immobile and mobile too; because subtle That is unknowable;
That stands far and near also.
Again the word ‘tat’ is used meaning ‘that’. And it is merely an elaboration of the earlier verse which said that
they (the Divine Beings) envelope all, hear and sees all and through them, the Absolute controls all the beings. This
verse says further that they are outside and inside all beings, immobile and mobile too, they in their subtle state are
unknowable and it is not possible to feel them inside or outside, moving or stationary, yet they are far and near us
as well. Through them, we are connected with the Absolute God.
We have already mentioned the passage from Dua-e-Kumayl, attributed to Imam Ali, as per which the noors of
the Masooms fill the higher portions of all beings. If that is so, why do we doubt that the Absolute referred to as
‘That’ is the supreme power. Since He knew He was unknowable, He created the devas as His Manifested Beings
or Purushottamas for all of us to take lessons and tread their footsteps.
[16]
And undivided, yet remaining divided as it were in beings; supporter of existence and That
which is to be known; holding back and releasing for expansive becoming.
ACBSP translates as follows: “Although the Supersoul appears to be divided among all beings, He is never
divided. He is situated as one. Although He is the maintainer of every living entity, it is to be understood that He
devours and develops all.”
This verse again justifies our argument. In fact, unless you take our argument as true, it is not possible to
describe ‘undivided, yet remaining divided’. The Divine Souls are undivided and are actually One Supreme Atma
created by God as His Manifested form. This is despite the fact that from that One Supreme Atma were created
Indra, Vayu, Saraswati, Agni and the rest, who were born on this earth as Mohammad, Ali, Fatima, Husain and the
rest of Mohammad’s progeny. It was perhaps this reason that Mohammad said that despite they being different
personalities, they all are Mohammad. “First is Muhammad, middle is Mohammad, last is Mohammad, all are
Mohammad.” Moreover, certain Upanishads describe clearly that the Manifested Self became two, which were
identical to the original one, these became five and the five became fourteen. All fourteen were identical to each
other and also identical to the Manifested Self, from where this division started.
The argument that ‘undivided, yet remaining divided’ has been taken to mean Supersoul’s presence in all
beings by ACBSP. If you read these verses together, you will yourself agree that this is not true. Field has already
been described and now the knower of the field is being described, which Manifested Self says is He Himself.
The fact that they are beginningless as described in verse 12 in this Chapter can be understood from the fact that
they actually owe their origin due to desire of the Unmanifested to have a Manifested form and have been there
even prior to the time of Man’s origin. That is why Mohammad said at a juncture, “I was even a Prophet when
Adam was being born. And Husain said that the sun, the moon, the earth, the entire cosmos – owe their origin to
them (Prophet and his progeny).
These verses also explain why the God will call for convulsion of the entire universe when the last of the devas
will be killed, that is why ‘supporter of existence’ is used as description of their virtues. Vishnu Purana explicitly
talks about this process of convulsion, after the last of the avatars will appear. That is why it is said here, all the
development owes its origin from them and it is they because of whom destruction of the world will occur.
Instead of confessing his inability to reach truth, NG sees paradoxes in this verse as well which, we are sure,

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 12

will get removed once the real meaning of these verses become clear to him and others. NG writes: “Again three
paradoxes are implied, two explicit and one hidden. In the first explicit one, the word iva (as it were) is meant to
relieve the contrast somewhat. The paradox of the one and the many is meant, although it is expressed in terms of
outward appearances.
The second paradox here has the implied opposition between the counterparts bhutabhartri (supporter of
existence) and jneyam (what is to be known) which in this Chapter should be understood as an objective philosophical
entity to be clearly placed in a circle part, as it were, from jnanam (wisdom), subjectively considered. The opposition
between the two counterparts is the same as that between existence and subsistence.
The third pair of paradoxical counterparts is based on the notion that there is a centrifugal and a centripetal
principle involved in reality, whether cosmic or psychic. Grasishnu (grasping) refers to the centripetal tendency to
hold inwards, and prabhavishnu (releasing expansive becoming) is the centrifugal tendency.”
[17]
The Light even of lights, That is said to be beyond darkness; knowledge, the knowable and
what is to be reached through knowledge; particularly located in the hearts of everyone.
God has sent innumerable messengers and Prophets, whereas there are lot many revered sages and rishis, who
have reached close to God. They may be termed as lights, but the devas are Lights even for those who are considered
light (jyotisham api taj jyotis) – far more esteemed, far more pious, far more knowledgeable and far more elevated
in all aspects considered as good in beings. That is why they are to be revered and respected. Darkness cannot reach
them means that no wrongful act that symbolizes darkness can ever be committed by them. They are the possessors
of all knowledge (jnanam), and they are the ones who ought to be known (jneyam), only to be reached through
wisdom (jnanagamyam).
The phrase ‘possessors of all knowledge’ is important because we have seen in history that only the Masooms
claimed to possess knowledge of all subjects and had a definite answer to all the questions that the seekers of
knowledge asked from them. Moreover, God takes guarantee in Quran that no impurity can ever reach them. That
is why it is said here that ‘darkness cannot reach them’.
[18]
Thus the field, and wisdom, and what has to be known, have been briefly told; My devotee,
having known this, attains to My state of being.
How the body (field) is related to the Absolute through the media of the Manifested nature of God in the form
of Divine Atmas and their virtues are what is to be known, whereas these Divine Atmas, their presence in spiritual
and material form, and their relationship with God can only be understood through wisdom as talked about in verse
11. Any devotee of God, as per Gita, who knows this divine secret, becomes one with the Absolute.
ACBSP has called this Divine Atma as the Supersoul, which is a manifestation of the Supreme Personality of
Godhead. Beyond this, we do not agree to most of what that is said.
Rama too, like Krishna, was an avatar of the Manifested Self or Vishnu. He says in Muktikopanishad to Hanuman:
“O son of Vayu! Always worship My Reality that is destructive of pains, without sound, touch, form, decay, taste,
destruction or smell, and without name and Gotra (clan). I am that non-dual One (Brahman) that is of the nature of
the visible (Jnana), like unto the Akas, supreme, always shining, without birth, non-dual, without destruction,
without attachment and pervading all. I am the All, and of the nature of salvation. One should ever meditate upon
Me thus: ‘I am of the form of the visible (Jnana), the pure, of changeless nature and have really no objects in Me.
I am the ever-full Brahman, traverse and across, up and down.’ Also meditate upon Me thus: ‘I am birthless,
deathless, ageless, immortal, self-shining, all-pervading, destructionless, causeless, pure beyond the effect (of the
universe) and ever content. When one’s body becomes a prey to time, he gives up the state of Jivanmukti, as the
wind attains the motionless state.’

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 13

 The following is said in the Rig Veda also: “Like the eye which is spread in the Akas (seeking all things without
any obstacle), so the wise ever see the Supreme Seat of Vishnu [the Manifested Self]. The Brahmanas that have
ever the Divine vision praise in diverse ways and illumine the Supreme Seat of Vishnu.”
[19]
Know you that nature and spirit are both beginningless; and know you also that modifications
and their intrinsic modalities are born of nature.
After seemingly closing a section with verse 18 in which the answers to the three sets of questions of Arjuna
were expressly concluded, we have here another extra section covering verses 19 to 22 inclusive in which, considering
the importance that the subject deserves, the Lord again begins to talk about the relationship between the human
body, the divine spirit, nature and the Absolute, so as to clear any doubts that may have still remained.
The Absolute created a spirit as His Manifested form. The spirit, as it owed its origin to the Absolute, also had
the virtues of the Absolute. Therefore, all the virtues that the Absolute is said to possess also became the virtues of
this spirit. Yet, these virtues were not their own, but owed their origin to the Absolute.
From this spirit, nature evolved and led to the creation of the entire world, including the living beings and
therefore the virtues of the spirit became the virtues of all of these in their uncorrupted form. For instance, a child
is born with his spirit being part of the pure Divine spirit. Therefore, certain virtues like truthfulness are part of his
spirit, until they are corrupted by external influences of nature.
However, Gita also states materialistic tendencies are due to the natural forces influencing him. For instance,
the need for God to create a Manifested form of Himself was because of the tendencies of his materialistic nature.
This negative trait is because of the material nature as per which man wishes to see everything in material form,
without which it is difficult for him to understand the real truth.
In fact, purusha (spirit) in pure form is fixed and has certain inherent virtues. But modifications and modalities
are part of prakriti (nature). Human beings, trees, animals and every living creature passes through the same laws
of nature, i.e. is born weak and susceptible to outside influences, grows into strong and sturdy being and then
passes through old age and the consequent death. The world too, we know through Vishnu Purana is to pass
through these stages, and we are presently passing a phase of Kaliyuga, when it is nearing its death. The day of the
God is about to be completed and will be followed by an equal period of night.
When the Divine Souls came down to live in this world, their body too was susceptible to changes as per
prakriti, which is a continuous non-ending process. It is this inter-relationship that is further described in succeeding
verse.
[20]
In what concerns agency for cause and effect the motivating factor is said to be nature; in the
matter of the experiencer of pleasure and pain, the motivating factor is spirit.
ACBSP translates in following manner: “Nature is said to be the cause of all material causes and effects,
whereas the living entity is the cause of the various sufferings and enjoyments in this world.”
The previous verse had said that the prakriti (nature) and the spirit were actually beginningless. The prakriti
(nature) and the purusha (spirit) are again referred to here as dual aspects of reality, they both being inter-related
and inter-opposing tendencies or forces.
Since the cosmos has been created out of this Divine Spirit, it can be said that the nature that we see present in
the cosmos also owes its origin to that Divine Spirit. It is prakriti (nature) that is responsible for all causes and their
subsequent effects that we see happening in this world. So much so that howsoever a man dies, whether he dies of
cancer, or heart failure, or a particular disease or falling from a height, they all are attributed to nature. Even if his
body is pierced with a sword or a knife, there is a certain natural process of cause and effect that can be witnessed.

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 14

 We have seen that the motivating factor of nature is behind all causes and effects that we see in this mechanistic
world. Similarly, in what we know in the everyday world as pleasure and pain, the motivating factor belongs to one
who can feel such pleasure and pain, here named purusha (spirit). Thus the thin dividing line that is sought to be
explicitly defined by this verse lies between the conscious spirit which is capable of feeling, and the inert matter
which is within the domain of causality, and which does not necessarily imply a selective or aesthetic consciousness,
yet which continuously interact with the body through its various senses described in verses 5-6, and can even have
an overpowering effect on the body as against the spirit pulling towards virtues and righteous deeds.
[21]
The spirit, seated in nature, appreciates the modalities born of nature; association with the
modalities is the cause of births in good or evil wombs.
We have said in previous verse that both prakriti (nature) and purusha (spirit) are inter-related and inter-opposing.
In the explanation of this verse, NG writes: “This verse is an attempted explanation of the process involved in
reincarnation, contributing to the inequality of status between types of men. The subject is not one that directly
concerns spirituality in the best sense of the word. But inequality in this world as an expression of injustice touches
on sociology and ethics, and can drastically influence politics, as it has done in India in the name of caste, which is
a major problem that can hardly be by-passed by an author such as Vyasa, whose figure may said to stand at the very
core of Indian spirituality, representing the supreme role of dialectical revaluation, of a superior way of life, individual
or collective.
In the theorization implied here, Vyasa is not unlike Plotinus in his graphic description of how the soul enters
matter. Bergson’s theories of matter and spirit follow the same lines. Even in the Gita the allusion to birth in good
or evil wombs has to be read side by side with xv, 8 and xvi, 19. There is a slight contradiction to be observed when
the implication of this verse is read with the implication of verse 31 of this Chapter, where it is said that the Self is
not affected though seated in the body, and though touching the body it is not tainted by the body.”
Fact is that there is no contradiction as pointed out by NG. Spirit and matter are different. The spirit in the body
does not get corrupted when touched by the material body. If that would have been so, man would have refrained
from helping a diseased person, picking up a child fallen in filth or even touching a dead body. Or for that matter,
even washing the excretions that come out from his body itself.
Spirit is seated in nature and has the power to appreciate the modalities of nature. If the modalities are negative
in nature, they corrupt the purity of the spirit. Whether the spirit takes birth in good or bad wombs depend on the
affect on it due to modalities of nature that it had to experience.
Sankara has even suggested “that good wombs are those of devas (divinities) and bad wombs those of lower
animals, which would imply a still wider range which a choice possible outside the human context altogether,”
says NG.
The fight between spirit leading a man to virtues and auspiciousness and the material nature is an ongoing
process. Those who allow material nature to govern them are losers and those whose spirit comes out victorious are
the gainers. This is the message of Gita.
[22]
Supervisor, and Permitter, Supporter, Experiencer, the Great lord, and also called the supreme
Self (is) the supreme Spirit in the body.
NG comments on this in the following words: “The mystery implied in the mode of contact between nature and
spirit which was left vague in the previous verse is sought to be further clarified here. Within the limits of the body,
the Absolute in its purest implications, suffers from certain conditionings and limitations. The favourite example in
Indian philosophy of a colourless, transparent crystal placed on red silk, the latter technically named upadhi (the
conditioning factor) explains the contact to some extent. In chemistry we have the example of catalytic agents

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 15

which themselves suffer no change while being necessary for effecting changes in other chemicals with which they
are in contact. If these two examples still do not explain the mystery sufficiently, especially in a contemplative
context, we find mentioned here some other functions or qualities of the supreme Self within the body limits, as its
modified patterns of behaviour or types of personality.”
What NG has termed limitations is not limitation at all. Had the spirit been all-powerful, no person would have
ever got astray. And there would have been no reward or punishment for actions in this world. God has left the man
to act upon his will. He has created the Divine spirit, which acts as a supervisor, permitter, supporter and experiencer.
This is talked about as antaratma (the inner atma that shows the way) by people in India! On the other hand, man’s
mind is free to respond to the onslaught of material forces in the manner he chooses. If the atma wins this battle, it
gets free from the cycle of rebirth and if the mind succumbs to the negative forces the atma gets corrupted.
The word upadrashta (supervisor) suggests the role of an overseer of works. He does not work himself, but his
immediate presence as a man on the spot is necessary for the work to go on. This He does by giving the role of
supervisors to the devas. An Upanishad even describes the devas as the guardians of our organs of senses and
action.
Likewise anumanta (permitter) can be thought of as a selective and eliminative principle. Certain acts are
approved and certain others disapproved depending upon an innate principle derived from the Absolute.
“The word bharta (supporter, one who bears the weight) can in the first place be thought of, not necessarily as
supporting from below, but from above as from a hanging lamp. The gross and active aspects of the senses, mind,
etc., which form an aggregate in themselves, depend for their intelligent conscious function, on the spirit which is
in contact with them, though indirectly. They are like the reflection of a flame on a mirror below, which reflection
looks as though the flame were burning downwards, while in reality it is burning upwards. The reflection depends
upon and may be said to be supported by the actual flame which represents pure wisdom, although within the limits
of the body there is no harm in calling the same wisdom the supporter.
The term bhokta (experiencer) is similarly justified, although in a strict sense absolute wisdom cannot be called
an enjoyer. Within the limits of the body it is permissible to refer to the spirit as enjoyer inasmuch as a dead body
cannot enjoy anything at all, and whatever enjoyment or experiencing there is on the perceptual side, must belong
in principle at least, to the Absolute.”
The expression mahesvarah (great lord) is used for the Manifested yet undivided form of the Absolute God,
who is also the Supreme Self (Atma), a part of which is present as the atma (spirit) in each living body. This
Supreme spirit has a corrective role to play in a human body, which gets weakened if the person enables materialistic
desires to overpower the corrective tendencies.
[23]
He who thus knows spirit and nature, together with the intrinsic modalities, though he may
happen to be leading every kind of life, is not born again.
He who knows the role of Divine Spirit and Nature, together with the intrinsic modalities, does not allow
material tendencies to overpower his senses. As a consequence the spirit remains pure all through the life. When
such a person’s body dies, the spirit gets united with spirit of the Supreme Soul and hence gets free from the cycle
of rebirth.
[24]
By meditation some behold the Self (atma) in the Self (atma) by the Self (atma); others by
Samkhya-Yoga (unitive reasoning) and others by karma-yoga (action unitively understood).
Translates ACBSP: “Some perceive the Supersoul within themselves through meditation, others through the
cultivation of knowledge, and still others through working without fruitive desires.”

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 16

 As we have repeatedly said, the purpose of the Gita to take us all to the worship of the Absolute God, who
created the Supreme Atma or Paramatma or the Manifested Self. Three modes of reaching the Supreme Self are
mentioned here. The first is through recognizing the Supreme Self (Paramatma) in one’s own self (atma) and using
the corrective tendencies of the Divine Self inside us, which is the supervisor, permitter, supporter, experiencer and
the Great Lord. We have proved again and again that this Divine Self comprises of fourteen devas or Masooms.
Such a person is lead to the Absolute God through this path.
Second way to realize the Absolute God is by Samkhya-Yoga or unitive reasoning that is talked about in detail
elsewhere in Gita. The third course, Karma-yoga (action without fruitive desires) too has been talked about elaborately
elsewhere and there is no need to explain it at the present moment.
[25]
But others, not knowing as stated (above) worship, having heard from others; they also cross
beyond death, depending on hearsay.
Those who have read Gray’s ‘Elegy written in a country churchyard’ will understand that there is a large section
of people who die without attaining to one of the three states as described in previous verse. Either the circumstances
were not suitable or they did not get the right atmosphere for pursuing their learning. Or perhaps, they remained
misguided despite their sincere attempts to reach the truth. What will happen to such people who out of innocence
and sincerity could not reach the truth but had a notion of the Absolute by hearsay or other indirect means? Since
God has ordained the reward or punishment on the basis of the person’s thinking, they cannot be punished. Such
people will also cross beyond death, innocence being the condition.
[26]
Whatever is produced, the unmoving or the moving, know you, O Best of the Bharatas (Arjuna),
that to be from the union of the field and the knower of the field.
ACBSP translates in the following manner: “O chief of the Bharatas, know that whatever you see in existence,
both the moving and the nonmoving, is only a combination of the field of activities and the knower of the field.”
We find here a return to the terms field and the knower of the field, with which this Chapter started. In the
course, both these were elaborated upon. Whereas field is the body comprising of material nature and includes the
modalities of nature as well, the knower of the field has been described as the spirit in the body that is in alignment
with the Supreme Soul of the Manifested form of the God and has certain virtues as inherent characteristics, which
acts as supervisor, permitter, supporter and experiencer and prevents the man’s spirit from getting swayed by
negative forces. We will know from the next chapter that even field or nature has modalities which could be sattvik,
rajasik or tamasik, which determine what kind of material onslaught the spirit will have to face. Those in sattvik or
pure mode will remain pure throughout whereas those in tamasik mode will not listen to the supervisory, permitting,
supporting and experiencing nature of the Spirit and will actually make the spirit corrupt.
A very interesting comment is given here in Gita, which says that not only the moving but even the nonmoving
objects are faced with these two opposing tendencies. Therefore, even moon as an object or stone are produced
from the union of the field and the knower of the field. Since we have proved that the knower of the field is the
spirit or the fourteen devas who comprise the Divine Spirit, it amounts to saying that every moving and non-
moving object is created through the union of Divine Nature and Divine Spirit, comprising of the fourteen devas.
Therefore, if Brhad Aranyaka Upanishad states that the moon, the sun and the stars, including the earth and the
entire life on it, were created out of the Soul of the Brahma, we should not have any doubts in understanding this
statement. After all, the same is said in the last hymn of Yajur-Veda and was also reiterated by Husain, which can
still be seen in detailed descriptions of Husain’s life.
[27]
He who sees the supreme Lord abiding (in a state of) equality in all beings, within the perishing

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 17

 as the non-perishing, he sees.
The word samam (equal), as used here, implies the high principle of seeing the Supreme in all entities, which
includes animate and inanimate objects according to the previous verse. This is different from the previous verses
where the atma was described as the extension of the Manifested form of God, which was created by the Absolute
God. But if man starts seeing the Absolute God Himself in all beings, moving or non-moving, he need no intermediary,
as the final goal is to reach the Absolute God himself.
If a person starts seeing God in all moving and nonmoving objects, there is bound to be peace on earth, as no
man will be innocently killed or harassed, no animal and not even a tree leaf will be plucked unnecessarily.
Also, no distinction will ever be made on the basis of caste, creed or religion. The entities here have the same
status as values, each within its own category. As the non-perishing in the perishing, it is the Absolute itself which
gives a final and equal status to all entities. Inequality of status in value is not conceivable when the value implied
in all entities is understood to be that of the Absolute.
[28]
For he who sees the Lord seated equally everywhere, destroys not the Self (Atma) by the Self
(Atma); and then he attains the supreme goal.
Translates ACBSP: “One who sees the Supersoul equally present everywhere, in every living being, does not
degrade himself by his mind. Thus he approaches the transcendental destination.”
This is an elaboration of the thought mentioned in verse 27. The living entity, by accepting his material existence,
has become situated differently than in his spiritual existence. But if one understands that the Supreme is situated
in His Paramatma manifestation everywhere, he does not degrade himself by a destructive mentality, and his atma
remains pure as ever. The mind is generally addicted to sense-gratifying processes; but when the mind turns to the
Absolute God, one does not need to understand the relationship between the body and the knower of the body, etc.
and becomes advanced in spiritual understanding.
Says NG: “When the Lord thus understood is equated with the Self, there is no longer any opposition. This
principle by which the Self as the Lord can unitively merge in the notion of the Self as the soul or inner spirit,
without any implied conflict between them, is explained in vi,6.
The expression hinasti (destroys) refers to the alternative contingency also mentioned in vi,6, which happens
when the two Selfs here implicitly referred to for purposes of discussion, are non-unitively or non-contemplatively
treated, contrary to the requirements of a yogic way of life. One who can treat them unitively easily reaches the
highest goal.”
Is it not clear that NG is confused over the use of self twice?
[29]
He who sees that all actions are done by nature alone, and likewise that the Self is actionless,
he (truly) sees.
ACBSP translates this verse as follows: “One who can see that all activities are performed by the body, which
is created of material nature, and sees that the self does nothing, actually sees.”
This thinking is also talked about in Gita on various occasions. A man who sees that all actions are done by
nature alone, surely will not do actions for worldly benefits. He won’t pursue the materialistic benefits from actions,
and therefore will never seek the fruits of actions, when he will commit them. Likewise, he will only perform those
actions that are necessary and refrain from performing any action other than these. This is so because in spite of the
fact that the Manifested Self is responsible for all actions, all births and deaths, he knows that the Manifested Self
does so only because it has been created by the Absolute God to do so. Hence, the Self does nothing and eventually,
it is the Absolute God, who performs the actions.
Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 18
 [30]
When he perceives the disjunct existence of beings established in the one, and from whence
also their expansion, then he becomes the Absolute.
The principle of one and the many has been talked about before in this Chapter. This is not the discussion of
creation of such a multitude of humanity from one, Adam. In fact, this talks of the One Manifested Self getting
divided and leading to the creation of the fourteen devas, identical to each other and also identical to the One
Manifested Self.
If you have agreed to our interpretation of the cause of war of Mahabharata, you will also agree that all this is
to clarify doubts as regards to the true identity of the devas in relation to the Absolute. One who understands the
true relationship attains union with the Absolute.
[31]
Having no beginning, having no attributes (gunas), this supreme Self, suffers no decrease
though dwelling in the body, O Son of Kunti (Arjuna), it neither acts nor is it tainted.
ACBSP translates: “Those with the vision of eternity can see that the imperishable soul is transcendental,
eternal, and beyond the modes of nature. Despite contact with the material body, O Arjuna, the soul neither does
anything nor is entangled.”

This begins the series of four verses in which the status of the One Manifested Self is restored to its full,
untainted purity and glory, in contrast to the notion of the devas who originated from the Manifested Self as
identical to the Self.
The word anadvitvam (beginninglessness) refers to the nature-aspect of the Absolute in his non-manifested
state and nirgunatvam (attributelessness), further gives evidence to it. Both put together and understood unitively
gives us the neutral value, which is actionless though seated within the living body.
32]
As the all-pervading subtle space-principle (akasa) is untarnished by reason of its subtlety,
so the Self, seated everywhere in the body, is untarnished.
ACBSP translates as follows: “The sky, due to its subtle nature, does not mix with anything, although it is all-
pervading. Similarly, the soul situated in Brahman vision does not mix with the body, though situated in that body.”
The point mooted in the previous verse is further elaborated on in this verse. Having no beginning, having no
attributes, the supreme Self suffers no decrease and is uniformly distributed in the body. Since the person described
here believes that it is that Supreme Self, that is present in his entire body, he does nothing that would tarnish the
self inside him.
ACBSP gives a different meaning to this verse when he says that just as sky does not mix with other objects like
light or space that are present near it, similarly the atma of a person who believes that it is the Non-manifested God
that dwells in the body, remains aloof and unaffected from the material tendencies of the body.
[33]
As the one sun illuminates this whole world, so does the Lord of the field, O Bharata
(Arjuna) illumine all the field.
ACBSP uses these words to translate: “O son of Bharata, as the sun alone illuminates all this universe, so does
the living entity, one within the body, illuminate the entire body by consciousness.”
Such a person believes that there is One Absolute God alone who is all-powerful, all-pervading and omnipresent.
Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 19
This One God, even though He is without attributes (gunas), yet He is extremely powerful and illuminates the
whole world and likewise illuminates the insides of the body by being present there, irrespective of whether it is the
body of a good or a bad person, similar to the sun which illuminates good and bad places indifferently, just revealing
its aloofness and supremacy as a glorious value. By shining on the field it can even be supposed that the field itself
and its visible existence depends on the unitive sun, which would thus include without difference the kshetra
(field) and the kshetrajna (knower of the field), fused into one supreme value.
The individual divine entities or the devas that might constitute the field, as in verse 3, are overlooked here
because “the many is treated as the dialectical counterpart of the one”, and taken collectively to be absorbed
unitively in the value that the knower of the field represents analogously to the sun.
[34]
Those who by the eye of wisdom perceive the difference between the field and the knower of
the field (its bearing on) elements-nature-emancipation – they go to the Supreme.
ACBSP says: “Those who see with eyes of knowledge the difference between the body and the knower of the
body, and can also understand the process of liberation from bondage in material nature, attain to the supreme
goal.”
In this Chapter the most important subject to which the author wanted our attention to be directed was the
distinction between the kshetra (the field) and the kshetrajna (the knower of the field). Summing up the discussion,
the author says that those who see with wisdom (wisdom is described in detail in verse 11) are able to find the link
between field and the knower of the field, otherwise a great mystery. Such a person achieves emancipation and
becomes one with the Supreme Himself and removed from the cycle of rebirth.
Writes NG: “The compound word bhuta-prakriti-moksha (elements-nature-emancipation) gives equal importance
to the three sections, while referring to them summarily here. Some translators treat the compound word not as
samahara-dvandva (collective-dual compound) but as panchami-tat-purusha (compound in which the members do
not lose their independence) by which the word gains the meaning of “liberation of beings from nature”. The object
of this concluding verse being one of the reviewing by way of a final resume of the subjects covered in this Chapter,
we prefer to treat the compound as a form of samahara-dvandva.”
Whatever NG says and writes, you know now that the entire content of Gita is now getting clear if you understand
the true personality of devas and know the cause of the war that Krishna fought and won. Those who know this
relationship between the devas (who later took birth as Mohammad, Ali and Fatima and their progeny) with the
Manifested Self and the relationship between the Manifested Self with the Absolute God attain union with the
Absolute God.

Thus ends in the Upanishads of the Songs of God, in the Science of the Wisdom of the
Absolute, in the Dialogue between Sri Krishna and Arjuna, the Thirteenth Chapter entitled
Unitive Understanding of the Distinction between the Actual and the Perceptual.

Bhagawad Gita Chapter 13 20