2.14 The contacts of the senses with the objects, O son of Kunti, which cause heat and cold, pleasure and pain, have a beginning and an end; they are impermanent; endure them bravely, O Arjuna.

2.14 Matra etc. But the unwise lament even over those passing situations of cold and heat, pleasure and pain that are created by those touches i.e., the contacts of the sense-objects-referable with the term matra - with the Soul through the door of the sense-organs; but the wise do not do so. Thus says [the Lord]. Or, the passage may be interpreted as : The touches (contacts) of these objects are with the matras, i.e., with the sense-organs, and not directly with the Supreme Self, Coming : birth. Going : destruction, Those situations that have these two you must forbear i.e., put up with.

**2.14** O son of Kunti, the objects of the senses, which are material, give pleasure and pain through cold (favorable) and heat (unfavorable). They are transitory, coming and going. O scion of Bharata, Arjuna, endure them. **Commentary:** [A doubt may arise: before these fourteenth and fifteenth verses (from 11 to 13) and after them (from 16 to 30), the subject matter pertains to the soul and the body. Then how have these two verses on 'contact with the objects of the senses' appeared in between (seemingly separate from the main topic)? The resolution is this: just as in the twelfth verse, to explain the eternal nature of all beings, the Lord said, 'Never was there a time when I did not exist...' thereby placing Himself in their category, similarly, to show that the body and other merely material objects are non-eternal, perishable, and mutable, the Lord here speaks of 'contact with the objects of the senses'.] The word 'tu' (but) is used here to distinguish the non-eternal entities like the body from the eternal principle. 'Matrāsparśāḥ' – That by which measurement or perception occurs, i.e., that by which knowledge is acquired, those instruments of knowledge—the senses and the mind—are called 'matrā' (the measuring agents). That which comes into contact with the matrā, i.e., with the senses and the mind, is called 'sparśa' (contact). Therefore, those mere objects of creation which are known through the senses and the mind are 'matrāsparśāḥ'. Here, why should only the objects be understood by the term 'matrāsparśāḥ', and not their relationship? If we take the term 'matrāsparśāḥ' to mean only the relationship with the objects, then that relationship cannot be called 'āgamāpāyinaḥ' (coming and going); because the acceptance of a relationship occurs not merely in the mind but in the self (the 'I'). The self is eternal; therefore, any acceptance that occurs in it also becomes seemingly eternal. As long as the self does not relinquish that acceptance, it remains exactly as it was. That is, even after separation from the objects, even when the objects cease to exist, the relationship with those objects persists (Footnote p. 52). For example, a woman becomes a widow, meaning she is permanently separated from her husband, yet even fifty years later if someone says, "This is so-and-so's wife," her ears perk up! This proves that even when the relative (the husband) is no more, the assumed relationship with him remains forever. From this perspective, it is not logical to call that relationship 'coming and going'; therefore, here the term 'matrāsparśāḥ' refers to the mere objects, not the relationship with them. 'Śītoṣṇasukhaduḥkhadāḥ' – Here, the words 'cold' and 'heat' signify favorability and unfavorability. If their meaning is taken as winter and summer, they would pertain only to the tactile sense (skin), which is limited. Therefore, it seems correct to take 'śīta' as meaning favorable and 'uṣṇa' as meaning unfavorable. The mere objects give pleasure and pain through favorability and unfavorability. That is, happiness arises from gaining a favorable object, person, situation, event, place, time, etc., that we desire, and sorrow arises from encountering an unfavorable object, person, situation, etc., that we do not desire. Here, favorability and unfavorability are the cause, and pleasure and pain are the effect. In reality, these objects do not have the power to give pleasure and pain. Man, by associating a relationship with them, attributes favorability or unfavorability to them, which makes these objects appear to give pleasure and pain. Therefore, the Lord has said 'sukhaduḥkhadāḥ' (givers of pleasure and pain). 'Āgamāpāyinaḥ' – The mere objects have a beginning and an end, are subject to production and destruction, and are coming and going. They are not permanent; because they did not exist before their production and will not exist after their destruction. Therefore, they are 'āgamāpāyī' (transitory). 'Anityāḥ' – If someone says, "They may not exist before production and after destruction, but surely they exist in the middle?" Then the Lord says that being non-eternal, they do not remain even in the middle. They change every moment. They change so rapidly that no one can see them again in the same form; because in the next moment they are not as they were in the previous moment. Therefore, the Lord has called them 'anityāḥ' (non-eternal). Not only are those objects non-eternal and mutable, but even the senses and the mind, through which those objects are known, are also mutable. How to understand their mutability? For example, by working throughout the day, fatigue sets in the senses etc. by evening, and the freshness that came after a satisfying sleep in the morning does not remain until evening. Therefore, sleep must be taken again, which removes the fatigue of the senses and brings an experience of freshness. Just as fatigue comes every moment in the waking state, similarly, freshness comes every moment in sleep. This proves that in the senses etc., change occurs every moment. Here, the mere objects are described in their gross aspect as 'āgamāpāyinaḥ' and in their subtle aspect as 'anityāḥ'. To describe them as even subtler than non-eternal, they will be called 'asat' (unreal) in the sixteenth verse; and that eternal principle described earlier will be called 'sat' (real).] 'Staṃstitikṣasva' – When all these 'matrāsparśa', i.e., the objects of the senses, appear, to have the knowledge that this is favorable and that is unfavorable is not a fault. Rather, the fault lies in allowing attachment, aversion, joy, sorrow, etc., to arise in the mind because of them. Therefore, even when there is knowledge of favorability and unfavorability, to not allow the arising of attachment, aversion, etc.—that is, to remain undisturbed amidst the objects of the senses—is itself to endure them. This endurance is what the Lord has called 'titikṣasva'. Another meaning is this: The activities and states of the body, senses, mind, etc., have a beginning and an end; they exist and cease to exist. Those activities and states are not in you; because you are the knower of them, separate from them. You yourself remain as you are. Therefore, remain undisturbed in those activities and states. To remain undisturbed in these is titikṣā (forbearance). **Connection:** The previous verse spoke of forbearance towards the objects of the senses. Now, what will result from such forbearance is explained in the following verse.