।।2.16।। असतो देहस्य सद् भावो न विद्यते सतः च आत्मनो न असद् भावः। उभयोः देहा त्मनोः उपलभ्यमानयोः यथोपलब्धि तत्त्वदर्शिभिः अन्तो दृष्टः। निर्णयान्तत्वात् निरूपणस्य निर्णय इह अन्तशब्देन उच्यते। देहस्य अचिद्वस्तुनोः असत्त्वम् एव स्वरूपम् आत्मनः चेतनस्य सत्त्वम् एव स्वरूपम् इति निर्णयो दृष्टः इत्यर्थः।विनाशस्वभावो हि असत्त्वम् अविनाशस्वभावश्च सत्त्वम्। यथा उक्तं भगवता पराशरेणतस्मान्न विज्ञानमृतेऽस्ति किञ्चित् क्वचित्कदाचिद्द्विज वस्तुजातम्। (वि0 पु0 2।12।43)सद्भाव एवं भवतो मयोक्तो ज्ञानं यथा सत्यमसत्यमन्यत् (वि0 पु0 2।12।45)अनाशी परमार्थश्च प्राज्ञैरभ्युपगम्यते। तत्तु नाशि न संदेहो नाशिद्रव्योपपादितम्।। (वि0 पु0 2।14।24)यत्तु कालान्तरेणापि नान्यां संज्ञामुपैति वै। परिणामादिसंभूतां तद्वस्तु नृप तच्च किम्।। (वि0 पु0 2।13।100) इतिअत्रापिअन्तवन्त इमे देहाः (गीता 2।18)अविनाशि तु तद्विद्धि (गीता 2।17) इति उच्यते। तदेव सत्त्वासत्त्वव्यपदेशहेतुः इति गम्यते। अत्र तु सत्कार्यवादस्य असङ्गत्वात् न तत्परोऽयं श्लोकः। देहात्मस्वभावाज्ञानमोहितस्य तन्मोहशान्तये हि उभयोः नाशित्वानाशित्वरूपस्वभावविवेक एव वक्तव्यः।स एवगतासूनगतासूंश्च नानुशोचन्ति (गीता 2।11) इति प्रस्तुतः। स एवअविनाशि तु तद्विद्धि (गीता 2।17)अन्तवन्त इमे देहाः (गीता 2।18) इत्यनन्तरम् उपपाद्यते अतो यथोक्त एव अर्थः।आत्मनः तु अविनाशित्वं कथम् उपपद्यते इति अत्र आह
2.16 'The unreal,' that is, the body, can never come into being. 'The real,' that is, the self, can never cease to be. The finale about these, the body and the self, which can be experienced, has been realised correctly by the seers of the Truth. As analyis ends in conclusion, the term 'finale' is here used. The meaning is this: Non-existence (i.e., perishableness) is the real nature of the body which is in itself insentient. Existence (i.e., imperishableness) is the real nature of the self, which is sentient. [What follows is the justification of describing the body as 'unreal' and as having 'never come into being.']
Non-existence has, indeed, the nature of perishableness, and existence has the nature of imperishableness, as Bhagavan Parasara has said: 'O Brahmana, apart from conscious entity there does not exist any group of things anywhere and at any time. Thus have I taught you what is real existence - how conscious entity is real, and all else is unreal' (V. P., 2.12.43 - 45). 'The Supreme Reality is considered as imperishable by the wise. There is no doubt that what can be obtained from a perishable substance is also perishable' (Ibid., 2.14.24). 'That entity which even by a change in time cannot come to possess a difference through modification etc., is real. What is that entity, O King? (It is the self who retains Its knowledge)' (Ibid., 2.13.100).
It is said here also: 'These bodies ৷৷. are said to have an end' (2.18) and 'Know That (the Atman) to be indestructible' (2.17). It is seen from this that this (i.e., perishableness of the body and imperishableness of the self) is the reason for the designating the Atman as 'existence' (Sattva) and body as 'non-existence' (Asvattva). This verse has no reference to the doctrine of Satkaryavada (i.e., the theory that effects are present in the cause), as such a theory has no relevance here. Arjuna is deluded about the true nature of the body and the self; so what ought to be taught to him in order to remove his delusion, is discrimination between these two - what is alified by perishablenss and what, by imperishableness. This (declaration) is introduced in the following way: 'For the dead, or for the living' (2.11).
Again this poin is made clear immediately (by the words), 'Know that to be indestructible ৷৷.' (2.17) and 'These bodies ৷৷. are said to have an end' (2.18).
How the imperishableness of the self is to be understood, Sri Krsna now teaches:
★🔗
