Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 10 - Shloka (Verse) 42

व्याख्या --'अथवा'--यह अव्यय-पद देकर भगवान् अर्जुनसे मानो यह कह रहे हैं कि तुमने जो प्रश्न किया था, उसके अनुसार मैंने उत्तर दिया ही है; अब मैं अपनी तरफसे तेरे लिये एक विशेष महत्त्वकी सार बात बताता हूँ।

अथवा हे अर्जुन इस उपर्युक्त प्रकारसे वर्णन किये हुए अधूरे विभूतिविस्तारके जाननेसे तेरा क्या ( प्रयोजन सिद्ध ) होगा? ( तू तो बस? ) यह सम्पूर्णतासे कहा जानेवाला अभिप्राय ही सुन ले -- मैं एक अंशसे अर्थात् सर्व भूतोंका आत्मरूप जो मेरा एक अवयव है उससे? इस सारे जगत्को विशेष रूपसे दृढ़तापूर्वक धारण करके स्थित हो रहा हूँ। ऐसा ही वेदमन्त्र भी कहते हैं कि समस्त भूत इस परमेश्वरका एक पाद है। इत्यादि।

Having spoken of the glories limb by limb (part by part) for everyone's ease, He now speaks of them in their entirety for the sake of gracing the devotee, beginning with 'athava' (or). 'Athava' is used to accept an alternative view.

By this extensive knowledge which still leaves a remainder, there would be no fruit for a capable person like you; thus He says 'bahuna' (by much). The meaning is that by knowing the spoken glories, everything is not known, because only some glories have been mentioned.

Then, by what instruction of few words can the entire meaning be known? Regarding that, (the implication is) 'entirely'. 'Vishtabhya' means specially supporting or sustaining; the connection is: I stand supporting the entire universe with a single 'pada' (foot/part), conditioned by the power of being the material cause of the entire manifestation, in the form of all beings.

In this very regard, He cites the Shruti as proof—'tatha cha' (and so it is). Thus, by this, the Lord's various glories are taught as objects of meditation and knowledge.

Having shown the form to be meditated upon as consisting of the entire manifestation, by teaching the unconditioned Reality which is beyond the manifestation with 'three quarters are immortal in heaven', the implied meaning of the word 'Tat' (That), which is the perfect, homogenous Existence-Consciousness-Bliss, is determined.

Having thus spoken of the glories briefly and in detail, He speaks to the incapable one (or regarding the incapable) with 'athava'. What is the use of this much knowledge for you? Implying that since this knowledge is a purifier of the mind, and you are capable with a pure mind, there is no purpose (for detailed enumeration) for you; He addresses him as 'O Arjuna'.

Then, to the query 'What should I meditate upon?', He answers. I stand having supported, i.e., sustained, this entire universe with a single portion. And so says the Shruti: 'All beings are His foot (quarter).'

Or, by this verse, the Yoga asked by Arjuna is stated. Thus, in the tenth chapter, by demonstrating the knowledge of the object of meditation endowed with Yoga and Vibhuti, which is the means to knowledge and the object to be known, the meaning of the word 'Tat' (That) has been ascertained.

किमिति वक्ष्यमाणप्राधान्यज्ञापनार्थं? न तूक्तनिष्फलत्वज्ञानाय। तथा सति नोच्येत। अज्ञात्वैनं सविशेषयुक्तं देवं वरं को विमुच्येत बन्धात् इत्यृग्वेदखिलेषु।

त्वं तु बहुफलप्राप्तियोग्य इति तवेति विशेषणम्।

अन्यस्तुत्यर्थत्वेन प्रसिद्धश्चैवात्र किंशब्दः।रागद्वेषौ यदि स्यातां तपसा किं प्रयोजनम्। तावुभौ यदि न स्यातां तपसा किं प्रयोजनम् इत्यादौ।

प्राधान्यं च सिद्धमेकत्र दर्शनात्सर्वत्र भगवद्दर्शनस्य। यो मां पश्यति सर्वत्र [6।30] इत्यादौ।

Addressing the highest qualified aspirant, He says 'athava', etc.

That (detailed listing) was spoken for the dull-witted; you, however, know just this much.

With a single 'amsha', i.e., a single part, having 'vishtabhya', i.e., pervaded this, I stand. This is in accordance with the Shruti: 'All beings are His foot.'

Therefore, the intention is: abandon limited vision and cultivate the awareness of Brahman everywhere.

What is the purpose of this extensive knowledge being spoken of? Whatever is this entire universe consisting of sentient and insentient beings—in the state of effect or cause, gross or subtle—I stand supporting ('vishtabhya') it with a ten-thousandth part of My glory, so that its existence, maintenance, and diverse activities do not transgress My will.

As stated by the reverend Parashara: 'In a fraction of a fraction of a ten-thousandth part of whom, this world-power is situated' (Vishnu Purana 1.9.53).

Or, what is the use of this limited knowledge? Have an equal vision everywhere; thus He says 'athava'.

What business do you have with this 'much' known separately? This entire universe, I stand supporting ('vishtabhya'), i.e., holding or pervading it, with a single 'amsha', i.e., merely a single part. There is nothing whatsoever apart from Me, as per the Shruti: 'All beings are His foot.'

What was started with 'pradhanyatah' (10.19) has been concluded. Now, with the verse 'athava', He states the collection of all glories, principal and non-principal, even more briefly than briefly.

'Uchyamanena' (by this being spoken)—the implication of the word 'etat' (this) is that the speaking has no end. With the intention that the purpose, which is the culminating knowledge of glories, would not be achieved (by endless listing), He says—'what is the purpose'. By 'idam' (this), the diversity established by various proofs is indicated; with this intent, it is glossed as 'consisting of sentient and insentient'. With 'karya' (effect) etc., the intended meaning of the word 'kritsna' (entire) is detailed. 'Gross and subtle' connect respectively to the states of effect and cause.

With 'svarupa' (nature) etc., the purpose of 'vishtambhana' (supporting) is stated. For transient things, 'svarupa-sadbhava' means origin; for eternal things, it means distinction from non-existence. For indeed, even the nature of eternal things is established by the Lord's eternal will. This has been elaborated earlier.

Here, to reject the idea of 'amsha' (part) being an incarnation of a part of His essential form, and on the strength of the context of 'niyamana' (control), it is stated 'by My glory' (in the commentary). Here, by the word 'mahima' (glory), the contextual capacity to control is intended. Therefore, it has the same meaning as 'born of a portion of tejas'.

The word 'eka' (one) here implies extreme minuteness; with this intent, it is said 'by a fraction of a ten-thousandth part'. 'Stambhana' (supporting) here means preventing arbitrary behavior, or presiding in the form of bringing under one's control. Regarding 'ekamshena' (by one part), he confirms his interpretation with 'yathoktam' (as stated). 'Vishwashakti'—the world itself is the power, meaning the world which is the specific entity useful for respective functions. Since it is stated immediately after 'tejomshasambhavam' (10.41), it is logical that the word 'amsha' in 'ekamshena' also refers to the same subject; this is the idea.

यद्यपि मित्रता और स्नेह के उत्स्फूर्त भावावेश में श्रीकृष्ण ने अर्जुन को अपनी विभूति (समष्टि रूप) और योग ( व्यष्टि रूप) को वर्णन करने का वचन दिया था? परन्तु एकएक उदाहरण देते समय उन्होंने अपने को इस कार्य के लिए सर्वथा असमर्थ पाया। अनन्त तत्त्व के अनन्त विस्तार का वर्णन कैसे संभव हो सकता है असमर्थता के कारण उन्हें विषाद है किन्तु पुन अपने शिष्य के प्रति अत्यन्त प्रेम के कारण? भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण सम्पूर्ण अध्याय का सार इस अन्तिम श्लोक में बताते हैं।इस बहुत जानने से तुम्हारा क्या प्रयोजन है वास्तव मे देखा जाय? तो अनन्त तत्त्व को प्रत्येक परिच्छिन्न रूप में दर्शाने का प्रयत्न व्यर्थ ही है? क्योंकि वह असंभव है। मिट्टी को समस्त विद्यमान घटों में तथा जल को सम्पूर्ण तरंगों में एकएक करके दिखाना असंभव है। केवल इतना ही किया जा सकता है कि कुछ उदाहरणों के द्वारा विद्यार्थियों को तत्त्व का दर्शन करने की कला को सिखाया जाय। गणित के अध्यापन में इसी पद्धति का उपयोग किया जाता है।मैं इस सम्पूर्ण जगत् को अपने एक अंश मात्र से धारण करके स्थित हूँ वेदान्त में जगत् शब्द में वे समस्त अनुभव समाविष्ट है? जो हम अपनी इन्द्रियों? मन और बुद्धि के द्वारा प्राप्त करते हैं। संक्षेप में जिन वस्तुओं को हम दृश्य रूप में जानते हैं? वे सभी जगत् शब्द की परिभाषा में आते हैं। इसमें दृश्य पदार्थ? भावनाएं? विचार और उनको ग्रहण करने वाली इन्द्रियादि उपाधियाँ भी सम्मिलित हैं।इस श्लोक की दूसरी पंक्ति में भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण आत्मस्वरूप की दृष्टि से कहते हैं कि यह सम्पूर्ण जगत् उनके एक अंश मात्र में धारण किया हुआ है। इस कथन का एक और दार्शनिक अभिप्राय यह है कि सत्य का अधिकांश भाग इस जगत् तथा उसके विकारों से सर्वथा निर्लिप्त है यद्यपि सर्वत्र समान रूप से व्याप्त अखण्ड सत्य में इस प्रकार अंशों का भेद नहीं किया जा सकता? तथापि लौकिक परिच्छिन्न भाषा के शब्दों द्वारा पारमार्थिक सत्य को निर्देशित करने की यह एक औपनिषदीय पद्धति है।conclusion तत्सदिति श्रीमद्भगवद्गीतासूपनिषस्तु ब्रह्मविद्यायां योगशास्त्रे,श्रीकृष्णार्जुनसंवादे विभूतियोगो नाम दशमोऽध्याय।।इस प्रकार श्रीकृष्णार्जुनसंवाद के रूप में ब्रह्मविद्या और योगशास्त्र स्वरूप श्रीमद्भगवद्गीतोपनिषद् का विभूतियोग नामक दंसवा अध्याय समाप्त होता है।

This section covers from 'Hanta te kathayishyami' up to 'Jagatsthitah'. By the verse 'Ahamatma' (Verse 20), He wards off exclusion/separation. Otherwise, in sentences like 'Among immovables I am the Himalayas', the exclusion implying 'Only the Himalaya is God, nothing else' would cause the realization of Brahman to be fragmented due to a lack of indivisibility.

Since His undivided pervasiveness does not ascend into the mind as such, this instructional text is for one who wishes to know it.

Thus, in the conclusion, having stated the doctrine of difference-cum-non-difference with 'Yadyadvibhutimatsattvam' (Verse 41), He finally concludes with non-difference alone with 'Athava bahunaitena... vishtabhyahamidam... ekamshena jagatsthitah' (Verse 42). It is indeed said: 'Pado'sya vishwa bhutani...' (RV 10.90.3).

The entire reality of God, the cause of the creation of beings, appearing in those various diverse forms, becomes the object of perception for all.

'Or what (is the use) of knowing all this much?'—To refute the impression that the previously mentioned separate knowledge is fruitless because of this objection, he explains 'kim' (what/why). This objection 'kim' is only to indicate the predominance of the knowledge of the all-pervading form that is about to be stated, in comparison to the knowledge of the nature of limited objects like the sun etc. mentioned earlier; it is not to indicate the fruitlessness of the specific knowledge mentioned. If it were fruitless, the statement of it would be futile; this is the meaning.

Objection: Since liberation is possible by knowledge of pervasiveness alone, why wouldn't specific knowledge be indeed futile? To this, he says 'ajnatva' (not knowing). Statements like 'non-attainment of attributes like joy being the head' etc. are spoken regarding meditation, whereas regarding knowledge there is Shruti, so there is no contradiction. Or, this Shruti concerns a specific qualified aspirant.

Objection: For those fit for knowledge of pervasiveness, specific knowledge is indeed fruitless? And let there be an arrangement that the statement (of specifics) is for others? Because of the force of the qualifier 'tava' (for you). To this, he says 'tvam tu' (but you). Therefore, (the implication is) 'for you, mere specific knowledge is not enough'. Since the qualifier can be explained otherwise, it does not establish the suggested arrangement; this is the idea.

Objection: Since the words 'what by knowing' imply 'nothing', suggesting the fruitlessness of what was said, and leading to the absurdity of its statement being futile; due to this obstruction, and since 'fruitless' and 'little fruit' are similar in lacking 'great fruit', it is interpreted by secondary implication (gauni vritti) that the mentioned knowledge is secondary, and consequently the knowledge to be stated is primary? (Question:) In that secondary usage, a purpose must be stated? (Answer:) No, because it is a conventional metaphor; with this view, he says 'anya' (other). 'Stuti' (praise) means indicating excellence. 'Artha' means purpose.

This explanation would hold if the predominance of the knowledge of pervasiveness over limited knowledge were established. How is that (established)? To this, he says 'pradhanyam cha' (and predominance). Because of the statement of specific fruit in 'He who knows Me...' etc. It is said that a meaning established by logic also becomes firm with the support of scriptural statements.

Having thus spoken of the glories part by part, He speaks of them in their entirety—'athava' (or), indicating an alternative.

What use is it to you, O Arjuna, to know this 'much', which still has a remainder? This entire universe, I stand supporting ('vishtabhya'), holding or pervading it, with a single 'amsha' (part), a mere fraction. There is nothing apart from Me, as per the Shruti: 'All beings are His one foot, three feet are immortal in heaven.'

Therefore, what is the use of this limited vision? Maintain the vision of Me everywhere; this is the intention.

(Verse:) 'Some fortunate ones, placing their mind in the Infinite, achieve the cessation of other objects. But my mind, tasting the drop of nectar flowing from Your lotus feet, becomes intoxicated again and again like a bee.'

Thus, if one perceives the Lord's portion only in objects possessing glory etc., an attitude of discardability regarding other things might arise, thereby disrupting the realization that everything consists of the Lord. Therefore, He states another mode with 'athava'.

'Athava', meaning by another alternative. O Arjuna, what purpose do you have with this 'much', i.e., varied knowledge? Meaning, none at all. Since there is no purpose served by this varied knowledge, He states the nature useful for the purpose—'This entire visible universe, I stand supporting ('vishtabhya') with a single 'amsha', i.e., a playful part; I alone exist.' By this, the idea conveyed is: 'Contemplate everything as merely a form of My sport.'

(Verse:) 'The world appears diverse due to one's own ignorance. To destroy that (ignorance), Sri Krishna spoke the Vibhuti-form (chapter) to Nara (Arjuna).'

Or, O Arjuna, what is the use to you of knowing this 'much' in this manner, which leaves a remainder? Listen to the meaning being spoken of in its entirety.

'Vishtabhya', meaning having specially supported or made firm; this entire universe; 'ekamshena', meaning with one part, with one foot, in the form of all beings—I stand. And so is the Vedic text: 'All beings are His foot' (Taittiriya Aranyaka 3.12).

Thus, resolving the exposition of Vibhuti into Yoga, He concludes with 'athava'.

Or, what is the use to you of knowing this 'much' detail being spoken of here? Know My 'Yoga', i.e., sovereignty/power, thus: I, the Purushottama, the Adhideva (Supreme Deity), stand supporting ('vishtabhya'), i.e., sustaining, pervading, and controlling, this entire universe consisting of sentient and insentient beings—which is Adhibhuta, in the state of the effect-body and subtle—with a single 'amsha', i.e., with My Akshara (Imperishable) glory in the form of Adhyatma.

By stating that He supports the universe with His single part, the contingency of total involvement (that the whole of God has transformed into the world) is also warded off. By this, His majesty is indicated.

अथवा or? बहुना (by) many? एतेन (by) this? किम् what? ज्ञातेन known? तव to thee? अर्जुन O Arjuna? विष्टभ्य supporting? अहम् I? इदम् this? कृत्स्नम् all? एकांशेन by one part? स्थितः exist? जगत् the world.Commentary The Lord concludes Having established or pervaded this whole world with one fragment of Myself? I remain.This verse is based on the declaration in the Purusha Sukta (RigVeda10.90.3) that One arter of Him is all the cosmos the three arters are the divine transcendent Reality.I exist supporting this whole world by one part? by one limit? or by one foot. One part of Myself constitutes all beings.All beings form His foot (Taittiriya Aranyaka 3.12). The whole world is one Pada or foot of the Lord. Amsa (part) or Pada (foot) is mere Kalpana or imagination or account of our own ignorance,or limiting adjunct. In reality Brahman is without any such parts or limbs and is formless.Arjuna has now a knowledge of the glories of the Lord. He is fit to behold the magnificent cosmic form of the Lord. Lord Krishna prepares Arjuna for this grand vision by giving him a description of His glories.Arjuna says O Lord? I now realise that the whole world is filled by Thee. I now wish to behold the whole universe in Thee with my eye of intuition.Thus in the Upanishads of the glorious Bhagavad Gita? the science of the Eternal? the scripture of Yoga? the dialogue between Sri Krishna and Arjuna? ends the tenth discourse entitledThe Yoga of the Divine Glories.,

Athava, or, on the other hand; kim, what is the need; of tava jnatena, your knowing; etena bahuna, this extensively-but imcompletely-in the above manner, O Arjuna? You listen to this subject that is going to be stated in its fullness: Aham, I; sthitah, remain; vistabhya, sustaining, supporting, holding firmly, in a special way; idam, this; krtsnam, whole; jagat, creation; ekamsena, by a part, by a foot [The Universe is called a foot of His by virtue of His having the limiting adjunct of being its efficient and material cause.] (of Myself), i.e. as the Self of all things [As the material and the efficient cause of all things]. The Vedic text, 'All beings form a foot of His' (Rg., Pu. Su. 10.90.3; Tai. Ar. 3.12.3) support this. [A Form constituted by the whole of creation has been presented in this chapter for meditation. Thery the unalified transcendental Reality, implied by the word tat (in tattva-masi) and referred to by the latter portion of the Commentator's otation (viz tripadasyamrtam divi: The immortal three-footed One is established in His own effulgence), becomes established.]

What is the use to you of this detailed knowledge taught by Me? I sustain this universe with an infinitesimal fraction of My power - this universe consisting of sentient and non-sentient entities, whether in effect or causal condition, whether gross or subtle - in such a manner that it does not violate My will in preserving its proper form, existence and various activities. As said by Bhagavan Parasara: 'On an infinitesimal fraction of this energy, this universe rests' (V. P., 1.9.53).