Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 16 - Shloka (Verse) 8

व्याख्या -- असत्यम् -- आसुर स्वभाववाले पुरुष कहा करते हैं कि यह जगत् असत्य है अर्थात् इसमें कोई भी बात सत्य नहीं है। जितने भी यज्ञ? दान? तप? ध्यान? स्वाध्याय? तीर्थ? व्रत आदि शुभकर्म किये जाते हैं? उनको वे सत्य नहीं मानते। उनको तो वे एक बहकावा मानते हैं।अप्रतिष्ठं ते जगदाहुरनीश्वरम् -- संसारमें आस्तिक पुरुषोंकी धर्म? ईश्वर? परलोक (टिप्पणी प0 896.1)। (पुनर्जन्म) आदिमें श्रद्धा होती है। परन्तु वे आसुर मनुष्य धर्म? ईश्वर आदिमें श्रद्धा नहीं रखते अतः वे ऐसा मानते हैं कि इस संसारमें धर्मअधर्म? पुण्यपाप आदिकी कोई प्रतिष्ठा -- मर्यादा नहीं है। इस जगत्को वे बिना मालिकका कहते हैं अर्थात् इस जगत्को रचनेवाला? इसका शासन करनेवाला? यहाँपर किये हुए पापपुण्योंका फल भुगतानेवाला कोई (ईश्वर) नहीं है (टिप्पणी प0 816.2)। अपरस्परसम्भूतं किमन्यत् कामहैतुकम् -- वे कहते हैं कि स्त्रीको पुरुषकी और पुरुषको स्त्रीकी कामना हो गयी। अतः उन दोनोंके परस्पर संयोगसे यह संसार पैदा हो गया। इसलिये काम ही इस संसारका हेतु है। इसके लिये ईश्वर? प्रारब्ध आदि किसीकी क्या जरूरत है ईश्वर आदिको इसमें कारण मानना ढकोसला है? केवल दुनियाको बहकाना है। सम्बन्ध -- जहाँ सद्भाव लुप्त हो जाते हैं? वहाँ सद्विचार काम नहीं करते अर्थात् सद्विचार प्रकट ही नहीं होते -- इसको अब आगेके श्लोकमें बताते हैं।

तथा --, वे आसुर स्वभाववाले मनुष्य कहा करते हैं कि जैसे हम झूठसे भरे हुए हैं? वैसे ही यह सारा संसार भी झूठा और प्रतिष्ठारहित है? अर्थात् धर्मअधर्म आदि इसका कोई आधार नहीं है? अतः निराधार है तथा अनीश्वर है? अर्थात् पुण्यपापकी अपेक्षासे इसका शासन करनेवाला कोई स्वामी नहीं है? अतः यह जगत् बिना ईश्वरका है। तथा कामसे प्रेरित हुए स्त्रीपुरुषोंका आपसमें संयोग हो जानेसे ही सारा जगत् उत्पन्न हुआ है? अतः इस जगत्का कारण काम ही है? दूसरा और क्या हो सकता है अर्थात् ( इसका ) धर्मअधर्मादि कोई दूसरा अदृष्ट कारण नहीं है? केवल काम ही प्राणियोंका कारण है। यह लोकायतिकों की दृष्टि है।

He states that there are other attributes of demonic people with 'Kincha' (Moreover). The connection is with the previous context: 'They say (ahuh) that... exists (vidyate)' (referring to the atheistic view in verse 8).

(The objection raised against the atheists would be): If one accepts a world devoid of 'Brahman' (God) as the controller of nature, and devoid of 'Adrishta' (unseen merit/demerit) known only through scripture, then how does its creation happen? To this doubt, (the demonic view) is stated—'Kincha' (Moreover...).

He explains the purport of the rhetorical question 'Kim anyad' (What else?) as 'Na kinchit' (Nothing else). (Meaning: They believe there is no cause other than lust).

Moreover, (they say) this world is 'Asatyam' (untrue)—just as we are full of falsehood, so too is this world full of falsehood because it lacks uncontradicted proof.

It is 'Apratishtham' (without foundation)—it lacks the foundation known as Dharma and Adharma which are the causes of order/arrangement. It is 'Anishvaram' (godless)—they say there is no Ruler (Ishvara) who governs with regard to Dharma and Adharma. Objection: In the absence of Dharma, Adharma, and their Overseer, how do they explain the origin of the world? Answer:

'Aparasparasambhutam'—The words 'Para' and 'Apara' are synonyms for 'Anya' (meaning mutual/one another). It is born from the mutual union of male and female impelled by lust (Kama). That which has lust alone as its cause is 'Kamahaitukam'. 'What else is there?' Meaning: There is no other cause for the world, such as 'Adrishta' (unseen merit/demerit) or Dharma, other than Kama; rather, Kama alone—the cause of the union between man and woman—is the cause of the entire world. This is the view of the Materialists (Lokayatikas).

(Note: Dhanpati refutes another interpretation): As for the view that interprets 'Aparaspara' using the grammatical rule "aparasparah kriya-satatye" (implying continuity), suggesting the world is born from the continuity of latent impressions (vasanas) of Dharma and Adharma acting as mutual causes like seed and sprout—that view should be disregarded. Why? Because the term 'Apratishtham' (foundationless) already implies the negation of Dharma/Adharma; therefore, assuming that interpretation here would lead to the fault of repetition and represents a forced, unjustifiable imagination.

They speak the opposite regarding the world's 'Satyam' (reality/truth), 'Pratishtha' (foundation), and 'Ishvara' (Lord Vishnu). (Contrary to their view, the scriptures state): "Its secret name (Upanishad) is 'Truth of the Truth'; the Pranas are truth and He is their Truth" (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 2.1.20).

"Two indeed are the forms of Brahman: the formed and the formless, the mortal and the immortal, the stationary and the moving, the existing (Sat) and the undefined (Tyat)" (Brihadaranyaka 2.3.1).

The Prachinashala Shruti states: "He alone establishes (sadayati) this and controls (yamayati) it."

(Regarding origin), mutual origination is indeed stated in verses like "Beings are born from food..." (Gita 3.14). (The Asuras deny these divine truths).

They say the world is 'Asatyam' (devoid of truth). And it is 'Apratishtham'—devoid of the foundation called Dharma and Adharma. It is 'Anishvaram'—devoid of a Controller (God).

'Aparasparasambhutam'—(Grammatically) the affix 'sut' is added by the rule "aparasparah kriya-satatye" (indicating continuity of action). (In their view), it is born from the continuity of Dharma, Adharma, and their latent impressions (vasanas) which act as mutual causes like seed and sprout.

'Kimanyat'—What else is there in the world? Nothing whatsoever is produced in dependence on Dharma, etc. Rather, everything is 'Kamahaitukam' (caused by lust). Kama is the state of union between man and woman; the world arises from that alone. The meaning is that a creature is born by mere nature, not by 'Adrishta' (unseen merit/demerit).

(The Demonic people) do not say that this world is 'Asatyam' (in the sense of being an effect of the Truth)—meaning, they do not accept that the world has Brahman as its Self, being an effect of Brahman who is designated by the word 'Satya'. They do not say it is 'Apratishtham' (Established)—meaning, established in Brahman. (Whereas the truth is that) the Earth, supported by the Infinite Brahman, supports all the worlds. As stated (in Vishnu Purana 2.5.27): "This Earth, supported on the head by that foremost of Nagas (Ananta/Shesha), supports the garland of worlds along with gods, demons, and men."

They do not say it is 'Anishvaram' (Ruled)—meaning, governed by Me, the Supreme Brahman, the Lord of all, of true resolve. (Whereas) it has been stated: "I am the source of everything; from Me everything proceeds" (Gita 10.8).

Instead, they say thus: 'Aparasparasambhutam'—This world of men, beasts, etc., is observed to be born from the mutual connection of woman and man. 'Kimanyat'—What else is observed other than this nature? Nothing else whatsoever is observed—this is the meaning. Therefore, this entire world is 'Kamahaitukam' (caused by lust).

Questions arise: How do they not know the engagement (Pravritti) and withdrawal (Nivritti) regarding Dharma and Adharma mentioned in the Vedas? If Dharma and Adharma are not accepted, how can there be an orderly arrangement of happiness and distress in the world? How can they transgress God's command regarding purity and conduct? And if God is not accepted, how does the world originate? Therefore, He says—'Asatyam' (Untrue), etc.

They describe the world as one where there is no 'Satyam'—meaning no authority like the Vedas and Puranas. The meaning is that they do not acknowledge the authority of the Vedas, etc. As it has been said (by materialists): "The three authors of the Vedas are buffoons, scoundrels, and demons."

For this very reason, they say it is 'Apratishtham' (without foundation)—meaning it lacks the foundation of Dharma and Adharma which causes order. They assert that the diversity of the world is merely natural (accidental).

For this very reason, it is 'Anishvaram'—they describe the world as having no God who is the Creator and Regulator.

Then, from where do they say the world originates? To this, He says—'Aparasparasambhutam.' 'Apara' and 'Para' mean 'Aparaspara' (mutual/one another); the world is born from the mutual union of the female and the male. What other cause is there for it? There is nothing else; rather, it is 'Kamahaitukam' (caused by lust). They say that 'Kama' (lust) alone, existing between man and woman in a continuous flow, is the cause of this world.

"Thus, not only do they not speak the truth, but they speak the opposite"—this is stated next; indicated by "Kincha" (Moreover). The word 'Asatyam' (Untrue) here does not mean 'Mithya' (Illusory/Falsehood). Why? Because the idea of the world being an illusion is contradicted by worldly perception and by their (Asuras') own statements (since Asuras are attached to worldly reality and lordship). Also, Asuras, who have a deep-seated attachment to what they consider real and stable power, cannot be deceived by the subtle arguments of the world being an illusion. The interpretation (by Shankara) that "Just as we are mostly liars, so is the whole world" is also weak. Why? Because the word 'Jagat' (world) does not refer only to sentient beings (who can lie), and because the negations here are intended to contradict the specific divine forms mentioned earlier. Just as 'Apratishtham' and 'Anishvaram' negate the Foundation and the Lord established by scripture, similarly 'Asatyam' here is intended to negate the 'Satyam' (Reality) established by scripture.

And that 'Satyam' is Brahman Itself, as famous in texts like "Truth, Knowledge, Infinite is Brahman" (Taittiriya Up. 2.1). In the Chandogya, He is defined by the name 'Satyam' as the controller of the sentient and insentient—"The name of this Brahman is Satyam... Sat, Ti, Yam...". Therefore, the intention here is that followers of Kapila, Kumarila, Jina, Sugata, Charvaka, etc., declare the world to be 'Abrahmatmakam' (not having Brahman as its self)—this is expressed by the term 'Asatyam'.

Regarding 'Apratishtham': Since it is impossible to negate the perceptually established support (like the ground supporting things) due to contradiction with universal experience, the intention is to negate the 'Support' taught in the scriptures. He explains this with the specific example: "By the Infinite Brahman..." This refutes the interpretation that 'Pratishtha' refers only to Dharma and Adharma. The idea is that He supports all worlds by His essential nature and His power. While scripture says the earth is supported by the Primeval Kurma, Shesha, and the Elephants of the directions, the rationalists (haitukas) prattle thus: "If the earth has a supporter, he needs another, and he another; this leads to infinite regress. Therefore, the earth has its own power to support." Some accept the theory of the earth revolving due to the force of wind. Jains believe in eternal falling due to gravity.

'Anishvaram' here does not negate worldly lords like idols or kings, for they do not deny them. As Charvakas repeat: "The King, established by worldly behavior, is God." Nor does it mean merely the negation of Brahman, as that would be a repetition of 'Asatyam'. Therefore, following the etymology, the purport is the negation of a 'Supernatural Controller' (Alaukika Niyantri)—explained by "Of true resolve," etc. The idea is: Just as a magnet acts by nature, they view this entire world of sentient and insentient beings as godless (Nirishvara), driven by mere nature (Jain view), or by the force of Dharma/Adharma alone, or ruled by an 'egoistic God' (thinking "Who else is a KNOWER called Supreme Lord other than me?"), or by a stream of gods limited by time and space. "Regulated" (Niyamitam)—The implication is that those who imagine deities like Prajapati and Pashupati (Shiva) to be the Supreme Lord, distinct from Me (Narayana), are also indeed Asuras.

Regarding the doubt "Other rulers are also seen and heard of, so how is everything regulated by the Lord?", He says "I am the source of all" (10.8). The regulating activity of other rulers is also dependent on the Lord. As stated in the Brahma Sutras, starting with " The agent, because scripture is meaningful" (2.4.1) and concluding with "But from the Supreme, for so implies the scripture" (2.3.41). Thus, by these three terms, it is stated that they do not accept that the creation, sustenance, and activity of the world are dependent on the Supreme Brahman. Regarding creation, the independence from Brahman that was asserted is now justified by them in a different way—He explains this with "Vadanti cha evam" (And they speak thus).

The phrase "Aparaspara..." is not a single sentence with the previous part, because "Kim anyat" (What else) would not fit, and it would require forced imagination. The interpretation "This view alone is sufficient for their Asura-hood, what else need be said?" is plagued by the fault of adding words (adhyahara). Therefore, "And they speak thus" is not said with the intention of adding words, but to present this specific view...

आसुरी लोगों के वर्णन में हम ऐसे नितान्त संशयी और भौतिकवादी पुरुष को पहचान सकते हैं? जो जीवन की ओर केवल अपनी सीमित बुद्धि के दृष्टिकोण से ही देखता है। इसलिए? स्वाभाविक ही है कि वह न जीवन का कोई चरम लक्ष्य देख पाता है? और न ही इस अनित्य और परस्पर असंबद्ध प्रतीत होने वाली घटनाओं से पूर्ण जगत् का कोई नित्य अधिष्ठान स्वीकार कर पाता है। इन भौतिकवादियों की बुद्धि प्रखर होती है और वे स्वतन्त्र और मौलिक विचार करने में समर्थ होते हैं। इन लोगों को अल्प मार्गदर्शन की आवश्यकता होती है? जिससे कि वे अपनी सीमित बुद्धि के परे भी देख सकें। इस श्लोक में भौतिकवादी दृष्टिकोण का वर्णन किया गया है।भौतिकवादी वैज्ञानिक पद्धति से जगत् का निरीक्षण और विश्लेषण करते हैं? फिर भी वे उस सत्य को नहीं पहचान पाते? जो इस विश्व को धारण किये हुए है। वे परिवर्तनों को देखतें हैं? और इस सतत परिवर्तन को ही वे जगत् समझ लेते हैं? जिसके लिए किसी नित्य? अविकारी अधिष्ठान का होना वे नहीं मानते हैं। परन्तु? वैज्ञानिक भी अब स्वीकार करते हैं कि नित्य? अपरिवर्तनशील अधिष्ठान के बिना न जगत् में परिवर्तन हो सकता है और न ही वह ज्ञात हो सकता है। परिवर्तन तो एक सापेक्ष घटना मात्र है। एक स्थिर और गतिशून्य पर्दे के बिना चलचित्र का प्रक्षेपण नहीं किया जा सकता और नदी के स्थिर तल के बिना जल का अखण्ड प्रवाह नहीं बना रह सकता। उसी प्रकार अधिष्ठान के बिना आभास नहीं हो सकता। सम्पूर्ण जगत् का यह आश्रय ही सत्य कहलाता है परन्तु आसुरी स्वभाव के लोगों के अनुसार? जगत् निराश्रय है? सत्यरहित है।अनीश्वरम् जगत् का कोई अधिष्ठान नहीं है तब कमसेकम? क्या कोई सर्वज्ञ सर्वशासक है? जो जगत् की घटनाओं को नियन्त्रित करता है भोगवादी लोगों के अनुसार ऐसा कोई नियन्ता और निर्माता नहीं है। न सृष्टिकर्ता है और न पालनकर्ता ही है।इनके मतानुसार यह सम्पूर्ण चराचर जगत् केवल महाभूतों के परम्पर संबंध से उत्पन्न हुआ है और यह संबंध जिस किसी रूप में परिणित होता है? वह केवल संयोग की बात है? और न कि उसके पार्श्व में कोई नियम है। प्राणियों की उत्पत्ति का एकमात्र कारण है? कामवासना। आधुनिक मनोवैज्ञानिक भी इस बात पर बल देते हैं कि कामवासना ही अन्य समस्त वृत्तियों की जननी है? जिसके कारण समस्त घटनाएं घट रही हैं और जीवन की समस्त उपलब्धियाँ संभव,होती हैं।आसुरी लोगों के दृष्टिकोण को दर्शाने के पश्चात् भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण ऐसे लोगों के भाग्य के प्रति सहानुभूति अनुभव करते हुए उनके कर्मों को बताते हैं

'Asatyam'—

They say that where there is no effect (result/fruit) other than what is seen (visible), such a world is 'Akinchitkam' (trifling/inconsequential).

It is not said by "Asatyam apratishtham te" that Asura-hood belongs merely to those who speak of the world's falsity (Mithyatva); rather, it belongs to all those who do not acknowledge Vishnu as the cause of the world's birth, etc.—with this intent, he says "Of the world...".

"Tad-vaiparityena" means they speak the opposite, i.e., "It has no Truth," etc. Regarding the point "Vishnu is the Truth of the world," he cites the Shruti—"Tasya..." i.e., "Of Him, who is the Truth of the Truth."

What is the secret name (Upanishad)? "Pranas"—meaning the formed and formless world—are called 'Satyam'. This Vishnu is the 'Truth' of those Pranas.

If the world did not have primary 'Reality' (Satyatva), this determination ("Truth of the Truth") would not be possible. Therefore, he interprets the reality of the world, consisting of Formed and Formless, using another Shruti—"Dve va va..." (Two indeed are the forms...). 'Rupe' means images/forms. Among them, the formed and stationary is called 'Sat'. The formless is called 'Yat' and 'Tyat'. Thus, 'Sat' and 'Tyat' combined are called 'Satyam'.

Now, he explains the "Truth of the world" aspect of Vishnu using Shruti—"Tasya..." 'Sat' is that which 'sadayati'—causes dissolution/creation. 'Yam' is that which 'yamayati'—controls/regulates. 'Sat' and 'Yam' make 'Satyam'. The meanings of 'Pratishtha' (Foundation) and 'Ishvara' (Lord) are well-known.

Regarding 'Aparasparasambhutam': The interpretation "Aparam parasmat sambhutam" (One born from another / mutual origin) is incorrect, because this is a section dealing with negation (what Asuras believe/deny). Therefore, it must be interpreted as: "They say it is NOT mutually originated (Na paraspara sambhutam)."

(Objection): Would it be so (that denying it is Asuric) if 'mutual origin' were the view accepted by the Lord? (Answer): Yes, hence he says "Paraspara..." (The Lord accepts the causal chain 'Beings from food, food from rain...'; Asuras deny this Divine order). Or (Alternative view): By this, he demonstrates the incorrectness of others' explanations. Since the Lord Himself has spoken of 'mutual origin' (in Chapter 3), how can His own statement be called 'Asuric'? (Therefore, the Asuric statement 'Aparasparasambhutam' implies a denial of the divine chain or a strictly lust-based definition). If one says the purport is to object to God (Ishvara), that is not correct, because it would lead to the fault of repetition.

Objection: The valid authority known as the 'Veda' exists—which expounds upon Dharma and Adharma (the objects of engagement and withdrawal), is faultless, is the very form of the Lord's command, and is famous throughout the world. Supporting it, there are Smritis, Puranas, and Itihasas. So how can there be ignorance of engagement, withdrawal, and their proofs? Or, even if they know, since the Lord exists as the Ruler to punish those who transgress His command, how can they remain devoid of purity and conduct by not following them? After all, the Lord as the Ruler of the wicked is also famous in the world and Vedas. To this, He says—'Asatyam' (Untrue), etc.

'Satyam' (Truth) refers to the valid authority called 'Veda', which conveys the Reality and whose purport is uncontradicted, along with the Puranas based on it. (The Asuras say) this authority does not exist; regarding it, they say "It is untrue." Although the physical form of the Veda is perceptually evident, since they do not accept its authority/validity, for them it is essentially non-existent. For this very reason, they say the world is 'Apratishtham'—meaning it lacks the foundation of Dharma and Adharma which causes order. Similarly, it is 'Anishvaram'—meaning it has no God as the Controller to bestow the fruits of good and evil actions. These Asuras describe the world thus. Due to the blockage caused by powerful sins, they do not accept the authority of the Vedas. Consequently, by not accepting Dharma, Adharma, and God as taught by the Vedas, they act as they please and fall from the human goal—this is the meaning.

(Objection): If one desires a world devoid of the Supreme Lord (who controls Nature with the help of Dharma/Adharma known only through scripture), then in the absence of a cause, how does the world originate? To this, He says—'Aparaspara...' 'Aparasparasambhutam'—The world is born from the mutual union of male and female impelled by lust (Kama). It is 'Kamahaitukam'—caused by lust alone; meaning, it is devoid of any cause other than lust. Objection: Is there any other cause like Dharma (Adrishta)? (Asuras say): No. "Kim anyat" (What else?)—What other unseen cause is there? There is indeed none. Even if one accepts 'Adrishta' (unseen merit), the argument eventually rests on 'Nature' (Svabhava); so let the diversity of the world be accepted as merely natural. When the origin is possible through the seen (visible lust), there is no room for imagining the unseen (Adrishta). Therefore, they say that 'Kama' alone is the cause of living beings, not any other 'Adrishta' or God. This is the view of the Materialists (Lokayatikas).

Moreover. Those Asuras say (ahuh) that the world is 'Asatyam'—meaning devoid of the authority of Vedas and Puranas. It is 'Apratishtham'—meaning disordered/unstable. It is 'Anishvaram'—meaning a world of which there is no Creator God existing.

Objection: In the absence of a Creator, how do they explain origin? Answer: "Aparaspara..."

'Apara' and 'Para' make 'Aparaspara' (mutual); it is born from the union of woman and man. It is 'Kamahaitukam'—such that the lust (Kama) of the man and woman is its only cause. "Anyat"—(They ask): What 'other' cause is there besides this? (Implying) There is nothing else—this is the meaning.

'Asatyam'—Just as we are mostly full of untruth, so is this entire world 'Asatyam' (unreal/false). 'Apratishtham cha'—Neither Dharma nor Adharma exists as the foundation of this world; therefore, it is 'Apratishtham' (without support). Thus do those demonic people describe the world.

'Anishvaram'—Nor does there exist a Ruling God (Ishvara) for it who governs with regard to Dharma and Adharma; therefore, they call the world 'Anishvaram' (Godless).

Moreover? 'Aparasparasambhutam'—The entire world is born from the mutual union of female and male driven by lust (Kama).

'Kimanyat'—(They say): It is 'Kamahaitukam'; its cause is Lust alone. What 'other' cause of the world could there be? There is no other 'unseen' (Adrishta) cause like Dharma or Adharma existing for the world; Kama alone is the cause of living beings. This is the view of the Lokayatikas (Materialists).

Moreover, 'Asatyam'—(They call the world untrue). (The scriptural truth is): "You alone are the origin of this 'Sat' (Manifest world)... You are the Truth of the Truth" (Srimad Bhagavatam 10.2.26). And Shrutis like "O Somya, this was 'Sat' alone in the beginning" (Chandogya 6.2.1) and "They call it 'Satyam'" (Taittiriya 2.6) confirm this. The Truth (Reality) is that since this world is accomplished by the action of the Absolutely Real Entity (Brahman), the world is 'Tadatmakam' (of the nature of Truth). However, Asuras call it 'Asatyam' (Untrue/False)—using arguments like it being imagined by Maya (illusion) or one's own ignorance. (Critique of the Asuric view): If that were so (if the world were false), then the Vedas which fall within that world, and the means (sadhanas) prescribed by them, would become useless and unworthy of acceptance. Interaction/transaction is not possible with non-existent things like a 'sky-flower' or a 'hare's horn' because they are 'Asat'—this is the meaning.

Similarly, they say it is 'Apratishtham'—meaning it does not have its foundation in Brahman. And they describe it as 'Anishvaram'—meaning they do not say it is regulated by the All-pervading Lord Purushottama of true resolve.

Whereas it has been stated by Me: "I am the source of all; from Me everything proceeds" (10.8), and "I alone create, destroy, and sustain Myself by My own Self."

But they speak thus: 'Aparasparasambhutam'—This world of men, beasts, etc., is observed to be born from the mutual connection of the female (Nature) and the male (Person) who have come together mutually. 'Kimanyat'—"What else?" meaning nothing other than this nature (like God or Adrishta) is observed. Therefore, the 'natural Asuras' (Sahaja Asuras) say that this entire world is 'Kamahaitukam' (caused by lust).

असत्यम् without truth? अप्रतिष्ठम् without (moral) basis? ते they? जगत् the world? आहुः say? अनीश्वरम् without a God? अपरस्परसम्भूतम् brought about by mutual union? किम् what? अन्यत else? कामहैतुकम् with lust for its cause.Commentary They hold that the universe is without any substratum or support or an undying basic reality.This is a description of the opinion of atheists like the Charvakas and other materialists. They do not believe in the existence of Brahman Who is the support of this world. They do not even accept the existence of an Isvara in this world. They say We are unreal. Therefore this world also is unreal? the scriptures which declare the truth are also unreal. What else but lust can be the cause of this universe Sexual passion is the sole cause of all living creatures. There is no such thing as the theory of Karma. The whole world is caused by the mutual union of man and woman under the impulse of lust. There is neither virtue nor vice. There is no Lord Who dispenses the fruits of actions of the individuals according to virtue and vice. Dharma and Adharma are not the basis of this world. Sexual desire is the sole basis for this universe. This world is a world of chance. They are not endowed with the faculty of introspection. They are ignorant of the field (Nature) and knower of the field (God).Mutual union Sexual union it may mean the union of atoms. The world arose from the combination of atoms according to the Vaiseshikas.

Te, they, the domoniacal persons; ahuh, say; that the jagat, world; is asatyam, unreal-as we ourselves are prone to falsehood, so is this whole world unreal; apratistham, it has no basis, it does not have righteousness and unrighteousness as its basis; it is anisvaram, without a God-nor is there a God who rules this (world) according to rigtheousness and unrighteousness (of beings). Hence they say that the world is godless. Moreover, it is aparaspara-sambhutam, born of mutual union. The whole world is born of the union of the male and female impelled by passion. (That union is) kama-haitukam, brought about by passion. Kama-haitukam and kama-hetukam are the same. Kim anyat, what other (cause can there be)? There exists to other unseen cause such as righteousness, unrigtheousness, etc. Certainly, the passion of living beings is the cause of the world. This is the view of the materialists.

They maintain that the universe is 'without truth,' viz., they do not accept that this universe, which is the effect of Brahman denoted by the term Satya, has Brahman for its Self. They contend that it is bereft of any 'foundation,' viz., they do not accept that it has Brahman for its foundation. Brahman as Ananta supports the earth and bears all the worlds, as declared in 'This earth, sustained upon the head of this great serpent, supports in its turn, this garland of worlds, along with their men, demons and gods' (V.P., 2.5.27). They say that it is 'without a Lord,' viz. they don't accept that this universe is controlled by Me, the Lord of all, the Supreme Brahman, whose will is always true. It has been already averred: 'I am the origin of all; from Me proceed everything' (10.8). And they also contend thus: 'What else can exist without mutual causation?' i.e., except by the union of the male and the female among men, beasts etc. What else exists apart from this nature? The meaning is that nothing else is seen. Therefore the entire world is rooted in sexual lust.