Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 2 - Shloka (Verse) 14

व्याख्या-- [यहाँ एक शंका होती है कि इन चौदहवें-पंद्रहवें श्लोकोंसे पहले (11 से 13) और आगे (16 से 30 तक) देही और देह--इन दोनोंका ही प्रकरण है। फिर बीचमें 'मात्रास्पर्श' के ये दो श्लोक (प्रकरणसे अलग) कैसे आये? इसका समाधान यह है कि जैसे बारहवें श्लोकमें भगवान्ने सम्पूर्ण जीवोंके नित्य-स्वरूपको बतानेके लिये 'किसी कालमें मैं नहीं था; ऐसी बात नहीं है'--ऐसा कहकर अपनेको उन्हींकी पंक्तिमें रख दिया, ऐसे ही शरीर आदि मात्र प्राकृत पदार्थोंको अनित्य, विनाशी, परिवर्तनशील बतानेके लिये भगवान्ने यहाँ 'मात्रास्पर्श' की बात कही है।]
'तु'--नित्य-त्तत्त्वसे देहादि अनित्य वस्तुओंको अलग बतानेके लिये यहाँ 'तु' पद आया है।
'मात्रास्पर्शाः'-- जिनसे माप-तौल होता है अर्थात् जिनसे ज्ञान होता है, उन (ज्ञानके साधन) इन्द्रियों और अन्तःकरणका नाम मात्रा' है। मात्रासे अर्थात् इन्द्रियों और अन्तःकरणसे जिनका संयोग होता है, उनका नाम 'स्पर्श' है। अतः इन्द्रियों और अन्तःकरणसे जिनका ज्ञान होता है, ऐसे सृष्टिके मात्र पदार्थ 'मात्रास्पर्शाः' हैं।
यहाँ 'मात्रास्पर्शाः' पदसे केवल पदार्थ ही क्यों लिये जायँ, पदार्थोंका सम्बन्ध क्यों न लिया जाय? अगर हम यहाँ
'मात्रास्पर्शाः' पदसे केवल पदार्थोंका सम्बन्ध ही लें, तो उस सम्बन्धको 'आगमापायिनः' (आने-जानेवाला) नहीं कह सकते; क्योंकि सम्बन्धकी स्वीकृति केवल अन्तःकरणमें न होकर स्वयंमें (अहम्में) होती है। स्वयं नित्य है, इसलिये उसमें जो स्वीकृति हो जाती है, वह भी नित्य-जैसी ही हो जाती है। स्वयं जबतक उस स्वीकृतिको नहीं छोड़ता, तबतक वह स्वीकृति ज्यों-की-त्यों बनी रहती है अर्थात् पदार्थोंका वियोग हो जानेपर भी, पदार्थोंके न रहनेपर भी, उन पदार्थोंका सम्बन्ध बना रहता है (टिप्पणी प0 52) । जैसे, कोई स्त्री विधवा हो गयी है अर्थात् उसका पतिसे सदाके लिये वियोग हो गया है, पर पचास वर्षके बाद भी उसको कोई कहता है कि यह अमुककी स्त्री है, तो उसके कान खड़े हो जाते हैं! इससे सिद्ध हुआ कि सम्बन्धी-(पति-) के न रहनेपर भी उसके साथ माना हुआ सम्बन्ध सदा बना रहता है। इस दृष्टिसे उस सम्बन्धको आने-जानेवाला कहना बनता नहीं; अतः यहाँ 'मात्रास्पर्शाः' पदसे पदार्थोंका सम्बन्ध न लेकर मात्र पदार्थ लिये गये हैं।
'शीतोष्णसुखदुःखदाः'-- यहाँ शीत और उष्ण शब्द अनुकूलता और प्रतिकूलताके वाचक हैं। अगर इनका अर्थ सरदी और गरमी लिया जाय तो ये केवल त्वगिन्द्रिय-(त्वचा-)के विषय हो जायँगे, जो कि एकदेशीय हैं। अतः शीतका अर्थ अनुकूलता और उष्णका अर्थ प्रतिकूलता लेना ही ठीक मालूम देता है।
मात्र पदार्थ अनुकूलता-प्रतिकूलताके द्वारा सुख-दुःख देनेवाले हैं अर्थात् जिसको हम चाहते हैं, ऐसी अनुकूल वस्तु, व्यक्ति, परिस्थिति, घटना, देश, काल आदिके मिलनेसे सुख होता है और जिसको हम नहीं चाहते, ऐसी प्रतिकूल वस्तु, व्यक्ति, परिस्थिति आदिके मिलनेसे दुःख होता है। यहाँ अनुकूलता-प्रतिकूलता कारण हैं और सुख-दुःख कार्य हैं। वास्तवमें देखा जाय तो इन पदार्थोंमें सुख-दुःख देनेकी सामर्थ्य नहीं है। मनुष्य इनके साथ सम्बन्ध जोड़कर इनमें अनुकूलता-प्रतिकूलताकी भावना कर लेता है, जिससे ये पदार्थ सुख-दुःख देनेवाले दीखते हैं। अतः भगवान्ने यहाँ 'सुखदुःखदाः' कहा है।
'आगमापायिनः' मात्र पदार्थ आदि-अन्तवाले, उत्पत्ति-विनाशशील और आने-जानेवाले हैं। वे ठहरनेवाले नहीं है; क्योंकि वे उत्पत्तिसे पहले नहीं थे और विनाशके बाद भी नहीं रहेंगे। इसलिये वे 'आगमापायी' हैं।
'अनित्याः' अगर कोई कहे कि वे उत्पत्तिसे पहले और विनाशके बाद भले ही न हों, पर मध्यमें तो रहते ही होंगे? तो भगवान् कहते हैं कि अनित्य होनेसे वे मध्यमें भी नहीं रहते। वे प्रतिक्षण बदलते रहते हैं। इतनी तेजीसे बदलते हैं कि उनको उसी रूपमें दुबारा कोई देख ही नहीं सकता; क्योंकि पहले क्षण वे जैसे थे, दूसरे क्षण वे वैसे रहते ही नहीं। इसलिये भगवान्ने उनको 'अनित्याः' कहा है।
केवल वे पदार्थ ही अनित्य, परिवर्तनशील नहीं हैं, प्रत्युत जिनसे उन पदार्थोंका ज्ञान होता है, वे इन्द्रियाँ और अन्तःकरण भी परिवर्तनशील हैं। उनके परिवर्तनको कैसे समझें? जैसे दिनमें काम करते-करते शामतक इन्द्रियों आदिमें थकावट आ जाती है, और सबेरे तृप्तिपूर्वक नींद लेनेपर उनमें जो ताजगी आयी थी, वह शामतक नहीं रहती। इसलिये पुनः नींद लेनी पड़ती है, जिससे इन्द्रियोंकी थकावट मिटती है और ताजगीका अनुभव होता है। जैसे जाग्रत्-अवस्थामें प्रतिक्षण थकावट आती रहती है ,ऐसे ही नींदमें प्रतिक्षण ताजगी आती रहती है। इससे सिद्ध हुआ कि इन्द्रियों आदिमें प्रतिक्षण परिवर्तन होता रहता है।
यहाँ मात्र पदार्थोंको स्थूलरूपसे 'आगमापायिनः' और सूक्ष्मरूपसे 'अनित्याः' कहा गया है। इनको अनित्यसे भी सूक्ष्म बतानेके लिये आगे सोलहवें श्लोकमें इनको 'असत्' कहेंगे; और पहले जिस नित्य-तत्त्वका वर्णन हुआ है, उसको 'सत्' कहेंगे।]
'तांस्तितिक्षस्व' ये जितने मात्रास्पर्श अर्थात् इन्द्रियोंके विषय हैं, उनके सामने आनेपर यह अनुकूल है और यह प्रतिकूल है--ऐसा ज्ञान होना दोषी नहीं है, प्रत्युत उनको लेकर अन्तःकरणमें राग-द्वेष हर्षशोक आदि विकार पैदा होना ही दोषी है। अतः अनुकूलता-प्रतिकूलता-का ज्ञान होनेपर भी राग-द्वेषादि विकारोंको पैदा न होने देना अर्थात् मात्रास्पर्शोंमें निर्विकार रहना ही उनको सहना है। इस सहनेको ही भगवान्ने 'तितिक्षस्व' कहा है।
दूसरा भाव यह है कि शरीर, इन्द्रियाँ, अन्तःकरण आदिकी क्रियाओँका, अवस्थाओंका आरम्भ और अन्त होता है तथा उनका भाव और अभाव होता है। वे क्रियाएँ, अवस्थाएँ तुम्हारेमें नहीं हैं; क्योंकि तुम उनको जाननेवाले हो, उनसे अलग हो। तुम स्वयं ज्यों-के-त्यों रहते हो। अतः उन क्रियाओंमें, अवस्थाओंमें तुम निर्विकार रहो। इनमें निर्विकार रहना ही तितिक्षा है।

सम्बन्ध-- पूर्वश्लोकमें मात्रास्पर्शोंकी तितिक्षाकी बात कही। अब ऐसी तितिक्षासे क्या होगा इसको आगेके श्लोकमें बताते हैं।

यद्यपि आत्मा नित्य है ऐसे जाननेवाले ज्ञानीको आत्मविनाशनिमित्तक मोह होना तो सम्भव नहीं तथापि शीतउष्ण और सुखदुःखप्राप्तिजनित लौकिक मोह तथा सुखवियोगजनित और दुःखसंयोगजनित शोक भी होता हुआ देखा जाता है ऐसे अर्जुनके वचनोंकी आशंका करके भगवान् कहते हैं मात्रा अर्थात् शब्दादि विषयोंको जिनसे जाना जाय ऐसी श्रोत्रादि इन्द्रियाँ और इन्द्रियोंके स्पर्श अर्थात् शब्दादि विषयोंके साथ उनके संयोग वे सब शीतउष्ण और सुखदुःख देने वाले हैं अर्थात् शीतउष्ण और सुखदुःख देते हैं। अथवा जिनका स्पर्श किया जाता है वे स्पर्श अर्थात् शब्दादि विषय ( इस व्युत्पत्तिके अनुसार यह अर्थ होगा कि ) मात्रा और स्पर्श यानी श्रोत्रादि इन्द्रियाँ और शब्दादि विषय ( ये सब ) शीतउष्ण और सुखदुःख देनेवाले हैं। शीत कभी सुखरूप होता है कभी दुःखरूप इसी तरह उष्ण भी अनिश्चितरूप है परंतु सुख और दुःख निश्चितरूप हैं क्योंकि उनमें व्यभिचार ( फेरफार ) नहीं होता। इसलिये सुखदुःखसे अलग शीत और उष्णका ग्रहण किया गया है।जिससे कि वे मात्रास्पर्शादि ( इन्द्रियाँ उनके विषय और उनके संयोग ) उत्पत्तिविनाशशील हैं इससे अनित्य हैं अतः उन शीतोष्णादिको तू सहन कर अर्थात् उनमें हर्ष और विषाद मत कर।

Even if the Self is eternal as proven by Shruti, and grief/delusion caused by its birth/death are absent, still grief and delusion might arise in another way—reiterating this doubt, the commentator introduces the verse as an answer with "Yadyapi" etc.

Relying on the fact that delusion etc., caused by the contact with cold, heat, pleasure, and pain, is observed through presence and absence (anvaya-vyatireka), the adjective "Laukika" (worldly) is used (in Shankara's commentary). For the candidate eligible for Knowledge suggested in "Ashochyan" (2.11), the qualification of "Titikshu" (forbearance) is taught here, in accordance with the Shruti "Having become forbearing and concentrated..."

Taking the word to be explained ("Matra"), he shows it refers to sense-objects through the derivation of 'instrument' (Karana)—with "Matrah" etc. Showing a genitive compound (Shashthi-samasa) and deriving "Sparsha" in the sense of 'state/action' (Bhava), he explains its meaning as "of the Matras..." He shows their functional action with "Te shita..." (They give cold...).

Now, accepting both words as referring to objects like sound etc. through the derivation of 'object' (Karma), and showing another compound, he states the function of objects with "Athava" (Or...). Objection: "Since giving cold/heat implies giving pleasure/pain, why are cold/heat mentioned separately from pleasure/pain?" Answer: To this, he says "Shitam..."

Mentioning them separately from objects is to indicate the "favorability" (anukulya) and "unfavorability" (pratikulya)—which are the causes of pleasure and pain included within those very objects. For external objects generate pleasure etc. only by producing cold or heat, or favorability or unfavorability, in the psycho-physical organism (Adhyatma).

Objection: "Since the contact between sense-objects and senses exists always in the Self (as it is all-pervading), the cold etc. caused by it would also be so; thus joy and sorrow caused by them would be permanent in It?" Answer: Anticipating this, he explains the second half ("Agamapayinah...") with "Yasmat" etc. And here, by the two addresses "Kaunteya" and "Bharata," it is illuminated that only one pure in "both lineages" (mother's and father's) is eligible for Knowledge.

Objection: "Even if grief and delusion caused by the destruction of the Self are absent due to its eternality, still those two (grief and delusion) caused by separation from pleasure, contact with pain, and the arrival of cold etc., are 'Durvara' (hard to prevent)?" If this is said, He answers with "Matrasparshah" etc. "Miyante"—Those by which objects are measured/perceived—are "Matrah," i.e., senses; their "Sparshah," i.e., contacts with objects. Or (alternatively)—"Sprishyante"—those which are touched/contacted—are "Sparshah," i.e., objects; "Matrah" (senses) and "Sparshah" (objects)—they give cold, heat, pleasure, and pain. With the intention that the contact of the skin-sense and its object—or those two (cold/heat) themselves—have the nature of giving 'variable' (aniyata) pleasure/pain and cold/heat, separate mention is made of cold/heat (which give variable pleasure/pain) from the 'constant' forms of pleasure/pain. Since they are of the nature of origin and destruction, therefore they are "Anitya" (impermanent). Therefore, "Tan titikshasva"—endure them. Meaning, do not engage in joy or grief regarding them.

"Like a woman's nature (fickle), these give pleasure etc.; taking refuge in the nature of the foremost of men like Bharata, you are fit to endure them"—this is the intent of the address (Bharata). Here, by the two addresses, some suggest that only one pure in both lineages is eligible for Knowledge. Others say it implies his "Dhiratva" (fortitude) due to being of noble lineage. Some say: "For you, pure in both lineages, ignorance of the Self is improper." If Self-knowledge could arise merely from the purity of both lineages, then this view would be correct. Or, it should be interpreted in accordance with the first view. (Note: It should be understood that commentators do not describe the intent of addresses everywhere because it is easy to understand).

"Still, due to 'tad-darshana-abhava' (not seeing them/absence of them) etc., there will be grief"—if this is said, He answers "No" with "Matrasparshah" etc. "Miyante"—Those which are measured/perceived—are "Matrah," i.e., objects; their "Sparshah," i.e., connections; they alone give cold, heat, pleasure, and pain. For the experience of cold/heat etc. in the Self arises only from the connection of cold/heat etc. in the body. And from that come pleasure and pain. For pain etc. is not possible in the Self "svatah" (naturally/intrinsically).

Why? Because they are "Agamapayitvat" (subject to coming and going). If they were intrinsic to the Self, they would exist even in deep sleep (but they don't). Therefore, since those "Matrasparshah" exist only in waking etc. and not otherwise, due to this "Anvaya-Vyatireka" (concomitance), they are caused by them alone, not intrinsic to the Self. And the Self has no connection with them other than the "Subject-Object" relationship.

Nor is there eternality even in the form of a "flow" (pravaha) despite being transitory (individually), because they are absent in deep sleep, dissolution, etc.—He states this with "Anityah." Therefore, the Self's delusion of identity with the body etc. is the sole cause of pain. Thus, for one freed from that, there is no pain in the death of kinsmen etc. Therefore, abandoning attachment, "Titikshasva"—endure those cold, heat, etc.

Objection: "Even if the Self is different from the subtle body (Linga-sharira), due to the experience 'I am miserable,' its being the locus of attributes like misery is inevitable. Thus, upon the destruction of kinsmen like Bhishma, connection with misery will indeed occur?" Anticipating this, He says "Matrasparshah" etc.

"Miyante" (are measured)—those by which objects are measured are "Matrah," i.e., functions of the senses. Or, the ten "Prajna-matras" (Speech etc.) and ten "Bhuta-matras" (Name/Form etc.)—famous in the Kaushitaki Upanishad—should be accepted as sense-organs and objects. Their "Sparshah"—connections in the form of subject-object relationship—should be the interpretation. Or, "Matra" (Object) contacts with "Pramatra" (Knower)—meaning the connection of sense-objects and senses. The word "Sparsha" denoting that (object/sense) is seen in "Sparshan kritva bahir bahyan" (Gita 5.27). There, the word "Sparsha" implies both the object and the sense possessing it. Therefore, all connections of the "Pramata" (Knower) with the "Prameya" (Known) through the "Pramana" (Means of knowledge/senses) are "Agamapayinah"—subject to origin and destruction like cold and heat, therefore "Anitya" (impermanent), and similarly givers of pleasure and pain. Therefore, "Titikshasva"—endure them. Addressing him as "Kaunteya" and "Bharata" suggests his "Dhiratva" (fortitude) due to noble lineage.

Anarthas (evils) like "Pramatrutva" (agentship/knowership)—being absent in deep sleep, Samadhi, possession by spirits etc., and present in waking and dream—appear in the Self "occasionally" (kadachitka); yet being false (mithya) like a snake on a rope, they do not become its attributes. For whatever appears non-differently in a locus only occasionally is superimposed (adhyasta) on it, like a snake on a rope. The agent/knower etc. also appears non-differently in the Inner Self (Pratyak) occasionally; therefore, it is false, this is certain. Thus, there is no connection of "Pramata" (agent) in the Inner Self at all. For a real connection between a Real and a False entity is impossible. Then the connection of the attributes of the agent (like misery) to the Inner Self is far removed indeed.

"Then how does the cognition 'I am miserable' arise in the Self?" We say: "Due to the superimposition of identity (tadatmya-adhyasa) with the respective adjuncts." That is why misery seen in waking does not continue in dream, and what is seen in dream is not seen in waking. As the Shruti says: "Whatever merit and sin he sees there, he remains untouched by it, for this Purusha is unattached."

The Shruti "Desire, determination, doubt... all this is Mind alone" states that the Mind alone is the material cause of all modifications like desire, by indicating non-difference. Therefore, the perception of misery in the Self is indeed a delusion like a dream; hence, "Titikshasva"—endure that (pain) generated by separation from the beloved—this is the sentiment.

Sound, touch, form, taste, and smell, along with their substrates, are called "Matras" because they are the effects of the Tanmatras (subtle elements).

Their "Sparshah" (contacts) via the ears and other senses produce pleasure and pain in forms like cold, heat, soft, hard, etc.

The word "cold-heat" is used as an illustration. "Titikshasva" (Endure) them with patience until the completion of the scriptural duties like war.

And since they are "Agamapayinah" (subject to coming and going), they are fit to be endured by the courageous. They are "Anitya" (impermanent), meaning that upon the destruction of the karma that causes bondage, they cease to exist due to their very nature of coming and going.

Objection: "I do not grieve for the dead or the living, but rather for the Self (myself) who is suffering the pain of separation from them"—to this, He says "Matrasparshah" etc.

"Miyante"—those by which objects are known—are "Matrah," i.e., the functions of the senses. Their "Sparshah" means connections with objects. They are givers of cold, heat, etc. Since they are "Agamapayinah" (coming and going), they are "Anitya" (impermanent/unstable). Therefore, "Titikshasva"—endure them.

Just as contacts with water, sunlight, etc., occurring at specific times, naturally produce cold, heat, etc., similarly, union with and separation from loved ones produce pleasure, pain, etc. Since they are unstable, enduring them is proper for you, who are "Dhira" (wise/steadfast), and not being overpowered by the joy and grief caused by them—this is the meaning.

Although this meaning should have been stated at the conclusion of the section on the eternality of the Self, it is stated immediately due to the urgency of the purport—he says "Imam artham anantaram."

Rejecting the interpretation by Shankara and others—"Matras are senses like ears by which sound etc. are measured"—as uncommon, he explains the meaning of "Matra" as "Sound etc." (in Ramanuja's Bhashya). "Sashrayah" (with substrates)—the idea is that a substance qualified by qualities is the effect of the Tanmatra. Regarding "Tanmatra-karyatvat" (because they are effects of Tanmatras): There is no dispute that Tanmatras are denoted by the word "Matra" (usages like Shabda-matra exist). Therefore, the substance which is their effect, being substantially one with them, is justifiably denoted by that word.

Considering the derivation of "Sparsha" in the sense of 'action/state' (Bhava) to be more well-known than the derivation of 'object' (Karma), and considering contact with objects as the direct cause of pleasure etc., he specifies the other correlative of contact (ears etc.) and explains the compound as "Contacts of them with ears etc." He explains that "Sheetoshna" are illustrative (upalakshana) and explains the compound with "Sheetoshna..." etc. The idea is: if one abandons the cause-effect relationship and interprets it simply as "givers of cold/heat AND givers of pleasure/pain," it would result in the redundancy of separate mention.

Since cold and heat are not relevant in battle, why is this said? He answers: "The words cold and heat are for illustration." Implied is "of the falling of weapons, etc." Cold, heat, etc. should be understood as applicable in respective Varna-Ashrama duties.

Drawing from "Dhiram" (to be spoken in 2.15) and "Dhiras tatra" (spoken in 2.13), he says "Tan dhairyena" (Them, with patience). Or, by the words "Kaunteya" and "Bharata" right here, it is suggested that for you—born of a Kshatriya woman and a descendant of a distinguished Kshatriya—patience alone is proper. Just as in penance and sacrifices, wind, sun, hunger, thirst, animal-killing, etc. must be endured until the completion of the rite, so too here, the falling of weapons and killing of enemies. Therefore, since sorrows caused by unavoidable sense-object contacts are hard to remove by grieving, "Titiksha" (endurance) is the only proper course instead of useless grief—this is the sentiment.

Here, regarding the 'pleasure' aspect, "Kshama" (endurance/forgiveness) means "non-elation" (anutseka) through indifference. The reason there too is their transient nature (agamapayitva). To avoid redundancy of the word "Anitya," he explains "Bandha..." (in Ramanuja's text). The word "Anitya" here negates "eternal continuity" (flow/pravaha). The view that splits the word as "Nityah" (Eternal) to suggest they should be endured because they are eternally associated is "weak" (manda). The meaning is that since they are absent in Liberation, they do not possess eternality even as a continuous flow.

विषय ग्रहण की वेदान्त की प्रक्रिया के अनुसार बाह्य वस्तुओं का ज्ञान इन्द्रियों के द्वारा होता है। इन्द्रियाँ तो केवल उपकरण हैं जिनके द्वारा जीव विषय ग्रहण करता है उनको जानता है। जीव के बिना केवल इन्द्रियाँ विषयों का ज्ञान नहीं करा सकतीं।यह तो सर्वविदित है कि एक ही वस्तु दो भिन्न व्यक्तियों को भिन्न प्रकार का अनुभव दे सकती है। एक ही वस्तु के द्वारा जो दो भिन्न अनुभव होते हैं उसका कारण उन दो व्यक्तियों की मानसिक संरचना का अन्तर है।यह भी देखा गया है कि व्यक्ति को एक समय जो वस्तु अत्यन्त प्रिय थी वही जीवन की दूसरी अवस्था में अप्रिय हो जाती है क्योंकि जैसेजैसे समय व्यतीत होता जाता है उसके मन में भी परिवर्तन होता जाता है। संक्षेप में यह स्पष्ट है कि जब हमारा इन्द्रियों के द्वारा बाह्य विषयों के साथ सम्पर्क होता है तभी किसी प्रकार का अनुभव भी संभव है।जो पुरुष यह समझ लेता है कि जगत् की वस्तुयें नित्य परिवर्तनशील हैं उत्पन्न और नष्ट होती रहती हैं वह पुरुष इन वस्तुओं के कारण स्वयं को कभी विचलित नहीं होने देगा। काल के प्रवाह में भविष्य की घटनायें वर्तमान का रूप लेती हैं और हमें विभिन्न अनुभवों को प्रदान करके निरन्तर भूतकाल में समाविष्ट हो जाती हैं। जगत् की कोई भी वस्तु एक क्षण के लिये भी विकृत हुये बिना नहीं रह सकती । यहाँ परिवर्तन ही एक अपरिवर्तनशील नियम है।इस नियम को समझ कर आदि और अन्त से युक्त वस्तुओं के होने या नहीं होने से बुद्धिमान पुरुष को शोक का कोई कारण नहीं रह जाता। शीत और उष्ण सफलता और असफलता सुख और दुख कोई भी नित्य नहीं हैं। जब वस्तुस्थिति ऐसी है तो प्रत्येक परिवर्तित परिस्थिति के कारण क्षुब्ध या चिन्तित होना अज्ञान का ही लक्षण है। जीवन में आने वाले कष्टों को चिन्तित हुये बिना शान्तिपूर्वक सहन करना चाहिये। सभी प्रकार की अनुकूल और प्रतिकूल परिस्थितियों में विवेकी पुरुष इस तथ्य को सदा ध्यान में रखता है कि यह भी बीत जायेगा।जगत् की वस्तुयें परिच्छिन्न हैं क्योंकि उनका आदि है और अन्त है। भगवान् कहते हैं कि ये वस्तुयें स्वभाव से ही अनित्य हैं। अनित्य शब्द से तात्पर्य यह है कि एक ही वस्तु किसी एक व्यक्ति के लिये ही कभी सुखदायक तो कभी दुखदायक हो सकती है।शीतउष्ण आदि को समान भाव से सहने वाले व्यक्ति को क्या लाभ मिलेगा सुनिये

Thus He states two meanings with "Na hi" etc. It is not indeed that I was not, but rather I was; so too you and these kings.

If there is "worthiness of grief" when the form changes, then why is there no grieving when youth is attained from childhood? He who is "Dhira" does not grieve.

And "Dhairya" (patience/firmness) is easy for one who has no attachment/faith even in this body. Therefore, seek patience.

He suspects grief in another way—'tathāpi' (even so), etc. Although, with the thought 'there will be loss of relatives etc.', grief is not proper; because there is no loss of Self as stated, and even in the loss of body there is the gain of a substitute. Still, with the thought 'upon their death, loss of my happiness and attainment of misery will occur', my grief has arisen. How? 'Due to the absence of seeing them,' etc. 'Tat' refers to relatives etc. By the word 'ādi', seeing them in a deformed state is also grasped. For, the sight, touch, conversation, etc., of objects of love are causes of happiness. When they are dead, due to the absence of seeing them etc., there is loss of happiness. And by seeing their cutting, piercing, etc., there is attainment of misery. Preceded by the negation of this, he introduces the verse—'na' (no), etc. 'Mīyante viṣayā yaiḥ' (by which objects are measured) means 'mātrāḥ' i.e., senses—this explanation is incorrect; because the word 'mātrā' is conventionally used for 'objects' in Puranas etc.—intending this, he explains 'mīyanta' (are measured), etc. Objection: Smell, taste, form, touch, and sound are objects. Therefore, whether it is a separate word (from sparsha) or a Dvandva compound, the repetition of 'sparsha' (touch)—which is included in objects—is useless? To this he says—'teṣām' (of those) objects. Objection: Still there is incompatibility, because objects do not have 'touch' (contact)? To this he says—'sambandhā' (connections), etc. Objection: If so, then by accepting a genitive compound (connection of objects), there is no fault even if they are separate words (why assume one phrase)? To this he plans the sentence—'ta eva' (they indeed), etc. The meaning of the word 'tu' is 'eva' (indeed). Because this effect (giving pleasure/pain) is not possible for objects and connections separately—this is the idea. Objection: The words 'cold' and 'heat' denote specific objects; so how can 'connection with objects' give specific objects? And how do they directly give pleasure and pain? And who is the relatum (receiver) to whom they give? To this he says—'dehe' (in the body), etc. By the word 'body' here, senses are indicated (lakṣita). By this, the words 'cold and heat' are indicators (upalakṣaka) of all objects. And by the mention of 'object', the direct experience (sākṣātkāra) of them is indicated; this is 'indicated indication' (lakṣita-lakṣaṇā). Only through experience is there receiving of pleasure and pain. The relatum is the body. And the giving is to the Self—this is said. By this, the worldly perception suspected by Arjuna is restated: Whatever contacts of whatever objects occur with whatever senses, by them occur the direct experiences of those objects; therein, from the experience of desired objects comes happiness, and from the experience of undesired objects comes misery. (Objection): Let it be so, what of the contextual doubt? To this, stating the meaning established by the 'kāku' (intonation) following the word 'tu', he says—'na hi' (not indeed), etc. 'Svataḥ' (by themselves) means merely by the contact of object and sense. 'Duḥkhādi' means experience of objects and pleasure/pain. By this, it is said: Are mere 'mātrā-sparśas' alone givers of cold-heat-pleasure-pain? No; but only accompanied by 'abhimāna' (identification/attachment). 'Abhimāna' here is affection caused by the superimposition of goodness on objects; and aversion caused by the error of enemy-ness etc., and non-discrimination caused by excessive 'mine-ness' in the body, senses, and inner organ. Objection: Why shouldn't the contact of object and sense alone be the cause of knowledge and pleasure/pain, so that 'abhimāna' is added as an extra factor in the causal aggregate? Preceded by this doubt, he explains the next foot (pāda)—'kuta' (how/why), etc. Objection: How is this obtained? We say 'by supplying yataḥ (since)'; because there is no other purpose, or because it contains the meaning of a reason. By the logic 'Injunctions and prohibitions regarding a qualified entity transfer to the qualification.' This qualification (impermanence) of 'mātrā-sparśas'—which are qualified as givers of cold-heat-pleasure-pain—transfers to the 'giving of cold-heat-pleasure-pain.' Meaning: The nature of giving cold-heat-pleasure-pain of mātrā-sparśas is impermanent because it is 'āgamāpāyī' (coming and going). How does this resolve the stated doubt? He explains through 'atiprasanga' (over-extension/reductio ad absurdum)—'yadi' (if), etc. If mātrā-sparśas were 'svataḥ'—by themselves, independent of abhimāna—givers of cold-heat-pleasure-pain to the Self, then they would be so 'even in sleep' (suptau api). For the causal aggregate does not deviate from the effect—this is the meaning. It should not be said that in sleep, connections of objects and senses do not exist; because the connection of the sense of touch (skin) is unavoidable. Therefore, 'cold and heat' are mentioned. By this, the absence of sense-mind contact is also refuted (as mind exists). Nor is there absence of contact with the Self; because the absence of separation of the mind from the Self at any time will be stated. Stating that the over-extension results in the opposite (viparyaya), he shows the direct meaning—'ata' (therefore), etc. Therefore, 'mātrā-sparśas' do not become givers of cold-heat-pleasure-pain to the Self 'svataḥ'—by themselves alone—this is the connection. The explanation of 'ata' is 'yatastannimittā eva' (since they are caused by that alone). 'Tat' refers to abhimāna. Only accompanied by that cause are they givers of cold-heat-pleasure-pain, since (yataḥ)—this is the meaning. How so? To this it is said 'mātra' (measure/object), etc. Only for one possessing abhimāna in waking and dream do mātrā-sparśas become such givers of cold-heat-pleasure-pain. Not at other times, in sleep etc. which are devoid of abhimāna; thus the property of giving cold-heat-pleasure-pain of mātrā-sparśas follows the presence and absence (anvaya-vyatireka) of abhimāna—this is the meaning. Objection: Production of knowledge is seen even in grass etc. (in animals) devoid of (human-like) abhimāna? (Answer): True, (but) knowledge which is the cause of pleasure and pain is the subject here, so there is no fault. And from this also, abhimāna alone is the affliction of the Self—he says 'ātmanaśca' (and of the self), etc. Here 'taiḥ' refers to knowledge, pleasure, and pain. The Self has no (real) connection with knowledge etc., because they are modifications of the mind. And thus, how can properties existing in another be causes of modification in another without abhimāna? And it is well known that the burning of a house 'accepted as one's own' makes Devadatta miserable. Objection: In the absence of connection of the Self with knowledge etc., how is it said 'experience of cold-heat etc. of the Self', etc.? To this it is said—'viṣaye' (in the object), etc. Knowledge etc., which are mental modifications, are 'objects' (viṣaya). And the Self is the 'subject' (viṣayī), because the Witness-Consciousness has them as objects. Intending this very relation, the usage 'knowledge of the Self' etc. occurs. And this is indicative. 'Ownership dependent on the Lord' should also be grasped, because the purport is in the rejection of identity and inherence (samavāya). Objection: It has been propounded that only mātrā-sparśas accompanied by abhimāna are causes of knowledge etc., not alone; then 'anityāḥ' (they are impermanent) is useless? (Answer): No, because 'āgamāpāyitva' (coming and going nature) itself is explained by this. Objection: What is the purpose even in the explanation? To this he says—'na ca' (and not), etc. The word 'āgamāpāyī' is used for two: (1) That which is eternal as a stream but impermanent as an individual, like Ganges water—that is called one 'āgamāpāyī'. (2) Whose stream also is cut off, like the (blooming of) Palasha flowers—that is the other. There, even though both are perceived from the word 'āgamāpāyī', the meaning of 'āgamāpāyī' which is 'eternality as a stream'—even if 'āgamāpāyitva' exists—is 'not' intended here. Because the giving of cold-heat-pleasure-pain is possible for mātrā-sparśas (as a stream), and it is not useful for the context. But only the second—because it is possible due to absence in sleep etc., and useful for the context in the stated manner—is what the Lord says by 'anityāḥ' (impermanent), this is the meaning. 'Pralaya' means fainting/swoon. By the word 'ādi', Asamprajnata Samadhi is grasped. Objection: The word 'anitya' has many meanings, true; still this (specific meaning) is established from the consideration of renewed effort etc. This too is a qualification transferred to the qualification. It should be known that this meaning (absence in sleep etc.) was presented by the Bhashyakara earlier, relying on the 'future' explanation (of anityāḥ). Summarizing the stated meaning, he concludes—'ata' (therefore), etc. In the stated manner, only the delusion 'this is mine' etc. regarding the body etc.—only accompanied by delusion—are the 'mātrā-sparśas' (painful), this is the meaning. (Objection): What of that? To this, he states the introduction to explain the fourth foot—'ata' (therefore), etc. For one 'freed from that'—freed from delusion—the grief of death of relatives etc. which was suspected before (will not occur); for the effect does not happen when a part of the causal aggregate (abhimāna) is absent—this is the idea. (Objection): What then? To this he explains the fourth foot—'ata' (therefore), etc. 'Titikṣasva' means make it fruitless (render it ineffective by endurance), this is the idea. Objection: It is proper that 'tān' (them) refers to 'mātrā-sparśas', so how is it said 'cold-heat etc.' (endure them)? Not so; because by the word 'tat', only the 'mātrā-sparśas' which are the causes of cold and heat are indicated.

Objection: 'Indeed, regarding the Self's eternality and all-pervasiveness, we do not dispute; but oneness in every body we do not tolerate. For thus: Possessing the nine special qualities named intellect, pleasure, pain, desire, aversion, effort, dharma, adharma, and mental impressions, distinct in every body, thus eternal and all-pervading are the selves—so the Vaisheshikas think. And this very view the Logicians, Mimamsakas, etc., have also accepted. The Sankhyas, however, though disagreeing regarding the Self's possession of qualities, do not disagree regarding the difference in every body. Otherwise, there would be the contingency of the intermixture of pleasure, pain, etc. And thus, for me who am distinct from Bhishma etc., even given eternality and all-pervasiveness, due to connection with pleasure, pain, etc., upon the separation of the bodies of kinsmen like Bhishma etc., separation from pleasure and conjunction with pain would indeed occur—so how are grief and delusion not inappropriate (i.e., they are appropriate)?' Anticipating this intention of Arjuna, for the discrimination of the subtle body, He says—'By these objects are measured'—thus 'matra' means senses; their 'sparsha' means connections with objects, or modifications of the inner organ taking the form of those specific objects. They are 'agamapayinah' (coming and going). They are givers of pleasure and pain through cold, heat, etc., only to the inner organ which possesses origin and destruction, but not to the eternal, all-pervading Self. Because of its attributelessness and changelessness. Indeed, the state of being the locus of non-eternal attributes is not possible for the eternal; because of the non-difference between attribute and substance, and the impossibility of another relation. And because of the impossibility of the witnessed being an attribute of the witness. That is said: 'Without change, one cannot be miserable; what is the witness-hood of the changing? I am the witness of thousands of mental modifications, therefore I am changeless.' Thus. And thus, since all arrangement is reasonable merely due to the difference of the inner organ which has become the locus of pleasure, pain, etc., there is no proof for the difference of the changeless, all-illumining Self; because of Its pursuance everywhere as Existence and as Illumination. Regarding pleasure, pain, etc., the causality of the inner organ is established by both disputants. There, since being the inherent cause (samavayi-karana) is indeed more respected/primary, it is proper to assume that alone, and not merely efficient causality (nimittatva) when another inherent cause is absent. And thus, the Shruti 'Desire, resolve...' stating 'all this is mind indeed,' speaks of the mind's being the material cause (upadana) of all modifications like desire etc., due to the instruction of non-difference. And since the Self's nature of self-luminous Knowledge and Bliss is taught by Shrutis, it is not the locus of desire etc.; therefore, the Vaisheshikas etc. have accepted the changeability and difference of the Self only through delusion—this is the meaning. Because the inner organ is coming-and-going and is an object of perception, those 'matra-sparshas' which are generators of pleasure etc., distinct from you who are of the nature of eternal Vision, are also non-eternal and of irregular nature; because what generates pleasure at one time, like cold, heat, etc., is seen to generate pain at another time. Similarly, what generates pain at one time is seen to generate pleasure at another time. The mention of cold and heat is for the indication of adhyatmika, adhibhautika, and adhidaivika pleasure and pain. Cold and heat are sometimes pleasure, sometimes pain; but pleasure and pain are never reversed; hence the separate mention. And thus, the extremely unstable 'matra-sparshas', which give pleasure, pain, etc., to the changing (entity) distinct from you, which are of the form of union and separation with Bhishma etc.—them you 'titikṣasva' (endure). 'These do nothing to me'—with this discrimination, ignore them. Do not know the Self as miserable through the superimposition of identity with the miserable one—this is the meaning. By the two addresses 'Kaunteya' and 'Bharata', He indicates that ignorance is inappropriate for you who are pure in both lineages.

"Attainment of a body will happen in the future (that is accepted), but I grieve because of my intolerance towards the enjoyment and pain that exist for a short time now"—if this is the objection, He answers with "Matrasparshah" etc.

"O Kaunteya"—O most affectionate one! "Matrasparshah"—the connections of the functions of the senses with objects—are givers of cold, heat, pleasure, and pain. Here, the meaning is this: Water, sunlight, etc., touched by the function of the senses, become givers of cold and heat. Similarly, union with and separation from friends etc. become givers of pleasure and pain.

In union there is one's own happiness, and in separation there is pain. One should not consider the pleasure and pain residing therein (in the self-interest). Rather, by considering the "friend's happiness" (duty/higher cause), enduring that (personal pain) is best and proper. Because they are not stable—He says "Agamapayinah."

They come and they depart; therefore, they are "Anitya" (impermanent). Therefore, "Titikshasva"—endure them. By the address "Bharata," it is indicated that this is proper for you.

"Matra"—Those by which sounds etc. are measured/perceived are the senses like ears etc. The "Sparshah" of the Matras are their contacts with sounds etc. They are "Sheetoshna-sukha-duhkha-dah"—givers of cold, heat, pleasure, and pain. Alternatively, "Sprishyante" (those which are contacted) are "Sparshah," i.e., objects like sound etc. "Matrah" (senses) and "Sparshah" (objects) are givers of cold, heat, pleasure, and pain.

Cold sometimes gives pleasure and sometimes pain. Similarly, heat is also of variable nature. However, pleasure and pain are of "fixed nature" (niyata-rupa) because they do not deviate (pleasure is always pleasant). Therefore, cold and heat are mentioned separately from them.

Since those contacts of senses (Matrasparshah) are "Agamapayinah"—having the nature of coming and going—therefore they are "Anitya" (impermanent). Therefore, "Titikshasva"—endure them, bear them. The meaning is: do not engage in joy or grief regarding them.

Objection: "Firmness/Patience (Dhairya) alone does not bring about that state by which I would not be deluded?" To this, He states the means to attain it with "Matrasparshah" etc.

"Matra" means forms/objects; their "Sparshah" means the senses (by which they are contacted). Or, "Sparshah" means contacts via the senses—the pairs of opposites like cold etc.

They are "Agamapayinah" (transient) and "Anitya" (impermanent), but endure them as "Vishishta" (specific/unavoidable experiences). For "enduring everything" is essential in Sankhya and Yoga; thereby, the "Dhira" (wise one) has no delusion.

मात्रास्पर्शाः contacts of senses with objects? तु indeed? कौन्तेय O Kaunteya (son of Kunti)? शीतोष्णसुखदुःखदाः producers of cold and heat? pleasure and pain? आगमापायिनः with beginning and end? अनित्याः impermanent? तान् them? तितिक्षस्व bear (thou)? भारत O Bharata.Commentary -- Cold is pleasant at one time and painful at another. Heat is pleasant in winter but painful in summer. The same object that gives pleasure at one time gives pain at another time. So the sensecontacts that give rise to the sensations of heat and cold? pleasure and pain come and go. Therefore? they are impermanent in nature. The objects come in contact with the senses or the Indriyas? viz.? skin? ear? eye? nose? etc.? and the sensations are carried by the nerves to the mind which has its seat in the brain. It is the mind that feels pleasure and pain. One should try to bear patiently heat and cold? pleasure and pain and develop a balanced state of mind. (Cf.V.22)

'In the case of a man who knows that the Self is eternal, although there is no possibility of delusion concerning the destruction of the Self, still delusion, as of ordinary people, caused by the experience of cold, heat, happiness and sorrow is noticed in him. Delusion arises from being deprived of happiness, and sorrow arises from contact with pain etc.' apprehending this kind of a talk from Arjuna, the Lord said, 'But the contacts of the organs,' etc.
Matra-sparsah, the contacts of the organs with objects; are sita-usna-sukha-duhkha-dah, producers of cold, heat, happiness and sorrow. Matrah means those by which are marked off (measured up) sounds etc., i.e. the organs of hearing etc. The sparsah, contacts, of the organs with sound etc. are matra-sparsah. Or, sparsah means those which are contacted, i.e. objects, viz sound etc. Matra-sparsah, the organs and objects, are the producers of cold, heat, happiness and sorrow.
Cold sometimes produces pleasure, and sometimes pain. Similarly the nature of heat, too, is unpredictable. On the other hand, happiness and sorrow have definite natures since they do not change. Hence they are mentioned separately from cold and heat. Since they, the organs, the contacts, etc., agamapayinah, have a beginning and an end, are by nature subject to origination and destruction; therefore, they are anityah, transient. Hence, titiksasva, bear; tan, them cold, heart, etc., i.e. do not be happy or sorry with regard to them.

As sound, touch, form, taste and smell with their bases, are the effects of subtle elements (Tanmatras), they are called Matras. The contact with these through the ear and other senses gives rise to feelings of pleasure and pain, in the form of heat and cold, softness and hardness. The words 'cold and heat' illustrate other sensations too. Endure these with courage till you have discharged your duties as prescribed by the scriptures. The brave must endure them patiently, as they 'come and go'. They are transient. When the Karmas, which cause bondage, are destroyed, this 'coming and going' will end.
The Lord now explains the purpose of this endurance: