Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 8 - Shloka (Verse) 5

व्याख्या--'अन्तकाले च' 'मामेव ৷৷. याति नास्त्यत्र संशयः'-- अन्तकालमें भी मेरा स्मरण करते हुए जो शरीर छोड़कर जाता है -- इसका तात्पर्य हुआ कि इस मनुष्यको जीवनमें साधनभजन करके अपना उद्धार करनेका अवसर दिया था पर इसने कुछ किया ही नहीं। अब बेचारा यह मनुष्य अन्तकालमें दूसरा साधन करनेमें असमर्थ है इसलिये बस मेरेको याद कर ले तो इसको मेरी प्राप्ति हो जायगी।'मामेव स्मरन्' का तात्पर्य है कि सुनने समझने और माननेमें जो कुछ आता है वह सब मेरा समग्ररूप है। अतः जो उसको मेरा ही स्वरूप मानेगा उसको अन्तकालमें भी मेरा ही चिन्तन होगा अर्थात् उसने जब सब कुछ मेरा ही स्वरूप मान लिया तो अन्तकालमें उसको जो कुछ याद आयेगा वह मेरा ही स्वरूप होगा इसलिये वह स्मरण मेरा ही होगा। मेरा स्मरण होनेसे उसको मेरी ही प्राप्ति होगी।'मद्भावम्' कहनेका तात्पर्य है कि साधकने मेरेको जिसकिसी भिन्न अथवा अभिन्न भावसे अर्थात् सगुणनिर्गुण साकारनिराकार द्विभुजचतुर्भुज तथा नाम लीला धाम रूप आदिसे स्वीकार किया है मेरी उपासना की है अन्तसमयके स्मरणके अनुसार वह मेरे उसी भावको प्राप्त होता है।
जो भगवान्की उपासना करते हैं वे तो अन्तसमयमें उपास्यका स्मरण होनेसे उसी उपास्यको अर्थात् भगवद्भावको प्राप्त होते हैं। परन्तु जो उपासना नहीं करते उनको भी अन्तसमयमें किसी कारणवशात् भगवान्के किसी नाम रूप लीला धाम आदिका स्मरण हो जाय तो वे भी उन उपासकोंकी तरह उसी भगवद्भावको प्राप्त हो जाते हैं। तात्पर्य है कि जैसे गुणोंमें स्थित रहनेवालेकी (गीता 14। 18) और अन्तकालमें जिसकिसी गुणके बढ़नेवालेकी वैसी ही गति होती है (गीता 14। 14 15) ऐसे ही जिसको अन्तमें भगवान् याद आ जाते हैं उसकी भी उपासकोंकी तरह गति होती है अर्थात् भगवान्की प्राप्ति होती है।भगवान्के सगुणनिर्गुण साकारनिराकार आदि अनेक रूपोंका और नाम लीला धाम आदिका भेद तो साधकोंकी दृष्टिसे है अन्तमें सब एक हो जाते हैं अर्थात् अन्तमें सब एक मद्भाव -- भगवद्भावको प्राप्त हो जाते हैं क्योंकि भगवान्का समग्र स्वरूप एक ही है। परन्तु गुणोंके अनुसार गतिको प्राप्त होनेवाले अन्तमें एक नहीं हो सकते क्योंकि तीनों गुण (सत्त्व रज तम) अलगअलग हैं। अतः गुणोंके अनुसार उनकी गतियाँ भी अलगअलग होती हैं।भगवान्का स्मरण करके शरीर छोड़नेवालोंका तो भगवान्के साथ सम्बन्ध रहता है और गुणोंके अनुसार शरीर छोड़नेवालोंका गुणोंके साथ सम्बन्ध रहता है। इसलिये अन्तमें भगवान्का स्मरण करनेवाले भगवान्के सम्मुख हो जाते हैं अर्थात् भगवान्को प्राप्त हो जाते हैं और गुणोंसे सम्बन्ध रखनेवाले गुणोंके सम्मुख हो जाते हैं अर्थात् गुणोंके कार्य जन्ममरणको प्राप्त हो जाते हैं।भगवान्ने एक यह विशेष छूट दी हुई है कि मरणासन्न व्यक्तिके कैसे ही आचरण रहे हों कैसे ही भाव रहे हों किसी भी तरहका जीवन बीता हो पर अन्तकालमें वह भगवान्को याद कर ले तो उसका कल्याण हो जायगा। कारण कि भगवान्ने जीवका कल्याण करनेके लिये ही उसको मनुष्यशरीर दिया है और जीवने उस मनुष्यशरीरको स्वीकार किया है। अतः जीवका कल्याण हो जाय तभी भगवान्का इस जीवको मनुष्यशरीर देना और जीवका मनुष्यशरीर लेना सफल होगा। परन्तु वह अपना उद्धार किये बिना ही आज दुनियासे विदा हो रहा है इसके लिये भगवान् कहते हैं कि भैया तेरी और मेरी दोनोंकी इज्जत रह जाय इसलिये अब जातेजाते (अन्तकालमें) भी तू मेरेको याद कर ले तो तेरा कल्याण हो जाय अतः हरेक मनुष्यके लिये सावधान होनेकी जरूरत है कि वह सब समयमें भगवान्का स्मरण करे कोई समय खाली न जाने दे क्योंकि अन्तकालका पता नहीं है कि कब आ जाय। वास्तवमें सब समय अन्तकाल ही है। यह बात तो है नहीं कि इतने वर्ष इतने महीने और इतने दिनोंके बाद मृत्यु होगी। देखनेमें तो यही आता है कि गर्भमें ही कई बालक मर जाते हैं कई जन्मते ही मर जाते हैं कई कुछ दिनोंमें महीनोंमें वर्षोंमें मर जाते हैं। इस प्रकार मरनेकी चाल हरदम चल ही रही है। अतः सब समयमें भगवान्को याद रखना चाहिये और यही समझना चाहिये कि बस यही अन्तकाल है नीतिमें यह बात आती है कि अगर धर्मका आचरण करना हो कल्याण करना हो तो मृत्युने मेरे केश पकड़े हुए हैं झटका दिया कि खत्म ऐसा विचार हरदम रहना चाहिये -- 'गृहीत इव केशेषु मृत्युना धर्ममाचरेत्'।
भगवान्की उपर्युक्त छूटसे मनुष्यमात्रको विशेष लाभ लेना चाहिये। कहीं कोई भी व्याधिग्रस्त मरणासन्न व्यक्ति हो तो उसके इष्टके चित्र या मूर्तिको उसे दिखाना चाहिये जैसी उसकी उपासना है और जिस भगवन्नाममें उसकी रुचि हो जिसका वह जप करता हो वही भगवन्नाम उसको सुनाना चाहिये जिस स्वरूपमें उसकी श्रद्धा और विश्वास हो उसकी याद दिलानी चाहिये भगवान्की महिमाका वर्णन करना चाहिये गीताके श्लोक सुनाने चाहिये। अगर वह बेहोश हो जाय तो उसके पास भगवन्नामका जपकीर्तन करना चाहिये जिससे उस मरणासन्न व्यक्तिके सामने भगवत्सम्बन्धी वायुमण्डल बना रहे। भगवत्सम्बन्धी वायुमण्डल रहनेसे वहाँ यमराजके दूत नहीं आ सकते। अजामिलके द्वारा मृत्युके समय नारायण नामका उच्चारण करनेसे,वहाँ भगवान्के पार्षद आ गये और यमदूत भागकर यमराजके पासमें गये तो यमराजने अपने दूतोंसे कहा कि जहाँ भगवन्नामका जप कीर्तन कथा आदि होते हों वहाँ तुमलोग कभी मत जाना क्योंकि वहाँ हमारा राज्य नहीं है (टिप्पणी प0 455.1)। ऐसा कहकर यमराजने भगवान्का स्मरण करके भगवान्से क्षमा माँगी कि मेरे दूतोंके द्वारा जो अपराध हुआ है उसको आप क्षमा करें (टिप्पणी प0 455.2)। अन्तकालमें स्मरणका तात्पर्य है कि उसने भगवान्का जो स्वरूप मान रखा है उसकी याद आ जाय अर्थात् उसने पहले राम कृष्ण विष्णु शिव शक्ति गणेश सूर्य सर्वव्यापक विश्वरूप परमात्मा आदिमेंसे जिस स्वरूपको मान रखा है उस स्वरूपके नाम रूप लीला धाम गुण प्रभाव आदिकी याद आ जाय। उसकी याद करते हुए शरीरको छोड़कर जानेसे वह भगवान्को ही प्राप्त होता है। कारण कि भगवान्की याद आनेसे मैं शरीर हूँ और शरीर मेरा है -- इसकी याद नहीं रहती प्रत्युत केवल भगवान्को ही याद करते हुए शरीर छूट जाता है। इसलिये उसके लिये भगवान्को प्राप्त होनेके अतिरिक्त और कोई गुंजाइश ही नहीं है।
यहाँ शङ्का होती है कि जिस व्यक्तिने उम्रभरमें भजनस्मरण नहीं किया कोई साधन नहीं किया सर्वथा भगवान्से विमुख रहा उसको अन्तकालमें भगवान्का स्मरण कैसे होगा और उसका कल्याण कैसे होगा इसका समाधान है कि अन्तसमयमें उसपर भगवान्की कोई विशेष कृपा हो जाय अथवा उसको किसी सन्तके दर्शन हो जायँ तो भगवान्का स्मरण होकर उसका कल्याण हो जाता है। उसके कल्याणके लिये कोई साधक उसको भगवान्का नाम लीला चरित्र सुनाये पद गाये तो भगवान्का स्मरण होनेसे उसका कल्याण हो जाता है। अगर मरणासन्न व्यक्तिको गीतामें रुचि हो तो उसको गीताका आठवाँ अध्याय सुनाना चाहिये क्योंकि इस अध्यायमें जीवकी सद्गतिका विशेषतासे वर्णन आया है। इसको सुननेसे उसको भगवान्की स्मृति हो जाती है। कारण कि वास्तवमें परमात्माका ही अंश होनेसे उसका परमात्माके साथ स्वतः सम्बन्ध है ही। अगर अयोध्या मथुरा हरिद्वार काशी आदि किसी तीर्थस्थलमें उसके प्राण छूट जायँ तो उस तीर्थके प्रभावसे उसको भगवान्की स्मृति हो जायगी (टिप्पणी प0 456.1)। ऐसे ही जिस जगह भगवान्के नामका जप कीर्तन कथा सत्संग आदि होता है उस जगह उसकी मृत्यु हो जाय तो वहाँके पवित्र वायुमण्डलके प्रभावसे उसको भगवान्की स्मृति हो सकती है। अन्तकालमें कोई भयंकर स्थिति आनेसे भयभीत होनेपर भी भगवान्की याद आ सकती है। शरीर छूटते समय शरीर कुटुम्ब रुपये आदिकी आशाममता छूट जाय और यह भाव हो जाय कि हे नाथ आपके बिना मेरा कोई नहीं है केवल आप ही मेरे हैं तो भगवान्की स्मृति होनेसे कल्याण हो जाता है। ऐसे ही किसी कारणसे अचानक अपने कल्याणका भाव बन जाय तो भी कल्याण हो सकता है (टिप्पणी प0 456.2)। ऐसे ही कोई साधक किसी प्राणी जीवजन्तुके मृत्युसमयमें उसका कल्याण हो जाय इस भावसे उसको भगवन्नाम सुनाता है तो उस भगवन्नामके प्रभावसे उस प्राणीका कल्याण हो जाता है। शास्त्रोंमें तो सन्तमहापुरुषोंके प्रभावकी विचित्र बातें आती हैं कि यदि सन्तमहापुरुष किसी मरणासन्न व्यक्तिको देख लें अथवा उसके मृत शरीर(मुर्दे) को देख लें अथवा उसकी चिताके धुएँको देख लें अथवा चिताकी भस्मको देख लें तो भी उस जीवका कल्याण हो जाता है (टिप्पणी प0 456.3)

और जो पुरुष अन्तकालमें -- मरणकालमें मुझ परमेश्वर -- विष्णुका ही स्मरण करता हुआ शरीर,छोड़कर जाता है वह मेरे भावको अर्थात् विष्णुके परम तत्त्वको प्राप्त होता है। इस विषयमें प्राप्त होता है या नहीं ऐसा कोई संशय नहीं है।

Regarding the objection raised with "And at the time of departure..." etc., He says—"Antakale cha" (And at the time of the end). By the emphasis in "Mam eva" (Me alone), the remembrance characterized by Adhyatma etc. is excluded. For in a 'qualified' (vishishta) remembrance (involving complex details), due to the distraction of the mind, even the principal remembrance might not occur.

And it is not that the remembrance of the Lord is not achieved at the time of death due to the loss of control over the body and senses (karya-karana). Because for one whose mind is always dedicated to the Lord with uninterrupted reverence, the continuous remembrance of the Lord is achieved even at that time, disregarding the aggregate of the body and senses. The meaning is: because of the absence of the misconception of "I and Mine" regarding that body.

In "Prayati" (he departs), the context implies the body is the ablative case (the point of departure). Relying on Shrutis like "He who knows Brahman becomes Brahman itself," he says—"Nasti" (There is no [doubt]). He acts out (presents) the very doubt that is to be negated—with "Yati va" (Whether he goes or not).

He gives the answer to the seventh question "And at the time of departure..."—with "Antakale" etc. "Antakale cha"—meaning at the time of departure. The purport is: at the time of the exit of the life-forces (prana-utkramana). Remembering "Mam eva"—Me alone, the Supreme Lord Vishnu. From the word "cha" (and), it should be understood that he is always habituated to the thought of God. By the qualification "Mam eva" (Me alone), the remembrance characterized by Adhyatma etc. is excluded. For in a qualified remembrance (involving other details), due to mental distraction, even the principal remembrance might not occur.

He who "Prayati" (departs) abandoning the "Kalevaram"—the body—attains "Madbhavam"—the Vaishnava principle (My nature). If he is a meditator on Saguna Brahman, (he attains) gradually; if a knower of Nirguna Brahman, immediately. In this view (Nirguna), "abandoning the body" is said from the perspective of worldly vision; because of the Shruti "His pranas do not depart, they merge right here."

"Atra"—regarding this matter—doubt whether "he attains My state or not" "na vidyate" (does not exist); because of Shrutis like "He leads them to Brahman... this is the path of the gods... those proceeding by this do not return to this human cycle," "The knower of Brahman attains the Supreme," "He who knows Brahman becomes Brahman indeed." Here regarding "there is nothing" (no doubt): (It means) doubt regarding the Self being distinct from the body, or regarding the attainment of My state. The doubt "Is the Self distinct from the body or not?" or "Even if distinct from the body, is it different from the Lord or not?"—such doubt "does not exist"; because of the Shruti "All doubts are severed."

And here, it should be seen that by "departing leaving the body," the distinctness of the Jiva from the body is stated, and by "attains My state," the non-difference from the Lord is stated.

[Critique:] Here, this must be said: In the answer to the question "How are You to be known by the self-controlled at the time of departure?", describing the refutation of the doubt "Is the Self distinct from the body or not?" is an "Akande Tandavam" (an untimely/irrelevant dance; a futile display of logic out of context). Because, since the meaning "The Self is distinct from the body etc." has been demonstrated repeatedly, there is no scope for doubt, and thus it is a "prohibition of the inapplicable" (aprasakta-pratishedha). Furthermore, if doubt arises again even regarding a meaning established by logic, its removal by mere implied meaning (arthika-artha) is impossible. The Shruti "All doubts are severed" is also worthy of being cited only when the term "Knower of the higher and lower" (paravara-vit) is present. This is the direction (gist of the argument).

"Madbhavam" means "existence in Me," which is of the nature of sorrowless and unsurpassed bliss.

And that has been stated in the Mokshadharma (Mahabharata) — "The goal of the liberated is Brahman, who is conceived as the Kshetrajna" [Mahabharata 12.334.41].

Here, among the answers to the six questions: In the first, the Jiva's state of being Brahman is stated. For those who know that, there is no departure (prayana) at all. According to the Shruti: "His life-forces do not depart; being Brahman indeed, he merges into Brahman right here." In the second, the pure meaning of the word "Thou" (tvam-padartha) is stated; since that knowledge also has the Reality (vastu-tattva) as its object, there is no need for "contemplation" (bhavana) there, so the thought (pratyaya) of it is not expected at the time of the fruit of contemplation (death). In the third and fourth, generated objects which are Karma and the means for it are stated. There too, contemplation is not expected. Since the mind is blocked by powerful karma at the time of death, the remembrance of the fruit of those means is inevitable, so contemplation is futile there.

By elimination (parishesha), regarding the last two—Effect-Brahman and Cause-Brahman, the Conditioned and Unconditioned—if the contemplation on either of them is firm, the thought of it at the time of death is inevitable; therefore, remembering the Supreme Self in either of those forms, he who departs leaving the body via the path of light (archiradi), attains "Madbhava" (My state, liberation) gradually (kramena) through the attainment of Brahmaloka—this He says with "Antakale cha" etc. The construction is clear. "There is no doubt here"—(It is thus):

Concerning the worship of Conditioned Brahman, the Shruti says: "A hundred and one are the arteries of the heart; one of them leads up to the crown of the head. Going upward by that, one attains immortality; the others serve for departing in other directions." Thus, for the worshipper of that, immortality preceded by departure (gati) is heard.

However, he who knows only the "Adhyatma-vastu" in the form of the pure meaning of "Thou," due to the absence of the knowledge of the unity of Brahman and Atman, does not fall under the scope of the sentence "His pranas do not depart"; rather, he is the subject of the verse "A hundred and one..."

[Objection:] But since he is not a worshipper (upasaka), how can this apply to him? [Answer:] Not so. According to the maxim "No doer of good, my dear, ever goes to grief," it is impossible for him to be "fallen from both." And because in the Kathavalli (Katha Upanishad), the verse "A hundred and one..." is recited in the context of the "Kevala-Yogi" who knows the partless Inner Self.

From the Shruti "Vedanta-vijnana-sunishchitarthah..." (Those Sannyasis of pure being, who have well-ascertained the meaning through the knowledge of Vedanta, are all liberated from the Supreme Immortal in the world of Brahman at the time of the great end), "Gradual Liberation" (krama-mukti) is understood only for those of "ascertained meaning," i.e., those who know the purified meaning of "Thou." And here, by "Sunishchitarthah," those possessing the conviction of the "Unity of Brahman and Atman" cannot be grasped, because their "absence of departure/motion" has been stated.

Nor can "worshippers" be grasped, because it is impossible. For worship (upasana) is the idea of That in what is not That. Just as the idea of Vishnu in the Shaligram stone, or the idea of Self in the Sutra and Virat Inner Controllers—it is not possible to call those possessing such ideas "Sunishchitarthah" (Those of well-ascertained reality).

Therefore, for the knowers of Adhyatma, due to the lack of understanding of the Unity of Brahman and Atman, and due to being non-worshippers (of specific forms), even in the absence of the final thought (antya-pratyaya), there is attainment of the Archiradi path—all this is flawless.

And he who departs at the time of the end, abandoning the body while remembering "Me" alone, attains "Madbhava" (My being).

He attains My "Bhava"—meaning My nature (svabhava). The meaning is: In whatever way he contemplates on Me at that time, he becomes of that same form.

Just as the ancient Bharata and others became of a form similar to the deer which was being remembered at that time.

That the nature of the "final thought" (antya-pratyaya) is to transform the rememberer into a form similar to its object—He states this very clearly [in the next verse]—

Regarding what was asked by "And how are You to be known at the time of departure," He shows the means of knowledge at the time of the end and its fruit—with "Antakale" etc.

Remembering "Me alone"—the Supreme Lord, the Inner Controller possessed of the aforementioned characteristics—he who departs abandoning the body "in an excellent manner" (prakarshena i.e., via the path of light/Archiradi), attains "Madbhava"—My nature/form. And regarding this, there is no doubt.

Remembrance is the means of knowledge, and attainment of My being is the fruit; this is the meaning.

The verse "Antakale" is the summary answer to the question "Prayanakale" [8.2]. Therefore, with the intention that this is not a subject regarding the Jnani alone, he says—"Idamapi" (This also). The purport is: due to the nature of the entity 'Adhiyajna' and the method to be described later.

He shows the syntax—with "Antakale cha." Regarding "attains Madbhava" (My nature), to dispel the delusion of attaining "absolute identity" (tadatmya) which is contrary to Shruti etc., he says "Mama yo bhavah" (My nature).

[Objection:] If one attains the nature of Ishvara, just as a worm placed in the nest of a wasp becomes of that species, there would be the contingency of becoming "another Ishvara" (ishvarantaratva). And since the attainment of the "Ishvara-nature" characterized by the eight qualities would be common to all three types of qualified aspirants, there would be no distinction among the aspirants. To this, he says—"Tadani" (At that time). The attainment of a resemblance (samya) to the specific form being meditated upon respectively is what is intended. And resemblance exists only when there is difference in essential attributes distinguishing the essential nature (svarupa), so there is no fault; this is the purport.

Thus the questions have been answered. By "Nastyatra samshaya" (There is no doubt here), he shows the "celebrity of the cause" (prayojaka-prasiddhi) intended—with "Yatha adibharatadayah" (Just as the ancient Bharata etc.). By this example too, the delusion of absolute identity is refuted; for the ancient Bharata did not have absolute identity with the deer being remembered, but rather only the acceptance of a deer body having a similar form to that—this is well-known in that very context. "Tadani" means the time of separation from the body.

महर्षि व्यास वेदान्त के इस मूलभूत सिद्धांत पर बल देते हुए नहीं थकते कि कोई भी जीव किसी देह विशेष के साथ तब तक तादात्म्य किये रहता है जब तक उसे अपने इच्छित अनुभवों को प्राप्त करने में वह देह उपयोगी और आवश्यक होता है। एक बार यह प्रयोजन सिद्ध हो जाने पर वह उस शरीर को सदा के लिए त्याग देता है। तत्पश्चात उस देह के प्रति न कोई कर्तव्य रहता है न सम्बन्ध और न ही कोई अभिमान। देह से विलग होने के समय जीव के मन में उस विषय के सम्बन्ध में विचार होंगे जिसके लिए वह प्रबल इच्छा या महत्वाकांक्षा रखता था चाहे वह इच्छा किसी भी जन्म में उत्पन्न हुई हो। इस प्रकार की मान्यता युक्तियुक्त है। ध्यान और भक्ति की साधना मन को एकाग्र करने की वह कला है जिसमें ध्येय विषयक एक अखण्ड वृत्ति बनाए रखी जाती है। ऐसा साधक अन्तकाल में मुझ पर ही ध्यान करता हुआ शरीर को त्याग कर जाता है।मरण के पूर्व की जीव की यह अन्तिम प्रबल इच्छा उसकी भावी गति को निश्चित करती है। जो जीव अपने जीवन काल में केवल अहंकार और स्वार्थ का जीवन जीता रहा हो और देह के साथ तादात्म्य करके निम्न स्तर की कामनाओं को ही पूर्ण करने में व्यस्त रहा हो ऐसा जीव वैषयिक वासनाओं से युक्त होने के कारण ऐसे ही शरीर को धारण करेगा जिसमें उसकी पाशविक प्रवृत्तियाँ अधिक से अधिक सन्तुष्ट हो सकें।इसके विपरीत जब कोई साधक स्वविवेक से कामुक जीवन की व्यर्थता को पहचानता है और इस कारण स्वयं को उन बन्धनों से मुक्त करने के लिए आतुर हो उठता है तब देह त्याग के पश्चात् वह साधक निश्चित ही विकास की उच्चतर स्थिति को प्राप्त होता है। इसी युक्तियक्त एवं बुद्धिगम्य सिद्धांत के अनुसार वेदान्त यह घोषणा करता है कि मरणासन्न पुरुष की अन्तिम इच्छा उसके भावी शरीर तथा वातावरण को निश्चित करती है।इसलिए भगवान् यहाँ कहते हैं कि अन्तकाल में आगे जो पुरुष मेरा स्मरण करता हुआ देह त्यागता है वह मेरे स्वरूप को प्राप्त होता है।यह निश्चय केवल मेरे ही विषय में नहीं है वरन् --

Now he decides the remaining question "How are You to be known at the time of departure?"—with "Antakale'pi" etc., up to "Asamshayam" (Without doubt). Not only in the healthy state, but even at the time of the end. "Mam"—Me, who am distinguished from all adjuncts. And regarding how the Lord might enter the path of memory in the unhealthy state when the activity of all senses has ceased, He teaches the means too with "Tasmat" (Therefore - next verse).

In all states, even during worldly transactions, he whose heart the Truth of God does not depart from—for that renouncer of all actions who is constantly full of God—the Truth of God necessarily and spontaneously becomes the object of memory. The cause here is "being constantly habituated to that sentiment" (sada tad-bhava-bhavitatvam). Therefore, He says—by whatever object the inner instrument is habituated always, that alone is remembered at the time of death and that nature alone is attained.

The purport is: One should be devoted to Me in all ways and desirous of obtaining Me. It is not the case that "whatever is remembered at the end (at the dying breath), that alone is attained." For if that were so, even for a Knower (Jnani), whose mental function is impaired by the imbalance of humors lasting as long as the body, and who has attained dullness/stupor—the destination would be like that of a Tamasic person. And this acceptance is not proper here, due to contradiction with authoritative Shruti.

There is indeed [the text]: "Whether in a holy place or in the house of a dog-eater, even if losing memory while abandoning the body, the one liberated at the very moment of Knowledge attains Kaivalya, free from grief." Therefore, this [verse] is a restatement (anuvada) of the rule. By whatever the inner instrument is habituated always, that alone is attained at the end, after departure. And whether it is remembered or not (at that specific physical moment) is not the insistence (nirbandha) here. And this secondary/inclusive sense (anvachaya) is indicated by the word "Api" (also). The word "Va" (or) clarifies the non-absolute necessity (asarvatha-bhavam) of the act of remembering. And that a person should be devoted to Me always and in all ways—this purport the Sage (Vyasa) himself reveals. As he says—"Therefore, at all times remember Me."

Thus, the connection of words here is: Always remembering whatever sentiment/object one abandons the body, or even remembering at the end—by the use of "Va" (or), even not remembering—he goes to that very state. Because he is always habituated to that sentiment.

Others, however, [interpret]: When abandoning the body, at the end—at the moment of leaving the body, which is imperceptible to other observers like relatives and sons, and which is the final moment following actions like gasping, heavy breathing, hiccupping, and stammering; when the bond of bodily firmness has become very thin; in that fraction of time which is devoid of body-caused pleasure, pain, and delusion and is denoted by the word "body-abandoning"—whatever one remembers, that alone becomes his form, graced by the first consciousness (of the next life). And the cause of remembrance at such a time is "being constantly habituated to that sentiment." "Tyajati" (abandons) should be construed as Locative (Tyajti = while abandoning). This is the old meaning.

[Objection:] If so, what is the purpose of that remembrance at the time of the end? [Reply:] Who says it is a "purpose" (means)? Rather, it happens simply as a matter of fact (vastu-vritta) at that final moment. [Objection:] But remembrance of maintaining sons, wives, and relatives, or drinking cold water etc. is seen at the final moment; so there would be attainment of that nature? [Reply:] Not so. For that is not the "final moment" because the state of the body is still manifest/clear. That "final moment" intended by us is not perceived by people like you.

But in that final moment, the form which is "to be" (in the next birth)—its impression (samskara), even if distant—must undergo "Awakening" (Prabodha) according to the maxim "There is uninterrupted sequence between memory and samskara due to their uniformity, even if separated by birth, place, and time" (Yoga Sutra 4.9). By the force of that, there is remembrance of that, and by that remembrance, attainment of that state. For some, even in the healthy state of the body, that (future form) is manifested by chance (kakataliya). Just as the description in the Purana of the deer etc. (regarding Bharata), and the deer-hood caused by that.

That is why in "And even at the time of departure, Me..." (7.30), the phrase "Api cha" (And also/even) is used. For those who always contemplate on God, thinking "We shall become thus"—their latent impression born of that blocks other impressions (Yoga Sutra 1.50). According to this rule, at that unperceivable final state, by pushing aside other samskaras, the remembrance of That Truth created by that samskara—which is (similar to) the remembrance of Him created during the moment of bodily existence—immediately at the very moment of the fall of the body, due to the cessation of the time-samskara and the non-manifestation of distinctions of knowables like "this is that," there is the state of the nature of the Supreme Lord whose essence is Pure Consciousness alone. This is enough. "Asamshayam" (Without doubt)—The purport is that one should not doubt here.

To refute the misunderstanding that "Madbhavam" (My being/nature) means "Madatmakatvam" (Being identical with Me), he explains—"Madbhavam" (My nature/state).

(Objection) "But existence in the Lord is always there, how is that a fruit?" To this he qualifies it—with "Nirduhkha" (Sorrowless).

Somewhere the reading is "Madbhavam madvadbhavam" (My nature means nature like Mine). There, since the Jivas who are reflections of the Lord always possess similarity with Him, how is that said to be 'attainable'? To this "Nirduhkha" is said.

Here "Atmakam" (of the nature of) is a reading; "Abhivyaktam" (Manifested) is the remainder (to be supplied).

(Objection) "Why not the apparent (direct) meaning itself (Becoming Me)?" (Answer) No, because for the liberated ones, due to being dependent on the Lord, becoming Him is impossible. "Whence is that too (dependence)?" To this he says "Tachcha" (And that). "The Knower of the Field (Jiva), the Supreme Self is the Goal"—thus it is supported.

Now He states the answer to the seventh question "And how are You to be known at the time of departure"—with "Mam eva" (Me alone). Remembering "Me"—Lord Vasudeva, Adhiyajna, whether Saguna (with attributes) or Nirguna (attributeless) Supreme Imperishable Brahman—and not Adhyatma etc.; remembering even at the time of the end when the entire aggregate of senses is agitated, due to the intensity (patuta) of that impression (samskara) resulting from constant contemplation; "Kalevaram muktva" (abandoning the body)—abandoning the misconception of "I and Mine" in the body; at the time of separation of life-forces, he who "Prayati" (departs). In the view of meditation on the Saguna, he goes "Prakarshena" (excellently/superiorly) via the Path of the Gods (Devayana) to be described as Fire, Light, Day, Bright fortnight etc., as opposed to the Path of the Ancestors (Pitriyana). That worshipper attains "Madbhava"—My form, or the state of Nirguna Brahman at the end of enjoyment in the world of Hiranyagarbha.

In the view of remembrance of Nirguna Brahman, however, "he departs abandoning the body" is meant from the perspective of worldly vision. For due to the Shruti "His pranas do not depart, they merge right here," there is absence of departure of his pranas and thus absence of motion (gati); he attains "Madbhava" directly. As per the Shruti "Being Brahman indeed, he merges into Brahman."

"There is no doubt here" regarding the Self distinct from the body or the attainment of My state. The doubt "Is the Self distinct from the body or not?" or "Even if distinct from the body, is it different from the Lord or not?"—does not exist. Because of the Shruti "All doubts are severed." And here, it should be seen that by "departing leaving the body," the distinctness of the Jiva from the body is stated, and by "attains My state," the non-difference from the Lord is stated.

He gives the answer to "And how are You to be known at the time of departure"—with "Antakale" etc.

"Antakale"—at the time of the termination of this body, or at the time of the "Anta-rupa" (final form) body, i.e., the body of the final birth, when the time of destruction has arrived. Remembering "Mam eva" (Me alone), he who "Prayati"—releases the body; abandoning the "Kalevaram"—the dead body which is unfit for worship—he "Yati" (attains) "Madbhavam"—the nature/form useful for Service (Seva).

In this matter, "there is no doubt"—it does not exist. Therefore, one should not doubt; this is the meaning.

By the word "Cha" (and), it is indicated that purity (of state/place) etc. is not to be considered. By the word "Eva" (alone), it is indicated that nothing else should be remembered as a fruit out of desire.

Antakale cha—And at the time of the end, the time of death; remembering 'Mam eva'—Me alone, the Supreme Lord Vishnu; 'Muktva'—having released, i.e., having completely abandoned; 'Kalevaram'—the body; 'Yah prayati'—he who departs, i.e., goes; 'Sah'—he; attains 'Madbhavam'—the Vaishnava Principle (My nature). 'Nasti'—there is no, i.e., there does not exist; 'Atra'—here, in this matter; 'Samshayah'—doubt, as to 'whether he attains or not.'

This rule is not regarding Me alone. What then? (He explains in the next verse)—

He gives the answer to 'And how are You to be known at the time of departure'—with 'Antakale' etc.

The word 'Eva' (alone) is for the purpose of excluding others.

Remembering 'Me alone'—the Lila-Purushottama (Supreme Person of Divine Play), who is Complete Bliss and untouched by (mere) Mantra, worship, etc.—the devotee-yogi who 'Prayati'—makes the departure—he attains 'Madbhava' (My nature); there is no doubt in this.

Ca, and ; anta-kale, at the time of death; yah, anyone who; prayati, departs; muktva, by giving up; the kalevaram, body; smaran, while thinking; mam eva, of Me alone, who am the supreme Lord Visnu; sah, he; yati, attains; madhavam, My state, the Reality that is Vishu, Asti, there is; na, no; samsayah, doubt; atra, about this, in this regard, as to whether he attains (Me) or not.
'This rule does not apply in relation to me alone.' 'What then?'

He who, at the last moment, while leaving the body, departs remembering Me alone, attains My being; he attains My condition. In whatever way he meditates on Me, he attains that very form, in the same manner as the royal sage Bharata attained the form of the deer remembered by him at death. Such is the meaning.
Sri Krsna further elucidates that it is the nature of one's last thought that leads to the attainment of a similar form by the meditator: