CHAPTER EIGHT

The Upanishadic Revolution is Launched:
Chapter Two of the Bhagavad Gita

In this chapter we will examine Chapter Two of the Bhagavad Gita in which the Upanishadic revolution to overthrow Brāhmanism was launched. There are many coded shlokas in this chapter. The revolution begins with BG 2:6. BG 2:1-3 were already explained in the chapter dealing with the Original Gita, and BG 2:4-5 were explained in the chapter titled ‘Brāhmanism Warns about the Consequences of Abandonment’. Below I have realigned some shlokas to facilitate the flow of the Upanishadic reasoning.

8.1: Shōkam, Dwandwam, and Karmaphalam are reintroduced

The Upanishadic seers set the stage for their revolution by reintroducing three issues shared by both Arjuna in the Mahābhārata context and the post-Vedic society in the Historical context: Shōkam, Dwandwam, and obsession with Karmaphalam.

2:6: Whether we should conquer them or they should conquer us -I do not know which is better (my Dwandwa-ridden mind is unable to decide). These cousins of ours are standing before us in this battlefield, killing whom we should not care to live (death is better than living with the burden of sinfulness -bad Karmaphalam- caused by killing one’s own relatives).

Arjuna’s Dwandwa-ridden mind is unable to decide whether he should conquer his adversaries or they should conquer him. Besides, killing them would certainly earn him sin -bad Karmaphalam. In the ancient society, death was preferred to living with a gnawing sense of sinfulness.

2:8: I do not find any relief from the Shōkam that is drying up my senses, even if I were to gain unrivalled and prosperous monarchy (here) on earth or even supremacy in heaven (hereafter).

In this shloka Arjuna expresses profound Shōkam, which neither Karmaphalam of Kāmya Karma -prosperous monarchy here on earth and even supremacy in heaven hereafter- could assuage. Note here that in the Original Gita 2:2 prince Krishna chides Arjuna that his behavior was shameful here on earth and heaven-barring hereafter. The message is that Kāmya Karma has no remedy for Shōkam. In fact, it is the cause of Shōkam and Dwandwam due to the loss of Knowledge of Atmān engendered by the Gunas (desire and attachment).

2:7: Arjuna continues: My nature (fighting spirit -the natural disposition of a Kshatriya to perform his duty) is weighed down with the taint of feeble-mindedness (not feeble-heartedness you accused me of in 2:3). My understanding is bewildered as to my duty (due to the combined effect of Shōkam, Dwandwam and fear of earning bad Karmaphalam).

Note here that in the Original Gita 2:3 prince Krishna accuses Arjuna of suffering from feeble-heartedness (Hridayadaurbalyam). In the Upanishadic Gita, Arjuna switches the focus from feeble-heartedness to feeble-mindedness (Kārpanyadoshopahataswabhāva). Whereas Brāhmanism obsessed with heroism, bravery and honor and heaven, Upanishadism obsessed with happiness of mind engendered by its contact with the inner peace. In the second sentence Arjuna says that his Shōkam, Dwandwam and fear of Karmaphalam have bewildered him about his duty.

8.2: The Upanishadic format is set up: Prince Krishna becomes Guru Krishna

2:7: I entreat you; say definitely what is good for me (enlighten me with what can get rid of my three maladies). I am your disciple. Do instruct me who have taken refuge in you.

In this second part of shloka 2:7: the Upanishadic seers set up the Upanishadic format (4:34) which elevates prince Krishna to the status of Arjuna’s Guru, which authorizes him to impart to him and the errant Brāhmins and Kshatriyas Knowledge of Atmān (2:11-13; 16-30) and Buddhiyoga (2:48-53). These two doctrines will replace the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma, while appearing to address Arjuna’s Shōkam, Dwandwam and concern about earning bad Karmaphalam.

2:9: After addressing Hrishikesha thus, Gudākesha, the Scorcher of foes, said to Gōvinda, “I shall not fight,” and held silence.

The ‘thick-haired Scorcher of Foes’ said to ‘the bristled-haired Chief of Cowherds’ that he shall not fight, and he fell silent. This shloka might be a code for something profound such as the upper class warrior seeking wisdom from a person of a somewhat lower social status. Cowherds belonged to Vaishya class (18:44). In any case, Arjuna’s silence was a cue to Guru Krishna to begin his discourse on the Knowledge of Atmān and Buddhiyoga,  which would address his Shōkam, Dwandwam and fear of Karmaphalam.

2:10: Sanjaya said to Dhritharāshtra: O Bharata, smiling as it were, Hrishikesha spoke these words to the despondent one stationed between the two armies:

Guru Krishna is smiling perhaps because he is amused by the little Upanishadic game he and Arjuna are playing, giving him the opportunity to overthrow the decadent Brāhmanism.

8.3: Guru Krishna explains that Knowledge of Atmān counters Shōkam

2:11: You grieve for those who should not be grieved for; yet you spell words of wisdom. The wise (who have gained the Knowledge of Atmān) grieve neither for the living nor for the dead.

In the Mahābhārata context, prince Krishna tells Arjuna that there is no need for him to grieve over the impending death of Kauravas who, by virtue of their wickedness, deserve to die.

In the Historical context, Guru Krishna teaches his listeners that grief (Shōkam) is indicative of ignorance of Atmān. On the pretext of addressing Arjuna’s grief, Guru Krishna teaches his listeners the doctrine of Knowledge of Atmān: wise people, who know the eternal and indestructible nature of Atmān, know that when someone dies his Atmān does not die, and so they do not grieve. One’s attachment to people, engendered by the nature of his Guna, makes one lose touch with Knowledge of Atmān. But a person who is wise, unattached to people does not feel the need to grieve either for the living or the dead. They are beyond grief. “He who knows the Self overcomes grief.” (Chandogya Up.: 7:1:3).

2:12-13: Nor I, nor you, nor any of these ruling princes was ever non-existent before; nor is it that we shall cease to be in the future. As the Atmān in the (present) body experiences childhood, youth and old age, He also passes on to another body (after death). The wise one is not deluded about this.

If one knows that Atmān is deathless and it passes through various stages of life after which it enters another body, he does not suffer Shōkam. To get in touch with Atmān, however, one must first overcome three functions of the Gunas: desire for, attachment to, and possessiveness of sense objects. A person who has gained Knowledge of Atmān become immune to grief.

2:16: The unreal (body) has no (permanent) existence; the real (Atmān) never ceases to be (it is permanent). The truth about both these has been realized by the (Upanishadic) seers.

A distinction must be made between the impermanent body and permanent Atmān. He who knows this is an enlightened man who never grieves.

2:17-18: Know That (Atmān/Brahman) to be verily indestructible by which all this (the body as well as the world) is pervaded. No one can destroy the Immutable. These bodies of the Indweller (Atmān), who is eternal, indestructible and immeasurable, are said to have an end. Fight therefore, O Bharata (without worrying about death of people you are attached to).

Whereas Atmān occupies the body Brahman pervades the whole universe. Human body changes shape as it gets old, and it can be destroyed. Atmān is immutable and indestructible (unlike the body formed by Prakriti). How can one grieve over something that never gets old, changes shape or dies?

2:19: He who holds Atmān as slayer and he who considers It as the slain, both of them are ignorant. It slays not, nor is It slain.

Whereas the Gunas are the cause of all action (3:5, 27 and 33), Atmān is completely actionless (13:29). Not only is it indestructible, but also it does not slay anyone (Katha Up.:1:2:19). A person who does not know the difference between the two is ignorant of Atmān. The second sentence of this shloka might be a veiled reference to the Vedic god Indra, the slayer of Vrtra, the demon. The author wants to stress the difference between the supreme Vedic divinity Indra, who is the very personification of the Gunas, and the Upanishadic divinity Atmān, which is free from the Gunas. In the Vedic literature, Indra is described as hard-drinking, lustful god, who wields his Weapon Vajrāyudha to kill his enemies. The word Indriyāni (Senses) is related to the word Indra, who is described as sensuous.

2:20-21: The Atmān is neither born nor does it die. Coming into being and ceasing to be do not take place in it. Unborn, eternal, constant and ancient, It is not killed when the body is slain. He who cognizes the Atmān as indestructible, eternal, unborn and changeless, how can he slay or cause another to slay?

This shloka describes various characteristics of Atmān as explained throughout the Upanishads. One who fully comprehends the true nature of Atmān recognizes that Atmān does not kill because It is actionless; nor is it killed because it is indestructible. The Upanishadic seers are setting the stage to appoint Atmān as the Supreme Divinty to replace the Vedic gods (4:24). The terms constant, eternal and changeless might be meant to compare the Atmān to Vedic gods such as Indra, the slayer of Vrtra; Vāyu (wind god) who blows; Agni (fire god) that lights now and dies later, and the like. Atmān is unlike anything anyone has been able to experience by his five Senses. And unlike the Vedic gods who, in the Vedas, are elevated to the position of supreme divinity now and demoted later; enthroned now and dethroned the next day; made vulnerable now and invulnerable the next moment, Atmān is stable, eternal, changeless and everlasting.

8.4: Guru Krishna hints of a New Dharma with new divinity: Atmān

2:22: As a man casting off worn-out garments puts on new ones, so the embodied Atmān, casting off worn-out bodies enters into others that are new.

The superficial, literal meaning of this shloka needs no elaboration. All Brāhmanic commentators safely stick to this explanation. However, there is a hidden meaning to this shloka. This shloka is a metaphor for the entity of Atmān discarding the worn-out Brāhmanism centered on the Vedic gods- Indra, Agni, Varuna, Mārutas, etc. and entering into the body of New Dharma of the Upanishads. The code words here are ‘worn-out’ and ‘new.’ In the Vedic times Brahman represented only a mysterious magical force to be invoked by means of Mantra at the time of Yajna dedicated to the Vedic gods. The priestly class was known as Brāhmin because it was believed that they possessed the knowledge of this magical force by means of which they communicated with Vedic gods. In the post-Vedic times, Brahman came to mean the all-pervading Universal Spirit -the Supreme Deity. So there was a paradigm shift in the concept of Brahman. As we will read in the next two chapters, the Upanishadic seers promote Brahman as the center of all Yajna (4:24). How do we know that the true purpose of this shloka was to replace the Vedic gods with Atmān? The next two shlokas support this view.

8.5: Atmān is superior to the Vedic gods and the Gunas (Senses)

2:23: Weapons do not cleave Atmān, fire burns It not, water wets It not, wind dries It not.

The literal meaning of this shloka is that, in contrast to the body that experiences the forces of nature by means of the Senses, Atmān is immune to them. Not only does Atmān not act, it is also immune to sensory perception unlike the human body. All Brāhmanic commentaries just stick to this simple literal meaning. The hidden meaning of this shloka, however, is that Atmān is invulnerable to the powers of the leading Vedic gods Indra, who wields his weapon Vajrāyudha; Agni, the fire god who burns; Varuna the water god who wets, and Māruta, the wind god who dries. The power of Atmān is superior to the power of the Vedic gods (Talavakāra Upanishad 3:4-11; Kathā Upanishad: 2:6: 3). There are frequent references in the Upanishads to Vedic gods “running away” in fear from Brahman. In the Upanishads, the Devas also stand for the Senses. Weapon, fire, wind, and water are felt by the Senses. Atmān is superior to the Senses, which are the functions of the Gunas (desire, attachment, etc.). In other words, Atmān is more powerful than the Vedic Devas as well as the Gunas. As we will read later, all Vedic gods will be retired soon and Atmān/Brahman will become the Supreme Deity. Just in case the dull-witted ritualists did not get the hidden message in the above shloka, Guru Krishna repeats himself:

2:24: This Atmān is un-cleavable, incombustible and neither wetted nor dried. It is eternal, all pervading, stable, immovable and everlasting.

8.6: Knowledge of Atmān counters Shōkam

2:25: This Atmān is said to be un-manifested, unthinkable and immutable. Therefore, knowing It as such, you should not grieve.

In the shloka above, Atmān is compared with the Gunas and the Devas. The Gunas manifest themselves in the quality of one’s actions; they can be thought of a Sāttvic, Rajāsic or Tāmasic; and they manifest as one Guna now and another next moment. Atmān has no such qualities. Atmān can be perceived only through intuition. In the Vedic literature, various gods mutate freely from one shape to another. Besides, the body grows, shrinks, withers and becomes part of earth. Atmān does not undergo any such mutations or changes. Once a person intuitively knows Atmān as none of the above, he will never grieve again because how can one grieve if he does not lose it?

2:30: This indweller in the bodies of all is ever invulnerable, O Bharata. Therefore you should not grieve for any being.

What is Atmān ever invulnerable to? It is invulnerable to old age, death, grief, pain, destruction, etc. (Cha. Up.: 8:7:3; BG: 14:20), which are the products of the Gunas (14:20). Once a person intuitively recognizes this fact, he has attained the Knowledge of Atmān. He then goes beyond grief. As we will read below, there is another reason why the Upanishadic seers introduce Atmān here: to establish It as the Divinity of the Upanishadic Dharma in order to replace the Vedic gods (BG: 4:24).

8.7: Guru Krishna tackles the doctrine of Karma with reasoning

2:26-28: Or, if you conceive of Atmān as given to constant births and deaths (as per the doctrine of Karma), even then, O mighty armed, you should not sorrow. Death is certain of that which is born; birth is certain of that which is dead. You should not therefore lament over the inevitable. Beings are all, O Bharata, un-manifested in their origin (before entering the body), manifested in their mid-state (during its life in the body) and un-manifested again in the end (after death). What is the point then for anguish?

In these three shlokas, Guru Krishna tackles the doctrine of Karma, which says that everyone must go through the cycle of birth, death and rebirth. Here Guru Krishna tries to tap into Arjuna’s Buddhi, the seat of reasoning. His argument is simple: If you know that births and deaths are inevitable, why would you suffer anguish? Even here, the fact that Atmān is recycled means it is indestructible. The reader should note here that the ultimate goal of the Upanishadic Gita, in contrast to the Brāhmanic Gita, is to completely end this cycle of birth, death and rebirth, and attain Nirvāna.

8.8: Guru Krishna chides Vedic scholars

2:29: One beholds the Atmān as wonderful; another mentions of It as marvelous; another hears of It as amazing; while others, even after hearing, know It not at all.

The hidden meaning of this shloka is that even Vedic scholars, who have heard about Atmān by listening to Shruthi (that which is heard -the Vedas and Upanishads), still know It not at all: shruthvāpyenam veda na chaiva kashchit. Why? Well, their obsession with Kāmya Karma, promoted by their Gunas, has prevented them from knowing Atmān. Here the words shranothi, shruthva and veda have been cleverly used as puns. This shloka is a modified form of the Upanishadic shloka in the Katha Up.: 1:2:7.

8.9: Guru Krishna explains Dwandwam and how Dwandwa-free action leads to freedom from bondage of Karma

2:14: The contacts of the senses with their objects create, O son of Kunti, feelings of heat and cold, of pain and pleasure (Dwandwam). They come and go and are impermanent. Bear them patiently, O Bharata.

In this shloka Guru Krishna explains what Dwandwa is. When the five Senses come into contact with sense objects, the Mind experiences Dwandwam: I like this, I dislike this; this makes me feel good, this makes me feel bad; I want to gain this, I am afraid of losing it. A Dwandwa-ridden mind loses touch with Buddhi and Atmān. However, unlike Atmān, Dwandwam is impermanent. If one can control his Senses (desire for and attachment to sense objects) he can eliminate Dwandwam. This leads to the mind becoming steady (Buddhiyukta). This is the first step toward attaining the Knowledge of Atmān. This shloka is the essence of Sanyāsa, the first of two pillars of Yoga.

2:15: That man, O the best of men, is fitted for immortality (he is freed from the cycle of birth, death and rebirth), whom these (pairs of opposites engendered by attachment) do not torment (when he acts), who is balanced in pain and pleasure and steadfast (has become Buddhiyukta).

If one acts with Buddhiyukta (steady) mind, and without Dwandwam of pain and pleasure, gain and loss, honor and dishonor, he earns no Karmaphalam, and so he breaks the bonds of Karma and attains immortality (becomes one with Brahman). This shloka is the essence of Tyāga, the second of two pillars of Yoga.

(Shlokas 2:31-37 are part of the Brāhmanic Original Gita, which we studied in Chapter Five of this book.)

8.10: Guru Krishna introduces the principles of Buddhiyoga

2:38: Treating alike pain and pleasure, gain and loss, victory and defeat, engage yourself in the battle. Thus you will incur no sin (bad Karmaphalam).

How can a Kshatriya avoid earning sin (bad Karmaphalam) when he kills? Prince Krishna of the Brāhmanic Gita said in 18:17: “If you fight according to your Dharma -socially obligated duty detrmined by your Guna and Karma- free from Ahamkāra, you will incur no sin (18:17). In fact, 2:33: If you don’t fight, forfeiting your duty and honor, you will incur sin. Furthermore, 2:37: Slain you will gain heaven; victorious you will enjoy earth. Therefore rouse up, O son of Kunti, resolved to fight! (2:37). In contrast, Guru Krishna of the Upanishadic Gita said, 2:38: “If you don’t want to earn sin, fight with a Dwandwa-free mind! Don’t worry about gain and loss; victory and defeat; heaven or hell! Thus you will not earn any bad Karmaphalam!”

In effect, the Upanishadic Guru Krishna says to Arjuna in 2:38: “Forget what I said as prince Krishna of Brāhmanism in 2:37! That is Brāhmanic thinking. Here is what the Upanishadic thinking is: Don’t engage yourself in any action with the desire to gain either the earth or the heaven. Instead, engage yourself in action without Dwandwam (gain and loss, victory and defeat, pain and pleasure, honor and dishonor), and desire for Karmaphalam (lordship here on earth and heaven hereafter). You should fight with evenness, equilibrium and equanimity of mind characterized by Buddhiyoga. Your attitude should be: If I win, I gain no Karmaphalam as I did not hanker for it. If I die, I will die without gaining any Karmaphalam, and so I will not go to either heaven or hell. Since I am not concerned with gaining anything from my action, I earn no Karmaphalam.”

The question is which Krishna’s advice is the right one for a hero ready for war?

It should be obvious to even half-witted warriors, leave alone Arjuna, that this Upanishadic advice is not appropriate for any real warrior. Every warrior must go to war with Brāhmanic determination to win the war, enjoy the glory here on earth or die and attain heaven hereafter (2:31-37). No right-thinking person wages war against his enemies unless he has something to gain from it. No one should go to war with the attitude: I will be indifferent to the outcome of this war; I will not care if I win or lose; I don’t care if I gain honor or dishonor. The main reason for adding this shloka here was to introduce the basic principle of Buddhiyoga, which the Upanishadic seers did in the shlokas 2:39 that follows it immediately. The Upanishadic shloka 2:38, added to counter 2:37, therefore, is not appropriate for Arjuna’s predicament at all, even though all Brāhmanic commentators pretend as though it is by means of convoluted logic. In reality it applies only to the Vedic ritualists in the Revolutionary context, wherein Guru Krishna is trying to reform Vedic ritualists performing desire-driven Karma, as we will read in 2:41-53. He wants them to perform Yajna (Karma) in the spirit of Buddhiyoga, free from Dwandwam and without hankering for Karmaphalam. How do we know this to be true? Read on.

8.11: Now Guru Krishna introduces Buddhiyoga as a way to overcome the doctrine of Karma

2:39: This Knowledge of the Atmān (2:11-13; 16-30, which overcomes Shōkam and Dwandwam, and counters and replaces the doctrine of the Gunas) has been described to you from Sānkhya (philosophy) point of view. Listen now as I explain to you Buddhiyoga, by the single-minded practice of which you will breakthrough the bonds of Karma (meaning, you will earn neither good nor bad Karmaphalam when you act, and so you will transcend the doctrine of Karma).

Guru Krishna spelled-out theoretical Knowledge of Atmān in 18 shlokas above. From now onwards, this doctrine of Knowledge of Atmān will replace the doctrine of the Gunas. To attain Atmān, however, one must overcome the force of the Gunas by the practice of Buddhiyoga -detachment from sense objects (Sanyāsa) and renouncing fruits of action (Tyāga). First, one must practice Sanyāsa (detachment from sense objects), which eliminates Dwandwam and reconnects the Mind with Buddhi. These two actions take place simultaneously. This makes one Buddhiyukta (2:48-49). In addition, when one acts with Buddhiyukta state of mind (without Dwandwam) he does not earn any Karmaphalam (2:15; 50-51). In other words, from now onwards, the doctrine of Buddhiyoga will be the tool to overcome the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma. Having introduced these two doctrines, Guru Krishna now compares them to the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma as exemplified by Kāmya Karma.

8.12: Guru Krishna compares Brāhmanic Dharma to the Upanishadic Dharma

2:40: In this endeavor (the practice of Buddhiyoga to attain Atmān) there is no loss of attempt (since nothing was desired in the first place, hence no Shōkam); nor is there any adverse effect (such as Dwandwam). The practice of even a little of this Dharma (unlike the Brāhmanic Dharma,) protects one from great fear (of earning sin or bad Karmaphalam resulting in the cycle of birth, death and rebirth).

1. Regarding the phrase ‘Abhikrama nāsha’ -‘loss of effort’-: By means of this phrase, Guru Krishna is trying show the reader the advantages of Buddhiyoga over Kāmya Karma.

While performing Kāmya Karma for wealth, power, children, heaven, etc. the sponsor might not obtain any of these sense objects and thus his effort might be a total loss, leading to disappointment and grief. In contrast, while practicing Buddhiyoga, there is no scope for loss of effort and consequent disappointment or grief, as all actions are performed without the Dwandwam of gain and loss. Absolutely nothing was desired in the effort, and so nothing was lost.

2. Regarding the phrase ‘Pratyavāyas’ -‘adverse effect’-: What could be the adverse effect of an action? It is Karmaphalam. All actions earn Karmaphalam except in the case of Yajna performed selflessly (3:9). According to Upanishadic thinking, Kāmya Karma produces the adverse effect of Karmaphalam. Why is Karmaphalam an adverse effect?  Because it promotes Samsāra: Lord Krishna explains:

BG: 9:20-21: The knowers of the three Vedas (Brāhmins and Kshatriyas), the drinkers of Soma, pray for the way to heaven. They reach the holy world of the Lord of the Devas and enjoy in heaven the celestial pleasures of the Devas. Having enjoyed the vast world of heaven (after gaining Karmaphalam from Yajna), they (Vedic ritualists) return to the world of mortals on exhaustion of their merits; thus abiding by the injunction of the three Vedas (=the doctrine of Karma), desiring objects of desires they come and go (born again and again).

In contrast, when one acts with his mind yoked to Buddhi (without Dwandwam), he earns no Karmaphalam, hence no adverse effect (2:15). Guru Krishna explains:

BG: 2:50: The one who acts with his mind stabilized by Buddhiyoga frees himself from both good and bad Karmaphalam. Therefore devote yourself to Buddhiyoga. Action done skillfully (avoiding Karmaphalam) is Yoga.

In fact, even if one gave up Buddhiyoga after practicing it for a while , there is no adverse effect. Lord Krishna explains this to Arjuna:

6:41-45: Having attained the worlds of the righteous and having lived there for countless years, he who falls from Yoga is born in the house of the pure and prosperous. Or he is born in a family of wise Yogis only. A birth like this is verily very difficult to obtain in this world. There he regains the knowledge acquired in his former body, and he strives more than before for perfection, O joy of the Kurus. By that very former practice he is led on in spite of himself. Even he who merely wishes to know Yoga rises above the performer of Vedic rites. The Yogi, who strives with assiduity, purified from sins (Karmaphalam) and perfected through many births reaches then the Supreme Goal (Nirvāna).

What this means is that over several births, the fallen Yogi keeps decreasing his accumulated Karmaphalam and finally, after it is all exhausted, attains Nirvāna.

3. Regarding the phrase, “The practice of even a little of this Dharma”: the phrase ‘asya Dharmasya’ -this Dharma- refers to the Upanishadic Dharma as a whole and not just to the discipline of Yoga as claimed by Brāhmanic commentators. Why? Well, for one thing, in the following thirteen shlokas Guru Krishna condemns almost all aspects of Brāhmanism: Vedic ritualists (2:41-44, 49), doctrines of the Gunas and Karma (2:45), Kāmya Karma (2:43, 47-49), and the Vedas themselves (2:46, 52-53). Second, he follows these shlokas with shlokas elaborating the fundamental principles of Upanishadic Dharma (2:54-72). Obviously, the purpose of Chapter Two was to replace Brāhmanism with Upanishadism.

4. Regarding the phrase ‘protects one from great fear ‘Mahato Bhayāt’: What great fear could the Upanishadic Dharma protect one from? The author of this shloka does not spell out the ‘great fear,’ which this Dharma protects one from. Therefore, we need to search for clues given in other shlokas.

Both Shankarāchārya and Rāmānujāchārya explain this as fear of transmigration of Atmān -being born again and again. It is true that the Upanishadic seers abhorred Samsāra resulting from Kāmya Karma. However, this shloka’s goal was to convert Vedic ritualists into Upanishadic Yogis. What could be the ‘great fear’ of the Vedic ritualists, which the Upanishadic Dharma could protect them from? It could not be fear of transmigration of Atmān as Vedic ritualists were never afraid of Samsāra. In fact, they indulged in Kāmya Karma to earn as much Karmaphalam as possible, go to heaven after death, enjoy life there, and return to earth for another birth (read 2:43 below). So, what ‘great fear’ of the Vedic ritualists that the Upanishadic Dharma could protect them from?

The clue can be found in the Brāhmanic shloka 3:35, which chronologically preceded 2:40. This shloka warned those who abandoned Brāhmanism to join heterodox Dharmas such as Buddhism and Jainism:

BG: 3:35: One’s own Dharma, though imperfect (due to such things as Kāmya Karma), is better than the Dharma of another well discharged. Better death in one’s own Dharma (for one would go to heaven); the Dharma of another is full of fear (because one would go to hell).

It is implied in this Brāhmanic shloka that if one died performing one’s own Dharma, however imperfectly, as exemplified by Kāmya Karma, he would attain heaven (9:20). If one died performing Para Dharma, however perfectly, one would go to hell. Why? Abandoning Brāhmanism was fraught with serious consequences to Brāhmanism and so Brāhmanism considered it a great sin. Brāhmanism warned everyone who abandoned it and joined the order of Buddhism and Jainism that they would go to hell for being responsible for destruction of family, corruption of women and consequent Varnasankara (class-admixture), destruction of Jāti Dharma and Kula Dharma (1:42-44). In fact, Brāhmanism declared that even the great Buddha was born to mislead Nastiks to hell. In the Brāhmanic Original Gita: 2:33, prince Krishna warns Arjuna that he would incur sin (and go to hell) if he abandoned his Dharma.

So in shloka 2:40, Guru Krishna of the Upanishadic Dharma assures Vedic ritualists that they need not fear going to hell for abandoning decadent Brāhmanism and joining the Upanishadic Dharma because practicing even a little of this Dharma protects them from the great fear of going to hell for abandoning Brāhmanism.

Shankarāchārya: “Here in the sphere of Karmayoga there is no loss of good beginnings; nor is there any sin involved. Even a little of this righteous law delivers one from great peril. Here, in Karma Yoga, the path leading to liberation, there is no loss of the good beginnings one makes; unlike in the case of agriculture, etc. the effects of these beginnings are conserved. And unlike what may happen in undergoing a medical treatment adverse reactions will not result from the practice of Karma Yoga. On the other hand, even a little of this Yogic discipline delivers one from the great peril of transmigratory life with its birth, deaths and so forth.”

Note: The Yoga under study is Buddhiyoga, which has two elements in it: Sanyāsa, also known as Jnānayoga, and Tyāga, also known as Karmayoga. Only later, in 3:3, does Lord Krishna divide Buddhiyoga into Jnānayoga and Karmayoga. The Achārya never catches the drift of the shloka’s hidden intent to knock down Brāhmanism by comparing it unfavorably with Upanishadism. Instead he resorts to applying ‘loss of effort’ to failure of crops, and ‘adverse effect’ to complications in medical treatment. He misses the real agenda of this shloka, namely to replace Brāhmanism with Upanishadism. His interpretation that the great fear referred to is the fear of rebirth does not make sense in the historical context.

Rāmānujāchārya: “Here, there is no loss of effort, nor any accrual of evil. Even a little of this Dharma (called Karma Yoga) protects a man from the great fear. Here in Karma Yoga, there is no loss of ‘Abhikrama’ or of effort that has been put in; ‘loss’ means the loss of efficacy to bring about the fruits. In Karma Yoga if work is begun and left unfinished, and the continuity is broken in the middle, it does not remain fruitless, as in the case of works undertaken for fruits. No evil result is acquired if the continuity of work is broken. Even a little bit of this Dharma known as Karmayoga or Nishkama karma (unselfish action without desire for any reward) gives protection from great fear, i. e., the fear of transmigratory existence.”

Note: This is a fairly accurate literal interpretation. However, Rāmānujāchārya also mistakes Buddhiyoga for Karmayoga even though the latter is one of two elements of Buddhiyoga. He mistakes the purpose of Yoga as gaining fruit when he says, “it does not remain fruitless.” The goal of Yoga is “not to gain any fruit at all.” He interprets this shloka literally and fails to recognize that this shloka’s real intent is to replace Brāhmanism with Upanishadism. He does not have a clue of the true intent of this shloka.

Madhvāchārya: “In this path (of devotion to the Lord) the beginning is never faulted nor the obstacles in the middle. Even a little effort in the righteous path will deliver you from great fear. Where even without any intention of propitiating Sri Vishnu whatever righteous act, through performance or non-performance, come to be performed, there comes about Righteousness to followers of Sri Vishnu. These Perennial Principles (Dharma) were initiated in Krita Era as Pancharatra and Veda. Except for His pleasure neither a drop of water nor a grain of rice is desirable to be given….”

Note: The Achārya goes on and on like this for another page, extolling Vishnu, the Vedas, etc.  Just about everything he writes is totally irrelevant to the shloka under study.

Swāmi Chidbhavānanda: “If a wrong medicine be administered to a patient, instead of it healing the disease, it may lead to the decease of the person. The practice of Yoga is not fraught with any danger of this kind. Any little practice of it, gives to that extent a glimpse into the nature of Atman. The fear of death is the greatest of all. As Atman is being understood this fear ceases.”

Note: The Swāmi misses the point that the sole purpose of this shloka was to replace Brāhmanism with Upanishadism. He identifies the fear as the fear of death. The upper classes of Brāhmanism developed the doctrine of Karma, in part, to overcome their fear of death. The real fear of Brāhmanism was fear of going to hell, not fear of dying.

Bhaktivedānta Swāmi: “Activity in Krishna consciousness, or acting for the benefit of Krishna without expectation of sense gratification, is highest transcendental quality of work.”

Note: The Swāmi goes on and on like this even though this shloka has nothing to do with either Lord Krishna or Krishna consciousness.

This single shloka is the proof that this is a revolution, not an evolution.

8.13: Guru Krishna condemns Vedic ritualists

2:41: To the one whose mind has been steadied by Buddhiyoga there is only one goal (attaining the Bliss of Atmān). Many branching and endless are the goals (lordship, wealth, heaven, etc.) of irresolute in mind (Dwandwa-ridden Vedic ritualists indulging in Kāmya Karma).

A Yogi’s mind is steadied by his Buddhi and is focused solely on Atmān. A Vedic ritualist’s mind is Dwandwa-ridden due to desire for, attachment to, and possessiveness of power, wealth, and heaven (read 2:43 below). How do we know that Guru Krishna is attacking the Vedic ritualists? Read the next shloka.

2: 42: The ignorant (Vedic ritualists who are deluded by the Gunas) who delight in the flowery words disputing about the Vedas say that there is nothing other than this (Kāmya Karma).

The Vedic ritualists loved to engage each other in debate about the Vedic doctrines of the Gunas and Karma that promoted Kāmya Karma. The phrase “nothing other than this” refers to the fact that for every malady in the society Brāhmanism had only one remedy: “Perform Kāmya Karma to get whatever you want! And give us food, cows, and gold!” The Upanishadic seers claimed that ignorance engendered by “delighting in the disputations” as far worse than that arising from performing Kāmya Karma itself (Brahadāranyaka Upanishad: 4:4:10; Isopanishad: 9, 12). The phrase “nothing other than this” could also represent material things here on earth.

2:43: They (the Vedic ritualists) are desire-ridden, who hold attainment of heaven as the goal of birth and its activities; and who are addicted to pompous sacrificial rites bringing pleasure and lordship.

Guru Krishna attacks the two fundamental goals of Kāmya Karma: pleasure and lordship here on earth and heaven hereafter, and lambastes the Vedic ritualists indulging in them. Note here that Guru Krishna derides the fact that attainment of heaven is the goal of these rituals, the very goal prince Krishna of Brāhmanism repeatedly recommended to Arjuna in the Original Brāhmanic Gita (2:3; 32, 37)! As we will read soon, the end of Samsāra, not heaven, is the goal of this Dharma. What happens to those who are entangled with these sense objects? They suffer Dwandwam.

2:44: There is no steadiness of mind for them (Vedic ritualists), who are entangled with pleasure and power and whose wisdom is stolen away.

When the mind is entangled with sense objects, Dwandwam is the result (2:14). The Dwandwa-ridden Mind is unsteady because it is deprived of the steadying effect of Buddhi. Another way of putting this is: He, who’s Mind is guided by Buddhi, becomes the Buddha (wise); he whose mind is entangled with sense objects becomes the Buddhu (stupid)!

8.14: Guru Krishna condemns the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma

2:45: The Vedas enumerate three Gunas (which promote desire, attachment, and delusion). Be free from the three Gunas, O Arjuna. Be free from Dwandwam (by giving up attachment). Being of goodness of mind (being free of Guna-rooted weaknesses such as desire and jealous rage), unconcerned with getting (earning Karmaphalam from your actions) and keeping (becoming attached to them), be centered on Atmān (which, gives Bliss here on earth and Nirvāna hereafter).

This single shloka forms the anthem of the Upanishadic Gita as well as the revolution: Get over the Gunas, all three of them; eliminate Dwandwam; cultivate goodness by giving up common human weaknesses rooted in the Gunas such as greed, lust and rage (3:37-43); become detached from sense objects and give up fruits of action (Karmaphalam), and be centered on Atmān (to overcome Shōkam). The word Nityasatvasto here stands for eternally fixed in goodness or truth. It does not represent Sāttvic Guna as some Brāhmanic commentators claim. The bottom line is: Instead of submitting to the power of any of the Gunas, one should take refuge in Atmān, the power higher than the Gunas (14:19-20). Instead of yielding to doctrine of Karma and craving Karmaphalam, one should renounce it and act in the spirit of Buddhiyoga. And by knowing Atmān, one overcomes Shōkam. Even though Guru Krishna seems to address this shloka to Arjuna, clearly he is addressing Vedic ritualists steeped in Kāmya Karma.

8.15: Guru Krishna downgrades the Vedas

2:46: To an enlightened Brāhmin (who has attained Knowledge of Atmān by means of Buddhiyoga) all the Vedas are as useful as a well when there is a flood everywhere.

In this shloka Guru Krishna attacks Vedas themselves. What use is a small tank of water (the limited and “lower knowledge” of all the Vedas, Mundaka Up: 1:1: 5) when there is water overflowing all around (the infinite Knowledge of Atmān)? The Upanishads repeatedly say, “One cannot know Brahman by the Vedas” (Katha Up.:1:2:23; Mundaka Up: 2:2:3). Why? The Vedic doctrines of the Gunas and Karma promote desire, attachment, possessiveness, ignorance of Atmān, and Samsāra. This also means that a ritualist who performs Kāmya Karma based on Vedic knowledge is ignorant, and cannot hope to attain Self-realization.

8.16: Shaking his finger at the Vedic ritualists, Guru Krishna lays down the Law

2:47: Your entitlement (Adhikāra) is only to the performance of Karma (Yajna); never to its fruits (for fruits belong to the Devas, as per 3:10-13). Fruits should never be the motive of your action (Do not indulge in Kāmya Karma); never become attached to inaction either (do not become an inactive monk of one of those heterodox Dharmas, who does absolutely nothing except begging).

In this seminal shloka Guru Krishna lays down the Law to the Vedic ritualists who obsessively perform Kāmya Karma desiring one sense object or another. The word Adhikāra in this shloka refers to the entitlement claimed by various Kshatriyas to perform certain Yajnas by virtue of their accomplishments in war and expansion of their territory. For example, to perform Ashvamedha Yajna (horse sacrifice), kings were first required to prove their entitlement by virtue of their accomplishments and conquests. These entitlements were based on Vedic scriptures and were granted to them by various priests on their payroll.

The correct meaning of this verse is that the Vedic ritualists’ entitlement is only to the selfless performance of Yajnas, and not to its fruits, because, according to the true intent of Prajāpati, the fruits belong to the Vedic Devas: Lord Krishna explains: 3:10-13: Having created mankind in the beginning together with Yajna, the Prajāpati said: ‘By this shall you propagate; this shall be the milch cow of your desires. Cherish the Devas with this (Yajna); and may those Devas cherish you; thus cherishing one another, you shall reap supreme good. Cherished by Yajna, the Devas shall bestow on you the enjoyment you desire. A thief verily is he who enjoys what is given by them without returning them anything. The good who eat the remains of Yajna are freed from all sins; but the sinful ones who cook food for themselves, they verily eat sin.” In other words, Yajnas were supposed to be the means for quid pro quo. In effect, Yajnas were thanksgiving rituals meant to return the debt (RNa) to the Vedic gods. Those who stole Karmaphalam from the Vedic gods and used it to fulfill their own desires are thieves. Yajnas were not meant to be grand barbecue parties in which one got drunk on Soma and sacrificed animals desiring power and pleasure here on earth and heaven hereafter! However, once the selfish motive was removed from the ritual of Yajna, one might totally lose interest in performing any Karma and become attached to inaction (akarmani). In other words, one might become a Buddhist Bhikku, a Jain Muni or an Ascetic, who does nothing at all. Guru Krishna does not want this undesirable side-effect from his verdict either. So he tells them, “Do not become inactive once you give up performance of Kāmya Karma.” As we will read in the next two chapters, Lord Krishna gives Jnānayoga to Brāhmins and Karmayoga to Kshatriyas in the place of Kāmya Karma.

Every Brāhmanic commentary on this shloka explains it in the context of Arjuna’s predicament even though it has absolutely no relevance to it whatsoever. Not only did Arjuna have the entitlement (Adhikāra) to wage the war but also he had every right to expect fruit of his action as prince Krishna declared to him in 2:37: Slain you will gain heaven; victorius you will enjoy the earth. Therefore rouse up, O son of Kunti, resolved to fight! The whole purpose of the ghastly war was to gain back his kingdom. Furthermore, as the Brāhmanic seers said in 2:33: “It is your bounden duty to fight to gain back your kingdom, failing which he would incur dishonor and sin.” He would be a hypocrite, if not a fool, to say, “I will wage this dreadful war against my own people without desiring to regain my kingdom!” War is not just a ritual like a Yajna. In this particular case, war was a dreadful way of correcting an injustice. Indifference to its results would certainly lead to disaster. Therefore, this shloka has no Mahābhārata context whatsoever, and applies only to the Vedic ritualists who hankered for fruits while performing Karma (Yajna), which were originally supposed to be without any selfish motive (3:9; 4:15-17). Now the question is whether this dictum could be applied in our daily lives. The fact is, contrary to the claim made by Brāhmanic commentators it is impossible for ordinary people to live up to this dictum when performing any action, except perhaps when one does volunteer work. Even here, most volunteers expect recognition for their work!

8.17: Perform Yajna without attachment to sense objects: Sanyāsa

2:48: Perform Karma (Yajna), O Dhananjaya, being fixed in Buddhiyoga, renouncing attachments (to wealth, lordship and heaven), and steady-minded (without Dwandwam). Equilibrium in success and failure (being of steady mind) is verily Yoga.

In this shloka, Guru Krishna introduces the first of two elements of Buddhiyoga: Sanyāsa -giving up attachment for sense objects (18:2). Once the Mind detaches itself from sense objects, it immediately connects with Buddhi and becomes Buddhiyukta and free from Dwandwam. A person of Buddhiyukta mind is steady in the face of success as well as failure. An attempt is made in this shloka to change Kāmya Karma into Nishkāma Karma.

8.18: Perform Yajnas without desiring fruits: Tyāga

2:49: Motivated Karma is, O Dhananjaya, far inferior to that performed with equanimity of mind engendered by Buddhiyoga. Take refuge in the evenness of the Buddhiyoga (when you act). Wretched are those (ritualists) who hanker for Karmaphalam (when they act/perform Yajna).

In this shloka Guru Krishna introduces the second element of Buddhiyoga: Tyāga -giving up Sankalpa -desire for fruits- when performing Yajna (18:2). Guru Krishna stresses the importance of performing Yajna without expecting anything in return. He says that Yajna performed in the spirit of Buddhiyoga is superior to the one with desire for fruits. Those ritualists who desire fruits are wretched, indeed as they suffer Dwandwam and earn Karmaphalam. By recommending giving up desire for fruits Guru Krishna at once pulled the rug from under Kāmya Karma and the Gunas in which they were rooted. If there is nothing to be gained by performing Yajna, what is the point of performing Yajna at all?

8.19: One does not earn Karmaphalam when he performs Karma in the spirit of Buddhiyga

2:50: The one whose mind is stabilized by Buddhiyoga frees himself in this life from good deeds (good Karmaphalam) as well as evil deeds (bad Karmaphalam); therefore girdle yourself to Yoga; work done skillfully (without suffering the side-effects such as Dwandwam and Karmaphalam) is verily Yoga.

Once the mind is stabilized by Buddhi, it becomes free from the Dwandwam of desire and aversion, and so one’s actions become free from both good and bad Karmaphalam here on earth. Yoga is nothing but work done skillfully, meaning done in such a way that one neither suffers Dwandwam nor earns Karmaphalam as its side-effect. Just as a skillful surgeon avoids complications such as infection and bleeding while performing surgery, a skillful Yogi avoids Dwandwam and Karmaphalam while performing action.

2:51: The wise with Buddhiyukta mind, renouncing selfishness in action, freed from the fetters of birth, verily go to the stainless state.

When one gives up attachment and selfishness while performing any Karma, he earns no Karmaphalam. By not earning Karmaphalam, one overcomes Samsāra hereafter. This means, when one performs selfless action he breaks the bonds of Karma and thus defies the doctrine of Karma. Note here that thus far Atmān is not part of the equation in Buddhiyoga.

8.20: Guru Krishna directly attacks the Vedas

2:52: When your Buddhi transcends the taint of delusion (bewilderment engendered by the Gunas), then shall you be disgusted by things you will hear (Shruthis yet to be heard) as well as that you have already heard (the Vedas).

In this shloka Guru Krishna says that when a Buddhiyogi has raised himself above the bewilderment engendered by desire and attachment associated with Kāmya Karma rooted in the Vedas, he would be disgusted with Shruthis yet to be revealed (Shrotavyasya) as well as the Vedas (Shrutasya), which promote them. Here the Upanishadic seers use the word Nirvedam as pun to express disgust with the Vedas. This word means disgust as well as Vedalessness. What are the Shruthis yet to be revealed? I believe they were referring to the newer Shruthis that were being churned out around this time promoting sacrificial rites, such as Taittiriya Upanishad. All Brāhmanism commentators simply gloss over this shloka which expresses disgust with the Vedas that promote Kāmya Karma.

2:53: When your Buddhi, disregarding the Vedic doctrines (of the Gunas and Karma), is firmly steadied in equilibrium (by Buddhiyoga), then you shall achieve the transcendental state of Yoga (Samādhi).

Once again Guru Krishna uses the word Shruthi as pun. The word Shruthiviprathipanna means disregarding the Shruthi. For one to achieve the transcendental state of mind known as Samādhi, the highest state of Yogic steadiness and concentration one could hope to achieve in life, he must disregard the temptations of the Vedic doctrines, such as the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma, that promote desire, attachment and delusion. Once again, Brāhmanic commentators either gloss over this shloka or obfuscate its true meaning altogether. Rāmānujāchārya goes a little further: He pointedly says that the word Shruthi in this shloka does not mean the Vedas, and that, “Intellect, which hearing from us, has become specially enlightened, having for its object the eternal, unsurpassed and subtle self -which belongs to a class different from all other entities-, then the intellect is firmly fixed, i. e., in a single psychosis, and stands unshaken.” Note here that the Upanishadic concept of Samādhi, which stands for the absolute tranquility of mind due to its contact with Atmān, is very different from the Brāhmanic concept of Samsiddhim (18:45), which stands for the highest level of perfection a person can attain in the Brāhmanic society by dutifully performing actions as per his Guna and Karma.

8.20: The concept of Sththaprajnya state of mind is introduced

2:54: Arjuna asks: What is the mark of the man of steadfast wisdom, O Keshava, who is steeped in Samādhi? How does the man firm in wisdom speak, sit and walk?

The answer to this question actually lies in shloka 5:8-9: That sage centered in the Self should think, “I do nothing at all” -though seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, eating, going, sleeping, breathing, speaking, emptying, holding, opening and closing the eyes -firm in the thought that the senses move among sense-objects. Based on the answers Guru Krishna gives in the following shlokas, a more appropriate question might have been, “What does it take for a man, O Keshava, to achieve the Sthithaprajnya state of mind conducive to achieving Samādhi (contact with Atmān)?” Therefore, it is safe to assume that this shloka was inappropriately placed here by some later editor, who had not fully grasped the Upanishadic concepts.

So far Buddhiyoga consisted of the Mind withdrawing from its attachment to sense objects and being steadied by Buddhi (Intellect). A Buddhiyogi’s ultimate goal is to attain Atmān. The term Samadhi -transcendental state of Yoga- stands for the Absolute Bliss a Buddhiyogi experiences by his mind’s direct contact with Atmān. The steady state of mind in which one’s mind has attained the Bliss of Atmān is known as Sthithaprajnya, the mind of steadfast wisdom. One can achieve the Absolute Bliss associated with the transcendental state of mind only when he is able to maintain steadiness of concentration and singleness of purpose even as his Buddhi is caught in the cross currents of the Vedic doctrines of the Gunas and Karma.

8.21: To attain the Sthithaprajnya state, one must give up all Guna-rooted weaknesses

2:55: When a man abandons all desires of the heart and is satisfied in Atmān and by Atmān, then he is said to have achieved the Sthithaprajnya State.

The answer is simple: Give up all desires of the heart and be satisfied with the Bliss of Atmān. Desire is rooted in the Gunas (3:37). The moment one gives up all his desires, his Mind will connect with his Buddhi as well as Atmān.

2:56: He whose mind is not perturbed by adversity, who does not crave for happiness, who is free from fondness, fear and anger (Guna-rooted weaknesses), is the Muni (sage) of transcendental wisdom.

If one does not harbor desire, he is not frustrated by adversity. If one does not crave happiness by sense objects, he does not experience Dwandwam. When one overcomes the Guna-rooted weaknesses such as desire for and attachment to sense objects; fear of losing them, and jealous rage for other’s possessions, his mind gets in touch with Atmān. The basic idea is that one must give up all human weaknesses rooted in the Gunas.

2:57: He who is unattached everywhere, who is not delighted at receiving good nor dejected by receiving evil, he is poised in wisdom.

When one is not attached to Karmaphalam, he does not worry about gaining or losing them when he acts. The steadiness of Mind thus achieved becomes the stepping stone to achieve Sthithaprajnya state of mind. Such a person does not jump in joy when he receives a fortune, nor sink into despair when he suffers a misfortune. Basically it is Buddhiyukta Mind that has achieved evenness, equilibrium, equanimity, and also Absolute Bliss of Atmān.

8.22: Warning: Do not underestimate the power of the Senses

2:60: The excited senses (desires), Arjuna, impetuously carry away the mind of even a wise man who is striving for perfection.

Is it easy to give up desire, attachment and possessiveness and achieve the Sthithaprajnya state of Mind? Not at all, says Guru Krishna. Even wise people often fall prey to their desires and get entangled with sense objects. A mind which falls prey to the Senses loses touch with Wisdom.

2:67: Just as the gale of wind pushes a ship on the waters, the mind that yields to the roving Senses (desires) breaks away from its wisdom.

The Mind is constantly caught between the Senses (desires and attachment) on the one hand and Buddhi (doing the right thing) on the other. Very often, the Senses win and even wise people do stupid things.

8.23: To steady one’s Mind he must say ‘No’ to desires and withdraw attachments

2:58: When also, like a tortoise withdrawing its limbs into its body, one withdraws his senses from sense objects, his wisdom is set steady.

Withdrawing Senses simply means saying “No!” to one’s desires for sense objects and reducing attachments to them. It is a long and arduous task. Once the Mind has controlled its desires, it connects with Buddhi (Wisdom) and becomes steady. In the picture below, the Senses have shrunk in size; attachments to sense objects are almost gone, and the sense objects have become insignificant. The Mind is girdled with Buddhi and centered on Atmān.

2:59: Sense objects drop out for the abstinent man though not the longing for them. However, his longing also ceases when he intuits the Supreme (Atmān).

Merely abstaining from sense objects does not mean the desire for them is completely gone. However, once one gets in touch with Atmān, even those residual cravings disappear. Why? Well, Atmān enjoys the Bliss associated with not wanting or needing anything.

8.24: A Bhāgavatha shloka suddenly pops up!

2:61: The Yogi, having controlled them all, sits focused on Me as the supreme goal. His wisdom is constant whose Senses (desire and attachment) are subjugated.

In the Bhagavad Gita Guru Krishna declares himself as Lord of beings only in BG Chapter Four, which is the second of the four step Upanishadic revolution. This shloka, 2:61, in which Guru Krishna suddenly claims himself to be God, is inappropriately interpolated into this Upanishadic chapter by a later Bhāgavatha scholar or editor. This is but one of many examples of how the Gita has been recklessly corrupted by various well-meaning authors who cared little for the integrity of the text in their exuberance to promote their own religious agendas. If I were Arjuna I would ask Guru Krishna in true Upanishadic spirit, “Why should the Yogi sit focused on you, Guruji? Are you God or something?”

8.25: Guru Krishna warns ritualists about the danger of attachment to sense objects

2:62-63: Brooding on the objects of senses (people, wealth, power, heaven, etc.) man develops attachment to them; from attachment comes hankering (”I must have it”); from hankering sprouts forth jealous rage (I hate my rival because he has it and I don’t); from jealous rage proceeds delusion (bewilderment due to disconnection of mind from wisdom); from delusion confused memory (of right thing to do); from confused memory the ruin of reason (one’s actions become irrational); due to the ruin of reason he perishes (he indulges in self-destructive behavior).

The above two shlokas are meant to warn the Vedic ritualists about the consequences of attachment to sense objects while performing Yajna. The summary of the above two shlokas is that the Guna-rooted weaknesses of desire, attachment, and possessiveness disconnect the mind from Buddhi leading to one indulging in stupid and ruinous behavior. This is fundamental wisdom of the Upanishadic Gita.

The above picture illustrates the consequences of Mind’s entanglement with sense objects. The Senses, the five ovals hanging down from the large over, are powerful. Their attachment to sense objects are very strong. Sense objects have become very important. The Mind is suffering from severe Dwandwam (the zigzag in its center) and it is disconnected from Buddhi. Buddhi is disconnected from Atmān. What is the solution for this problem?

2:64-66: But the disciplined Yogi, moving among objects with his Senses (desires) under control, and free from attraction and aversion (Dwandwam), gains tranquility. In tranquility, all his sorrow is destroyed. For the Buddhi of the tranquil-minded is soon established in equilibrium (becomes Buddhiyukta). There is no wisdom in the fickle-minded (who is Dwandwa-ridden due to his attachment to sense objects); to the one with unsteady mind, there is no peace. And how can the mind without peace enjoy happiness (of Atmān here on earth)?

What is the secret of gaining tranquility and overcoming sorrow? One should freely move among various sense objects without desire and attachment. By controlling these, one prevents Dwandwam. Such a mind achieves evenness, equilibrium, and equanimity associated with Buddhiyoga even while enjoying life. For one to enjoy happiness and peace, his mind must first be steadied.

2:68: Therefore, Arjuna, his cognition is well-poised, whose Senses are completely restrained from their objects.

Complete control over one’s Senses (desires and attachments) is essential for one’s mind to become absolutely steady and stress-free. Once the Senses are controlled, the Mind connects with Buddhi, yokes itself to it, and becomes Buddhiyukta. The main goal of Buddhiyoga is to achieve steadiness of Mind by controlling one’s desires and attachment to sense objects as well as the fruit of actions.

2:69: That which is night to all beings, in that the disciplined man wakes; that in which all beings wake, is night to Atmān-cognizing Muni.

This enigmatic shloka perhaps means as follows: When all people around him are living in darkness (ignorance) engendered by their desire for and attachment to sense objects, the Yogi wakes up to the enlightenment of Atmān due to his detachment from sense objects. When everyone around him is entangled in the mundane day to day materials, the Yogi who has attained Atmān is completely detached from it as if he is fast asleep. In other words, a Yogi marches to a different tune from the ritualists.

8.26: Attaining the Bliss of Atmān here on earth

2:70-71: Not the desirer of desires, but that man attains Peace (of Atmān), in whom all desires merge even as rivers flow into the ocean which is full and unmoving. That man attains Peace (here on earth) who is devoid of cravings, freed from all desires and without the feeling of “I” and “mine.”

This shloka shows how Yoga of detachment promotes Bliss here on earth in contrast to Kāmya Karma which promotes Shokam and Dwandwam here on earth. To achieve the absolute Bliss of Atmān even during one’s lifetime, one must give up all aspects related to Kāmya Karma: desire for, and attachment to, and possessiveness (delusion of “I” and “mine”) of sense objects. In these shlokas Guru Krishna is clearly referring to the Vedic ritualists who were obsessed with accumulating Karmaphalam by means of Kāmya Karma and enjoying life here on earth. These shlokas have no relevance to Arjuna’s predicament.

8.27: Attaining Nirvāna hereafter

2:72: This, O Pārtha, is the Brahman state. Attaining this none will be bewildered (by the doctrines of the Gunas and Karma). Being established in It even at the hour of death, a man gets into oneness with the Brahman (attains Nirvāna hereafter).

Whereas the goal of Kāmya Karma of Brāhmanism was to earn Karmaphalam and attain heaven hereafter (2:37, 43), the goal of the Upanishadic Yoga was to earn no Karmaphalam and attain Nirvāna hereafter. Note here that the Upanishadic seers declare that Atmān and Brahman are one and the same. The man who attains Atmān has attained the state of Brahmanirvāna -reunion of Atmān with Brahman.

Summary: This chapter represents the first step of the Upanishadic revolution. In this chapter, Guru Krishna of Upanishadism replaces the doctrine of the Guna with the doctrine of Knowledge of Atman; the doctrine of Karma with Buddhiyoga; Kāmya Karma with Nishkāma Karma (desireless Karma). And he brings about a paradigm shift in the Brāhmanic concerns about the issue of here and hereafter. In the place of Brāhmanic goal of pleasure and wealth here on earth, he recommends Bliss of Atmān here on earth. Instead of Brāhmanic goal of attainment of heaven hereafter, he recommends end of Samsāra and attainment of Nirvāna hereafter. Let us now study how the Upanishadic seers go about consolidating their revolution and reforming Brāhmins and Kshatriyas.