The Field and the Knower

Today, Swami Kaivalyanandaji began discussions on the 13th chapter, 'the Yoga of the field and the knower of the field.' Here is the 2nd shloka;

'Idam shariram kaunteya, kshetram ityabhidhiyate,
Etad yo vetti tam prahuh kshetrajnam iti tadvidah.' 13.2

There is also a shloka before this in some books, 'purusham prakritim caiva...' However, Swami said that this shloka is not in any of the major sanskrit commentaries, by Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, or Madhvacharya. Therefore, it is said that it was added in later. In the major commentaries, the 13th chapter begins from this shloka.
The Lord says, 'Arjuna! This body is called the field, and he who knows it is called the knower of the field.'
Swami said that this shloka is also misunderstood, especially by Malayalis. This is because in Malayalam, the word 'kshetram' means 'temple.' So, most commentators from Kerala interpret in this way; 'this body is the temple, and seated inside is the Lord.'
That is a good idea, but the thing they don't know is that the word 'kshetram' doesn't mean 'temple' in Sanskrit. In fact, only in Malayalam has it gotten that meaning. In the Mahabharata, that meaning for the word 'kshetram' isn't seen. Instead, it means 'field,' like in 'dharma kshetra kuru kshetre' - 'in the field of righteousness..'
Here, because this explains about Prakriti, or Nature, Swami discussed the similarities between the ideas of the Gita and the philosophy of Sankhya. The Sankhya philosophy was propounded by the rishi Kapila. He was the first to describe Nature as consisting of the three gunas of sattva, rajas, and tamas. This division is a main theme of the Gita.
The rishi Kapila also was the first to say that the individual soul, or 'jiva,' is free from all attributes, or 'nirguna.' This is why Shankaracharya borrows many ideas from Kapila's system of Sankhya. However, the Sankhya system never even mentions about 'Ishvara,' an all-knowing, all-powerful Creator. That is where Shankaracharya refutes the Sankhya system, and also where the Gita stands.
The Lord says, 'mayadhyakshena prakritih, suyate sacaracaram' - 'This Nature creates all beings, moving and non-moving, with Me as an overseer.' This is the philosophy of the Gita. This agrees that Prakriti is the cause of the universe, but says that God is an 'over-seer.' In over words, the inert Nature cannot produce creation without the Consciousness of God. That is what the Gita says. In that creation, however, the place of God is as a 'non-doer,' as a mere witness.
Swami also said that when the spiritual scriptures discuss about creation, we shouldn't try to link this with 'modern science.' Suppose a Swami tries to talk about the Gita and modern science. He will end up without correctly explaining science, and without understanding the Gita.
Actually, when the scriptures discuss the process of Creation, it is for a different purpose than that of science. The purpose of this is to lead the mind to subtler and subtler levels till it can understand the nature of God. On the other hand, modern science uses external instruments and experiments to find a material conclusion. That is why we shouldn't misunderstand what the scriptures say on the level of material science.
Our minds our not subtle enough to grasp the nature of God. Therefore, the scriptures explain about the process of Creation in order to lead one to the very source of existence. Thus, the creation is divided into parts; space, wind, fire, water, and earth. It is said that earth comes from water, water from fire, that from wind, and that from space. This isn't said materially. A scientist would laugh if you said that water comes from fire.
Instead, these are 'tattvas,' subtle principles. Earth is the most gross element, so that is last, while the other elements are increasingly subtle, while space is only able to be grasped with the mind. Thus, one is led to more subtle levels of mind. In the scriptures, this is called 'adhyaropa apavada tantra.'

Piyush,
July 16, 2007