FolioCorpusBhagavad-gītā

Bhagavad-gītā 2.13

देहिनोऽस्मिन्यथा देहे कौमारं यौवनं जरा । तथा देहान्तरप्राप्तिर्धीरस्तत्र न मुह्यति ॥ १३ ॥
dehino ’smin yathā dehe
[dehino ’smin yathaa dehe]
kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā
[kaumaaram yauvanam jaraa]
tathā dehāntara-prāptir
[tathaa dehaantara-praaptir]
dhīras tatra na muhyati
[dheeras tatra na muhyati]
Word-for-word
dehinaḥ — of the embodied asmin — in this yathā — as dehe — in the body kaumāram — boyhood yauvanam — youth jarā — old age tathā — similarly deha - antara — of transference of the body prāptiḥ — achievement dhīraḥ — the sober tatra — thereupon na — never muhyati — is deluded .
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
dehino ’smin yathā dehe
dehinaḥ
of the embodied
kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā
tathā dehāntara-prāptir
dhīras tatra na muhyati
asmin
in this
yathā
as
dehe
in the body
kaumāram
boyhood
yauvanam
youth
jarā
old age
tathā
similarly
deha - antara
of transference of the body
prāptiḥ
achievement
dhīraḥ
the sober
tatra
thereupon
na
never
muhyati
is deluded .
Important Words
  • dehinaḥ — of the embodied
    Genitive of dehin — the possessor of a body, the soul. The verse's grammar already does the work of the teaching: there is a *possessor* of the body, distinct from the body.
  • kaumāram — boyhood
    The first station. Already the listener has experienced one bodily transition — from the infant's body to the boy's. The verse uses what the listener already knows to teach what he does not.
  • deha - antara — another body
    Antara — *another*, *further*. The next body after this one is treated as one more in a series, not as a categorical break. Death is rendered grammatically equivalent to growing up.
  • dhīraḥ — the sober one
    From √dhṛ — to hold steady. The dhīra is the one who holds the mind steady across transitions. Not unfeeling — unbewildered. The Gītā's first technical name for the realized practitioner.
  • muhyati — is bewildered
    From √muh — to be confused. Moha will become a great theme of the chapter. Here Kṛṣṇa first uses its verb, with negation: the dhīra does *not* muh at the transition. The whole Gītā is anti-moha.
As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change.
Classical Sanskrit analysis शास्त्रीय विश्लेषण
How Sanskrit scholars read this verse — split, rearranged, grammar-tagged. For the plain English distilled meaning, jump to Plain meaning below.
Auto-generated study layers — original analysis of the public-domain śloka. Review against a published edition for academic work.
Plain meaning (तात्पर्य · Tātparya)
Kṛṣṇa softens metaphysics with a familiar example: the same person passes through child–youth–elder in one body without losing identity. Just so, transition to another body is no annihilation. The dhīra — the steady-minded — sees this and is unshaken.
Further notes (विवरण · Vivaraṇa)
This verse furnishes the standard analogy used throughout later Vedānta to argue ātman's continuity. Each stage of life is a different 'body' in functional terms, yet the experiencer is constant. The word dhīra recurs in 2.15 and through the Gītā as the marker of one who has assimilated this view.
Prose order (अन्वय · Anvaya)
यथा अस्मिन् देहे देहिनः कौमारम् यौवनम् जरा (भवति), तथा देह-अन्तर-प्राप्तिः (भवति) । तत्र धीरः न मुह्यति ।
yathā asmin dehe dehinaḥ kaumāram yauvanam jarā (bhavati), tathā deha-antara-prāptiḥ (bhavati) | tatra dhīraḥ na muhyati |
Just as for the embodied one (the soul) there is, in this body, boyhood, youth, and old age, so too is there the obtaining of another body. The wise one is not bewildered by that.
Word split (पदच्छेद · Padaccheda)
देहिनः अस्मिन् यथा देहे कौमारम् यौवनम् जरा । तथा देह-अन्तर-प्राप्तिः धीरः तत्र न मुह्यति ॥
dehinaḥ asmin yathā dehe kaumāram yauvanam jarā | tathā deha-antara-prāptiḥ dhīraḥ tatra na muhyati ||
Grammar (व्याकरण · Vyākaraṇa)
SanskritIASTGrammarMeaning
देहिनः dehinaḥ देहिन् (m.) gen.sg. (genitive singular), 'of the embodied one' of the embodied (soul)
अस्मिन् asmin इदम् (dem. (demonstrative)) loc.sg. (locative singular)m. in this
यथा yathā ind. (indeclinable), 'as' just as
देहे dehe देह (m.) loc.sg. (locative singular) in the body
कौमारम् kaumāram कौमार (n.) nom.sg. (nominative singular), 'boyhood' boyhood
यौवनम् yauvanam यौवन (n.) nom.sg. (nominative singular), 'youth' youth
जरा jarā जरा (f.) nom.sg. (nominative singular) old age
तथा tathā ind. (indeclinable), 'so' so too
देह-अन्तर-प्राप्तिः deha-antara-prāptiḥ देह (m.) + अन्तर (adj.) + प्राप्ति (f.) nom.sg. (nominative singular), tatpuruṣa cpd. (compound) obtaining of another body
धीरः dhīraḥ धीर (m.) nom.sg. (nominative singular), 'the steady one, sage' the wise one
तत्र tatra ind. (indeclinable), 'there, in that matter' in that
न मुह्यति na muhyati √मुह् pres. (present) 3sg.par. (parasmaipada / active voice), with न is not bewildered
Purport

Since every living entity is an individual soul, each is changing his body every moment, manifesting sometimes as a child, sometimes as a youth and sometimes as an old man. Yet the same spirit soul is there and does not undergo any change. This individual soul finally changes the body at death and transmigrates to another body; and since it is sure to have another body in the next birth – either material or spiritual – there was no cause for lamentation by Arjuna on account of death, neither for Bhīṣma nor for Droṇa, for whom he was so much concerned. Rather, he should rejoice for their changing bodies from old to new ones, thereby rejuvenating their energy. Such changes of body account for varieties of enjoyment or suffering, according to one’s work in life. So Bhīṣma and Droṇa, being noble souls, were surely going to have spiritual bodies in the next life, or at least life in heavenly bodies for superior enjoyment of material existence. So, in either case, there was no cause of lamentation. Any man who has perfect knowledge of the constitution of the individual soul, the Supersoul, and nature – both material and spiritual – is called a dhīra, or a most sober man. Such a man is never deluded by the change of bodies. The Māyāvādī theory of oneness of the spirit soul cannot be entertained, on the ground that the spirit soul cannot be cut into pieces as a fragmental portion. Such cutting into different individual souls would make the Supreme cleavable or changeable, against the principle of the Supreme Soul’s being unchangeable. As confirmed in the Gītā, the fragmental portions of the Supreme exist eternally ( sanātana ) and are called kṣara; that is, they have a tendency to fall down into material nature. These fragmental portions are eternally so, and even after liberation the individual soul remains the same – fragmental. But once liberated, he lives an eternal life in bliss and knowledge with the Personality of Godhead. The theory of reflection can be applied to the Supersoul, who is present in each and every individual body and is known as the Paramātmā. He is different from the individual living entity. When the sky is reflected in water, the reflections represent both the sun and the moon and the stars also. The stars can be compared to the living entities and the sun or the moon to the Supreme Lord. The individual fragmental spirit soul is represented by Arjuna, and the Supreme Soul is the Personality of Godhead Śrī Kṛṣṇa. They are not on the same level, as it will be apparent in the beginning of the Fourth Chapter. If Arjuna is on the same level with Kṛṣṇa, and Kṛṣṇa is not superior to Arjuna, then their relationship of instructor and instructed becomes meaningless. If both of them are deluded by the illusory energy ( māyā ), then there is no need of one being the instructor and the other the instructed. Such instruction would be useless because, in the clutches of māyā, no one can be an authoritative instructor. Under the circumstances, it is admitted that Lord Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Lord, superior in position to the living entity, Arjuna, who is a forgetful soul deluded by māyā.

— A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda
Gauḍīya Ācāryas
Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura Gauḍīya
Translation
13. As the soul passes through boyhood, youth and old age, so it attains another body after death. The wise are not bewildered by this.
Commentary

“One’s body becomes the object of affection as it is related to the soul (which is most dear to the self.) By relation with that body, one’s sons, brothers or other relatives become objects of affection. And by relationship to them, even their sons also become objects of affection. So when their bodies perish, there will certainly be lamentation.”

In answer to this, He speaks this verse. “In the body belonging to the jīva (dehinaḥ) one attains stages such as boyhood. After boyhood is destroyed one attains youth. When youth is destroyed one attains old age. In the same manner, one attains another body (after death). Just as (yathā) one does not lament for the destruction of the objects of affection in the form of boyhood and youth of the body which are related to the soul (and therefore dear), so (tathā) one should also not lament for the destruction of the object of affection, the body, which is also related to the soul.” “But with the destruction of youth and attaining old age, one does lament.” “But then again, with the destruction of boyhood and attainment of youth one rejoices. And with the destruction of worn out bodies of Bhīṣma and Droṇa, they will attain new bodies and will also become joyful.” Another meaning is: Just as in one body a jīva attains various states such as boyhood, the same jīva attains various bodies life after life (and therefore one should not lament). [Note: In the first interpretation one should not lament because changes from boyhood to youth and change of body are all incidental to the ātmā which remains most dear. In the second interpretation one should not lament for the dead body because a person will get another body after death.]

Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Gauḍīya
Translation
13. As the soul passes through boyhood, youth and old age, so he attains another body at death. The wise are not bewildered by this.
Commentary

“In spite of the eternal nature of the souls distinct from the bodies of Bhīṣma and others, it is appropriate to lament for the bodies which are the places of enjoyment.” The soul, which has many bodies in the past, present and future, has the three states of childhood, youth and old age while existing in the present body. Just as one does not lament at gaining a succession of bodies, related to the soul, and suitable for his enjoyment, with the destruction of a series of previous bodies, the acquisition of another body with the destruction of the present body should be a source of jubilation for you, rather than a source of lamentation. In this manner, Yayāti became joyful on gaining a youthful body. The intelligent person (dhīraḥ), one who knows the true nature of the maturing karmas upon the jīva in combination with his impressions (svabhāva) [Note: The impressions are the mechanism or cause of remembrance of experiences from previous lives, by which he shows attraction or repulsion to particular objects. This is distinct from karma, the material response to his previous actions. The karma creates situations for the jīva by giving him a body and circumstances in life. The jīva then chooses to act, but greatly influenced by the impressions, rather than scriptural knowledge. A person not influenced by those impressions or his karma but by true knowledge is a dhīra.] and body, is not bewildered by the change. It should be understood that dehinaḥ (of he who possesses the body) is in the singular to denote a class (and does not imply that there is only one soul in existence) since previously the plurality of souls was stated (you and all these kings.) The following claim is made by proponents of one soul (ekātmā vāda). eka eva viśuddhātmā tasyāvidyayāparicchinnasya tasyāṁ pratibimbitasya vā nānātmatvam The pure ātmā is one only. It appears as many souls either by division or reflection, through ignorance. The śruti says: ākāśam ekaṁ hi yathā ghaṭādiṣu pṛthag bhavet, tathātmaiko hy anekastho hy jalādhāreṣv ivāṁśumān Just as the one ether becomes separate entities in many pots, so the one ātmā becomes situated as many, as the sun is reflected on the substratum of water. Yajñavalkya Saṁhitā, Yajur Veda, 3.4.144 The proponents of one soul claim that Kṛṣṇa speaks in the singular in this verse in order to teach oneness of the soul by rejection of plurality, since there is destruction of the false concept of plurality of souls through knowledge. This however is a foolish claim, because of the impossibility of dividing up a mass of consciousness by dull (and inferior) ignorance. Furthermore, even the proponents of one soul do not accept that the one Brahman can be the object of reflection or any action of anything else. [Note: Consciousness is a pure subject and never can become an object. It is not revealed by another object. Only Brahman exists. This is the advaita claim.] Also accepting a real division of the one soul would produce the fault of transformation in the soul, like breaking a rock with a chisel, which would contradict the soul’s unchangeable nature. And it is impossible for the great formless Brahman to become reflected images (jīvas). Otherwise one would see reflections of space and the directions. [Note: Has anyone seen pure consciousness reflected in a mirror or water? Even material elements like akāśa which are formless and space (dik) cannot really be reflected in water or a mirror. What we see is caused by light and its product color. This is also explained in the commentary on Vedānta Sūtra 3.2.19.] The false proposition that this reflection is different from normal perception cannot be accepted (since the example was given from our perceptual experience to help us understand). One can perceive a reflection of the sky only because of apprehending a group of glowing objects like constellations and planets within the sky shining on water. [Note: To say that the Brahman gets reflected as numerous jīvas, one would need a Brahman with qualities (sky with planets) that could be reflected and a substance like water (some real object other than brahman) upon which reflection takes place.] Though the śruti refers to Brahman as ākāśa in such statements as ākāśam ekaṁ hi, mentioned above, this does not indicate a formless Brahman but rather paramātmā. When the śrutis speak of paramātmā as being like the ether or the sun they are proclaiming the many functions of paramātmā. Thus the word ākāśa used to describe the Lord is not contradictory. Even the existence of an instructor of oneness is an impossibility. Does he know the truth or not? If he knows the truth—that there is only one ātmā—then the existence of someone to teach will not manifest. If he does not know the truth, then he is not in the position to teach knowledge of ātmā because of his ignorance. The argument that brahman can be the subject of bādhita anuvrtti, residual appearance of duality after it has been destroyed by knowledge, has already been rejected.

Bhūrijana Dāsa Gauḍīya
Commentary

Arjuna is worried because he has to kill Bhisma, Drona and others. He is going to force them to die. So Krsna is telling him: "They cannot die because they are souls. And death is only a change of bodies, and this type of change of bodies isn't so rare because at one time Bhisma was a young boy, then a youth, then now, he is a old man. He has gone through so many changes of bodies. Death is just another change of body. Be sober, stop your lamentation because it is based on illusion!" Arjuna might say: "But my relationship is with their bodies. So if they are killed, their bodies will be gone and I will be miserable". Krsna's answer to that is:

[ 2‑ Performance of duty must not be effected by happiness and distress arising from sense perception. (14‑15) ]

Study Notes — Gauranga Priya Dāsa
Gauranga Priya Dāsa Study
Bhakti-śāstrī Notes, ISKCON Chowpatty (2009)
Theme

A ‘Dhira’ is not bewildered by change of bodies

Change of body – “boyhood to youth to old-age to another body”
Classical Ācāryas
Śrī Śaṅkarācārya Classical
Translation
2.13 As to that, to show how the Self is eternal, the Lord cites an illustration by saying,'৷৷.of the embodied,' etc. Yatha, as are, the manner in which; kaumaram, boyhood; yauvanam, youth, middle age; and jara, decrepitude, advance of age; dehinah, to an embodied being, to one who possesses a body (deha), to the Self possessing a body; asmin, in this, present; dehe, body . These three states are mutually distinct. On these, when the first state gets destroyed the Self does not get destroyed; when the second state comes into being It is not born. What then? It is seen that the Self, which verily remains unchanged, acires the second and third states. Tatha, similar, indeed; is Its, the unchanging Self's dehantarapraptih, acisition of another body, a body different from the present one. This is the meaning. Tatra, this being so; dhirah, an intelligent person; na, does not; muhyati, get deluded.
Śrī Rāmānujācārya Classical
Translation
2.13 As the self is eternal, one does not grieve, thinking that the self is lost, when an embodied self living in a body gives up the state of childhood and attains youth and other states. Similarly, the wise men, knowing that the self is eternal, do not grieve, when the self attains a body different from the present body. Hence the selves, being eternal, are not fit objects for grief. This much has to be done here; the eternal selves because of Their being subject ot beginningless Karma become endowed with bodies suited to Their Karmas. To get rid of this bondage (of bodies), embodied beings perform duties like war appropriate to their stations in life with the help of the same bodies in an attitude of detachment from the fruits as prescribed by the scripture. Even to such aspirants, contacts with sense-objects give pleasure and pain, arising from cold, heat and such other things. But these experiences are to be endured till the acts enjoined in the scriptures come to an end. The Lord explains the significance immediately afterwards:
Śrī Abhinavagupta Classical
Translation
2.12-13 Na hi etc. Dehinah etc Never indeed did I not exist, but I did exist [always]. Likewise are you and these kings. If there can be lamentability for one, on attaining change in physical form then why is one not lamented over when one attains the youth from the boyhood ? He, who is wise, does not lament. But, wisdom is easily attainable for him whose concern is not even for this [present] body. Therefore you must seek wisdom.
Swami Sivananda Classical
Translation
2.13 Just as in this body the embodied (soul) passes into childhood, youth and old age, so also does it pass into another body; the firm man does not grieve thereat.
Commentary

2.13 देहिनः of the embodied (soul)? अस्मिन् in this? यथा as? देहे in body? कौमारम् childhood? यौवनम् youth? जरा old age? तथा so also? देहान्तरप्राप्तिः the attaining of another body? धीरः the firm? तत्र thereat? न not? मुह्यति grieves.Commentary -- Just as there is no interruption in the passing of childhood into youth and youth into old age in this body? so also there is no interruption by death in the continuity of the ego. The Self is not dead at the termination of the stage? viz.? childhood. It is certainly not born again at the beginning of the second stage? viz.? youth. Just as the Self passes unchanged from childhood to youth and from yourth to old age? so also the Self passes unchanged from one body into,another. Therefore? the wise man is not at all distressed about it.

Swami Gambhīrānanda Classical
Translation
2.13 As are boyhood, youth and decrepitude to an embodied being in this (present) body, similar is the acisition of another body. This being so, an intelligent person does not get deluded.
Shri Purohit Swami Classical
Translation
2.13 As the soul experiences in this body infancy, youth and old age, so finally it passes into another. The wise have no delusion about this.
Related values & verses
Related values
Tyaga (Renunciation / Letting Go)Svadhyaya (Self-study & Scripture Study)Bhakti (Devotion)
Related verses
BG 2.22 BG 8.6 BG 15.8 SB 3.31.1 SB 4.29.60 SB 11.22.41 CC Ādi 5.43 CC Madhya 20.118 CC Madhya 22.30 Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1.2.18Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 5.11
Concepts
Karma
Study Q&A referencing this verse
Related lectures
Personal Guidance
The soul passes through childhood, youth, and old age in one body and then into the next — the dhīra is not bewildered by this passage.
Practical Applications
  • Reflect on the bodies you have already 'transitioned through' — infant, child, youth — and feel the continuity of the same self.
  • When facing aging or death, anchor in the dhīra-bhāva — the steadiness of one who knows the soul is unchanged.
  • Speak to a child and an elder today, and in both, look for the same eternal soul.
Reflection Questions
  • Where do I still treat the body's transitions as if they were my own annihilation?
  • What does it mean for me to live as a dhīra in this season of life?
Analogy

The same traveler walks first as child, then as youth, then as old man — three forms in one journey, one passenger throughout. The body's three ages, and then the body itself, are stations along the soul's road. The dhīra, the steady one, does not mistake the station for the traveler.

Stories
Bhīṣma chooses his moment of death

Lying on the bed of arrows, Bhīṣma waited for uttarāyaṇa — the auspicious northern course of the sun — before releasing the body. He was unbewildered by the transition; he chose its hour.

This verse names Bhīṣma's bhāva exactly: dhīras tatra na muhyati. The grandsire is the verse's living example, lying on the very field where Kṛṣṇa now speaks it.

📝 My note

Source: vedabase.io

← Read full Chapter 2