FolioCorpusBhagavad-gītā

Bhagavad-gītā 2.25

अव्यक्तोऽयमचिन्त्योऽयमविकार्योऽयमुच्यते । तस्मादेवं विदित्वैनं नानुशोचितुमर्हसि ॥ २५ ॥
avyakto ’yam acintyo ’yam
[avyakto ’yam achintyo ’yam]
avikāryo ’yam ucyate
[avikaaryo ’yam uchyate]
tasmād evaṁ viditvainaṁ
[tasmaad evam viditvainam]
nānuśocitum arhasi
[naanushochitum arhasi]
Word-for-word
avyaktaḥ — invisible ayam — this soul acintyaḥ — inconceivable ayam — this soul avikāryaḥ — unchangeable ayam — this soul ucyate — is said tasmāt — therefore evam — like this viditvā — knowing it well enam — this soul na — do not anuśocitum — to lament arhasi — you deserve .
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
avyakto ’yam acintyo ’yam
avyaktaḥ
invisible
ayam
this soul
acintyaḥ
inconceivable
ayam
this soul
avikāryo ’yam ucyate
avikāryaḥ
unchangeable
ayam
this soul
ucyate
is said
tasmād evaṁ viditvainaṁ
tasmāt
therefore
evam
like this
viditvā
knowing it well
enam
this soul
na
do not
nānuśocitum arhasi
anuśocitum
to lament
arhasi
you deserve .
Important Words
  • avyaktaḥ — unmanifest
    A + vyakta — not manifested to the senses. The soul does not become visible the way bodies become visible. The senses' verdict is structurally incomplete; not seeing the soul does not mean the soul is not.
  • acintyaḥ — inconceivable
    A + cintya — not to be thought through. The mind cannot fully grasp the soul by ordinary conception. Acintya will return as a central Gauḍīya category: acintya-bhedābheda.
  • avikāryaḥ — immutable
    A + vikārya — not subject to change. The six modifications of material things (asti, jāyate, vardhate, vipariṇamate, apakṣīyate, vinaśyati) do not apply. The soul is exempt from vikāra.
  • viditvā — knowing
    Gerund of √vid — to know. The verse turns from description to injunction by way of cognition: *having known thus*. Knowledge is the hinge between metaphysics and conduct.
  • anuśocitum — to grieve
    Infinitive of anu-√śuc — to follow with grief, to grieve after. The verse forbids the act of subsequent lamentation. With this knowledge, grief loses its object — and so it should lose its action.
It is said that the soul is invisible, inconceivable and immutable. Knowing this, you should not grieve for the body.
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)
Three further negations — unmanifest, unthinkable, unchangeable — exhaust the perceptual, conceptual, and dynamic categories under which destruction could be predicated. Knowing this, sorrow simply has no object.
Further notes (विवरण · Vivaraṇa)
Avyakta places the ātman beyond sense-evidence; acintya beyond rational construction; avikārya beyond modification. The conclusion is structurally argumentative: tasmāt ('therefore') — given these properties, grief is unreasonable. This is the rational refutation of grief; verses 2.26-2.30 will offer concessive refutations on alternative metaphysical assumptions.
Prose order (अन्वय · Anvaya)
अयम् अव्यक्तः, अयम् अचिन्त्यः, अयम् अविकार्यः (इति) उच्यते । तस्मात् एनम् एवम् विदित्वा (त्वम्) अनुशोचितुम् न अर्हसि ।
ayam avyaktaḥ, ayam acintyaḥ, ayam avikāryaḥ (iti) ucyate | tasmāt enam evam viditvā (tvam) anuśocitum na arhasi |
He is said to be unmanifest, He is unthinkable, He is unchangeable. Therefore, having known him thus, you ought not to grieve.
Word split (पदच्छेद · Padaccheda)
अव्यक्तः अयम् अचिन्त्यः अयम् अविकार्यः अयम् उच्यते । तस्मात् एवम् विदित्वा एनम् न अनुशोचितुम् अर्हसि ॥
avyaktaḥ ayam acintyaḥ ayam avikāryaḥ ayam ucyate | tasmāt evam viditvā enam na anuśocitum arhasi ||
Grammar (व्याकरण · Vyākaraṇa)
SanskritIASTGrammarMeaning
अव्यक्तः avyaktaḥ अ + व्यक्त p.p.p. (past passive participle) nom.sg. (nominative singular)m., 'unmanifest' unmanifest
अचिन्त्यः acintyaḥ अ + चिन्त्य (gerundive of √चिन्त्) nom.sg. (nominative singular)m. unthinkable
अविकार्यः avikāryaḥ अ + विकार्य (gerundive of वि+√कृ) nom.sg. (nominative singular)m. unchangeable
उच्यते ucyate √वच् pass. (passive) pres. (present) 3sg. is said
तस्मात् tasmāt तद् (pron. (pronoun)) abl.sg. (ablative singular), 'therefore' therefore
एवम् evam ind. (indeclinable), adv. thus
विदित्वा viditvā √विद् abs. (absolutive) having known
एनम् enam एनद् (pron. (pronoun)) acc.sg. (accusative singular)m. this
न अर्हसि na arhasi √अर्ह् pres. (present) 2sg.par. (parasmaipada / active voice), with न you ought not
अनुशोचितुम् anuśocitum अनु+√शुच् inf. (infinitive) to grieve
Purport

As described previously, the magnitude of the soul is so small for our material calculation that he cannot be seen even by the most powerful microscope; therefore, he is invisible. As far as the soul’s existence is concerned, no one can establish his existence experimentally beyond the proof of śruti, or Vedic wisdom. We have to accept this truth, because there is no other source of understanding the existence of the soul, although it is a fact by perception. There are many things we have to accept solely on grounds of superior authority. No one can deny the existence of his father, based upon the authority of his mother. There is no source of understanding the identity of the father except by the authority of the mother. Similarly, there is no source of understanding the soul except by studying the Vedas. In other words, the soul is inconceivable by human experimental knowledge. The soul is consciousness and conscious – that also is the statement of the Vedas, and we have to accept that. Unlike the bodily changes, there is no change in the soul. As eternally unchangeable, the soul remains atomic in comparison to the infinite Supreme Soul. The Supreme Soul is infinite, and the atomic soul is infinitesimal. Therefore, the infinitesimal soul, being unchangeable, can never become equal to the infinite soul, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This concept is repeated in the Vedas in different ways just to confirm the stability of the conception of the soul. Repetition of something is necessary in order that we understand the matter thoroughly, without error.

— A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda
Gauḍīya Ācāryas
Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura Gauḍīya
Translation
25. It is imperceptibly small, pervading the body inconceivably, and without changes. Knowing it thus, you should not lament.
Commentary

Therefore the ātmā is described in this way (taking the descriptions of the previous verse): it cannot be cut, burned, dried or moistened. The repetition of the words signifying the eternal nature of the soul in this section (such as the use of the words nitya and sanātanaḥ in this verse, and statements of previous verses) is for the purpose of precisely defining the soul for those of confused intellect, just as one will repeat several times in order to make certain that everyone understands, “This is the dharma of Kali-yuga, this is the dharma of Kali-yuga.” Sarva-gataḥ (gone everywhere) means that the soul goes into all sorts of bodies such as human, animal and deva by its karma. [Note: The other meaning is pervading everywhere, but this meaning is not taken since the subject is the jīva , who pervades only his own body.] Sthāṇu and acala have the same meaning, “having stability,” [Note: Baladeva explains sthānu as “having a stable svarūpa.”] and the repetition makes the meaning clear. Because it is very fine, it is called avyakta. Because it pervades the body with consciousness, it is called acintya, beyond conception. Being devoid of the six changes such as birth, it is called avikārya.

Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Gauḍīya
Translation
25. It is imperceptible, inconceivable, and without changes. Knowing it thus, you should not lament.
Commentary

The ātmā is not perceptible by the material senses (avyaktaḥ). It is beyond logic (acintyaḥ), being understood only through scriptures. By the scriptures the ātmā is understood to be jñāna svarūpa, knowledge itself, and a knower of things. It is not subject to the six changes (avikāryaḥ). The Lord, in teaching the nature of the ātmā with such statements as avināśi tu tad viddhi had used repetition of words with similar meaning, in order that the ātmā, which is difficult to understand, can be easily understood. Thus this is not a fault. Or the repeated words can be explained as useful for ascertaining the real nature of the ātmā. To the extent that you know the nature of the ātmā (evam viditvā) with certainty, you will no longer lament. The Lord will explain next with the words such as āścaryavat paśyati kaścit. (verse 29) how others view the ātmā.

Bhūrijana Dāsa Gauḍīya
Commentary

Now with the words "atha ca"‑ "if however", the topic is going to be changed. Krsna has explained to Arjuna that the weapons that he is holding they cannot hurt the soul. So he should fight! But now Krsna is reversing His argument,

[ 3 ‑ The eternal, indestructible, immutable soul cannot be killed and the temporary body cannot be saved. Therefore fight.(26‑30) ]

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

Further qualities of the soul – Soul is invisible, inconceivable and immutable

Focus of Learning

(a) Soul as invisible – The soul is too small to be seen even by the most powerful microscope

(b) Soul as inconceivable –

No-one can establish the existence of the soul by human experimental efforts
Only source of understanding is the proof by ‘sruti’ (Vedic wisdom)
Example of understandings based solely on superior authorities and beyond the capacity of experiment

▪ To know the existence of one’s father based on the authority of the mother

(c) Soul as immutable – This establishes the stability of the conception of the soul

Never changes like matter – Unlike body which goes through six changes
Never becomes God – The soul always remains atomic to the infinite Supreme

PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF TEXT 2.25

As the soul is beyond the range of ordinary perception, it cannot be understood by direct

empiric methods alone. We must therefore understand the soul on the basis of Vedic wisdom

(a) What is established by the qualities given in this verse

Individual soul is eternally the atomic particle of the spirit whole
He remains the same atom eternally, without change

(b) This verse refutes the monistic theory (Mayavada)

Spirit soul is insoluble – Thus can never merge into Impersonal Brahman but always remains unchangeable, eternal individual
What about impersonal liberation – The atomic soul may prefer to remain as a spiritual spark in Brahmajyoti
Destiny of intelligent souls – They enter the spiritual planets to associate with the Supreme Personality of Godhead

(c) Importance of the word ‘Sarva-gatah’ – All-pervading

This is significant because the living entities are present all over God’s creation
They are present in water, air, land or even in fire
Practical application:
Sterilization by fire is refuted here, because the soul cannot be burned by fire
Living entities are also present in the sun with suitable bodies

(d) PRACTICAL APPLICATION: Applying this philosophy to Arjuna’s case – Arjuna became liberated by

the knowledge received by Krishna, but he never became one with Krishna

Classical Ācāryas
Śrī Śaṅkarācārya Classical
Translation
2.25 Moreover, ucyate, it is said that; ayam, This, the Self; is avyaktah, unmanifest, since, being beyond the ken of all the organs, It cannot be objectified. For this very reason, ayam, This; is acintyah, inconceivable. For anything that comes within the purview of the organs becomes the object of thought. But this Self is inconceivable becuase It is not an object of the organs. Hence, indeed, It is avikaryah, unchangeable. This Self does not change as milk does when mixed with curd, a curdling medium, etc. And It is chnageless owing to partlessness, for it is not seen that any non-composite thing is changeful. Not being subject to transformation, It is said to be changeless. Tasmat, therefore; vidivata, having known; enam, this one, the Self; evam, thus, as described; na arhasi, you ought not; anusocitum, to grieve, thinking, 'I am the slayer of these; these are killed by me.'
Śrī Rāmānujācārya Classical
Translation
2.25 The self is not made manifest by those Pramanas (means of knowledge) by which objects susceptible of being cleft etc., are made manifest; hence It is unmanifest, being different in kind from objects susceptible to cleaving etc., It is inconceivable, being different in kind from all objects. As It does not possess the essential nature of any of them. It cannot even be conceived. Therefore, It is unchanging, incapable of modifications. So knowing this self to be possessed of the above mentioned alities, it does not become you to feel grief for Its sake.
Śrī Abhinavagupta Classical
Translation
2.23-25 Nainam etc. upto arhasi. The weapons etc., that cause destruction, haldly do anything to This. For, being, by nature, exclusively pure Consciousness, remaining without support, having no component parts and being independent, this cannot be destroyed through the process of either assumption of an altogether different nature, or the destruction of the support, or the mutual separation of the component parts, or the rise of an opponent, and so on. Nor the act to going to another body is a new thing for This. For, even when This is [apparently] with a single body, This travels always to different body; for the body does not remain the same even for a moment. By understanding this Self to be as such, you should not lament This.
Swami Sivananda Classical
Translation
2.25 This (Self) is said to be unmanifested, unthinkable and unchangeable. Therefore, knowing This to be such, thou shouldst not grieve.
Commentary

2.25 अव्यक्तः unmanifested? अयम् this (Self)? अचिन्त्यः unthinkable? अयम् this? अविकार्यः unchangeable? अयम् this? उच्यते is said? तस्मात् therefore? एवम् thus? विदित्वा having known? एनम् this? न not? अनुशोचितुम् to grieve? अर्हसि (thou) oughtest.Commentary The Self is not an object of perception. It can hardly be seen by the physical eyes. Therefore? the Self is unmanifested. That which is seen by the eyes becomes an object of thought. As the Self cannot be perceived by the eyes? It is unthinkable. Milk when mixed with buttermilk changes its form. The Self cannot change Its form like milk. Hence? It is changeless and immutable. Therefore? thus understanding the Self? thou shouldst not mourn. Thou shouldst not think also that thou art their slayer and that they are killed by thee.

Swami Gambhīrānanda Classical
Translation
2.25 It is said that This is unmanifest; This is inconceivable; This is unchangeable. Therefore, having known This thus, you ougth not to grieve.
Shri Purohit Swami Classical
Translation
2.25 It is named the Unmanifest, the Unthinkable, the immutable. Wherefore, knowing the Spirit as such, thou hast no cause to grieve.
Related values & verses
Related values
Tyaga (Renunciation / Letting Go)Karuna (Kindness / Compassion)Ahimsa (Non-violence / Compassion)Tapas (Austerity / Discipline)Guru Bhakti (Reverence for Teacher)Atma Nigraha (Self-control)Daksya (Resourcefulness / Skill)Maitri (Friendship / Goodwill)Abhaya (Fearlessness)
Related verses
BG 2.18 BG 12.3 BG 13.16 SB 3.7.39 SB 10.14.2 SB 11.12.18 CC Ādi 3.84 CC Madhya 9.194 CC Madhya 20.108 Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1.2.8Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.1.6
Concepts
Dharma
Related lectures
Personal Guidance
The soul is invisible, inconceivable, immutable — knowing this, do not lament for the body or anyone else's body.
Practical Applications
  • When you cannot perceive a spiritual truth, accept that imperceptibility is part of its nature, not evidence against it.
  • Read this verse before attending a funeral or memorial.
  • Make peace with the fact that the soul cannot be photographed, measured, or proven by sense data.
Reflection Questions
  • Where am I demanding that spiritual truth submit to material measurement?
  • What am I lamenting that I have already been instructed not to lament?
Analogy

The mind tries to picture the soul as one pictures a stone, a flame, a fragrance — and fails. The picture is always too small. Avyakta, acintya, avikārya: the soul does not fit the categories of the picturing mind. Therefore lament for it is doubly absurd — one cannot even mourn correctly what one cannot conceive correctly.

📝 My note

Source: vedabase.io

← Read full Chapter 2