Sanskrit
न त्वेवाहं जातु नासं न त्वं नेमे जनाधिपाः । न चैव न भविष्यामः सर्वे वयमतः परम् ॥
na tv evāhaṃ jātu nāsaṃ na tvaṃ neme janādhipāḥ na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ sarve vayam ataḥ param
Translation
Nor at any time verily was I not, nor thou, nor these princes of men, nor verily shall we ever cease to be, hereafter.
Annie Besant · The Bhagavad-Gita, translated by Annie Besant (4th ed., 1922) — Wikisource · Public Domain
Explanation
Krishna makes the claim atemporal, not just about this life: he, Arjuna, and everyone present have always existed, and will never cease to exist. This isn’t a claim about reincarnation offered as an afterthought — it’s stated as a basic fact about the nature of selves, extended backward and forward without limit. Grammatically it is a chain of double negatives — “never was I not” — stronger than a plain assertion of permanence: it forecloses even the moment of non-being. This is the first positive statement of the ātman teaching that runs to BG 2.30.
Study deeper
Word by word
- na tv evāhaṃन त्व् एवाहं
- not indeed ever [was] I (na + tu + eva + aham)
- jātuजातु
- at any time
- nāsaṃनासं
- did not exist (na + āsam)
- na tvaṃन त्वं
- nor you (na + tvam)
- neme janādhipāḥनेमे जनाधिपाः
- nor these lords of men (na + ime + jana-adhipāḥ)
- na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥन चैव न भविष्यामः
- nor shall we ever cease to be (na + ca + eva + na + bhaviṣyāmaḥ)
- sarveसर्वे
- all
- vayamवयं
- we
- ataḥ paramअतः परं
- hereafter (ataḥ + param)
Commentary
Site Commentary
Krishna could have stated this as a pure abstraction — “the self is eternal” — but instead he names three concrete parties: himself, Arjuna, and the kings assembled on the field. The metaphysics arrives already anchored to the specific people in the specific crisis, which is exactly what makes it usable rather than merely true — Arjuna doesn’t have to translate a general principle into his particular grief, Krishna has already done that translation for him.
Original commentary written for this site · © Amit Singh — original commentary
Concepts
Apply this verse
Lessons
Personal
- When you're trying to internalize a general truth — that setbacks pass, that fear distorts — don't leave it abstract; name it against your actual, specific situation the way this verse names Krishna, Arjuna, and the assembled kings by name. Abstractions convince the mind; specifics move the gut.
Professional
- When you explain a general principle to your team, anchor it immediately to their actual current situation rather than leaving it as policy — a principle stated abstractly gets nodded at; the same principle applied to their specific case gets used.
Family & Social
- When you want a general truth to actually land with someone you love, apply it to their specific situation by name rather than leaving it general — "this always passes" lands differently than "this fight, specifically, will pass."
Ask yourself
A few ways to take this verse past reading. Ticks and the note stay in this browser.