संस्कृत
न जायते म्रियते वा कदाचिन्नायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः । अजो नित्यः शाश्वतोऽयं पुराणो न हन्यते हन्यमाने शरीरे ॥
na jāyate mriyate vā kadācin nāyaṃ bhūtvā bhavitā vā na bhūyaḥ ajo nityaḥ śāśvato'yaṃ purāṇo na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre
अनुवाद
He is not born, nor doth he die; nor having been, ceaseth he any more to be; unborn, perpetual, eternal and ancient, he is not slain when the body is slaughtered.
Annie Besant · The Bhagavad-Gita, translated by Annie Besant (4th ed., 1922) — Wikisource · Public Domain
व्याख्या
The core metaphysical claim of the whole Gita: the self (atman) that animates the body is not the kind of thing that is born or dies. Bodies begin and end; the self that inhabits them does not. Krishna isn’t offering this as comfort so much as correcting a category error — Arjuna is grieving over what he takes to be the destruction of persons, when what actually happens on a battlefield is the destruction of bodies. This verse is the hinge the whole chapter’s argument for fighting turns on: if the self cannot be killed, killing is not what the killer imagines it to be. The five adjectives — unborn, eternal, everlasting, ancient, undying — are piled up without connectives, the way BG 2.24 will pile up its own list. The ātman is defined here almost entirely by negation and by what time cannot do to it.
गहराई से अध्ययन करें
शब्द-दर-शब्द
- na jāyateन जायते
- is not born (na + jāyate)
- mriyate vāंरियते वा
- nor dies (mriyate + vā)
- kadācinकदाचिन्
- at any time
- nāyaṃ bhūtvā bhavitā vā na bhūyaḥनायं भूत्वा भविता वा न भूयः
- this one, having been, will not cease to be again (na + ayam + bhūtvā + bhavitā + vā + na + bhūyaḥ)
- ajoअजो
- unborn
- nityaḥनित्यः
- eternal
- śāśvato'yaṃशाश्वतोऽयं
- this everlasting one (śāśvataḥ + ayam)
- purāṇoपुराणो
- ancient
- na hanyateन हन्यते
- is not slain (na + hanyate)
- hanyamāneहन्यमाने
- when [it] is slain
- śarīreशरीरे
- the body [being slain]
टीका
Site Commentary
Notice that even while making the case that killing doesn’t touch the self, Krishna doesn’t reach for gentler language — “the body is slaughtered,” not “passes away” or something softer. The philosophical argument that should make violence easier to accept is delivered without softening the violence itself, which suggests the point isn’t to make killing feel smaller, only to correctly locate what it does and doesn’t reach.
Original commentary written for this site · © Amit Singh — original commentary
अवधारणाएँ
इस श्लोक को अपनाएँ
पाठ
व्यक्तिगत
- When you're trying to accept a hard truth that makes a difficult action feel more bearable, be suspicious of any version of the truth that also makes the action itself sound smaller than it is — the honest version keeps the weight of what you're doing intact even as it reframes it.
व्यावसायिक
- When you make the case for a hard call — a layoff, a shutdown, a hard pivot — don't soften the language describing the cost to make the decision easier to accept. Keep the real weight of the action visible even while making the case that it's the right one.
परिवार और समाज
- When you're helping someone accept a painful necessity, don't soften the language around what's actually being lost — naming it plainly, even while making the case for why it's still the right path, keeps the whole thing honest.
स्वयं से पूछें
इस श्लोक को पढ़ने से आगे ले जाने के कुछ तरीके। टिक और नोट इसी ब्राउज़र में रहते हैं।
इस श्लोक पर चिंतन करें
खोज जारी रखें
अध्ययन-मार्ग