Srimad BhagavadGita

In order to remove Arjuna’s grief, from śloka gatāsūn agatāsūṃśca nānuśocanti paṇḍitāḥ B.G 2.11 onwards, Kṛṣṇa started explaining about the eternal nature of the soul and the ever transient nature of the bodies. As a part of the explanation, in this śloka Kṛṣṇa makes a declaration that the soul is eternal by nature and the body is transient by nature. Kṛṣṇa says, "Eternality which is a quality of the real is not there for the physical body which is referred to as 'asat- unreal'. Transience which is a quality of the unreal is not there for the soul which is referred to as 'sat- real'. This conclusion about these two- the body and the soul, has also been revealed in this way by the seers."

asataḥ bhāvaḥ na vidyate sataḥ abhāvaḥ na vidyate (For asat there is no bhāva and for sat there is no abhāva) In the śāstras, it is often seen that the conscious soul which never undergoes any changes and which is said to exist at all times is addressed as 'sat' and the insentient matter which is ever changing and which is said to be nonexistent at all times is addressed as 'asat'.

Since the context here is Kṛṣṇa's explanation of the nature of the never changing eternal soul and the ever changing transient body to Arjuna, it is apt to infer that Kṛṣṇa is referring to the soul by the term 'sat' and to the body by the term 'asat'. The word bhāvaḥ which means 'existence' thus refers to 'eternality' and abhāvaḥ which means 'nonexistence' refers to 'transience' in this context.

The meaning can be clearly understood when the words are arranged as follows,

asataḥ bhāvaḥ na vidyate (The body which is addressed as asat since it exists only as long as a lightening

does, has no eternality)

sataḥ abhāvaḥ na vidyate (The soul which is addressed as sat since it exists at all times, has no

transience)

The defining quality for the body which is a material with no consciousness is being 'asat/unreal'.

The defining quality for the soul which is a material with consciousness is being 'sat/real'.

Note: The words asat and abhāvaḥ translated as unreal and nonexistent do not mean never existing (like an imaginary horn of a rabbit). These words convey its quality of being destroyed. Similarly, the words sat and bhāvaḥ translated as real and existent, convey the quality of indestructibility.

Parāśara maharṣi has used the same notation in Sri Viṣṇu Purāṇa.

tasmāt na vignānamṛtesti kincit kvacit kadācit dvija vastujātaṃ Viṣṇu Purāṇa 2.12.43 (O Brahmaṇa! Other than the soul whose nature is knowledge, no other material is called as 'sat' at any time or place.)

sadbhāv evaṃ bhavato mayokto jñānam yathā satyam asatyam anyat Viṣṇu Purāṇa 2.12.45 (The quality of sat has thus been told by me to thy respectable self. The soul itself whose nature is knowledge is referred to as satyam and the insentient material is referred to as asatyam).

Through the above ślokas, Parāśara maharṣi tells us that the words nāsti, asatyam, asat, avastu are used for the insentient body since it is destructible and the words asti, satyam, sat, vastu are used for the conscious soul since it is indestructible. In worldly usage, we see that something that does not exist at all (like a rabbit's horn) is referred to as asat, nāsti or avastu. However from the above statements we come to know that our riṣis addressed destructible material by these names. This is confirmed from the below statements too.

anāśīparamārthaśca prājṇairabhyūpagamyate tattu nāśi na sandehaḥ nāśi dravyopapāditam Viṣṇu Purāṇa 2.14.24 (That the indestructible material itself is paramārth- the highest truth or satyam, is agreed by jñānis. What is proven to be destructible, is called nāśi or asatyam. There is no doubt about this.)

yattu kālāntarenāpinānyasaṃjñāmupaiti vai parināmādisambhūtām tadvastu nṛpa tacca kim Viṣṇu Purāṇa 2.13.100 (The material which does not undergo any change in its name and form even over a period of time is called vastu. Which is that substance amongst all substances we see?)

In this chapter of the Gītā too, in the ślokas that follow, for eg: In śloka 2.18 antavanta ime dehāḥ... (These bodies are subject to destruction) and śloka 2.17 avinaṣi tu tadviddhi... (Know that the soul is indestructible), the body’s quality of destructibility and soul’s quality of indestructibility are established respectively. Hence it is clear without doubt that the reason for referring to the body as asat and soul as sat in these ślokas is due to their destructibility and indestructibility respectively.

In Upaniṣads too, satyamcānṛtam ca Taittirīya Āraṇyaka 6, for the same reason the sentient is referred to as true or sat and the insentient as untrue or asat.

A question might arise: asadevedamagra āsīt Chāndogya Up 6.2.1 (This whole world was asat in the beginning) In places like these, even the soul is referred to as asat, why? 

Answer: In the state of pralaya (cosmic dissolution), since the souls exist as motionless, without any distinctions of names and forms they are also referred as asat there. Similarly, in certain places the insentient bodies are also referred to as sat. This is done only for the purpose of clarifying that they are not totally nonexistent as the imaginary horn of a rabbit but are transient.

ubhayoḥ anayoḥ (About these two, the soul and the body) This word 'anayoḥ' conveys that it is evident in every single person that the body undergoes timely destruction and the soul never changes.

tattva darśibhiḥ tu antaḥ dṛṣṭaḥ (They being seers, have indeed seen and concluded about the body and the soul in this manner) 

tu The term 'tu' conveys the meaning that, as they see the truth as it is, what they see is declared as a

conclusion about it by them.

antaḥ A decision about a subject is nothing but the conclusion derived about it by ācāryas after

scrutiny. The word antaḥ therefore would mean 'decision' in this context.

Summary:

The aim of this śloka is to describe the nature of the soul and the body and to bring out the contrast between them as being indestructible vs being destructible respectively.

Doubt: Some commentaries explain the meaning of the first part of this śloka nāsato vidyate bhāvo nābhāvo vidyate sataḥ as, 'a material that does not exist cannot be newly created and an existing material cannot be entirely destroyed'.

The above meaning is as per satkāryavāda which is agreeable to all the vedāntins (satkāryavāda- It is regarding kārya-kāraṇa, cause and effect. According to this principle, the kāraṇam or cause is present in the kāryam or the effect in a subtle form before its manifestation. All the kāryas are possible only by the sat kāraṇam- the existing cause). Why is this meaning not considered in our commentary? 

Clarification: Listed below are the reasons to show why this meaning based on satkāryavāda is not appropriate in this context.

Satkāryavāda is not the proposed topic of this Chapter of the Bhagawad Gītā. Condemning Vaiśeṣikas and others who do not agree to satkāryavāda is also not the intent of this chapter. This is also not a chapter meant for discussing sāṃkhya and other philosophies that agree with satkāryavāda and the vedāntic doctrine based on satkāryavāda that 'by knowing that one substance, everything is known'. The scenario here is that Arjuna is in a deluded state, unclear about the nature of body and the soul and thus full of grief. To remove his delusion, the need of the hour is to explain to him about the destructible nature of the body and the indestructible nature of the soul. Knowledge about satkāryavāda cannot remove Arjuna’s grief. When we look at the meanings of the ślokas pre and post this śloka, we see that the said context is being maintained. For eg: Earlier in śloka 2.11 gatāsūn agatāsūṃśca nānuśocanti paṇḍitāḥ (The learned do not grieve about the body or the soul) and later in śloka 2.17 avinaṣi tu tadviddhi and śloka 2.18 antavanta ime dehāḥ too knowledge on the nature of the body and the soul have been proposed. Hence the actual meaning of this śloka is as discussed in the beginning of the purport.

Many more commentators have come up with meanings for this śloka which are out of context too. Hence they have not been considered.