Srimad BhagavadGita

We often see insentient objects like clay vessels or mud pots transforming into a different state called the 'broken pieces state'. When this change happens we may feel a little sad that, 'O, my vessel is gone, my pot is gone'. But in the case of human, devata, animal or tree/plant bodies there is no scope for such sadness when they get destroyed as their earlier and later states are not known to us. This is explained by Kṛṣṇa here. HE says, "O Arjuna! All the bodies are in an invisible state prior to their birth (in the beginning), in a visible state during their lifetime (in the middle) and and again in an invisible state post death (in the end). So, why grieve in that matter?"

Q: It is said that there is no scope for such sadness when bodies get destroyed as their earlier and later states are not known to us. Why is it so?

A: If we know that the earlier and later states are more painful than the present state, then we may grieve about those states. In the case of a pot, since we know the later state (the broken state) to be the inferior state we are grieving over the loss of the pot. In the case of bodies, it is not possible for us to know if the earlier and later states are more painful or more pleasurable than the present state. Hence the question of grieving about those states does not arise at all.

avyaktādīni bhūtāni The ongoing context is the discussion of dehātmavāda. Kṛṣṇa is convincing Arjuna that he should not be grieving for his relatives even if he is a believer of dehātmavāda (the doctrine that the body itself is the soul). Suiting this context, 'bhūtāni' here refers to the bodies made up of the five mahābhūtas. 'bhūtāni avyaktādīni' means, 'These bodies which have an earlier state not visible to our eyes'. Since primary matter (mūla prakṛti) is also called avyakta, another meaning for 'bhūtāni avyaktādīni' could be that 'These bodies which are born from mūla prakṛti and which are invisible'. This meaning does not fit into the context and hence it should not be taken. The meaning taken by us is confirmed by the Mahābhārata śloka 2-6,13, abhāvādīni bhūtāni bhāvamadhyāni bhārata | abhāvanidhanānyeva tatra kā paridevanā || adarśanādāpatitāḥ punaścādarsanam gatāḥ | naite tava na teṣām tvam tatra kā paridevanā || (O Dhṛtarāṣṭra! These jīvarāśi (living beings) have abhāva (unmanifest state) in the beginning, bhāva (manifest state) in between and abhāva in the end. Why grieve in this matter? They come out of the un-manifest state and again get into the un-manifest state. Neither do these people belong to you nor do you belong to them. What is there to grieve over here?) At the end of the Mahābhārata war, Vidura thus consoled Dhṛtarāṣṭra. His above words are in line with our present śloka, the only difference is the usage of the words abhāva and adarśana in place of avyakta, conveying the same meaning 'invisible earlier state' as told by us.

bhūtāni vyakta madhyāni These bodies exist in such a way that only their intermediate state between birth to death is manifest.

avyakta nidhanāni These bodies have a later state which is un-manifest . 

eva The term eva conveys that it is natural for the body to have earlier and later states which are un-manifest and an in between state which is manifest. It is clear from this that transformation is the inherent nature of bodies.

tatra kā parivedanā When it is the nature of the body to undergo transformation in this manner, why grieve for it? There is absolutely no reason to grieve.

Summary:

The gist of this śloka is that even when it is analysed based on the intricacies in the Lokāyata or Cārvāka philosophy which propounds dehātmavāda (the doctrine that the body itself is the soul), there is no reason to grieve.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Below is an elaborate discussion on why there is no reason to grieve over the past invisible state, present visible state and the future invisible state as per Dehātmavāda.

Dehātmavāda rejects the existence of entities such as the conscious soul or god and also after-life.

As per dehātmavāda, the state of human existence is just the coming together of hands, legs, etc, and hands, legs, etc, do not exist in the earlier and later states, therefore it is not possible to say that those states are natural to the human body. Also, the later state comes only after the human state ends and the earlier state is not visible when the human state prevails, therefore these earlier and later states cannot be natural to the human body and transformation alone is the natural tendency of human bodies. This explanation holds good for the other three types of bodies too namely devata, animal and tree/plant bodies. Therefore, just as no one grieves for the unseen earlier state and the visible middle state, there is no good reason to grieve for the unseen later state too.

Q: What if the earlier and later states are still considered as the natural states of the body?

A: Then we will have to grieve about the present manifest state which is a result of change in the earlier natural state of the body and definitely not about the natural invisible later state. 

Q: If it is proposed that the middle state (manifest human/devata/animal/plant state) itself is the natural state and only due to a certain hindrance, the earlier and later states are created and this proposed concept is accepted?

A: Then since this hindrance is unavoidable, also since this acquired hindrance will have to get cleared someday and the natural manifest state will come on its own when the hindrance gets cleared, there is no reason to grieve for the body in any which way. 

Q: If Arjuna might say that, 'It is the natural states of substances like the body that usually cause grief and I am in grief for the same reason.

A: The answer to this is that, "O Arjuna! If that is the case, as this world is full of such substances and a change in the natural state is always occurring to some substance or the other, all the people living here will have to be forever drowned in an ocean of sorrow. The reason for grief is forever existing. So you have no reason to specifically grieve now.

Q: Even while one drowned in this ocean of misery, at certain times and certain instances one comes across reasons that give relief and some happiness. 'If Arjuna might say that, 'Since such pleasure causing reasons are hidden from me, my happiness is gone'.

A: The answer to this is, 'O Arjuna! In that case you should give up on the actions that lead to sorrow, like glorifying these enemies and wanting to beg for a living but not actions that lead to pleasure like destruction of enemies and attainment of kingdom. If you fear the destruction of your body and your other pleasurable possessions, then you who is Mahābāhu, belonging to the illustrious Bharata dynasty must protect your body by fighting against the enemies desiring to destroy you. If you fear that the world will blame you for killing your own relatives and decide to stop the war and return back, remember that you will be at fault in the eyes of the world which will think that Arjuna, the invincible warrior having given up the task of protecting his wife and his righteous blood relations, is sitting idle doing nothing' or you will be defamed and labelled as a useless coward, which is worse than death for a warrior. These blames will be unavoidable just like the pain caused by heat and cold. Due to lack of careful thinking you have developed affection in an inappropriate place. The only way out for you is to give up this misplaced affection. O Arjuna! you are caught up in the great trap of dehātmavāda (the body and soul are one). Even if you carefully analyse the philosophy of the Lokāyatikas who are leaders in dehātmavāda, you will have no reason to grieve." 

Kṛṣṇa thus convinced Arjuna that even if he is a believer of the avaidica radical dehātmavāda, he still has no reason to grieve.