न मे विदुः सुरगणाः प्रभवं न महर्षयः | अहमादिर्हि देवानां महर्षीणां च सर्वशः ||२||
na me viduḥ sura-gaṇāḥ prabhavaṃ na maharṣayaḥ | aham ādir hi devānāṃ maharṣīṇāṃ ca sarvaśaḥ || 2 ||
Neither the gods nor the great sages know My origin — for I am the source of them all, in every way.
Word by word (3)
- na me viduḥ sura-gaṇāḥ prabhavam na maharṣayaḥ
- — Neither the hosts of gods nor the great sages know My origin · na = not. me = My (genitive). viduḥ = they know (√vid = to know; perfect tense viduḥ = 'they know, they understand'). sura-gaṇāḥ = hosts of gods (sura = god, divine being; gaṇāḥ = group, host; sura-gaṇāḥ = 'the assembled gods, the company of gods'). prabhavam = origin, source, divine birth (pra + √bhū = to come forth; prabhava = 'coming forth, origin, source, manifestation power'; the word suggests not merely birth-event but the divine's emergence into manifestation — its source/origin). na = not (repeated for emphasis). maharṣayaḥ = great sages (mahā = great + ṛṣi = seer/sage; maharṣi = great sage; plural maharṣayaḥ). V2's first half makes an extraordinary statement: not even the gods (sura-gaṇāḥ) or great sages (maharṣayaḥ) — the two highest categories of spiritual beings in the cosmic hierarchy — know My prabhavam (origin/source). This is not a limitation of the gods and sages but an ontological statement about what it means to be the source: you cannot be simultaneously the source AND be fully known by what you are the source of.
- aham ādir hi devānāṃ maharṣīṇāṃ ca sarvaśaḥ
- — For I am the origin of the gods and great sages in every way · aham = I. ādir hi = the origin indeed (ādi = beginning, origin, source — from √ad = to begin; ādiḥ = 'origin, primal source'; hi = indeed/for — giving the reason). devānāṃ = of the gods (genitive plural of deva). maharṣīṇāṃ = of the great sages (genitive plural of maharṣi). ca = and. sarvaśaḥ = in every way, completely, on every side (sarva = all; sarvaśaḥ = adverb 'in every respect, from every angle, completely'). Aham ādir hi devānāṃ maharṣīṇāṃ — 'I am the origin indeed of the gods and great sages.' This is the reason (hi = for/because) the gods and sages cannot know Krishna's prabhavam: they ARE what has arisen FROM Him. A stream cannot know the spring — it is what the spring produced. The devānāṃ maharṣīṇāṃ ca sarvaśaḥ (in every way, completely) emphasizes that the origination is not partial but complete: the divine is the complete source of gods and sages in every respect. This verse thus presents a cosmological hierarchy: Krishna → gods and sages → all other beings. If even the gods and sages cannot know the source, the teaching that follows (the vibhūtis) is given out of divine grace, not earned through inquiry.
- prabhavaṃ — divine origin as both birth-source and manifestation-power
- — V2's prabhavam names both the divine's origin and the power by which it originates all — the gods/sages cannot know it because it transcends their ontological level · The word prabhavam (from pra + √bhū) is philosophically rich. It means: (1) origin, birth-source; (2) manifestation-power, the power by which something comes into being; (3) the essential nature from which all proceeds. The Swarupananda commentary notes: 'Prabhavam — higher origin (birth) — though birthless, yet taking various manifestations of power.' This commentary note captures the paradox: the divine has no birth (ajam — V3) yet has prabhavam (the power of origin, the source from which all arises). The gods and sages cannot know this prabhavam precisely because they ARE what the prabhavam produced. This is Ch.10's opening epistemological point: the knowledge of Ch.10 (the vibhūtis, the divine manifestations) can only be given by the divine itself — it cannot be reached by inquiry from below, only by revelation from above. Hence the structure: Krishna teaches (V1 = again, hear) rather than waiting to be found through inquiry.
V2 makes a startling ontological claim: not even the gods (sura-gaṇāḥ) or great sages (maharṣayaḥ) know Krishna's prabhavam (origin). Why? aham ādir hi devānāṃ maharṣīṇāṃ ca sarvaśaḥ — 'I am the origin of the gods and great sages in every way.' The gods cannot know their own source for the same reason a river cannot know the spring: they ARE what arose from it. This grounds Ch.10's teaching: what follows (the vibhūtis) can only be known through divine grace (Krishna telling Arjuna), not through inquiry from below.
A modern analogy
A computer program cannot know the source code that created it from within its own operation — it runs on the code but cannot access the programmer's originating decision to write it. Similarly, the gods run on Krishna's prabhavam but cannot access that prabhavam from within their own operations. The programmer (Krishna) has to tell them, which is what V1 sets up: 'hear My supreme word' — the source telling the originate about the originating act.
What it does NOT mean
V2 does not say the gods and sages are ignorant or inferior. It says they cannot know the ORIGIN of what they themselves are — which is a logical statement, not a criticism. The most spiritually advanced beings (gods and sages) cannot know the ground of their own existence through their own faculties because that ground is ontologically prior to them. This is not a failure of their intelligence but a structural feature of the originator-originated relationship.
Take with you
- V2 as a teaching in epistemic humility: if even the gods don't know the divine's origin, the appropriate stance for a human being is receptive openness rather than intellectual certainty about God's nature. V2 is the Gita's 'I don't fully know the divine's ultimate origin — and that's OK; what I CAN know is given through grace (V10.1's hita-kāmyayā).'
- V2's aham ādir (I am the origin) as the frame for Ch.10's vibhūti catalogue: everything that follows in V10.20-V42 (I am Viṣṇu, I am the sun, I am the Himalayas...) makes sense in light of V2: if Krishna is the origin of gods and sages, then wherever excellence appears — in nature, in beings, in activity — that excellence is a vibhūti (manifestation) of the originating source.
- V2 and V3 as a pair: V2 = not even the gods know My origin (cognitive limitation statement); V3 = but the MORTAL who knows Me as birthless and beginningless is freed from all sin (practical possibility). The teaching moves from what gods cannot know to what a human being, through grace, CAN know and benefit from.
V10.2 is one of the Gita's most precise ontological statements. It operates on two levels: (1) epistemological — the gods and sages cannot know the divine's prabhavam; (2) ontological — the reason they cannot know it is that they ARE what has arisen from that prabhavam. The verse thus establishes a specific relationship: the divine as origin (ādi) of even the highest created categories (gods + sages). The Shankaracharya commentary note: 'Prabhavam — higher origin (birth) — though birthless, yet taking various manifestations of power.' This commentary captures the paradox: ajam (unborn — V3) + prabhavam (origin-power). The divine does not have a birth-event but IS the originating power from which all arises. The gods and sages cannot know this because it is prior to and constitutive of their own being. This verse is Ch.10's ontological foundation: if Krishna is the ādi (origin) of gods and sages in every way (sarvaśaḥ), then the vibhūtis He is about to reveal are not arbitrary claims but manifestations of the originating power wherever it is most concentrated and pure in creation. The vibhūti catalogue (V10.20-V42) is the phenomenology of the origin's expressions in its own origination.
Advaita lens
Shankaracharya: the gods and sages are modifications of the one Brahman; they cannot know the prabhavam (origin) of Brahman from within their modifications because knowing requires the knower and known to be distinct — but Brahman is the ground of the knower itself. In Advaita: the only way to 'know' Brahman is not as an object but through ātman-recognition: you don't know Brahman from outside it (which gods attempt) — you recognize that you ARE Brahman (which the jñānī achieves). V2's epistemological point thus supports Advaita's core: objectifying Brahman (as gods and sages attempt) fails; recognizing the identity (ātman = Brahman) is the only valid 'knowing.'
Bhakti lens
For bhakti: the divine's prabhavam being unknown even to gods makes it MORE wondrous that it is revealed to the devotee through grace (hita-kāmyayā, V1). What gods cannot know through their own inquiry is freely given to the loving devotee. This is the bhakti paradox: the highest knowledge comes not through spiritual advancement (which the gods and sages have) but through love and receptivity (which the devotee has). V2 thus grounds bhakti's claim that love is a higher epistemological tool than cosmic spiritual status.
Karma-Yoga lens
V2 for karma yoga: Tilak's commentary on V2 notes that the divine's inaccessibility to gods is because the divine transcends the field of Prakriti in which gods operate. The karma yogi who acts through Prakriti (through the gunas, through the world) also participates in this same limitation. The karma yoga path's non-attachment (nāsakt = not attached) corresponds to not claiming to fully know the source — acting in the world without claiming to comprehend the origin of the world.
Modern parallels
V2's epistemological point parallels Gödel's incompleteness theorem in mathematics: a formal system cannot prove its own consistency from within itself. Similarly, the divine's originating ground cannot be known by the originate categories (gods, sages) from within their own operations. The 'completeness' of the system (fully knowing the divine's origin) requires a perspective outside the system — which is the divine itself (hence Krishna revealing through V1's teaching).
Practice
V2 contemplation: rest in the statement 'I am the origin of the gods and sages in every way.' Not as ego-inflation but as ātman-recognition: the ground of your awareness IS that origin. The gods arise from it; the sages arise from it; YOU arise from it — and your awareness, at its deepest, is not separate from it. Rest in this as a 10-minute contemplation.
Public-domain translations (3) compare all →
Neither the hosts of Devas, nor the great Rishis, know My origin, for in every way I am the source of all the Devas and the great Rishis. [4]
Neither the assemblage of the Gods nor the Adept Kings know my origin, because I am the origin of all the Gods and of the Adepts. [6]
Not the great company of gods nor kingly Rishis know / My Nature, Who have made the gods and Rishis long ago; [7]
This verse speaks to
Where this thread continues
Who knows Me as unborn, beginningless, Great Lord of worlds — that one is undeluded among mortals, freed from all sin.
Veiled by yoga-māyā, I am not manifest to all — this deluded world does not recognize Me, the Unborn, the Imperishable.
Whoever does not turn the cosmic wheel of giving — living only for sense-pleasure — lives in vain.
I taught this imperishable yoga to the sun-god at the dawn of time — it has been passed down through kings ever since.
Whenever dharma declines and adharma rises — I project Myself forth. The divine responds to every crisis.
For the protection of the good, destruction of wickedness, establishment of dharma — I come, age after age.