GitaChapter 7Verse 24

Gita 7.24

Jnana Vijnana Yoga

अव्यक्तं व्यक्तिमापन्नं मन्यन्ते मामबुद्धयः । परं भावमजानन्तो ममाव्ययमनुत्तमम् ॥

avyaktaṁ vyaktim āpannaṁ manyante mām abuddhayaḥ | paraṁ bhāvam ajānanto mamāvyayam anuttamam ||

In essence: The spiritually immature mistake God's human form for His totality, missing the infinite behind the finite.

A conversation between a seeker and guide to help you feel this verse deeply

Sadhak-Guru Dialogue

Sadhak: "But Krishna, aren't You standing right here? You have a body, a history. How can You be unmanifest?"

Guru: "Look at the sun's reflection in a pond. Is the sun in the pond?"

Sadhak: "No, the real sun is in the sky. The reflection is just... an appearance."

Guru: "Yet someone might think the sun is in the pond—that's all the sun is. The unintelligent mistake the reflection for the totality."

Sadhak: "So Krishna's body is like a reflection of the infinite?"

Guru: "Precisely. The form manifests so humans can relate, but the reality it reflects is avyaya—without decay—and anuttama—beyond comparison."

Sadhak: "Then why does Krishna appear at all? Why not remain unmanifest?"

Guru: "Out of compassion. The unmanifest cannot be grasped by minds trained only on objects. So the infinite condescends into form—not becoming limited, but making itself accessible."

Sadhak: "But many people saw Krishna and didn't recognize anything divine. Wasn't the form enough?"

Guru: "The form is the invitation, not the recognition. Recognition requires prepared eyes—what the verse calls buddhi. Thousands saw Jesus, heard Buddha, met Krishna. Few recognized."

Sadhak: "How do I develop that recognition? How do I see through form to the formless?"

Guru: "By loosening your grip on appearances. When you love someone, you begin to sense something in them beyond their body and personality—something infinite peering through. That's the beginning. Apply the same perception to the Divine, and you'll start seeing the unmanifest within every manifest form."

Did this resonate with you? Share it with someone who needs to hear this.

🌅 Daily Practice

🌅 Morning

Begin with 'Form-to-Formless' meditation. Look at any image or murti of the Divine—Krishna, any deity, or a symbol. First, see the form fully: colors, features, expressions. Then gently let your focus soften, allowing the form to become a window. Ask: 'What is looking at me through these eyes? What infinite presence wears this finite form?' Sit with whatever arises. The practice trains perception to see through without dismissing the manifest.

☀️ Daytime

Throughout the day, practice 'double seeing.' When you encounter any person, first see them as they appear—body, personality, role. Then mentally bow to what is unmanifest in them—the consciousness behind the appearance, the infinite wearing that particular finite costume. This isn't philosophical abstraction; it changes how you relate. You begin treating people as infinite beings temporarily clothed, not as mere appearances.

🌙 Evening

Reflect: Where today did I relate only to surfaces? Where did I see only the manifest and miss the unmanifest behind it? This might be in encounters with people, with nature, with situations. The goal isn't self-criticism but recognition of the habitual limitation. Then consider: What would change if I consistently saw through forms to the formless? Journal briefly on how this verse's teaching might transform tomorrow's perception.

Common Questions

If Krishna criticizes those who see Him as merely manifest, does that mean worship of His form is inferior?
No—this verse critiques those who see ONLY form and miss the transcendence. Form-worship is valid and even necessary as a starting point. The problem is getting stuck there—thinking the form exhausts the reality. Mature devotees worship the form as a window to the formless. They use the manifest to access the unmanifest. The unintelligent see the window as a wall. The form should be a doorway, not a destination.
This seems to contradict verses where Krishna emphasizes His personal form as supreme. Which is true—personal or impersonal?
Both, simultaneously. Krishna's teaching transcends this dichotomy. The impersonal Brahman is His effulgence; the personal form is His complete manifestation. Neither cancels the other. The 'para bhāva' mentioned here is not impersonal formlessness but the transcendent nature that is both beyond and inclusive of all forms. The error isn't preferring personal or impersonal—it's reducing the infinite to either category exclusively.
How can ordinary people be blamed for not recognizing God? Shouldn't divine manifestations be more obvious?
The Divine's hiddenness is actually compassionate—it preserves human freedom. If God appeared with unmistakable overwhelming power, there would be no choice but submission. By appearing veiled, Krishna allows genuine recognition to emerge from genuine seeking. The 'blame' in this verse isn't condemnation but diagnosis—identifying the limitation that prevents recognition. It's a call to develop buddhi, not a judgment on those who haven't yet.