Verse 2.228

Sanskrit text and transliteration:

गोधनाद्यभिमानेन तद्वानस्मीत्यविद्यया ।
ब्रह्मचारी गृहस्थोऽहं तापसोऽस्मि तथा मुनिः ।
देहलिङ्गात्मसंस्कारान्मन्यते सङ्गकारणात् ॥ २२८ ॥

godhanādyabhimānena tadvānasmītyavidyayā |
brahmacārī gṛhastho'haṃ tāpaso'smi tathā muniḥ |
dehaliṅgātmasaṃskārānmanyate saṅgakāraṇāt || 228 ||

English translation of verse 2.228:

By the conceit of the Self in cattle, wealth, and the like, a person thinks due to ignorance: “I own them.” In the same way, because of attachment he thinks of the purificatory rites of the gross and subtle bodies (as those of the Self) and considers himself to the effect “I am a bachelor,” “I am a householder,” “I am an ascetic,” “I am a sage.”

Notes:

An ignorant man suffers from two kinds of conceit or erroneous notion. The first is ahamabhimāna which is erroneous identification of the Self with the intellect, or the mind, or the vital air, or the senses, or the body. This has been explained in verses (225) to (227) with a view to show that the Self has to be differentiated from each one of them.

The second one is mamābhimāna which is explained in this verse. On account of this erroneous notion, he looks upon the external things as his own and says: “This is my cow,” “This property belongs to me,” “These are my kinsmen,” etc. Just as the Self cannot be identified with the intellect, mind etc., which are not-Self, so also the Self cannot be related to any of the external things of the world. The Self has no relation whatsoever with anything, subjective as well as objective.

The Self by its very nature is pure, and so there is no scope for any purificatory rite with regard to the Self. But there are various acts of purification (saṃskāra) for the gross and subtle bodies such as snāna, ācamana, and so on. Consequent on the various purificatory acts, a person considers himself in terms of various statuses such as a celebate student, a householder, etc. Neither the purificatory acts nor the different statuses have anything to do with the Self. In the celebrated introduction contained in his bhāṣya on the Brahma-sūtra, Śaṅkara says that distinctions such as a brāhmaṇa, a kṣatriya, and the like, and the śruti texts such as “A brāhmaṇa is to sacrifice” (brāhmaṇo yajeta) are operative only on the supposition that on the Self are superimposed particular conditions such as caste, stage of life, age, outward circumstances and so on.