BY DEVOTION HE COMES TO KNOW ME — Devotion, as we have explained, is “love for the Supreme.” Love is measured by the degree of identification the lover maintains with the beloved. When an ego-centric individuality, having made all the above adjustments, increasingly seeks and discovers its identity with the Self, it comes to experience the true nature of the Self more and more clearly. Such a seeker comes to understand “WHAT AND WHO I AM.”

In the entire Geeta, the first person singular is used by the Lord to indicate the Supreme Goal. It is not Lord Krishna, as an individual person who is indicated by the terms ‘I’ and ‘Me’ as used in these discourses. Remember, this is the Lord’s own Song, sung to revive His devotees, and the pronouns used here represent the Paramatman. To know the Self means to know both Its nature and identity. These are the topics in all scriptures. But the scriptural study gives us only an intellectual comprehension of Truth and not its Essence (Tattwatah), a spiritual apprehension of Truth as a lived experience.

THEN, HAVING KNOWN ME IN ESSENCE — When this experience comes through a slow and steady unfoldment of the Light of Consciousness, through the dropping of the veils of ‘ignorance’created by our identifications with the body, we come to apprehend, IN TOTO, the Infinite. The individuality or the ego, ends and “HE THEREAFTER ENTERS ME.”

The “ENTRY” mentioned here is not like that of a man entering a structure, a house separate from himself. There is no ego to enter into the plane of God-consciousness. The term “ENTRY” is used here exactly in the same fashion as “the dreamer ENTERS the waking state.” The dreamer cannot retain his own individuality when he ENTERS the waking world, but he himself becomes the “waker.” Similarly, when the ego ENTERS God-consciousness, the individuality cannot retain itself as such. The misconception that he is an individual ends and he rediscovers, becomes or awakens to, the Infinite Brahmanhood — the State of Krishna-Consciousness.

DEVOTION FOR THE LORD IS NEVER COMPLETE WITHOUT SERVICE TO THE LIVING WORLD OF CREATURES:

Bhaktya, through devotion, through that devotion described as Knowledge; abhijanati, he knows; mam, Me; tattvatah, in reality; as to yavan, what I am, with the extensive differences created by limiting adjuncts; and yah asmi, who I am when all distinctions create by the limiting adjuncts are destroyed-Me who am the supreme Person comparable to space [In points of all-pervasiveness and non-attachment.] and one-without-a-second, absolute, homogeneous Consciousness, birthless, ageless, immortal, fearless and deathless. Tatah, then; jnatva, having known; mam, Me, thus; tattvatah, in truth; visate, he enters into Me, Myself; tadanantaram, immediately after that (Knowledge). Here, by saing, ‘having known, he enters without delay’, it is not meant that the acts of ‘knowing’ and ‘entering immediately after’ are different. What then? What is meant is the absolute Knowledge itself that has to no other result, [In place of phalantarabhava-jnana-matram eva, Ast. reads ‘phalantarbhavat jnanamatram eva, absolute Knowledge itself, since there is no other result’.-Tr.] for it has been said, ‘And…understand Me to be the “Knower of the field”, (13.2).
Opponent: Has it not been contradictory to say, he knows Me through that which is the supreme steadliness (nistha) in Knowledge?
Vedantin: If it be asked, How it is contradictory?
Opponent: The answer is: Whenever any Knowledge of something arises in a knower, at that very moment the knower knows that object. Hence, he does not depend on steadfastness in Knowledge which consists in the repetition of the act of knowing. And therefore, it is contradictory to say one knows not through knowledge, but through steadfastness in knowledge which is a repetition of the act of knowing.
Vedantin: There is no such fault, since the culmination of Knowledge-which (Knowledge) is associated with the causes of its unfoldment and maturity, and which has nothing to contradict it- in the conviction that one’s own Self has been realized is what is referred to by the word nistha (consummation): When knowledge-which concerns the identity of the ‘Knower of the field’ and the supreme Self, and which remains associated with the renunciation of all actions that arise from the perception of the distinction among their accessories such as agent etc., and which unfolds from the instruction of the scriptures and teachers, depending on purity of the intellect etc. and humility etc. which are the auxiliary cuases of the origin and maturity of Knowledge-continues in the form of the conviction that one’s own Self has been realized, then that continuance is called the supreme steadfastness (nistha) in Knowledge. This steadfastness in Knowledge that is such has been spoken of as the highest, the fourth kind of devotion in relation to the three other devotions viz of the afflicted, etc. (cf. 7.16). Through that highest devotion one realizes the Lord in truth. Immediately after that the idea of difference between the Lord and the Knower of the field vanishes totally. There-fore the statement, ‘one knows Me through devotion in the form of steadfastness in Knowledge’, is not contradictory. And, in this sense, all the scriptures-consisting of Vedanta (Upanisads etc.), History, Mythology and Smrtis-, as for instance, ‘Knowing (this very Self the Brahmanas) renounce…and lead a mendicant’s life’ (Br. 3.5.1), ‘Therefore they speak of monasticism as excellent among these austerities’ (Ma. Na. 24.1), ‘Monasticism verily became supreme’ (ibid. 21.2), which enjoin renunciation become meaningful. Thus, monasticism means renunciation of rites and duties. There are also the texts, ‘Having renounced the Vedas as well as this world and the next’ (Ap. Dh. Su. 2.9.13), and ‘Give up religion and irreligion’ (Mbh. Sa. 329.40; 331.44), etc. And here (in the Gita) also various relevant) passages have been pointed out. In is not porper that those texts should be meaningless. Nor are they merely eulogistic, since they occur in their own contexts. Besides, Liberation consists in being established in the changeless real nature of the indwelling Self. Indeed, it is not possible that one who wants to go to the eastern sea and the other who wants to go in the opposite direction to the western sea can have the same course! And steadfastness in Knowledg consists in being totally absorbed in maintaining a current of thought with regard to the indwelling Self. And that is opposed to coexistence with duties, like going to the western sea. It has been the conclusion of those versed in the valid means of knowledge that the difference between them is as wide as that between a mountain and a mustard seed! Therefore it is established that one should have recourse to steadfastness in Knowledge only, by relinquishing all rites and duties. The fruit of the attainment of success from the Yoga of Devotion consisting in worshiping the Lord with one’s own actions is the ability to remain steadfast in Knowledge, from which, follows stead-fastness in Knowledge, culminating in the result, Liberation. That Yoga of Devotion to the Lord is now being praised in this concluding section dealing with the purport of the Scripture, with a veiw to generating a firm conviction with regard to it (the purport of the Scripture):