A fundamental conflict in the Bhagavad Gita is the notion of whether or not the "self" is independent of or synonymous with the greater supreme mind (or "Self") manifested in Krishna; this is the main distinction between reading the text from a monist or dualist perspective. In other words, is an individual's “self” truly its own – or is it part of a larger entity? The idea that the self is independent of Krishna is essential to the foundation of the validity of the Bhagavad Gita, as it supports the validity of Krishna's existence and the concepts of dharma, karma and reincarnation. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”?Get an original essay To define the individuality of a living being, in the context of the Bhagavad Gita, is to attribute to it an essence that distinguishes a being of another. , a kind of “soul” or “self” at the heart of being. The text addresses three levels of being synthesized into: [1] the physical body which is ephemeral, [2] the mind and ego, and [3] the “self” which is eternal and indestructible in nature. This "self" lives several lives in several bodies in the endless cycle of death and rebirth until one abandons attachment and exercises implacable devotion to Krishna, for only He can save them "from the ocean/of death and rebirth” (110, 12.7). . Those who have mastered the mundane world will then exist in the infinite mind, be illuminated by self-knowledge, which will illuminate the ultimate reality of existence, and find true liberation in something infinite and euphoric that no other worldly experience could ever compare. As presented in the text, this “self” is described as a dual spirit, one “transient and eternal” and the other as “the supreme spirit of man” (125, 15.16). Outside of the individual “self” that each living being contains, there is a larger spirit, manifested in Krishna. Krishna states that “since I transcend the ephemeral/and am superior to the eternal,/I am known as the supreme spirit of man/in the world and in sacred tradition” (126, 15.18) . This statement serves as a huge ellipsis that Krishna must be the one true “self” and is presented as the manifestation of the “Self”. However, this representation is a double-edged sword. Certainly, this manifestation of Krishna defends this transcendent spirit of a Divine, it calls into question the idea and the extent of the individuality of each living being. If the Bhagavad Gita suggests that the individual “self” is part of Krishna, this poses a great contradiction to the foundation of the Bhagavad Gita; he questions the validity of Krishna's power and the "beginninglessness" of the supreme "Self" (117, 13.31). As Krishna describes himself and his vast being, and in his “womb is the great infinite spirit;/in him I place the embryo,/and from there, Arjuna,/comes the origin of all creatures/ the infinite spirit the great womb/ of all forms that are born/ in all wombs,/ and I am the father who gives the seed” (119, 14.3). This passage could be interpreted as that there is a part of Krishna in every living being, for he is the “seed-giving father” (119, 14.3). If “self” and Krishna, as the manifestation of the all-encompassing divine mind, are synonymous, then, by extension, every living being holds within itself a part of divinity and divine essence. Every living being must therefore be deified and divinized by extension. This suggests that there is a beginning and an end, a before and an after, where the "Self" has given parts of itself to be infused into all living beings, and that when those living beings reach nirvana, they will eventually return to..