What is the correct interpretation of Gita chapter 7 verse 24 ?

[The Crimson Universe]

Here is the explanation by the dualists (the ISKCONITES) :

Unintelligent men, who do not know Me perfectly, think that I, the supreme personality of Godhead, Krsna, was impersonal (avyaktam) before and have now assumed this personality (vyaktam).
Due to their small knowledge, they do not know my higher nature, which is imperishable and supreme.

According to the ISKCONITES, the higher or original nature of the Lord is vyaktam or the manifested state, (which is Krishna), who lives in his spiritual abode Goloka dhama. And this Krishna reincarnated on earth as a cowherd in dwapara yuga. The ISKCONITES believe that the avyaktam state of the lord is subordinate to his vyaktam Krishna form.
.............

Now, here is the explanation of that same verse, by an advaitin, Alladi Mahadeva Shastri, taken from Shankaracharya Gita Bhasya.

The foolish regard Me as the unmanifested coming in manifestation, knowing not My higher, immutable, unsurpassed nature.

Here Alladi explains that fools think that the Lord have just now come into manifestation, as he was unmanifested before.

But isn't that true? I mean, if we go by the beliefs of the advaitins, then the Lord WAS avyaktam before and then became vyaktam as Vishnu, and then again he became vyaktam as the dasha avatars.
If that is true, then why call us foolish?

 

[George-ananda]

Here is the explanation by the dualists (the ISKCONITES) :

Unintelligent men, who do not know Me perfectly, think that I, the supreme personality of Godhead, Krsna, was impersonal (avyaktam) before and have now assumed this personality (vyaktam).
Due to their small knowledge, they do not know my higher nature, which is imperishable and supreme.

According to the ISKCONITES, the higher or original nature of the Lord is vyaktam or the manifested state, (which is Krishna), who lives in his spiritual abode Goloka dhama. And this Krishna reincarnated on earth as a cowherd in dwapara yuga. The ISKCONITES believe that the avyaktam state of the lord is subordinate to his vyaktam Krishna form.
.............

Now, here is the explanation of that same verse, by an advaitin, Alladi Mahadeva Shastri, taken from Shankaracharya Gita Bhasya.

The foolish regard Me as the unmanifested coming in manifestation, knowing not My higher, immutable, unsurpassed nature.

Here Alladi explains that fools think that the Lord have just now come into manifestation, as he was unmanifested before.

But isn't that true? I mean, if we go by the beliefs of the advaitins, then the Lord WAS avyaktam before and then became vyaktam as Vishnu, and then again he became vyaktam as the dasha avatars.
If that is true, then why call us foolish?

I take it that the wise see past the personal form of Krishna and see the 'real' higher, immutable unsurpassed (Brahman). Brahman never changes an iota and does not 'become' Krishna.

It is a good question by the way.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Here is the explanation by the dualists (the ISKCONITES) :

Unintelligent men, who do not know Me perfectly, think that I, the supreme personality of Godhead, Krsna, was impersonal (avyaktam) before and have now assumed this personality (vyaktam).
Due to their small knowledge, they do not know my higher nature, which is imperishable and supreme.

According to the ISKCONITES, the higher or original nature of the Lord is vyaktam or the manifested state, (which is Krishna), who lives in his spiritual abode Goloka dhama. And this Krishna reincarnated on earth as a cowherd in dwapara yuga. The ISKCONITES believe that the avyaktam state of the lord is subordinate to his vyaktam Krishna form.
.............

Now, here is the explanation of that same verse, by an advaitin, Alladi Mahadeva Shastri, taken from Shankaracharya Gita Bhasya.

The foolish regard Me as the unmanifested coming in manifestation, knowing not My higher, immutable, unsurpassed nature.

Here Alladi explains that fools think that the Lord have just now come into manifestation, as he was unmanifested before.

But isn't that true? I mean, if we go by the beliefs of the advaitins, then the Lord WAS avyaktam before and then became vyaktam as Vishnu, and then again he became vyaktam as the dasha avatars.
If that is true, then why call us foolish?

As always, this verse is interpreted differently by different people.

Shankara - The ignorant think Krishna is an ordinary person who did not exist before. They do not see the imperishable supreme that Krishna (the person) represents.

Ramanuja - The ignorant think Krishna is an ordinary person who did not exist before. They do not see that Krishna is Narayana (the Surpeme entity worshipped in the Veda).

There are other interpretations where the ignorant here are taken to mean worshippers of other gods, etc.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I take it that the wise see past the personal form of Krishna and see the 'real' higher, immutable unsurpassed (Brahman). Brahman never changes an iota and does not 'become' Krishna.

Good question. Nothing wrong is calling Krishna Brahman. All things in the universe are Brahman, 'vyaktam' or 'avyaktam'. Even you and me are Brahman. Are we something other than that? 'Vyakta' (manifested) is but our perception, our illusion, 'maya'.
"Brahma satyam, jagan-mithya ..", so said Adi Sankara.

 

[ManSinha]

Personally speaking - from what I have read and experienced - the people from ISKCON have a bit of skewed view - I would go to the source itself

I think these quotes put things into perspective - Krishna is not referring IMO to his earthly form but that of the Universe personified by him and embodied in him

Gita 7:6

etad-yonīni bhūtāni sarvāṇītyupadhāraya
ahaṁ kṛitsnasya jagataḥ prabhavaḥ pralayas tathā

Know that all living beings are manifested by these two energies of mine. I am the source of the entire creation, and into me it again dissolves.

Gita 7:7

mattaḥ parataraṁ nānyat kiñchid asti dhanañjaya
mayi sarvam idaṁ protaṁ sūtre maṇi-gaṇā iva

There is nothing higher than myself, O Arjun. Everything rests in me, as beads strung on a thread.

Sikhism - to go off on a tangent - also supports that view that there is a single underlying all-pervading consciousness which contains us all

Here is one supportive quote about advice to the everyday person - sorry to drift off the OP

 

[atanu]

Here is the explanation by the dualists (the ISKCONITES) :

Unintelligent men, who do not know Me perfectly, think that I, the supreme personality of Godhead, Krsna, was impersonal (avyaktam) before and have now assumed this personality (vyaktam).
Due to their small knowledge, they do not know my higher nature, which is imperishable and supreme.

According to the ISKCONITES, the higher or original nature of the Lord is vyaktam or the manifested state, (which is Krishna), who lives in his spiritual abode Goloka dhama. And this Krishna reincarnated on earth as a cowherd in dwapara yuga. The ISKCONITES believe that the avyaktam state of the lord is subordinate to his vyaktam Krishna form.
.............

Now, here is the explanation of that same verse, by an advaitin, Alladi Mahadeva Shastri, taken from Shankaracharya Gita Bhasya.

The foolish regard Me as the unmanifested coming in manifestation, knowing not My higher, immutable, unsurpassed nature.

Here Alladi explains that fools think that the Lord have just now come into manifestation, as he was unmanifested before.

But isn't that true? I mean, if we go by the beliefs of the advaitins, then the Lord WAS avyaktam before and then became vyaktam as Vishnu, and then again he became vyaktam as the dasha avatars.
If that is true, then why call us foolish?

I have not read all posts.

Upanishads, of which Gita is an essence, teaches of three levels: the manifest universe (vyaktam), the unmanifest root nature (avayakta moola Prakriti) and the Immutable-Imperishable. Hope this helps.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You are correct, IMHO, Atanu. 'Avyakta' (what is not perceived, unmanifested) is the 'moola prakriti' - 'real substance' (rough translation).