- B.G 18.01
arjuna uvāca
Arjuna said:
saṃnyāsasya mahābāho tattvamicchāmi veditum। tyāgasya ca hṛṣīkeśa pṛthak keśiniṣūdana॥1॥
O mighty-armed one, I wish to know the truth of renunciation (saṃnyāsa) and of relinquishment (tyāga) separately, O Hṛṣīkeśa, O Keśiniṣūdana.
Bhā.: This chapter concludes by summarizing all the means (sādhanaṃ) previously mentioned.
Tāt.: This is a decisive summary of the duties stated in all the chapters and also includes the unstated proponent of the three qualities.
- B.G 18.02
śrībhagavānuvāca
The auspicious Lord spoke:
kāmyānāṃ karmaṇāṃ nyāsaṃ sanyāsaṃ kavayo viduḥ। sarvakarmaphalatyāgaṃ prāhustyāgaṃ vicakṣaṇāḥ ॥2॥
Sages understand the renuncement of actions arising from desire as true renunciation (saṃnyāsa), while the wise declare that giving up the fruits of all actions is relinquishment (tyāga).
Bhā.: Renunciation (saṃnyāsa) involves giving up actions driven by desires, by not performing them and by not desiring their fruits. However, relinquishment (tyāga) is the giving up of the fruits of actions.
- B.G 18.03
tyājyaṃ doṣavadityeke karma prāhurmanīṣiṇaḥ। yajñadānatapaḥkarma na tyājyamiti cāpare ॥3॥
Some wise individuals say that actions should be relinquished as they are flawed, while others argue that acts of sacrifice (yajña), charity (dāna), and austerity (tapaḥ) should not be relinquished.
Bhā.: Since the word "manīṣiṇaḥ" or "wise persons" is used here, both viewpoints are acceptable, and we must understand them correctly. The key point to note is the difference between renunciation and relinquishment. When the wise talk about relinquishing the actions, they are recommending relinquishing the attachment to results and not abandoning the actions themselves. The concept 'relinquisher of the fruits of actions' will be further elaborated.
Tāt.: Since the word "manīṣiṇaḥ" or "wise persons" is used here, both viewpoints are acceptable, and we must understand them correctly. The key point to note is the difference between renunciation and relinquishment. When the wise talk about relinquishing the actions, they are recommending relinquishing the attachment to results and not abandoning the actions themselves. The concept 'relinquisher of the fruits of actions' will be further elaborated.
- B.G 18.04
niścayaṃ śṛṇu me tatra tyāge bharatasattama। tyāgo hi puruṣavyāghra trividhaḥ samprakīrtitaḥ ॥4॥
Listen to my definitive conclusion on relinguishment (tyāga), O best of the Bharatas. Relinquishment is indeed declared to be of three kinds, O tiger among men.
Bhā.: Definitive conclusions regarding relinquishment (tyāga) is explained further.
- B.G 18.05
yajñadānatapaḥkarma na tyājyaṃ kāryameva tat। yajño dānaṃ tapaścaiva pāvanāni manīṣiṇām ॥5॥
Sacrifice, charity, and austerity should not be abandoned; they must indeed be performed. Sacrifice, charity, and austerity are purifiers of the wise.
etānyapi tu karmāṇi saṅgaṃ tyaktvā phalāni ca। kartavyānīti me pārtha niścitaṃ matamuttamam ॥6॥
O Arjuna, these actions also should be performed without attachment or desire for results, as duties; this is my firm and highly regarded opinion.
Bhā.: Sacrifice, charity and austerity are of various types, including giving knowledge, offering protection etc. as elaborated in 4.28. Chanting name of the Lord can be done by all. Hence, these duties must be performed by all classes of society, and is not restricted to a few, as interpreted by other Āchāryas.
Tāt.: Sacrifice, charity and austerity are of various types, including giving knowledge, offering protection etc. as elaborated in 4.28. Chanting name of the Lord can be done by all. Hence, these duties must be performed by all classes of society, and is not restricted to a few, as interpreted by other Āchāryas.
- B.G 18.07
niyatasya tu saṃnyāsaḥ karmaṇo nopapadyate। mohāttasya parityāgastām asaḥ parikīrtitaḥ ॥7॥
Renouncing (saṃnyāsaḥ) prescribed duties is not appropriate. Abandoning them out of delusion is said to be in the mode of ignorance.
Tāt.: Understanding 'relinquishment of attachment and fruits' as 'relinquishment of ones own true nature' is due to false knowledge, called 'moha' i.e. delusion.
- B.G 18.08
duḥkhamityeva yatkarma kāyakleśabhayāt tyajet। sa kṛtvā rājasaṃ tyāgaṃ naiva tyāgaphalaṃ labhet ॥8॥
He who renounces action only because it is suffering, out of fear of bodily discomfort, having performed such passionate 'rajasic' relinquishment, does not indeed obtain the fruits of relinquishment.
Tāt.: The suffering mentioned is the mental-suffering, observed when devoid of delusion. The word 'duḥkham' is used for mental suffering alone in ancient sanskrit literature, while 'āyāsaḥ' i.e. exertion, is considered for external physical suffering.
- B.G 18.09 and 10
kāryamityeva yat karma niyataṃ kriyate'rjuna। saṅgaṃ tyaktvā phalaṃ caiva sa tyāgaḥ sāttviko mataḥ ॥9॥
O Arjuna, when an action is performed as a duty without any attachment or expectation of results, such relinquishment is regarded as being in the mode of 'sāttva', i.e. goodness.
na dveṣṭyakusalaṃ karma kuśale nānuṣajjate। tyāgī sattvasamāviṣṭo medhāvī chinnasaṃśayaḥ ॥10॥
The wise relinquisher, filled with purity and free from doubts, neither hates unskilled actions nor is attached to skilled ones.
Tāt.: One who truly understands the essence of Vishnu does not despise unskillful actions that bring visible suffering, nor does he become attached to the transient nature of sattvic virtues performed in the past. When one is free from the desire for results, their actions do not bind them. Otherwise, even a slight fault is directly perceived.
- B.G 18.11
na hi dehabhṛtā śakyaṃ tyaktuṃ karmāṇyaśeṣataḥ। yastu karmaphalatyāgī sa tyāgītyabhidhīyate ॥11॥
Indeed, it is impossible for one who has a body to renounce actions completely. However, one who relinquishes the fruits of actions is truly considered a relinquisher.
Bhā.: It is conclusively stated that there is no other meaning for 'tyāga' i.e. relinquishment, than to relinquish the fruits of actions.
- B.G 18.12
aniṣṭamiṣṭaṃ miśraṃ ca trividhaṃ karmaṇaḥ phalam। bhavatyatyāgināṃ pretya na tu saṃnyāsināṃ kvacit ॥12॥
The results of actions, which are of three types — undesirable, desirable, and mixed — manifest after death for those who have not relinquished, but never for those who have renounced.
Bhā.: Right kind of relinquishment is praised.
Tāt.: Even monkhood or renunciation involves relinquishment. The subtle difference needs to be understood. The monk or renouncer abandons all activities to be performed for someone else's sake. He performs his own duties, relinquishing their results.
- B.G 18.13
pañcaitāni mahābāho kāraṇāni nibodha me। sāṅkhye kṛtānte proktāni siddhaye sarvakarmaṇām ॥13॥
O mighty-armed one, let me explain to you these five causes that are mentioned in the conclusion of Sāṅkhya philosophy for the successful completion of all actions.
Bhā.: The renunciation is further elaborated by stating causes of action. Sānkya philosophy concludes with the doctrine of knowledge.
Tāt.: Testimonials are provided to inform the original Sānkhya philosophy, as told by Lord Kapila, who is an incarnation of Vishnu, is only Vedic and includes theism, while other distorted versions are considered non-Vedic.
- B.G 18.14
adhiṣṭhānaṃ tathā kartā karaṇaṃ ca pṛthagvidham। vividhāśca pṛthak ceṣṭā daivaṃ caivātra pañcamam ॥14॥
The foundation, the doer, the instruments, various movements, and the divine are the five factors involved here.
Bhā.: 'adhiṣṭhānaṃ' - the foundation such as the body; 'kartā' - all doer, the Brahman; 'karaṇam' - instruments like senses; 'ceṣṭā' - movement, both physical and mental; and 'daivam' - the unseen; are considered the five causes of action.
Tāt.: 'adhiṣṭhānam' - the foundation, implies the body and other elements.
- B.G 18.15 and 16
śarīravāṅmanobhir yat karma prārabhate naraḥ। nyāyyaṃ vā viparītaṃ vā pañcaite tasya hetavaḥ ॥15॥
Whatever action a man performs with his body, speech, and mind, whether it is just or unjust, these five are its causes.
tatraivaṃ sati kartāraṃ ātmānaṃ kevalaṃ tu yaḥ। paśyatyakṛtabuddhitvānna sa paśyati durmatiḥ ॥16॥
In this situation, the one who perceives the Ātmān, the Lord, as inactive (merely active), due to lack of wisdom, does not truly see, as he is misguided.
Bhā.: 'kartāraṃ ātmānaṃ kevalaṃ' - translates to one who perceives 'Ātmān as merely active, i.e. inactive. One who overlooks the omnipotent aspect of the Lord is foolish.
- B.G 18.17
yasya nāhaṅkṛto bhāvo buddhiryasya na lipyate। hatvāpi sa imān lokān na hanti na nibadhyate ॥17॥
He who has no egoism, whose intellect is not tainted, even if he kills these worlds, he does not kill, nor is he bound.
Bhā.: Knowledge and ability to be devoid of ego is praised. He who is slightly egoistic is also slightly bound.
Tāt.: When one considers freedom and performs duty out of attachment, faults may arise due to that cause, but virtues may also be born from good deeds. But 'intelligence that is not attached' does not act out of passion, but rather with a sense of righteousness. Freedom is recognized in God alone, never in oneself.
- B.G 18.18
jñānaṃ jñeyaṃ parijñātā trividhā karmacodanā। karaṇaṃ karma karteti trividhaḥ karmasaṅgrahaḥ ॥18॥
Knowledge, the object of knowledge, and the knower constitute the threefold impulse to action. Correspondingly, instrument, action, and the doer form the threefold aggregate of causes of actions.
Bhā.: The term 'karma saṅgrahaḥ' in the context means 'collection of causes of actions'.
The hypothesis that recommended injunctions and moral rules have no effect on sentient beings because of the non-agency, similar to inert insentient things, is refuted. A sentient being differs from an insentient because of its intentionality (apekṣya), which arises from knowledge, the object of knowledge and the knower. Even in inaction, the egoistic sense of doership, i.e. intentionality is involved. Even when one is not the doer, desires arise by the grace of God, instrumented, based on the stated causes (knowledge, the object of knowledge, and the knower) through the method, and the benevolent human goal is achieved through actions.
Tāt.: The term 'saṅgrahaḥ' refers collectively to the five causes. In the term 'karaṇa' i.e. instrument, the physical body is included. By the term 'daiva', the main agency of the God is indicated. By the term 'kartṛ' independent agency is indicated which is threefold. The term 'karma' i.e. action refers to 'ceṣṭā' i.e. various movements.
The Lord is the instigator of all beings' actions, and He alone is the inspiration behind the knower, known, and knowledge. This is because:
Speciality is twofold: one is called particular (how one is special) and the other is difference (how one is different from the other). Self-sufficiency of the Lord is not an indeterminate state, like the speciality of other ordinary entities, which are primarily based on difference. It is driven by the eternality of His innate-nature, which pervades everything. As His innate-nature is eternal, it becomes His speciality as well. (For a layperson, it is suffice to understand that the attributes of God are non-different from Him, because of His special properties, unlike other entities.)
- B.G 18.19
jñānaṁ karma ca kartā ca tridhaiva guṇabhedataḥ। procyate guṇasaṅkhyāne yathāvacchṛṇu tānyapi ॥19॥
Knowledge, action, and the doer are classified threefold according to the qualities. Listen to them as they are explained in the enumeration of qualities.
Bhā.: For the purpose of elaborating the spiritual practice, differences in qualities are explained starting from this verse. Term 'guṇasaṅkhyāne' in the context means ways of enumerating qualities.
Tāt.: Term 'guṇasaṅkhyāne' refers to the supreme Sāṅkhya philosophy.
- B.G 18.20
sarvabhūteṣu yenaikaṃ bhāvamavyayamīkṣate। avibhaktaṃ vibhakteṣu tajjñānaṃ viddhi sāttvikam ॥20॥
The knowledge by which one perceives the single immutable essence, undivided in the divided, know that knowledge as 'sāttvik' i.e. pure.
Bhā.: The phrase 'ekaṁ bhāvaṁ' i.e. 'single essence', refers to Lord Vishnu.
Tāt.: The Lord Vishnu is all-pervading, yet separate from the inert-insentient, the bound beings, and the liberated ones. He operates among them through the gradation and distinction of living beings and through their interaction with each other. The knowledge that is directly the cause of liberation is declared to be pure, characterized by a proper understanding of the attributes of both the inert and the living beings, and that of Lord Vishnu.
- B.G 18.21 and 22
pṛthaktvena tu yajjñānaṃ nānābhāvān pṛthagvidhān। vetti sarveṣu bhūteṣu tajjñānaṃ viddhi rājasam ॥21॥
But the knowledge that perceives various distinct entities separately in all beings, know that knowledge to be 'rājas' i.e. passionate.
yattu kṛtsnavadekasmin kārye saktamahaitukam। atattvārthavadalpaṃ ca tattāmasamudāhṛtam ॥22॥
That which is done with attachment to a single action, as if it were all-important, without reason, and without understanding the essence, is said to be 'tāmas' i.e. in the mode of ignorance.
Tāt.: The inability to recognize the all-pervading one Lord is considered a characteristic of 'rājasatvam' i.e. passion. Viewing the knowledge of one as complete is indeed 'tāmasam' i.e. ignorance. The knowledge of unity with the complete Brahman, in the form of liberation and other qualities, is considered great darkness due to the obligatory nature and dependence of the limited living being. What then is the knowledge that everything is only that? Knowledge that is devoid of causality is considered ignorance. It is characterized by false imagination arising from the non-distinction between the real and the unreal, and is devoid of true meaning. Thus, 'māyāvāda' i.e. the doctrine of illusion, which attributes the actions of an attached individual to the complete Brahman and conceptualizes truth from imagination born out of little knowledge — must be rejected.
- B.G 18.23
niyataṁ saṅgarahitam arāgadveṣataḥ kṛtam। aphalaprepsunā karma yat tat sāttvikam ucyate ॥23॥
An action that is regulated and free from attachment, performed without passion or hatred, and without desire for results, is considered to be in the mode of 'sāttvik', i.e. goodness.
Tāt.: Understanding the supreme nature of Lord Vishnu, performing all actions as an offering to the Lord is a means to liberation. While non-performance leads to sin.
- B.G 18.24
yattu kāmepsunā karma sāhaṅkāreṇa vā punaḥ। kriyate bahulāyāsaṃ tadrājasamudāhṛtam ॥24॥
But that action which is performed with desire or with ego, again with much effort, that is declared to be in the mode of 'rājas', i.e. passion.
- B.G 18.25
anubandhaṁ kṣayaṁ hiṁsāmanavekṣya ca pauruṣam। mohādārabhyate karma yattat tāmasamucyate ॥25॥
The action that is undertaken out of delusion, without considering the consequences, destruction, violence, and effort, is said to be in the mode of 'tāmas', i.e. ignorance.
- B.G 18.26
muktasaṅgo'nahaṁvādī dhṛtyutsāhasamanvitaḥ। siddhyasiddhyoḥ nirvikāraḥ kartā sātvika ucyate ॥26॥
A person who performs their duties without attachment, ego, and remains steady in both success and failure, is considered to be acting in the mode of goodness.
Tāt.: Only by having the conviction that everything is under the control of the Lord, does one become 'anahaṁvādī', i.e. the proponent who focuses on 'not I, or not me'
- B.G 18.27
rāgī karmaphalaprepsurlubdho hiṁsātmako'śuciḥ। harṣaśokānvitaḥ kartā rājasaḥ parikīrtitaḥ ॥27॥
The doer who is attached, desiring the fruits of actions, greedy, violent, impure, endowed with joy and sorrow, is declared to be 'rājasik', i.e. passionate.
- B.G 18.28
ayuktaḥ prākṛtaḥ stabdhaḥ śaṭho naiṣkṛtiko'lasaḥ। viṣādī dīrghasūtrī ca kartā tāmasa ucyate ॥28॥
A person who is uncoordinated, unrefined, stubborn, deceitful, malicious, lazy, despondent, procrastinating, and a grudge-holder is referred to as a 'tāmas', i.e. dark doer.
Bhā.: He who points out a fault done by another, even if it was done long ago, is called a 'dīrghasūtrī', i.e. a grudge-holder.
Tāt.: The one who has not been elevated through the power of devotion to the Lord is indeed ordinary, and is a 'dīrghasūtrī' i.e. procrastinates, thinking, 'I will do it later'. A lazy and procrastinating (dīrghasūtrī) person, though endowed with some goodness, is considered to be of a dark nature. An unfit, passionate, stubborn, natural, deceitful, and wicked person is of a passionate nature. It is said that with each fault, one descends into darkness, leading to a wretched human state, then to an animal state, and finally into complete darkness. This is the result in sequence.
- B.G 18.29
Bhā.:
Tāt.:
- B.G 18.30
Bhā.:
Tāt.:
- B.G 18.31
Bhā.:
Tāt.:
