But others explain: Since obligatory (nitya) actions bear no fruits, it is not right to speak of "setting aside attach- ment and the fruits." Therefore in the words " even those actions " etc., the Lord teaches that even those works- which are intended to secure objects of desire — i.e., even hamaya or interested works, as opposed to nitya or obligatory works — should be performed; how much more then the obligatory acts of worship, gift and austerity.
448 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XVIIL It is wrong to say so; for it has been declared here that even obligatory actions are productive of fruits, in the words " worship, gift and austerity are the purifiers of the wise " (xviii. 5). To a seeker of liberation who would give up even the obligatory works, looking upon them as the cause of bondage, where is an occasion to engage in interested works? 41 Even these actions " cannot refer to interested (kamya) works, inasmuch as these have been despised as constituting an inferior path (ii. 49) and decisively declared to be the cause of bondage (iii. 9, ii. 45, ix- 20,21), and are too far removed from the present section.
Tamasic and Eajasic renunciations of works.
Therefore for a seeker of liberation who is ignorant and is (therefore) bound to perform works, 7, Verily, the abandonment of an obligatory duty is not proper; the abandonment thereof from ignorance is declared to be Tamasic.
Not proper * since it is admitted to be a purifier in the case of an ignorant man. To hold that a duty is obligatory and then to abandon it involves a self-contratfiction. Therefore, this sort of abandonment is due to ignorance and is said to be Tamasic, inasmuch a signorance is Tamas.
Moreover, 8. Whatever act one may abandon because it is painful, from fear of bodily trouble, he practises Rajasic abandonment, and he shall obtain no fruit whatever of abandonment He does not obtain moksha, which is the fruit of the renunciation of all actions accompanied with wisdom. Renunciation in works is Sattvic. What then is the Sattvic abandonment? — The Lord says: 9 Whatever obligatory work is done, by Arjuna, merely because it ought to be done, by abandoning attachment and also the fruit, that abandonment is deemed to be Sattvic.
Abandoning etc.: — These words of the Lord" form, as we have said, the authority which declares that obligatory (nitya) works produce fruits.
Or thus: — An ignorant man may even suppose that though the fruits of obligatory works are not declared in the Scripture, the obligatory works, when performed, do produce their fruits for the doer in the form of self-regeneration, or by way of warding off pratyavaya or the sin of non-perfor* maoce. But even this supposition is prevented by the words " abandoning the fruits.'* Hence the appropriateness That abandonment: the abandoning of all attachment for, and of the fruits of, obligatory works.
(Objection):— It is the threefold abandonment of works — referred to as * sa#myasa* (xviii. 7) — that forms the subject of the present section (xviii. 4, etc.). Out of the three, the Rajasic and Tamasic (sorts of abandonment of works) have been treated of. How is it that the abandonment of attach- ment and of the fruits of works is spoken of as the third? It is something like saying, 4* Three Brahmawas have come; 450 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XVIII.
two of them are proficient in shaJangas or the six auxiliary sciences, and the third is a Ksbatriya-n (Answer}; — No such objection can be raised here; for, the object of this section is to praise fthe abandonment of the fruits of works, as compared with the abandonment of works, ie%% by •comparing the two abandonments), both being alike abandon- ments' In fact the abandonment of works and the abandon- ment of desire for the fruits do agree in so far as they alike imply abandonment- Accordingly, by despising the two sorts of the abandmment of workst as Rajasic and. Tamasic abandonments, the abandonment of desire for the fruits of the works is praised as being the Sattvic abandonment, in the words ' that abandonment is deemed to be Sattvic-* From Renunciation in works to Renunciation of all works.
When the man who is qualified for (Kafma- Yoga) performs obligatory works without attachment and without a longing for results, his inner sense (anta&-kara*ta) unsoiled by desire for results and regenerated by (the performance of) obligatory works, becomes pure. When pure and tranquil, the inner sense is fit for contemplation of the Self. Now, with a view to teach how the man whose inner sense has been purified by the performance of obligatory works and who is prepared to acquire the Self-knowledge may gradually attain to jaana-nishfha or deyotion in knowledge, the Lord proceeds as follows: 10. He hates not evil action, nor is he attach- ed, to a good one, — he who has abandoned, pervaded by Sattva and possessed of wisdom, his doubts cut asunder.
Evil action: the Kamya-karma, the interested action, which becomes the cause of samsara by producing a bodfy. He does not hate evil action, thinking '* of what avail is it£* Good, one: nitya-karma, obligatory action. He cherishes no attachment for it by way of thinking that it leads to rnoksha by purifying the fyeart and thereby conducing to knowledge and to devotion in knowledge. —Of whom is this said?— Of him who has abandoned attachment and desire, and who, having abandoned attachment to action and desire for its fruit, performs obligatory works (nitya-karma)— When does he hate no evil action? When is he not attached to a good one?— When he is permeated with Sattva, which causes a discriminative knowledge of the Self and the not- Self. As he is permeated with Sattva^ he becomes gifted with wisdom, •with knowledge of Self. As he becomes possessed of wisdom, his doubt caused by avidya is cut. asunder by the conviction that to abide in the true nature of the Serf is alone the means of attaining the Highest Bliss, and that there is no other means- That is to say, when a man who is qualified (tor Karma- Yoga) practises Karma- Yoga in the manner described abo%*e and thereby becomes gradually refined in the self (autafc- Itarawa', then he knows himself to be that Self; who» as devoid of birth or any other change of condition, is immuta- ble; herenounces all action in thought; he remains without acting or causing others to act; he attains devotion in wisdom* *.a, he attains freedom from action. Thus, the purpose of the Karma- Yoga described above lias been taught in this verse.
Renunciation of Fruits is alone possible for the Ignorant. For the unenlightened man, on the other hand, who wears a bady by way of identifying himself with it, who, Jicrt jet disabused of tbe notion that the Self is the agent of action, firmly believes that he is himself the agent,-— for him v/ho is thus qualified for Karma-Toga, abandonment of all works is impossible, so that his duty lies only in performing prescribed works by abandoning their fruits, — not in abandon- ing those works. To impress this point, the Lord proceeds. thus: ii. Verily, it is not possible for an embodied being to abandon actions completely; he who abandons the fruits of actions is verily said to be an abandoner.
An embodied being: a body-wearer, t.e, he who identi- fies himself with the body. No man or discrimination can be called a body-wearer, for it has been pointed out (ii. 21, etc,) that such a man does not concern himself (in actions) as their agent. So the meaning is: it is not possible for an ignorant man to abandon actions completely. When an ignorant man who is qualified for action performs obligatory works, abandon- ing merely the desire for the fruits of his actions, he is said to he an abandoner (tyagin) though he is a performer of works. This— the title " abandoner,*'—- is applied to him for courtesy's sake. Accordingly, the abandonment of all actions is possible for him alone who, realising the Supreme Reality, is not a * body-wearer * *>., does not regard the body as the Self Effects of the true Renunciation after Death.
Now, what is the benefit which accrues from the abandon- ment of all actions P— The Lord says.- 12. The threefold fruit of action^—evil, good, and mixed,— accrues after death to non-abandon- ers, but never to abandoners.
Fruit: brought forth by the operation of various external factors. It is a doing of avidya; it is like the glamour casl by a juggler's art, very delusive, inhering, to all appearance, in the Innermost Self-; by its very etymology, the word 'phala', fruit, implies something that vanishes, something unsubstantial. Action (karma): Dharma and Adharma. Evil: such as hell (naraka), the animal kingdom, etc. Goq&z such as the Devas. Mixed: Good and evil mixed together in one; the humanity. These three sorts of fruits accrue after death to non-abandoners, to the unenlightened, to the follow- ers of Karma-yoga, to the, abandoners (sawnyasins) not strictly so called,* but never to the reil sawnyasins, engaged exclusively in the path of knowledge (jnana-nishiha) and belonging to the highest order of sawnyasins, the Parama- hamsa-Parivrajakas. Indeed, exclusive devotion to Right Knowledge cannot but destroy avidya and other seeds of sawsara.
Accordingly, a complete abandonment of all works is possible for him alone who has attained to Right Knowledge, inasmuch as he sees that action and its accessories and its results are all ascribed to the Self by Avidya: but, foruW unenlightened man indentifying himself with the body, etc, which constitute action, its agent and accessories, complete ■■"■ ' ' ' "■ ■■■ ■ * That is to say, those who perform works without desire for their fruits will necessarily reap, after death, the ftaits of their respective actions. —A.
454 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XVIII, abandonment of action is not possible. This truth, the Lord proceeds to teach in the following verses: Factors in the Production of an Act.
q&uft *w4Td mmifa Rf re it i 13 These five factors in the accomplishment of all action, know thou from Me, O mighty- armed, a$ taught in the Sankhya which is the end of action.
These: which are going to be mentioned. Lewrn: this- exhortation is intended to secure steady attention on the part of the hearer to what follows, as well as to indicate the differ- ence (in the view which is going to be presented) as to the nature of those things. In the words "taught in the Sankhya, * the Lord praises them, as they are things that ought to be known. Sankhya: Vedanta (the Upanishads) in which all the things that have to be known are expounded. It is qualified by the epithet %l krita-anta," the end of action, that which puts an end to all action (karma). The verses ii. 46, and iv. 33 teach that all action ceases when the knowledge of the Self arises; so that the Vedanta, which imparts Self- knowledge, is * the end of action.'
14. The seat and actor and the various organs., and the several functions of various sorts, and the Divinity also, the fifth among these; The seat: the body which is the seat of desire, hatred, happiness, misery, knowledge and the like; *.«., the seat of their manifestation Actor: the enjoyer, partaking of the charac- ter of the upadhi with which it may be associated The various organe: such as the sense of hearing, by which to perceive sound, etc- Functions: of the air (vayu), such as outbreathing, and inbreathing- Of various sorts: twelve in number. Divinity: such as the Aditya aad other Gods by whose aid the eye and other organs discharge their functions.
15. Whatever action a man does by the body, speech and mind, right or the opposite, these five are its causes.
Bight: not opposed to dharma, taught in the *astra. The opposite: what is opposed to dharma and opposed to #astra. Even those actions, — the act of twinkling and the like,— which are the necessary conditions of life are denoted by the expression " the right or the opposite", since they are but the effects of the past dharma and a-dharma. Its causes: the causes of every action.
{Objection): — The body, etc, (xviii. 14), are necessary factors in every action. Why do you speak of (a distinction in actions) in the words " whatever action a man does by the body,.speech or mind?'* ( Answer): — This objection cannot be urged against us. In the performance of every action, whether enjoyed or forbidden, one of the three —body, speech or mind— has a more prominent share than the rest; while seeing, hearing, and other activities, which form mere concomitants of life, are subordi- nate to the activity of that one. All actions are thus classed into three groups and are spoken of as performed by body, or speech, or mind. Even at the time of fruition, the fruit of 456 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XVIII.
an action is enjoyed through the instrumentality of body, speech and mind, one of them being more prominent than the rest. Hence no gainsaying of the assertion that all the five are the causes of action (xviii. 1 4) The agency of the self is an illusion.
i5 Now, such being the case, verily, he who as untrained in understanding, looks on the pure Self as the agent, that man of perverted intelli- gence sees not.
Now: with reference to what we are speaking of. Such being the case: every action being accomplished by the five causes described above. Now case: this shows the reason why the person here referred to is said to be a man of per- verted intelligence. The unenlightened one, in virtue of his ignorance, identifies the Self with the five causes and looks upon the pure Self as the agent of the action, which is really accomplished by those five causes. — Why does he regard them so? — For, his understanding (buddhi) has not been trained in the Vedanta, has not been trained by a master s teaching, has not been trained in the principles of reasoning. Even he who, while maintaining the existence of the dis- embodied Self, looks upon the pure Self as the agent, is a man of untrained understanding; he does not therefore see the truth about the Self and action. He is therefore a man of perverted intelligence, — his intelligence takes a wrong direction, is vicious, continually leading to birth and death. Though seeing, yet he does not see (the truth), like a man whose timira- affected eye sees many moons, or like one who regards tbat the moon moves when the clouds are in motion, or like a man who, seated in a vehicle, regards himself as running-— when it is the others (the bearers) that run.
Realisation of the Hon Agency of the Self Leads to Absolution from the Effects of All Works.
Who then is the wise man that -sees rightly? — The answer follows: 17. He who is free from egotistic notion, whose mind is not tainted, — though he kills these creatures, he kills not, he is not bound.
He whose mind has been well trained in the scriptures, well-trained by a master's instructions, and well-trained in the sound principles of reasoning, is free from the egotistic notion that * I am the agent.* He thinks thus: It is these five — the body, etc, ascribed to the Self through avidya — that are the causes of all action, not I. I am the witness of their actions. I am ** without breath, without mind, pure, higher than the Indestructible which is Supreme " (Mu«d. Up. 2*1-2). I am pure and immutable. He whose autafl- karana (buddhi), which is an upadhi of the Self, is not tainted, does not repent thus: *' I have done this: thereby I shall go to naraka (hell).** He is wise: he sees rightly: though he kills all these living creatures, he commits no act of killing^ nor is he bound by the fruit of a-dharma as an effect of that act.
(Objection): — Even supposing that this is intended as a, mere praise, the statement that " though he kills all thes» creatures, he does not kill " involves a self-contradiction.
(Answer}: — This objection cannot stand; for, the state- ment can be explained by distinguishing the two standpoints 458 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XVIIL of worldly conception and absolute truth. From the stand- point of worldly conception, which consists in thinking ' I am the killer* by identifying the Self with the physical body etc, the Lord says, " though he kills;M and from the stand- point of absolute truth explained above, He says. * he kills not* be is not bound.* Thus both are quite explicable.
(Objection): —The Self does act in conjunction with the body, etc., as implied by the use of the word 'pure' in xviii. 16, * he who looks on the pure Self as the agent.* (Answer); — This contention is untenable; for the Self being, by nature, immutable, we cannot conceive Him to act io conjunction with the body, etc. What is subject to change can alone conjoin with others, and thus conjoined can become the agent. But there can be no conjunction of the immutable Self with anything whatsoever, and He cannot therefore act in conjunction with another* Thus, the isolated condition;, being natural condition. And His immutability is quite evident to all, as taught by the sruti, smriti and reason. In the Gita itself, for instance, it has been over and over again taught in the words, " He is unchangeable " (ii. 25): '* actions are wrought by gunas " (III. 27); *' though dwelling in the body, be acts not ■" fxiii 31). And the same thing is also taught in the passages of the sruti such as H It meditates as it were, It moves as it were " (Bri Up. 4-3-7). By reasoning also we may establish the same, thus: — That the Self is an entity without parts, is not dependent oh another, and is immutable* is the royal road (i.e., is undisputed). Even if it be admitted that the Self is subject to change, He should only be subject to a change of His own; the actions of the body, etc, can never be attributed to the agency of the Self. Indeed, the action of one cannot go to another that has not done it. And what is attributed to the Self by avidya cannot really pertain to Him, in the same why that the mother-of-pearl cannot be- come silver, or (to take another illustration) in the same way that surface and dirt ascribed by children through ignorance to akasa cannot really pertain to akasa. Accordingly, any changes that may take place in the body, etc., belong to them only, not to the Self. Wherefore, it is but right to say that in the absence of egotism and of all taint in the mind, the wise man neither kills nor is bound.
Having started this proposition in the words "he slays not, nor is he slain;*' (ii. 19) having stated in ii. 20 as the reason therefore the immutability of the Self, having in the beginning of the sastra tfi. 21) briefly taught that to a wise man there is no need for works, and having introduced the subject here and there in the middle and expatiated upon it, the Lord now concludes it in the words that the wise man ** kills not, nor is bound** with a view to sum up the teaching of the sastra. Thus in the absence of the egotistic feeling of embodied existence, the samnyasins renounce all avidya-generated action, and it is therefore right to say that the threefold fruit of action " evil, good and mixed" (xviii. 12), does not accrue to the sawnyasins; and the further conclusion also is inevitable that quite the reverse is the lot of others. This teaching of the Gitasastra has been conclud- ed here. To show that this essence of the whole Vedic Teaching should be investigated and understood by wise men of trained intelligence, it has been expounded by us here and there in several sections in accordance with the scripture (sastra) and reason.
The impulses to action.
Now will be mentioned the impulses to action: ffR ire wirtm mmi w^jrw » 460 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XVIII.
18. Knowledge, the object known, the knower, (form) the threefold impulse to action; the organ, the end, the agent, from the threefold basis of action.
Knowledge: any knowledge, knowledge in general. Similarly the object hiown refers to objects in general, to all objects of knowledge. The knower: the experiences partak- ing of the nature of the upadhi, a creature of avidya. This triad forms the threefold impulse to all action, to action in general. Indeed, performance of action with a view to avoid a thing or to obtain another and so on, is possible only when there is a conjunction of the three, — knowledge, etc The actions accomplished by the five (causes of action \ — by the body, etc.,— and grouped into three classes according to their respective seats— speech, mind, body, — are ail traceable to the interplay of the organ, etc. r and this is taught in the second part of the verse. The organ: that by which some- thing is done » external organs being the organ of hearing, etc., and the internal organs being buddhi (intelligence), etc. The end: that which is sought for, that which is reached through action by the agent. The agent: he who sets the organs going, partaking of the nature of the upadhi (in which he works). In these three ail action inheres, and they are therefore said to form the threefold basis of action.
The impulses are threefold according to the gunas.
Inasmuch as action, the several factors of action, and the fruit, are all made up of the guraas, the Lord now proceeds to teach the threefold distinction of each, according to the three distinct gunas, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas: 19. Knowledge and action, and the agent? are said in the science of gunas to be of three kinds only, according to the distinction in gunas. Hear thou duly of them.
Action (karma): ' karma ' here means action (kriya). It is not used in the technical sense of the word denoting the object of an action, what is sought to be attained by means of action, Agent: the performer of acts. They are of three kinds only — This restriction is intended to imply the absence of dintinctions other than that caused by the gunas. — Gunas; such as Sattva. The science of gunas here referred to is Kapila's system of philosophy, — Even Kapila's science of gu«as is certainly an authority so far as it concerns gunas and their experiencer (bhoktn). Though they are opposed to tis as regards the supreme truth, viz-, the oneness or non- duality of Brahman, still the followers of Kapila are of ac- knowledged authority in the exposition of the functions of gums and of their products, and their science is therefore accepted here as an authority as serving to extol the teach- ing which follows. Hence no inconsistency. Hear, etc: Pay attention to the teaching which follows here, concerning knowledge and the rest, as well as their various distinctions caused by different gunas, as I describe them duly, according to science, according to reason.
Sattvic Knowledge. Here follows the threefold character of knowledge: 20. That by which a man sees the one Indes- tructible Reality in all beings, inseparate in the separated,—- that knowledge know thou as Sattvic.
462 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. XVIIL Meality (Bhavaj; the one Self. Inde&truGtihle: which cannot be exhausted either in itself or in its properties,- KuJastha or immutable. All beings; from Avyakta, or the unmanifested matter, dowi to the sthavara or unmoving objects. That Reality, the Self, is not different in different bodies; like the akasa, the Self admits of no division. Know thou this direct and right perception of the non-dual Self as SattViC' Eajasic Knowledge.
The dualistic fallacious systems of philosophy are Raja- sic and Tamasic, and therefore they cannot directly bring about the cessation of samsara 21. But that knowledge which by differen- tiation, sees in all the creatures various entities of distinct kinds, that knowledge know thou as Rajasic.
By differentiation: regarding them as different in differ- ent bodies. Entities: Selfs. Which mm, etc.: This should be interpreted to mean ' by which one sees** since knowledge cannot be an agent.
Tamasic Knowledge.
22. Bat that which clings to one single effect as if it were all, without reason, having no real object, and narrow, that is declared to be Tama- sic.
Tamasic knowledge is engrossed in one single effect, — such as the body or an external idol — as though it is all-com- prehensive, thinking * this body is the Self * or ' that is God,* and that there is nothing higher than that. Jiva (soul), for example, dwelling in the body is regarded by the naked Sramawakas,* etc., as being of the size of that body, and the Isvara is regarded (by some) to be the mere stone or piece of wood t This knowledge is not founded on reason and does not perceive things as they are. Because it is not founded on reason, it is narrow^ as extending over a limited area, or as producing very small results* This knowledge is said to be Tamasic, because it is found only in Tamasic beings possessing no faculty of discrimination.
Sattvic Actio u. The threefold nature of action is next described t 23. An action which is ordained, which is free from attachment, which is done without love or hatred by one not desirous of the fruit, that action is declared to be Sattvic.
Ordained -. Obligatory (nitya). It is not an action done by one impelled by love or hatred.
Bajasic Action.
* The Jains- Some M5S- read Kshapanakas* f The material of which the image is made.
464 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [Dis. XVIII..
24. But the action which is done by one longing for pleasures, or done by the egotisticj costing much trouble, that is declared to be Rajasic.
Pleasures: as fruits of action. The EgotisHe: not as distinguished from one who has realised the true nature of the Self (who is absolutely free from egotism), but as distin- guished from one who is free from pride in the sense in which an ordinary srotriya (a devotee of the Vedic Religion) of the world is expected to be free from egotism. For, he -who is absolutely without egotism, le,t one who has realised the Self, cannot even be imagined to long for the fruit of an action; or to do an action costing much trouble. Even the doer of a Sattvic action is ignorant of the Self and is egotistic* much more so are the Rajasic and Tamasic doers. In common parlance, a srotriya who is ignorant of the Self is said to be iree from egotism; we say " He is a modest (unegotistic) Brahmana." It is only from this class of persons that the doer of a Rajasic action is distinguished as being egotistic.
Tamasic Action, ^