2.11 The Lord said You are grieving for those who do not deserve to be grieved for. You also speak words of wisdom about the nature of the body and the self as follows: 'The ancestors fall degraded, deprived of the ritual oblations of food and water' (I. 42). There is no reason for such grief for those who possess the knowledge of the nature of the body and the self. Those who know the exact truth will not grieve for those bodies from which life has departed and for those from whome the principle of life has not departed. They do not grieve for bodies or souls.
Hence, in you this contradiction is visible - your grief at the thought 'I shall slay them?' and at the same time your talk about righteousness and unrighteousness, as if it were the result of knowledge of the self as distinct from the body. Therefore you do not know the nature of the body nor of the self which is distinct from the body and is eternal. Nor do you know of duties like war etc., which (as duty) constitute the means for the attainment of the self, nor of the fact that this war (which forms a duty in the present context), if fought without any selfish desire for results, is a means for the attainment of the knowledge of the true nature of the self.
The implied meaning is this: This self, verily, is not dependent on the body for Its existence, nor is It subjected to destruction on the death of the body, as there is no birth or death for It. Therefore there is no cause for grief. But the body is insentient by nature, is subject to change, and its birth and death are natural; thus it (body) too is not to be grieved for.
First listen about the nature of the self.


2.12 Indeed, I, the Lord of all, who is eternal, was never non-existent, but existed always. It is not that these selves like you, who are subject to My Lordship, did not exist; you have always existed. It is not that 'all of us', I and you, shall cease to be 'in the future', i.e., beyond the present time; we shall always exist. Even as no doubt can be entertainted that I, the Supreme Self and Lord of all, am eternal, likewise, you (Arjuna and all others) who are embodied selves, also should be considered eternal.
The foregoing implies that the difference between the Lord, the sovereign over all, and the individual selves, as also the differences among the individual selves themselves, are real. This has been declared by the Lord Himself. For, different terms like 'I', 'you', 'these', 'all' and 'we' have been used by the Lord while explaining the truth of eternality in order to remove the misunderstanding of Arjuna who is deluded by ignorance.
[Now follows a refutation of the Upadhi theory of Bhaskara and the Ignorance theory of the Advaitins which deny any ultimate difference between the Lord and the Jivas.]
If we examine (Bhaskara's) theory of Upadhis (adjuncts), which states that the apparent differences among Jivas are due to adjuncts, it will have to be admitted that mention about differences is out of place when explaining the ultimate truth, because the theory holds that there are no such differences in reality. But that the differences mentioned by the Lord are natural, is taught by the Sruti also: 'Eternal among eternals, sentient among sentients, the one, who fulfils the desires of the many' (Sve. U. VI. 13, Ka. U. V. 13).
The meaning of the text is: Among the eternal sentient beings who are countless, He, who is the Supreme Spirit, fulfils the desires of all.'
As regards the theory of the Advaitins that the perception of difference is brought about by ignorance only and is not really real, the Supreme Being - whose vision must be true and who, therefore must have an immediate cognition of the differencelss and immutable and eternal consciousness as constituting the nature of the Atman in all authenticity, and who must thery be always free from all ignorance and its effects - cannot possibly perceive the so-called difference arising from ignornace. It is, therefore, unimaginable that He engages himself in activities such as teaching, which can proceed only from such a perception of differences arising from ignorance.
The argument that the Supreme Being, though possessed of the understanding of nom-duality, can still have the awareness of such difference persisting even after sublation, just as a piece of cloth may have been burnt up and yet continues to have the appearance of cloth, and that such a continuance of the subltated does not cause bondage - such an argument is invalid in the light of another analogy of a similar kind, namely, the perception of the mirage, which, when understood to be what it is, does not make one endeavour to fetch water therefrom. In the same way even if the impression of difference negated by the non-dualistic illumination persists, it cannot impel one to activities such as teaching; for the object to whom the instruction is to be imparted is discovered to be unreal. The idea is that just as the discovery of the non-existence of water in a mirage stops all effort to get water from it, so also when all duality is sublated by illumination, no activity like teaching disciples etc., can take place.
Nor can the Lord be conceived as having been previously ignorant and as attaining knowledge of unity through the scirptures, and as still being subject to the continuation of the stultified experiences. Such a position would stand in contradiction to the Sruti and the Smrti: 'He, who is all-comprehender' (Mun. U., 1. 1. 9); all knower and supreme and natural power of varied types are spoken of in Srutis, such as knowledge, strength and action' (Sve. U. 6. 8); 'I know, Arjuna, all beings of the past, present and future but no one knows Me,' etc. (Gita 7. 26).
And again, if the perception of difference and distinction are said to persist even after the unitary Self has been decisively understood, the estion will arise - to whom will the Lord and the succession of teachers of the tradition impart the knowledge in accordance with their understanding? The estion needs an answer. The idea is that knowledge of non-duality and perception of differences cannot co-exist. If it be replied by Advaitins holding the Bimba-Pratibimba (the original and reflections) theory that teachers give instructions to their own reflections in the form of disciples such as Arjuna, it would amount to an absurdity.
For, no one who is not out of his senses would undertake to give any instruction to his own reflections in mediums such as a precious stone, the blade of a sword or a mirror, knowing, as he does, that they are non-different from himself. The theory of the persistence of the sublated is thus impossible to maintain, as the knowledge of the unitary self destroys the beginningless ignorance in which differences falling outside the self are supposed to be rooted. 'The persistence of the sublated' does occur in cases such as the vision of the two moons, where the cause of the vision is the result of some real defect in eyesight, nor removable by the right understanding of the singleness of the moon. Even though the perception of the two moons may continue, the sublated cognition is rendered inconseential on the strength of strong contrary evidence. For, it will not lead to any activity appropriate for a real experience.
But in the present context (i.e. the Advaitic), the conception of difference, whose object and cause are admittedly unreal, is cancelled by the knowledge of reality. So the 'persistence of the sublated' can in no way happen. Thus, if the Supreme Lord and the present succession of preceptors have attained the understanding of (Non-dual) reality, their perception of difference and work such as teaching proceeding from that perception, are impossible. If, on the other hand, the perception of difference persists because of the continuance of ignorance and its cause, then these teachers are themselves ignorant of the truth, and they will be incapable of teaching the truth.
Further, as the preceptor has attained the knowledge of the unitary self and thery the ignorance concerning Brahman and all the effects of such ignorance are thus annihilated, there is no purpose in instructing the disciple. It it is held that the preceptor and his knowledge are just in the imagination of the disciple, the disciple and his knowledge are similarly the product of the imagination of the preceptor, and as such can not put an end to the ignorance in estion. If it is maintained that the disciple's knowledge destroys ignorance etc., because it contradicts the antecedent state of non-enlightenment, the same can be asserted of the preceptor's knowledge. The futility of such teachings is obvious. Enough of these unsound doctrines which have all been refuted.


2.13 As the self is eternal, one does not grieve, thinking that the self is lost, when an embodied self living in a body gives up the state of childhood and attains youth and other states. Similarly, the wise men, knowing that the self is eternal, do not grieve, when the self attains a body different from the present body. Hence the selves, being eternal, are not fit objects for grief.
This much has to be done here; the eternal selves because of Their being subject ot beginningless Karma become endowed with bodies suited to Their Karmas. To get rid of this bondage (of bodies), embodied beings perform duties like war appropriate to their stations in life with the help of the same bodies in an attitude of detachment from the fruits as prescribed by the scripture. Even to such aspirants, contacts with sense-objects give pleasure and pain, arising from cold, heat and such other things. But these experiences are to be endured till the acts enjoined in the scriptures come to an end.
The Lord explains the significance immediately afterwards:


2.14 As sound, touch, form, taste and smell with their bases, are the effects of subtle elements (Tanmatras), they are called Matras. The contact with these through the ear and other senses gives rise to feelings of pleasure and pain, in the form of heat and cold, softness and hardness. The words 'cold and heat' illustrate other sensations too. Endure these with courage till you have discharged your duties as prescribed by the scriptures. The brave must endure them patiently, as they 'come and go'. They are transient. When the Karmas, which cause bondage, are destroyed, this 'coming and going' will end.
The Lord now explains the purpose of this endurance:


2.15 That person endowed with courage, who considers pain as inevitable as pleasure, and who performs war and such other acts suited to his station in life without attachment to the results and only as a means of attaining immortality - one whom the impact of weapons in war etc., which involve soft or harsh contacts, do not trouble, that person only attains immortality, not a person like you, who cannnot bear grief. As the selves are immortal, what is to be done here, is this much only. This is the meaning.
Because of the immortality of the selves and the natural destructibility of the bodies, there is no cause for grief. It was told (previously): 'The wise grieve neither for the dead nor for the living' (2. 11). Now the Lord elucidates the same view.


2.16 'The unreal,' that is, the body, can never come into being. 'The real,' that is, the self, can never cease to be. The finale about these, the body and the self, which can be experienced, has been realised correctly by the seers of the Truth. As analyis ends in conclusion, the term 'finale' is here used. The meaning is this: Non-existence (i.e., perishableness) is the real nature of the body which is in itself insentient. Existence (i.e., imperishableness) is the real nature of the self, which is sentient. [What follows is the justification of describing the body as 'unreal' and as having 'never come into being.']
Non-existence has, indeed, the nature of perishableness, and existence has the nature of imperishableness, as Bhagavan Parasara has said: 'O Brahmana, apart from conscious entity there does not exist any group of things anywhere and at any time. Thus have I taught you what is real existence - how conscious entity is real, and all else is unreal' (V. P., 2.12.43 - 45). 'The Supreme Reality is considered as imperishable by the wise. There is no doubt that what can be obtained from a perishable substance is also perishable' (Ibid., 2.14.24). 'That entity which even by a change in time cannot come to possess a difference through modification etc., is real. What is that entity, O King? (It is the self who retains Its knowledge)' (Ibid., 2.13.100).
It is said here also: 'These bodies ৷৷. are said to have an end' (2.18) and 'Know That (the Atman) to be indestructible' (2.17). It is seen from this that this (i.e., perishableness of the body and imperishableness of the self) is the reason for the designating the Atman as 'existence' (Sattva) and body as 'non-existence' (Asvattva). This verse has no reference to the doctrine of Satkaryavada (i.e., the theory that effects are present in the cause), as such a theory has no relevance here. Arjuna is deluded about the true nature of the body and the self; so what ought to be taught to him in order to remove his delusion, is discrimination between these two - what is alified by perishablenss and what, by imperishableness. This (declaration) is introduced in the following way: 'For the dead, or for the living' (2.11).
Again this poin is made clear immediately (by the words), 'Know that to be indestructible ৷৷.' (2.17) and 'These bodies ৷৷. are said to have an end' (2.18).
How the imperishableness of the self is to be understood, Sri Krsna now teaches:


2.17 Know that the self in its essential nature is imperishable. The whole of insentient matter, which is different (from the self), is pervaded by the self. Because of pervasiveness and extreme subtlety, the self cannot be destroyed; for every entity other than the self is capable of being pervaded by the self, and hence they are grosser than It. Destructive agents like weapons, water, wind, fire etc., pervade the substances to be destroyed and disintegrate them. Even hammers and such other instruments rouse wind through violent contact with the objects and thery destroy their objects. So, the essential nature of the self being subtler than anything else, It is imperishable.
(The Lord) now says that the bodies are perishable:


2.18 The root 'dih' means 'to grow.' Hence these bodies (Dehas) are characterised by complexity. They have an end - their nature is perishablity. For, jugs and such other things which are characterised by complexity are seen to have an end. The bodies of the embodied self, which are made of conglomerated elements, serve the purpose of experiencing the effects of Karmas, as stated in Brh. U. IV. 4.5, 'Auspicious embodiments are got through good actions.' Such bodies perish when Karmas are exhausted. Further the self is imperishable. Why? Because it is not measurable. Neither can It be conceived as the object of knowledge, but only as the subject (knower). It will be taught later on: 'He who knows It is called the knower of the Field by those who know this (13.1).
Besides, the self is not seen to be made up of many (elements). Because in the perception 'I am the knower' throughout the body, only something other than the body is understood as possessing an invariable form as the knower. Further, this knower cannot be dismembered and seen in different places as is the case with the body. Therefore the self is eternal, for (1) It is not a complex being of a single form; (2) It is the knowing subject; and (3) It pervades all. On the contrary, the body is perishable, because (1) it is complex; (2) it serves the purpose of experiencing the fruits of Karma by the embodied self; (3) it has a plurality of parts and (4) it can be pervaded. Therefore, as the body is by nature perishable and the self by nature is eternal, both are not objects fit for grief. Hence, bearing with courage the inevitable strike of weapons, sharp or hard, liable to be received by you and others, begin the action called war without being attached to the fruits but for the sake of attaining immortality.


2.19 With regard to "This" viz., the self, whose nature has been described above, he who thinks of It as the slayer, i.e., as the cause of slaying, and he who thinks 'This' (self) as slain by some cause or other - both of them do not know. As this self is eternal for the reasons mentioned above, no possible cause of destruction can slay It and for the same reason, It cannot be slain. Though the root 'han' (to slay) has the self for its object, it signifies causing the separation of the body from the self and not destruction of the self. Scriptural texts like 'You shall not cause injury to beings' and 'The Brahmana shall not be killed'? (K. Sm. 8.2) indicate unsanctioned actions, causing separation of the body from the self. [In the above otes, slaughter in an ethical sense is referred to, while the text refers to killing or separating the self from the body in a metaphsyical sense. This is made explicit in the following verse].


2.20 As the self is eternal for the reasons mentioned (above), and hence free from modifications, it is said that all the attributes of the insentient (body) like birth, death etc., never touch the self. In this connection, as the statement, 'It is never born, It never dies' is in the present tense, it should be understood that the birth and death which are experienced by all in all bodies, do not touch the self. The statement 'Having come into being once, It never ceases to be' means that this self, having emerged at the beginning of a Kalpa (one aeon of manifestation) will not cease to be at the end of the Kalpa (i.e., will emerge again at the beginning of the next Kalpa unless It is liberated). This is the meaning - that birth at the beginning of a Kalpa in bodies such as those of Brahman and others, and death at the end of a Kalpa as stated in the scriptures, do not touch the self. Hence, the selves in all bodies, are unborn, and therefore eternal. It is abiding, not connected, like matter, with invisible modifications taking place. It is primeval; the meaning is that It existed from time immemorial; It is even new i.e., It is capable of being experienced always as fresh. Therefore, when the body is slain the self is not slain.


2.21 He who knows the self to be eternal, as It is indestructible, unborn and changeless - how can that person be said to cause the death of the self, be it of the self existing in the bodies of gods or animals or immovables? Whom does he kill? The meaning is - how can he destroy any one or cause anyone to slay? How does he become an instrument for slaying? The meaning is this: the feeling of sorrow: 'I cause the slaying of these selves, I slay these,' has its basis solely in ignorance about the true nature of the self.
Let it be granted that what is done is only separation of the bodies from the eternal selves. Even then, when the bodies, which are instruments for the experience of agreeable pleasures, perish, there still exists reason for sorrow in their separation from the bodies. To this (Sri Krsna) replies:


2.22 That those who give up their bodies in a righteous war get more beauteous bodies than before, is known through the scriptures. Casting off worn-out garments and taking new and beautiful ones, can be only a cause of joy, as seen here in the world in the case of new garments.
Once again Sri Krsna emphasises for easy understanding the indestructibility of the self, taught before: 'Know that to be indestructible by which all this is pervaded' (II.17) and confirms it thus:


2.23 - 2.24 Weapons, fire, water and air are incapable of cleaving, burning, wetting and drying the self; for, the nature of the self is to pervade all elements; It is present everywhere; for, It is subtler than all the elements; It is not capable of being pervaded by them; and cleaving, burning, wetting and drying are actions which can take place only by pervading a substance. Therefore the self is eternal. It is stable, immovable and primeval. The meaning is that It is unchanging, unshakable and ancient.


2.25 The self is not made manifest by those Pramanas (means of knowledge) by which objects susceptible of being cleft etc., are made manifest; hence It is unmanifest, being different in kind from objects susceptible to cleaving etc., It is inconceivable, being different in kind from all objects. As It does not possess the essential nature of any of them. It cannot even be conceived. Therefore, It is unchanging, incapable of modifications. So knowing this self to be possessed of the above mentioned alities, it does not become you to feel grief for Its sake.


2.26 Besides, if you consider this self as identical with the body, which is constantly born and constantly dies - which is nothing other than these characteristics of the body mentioned above -, even then it does not become you to feel grief; because, birth and death are inevitable for the body, whose nature is modification.


2.27 For what has originated, destruction is certain - it is seen to be inevitable. Similarly what has perished will inevitably originate. How should this be understood - that there is origination for that (entity)which has perished? It is seen that an existing entity only can originate and not a non-existent one. Origination, annihilation etc., are merely particular states of an existent entity.
Now thread etc., do really exist. When arranged in a particular way, they are called clothes etc. It is seen that even those who uphold the doctrine that the effect is a new entity (Asatkarya-vadins) will admit this much that no new entity over and above the particular arrangement of threads is seen. It is not tenable to hold that this is the coming into being of a new entity, since, by the process of manufacture there is only attainment of a new name and special functions. No new entity emerges.
Origination, annihilation etc., are thus particular stages of an existent entity. With regard to an entity which has entered into a stage known as origination, its entry into the opposite condition is called annihilation. Of an evolving entity, a seqence of evolutionary stages is inevitable. For instance, clay becomes a lump, jug, a potsherd, and (finally) powder. Here, what is called annihilation is the attainment of a succeeding stage by an entity which existed previously in a preceding stage. And this annihilation itself is called birth in that stage. Thus, the seence called birth and annihilation being inevitable for an evolving entity, it is not worthy of you to grieve.
Now Sri Krsna says that not even the slightest grief arising from seeing an entity passing from a previous existing stage to an opposite stage, is justifiable in regard to human beings etc.


2.28 Human beings etc., (i.e., bodies) exist as entities; their previous stages are unknown, their middle stages in the form of man etc., are known, and their (final) and future stages are unknown. As they thus exist in their own natural stages, there is no cause for grief.
After thus saying that there is no cause for grief even according to the view which identifies the body with the self, Sri Krsna proceeds to say that it is hard to find one who can be said to have truly perceived the Atman or spoken about It or heard about It or gained a true conception of It by hearing. For the Atman, which is actually different from the body, is of a wonderful nature.


2.29 Among innumerable beings, someone, who by great austerity has got rid of sins and has increased his merits, realises this self possessing the above mentioned nature, which is wonderful and distinct in kind from all things other than Itself. Such a one speaks of It to another. Thus, someone hears of It. And even after hearing of It, no one knows It exactly that It really exists. The term 'ca' (and) implies that even amongst the seers, the speakers and hearers, one with authentic percepetion, authentic speech and authentic hearing, is a rarity.


2.30 The self within the body of everyone such as gods etc., must be considered to be eternally imperishable, though the body can be killed. Therefore, all beings from gods to immovable beings, even though they possess different forms, are all uniform and eternal in their nature as described above. The ineality and the perishableness pertain only to the bodies. Therefore, it is not fit for you to feel grief for any of the beings beginning from gods etc., and not merely for Bhisma and such others.


2.31 Further, even though there is killing of life in this war which has begun, it is not fit for you to waver, considering your own duty, as in the Agnisomiya and other sacrifices involving slaughter. To a Ksatriya, there is no greater good than a righteous war, begun for a just cause. It will be declared in the Gita: 'Valour, non-defeat (by the enemies), fortitude, adroitness and also not fleeing from battle, generosity, lordliness - these are the duties of the Ksatriya born of his very nature.' (18.43).
In Agnisomiya etc., no injury is caused to the animal to be immolated; for, according to the Vedic Text, the victim, a he-goat, after abandoning an inferior body, will attain heaven etc., with a beautiful body. The Text pertaining to immolation declares: 'O animal, by this (immolation) you will never die, you are not destroyed. You will pass through happy paths to the realm of the gods, where the virtuous only reach and not the sinful. May the god Savitr give you a proper place.' (Yaj. 4.6.9.46). Likewise the attainment of more beautiful bodies by those who die here in this war has been declared in the Gita, 'As a man casts off worn-out garments and takes others that are new ৷৷.' (2.22). Hence, just as lancing and such other operations of a surgeon are for curing a patient, the immolation of the sacrificial animal in the Agnisomiya etc., is only for its good.


2.32 Only the fortunate Ksatriyas, i.e., the meritorious ones, gian such a war as this, which has come unsought, which is the means for the attainment of immeasurable bliss, and which gives an unobstructed pathway to heaven.


2.33 If in delusion, you do not wage this war, which has started and which is the duty of a Ksatriya, then, owing to the non-performance of your immediate and incumbent duty, you will lose the immeasurable bliss which is the fruit of discharging your duty and the immeasurable fame which is the fruit of victory. In addition, you will incur extreme sin.


2.34 You will then incur not merely the loss of all happiness and honour but will be the object of disrespect by all people, the alifies and even the unalified, for all time. They will ridicule you saying, 'When the battle began, Arjuna ran away.' It it be asked, 'What if it be so?", the reply is: 'To one who is honoured by all for courage, prowess, valour, etc., this kind of dishonour arising from the reverse of these attributes, is worse than death? The meaning is that itself would be better for you than this kind of dishonour.
If it is said, 'How could dishonour accrue to me, who am a hero, but have withdrawn from the battle only out of love and compassion for my relatives?' the reply is as follows:


2.35 Great warriors like Karna, Duryodhana, etc., hitherto held you in high esteem as a heroic enemy. Now by refraining from battle when it has begun, you will appear to them as despicable and easily defeatable. These great warriors will think of you as withdrawing from battle out of fear. Because turning away from battle does not happen in the case of brave enemies through affection etc., for relatives. It can happen only through fear of enemies.
Moreover


2.36 Moreover, your enemies, the sons of Dhrtarastra, will make many remarks unutterably slanderous and disparaging to heroes, saying, 'How can this Partha stand in the presence of us, who are heroes, even for a moment? His prowess is elsewhere than in our presence.' Can there be anything more painful to you than this? You yourself will understand that death is preferable to subjection to disparagement of this kind.
Sri Krsna now says that for a hero, enemies being slain by oneself and oneself being slain by enemies are both conducive to supreme bliss.


2.37 If you are slain in a righteous war by enemies, you shall thery attain supreme bliss. Or, slaying the enemies, you shall enjoy this kingdom without obstacles. As the duty called war, when done without attachment to the fruits, becomes the means for winning supreme bliss, you will attain that supreme bliss. Therefore, arise, assured that engagement in war (here the duty) is the means for attaining release, which is known as man's supreme goal. This alone is suitable for you, the son of Kunti. This is the purport.
Sri Krsna then explains to the aspirant for liberation how to conduct oneself in war.


2.38 Thus, knowing the self to be eternal, different from the body and untouched by all corporeal alities, remaining unaffected by pleasure and pain resulting from the weapon-strokes etc., inevitable in a war, as also by gain and loss of wealth, victory and defeat, and keeping yourself free from attachment to heaven and such other frutis, begin the battle considering it merely as your own duty. Thus, you will incur no sin. Here sin means transmigratory existence which is misery. The purport is that you will be liberarted from the bondage of transmigratory existence.
Thus, after teaching the knowledge of the real nature of the self, Sri Krsna begins to expound the Yoga of work, which, when preceded by it (i.e., knowledge of the self), constitutes the means for liberation.


2.39 'Sankhya' means 'intellect,' and the truth about the Atman, which is determinable by the intellect, is 'Sankhyam'. Concerning the nature of the self which has to be known, whatever Buddhi has to be taught, has been taught to you in the passage beginning with, 'It is not that I did not exist' (II.12) and ending with the words, 'Therefore, you shall not grieve for any being' (II.30). The disposition of mind (Buddhi) which is reired for the performance of works preceded by knowledge of the self and which thus constitutes the means of attaining release, that is here called by the term Yoga. It will be clearly told later on, 'Work done with desire for fruits is far inferior to work done with evennes of mind' (II. 49). What Buddhi or attitude of mind is reired for making your act deserve the name of Yoga, listen to it now. Endowed with that knowledge, you will be able to cast away the bondage of Karma. 'Karma-bandha' means the bondage due to Karma i.e., the bondage of Samsara.
Now Sri Krsna explains the glory of works associated with the Buddhi to be described hereafter:


2.40 Here, in Karma Yoga, there is no loss of 'Abhikrama' or of effort that has been put in; 'loss' means the loss of efficacy to bring about the fruits. In Karma Yoga if work is begun and left unfinished, and the continuity is broken in the middle, it does not remain fruitless, as in the case of works undertaken for their fruits. No evil result is acired if the continuity of work is broken. Even a little of this Dharma known as Karma Yoga or Niskama Karma (unselfish action without desire for any reward) gives protection from the great fear, i.e., the fear of transmigratory existence.
The same purport is explained later thus: 'Neither in this world nor the next, O Arjuna, there is annihilation for him' (6.40). But in works, Vedic and secular, when there is interruption in the middle, not only do they not yield fruits, but also there is accrual of evil.
Now, Sri Krsna distinguishes the Buddhi or mental disposition concerned with those acts which constitute a means for attaining release from those which are concerned with the acts meant for gaining the desired objects:


2.41 Here, i.e., in every ritual sanctioned by the scriptures, the Buddhi or disposition of mind marked by resolution, is single. The Buddhi marked by resolution is the Buddhi concerned with acts which must be performed by one desirous of release (and not any kind of work). The term 'Vyavasaya' menas unshakable conviction: this Buddhi (disposition of mind) comes out of prior determination about the true nature of the self. But the Buddhi concerning the performance of rituals of fulfill certain desires, is marked by irresolution; because here only this much knowledge of the self is sufficient - 'the self (as an entity) exists differently from the body.' Such a general understanding is sufficient to alify for performing acts giving fulfilment of certain desires. It does not reire any definite knowledge about the true nature of the self. For, even if there is no such knowledge, desires for heaven etc., can arise, the means for their attainment can be adopted, and the experience of those fruits can take place. For this reason there is no contradiction in the teaching of the scriptures. [The contradiction negated here is how can the same scriptural acts produce different results - fulfilment of desires and liberation. The difference in the disposition of the mind accouts of it.]
The Buddhi (mental disposition) marked by resolution has a single aim, because it relates to the attainment of a single fruit. For, as far as one desiring release is concerned, all acts are enjoined only for the accomplishment of that single fruit. Therefore, since the purpose of the scriptures here is one only (i.e., liberation), the Buddhi regarding all rituals taught in the scriptures too is only one, as far as liberation-seekers are concerned. For example, the set of six sacrifices, beginning with Agneya with all their subsidiary processes (though enjoined in different passages) forms the subject of a single injunction, as they are all for the attainment of a single fruit. Conseently the Buddhi concerning these is one only. The meaning of the verse under discussion must be construed in the same manner. But the Buddhi of the irresolute ones who are engaged in rituals for winning such fruits as heaven, sons, cattle, food etc., are endless, frutis being endless. In rituals like Darsapurnamasa (new moon and full moon sacrifice), even though attainment of a single fruit (heaven) is enjoined, there accrues to these the character of having many branches on account of the mention of many secondary fruits as evidenced by such passages as, 'He desires a long life.' Therefore the Buddhi of irresolute ones has many branches and are endless.
The purport is: In performing obligatory and occasional rituals, all fruits, primary and secondary, promised in the scriptures, should be abandoned, with the idea that release or salvation is the only purpose of all scripture-ordained rituals. These rituals should be performed without any thought of selfish gains. In addition, acts motivated by desires (Kamya-karmas) also should be performed according to one's own capacity, after abandoning all desire for fruits and with the conviction that they also, when performed in that way, form the means for attainment of release. They should be looked upon as eal to obligatory and occasional rites suited to one's own station and stage in life.
Sri Krsna condemns those who perform acts for the attainment of objects of desire:


2.42 - 2.44 The ignorant, whose knowledge is little, and who have as their sole aim the attainment of enjoyment and power, speak the flowery language i.e., having its flowers (show) only as fruits, which look apparently beautiful at first sight. They rejoice in the letter of the Vedas i.e., they are attached to heaven and such other results (promised in the Karma-kanda of the Vedas). They say that there is nothing else, owing to their intense attachment to these results. They say that there is no fruit superior to heaven etc. They are full of worldly desires and their minds are highly attached to secular desires. They hanker for heaven, i.e. think of the enjoyment of the felicities of heaven, after which one can again have rirth which offers again the opportunity to perform varied rites devoid of true knowledge and leads towards the attainment of enjoyments and power once again.
With regard to those who cling to pleasure and power and whose understanding is contaminated by that flowery speech relating to pleasure and lordly powers, the aforesaid mental disposition characterised by resolution, will not arise in their Samadhi. Samadhi here means the mind. The knowledge of the self will not arise in such minds. In the minds of these persons, there cannot arise the mental disposition that looks on all Vedic rituals as means for liberation based on the determined conviction about the real form of the self. Hence, in an aspirant for liberation, there should be no attachment to rituals out of the conviction that they are meant for the acisition of objects of desire only.
It may be estioned why the Vedas, which have more of love for Jivas than thousands of parents, and which are endeavouring to save the Jivas, should prescribe in this way rites whose fruits are infinitesimal and which produce only new births. It can also be asked if it is proper to abandon what is given in the Vedas. Sri Krsna replies to these estions.


2.45 The word Traigunya means the three Gunas - Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Here the term Traigunya denotes persons in whom Sattva, Rajas and Tamas are in abundance. The Vedas in prescribing desire-oriented rituals (Kamya-karmas) have such persons in view. Because of their great love, the Vedas teach what is good to those in whom Tamas, Rajas and Sattva preponderate. If the Vedas had not explained to these persons the means for the attainment of heaven etc., according to the Gunas, then those persons who are not interested in liberation owing to absence of Sattva and preponderance of Rajas and Tamas in them, would get completely lost amidst what should not be resorted to, without knowing the means for attaining the results they desire. Hence the Vedas are concerned with the Gunas. Be you free from the three Gunas. Try to acire Sattva in abundance; increase that alone. The purport is: do not nurse the preponderance of the three Gunas in their state of inter-mixture; do not cultivate such preponderance.
Be free from the pairs of opposites; be free from all the characteristics of worldly life. Abide in pure Sattva; be established in Sattva, in its state of purity without the admixture of the other two Gunas. If it is estioned how that is possible, the reply is as follows. Never care to acire things nor protect what has been acired. While abandoning the acisition of what is not reired for self-realisation, abandon also the conservation of such things already acired. You can thus be established in self-control and thery become an aspirant after the essentail nature of the self. 'Yoga' is acisition of what has not been acired; 'Ksema' is preservation of things already acired. Abandoning these is a must for an aspirant after the essential nature of the self. If you conduct yourself in this way, the preponderance of Rajas and Tamas will be annihilated, and pure Sattva will develop.
Besides, all that is taught in the Vedas is not fit to be utilised by all.


2.46 Whatever use, a thirsty person has for a reservoir, which is flooded with water on all sides and which has been constructed for all kinds of purposes like irrigation, only to that extent of it, i.e., enough to drink will be of use to the thirsty person and not all the water. Likewise, whatever in all the Vedas from the means for release to a knowing Brahmana, i.e., one who is established in the study of the Vedas and who aspires for release only to that extent is it to be accepted by him and not anything else.
Sri Krsna now says that this much alone is to be accepted by an aspirant, established in Sattva:


2.47 As for obligatory, occasional and desiderative acts taught in the Vedas and associated with some result or other, you, an aspirant established in Sattva, have the right only to perform them: You have no right to the fruits known to be derived from such acts. Acts done with a desire for fruit bring about bondage. But acts done without an eye on fruits form My worship and become a means for release. Do not become an agent of acts with the idea of being the reaper of their fruits. Even when you, who are established in pure Sattva and are desrious of release, perform acts, you should not look upon yourself as the agent. Likewise, it is necessary to contemplate yourself as not being the cause of even appeasing hunger and such other bodily necessities. Later on it will be said that both of these, agency of action and desire for fruits, should be considered as belonging to Gunas, or in the alternative to Me who am the Lord of all. Thinking thus, do work. With regard to inaction, i.e., abstaining from performance of duties, as when you said, 'I will not fight,' let there be no attachment to such inaction in you. The meaning is let your interest be only in the discharge of such obligatory duties like this war in the manner described above.
Sri Krsna makes this clear in the following verse:


2.48 Abandoning the attachment to kingdom, relatives etc., and established in Yoga, engage in war and such other activities. Perform these with eanimity as regards success and failure resulting from victory etc., which are inherent in them. This eanimity with regard to success and failure is called here by the term Yoga, in the expression 'established in Yoga.' Yoga is eanimity of mind which takes the form of evenness in success and failure.
Sri Krsna explains why this is repeatedly said:


2.49 All other kinds of action are far inferior to those done with evenness of mind, which consists in the renunciation of the main result and with eanimity towards success or failure in respect of the secondary results. Between the two kinds of actions, the one with eanimity and the other with attachment, the former associated with eanimity removes all the sufferings of Samsara and leads to release which is the highest object of human existence. The latter type of actions, which is pursued with an eye on results, leads one to Samsara whose character is endless suffering. Thus when an act is being done, take refuge in Buddhi (evenness of mind). Refuge means abode. Live in that Buddhi, is the meaning. 'Miserable are they who act with a motive for results': it means, 'Those who act with attachment to the results, etc., are miserable, as they will continue in Samsara.'


2.50 He, who is established in evenness of mind in the performance of actions, relinishes good and evil Karmas which have accumulated from time immemorial causing bondage endlessly. Therefore acire this aforesaid evenness of mind (Buddhi Yoga). Yoga is skill in action. That is, this evenness of mind when one is engaged in action, is possible through great skill, i.e., ability.


2.51 Those who possess this evenness of mind while performing actions and relinish their fruits, are freed from the bondage of rirth, and go to the region beyond all ills. 'Hi' means that this dictum or teaching is well known in all the Upanisads.


2.52 If you act in this manner and get freed from impurities, your intellect will pass beyond the tangle of delusion. The dense impurity of sin is the nature of that delusion which generates attachment to infinitesimal results, of which you have already heard much from us and will hear more later on. You will then immediately feel, of your own accord, renunciation or feeling of disgust for them all.
Sri Krsna now teaches the goal called self-realisation (Yoga) which results from the performance of duty as taught in the passage beginning with 'Now, listen to this with regard to Karma Yoga' (2.39) which is based on the knowledge of the real nature of the self gained through the refinement of the mind.


2.53 Here 'Sruti' means hearing (and not the Veda). When your intellect, which, by hearing from us, has become specially enlightened, having for its object the eternal, unsurpassed and subtle self - which belongs to a class different from all other entities -, then the intellect is firmly fixed, i.e., in a single psychosis and stands unshaken. In such a concentrated mind, purified by the performance of duties without attachment, will be generated true Yoga, which consists in the vision of the self. What is said is this: Karma Yoga, which presupposes the knowledge of the real nature of the self obtained from the scriptures, leads to a firm devotion to knowledge known as the state of firm wisdom; and the state of 'firm wisdom;' which is in the form of devotion to knowledge, generates the vision of the self; this vision is here called Yoga.
Arjuna, thus taught, estions about the nature of 'firm wisdom' which constitutes the means for the attainment of Yoga and which itself is attainable through Karma Yoga which consists in work with detachment, and also about the mode of behaviour of a man of 'firm wisdom.'


2.54 Arjuna said What is the speech of a man of firm wisdom who is abiding with the mind controlled? What words can describe his state? What is his nature? This is the meaning of 'How does a man of firm wisdom speak etc.?'
His specific conduct is now described as his nature can be inferred therefrom.


2.55 The Lord said When a person is satisfied in himself with himself, i.e. when his mind depends on the self within himself; and being content with that, expels all the desires of the mind which are different from that state of mind - then he is said to be a man of firm wisdom. This is the highest form of devotion of knowledge.
Then, the lower state, not far below it, of one established in firm wisdom, is described:


2.56 Even when there are reasons for grief like separation from beloved ones, his mind is not perturbed, i.e., he is not aggrieved. He has no longing to enjoy pleasures, i.e., even though the things which he likes are near him, he has no longing for them. He is free from desire and anger; desire is longing for objects not yet obtained; he is free from this. Fear is affliction produced from the knowledge of the factors which cause separation from the beloved or from meeting with that which is not desirable; he is free from this. Anger is a disturbed state of one's own mind which produces affliction and which is aimed at another sentient being who is the cause of separation from the beloved or of confrontation with what is not desirable. He is free from this.
A sage of this sort, who constantly meditates on the self, is said to be of firm wisdom.
Then, the next state below this is described:


2.57 He, who, has no love for all pleasing objects, i.e., who is indifferent to them, and who does not feel attraction or repulsion when he is united with or separated from attractive or repulsive objects respectively, who neither rejoices at the former, nor hates the latter - he also is of firm wisdom.
Sri Krsna now mentions the next lower state.


2.58 When one is able to draw the senses away from the sense-objects on every side when the senses try to contact the sense-objects, just as a tortoise draws in its limbs, and is capable of fixing his mind on the self - he too is of firm wisdom. Thus there are four stages of devotion to knowledge, each stage being perfected through the succeeding stage.
Now Sri Krsna speaks of the difficulty of the attainment of firm devotion to knowledge and the means of that attainment.


2.59 The sense objects are the food of the senses. From the abstinent embodied being, i.e., from one who has withdrawn his senses from objects, these sense-objects, being rejected by him, turn away, but not the relish for them. Relish means hankering. The meaning is that the hankering for the sense-objects does not go away by abstinence alone. But even this hankering will go away, when one sees that the essential nature of the self is superior to the sense-objects and that the realisation of this self gives greater happiness than the enjoyment of sense-objects.


2.60 Except by the experience of the self, the hankering for objects will not go away. When the hankering for the sense-objects does not go away, the senses of even a wise man, though he is ever striving to subdue them, become refractory, i.e., become violent and carry away perforce the mind. Thus, the subduing of the senses depends on the vision of the self, and the vision of the self depends on the subduing of the senses. Conseently, i.e., because of this mutual dependence, firm devotion to knowledge is difficult to achieve.


2.61 With a desire to overcome this mutual dependence between the subduing of the senses and vision of the self, one has to coner the senses which are difficult to subdue on account of their attachment to sense-objects. So, focussing the mind on Me who am the only auspicious object for meditation, let him remain steadfast. When the mind is focussed on Me as its object, then such a mind, purified by the burning away of all impurities and devoid of attachment to the senses, is able to control the senses. Then the mind with the senses under control will be able to experience the self. As said in Visnu Purana, 'As the leaping fire fanned by the wind burns away a forest of dry trees, so Visnu, who is in the hearts of all the Yogins, destroys all the sins.' Sri Krsna teaches the same here: 'He whose senses are under control, his knowledge is firmly set.'
Sri Krsna says: 'One who endeavours to subdue the senses, depending on one's own exertions, and does not focus the mind on Me in this way, becomes lost.'


2.62 Indeed, in respect of a person, whose attachment to sense-objects is expelled but whose mind is not focussed on Me, even though he controls the senses, contemplation on sense-objects is unavoidable on account of the impressions of sins from time immemorial. Again attachment increases fully in 'a man who thinks about sense-objects'. From attachment arises desire.' What is called 'desire' is the further stage of attachment. After reaching that stage, it is not possible for a man to stay without experiencing the sense-objects. 'From such desire arises anger.' When a desire exists without its object being nearby, anger arises against persons nearby under the following. 'Our desire is thwarted by these persons.'
'From anger there comes delusion'. Delusion is want of discrimination between what ought to be done and what ought not to be done. Not possessing that discrimination one does anything and everything. Then there follows the failure of memory, i.e., of the impressions of the earlier efforts of sense control, when one strives again to control the senses.


2.63 'From the loss of memory there comes the destruction of discrimination.' The meaning is that there will be destruction of the effect of efforts made earlier to attain the knowledge of the self. From the destruction of discrimination, one becomes lost, i.e., is sunk in Samsara or worldliness.


2.64 Having focussed, in the way already described, the mind on Me - the Lord of all and the auspicious object of meditation, he who goes through, i.e., considers with contempt the sense-objects, with senses under control and free from hate and attraction by reason of all impurities of mind being burnt out - such a person has a disciplined self, i.e., disciplined mind. He attains serenity. The meaning is that his mind will be free of impurities.


2.65 When the mind of this person gets serene, he gets rid of all sorrows originating from contact with matter. For, in respect of the peson whose mind is serene, i.e., is free from the evil which is antagonistic to the vision of the self, the Buddhi, having the pure self for its object, becomes established immediately. Thus, when the mind is serene, the loss of all sorrow surely arises.


2.66 In him who does not focus his mind on Me but is engaged only in the control of senses by his own exertion, the Buddhi or the right disposition that is concerned with the pure self never arises. Therefore he fails in the practice of meditation on the self. In one who cannot think of the pure self, there arises the desire for sense objects; in him serenity does not arise. How can eternal and unsurpassed bliss be generated in him who is not serene but is attached to sense-objects? [The idea is that without the aid of devotion to God, the effort to control the senses by one's will power alone will end in failure.]
Sri Krsna speaks again of the calamity that befalls one who does not practise the control of the senses in the way prescribed above:


2.67 That mind, which is allowed by a person to be submissive to, i.e., allowed to go after the senses which go on operating, i.e., experiencing sense-objects, such a mind loses its inclination towards the pure self. The meaning is that it gets inclined towards sense-objects. Just as a contrary wind forcibly carries away a ship moving on the waters, in the name manner wisdon also is carried away from such a mind. [The idea is that the pursuit of sense pleasures dulls one's spiritual inclination, and the mind ultimately succumbs to them unresisting.]


2.68 Therefore, in the way described above, he whose mind is focussed on Me the auspicious object for meditation, and whose senses are thery restrained from sense-objects in everyway, in his mind alone wisdom is firmly set.
Sri Krsna now speaks of the state of attainment by one whose senses are subdued and whose mind is serene.


2.69 That Buddhi (understanding) which has the self for its object, is night to all beings, i.e., is obscure like night to all. But he, who has subdued the senses and is serene, is awake in respect of the self. The meaning is that he has the vision of the self. All beings are awake, i.e., are actively cognisant in respect of objects of the senses like sound. But such sense objects are like things enshrouded by night to the sage who is awake to the self.


2.70 The river waters enter into the sea which is full by itself and is thus the same, i.e., unchanging in shape. The sea exhibits no special increase or decrease, whether the waters or rivers enter it or not. Even so do all objects of desire, i.e., objects of sense perception like sound etc., enter into a self-controlled one, i.e., they produce only sensorial impressions but no reaction from him. Such a person will attain peace. The meaning is that he alone attains to peace, who by reason of the contentment coming from the vision of the self, feels no disturbance when objects of sense like sound, etc., come within the ken of the senses or when they do not come. This is not the case with one who runs after desires. Whoever is agitated by sound and other objects, never attains to peace.


2.71 What are desired, they are called the objects of desire. These are sound and other sense-objects. The person, who wants peace must abandon all sense-objects such as sound, touch etc. He should have no longing for them. He should be without the sense of 'mineness' regarding them, as that sense arises from the misconception that the body, which is really non-self, is the self. He who lives in this way attains to peace after seeing the self.


2.72 This state of performing disinterested work which is preceded by the knowledge of the eternal self and which is characterised by firm wisdom, is the Brahmi-state, which secures the attainment of the Brahman (the self). After attaining such a state, he will not be deluded, i.e., he will not get again the mortal coil. Reaching this state even during the last years of life, he wins the blissful Brahman (the self) i.e., which is full of beatitude. The meaning is that he attains the self which is constituted of nothing but bliss.
Thus in the second chapter, the Lord wanted to remove the delusion of Arjuna, who did not know the real nature of the self and also did not realize that the activity named 'war' (here an ordained duty) is a means for attaining the nature of Sankhya or the self. Arjuna was under the delusion that the body is itself the self, and dominated by that delusion, had retreated from battle. He was therefore taught the knowledge called 'Sankhya' or the understanding of the self, and Yoga or what is called the path of practical work without attachment. These together have as their objective the attainment of steady wisdom (Sthitaprajnata)
This has been explained in the following verse by Sri Yamunacarya: Sankhya and Yoga, which comprehend within their scope the understanding of the eternal self and the practical way of disinterested action respectively, were imparted in order to remove Arjuna's delusion.
Through them the state of firm wisdom can be reached.


3.1 'Arjuna said If you consider that knowledge is superior to works, why do you engage me in this terrible deed?' What is said here is this: If the firm adherence to knowledge is the only means to the vision of the self, then how can one accept the idea that devotion to works (Karma) leads to it? It was said before that this firm devotion to knowledge, which forms the means for the vision of the self, could arise by the cessation of the activities of all the senses and the mind in relation to their respective objects such as sound. If the vision of the self is to be attained, which arises by the cessation of the activities of the senses, I should be guided to engage myself solely to acire firm devotion to knowledge, which is preceded by the abandoning of all works. For what purpose, then, do you engage me in this terrible deed, which consists in the activities of all the senses, and is thus an obstacle for the vision of the self?


3.2 Conseently, it appears to me as if 'you confuse me with statements that seem to contradict each other.' For, firm devotion to knowledge which forms the means for the vision of the self and which is of the nature of stopping the operations of the senses on the one hand, and on the other exhortation to action which is of a nature opposite to it, i.e., knowledge, as a means to the same vision of that Atman - these statements are contradictory and confusing. Therefore tell me clearly the path following which I can take a determined course and win the Supreme Being.


3.3 The Lord said You have not properly understood what I taught you before. In this world, full of people with varying degrees of alifications, I have taught in the days of yore two ways, that of knowledge (Jnana Yoga) and that of works, according to the alifications of aspirants. There is no contradiction in this. It is not possible for all people of the world in whom the desire for release has arisen, to become capable immediately for the practice of Jnana Yoga. But he who performs the worship of the Supreme Person without desire for fruits and thery gets completely rid of inner impurities and keeps his senses unagitated - he becomes competent for the path of knowledge.
That all activities are for performing the worship of the Supreme Person will be taught in the Gita verse, 'He from `whom the activities of all beings arise and by whom all this is pervaded - by worshipping Him with his duty man reaches perfection' (18.46). Earlier also performance of activities without any attachment to the fruits is enjoined by the verse beginning with. 'You have the right to work alone ৷৷.' (2.47). Next for those whose intellect has been redeemed by this kind of discipline, is enjoined Jnana Yoga by the words, 'When a man renounces all the desires ৷৷.' (2.55).
Conseently, firm devotion to Jnana Yoga is taught only to the Sankhyas, i.e., those persons who are competent to follow the discipline of the knowledge of the self, and Karma Yoga to Yogins, i.e., to those competent for the path of work. Sankhya means Buddhi and those who are endowed with the Buddhi (intellectual or mental disposition) having only the self for its object, are Sankhyans. Therefore those who are not fit for this are alified for Karma Yoga. Those who are possessed of Buddhi which is agitated by objects of the senses, are the persons alified for Karma Yoga, whereas those whose Buddhi is not thus agitated, are alified for Jnana Yoga. Therefore nothing contradictory and confusing is taught.
It is said in the next stanza that Jnana Yoga is difficult to practise all at once, even when the desire for release arises in any worldy person:


3.4 Not by non-performance of the acts prescribed by the scriptures, does a person attain freedom from Karma, i.e., Jnana Yoga; nor by ceasing to perform such actions as are prescribed in the scriptures and are already begun by him. For, success is achieved by actions done without attachment to the fruits and by way of worshipping the Supreme Person. Hence devoid of it (Karma-nistha), one does not achieve Jnana-nistha. By those persons who have not worshipped Govinda by acts done without attachment to fruits and whose beginningless and endless accumulation of evil has not been annulled thery, constant contemplation on the self is not possible. It can be done only if it is preceded by the attainment of a state in which the operation of the senses have been freed from disturbance.
This view is put forward by the Lord:


3.5 In this world, no man can rest without doing work; for every person, even though he may have determined, 'I will not do anything,' is caused to act, i.e., is compelled to act according to the Gunas born of Prakrti. The Gunas are Sattva, Rajas and Tamas which increase in accordance with his old Karma. Conseently, Jnana Yoga can be attained only by means of a purified inner organ after annulling the old accumulation of sins by means of Karma Yoga of the aforesaid characteristics and bringing Sattva and other Gunas under control.
Otherwise, one who engages oneself in Jnana Yoga becomes a hypocrite:


3.6 He whose inner and outer organs of senses are not conered because of his sins not being annulled but is none the less struggling for winning knowledge of the self, whose mind is forced to turn away from the self by reason of it being attached to sense objects, and who conseently lets his minds dwell on them - he is called a hypocrite, because his actions are at variance with his professions. The meaning is that by practising the knowledge of the self in this way, he becomes perverted and lost.


3.7 Conseently, he who, with aspiration to have the vision of the self, directs his senses to action according to the scriptures, such action being of the same class as those which he practised earlier, and who then begins to practise Karma Yoga, after renouncing attachment, with the senses which are naturally inclined to action - he, by reason of there being no chance of errors, excels a man following Jnana Yoga, because there is no fear of a fall in his case.


3.8 'Obligatory' (Niyatam) means 'concomitant' (Vyaptam); for action is concomitant with that which is conjoined with Prakrti or the body. The contact with Prakrti has arisen from beginingless subtle impressions (Vasanas). You must perform work, because the performance of action is easy and may not cause accidents by reason of its being obligatory. Action is superior to non-action, i.e., even to the devotee of Jnana. Because of the instruction at the beginning (of this context), 'No man experiences freedom from activity' (3.4), devotion to Jnana alone is indicated by the word, 'Non-action' (Akarma). Even in the case of one alified for devotion to Jnana, devotion to Karma indeed is better because Jnana-nistha is difficult to perform and liable to accidents, as it has not been practised previoulsy and as it does not come to one naturally. Subseently it will be described how, one with the knowledge of the true nature of the self can carry on actions along with that knowledge. Conseently, we should take the meaning here to be that, because knowledge of the self too is included in Karma Yoga, this kind of Yoga is superior.
This statement on the superiority of activity (Karma Yoga) over Jnana Yoga is valid even when there is competency for one to adopt Jnana Yoga. For, if you abandon all activities to alify yourself for Jnana Yoga, then, for you, who is thus inactive while following Jnana Yoga, even the nourishment of the body, which is necessary even for Jnana-nistha, will not be achieved. The body has to be necessarily sustained until the means are executed to the full. Performing 'great sacrifices' with the help of honestly earned wealth, the body should be sustained by consuming the remainders left after such sacrifices. This is made clear from scriptural texts like, 'When the food is pure, the Sattva (mind or inner organ) becomes pure; when the Sattva is pure, then the remembrance (meditation) will be steady' (Cha. U., 7.26.2). Sri Krsna himself will declare: 'The sinful ones who cook food for their own sake eat sin (3.13).
Conseently,even the sustenance of the body will not be possible in the case of one who practises Jnana-nistha, and does not act. In other ways also Karma Yoga is superior to Jnana Yoga even in respect of one who is alified for Jnana-nistha; for, obligatory and occasional rites like the 'great sacrifices' must be carried out by one who follows Jnana Yoga too, as he has to sustain the body until he attains perfection. Besides, the understanding of the true nature of the self is incorporated in Karma Yoga, as it involves the contemplation of the self as being a non-agent. It is also in line with the nature of life (Prakrti). Karma Yoga, is for these reasons easier and it is free from danger of downfall. Therefore, you must perform Karma Yoga only. This is the purport of the verse.
If it is contended that any action such as earning money implies 'I-ness', 'My-ness' etc., and will therefore be disturbing to the senses, and that such a person devoted often to works will be in bondage through subtle impressions of his acts, Sri Krsna says:


3.9 The world is imprisoned by the bond of work only when work is done for personal ends, but not when work is performed or money acired for the purpose of sacrifice etc. prescribed in the scriptures. So, for the purpose of sacrifice, you must perform acts like the acisition of money. In doing so, overcome attachments generated by the pursuit of personal ambitions, and then do your work in the spirit of Yajna. When a person free from attachment does the work for the sake of sacrifices etc., the Supreme Person, propitiated by sacrifices etc., grants him the calm vision of the self after destroying the subtle impressions of his Karmas, which have continued from time without beginning.
Sri Krsna stresses the need for sustenance of the body solely by the remnants of sacrifices in respect of those who are devoted to all ends of human life. He decries the sin of those who nourish the body by things other than the remnants of sacrifices:


3.10 As there is the scriptural text beginning with 'The Lord of Universe' (Tai. Na., 11.3), it is justifiable to take the term Prajapati in its wider connotation and interpret it to mean Narayana who is the Lord of all beings, the creator of the universe and the Self of the universe. In the beginning, i.e., during the creation, He, the Lord of beings, saw all beings helpless by their conjunction with beginningless non-conscient matter, bereft of the distinctions of name and form, and submerged in Himself. They were incapable of attaining the major ends of human existence, being almost one with non-conscient matter. He, the supremely compassionate, with a desire to resuscitate them, created them together with sacrifice in order that they might perform sacrifices as His worship and said: 'By this sacrifice, shall you prosper,' i.e., multiply and prosper. May this sacrifice fulfil your supreme object of desire called release (Moksa) and also the other desires that are in conformity with it.
How, then, should this be done?


3.11 'By this,' i.e., by this sacrifice, you propitiate the gods who form My body and have Me as their Self. For Sri Krsna will say later on: 'For I am the only enjoyer and the only Lord of Sacrifices' (9.24). Worshipped by sacrifices, may these gods, who have Me as their Self, nourish you with food, drink etc., which are reired also for their worship. Thus, supporting each other, may you attain the highest good called Moksa (release).


3.12 'Pleased by the sacrifice,' i.e., propitiated by the sacrifice, the gods, who have Me as their Self, will bestow on you the enjoyments you desire. Whatever objects are desired by persons keen on attaining release, the supreme end of human endeavour, all those will be granted by gods previously worshipped through many sacrifices. That is, whatever is solicited with more and more propitiation, all those enjoyments they will bestow on you. Whoever enjoys the objects of enjoyment granted by them for the purpose of worshipping them, without giving them their due share in return - he is verily a thief. What is called 'theft' is indeed taking what belongs to another as one's own and using it for oneself, when it is really designed for the purpose of another. The purport is that such a person becomes unfit not only for the supreme end of human endeavour, but also will go down towards purgatory (Naraka).
Sri Krsna expands the same:


3.13 Those persons who acire food materials solely for propitiating the Supreme Person abiding as the Self of Indra and other deities, and who, after cooking them, propitiate, through them, the Supreme Person as He is, and then sustain themselves on the remnants of oblations (made for such propitiation), they alone will be free of impurities which have resulted from beginningless evil and which are inimical to the vision of the self. But they are evil-minded, who acire for selfish use the things which the Supreme Being, abiding as the Self of Indra and other deities, has granted them for worshipping Him with, and use it all on the other hand for feeding themselves - they eat only sin. Turning away from the vision of the self, they cook only for being led to Naraka (for the expiation of the sin incurred thery).
Sri Krsna says that, from the standpoint of the world as well as that of the scriptures, everything has its origin in sacrifice; and He speaks of the need for the performance of the sacrifices and of the blemish in not performing the same:


3.14 From food arise all beings; from rain food is produced. These two facts are matters of common experience. 'From sacrifice comes rain' this is known from the scriptures such as, 'The oblations offered in fire reach the sun, and from the sun comes rain' (Manu, 6.76), and sacrifice is born out of activities in the form of collecting materials, etc., by the agent. And activity arises from 'Brahman', the body born of Prakrti.


3.15 Here ther term, 'Brahman' connotes the physical body consisting of modifications of the Prakrti; for the Prakrti is denoted here by the term 'Brahman', as in the scriptural text: 'From Him arises, this Brahman and this 'Brahman' becomes name, form and food' (Mun. U., 1.1.9). Here also it will be said by Sri Krsna: 'This great 'Brahman' is my womb' (14.3). Therefore, the words that 'Activity springs from 'Brahman' teaches that activity is produced by the physical body which is of the nature of the modification of Prakrti. The 'Brahman' arises from the imperishable self. Here the term, 'imperishable', indicates the individual self. The physical body, which is inhabited by the self who is satisfied by food and drink, is fit for action; hence the physical body which constitutes the instrument of activity is said to be from the imperishable. Therefore the 'all-pervading Brahman' means here the bodies of all persons of diverse kinds which are the products of Prakrti which comprises all material entities, and is hence all-pervading. They, the bodies, are established in sacrifice. The meanig is that the bodies have roots in sacrifice.


3.16 Thus this wheel is set in motion by the Supreme Person: From food arise embodied selves which are denoted by the word 'beings': from rain food; from sacrifice rain; sacrifice from activities which constitute the exercise of an agent; and activity from the embodied self; and again the body endowed with life from food. In this manner there is a seence which revolves like a wheel through the mutual relations of cause and effect.
Hence, He who is engaged in spiritual practice - whether one is alified for Karma Yoga or Jnana Yoga - if he does not follow, i.e., does not keep in motion the wheel which revolves in a circle through mutual relation of cause and effect - that person by not maintaining his bodily subsistence by means of the 'remainder of sacrifice,' lives in sin. His life begins in sin or develops in sin, or is of both these kinds; he lives the life of sin. Thus he is a reveller in his senses and not in his self. The senses become the pleasure-gardens of one whose mind and body are not nourished by the 'remainders of sacrifices.' Rajas and Tamas preponderate in his body. Being thus turned away from the vision of the self, he rejoices only in the enjoyment of the senses. Therefore, even if he were to attempt for the vision of the self, it will be fruitless. So he lives in vain, O Arjuna.
Sri Krsna now says that there is no need for the performance of the 'great sacrifices' etc., according to his station and stage of life, only in respect of a liberated person whose vision of the self does not depend on any external means.


3.17 But for him, who is not in need of the means of Jnana Yoga and Karma Yoga, who finds delight in the self on his own, i.e., who is established in the self, who is satisfied by the self alone and not by food, drink and other things which are other than the self, who rejoices in the self alone and not in pleasure gardens, garlands, sandalpaste, vocal and instrumental music etc., and for whom everything, his subsistence, nourishment and enjoyment, is the self alone - for him nothing remains to be performed for the vision of the self, because the essential nature of the self is perpetually in his unaided vision.


3.18 Thus, for such a one there is no purpose, i.e., nothing to be gained from work done as a means for the vision of the self, nor is he subject to any evil or calamity from work left undone, because his vision of the self does not rest on any external means. To such a person who has turned by himself away from non-intelligent matter which is different from the self, there is nothing acceptable as a purpose to be gained from the constituents of Prakrti and their products; only if there were such a purpose, there would be the need for the means of retreat therefrom. For, the adoption of the means is only for effecting such a retreat. But he is verily liberated.
Non-pursuit of the means for vision of the self is only for that person whose vision of the self no longer depends on any means. But Karma Yoga is better in gaining the vision of the self for one who is in pursuit of the means for that vision, because it is easy to perfom, because it is secure from possible error, because the contemplation of the true nature of the self is included in it, and because even for a Jnana Yogin the performance of minimum activity is necessary. For these reasons, Karma Yoga is better as a means for the vision of the Atman.


3.19 Therefore, considering that work has to be performed with detachment, you perform it, considering yourself a non-agent. This will be declared in the words 'with detachment' and 'which ought to be done,' meaning that one attains the Supreme by Karma Yoga itself.


3.20 It is also declared that Karma Yoga alone Janaka and others reached perfection.
Because, Karma Yoga is the best means for securing the vision of the self even for a person who is alified for Jnana Yoga, royal sages like Janaka and others, who are foremost among the Jnanins, preferred Karma Yoga as the means for attaining perfection.
Thus, having first declared previously that Karma Yoga must be practised by an aspirant for release who is alified for Karma Yoga alone, as he is unfit for Jnana Yoga, it was next stated with reasons that, even for one who is alified for Jnana Yoga, Karma Yoga is better than Jnana Yoga Now it is going to be declared (in verses 20-26) that Karma Yoga must be performed in every way by one who is virtuous.
At least for the guidance of the world, you should do work even if there is no need of it for yourself.


3.21 Whatever 'an eminent man,' i.e., he, who is famous for his knowledge of all the scriptures and for his observance of the scriptural dictates, performs, others who have incomplete knowledge of the scriptures will also perform, following his example. With regard to any duty which is being performed with all its ancillaries by an eminent personage, the people with incomplete knowledge will do it with the same ancillaries. Therefore for the protection of the world, all acts that are appropriate to one's station and stage in life must always be performed by an eminent man who is distinguished for his wisdom. Otherwise, the evil generated from the ruin of the large masses of the world (who neglect their duties by following his example), will bring him down, even if he were a follower of pure Jnana Yoga.


3.22 For Me, who is the Lord of all, who has all desires fulfilled, who is omniscient, whose will is always true, and who, at My own will, remains in the three worlds in the forms of gods, men and such other beings, there is nothing whatever to achieve. Therefore though there is for Me nothing 'unacired', i.e., nothing yet to be acired by work, I go on working for the protection of the world.


3.23 If I, the Lord of all, whose will is always true, whose sport consists in creation, sustentation and dissolution of universe at My will, even though I am born at My pleasure as a man to help the world - if, I thus incarnating in the family of Vasudeva who is the foremost among virtuous men, did not contine to work unwearied at all times suitable to that family, then, these men with incomplete knowledge would follow My path, thinking that the way adopted by the son of virtuous Vasudeva alone is the real way. And in place of winning the self, they would go to Naraka because of their failure to do what ought to be done and also because of the sin arising from non-performance of duty.


3.24 If I do not do the work suitable to My station in life, likewise all the virtuous men also, neglecting their duties by following My example, would be destroyed on account of not performing their duties. That is, they will become lost. Thus I would be bringing about chaos among all virtuous men on account of My failure to conduct Myself as prescribed in the scriptures. Therefore I would be destroying all these people. Even so, if you, Arjuna, a son of Pandu and a brother of Yudhisthira and the foremost of the virtuous, claim to be alified for Jnana Yoga, then the virtuous aspirants, who do not know everything and who follow your way, without knowing their own competency, would give up practising Karma Yoga and will be lost. Therefore work should be done by one who is recognised as learned and worthy.


3.25 'The ignorant' are those people who do not know the entire truth about the self; 'attached to their work' means they are inseparably yoked to work. Because of their incomplete knowledge of the self, they are not alified for Jnana Yoga which is of the nature of practising knowledge of the self. They are alified for Karma Yoga only. As they should practise Karma Yoga for the vision of the self in the same manner Karma Yoga should be practised by one who is recognised as virtuous, who is unattached to work by reason of the vision of the self, and who wishes that his conduct should give guidance to others in virtuous conduct. In this way he should protect the world from chaos by his example. Such a person, even though alified for Jnana Yoga, should practice Karma Yoga.


3.26 Do not bewilder the minds of ignorant aspirants by saying that there is, besides Karma Yoga, another way to the vision of the self. They cannot practise Jnana Yoga on account of their incomplete knowledge of the self, and attachment to action. They are alified for Karma Yoga because of their being fit only for activity on account of the subtle impressions of their beginningless Karma. What then follows from this? It is this: Even though one is alified for Jnana Yoga because of the complete knowledge of the self, one should do work, holding the view as said previously, that Karma Yoga by itself without Jnana Yoga is an independent means for the vision of the self. He should thus generate love for all types of activity among those who do not know the complete truth.
Sri Krsna declares (in the verses 27 to 30) the way in which the self is to be contemplated on as not being an agent as reired by Karma Yoga, after demonstrating the difference between the enlightened and unenlightened among those practising Karma Yoga.


3.27 It is the Gunas of Prakrti like Sattva, Rajas etc., that perform all the activities appropriate to them. But the man, whose nature is deluded by his Ahankara, thinks, 'I am the doer of all these actions.' Ahankara is the mistaken conception of 'I' applied to the workings of Prakrti which is not the 'I'. The meaning is that it is because of this (Ahankara), that one who is ignorant of the real nature of the self, thinks, 'I am the doer' with regard to the activities that are really being done by the Gunas of Prakrti.


3.28 But he who knows the truth about the divisions of the Gunas and their actions - namely, about the division among Sattva etc., on the one hand, and the divisions among their respective functionings on the other hand - it is he who, realising that Gunas, i.e., Sattva etc., are operating on their own products, is not attached to the actions of the Gunas, being convinced, 'I am not the doer.'


3.29 Those who 'do not know the whole truth' are those persons who are trying for the vision of the self but are deluded about the nature of the self, not knowing, on account of their involvement in Prakrti, that actions proceed from the Gunas of Prakrti. They are therefore attached to the actions of the Gunas - i.e., only to actions forming part of Karma Yoga. They are alified only for Karma Yoga. One who knows the complete truth should not, by himself remaining a practitioner of Jnana Yoga, unsettle those persons who are ignorant and who do not know the complete truth. Those, the ignorant, who tend to follow the behaviour of a great man, when they see him transcend Karma Yoga, will have their minds shaken from Karma Yoga. Thus, the great man, should himself remain established in Karma Yoga, while having the full knowledge of the true nature of the self and contemplating on the self as not being the agent. Thus he should demonstrate that Karma Yoga by itself is an autonomous means for the vision of the self. He should create in those who do not know the complete truth the love of Karma Yoga.
The superiority of this Karma Yoga over Jnana Yoga even for those who are alified for Jnana Yoga has already been stated. Therefore one who is a respected person of note should follow this Karma Yoga alone for the good of the world. The method of performing actions after attributing agency to the Gunas by discerning the nature of the self as different from Prakrti, has been taught. The agency of the self is not produced by the inherent nature of the self, but by its contact with the Gunas. Hence by discriminating between what is obtained by contact and not obtained when there is no contact, it has to be understood that this agency is due to the Gunas or Prakrti.
Now it is said that the agency of works, first attributed to Gunas, ultimately go to the Supreme Person who is the Self of all. It is done by discerning that the nature of the individual self is one of subservience to the Supreme Person, as they constitute His body:


3.30 Do all prescribed acts such as war etc., (here a duty) free from desire or selfishness and devoid of fear, with a mind focussed on the self. Surrender all acts to Me, the Lord of all, who constitutes the inner pervading Self of all beings. 'Adhyatma-cetas' is that mind which is focussed on the self by knowledge of the essential nature of the self as declared in hundreds of Vedic texts. That this individual self constitutes the body of the Supreme Self and is actuated by Him, is taught by Sruti texts like: 'He who has entered within, is the ruler of all beings and is the Self of all' (Tai. Ar., 3.11), 'Him who has entered inside and is the doer' (Ibid., 3.23), 'He who, dwelling in the self, is within the self, whom the Self does not know, whose body is the self, who controls the self from within - He is your internal ruler and Immortal Self' (Br. U., 3.7.22). Smrti texts also speak in the same manner: 'Him who is the ruler of all' (Manu, 12.122). Sri Krsna will say later on: 'And I am seated in the hearts of all; from Me are memory, knowledge and the faculty of reason' (15.15); 'The Lord, O Arjuna, lives in the heart of everything causing them to spin round and round by His power, as if set on a wheel' (18.61). Hence, dedicate to Me, the Supreme Person, all actions considering them as done by Me, by contemplating on the self as actuated by Me by reason of Its constituting My body. And do every thing, considering the actions as My worship only; becoming free from desire for fruits and therefore free from selfishness as regards actions, engage in acts like war etc., devoid of 'fever', i.e., the excitement caused by passions like anger.
Contemplate that the Supreme Person, Lord of all, Principal of all, gets done His own works only for the purpose of getting Himself worshipped with His own instruments, namely, the individual selves which belong to Him and are His agents. Become free from selfish attachment to action. Also be free from the feverish concern originating from such thoughts as 'What will become of me with an ancient, endless accumulation of evil arising from beginningless time?' Perform Karma Yoga with ease, for the Supreme Person Himself, worshipped by acts, will free you from bondage. His Lordship and Principalship over all are settled by Sruti texts like: 'Him who is the supreme and great Lord of lords, Him the Supreme Divinity of divinities' (Sve. U., 6.7), 'The Lord of the Universe' (Tai. Na., 11.3), 'The Supreme Ruler of rulers' (Sve. U., 6.6-7). Isvaratva is the same as Sesitva, which means controllership.
Sri Krsna declares that this alone is the essential meaning of the Upanisads:


3.31 There are those persons who are alified to understand the Sastras and decide for themselves what is My doctrine, and follow them accordingly; there are others who are full of faith in the meaning of the Sastras without however practising it. And there are still others who, even though devoid of faith, do not cavil at it, saying that the true meaning of the Sastras cannot be this, i.e., they do not find any blemish pertaining to the Sastras which possess great alities. All these persons are freed from Karmas which are there from beginningless time and which cause bondage. By the term, api (even) in 'te pi karmabhih' ('even they from Karmas'), these men are divided into three groups. The meaning is that those who, even if they do not act upon the meaning but still believe in this meaning of the Sastras and do not cavil at it, will be cleansed of their evil by their faith and freedom from fault-finding. For, if they have faith they will, before long, take to the practice of this very meaning of the Sastras and be freed.
Sri Krsna now speaks of the evil that will befall those who do not practice this instruction of the Upanisads, i.e., those who are faithless and who cavil at it.


3.32 But those who do not follow this view of Mine, namely, that the self has Me for Its support, is subservient to Me and is actuated by Me only, i.e., those who do not perform all acts contemplating in this way as also those who have no faith in the meaning of the Sastras and calumniate them - know them to be extremely deluded and devoid of reasoning and knowledge and conseently completely lost. For, the function of the mind is the determination of the real nature of things, and in its absence, those mentioned above are devoid of reason, and therefore apostates in knowledge and extremely deluded in all ways.
For one united with the Prakrti (body), the sense of agency results from the preponderance of the Gunas of Prakrti. But this agency really rests with the Supreme Person. Contemplating thus, Karma Yoga alone should be practised by both - those who are competent for Karma Yoga only and those who are competent for Jnana Yoga. The implied superiority of Karma Yoga has the following justifications; it is easy to perform, free from liability to lapse, and independent of anything else; it comprises the knowledge of the self also within its scope. On the other hand Jnana Yoga is difficult to practise, is not free from the liability to lapse, leaves one dependent on actions for the sustenance of the body etc. And for a distinguished perosn, this (i.e., Karma Yoga) is especially what ought to be practised.
Next, till the end of this chapter, it is explained how Jnana Yoga, being difficult, is liable to lead to lapses.


3.33 Such and such is the nature of the self, which is different from the Prakrti - this has to be always contemplated upon: thus declare the Sastras. Even a person who knows this, acts in relation to material objects only according to his own nature, i.e., guided by his old subtle impressions. How is this? 'All beings follow their nature.' Beings in conjunction with non-conscient matter, all follow only subtle impressions which have continued to come from time immemorial. What can the control enjoined by Sastras, do to these beings who follow their subtle impressions?
Sri Krsna expounds the way by which individuals are overpowered to follow their respective natures:


3.34 An unavoidable attraction has been fixed for organs of sense like ear towards the objects like sound, and for organs of action like that of tongue towards their objects like tasty food. This longing is in the form of desire to experience these objects, which is caused by old subtle impressions. When their experience is thwarted, an unavoidable aversion is experienced. Thus, these two, attachment and aversion, bring under their control one who aspires to follow Jnana Yoga, and forcibly engage him in actions appropriate to them, in spite of his having established some sort of control over the senses.
Such an aspirant fails to get the experience of the self, and therefore becomes completely lost. So no one practising Jnana Yoga should come under the sway of attachment and aversion, which are ruinous. These two, attachment and aversion, are indeed his unconerable foes that deter him from the practice of Jnana Yoga.


3.35 Therefore Karma Yoga is better than Jnana Yoga. For, it forms one's own duty, since it is natural to one and easy to perform, and though defective, is free from liability to interruption and fall. Jnana Yoga, on the other hand, though performed well for some time, constitutes the duty of another, as it is difficult to practise for one conjoined with Prakrti. It is therefore liable to interruption. For a person who lives practising Karma Yoga - which is his duty because he is alified for it - even death without success in one birth does not matter. For, in the next birth with the help of the experience already gained in the previous birth, it will be possible for him to perform Karma Yoga without any impediments. Jnana Yoga is fraught with fear because of the possibility of errors for anyone who is conjoined to Prakrti. It is another's duty, on account of it being not easily adoptable by him.


3.36 Arjuna said Impelled by what does a man practising Jnana Yoga commit sin in the form of experiencing the objects of the senses, as if constrained by force, even against his own will not to experience the objects of the senses.


3.37 The Lord said The highly ravenous desire is born of the Guna Rajas originating from old subtle impressions. It has for its objects sound and other sense contacts. It is a foe to him who is practising Jnana Yoga, as he is joined with Prakrti constituted of the Gunas which rise and subside periodically. It attracts him towards the objects of the senses. It is this desire alone which, when hampered, develops into anger towards those persons who are the cause of such hindrance. It is a powerful cause of sin. It incites the aspirant to do harm to others. Know this, which is born of the Guna called Rajas, as the natural enemy of Jnana Yogins.


3.38 As a fire is enveloped by smoke, as a mirror by dust and as an embryo by the membrance, so are the embodied beings covered by this desire.
Sri Krsna teaches the mode of this envelopement:


3.39 The knowledge, having the self for its subject, of this embodied person (the Jiva) whose nature is knowledge, is enveloped by this constant enemy in the shape of desire, which brings about attachment for sense-objects. This desire is difficult to satisfy, i.e., has for its object things unworthy of attainment and is insatiable, i.e., never attains satisfaction.
Now listen to what constitutes the instruments with which desire subdues the self. Sri Krsna goes on to expound this:


3.40 The senses, the mind and the intellect are the instruments of desire in so far as it overpowers the self through them. By means of these, viz., the senses, the mind and the intellect, which have been reduced to the position of servants through attachment to sense objects, desire deludes the embodied soul caught up in Prakrti by covering up Its knowledge. Here 'deluding' means making the self a victim of manifold illusions, by turning It away from the knowledge of Its true nature, and making It indulge in sensuous experiences.


3.41 For whatever reason a person engaged in Jnana Yoga, which is of the nature of abandoning the activities of all the senses, should control this enemy in the shape of desire which turns him away from the self through creating infatuation for objects of the senses - for the same reason, you, who are yoked to the activities of the senses by reason of being in conjunction with the Prakrti, should, in the beginning itself, i.e., at the very beginning of the practice of the means for release, control the senses by the practice of Karma Yoga, which provides for the regulation of the working of the senses. And then you must destroy, i.e., slay this sinful enemy, which is in the shape of desire and which destroys knowledge and discrimination, i.e., knowledge relating to the nature of the self and of the discriminative power, which is the means to gain this knowledge.
Sri Krsna speaks of that which is most important among the adversaries:


3.42 The senses are called the important obstacles of knowledge, because when the senses keep operating on their objects, the knowledge of the self cannot arise. 'The mind is higher than the senses': even if the senses are withdrawn, if the Manas (mind) ruminates over sense objects, knowledge of the self cannot be had. 'The intellect (Buddhi) is greater than the mind', i.e., even if the mind is indifferent to sense objects, a perverted decision by the intellect can obstruct the dawn of the knowledge of the self. But even if all of them upto the intellect are ietened from their activity, still when desire, identified with will, originating from Rajas, is operating, it by itself obstructs the knowledge of the self by inducing the senses etc., to operate in their fields. Thus it is said here: 'But what is greater than intellect is that.' What is greater than the intellect - is desire. Such is the sense of the last sentence here.


3.43 Thus, understanding desire, which is higher than even the intellect, to be the fore antagonistic to Jnana Yoga, and establishing the mind by means of the intellect in Karma Yoga, slay, i.e., destroy this foe, in the shape of desire which is difficult to overcome.


4.1 - 4.2 The Lord said This Karma Yoga declared to you should not be considered as having been taught now merely, for creating encouragement in you for war. I Myself had taught this Yoga to Vivasvan at the commencement of Manu's age as a means for all beings to attain release, which is man's supreme end. Vivasvan taught it to Manu, and Manu to Iksvaku. The royal sages of old knew this Yoga transmitted by tradition. Because of long lapse of time and because of the dullness of the intellect of those who heard it, it has been almost lost.


4.3 It is the same ancient, unchanged Yoga which is now taught to you, who out of friendship and overwhelming devotion have resorted to Me whole-heartedly. The meaning is that it has been taught to you fully with all its accessories. Because it is the most mysterious knowledge declared in the Vedanta, it cannot be known or taught by anyone other than Myself.
In this connection, in order to know the truth about the Lord's descent correctly, Arjuna asked:


4.4 Arjuna said According to the calculation of time, your birth was indeed later, contemporaneous with our births. And the birth of Vivasvan was at an earlier time, reckoned as twenty-eight cycles of units of four Yugas each. How can I understand as true that you taught it in the beginning?
Now, there is no contradiction here, for it was ite possible that He had taught Vivasvan in a former birth. The memory of what was done in former births is ite natural for great men. This should not be taken to mean that Arjuna does not know the son of Vasudeva, the speaker, as the Lord of all. Because he (Arjuna) says later on: 'You are the Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Light and the Supreme Purifier. All the seers proclaim You as the eternal Divine Purusa, the Primal Lord, unborn and all-pervading. So also proclaim the divine sage Narada, Asita, Devala and Vyasa. You Yourself also are saying this to me' (10.12-13.)
Arjuna had heard repeatedly from Bhisma and others during the Rajasuya sacrifice of Yudhisthira, 'Krsna alone is the cause of creation and submergence of all the worlds. This universe, consisting of things both animate and inanimate, was created for the sake of Krsna' (Ma. Bha., 2.38.23) 'The entire universe is subservient to Krsna' is the meaning of 'For the sake of Krnsa'.
This apparent contradiction may be explained as follows: Arjuna surely knows the son of Vasudeva as the Bhagavan. Though knowing Him as such, he estions as if he did not know Him. This is his intention. Can the birth of the Lord of all, who is antagonistic to all that is evil and wholly auspicious, omniscient, whose will is always true and whose desires are fulfilled - can the birth of such a Person be of the same nature as that of the gods, men etc., who are subject to Karma? Or can it be false like the illusions of a magical show? Or could it be real? In other words, is the birth of the Supreme Being as the incarnate a real fact or a mere illusory phenomenon produced by a magician's art? If His birth is real, what is the mode of His birth? What is the nature of His body? What is the manner of His birth? What is the nature of this body of His? What is the casue of His birth? To what end is He born? The way in which Sri Krsna answers Arjuna's estion, justifies the construing of his estion in this way.


4.5 The Lord said By this, the reality of the Lord's birth is declared in the sentence, 'Many births of Mine have passed.' 'So is it with you' is added by way of illustration.
The mode of incarnation, the reality of His body and the cause of His birth are explained in the following verse.