18.57 'By your mind' means with thought which considers the self as belonging to Me and as controlled by Me. For, it has been declared: 'Surrendering all your acts to Me with a mind focussed on the self' (3.30). Surrendering all acts to Me along with agentship and the object of worship and regarding 'Me as the goal,' i.e., constantly contemplating that I alone am to be attained as the goal; performing all acts; and resorting to Buddhi-Yoga - focus your mind on Me always. Buddhi Yoga here implies the mental attitude special to the seeker of salvation in regard to agency of works, the fruits etc.
Thus


18.58 Thus, focusing your thought on Me, if you can perform all acts, you will, by My grace, cross over all difficulties of Samsara. If, however, out of 'self-conceit,' i.e., out of the feeling, 'I know well what is to be done and what is not to be done' - out of such a feeling, if you do not heed My words, you shall perish. Except Myself, there is none who knows what ought and what ought not to be done by all living beings; there is also none other than Myself who is in the position of a law-giver to them.


18.59 If, in your 'self-conceit,' i.e., under a false sense of independence that you know what is good for you and what is not - if, not heeding My ?nd, you think, 'I will not fight,' then this resolve based on your sense of independence will be in vain. For Nature will compel you to go against your resolve - you who are ignorant and who adversely react to my sovereignty.
He elucidates the same:


18.60 For, heroism is the duty of a Ksatriya born of his nature. Impelled by your own duty of heroism born of your own nature, you will lose self-control when you get the taunts of your enemies. Unable to suffer it, you will be compelled to engage them in battle, which, now, out of delusion and ignorance, you do not desire to do.
All beings have been ordained by Me to follow their Prakrti acired by their previous Karmas. Listen about it:


18.61 Lord Vasudeva, who is the ruler over all, lives in 'the heart of all beings,' i.e., in the region from which arises all knowledge which is at the root of all secular and spiritual activities. How and doing what does He exist? He exists enabling, by His Maya (power), 'all beings who are mounted, as it were, on the machine Prakrti' in the form of body and senses created by Himself, to act in accordance with their Gunas of Sattva and others. It was already expressed in 'And I am seated in the hearts of all. From Me are memory, knowledge and their removal also' (15.15) and in 'From Me proceed everything' (10.8). The Srutis also proclaim 'He who, dwelling in the self' (Br. U. Madh., 3.7.22).
He now explains the way to get rid of the Maya:


18.62 Such being the case, take refuge with all your heart (Sarvabhavena), by every disposition of your body, senses and mind (Sarvatmana) in Him - Him, the ruler of all, who has become your charioteer out of compassion for dependents, and who orders you, 'Act thus' and so on. Even if you do not do so now, fighting in battle etc., is inevitable for you who are ignorant and actuated by His Maya, but then you will get ruined. Therefore, fight etc., in the manner which has been explained by Him. Such is the meaning.
Acting in this way, you will attain supreme peace, release from all bondage, and the eternal abode. Hundreds of Srutis declare it: 'That supreme place of Visnu which the sages see' (Rg. S., 1.2.6.5); 'They become meritorious and reach this heaven where Devas and Sadhyas dwell' (Tai. A., 3.12); 'Where dwell the ancient sages, the first-born' (Tai.Sam., 4.7.13.1); 'The supreme place above the paradise in the heart of the Supreme Heaven' (Ma. Na., 8.14); 'He who is in the Supreme Heaven and presides over this' (Rg. S., 8.7.17.7); 'Now that light which shines above this Supreme Heaven' (Cha. U., 3.13.7); and 'He reaches the end of the journey, the Highest abode of Visnu' (Ka. U., 3.9).


18.63 Thus, in this manner, has been set forth everything that is to be acired by those aspirants for release - the mystery of mysteries, concerning Karma Yoga, Jnana Yoga and Bhakti Yoga. Reflecting on it fully, do what you wish to do according to your alification - i.e., follow Karma Yoga, or Jnana Yoga or Bhakti Yoga according to your liking. Such is the meaning.


18.64 It has been said that Bhakti Yoga is the most secret of all secrets, in such texts as 'I will declare to you, who does not cavil, this most mysterious knowledge' (9.1). Hear again My supreme word concerning it (i.e., Bhakti Yoga). As you are exceedingly dear to Me, therefore, I shall declare what is good for you.


18.65 What is enjoined in Vedanta texts such as 'I know the Great Person of the radiance of the sun, who is beyond this Prakrti. Knowing Him thus, one becomes here immortal; there is no path for immortality' (Sve. U., 3.8); what is designated by words such as knowledge (Vedanta), meditation (Dhyana) and worship (Upasana); what is of the form of direct perception (Darsana) having the character of continuous succession of memory of a surpassingly loving nature to the worshipped - it is this that is enjoined herein by the words 'Focus your mind on Me,' 'Be My devotee.' It means, be one to whom I am incomparably dear. Since I am the object of superabundant love, meditate on Me, i.e., practise the succession of memory of unsurpassed love of Me. Such is the meaning. Be My worshipper (yaji). Here also the expression, 'Be My devotee' is applicable. Yajna is worship. Worship Me as one exceedingly dear to you. Worship (Aradhana) is complete subservience to the Lord. Prostrate before Me. Prostration means bowing down. The meaning is: Bow down humbly before Me with great love.
Renouncing thus all ego-centredness, you shall come to Me. I make this solemn promise to you. Do not take it as a mere flattery. For you are dear to Me. It has been already stated, 'For I am inexpressibly dear to the man of knowledge and dear is he to Me' (7.17). He in whom there is surpassing love for Me, I hold him also as surpassingly dear to Me. Conseently, not being able to bear separation from him, I myself will enable him to attain Me. It is this truth alone that has been solemnly declared to you in the expression that 'you shall come to Me alone.'


18.66 'Relinishing all Dharmas means the complete relinishment of the sense of agency, possessiveness, fruits etc., in the practising of Karma, Jnana and Bhakti Yogas in the way instructed, and the realising of Me as the agent, object of worship, the means and the end. It means that relinishment is not of all devotional duties but only of the sense of agency and the fruits. This is the Sastraic relinishment of all Dharmas. It is firmly established in the beginning of this chapter commencing from, 'Listen regarding My decision, O Arjuna, about abandonment; for abandonment is declared to be of three kinds' (18.4), and 'Renouncing attachments and also the fruit, such abandonment is regarded as Sattvika ৷৷. for it is impossible for one who bears the body to abandon acts entirely. But he who gives up the fruits of works, is called the abandoner' (18.9-11).
If you practise such abandonment of the sense of agency and fruits, I will release you from all 'sins' - i.e., I will release you from all evil incompatible with the attainment of Myself, consisting of innumerable acts of the nature of doing what ought not to be done and not doing what ought to be done. These piled up from beginningless times from the obstruction in the way. Grieve not, you should not despair; for I shall release you from all these obstructions.
Another (alternative) explanation is this: Bhakti Yoga is possible only for those people to whom the Lord is exceedingly dear and who are free from all evils. Those evils are so huge in their case that the expiatory rites which could wash them off, could not be performed in the limited time of one's life span. Ajuna therefore thought that he was unfit for commencing Bhakti Yoga. To remove the grief of Arjuna the Lord said: 'Completely relinishing all Dharmas, seek Me alone for refuge.' Expiatory rites can be taken here as what is meant by Dharma, Completely forsake these rites (Dharmas) appropriate for the removal of numerous and varied sins piled up from beginningless time and obstructing the starting of Bhakti Yoga. The expiatory rites consist of practices like Krcchra, Candrayana, Kusmanda, Vaisvanara, Vratapati, Pavitresti, Trvrit, Agnistoma etc., which are of manifold varieties, and which are difficult to perform on account of the brevity of life. So in order to succeed in commencing Bhakti Yoga, seek Me alone for refuge. I am supremely compassionate, the refuge of all without considering the differences of character among them, and am an ocean of tenderness for those dependent on Me. I will release you from all evil, the nature of which has been explained as incompatible with the commencement of Bhakti Yoga. Grieve not. [Both these interpretations of this famous verse are said to teach only Bhakti Yoga and not Prapatti. But the estion will rise in one's mind - why should it not be so taken?]


18.67 I have taught you this most secret doctrine. This should not be imparted by you to someone who has not practised austere disciplines. Never should this be taught to someone who is not devoted to Me and to you, the teacher (i.e., when you have to play the role of a teacher of this doctrine). The meaning is that it should not be taught by you to someone who, though practising austerities, is not a devotee and does not serve Me. It is also never to be taught to one who has no wish to listen, even though he is a devotee. Nor should it be imparted to one who traduces Me, that is, who - when My nature, glories and attributes are described - discovers defects in them. The differences of case (from ablative to nominative form) is to teach that the last one is the most despicable character.


18.68 Whose expounds or elucidates this supreme mystery to My devotees, he, aciring supreme devotion towards Me, will reach Me only. There is no doubt about this.


18.69 There never exists nor has existed anyone other than such a person as described, who does greater service to Me than he. In the future too, there will not be another such. The first reference is to those who are not worthy to hear the Gita. It is meant to teach that explaining it to them is more displeasing to the Lord than not teaching to those who are worthy.


18.70 He who will study the dialogue between us, which is consistent with the path to realisation, by him I shall be worshipped through the sacrifice of knowledge. Such is My view. The meaning is that whateve sacrifice of knowledge is taught herein, by that I shall become worshipped by the mere fact of its study.


18.71 A man who, with faith and without cavilling, hears the Gita when faught by a alified teacher, he too is, by such hearing, released from all evil incompatible with devotional life. He shall reach the Lokas, i.e., the realms of the hosts of My devotees who have done virtuous acts, and who will facilitate the growth of devotion in these new arrivals and lead them ultimately to liberation.


18.72 O Arjuna, have you heard attentively all that I have taught? Has your delusion caused by ignorance, been dispelled - that ignorance deluded by which you said, 'I shall not fight'?


18.73 Arjuna said 'Delusion' or misapprehension is perverted knowledge. By Your grace it has been destroyed. 'Smrti' or memory is the knowledge of things as they really are. I have acired that. Misapprehension here is the misconception that the self is the Prakrti (body-mind) which is the non-self in reality. It consists in one not apprehending that all intelligent and non-intelligent entities, by reason of their forming the body of the Supreme Being, have Him as their Atman and are thus ensouled by Him. The misapprehension also consists in the lack of knowledge that actions, obligatory and occasional, do not cause bondage but actually form a means for the propitiation of the Supreme Being. All such misapprehensions are now destroyed.
The various phases of knowledge that cleared the misunderstanding may be catalogued as follows: (1) The self is different from Prakrti and is therefore devoid of the alities of Prakrti. Its nature is that of the knower of Prakrti. (2) The self is a Sesa (sub-ordinate and servant) of the Supreme Person and is ruled by Him. The true knowledge about the Supreme Person is that He is what is signified by the expression Supreme Brahman. (3) He is the great ocean of all auspicious, excellent attributes such as knowledge, strength, glory, valour, power, brilliance etc., which are unbounded and natural. His essence consists solely of auspiciousness. He is antagonistic to all that is evil without exception. The origin, sustentation and dissolution of the entire universe are His sport. (4) You (Sri Krsna) are Vasudeva, the Supreme Person, known from the Vedanta, and who can be reached only by worship, which has taken the form of Bhakti. (5) Bhakti can be achieved by the control of the senses and the mind, the abandonment of prohibited acts and the performance of occasional and obligatory acts as solely intended for the goal of the satisfaction of the Supreme Person. Bhakti has to be developed day after day through the regular practice of the discriminatory knowledge of the higher and lower truths. All this has been attained by me (Arjuna).
Therefore I stand steadfast, freed from the doubts and devoid of the depression rooted in perverted knowledge nourished by compassion and love for relatives. Now I shall fulfil Your words, concerned with fighting etc., which ought to be done by me. I shall fight as instructed by You. Such is the meaning.
Sanjaya now relates to Dhrtarastra who had estioned him earlier as to what his sons and the Pandavas were doing in the battle:


18.74 Sanjaya said Thus, in this way have I been hearing, this wondrous and thrilling dialogue, as it took place between Vasudeva, the son of Vasudeva, and His paternal aunt's son Arjuna, who is a Mahatman, one possessed of a great intelligence, and who has resorted to the feet of Sri Krsna.


18.75 By the grace of Vyasa i.e., by the benefit of the divine sense of perception, granted by him, I have heard this supreme mystery called Yoga from Sri Krsna himself - Sri Krsna who is the treasure-house of knowledge, strength, sovereignty, valour, power and brilliance.


18.76 Remembering this auspicious and wondrous dialogue between Sri Krsna and Arjuna, directly heard by me, I rejoice again and again.


18.77 Great amazement is caused in me, stirred by joy born of the repeated remembrance of that most marvellous and sovereign form of the Lord revealed to Arjuna and directly witnessed by me. I rejoice again and again.
Why say more?


18.78 Wherever there is Sri Krsna, the son of Vasudeva, the 'Yogesvara' who is the ruler of the various manifestations of Nature pertaining to all intelligent and non-intelligent entities that have high and low forms, and on whose volition depend the differences in the essential natures, existences and the activities of all things other than Himself, and wherever there is Arjuna, the archer, who is his paternal aunt's son and who took sole refuge at His feet - in such places there always will be present fortune, victory, wealth and sound morality. Such is my firm conviction.


1.1 Dharmaksetre etc. Here some [authors] offer a different explanation as1 :-Kuruksetra : the man's body is the ksetra i.e., the facilitator, of the kurus, i.e., the sense-organs. 2 The same is the field of all wordly duties, since it is the cuse of their birth; which is also the field of the righteous act that has been described as :
'This is the highest righteous act viz., to realise the Self by means of the Yogas';
and which is the protector4 [of the embodied Self] by achieving emancipation [by means of this], through the destruction of all duties. It is the location where there is the confrontation among all ksatras, the murderous ones-because the root ksad means 'to kill' - viz, passion and asceticism, wrath and forbearance, and others that stand in the mutual relationship of the slayer and the slain. Those that exist in it are the mamakas,-i.e., the intentions that are worthy of man of ignorance and are the products of ignorance-and those that are born of Pandu: i.e., the intentions, of which the soul is the very knowledge itself5 and which are worthy of persons of pure knowledge. What did they do? In other words, which were vanished by what? Mamaka : a man of ignorance as he utters [always] 'mine'6. Pandu : the pure one.7


1.2 – 1.9 Why this exhaustive counting? The reality of things is this:


1.2 1.9 Why this exhaustive counting? The reality of things is this:


1.10 Aparyaptam etc. For us, for Pandava army grauded by Bhimasena is unlimited, i.e., it is not possible to vanish; or it is not sufficient, i.e., very insignificant when compared with our army. This is the meaning. On the other hand, for these Pandavas, this army guarded by Bhisma, belonging to us, is limited i.e., it is possible to vanish; or it is sufficient i.e., too much; in other words it is not possible to be vanished in the war by these (Pandavas).


1.11 Ayanesu etc. Paths : rows.


1.12 1.29 Sri Abhinavgupta did not comment upon this sloka.


1.30 – 1.34 Na ca sreyah, etc., upto mahikrte. Those who are wrongly conceived as object of slaying, with the individualizing idea that 'these are my teachers etc.'8 would necessarily generate sin. Similarly, the act of slaying even of those deserving to be slain in the battle-if undertaken with the idea that 'This battle is to be fought for the apparent results like pleasures, happiness etc.'- then it generates sin necessarily. This idea lurks in the objection [of Arjuna]. That is why a reply is going to be given [by Bhagavat] as 'You must undertake actions simply as your own duty, and not with an individualizing idea'.


1.30 1.34 Na ca sreyah, etc., upto mahikrte. Those who are wrongly conceived as object of slaying, with the individualizing idea that 'these are my teachers etc.'8 would necessarily generate sin. Similarly, the act of slaying even of those deserving to be slain in the battle-if undertaken with the idea that 'This battle is to be fought for the apparent results like pleasures, happiness etc.'- then it generates sin necessarily. This idea lurks in the objection [of Arjuna]. That is why a reply is going to be given [by Bhagavat] as 'You must undertake actions simply as your own duty, and not with an individualizing idea'.


1.35 – 1.44 Nihatya etc. upto anususruma. Sin alone is the agent in the act of slaying these desperadoes. Therefore here the idea is this : These ememies of ours have been slain, i.e., have been take possession of, by sin. Sin would come to us also after slaying them. Sin in this context is the disregard, on account of greed etc., to the injurious conseences like the ruination of the family and the like. That is why Arjuna makes a specific mention of the [ruin of the] family etc., and of its duties in the passage 'How by slaying my own kinsmen etc'.
The act of slaying, undertaken with an individualizing idea about its result, and with a particularizing idea about the person to be slain, is a great sin. To say this very thing precisely and to indicate the intensity of his own agony, Arjuna says only to himself [see next sloka]:


1.35 1.44 Nihatya etc. upto anususruma. Sin alone is the agent in the act of slaying these desperadoes. Therefore here the idea is this : These ememies of ours have been slain, i.e., have been take possession of, by sin. Sin would come to us also after slaying them. Sin in this context is the disregard, on account of greed etc., to the injurious conseences like the ruination of the family and the like. That is why Arjuna makes a specific mention of the [ruin of the] family etc., and of its duties in the passage 'How by slaying my own kinsmen etc'.
The act of slaying, undertaken with an individualizing idea about its result, and with a particularizing idea about the person to be slain, is a great sin. To say this very thing precisely and to indicate the intensity of his own agony, Arjuna says only to himself [see next sloka]:


1.45 Aho bata etc. We denotes one and all who were divided [into the opposite campus] by the division among the Kauravas and the Pandavas.
When every one is indiscriminate, what act is proper for me, while I am endowed with the faculty to discriminate? Of course, it is proper to turn back from the battle. Yet, says [Arjuna], what is much more proper is this [see next sloka]:


1.26 - 1.47 Arjuna said - Sanjaya said Sanjaya continued: The high-minded Arjuna, extremely kind, deeply friendly, and supremely righteous, having brothers like himself, though repeatedly deceived by the treacherous attempts of your people like burning in the lac-house etc., and therefore fit to be killed by him with the help of the Supreme Person, nevertheless said, 'I will not fight.'
He felt weak, overcome as he was by his love and extreme compassion for his relatives. He was also filled with fear, not knowing what was righteous and what unrighteous. His mind was tortured by grief, because of the thought of future separation from his relations. So he threw away his bow and arrow and sat on the chariot as if to fast to death.
1.46. It would be more beneficial for me if Dhrtarastra's men with weapons in their hands, should slay me, unresisting and unarmed.
1.46 If, on the contrary, the sons of Dhritarashtra, with weapons in their hand, should slay me, unarmed and unresisting, surely that would be better for my welfare!"


1.26 - 1.47 Arjuna said - Sanjaya said Sanjaya continued: The high-minded Arjuna, extremely kind, deeply friendly, and supremely righteous, having brothers like himself, though repeatedly deceived by the treacherous attempts of your people like burning in the lac-house etc., and therefore fit to be killed by him with the help of the Supreme Person, nevertheless said, 'I will not fight.' He felt weak, overcome as he was by his love and extreme compassion for his relatives. He was also filled with fear, not knowing what was righteous and what unrighteous. His mind was tortured by grief, because of the thought of future separation from his relations. So he threw away his bow and arrow and sat on the chariot as if to fast to death. 1.47. Sanjaya said Having said this much about the battle, and letting his bow fall with arrows, Arjuna sat down on the back of the chariot, with his mind agitated with grief.
1.47 Sanjaya said: "Having spoken thus, in the midst of the armies, Arjuna sank on the seat of the chariot, casting away his bow and arrow; heartbroken with grief."


2.1 Sri Abhinavagupta did not comment upon this sloka.


2.2 Kutah etc. To commence with, the Bhagavat exhorts Arjuna just by following the worldly (common) practice; but, in due course, He will impart knowledge. Hence He says 'practised by men of low birth'.
Uttering words of ruke such as 'unmanliness' etc., the Bhagavat causes [Arjuna] to know that he misconceives demerit as meritorious :


2.3 Sri Abhinavagupta did not comment upon this sloka.


2.4 See Comment under 2.6


2.5 See Comment under 2.6


2.4-6 Katham etc. upto Dhartarastrah. By the portion Bhisma and Drona in war' etc., and by the portion 'I would [not] enjoy the objects of pleasure', the Sage indicates that in Arjuna's objection, the intention for a particular act and the intention for a particular result are the points deserving rejection. By the portion 'We do not know this' etc., he speaks of the intention for a particular action. For, without intention no action is possible. Certainly one does not proceed on a war with an intention of getting defeated. '[In the present war] even our victory would be surely our misfortune.' This he says by the portion 'It is good even to go about begging without killing the elders'. It is also impossible to conclude 'Whether we desire victory or defeat'; for even in the case of our victory our relatives would perish totally.'


2.7 See Comment under 2.10


2.8 See Comment under 2.10


2.9 See Comment under 2.10


2.7-10 Karpanya-etc. upto vacah. By the portion 'in between the two armies' etc., [the Sage] indicates this : Beings possessed by doubt, Arjuna had not abstained from the war totally; for, he says thus : 'Please teach me, who am taking refuge in you'. Therefore while he still remains just in between both knowledge and ignorance, he is taught by the glorious Bhagavat.


2.11 Asocyan etc. You lament for the body that cannot be lamented over, because it is of incessantly perishing nature; and also for the Soul that does not reire to be lamented. No one, either of departed life, i.e., the dead, or of non-departed life, i.e., the living, is to be mourned for. As for instance, the Soul is ever non-perishing. What sort of lamentability can be for It, as It is plessantly travelling in different bodies ? Nor is it right to say that Its lamentability is due only to Its travel in another body. For, in that case, It should be lamented for, even when the stage of youth etc., is attained.
In this manner, the two ideas [the Lord] relates :


2.12 See Comment under 2.13


2.12-13 Na hi etc. Dehinah etc Never indeed did I not exist, but I did exist [always]. Likewise are you and these kings. If there can be lamentability for one, on attaining change in physical form then why is one not lamented over when one attains the youth from the boyhood ? He, who is wise, does not lament. But, wisdom is easily attainable for him whose concern is not even for this [present] body. Therefore you must seek wisdom.


2.14 Matra etc. But the unwise lament even over those passing situations of cold and heat, pleasure and pain that are created by those touches i.e., the contacts of the sense-objects-referable with the term matra - with the Soul through the door of the sense-organs; but the wise do not do so. Thus says [the Lord].
Or, the passage may be interpreted as : The touches (contacts) of these objects are with the matras, i.e., with the sense-organs, and not directly with the Supreme Self, Coming : birth. Going : destruction, Those situations that have these two you must forbear i.e., put up with.


2.15 But, because all these different situations are of the nature of coming and going, on that account itself are they not to be lamented on ? It is not so. As for instance : What is this which is termed 'coming' ? If it is 'birth', what is that 'birth' itself ? It is wrong to say that is the same as gaining the self by what is non-existent. For, to be of the nature of non-existence, is indeed to be devoid of every inherent nature and to be devoid of the very self. If a thing is devoid of the self and devoid of every nature, how is it possible to convert it into what has an intrinsic nature ? Surely, it is impossible to convert the non-blue into blue. For, it is faulty and undesirable to covert the non-blue into blue. For, it is faulty and undesirable to conclude that a thing with certain in nature changes to be of a different nature. Hence the scritpure goes -
'The intrinsic nature of beings would not cease to
exist, e.g., the heat of the sun'.
On the other hand, if the 'birth' signifies the gaining of self just by what [really] exists, even then, why the lamentability on its coming ? For, what has gained a self, could never be non-existent and conseently it would be eternal.
Likewise, is the act of 'going' also meant for the existent or the non-existent ? What is non-existent is just non-existent [for ever.] How can there be a non-existence-nature even in the case of that which is of the existence-nature ? If it is said that it is of the non-existence-nature in the second moment; [since its birth], then it should be so even in the first moment; and so nothing would be existent. For, the intrinsic nature [ever] remains unabandoned.
But is it not that the destruction of it (i.e., of a given thing, like a pot) is brought about by the stroke of a hammer etc.? Yet, if that destruction is altogether different [from the existent one i.e. the pot], then what does it matter for what is existent ? But, it is not be seen [at that time] ? Yet, what is actually existent (pot) may not be seen just as when it is covered with a cloth; but it has not turned to be altogether different. In fact, it has been said [in the scriptures] that this is not different [from the existent]. Summarising all these, [the Lord] says -


2.16 Nasatah etc. And then, also following the common worldly practice [the Lord] says this : There is no [real] existence for what is non-existent i.e., the body [etc.], that is continuously perishing; for it is changing incessantly by stages. Again, never there is destruction for the ever existing Supreme Self, because of Its unchanging nature. So says the Veda too :
'Lo ! This Soul is of unchanging nature and [hence]
is destructions' (the Br. U, IV, v. 14).
Of These two : of what is existent and what is non-existent. Finality : the point of boundary where they come to an end.
But is this permanent or transient which is perceived by persons who are prone to see the truth ? Having raised this doubt, [the Lord] says :


2.17 Avinasi etc [Here] tu is in the sense of ca 'and'. So, 'and' the Soul is not of perishing nature.


2.18 Antavantah etc. The bodies, at the time of their attaining the unobservable stage, meet their apparent destruction. This would be impossible if they do not suffer the peculiar destruction, that it to say they undergo changes every moment. For, it has been said-
'By observing the dilapidated condition of beings at their last moment, the loss of newness is very moment is inferred'
The same has been said by the Sage (Vyasa) also as-
'In every being, in every moment, there is mutual difference between its tiny parts that have different purposes. But on account of its subtlity, it is not cleary comprehended (MB, Santi., Moksa. Ch. 308, verse 121).
[In theabove passage] having different purposes amounts to say 'because they perform different acts having their own respective special purposes.;
Now, the bodies have thier end and are ever changing. On the other hand, the Self is destructionless, because It is incomprehensible. Changing nature belongs only to the insentient thing which is comprehensible, but not to what is non-insentient and is exclusively consciousness in nature. Because, it is not possible [for one] to gain an altogether different nature. Thus, the bodies meet permanently their end and hence they cannot be lamented for; the Self ever remains without destruction (or without changing) and hence need not be lamented for. Thus a single krtya-suffix has been employed on both the senses simultaneously by the sage in the expression asocyan.


2.19 Ya enam etc. Whosoever veiws This i.e., the Self and the body, to be the slayer and the slain, ignorance is in him. That is why he is in bondage.
The same [point the Lord] clarifies -


2.20 Na jayate etc. Having not been at one time, This etc. : this Self will come to be, having not been at any time non-existent, but only having been existent. Therefore This is not born, This does not die too. For, having been [at one time], This will never be non-existent [at another time]; but certainly This will be [always] existent.


2.21 Veda etc. Whosoever, because of his realisation, under-stands this Self as 'This neither slays [any one]. nor is This slain [by any one] - how could there be any bondage for him ?


2.22 Vasamsi etc. just as a well - dressed person, on the destruction of his garment, gets himself dressed in another more suitable garment, and he does not perish on that account, in the same way the Self, dressed with different bodies [behaves].


2.23 See Comment under 2.25


2.24 See Comment under 2.25


2.23-25 Nainam etc. upto arhasi. The weapons etc., that cause destruction, haldly do anything to This. For, being, by nature, exclusively pure Consciousness, remaining without support, having no component parts and being independent, this cannot be destroyed through the process of either assumption of an altogether different nature, or the destruction of the support, or the mutual separation of the component parts, or the rise of an opponent, and so on. Nor the act to going to another body is a new thing for This. For, even when This is [apparently] with a single body, This travels always to different body; for the body does not remain the same even for a moment. By understanding this Self to be as such, you should not lament This.


2.26 Atha va etc. On the other hand if you deam 'This' to be the body and to be born constantly,-because its stream does not stop-even then, there is no necessity to lament. Or, if, following the [Vainasika Buddhists' ?] doctrine of continuous decay of things, you deem This to be constantly dying, even then where is the need for lamenting ? If you, in the same manner, deem the Self to be constantly born or to be constantly dying on account of Its contacts and separations with bodies, even then it is unwarranted, on every account, on the part of the men of rational thinking, to lament.
Otherwise this [division of] permanence and impermanence does not stand reasoning. For-


2.27 Jatasya etc. Destruction comes after birth, and after the destruction comes birth. Thus, this series of birth-and-death is like a circle. Hence to what extent is this to be lamented for ?
Furthermore-


2.28 Avyaktadini etc. Whether beings are permanent or impermanent, this much is certain : The person, who laments over a given object - as far as that person is concerned, that object is at the beginning unmanifest and at the end also it is unmanifest. Its manifestation in between is therefore a deviation from its natural state, Rather, there may be need to lament over the deviation from natural state and nor over the natural state [itself]. Further, whatever has been approved as its root cause, that itself permanently exhibits, within itself, a variety of different and endless creation, sustenance and absorption as its own manifold nature, in a set pattern. Hence what is the necessity for lamenting over the same nature of this (its effect) ?
And enowed with the above mentioned nature-


2.39 Ascaryavat etc. But, if this Self is, in this manner, changeless (or destructionless), why is This not observed just as such by all ? It is so because, as if by a rare chance, only some one observes [This]. Even after listening, not even one understands This i.e., realises This.


2.30 Dehi etc. On these grounds, the permanent destruction-lessness of the Self [is established].


2.31 Sva-Dharmam etc. Because one's duty cannot be avoided, wavering with regard to fighting the war is not proper [on the part of Arjuna].


2.32 Yadrcchaya etc. A war of this nature, because it is conducive to the heaven, should not be avoided even by other such Ksatriyas who are full of desires How much less [it is to be avoided] in the case of one to whom the science of knowledge of this nature has been taught ? This is what is intended to be conveyed [here] And the verse does not at all end with [determining how to attain] the heaven.
The very thing (i.e. sin), fearing which you withdraw from the battle, will befall you branching off hundredfold. This [the Lord] says-


2.33 See Comment under 2.37


2.34 See Comment under 2.37


2.35 See Comment under 2.37


2.36 See Comment under 2.37


2.33-37 Atha ca etc., upto krta-niscavah. Accepting what the opponent has stated, this pentad of verses is narrated as an argument : 'If your goodself prefers to abide by the generally accepted practice, even then this [fighting] must be undertaken necessarily'.


2.38 Sukha-duhkhe etc. For you, performing actions as your own duty, never there is any connection with sin.


2.39 Esa te etc. And this knowledge in th form of determination has been declared [to you] for your sankhya, i.e., perfect knowledge. Now, how the self-same determinate knowledge is also taught for the Yoga i.e., dexerity in action - in that manner only you must listen to by means of which determinate knowledge you shall avoid the binding nature of the actions. Truely, the actions do not themselves bind as they are insentient. Hence, it is the Self which binds Itself by means of the actions in the form of mental impressions.


2.40 Neha etc. Here in this determinate knowledge there arises no loss through transgression, an offence due to negligence; because negligence is [itself] absent there. And just as a burning oil in the boiler get cooled soon, due to a limited antity of sandal (put in it), in the same way due to this knowledge of Yoga-eventhough it is very little-the great danger in the form of the cycle of birth-and-death perishes completely.
And this knowledge is not introduced as a new thing. Then what ?


2.41 Vyavasayatmika etc. The knowledge in the form of determination is just one and natural in the case of everyone; but it suffers manifoldedness according to the objects to be determined.
Therefore -


2.42 See Comment under 2.44


2.43 See Comment under 2.44


2.42-44 Yam imam etc., upto na vidhiyate. Those, who crave for objects of desire, speak, on their own accord, of this flowery Vedic speech which is pervaded by the fruits i.e., the heaven in the future; and who, hence, desire the action itself as the fruit of their birth - these are men without insight. further, having their mind carried away by the same Vedic sentence imagined by themselves, these persons, eventhough they are endowed with the determinate knowledge, are not fit for concentration, because they do not decide this (concentration) as a fruit [of their action]. This is the purport of the traid of these verses.


2.45 Traigunya-etc. The Vedas bind very much [only] by means of the three Strands and they do not bind on their own accord. For, the rituals prescribed in the Vedas, create bondage if they are performed with an intention of pleasure, or of (avoiding) pain, or with an illlusion of attachment. Hence the traid of Strands in the form of desire (or in a pleasing form) must be abandoned.
If the present passage were intended to condemn the Vedas, then the act of fighting the battle in estion would be spoiled, because there is nothing other than the Vedas do not bind those, from whom the desire for fruit has completely gone.
Because the Vedas alone are useful for proper knowledge in the case of those persons [free from the Strands] hence [the Lord] says-


2.46 Yavan etc. He, according to whom the importance lies in his own duty alone or in the knowledge - for him the purpose is served even from a limited portion of the Vedic teaching
Therefore-


2.47 Karmani etc. You should be concerned in the action alone, but not in the fruits of actions. But, if an action has been performed, then will not its fruit just inevitably befall [to the performer] ? No. It is not so. For, in that case, if you are covered with the dirt of desire for fruits, then you become a cuase for the fruit of action. What is prayed for is known to be the fruit; and it does not befall him who does not desire it. Thus, what attachment a person entertains with regard to the negation of action, that alone is like a firm seizure, and is of the nature of false conception, and hence it must be abandoned.
Then what ?-


2.48 Yogasthah etc. Being established in Yoga you must perform actions. Evenness [of mind] is the Yoga.


2.49 Durena etc. Due to the contact (one has) with determining faculty [one's] inferior action i.e., the action that bears bad fruits and is empty, remains far away [from him]. Therefore seek i.e., pray for a refuge in the determining faculty of that nature, on account of which that determining faculty is gained.


2.50 Buddhiyuktah etc. Both indicates the mutual exclusion [of the good and bad actions]. Therefore [strive] for Yoga etc. : Working in that manner alone constitutes the supreme proficiency, by [working] in which manner the good action and the bad action perish. This is the idea here.


2.51 Karmajam etc. The persons who are endowed with the determining faculty with regard to the Yoga, renounce the birth-bondage, by renouncing the fruit of actions; and they attain the Brahman-existence.


2.52 See Comment under 2.53


2.52-53 Yada te etc. Sruti-etc. At the time, when the determining facult with regard to the Yoga is attained, the clear sign of recognizing it, is this : An attitude of futility about the revealed literature that has to be listened to, that has been listened to and that is being declared. What has been declared by the above is this : 'This present view of yours about the ruination of your race is out of place and it is due to the influence of your deceptive notion, born of mental impressions created by your listening to the teachings of those scriptures that favour the observers who are fallen deep into the course of ignorance. But, that view shall vanish when the respect for such a teaching disappears.


2.54 Sthita-prajnasya etc. By the statement 'When the determing faculty shall stand [firm in concentration, at that time you shall attain Yoga - above II, 55]' it has been [virtually] stated there that the appellation sthita-prajna (man-of-stabilized-intellect) is a nomenclature signifying man-of-Yoga who is fixed in concentration. Now, what is the connotation of it, i.e., what is the basis for the usage of this nomenclature ? For, [connotation is that] basing on which a particular meaning is connoted by words. Does the appellation sthita-prajna of the man-of-Yoga speak of him through its traditional (or conventional) force of the word or through its force of etymology ? This is the first estion. Of course, regarding the traditional force of the word there is no doubt at all. [For, it has no such force in it]. Yet, the present estion is to make the etymological meaning-though it is already available-clear by explaining the basis for definition of special nature.
The expression sthira-dhih has for its imports both the expression [itself] and its meaning 'the fixed-minded'. Of them, does the expression sthira-dhih denote that meaning alone which is indicated by the force of its components; or else does it denote the ascetic also ? This is the second estion.
Again, where would that firm-minded man-of-Yoga abide i.e., what would he practise; or what would his firmness depend on ? This is the third [estion].
And what world he achieve by practising ? This is the fourth [estion].
These four estions are decided one by one by the Bhagavat [in the seel].


2.55 Prajahati etc. [The expression 'a man-of-stabilized-intellect' denotes] a man whose intellect has stabilized, i.e., has grown roots. Growing roots is growing roots permanently on the Self. For, if that is achieved, the agitation in the form of desire born of the distraction by sense-objects comes to an end. Therefore, the nomenclature 'a man-of-stabilized-intellect' applied to a man-of-Yoga, has an etymological sense and it is appropriate in this way. In this manner one estion has been answered.


2.56 Dukkhesu etc. Only that sage whose mental attitude is free from desire and hatred in the midst of pleasure and pain, and not anyone else, is a man-of-stabilized-intellect.
This is also proper. For-


2.57 Yah sarvatra etc. There is no joy or sorrow in him while meeting the good or the bad.


2.58 Yada samharate etc. the nomenclature is not an expression having a composite of both the forces of etymological and traditional meanings, like the word pankaja 'a lotus'. But it has only the etymological force like the word pacaka 'a cook'. Whenever he (the sage) withdraws just in his own self-just as a tortoise keeps its limbs in its bossom-from the sense-objects i.e., warding off from the sense-objects, then and then [only] he is man-of-stabilized-intellect.
Or [the passage may mean :] Whenever he withdraws, within his own Self, [all], beginning from the sense-objects upto sense-organs i.e., when he approprites in his own Self all in the form of sense-objects and sense-organs.
But, how is it that the nomenclature 'a man-of-stabilized-intellect' does not hold good in the case of an ascetic ? It is answered-


2.59 Visayah etc. Of course, in his (ascetic's) case there is no contact with sense-objects, colour and the rest that are enjoyable. Yet, the sense-obects retreat [from him] leaving a taste in the form of longing that exists in his internal organ. Hence he is not a man-of-stabilized-intellect. Some (commentators) say that 'taste' denotes the sweetness etc., of the objects of experience. But, in the case of a man of Yoga there exists no longing as he has seen the Supreme Lord. On the other hand, in the case of the other, i.e. an ascetic, this does not retreat (disappear).


2.60 Yattasyapi etc. For, the mind of that ascetic too is carried away by the sense-organs. Or, the expression yattasya api denotes 'even of one who exerts'. [So], it is but the mind that is to be subdued by a man of Yoga. Thus the second [estion] is decided.


2.61 Tani etc. He, who restrains his sense-organs in this manner by means of his mind, but not by inactivity-he alone is a man-of-stabilized-intellect. He would remain viewing Me alone as his goal i.e., he would concentrate his attention on nothing but Me, the Supreme Lord, the Consciousness-Self.


2.62 See Comment under 2.63


2.63 Dhyayatah etc. krodhat etc. In the case of an ascetic, the very act of abandoning sense-objects itself resutls in undertaking the sense-objects. For, they abandon indeed by meditating [on them], and at the very time of such a meditation, attachment etc., are born in regular succession. Hence the act of abandoning objects is harmless only in the case of a man-of-stabilized-intellect. (65)


2.64 See Comment under 2.68


2.65 See Comment under 2.68


2.66 See Comment under 2.68


2.67 See Comment under 2.68


2.64-68 Raga-dvesa-etc. upto pratisthita. Here the purport is this : He, who controls his mind, is not tossed by the waves of wrath etc., even while he is enjoying the sense-objects; hence he alone is a man of Yoga, a man-of-stabilized-intellect.
Extraordinary is the man of Yoga, even while he is attending to the worldly business. While examining this point, the characteristics mark of his (man of Yoga), is briefly related by the Supreme Lord-


2.69 Ya nisa etc. Infatuating is the Illusion which is night for all beings. In that , the sage is awake (vigilant) with the thought 'How It could be avoided' The stage where the worldly men keep awake i.e., perform multifarious [worldly] activities, that stage is the night for the sage, as he is ignorant regarding the worldly activities.
It amounts to this statement : What is well-known as illusion, Its nature is indeed two-ford, viz., to delude and also to wear a deceptive appearance of spinning pleasure. Of them (the two natures), the worldly man, not considering Its former nautre, remains with a memory well teid to the second nature. On the other hand, the man of Yoga, who is contrary to the other, observes Its deluding nature in order to root It out. Thus the man of perfect knowledge, while seeing [properly], pays no attention to Its nature of spinning pleasure. His indifference to Its nature of spinning pleasure is due to the destruction of his false knowledge. That stage is night to him, even while he sees. Hence this is strange. The man of Yoga is awake (or understands) in the field of wisdom, where everyone else is unconscious (or totally perplexed); but in [the field] of ignorance he is not awake (or does not understand), where ordinary man is awake (or understands well). This is also strange.
That is why-


2.70 Apuryamanam etc. the man of Yoga does not run out for the sake of pleasure; but, rather just as the floods of the rivers enter into the sea, the objects of pleasure [themselves] continuously enter into him on account of their being peculiar attributes of the sense-organs; and they do not create in him waves [of agitation]. thus the third estion is decided.


2.71 Vihaya etc. Because he has renounced all desires, the man of Yoga, attains emancipation in the form of peace.


2.72 Esa etc. This is the Brahman-existance by remaining, i.e., having dwalt in which, even for a moment, one attains the Supreme Brahman [after] one's body breaks. Thus [all the] four estions have been decided.


3.1 See Comment under 3.2


3.1-2 Jyayasi etc. and Vyamisrena etc. Action has been taught and knowledge too. Now it is proper [to attach] importance not to both, but only to knowledge. Now if with the strenght of knowledge the action is to be destroyed from its very root, according to the instruction 'The man of wisdom casts off [both the good and the bad action]', then what is the autility of action ? This is idea of [Arjuna's] estion.
But the Bhagavat gives the answer :


3.3 Loke etc. In the world, this twofold path is well known. Knowledge is important for men of reflection and action for men of Yoga. But that path has been declared by Me to be only one. For, the Consciousness consists predominantly of knowledg and action. This is the idea here.
For this [the Lord continues] -


3.4 See Comment under 3.5


3.4-5 Na karmanam etc Na hi etc. Knowledge, deserted by action, does not exist; and the action, combined with dexterity does not exist, [if it is] deserted by knowledge. Therefore knowledge and action constitute one and the same thing. Hence it has been delclared :
'Knowledge is not deserted by action and action is
not deserted by knowledge. [Hence] a teacher who
is well accomplished in knowledge and action, is
the cutter of the fetters of the fettered'.
Therefore the action that is included within the knowledge cannot be avoided. For, the body, the organ of speech and the mind are, by nature, in a perpetual motion; and hence an individual, being simply under the control of other than himself, necessarily performs one action or the other. For, the body, the speech-organ and the mind are of the nature of throbing.


3.6 Karmendriyani etc. If he does not act with his organs of action, then he necessarily acts with his mind. At the same time he is the man of deluded action; For, the mental actions can never be avoided totally.


3.7 Yas tu etc. When actions are being performed [by him], there is no loss of his knowledge. For, when the mind does not function, he does his work like a machine-man.
Therefore -


3.8 Niyatam etc. you must perform action which has been enjoined i.e., prescribed in the scriptures. For, even the just subsistence of body depends on action.
Because -


3.9 Yajnarthat etc. Binding are the actions which are different from the one that is Yajnartha, i.e., the one that is to be performed necessarily. The action, that is to be performed necessarily, does not yield any fruit, if it is performed with no attachment for the fruit.


3.10 Saha-etc. The lord of creatures, the Supreme Soul, created creatures, just together with actions. It has also been declared by Him that the procreation i.e., lineage of creatures is through actions alone; these alone would give them what is desired viz., either the cycle of birth-and-death or emancipation - the cycle of birth-and-death is due to attachment and emancipation, due to the freedom from attachment.
The sense-objects deserve to be enjoyed only by those for whom emancipation is the most important. This is declared :


3.11 Devan etc. Devas : Those that have a tendency of playing i.e., the deities who preside over the organs and who dwell in the senses (or who are nothing but the sensitive faculty of the senses) and who are well-known in the Rahasyasastra. 'You must gratify these deities by this action i.e., feed them compability with sense-objects. Then, being satisfied, let these deities gratify (cause) you to have emancipation suitable exclusively to the intrinsic nature of the Self. For, [then alone you attain] a capacity to remain in your own Self. Thus when the mutual gratification - you gratifying the [deities of the] senses, and they letting [you] be absorbed in the Self - in the uninterruped series of periods of being extrovert and of meditation, you shall soon undoubtedly attain the highest good i.e., the Supreme that is marked with the total disappearance of [all] mutual differences.'
This path of the said nature is to be followed not merely for emancipation, but also for gaining all super - human powers (or success siddhi). This [the Lord] says -


3.12 Istan etc. [The deities of] the senses, gratified by the necessry actions, bind [the aspirant's mind] to the state of remaining firm on some object of meditation. Therefore when they are at work, the things, i.e., the objects are granted [to him] by none but the [deities of the] senses, through recollection, resolution, meditation etc., of their objects. If these objects are not offered for the enjoyment of the deities, then it would amount to the status of a theif i.e., to an act of thief, because he is acting deceitfully. Indeed it has already been declared by the Bhagavat that 'He is called a man of deluded action'. Therefore the idea in the passage [under study] is this : Whosoever is desirous of attaining by easy means, the supernatural power [like anima etc.], or of attaining emancipation, he should enjoy the objects as and when they are brought, [and enjoy] just with the aim of simply alliviating the impatience of the [deities of the] senses.


3.13 Yajnasista-etc. Those who enjoy the pleasures of obects that have come to them on the authority of laws enjoining what is to be necessarily performed; and who enjoy them viewing [the enjoyment] only as a secondary (or intermediate) action and conseently as a subsidiary having no separate purpose; and again those who enjoy the remnant of the necessary action in the form of gratifying the group of the devas of the snese-organs-that residue of food marked with bliss in being firmly established in their own Self - that is to say, those who have mounted upon the Self and are desirous of enjoying objects only as a means to achieve this end - they are freed from all faults of good and bad. Those, who for their own selves etc. : On the other hand, those who believe, under the influence of ignorance, the sheer superficial enjoyment of objects as their final goal, and act with the notion 'We perform this [act] for the sake of ourselves' - those persons alone gain the sin in the form of good and bad.


3.14 See Comment under 3.15


3.14-15 Annat etc. Karma etc. The things, that are born and are of diversified nature, arise from the food viz , the one which is of the nature of being undifferentiated objct of enjoyment, and which is somehow called by different synonyms like maya, vidya, kala etc. The said food also [arises] from the 'rain-cloud' i.e., the Self, which is of the nature of uninterrupted Consciousness. For, the state of being an object of enjoyment gains its existence depending on the enjoyer. That 'rain-cloud' too viz., the enjoyer, [arises] from the sacrifice (yajna) i.e., the act of enjoying. For, the state of being an enjoyer depends on the act of enjoying. And the act of enjoying [arises] from action, i.e., from the strength of freedom of action-energy (freedom in assuming any and every from).
The said freedom also, though it is uninterrupted, [arises] due to the good touch of the Brahman Which is full of freedom and of forms that are conditioned and are many, (or which is full of freedom and of many forms and is not conditioned); and which is the Supreme Soul, Brahman assuming the beings (tattvas), viz., the mighty Isvara (or Mahesvara) [and the Sadasiva] skipping high on It (Brahman). That Brahman, having the rising Lord-ship (or might) that is pure and unvieled, arises from what does not stream forth viz., the pure Supreme Consciousness in which the entire waves of might and Lordship have totally calmed down. Thus, the sacrifice well established [as an exil] in this manner, causing a six spoked wheel to rotate , spins the [two-fold] yarns - the yarn of emancipation by employing that part fitted with three spokes, and the yarn of [birth-and-death] activity by looming with the part of the [other] three spokes. Thus, the Brahman Which is charming with rolling waves of wisdom and ignorance, is established on nothing but the sacrifice.
But certain other commentators [interpret the passage as ] : The food is indeed the cause of beings through its graded chages into semen verile and blood; the food arises from the rain-cloud through the rains; that rains too arises from the [Vedic] sacrifice according to the principle :
'The oblation offered into the [sacrificial] fire, pro-
perly reaches the sun etc. (Manu. III, 76).
The sacrifice [arises] from the action; the action follows the knowledge, and the knowledge is from the Imperishable.
Still others [explain] differently : The food that is being enjoyed is the pentad of sense-objects; depending on it, the bhutas (elements) i.e., the sense-organs, act; the objects are of the nature of the sparkles of the Self. Therefore, it is only the Self that is being nourished by enjoying sense-objects. Hence the all-pervading Brahman is established in action. For It is identical with that.


3.16 Evam etc. On the other hand, he, who does not accept as stated above, is full of sins. For, he enjoys only in the sense-organs and not in the Self.


3.17 See Comment under 3.19


3.18 See Comment under 3.19


3.17-19 Yas ca etc. upto purusah. However, for a person who rejoices in the Self and performs action simply as a [routine] business of organs of action, there is no difference between (his) action and nonaciton. That is why he inflicts punishment on, or does favour to, every being, not with desire for any gain for himself, but with a conviction that it a is thing that deserves to be performed. Therefore, just unattached, one should perform action that is to be performed.


3.20 Karman=aiva etc. Therefore, janaka and others are examples for the fact that emancipation is even for those who perform action.


3.21 See Comment under 3.22


3.21-22 Yad yad acarati etc. Na me etc. The Bhagavat cities Himself as an example to illustrate the idea that to favour the world is the [only] purpose for such a person to exert in action, eventhough he has already attained whatever is to be attained, and is fully satisfied in his mind.


3.23 See Comment under 3.25


3.24 See Comment under 3.25


3.23-25 Yadi etc. upto loka-sangraham. Further, if a well-in-formed person were to abandon action, that would create in the society, a split for bad in the form of being illrooted, becuase of the binding force - viz., the regard for a particular well-known theroy-being loosened. For, they are able neither to cast off their tendency of action nor to accupy the tradition (or stream) of wisdom. Conseently they become weak.
Because these (common men) are not purified correct knowledge, therefore to break i.e., to shake their mind would be highly harmful for them. Hence, for their benefit, one should not disturb their mind. This [the Lord] says :


3.26 Na buddhi-etc. Himself knowing in this way, let him perform actions and let him not disturb the minds of common men.
[In the last verse] reference is made 'of the ignorant person'. [The Lord] now demonstrates their ignorance -


3.27 Prakreh etc. Indeed the actions are performed by the Strands, Sattva etc., belonging to the Prakrti. But the fool unnecessarily binds himself by wrongly comprehending 'I' am the doer'.


3.28 Tattvavit tu etc. On the other hand, the knower of the real nature of divisions of the Strands and of their actions, sets himself free by viewing 'The Prakrti acts; what comes to men ?'
The ignorant men have been described as being attached to action (above III, 26). That attachment [of theirs, the Lord] demonstrates :


3.29 Prakrteh etc. The deluded persons, under the influence of the Strands, Sattva etc., are attached to the actions performed by the Sattva etc., which are the Strands belonging to the Prakrti.
In the same context (III, 26) it has been said : 'Therefore being a master of Yoga, let [the wise] fulfil actions'. How to do that ? [The Lord] clarifies :


3.30 Mayi etc. You should perform the worldly act of fighting a war, being desirous of doing favour for the world; renouncing all actions in Me with the thought 'I am not the doer [of any act]'; and being convinced 'None but the Sovereign Supreme Lord is the doer of all acts, and I am nobody'.


3.31 See Comment under 3.32


3.31-32 Ye Me etc. Ye tvetat etc. Taking shelter in this doctrine whosoever performs any action, it does not bind him. On the other hand those, who have no faith is this knowledge, are lost totally; for, they are constantly socked in the fear of birth, death etc.


3.33 Sadrsam etc. There is hardly any difference in the wordly activities like eating etc., of him who is a man of wisdom. But he too acts only in conformity to the Sattva, etc., just knowing in this manner : 'Because the elements like the Earth etc. get absorbed into the prakrti; and the Self is also a non-doer and ever-freed; therefore the erradication of birth etc., are for whose sake ?'
Then how can there be bondage at all [for a man of worldly life] ? That is as follows, it is said :


3.34 See Comment under 3.35


3.34-35 Indriyasya etc., Sreyan etc. A person living the worldly life does entertain likes or dislikes towards every sense-object. For, due to his total ignorance he imagines that actions are performed only by his Self. Thus there is this difference between a man of knowledge and a man of worldly life, eventhough they perform alike their [respective] worldly activities such as eating etc.
The established view of ours [in this regard] is this : For a person, who, freed from attachment in every way, Performs his own duty, there is hardly any bond of merit or demerit. Indeed one's own duty never disappears from one's heart and it is certainly rooted there deeply as a natural taste. Not a single creature is born without that. Hence it should not be given up.


3.36 Atha etc. The estion is this : Eventhough a man knows a sin to be a sin, why does he proceed on it ? The idea in raising this estion is this : If one's own duty cannot be (or should not be) given up, because it does not vanish from one's own heart, then how to account for the sinful acts of these men [of the world] ? This amounts to say : What is one's own duty by which the creature is never deserted ?
Eventhough one's own duty rests in one's heart, the confusion (or evil) is created by the interruption (or covering) of an intruder, and it is not created by the absence of that duty-with this purport in mind, an answer to the above estion-


3.37 Kama esah etc. A total absence of difference among these two (desire and wrath) is indicated by the word esah 'this' twice uttered. These desire and wrath are ever interrelated and remain in an inseparable mutual co-existence. Hence [the Lord] well describes them only as identical. This is a swallower i.e., a devouer of the morsel of festival i.e., the happiness. The wrath alone is a bestower of sins as it is the cause of great sins. This is man of intelligence should view to be an enemy.


3.38 Dhumena etc. [The foe's tripple nature viz.] being a mischivous appendage, himself creating mischieves, and being an object of disgust, is explained by the triad of these similes. He : the Self.


3.39 Avrtam etc. Looks like a desired one : For it acts when there is desire. It is fire, because it is like fire impossible to satiate. For, it burns down both the visible and the invisible results [of rightious actions].


3.40 Indriyani etc. In the beginning, it stands on the sense organs at work. For example, when an enemy is sighted with eyes, he generates wrath about himself at the very place of the perceiver's sense-organ, then in the mind i.e., fancy, then in the intellect, i.e., resolve; and producing delusion in this way, it destroys knowledge.
[The Lord] speaks of the means for avoiding this foe as :


3.41 Or the passage jnana-vijnana-nasana may be an adverb [modifying the verb 'must avoid'] meaning 'by destroying it i.e., by keeping it off by means of knowledge (thought) i.e., by means of the mind and by means of superior knowledge (superior thought) i.e., by means of the intellect.' The intention is this : One must not allow, in the fancy, [the wrath] risen in the sense-organs, and must not make any resolve about [the foe], fancied.
The logic in this regard (in the above means) [ the Lords ] explains in a couple of verses:


3.42 See Comment under 3.43


3.42-43 Indriyani etc. Evam etc. 'Because the sense-organs are different from the sense-objects that indicate the foe [in estion]; from them the mind is different; from that too different is the intellect; what is instrinsically different from the intellect also is the Self; so due to wrath, risen at the sense-organs, how can there be a disturbance in the mind, in the intellect or in the Self ?' Let one contemplate in this manner. This is what is meant here.
This is intention of the experts of the Rahasya [literature] : The Supreme I-consciousness viz., the awareness 'All I am', which remains beyond the intellect, and the essence of which allows no difference-that is indeed the highest identity. Therefore no furstration (or cut) can be for That which is complete all around; hence wrath etc., do not rise [in It]. Therefore, taking hold of the Supreme Energy which in essence is Consciousness, you must slay the foe, the wrath which is ignorance in essence.


4.1 See Comment under 4.3


4.2 See Comment under 4.3


4.1-3 Evam etc. upto uttamam. Eventhough it has come down by regular succession of teacher, it is lost now. By this [statement] the Bhagavat indicates the rarity (or difficulty) and respectability of this knowledge. You are My devotee and friend too : You are a devotee having nothing but Me as your final goal and you are a friend too. This 'too' indicates the secondary importance [of the friendship]. Hence, just as in the sentence 'wander begging food [etc]', the importance lies in the act of begging food, but unimportance in the act of bringing the cow; in the same way, in the present case it is devotion towards the teacher that is important and not the friendship also. This is the idea intended here.


4.4 Even though he knows the nature of the Lord, Arjuna asks this estion in order to publisize it to the world.


4.5 See Comment under 4.9


4.6 See Comment under 4.9


4.7 See Comment under 4.9


4.8 See Comment under 4.9


4.5-9 Bahuni etc. upto Arjuna. Indeed the Bhagavat is Himself devoid of all bodily connections on account of His having the group of the 'six attributes' in toto. Yet, out of His nature of stabilising [the universe], and out of compassion, He sends forth (or creates) that is which the Self is secondary. The meaning is this : He takes hold of a body, in which the Self, with the group of 'six alities' in full, remains secondary because of Its role as a helper of the body. On account of this, His birth is divine. For, it has been created not by the results of actions, but by His own Trick-of-Illusion, by the highest knowledge of Yoga, and by the energy of Freedom of His own. His action too is divine, as it is incabable of yielding fruits [for Him]. Whosoever knows this truth in this manner i.e., realises in his own Self also in this manner, he necessarily understands the Bhagavat Vasudeva beng.


4.10 Vita-etc. Therefore many persons, who realise in this manner are free anger etc., because they have [all] their desires completely fulfilled, due to their being full of Me; and who perform actions which are to be performed and which do not yield any fruit [for them] - they have attained My own nature.
For-


4.11 See Comment under 4.12


4.11-12 Ye yatha etc. and Kanksantah etc. Different persons with differents forms in their mind take refuge in Me. Assuming the same [respective] forms for them I favour the. Only in this manner, those who are full of Me and those who are not so-all just follow my Path. For [even the performance of sacrifices] Jyotistoma and so on, is not a different path; that is also My own will of that nature. Indeed it is going to be declared [by the Lord] as 'the four-fold caste-structure has been created by Me'.
Some one says : The Present Tense (anuvarttante) is in the sense of Potential. Just as in the sentence 'They take hold of the group of sixteen in the Atiratra [sacrifce]', the expression 'They take hold of' means 'They should take hold of' in the same way in the present sentence too 'they follow', means 'they should follow'.
The success [of the action] viz., the enjoyment and emancipation is [achieved] here alone in this word of men and not anywhere else.


4.13 See Comment under 4.14


4.13-14 Catur-varnyam etc. Na mam etc. How can there be taint of actions in Me Who remain like the ether ? The comparison with ether is due to the absence of desire [in both]. As such etc. : whosoever, with this sort of thought, takes refuge in the Bhagavat i.e. contemplates everywhere at all times on the Bliss-dense Supreme Lord as 'There exits nothing othe than Vasudeva [the Absolute]' - for him can there be any bondage by actions ?


4.15 Evam etc. Therefore being purified by this [sort of] conviction you too should perform actions that are to be necessarily performed.
But, if it is said that success would result just from the non-performance of action, that is not correct. For -


4.16 See Comment under 4.17


4.16-17 Kim karma etc. Karmanah etc. The classification of [good] action and non-action is difficult to comprehend. That is to say there is bad action even among the action that has been ordained [in the scriptures], just as the animal-slaughter in the [pious] Agnistoma sacrifice. Again, even in the midst of action, that goes against [the scripture], there is auspicious action; for example there is an end for the trouble of the people in the act of killing a murderous animal. Even in the case of non-performance of action, there do exist [both] the auspicious and inauspicious acts; for there will be necessarily [some] acts performed by the sense of speech and by the mind as they are difficult to avoid without wisdom. Therefore on account of its mysterious nature, even hte experts have not properly understood the action as : 'Prosperity would be for as by this [particular] auspicious action; and emancipation would be for us by that [particular] non-undertaking of [certain] actions'. Therefore, it is the fire of wisdom taught in the seel, that alone is capable of positively burning down the fuel of all the auspicious and inauspicious actions; and hence that is to be sought after as a refuge. This is what is intended by the Bhagavat.
In order to calrify the same, [the Lord] says -


4.18 Karmani etc : He who finds the actions, [seemingly] of his own, to be non-actions [of his], on account of his being non-performer [of any action], because of his state of total tranility; and he who recognises the non-actions [of his] i.e., the actions performed by others, as actions being performed by himself (or who recognises the non-actions undertaken by others as being undertaken by himself), because of his intrinsic nature of the fully risen state; that person alone is a man of intelligence in the midst of all; and he [alone] performs action fully i.e., in its entirity. Therefore what fruit should be borne for him by what action ? This is at the stage of rising. But, at the stage of total tranility he injures, or cuts all actions. Thus he performs all action or performs no action. This is the secret and sacred knowledge, got by sitting near (by serving) the feet of the preceptors.
Therefore -


4.19 Yasya etc. The actions, performed without intention for the desirable objects, - i.e., the fruits desired for - are burnt up by putting them into the fire of wisdom, the nature of which has been earlier described , and also is to be described in the seel.


4.20 See Comment under 4.21


4.21 Tyaktva etc. Nirasih etc. Even though he sets upon : Even though he is directly exerting in. Bodily action : the action which is in the form of activity of the organs for simply maintaining the body, and which is not coloured (desired) so much by the mind and intellect.


4.22 Yadrccha-etc. He does not get bound even when he acts : Here nibadhyate 'gets bound' is a usage of transitive verb with its object functioning as the subject. [Hence] the meaning is : The Self binds Itself by undertaking the dirt of mental impressions for fruits [of action]. Otherwise [the usage would amount to attribute] freedom of actions to the insentient in binding [the Self] - a proposition which is not a very happy one.


4.23 Gatasangasya etc. For sacrifice (yajnaya) : The singular number is to be construed with the class [yajnatva]. [Hence the meaning is] : 'The sacrifice' that are being defined in the seel.
It has been said 'for the sake of sacrifice etc.' Now their general nature, [the Lord] describes :


4.24 Brahmarpanam etc. That is to be offered to the Brahman (list) : that, the offering of which is in the Brahman i.e., the reentrance of which is only into That, just from which it has originated. The Brahman (2nd) : That which is the same as the entire universe what we see - this is that very oblation. Into the Brahman-fire : into the fire which is the same as the Brahman, the highly tranil Supreme Consciousness. By the Brahman : by one or the other action. Is poured : is offered for the augmentation of It's lumination. Hence, a man of Yoga, whose Brahman-action of this sort is itself a deep concentration - by him, the Brahman alone is [a goal] to be attained i.e., to be realised, not anything else; for there is no other thing.
Alternatively [in the verse] the meaning 'by him' brings in, by implication, the meaning 'by whom'. So the following is the alignment [of words] : The action, in which the Brahman-oblation, intended to be an offering to a deity of the Brahman-nature, has been indeed poured into the Brahman-fire by the sacrificer, identical with the Brahman - that very Brahman-action of this sort is itself a deep contemplaiton, because it is the means to gain the innate nature of the Self. And what is attained by this Brahman-action-contemplation is the very Brahman Itself and not any other fruit. Indeed it has been maintained [by the Lord] as :
'The way in which men resort to Me,
[in the same way I favour them]'. (IV, II)
'Those, who have cultivated the nature of performing sacrifice which is nothing but Me, but of the delimited nature - they attain, therefore, the fruit of similar [limited] nature. This is different matter. But, with regard to those who have realised the nature of the sacrifice identical with Me ( the Supreme Consciousness), the Unlimited and complete; how could they be entertaining a craving for a bit of limited fruit ?' This is the idea here.
Thus, a top secret is furnished by this and by the succeeding verses. that has been also detailed by us (Ag.) - even though our intelligence is limited - as far as our intelligence permits, by not transgressing the instructions of our preceptors. Maybe, for a person without a regular course of the oral tradition [of the system], this looks like a picture painted on the sky and does not appeal to his mind. On that account we should not be blamed.
It has been declared by some, in this context, that [here in this verse] the oblation, the fire and the instruments like sruk [used for offering the oblation into the fire in the sacrifice] and also the act [of offering] are all adjectives alifying the Brahmam. This [explanation] deserves to be ignored. For, these commentators have not troden on the path of the secret tradition.


4.25 Daivam etc. the Devas are the sense-organs that are playful. The yajna that stands based on them is nothing but the act of receiving objects of their own. Certain persons are thoroughly devoted only to that yajna, i.e., they gain the gain of their own Self by examining this (yajna) from its root . That is why they are men of Yoga; for, they are absorbed in the Yoga permanently at all stages. Indeed in Yogin the suffix ini, a synonym of matup, here signifies 'perpetual connection'. Further, they (Yogins) pour, as an offering, the self-same yajna, above defined, into the Brhaman-fire that is insatiable i.e. that cannot be satisfied. Thus [the verse] has been interpreted by some.
However, the Sage (the author of the Gita) does not violate the context. Hence, that meaning which exists in his heart we shall show : Certain masters of Yoga perform godly sacrifice i.e., sacrifice, consisting of external objects, and intending only deities like Indra etc., of varied forms. Further, with a single conviction that 'It is a Yajna and a thing to be performed', i.e., with no craving for fruit, they offer the same sacrifice, that is being performed, into the Brahman - fire which is insatiable i.e., difficult to satisfy. Thus even those, who perform sacrificial rites with material objects, attain the Supreme Brahman. For, it is going to be declared in the seel : 'All these persons too have understood sacrifice' (IV, 30 below). The Vedic text also [says] :
'The gods offered sacrifice [just] as sacrifice'. (RV, I, 164, 50; TS, III, v, II, 5; etc.)


4.26 Srotradini etc. But others [offer] the sense-organs into the fires of the restrainer. Restrainer : the mind. Its fires are the tongues of flame that are in the form of subdued views of objects and are capable of burning up desires. Into them they offer the sense-organs. Hence, they are the performers of penance-sacrifices. Still others offer objects into the fires of sense-organs that are fully set-blaze by wisdom and that are capable of burning up the fruits [of actions]. I.e., they seek enjoyment only for destroying the [past] mental impression of differences [between the enjoyer and the objects of enjoyment]. This is the secret and sacred truth. Hence I (Ag.) have myself stated in the laghvi Prakriya (the Little Process) as :
'The object of enjoyment does not manifest as different from you, the enjoyer. Because, it is the [process of] enjoyment that itself is the identification (or unity) of hte enjoyer and the object of enjoyment'.
In the [work] Spanda also [it has been said] :
'It is the enjoyer himself who remains in all the instances and at all times, in the form of the object of enjoyment'.


4.27 See Comment under 4.28


4.27-28 Sarvani etc. Dravyayajnak etc. Again all the activities of their sense-organs, the activities of their mind, and the activities of their vital airs, such as issuing through the mouth and nose, driving down the urine etc., other [seekers] established in the fire of concentration, named Yoga, which is the means for subduing the self i.e., the mind, and which is set ablaze by i.e., to be filled with, knowledge. The idea is this : With their intellect that has completely abandoned all other activities due to their concentration on the object, they receive the object that is being perceived on conceived. That has been stated in the Sivopanisad :
'When the intellect, concentrated on a certain object, not rejected, would not go to another object, at that time the meditation, remaining in the core of the objects, blossoms very much.'
Thus the Yoga-sacrifices are explained.
So far the performers of the material-object-sacrifices, the austerity-sacrifices, and the yoga-sacrifices have been defined. Those, who are the performers of the svadhyaya-knowledge-sacrifices are defined now [as] -


4.29 See Comment under 4.30


4.29-30 Apane etc. Apare etc. Prana (1st) : the arising one i.e., the nada which has, as its end, that one where the first syllabic instance of Pranava dissolves. Into the apana : into what sets down, and is of the nature of entering inot the Svananda. They offer : Thus is the svadhyaya of the nature of the firmness of the body is described.
What sets down, some [sages] established on what rises up, so that the pupil's self (mind) may learn the processes of sending out and drawing in [the vital airs]. By [thus] uniting these two, they bestow emanciaption on their own Self and on the Self of the pupils; and they, on that account, remain with their mind firmly established on the svadhyaya-sacrifice full of Svananda (i.e., Nijananda) and Parananda - a svadhyaya of the nature of examining, enlightening, entering and uniting [the prana nad apana] in their own Self and in the Self of the pupils. That is why the process of filling [the vital air] in has been first mentioned; and the process of emptying the same out at the last. Further, the process of the inward turning of the act of enjoying objects, is suggested by the first arter of the verse (29), and by the second arter the act of coming out for enjoying the objects through the process of having the supreme state-of-bodylessness. Therefore, the performers of the sacrifice of wisdom are not different from the performers of the svadhyaya-sacrifice.
The same sages have the desries of their own and of their pupils fulfilled on account of their thorough practice of the said activity; control both the said paths, restrict their food viz., enjoyment of objects; and offer pranas into the pranas, i.e, they offer, by means of the ietude at the stage of stopping [the vital air], the rising of all the mental modifications into the splendour of rising waves of Parananda and Nirananda. All these persons know the truth (or nature) of hte sacrifices, starting from the material-sacrifice upto the wisdom-sacrifice; only by that means they have eradicated their sins; that is to say, they have uprooted the mighty delusion with its roots, made of mental impressions of duality.


4.31 Yajna-etc. They enjoy the nectar of the Parananda and the Nirananda, which is of the nature of relaxing in their own Self and which has been ordained-i.e., brought about - by the sacrifice and which is the remnant of the sacrifice in the form of satisfying [the deities of] their own sense-organs. Yet, remaining as Brahman Itself, they get themselves mixed [in this mundane life] to their heart-content.
Here we refrain [ourselves] from the free talk of clearly disclosing what is highly secret. Further, here a good amount of tasty secret has been kept well hidden. Yet, this becomes an object of [actual] chewing and [thus] becomes the cause for enjoying (realising) what is Real, in the case of those persons whose [bodily and internal] elements have been ealised by the powerful medicines of the tradition learnt from the revered teachers, pleased with service, laden with very assiduous devotion.
In this context other explanations have been offered by [other] commentators. However, let the intellectuals weigh and decide for themselves, those explanations and the etymological interpretations offered by our revered preceptors. So, look ! What is the use of the sport of criticising the statements of those commentators ? Hence let us stick to only what we have begun with.


4.32 Evam etc. All these sacrifices have been detailed in the mouth of i.e., at the entrance to, i.e., as means to [attain], the Brahman. In them there lies the practice of actions as common factor. By knowing in this manner, you too shall attain liberation from bondage.
The speciality here is this :


Sri Abhinavgupta did not comment on this sloka


4.34 See Comment under 4.35


4.34-35 Tat etc. Yaj=jnatva etc. This : the knowledge. By prostration : by devotion. By iniry : by the consideration of pros and cons, by good reasoning etc. By service : by practice. You should learn [this], For, those that are endowed with knowledge i.e., your own different sense-organs, that are exceedingly favoured by consciousness, will point out nearby i.e., will lead the truth to you if you remain practising in the said manner. For this, it has been said that they (sense-organs) are capable of showing the truth i.e., they show nothing but the truth. That has been said :
'The Yoga alone is the teacher of Yoga [practice]'
and
'On [reaching] that [seeded Yoga] [there arises] an
insight, truth-bearing' (YS, I, 48).
If 'those that are endowed with knowledge' is interpreted to mean 'other wise persons', then it would amount to say that what the Bhagavat Himself had taught is untruth. Or, the purpose of saying in this manner may be to teach a conventional rule : Other persons too should learn from the men of wisdom only by prostration etc., and not by any other means.
The [locatives] atmani 'in your Self' and mayi 'in Me' are in the same-case-relationship, and they mean 'in your Soul that has attained (realised Its) identity with Me'. Atho is an expletive. In order to established the [total] sameness (identity) of the Absolute with the [individual] Self, a certain characteristic mark [of the two], is mentioned [here]. If the non-sameness (non-identity) [of these two] is intended, then the meanings 'choice' etc., [of atho] have no relevance here.
Saying that 'the sin also perishes' in the first verse [of following two], in order to clarify the earlier statement 'all actions, leaving no bit, [meet their end in knowledge' - verse 33 above]; indicating, by 'all actions' - in the second verse-that the suggested meaning of 'leaving no bit (verse 33)' is 'not even a bit of mental impression [of actions] survives'; [the Lord] explains-


4.36 See Comment under 4.37


4.36-37 Api cet etc. Yatha etc. The idea is this : One should exert is such a way so that the fire of knowledge remains well fuelled with the knot of firmness of conviction born of practice.


4.38 Na hi etc. There exists no purifier similar to the knowledge. The purity of other things is due to the touch of Consciousness and is not intrinsic. This point is not elaborated here for fear of a lengthy discussion. This purifying nature of the knowledge, one would understand for himself on reaching the stage of being perfectly enlightened.


4.39 See Comment under 4.40


4.39-40 Sraddhavan etc. Ajnah etc. Here the idea of the passage is this : The incoming of faith and the performance of activities intending this [knowledge], both spring up soon no doubt, if one, being a believer, entertains no doubt. Therefore, one should remain being favoured by the preceptors and the scriptures, and not entertaining any doubt. For, the doubt is a destroyer of everything [good]. Indeed a person with doubt knows nothing, because he does not have faith. Hence one should remain without doubt.
The subject matter that has been elaborated in this entire chapter is now summarised by a pair of the [following] verses :


4.41 Yoga-etc. Renunciation of actions becomes possible only through Yoga and not otherwise. This has been discussed also [in the seel].


4.42 Tasmat etc. Cutting asunder the doubt, you must practise, by the said method, the Yoga, the dexterity in action; and then stand up i.e., perform your activities simply with the idea that they are to be performed.


5.1 Samnyasam etc. Is renunciation superior or Yoga ? this is the estion of the doubting person (Arjuna).


5.2 Samnyasah etc. Renunciation and the Yoga of action-not only one, but two-are mentioned here. Happily joining together they yield salvation. (However), the superiority of the Yoga [over the renunciation] is due to the fact that but for the Yoga, renunciation does not exist.


5.3 Jneyah etc. Therefore he alone is all the time man-of-renunciation, by whom both desire and hatred have been renounced from his mind. Because his intellect has come out of the pairs of anger, delusion and others, he is released just easily.


5.4 See Comment under 5.5


5.4-5 Samkhya-Yogau etc. Yat samkhyaih etc. There is nothing to differentiate as 'This is path of knowledge' [and] 'This is Yoga'. Indeed both these are ever inter-connected. Knowledge is not without Yoga; and Yoga also is not without knowledge. Hence the identity of these two.


5.6 Samnyasastu etc. [Here] the word tu is used in the sense of 'affirmation' and it is to be construed in a different order. [Hence the meaning is] : For a person without Yoga, it is certainly hard to attain renunciation. Because, as it has been already shown logically, it is difficult to renounce actions. But, it is certainly easy for men of Yoga to attain this. That has been said earlier.


5৷৷7 See Comment under 5.11


5.8 See Comment under 5.11


5.9 See Comment under 5.11


5.10 See Comment under 5.11


5.7-11 Yogayuktah etc. upto atma-siddhaye. He, whose (by whom) Self is [realised to be] the Self of all beings, is not stained, eventhough he performs all [sorts of] actions. For, he has undertaken neither what is enjoined nor what is prohibited. Hence, even while performing actions such as seeing and the like, he bears in mind, -i.e., he resolves with [all] firmness of observation, - that 'If the sense-organs like eyes etc., function on their respective objects, what does it matter for me ? Indeed one is not stained by what another does'. This act is nothing but dedicating one's actions to the Brahman. In this regard the characteristic mark is his detachment. Due to that he is not stained. Because they do not have attachment, the men of Yoga perform actions only with their body etc., that are freed from attachment and do not depend on each other.


5.12 Yuktah etc. Highest : that from which there is no return.


5.13 Sarva - etc. [He would view as] : 'Just as for a person within a house there is no connection with dilapidation etc., that are found in the house, in the same way for me too residing in the body-house beautified with nine windows in the form of openings like the eyes etc., there is no connection with its attributes.'
For -


5.14 Na kartrtvam etc. This Soul does not do anything for anything. But, Its exertion is only Its inherent nature and it is not due to any desire for results. For, the Bhagavat, the Conscious Energy Itself Whose ultimately true inherent nature is the Illumination-Bliss-Freedom-of-Will, and Which brings out, merely by Its own nature, the continuous series of creation, manitenance and withdrawl of all (the Universe); hence in It, there is never a departure, even to a little extent, from Its own inherent nature. Hence there is no such thing as a particular stage of being a creator i.e., a creatorhood separate [from Itself]. Because that does not exist, what actions can be there ? If actions are not there, the fruit is to be of what or for whom ? Then what connection could be three with the fruit of action ?
[Further], 'action' in this context is [only] the kriya-[sakti] or creative energy [which is nothing but His will], and 'result of action' too in only the fruit of this kriya. For example, the activity like rotating the [potter's] wheel by the stick is not [actually] different [from what is to be created i.e., the pot]. Nor the creator of the pot is different from it. For, all exist within the Conscious Energy. Therefore, it is only the Animate Sovereign Supreme Lord that manifests in this and that form. Therefore there exist no activity and its result etc., apart from That. This is demonstrated conclusion [of the scriptures].
So, if there is no activity or its result [as stated above], then even the result, ordained in [the scriptural] injunctions cannot have a status of being produced by the unseen [cause]. After saying this in the other first hemistich [of the following verse], the Lord justifies in the other hemistich the same statement with reference to the men of mundane life :-


5.15 Nadatte etc. The sinful acts and the like have been effected not by the Soul; but they have been effected by the Illusion belonging to It, just as a poison is effected in the nectar by a doubt.
Therefore-


5.16 Jnanena etc. When however the Illusion is destroyed by knowledge, then the natural capacity of knowledge, in illuminating itself and other things starts to work automatically just as the sun does when the darkness is lost. Indeed when the doubt [of poison] is completely rooted out, the nectar does the work of the nectar just automatically.
But this is possible for those who have their intellect and mind gone to This [Self] and have abandoned [all] other activities. To make this idea clear [the Lord] says -


5.17 Because it is only the inherent nature that exerts thus, therefore [the Lord] says that the men, who have destroyed their illusion would remain as follows -


5.18 Vidya-etc. So, regarding a Brahmana these men of Yoga entertain no such veiw as 'I shall become a man of merit by serving him' and so on; regarding a cow, no [idea] like 'It is purifying and sacred' and so on; regarding an elephant, no thought of wealth and so on; regarding a dog, no conviction that it is impure, mischievous and so on; and with regard to a dog-cooker no opinion that he is a sinner, is impure and so on. That is why it is said that 'they look eally [upon these]' and not that 'they act eally [with them]. This has been said as -
The Self, which is of the nature of pure Consciousness, [shines] in he bodies of all; no discriminating factor exists anywhere. Hence, the person who has conered the cycle of birth-and-death, remains consdering all as fully absorbed in That (Consciousness) (VB, verse 100).
Here too nothing but this stream of thought has been mentioned by 'remains considering'.
The proper mental disposition of a man of wisdom, says [the Lord], would be like this :


5.19 This sloka does not exit in Gitartha sangraha of Abhinavagupta.


5.20 Na prahrsyet etc. In the case of this person, who habitually looks [upon all] alike, the classification of foes and friends is at the level of mundane business alone, and not internally, as he is firmly established in the Brahman.


5.21 He, in whom there is no desire for the external touch viz., the object-he thinks says as follows the Bhagawat -


5.22 Ye hi etc. He considers indeed as follows : 'All enjoyments born of the external objects are in the form of causes of misery; and even otherwise , they are impermanent'.


5.23 Saknoti etc. It is not easy to accomplish this; [for], if this force of wrath and desire, hard to bear is endured till the last moment of the body, not for a moment alone-then is the total Bliss achievement.


5.24
Yo'ntah etc : Within : For him there is happiness nowhere but within and it does not depend on any external object ; there alone he rejoices; his lustre is there only. But, there is an apparent ignorance [of him] in his worldly dealings. That has been said as -
'[A man of realisation] would wander, like a fool,
with no inclination for discussion.' (PS, 71)


5.25 Labhante etc. This [goal] is however possible to attain for those in whom the double knots in the form of dualism and doubt have been cut off.


5.26 Kama - etc. For them at all times i.e., at all stages, there is Brahman-Existence, the ultimately true one, and it does not look for the time of control [of the mind (mediation)]


5.27 See Comment under 5.28


5.27-28 Sparsan etc.; Yatendriya-etc. Warding off outside, i.e., not accepting, the external contacts (objects); establishing all the sense-organs - indicated by 'sense of sight' - in the middle place in between the two wandering ones, i.e., the right and the left views in the form of desire and wrath viz., in that particular place which is free from both these; he would remain fixing in eipoise (or making neutral) both the forward (upward) and backward (downward) moving forces viz., the pious and impious acts, within the mental modification. Nasa 'that which acts crookedly'. This is mental modification, because it behaves crookedly i.e., ineally due to anger etc. The same is in the external plane. A man of Yoga of this type is just free, though he transacts all mundane business.


5.29 Bhokatram etc. [The Lord is deemed to be] the enjoyer in the caste of their fruit of the sacrifices. For, it is in favour of Him that the fruit is renounced. the same is with regard to the austerities. By knowing the nautre of the Lord as such, a man of Yoga is released, whatever way he may remain in.


6.1 See Comment under 6.2


6.1-2 The subject matter that has been thus established in the series of the preceding chapters is summarised by a couple of verses.
Anasritah etc. Yam etc. Bounden : Ordained [in the law books] according to one's caste etc. [Thus] man-lf-renunciation and man-of-Yoga are synonyms. That is why [the Lord] says, 'what [the learned] call renunciation' etc. Therefore, without Yoga no renunciation is possible. Similarly Yoga is not possible without renouncing the intention [for fruit]. Conseently, the Yoga and renunciation are ever interlinked. The idea, suggested by 'not he who remains [simply] without his fires etc.' is this : He remains neither without fires, nor without actions and yet he is man of renunciation, Hence this is strange.
Of course, following the principle [involved in the statement] 'Playing dice is the kingship, without throne', and following logic it has been asserted already that renunciation is not possible for a person who remains simply without actions. Yet-


6.3 Aruruksoh etc for a sage : For a man of wisdom. Action : that which reires to be performed. Cause (1st) : a means to attain. Quietude : to remain uninterrupted at the stage [already] achieved. Here Cause (2nd) is an indicator.
The same idea is made clear as-


6.4 Yada etc. What is desired by the senses : Objects of senses. The actions for them : actions such as earning the objects and so on.
In this [path of] knowledge one should be necessarily attentive. This [the Lord] says-


6.5 See Comment under 6.6


6.5-6 Uddharet etc. Bandhuh etc. In this [path] there is no other means excepting the self i.e. nothing but one's mind. Indeed the subdued mind is a friend and it lifts up [the Self] from the highly dreadful cycle of birth and death. But the unsubdued one does the act of enmity as it throws [the Self] down in the horrible hell.
The characteristic mark of the subdued-minded man is this :


6.7 Jita-etc. A person with complete calmness : a person without ego. [The thinking etc.] ; A thinking that entertains no difference in the case of others and of himself, and of cold and heat etc., i.e., [entertains] no like and dislike [for them].


6.8 Jnana - etc. Knowledge : a knowledge which is different from the false one. What consists of varied thoughts : the action in which varied thoughts are involved, i.e. the action that is born as result of preceding thoughts of reasoning.


6.9 Suhrt etc. Friend is one whose heart remains good and auspicious without cause (on its own accord). Companionship is [that which is felt] mutually. Enmity is [also that which is felt] between one another. The indifferent one : the one, who is free from both these. One who remains in the middle : he who is partly a friend and partly an enemy. Foe : he who deserves to be hated, [but] cannot be hated. Relative : the one [connected] by marital bondage. Whosoever is with his mind eal to all these as well as to the righteous and the sinful; he excells [all] i.e., stage after stage he goes out of the cycle of birth-and-death.
By the worshipful-footed persons of this sort -


6.10 See Comment under 6.15


6.11 See Comment under 6.15


6.12 See Comment under 6.15


6.13 See Comment under 6.15


6.14 See Comment under 6.15