Bg 18.1-78

 18.1

arjuna uvāca:
O mighty-armed one, I wish to know the truth of sannyāsa (renunciation) and tyāga (relinquishment), O Hṛṣīkeśa, separately, O slayer of Keśin.

śrīdhara:

In the eighteenth chapter, He clearly spoke about the division of nyāsa and tyāga, summarizing the entire meaning of the Gītā, in determining the highest truth.

And here -

"Renouncing all actions in the mind, the self-controlled one rests happily" (Gītā 5.13)
"One whose self is united with the yoga of renunciation" (Gītā 9.28)

In these and other verses, renunciation of action is taught. Similarly -

"Abandoning attachment to the fruits of action,
Ever content, independent,
He does nothing at all,
Though engaged in action." (Gītā 4.20)

In these and other verses, performance of action with relinquishment of only the fruits is taught. And the omniscient, supremely compassionate Lord would not teach something mutually contradictory. Therefore, desiring to know the non-contradictory way of renunciation of action and its performance, Arjuna said "sannyāsasya" etc. O Hṛṣīkeśa, controller of all senses! O slayer of Keśin, who in battle with the great horse-formed demon named Keśin, when he came to devour You with mouth wide open, You entered Your left arm into his extremely wide-open mouth, and in that very moment, with that same arm grown large, tore him apart like a bitter gourd fruit and slew him. Hence the address "O mighty-armed one". I wish to know separately, with discrimination, the truth of sannyāsa and tyāga.

viśvanātha:

The threefold nature of sannyāsa, jñāna, karma, etc., the determination of liberation, and the most secret essence of bhakti - these are spoken of in the eighteenth chapter.

In the previous chapter -

"The various acts of sacrifice, austerity and charity
Performed without expectation of results
Are termed as 'tat' by those desiring liberation." (Gītā 17.25)

In this statement of the Lord, by the word "those desiring liberation", only the sannyāsīs are meant. Or if they are different, then for those who relinquish the fruits of all actions as You have said - "Then, with controlled mind, renounce the fruits of all actions" (Gītā 12.11) - what is that tyāga of theirs? And what is that sannyāsa of the sannyāsīs? Desiring to know this with discrimination, he says "sannyāsasya" etc. By "separately", if the words sannyāsa and tyāga have different meanings, then I wish to know separately the truth of sannyāsa and tyāga. But if they are synonymous in Your view or in another's view, then I wish to know separately their unity of meaning, that is, their synonymity. O Hṛṣīkeśa, as You are the prompter of my intellect, You alone raise this doubt in me. O slayer of Keśin, You alone will tear apart this doubt like Keśin - this is the idea. O mighty-armed one - You are endowed with great arm-strength, I am endowed with some arm-strength, only in this aspect is there friendship between You and me. Not in aspects like omniscience, etc. Therefore, due to this slight friendship given by You, I am without hesitation in questioning - this is the idea.

baladeva:

Here summarizing all the meanings of the Gītā in the eighteenth chapter,
Hari spoke of the extreme secrecy of bhakti and prapatti there.

"Renouncing all actions in the mind, the self-controlled one rests happily" (Gītā 5.13) - what is meant by the word sannyāsa here and in other places? And in "Abandoning attachment to the fruits of action" (Gītā 4.20) and other places, what is meant by the word tyāga by the Lord? Doubting this, Arjuna asks "sannyāsasya" etc. Are the words sannyāsa and tyāga of different meanings like the words "mountain" and "tree", or of similar meaning like the words "Kuru" and "Pāṇḍava"? If the former, then I wish to know separately the truth of sannyāsa and tyāga. If the latter, then there must be some minor qualifying difference, and I wish to know that. O mighty-armed Kṛṣṇa, O Hṛṣīkeśa, as You are the prompter of the functions of the intellect, You alone raise my doubt. O slayer of Keśin, You will destroy my doubt like Keśin.

bhg 18.2

The Blessed Lord said:
The wise understand sannyāsa (renunciation) as the abandonment of actions motivated by desire. The discerning declare tyāga (relinquishment) to be the relinquishment of the fruits of all actions. ||2||

śrīdhara: The Blessed Lord answered thus - "kāmyānām" etc. The wise understand sannyāsa as the complete abandonment of actions prescribed with desire, such as "One desiring a son should perform sacrifice" or "One desiring heaven should perform sacrifice." The learned understand sannyāsa as the complete abandonment of all actions along with their fruits. The discerning and skillful declare tyāga to be the relinquishment of only the fruits of all actions - both those motivated by desire and obligatory ones. Not the abandonment of action itself.

Now, how can there be relinquishment of non-existent fruits for obligatory actions where no fruits are mentioned? Indeed, a barren woman cannot abandon a son.

It is said that although specific fruits are not mentioned for daily obligatory actions like "One should worship at twilight daily" or "One should offer the agnihotra sacrifice for life" as they are for actions like "One desiring heaven should sacrifice", still the injunction implies some general fruit to motivate a discerning person to act, as in "One should perform the Viśvajit sacrifice." The injunction's purpose should not be considered to be merely self-accomplishment through faith, as that would be difficult to refute due to the impossibility of human engagement otherwise. Fruits are also mentioned for obligatory actions: "All these become meritorious worlds", "By ritual action, the world of the fathers", "By dharma, they ward off sin" etc. Therefore, it is aptly said that the discerning declare tyāga to be the relinquishment of the fruits of all actions.

Now, if fruits are relinquished, there would be no engagement in fruitless actions. Not so, because all actions are enjoined for the purpose of inquiry through association and separation. Thus the śruti states: "Brahmins seek to know That through recitation of the Vedas, sacrifice, charity, austerity and fasting." Therefore, abandoning all fruits mentioned in śruti as binding, the performance of all actions for the sake of inquiry is indeed possible. Inquiry means the mind's inclination towards the inner Self through discrimination between the eternal and non-eternal, by ceasing identification with the body etc. Until then, one should necessarily perform non-conflicting actions as appropriate for mental purification, relinquishing their fruits. This relinquishment of fruits, not the actions themselves, is called karma-tyāga. Thus the śruti states: "Performing actions here, one should wish to live a hundred years." (īśo 2) Thereafter, cessation of all actions happens naturally. As stated in the Naiṣkarmya-siddhi:

"Actions, producing the mind's inclination inwards through purification,
Having fulfilled their purpose, cease, like rainclouds in autumn."

The Lord also said: "But one who delights only in the Self..." etc. Vasiṣṭha also said:

"The yogi should not abandon actions; rather, he is abandoned by actions.
Only by destroying the root of action, which is intention."

Or one may abandon actions seeing they disturb steadfastness in knowledge. As stated in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavata:

"One should perform actions
Until detachment arises,
Or faith develops
In hearing about Me, etc." (bhp 11.20.9)

"One established in knowledge, or detached, or devoted to Me, or indifferent,
Abandoning the external marks of life stages, should live beyond injunctions." (bhp 11.18.28) etc.
Enough digression, let us return to the topic at hand. ||2||

viśvanātha: First, adopting the earlier view, he states the different meanings of the words sannyāsa and tyāga in "kāmyānām" etc. The wise understand sannyāsa as the complete abandonment of desire-motivated actions prescribed as "One desiring a son should sacrifice" or "One desiring heaven should sacrifice", but not of obligatory actions like twilight worship. The meaning is that tyāga refers to performing all actions, both desire-motivated and obligatory, without desire for fruits, as the śrutis "By ritual action, the world of the fathers" and "By dharma, sin is warded off" etc. indeed declare fruits. Sannyāsa refers to performing obligatory actions without desire for fruits, while completely abandoning desire-motivated actions. This distinction should be understood. ||2||

baladeva: Thus questioned, the Lord said "kāmyānām" etc. The wise understand sannyāsa as the complete abandonment of actions prescribed with desire, such as the putreṣṭi or jyotiṣṭoma sacrifices enjoined as "One desiring a son should sacrifice" or "One desiring heaven should sacrifice", but not of obligatory actions like the agnihotra. The discerning declare tyāga, characterized as sannyāsa, to be the relinquishment of the fruits of all actions, both desire-motivated and obligatory, not their complete abandonment. Obligatory actions do have fruits, as heard in "By ritual action, the world of the fathers", "By dharma, sin is warded off" etc. Although specific fruits are not mentioned for daily obligatory actions like "One should worship at twilight daily" or "One should offer the agnihotra for life" as they are for "One desiring a son should sacrifice" etc., still the injunction implies some fruit, as in "One should perform the Viśvajit sacrifice." Otherwise, the impossibility of human engagement would be difficult to refute. Thus, sannyāsa means complete abandonment of desire-motivated actions, but relinquishment of fruits for obligatory actions. Tyāga means performing all actions without desire for fruits. The objection of inaction due to lack of fruits is refuted by the previously stated fruit of knowledge arising. ||2||

bhg 18.3

Some wise men say that all action should be abandoned as evil, while others say that acts of sacrifice, gift and austerity should not be relinquished. (3)

Sridhara: For the ignorant, the meaning of the word "renunciation" is merely giving up the fruits. It is not renunciation of action. To strengthen this very point by refuting other views, he shows the difference of opinion: "Some say it should be abandoned." Some Sankhyas say that all action should be abandoned because it is faulty, being the cause of bondage due to flaws like violence, etc. This is the purport - The prohibition "One should not harm any beings" states that violence is the cause of misfortune for a person. But the injunction in the context "One should sacrifice the animal for Agni and Soma" states that violence is auxiliary to the sacrifice. Therefore, since they have different objects, there is no contradiction between the general and specific rules. And since violence etc. is possible in all actions that require materials, all action should indeed be abandoned. As it is said - "The Vedic [rituals] are like the visible [objects], for they too involve impurity, decay and excess." The meaning is: That which is heard from the teacher's recitation is śruti (ānuśrava) or Veda. The means taught by it, like the Jyotishtoma sacrifice, is ānuśravika. There is impurity in the form of violence. Also there is decay or destruction. And there are gradations in the heavens produced by Agnihotra, Jyotishtoma, etc. But superiority makes everyone unhappy.

But other Mimamsakas say that acts of sacrifice etc. should not be abandoned. This is the purport - Although this violence is for the sake of the sacrifice, it should be done by a person. And even if done for another purpose, it is indeed the cause of sin for a person. For just as an injunction enjoins the performance of what is to be enjoined for that purpose, since being auxiliary is characterized by being for that purpose, a prohibition does not require the prohibited thing to be for that purpose, since it depends only on the occurrence. Otherwise there would be no fault in what is done through ignorance, negligence, etc. Thus, since they have the same object, there is no flaw in the general scripture being overruled by the specific. Therefore obligatory sacrificial acts etc. should not be abandoned. This refutes the equal force of injunction and prohibition in order to establish the general-specific rule. (3)

Visvanatha: He introduces again a difference of opinion on renunciation with "some say it should be abandoned." Some Sankhyas say action should be abandoned in itself because it is faulty, involving flaws like violence. Others, the Mimamsakas, say that sacrificial acts etc. should not be abandoned since they are enjoined in scripture. (3)

Baladeva: He states again a difference of opinion on renunciation with "some say it should be abandoned." Some wise men, the Kapila followers who point to the śruti "One should not harm any beings", say that action is faulty, involving flaws like animal sacrifice, and hence should be abandoned, rejected in itself. But the śruti "One should sacrifice the animal for Agni and Soma" states that violence is a part of the sacrifice and prevents it from being a cause of misfortune. And thus since violence is possible in acts requiring materials, all action should be abandoned. But other Jaimini followers say that sacrificial acts etc. should not be abandoned, as they are flawless being enjoined by the Veda. The meaning is: Although action involves both violence and kindness, since it is declared as dharma by the Veda, it is not faulty and hence should indeed be performed. The general prohibition "One should not harm" states that violence is sinful elsewhere than in sacrifice. So there is no fault. (3)

Bg 18.4

Hear from Me the conclusion about renunciation, O best of the Bharatas. Renunciation, O tiger among men, has been declared to be of three kinds. (4)

Sridhara: Having presented the difference of opinion thus, he says "conclusion" in order to state his own view. Hear the conclusion from My words regarding renunciation which is thus disputed. Lest you think "What is there to hear about renunciation which is well-known?", he says "O tiger among men", O best of men. This renunciation is difficult to understand. For this renunciation of action has been well declared by those who know the truth to be of three kinds - sattvic etc. And the threefold nature will be stated later with "But renunciation of obligatory action is not proper" etc. (4)

Visvanatha: He states his own view with "conclusion". "Of three kinds" means sattvic, rajasic and tamasic. Here, after mentioning the threefold nature of renunciation, he will use the word "sannyāsa" for its tamasic type in "But renunciation of obligatory action is not proper. Abandoning it through delusion is declared to be tamasic." From this it is understood that in the Lord's view, the words tyāga and sannyāsa have the same meaning. (4)

Baladeva: Having thus described the difference of opinion, he states his own view with "conclusion". Hear My, the omniscient Supreme Lord's, conclusion regarding renunciation which is caught in differences of opinion. If you think "What is there to hear about renunciation which is well-known?", he says "For renunciation". For renunciation has been well declared by the wise to be of three kinds - tamasic etc. Thus it is difficult to understand and should be heard. The threefold nature of renunciation will be stated later with "But renunciation of obligatory action" etc. (4)

bhg 18.5

yajñadānatapaḥkarma na tyājyaṃ kāryam eva tat |
yajño dānaṃ tapaś caiva pāvanāni manīṣiṇām ||5||

śrīdhara: First of all, he states the determination in "yajña" with two verses. For the wise (manīṣiṇām), they are purifying (pāvanāni), causing purification of the mind. ||5||

viśvanātha: Even among the desirable actions, according to the Lord's view, the sattvic yajña (sacrifice), dāna (charity), and tapas (austerity) should be performed without desire for results, as stated in "yajña etc. should be performed". The reason for this is "purifying" (pāvanāni), meaning they purify the mind. ||5||

baladeva: First, he states his own determination in that with two verses starting with "yajña". Yajña and other actions should certainly be performed by the wise, not abandoned, as they are purifying, destroying the faults of worldly existence through the arising of inner knowledge, like a poison-removing thread. ||5||

bhg 18.6

etāny api tu karmāṇi saṅgaṃ tyaktvā phalāni ca |
kartavyānīti me pārtha niścitaṃ matam uttamam ||6||

śrīdhara: Showing the manner in which these actions become purifying when performed, he says "etāni" (these). These very actions of yajña etc. which I have called purifying should be performed. How? By renouncing attachment, the obsession with being the doer, they should be performed solely as worship of the Lord. And renouncing the fruits, they should be performed - this is my definite opinion. Hence it is supreme. ||6||

viśvanātha: Showing the manner in which these become purifying when performed, he says "etāny api" (these also). Attachment means obsession with being the doer, and fruits means desire for results. The renunciation of desire for results and obsession with being the doer is itself called renunciation and sannyāsa (a with macron) (renunciation) - this is the meaning. ||6||

baladeva: He states the manner of purification of yajña etc. in "etāny api" (these also). Renouncing attachment, the obsession with being the doer, and all fruits such as the world of ancestors etc. that were mentioned earlier, they should be performed solely with the intention of worshipping the Lord - this is my definite opinion, hence this view is supreme. Since renunciation of obsession with being the doer is also included, the view of Pārtha's charioteer is superior. ||6||

bhg 18.7

niyatasya tu saṃnyāsaḥ karmaṇo nopapadyate |
mohāt tasya parityāgas tāmasaḥ parikīrtitaḥ ||7||

śrīdhara: Now he shows the threefold nature of renunciation that was promised, in "niyatasya" and the next two verses. Renunciation of desirable action is appropriate because it causes bondage. But renunciation, abandonment of obligatory action is not appropriate, because it leads to liberation through purification of sattva. Therefore, its abandonment, though it should be accepted, thinking "it should be abandoned" - such abandonment would be only due to delusion. And because delusion is tamasic, it is declared to be tamasic. ||7||

viśvanātha: He states the tamasic type of the threefold renunciation that was begun, in "niyatasya" (of the obligatory). "Mohāt" means from ignorance of the true purport of scripture. A sannyāsī (sannyāsī with macron) (renunciate) may renounce desirable actions due to their non-necessity, but renunciation of obligatory action is not appropriate - this is the meaning of "tu". "Mohāt" means from ignorance. The fruit of tamasic renunciation is attainment of ignorance only, not attainment of the desired knowledge - this is the meaning. ||7||

baladeva: He states the threefold renunciation that was promised in "niyatasya" and the next two verses. Renunciation of desirable action is appropriate because it causes bondage. But renunciation, abandonment of obligatory and occasional actions like the great sacrifices is not appropriate. Because it liberates through the inner knowledge it contains, like worn-out [bonds], and because it sustains bodily life, its abandonment is not proper. For by it, the divine manifestations of the Lord are worshipped, and with its purified remnants, bodily life is sustained for attaining knowledge of truth. Otherwise, it was stated earlier "Always perform your prescribed duty" etc. in the third [chapter]. Its complete abandonment in essence, out of delusion, thinking "this too causes bondage" - out of ignorance - becomes tamasic, because delusion is a quality of tamas. ||7||

bhg 18.8

The action which one abandons simply because it is painful, out of fear of bodily discomfort - having performed such a rajas-based renunciation, one does not obtain the fruit of renunciation. ||8||

Śrīdhara: He describes rajas-based renunciation with "duḥkham iti". One who, without self-knowledge, thinking only "it is painful", abandons obligatory action out of fear of bodily exertion - such renunciation is rajas-based because pain is a quality of rajas. Therefore, having performed such rajas-based renunciation, that rajasic person does not obtain the fruit of renunciation, which is characterized by steadfastness in knowledge. This is the meaning. ||8||

Viśvanātha: "duḥkham ity eva" - Although I know that performing obligatory actions is indeed necessary and virtuous, not faulty, still, why should I needlessly trouble my body with them? This is the sentiment. He does not obtain the fruit of renunciation, which is knowledge. ||8||

Baladeva: Even one who knows that prescribed action performed without desire is the cause of liberation may abandon it, thinking it is painful due to acquiring wealth, bathing in the morning, etc., out of fear of bodily discomfort. That renunciation is rajasic because pain is a quality of rajas. Even having performed such renunciation, a person does not obtain its fruit, which is steadfastness in knowledge. ||8||

bhg 18.9

The action which is performed as a duty, abandoning attachment and also the fruit - that renunciation is considered sāttvika, O Arjuna. ||9||

Śrīdhara: He describes sāttvika renunciation with "kāryam iti". The renunciation by which obligatory action, prescribed as necessary duty, is performed abandoning attachment and fruit - such renunciation is considered sāttvika. ||9||

Viśvanātha: "kāryam" means obligatory action that must be performed. "niyatam" means regular, daily action. "sāttvika" implies that one would indeed obtain knowledge, which is the fruit of renunciation. This is the meaning. ||9||

Baladeva: The renunciation by which prescribed action is performed as an obligatory duty, abandoning attachment in the form of identification as the doer and all fruit - that renunciation is sāttvika because such knowledge is a quality of sattva. ||9||

bhg 18.10

The renouncer imbued with sattva, intelligent and free from doubt, neither hates disagreeable action nor is attached to agreeable action. ||10||

Śrīdhara: He describes the characteristics of one established in such sāttvika renunciation with "na dveṣṭi" etc. "sattva-samāviṣṭaḥ" means pervaded by sattva. The sāttvika renouncer does not hate disagreeable action that brings pain, like bathing early in winter. And he is not attached to agreeable action that brings pleasure, like bathing at noon in summer. The reason is that he is intelligent, of steady intellect. Where he endures even great pain like being humiliated by others and abandons pleasures like heaven, there he considers how insignificant are these temporary pleasures and pains. This is the meaning. Therefore, his doubt is cut off - the false knowledge characterized by desire to obtain and avoid bodily pleasure and pain. ||10||

Viśvanātha: He describes the characteristics of one established in such sāttvika renunciation with "na dveṣṭi" etc. He does not hate disagreeable action that brings discomfort, like bathing early in winter. He is not attached to agreeable action like bathing in summer. ||10||

Baladeva: He describes the characteristics of the sāttvika renouncer with "dveṣṭi". He does not hate disagreeable action that brings pain, like bathing early in winter. He is not attached to agreeable action that brings pleasure, like bathing at noon in summer. Because he is imbued with sattva, very intelligent, of steady intellect, his doubt is cut off - characterized by whether prescribed actions, though performed with difficulty, will produce knowledge or not. Such is to be understood as a sāttvika renouncer. ||10||

bhg 18.11

Indeed, for an embodied being it is not possible to abandon actions entirely. But one who renounces the fruits of action is called a renouncer. ||11||

Śrīdhara: One might think that renunciation of all action is better than such renunciation of the fruits of action. In that case, steadfastness in knowledge would be easily attained due to the absence of the distraction of action. To this he says "na hi". For one who bears a body, who identifies the body as the self, it is indeed not possible to abandon all actions completely. This has been stated: "Indeed, no one ever remains for even a moment without performing action." Therefore, one who, even while performing actions, renounces the fruits of action - he alone is called the foremost renouncer. ||11||

Viśvanātha: He says "na hi" to indicate that even here, ritualistic action should not be abandoned. It is not possible to abandon, not possible. As it is said: "Indeed, no one ever remains for even a moment without performing action." ||11||

Baladeva: If it is argued that renunciation of action itself is superior to such renunciation of fruits, as it allows for steadfastness in knowledge without distraction, he responds with "na hi". For one who has a body, it is indeed not possible to completely abandon actions, not possible. As it is said: "Indeed, no one ever remains even for a moment" etc. Therefore, one who performs actions while renouncing their fruits is called a renunciant. Thus, the opinion of Pārtha's charioteer is that a qualified practitioner who is steadfast, free from ego-attachment to being the doer and desire for fruits, should perform all actions according to his capacity while seeking knowledge. ||11||

BhG 18.12

The threefold fruit of action - undesirable, desirable, and mixed - accrues after death to those who do not renounce, but never to the renouncers. ||12||

Śrīdhara: He states the result of such renunciation of the fruit of action in "aniṣṭam". Undesirable means hellish state. Desirable means divine state. Mixed means human state. Thus the well-known threefold fruit of sinful, meritorious and mixed actions. All of that accrues after death only to the non-renouncers who have desires, because they engage in the three types of action. But it never accrues to the renouncers. Here the term "renouncer" also includes those who renounce the fruits of action, due to similarity in renouncing fruits. As it is said in the beginning: "He who performs obligatory action without depending on the fruit of action is both a renunciate and a yogī." Thus the term "renouncer" is seen to apply to those who renounce the fruits of action. For those sattvic people, there is no possibility of sin, and the fruits of merit are renounced by dedicating to the Lord, so the threefold fruit of action does not accrue - this is the meaning. ||12||

Viśvanātha: He states the fault in the absence of such renunciation - undesirable means the suffering of hell, desirable means the pleasure of heaven, mixed means happiness and suffering in human birth. These accrue only to the non-renouncers, those devoid of such renunciation, after death in the next world. ||12||

Baladeva: He states the fault in the absence of such renunciation in "aniṣṭam". Undesirable means hellish state. Desirable means heavenly state. Mixed means human state. The threefold fruit of action - consisting of suffering, pleasure and their combination - accrues after death to the non-renouncers who lack the aforementioned renunciation. But not to the renouncers who possess the aforementioned renunciation. For them, liberation occurs through the knowledge inherent in action - thus the fruit of renunciation is stated. ||12||

BhG 18.13

O mighty-armed one, learn from Me these five causes for the accomplishment of all actions, as proclaimed in the Sāṃkhya which brings an end to action. ||13||

Śrīdhara: If one asks how the fruit of action does not accrue to one who performs action, he explains in five verses beginning with "pañca" that there is no taint of the fruit of action for one who is free from attachment and ego. Know from my words these five causes that will be stated for the accomplishment, i.e. completion, of all actions. They must be known in order to remove the ego's sense of doership - this is the meaning. He praises them by saying "sāṃkhya". Sāṃkhya is the knowledge of reality by which the Supreme Self is thoroughly known. Sāṃkhya is the manifesting self-knowledge. Sāṃkhya is that in which action ends, i.e. ceases. Kṛtānta is the Sāṃkhya scripture itself, in which the end is determined. They are proclaimed in that. Therefore understand them thoroughly - this is the meaning.

Viśvanātha: If one asks how the fruit of action does not accrue to one who performs action, he explains in five verses beginning with "pañcamāni" that there is no taint of action when one is free from ego. Know from my words these five causes for the accomplishment, i.e. completion, of all actions. Sāṃkhya thoroughly explains, i.e. describes the Supreme Self. It is the Vedānta scripture. What kind? That in which action ends, i.e. is destroyed. They are proclaimed in that.

Baladeva: If one asks how the fruits of actions do not accrue to those who perform actions, it is by renouncing ego-attachment to being the doer in oneself and by determining the Supreme Lord to be the primary doer - with this intention he speaks "pañcaitāni" in five verses. O mighty-armed one, learn from Me these five causes for the accomplishment, i.e. completion, of all actions. He states the authority in "sāṃkhya". Sāṃkhya is knowledge, and the Vedānta scripture that expounds it is Sāṃkhya. What kind? He says "kṛtānte" - that which makes the conclusion that the Supreme Self is the instigator of all causes of action - this is the meaning. This is known to the indwelling Brahman. Here also it is said: "And I am seated in the hearts of all" (Gītā 15.15) etc. And it will be said: "The Lord dwells in the hearts of all beings" (Gītā 18.61) etc.

bhg 18.14

adhiṣṭhānaṃ (the substratum) as well as the doer, the various instruments, the different kinds of efforts, and divine providence as the fifth. ||14||

Śrīdhara: He explains those very things in "adhiṣṭhānam" etc. Adhiṣṭhānam means the body. The doer is the ego, which is the knot of consciousness and non-consciousness. "Of various kinds" means of many types. The instruments are the eyes, ears, etc. "Various" refers to their functions and essential natures. The different efforts are the activities of prāṇa, apāna, etc. Here, the fifth cause is divine providence, which is the inner controller who impels everything and aids the senses, the sun, etc. ||14||

Viśvanātha: He enumerates those very things in "adhiṣṭhānam" etc. Adhiṣṭhānam is the body. The doer is the ego, which is the knot of consciousness and matter. The instruments are the eyes, ears, etc., "of various kinds" means of many types. The different efforts are the separate functions of prāṇa, apāna, etc. Divine providence is the inner controller who impels everything. ||14||

Baladeva: He enumerates those very things in "adhiṣṭhānam" etc. Adhiṣṭhānam, that which is inhabited by the soul, is the body. The doer is the soul. The śruti speaks of its nature as the knower and doer: "For this one is the seer, the creator" (Praśna Upaniṣad 4.9), etc. The author of the Vedānta-sūtras also states: "The knower, for this very reason" (VS 2.3.18) and "The doer, on account of the scriptural statement" (VS 2.3.26), etc. The instruments are the senses along with the mind. "Of various kinds" refers to their separate functions in accomplishing actions. The various and separate efforts are the diverse and distinct functions of prāṇa, apāna, etc. "And divine providence" - in this collection of causes for accomplishing action, divine providence, the supreme Brahman who is worshipped by all, is the fifth. The meaning is that in the accomplishment of action, Lord Hari as the inner controller is the principal cause. For those who are certain that He, equipped with the body, senses, vital airs, and soul, is the instigator of action, and who are free from the desire and attachment to doership in actions and their fruits, actions are not binding - this is the import.

If the soul's doership depends on the Supreme Lord, then its action would be subject to His control, like a piece of wood. And the scriptures of injunction and prohibition would be useless. One who is controlled is seen to be unable to act by his own will. The reply is: The soul, which is the substratum of the powers invested by the Supreme Lord, using the body, senses, etc. given by Him and empowered by Him, inhabits the body, senses, etc. by its own will for the accomplishment of action. The Supreme Lord, present within all that, giving His consent, impels it. Thus the soul has the capacity for engagement and withdrawal by its own will, so there is no difficulty. The author of the Vedānta-sūtras has determined it thus: "From the Supreme, because of the scriptural statement of that power" (VS 2.3.40), etc. If it is argued that a liberated soul would not have doership because it has abandoned the body, senses, and vital airs - this is not so, because at that time it possesses divine ones that are accomplished by will. ||14||

Whatever action a person undertakes by body, speech or mind, whether proper or improper, these five are its causes. ||15||

Śrīdhara: He states that these are the causes of all actions in "śarīra" etc. The action undertaken by the five factors mentioned can be included in just three categories. "By body, speech and mind" refers to the well-known three types of action - physical, verbal and mental. Whatever proper or improper action a person performs with the body etc., these five are the causes of that action.

Viśvanātha: "By body" etc. - action is of three types: physical, verbal and mental. And all of that is of two types: proper (lawful) or improper (unlawful). These five are the causes of all of that action.

Baladeva: "śarīra" etc. - proper means scriptural, improper means unscriptural. ||15||

Therefore, in this situation, one who sees the pure Self alone as the doer, due to imperfect understanding, does not see properly. That person is of poor intelligence. ||16||

Śrīdhara: What follows from this? He states this in "tatra" etc. When all action has these five causes, in this situation one who sees the pure, unconditioned, unattached Self as the doer, due to an mind unsanctified by the teachings of scripture and teachers, that person of poor intelligence does not see properly.

Viśvanātha: What follows from this? He states this in "tatra" etc. When all action has only these five causes, in this situation one who sees the Self, the individual soul which is actually detached, as the doer, due to unrefined understanding, that person of poor intelligence does not see at all. The import is that such an ignorant person is called blind.

Baladeva: What follows from this? He states this in "tatra" etc. "tatra" - When the soul's doership depends on the Supreme Lord's consent and requires the body etc. given by Him, in this situation one who sees only the Self, just the individual soul, as the doer in action - that person of poor intelligence, due to lack of knowledge, does not see, like a blind person.

bhg 18.17

He whose state of being is not ego-made, whose intellect is not tainted - even though killing these worlds, he does not kill and is not bound. ||17||

Śrīdhara: Who then is wise, of whom it was said that there is no taint of action? Expecting this, he says - "yasya" etc. The state of being that is made as "I am the doer" - this kind of state. Or, ahaṅkṛta means the nature of ego, the obsession with being the doer, which he does not have. This means that he sees only the body etc. as the doer of actions. Therefore, his intellect is not tainted, not attached to actions with notions of desirable and undesirable. One who sees the self as distinct from the body etc., even though killing all these beings from a worldly perspective, does not kill from his own perspective, and is not bound by the fruits of those actions, does not attain bondage. What then is the fear of bondage for him through actions that are causes of indirect knowledge through purification of being? As it is said: "He who performs actions offering them to Brahman, abandoning attachment, is not tainted by sin, just as a lotus leaf by water." (Gītā 5.10)

Viśvanātha: Who then is wise and clear-sighted? To this he says "yasya" etc. One who does not have the nature of ego, the obsession with being the doer, and therefore whose intellect is not tainted, not attached to actions with notions of desirable and undesirable - he indeed does not obtain the fruit of action. What is to be done? He says "hatvāpi" etc. - he, even while performing good or bad actions, does not really perform them. Even though killing all these beings from a worldly perspective, from his own perspective he does not kill at all. The idea is that he is without intention. Therefore, he is not bound, does not obtain the fruit of action.

Baladeva: Who then is clear-sighted and wise? To this he says "yasya" etc. The person whose state of mind is not ego-made, when it is understood that one's agency depends on the Supreme Lord, there is no conceit thinking "I alone perform actions". And whose intellect is not tainted by desire for the fruits of action. He, even after killing these worlds, not only the Bhīṣmas etc., does not kill, and is not bound or tainted by that action of killing all worlds. ||17||

Knowledge, the object of knowledge, and the knower are the threefold impetus to action. The instrument, the action, and the doer are the threefold constituents of action. ||18||

Śrīdhara: To justify "even though killing, he does not kill and is not bound", intending to show that there is no connection of the non-material self with the threefold nature of the impetus to action, the basis of action, and the fruits of action etc., he speaks of the impetus to action and the basis of action - "jñānam" etc. Knowledge is the understanding that this is the means to the desired end. The object of knowledge is the action that is the means to the desired end. The knower is the basis of such knowledge. Thus, there is a threefold impetus to action. Impetus means that by which one is impelled or prompted. It means that the triad of knowledge etc. is the cause of engaging in action. Or, impetus means injunction. As said by the Bhaṭṭas: "Impetus, instruction, and injunction are synonyms." Thus, the meaning is that the injunction to act operates based on the aforementioned threefold knowledge etc., which is of the nature of the three guṇas. As it is said: "The Vedas deal with the three guṇas." Similarly, the instrument is the most effective means. The action is what is most desired by the doer. The doer is the performer of the action. Action-aggregate means that in which action is aggregated. The instrument etc. is the threefold factor, meaning the basis of action. The other three factors like the recipient etc. are merely mutual instigators of action, not direct bases of action. Therefore, only the triad of instrument etc. is said to be the basis of action.

Viśvanātha: Thus, in the view of the Lord, renunciation with the characteristics mentioned is indeed sannyāsa for the jñānins, but for the devotees, renunciation of karma-yoga is understood by its very nature. As said by the Lord Himself in the Eleventh [Canto]:

"One who worships Me, having abandoned all dharmas, even those prescribed by Me, knowing their merits and demerits, is the best of persons." (Bhāgavata Purāṇa 11.11.37)

The meaning of this has been explained by the venerable commentator thus: "One who worships Me, having abandoned his own dharmas, even those prescribed by Me in the form of the Vedas, is indeed the best of persons." Is it due to ignorance or atheism? No, knowing the merits like purification of being etc. in the performance of dharma and the demerits, the transgressions in the opposite case, with the firm conviction that everything will be accomplished by devotion to Me alone, as it obstructs meditation on Me, he abandons dharmas. Here, the interpretation that "abandoning dharmas" means "abandoning the fruits of dharma" is not fitting. For there would be no transgression in abandoning the fruits of dharma - this should be noted. This is the purport of the Lord's words and their commentators - Knowledge indeed necessarily depends on purification of mind. Only when gradations in mental purity occur through desireless actions, do gradations in the arising of knowledge occur, not otherwise. Therefore, for the complete arising of knowledge, even sannyāsins should not perform desireless action. As it is said:

"For the sage seeking to attain yoga, action is said to be the means. For one who has attained yoga, serenity is said to be the means." (Gītā 6.2)

"But for the man who rejoices only in the Self, who is satisfied with the Self, and who is content in the Self alone, there is nothing to be done." (Gītā 3.17)

Bhakti, however, is supremely independent and extremely powerful. It does not require purification of the mind, as stated:

"One who faithfully hears about the pastimes of Lord Viṣṇu (viṣṇoḥ) with the gopīs of Vraja, as described in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (bhp 10.33.42), soon attains transcendental devotion to the Supreme Lord and quickly becomes freed from the heart disease of lust."

Here, by one's own realization of having heart disease, the highest devotion first enters even an unqualified person, and then the lust and other impurities are removed from there itself. Similarly:

"When Kṛṣṇa (kṛṣṇaḥ) enters through the ear into the heart of His devotee, He cleanses away all impurities, just as the autumn season purifies muddy water." (bhp 2.8.5)

Thus, if such purification of the mind occurs through devotion alone, then how should devotees perform karma?

Now let us follow the context - Not only is knowledge the knowledge of the self as distinct from the body etc., but the nature of the self is also to be known. The knower is the basis of such knowledge. But in this triad, there is a connection with karma. That too should be known by the sannyāsīs, hence it is said "jñānam". Here, the word "codanā" means injunction, as stated by the Bhaṭṭas: "Codanā, instruction, and injunction are synonymous."

He himself explains the first half of the verse with "karaṇam". The knowledge that is the instrument of knowing is the instrumental factor. This is derived from the etymology "that by which something is known is knowledge". The object to be known, the nature of the individual soul, is the object factor. The one who knows it completely is the agent. Thus, there are three types - instrument, object, and agent - these are the three factors.

"Karma-saṅgraha" means that karma is comprehended only through the performance of desireless action. This is the explanation of the term "karma-codanā". The idea is that these three - being the knower, the known, and the knowing - are rooted in the performance of desireless action. ||18-19||

Baladeva: As in the knowledge section, in the karma section also there are three aspects of knowledge. This should be understood by the dedicated practitioner of karma. He instructs this with "jñānam". The injunction of karma, such as the Jyotiṣṭoma sacrifice, contains the triad of knowledge, object of knowledge, and knower. This is because the experts say "Codanā, instruction, and injunction are synonymous." He himself explains this triad with "karaṇam". The knowledge is the instrumental factor, meaning the instrument of knowing, as per its etymology. The object to be known, the Jyotiṣṭoma etc. to be performed, is the object factor. The one who knows it completely through its performance is the agent factor. Thus, the comprehension of karma, the injunction of Jyotiṣṭoma etc., is threefold, accomplished by the triad of instrument etc. factors. This is the meaning of the equivalence of the words "codanā" and "saṅgraha". || 18 ||

bhg 18.19

Knowledge, action and the doer are declared to be of three kinds each, according to the distinctions of the guṇas, in the philosophy that enumerates the guṇas. Hear about them also as they really are.

Śrīdhara: Then what? To this he says "jñānam". Guṇa-saṅkhyāna is the Sāṅkhya philosophy in which the guṇas are fully explained through the distinctions of their effects. In that, knowledge, action, and the doer are each said to be of three kinds according to the distinctions of sattva and other guṇas. Listen to these aspects of knowledge etc. that will be explained, as they are. The word "eva" in "tridhaiva" is to negate actions for the self apart from the three guṇas as conditioning factors. In the fourteenth chapter, beginning with "There sattva, being pure", the way the guṇas cause bondage was described. In the seventeenth chapter, beginning with "Those in sattva worship the gods", by describing the threefold nature produced by the guṇas, it was said that one should abandon the nature of rajas and tamas and cultivate a sāttvika nature by serving sāttvika food etc. Here, however, to show that there is no connection of action, agent, result etc. with the self, everything is said to be composed of the three guṇas. This distinction should be understood. ||19||

Baladeva: With "jñānam", in the philosophy that enumerates the guṇas, the manner in which the guṇas cause bondage was described in the fourteenth chapter beginning with "There sattva, being pure". In the seventeenth, the distinctions of nature produced by the guṇas were described beginning with "Those in sattva worship the gods". Here, however, the threefold nature of knowledge etc. which are designated by the guṇas is described. This should be understood. ||19||

bhg 18.20

sarvabhūteṣu yenaikaṃ bhāvam avyayam īkṣate |
avibhaktaṃ vibhakteṣu taj jñānaṃ viddhi sāttvikam ||20||

śrīdharaḥ - There, he speaks of the threefold nature of knowledge as sāttvika etc. in three verses beginning with sarva-bhūteṣu. In all beings, from Brahmā down to immobile objects, which are separate from each other, by which knowledge one sees the undivided, all-pervading, one, immutable existence, the supreme Self principle, know that knowledge to be sāttvika. ||20||

viśvanāthaḥ - He speaks of sāttvika knowledge - sarva-bhūteṣu etc. By which knowledge related to karma one sees the one existence, the one individual self present in all beings - humans, gods, animals etc. in sequence for experiencing various fruits, immutable though they are perishable, undivided though divided from each other, of one form - know that to be sāttvika knowledge. ||20||

baladevaḥ - He speaks of sāttvika knowledge - sarva etc. By which one sees the individual self as one, existing in all beings - gods, humans etc. in sequence due to experiencing fruits of various karmas; immutable though they are perishable, undivided though mutually different, of one form - that knowledge, the Upaniṣadic knowledge of the undifferentiated self, is sāttvika - this is the meaning. ||20||

bhg 18.21

pṛthaktvena tu yaj jñānaṃ nānābhāvān pṛthagvidhān |
vetti sarveṣu bhūteṣu taj jñānaṃ viddhi rājasam ||21||

śrīdhara: He speaks of rājasa knowledge in pṛthaktvena etc. This itself is an explanation of "the knowledge which by separateness". By which knowledge one knows in all beings many existences, truly separate knowers of the field, distinct in terms of being happy, miserable etc. - know that knowledge to be rājasa. ||21||

viśvanātha: He speaks of rājasa knowledge - the knowledge which sees the individual self as separate in all beings. The view of the demons is that the destruction of the body is indeed the destruction of the self. Therefore, due to creating such scriptures that in separate bodies there are indeed separate selves, [one knows] various existences, various views - that the self is the substratum of pleasure and pain, that it is not the substratum of pleasure and pain, that it is inert, that it is conscious, that it is all-pervading, that it is atomic in nature, that it is many, etc. - by which one knows such conceptions, that is rājasa. ||21||

baladeva: He speaks of rājasa knowledge in pṛthaktvena etc. The knowledge which [sees] the individual self as separate in all beings - in the bodies of gods, humans etc., the knowledge that the destruction of the body is indeed the destruction of the self - this is the meaning. And by which one knows various existences, various views - that the body itself is the self, that the self is different from the body and of the same size as the body, that momentary consciousness is the self, that the self is eternal, all-pervading and mere knowledge, that the self is different from the body, the substratum of nine special qualities, non-inert and all-pervading - by which one knows such arguments of the Lokāyatikas, Jainas, Buddhists, Māyāvādins, logicians etc., that is rājasa knowledge. ||21||

bhg 18.22

yat tu kṛtsnavad ekasmin kārye saktam ahetukam |
atattvārthavad alpaṃ ca tat tāmasam udāhṛtam ||22||

śrīdhara: He speaks of tāmasa knowledge in yat etc. That which is attached as if complete to a single effect - the body, an idol etc., thinking "this much alone is the self or God", which is irrational, without valid reasoning, devoid of support in ultimate reality, and therefore insignificant, being trivial due to having a small object and small result - knowledge which is of this kind is called tāmasa. ||22||

viśvanātha: He speaks of tāmasa knowledge in yat tu etc. That knowledge which is irrational, merely instinctive, and therefore attached to a single worldly act - bathing, eating, drinking, sexual intercourse and the actions leading to them, but not to Vedic acts like sacrifice and charity, and therefore without real meaning, having no real purpose in it - that which is insignificant, base like that of animals, is tāmasa knowledge. In brief: knowledge of That (Brahman) as distinct from the body etc. is sāttvika, knowledge of the scriptures of logic etc. which establish various doctrines is rājasa, and knowledge of worldly affairs like bathing and eating is tāmasa. ||22||

baladeva: He speaks of tāmasa knowledge in yat tu etc. That knowledge which is irrational, instinctive, not knowledge from scripture as the source, and therefore attached to a single worldly act - bathing, eating, associating with women etc., but not to Vedic acts like sacrifice and charity, as if complete, meaning "there is nothing more than this", and therefore without real meaning, where there is no real purpose; insignificant, being base due to being common with animals - that worldly knowledge of bathing, eating etc. is tāmasa. ||22||

bhg 18.23

niyataṃ saṅgarahitam arāgadveṣataḥ kṛtam |
aphalaprepsunā karma yat tat sāttvikam ucyate ||23||

śrīdhara: Now he describes the three types of karma in three verses - starting with "niyatam". Niyatam means prescribed as a daily duty. Saṅga-rahitam means without attachment. Arāga-dveṣataḥ means not done out of affection for children etc. or hatred for enemies. Phala-prepsuḥ means one who desires to obtain results. Karma done by one who is the opposite of that, i.e. without desires, is called sāttvika. ||23||

viśvanātha: After describing three types of knowledge, he now describes three types of karma - Niyatam means prescribed as a daily duty. Saṅga-rahitam means without attachment. Therefore arāga-dveṣataḥ means done without likes and dislikes. Aphalepsunā means by one who has no desire for results. Such karma is sāttvika. ||23||

baladevaḥ: Now he describes the three types of karma in three verses - starting with "niyatam". Niyatam means prescribed for one's varṇa (social class) and āśrama (stage of life). Saṅga-rahitam means free from the ego of being the doer. Arāga-dveṣataḥ kṛtaṃ means not done out of desire for fame or aversion to infamy, but rather as worship of God by one without desire for results. Such karma is sāttvika. ||23||

bhg 18.24

yat tu kāmepsunā karma sāhaṃkāreṇa vā punaḥ |
kriyate bahulāyāsaṃ tad rājasam udāhṛtam ||24||

śrīdhara: He describes rājasa karma with "yat". Karma done by kāmepsunā, one who desires to obtain results, or sāhaṅkāreṇa, with ego thinking "Who else is as learned as me?", and which involves great exertion, is called rājasa. ||24||

viśvanātha: Kāmepsunā means with little ego. Sāhaṅkāreṇa means with excessive ego. ||24||

baladevaḥ: Karma done by kāmepsunā, one who desires results, sāhaṅkāreṇa, one attached to the ego of being the doer, and which involves great exertion, is rājasa. ||24||

bhg 18.25

anubandhaṃ kṣayaṃ hiṃsām anapekṣya ca pauruṣam |
mohād ārabhyate karma yat tat tāmasam ucyate ||25||

śrīdhara: He describes tāmasa karma with "anubandham". Anubandha means future good or bad consequences. Kṣaya means loss of wealth. Hiṃsā means harming others. Pauruṣa means one's own ability. Without considering these, and only out of delusion, karma that is undertaken is called tāmasa. ||25||

viśvanātha: Anubandha means future bondage by kings, thieves, servants of Yama etc. after performing the karma. Kṣaya means decrease of dharma, knowledge etc. Hiṃsā means destruction of oneself. Without considering these and pauruṣa, which means karma to be done by ordinary people, that which is undertaken only out of delusion is tāmasa. ||25||

baladevaḥ: Anubandha means bondage by servants of the king or Yama after performing the karma. Kṣaya means destruction of dharma etc. Hiṃsā means harming living beings. Without considering these and pauruṣa, which means ability, karma undertaken out of delusion is tāmasa. ||25||

bhg 18.26

muktasaṅgonahaṃvādī dhṛtyutsāhasamanvitaḥ |
siddhyasiddhyor nirvikāraḥ kartā sāttvika ucyate ||26||

śrīdhara: He describes the three types of doers in three verses starting with "mukta-saṅga". Mukta-saṅga means free from attachment. Anahaṃvādī means free from proud speech. Dhṛti means steadiness. Utsāha means enthusiasm. Samanvitaḥ means endowed with these. Nirvikāra means free from joy and sorrow in success or failure of the undertaken work. Such a doer is called sāttvika. ||26||

viśvanātha: Having described the three types of karma, he now describes the three types of doers starting with "mukta-saṅga". ||26||

baladevaḥ: Now he describes the three types of doers in three verses starting with "mukta". Mukta-saṅga means free from ego of being the doer and desire for results. Anahaṃvādī means free from proud speech. Dhṛti means ability to endure unavoidable suffering until completion of undertaken work. Utsāha means enthusiasm to perform it. Samanvitaḥ means endowed with these. Nirvikāra means free from happiness and distress in success or failure of incidental results. Such a doer is sāttvika. ||26||

bhg 18.27

The doer who is passionate, desirous of the fruits of action, greedy, of a violent nature, impure, subject to joy and sorrow, is said to be rājasa (of the nature of passion). ||27||

Śrīdhara: He describes the rājasa doer as "rāgī" etc. Rāgī means affectionate towards sons etc. Karma-phala-prepsu means desiring the fruits of action. Lubdha means covetous of others' possessions. Hiṃsātmaka means of a violent nature. One who is subject to joy and sorrow in gain and loss, such a doer is said to be rājasa. ||27||

Viśvanātha: Rāgī means attached to action. Lubdha means attached to sense objects. ||27||

Baladeva: Rāgī means attached to wife, sons etc. Karma-phala-prepsu means extremely desirous of animals, sons, food, heaven etc. Lubdha means unable to spend the resources required for action. Hiṃsātmaka means performing action by oppressing others. Aśuci means devoid of the prescribed purification required for action. One who is subject to joy and sorrow at the success and failure of the fruits of action. Such a doer is rājasa. ||27||

BhG 18.28

The doer who is undisciplined, vulgar, obstinate, deceitful, malicious, lazy, despondent, and procrastinating is said to be tāmasa (of the nature of ignorance). ||28||

Śrīdhara: He describes the tāmasa doer as "ayukta" etc. Ayukta means inattentive. Prākṛta means devoid of discrimination. Stabdha means unyielding. Śaṭha means one who conceals his abilities. Naikṛtika means intent on thwarting others' efforts. Alasa means disinclined to act. Viṣādī means always of a depressed nature even in duties. Dīrgha-sūtrī means one who always prolongs duties, of a slow nature. What should be done today or tomorrow, he does not do even in a month. One who is of such nature, that doer is said to be tāmasa. ||28||

By the threefold nature of the doer, the threefold nature of the knower is also stated. By the threefold nature of action, the threefold nature of the knowable should also be understood. By the threefold nature of intellect, the threefold nature of the instrument will also be stated. ||28||

Viśvanātha: Ayukta means one who acts improperly. Prākṛta means one who remains in his own nature, who does whatever comes to his mind, and does not consider even the words of the guru as authoritative. Naikṛtika means one who insults others.

Thus, only the sāttvika renunciation with the characteristics described by the wise should be practiced, only the sāttvika knowledge fixed in action should be resorted to, only sāttvika action should be performed, and one should be only a sāttvika doer. This alone is the renunciation for the wise - this is my understanding, the essence of this context. For devotees, however, knowledge is beyond the three guṇas, my action called bhakti-yoga is beyond the three guṇas, and the doers are also beyond the three guṇas. As stated by the Lord Himself in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavata:

"Kaivalya is sāttvika knowledge, that which is speculative is rājasa, prākṛta is tāmasa knowledge, and that which is fixed on Me is remembered as nirguṇa (beyond the guṇas)." (BhP 11.25.24)

"The characteristics of bhakti-yoga, which is nirguṇa, have been described." (BhP 3.29.11)

"The sāttvika doer is unattached, the rājasa is blinded by attachment, the tāmasa is said to be forgetful, and he who takes shelter in Me is nirguṇa." (BhP 11.25.26)

Moreover, not only these three are beyond the guṇas in bhakti, but everything related to bhakti is beyond the guṇas. As stated there:

"Sāttvika faith is spiritual, rājasa faith is in karma, tāmasa faith is in adharma, but faith in My service is nirguṇa." (BhP 11.25.27)

"The forest is a sāttvika residence, the village is said to be rājasa, the gambling den is tāmasa, but My abode is nirguṇa." (BhP 11.25.25)

"Sāttvika happiness arises from the self, rājasa from sense objects, tāmasa from delusion and degradation, but that which has taken shelter in Me is nirguṇa." (BhP 11.25.29)

Thus, for devotees who have transcended the modes, all knowledge, activities, faith, etc. related to devotional service, as well as their own happiness, etc., are all transcendental to the modes. For sattvic jñānīs, all those things related to knowledge are sattvic. For rajasic karmīs, all those things are rajasic. For tamasic undisciplined people, all those things are tamasic. This should be understood from the perspective of the Gītā and Bhāgavata. Even for jñānīs, in their final stage after renouncing knowledge, it is said in the fourteenth chapter that they transcend the modes through pure devotion alone. ||28||

Baladeva: Ayukta means one who acts improperly. Prākṛta (prakṛtau) means one who acts according to his own nature, not according to scripture. Stabdha means not humble. Śaṭha means one who conceals his abilities. Naikṛtika means one who insults others. Alasa means slack in undertaken work. Viṣādī means overwhelmed with grief. Dīrgha-sūtrī means one who does not complete in a year what should be done in a day. Such a doer is tamasic. ||28||

bhg 18.29

Listen, O Dhanaṃjaya, as I explain fully and separately the threefold division of intelligence and determination according to the modes of nature. ||29||

Śrīdhara: Now he introduces the threefold nature of intelligence and determination in "buddher bhedam". The meaning is clear. ||29||

Viśvanātha: To indicate that for jñānīs everything is to be accepted as sattvic, he speaks of the threefold nature of intelligence etc. in "buddher". ||29||

Baladeva: Having spoken of the threefold nature of knowledge, the knowable and the knower, he introduces the threefold nature of intelligence and determination in "buddher". The meaning is clear. ||29||

bhg 18.30

The intelligence that knows what is to be done and what is not to be done, what is to be feared and what is not to be feared, what causes bondage and what leads to liberation - that intelligence, O Pārtha, is sattvic. ||30||

Śrīdhara: Here he explains the threefold nature of intelligence in three verses starting with "pravṛttiṃ ca". Pravṛtti means in dharma. Nivṛtti means from adharma. What should be done and not done in which place and time. Bhayābhaye means the causes of what should and should not be done, beneficial and harmful. How one is bound and how liberated - the intelligence that knows this is sattvic. Though it should say "by which one knows", agency is attributed to the instrument, as in "the wood cooks". ||30||

Viśvanātha: Bhayābhaye means the causes of saṃsāra and freedom from saṃsāra. ||30||

Baladeva: He explains the threefold nature of intelligence in three verses starting with "pravṛttiṃ ca". The intelligence that knows engagement in dharma and withdrawal from adharma - though it should say "by which one knows", agency is attributed to the instrument, as in "the axe cuts". It knows that selfless action is to be done and selfish action is not to be done. It knows that non-scriptural activity causes fear and scriptural activity causes fearlessness. It knows bondage as the nature of saṃsāra and liberation as the nature of cutting that off. Such intelligence is sattvic. ||30||

bhg 18.31

That intelligence by which one does not properly understand dharma and adharma, what should be done and what should not be done - that intelligence, O Pārtha, is rajasic. ||31||

Śrīdhara: He describes rajasic intelligence in "yayā". Ayathāvat means doubtfully. The rest is clear. ||31||

Viśvanātha: Ayathāvat means incorrectly. ||31||

Baladeva: He describes rajasic intelligence in "yayā". Ayathāvat means incorrectly. ||31||

bhg 18.32

That intelligence which, covered by darkness, considers adharma to be dharma and sees all things perversely - that intelligence, O Pārtha, is tamasic. ||32||

Śrīdhara: He describes tamasic intelligence in "adharmam". Intelligence that grasps things perversely is tamasic. Intelligence is the previously mentioned antaḥkaraṇa. Knowledge is its function. Determination is also its function. Or intelligence may be the function of discrimination of the antaḥkaraṇa as the substrate. Though there are many functions like desire and aversion, the threefold nature of these is stated due to their importance in determining dharma, adharma, fear and fearlessness. This also indicates the other functions. ||32||

Viśvanātha: "Yā manyate" means "by which one considers", as in "the axe cuts". ||32||

Baladeva: He describes tamasic intelligence in "adharmam". Intelligence that grasps things perversely is tamasic. It considers all things perversely - the virtuous as non-virtuous and the non-virtuous as virtuous, the supreme truth as non-supreme and the non-supreme as supreme truth. ||32||

bhg 18.33

The steadfastness by which one controls the activities of the mind, life airs and senses through unwavering yoga (and in brackets: spiritual practice), O Pārtha, that steadfastness is sāttvika (and in brackets: in the mode of goodness). ||33||

Śrīdhara: Now he describes the threefold nature of steadfastness in three verses beginning with "dhṛtyā". By yoga, meaning single-pointedness of mind, which is unwavering and does not wander to other objects, by which steadfastness one controls and restrains the activities of the mind, life airs and senses, that steadfastness is sāttvika. ||33||

Viśvanātha: He describes the threefold nature of steadfastness in "dhṛtyā". ||33||

Baladeva: He describes the threefold nature of steadfastness in three verses beginning with "dhṛtyā". That steadfastness by which a person controls the activities of the mind, life airs and senses, which are means for yoga, is sāttvika. How is it described? He says "yogena". Yoga means contemplation of the Supreme Soul. By that which is unwavering, meaning not grasping any other object - this is the meaning. ||33||

BG 18.34

But that steadfastness by which one holds to dharma, artha and kāma (and in brackets: virtue, wealth and pleasure), O Arjuna, with attachment, desiring the fruits, that steadfastness, O Pārtha, is rājasī (and in brackets: in the mode of passion). ||34||

Śrīdhara: He describes rājasī steadfastness in "yayā tu". That steadfastness by which one primarily holds on to dharma, artha and kāma, not relinquishing them, and through attachment to them becomes desirous of fruits, that is rājasī steadfastness.

Viśvanātha - no comment

Baladeva: A person desiring fruits through association with those who have worldly desires and knowledge. That steadfastness by which one holds to dharma and other goals, and the activities of mind, life airs and senses that are means to achieve them, that steadfastness is rājasī.

BG 18.35

That steadfastness by which a person of poor intelligence does not give up sleep, fear, grief, depression and also intoxication, O Pārtha, that steadfastness is tāmasī (and in brackets: in the mode of ignorance). ||35||

Śrīdhara: He describes tāmasī steadfastness in "yayā". A person of poor intelligence, whose intellect is full of improper discrimination, by which steadfastness he does not give up sleep and so on, but repeatedly returns to them. Sleep here means slumber. That steadfastness is tāmasī. ||35||

Viśvanātha - no comment

Baladeva: That steadfastness by which a person of poor intelligence does not give up sleep and so on, but continues to hold on to them, that steadfastness is tāmasī. Sleep means slumber, intoxication means pride born of sense enjoyment. By the words "sleep" and so on are meant the activities of mind, life airs and senses that are their causes. The steadfastness by which one holds on to these is tāmasī steadfastness - this is the meaning. ||35||

BG 18.36-37

Now hear from Me about the threefold happiness, O best of the Bharatas. That in which one rejoices through practice and reaches the end of sorrow. ||36||

That which is like poison at first but like nectar in the end, that happiness is said to be sāttvika, born from the clarity of one's self-understanding. ||37||

Śrīdhara: Now he introduces the threefold nature of happiness in one and a half verses beginning with "sukham". The meaning is clear. ||36|| He describes sāttvika happiness in one and a half verses beginning with "abhyāsād". That happiness in which one rejoices through practice, meaning repeated engagement, not attaining joy suddenly like in sensual pleasures, and rejoicing in which one thoroughly reaches the end of sorrow. What is it like? That which at first seems somewhat like poison, being dependent on mental restraint, seeming to bring suffering, but in the end is like nectar. Self-understanding means understanding related to the self. Its clarity means its state of purity through giving up the contamination of passion and ignorance. The happiness born from that is said by the yogis to be sāttvika. ||37||

viśvanātha - He explains sāttvika happiness in one and a half verses. The meaning is that one delights in it only through repeated practice, not like in sense objects where one delights immediately. "Duḥkhāntaṃ nigacchati" means that by delighting in it, one crosses over the suffering of saṃsāra. ||36|| "Viṣam iva" means that the restraint of the senses and mind is initially painful - that is the idea. ||37||

baladevaḥ: Now he acknowledges the threefold nature of happiness with half a verse starting "sukhaṃ tu". He explains sāttvika happiness in one and a half verses starting with "abhyāsāt". Through repeated practice and cultivation one delights in it, not like in sense objects where one delights immediately. By delighting in it, one reaches the end of suffering and crosses over saṃsāra. ||36|| That which at first seems like poison due to the pain of restraining the mind and the revelation of the isolated self, and thus seems to bring extreme suffering. At maturity, when samādhi is perfected, it becomes like nectar due to the revelation of the isolated self, like a shower of amṛta (nectar). That happiness which arises from the clarity of the intellect connected to the self is sāttvika happiness. Its clarity is the removal of the impurity of connection to sense objects. ||37||

bhg 18.38

That which arises from the contact between the senses and their objects, which at first is like nectar but at the end is like poison - that happiness is remembered to be rājasa. ||38||

śrīdhara: He explains rājasa happiness with "viṣaya" etc. That well-known happiness from contact with women etc., which at first seems like nectar, but in the end is like poison because it causes suffering here and hereafter. That happiness is remembered to be rājasa. ||38||

viśvanātha: That which is like nectar, such as enjoyment with another's wife. ||38||

baladeva: That which at first seems like nectar, extremely sweet, from the contact of the senses like the eyes etc. with sense objects like the form and touch of young women etc., but in the end becomes like poison, extremely painful, because it leads to hell - that is rājasa happiness. ||38||

bhg 18.39

That happiness which deludes the self both in the beginning and as a consequence, arising from sleep, laziness and heedlessness, is declared to be tāmasa. ||39||

śrīdhara: He explains tāmasa happiness with "yad" etc. That happiness which deludes the self both at the first moment and afterwards. He elaborates: That happiness which arises from sleep, laziness, and heedlessness - which is grasped by the mind as a lack of determination towards what should be done - is declared to be tāmasa. ||39||

viśvanātha: No comment

baladeva: That which deludes the self, concealing the true nature of things, both at the time of experience and afterwards at the time of consequence, and which arises from sleep etc., is tāmasa happiness. Laziness is inactivity of the senses. Heedlessness is lack of attention to what should and should not be done. ||39||

bhg 18.40

There is no being on earth or again among the gods in heaven that is free from these three guṇas born of prakṛti. ||40||

śrīdhara: Summarizing the topic while including what was unsaid, he concludes with "na tad" etc. Any being or anything else that would be free from these three guṇas - sattva etc. - born of prakṛti does not exist anywhere, on earth among humans etc., or in heaven among the gods. That is the meaning. ||40||

viśvanātha: Summarizing the topic while including what was unsaid, he concludes with "na" etc. There is no being or any other thing anywhere that would be free from these three guṇas born of prakṛti. Therefore, everything that exists is composed of the three guṇas. Among these, only the sāttvika is to be accepted, while the rājasa and tāmasa are not to be accepted - that is the purport of this section. ||40||

baladevaḥ: Concluding the topic while including what was unsaid, he summarizes with "na tad" etc. There is no being or any other thing on earth among humans etc., in heaven among gods etc., meaning among those mixed with prakṛti from Brahmā down to a blade of grass, that would be free or devoid of these three guṇas born of prakṛti. Therefore, among things composed of the three guṇas, only the sāttvika is useful and should be accepted, while the others should be rejected - that is the purport of this section. ||40||

bhg 18.41

The actions of brāhmaṇas (brahmins), kṣatriyas (warriors), vaiśyas (merchants), and śūdras (laborers) are distinctly distributed according to the qualities born of their nature, O Parantapa. ||41||

śrīdhara: Now, if everything including actions, instruments, results, and all living beings are made of the three guṇas (qualities), then how is liberation possible? In response to this, he begins a new section to show the essence of the entire Gītā's meaning, which is that through worshipping the Supreme Lord with one's prescribed duties, one obtains knowledge by His grace. This section continues until the end of the chapter. O Parantapa, O scorcher of enemies! The actions of brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas, vaiśyas, and śūdras are distinctly prescribed according to their divisions. śūdras are mentioned separately due to their difference in not being twice-born. The division is characterized by qualities born of their nature, which are sāttvika (goodness) and others. Or, nature means the impressions from previous births. Kṣatriyas are predominantly rajas (passion) with some sattva. Vaiśyas are predominantly rajas with some tamas (ignorance). śūdras are predominantly tamas with some rajas. ||41||

viśvanātha: Moreover, although all living beings are composed of the three guṇas, they can achieve their goal by worshipping the Supreme Lord through their prescribed duties. This is stated in six verses beginning with "brāhmaṇa". The actions prescribed for brāhmaṇas and others are distinctly divided according to the qualities of sattva and others that manifest by their very nature. ||41||

baladeva: Although all things are composed of the three guṇas, if brāhmaṇas and others perform their prescribed duties as worship of the Lord, those duties produce steadiness in knowledge and become liberating. This section of six verses begins with "brāhmaṇa". śūdras are mentioned separately due to not being twice-born. The actions of the four classes - brāhmaṇas and others - are divided by scripture along with the qualities born of their nature. Nature means impressions from previous lives, from which the qualities of sattva and others arise. Thus, the qualified brāhmaṇas and others have these duties: The brāhmaṇa is predominantly sattva due to being peaceful. The kṣatriya is predominantly rajas with some sattva due to having a lordly nature. The vaiśya is predominantly rajas with some tamas due to being focused on worldly matters. The śūdra is predominantly tamas with some rajas due to having a foolish nature. Their specific duties will be stated later. ||41||

Bg 18.42

Control of the mind, control of the senses, austerity, purity, forbearance, and also straightforwardness, knowledge, realization, and faith - these are the natural duties of the brāhmaṇa. ||42||

śrīdhara: Here he states the natural duties of the brāhmaṇa. śama means calming of the mind. dama means restraint of the external senses. tapas means the previously mentioned physical austerities. śauca means external and internal purity. kṣānti means forgiveness. ārjava means straightforwardness. jñāna and vijñāna mean knowledge and realization. āstikya means faith in the meaning of scriptures. These are the natural brahminical duties born of their nature, as stated earlier "distributed according to qualities born of their nature". ||42||

viśvanātha: Here he states the natural duties of brāhmaṇas, who are predominantly in sattva. śama means control of the inner senses. dama means control of the outer senses. tapas means austerities of the body, etc. jñāna and vijñāna mean knowledge from scripture and experience. āstikya means firm faith in the meaning of scripture. These and others are the natural brahminical duties. ||42||

baladeva: He states the natural duty of the brāhmaṇa. śama means control of the inner faculties. dama means control of the outer faculties. tapas means scriptural bodily austerities. śauca means twofold purity as mentioned before. kṣānti means forbearance. ārjava means straightforwardness. jñāna means understanding of higher and lower truths from scripture. vijñāna means realizing their exclusive nature from that same source. āstikya means the conviction that Hari, who is known through all the Vedas, is the sole cause of everything and when worshipped through one's prescribed duties or pure devotion, becomes pleased and grants everything up to Himself. This is the natural brahminical duty, though it is called so due to the predominance of sattva in brāhmaṇas. Thus it is said by Viṣṇu - ||42||

kṣamā satyaṃ damaḥ śaucaṃ
dānam indriya-saṃyamaḥ |
ahiṃsā guru-śuśrūṣā
tīrthānusaraṇaṃ dayā ||

ārjavaṃ lobha-śūnyatvaṃ deva-brāhmaṇa-pūjanam | anabhyasūyā ca tathā dharma-sāmānya ucyate || iti ||42||

bhg 18.43

Valor, brilliance, fortitude, skill, and also not fleeing in battle, generosity, and lordly nature - these are the natural duties of kṣatriyas (warriors). [43]

śrīdhara: He describes the natural duties of a kṣatriya with "valor" etc. Śaurya means prowess. Tejas means boldness. Dhṛti means steadfastness. Dākṣya means skillfulness. Not fleeing in battle means not turning away. Dāna means generosity. Īśvara-bhāva means the power to control. These are the natural duties of a kṣatriya. [43]

viśvanātha: He describes the duties of kṣatriyas, who are predominantly rajasic with some sattva: Śaurya means prowess, tejas means boldness, dhṛti means steadfastness, īśvara-bhāva means rulership over people. [43]

baladevaḥ: He describes the kṣatriya's duties with "valor" etc. Śaurya means fearless engagement in battle. Tejas means being unassailable by others. Dhṛti means not letting the body and senses become dejected even in great calamity. Dākṣya means skill in accomplishing actions. Not fleeing in battle means not turning away even when certain of one's death. Dāna means giving away one's wealth without hesitation. Īśvara-bhāva means displaying power and authority over those to be ruled for the protection of subjects. These are the natural duties of a kṣatriya. [43]

bhg 18.44

Agriculture, cow protection and trade are the natural duties of vaiśyas (merchants). And service is the natural duty of śūdras (laborers). [44]

śrīdhara: He describes the duties of vaiśyas and śūdras with "agriculture" etc. Kṛṣi means plowing. Gaurakṣya means cow protection, that is, animal husbandry. Vāṇijya means buying and selling etc. These are the natural duties of vaiśyas. Service to the three higher castes is the natural duty of śūdras. [44]

viśvanātha: He describes the duties of those predominantly rajasic with some tamas with "agriculture" etc. Gaurakṣya means cow protection. He describes the duties of śūdras, who are predominantly tamasic with some rajas, as service to brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas and vaiśyas. [44]

baladevaḥ: He describes the vaiśya's duties with "agriculture" etc. Kṛṣi means plowing the earth with a plow etc. for producing food. Gaurakṣya means animal husbandry. Vāṇijya means trade characterized by buying and selling. Lending money on interest is also included in this. These are the natural duties of vaiśyas. Then he describes the śūdra's duty with "service". Service to brāhmaṇas and other twice-born classes is the natural duty of śūdras. These also represent the duties of the four stages of life. [44]

bhg 18.45

By being devoted to his own duty, a man attains perfection. Hear how one devoted to his own duty attains perfection. [45]

śrīdhara: He states that such duties of brāhmaṇas etc. are the cause of knowledge, with "in his own" etc. A man devoted to and established in the duty prescribed for his status attains perfection, meaning fitness for knowledge. He describes how duties lead to attaining knowledge in one and a half verses. Hear how one established in his own duty attains knowledge of reality. [45]

viśvanātha: No comment

baladevaḥ: He states that the aforementioned duties are the cause of knowledge, with "in his own" etc. A man devoted to and performing the duty prescribed for his caste and stage of life attains perfection, meaning establishment in knowledge which is inherent in duty like a thread in cloth. If it is asked how duty, which is binding, can lead to knowledge which liberates, it is due to a special state of mind, which he explains with "one's own duty". [45]

bhg 18.46

By worshipping through his own duty Him from whom all beings originate and by whom all this is pervaded, a man attains perfection. [46]

śrīdhara: He describes that very one with "from whom" etc. The Supreme Lord as the inner controller, from whom the activity of beings originates, and by whom as the cause this entire universe is pervaded - by worshipping Him through one's own duty, a person attains perfection. [46]

viśvanātha: From the Supreme Lord. By worshipping Him through that action, offering it mentally to Him - that itself is worshipping Him. ||46||

baladevaḥ: From which. From the Supreme Lord comes the activity characterized by birth etc. of beings, by whom this entire world is pervaded. Worshipping Him who is established as Indra and other deities through one's prescribed duties, mentally offering that action to Him thinking "May my Lord be pleased by this action", a human attains perfection, steadfastness in knowledge. ||46||

bhg 18.47

Better is one's own dharma (svadharma), though defective, than another's dharma (paradharma) well performed.
By doing the work prescribed by one's own nature, one does not incur sin. ||47||

śrīdhara: He states the result of the qualifier "one's own duty" in "Better is". Even though defective, one's own dharma is superior to another's dharma, even if well performed. The dharma of others like begging should not be considered superior to one's own dharma like fighting, which involves killing relatives etc. Because by doing the work prescribed by one's aforementioned nature, one does not incur sin. ||47||

viśvanātha: One should not think "Seeing one's own dharma as rajasic due to its activities etc., disliking it, sattvic work should be done instead" - he says this in "Better is". One's own dharma, though defective, inferior, even if impossible to perform properly, is superior even to another's superior dharma that is well performed. Therefore, abandoning your own dharma of fighting, which has the fault of killing relatives etc., you should not perform another's dharma like begging - this is the meaning. ||47||

baladevaḥ: If it is argued that due to the rajasic nature etc. of kshatriya and other dharmas, kshatriyas etc. who lack interest in them should only practice the sattvic dharma of brahmins, he replies to this in "Better is". One's own dharma, though inferior or even if well performed, is superior to another's superior dharma even if well performed, because it is prescribed.

bhg 18.48

One should not abandon the work born of one's nature, O son of Kunti (kaunteya), even though it may be defective.
For all undertakings are enveloped by defects, as fire is by smoke. ||48||

śrīdhara: If, on the other hand, seeing the fault of violence etc. in one's own dharma from the Sankhya perspective, you consider another's dharma superior, then the fault of having defects applies equally to another's dharma - with this intent he says "Born of one's nature". One should not abandon work born of one's nature, even though defective. For all undertakings, all actions for seen and unseen purposes, are indeed enveloped by some defect. Just as fire is enveloped by its natural smoke. Therefore, just as fire's defect of smoke is removed and only its heat is used to dispel darkness and cold etc., similarly only the virtuous aspect of action should be used for purification of one's nature, removing the defective aspect - this is the meaning. ||48||

viśvanātha: One should not think that defects exist only in one's own dharma, because some defect exists in other dharmas as well - he says this in "Born of one's nature". All undertakings, actions that are means for seen and unseen results, are indeed enveloped by defects. Just as fire is seen to be enveloped by the defect of smoke. Therefore, just as fire's defect of smoke is removed and only its heat is used to dispel darkness and cold etc., similarly only the virtuous aspect of action should be used for purification of one's nature, removing the defective aspect - this is the meaning. ||48||

baladevaḥ: It is not that only the kshatriya etc. dharmas like fighting etc. have defects. The brahmin dharmas are also like that - he says this in "Born of one's nature". One should not abandon work born of one's nature, even though defective, mixed with violence etc. Rather, one should perform it because it is prescribed. One should not practice brahmin duties thinking they are faultless - this is the meaning. For all. The undertakings, actions of all varnas - brahmins etc. - are generally enveloped, pervaded by some defect, because they are composed of the three gunas and require material means. As fire by smoke - just as fire's smoky aspect is removed and its heat is used to dispel cold etc., similarly the defective aspect of actions should be removed by offering them to God, and their knowledge-generating aspect should be used for self-realization - this is the meaning. ||48||

bhg 18.49

With unattached intellect everywhere, self-controlled, free from longing,
One attains the supreme perfection of actionlessness (naiṣkarmyasiddhim) through renunciation (saṃnyāsena). ||49||

śrīdhara: If it is asked how only the virtuous aspect is accomplished when action is performed, with the defective aspect removed, he replies in "With unattached intellect". One whose intellect is unattached, free from attachment. Self-controlled means free from ego. Free from longing means free from desire for results. Through renunciation characterized by abandoning attachment to action and its fruits as previously stated - "Abandoning attachment and also the fruit, that renunciation is considered sattvic" (Gita 18.9) - one attains the perfection of actionlessness characterized by cessation of all actions, purification of one's nature. Although performance of action with abandonment of attachment and fruits is itself actionlessness due to absence of the notion of doership (as stated in the four verses beginning with "The enlightened one should think 'I do not do anything at all'" (Gita 5.8) etc.), still by the renunciation characterized as stated here one attains the supreme perfection of actionlessness, the state of a paramahamsa characterized as "Mentally renouncing all actions, the self-controlled one rests happily" (Gita 5.13). ||49||

viśvanātha: Thus, for the first renunciant who has abandoned the faults in action characterized by attachment to doership and desire for results, when he reaches the state of being established in yoga through maturation of practice over time, there is a second renunciation in the form of abandoning actions themselves. He explains this: One whose intellect is unattached everywhere, meaning not attached to material objects, whose mind is controlled, who has conquered the self, whose longing even for the pleasures up to Brahmaloka has departed - through renunciation, by abandoning actions themselves, he attains the highest, supreme perfection of inaction. The meaning is that in the state of being established in yoga, the perfection of inaction becomes exceedingly accomplished for him. ||49||

baladeva: Thus one who is established in knowledge, having realized his true nature through karma-yoga imbued with knowledge as an aspirant, should then renounce karma-yoga itself - he states this with "unattached" etc. One whose intellect is unattached to all objects other than the self, who has conquered the self, whose mind is controlled through relishing the bliss of the self, and therefore without longing, devoid of desire for various pleasures to be attained through objects other than the self. Through renunciation, by abandoning actions themselves which distract from relishing the bliss of the self, he attains the supreme perfection characterized by inaction, becoming established in yoga. This is stated in the third chapter: "But one who rejoices only in the self" (gītā 3.17) etc. ||49||

bhg 18.50

Learn from Me briefly, O son of Kunti, how one who has attained perfection reaches Brahman, that supreme state of knowledge. ||50||

śrīdhara: He describes the manner of attaining Brahman for such a paramahaṁsa (supreme renunciate) established in knowledge, in six verses beginning with "one who has attained perfection". Learn from My words briefly how one who has attained the perfection of inaction reaches Brahman in that manner. To show that established state of attaining Brahman, he says "that supreme state of knowledge". niṣṭhā means culmination, completion. ||50||

viśvanātha: Then, how one experiences Brahman - that itself is the supreme culmination of knowledge. The Amara-kośa states: "niṣṭhā means completion, destruction, end". When ignorance has mostly ceased and knowledge also begins to cease, understand how one would experience Brahman by renouncing even knowledge. ||50||

baladeva: "One who has attained perfection": Having worshiped Hari through prescribed actions and attained through His grace the culmination of renouncing all actions and absorption in meditation on the self, learn from Me briefly how one thus situated experiences Brahman, realizes his true nature manifesting the eightfold qualities. That supreme state of knowledge, the state of knowledge focused on the Supreme Lord, is being described by Me to you - hear that also. ||50||

bhg 18.51-53

Endowed with a purified intellect, firmly restraining oneself through determination, renouncing the objects of the senses like sound, and casting off attachment and aversion; ||51||

Resorting to a secluded place, eating lightly, with speech, body and mind controlled, constantly engaged in meditation and yoga, taking refuge in dispassion; ||52||

Abandoning egotism, force, arrogance, desire, anger and possessiveness, free from the notion of "mine" and peaceful - he becomes fit for realizing Brahman. ||53||

śrīdhara: He explains this thus with "Endowed with a purified intellect" etc. The words from "Endowed with a purified intellect" etc. up to "he becomes fit for realizing Brahman" in the third verse are to be connected. Endowed with the previously mentioned sattvic intellect purified in the stated manner, firmly restraining that very intellect through sattvic determination, renouncing sense objects like sound, and casting off attachment and aversion towards them; ||51|| Moreover, "Resorting to a secluded place" etc. Resorting to a secluded place means dwelling in a pure location, eating lightly means eating moderately. Through these means, with speech, body and mind controlled, becoming one whose speech, body and mind are restrained, constantly, always engaged in yoga which is union with Brahman through meditation, and for uninterrupted meditation, repeatedly taking firm refuge in dispassion; ||52|| Then, "Abandoning egotism" etc. Thoroughly abandoning egotism like "I am detached" etc., force meaning obstinacy, arrogance characterized by engaging in wrong paths due to the power of yoga, desire and anger even towards objects being experienced due to prārabdha karma, and possessiveness; free from the notion of "mine", peaceful, having attained supreme tranquility, he becomes fit, becomes qualified for realizing Brahman, for remaining steadfast in the conviction "I am Brahman". ||53||

viśvanātha: With a pure sattvic intellect and sattvic determination, controlling the mind, through meditation focused solely on the Lord, one who is devoted to the highest yoga; strength here means desire and attachment, not ability; freeing oneself from egoism etc. means cessation of ignorance; peaceful means tranquil even beyond the sattva quality, implying renunciation of knowledge, as stated in the Eleventh Canto: "One should renounce even knowledge in Me" (BhP 11.19.1). The idea is that without ceasing both ignorance and knowledge, realization of Brahman is not possible. One becomes capable of attaining Brahman realization. ||51-53||

baladeva: He explains that method with "buddhyā" etc. Endowed with a pure sattvic intellect and such determination, controlling the mind and making it fit for samādhi, abandoning sense objects like sound etc., keeping them at a distance, casting off attachment and aversion which are their causes; resorting to solitude, eating lightly and moderately, with speech and other faculties restrained and focused on the object of meditation; always devoted to the yoga of meditation, absorbed in contemplation of Hari; with dispassion towards all objects other than the self; ego means identification with the body; strength means the impressions that increase it; pride is its cause; desire is longing for enjoyments that come due to remaining prārabdha karma; anger when those are taken by others; and possessiveness is action towards those. Freeing oneself from egoism etc., becoming free from the sense of "mine", one becomes capable of attaining the state of Brahman, which means realizing one's true nature endowed with the eight qualities. Peaceful means steady like a waveless ocean. ||51-53||

BhG 18.54

One who has attained the state of Brahman becomes joyful in the self, neither grieves nor desires, equal towards all beings, attains supreme devotion to Me. ||54||

śrīdhara: He states the result of being firmly established in the realization "I am Brahman" with "brahma" etc. One established in Brahman, with a serene mind, does not grieve for what is lost nor desire what is unattained, due to absence of identification with the body etc. Therefore, being equal towards all beings, due to absence of disturbance caused by attachment, aversion etc., he attains supreme devotion characterized by meditation on Me in all beings. ||54||

viśvanātha: Then, with the removal of limiting adjuncts, "brahma-bhūtaḥ" means becoming of the nature of Brahman as uncovered consciousness. Due to removal of the impurity of the guṇas. "Prasannātmā" means one whose self is serene. Thus, unlike in the previous state, he does not grieve for what is lost nor desire what is unattained, due to absence of identification with the body etc. Equal towards all beings, auspicious and inauspicious, like a child, due to lack of external awareness.

Then, even when knowledge ceases like a fire without fuel, he attains My indestructible devotion in the form of hearing, chanting etc., which is inherent in knowledge. Because it is a function of My essential potency, distinct from the māyā potency, it remains even when both ignorance and knowledge cease. Therefore "parām" means supreme, different from and superior to knowledge, pure, devoid of desireless action, knowledge etc. "Labhate" is used because previously, when knowledge, detachment etc. were present for liberation, there was no clear perception of devotion present in all beings like the inner controller. Therefore "kurute" is not used, but "labhate". Like finding a golden gem mixed with beans etc., which remains indestructible even when they are destroyed, he attains it separately as pure. Full prema-bhakti is generally not attained at this time, nor is its fruit of sāyujya, so "parā" should be interpreted as characterized by prema. ||54||

baladeva: He states the attainment that follows becoming Brahman with "brahma" etc. "Brahma-bhūtaḥ" means one who has directly realized his own nature endowed with the eight qualities. "Prasannātmā" means extremely pure due to the cessation of afflictions, karma, fruition and impressions - in expressions like "rivers with clear water", extreme purity is the meaning of "prasanna". Being thus, he neither grieves nor desires for anything other than Me. Equal towards all beings high and low other than Me, considering them to be like straw or wood due to being equally rejectable. Being thus, he attains supreme devotion to Me, the culmination mentioned in "which is supreme to knowledge" (Gītā 18.50), characterized by experience of Me, of the same form as seeing Me, the devotion to be attained. ||54||

BhG 18.55

Through devotion he knows Me as I am in truth, in My full extent and nature. Then knowing Me in truth, he enters into Me immediately after. ||55||

śrīdhara: Then with "bhaktyā" etc. Thus, through supreme devotion he knows Me in truth. How am I? As much as I am, all-pervading, and what I am, a mass of existence, consciousness and bliss - as such. Then knowing Me thus in truth, immediately after, when that knowledge ceases, he enters into Me, becomes of the nature of supreme bliss. ||55||

viśvanātha: If one asks what happens to him then through that attained devotion, he states another meaning with "bhaktyā" etc. How much I am and what I am, that Me, the object denoted by "tat", whether a jñānī or various types of devotees, one knows only through devotion in truth. Because I have said "I am attainable only through single-minded devotion" (BhP 11.14.11). Since it is so, therefore the jñānī under discussion, then through that devotion alone, immediately after, only after the cessation of knowledge, knowing Me, enters into Me, experiences the bliss of attaining sāyujya with Me. Because I am beyond māyā and ignorance is of the nature of māyā, I cannot be understood even through knowledge - this is the idea.

What is known as sāṅkhya, yoga, detachment, austerity, and devotion to Keśava - these five are described as knowledge in the Nārada Pañcarātra. There, devotion is heard as a function of knowledge. Indeed, that is just a certain portion of devotion, which is a function of the hlādinī power, that has entered into knowledge for the success of knowledge. It also enters into karma-yoga for the success of karma. Without it, karma, jñāna, yoga, etc. are said to be mere labor. Because nirguṇā (transcendental) devotion does not actually become a function of knowledge possessing good qualities, therefore knowledge is the cause only as a remover of ignorance, but in knowing the meaning of that (supreme reality), it is devotion alone.

Moreover - according to the smṛti "Knowledge is born from sattva" (Gītā 14.17), knowledge born from sattva is sattva itself. And that sattva is referred to by the word 'knowledge'. Just as knowledge arising from devotion is devotion itself, the same is sometimes called by the word 'devotion' and sometimes by the word 'knowledge'. Thus, knowledge should also be seen as twofold. One should renounce the first knowledge and attain union with Brahman through the second knowledge - this should also be known from the perspective of the twenty-fifth chapter of the eleventh canto [*endnote]. Here, some who seek union through knowledge alone without devotion, considering themselves knowers, achieve only suffering as a result and are indeed greatly criticized. Others, knowing that liberation is not possible through knowledge alone without devotion, practice knowledge mixed with devotion, but considering the Lord to be limited by māyā and His form to be made of material qualities, even after reaching the state of being established in yoga, they too, though considering themselves liberated knowers, are indeed criticized. As it is said:

"From the mouth, arms, thighs and feet of the cosmic Person, along with the four social orders, the four varṇas were born separately according to the material qualities, starting with the brāhmaṇas." (BhP 11.5.2)

"Those who do not worship this Person, who is the direct manifestation of the Self and the controller, or who, even while worshiping, disrespect Him, fall down from their position." (BhP 11.5.3)

The meaning is: Those who do not worship and those who, even while worshiping, disrespect Him - even if they are sannyāsīs and even if their knowledge is destroyed - they fall down. It is also said:

"O lotus-eyed one, those who consider themselves liberated but whose intelligence is impure due to not being devoted to You, even though they may rise to the highest position through great difficulty, fall down again because they disregard Your feet." (BhP 10.2.32)

Here, the word "feet" is used specifically to indicate devotion. "Those who disregard Your feet" means considering His form to be made of material qualities is itself disregard for His form. As it is said:

"Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form." (Gītā 9.11)

In reality, however, that human form is indeed composed of existence, consciousness, and bliss. Its visibility is due to the influence of His inconceivable power of mercy. As it is said in the Nārāyaṇādhyātma:

"Although the Lord is eternally unmanifest, He is seen through His own power. Without that, who could see this supremely blissful Lord?"

Thus, the Lord's form being composed of existence, consciousness, and bliss is established in "whose form is existence, consciousness, and bliss, seated at the base of a desire tree in Vṛndāvana" (GTU 1.33). Even though there are thousands of authoritative statements in śruti and smṛti such as "He whose body is the Vedic sound", some think that even the Lord is limited by māyā based on the śruti view "Know māyā to be prakṛti and the wielder of māyā to be the great Lord" (ŚvetU 4.2). But He is endowed with the eternal power called māyā, which is His intrinsic nature. Therefore, according to the śruti authenticated by Madhva's commentary, "They declare the eternal Viṣṇu to be endowed with māyā." In "māyāṃ tu", the word māyā refers to the intrinsic conscious power, not the extrinsic power composed of the three guṇas. They do not consider the meaning of that śruti to be this. Or they do not consider the meaning to be "One should know prakṛti as Durgā and the wielder of māyā as the great Lord Śambhu."

Therefore, even those who have attained the state of liberation while living, due to offenses against the Lord, fall down. As it is said in a supplementary statement quoted in the Vāsanā-bhāṣya:

"Even those liberated while living return to the cycle of rebirth if they commit offenses against the Lord of inconceivable great power."

And they, thinking that when the attainment of results occurs, there is no use for the means, at the time of renouncing knowledge, abandoning knowledge and devotion which has become secondary to it, consider his direct experience to be false. Due to offense against the deity, with the disappearance of devotion along with knowledge, they never again obtain devotion. And without devotion, due to not experiencing the object of that, they should be known as those with false samādhi (samādhi) who consider themselves liberated while living. As it is said - "Those others who consider themselves liberated, O lotus-eyed one" etc.

But those who practice knowledge mixed with devotion, honoring the form of the Lord as composed of existence, consciousness and bliss, gradually attain supreme devotion when ignorance and knowledge cease. They are liberated while living, of two types. Some, performing devotion for the sake of union, directly experience that object through that very devotion and attain union with it. They are indeed praised. Others, the greatly fortunate, by the influence of accidental association with great devotees who are peaceful, abandon the desire for liberation and immerse themselves in tasting the sweetness of devotional sentiment, like Śuka and others. They are indeed supremely praised. As it is said:

"Even self-satisfied sages and ascetics free from material bondage perform unmotivated devotional service to Lord Kṛṣṇa, who possesses such wonderful qualities." (BhP 1.7.10)

Thus, of the four types of jñānīs (jñānin), two are condemned and fall, two are praised and cross over saṃsāra (saṃsāra). ||55||

Baladeva: Then what? He says "By devotion". He knows, experiences Me as I am in My essential nature, qualities and glory through supreme devotion to Me. Then, due to supreme devotion to Me, having truly known and experienced Me of the stated characteristics, immediately after that, for that very reason, he enters into Me, becomes united with Me. Just as in "He enters the city", only connection with the city is understood, not becoming the city itself.

Here it should be understood that devotion alone is stated as the cause for both true knowledge and entering. As stated previously, "But by undivided devotion it is possible" (Gītā 11.54) etc. "Immediately after that" means at the time after the true experience of My essential nature, qualities and glory. Or, having truly known Me through supreme devotion, then taking that devotion itself, he enters into Me. The fifth case is used for the object when lyap is elided. The author of the sūtras states that devotion exists even in liberation: "Until departure, for it is seen there also" (VS 4.1.12). The meaning of the sūtra is: Until departure, until liberation, devotion continues even there in liberation, for it is seen in śruti. Those whose ignorance is destroyed by devotion, their taste for devotion increases, like the taste for sugar of those whose bile is destroyed by sugar - thus say those who know the secret. And thus the path of means and end for those with firm faith has been stated. ||55||

BhG 18.56

Always performing all actions, taking refuge in Me,
By My grace he attains the eternal, imperishable abode. ||56||

Śrīdhara: He concludes the previously stated method of liberation through worship of the Supreme Lord by one's own duties with "all actions". Performing all obligatory and occasional duties always according to the previously stated method, taking refuge in Me alone, not in the fruit of heaven etc., by My grace he attains the eternal, beginningless, supreme abode. ||56||

Viśvanātha: Thus it has been stated that the jñānī attains union with Me only gradually through renunciation of the fruits of action and renunciation of action. Now hear how My devotee attains Me, he says with "all". One who takes special refuge in Me, even with desire - what to speak of the desireless devotee. Performing all actions - obligatory, occasional, desireful, those characterized by maintaining children and wife etc., and even worldly ones - what to speak of one who has abandoned karma yoga, jñāna, worship of other gods, and other desires, who is not a devotee.

Here "takes refuge" means "serves completely". The prefix ā indicates the predominance of service. The word api ("even") in "even actions" indicates the secondary nature of actions. Therefore this is one with devotion mixed with karma, not one with karma mixed with devotion, so there is no over-application to the karma discussed in the first six chapters. He attains the eternal great abode, My abode of Vaikuṇṭha, Mathurā, Dvārakā, Ayodhyā etc.

But how will that abode remain during the great dissolution? To this he says "imperishable" - nothing of My abode perishes during the great dissolution, due to My inconceivable power.

But surely the jñānī attains union only after many births, with many austerities and pains, and only when all objects and senses have ceased in inaction. How does he attain Your eternal abode even while active and desireful, just by taking refuge in You? To this he says "by My grace" - know that the power of My grace is inconceivable. ||56||

baladeva: Now he speaks about those who are fully established with "sarva" in one and a half verses. One who relies solely on me, performing all his prescribed duties as appropriate. The word "api" implies that at other times he is devoted to me alone, since there is no primary time for him. Thus the author of the sutras says: "In every way too, because of the twofold characteristics there" (VS 3.4.34). Such a person, by my grace, by my excessive favor, attains the eternal, immutable, unchanging abode characterized by knowledge and bliss, known as the supreme spiritual sky. ||56||

BG 18.57

Mentally renouncing all actions in Me, devoted to Me,
Taking refuge in buddhi-yoga (intelligence-union), be always absorbed in thought of Me. ||57||

śrīdhara: Since this is so, therefore "cetasā" etc. All actions. Mentally renouncing in Me, offering, having Me as the supreme goal, taking refuge in yoga with resolute intelligence, always, even while performing actions, according to the principle "The offering is Brahman, the oblation is Brahman" (Gītā 4.24), having the mind fixed on Me alone - become like this. ||57||

viśvanātha: "Well then, what do you definitively command me regarding yourself? Should I become Your exclusive devotee, or a devotee with desires as described just before?" To this he says "cetasā" etc. "You will not be able to become the most excellent exclusive devotee. Nor should you be the lowest devotee with desires among all devotees. Rather, you should become a middle-level devotee." Renouncing all actions in Me, offering the duties of your social order and worldly activities, having Me as the supreme goal means one who is desireless, for whom I alone am the highest human pursuit to be attained. As was said before:

"Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer, whatever you give, whatever austerity you perform, O son of Kuntī, do that as an offering to Me." (Gītā 9.27)

Taking refuge in buddhi-yoga means yoga with resolute intelligence. Always absorbed in thought of Me means remembering Me even at other times while performing actions. ||57||

baladeva: Because you are like that, you should perform all your prescribed duties, mentally renouncing them in Me, your master, free from the ego of being the doer, etc., having Me as your sole goal, taking refuge in buddhi-yoga, always absorbed in thought of Me even while performing actions. This was also told to you before with "Whatever you do" etc. - offer the actions and then perform them, not perform them and then offer. ||57||

BG 18.58

Absorbed in thought of Me, by My grace you will overcome all obstacles;
But if out of ego you do not listen, you will perish. ||58||

śrīdhara: Then hear what will happen - "mac-cittaḥ" etc. Being absorbed in thought of Me, by My grace you will cross over all obstacles, all insurmountable worldly sufferings. He states the fault in the opposite case - But if out of ego, out of the conceit of being a knower, you do not listen to what I have said, then you will perish, you will fall from the goal of human life. ||58||

viśvanātha: Then what? To this he says "mac-cittaḥ" etc. ||58||

baladeva: Thus absorbed in thought of Me, you will cross over all obstacles, all insurmountable worldly sufferings, by My grace alone. Do not worry about that. I, the friend of My devotees, will remove them and give Myself. Thus the path of means and ends for those who are fully established has been stated. But if out of ego, out of pride in knowledge of what should and should not be done, you do not listen to what I have said, then you will perish, you will fall from your goal. For there is no one other than Me who knows or can command what should and should not be done for living beings. ||58||

BG 18.59

If relying on ego you think "I will not fight",
Vain is this resolve of yours; nature will compel you. ||59||

śrīdhara: "I may perish, but I will not fight with relatives" - if you think this, he says "yad ahaṅkāram" etc. Disregarding what I have said, relying solely on ego, if you resolve "I will not fight", this resolve of yours is vain, because you are not independent. He says this very thing - Nature, in the form of the mode of passion, will compel you, will impel you. ||59||

viśvanātha: "But for me as a kṣatriya (warrior), fighting is indeed the highest duty. I do not wish to engage in it out of fear of the sin of killing relatives." To this he says threateningly "yad aham" etc. prakṛti (nature) means svabhāva (innate nature). Now you do not heed my words, but when your natural enthusiasm for battle as a great hero inevitably arises, then while fighting you will laugh at me yourself as you kill Bhīṣma and other elders - this is the meaning. ||59||

baladeva: Although fighting is indeed the duty of a kṣatriya, if you think "I will not fight" out of fear of sin from killing teachers, brahmins, etc., relying on the ego of knowing what should and should not be done, then this resolve of yours will be false, fruitless. Nature, My māyā, transformed into the mode of passion, will compel you who disregard My words to fight, which will result in killing teachers and others. ||59||

bhg 18.60

svabhāvena kaunteya nibaddhaḥ svena karmaṇā |
kartuṃ necchasi yan mohāt kariṣyasy avaśopi tat ||60||

śrīdhara: Furthermore, svabhāvajena means: svabhāva is the cause of being a kṣatriya, the impressions from previous lives. You are bound by your own karma arising from that, namely valor etc. as mentioned before. Though out of delusion you do not wish to perform the action characterized as fighting, being helpless you will indeed do that action. ||60||

viśvanātha: He elaborates on the meaning stated before. svabhāva is the cause of being a kṣatriya, the previous impressions. You are bound and controlled by your own karma arising from that. ||60||

baladeva: He substantiates what was said in svabhāva etc. If out of delusion or ignorance you do not wish to fight as I have instructed, then bound by your own natural karma of valor manifested by my illusion, you will do it helplessly. ||60||

bhg 18.61

īśvaraḥ sarvabhūtānāṃ hṛddeśerjuna tiṣṭhati |
bhrāmayan sarvabhūtāni yantrārūḍhāni māyayā ||61||

śrīdhara: Thus in these two verses the dependence on prakṛti and dependence on one's own nature according to the Sāṅkhya and other views have been stated. Now he states his own view in two verses starting with īśvara. The Lord, the inner controller, resides in the heart of all beings. What does he do? He causes all beings to revolve by his own power of māyā, engaging them in their respective actions. Just as in the world a puppeteer causes artificial beings mounted on wooden machines to revolve, similarly. Or it means he causes beings mounted on machines, i.e. bodies, the souls identifying with bodies, to revolve.

And so the mantra of the Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad states:

"The one God, hidden in all beings, all-pervading, the inner self of all beings, overseer of action, dwelling in all beings, the witness, the knower, alone and devoid of qualities." (Śvetu 6.11)

And the Antaryāmi Brāhmaṇa: "He who dwelling in the self, controls the self from within, whom the self does not know, whose body is the self, who controls the self from within - he is your self, the inner controller, the immortal" and so on. ||61||

viśvanātha: Having stated the view of the proponents of svabhāva in two verses, he now states his own view. īśvara means Nārāyaṇa, the inner controller of all. As stated: "He who dwelling in the earth, controls the earth from within, whom the earth does not know, whose body is the earth, who controls the earth from within" (Bau 3.6.3). And:

"Whatever is seen or heard in this world,
Nārāyaṇa exists pervading it all, inside and outside." (Mahānārāyaṇa Upaniṣad 13.5)

The Lord, the inner controller established by such śruti statements, resides in the heart. What does he do? He causes all beings to revolve by māyā, his own power, engaging them in their respective actions. Just as māyā causes artificial beings in the form of dolls mounted on machines with moving strings etc. to revolve, similarly. Or it means all souls mounted on machines, i.e. bodies. ||61||

baladeva: He instructs Arjuna, who is clinging to the notion of being the knower, about the most essential knowledge in two verses starting with īśvara. O Arjuna, if you think you are the knower, then know from the Antaryāmi Brāhmaṇa that the Lord who resides in the heart of all beings from Brahmā down to immobile objects, causing them to revolve by māyā, his own power. He qualifies all beings with yantra: mounted on the machine made of māyā in accordance with their karma, consisting of the body, senses and life-airs. A simile is implied by the metaphor - just as a puppeteer causes artificial beings mounted on wooden machines to revolve, similarly. ||61||

bhg 18.62

tam eva śaraṇaṃ gaccha sarvabhāvena bhārata |
tatprasādāt parāṃ śāntiṃ sthānaṃ prāpsyasi śāśvatam ||62||

śrīdhara: Since all souls are thus dependent on the Supreme Lord, therefore abandoning egotism, take refuge in that Lord alone with your whole being. Then by his grace you will attain supreme peace and the eternal abode of the Lord. ||62||

viśvanātha: He states the purpose of imparting this knowledge: The supreme cessation of both ignorance and knowledge. And then the eternal abode, Vaikuṇṭha. This taking refuge in the inner controller is only for worshippers of the inner controller. For worshippers of the Lord, taking refuge in the Lord will be stated later, according to some. But others say: "He who is my beloved deity Śrī Kṛṣṇa is indeed my guru who instructs me in bhakti-yoga and what is beneficial. I constantly contemplate taking refuge in him." As stated by Uddhava:

"O Lord, even sages who live for the duration of Brahmā's life cannot repay their debt to you, as they remember with joy that you, manifesting as the guru and the Supersoul, reveal the path to yourself while removing the impurities within and without of embodied beings." (Bhp 11.29.6) ||62||

baladeva: Therefore take refuge in that Lord alone with your whole being, with all your faculties. What then? He answers in tat etc. Supreme peace characterized by freedom from all afflictions. And the eternal, everlasting abode sung of in śruti as "that supreme abode of Viṣṇu" etc. You will attain. And that Lord is myself, your friend, as I previously stated "I am seated in the hearts of all" (Gītā 15.15) etc. This was accepted by you saying "You are the supreme Brahman, the supreme abode" (Gītā 10.12) etc., seeking confirmation from sages etc. And because it was directly perceived in the universal form vision. Therefore abide by my instruction. ||62||

bhg 18.63

Thus I have declared to you this knowledge, which is more secret than all secrets. Reflect on this completely and then do as you wish. [63]

Śrīdhara: Summarizing the entire meaning of the Gītā, he says "iti" etc. In this way, I, who am omniscient and supremely compassionate, have declared and instructed this knowledge to you. What kind of knowledge? More secret than what is secret, than the knowledge of secret mantras, yoga, etc. Having fully reflected on this Gītā scripture instructed by me, afterwards do as you wish. The idea is that when you have reflected on this, your delusion will cease. [63]

Viśvanātha: He summarizes the entire meaning of the Gītā with "iti" etc. The knowledge of karma-yoga, aṣṭāṅga-yoga (eight-limbed yoga) and jñāna-yoga (knowledge yoga) - the scripture of knowledge by which these are known, is more secret than secret because it is extremely confidential, not revealed even by Vasiṣṭha, Bādarāyaṇa, Nārada, etc. in their own composed scriptures. Or, their omniscience is relative while mine is absolute, therefore they do not know this which is extremely secret. The idea is that even I have not instructed this to you completely in every way because it is extremely secret. Having reflected on this completely, without omission, as you wish, in whatever way you desire, do that - thus the final group of six verses on knowledge is complete. This group of three sets of six verses is the crest jewel of all knowledge, the Śrī Gītā scripture, the most priceless and secret container of devotion. The first group of six verses on karma (action) is its golden base covering. The final group of six verses on jñāna (knowledge) is its gem-studded golden upper covering. Between them shines the devotion contained in the middle group of six verses, priceless in the three worlds, able to control Śrī Kṛṣṇa, a great jeweled ornament, whose attendant is the pair of verses beginning with "man-manā bhava" in the latter half of the upper covering, consisting of 64 pure syllables, as is understood. [63]

Baladeva: Concluding the scripture, he says "iti" etc. Thus, in the manner stated before, this knowledge, the Gītā scripture - by which karma (action), bhakti (devotion) and jñāna (knowledge) are known, according to etymology - that I have declared and thoroughly explained to you. More secret than secret mantra and other confidential scriptures, thus it is to be kept hidden. Having reflected on this scripture completely, in its entirety, afterwards do as you wish. When you have reflected on this, your delusion will be destroyed and you will be established in my words. [63]

Hear again My supreme word, which is the most secret of all. You are surely dear to Me, therefore I will speak what is beneficial for you. [64]

Śrīdhara: To one unable to completely reflect on the very profound Gītā scripture, out of compassion he himself summarizes its essence, saying "most secret of all" in three verses. More secret than all secrets, My words stated here and there, hear again what I will now say. He states the reason for repeating: thinking "you are firmly, extremely dear to Me," for that very reason I will speak what is beneficial for you. Or, "you are dear to Me and what I will say is firmly established by all valid means of knowledge" - understanding this, therefore I will speak to you. Some read "of firm resolve." [64]

Viśvanātha: Then, seeing his dear friend Arjuna silent after attempting to reflect on the Gītā scripture of very profound meaning, the Lord, His heart melting with compassion, says: "O dear friend Arjuna, I myself will speak the essence of all scriptures in eight verses. Enough of your trouble in reflecting on this and that." He says "sarva" etc. "Again" refers to what was previously stated at the end of the chapter on royal knowledge and royal secret:

"Fix your mind on Me, be devoted to Me, worship Me, bow down to Me. Thus uniting yourself, absorbed in Me, you will come to Me alone." (Gītā 9.34)

That same supreme, most secret essence of the meaning of all scriptures, including the Gītā scripture - the idea is that there is nothing more secret than this anywhere, from anyone, in any way, absolutely. He states the reason for repeating: "You are firmly, extremely dear to Me, you are My friend" - for that very reason "what is beneficial for you" - the idea is that no one tells extremely secret things to anyone except a friend. There is also the reading "of firm resolve." [64]

Baladeva: Now, about to instruct the path of means and ends for those who are independent, he first praises it with "sarva" etc. Most secret among all secrets. "Again" refers to what was previously stated in the chapter on royal knowledge beginning with "man-manā bhava" etc. - hear what is being said again at the end due to its being extremely dear to Me, supreme, the essence of all essences, even the essence of the Gītā scripture. The reason for repeating is "you are dear." You are My dearest beloved. You are convinced that My words are firm, supported by all valid means of knowledge, therefore I will speak what is beneficial for you. Still, this alone is to be practiced - this is the idea. [64]

bhg 18.65

Fix your mind on Me, be devoted to Me, worship Me, and bow down to Me. Thus uniting yourself with Me and regarding Me as the supreme goal, you will come to Me. I promise you this truly, for you are dear to Me. 65

Śrīdhara: He says the same thing in "man-manā". Let your mind be fixed on Me. Be My devotee, be inclined to worship Me. Be My worshipper, be inclined to sacrifice to Me. Bow down to Me alone. Conducting yourself in this way, you will come to Me, you will attain Me by the knowledge obtained through My grace. And do not have any doubt about this. For you are dear to Me. Now I make a promise to you, just as it will be. 65

Viśvanātha: "Fix your mind on Me" means think of Me while being My devotee, not by becoming a jñānī or yogī to meditate on Me. Or, fix your mind on Me means become one whose mind is to be given to Me, Śyāmasundara, with curly locks, beautiful eyebrows, and a moon-like face showering the nectar of sweet glances of mercy. Or, "Be My devotee" means give Me your senses. Serve Me with all your senses through hearing, chanting, seeing My form, cleaning My temple, decorating with flowers, etc. Or, "Be My worshipper" means give Me incense, flowers, lamps, and food offerings. Worship Me. Or, "Bow down to Me" means give Me at least a bow. Prostrate on the ground or do an eight-limbed bow. Do all four of these - thinking of Me, serving, worshiping, bowing - or any one of them. You will come to Me, attain Me. Give your mind, senses, or offerings - I will truly give Myself to you. Have no doubt about this. "Satyam" means both oath and truth, according to Amara.

The people of Mathura swear in every sentence, so He says "I promise" - I declare after making a vow. You are dear to Me, for no one deceives a dear one. 65

Baladeva: He speaks these words in "man-manā bhava". As explained before, due to your mind being fixed on Me, you will come to Me alone, Kṛṣṇa, the son of Devakī, your beloved, with qualities like a blue lotus hue, appearing in human form - not to My other forms with a thousand heads, thumb-sized, or as Nṛsiṃha, Varāha, etc. I will give Myself as your friend - this is a true oath to you. "Satyam" means both oath and truth, according to Nānārthavarga. Have no doubt about this.

Even your oath may not remove my doubt since you are from Mathura, so He says "I promise" - I speak after making a vow. You are dear to Me, for the people of Mathura do not deceive a dear one with affectionate minds, what to speak of one most dear. As you are extremely fond of Me, so am I of you. I cannot bear separation from you, as I said before with "priyo hi". Therefore, have faith in My words - you will attain Me alone. 65

Leave aside all dharmas and take refuge in Me alone. I will liberate you from all sins; do not grieve. 66

Śrīdhara: He speaks of something even more secret in "sarva". With firm faith that everything will be accomplished by devotion to Me alone, abandoning obligatory duties, take refuge in Me alone. Conducting yourself thus, do not grieve thinking sin may result from abandoning duties. For I will liberate you, who have taken refuge in Me alone, from all sins. 66

Viśvanātha: Now, should I perform meditation on You, etc. along with following the duties of my social order, or exclusively? He answers this in "sarva-dharmān" - abandoning all duties of varṇa and āśrama, take refuge in Me alone. "Abandoning" should not be interpreted as renunciation, since Arjuna as a kṣatriya is not eligible for sannyāsa. Nor should it be said that the Lord instructed the masses while targeting Arjuna, for it is proper to apply the instruction to Arjuna as the target, while it may also be applicable to others, but not otherwise. Nor should "abandoning" be interpreted as merely renouncing the fruits, for this verse means the same as:

O king, one who has taken complete shelter of Mukunda (Krishna), abandoning all other duties, is no longer a servant or debtor to the celestial sages, ordinary living entities, ancestors, or demigods. (BhP 11.5.41)

When a mortal abandons all karmic activities and fully dedicates himself to Me, desiring to serve Me, at that time he attains immortality and becomes qualified to associate with Me. (BhP 11.29.32)

As long as one is not detached from fruitive work and material enjoyment, and as long as one has no faith in hearing and chanting about Me, one should continue to carry out the ordinary prescribed duties. (BhP 11.20.9)

One who gives up all prescribed duties and simply worships Me, understanding both the good and bad qualities of his own nature as ordained by Me, is considered the best among all beings. (BhP 11.11.37)

By these words of the Lord, beginning with "iti", the necessity of explaining the single meaning is established. And here, due to the use of the word "pari". Therefore, the meaning is: "Take refuge in Me alone, not in dharma, knowledge, yoga, other deities, etc." Previously, I said you have no qualification for the highest devotion to anyone other than Me, so by saying "whatever you do, whatever you eat", etc., I indicated your qualification for devotion mixed with karma. But now, out of extreme mercy, I have given you qualification for exclusive devotion to Me, removing the rule of its characteristic of being attainable only by the chance grace of My exclusive devotees, like My own vow in the battle with Bhishma. And you need not fear any fault in abandoning nitya-naimittika karma by My order. In the form of Vedas, I myself ordained the performance of nitya karma, but now in My personal form I ordain its abandonment. So how can sins arise for you in not performing nitya karma? Rather, from now on, sins will arise only in performing nitya karma, due to directly transgressing My order - this should be understood.

Now, one who takes refuge in someone becomes dependent on them like a purchased animal. He does only what they make him do. He stays only where they place him. He eats only what they feed him. This is the essence of the dharma characterized by taking refuge. As stated in the Vayu Purana:

"Determination to do what is favorable, rejection of what is unfavorable, faith that 'He will protect me', choosing Him as protector, self-surrender, and humility - these six are śaraṇāgati (surrender)."

Favorable is activity pleasing to one's chosen deity as prescribed in devotional scriptures, unfavorable is the opposite. "As protector" means "He alone is my protector, no one else". Faith that "He will protect me" is the confidence like that of Draupadi and Gajendra that "He will certainly protect me" even when faced with unfavorable circumstances. Self-surrender is dedicating oneself along with one's gross and subtle bodies solely for Krishna. Humility is not expressing one's pitiable state to anyone else. Śaraṇāgati (surrender) is that which consists of the performance of these six things.

So from today, if I have indeed taken refuge in You, then whatever You say, good or bad, is my duty. If You make me perform dharma, there is no worry. But if You, being the Lord and acting independently, make me perform adharma, then what is my recourse? To this He says "aham" (I). From all sins, past and future, as many as exist or as many as I will cause you to commit, I will free you from all of them. I am not like other refuge-givers, incapable in this - this is the meaning.

Relying on You alone, I have taught this scripture to the whole world. Do not grieve, neither for yourself nor for others. May the entire world, beginning with you, abandoning all duties to self and others, become devoted to contemplating Me etc., take refuge in Me, and live happily. The burden of freeing them from sin, and even from samsara, I have certainly accepted.

"Those who worship Me, thinking of Me alone, to those ever-united ones I carry what they lack and preserve what they have." (Gita 9.22)

Alas, do not grieve thinking "I have placed such a great burden on my Lord", for I who am affectionate to devotees do not feel even a trace of trouble in this. Thus there is nothing more to be taught, so the scripture is concluded. ||66||

Baladeva: Now, how can pure devotion to You in the form of worship, obeisances, etc. be performed by a person whose heart is polluted by infinite sins in the form of past karma, as long as those infinite sins opposed to devotion to You are not destroyed by prescribed atonements like kṛcchra and enjoined dharmas? To this he says "sarva" (all). Abandoning, i.e. completely giving up all dharmas that are prescribed atonements for past sins like kṛcchra etc., take refuge in Me alone, the Lord of all, Krishna, who has appeared in many forms like Nrsimha, Dasarathi etc., who is the object of pure devotion, who destroys all desires up to ignorance, and not in any other like Siva etc. The mutual obligation is shown: "I, the refuge-giver and Lord of all, will free you who have taken refuge from all sins, from past karmas." You should not grieve. Do not lament thinking "How can I, short-lived, perform those difficult kṛcchra etc. which take very long to accomplish, while You desire purification of the heart quickly?" - this is the meaning.

It is said here that this should not happen to one who has taken refuge in me. The śruti also says thus: "Not by action, not by progeny, not by wealth, but by renunciation alone some attained immortality." And similarly it begins: "He knows through faith, devotion, meditation, and yoga." For the purification of the hearts of those who are established and for the welfare of the world for those who are fully established, these duties should be performed accordingly. From passages beginning with "That very one" and "This self is to be attained by truth, by austerity" and other śrutis.

And it should not be explained as "Do not grieve" thinking there would be sin characterized by transgression in abandoning prescribed duties. Just as for a renunciate in abandoning agnihotra etc. by Vedic injunction, so for one who has taken refuge in Him in abandoning that by the Lord's command, because that is not applicable to him. On the contrary, transgressing His command would incur fault. And there is no incurring of transgression from abandoning prescribed duties in their essential nature. It should be explained as "All fruits of dharma." Because there is no incurring of that in abandoning the fruits. Therefore for one who has taken refuge there is abandonment of dharma in its essential nature. And there is no incurring of performance of one's own dharma by the maxim "Indeed never anywhere" etc., because by that maxim there is no incurring of that for one engaged in His worship etc. And thus for one established, up to direct experience of the self, and for one fully established, up to direct experience of the supreme self, just as there is practice of dharma, so for one who has taken refuge it is up to purification of the inner self. It is said exactly thus in the Eleventh:

"One should perform actions until one becomes detached, or until faith arises in hearing about Me, etc." (BhP 11.20.9)

This śaraṇāgati (taking refuge) called prapatti (surrender) has six limbs, according to the Vāyu Purāṇa:

"Resolve to do what is favorable, rejection of what is unfavorable, faith that He will protect, choosing Him as protector, self-surrender, and feeling helpless - these six are śaraṇāgati."

Ānukūlya is engaging in activity prescribed in devotional scriptures that is pleasing to Hari. Prātikūlya is the opposite of that. Ātma-nikṣepa is placing one's burden on Him who gives refuge. Kārpaṇya is anguish. In some readings it says "nikṣepaṇam akārpaṇyam". There kārpaṇya means displaying one's wretchedness to others besides Him. The rest is clear. ||66||

BhG 18.67

Never teach this to one who is without austerity, nor to one who is not devoted, nor to one who does not render service, nor to one who speaks ill of Me. ||67||

Śrīdhara: Having thus taught the essence of the meaning of the Gītā, he states a rule for propagating that tradition with "idam" etc. This essence of the meaning of the Gītā should not be spoken by you to one without austerity, i.e. lacking in religious practice. And it should never be spoken to one who is not devoted, i.e. devoid of devotion to the guru and to God. It should not be spoken to one who does not render service. And it should not be spoken to one who speaks ill of Me, the Supreme Lord, criticizing with a human perspective by imputing faults. ||67||

Viśvanātha: Having thus taught the scripture of the Gītā, he states a rule for propagating the tradition with "idam" etc. It should not be spoken to one without austerity, i.e. with uncontrolled senses, because it is said "The highest austerity is one-pointedness of the mind and senses." Even if one has controlled senses, it should not be spoken to one who is not devoted. Even if one possesses the three qualities beginning with controlled senses, it should never be spoken to one who speaks ill of Me, imputing the defect of being subject to māyā to Me, the full Brahman without limitations. ||67||

Baladeva: Now he teaches that the scripture of the Gītā taught by himself should be given only to worthy recipients, not to unworthy ones, with "idam" etc. This scripture should not be spoken by you to one without austerity, i.e. with uncontrolled senses. Even to one with austerity, it should not be spoken to one who is not devoted, i.e. devoid of devotion to you as the teacher of the scripture and to Me as the subject taught by the scripture. Even to one with austerity and devotion, it should not be spoken to one who does not wish to hear. But to one who speaks ill of Me, the Supreme Lord with an eternal form of qualities, imputing to Me the state of having a form with material qualities, it should never be spoken - thus he is indicated by a different case ending. Thus says the author of the Sūtras: "Not revealing, due to the connection" (VS 3.4.50). ||67||

BhG 18.68
One who explains this supreme secret to My devotees, having performed the highest devotion to Me, will come to Me alone, without doubt. ||68||

Śrīdhara: He states the result for one who teaches the scripture of the Gītā to those free from these faults, with "yaḥ" etc. "Will explain to My devotees" means "will speak to My devotees." He performs the highest devotion to Me, then being free from doubt he attains Me alone - this is the meaning. ||68||

Viśvanātha: He states the result for one who teaches this, with "yaḥ" etc. in two verses. "Having performed the highest devotion" means first attainment of supreme devotion. Then attainment of Me. This happens for the teacher of this. ||68||

Baladeva: He states the result for the teacher of the scripture with "yaḥ" etc. For the teacher of this, first there is attainment of supreme devotion to Me, then attainment of My abode. ||68||

bhg 18.69

And no one among humans will be dearer to me than he who explains this sacred teaching, nor will there be anyone on earth more beloved to me than him. [69]

Śrīdhara: Moreover, among humans there is no one who is dearer to me or gives me more satisfaction than those devotees of mine who explain the Gītā scripture. Nor will there be anyone dearer to me on earth in the future. [69]

Viśvanātha: There is no one dearer or more beloved than that instructor. [69]

Baladeva: Among humans there was no one in the past nor will there be in the future who gives me more satisfaction than the instructor of the Gītā. There was no one on earth dearer to me than him nor will there be in the future. [69]

BhG 18.70:

And he who will study this sacred dialogue of ours, by him I shall be worshipped through the sacrifice of knowledge (jñānayajñena) - such is my view. [70]

Śrīdhara: He states the result for one who recites in adhyeṣyate, etc. He who will study this sacred dialogue between us, Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna, by reciting it as japa, by him I shall be worshipped through the sacrifice of knowledge, which is superior to all sacrifices - such is my view. Even if he simply recites without understanding the meaning of the Gītā, as I listen to it, I consider that he is revealing me. Just as in the world, when someone happens to mention someone's name, that person thinks "He is calling me" and approaches, similarly I too would become present near him. That is why I am pleased even by the mere utterance of my name by Ajāmila, Kṣatrabandhu and others. Similarly I would be pleased with him too - this is the idea. [70]

Viśvanātha: He states the result of studying this in adhyeṣyate, etc. [70]

Baladeva: Now he states the result for one who studies the scripture in adhyeṣyate ca, etc. By the sacrifice of knowledge described here, I shall be worshipped by the mere recitation of this - such is my view. I will be easily attainable to him - this is the meaning. [70]

BhG 18.71:

And the person who would listen with faith and without envy, he too, liberated, shall attain the auspicious worlds of those of meritorious deeds. [71]

Śrīdhara: He states the result even for one who listens to another reciting, in śraddhāvān, etc. The person who listens with faith, and to exclude the fault of thinking "Why is he reciting loudly?" or "He is reciting incorrectly", he says "without envy" - he who listens without faultfinding, he too, freed from all sins, shall attain the worlds of those who perform meritorious deeds like the Aśvamedha sacrifice. [71]

Viśvanātha: He states the result of hearing this in śraddhāvān, etc. [71]

Baladeva: He states the result for the listener in śraddhā, etc. He who simply listens with faith, without envy, not finding fault thinking "Why is he reciting loudly or incorrectly?", he too, freed from all sins, shall attain the worlds of those who perform meritorious deeds like the Aśvamedha sacrifice. Or he shall attain the worlds of those of meritorious deeds means the worlds of devotees like Dhruvaloka and the divisions of Vaikuṇṭha. [71]

BhG 18.72:

Has this been heard by you, O Pārtha, with one-pointed mind? Has your delusion born of ignorance been destroyed, O Dhanaṃjaya? [72]

Śrīdhara: With the intention "If it has not been properly understood, I will instruct again", he asks kaccid, etc. Kaccid is used in the sense of a question. Delusion born of ignorance means misconception due to lack of knowledge of truth. The rest is clear. [72]

Viśvanātha: With the intention "If it has not been properly understood, I will instruct again", he asks kaccid, etc. [72]

Baladeva: Thus the scripture and the glory of its recitation etc. have been stated. Now he asks about attention to the meaning of the scripture and its realization in kaccid, etc. Kaccid is an indeclinable used in the sense of a question. If it has not been properly realized, I will instruct this again - this is the idea. [72]

BhG 18.73:

Arjuna said:
My delusion is destroyed, I have gained memory by Your grace, O Acyuta. I am firm, free from doubt. I shall act according to Your word. [73]

Śrīdhara: Having achieved his purpose, Arjuna spoke naṣṭa, etc. My delusion regarding the self is destroyed, since I have gained memory in the form of awareness of my true nature that "This is who I am" by Your grace. Therefore I am firm, I have risen to fight, my doubt regarding dharma is gone, I shall carry out Your command. [73]

Viśvanātha: "What more shall I ask? Having abandoned all dharmas, I have taken refuge in You alone. I am free from worry and have full faith in You" - he says this in naṣṭa, etc. After kariṣye, the meaning is: Henceforth, for me who have taken refuge, staying fixed in Your command alone is my dharma. Not my caste duties, nor regard for the path of knowledge. From today I have abandoned those. Then when the Lord said "O dear friend Arjuna, there remains some task to be done in relieving the earth's burden. I wish to accomplish that through you", Arjuna, taking up his Gāṇḍīva bow, rose to fight. [73]

baladeva: Thus asked, Pārtha speaks about the result of his experience of the scripture through naṣṭa iti. The delusion characterized by mistaken knowledge has been destroyed for me by your grace, and I have gained memory fixed on the true nature of things. I am now free from doubt, with my uncertainty cut away. I will follow your words. This means - all living beings including gods and humans are independent in their respective actions, identified with their bodies, and honored by pride and enmity. The gods give desired objects to them. But there is some Supreme Lord. He is indeed without qualities, formless, indifferent, and nature is the cause of the world due to His proximity - such was the delusion characterized by mistaken knowledge that I had before. It has been destroyed by the instruction I received from you. The Supreme Lord possessing the parākhya form and powers, embodiment of knowledge and bliss, ocean of qualities like omniscience, supreme lordship, true resolve etc., friend of devotees, controller of all, creator of the diverse creation in accordance with souls' karma merely by His will through His powers known as nature, soul and time, giver of everything up to Himself to His devotees, wealth of the destitute devotees - You are indeed that Lord, my friend, son of Vasudeva - such true knowledge has arisen in me. Therefore, I have now taken refuge in You. My doubt that You will ever abandon me has been cut away. Now, if removing the earth's burden is Your purpose that I as one surrendered should accomplish, then I will carry out Your words - saying this, Arjuna stood up with bow in hand. ||73||

bhg 18.74

sañjaya uvāca
ity ahaṃ vāsudevasya pārthasya ca mahātmanaḥ |
saṃvādam imam aśrauṣam adbhutaṃ romaharṣaṇam ||74||

śrīdhara: Having thus narrated the dialogue between Śrī Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna to Dhṛtarāṣṭra, Sañjaya continues the present narrative saying iti. I heard this dialogue which causes horripilation, i.e. makes the hair stand on end. The rest is clear. ||74||

viśvanātha: Hereafter, the explanation of the five verses where the final verses summarizing the essence of the entire Gītā are found, those two pages have now been taken away by Vināyaka on his vehicle. So I am not writing that again. May he who speaks only that be pleased. Obeisance to him. Thus the commentary on the Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā called Sārārtha-darśinī is completed for the pleasure of the saintly.

May the sweetness of this Sārārthavarṣiṇī which showers essence and is universally beneficial to devotee cātaka birds shine in my heart.

Thus in the Sārārthavarṣiṇī which delights the hearts of devotees, the eighteenth chapter of the Gītā is completed in good association.
Thus ends the commentary called Sārārthavarṣiṇī by Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākkura. ||74-78||

baladeva: The meaning of the scripture is completed. Now continuing the connection of the narrative, Sañjaya said to Dhṛtarāṣṭra ity aham iti. Adbhutam means causing wonder to the mind, being inconceivable in the world. Romaharṣaṇam means causing horripilation in the body. ||74||

bhg 18.75

vyāsaprasādāc chrutavān etad guhyam ahaṃ param |
yogaṃ yogeśvarāt kṛṣṇāt sākṣāt kathayataḥ svayam ||75||

śrīdhara: He states the possibility of his hearing that in vyāsa-prasādād iti. Lord Vyāsa gave me divine eyes, ears etc., therefore by Vyāsa's grace I have heard this. In expectation of what that is, he says param yogam. He reveals its supremacy in yogeśvarāt - I heard it from Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Lord of yoga, directly speaking it Himself. ||75||

baladeva: He states his qualification for hearing that dialogue which occurred at a distance in vyāsa iti. By Vyāsa's grace, in the form of obtaining divine eyes, ears etc. given by him, I have heard this secret. What is this? He says param yogam iti - meaning karma-yoga, jñāna-yoga and bhakti-yoga. He establishes its supremacy by yogeśvarād iti. Yoga is the natural connection of all beings including gods and humans. From Kṛṣṇa who is the controller and natural form of their lords, speaking directly Himself, not through succession, I have heard - thus he praises his good fortune. ||75||

bhg 18.76

rājan saṃsmṛtya saṃsmṛtya saṃvādam imam adbhutam |
keśavārjunayoḥ puṇyaṃ hṛṣyāmi ca muhur muhuḥ ||76||

śrīdhara: Moreover, rājann iti. Hṛṣyāmi means I get horripilation, or I attain joy. The rest is clear. ||76||

baladeva: Rājan Dhṛtarāṣṭra, puṇyam means removing all faults of the hearer up to ignorance. Muhur muhuḥ means every moment hṛṣyāmi - I get horripilation. ||76||

bhg 18.77

And remembering and remembering that extremely wonderful form of Hari, O great king, I am filled with great amazement and I rejoice again and again. ||77||

Śrīdhara: Moreover, "that" refers to the universal form. The rest is clear. ||77||

Baladeva: "That" refers to the universal form which was shown to Arjuna. ||77||

BhG 18.78

Wherever Krishna, the master of yoga, is present, and wherever Partha, the wielder of the bow, is present, there prosperity, victory, wealth and unwavering righteousness will be - this is my opinion. ||78||

Śrīdhara: Therefore, abandon your worry about the kingdom etc. for your sons - with this intention he says "Wherever". Wherever the master of yoga, Sri Krishna, is present on the side of the Pandavas, and wherever Partha, the wielder of the Gandiva bow is present, there indeed is Sri, the goddess of royal fortune, there indeed is certain victory - this is the connection. This is my firm opinion. Therefore, even now, along with your sons, you should take shelter of Sri Krishna, please the Pandavas, offer everything to them, and protect the lives of your sons - this is the meaning.

For one endowed with devotion to the Lord,
Through His grace and self-realization,
There is easily liberation from bondage -
This is the summary of the meaning of the Gita.

Thus,

"That Supreme Person, O Partha, is attainable by exclusive devotion." (Gita 8.22)

"But by undivided devotion, O Arjuna, I can be known in this form." (Gita 11.54)

From hearing in these and other verses that devotion to the Lord is the most effective means for liberation, it is clearly understood that exclusive devotion to Him alone, accompanied only by the subsidiary process of knowledge arising from His grace, is the cause of liberation. And it is proper that knowledge is subsidiary to devotion -

"To those who are constantly devoted and worship Me with love, I give the understanding by which they can come to Me." (Gita 10.10)

"My devotee, knowing this, becomes fit for My nature. Know that both nature and the person are without beginning." (Gita 13.19)

It is not proper to say that knowledge alone is devotion. "Equal to all beings, he attains supreme devotion to Me." (Gita 18.54) "By devotion he knows Me in truth, who I am and what I am." (Gita 18.55) From seeing the distinction in these and other verses. Nor should one suspect contradiction with the Sruti statement "Only by knowing Him does one go beyond death; there is no other path to go" - because knowledge is subsidiary to devotion. When it is said "He cooks with wood", it does not mean that flames are ineffective. Moreover,

"To one who has supreme devotion to God, and as much devotion to the guru as to God, to that great soul these matters that have been taught become clearly manifest." (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6.23)

At the end of life, God reveals the supreme Brahman that delivers.

"He is attainable only by one whom He chooses" - these and other statements of Sruti, Smriti and Puranas become reconciled in this way. Therefore, it is established that devotion to the Lord alone is the cause of liberation.

By the understanding given by Him alone, this commentary on His Gita has been composed. May that supremely blissful Madhava be pleased by it.

This Gita-subodhinī has now been composed by the ascetic Śrīdhara Svāmī, who bears the dust of the lotus feet of the supremely blissful one.

Desiring to attain the truth contained within the Bhagavad-gītā, seduced by one's own boldness, how can one approach it without the nectar-glance of the guru's grace? Desiring to obtain the inner jewel of the ocean after removing its water with one's own cupped hands, how can one not sink in its whirlpools without a worthy helmsman?

Thus ends the eighteenth chapter named "Determination of the Supreme Purpose" in the Subodhini commentary on the Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā composed by Śrī Śrīdhara Svāmī. ||78||

Baladeva: This being so, abandon your desire for victory etc. for your sons - thus he says "Wherever". Where the master of yoga, previously explained as He whose will controls the nature, condition and activities of all beings other than Himself, Krishna the son of Vasudeva, is present as a helper even to the extent of being a charioteer. Where Partha, the son of your father's sister, an incarnation of Nara, exclusively devoted to Krishna, the wielder of the bow, holding the unbreakable Gandiva, is present. There indeed, in the party of Yudhishthira presided over by Krishna and Arjuna, is Sri the goddess of royal fortune, victory which is the cause of defeating enemies and supreme excellence, prosperity which is the progressive increase of royal splendor, and righteousness which is steadfast righteous conduct - this is connected everywhere. But if it is suspected that this scripture is aimed at war, that is not so - because of instructions like "Fix your mind on Me, be My devotee" and "Abandoning all dharmas". Therefore the duties of the four varnas and asramas are described here as means of purifying the heart and for maintaining society - this is quite proper. ||78||

There are many means, among them surrender preceded by servitude,
Quickly pleases Vishnu - this is the opinion of the eighteenth chapter.

That supreme truth sung here
Was nursed at Yaśodā's breast,
Became Partha's charioteer,
And is full of excellent qualities.

Having obtained the boat of His will, I dove
Into the ocean of the Gita and grasped the jewel of its wondrous meaning.
I am unable to surface due to joy -
May that playful son of Nanda be dear to me.

This commentary named Śrīmad-gītā-bhūṣaṇa
Has been carefully composed by Vidyābhūṣaṇa.
O saints who are greedy for the sweetness of love for Śrī Govinda
And melting with compassion, please correct it.

Thus ends the eighteenth chapter in the commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā Upaniṣad.

[*endnote] The text reads mā yat samaḥ.
[*endnote] Bishwas has agamya.
[*endnote] Quoted above in Viśvanātha's commentaries to
[*endnote] Mama not in Bishwas edition, who also reads necchasīti.
[*endnote] BhG 18.61-66 are commented on extensively in Kṛṣṇa-sandarbha, para. 82 and Sarva-saṃvādinī.
[*endnote] This reference to the Bṛhad-āraṇyaka Upaniṣad (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad). This exact text is not found there.
[*endnote] Jagat sarvam in the text.
[*endnote] Bhramayan not in Krishnadas edition.
[*endnote] Bishwas - śāstreṇa prakāśitam (illuminated by scripture)
[*endnote] Both texts read svābhirucitas tat, but this reading seems grammatically problematic.
[*endnote] Krishnadas gives bhartṛtve as an alternative reading both here and further down.
[*endnote] The usual reading is ātma-nikṣepa-kārpaṇye (self-surrender and humility).