Bg 4.1-42

 Now the fourth chapter.

(4.1)

The Blessed Lord said:
I taught this imperishable yoga to Vivasvān;
Vivasvān told it to Manu; Manu spoke it to Ikṣvāku.

Śrīdhara:
To reveal his appearance and disappearance, Hari himself
Praises karma-yoga for the purpose of discerning the truth and the words.

Thus far, in two chapters, jñāna-yoga, which is facilitated by karma-yoga, has been stated as the means to liberation. Thus, elaborating on the truth through the prescription of qualities like brahmārpaṇa (offering to Brahman) and through the discernment of word meanings, the Lord, first praising it as mutually unattainable, spoke "imam" in three verses. It is imperishable (avyaya) because its fruit is imperishable. I taught this yoga to Vivasvān, the sun god, in ancient times. And he told it to his son Manu, Śrāddhadeva. And that Manu spoke it to his son Ikṣvāku.

Madhusūdana: Although previously two yogas were described - jñāna-yoga as the goal and karma-yoga as the means to it - yet, in the direction of "He who sees Sāṅkhya and Yoga as one, he truly sees" [Gītā 5.6], considering the unity of the goal and the means due to the oneness of the fruit, the Lord praises karma-yoga, which is the means, and jñāna-yoga, which is the goal, for prescribing various qualities, by narrating the lineage.

I, the Blessed Lord Vāsudeva, the protector of the entire world, spoke excellently, in the form of removing all doubts etc., this yoga described in two chapters, characterized by steadfastness in knowledge and attainable through steadfastness in action, to Vivasvān, the sun god who is the seed of all Kṣatriya lineages, at the time of creation to empower the kings and thereby protect the entire world dependent on them. How is this empowerment done? He shows specifically - imperishable (avyaya) because it is rooted in the imperishable Veda and because its fruit is imperishable, it does not deviate from its fruit, thus it is avyaya, having unfailing fruit. The idea is that empowerment is possible through such means.

And that disciple of mine, Vivasvān, told it to his son Manu Vaivasvata. And that Manu spoke it to his son Ikṣvāku, the first king. Although this instruction from the Lord is common to Svāyambhuva and other Manus in every Manvantara, the tradition is counted starting from Āditya with reference to the current Vaivasvata Manvantara.

Viśvanātha:
In the fourth, the eternality of birth and actions as the cause of His manifestation,
His own statement, and the elaboration on the excellence of knowledge of Brahma-yajña etc.

He praises the jñāna-yoga, attainable through niṣkāma-karma (desireless action), described in two chapters, with "imam".

Baladeva:
In the fourth, that son of Devakī, the divine one, highly
Proclaimed the cause of His manifestation, the eternality of His pastimes,
jñāna-yoga in good actions, and also mostly
The greatness of knowledge.

Unifying jñāna-yoga and karma-yoga, described in the previous two chapters, as having the same fruit, He praises it by narrating its lineage with "imam". I taught this to you, the sun. Imperishable (avyaya) means eternal, because it is the meaning of the Veda it does not deviate, and because its fruit is unfailing. And that disciple of mine, Vivasvān, told it to his son Manu Vaivasvata. And that Manu spoke it to his son Ikṣvāku.

(4.2)

Thus, this yoga was received through the succession of teachers and disciples, and the saintly kings understood it in that way. But in course of time the succession was broken, and therefore the science as it is appears to be lost, O Parantapa.

Śrīdhara: Thus - in this way. The saintly kings are those who are both kings and sages. Other saintly kings headed by Nimi. They knew this yoga taught by their fathers and others headed by Ikṣvāku. He states the reason for the ignorance of present-day people: O Parantapa (destroyer of enemies)! That yoga has been lost, broken in this world due to the influence of time.

Madhusūdana: Thus, this yoga received through the succession of teachers and disciples beginning with the Sun-god, was known by the saintly kings - those who are both kings and sages, capable of perceiving subtle meanings despite being in positions of power, headed by Nimi - as taught by their fathers and others. Therefore, to increase faith, it is praised as a yoga of great influence, since being rooted in the beginningless Veda, having endless fruits, and being received through a beginningless succession of teachers and disciples, it is not subject to suspicion of being artificial.

That very yoga, though of great purpose, has now in our time of interaction at the end of Dvāpara, having reached weak people of uncontrolled senses who are unqualified, become lost, with its tradition broken, being overwhelmed by lust, anger, etc., due to the long time that diminishes dharma. The Lord laments: "Alas, how unfortunate for the world, as without it the goals of human life cannot be attained!" O Parantapa! Parantapa means one who scorches enemies, the host of enemies in the form of lust, anger, etc., with valor, strong discrimination and austerity, like the sun - meaning one of controlled senses. This is seen from wonderful deeds like disregarding Urvaśī, etc. Thus he indicates: "You are qualified for this, being of controlled senses."

Viśvanātha: Nothing.

Baladeva: Thus the saintly kings knew this yoga received through the succession of teachers and disciples beginning with Vivasvān, as taught by their fathers and others like Ikṣvāku. It has become lost in this world, with its tradition broken.

(4.3)

This very same ancient yoga has been told by Me to you today. You are My devotee and friend - this is indeed a supreme secret. [3]

Śrīdhara: This very same yoga has been told again to you today, when the tradition had been broken. Because you are My devotee and friend. I do not tell this to anyone else. For this is the supreme secret. [3]

Madhusūdana: That which was previously instructed, but due to lack of qualified disciples, the tradition was broken. And without which the goal of human life cannot be attained. That very same ancient yoga which has been passed down through the eternal succession of gurus, has today, at the time when the tradition was broken, been thoroughly explained by Me with great affection to you. Not to anyone else. Why? Because "You are My devotee and friend." The word "iti" indicates the reason. Because you are My devotee, having taken full shelter, extremely devoted, and My friend of the same age, an affectionate companion always - therefore it was told to you. Why is it not told to others? To that he says: For this knowledge is the supreme secret, extremely confidential. [3]

Viśvanātha: The reason for speaking this only to you: The two sentiments of being a devotee (servant) and friend. And the reason for not speaking to others who are modern is that it is secret. [3]

Baladeva: That very same yoga, which is to be spoken in proper sequence, has been told by Me, your extremely affectionate friend, to you, My affectionate friend, because you are My devotee who has taken shelter and My friend - not to anyone else. The reason for this is that it is secret. For it is the supreme secret, to be kept confidential. [3]

(4.4)

Arjuna said:
Your birth is later, the birth of Vivasvān is earlier.
How am I to understand that You taught this in the beginning? [4]

Śrīdhara: Seeing the impossibility of the Lord instructing Vivasvān about yoga, Arjuna said: Your birth is later, recent. Vivasvān's birth is earlier, in ancient times. Therefore, since You are recent, how can I know or understand that You taught yoga in the beginning to the ancient Vivasvān? [4]

Madhusūdana: To remove the misconception of foolish people who doubt the Lord Vāsudeva's omniscience and eternality due to His human form, Arjuna asks doubtfully: Your birth is later - recent, taking a body in Vasudeva's home, and inferior due to being human. Vivasvān's birth is earlier - at the beginning of creation, and superior due to being a demigod. Since the absence of birth for the self was previously established, Arjuna's question refers only to the body. Therefore, how am I to understand this without contradiction? He elaborates on the meaning of "this": That You taught yoga in the beginning. You, who are now a human lacking omniscience, taught in the beginning of creation to the ancient omniscient sun-god - this is the contradiction.

The underlying meaning here is: Did You, unembodied, teach the sun-god through a different body, or with this body? Not the first option, because one who is not omniscient cannot remember experiences from past lives. Otherwise, I too would remember past lives. Because You and I are equally non-omniscient as humans. As the experts have said: "Experiences from past lives are not remembered." Nor the second option, because this present body did not exist at the beginning of creation. Thus, the existence in a different body at the beginning of creation is not possible - these are Arjuna's two prima facie views based on non-omniscience and non-eternality. [4]

Viśvanātha: Seeing the impossibility of what was said, he asks: Later means recent. Earlier means ancient. Thus, how am I to believe this? - this is the meaning. [4]

Baladeva: To refute those who are unaware and doubt Kṛṣṇa's eternality and omniscience, Arjuna said: Later means recent, earlier means ancient. Therefore, how am I to understand that You, who are recent, taught yoga to the ancient Vivasvān? The meaning is: It is not that Arjuna does not know Kṛṣṇa as the Supreme Lord, since He appears in that form as a human incarnation, and because Kṛṣṇa had said "the supreme abode, the supreme abode" etc. Rather, he asks "Your birth is later" etc. to refute the ignorant doubt about His non-omniscience. The Supreme Lord knows His own nature in a way that no one else can. Therefore, His form, birth, etc. should be revealed only from His lotus mouth for the welfare of the world. For that purpose, when He speaks about His own glories, He should not be accused of boasting, but should be praised for His compassion. And though he knows that You, the Supreme Brahman in human form, have a nature, birth, etc. different from ordinary people, this question of Arjuna, though knowledgeable, is asked as if ignorant in order to elicit an answer that will dispel others' doubts. [4]

(4.5)

The Blessed Lord said:
Many births of mine have passed, and of yours too, Arjuna.
I know them all, but you do not know, O scorcher of foes.

Śrīdhara: With the intention of explaining that He had instructed in another form, the Blessed Lord says "Many" etc. I know them all, due to my undiminished power of knowledge. But you do not know, due to being covered by ignorance. (5)

Madhusūdana: To that, He gives the first answer regarding omniscience with "Many" etc. My many births, meaning assuming playful bodies from the perspective of worldly vision like the rising of the sun, have passed, and yours too as an ignorant person acquiring bodies due to karma. "And yours" is indicative of other souls as well, or with the intention of the unity of souls. O Arjuna! By addressing him by the name of the Arjuna tree in this verse, He indicates his covered knowledge. I, the omniscient, all-powerful Lord, know all those births - mine, yours and others'. But you, the ignorant soul with obscured power of knowledge, do not know even your own, what to speak of others'. O Parantapa (scorcher of foes)! This suggests you are deluded, as you have set out to kill, imagining a separate enemy due to mistaken vision. Thus by these two forms of address, both the concealing and projecting aspects, which are two properties of ignorance, are shown. (5)

Viśvanātha: With the intention of explaining that He had instructed in another incarnation, He says "Many" etc. "And yours" means whenever I incarnate, you also appear as my associate - this is the meaning. I know, I am aware, due to being omniscient as the Lord of all. You do not know, as I have covered your knowledge for the sake of my pastimes - this is the implication. Hence, O Parantapa! You scorch enemies merely with the pride of presently being Kuntī's son. (5)

Baladeva: The Lord, who bears many eternally perfect forms in Himself like a crystal, as stated in scriptures like "Though one, He appears in many ways", says with the thought that He had previously instructed him in another form, "Many" etc. "And yours" means you too had as many births, due to being my companion - this is the meaning. "You do not know" - presently I have covered your knowledge by my inconceivable power for the success of my pastimes - this is the implication. By this, His omniscience is shown. Here the reality of the Lord's births should be understood, from the statement from His own mouth "Many" etc., and from the example "and yours". The transformation called birth is not for Him, as it is refuted by the subsequent explanation. (5)

(4.6)

Although I am unborn and My Self is imperishable, although I am the Lord of all beings,
yet by My own nature I come into being by My own māyā.

Śrīdhara: If You are beginningless, how can You have birth? And if You are indestructible, how can You be reborn, that You say "Many births of mine have passed"? How can You, the Lord free from virtue and vice, have birth like a soul? To this He says "Although unborn" etc. True, it is so. Yet, although I am unborn, without birth, and although My Self is imperishable, of indestructible nature, and although I am the Lord, free from subservience to karma, I come into being by My own māyā, I fully manifest with undiminished knowledge, strength, prowess and other powers.

But still, how can You who are devoid of the subtle body of sixteen parts have birth? To this He says: "Taking refuge in My own nature" - adopting My own nature made of pure sattva. The meaning is: I incarnate by My own will in a form of pure, exalted sattva. (6)

Madhusūdana: If you remember having many past lives, then you are a jīva who remembers past births. Knowledge of other births is also possible for yogis through identification with the universal Self, or through scriptural insight, as per the principle "like Vāmadeva" [Ve.Sū. 1.1.30]. Thus Vāmadeva, though a jīva, said in the Dāśatayī: "I was Manu, and I was the Sun. I am the sage Kakṣīvān, a brahmin," etc. Therefore, you are not the primary omniscient one. So how could you, not being God, have taught the omniscient Sun? For a jīva cannot have primary omniscience, as being limited by individual conditions, it lacks connection to everything. Even for the cosmic form Virāj, with its gross elemental body, knowledge of subtle elemental transformations and māyā transformations is not possible. Similarly, for Hiraṇyagarbha with his subtle elemental body, lack of knowledge about the sequence of creation of space etc. from its cause māyā is established. Therefore, only God, due to having the causal limiting adjunct, has knowledge of all objects past, present and future, and is the primary omniscient one. The three modes of māyā - past, present and future - or one all-encompassing mode of māyā, is another matter. For that eternal, omniscient God, birth is impossible due to absence of virtue and vice, and having many past lives is far removed. Thus, addressing the two doubts - impossibility of omniscience for a jīva and impossibility of taking a body for God - he also addresses the non-eternal view by saying "Though unborn".

Birth is taking on a new body, senses etc. Death is separation from the previously held body, senses etc. Both of these are called "non-existence after death" by logicians. As stated: "For one who is born, death is certain; for one who is dead, birth is certain." [Gītā 2.27] Both of these happen due to virtue and vice. Being subject to virtue and vice applies to the ignorant jīva who identifies with the body, as he is eligible for karma. So what is said - that such taking of a body is not possible for the omniscient God who is the cause of all - is indeed correct. How? If His body were made of gross elements, then in individual form it would be like our waking state, and in cosmic form it would be the jīva of Virāj, as that would be its limiting adjunct. If made of subtle elements, then in individual form it would be like our dream state, and in cosmic form it would be the jīva of Hiraṇyagarbha, as that would be its limiting adjunct. Thus it is established that a physical body inhabited by a jīva is not possible for the Supreme Lord. It cannot be said that He enters such a body inhabited by a jīva, like elements entering it. For if we accept that jīva's enjoyment through that body, then since His entry into all bodies as the Inner Controller already exists, accepting a particular body would be pointless. And without enjoyment, it cannot be a jīva's body. Therefore, in the first half he accepts that God has no physical body: "Though unborn and of immutable nature, and though the Lord of beings".

"Though unborn" negates taking on a new body, "though of immutable nature" negates separation from a previous body, and "though the Lord of beings" negates being subject to virtue and vice for all divine qualities from Brahmā down to a blade of grass. Then how is a body taken on? The second half answers: "Controlling My own nature, I manifest Myself." Controlling My own nature, called māyā, with its diverse many powers skilled in accomplishing the impossible, which is My limiting adjunct, with a reflection of consciousness, I manifest Myself. By its special transformations alone, which proceed by My will as the cause of the world, being made of pure sattva, it becomes My form. Thus unborn-ness, immutability and lordship are possible for Me qualified by that. Therefore, it is possible that with this eternal body I taught this yoga to Vivasvān and you in ancient times. Thus the scripture: "Brahman has space as its body." Space here means the unmanifest. "In space alone it is woven warp and woof" [Bṛ.Ā.U. 3.8.7], etc. show this. And by the principle "Space, from its characteristics" [Ve.Sū. 1.1.22].

Then how is there a perception of human-ness etc., which are properties of a physical body, if there is no physical form? To this he says: "By My own māyā". The perception of human-ness etc. in Me is only by My māyā for the welfare of the world, not in reality. As stated in the Mokṣa-dharma:

"This māyā was created by Me, that you see Me, O Nārada,
Endowed with the qualities of all beings; but you cannot truly see Me." [Ma.Bhā. 12.326.43]

The meaning is: You cannot see with physical eyes Me endowed with the qualities of all beings, which is My causal limiting adjunct. And the venerable commentator has said: "That Lord, always endowed with knowledge, sovereignty, power, strength, valor and splendor, controlling His own māyā, which is His nature consisting of the three guṇas, though unborn, immutable, the Lord of beings, and of eternally pure, conscious and free nature, appears as if embodied and born, acting for the welfare of the world, though without any selfish purpose, out of compassion for beings." And the expositors have said: "He manifested with a divine, māyā-made form created by His own will."

The eternal causal limiting adjunct called māyā with many powers,
That itself is the Lord's body - this is the view of the commentators.

But others do not accept a body-soul relationship in the Supreme Lord. Rather, the eternal, all-pervading, mass of existence-consciousness-bliss, the complete, attributeless Supreme Self, Lord Vāsudeva - He Himself is that form, not some other physical or illusory one. In this view, the explanation is: Though all-pervading like space and eternal, "This Self is indestructible, O dear one, of imperishable nature" etc. from scripture, and from principles like "But impossibility, due to the inappropriateness for what exists" [Ve.Sū. 2.3.8], "Not the Self, as it is not mentioned in scripture, and due to eternality, from those" [Ve.Sū. 2.3.16] etc., factually without birth and death, illuminating all, the Lord of all beings as the substratum of all causal māyā, I control My nature, My own being which is a homogeneous mass of existence-consciousness-bliss.

He excludes māyā by "My own". The meaning is: My own true nature. "On what is that Lord established? In His own greatness" [Chā.U. 7.24.1], says scripture. Established in My own nature, remaining in My own nature, I manifest, I act as if embodied without actually having a body-soul relationship. Then how is there a perception of body-ness in the attributeless, pure mass of existence-consciousness-bliss? To this he says: "By My own māyā". The perception of a body-soul relationship in Me, the attributeless, pure mass of existence-consciousness-bliss, Lord Vāsudeva, who is devoid of body-soul relationship, is mere illusion. As stated:

"Know this Krishna to be the Self of all selves.
For the world's benefit, He too appears here as if embodied, by māyā." [Bhā.Pu.10.14.55]

"Oh what fortune, oh what fortune of Nanda the cowherd and the inhabitants of Vraja,
Whose friend is the supreme bliss, the complete eternal Brahman." [Bhā. 11.14.32]

But some desire real division of parts and modification even for the eternal, partless, immutable supreme bliss. They, speaking irrationally, should not be refuted by us, as per the principle "Why elaborate further?" If it were possible, let it be so. We desist. ||5||

Viśvanātha: He describes the manner of his own birth - Although unborn and without birth, I manifest in forms such as devas, humans, animals, etc. Now what is so wondrous about this? Even the jīva, though actually unborn, is born again after the destruction of the gross body? To this he says - with an imperishable self and indestructible body. Moreover, the jīva's unborn nature is separate from its own body, its birth is only due to the illusory connection with a body, but for me, being the Lord, both my unborn nature and birth are established in my essential form, which is united with my body. And this, being impossible, is indeed inconceivable. Therefore, he says that unlike the jīva subject to merit and sin, there is no question of my birth in good or bad wombs - Although I am the Lord of beings, I am free from subservience to karma, this is the meaning.

Now the jīva obtains bodies of devas etc. that are obtained through karma, by means of its subtle body which binds it. You are the supreme Lord, without a subtle body, all-pervading, controller of karma, time, etc. According to the śruti "May I become many", you indeed become the form of the entire universe. Even so, when you say "Although I am thus, I manifest", I understand this to mean that you manifest to reveal in the world eternally existing special bodies that are distinct from the entire universe. How is that? To this he says "adhiṣṭhāya prakṛtiṁ svām". Here if the word prakṛti refers to the external potency of māyā, then the supreme Lord as its controller becomes the form of the universe through it, so no special understanding is gained. Therefore, according to the statement "These are the perfected nature, the essential form and the inherent nature", here the word prakṛti refers to the essential form itself. It is not the māyā-śakti that is his essential nature. His essential nature is indeed existence-consciousness-bliss. Hence Śrī Svāmī Caraṇa says "You whose nature is pure goodness". "Establishing my own nature, I manifest by my own will in my essential form" - this is the meaning according to Śrī Rāmānujācārya. "Prakṛti means inherent nature which is concentrated existence-consciousness-bliss. He excludes māyā, meaning his own essential form" - this is the meaning. According to the śruti "O Lord, in what is he established? In his own greatness." "Establishing my own essential form, remaining situated in my essential nature, I manifest and act like an embodied being without actually having the relationship of body and soul" - thus say Śrī Madhusūdana Sarasvatī.

Now if you are indeed of an imperishable nature with indestructible forms like fish, tortoise etc., then why are your manifesting form and previously manifested forms not perceived simultaneously? To this he says - By my own māyā which is my essential nature, by which the concealing and revealing of my own essential form is done, meaning by the yoga-māyā which is a function of the conscious potency. For by that, having concealed the forms manifested in previous times, revealing the present form, I manifest. "By my own māyā, that is, by the potency of complete knowledge, strength, prowess etc. that is not separate from me, I manifest" - thus say Śrī Svāmī Caraṇa. "By ātma-māyā, meaning self-knowledge - māyā is a synonym for knowledge here, as in 'māyā means knowledge'. Thus is the usage of experts - 'By māyā he always knows the good and bad of ancient things'" - thus say Śrī Rāmānujācārya. "The perception of me, Lord Vāsudeva, who am devoid of the relationship of body and soul, in that form, is mere illusion" - thus say Śrī Madhusūdana Sarasvatī. ||6||

Baladeva: Describing his essential nature and birth as distinct from the world, he states his eternality saying "Although unborn". Here the word prakṛti is a synonym for essential nature and inherent nature. "Establishing my own prakṛti" means relying on my own essential nature, I manifest. "These are the perfected nature, the essential form and inherent nature" - thus Amara. "I manifest in my essential form alone" - to consider this meaning he elaborates with "Although unborn" etc. Api is for emphasis. Birth means connection with a new body. Although devoid of that. Although of imperishable nature, meaning although of a nature devoid of transformation, whose self (ātmā) is the intellect etc. According to the statement "ātmā refers to the self". "Although Lord of beings" means although the controller of other jīvas. The meaning is - I descend in that very form which is unborn etc., full of all-pervading knowledge and bliss. This is an elaboration of "I manifest in my essential form alone". Just as for the sun, it is merely a manifestation of such an essential form, so his essential form and birth are distinct from the world, thereby clearly eternal. Subservience to karma is negated. The śruti also says thus: "Though unborn, he is born in many ways". And the smṛti: "The birth of Hari is in no way a transformation" etc. Therefore the vision of him in the maternity home with divine weapons and ornaments, in a divine form endowed with six opulences, is remembered. He states the purpose saying "by my own māyā". The meaning is - for the sake of uplifting devoted souls, out of compassion for them. Māyā means deception and also compassion, according to Viśva. Some say "by my own māyā" means by my own omniscience, by my own will. According to the Nighaṇṭu lexicon, māyā means knowledge. Indeed, worldly beings like kings, abandoning previous bodies etc. and taking on new bodies etc., are born unconscious and ignorant. The distinction of Hari's birth is very clear. By "Although Lord of beings", even accomplished yogis etc. are excluded. Though Hari is concentrated bliss and consciousness, devoid of distinction between body and soul, and between quality and qualified, due to the force of the particular situation, there was perception of him by the wise in various forms. ||6||

(4.7)

Whenever there is a decline of dharma, O Bhārata,
And an increase of adharma, then I manifest myself.

Śrīdhara: In response to the question "When do you manifest?", he says "Whenever" etc. Decline (glāni) means decrease. Increase (abhyutthāna) means abundance. ||7||

Madhusūdana: Thus, when and for what purpose does one who is concentrated existence-consciousness-bliss act like an embodied being? This is answered in "Whenever" etc. When there is a decline, a decrease of dharma prescribed by the Vedas, which is the means for the prosperity and ultimate good of living beings, which is characterized by acts of commission and omission, which is implied by the conduct of the varṇas and āśramas - O Bhārata, as you are born in Bharata's lineage and devoted to knowledge, you cannot tolerate the decline of dharma, this is the purpose of the address. Similarly, whenever there is an increase, a rise of adharma prohibited by the Vedas, which is the cause of various types of misery, which is opposed to dharma, then I create myself, that is, I reveal through māyā my eternally perfect form as if it were created. ||7||

Viśvanātha: In response to the question "When do you manifest?", he says "Whenever" etc. When there is a decline, a decrease of dharma, and an increase, a growth of adharma - being unable to tolerate these two, in order to reverse them, this is the idea. "I create myself" means I reveal through māyā my eternally perfect form as if it were created - thus say Śrī Madhusūdana Sarasvatī. ||7||

Baladeva: Now he speaks about the time of manifestation with "yada" etc. When there is decline (glāni) of dharma as stated in the Vedas, and rise (abhyutthānam) of adharma which is opposed to it, then I manifest (sṛjāmi) myself. I do not create myself, as I am eternally established. Thus there is no fixed rule about the time of my manifestation. ||7||

(4.8)

For the protection of the virtuous, for the destruction of the wicked,
And for the establishment of dharma, I manifest myself in every age.

Śrīdhara: For what purpose? Expecting this question, he says "For the protection" etc. For the protection of the virtuous who follow their dharma. Those who perform wicked deeds are called duṣkṛtaḥ. For their destruction. Thus, for the establishment of dharma, to firmly establish dharma by protecting the virtuous and destroying the wicked. "I manifest in every age" means at the appropriate times in each age. One should not suspect cruelty even though he punishes the wicked. As they say - "Just as a mother shows no cruelty in caressing or punishing her child, so too the great Lord who controls virtue and vice." ||8||

Madhusūdana: Is the decline of dharma and rise of adharma the cause of your satisfaction, that you manifest at that very time? And thus would your incarnation only bring misfortune? Saying no to this, he states "For the protection" etc. For the all-round protection of the virtuous, the performers of meritorious deeds, followers of the Vedic path, who are diminished by the decline of dharma. And for the destruction of the wicked, the sinners, opponents of the Vedic path, who increase with the rise of adharma. How would both these happen? He states this with "For the establishment of dharma" - establishing dharma properly by removing adharma, protecting the Vedic path is establishing dharma, for that purpose I manifest as before. In every age means in each and every age. ||8||

Viśvanātha: But can't your devotees, the royal sages or brahmin sages, remove the decline of dharma and rise of adharma? Is your incarnation necessary just for this? If asked this, it is true. I manifest to perform other difficult tasks too, he says with "For the protection" etc. For the protection of the virtuous - to protect my exclusive devotees from the anxiety-like suffering of eagerly longing for my vision. And for the destruction of the wicked - those who give suffering to my devotees, who cannot be killed by others, like Rāvaṇa, Kaṁsa, Keśī, etc. And for the establishment of dharma - to properly establish the supreme dharma characterized by meditation on me, worshipping me, serving me, and glorifying me through song, which cannot be propagated by others. That is the meaning. In every age means in each age or in each kalpa. One should not suspect partiality in the Lord for punishing the wicked. By killing the demons by their own creator, protecting them from the fruits of various evil deeds, from bowing down in hell, and from saṁsāra, that punishment is indeed determined to be a favor. ||8||

Baladeva: But can't your devotees, the royal sages, remove the decline of dharma and rise of adharma? Is your manifestation necessary just for this purpose? He answers this with "For the protection" etc. For the protection of the virtuous - those absorbed in my form and qualities, longing for direct vision of me, extremely anxious without it, from that anxiety-like suffering, by giving direct vision of my extremely attractive form. And for the destruction of the wicked - performers of evil deeds who cannot be killed by others, like the ten-headed Rāvaṇa, Kaṁsa, etc. who are hostile to such devotees. For the establishment of dharma - for the propagation of pure devotional yoga characterized by exclusive worship and meditation on me, which is also Vedic but cannot be propagated by others - these three are the cause of my manifestation. In every age means at the appropriate times. There is no partiality in Hari for killing the wicked, as it results in their attaining the bliss of liberation, thus ultimately being an act of grace. ||8||

(4.9)

One who knows in truth my divine birth and activities,
Leaving the body, is not born again, but attains me, O Arjuna.

Śrīdhara: He states the result of knowing such divine births and activities of the Lord with "Birth" etc. My birth taken by my own will and my activities of protecting dharma are divine, supernatural. One who knows in truth that they are only for the grace of others, leaving identification with the body, is not born again into saṁsāra. Rather, he attains me alone. ||9||

Madhusūdana: Birth is the imitation by me, who am eternally established as a mass of existence-consciousness-bliss, for the sake of sport. And activities are the protection of the world through establishing dharma, by me the eternally established Lord, divine, supernatural, impossible for others to perform, unique to the Lord. One who knows this in truth as stated earlier with "Though unborn" etc., by removing misconceptions. For the deluded imagine that even the Lord's birth involves residing in the womb etc. like humans, and activities are only for his own enjoyment. But in reality, by knowledge of his pure existence-consciousness-bliss nature, removing that, knowing that though unborn he imitates birth through māyā, and though inactive he imitates activities for the grace of others - one who knows this, by realization of his own true nature too, leaving this body, is not born again. Rather he attains me, Lord Vāsudeva, the mass of existence-consciousness-bliss, meaning he is liberated from saṁsāra. ||9||
 
viśvanāthaḥ: He says "janma" (birth) to indicate that one becomes fulfilled merely by truly knowing the characteristics of My birth as described, as well as My actions after birth. "Divyam" (divine) means aprākṛtam (transcendental), according to Śrī Rāmānujācārya and Śrī Madhusūdana Sarasvatī. "Divyam" means alaukikam (supernatural) according to Śrī Svāmī. Since the worlds are created by prakṛti (material nature), the meaning of alaukika for them is also aprākṛta. Therefore, the Lord's birth and activities are eternal because they are transcendental, being beyond the guṇas (material modes). This eternity of the Lord's birth and activities is established by Śrī Jīva Gosvāmī in the Bhagavat-sandarbha on the verse "na vidyate yasya ca janma karma vā" [Bhā.Pu. 8.3.8]. Or, even if logically inexplicable, this should be accepted on the strength of śruti and smṛti statements, beyond argument. The Puruṣa-bodhinī śruti of the Pippalāda branch states: "eko devo nitya-līlānurakto bhakta-vyāpī bhakta-hṛdayāntarātmā" (The one God, attached to eternal pastimes, pervades the devotees and is the inner Self in the devotees' hearts). The eternity of birth and activities is elaborated many times in the Śrī-bhāgavatāmṛta. Thus, "yo vetti tattvataḥ" (one who knows in truth) means one who knows the eternity of My birth and activities based on faith in My words "ajo'pi sann avyayātmā" and "janma karma ca me divyam", without seeking any logical explanation for their eternity. Or, "tattvataḥ" refers to brahman as indicated later in "oṁ tat sad iti nirdeśo brahmaṇas trividhaḥ smṛtaḥ" [Gītā 17.18], so it means one who knows My birth and activities as having the nature of brahman. He, upon leaving the present body, does not take birth again, but comes to Me. Here, due to the additional "dehaṁ tyaktvā" (leaving the body), they explain: He, without even leaving the body, comes to Me. By knowing the true nature of My divine birth and activities, all sins opposing taking shelter of Me are destroyed, and in this very life, by taking shelter of Me as described, becoming solely devoted to Me with mind fixed only on Me, he attains Me - thus say Śrī Rāmānujācārya. ||9||

baladevaḥ: The Lord speaks the verse beginning with "janma" with the intention that liberation, difficult to attain even with thousands of laborious practices, becomes easily attainable for those following the path of exclusive devotion to Me by hearing about My birth and activities. My birth, as the Supreme Lord with infallible will, having many eternal forms like Nṛsiṁha and Raghunātha like vaidūrya gems, with the characteristics described in various places, as well as My activities, meaning the pastimes connected with various devotees - both of these are divine (aprākṛta) and eternal. One who knows this in truth, with firm faith based on śruti statements like "eko devo nitya-līlānurakto bhakta-vyāpī bhakta-hṛdy antarātmā" and My words "divyam", without need for logic. O Arjuna! He, upon leaving the present body, does not take another material birth, but comes to Me, pleased by those activities, and becomes liberated. Or, it can be explained that one who knows My birth and activities as brahman in truth, based on the indication of their liberating power and śruti statements like "tat tvam asi". Otherwise, the śruti "tam eva viditvātimṛtyum eti nānyaḥ panthā vidyate'yanāya" [Śve.U. 3.8] would be contradicted. The rest is the same. Regarding the eternity of birth etc., logical arguments should be seen elaborated elsewhere. ||9||

(4.10)

vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodhā man-mayā mām upāśritāḥ |
bahavo jñāna-tapasā pūtā mad-bhāvam āgatāḥ ||

śrīdharaḥ: How is attainment of You possible through knowledge of birth and activities? To answer this, he says "vīta-rāga" etc. Knowing My supreme compassion, that I protect dharma through avatāras of pure sattva, taking shelter of Me alone. Jñāna (knowledge) obtained by My grace, and tapas (austerity) - the means for its maturation is one's own dharma. These two form a dvandva compound. Purified by that jñāna-tapas, cleansed of ignorance and its effects. Many have attained mad-bhāva, union with Me. The path of devotion to Me is not something that has only recently begun. Thus, having shown the Lord and the individual soul as the meanings of "tat" and "tvam" qualified by knowledge and ignorance respectively in "tāny ahaṁ veda sarvāṇi" etc., their oneness in the aspect of consciousness should be understood as stated for the pure soul, whose ignorance is removed by knowledge obtained by the Lord's grace, since the Lord is eternally pure due to absence of ignorance. ||10||

madhusūdanaḥ: Having said "mām eti so'rjuna", he now shows his own nature as the goal attained by all liberated souls and the beginningless tradition of this path of liberation in "vīta-rāga" etc. Rāga is thirst for various fruits. Bhaya is fear of how to live abandoning all objects in the path of knowledge. Krodha is aversion, thinking how this path of knowledge destroying all objects can be beneficial. Those from whom these rāga, bhaya and krodha have gone (vīta) through discrimination are vīta-rāga-bhaya-krodha, of pure sattva. Man-maya means having attained the state of being the Supreme Self, the meaning of "tat". Many have been purified by jñāna-tapas - knowledge itself is austerity as it destroys all karma, for he will say "na hi jñānena sadṛśaṁ pavitram iha vidyate". Purified by that, with all sins destroyed, free from the impurities of ignorance and its effects. They have attained mad-bhāva, My nature, pure existence-consciousness-bliss, liberation, by mere removal of ignorance.

Or, purified by jñāna-tapas, becoming jīvan-muktas, they have attained mad-bhāva, bhāva in the form of rati or prema towards Me. For he will say "teṣāṁ jñānī nitya-yuktā eka-bhaktir viśiṣyate". ||10||

viśvanāthaḥ: Not only one recent person, but even ancient ones who knew the truth of My birth and activities in previous kalpas attained Me, he says in "vīta" etc. Jñāna means experiential knowledge of the truth of My birth and activities as described. Tapas is that very knowledge. Purified by that - thus say Śrī Rāmānujācārya.

Or, purified by the austerity (tapas) which takes the form of enduring the burning poison of various evil opinions and fallacious arguments in the experience of certainty about the eternality of My birth and actions in knowledge. And thus, there is a śruti quoted by Śrī Rāmānuja: "tasya dhīrāḥ parijānanti yonim" - meaning that only the wise, the intelligent ones, know His origin, the nature of His birth. Those who have abandoned attachment and other [emotions] towards people who prattle evil opinions - they have no attachment or affection for them, nor fear of them, nor anger towards them - this is the meaning for My devotees. How much more so [are they purified] who are abundant in meditation, reflection, hearing, and glorification of My birth and actions, [who are] absorbed in Me. [They attain] mad-bhāvam (love for Me). ||10||

Baladeva: To strengthen their eternality, he now says "vīta" etc., just as in the past, many were liberated by knowledge of the eternality of my birth etc. The connection is that in the past, many people, purified by knowledge and austerity, attained my state. The knowledge concerning the eternality of my birth etc., being difficult to attain through scripture and reasoning, is itself austerity, or the austerity which takes the form of removing various wrong views and false arguments related to that knowledge - purified by this, their ignorance was dispelled. "Bhāva" in me means love or existence, i.e. direct realization of me. He describes what they are like with "vīta" etc. - those who have abandoned attachment etc. which are opposed to that eternality, meaning they do not display attachment, fear or anger towards them. The reason for this is: absorbed in me, taking sole refuge in me, they worship me. (10)

(4.11)

In whatever way people surrender unto Me, I reward them accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Pṛthā.

Śrīdhara: But then is there partiality in you, that you give your own state only to those who take exclusive shelter of you, and not to others who have desires? Therefore he says "ye" etc. In whatever way, whether with desire or without desire, those who worship Me, I reward them in that same way by giving the desired fruits. It should not be thought that I neglect those who worship Indra and other gods with desires, abandoning Me. Because in all respects, even the worshippers of Indra and others follow My path, the path of worship, since I alone am to be served in the form of Indra and others. (11)

Madhusūdana: But those purified by knowledge and austerity who are desireless attain your state, while those who are impure and have desires do not attain it - thus there would be partiality and cruelty in you as the giver of fruits. He says no, with "ye yathā" etc. Those who are distressed, those desiring wealth, those seeking knowledge, and the wise - in whatever way, whether with desire or without desire, they surrender unto Me, the Lord who gives all fruits, I reward them accordingly by giving the desired fruits, not in the opposite way. There, I reward the non-seekers of liberation who are distressed and desiring wealth by removing distress and giving wealth. I reward the seekers of knowledge who perform desireless actions prescribed by śruti like "They desire to know through sacrifice" etc. by giving knowledge, and the wise who desire liberation by giving liberation. But I do not give something else for another desire - this is the meaning.

But still you give fruits only to your own devotees, not to devotees of other gods, so partiality remains - he says no, with "mama" etc. O Pārtha, all people, qualified for karma, follow My path, the path of worship characterized by karma and jñāna, in all ways, even when following Indra and others, because I am the all-pervading Vāsudeva. From mantras like "They call Him Indra, Mitra, Varuṇa, Agni" etc. and from the reasoning "The fruit is from that, because it is logical" (Vedānta Sūtra 3.2.38), the meaning is that the Lord alone is the giver of fruits in all forms. He will also say this later in "Even those who worship other gods" (Gītā 9.23) etc. (11)

Viśvanātha: But your exclusive devotees indeed consider the eternality of your birth and activities. However, some who have surrendered to you for attaining knowledge etc., like the jñānīs, do not consider the eternality of your birth and activities. Regarding this he says "ye" etc. In whatever way they surrender unto Me, worship Me, I also reward them in that same way. I give the fruit of worship.

This is the meaning: Those who, thinking "The birth and activities of my Lord are indeed eternal", having particular desires in those various pastimes, worship Me giving pleasure - I also, being the Lord capable of doing, not doing and doing otherwise, making the eternality of their birth and activities also, making them my associates and descending with them at the appropriate times and keeping them within, constantly blessing them, give the fruit of their worship which is indeed love. Those jñānīs etc. who, thinking my birth and activities are perishable and my form is made of māyā, surrender unto Me - I also, making them again and again have perishable births and activities and fall into the snare of māyā, give them that fruit which is the sorrow of birth and death. But those jñānīs who, thinking the eternality of my birth and activities and the sat-cit-ānanda nature of my form, surrender unto Me for attaining their own knowledge - for those seekers of liberation who desire the destruction of their two bodies, I fulfill the imperishable bliss of Brahman and give the fruit of worship which is indeed the destruction of birth and death born of ignorance. Therefore not only my devotees surrender unto Me, but also in all respects all people - the jñānīs, karmīs, yogīs and worshippers of other gods follow My path, because I am the form of all, all paths of jñāna, karma etc. are indeed My paths - this is the meaning. (11)

Baladeva: But you, the all-controlling Lord with eternal birth etc. known by me, are also heard of as a Lord the size of a thumb somewhere, without birth etc. So would there be variety in you and your worship? If asked this, he says "Om" with "ye yathā" etc. Those devotees who surrender unto Me, worship Me, the one Lord who is like a cat's-eye gem with many forms, in whatever way, with whatever mood - I, being such, reward them in that same way, with a form and mood according to their mood, directly manifesting and blessing them. The word "eva" negates deficiency. Therefore, all people follow, pursue My path alone, who have many forms, which has many varieties of worship, out of compassion for the succession of worshippers engaged in that worship since beginningless time. (11)

(4.12)

Men in this world desire success in fruitive activities, and therefore they worship the demigods. Quickly, of course, men get results from fruitive work in this world.

Śrīdhara: Then why don't all worship you for liberation? To this he says "kāṅkṣantaḥ" etc. Desiring success of actions, the fruit of karma, generally in this human world they worship Indra and other gods, not Me directly. Because (hi) success born of karma, the fruit of karma, happens quickly. But not the fruit of knowledge which is liberation, because knowledge is difficult to attain. (12)

Madhusūdana: But why don't all surrender unto You, the Lord Vāsudeva? To this he says "kāṅkṣantaḥ" etc. Desiring success of actions, the production of fruits, in this world they worship the gods, Indra, Agni and others, being obstructed by ignorance, but not Me, Lord Vāsudeva, being desireless - this is the remainder. Why? Because (hi) for the worshippers of Indra and other gods who desire their fruits, success born of karma, the fruit produced by karma, happens quickly, very soon, in the human world. But the fruit of knowledge, being dependent on purity of the inner organs, does not happen quickly.

By specifying "in the human world" karma-fruit happens quickly, the Lord has indicated that in other worlds also there is attainment of the fruits of karma other than the duties of varṇa and āśrama. Therefore those with desires, averse to liberation, worship other gods for attaining various small fruits, so they do not surrender unto Me, Vāsudeva, directly like the seekers of liberation - this is the meaning. (12)

viśvanāthaḥ: Even among humans, those who are lustful abandon the direct path of devotion to me and instead follow the path of karma which produces quick results. This is stated in "kāṅkṣanta". Karma-born success consists of heaven etc. ||12||

baladevaḥ: Having spoken about the incidental, he now speaks about the rare nature of those who perform desireless action as a form of knowledge, in "kāṅkṣanta". In this world, beings controlled by beginningless desires for enjoyment, desiring success in actions, worship lesser gods like Indra etc. with desire-motivated actions for temporary and small results like animals, sons etc., rather than worshiping me, the Lord of all gods, with desireless actions, even though I give eternal bliss. For in this human world, success born of karma comes quickly. But success in the form of liberation, obtained from me through desireless action and knowledge, comes only after a long time. All people, lacking discrimination between good and bad due to being gripped by desires for enjoyment, worship my servant deities for quick enjoyment. But rarely does someone with discrimination between good and bad worship me, the Lord of all gods, with desireless actions to remove the miseries of worldly existence. This is the purport. ||12||

(4.13)

cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ |
tasya kartāram api māṁ viddhy akartāram avyayam ||

śrīdharaḥ: Some act with desire, some without - this diversity of action. And you as the creator make diversity among brāhmaṇas (brahmanas) etc. as superior, middling etc. How then are you not partial? Anticipating this doubt, he says "cāturvarṇyam". Cāturvarṇyam means the four varṇas (varnas), with the suffix ṣyañ in the sense of "itself". The meaning is - brāhmaṇas (brahmanas) are sattva-predominant, their actions are control of mind, senses etc. Kṣatriyas (kshatriyas) are sattva-rajas predominant, their actions are valor, fighting etc. Vaiśyas (vaishyas) are rajas-tamas predominant, their actions are agriculture, trade etc. Śūdras (shudras) are tamas-predominant, their actions are service to the other three varṇas etc. Thus the system of four varṇas was indeed created by me through divisions of guṇas (gunas) and actions. This is true, yet know me to be the non-doer in terms of results, even though I am the creator of this. The reason is - avyayam, meaning free from attachment, free from effort, or free from destruction etc. ||13||

madhusūdanaḥ: Due to differences in the guṇas (gunas) that initiate the body, not all have the same nature. This is stated in "cāturvarṇyam". Cāturvarṇyam means just the four varṇas, with ṣyañ in the sense of "itself". Created by me, the Lord, according to divisions of guṇas and actions. Thus, brāhmaṇas are sattva-predominant, their actions are sattvic like control of mind and senses etc. Kṣatriyas are rajas-predominant with some sattva, their actions are valor, energy etc. Vaiśyas are rajas-predominant with some tamas, their actions are agriculture etc. Śūdras are tamas-predominant, their actions are tamasic like service to the other three varṇas etc. This is established in the human world.

If so, then partiality on your part as the creator of the varṇa system with unequal natures seems unavoidable. Anticipating this doubt, he says no, know me to be the non-doer from the absolute perspective, though the creator of this varṇa system with unequal natures from the worldly perspective. Avyayam means with unfading glory due to being free from ego. ||13||

viśvanāthaḥ: The paths of devotion and knowledge are liberating, but the path of karma is binding. Thus partiality seems to apply to you, the Supreme Lord, as the creator of all paths. To this he says no, in "cāturvarṇyam". Cāturvarṇyam means just the four varṇas, with ṣyañ in the sense of "itself". Here, brāhmaṇas are sattva-predominant, their actions are control of mind and senses etc. Kṣatriyas are rajas-sattva predominant, their actions are valor, fighting etc. Vaiśyas are tamas-rajas predominant, their actions are agriculture, cow protection etc. Śūdras are tamas-predominant, their action is service. Thus the four varṇas were created by me according to divisions of guṇas and actions, as following the path of dharma. But know me, though the creator of these, to be the non-creator, as they are created by the guṇas of prakṛti (prakriti), and prakṛti is my energy. Though the creator, I am essentially the non-creator, as my nature is beyond the guṇas of prakṛti. Hence avyayam. The meaning is - even in creating, there is no change in me whatsoever. ||13||

baladevaḥ: Now he states the cause for destroying desire for enjoyment which obstructs performance of desireless action, in "cāturvarṇyam" in two verses. Cāturvarṇyam means the four varṇas, with ṣyañ in its own sense. Brāhmaṇas are sattva-predominant, their actions are control etc. Kṣatriyas are rajas-sattva predominant, their actions are fighting etc. Vaiśyas are tamas-rajas predominant, their actions are agriculture etc. Śūdras are tamas-predominant, their actions are service to the other three varṇas etc. Thus the four varṇas divided according to divisions of guṇas and actions were created by me, the Lord of all. This also implies maintenance and destruction. I alone am the creator etc. of the universe from Brahmā to a blade of grass. As the sūtra (sutra) states - "From whom is the birth etc. of this" [Vedānta-sūtra 1.1.2]. Know me to be the non-doer of that creation etc. though I am its creator, as it is mediated by those respective actions. Thus partiality etc. in myself is refuted. This is stated in "avyayam" - the meaning is, even in creating there is no change, as I am equal. ||13||

(4.14)

na māṁ karmāṇi limpanti na me karma-phale spṛhā |
iti māṁ yo'bhijānāti karmabhir na sa badhyate ||14||

śrīdharaḥ: Showing that very thing, he says "na mām". Actions like creation of the universe etc. do not bind me, do not make me attached. Because I am free from ego and have no desire for the fruits of action. What is to be done since actions bind me? One who knows me as free from the taint of action is also not bound by actions, due to the weakening of ego etc. in one who knows my freedom from taint is due to lack of ego, desire etc. ||14||

madhusūdana: Actions related to the creation of the universe and so on do not bind me, who am free from egoism, as the doer, devoid of the sense of doership. Thus, refuting doership, he refutes enjoyership: "I have no desire for the fruits of action, being one whose desires are fulfilled. What desire can one whose desires are fulfilled have?", as per the śruti. For actions bind due to the sense of doership and desire for fruits. In their absence, actions do not bind me. Thus, whoever else knows me as the non-doer and non-enjoyer in essence is not bound by actions - he is liberated by the knowledge of the non-doer self, this is the meaning. ||14||

viśvanātha: "Well, let that be for now. At present, you have incarnated in a kṣatriya family. You perform actions befitting the kṣatriya class daily. What is to be said about that?" To this he says "na mām". They do not bind, do not make impure, like they do the jīva. Nor do I have desire for the fruits of action like heaven etc., as the jīva does. Though full of self-bliss as the Supreme Lord, my performance of actions etc. is only for guiding the world - this is the idea. "iti mām" means one who does not know this is bound by actions - this is the implication. ||14||

baladeva: He elaborates on this in "na mām". Actions like the creation of the universe do not bind me, do not make me impure with faults like partiality etc., as they do the jīva. For they are prompted by the karma of the created jīvas, not by me, nor do I have desire for the fruits of creation etc., hence they do not bind. One who performs actions with desire for fruits is bound by their fruits. But I am full of inherent bliss, moved by compassion arising from the hunger of the kṣetrajña merged in prakṛti. Like the rain cloud, being merely the instrumental cause, I instigate those actions. The smṛti also states:

"He is merely the instrumental cause in the act of creation of the created beings. For the creative powers of the created ones are the principal cause."

The meaning is: In the act of creation of the created kṣetrajñas who are subject to states like gods, humans etc., that Supreme Lord is merely the instrumental cause. But the cause of the variety of states like gods etc. are only the past karma-powers of those created beings. Thus the sūtrakāra says: "Not due to partiality and cruelty" [Ve.Sū. 2.1.35] etc. He then states the fruit of this knowledge in "iti mām". One who knows me as such is not bound by past karmas which are opposed to and the cause of that [knowledge]. He is liberated from them - this is the meaning. ||14||

(4.15)

Knowing thus, even the ancient seekers of liberation performed action. Therefore, you too perform action, as the ancients did in the more ancient times.

śrīdhara: Having refuted the incidental partiality of the Lord in four verses beginning with "ye yathā mām", he reminds of the previously stated karma-yoga to elaborate on it in "evam". Action performed without egoism etc. does not bind. Knowing thus, even the ancient seekers of liberation like Janaka performed it in more ancient times, in other yugas, for the purification of their nature. Therefore, you too first perform action. ||15||

madhusūdana: Since one is not bound by actions due to the knowledge "I am not the doer, I have no desire for the fruits of action", he says "evam". Knowing thus the non-binding of action for the non-doer self, even the ancients who have passed, like Yayāti, Yadu etc. in this yuga, who were seekers of liberation, performed action. Therefore, you too perform action only, not sitting idle nor renunciation. If not a knower of truth, then for self-purification; if a knower of truth, then for guiding the world. It was done in more ancient times, in other yugas, by the ancients like Janaka. By this he shows that action must be performed by you, as it was done by the ancients and more ancients in this yuga and other yugas. ||15||

viśvanātha: Knowing me as such, even the ancients like Janaka performed action only for guiding the world. ||15||

baladeva: "evam" - Knowing me thus, action was performed by the ancient disciples who follow me, like Vivasvān etc., who were seekers of liberation, without desire. Therefore, you too perform that action, not renunciation of action. If of impure mind, then for knowledge-filled purification of mind; if of pure mind, then for guiding the world - this is the meaning. What kind was done by those ancients? "pūrvataram" - very ancient. ||15||

(4.16)

What is action? What is inaction? Even the wise are deluded in this matter. I shall explain to you that action, knowing which you shall be freed from inauspiciousness.

śrīdhara: And that should be done after deliberation with knowers of truth, not merely following worldly tradition. Thus he says "kiṁ karma". What is action? What kind of performance of action? What is inaction? What kind of non-performance of action? Even the wise are deluded in this matter. Therefore, that action and inaction, knowing and practicing which you will be freed, liberated from inauspiciousness, from saṁsāra, I shall explain to you - listen to that. ||16||

madhusūdana: "Is there any doubt at all regarding action, that you insist so much on 'done by the ancients in more ancient times'?" There certainly is, thus he says "kiṁ karma". Due to seeing the illusion of movement in stationary trees on the shore for one in a boat, and similarly seeing the illusion of non-movement in moving people seen from afar with the eyes, even the wise are deluded in this matter of what is really action and what is really inaction, having attained inability to determine due to it being extremely difficult to ascertain - this is the meaning. Therefore, I shall explain to you action, and by joining the 'a' prefix, inaction as well, explain thoroughly by removing doubt. Knowing which nature of action and inaction, you shall be freed, liberated from inauspiciousness, from saṁsāra. ||16||

viśvanātha: Moreover, action should not be performed by the wise merely following precedent. Rather, it should be done only after knowing its particular method. Thus he first states its difficulty to know. ||16||

Baladeva: Now, if you ask whether there is any doubt regarding karma, since you insist on saying "previously done by the ancients", then indeed there is, as stated in "kiṁ karma". What form should karma that is to be performed by those desiring liberation take, and what form should akarma (non-action) and karma other than that, including the knowledge contained within it, take? That is the meaning. And its difference from that. In this matter, even wise poets are deluded, having reached confusion due to inability to determine its true nature. I, the all-powerful and all-knowing, will explain to you that karma and, by joining the letter a, akarma, knowing which, practicing, and attaining which you will be liberated from the inauspicious saṃsāra (cycle of rebirth). ||16||

(4.17)

karmaṇo hy api boddhavyaṁ boddhavyaṁ ca vikarmaṇaḥ |
akarmaṇaś ca boddhavyaṁ gahanā karmaṇo gatiḥ ||

Śrīdhara: Now, karma is well-known in the world as action involving the body, etc. Akarma is the absence of such action. So how can it be said that even the wise are deluded in this matter? To this, he says "karmaṇa" etc. There is a truth to be understood even about karma, prescribed action. It is not merely what is commonly known in the world. There is a truth to be understood even about akarma, non-prescribed action. There is a truth to be understood even about vikarma, prohibited action. Because the course of karma is profound. "Karmaṇa" is used as a synecdoche. The meaning is that the truth of karma, akarma, and vikarma is difficult to understand. ||17||

Madhusūdana: Now, if you say "I already know this because it is well-known to everyone: action of the body and senses is karma, and sitting silently is akarma, so what do you have to say about that?", to this he says "karmaṇa" etc. Because there is a truth to be understood about karma prescribed by scripture, and about vikarma which is prohibited, and about akarma which is remaining silent. In these three sentences, "there is a truth" is to be supplied. Because it is profound, difficult to know. "Karmaṇa" is a synecdoche for karma, akarma, and vikarma. The meaning is that their course or nature is profound. ||18||

Viśvanātha: The truth is that performing prohibited actions leads to a bad destination. Similarly, for a sannyāsin (renunciate), what kind of non-performance of action is auspicious? Otherwise, how could the highest good be attained? This is the idea. "Karmaṇa" is a synecdoche for karma, akarma, and vikarma. Course means nature. Profound means difficult to comprehend. ||17||

Baladeva: Now, if you say that even the wise are deluded, he responds with "karmaṇo hi" etc. The nature of karma, which is to be performed without desire by those seeking liberation, is to be understood. The nature of vikarma, which is desire-motivated action contrary to knowledge, is to be understood. And the nature of akarma, which is different from karma and is knowledge, is to be understood. The meaning is that these should be considered along with those who know their respective natures. The course of karma and akarma is profound, difficult to comprehend. Therefore, even the wise are deluded in this matter. ||17||

(4.18)

He who sees inaction in action and action in inaction, he is wise among men, he is a yogī and a performer of all actions.

Śrīdhara: Thus showing the difficulty in understanding karma etc., he says "karmaṇi" etc. He who would see inaction in action characterized by worship of the Supreme Lord, in the sphere of karma - "this is not karma" - because for him it is not binding, being the cause of knowledge. And he who would see action in inaction, in not performing what is prescribed, because it is binding, being the cause of sin. Among men performing karma, he is wise, being superior due to his resolute intelligence. He praises him: "he is a yogī", because through that karma he attains jñāna-yoga. And he alone is the performer of all actions, because in that karma, which is like a place flooded with water from all sides, all the fruits of karma are included. Thus, in the stage of one desiring to ascend, in the state of being qualified for karma-yoga, the karma-yoga stated earlier with "Not by abstaining from actions" etc. is clarified. And because this section is an elaboration of that, there is no fault of repetition. By this alone, it should be understood that an elaboration is also made of the uselessness of karma stated for one established in yoga with "But he who rejoices only in the Self" etc. If karma is not binding even for one desiring to ascend, how could it be binding for one who has ascended - this verse is also applicable here.

Or alternatively, he who would see inaction, which is natural actionlessness, even when engaged in action, in the activities of the body, senses etc., through experiencing the distinction of the self from the body etc. And he who would see action in inaction, in renouncing actions out of aversion without knowledge, because it is falsely practiced, being accomplished through effort. This is stated with "Restraining the organs of action" etc. He who is thus is wise, a scholar among all men. The reason for this - because while performing all actions, food etc. that come by chance, he is indeed a yogī, established in samādhi through knowledge of the non-doer self - this is the meaning. By this alone, eating leftovers etc. that come naturally to the knower is not a fault. But for the ignorant, done out of attachment, it is a fault - thus the truth of vikarma also should be understood as determined. ||18||

Madhusūdana: What then is the nature of karma and other things? He explains this in "karmaṇi". In karma, which is the activity of the body, senses, etc., whether prescribed or prohibited, "I am doing" is superimposed on the self through misidentification with the agent. Just as motion is erroneously attributed to stationary trees on the shore when one is in a moving boat, one who sees the absence of action in the self, which is not truly an agent, by contemplating its true nature, sees correctly. Similarly, when action ceases in the body and senses, which are always active due to being transformations of the three guṇas of māyā, one erroneously thinks "I am sitting quietly at ease". Just as people standing far away appear not to be moving even though they are walking, one who sees the true nature of the ever-active body and senses realizes that karma is actually the effort called cessation of activity. Even in a state of indifference, the very notion "I am indifferent" is karma. Such a person who sees the ultimate truth is praised with three qualities - being wise, being endowed with yoga, and performing all actions - as stated in "sa buddhimān" etc.

Here, the first quarter shows the truth of karma and vikarma, as the word karma refers to prescribed and prohibited actions. The second quarter shows the truth of akarma. This should be understood. Therefore, your notion that "I should just remain quiet and at ease since karma is a cause of bondage" is false. In the absence of the sense of doership, neither prescribed nor prohibited karma causes bondage. This has been explained in verses like "Actions do not bind me" [Gītā 4.14]. But when there is a sense of doership, even the karma of indifference expressed as "I am sitting quietly" is indeed a cause of bondage due to lack of knowledge of the truth of reality. Therefore, knowing the truth of karma, vikarma and akarma in this way, abandoning vikarma and akarma, one should perform only prescribed karma, giving up the sense of doership and desire for results - this is the intention.

Another interpretation: One who sees in karma, which is visible and inert knowledge-action, the self-luminous consciousness that is the substratum of all illusions, pervading everything as existence and manifestation, which cannot be known through akarma, from the ultimate perspective. Similarly, in akarma, the self-luminous witnessing principle, karma is seen as an illusory appearance, not ultimately real, due to the impossibility of a relation between seer and seen. As the śruti says:

"He who sees all beings in the self alone, and the self in all beings, feels no hatred." [Īśā Upaniṣad 6]

Thus, even in mutual superimposition, one who sees the pure reality is alone wise among men, no one else. Because he sees the ultimate truth while others do not. He is endowed with the means of wisdom, having a pure and focused mind. Therefore he alone is praised with real qualities as the performer of all actions that purify the inner instrument. Since this is so, you too should become a seer of the ultimate truth, as that alone makes possible the performance of all actions - this is the intention.

Therefore, what was said earlier - "knowing which you will be freed from inauspiciousness", and that "the truth of karma etc. is to be known", and the praise "he is wise" etc. - all this is consistent with seeing the ultimate truth. For liberation from the inauspicious cycle of rebirth is not possible through any other knowledge. And nothing else is to be known as the truth, nor is there wisdom in knowing anything else. So the interpretation referring to seers of the ultimate truth is indeed appropriate.

But the interpretation that "one who sees karma performed for the eternal Supreme Lord as non-karma due to not causing bondage, and who sees akarma, non-performance of obligatory duties, as karma due to causing sin - he is wise" etc., is entirely inappropriate. For the knowledge that obligatory duty is non-karma is not a cause of freedom from inauspiciousness, and is itself inauspicious being false knowledge. Such false knowledge is not to be known as the truth, nor is there wisdom etc. in such knowledge as it is erroneous. Performance of obligatory duties is intrinsically useful for purifying the mind, but seeing it as non-action is nowhere prescribed, unlike seeing Brahman in sacred names etc. Nor does this very verse prescribe it, as that would contradict the context etc. as explained. Similarly, non-performance of obligatory duties is intrinsically useful as characterizing action contrary to obligatory duties, but seeing it as action is nowhere useful. Nor does non-performance of obligatory duties produce sin, as an effect cannot arise from a non-existent cause. Otherwise there would be the absurd consequence of effects arising at all times without distinction. As per the maxim "Action words denote existence, from them action is understood, for this is the meaning that is enjoined", only the existent is the producer of the unseen potency. Even in statements like "He does not take the sixteenth cup in the Atirātra sacrifice", it is accepted that only a particular resolve produces the unseen potency, like in the Prajāpati vow "One should not look at the rising sun" etc. Therefore, the conclusion of Vedic scholars is that only the action like sitting etc. which is contrary to obligatory duty and indicated by non-performance of obligatory duty at the time fit for its performance is the cause of sin. Hence in "not performing prescribed duty", the present participle is explained as having the sense of indication. Although "in cause and indication, action" is remembered without distinction, here causality is not possible. Therefore, when removal of false perception is the topic, explanation of false perception is not at all appropriate. Nor is this statement solely about performance of obligatory duties, for if the Lord had used the unclear expression "One who sees non-action in action" etc. to mean "One should perform obligatory duties", He would incur the fault of being deceptive. All this has been explained at length in the commentary itself, so I desist.

Viśvanātha: He explains the knowledge of the truth of karma and akarma in "karmaṇi". For one with a pure mind, even though possessing knowledge, who has not formally taken sannyāsa like Janaka etc., in karma being performed, in selfless karma yoga, there is akarma. "This is not karma" - one who sees thus, because that karma does not cause bondage - this is the idea. Similarly, for one with an impure mind, even though lacking knowledge, who knows the scriptures and boasts of knowledge, a sannyāsin, in akarma, in non-performance of karma, one sees karma - he experiences karmic bondage leading to a bad destiny. He alone is wise. But he performs all actions completely, he does not take sannyāsa through association with or words of that boastful pretender to knowledge - this is the idea. And so the Lord's words:

"But one who has not controlled the six enemies, whose senses are unrestrained,
Who lacks knowledge and detachment, yet takes up the triple staff -
He deceives the gods, himself, Me who dwells within, and destroys dharma.
With impurities not burnt away, he falls from this world and the next." [Bhāgavata Purāṇa 11.18.40-41]

Baladeva: He explains the nature of karma and akarma to be known in "karmaṇi". One who in karma being performed selflessly sees akarma, meaning self-knowledge in the context of karma, and who in akarma, self-knowledge, sees karma. This means: A seeker who sees karma performed for purification of the heart as having the form of knowledge due to being accompanied by contemplation of self-knowledge, and sees that knowledge as having the form of karma due to being attained through karma. Because both have the same ultimate goal, one should know both as one - this is the meaning. This will be stated later: "The ignorant speak of Sāṅkhya and Yoga as different" etc. Thus, one who contemplates the true nature of the self while performing karma is wise among men, a scholar. He is endowed with yoga, fit for liberation. He performs all actions completely, as the fruits of all actions are included within the bliss of self-knowledge.

(4.19)

He whose all undertakings are free from desire and resolve, whose actions are burned by the fire of knowledge - him the wise call a paṇḍita (learned man).

śrīdharaḥ: He explains the meaning of the dual sense stated earlier through śruti and implication by "he who sees inaction in action" in five verses beginning with "yasya". samārambhāḥ means actions that are well-begun. kāma means desire for the fruit. He whose actions are free from resolve for that (fruit) is called a paṇḍita. The reason for this is that his actions are burned, i.e. brought to the state of inaction, by the fire of knowledge born when the mind is purified by those undertakings. In the advanced state, kāma refers to the object that is the cause of the fruit. saṅkalpa is the resolve regarding what is to be done, thinking "this should be done for that purpose". (His actions are) free from these two. The rest is clear. ||19||

madhusūdanaḥ: This absence of being affected by action due to lack of ego as the doer in one who sees the highest truth is elaborated from "yasya sarva" up to "brahma-karma-samādhi". For him who sees the highest truth as described earlier, all undertakings, whether Vedic or worldly, which are actions according to the derivation "they are well begun", are free from desire and resolve. kāma is thirst for results, saṅkalpa is the ego-sense of doership thinking "I am doing". (His actions) are devoid of these two. They become mere movements due to the momentum of prārabdha karma, either for the welfare of the world or just for maintaining life. For him whose actions are burned by the fire of knowledge, which is the vision of inaction etc. in action etc., according to the principle "for him who has attained that, there is non-attachment and destruction in the latter and former halves due to that designation" [ve.sū. 4.1.13]. The wise, the knowers of Brahman, call him truly learned (paṇḍita). The meaning is that one with right vision is called learned, not one who is deluded. ||19||

viśvanāthaḥ: He elaborates the stated meaning in five verses beginning with "yasya". samārambhāḥ means actions that are well-begun. kāma is the fruit, free from resolve for that. Knowledge itself is the fire; his actions - those being done, prescribed, and prohibited - are burned by that. By this, vikarma (prohibited action) is also explained. For such a qualified person, just as he would see action as inaction, he would also see prohibited action as inaction itself - this is the connection with the previous verse. As will be said later:

"Even if you were the most sinful of all sinners, you would cross over all sin by the boat of knowledge alone. As a blazing fire reduces firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge reduce all actions to ashes." [Gītā 4.36-37] ||19||

baladevaḥ: He states the form of knowledge of action in five verses beginning with "yasya". samārambhāḥ are actions. kāmāḥ are fruits that are desired. (His actions are) devoid of resolve for those, empty of actions intended for the self. The wise call him paṇḍita, a knower of the self. The reason for this is: jñāna etc. His accumulated actions are burned by the fire of self-knowledge that manifests when the heart is purified by those undertakings. ||19||

(4.20)

Having renounced attachment to the fruits of action and ever content, dependent on none, even though engaged in action, he does not do anything.

śrīdharaḥ: Moreover, having renounced attachment to action and its fruits, ever content with his own bliss, and therefore without need for support for the sake of gain and security, such a person, though engaged in natural or prescribed action, does not truly do anything. The meaning is that his action attains the state of inaction.

madhusūdanaḥ: Let it be that the fire of knowledge burns up past actions that have not begun to bear fruit and prevents future actions from arising. But someone might doubt that actions performed at the time of the arising of knowledge, not being included in either the past or the future, would lead to results. To dispel this doubt, he says "Having renounced". Having renounced attachment to action and its fruits, having overcome the sense of doership and desire for enjoyment through the correct vision of the Self as non-doer and non-enjoyer, ever content through attaining the nature of supreme bliss, desireless in all things, without support meaning one from whom support such as body and senses has departed through the vision of non-duality, free from identification with body and senses. The two qualifying phrases containing reasons are given in order for the cessation of desire for results and the sense of doership. Such a liberated-while-living person, even though engaged in Vedic or worldly action in the state of ordinary consciousness, seemingly fully engaged in action from the worldly perspective due to the force of prārabdha karma (actions that have begun to bear fruit), from his own perspective does not do anything at all, because it is negated by the vision of the actionless Self. This is the meaning.

viśvanāthaḥ: Ever content means always satisfied with his own bliss. Without support means he does not depend on anyone for his gain and security.

baladevaḥ: He clarifies the stated meaning with "Having renounced". Having renounced attachment to the fruits of action, ever content with the Self experienced eternally, without support meaning without need for support even for gain and security, such a qualified person, even though engaged in action, does not do anything at all. Under the pretext of performing action, he accomplishes steadfastness in knowledge. This is the state of one who wishes to ascend. By this, the nature of prohibited action as binding should be understood. This is what is being said.

(4.21)

Free from expectations, with controlled mind and body, having renounced all possessions, performing only bodily action, one does not incur sin.

śrīdharaḥ: Moreover, nirāśīḥ (free from expectations) means one from whom desires for blessings have departed. One whose mind and body are controlled. One who has renounced all possessions. Such a person, even while performing only bodily actions, without attachment to being the doer, does not incur sin or bondage. In the case of one established in yoga, even while performing natural activities like begging alms just for bodily sustenance, one does not incur sin due to non-performance of prescribed duties.

madhusūdanaḥ: When even extreme causes of distraction like the jyotiṣṭoma sacrifice do not produce their fruits due to perfect knowledge, then certainly activities like begging alms which are not distracting and are merely for bodily sustenance cannot be causes of bondage. This is stated by the a fortiori argument in nirāśīḥ, etc. Nirāśīḥ means free from craving. Yata-cittātmā means one whose mind (inner instrument) and body (with external senses) are controlled through pratyāhāra (sense withdrawal). Having conquered the senses and being free from craving, one has renounced all possessions, meaning all objects of enjoyment. Even such a person, due to prārabdha karma, performs bodily action merely for bodily sustenance, such as wearing a loincloth, begging alms, etc., which are permitted by scripture for a renunciate, whether physical, verbal or mental. Doing even this without the ego of doership, seeing action as superimposed by others, due to the vision of the non-doer Self, one does not incur sin, meaning the undesirable cycle of rebirth which is the fruit of dharma and adharma, since even merit produces undesirable results like sin.

Those who interpret śārīram as "to be performed by the body" gain no additional meaning from the word kevalam (only), making śārīram redundant. If it is said to exclude verbal and mental action, then taking karma to mean only prescribed action leads to the useless negation of an inapplicable prohibition in "performing only bodily prescribed action, one does not incur sin." Even taking it to refer to both prescribed and prohibited action leads to contradiction, as explained at length in the commentary.

viśvanāthaḥ: Ātmā means the gross body. Even while performing bodily action for bodily sustenance, like accepting improper gifts, one does not incur sin. This should also be understood for prohibited action.

baladevaḥ: Now the state of one established in yoga is described in three verses beginning with nirāśīḥ. Nirāśīḥ means one from whom desire for fruits has departed. Yata-cittātmā means one whose mind and body are controlled. Tyakta-sarva-parigrahaḥ means free from possessiveness towards material objects, for the sake of seeing the Self alone. Even while performing bodily action for bodily sustenance, like accepting improper gifts, one does not incur sin.

(4.22)

Content with whatever comes unsought, transcending the dualities, free from envy, equal in success and failure, even though acting, he is not bound.

śrīdharaḥ: Moreover, yadṛcchā-lābha (chance gain) means a gain that comes unsought. Contented with that. Transcended the dualities like cold and heat, meaning able to endure them. Free from envy means without enmity. Equal in success and failure of chance gain, free from joy and sorrow. One who is like this, even after performing the prescribed or natural actions of the previous and subsequent stages, does not attain bondage. ||22||

madhusūdanaḥ: For a renunciate who has abandoned all possessions, action is permitted only for maintaining the body. Since bodily sustenance is impossible without food, clothing, etc., it might be concluded that one should obtain food, etc. even by begging or one's own efforts. To restrict this, it is stated yadṛcchā-lābha (chance gain), etc. Yadṛcchā-lābha means gain of food, clothing, etc. allowed by scripture, without effort not sanctioned by scripture, but by chance alone. Content with that, without desire for more. Thus scripture states "one should practice begging" and elaborates "unsolicited, unplanned, available by chance", prohibiting efforts like solicitation, planning, etc. Manu also says:

"Never seek alms by interpreting omens or portents, or by skill in astrology and palmistry, or by giving counsel and interpreting texts." [Manu 6.50]

But effort allowed by scripture, like renunciates entering a village for alms, should certainly be made. Similarly, what may be accepted is also restricted by scripture:

"Two loincloths, an upper garment, a patched cloak for protection from cold, sandals - one may accept these, but should not accumulate anything else."

Other scriptural injunctions and prohibitions should be inferred similarly.

Now, without personal effort, how can one live when afflicted by cold, heat, etc.? To this he says dvandvātīta (beyond dualities) - transcended dualities like hunger, thirst, cold, heat, rain, etc., as they do not arise in the state of absorption. Even when they arise in the waking state, they are negated by the realization of supreme bliss, non-dual self as non-doer and non-experiencer. Thus, even when afflicted by these dualities, his mind remains unperturbed. Therefore, vimatsara (free from envy) - free from envy which is intolerance of others' excellence preceded by desire for self-excellence, due to vision of non-dual self, having an attitude free from enmity. Therefore sama (equal) - same, in success and failure of chance gain, neither elated in success nor dejected in failure. He, experiencing himself as a non-doer with doership superimposed by others, even after performing actions like begging alms, etc. for mere bodily sustenance, is not bound, as karma which is the cause of bondage along with its cause has been burnt by the fire of knowledge. This is a restatement of what was said earlier. ||22||

viśvanāthaḥ: Nothing.

baladevaḥ: Now he states that food, clothing, etc. for bodily sustenance should not be obtained by personal effort, in yadṛcchayā (by chance), etc. Yadṛcchā-lābha (chance gain) means gain without begging. Content with that, satisfied. Transcended dualities like cold and heat, able to endure them. Free from envy, not retaliating even when troubled by others. Equal due to absence of joy in success and sorrow in failure of chance gain. One who is like this, even after performing bodily actions, is not bound by them, is not affected due to the power of steadfastness in knowledge. ||22||

(4.23)

gata-saṅgasya muktasya jñānāvasthita-cetasaḥ |
yajñāyācarataḥ karma samagraṁ pravilīyate ||

śrīdharaḥ: Moreover, gata-saṅgasya means: For one who is free from attachments, desireless, liberated from passions etc. jñāne'vasthitaṁ ceto yasya tasya means: whose mind is established in knowledge. For one who performs actions for yajña (sacrifice), for the sake of the Supreme Lord, all actions, along with their impressions, dissolve completely. They attain the state of non-action. In the view of those established in yoga, yajñāya means: performing actions only for the protection of sacrifice and for the welfare of the world. ||23||

madhusūdanaḥ: It has been said that a renunciate who has given up all possessions and is content with whatever comes unsought, is not bound by actions such as begging alms etc., performed only for the maintenance of the body. Someone might doubt whether the sacrificial and other actions performed by a householder knower of Brahman like Janaka would be a cause of bondage. To remove this doubt, he elaborates on what was previously stated beginning with "abandoning attachment to the fruits of action" in the verse gata-saṅgasya. gata-saṅgasya means: one who is free from attachment to results. muktasya means: free from the false identification with being the doer, enjoyer, etc. jñānāvasthita-cetaso means: one whose mind is established in the non-dual knowledge of the identity of Brahman and Atman, i.e., one of steady wisdom. The connection of the latter qualifications as causes of the former should be understood: How is one free from attachment? Because one is free from false identification. How is that? Because one is of steady wisdom. Even for such a person, due to prarabdha karma, yajñāya means: for the protection of sacrifice, for setting an example of proper conduct in sacrifices like Jyotishtoma for the sake of people's engagement, or for the pleasure of Vishnu. ācarataḥ karma means: performing actions like sacrifice, charity, etc. samagraṁ means: along with their complete results. pravilīyate means: they dissolve completely, they are destroyed due to the severance of their cause by the vision of truth. ||23||

viśvanāthaḥ: yajña means sacrifice as will be defined later. For one who performs actions for that purpose, those actions dissolve, meaning they attain the state of non-action. ||23||

baladevaḥ: For one who is free from attachment, desireless, liberated from passion and aversion etc., whose mind is fixed in knowledge of the self, who performs actions to please Vishnu, meditating on Him, all past binding karma dissolves completely. ||23||

(4.24)

The offering is brahman, the oblation is brahman, offered by brahman in the fire of brahman. Brahman alone is to be reached by him who sees brahman in action.

Śrīdhara: Thus, action characterized by worship of the Supreme Lord is non-action due to being the cause of knowledge and not being binding. But in the elevated state, even natural action is non-action due to being negated by the knowledge of the non-doer Self. This dissolution of action described by "one who sees inaction in action" is elaborated. Now he states the dissolution of action for one who sees brahman pervading action and its auxiliaries in "The offering is brahman". That by which the offering is made, the ladle etc., is also brahman. The oblation being offered, the ghee etc., is also brahman. The fire is brahman. The offering made in that by the doer who is brahman is the oblation. The fire, the doer, and the action are all brahman - this is the meaning. Thus, for one whose absorption is in action which is of the nature of brahman, brahman alone is to be attained. There is no other result - this is the meaning. ||24||

Madhusūdana: But how does action that is being performed perish without producing a result, due to the destruction of its cause on the realization of brahman? He answers this in "The offering is brahman". For the ritual action of sacrifice etc. is accomplished by many factors. Sacrifice is the relinquishing of an object with a deity as the recipient. When that same relinquished object is cast into the fire, it is called oblation. There, the intended deity is the recipient, the relinquished object denoted by the word "oblation" is the direct object of the verbal root, and heaven etc. is the mediate result which is the object of the injunction. Thus in casting the oblation which holds the offering into the fire, the ladle etc. is the most efficient instrument, and mantras etc. are the revealing instrument - so even the instrument is twofold, divided into actual factor and indicator. Similarly, the relinquishing and casting into the fire are two actions. In the first, the sacrificer is the agent. In the casting, the priest hired by the sacrificer is the agent and the fire is the location of casting. Similarly, place, time etc. should be seen as the substratum common to all actions.

Thus, just as the notions of snake, stick etc. imagined due to ignorance of the rope are negated by knowledge of the true nature of the rope, so all practical dealings of action, factors etc. imagined due to ignorance of brahman are negated by knowledge of the true nature of brahman. Though an appearance of practical dealings of action, factors etc. is seen due to persistence of the negated, it does not lead to results, like a burnt cloth. This is taught by this verse. And the vision of brahman as the self of all sacrifice is praised.

Thus - The offering denoted by the instrumental derivation "that by which it is offered" is the ladle, mantras etc. Similarly, the offering denoted by the dative derivation "that to which it is offered" is the recipient deity. Similarly, the offering denoted by the locative derivation "that in which it is offered" is the substratum of place, time etc. All that is brahman alone, being imagined in brahman, without existence apart from the substratum, like a snake imagined in a rope. Similarly, the oblation which is the direct object in the actions of relinquishing and casting is also brahman alone. Similarly, that in which it is cast, the fire, is also brahman alone. "In the fire of brahman" is a compound word. Similarly, that by which as agent - the sacrificer and priest - it is relinquished and cast, both that agent factor denoted by the instrumental case prescribed for the agent, is stated as "by brahman". Similarly, "offered" meaning the action of offering - the relinquishing and casting - that too is brahman alone. Similarly, that which is to be attained by that offering, heaven etc. as the mediate object, that too is brahman alone. The word "alone" here is connected everywhere. Even with "offered", "brahman alone" is to be supplied, due to the absence of separation and expectancy, like the completion of a later sentence "may the lord of consciousness purify you" etc. with "without gap" etc.

By one who has absorption in action in this form, i.e. knowledge of brahman, that knower of brahman though performing action, brahman the supreme non-dual bliss is to be attained - this is to be supplied, due to expectancy and absence of separation, like the completion of a prior sentence "O Agni, your abode" etc. with "may that most excellent body" etc.

Or, by the derivation "that for which result it is offered", even the result of heaven etc. is to be taken by the word "offering" itself. And thus the latter half "Brahman alone is to be reached by him who sees brahman in action" is for stating the result of knowledge alone - this is proper. In this view, "by him who sees brahman in action" is either one compound word, or separate words - the first "brahman" is connected with "offered", and the last with "to be reached". Thus the difficulty of double supplying should be seen as avoided. "Brahman is to be reached" means its attainment in non-difference, figuratively. Therefore indeed, not the insignificant result of heaven etc. is to be attained by him, due to the cessation of practical dealings of factors based on knowledge and ignorance. As stated by the author of the Vārtika:

"In practical dealings of factors, the pure reality is not seen. When the pure reality is established, how can there be engagement in factors?"

The interpretation of some that the vision of brahman is imposed on the offering etc. without destroying the nature of the factors themselves, like in names etc., by mere connection for a particular result, has been refuted by the author of the Bhāṣya himself by arguments like contradiction with the introduction etc., and the inapplicability of mere connection in effecting knowledge of brahman. ||24||

Viśvanātha: It was stated "Perform sacrifice". What kind of sacrifice is that? Expecting this, he says "The offering is brahman". That by which it is offered, the ladle etc., is the offering. That too is brahman alone. The oblation being offered is also brahman alone. "In the fire of brahman" means the fire which is the location of offering is also brahman alone. Thus for the discriminating person, brahman alone is to be attained, not any other result. Why? By him whose absorption, one-pointedness of mind, is in action which is of the nature of brahman. ||24||

Baladeva: Having thus stated the nature of knowledge of prescribed action containing contemplation of the discriminated individual self, he states its nature as the supreme self by contemplation of its form including its auxiliaries in "The offering is brahman". By the derivation "that by which the self is offered", the offering is the ladle, and the presiding deity like Indra etc. That too is brahman alone. The oblation being offered, the ghee etc., that too is brahman alone. And that oblation is offered, relinquished and cast by the sacrificer and priest who are brahman, in the fire which is brahman as the receptacle of oblation. The fire, sacrificer and priest are brahman alone - this is the meaning. In "brahmāgnau", the elision of the case-ending is Vedic. It should not be said that it is a compound word, because the vision of brahman in the fire is to be enjoined. And thus for one whose absorption, one-pointedness of mind, is in action including its auxiliaries which are of the form of brahman, by that seeker of liberation, brahman alone is to be attained, one's own nature and the supreme nature are to be obtained and seen - this is the meaning. In "If one knows brahman as consciousness" etc. the word brahman refers to the individual self. In "Brahman is consciousness, bliss" etc. it refers to the supreme self. Due to the connection of qualities like being the offering etc., there is no repetition of this section. The commentators explain that the ladle etc. are brahman due to having their existence dependent on it and being pervaded by it. Action contemplated in such a way, having the form of knowledge, becomes fit for seeing that. ||24||

(4.25)

Other yogīs (yogins) worship only the deva (divine) yajña (sacrifice).
Others offer the yajña as a sacrifice in the fire of Brahman.

śrīdharaḥ: In order to praise this knowledge characterized by the vision of Brahman everywhere, which is accomplished as a sacrifice and is superior to all sacrifices because it is attainable through all sacrificial means, he speaks of many sacrifices that are means to knowledge according to the differences in qualification, in eight verses beginning with "daivam". That in which the devas (gods) like Indra and Varuṇa are worshipped. The word "eva" shows the absence of the idea of Brahman in Indra and others. Other karma-yogīs (karma yogins) worship only that divine sacrifice, they perform it with faith. But other jñāna-yogīs (jnana yogins) offer the sacrifice in the fire which is of the nature of Brahman, by the means of sacrifice itself, in the manner stated as "offering to Brahman" and so on. The meaning is that they dissolve all actions like sacrifice and so on. This is the jñāna-yajña (jnana yajna, sacrifice of knowledge). ||25||

madhusūdanaḥ: Now, to praise that perfect vision again as being in the form of sacrifice, for the purpose of praising it, he mentions other ignorant ones in "daivam". The devas (gods) like Indra and Agni are worshipped by which, that is daiva (divine), that sacrifice alone in the form of darśa, pūrṇamāsa, jyotiṣṭoma and so on, other yogīs (yogins) worship constantly, not the jñāna-yajña (jnana yajna). Having thus spoken of the karma-yajña (karma yajna), he speaks of the jñāna-yajña (jnana yajna) which is its result through the purification of the inner organ, in "brahmāgnau". Brahman which is of the nature of truth, knowledge, infinity and bliss, devoid of all particulars, that is the meaning of "tat" (that), in that fire, the sacrifice which is the inner self, the meaning of "tvam" (you), by the sacrifice itself. The word "yajña" (yajna) is mentioned among the names of the self by Yāska. The third case ending is used in the sense of such characterization. The word "eva" is for excluding difference and non-difference. They offer by non-difference with the meaning of "tvam" (you), that is, they see as its essential nature. Others are different from the previous ones, they are renunciates established in the vision of reality, this is the meaning.

The vision of non-difference between the individual self and Brahman is accomplished as a sacrifice and is mentioned among the means of sacrifice to praise it, as stated in "The sacrifice of knowledge is superior to the sacrifice of material things" and so on. ||25||

viśvanāthaḥ: Indeed, there are many other sacrifices by distinction. Hear them from me, he says in eight verses beginning with "daivam eva". The devas (gods) like Indra and Varuṇa are worshipped in which, that is daiva (divine). The absence of the idea of Brahman in Indra and others is shown. The suffix "aṇ" is used in the sense of "this is its deity". Yogīs (yogins) means karma-yogīs (karma yogins). But other jñāna-yogīs (jnana yogins) offer in the fire which is Brahman, the Supreme Self, in that which is the meaning of "tat" (that), the sacrifice which is in the place of the oblation, the individual self which is the meaning of "tvam" (you), by the sacrifice which is in the form of the praṇava (Om), the mantra itself. This jñāna-yajña (jnana yajna) will be praised later. Here the words "yajñam" and "yajñena" denote the object and instrument of action, by the first figure of speech they indicate the pure individual self and praṇava (Om). ||25||

baladevaḥ: Having thus described the nature of action as knowledge through contemplation on Brahman, he speaks of the types of karma-yoga in "daivam". Other yogīs (yogins) worship the divine sacrifice in the form of worship of Indra and other gods, they are established in that alone. Others offer the sacrifice in the fire which has become Brahman, by the sacrifice which is the ladle and so on, the sacrifice which is in the form of oblations like ghee, according to the method of "offering to Brahman" and so on. The meaning is that they are established in the fire sacrifice alone. ||25||

(4.26)

Others offer the senses like hearing and so on into the fires of restraint. Some offer the sense objects like sound and so on into the fires of the senses.

śrīdharaḥ: Others, the lifelong celibates, offer the senses like hearing and so on into the fires in the form of restraint of each sense. They remain focused on restraint, subduing the senses. This is the meaning. The senses themselves are the fires. Into these, other householders offer sound and other objects. Even at the time of enjoying sense objects, being unattached, they offer sound and other objects imagined as oblations into the senses imagined as fires. This is the meaning. ||26||

madhusūdanaḥ: Others offer the senses like hearing and so on into the fires of restraint. Some offer the sense objects like sound and so on into the fires of the senses. ||26||

viśvanāthaḥ: Others, the lifelong celibates, offer the senses like hearing and so on. Restraint, the controlled mind itself, these are the fires - they offer into these. They dissolve the senses in the pure mind. This is the meaning. Others, celibates of a lower order, offer sound and other sense objects into the fires of the senses - the senses themselves are the fires - they offer into these, meaning they dissolve sound and other objects in the senses. This is the meaning. ||26||

baladevaḥ: Others, the lifelong celibates, offer the senses like hearing and so on into the fires of restraint, into the fires in the form of restraint of each sense. Subduing those, they remain focused on restraint. Other householders offer sound and other objects into the fires of the senses, into the senses imagined as fires. Enjoying those without attachment, they make the senses inclined towards that. ||26||

(4.27)

Others sacrifice all the actions of the senses and the actions of the prāṇa (life-breath) in the fire of yoga of self-control, kindled by knowledge.

śrīdharaḥ: Moreover, sarvāṇīti. Others are those absorbed in meditation. The actions of the buddhīndriya (cognitive senses) such as hearing and seeing are śravaṇa (hearing), darśana (seeing), etc. The actions of the karmendriya (active senses) such as speech and hands are vacana (speaking), upādāna (grasping), etc. And the actions of the ten prāṇa (life-breaths): The action of prāṇa is outward movement. The action of apāna is downward movement. The action of vyāna is diffusion, contraction, expansion, etc. The action of samāna is digestion of food and drink, etc. The action of udāna is upward movement—

udgāre nāga ākhyātaḥ kūrmas tūnmīlane smṛtaḥ |
kṛkaraḥ kṣut-karo jñeyo devadatto vijṛmbhaṇe |
na jahāti mṛte kvāpi sarva-vyāpī dhanañjayaḥ || [gheraṇḍa-saṁhitā 5.64]

They sacrifice all these. Ātma-saṁyama (self-control) is one-pointed meditation. That itself is yoga. That itself is fire. In that fire kindled by knowledge, the object of meditation, having properly known the object of meditation and controlling the mind in it, they cease all these actions. This is the meaning. ||27||

madhusūdanaḥ: tad ananyatvam ārambhaṇa-śabdādibhyaḥ [ve.sū. 2.1.14] Others are those who know the pure meaning of 'thou'. All the senses and their actions, hearing, seeing, etc., all the actions of the senses and the actions of the prāṇa, others sacrifice in the fire of yoga of self-control, kindled by knowledge. ||27||

viśvanāthaḥ: Others are those who know the pure meaning of 'thou'. All the senses and their actions such as hearing, seeing, etc. The actions of prāṇa are the ten prāṇas and their actions. The action of prāṇa is outward movement. The action of apāna is downward movement. The action of samāna is equalization of food and drink, etc. The action of udāna is upward movement. The action of vyāna is movement in all directions.

udgāre nāga ākhyātaḥ kūrmas tūnmīlane smṛtaḥ |
kṛkaraḥ kṣut-karo jñeyo devadatto vijṛmbhaṇe |
na jahāti mṛte kvāpi sarvavyāpī dhanaṁjayaḥ || [gheraṇḍa-saṁhitā 5.64]

Thus are the ten prāṇas and their actions. They sacrifice in the fire, which is the purification of the self, the meaning of 'thou'. They dissolve the mind, intellect, and other senses, and the ten prāṇas. They contemplate that only one inner self exists, not others including the mind. This is the meaning. ||27||

baladevaḥ: sarvāṇīti. Others sacrifice the actions of the senses and the actions of prāṇa in the fire of yoga of self-control. The control of the self, which is the mind, that itself is yoga, in that conceived as fire, they sacrifice. They strive to prevent the tendency of the senses and prāṇas towards action through the mind. The actions of the senses such as hearing are grasping of sound, etc. The actions of prāṇa: the action of prāṇa is outward movement, of apāna is downward movement, of vyāna is pervading the entire body, contraction, expansion, etc., of samāna is equalizing food and drink, etc., of udāna is upward movement — thus should all be understood collectively in the fire kindled by knowledge, illuminated by contemplation of the self. ||27||

(4.28)

Some are performers of sacrifice through material possessions, some through austerities, some through yoga, and others through study and knowledge. These are ascetics with strict vows.

śrīdharaḥ: dravya-yajñā and so on. Those for whom material giving itself is sacrifice are dravya-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through material possessions). Those for whom austerity itself, such as kṛcchra and cāndrāyaṇa, is sacrifice are tapo-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through austerities). Those for whom the eight-limbed yoga itself is sacrifice are yoga-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through yoga). Those for whom the knowledge of meaning acquired through study, listening, reflection and so on of the Vedas is itself sacrifice are svādhyāya-jñāna-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through study and knowledge). Or there are two types: those who sacrifice by reciting the Vedas and those who sacrifice through knowledge of their meaning. yatayaḥ means those who are diligent. Those whose vows are well-sharpened, i.e. made keen. ||28||

madhusūdanaḥ: [Repeats the verse]

viśvanāthaḥ: Those for whom material giving itself is sacrifice are dravya-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through material possessions). Those for whom austerity itself, such as kṛcchra and cāndrāyaṇa, is sacrifice are tapo-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through austerities). Those for whom the eight-limbed yoga itself is sacrifice are yoga-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through yoga). Those for whom study, which is recitation of the Vedas, and knowledge of their meaning is sacrifice are svādhyāya-jñāna-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through study and knowledge). yatayaḥ means those devoted to effort. All these are those whose vows are well-sharpened, i.e. made keen. ||28||

baladevaḥ: Some karma yogis are dravya-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through material possessions), devoted to giving food and other things. Some are tapo-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through austerities), devoted to vows such as kṛcchra and cāndrāyaṇa. Some are svādhyāya-jñāna-yajñāḥ (sacrificers through study and knowledge), devoted to studying the Vedas and practicing their meaning. yatayaḥ means those who are diligent in these. saṁśita-vratāḥ means those whose practices of these respective things are keen. ||28||

(4.29)

Some offer the prāṇa (upward moving breath) into the apāna (downward moving breath), while others offer the apāna into the prāṇa. Yet others, having restrained the movements of both prāṇa and apāna, are devoted to prāṇāyāma (breath control).

Śrīdhara: Moreover, "apāne" etc. They offer the upward-moving prāṇa into the downward-moving apāna through inhalation. During inhalation, they unite the prāṇa with the apāna. Similarly, having restrained the upward and downward movements of prāṇa and apāna through retention, they offer the apāna into the prāṇa during exhalation. Thus, through inhalation, retention, and exhalation, others are devoted to prāṇāyāma. This is the meaning. Furthermore, "apare" etc. Others, practicing the restriction of food intake, contemplate on the dissolution of the functions of each sense organ as they naturally decay. This is the meaning.

Alternatively, "apāne juhvati prāṇaṁ prāṇe'pānaṁ tathāpare" means that through the alternating inhalation and exhalation, they contemplate on the unity of the meanings of "that" and "thou" through the exchange manifested by the ajapā (unspoken) mantra "haṁsaḥ so'ham" in forward and reverse order. As stated in the Yoga Śāstra:

"It goes out with 'sa' and enters again with 'ham'.
One should meditate on that very prāṇa as 'I am haṁsa'."

The verse "prāṇāpāna-gatī ruddhvā" describes the prāṇāyāma sacrifice performed by others. Its meaning is: One should fill two parts with food, one part with water, and leave the fourth part empty for movement. Those who follow such prescribed diet regulations, having restrained the movements of prāṇa and apāna through retention, being devoted to prāṇāyāma, offer the prāṇas (senses) into the prāṇas. For during retention, all prāṇas become unified, so they contemplate on the offering as the senses dissolve therein. As stated in the Yoga Śāstra:

"As the mind becomes steady through constant practice,
So do the breath, speech, body, and vision become steady." ||29||

Madhusūdana: He describes the prāṇāyāma sacrifice with one and a half verses - "apāne" etc. They offer the prāṇa function into the apāna function, meaning they perform the prāṇāyāma called pūraka by bringing external air into the body. Others offer the prāṇa into the apāna, meaning they perform the prāṇāyāma called recaka by expelling bodily air outwards. By mentioning pūraka and recaka, the two types of kumbhaka (retention) that inevitably accompany them are also mentioned. Retaining the breath after inhaling to capacity is called internal kumbhaka. Retaining after exhaling completely is called external kumbhaka.

After restating these three types of prāṇāyāma, he describes the fourth kumbhaka: The outward movement of internal air through the mouth and nose is the movement of prāṇa called exhalation. The inward movement of external air is the movement of apāna called inhalation. In pūraka, the prāṇa movement is restrained; in recaka, the apāna movement is restrained; in kumbhaka, both movements are restrained. Having thus restrained the movements of prāṇa and apāna called inhalation and exhalation, either in sequence or simultaneously, others who are devoted to prāṇāyāma, different from the previous ones and not restricting their diet, but distinguished by yoga practices like dietary regulations, offer the prāṇas in the form of sense and action organs into the restrained prāṇas through practice of internal and external kumbhaka, meaning they dissolve them through practice of the fourth kumbhaka.

All this has been concisely and elaborately explained by the venerable Patañjali in aphorisms. The concise aphorism is: "When that [posture] is steady, prāṇāyāma is the cessation of the movements of inhalation and exhalation" [Yoga Sūtra 2.49]. When that posture is steady, prāṇāyāma should be practiced. What kind? Characterized by cessation of the movements of inhalation and exhalation, meaning the natural flow of the prāṇa and apāna functions of inhalation and exhalation without personal effort, either sequentially or simultaneously, is restrained by special personal effort - this is its defining characteristic.

He elaborates on this: "External, internal, and restrained operations, regulated by place, time and number, become long and subtle" [Yoga Sūtra 2.50]. Pūraka is the external operation as it restrains outward movement. Recaka is the internal operation as it restrains inward movement. Some explain "external" as recaka and "internal" as pūraka. Kumbhaka is the restrained operation that simultaneously restrains both movements. It is said: "When both inhalation and exhalation are restrained at once by a single effort of retention, not by repeated efforts of inhalation or exhalation as before, but just as water placed on a hot stone dries up and contracts from all sides, so too this moving air, its action restrained by a strong retentive effort, remains in the body in a subtle form, neither filling nor emptying."

This threefold prāṇāyāma, regulated by place, time and number, becomes long and subtle. Just as a dense solid mass becomes long and subtle when stretched out, so too the prāṇa becomes long and subtle when practiced with increase in place, time and number. To explain: Normally, exhalation extends twelve finger-widths from the heart to the tip of the nose. Inhalation returns from there to the heart. This is the natural movement of prāṇa and apāna. But with practice, it gradually extends from the navel through the central channel to twenty-four or thirty-six finger-widths beyond the nose. Inhalation should be understood similarly. The external extension should be measured by the movement of a fine cotton fiber in a windless place. The internal extension should be inferred from an ant-like subtle touch sensation. This is the regulation by place.

The regulation by time is as follows: A fourth of the time taken for one blink of an eye is a kṣaṇa. Their number should be determined. The time taken to touch one's knee three times and snap one's fingers is a mātrā. The first stage is slow, with thirty-six such mātrās. The second stage is medium, with twice that. The third stage is intense, with thrice that. The striking of the head by air pushed up from the navel root during exhalation is called udghāta. This is the regulation by time.

The regulation by number is either by repetitions of praṇava (Oṁ) chanting or by counting inhalations and exhalations. Time and number are mentioned separately to indicate a slight intended distinction. Although spatial extension is not perceived in kumbhaka, temporal and numerical extension is indeed perceived. This threefold prāṇāyāma, practiced daily and extending in space, time and number over days, fortnights, months etc., becomes long and subtle, being perceivable only with utmost skill.

He summarized the fourth type which is the result as follows—bāhyābhyantara-viṣayākṣepī caturthaḥ [yo.sū. 2.51]. The external object is exhalation, recaka. The internal object is inhalation, pūraka. Or vice versa. The third type of kumbhaka is twofold, external and internal retention, which occurs once due to the effort of strong retention with respect to both of those. The fourth type of kumbhaka occurs repeatedly due to the skill in practicing kumbhaka alone, without depending on those two, by the effort for each. Thus, bāhyābhyantara-viṣayākṣepī means independent of those.

Another explanation—the external object is dvādaśānta etc., the internal object is heart, navel cakra etc. The fourth prāṇāyāma is the cessation of movement in the form of retention, which throws off and considers those two objects. The distinction is that the third occurs suddenly without considering the external and internal objects. This fourfold prāṇāyāma is shown in one and a half verses beginning with apāne juhvati prāṇam. ||29||

viśvanātha: Others dedicated to prāṇāyāma offer the upward-moving prāṇa into the downward-moving apāna during inhalation, uniting prāṇa with apāna. Similarly, during exhalation they offer apāna into prāṇa. During retention, restraining the movements of prāṇa and apāna, they become absorbed in prāṇāyāma. Others desiring control of the senses, with regulated and little food, offer the senses into the prāṇas which are sustained by the restriction of food. Since the functioning of the senses depends on prāṇa, when prāṇa becomes weak, the senses themselves become incapable of grasping their objects and merge into the prāṇas. ||29||

baladeva: Moreover, apāne etc. Thus others dedicated to prāṇāyāma practice in three ways: They offer the upward-moving prāṇa into the downward-moving apāna. During inhalation they unite prāṇa with apāna. Similarly they offer apāna into prāṇa, uniting apāna with prāṇa and expelling it outwards during exhalation. They restrain the movements of prāṇa and apāna, inhalation and exhalation, through retention. The outward movement of internal air through the nose and mouth is inhalation, the movement of prāṇa. The inward entrance of that which has gone out is exhalation, the movement of apāna. Their restraint is kumbhaka, which is of two types: Internal kumbhaka is restraint of inhalation and exhalation after filling with air. External kumbhaka is their restraint after expelling air. Others with regulated diet, practicing restriction of food, offer the senses into the prāṇas. When those (prāṇas) are sustained by little food, the senses which depend on them for their functioning become incapable of grasping objects and dissolve into them like drops of water poured on heated iron. ||29||

(4.30)

apare niyatāhārāḥ prāṇān prāṇeṣu juhvati |
sarve'py ete yajña-vido yajña-kṣapita-kalmaṣāḥ ||

śrīdhara: Thus he states the result for the twelve types of knowers of sacrifice mentioned: sarve'pi etc. Yajña-vidaḥ means those who obtain (vindanti) sacrifices, or those who know sacrifices. Yajña-kṣapita-kalmaṣāḥ means those whose impurities have been destroyed by sacrifices. ||30||

madhusūdana: Thus he states the result for the twelve types of knowers of sacrifice mentioned: sarve'pi etc. Yajña-vidaḥ means those who know or obtain sacrifices, the knowers and performers of sacrifices. Yajña-kṣapita-kalmaṣāḥ means those whose sins have been destroyed by the previously mentioned sacrifices. Yajña-śiṣṭāmṛta-bhujaḥ means those who eat food called amṛta in the time remaining after performing sacrifices. The meaning is that they all attain the eternal Brahman through purification of sattva and attainment of knowledge, becoming liberated from saṁsāra. ||30||

viśvanātha: Sarve'py ete yajña-vidaḥ means those obtaining the sacrifices with the characteristics mentioned, they attain Brahman through knowledge. Here he states the result not intended: Yajña-śiṣṭa means what remains after sacrifice, the amṛta which is the attainment of enjoyment, prosperity, supernatural powers etc., they enjoy that. ||30||

baladeva: Ete means those desiring control of the senses. Sarve'pi means the knowers of sacrifice. Yajña-kṣapita-kalmaṣāḥ means those whose impurities have been destroyed by those very sacrifices to gods etc. mentioned before. ||30||

(4.31)

Those who eat the nectar-like remnants of sacrifices go to the eternal Brahman. This world is not for one who does not perform sacrifice, how then the other, O best of the Kurus?

Śrīdhara: "Those who eat the nectar-like remnants of sacrifices" means those who, after performing sacrifices, eat the permissible food which is like nectar in the remaining time. They attain the eternal, everlasting Brahman through knowledge. He states the fault of not doing so in "This world is not". Even this human world of little pleasure does not exist for one without sacrifice, one who does not perform sacrifices. How then the other world of great pleasure? Thus sacrifices should be performed in all ways. This is the meaning. ||31||

Madhusūdana: Having stated the merit in connection, he states the fault in disconnection with "sacrifice" in half a verse. One who does not have even one among the stated sacrifices is without sacrifice. For him even this human world of little pleasure does not exist, being completely blameworthy. How then the other world attainable by special means, O best of the Kurus? ||31||

Viśvanātha: He states the unintended result thus: "they go to Brahman". He states the fault of not doing so with "This world is not". Even this human world of little pleasure does not exist. How then the world of gods etc. to be attained by him? This is the meaning. ||31||

Baladeva: He states the unintended result with "remnants of sacrifice". Those who enjoy the nectar-like remnants of sacrifice - food etc. and attainments of enjoyment, prosperity etc. He states the intended result with "they go". By the knowledge that accomplishes that, to Brahman - as stated before. ||30||

(4.32)

Thus, many types of sacrifices are spread at the mouth of the Veda. Know them all to be born of action. Knowing this, you shall be liberated.

śrīdharaḥ: Thus, many types - to praise the sacrifice of knowledge, he summarizes the sacrifices mentioned before with "Thus, many types". Spread at the mouth of the Veda (brahmaṇaḥ) - meaning directly prescribed by the Veda. Nevertheless, know all of them to be produced by actions of speech, mind and body, devoid of contact with the true nature of the self. Because the self is beyond the scope of action. Knowing thus, being established in knowledge, you will become liberated from saṃsāra (cycle of rebirth). ||32||

madhusūdanaḥ: Is this said by you merely through your own imagination, or is the Veda itself the authority here? He says "Thus" - Thus, as stated, many types, many kinds of sacrifices, in the form of all Vedic means for attaining prosperity, are spread, extended at the mouth, at the door of the Veda (brahmaṇaḥ). The meaning is that these are understood only through the door of the Veda. The Vedic statements are not quoted individually due to fear of elaboration. Know them, understand all those sacrifices to be born of action - arising from physical, verbal and mental actions, not born of the self. For the self is inactive, these are not its activities. But knowing thus - "I am inactive, indifferent" - you shall be liberated from this bondage of saṃsāra (cycle of rebirth). This is the remainder of the sentence. ||32||

viśvanāthaḥ: By the mouth of the Veda (brahmaṇaḥ) means clearly stated by the Veda itself. Born of action means produced by actions of speech, mind and body. ||32||

baladevaḥ: Thus - spread at the mouth of the Veda (brahmaṇaḥ). Clearly stated by it itself as means for attaining the distinct self. Born of action means produced by actions of speech, mind and body. Knowing thus, understanding them as stated by it as means, practicing them, having perceived the twofold self through the knowledge produced by that, you shall be liberated from saṃsāra (cycle of rebirth). ||32||

(4.33)

śreyān dravya-mayād yajñāj jñāna-yajñaḥ parantapa |
sarvaṁ karmākhilaṁ pārtha jñāne parisamāpyate ||

The jñāna-yajña (sacrifice of knowledge) is superior to the sacrifice made with material objects, O Parantapa. All actions in their entirety, O Pārtha, culminate in knowledge.

śrīdharaḥ: He states that the jñāna-yajña is superior to the karma-yajña in "śreyān" etc. The jñāna-yajña is superior to the sacrifice made with material objects, which is produced by non-self activity, such as rituals to deities. Although the jñāna-yajña also depends on mental activity, the knowledge of the true nature of the self is merely manifested in the transformation of the mind. It is not produced by it, hence the distinction from the material sacrifice. The reason for its superiority is that all actions in their entirety, along with their fruits, culminate in knowledge. The meaning is that they are included in it. As the śruti states: "Whatever good deeds people perform, all that it encompasses."

madhusūdanaḥ: When equality is obtained between self, action and knowledge due to their similar description, he states "śreyān" etc. It is superior, more praiseworthy, because it directly results in liberation. The jñāna-yajña alone is superior to all sacrifices characterized by material objects and devoid of knowledge, which result in worldly fruits. O Parantapa! Why is this so? Because all karma - Vedic rituals like iṣṭi (sacrifices), paśu (animal sacrifices), soma (soma sacrifices), and cayana (fire altar construction), as well as all smārta karma like meditation - culminates in that knowledge, the direct realization of the unity of Brahman and Ātman, by removing obstacles. As the śruti states: "Brahmins seek to know this through study of the Vedas, through sacrifice, charity, austerity with fasting" and "Through dharma one destroys sin." The superiority of knowledge is also due to the principle that "All expectations are like the horse in Vedic sacrificial injunctions" [Ve.Sū. 3.4.26].

viśvanāthaḥ: Among these, the jñāna-yajña described by "into the fire of Brahman" is superior even to the material sacrifice characterized as "the offering is Brahman, the oblation is Brahman". Why? Because when there is knowledge, all actions in their entirety become fruitful and are completed. The meaning is that after knowledge, karma does not remain.

baladevaḥ: The karma-yogas described earlier, being twofold like a forest due to containing contemplation of the distinct self, are praised for their knowledge aspect in "śreyān" etc. In the twofold karma, the knowledge aspect is superior to the material and fear aspects. "Material" also indicates sense restraint etc., as they are means to that. He elaborates on this - O Pārtha! When there is knowledge, all actions in their entirety along with their parts cease, as it is seen that when the fruit is obtained, the means cease.

(4.34)

Know that by prostration, by inquiry, and by service. The wise ones, who have realized the truth, will impart that knowledge to you.

Śrīdhara: He explains the means for such self-knowledge with "tat" etc. Know (viddhi) that knowledge, meaning obtain it. By prostration (praṇipātena) to the knowers, by bowing down. Then by inquiry (paripraśnena): "Whence is this saṁsāra of mine? How can it cease?" By such inquiry. And by service (sevayā), attending to the guru. The wise ones (jñāninaḥ) are those learned in scripture. The seers of truth (tattva-darśinaḥ) are those who have direct experience. They will impart knowledge to you through instruction. ||34||

Madhusūdana: The most immediate means for attaining such knowledge is stated with "tat viddhi" etc. Obtain that knowledge which is the fruit of all actions by approaching teachers, prostrating to them - prostration means falling down low, a full prostration - by thorough inquiry with many questions like "Who am I? How am I bound? By what means can I be liberated?" etc., by service, acting favorably towards them in every way. Thus, when you are receptive through exceptional devotion and faith, those who are wise (jñāninaḥ), skilled in texts, sentences, logic etc., and seers of truth (tattva-darśinaḥ) who have realized directly, will impart to you through instruction that knowledge of the Supreme Self which directly leads to liberation. The Lord's view is that only knowledge imparted by those with direct realization culminates in the fruit, not by those without it even if skilled in texts, sentences, logic etc. This agrees with the śruti: "For the knowledge of That, one should approach a guru who is learned in the scriptures and established in Brahman, with fuel in hand." [Mu.U. 1.1.12] There also, "learned in the scriptures" is explained as one who has studied the Vedas, and "established in Brahman" as one who has directly realized Brahman. The plural here referring to teachers is for showing great respect even for one, not to indicate plurality. It should be understood that once the knowledge of truth arises from a single teacher who has realized the truth, approaching other teachers for that purpose is not appropriate. ||34||

Viśvanātha: He explains the method for attaining that knowledge with "tat" etc. By prostration (praṇipātena), bowing down like a stick to the guru who imparts knowledge. By inquiry (paripraśnena): "O Lord! Whence is this saṁsāra of mine? How will it cease?" And by service (sevayā), attending to him. As per the śruti: "For the knowledge of That, one should approach a guru who is learned in the scriptures and established in Brahman, with fuel in hand." [Mu.U. 1.1.12] ||34||

Baladeva: Having thus instructed about the knowledge of the jīva's nature and its means completely, now teaching about knowledge through worship of the Supreme's nature, he states it is obtained through association with the saintly with "tat" etc. That knowledge related to the Supreme Self, for which both have been instructed by me to you starting with "Know that which is indestructible" [Gītā 2.17], you who have understood your own nature should know (viddhi), obtain, from the wise saintly persons who are pleased by prostration etc. There, prostration (praṇipāta) is bowing down like a stick. Service (sevā) is attending to them like a servant. Thorough inquiry (paripraśna) is various questions about His nature, qualities, and glories.

If it is said they will not speak being indifferent, to that he says "upadekṣyanti" etc. Those wise ones (jñāninaḥ) who have realized their own nature, seeing your desire to know through prostration etc., will impart that related knowledge to you who are suitable. The seers of truth (tattva-darśinaḥ) means those who propagate that knowledge, that is, the compassionate ones.

If it is said that "tat" here should refer to knowledge of the jīva as that is the context, no. Because the Supreme Self is also transcendental, as stated in "Never did I not exist" [Gītā 2.12], "Let him sit focusing on Me" [Gītā 2.61], "Though I am unborn and imperishable in nature" [Gītā 4.6] etc. Thus the author of the sūtras states: "And it refers to another purpose." [Ve.Sū. 1.3.20] Otherwise there would be contradiction with the upcoming glory of knowledge which agrees with śruti and sūtra. This has been well explained. ||34||

(4.35)

Having known which, O Pāṇḍava, you will not again fall into such delusion,
By which you will see all beings without exception in the Self, and then in Me.

śrīdharaḥ: He describes the fruit of knowledge in one and a half verses beginning with "yaj jñātvā". Having attained this knowledge, you will not again fall into delusion caused by killing relatives and so on. The reason for this is - by this knowledge you will see all beings like fathers and sons, which are manifestations of your own ignorance, as non-different from your own Self. Then you will see the Self as non-different from Me, the Supreme Self. This is the meaning. ||35||

madhusūdanaḥ: Thus, what would happen by forcefully producing knowledge? To answer this, he says "yaj jñātvā". Having attained that knowledge previously mentioned, taught by teachers. Like "odana-pākaṁ pacati", the same root is used. The usage is with general intention. You will not again fall into such delusion, confusion caused by killing relatives and so on, O Scorcher of Foes!

Why is this so? Because by this very knowledge you will see all beings like fathers and sons, without exception, from Brahmā down to a blade of grass, which are manifestations of your own ignorance, non-differently in the Self, in you who are denoted by 'you', and then also in Me, Lord Vāsudeva, denoted by 'that', who am the ultimate reality devoid of difference and the substratum. Because the imagined has no existence apart from the substratum. The meaning is that having directly realized Me, Lord Vāsudeva, as the Self, when all ignorance is destroyed, its effects, the beings, will not remain. ||35||

viśvanāthaḥ: He describes the fruit of knowledge in one and a half verses beginning with "yaj jñātvā". Having known this knowledge that the Self is distinct from the body, you will not attain delusion, which is a property of the inner organ. And by the removal of delusion, due to gaining the naturally and eternally established knowledge of the Self, you will see all beings without exception, humans, animals, etc., as separately existing in the Self, the individual soul, as limiting adjuncts. Then you will see them existing in Me, the supreme cause, as effects. ||35||

baladevaḥ: He describes the fruit of the aforementioned knowledge with "yad". Having known, realized this knowledge related to the Supreme Self, which is preceded by knowledge of the individual soul, you will not again fall into such delusion caused by killing relatives and so on. How will I not fall into it? To answer this, he says "yena". By which knowledge you will see all beings, bodies of gods, humans, etc., without exception, meaning all, existing in the Self, in one's own nature, as limiting adjuncts, separately. Then you will see them existing in Me, the Lord of all, the cause of all, as effects. This is what is meant: The individual souls distinct from both bodies, for those averse to Hari, attachments to bodies and bodily things are created by Hari's māyā (illusion) alone. The appearance of the state of killer and killed is also by that alone. For those of pure nature, there is no connection with those. The Supreme Self, who is indeed the Lord of all, for the souls dependent on Him, according to their respective karmas, produces their respective bodies and senses, their bodily sustenance, and their respective enjoyments of happiness in other worlds, but when worshipped grants liberation. Thus for the knower there is no scope for delusion. ||35||

(4.36)

Even if you are the most sinful of all sinners, you shall cross over all sin by the raft of knowledge alone.

Śrīdhara: Moreover, "even if" etc. Even if you are exceedingly sinful compared to all sinners, still you shall completely and effortlessly cross over the entire ocean of sin by the raft of knowledge alone, by the boat of knowledge alone.

Madhusūdana: Moreover, listen to the greatness of knowledge, "even if" etc. The particles "api cet" are used to indicate the acceptance of an improbable situation. Even though this situation is not really possible, it is accepted hypothetically to explain the result of knowledge. Even if you were to be the most sinful, more sinful than all sinners, still you shall cross over all vṛjina (sin), which is like an extremely difficult-to-cross ocean, by the raft of knowledge alone, not by any other means. Using knowledge alone as a raft or boat, you shall cross over completely, effortlessly, and in a way that precludes returning. By the word vṛjina here, karma in the form of dharma and adharma, which results in saṃsāra, is meant, because for one desiring liberation, even merit is undesirable like sin.

Viśvanātha: He speaks of the greatness of knowledge in "even if" etc. Even if you are exceedingly sinful compared to all sinners, still - here, with so much sin present, how is purification of the inner organ possible? And without that, how can knowledge arise? Nor is such misconduct possible for one in whom knowledge has arisen. Therefore, here the explanation of Śrī Madhusūdana Sarasvatī is: The particles "api cet" are used to indicate the acceptance of an improbable situation. Even though this situation is not really possible, it is accepted hypothetically to explain the result of knowledge.

Baladeva: He speaks of the power of knowledge in "even if" etc. Even if you are exceedingly sinful compared to all sinners, still you shall cross over all vṛjina (sin), all sin which is like a difficult-to-cross ocean, by the raft of knowledge with the characteristics mentioned.

(4.37)

Just as a blazing fire reduces firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge reduce all karma to ashes.

śrīdharaḥ: Just as a blazing fire reduces firewood to ashes, so does the seeker of liberation who has attained self-knowledge in time find and obtain [that knowledge] in the great Self. This is the meaning.

madhusūdanaḥ: Thinking that karmas may not be destroyed when crossing [the ocean] like an ocean, he gives another example saying "Just as firewood". Just as blazing fire reduces firewood to ashes, O Arjuna, so does the fire of knowledge reduce all karmas - both sinful and meritorious, except those that have begun to bear fruit - to ashes, that is, destroys them by destroying ignorance which is their cause. Thus the śruti (scripture) says:

"The knot of the heart is cut, all doubts are resolved, and one's karmas are exhausted when That which is both high and low is seen." [MU 2.2.8]

The sūtra (aphorism) states: "On attaining that [knowledge], [there is] non-attachment and destruction of the latter and former [karmas]. This is declared [in scripture]. For the other also, there is thus non-attachment, but [only] on the fall [of the body]." [VS 4.1.13-14]

Another sūtra says: "But only those [karmas] that have not begun to bear fruit are destroyed at that time, for that is the limit." [VS 4.1.15]

But those [karmas] that produced the body which gave rise to knowledge are destroyed only at the end of that body. As the śruti says: "For him there is delay only so long as he is not liberated [from the body]." [ChU 6.14.2]

And the sūtra states: "But the others [karmas] he exhausts by experiencing [their fruits] and then attains [liberation]." [VS 4.1.19]

For those with special duties, the very [karmas] that produced the body which gave rise to knowledge also produce other bodies, as in the case of Vasiṣṭha, Apāntaratamas and others. Thus the sūtra says: "For those with special duties, [there is] continuance as long as the duty [lasts]." [VS 3.3.32]

A special duty is a powerful karma that has begun to bear fruit and produces many bodies. This applies only to worshippers, not to others. Karmas that have not begun to bear fruit are destroyed; those that have begun to bear fruit remain until their enjoyment is completed. There is no distinction whether the enjoyment is through one body or many. More details should be seen in the source texts.

viśvanāthaḥ: He states with an example that for one with a pure inner organ, knowledge destroys only those karmas that have not begun to bear fruit: "Just as" etc. samiddhaḥ means blazing.

baladevaḥ: It was said that sinful karmas are destroyed by knowledge of Brahman. Now he says that meritorious karmas are also destroyed: "Just as" etc. Just as blazing fire reduces firewood to ashes, so does the fire of knowledge - the fire of experiencing the Self and the Supreme - reduce all karmas, both meritorious and sinful, except those that have begun to bear fruit, to ashes. Of these, it burns up accumulated karmas that have not begun to bear fruit like a ball of cotton; it renders ineffective karmas being performed like a water drop on a lotus leaf; but karmas that have begun to bear fruit, though greatly weakened by its power, are maintained in the knower of the Self by the will of Hari for the purpose of setting an example. The śruti also says: "He crosses over both of these - merit and sin." [ChU 5.24.3] This means the experiencer of Brahman crosses over, i.e. transcends, both of these - meritorious and sinful karmas, accumulated and being performed. Thus the author of the sūtras says: "On attaining that [knowledge], [there is] non-attachment and destruction of the latter and former [karmas]. This is declared [in scripture]." [VS 4.1.13] and so on.

(4.38)

Indeed, there is nothing in this world as purifying as knowledge. One who has become perfected in yoga finds that knowledge within himself in due course of time.

śrīdharaḥ: He states the reason for this with "na hi" etc. Purifying means causing purity. Among austerities, yoga, etc. in this world, there is nothing equal to knowledge. Then why don't all people practice self-knowledge alone? To answer this, he says "tat svayam" etc. in one and a half verses. That knowledge regarding the self, one who has become perfected through karma yoga over a long time, having attained fitness, obtains effortlessly by himself. The meaning is that it cannot be obtained without karma yoga. ||38||

madhusūdanaḥ: Since it is thus, therefore "na hi" etc. Indeed, there is nothing as purifying as knowledge, nothing that causes purity, that exists in this world, in the Veda or in worldly affairs. This is because anything other than knowledge cannot remove ignorance and thus cannot remove sin from its root, and due to the presence of the cause, sin arises again. But through knowledge, by the removal of ignorance, sin is removed from its root. Thus nothing else is equal to it.

Why doesn't that knowledge regarding the self arise suddenly for everyone? To answer this, he says that knowledge in due course of time, one who is perfected in yoga, perfected through the previously mentioned karma yoga, purified, having attained fitness, finds within himself, in his inner organ. The meaning is that one who has not attained fitness does not find it as given by another or as belonging to another. ||38||

viśvanāthaḥ: Among those endowed with austerities, yoga, etc. in this world, there is nothing as purifying as knowledge. That knowledge is not easily attainable for all. But only one who is fully perfected through yoga, through karma yoga free from desire, and that too only in due course of time, not immediately, finds it arisen within himself. The idea is that it is not obtained merely by accepting sannyāsa. ||38||

baladevaḥ: "Na hi" etc. Because there is no austerity, pilgrimage, etc. as purifying as knowledge. Therefore that knowledge which destroys all sin is not easily attainable for all, but only one who is perfected, fully matured, through yoga, through desireless action, and that too only in due course of time, not immediately, finds it obtained within himself. The meaning is that it is not obtained merely by accepting the life of a wandering mendicant. ||38||

(4.39)

śraddhāvāṁl labhate jñānaṁ tatparaḥ saṁyatendriyaḥ |
jñānaṁ labdhvā parāṁ śāntim acireṇādhigacchati ||

śrīdharaḥ: Furthermore, śraddhāvān means one who has faith, with a belief in the teachings of the guru. tat-paras means single-minded devotion to that. And saṁyatendriyaś means with controlled senses. He attains that knowledge. Not others. Therefore, before attaining knowledge through the wealth of faith and other qualities, karma yoga alone should be practiced for purification. But after attaining knowledge, he has nothing to do, as it is said that having attained knowledge, he quickly attains liberation. ||39||

madhusūdanaḥ: The means by which knowledge is attained exclusively is said to be even nearer than the aforementioned prostration, etc., as stated in śraddhāvān. A person with śraddhā (faith), which is the form of valid knowledge in the words of the guru and Vedānta that "this is thus," attains knowledge. Even such a person might be lazy, so it is said tat-paraḥ, meaning extremely devoted to the means of knowledge such as serving the guru. Even one with faith and devotion might have uncontrolled senses, so it is said saṁyatendriyaḥ, meaning one whose senses are withdrawn from objects. One who possesses these three qualities certainly attains knowledge. Prostration, etc., being external, may be uncertain due to the possibility of deceit, etc. But faith, etc., is the exclusive means, that is the meaning.

Having attained knowledge through such means, one quickly, without delay, attains parāṁ śāntim (supreme peace), which is liberation in the form of cessation of ignorance and its effects. Just as a lamp, merely by its appearance, removes darkness without depending on any auxiliary, similarly knowledge, merely by its appearance, removes ignorance without depending on any contemplation, etc. This is the idea. ||39||

viśvanāthaḥ: Then, being of what nature and when does one attain it? To this, he says śraddhāvān, etc. One who has śraddhā (faith), which is the belief that knowledge arises only through purification of the inner organ by selfless action, as per the meaning of the scriptures. tat-paras means devoted to its practice. Even such a person, when he becomes saṁyatendriyaḥ (one with controlled senses), then [he attains] parāṁ śāntim (supreme peace), the destruction of worldly existence. ||39||

baladevaḥ: Being of what nature and when does one attain it? He says śraddhāvān, etc. Firm belief that knowledge arises when the heart is purified by selfless action is śraddhā (faith). One who has that. tat-paras means devoted to its practice. Even such a person, when he becomes saṁyatendriyaḥ (one with controlled senses), then [he attains] parāṁ śāntim (supreme peace), liberation. ||39||

(4.40)

The ignorant and the faithless, as well as the doubting soul, perish. For the doubting soul there is neither this world, nor the next, nor happiness.

śrīdharaḥ: After speaking of one qualified for knowledge, he now speaks of the opposite, one who is unqualified, with "The ignorant, etc." The ignorant is one who does not understand the meaning taught by the guru. Even if some knowledge arises, he is also faithless in it. Even if faith arises, he whose mind is overcome with doubt thinking "Will this be accomplished for me or not?" perishes. He falls from his own purpose. Among these three, the doubting soul perishes completely. For him this world does not exist due to the failure to earn wealth, marry, etc. Nor does the next world exist due to the non-fulfillment of dharma. Nor is there happiness, as even enjoyment is impossible due to doubt itself. ||40||

madhusūdanaḥ: And here doubt should not be entertained, why? "The ignorant, etc." The ignorant is one devoid of self-knowledge due to not having studied the scriptures. The faithless is one who has the atheistic notion that takes the form of the opposite view that "This is certainly not so" regarding the meaning of the guru's Vedānta statements. The doubting soul, whose mind is overcome with doubt everywhere thinking "Is this so or not?", perishes, falls from his own purpose. The use of the two "and"s in "The ignorant and the faithless perish" is for stating their inferiority in relation to the doubting soul. Why? Indeed, the doubting soul is the most sinful in all respects because for him this human world does not exist due to the absence of earning wealth, etc., the next world does not exist due to the absence of dharma, knowledge, etc. of heaven, liberation, etc. There is no happiness from eating, etc. for the doubting soul whose mind is overcome with doubt in all matters. For the ignorant and faithless, though the next world does not exist, the human world and happiness from eating, etc. do exist. But the doubting soul, being deprived of all three, is the most sinful in all respects - this is the meaning. ||40||

viśvanāthaḥ: After speaking of one qualified for knowledge, he now speaks of one with the opposite qualification with "The ignorant, etc." The ignorant is foolish like animals, etc. The faithless, even with knowledge of scripture, seeing the mutual contradictions of various doctrines, is not confident in anything. Even with faith, the doubting soul has a mind overcome with doubt thinking "Will this be accomplished for me or not?" Among these also, he especially condemns the doubting soul with "For him neither, etc." ||40||

baladevaḥ: Having stated one qualified for knowledge and its fruit, he now states the opposite and its fruit with "The ignorant, etc." The ignorant is devoid of scriptural knowledge like animals, etc. The faithless, even with scriptural knowledge, is not confident in anything due to contradictory doctrines. Even with faith, the doubting soul, whose mind doubts thinking "Will this be accomplished for me or not?", perishes, falls from his own purpose. Among these also, he condemns the doubting soul with "For him neither, etc." For the doubting soul, neither this material world, nor the next non-material world, nor any happiness exists. For happiness is produced by scriptural action, and that action is preceded by clear self-knowledge. How can that exist for one who doubts in that? - this is the meaning. ||40||

(4.41)

yoga-saṁnyasta-karmāṇaṁ jñāna-saṁchinna-saṁśayam |
ātmavantaṁ na karmāṇi nibadhnanti dhanañjaya ||

śrīdharaḥ: He summarizes the twofold devotion to Brahman, consisting of karma and jñāna, as explained in the two previous chapters, with a distinction between the earlier and later stages, using two verses beginning with "yoga". Actions do not bind one who has renounced actions through yoga, which is a form of worship of the Supreme Lord. Furthermore, actions do not bind one who is self-controlled and whose doubts have been cut asunder by knowledge, that is, self-realization, and who is free from the conceit of identifying with the body and so on. Such actions may be for the welfare of the world or natural to oneself. ||41||

madhusūdanaḥ: To remove such doubt, which is the root of all misfortune, he states the means for self-realization, summarizing the twofold devotion to Brahman consisting of karma and jñāna, as explained in the two previous chapters, with a distinction between the earlier and later stages, using two verses beginning with "yoga". One who has renounced actions through yoga, meaning either offering actions to the Lord with an attitude of equanimity, which is a form of worship, or abandoning actions through the realization of the highest truth. How can one renounce actions through yoga when doubt exists? Thus he says "whose doubts have been cut asunder by knowledge," meaning by self-realization. How can knowledge arise when one is subject to sense objects? Thus he says "self-controlled," meaning always vigilant. Actions, whether for the welfare of the world or mere restless activity, do not bind such a person who is vigilant, knowledgeable, free from doubt, and has renounced actions through yoga. They do not give rise to a body, whether undesirable, desirable, or mixed, O Dhanañjaya. ||41||

viśvanāthaḥ: Such a person attains freedom from action, he says. One who has renounced actions through yoga, meaning renunciation immediately following selfless action yoga. Then, after the practice of knowledge, one whose doubts have been cut asunder. Self-controlled, meaning one who has realized the inner self. Actions do not bind such a person. ||41||

baladevaḥ: Such a person attains the state characterized by freedom from action, he says with "yoga". One who has renounced actions through yoga, as stated earlier in "Established in yoga, perform actions," meaning actions that have taken the form of knowledge. One whose doubts have been cut asunder by the knowledge I have taught. Self-controlled, meaning one who has perceived the self. Actions do not bind such a person, as they have been removed by knowledge. ||42||

(4.42


Therefore, cut asunder the doubt in your heart born of ignorance with the sword of knowledge about the Self. Establish yourself in yoga and arise, O Bhārata. ||42||

śrīdharaḥ: Therefore, since it is so, having cut asunder this doubt residing in the heart, born of ignorance about the Self, which is the cause of sorrow etc., with the sword of discrimination between the body and the Self, take refuge in karma-yoga which is the means to knowledge of the supreme Self. And first, arise for the battle at hand. By addressing him as "O Bhārata", it is shown that fighting is his duty as a kṣatriya (warrior). ||42||

I bow to that Śauri (Kṛṣṇa) who cuts asunder doubts, who has spoken of two types of steadfastness - based on karma and jñāna (knowledge), according to the stages of life etc.

Thus ends the fourth chapter named Jñāna-yoga in the Subodhinī, the commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā composed by Śrīdhara Svāmī. ||4||

madhusūdanaḥ: Therefore, cut asunder the doubt in your heart born of ignorance with the sword of knowledge about the Self. Establish yourself in yoga and arise, O Bhārata. ||42||

Thus ends the fourth chapter named Brahmārpaṇa-yoga in the Śrīmad-bhagavad-gītā-gūḍhārtha-dīpikā composed by Śrī Madhusūdana Sarasvatī, disciple of Śrī Viśveśvara Sarasvatī, the paramahaṁsa parivrajaka ācārya. ||4||

viśvanāthaḥ: He concludes with "Therefore" etc. Having cut asunder the doubt residing in the heart, take refuge in yoga, i.e. selfless karma-yoga. Arise means to fight, that is the idea. ||42||

Among the means to liberation mentioned, knowledge is praised here.
But karma alone is the means to knowledge - this is determined as the meaning of the chapter.
Thus in the Sārārtha-darśinī, delighting the hearts of devotees,
This fourth chapter of the Gītā is indeed connected, connected for the saintly. ||4||

baladevaḥ: Therefore etc. Having cut asunder the doubt about the Self residing in the heart with the sword of knowledge instructed by me, establish yourself in yoga, the selfless karma instructed by me. For that purpose, arise. ||42||

Karma has two parts like grain; knowledge is superior to the material part,
Like rice is to husk - this is the conclusion of the fourth chapter. ||4||

Thus ends the fourth chapter in the commentary on the Bhagavad-gītā Upaniṣad. ||4||