rīmad Bhagavad Gītā 21 страница

niścayaṃ śrṇu me tatra tyāge bharata sattama | tyāgo hi puruṣa-vyāghra tri-vidhaḥ saṃprakīrtitaḥ || 4 ||

4. Listen to My verdict, O Arjuna (Tiger-among-men), regarding relinquishment (Tyāga) for relinquishment is declared to be of three kinds.

Commentary

The term ‘Tyāga’ has been used by Krishna in respect of actions prescribed by the Scriptures from three points of view:– (1) as referring to results, (2) as referring to the acts themselves and, (3) as referring to agency.

• The relinquishment of results consists in the conviction that 'Heaven and such other [beneficial] results arising from acts do not belong to Me.'

• Renunciation of acts is the complete rejection of the sense of possessiveness in regard to one's acts. This sense of possessiveness appears as a conviction that — 'I am undertaking these works because they are the means for achieving my own personal goals.'

• Renunciation of agency is correctly ascribing all instrumentality to the Supreme Lord of all.

yajñā dāna tapaḥ karma na tyājyaṃ kāryam eva tat | yajño dānaṃ tapaścaiva pāvanāni manīṣiṇām || 5 ||

5. The acts of yajña, philanthropy and self-discipline should not be relinquished; but should be performed. For yajña, philanthropy and self-discipline are the purifiers of the wise.

Commentary

Why? Because these three practices performed consistently and perpetually until death are an aid to the erasure of previous Karmas which stand in the way of the fulfilment of one’s spiritual development.

etānyapi tu karmāṇi saṅgaṃ tvyaktvā phalāni ca | kartavyānīti me pārthas niścitaṃ matam uttamam || 6 ||

6. It is My considered and final opinion that even these [three] practices should be done, O Arjuna, relinquishing all attachment and the desire for reward.

Commentary

They should be performed regularly throughout life by one who desires Liberation, as an adjunct to spiritual practice, renouncing attachment, that is, the self-centred motivation regarding works and their results.

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

7. But the renunciation (sannyāsa) of obligatory acts (nitya karma) is not proper. Relinquishment (Tyāga) of these through delusion is declared to be in the Mode of Tamas.

Commentary

The synonymity of these two terms Tyāga and sannyāsa is conclusively established by this verse. Obligatory acts (should not be rejected for without works even the sustenance of the body would be impossible, as already stated:—

'From inaction, not even the body can be sustained' (3.8).

Nitya karmas are those acts concerned with acts of daily living such as the Five Great Sacrifices (Pañca Mahā Yajnas — see footnote to Chap 3:8) in which offerings are made and the remnants consumed as a sacramental meal. Nurturing the body by eating the remnants of food offered to the Lord produces a positive mind-set according to the Vedas. Therefore enlightenment in the form of direct perception of Brahman, is dependent on the purity of diet. The relinquishment of these obligatory duties, which contribute to the development of wisdom, through the misconception that they perpetuate material bondage is a characteristic of the Mode of Ignorance.

duḥkham ityeva yat karma kāya kleśa-bhayāt tyajet | sa kṛtvā rājasaṃ tyāgaṃ naiva tyāga phalaṃ labhet || 8 ||

8. One who renounces works as being bothersome from apprehension of physical hardship, acts in the Mode of Rajas and will not gain the merit of renunciation (Tyāga).

Commentary

Although works constitute an indirect means for Liberation, yet they produce frustration, since they involve collecting materials making a effort which is troublesome and cause physical stress through strenuous exertion. If, on account of such apprehension, one decides that the practice of meditation alone should be adopted for perfection in Yoga, and abandons rites like the Five Great Sacrifices — such renunciation is made in the Mode of Passion. Since this is not in accordance with the design of the Scriptures. In fact, works themselves do not directly purify the mind but only indirectly through channeling the grace of God.

kāryam ityeva yat karma niyataṃ kriyate’rjuna | saṅgaṃ tyaktvā phalaṃ caiva sa tyāgaḥ sātviko mataḥ || 9 ||

9. When obligatory works are performed merely as duty, O Arjuna, renouncing attachment and also fruits, such relinquishment is regarded as Sattvic.

na dveṣṭy-akuśalaṃ karma kuśale nānuṣajjate | tyāgī sattva samāviṣṭo medhāvī-cchinna saṃśayaḥ || 10 ||

10. The one who has renounced, being wise and imbued with Sattva, free from doubts neither hates disagreeable work nor clings to an agreeable one.

Commentary

One who is thus, filled with the Mode of Harmony and wise, ie., with the knowledge of reality as it is, and as a consequence of it, is free from all doubts.

Disagreeable work (akuśalam karma) are those which produce undesirable results; and agreeable acts (kuśalam karma) are those which bring about desirable results.

In respect of both these types of works there is neither resentment nor enthusiasm because of (a) the absence of the feeling of possession and (b) the forsaking of all goals other than the Ultimate Truth (Brahman) as well as (c) the rejection of the notion of agency.

na hi deha-bhṛtā śakyaṃ tyaktuṃ karmāṇy-aśeṣataḥ | yastu karma-phala-tyāgī sa tyāgīty-abhidhīyate || 11 ||

11. For, it is impossible for an embodied being to abandon work entirely. But one who foregoes the rewards of works, is called a renunciate.

Commentary

It is impossible for one who has a body and has to maintain it, to abandon all actions; for eating, drinking etc., required for nourishing the body and other acts connected therewith are unavoidable. For the same reason the Five Great Sacrifices etc., are also indispensable.

Since the topic was commenced with the declaration:— 'For renunciation (Tyāga) is declared to be of three kinds' (18.4). The reference in this verse to renunciation of rewards is illustrative; — it implies also the renunciation of the idea of agency as well as attachment to the works themselves.

An objection may be raised to this statement thus:— “Sacrifices such as Agnihotra, the sacrifices of the full and new moon, the Jyotistoma etc., and also the Five Great Sacrifices are enjoined by the Shastras only because of their results like the attainment of heaven. Even the obligatory (nitya) and periodic (naimittika) ceremonies are enjoined because of their rewards, as implied in the following passage:— ''the world of Prajāpati is obtained by the householders” (V.P., 1.6.37). Therefore, as all work is understood to be directed at specific results, it is inevitable that both agreeable and disagreeable results will accrue, even though the actions may be performed without any desire for rewards, just as a seed sown must grow into a tree and bear fruit. Hence, one who aspires for Liberation should relinquish all works, because the results are incompatible with Liberation.” Sri Krishna answers such objections:—

aniṣṭam iṣṭaṃ miśraṃ ca trividhaṃ karmaṇaḥ phalam | bhavaty-atyāgināṃ pretya na tu saṃnyāsināṃ kvacit || 12 ||

12. Undesirable, desirable and mixed — thus threefold is the result of work that accrues after death to those who have not renounced; but to those who have renounced, there is none whatsoever.

Commentary

The ‘undesirable result’ is Purgatory [and other negative Karmic states], ‘the desirable’ is heaven [and various positive Karmic states], ‘the mixed’ is progeny, and other material benefits [such as cows, food etc.], which are also mixed with some undesirable results. Those who have not abandoned the idea of agency, possessiveness and desire for rewards — obtain these three types of consequences after death. The meaning of ‘after death’ (Pretya) may also be understood as ‘following the performance of actions’. But to those who have relinquished the sense of agency etc., no such results, which are a hindrance to final Liberation are accrued.

The purport is this: — Sacrifices, charity and self-discipline, must certainly be performed throughout life and are necessary for achieving one’s material goals; but in regard to Liberation from Samsāra their application is different. On the surface these practices appear to be the same in both cases (material gain and Liberation), but their end result differs according to the motive. Their application to the process of Liberation is indicated in such texts as —

'The Brahmins desire to know Him by the study of the Vedas, by sacrifices, by philanthropy, by self-discipline associated with fasting' (Br. Up., 4.4.22).

But here Sri Krishna enjoins the performance of work without the idea of agency or motive.

Sri Krishna now teaches how one can realise that one is not the agent, by attributing all agency to God, the Supreme Being and the Inner Ruler. By cultivating this attitude, one can attain freedom from possessiveness with regard to actions and their rewards. For it is the Supreme Being who performs all actions through the individual Selves who are His expressions. The organs, bodies and life-breaths (prāṇa) of all embodied beings are His vestures. The purpose of their existence is for His pleasure alone. Therefore, even the appeasement of hunger etc., and such other acts of daily living are all considered as the means for accomplishing the pleasure of the Supreme Lord Himself.

pañcaitāni mahābāho kāraṇāni nibodha me |

sāṅkhye kṛtānte proktāni siddhaye sarva karmaṇām || 13 ||

13. Learn from Me, O Arjuna, these five causes which that are considered in reasoned deliberation (Saṅkhya-krtānta) to be responsible for the accomplishment of all works.

Commentary

‘Saṅkhya’ here means the reasoning faculty. ‘Saṅkhya-krtānta’ means those conclusions which are arrived at, after rational and intelligent deliberation in accordance with the Vedic teachings on the nature of the things as they really are. There are considered to be five factors which contribute to the actualisation all works.

adhiṣṭhānaṃ tathā kartā karaṇaṃ ca pṛthag vidham | vividhāśca pṛthak-ceṣṭā daivaṃ caivātra pañcamam || 14 ||

14. The seat of action (the body) and likewise the agent, the various organs, the different and distinctive functions of Prāṇa (vital force) and also the presiding deity is the fifth among these. śarīra vāṅg-manobhir yat karma prārabhate naraḥ | nyāyyaṃ vā viparītaṃ vā pañcaite tasya hetavaḥ || 15 ||

15. For whatever work one undertakes by body, speech and mind, whether right or wrong, these five are its basis.

Commentary

These five factors are the basis of all actions performed by means of the body, mind or speech, whether they are authorised by the Shastras or not.

(1) The body, which is a combination of the 'five great elements' is known as the seat of action (adhiṣṭhānam), since it is governed by the individual Self.

(2) The ‘doer’ is the individual Jivātman. In the Vedanta-Sutras it is declared that the individual Self is the knower and the doer

(3) The various organs are the five motor organs; speech, hands, feet, reproductive system and alimentary system along with the mind. They are varied in accordance with their distinct functions in accomplishing actions.

(4) The unique and distinctive functions of Prāṇa (vital force) — here the expression 'functions' (Ceṣṭa) refers to all its several dynamics which sustain the body and senses through its divisions of Prāṇa, Apāṇa, Vyāna, Udāna and Samāna.

(5) the Presiding Deity (daivam) is the Supreme Self, the Inner Ruler, who is the main ‘cause’ in carrying out the action.

It has been already affirmed that:— 'I am seated in the hearts of all. From Me proceed memory, knowledge and their absence also' (15.15), and Sri Krishna will later say:— 'The Lord, O Arjuna, lives in the heart of every being causing them to revolve by His power as if mounted on a machine' (18.61). The agency of the individual Self is dependent on the Supreme Self as established in the aphorism:—

'But (the power of being the doer) is from the Supreme, because the Veda says so' (B.S., 2.3.40).

Now an objection may be raised in this way:— "If the agency of the individual Self is dependent on the Supreme Being then the Scriptures containing injunctions and prohibitions are worthless because the individual Self cannot be charged with moral responsibility". This objection is satisfactorily answered by the author of the Brahma-

Sutras in the aphorism:—

'But He requires the individual Self to make an effort in order that the injunctions and prohibitions of Shastra should not be redundant' (B.S.2.3.41).

The general paradigm is this:— By means of the senses, body etc., provided by the Supreme Being, supported by Him and empowered by Him — the individual begins, of its own free will, the effort of directing the body, senses etc., in the performance of actions. The Jīva itself, of its own free will, is responsible for activity, since the Supreme Being, abiding within, impels it to act only in the sense of granting His permission. Just as projects such as moving heavy stones and trees are collectively the labour of many persons who are all equally responsible for the effect as a group, yet each one of them individually is also responsible for it by being subject to positive and negative commands (by the managing director).

tatraivaṃ sati kartāram ātmānaṃ kevalaṃ tu yaḥ | paśyat yat kṛta buddhitvān na sa paśyati durmatiḥ || 16 ||

16. Now such being the case, the fool who sees only the Self as the agent on account of undeveloped intellect — does not see at all.

Commentary

In order to do anything the Jīvātman requires the consent of the Paramātman. Such being the case, if one regards the Jīvātman as the sole agent, due to an undeveloped intellect, one does not see reality as it actually is.

yasya nāhaṅkṛto bhāvo buddhir yasya na lipyate | hatvāpi sa imāṃ-llokān na hanti na nibadhyate || 17 ||

17. He who is free from the egoistic notion and whose understanding is not tainted — though he slays all these men, he slays not, nor is he bound.

Commentary

He who is free from the egoistic notion of being the sole agent is therefore not tainted by self-conceit. He has arrived at the logical conclusion that — 'As I am not the agent of this work, its results are extraneous to me; so this work does not belong to me'— such a person, is not bound by this enterprise known as ‘battle’. In other words he does not experience the karma of such actions.

jñānaṃ jñeyaṃ pari-jñātā trividhā karma codanā | karaṇaṃ karma karteti trividhaḥ karma saṅgrahaḥ || 18 ||

18. Knowing, the knowable and the knower are the threefold stimulus to action. The instrument, the act and the agent are the threefold basis of action.

Commentary

'Knowing' means the knowledge about the work which ought to be performed. The 'knowable' is the work which ought to be performed. 'The knower' is the person who understands this work. The meaning is that in the [Vedic paradigm] the injunctions to do [ritual] acts, are a combination of these three. Among these three factors, action itself, which is the object of knowledge, is briefly described as being threefold — the instrument, action and the agent. The ‘instrument’ consists of the materials and implements which are the means [of the ritual act]. The ‘action’ consists of the [actual] sacrifice etc. The ‘agent’ is the performer [of the sacrifice].

(This Vedic Paradigm is intended to be used as model for all acts — spiritual as well as mundane.

Ed.) jñānaṃ karma ca kartā ca tridhaiva guṇa-bhedataḥ | procyate guṇa saṅkhyāne yathāvac-chṛṇu tāny-api || 19 ||

19. Knowledge, act and actor are declared, according to the Doctrine of the Gunas (Sankhya philosophy) to be of three kinds, according to the Modal Differences. Listen to a description of them as they really are.

The Threefold Division of Knowledge

sarva-bhūteṣu yenaikaṃ bhāvam avyayam īkṣate | avibhaktaṃ vibhakteṣu taj-jñānaṃ viddhi sātvikam || 20 ||

20. That knowledge which reveals one immutable reality in all beings, and not as separate in the different bodies — know that knowledge to be Sattvic.

Commentary

The Self, which is of the form of consciousness, is alike and uniform, though distinct, in all beings, even though they may externally, and from the point of view of qualification and function, be distinguished into social classes, students, householders, fair, tall etc.

pṛthaktvena tu yaj-jñānaṃ nānā bhāvān pṛthag-vidhān | vetti sarveṣu bhūteṣu taj-jñānaṃ viddhi rājasam || 21 ||

21. But that knowledge which sees various and distinctive (spiritual) entities in all the separate (physical) beings — know that knowledge to be Rajasic.

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

22. But that which adheres to one single act as if it were the whole, which is not founded on reason, and which is untrue and trivial — that knowledge is declared to be Tamasic.

Commentary

But that understanding which clings to a single type of act as a bounden duty — such as the worship of disembodied spirits or elementals yielding very small rewards — as if it granted all desires; that work which is not based on any sound reason — in other words, because of attachment, since it is not fully productive and is 'untrue' because it is based on a false view of things — such as seeing differentiation in the nature of the Atman; 'trivial' because the practice yields poor results.

The Threefold Division of Acts

niyataṃ saṅga rahitam arāga-dveṣataḥ kṛtam | aphala prepsunā karma tat tat sātvikam ucyate || 23 ||

23. That obligatory work which is done without attachment, without desire or aversion, by one who desires no reward is said to be Sattvic

Commentary

'Obligatory work' are those activities which are appropriate to one's own profession and stage of life (varṇa-āśrama). Doing it 'without attachment' means being free from the idea of agency or personal involvement, and 'without desire or aversion' means that it is not done through either a desire to win approval or to avoid calumny — that is, performed without ostentation.

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

24. But that act which is performed with great effort by one who longs to gratify desires and prompted by self-interest; is said to be Rajasic.

Commentary

Here vā (or) is used in the sense of ca (and) — in other words, whatever work is performed by one who possesses the misconception that whatever enormous effort this act demands, it is performed entirely by oneself.

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

25. That task which is undertaken through delusion, disregarding the consequences, loss, injury and one's own capacity is said to be Tamasic

Commentary

'Consequence' refers to the [personal] suffering which follows from an action performed. 'Loss' means financial loss involved in doing that action. 'Injury' is suffering caused to other living beings during the execution of the action. 'Personal capacity' is the ability to complete the task. Whenever an enterprise is undertaken without considering these aspects and from delusion ie., unmindful of the actual agency of the Divine — that act is said to be in the Mode of Ignorance.

The Threefold Division of Agents

mukta saṅgo’nahaṃvādī dhṛty-utsāha-samanvitaḥ | siddhy-asiddhyor nirvikāraḥ kartā sātvika ucyate || 26 ||

26. An agent who is free from attachment, and self-acclaim, who is endowed with perseverance and enthusiasm and is unaffected by success and failure, is said to be Sattvic.

Commentary

Free from self-acclaim (an-ahamvādi) means one does not have the feeling of being the agent. Perseverance is the attribute of enduring until the completion, any suffering that is collateral in the work undertaken.

rāgī karma phala prepsur-lubdho hiṃsātmako’śuciḥ | harṣa śokānvitaḥ kartā rājasaḥ parikīrtitaḥ || 27 ||

27. That agent is known as Rajasic who is swayed by desire and motivated by gain, stingy, cruel, impure and overwhelmed by delight and grief.

Commentary

Cruel — one who hurts others who have been engaged to do the work; impure — lacks the [mental & physical] purity required for the act; overwhelmed by delight and grief — is elated or depressed by success or failure in victory or defeat, in a battle.

ayuktaḥ prākṛtaḥ stabdhaḥ śaṭho naiṣkṛtiko’lasaḥ | viṣādī dīrgha-sūtrī ca kartā tāmasa ucyate || 28 ||

28. That agent who is unqualified, vulgar, obstinate, unscrupulous, dishonest, lazy, morose and a procrastinator is said to be Tamasic

Commentary

Unqualified (Ayukta) — is unfit for works enjoined by the Shastras, and is engaged in forbidden activities; vulgar (prākṛtaḥ) — uneducated; stubborn (stabdhaḥ) — not disposed to work; unscrupulous (ṣaṭaḥ) — inclined to do nefarious deeds; dishonest (naiṣkṛtikaḥ) — treacherous; lazy (ālasaḥ) — not inclined to carry out even work that is undertaken; morose (viṣādī) — given to excessive moodiness; and a procrastinator (dīrgha-sūtrī) — a person who, while engaged in nefarious activities, spends a lot of time thinking about harming others.

The Threefold Division of Rationalism (Buddhi) and Fortitude (Dhṛti)

These [intellectual] faculties contribute to understanding the definitive conclusions about the facts of reality (tattvas) and the purpose of human life (puruṣārthas).

buddher bhedaṃ dhṛteścaiva guṇatas trividhaṃ śṛṇu | procyamānam aśeṣeṇa pṛthaktvena dhanañjaya || 29 ||

29. Hear now, the threefold division of Buddhi (rationalism) and Dhṛti (fortitude), according to the Gunas, O Arjuna, as I declare them completely and distinctly.

Commentary

'Buddhi' is the reasoned conclusion reached through [intellectual] analysis. 'Dhrti' is the resolution to persevere in whatever task has been undertaken even against all odds.

pravṛtiṃ ca nivṛttiṃ ca kāryākārye bhayābhaye |

bandhaṃ mokṣaṃ ca yā vetti buddhiḥ sā pārtha sātvakī || 30 ||

30. That Rationalism is considered to be Sattvic O Arjuna, which discerns extroversion and introversion, what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, fear and freedom from fear, bondage and liberation.

Commentary

Extroversion (pravṛtti) — the Dharma which is practiced as the means for worldly prosperity. Introversion (nivṛtti) — the Dharma which is practiced as the means for Liberation (Mokṣa). A pure intellect understands that transgression of the teachings of Dharma is the cause of fear and the following of the teachings is the cause of fearlessness. It reveals the causes of bondage and Liberation — the true nature of Samsāra and deliverance from it.

yayā dharmam adharmaṃ ca kāryaṃ cākāryam eva ca | ayathāvat prajānāti buddhiḥ sā pārtha rājasī || 31 ||

31. The Rationalism which produces a mistaken conception of Dharma and Adharma and also of what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, O Arjuna, is Rajasic.

Commentary

‘What ought to be done, and what ought not to be done’ — in accordance with place, time and circumstances.

adharmaṃ dharmam iti yā manyate tamasāvṛtā | sarvārthān viparītāṃśca buddhiḥ sā pārtha tāmasī || 32 ||

32. That Rationalism, O Arjuna, which, enveloped in darkness, regards Adharma as Dharma and which reverses every value, is Tamasic.

dhṛtyā yayā dhārayate manaḥ prāṇendriya kriyāḥ | yogenāvyabhicāriṇyā dhṛtiḥ sā pārtha sātvikī || 33 ||

33. That perseverance by which one, through steady application, maintains the consistent functioning of the mind and metabolism and the work of these sense-organs — that perseverance is of the nature of Sattva.

Commentary

The meaning is that the perseverance in the Mode of Goodness entails persistence in contemplation and other acts of spiritual practice (which includes physical well-being) until the attainment of the goal.

yayā tu dharma kāmārthān dhṛtyā dhārayate’rjuna | prasaṅgena phalākāṅkṣī dhṛtiḥ sā pārtha rājasī || 34 ||

34. That perseverance, O Arjuna, by which, on account of attachment and desire for rewards, one adheres to [the pursuit of] Dharma, Kāma and Artha is Rajasic.

Commentary

These are the three Puruṣārthas or Goals of Human Endeavour which are Dharma — duty/right action, Kāma — recreational activities, and Artha — economical advancement. One who is dedicated to their pursuit is in the Mode of Passion.

yayā svapnaṃ bhayaṃ śokaṃ viṣādaṃ madam eva ca | na vimuñcati durmedhā dhṛtiḥ sā pārtha tāmasī || 35 ||

35. That perseverance by which a foolish person does not give up sleep, fear, grief, depression and passion, O Arjuna, is of the nature of Tamas.

Commentary

A fool persists in sleep, and the inebriation of passion produced by the enjoyment of sense objects. The terms fear, grief and depression refer to those things which cause feelings of fear, grief and depression. That clinging by which one maintains the thought processes and actions which lead to these, is of the nature of Ignorance.

The Threefold Division of Happiness

sukhaṃ tvidānīṃ trividhaṃ śṛṇu me bharatarṣabha | abhyāsād ramate yatra duḥkhāntaṃ ca nigacchati || 36 ||

36. Now hear from Me, O Arjuna, the threefold division of happiness, in which one enjoys by continued practice and by which one is surely freed from suffering;

Commentary

True happiness is that incomparable joy which a person, through continued [spiritual] practice over a long period of time, gradually attains, and [after attaining which,] is never again engulfed by the suffering of Samsāra.

yat tad agre viṣam iva pariṇāme’mṛtopamam |

tat sukhaṃ sātvikaṃ proktam ātma buddhi prasādajam || 37 ||

37. That joy which is like poison at first but eventually becomes like ambrosia, arising from the serene state of the mind focusing on the Atman — such joy is said to be Sattvic.

Commentary

At the commencement of the spiritual practice (Yoga), because of the great effort required [to practice] and because the disengaging of the Self from Material nature does not occur naturally, one experiences great suffering. But in the end, after perseverance in the practice, when the essential nature of the Self, as truly detached from Prakrti, is realised then there is ecstatic joy. This joy is achieved through the cultivation of mental tranquillity produced by meditation upon the Self.

⇐ Предыдущая 16 17 18 19 202122 23 24 25 Следующая ⇒