Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 12 - Shloka (Verse) 4

व्याख्या --'तु'--यहाँ 'तु' पद साकार-उपासकोंसे निराकार-उपासकोंकी भिन्नता दिखानेके लिये आया है। 'संनियम्येन्द्रियग्रामम्' -- 'सम्' और 'नि' -- दो उपसर्गोंसे युक्त 'संनियम्य' पद देकर भगवान्ने यह बताया है कि सभी इन्द्रियोंको सम्यक् प्रकारसे एवं पूर्णतः वशमें करे? जिससे वे किसी अन्य विषयमें न जायँ। इन्द्रियाँ अच्छी प्रकारसे पूर्णतः वशमें न होनेपर निर्गुणतत्त्वकी उपासनामें कठिनता होती है। सगुण-उपासनामें तो ध्यानका विषय सगुण भगवान् होनेसे इन्द्रियाँ भगवान्में लग सकती हैं; क्योंकि भगवान्के सगुण स्वरूपमें इन्द्रियोंको अपने विषय प्राप्त हो जाते हैं। अतः सगुण-उपासनामें इन्द्रिय-संयमकी आवश्यकता होते हुए भी इसकी उतनी अधिक आवश्यकता नहीं है, जितनी निर्गुण-उपासनामें है। निर्गुण-उपासनामें चिन्तनका कोई आधार न रहनेसे इन्द्रियोंका सम्यक् संयम हुए बिना (आसक्ति रहनेपर) विषयोंमें मन जा सकता है और विषयोंका चिन्तन होनेसे पतन होनेकी अधिक सम्भावना रहती है (गीता 2। 62 -- 63)। अतः निर्गुणोपासकके लिये सभी इन्द्रियोंको विषयोंसे हटाते हुए सम्यक् प्रकारसे पूर्णतः वशमें करना आवश्यक है। इन्द्रियोंको केवल बाहरसे ही वशमें नहीं करना है, प्रत्युत विषयोंके प्रति साधकके अन्तःकरणमें भी राग नहीं रहना चाहिये; क्योंकि जबतक विषयोंमें राग है, तबतक ब्रह्मकी प्राप्ति कठिन है (गीता 15। 11)।

तथा जो इन्द्रियोंके समुदायको भली प्रकार संयम करके -- उन्हें विषयोंसे रोककर? सर्वत्र -- सब समय समबुद्धिवाले होते हैं अर्थात् इष्ट और अनिष्टकी प्राप्तिमें जिनकी बुद्धि समान रहती है? ऐसे वे समस्त भूतोंके हितमें तत्पर अक्षरोपासक मुझे ही प्राप्त करते हैं। उन अक्षरउपासकोंके सम्बन्धमें वे मुझे प्राप्त होते हैं इस विषयमें तो कहना ही क्या है क्योंकि ज्ञानीको तो मैं अपना आत्मा ही समझता हूँ यह पहले ही कहा जा चुका है। जो भगवत्स्वरूप ही हैं उन संतजनोंके विषयमें युक्ततम या अयुक्ततम कुछ भी कहना नहीं बन सकता।,

How do they worship the Imperishable, and what will happen in that worship, that he says then -- Saṁniyamya (Having fully restrained).

Tulya (equal) -- free from joy, sorrow, attachment, aversion, etc., because ignorance is removed by right knowledge.

Intending the impossibility of those depending on sequential succession, he says -- Te ya iti (Those who). Devoted to the welfare of all beings -- contemplating only the welfare of all beings and practicing the same.

Since the attainment of the Lord by the wise according to their knowledge is established by implication, it is merely a restatement, he says -- Na tviti (But not). The attainment of the Lord by the knowers is established indeed, he states the proof for this -- Jñānī tv iti (But the knower).

In the attainment of the Lord by the wise, they alone should be called the most devoted, why did you call the worshipers of Saguna Brahman the most devoted, fearing this, he says -- Na hīti (Indeed not).

He states the manner and also the fruit of the worship. Having fully restrained the group of sense organs (indriyagrāmam) -- having withdrawn them from their objects. Sarvatra Samabuddhayaḥ (possessing equal intellect everywhere) -- those whose intellect is equal (sama), free from attachment and aversion, in the attainment of the desired and the undesired at all times. For this very reason Sarveṣāṁ Bhūtānāṁ Hite Ratāḥ (delighted in the welfare of all beings), those who worship the Imperishable in this manner, they attain Me, the Supreme Self.

By the word 'eva' (alone), he indicates the qualification of these alone for direct attainment of liberation.

Attainment here should also be understood like the attainment of something already attained, such as the necklace forgotten on one's own neck, and not like the attainment of a village etc. which was not attained.

From the Shruti 'vimuktaś ca vimucyate' (and the liberated one is liberated). And also from the Smṛti 'jñānī tv ātmaiva me matam' (the knower is verily My Self, this is My view).

"Let Your worshippers alone be the best; but what is the fruit of the others?"—to this He says—"Ye tu" (But those who) etc.

The quality of being "Anirdeshya" (Indefinable) is stated of Maya in Bhagavatam: "Some have conviction even in the Indisputable and Indefinable"—thus. But Ishvara is spoken of by the word 'Deva' (God)—in "Daivam anye pare" (Others sacrifice to the Deva - 4.25).

And it is stated in the Kashayana Shruti of Sama Veda: "Neither non-existence (Asat) was nor existence (Sat) was then" (Rig Veda 10.129.1?)—thus. Starting with "Neither Great Element nor Sub-element was then" etc., "Darkness (Tamas) was hidden by darkness in the beginning" (Rig Veda 10.129.3?)—thus. "Tamas indeed is Unmanifest, undecaying, indefinable; this indeed is Prakriti"—thus. She is indeed characterized by being all-pervading, unthinkable etc.

For instance in Mokshadharma: "From the Resort of Narayana's qualities, from the Undecaying, Immortal, Supersensuous, Ungraspable, Unborn (Asambhavatah); from the Unreal (Asatyat?), from the Non-violent (Ahimsrat - indestructible?), from the Chief (Lalamat), from the One having a second specific activity, from the Non-inimical, from the Inexhaustible, from the Immortal, from the Imperishable (Akshara), from the Formless; from Her who is All (Sarvasyah), of All (Sarvasya), the Maker of All (Sarvakartuh), from the Eternal Darkness" (Mahabharata 12.342.6?)—thus. "This was Tamas-formed, Unknown, Characteristic-less, Indisputable, Unknowable, as if asleep everywhere"—in Manava (Manu Smriti 1.5).

He will say "The Kutastha is called Akshara" (15.16). Standing in the 'Kuta'—in Akasha (Space)—is 'Kutastha'. "She is established in Akasha, therefore She is considered Kuta-sthita"—thus indeed in the Khilas of Rig Veda. "She is All-pervading (Sarvaga), Immovable (Nischala), Womb of the world; and She is Imperishable, Moving everywhere (Vishvaga), Free from Rajas"—in the Gaupavana Shakha of Sama Veda.

How should such an Imperishable be worshipped, to this he says -- Saṁniyamya (Having fully restrained). Sarvatra kāle sarvadā (At all times, always). By this, the continuous nature of meditation is stated. Indriyagrāmam -- having fully restrained the sense organs along with the mind, bringing them under the control of the Self through unification. Meaning, having dissolved them into their cause.

Those whose intellect is Sama (equal/free from agitation), those who are Samabuddhayaḥ, they also attain Me alone, the non-dual Supreme Brahman, the highest goal (Parā Kāṣṭhā). And the Shruti also (says) thus: 'yadā pañca vatiṣṭhante jñānāni manasā saha. buddhiś ca na viceṣṭati tāmahuḥ paramāṁ gatim' (When the five knowledges (sense organs) stand still along with the mind, and the intellect does not stir, that they call the Supreme State).

By 'sarvabhūtahite ratāḥ' (devoted to the welfare of all beings), renunciation, by the giving of fearlessness to all beings, is also enjoined as an auxiliary part of meditation.

But those who worship the Akṣara (Imperishable/the nature of the inner Self), which is Anirdeśya (indescribable, because it is non-designable by words like Deva etc., due to being different from the body), and for this very reason Avyakta (unmanifested) by sense organs (Karaṇas) like the eye etc., Sarvatragam (pervading everywhere) and Achintyam (inconceivable), though present in all bodies of gods etc., yet due to being dissimilar to them, it is unworthy of being contemplated in that particular form; and for that very reason Kūṭastham (unchanging/common to all, meaning unconnected with the particular forms of those gods etc.).

Due to non-transformability, it does not move or deviate from its own unique nature, therefore Achalam (immovable), and for this reason Dhruvam (permanent). Having properly restrained the group of sense organs (Indriyagrāmam), such as the eye etc., from all their activities, they are Sarvatra Samabuddhayaḥ (possessing equal intellect everywhere), meaning possessing equal intellect in the Selves situated in the uneven forms of the bodies of gods etc., due to their being of the single form of knowledge. For this very reason, they are Sarvabhūtahite Ratāḥ (devoted to the welfare of all beings), desisting from delight in the harm of all beings. For delight in the harm of all beings is caused by the conceit (Abhimāna) of the Self in the uneven forms of gods etc.

Those who worship the Akṣara in this manner, they too attain Me alone. They attain the Self which is of the same form as Me, non-transmigratory, this is the meaning. It will be said, 'mamas adharmyam āgatāḥ' (They attain My nature) (Gītā 14.2), and the Shruti also states 'nirañjanaḥ paramaṁ sāmyam upaiti' (The taintless one attains supreme equality) (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 3.1.3).

And the distinctness of the Supreme Brahman from the Kūṭastha designated by the word Akṣara will be stated. 'kūṭastho'kṣaraucyate' (The Kūṭastha is called Akṣara), 'uttamaḥpuruṣastvanyaḥ' (But the supreme Puruṣa is other) (Gītā 15.16-17), thus.

But in the Akṣara Vidyā of 'athaparāyayā tadakṣaramadhigamyate' (Now the higher knowledge by which that Imperishable is attained) (Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.1.5), the Supreme Brahman itself is designated by the word Akṣara, because it is the source of beings (Bhūtayoni).

Saṁniyamya (Having fully restrained) etc. Clear.

He states the inferiority of the one devoted to the Imperishable (Akṣara-niṣṭha) with 'ye tv akṣaram' etc., in three verses.

Since the prohibition of designation of all kinds is flawed by self-contradiction etc., he states the specific designation intended to be prohibited in the actual form, along with its reason -- Dehādanyatayeti (By being other than the body). Although words like Deva etc., function through the body even in the embodied Self which is other than the body, yet in the nature of the liberated Self (Apavṛktātmasvarūpa), which is to be specifically designated and is free from connection with Prakṛti (Primordial Matter), such a usage is not possible at all, this is the intention. Tata eva -- only by being other than the body, this is the meaning.

In intending the quality of being extremely unmanifested (atyantānabhivyaktatva), there is a contradiction with the speaker's own statement 'upāsate' (they worship), with this intention he says -- chakṣurādikaraṇānabhivyaktamiti (unmanifested by sense organs like the eye etc.).

In 'sarvatragam' (all-pervading), to resolve the contradiction with the Shruti on atomicity (aṇutva), he says -- devādideheṣviti (in the bodies of gods etc.). Or, to introduce the subject of the quality of being thinkable (chintyatva) which is to be negated, 'sarvatragam' is said, he says -- devādideheṣu vartamānam apīti (even though existing in the bodies of gods etc.).

'tena tena rūpeṇa' (in that particular form) is not possible to negate mere thinking due to contradiction with the injunction for thinking of the Self, this is the sense. 'tata eva kūṭastham' -- for that very reason, due to being distinct from those (particular forms), this is the meaning.

The former Puruṣa (Self) is common to many, continuously existing Puruṣas; here only commonness is intended, he says -- sarvasādhāraṇamiti (common to all). By this, those who speak of the supervision of Māyā (māyādhyakṣatva) designated by the word Kūṭa, or existence like a heap (rāśivat sthitattva), are refuted by the rejection of the well-known meaning etc. Hence, 'immovable like a Kūṭa, free from growth, decay etc.' is also weak here.

Now, is the quality of being common to all simultaneously unestablished? Even by assuming bodies of all kinds of species due to differences in time, there is no assumption of all individuals? Hence, how is the quality of being common to all possible? To this he says -- devādi. The sense is that the non-common (asādhāraṇa) qualities like god-ness etc., are not directly connected with the Self without an intervening factor.

Since the prohibition of motion etc., is unsuitable for the Jīva (individual soul) which has the act of passing out (utkrānti) etc., he states what is intended by the word Achala here -- apariṇāmitveneti (by non-transformability). Impermanence (anityatva) is indeed pervaded by transformation (pariṇāma). For that reason, the absence of the pervaded (impermanence) is intended due to the absence of the pervader (transformation), thus there is no tautology, he says -- tata eva dhruvamiti (for that very reason, permanent).

Since the restraint of the mind is established by 'upāsate' (they worship) itself, he explains it as being aimed at the restraint of the activities of the external sense organs appropriate for it -- samyaṅniyamya (having properly restrained). 'ahiṁsā satyam asteyaṁ brahmacharyaparigrahaḥ' (non-violence, truth, non-stealing, celibacy, non-possession) etc. is intended by 'sarvatra' (everywhere). 'śuni caiva śvapāke ca paṇḍitāḥ samadarśinaḥ' (The wise see equally in a dog and an outcaste) etc. is intended by 'ātmasu jñānaikākāratayā samabuddhayaḥ' (possessing equal intellect in the Selves due to their being of the single form of knowledge). Tata eva -- for that very reason, by possessing equal intellect.

Ye evam akṣaram upāsate -- those who worship the Supreme Self, having determined the inner Self denoted by the word Akṣara as the object to be attained, and the Supreme Self as the means of attaining it. Te'pi -- they also, meaning those who are certain of an object to be attained other than Me. Mām prāpnuvanti eva -- they attain the liberated form which is an inseparably related attribute, which is of the same form as Me, as stated in the manner 'viṣṇuśaktiḥ parā proktā' (Viṣṇu's energy is declared to be supreme) (Viṣṇu Purāṇa 6.7.61) and 'avibhāgena dṛṣṭatvā' (because of being seen as non-separate) (Brahma Sūtra 4.4.3), this is the meaning.

The body of the object of knowledge is better, if we find the scriptural authority, fearing this, he cites a corroborating Shruti -- paramaṁ sāmyam upaitīti (attains supreme equality). Now, how is the word Akṣara, commonly used for the Supreme Brahman in 'athaparāyayā tadakṣaramadhigamyate' (Now the higher knowledge by which that Imperishable is attained), 'akṣaramambarāntadhṛteḥ' (The Imperishable sustains up to Ākāśa) etc., said to be the designator of the individual Self? Because it is stated in 'amṛtākṣaraṁ haraḥ' (Hara is immortal and imperishable), 'kūṭastho'kṣaraucyate' (The Kūṭastha is called Akṣara) etc., to this he says -- tathākṣaraśabdānirdiṣṭādityādinā (And from the one designated by the word Akṣara etc.).

In the manner stated in 'pañcaviṁśakamavyaktaṁ ṣaḍviṁśaḥpuruṣottamaḥ. etajjñātvā vimucyante yatayaḥ śāntabuddhayaḥ' (The twenty-fifth is the unmanifest, the twenty-sixth is the Supreme Person. Knowing this, ascetics with tranquil intellects are liberated) (Yājñavalkya Smṛti), the effort is greater for those whose minds are attached to the unmanifest (Prakṛti) and the individual Self, because of the absence of a mind fixed on Me. The mental modification having the unmanifest as its object is in the form of the cessation of all senses.

Now, being possessed of a body is possible even for Sanaka etc., fearing this, 'dehātmābhimānayuktaiḥ' (possessed of the conceit of body being the Self) is said.

पूर्व श्लोकों में सगुणोपासक भक्तों के लिए आवश्यक गुणों का वर्णन करने के पश्चात् अब भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण निर्गुण के उपासकों का वर्णन उपर्युक्त दो श्लोकों में करते हैं।अक्षर रूप और गुणों से युक्त सभी वस्तुएं द्रव्य हैं और सभी द्रव्य क्षर अर्थात् नाशवान होते हैं। इन्द्रियों के द्वारा केवल इन द्रव्यों का ही ज्ञान हो सकता है। अत अक्षर शब्द से यह सूचित किया गया है कि इन्द्रियों के द्वारा परमतत्त्व का ज्ञान कदापि संभव नहीं है।अनिर्देश्य जो परिभाषित नहीं किया जा सकता है उसे अनिर्देश्य कहते हैं। सभी परिभाषाएं दृश्य वस्तु के सन्दर्भ में ही दी जा सकती हैं। अत जो इन्द्रियों का दृश्य नहीं होता? उसकी न परिभाषा दी जा सकती है और न ही उसे अन्य वस्तुओं से भिन्न करके जाना जा सकता है।सर्वत्रगम् जो अनन्त तत्त्व गुण रहित होने से व्यक्त नहीं हैं? और इसी कारण अनिर्देश्य है? उसको सर्वव्यापी होना आवश्यक है। यदि परमात्मा से कोई स्थान रिक्त हो? तो परमात्मा को आकार विशेष प्राप्त हो जायेगा। और साकार वस्तु विनाशी भी होगी।अचिन्त्यम् मन के द्वारा जिस वस्तु का चिन्तन किया जा सकता है? वह दृश्य पदार्थ होने के कारण नाशवान् होगी। इसलिए अविनाशी तत्त्व निश्चित ही अकल्पनीय? अग्राह्य और अचिन्त्य होगा।कूटस्थम् (अविकारी) यद्यपि चैतन्यस्वरूप आत्मा वह अधिष्ठान है? जिसके ऊपर सब विकार और परिवर्तन होते रहते हैं? परन्तु वह स्वयं अपरिवर्तनशील और अविकारी ही रहता है। कूट शब्द का अर्थ है निहाई। एक लुहार की दुकान में निहाई पर अन्य लौह खण्डों को रखकर उन पर आघात करके उन्हें विभिन्न आकार दिये जाते हैं? परन्तु निहाई स्वयं अपरिवर्तित ही रहती है। उसी प्रकार चैतन्य के सम्बन्ध से उपाधियों तथा व्यक्तित्व में विकार होता है? किन्तु चैतन्य तत्त्व कूट के समान अविकारी रहता है।अचलम् चलन का अर्थ है वस्तु का देश और काल की मर्यादा में परिवर्तन होना। कोई वस्तु अपने में ही चल नहीं सकती उसका चलन वही पर संभव है? जहाँ पर वह पहले से विद्यमान नहीं है। यहाँ? इस क्षण मैं कुर्सी पर बैठा हूँ। मैं दूसरे क्षण दूसरा स्थान ग्रहण करने जा सकता हूँ। परन्तु? यहीं और इसी क्षण अपनी कुर्सी पर बैठा मैं अपने में ही चल फिर नहीं सकता? क्योंकि मैं स्वयं को पूर्णत व्याप्त किये हुए हूँ। परमात्मा सर्वव्यापी है? और इसलिए? देश या काल में ऐसा कोई स्थान या क्षण नहीं है? जहाँ वह विद्यमान न हो? अत वह अचल कहलाता है। वह यत्र? तत्र? सर्वत्र है उसमें ही भूत? वर्तमान और भविष्य का अस्तित्व है।ध्रुवम् (शाश्वत् सनातन) विकारी वस्तु देश और काल से अवच्छिन्न होती है। परन्तु जो देश और काल का भी अधिष्ठान है? वह परमात्मा इन दोनों से परिच्छिन्न नहीं हो सकता है। अनन्त स्वरूप चैतन्य आत्मा सर्वत्र? सब काल में एक ही है। शैशव? यौवन और वृद्धावस्था में? सर्वत्र? सब काल और सुखदुख? लाभहानि की समस्त परिस्थितियों में आत्मा एक समान ही रहता है। जब हम अपने शरीर? मन और बुद्धि के स्तर पर आते हैं? केवल तभी हम आइन्स्टीन के द्वारा वर्णित देश और काल की सापेक्षता के जगत् में प्रवेश करते हैं। परमात्मा कालविच्छिन्न नहीं है वह काल का भी शासक है। वह ध्रुव है।यहाँ ध्यान देने योग्य बात यह है कि इन दो श्लोकों में प्रयुक्त शब्द उपनिषदों से लिये गये हैं। इन शब्दों के द्वारा उस परमात्मा का निर्देश किया जाता है? जो इस नित्य परिवर्तनशील नाम और रूपों? कर्म और घटनाओं? विषय ग्रहण और भावनाओं? विचारों तथा अनुभवों के जगत् का एकमेव सनातन अधिष्ठान है। सभी उपासकों में निम्नलिखित तीन गुणों का होना आवश्यक है।इन्द्रियसंयम इन्द्रियों के द्वारा अपनी शक्तियों का अपव्यय करना अविचारी एवं निम्न स्तर की रुचि वाले मनुष्यों का कार्य़ होता है। पूर्णत्व के शिखर पर पहुँचकर परमानन्द का अनुभव करने की जिस साधक की महत्त्वाकांक्षा है? उसको चाहिए कि वह इस अपव्यय में कटौती करे? और इस प्रकार उपार्जित शक्तियों का सदुपयोग ध्यान में आत्मानुभव को प्राप्त करने के लिए करे। पांच ज्ञानेन्द्रियां ही वे द्वार हैं? जिनके माध्यम से मन को विचलित करने वाले बाह्य जगत् के विषय चोरी छिपे मन में प्रवेश करके हमारी आन्तरिक शान्ति को नष्ट कर देते हैं। और फिर हमारा मन कर्मेन्द्रियों के द्वारा बाह्य जगत् में अपनी प्रतिक्रियाएं व्यक्त करने को दौड़ पड़ता है। इस प्रकार? विषयग्रहण और प्रतिक्रिया रूप यह व्यवहार मन के सामंजस्य और सन्तुलन को तोड़ देता है। इसलिए? यहाँ श्रीकृष्ण का इन्द्रियसंयम पर बल देना उचित ही है? क्योंकि ध्यानमार्ग की सफलता इसी पर निर्भर करती है।सर्वत्र समबुद्धि सफलता के लिए आवश्यक यह दूसरा गुण है। समस्त प्रकार की परिस्थितियों और अनुभवों में बुद्धि की समता होनी चाहिए। बाह्य विक्षेपरहित दशा की आशा और प्रतीक्षा करना मूर्खता का लक्षण ही है। ऐसी आदर्श परिस्थिति का होना असम्भव है। जगत् की वस्तुएं अपने में ही तथा विशिष्ट संरचनाओं के रूप में भी निरन्तर परिवर्तित होती रहती हैं। इसलिए ऐसे नित्य परिवर्तनशील रचना वाले जगत् में किसी ऐसी इष्ट स्थिति की अपेक्षा रखना जो साधक के ध्यानाभ्यास के लाभ के लिए निरन्तर एक समान बनी रहे? वास्तव में अविवेकपूर्ण ही कहा जा सकता है। यह सर्वथा असंभव है। इसलिए? ऐसे परिवर्तनशील जगत् में साधक को ही चाहिए कि व्ाह अपने बौद्धिक मूल्यांकनों? मन की आसक्तियों तथा बाह्य जगत् के साथ होने वाले सम्पर्कों को विवेकपूर्ण संयमित करके बुद्धि की समता और मन का सन्तुलन बनाये रखे। दृष्टि के समक्ष मन में विकार या विक्षेप उत्पन्न करने वाले विषयों या परिस्थितियों के होने पर भी जो पुरुष अपना सन्तुलन नहीं खोता है? वही समबुद्धि कहलाता है। जिस पुरुष ने अपनी विवेकशक्ति का विकास किया है? वह बड़ी सरलता से सौन्दर्य के उस स्वर्णिम तार को देख और पहचान सकता है? जो इस जगत् की उन समस्त वस्तुओं को धारण किये हुए है? जो सुन्दर और आकर्षक तथा कुरूप और प्रतिकर्षक है। इस क्षमता से सम्पन्न साधक को ही यहाँ समबुद्धि कहा गया है।किसी व्यक्ति का शिशु पुत्र किसी समय मैला है तो दुसरे समय अत्यन्त चंचल प्रात रुदन कर रहा होता है? तो दोपहर में हंसता है संध्याकाल में तंग करता है और रात में उन्मत्त और फिर भी? उसकी इन सब दशाओं में उसका पिता एक पुत्र को ही देखता है? और इसलिए उसके भिन्नभिन्न रूपों में भी उसे समान रूप से ही प्रेम करता है। यह उस प्रेमपूर्ण पिता की समबुद्धि है। इसी प्रकार एक सच्चा साधक अपने जीवन के भयानक दुखान्तों और आनन्ददायक सुखान्तों में तथा अभूतपूर्व सफलताओं और निराशाजनक विफलताओं में भी अपने हृदय के इष्ट देव को पहचानना सीखता है। इसलिए? वह बौद्धिक समता को प्राप्त हो जाता है।भूतमात्र के हित में रत होते हैं सफलता के लिए आवश्यक तीसरे गुण को बताते हुए भगवान् कहते हैं कि साधक को अर्पण की भावना से सदैव यथाशक्ति भूतमात्र की सेवा में रत रहना चाहिए। जब तक मनुष्य इस शरीर को धारण किये जीवित रहता है? तब तक उसके लिये यह सर्वथा असंभव है कि नित्य निरन्तर प्रत्येक समय अपने मन और बुद्धि को आत्मचिन्तन में ही स्थिर कर सके। जगत् के साथ उसे सामान्य व्यवहार करना ही होगा। इस प्रकार के व्यवहारों में उसे निरन्तर अथक प्रय़त्न करके प्राणीमात्र की सेवा करनी चाहिए। यह तो इस ज्ञान का स्वरूप ही है। भूतमात्र को प्रेम करना तो उसका धर्म ही है।इस प्रकार उक्त तीन गुणों से सम्पन्न होकर जो साधकगण अक्षर और अव्यक्त की उपासना करते हैं? वे भी मुझे ही प्राप्त होते हैं यह भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण की घोषणा है।अर्जुन द्वारा पूछा गया प्रश्न वास्तव में विवादास्पद है? जबकि भगवान् द्वारा दिया गया उसका उत्तर एक अविवादास्पद सत्य की घोषणा है। यहाँ महान् दार्शनिक भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण यह बताते हैं कि किस प्रकार दोनों ही उपासक एक ही लक्ष्य को प्राप्त करते हैं। दोनों में ही सफलता के लिए कौन से समान गुणों का होना आवश्यक है। यहाँ वर्णित साधना पद्धतियों का निष्ठापूर्वक और पूर्णतया पालन करने पर सगुणसाकार अथवा निर्गुणनिराकार की उपासना के द्वारा एक ही परमात्मा की प्राप्ति होगी।परन्तु? सामान्यत? बहुसंख्यक साधकों के विषय में वे कहते हैं

'Ye tu' (But those who) etc. up to 'avāpyate' (is attained). But those who worship the Akṣara Brahman, on the Self, by the attributes like 'sarvatragam' (all-pervading) etc., all the attributes of Īśvara (the Lord) are superimposed on the Self.

Therefore, although the worshipers of Brahman also attain Me alone, nevertheless their effort (kleśa) is greater.

Indeed, having superimposed the group of eight qualities, such as being free from sin, etc., on the Self, they subsequently worship that very Self, thus they find double effort even when Īśvara (the Lord), who possesses the greatness of the naturally established group of qualities, is attainable without effort.

"If so, then by 'Entering into Me' (12.2) alone, the answer to the question 'My worshippers alone are the best' has happened? (Then) what is the use of the subsequent sentence?"—To this he says—"Bhavantu" (Let them be). This acceptance is pregnant with objection. "It is not proper that Your worshippers alone are the best"—this is the idea.

To establish that, he asks—"Itaresham" (Of others). "Do the worshippers of the Unmanifest have the fruit of Liberation? Or not? If not, there is contradiction with the cited sentence. In the first case (if yes), how are Your worshippers the best? Because of equality of fruit"—this is the purport.

(Objection) "Now, since these adjectives (Indefinable etc.) are impossible elsewhere than Brahman, how is this introduced as an answer to 'What is the fruit of others'?"—To this; since Imperishability (Aksharatva) and Unmanifest-ness (Avyaktatva) have been established in Maya, establishing the others (adjectives) there (in Maya), he first establishes 'Indefinability'—with "Anirdeshyatvam cha" (And indefinability). Beyond words. "Of Dharma, my leg-break"—is the construction (example).

"Now, let Ishvara also be Indefinable here?"—To this he says—"Ishvarastu" (But Ishvara). "They say Daiva (Fate/God) is the cause of leg-break" (Example). And thus there would be repetition; this is the purport. And the word 'Daiva' does not mean Adrishta (Unseen potency/Fate). Because that is stated separately as "Others sacrifice Action" (4.25?). Regarding the Indefinability of Maya, he states clear proof—"Uktam cha" (And it is said).

"Mahabhuta"—form of Akasha and Vayu. "Upabhuta"—characterized by Tejas and Water (?). "Tada"—in Dissolution. "Ajaram" (Undecaying) etc. are establishers of existence in dissolution. And to show that "This is not Brahman," "Esha hyesha prakritih" (This indeed is Prakriti) is cited.

Now to establish "Sarvatragam" (All-pervading) etc. in Maya, he says—"Sarvaga" (All-pervading). The instruction is regarding the state/nature (Bhava-pradhana). Or the definition-word denotes the essential nature. "Narayana-guna"—His will etc.—characterized by that is the "Ashraya" (Resort) of whom, that is such. By this, Brahman is excluded. "Ajarat", "Amarat" (From undecaying, immortal)—of the inert Pradhana etc.; because of the absence of obtaining that (decay/death) for it.

From "Agrahyat"—beyond even the mind—by this "Achintyam" (Unthinkable) is established. From "Asambhavatah" (Unborn?), "Akshayat" (Inexhaustible), "Aksharat" (Imperishable)—"Dhruvatva" (Firmness/Constancy) is established. "Asati"—in dissolution; "Bhavam" (Being/Born?)—"Asattyam" (Unreality/In non-existence?). "Lalamam"—Pradhana (Chief). "Dvitiya"—dependence solely on the Lord; is the specific activity of whom, that is such. "Amurtitah"—from being devoid of material body. "Sarvasyah" (Of all)—"Sarvagayah" (Of the all-pervading)—this is Vedic gender-change? Because of identifying with beginningless Avidya. "Shashvat-tamasah purushobhut" (From eternal darkness Purusha became)—is the construction.

This well-known Tamas named Maya was as if asleep everywhere in dissolution, devoid of activity. "Abhutam"—unborn. By "Aprajnatam" (Unknown) etc., the absence of being knowable by perception, inference, and scripture is stated. Due to having unknowable characteristics, it is "Apratarkyam" (Indisputable/Incomprehensible). By this "Sarvatragam Achintyam Dhruvam" is established.

If by the Gita sentence "Kutastham" and "Nityam" (are established), then "Dhruvam" is repetition. "Kuta—Falsehood—stays in this"—is impossible (for Brahman); to this he says—"Kuta". The denotation of the word Kuta in the sense of Akasha (Space) was read before. Still, for firmness, Shruti is cited. According to Shruti, it is feminine gender (Kutastha). "Sa sarvaga" (She is all-pervading)—is clear proof for the stated meaning. "Nischala" (Immovable)—not fallen from her position. "Vishvam gatam" (Universe has gone)—is dependent on her, so "Vishvaga" (Going everywhere/Containing universe). And these stated adjectives should be known as being for the support of accepting Her worship as a means to Liberation.

In the expectation of what superiority exists in the knowers of Saguna Brahman compared to the knowers of Nirguna Brahman, by which they alone are the most devoted and they alone are the desired ones, to state that superiority, he introduces the knowers of Nirguna Brahman, who define it, with two (verses) -- Ye tvityādinā (beginning with 'But those who'). 'Ye'kṣaraṁ mām upāsate te'pi mām eva prāpnuvanti' (Those who worship the Imperishable, they too attain Me alone) is the construction with the second (verse). The word 'tu' (but) is for indicating distinctiveness from the former ones. Akṣara (Imperishable) -- the qualityless Brahman (Nirviśeṣa Brahma), famous in the Vācaknavī Brāhmaṇa (Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad). There are seven attributes for its description.

Anirdeśyam -- incapable of being designated by word. Because it is avyaktam (unmanifested) -- devoid of Jāti (genus), Guṇa (quality), Kriyā (action), and Sambandha (relation), which are the causes for the application of a word. Since a word functions only by means of Jāti, Guṇa, Kriyā, or Sambandha, its application to the Nirviśeṣa (qualityless) is impossible. Why is it devoid of Jāti etc., to this he says -- Sarvatragamiti (Pervading everywhere). Sarvatragam -- all-pervading, the cause of all. Therefore, devoid of Jāti etc., because the connection with Jāti etc. is seen only in the Paricchinna (limited) effect, and because Ākāśa (space) etc. are also accepted as effects.

For this very reason Achintyam -- it is not the object even of the mental modification, just as it is not of the application of word. Due to the limited scope of the mind also, as per the Shruti 'yato vāco nivartante aprāpyamanasā saha' (From which words turn back, without reaching it, along with the mind). Then how is the Shruti 'taṁ tvaupaniṣadaṁ puruṣaṁ pṛcchāmi' (I ask you about that Puruṣa known in the Upaniṣads), and 'dṛśyate tvagryayā buddhyā' (But it is seen by a subtle intellect), and the Sūtra 'śāstrayonitvāt' (because scripture is its source) (justified)? It is said. By the reflection of the last mental modification, which is produced by a word through a relation imagined by Avidyā (ignorance), in the pure entity which is the nature of supreme bliss and consciousness, the cessation of Avidyā and its imagined effects is appropriate, and thus it is conventionally spoken of as the object.

Therefore, to demonstrate the Avidyā-relation superimposed on it, he says -- Kūṭasthamiti (Abiding in the Kūṭa). Kūṭastham -- that which, though unreal, is perceived as real, is called Kūṭa, so it is said by people. As in 'kūṭakārṣāpaṇaḥ' (counterfeit coin), 'kūṭasākṣitvam' (false testimony) etc. Ignorance called Māyā, though unreal along with the manifold effects, is perceived as real by the worldly people, and is Kūṭa. In that, it resides as the substratum by a superimpositional (Adhyāsika) relation, thus Kūṭastham -- the substratum of ignorance and its effects, this is the meaning. By this, the refutation of all inconsistencies is made. For this very reason -- since all modifications are imagined by Avidyā, its substratum, the witnessing consciousness (Sākṣi Chaitanya), is changeless, he says -- Achalamiti (Immovable). Achalam -- free from motion/change. Due to immovability itself, Dhruvam -- unchangeable, eternal.

Such pure Brahman they Pariupāsate -- by Shravana (hearing) removing the impossibility regarding the means of knowledge, by Manana (reflection) (removing the impossibility) regarding the object of knowledge, and subsequently for the cessation of contrary notions, they Dhyāyanti (meditate). They make it the object by Dhyāna (meditation) called Nididhyāsana, which is a continuous flow of similar notions like a stream of oil, by rejecting dissimilar notions, this is the meaning.

How is the rejection of dissimilar notions possible when there is conjunction of objects and senses, to this he says -- Saṁniyamyeeti (Having properly restrained). Saṁniyamya -- having withdrawn the Indriyagrāmam (the group of sense organs) from their objects. By this, the acquisition of Śama (control of mind), Dama (control of senses) etc. is stated. When the desire for the enjoyment of objects exists, how is the withdrawal of the senses from them possible, to this he says -- Sarvatreti (Everywhere). Whose intellect is Sama (equal) regarding all objects, free from joy and sorrow, and from attachment and aversion. Because ignorance, which is the cause of attachment and aversion, is removed by right knowledge, and desire is removed by the practice of seeing defects in objects, they are Samabuddhayaḥ (of equal intellect) everywhere. By this, Vashīkāra-sañjñā Vairāgya (the highest stage of detachment) is stated.

For this very reason -- due to seeing the Self everywhere and being free from aversion which is the cause of violence, they are Sarvabhūtahite Ratāḥ (devoted to the welfare of all beings). They have given the gift of fearlessness to all beings by the mantra 'abhayaṁ sarvabhūtebhyo mattaḥ svāhā' (fearlessness to all beings from me, svāhā). They have performed Saṁnyāsa (renunciation), this is the meaning. As per the Smṛti 'abhayaṁ sarvabhūtebhyo dattvā saṁnyāsam ācaret' (having given fearlessness to all beings, one should undertake renunciation). Being possessed of all such means, having become Brahman themselves, they attain the Akṣara Brahman alone by a doubt-free direct perception, which is the fruit of all means. Previously also being of My nature, by the cessation of Avidyā, they remain of My nature alone, this is the meaning. 'brahmaivasanbrahmāpyeti' (Being Brahman, he attains Brahman), 'brahmavedabrahmaivabhavati' (He who knows Brahman becomes Brahman) etc. are the Shrutis, and here too 'jñānī tvātmaiva me matam' (The knower is verily My Self, this is My view) is said.

Having fully restrained and subdued the group of sense organs (indriyagrāmam), being of equal intellect (samabuddhayaḥ) everywhere, in Me, in gods etc., or in worldly joys and sorrows, and being devoted to the welfare of all beings (sarvabhūtahite ratāḥ), those who worship, meditate, they attain Me alone.

By the word 'eva' (alone), the sense is that they are mediated by (separated by an interval from) the Imperishable in their attainment.

The absence of their own state of being the most devoted is also indicated.

Saṁniyamya (Having fully restrained) -- having properly restrained, having withdrawn. Indriyagrāmam -- the group of sense organs. Sarvatra -- at all times. Samabuddhayaḥ -- whose intellect is equal in the attainment of the desired and the undesired, they are Samabuddhayaḥ.

Te ye evaṁvidhāḥ -- Those who are of this kind, Te prāpnuvanti mām eva (They attain Me alone), Sarvabhūtahite Ratāḥ (devoted to the welfare of all beings).

And nothing needs to be said regarding them that they attain Me, for it has been said 'jñānī tvātmaiva me matam' (The knower is verily My Self, this is My view) (Gītā 7.18).

It is not proper to speak of the state of being the most devoted or the least devoted regarding those who are the very nature of the Lord.

But --

Ye tu iti. The word 'tu' indicates distinction. Those who worship the Akṣara (Imperishable/part of the Inner Controller's nature), which is Avyakta (unmanifest) due to the absence of name and form as stated before, which is calculated bliss (gaṇitānanda), which is the great form (bṛhatsvarūpa).

The distinction is clear. The Akṣara is unmanifest, but I am manifest. That (Akṣara) is indescribable, but I am worthy of transcendental designation by My own will. That is all-pervading, but I am attainable only by the devotee. And that is inconceivable, but I am conceivable by devotees. That is Kūṭastha (common to all), I am uncommon. That is Achala (immovable Self), I am mobile, moving while sporting here and there. That is Dhruva (permanent) in the form of the state (Aiśvarya) in the spiritual realm (Adhyātma), but I am Īśvara, its abode, thus.

Its worshipers attain Me, the Śrī (Lakṣmī) who is the nature of Brahman's bliss, or Me, the permanent Self.

संनियम्य having restrained? इन्द्रियग्रामम् the aggregate of the senses? सर्वत्र everywhere? समबुद्धयः evenminded? ते they? प्राप्नुवन्ति obtian? माम् Me? एव only? सर्वभूतहिते in the welfare of all beings? रताः rejoicers.Commentary Those who are free from likes and dislikes (attraction and repulsion) can possess,eanimity of mind. Those who have destroyed ignorance which is the cause for exhilaration and grief? through the knowledge of the Self? those who are free from all kinds of sensual cravings through the constant practice of finding the defects or the evil in sensual pleasures can have evenness of mind. Those who are neither elated nor troubled when they get desirable or undesirable objects can possess evenness of mind.The two currents of love and hatred (likes and dislikes) make a man think of harming others. When these two are destroyed through meditation on the Self? the Yogi is intent on the welfare of others. He rejoices in doing service to the people. He plunges himself in service. He works constantly for the solidarity or wellbeing of this world. He gives fearlessness (Abhayadana) to all creatures. No creature is afraid of him. He becomes a Paramahamsa Sannyasi who gives shelter to all in his heart. He attains Selfrealisation. He becoes a knower of Brahman. The knower of Brahman becomes Brahman.By means of the control of the senses the Yogi closes the ten doors (the senses) and withdraws the senses from the sensual objects and fixes the mind on the innermost Self. Those who meditate on the imperishable transcendental Brahman? restraining and subduing the senses? regarding everything eally? rejoicing in the welfare of all beings -- these also come to Me. It needs no saying that they reach Myself? because I hold the wise as verily Myself (Cf.VII.18). Further it is not necessary to say that they are the best Yogins as they are one with Brahman Himself. (Cf.V.25XI.55)But --

Samniyamya, by fully controlling, withdrawing; indriya-gramam, all the organs; and sarvatra, always at all times; sama-buddhayah, being even-minded-the even-minded are those whose minds remain eipoised in getting anything desirable or undesirable; te, they, those who are of this kind; ratah, engaged; sarva-bhuta-hite, in the welfare of all beings prapnuvanti, attain; mam, Me; eva, alone. As regards them it needs no saying that they attain Me, for it has been said, '৷৷.but the man of Knowledge is the very Self. (This is) My opinion' (7.18). It is certainly not proper to speak of being or not being the best among the yogis with regard to those who have attained identity with the Lord.
But,

The individual self meditated upon by those who follow the path of the 'Aksara' (the Imperishable) is thus described: It cannot be 'defined' in terms indicated by expressions like gods and men etc., for It is different from the body; It is 'imperceptible' through the senses such as eyes; It is 'omnipresent and unthinkable,' for though It exists everywhere in bodies such as those of gods and others, It cannot be conceived in terms of those bodies, as It is an entity of an altogether different kind; It is 'common to all beings' i.e., alike in all beings but different from the bodily forms distinguishing them; It is 'immovable' as It does not move out of Its unie nature, being unmodifiable, and therefore eternal. Such aspirants are further described as those who, 'subduing their senses' like the eye from their natural operations, look upon all beings of different forms as 'eal' by virtue of their knowledge of the sameness of the nature of the selves as knowers in all. Therefore they are not given 'to take pleasure in the misfortune of others,' as such feelings proceed from one's identification with one's own special bodily form.
Those who meditate on the Imperishable Principle (individual self) in this way, even they come to Me. It means that they also realise their essential self, which, in respect of freedom from Samsara, is like My own Self. So Sri Krsna will declare later on: 'Partaking of My nature' (14.2). Also the Sruti says: 'Untainted, he attains supreme eality' (Mun. U., 3.1.3).
Likewise He will declare the Supreme Brahman as being distinct from the freed self which is without modification and is denoted by the term 'Imperishable' (Aksara), and is described as unchanging (Kutastha). 'The Highest Person is other than this Imperishable' (15.16 - 17). But in the teaching in Aksara-vidya 'Now that higher science by which that Aksara is known' (Mun. U., 1.5) the entity that is designated by the term Aksara is Supreme Brahman Himself; for He is the source of all beings, etc. Greater is the difficulty of those whose minds are attached to the unmanifest. The path of the unmanifest is a psychosis of the mind with the unmanifest as its object. It is accomplished with difficulty by embodied beings, who have misconceived the body as the self. For, embodied beings mistake the body for the self.
The superiority of those who adore the Supreme Being is now stated clearly: