Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 13 - Shloka (Verse) 30

व्याख्या -- प्रकृत्यैव च कर्माणि क्रियमाणानि सर्वशः -- वास्तवमें चेतन तत्त्व स्वतःस्वाभाविक निर्विकार? सम और शान्तरूपसे स्थित है। उस चेतन तत्त्व(परमात्मा) की शक्ति प्रकृति स्वतःस्वाभाविक क्रियाशील है। उसमें नित्यनिरन्तर क्रिया होती रहती है -- प्रकर्षेण करणं (भावे ल्युट्) इति प्रकृतिः। यद्यपि प्रकृतिको सक्रिय और अक्रिय -- दो अवस्थाओंवाली (सर्गअवस्थामें सक्रिय और प्रलयअवस्थामें अक्रिय) कहते हैं? तथापि सूक्ष्म विचार करें तो प्रलयअवस्थामें भी उसकी क्रियाशीलता मिटती नहीं है। कारण कि जब प्रलयका आरम्भ होता है? तब प्रकृति सर्गअवस्थाकी तरफ चलती है। इस प्रकार प्रकृतिमें सूक्ष्म क्रिया चलती ही रहती है। प्रकृतिकी सूक्ष्म क्रियाको ही अक्रियअवस्था कहते हैं क्योंकि इस अवस्थामें सृष्टिकी रचना नहीं होती। परन्तु महासर्गमें जब सृष्टिकी रचना होती है? तब सर्गके आरम्भसे सर्गके मध्यतक प्रकृति सर्गकी तरफ चलती है और सर्गका मध्य भाग आनेपर प्रकृति प्रलयकी तरफ चलती है। इस प्रकार प्रकृतिकी स्थूल क्रियाको सक्रियअवस्था कहते हैं। अगर प्रलय और महाप्रलयमें प्रकृतिको अक्रिय माना जाय? तो प्रलयमहाप्रलयका आदि? मध्य और अन्त कैसे होगा ये तीनों तो प्रकृतिमें सूक्ष्म क्रिया होनेसे ही होते हैं। अतः सर्गअवस्थाकी अपेक्षा प्रलयअवस्थामें अपेक्षाकृत अक्रियता है? सर्वथा अक्रियता नहीं है।सूर्यका उदय होता है? फिर वह मध्यमें आ जाता है और फिर वह अस्त हो जाता है? तो इससे मालूम होता है कि प्रातः सूर्योदय होनेपर प्रकाश मध्याह्नतक बढ़ता जाता है और मध्याह्नसे सूर्यास्ततक प्रकाश घटता जाता है। सूर्यास्त होनेके बाद आधी राततक अन्धकार बढ़ता जाता है और आधी रातसे सूर्योदयतक अन्धकार घटता जाता है। वास्तवमें प्रकाश और अन्धकारकी सूक्ष्म सन्धि मध्याह्न और मध्यरात ही है? पर वह दीखती है सूर्योदय और सूर्यास्तके समय। इस दृष्टिसे प्रकाश और अन्धकारकी क्रिया मिटती नहीं? प्रत्युत निरन्तर होती ही रहती है। ऐसे ही सर्ग और प्रलय? महासर्ग और महाप्रलयमें भी प्रकृतिमें क्रिया निरन्तर होती ही रहती है (टिप्पणी प0 704)।इस क्रियाशील प्रकृतिके साथ जब यह पुरुष सम्बन्ध जोड़ लेता है? तब शरीरद्वारा होनेवाली स्वाभाविक क्रियाएँ (तादात्म्यके कारण) अपनेमें प्रतीत होने लगती हैं। यः पश्यति तथात्मानमकर्तारं स पश्यति -- प्रकृति और उसके कार्य स्थूल? सूक्ष्म और कारणशरीरमें खानापीना? चलनाफिरना? उठनाबैठना? घटनाबढ़ना? हिलनाडुलना? सोनाजागना? चिन्तन करना? समाधिस्थ होना आदि जो कुछ भी क्रियाएँ होती हैं? वे सभी प्रकृतिके द्वारा ही होती हैं? स्वयंके द्वारा नहीं क्योंकि स्वयंमें कोई क्रिया होती ही नहीं -- ऐसा जो देखता है अर्थात् अनुभव करता है? वही वास्तवमें ठीक देखता है। कारण कि ऐसा देखनेसे अपनेमें अकर्तृत्व(अकर्तापन) का अनुभव हो जाता है।यहाँ क्रियाओंको प्रकृतिके द्वारा होनेवाली बताया है? कहीं गुणोंके द्वारा होनेवाली बताया है और कहीं,इन्द्रियोंके द्वारा होनेवाली बताया है -- ये तीनों बातें एक ही हैं। प्रकृति सबका कारण है? गुण प्रकृतिके कार्य हैं और गुणोंका कार्य इन्द्रियाँ हैं। अतः प्रकृति? गुण और इन्द्रियाँ -- इनके द्वारा होनेवाली सभी क्रियाएँ प्रकृतिके द्वारा होनेवाली ही कही जाती हैं।

यह जो कहा कि ईश्वरको सब भूतोंमें सम भावसे स्थित देखता हुआ पुरुष? आत्माद्वारा आत्माका नाश नहीं करता? यह युक्तिसङ्गत नहीं है क्योंकि अपने गुण और कर्मोंकी विलक्षणतासे विभिन्न हुए जीवोंमें इस प्रकार देखना नहीं बन सकता? ऐसी शंका करके कहते हैं --, मायाको प्रकृति समझना चाहिये इत्यादि मन्त्रोंके अनुसार भगवान्की त्रिगुणात्मिका मायाका नाम प्रकृति है? जो कि महत्तत्त्व आदि कार्यकरणके आकारमें परिणत है उस प्रकृतिद्वारा ही मन? वाणी और शरीरसे होनेवाले सारे कर्म? सब प्रकारसे सम्पादन किये जाते हैं अन्य किसीसे नहीं? इस प्रकार जो देखता है। तथा आत्माकोक्षेत्रज्ञको जो समस्त उपाधियोंसे रहित अकर्ता देखता है? वही देखता है अर्थात् वही परमार्थदर्शी है क्योंकि आकाशकी भाँति निर्गुण और विशेषतारहित अकर्ता आत्मामें? भेदभावका होना प्रमाणित नहीं हो सकता। यह अभिप्राय है।

Regarding the contingency of the distinctness of Nature and modifications from the Person as in Sankhya, He refutes -- 'Again' etc. He restates the direct vision generated by instruction -- 'Self alone' etc. He sees the manifoldness of beings -- of modifications -- along with Nature as merged into the Self alone; for the separateness of beings cannot be dissolved into the absolute Supreme while Nature exists (as real/separate), this is the meaning.

Perceiving that the attainment of the nature of everything from Nature down to specific gross objects is from the Full Self alone, he sees their nature as That alone, he says -- 'From That alone' (tata eva). He clarifies that very expansion with the support of Sruti -- 'From the Self'.

'Attaining Brahman' means manifestation as Fullness; because everything that is the cause of lack of fullness has been assimilated into the Self, he says -- 'Brahman indeed'. He indicates that liberation is simultaneous with knowledge -- 'Then' (tada).

(Objection): Well, due to distinctness by qualities like pleasure and pain etc., and by own actions named Dharma and Adharma, since there is difference in every body, equal vision regarding the Selves qualified by those is impossible -- if this is said, He says there. 'Nature' is the Maya of the Lord consisting of three Gunas. From the Sruti "Know Maya as Nature".

'By her alone' 'actions' -- initiated by speech, mind, and body -- are being performed 'in all ways' (sarvashah). And in 'in all ways', there is abundance of modes like being desire-prompted, prohibited, etc.; he who sees (this). Similarly, 'the Self', the Knower of the Field, 'the non-doer', devoid of all adjuncts, One, 'he who sees'; 'he sees', he is the seer of ultimate truth, as before.

Because proof for difference is impossible in the attributeless, non-doer, distinct-less (Self) like the sky, this is the meaning.

'And sees the Self as the non-doer, he sees'.

(Objection): Well, who sees beings of unequal nature with equal intellect, like (seeing) fire with the idea of cold? Doubting this, He says -- "By Nature alone".

'In all ways' -- actions commenced by speech, mind, and body -- are being performed by Nature alone, he who sees this;

similarly, he who sees 'the Self' 'and' (cha) as 'non-doer', in the manner stated before; 'he alone' sees equally everywhere -- this is the connection with the previous.

When, among all beings like gods etc. which consist of the two principles Nature and Person, he sees their 'separate existence' (prithag-bhavam) -- like godhood, manhood, shortness, tallness, etc. -- as 'situated in one' (ekastham), situated in one principle, situated in Nature; not situated in the Self;

and when he sees the expansion of differences like successive sons, grandsons, etc. 'from that alone' (tata eva) -- from Nature alone;

'then indeed' he 'attains Brahman' -- he attains the Self having the sole form of unlimited knowledge, this is the meaning.

(Objection): Well, when inequality is seen due to the agency of good and bad actions, how is there equality of the Self? Doubting this, He says -- "By Nature alone".

By Nature alone -- transformed into the form of body and senses -- actions are being performed "in all ways" -- he who sees this; and similarly sees 'the Self' 'and' as 'non-doer' -- that the agency of the Self is only due to identification with the body, not by Itself -- he who sees thus; 'he alone' sees rightly, not another, this is the meaning.

Now, the difference in properties like being the direct locus of action and the absence thereof is stated -- by the two verses beginning with "By Nature alone". Here 'actions' are contraction, expansion, etc.

Mere perception of the nature of actions being performed by Nature is common to the wise and the ignorant; but for the wise, seeing that they are being performed by Nature is the distinction; thus to clarify the acceptable part -- "Being performed" (Kriyamanani) -- this (quote) is made.

He establishes non-doership by the pure form intended by the word 'Self' -- "Of the form of knowledge". Or the reading is "Of the form of the Knower" (Jnatakaram).

How then is there subjection to scripture and experiencership of its fruit etc.? To this he says -- "Of him". Since all this is based on the stream of adjuncts revolving like a wheel, there is no defect, this is the sense.

विभिन्न मोटर कम्पनियों के द्वारा निर्मित विभिन्न अश्वशक्ति की असंख्य कारों में से प्रत्येक वाहन का कार्य सम्पादन विशिष्ट होता है। इससे हम यह नहीं कह सकते कि इन कारों में प्रयुक्त पेट्रोल विभिन्न क्षमताओं का है। बल्ब अनेक हैं? परन्तु विद्युत् तो एक ही है। ये दृष्टान्त इस श्लोक में व्यक्त किये गये आत्मैकत्व के सिद्धान्त को भली भाँति स्पष्ट करते हैं।सब कर्म आत्मा की केवल उपस्थिति में प्रकृति से उत्पन्न उपाधियों के द्वारा ही किये जाते हैं। अब विभिन्न व्यक्तियों के कर्मों में जो भेद है? वह उनके विभिन्न शुभाशुभ संस्कारों और इच्छाओं के कारण है? आत्मा के कारण नहीं। केवल क्षेत्र या क्षेत्रज्ञ में कोई कर्म नहीं होते हैं।आत्मा अकर्ता है कर्म करने के लिये शरीरादि कारणों की और मन में इच्छा की आवश्यकता होती है? परन्तु आत्मा सर्वव्यापी? निराकार और सर्व उपाधि रहित होने से उसमें कोई कर्म ही नहीं हो सकते? तो फिर वह कर्ता कैसे हो सकता है आत्मा के अकर्तृत्व के विषय में अन्य कारण भी आगे प्रस्तुत किये जायेंगे।जो प्रकृति की क्रियाओं में आत्मा को अकर्ता जानता है? वही पुरुष वास्तव में तत्त्व को देखता है। उपाधियों के अभाव में समस्त जीवों के गुणों और कर्मों की विलक्षणता का अभाव होकर केवल परमात्मा ही स्वस्वरूप में अवस्थित रह जाता है।पुन? ज्ञानी पुरुष के सम्यक् दर्शन को दूसरे शब्दों में बताते हुये कहते हैं

'By Nature'. For he who has such a very firm understanding that "Nature alone does this, not I anything", he, even while doing everything, does not do.

Thus is non-doership.

Regarding 'By Nature alone and', someone states the connection as 'He who sees actions being performed by Nature alone, he sees the Self as non-doer';

that is incorrect, because of the contingency of the futility of the word 'tathā' (similarly); with this thought, he explains differently -- 'And the Self'. He sees the Supreme Lord.

(Objection): Well, the agents of good and bad actions are Selves different in every body and unequal due to being enjoyers of respective various fruits, so how was it said 'seeing the one Self situated in all beings equally, he does not kill the Self by the self'? -- To this He says -- 'By Nature alone'.

Actions -- commenced by speech, mind, and body -- 'in all ways', by all modes, are being performed 'by Nature alone' -- which has transformed into the form of the aggregate of body and senses, which is the cause of all effects and modifications, consisting of three Gunas, which is indeed the Lord's Maya -- and not by the Person who is devoid of all modifications; he who, the discriminating one, sees (this);

and thus, even in actions being performed by the Field, 'similarly' (tathā) sees 'the Self', the Knower of the Field, as 'non-doer', devoid of all adjuncts, unattached, one, equal everywhere.

The word 'tathā' is for attracting the verb 'sees'. 'He sees', he is the seer of ultimate truth, as before.

Even though the Field with modifications differs and is unequal in every body due to the agency of respective various actions, there is no proof whatsoever for difference in the attributeless, non-doer Self, like the sky -- this has been established before.

(Objection): Well, if He alone exists everywhere in all forms, then why do not all see (Him) thus? Doubting this, He says -- 'By Nature alone'.

He who sees actions useful for sport alone being performed 'by Nature'; by 'and' (cha), being caused to be performed; similarly, he who sees 'the self', the Jiva, as 'non-doer', incapable of doing anything in the absence of His (Lord's) will; 'he sees' the Supreme Lord -- this is to be supplied.

Or, he alone sees, others are indeed blind, this is the sense.

'By Nature' -- Nature is the Lord's Maya consisting of three Gunas; from the Mantra text 'Know Maya indeed as Nature' (Sve. U. 4.10); by Her, 'by Nature alone' -- and not by another -- transformed into the form of effects and instruments like Mahat etc., 'actions' -- commenced by speech, mind, and body -- 'being performed', being accomplished, 'in all ways', by all modes; he who 'sees', perceives;

'similarly' sees 'the Self', the Knower of the Field, as 'non-doer', devoid of all adjuncts; 'he sees'; he is the seer of ultimate truth, this is the intention. For there is impossibility of proof regarding difference in the attributeless, non-doer, distinctless (Self), like the sky, this is the meaning.

Again he elaborates that very right vision with other words --

He states the fruit in the vision of the second (form of) himself also -- 'By Nature alone'.

In Sankhya, actions are being performed 'by Nature alone'; agency, due to having activity, rests in Nature; but not in the mere Self, the nature of Jiva, which is atomic in size and of the form of consciousness; even though (there is agency) only through the continuity of the status of being a part of the Purushottama who is the main Doer; but in the qualification by the adjunct of the two bodies (gross and subtle), the agency there is indeed material (Prakrita), this should be contemplated;

and thus, he who finally sees 'the self' -- his own nature, the unconditional state -- as 'non-doer', 'he sees', but others are blind.

प्रकृत्या by Nature? एव alone? च and? कर्माणि actions? क्रियमाणानि being performed? सर्वशः all? यः who? पश्यति sees? तथा so also? आत्मानम् the Self? अकर्तारम् actionless? सः he? पश्यति sees.Commentary Nature is responsible for all activities. The Self is beyond all action. It is the silent witness only. He who experiences thus is the real seer or sage.He who knows that all actions proceeding from the five organs of knowledge? the five organs of action? the mind and the intellect are prompted by Nature and that the Self is actionless? really sees. He alone sees. He who identifies himself with the body? the mind and the senses and foolishly thinks that the Self is the actor is an ignorant man. He sees only with the physical eyes. He has no inner eye of intuition. The sky remains motionless but the clouds move across the sky. Even so the Self is actionless but Nature does everythin. The Self is destitute of any limiting adjunct. Just as there is no variety in ether? so also there is no variety in the Self. It is one homogeneous essence. It is free from any kind of characteristics. (Cf.III.27XIV.19XVIII.16)

And yah, he who; pasyati, sees, realizes; karmani, actions, those performed through speech, mind and body; as kriyamanani, being done, being accomplished; sarvasah, in various ways; prakrtya, by Nature-Nature is God's Maya consisting of the three alities, as is said in the Upanisadic text, 'However, know Maya as Nature' (Sv. 4.10); by that Nature; eva, itself-not by the other [Not by the Pradhana of the Sankhyas, known otherwise as prakrti.] which transforms itself in the form of cause and effects such as Mahat etc.; tatha, and also; atmanam, the Self, the Knower of the field; as akartaram, the non-agent, devoid of all adjuncts; sah, he; pasyati, sees-he is the one who has realized the supreme Reality. This is the idea. What is implied is that there is no valid proof about differences in the Non-agent who is devoid of alities and is unconditioned like space.
The Lord elaborates again in other words that very true knowledge:

When he perceives that 'all acts are performed by the Prakrti' in the manner previously stated in, 'Prakrti is said to be the cause of agency to the body and sense-organs' (13.20), and perceive also that 'the self, being of the form of knowledge, is not the doer,' and that the self's conjunction with the Prakrti, Its direction of the body and Its experiences of happiness and misery are the result of ignorance of the nature of Karma - then indeed he perceives the pure self.