Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 14 - Shloka (Verse) 19

व्याख्या -- नान्यं गुणेभ्यः ৷৷. मद्भावं सोऽधिगच्छति -- गुणोंके सिवाय अन्य कोई कर्ता है ही नहीं अर्थात् सम्पूर्ण क्रियाएँ गुणोंसे ही हो रही हैं? सम्पूर्ण परिवर्तन गुणोंमें ही हो रहा है। तात्पर्य है कि सम्पूर्ण क्रियाओं और परिवर्तनोंमें गुण ही कारण हैं? और कोई कारण नहीं है। वे गुण जिससे प्रकाशित होते हैं? वह तत्त्व गुणोंसे पर है। गुणोंसे पर होनेसे वह कभी गुणोंसे लिप्त नहीं होता अर्थात् गुणों और क्रियाओँका उसपर कोई असर नहीं पड़ता। ऐसे उस तत्त्वको जो विचारकुशल साधक जान लेता है अर्थात् विवेकके द्वारा अपनेआपको गुणोंसे पर? असम्बद्ध? निर्लिप्त अनुभव कर लेता है कि गुणोंके साथ अपना सम्बन्ध न कभी,हुआ है? न है? न होगा और न हो ही सकता है। कारण कि गुण परिवर्तनशील हैं और स्वयंमें कभी परिवर्तन होता ही नहीं। वह फिर मेरे भावको? मेरे स्वरूपको प्राप्त हो जाता है। तात्पर्य है कि वह जो भूलसे गुणोंके साथ अपना सम्बन्ध मानता था? वह मान्यता मिट जाती है और मेरे साथ उसका जो स्वतःसिद्ध सम्बन्ध है? वह ज्योंकात्यों रह जाता है।

प्रकृतिमें स्थित होनारूप मिथ्याज्ञानसे युक्त पुरुषका सुखदुःखमोहात्मक भोगरूप गुणोंमें मैं सुखी? दुखी अथवा मूढ हूँ इस प्रकारका जो सङ्ग है? वह सङ्ग ही इस पुरुषकी अच्छीबुरी योनियोंमें जन्मप्राप्तिरूप संसारका कारण है। यह बात जो पहले तेरहवें अध्यायमें संक्षेपसे कही थी? उसीको यहाँ सत्त्वं रजस्तम इति गुणाः प्रकृतिसंभवाः इस श्लोकसे लेकर ( उपर्युक्त श्लोकतक ) गुणोंका स्वरूप? गुणोंका कार्य? अपने कार्यद्वारा गुणोंका बन्धकत्व तथा गुणोंके कार्यद्वारा बँधे हुए पुरुषकी जो गति होती है? इन सब मिथ्याज्ञानरूप अज्ञानमूलक बन्धनके कारणोंको? विस्तारपूर्वक बतलाकर? अब यथार्थ ज्ञानसे मोक्ष ( कैसे होता है सो ) बतलाना चाहिये? इसलिये भगवान् बोले --, जिस समय द्रष्टा पुरुष ज्ञानी होकर? कार्य? करण और विषयोंके आकारमें परिणत हुए गुणोंसे अतिरिक्त अन्य किसीको ( भी ) कर्ता नहीं देखता है? अर्थात् यही देखता है कि समस्त अवस्थाओंमें स्थित हुए गुण ही,समस्त कर्मोंके कर्ता हैं तथा गुणोंके व्यापारके साक्षीरूप आत्माको गुणोंसे पर जानता है? तब वह द्रष्टा मेरे भावको प्राप्त होता है।

Having set aside the questions like 'in which Guna', 'how', etc., and for the purpose of answering 'how liberation from Gunas occurs', preceded by a restatement of what has passed, he introduces the right knowledge which is the remover of false knowledge — with 'Purushasya', etc. 'And that which is the goal of the Purusha' is the remaining part (to be supplied).

Moksha is the state of being Brahman preceded by separation from the Gunas. To explain the verse dedicated to the statement of right knowledge, he takes up the symbol (first word) — 'Nanyam' (Not other). He states the intended meaning of the word 'Guna', which has the effects of Sattva etc. as its object — 'Karya' (Effect), etc. Immediate succession to knowledge is the meaning of the word 'Anu'.

Having stated the literal meaning, he states the implied meaning of the first half — 'Guna eva' (Gunas alone). The import is: all states transformed into the forms of the respective effects and instruments. Of all actions, bodily, verbal, and mental, enjoined and prohibited; this is the meaning. 'Param' means distinct/separate. He clarifies the distinctness itself — 'Guna' (etc.).

The meaning is: the Self as Attribute-less Brahman. 'Madbhavam', i.e., the nature of being the Self of Brahman, he attains. His state of being Brahman is manifested; this is the meaning.

The attachment of the Person, who is endowed with false knowledge by nature of being situated in Prakriti, to the enjoyable qualities consisting of pleasure, pain, and delusion, in the form 'I am happy, miserable, deluded', is the cause of the Samsara of the Person characterized by obtaining birth in good and evil wombs" -- thus what was said briefly in the previous chapter by "Purushah prakritistho hi bhungkte prakritijan gunan. Karanam gunasango'sya sadasadyonijanmasu" [13.22],

that in this chapter [beginning with] "Sattvam rajastama iti gunah" [14.5]...

He does not see the transforming agent as other than the Gunas. Otherwise, there would be contradiction with the Shruti "When the seer sees the golden-hued maker, the Lord, the Person, the source of Brahma" [Mundaka 3.1.3].

"Neither am I the doer, nor are you the doer, the doer is He who is always the Lord" -- this is in Mokshadharma.

The answer to 'How does Prakriti bind the Purusha?' has been stated. Or, regarding 'How is his liberation from that?', He states the answer -- 'Nanyam' etc.

'Gunebhyah' (Than the Gunas), which are transformed into the forms of effects, instruments, and objects, other than them, the Self which is pure consciousness; 'Drashta' (the seer), the Jiva, 'Kartaram na anupashyati' (does not see a doer), does not see following discrimination. But sees that 'Gunas alone are doers', not that 'I am the doer'.

And if he knows 'Mam' (Me) as 'Param' (higher) than the Gunas, as the witness of the operation of Gunas, then that knower attains My state, the state of Brahman. Otherwise, he has gone to the state of Gunas.

Thus, by service of Sattvic food and performance of actions in the form of worship of the Lord devoid of desire for fruit, having overpowered Rajas and Tamas in every way, being established in excellent Sattva, when this seer does not see a doer other than the Gunas? Sees that 'Gunas alone are doers in activities corresponding to themselves'? And knows (what is) higher than the Gunas? Knows the Self as a non-doer other than the doer-Gunas? He attains 'Madbhavam'? Attains that which is My state.

This is what is said -- The doership in various actions of the Self, who is naturally of pure nature, is caused by attachment to Gunas rooted in previous karmas? But the Self is naturally a non-doer, of the sole form of unlimited knowledge; when he sees the Self thus? Then he attains My state.

'Seeing the Self as a non-doer other than the doer-Gunas, he attains the state of the Lord' - this has been said? What kind is that state of the Lord? To this, He says here --

Thus, having spoken of the expanse of Samsara caused by attachment to the qualities of Prakriti, now He shows liberation through discrimination from that -- 'Nanyam' etc.

But when the seer, having become discriminative, does not see a doer other than the Gunas transformed into forms like intellect etc.? But rather sees that 'Gunas alone perform actions'? And knows the Self as 'higher than the Gunas', distinct, their witness; he attains, reaches My state, Brahman-hood.

Objection: 'Existing in Sattva, they go upwards' [14.18] — if liberation is asserted for one established in Sattva, then the subsequent statement about liberation for one who has transcended the three Gunas would be contradicted? To address this doubt, he introduces the subsequent text — with 'Ahara visheshaih' (By special foods).

That special foods etc. are the cause for the increase of Sattva is established before and after. The transcendence of the worldly three Gunas, and the upward movement through increased Sattva is well-consistent; this is the idea.

'Eating the remnants of the sacrifice' [3.13], 'The enjoyer of sacrifices and austerities' [5.29], 'Overpowering Rajas and Tamas, Sattva arises, O Bharata' [14.10] — in accordance with these previously stated points, he states the meaning relevant to the context — with 'Evam sattvikahara' (Thus, sattvic food), etc.

'Sarvatmana' (By the whole self) means 'apunarudbhavam' (non-rebirth); this is the meaning.

'Sees no doer other than the Gunas' — this is a negation of doership for anyone other than the Gunas. There, lest the understanding arise that the agent-Self is not different from the Gunas, he says — 'Guna eva' (Gunas alone).

To dispel the doership characterized by being the locus of effort which is a property of the person (Purusha), he says — 'Svanuguna...' (Doers in activities suitable to themselves).

Since seeing doership in some cases is possible even for those who do not know the Self, a distinction from that is stated — 'Gunebhyashca' (And from the Gunas). To restrict the 'supremacy' (paratam) relative to the form under discussion, he says — 'Kartribhyah' (Than the doers). By the statement 'Higher than the doers', the notion of possessing superior doership is dispelled — 'Anyam' (Other).

Although doership is not contradictory even if there is 'otherness' like the Gunas are different from each other, here the absence of the form under discussion is what is intended by the word 'Anyam' (Other); he says — 'Akartaram' (Non-doer). It means not being the locus of activities based on Gunas, and inherently unfit for activities rooted in them.

The subsequent text is for dispelling the delusion of identity of essence (svarupa-aikya); with this intention, he states the meaning of the word 'Madbhavam' — 'Mama yo bhavah' (My nature which is...).

The knowledge of the doership of Gunas is useless? And the non-doership of the Self is contrary to 'The Agent, on account of the scripture having a purport' [Brahma Sutra 2.3.33], etc.? To this, he says — 'Etaduktam' (This is stated). In actions of the nature of merit and demerit and in worldly actions, doership is unnatural; but being the locus of effort is not (unnatural); with this intention he says — 'Atmanah svatah' (Of the Self, inherently). By this, it is also shown that the word 'Para' here is not intended to refer to the Supreme Self.

'Vividhakarmasu' (In various actions) means in worldly Sattvic, Rajasic, and Tamasic actions; this is the meaning. 'Svatastvakarta' (But inherently a non-doer) means only in those (actions) created by Gunas; otherwise, it would contradict 'eating, playing' [Chandogya 8.12.3], etc.

Here, by 'Madbhavam', identity (tadatmyam) might be understood? And that is contrary to what was stated before 'Attained to My likeness' [14.2]. And the Shruti says 'Attains supreme equality' [Mundaka 3.1.3]. And another Shruti says 'As pure water poured into pure (water) becomes exactly like that; so becomes the self of the sage who knows, O Gautama' [Katha 2.4.15]. Here, even in the contact of two waters, since identity of essence (svarupa-aikya) is impossible, and due to the natural force of the word 'tadrk' (like that), the purport of 'equality' is clear. And Vasistha to Janaka says — 'Meeting with the Supreme, this one becomes possessing supreme attributes indeed; meeting with the Pure and the Awakened/Wise, he becomes possessing pure attributes and wise. Meeting with the Liberated, he becomes liberated indeed then (O best of men). And meeting with one characterized by separation, he becomes a separated self. Meeting with the specially released, he becomes specially released here then. With the Clean (Radiant), he becomes Clean (possessing pure attributes) and of immeasurable brilliance. This one becomes a stainless soul meeting with the Stainless Soul. And so too, meeting with the Absolute (Kevala), he becomes the Absolute Soul. And the independent meeting with the Independent obtains independence' [Mahabharata 12.308.2630].

अब तक किये गये वर्णन से तो आत्मा का ऐसा दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण चित्र सामने उभरकर आता है कि मानों वह कभी इन गुणों के बन्धन से मुक्त ही नहीं हो सकता। गीता के अध्येता को इस स्थल पर निराशा का अनुभव हो सकता है। जब तक हम रेलगाड़ी में आसीन रहेंगे? तब तक रेल की गति हमारी गति होगी। परन्तु जैसे ही हम गन्तव्य स्थान पर उतर जाते हैं? तब हम स्थिर हो जाते हैं हैं? केवल रेल गतिमान रहती है। इसी प्रकार? देहादि उपाधियों को ही अपना स्वरूप समझकर उनसे तादात्म्य करने पर उनके विकारों को हम अपने ही विकार मानकर दुख? कष्ट और बन्धन का अनुभव करते हैं। तात्पर्य यह हुआ कि आत्मा के अनुभव में आने वाला बन्धन अविद्याजनित (मिथ्या) है? वास्तविक नहीं। अत उपाधियों में स्थित अहंभाव को त्यागकर उसके साक्षीस्वरूप आत्मा में स्थिति प्राप्त करना ही तीनगुणों से मुक्ति है।निदिध्यासन की साधना में इस तादात्म्य की निवृत्ति और स्वस्वरूप में स्थिति प्राप्त करने का अभ्यास किया जाता है। जिस साधक में ध्यान की योग्यता है? वह आत्मा को देखेगा अर्थात् साक्षात् आत्मरूप से अनुभव करेगा। यह आत्मा समस्त दोषों से सर्वथा मुक्त है परन्तु यह देखना घटपटादि दृश्य वस्तु को देखने के समान नहीं है आत्मा इन्द्रिय? मन और बुद्धि का भी द्रष्टा है? उनका दृश्य नहीं। दर्शन से तात्पर्य ऐसे निश्चयात्मक ज्ञान से है? जिसको प्राप्त कर लेने के पश्चात् तत्त्व के विषय में संकल्पविकल्प करने का कोई अवसर ही नहीं रह जाता।गुणों के अतिरिक्त किसी अन्य को कर्ता नहीं देखता आत्मानुभवी पुरुष न केवल अपने अनन्तस्वरूप को पहचानता है? वरन् यह भी जानता है कि अब तक जिस अहंकार को कर्तृत्व का अभिमान था वह इन गुणों के अतिरिक्त कोई वस्तु नहीं है? अर्थात् अहंकार उन गुणों का ही कार्य है। ये गुण ही हमारे विचारों पर शासन करके उनकी दिशा को निर्धारित करते हैं। अत कर्तृत्वभोक्तृत्वादि अभिमान जिसमें स्थित है? वह सूक्ष्म शरीर यहाँ गुण शब्द से सूचित किया गया है।और गुणों से परे तत्त्व को जो जानता है मन स्वयं जड़ होने के कारण न कुछ कार्य कर सकता है और न स्वयं अपनी वृत्तियों को देख सकता है। अत जो चेतन तत्त्व उसे चेतनता प्रदान कर कार्यक्षम बनाता है? वह उस मन से भिन्न ही होगा। यदि किसी पात्र में रखा जल पिघले हुये रजत के समान चमक रहा हो? तो इसका अर्थ यह हुआ कि उसने वह प्रभा सूर्य से प्राप्त की होगी। जल में अपनी स्वयं की कोई चमक नहीं होती। अब यदि उस जल में स्थित सूर्य का प्रतिबिम्ब छिन्नभिन्न होता है? तो उसका कारण पात्र में स्थित जल का स्वभाव होगा? न कि स्वयं सूर्य ही आकाश में नृत्य कर रहा होगा मन की उपाधि में व्यक्त हुआ चैतन्य ही व्यष्टि जीव कहलाता है? जिसे उपाधि के परिच्छेदों का कष्ट अनुभव होता है।जो पुरुष जीवभाव को त्यागकर उसके बिम्बभूत सच्चिदानन्द आत्मा को अपने स्वरूप से पहचान लेता है? वही पुरुष सभी परिच्छेदों के बन्धनों? दुख के अश्रुओं और निराशाओं के निश्वासों से सदा के लिये मुक्त हो जाता है।वह मेरे स्वरूप को प्राप्त होता है उपनिषद् की घोषणा के अनुसार आत्मवित् पुरुष स्वयं ही आत्मा बन जाता है। मेरे स्वरूप से तात्पर्य आत्मस्वरूप से ही है। भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण को देवकीपुत्र या वृन्दावन के मुरली मनोहर कृष्ण ही नहीं समझना चाहिये। यहाँ श्रीकृष्ण भूतमात्र की आत्मा के रूप में उपदेश दे रहे हैं और गीता के प्रत्येक अध्येता को यह समझना चाहिये कि उसकी आत्मा ही जीव को उपदेश दे रही है।जाग्रतपुरुष स्वप्न में ऐसी स्थिति को उत्पन्न करता है कि वहाँ स्वप्नद्रष्टा के रूप में वह वस्तुओं को प्राप्त कर या खोकर सुखी और दुखी होता है। ये समस्त सुखदुख स्वयं में ही निहित स्वप्नद्रष्टा को होते हैं। जब वह स्वप्न से जागता है? तो स्वप्न जगत् और उसके बन्धन समाप्त हो जाते हैं और स्वयं स्वप्नद्रष्टा ही जाग्रतपुरुष बन जाता है। कल्पना कीजिये कि स्वप्नवस्था में उस दुखी स्वप्न द्रष्टा को उसकी जाग्रत अवस्था की चेतना आकर उपदेश देती है? तो वह यही श्लोक कहेगी कि जब स्वप्नद्रष्टा तुम स्वप्न देखने वाले मन के अतिरिक्त किसी कर्ता को नहीं देखोगे? और अपने में ही उस तत्त्व को जानोगे? जो इस मन से परे हैं तब तुम मेरे इस स्वरूप को अर्थात् जाग्रत की चेतना को प्राप्त होगे।इसी प्रकार? यहाँ चैतन्य की दृष्टि से उपदेश देते हैं कि जो मनुष्य अपने जाग्रतस्वप्नसुषुप्ति के व्यक्तित्व को त्यागकर उससे परे स्थित आत्मस्वरूप को पहचानता है? वही वास्तव में परम सत्य का जाग्रत पुरुष कहा जा सकता है। वह स्वयं आत्मस्वरूप (मद्भाव) बन जाता है।इस ज्ञान के फल को और अधिक स्पष्ट करते हुये भगवान् कहते है

'Karmanah' etc. up to 'Ashnute'.

Here some unconnected verses are imagined? Because of being repetitive (having repetitive meaning), they are indeed to be rejected.

But this conduct beyond Gunas (or hearing about transcending Gunas) is meant for liberation alone.

'Nanyam gunebhyah kartaram' (Not a doer other than Gunas); by this 'independent doership belongs to Gunas alone? Not to another' is being said - to refute this wrong explanation, he says -- 'Parinami' etc. (Referring to Madhvacharya's commentary).

Why is this? To this he says -- 'Anyatha' (Otherwise), in the absence of doership for one other than Gunas.

In Mokshadharma, the doership of the Supreme Lord is stated, and there would be contradiction with that - this is the remainder of the sentence.

In this chapter, three subjects are presented as matters to be stated. Among them, the dependence of the union of the Field and Knower on the Lord; and who the Gunas are; or how they bind — these two subjects have been stated. But now, how liberation from the Gunas occurs; and what is the characteristic of the liberated — this remains to be stated.

There, since the Gunas are of the nature of false knowledge, liberation from them occurs through right knowledge, he says — 'Gunebhyah' (Than the Gunas), i.e., transformed into the forms of effects (body/objects) and instruments (senses), when the 'Drashta' (Seer), i.e., being skilled in inquiry, 'anupashyati' (sees accordingly), i.e., sees following reflection, 'no other agent' (nanyam kartaram); he sees that 'Guna eva' (Gunas alone) — having attained the states of internal organ, external instruments, body, and objects — are the doers of all actions.

'Gunebhyashca' (And than the Gunas) — i.e., transformed into those respective special states — 'Param' (Higher/Beyond), i.e., untouched by the Gunas and their effects, illuminating them like the sun is untouched by water and its tremors etc., the Immutable, the Witness of all, everywhere equal, the One Knower of the Field, he knows; 'Madbhavam' (My state), i.e., My nature, 'sah drashta' (that seer) attains.

Thus having spoken of the forms of Gunas etc. produced by His own will for His own sport, he who is devoid of the notion of highness etc. in the attributes of high, middle, low created (by Gunas), who possesses knowledge of My sport, who is free from attachment to them, he attains My devotion - for this purpose this is described, He says -- 'Nanyam' etc.

When, at a time distinguished by My grace, the seer, the discriminative one, sees the Doer, the root of all, through the Gunas which are forms manifested for His own sport? 'Na anyam' (Not another); and again knows the Purushottama as higher than the Gunas which have diverse forms; he attains My state, My devotion? Meaning attains.

Here the idea is -- By seeing the various diversities caused by Gunas, by knowledge of the greatness of Purushottama, seeing that diversity everywhere, (seeing) the Doer of that who has manifested in that form, 'Anu' (following that), just as the Lord sees (the world) as His own self alone, so he sees? He does not see anyone else; he attains My state.

'Na anyam' (Not another), other than the Gunas transformed into the forms of effects, instruments, and objects, a doer, when the seer, becoming wise, 'na anupashyati' (does not see)?

Sees thus: 'Gunas alone, in all states, are the doers of all actions'? And knows 'higher than the Gunas', the witness of the operation of Gunas?

'Madbhavam', My state, that seer attains.

How does he attain? It is said --

Thus, in the description of the division of creation by Gunas, having explained the sport of bondage for every Purusha, now, through discrimination from that, through transcending Gunas, He speaks of the sport of liberation in two verses -- 'Nanyam' etc.

When he does not see a doer other than the Gunas; sees that Gunas alone are doers in activities corresponding to themselves; and knows the Self beyond the Gunas; then the seer attains My state, the state of Akshara Brahman; because of the Shruti 'Knower of Brahman becomes Brahman indeed' [Mundaka 3.2.9].

For Brahman is attributeless, Himself immutable; then, transcending these three Gunas, he 'Ashnute', attains, immortality, or enjoys the bliss of Brahman.

न not? अन्यम् other? गुणेभ्यः than the Gunas? कर्तारम् agent? यदा when? द्रष्टा the seer? अनुपश्यति beholds? गुणेभ्यः than the alities? च and? परम् higher? वेत्ति knows? मद्भावम् My Being? सः he? अधिगच्छति,attains to.Commentary The Supreme Self is in no way contaminated by the alities. The liberated sage exclaims I am the witness of the alities. I am neither the enjoyer nor the doer. The alities form the motive power of all actions. I am beyond the Gunas. The Gunas alone are responsible for all actions. I am entirely distinct from the alities. I am pure consciousness. I cannot be touched by the alities. I am like the ether.When a man gets illumination or attains knowledge of the Self? when he realises that there is no agent except the Gunas which are themselves modified as the bodies? the senses and their objects? when he knows that it is the Gunas only that become the agent in all transformations? in all states and in all actions? and when he realises the Supreme Self Who is distinct from the Gunas? Who is the silent witness of the Gunas and their functions? he attains to My state (liberation)? i.e.? becomes identical with Me. He becomes a Gunatita? i.e.? one who has transcended the three Gunas.

Yada, when; drasta, the witness, after becoming illumined; anupasyati, sees; na anyam, none other; gunhyah, than the alities that have transformed into the shape of body, orgnas and objects; kartaram,as the agent-(i.e.) he sees thus that the alities themselves, in all their modes, are the agents of all activities; ca, and; vetti, knows; that which, standing as the witness of the activities of the alities, is param, superior; gunhyah, to the alities; sah, he, the witness; adhigacchati, attains; madbhavam, My nature.
How does he attain? That is being stated:

The seer has in the first place to totally subdue his Rajas and Tamas and stay in pure Sattva. This is accomplished through nourishment by Sattvika food and the performance of disinterested actions for the propitiation of the Lord. He then perceives 'no agent of action other than the Gunas' i.e., sees that the Gunas are themselves the agents according to their nature. Further he perceives what is 'other than the Gunas,' i.e., perceives the Gunas which are agents and the self who is not an agent of action. Such a seer attains to 'My state,' i.e., gains likeness with Me in transcending the three Gunas etc. The purport is this: The self, pure in nature by Itself, gains agency through varius actions by contact with the Gunas springing from past Karmas. When one perceives the self in this way, namely, that the self by Itself is no agent of actions and is of the nature of infinite knowledge, then It attains to My likeness.
It is stated that one attains to the likeness of the Lord after perceiving the self as a non-agent and as other than the Gunas. What is meant by the state of likeness to the Lord? Sri Krsna now describes it: