Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 14 - Shloka (Verse) 5

व्याख्या -- सत्त्वं रजस्तम इति गुणाः प्रकृतिसम्भवाः -- तीसरे और चौथे श्लोकमें जिस मूल प्रकृतिको महद् ब्रह्म नामसे कहा है? उसी मूल प्रकृतिसे सत्त्व? रज और तम -- ये तीनों गुण पैदा होते हैं।यहाँ इति पदका तात्पर्य है कि इन तीनों गुणोंसे अनन्त सृष्टियाँ पैदा होती हैं तथा तीनों गुणोंके तारतम्यसे प्राणियोंके अनेक भेद हो जाते हैं? पर गुण न दो होते हैं? न चार होते हैं? प्रत्युत तीन ही होते हैं।निबध्नन्ति महाबाहो देहे देहिनमव्ययम् -- ये तीनों गुण अविनाशी देहीको देहमें बाँध देते हैं। वास्तवमें देखा जाय तो ये तीनों गुण अपनी तरफसे किसीको भी नहीं बाँधते? प्रत्युत यह पुरुष ही इन गुणोंके साथ सम्बन्ध जोड़कर बँध जाता है। तात्पर्य है कि गुणोंके कार्य पदार्थ? धन? परिवार? शरीर? स्वभाव? वृत्तियाँ? परिस्थितियाँ? क्रियाएँ आदिको अपना मान लेनेसे यह जीव स्वयं अविनाशी होता हुआ भी बँध जाता है? विनाशी पदार्थ? धन आदिके वशमें हो जाता है सर्वथा स्वतन्त्र होता हुआ भी पराधीन हो जाता है। जैसे? मनुष्य जिस धनको अपना मानता है? उस धनके घटनेबढ़नेसे स्वयंपर असर पड़ता है जिन व्यक्तियोंको अपना मानता है? उनके जन्मनेमरनेसे स्वयंपर असर पड़ता है जिस शरीरको अपना मानता है? उसके घटनेबढ़नेसे स्वयंपर असर पड़ता है। यही गुणोंका अविनाशी देहीको बाँधना है।यह बड़े आश्चर्यकी बात है कि यह देही स्वयं अविनाशीरूपसे ज्योंकात्यों रहता हुआ भी गुणोंके? गुणोंकी वृत्तियोंके अधीन होकर स्वयं सात्त्विक? राजस और तामस बन जाता है। गोस्वामी तुलसीदासजी कहते हैं -- ईस्वर अंस जीव अबिनासी। चेतन अमल सहज सुखरासी।। (मानस 7। 117। 1)जीवका यह अविनाशी स्वरूप वास्तवमें कभी भी गुणोंसे नहीं बँधता परन्तु जब वह विनाशी देहको मैं? मेरा और मेरे लिये मान लेता है? तब वह अपनी मान्यताके कारण गुणोंसे बँध जाता है? और उसको परमात्मतत्त्वकी प्राप्तिमें कठिनता प्रतीत होती है (गीता 12। 5)। देहाभिमानके कारण गुणोंके द्वारा देहमें बँध जानेसे वह तीनों गुणोंसे परे अपने अविनाशी स्वरूपको नहीं जान सकता। गुणोंसे देहमें बँध जानेपर भी जीवका जो वास्तविक अविनाशी स्वरूप है? वह ज्योंकात्यों ही रहता है? जिसका लक्ष्य भगवान्ने यहाँ,अव्ययम् पदसे कराया है।यहाँ देहिनम् पदका तात्पर्य है कि देहमें तादात्म्य? ममता और कामना होनेसे ही तीनों गुण इस पुरुषको देहमें बाँधते हैं। यदि देहमें तादात्म्य? ममता और कामना न हो? तो फिर यह परमात्मस्वरूप ही है।विशेष बातशरीरके साथ जीव दो तरहसे अपना सम्बन्ध जोड़ता है -- (1) अभेदभावसे -- अपनेको शरीरमें बैठाना? जिससे मैं शरीर हूँ ऐसा दीखने लगता है? और (2) भेदभावसे -- शरीरको अपनेमें बैठाना? जिससे शरीर मेरा है ऐसा दीखने लगता है। अभेदभावसे सम्बन्ध जो़ड़नेसे जीव अपनेको शरीर मान लेता है? जिसको अहंता कहते हैं और भेदभावसे सम्बन्ध जो़ड़नेसे जीव शरीरको अपना मान लेता है? जिसको,ममता कहते हैं। इस प्रकार शरीरसे अपना सम्बन्ध जोड़नेपर सत्त्व? रज और तम -- तीनों गुण अपनी वृत्तियोंके द्वारा शरीरमें अहंताममता दृढ़ करके जीवको बाँध देते हैं।जैसे विवाह हो जानेपर पत्नीके पूरे परिवार(ससुराल) के साथ सम्बन्ध जुड़ जाता है? पत्नीके वस्त्राभूषण आदिकी आवश्यकता अपनी आवश्यकता प्रतीत होने लगती है? ऐसे ही शरीरके साथ मैंमेरेका सम्बन्ध हो जानेपर जीवका पूरे संसारके साथ सम्बन्ध जुड़ जाता है और शरीरनिर्वाहकी वस्तुओँको वह अपनी आवश्यकता मानने लग जाता है। अनित्य शरीरसे सम्बन्ध (एकात्मता) माननेके कारण वह अनित्य शरीरको नित्य रखनेकी इच्छा करने लगता है क्योंकि वह स्वयं नित्य है। शरीरके साथ सम्बन्ध माननेके कारण ही उसको मरनेका भय लगने लगता है क्योंकि शरीर मरनेवाला है। यदि शरीरसे सम्बन्ध न रहे? तो फिर न तो नित्य बने रहनेकी इच्छा होगी और न मरनेका भय ही होगा। अतः जबतक नित्य बने रहनेकी इच्छा और मरनेका भय है? तबतक वह गुणोंसे बँधा हुआ है।जीव स्वयं अविनाशी है और शरीर विनाशी है। शरीरका प्रतिक्षण अपनेआप वियोग हो रहा है। जिसका अपनेआप वियोग हो रहा है? उससे सम्बन्धविच्छेद करनेमें क्या कठिनता और क्या उद्योग उद्योग है तो केवल इतना ही है कि स्वतः वियुक्त होनेवाली वस्तुको पकड़ना नहीं है। उसको न पकड़नेसे अपने अविनाशी? गुणातीत स्वरूपका अपनेआप अनुभव हो जायगा। सम्बन्ध -- पूर्वश्लोकमें भगवान्ने सत्त्व? रज और तम -- इन तीनों गुणोंके द्वारा देहीके बाँधे जानेकी बात कही। उन तीनों गुणोंमेंसे सत्त्वगुणका स्वरूप और उसके बाँधनेका प्रकार आगेके श्लोकमें बताते हैं।

वे गुण कौनकौनसे हैं और कैसे बाँधते हैं सो कहते हैं --, सत्त्व? रज और तम -- ऐसे नामोंवाले ये तीन गुण हैं। गुण शब्द पारिभाषिक है। यहाँ रूप? रस आदिकी भाँति किसी द्रव्यके आश्रित गुणोंका ग्रहण नहीं है? तथा गुण और गुणवान् ( प्रकृति ) का भेद भी यहाँ विवक्षित नहीं है। जैसे रूपादि गुण द्रव्यके अधीन होते हैं वैसे ही ये सत्त्वादि गुण सदा क्षेत्रज्ञके अधीन हुए ही अविद्यात्मक होनेके कारण मानो क्षेत्रज्ञको बाँध लेते हैं। उस ( क्षेत्रज्ञ ) को आश्रय बनाकर ही ( ये गुण ) अपना स्वरूप प्रकट करनेमें समर्थ होते हैं? अतः बाँधते हैं ऐसा कहा जाता है। जिसकी भुजाएँ अतिशय सामर्थ्ययुक्त और जानु ( घुटनों ) तक लंबी हों? उसका नाम महाबाहु है। हे महाबाहो भगवान्की मायासे उत्पन्न ये तीनों गुण इस शरीरमें शरीरधारी अविनाशी क्षेत्रज्ञको मानो बाँध लेते हैं। क्षेत्रज्ञका अविनाशित्व अनादित्वात् इत्यादि श्लोकमें कहा ही है। पू0 -- पहले यह कहा है कि देही -- आत्मा लिप्त नहीं होता? फिर यहाँ यह विपरीत बात कैसे कही जाती है कि उसको गुण बाँधते हैं। उ0 -- इव शब्दका अध्याहार करके हमने इस शङ्काका परिहार कर दिया है। अर्थात् वास्तवमें नहीं बाँधते? बाँधते हुएसे प्रतीत होते हैं।

Thus, by showing the origin of the world from the union of the Field and Knower, it was stated that Brahman alone transmigrates due to Avidya. Now, having restated the two expectations (questions) mentioned at the beginning of the chapter, He gives the answer with the subsequent verse — 'Ke gunah' (Who are the Gunas?).

Doubting how the word 'Guna' applies to Sattva etc., he says 'because of dependence' — 'Gunah' (Gunas). Doubting why the word 'Guna' in Sattva etc. should not be based on the cause of residing in a substance like color (rupa) etc., he says it is not so because, being of the nature of Prakriti, they are the support of everything — 'Na rupadivat' (Not like color, etc.).

Doubting that since Gunas and Prakriti are mentioned separately, there is a difference, so how can they be of the nature of Prakriti? He says — 'Na ca guna' (And not Guna...). The meaning is that in case of absolute difference, that state (of being one) is impossible, like a cow and a horse. And doubting that in case of difference-cum-identity, since that state is impossible and there is distinction, why is the definition 'Guna' applied to them? He says — 'Tasmat' (Therefore).

He states the cause for their eternal dependence on the Knower of the Field — 'Avidya' (Ignorance). The answer to 'Who are the Gunas?' has been given; he states the answer to 'How do they bind?' — 'Kshetrajnam' (The Knower of the Field). He explains that very point — 'Tam aspadikritya' (Having made Him the support). He states that the material Gunas are of the nature of Prakriti — 'Te ca' (And they). 'Sambhavati asmat' (That from which it arises) is 'sambhava'; those whose 'sambhava' (source) is Prakriti are thus. He distinguishes (this) from the Sankhya Prakriti named Pradhana — 'Bhagavat' (of the Lord).

Explaining the verb 'nibadhnanti' (bind fast) with the adjunct of the word 'iva' (as if) to mean 'showing [Him] as possessing their own modifications', he explains the word 'Mahabahu' — 'Mahantau' (Mighty/Great). The embodied one, thinking the body to be the Self, the master of the body; this is the meaning.

Doubting how the Immutable (Kutastha) can be bound, saying this is the majesty of Maya according to the maxim 'One might imagine Meru to be an atom', he says — 'Avyayam' (Immutable). Regarding the expectation of absence of decay either inherently or through attributes, he says — 'Avyayatvam ca' (And immutability...).

Doubting that the statement 'they bind' is contradictory to 'He is not tainted by sin', he says — 'Nanu' (But/Objection). He says it is not so because this objection has been remedied by us who are interpreting the verb with the adjunct of the word 'iva' — 'Parihritam' (Remedied/Answered).

Thus, by establishing the dependence of Prakriti and Purusha on the Lord in the two (verses), their independence accepted by the Sankhyas is refuted. Now, He ascertains 'Who are the Gunas?' and 'How is the attachment?' — with 'Sattvam', etc., in fourteen (verses). Sattva, Rajas, Tamas — these are the Gunas so named.

The word 'iti' is not definitional like color, etc., nor does it indicate that Sattva, etc., reside in a substance; because being of the nature of Prakriti, they are the support of all. Nor is the difference between quality and qualified intended here; because in absolute difference, that state (of identity) is impossible, like a cow and a horse.

'Therefore', they are 'like' qualities (Gunah iva), eternally dependent; regarding the Knower of the Field, because their acquisition (existence) occurs only by making Him the support. 'Prakritisambhavah' — the equilibrium state of the three Gunas is Prakriti, the Maya of the Lord; she is the 'sambhavah', meaning the cause of manifestation, of whom, they are (born of Prakriti). 'Dehe' (In the body) — the Embodied one, meaning the Jiva who possesses a body and thinks the body is the Self; who is in reality 'Avyayam', meaning changeless, as propounded in the verse 'Anaditvat' (13.32) — they 'nibadhnanti' (bind). By the maxim 'One might imagine Meru to be an atom',

this is the majesty of Maya; the binding of the Immutable is also merely false because it is a product of Maya, but not real; therefore he does not act nor is he tainted. 'He is not tainted by sin', etc. — that the embodied one is not tainted was stated before; that here it is stated otherwise as 'they bind' — such a doubt should not be raised.

'Mahabahu' is one whose arms are mighty, meaning capable, or long reaching to the knees; its address is 'O Mahabaho'. The knowledge 'I am Immutable' alone is the means of liberation from the bondage created by Gunas, and not 'I am mighty-armed'; because the strength of the arm is useless here, and on the contrary, body-identification is the means of bondage; to indicate this, (the address is used).

He shows the mode of bondage for the sake of practicing the means -- with 'Sattva' etc.

Thus, it has been stated that Prakriti creates beings through the support of the Lord. Now, of what nature she is (and how) she binds, that is stated — 'Sattvam' (Sattva).

Prakriti is the state of equilibrium of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas. 'Prakritisambhavah' (Born of Prakriti) are those said to be emerging/increasing from her (from that source) through inequality in a mutual relationship of subsidiary and principal; not that the Gunas are different from Prakriti or from the substance, like those of the Vaisheshikas.

These, O Mighty-armed one; in the body, bind the Embodied one — even though He is Immutable — like a calf to a post, the Gunas becoming the rope.

Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas are the three qualities (Gunas); they are specific natures inherent in the very form of Prakriti; they are to be defined solely by their effects like illumination etc.; in the state of Prakriti they are unmanifest; in its modifications like Mahat etc., they are manifest; they bind this embodied soul who is connected with bodies like gods, humans, etc. formed by elements ranging from Mahat to the specific ones; who is immutable, naturally unfit for connection with qualities, existing in the body; meaning, they bind him due to the limiting adjunct of existing in the body.

He states the form of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas and the mode of bondage --

Thus, having defined the origin of all beings from Prakriti and Purusha who are dependent on the Supreme Lord, now He expands on the Samsara of the Purusha due to the connection with Prakriti -- with 'Sattva' etc. in fourteen verses.

Sattva, Rajas, Tamas -- these three qualities are 'Prakritisambhavah'; those whose origin, birth is from Prakriti are so called.

Prakriti is the equilibrium of Gunas; being manifested separately from it, they bind the embodied one, the part of Consciousness, situated in identification with the body which is an effect of Prakriti, who is in reality immutable, indeed changeless. Meaning, they unite him with their effects like pleasure, pain, delusion, etc.

Objection: In occasional creations etc., birth occurs due to contact with insentient matter created by the Supreme Person's resolve in accordance with ancient Karma? And ancient Karma has given its fruit by that itself? And upon the exhaustion of the Karma that originated it, that body should perish; and the self is naturally pure; whence then is it subject to eternal creation (continuous birth)? To this, He introduces the section on bondage by Gunas -- 'Evam' etc.

Meaning, in the manner stated in the two verses concerning the collective and the individual. Attributes defining the nature never abandon the substance? Therefore, 'born of Prakriti' here implies only manifestation as inequality in the state of effect; with this intention he says 'inherent in the nature of Prakriti'. Meaning unconditional. The word 'iti' is to show the distinction from qualities like sound etc. which are in Prakriti in the state of effect, characterized by being definers of nature and eternally inherent.

He refutes the Sankhyas who say that Sattva etc. are the substance of Prakriti -- 'specific natures'. Meaning specific uncommon attributes. Although uncommon to sentient beings, pleasure, pain etc. are conditional? And natural attributes like substantiality etc. are common? To exclude both, the two words 'inherent in nature' and 'specific natures' are used. By this, Shankara's statement that 'Gunas is a technical term? not dependent on substance like color etc.' is rejected. The idea is that the well-known meaning of the word Guna is contradictory to his view.

Objection: Gunas called Sattva etc. are not seen by perception like sound etc., nor does inference apply to eternal supersensible things, as established in the Shariraka (Brahmasutra); nor do we see a purpose for teaching invisible qualities of Prakriti like crows' teeth; therefore, like the Vaisheshikas etc., it is appropriate to say this refers to something else; to this he says -- 'Prakasha' etc.

This is the intention -- effects like illumination, activity, delusion are perceptible; and their specific causes are inferred generally by those very effects? Since no effect arises without a specific cause; and that specific is of the form of Sattva etc. is established by scripture; nor is it purposeless here? Because it culminates in rejection or acceptance, like the teaching of specific powers of invisible poisons and medicines.

If they are definable only by effects, then in the state of dissolution (Pratisarga), due to absence of effects like pleasure/pain, there would be absence of Gunas like Sattva; then how are they inherent in nature? To this he says -- 'Unmanifest in the state of Prakriti'. The idea is that manifestation, which is the cause of effects, does not exist then. 'In its modifications' etc., like the manifestation of smell etc. in flowers and fruits due to transformation, this is the idea.

How do Gunas situated in Prakriti and its modifications bind the one who is naturally immutable and unfit for connection with Gunas? The answer is the word 'Dehi' (embodied), he says -- 'In Mahat etc.' The word 'Avyaya' here is intended to negate the change in the form of contraction of knowledge caused by connection with Gunas; with this intention he says -- 'Immutable, naturally unfit for connection with Gunas'.

Still, regarding 'Though existing in the body, O Kaunteya, he does not act nor is tainted' [13.31], how is there the taint called bondage? To this, it is intended by 'Dehe' (in the body) that it is conditional upon the connection with the body which is uninterrupted until liberation; he says -- 'Due to the limiting adjunct of existing in the body'. By this, Shankara's bad statement 'They bind the Knower of the Field as it were? Making him the locus, they obtain themselves' is rejected. Indeed this bondage of Gunas cannot be destroyed by strength of forearm; with this intention the word 'Mahabahu' (Mighty-armed) is used. 'Long are the arms of the wise by which the injurer is injured' -- this is the idea. Or, just as by the strength of your arms, enemies are bound.

गुण शब्द अध्यात्मशास्त्र की पारिभाषिक शब्दावली का होने के कारण उसका किसी अन्य भाषा में अनुवाद करना कठिन है। विशेषकर अंग्रेजी में उसका समानार्थी कोई शब्द नहीं है। इसका कारण यह है कि पाश्चात्य मनोविज्ञान अभी भी शैशव अवस्था में ही है। जब उनके द्वारा मनोविज्ञान का सैद्धान्तिक और प्रायोगिक निरीक्षण तथा अध्ययन पूर्ण कर लिया जायेगा? केवल तभी? वे प्रत्येक व्यक्ति के अन्तकरण में उदित होने वाले विचारों पर इन गुणों के पड़ने वाले प्रभाव को समझ पायेंगे।आध्यात्मिक साहित्य में सत्त्व? रज और तम? इन तीन गुणों को क्रमश श्वेत? रक्त और कृष्ण वर्ण के द्वारा सूचित किया जाता है।संस्कृत में गुण शब्द का अर्थ रज्जु अर्थात् रस्सी भी होता है। तात्पर्य यह हुआ कि प्रकृति के ये तीन गुण रज्जु के समान हैं? जो सच्चित्स्वरूप आत्मतत्त्व को असत् और जड़ अनात्मतत्त्व के साथ बांध देते हैं। सारांशत? ये गुण वे तीन विभिन्न प्रकार के भाव हैं जिनके वशीभूत् होकर हमारा मन? निरन्तर परिवर्तनशील परिस्थितियों में विविध प्रकार से अपनी प्रतिक्रियारूपी क्रीड़ा करता रहता है।ये गुण प्रकृति से उत्पन्न हुये हैं। वे आत्मा को देह के साथ मानो बांध देते हैं? जिसके कारण वह जीव भाव को प्राप्त होकर जन्म और मरण के अविरल चक्र और संसार के दुखों में फँस जाता है। जैसा कि पहले भी कहा जा चुका है? प्रकृति के ये गुण द्रव्याश्रित धर्म नहीं हैं। हम केवल इतना ही कह सकते हैं कि ये विभिन्न प्रकार के भाव हैं? जिनके कारण भिन्नभिन्न व्यक्तियों का व्यवहार भिन्नभिन्न प्रकार का होता है।आत्मा और अनात्मा का यह संबंध मिथ्या है? वास्तविक नहीं। देशकालादि के परिच्छेदों से मुक्त आत्मा को इन परिच्छेदों से युक्त? स्वप्न के समान प्रक्षेपित? जड़ उपाधियों के साथ कभी नहीं बांधा जा सकता। वह इनके दोषों से सदा असंस्पृष्ट ही रहता है? जैसे? स्तंभ अपने में अध्यस्त प्रेत से और जाग्रत् पुरुष स्वप्न द्रष्टा के अपराधों से वस्तुत अलिप्त ही रहता है। इसी प्रकार? जब तक त्रिगुण जनित बन्धन बना रहता है? तब तक ऐसा प्रतीत होता है? मानो आत्मा इन अनात्म उपाधियों के संसर्गवशात् जीव भाव को प्राप्त हुआ है? परन्तु यथार्थत वह नित्यमुक्त ही रहता है।उपर्युक्त विवेचन से अब यह स्पष्ट हो जाता है कि किस प्रकार इन गुणों के स्वरूप तथा उनसे उत्पन्न बन्धन की प्रक्रिया का स्पष्ट ज्ञान हमें मुक्ति का अधिकार पत्र प्रदान कर सकता है।अब? भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण सर्वप्रथम सत्त्वगुण का लक्षण बताते हैं

'Sattva' etc.

And this embodied one, as the Self, is bound by the attributes Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas for enjoyment up to liberation.

Objection: The promised knowledge was stated in two verses? Then why is inconsistent text spoken in the subsequent book? To this he says -- 'Bandha' etc.

For he who knows 'I am bound', he alone, desiring to know the means of its cessation, having known it, practices it?

Therefore, for the practice of the means to cut off bondage, to make that known, to produce the desire to know, He first shows the mode of bondage caused by the three Gunas; thus there is no inconsistency, this is the meaning.

So thus, by refuting the godless Sankhya, the dependence of the union of the Field and Knower on the Lord has been stated. Now, in which Guna how attachment occurs, or who the Gunas are, or how they bind, is stated — with 'Sattvam', etc., up to (before) 'Nanyam' (14.19) in fourteen (verses).

Sattva, Rajas, Tamas — the Gunas so named are eternally dependent on the Purusha; because all insentient things exist for the sake of the sentient; not that they reside in a substance like the color etc. of the Vaisheshikas. Nor is the difference between quality and qualified intended here, because Prakriti consists of the three Gunas. Then how are they called 'Prakritisambhavah' (born of Prakriti)? The equilibrium state of the three Gunas is Prakriti, the Maya of the Lord; those transformed from her source through inequality in a mutual relationship of subsidiary and principal are called 'Prakritisambhavah'.

And they, in the body — meaning in the aggregate of body and senses which is the effect of Prakriti — 'nibadhnanti' (bind) the Embodied one, i.e., the Jiva who has fallen into the superimposition of identity with the body; who is 'Avyaya' (Immutable) because in supreme reality He is void of all modifications. (They bind) by showing Him, who is truly modification-less, as if possessing their own modifications, through delusion; just as water-vessels (show) the sun situated in the sky as possessing their own tremors etc., through the superimposition of the reflection. And that there is no real bondage has been explained before with 'Even though situated in the body, O Kaunteya, He does not act nor is He tainted'.

Objection: How is there bondage for the seed situated in bodies etc. produced by the playful Prakriti for the sake of sport? To this He says -- 'Sattvam' etc.

The qualities named Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas are 'Prakritisambhavah', meaning such whose origin, birth is from Prakriti; they 'Nibadhnanti', i.e., subjugate the 'Avyayam', i.e., free from attributes like destruction etc., 'Dehinam', i.e., the Jiva consisting of a part of the Lord's consciousness, who has manifested in that form through that for the sake of enjoyment of qualities?

Because of being intent on taste, this is the meaning.

Sattva, Rajas, Tamas -- thus named. 'Gunah' is a technical term? Gunas are not dependent on substance like color etc. Nor is the difference between quality and qualified intended here.

Therefore, like qualities, being eternally dependent on the Knower of the Field, because they are of the nature of ignorance, they bind the Knower of the Field as it were. Making him the support, they obtain their self (existence); thus it is said 'they bind'.

And they are 'Prakritisambhavah', born of Divine Maya; they bind as it were, O Mighty-armed? He whose arms are great, very capable, reaching down to the knees is Mahabahu (Mighty-armed)? O Mighty-armed, 'Dehe', in the body, 'Dehinam', the possessor of the body, 'Avyayam' (the Immutable)? And immutability has been stated by the verse 'Due to beginninglessness' (Gita 13.31) etc.

Objection: It was said 'The embodied one is not tainted'. Then how is it said differently here 'They bind'? (Answer:) It has been answered by us with the word 'iva' -- 'they bind as it were'.

Among them, the definition of Sattva alone is stated first --

By this, having explained the sport of creation born of His own Nature among Jivas by His own will, now to explain the sport of bondage, He states the Gunas which are the cause of bondage in fourteen verses -- 'Sattvam' etc.

And these, along with their effects, are not qualities of the Self? Rather they are said to belong to Prakriti as 'born of Prakriti'. The Gunas alone bind the generated sentient being in the respective bodies. The attribute of Prakriti alone is the cause of inferiority there, for one possessing the modification of 'I' in the body, not for the one qualified by adjuncts, nor for another.

And the qualities which have come together in Prakriti, which is a part of the Lord, are fundamentally the Sat-Chit-Ananda of the Lord alone; transforming, they become binding defects due to being situated in the inert. Due to the connection with binding (ropes), their name is 'Gunas'. He states exactly that -- 'Nibadhnanti' (they bind).

There, the qualities Sattva etc. arisen from Prakriti bind that Jiva who is atomic in nature, a part of consciousness, identifying with the body, even though he is immutable. 'You, remove that bondage' -- thus He addresses.

सत्त्वम् purity? रजः passion? तमः inertia? इति these? गुणाः alities? प्रकृतिसंभवाः born of Prakriti? निबध्नन्ति bind? महाबाहो O mightyarmed? देहे in the body? देहिनम् the embodied? अव्ययम् the,indestructible.Commentary Sattva is the best. Rajas comes next. Tamas is the lowest and the worst. The three alities indicate the triple mentality. They produce attachment in the individual souls? delude them and bind them down? as it were? to Samsara. Just as the three conditions of childhood? youth and old age are found in the same body? so also the three alities inhere in the mind. The soul gets limited by identifying itself with body and the three alities. It is subject to birth and death and experiences happiness and misery? pleasure and pain? joy and sorrow till it realises its identity with the supreme Self.The word Guna is usually translated as ality. It does not signify property? attribute or ality? such as the blue colour of a cloth. Gunas are really the primary constitutents of Nature and are the basis of all substances. Therefore it is not proper to call them alities inhering in substances.If you want to attain freedom or perfection? if you wish to become immortal? you must rise above the modes of Nature. You must transcend the Gunas.If the water in the vessel is agitated? the reflected sun in the water also appears to be agitated through Pratibimba Adhyasa (superimposition of reflection on water). Even so the pure unchanging Self appears to be bound by the alities of Nature through superimposition. In reality the Self is ever free and untainted. It is beyond them.The Gunas which are only forms of ignorance are ever dependent on the knower of the field. They bind? fast? as it were? the knower of the field. They have him as the basis of their existence.A knowledge of the Gunas and their operation is very necessary. Only if you have this knowledge can you free yourself from their clutches.Mahabaho Mightyarmed with strong and sinewy arms reaching down to the kness. This is a very auspicious sign. Yogis and sages have such beautiful arms.These three Gunas are present in all human beings. No one is free from the operation of any one of the three alities of Nature. They are not constant. Sometimes Sattva predominates at other times Rajas or Tamas predominates.Sattva has the characteristic of effulgence. It is also harmony and goodness or purity. Rajas is passion or activity. Tamas is inertia or darkness.Analyse all phenomena in terms of these three. Know their characteristics. Stand as a witness of these alities. Do not identify yourself with them. Separate yourself from them. Become a Gunatita. You will attain Supreme Peace? immortality and eternal bliss. (Cf.XIII.22)

O mighty-armed one-who are possessed of hands which are great and mighty, and extend upto the knees, gunah, the alities are named sattva, rajas and tamas. And they, prakrti-sambhavah, born of Nature, born of Maya which belongs to God; nibadhnanti, bind, as it were; the avyayam, immutable-the immutability has been spoken of in the verse, 'Being without beginning৷৷.,' etc. (13.31); dehinam, embodied being; dehe, to the body.
The word guna is a technical term, and is not a ality like colour etc. which inhere in some substance. Nor is it meant here that ality and substance are different. Therefore they are ever dependent on the Knower of the field, just as alities are dependent (on some substance). Being of the nature of ignorance, they bind the Knower of the field, as it were. They come into being, making That (Knower) their sustainer. In this sense it is said that they bind.
Objection; Was it not said that the embodied one does not become defiled (see 13.31-2)? So, why as it contrarily said here that 'they bind'?
Reply: We have rutted this objection by using the word iva (as it were) in 'they bind, as it were'.

The three Gunas of Prakrti - Sattva, Rajas and Tamas - are inherent in the essential nature of Prakrti and are particular expressions of it. They can be known only through their effects such as 'brightness' etc. They are not apparent in the unevolved state of Prakrti but become apparent in its transformations as Mahat etc. They bind the self, which is conjoined with bodies such as those of divinities, men etc., composed of the modifications of Prakrti beginning with Mahat and ending with the elements. The self is immutable, i.e., It is not in Its pristine nature conjoined with the Gunas. But the Gunas bind It when residing in the body. The meaning is that they bind It by virtue of the limiting conditions of Its living in the body.
Sri Krsna proceeds to speak of the nature of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas and their modes of binding (the self):