Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 17 - Shloka (Verse) 2

व्याख्या -- [अर्जुनने निष्ठाको जाननेके लिये प्रश्न किया था? पर भगवान् उसका उत्तर श्रद्धाको लेकर देते हैं क्योंकि श्रद्धाके अनुसार ही निष्ठा होती है।]त्रिविधा भवति श्रद्धा देहिनां सा स्वभावजा -- श्रद्धा तीन तरहकी होती है। वह श्रद्धा कौनसी है सङ्गजा है? शास्त्रजा है या स्वभावजा है तो कहते हैं कि वह स्वभावजा है -- सा स्वभावजा अर्थात् स्वभावसे पैदा हुई स्वतःसिद्ध श्रद्धा है। वह न तो सङ्गसे पैदा हुई है और न शास्त्रोंसे पैदा हुई है। वे स्वाभाविक इस प्रवाहमें बह रहे हैं और देवता आदिका पूजन करते जा रहे हैं।सात्त्विकी राजसी चैव तामसी चेति तां श्रृणु -- वह स्वभावजा श्रद्धा तीन प्रकारकी होती है -- सात्त्विकी? राजसी और तामसी। उन तीनोंको अलगअलग सुनो।पीछेके श्लोकमें सत्त्वमाहो रजस्तमः पदोंमें आहो अव्यय देनेका तात्पर्य यह था कि अर्जुनकी दृष्टिमें सत्त्वम् से दैवीसम्पत्ति और रजस्तमः से आसुरीसम्पत्ति -- ये दो ही विभाग हैं और भगवान् भी बन्धनकी दृष्टिसे राजसीतामसी दोनोंको आसुरीसम्पत्ति ही मानते हैं -- निबन्धायासुरीमता (16। 5)। परंतु बन्धनकी दृष्टिसे राजसी और तामसी एक होते हुए भी दोनोंके बन्धनमें भेद है। राजस मनुष्य सकामभावसे शास्त्रविहित कर्म भी करते हैं अतः वे स्वर्गादि ऊँचे लोकोंमें जाकर और वहाँके भोगोंको भोगकर पुण्य क्षीण होनेपर फिर मृत्युलोकमें लौट आते हैं -- क्षीणे पुण्ये मर्त्यलोकं विशन्ति (गीता 9। 21)। परन्तु तामस मनुष्य शास्त्रविहित कर्म नहीं करते अतः वे कामना और मूढ़ताके कारण अधम गतिमें जाते हैं -- अधो गच्छन्ति तामसाः (गीता 14। 18)। इस प्रकार राजस और तामस -- दोनों ही मनुष्योंका बन्धन बना रहता है। दोनोंके बन्धनमें भेदकी दृष्टिसे ही भगवान् आसुरीसम्पदावालोंकी श्रद्धाके राजसी और तामसी -- दो भेद करते हैं और सात्त्विकी? राजसी और तामसी -- तीनों श्रद्धाओंको अलगअलग सुननेके लिये कहते हैं। सम्बन्ध -- पूर्वश्लोकमें वर्णित स्वभावजा श्रद्धाके तीन भेद क्यों होते हैं -- इसे भगवान् आगेके श्लोकमें बताते हैं।

यह प्रश्न साधारण मनुष्योंके विषयमें है अतः इसका उत्तर बिना विभाग किये देना उचित नहीं? इस अभिप्रायसे श्रीभगवान् बोले --, जिस निष्ठाके विषयमें तू पूछता है? मनुष्योंकी वह स्वभावजन्य श्रद्धा अर्थात् जन्मान्तरमें किये हुए धर्मअधर्म आदिके जो संस्कार मृत्युके समय प्रकट हुआ करते हैं उनके समुदायका नाम स्वभाव है? उससे उत्पन्न हुई श्रद्धातीन प्रकारकी होती है। सत्त्वगुणसे उत्पन्न हुई देवपूजादिविषयक श्रद्धा सात्त्विकी है? रजोगुणसे उत्पन्न हुई यक्षराक्षसादिकी पूजाविषयक श्रद्धा राजसी है और तमोगुणसे उत्पन्न हुई प्रेतपिशाच आदिकी पूजाविषयक श्रद्धा तामसी है। ऐसे तीन प्रकारकी श्रद्धा होती है। उस आगे कही जानेवाली ( तीन प्रकारकी ) श्रद्धाको तू सुन।

With the intention that an answer abiding in the specific cannot be spoken generally, He remedies (the situation) — 'Samanya' (General...).

Why is the threefold nature of faith being stated as if inappropriate to the question? Regarding this, He says — 'Yasyam' (In which...). Meaning, in the action preceded by faith.

He states the cause for the threefold nature of faith — 'Sa svabhavaja' (That is born of nature). He states the meaning of the word 'Svabhava' as useful to the context — 'Janmantara' (Other births...).

How is it threefold? Regarding this expectation, He says — 'Sattviki' etc. How is the stated faith born of nature? Regarding this, He says — 'Tam' (That...).

Answering according to the question, the Blessed Lord said. Faith is 'Trividha' -- of three kinds; that (faith) endowed with which you ask the status of people, is 'Svabhavaja' (born of nature) 'Dehinam' (of the embodied ones) -- of the Jivas. The latent impressions of Dharma and Adharma etc. performed in other births, manifested at the time of death, is called 'Svabhava'. Born from that; because of being born from the threefold nature of Jivas, faith is of three kinds; this is the meaning.

And as for the interpretation of others that -- 'Asvabhavaja' (not born of nature) means born when 'Asvabhava' -- absence of 'Asus' (life/breaths), i.e., death -- is near; at the time of death, upon the emergence of Gunas individually or collectively, in the next birth due to the force of those impressions, there is preponderance of those respective Gunas only -- this arrangement is the cause; that (interpretation) is to be ignored because it is displayed by the maxim 'Since there is a mouth, one must speak' (speaking nonsense).

He states the threefold nature of faith. Thus, 'Tam' (that) 'Trividham' (threefold) faith, being spoken by Me, 'Shrunu' (hear).

Therefore, classifying them, He speaks beginning with the verse "Threefold..."

Thus, upon being asked in a general manner, the Lord gives a general answer—"Threefold" etc.

"Svabhava" (Nature) refers to the Dharma (merit) and Adharma (demerit) of previous lives; that which is born from this is "Svabhavaja" (born of nature).

If, in a previous life, this person practiced Sattvic Dharma such as worship of Devas, then their faith becomes pure Sattvic. If the practice was Rajasic, such as worship of Yakshas, then the faith is Rajasic. If it was Tamasic, such as worship of ghosts and spirits, then the faith is Tamasic.

Thus, the faith of the embodied ones—those who possess identification with the body—is of three kinds; listen as I explain it.

The Blessed Lord said — The faith of all embodied beings is of three kinds, and it is 'Svabhavaja' — 'Svabhava' means one's own extraordinary nature; the specific taste/liking for respective things caused by ancient latent impressions (vasanas). Where there is liking, there faith arises. For 'Shraddha' (faith) is the haste/eagerness in the means, preceded by the belief that 'this accomplishes what is desired by me'. Vasana, Ruchi (liking), and Shraddha are attributes of the self, born of contact with the Gunas.

The generators of those attributes of the self like Vasana etc. are the attributes residing in the body, senses, internal organ, and objects — the Gunas like Sattva etc. — which are to be ascertained only by their effects; meaning, (faith) is born of the experience of the body etc. endowed with Gunas like Sattva etc. And therefore, this faith is threefold — Sattvic, Rajasic, and Tamasic.

Hear about that faith. Hear of what nature that faith is; this is the meaning.

Here, answering, the Blessed Lord said — 'Trividha' (Threefold...). This is the meaning — For those proceeding from the knowledge of scriptural truth, the faith concerning the worship of the Supreme Lord is Sattvic and of only one kind.

But for the embodied beings proceeding merely by worldly conduct, the faith which is there, is indeed threefold — Sattvic, Rajasic, and Tamasic.

The cause there is — 'Svabhavaja'. 'Svabhava' means the impression of past actions; born from that is 'Svabhavaja'.

For indeed, the discriminative knowledge stated in the scriptures is capable of changing the nature; but they do not have that; therefore, (faith) occurs merely by nature, hence faith is of three kinds. Hear this threefold faith.

That has been stated (before) — by 'The resolute intellect is one here, O Kurunandana' [2.41] etc.

Even in the absence of a question like 'How many kinds of faith are there?', to avoid the suspicion of inconsistency in the statement, and stating the purpose of describing the threefold nature of faith, he says — 'Evam prishtah' (Thus asked), etc. Asked something contrary to what was taught before; this is the meaning. 'Hridi nidhaya' (Keeping in mind) — meaning, to introduce the direct answer gradually. Or, the direct answer is not given immediately to indicate the utter disregard for the question; this is the idea. 'Gunatastraividhyam' (Threefold according to Gunas) — meaning endowed with difference in fruits caused by the difference in Gunas.

Here indeed, due to the presence of faith, Sattvic nature is suspected; due to transgression of Shastra, Tamasic nature; and due to the combination of both, Rajasic nature; there, 'being preceded by faith' is useful for being the means to fruit; that is only in scriptural acts; and even there, faith is not uniform; with this intention, the threefold nature of 'scriptural faith' is taken up. By this, through the maxim of exclusion (Parisankhya), the threefold nature causing difference in fruit in non-scriptural acts is refuted. Here it is stated that the determination of the status like Sattva etc. is based on the difference in faith.

By 'Dehinam' (of the embodied), the variety of qualified aspirants corresponding to respective bodies is intended; with this intention he says — 'Sarvesham' (Of all). Meaning even of Brahma etc. 'Dehinam' — meaning corresponding to the specific bodies abounding in Gunas like Sattva etc.; this is the idea.

In common scriptures and in the eulogies (arthavada) prompting towards them, how can there be a difference in faith fixed by the difference in persons? In this doubt, 'Sa svabhavaja' is a separate sentence; with this intention he says — 'Sa ca' (And that...). To express the uniqueness of the cause for the uniqueness of the effect, he states — 'Svabhavah svasadharano bhavah' (Svabhava is one's own extraordinary nature). What is that nature and what is the cause of its extraordinariness? To this he says — 'Pracina' (Ancient...). The word 'Bhava' here refers to a specific attribute. In the word 'Svabhava' which has multiple meanings, how is 'Ruchi' (liking/taste) intended here? To this he says — 'Yatra rucih' (Where there is liking...). The cause-effect relationship between liking and faith is established by agreement and difference (anvaya-vyatireka); this is the meaning.

What is faith distinct from liking and being its effect? To this he says — 'Shraddha hi' (For faith...). Lexicographers read the word 'Shraddha' even in the sense of 'belief extending up to haste/eagerness' as in 'Shraddha is in belief and desire'.

Objection: Since it is heard 'Desire, determination, doubt, faith, lack of faith, steadfastness, lack of steadfastness, shame, intelligence, fear — all this is Mind alone' [Brihadaranyaka Up. 1.5.3]; regarding faith etc. which are attributes of the internal organ and do not taint the Self, and which are caused by Gunas, even if they can be attributes of Gunas, how is their connection with the Innermost Self stated here by the word 'Sva' (own) and 'Dehi' (embodied)? To this he says — 'Vasana' (Latent impression...). They are specific transformations of the attributive knowledge (Dharmabhuta-jnana) conditioned by the contact with Guna-consisting Prakriti rooted in Karma, belonging to the Self whose essential nature is pure; this is the meaning. For the inclusion of designations like Sattvic etc. in the differences of faith, and to remove the doubt 'How can the attributeless Self have connection with Vasana etc. rooted in Sattva etc.?', he explains the origin from contact with Gunas through the process indicated by the word 'Dehi' — 'Tesham' (Their...). Just as due to contact with fire etc. qualified by chemicals etc., specific qualities born of heat (pakaja) originate in earthen pots etc.; so it is here; this is the idea.

The rejection of those (Gunas) established by Shastra as causes of respective effects due to non-perception is incorrect; with this intention he says — 'Karyainkanirupaniyah' (To be ascertained only by effects). How can supra-sensuous and unexperienced things be the cause of Vasana? To this he says — 'Sattvadigunayukta' (Endowed with Gunas like Sattva etc.). Relative to the root cause, faith has the distinct designations like Sattvic etc.; he says — 'Tatashca' (And therefore...).

Having been made to hear about the threefold nature like Sattvic etc., why is it said again 'Shrunu' (Hear)? To this he says — 'Sa shraddha yatsvabhava' (Of what nature that faith is...). Since the nature and the general threefoldness are known, 'Shrunu' is said with the intention of the specific modes which are unknown.

अपने मुख्य प्रवचन के पूर्व आमुख रूप में? भगवान् कहते हैं कि श्रद्धा तीन प्रकार की होती हैं सात्त्विकी? राजसी और तामसी। श्रद्धा के अनुसार हमारी वासनाएं होती हैं और वे ही जीवन विषयक हमारे दृष्टिकोण को निश्चित करती हैं। हमारे समस्त विचार? भावनाएं और कर्म हमारे दृष्टिकोण के अनुरूप ही होते हैं। अत स्वाभाविक ही है कि मनुष्य के शारीरिक कर्म? मानसिक व्यवहार और बौद्धिक संरचनाएं सब उसकी श्रद्धा से निश्चित होते हैं। इसलिए प्रत्येक व्यक्ति अपनी श्रद्धा के अनुरूप होता है? यह नियम है। जो मनुष्य अपनी देह के साथ जितना अधिक तादात्म्य करेगा उतना ही अधिक स्थूल और दृढ़ उसका अभिमान या अहंकार होगा। यह सब सत्त्व? रज और तम इन गुणों के न्यूनाधिक्य पर निर्भर करता है।श्रद्धा के समझने के लिए इन तीन गुणों के सन्दर्भ का क्या औचित्य है इस पर कहते हैं

So here, the answer is given by the Blessed Lord in accordance with faith — 'Trividha' (Threefold...). And there, this is the intention —

'Shastra' (Scripture) is indeed devoid of being preceded by an intellect corrupted by bias; and it is of the form of firmness of consideration, firmly grasped due to the very freedom of consciousness (Bodha), and having the nature of fruit etc.; having the nature of Supreme Brahman which is the highest reality of the Speech-principle (Vak-tattva) flowing from pure reflection (Vimarsha); due to independent spreading, from the inner nature of consciousness up to the external expansion; and that (Shastra) extends from the very subtle form of Pranava etc. up to the tradition of popular sayings known in worldly usage. As it is said — 'And in the memory and conduct of those who know it' (Gautama Dharma Sutra 1.2).

And that (Shastra) is inherently the discriminator of duty and non-duty for the instruction of beneficial and harmful. He whose heart is tender by nature due to the excess of Sattva, by him what is practiced is indeed 'scriptural'. But the other, polluted by Rajas and Tamas, even while practicing what is stated in scripture, does not (really) practice; because of not performing the scriptural meaning in its entirety. For Shastra is fruitful only for those possessed of Sattva;

the Shastra itself says — 'He whose hands and feet and mind are well controlled; and knowledge, austerity and character (are present); he attains the fruit of the pilgrimage.' [Mahabharata Aranyaka Parva 80.30]. Not another; because of being uncontrolled. Therefore, the meaning of Shastra is fruitful in those who have abandoned Lust, Anger, and Delusion; this is the purport of this chapter.

That very subject is being elaborated; and being of clear meaning, it is not being commented upon (in detail). But it is being written only to remove misunderstandings regarding the reading.

Objection: When asked 'What indeed is their status?' [17.1], Sattvic nature etc. should be stated? Why is 'Threefold' etc. being stated? To this he says — 'Atah' (Therefore...).

Since the status of those ignorant of Vedic injunction was asked by Arjuna in this way; and ignorance can be a differentiator common to all three (types). And there are no varieties of ignorance; therefore, dividing the 'faith' mentioned as their attribute in 'endowed with faith' into Sattvic etc., based on that (faith), He states their nature; this is the meaning.

Those who, casting aside scriptural injunction, sacrifice with faith, differ due to the difference in faith; there, those endowed with Sattvic faith are 'Devas', they are qualified for scriptural means and are united with its fruit. But those endowed with Rajasic and Tamasic faith are 'Asuras', they are neither qualified for scriptural means nor united with its fruit; wishing to remove Arjuna's doubt with this discrimination, (He states) the difference of faith -- the faith with which endowed they sacrifice casting aside scriptural injunction, that is 'Svabhavaja' (born of nature) of the embodied.

The auspicious and inauspicious impressions of Dharma and Adharma etc. performed in other births, which is the originator of the present birth, is 'Svabhava'. That is threefold -- Sattvic, Rajasic, and Tamasic.

Faith generated by that becomes threefold -- Sattvic, Rajasic, and Tamasic. Because the effect conforms to the cause.

But that (faith) of the wise which is born merely from scriptural impression in the commenced birth, being one-formed due to the cause being one-formed, is Sattvic alone, not Rajasic and Tamasic; this is the meaning of the first 'ca' (and). But the one independent of scripture, common to all living beings, is 'Svabhavaja'. That very (Svabhavaja faith) is 'Trividha' (threefold) due to the threefold nature of Svabhava; this is the meaning of the word 'Eva' (indeed). The final 'ca' is for combining the stated three kinds.

Since the scriptural discriminative knowledge, which is the counteractant of the nature named past-life impressions, does not exist for the embodied beings who have disregarded the scripture; therefore, hear that faith of theirs which becomes threefold due to the force of nature. And having heard, determine the Divine and Asuric nature yourself; this is the meaning.

Here Sri Krishna gives the answer — 'Trividha' (Threefold...). The faith of 'Dehinam' — of the worldly people having pride in the body — is of three kinds; Sattvic, and again Rajasic indeed, and Tamasic — in this manner threefold.

And that is 'Svabhavaja' — born of one's own innate qualities; but not Nirguna (devoid of Gunas). And this is the idea —

From the faith in My worship stated by scriptural injunction, the rise of knowledge of worldly qualities etc. occurs; due to being Nirguna, and due to the absence of attachment to Sattva because of the Jiva also being Nirguna, the faith having My attainment as fruit is of one form only; (but this) different (faith) is born of the nature of Gunas; and being threefold and different, it is not the accomplisher of that fruit;

to make known this difference, hear that threefold (faith) being spoken by Me; by hearing that alone your doubt will be removed.

In 'Sattvanurupa' (According to Sattva), the quality (Guna) of Sattva is not meant; because if the faith of every person depended on that (Sattva Guna alone), the division of Rajasic and Tamasic faith would be impossible. If you say that Sattva is required everywhere as an auxiliary? No, because Rajas and Tamas are also like that (required as auxiliaries). For the three Gunas initiate all actions only by existing in a relationship of mutual subsidiarity, like Vata, Pitta, and Kapha etc. Therefore, the 'Sattva' designated here as the common cause of all faith is indeed the internal organ (antahkarana) supported by the three Gunas; he says — 'Sattvamantahkaranam' (Sattva is the internal organ). He explains the conformity — 'Antahkaranam yadrishagunayuktam' (Whatever kind of qualities the internal organ is endowed with...). Meaning, endowed with Sattva etc. which are the exciters of latent impressions (vasanas) that generate taste/liking for respective objects. Previously 'Dehinam sa svabhavaja' [17.2] was stated; but here it is said to be caused by the internal organ? This is not an alternative; because that is impossible in an established fact. Nor is it an alternative based on difference of persons; because 'Sarvasya' (Of all) is stated. Nor is it a combination; because independence is perceived. Regarding this, he says — 'Sattvashabda' (The word Sattva...). Among the factors included in the causal aggregate, mentioning any one of them in different contexts is not inappropriate; this is the idea.

In 'Shraddhamayah' (Consisting of faith), if 'mayat' suffix is in the sense of the word itself (svarthika), it would be purposeless; and even if in the sense of abundance etc., it would be useless in the context; intending the connection with the fruit of faith, he states the meaning as modification (vikara) — 'Shraddhaparinamah' (Transformation/Result of faith). Thus, generally, the relationship with the fruit generated by faith has been stated; there, by 'Yo yacchraddhah' (He who has whatever faith), the connection of a specific fruit for one possessing specific faith is stated; he says — 'Yah purushah' (Whatever person...). To indicate the difference from other faiths, the words 'Yat' and 'Tat' are explained as referring to the 'mode/type' — by 'Yadrishya' (Of whatever kind...) etc. Like 'Ghee is life' [Yajurveda 2.3.2.2] etc., intending the excess of cause-effect relationship, 'Sa eva sah' (He is that verily) is a well-established superimposition; he says — 'Sa tadrishashraddhaparinamah' (He is the result of such faith). By this, in 'Sa eva sah', due to the absence of difference in the predicate, the doubt of repetition is also remedied.

Since the Purusha (Self) is eternal, and the expansion etc. of attributive knowledge is arranged through senses, and body etc. are specific transformations of insentient matter (Acit), relative to what is the 'being a transformation of faith' stated for the Purusha? To this he says — 'Punyakarma' (Meritorious action...). The idea is that the question arises here indeed due to the desire to know the difference in fruits.

So here, the answer is given by the Blessed Lord in accordance with faith — 'Trividha' (Threefold...). And there, this is the intention — 'Shastra' (Scripture) is indeed devoid of being preceded by an intellect corrupted by bias; and it is of the form of firmness of consideration, firmly grasped due to the very freedom of consciousness (Bodha), and having the nature of fruit etc.; having the nature of Supreme Brahman which is the highest reality of the Speech-principle (Vak-tattva) flowing from pure reflection (Vimarsha); due to independent spreading, from the inner nature of consciousness up to the external expansion; and that (Shastra) extends from the very subtle form of Pranava etc. up to the tradition of popular sayings known in worldly usage.

As it is said — 'And in the memory and conduct of those who know it' (Gautama Dharma Sutra 1.2). And that (Shastra) is inherently the discriminator of duty and non-duty for the instruction of beneficial and harmful. He whose heart is tender by nature due to the excess of Sattva, by him what is practiced is indeed 'scriptural'.

But the other, polluted by Rajas and Tamas, even while practicing what is stated in scripture, does not (really) practice; because of not performing the scriptural meaning in its entirety. For Shastra is fruitful only for those possessed of Sattva; the Shastra itself says — 'He whose hands and feet and mind are well controlled; and knowledge, austerity and character (are present); he attains the fruit of the pilgrimage.' [Mahabharata Aranyaka Parva 80.30]. Not another; because of being uncontrolled. Therefore, the meaning of Shastra is fruitful in those who have abandoned Lust, Anger, and Delusion; this is the purport of this chapter.

That very subject is being elaborated; and being of clear meaning, it is not being commented upon (in detail). But it is being written only to remove misunderstandings regarding the reading.

त्रिविधा threefold? भवति is? श्रद्धा faith? देहिनाम् of the embodied? सा that (faith)? स्वभावजा (is) inherent in (their) nature? सात्त्विकी Sattvic (pure)? राजसी Rajasic (passionate)? च and? एव even? तामसी Tamasic (dark)? च and? इति thus? ताम् it? श्रृणु hear (thou).Commentary The whole world is made up? as if were? of faith. Faith assumes a threefold aspect under the influence of the three alities. When Sattva is strongly developed? when there is a preponderance of Sattva or purity in a man? it is easy for him to attain Selfrealisation or the knowledge of the Self. If Rajas is predominant? the faith becomes the handmaid of activity. If Tamas or inertia prevails? faith is annihilated.Those who are endowed with Sattvic faith aim at the attainment of liberation. Those who are endowed with Rajasic faith run after inferior duties or worldly activities. Those whose faith is Tamasic are cruel. They kill animals for sacrifice. They invoke the spirits and talk with ghosts. When faith is joined to Sattva? it leads to salvation. When Rajas preponderates? it colours the faith and leads to various activities. When Tamas predominates? the faith results in darkness.Faith acires different alities when it is in company with the mind of man. Mind is a thing of many colours. Just as the water of the Ganga is contaminated by being put in a vessel where lior had been kept? so also a virtuous person is spoiled by bad company or constant association with evil persons. The three Gunas or attributes colour the faith of a man. The mind of a man is governed by the preponderating attribute or ality which manifests itself when the other two alities are suppressed. Faith takes a threefold aspect in accordance with the inherent nature or tendencies of the man. The inclinations of men are moulded according to their ality or inherent nature born of their past Samskaras.As is the tendency? so is the desire as is the desire? so is the action as is the action? so is the birth into another being after death. The body is like the seed of the tree? a perpetual chain. Seed perishes in developing into a tree and the tree again produces the seed. This process or cycle continues eternally. Even so man takes a body? does actions? develops tendencies? dies and puts,on a new body in accordance with the nature or tendencies. This continues till he gets knowledge of the Self by transcending the three Gunas? when ignorance? the root cause of birth and death? is destroyed.Faith is born of the individual nature? i.e.? the Samskaras or the latent impressions of virtuous and vicious actions which were performed in the past births and which manifested themselves at the time of death. In the subconscious mind or the Chitta there is a reservoir of past impressions which are revived through the operation of memory.Sattvic Faith in the worship of gods? which is an effect of Sattva.Rajasic Faith in the worship of the Yakshas and Rakshasas? which is an effect of Rajas.Tamasic Faith in the worship of the disembodied spirits and ghosts? which is an effect of Tamas.Faith is the main support of life. It is not mere intellectual belief or blind acceptance of pet dogmas or doctrines. You must understand clearly its characteristics? just as you recognise a tree from the fruits? the mind of a man from his speech? and the actions of previous birth from worldly pleasures and pains.Svabhavaja Inherent in their nature born of past Samskaras.Tam Of it? referring to the threefold faith.

Sa, that; sraddha, faith, the state about which you ask; dehinam, of the embodied beings; svabhavaja, born of their own nature-by svabhava (nature) is meant that latent impression of virtuous acts etc. acired in the past lives, which becomes manifest at the time of death; what arises out of that is svabhavaja-; is trividha, threefold, of three kinds; sattviki, born of sattva, and related to worship of gods, etc.; rajasi, born of rajas, concerning worship of Yaksas (a class of demi-gods, Kubera and others), Raksas (ogres, Nairrti and others); and tamasi, born of tamas, concerning worship of ghosts, goblins and others. Thus it is of three kinds. Srnu, hear; tam, about it, that faith, as it is being stated.
That (faith) is threefold as follows:

The Lord said 'Threefold is the faith among all' embodied beings. And it arises from their 'inborn nature.' What is called Svabhava is the state unie to one's own nature. It is the special taste or predilection caused by previous subtle impressions, 'Vasanas.' To whatever one's predilection is directed, there faith is born in respect of it. For 'faith' is zeal or eagerness about any means in the belief that it is the way of action to achieve one's own desired object. Vasana (subtle impression), Ruci (taste) and Sraddha (faith) are the alities of the self born from its association with the Gunas. The Sattva and the other Gunas are the alities of the body, the senses, the internal organs and sense-objects. They bring about their alities in the self associated with them. These are the Vasanas. These Gunas can be described only by their effects. These (i.e., Vasanas etc.) originate from experiences with the body etc., having origination in Sattva and other Gunas. Thus faith is threefold as marked by Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. Listen about this faith.