Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 18 - Shloka (Verse) 24

यत्तु (टिप्पणी प0 906) कामेप्सुना कर्म -- हम कर्म करेंगे तो हमें पदार्थ मिलेंगे? सुखआराम मिलेगा? भोग मिलेंगे? आदरसम्मानबड़ाई मिलेगी आदि फलकी इच्छावाले व्यक्तिके द्वारा कर्म किया जाय।साहंकारेण -- लोगोंके सामने कर्म करनेसे लोग देखते हैं और वाहवाह करते हैं तो अभिमान आता है और जहाँ लोग सामने नहीं होते? वहाँ (एकान्तमें) कर्म करनेसे दूसरोंकी अपेक्षा अपनेमें विलक्षणता? विशेषता देखकर अभिमान आता है। जैसे -- दूसरे आदमी हमारी तरह सुचारुरूपसे साङ्गोपाङ्ग कार्य नहीं कर सकते हमारेमें काम करनेकी जो योग्यता? विद्या? चतुरता आदि है? वह हरेक आदमीमें नहीं मिलेगी हम जो भी काम करते हैं? उसको बहुत ही ईमानदारीसे और जल्दी करते हैं? आदिआदि। इस प्रकार अहंकारपूर्वक किया गया कर्म राजस कहलाता है।वा पुनः -- आगे भविष्यमें मिलनेवाले फलको लेकर (फलेच्छापूर्वक) कर्म किया जाय अथवा वर्तमानमें अपनी विशेषताको लेकर (अहंकारपूर्वक) कर्म किया जाय -- इन दोनों भावोंमेंसे एक भाव होनेपर भी वह कर्म राजस हो जाता है? यह बतानेके लिये यहाँ वा पुनः पद आये हैं। तात्पर्य है कि फलेच्छा और अहंकार -- इन दोनोंमेंसे जब एक भाव होनेपर भी कर्म राजस हो जाता है? तब दोनों भाव होनेपर वह कर्म राजस हो ही जायगा। क्रियते बहुलायासम् -- कर्म करते समय हरेक व्यक्तिके शरीरमें परिश्रम तो होता ही है? पर जिस व्यक्तिमें शरीरके सुखआरामकी इच्छा मुख्य होती है? उसको कर्म करते समय शरीरमें ज्यादा परिश्रम मालूम देता है।जिस व्यक्तिमें कर्मफलकी इच्छा तो मुख्य है? पर शारीरिक सुखआरामकी इच्छा मुख्य नहीं है? अर्थात् सुखआराम लेनेकी स्वाभाविक ही प्रकृति नहीं है? उसको कर्म करते हुए भी शरीरमें परिश्रम नहीं मालूम देता। कारण कि भीतरमें भोगों और संग्रहकी जोरदार कामना होनेसे उसकी वृत्ति कामनापूर्तिकी तरफ ही लगी रहती है शरीरकी तरफ नहीं। तात्पर्य है कि शरीरके सुखआरामकी मुख्यता होनेसे फलेच्छाकी अवहेलना हो जाती है और फलेच्छाकी मुख्यता होनेसे शरीरके सुखआरामकी अवहेलना हो जाती है।लोगोंके सामने कर्म करते समय अहंकारजन्य सुखकी खुराक मिलनेसे और शरीरके सुखआरामकी मुख्यता न होनेसे राजस मनुष्यको कर्म करनेमें परिश्रम नहीं मालूम देता। परन्तु एकान्तमें कर्म करते समय अहंकारजन्य सुखकी खुराक न मिलनेसे और शरीरके सुखआरामकी मुख्यता होनेसे राजस मनुष्यको कर्म करनेमें ज्यादा परिश्रम मालूम देता है।तद्राजसमुदाहृतम् -- ऐसे फलकी इच्छावाले मनुष्यके द्वारा अहंकार और परिश्रमपूर्वक किया हुआ जो कर्म है? वह राजस कहा गया है। सम्बन्ध -- अब तामस कर्मका वर्णन करते हैं।

जो कर्म? भोगरूप फलकी इच्छावाले पुरुषद्वारा या अहंकारयुक्त पुरुषद्वारा ( किया जाता है )। इस श्लोकमें साहंकारेण पद तत्त्वज्ञानकी अपेक्षासे नहीं है। तो क्या है वेदशास्त्रको जाननेवाले लौकिक निरहंकारीकी अपेक्षासे है क्योंकि जो वास्तविक निरहंकारी आत्मवेत्ता है? उसमें तो फलेच्छुकता और बहुत परिश्रमयुक्त कर्तृत्वकी आशंका ही नहीं हो सकती। सात्त्विक कर्मका भी कर्ता? आत्मतत्त्वको न जाननेवाला अहंकारयुक्त मनुष्य ही होता है? फिर राजसतामस कर्मोंके कर्ताकी तो बात ही क्या है संसारमें आत्मतत्त्वको न जाननेवाला भी? वेदशास्त्रका ज्ञाता पुरुष निरहंकारी कहा जाता है। जैसे अमुक ब्राह्मण निरहंकारी है ऐसा प्रयोग होता है। सुतरां ऐसे पुरुषकी अपेक्षासे ही इस श्लोकमें साहंकारेण वा यह वचन कहा गया है। पुनः शब्द पादपूर्ण करनेके लिये है। तथा जो कर्म बहुत परिश्रमसे युक्त है? अर्थात् करनेवाला जिसको बहुत परिश्रमसे कर पाता है? वह कर्म राजस कहा गया है।

He specifies the Rajasic action — 'Yattu'. Action done by an agent desiring fruit is Rajasic — this connects later.

He prevents the intention that action is done by an egoistic knower of Truth [in contrast to] a non-egoistic knower of Truth — by 'Sāhaṅkāreṇa'.

If 'compared to action done by a non-egoistic knower of Truth, this action done by an egoistic ignorant one [is Rajasic]' is not intended, then what is intended here? — thus he asks — 'Kiṃ tarhi'. Indeed, he who is sinless, learned in Veda (Shrotriya), not deviating from the world, his action which is devoid of egoism, compared to that, this action done by one with egoism [is Rajasic] — thus it is said, he says — 'Laukika'.

Objection: Why is 'with egoism' etc. not desired in comparison to the agency of action of the non-egoistic knower of Truth? To that he says — 'Yo hi'. Because the knower of Truth is excluded by force of another qualification itself, this qualification is not relative to him, this is the meaning.

He establishes by a fortiori argument that agency in Rajasic action belongs only to the egoistic one — 'Sāttvikasya'.

Objection: Since it is impossible for anyone other than the knower of Self to be non-egoistic, how is it said 'with egoism' relative to him? To that he says — 'Loka'.

Having stated Sattvic action, He illustrates the Rajasic — 'Yattu'. 'Tu' indicates distinction from Sattvic.

'Kāmepsu' — by one desiring fruit; 'sāhaṅkāreṇa vā punaḥ' — 'who is another Shrotriya equal to me' — with such adherence to egoism; one should not be deluded that 'with egoism' is in comparison to the agency of action of the non-egoistic knower of Truth, because he (knower) is not qualified for action. But one who is devoid of the pride 'there is no other Shrotriya equal to me', even though a knower of non-Self, is called 'non-egoistic' in the world, in comparison to him it is said 'or again with egoism'.

'Bahulāyāsam' — accomplishable with great effort — with trouble — whatever action is done, that is declared Rajasic.

'Yattu kāmepsunā' — by one seeking fruit;

'sāhaṅkāreṇa' — although a Sattvic person who is a knower of non-Self is also egoistic, still 'I alone am skilled in action, a great Shrotriya' — such pride is egoism, by one possessed of that — 'sāhaṅkāreṇa'.

The word 'vā' is in the sense of 'and' (ca). 'Kriyate bahulāyāsam' — causing excessive fatigue; that action is declared Rajasic.

'Yattu punaḥ' — and whatever again; 'kāmepsunā' — by one desiring fruit; 'sāhaṅkāreṇa vā' — the word 'vā' is in the sense of 'and' — and by one endowed with pride of agency; 'bahulāyāsam' — whatever action involving great effort is done; that is 'rājasam'

— whatever action is done by one endowed with pride of the form 'this action of great effort is being done by me alone', that is Rajasic, this is the meaning.

He states Rajasic action — 'Yattu'. And whatever action 'kāmepsunā' — by one wishing to obtain fruit; 'sāhaṅkāreṇa vā' — 'who is another Shrotriya equal to me' — thus by one endowed with deep-seated egoism and is done;

and which 'punaḥ' (again) is 'bahulāyāsam' — endowed with excessive trouble; that action is declared Rajasic.

By 'Kāmepsunā' (by one desiring desire), he manifests the statement opposite to what was said by 'Aphalaprepsunā' [18.23] — 'Phalaprepsunā' (by one desiring fruit). Here the compound is with genitive of general relation. Since alternative etc. is impossible here, it is said that the word 'vā' is in the sense of 'and' (ca).

Due to being rooted in Rajas which is predominant in activity, 'Bahulāyāsatva' (state of involving great effort) is due to mixture of useless effort.

And there, in all cases the pride 'I myself am the cause' is intended by the word 'Sāhaṅkāra'.

Therefore indeed the word 'Bahulāyāsa' is also purposeful, with this intention he says — 'Bahulāyāsam idaṃ karma mayaiva' (This great-effort action is by me alone).

राजसिक कर्म मैं कर्ता हूँ की भावना से प्रेरित? अहंकार से युक्त स्वार्थ और परिश्रम से परिपूर्ण होते हैं। इनका कर्ता अत्याधित तनाव और दबाव में रहता है।इस श्लोक का अर्थ स्पष्ट है। राजनीतिक नेताओं? सामाजिक कार्यकर्ताओं? बड़ेबड़े उद्योगपतियों अत्यधिक चिन्तित पालकों? कट्टर धर्म प्रचारकों? धर्म परिवर्तन कराने वाली मिशनरियों तथा अन्धाधुन्ध धन कमाने वालों के प्राय समस्त कर्म राजस श्रेणी में ही आते हैं। कभीकभी तो वे तमोगुण के स्तर तक भी गिर जाते हैं।

From 'Niyatam' etc. up to 'is called Tamasic'.

'Niyatam' — [thinking] it is to be done.

'Kleśaiḥ' (with afflictions) — with ignorance etc.; 'bahulam' (much/abundant) — pervaded.

'Mohāt' (from delusion) — from that which consists of adherence/insistence.

'Yattu'. 'Tu' distinguishes from Sattvic. 'Kāmepsunā' — by an agent desiring fruit; 'sāhaṅkāreṇa' — and by one endowed with pride of the nature of attachment mentioned before. The word 'vā' is in [the sense of] conjunction. 'Punaḥ' — irregular, as long as desire lasts, by repetition of Kamya actions; 'bahulāyāsam' — causing trouble due to completion of all parts [of ritual]; whatever Kamya action is done, that is declared Rajasic.

Here by all adjectives, the contrast with all Sattvic adjectives is shown.

He states the Rajasic action — 'Yattu'.

Whatever action 'punaḥ' (again) 'kāmepsunā' — with desire to obtain fruit; 'vā' (or) — devoid of desire for fruit but 'sāhaṅkāreṇa' — for proclaiming one's own greatness in the worlds; 'punaḥ' 'bahulāyāsam' — endowed with excessive trouble, accompanied by bodily harm, is done; that action is declared Rajasic.

But that 'Karma' (action) which is done 'Kamepsuna' -- by one desiring the fruit of action, this is the meaning; 'va' (or) 'Sahankarena' (by one with egoism) -- this is not in relation to the Knower of Truth (Tattvajnani). Then what? In relation to the worldly scholar (Shrotriya) who is free from egotism. For he who is the Knower of Self, devoid of egoism in the supreme sense; for him there is no applicability of 'desiring fruit' and 'doership with great effort'.

Even of a Sattvic action, the non-knower of Self is an egoistic doer; what to speak of Rajasic and Tamasic (doers). In the world, even a non-knower of Self, a Shrotriya, is called 'egoless' -- as 'this Brahmin is egoless'. Therefore, only in relation to him, it is said 'or by one with egoism'.

The word 'Punah' (again/modifying 'kriyate') is for filling the verse-foot. 'Kriyate bahulayasam' -- which is performed by the doer with great effort/exertion; that action is 'Rajasam udahritam' (said to be Rajasic).

'Yattu'. 'Kāmepsunā' — by one desiring fruit; 'kartṛtvādyahaṅkārapūrvakena vā' — or preceded by egoism of agency etc., 'this fruit-producing action is mine' — where there is great effort, that is Rajasic.

यत् which? तु but? कामेप्सुना by one longing for desires? कर्म action? साहङ्कारेण with egoism? वा or? पुनः again? क्रियते is performed? बहुलायासम् with much effort? तत् that? राजसम् Rajasic (passionate)? उदाहृतम् is declared.Commentary A passionate man performs various selfish actions. He boasts of his actions in public. Passion prompts him to do them. He can never work without expectation of a reward.Kamepsuna? phalepsuna The Rajasic or passionate man expects pleasures as fruits of action. A liberated sage alone is absolutely free from egoism. He will not dream even of a reward for the action? because all his desires are gratified when he realises Brahman. He is an Aptakama. (Aptakamasya ka spriha) How can there be longing or craving in a sage in whom all desires are gratified or burnt by the fire of SelfknowledgeEven the performer of a pure act? who has no knowledge of the Self is egoistic. If such be the case? the Rajasic and Tamasic workers are much more egoistic. In worldly parlance we speak of a learned Pundit This Pundit is a very modest? unassuming? and egoless Brahmana.Now listen? O Arjuna? to the characteristics of action that is of darkness.

But tat, that; karma, action; udahrtam, is said to be; rajasam, born of rajas; yat, which; is kriyate, done; kamepsuna by one desirous of results; va, or; saahankarena, by one who is egotistic; and bahulaayasam, which is highly strenuous, accomplished by the agent with great effort.
'Egotistic' is not used in contrast to knowledge of Truth. What then? It is used in contrast to the absence of egotism in an ordinary person versed in the Vedic path. For in the case of the knower of the Self, who is not egotistic in the real sense, there is no estion of his being desirous of results or of being an agent of actions reiring great effort. Even of actions born of sattva, the agent is one who has not realized the Self and is possessed of egoism; what to speak of actions born of rajas and tamas! In common parlance, a person versed in the Vedic path, even though not possessing knowledge of the Self, is spoken of as being free from egotism thus-'This Brahmana is free from egotism'. Therefore, 'sahan-karena va' is said in contrast to him only. Punah (again) is used to complete the meter.

But whatever act is performed by one who seeks to gratify his desires, viz., by one who desires the results of his action and with the feeling of egoism, viz., has the misconceived notion that oneself is the agent; and with a great deal of effort - such an act is of the nature of Rajas. Here va (or) is used in the sense of ca (and). Whatever action is performed by one who possesses the misconceived notion, 'This action demanding enormous effort is performed entirely by me' - it is said to be Rajasika.