Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 18 - Shloka (Verse) 5

यज्ञदानतपःकर्म न त्याज्यं कार्यमेव तत् -- यहाँ भगवान्ने दूसरोंके मत (18। 3) को ठीक बताया है। भगवान् कठोर शब्दोंसे किसीके मतका खण्डन नहीं करते। आदर देनेके लिये भगवान् दूसरेके मतका वास्तविक अंश ले लेते हैं और उसमें अपना मत भी शामिल कर देते हैं। यहाँ भगवान्ने दूसरेके मतके अनुसार कहा कि यज्ञ? दान और तपरूप कर्म छोड़ने नहीं चाहिये। इसके साथ भगवान्ने अपना मत बताया कि इतना ही नहीं? प्रत्युत उनको न करते हों तो जरूर करना चाहिये -- कार्यमेव तत्। कारण कि यज्ञ? दान और तप -- तीनों कर्म मनीषियोंको पवित्र करनेवाले हैं।यज्ञो दानं तपश्चैव पावनानि मनीषिणाम् -- यहाँ चैव पदका तात्पर्य है कि नित्य? नैमित्तिक? जीविकासम्बन्धी? शरीरसम्बन्धी आदि जितने भी कर्तव्यकर्म हैं? उनको भी जरूर करना चाहिये क्योंकि वे भी मनीषियोंको पवित्र करनेवाले हैं।,जो मनुष्य समत्वबुद्धिसे युक्त होकर कर्मजन्य फलका त्याग कर देते हैं? वे मनीषी हैं -- कर्मजं बुद्धियुक्ता हि फलं त्यक्त्वा मनीषिणः (गीता 2। 51)। ऐसे मनीषियोंको वे यज्ञादि कर्म पवित्र करते हैं। परन्तु जो वास्तवमें मनीषी नहीं हैं? जिनकी इन्द्रियाँ वशमें नहीं हैं अर्थात् अपने सुखभोगके लिये ही जो यज्ञ? दानादि कर्म करते हैं? उनको वे कर्म पवित्र नहीं करते? प्रत्युत वे कर्म बन्धनकारक हो जाते हैं।इस श्लोकके पूर्वार्धमें यज्ञदानतपःकर्म -- ऐसा समासयुक्त पद दिया है और उत्तरार्धमें यज्ञो दानं तपः -- ऐसे अलगअलग पद दिये हैं? इसका तात्पर्य है कि भगवान्ने समासयुक्त पदसे यह बताया है कि यज्ञ? दान और तपका त्याग नहीं करना चाहिये? प्रत्युत इनको जरूर करना चाहिये और अलगअलग पदोंसे यह बताया है,कि इनमेंसे एकएक कर्म भी मनीषीको पवित्र करनेवाला है।

वह निश्चय क्या है इसपर कहते हैं --, यज्ञ? दान और तप? ये तीन प्रकारके कर्म त्यागनेयोग्य नहीं हैं अर्थात् इन तीनोंका त्याग करना उचित नहीं है? इन्हें तो करना ही चाहिये क्योंकि यज्ञ? दान और तप ये तीनों बुद्धिमानोंको अर्थात् फलकामनारहित पुरुषोंको? पवित्र करनेवाले हैं।

To determine specifically that very determination of the Lord, [he] shows the engagement of the subsequent verse preceded by a question — 'Kaḥ punaḥ' (What then).

He states the reason for the duty of sacrifice etc. — 'Yajñaḥ'.

Not only not to be abandoned, but indeed to be done, He says — 'Kāryam'.

Having divided what was promised thus, He divides the reason — 'Kasmāt' (Why).

Showing the promised determination, He states the reason therein — 'Yajño dānam tapaḥ' — this threefold action is 'na tyājyam' — not to be abandoned.

He strengthens the meaning stated negatively by a positive statement. 'Kāryameva tat' — that threefold action is indeed to be done.

'Cha' is in the sense of reason. Because sacrifice, charity, and austerities are indeed 'pāvanāni' — purifiers. Or 'purifiers indeed'.

Of 'manīṣiṇām' — the skillful ones, devoid of desire for fruit.

By the logic of the needle and the boiler (doing the easier/smaller task first), before stating the nature of Tyaga, He presents the view of non-abandonment which is the other opinion — 'Yajña'. Action like sacrifice etc. is not to be abandoned but indeed 'kāryam' — to be done; like a man seized for forced labor, it must necessarily be performed by him. Because of hearing of sin in non-performance.

The letter 'cha' has the meaning of reason. Because sacrifice, charity, and austerity are indeed 'pāvanāni' — purifiers, cleaners of the mind, of 'manīṣiṇām' — the desireless, devoid of hypocrisy etc.

And so the Shruti: 'Three branches of Dharma: Sacrifice, study, charity is the first; austerity alone is the second; the celibate student dwelling in the teacher's house is the third; all these become attainers of meritorious worlds'. It shows the purifying nature of the householder's duties (sacrifice etc.), the forest-dweller's duty (austerity), and the celibate student's duty (dwelling in teacher's house). Here also by the words sacrifice and charity, householder duties are to be known; by 'tapas', forest-dweller duties; and by the remainder 'karma', celibate student duties are to be known.

Vedic action beginning with sacrifice, charity, and austerity is never to be abandoned by the seeker of liberation, but indeed is to be done day by day until death.

Why? Actions related to Varna and Ashrama beginning with sacrifice, charity, and austerity are 'pāvanāni' — purifiers — of 'manīṣiṇām' — those given to reflection.

Reflection means meditation (Upasana). For seekers of liberation performing meditation throughout life, they are destroyers of past actions which are opposed to the accomplishment of meditation, this is the meaning.

First, He states the determination — by the two [verses] 'Yajña dāna'.

'Pāvanāni' — purifiers, causers of mental purity, of 'manīṣiṇām' — the discriminators.

Thus, the restatement of threefold Tyaga is spoken for the purpose of excluding the abandonment of the nature (form) [of action] — by 'Yajña dāna' etc.

Some say that before the rise of desire to know etc., sacrifice etc. is to be performed, but after that it is to be abandoned; to refute their view, He says — 'Na kadācidapi' (Never at all). 'He indeed living thus throughout life' [Chhandogya 8.15.1] — with the intention of this Shruti, He says — 'Api tu āprayāṇāt' (But until death). And so the Sutra 'Until death, for there also it is seen' [Brahma Sutra 4.1.12]. 'Aharahaḥ' (Day by day) implies the enjoined time.

Objection: For one established in knowledge (Vidya), for what purpose is action? Not for remote help, because the view of combination etc. is not accepted. Nor for knowledge of Truth, because that is established by the means (Pramana) with its accessories. Nor for meditation which is in the form of remembrance of that, because that is achievable by strength of impressions etc. Nor do we see any other purpose expected by the seeker of liberation achievable by action? And there is no engagement even of a dull person without aiming at a purpose? With this intention, the display of expectation 'Kutaḥ' (Why).

'Prabhṛti' (etc.) word is used with the intention that 'Cha' implies the collection of what is not mentioned. 'Varṇāśramasambandhīnī' — The result which is the abandonment of the nature of even Nitya and Naimittika actions, that is refuted here, this is the idea.

To indicate the help by proximity of sacrifice etc., the word 'manīṣi' here refers to the nature of knowledge to be helped; with this intention he says — 'Mananaśīlānām'. 'Manas' (mind) 'īṣiṇaḥ' (rulers) are 'manīṣiṇaḥ' — in this derivation, this is the resultant statement. To exclude logical reflection occurring after hearing, he says — 'Mananam upāsanam'. He reveals the mode of help established by the collocation 'Pāvanāni manīṣiṇām' — by 'Mumukṣūṇām' etc.

Starting with 'Should meditate until death' [Prashna 5.1], 'He who meditates on this Supreme Person with this very syllable Om of three matras' [Prashna 5.5] — it is understood that meditation is to be performed throughout life. Therefore, its auxiliary is also to be performed throughout life. And that is described by 'He indeed living thus throughout life' etc., this is the idea.

Since there is no removal of subsequent sins like meditation does, the word 'Prācīna' (ancient/past) [is used].

पूर्व श्लोक में कथित द्वितीय मत को स्वीकारते हुए भगवान् उस पर विशेष बल देते हैं। यज्ञ? दान और तपरूप कर्म करणीय हैं? त्याज्य नहीं। पूर्व अध्याय में हमने देखा था कि इन कर्मों का सम्यक् आचरण करने पर वे अन्तकरण को शुद्धि प्रदान करते हैं? जो आत्मोन्नति और आत्मसाक्षात्कार के लिए आवश्यक है। अविद्याजनित बन्धनों से मुक्ति पाने के इच्छुक साधकों को श्रद्धा भक्ति पूर्वक यज्ञ? दान और तप का आचरण करना चाहिए। इसके द्वारा वे आन्तरिक शान्ति और संतुलन को प्राप्त कर सकते हैं।आगे कहते हैं

So right here, to decide the specific [truth], He presents the views — 'Tyājyam' etc. 'Doshavat' — possessing sin due to having violence etc. 'Tat' action is to be abandoned; not all [action] which has good fruit — thus some think there is a distinction in Tyaga, like those holding Sankhya views.

Others, entered into the garb of Mimamsakas... 'For the purpose of sacrifice [violence] is understood from scripture'. And by the logic 'Therefore that which is Vedic violence...' etc., violence which is part of the procedure is not violence at all. Because the general scripture 'Do not kill' is annulled there, Syena etc. only is violence. 'And the affix of the bhāvanā is compliant in the part of the fruit'. Therefore one should not abandon others even if connected with violence etc. Those who take refuge solely in scripture for division of what is to be done and not done think they are 'Pandits'. ||3||

From 'Niścayam' etc. up to 'Abhidhīyate'. But there, this is the determination — due to the variety of nature of Gunas defined before, of Tyaga itself being done by mental modification made of Sattva, Rajas, Tamas, appearing with that specific nature... in reality, Tyaga is the performance of actions by knowers of Supreme Brahman with equanimity in success and failure etc., by avoiding attachment and aversion, by lack of desire for fruit.

Therefore He says — having done Rajasic and Tamasic Tyaga, there is no connection with fruit [of Tyaga]. But from Sattvic Tyaga, the fruit is the protection of the meaning of scripture. Again, for the sage who has abandoned the grasp of the collection of Gunas, the statement of 'Tyaga' in truth is reasonable.

What is that determination? The second view among the two views which are the extreme ends of the dispute — He states this by the two [verses] — 'Yajña' etc.

'Cha' is in the sense of reason. Because sacrifice, charity, and austerity are 'pāvanāni' (purifiers) of 'manīṣiṇām' — of those who have not desired fruit; they are purifiers by washing away the dirt of sin which obstructs knowledge and by instilling the quality of merit which constitutes fitness for the rise of knowledge. Only for those who have not desired fruit, sacrifice, charity, and austerity act as purifiers indeed. By the purification of the adjunct (mind), the purification of the conditioned (Self) is intended here.

Therefore, by those seeking purification of mind, by those qualified for action, sacrifice, charity, austerity — which is action devoid of desire for fruit — that is not to be abandoned, but that is indeed 'kāryam' (to be done).

Although 'to be done' is obtained from 'not to be abandoned', it is said again 'kāryameva' (indeed to be done) for the sake of extreme emphasis. Or, since it is 'kāryam' — enjoined by scripture as a duty — therefore it is 'not to be abandoned at all'.

He will state the threefold nature later [18.79?]. First, He states the determination — by the two 'Yajña dāna'.

Action like sacrifice etc. is not to be abandoned, because it is 'kāryam' — necessarily to be done, to avoid sin.

Sacrifice — worship; charity and austerity are indeed purifiers — cleansers of the mind — of 'manīṣiṇām' — of the wise, of the knowers of His true nature — these performed in the knowledge of His nature. Therefore, this threefold action is to be done.

By the word 'eva', it is implied that they are not to be done with desire for other fruits.

Sacrifice, charity, austerity — this threefold action is not to be abandoned — should not be given up; it is 'kāryam' — indeed to be done.

Why? Sacrifice, charity, and austerity are indeed purifiers — causing purity — of 'manīṣiṇām' — of those who do not desire fruit, this is [the meaning].

He accepts the Mimamsaka view in one part — 'Yajña' etc. By the Shruti 'Yajna is indeed Vishnu' [Tai. Sam. 1.7.4, Shan. Bra. 1.3.1], Yajna is of the nature of the Lord; and charity is of the nature of giving up wealth aimed at a deity; and austerity is the practice of one's own Dharma — that this Vedic action which is in the position of Dharma of the Lord is not to be abandoned, even by a seeker of liberation. Rather, until death, day by day, it is indeed to be done; even because it is stated in the Vedas it is to be done, due to the rule of not abandoning the Veda even in one part.

Objection: Whence (Why) is this instruction of injunction of duty? To this He says — 'Pāvanāni' (purifiers). Sacrifice etc. are instillers of qualities for 'manīṣiṇām' — for those very wise men by whom it was said 'like a defect' — thus 'like a defect' is refuted. Therefore, by the Lord's devotee Yudhishthira, taking the command 'I shall worship Your glories' [Bhag. 10.7.3?], it was indeed performed, because of being for the purpose of purification.

And this is detailed in the Bhashya preceded by presentation of debate and dialogue on 'whether action is to be done or not done by the Lord's devotees', so it is not expanded here.

यज्ञदानतपःकर्म acts of sacrifice? gift and austerity? न not? त्याज्यम् should be abandoned? कार्यम् should be performed? एव indeed? तत् that? यज्ञः sacrifice? दानम् gift? तपः austerity? च and? एव indeed? पावनानि purifiers? मनीषिणाम् of the wise.Commentary Acts of sacrifice? gift and austerity purify the hearts of those who have no desire for rewards. These actions are considered obligatory and ought to be performed. Actions that are skilfully performed lose their power to bind the soul and free it from earthly bondage.Now? O Arjuna? I will explain to thee that skilful way by which actions can destroye their own effect.

Yajna-dana-tapah-karma, the practice of sacrifice, charity and austerity-this threefold practice; na tyajyam, is not to be abandoned; tat, it; is eva, surely; karyam, to be undertaken. Why? Yajnah, sacrifice; danam, charity; and tapah, austerity; are eva, verily; pavanani, the purifiers, the causes of sanctification; manisinam, of the wise, i.e. of those who do not seek results for themselves.

Acts such as sacrifices, gifts, austerities etc., enjoined in the Vedas should not be relinished by the aspirant for release, but should be performed day after day until his death.
Why?
Acts like sacrifices, gifts and austerities associated with the different stations of life, are the means of purification for the wise., i.e., for those given to contemplation. Contemplation is worship. For the aspirants who perform such worship (Upasana) throughout their lives, they (sacrifices etc.) are a help to erase the previous Karmas which stand in the way of the fulfilment of such worship.