Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 2 - Shloka (Verse) 40

व्याख्या-- [इस समबुद्धिकी महिमा भगवान्ने पूर्वश्लोकके उत्तरार्धमें और इस (चालीसवें) श्लोकमें चार प्रकारसे बतायी है-- (1) इसके द्वारा कर्मबन्धनसे मुक्त हो जाता है, (2) इसके उपक्रमका नाश नहीं होता, (3) इसका उलटा फल नहीं होता और (4) इसका थोड़ा-सा भी अनुष्ठान महान् भयसे रक्षा करनेवाला होता है।]
'नेहाभिक्रमनाशोऽस्ति'-- इस समबुद्धि (समता) का केवल आरम्भ ही हो जाय, तो उस आरम्भका भी नाश नहीं होता। मनमें समता प्राप्त करनेकी जो लालसा, उत्कण्ठा लगी है, यही इस समताका आरम्भ होना है। इस आरम्भका कभी अभाव नहीं होता; क्योंकि सत्य वस्तुकी लालसा भी सत्य ही होती है।
यहाँ 'इह' कहनेका तात्पर्य है कि इस मनुष्यलोकमें यह मनुष्य ही इस समबुद्धिको प्राप्त करनेका अधिकारी है। मनुष्यके सिवाय दूसरी सभी भोगयोनियाँ है। अतः उन योनियोंमें विषमता (राग-द्वेष) का नाश करनेका अवसर नहीं है; क्योंकि भोग राग-द्वेषपूर्वक ही होते हैं। यदि राग-द्वेष न हों तो भोग होगा ही नहीं, प्रत्युत साधन ही होगा।
'प्रत्यवायो न विद्यते'--सकामभावपूर्वक किये गये कर्मोंमें अगर मन्त्र-उच्चारण, यज्ञ-विधि आदिमें कोई कमी रह जाय तो उसका उलटा फल हो जाता है। जैसे, कोई पुत्र-प्राप्तिके लिये पुत्रेष्टि यज्ञ करता है तो उसमें विधिकी त्रुटि हो जानेसे पुत्रका होना तो दूर रहा, घरमें किसीकी मृत्यु हो जाती है अथवा विधिकी कमी रहनेसे इतना उलटा फल न भी हो, तो भी पुत्र पूर्ण अङ्गोंके साथ नहीं जन्मता! परन्तु जो मनुष्य इस समबुद्धिको अपने अनुष्ठानमें लानेका प्रयत्न करता है, उसके प्रयत्नका, अनुष्ठानका कभी भी उलटा फल नहीं होता। कारण कि उसके अनुष्ठानमें फलकी इच्छा नहीं होती। जबतक फलेच्छा रहती है, तबतक समता नहीं आती और समता आनेपर फलेच्छा नहीं रहती। अतः उसके अनुष्ठानका विपरीत फल होता ही नहीं, होना सम्भव ही नहीं।
विपरीत फल क्या है? संसारसे विषमताका होना ही विपरीत फल है। सांसारिक किसी कार्यमें राग होना और किसी कार्यमें द्वेष होना ही विषमता है, और इसी विषमतासे जन्म-मरणरूप बन्धन होता है। परन्तु मनुष्यमें जब समता आती है, तब राग-द्वेष नहीं रहते और राग-द्वेषके न रहनेसे विषमता नहीं रहती, तो फिर उसका विपरीत फल होनेका कोई कारण ही नहीं है।
'स्वल्पमप्यस्य धर्मस्य त्रायते महतो भयात्'--इस समबुद्धिरूप धर्मका थोड़ा-सा भी अनुष्ठान हो जाय, थोड़ी-सी भी समता जीवनमें, आचरणमें आ जाय तो यह जन्ममरणरूप महान् भयसे रक्षा कर लेता है। जैसे सकाम कर्म फल देकर नष्ट हो जाता है ऐसे यह समता धन-सम्पत्ति आदि कोई फल देकर नष्ट नहीं होती अर्थात् इसका फल नाशवान् धनसम्पत्ति आदिकी प्राप्ति नहीं होत। साधकके अन्तःकरणमें अनुकूल-प्रतिकूल वस्तु, व्यक्ति, घटना, परिस्थिति आदिमें जितनी समता आ जाती है, उतनी समता अ़टल हो जाती है। इस समताका किसी भी कालमें नाश नहीं हो सकता। जैसे, योगभ्रष्टकी साधन-अवस्था में जितनी समता आ जाती है, जितनी साधन-सामग्री हो जाती है, उसका स्वर्गादि ऊँचे लोकोंमें बहुत वर्षोंतक सुख भोगनेपर और मृत्युलोगमें श्रीमानोंके घरमें भोग भोगनेपर भी नाश नहीं होता (गीता 6। 41 44)। यह समता, साधन-सामग्री कभी किञ्चिन्मात्र भी खर्च नहीं होती, प्रत्युत सदा ज्यों-की-त्यों सुरक्षित रहती है; क्योंकि यह सत् है, सदा रहनेवाली है।
'धर्म' नाम दो बातोंका है--(1) दान करना, प्याऊ लगाना, अन्नक्षेत्र खोलना आदि परोपकारके कार्य करना और (2) वर्ण-आश्रमके अनुसार शास्त्र-विहित अपने कर्तव्य-कर्मका तत्परतासे पालन करना। इन धर्मोंका निष्कामभावपूर्वक पालन करनेसे समतारूप धर्म स्वतः आ जाता है; क्योंकि यह समतारूप धर्म स्वयंका धर्म अर्थात् स्वरूप है। इसी बातको लेकर यहाँ समबुद्धिको धर्म कहा गया है।
समतासम्बन्धी विशेष बात
लोगोंके भीतर प्रायः यह बात बैठी हुई है कि मन लगनेसे ही भजन-स्मरण होता है, मन नहीं लगा तो राम-राम करनेसे क्या लाभ? परन्तु गीताकी दृष्टिमें मन लगना कोई ऊँची चीज नहीं है। गीताकी दृष्टिमें ऊँची चीज है--समता। दूसरे लक्षण आयें या न आयें, जिसमें समता आ गयी उसको गीता सिद्ध कह देती है। जिसमें दूसरे सब लक्षण आ जायँ और समता न आये उसको गीता सिद्ध नहीं कहती।
समता दो तरहकी होती है--अन्तःकरणकी समता और स्वरूपकी समता। समरूप परमात्मा सब जगह परिपूर्ण है। उस समरूप परमात्मामें जो स्थित हो गया, उसने संसार-मात्रपर विजय प्राप्त कर ली, वह जीवन्मुक्त हो गया। परन्तु इसकी पहचान अन्तःकरणकी समतासे होती है (गीता 5। 19)। अन्तःकरणकी समता है-- सिद्धि-असिद्धिमें सम रहना (गीता 2। 48)। प्रशंसा हो जाय या निन्दा हो जाय कार्य सफल हो जाय या असफल हो जाय, लाखों रूपये आ जायँ या लाखों रूपये चले जायँ पर उससे अन्तःकरणमें कोई हलचल न हो; सुख-दुःख, हर्ष-शोक आदि न हो (गीता 5। 20)। इस समताका कभी नाश नहीं होता। कल्याणके सिवाय इस समताका दूसरा कोई फल होता ही नहीं।
मनुष्य, तप, दान, तीर्थ, व्रत आदि कोई भी पुण्य-कर्म करे, वह फल देकर नष्ट हो जाता है; परन्तु साधन करते-करते अन्तःकरणमें थोड़ी भी समता (निर्विकारता) आ जाय तो वह नष्ट नहीं होती, प्रत्युत कल्याण कर देती है। इसलिये साधनमें समता जितनी ऊँची चीज है, मनकी एकाग्रता उतनी ऊँची चीज नहीं है। मन एकाग्र होनेसे सिद्धियाँ तो प्राप्त हो जाती है, पर कल्याण नहीं होता। परन्तु समता आनेसे मनुष्य संसार-बन्धनसे सुखपूर्वक मुक्त हो जाता है (गीता 5। 3)।
सम्बन्ध-- उन्तालीसवें श्लोकमें भगवान्ने जिस समबुद्धिको योगमें सुननेके लिये कहा था उसी समबुद्धिको प्राप्त करनेका साधन आगेके श्लोकमें बताते हैं।

इसके सिवा और भी सुन आरम्भका नाम अभिक्रम है इस कर्मयोगरूप मोक्षमार्गमें अभिक्रमका यानी प्रारम्भका कृषि आदिके सदृश नाश नहीं होता। अभिप्राय यह कि योगविषयक प्रारम्भका फल अनैकान्तिक ( संशययुक्त ) नहीं है। तथा चिकित्सादिकी तरह ( इसमें ) प्रत्यवाय ( विपरीत फल ) भी नहीं होता है। तो क्या होता है इस कर्मयोगरूप धर्मका थोड़ासा भी अनुष्ठान ( साधन ) जन्ममरणरूप महान् संसारभयसे रक्षा किया करता है।

Objection: Since the performance of action has uncertain fruit, it is of no consequence; and being polluted by many evils, it is defective; therefore, even the Yoga-understanding is not worthy of faith? To that He says 'kiñca' (moreover). Something else is said. Meaning, the reason for the necessity of the performance of action. Objection: Since it is impossible to perform Samadhi along with action, and many obstacles are possible, and its fruit, direct realization, being achievable by long practice, is impossible in one birth; consequently, the Yogi might fall and fall into ruin? Anticipating this, He says 'neha' (not here). The negative particle 'na' taken as a symbol is restated as 'nāsti' (is not) to suit the syntax again. As for the statement that performance of action is of no consequence due to uncertain fruit, he refutes that with 'yathā' etc. The fruit of the commencement of agriculture, trade, etc. is irregular because it depends on mere probability; not so is the fruit of the commencement in Vedic action irregular; that is not proper, because it would contradict scripture—this is the meaning. And regarding what was said that the performance is defective being polluted by many evils, to that he says 'kiñca'. 'For this reason also performance of action is necessary'—having promised this, he clarifies another reason with 'nāpi' etc. When medical treatment is being done, increase of disease, or death, or adverse effect is also possible, because the ripening of karma is difficult to determine; there is no such defect in the performance of (Yoga) action, because it is enjoined—this is the meaning. Now he asks the fruit of the performance of action with 'kintu' etc. Explaining the second half, he states the intended fruit—'svalpam api' (even a little), etc. Protection through the generation of right knowledge is intended. 'Even if engaged in all sins, meditating on Achyuta for a moment, he becomes an ascetic and performer of austerity, a purifier of the company-purifiers'—from this Smriti; this is the meaning.

With the intention that this has a great distinction from optional (Kamya) actions, He says 'neha' (not here), etc. Here—in desireless action and in the path of liberation characterized by Samadhi-yoga—there is no destruction of the 'abhikrama', the commencement. Unlike agriculture etc., there is no adverse effect—production of sin—like in medical treatment. Even a little of this Dharma practiced protects from great fear—the fear of Samsara characterized by birth and death etc.

He explains this very thing with 'neha' etc. Here—when Karma Yoga is being practiced for the destruction of the bondage of action. 'Abhikrama'—that by which one approaches/commences—is the commencement of action or action itself; there is no destruction of it. Other (action) perishes after giving fruit, but not this; because the desired fruit has not yet been generated. Objection: Since this also falls under 'Kamya' (optional/desire-motivated action for Moksha), the sin arising from the non-performance of Nitya (obligatory) action would certainly arise? Because for what is performed once, being the cause of two fruits—destruction of bondage and avoidance of sin—is improper? Anticipating this, He says 'pratyavāyo na vidyate' (there is no sin). By the Shruti 'Brahmins desire to know Him by Vedic recitation, sacrifice, charity, austerity, fasting', applying the logic of 'Separate Connection' (Samyoga-prithaktva)—just as by 'One desiring sense-power should offer with curd', the obligatory curd is for the sake of vigor—so too, the 'being for the sake of desire for knowledge' (vividishā) of even obligatory actions is established by the force of application (viniyoga). And consequently, since the obligatory is also accomplished by the optional performance itself, there is no sin caused by non-performance of the obligatory, nor sin caused by the non-completion of all limbs due to it being optional. Because only obligatory actions are applied (here). And in obligatory actions, performance according to capacity is permitted. In the Vartika, however, the application of optional actions is also seen here. As: 'For the birth of knowledge of the unity of Self, the injunction of obligatory actions like Vedic recitation is stated by the sentence

'Iha'—in Karma Yoga—there is no destruction of 'abhikrama'. Abhikrama is commencement; destruction is the destruction of the state of being a means to the fruit. There is no fruitlessness of what is begun, unfinished, or interrupted. Even in the interruption of what is begun, there is no 'pratyavāya' (adverse effect/sin). Even a 'small part' of 'asya'—this one's own duty named Karma Yoga—protects from great fear—fear of Samsara. This meaning will be expanded later in 'O Partha, neither here nor in the next world is there destruction for him' (Gita 6.40). For other worldly and Vedic means, if interrupted, do not lead to the production of fruit and do lead to adverse effect (sin). He distinguishes the understanding regarding action which is the means to liberation from the understanding regarding optional (Kamya) action—

Objection: Since actions, like agriculture etc., sometimes deviate in fruit due to abundance of obstacles, and since adverse effect (sin) is possible due to defect in limbs like Mantras etc., how can there be destruction of the bondage of action by Karma Yoga? To that He says 'neha' (not here), etc. 'Iha'—in desireless Karma Yoga—there is no 'destruction'—fruitlessness—of the 'abhikrama', i.e., commencement; and 'pratyavāya' (sin) does not exist; because obstacles, defects, etc. are impossible due to the very fact of being intended for God. Moreover, even a little—even mere commencement—performed of 'asya' (this) Dharma, protects from great fear—from Samsara; unlike optional (Kamya) action, there is no fruitlessness of this due to slight defect in limbs etc.—this is the meaning.

Objection: After saying 'Hear this' (2.39), 'Resolute...' (2.41) etc. should be said; 'Neha abhikrama...' in between does not fit? To this, he says—'vakṣyamāṇa' (to be described), etc. By stating the greatness in the introduction, 'prarocana' (incitement/inducement) is done to generate excessive desire to know—this is the idea. He states the distinctness from other actions indicated by 'iha'—as 'karmayoge'. He dispels the doubt of 'movement towards' (literal meaning of abhi-krama) saying 'abhikrama is commencement'. The idea is that this is like the word 'upakrama'. How can there be non-destruction of commencement which is of the nature of action? Therefore—'destruction is the destruction of the state of being a means to fruit'. He states the purport—'ārabdhasya' (of the begun), etc. Showing the cause for the doubt of sin, he explains the second quarter—'ārabdhasya vicchede' (in the interruption of the begun), etc. He explains the second half which details the aforesaid—'asya' (of this), etc. 'Saṃsārabhayāt'—fear qualified by greatness is indeed the fear of Samsara—this is the idea. Even a small part is the cause for the cessation of Samsara—because even if interrupted due to defects of place, time, etc., and due to inadvertent performance of prohibited acts, there is certainly reconnection—showing this, and stating that this verse intends only the said meaning, and asserting non-repetition with what will be said later (in Ch 6) due to the form of brief and detailed statement—he says 'ayamartha' (this meaning), etc. Regarding the doubt 'How is there no contingency of destruction of the performed part?', he shows what is excluded by 'iha'—with 'anyāni hi' (others indeed), etc. 'Laukikāni' (worldly)—this example is stated as the cause of excessive doubt. The idea of the general designation 'vaidikāni' is this: Even Nitya and Naimittika actions, if interrupted, would not lead to fruit and would lead to sin. Only slight defect rooted in inability etc. is tolerable there. But in Kamya actions, there is fruitlessness even in the defect of a limb—this is the distinction. Thus 'they lead to adverse effect'—meaning not only merely the non-attainment of heaven etc., but attainment of the state of a Brahmarakshasa etc. could also occur—this is the idea.

क्रमनाश जिस प्रकार कृषि क्षेत्र में फसल पाने के लिये भूमि जोतना सींचना बीज बोना निराई सुरक्षा और कटाई आदि क्रम का पालन करना पड़ता है अन्यथा हानि उठानी पड़ती है उसी प्रकार वेदों के कर्मकाण्ड में वर्णित यज्ञयागादि के अनुष्ठान में भी क्रमानुसार क्रिया विधि न करने पर यज्ञ का फल नहीं मिलता। इतना ही नहीं यदि वेद प्रतिपादित कर्मों को न किया जाय तो वह प्रत्यवाय दोष कहलाता है जिसका अनिष्ट फल कर्त्ता (जीव)को भोगना पड़ता है। लौकिक फल प्राप्ति में यही बातें देखी जाती हैं। भौतिक जगत् में भी इसी प्रकार के अनेक उदाहरण हैं जैसे गलत औषधियों के प्रयोग से रोगी को अपने प्राणों से हाथ धोना पड़ता है।कर्म क्षेत्र में इन दोषों के होने से हमें इष्टफल नहीं मिल पाता। भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण यहां मानो इस ज्ञान का विज्ञापन करते हुये कर्मयोग का उपर्युक्त दोनों दोषों से सर्वथा मुक्त और सुरक्षित होने का आश्वासन देते हैं।अब इस ज्ञान का स्वरूप बताते हैं

'Eṣā te' (This to you...) etc. And this resolute understanding regarding Sankhya—right knowledge—has been spoken to you. And hear this very same (understanding) as it is spoken regarding Yoga—for skill in action; by which understanding you will cast off the binding nature of actions. For actions do not bind by themselves, being inert. Therefore, the Self binds itself by itself through actions which are of the nature of impressions (vasanas).

Objection: 'Since by the Shruti "Tam etam..." (Brahmins desire to know Him by Vedic recitation...), all actions are applied aiming at the desire for knowledge and knowledge itself by the logic of "Separate Connection" (Samyoga-prithaktva), and since purification of the mind is the means therein, performance of action is enjoined for me. There, since the destruction of fruit taught by the Shruti "Just as here the world won by action perishes..." is possible; and since sacrifices etc. performed aiming at knowledge and desire for knowledge are "Kamya" (desire-motivated/optional) and thus to be performed with the completion of all limbs, defect is possible even in the non-accomplishment of a slight limb; and since it is impossible to perform all actions enjoined by sentences like "by sacrifice" etc. even in the span of a man's life; whence is the hope for the fruit "you will cast off the bondage of action"?'—To this the Lord says—'Abhikramyate'—the fruit which is commenced by action is 'Abhikrama'; its destruction—which is propounded by 'tadyatheha' etc.—does not exist 'iha'—in desireless Karma Yoga. Because its fruit, purification, being of the nature of destruction of sin, and lacking the nature of enjoyment denoted by the word 'Loka' (world), destruction is impossible; and since the desire for knowledge ending in knowledge is alone the fruit of action, and since knowledge generates the fruit of removal of ignorance without interval, destruction without generating the fruit is impossible; thus 'there is no destruction of fruit here' is rightly said. It is said: 'The censure in "tadyatheha" is regarding the fruit, not the action; action performed abandoning desire for fruit creates purity.' Similarly, 'Pratyavāya'—defect caused by the defect of limbs—does not exist here; because by the sentence 'tam' (tam etam), only obligatory (Nitya) actions are applied in the desire for knowledge through the destruction of accumulated sins. And there, since there is no rule of completion of all limbs; and even in the view that optional (Kamya) actions are also applied by the logic of 'Separate Connection', due to being devoid of desire for fruit, they are equal to obligatory ones. For there is no intrinsic difference between optional and obligatory Agnihotra. The designation of optional and obligatory is only due to the desire for fruit and its absence. And these two views are stated in the Vartika: 'For the birth of knowledge of the unity of Self, the injunction of obligatory actions like Vedic recitation is stated by the sentence 'tam etam'. Or, the being for the sake of desire for knowledge of optional actions too, by the sentence 'tam etam' due to the separateness of connection.' Thus. And thus, the rule of completion of all limbs is only in action performed with desire for fruit; in action for purification which is distinct from that, since completion is possible by substitutes etc., there is no sin (pratyavaya) caused by defect of limbs—this is the meaning. Similarly, of this Dharma for purification—enjoined by the sentence 'tam etam' etc.—'madhye' (in the middle/course), even a 'little'—performed somewhat according to capacity regarding number or procedure for the worship of God—being existent, saves from the great fear of Samsara; protects the performer by securing the grace of God. From Smritis like 'Even if engaged in all sins, meditating on Achyuta for a moment, he becomes a great ascetic, a purifier of the company-purifiers.' And since there is no enjoiner of combination (samuccaya) in the sentence 'tam etam', and since gradation in performance is reasonable due to gradation in impurity, 'you will cast off the bondage of action' is rightly said.

Objection: 'Due to the multitude of actions and their being achievable by time etc., due to the absence of completeness in performed actions, there would be defect; and on the contrary, due to defect in limbs etc., there would be possibility of sin (pratyavaya) etc.; so how will there not be bondage?' If this is said—anticipating this, since Arjuna is ignorant of the nature of Yoga which is of the form of union like the Lord's earring (Kundala), to make that known, He states its nature—'nehābhikramanāśaḥ' (no destruction of commencement here), etc. In the Lord's path, the duty of actions is for the sake of the Lord, as the Lord's command, and not as means to (other) fruit; therefore, the aforementioned defect is not possible here. He says that very thing—'Iha'—in the action performed as My command—there is no 'abhikrama-nāśa'—destruction of commenced action; meaning it does not become fruitless. And there is no sin (pratyavaya). Because even a little of this Dharma performed 'trāyate'—saves—from great fear. Here the idea is: Elsewhere, to make the performed action fruitful and complete, remembrance of the Lord is taught by 'yasya smṛtyā...' (Vishnu Purana) etc.; there (in this path), how can actions performed directly for the Lord be fruitless?

'Na iha'—in the path of liberation, in Karma Yoga—there is no 'abhikrama-nāśa'—abhikramaṇa is abhikrama, commencement; its destruction—does not exist, as (it does) for agriculture etc. The meaning is that in the subject of Yoga, the commencement does not have uncertain fruit. Moreover, nor does 'pratyavāya' (adverse effect) exist—occur—like in medical treatment. But 'svalpam api'—even a little—of 'asya dharmasya'—of this Yoga-dharma—performed, 'trāyate'—saves—'mahato bhayāt'—from great fear, from the fear of Samsara characterized by birth and death etc. That understanding which was spoken regarding Sankhya, and which is to be described regarding Yoga...

He states the ease in Yoga from all sides—'nehābhikramanāśaḥ' etc. 'Iha'—in the Yoga-understanding—whatever 'abhikrama'—commencement—of Dharma is there, there is no destruction of it. Because of the Bhagavata statement: 'Indeed, in the commencement of the parts, there is no destruction of one's own duty, O Uddhava, even an atom; this is determined by Me' (11.29.20). Even a little commencement of this Dharma saves from great fear. In Sankhya, however, upon perfection, there is abandonment of religious actions; here it is not so. And it is said: 'Yama etc. are indeed to be done; upon perfection of Yoga, there is fulfillment' thus.

न not? इह in this? अभिक्रमनाशः loss of effort? अस्ति is? प्रत्यवायः production of contrary results? न not? विद्यते is? स्वल्पम् very little? अपि even? अस्य of this? धर्मस्य duty? त्रायते protects? महतः (from) great? भयात् fear.Commentary If a religious ceremony is left uncompleted? it is a wastage as the performer cannot realise the fruits. But it is not so in the case of Karma Yoga because every action causes immediate purification of the heart.In agriculture there is uncertainty. The farmer may till the land? plough and sow the seed but he may not get a crop if there is no rain. This is not so in Karma Yoga. There is no uncertainty at all. Further? there is no chance of any harm coming out of it. In the case of medical treatment great harm will result from the doctors injudicious treatment if he uses a wrong medicine. But it is not so in the case of Karma Yoga. Anything done? however little it may be? in this path of Yoga? the Yoga of action? saves one from great fear of being caught in the wheel of birth and death. Lord Krishna here extols Karma Yoga in order to create interest in Arjuna in this Yoga.

Moreover, iha, here, in the path to Liberation, viz the Yoga of Action (rites and duties); na, there is no; abhikrama-nasah, waste of an attempt, of a beginning, unlike as in agriculture etc. The meaning is that the result of any attempt in the case of Yoga is not uncertain. Besides, unlike as in medical care, na vidyate, nor is there, nor does there arises; any pratyavayah, harm. But, svalpam api, even a little; asya, of this; dharmasya, righteousness in the form of Yoga (of Action); when pracised, trayate, saves (one); mahato bhayat, from great fear, of mundance existence characterized by death, birth, etc.

Here, in Karma Yoga, there is no loss of 'Abhikrama' or of effort that has been put in; 'loss' means the loss of efficacy to bring about the fruits. In Karma Yoga if work is begun and left unfinished, and the continuity is broken in the middle, it does not remain fruitless, as in the case of works undertaken for their fruits. No evil result is acired if the continuity of work is broken. Even a little of this Dharma known as Karma Yoga or Niskama Karma (unselfish action without desire for any reward) gives protection from the great fear, i.e., the fear of transmigratory existence.
The same purport is explained later thus: 'Neither in this world nor the next, O Arjuna, there is annihilation for him' (6.40). But in works, Vedic and secular, when there is interruption in the middle, not only do they not yield fruits, but also there is accrual of evil.
Now, Sri Krsna distinguishes the Buddhi or mental disposition concerned with those acts which constitute a means for attaining release from those which are concerned with the acts meant for gaining the desired objects: