Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 2 - Shloka (Verse) 47

'कर्मण्येवाधिकारस्ते'-- प्राप्त कर्तव्य कर्मका पालन करनेमें ही तेरा अधिकार है। इसमें तू स्वतन्त्र है। कारण कि मनुष्य कर्मयोनि है। मनुष्यके सिवाय दूसरी कोई भी योनि नया कर्म करनेके लिये नहीं है। पशु-पक्षी आदि जङ्गम और वृक्ष, लता आदि स्थावर प्राणी नया कर्म नहीं कर सकते। देवता आदिमें नया कर्म करनेकी सामर्थ्य तो है, पर वे केवल पहले किये गये यज्ञ, दान आदि शुभ कर्मोंका फल भोगनेके लिये ही हैं। वे भगवान्के विधानके अनुसार मनुष्योंके लिये कर्म करनेकी सामग्री दे सकते हैं, पर केवल सुखभोगमें ही लिप्त रहनेके कारण स्वयं नया कर्म नहीं कर सकते। नारकीय जीव भी भोगयोनि होनेके कारण अपने दुष्कर्मोंका फल भोगते हैं, नया कर्म नहीं कर सकते। नया कर्म करनेमें तो केवल-मनुष्यका ही अधिकार है। भगवान्ने सेवारूप नया कर्म करके केवल अपना उद्धार करनेके लिये यह अन्तिम मनुष्यजन्म दिया है। अगर यह कर्मोंको अपने लिये करेगा तो बन्धनमें पड़ जायगा और अगर कर्मोंको न करके आलस्य-प्रमादमें पड़ा रहेगा तो बार-बार जन्मता-मरता रहेगा। अतः भगवान् कहते हैं कि तेरा केवल सेवारूप कर्तव्य-कर्म करनेमें ही अधिकार है।
'कर्मणि' पदमें एकवचन देनेका तात्पर्य है कि मनुष्यके सामने देश, काल, घटना, परिस्थिति आदिको लेकर शास्त्रविहित कर्म तो अलग-अलग होंगे, पर एक समयमें एक मनुष्य किसी एक कर्मको ही तत्परतापूर्वक कर सकता है। जैसे, क्षत्रिय होनेके कारण अर्जुनके लिये युद्ध करना, दान देना आदि कर्तव्यकर्मोंका विधान है, पर वर्तमानमें युद्धके समय वह एक युद्धरूप कर्तव्य-कर्म ही कर सकता है, दान आदि कर्तव्य-कर्म नहीं कर सकता।
'मार्मिक बात'
मनुष्यशरीरमें दो बातें हैं--पुराने कर्मोंका फलभोग और नया पुरुषार्थ। दूसरी योनियोंमें केवल पुराने कर्मोंका फलभोग है अर्थात् कीट-पतंग, पशु-पक्षी, देवता, ब्रह्म-लोकतककी योनियाँ भोग-योनियाँ हैं। इसलिये उनके लिये ऐसा करो और ऐसा मत करो'--यह विधान नहीं है। पशु-पक्षी कीट-पतंग आदि जो कुछ भी कर्म करते हैं, उनका वह कर्म भी फलभोगमें है। कारण कि उनके द्वारा किया जानेवाला कर्म उनके प्रारब्धके अनुसार पहलेसे ही रचा हुआ है। उनके जीवनमें अनुकूल-प्रतिकूल परिस्थितिका जो कुछ भोग होता है, वह भोग भी फलभोगमें ही है। परन्तु मनुष्यशरीर तो केवल नये पुरुषार्थके लिये ही मिला है, जिससे यह अपना उद्धार कर ले।
इस मनुष्यशरीरमें दो विभाग हैं--एक तो इसके सामने पुराने कर्मोंके फलरूपमें अनुकूल-प्रतिकूल परिस्थिति आती है; और दूसरा यह नया पुरुषार्थ (नये कर्म) करता है। नये कर्मोंके अनुसार ही इसके भविष्यका निर्माण होता है। इसलिये शास्त्र, सन्त-महापुरुषोंका विधि-निषेध, राज्य आदिका शासन केवल मनुष्योंके लिये ही होता है ;क्योंकि मनुष्यमें पुरुषार्थकी प्रघानता है, नये कर्मोंको करनेकी स्वतन्त्रता है। परन्तु पिछले कर्मोंके फलस्वरूप मिलनेवाली अनुकूल-प्रतिकूलरूप परिस्थितिको बदलनेमें यह परतन्त्र है। तात्पर्य है कि मनुष्य कर्म करनेमें स्वतन्त्र और फल-प्राप्तिमें परतन्त्र है। परन्तु अनुकूल-प्रतिकूलरूपसे प्राप्त परिस्थितिका सदुपयोग करके मनुष्य उसको अपने उद्धारकी साधन-सामग्री बना सकता है; क्योंकि यह मनुष्यशरीर अपने उद्धारके लिये ही मिला है। इसलिये इसमें नया पुरुषार्थ भी उद्धारके लिये है और पुराने कर्मोंके फल फलरूपसे प्राप्त परिस्थिति भी उद्धारके लिये ही है।

तेरा कर्ममें ही अधिकार है ज्ञाननिष्ठामें नहीं। वहाँ ( कर्ममार्गमें ) कर्म करते हुए तेरा फलमें कभी अधिकार न हो अर्थात् तुझे किसी भी अवस्थामें कर्मफलकी इच्छा नहीं होनी चाहिये। यदि कर्मफलमें तेरी तृष्णा होगी तो तू कर्मफलप्राप्तिका कारण होगा। अतः इस प्रकार कर्मफलप्राप्तिका कारण तू मत बन। क्योंकि जब मनुष्य कर्मफलकी कामनासे प्रेरित होकर कर्ममें प्रवृत्त होता है तब वह कर्मफलरूप पुनर्जन्मका हेतु बन ही जाता है। यदि कर्मफलकी इच्छा न करें तो दुःखरूप कर्म करनेकी क्या आवश्यकता है इस प्रकार कर्म न करनेमें भी तेरी आसक्तिप्रीति नहीं होनी चाहिये।

"Then, abandoning the path of Yoga which is a means to the human goal indirectly, Self-knowledge which is the direct cause of the human goal should be taught for that purpose; for my mind yearns for that?" Raising this doubt, he says "Tava ca" (And your). "Then there might be desire for its fruit too?" He says no with "Ma phaleshu" (Not in the fruits). He expands on the previously stated meaning with "Ma karma" (Let not action...). "If attachment to fruit is impossible, I have faith only in non-performance of action"—raising this doubt, he says "Ma te" (Let not your). He prevents the contingency of abandonment of action even for one not qualified for knowledge with "Karmani eva" (In action alone). He states the meaning of the word 'Eva' (only) in 'Karmani eva' with "Na jnana" (Not knowledge...). For indeed, the primary qualification does not succeed there for a non-Brahmana whose impurities are not ripened; this is the meaning. "Then connection with fruits would be unavoidable?" Raising this doubt, he says "Tatra" (Therein). "While there is qualification in action alone"—this is the meaning of the locative case. He clarifies the absence of qualification regarding fruits with "Karma" (Action). "Before, after, and at the time of performance of action"—this is intended by "Kadachana" (at any time); he says "Kasyanchit" (In any). He states the defect in attachment to fruit with "Yada" (When). "Thus, through the thirst for the fruit of action"—this is the meaning. He explains "being the cause of the fruit of action" with "Yada hi". Then, "fruitless, painful action should not be done"—repeating this doubt, he refutes it with "Yadi" etc. He clarifies what was said—"Let there not be attachment to inaction"—with "Akarane" (In non-performance).

"Then where does my right lie?"—in response to this expectation, He says "Karmani" (In action alone). (Your right is) in action alone, and not in steadfastness in Knowledge (Jnana-Nishtha), due to the absence of purity of the inner instrument (mind). Even there (in action), (your right is) only in action that is the cause of mental purification and devoid of attachment to results, and not in desire-prompted (Kamya) action which is the cause of bondage—this He states with "Ma" (Let not/Do not).

"Kadachana" means: even in any state whatsoever, let there be no thirst (craving) in you for the fruits of action. The meaning is: let you not have a right in desire-prompted (Kamya) actions through the thirst for results.

(Objection:) "Even in the absence of thirst (desire), just as satisfaction arises from eating (automatically), so too the fruit of action will indeed occur?"—to this, He says "Ma karma" (Do not be the cause...). Do not be the cause of the fruit of action; do not become the producer of that (fruit) through thirst for the result. Because there is a rule that action performed with desire yields fruits like cattle etc., as per the Shruti text: "One desirous of cattle should sacrifice with the Chitra sacrifice."

And as for the interpretation "He whose motive for engagement is the fruit of action" (taking it as a Bahuvrihi compound), that is not correct. Because, compared to Bahuvrihi, the Tatpurusha compound ("The cause of the fruit of action") is lighter (simpler). (Finally:) Thinking "What is the use of action which is of the nature of pain and is fruitless?"—let there not be attachment (Sanga) in you towards the non-performance of action.

Censure of the desirous (Kamatmanas) was done. (Doubt:) How so, when desire is also enjoined in texts like "One desirous of heaven should sacrifice" (Apastamba Shrauta Sutra 10.1.2.1)? To this, He says "Karmanyeva" (In action alone). The word "Te" (Your) is used as an 'Upalakshana' (figurative representation for all). (Meaning:) When there is no duty of desiring fruit even for a Knower like you, what to say of others? It is not that it exists for some and not for you. For he (Arjuna) is indeed a Knower (Jnani), a portion of Nara and Indra; the delusion etc., are due to temporary suppression. If knowledge does not belong to those of pure Sattva, then to whom else? And their knowledge is established by instruction etc. Due to the enumeration of Knowers like Partha and Arstisena, it is only worldly desire that is prohibited here. Fruits occur dependently (not independently). Fruits of action do not occur by effort in the absence of action. And for a performer of Kamya-karma, if there is no obstruction, fruits occur even if one tries to prevent them. Therefore, the sin/fault lies only in the non-performance of action, not in the non-attainment of fruit due to Knowledge or desirelessness. Thus, the qualification is in action alone. Therefore, that alone must be done. Attainment of fruit is not through desire nor through the prohibition (abandonment) of action by Knowledge.

The purport of scriptural statements mentioning desire has been stated by the Lord Himself: "The scriptural promise of fruit is for 'rochana' (enticement/creating interest), just as sweet inducement for medicine" (Bhagavata 11.21.23). Therefore, "A desirous one should sacrifice" means (if one has desire, he should sacrifice), not that one should become desirous to sacrifice. This is known from statements like "Desireless and preceded by Knowledge..." and from what will be said later, and from injunctions like "In every spring, one should sacrifice with Jyotistoma" (where no desire is mentioned).

Therefore, "Ma karma-phala-hetur-bhuh" (Do not be a cause of the fruit of action). He whose motive (hetu) in the performance of action is the fruit of action, is a 'Karma-phala-hetu'; do not be that.
(If you say:) "Then I will not act," He says "Ma te" (Let not yours...). Meaning: Let there be no attachment/affection in you towards the non-performance of action. Otherwise, even in the absence of (worldly) fruit, there is the existence of the fruit called 'My Grace' (Mat-prasada).

And desire for That (Grace) is proper. From the conduct of great souls—"We choose for Your satisfaction"; and specifically from the absence of censure for this (desire) and the censure of other desires. It is well known that "The special rule invalidates the general rule" (as in 'Bring everyone, (but) not Maitra'). Therefore, supported by verses like "Desiring Bhakti, some do not desire even oneness with Me" (Bhagavata 3.25.34), "Inquiry into Brahman" (Brahma Sutra 1.1.1), "Having known, let him practice wisdom," "He is to be seen," etc.—desire for Bhakti and Knowledge is to be done. Also, by the well-known worldly logic: there is not as much affection towards a servant who serves for his own interest; but when asked "What shall I give?", towards the beggar who asks only for "service etc.," there is much greater affection. Thus, it is established that desire for Bhakti, Knowledge, etc., should be done.

"Nanu" (Objection): For me also, who am a seeker of the Self-knowledge taught in the Upanishads, 'Shama' (quietude/cessation of activity) alone is desired; so how do You impel me saying "Fight"? Anticipating this doubt, He says "Karmanyeva" (In action alone).

Your qualification (Adhikara) is in action alone, not in steadfastness in Knowledge (Jnana-Nishtha).

"Ma" (Let not) is pulled (syntactically connected) to mean: Let there be no attachment in fruits.

"Karma-phala-hetu"—Do not be one for whom the fruit of action (like heaven, cattle, etc.) is the impeller/motive in actions.

"Akarmani"—Let not your attachment be in the non-performance of action either.

In 'action'—be it Nitya (daily/obligatory), Naimittika (occasional), or Kamya (desire-prompted)—which is heard (in scriptures) as being related to some specific fruit; for 'Te' (you), the seeker of liberation (Mumukshu) established in eternal Sattva (Goodness), the qualification is in action merely. In the 'fruits' understood as related to that action, let there never be any right/claim.

Because fruitful action is of the nature of bondage, and distinct/fruitless action—which is solely of the nature of My worship—is the cause of liberation.
And "Ma karma-phalayoh hetuh bhuh" (Do not be the cause of the action and the fruit). Even while action is being performed by you, you, the Mumukshu established in eternal Sattva, must contemplate your own 'non-doership' (Akartritva). You must also contemplate that you are not the 'cause' (Hetu) of the fruit, such as the alleviation of hunger, etc. Both of these (agency and cause of fruit) are to be contemplated as belonging either to the Gunas (modes of nature) or to Me, the Lord of all—this will be stated later.

Contemplating thus, perform action. In "Akarmani"—i.e., in non-performance, as stated by you "I shall not fight"—let there be no attachment in that. The meaning is: let there be attachment only in actions like war, in the manner described. He clarifies this very point—

(Doubt:) "Then, thinking that 'all fruits of action will occur from the worship of the Supreme Lord alone', one might engage (only in worship); what is the use of action?"—Anticipating this doubt and warding it off, He says "Karmanyeva" (In action alone).

"Te" (Your)—of the seeker of Truth-Knowledge—right/qualification is in action alone. In its fruits—which are the causes of bondage—let there be no "Adhikara," meaning 'Kama' (desire).

"Nanu" (Objection): "Once action is performed, its fruit will indeed occur, just as satisfaction follows eating?"—Anticipating this, He says. "Ma karma-phala-hetur-bhuh"—Do not be one for whom the fruit of action is the motive (hetu) for engagement. The idea is: Only the desired object (like heaven etc.) becomes the 'fruit' because it qualifies the 'enjoined person' (Niyojya); therefore, an undesired fruit does not accrue (does not bind).

Therefore, out of fear that "the fruit will be binding," let there be no "Sanga"—i.e., Nishtha (fixed adherence/attachment)—in "Akarmani" (in the non-performance of action).

वेद प्रतिपादित सिद्धान्त के अनुसार ईश्वरार्पण बुद्धि और निष्काम भाव से किये गये कर्म अन्तकरण को शुद्ध करते हैं। आत्मबोध के पूर्व चित्तशुद्धि होना अनिवार्य है। गीता में इसी सिद्धान्त की पुष्टि करते हुये विशद विवरण में वैयक्तिक और सामाजिक सभी कर्मों का समावेश कर लिया गया है जबकि वेदों में कर्म से तात्पर्य यज्ञयागादि धार्मिक विधियों से ही था।अपरिपक्व बुद्धि से तत्त्वज्ञान जैसा गम्भीर विषय समझ में नहीं आ सकता। पर्याप्त विचार किये बिना उपर्युक्त श्लोक का अर्थ असंभव ही प्रतीत होगा। अधिकसेअधिक कोई यह मान लेगा कि उस काल में दरिद्र को दरिद्र ही रखने में और धनवान को उन पर अत्याचार करने की धार्मिक अनुमति इस श्लोक में दी गयी हैं। केवल बौद्धिक विचार करने वाले व्यक्ति को फलासक्ति न रखकर कर्म करने का आदर्श अव्यावहारिक और असंभव प्रतीत होगा। परन्तु वही व्यक्ति अध्ययन के पश्चात् अपने कर्म क्षेत्र में इसका पालन करके देखे तो उसे यह ज्ञात होगा कि जीवन में वास्तविक सफलताओं को प्राप्त करने की यही एक मात्र कुंजी है।इसके पूर्व प्रेरणा का जीवन जीने की कला जो कर्मयोग के रूप में बतायी गयी थी उसी की शिक्षा यहाँ श्रीकृष्ण पुन अर्जुन को दे रहे हैं। अनुचित संकल्पविकल्प जीवन के विष हैं। जीवन में सभी असफलताओं का मूल मनस्थिरता के अभाव में निहित है जो सामान्यत भविष्य में संभाव्य हानि के भय की कल्पना मात्र का परिणाम होता है। हममें से अधिकांश लोग असफलता के भय से महान् कार्य को अपने हाथों में लेना ही स्वीकार नहीं करते और जो कोई थोड़े लोग ऐसा साहस करते भी हैं तो अल्पकाल के बाद निरुत्साहित होकर उस कार्य को अपूर्ण ही छोड़ देते हैं। इसका कारण एक ही हैमन की शक्ति का अपव्यय। इस अपव्यय के परिहार का एक मात्र उपाय है किसी श्रेष्ठ आदर्श के प्रति सब कर्मों का समर्पण। प्रेरणायुक्त इन कर्मों की परिसमाप्ति गौरवमयी सफलता मेंं ही होती है। यह कर्म का सनातन नियम है।भविष्य का निर्माण सदैव वर्तमान में होता है। आगामी कल की फसल आज के जोतने और बीज बोने पर निर्भर है। किन्तु भविष्य में सम्भावित फसल की हानि की कल्पना करके ही यदि कोई कृषक भूमि जोतने और बीजारोपण के अवसरों को वर्तमान समय में खो देता है तो यह निश्चित है कि भविष्य में उसे कोई फसल मिलने वाली नहीं। उन्नत भविष्य के लिए वर्तमान समय का उपयोग बुद्धिमत्तापूर्वक करना चाहिये। भूतकाल तो मृत है और भविष्य अभी अनुत्पन्न। वर्तमान में अकुशलता से कार्य करने पर व्यक्ति को भविष्य में किसी बड़ी सफलता की आशा नहीं करनी चाहिये।इस सुविदित और बोधगम्य मूलभूत सत्य को गीता की भाषा में इस प्रकार कह सकते हैं कि यदि तुम सफलता चाहते हो तो ऐसे मन से प्रयत्न कभी नहीं करो जो फल प्राप्ति की चिन्ता एवं भय से बिखरा हुआ हो। यहाँ कर्मफल से शास्त्र का क्या तात्पर्य है इसे सूक्ष्म विचार से समझना आवश्यक और लाभप्रद होगा। सम्यक् विचार करने से यह ज्ञात होगा कि वास्तव में कर्मफल स्वयं कर्म से कोई भिन्न वस्तु नहीं है। वर्तमान में किया गया कर्म ही भविष्य में फल के रूप में प्रकट होता है। वास्तविकता यह है कि कर्म की समाप्ति अथवा पूर्णता उसके फल में ही है जो उससे भिन्न नहीं है। अत कर्मफल की चिन्ता करके उसी में डूबे रहने का अर्थ है शक्तिशाली गतिशील वर्तमान से पलायन करना और अनुत्पन्न भविष्य की कल्पना में बने रहना संक्षेप में भगवान् का आह्वान है कि मनुष्य को व्यर्थ की चिन्ताओं में प्राप्त समय को नहीं खोना चाहिये वरन् बुद्धिमत्तापूर्वक उसका सदुपयोग करना चाहिये। भविष्य का निर्माण अपने आप होगा और कर्मयोगी को प्राप्त होगी श्रेष्ठ आध्यात्मिक उन्नति।निष्कर्ष यह निकलता है कि अर्जुन के लिये इस युद्ध का प्रयोजन धर्म पालन जैसा श्रेष्ठ आदर्श है यह समझकर उसे अपनी पूरी योग्यता से कर्म में प्रवृत्त होना चाहिये। प्रेरणायुक्त कर्मों का सुफल अवश्य मिलेगा और उसके साथ ही चित्त शुद्धि के रूप में आध्यात्मिक फल भी प्राप्त होगा।एक सच्चा कर्मयोगी बनने के लिये इस श्लोक में चार नियम बताये गये हैं। जो यह समझता है कि (क) कर्म करने मात्र में मेरा अधिकार है (ख) कर्मफल की चिन्ता करने की आवश्यकता नहीं है (ग) किसी कर्म विशेष के एक निश्चित फल का आग्रह या उद्देश्य मन में नहीं होना चाहिये और (घ) इन सबका निष्कर्ष यह नहीं कि अकर्म में प्रीति हो वही व्यक्ति वास्तव में कर्मयोगी है। संक्षेप में इस उपदेश का प्रयोजन मनुष्य को चिन्ता मुक्त बनाकर कर्म करते हुये दैवी आनन्द में निमग्न रहकर जीना सिखाना है। कर्म करना ही उसके लिये सबसे बड़ा पुरस्कार और उपहार है श्रेष्ठ कर्म करने के सन्तोष और आनन्द में वह अपने आपको भूल जाता है। कर्म है साधन और आत्मानुभूति है साध्य।ईश्वर का स्मरण करते हुये सभी बाह्य चुनौतियों का तत्परता से सामना करते हुये मनुष्य सरलतापूर्वक शान्ति और वासना क्षय द्वारा चित्त की शुद्धि प्राप्त कर सकता है। जितनी अधिक मात्रा में चित्त में शुद्धि होगी उतनी ही अधिक आत्मानुभूति उसे सुलभ होगी।यदि कर्मफल की आसक्ति रखकर कर्म न करें तो फिर उन्हें कैसे करना चाहिये इसका उत्तर है

Since the Vedas are useful for them only for right knowledge, therefore indeed he says 'Yavan'. For whom there is predominance in one's own duty alone or in knowledge, for him the purpose is accomplished even from a limited statement of the Veda.

"Having stated the absence of action for the wise, now the action of the ignorant is being stated"—to refute this alternative explanation, he says "Kamatmanam". (Meaning) the censure of those workers performing action with desire, which was done by "Yam imam" (2.42) etc., is not proper; this is the meaning. "Why? Since in 'One desirous of heaven should sacrifice' (Apastamba Shrauta Sutra 10.1.2.1) etc., desire for heaven is also enjoined like the sacrifice, there is no blameworthiness for those performing what is enjoined. If it were so, there would be the contingency of blameworthiness of the sacrifice also"—saying thus, the opponent holds it to be a specific injunction. To refute the misunderstanding that the word "Te" (Your) refers only to Arjuna, he says "Te". Meaning implies all Varnas and Ashramas; that is its purpose; hence "Tathoktam" (thus said). "When the use of words depends on the speaker, let the expressive word alone be used; what is the use of indication (Lakshana)?" To this he says "Tava" etc. He for whom desire for fruit is a duty is "Tathokta"; his state is "Tatta" (duty of desire for fruit). Or, the duty of desire for fruit is "Tava"—of you, the doer. Even if done, desire for fruit is not extremely obstructive for the wise one. Because the knowledge to be obstructed by that has been obtained, and liberation is certain. Still, because it causes delay in liberation, even that should not be done; what to speak of other ignorant ones; to demonstrate this, an indicative word is used; this is the purport. "Objection: 'Qualification in action alone...' (and) 'Not in fruits...'—these two were stated; then how is the acceptance of only one—'duty of desire for fruit'—stated?" Since the prohibition of the duty of desire for fruit is predominant here, 'Qualification in action alone' is a restatement of its meaning. "Still, 'No qualification in desire for fruit' should be stated?" Do not say so. Because it is stated to support the duty and non-duty of the absence and presence of qualification, only the probandum (what is to be proved) is taken up. And thus he will say. He states what is to be excluded by the statement that "Te" implies others, with "Na tu". It is not the meaning that "Duty of desire for fruit exists for some, only not for you"; this is the meaning. Because of the prohibition for all in "Desire desires another..." (Mundaka 3.2.2) etc.; this is the purport. "Objection: This would be if Arjuna were wise; whence is that?" To this he says "Sa hi". He shows the proof indicated by the word "Hi" with "Naramsa". "Then how is Arjuna's delusion stated in 'Having known which, (you will) not again (get) delusion' (4.35), and how is his questioning (proper)?" To this he says "Mohadi". Delusion is due to the overpowering of knowledge by strong Prarabdha karma etc. The question is for the sake of specific knowledge etc.; this is the meaning. "Objection: How are Indra etc. alone wise?" To this he says "Yadi". For Sattva is the cause of knowledge. From the statement "From Sattva knowledge is born" (14.17); and gods are of pure Sattva; therefore, due to the existence of the cause, their knowledge is reasonable. Otherwise, it would not exist for anyone. "For this reason also Indra etc. are wise"—to this he says "Upadesha". "This indeed Indra spoke to Vishvamitra"—such is the instruction. By the word "Adi", celibacy in Prajapati (is included). He states another proof for Arjuna's wisdom with "Partha". Because of counting among the wise. By this, wrong explanation is also refuted. "Objection: Here, by 'Ma phaleshu', prohibition regarding fruit is done; so how is 'Phalakama' (desire for fruit) stated?" There he says "Kama". By the word "Phala", implying the desire for that, the prohibition regarding that is done here, not regarding the fruit; this is the meaning. "Why resort to indication?" To this he says "Phalani". Where indeed there is independence for the person to do or not to do, there alone is prohibition; not elsewhere, due to absence of applicability. And there is no independence regarding fruits; therefore, due to obstruction in the primary meaning, indication is resorted to; this is the meaning. "How is there lack of independence?" To this, regarding "doing" (occurrence), he says "Na hi". Regarding "not doing" (non-occurrence) also, he says "Bhavanti ca". "Ca" is for emphasis. "Avirodhe" means in the absence of specific obstructions like realization of Brahman. So by this, the two words "Te" and "Phaleshu" are explained. "Let this be: In 'Swargakamo yajeta' etc., action like sacrifice qualified by desire for heaven etc. is stated as duty; therefore censure of the desirous is not proper"—in this doubt, "Qualification in action alone" etc. is stated irrelevantly; and he who considers desire also as a duty like action, whence is his lack of qualification in desire for fruit established? And what is the purpose in using an indicative word in "Phaleshu"? Raising this doubt, he explains the first half with "Atah". "Atah" is connected with the meaning that follows "Bhutva" which will be stated later. "Atah"—meaning when the two words are indicative by the stated logic. "The meaning of the verse is accomplished"—this is to be supplied. There, regarding the two meanings stated—"Qualification of all Varnas and Ashramas is in action alone, not in desire for fruit"—he states two reasons with "Karmakarana". Having said "Doing actions indeed here" (Isha 2), because it is stated "Thus in you, not otherwise than this, action does not cling to man" (Isha 2). Sin is in non-performance of action alone—characterized by attainment of the undesired and non-attainment of the desired. But there is no sin in desirelessness; due to absence of proof. "Objection: In the absence of desire, due to non-attainment of those specific fruits, how is there absence of sin?" To this it is said "Phalapraptau". To justify that there is no sin even in the non-attainment of the fruit of desire-driven action, it is said "Jnanadina va". The word "Va" is in the sense of simile. Just as for one going to liberation by means of knowledge etc., non-attainment of heaven etc. is not a cause for grief; because the loss of a small fruit is insignificant when obtaining a great fruit; so also there is no grief in the non-attainment of fruit due to desirelessness; because of the attainment of the great fruit of knowledge etc. by desireless action; this is the purport. "Then what?" To this, he states the two conclusions stated in the Gita for the two reasons mentioned, with "Atah". "Not in desire for fruit" should also be said. Since thus there is sin in non-performance of action, therefore qualification is in action alone. Since there is sin in non-performance of desire (actually meaning no sin in non-performance of desire), therefore there is no qualification in desire; this is the meaning. "Then what in the present context?" To this he states the two supreme conclusions with "Atah". Since qualification is in action alone, therefore that alone is the duty—the subject of injunction; this is the meaning. Since there is (no) qualification by desire, therefore attainment of fruit by desire—meaning desire for the attainment of fruit—is not a duty. There is an example: "Jnanadinishedhena va". Here too "Va" is for simile. Just as attainment of fruit is not done by a wise person by abandoning knowledge etc., so; this is the meaning. The previously stated intention alone holds. "If action alone is the subject of injunction, not desire, then what is the purport of sentences like 'Swargakamo yajeta'?" To this he says "Kama". Minds perfumed by beginningless desire for objects cannot be suddenly engaged in action which is the means to knowledge; therefore, to generate interest in action for them, Sruti like "Swargakamah" (Apastamba Shrauta 10.1.2.1) proceeded; having the intention "I will gradually make those engaged in action abandon desire." Just as by alluring with fruit, a liking for medicine is created in children, so; this is the meaning. "Let the purport be so; but how is the construction?" To this he says "Atah". Since by this logic it is obtained that action alone is the duty, not desire; therefore "A desirous one should sacrifice" is the only meaning of the Sruti. Meaning: Sacrifice is ordained translating (restating) the desire. He states what is excluded by the word "Eva" with "Na tu". But the injunction of sacrifice qualified by desire is not there; this is the meaning. This is what is said: In the suspicion of a qualified injunction, the supreme conclusion to be supplied here is "This is not a qualified injunction, but only of sacrifice translating the desire." "Whence is that?" In this expectation, the statement of reason "Because action alone is duty, and desire lacks that" should be added. "Whence is that too?" In this expectation, the appearance of the two reasons stated in the Gita "Qualification in action alone, not desire for fruit". "Whence is that too?" In this expectation, the supply of the two reasons: "Presence and absence of sin in doing and not doing action and desire." To justify this, the indicative word "Phala" is used. Bhaskara says: "Only Nitya and Naimittika actions are to be done by the seeker of liberation desirelessly, not Jyotishtoma etc. ordained in the qualification of desire; because of the absence of proof for doing them desirelessly; therefore this explanation is wrong." There he says "Nishkama". This explanation is proper because having started with Yajna etc., its performance is stated as desireless. And from statements to be spoken like "Abandoning attachment to these actions too" (18.6). And it is not that these refer to Nitya and Naimittika; because due to the absence of applicability of desire there, its prohibition would be unreasonable. Moreover, because of the non-injunction of the sacrifice named "Jyoti", which is other than Nitya-Naimittika, without desire for fruit. And it is not accepted that this is a restatement for the injunction of a quality for Jyotishtoma alone. By the word "Adi", "One should sacrifice with Vishvajit" etc. are included. "Even there, the supply of the word 'Swargakama' is decided"—if you say this, true; for the desirous it is so; the reason for not being stated by its own word is stated here. "Objection: Since the doubt is refuted by the first half itself, what is the use of the second half?" To this he states the utility of the two quarters in order with "Atah". "Since desire for fruit is not a duty, being the cause of the fruit of action is not applicable; why is it prohibited?" To this he says "Karma". Due to being a "Shakaparthiva" compound etc., the word "Tatkriti" (doing that) is elided here; this is the purport. "Tarhi...?"—Meaning if the fruit is not to be desired. "I will not do it, because it is itself of the nature of trouble"—this is the idea. Since the word "Akarma" applies even to the prohibited, and the word "Sanga" has many meanings, he explains it as useful to the context with "Karma". "How is this answer to one objecting with reasoning?" To this he states the Lord's intention with "Anya". By the word "Prasada", devotion, knowledge etc. are also implied. "So then, it is said that action should be done with the desire for God's grace etc.?" And that is not proper; because desire is censured. Otherwise there would be the contingency of desire for heaven etc. too. "Therefore this description of the Lord's intention is not proper"—to this he says "Iccha". Because the duty of satisfying the Lord is understood from the conduct of the great "We choose all action for Your satisfaction." "Objection: Even in its non-duty, it is said that there is proof in the statement of censure of desire?" To this he says "Anindanat" (Due to non-censure). Just as the conduct of the great is regarding a specific subject, the statement of censure of desire is not so, but only regarding the general subject. Therefore it is barred by the conduct of the great; this is the purport. "Then like that, desire for heaven etc. is also a duty"—to what was said there, he says "Visheshatah". By the word "Ca", he gathers the absence of proof. "Let the conduct be regarding a specific subject, and the statement of censure of desire regarding the general; still whence is the relation of badhya-badhaka (barred and barring)?" To this he says "Samanya". The words Samanya and Vishesha refer to the proofs regarding them. By the word "Ca"—when there is contradiction. And concluding the stated proof, he states other proofs here with "Atah". "Ekatmatam" means Sayujya. "Desiring devotion" is the remainder of this very [sentence]. "Objection: The word 'Brahmajijnasa' does not refer to the desire for knowledge, but is indicative of inquiry?" True; still, inquiry preceded by that (desire) is indicated; otherwise due to absence of connection. "From the logic established in the world"—meaning from inference whose concomitance is established in the world.

Objection: If attainment of supreme bliss is done by acquiring Self-knowledge through desireless actions, then Self-knowledge alone is to be acquired; what is the use of actions which involve much effort and are external means? Raising this doubt, he says "Te". "For you"—whose internal organ is impure, who are unfit for the arising of true knowledge—qualification is "in action alone"—which purifies the internal organ—let there be the understanding "This is to be done by me"; not in the form of steadfastness in knowledge like inquiry into Vedanta sentences etc. And for you performing action, let there not be qualification—the understanding "This is to be enjoyed by me"—"in its fruits"—heaven etc.—"Kadachana"—in any state whatsoever, before, after, or at the time of performance of action. "Objection: Even in the absence of the understanding 'This is to be enjoyed by me,' action will generate the fruit by its own power alone?" If you say this, he says "No" with "Ma karmaphalaheturbhuh". For performing action with desire for fruit, one becomes the "Hetu"—producer—of the fruit. But you, being desireless, do not be the cause of the fruit of action. For it is said that action done desirelessly with the intellect of offering to God does not lead to fruit. "In the absence of fruit, what is the use of action?" To this he says "Ma te sango'stvakarmani". "If fruit is not desired, what is the use of action which is of the nature of pain?"—thus let there not be your fondness for non-performance.

Objection: If it is so, then why the instruction to perform action? Raising this doubt, he says "Karmani evadhikaraste" etc. "Te"—for you—possessed of the knowledge of self, other, I, and mine—qualification is in action alone. "Asti" (is) is the remainder. Here the idea is: As long as there is the knowledge of "self and other", there is no abandonment of action. Therefore "One should perform actions as long as one does not become detached..." etc. is said in Sri Bhagavata (11.20.9). "Objection: Then there is contradiction with what was said before?" If you say this, he says there "Ma phaleshu" etc. In "fruits"—stated therein—let there not be qualification—desire in the mind. "Kadachana"—even in the stage of means (practice). "Objection: Action performed will indeed produce its fruit even in the absence of desire, like poison causes death even if eaten out of ignorance?" To this he says "Ma karmaphalahetuh" etc. You "Karmaphalahetuh"—possessed of a body to be enjoyed for the enjoyment of the fruit of action—do not be. Meaning: You will not become. By My command; this is the purport. Moreover, let there not be your "Sanga"—connection—in "Akarmani"—in the desire-driven doer. Thus I give a boon indeed; this is the purport.

Qualification is in action alone," not in steadfastness in knowledge, "Te"—for you. And therein, while doing action, "Ma phaleshu"—let there not be qualification—let there not be thirst for the fruit of action, "Kadachana"—in any state whatsoever; this is the meaning. When there is thirst for the fruit of action for you, then you would be the cause of attaining the fruit of action; thus "Ma karmaphalahetuh bhuh" (Do not be the cause of the fruit of action). For when one engages in action impelled by thirst for the fruit of action, then one becomes the cause of birth which is the very fruit of action. "If the fruit of action is not desired, what is the use of action which is of the nature of pain?"—thus "Ma te"—your—"Sanga"—let there be attachment—"Akarmani"—let there not be fondness for non-performance.

This being so, "What is to be accepted by me in the ocean of Veda?" In this expectation, he says "Karmani evadhikaraste" etc. Action alone is to be accepted, therein alone—in that—is the qualification. But let there never be qualification in its fruits. He states the seal of the instruction with "Ma karmaphalaheturbhuh" etc. And in "Akarmani"—in the prohibited [or] in another's duty—let there not be your attachment.

कर्मणि in work? एव only? अधिकारः right? ते thy? मा not? फलेषु in the fruits? कदाचन at any time? मा not? कर्मफलहेतुः भूः let not the fruits of action be thy motive? मा not? ते thy? सङ्गः attachment? अस्तु let (there) be? अकर्मणि in inaction.Commentary When you perform actions have no desire for the fruits thereof under any circumstances. If you thirst for the fruits of your actions? you will have to take birth again and again to enjoy them. Action done with expectation of fruits (rewards) brings bondage. If you do not thirst for them? you get purification of heart and you will get knowledge of the Self through purity of heart and through the knowledge of the Self you will be freed from the round of births and deaths.Neither let thy attachment be towards inaction thinking what is the use of doing actions when I cannot get any reward for themIn a broad sense Karma means action. It also means duty which one has to perform according to his caste or station of life. According to the followers of the Karma Kanda of the Vedas (the Mimamsakas) Karma means the rituals and sacrifices prescribed in the Vedas. It has a deep meaning also. It signifies the destiny or the storehouse of tendencies of a man which give rise to his future birth.

Te, your; adhikarah, right; is karmani eva, for action alone, not for steadfastness in Knowledge. Even there, when you are engaged in action, you have ma kadacana, never, i.e. under no condition whatever; a right phalesu, for the results of action may you not have a hankering for the results of action. Whenever you have a hankering for the fruits of action, you will become the agent of aciring the results of action. Ma, do not; thus bhuh, become; karma-phalahetuh, the agent of aciring the results of action. For when one engages in action by being impelled by thirst for the results of action, then he does become the cause for the production of the results of action. Ma, may you not; astu, have; sangah, an inclination; akarmani, for inaction, thinking, 'If the results of work be not desired, what is the need of work which involves pain?'

As for obligatory, occasional and desiderative acts taught in the Vedas and associated with some result or other, you, an aspirant established in Sattva, have the right only to perform them: You have no right to the fruits known to be derived from such acts. Acts done with a desire for fruit bring about bondage. But acts done without an eye on fruits form My worship and become a means for release. Do not become an agent of acts with the idea of being the reaper of their fruits. Even when you, who are established in pure Sattva and are desrious of release, perform acts, you should not look upon yourself as the agent. Likewise, it is necessary to contemplate yourself as not being the cause of even appeasing hunger and such other bodily necessities. Later on it will be said that both of these, agency of action and desire for fruits, should be considered as belonging to Gunas, or in the alternative to Me who am the Lord of all. Thinking thus, do work. With regard to inaction, i.e., abstaining from performance of duties, as when you said, 'I will not fight,' let there be no attachment to such inaction in you. The meaning is let your interest be only in the discharge of such obligatory duties like this war in the manner described above.
Sri Krsna makes this clear in the following verse: