Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 2 - Shloka (Verse) 60

व्याख्या-- 'यततो ह्यपि ৷৷. प्रसभं मनः'-- (टिप्पणी प0 98.1) जो स्वयं यत्न करता है, साधन करता है, हरेक कामको विवेक-पूर्वक करता है, आसक्ति और फलेच्छाका त्याग करता है, दूसरोंका हित हो दूसरोंको सुख पहुँचे, दूसरोंका कल्याण हो--ऐसा भाव रखता है और वैसी क्रिया भी करता है, जो स्वयं कर्त्तव्य-अकर्त्तव्य ,सार-असारको जानता है और कौन-कौन-से कर्म करनेसे उनका क्या-क्या परिणाम होता है--इसको भी जाननेवाला है, ऐसे विद्वान पुरुषके लिय यहाँ 'यततो ह्यपि पुरुषस्य विपश्चितः' पद आये हैं। प्रयत्न करनेवाले ऐसे विद्वान् पुरुषकी भी प्रमथनशील इन्द्रियाँ उसके मनको बलपूर्वक हर लेती हैं विषयोंकी तरफ खींच लेती हैं, अर्थात् वह विषयोंकी तरफ खिंच जाता है आकृष्ट हो जाता है। इसका कारण यह है कि जबतक बुद्धि सर्वथा परमात्म-तत्त्वमें प्रतिष्ठित (स्थित) नहीं होती, बुद्धिमें संसारकी यत्किञ्चित् सत्ता रहती है, विषयेन्द्रिय-सम्बन्धसे सुख होता है, भोगे हुए भोगोंके संस्कार रहते हैं, तबतक साधनपरायण बुद्धिमान् विवेकी पुरुषकी भी इन्द्रियाँ सर्वथा वशमें नहीं होतीं। इन्द्रियोंके विषय सामने आनेपर भोगे हुए भोगोंके संस्कारओंके
कारण इन्द्रियाँ मन-बुद्धिको जबर्दस्ती विषयोंकी तरफ खींच ले जाती हैं। ऐसे अनेक ऋषियोंके उदाहरण भी आते हैं, जो विषयोंके सामने आनेपर विचलित हो गये। अतः साधकको अपनी इन्द्रियोंपर कभी भी मेरी इन्द्रियाँ वशमें है', ऐसा विश्वास नहीं करना चाहिये (टिप्पणी प0 98.2) और कभी भी यह अभिमान नहीं करना चाहिये कि 'मैं जितेन्द्रिय हो गया हूँ।'
सम्बन्ध-- पूर्वश्लोकमें यह बताया कि रसबुद्धि रहनेसे यत्न करते हुए विद्वान् मनुष्यकी भी इन्द्रियाँ उसके मनको हर लेती हैं जिससे उसकी बुद्धि परमात्मामें प्रतिष्ठित नहीं होती। अतः रसबुद्धिको दूर कैसे किया जाय इसका उपाय आगेके श्लोकमें बताते हैं।

यथार्थ ज्ञानरूप बुद्धिकी स्थिरता चाहनेवाले पुरुषोंको पहले इन्द्रियोंको अपने वशमें कर लेना चाहिये क्योंकि उनको वशमें न करनेसे दोष बतलाते हैं हे कौन्तेय जिससे की प्रयत्न करनेवाले विचारशील बुद्धिमान् पुरुषकी भी प्रमथनशील इन्द्रियाँ उस विषयाभिमुख हुए पुरुषको क्षुब्ध कर देती हैं व्याकुल कर देती हैं और व्याकुल करके ( उस ) केवल प्रकाशको ही देखनेवाले विद्वान्के विवेकविज्ञानयुक्त मनको ( भी ) बलात्कारसे विचलित कर देती हैं।

He introduces the next verse with "samyagdarshana" (right vision) etc. [Objection:] If the stability of wisdom is possible merely by the mind being under one's own control, what is the purpose of bringing the senses under one's own control? Anticipating this doubt, He says "yasmat" (because/since) etc.

[Objection:] "For a discriminating person who sees defects in objects, the senses turn away from objects by themselves; regarding that, what is to be done by one wishing for the stability of wisdom?" To this, He says "yatato hi" (indeed, of the striving one) etc. "Effort" (prayatna) is the repeated perception of defects in objects. He will state the connection of the word "hi"—which has the meaning of "yasmat" (since/because)—at the conclusion. Having grasped the connection of the word "api" as "prayatnam kurvato 'pi" (even while making effort), he states another connection with "purushasya" (of the person) etc.

He reveals the "pramathanashilatvam" (nature of churning/agitating) with "vishaya" etc. He states the fruit of agitation—i.e., confusion—with "akulikritya" (having confused/distracted) etc.

He clarifies the statement "prakasham eva" (light itself) with "pashyatah" (of the seeing one) etc. The connection is: Even of the "vipaschitah"—of the wise man—the senses carry away the mind which is "prakasham eva"—endowed with the realization named discrimination (viveka), which is denoted by the word "light" (prakasha). Restating the meaning of the word "hi", and intending the connection with the preceding as "tasmat" (therefore) the senses must be established under one's own control, he says "yatas tasmat" (since... therefore) etc.

It has been stated that without right vision, there is no cutting off of "rasa" (attachment); and that (right vision) is difficult to attain for one who has not conquered the senses, and sense-control is achievable only by great effort. Therefore, with the intention that sense-conquest must be performed at the beginning by one wishing to accomplish the stability of wisdom characterized by right vision, He states the defect in not doing so with "yatatah" etc.

"Hi"—because—even of the "vipaschitah", the intelligent man, "yatatah"—who is making effort for the stability of wisdom, the senses are "pramathanashilani" (turbulent/agitating)—capable of turning the person towards objects. Having agitated him, they "prasabham"—forcibly/violently—carry away the mind even though it is endowed with discrimination.

By addressing him as "Kaunteya" (O Son of Kunti), He indicates the weakness of the person relative to the senses.

Even of the wise one devoid of direct realization, even of one making ordinary effort, "the senses steal the mind". "Purushasya"—of the one identified with the body. What is the defect from that? "Pramathini"—of the nature of agitating/churning, of the person.

Moreover, the senses of a sleeping person etc. merge by themselves due to fatigue; but by the concentrated one (samahita), they are withdrawn by his own will, like limbs by a tortoise. And this is achievable only by extreme exertion—He states this with "yatatah" etc.

Of the "vipaschitah"—one possessing the teachings of scriptures and the teacher—even while "yatatah"—making effort for the perfection of Samadhi—the senses, being the agents (kartru), carry away the mind—which has become the object (karma) being steadied in the inner Self (pratici)—and make it inclined towards objects.

Because they are "pramathini" (agitating/turbulent); just as many thieves in a forest, having overpowered (pramathya) a single man, carry away his wealth, similarly, the senses carry away the mind of the striving one. Because they are "prasabham"—excessively turbulent by nature.

Without the vision of the Self, attachment to objects does not cease; and when attachment to objects has not ceased, the "pramathini"—powerful—senses of even the "vipaschitah"—the striving—person "prasahya" (forcibly) carry away the mind.

Thus, conquest of the senses depends on the vision of the Self, and vision of the Self depends on the conquest of the senses; therefore, Jnananistha (steadfastness in knowledge) is difficult to attain.

Indeed, without control of the senses, the state of sthitaprajna (steady wisdom) is not possible. Therefore, in the stage of a seeker (sadhaka), great effort must be made regarding that; He states this with the two verses beginning with "yatato hyapi".

The senses "prasabham"—forcibly—carry away the mind even of the "yatatah"—one striving for liberation—"vipaschitah"—even of the discriminating one.

Because they are "pramathini"—having the nature of churning (agitating).

अब तक के अपने प्रवचन में भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण ने ज्ञानी पुरुष के इन्द्रिय संयम की सार्मथ्य पर विशेष बल दिया है। भारत में दर्शनशास्त्र के सिद्धान्तों को अव्यावहारिक होने पर स्वीकारा नहीं जाता। अत गीता में श्रीकृष्ण अर्जुन को उन साधनों का भी उपदेश देते हैं जिनके अभ्यास से वह भी स्थितप्रज्ञ के पूर्णत्व को प्राप्त कर सकता है।सत्त्व (विवेकशीलता) रज (क्रियाशीलता ) और तम (निष्क्रियता) इन तीन गुणों का प्रभाव प्रत्येक व्यक्ति के अन्तकरण पर पड़ता है। तमोगुण के आवरण तथा रजोगुण के विक्षेप के कारण जब सत्त्व गुण भी दूषित हो जाता है तब अनेक दुखों को हमें भोगना पड़ता है। यदि इन्द्रियों पर पूर्ण संयम न हो तो वे मन को विषयों की ओर बलपूर्वक खींच ले जायेंगी जिसका एक मात्र परिणाम होगा दुख। इस श्लोक में स्वीकार किया गया है कि ऐसी स्थिति किसी बुद्धिमान साधक की भी कभीकभी होती है। यह वाक्य भयभीत करने या किसी को निरुत्साहित करने के लिए नहीं समझना चाहिए। अर्जुन को केवल इस बात की सावधानी रखने को कहा गया है कि वह कभी अपने मन का बुद्धि पर आधिपत्य स्थापित न होने दे। सावधानी की यह सूचना अत्यन्त समयोचित है।अध्यात्म साधना का अभ्यास करने वाले अनेक साधकों के पतन का कारण एक ही है। कुछ वर्षों तक तो वे संयम के प्रति सजग रहते हैं जिसके फलस्वरूप उन्हें आनन्द भी मिलता है। तत्पश्चात् स्वयं पर अत्यधिक विश्वास के कारण तप के प्रति उनकी जागरूकता कम हो जाती है और तब स्वाभाविक ही इन्द्रियाँ बलपूर्वक मन को विषयों में खींच ले जाती हैं और साधक की शान्ति को नष्ट कर देती हैं।

"Yada samharate" (When he withdraws) etc. And his status of being established in Yoga (yogarudha) is not like that of a cook (pachaka—i.e., defined only by a temporary action).

Whenever, indeed, this one withdraws the senses—draws them into the embrace (krodikaroti) of the Self alone, like a tortoise its limbs, having warded off objects from objects—then and there he is of steady wisdom (sthiraprajna).

Or else: he withdraws the senses from the sense-objects into the Self; he assimilates everything consisting of objects and senses into the Self (atmasatkurute).

Objection: Having stated victory over senses by effort and knowledge, how is 'even of the striving' stated which is contrary to that? If thus asked, no. For victory over senses, is it possible by great effort characterized by fasting etc., or by ordinary effort like withdrawal etc.? Similarly, is it accomplished by direct knowledge (Aparoksha), or even by knowledge of discrimination between eternal and non-eternal? Suspecting this, the negation of that (ordinary effort/knowledge) is done here; having this intention he explains "Aparoksha" etc. To indicate the predominance of knowledge, although "Vipaschitah api" (even of the wise) is stated later, it is explained at the beginning with "Aparoksha" etc. The meaning of "Yatatah api" is "ordinary" (of ordinary effort). "Haranti" (they steal)—bringing them near objects, making the mind face them, they make it attached to them; this is the meaning. "Of the Purusha"—this is useless because it happens to women too? To this he says "Purushasya" (of one identified with the body). And this is to justify what was said. To state the purpose of "Pramathini", he says "Ko doshah" (What is the defect?). The intention is: by this much, how is there non-conquest of the self? They have stolen the mind; (they are) agitators of the person; not conquered by him; this is the purport. By "Purushasya", he shows its connection in both places.

In that matter, the control of the external senses and the control of the mind are the extraordinary causes for the stability of wisdom; to state that in the absence of both, wisdom is not seen, He first states the defect in the absence of external sense control with "yatatah".

O Kaunteya! "Yatatah"—of one making effort consisting of repeatedly seeing defects in objects. [Grammatical Note:] Due to the indication that Atmanepada is not mandatory for roots marked as anudattet (like yat), the use of Parasmaipada (in yatatah) is not contradictory.

Of the "vipaschitah"—of the extremely discriminating—person, the senses carry away the mind, even if it has been made changeless for a moment; they cause it to undergo change.

[Objection:] When the opposing factor, discrimination (viveka), exists, how does the attainment of change (disturbance) occur? To this He says: "Pramathini"—having the nature of churning/agitating; due to being extremely strong, they are capable of crushing discrimination. Therefore "prasabham"—forcibly/violently—indeed while he is looking on. While the master is "vipaschit" (wise) and the guard "viveka" (discrimination) exists, due to being all-agitating, the senses cause the mind that has entered into the wisdom born of discrimination to fall from there, and by becoming possessed by their own objects, they carry it away—this is the meaning.

The word "hi" indicates well-known-ness. Indeed, this fact is well-known in the world: just as turbulent robbers, having forcibly overpowered a wealthy man and the guard of the wealth, carry away the money even while the two are watching; so too, the senses carry away the mind in the proximity of objects.

Objection: Restraint of senses is proper to be done by all; what is the distinction in the Sthitaprajna? If thus asked, there he says "Yatatah" in two verses. O Kaunteya, of the "Vipaschitah"—of the man who knows the meaning of scriptures—"Yatatah api"—even while striving—the "Pramathini"—agitating (churning by nature)—senses "Prasabham"—forcibly—steal the mind.

Yatatah—meaning "of the one making effort"—even; "hi"—meaning "because"; O Kaunteya; "purushasya vipaschitah"—of the wise person, meaning even of the intelligent one—this is the connection with the separated word.

"Indriyani pramathini"—the senses are agitating, meaning possessing the nature of churning; indeed, they agitate the person facing objects, they confuse him; and having confused him, they "haranti prasabham"—carry away forcibly (violently)—"prakasham eva pashyatah"—while he is seeing the very light [of discrimination]—the mind endowed with the knowledge of discrimination.

.. "Yatah" (Since), "tasmat" (therefore)...

Among those very (means), firstly in the instruction, to strengthen the sense of duty, He defines his "sitting" together with the reason, in the two verses beginning with "yatato 'pi".

Even for one making effort, the practice of conquering the various senses is indeed superior, due to the senses' nature of agitating the mind. Therefore, having first controlled them all by the intellect, he who sits disciplined (yukta) and intent on Me (matparah)—his wisdom alone should be understood as established.

यततः of the striving? हि indeed? अपि even? कौन्तेय O Kaunteya (son of Kunti)? पुरुषस्य of man? विपश्चितः (of the) wise? इन्द्रियाणि the senses? प्रमाथीनि turbulent? हरन्ति carry away? प्रसभम् violently? मनः the mind.Commentary The aspirant should first bring the senses under his control. The senses are like horses. If you keep the horses under your perfect control you can reach your destinaton safely. Turbulent horses will throw you down on the way. Even so the turbulent senses will hurl you down into the objects of the senses and you cannot reach your spiritual destination? viz.? Param Dhama (the supreme abode) or the abode of eternal peace and immortality or Moksha (final liberation). (Cf.III.33V.14).

Hi, for; kaunteya, O son of Kunti; pramathini, the turbulent; indriyani, organs; prasabham, violently; haranti, snatch away; manah, the mind; vipascitah, of an intelligent; purusasya, person; api, even; yatatah, while he is striving diligently [Repeatedly being mindful of the evils that arise from sense-objects.] (or,) the words purusasya vipascitah (of an intelligent person) are to be connected with the remote word api (even). [The Commentator says that api may be construed either with yatatah or with vipascitah purusasya.-Tr.] Indeed, the organs confound a person who is inclined towards objects, and after confounding him, violently carry away his mind endowed with discriminating knoweldge, even when he is aware of this.
Since this is so, therefore,

Except by the experience of the self, the hankering for objects will not go away. When the hankering for the sense-objects does not go away, the senses of even a wise man, though he is ever striving to subdue them, become refractory, i.e., become violent and carry away perforce the mind. Thus, the subduing of the senses depends on the vision of the self, and the vision of the self depends on the subduing of the senses. Conseently, i.e., because of this mutual dependence, firm devotion to knowledge is difficult to achieve.