Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 3 - Shloka (Verse) 21

व्याख्या--'यद्यदाचरति श्रेष्ठस्तत्तदेवेतरो जनः'-- श्रेष्ठ पुरुष वही है, जो संसार-(शरीरादि पदार्थों-) को और 'स्वयं'-(अपने स्वरूप-) को तत्त्वसे जानता है। उसका यह स्वाभाविक अनुभव होता है कि शरीर, इन्द्रियाँ, मन, बुद्धि, धन, कुटुम्ब, जमीन आदि पदार्थ संसारके हैं, अपने नहीं। इतना ही नहीं, वह श्रेष्ठ पुरुष त्याग, वैराग्य, प्रेम, ज्ञान, सद्गुण आदिको भी अपना नहीं मानता; क्योंकि उन्हें भी अपना माननेसे व्यक्तित्व पुष्ट होता है, जो तत्त्वप्राप्तिमें बाधक है। 'मैं त्यागी हूँ', 'मैं वैरागी हूँ', 'मैं सेवक हूँ', 'मैं भक्त हूँ' आदि भाव भी व्यक्तित्वको पुष्ट करनेवाले होनेके कारण तत्त्वप्राप्तिमें बाधक होते हैं। श्रेष्ठ पुरुषमें (जडताके सम्बन्धसे होनेवाला) 'व्यष्टि अहंकार' तो होता ही नहीं, और 'समष्टि अहंकार' व्यवहारमात्रके लिये होता है, जो संसारकी सेवामें लगा रहता है; क्योंकि अहंकार भी संसारका ही है (गीता 7। 4 13। 5)।
संसारसे मिले हुए शरीर, धन, परिवार, पद, योग्यता, अधिकार आदि सब पदार्थ सदुपयोग करने अर्थात् दूसरोंकी सेवामें लगानेके लिये ही मिले हैं; उपभोग करने अथवा अपना अधिकार जमानेके लिये नहीं। जो इन्हें अपना और अपने लिये मानकर इनका उपभोग करता है, उसको भगवान् चोर कहते हैं-- 'यो भुङ्क्ते स्तेन एव सः' (गीता 3। 12)। ये सब पदार्थ समष्टिके ही हैं, व्यष्टिके कभी किसी प्रकार नहीं। वास्तवमें इन पदार्थोंसे हमारा कोई सम्बन्ध नहीं है। श्रेष्ठ पुरुषके अपने कहलानेवाले शरीरादि पदार्थ (संसारके होनेसे) स्वतः-स्वाभाविक संसारकी सेवामें लगते हैं। सम्पूर्ण प्राणियोंके हितमें उसकी स्वाभाविक प्रवृत्ति होती है। 'देने' के भावसे समाजमें एकता, प्रेम उत्पन्न होता है और 'लेने' के भावसे संघर्ष उत्पन्न होता है। 'देने' का भाव उद्धार करनेवाला और 'लेने' का भाव पतन करनेवाला होता है। शरीरको 'मैं', 'मेरा' अथवा 'मेरे लिये' माननेसे ही 'लेने' का भाव उत्पन्न होता है। शरीरसे अपना कोई सम्बन्ध न माननेके कारण श्रेष्ठ पुरुषमें 'लेने' का भाव किञ्चिन्मात्र भी नहीं होता। अतः उसकी प्रत्येक क्रिया दूसरोंका हित करनेवाली ही होती है। ऐसे श्रेष्ठ पुरुषके दर्शन, स्पर्श, वार्तालाप, चिन्तन आदिसे स्वतः लोगोंका हित होता है। इतना ही नहीं, उसके शरीरको स्पर्श करके बहनेवाली वायुतकसे लोगोंका हित होता है।

लोकसंग्रह किसको करना चाहिये और किसलिये करना चाहिये सो कहते हैं श्रेष्ठ पुरुष जोजो कर्म करता है अर्थात् प्रधान मनुष्य जिसजिस कर्ममें बर्तता है दूसरे लोग उसके अनुयायी होकर उसउस कर्मका ही आचरण किया करते हैं। तथा वह श्रेष्ठ पुरुष जिसजिस लौकिक या वैदिक प्रथाको प्रामाणिक मानता है लोग उसीके अनुसार चलते हैं अर्थात् उसीको प्रमाण मानते हैं।

Having raised the doubt that "a man of knowledge who has attained his goal need not engage in action even for the sake of the maintenance of the world," He refutes it with the words "Loka..." etc.

Whatever action—enjoined or prohibited—is performed by one who is regarded as endowed with scriptural hearing and study, that very same action the common person follows; therefore, even by the man of knowledge, enjoined action must be performed to establish the bounds of social order—this is the meaning.

Having shown that others follow the Best in conduct, He shows that they follow him in understanding (acceptance/pratipatti) as well, with "kiñcha" (moreover).

"If I engage in action, how will the maintenance of the world happen?" To this, He says "yat" (whatever).

Whatever action the "Best"—the principal person—performs, that very action the "other"—the other person following him—performs.

Moreover, whatever authority—worldly or Vedic—that principal person accepts (demonstrates), the world follows that. It means the world accepts that very thing as authority.

"Whatever action-scripture or renunciation-scripture"—believing that there is no valid proof to restrict the meaning in this way, the Acharyas did not explain it so (did not limit the interpretation).

Whatever statement, etc., he (the Best) accepts as authority (or establishes as standard); the meaning is that (the world) abides by that stated manner.

Here, He cites the conduct of the virtuous as authority with the words "by action alone" (karmaṇaiva). It was by action alone, coupled with it, that kings like Janaka—Kshatriyas like yourself—set out to attain perfection (samsiddhi), which implies steadfastness in knowledge (jnana-nishtha) achievable by hearing (shravana) and other practices; not by renunciation (sannyasa).

Anticipating the objection, "For me, whose mind is pure, there is no need for action," He speaks of "Loka..." (Lokasamgraha). Lokasamgraha means engaging the people in their own respective duties. (Objection): If action is to be performed solely for the welfare of the world even in the absence of one's own purpose, then even wise Brahmanas could not adopt renunciation. (Reply): If you say their renunciation is to induce ascetics to accept the duties of renunciation, then that prohibition (of the staff, etc.) does not bar Arjuna either. (Objection): If you say that a Kshatriya has no right to renunciation? (Reply): Even if there is no right to wear the insignia (like the staff), there is a right to merely abandon distracting actions, just like Bharata, Rishabha, and others. In the Vartika, it is stated: "If it is accepted that knowledge cuts off all qualifications, why is the rule of qualification forced upon the state of rising (from action)?" Thus, the right of Kshatriyas and others to Vidvat-Sannyasa (renunciation of the wise) has been established.

(Objection): Therefore, holding the world together is not the primary purpose of action? (Reply): True. But using His own example, "There is nothing for Me to do, O Partha," and because Arjuna is a qualified person (a leader/adhikari), Arjuna alone is being enjoined in this way, not merely every Kshatriya generally—may your honor be satisfied with this.

The "Best" (Shrestha)—one who is celebrated as the knower of the entire scripture and as a practitioner—whatever he practices, even the person of incomplete knowledge practices that very thing. Even regarding the action being performed, whatever "authority" (pramana)—meaning whatever auxiliaries/details (anga) he observes in performance—the world of incomplete knowledge follows that very same detail (mode of performance).

Therefore, for the protection of the world, the Best person, celebrated as distinguished (shishta), must always perform all actions appropriate to his own Varna and Ashrama. Otherwise, the sin generated by the ruin of the world would cause him to fall even from Jnana Yoga.

Regarding how the holding together of the world (Lokasamgraha) occurs in the performance of action, He states with "Yat" (whatever).

The "other"—meaning the common person—performs that very same action.

Whatever that best person considers as authority (pramana)—whether the scripture of action or the scripture of renunciation—the world follows that very thing.

The superiority of Karma Yoga is illustrated by the practice of distinguished persons (shishta) with the phrase "by action alone" (karmaṇaiva). He shows the qualification for Jnana Yoga indicated by the word "hi" (indeed), saying "Royal Sages are the foremost among the wise." Kings are indeed of broad and unfathomable minds; further, being Rishis, they are seers of supersensuous objects; further, they are knowers of the Self; and further, due to naturally controlled senses and because of excellent innate goodness (sattva), etc., they are the foremost among them—this is the meaning. The word "eva" (alone) in "karmaṇaiva" is intended to mean the non-cessation of Karma Yoga even for one capable of Jnana Yoga. Since the word "samsiddhi" (perfection) refers to the example "he attains the Supreme," it is stated here as "they attained the Self." And this being so, the emphasis "by action alone"—which implies independence from the previously mentioned (need for) Jnana Yoga—also becomes justified.

He summarizes what has been said to establish the connection with what follows using "Thus" (evam). By "now" (idanim), it is indicated that the text from "regarding the holding together of the world" (lokasaṅgraham) up to "the wise man acting with yoke" (3.26) is continuous.

"In every way": meaning, for the protection of the world, and to avoid the state of being fallen from both (paths)—since the sin generated by social chaos (caused by non-performance) causes a fall even from Jnana Yoga. In the construction "lokasaṅgraham api" (even lokasaṅgraham), the subordination of lokasaṅgraham might be understood; but by saying "pashyan api" (even considering), it is highlighted that lokasaṅgraham is a greater reason for the duty of action than the previously stated reasons—this construction is stated. The word "eva" should be construed with "kartum evārhasi" (you ought only to perform) to exclude Jnana Yoga—with this intention, it is said "you ought to perform action alone." Or, the "eva" in "lokasaṅgraham eva" implies the absolute necessity of lokasaṅgraham; while "karma eva" (action alone) is stated as obtained from the context. By "arhasi" (you ought/deserve), Arjuna's specific qualification as a cause for the sole performance of Karma Yoga is highlighted.

"Shrestha" (best)—per the grammatical rule 'praśasyasya śraḥ' (Ashtadhyayi 5.3.60), it means "most praiseworthy." Considering that his being "most praiseworthy" is useful for his actions being worthy of imitation by practitioners, and keeping in mind the statement to be made later "The knower of the whole should not unsettle the dull" (3.29), it is said "he is celebrated as a knower of the whole scripture and as a practitioner." For one who is a practitioner but not a knower of the whole, or one who is a knower of the whole but not a practitioner—even if having both aspects—if he is not famous, his practice is not worthy of imitation; therefore, the three terms are used to exclude such cases.

In the phrase "whatever authority (pramāṇa) he makes (kurute)," if it meant "whatever scripture he accepts as authority, the world follows that," it would be a redundancy in meaning, because "following that" takes the form of "practicing its meaning." Therefore, "kurute" should be taken in the sense of "budhyate" (understands/determines). And in the previous sentence "considering even the welfare of the world, you ought to perform action," only "you ought to perform" was said; it was not proposed that "you ought to accept scripture as authority," for which this (redundancy) would be said. In "whatever he practices" (yad yad ācharati), when the principal form of the action to be performed is specified, a desire arises regarding its mode (prakāra); therefore, it is appropriate to state that—with this intention, "yat pramāṇam" is explained as "yad aṅgayuktam" (equipped with which auxiliaries). The word "pramāṇa" here refers to the limit/measure (avadhi); and the limits of the action to be performed are indeed its auxiliary parts (angas). That is why the procedure (itikartavyatā) is metaphorically referred to by words indicating injunctions. "Yat pramāṇam" means "as it is"—the commentary of Yadavaprakasha is also to this effect. To demonstrate the natural force of the word "kurute" in this sense, it is explained as "anutiṣṭhati" (performs/practices). Otherwise, there would be an implication (lakṣaṇā) of a different meaning—this is the idea. To establish the specific meaning of "yat pramāṇam," he states the meaning of the word "tat": "tad aṅgayuktam" (equipped with those parts). Objection: If the auxiliary (anga) is indicated by the word "yat," how does the word "tat" refer to that which is qualified by the auxiliary? Solution: In this way—when it is said "he performs/practices that which is equipped with parts," the word function is "he practices that part." And since the part cannot exist separately from the whole (angi), it is established by implication that it refers to the (action) qualified by the parts.

"Therefore" (ataḥ)—this reveals the intended benefit and harm of performance and non-performance (respectively), meaning because his practice is followed by the world. "Always" (sarvadā)—meaning until the attainment of the Self. Objection: If he himself becomes liberated through Jnana Yoga, what is it to him whether the world is held together or not? To this, he says "Otherwise" (anyathā)—meaning, if Karma Yoga is abandoned thinking "I am qualified for Jnana Yoga." The word "api" in "jñānayogād api" (even from Jnana Yoga) indicates the state of being fallen from both.

मनुष्य मूलत अनुकरण करने वाला प्राणी है। यह एक मनोवैज्ञानिक सत्य है। इतिहास के किसी काल में भी समाज का नैतिक पुनरुत्थान हुआ है तो उस केवल राष्ट्र के नेतृत्व करने वाले व्यक्तियों के आदर्शों के कारण। शिक्षकों के सद्व्यवहार से ही विद्यार्थियों को अनुशासित किया जा सकता है यदि किसी राष्ट्र का शासक भ्रष्ट और अत्याचारी हो तो निम्न पदों के अधिकारी सत्य और ईमानदार नहीं हो सकते। छोटे बालकों का व्यवहार पूर्णत उनके मातापिता के आचरण एवं संस्कृति द्वारा निर्भर और नियन्त्रित होता है।इस तथ्य को ध्यान में रखते हुये भगवान् कर्माचरण के लिए अर्जुन के समक्ष एक और कारण प्रस्तुत करते हैं। यदि वह कर्म नहीं करता तो सम्भव है समाज के अधिकांश लोग भी स्वकर्तव्यपराङमुख हो जायेंगे और अन्त में परिणाम होगा जीवन में संस्कृति का ह्रास।अब आगे इस बात पर बल देने तथा अब तक दिये गये उपदेश का प्रभाव दृढ़ करने के लिए भगवान् स्वयं का ही उदाहरण देते हैं। यद्यपि भगवान् स्वयं नित्यमुक्त हैं तथापि तमोगुण और रजोगुण की बुराइयों में पड़ी तत्कालीन पीढ़ी को उसमें से बाहर निकालने के लिए वे स्वयं अनासक्त भाव से कुशलतापूर्वक कर्म करते हुये सभी के लिये एक आदर्श स्थापित करते हैं।अधर्म का सक्रिय प्रतिकार यह श्रीकृष्ण का सिद्धांत है। उनकी अहिंसा उस दिवास्वप्न देखने वाले कायर के समान नहीं थी जो अन्याय का प्रतिकार न करके संस्कृति का रक्षण करने में असमर्थ होता है। अब अर्जुन मन में कर्मयोग के विषय में कोई संदेह नहीं रह सकता था।यदि लोकसंग्रह के विषय में तुम्हें कोई शंका हो तो तुम मुझे क्यों नहीं देखते मेरे अनुसार तुम भी लोगों को अधर्म के मार्ग से निवृत्त कर उन्हें धर्म मार्ग में प्रवृत्त होने के लिये अपना आदर्श क्यों नहीं स्थापित करते

"Whatever he practices" (yad yad ācharati), etc. "There is nothing for Me" (na me), etc. That for one who has attained what is to be attained and whose mind is perfect (fulfilled), the purpose in engaging in action is grace upon the world—

in this regard, the Blessed Lord cites Himself alone as the example.

In the phrase "whatever authority he makes" (sa yatpramāṇaṃ kurute), is "yat" intended to refer to valid authority (pramāṇa) or invalid authority? In the first case, saying "he makes it authority" is improper, because one cannot "make" what already exists (as authority). In the second case too, it is exactly so (improper), because it is impossible (to make the invalid valid). To this objection, he answers with "sa" (he), etc.

That statement, etc., which is indeed valid authority but is not comprehended as such by the world—he makes that known as authority; this is the meaning.

Or, "yatpramāṇam" is a single compound word meaning "action based on which authority"—whether worldly or Vedic—he performs; with this intention, he states the purport: "he stands (acts) according to the manner stated"—this is the meaning.

(Objection): "Even if action is performed by me, why would the world adopt it?" Anticipating this doubt, He explains that it is because the world follows the conduct of the Best, with the words "yad yad" (whatever), etc. Whatever action the "Best"—the principal person like a king, etc.—performs, whether good or bad, the "other"—the common person following him—performs that very same action, and not something else independently; this is the meaning.

(Objection): "Looking at the scripture, why does the world not abandon the unscriptural conduct of the Best and practice only what is scriptural?" Anticipating this doubt, He shows that just as in conduct, so too in understanding (pratipatti), the "other" follows the Best, with "sa yat" (he whatever), etc. Whatever worldly or Vedic matter he—the Best—"makes authority," i.e., regards as authoritative, the world too follows that same thing—i.e., makes it authority—and not something else independently; this is the meaning.

And thus, based on the maxim "The behavior of the people follows the principal (leader)," action must indeed be performed by you, the King who is the principal figure, for the protection of the world—this is the intention.

(Objection): "Even Lokasamgraha (maintenance of the world) is indeed improper for devotees." To this He says "yad yad" (whatever), etc. The Best—My devotee—whatever he practices, the other person practices that very thing. Whatever he—My devotee—makes authority, the world follows that very thing, i.e., accepts it as authority.

The sentiment here is this: Lokasamgraha is to be performed by devotees by My command. Because, seeing their conduct, the world also will act in the same way. Even though, due to ignorance of its (Bhakti's) true nature, they (the people) being unqualified at that time, the fruit would indeed not accrue, and there is no desire in Me to give the fruit.

Because devotion (Bhakti) is given only to some specific person by supreme grace, not to everyone. If given to everyone, the creation (Srishti) itself would be annihilated. Therefore, by imposing/hiding that (truth/karma), for the sake of the continuation of creation, action should be performed outwardly with a guise (kāpaṭyena)—this is the sentiment.

Whatever action the "Best"—the principal person—practices (performs), that very same action the "other"—the common person following him—practices.

Moreover, whatever the Best person "makes authority"—whether worldly or Vedic—the world follows that; meaning, it accepts that very thing as authority.

If you have any doubt here regarding the duty of maintaining the world (Lokasamgraha), then why do you not look at Me?

Because (of the rule that people follow the great), therefore "whatever" (yad yad), etc.

यद्यत् whatsoever? आचरति does? श्रेष्ठः the best? तत्तत् that? एव only? इतरः the other? जनः people? सः he (that great man)? यत् what? प्रमाणम् standard (authority? demonstration)? कुरुते does? लोकः the world (people)? तत् that? अनुवर्तते follows.Commentary Man is a social animal. He is an imitating animal too. He takes his ideas of right and wrong from those whom he regards as his moral superior. Whatever a great man follows? the same is considered as an authority by his followers. They try to follow him. They endeavour to walk in his footsteps.

Yat yat, [This is according to the Ast. The G1. Pr. reads, yat yat yesu yesu.-Tr.] whatever action; a sresthah, superior person, a leader; acarati, does; itarah, another; janah, person, who follows him; does tat tat eva, that very action. Further, yat, whatever; sah, he, the superior person; kurute, upholds; as pramanam, authority, be it Vedic or secular; lokah, an ordinary person; anuvartate, follows; tat, that, i.e. he accepts that very thing as authoritative.
'If you have a doubt here with regard to the duty of preventing people from straying, then why do you not observe Me?'

Whatever 'an eminent man,' i.e., he, who is famous for his knowledge of all the scriptures and for his observance of the scriptural dictates, performs, others who have incomplete knowledge of the scriptures will also perform, following his example. With regard to any duty which is being performed with all its ancillaries by an eminent personage, the people with incomplete knowledge will do it with the same ancillaries. Therefore for the protection of the world, all acts that are appropriate to one's station and stage in life must always be performed by an eminent man who is distinguished for his wisdom. Otherwise, the evil generated from the ruin of the large masses of the world (who neglect their duties by following his example), will bring him down, even if he were a follower of pure Jnana Yoga.