Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 3 - Shloka (Verse) 27

व्याख्या--'प्रकृतेः क्रियमाणानि गुणैः कर्माणि सर्वशः'-- जिस समष्टि शक्तिसे शरीर, वृक्ष आदि पैदा होते और बढ़ते-घटते हैं, गङ्गा आदि नदियाँ प्रवाहित होती हैं, मकान आदि पदार्थोंमें परिवर्तन होताहै, उसी समष्टि शक्तिसे मनुष्यकी देखना, सुनना, खाना-पीना आदि सब क्रियाएँ होती हैं। परन्तु मनुष्य अहंकारसे मोहित होकर, अज्ञानवश एक ही समष्टि शक्तिसे होनेवाली क्रियाओंके दो विभाग कर लेता है-- एक तो स्वतः होनेवाली क्रियाएँ; जैसे-- शरीरका बनना, भोजनका पचना इत्यादि; और दूसरी, ज्ञानपूर्वक होनेवाली क्रियाएँ; जैसे-- देखना, बोलना, भोजन करना इत्यादि। ज्ञानपूर्वक होनेवाली क्रियाओंको मनुष्य अज्ञानवश अपनेद्वारा की जानेवाली मान लेता है।प्रकृतिसे उत्पन्न गुणों-(सत्त्व, रज और तम-) का कार्य होनेसे बुद्धि, अहंकार, मन, पञ्चमहाभूत, दस इन्द्रियाँ और इन्द्रियोंके शब्दादि पाँच विषय-- ये भी प्रकृतिके गुण कहे जाते हैं। उपर्युक्त पदोंमें भगवान् स्पष्ट करते हैं कि सम्पूर्ण क्रियाएँ (चाहे समष्टिकी हों या व्यष्टिकी) प्रकृतिके गुणों द्वारा ही की जाती हैं, स्वरूपके द्वारा नहीं।

मूर्ख अज्ञानी मनुष्य कर्मोंमें किस प्रकार आसक्त होता है सो कहते हैं सत्त्व रजस् और तमस् इन तीनों गुणोंकी जो साम्यावस्था है उसका नाम प्रधान या प्रकृति है उस प्रकृतिके गुणोंसे अर्थात् कार्य और करणरूप समस्त विकारोंसे लौकिक और शास्त्रीय सम्पूर्ण कर्म सब प्रकारसे किये जाते हैं। परंतु अहंकारविमूढात्मा कार्य और करणके संघातरूप शरीरमें आत्मभावकी प्रतीतिका नाम अहंकार है उस अहंकारसे जिसका अन्तःकरण अनेक प्रकारसे मोहित हो चुका है ऐसा देहेन्द्रियके धर्मको अपना धर्म माननेवाला देहाभिमानी पुरुष अविद्यावश प्रकृतिके कर्मोंको अपनेमें मानता हुआ उनउन कर्मोंका मैं कर्ता हूँ ऐसा मान बैठता है।

Having mentioned "of the ignorant attached to action" (in 3.26), He states the connection of the next verse with "avidvān" (the ignorant man).

(Objection): Since agency (kartṛtva) is accepted as real for the Self, how does the wise man, even while performing action, see the absence of that agency? Anticipating this, He says "prakṛteḥ" (of Prakriti).

Revealing the nature of the attachment of the ignorant man to actions, He explains the verse beginning with "prakṛteḥ." By the word "pradhāna" (Prakriti), the power of Māyā (illusion) is meant; and "avidyayā" (by ignorance) is connected with both.

He explains this verse ("attached to action") in two verses beginning with "prakṛteḥ" (of Prakriti).

All actions are being performed "sarvaśaḥ" (in every way) by the "guṇaiḥ"—meaning the modifications (vikāraiḥ) in the form of cause and effect (body and senses)—of Prakriti, the Pradhāna (primordial matter), the power of Māyā.

Ahaṅkāra (egoism) is the notion of "I" in the aggregate of body and senses; bewildered by that, whose self (mind/internal organ) is unable to discern the true nature of the Self, he (the ignorant) thinks "I am the doer of action" by ignorance.

He states the difference in action between the wise and the unwise with "prakṛteḥ" (of Prakriti).

"By the qualities of Prakriti" means by the senses, etc. For they (the senses, etc.) are indeed subordinate to Prakriti and related to it.

For the reflection (the individual soul/Jiva) has no action (of its own).

The question is, how does an ignorant person become attached to actions? The answer is given by the word 'prakriteh' (of nature), etc. 'Prakriti' is the power of the Supreme Lord, characterized by the qualities (Gunas) of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas, well-known from the Shruti (Vedic scripture) 'Devatma-shaktim sva-gunair nigudham' (the Self-power of the Lord is concealed by its own qualities). Actions are performed by the qualities of that power, which take the form of the aggregate of cause and effect (body and senses). But the Jiva (individual soul), being deluded by the ego (superimposed on itself), and seeing the attributes like doership (Kartritva) belonging to those qualities as its own attributes, and not perceiving its own nature as unattached, blissful, and consciousness-in-itself, thinks 'I perform actions,' 'I am the doer of actions.' The grammatical analysis is 'ahankāreṇa vimūḍhaḥ' (deluded by ego) and 'ātmā' (the soul).

The word 'Kartā' uses the suffix tṛn, which prevents the use of the possessive sixth case (Genitive) by the rule 'na lokāvyayaniṣṭhā-khalarthatṛnām' (prohibiting the Genitive case with certain words). Otherwise, if the suffix tṛc had been used, the sixth case would have been mandatory, resulting in 'karmaṇām kartā aham' (I am the doer of the actions).

Regarding the actions being performed by the qualities of Prakriti (Sattva, etc.) in accordance with their nature, the soul deluded by ego (ahankāra-vimūḍhātmā) thinks, "I am the doer."

The compound word 'ahankāra-vimūḍhātmā' means: the one whose self (true nature) is confused or unknown due to ego. Ego (ahankāra) is the identification of 'I' with that which is not the self (Prakriti, the body/mind complex). This person, whose true nature is unknown due to this ego, thinks "I am the doer" regarding the qualities (senses) and the actions they perform; this is the meaning.

Objection: If action is to be performed even by the wise, then what is the distinction between the wise and the unwise? Suspecting this, He shows the distinction between the two—with the two verses beginning 'Prakriteh' (Of nature...).

Actions which are being performed in every way by the Gunas of Prakriti, i.e., by the senses which are the effects of Prakriti—regarding them, he thinks 'I alone am the doer, I do them'. The reason for that is—'By Ahankara', i.e., one whose Atma (intellect/mind) is deluded by the superimposition of the Self on the senses etc.

'Lokasaṅgraha' (welfare of the world) means bringing people together, making them part of the same group by ensuring they share the same attitude towards one's own practice (Karma Yoga).

'Karmavāsanā' (latent impressions of action) are the particular aspects of previous merits and demerits that initiate subsequent merits and demerits, which are the cause of the memory capable of impelling subsequent bodies, or they are the residual impressions (saṁskāra) born from the specific experience of impelling previous bodies, like the impression from playing a musical instrument.

'Buddhibheda' (causing difference in intellect) means changing the intellect otherwise, and this (change) is shown in the current context by expressions like 'other than Karma Yoga,' etc. By the word 'yuktaḥ' (endowed), the intention is the Yoga of intellect characterized by non-attachment, mentioned earlier, for the person performing actions for 'Lokasaṅgraha,' in order to avoid unnecessary delay in achieving the desired end; hence 'buddhyā yuktaḥ' (endowed with intellect) is stated.

The meaning of 'joṣayet' (should make them engage/propitiate) is 'should generate love/interest.' The root juṣī is in the sense of 'love' and 'service.' The syntactic connection is that he should 'joṣayet' (make them engage) in 'sarvakarmāṇi' (all actions) to 'karmasaṅginaḥ puruṣān' (persons attached to action).

The meaning of the four verses starting with 'prakṛteḥ' is given by 'Karmayogam,' etc. The meaning of the two verses is given in reverse order (first the ignorant, then the wise). In the third verse, non-deviation (avichālana) is taught by way of clarifying this.

'Karmayogāpekṣitam' means 'required as an auxiliary (iti kartavyatā) in Karma Yoga.' When 'prakṛter guṇaiḥ' (by the qualities of nature) is said, 'sattvādibhiḥ' (by Sattva, etc.) is specified to exclude the natural qualities like sound, etc., which are irrelevant to the present topic, and to show the particular meaning established by the prominence of common usage, etc. 'Svānurūpam' (according to their nature) is stated, indicating the division of Sāttvika and other actions to be described later, which is suggested by the word denoting manner 'sarvaśaḥ' (in all ways).

Since 'kartā' (doer) is an agent-noun formed with the suffix tṛj, there might arise the use of the Genitive (sixth case); therefore, to avoid that fault and to remove the delusion of asserting 'I-ness' in the doership of actions, 'karmāṇi prati' (with respect to actions) is stated. If the suffix tṛn were intended, this would be the resulting statement.

Regarding 'ahaṅkāra-vimūḍhātmā,' which has three similar parts and multiple meanings, the intended meaning here is analyzed as 'ahaṅkāreṇa,' etc. Here, mere 'I-feeling' (Aham-bhāva) is not stated, because that is included in the nature of the Self. Nor is the non-conscious substance called 'ahaṅkāra' (ego-stuff) meant, because even that acts by means of the delusion of body and Self, and it is improper to speak of it as the immediate cause. Nor is 'pride' meant, as it is not referred to as the cause of insult to the excellent, etc. Therefore, the delusion of the Self being the body is intended here by the word 'ahaṅkāra'; with this intent, it is said: 'ahaṅkāro nāma anahamarthe prakṛtāvaham abhimānaḥ' (Ego is the identification of 'I' with the non-self, i.e., Prakriti). By this, the etymology of the word 'ahaṅkāra' is shown with the suffix cvi in the sense of 'becoming that which was not.'

'Ajñātātmasvarūpaḥ' (one whose true nature is unknown) - the analysis is 'vimūḍha ātmā svarūpaṁ yasya sa vimūḍhātmā' (he whose true nature of the self is deluded is vimūḍhātmā). The sense is that the word vimūḍha here is in the same case (samanādhikaraṇa) as the object of delusion, as in 'diśo vimuhyeyuḥ' (the directions become deluded).

In 'guṇakarmavibhāgayoḥ' (in the divisions of qualities and actions), the Locative (seventh case) denoting the subject matter is more appropriate than the Genitive which would relate to the secondary element; this is assumed, and thus it is stated: 'sattvādi guṇavibhāge tattat karmavibhāge ca' (in the division of Sattva and other qualities, and in the division of those respective actions). The word vibhāga (division), being after the Dwandva compound, is connected with each.

Since qualities do not directly abide in qualities, and since the intention, according to the process explained by others, is the senses and their objects, etc., where there is an implied connection of the two terms, the word guṇa ending in the Locative case is used figuratively to denote the effects of the qualities; with this intention, it is said: 'svaguṇeṣu sveṣu kāryeṣu' (in its own qualities, i.e., in its own effects). The effects of the qualities will also be classified later. Alternatively, this is stated because of the prominence of the cause and the secondary nature of the effect in relation to it.

भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण निरन्तर इस बात पर बल देते हैं कि अनासक्त अथवा निष्काम कर्म ही आदर्श है। यह कहना सरल परन्तु करना कठिन होता है। बुद्धि से यह बात समझ में आने पर भी उसे कार्यान्वित करना सरल काम नहीं। हम सबके साथ कठिनाई यह है कि हम जानते नहीं कि कर्म में आसक्ति को त्याग कर फिर कर्म भी किस प्रकार करते रहें। यहाँ भगवान् विवेक की वह पद्धति बता रहें हैं जिसके द्वारा इस अनासक्ति को हम प्राप्त कर सकते हैं।आत्म अज्ञान बुद्धि और मन के स्तर पर क्रमश इच्छा और विचार के रूप में व्यक्त होता है। ये विचार मन की सात्त्विक राजसिक एवं तामसिक प्रवृत्तियों के अनुरूप होकर शरीर के स्तर पर कर्म के रूप में व्यक्त होते हैं। इन तीनों गुणों में से जिस गुण का आधिक्य विचारों में होता है मनुष्य के कर्म भी ठीक उसी प्रकार के ही होते हैं। जैसे सत्त्व के कारण शुभ कर्म और रजोगुण तथा तमोगुण से क्रमश उत्पन्न होते हैं कामक्रोध से प्रेरित तथा क्रूर पाशविक कर्म। इस प्रकार हम देखते हैं कि इन वासनाओं का ही जगत् में व्यक्त होने वाला स्थूल रूप कर्म कहलाता है।जहाँ मन है वहाँ कर्म भी है। कर्म मन से ही उत्पन्न होते हैं और मन से ही शक्ति प्राप्तकर मन की सहायता से ही किये जाते हैं। परन्तु मन के साथ अविद्याजनित मिथ्या तादात्म्य के कारण मनुष्य स्वयं को ही कर्ता मानता है। कर्तृत्व की भावना होने पर फल की चिन्ता व्याकुलता एवं आसक्ति होना स्वाभाविक ही है।स्वप्न में अपने ही संस्कारों से एक जगत् उत्पन्न करके मनुष्य उसके साथ तादात्म्य स्थापित करता है उसे ही स्वप्नद्रष्टा कहते हैं। स्वप्न के दुख स्वप्नद्रष्टा के लिए होते हैं और किसी के लिए नहीं। स्वप्नजगत् के साथ तादात्म्य को त्यागने पर द्रष्टा के सब दुख समाप्त हो जाते हैं। इसी प्रकार वासना इच्छा कर्म अथवा फल स्वयं किसी भी प्रकार की आसक्ति को जन्म नहीं देते किन्तु जब हमारा तादात्म्य मन के साथ हो जाता है तो कर्तृत्व और आसक्ति दोनों की ही उत्पत्ति होती है। जिस क्षण इस विवेक का उदय होता है आसक्ति का अस्तित्व वहाँ नहीं रह पाता। जीवन शान्तिमय हो जाता है।परन्तु ज्ञानी पुरुष आसक्त नहीं होते क्योंकि

The term 'of the ignorant' (Ajñānām) was used. Now their ignorance is shown by the word 'prakṛteḥ' (of Nature).

Actions are indeed performed by the qualities (Guṇas) such as Sattva, etc., which belong to Prakriti. But the deluded person, determining (adhyavasya) 'I am the doer,' falsely binds the Self.

Since the two verses starting with 'prakṛteḥ kriyamāṇāni' are not quite clear, (Śrī Jayatīrtha) states their import, starting with 'vidvat,' etc. The connection (anvaya) is 'as appropriate' (yathāyogam), not 'in the order of the verses' (yathākramam). Saying 'karmabhedam' (distinction of actions) means the verse is elaborating it ('prapañcayati'). This is said because 'saktāḥ karmaṇi' (attached to action), etc., was already stated (in verse 3.25).

Showing the construction (anvaya) due to the intervening words, and since the word 'guṇa' has multiple meanings, the intended sense is stated with 'prakṛteḥ,' etc. By the word 'ādi' (etc.), the body and the mind are included.

How can substances like the senses, etc., be the 'guṇas' (qualities) of Prakriti? In answer, he says, 'prakṛtim,' etc. (Here 'guṇa' means) 'secondary' or 'subordinate' (guna-bhūtāny apradhānāni).

He interprets it in another way, starting with 'tat,' etc. This means 'and the effects of Prakriti.' Thus, the word 'guṇa' is established to mean 'effect' (kāryārtha).

The question is, since the Jīva (individual soul) is also a doer, how is it said 'ahaṅkāravimūḍhātmā kartā'ham iti manyate' (the soul deluded by ego thinks 'I am the doer')? In answer, he says, 'na hi,' etc. The phrase 'independently' (svātantryeṇa) is to be supplied here.

When the mutual division of the qualities and the actions was to be stated, why is the dual number used (vibhāgayoḥ) when the singular would suffice (vibhāge), and with what is this (dual) connected? Resolving this doubt by stating the meaning of the word 'vibhāga' (division), he says, 'karma,' etc. Here, the distinction between actions and the senses, etc., is intended due to the difference in the related entities, namely, the Jīva, Īśvara, and Prakriti, which should be understood from other texts.

The intended meaning of the two words 'guṇā guṇeṣu' is stated as 'guṇāḥ,' etc.

Showing the distinction between the knowledgeable and the ignorant, even though they perform actions similarly, by the presence or absence of the pride of doership, he elaborates the meaning of the verse 'saktāḥ karmaṇi' (25) with these two verses.

'Prakriti' is Māyā, composed of the qualities Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas, which is of the nature of false knowledge and is the power of the Supreme Lord, as stated in the Shruti: 'Māyāṁ tu prakṛtiṁ vidyān māyinaṁ tu maheśvaram' (Know Māyā to be Prakriti and Maheśvara to be the Lord of Māyā).

The actions, both worldly and Vedic, which are performed in all ways by the qualities (modifications/vikāras) of that Prakriti, which are in the form of cause and effect (body and senses), are regarded by the person whose Antaḥkaraṇa (inner instrument) is 'vimūḍha' (deluded) by 'ahaṅkāra' (i.e., the self-identification with the aggregate of cause and effect) - meaning, the one who has self-pride in the non-self - as 'kartā aham' (I am the doer), 'karomi aham' (I do), due to the superimposition of doership.

The suffix tṛn is used in 'kartā aham.' Therefore, the prohibition of the Genitive (sixth case) is enforced by the rule 'na lokāvyayaniṣṭhā-khalarthatṛnām.'

Objection: If the wise man also acts in that way, then what is the difference from the unwise? And where is the utility of his knowledge, since due to engagement in action throughout the whole time, there is no opportunity for service (Seva) etc.? Therefore, He states the difference between the unwise and the wise—with 'Prakriteh' etc.

One whose self is deluded by Ahankara, the unwise, thinks 'I alone am the doer' regarding actions being performed in every way by the Gunas of Prakriti, i.e., the senses; he does not consider the Will of the Lord (as the doer).

And the Lord causes those (actions) to be done for the delusion of the world.

'Prakriti' is the state of equilibrium (sāmyāvasthā) of the qualities of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas, also called Pradhāna. Actions, both secular (worldly) and scriptural, are performed in all ways by the guṇas (qualities/modifications) of that Prakriti, which are in the form of cause and effect (body and senses).

'Ahaṅkāravimūḍhātmā' is he whose internal organ (antaḥkaraṇa) is deluded in various ways by 'ahaṅkāra' (ego, which is the idea of the Self as the aggregate of cause and effect). That person (the ignorant one), who is characterized by the attributes of cause and effect, who identifies the Self with cause and effect, and who, due to nescience (avidyā), considers the actions to belong to the Self, thinks, 'I am the doer of those respective actions.'

On the other hand, the one who is knowledgeable (the description of whom follows).

The special distinction between the knowledgeable and the ignorant person, both engaged in action, is clearly shown by these two verses, starting with 'prakṛteḥ.' The word 'prakṛteḥ' (of Prakriti) indicates the context of seeing the distinction (of the Self) according to the Sāṅkhya-Yoga system, so it is not an irrelevant subject.

It is as follows: In the Brahmavādi Sāṅkhya view, the Puruṣottama (Supreme Person) Himself, who is the doer, enjoyer, and support of all attributes of the world, partially becomes the Immutable (Akṣara), Time, Prakriti, Puruṣa, and the Self (Ātman), as the Shruti states: 'sa imameva ātmānaṁ dvedhāpātayat tataḥ patiśca patnī cābhavat' (He divided this Self into two, and then it became husband and wife). Among these, Prakriti is the doer (karti) and Puruṣa, being connected with it, is the enjoyer (bhoktā).

In reality, Puruṣa is unaffected by the attributes of Prakriti, like a lotus leaf by water (puṣkarapalāśavat), yet the person of mistaken intellect (viprīta-mati), thinks 'I am the doer,' regarding the actions performed by the qualities which are transformed into guṇas (senses) or the qualities residing in the senses. (He fails to recognize that) actions are performed by the qualities, and not by the Self alone.

But the 'division-principle-knower' (vibhāga-tattvavit) is not attached. By understanding that the qualities residing in the senses operate upon the objects of the senses (viṣaya-guṇeṣu), the meaning of Sāṅkhya and Yoga is established to be one and the same.

प्रकृतेः of nature? क्रियमाणानि are performed? गुणैः by the alities? कर्माणि actions? सर्वशः in all cases? अहङ्कारविमूढात्मा one whose mind is deluded by egosim? कर्ता doer? अहम् I? इति thus? मन्यते thinks.Commentary Prakriti or Pradhana or Nature is that state in which the three Gunas? viz.? Sattva? Rajas and Tamas exist in a state of eilibrium. When this eilibrium is disturbed? creation begins body? senses? mind? etc.? are formed. The man who is deluded by egoism identifies the Self with the body? mind? the life force and the senses and ascribes to the Self all the attributes of the body and the senses. He? therefore? thinks through ignorance? I am the doer. In reality the Gunas of Nature perform all actions. (Cf.III.29V.9IX.9?10XIII.21?24?30?32XVIII.13?14).

Karmani kriyamanani, while actions, secular and scriptural, are being done; sarvasah, in ever way; gunaih, by the gunas, (i.e.) by the modifications in the form of body and organs; (born) prakrteh, of Nature-Nature, (otherwise known as) Pradhana [Pradhana, Maya, the Power of God.], being the state of eilibrium of the three alities of sattva, rajas and tamas; ahankara-vimudha-atma, one who is deluded by egoism; manyate, thinks; iti, thus; 'Aham karta, I am the doer.'
Ahankara is self-identification with the aggregate of body and organs. He whose atma, mind, is vimudham, diluded in diverse ways, by that (ahankara) is ahankara-vimudha-atma. He who imagines the characteristics of the body and organs to be his own, who has self-identification with the body and the organs, and who, through ignorance, believes the activities to be his own-, he thinks, 'I am the doer of those diverse activities.'

It is the Gunas of Prakrti like Sattva, Rajas etc., that perform all the activities appropriate to them. But the man, whose nature is deluded by his Ahankara, thinks, 'I am the doer of all these actions.' Ahankara is the mistaken conception of 'I' applied to the workings of Prakrti which is not the 'I'. The meaning is that it is because of this (Ahankara), that one who is ignorant of the real nature of the self, thinks, 'I am the doer' with regard to the activities that are really being done by the Gunas of Prakrti.