Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 3 - Shloka (Verse) 39

व्याख्या--'एतेन'-- सैंतीसवें श्लोकमें भगवान्ने पाप करवानेमें मुख्य कारण 'काम' अर्थात् कामनाको बताया था। उसी कामनाके लिये यहाँ 'एतेन'पद आया है।
'दुष्पूरेणानलेन च'-- जैसे अग्निमें घीकी सुहाती-सुहाती (अनुकूल) आहुति देते रहनेसे अग्नि कभी तृप्त नहीं होती, प्रत्युत बढ़ती ही रहती है, ऐसे ही कामनाके अनुकूल भोग भोगते रहनेसे कामना कभी तृप्त नहीं होती, प्रत्युत अधिकाधिक बढ़ती ही रहती है (टिप्पणी प0 194)। जो भी वस्तु सामने आती रहती है, कामना अग्निकी तरह उसे खाती रहती है।भोग और संग्रहकी कामना कभी पूरी होती ही नहीं। जितने ही भोग-पदार्थ मिलते हैं, उतनी ही उनकी भूख बढ़ती है। कारण कि कामना जडकी ही होती है, इसलिये जडके सम्बन्धसे वह कभी मिटती नहीं प्रत्युत अधिकाधिक बढ़ती है। सुन्दरदासजी लिखते हैं--

जिसका ( उपर्युक्त श्लोकमें ) इदम् शब्दसे संकेत किया गया है जो कामसे आच्छादित है वह कौन है सो कहा जाता है ज्ञानीके ( विवेकीके ) इस कामरूप नित्य वैरीसे ज्ञान ढका हुआ है। ज्ञानी ही पहलेसे जानता है कि इसके द्वारा मैं अनर्थोंमें नियुक्त किया गया हूँ। इससे वह सदा दुखी भी होता है। इसलिये यह ज्ञानीका ही नित्य वैरी है मूर्खका नहीं क्योंकि वह मूर्ख तो तृष्णाके समय उसको मित्रके समान समझता है। फिर जब उसका परिणामरूप दुःख प्राप्त होता है तब समझता है कि तृष्णाके द्वारा मैं दुखी किया गया हूँ पहले नहीं जानता इसलिये यह काम ज्ञानीका ही नित्य वैरी है। कैसे कामके द्वारा ( ज्ञान आच्छादित है इसपर कहते हैं ) कामना इच्छा ही जिसका स्वरूप है जो अति कष्टसे पूर्ण होता है तथा जो अनल है भोगोंसे कभी भी तृप्त नहीं होता ऐसे कामनारूप वैरीद्वारा (ज्ञान आच्छादित है )।

He introduces the subsequent verse with the expectation of specifying particularly what was mentioned generally, with the words "What then," etc. To establish that knowledge is covered by desire, attributes such as "by the eternal enemy of the knower" are used. Taking the symbol [text], he explains with "covered," etc.

Anticipating the doubt, "Even if it is hostile to knowers, how is desire an eternal enemy?", he says "For the knower indeed" (jñānī hi). The state of addiction to desire is spoken of as "already" (pūrvam) even without the arrival of disaster. By the word "hence" (ataḥ), the very attachment to desire is referred to. By "eternally indeed" (nityam eva), both the state of origin and the state of action of desire are stated.

(Objection:) "Since being constituted of desire is not praiseworthy for anyone at all, desire is an eternal enemy [for all]; so why the qualification 'of the knower' (jñāninaḥ)?" Anticipating this doubt, he says "But not" (na tu).

He explains that for the ignorant, it is not an eternal enemy, with "For he" (sa hi). The state prior to the arrival of the effect [suffering] is called "before." He states the conclusion derived from the fact that while there is hostility towards the ignorant, there is an absence of eternal hostility [for them], with "therefore" (ataḥ). The meaning is: Although there is no difference in it being an eternal enemy by its own nature, an internal distinction is established based on knowledge and ignorance.

Through inquiry, he reveals the enemy in context itself with "in what form," etc.

He indicates what is denoted by the word "this" with "covered" (āvṛtam). By this desire, which is the eternal enemy of the knower, "knowledge"—meaning knowledge in the form of discrimination (viveka)—is covered. For the knower knows even at the time of its [desire's] origin, "I have been engaged in disaster by this." He becomes miserable from that very moment. Therefore, this is the eternal enemy of the knower, but not of the fool. For he [the fool], viewing desire as a friend at the time of its origin, does not know at that time, "I have been engaged in suffering by this," but only when the suffering which is its effect is obtained; therefore, for him, this is not an eternal enemy.

In what form is it an enemy? To this, He says: By that kāmarūpa—whose form is desire or wishing itself—and by that [attribute of being] duṣpūra—whose filling is [only possible] with difficulty (or pain). Why? To this, He says: Anala is that for which there is "no enough" (na alam), i.e., no satisfaction exists; by that [anala]. For he who sometime attains satisfaction can be filled, but this one is not so—this is the meaning. The letter 'ca' (and) is in the sense of a simile. The explanation of analena as "like fire" has been neglected by the teachers [commentators] because it is easily understood.

And the view that "knowledge" (jñāna) means the inner faculty (antaḥkaraṇa)—derived as "that by which it is known"—is to be disregarded. Because, in accordance with [the phrase] "destroyer of knowledge and realization" (jñāna-vijñāna-nāśanam - 3.41), it is appropriate to grasp [the meaning of] discriminative knowledge here as well.

Addressing him as "Kaunteya" (Son of Kunti), He implies: "You too—whose knowledge is covered by desire in the very form of 'may there be no separation from relatives'—have been engaged in grief and delusion which are of the nature of womanly conduct."

Knowledge, even though born from scripture, does not shine forth for the direct realization (aparokṣya) of the Supreme Self because it is covered by desire; if [this is true] even for the knower, what to say of the one with little knowledge?

[It is covered] by the "eternal enemy" named kāmarūpa (taking the form of desire), which is duṣpūra (difficult to satisfy). For desire is filled [satisfied] with difficulty (pain). Indeed, the position of Indra and others is not obtained with ease.

Even if the position of Indra etc. is obtained, one again desires the position of Brahma etc.; thus, there is no sense of alam ("enough"), hence it is anala (insatiable).

And it is said: "Smoke is indeed [the cover] of Fire, i.e., Knowledge/Brahman; dirt is of the Mirror, i.e., the Intellect (Buddhi); and the ulba is of the Fetus, i.e., the Soul (Jīva); desire is indeed the cover [corresponding to these]."

"Covered" (āvṛtam). "Knowledge" means the sattva (purity/essence) of the inner faculty (antaḥkaraṇa); according to the Shruti (scripture): "Modesty, intelligence, fear—all these are mind indeed." It is covered by this desire, which is of the nature of the quality of passion (rajoguṇa).

[It is covered] by the "eternal enemy of the knower"—meaning the knower (pramātṛ) distinguished by the inner faculty—[which is] in the form of desire (kāmarūpeṇa) and is difficult to satisfy (duṣpūreṇa), i.e., unfit to be filled. For this [desire], being filled, would produce only disasters. Analena—Even if it were to be filled, it is anala—meaning, he for whom there is no alam (sufficiency/enough); by that anala. Just as fire cannot be satisfied by wood but only increases, in the same way, this [desire] also [increases]—this is the meaning.

The purport is this: The sattva of the inner faculty is indeed of the nature of light, like fire. If it is covered by its innate desire—just as fire [is covered] by smoke—it causes the knower to fall into disaster. Otherwise, that very [inner faculty], being naturally pure, would attain discrimination (viveka) and dispassion (vairāgya) and redeem him. Therefore, this desire is the eternal enemy of the knower.

The knowledge regarding the Self of this living being—who is a knower by nature consisting of knowledge—is covered by this [enemy] in the form of desire, which generates delusion regarding sense-objects and is an eternal enemy. [It is covered] by [that which is] difficult to satisfy (duṣpūra), i.e., having objects unworthy of fulfillment, and by [that which is] an insatiable fire (anala), i.e., devoid of sufficiency.

With what instruments does this desire possess the self? This, He states here.

Indicating what is denoted by the word "this" (idam), He clarifies the hostility with "covered," etc. "This," i.e., discriminative knowledge, is covered by this.

For the ignorant person, at the time of enjoyment, desire is indeed a cause of happiness; only in the consequence does it turn into hostility. But for the knower, even at that time [of enjoyment], due to his contemplation of the disaster [inherent in it], it is a cause of sorrow alone; therefore, it is called the "eternal enemy."

Moreover, even while being filled with objects, it is duṣpūra (difficult to satisfy); and when not being filled, because it is the cause of grief and distress, it is comparable to fire (anala). By this, its eternal hostility towards everyone is stated.

To remove the [charge of] repetition regarding "knowledge is covered," etc., he [Ramanuja] said: "He states the mode of covering." Here, when it was said "by this, this is covered" (3.38), the intent is: "How is the expectation 'what is that covered thing?' even logical?" [implying the context was clear].

Here, the word jñānī (knower) does not refer to one whose object of knowledge is accomplished [perfected], because for one in that state, knowledge is not covered by desire. Consequently, it is appropriate that it refers only to all field-knowers (kṣetrajñas/souls) whose knowledge is not yet accomplished; with this intention, the phrase "of this living being, the knower" was used. Regarding "of the knower" (jñāninaḥ), to demonstrate that the suffix refers to a natural relationship established by Shruti, and to indicate that the covering is adventitious (aupādhika), the phrase "of one whose nature is knowledge" (jñānasvabhāvasya) was used. Since even for the field-knower experiencing the fruits of karma, the knowledge of objects like sound, etc., is not covered, it is stated as "knowledge regarding the Self." Since the word kāmarūpa is well-known in the sense of "taking forms at one's own will" [shapeshifting], to remove that confusion, it is stated as "in the form of desire" (kāmakāreṇa).

He reveals the mode of covering knowledge regarding the Self—which is implied by the nature of desire that is distinct from the Self—with the phrase "by generating delusion regarding sense-objects." "By the eternal enemy" means by the beginningless enemy which lasts until the limit of Self-realization. Or, in the view that accepts the existence of eternally transmigrating souls (nitya-saṃsāri), its eternal hostility towards some souls is established. The meaning of the word anala is the absence of the feeling of "enough" (alam) even when worthy objects are obtained. As it is said: "The mine of thirst is unfathomable; it is difficult to fill; by what can it be filled? Which, even when great fillings are thrown in, is only dug deeper by the filling itself." In the manner stated, the intention of the word duṣpūra (difficult to fill) is to be the cause of engagement in unworthy and difficult-to-obtain objects; with this intention, it is said: "by the duṣpūra, meaning having objects unworthy of fulfillment" and "by the anala, meaning devoid of sufficiency." Alternatively, the word anala is a synonym for fire, used metaphorically for desire; just as there is no division of objects or satisfaction for fire, so is it [for desire]—this is the purport.

यहाँ यह स्पष्ट किया गया है कि उस कामरूप शत्रु के द्वारा यह ज्ञान अर्थात् विवेक सार्मथ्य आच्छादित हो जाती है। आत्मानात्म नित्यानित्य और सत्यासत्य में जिस विवेक सार्मथ्य के कारण सब प्राणियों में मनुष्य को सर्वोच्च स्थान प्राप्त है उसी बुद्धि की क्षमता को यह आवृत कर देता है। यह काम दुष्पूर अर्थात् इसका पूर्ण होना असम्भव ही होता है।अब भगवान् उस काम के निवास स्थान बताते हैं जिसके ज्ञान से शत्रु को नष्ट करना सरल होगा

"Covered," etc. "By that which takes the form of desire" (kāmarūpa)—because it moves in desire.

"And by the fire" (analena)—like fire, which is impossible to satisfy, because it burns both the seen [visible results] and the unseen [future merit].

Thus, having stated that it obstructs the knowable, the instrument of knowledge, and the knower [in the previous verse], the obstruction of knowledge has been stated.

With "knowledge is covered," what is being said again? To this, he [Madhavacharya] says "from scripture," etc. Previously, the obstruction to the origin of knowledge was stated; now, however, it is stated that even if knowledge is somehow produced, it does not become effective for its own function. Therefore, there is no fault of repetition—this is the purport. "Acting out of desire" (kāmakāreṇa)—because of the statement in Brahma Sutra 3.4.15.

[Objection:] "For direct realization (aparokṣa-jñāna) in the means of liberation, there is no obstruction by anything?" To this, he says "from scripture" [meaning scriptural knowledge]. And regarding "for the direct realization of the Supreme Self"—[it means] it does not shine forth, i.e., it does not prevail.

"Of the knower"—this [qualification] is useless, because the connection of knowledge with a knower is invariable? To this, he says "even of the knower"—meaning even of one who possesses knowledge born of scripture. "Of the one with little knowledge"—meaning one who possesses knowledge born merely from the Guru's instruction.

Others, however, describe it thus: "It is the eternal enemy of the knower, not of the fool. For the knower strives, thinking 'I will destroy desire,' but the fool follows it." That [view] is refuted by this [commentary]. Indeed, "hostility" here is intended as "harmfulness" (apakāritva), and that is greater in the fool than in the knower. Just because the fool does not investigate it [as an enemy], it does not mean it does not exist there.

It is called kāmarūpa because it takes a form conforming to one's will. But since this is not possible for desire, which is an attribute of the inner faculty, he says "Kāma..."—meaning, that by which it is characterized is rūpa, meaning ākhyā (name/title) is intended here. Then, this becomes a qualifying word (adjective); what is its qualified object (noun)? To this, he says "eternal [enemy]," etc.

That which cannot be filled is duṣpūra. [Objection:] But desire can be filled by acquiring objects? To this, he explains it differently: "by the duṣpūra." The prefix duḥ is not in the sense of negation (nañ), but in the sense of difficulty/pain (kṛcchra). He justifies this with "For indeed not" (na hi), etc. This is an implication for the objects of desire.

[Objection:] Since its nature is blazing, it is appropriate that anger be 'fire' (anala), but how is desire fire? To this, he explains differently with reasoning: "Even if" (yadyapi), etc. This too is an implication for wanting more than what is attained.

He states the agreement of authority regarding the meaning of the two verses with "And it is said," etc. Kāmakaḥ—meaning contemptible desire—is [the cover] of knowledge and of Brahman; [as] smoke is of fire. And dirt is of the intellect (buddhi), i.e., the mirror. And the ulba is of the soul (jīva), i.e., the fetus. Thus, there is a hidden simile everywhere. By this, the explanation that the second verse [3.39] is merely an elaboration of what was said in "By this, this [is covered]" [3.38] is rejected.

He expounds on the summary statement, "So is this covered by that." "Knowledge"—derived as "that by which it is known," meaning the inner faculty (antaḥkaraṇa), or discriminative wisdom (viveka-vijñāna)—which is indicated by the word "this," is covered by this desire. Even so, since it appears superficially to be a cause of pleasure, could it be acceptable? To this, He says: "by the eternal enemy of the knower." For the ignorant person, seeing desire as a friend at the time of enjoying objects, knows its hostility only when the suffering which is its effect is obtained, thinking "I have been made miserable by desire." But the knower knows even at the time of enjoyment, "I have been made to enter into disaster by this." Therefore, [unlike] the undiscriminating one who becomes miserable [later], for the knower, "by this" [desire, suffering is caused] both at the time of enjoyment and in its consequence; thus, it is his eternal enemy. The meaning is that it must certainly be killed by him.

Then, what is its nature? To this, He says: "by the kāmarūpa"—meaning kāma, wish, thirst—that alone is whose form; by that. By manifesting the relationship with "O Son of Kunti," He indicates affection.

[Objection:] "Even if it is to be abandoned by the discriminating, it might be acceptable for the undiscriminating?" To this, He says: "and by the duṣpūra (insatiable) anala (fire)." The letter 'ca' (and) is in the sense of a simile. Anala is that for which alam (sufficiency) does not exist, i.e., fire. Just as that [fire] cannot be filled [satisfied] by oblation (havis), so too this [desire] cannot be satisfied by enjoyment—this is the meaning. Therefore, because it is a cause of constant distress, it is to be abandoned even by the undiscriminating, just as by the discriminating. And so says the Smriti (Manu 2.94): "Desire is never pacified by the enjoyment of desires; rather, it increases even more, like fire (kṛṣṇavartma) by oblation." Alternatively, [anticipating the view:] "Desire ceases upon the attainment of the object; therefore desire, which is of the nature of a wish, will cease by itself through the enjoyment of the object; why the excessive insistence [on restraint] regarding it?"—to this, it is said "by the duṣpūra and the anala." Even though desire disappears temporarily upon the attainment of the object, because it appears again, the attainment of the object is not the dispeller of desire; but only the 'vision of defects' (doṣa-dṛṣṭi) in the object is so [the dispeller]—this is the purport.

O Son of Kunti!—[meaning] a devotee from the very root and worthy of My instruction—the knowledge of the "knower"—meaning one who knows his own true nature as being a part (aṃśa) of Me—is covered by that "eternal enemy" desire. And again, by "fire" (anala)—meaning the digestive fire (rasapācaka) situated in the belly, for by that too desire increases—[so] knowledge is covered by that which takes the form of desire. By what kind of fire? By the duṣpūra—that whose filling is done with difficulty (or pain).

Hence the saying: "All is conquered when the taste (rasa) is conquered."

Or, this is [simply] an adjective for desire itself.

Knowledge is covered by this "eternal enemy of the knower." For the knower knows indeed "already" (pūrvam eva) [before the result], "I have been engaged in disaster by this," and he becomes miserable constantly. Therefore, this is the eternal enemy of the knower, but not of the fool.

For he [the fool], viewing desire as a friend at the time of craving, knows "I have been rendered miserable by thirst" only when the suffering which is its effect is obtained, not beforehand. Therefore, it is the eternal enemy of the knower alone.

In what form? By kāmarūpa—desire (icchā) itself is its form, hence kāmarūpa; by that. By duṣpūra—its filling is done with difficulty (pain), hence duṣpūra; by that. And by anala—its alam, i.e., sufficiency, does not exist, hence anala; by that.

[Introduction to next verse]: What, then, is the abode (adhiṣṭhāna) of this desire, which is the enemy of the whole world in its capacity as the covering of knowledge? In anticipation of this [question], He speaks [the next verse]; for when the abode of the enemy is known, it can be destroyed with ease.

Indicating what was specified by the word "this" (etat), He clarifies the hostility. "Knowledge is covered"—this is clear.

And its quality of being fire (analatva) is because it is the cause of grief and distress (santāpa).

आवृतम् enveloped? ज्ञानम् wisdom? एतेन by this? ज्ञानिनः of the wise? नित्यवैरिणा by the constant enemy? कामरूपेण whose form is desire? कौन्तेय O Kaunteya? दुष्पूरेण unappeasable? अनलेन by fire? च and.Commentary Manu says? Desire can never be satiated or cooled down by the enjoyment ofobjects. But as fire blazes forth the more when fed with Ghee (melted butter) and wood? so it grows the more it feeds on the objects of enjoyment. If all the foodstuffs of the earth? all the precious metals? all the animals and all the beautiful women were to pass into the possession of one man endowed with desire? they would still fail to give him satisfaction.The ignorant man considers desire as his friend when he craves for objects. He welcomes desire for the gratification of the senses but the wise man knows from experience even before suffering the conseence that desire will bring only troubles and misery for him. So it is a constant enemy of the wise but not of the ignorant.

Jnanam, Knowledge; is avrtam, covered; etena, by this; nityavairina, constant enemy; jnaninah, of the wise. For the wise person knows even earlier, 'I am being induced by this into evil.' And he always [Both at the time when desire arises in him, and also when he is forced to act by it.] feels distressed. Therefore, it is the constant enemy of the wise but not of a fool. For the fool looks upon desire as a friend so long as hankering lasts. When sorrow comes as a conseence, he realizes, 'I have been driven into sorrow because of longings', but certainly not earlier. Therefore it is the constant enemy of the wise alone.
In what form? Kama-rupena, in the form of desire-tha which has wish itself as its expression is kama-rupa; in that form-; (and) duspurena, which is an insatiable; analena, fire. That which is difficult to satisfy is duspurah; and (derivatively) that which never has enough (alam) is analam.
Again, having what as its abode does desire, in the form of a viel over Knowledge, become the enemy of all? Since when the abode of an enemy is known, it is possible to easily slay the enemy, therefore the Lord says:

The knowledge, having the self for its subject, of this embodied person (the Jiva) whose nature is knowledge, is enveloped by this constant enemy in the shape of desire, which brings about attachment for sense-objects. This desire is difficult to satisfy, i.e., has for its object things unworthy of attainment and is insatiable, i.e., never attains satisfaction.
Now listen to what constitutes the instruments with which desire subdues the self. Sri Krsna goes on to expound this: