Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 4 - Shloka (Verse) 21

व्याख्या--'यतचित्तात्मा'-- संसारमें आशा या इच्छा रहनेके कारण ही शरीर, इन्द्रियाँ, मन आदि वशमें नहीं होते। इसी श्लोकमें 'निराशीः' पदसे बताया है कि कर्मयोगीमें आशा या इच्छा नहीं रहती। अतः उसके शरीर, इन्द्रियाँ और अन्तःकरण स्वतः वशमें रहते हैं। इनके वशमें रहनेसे उसके द्वारा व्यर्थकी कोई क्रिया नहीं होती। 'त्यक्तसर्वपरिग्रहः'-- कर्मयोगी अगर संन्यासी है, तो वह सब प्रकारकी भोग-सामग्रीके संग्रहका स्वरूपसे त्याग कर देता है। अगर वह गृहस्थ है, तो वह भोग-बुद्धिसे (अपने सुखके लिये) किसी भी सामग्रीका संग्रह नहीं करता। उसके पास जो भी सामग्री है उसको वह अपनी और अपने लिये न मानकर संसारकी और संसारके लिये ही मानता है तथा संसारके सुखमें ही उस सामग्रीको लगाता है। भोगबुद्धिसे संग्रहका त्याग करना तो साधकमात्रके लिये आवश्यक है।[ऐसा निवृत्तिपरक श्लोक गीतामें और कहीं नहीं आया है। छठे अध्यायके दसवें श्लोकमें ध्यानयोगीके लिये और अठारहवें अध्यायके तिरपनवें श्लोकमें ज्ञानयोगीके लिये परिग्रहका त्याग करनेकी बात आयी है। परन्तु उनसे भी ऊँची श्रेणीके परिग्रह-त्यागकी बात

वह केवल शरीरयात्राके लिये चेष्टा करनेवाला ज्ञाननिष्ठ यति इस लोक और परलोकके समस्त इच्छित भोगोंको आशासे रहित होनेके कारण इस लोक और परलोकके भोगरूप फल देनेवाले कर्मोंमें अपना कोई भी प्रयोजन न देखकर कर्मोंको और कर्मोंके साधनोंको त्यागकर मुक्त हो जाता है। इसी भावको दिखलानेके लिये ( अगला श्लोक ) कहते हैं जिसकी सम्पूर्ण आशाएँ दूर हो गयी हैं वह निराशीः है जिसने चित्त यानी अन्तःकरणको और आत्मा यानी बाह्य कार्यकरणके संघातरूप शरीरको इन दोनोंको भलीप्रकार अपने वशमें कर लिया है वह यतचित्तात्मा कहलाता है जिसने समस्त परिग्रहका अर्थात् भोगोंकी सामग्रीका सर्वथा त्याग कर दिया है वह त्यक्तसर्वपरिग्रह है। ऐसा पुरुष केवल शरीरस्थितिमात्रके लिये किये जानेवाले और अभिमानरहित कर्मोंको करता हुआ पापकोअर्थात् अनिष्टरूप पुण्य पाप दोनोंको नहीं प्राप्त होता। बन्धनकारक होनेसे धर्म भी मुमुक्षुके लिये तो पाप ही है। यहाँ शारीरं केवलं कर्म इस पदमें शरीरद्वारा होनेवाले कर्म शारीरिक कर्म माने गये हैं या शरीरनिर्वाहमात्रके लिये जानेवाले कर्म शारीरिक कर्म माने गये हैं चाहे शरीरद्वारा होनेवाले कर्म शारीरिक कर्म माने जायँ या शरीरनिर्वाहमात्रके लिये किये जानेवाले कर्म शारीरिक कर्म माने जायँ इस विवेचनसे क्या प्रयोजन है इसपर कहते हैं जो शरीरद्वारा होनेवाले कर्मोंका नाम शारीरिक कर्म मान लिया जाय तो इस लोकमें या परलोकमें फल देनेवाले निषिद्ध कर्मोंको भी शरीरद्वारा करता हुआ मनुष्य पापको प्राप्त नहीं होता ऐसा कहनेसे भगवान्के कथनमें विरुद्ध विधानका दोष आता है। और इस लोक या परलोकमें फल देनेवाले शास्त्रविहित कर्मोंको शरीरद्वारा करता हुआ मनुष्य पापको प्राप्त नहीं होता ऐसा कहनेसे भी बिना प्राप्त हुए दोषके प्रतिषेध करनेका प्रसङ्ग आ जाता है। तथा शारीरिक कर्म करता हुआ इस विशेषणसे और केवल शब्दके प्रयोगसे ( उपर्युक्त मान्यताके अनुसार ) भगवान्का यह कहना हो जाता है कि ( शरीरके सिवा ) मनवाणीद्वारा किये जानेवाले विहित और प्रतिषिद्ध कर्मोंको जो कि धर्म और अधर्म नामसे कहे जाते हैं करता हुआ मनुष्य पापको प्राप्त होता है। उसमें भी मनवाणीद्वारा विहित कर्मोंको करता हुआ पापको प्राप्त होता है यह कहना तो विरुद्ध विधान होगा और निषिद्ध कर्मोंको करता हुआ पापको प्राप्त होता है यह कहना अनुवादमात्र होनेसे व्यर्थ होगा। परंतु जब शरीरनिर्वाहमात्रके लिये किये जानेवाले कर्म शारीरिक कर्म मान लिये जायँगे तब इसका यह अर्थ हो जायगा कि इस लोक या परलोकके भोग ही जिनका प्रयोजन है जो विधिनिषेधात्मक शास्त्रोंद्वारा जाने जाते हैं जो शरीर मन या वाणीद्वारा किये जाते हैं ऐसे अन्य कर्मोंको न करता हुआ उन शरीर मन या वाणीसे केवल शरीरनिर्वाहके लिये आवश्यक कर्म लोकदृष्टिसे करता हुआ पुरुष किल्बिषको प्राप्त नहीं होता। यहाँ केवल शब्दके प्रयोगसे यह अभिप्राय है कि वह मैं करता हूँ इस अभिमानसे रहित होकर केवल लोकदृष्टिसे ही शरीर वाणी आदिकी चेष्टामात्र करता है। ऐसे पुरुषको पापरूप किल्बिष प्राप्त होना तो असम्भव है इसलिये यहाँ यह समझना चाहिये कि वह किल्बिषको यानी संसारको प्राप्त नहीं होता। ज्ञानरूप अग्निद्वारा उसके समस्त कर्मोंका नाश हो जानेके कारण वह बिना किसी प्रतिबन्धके मुक्त ही हो जाता है। यह पहले कहे हुए यथार्थ आत्मज्ञानके फलका अनुवादमात्र है। शारीरं केवलं कर्म इस वाक्यका इस प्रकार अर्थ मान लेनेसे वह अर्थ निर्दोष सिद्ध होता है।

He introduces the subsequent verse, preceded by the desire for the reason, with "yah punah" (but he who) etc. "The opposite of the previously described" means being independent of lokasangraha etc. If all possessions are renounced, the body's maintenance would be difficult? Anticipating this, He says "shariram" (body) etc.

Having thus refuted the interpretation of shariram as "action performed by the body," He shows the benefit in the second option (action for the sustenance of the body).

He indicates that the Knower does not engage in action from his own perspective even there, with "loka" (world) etc.

He states the intended meaning of "the Knower acting in the manner described does not acquire sin" with "evambhutasya" (of one who is such). The meaning is: one who does not perform actions accessible by injunctions and prohibitions, other than those necessary for body maintenance.

He concludes that the two qualifications, "shariram kevalam," are faultless [when understood in this sense].

If the Knower of the inactive Self remains untainted even while performing distracting actions like Darsha-purnamasa (rituals), how much more so the Yati (Sannyasin) who is free from distraction, whose effort is solely for the maintenance of the body, and who is dedicated to Knowledge—he does not acquire sin—with this intention, He speaks. Nirashih is one from whom desires (ashishah/trshna) have gone forth. Yatacittatma is one who has controlled the Chitta (mind) and Atman (the aggregate of internal and external agents/senses). Having abandoned all possessions, he performs merely 'bodily' action—meaning action for the sole purpose of bodily sustenance, like begging for food—without ego, even when seen from the world's perspective, and does not acquire kilbisham (sin/samsara, which includes dharma and adharma). For, even dharma is considered the form of kilbisha (sin) for the seeker of liberation, as it leads to bondage.

He states the means for abandoning desire (kama) etc., with "nirashih" (free from desires) etc.

The meaning is that one becomes free from desires by being yata-cittatma (controlled mind and self). Atman means Manah (mind).

Renunciation of possessions (parigraha-tyaga) means the absence of ego/ownership (anabhimana).

He states the intention of "naiva kiñcit karoti" (does nothing at all, 4.20) as "na apnoti kilbisham" (does not incur sin).

Objection: "Non-performance (inaction) is truly primary and superior to this secondary performance of action"—anticipating this, and emphasizing that non-performance is a cause of sin (pratyavāya) for the householder, He speaks by way of contrast (vyatireka) with "nirashih" (free from desires) etc.

The ascetic (sannyasin) who is without possessions—if he is nirashih (not even desiring yogic powers), and whose mind/intellect (citta) and self (atma—the aggregate of body/senses) are controlled—he performs shariram (bodily action) in the external awareness state, which is action solely for the purpose of bodily maintenance (e.g., begging for food). Even that, he performs without the ego of doership, acting with superimposed agency by others; he does not incur kilbisham (sin/demerit) arising from the non-performance of duties like Agnihotra, which are enjoined as lifelong obligations, because he has abandoned them by scriptural injunction.

But the saparigraha (householder with possessions), even if free from desires and self-controlled, while performing merely bodily action, does incur sin due to the non-performance of his prescribed duties—this is the meaning.

Nirashih is one from whom attachment to fruit (phalabhisandhih) has departed. Yatacittatma is one whose citta and mind are controlled. Tyaktasarvaparigrahah is one who is free from the sense of "mine" (mamata) toward Prakriti and its products, because the Self is his sole purpose. Such a person, performing merely bodily action throughout his life, does not acquire kilbisham (the cycle of Samsara).

The meaning is that he sees the Self through this form of pure Karma Yoga, which is free from the interruption of dedication to Knowledge (Jnana-nishtha).

Furthermore, "nirashih" (free from desires) etc. Nirashih is one from whom longings (ashishah/kamana) have departed. Yatacittatma is one whose mind (citta) and self (atma, meaning the body here) are restrained. Tyaktasarvaparigrahah is one who has abandoned all possessions.

Even when performing shariram (bodily) action—meaning action accomplished merely by the body, devoid of the insistence on doership—he does not acquire kilbisham (bondage).

In the case of the Yogarudha (the one established in yoga), even when performing spontaneous actions like begging for food, which are useful only for bodily maintenance, he does not incur kilbisham, which is the fault caused by the non-performance of enjoined duties.

He states the means for abandoning desire (kama) etc., with "nirashih" (free from desires) etc.

The meaning is that one becomes free from desires by being yata-cittatma (controlled mind and self).

Atman means Manah (mind).

Renunciation of possessions (parigraha-tyaga) means the absence of ego/ownership (anabhimana).

He states the intention of "naiva kiñcit karoti" (does nothing at all, 4.20)

as "na apnoti kilbisham"

(does not incur sin).

केवल शरीर द्वारा कर्म किए जाने से वासना के रूप में प्रतिक्रिया उत्पन्न नहीं हो सकती। वासनायें अन्तकरण में उत्पन्न होती हैं और उनकी उत्पत्ति का कारण कर्तृत्वाभिमान के साथ किए कर्म हैं। स्वार्थ के प्रबल होने पर ही ये वासनाएँ बन्धनकारक बनती हैं।आत्मा के साथ शरीर मन और बुद्धि इन अविद्याजनित उपाधियों के मिथ्या तादात्म्य से अहंकार उत्पन्न होता है। इस अहंकार की प्रतिष्ठा भविष्य की आशाओं तथा वर्तमान में प्राप्त विषयोपभोगजनित सन्तोष में है।इसलिए इस श्लोक में कहा गया है कि जो व्यक्ति (क) आशारहित है (ख) जिसने शरीर और मन को संयमित किया है (ग) जो सब परिग्रहों से मुक्त है उस व्यक्ति में इस मिथ्या अहंकार का कोई अस्तित्व शेष नहीं रह सकता। अहंकार के नष्ट होने पर केवल शरीर द्वारा किये गये कर्मों में यह सार्मथ्य नहीं होती कि वे अंतकरण में नये संस्कारों को उत्पन्न कर सकें।निद्रावस्था में किसी व्यक्ति के विवस्त्र हो जाने पर किसी प्रकार के अशोभनीय व्यवहार का आरोप नहीं किया जा सकता। निद्रा में यदि किसी व्यक्ति का पदाघात उसके अपने पुत्र को लगता है तो उस पर क्रूरता का आरोप भी नहीं हो सकता। क्योंकि उस समय शरीर में मैं नहीं था। इसका कारण है कि दोनों ही स्थितियों में व्यक्ति में कर्तृत्त्व का अभिमान नहीं था। अत स्पष्ट है कि सभी प्रकार के दुख कष्ट बन्धन आदि केवल कर्तृत्वाभिमानी जीव को ही होते हैं और उसके अभाव में शारीरिक कर्मों में मनुष्य को बांधने की क्षमता नहीं होती है।आत्मानुभवी सन्त पुरुष के कर्म उसे स्पर्श तक नहीं कर सकते क्योंकि वह उनका कर्ता ही नहीं है कर्म केवल उसके द्वारा व्यक्त होते हैं। ऐसा महान् पुरुष कर्मों का कर्त्ता नहीं वरन् ईश्वर की इच्छा को व्यक्त करने का सर्वोत्तम करण अथवा माध्यम है।यदि वीणा से मधुर संगीत व्यक्त नहीं हो रहा हो तो श्रोतागण उस वाद्य पर आक्रमण नहीं करते यद्यपि वीणा वादक भी सुरक्षित नहीं रह सकता है वीणा अपने आप मधुर ध्वनि को उत्पन्न नहीं करती परन्तु वादक की उंगलियों के स्पर्शमात्र से अपने में से संगीत को व्यक्त होने देती है। वादक की इच्छा और स्पर्श के अनुसार झुक जाने भर से उसका कर्त्तव्य समाप्त हो जाता है। अहंकार से रहित आत्मज्ञानी पुरुष भी वह श्रेष्ठतम माध्यम है जिसके द्वारा ईश्वर की इच्छा पूर्णरूप से प्रगट होती है। ऐसे पुरुष के कर्म उसके लिए पाप और पुण्य रूप बन्धन नहीं उत्पन्न कर सकते वह तो केवल माध्यम है।ज्ञानयोग में स्थित शरीर धारण के लिये आवश्यक कर्म करता हुआ पुरुष नित्य मुक्त ही है। भगवान् कहते हैं

Objection: "Non-performance (inaction) is truly primary and superior to this secondary performance of action"—anticipating this, and emphasizing that non-performance is a cause of sin (pratyavāya) for the householder, He speaks by way of contrast (vyatireka) with "nirashih" (free from desires) etc.

The ascetic (sannyasin) who is without possessions—if he is nirashih (not even desiring yogic powers), and whose Citta (mind/intellect) and Atman (body/senses aggregate) are controlled—meaning whose external and internal modifications are restrained in the state of samadhi—he performs shariram (bodily action) in the external awareness state, which is action solely for the purpose of bodily maintenance (e.g., begging for food).

Even that, he performs without the ego of doership, acting with superimposed agency by others; he does not incur kilbisham (sin/demerit) arising from the non-performance of lifelong duties like Agnihotra, because he has abandoned them by scriptural injunction.

But the saparigraha (householder with possessions), even if free from desires and self-controlled, while performing merely bodily action, does incur sin due to the non-performance of his prescribed duties—this is the meaning.

"The state of being free from desire (kama) etc., is expressed by the word 'nirashih'"—to this, He replies with "kama" etc. It is supplemented that "he becomes nirashih and tyaktasarvaparigrahah (one who has abandoned all possessions)."

The statement that "the body with senses is the self" is false, because the control of the inner self's modifications automatically achieves this control [of the outer self]—with this sentiment, He says "atma" etc.

Renunciation of possessions (parigraha-tyaga) means the absence of ego.

The interpretation of the previous verse, "even though engaged in action, he does nothing at all," as being due to the knowledge of the falsity of actions is incorrect (asat). Because the intention is described differently in this verse—with this sentiment, He says "naiva" etc.

The statement of this intention through secondary meaning (gauni vrtti) should be noted.

Since even Jyotishtoma and similar rituals, which are sources of extreme distraction, are rendered non-fruit-bearing by virtue of right knowledge, then minimal actions like begging, which are merely for body maintenance and non-distracting, certainly do not cause bondage—He states this by the Kaimutya Nyaya (a fortiori argument) with "nirashih" (devoid of desire) etc. Yatacittatma is one whose Citta (inner sense) and Atman (the body along with external senses) are restrained by Pratyahara (sense withdrawal).

Tyaktasarvaparigrahah is one who has abandoned all possessions (tools of enjoyment). Such a person, even by the force of prarabdha karma, performs shariram (bodily) action—which is action sanctioned by scripture for the ascetic (yati), whose sole purpose is body maintenance (e.g., begging for food, wearing minimal clothing)—and even that, he performs without the ego of doership, acting with superimposed agency by others; by the vision of the truly non-doer Self, he does not attain kilbisham, which is the undesired Samsara (cycle of rebirth), the result of dharma and adharma. For merit (punya) is also kilbisha (sin/harm) because it leads to an undesired result.

[He notes that the interpretation defining shariram as action performed by the body is rejected due to its flaws, as explained in the Bhashya.]

Objection: "Even in this way, action might certainly be binding if performed with an exalted intellect as mentioned in the action-mantras?" To this, He replies "nirashih" etc.

Nirashih is desireless. Yatacittatma is one whose senses and body are restrained. Tyaktasarvaparigrahah is one who has abandoned all possessions (cattle, sons, etc.),

where the word sarva also includes bodily pleasure.

Being such, performing kevala shariram karma (merely bodily action)—due to possessing a Brahmin's body, and due to the absence of fruit, treating it like bodily functions such as passing waste, and uttering the Lord's name for purification—he does not acquire kilbisham (bondage).

Nirashih is one from whom longings (ashishah) have departed. Yatacittatma is one who has controlled both the Citta (inner sense/mind) and the Atman (the outer aggregate of body and senses). Tyaktasarvaparigrahah is one who has abandoned all possessions.

Shariram (bodily) action is that whose sole purpose is bodily maintenance; performing this action, even kevalam (merely) and without ego (abhimana) even in that, he does not incur kilbisham, which is the undesired sin and dharma (merit). Dharma is also kilbisham for the seeker of liberation because it causes bondage. Therefore, he is freed from both of them; he is liberated from Samsara.

[The Siddhanti establishes:] However, when action whose sole purpose is body maintenance is intended, then without performing other actions for visible or invisible results (which are enjoined or prohibited, and accomplished by body, speech, and mind), and performing merely the efforts of the body, etc., which are only for body maintenance (due to the word kevalam) and without the ego of "I do" (due to being free from abhimana), he does not incur kilbisham. Since the acquisition of kilbisham (sin) is impossible for such a person, he does not attain Samsara; he is certainly liberated without obstruction—this is merely a statement of the result of the previously mentioned correct vision. Thus, the interpretation of "shariram kevalam karma" becomes faultless.

"Nirashih" (free from desire) etc. The seeker of the lower stage (Apakrshta-Adhikari), who is averse to desires for heaven etc., and whose mind and self (body) are controlled by Yoga. He who has abandoned all possessions, which is the worldly attitude (loka-bhava), performs action accomplished merely by the body, and does not perform actions caused by the ego of the self. Being such, performing action merely with the body due to the absence of ego etc., he does not acquire kilbisham (the sin called pratyavaya arising from that which is other than auspicious). Thus, akarmatvam (actionlessness) is established due to the absence of insistence on doership and the contemplation of Brahman. He performs action accomplished merely by the body, and does not perform actions caused by the ego of the self.

Here, only the superimposition (adhyasa) is removed, not the reality (svarupam), because he is situated within the phenomenal world.

निराशीः without hope? यतचित्तात्मा one with the mind and self controlled? त्यक्तसर्वपरिग्रहः having abandoned all covetousness? शारीरम् bodily? केवलम् merely? कर्म action? कुर्वन् doing? न not? आप्नोति obtains? किल्बिषम् sin.Commentary The liberated sage renounces all actions except what is necessary for the bare maintenance of the body. He has abandoned all possessions. He incurs no sin which will cause evil effects. For a man who thirsts for liberation (Mumukshu) even righteous activity (Dharma) is a sin as it causes bondage to Samsara. Dharma is a golden fetter for him. A golden fetter is also a fetter. A sage is liberated from both Dharma and Adharma? good and evil or virtue and vice. (Cf.III.7)

Nirasih, one who is without solicitation-one from whom asisah [Asih is a kind of desire that can be classed under prayer. (Some translate it as desire, hope.-Tr.)], solicitations, have departed; yata-citta-atma, who has the mind and organs under control-one by whom have been controlled (yatau) both the internal organ (citta) and the external aggregate of body and organs (atma); (and) is tyakta-sarva-parigrahah, [ Parigraha: receiving, accepting, possessions, belongings.-V.S.A] totally without possessions- one by whom have been renounced (tyaktah) all (sarvah) possessions (parigrahah); na apnoti, he does not incur; kilbisam, sin, in the form of evil as also rigtheousness-to one aspiring for Liberation, even righteousness is surely an evil because it brings bondage-; [Here Ast. adds tasmat tabhyam mukto bhavati samsarat mukto bhavati ityarthah, therefore, he becomes free from both of them, i.e. he becomes liberated from transmigration.-Tr.] kurvan, by performing; karma, actions; kevalam, merely; sariram, for the purpose of maintaining the body-without the idea of agenship even with regard to these (actions).
Further, in the expression, 'kevalam sariram karma', do the words sariram karma mean 'actions done by the body' or 'actions merely for the purpose of maintaining the body? Again, what does it matter if by (the words) sariram karma is meant 'actions done by the body' or 'actions merely for the purpose of maintaning the body?
The answer is: If by sariram karma is meant actions done by the body, then it will amount to a contradiction [Contradiction of the scriptures.] when the Lord says, 'one does not incur sin by doing with his body any action meant for seen or unseen purposes, even though it be prohibited.' Even if the Lord were to say that 'one does not incur sin by doing with his body some scripturally sanctioned action intended to secure a seen or an unseen end', then there arises the contingency of His denying something (some evil) that has not come into being!
(Further,) from the specification, sariram karma kurvan (by doing actions with the body), and from the use of the word kevala (only), it will amount to saying that one incurs sin by performing actions, called righteous and unrighteous, which can be accomplished with the mind and speech and which come within the purview of injunction and prohibition. Even there, the statement that one incurs sin by performing enjoined actions through the mind and speech will involve a contradiction; even in the case of doing what is prohibited, it will amount to a mere purposeless restatement of a known fact.
On the other hand, when the sense conveyed by sariram karma is taken as acctions merely for the purpose of maintaining the body, then the implication will be that he does not do any other work as can be accomplished physically, orally, or mentally, which are known from injunctions and prohibitions (of the scriptures) and which have in view seen or unseen results; while he appears to people to be working with those very body (speech) etc. merely for the purpose of maintaining the body, yet he does not incur sin by merely making movements of the body etc., because from the use of the word kevala, (merely) it follows that he is devoid of the sense of agentship implicit in the idea, 'I do.' Since there is no possibility of a person who has reached such a state incurring evil as suggest by the word sin, therefore he does not become subject to the evil of transmigration. That is to say, he certainly becomes free without any obstacle since he has all his actions burnt away by the fire of wisdom.
This verse is only a reiteration of the result of full illumination stated earlier. It becomes faultless by accepting the interpretation of sariram karma thus.
In the case of the monk who has renounced all possessions, since owning food etc. meant for the bare sustenance of the body is absent, therefore it becomes imperative to beg for alms etc. for the upkeep of the body. Under this circumstance, by way of pointing out the means of obtaining food etc. for the maintenance of the body of a monk as permitted by the text, 'What comes unasked for, without forethought and spontaneously৷৷.' [Unasked for: what comes before the monk gets ready for going out for alms; without forethought: alms that are not given with abuses, and have not fallen on the ground, but collected from five or seven houses without any plan; spontaneously: alms brought to one spontaneously by devoted people.] (Bo. Sm. 21. 8. 12) etc., the Lord says:

'Free from desire' means having no attachment to the fruits of actions. 'His intellect and mind controlled' means one whose intellect and mind are under control. 'Giving up all possessions' means one who, on account of his having the self as his primary objective, is devoid of the sense of ownership in relation to Prakrti and its derivatives. One who is thus engaged in bodily work alone as long as he lives, does not incur any sin, i.e., does not get engrossed in Samsara. He gets the vision of the self by Karma Yoga of this kind itself, and need not resort to any exlusive practice of Jnana Yoga in between liberation and the practice of Karma Yoga of the alone description.