Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 4 - Shloka (Verse) 37

व्याख्या--'यथैधांसि समिद्धोऽग्निर्भस्मसात् कुरुतेऽर्जुन'--पीछेके श्लोकमें भगवान्ने ज्ञानरूपी नौकाके द्वारा सम्पूर्ण पाप-समुद्रको तरनेकी बात कही। उससे यह प्रश्न पैदा होता है कि पापसमुद्र तो शेष रहता ही है, फिर उसका क्या होगा? अतः भगवान् पुनः दूसरा दृष्टान्त देते हुए कहते हैं कि जैसे प्रज्वलित अग्नि काष्ठादि सम्पूर्ण ईंधनोंको इस प्रकार भस्म कर देती है कि उनका किञ्चिन्मात्र भी अंश शेष नहीं रहता, ऐसे ही ज्ञानरूप अग्नि सम्पूर्ण पापोंको इस प्रकार भस्म कर देती है कि उनका किञ्चिन्मात्र भी अंश शेष नहीं रहता।

ज्ञान पापको किस प्रकार नष्ट कर देता है सो दृष्टान्तसहित कहते हैं हे अर्जुन जैसे अच्छी प्रकारसे प्रदीप्त यानी प्रज्वलित हुआ अग्नि ईंधनको अर्थात् काष्ठके समूहको भस्मरूप कर देता है वैसे ही ज्ञानरूप अग्नि सब कर्मोंको भस्मरूप कर देता है अर्थात् निर्बीज कर देता है। क्योंकि ईंधनकी भाँति ज्ञानरूप अग्नि कर्मोंको साक्षात् भस्मरूप नहीं कर सकता इसलिये इसका यही अभिप्राय है कि यथार्थ ज्ञान सब कर्मोंको निर्बीज करनेका हेतु है। जिस कर्मसे शरीर उत्पन्न हुआ है वह फल देनेके लिये प्रवृत्त हो चुका इसलिये उसका नाश तो उपभोगद्वारा ही होगा। यह युक्तिसिद्ध बात है। अतः इस जन्ममें ज्ञानकी उत्पत्तिसे पहले और ज्ञानके साथसाथ किये हुए एवं पुराने अनेक जन्मोंमें किये हुए जो कर्म अभीतक फल देनेके लिये प्रवृत्त नहीं हुए हैं उन सब कर्मोंको ही ज्ञानाग्नि भस्म करता है ( प्रारब्धकर्मोंको नहीं )।

Anticipating the doubt that even when Knowledge exists, merit (Dharma) and demerit (Adharma) are perceived, so how can there be cessation from them? He introduces the next verse to show by an example that Knowledge is the remover of Dharma and Adharma with "Jnanam" (Knowledge) etc. He illustrates the distinction between the remover and the non-remover through the division of the fit and the unfit object with "Yatha" (Just as). He states the subject illustrated (Darshtantika) in accordance with the example with "Jnanagnih" (Fire of Knowledge). Intending that even regarding a fit object, the burning capacity of fire depends on the absence of obstacles, he qualifies it with "Samyak" (Well/Properly). He explains the subject illustrated with "Jnanameva" (Knowledge itself...).

[Objection:] "Why is it not said that Knowledge burns action directly? Why is the explanation given that 'it renders action seedless'?" [Reply:] Anticipating this, he says "Na hi" (Not indeed...). In the world, the capacity of knowledge is seen to be in removing the ignorance covering its object (prameya); therefore, the knowledge of the immutable Brahman-Self also, while removing that ignorance, removes the delusion of doership born of it, which is the seed of action. And when that [delusion] is removed, actions cannot remain. It is not that Knowledge is the direct remover of actions, for the universal rule (Vyapti) is that knowledge is the remover of ignorance only; and if that [ignorance] is not removed, the rise of action is again possible—this is the meaning.

Since Knowledge is not the direct remover of action, he states the conclusion with "Tasmat" (Therefore...). [Objection:] "If Right Knowledge is accepted as the remover of action through the removal of the root Ignorance, then there arises the contingency of the removal of even the action that has begun to bear fruit (Prarabdha-karma), so the fall of the body would occur at the very moment of the rise of Knowledge." [Reply:] To this, he says "Samarthyat" (Due to capacity/force...). If the body were removed at the same time as the rise of Knowledge, the Lord's intention that "Knowledge taught by Seers of Truth is fruitful" would be contradicted [since no teacher would remain]; therefore, because the availability of a teacher would otherwise be inexplicable, Knowledge does not destroy the "trace of ignorance" (ajnana-lesha) which sustains the action that has begun to bear fruit—this is the meaning.

[Objection:] "How then is the action that has begun to bear fruit destroyed?" [Reply:] He says "Yena" (By which/By enjoyment...). [Objection:] "Then how is it said that the fire of Knowledge reduces all actions to ashes?" [Reply:] He says "Atah" (Therefore...). Since the removal of actions that have begun to bear fruit is inexplicable by Knowledge, Knowledge removes all those actions whose fruits have not begun (Anarabdha-phala)—those performed in this very birth prior to the rise of Knowledge, those present along with Knowledge, and those accumulated in many past births—by removing their cause; this is the meaning.

[Objection:] "By the statement 'You will cross over by the boat of Knowledge,' the capacity of Knowledge to destroy sin has not been conveyed [only crossing over is mentioned]?" [Reply:] Anticipating this, and intending that "Knowledge destroys sin and does not leave a remainder; that very destruction is the crossing over," He speaks with an example. "Yatha"—Just as—"Edhamsi," i.e., pieces of wood/fuel, "Samyag-diptah"—well-kindled—fire reduces to "Bhasmasat"—the state of ashes. So indeed does the fire of Knowledge—"Jnanagnih"—reduce all actions to the state of ashes. The meaning is that it renders them seedless.

Addressing him as "Arjuna" (White/Pure), He implies that such Knowledge is obtained only by one of pure mind, not by another. Or, He implies that Knowledge, having burnt all actions, leads to the "Pure" (Shuddha) Brahman. Or, implying "Having reduced all actions to ashes by such Knowledge, become one whose name is meaningful [Arjuna = bright/victorious]," He says "Arjuna." The purport is that Right Vision (Samyag-darshana) is the cause of the seedlessness of all actions except the Prarabdha actions.

Because Prarabdha actions—whose fruits have begun—are exhausted only by enjoyment. "Tasmat"—Therefore, it reduces to ashes "Sarvani"—all actions whose fruits have not begun (apravritta-phala): those accumulated in many past births, those performed in this birth prior to the rise of Knowledge, and those belonging to the time of practicing the means of the fire of Knowledge. It should be understood that for actions occurring after Knowledge, there is "non-connection" (asambandha). And so are the Sutras of the Lord Badarayana (Vyasa): "Upon the attainment of that, there is non-clinging and destruction of the later and earlier sins, because of such declaration" (Brahma Sutra 4.1.13); "Of the other [merit] also there is thus non-clinging, but upon death" (4.1.14); "But only those former works whose effects have not begun, because that is the limit" (4.1.15); "But having exhausted the others [Prarabdha] by enjoyment, he attains" (4.1.19). Since action is for the sake of fruit, its exhaustion without giving fruit is impossible. [Prima Facie View:] "Upon the attainment of Brahman, the sin (Durita) yielding contrary fruit is not destroyed." [Conclusion:]

Upon "Tad-adhigama"—the attainment/realization of that [Brahman]—there is "Ashlesha"—non-clinging or non-connection—of the "Uttara agha" (later sin), and destruction of the "Purva" (earlier sin). Why? "Tad-vyapadeshat"—because their non-clinging and destruction are declared by Srutis. Such as: "Just as water does not cling to a lotus leaf, so evil action does not cling to one who knows thus"; "Just as the soft fiber of Isika grass thrown into fire is burnt, so indeed are all his sins burnt"; "The knot of the heart is broken, all doubts are cut asunder, and his actions perish when He who is both high and low is seen" (Mundaka 2.2.8).

[Objection:] "Dharma (merit) is scriptural, so there should be no contradiction with scriptural Knowledge?" [Reply:] He says [re: BS 4.1.14]: Of the "Itara"—the other, i.e., meritorious action—also, "Evam"—just like sin, there is non-clinging and destruction. Why? Because it too, being the cause of its own fruit, has the contingency of being an obstacle to Knowledge [Liberation]. In Srutis like "He crosses both these [merit and demerit] right here," the destruction of the good deed is also stated for one having bad deeds. And regarding the destruction of action caused by the realization of the non-doer Self, there is equality between merit and demerit. Also, "His actions perish" is a general statement (avishesha-shruti). Even where only the word "Papma" (sin) is read, it should be seen that merit is also included by it; because its fruit is inferior compared to Knowledge. The word "Tu" (But) [in the Sutra] has the meaning of emphasis ("Eva"). Thus, since the non-clinging and destruction of merit and demerit—the causes of bondage—are established by the power of Knowledge, Liberation upon the fall of the body of the Knower is certain; this is the meaning.

[Objection:] There, hearing the specific Sruti "He crosses both these right here," it is inferred that there is destruction of both Arabdha-karya (Prarabdha) and Anarabdha-karya (Sanchita/Agami) without distinction. [Reply:] He refutes this [re: BS 4.1.15]: "Anarabdha-karye"—Only those former merits and demerits whose fruits have not begun—accumulated in other births and also in this birth prior to the rise of Knowledge—are destroyed by that Attainment; but not the "Arabdha-karye"—those by which this birth, which is the abode for [attaining] Brahma-knowledge, was constructed. Why? From the Sruti "For him, there is delay only as long as he is not liberated [from the body]; then he attains" (Chandogya 6.14.2), the attainment of well-being is stated as having the fall of the body as its limit.

[Objection:] "By the force of the Reality—the realization of the non-doer Self—why are even Prarabdha actions not destroyed? Just as the seed-power is destroyed upon contact with fire?" [Reply:] It is said: The rise of the realization of Truth is not possible without depending on the reservoir of action that has begun to bear fruit (Arabdha-karya). And when that is depended upon, just like a potter's wheel, since it is impossible to stop the active momentum in the middle, there is the maintenance of the momentum until it is exhausted. Even though sublated (badhita) by the realization of the non-doer Self, the false knowledge (Mithya-jnana)—which is the substratum of action—continues indeed for some time due to Samsara (latent impression), like the perception of [inverted] trees in water. The destruction of merits and demerits whose effects have not begun is stated to be by the power of Knowledge; "Itare tu"—but the others, the Prarabdha ones—having exhausted them by enjoyment, he attains Brahman. This is based on Srutis like "For him only so long..." and "Being Brahman indeed, he merges into Brahman."

"Yatha" etc. "Edhamsi" means pieces of wood.

"Karmani" means [all] actions other than Prarabdha.

Just as a well-kindled fire [reduces] a heap of fuel [to ashes], so does the fire in the form of the knowledge of the true nature of the Self reduce to ashes the accumulation of manifold actions belonging to the individual soul (Jivatma), which has continued from beginningless time.

Dispelling the delusion that "there is merely a crossing over of sin which exists like an ocean, but not the destruction of sin" by means of an example, He says "Yatha" (Just as).

Just as a blazing fire reduces "Edhamsi," i.e., pieces of wood, to the state of ashes, so does the fire in the form of Self-knowledge reduce all actions—except the Prarabdha karma (actions that have begun to bear fruit)—to ashes; this is the meaning.

[Objection:] "How can a single thing be the remover of infinite sins accumulated from beginningless time? And because of statements like 'Action does not perish without being enjoyed even in hundreds of crores of Kalpas' (Brahmavaivarta Purana 26.70), being the remover of the essential nature of sin is illogical; it [Knowledge] might only cause delay." Anticipating this doubt, it is said "Yatha edhamsi" (Just as fuel...) etc.

The example of crossing the ocean is not opposed to re-entry [into the ocean]; but by the example of reducing wood to ashes, even the contingency of [actions] producing effects again is negated. "Bhasmasat kurute"—makes them reduced to ashes; the meaning is it renders them incapable of producing effects.

Regarding "Samiddhah" (kindled/blazing)—to indicate the capacity to burn everything, the meaning of the prefix and the root is expressed [in Ramanuja's commentary] as "Samyak pravriddha" (well-grown/blazing). "Edhamsi" (fuels)—this plural number indicates the intention that one [fire] is the remover of many; he [Ramanuja] shows this with "Indhana-sanchayam" (heap of fuel).

From the statement "Sarvakarmani" (all actions), it is understood that it is the remover even of specific worldly merits (Punya) which stand as obstacles. The statement "Nabhuktam" (Not without being enjoyed...) refers to other contexts; otherwise, the scriptures on atonement (Prayashchitta) would be angry [i.e., rendered useless]—this is the purport.

यह दृष्टान्त सुपरिचित तथा अत्यन्त उपयुक्त है। ईन्धन की लकड़ियों का आकारप्रकार या रंग कुछ भी हो जब उन्हें अग्निकुण्ड में डाला जाता है तब सब का अन्तिम परिणाम एक ही होता है भस्म। उस भस्म के ढेर से हम विभिन्न लकड़ियों की राख को अलगअलग नहीं कर सकते। उनका मूलरूप सर्वथा नष्ट हो जाता है। इसी प्रकार पाप और पुण्य जो भी और जितने भी कर्म हैं वे सब ज्ञानाग्नि में भस्मीभूत हो जाते है। उनका पूर्व का कार्यकारण रूप नष्ट हो जाता है।कर्म फल प्रदान करते हैं। परन्तु सभी कर्म एक साथ ही फलदायी नहीं हो सकते। नियमानुसार जब वे परिपक्व हो जाते हैं तभी उनका फल प्राप्त होने लगता हैं। अनादि काल से जीव कर्तृत्व का अभिमान करके अनेक कर्मों को करता आ रहा है। इसीलिये उसे अनेक प्रकार के शरीर भी धारण करने पड़ते हैं। इन कर्मों का फलोपभोग आवश्यक होता है।शास्त्रों में इन कर्मों का वर्गीकरण तीन भागों में किया गया है (क) संचितअर्जित किये कर्म जो अभी फलदायी नहीं हुए हैं (ख) प्रारब्ध जिन्होंने फल देना प्रारम्भ कर दिया है तथा (ग) आगामी अर्थात् जिन कर्मों का फल भविष्य में मिलेगा। इस श्लोक में सब कर्मों से तात्पर्य संचित और आगामी कर्मों से है।इसलिये

To clarify what was stated as "Sarvam karmakhilam" (all action entirely - verse 33), He explains "Sarvam karma" (all action) by the first verse [36], saying that unrighteousness (Adharma) also perishes; and He explains "Akhilam" (entirely) by the second verse [37]—beginning with "Yatha"—indicating that not even a trace of latent impression (Samskara) remains.

Regarding "Susamiddhah" (well-kindled): The purport is that one should strive in such a way that the fire of Knowledge becomes well-kindled through the bond of firmness of understanding born of practice.

[Objection:] "Crossing like an ocean implies actions might not be destroyed?" Anticipating this doubt, He states another example with "Yatha" (Just as). Just as "Samiddhah"—blazing—fire reduces "Edhamsi"—pieces of wood—to "Bhasmasat"—to the state of ashes; O Arjuna, the "Jnanagnih" (Fire of Knowledge) reduces "Sarvakarmani"—all actions, sins and merits without distinction, except those whose fruits have begun (Prarabdha-phala)—to ashes "Tatha" (so); meaning it destroys them by the destruction of their cause, Ignorance.

And so is the Shruti: "The knot of the heart is broken, all doubts are cut asunder, and his actions perish when He who is both high and low is seen." And in the Sutras: "Upon attainment of that, there is non-clinging and destruction of later and earlier sins..." (BS 4.1.13) and "Of the other [merit] also there is thus non-clinging..." (BS 4.1.14).

Regarding the point that only unbegun merits and demerits perish, the Sutra is: "But only those former works whose effects have not begun..." (BS 4.1.15).

However, for those [actions] which initiated the body that produced Knowledge, destruction occurs only at the end of that body; because of the Shruti "For him, the delay is only so long..." and the Sutra "But having exhausted the others by enjoyment, he attains" (BS 4.1.19).

But for "Adhikarikas" (those holding cosmic offices), the very same actions that initiated the body producing Knowledge are also the initiators of other bodies [to fulfill the office]. As in the case of Vasistha, Apantaratamas, etc. And so is the Sutra: "Those holding offices exist as long as the office lasts" (BS 3.3.32).

"Office" (Adhikara) is a powerful Prarabdha karma that initiates multiple bodies. And that applies only to Upasakas (great meditators), not others.

Unbegun actions perish, but those that have begun remain until the completion of enjoyment. Whether enjoyment is through one body or many, there is no difference. Detailed elaboration should be seen in the source texts.

By describing sin as an "ocean" and Knowledge as a "boat"—since the former is not small (huge) and unfathomable, and the latter is small and situated in the midst of it—there might be a possibility of sinking at some point. Therefore, He states an example regarding the capacity of a small entity to eliminate a huge object with "Yatha edhamsi" etc.

O Arjuna, just as fire, even if much smaller than the wood, when "Samiddhah"—well-kindled/fueled—reduces "Edhamsi" (wood) to ashes; so does the "Jnanagnih"—the fire of Knowledge—reduce all actions to ashes; meaning it makes them like ashes, incapable of generating the enjoyment of their fruits in the future.

Just as "Edhamsi"—pieces of wood—are reduced to "Bhasmasat"—to the state of ashes—by "Samiddhah"—well-kindled/blazing—fire; O Arjuna, "Jnanagnih"—Knowledge itself as fire—reduces all actions to ashes "Tatha" (similarly); meaning it renders them seedless.

Indeed, the fire of Knowledge cannot literally burn actions to ashes like fuel. Therefore, the intention is that Right Vision (Samyag-darshana) is the cause of the seedlessness of all actions.

Due to the force [of momentum], the action by which the body was begun has already started bearing fruit, so it is exhausted only by enjoyment. Therefore, it reduces to ashes all those actions whose fruits have not begun (Apravritta-phala)—those performed before the rise of Knowledge, those performed along with Knowledge, and those performed in many past lives.

[Objection:] "Since Knowledge is extremely small—being weak and described as a 'boat'—compared to the great Sin?" Anticipating this doubt, He describes the strength (prabalatva) of Knowledge through the example of fire with "Yatha" (Just as).

Blazing fire and Knowledge are strong.

"Sarvakarmani"—[It burns] all actions, light or heavy, accumulated at the time of its own origin.

However, there is no burning of the Prarabdha actions because they are not "born/accumulated at the time of its own origin" [they are already active]; otherwise, Knowledge itself would not exist [as the body would fall].

Regarding this, "But only those former works whose effects have not begun..." (Brahma Sutra 4.1.15) is the authoritative aphorism (Tattva-sutra).

यथा as? एधांसि fuel? समिद्धः blazing? अग्निः fire? भस्मसात्कुरुते reduces to ashes? अर्जुन O Arjuna? ज्ञानाग्निः fire of knowledge? सर्वकर्माणि all actions? भस्मसात्कुरुते reduces to ashes? तथा so.Commentary Just as the sees that are roasted cannot germinate? so also the actions that are burnt by the fire of knowledge cannot bear fruits? i.e.? cannot bring man to this world again for the enjoyment of the fruits of his actions. This is reducing actions to ashes. The actions lose their potency as they are burnt by the fire of knowledge. When the knowledge of the Self dawns? all actions with their results are burnt by the fire of that knowledge just as fuel is burnt by the fire. When there is no agencymentality (the idea I do this)? when there is no desire for the fruits? action is no action at all. It has lost its potency. The fire of knowledge can burn all actions except the Prarabdha Karma? or the result of the past action which has brought this body into existence and which has thus already begun to bear fruits or produce effects.According to some philosophers even the Prarabdha Karma is destroyed by the fire of knowledge. Sri Sankara says in his AparokshanubhutiIn the passage his actions are destroyed when the Supreme is realised the Veda expressly speaks of actions (Karmas) in the plural? in order to signify the destruction of even the Prarabdha.There are three kinds of Karmas or reaction to or fructification of past actions (1) Prarabdha? so much of the past actions as has given rise to the present birth? (2) Sanchita? the balance of the past actions that will give rise to future births -- the storehouse of accumulated actions? and (3) Agami or Kriyamana? acts being done in the present life. If by the knowledge of the Self only the Sanchita and Agami were destroyed and not Prarabdha? the dual number would have been used and not the plural. (Sanskrit grammar has singular? dual and plural numbers). (Cf.IV.1019)

O Arjuna, yatha, as; a samiddhah, blazing; agnih, fire, a well lighted fire; kurute, reduces; edhamsi, pieces of wood; bhasmasat, to ashes; tatha, similarly; jnanagnih, the fire of Knowledge-Knowledge itself being the fire; kurute, reduces; bhasmasat, to ashes; sarva-karmani, all actions, i.e. it renders them ineffective, for the fire of Knowledge itself cannot directly [Knowledge destroys ignorance, and thery the idea of agentship is eradicated. This in turn makes actions impossible.] burn actions to ashes, like pieces of wood. So, the idea implied is that full enlightenment is the cuase of making all actions impotent.
From the force the context [If the body were to die just with the dawn of Knowledge, imparting of Knowledge by enlightened persons would be impossible, and thus there would be no teacher to transmit Knowledge!] it follows that, since the result of actions owing to which the present body has been born has already become effective, therefore it gets eshausted only through experiencing it. Hence, Knowledge reduces to ashes only all those actions that were done (in this life) prior to the rise of Knowledge and that have not become effective, as also those performed along with (i.e. after the dawn of) Knowledge, and those that were done in the many past lives.
Since this is so, therefore,

The fire of knowledge concerning the real nature of the self reduces to ashes the collection of endless Karmas accumulated from beginningless times, just as a well-kindled fire reduces to ashes a bundle of firewood.