Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 6 - Shloka (Verse) 40

व्याख्या--[जिसको अन्तकालमें परमात्माका स्मरण नहीं होता उसका कहीं पतन तो नहीं हो जाता--इस बातको लेकर अर्जुनके हृदयमें बहुत व्याकुलता है। यह व्याकुलता भगवान्से छिपी नहीं है। अतः भगवान् अर्जुनके कां गतिं कृष्ण गच्छति इस प्रश्नका उत्तर देनेसे पहले ही अर्जुनके हृदयकी व्याकुलता दूर करते हैं।]
'पार्थ नैवेह नामुत्र विनाशस्तस्य विद्यते'--हे पृथानन्दन! जो साधक अन्तसमयमें किसी कारणवश योगसे, साधनसे विचलित हो गया है, वह योगभ्रष्ट साधक मरनेके बाद चाहे इस लोकमें जन्म ले, चाहे परलोकमें जन्म ले, उसका पतन नहीं होता (गीता 6। 41 45)। तात्पर्य है कि उसकी योगमें जितनी स्थिति बन चुकी है, उससे नीचे वह नहीं गिरता। उसकी साधन-सामग्री नष्ट नहीं होती। उसका पारमार्थिक उद्देश्य नहीं बदलता। जैसे अनादिकालसे वह जन्मता-मरता रहा है, ऐसे ही आगे भी जन्मता-मरता रहे--उसका यह पतन नहीं होता।
जैसे भरत मुनि भारतवर्षका राज्य छोड़कर एकान्तमें तप करते थे। वहाँ दयापरवश होकर वे हरिणके बच्चेमें आसक्त हो गये, जिससे दूसरे जन्ममें उनको हरिण बनना पड़ा। परन्तु उन्होंने जितना त्याग, तप किया था, उनकी जितनी साधनकी पूँजी इकट्ठी हुई थी, वह उस हरिणके जन्ममें भी नष्ट नहीं हुई। उनको हरिणके जन्ममें भी पूर्वजन्मकी बात याद थी, जो कि मनुष्यजन्ममें भी नहीं रहती। अतः वे (हरिण-जन्ममें) बचपनसे ही अपनी माँके साथ नहीं रहे। वे हरे पत्ते न खाकर सूखे पत्ते खाते थे। तात्पर्य यह है कि अपनी स्थितिसे न गिरनेके कारण हरिणके जन्ममें भी उनका पतन नहीं हुआ (श्रीमद्भागवत, स्कन्ध 5, अध्याय 7 8)। इसी तरहसे पहले मनुष्यजन्ममें जिनका स्वभाव सेवा करनेका, जप-ध्यान करनेका रहा है, और विचार अपना उद्धार करनेका रहा है वे किसी कारणवश अन्तसमयमें योगभ्रष्ट हो जायँ तथा इस लोकमें पशु-पक्षी भी बन जायँ, तो भी उनका वह अच्छा स्वभाव और सत्संस्कार नष्ट नहीं होते। ऐसे बहुत-से उदाहरण आते हैं कि कोई दूसरे जन्ममें हाथी, ऊँट आदि बन गये, पर उन योनियोंमें भी वे भगवान्की कथा सुनते थे। एक जगह कथा होती थी, तो एक काला कुत्ता आकर वहाँ बैठता और कथा सुनता। जब कीर्तन करते हुए कीर्तन-मण्डली घूमती, तो उस मण्डलीके साथ वह कुत्ता भी घूमता था। यह हमारी देखी हुई बात है।

श्रीभगवान् बोले हे पार्थ उस योगभ्रष्ट पुरुषका इस लोकमें या परलोकमें कहीं भी नाश नहीं होता है। पहलेकी अपेक्षा हीनजन्मकी प्राप्तिका नाम नाश है सो ऐसी अवस्था योगभ्रष्टकी नहीं होती। क्योंकि हे तात शुभ कार्य करनेवाला कोई भी मनुष्य दुर्गतिको अर्थात् नीच गतिको नहीं पाता। पिता पुत्ररूपसे आत्माका विस्तार करता है अतः उसको तात कहते हैं तथा पिता ही पुत्ररूपसे उत्पन्न होता है अतः पुत्रको भी तात कहते हैं। शिष्य भी पुत्रके तुल्य है इसलिये उसको भी तात कहते हैं।

Removing the fear regarding the Yogi's ruin, He gives the answer—'Sri Bhagavan' etc. Regarding the statement that the Yogi fallen from both paths perishes, He says—'Partha' etc. He states the reason for that with—'Naiva iha' (Not indeed here).

For the Yogi fallen from both paths, there is no 'worldly' ruin—characterized by the censure of wise men—because of the presence of faith etc. Nevertheless, raising the doubt "How is there an absence of other-worldly ruin?", and having defined the nature of that (ruin), He asserts its absence—with 'Nasho' (destruction) etc. He analyzes the reason-portion with 'Na hi' etc.

Even for one fallen from both, 'being a doer of good' (Shubhakrit) is justified due to the presence of faith, control of senses etc., and the partially performed hearing (of scriptures) etc. 'Tata'—How is the disciple, who is in the place of a son, addressed as such, since the word 'Tata' applies to the father? Anticipating this, he explains—'Tanoti' (he extends/propagates). (The father extends himself as the son), therefore addressing the disciple, who is in the place of a son, as 'Tata' is not contradictory—this is the meaning.

He does not go to a despiseable state because he is a doer of good; thus, there is absence of ruin.

Thus requested by Arjuna for the removal of doubt, in order to cut it, the Blessed Lord said—'Partha' etc. For that person fallen from Yoga, 'Vinasha' (destruction/ruin)—meaning attainment of a birth lower than the previous one 'Iha' (in this world), or attainment of hell 'Amutra' (in the other world)—does not exist. 'Hi'—because, a 'Kalyanakrit'—doer of good—never goes to, i.e., attains, a bad state.

He 'extends' (Tanoti) himself in the form of a son, therefore the father is called 'Tata'. The father himself is born in the form of the son, therefore the son is also called 'Tata'. Since a disciple is also equal to a son, He says 'O Tata'.

"In this there is no loss of effort... even a little of this duty saves from great fear" (Gita 2.40)—this statement of Mine, which is a pointer, has been forgotten by you due to 'womanly nature' (implied by matronymic) because of small-mindedness, and thus you have asked—this is implied by the address 'Partha' (Son of Pritha). Nevertheless, being a disciple and thus equal to a son, you are to be instructed by Me again and again in detail—to suggest this, the word 'Tata' is used.

As for (the interpretation of some who say) that the word 'pravrittasya' (of one engaged) remains to be supplied to 'iha amutra' (here and hereafter); and thus the meaning is "of one 'engaged' in the means for the fruit 'here' which is liberating knowledge, and the fruit 'hereafter' which is heaven etc."—that is not correct. Because, when the proper meaning of the sentence is established by the manner stated in the Bhashya, assuming figurative meaning (Lakshana) or supplying words (Adhyahara) is futile.

Here, in answer, the Lord said—'Partha' etc. He addresses him as 'O Tata' out of affection.

His ruin 'Iha' (here)—meaning attainment of a low womb/species, and ruin 'Amutra' (hereafter)—meaning attainment of hell; neither of those two occurs.

'Hi'—because, a doer of good never attains a bad state.

The Blessed Lord said—For one who has commenced Yoga with faith and (then) fallen from it, there is no destruction 'Iha' (here) and 'Amutra' (hereafter). The meaning is: Destruction—in the form of non-attainment of the desired objects in the experience of material joys like heaven etc. and in the experience of Brahman, and (destruction) in the form of attainment of the undesirable known as 'Pratyavaya' (sin/adverse consequence)—does not exist.

For indeed, no one who performs Yoga, which is of the nature of unsurpassable good, goes to a bad state even in the three times (past, present, or future).

Regarding how he will be (what happens to him), He says (in the next verse).

Here, in answer, the Blessed Lord spoke with four and a half verses beginning with 'Partha'.

Ruin 'in this world'—meaning fallen status due to falling from both (Karma and Yoga); and ruin 'Amutra' (in the other world)—meaning attainment of hell; neither of those exists for him.

Because a 'Kalyanakrit'—a doer of good—never goes to a bad state. And this (Yogi) is a doer of good because he engaged in Yoga with faith.

He addresses him as 'Tata' (Dear one), showing affection according to worldly custom.

Now, He refutes the state of being 'fallen from both' through the connection with both human goals—with 'Partha' etc. He states the two forms referred to by 'Tasya' (of him)—with 'Shraddhaya' (by faith) etc. Avoiding the interpretation of the words 'Iha' (here) and 'Amutra' (hereafter) as referring merely to the earth and heaven etc., he states what is intended here—with 'Prakrita' (material) etc. Just as for a seeker of liberation (Mumukshu), even merit (Punya) is categorized as sin (Papa - because it binds), similarly for him (the Yogi), even heaven etc. are fit to be designated by the word 'Iha' (here/worldly) and are consistent with the context—this is the idea.

The word 'Vinasha' (destruction) comprehends everything stated earlier in "There is no loss of effort here... nor is there any adverse consequence (Pratyavaya)" (2.40)—this he states with 'Pratyavaya' etc. To imply that the word 'Kalyana' (good) here results in the specific subject at hand (Yoga), he says 'Niratishaya' (unsurpassable) etc.

By the instruction 'Gacchati' (goes) in the continuous present tense, 'even in the three times' is implied. Because it is achievable by infinite merits accumulated over many times, there is an absence of evil deeds even in the past; presently there is engagement in Yoga which is unsurpassable good; and subsequently (in the future) too, there is attainment of meritorious worlds, perfection of Yoga, Liberation, etc.; therefore, 'Durgati' (bad state) is impossible in all three times. 'Durgati' means hell or simply an undesirable state. 'Hi' is used in the sense of reason or well-known fact. The idea is that the attainment of a bad state by anyone who has commenced Yoga, at any time, is not established by any valid means of knowledge (Pramana).

अपने उत्तर के प्रारम्भ में ही भगवान् स्पष्ट आश्वासन देते हैं कि कोई भी शुभ कर्म करने वाला न इहलोक में और न परलोक में दुर्गति को प्राप्त होता है।भगवान् का यह कथन किसी अन्धविश्वास पर आधारित मात्र भावुक आश्वासन नहीं है अथवा न किसी देवदूत के माध्यम से दिया गया दैवी आदेश है जिसे धर्मपारायण लोगों को स्वीकार ही करना है। मनुष्य की बुद्धि एवं तर्क के विरुद्ध किसी भी मत को हिन्दू स्वीकार नहीं करते चाहे वह मत किसी देवता का ही क्यों न हो। धर्म जीवन का विज्ञान है और इसलिये उसमें प्रतिपादित सिद्धान्तों एवं साधनाओं का युक्तियुक्त विवेचन भी होना आवश्यक है।हमारी संस्कृति की इस विशिष्टता के अनुरूप ही भगवान् अपने कथन को स्पष्ट करते हुये कहते हैं कि हे तात कोई भी शुभ कर्म करने वाला दुर्गति को प्राप्त नहीं होता। वर्तमान में पुण्य कर्म करने वाला भविष्य में कभी दुख नहीं पायेगा क्योंकि भूत और वर्तमान का परिणत रूप ही भविष्य है।अर्जुन को योगभ्रष्ट के नाश की आशंका होने का कारण यह था कि जीवन की निरन्तरता और नियमबद्धता को वह ठीक से समझ नहीं पाया था। जन्म और मृत्यु के साथ ही जीव के अस्तित्व का प्रारम्भ और नाश हुआ समझना दर्शनशास्त्र की प्रारम्भिक अवस्था में ही संभव है। वस्तुत ऐसे सिद्धांत को दर्शन भी नहीं कहा जा सकता।साहसिक बुद्धि के जो जिज्ञासु साधक जीवन के नियम एवं अर्थ तथा विश्व के प्रयोजन को जानना चाहते हैं उन्हें यह स्वीकारना पड़ेगा कि मनुष्य का वर्तमान जीवन सत्य के वक्षस्थल को सुशोभित करने वाले अनन्त सौन्दर्य के कण्ठाभरण का एक मुक्ता है। भूत का परिणाम है वर्तमान और प्रत्येक विचार ज्ञान एवं कर्म के द्वारा हम भविष्य की रूपरेखा खींच रहे होते हैं। हिन्दुओं में देहधारी जीव के पूर्वजन्म तथा पुनर्जन्म में विश्वास किया जाता है। इसी को पुनर्जन्म का सिद्धांत कहते हैं।इसी सिद्धांत के आधार पर श्रीकृष्ण यहाँ योगी के विनाश अथवा दुर्गति की संभावना को नकारते हैं। हो सकता है कि कभीकभी साधक का पतन होते हुए या मृत्यु होती हुई दिखाई दे किन्तु उनका विनाश नहीं होता। आज का परिणत रूप भविष्य है।पुत्र को संस्कृत में तात कहते हैं। उपनिषदों में भी शिष्य को पुत्र रूप में संबोधित किया गया है। उसी परम्परा के अनुसार अर्जुन को तात कहकर संबोधित करने में उसके प्रति भगवान् का पुत्रवत् भाव स्पष्ट हो जाता है। कोई व्यक्ति अन्य लोगों के प्रति कितनी ही दुष्टता एवं वंचना का भाव क्यों न रखता हो परन्तु अपने ही पुत्र को हानि पहुँचाने का विचार उसके मन में कभी नहीं आता। इसी पितृप्रेम से श्रीकृष्ण अर्जुन को आश्वस्त करते हैं कि साधक का कभी वास्तविक पतन नहीं होता। आत्मिक विकास की सीढ़ी पर एक भी सोपान चढ़ने का अर्थ है पूर्णत्व की ओर बढ़ना।योगसिद्धि को जो प्राप्त नहीं हुआ उसकी निश्चित रूप से क्या गति होती है भगवान् कहते हैं

Here is the decision/conclusion—'Partha' etc.

There is no ruin for that person fallen from Yoga in 'this' world or in the 'next' world, because his faith remains undestroyed—this is the sentiment.

For he has performed 'Kalyana' (good)—characterized by the path of the Lord. And that (good) is not perishable like Agnistoma and other sacrifices.

Thus, removing Arjuna's fear regarding the ruin of the Yogi, He gives the answer—'Sri Bhagavan Uvacha'. What is the meaning of "the Yogi fallen from both perishes"? Does he become blameworthy among wise men 'in this world' because of the abandonment of actions prescribed by the Vedas, like some unrestrained person? Or does he attain a wretched state 'in the next world'? As stated by the Shruti: "Then, not going by either of these two paths, they become those insects, moths, and biting creatures." And as stated by Manu: "An eater of vomit, a demon with a face of fire, a ghost... becomes the Brahmin who has fallen from his Dharma," etc.

He says that neither of those two happens—'O Partha, neither here nor hereafter' is there ruin for him—for the one fallen from Yoga who has renounced all actions according to scripture, is completely detached, has approached a Guru and is performing hearing of Vedanta etc., and has died in the interim. He states the reason why there is no ruin for him in both places—'Hi'—because a 'Kalyanakrit'—one performing what is prescribed by scripture (good)—never 'gacchati' (goes to) a 'Durgati' (bad state)—which means ill-fame in this world and the state of insects etc. in the next. This (Yogi), being indeed excellent in all respects, does not go to a bad state; what need is there to say more?—this is the meaning.

'Tanoti' (he extends) himself in the form of a son, therefore the father is called 'Tata'. By adding the suffix 'ka' and 'an' in the same sense to 'Tata', 'Tata' is formed, like (words) Rakshasa and Vayasa etc. And since the father himself exists in the form of the son, addressing the disciple, who is in the place of a son, as 'Tata' is to indicate excessive compassion.

The argument that was made—"The fallen Yogi goes to a miserable state because, being ignorant, he is unconnected to the paths of Devayana (Path of Gods) and Pitriyana (Path of Fathers), just like one fallen from his Dharma"—is incorrect. Because the premise 'being unconnected to the Devayana path' is unproven for him. In the Panchagni Vidya (Knowledge of Five Fires), it is stated: "Those who know this thus, and those who in the forest meditate on Faith and Truth, they go to the Light (Archis)..."—here, without distinction, just like for the knowers of the Five Fires, the attainment of Brahmaloka through the Devayana path is stated even for seekers of liberation who are 'Atatkratu' (without sacrifices) but possess Faith and Truth. And for the fallen Yogi who is dedicated to Hearing (scriptures) etc., the possession of 'Faith' is established by the phrase "endowed with faith" (Shraddhavitto bhutva); and 'Truth'—in the form of the restraint of speech activity which is speaking falsehood—is obtained by the phrase "Shanto dantah" (calm and self-controlled); for 'Dama' is indeed the restraint of the unrestrained activity of external senses. And in Yoga Shastra, it is stated as a limb of Yoga: "Non-violence, Truth, Non-stealing, Celibacy, and Non-possession are Yamas." Even if by the word 'Truth', Brahman itself is meant, there is no harm, because hearing Vedanta etc. is also of the nature of thinking of the Truth-Brahman. Even being without ritual sacrifices ('atatkratu'), the attainment of Brahmaloka is possible like the knowers of Panchagni. And so there is the Smriti: "From Sannyasa, the abode of Brahman (is attained)."

Also, the investigation of Vedanta sentences attained in this life is remembered (in Smriti) to have a fruit equal to the fruit of the 'Krichhra-ashiti' (a severe penance). Thus, when even one of these—Sannyasa, Faith, Truth, and Inquiry into Brahman—is a means for attaining Brahmaloka, what surprise is there that when combined, they are the means for it? Therefore, the followers of the Taittiriya branch recited the life of a Yogi as being the form of all sacrifices with the words: "Of him who knows thus, the sacrifice is..." etc. And it is remembered (in Smriti): "He has bathed in the waters of all holy places, the entire earth has been given by him, a thousand sacrifices have been performed, and all the gods have been worshipped; his ancestors have been lifted up from Samsara, and he is worthy of worship in the three worlds—he whose mind attains steadiness in the inquiry of Brahman even for a moment."

Having thus heard Arjuna's resolute statement of doubt, the Lord spoke to him—'Partha' etc.

O Partha—unworthy of doubting in that manner! In 'Iha loka' (this world)—meaning in the prescribed Dharma and Devotion (Bhakti) which imitate the actions previously renounced; and in 'Amutra loka' (the other world)—meaning in the form of servitude to others etc.; for 'him'—who engaged due to trust in My words—'Vinasha' (destruction)—meaning 'special destruction', which is the non-vision of Me—does not exist.

How can there be ruin when there is engagement through faith and trust in My words? For there is no ruin for one engaged in an extraordinarily excellent action; this He states with 'Na hi' etc.

Being a devotee, he is addressed as 'Tata' (Dear one), treating him as His own child, and instructed. A 'Kalyanakrit'—one doing good with the intellect of Dharma etc. and with the commonality of desire for fruit—'Hi' (undoubtedly) does not go to a bad state.

Then, how could one engaged here (in Yoga) with 'Shraddha' (faith) perish?—this is the meaning.

'O Partha'! Neither 'Iha'—in this world, nor 'Amutra'—in the other world—does destruction exist for him; meaning it is not there.

'Nasha' (Destruction) means attaining a birth lower than the previous one; that does not happen to the one fallen from Yoga.

'Na hi'—Because; a 'Kalyanakrit'—a doer of good—does not go to a 'Durgati'—a bad state. 'O Tata'—He 'extends' (tanoti) himself in the form of a son, therefore the father is called 'Tata'.

The father himself is the son, therefore the son is also called 'Tata'. A disciple is also called a son (hence addressed as Tata). Since he does not go (to a bad state).

(But what happens to him?...)

Here, in answer, the Blessed Lord spoke—'Partha' etc., in four and a half verses.

There is no ruin for him here and hereafter.

He states the reasoning here—with 'Na hi' etc.

This person is a 'Kalyanakrit' (doer of good), and not a doer of inauspicious actions. Otherwise (if he were a doer of evil), there would certainly be an undesirable result.

पार्थ O Partha, न not, एव verily, इह here, न not, अमुत्र in the next world, विनाशः destruction, तस्य of him, विद्यते is, न not, हि verily, कल्याणकृत् he who does good, कश्चित् anyone, दुर्गतिम् bad state or grief, तात O My son, गच्छति goes.Commentary He who has not succeeded in attaining to perfection in Yoga in this birth will not be destroyed in this world or in the next world. Surely he will not take a birth lower than the present one. What will he attain, then? This is described by the Lord in verses 41, 42, 43 and 44.
Tata: son. A disciple is regarded as a son.

O Partha, eva vidyate, there is certainly; na vinasah, no ruin; tasya, for him; iha, here, in this world; or amutra, hereafter, in the other world. Ruin means a birth inferior to the previous one; that is not there for one who has fallen from Yoga. Hi, for; na kascit, no one; kalyana-krt, engaged in good; gacchati, meets with; durgatim, a deplorable end; tata, My son! A father is called tata because he perpetuates himself (tanoti) through the son. Since the father himself becomes the son, therefore the son also is called tata. A disciple is called putra (son). [Sri krsna addressed Arjuna thus because the latter was his disciple.]
But what happens to him?

The Lord said Neither here nor there is destruction for him who has begun Yoga with faith and has then fallen away from it. The meaning is that there is no destruction either in the form of failure of attainment of desires or in the form of Pratyavaya, which means the attainment of what is undesirable because of defects in the performance of works. Therefore no one who practises this incomparably auspicious Yoga ever comes to an evil end in the present, past or future.
Sri Krsna explains how this is so: