Bhagavad Gita - Chapter 9 - Shloka (Verse) 9

व्याख्या--'उदासीनवदासीनमसक्तं तेषु कर्मसु'--महासर्गके आदिमें प्रकृतिके परवश हुए प्राणियोंकी उनके कर्मोंके अनुसार विविध प्रकारसे रचनारूप जो कर्म है, उसमें मेरी आसक्ति नहीं है। कारण कि मैं उनमें उदासीनकी तरह रहता हूँ अर्थात् प्राणियोंके उत्पन्न होनेपर मैं हर्षित नहीं होता और उनके प्रकृतिमें लीन होनेपर मैं खिन्न नहीं होता।यहाँ 'उदासीनवत्' पदमें जो 'वत्'(वति) प्रत्यय है, उसका अर्थ तरह होता है अतः इस पदका अर्थ हुआ -- उदासीनकी तरह। भगवान्ने अपनेको उदासीनकी तरह क्यों कहा? कारण कि मनुष्य उसी वस्तुसे उदासीन होता है, जिस वस्तुकी वह सत्ता मानता है। परन्तु जिस संसारकी उत्पत्ति, स्थिति और प्रलय होता है, उसकी भगवान्के सिवाय कोई स्वतन्त्र सत्ता ही नहीं है। इसलिये भगवान् उस संसारकी रचनारूप कर्मसे उदासीन क्या रहें? वे तो उदासीनकी तरह रहते हैं; क्योंकि भगवान्की दृष्टिमें संसारकी कोई सत्ता ही नहीं है। तात्पर्य है कि वास्तवमें यह सब भगवान्का ही स्वरूप है, इनकी स्वतन्त्र सत्ता है ही नहीं, तो अपने स्वरूपसे भगवान् क्या उदासीन रहें? इसलिये भगवान् उदासीनकी तरह हैं।

तब तो भूतसमुदायको विषम रचनेवाले आप परमेश्वरका उस विषम रचनाजनित पुण्यपापसे भी सम्बन्ध होता ही होगा ऐसी शङ्का होनेपर भगवान् ये वचन बोले --, हे धनंजय भूतसमुदायकी विषम रचनानिमित्तक वे कर्म? मुझ ईश्वरको बन्धनमें नहीं डालते। उन कर्मोंका सम्बन्ध न होनेमें कारण बतलाते हैं -- मैं उन कर्मोंमें उदासीनकी भाँति स्थित रहता हूँ अर्थात् आत्मा निर्विकार है? इसलिये जैसे कोई उदासीन -- उपेक्षा करनेवाला स्थित हो उसीकी भाँति मैं स्थित रहता हूँ। तथा उन कर्मोंमें फलसम्बन्धी आसक्तिसे और मैं करता हूँ इस अभिमानसे भी मैं रहित हूँ ( इस कारण वे कर्म मुझे नहीं बाँधते )। इससे यह अभिप्राय समझ लेना चाहिये कि कर्तापनके अभिमानका अभाव और फलसम्बन्धी आसक्तिका अभाव दूसरोंको भी बन्धनरहित कर देनेवाला है। इसके सिवा अन्य प्रकारसे किये हुए कर्मोंद्वारा मूर्खलोग कोशकार ( रेशमके कीड़े ) की भाँति बन्धनमें पड़ते हैं।,

If You create the multitude of material beings, dependent on ignorance etc. by nature, in an unequal manner, then due to the inequality of creation, You would possess merit/demerit etc., leading to the objection of 'non-Lordship'; such a doubt is raised -- 'tarhi' (then), etc.

By the locative case in 'tatra', the Supreme Lord is described.

Just as there is no connection with actions for the Lord due to the absence of attachment to results and absence of the ego of doership, so too for anyone other than the Lord, the absence of both is the cause for the non-connection with merit etc.; this he states with 'ato'nyasya', etc.

If there were ego of doership in actions or attachment to fruits of action for someone, regarding that he says -- 'anyathā', etc.

(Doubt): Just as the Jiva is bound due to having an unequal nature, why do the actions of merit and demerit not bind You, who are the creator of unequal creation like gods, animals, etc., since inequality is inevitable? Anticipating this -- He says 'na cha', etc., implying: Just as the wish-fulfilling tree (Kalpavriksha) etc., being neutral and unattached to actions involved in giving good or bad like 'I will give good to this one, bad to that one', creates fruits according to the respective resolutions generated by the respective karmas of men, and yet those actions do not bind it; so too Me.

Those actions which are the cause of the support and creation of the multitude of beings do not bind Me, the Lord. Just as actions of punishment and grace performed here and there do not bind you (Arjuna) who are engaged in conquering wealth for Yudhisthira's Rajasuya sacrifice, because you executed punishment and grace in accordance with the actions of those respective kings; this is the intention of the address 'Dhananjaya'.

Having said 'Actions do not bind Me', He states the reason for that -- with 'udāsinavadāsīnam' (seated like one neutral), etc. Thus, for one devoid of attachment to fruit and free from the egoism 'I do', there is no bondage by those actions. Therefore, for another also, the absence of attachment to fruit and doership is the cause of non-bondage; otherwise, the deluded one is bound by actions like a silkworm (koshakara); this is the meaning.

'Udāsinavat' (Like one neutral), but not (actually) neutral. He states the meaning of that as -- 'asaktam' (unattached). The Shruti says 'avākyanādaraḥ' (He is silent and unconcerned/unattached - Chandogya 3.14.2).

In the Bhagavata (2.10.12): 'Substance, Karma, Time, Nature, and the Soul exist by His grace and cease to exist by His neglect';

the idea is, how can there be bondage of all actions for Him whose very non-attachment empowers all actions? For the Shruti says: 'He does not become greater by action, nor smaller' (Brihadaranyaka 4.4.23). How can Karma bind Him who controls the Karmas?

(Doubt): While creating an unequal creation, You would incur the faults of inequality and cruelty? To this He says -- 'na cha', etc. Those actions in the form of unequal creation do not bind Me. The reason for that is -- 'udāsinavadāsīnam' (seated like one neutral).

Just as the rain cloud rains remaining neutral, without attachment to some seeds and aversion to others, similarly the Lord creates the world without having attachment to the virtuous or aversion to the sinners. Due to the force of their respective extraordinary seeds of Karma, they attain different results; there is no inequality etc. on the part of the Lord; this is the meaning.

(Doubt): 'I create' and 'seated like one neutral' -- aren't these contradictory statements? Raising this doubt, He says -- 'mayā', etc. (referring to the next verse). By Me, the immutable Supervisor (Adhyaksha), the impeller who is like a magnet, Nature (Prakriti) produces the moving and unmoving world. By this very cause of supervision, O Kaunteya, the world 'viparivartate', i.e., revolves through states like birth etc. The idea is that like a magnet, I am both neutral and the impeller of creation.

And the Mantra (Scripture) also establishes the status of the one God as the Supervisor of all and the Witness: 'One God hidden in all beings, all-pervading, the Inner Self of all beings; the Supervisor of actions, the Abode of all beings, the Witness, the Knower, the Absolute, and free from Gunas'.

And those actions of unequal creation etc. do not bind Me; they do not attribute cruelty etc. to Me. Because the actions performed previously by the Knowers of the Field (souls) are themselves the cause of the unequal states like gods etc.; but I am unattached to that inequality, seated there like one neutral.

As the Author of the Sutras says: 'Inequality and cruelty are not (in God), because He is dependent (on karma)' (Brahma Sutra 2.1.34); 'If it be said that there is no karma (before creation) due to non-distinction, (we say) no, because of beginninglessness' (Brahma Sutra 2.1.35).

ननु एवं नानाविधानि कर्माणि कुर्वतस्तव जीववद्वन्धः कथं न स्यादित्याशङ्क्याह -- नचेति।

तानि सृष्ट्यादीनि कर्माणि मां न निबध्नन्ति। कर्मासक्तिर्हि बन्धहेतुः सा चाप्तकामत्वान्मम नास्त्यत उदासीनवद्वर्तमानस्य मे बन्धनं नापादयन्ति?

उदासीनत्वे कर्तृत्वानुपपत्तेरुदासीनवत्स्थितमित्युक्तम्।

न च मां तानि कर्माणि इत्येतन्न पुण्यपापरूपकर्मविषयम्? तस्याप्रस्तुतत्वेनतानि इति परामर्शायोगात् सृष्टिसंहारादेश्च प्रसक्तत्वात्तत्परामर्श एवोचितः तस्य दोषरूपत्वमपि सृज्यदेवादिवैषम्यादिना द्योतितमिति तन्निरासार्थोऽयं श्लोक इत्यभिप्रायेणाह -- एवं तर्हीति।

सृष्ट्यादीनीत्यादिशब्देन स्थितिसंहारनिग्रहानुग्रहादिसङ्ग्रहः।नैर्घृण्यादीत्यादिशब्देन पक्षपातित्वाव्यवस्थितत्वादि सङ्गृह्यते।

निबध्नन्ति इति न संसाररूपो बन्ध उच्यते? जगत्सृष्ट्यादेः संसारहेतुत्वाश्रवणात्? परोक्तधर्माधर्मसम्बन्धशङ्काप्रसङ्गाभावात्? दौर्जन्ये सत्यपीश्वरस्य नियामकाभावात् अतो नैर्घृण्यादिरूपदोषानुबन्ध एवात्र शङ्कितः प्रतिषिध्यत इत्याहमयीति। चः शङ्कानिवृत्त्यर्थः।

सृष्टिवैषम्ये प्रयोजकमभिप्रेतमाहयत इति।स्वशक्त्या वस्तु वस्तुतां [वि.पु.1।4।52]कर्मभिर्भाविताः पूर्वैः [वि.पु.1।5।26]आब्रह्मस्तम्बपर्यन्ता जगदन्तर्व्यवस्थिताः। प्राणिनः कर्मजनितसंसारवशवर्तिनः [वि.ध.104।23।36]वाचिकैः पक्षिमृगतां मानसैरन्त्यजातिताम् [मनुः12।9]अविद्या कर्मसंज्ञान्या तृतीया शक्तिरिष्यते। यया क्षेत्रज्ञशक्तिः सा वेष्टिता नृप सर्वगा।।संसारतापानखिलानवाप्नोत्यतिसन्ततान्। तया तिरोहितत्वाच्च शक्तिः क्षेत्रज्ञसंज्ञिता।।सर्वभूतेषु भूपाल तारतम्येन [वर्तते] लक्ष्यते [वि.पु.6।7।6163़] इत्यादिभिः सिद्धोऽयमर्थः।

तेषु कर्मस्वसक्तम् इत्युक्ते सति अकर्तृत्वादिभ्रमः स्यादिति तन्निरासायोक्तंतत्र वैषम्य इति।असक्तः प्रयोजकत्वरूपसम्बन्धरहित इत्यर्थः।

असक्तत्वे दृष्टान्त उच्यतेउदासीनवदासीन इति। यथा कस्मिंश्चित्कर्मणि उदासीनस्तत्र प्रयोजकत्वरूपसम्बन्धरहितः? तथा कर्ताऽप्यसौ तस्मिन्नंशे। यद्वा उदासीनवदासीन इत्यर्थः। तेन कर्मानुष्ठानदशायामीश्वरस्य वैषम्यादुदासीनत्वमेवोच्यते।

विषमसृष्टेः,कर्मसापेक्षत्वे जीवानां तत्कर्मप्रवाहाणां च अनादितया प्रलयकालेऽपि तत्सद्भावे सूत्रद्वयं दर्शयति -- वैषम्येति।

एक परिच्छिन्न जीव को उसके अहंकारमूलक कर्म अपने संस्कार उसके अन्तकरण में अंकित करके कालान्तर में फलोन्मुख होकर उसे उत्पीड़ित करते हैं। सभी अहंकार केन्द्रित कर्म? जो कि सदा स्वार्थ से ही प्रेरित होते हैं? अपने कुरूप पदचिन्हों को मनरूपी समुद्र तट पर अंकित करते हैं? निरहंकार और निस्वार्थ भाव से किये गये कर्म नहीं जैसे? आकाश में विचरण करते हुए पक्षी अपने पदचिन्हों को पीछे नहीं छोड़ते। एक कृतघ्न पुत्र अपने पिता पर ही पदाघात करता है इसकी तुलना कीजिये? खेल में मग्न उस निष्पाप शिशु से जो अपने छोटेछोटे पैरों से अपने पिता को मार रहा हो यद्यपि पदाघात की क्रिया में समानता होने पर भी दोनों के अन्तर को समझने के लिए हमें किसी दार्शनिक की सूक्ष्म दृष्टि की आवश्यकता नहीं होती। जहाँ कहीं और जब कभी अहंकार और स्वार्थ से प्रेरित होकर कर्म किये जाते हैं? वे निश्चय ही दुखदायक वासनाओं को जन्म देते हैं।प्रकृति को चेतनता प्रदान करने और भूत समुदाय की पुनपुन रचना करने में परम पुरुष को न कोई राग है और न कोई द्वेष। इस सृष्टि चक्र के चलते रहने मात्र से वह सनातन परम पुरुष कभी प्रभावित नहीं होता। वे कर्म मुझे बांधते नहीं। कारण यह है कि वे कर्म न अहंकार मूलक हैं और न स्वार्थ से प्रेरित।चलचित्रगृह के श्वेत परदे पर दिखाया जाने वाला चलचित्र (सिनेमा) कितना ही दुखान्त और हत्यापूर्ण क्यों न हो? उसकी कथा कितनी ही अश्रुपूर्ण और उदासी भरी क्यों न हो? कितने ही आंधी और वर्षा के दृश्य उसमें क्यों न दिखाये गये हों सिनेमा की समाप्ति पर वह श्वेतपट न रक्तरंजित होता है और न अश्रुओं से भीगा ही होता है? और न तूफानों से वह क्षतिग्रस्त ही होता है। तथापि हम जानते हैं कि उस स्थिर अपरिवर्तित पट के बिना? छाया और प्रकाश के माध्यम से चित्रपट की कथा प्रदर्शित नहीं की जा सकती थी। उसी प्रकार? नित्य शुद्ध अनन्त आत्मा वह चिरस्थायी रंगमंच हैं? जिस पर दुखपूर्ण जीवन का नाटक अनेकत्व की भाषा में असंख्य जीवों के द्वारा निरन्तर अभिनीत होता रहता है? जो अपनी पूर्वाजित वासनाओं से विवश हुए निर्धारित भूमिकाओं को करते रहते हैं।रेल के पटरी से उतरने के कारण होने वाली भयंकर दुर्घटना के लिए इंजिन की वाष्प को दंडित नहीं किया जाता? और न ही गन्तव्य तक अपने समय पर सुरक्षित पहुँचने पर उसका अभिनन्दन ही किया जाता है। यह सत्य है कि उस वाष्प के बिना दुर्घटना नहीं हो सकती थी और न ही गन्तव्य की प्राप्ति क्योंकि उसके बिना इंजिन केवल निष्क्रिय? भारी लोहा ही होता है। रचनात्मक या विध्वंसात्मक कार्य करने की शक्ति इंजिन को वाष्प से ही प्राप्त होती है। इन सब घटनाओं में? उस वाष्प को इंजिन चलाने के प्रति न राग है और न द्वेष? इसलिए इन घटनाओं का उत्तरदायित्व उस पर थोप कर उसे बन्धन में नहीं डाला जाता। कर्म का प्रेरक उद्देश्य ही कर्म के फल्ा को निश्चित करता है।सम्पूर्ण शक्ति का स्रोत आत्मा है। वह मन को शक्ति प्रदान करता है। प्रत्येक मन वासनाओं का संचय मात्र है। शुभ वासनाओं से संस्कारित मन आनन्द और सामञ्जस्य का गीत गाता है? जबकि अशुभ वासनाएं मन को दुख से कराहने को बाध्य करती हैं। ग्रामोफोन की सुई रिकार्ड से बज रहे संगीत के लिए उत्तरदायी नहीं होती। जैसा रिकार्ड? वैसा संगीत। इसी प्रकार? आत्मा सनातन है? जिसे इसकी चिन्ता नहीं होती है कि किस प्रकार का जगत् उत्पन्न हुआ है। जगत् परिवर्तन के प्रति उसे किसी प्रकार की व्याकुलता नहीं होती। जगत् में जो कुछ हो रहा हो चाहे हत्या हो या प्राणोत्सर्ग सूर्यप्रकाश उसे प्रकाशित करता है। सूर्य का सम्बन्ध न हत्यारे के अप्ाराध से है और न बलिदानी पुरुष के गौरव से ही है। शुद्धचैतन्यस्वरूप आत्मा वासनारूपी प्रकृति को व्यक्त करने की क्षमता प्रदान करता है? फिर वे वासनाएं नरकयातना के लिए हों या गौरव ख्याति के लिए। उन कर्मों में असक्त और उदासीन के समान स्थित आत्मा को वे कर्म नहीं बांधते हैं।अनन्त और सान्त में निश्चित रूप से वह अद्भुत सम्बन्ध कौनसा है ऐसा कहा गया है कि सान्त प्रकृति अनन्त आत्मा के कारण कार्य करती है और फिर भी आत्मा उदासीन रहता है? वह कैसे

'Na cha', etc. 'Mayā', etc.

And I have no bondage of Karma, because I exist with neutrality.

Therefore, I am the cause in the creation of the world, due to not resorting to activity (Myself).

If there is independent doership, how is neutrality spoken of? If you say this -- No, because by the suffix 'vati' (like), that (absolute neutrality) is negated; with this idea, he says 'udāsinavat' (like one neutral). Even if He is non-neutral, the suffix 'vat' would be useless? Because there is no other meaning for it; to this he says 'tadartham' (its meaning), etc. The meaning of 'vat' is similarity, which He Himself explains (by saying 'unattached'); this is the meaning.

He cites authority for the Supreme Lord's lack of attachment to actions -- 'avākya', etc. (Doubt): Why shouldn't He be absolutely neutral? (Answer): No, for in that case, there would be the contingency of the non-existence of Prakriti etc.; with this idea, he quotes 'dravyam', etc.

If the Lord has independent doership, then how can the word 'neutral' be the reason (hetu) for 'those actions do not bind Me'? To this he says -- 'yasya', etc. 'Asaktyā' means with disregard, effortlessly.

Some prattle that 'Even the Lord has karmic bondage', such as 'By which Vishnu was cast into the great difficulty of the forest of ten incarnations' (Neetishataka 92); to refute that, he states Shruti and logic -- 'na karmaṇā', etc. 'Niyamayati' means controls.

Therefore 'na cha' -- those actions named creation, preservation, and dissolution, being performed by Me like a magician or a dreamer, do not bind Me; they do not make Me a partaker of merit and demerit through grace and punishment, because they are illusory.

O Dhananjaya! By recalling that you brought wealth having conquered all kings for Yudhisthira's Rajasuya, great power is implied for encouragement.

Why do those actions not bind? To this He says -- 'udāsinavadāsīnam' (seated like one neutral). Just as an indifferent person (upekshaka), unconnected with the victory or defeat of two disputants, remains changeless and untouched by the joy and sorrow caused by it, so too remaining changeless. Since there is no exertion/desire (in God) like in two disputants, the suffix 'vati' (like) is used based on the similarity of indifference alone.

Therefore, being changeless and 'asaktam' (unattached) in those actions of creation etc. -- meaning devoid of attachment characterized by the egoism 'I do' -- it is indeed logical that actions do not bind Me.

By this it is stated that even for another, in the absence of doership and attachment to fruit, actions are not the cause of bondage; but when both are present, the deluded one is bound by actions like a silkworm; this is the intention.

(Doubt): Why do those beings created by the force of Your sportive power not overpower You and keep You fixed only in worldly sport? Anticipating this, He says -- 'na cha mām', etc.

O Dhananjaya (one whose mind is singularly focused on worldly wealth)! Those beings do not bind Me, do not overpower Me, who am 'seated like one neutral' -- meaning, remaining in them solely out of supreme grace to fulfill them.

'Cha' (And) again, those sportive actions also do not overpower Me. Why? Because even in those sportive actions I am 'asaktam' (unattached); due to being Self-satisfied (Atmarama) and engaging in sport only to impart juice/joy (Rasa) to the powers (Shaktis).

This very thing is stated (in Bhagavata 8.5.5): 'By whom, worshipped by the world, the Vaikuntha world was created when prayed to by Goddess Rama, wishing to please her'.

O Dhananjaya! Those actions, which are the cause of the unequal creation of the multitude of beings, do not bind Me, the Lord. He states the reason for the non-connection of actions there -- 'udāsinavad āsīnam'. Seated like someone who is neutral/indifferent. Because the Self is changeless. 'Asaktam' -- devoid of attachment to fruit; free from the egoism 'I do' regarding those actions.

Therefore, for another also, the absence of ego of doership and absence of attachment to fruit is the cause of non-connection; otherwise, the deluded one is bound by actions like a silkworm; this is the intention.

(Doubt): 'I create this multitude of beings' and 'seated like one neutral' -- isn't this stated contradictorily? To resolve this, He says --

And thus, even in performing unequal actions, there is no bondage of cruelty etc. for Me because of being unattached; this He says -- 'na cha mām', etc.

These (actions), indicative of extraordinary glory, do not bind Me, i.e., do not impose the bondage of cruelty etc.; because the actions of the individual souls are natural (of Prakriti) and they are the causes of the states of gods etc.

But I am 'like one neutral' regarding those actions and Prakriti; according to the statement 'Maya turns away, ashamed to face Him', etc.

Inequality and cruelty belong to the attached agent, not to the unattached.

As the Author of the Sutras says: 'Inequality and cruelty are not (in God) because He is dependent (on karma), for so (Scripture) shows'; 'If it be said there is no karma due to non-distinction, (we say) no, because of beginninglessness' (Brahma Sutra 2.1.34-35).

न not? च and? माम् Me? तानि these? कर्माणि acts? निबध्नन्ति bind? धनञ्जय O Dhananjaya? उदासीनवत् like one indifferent? आसीनम् sitting? असक्तम् unattached? तेषु in those? कर्मसु acts.Commentary These acts Creation and dissolution of the universe. I am the only cause of dissolution of the universe. I am the only cause of Nature and its activities and yet? being indifferent to everythin? I do nothing. Nor do I cause anything to be done.I remain as one neutral or indifferent or unconcerned. I have no attachment for the fruits of those actions. Further I have not go the egoistic feeling of agency I do this. I know that the Self is actionless. Therefore the actions involved in creation and dissolution do not bind Me.As in the case of Isvara so in the case of others also the absence of the egoistic feeling of agency and the absense of attachment to the fruits of action is the cause of freedom (from Dharma and Adharma? virtue and evil) The ignorant man who works with egoism and who expects rewards for his action is bound by his own actions like the silkworm in the cocoon.Just as the neutral referee or umpire in a cricket or football match is not affected by the victory or defeat of the parties? so also the Lord is not affected by the creation and destruction of this world as He remains unconcerned or indifferent and as He is a silent and changeless witness. (Cf.IV.14)

O Dhananjaya, na ca, nor do; tani, those; karmani, actions-which are the sources of the creation of the multitude of beings uneally; nibadhnanti, bind; mam, Me, who am God. As to that, the Lord states the reason for His not becoming associated with the actions: Asinam, remaining (as I do); udasinavat, like one unconcerned, like some indifferent spectator- for the Self is not subject to any change; and asaktam, unattached; tesu karmasu, to those actions-free from attachment to results, free from the egoism that 'I do.'
Hence, even int he case of any other person also, the absence of the idea of agentship and the absence of attachment to results are the causes of not getting bound. Otherwise, like the silkworm, a foolish man becomes bound by acitons. This is the idea.
There (in th previous two verses) it involves a contradiction to say, 'Remaining like one unconcerned, I project forth this multitude of beings.' In order to dispel this doubt the Lord says:

But actions like uneal creation do not bind Me. There can be no imputation of cruelty etc., to Me, because the previous actions (Karmas) of individual selves are the causes for the ineality of conditions like that of gods etc. I am untouched by the ineality. I sit, as it were, apart from it as one unconcerned. Accordingly, the author of the Vedanta-sutras says: 'Not ineality and cruelty, on account of (creation) being dependent, for so scripture declares' (Br. Su., 2.1.34), and 'If it be said that there is no Karma on account of non-distinction, it is replied that it is not proper to say so, because it is beginningless ৷৷.' (Ibid., 2.1.35). [The idea is this: Creation has no first beginning. It is an eternal cyclic process of creation and dissolution of the universe. So the differentiation of Karma, Jiva and Isvara even before creation has to be accepted. Only in the creative cycle the differentiation becomes patent, and in the dissolved condition it remains latent.]