Purify mind with action. Realise the Self

Here furthermore, beginning from ‘Drishtwa tu Pandavaneekam,’ up to the statement ‘Na Yotsya Iti Govindam Uktwa Tushnim Babhuva Ha’ , the text has highlighted the grief and delusion of beings.  The grief and delusion are the seeds of transmigration and the being is flawed on account of these qualities. The reason why they show up has been explained in this text.

In that manner indeed, when Arjuna says, “Katham Bhishmamaham Sankhye,” etc., he is displaying the erroneous thought processes of identifying with the kingdom, teacher, children, friends, well-wishers, family, relatives and extended family as, “I am this person (Arjuna) and all these persons belong to me. This has caused him to be identified with them through affection or be disconnected from them through dislike. Displaying the qualities of grief and delusion in one’s own self, he says, “Katham Bhishmamaham Sankhye.”

Owing to grief and delusion crowding his wisdom and discriminative faculty, owing to lack of clarity on what is the truth and what is not, even though having yoked himself to the work of a Kshatriya in the righteous war, he withdrew himself from the war. He was getting ready to take up another lifestyle of living by seeking alms. In the same way, all beings whose minds are clouded by sorrow and delusion, by nature, they give up their natural duties and take up those actions which have not been prescribed for them.

Even if they are engaged in doing their own entitled duties, their actions through speech, mind and body are tuned to expectation of particular results they desire and it is filled with the idea of doership. In this manner, owing to gathering results of actions which are both righteous and unrighteous they are unable to withdraw from Samsara or transmigration which causes lifetimes that one likes or does not like, joy and sorrow. Therefore, grief and delusion are the seeds of Samsara or experience of birth and death continuously.

Freedom from sorrow and delusion is only through knowledge of the Self which follows giving up all actions and not by any other means. In this manner, desiring to explain this, Bhagavan Vasudeva keeps Arjuna as a context to teach this for blessing the whole world and begins with the words, “Ashochyan,” etc.

Here, some say that it is not by Self-knowledge which is the result of giving up all actions that freedom is attained indeed, then what if it is mentioned everywhere in the Gita that such freedom is possible only by actions such as Agni Hotra and actions mentioned in the Vedas and Smritis. If it may be said that knowledge attained through this process, along with work, alone will lead to attainment of liberation?
To establish this they quote from the verses, “If you do not fight this righteous battle, “Your power lies in action alone,” “Therefore perform action only,” etc.

It should not be argued that since it involves violence, the actions specified in the Vedas are not righteous. How? The duty of a Kshatriya of fighting in battle, causing harm to the preceptor, brother or son, defined by physically hurting them, even if it is extremely gory, it is only one’s own prescribed righteous action. Doing it is not unrighteous. If not done, “Then having destroyed one’s own duty and fame, you will attain sin.” – saying thus, it has been made very clear even in the beginning that doing one’s own duty as long as one is alive, even if it causes harm or injury to animals etc., is not Adharma.
That is not true. The difference between being established in the knowledge of the Self and of action has been pronounced and takes refuge in two different types of thought.

Beginning with, “Ashochyan,” and ending with, “Swadharmam Api Cha Avekshya,” in the text, Bhagavan establishes the essence of the Supreme Reality. That is Sankhya. That thought which asserts that the knowledge that the Self is free from the six modifications beginning from birth, is not the doer. That thought that arises in this manner to assert the meaning of the text is Sankhya thought. Those realised beings who adhere to this pattern of thinking are called Sankhyas.

Before the Sankhya thought process could happen, Yoga is the process of pointing out that the Atman is different from the body etc. (body, mind and intellect), dependent on doership and enjoyership with knowledge of the distinction between what is righteous and unrighteous, a means established to attain liberation is Yoga Buddhi. They are called Yogis who are ideal for this path of action.

In this manner, the two types of thought processes have been separately shown by Bhagavan in the line, “Esha Teabhihita Sankhye, Buddhir Yoge Twimam Shrunu,” etc. So far it has been spoken to you about Sankhya now listen to this thought as Yoga.
Amidst the two for the sake of Sankhya, Yogins who have united with the knowledge of the Sankhya Yoga and established  in it, it has been explained separately as, “Pura Vedatmana Maya Prokta,” earlier it was mentioned by Me from the perspective of the Vedas.

In the same way, it has been mentioned for those who have taken refuge and established in the yoga of action separately as “Karma Yogena Yoginam,” as Karma Yoga for the Yogis. In this way taking refuge with the thought of Sankhya and the thought of the Yoga, it has been mentioned by Bhagavan Himself separately that of the paths of knowledge and action seeing that identifying with the different thoughts of doership and non-doership, oneness and manyness, which is impossible to belong to the same person.

Just as this distinction has been spelt out in the Shathapathiya Brahmana too: Those who desire to reach the world of the Self the Brahmana gives up everything and moves around with dispassion. In this manner, the idea of giving up all actions is expressed. By the remaining statement, “What will we do with children or people, for us for whom the Self alone is the world?
in this way itself, the human being, before getting married, but having the desire to do righteous action, taking to the means of attaining the three worlds, sons, human and divine wealth, and the human wealth of action that helps to reach the world of the ancestors and the divine wealth which is the means to attain divine worlds through Upasana. “He so desired,” it has been thus said in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.
In this manner, it is only for the ignorant man who is desirous, all actions prescribed by the Vedas have been prescribed. For the one who has no desires, giving up Karmas and Upasana and becoming a Parivrajaka (wandering mendicant) has been prescribed. It is only for those who have no desires and wish to reach the world of the Self.

As Bhagavan has distinguished between Vedic rituals and knowledge, this logic is untenable that it is his opinion that karma and upasana go together. Further, Arjuna’s question of Jyayasi Chet Karmanaste,” if you say Jnana is greater than Karma – will not be a suitable thing to ask in this context.

One person cannot follow Jnana and Karma and because it has not been said by Bhagavan earlier. Then how does Arjuna, who has not heard it, asks Bhagavan that knowledge is greater than action. It is a false superimposition to say it is your thought that knowledge is better than action.
If the oneness of knowledge and action has been told to all, it can be understood that it is told to Arjuna also. If it has been told to Arjuna, then how does he ask, “Which one is greater of the two.” If both Jnana and Karma have been advised, how can he question which is the better of the two?
If a man goes to a vaidya to get his bile in balancew and the Vaidya says, take food that is sweet and cooling, how would it be appropriate to question the doctor, “Between sweet and cooling, which will bring down the bile?” Such a question will not arise.
If in case, it is understood that Arjuna’s question is to further understand with clarity, the words of Bhagavan not having been understood in the first place, even then Bhagavan would have given a reply in tune with the question, “When I have spoken of the unity of two paths of knowledge and action, then why are you confused?”
Not indeed again, after the question he answers differently, not in keeping with the question that, “I have mentioned two paths before.”  It is not appropriate to say this.

Further to say that Jnana Samucchayam is only for actions related to the Smritis to segregate and state it so will not be suitable.
Further if it is known that Yuddha or war is the action specified by the Smritis for the Kshatriyas then: “Why do you unite me with this cruel action?” The words he chides Krishna with are improper.
Therefore, in the Gita Shastra, there is no connection established between actions prescribed in the Shrutis and Smritis for knowledge of the Self. even a little bit. It is not possible to show any such connection.
For the one who, on account of Ajnana, is engaged in action, springing from desire or hatred, actions such as Yagna, Dana and Tapas attain Vishuddha Satwa, attains to that knowledge of that Brahman which is one and non-dual, to that person, even when the purpose of Karma is concluded, they are engaged in action for the welfare of the world. For such a person, there is no karma. Only when there is karma, there is unity with Jnana.
Wisdom and ignorance cannot exist together. Just as Bhagavan Sri Vasudeva’s teaching that Kshatriya Karma cannot be tied up with wisdom for attainment of the goal of life, in the same way, for the wise person who engages in action without desire for the results and free of identification as the doer of the action cannot be tied to knowledge.  There is no connection with wisdom. The one who knows the truth will not consider himself the doer of the action. He does not give much importance to the results of the action. Just as a person with a desire for heaven etc. takes up the necessary processes for fulfilment of that desire such as yagna etc., and continuing with the Agnihotra has finished half, but his desire has got exhausted. He however continues with his Yagna, though free of desires for the results. That Agnihotra cannot be said to be a desire-filled one.
In the same way, Bhagavan shows it here and there. Even though I do. I don’t and the results of action do not taint me.

Moreover, the statements in the Gita, “Actions were done by our ancestors in the manner their ancestors did. Kings such as Janaka and others lived and attained success of a steady mind by action. This has to be well sorted out and understood.
How is it possible?

Whereas the truth even when they were engaging in action for the sake of the welfare of the world, with the knowledge that Gunas or qualities transact with qualities, alone achieved success of experiencing joy by quieting the mind. Even after they retired from work, they achieved the state of mind by continuing with action. Hence they have not given up on their actions. That is the meaning.

Hence the exposition should be that kings such as Janaka did not achieve that state by knowing the truth, but by means of offering their actions to Ishwara and attuned to the complete perfection of purification of mind or through that, the knowledge of the Self .

This meaning alone is being spoken of by Bhagavan when it is said actions are performed for purification of mind furthermore by stating that by doing one’s own duties, they worshipped the Lord in all ways and attained purification of mind etc. This is the meaning of the words of Bhagavan. Therefore, in the Gita, attainment of liberation is only by knowing the truth alone and not by associating that knowledge with action. This is the decisive meaning.
In which manner, this meaning will be established, in that way, we will take up chapter by chapter, sort the meanings out and point out here and there.

There is in this manner, Bhagavan Vasudevah seeking to lift Arjuna who is immersed in the ocean of great grief caused by being befuddled by what his duties and responsibilities are, not seeing any other means than Self-Knowledge,  desiring to lift Arjuna, he sets his mind to give an exposition on Self-Knowledge.