श्री भगवानुवाच
काम्यानां कर्मणां न्यासं संन्यासं कवयो विदुः।
सर्वकर्मफलत्यागं प्राहुस्त्यागं विचक्षणाः।।18.2।।
।।18.2।।श्रीभगवान् बोले -- कई विद्वान् काम्यकर्मोंके त्यागको संन्यास कहते हैं और कई विद्वान् सम्पूर्ण कर्मोंके फलके त्यागको त्याग कहते हैं। कई विद्वान् कहते हैं कि कर्मोंको दोषकी तरह छोड़ देना चाहिये और कई विद्वान् कहते हैं कि यज्ञ? दान और तपरूप कर्मोंका त्याग नहीं करना चाहिये।
।।18.2।। श्रीभगवान् ने कहा -- (कुछ) कवि (पण्डित) जन काम्य कर्मों के त्याग को संन्यास समझते हैं और विचारशील जन समस्त कर्मों के फलों के त्याग को त्याग कहते हैं।।
।।18.2।। व्याख्या -- दार्शनिक विद्वानोंके चार मत हैं --,1 -- काम्यानां कर्मणां न्यासं संन्यासं कवयो विदुः -- कई विद्वान् कहते हैं कि काम्यकर्मोंके त्यागका नाम संन्यास है अर्थात् इष्टकी प्राप्ति और अनिष्टकी निवृत्तिके लिये जो कर्म किये जाते हैं? उनका त्याग करनेका नाम संन्यास है।2 -- सर्वकर्मफलत्यागं प्राहुस्त्यागं विचक्षणाः -- कई विद्वान् कहते हैं कि सम्पूर्ण कर्मोंके फलकी इच्छाका त्याग करनेका नाम त्याग है अर्थात् फल न चाहकर कर्तव्यकर्मोंको करते रहनेका नाम त्याग है।3 -- त्याज्यं दोष (टिप्पणी प0 870.1) वदित्येके कर्म प्राहुर्मनीषिणः -- कई विद्वान् कहते हैं कि सम्पूर्ण कर्मोंको दोषकी तरह छोड़ देना चाहिये।4 -- यज्ञदानतपःकर्म न त्याज्यमिति चापरे -- अन्य विद्वान् कहते हैं कि दूसरे सब कर्मोंका भले ही त्याग कर दें? पर यज्ञ? दान और तपरूप कर्मोंका त्याग नहीं करना चाहिये।उपर्युक्त चारों मतोंमें दो विभाग दिखायी देते हैं -- पहला और तीसरा मत संन्यास(सांख्ययोग) का है तथा दूसरा और चौथा मत त्याग(कर्मयोग) का है। इन दो विभागोंमें भी थोड़ाथोड़ा अन्तर है। पहले मतमें केवल काम्यकर्मोंका त्याग है और तीसरे मतमें कर्ममात्रका त्याग है। ऐसे ही दूसरे मतमें कर्मोंके फलका त्याग है और चौथे मतमें यज्ञ? दान और तपरूप कर्मोंके त्यागका निषेध है।दार्शनिकोंके उपर्युक्त चार मतोंमें क्याक्या कमियाँ हैं और उनकी अपेक्षा भगवान्के मतमें क्याक्या विलक्षणताएँ हैं? इसका विवेचन इस प्रकार है --,1 -- काम्यानां कर्मणां न्यासं संन्यासम् -- संन्यासके इस पहले मतमें केवल काम्यकर्मोंका त्याग बताया गया है परन्तु इसके अलावा भी नित्य? नैमित्तिक आदि आवश्यक कर्तव्यकर्म बाकी रह जाते हैं (टिप्पणी प0 870.2)। अतः यह मत पूर्ण नहीं है क्योंकि इसमें न तो कर्तृत्वका त्याग बताया है और न स्वरूपमें स्थिति ही बतायी है। परन्तु भगवान्के मतमें कर्मोंमें कर्तृत्वाभिमान नहीं रहता और स्वरूपमें स्थिति हो जाती है जैसे -- इसी अध्यायके सत्रहवें श्लोकमें जिसमें अहंकृतभाव नहीं है और जिसकी बुद्धि कर्मफलमें लिप्त नहीं होती -- ऐसा कहकर कर्तृत्वाभिमानका त्याग बताया है और अगर वह सम्पूर्ण प्राणियोंको मार दे? तो भी न मारता है? न बँधता है -- ऐसा कहकर स्वरूपमें स्थिति बतायी है।2 -- त्याज्यं दोषवदित्येके -- संन्यासके इस दूसरे मतमें सब कर्मोंको दोषकी तरह छोड़नेकी बात है। परन्तु सम्पूर्ण कर्मोंका त्याग कोई कर ही नहीं सकता (गीता 3। 5) और कर्ममात्रका त्याग करनेसे जीवननिर्वाह भी नहीं हो सकता (गीता 3। 8)। इसलिये भगवान्ने नित्य कर्मोंका स्वरूपसे त्याग करनेको राजसतामस त्याग बताया है (18। 78)।3 -- सर्वकर्मफलत्यागम् -- त्यागके इस पहले मतमें केवल फलका त्याग बताया है। यहाँ फलत्यागके अन्तर्गत केवल कामनाके त्यागकी ही बात आयी है (टिप्पणी प0 871.1)। ममताआसक्तिके त्यागकी बात इसके अन्तर्गत नहीं ले सकते क्योंकि ऐसा लेनेपर दार्शनिकों और भगवान्के मतोंमें कोई अन्तर नहीं रहेगा। भगवान्के मतमें कर्मकी आसक्ति और फलकी आसक्ति -- दोनोंके ही त्यागकी बात आयी है -- सङ्गं त्यक्त्वा फलानि च (गीता 18। 6)।4 -- यज्ञदानतपःकर्म न त्याज्यम् -- त्याग अर्थात् कर्मयोगके इस दूसरे मतमें यज्ञ? दान और तपरूप कर्मोंका त्याग न करनेकी बात है। परन्तु इन तीनोंके अलावा वर्ण? आश्रम? परिस्थिति आदिको लेकर जितने कर्म आते हैं? उनको करने अथवा न करनेके विषयमें कुछ नहीं कहा गया है -- यह इसमें अधूरापन है। भगवान्के मतमें इन कर्मोंका केवल त्याग ही नहीं करना चाहिये? प्रत्युत इनको न करते हों? तो जरूर करना चाहिये और इनके अतिरिक्त तीर्थ? व्रत आदि कर्मोंको भी फल एवं आसक्तिका त्याग करके करना चाहिये (18। 56)। सम्बन्ध -- पीछेके दो श्लोकोंमें दार्शनिक विद्वानोंके चार मत बतानेके बाद अब भगवान् आगेके तीन श्लोकोंमें पहले त्यागके विषयमें अपना मत बताते हैं।
।।18.2।। काम्य कर्मों का त्याग संन्यास कलाता है और समस्त कर्मों का फलत्याग त्याग कहा जाता हा। शास्त्रीय सिद्धांतों से अनभिज्ञ लोगों को इन दोनों में कोई अन्तर नहीं ज्ञात होता? क्योंकि कामना सदैव फलप्राप्ति की ही होती है। अत? कामना प्रेरित कर्मों का त्याग और कर्मफल की आसक्ति का त्याग ये दोनों ही समान प्रतीत होते हैं। इसका कारण शास्त्रों से अनभिज्ञता अथवा उनका सतही अध्ययन ही हो सकता है।इसमें कोई सन्देह नहीं कि दोनों का अर्थ कामना का त्याग ही है? परन्तु त्याग और संन्यास में कुछ अन्तर है। फिर भी त्याग? संन्यास का अविभाज्य अंग है। मनुष्य वर्तमान में कर्म करता है और आशा करता है कि उसे इष्टफल भविष्य में प्राप्त होगा। वर्तमान के कर्म का परिणाम ही भावी फल है। इसलिए? निष्काम कर्म वर्तमान में ही हो सकते हैं? जब कि फलभोग की चिन्ता से उत्पन्न होने वाली मन की व्याकुलता का संबंध भविष्य काल से होता है। वर्तमान के कर्म की परिसमाप्ति भावी फल में होती है। कामना और विक्षेप मन में अशान्ति उत्पन्न करते हैं। कामना जितनी अधिक तीव्र होगी? उतनी ही अधिक मात्रा में हमारी आन्तरिक शक्तियों का ह्रास होगा और ऐसा शक्तिहीन पुरुष किसी भी कर्म को कुशलता एवं उत्साह के साथ सम्पादित नहीं कर सकता। यह भी ध्यान देने योग्य बात है कि अहंकार या जीव ही इच्छा करता है। अत? अहंकार की निवृत्ति का अर्थ है? व्यष्टि जीव की विरति और उस साधक की अपने सर्वोच्च स्वरूप में दृढ़ स्थिति।कर्म वर्तमान में होते हैं और उनके फल भविष्य में प्राप्त होने की सम्भावना रहती है। जो व्यक्ति फल की चिन्ता करता है वह वर्तमान में कार्य करने की अपनी क्षमता खो देता है। स्वाभाविक ही है कि उस व्यक्ति को इष्ट फल मिलने की सम्भावना कम हो जाती है? क्योंकि कर्म का फल कर्ता के प्रयत्न तथा प्रकृति के नियमादि अन्य कई कारणों पर निर्भर करता है। अत हमें फलासक्ति का त्याग करने का उपदेश दिया जाता है।संक्षेप में यह कहा जा सकता है कि त्याग साधन है और संन्यास साध्य है। त्याग और संन्यास की साधना का संबंध हमारे कर्मों से है। भगवान् श्रीकृष्ण कर्म के महत्त्व पर बल देते हुए कभी नहीं थकते। इन दोनों शब्दों में से कोई भी यह नहीं दर्शाता है कि हमको कर्म की उपेक्षा करनी चाहिए। इसके विपरीत? दोनों का आग्रह कर्म के पालन पर ही है। हमको कर्म करने ही चाहिए। तथापि? ये कर्म अहंकार और स्वार्थ या फलासक्ति से रहित होने चाहिए। फलासक्ति ही हमारी कार्यकुशलता में बाधक बनती है। फलासक्ति के अभाव में हमारे कर्म हमें अपना पूर्ण पुरस्कार प्रदान कर सकते हैं। हम कह सकते हैं कि वेदों में प्रयुक्त इन दो शब्दों के अर्थों की अपेक्षा गीता में दी गई इनकी परिभाषाएं अधिक उदार एवं सहिष्णु हैं।अज्ञानी पुरुष को कर्म करने चाहिए या नहीं इस पर कहते हैं
18.2 The Blessed Lord said The learned ones know sannyasa to be the giving up of actions done with a desire for reward. The adepts call the abandonment of the results of all works as tyaga.
18.2 The Blessed Lord said The sages understand Sannyasa to be the renunciation of action with desire; the wise declare the abandonment of the fruits of all actions as Tyaga.
18.2. The Bhagavat said The seers understand the act of renouncing the desire-motivated actions as renunciation; the experts declare the relinishment of the fruits of all actions to be relinishment.
18.2 काम्यानाम् (of) desireful? कर्मणाम् of actions? न्यासम् the renunciation? संन्यासम् Sannyasa? कवयः the sages? विदुः understand? सर्वकर्मफलत्यागम् the abandonment of the fruits of all works? प्राहुः declare? त्यागम् abandonment? विचक्षणाः the wise.Commentary Kamya Karmani Activities such as the Asvamedha (a special sacrifice)? etc.? which are performed for the attainment of specific selfish ends. The wise men declare that Tyaga means abandonment of the fruits of all the Nitya and Naimittika works (ordinary and extraordinary or occasional duties).The rootmeaning of the words Sannyasa and Tyaga is to give up. In popular usage Sannyasa and Tyaga are more or less synonymous. Both mean renunciation. The two words do not mean two altogether distinct ideas as stone and fruit? or pot and cloth. They convey the same general idea with a slight distinction.An objector asks It is said that the Nitya and Naimittika actions cannot produce any fruits. Why then is the relinishment of their fruits mentioned here It is like asking for the relinishment of the barren womans sonWe say The objection is not correct. In the opinion of the Lord? ordinary and occasional duties cause their own fruits (vide XVIII.12). Sannyasins alone who have renounced the desire for the fruits of actions will not get the fruits? but other persons will have to reap the fruits of the ordinary and occasional actions.If one renounces all actions after the attainment of Selfrealisation and enters into the fourth order of life (Sannyasa) it is called VidvatSannyasa. If one renounces all actions and enters into the order of Sannyasa for the sake of doing VedantaVichara (or reflection on the truths of the Vedantaphilosophy and on the true significance of the great sentences of the Upanishads which reveal the identity of the individual soul with the Supreme Being) and for thus attaining Selfrealisation? it is called VividishaSannyasa.
18.2 Some kavayah, learned ones; viduh, know; sannyasam, sannyasa, the meaning of the word sannyasa, the non-performance of what comes as a duty; to be the nyasam, giving up; karmanam, of actions; kamyanam, done with a desire for reward, e.g. Horse-sacrifice etc. Sarva-karma-phala-tyagah, abandonment of the results of all actions, means the giving up of the results accruing to oneself from all actions- the daily obligatory and the occasional (nitya and naimittika) that are performed. Vicaksanah, the adepts, the learned ones; prahuh, call, speak of that; as tyagam, tyaga, as the meaning of the word tyaga. Even if the giving up of actions for desired results or the abandonment of results be the intended meaning, in either case the one meaning of the words sannyasa and tyaga amounts only to tyaga (giving up); they do not imply distinct categories as do the words pot and cloth. Objection: Well, is it not that they say the daily obligatory (nitya) and the occasional (naimittika) rites and duties have no results at all? How is the giving up of their results spoken of-like the abandoning of a son of a barren woman?! Reply: This defect does not desire. It is the intention of the Lord that the nitya-karmas (daily obligatory duties) also have results; for the Lord will say, The threefold results of actions-the undesirable, the desirable and the mixed-accrue after death to those who do not resort to tyaga, and also, but never to those who resort to sannyasa (monks) (12). Indeed, by showing that, it is only in the case of sannyasins (monks) alone that there is no connection with the results of actions, the Lord asserts in, ৷৷.accrue after death to those who do not resort to tyaga (renunciation) (abid.), that the result of daily obligatory (nitya) duties accrue to those who are not sannyasins (monks).
18.2 Kamyanam etc. The desire-motivated actions : the Agnistoma (sacrifce) etc. All actions etc. : The relinishment is the relinishment of fruits, even while performing all actions tha are to be performed daily or occasionally. Whatever remains to be spoken in this chapter had been examined in detail even by the previous commentators like the revered Bhatta Bhaskara and others. Hence why should we take the trouble of repeating. For, our main concern is to fulfil the promise to show only the hidden purport of this [work]. Therefore now [the Bhagavat] relates different views in order to determine the best in this regard -
18.2 The Lord said Some scholars understand that Sannyasa is complete relinishment of desire-prompted acts. Some other wise men say that the meaning of the term Tyaga, according to the Sastras dealing with release, is relinishment of the fruits not only of all desiderative (Kamya), but also of obligatory and occasional, duties . Here, the problem is, whether the Tyaga taught in the Sastras concern desiderative acts themselves, or fruits of all acts. Sri Krsna has used the terms Sannyasa in one place and Tyaga elsewhere. From this it is understood that Sri Krsna uses the terms Tyaga and Sannyasa as synonyms. Likewise, the decisive teaching is about Tyaga alone in the statement: Hear My decision, O Arjuna, about Tyaga (18.4). That the terms are synonymously used to denote the same sense, is conclusively established from such passages as: But the renunciation (Sannyasa) of obligatory work is not proper. Abandonment (Tyaga) of it through delusion is declared to be Tamasika (18.7); and To those who have not renounced the fruits of actions, threefold are the conseences after death - undesirable, desriable and mixed. But to those who have renounced, none whatsoever (18.12).
Taking up the former idea first, the Lord explains the different derivations of the two words. To renounce (nyasa) at the very root activities performed for fulfilling personal desires (kamyanam karmanam) is called sannyasa. Personal desires are indicated in such statements as the following: putra-kamo yajeta, svarga-kamo yajeta One with a desire for a son should worship. One with desire for svarga should worship. Apastambha Srauta Sutra 3.9.4,19.10.14 This does not mean that one should reject daily obligatory activities (nitya karma) such as sandhya worship. Tyaga means that one should give the results of all activities in performance of actions with personal desire (kamya karma) or obligatory actions (nitya karma), rather than to give up those activities completely. For the srutis also promise results for the obligatory actions (nitya karma). karmana pitrloka By the obligatory actions one goes to pitr loka. Brhad Aranyaka Upanisad 1.5 dharmena papam apanudati By following dharma, one eradicates sin. Mahanarayana Upanisad 15.7 Therefore, in tyaga, one should perform all kamya and nitya karmas without seeking results, whereas in sannyasa one performs only obligatory duties (nitya karma) without the desire for results, and completely rejects rituals for personal gratification (kamya karma). This is the distinction of the two words sannyasa and tyaga.
The Supreme Lord Krishna replied: Sages and those proficient in learning understand that renouncing and abandoning actions that fulfil desires found in the Vedic scriptures such as prescribed procedures for getting a son, or prescribed rituals for entering the heavenly planets is known as sannyasa and this includes renouncing all actions as well as their rewards. The spiritually enlightened declare that renouncing and relinquishing the desire for rewards of actions although performing daily and occasional prescribed duties and not renouncing the actions themselves is known as tyaja. The question may arise that since no rewards are mentioned for regular and occasional prescribed duties how can there be renunciation of rewards that do not exist. It is as if a barren woman could give up her child. The answer to such a query is that although no specific rewards are declared in the Vedic scriptures, ordinances and injunctions such as: The sandhya vrata which is the chanting of sacred incantations three times daily must always duly be performed by initiated Vaisnava Brahmins and the Ekadasi vrata which is fasting from all grains and beans on the 11th day of the waxing and waning moon must always be observed by all human beings. Although ordinances and injunctions cannot inspire a undiscerning person to perform an activity which seems to have no purpose; yet if they are omitted or ignored it will be a cause for sinfulness and demerit. So according to the rule of parallel opposites it is understood that some merit must also be present in performing prescribed Vedic activities. It would not be reasonable to follow Prabhakaras opinion that the injunction itself is self-sufficient and requires no result because that would be contrary to the law of karma or that of there is an equal reaction comprised from every action. Further more Vedic scriptures such as the Chandogya Upanisad II.XXIII.I beginning trayo dharma skandha yagno confirms that: Those who perform sacred Vedic rites attain to immortality. The Brihadaranyaka Upanisad I.V.XVI beginning atha trayo vai a loka confirms that: By performing Vedic rituals and knowledge the higher realms are gained and the Maha Narayana Upanidad XXII.I declares that: By performance of Vedic rituals one is absolved from sins. This is why the spiritually evolved agree that the abandoning of the desire for rewards of actions is renunciation known as tyaja. But then an argument could be raised that if one were to relinquish the desire for any reward there would be no inclination to perform the action. But this thinking is faulty and not accurate because all Vedic activities are for the general evolution of society and are meant to gradually produce the impulse for atma tattva or self-realisation. The Brhadaranyaka Upanisad IV.IV.XXII beginning sa va esa mahanaja atma states: Vaisnava brahmanas realise the atma or immortal soul by study of the Vedic scriptures, through ritualistic propitiation and worship and by austerities which is renunciation of the objects of sense enjoyment. Hence it has been clarified that renunciation for the desires of rewards is what is to be abandoned as they keep one revolving in samsara the perpetual cycle of birth and death and thus it is possible to perform all actions in such a renounced state and achieve moksa or liberation from material existence. Moksa may also be considered a desire but it is the internal desire of the intellect for a spiritual result and not the mundane desire for a material reward. Moksa is achieved by inclination of the intellect, by inspired faith, by reflection, introspection and meditation, by the cessation of identifying with the physical body, by discrimination between matter and spirit. Until one has reached this point, the relegation of prescribed duties for purification of the mind which are not antagonistic to devotion to the Supreme Lord while relinquishing the desire for rewards is essential and not the actual abandonment of actions. The Iso Upanisad verse II beginning kurvan neve ha karmani states: By performing Vedic activities one should not mind to live 100 years. That is because during this time the cessation of activities without the desire for rewards will manifest automatically as a natural process due to the internal inclination of the purified intellect which dissolves all impurities as the spring rain clouds depart after fulfilling their purpose. Lord Krishna has stated earlier in chapter 3, verse 17 that: One who delights in the atma, who is satisfied with the atma, who is content in the atma has no need to perform any duties. The great sage Vasisitha has explained that: The enlightened make no effort to renounce actions yet actions renounce them for the root of all actions is desire and desire is non-existent in the enlightened ones. One may also renounce actions due to the fact that actions impede and hinder the practice of meditation. One should perform mundane actions until one develops distaste and then disgust for them. In the Srimad Bhagavatam XI.XIV.XXVIII beginning tasmad aswad abbhidhyanam Lord Krishna Himself explains that: One should give up all material processes for elevation which are like the meanderings of a dream and purify themselves by focusing the mind completely in the Supreme Lord. The precise reason for this instruction was given by Lord Krishna earlier in Srimad Bhagavatam XI.XIV.XXII beginning dharmah satya-dayopeto means: Righteous and spiritual activities performed sincerely as well as esoteric knowledge obtained by prodigious austerities cannot completely purify the consciousness if they are not endowed with devotion to the Supreme Lord. In this light even moksa is insignificant and never pursued or even thought about by the surrendered devotees of the Supreme Lord Krishna or any of His authorised incarnations and expansions as revealed in Vedic scriptures. So we have presented various examples from diverse angles of vision to answer this question adequately.
Lord Krishna explains that the absence of prescribed Vedic actions which hold even a miniscule residue for rewards is renunciation known as sannyasa or relinquishing of actions. Tyaja is renunciation by abandoning the desire for rewards and not the prescribed actions themselves. Both sannyasa and tyaja are considered renunciation.
Some learned philosophers contend that sannyasa or renunciation is the abstention from performing activities for rewards. Other sophisticated sages assert that in sections of the Vedic scriptures pertaining to moksa or liberation from material existence that tyaja or renunciation means abandoning the rewards attached to Vedic activities whether they are namittika or regular duties or kamya or specific activities prescribed for specific results. The contention here is the predominance of one or the other points of view when in contradiction. Is sannyasa or abandonment of the activities for rewards alone sufficient or is tyaja the abandonment of desires for rewards the essential attribute to be embraced? Both appear to be plausible and both are situated in renunciation and both may be used synonymously and considered as renunciation. More clarity concerning this topic is presented by Lord Krishna in verses four, seven and twelve.
Some learned philosophers contend that sannyasa or renunciation is the abstention from performing activities for rewards. Other sophisticated sages assert that in sections of the Vedic scriptures pertaining to moksa or liberation from material existence that tyaja or renunciation means abandoning the rewards attached to Vedic activities whether they are namittika or regular duties or kamya or specific activities prescribed for specific results. The contention here is the predominance of one or the other points of view when in contradiction. Is sannyasa or abandonment of the activities for rewards alone sufficient or is tyaja the abandonment of desires for rewards the essential attribute to be embraced? Both appear to be plausible and both are situated in renunciation and both may be used synonymously and considered as renunciation. More clarity concerning this topic is presented by Lord Krishna in verses four, seven and twelve.
Sri Bhagavaan Uvaacha: Kaamyaanaam karmanaam nyaasam sannyaasam kavayoviduh; Sarvakarmaphalatyaagam praahustyaagam vichakshanaah.
śhrī-bhagavān uvācha—the Supreme Divine Personality said; kāmyānām—desireful; karmaṇām—of actions; nyāsam—giving up; sanyāsam—renunciation of actions; kavayaḥ—the learned; viduḥ—to understand; sarva—all; karma-phala—fruits of actions; tyāgam—renunciation of desires for enjoying the fruits of actions; prāhuḥ—declare; tyāgam—renunciation of desires for enjoying the fruits of actions; vichakṣhaṇāḥ—the wise
