अर्जुन उवाच
ज्यायसी चेत्कर्मणस्ते मता बुद्धिर्जनार्दन।
तत्किं कर्मणि घोरे मां नियोजयसि केशव।।3.1।।
3.1 Arjuna said If Thou thinkest that knowledge is superior to action, O Krishna, why then, O Kesava, dost Thou ask me to engage in this terrible action?
3.1 O Janardana, cet, if it be; te, Your; mata, opinion, intention; that buddhih, Wisdom; jyayasi, is superior; karmanah, to action-. If the combination of Wisdom and action be intended (by the Lord), then the means to Liberation is only one. [The path combining Wisdom and action.] In that case, Arjuna would have done something illogical in separating Wisdom from action by saying that Wisdom is superior to action. For, that (Wisdom or action, which is a constituent of the combination) cannot be greater than that (Combination, even) from the point of view of the result. [Since what is intended is a combination, therefore, the separation of Knowledge from action, from the point of view of the result, is not justifiable. When Knowledge and action are considered to form together a single means to Liberation, in that case each of them cannot be considered separately as producing its own distinct result. Arjunas estion can be justified only if this separation were possible.] Similarly, what Arjuna said by way of censuring the Lord, as it were, in, It has been stated by the Lord that Wisdom is superior to action, and He exhorts me saying, Undertake action, which is a source of evil! What may be the reason for this?, and also in, Tatkim, why then, O Kesava; niyojayasi, do You urge; mam, me; to ghore, horrible, cruel; karmani, action; involving injury?-that (censure) also does not become reasonable. On the other hand, [If the opponents view be that Knowledge is to be combined with rites and duties sanctioned by the Vedas and the Smrtis in the case of the householders only, whereas for others those sanctioned by the Smrtis alone are to be combined with Knowledge৷৷., then৷৷.] if it be supposed that the combination (of Knowledge) with action sanctioned only by the Smrtis has been enjoined for all by the Lord, and Arjuna also comprehended (accordingly), then, how can the statement, Why then do you urge me to horrible action, be rational? Besides,
Arjuna UvaachaJyaayasee chet karmanaste mataa buddhir janaardana; Tat kim karmani ghore maam niyojayasi keshava.
arjunaḥ uvācha—Arjun said; jyāyasī—superior; chet—if; karmaṇaḥ—than fruitive action; te—by you; matā—is considered; buddhiḥ—intellect; janārdana—he who looks after the public, Krishna; tat—then; kim—why; karmaṇi—action; ghore—terrible; mām—me; niyojayasi—do you engage; keśhava—Krishna, the killer of the demon named Keshi; vyāmiśhreṇa iva—by your apparently ambiguous; vākyena—words; buddhim—intellect; mohayasi—I am getting bewildered; iva—as it were; me—my; tat—therefore; ekam—one; vada—please tell; niśhchitya—decisively; yena—by which; śhreyaḥ—the highest good; aham—I; āpnuyām—may attain
