File manager

There is (astis) no such (na tad) being in existence (sattvaṁ), either on earth (pṛthivyāṁ vā) or (vā) even (punaḥ) among the demigods (deveṣu) in the higher planetary system (divi), who (yad) is (syāt) freed from (muktaṁ) these (ebhiḥ) three (tribhir) modes (guṇaiḥ) born of material nature (prakṛti-jair). (BG 18.40)

The influence of the three modes leads to the exhibition of certain psychophysical traits that furthermore results in a natural division within our society for engagement in different occupational activities. As stated earlier (BG 4.13), Krishna Himself created such an organized system to engage everyone according to one’s qualities and actions. Here, Krishna reiterates the same point, but also spells out the social divisions based on the modes of nature and presents this in the light of the aforementioned dynamics of action.

The actions [duties] (karmāṇi) of the brāhmaṇas (brāhmaṇa), the kṣatriyas (kṣatriya), the vaiśyas (viśāṁ) and the śūdras (śūdrāṇāṁ) are divided by (pravibhaktāni) the psychophysical trait (svabhāva) born of (prabhavair) the modes (guṇaiḥ). (BG 18.41) Roughly, they correspond to the intellectual teaching class, the ruling class, the business class, and the worker class respectively. Henceforth, Krishna discusses the actions of the brāhmaṇas, the kṣatriyas, the vaiśyas, and the śūdras.

Peacefulness (śamo), self-control (damas), austerity (tapaḥ), purity (śaucaṁ), tolerance (kṣāntir), as well as (eva ca) honesty (ārjavam), knowledge (jñānaṁ), wisdom (vijñānam), and faith in God (āstikyaṁ) constitute the action of a brāhmaṇa (brahma-karma) born of psychophysical nature (svabhāva-jam). (BG 18.42) Heroism (śauryaṁ), power (tejo), conviction (dhṛtir), proficiency (dākṣyaṁ), not fleeing from battle (yuddhe cāpy apalāyanam), generosity (dānam) and ruling spirit (īśvara-bhāvaś ca) form the action of a kṣatriya (kṣātraṁ karma) born of nature (svabhāva-jam). (BG 18.43) It is noteworthy that the actions of brāhmaṇas and kṣatriyas are indistinguishable from their qualities.

Agriculture (kṛṣi), cow protection (go-rakṣya), and business (vāṇijyaṁ) form the action of a vaiśya (vaiśya-karma) born of nature (svabhāva-jam). And the action (karma) of a śūdra (śūdrasyāpi) born of nature (svabhāva-jam) lies in rendering service to others (paricaryātmakaṁ). (BG 18.44)

By engagement in (abhirataḥ) one’s own (sve sve) work (karmaṇy), each person (naraḥ) achieves (labhate) perfection (saṁsiddhiṁ). Let’s hear (tac chṛṇu) how (yathā) one attains (vindati) perfection (siddhiṁ) by engagement in one’s work (sva-karma-nirataḥ). (BG 18.45) Here is a secret. By worship of the Supreme (tam abhyarcya), from whom (yataḥ) all living beings (bhūtānāṁ) came into being (pravṛttir) and by whom (yena) all (sarvam) this (idaṁ) is pervaded (tatam), utilizing one’s own work (sva-karmaṇā), a human being (mānavaḥ) attains perfection (siddhiṁ vindati). (BG 18.46)

In summary, the secret to perfection lies in the dedication of our actions to the Supreme, or doing everything for the pleasure of the Supreme Lord.

That (tad) which (yat) is just like poison (viṣam iva) at the beginning (agre) and like nectar (amṛtopamam) at the end (pariṇāme) that happiness (tat sukhaṁ) is said to be (proktam) in the mode of goodness (sāttvikaṁ). It is born of self-discernment and mercy (ātma-buddhi-prasāda-jam). (BG 18.37)

The (tad) happiness (sukhaṁ) from the contact of the senses with their objects (viṣayendriya-saṁyogād), which (yat) appears like nectar (amṛtopamam) at the beginning (agre) but like poison (viṣam iva) at the end (pariṇāme), that (tat) is considered to be (smṛtam) in the mode of passion (rājasaṁ). (BG 18.38)

And (ca), that (tat) happiness (sukhaṁ), which (yad) deludes the soul (mohanam ātmanaḥ) at the beginning (agre) and at the end (anubandhe ca), arising from (utthaṁ) sleep, laziness and madness (nidrālasya-pramāda) is said to be (udāhṛtam) in the mode of darkness (tāmasam). (BG 18.39)

The conviction (dhṛtyā), by which (yayā) the activities of the mind, life, and senses (manaḥ-prāṇendriya-kriyāḥ) are sustained (dhārayate) by undeviating (āvyabhicāriṇyā) practice of yoga (yogena), that conviction (dhṛtiḥ sā) is in the mode of goodness (sāttvikī). (BG 18.33)

But (tu) that conviction (dhṛtyā), which is eager for fruit (phalākāṅkṣī), by which (yayā) righteousness (dharma) is sustained (dhārayate) for the sake of (arthān) enjoying lustful desire (kāma) with intense attachment (prasaṅgena), that (sā) conviction (dhṛtiḥ) is in the mode of passion (rājasī). (BG 18.34)

The unintelligent (durmedhā) conviction (yayā) by which one cannot give up (na vimuñcati ) sleep (svapnaṁ), fearfulness (bhayaṁ), lamentation (śokaṁ), depression (viṣādaṁ) and even madness (madam eva ca), that (sā) conviction (dhṛtiḥ) is in the mode of darkness (tāmasī). (BG 18.35)

Krishna describes a variety of motivations driving a performer influenced by the modes of material nature.

Free from attachment (mukta-saṅgo) and false ego (anahaṁ-vādī), accompanied by conviction and enthusiasm (dhṛty-utsāha-samanvitaḥ), and unwavering (nirvikāraḥ) in success and failure (siddhy-asiddhyor), a performer (kartā) is said to be (ucyate) in the mode of goodness (sāttvika). (BG 18.26)

Attached [to action and the fruit of action] (rāgī), desiring to enjoy the fruit of action (karma-phala-prepsur), greedy (lubdho), envious (hiṁsātmako), impure (aśuciḥ), and filled with joy and sorrow (harṣa-śokānvitaḥ), a performer (kartā) is declared to be (parikīrtitaḥ) in the mode of passion (rājasaḥ). (BG 18.27)

Improperly engaged (ayuktaḥ), materialistic (prākṛtaḥ), obstinate (stabdhaḥ), deceitful (śaṭho), malicious (naiṣkṛtiko), lazy (alasaḥ), morose (viṣādī) and procrastinating (dīrgha-sūtrī ca), a performer (kartā) is said to be (ucyate) in the mode of darkness (tāmasa). (BG 18.28)

What are the qualities a performer of action exhibits while carrying out the action? These are expressed in terms of the performer’s discernment and conviction in three modes during the performance of the action. Let’s hear (śṛṇu) of the divisions (bhedaṁ) of discernment and conviction (buddher dhṛteś caiva), according to the three modes of material nature (guṇatas tri-vidhaṁ) as described (procyamānam) in full (aśeṣeṇa) in different ways (pṛthaktvena). (BG 18.29)

The quality of discernment (buddhiḥ) which (yā) carries the understanding (vetti) of what is to be engaged in (pravṛttiṁ ca) and what is to be refrained from (nivṛttiṁ ca), what is one’s duty and what is not one’s duty (kāryākārye), what is to be feared and what is not to be feared (bhayābhaye), what is binding and what is liberating (bandhaṁ mokṣaṁ ca), that is (sā) in the mode of goodness (sāttvikī). (BG 18.30)

The quality of discernment (buddhiḥ) by which (yayā) one imprecisely (ayathāvat) understands (prajānāti) righteousness and unrighteousness (dharmam adharmaṁ ca), what is one’s duty and what is not one’s duty (kāryaṁ cākāryam eva ca), that is (sā) in the mode of passion (rājasī). (BG 18.31)

The quality of discernment (buddhiḥ) which (yā), covered by darkness (tamasāvṛtā) considers (manyate) unrighteousness as righteousness (adharmaṁ dharmam iti) and takes every meaning (sarvārthān) in an opposite way (viparītāṁś ca), that is (sā) in the mode of darkness (tāmasī). (BG 18.32)

That conception (jñānaṁ) by which (yena) one sees (īkṣate) one (ekaṁ) unchanging (avyayam) nature (bhāvam) in all living beings (sarva-bhūteṣu), undivided (avibhaktaṁ) in the divided (vibhakteṣu), we should understand (viddhi) it (taj) to be in the mode of goodness (sāttvikam). (BG 18.20) However (tu), the (yaj) conception (jñānaṁ) by which one understands (vetti) many essential natures (nānā-bhāvān) of different varieties (pṛthag-vidhān) manifest differently (pṛthaktvena) in all living beings (sarveṣu bhūteṣu), we should know (viddhi) that conception (taj jñānaṁ) to be in the mode of passion (rājasam). (BG 18.21) But (tu), the conception by which (yat) one is attached (saktam) to one (ekasmin) action (kārye) as the all in all (kṛtsna-vad), without any sound reasoning (ahaitukam), without any basis of the truth (atattvārtha-vad), and is fragmental in conception (alpaṁ ca), that (tat) is said to be (udāhṛtam) in the mode of darkness (tāmasam). (BG 18.22)

A material conception propels a material action, while a spiritual conception results in a spiritual action.

That (tat) action (karma) which (yat) is prescribed (niyataṁ) and which is performed (kṛtam) without attachment (saṅga-rahitam), without love or hatred (arāga-dveṣataḥ), by one without desiring fruits (aphala-prepsunā) is said to be (ucyate) in the mode of goodness (sāttvikam). (BG 18.23) But (tu) that (tad) action (karma) which (yat) is performed (kriyate) with great effort (bahulāyāsaṁ) by one seeking to gratify one’s desires (kāmepsunā), or again (vā punaḥ), enacted with false ego (sāhaṅkāreṇa), is declared to be (udāhṛtam) in the mode of passion (rājasam). (BG 18.24) That (tat) action (karma) which (yat) is initiated (ārabhyate) in illusion (mohād), disregarding (anapekṣya ca) future bondage (anubandhaṁ), waste (kṣayaṁ), violence (hiṁsām) and one’s own ability (pauruṣam) is said to be (ucyate) in the mode of darkness (tāmasam). (BG 18.25)

One whose (yasya) internal state (bhāvo) is not (na) governed by false ego (ahaṅkṛto), whose (yasya) power of discernment (buddhir) is not (na) tainted (lipyate), even while killing (hatvāpi) these people (sa imāḻ lokān), does not kill (na hanti) and is not bound (na nibadhyate) [by action]. (BG 18.17)

Knowledge (jñānaṁ), the object of knowledge (jñeyaṁ), and the knower (parijñātā) are the three types (tri-vidhā) of impetuses of action (karma-codanā). The senses (karaṇaṁ), the action (karma), and the performer (karteti) are the three (tri-vidhaḥ) constituents of action (karma-saṅgrahaḥ). (BG 18.18) Knowledge (jñānaṁ), the action (karma ca), and the performer of action (kartā ca) are at three levels (tridhaiva) distinguished based on the modes of material nature (guṇa-bhedataḥ). Let’s hear (chṛṇu) them as well (tāny api) in their true form (yathāvac). (BG 18.19)

Every action begins with the performer’s carrying a conception [material or spiritual] about himself or herself, the objects of this material world as well as the goal of life. Knowledge (jñānaṁ) here refers to one’s inner conceptions that encapsulate the basis of action. The defining characteristic of a performer is his or her motivation behind the action. So, we can associate the performer (kartā) with the performer’s motivation behind the action.

The performer’s conceptions, the motivation behind an action, and the action itself can get colored by the modes of nature. Before performing an action (karma), the conception (jñānaṁ), and motivation (kartā) of the performer come into play. During the performance of the action, the performer’s discernment (buddhi) to chalk out the details of the action at hand and inner conviction (dhṛti) to stay put in the action are driving the show. Overall, what matters before, during, and after the performance of the action is the experience of happiness (sukha) that the performer goes through in the process of executing the action. We can express these succinctly as follows:

Conception (jñānaṁ) + Motivation (kartā) + Action (karma) + Discernment (buddhi) + Conviction (dhṛti) => Experience (sukha)

So, Krishna henceforth discusses the qualitative influence of the modes of nature on each of these factors of action in great detail.

We should understand (nibodha) from Krishna (me) that as stated (proktāni) in the Sāṅkhya conclusion (sāṅkhye kṛtānte), these are the five (pañcaitāni) causes (kāraṇāni) for success (siddhaye) in all actions (sarva-karmaṇām) (BG 18.13) – the place of action (adhiṣṭhānaṁ), and (tathā) the performer (kartā), the various senses (karaṇaṁ ca pṛthag-vidham), the many different kinds of endeavor (vividhāś ca pṛthak ceṣṭā), and (ca) certainly (eva) the (atra) fifth cause (pañcamam), the Supersoul (daivaṁ). (BG 18.14) Another way to list the five causes that produce fruits from an action is as follows:

1. the environmental factors (the body, and the immediate environment where one is performing an action), which are provided by and fully under the control of the Supersoul. This is where the laws of physics operate. The body here refers to the facilities and limitations one is born with in a particular species of life. The following three causes are somewhat partially under the control of a conscious individual soul.
2. the conscious initiator of action [the embodied soul], who is typically within the influence of the modes of nature. This is where the impetus of action is.
3. the various tools associated with the body, which refer to the prowess of the senses that constitute the body. By honing specific skills, one can increase the prowess of one’s senses. The sensory prowess leads to the development of various techniques that contribute to efficacy within an action. One may have certain prowess, but it is useless until one makes some efforts.
4. the diverse efforts that are consciously made by the initiator of action.
5. the divine Supersoul, which permeates each of the above causes and acts as the ultimate sanctioning agent.

Whatever (yat) right or wrong (nyāyyaṁ vā viparītaṁ vā) action (karma) a person (naraḥ) initiates (prārabhate) with body, speech, and mind (śarīra-vāṅ-manobhir), these aforementioned five factors (pañcaite) are its (tasya) causes (hetavaḥ). (BG 18.15)

It is clear that an embodied soul is not the sole doer but has only a small contribution toward the fruits of action. Therefore, we are not entitled to enjoy the fruits of our actions.

Hence (tatraivaṁ), one who (yaḥ) but (tu) sees (paśyaty) oneself (ātmānaṁ) as the only (kevalaṁ) doer (sati kartāram), is not considered intelligent (akṛta-buddhitvān). Such an unintelligent person (durmatiḥ) cannot see things as they are (na sa paśyati). (BG 18.16) In this way, the unintelligent gets wrapped up in various attachments, stemming from the false conception that one is the sole doer of actions and the sole producer of results.

A charity (dānaṁ) that is (yad) given (dīyate) out of duty (dātavyam iti) without expecting any favor back (anupakāriṇe), at the right place (deśe) and time (kāle ca), and to a worthy recipient (pātre ca) – that charity (tad dānaṁ) is considered to be (smṛtam) in the mode of goodness (sāttvikaṁ). (BG 17.20)

But (tu), that (tad) charity (dānaṁ), which is (yat) given (dīyate) grudgingly (parikliṣṭaṁ ca) for the sake of (ārthaṁ) receiving favor in return (pratyupakāra), or (vā) again (punaḥ) aiming (uddiśya) for some fruit (phalam) is considered to be (smṛtam) in the mode of passion (rājasaṁ). (BG 17.21)

A charity (dānam), which is (yad) given (dīyate) at an improper place and time (adeśa-kāle), and to an unworthy recipient (apātrebhyaś ca), without proper regard (asat-kṛtam) and without proper attention (avajñātaṁ) – that is (tat) said to be (udāhṛtam) in the mode of darkness (tāmasam). (BG 17.22)

Worship (pūjanaṁ) of the Lord (deva), the twice-born (dvija), the spiritual master (guru), and the wise (prājña), cleanliness (śaucam), simplicity (ārjavam), celibacy (brahmacaryam) and nonviolence (ahiṁsā ca) are said to constitute (ucyate) bodily austerity (śārīraṁ tapa). (BG 17.14)

Speech (vākyaṁ) that is (yat) not causing a disturbance (anudvega-karaṁ), true (satyaṁ), pleasing (priya), and beneficial (hitaṁ ca), as well as (caiva) the practice of studying scriptures (svādhyāyābhyasanaṁ) are said to comprise (ucyate) austerity of the speech (vāṅ-mayaṁ tapa). (BG 17.15)

The satisfaction of the mind (manaḥ-prasādaḥ), gentleness (saumyatvaṁ), silence (maunam), self-control (ātma-vinigrahaḥ) and purity of one’s existence (bhāva-saṁśuddhir) – these (ity etat) are said to constitute (ucyate) mental austerity (tapo mānasam). (BG 17.16)

That (tat) threefold [bodily, speech and mental] (tri-vidhaṁ) austerity (tapas), which is executed (taptaṁ) with transcendental (parayā) faith (śraddhayā) by people (naraiḥ) not seeking any fruits (aphalākāṅkṣibhir) while engaged (yuktaiḥ) is considered to be (paricakṣate) in goodness (sāttvikaṁ). (BG 17.17)

An erratic (calam) and non-permanent (adhruvam) austerity (tapo) that is (yat) performed (kriyate) for the sake of gaining (ārthaṁ) respect (satkāra), prestige (māna) and honor (pūja), and with deceit (dambhena caiva) – that is said to be (tad iha proktaṁ) in the mode of passion (rājasaṁ). (BG 17.18)

An austerity (tapaḥ) that is (yat) performed (kriyate) out of foolishness (mūḍha-grāheṇa) by torturing oneself (ātmano pīḍayā) or (vā) for the sake of (ārthaṁ) destroying others (parasyotsādana), is said to be (udāhṛtam) in the mode of ignorance (tāmasam). (BG 17.19)

A sacrifice (yajño) that is (ya) performed (ijyate) by those who seek no fruits (aphalākāṅkṣibhir), according to the directions of scripture (vidhi-diṣṭo), as a matter of duty (yaṣṭavyam eveti), with the mind in full concentration (manaḥ samādhāya), is of the quality of goodness (sa sāttvikaḥ). (BG 17.11)

But (tu), a sacrifice (yajñaṁ) that is (yat) performed (ijyate) seeking (abhisandhāya) the fruit (phalaṁ) and also (api caiva) for the sake of deceit (dambhārtham), we should know that (taṁ viddhi) to be in the mode of passion (rājasam). (BG 17.12)

A sacrifice (yajñaṁ) performed without following any rules and regulations (vidhi-hīnam), without sharing of food (asṛṣṭānnaṁ), without chanting of mantra (mantra-hīnam), without offering gifts (adakṣiṇam), and without faith (śraddhā-virahitaṁ) is to be considered (paricakṣate) in the mode of darkness (tāmasaṁ). (BG 17.13)

In summary, a sacrifice in the mode of goodness and that in the mode of darkness are poles apart – the former is performed selflessly according to the directions of scriptures while the latter is bereft of any formal directions. A sacrifice in the mode of passion is characterized by utter selfishness.