The Bhagavadgîtâ, with the Sanatsugâtîya and the Anugîtâ — SBE Vol. 8 (trans. K. T. Telang, 1882)
The translator’s English as printed (K. T. Telang). The original-language text is not held; names are romanised as the translator printed them.
(making) sacrifices, penances, and gifts, is called ‘Sat;’ and (all) action, too, of which that¹ is the object, is also called ‘Sat.’ Whatever oblation is offered, whatever is given, whatever penance is performed, and whatever is done, without faith², that, O son of Pṛtha¹ is called ‘Asat, and that is nought, both after death and here,
CHAPTER XVIII.
Arguna said :
O you of mighty arms! O Hṛishîkesa!l O destroyer of Kesin! I wish to know the truth about renunciation and abandonment distinctly.
The Deity said:
By renunciation the sages understand the rejection of actions done with desires. The wise call the abandonment of the fruit of all actions (by the name) abandonment. Some wise men say, that action should be abandoned as being full of evil; and others, that the actions of sacrifice, gift, and penance should not be abandoned. As to that abandonment, O best of the descendants of Bharata! listen to my decision ; for abandonment, O bravest of men! is described (to be) threefold. The actions of sacrifice, gift, and penance should not be abandoned; they must needs be performed ; for sacrifices, gifts, and penances are means of sanctification to the wise. But even these actions, O son of Pṛithâ! should be performed, abandoning attachment and fruit; such is my excellent and decided opinion. The renunciation of prescribed action is not proper. Its abandonment through delusion¹ is described as of the quality of darkness. When a man abandons action, merely as being troublesome, through fear of bodily affliction, he does not obtain the fruit² of abandonment by making (such) passionate abandonment. When prescribed action is performed, O Arğuna! abandoning attachment and fruit also, merely because it ought to be performed, that is deemed (to be) a good abandonment. He who is possessed of abandonment”, being full of goodness, and talented, and having his doubts destroyed, is not averse from unpleasant actions, is not attached to pleasant* (ones). Since no embodied (being) can abandon actions without exception*, he is said to be possessed of abandonment, who abandons the fruit of action. The threefold fruit of action, agreeable, disagreeable, and mixed, accrues after death to those who are not possessed of abandonment, but never to renouncers*. Learn from me, O you of mighty arms! these five causes of the completion of all actions, declared in the Sankhya system 2 The substratum, the agent likewise, the various sorts of organs, and the various and distinct movements, and with these the deities, too, as the fifth. Whatever action, just or otherwise, a man performs with his body, speech, and mind, these five are its causes. That being so, the undiscerning man, who being of an unrefined understanding, sees the agent in the immaculate self, sees not (rightly)⁸ He who has no feeling of egoism*, and whose mind is not tainted, even though he kills (all) these people, kills not, is not fettered 5 (by the action). Knowledge‘, the object of knowledge, the knower—threefold is the prompting to action. The instrument, the action, the agent, thus in brief is action threefold. Knowledge and action and agent are declared in the enumeration of qualities² (to be) of three classes only, according to the difference of qualities. Hear about these also as they really are. Know that knowledge to be good, by which (a man) sees one entity, inexhaustible, and not different in all things (apparently) different? (from one another)*. Know that knowledge to be passionate, which is (based) on distinctions* (between different entities), which sees in all things various entities of different kinds. And that is described as dark, which clings to one created (thing) only as everything, which is devoid of reason, devoid of real principle, and insignificant*. That action is called good, which is prescribed, which is devoid of attachment, which is not done from (motives of) affection or aversion, (and which is done) by one not wishing for the fruit. That is described as passionate, which (occasions) much trouble, is performed by one who wishes for objects of desire, or one who is full of egotism*. The action is called dark, which is commenced through delusion, without regard to consequences, loss, injury, or strength* That agent is called good, who has cast off attachment, who is free from egotistic talk, who is possessed of courage and energy, and unaffected by success or ill-success. That agent is called passionate, who is full of affections⁸, wishes for the fruit of actions, who is covetous, cruel, and impure, and feels joy and sorrow. That agent is called dark, who is without application*, void of discernment, headstrong, crafty, malicious, lazy, melancholy, and slow. Now hear, O Dhanañgaya! the threefold division of intelligence¹ and courage, according to qualities, which I am about to declare exhaustively and distinctly. That intelligence, O son of Pṛtha¹ is good which understands action and inaction², what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, danger and the absence of danger, emancipation and bondage. That intelligence, O son of Pṛtha¹ is passionate, by which one imperfectly understands piety and impiety, what ought to be done and also what ought not to be done. That intelligence, O son of Pṛtha¹ is dark, which shrouded by darkness, understands impiety (to be) piety, and all things incorrectly. That courage, O son of Pṛtha¹ is good courage, which is unswerving 4, and by which one controls the operations of the mind, breath, and senses, through abstraction. But, O Arğuna! that courage is passionate, by which one adheres to piety, lust, and wealth*, and through attachment* wishes,
1 Le. either the Brahman itself, or sacrifice, penance, and gift.
2 Cf. Sutta Nipata, p. 69.
8 The meaning of this whole passage seems to be that these three words, which designate the Brahman, have distinct uses, as specified. ‘Om,’ says Nîlakaṇṭha, is employed whether the action is done with any special desire or not. Those who study the Brahman there means ‘study the Vedas.” ‘Tad’ is employed in case of actions without desires only. ‘Sat’ is employed, according to Sankara, in case of existence, such as the birth of a first son; ‘ goodness,’ the reclamation of a bad man ; * auspicious acts, marriage, &c. The intelligent use of these terms as here specified is said to cure any defects in the actions, the various classes of which are mentioned before. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY LIBRARY
(making) sacrifices, penances, and gifts, is called 'Sat;' and (all) action, too, of which that¹ is the object, is also called 'Sat.' Whatever oblation is offered, whatever is given, whatever penance is performed, and whatever is done, without faith², that, O son of Pṛtha¹, is called 'Asat,' and that is nought, both after death and here.
CHAPTER XVIII.
Arjuna said:
O mighty-armed one! O Hṛṣīkeśa! O slayer of Keśin! I wish to know the true nature of renunciation and abandonment, each distinctly in itself.
The Deity said:
By renunciation the sages understand the rejection of actions done with desires. The wise call the abandonment of the fruit of all actions (by the name) abandonment. Some wise men say that action should be abandoned as being full of evil; and others, that the actions of sacrifice, gift, and penance should not be abandoned. As to that abandonment, O best of the descendants of Bharata! listen to my decision; for abandonment, O bravest of men! is described as threefold. The actions of sacrifice, gift, and penance should not be abandoned; they must be performed; for sacrifices, gifts, and penances are means of sanctification to the wise. But even these actions, O son of Pṛithâ! should be performed while abandoning attachment and fruit; such is my excellent and decided opinion. The renunciation of prescribed action is not proper. Its abandonment through delusion¹ is described as of the quality of darkness. When a man abandons action merely because it is troublesome, through fear of bodily affliction, he does not obtain the fruit² of abandonment by making such a passionate abandonment. When prescribed action is performed, O Arjuna! abandoning attachment and fruit as well, simply because it ought to be performed, that is deemed a good abandonment. He who is possessed of abandonment, being full of goodness and talented, his doubts destroyed, is not averse from unpleasant actions and is not attached to pleasant* ones. Since no embodied being can abandon actions without exception*, the one who abandons the fruit of action is said to be possessed of abandonment. The threefold fruit of action—agreeable, disagreeable, and mixed—accrues after death to those who are not possessed of abandonment, but never to renouncers*. Learn from me, O you of mighty arms! these five causes of the completion of all actions, declared in the Sankhya system 2 The substratum, the agent likewise, the various sorts of organs, and the various and distinct movements, and with these the deities too, as the fifth. Whatever action, just or otherwise, a man performs with his body, speech, and mind, these five are its causes. That being so, the undiscerning man who, having an unrefined understanding, sees the agent in the immaculate self, does not see rightly⁸. He who has no feeling of egoism* and whose mind is not tainted, even though he kills all these people, kills not and is not fettered 5 by the action. Knowledge', the object of knowledge, the knower—threefold is the prompting to action. The instrument, the action, the agent: thus in brief action is threefold. Knowledge and action and agent are declared in the enumeration of qualities² to be of three classes only, according to the difference of qualities. Hear about these also as they really are. Know that knowledge to be good by which a man sees one entity, inexhaustible, and not different in all things apparently different from one another*. Know that knowledge to be passionate which is based on distinctions* between different entities and sees in all things various entities of different kinds. And that is described as dark which clings to one created thing only as everything, which is devoid of reason, devoid of real principle, and insignificant*. That action is called good which is prescribed, devoid of attachment, not done from motives of affection or aversion, and done by one who does not wish for the fruit. That is described as passionate which occasions much trouble and is performed by one who wishes for objects of desire or who is full of egotism*. The action is called dark which is commenced through delusion, without regard to consequences, loss, injury, or strength*. That agent is called good who has cast off attachment, who is free from egotistic talk, who is possessed of courage and energy, and who is unaffected by success or ill-success. That agent is called passionate who is full of affections⁸, wishes for the fruit of actions, is covetous, cruel, and impure, and feels joy and sorrow. That agent is called dark who is without application*, void of discernment, headstrong, crafty, malicious, lazy, melancholy, and slow. Now hear, O Dhanañjaya! the threefold division of intelligence¹ and courage, according to qualities, which I am about to declare exhaustively and distinctly. That intelligence, O son of Pṛtha¹ is good which understands action and inaction², what ought to be done and what ought not to be done, danger and the absence of danger, emancipation and bondage. That intelligence, O son of Pṛtha¹ is passionate, by which one imperfectly understands piety and impiety, what ought to be done and also what ought not to be done. That intelligence, O son of Pṛtha¹ is dark, which, shrouded by darkness, understands impiety to be piety and all things incorrectly. That courage, O son of Pṛtha¹ is good courage, which is unswerving 4, and by which one controls the operations of the mind, breath, and senses through abstraction. But, O Arjuna! that courage is passionate, by which one adheres to piety, lust, and wealth*, and through attachment* wishes,
1 That is, either the Brahman itself, or sacrifice, penance, and gift.
2 Cf. Sutta Nipata, p. 69.
8 The meaning of this whole passage seems to be that these three words designating the Brahman have distinct uses, as specified. 'Om,' says Nîlakaṇṭha, is used whether the action is performed with some particular desire or without any desire at all. 'Those who study the Brahman' means 'those who study the Vedas.' 'Tad' is used only in the case of actions performed without desire. 'Sat' is used, according to Sankara, in the case of existence, such as the birth of a first son; goodness, such as the reclamation of a bad man; and auspicious acts, such as marriage. Using these terms correctly in the ways here specified is said to remedy any defects in the actions, the various classes of which are mentioned earlier.