FolioCorpusBhagavad-gītā

Bhagavad-gītā 18.7

నియతస్య తు సన్న్యాస: కర్మణో నోపపద్యతే । మోహాత్తస్య పరిత్యాగస్తామస: పరికీర్తిత: ॥ ౭ ॥
niyatasya tu sannyāsaḥ
[niyatasya tu sannyaasah]
karmaṇo nopapadyate
[karmano nopapadyate]
mohāt tasya parityāgas
[mohaat tasya parityaagas]
tāmasaḥ parikīrtitaḥ
[taamasah parikeertitah]
Word-for-word
niyatasya — prescribed tu — but sannyāsaḥ — renunciation karmaṇaḥ — of activities na — never upapadyate — is deserved mohāt — by illusion tasya — of them parityāgaḥ — renunciation tāmasaḥ — in the mode of ignorance parikīrtitaḥ — is declared .
Blended reading (Sanskrit + English inline)
niyatasya tu sannyāsaḥ
niyatasya
prescribed
tu
but
sannyāsaḥ
renunciation
karmaṇo nopapadyate
karmaṇaḥ
of activities
na
never
upapadyate
is deserved
mohāt tasya parityāgas
mohāt
by illusion
tasya
of them
parityāgaḥ
renunciation
tāmasaḥ parikīrtitaḥ
tāmasaḥ
in the mode of ignorance
parikīrtitaḥ
is declared .
Important Words
  • niyatasya — of prescribed (duty)
    Specifically the duty assigned to one by varṇa, āśrama, and situation. Kṛṣṇa is not talking about giving up just any work — only about abandoning *one's own* prescribed duty.
  • sannyāsaḥ — renunciation
    Same word as before, now applied wrongly. The verse exposes the misuse — sannyāsa of niyata-karma is not real sannyāsa at all.
  • mohāt — from illusion
    Ablative of cause. The motive matters. Renunciation born from moha — not from understanding — is the diagnostic mark of tamas.
  • tāmasaḥ — in the mode of ignorance
    First of the three tyāga categories the chapter will name. Kṛṣṇa starts at the bottom — the worst kind — to clear the field before describing what real tyāga looks like.
  • parikīrtitaḥ — is fully declared, is named
    Strong verb. This is not a tentative label; it is the formal classification. Such renunciation has a name in śāstra, and that name is tāmasa.
Prescribed duties should never be renounced. If one gives up his prescribed duties because of illusion, such renunciation is said to be in the mode of ignorance.
Purport

Work for material satisfaction must be given up, but activities which promote one to spiritual activity, like cooking for the Supreme Lord and offering the food to the Lord and then accepting the food, are recommended. It is said that a person in the renounced order of life should not cook for himself. Cooking for oneself is prohibited, but cooking for the Supreme Lord is not prohibited. Similarly, a sannyāsī may perform a marriage ceremony to help his disciple in the advancement of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. If one renounces such activities, it is to be understood that he is acting in the mode of darkness.

— A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda
Gauḍīya Ācāryas
Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura Gauḍīya
Translation
7. It is not recommended to give up nitya-karmas even for the sannyāsī. Rejection arising from ignorance of scripture ends in ignorance.
Commentary

Starting the description of the three types of tyāga, the Lord here describes tamasic tyāga. Giving up daily activities (niyatasya karmaṇaḥ) is not recommended. To reject the nitya-karmas out of ignorance of the meaning of scriptures (mohāt) is called tamasic tyāga. The sannyāsī can reject kāmya-karmas since they are not obligatory, but nitya-karmas are not to be rejected. That is the suggestion of the word tu. The result of such tamasic tyāga is ignorance, instead of attainment of knowledge, which was the very goal in rejecting the nitya-karma.

Baladeva Vidyābhūṣaṇa Gauḍīya
Translation
7. It is not recommended that even the sannyāsī give up daily rituals. Rejection arising from lack of knoweldge ends in the mode of ignorance.
Commentary

Now the Lord speaks of the three types of tyāga that He promised to explain, in three verses. One should give up kāmya karmas because they lead to bondage. But one should not renounce nitya and naimittika karms such as the five daily sacrifices. [Note: These are the paṣca mahā yajṣas: offerings to brahman by chanting the Vedas, offerings to the devas by arcana, offerings to the pitṛs by tarpaṇa, offerings to guests by food, and offerings to animals by food. Nitya karmas are those prescribed for daily performance and naimittika are those prescribed periodically, such as monthly or yearly.] These should not be given up because they produce liberation through the knowledge inherent in them from aiming at ātmā, and they enable one to continue to support the material body. A person worshipping the devatās who are vibhūṭis of the Lord can accomplish maintenance of his body for pursuing knowledge of the truth, by taking the purified remnants. If a person does the opposite of what was stated in Chapter three, in such statements as niyataṁ kuru karma tvam, and gives up those duties completely (parityāgaḥ) out of lack of knowledge (mohāt), thinking they will cause bondage, it is in the tamasic mode, since that moha is the quality of the mode of ignorance.

Bhūrijana Dāsa Gauḍīya
Commentary

What is the result of illusion or acting in illusion? ‑ Simply further illusion. These three kinds of renunciation are going to be described here and it should be clear by the end that Krsna is recommending one of these three kinds of renunciation. It is not renunciation in ignorance nor renunciation in passion. Here, giving up prescribed duties out of illusion, is in ignorance.

Study Notes — Gauranga Priya Dāsa
Gauranga Priya Dāsa Study
Bhakti-śāstrī Notes, ISKCON Chowpatty (2009)
Theme

Renunciation in the mode of ignorance

Prescribed duties should never be renounced
Giving up prescribed duties because of illusion is in the mode of ignorance
Examples – Cooking and marriage ceremony
Activities which promotes one to spiritual activity are recommended e.g. cooking and offering to the Lord; For a sannyasi, cooking for oneself is prohibited, but cooking for Supreme Lord is not prohibited
Sannyasi may perform marriage ceremony for his disciple to help him advance in Krishna consciousness
Classical Ācāryas
Śrī Śaṅkarācārya Classical
Translation
18.7 Therefore, sannyasah, the abandoning; niyatasya tu karmanah, of the daily obligatory acts, by the seeker of Liberation who is as yet unenlightened and is fit for rites and duites; na apapadyate, is not justifiable, because what is desired is the purification of unenlightened persons. Parityagah, giving up; tasya, of that, of the daily obligatory duty; mohat, through delusion, through ignorance; parikirtitah, is declared; to be tamasah, based on tamas. Niyata is that duty which must be performed. That an act is niyata (obligatory) and it is relinished is contradictory. Therefore the giving up of that through delusion is declared to be based on tamas, for delusion is tamas. Besides,
Śrī Rāmānujācārya Classical
Translation
18.7 Obligatory acts consist of daily, and occasional ceremonies like the five great sacrifices; their abandonment is not proper, for without actions even the sustenance of the body would be impossible, as already stated: 'From no-work, not even the body can be sustained' (3.8). The sustenance of the body by eating the sacrificial remnants produces perfect knowledge. Otherwise, as declared in the statement, 'But the sinful ones eat sin' (3.13). The satisfaction that comes by eating food which is not the remnant of sacrifice and which is therefore of the form of sin, is productive of erroneous knowledge in the mind. For, as declared in the Sruti, 'The mind consists of food' (Cha. U., 6.5.4), the mind is sustained by food. Also, there is the Sruti text, 'When the food is pure, the mind becomes pure; when the mind is pure, remembrance becomes firmly fixed; and when remembrance is acired, there is release from all knots of the heart' (Ibid., 7.26.2). It is therefore proved by the Sruti that knowledge of the form of direct perception of Brahman, is dependent on the purity of food. Hence the great sacrifices and such other obligatory and occasional rites are worthy of adoption till one's death, as they help in the knowledge of the Brahman. The renunciation of these is therefore not proper. Thus, the relinishment of these acts which produce knowledge through the delusion that they bind the self, is rooted in Tamas. Tamasika renunciation has its roots in Tamas. Since such renunciation has its roots in ignorance which is the effect of Tamas, such renunciation is said to have its roots in Tamas. For Tamas is the root of ignorance as has been stated: 'From Tamas arise negligence and delusion, and also, ignorance' (14.17). Ignorance is erroneous knowledge which is antagonistic to right knowledge. So, it will be taught, 'That reason which, enveloped in Tamas, regards wrong as right, and which reverses every value, O Arjuna, is Tamasika' (18.32). It is for this reason that the renunciation of obligatory and occasional actions are said to have their roots in erroneous knowledge.
Śrī Abhinavagupta Classical
Translation
18.7 See Comment under 18.11
Swami Sivananda Classical
Translation
18.7 Verily the renunciation of obligatory action is not proper; the abandonment of the same from delusion is declared to be Tamasic.
Commentary

18.7 नियतस्य obligatory? तु verily? संन्यासः renunciation? कर्मणः of action? न not? उपपद्यते is proper? मोहात् from delusion? तस्य of the same? परित्यागः abandonment? तामसः Tamasic? परिकीर्तितः is declared.Commentary Renunciation of obligatory action is not proper because it is purifying in the case of an ignorant man. Should a man renounce actions that he should perform as a duty? such renunciation can only be of the ality of darkness. Prescribed duties must not be abandoned and if anyone does so? he is certainly deluded by ignorance. Tamas is ignorance.Niyata Prescribed according to ones religion. To hold that a duty is obligatory and then to relinish it is indeed selfcontradictory.

Swami Gambhīrānanda Classical
Translation
18.7 The abandoning of daily obligatory acts (nityakamas) is not justifiable. Giving up that through delusion is declared to be based on tamas.
Shri Purohit Swami Classical
Translation
18.7 It is not right to give up actions which are obligatory; and if they are misunderstood, it is the result of sheer ignorance.
Related values & verses
Related values
Tyaga (Renunciation / Letting Go)Karuna (Kindness / Compassion)Ahimsa (Non-violence / Compassion)Tapas (Austerity / Discipline)Guru Bhakti (Reverence for Teacher)Atma Nigraha (Self-control)Daksya (Resourcefulness / Skill)Abhaya (Fearlessness)
Related verses
BG 3.8 BG 2.47 BG 18.48 SB 11.3.43 SB 11.18.22 SB 5.5.4 CC Madhya 22.91 CC Madhya 22.93 CC Antya 6.220 Īśa Upaniṣad 9 Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad 1.2.8
Related lectures
Personal Guidance
Renunciation of prescribed duty is improper — out of illusion, called tamasic renunciation.
Practical Applications
  • Recognize that giving up prescribed duty is tamasic, not spiritual.
  • Don't confuse laziness with renunciation.
  • Honor your prescribed duty.
Reflection Questions
  • Where have I confused laziness with renunciation?
  • What prescribed duty calls?
Analogy

A soldier who throws down his weapon mid-battle because the noise upsets him has not renounced — he has deserted. To leave one's post under the spell of moha is not vairāgya but tamas wearing vairāgya's robe.

Stories
Arjuna's own first impulse

At the opening of the Gītā, Arjuna threw down his Gāṇḍīva and said he would rather beg than fight. It looked like renunciation. Kṛṣṇa diagnosed it as moha — the very tāmasa-tyāga this verse names.

The whole Gītā is in one sense Kṛṣṇa's correction of that first impulse. Real renunciation is not the dropping of niyata-karma under emotional pressure; that is the lowest variety masquerading as the highest.

📝 My note

Source: vedabase.io

← Read full Chapter 18