Verse 12.90

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

प्रवृत्तं कर्म संसेव्यं देवानामेति साम्यताम् ।
निवृत्तं सेवमानस्तु भूतान्यत्येति पञ्च वै ॥ ९० ॥

pravṛttaṃ karma saṃsevyaṃ devānāmeti sāmyatām |
nivṛttaṃ sevamānastu bhūtānyatyeti pañca vai || 90 ||

He who devotes himself to the ‘active’ side, attains equality to the gods; while he who devotes himself to the ‘passive’ section, passes beyond the five material substances.—(90)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

(A) “It has been said that the ‘active’ act is that which brings about desirable rewards; and among actions leading to desirable rewards, some securing for the agent Heaven or some such results, while some bring about only visible results. There is none that is known to bring any such desirable result as ‘equality to the gods.’ Why then should it be said that the man ‘attains equality to the gods’? Those actions also in connection with which no particular rewards are mentioned,—such for instance, as the Viśvajit and other sacrifices,—have been held to have their reward in the attaining of Heaven. Thus we do not know what those acts are of which the reward consists in attaining ‘equality to the gods.’—It will not be right to argue in this connection that—‘Those actions that have been laid down as bringing a particular reward, when done by men who have no desire for that reward, bring about the said equality to the gods.’—as this would involve the rejecting of what is directly asserted and thus assuming of that which is nowhere asserted. In fact what is spoken of in the Veda as the ‘reward’ of actions is something that is desired, such as village, Heaven and so forth, and not the taking of poison and such things. Under the circumstances, to say that ‘equality to gods’ is attained (as the result of acts) and yet it is not ‘desired,’ would be a contradiction in terms.—‘How is it then that under Prohibitions, such results are mentioned as not desired?’—It is in the very nature of the prohibited act that its results should be undesirable; what is evil cannot be desired [and the result of the prohibited act can only be evil]. If it be held that ‘equality to gods’ is the result of the compulsory acts, then that would deprive these acts of their ‘compulsory’ character;—a character that has been understood to belong to them on the basis of the declaration that they are to be performed ‘as long as one is alive.’ If it be absolutely necessary to assume some reward in the case of these acts also, we may assume it to consist in ‘escaping from sin;’ as such a reward, if assumed, would not be inconsistent with the compulsory character of the acts.”

(B) “As regards the latter part of the verse—‘passes beyond the five material substances’— we do not understand how ‘atyeti’ can mean ‘passes beyond’ or ‘becomes freed from.’ As a matter of fact, ‘atyaya’ is used in the sense of ‘laya,’ ‘becoming resolved into’; and certainly it is not meant that the soul ever becomes ‘resolved into’ the material substances; what is meant is that ‘it becomes one with Brahman.’ Others also have explained the passage to mean that ‘the man goes beyond (atikrāmati) the five material substances,’—i.e., ‘his body is no longer made up of the five substances, it becomes purely luminous.’ But this also is nothing; as ‘Liberation’ means not being fettered with a body; so that whether the body is take to be constituted of five substances, or of only one (Light), it is all the same so far as the metempsychic bondage of the Soul is concerned.”

“For these reasons some other explanation, has to be found for this verse.”

The answer to the above is as follows:—

(A) The question has been asked—“What action is that of which equality to gods is the reward? The compulsory acts have no reward, while those that are done for the purpose of obtaining a reward, have distinct rewards mentioned along with them.” Our answer to this is, that the reward spoken of in the text is not one that is held to follow from all Vedic Acts; what is meant is that if a man does an act of the ‘passive’ kind, but with a distinct desire for its result (in the shape of Liberation), and somehow fails to attain it, then the reward that he obtains is equality to the. gods. The purport of it all is that, of all that is laid down in the Ritualistic Section of the Veda, the culminating point of the reward is the attainment of equality to the gods, and not Liberation. As for the acts prescribed in the Esoteric Section of the Veda, which leads to the result that the man never again returns to metempsychic existence,—if the Agent happens to be desirous of obtaining a reward, he becomes tainted by that hankering, and that act of his turns out, on account of that taint, to be a cause of bondage. It is in the very nature of actions that they prompt the Agent, to undertake them for the purpose of bringing to him a definite reward. Thus the compulsory acts also, if left undone, become sources of sin; and as such these also tend to invest the Agent with a material body (for the experiencing of the fruits of that omission).—“If one performs the compulsory acts, and does not perform those that are conducive to rewards, or those that are forbidden, there being no acts that would bring about a material body for him, the man would naturally attain Liberation;—where then would there be any use for the ‘knowledge of self’? This is what has been declared in such passages as—‘With a view to avoid sin, one should perforin the compulsory and occasional acts; it is only when one is unfit for Liberation that he undertakes such as are either forbidden or conducive to desirable results.’”—This has been explained already: Knowledge is necessary for the destruction of Ignorance; until Ignorance has been destroyed by Knowledge,—it is not possible for one to become one with Brahman. It is with a view to this that action done without desires has been spoken of as ‘done with knowledge’ (Verse 89);—and also ‘selfishness is not commended’ (2.2).—When two persons act similarly, they gain equal prosperity; this is what is meant by the ‘equality’ (of gods);—the meaning being that he attains the same condition as that of the gods.

(B) As regards the objections against the declaration that the man ‘passes beyond the five material substances,’ and the confusion that is made regarding its real signification,—that also is not right. Because ‘atyaya’ may mean disappearance also; so that what the text means is that the whole phenomenal world, consisting of material substances, disappears for the man.

If we read ‘abhyeti’ for ‘atyeti,’ it would mean that the man becomes freed form the shackles of the body.—(90)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 1033).