Download Bhagwad Gita 18.11 Download BG 18.11 as Image

⮪ BG 18.10 Bhagwad Gita English BG 18.12⮫

Bhagavad Gita Chapter 18 Verse 11

भगवद् गीता अध्याय 18 श्लोक 11

न हि देहभृता शक्यं त्यक्तुं कर्माण्यशेषतः।
यस्तु कर्मफलत्यागी स त्यागीत्यभिधीयते।।18.11।।

English Translation - Swami Gambirananda

18.11 Since it is not possible for one who holds on to a body to give up actions entirely, therefore he, on the other hand, who renounces results on actions is called a man of renunciation.

English Translation - Swami Sivananda

18.11 Verily, it is not possible for an embodied being to abandon actions entirely; but he who relinishes the rewards of actions is verily called a man of renunciation.

English Translation - Dr. S. Sankaranarayan

18.11. Indeed, to relinish actions entirely is not possible for a body-bearing one; but whosoever relinishes the fruits of actions, he is said to be a man of [true] relinishment.

English Commentary - Swami Sivananda

18.11 न not? हि verily? देहभृता by an embodied being? शक्यम् possible? त्यक्तुम् to abandon? कर्माणि actions? अशेषतः entirely? यः who? तु but? कर्मफलत्यागी relinisher of the fruits of actions? सः he? त्यागी relinisher? इति thus? अभिधीयते is called.Commentary He who has assumed a human body and yet grumbles at having to perform actions is verily a fool. Can fire that is endowed with heat as its natural property ever think of getting rid of it So long as you are living in this body you cannot entirely relinish action. Lord Krishna says to Arjuna Nor can anyone? even for an instant remain actionless for helplessly is everyone driven to action by the alities born of Nature (Cf.III.5). Nature (and your own nature? too) will urge you to do actions. You will have to abandon the idea of agency and the fruits of actions. Then you are ite safe. No action will bind you.The ignorant man who identifies himself with the body and who thinks that he is himself the doer of all actions should not abandon actions. It is impossible for him to relinish actions. He will have to perform all the prescribed duties while relinishing their fruits.Dehabhrita A wearer of the body An embodied being? i.e.? he who identifies himself with the body. A man who has discrimination between the Real and the unreal? the Eternal and the transient? cannot be called a bodywearer? because he does not think that he is the doer of actions -- vide chapter II.21 (He who knows Him Who is indestructible? eternal? unborn? undiminishing -- how can that man slay? O Arjuna? or cause to be slain).When the ignorant man who is alified for action does the prescribed duties? relinishing the desire for the fruits of his actions? he is called a Tyagi? although he is active. This title Tyagi is given to him for the sake of courtesy.The relinishment of all actions is possible only for him who has attained Selfrealisation and who is? therefore? not a wearer of the body? i.e.? does not hink that the body is the Self. (Cf.III.5)

English Translation of Sanskrit Commentary By Sri Shankaracharya's

18.11 Deha-bhrta, for one who holds on to a body-one who maintains (bibharti) a body (deha) is called a deha-bhrt. One who has self-indentification with the body is called a deha-bhrt, but not a so a man of discrimination; for he has been excluded from the eligibility for agentship by such texts as, He who knows this One is indestructible৷৷. etc. Hence, for that unenlightened person who holds on to the body, he, since; it is na, not; sakyam, possible; tyaktum, to give up, renounce; karmani, actions; asesatah, entirely, totally; therefore the ignorant person who is competent (for rites and duties), yah, who; tu, on the other hand; karma-phala-tyagi, renounces results of actions, relinishes only the hankering for the results of actions while performing the nityakarmas; sah, he; is abhidhiyate, called; tyagi iti, a man of renunciation-even though he continues to be a man of rites and duties. This is said by way of eulogy. Therefore total renunciation of actions is possible only for one who has realized the supreme Truth, who does not hold on to the body, and who is devoid of the idea that the body is the Self. Again, what is that purpose which is accomplished through renunciation of all actions? This is being stated:

English Translation of Commentary - Dr. S. Sankaranarayan

18.4-11 Niscayam etc. upto abhidhiyate. The conclusion here is this : Due to the manifoldness of the nature of the Strands, that have been defined earlier, the act of relinishment itself is performed with a certain mental disposition which is a modification of the Sattva, the Rajas and the Tamas (the Strands). Because it reflects (is contaminated by) the nature of the person having the same (the said mental dispositon), what is called the real (unalloyed) relinishment is the performance of the actions by the knowers of the Supreme Brahman by giving up desire to achieve fruits and by avoiding the craving and hatred on account of their eanimity to [the pairs of opposites like] success and failure etc. That is why [the Bhagavat] says : By the act of relinishment born of the Rajas or of the Tamas (Strands), no connection with the fruit [of relinishment] is attained. However, for an act of relinishing, born of the Sattva (Strand), there is the fruit in the form of honouring the purport of the scriptures. The application of the term relinishment stands to reason, in fact, only in the case of a sage who has relinished his holding on the multitude of the Strands.

English Translation of Ramanuja's Sanskrit Commentary

18.11 It is impossible for one who has a body and has to nourish it. to abandon action entirely; for eating, drinking etc., reired for nourshing the body and other acts connected therewith are unavoidable. And for the same reason the five great sacrifices etc., are also indispensable. He who has given up the fruits of the five great sacrifices, is said to have renounced; this is referred to in the Srutis such as: Only through renunciation do some obtain immortality (Ma. Na., 8.14). Renunciation of fruits of actions is illustrative; it implies much more. It implies one who has renounced the fruits, agency and attachment to works, as the topic has been begun with the declaration: For abandonment (Tyaga) is declard to be of three kinds (18.4). This statement may be estioned in the following manner: Agnihotra, the full moon and new moon sacrifices, Jyotistoma etc., and also the five great sacrifices are enjoined by the Sastras only for the attainment of their results like heaven. They are not purposeless. Even the injunction with regard to obligatory and occasional ceremonies is enjoined because they yield results, as implied in the following passage: For householders, Prajapatya ceremony (V.P., 1.6.37). Therefore, as the performance of actions has to be understood as a means for attaining their respective results, the accruing of agreeable and disagreeable results is inevitable, even though they are performed without any desire for fruits, just as a seed sown must grow into a tree and bear fruit. Hence, actions ought not to be performed by an aspirant for release, because the results are incompatible with release. Sri Krsna answers such objections:

Commentary - Chakravarthi Ji

Therefore, actions ordained by scripture should not be given up. It is not possible for one with a body to give up activities. Sakyam is used for the proper word sakyani. The Lord has already said that not for a moment can the person remain without doing action: na hi kascit ksanam api jatu tisthaty akarma-krd iti. (BG 3.5)

Rudra Vaishnava Sampradaya - Commentary

It may be postulated that better than renunciation of the rewards of actions, it is better to simply renounce all actions; for then there is no distraction from meditation and contemplation and one can unhindered attain the joy of a stable, steadfast state of consciousness. In anticipation of this Lord Krishna explains the reality that no living entity can completely stop all actions entirely. No one ever remains inactive even for a moment as the heart is beating, the lungs are breathing, the pulse is pulsing, the eyes are blinking, the mind is reflecting, etc. etc. Therefore renouncing the desire for rewards is true renunciation.

Brahma Vaishnava Sampradaya - Commentary

Lord Krishna explains that since it is impossible for any living entity to completely renounce actions entirely it is clear that renunciation of the desire for rewards of actions and all ego sense as the doer of actions is actual renunciation and not the mere cessation of activities.

Shri Vaishnava Sampradaya - Commentary

It should be clearly understood that whether confined to a physical body or a subtle body it is virtually impossible to entirely give up all action completely. In the physical body the heart is beating, the lungs are breathing, water must be drunk, some form of nourishment must be ingested. If it is a subtle body then sunshine must be absorbed or prana or energy must be assimilated. These things are indispensable for life in a physical or subtle body. Thus while residing in a physical body the observance of prescribed Vedic activities are essential and must be performed. It is the renouncing of desires for the rewards of actions that is factual renunciation and not the mere abandoning of activities. Such renunciation also includes idea of authorship and the bane of attachment. It may be argued that prescribed Vedic activities have rewards automatically associated with them such as entry to Svarga the heavenly planets so by such inseparable relationships they are clear incentives. This is also applicable to the merits accrued from nitya or daily duties and naimittika or occasional duties as well. These actions can be compared to planting a mango tree and the fruits can be considered the rewards thereof. But motivation for the rewards of actions opposed to bhakti or exclusive loving devotion to Lord Krishna and is inimical to moksa or liberation from material existence. Verily this is true. So all rewards whether or not desirable or undesirable must be renounced as only activities performed without motive and hankering for rewards are to be enacted and this is actual renunciation.

Kumara Vaishnava Sampradaya - Commentary

It should be clearly understood that whether confined to a physical body or a subtle body it is virtually impossible to entirely give up all action completely. In the physical body the heart is beating, the lungs are breathing, water must be drunk, some form of nourishment must be ingested. If it is a subtle body then sunshine must be absorbed or prana or energy must be assimilated. These things are indispensable for life in a physical or subtle body. Thus while residing in a physical body the observance of prescribed Vedic activities are essential and must be performed. It is the renouncing of desires for the rewards of actions that is factual renunciation and not the mere abandoning of activities. Such renunciation also includes idea of authorship and the bane of attachment. It may be argued that prescribed Vedic activities have rewards automatically associated with them such as entry to Svarga the heavenly planets so by such inseparable relationships they are clear incentives. This is also applicable to the merits accrued from nitya or daily duties and naimittika or occasional duties as well. These actions can be compared to planting a mango tree and the fruits can be considered the rewards thereof. But motivation for the rewards of actions opposed to bhakti or exclusive loving devotion to Lord Krishna and is inimical to moksa or liberation from material existence. Verily this is true. So all rewards whether or not desirable or undesirable must be renounced as only activities performed without motive and hankering for rewards are to be enacted and this is actual renunciation.

Transliteration Bhagavad Gita 18.11

Na hi dehabhritaa shakyam tyaktum karmaanyasheshatah; Yastu karmaphalatyaagi sa tyaageetyabhidheeyate.

Word Meanings Bhagavad Gita 18.11

na—not; hi—indeed; deha-bhṛitā—for the embodied being; śhakyam—possible; tyaktum—to give up; karmāṇi—activities; aśheṣhataḥ—entirely; yaḥ—who; tu—but; karma-phala—fruits of actions; tyāgī—one who renounces all desires for enjoying the fruits of actions; saḥ—they; tyāgī—one who renounces all desires for enjoying the fruits of actions; iti—as; abhidhīyate—are said