Bg 3.2

vyāmiśreṇeva vākyena

buddhiṁ mohayasīva me

tad ekaṁ vada niścitya

yena śreyo ’ham āpnuyām

Word for word:

vyāmiśreṇa — by equivocal; iva — certainly; vākyena — words; buddhim — intelligence; mohayasi — You are bewildering; iva — certainly; me — my; tat — therefore; ekam — only one; vada — please tell; niścitya — ascertaining; yena — by which; śreyaḥ — real benefit; aham — I; āpnuyām — may have.

Translation:

Arjuna said: O Janārdana, O Keśava, why do You want to engage me in this ghastly warfare if You think that intelligence is better than fruitive work?

vyāmiśreṇeva

miśra is mixed, vyāmiśreṇeva is very deeply mixed.

eva vākye, so the vakya is definitely mishra.

buddhiṁ mohayasīva me, so my buddhi has become as if deluded, mohayasīva me.

so the first line is eva, the second line is iva.

So what should I do? tad ekaṁ vada niścitya, so tell me one thing (ekaṁ) for certain what I should do. ekaṁ vada.

yena śreyo ’ham āpnuyām, by which I will attain auspiciousness. By which I will attain śreya.

mohayasīva is used to indicate that yes, your intention is not to put me in Moha, but somehow I have gone into Moha. So mohayas + iva, iva means like.

Arjuna sees two options:

1. Inactivity (Renouncing) – Buddhi

2. Activity (Fighting) – Vikarma

jyāyasī cet karmaṇas te

matā buddhir janārdana

So he is thinking if I have to renounce, then that is the action of Buddhi.

And if I have to fight, he is thinking fighting is Vikarma. So why should I perform Vikarma? That is the question. Arjuna is saying, “you are thinking Buddhi is better than Karma, then why are you engaging me in Ghora Karma?” Here Arjuna sees only two options for himself: one is action and the other is inaction (renunciations). So action means fighting, which will cause him Karmic bondage, and inaction (renunciation) will not cause him bondage.

Krishna has referred to multiple things, but in the last section, sthitha Prajnya section, He doesn’t refer to fighting at all. In fact, Krishna doesn’t refer ‘to fight’ after the 2.38th verse, but He mentioned how to fight? Fight with equanimity. But from 2.39 to 2.72, there is no direct exhortation to fight, so whatever earlier instruction was given that is not canceled, but that is not reemphasized. But still, there are other concepts that have been talked about, which seems to be contradictory to the instruction of fighting. And what are those? For example, Krishna has talked about Shanti, which means not fighting, and Krishna has referred to Shanti in the conclusion of the 2nd chapter of BG twice in 2.70.d and 2.71.d.

Now Krishna is talking about the peace of the heart. When the heart is in harmony with our spiritual nature, then we get a deep unflappable peace. Whereas Arjuna is thinking of peace in terms of what is happening in the battlefield, peace means no fighting.

So that also adds to the confusion of Arjuna because Krishna used words which seem generally correlated. Also, Krishna has repeatedly used the word Buddhi (although Buddhi, vivek, Jnana are different but similar). Generally, when people acquire or Jnana is awakened (by Vedic scripture), they develop Vairagya. Why? Because when one studies scripture, they understand that this world is temporary and entangling; let me get out of this world. So that is what generally people do when they develop Jnana; they develop Vairagya. Because Krishna has used so many terms related to Jnana like Buddhi, Prajna, Sthitha Dhir Muni, Sthitha Prajna, Prajna Prathisthita, Buddhi Parya Thisthate. So Arjuna is thinking that will correlate with renunciation. Therefore, Buddhi he correlates with not fighting, so Arjuna is thinking it is better to act in Buddhi. For example, Krishna has said: vyavasāyātmikā buddhir ekeha kuru-nandana. So in 2.41, He has said those who have Buddhi are one-pointed. So Arjuna is thinking; if Buddhi is superior, then why should I fight?

But actually, in the previous chapter, Krishna has talked at multiple levels. Krishna has talked into 4 distinct levels:

1. Jnana Yoga (Renounced inactivity – no fighting)

2. Nishkama Karma Yoga (Renounced activity – fighting for liberation)

3. Karma-Kanda (Fruitive Activities – fighting for heaven)

4. Vikarma (Sinful Activity – giving up fighting)

Krishna has recommended the 2nd option, Nishkama Karma Yoga, BG 2.38 to 2.72.

Only the first one involves inactivity; all others involve activity, but there is a difference in consciousness and motivation underlying that activity. So when one is performing Nishkama Karam Yoga, at that time, one is understanding: I am not the body; I am the soul, and I should strive for liberation. That is what Krishna has talked about from 2.38 to 2.72; the level that Krishna wants Arjuna to act at.

And prior to that, from 2.31 to 2.37-38, He has talked about fruitive activity, Karma-Kanda, work to attain heaven, and Vikarma means working sinfully, acting against one’s dharma. Here, Krishna has talked about Vikarma in a different way.

Krishna said, giving up your duty, giving up fighting is Vikarma 2.33; (If, however, you do not perform your religious duty of fighting, then you will certainly incur sins for neglecting your duties and thus lose your reputation as a fighter). So the conception of Vikarma for Arjuna and Krishna are different. Arjuna thinks if he fights against his relatives, that will be Vikarma, but Krishna says if you don’t do your duty as Kshatriya, that is bad Karma, Vikarma.

Why is this misconception, what is Vikarma arisen? Because Arjuna misunderstood the word that Krishna uses in BG 2.49 ‘dūreṇa hy avaraṁ karma, buddhi-yogād dhanañ-jaya’. There Krishna used the word Buddhi; He is saying Buddhi is superior to avaram karma, inauspicious work. So keep aside inauspicious work and act in Buddhi. So when Krishna is using Avram Karma, if we look at the context, Krishna is calling Karma kanda as Avram Karma, inauspicious work, whereas Arjuna is thinking fighting against his relative is inauspicious work.

Again: In 2.49, Krishna condemns karma-kanda compared to Nishkam Karma Yoga. Arjuna thinks fighting is condemned as compared to Jnana. So when Arjuna thinks like that, he asks this question, and Krishna will answer.