Chapter 18 Shloka 40

न तदस्ति पृथिव्यां वा दिवि देवेषु वा पुनः।

सत्त्वं प्रकृतिजैर्मुक्तं यदेभिः स्यात्त्रिभिर्गुणैः।।४०।।

There is nothing existent,

whether on earth or heaven

or amongst the gods, which is

devoid of these three attributes

derived from Prakriti.

Chapter 18 Shloka 40

न तदस्ति पृथिव्यां वा दिवि देवेषु वा पुनः।

सत्त्वं प्रकृतिजैर्मुक्तं यदेभिः स्यात्त्रिभिर्गुणैः ।।४०।।

Lord Krishna says:

There is nothing existent, whether on earth or heaven or amongst the gods, which is devoid of these three attributes derived from Prakriti.

The Lord says that there is nothing in this creation which does not contain the three attributes. On earth, whatever exists:

a) ordinary people,

b) all beings,

c) all animals,

d) the animate and the inanimate,

– are all imbued with the three attributes.

And even in the heavens:

a) the ether,

b) the sun, the moon and the stars,

c) even the wind

– all possess the three attributes.

However, do not take this to mean that the deities are not imbued with these three attributes. A certain ratio of all these three attributes is to be found in the deities as well.

1. Whatsoever is created, possesses these three attributes.

2. The mind, the intellect and even knowledge is imbued with these three-fold attributes.

3. These three attributes also inhere in the five elements.

4. The predominantly sattvic being also possesses the attributes of rajas and tamas in some proportion.

5. Similarly, the predominantly rajsic being possesses some sattva and tamas.

6. The tamsic being also possesses some sattva and rajas.

My little one, the inanimate body also has its own attributes. These attributes are blind and spontaneous. The mind too, has attributes of its own, as does the intellect.

1. The attributes of the body are essentially tamsic.

2. The attributes of action are essentially rajsic.

3. The attributes of knowledge can be likened to the effulgent attribute of sattva.

These three attributes are to be found in deities as well. In fact, all are possessed with these three attributes. But those who possess predominantly divine qualities are called deities, whilst those in whom demonic tendencies predominate are called demons.

Both possess a nature constituted of the attributes of Prakriti. The difference is in their perspective. One uses those attributes for others, devoid of attachment. He is a deity – he is God-like. The other uses every quality for the establishment of the ‘I’ – he is a demon. The gunatit and the sthit pragya are not influenced by any attributes.

It does not matter what attributes compose our basic temperament. One is a gunatit, uninfluenced by all attributes:

a) if one is devoid of attachment;

b) if one is a mere witness who watches all from afar;

c) if one is indifferent towards them;

d) if one does not consider oneself to be the owner of those attributes;

e) if one does not take pride in those attributes;

f) if one does not become distressed with one’s negative traits;

g) if one is not excessively elated with one’s positive traits;

h) if one witnesses the play of attributes from afar, knowing that one is essentially the Atma;

i)  if one knows that it is qualities which interact with other qualities – knowing this, one becomes an indifferent and impartial witness to all that transpires with or through this body-self. Then one is not bound or fettered by the attributes.

Try and understand. Just as this body and ego combine to form the jivatma, so also the body devoid of ego is a pure manifestation of Brahm. The mind and the ego combine to form thejivatma, whereas the mind devoid of the ego goes to form a pure manifestation of Brahm.

Ego is attachment and attachment enlivens the ego. If one is no longer attached to the body, one is not affected by the attributes of the body. Such an individual does nothing for the establishment of the body-self.

1. He is no longer in the habit of claiming any rights over his own body.

2. He becomes forgetful of the body-self.

3. His mind then becomes devoid of aberrations.

4. When positive or negative thought processes no longer erupt in his mind, the mind too, ceases to affect him.

5. Such a one becomes oblivious to the demands of the body.

a) Then, no desire arises.

b) Then how can any positive or negative thoughts arise?

c) No craving remains.

d) The mind is silenced.

e) Even the intellect says naught.

f) Due to the absence of attachment, the intellect which is subservient to the body no longer remains.

g) Due to the absence of attachment, there is an absence of the idea ‘I am the body’.

h) Since attachment is non-existent, the idea of doership does not exist.

i)  Due to the non-existence of attachment, the idea of enjoyership is also non-existent.

j)  Such a detached one severs all relationships with the body-self.

–  Thus he exists in total forgetfulness of himself.

–  The slightest thought of the self that still remains is annihilated through the grace of the Supreme.

The attributes no longer matter to such a one. He uses no attributes for himself. He identifies with whosoever comes to him and responds appropriately to each one who seeks to have any particular relationship with him. Thus you must understand that attributes by themselves only matter inasmuch as they constitute an individual’s nature.

1. Whether one has a divine or demonic nature depends on one’s perspective.

2. Whether one has a divine or demonic nature depends on one’s attachment.

3. Whether one has a divine or demonic nature depends on one’s egoism.

Now understand that the ego inherent in the above tendencies is also coloured with the three attributes. Those three attributes are further divided threefold. Thus, when ego is conjoined with divinity and dharma, it says “I shall give charity; I am the greatest of all.” Even though the ego transforms all dispositions into basically demonic tendencies, the act of giving charity, of engaging in yagya etc. is sattvic in essence.

If one says ‘I am a sadhu’ or ‘I am the Lord’ what is predominant is the sense of ‘I’ – this points to the presence of the intellect which is subservient to the body.

1. Pride of the body-self is tamsic in nature.

2. Pride of the body-self reveals one’s ignorance and moha. This too, is tamsic in nature.

Thus it is evident that an element of tamas is inherent in sattva. Where there is the preponderance of sattva, one becomes attached to effulgence and joy. But when the body does not belong to oneself, then one is not attached to the attributes of the body.

Understand from this that each attribute has other attributes inherent in it. This is what the Lord is clarifying here.