नियतस्य तु संन्यासः कर्मणो नोपपद्यते |
मोहात्तस्य परित्यागस्तामसः परिकीर्तितः ||१८-७||
niyatasya tu saṃnyāsaḥ karmaṇo nopapadyate . mohāttasya parityāgastāmasaḥ parikīrtitaḥ ||18-7||
18.7 Verily the renunciation of obligatory action is not proper; the abandonment of the same from delusion is declared to be Tamasic.
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
Non-dualism. The individual self and Brahman are one. The world is appearance (maya). Liberation through knowledge.
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,
(Showing excerpt)
18.7 The abandoning of daily obligatory acts (nityakamas) is not justifiable. Giving up that through delusion is declared to be based on tamas.
This interpretation draws on the Advaita tradition and may not represent the view of any single school. For authoritative guidance within a specific tradition, seek a qualified teacher.
Want to explore this verse deeper?