Chapter 17 Verses 02 and 03

Audio-BG-Chanting-17.2

Audio-BG-Chanting-17.3

श्रीभगवानुवाच - 

त्रिविधा भवति श्रद्धा देहिनां सा स्वभावजा ।
सात्त्विकी राजसी चैव तामसी चेति तां शृणु ॥ १७.२ ॥
सत्त्वानुरूपा सर्वस्य श्रद्धा भवति भारत ।
श्रद्धामयोऽयं पुरुषो यो यच्छ्रद्धः स एव सः ॥ १७.३ ॥

trividhā bhavati śraddhā dehinām sā svabhāva-jā |
sāttvikī rājasī caiva tāmasī ceti tām śṛṇu || 17.2 ||
sattvānurūpā sarvasya śraddhā bhavati bhārata |
śraddhāmayo’yam puruṣo yo yacchraddha: sa eva sa: || 17.3 ||

Audio-BG-17.2

Audio-BG-17.3

As before, Krishna takes up the question and answers in a brief but fundamental manner. Arjuna’s question virtually means: How should one look at the plural, multiple notes that human nature evinces? How to evaluate the fondness, fascination and attunement it displays in religious life, so that the seeker may incorporate the right and eliminate the wrong?

Maybe Arjuna, in particular, wants to know how such people as are devoid of any allegiance to scriptural injunctions, but are sufficiently imbued with śraddhā (assiduous application to what is being done) are to be rated in terms of spiritual merits, qualities.

Here Arjuna clearly gives a provision to those ordinary people who have spiritual inclinations, but who are not generally religious. Does spirituality, he seeks to know, embrace them also equally? Is there any spiritual reward or salvation for them?

The three-fold śraddhā

Krishna clarifies:

Śraddhā of the embodied is nature-born; it is of three kinds – sāttvika, rājasika and tāmasika. Listen about it. Śraddhā of all is according to their essence. Man is an embodiment of śraddhā. Whatever one’s śraddhā is, he verily is that.

Krishna’s answer is quite fundamental. It is comprehensive too. The attention and application people generally display, he says, are threefold. The differences noticed are quite natural, meaning nature-born. It is like the varṇa he discussed earlier. Variety being inexorable with nature, the three-fold śraddhā is also inevitable in whatever is born of nature and sustained by it.

Krishna looks at everything and all, no matter whether it is a quality, trait or other features, as governed by Nature. And sattva, rajas and tamas constitute Nature. In other words, the three-fold classification found in all other spheres of creation also applies to śraddhā (attention and application), about which Arjuna enquires.

Man is embodiment of his śraddhā alone

In addition, Krishna makes a very significant statement. Śraddhā, he says, is something inseparable from one’s nature or inner constitution. In fact, every one is what his attention is. It is in and through attention and application that an individual grows, expresses himself and brings about all outcomes in his life. Whatever level and degree of attention one has, that indeed will be his actual worth, skill and ability, and consequently the quality of effort and resultant attainment.

Many people look at the same object, alive or non-alive. It is the function of eyes to see. But what follows makes all the difference. How much, how well, how deeply, how intently is this seeing done? This question does not relate to or stop with the eyes alone.

The inner mind employs the eyes. And the mind itself has intelligence to direct it. It is the mind and intelligence that make all the difference. What the eyes see becomes a further subject of study, analysis and finding.

People differ not so much in their eyes and what they do. The difference is wrought by the inner levels. All are born on the same earth and surrounded by the same pañcabhūtas. The sights outside are the same for all. But the thoughtfulness and observation each succeeds in making, will not be alike at all. And this results in the assorted nature of human ability, skill and worth in any walk of life. The degrees of attention and application found in people are strikingly variant, different. The entire research and development process revolves around the intensity of attention and application of the people involved in the pursuit.

So it means quite a lot when Krishna clarifies that an individual is made up of his attention and application alone. Arjuna himself illustrates this truth. He gazed at the war and warriors. What all thoughts crept into his mind and how suddenly did he become a nervous wreck, doubtful and reluctant to fight at all! The more striking, revealing part of the plight is the discomfiture the sight of Bheeshma and Drona caused. At the same time, he regards them as Mahānubhāvas, great ones noted for their exemplary righteousness and behavioural majesty.

Was this not then a sudden, unthoughtful reaction? Is it that the war was unanticipated? Were not Bheeshma and Drona expected to side Duryodhana? Being unassailable in their valour, it is natural that they both stood in front, leading the enemy camps. What then was there for Arjuna to feel so aghast, fearful and burst into tears?

Did not Arjuna think about the eventuality earlier? Why did he miss this crucial possibility? If he had known, how did his mind wage such a tempest of doubt, fear and reluctance, considering the fact that he and others had accepted the challenge from Bheeshma and raised reciprocal war cries?

What further? Are not Bheeshma and Drona icons of morality, ethics and righteousness, to be worshipped and emulated with adoration? If so, should not their presence as leaders of the opposite army signal Arjuna about the inevitable propriety of the confrontation?

What was quite proper for them should have been no different for Arjuna, their student and follower. Instead of arousing turmoil and fear, the presence of these venerable stalwarts should have instilled a higher dimension of righteousness and its supreme goal! The war acceptable to them should have been viewed alike by Arjuna, their disciple. Conceding its place and propriety, he should have accepted the fate and proceeded accordingly. At best he could have sought either from them or Krishna himself any clarification or enlightenment in the matter, for his confirmation.

Obviously, his vision was clouded, constricted. He failed to rise above the petty notions and feelings the mind is known to present in and out of time and occasion. His observation and analysis were not deep, proper or wholesome.

But when Krishna put forth his critical comments, disproving Arjuna’s claims, views and resolve, the reluctant mind became receptive and the intelligence became sharp, rational and enquiring. The śraddhā, he perhaps lacked till then, graced him and he began to appreciate Krishna’s viewpoint.

Attention – the focus of spiritual pursuit

The entire Bhagavad Gita dialogue is nothing but a product, an outcome, a resultant of Krishna’s śraddhā, attention and application.

In showing that the situation was not anything gloomy, but revealing, in making Arjuna see the eternal and wholesome relevance of human life, its mission and goal, Krishna displays a mastery and magnificence, which shine as exemplary even today.

How the one factor, namely śraddhā (attention), can mean so much of difference in making the mind dejected or delightful, is adequately brought home by Arjuna’s confrontation and subsequent enlightenment. So when Krishna says that a human is verily what his śraddhā (attention) makes him, it is a great statement of truth, revelation and assurance.

Spiritual seekers and Knowers will generally be dispassionate and indifferent to the world and worldly life. It is an inevitable part of their inspiration and evaluation. But can these qualities in any way imply or advocate inattention on the seeker’s part towards anything whatever? Krishna’s verdict on attention, śraddhā, should speak volumes in the matter.

Śraddhā is the first and last word in any field of knowledge, both in gaining and expressing it. It should be even more so in the context of spiritual wisdom. If attentiveness is there, it will express itself in all the fields of one’s life.

The Soul is present in everybody. Its presence alone activates the senses and initiates thoughts, emotions and knowledge. Without the Soul, neither the body can exist and function nor the mind, intelligence and ego, manifest. Yet, why is it that every one senses the body but misses the Soul? Even decades of effort and austerity sometimes fail to clinch the search for the Soul. Why?

It is sheer lack of attention to be sharp and focused on the goal. There is a general feeling that to be a spiritual person, seeker or Knower is to delight in unkempt hair, unclean dress and generally be careless about anything. Can there be a greater travesty?

Knowledge is noted for its sublime effects. It brings orderliness, rhythm, discipline and refinement at all levels. Only then it can make its votary worthy and effective in his interactions and achievements. In the name of knowledge, how can one be unclean, disorderly and disorganized? Attention, śraddhā alone brings knowledge, retains and employs it efficiently whenever and wherever needed.

It is true that spiritual seekers and votaries form an amazing assortment. That is because spirituality is amenable to one and all. So, all kinds of people, given to manifold habits and ways fill the spiritual arena. Let this be so.

But that is no reason for a sublime Knower to be shabby, haphazard and unrefined in the matter of living, moving, interacting, dressing and the like. Janaka sat on the throne and ruled Mithila, surrounded by knowledgeable ministers and advisers. He was yet a Knower.

What about Krishna, the Bhagavad Gita Instructor? Can there be a better example? To think deeply, get at right conclusions, be able to express and give effect to them in an appealing and rational manner calls for considerable attention and application. So attention or śraddhā is something that cannot be ignored or sacrificed by the human at any time. It is all the more so in the case of seekers and Knowers.

Think of the qualities Krishna has enumerated about the sthita-prajña and sthitadhī in the 2nd chapter, about the excellent devotee in the 12th and about the Knower in the 13th chapter. To grasp them with rectitude and reflect upon and embody them in actual life, how much of attention is called for! In fact, the very jñāna-sādhanā is a process of attention and assiduous application. That is why it becomes dear and rare too.

How well have the Upanishads declared:

Self-realization is a process of hitting at the Self within, like an arrow at its target. Praṇava or ‘OM’ is the bow for the purpose. One’s own mind is the sharp arrow to be fixed on it. And without carelessness, with unflinching attention, it has to be shot at Brahman, the inner target. Flying fast, the arrow will hit the target, penetrate it and be one with it.

Mind is present in all. Brahman also is there intact. All that is needed is to use this mind and hit at Brahman, the Self. To hit the closest target, with one’s own mind, should not become difficult at all. Yet, rarely this happens. What but attention can bring about this inner mastery?