back to questions
Bhagavad-Gītā with Śaṅkara's bhāṣya · 2.44
bhogaiśvarya-prasaktānāṃ tayāpahṛta-cetasām | vyavasāyātmikā buddhiḥ samādhau na vidhīyate
Translation. For those attached exclusively to enjoyment and dominion,
whose minds—their discriminative insight—are obscured by that [rite-laden speech],
determination-natured understanding (buddhi)
does not come to be in the inner faculty (samādhi).
Grammar check: 8 words pass / 0 flagged / 0 beyond the checkerPāṇini-verified
Every word's claimed grammar is re-derived with vidyut-prakriya, software implementing Pāṇini's rules. Flags are shown, never hidden; some are the text taking epic or Vedic liberties the classical rules do not generate.
Word by word
| surface | lemma | grammar |
|---|
| bhogaiśvarya-prasaktānām | bhogaiśvarya-prasakta | pass |
| tayā | tad | pass |
| apahṛta-cetasām | apahṛta-cetas | pass |
| vyavasāyātmikā | vyavasāyātmikā | pass |
| buddhiḥ | buddhi | pass |
| samādhau | samādhi | pass |
| na | na | pass |
| vidhīyate | dhā | pass |
How the commentary settled it
Where the verse alone is ambiguous, the reading follows Śaṅkara's commentary; the deciding lines are quoted below each decision.
Bhogaiśvarya-prasakta denotes people attached specifically to both enjoyment and dominion. The first two members form an internal dvandva, while their relation to prasakta is that of the object or locus of attachment.→ attached exclusively to enjoyment and dominion
gita [1]bhogaḥ kartavyaḥ caiśvaryaṃ ca iti bhogaiśvaryayor eva praṇayavatāṃ tad-ātma-bhūtānām
‘Enjoyment is to be pursued, and dominion too’: [the expression denotes] those whose affection is exclusively for enjoyment and dominion, and who have become identified with them.
The instrumental tayā refers to the speech discussed in the preceding context and expresses what has carried off or obscured their minds; it does not refer to enjoyment or dominion.→ by that speech, replete with specifications of rites
gita [2]tayā kriyā-viśeṣa-bahulayā vācā apahṛta-cetasām
whose minds have been carried away by that speech, which abounds in specifications of rites.
Apahṛta-cetas is a possessive bahuvrīhi, ‘those whose minds have been carried away.’ Śaṅkara specifies the resulting condition as the obscuration of discriminative insight.→ those whose minds—specifically their discriminative insight—are obscured
gita [2]apahṛta-cetasām ācchādita-viveka-prajñānāṃ
of those whose minds have been carried away—that is, whose discriminative insight has been obscured.
Vyavasāyātmikā is construed as a feminine bahuvrīhi adjective qualifying buddhiḥ: the understanding has determination as its defining nature.→ determination-natured, qualifying buddhiḥ
gita []
The internal compound relation follows ordinary grammar and the adjectival use of feminine -ātmikā; the commentary does not explicitly analyze its vigraha.
The phrase vyavasāyātmikā buddhiḥ refers, in Śaṅkara’s exposition, to determined understanding in either Sāṃkhya or Yoga.→ determination-natured understanding, applicable to Sāṃkhya or Yoga
gita [2]vyavasāyātmikā sāṃkhye yoge vā buddhiḥ
the determination-natured understanding, whether in Sāṃkhya or in Yoga.
Samādhau is a locative governed by the existential sense Śaṅkara assigns to vidhīyate. Samādhi here is defined as the inner faculty or intellect in which objects are assembled for a person’s experience, not merely as meditative absorption.→ in the inner faculty (samādhi)
gita [2]samādhau samādhīyate asmin puruṣopabhogāya sarvam iti samādhiḥ antaḥkaraṇaṃ buddhiḥ tasmin samādhau
In samādhi: everything is placed together in it for a person’s experience, and therefore it is ‘samādhi’—the inner faculty, the intellect; in that samādhi.
Although vidhīyate is morphologically passive and can ordinarily mean ‘is prescribed’ or ‘is established,’ Śaṅkara expressly gives it the contextual force ‘comes to be, exists.’→ does not come to be
gita [2]na vidhīyate na bhavati ity arthaḥ
‘It is not vidhīyate’ means ‘it does not come to be.’
The two genitive plurals identify the people to whom the absent understanding belongs; idiomatic English may therefore render the construction ‘for those … understanding does not come to be.’→ for those people, such understanding does not come to be
gita [1, 3]praṇayavatāṃ tad-ātma-bhūtānām | ya evaṃ viveka-buddhi-rahitāḥ teṣāṃ kāmātmanāṃ
of those who are attached and have become identified with them; of those desire-centered people who thus lack discriminative understanding.
Śaṅkara's commentary on this unit
1bhogaiśvarya-prasaktānāṃ bhogaḥ kartavyaḥ caiśvaryaṃ ca iti bhogaiśvaryayor eva praṇayavatāṃ tad-ātma-bhūtānām |
2tayā kriyā-viśeṣa-bahulayā vācā apahṛta-cetasām ācchādita-viveka-prajñānāṃ vyavasāyātmikā sāṃkhye yoge vā buddhiḥ samādhau samādhīyate asmin puruṣopabhogāya sarvam iti samādhiḥ antaḥkaraṇaṃ buddhiḥ tasmin samādhau, na vidhīyate na bhavati ity arthaḥ ||bhgs_2.44||
3ya evaṃ viveka-buddhi-rahitāḥ teṣāṃ kāmātmanāṃ yat phalaṃ tad āha -