**3.34** For each sense-organ in its respective object, attraction (rāga) and aversion (dveṣa) are established in man, based on (his perception of) favorability and unfavorability. One should not come under the sway of these two, for they are indeed the enemies (obstructing the spiritual path).
**Commentary:** The phrase 'for each sense-organ in its respective object' uses the word 'indriyasya' (of the sense-organ) twice to indicate that attraction and aversion are distinctly established for *each* sense-organ (hearing, touch, sight, taste, smell) in *each* of its respective objects (sound, touch, form, taste, odor). The meaning is that a person's attraction and aversion remain established in each object of each sense-organ, based on the notion of favorability and unfavorability. When there is a feeling of favorability towards an object of the senses, a person develops 'attraction' (rāga) for that object; when there is a feeling of unfavorability, he develops 'aversion' (dveṣa) for it.
In reality, attraction and aversion do not reside in the objects themselves. If they did, the same object would be equally pleasing or displeasing to everyone. But this is not so; for example, rain is pleasing to a farmer but displeasing to a potter. Even for the same person, an object is not always pleasing or displeasing; for example, cool air feels good in summer but bad in winter. Thus, all objects appear pleasing or displeasing only due to one's own feeling of favorability or unfavorability towards them. In other words, a person, by imposing his own favorable or unfavorable feeling upon objects, deems them good or bad and thus develops attraction or aversion. Therefore, the Lord has stated that attraction and aversion are established in each object of each sense-organ.
In truth, attraction and aversion reside in the assumed 'I' (ego, ahaṃ). The assumed relationship with the body is called 'I'. Therefore, as long as the assumed relationship with the body remains, attraction and aversion reside within it, and these very attraction and aversion are perceived in the intellect, mind, senses, and their objects. In verses 37 to 43 of this chapter, the Lord has referred to these very attraction and aversion by the names 'desire' (kāma) and 'anger' (krodha). Desire and anger are the gross forms of attraction and aversion. In the fortieth verse, it is stated that this 'desire' resides in the senses, mind, and intellect. Because 'desire' is perceived in these (senses, mind, and intellect) just as in objects, the Lord has described them as the abode of desire. Just as attraction and aversion are merely perceived in objects, similarly, they are merely perceived in the senses, mind, and intellect. These senses, mind, and intellect are merely instruments (tools) for performing action. Where is there any desire-anger or attraction-aversion in them? Furthermore, in the fifty-ninth verse of the second chapter, the Lord says that for a person who refrains from grasping objects through the senses, the objects cease, but the attraction for them residing within him does not cease. This attraction ceases only upon the realization of the Supreme Self.
Through the words 'one should not come under the sway of these two,' the Lord assures the aspirant that when the tendency of attraction-aversion arises, he should never become despondent about the means (sādhana) or the goal (sādhya). Rather, he should not engage in or refrain from any action by coming under the sway of the tendency of attraction-aversion. Engagement in or withdrawal from actions should be according to the scriptures (Gītā 16.24). If the aspirant's engagement in or withdrawal from actions is based on attraction-aversion, it means the aspirant has come under the sway of attraction-aversion. Engagement or withdrawal prompted by attraction strengthens 'attraction,' and engagement or withdrawal prompted by aversion strengthens 'aversion.' As a result of such strengthening of attraction-aversion, downfall alone occurs.
When an aspirant renounces worldly activities and engages in devotion (bhajana), many favorable and unfavorable mental impressions (sphuraṇā) of the world begin to arise, causing him anxiety. Here, the Lord, as it were, assures the aspirant that he should not be anxious about these impressions. In truth, these impressions have no real existence; because they arise; and it is a principle that whatever is produced is subject to destruction. Therefore, if examined thoughtfully, the impressions are not coming, rather they are going. The reason is that while engaged in worldly activities, due to lack of leisure, the impressions remain suppressed, and as soon as worldly activities are renounced, leisure is obtained, and old impressions begin to emerge in the form of these mental impressions. Therefore, the aspirant should not develop attraction or aversion towards these favorable or unfavorable impressions either; rather, he should remain detached himself, carefully disregarding them. Similarly, he should not develop attraction-aversion towards objects, persons, subjects, etc.
**Means to Conquer Attraction-Aversion**
By performing actions under the sway of attraction-aversion, attraction-aversion become strengthened (powerful) and assume the form of impure nature (svabhāva). When nature becomes impure, one remains under its subjugation. Actions performed under the influence of such impure nature bind a person. Therefore, one should not engage in or withdraw from any action under the sway of attraction-aversion—this remedy is stated here. Prior to this, the Lord has said that one who follows My teaching is freed from the bondage of action (Gītā 3.31). Therefore, by performing actions according to the Lord's teaching, without coming under the sway of the tendency of attraction-aversion, attraction-aversion are easily destroyed. The meaning is that the aspirant should completely surrender all actions and himself as well to the Lord, and accept that actions are not for me, but for the Lord alone; the body, senses, mind, intellect, etc., through which actions are performed, also belong to the Lord alone; and I too belong to the Lord alone. Then, by performing duty-bound actions without desire, without sense of mine-ness, and without anxiety, attraction-aversion are destroyed. Thus, one should engage in or withdraw from any action only by keeping the Lord's teaching, i.e., principle, before oneself.
The entire creation is the work of Nature, and the body is a part of creation. As long as there is attachment towards the body, attraction-aversion exist, meaning a person accepts or rejects things with liking or disliking. This very liking-disliking is the subtle form of attraction-aversion. Engagement or withdrawal prompted by attraction-aversion strengthens attraction-aversion; but engaging in or withdrawing from any action by keeping the scriptures before oneself destroys attraction-aversion. The reason is that by acting according to the scriptures, the primacy of one's own liking and disliking ceases. If someone does not know the scriptures, then for him there are the words of the great sage Vedavyāsa: "O men! Listen to the essence of Dharma and having listened, hold it firmly: 'One should not do unto others what is disagreeable to oneself.'" (Padma Purāṇa, Sṛṣṭi 19.355-56). Even liberated great souls respect only the injunctions of the scriptures. Therefore, even when his father's hand was visibly present during the offering of piṇḍa in the śrāddha ceremony, Bhīṣma Pitāmaha offered the piṇḍa on kuśa grass according to the injunction of the scriptures (Mahābhārata, Anuśāsana 84.15-20). Hence, the aspirant should perform all actions only according to the injunctions of the scriptures.
For aspirants desirous of destroying attraction-aversion, the authority of scripture is necessary in performing actions. However, the heart of a great soul who is completely free from attraction-aversion becomes so pure and spotless that the purport of the Vedas manifests spontaneously within it, whether he is educated or not. Whatever arises in his heart is in accordance with the scriptures (Note P. 178). Due to the complete absence of attraction-aversion, actions forbidden by the scriptures are never performed by that great soul. His nature spontaneously becomes in accordance with the scriptures. This is why the conduct and words of such a great soul become an ideal for other men (Gītā 3.21). Therefore, by following the conduct and words of that great soul, the aspirant's attraction-aversion are also destroyed.
Some believe that attraction-aversion are inherent properties (dharma) of the inner instrument (antaḥkaraṇa) and therefore cannot be destroyed. But this view does not appear logical. In reality, attraction-aversion are adventitious modifications (vikāra) of the inner instrument, not inherent properties. If they were inherent properties, then whenever the inner instrument is awake, attraction-aversion would also be present, meaning they would always be perceived. But they are not perceived always, only occasionally. It is the experience of aspirants that upon spiritual practice, attraction-aversion gradually diminish. That which diminishes is destructible. This also proves that attraction-aversion are not inherent properties of the inner instrument. The Lord has called attraction-aversion 'mental' (manogata): "All desires, O Pārtha, that reside in the mind" (Gītā 2.55), meaning they come to the mind, they do not reside permanently. Besides, the Lord has called attraction-aversion modifications (vikāra) (Gītā 13.6) and has called the constant equipoise of mind in the attainment of the pleasant and unpleasant as the means (sādhana) (Gītā 13.9). If attraction-aversion were inherent properties of the inner instrument, this state of equanimity could not become a means at all. A property is permanent, while a modification is impermanent, i.e., it comes and goes. Attraction-aversion come and go in the inner instrument; therefore, they can be destroyed.
Nature (insentient, prakṛti) and the Conscious Being (sentient, puruṣa) are distinct. The discrimination between these two is self-evident. The Conscious Being, not giving importance to this discrimination, identifies with the body born of Nature and considers itself localized. This identification of the insentient with the sentient is called 'I' (ahaṃ), and attraction-aversion reside in this alone. The meaning is that attraction-aversion reside in egoity (ahaṃtā, I-ness), and egoity is strengthened by attraction-aversion. These very attraction-aversion are perceived in the intellect, whereby one's own opinions based on principles etc. seem pleasing and others' opinions seem displeasing. Then these attraction-aversion are perceived in the mind, whereby things favorable to the mind seem pleasing and unfavorable things seem displeasing. Then these very attraction-aversion are perceived in the senses, whereby objects favorable to the senses seem pleasing and unfavorable objects seem displeasing. These very attraction-aversion are perceived in the objects of the senses (sound, touch, form, taste, odor) based on one's own feeling of favorability and unfavorability. Therefore, upon the dissolution of the knot of egoity (the identification of insentient and sentient), attraction-aversion are completely eradicated, because attraction-aversion are based on egoity alone.
'I am a servant'; 'I am an aspirant'; 'I am a devotee'—attraction-aversion also reside in that very 'I' in which these servant, aspirant, and devotee reside. Attraction-aversion reside neither in the insentient alone nor in the sentient alone, but in the assumed relationship between the insentient and sentient. Although residing in the assumed relationship between insentient and sentient, these attraction-aversion reside primarily in the insentient. In the identification of insentient and sentient, the attraction of the insentient occurs in the insentient part itself, but due to the identification, it appears to be in the sentient. The attraction of the insentient is rāga. Therefore, when an aspirant considers the body (insentient) itself as his nature, he finds difficulty in destroying attraction-aversion. But by keeping his vision on his sentient nature, he does not find difficulty in destroying attraction-aversion. The reason is that attraction-aversion are not self-existent; rather, they are produced from the relationship with the insentient (asat).
If there is 'attraction' (rāga) in good company (satsaṅga), devotion, meditation, etc., then there will be aversion (dveṣa) towards the world; but if there is 'love' (prema), there will be no aversion towards the world, rather there will be indifference (turning away) from the world (Note P. 179). Attraction towards one object of the world causes aversion towards another object, but love for God causes dispassion (vairāgya) towards the world. With dispassion, the desire to enjoy pleasure from the world ceases, and spontaneous service to the world occurs. As a result, along with the body, senses, mind, and intellect, the 'I' also spontaneously engages in serving the world. Consequently, upon the severance of relationship with the 'I' along with the body etc., the attraction-aversion residing in it are completely destroyed.
A person's actions are based on either nature (svabhāva) or principle (siddhānta). Performing actions solely for spiritual progress is performing actions based on principle. Nature is of two types: free from attraction-aversion (pure) and endowed with attraction-aversion (impure). Nature cannot be destroyed, but it can certainly be made pure, i.e., free from attraction-aversion. Just as the Ganges emerges from Gangotri; if a dam is built as high as or higher than Gangotri, the flow of the Ganges can be stopped. But doing so is not an easy task. However, by digging canals from the Ganges, its flow can be diverted. Similarly, the flow of natural actions cannot be destroyed, but it can be changed, i.e., it can be made free from attraction-aversion—this is the profound principle of the Gītā. In actions prompted by attraction-aversion, engagement and withdrawal are not as obstructive as attraction-aversion themselves are. That is why the Lord has called only one who renounces attraction-aversion as the true renunciant (Gītā 18.10). Usually, the aspirant's attention does not go towards attraction-aversion, hence his engagement and withdrawal are prompted by attraction-aversion. Therefore, to become free from attraction-aversion, the aspirant should perform all actions only by keeping the principle before himself. Then his nature will spontaneously become in accordance with the principle and pure.
When a mental impression endowed with attraction-aversion arises, acting according to it strengthens attraction-aversion, and by not acting according to it but acting according to the principle, attraction-aversion are destroyed.
There should be no attraction-aversion towards auspicious and inauspicious mental impressions. The aspirant should, without accepting the mental impressions arising in the mind as his own, not associate with them in any way, neither supporting nor opposing them.
If the aspirant finds himself incapable of removing attraction-aversion, he should take refuge in the all-powerful, supreme well-wisher, the Lord. Then, by the Lord's grace, his attraction-aversion are removed (Gītā 7.14) and supreme peace is attained (Gītā 18.62). To consider that the assumed 'I' along with the body, senses, mind, intellect, vital airs, and all worldly objects—all belong to the Lord alone—this itself is taking refuge in the Lord. Then, for the pleasure of the Lord, one should merely serve the Lord's people with the materials given by the Lord and desire nothing in return. Desiring anything in return maintains a relationship with the insentient. Serving the world selflessly is an infallible means to destroy attraction-aversion. Whatever one has, from the gross, subtle, and causal bodies up to the assumed 'I', should be engaged in serving the world alone. Because all these things are essentially non-different from the world. To consider them as separate from the world (as one's own) is bondage. One should not take the pleasure of actions and objects through the gross body, the pleasure of contemplation through the subtle body, or the pleasure of stability through the causal body. In truth, the human body is not for one's own pleasure at all—"O body, do not desire the fruit of sense-objects." (Mānasa 7.44.1)
Another point: the body, senses, mind, intellect, objects, etc., through which service is done, are all parts of the world. When the world itself is not mine, then how can its part be mine? By considering these body etc. as one's own, true service cannot be done; because this gives rise to attachment and selfishness. Therefore, these things should be considered as belonging to the one who is served. Just as a devotee considers objects as belonging to the Lord alone and offers them to the Lord—"What belongs to You, O Govinda, I offer to You alone"—similarly, a karma-yogī considers objects as belonging to the world alone and offers them to the world.
**A Profound Point Regarding Service**
Only one who never desires anything for himself can serve. The desire for wealth etc. for service is indeed a desire; because the desire to serve itself gives rise to the desire for wealth etc. Therefore, if opportunity is obtained and one is capable, service should be rendered, but one should not have the desire to serve.
To become happy by giving happiness to another; to harbor the thought, 'People get happiness through me'; to desire even a little honor or praise in return for service, and to be pleased upon receiving honor or praise—this is actually enjoyment, not service. Because doing so transforms service into sense-enjoyment, meaning service becomes for one's own pleasure. If even a little pleasure is taken in serving, that pleasure creates a sense of importance towards wealth etc., which gradually gives rise to attachment and desire.
One who has the notion, 'I give something to someone,' cannot comprehend this point, nor can anyone easily make him understand that the things employed in service belong to the one who is served. If we give his
★🔗
