HomeBhagavad GitaCh. 18Shloka 21
Previous Verse
Next Verse

Bhagavad Gita — Moksha Sannyasa Yoga, Shloka 21

Moksha Sannyasa Yoga

Bhagavad Gita 21 illustration

पृथक्त्वेन तु यज्ज्ञानं नानाभावान्पृथग्विधान् । वेत्ति सर्वेषु भूतेषु तज्ज्ञानं विद्धि राजसम् ॥ १८.२१ ॥

pṛthaktvena tu yaj jñānaṁ nānābhāvān pṛthagvidhān | vetti sarveṣu bhūteṣu taj jñānaṁ viddhi rājasam || 18.21 ||

But that knowledge by which one knows, in all beings, manifold states as separate and diverse—know that knowledge to be rājasika.

परन्तु जिस ज्ञान के द्वारा मनुष्य समस्त प्राणियों में नाना प्रकार के पृथक्-पृथक् भावों को अलग-अलग देखता है, उस ज्ञान को राजस जानो।

But that knowledge which, in all beings, knows the various states as distinct and of different kinds—know that knowledge to be rajasic.

Traditional glosses often treat rajasic knowledge as overemphasis on difference leading to attachment and rivalry. Academic-literal readings describe it as cognition that apprehends plurality and separateness; the evaluative dimension (why it is ‘rajasic’) is inferred from the broader guṇa framework.

पृथक्त्वेनby separateness; through the notion of distinctness
पृथक्त्वेन:
करण
Rootपृथक्त्व
तुbut; indeed
तु:
Rootतु
यत्which
यत्:
Rootयद्
ज्ञानम्knowledge
ज्ञानम्:
कर्ता
Rootज्ञान
नानाभावान्diverse states/conditions; manifold entities
नानाभावान्:
कर्म
Rootनानाभाव
पृथक्separately; as distinct
पृथक्:
Rootपृथक्
विधान्as different kinds; as separate varieties
विधान्:
कर्म
Rootविध
वेत्तिknows; cognizes
वेत्ति:
Root√विद् (जानने)
सर्वेषुin all
सर्वेषु:
अधिकरण
Rootसर्व
भूतेषुin beings; in creatures
भूतेषु:
अधिकरण
Rootभूत
तत्that
तत्:
Rootतद्
ज्ञानम्knowledge
ज्ञानम्:
कर्म
Rootज्ञान
विद्धिknow (you); understand
विद्धि:
Root√विद् (जानने)
राजसम्rajasic; belonging to rajas
राजसम्:
Rootराजस
Krishna
RajasJñānaPlurality vs unity
Fragmented cognitionCategorization and differenceMotivated perception

FAQs

Rajasic knowledge prioritizes distinctions—types, roles, comparisons—which can be useful for practical tasks but may also fuel restlessness, competitiveness, and attachment to outcomes.

It represents a standpoint that treats plurality as primary and does not (or cannot) see an underlying unity as decisive; thus it remains within the domain of differentiated phenomena.

It contrasts with the previous verse’s integrative sattvic vision, showing how guṇa-conditioning shapes what counts as ‘knowledge’.

It can describe analytic but divisive thinking—e.g., reducing people to categories. The Gītā’s framing invites balancing necessary differentiation with a unifying ethical outlook.