HomeBhagavad GitaCh. 6Shloka 34
Previous Verse
Next Verse

Shloka 34

Dhyana YogaAtma Samyama Yoga

Bhagavad Gita 34 illustration

चञ्चलं हि मनः कृष्ण प्रमाथि बलवद्दृढम् । तस्याहं निग्रहं मन्ये वायोरिव सुदुष्करम् ॥ ६.३४ ॥

cañcalaṁ hi manaḥ kṛṣṇa pramāthi balavad dṛḍham | tasyāhaṁ nigrahaṁ manye vāyor iva su-duṣkaram || 6.34 ||

Arjuna said: For the mind, O Kṛṣṇa, is indeed restless, turbulent, strong, and obstinate; I deem its restraint to be exceedingly difficult—like restraining the wind.

For the mind is restless, O Krishna, turbulent, strong and obstinate; I consider its restraint as very difficult, like that of the wind.

Indeed the mind is unsteady, O Krishna—disturbing, powerful, and stubborn; I think its control is exceedingly difficult, as (difficult) as (controlling) the wind.

The verse is stable across common recensions. ‘Pramāthi’ conveys disruptive agitation; translators vary between ‘turbulent,’ ‘violent,’ or ‘tormenting,’ but the context is inner struggle rather than external conflict.

चञ्चलम्restless, unsteady
चञ्चलम्:
Rootचञ्चल
हिindeed, surely
हि:
Rootहि
मनःmind
मनः:
Karta
Rootमनस्
कृष्णO Krishna
कृष्ण:
Rootकृष्ण
प्रमाथिturbulent, violently agitating
प्रमाथि:
Rootप्रमाथिन्
बलवत्strong, powerful
बलवत्:
Rootबलवत्
दृढम्firm, obstinate
दृढम्:
Rootदृढ
तस्यof it (of that mind)
तस्य:
Rootतद्
अहम्I
अहम्:
Karta
Rootअस्मद्
निग्रहम्restraint, control
निग्रहम्:
Karma
Rootनिग्रह
मन्येI think, I consider
मन्ये:
Root√मन् (मन्यते)
वायोःof the wind
वायोः:
Rootवायु
इवlike, as
इव:
Rootइव
सुदुष्करम्very difficult, extremely hard to do
सुदुष्करम्:
Rootसुदुष्कर
Arjuna
Manas (mind)Nigraha (restraint)Cañcalatva (instability)Abhyāsa/Vairāgya (implied remedies)
Difficulty of self-masteryInner turbulence as obstacleRealism about practiceMetaphor of wind (ungraspability)

FAQs

The mind is characterized as strong and habit-driven, anticipating modern observations about attention capture and entrenched patterns; the wind metaphor conveys how quickly thoughts can shift.

The verse does not assert a metaphysical doctrine so much as it diagnoses the practical condition of embodied cognition that obstructs contemplative realization.

It intensifies Arjuna’s objection, setting up Krishna’s response that control is possible through systematic training and detachment.

It supports a gradual-training model: expecting immediate control is unrealistic; structured practice, environment design, and reduced compulsive engagement are implied.