Bhagavad Gita — Moksha Sannyasa Yoga, Shloka 7

Moksha Sannyasa Yoga

Devanagari script

नियतस्य तु संन्यासः कर्मणो नोपपद्यते । मोहात्तस्य परित्यागस्तामसः परिकीर्तितः ॥ १८.७ ॥

Transliteration

niyatasya tu saṃnyāsaḥ karmaṇo nopapadyate | mohāt tasya parityāgas tāmasaḥ parikīrtitaḥ || 18.7 ||

Translation

ନିୟତ କର୍ମର ସନ୍ନ୍ୟାସ ଯୁକ୍ତିସଙ୍ଗତ ନୁହେଁ; ମୋହବଶତଃ ତାହାର ପରିତ୍ୟାଗ ‘ତାମସ’ ବୋଲି ପରିକୀର୍ତ୍ତିତ।

Gita Press Meaning

नियत कर्म का संन्यास उचित नहीं है; मोहवश उसका त्याग ‘तामस’ कहा गया है।

Critical Edition Meaning

Renunciation of prescribed action is not appropriate; abandoning it out of delusion is declared to be tamasic.

Comparative Note

Traditional exegesis often identifies ‘prescribed’ with obligatory duties grounded in dharma and social role; the academic reading keeps the normative point: withdrawal motivated by confusion (moha) is ethically and psychologically inferior within the guṇa framework.

Word by Word

• नियतस्य: of the obligatory (prescribed)
• Root: नियत

• तु: but
• Root: तु

• संन्यासः: renunciation (giving up)
• संन्यासः: Karta
• Root: संन्यास

• कर्मणः: of action; of work
• Root: कर्मन्

• न: not
• Root: न

• उपपद्यते: is proper; is justified; is possible
• Root: √पद् (उप + √पद्)

• मोहात्: from delusion
• मोहात्: Apadana
• Root: मोह

• तस्य: of that (of it)
• Root: तद्

• परित्यागः: abandonment; giving up
• परित्यागः: Karta
• Root: परित्याग

• तामसः: tamasic; born of darkness
• Root: तामस

• परिकीर्तितः: is declared; is described
• Root: परि + √कीर्त्

Speakers

• Krishna

Primary Concepts

• Niyata-karma (prescribed duty)
• Moha (delusion)
• Tamas-guṇa
• Tyāga

Key Themes

• Critique of escapism
• Guṇa-based ethics
• Duty with inner freedom

FAQs

Psychological significance?

The verse distinguishes detachment from avoidance: giving up responsibilities due to confusion or inertia is framed as tamasic, often linked with diminished clarity and motivation.

Metaphysical meaning?

Within guṇa theory, tamas obscures discernment; thus ‘renunciation’ arising from moha does not conduce to liberation-oriented clarity, even if it resembles renunciation externally.

Contextual relevance?

It begins the promised threefold analysis of tyāga by marking an improper form: abandoning dharmically required action from delusion.

Modern Application?

It can inform ethical decision-making by asking whether stepping back from duties is a thoughtful boundary or a confusion-driven retreat; the text recommends clarity-based disengagement rather than inertia-based withdrawal.