Serenity of mind, gentleness, silence, self-control, and purity of heart—these qualities are known as the austerity of the mind. When the threefold austerity—of body, speech, and mind—is practiced with supreme faith by those who are steadfast, without any desire for reward, it is considered pure and sattvic. But when austerity is performed for the sake of gaining respect, honor, or worship, or practiced with hypocrisy, it is deemed passionate, unstable, and insincere. And when austerity is undertaken with a misguided understanding, causing pain to oneself or with the intention to harm others, it is said to be of the nature of darkness. Similarly, a gift given with the thought, “It should be given,” to someone who does not return the favor, given at the right place and time, and to a worthy recipient—such a gift is remembered as pure. But if a gift is given with the expectation of something in return, or with a desire for reward, or given unwillingly, it is considered passionate. And gifts offered at the wrong place or time, to unworthy people, or given without respect or with contempt, are declared to be of darkness. The ancient sages remembered the threefold description of Brahman—“Om Tat Sat”—and by this, the Brahmins, the Vedas, and sacrifices were ordained. Therefore, those who know Brahman always begin their acts of sacrifice, charity, and austerity, as prescribed, by uttering “Om.” Uttering “Tat,” those who seek liberation perform various acts of sacrifice, austerity, and charity without seeking reward. “Sat” is used to indicate reality and goodness, and also refers to praiseworthy actions. Perseverance in sacrifice, austerity, and charity is also called “Sat,” and any action undertaken for these purposes is likewise designated as “Sat.” But whatever is offered, given, or performed as austerity or act, without faith, is called “asat”—it has no value here or hereafter, O Partha. At this point, Arjuna spoke, “O mighty-armed Krishna, I wish to understand the truth of renunciation and abandonment, O Hrishikesha, and the difference between them, O slayer of Keshin.” The Blessed Lord replied, “O Arjuna, the wise understand renunciation as the giving up of actions performed with desire, while the learned declare abandonment to be the relinquishing of the fruits of all actions. Some thinkers say that action itself should be abandoned as evil, but others insist that acts of sacrifice, charity, and austerity should never be given up. Listen, O best of the Bharatas, to my final teaching on abandonment, for it is said to be of three kinds. Acts of sacrifice, charity, and austerity are not to be abandoned; they must indeed be performed, for they purify even the wise. But these actions should be done by giving up attachment and desire for their results. This, O Partha, is my firm and highest judgment. Renouncing prescribed actions is not proper; if one abandons them out of delusion, such abandonment is of the nature of darkness. If one gives up action simply because it is painful, or out of fear of bodily discomfort, that abandonment is passionate, and the fruit of true renunciation is not gained. But when a person performs prescribed actions simply because they are to be done, giving up all attachment and desire for results, that renunciation is of the nature of goodness. The person who is pure, wise, and free from doubt, who neither hates disagreeable action nor clings to agreeable action, is established in goodness. Indeed, one who possesses a body cannot completely give up all actions, but whoever relinquishes the fruits of actions is truly called a renouncer. Those who do not renounce receive, after death, the threefold fruit of action—undesirable, desirable, and mixed. But those who are true renunciants do not experience such results. O mighty-armed one, let me tell you the five causes, as declared in the philosophy of knowledge, that are necessary for the accomplishment of all actions: the body as the seat of action, the agent, the various instruments, the different kinds of activities, and the divine as the fifth. Whatever action a person undertakes with body, speech, or mind—whether just or unjust—these five are its causes. Therefore, whoever, due to an unrefined understanding, sees only the self as the agent, does not see truly and has a distorted intellect. Whoever is free from the sense of ego and whose understanding is pure, even if such a person were to kill, is neither killing nor bound by the act. There are three motivations for action: knowledge, the object of knowledge, and the knower. And there are three constituents of action: the instrument, the action itself, and the agent. Knowledge, action, and the agent are each of three kinds, according to the qualities of nature—hear them as they are. That knowledge by which one sees the one imperishable reality in all beings, undivided though appearing divided, is of the nature of goodness. The knowledge by which one sees all beings as separate and distinct, that is passionate. And the knowledge attached to a single effect as if it were the whole, lacking reason and truth, is of darkness. Prescribed action, performed without attachment, without desire or aversion, and without longing for results, is of the nature of goodness. Action performed with a desire for its fruit, or with pride and great effort, is of the nature of passion. Action taken in delusion, without concern for consequences, loss, harm, or one’s own capacity, is of the nature of darkness. A sattvic agent is one who acts without attachment, does not claim “I am the doer,” is steadfast and enthusiastic, and remains unchanged in success or failure. A rajasic agent is passionate, eager for the fruits of action, greedy, violent, impure, and swayed by joy and sorrow.