GitaChapter 18Verse 30

Gita 18.30

Moksha Sanyasa Yoga

प्रवृत्तिं च निवृत्तिं च कार्याकार्ये भयाभये । बन्धं मोक्षं च या वेत्ति बुद्धिः सा पार्थ सात्त्विकी ॥३०॥

pravṛttiṃ ca nivṛttiṃ ca kāryākārye bhayābhaye | bandhaṃ mokṣaṃ ca yā vetti buddhiḥ sā pārtha sāttvikī ||30||

In essence: The sattvic intellect is a lamp of discernment—knowing when to engage and when to withdraw, what must be done and what must be avoided, what binds and what liberates.

A conversation between a seeker and guide to help you feel this verse deeply

Sadhak-Guru Dialogue

Sadhak: "How does one develop this discerning intellect?"

Guru: "Through three means primarily: first, study of scriptures with a qualified teacher who can transmit not just information but wisdom; second, contemplation that digests what is learned until it becomes one's own understanding; third, practice that tests and refines understanding against experience. Sattvic buddhi is not inborn but cultivated through sustained effort in these three areas."

Sadhak: "I often feel confused about what I 'should' do. Is that a sign of rajasic intellect?"

Guru: "Confusion about duty is common and doesn't necessarily indicate rajasic intellect. The sattvic intellect sees clearly; the rajasic confuses dharma and adharma; the tamasic reverses them entirely. Ask yourself: do you see multiple options without knowing which is right (potentially sattvic seeking clarity), or do you mix up right and wrong (rajasic), or do you actually believe wrong is right (tamasic)? Your very question suggests you're seeking sattvic clarity."

Sadhak: "What does it mean to know 'what should be feared and what should not'?"

Guru: "Most people's fears are misplaced. They fear loss of possessions, reputation, comfort—none of which actually touch the Self. They don't fear what truly harms them: growing attachment, deepening ignorance, lost opportunity for spiritual growth. Sattvic intellect rearranges fear rightly: it is vigilant against what binds the soul and untroubled by what merely affects the body or circumstances."

Did this resonate with you? Share it with someone who needs to hear this.

🌅 Daily Practice

🌅 Morning

Reflect on the day ahead: 'Where is pravṛtti (engagement) needed? Where is nivṛtti (withdrawal) appropriate?' Plan for both—active duties and quiet practices. This balance is itself an expression of sattvic understanding.

☀️ Daytime

When facing decisions, ask the three discernments: 'Should I engage or withdraw here? Is this something that should or should not be done? What here leads to bondage, what to freedom?' Even a moment's pause for these questions refines the intellect.

🌙 Evening

Review decisions made: 'Did I correctly assess duty today? Did I fear the right things and remain untroubled by the wrong things? Did my choices move me toward freedom or deeper bondage?' This reflection gradually sharpens sattvic discernment.

Common Questions

Are pravṛtti (engagement) and nivṛtti (withdrawal) equally valid paths?
Krishna teaches that both have their place and neither is universally superior. In Chapter 3, he explains that engagement done rightly is yoga; in Chapter 5, he says karma yoga and sannyasa both lead to liberation. Sattvic intellect knows which is appropriate for a given person at a given time. For most people, the path moves from engaged action (karma yoga) to eventual withdrawal—but this is a natural development, not an imposed renunciation.
How can I know if my understanding of bondage and liberation is correct?
Test it against the teachings of realized masters and authentic scriptures. Personal opinion about what binds and frees is unreliable; wisdom traditions have mapped this territory for millennia. Additionally, observe whether following your understanding leads toward greater peace, clarity, and freedom or toward more agitation and confusion. Correct understanding bears correct fruit.
Isn't it arrogant to claim to know what should and shouldn't be done?
There is a difference between humble wisdom and arrogant certainty. Sattvic intellect knows with humility—understanding that its clarity comes from alignment with truth, not from personal superiority. It remains open to learning, acknowledges complexity, and acts without dogmatism. The arrogant claim to know without actually understanding is rajasic or tamasic, not sattvic.