18/3,

आज का श्लोक,
__________________

अध्याय 18, श्लोक 3,

त्याज्यं दोषवदित्येके कर्म प्राहुर्मनीषिणः ।
यज्ञदानतपःकर्म न त्याज्यमिति चापरे ॥
--
(त्याज्यम् दोषवत् इति एके कर्म प्राहुः मनीषिणः ।
यज्ञदानतपःकर्म न त्याज्यम् इति च अपरे ॥)
--
भावार्थ :
कुछ मनीषी (मननशील) कहते हैं कि कर्ममात्र दोषयुक्त हैं इसलिए (स्वरूप से ही) त्याज्य हैं । अन्य कुछ कहते हैं कि अनेक कर्म यद्यपि त्याज्य हैं, किन्तु यज्ञ तप एवं दान त्याज्य नहीं (कर्तव्य) हैं ।
--
टिप्पणी :
जो मनीषी कर्म को स्वरूप से ही त्याज्य कहते हैं, वे ऐसा इसलिए कहते हैं कि कर्म (करने) का संकल्प ही मनुष्य के मन में कर्तृत्व का, अपने स्वतन्त्र कर्ता होने का भ्रम उत्पन्न कर देता है । यह कर्तृत्व की भावना ही मूलतः आत्मा (स्वरूप) पर आवरण बन जाती है । और फिर कर्तृत्व की भावना को, कर्तापन के अभिमान को कैसे त्यागें, यह प्रश्न मन में पैदा होता है । फिर कहा जाता है कि सारे कर्म ईश्वर को समर्पित कर दो, या ईश्वर-समर्पित इस बुद्धि से करो कि मैं तो निमित्त मात्र हूँ । किन्तु यदि कोई प्रारंभ में ही इस बात का विचार करता है कि वास्तविक ’कर्ता’ कौन है, तो उसे अपनी मौलिक भूल स्पष्ट हो जाती है । कर्तृत्व के अभिमान से अभिभूत होना ही मौलिक भूल है । यदि हम इस मौलिक भूल को समझ लेते हैं तो ईश्वर को समर्पित करने का प्रश्न ही कहाँ पैदा होता है । और यदि नहीं समझते तो फिर ईश्वर के अस्तित्व और स्वरूप तथा आस्था अनास्था का प्रश्न भी उत्पन्न हो जाता है । फिर ’मेरा ईश्वर’ / ’आपका ईश्वर’ का प्रश्न भी ।      
जो अन्य मनीषी कहते हैं कि यज्ञ दान तथा कर्म या यज्ञ, दान एवं तप इन तीन रूपों में किया जानेवाला कर्म कभी त्याज्य नहीं है, इसका अर्थ यह हुआ कि उन्हें ईश्वर-प्रदत्त कर्तव्य कर्म समझते हुए यथाशक्ति कर्तृत्व की भावना से रहित होकर किया जाना चाहिए ।
इस प्रकार दोनों दृष्टियों में अविरोध ही है ।
पुनः शास्त्रों में कर्म के प्रकार के आधार पर उसका वर्गीकरण काम्य, विहित, और निषिद्ध तथा त्याज्य, आदि में किया जाता है । कर्म (तथा कर्मफल) का एक वर्गीकरण संचित, प्रारब्ध तथा आगामी के आधार पर भी किया जाता है ।  
--
Chapter 18, śloka 3,

tyājyaṃ doṣavadityeke
karma prāhurmanīṣiṇaḥ |
yajñadānatapaḥkarma
na tyājyamiti cāpare ||
--
(tyājyam doṣavat iti eke
karma prāhuḥ manīṣiṇaḥ |
yajñadānatapaḥkarma
na tyājyam iti ca apare ||)
--
Meaning :
Some learned men assert that because no action is flawless, one should abstain from all action, while others insist that one should never eschew / escape from performing action such as the sacrifice, charity, and austerity.  are
--
Note :
The first view stresses that because the notion 'I do, I perform action therefore the same happens' creates a false (sense of) a 'me', of an agent responsible for the action, and this sense gains weitage, the mind gets overwhelmed with this false sense of 'me'. Thought assumes this 'me' as an independent entity who is the sole authority. This confusion on the part of thought is further strengthened by the idea of 'choice of action'. What is worth-done, what need not, what should not be done in any condition? This gives rise to the idea of freedom, One tends to think; I am free to do / to not do, and the basic flaw in this sequence of logic is lost sight of. What is the entity 'me'? Once the idea that 'I am free to do / not to do' takes place in the mind, the 'I' springs up in thought and assumes an (apparently, not really) independent existence. This 'I' is but a thought only, but of a specific kind, and once possessed by this one could not escape confusion. So action is to be given up in its essence that creates the sense of 'I', and no action is exception to this.
And the first view tells us to carry on all action (karma) that is synonymous to sacrifice, charity and austerity, because that are 'dharma', ordained and part of our essential nature, we can not and should not overlook or escape from them, because that is part of the cosmic functioning. Obviously such action(s) could be performed far more in a better way keepin the sense of 'me', the one who performs them, -forgotten. This way we are free from sin. Because sin is incurred when there is lapse of duty, - deliberately or because of lazyness.
The two views are thus not paradoxical, and stress upon the same teaching.
Again, the 'karma'(and 'karmaphala' / fruits of action) is defined and classified in various ways as kāmya (to fulfill a wish), vihita (duty, as advised by the scriptures), niṣiddha (prohibited by scriptures) and, tyājya (to be shunned). There is still another way of classifying 'karma' as saṃcita (accumulared, done in the past), prārabdha (that which as the effect of the past has started bearing fruit in the present), and āgāmī (that which will bear fruit in future).
Freedom of choice :
Because all tendencies (saṃskāra) are the result of the past, it is not possible for man to affect them in any way. And the external conditions are also beyond one's control. The only way available therefore is to find out exactly 'Who' is affected by 'karma'? Namely, the consciousness / 'me' / sense of 'me'. Having once understood this, one can stay aloof and unaffected. This however needs interest, sense of urgency and earnestness. Maturity is not attained in a moment, though one could sure and readily attain the insight and wisdom .  
--