________________
CONCLUSION
673
that this course of propriety and of gentleness was of no avail, you have started the war, as there was no other alternative. For this, you are not to blame at all; because, it is your duty, to acquire these rights ultimately by fight, if necessary, in the interests of public welfare, according to the religion of Ksatriyas, instead of wasting time in begging like a Brahmin (Ma. Bha. U. 28 and 72; and Vanaparva 33. 48 and 50)". Accepting this logical reasoning of the Blessed Lord, Vyasa has satisfied Yudhisthira later on in the Santiparva (San. ch. 32 and 33). But though the Reason is thus considered to be the superior factor in deciding what is right and what is wrong, it becomes necessary to explain what is meant by Pure Reason; because, as both the Mind and the Reason are evolutes (vikura) of Matter (prakrts), they can inherently be of three kinds, that is sättvika (static), rājasa (active) and tamasa (ignorant). Therefore, the Gita has said that, that Reasoning Faculty which Realises the Form of the permanent Atman, which (Atman) is beyond the cognizance of Reason, which (form) is common. to all created things, is to be called the pure or the sütteka Reason in the Philosophy of Karma-Yoga. The sättvika Reason is also known as the Equable Reason; and the word 'Equable" means" which recognises and Realises the unity or identity of the Atman which inhabits all created things". That Reason which does not Realise this identity, is neither pure nor sattvika. When one has thus decided that this Equability of Reason is the most important factor in determining questions of Morality, the next question which naturally arises is, how to recognise this evenness or Equability of Reason; because, as the Reason is an internal organ, one cannot see by one's eyes whether it is good or bad. Therefore, in order to find out whether or not the Reason is pure and equable, one must in the first instance consider the external Actions of the man; otherwise, a man will by his mouth say that his Reason is pure and equable, and by his hands do whatever he likes. Therefore, the Sastras have laid down the proposition that the true Knower of the Brahman has to be recognised by considering his nature; and that if he is a mere talker, he is not a true saint. In describing the characteristics of the Sthitaprajña or of the Devotee of the Blessed Lord, the Bhagavadgits principally
