Now let us come to the subject! Kṛṣṇa Paramātma called Arjuna and said: “Brother-in-law! The four varṇas were created by Me according to the division of guṇa and karma. Though I Myself am their doer, I am yet a non-doer. Seen with the vision of tattva, inert karma cannot bind the 'Caitanya Ātma'. The Ātma is asaṅga by its very nature. There is neither the abhimāna 'I am doing' nor Ahaṅkāra and mamakāra. That is why this karma, which takes the form of the creation, sustenance and dissolution of the world, does not bind Me in the least. Abhimāna, Ahaṅkāra and mamakāra are the marks of the ajñānis. It is such people alone whom karmas bind. Though from the standpoint of vyavahāra I appear to people like one who does karmas, in reality I am a non-doer. Brother-in-law! Not only this: these karmas do not let go at this point. From karmas comes fruit; from desire for the fruit, vāsanās; and from vāsanās, births have to be taken. In those births, again karma, desire for the fruit, vāsanā, and again birth. In this way one falls into the grip of birth and death and is tormented. What is called karma is a great whirlpool. Whirling one round and round, it drags one down to the bottom. Arjuna! Listen with great care to one more thing! Karma has no power or capacity to bind. By itself it cannot bind. But the abhimāna 'I am doing this karma' and the craving for the fruit become the chief causes of bondage. For example, a zero has value only when a one is joined to it, does it not! In the same way, 'doership' is like the digit, and karmas are like the zeros. So it is through doership, which is the digit, that bonds are formed. Therefore, brother-in-law, if you give up abhimāna, karma will not trouble you at all. What are called akarmas, they also call the side of non-action. To put these simply: karmas done without attachment to the fruit do not turn into vāsanās; and when there are no vāsanās, there is no rebirth either. The mumukṣus of old, who conducted such sacred enquiries with dedication, performed karmas. Such mumukṣus did not think that they were either doers or enjoyers. They used to think that God alone is the doer of all, and that these are merely matters of vyavahāra.”