Krishna now describes the second kind of austerity, the rajasic (rajas being the quality of restless passion and craving). The act itself can look exactly like genuine austerity. What makes it rajasic is its motive: it is done to win three social rewards. The verse names them as satkara, mana, and puja. The commentators unpack these as a graded ladder of recognition. Satkara is honour through words: being praised aloud as 'here is a fine ascetic, a good brahmin, a holy man.' Mana is honour through the body of others: people rising from their seats to greet you, bowing, saluting, treating you with marks of respect. Puja is honour through what others give: having your feet washed, being garlanded and reverenced, receiving gifts and wealth. The austerity is performed for the sake of this whole harvest of public esteem.

Alongside the craving for recognition, the verse names a second mark: dambha, which means ostentation, pretence, or hypocrisy. The commentators stress that this is austerity worn as a costume. They picture it as 'carrying a dharma-banner,' making a public display of piety, putting on a show of righteousness. Several add that the inner ground is missing precisely the disposition of trust or faith (sraddha) in the austerity itself; the outward form is kept up, but the heart that should fuel it is absent. So the rajasic austerity is doubly hollow: aimed outward at applause, and faked rather than truly felt.

Because its aim is so worldly, this austerity is called chala, unsteady, and adhruva, uncertain or impermanent. The commentators give a consistent account of why. Its fruit is only of this world (iha): it earns nothing beyond, no heaven and no higher state, only some passing prestige here. And even that prestige does not last. It is unsteady because its fuel is the changing applause of others, and applause shifts; one source notes it lasts only until the pretence is exposed. It is uncertain because the very fruit it chases, honour and the rest, is never assured: it may come or may not. So both names point at the same hollowness: an austerity anchored in public opinion has nothing solid to stand on.

A subtle and important point that several commentators draw out: the rajasic act is not a failure to perform austerity. It is the very same bodily, verbal, and mental discipline as the highest kind, only diverted by its inner aim toward worldly prestige. The act does not change in its outward form at all; what changes is that display-motives have been substituted for faith. This is why the same austerity can be either among the chapter's highest worth or among its lowest, depending entirely on the inward direction of the heart. The teaching therefore turns the seeker's attention away from the visible deed and onto the quiet question of why it is being done.

Śrī Puruṣottama · Śrīdhara Svāmī