Gita essays 33
The concluding
chapter of Bhagavad Gita, chapter 18, opens with the question of Arjuna,
seeking clarification on Sanyasa and Tyaga as both mean renunciation. Lord Krishna does not give a direct reply
differentiating between these two but starts his reply, giving the distinction
between Sanyasa and Tyaga quoting sages and wise people.
The sages regard Sanyasa as the renunciation of desire-born actions; the
wise declare the renunciation of the fruits of all actions as Tyaga. (18-2)
Sanyasa is giving up
of desire motivated action while Tyaga is giving up of desire for the fruits of
actions. A desire-prompted action
relates to the present while anxiety to enjoy its fruits relates to the future
in the time-frame, causing mental disturbance in the present. Sanyasa is the
goal to be reached through Tyaga, abandoning the anxiety for the enjoyment of
the fruits of actions. Both Sanyasa and
Tyaga are disciplines in our activities, the former the goal, the latter the
means and they do not advocate the complete renunciation of all actions before acquiring Athmajnanam but
the performance of all actions, secular or spiritual, as nishkama karma or
desireless actions. In fact practice of
worship (yajna), charity (dhana) and austerity (tapas) should not be given up before
becoming a Jivan muktha because these activities bring about a discipline in
the mind and its inner peace and equilibrium which are necessary for spiritual
unfoldment and gaining of Athmajnanam.
But even these activities of worship, charity and austerity should be
performed without any sense of egoism and desire for its rewards. Lord here does not discuss asrama sanyasa,
monastic life-style, as it is applicable to spiritually evolved people only and
so emphasises here the importance of obligatory duties like yajna, dhana and
tapas for the spiritual aspirants for Athmajnanam. Lord also takes this opportunity to discuss
karma in detail along with the classification of renunciation of karma as Satvic,
Rajasic and Tamasic. First let us see the three categories, as spelt out by the
Lord. Only He names them here in reverse order, Tamasic, Rajasic and Satvic.
Renunciation of
obligatory action is not proper. Its renunciation out of delusion is said to be
Tamasic (18-7)
He who abandons action on account of the fear of physical
strain (considering it to be
painful), does not obtain the merit of renunciation by doing such Rajasic
renunciation. (18-8)
Whatever obligatory action is done, with the mind-set
that it should be done, abandoning attachment and also the desire for reward, that
renunciation is regarded as Satvic, O Arjuna!
(18-9)
Lord is making the
teaching at Arjuna’s level. Arjuna is a
spiritually unripe student who is not free from raga, dwesha etc. It is his reluctance to offer battle to his
grand-father, Bhishma and guru Drona in this 'do or die' war that makes him think
of Sanyasa. Lord’s earlier teaching of karma sanyasa has not convinced him
of mental renunciation and he is still contemplating physical renunciation only.
So Lord tells him that giving up obligatory duties in the name of total
renunciation is only renunciation under delusion, Tamasic renunciation and to
renounce as Arjuna wants to, because pursuit of duties is painful to him, is
Rajasic renunciation that confers no merit on the renouncer. Only Satvic renunciation where one performs
the obligatory duties with the firm conviction that they should not be
renounced and renounces only attachment to such actions and the anxiety for
their rewards, is the true renunciation called Tyaga.
Such a person of Satvic renunciation is only acclaimed by
the Lord as Tyagi and this Tyagi being not attached to fruits of his action, is
not affected by the fruits of action, good, bad or mixed. He is not elated when the results are
agreeable nor is he depressed when they turn disagreeable and Lord acclaims him
as an intelligent person. As per Swami
Paramarthananda satvic sanyasa yoga is another name for karma yoga and this Tyagi
is a karma yogi only. As per the theory of re-incarnation, present
determines the quality of the future and next birth and its environment
would depend upon the type of vasanas produced in the present by the actions. This
can be in anyone of the three categories; agreeable, if birth is in higher lokas,
disagreeable if birth is in lower lokas, or a mixture of both, if it
happens in the same manushya loka. This type of result is applicable to
non-Tyagis only as vasanas are created due to one’s reactions to results and a Tyagi
is free from all reactions to the fruits of actions. After extolling Tyaga and Tyagi, Lord takes
up for closer examination the components that constitute all actions qualifying
as karma.
Lord quotes Sankhyan philosophy, which Sri Sankaracharya
identifies with Vedanta, to list out the five factors that govern the karma.
They are, in Lord’s own words –
The body (the seat of action), the doer (ego), the
various instruments (sense organs of perception and action), the varied
functions (of organs), and the presiding Divinity, the fifth. (18-14)
So the five components that make an action qualify as
karma are:
1. The body -Adhishthaanam
-the gateway for the entrance and existence of stimuli
2. The ego -Karta-
which seeks fulfillment of the action through the body
3. The organs
of perception and action - Karanam - through which the inner personality
comes into contact with the field of enjoyment and satisfaction
4. The various
forms and processes of action
5. The
presiding Divinity, called here daivam, stands for the unaccountable
element which is commonly called luck, destiny, fate or the force accumulated
by the acts of one's past lives
All actions of body, mind and speech, whether they be
good or bad, are governed by these five factors, asserts the Lord. Since only these five factors are behind all
actions, the Self is always actionless and It is only a silent witness. But a
man of perverted understanding attributes agency to the pure Self as the doer
because of misapprehension of the facts. He equates the body with the Self
because of his lack of knowledge of the pure, actionless Self. He does not behold the one eternal essence
which is the substratum of everything, the Pure Consciousness.
Lord contrasts his attitude with one who does not have
the notion “I am the doer” and says:
He who is ever free from the egoistic notion, whose
intelligence is not tainted by good or evil, though he slays these people, he
slays not, nor is he bound (by the action). (18-17)
Lord Krishna says that those who have no sense of egoism
and whose intelligence is not vitiated by false values of possession,
acquisition etc. perform no action although they act. While a man of above mentioned temperament is
acting in the world, such actions leave no mental impressions (vasanas) in him
and he remains detached. An egoless man
of wisdom while working in any field works with an attitude of surrender to
Divine Will and actions performed by him with such an attitude of dedication
create no vasanas. So The Lord says
`though he kills he does not kill'.
Thus Arjuna is told
that if he can act in the world without identifying with things around him and
does his duty in the consciousness of the Divine, even if he kills his kith and
kin, teachers etc. he would not be committing any crime and the killings would
not leave any murderous impressions in him.
-----------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment