(Question):— If Thou, Isvara, art free from affection and other evil passions, then, since Thou art gracious to all creatures alike and able to grant every desire, why do they not all desire moksba and seek Thee, with the knowledge that Vasudeva is all?
(Answer): — Listen why it is so: 12. They who long after success in actions sacrifice here to the Gods: for, soon in this world of man accrues success from action.
They who long after success in action sacrifice to the Gods, such as Indra and Agni. The sruti says; " He who, on the other hand, 'worships a separate God, thinking, ' He is separate from me and I am sepa- rate from Him ' — he knows not. He is to the Devas as cattle (to men)'* (Br'u Up. 1-4-1(3).
For, quickly is the fruit of action reaped in this world of men by those who, with selfish ends in view, sacrifice to external Gods, performing the works enjoined on them according to their caste (var«a) and order (asrama). It is for this world of men that Vedic injunctions are meant' — By *>., whether it be for a selfish end or for moksha, every one should follow the Lord, in the path of works or of knowledge. It is the Supreme Xord Himself that abides as the Self in every form,-— (A) f Not men only, but other beings as well,— (A) 11—13] JNANA YOGA 125 the expression " soon in this world of man " the Lord implies that even in other worlds actions produce results: the only difference being that it is only to this world of men that injunctions based upon castes and religious orders apply t Caste, A Divinely ordered human institution What is the foundation of the law that the respective ^"tifis of the several castes and religious orders obtain only is world of men, but not in other worlds? — Or the ques* may be put thus: It has been said that men, split up into igmmunities of several castes and orders (var«as and nas), should follow Thy path in all things, Why should necessarily follow Thy path only, but not that of any r? — The answer follows: 13. The fourfold caste has been created by according to the distribution of energies and )ns; though I am the author thereof, know Me on-agent and immutable.
The four castes (varwas, ttt.t colours) have been created [e, Isvara, according to the distribution of energies (gunas) of actions. The energies are Sattva (goodness), Rajas ness, activity,) and Tamas (darkness). The actions of a> nana (priest), in whom Sattva predominates, are serenity estraint, austerity &c., (xviii 42). The actions of a riya (warrior), in whom Rajas predominates and Sattva ^ordinate to Rajas, are prowess, daring, &c, (xviii 43). actions of a vaisya (merchant)i in whom Rajas pre- □atesand Tamas is subordinate to Rajas, are agriculture, (xviii. 44). The action of a sudra (servant) in whom 126 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. (DlS. IV.
Tamas predominates and Rajas is subordinate to Tamas, is only servitude. Thus have been created the four castes according to the distribution of energies and actions. This fourfold caste does not exist in other worlds. Hence the limitation " in this world of man." (iv. 12).
; Objection);— Oh! then Thou art the author of the act of creating the four castes, and as such Thou art bound by its effect 5 wherefore Thou art not the eternal Lord nor the eternally unbound Answer: — Though I am the author of this act when viewed from the standpoint of Maya, still know thou that I am in reality no agent and therefore not subject to samsara. Action without attachment does not bind tbe soul. Since I am not in reality the author of those actions, of which you think Me to be the author, 14. Actions pollute Me not, nor have I a desire for the fruit of actions. He who knows Me thus is not bound by actions.
For want of egoism (ahawkara), these actions do not pollute Me by necessitating incarnation; nor have I a desire for the fruit of thess actions. On the other hand, it is but right that actions should pollute those men of the world (samsara) who are attached to their actions, thinking them- selves to be the authors thereof, and longing for tbe fruits of such actions. As I have none of these, (war., desire and at- tachment), action cannot pollute Me. Any other person, too, who knows Me to be his Self, who thinks " I am no agent, I have no longing for the fruits of actions"— his ■action too will not necessitate incarnation.
13—16] JNANA YOGA. 127 Knowing that ' I am no agent. I have no longing for the fruits of actions.'
15. Thus knowing, men of old performed ac- tion in the hope of liberation: therefore do thou also perform action as did the ancients in the olden time.
As the ancients performed action, do thou also perform action; do not sit quiet, nor renounce action, if thou art ignorant, do thou perform action to purify the self. If thou art wise and knowest the truth, do thou perform action for the protection of the masses. It was performed by the ancients such as Janaka in the olden time; it is not a recent instruction.
The real nature of action and inaction.
If action should be performed here (in this world of man) 1 shall perform it on the authority of Thy word. Why shouldst thou add that it was performed by the ancients in the olden time?— In reply the Lord says; (Listen). For there is a great difficulty in (understanding; action. — How?
16. What is action? What is inaction — As to this, even the wise are deluded 1 shall teach thee such action, by knowing which thou shalt be liberated from evil.
Even the wise are deluded as to what is action and what is inaction. Wherefore 1 will explain to you the nature of action and of inaction, knowing which thou shalt be released from the evil of sa^sara.
Neither shouldst thou think thus; " It is familiar to all that action means movement of the body, and inaction means absence of it, to sit quiet. What is there to be learnt about them?"
Wherefore?
The answer follows: 17. For, thou hast to know something even of action, something to know of unlawful action, and something to know of inaction; hard to under- stand is the nature of action.
For there is much to be learnt about the action which is enjoined by the scripture, about the action which is unlawful, and about inaction. In fact, it is bard to understand the true nature of action (enjoined), of inaction, and of unlawful action.
What, then, is the true nature of action and inaction about which much has to be learnt, and which you have pro- mised to teach? — Listen: 18. He who can see inaction in action, who can also see action in inaction, he is wise among men, he is devout, he is the performer of all action.
16—18] JNANA YOGA. 129 ' Action * means what is done, an act in general. Inaction can be seen in action, and action in inaction, since both inac- tion (nivritti) and action (pravritti) presuppose an agent* In fact all our experience of such things as action and agent is possible only in a state of avidya, only when we have not yet attained to the Real (vastu). He who sees inaction in action and who sees action in inaction, — he is wise among men, he is devout (yukta, yogin), he has done all action — Thus is he extolled who sees action in inaction and vice versa- (Objection); — What means this incongruity, " who can see inaction in action and action in inaction"? Surely action •can never realize such an incongruity?
(Answer): — This objection does not apply to our inter- pretation. To an ignorant man of the world, what in reality is inaction appears as action, and what in reality is action appears as inaction. With a view to teach what their real nature is, the Lord says'* He who can see inaction in action," &c. Hence no incongruity. It must be a bare truth that the Lord means to teach here, inasmuch as He has said that he who realizes this view of action and inaction is wise, and has introduced the subject by saying that there is much to be learnt about action and inaction, (iv. 17). It has also been said that ' by knowing which thou shalt be liberated from evil* (iv. 16); and certainly freedom from evil cannot be achieved by means of false knowledge. Wherfore, we should under- stand that action and inaction are misunderstood by all living * It has been said that action should be seen in inaction and vice versa because in both an agent is presupposed. This cannot be objected to on the ground that nivntti or inaction is resorted to only when the One real Self is known, and that therefore it presuppose no agency of the Self. For action or inaction, Pravitti or Nivritti. is resorted to only before obtaining a knowledge of the Real Self, as a means of attaining 130 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. IV.
beings and that the Lord, wishing to remove this false view of them, teaches " He whoxan see inaction in action " &c. Moreover, inaction cannot be said to be located in action or contained in it, as jujube (badara) fruits in a vessel, nor can action be said to be located in inaction: for, inaction is but the absence of action. Wherefore (the meaning of the Lord must be that) action and inaction are not rightly understood by people and that the one is mistaken for the other, as the mirage is mistaken for water, or as the mother-of-pearl is mistaken for silver.
(Objection): — Action is ever action to all; it never appears to be anything else?
(Answer):— Not so. When a ship is in motion, the motionless trees on the shore appear, to a man on board the ship, to move in the opposite direction; distant and moving bodies which are far away from our eye appear to be motion- less. Similarly, here, (in the case of the Self) inaction is mis- taken for action, and action for inaction. Wherefore, to remove this false impression, the Lord says " He who can see inaction in action " &c.
Though such an objection has been more than once answered, people who have long been subject to great mis- conceptions are deluded often and often, forget the truth though often and often taught, and often and often raise objections based on false premises. Wherefore, seeing how difficult the Real is for us to know, the Lord often answers such objections.
The truth that the Self is actionless, so clearly taught by sruti, smnti, and reason, has been taught here also in ii. 20--24; and it will also be taught hereafter. It is, how- ever a deep-rooted habit of the mind to connect action with the actionless Self, though it is contrary to His real nature 18] JNANA YOGA. 131 18] JNANA YOGA. 131 wherefore, " even the wise are deluded as to what is action and what is inaction'* (v. 16). Action pertains to the physi- cal body (deha) etc., but man falsely attributes action to the Self and imagines " I am the agent, mine is action, by me shall the fruit of action to reaped." Similarly, he falsely imputes to the Self the cessation (of activity) which really per- tains to the body and the senses, as also the happiness which results from that cessation (of activity): he imagines ' I shall be quiet, so that I may be happy, without worry and without action; and I do nothing now, lam quiet and happy.*. To remove this false impression, the Lord says " He who can see inaction in action," &c.
Now, action which belongs to the body and the senses, while yet retaining its' own nature as action, is falsely imputed by all to the Self who is actionless and immutable; whence even a learned man thinks " I act.'* Hence the passage means: — He who sees inaction in action, ».eM he who has the right knowledge that action which is commonly supposed by all to pertain to the Self, does not really belong to the Self, just as motion does not really pertain to the trees (on the shore of the river) which appear (to a man on board the ship) to move in the opposite direction; and he who sees -action in inaction, i.e., he who knows that even inaction is action,— for, inaction is but a cessation of bodily and mental activities, and like action it is falsely attributed to the Self and causes the feeling of egoism as expressed in the words " quiet and doing nothing, I sit happy;** — he who can realize the nature of action and inaction as now explained is wise among men; he is devout (Yogin), he is the performer of all actions. He is released from evil; he has achieved all.
This verse has been interpreted in a different way by some commentators.— How?— The obligatory duties (hitya- karma), performed for the sake of Is vara, do not produce any 132 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. IV effect and may therefore, be figuratively termed inaction i.e., they are equivalent to inaction; and neglect of those duties produces evil and may therefore, only figuratively, be termed action i.e.. it is equivalent to action. Accordingly, they have interpreted the verse thus:-— He who regards the obligatory duties (nityakarma) as inaction, since they do not produce any effect — just as a cow may be said to be no cow when she does not serve the purpose of yielding milk, — and he who regards the neglect of obligatory duties as an action, since it produces evil such has hell (naraka), he is wise among men. &e.
This interpretation cannot hold good. As such know- ledge cannot lead to liberation from evil, the Lord's statement that " by knowing which thou shalt be liberated from evil"(iv. 16) would prove false. Even though it be grant- ed (for mere argument's sake) that liberation from evil accrues from the performance of obligatory duties (nitya- karma) it can never be granted that it will accrue from the mere knowledge that they do not.produce any effect. Cer- tainly it is nowhere taught (in sruti) that liberation from evil accrues from the knowledge that obligatory duties do not produce effects or from a knowledge of those obligatory duties themselves. It cannot be urged that it has* been taught here by the Lord.* The same argument holds good also against their view as to seeing action in inaction. Indeed, this precept enjoins, (they holdl not that neglect of obligatory duties (nitya-karma) should be regarded as action, but only that obligatory duties should be perform- ed. Moreover, no good can result from the knowledge that non-performance of obligatory duties leads to evil. Neither * For in.the words " by knowing which thou shalt be liberated from, vil," (v. 16) the Lord refers to knowledge of the things there spoken of, ut not to the particular knowledge that obligatory duties produce no effects* 181 JNANA YOGA. 133 can non-performance (which is non-existent in itself) of obligatory duties be enjoined as an object on which to fix our thought. Nop by a false "knowledge which regards inaction as action can a man be released from evil, or said, to be wise and devout and to have performed all actions: and such a knowledge deserves no praise. False knowledge is itself the evil; how can it release us from another evil? Darkness does not expel darkness- (ObjeGtiori):■— -The knowledge that inaction is action or that action is inaction is not an illusion, but a figurative idea, based upon the fact of productiveness or unproductiveness of effects.
(Answer): — No. For, nowhere is it taught that even such a figurative idea regarding action and inaction is of any good. Neither is any purpose served by thus ignoring the. immediate subject of discourse and speaking of something else. It is, moreover, possible to express more directly the fact that obligatory duties do not produce effects and that their omission leads to hell. What, then, might be the purpose served by such an ambiguous circumlocution as " he who can see inaction in action " &c. P Such an explanation is tantamount to saying that the Lord wanted to confound others Jby these utterances. It is not necessary to mistify the doctrine (of obligatory duties) by means of symbolicr language, nor is it possible to maintain that it can be easily understood if expressed often and often and in more ways than one.* For, the same doctrine is more clearly expressed in ii. 47, and needs no reiteration. It is only what is high and worthy of our effort that is worth knowing, but not the worthless. No false knowledge is worth acquiring: nor is its * Just as we are to fix oat idea of Vie«a oa a symbol such as an idol. The symbol alleged to D3 presented here to fix our thought apon. is an abhava or nonentity* 134 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. IV.
object* — which is unreal— worth knowing. No evil can arise from non-performance; no existence can arise from non-existence. It has been said here, "Of the unreal no being there is,*' (ii. 1 6), and in the sruti " How can the exis- tent arise from the non-existent?" (Chha Up. 6-2-2), To say that an existent object arises from the non-existent is tant- amount to saying that non-existence itself becomes existence and vice versa, which cannot be maintained as it is against all evidence. The scripture (sastta) cannot enjoin an act which is productive of no good; for, such an act is painful in its performance, and no pain would ever be deliberately incurred. Since it is admitted that omission of such duties leads to hell, it would simply amount to this, that Revelation (sastra) is of no good, since performance as well as omission of duties there- in enjoined alike result in pain. Moreover, he who admits that obligatory duties produce no effects and at the same time holds that they lead to salvation, lands himself in a self-contradiction. Wherefore, this verse admits only of a literal interpreta- tion, and we have interpreted it accordingly.
Who is a Sage?
Who is a Sage?
The realization of inaction in action and vice versa is extolled as follows * xg. He whose engagements are all devoid of desires and purposes* and whose actions have been burnt by the fire of wisdom, him the wise call a sage.
* The object of illusory knowledge, such as action (karma.)
18—20] JNAtfA YOGA. 135 The man who has realized the truth described above, whose works are all free from desires and from purposes (sankalpaj which cause those desires, who performs mere deeds without any immediate purpose,— if he be engaged in wordly action, he does so with a view to set an example to the masses; if he has renounced wordly life, he performs deeds only for bodily maintenance, — whose actions, good and bad, are consumed in the fire of wisdam which consists in the realization of inaction and vice versa: him the wise who know- Brahman call a real sage (pantfita).
The Sage's Worldly Action as an Example to the Masses.
He who can see action in inaction and vice versa, (i.e., who has realized the true nature of action and inaction), is, by virtue of that very realization, free from action; he renounces {the world) and engages in no action,— only doing what is re- quired for the bare existence of his body,—even though he had been engaged in action before realizing the truth. On the other hand, there may be a person who, having started with action and having since obtained the right knowledge of the Self really abandons action with all its accessories, as he finds action of no use; but who, finding that for some reason he cannot abandon action, may continue doing action as before, with a view to set an example to the world at large, devoid of attachment to action and its result, and therefore having no selfish end in view; such a man really does nothing. His action is equivalent to inaction, since all his actions are con- sumed in the fire of knowledge. To teach this, the Lord says: *\ /v 136 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. IV.
20. Having abandoned attachment for the fruits of action, ever content, dependent on none, though engaged inactions, nothing at all does he do.
He who has abandoned all concern for action and all attachment for its results in virtue of the knowledge of the truth explained above, who is always content, longing for no objects of senses: who seeks nothing whereby to achieve any end of his (a.e., to secure enjoyments in this birth or the next) j who, for want of any selfish end in view, might give up action with its accessories; but who finding it impracticable to get away from action* engages in action as before with a view to set an example to the world or to avoid the displeasure of the orthodox, — such a man, though engaged in actions* really does nothing at all, since he is endued with knowledge of the actionless Self.
The Sage's Action Fox Bodily Maintenance.
He who, unl ike the one just spoken of, has, even before engaging in action, realized his indentity with Brahman (the absolute) abiding within all as the innermost actionless Self (the Pratyagatman); who is free from desire for objects of pleasure seen or unseen: and who, therefore, finding no use in action which is intended to secure such objects of pleasure, renounces all action with accessories, except what is necessary for the bare bodily maintenance; such a devotee, steady in his devotion to knowledge, is liberated. To teach this, the Lord ssys: 21. Free from desire, with the mind and the self controlled, having relinquished all possessions doing mere bodily action, he incurs no sin.
20—21] JNANA YOGA. 137 He from whom all desires have departed, by whom the mind and the body (the self, the external aggregate of causes and effects) have been controlled, by whom all property has been disowned, who does mere bodily action (action necessary for the bare existence of the body), without attachment even for that action,—he incurs no sin which will produce evil effects. Even dharma is a sin, — in the case of him who seeks liberation, — inasmuch as it causes bondage. He is liberated from both (dharma and a-dharma), le\ he is liberated from sams&ra.
Now, what does the phrase ' mere bodily action ', (sarlra- kaxma) mean? Does it mean action which can be performed by means of the body only? Or does it mean action required for the bare existence of the body P One may ask: What is the good of this enquiry? What if ' bodily action * means ' action done by means of the body, or ' action necessary for the bare existence of the body1?
We reply as follows: Firstly:— If 'mere bodily action' means 'action which can be performed by means of the body only', the words would imply that even he who, by means of the body, does an un- lawful action productive of some visible or invisible results» incurs no sin. Then this teaching would contradict the • teaching of the sS-stra. And to say that he who does by means of the body a lawful action productive of some visible or invisible results incurs no sin is to deny something which even the opponent would never advance. Moreover, the qualifica- tions ' doing bodily action ' and ' mere * would imply that sin accrues to him who in speech or thought performs actions enjoined or prohibited by the s&stra, respectively called dharma and a-dharma. To say, then, that he who does a lawful act in speech or thought incurs sin would be to contradict the 138 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA. [DlS. IV.
scripture; and to say that he who does an unlawful act in speech or thought incurs sin is a useless reiteration of what is known.
Secondly: If, on the other hand, "bodily action'' be interpreted to mean * action required for the bare existence of the body,' then the teaching amounts to this: He who in deed, speech and thought does no other action, lawful or Unlawful, productive of results here or hereafter; iwho, in deed, speech or thought, performs in the eye of the world just those acts which are required for the bare existence of the body without even such attachment to those acts as is implied in the words " I do," he does not incur sin. Since it cannot even be imagined that such a man can do any wrong which may be called sin, he is not subject to rebirth; he is liberated without any let or hindrance, since all his actions have been consumed in the fire of knowledge.— Thus, there is here only a reiteration of the results of the right knowledge, which have been described already (in iv. 18). The phrase ' mere bodily action ' thus understood gives no room to •objection- Since an ascetic who has disowned all property does not own even the articles of food and other things re juired for the maintenance of the body, it would follow that the body should be maintained by begging or such other means. Now the Lord points out such means of obtaining food and other things required for the maintenance of the body as are sanc- tioned by the texts like the following: '* What is not begged for, not previously arrranged for, what has been brought to him without his effort...'* 21—22] JNANA YOGA. 139 22. Satisfied with what comes to him by chance, rising above the pairs of opposites, free from envy, equanimous in success and failure, though acting he is not bound.
He who is satisfied with whatever he may obtain by chance, without his effort or request, who his not affected in mind by the attack of such pairs of opposite (dvandva) as heat and cold, who cherishes no feelings of envy and jea- lousy, who is calm whether he obtains or not such things as might come to him without effort, — such a devotee, feeling no pleasure or pain whether he obtains or not food and otbet things required for the maintenance of the body, seeing action in inaction and vice verm, ever steady in his knowledge of the true nature of the Self, always disowning agency — " I da nothing at all, energies act upon energies," — in all acts of the body, etc., while begging or doing anything else for the bare existence of the body, — thus realizing the non-agency of the Self, he really does no act at all, not even the act of begging. But as he appears to act like the generality of mankind, agency is imputed to him by people, and so far he is the agent in the act of begging and the like. From his own point of view, however, as based on the teaching of the scriptures which are the source of right knowledge, he is no agent at alL Thtis, though he performs the act of begging and the like required for the bare existence of the body, and though with reference to these acts agency is imputed to him by others, he is not bound, since action and its cause, which are the source of bondage, have been burnt in the fire of wisdom- This is only a reiteration of what has been already said (iv. 19, 21). The sage's worldly action does not bind him.
It has been shown in iv. 20 that that mam does no action Vfho, having started in life with action, has since realized the 140 THE BHAGAVAD-GITA [DlS. IV.
actionless Self as one with Brahman and has seen the non- existence of the agent, action and results, but who, though competent to renounce action, yet, on account of something preventing him from doing so, has continued in action as before. Of him who, as thus shown, does no action, the Lord says: 23. Of the man whose attachment is gone, who is liberated, whose mind is established in know- ledge, who acts for the sake of sacrifice, — his whole action melts away.
That man from whom all attachment is gone, from whom all cause of bondage, dharma and a-dharma, has fled away, whose mind is ever fixed in wisdom alone, who acts with a view, to the peiformance of a sacrifice —his action with its result is dissolved away, is reduced to nothing. Wisdom-sacrifice.
For what reason, then, is all action which he does, entirely dissolved, without producing its natural result?- Listen why.
24. Brahman is the offering, Brahman the oblation; Jby Brahman is the oblation poured into the fire of Brahman; Brahman verily shall be reached by him who always sees Brahman in action.