ACTION AND INACTION IN B G
*English Commentary By Swami Sivananda*
4.18 कर्मणि in action? अकर्म inaction? यः who? पश्येत् would see? अकर्मणि in
inaction? च and? कर्म action? यः who? सः he? बुद्धिमान् wise? मनुष्येषु among
men? सः he? युक्तः Yogi? कृत्स्नकर्मकृत् performer of all actions.
Commentary:
In common parlance action means movement of the body? movement of the
hands and feet? and inaction means to sit quiet. It is the idea of agency?
the idea I am the doer that binds man to Samsara. If this idea vanishes?
Action is no action at all. It will not bind one to Samsara. This is
inaction in action.
If you stand as s spectator or silent witness of Natures activities?
Feeling Nature does everything I am non-doer (Akarta)? If you identify
yourself with the actionless Self? No matter what work or how much of it is
done? Action is no action at all. This is inaction in action.
By such a practice and feeling action loses its binding nature. A man
may sit ineptly. He may not do anything. But if he has the idea of agency
or doer ship? or if he thinks that he is the doer? He is doing every
action, though he is sitting ineptly. This is action in inaction.
The restless mind will ever be doing actions even though one sits
ineptly. Actions of the mind are real actions. Nor can anyone even for one
moment remain really actionless; for helplessly is everyone driven to
action by the alites of Nature. (Chapter III.5) Inaction also induces the
feeling of egoism. The inactive man says? I sit ineptly I do nothing.
Inaction? like action; is wrongly attributed to the Self. He is the
performer of all actions who knows this truth. He has attained the end of
all actions; i.e.? freedom or knowledge or perfection. When a steamer
moves; the trees on the shore which are motionless appear to move in the
opposite direction to a man who is in the steamer. Moving objects that are
very far away appear to be stationary or motionless. Even so in the case of
the Self inaction is mistaken for action and, action for inaction.
The Self is actionless (Akarta or non-doer; Nish kriya or without
work). The body and the senses perform action. The actions of the body and
the senses are falsely and wrongly attributed by the ignorant to the
actionless Self. Therefore, the ignorant man thinks, I act. He thinks that
the Self is the doer or the agent of the action. This is a mistake. This is
ignorance. Just as motion does not really belong to the trees on the shore
which appear to move in the opposite direction to a man on board the ship;
so also action does not really pertain to the Self. This ignorance which is
the cause of birth and death vanishes when you attain Self-realisation.
B G 4.18 He who seethe inaction in action and action in inaction, he is
wise among men; he is a Yogi and performer of all actions.
*Sri Shankaracharya's Sanskrit Commentary By Swami Gambeerananda*
4.18 Since engagement and non-engagement (in action) depend on an agent,
therefore, yah, he who; *pasyet*, i.e. pasyati, finds; akarma, inaction,
absence of action; *karmani*, in action-karma means whatever is done,
action in general; in the action-; and yah, who; finds karma, action;
*akarmani,* in inaction, in the absence of action; say, he is buddhi man, a
wise one; *manusyesu*, among men. All dealings involving an act,
accessories, etc. exist certainly on the plane of ignorance, [Both
engagement and non-engagement presuppose agent ship and an act of some
kind. This, however, holds good on the plane of ignorance, but not on that
of Self-realization.] only so long as one has not attained to the Reality. He
is a yogi, *yuktah*, engaged in yoga; and a *krtsna-karma-krt**,* performer
of all actions.
One who discriminates between action and actions. Between different
actions where inaction is also an action: One who discriminates between action
and inaction is praised thus.
Objection: Well, what is meant by this contradictory statement, 'He
who finds inaction in action', and 'action in inaction'? For action cannot
become inaction, nor inaction action. That being so, how can a witness have
(such) an incongruous perception?
Vedantin: Is it not that to an ordinary foolish observer, that which
is reality is inaction appears as action, and similarly, action itself as
inaction; That being so, in order to show things as they are the Lord says,
'He who finds inaction in action', etc. Therefore, there is no incongruity.
Besides, the falsifications such as 'intelligent' etc. (thus) become
logical. And by saying, 'there is something to be known', is implied
the perception
of things as they are. Moreover, freedom from evil cannot follow from an
erroneous perception; whereas it has been said, 'by knowing which you will
become free from evil'. Therefore, one account of action and inaction being
perceived contrarily by the creatures, the Lord's utterance, 'he who finds
inaction in action,' etc. is for dispelling their contrary perception. Not
that in the empirical plane inaction has action as its receptacle, like a
plum in a bowl! Nor even has action inaction as its receptacle, because
inaction is a negation of action Therefore, action and inaction are
actually perceived contrarily by the ordinary persons-like seeing water in
a mirage, or silver in nacre.
Objection: Is it not that to every one action is action itself? Never is
there an exception to this.?
Vedantin: That is not so, because when a boat is moving, motionless trees
on the bank appear to move in the opposite direction to a man on the boat;
an absence of motion is noticed in distant moving things which are not near
one's eyes. Similarly, here also occurs the contrary perceptions, viz
seeing action in inaction under the idea, 'I am doing', [Ast. omits 'aham
karomi iti, under the idea, "I am doing"‘. -Tr.] and seeing, inaction in
action, -because of which it is said, 'He who finds inaction in action,'
etc. in order to eliminate them. As such, although this answer has been
given more than once, still a man becomes repeatedly deluded under the
influence of a totally opposite perception. And forgetting the truth that
has been heard again and again, he repeatedly raises false issues and
actions! And therefore, observing that the subject is difficult to
understand, the Lord gives His answer again and again.
The absence of action in the Self-well-known from the Vedas, Smritis
and logic, as stated in, '(It is said that) This is unmanifest; This is
inconceivable' (2.25), 'Never is this One born, and never does It die'
(2.20; Ka. 1.2.18), etc.-has been and will be spoken of. The contrary
perception of action in that actionless Self, i.e., in inaction, is very
deep-rooted, owing to which 'even the intelligent are confounded as to what
is action and what is inaction.' And as a consented of the superimposition
of action pertaining to the body etc. on the Self, there arises such ideas
as, 'I am an agent; this is my action; its result is to be enjoyed by me.'
Similarly, with the idea, 'I shall remain quiet, when I shall be free from
exertion, free from activity, and happy', and superimposing on the Self the
cessation of activities pertaining to the body and organs and the resulting
happiness, a man imagines, 'I shall not do anything; I shall sit quietly
and happily.' That being so, the Lord says, 'he who finds inaction in
action,' etc. with a view to removing this contrary understanding of man.
And here in this world, though action belonging to the body and organs
continues to be action, still it is superimposed by everyone on the
actionless, unchanging Self, as a result of which even a learned person
thing, 'I act.'
Therefore, in action (karmani), which is universally considered by
all people to be inherent in the Self, like the perception of motion in the
(stationary) trees on the bank of a river-(in that action) he who contrariwise
finds the fact of inaction, like perceiving absence of motion in those
trees-. And, in inaction (akarmani) in the cessation of the activities
pertaining to the body and organs and ascribed to the Self in the same way
that actions are ascribed-, in that action, he who sees action because of
egoism being implicit in the idea, 'I am happily seated quietly, without
doing anything'-; he who knows thus the distinction between action and
inaction, is wise, is learned among men; he is engaged in yoga, he is a
yogi, and a performer of all actions. And he, freed from evil, attains
fulfilment. This is the meaning. This verse is interpreted by some in
another way. How?
(Thus:) 'Since the daily obligatory duties (nityakarmas) certainly
have no results when performed as a dedication to God, therefore, in a
secondary sense, they are said to be inaction
. Again, the non-performance of these (nitya-karmas) is
inaction;
since this produces an evil result, therefore it is called action,
verily in a figurative sense.
That being so, he who sees inaction in the daily obligatory duties
(nitya-karmas) owing to the absence of their results-in the same way as a
cow that does not yield milk is said to be not a cow, though in reality it
is so-so also, in the non-performance of the daily obligatory duties, i.e.,
in inaction, he who sees action since those yields results such as hell etc
৷৷.' (Ramanuja argued thus) (KR then all failures will tantamount to
action in inaction only)
This explanation is not logical, because freedom from evil as a
result of such knowledge is unreasonable, and the utterance of the Lord in
the sentence, '৷৷.by knowing which you will become freed from evil', will
be contradicted.
How? Even if it be that liberation from evil follows from the
performance of nitya-karmas, it cannot, however, follow from the knowledge
of the absence of their results. For it has not been enjoined (anywhere)
that knowledge of the nityakarmas (themselves), leads to the result of
freedom from evil. { KR n Doing Pujas and Nitya karmas and samskaras may
not really lead any one to Mukti, except that the punarjanmam will be soft
and not tough}. Nor has this been stated here by the Lord Himself. Here is
refuted the 'seeing of action in inaction' [As explained by others. -Tr.],
for (according to the opponent) 'seeing of action in inaction' has not been
enjoined here [Here, in the present verse.] as a duty, but (what has been
enjoined is) merely that performance of the Nitya karmas is obligatory.
Moreover, no result can accrue from the knowledge that evil arises from
non-performance of Nitya-kramas. Nor even has non-performance of Nitya
karmas been enjoined as something that should be known. { KR It is not
denial but the reality of the results enjoined and no one is prohibited
from doing anything in good sstead and that is why rewards are determined
by HIM only}.
Besides, such results as freedom from evil, wisdom, engagement in
yoga, and being a performer of all actions cannot reasonably follow from a
false perception of action as inaction. Nor is this a eulogy of false
perception. [The stated results accrue from correct knowledge, not from
false perception; and correct knowledge alone is praise-worthy.] Indeed,
false perception is itself an obvious form of evil! How can it bring about
liberation from another evil? Surely, darkness does not become the remover
of darkness!
Opponent: Well, the seeing of inaction in action, or the seeing of action
in inaction-that is not a false perception.
Vadantin: What then?
Opponent: It is a figurative statement based on the existence or the
non-existence of results.
Vedantin: Not so, because there is no such scriptural statement that
something results from knowing action as inaction and inaction as action,
even in a figurative sense. Besides, nothing particular is gained by
rejecting what is heard of (in the scriptures) and imagining something that
is not. Further, it was possible (for the Lord) to express in His own words
that there is no result from the Nitya karmas, and that by their
non-performance one would have to go to hell. Under such circumstances,
what was the need of the ambiguous statement, 'He who sees inaction in
action,' etc., which is misleading to others? This being the case, such an
explanation by anyone will be clearly tantamount to imagining that
statement of the Lord as meant for deluding people.
Moreover, this subject-matter (performance of Nitya karmas) is not
something to be protected with mystifying words. It is not even logical to
say that the subject-matter will become easy for comprehension if it is
stated again and again through different words. For, the subject-matter
that was stated more clearly in, 'Your right is for action alone' (2.47),
does not need any repetition. And everywhere it is said that whatever is
good and ought to be practised deserves to be understood; anything
purposeless does not deserve to be known. Besides, neither is false
knowledge worth airing nor is the semblance of an object presented by it
worth knowing. Nor even can any evil, which is an entity, arise from the
non-performance of Nitya karmas, which is a non-entity, for there is the
statement, 'Of the unreal there is no being' (2.16), and (in the Upanishad)
it has been pointed out, 'How can existence originate from nonexistence?'
(Ch. 4.2.2). Since emergence of the existent from the non-existent has been
denied, therefore anyone's assertion that the existent originates from the
non-existent will amount to saying that a non-entity becomes an entity, and
an entity becomes a non-entity! And that is not rational because it runs
counter to all the means of valid knowledge.
Further, the scriptures cannot enjoin fruitless actions, they
being naturally painful; and it is illogical that what is painful should be
done intentionally. Also, if it is admitted that falling into hell results
from their non-performance (i.e., of the Nitya karmas), then that too is
surely a source of evil. In either case, whether one undertakes them or
not, the scriptures will be imagined to be useless. And there will be a
contradiction with your own standpoint when, after holding that the Nitya
karmas are fruitless, you assert that they lead to Liberation. Therefore,
the meaning of 'He who finds inaction in action,' etc. is just what stands
out literally. And the verse has been explained by us accordingly. The
aforesaid perception of 'inaction in action,' etc. is being praised:
Actions can be performed physically, mentally, and spiritually. You
must be familiar with them. When you watch a movie or listen to a
discourse, or enjoy a quiet moment listening to your favorite music or
reminiscing something, your body may be physically inactive, but your mind
remains active. You cannot say you are doing nothing. Even when you are
physically inactive, your senses would be dwelling upon various things in
your environment. You may see an object and desire that object, or you may
feel repelled by it. Such reactions arise from your desires and attachments.
Whenever your mind is propelled by desires and thinks in certain ways, know
that you are creating karma even if you have not outwardly done anything.
Same happens in meditation, which is a mental activity. If it is done with
selfish desires, even for a good cause, or to experience peace and
happiness, know that it produces consequences. Anything that you do for
yourself, in which you take pride or for which you claim ownership,
produces consequences for you. Your karma is the investment, which you make
to express your egoism or your will. Worrying, daydreaming, becoming angry
at the mere thought of something, are also actions with consequences. An
idle mind is an active mind, even if outwardly nothing may be happening.
They are examples of actions in inaction because you are still engaged in
the chain of cause and effect, and you have not disabled the mechanism of
karma.
Now take another situation. You have prayed to God expecting nothing
in return. It is an action without desires, and it will not produce any
karma for you. You may perform any action as if you are doing it as a duty
to God. If your thought is genuine, it will not produce any karma. If you
do sadhana (practice) for long, you will silence your ego and assume the
subtle identify of your soul. When you perform any actions as if you are an
eternal Self, they do not bind you. It is important that in doing so you
are not drawn to anything, and you do not take particular interest in
anything. You should remain firmly established in your spiritual identity
and perform your actions as an eternal Self. Then your actions will not
bind you.
Karma arises if you believe and act as if you are living to fulfill
your dreams and desires, assuming your physical identity as your real
identity. It is what most people do. However, if you believe that you are
not living for your sake, but to fulfill your obligations as an aspect of
God, or as an eternal Self, your actions will not produce karma for you.
They may produce karma, but it will go into the account of God. As you
transfer the burden of ownership and doership to God, the burden of karma
also becomes transferred.
In case of God, he will not directly speak to you or ask you to do
anything. You have to step into the shoes of God and assume his role. Using
your intelligence and discretion, you should know how he may conduct
himself in the world as an embodied being, or as an incarnation, and live
that way. This is the purpose of his incarnations, to let the world know
how God in his eternal wisdom may live upon earth as a human being, or as
an animal, and how he may exemplify righteous conduct in every aspect of
life and in different circumstances.
You can also become free from the burden of karma by not seeking the fruit
of your actions. In other words, you should perform actions without
expectations and without worrying about the outcome, leaving them to God or
your soul. In worldly activities, you have to plan everything meticulously
and focus upon your goals. Your performance will be judged based upon the
results you produce. In the spiritual world, you have to set aside all
planning and result oriented performance. Instead you have to focus upon
the execution and leave the outcome to itself.
Truly speaking, you cannot live spontaneously in the material world, and
let life happen. It will not be possible unless you turn to spirituality
and completely surrender yourself. Since you cannot do it easily, at least
offer all your actions to God and let him take responsibility for their
outcome and consequences. It is the best you can do under the circumstances.
Bring God into your life and let him be the owner of everything that you
have and do, and let him take responsibility for all your actions. You may
not be able to surrender at once, because your ego will put up a stiff
resistance. Do it in steps. Start offering the food you eat, the things you
like, and gradually keep adding. That way, without much pain, you can
immunize your life against karma and arrest its accumulation.
When you make an effort out of selfish desires, it produces karma.
However, when you make an effort without desires and
expectations, it sets you free. This is the secret. However, as I said
before, it is not easy to get rid of your desires or become
established in your spiritual identity. You cannot easily silence your
ego, or the notion that you are not responsible for your life and your
actions. It comes after a long practice, when you purify your mind
and body, and cultivate detachment and dispassion. Until then, keep
trying and keep working on your self-transformation and inner
preparation. Put that thought in your subtle mind and let it grow.
KR IRS 29922
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZop_f5_R6PTxCJ3qEM7k%3D6dAtv-nJ%3D-bfoy47x%2BxJsG76A%40mail.gmail.com.
