The Concept of Action in the Bhagvad-Gita

7/24/2019 The Concept of Action in the Bhagvad-Gita

1/12

THE CONCEPT OF ACTION IN THE BHAGVAD-GITA*

I

The Bhagvad Gita has been interpreted by its admirers in diverse

ways, and critical scholarship has estimated its worth in varying de-

grees. As a philosophico-religious document of ancient India it has

occupied a prominent place in the lives of millions. Scholars have

quarrelled over its central teaching. I t is not the intention of this

paper to enter into that controversy. This paper has the modest aim

of examining critically the Gita doctrine of Niskama-Karma as pro-

pounded in the text and then to offer an alternative theory which, in

my view, will be better suited to meet the demands and challenges of

a changing social situation.

In the light of the context and the setting in which the doctrine is

preached it is well-nigh safe to say that the Gita is an exhortation

to duty and a stirring call to action. Krishna undertakes the task of

persuading Arjuna to shake off inertia and perform his duty in a

manly way. This is supposed to be a moral persuasion because it is

aimed at convincing Arjuna and converting him on rational grounds.

The actual arguments may have a mixture of reason and emotional

appeal, but the impression given is that of rational justification for

moral action. I t is therefore set out as a philosophy of moral action.

However it is evident to any student of the Gita that moral action

there has not been conceived in isolation but is viewed in the larger

context firstly of a metaphysical commitment derived from proto-

Samkhya and Upanisadic doctrines and secondly of a theistic faith

in a personal God.

The Gita believes in status quo and sets a high value on social

stability. It accepts the established social order and derives the con

tent of duty from the caste structure and from the notion of differ-

ent stages of life. The ideal of lokasamagraha is held in high esteem

and Krishna appeals to Arjuna to act in its name. 111.

20 .

Its doc-

trine of Niskama-Karma or disinterested action can be understood

only in the light of the

ultimate end

which is conceived as Moksa.

Moksa means liberation of the empirical self from all bondage to

the not-self a total emancipation from the phenomenal world cul-

*Section I of this chapter appeared in the Quest no. 42 1964), 23-25 Calcutta, India,

under the title Doctrine of Niskama-Karma: An Alternative Interpretation. Reprinted

by permission of the editors of the Quest.


2/12


3/12

6

PHILOSOPHY RESEARCHN D PHENOMENOLOGICAL

and void. Thus the Gita, in effect, encourages a kind of spiritual self-

consciousness which is inimical to moral action.

Secondly it is said that the Gita s doctrine of ethics is deonto-

logical since it e xh ~ r t s s to do our duties because they are duties

without regard to any consequences they lead to. This would work

only when we assume, as the Gita does, that the content of duty is

derived from the social organization and is in strict conformity with

svadharma

and

svabhava

However, in actual life moral situations are

always problematic and for their solution the existing code of duties

offers very little, if any, guidance at all. Such a problem is faced by

Arjuna as the opening Chapter of the Gita so ably dramatizes. Hence

the main issue is how to solve a moral problem and how to act

in a

moral situation. It appears to me that a rational appraisal and eval-

uation of the problem is called for in the light of the conditions

under which one is to act (here svadharma

and

svabhava

are rele-

vant) and in the light of the consequences which are likely to ensue

and which one thinks desirable or undesirable If this is admitted

then in order to resolve a moral problem one should act after a

proper appraisal of the situation to achieve the end or the goal which

rational reflection shows to be most desirable. In other words one

should have a firm commitment

to achieve the goal and should show

all the care and concern for its fulfilment. One would wonder what

exactly the Gita

means

by saying that one should not care for the

frui ts of one s actions (phalasa) in the performance of duty (11.

47,

48 .

If it means that one should not be commit ted to the fulfilment

of the goal then it is almost asking for the impossible as it would

undermine the very need for moral action.

It should not be forgotten that the Gita purports to offer

ui

dance in times of social and moral crisis. When one faces conflicting

obligations and is not able to decide between competing goods, and

in short, when one is confronted with a crisis of the spirit, one needs

to know what is the right thing to do. Arjuna faced such a crisis and

stood in need of enlightenment with respect to the right course to

follow in the specific situation portrayed in the Mahabharata. Now

it appears to me that while Arjuna s situation is revolutionary,

fraught with the gravest of consequences and is such that its moral

significance is uncertain and indeterminate, the advice given by

Krishna is in terms of a static code of duties determined by sva-

dharma. Certainly such a static code of duties is unfit to meet the

dynamic situation faced by Arjuna otherwise he would not have

asked for any moral advice at all. One has a feeling that the whole

tenor of the advice given by Krishna is in terms of a transcendental


4/12

doctrine. Such an esoteric doctrine of an eternal Atman might have

been highly useful in infusing courage and in boosting up morale.

But it is evident that from the point of view of such metaphysical

heights all actions might be justified . Hence my contention is that

there is a disharmony between the changing character of a moral

situation and the unchanging eternal nature of the Reality in terms

of which advice is offered. Arjuna is not led by Krishna through a

rational reflection on the social and moral consequences of acting

one way or the other but is initiated in the mysteries of an esoteric

doctrine. And it is precisely because of this metaphysical intrusion

into the solution of a dynamic moral situation that the Gita preaches

a serene unconcern for and nonattachment to all consequences, per-

sonal or social. Is it because of an underlying assumption that a

right action must lead to right consequences?

On the other hand Krishna himself is deemed to have exhausted

all possibilities of a rapprochement in order to arrive a t an amicable

settlement between the contending parties. Having therefore con-

sidered the issue from all points of view and having weighed and

evaluated the consequences social and moral which might en-

sue by following the alternatives of fighting or not fighting, he should

have convinced himself of the superior worth and righteousness of

fighting the war in order to win it Unless therefore he was fully

committed to achieve the goal of winning the war and unless every-

thing was staked for bringing it to a successful conclusion there was

no point in fighting it and no hope for reestablishing dharma on

earth. We should not forget that Krishna, as tradition depicts him,

was a master strategist and a superb politician, and as such was

goal-oriented. The efficacy of persuading Arjuna to fight the war

and thus be goal-oriented on the basis of a doctrine which is highly

metaphysical and self-oriented is therefore highly doubtful.

This tension between the need for being goal-oriented and for

effective moral and social action to achieve a desirable social end on

the one hand, and the need for an ultimate concern for the serene

Atman on the other has characterised Indian culture ever since.

These have never been fully reconciled. In actual practice for the

vast mass of people it has meant either a lip service to the transcen-

dental self and a consequent withdrawal from the field of social and

moral action, or an opportunistic pursuit of selfish, individual goals.

In both cases it has been detrimental to effective social change for

the better and to some extent it accounts for the relatively static

character of Indian society.

Therefore a more sensible and fruitful interpretation of niskama-


5/12

karma would be to hold that while we should be firmly

committed

to achieve the goal after a rational assessment of the situation, we

should not be so egoistically involved in the issue as to calculate

what, in terms of pleasure or pain, prosperity o r otherwise, will be

its likely effect on our personal fortunes. This is indeed the sine qua

non of all effective action as it brings out the best in human nature

and releases boundless sources of energy which might otherwise

have been frittered away in selfish calculations. Nonattachment in

this sense is certainly the most inspiring message we have from the

Gita. It is, I believe, an incorrect or at least a partial interpretation

of the doctrine of Niskama-Karma that has puzzled thinkers and

men of action alike who have drawn their inspiration from the Gita.

If the above distinction is kept in view then it will be perfectly legiti-

mate, nay morally indispensable to be

committed

to the fulfilment

of the goal and yet to be

detached

with respect to its effects on

personal fortunes.

This interpretation may not be wholly in line with the doctrine

as preached in the Gita but is certainly consistent with the practice

of Krishna a s mentioned in the

traditidnal texts.

I1

Let us now pass on to the general theory of action and the

related concepts of self and freedom as advocated by the Gita. Its

concept of duty or moral action is organically related to these other

concepts which function as a constant metaphysical backdrop to its

ethical doctrine. The Gita shares with all other traditional philosoph-

ical systems (with the sole exception of the

Carvaka

materialists) a

belief in what is known as the law of karma. It is amazing to find

that a popular version of the law of

karma

has become, through

the centuries, deeply embedded in the warp and woof of Indian

thought and culture. Briefly put, the doctrine of

karma

holds that

just as there is natural order where nothing happens without an

adequate cause, in the same way there is a moral order in which no

person can escape the consequences of one's actions

good, bad, or

indifferent. And this law is supposed to apply not only so long as a

man lives but it is operative in determining a person's future birth

after his death. Belief in a continuum of births and deaths samsara)

according to one's deeds is a pervasive one in Indian culture. Though

there has been no attempt at a rigorous rational justification or

proof f or the existence of such a law, there have been some consid'er-

ations which have led Indian thinkers to believe in such doctrine.

The most obvious factor in producing such a belief is the dramatic

sight of gross inequalities in the personal fortunes of human beings


6/12

which could not; it was supposed, be accounted for b y known fac-

tors in their present lives. And therefore, -the law of karma with a

belief in a succession of bir ths and deaths was postulated to explain

the varying fortunes of various human beings. The Gita, not being a

systematic pMlosophica1 work, wavers between two possible inter-

pretations of the doctrine of karma,Some passages (IV.

9

and VI.

40-

45 suggest that the bonds of karma produce their effects automat-

ically by their own inherent potencies and that the present configur-

ation of the world is due to the effect of karma. Other passages (XVI.

19 point out that it is God who reward s and punishes bad deeds of

persons and brings out the good and bad births associated therewith.

The doctrine, shorn of its metaphysical overtones; derives its plausi-

bility from some obvious emyirical observations and considerations.

It is commonplace to find that our words, thoughts, and d d s a v e

an impress on our character and shape our destiny in some form. No-

body remains the,same for having said, thought, or done something.

Knowingly or unknowingly, wittingly or unwittingly, we are forging

our habits of thought and action. In this manner one cannot escape

the effect of one s thoughts and actions on one s life, and it is pure

fancy to think otherwise. Secondly, though all thoughts and actions

are personal and individual, they are embedded in a social situation

and have social consequences some of which are determiaable

while others remain nebulous and ambiguous. Therefore, in this

sense also our. deeds bring about natural and social consequences

including responses from other human beings. It may be legitimate

to hold that the consequences of our deeds, in these two senses, fol-

low us as naturally as the night follows the .day.

The question is whether these obvious empirical considerations

constitute an adequa te ground for sue

a

belief. In the absence of

decisive empirical evidence for remembering the experiences of one s

previous existence it is difficult to answer the question in the affir-

mative. Moreover, the supposed existence in previous births runs

into the difficult conceptual problems of the nature of the self, per-

sonal identity, and the mechanism of carrying memories from one

birth to another together with the problem of their mutual relation-

ship. This is not all. The hypothesis of karma has to sort out the

notions of good and bad deeds, right and wrong actions and relate

1

I am aware of the empirical research being done in various countries-of the world

on the alleged hypothesis of reincarnation. In connection with the whole field of psychi-

c l research a recent book Psychic Discoveries ehind the Iron Curtain by Sheila

Ostrander and Lynn Schroeder makes interesting reading. It has been published by

Prentice-Hall Inc. Englewood Cliffs N. J. in 1970.


7/12

them to the jays and sorrows, pleasures and pains, and the various

ups and' downs of life. It has to disentangle and illuminate the intri-

cate web of human existence with its tragedies and comedies, and its

well-nigh unintelligible contingencies and vicissitudes. Faced with

such a stupendous task the Indian thinkers of the ancient past (in-

cluding the author of the Gita) adopted, on the one hand, a static

concept of right action in terms of conventional class duties and

caste duties (svadharma and svabhava), and on the other hand,

resorted' to a metaphysical explanation for the gross inequalities and

manifest injustices of human life in terms of the operation of a mys-

terious law of karma. Even the historical Buddha who rejected

traditional caste-ism and broomed away the mystical lore of Vedic

sacrifices, accepted uncritically the so-called law of karma. We can

therefore discern in traditional Indian thought and culture a peculiar

combination of static social morality with an individual quest for

transcendence of the whole social order for the attainment of ulti-

mate freedom (moksa or nirvana) which is supposed to terminate

the whole cycle of births and' deaths(samsara). Historically speaking

such a combination led to the total neglect of a historical and dynam-

ic analysis of society and morals. The sages of the Upanisads, the

author of the Gita and the historical Buddha truly recognized change

and flux as a pervasive feature of natural and social reality. But in-

stead of analyzing these changes in terms of natural and socio-

economic and historical factors so as to guide these towards con-

sciously adopted desirable goals, they ridiculed and devaluated the

whole flux of natural and social order as mere phenomenon to be

transcended by the attainment of ultimate freedom thus leaving

the changing world without an intelligent control and guidance. No

wonder they discovered the cause of man's varying fortunes and mis-

fortunes in his ignorance (avidya) of ultimate reality, of the trans-

cendent self or of nirvana. Thus a metaphysical cause (Ignorance of

reality) was substituted for a slow, careful, and painstaking analysis

of economic, political, social, and historical factors which determined

the fate of millions. They adopted a wholesale metaphysical remedy

for the evils of the temporal world of change namely, a withdraw-

al of personal involvement in social affairs together with the perfor-

mance of fixed static caste duties in a mechanical but nonattached

manner. This heightened and intensified awareness of one's own

transcendental freedom (moksa) meant in practica either sheer hypo-

crisy or a passive acceptance of one's fate according to the mysteri-

ous operation of the law of karma. Was such an attitude caused by

the tropical climate of India or by an inveterate metaphysical trait


8/12

4

HECONCEPT BHAGVAD-GITA

F ACTIONIN THE

of the Aryan mind in search of ultimate intelligibility, or by a com-

bination of these factors? Or was it after all a result of a failure of

nerve in the face of rapid social and political changes involving mil-

lions of human beings? However it may have come about i t gave to

Indian thought and culture an unhistorical, static, and a transtempo-

ral character. The alleged individual pursuit of the ideal of a trans-

temporal freedom has diverted much-needed attention from the ur-

gent task of intelligent and cooperative action for bringing about de-

sirable social change.

No

wonder, the pace of social change in India

has remained to this day terribly and exasperatingly slow. This might

have given rise to its social backwardness and economic poverty

which in turn should have confirmed a fatalistic belief in the law of

karma

to explain away the miseries and misfortunes of an untold

number of people. Such a circular c a u s a 1 t y has become almost

chronic and vicious.

It will be seen that the foregoing analysis is justified in the light

of the concepts of self, action, and freedom as put forward by the

Gita. The Gita borrows from the Upanisads2 the concept of two selves

the empirical and the transcendental (11. 17 20, 22, 24, 25; XIII.

32). It holds that the empirical self

J iva )

is caught up in the causal

nexus and is subject to the cycle of births and d e t h s s amsa ra )

while the real self remains eternally free, transcendent, pure, and

unaffeoted by the temporal concerns of the former. While the Gita has

not worked out the theoretical problem of the relation between these

two selves (indeed it is doubtful whyther this problem in its tradi-

tional formulation can ever be solved satisfactorily) yet it says that

one should lift oneself by one's own efforts and should not degrade

oneself because one's own self is one's friend and one's own self is

one's enemy (VI. 5-6). The Gita, however, repeatedly points out that

though the ultimate ideal is the attainment of transcendent freedom,

yet there is no escape from the performance of one's social duties.

Traditional class duties cannot be circumvented and the social order

is

a

sine qua non of any quest for transcendence. In this manner the

Upanisadic

ideal of pure, and uncompromising transcendence has

been toned down by a recognition of the unavoidable importance of

the performance of social duties. As pointed out above it suggests

tha; one can attain such a freedom by performing one's class duties

in a spirit of nonattachment to the personal and social consequences

of the action. Whether such a combination of the contemplative and

the active ideals is possible or not is a practical question. But the ad-

Cf. Katha, 11. 18-20 20-5; 111. 3 4 7-8 10-15;

lso

Mundaka 111, 1. 1 3.


9/12

vocacy of combining an individual quest for transtemporal freedom

with complete disregard of social consequences is fraught with the

g r e a t e s t danger. Nonattached performance of mechanically fixed

class duties may come into conflict with some universal duties

sa -

dharana dharma) such as eschewing needless violence to the inno-

cent. As a matter of faclt Arjuna sought the advice of Krishna specifi-

cally because he saw a conflict between the performance of the du-

ties of his class (which was to fight the war) and the common duty

of avoiding bloodshed on a vast scale. It is significant to note that

Krishna advises him to give preference to the performance of his

class duty to fight in a spirit of nonattachment to personal and social

consequences, and leave the rest to God. For, in the view of the Gita,

no harm can come to such a person. Nay, he attains his highest goal

liberation from the endless cycle of births and deaths. Thus it may

happen that such a hyperconsciousness and concern about one's indi-

vidual spiritual freedom can lead to the most tragic and violent con-

sequences. No wonder, in modern times Mahatma Gandhi interpreted

the Gita apologetically in a nonviolent way suggesting that the fratri-

cidal war as depicted in the Mahabharata is not an historical one b,=t

only a symbolic one i.e., between one's lower self and the higher

self.

What then is Gita's general theory of action? What is an act?

account of action in general is intertwined with its concept of ris.

action. I t says: He who perceives inaction in action and action in in-

action, has among men attained real knowledge; even while perform-

ing all action he is doing Yoga (IV. 18 . The first point to note here

is that it is the empirical self, strictly speaking, which is involved in

action or inaction. The transcendental self is eternally free from all

entanglements with action or inaction. The empirical self with the

mind, the senses, and the body, goes round and round in an endless

cycle of doing and undergoing reaping good or bad consequences.

It is caught up in the causal nexus and action cycle because it is a

part of

Prakrti

the primal matter, whose

gunas

(the characteristic

qualities) perform actions everywhere. It is through ignorance of the

true state of affairs and consequent false pride that one thinks him-

self to be an agent (111. 27; XIII. 29 . The real self never acts or un-

dergoes any change. Therefore when it exhorts us to perceive inac-

tion in action it means that we ought to renounce selfish involve-

ment and adopt an inner atti tude of mental equipoise and detach-

ment while we are actively engaged in pursuing in the most intense

manner the performance of our alloted duties. And when it asks us to

perceive action in inaction it means that when we are externally


10/12

43

HECONCEPTF

CTION

I N T H E BHAGVAD-GITA

inactive (refraining from doing anything overtly) we may still be

mentally attached to selfish desires and may a l l ~ whem to run riot

without any internal control. Thus in this verse the author of the

Gita mixes a moral ought or an exhortation and recommendation

in the first part (in exhorting us to perceive inaction in action )

with a factual analysis of what may be happening when one is exter-

nally inactive in the second part (in asking us to perceive action in

inaction ). Such a mixing of a descriptive analysis of action with a

prescriptive advice as to what one ought to do is a pervasive feature

of the Gita's theory of action. It tells us time and again that the soul

(or the real self) never acts, nor is it concerned with the fruits of ac-

tion (V. 14; XIII. 32 . It maintains that in reality all actions including

reflex, instindive, impulsive, and intentionally willed ones are made

to happen primarily through the movements of the gunas of Prakrti

(primal matter)3 and secondarily through the c o 11 o c a t i o n of five

causes, viz., the body, the agent, the various sense organs, the various

sensorimotor activities, and the unknown objective causal elements

or tne power of God (XVIII. 14). It tells us that he, who has realized

that there is no agency other than the three qualities of Prakrti

(Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas) and has understood the nature of the

transcendent self beyond these qualities, ultimately attains commun-

ion with God (XIV. 19). Thus because of a metaphysical doctrine of

the real self derived from the Upanisads, the Gita blurs the distinc-

tion between reflex and instinctive behavioral reaction on the one

hand, and a willed intentional action on the other. Both are caused

by the gunas or the five factors. They are made to happen. The spon-

taneity, innovative initiative, and intentionality of an active self are

undermined. What becomes of human choice and freedom? As a mat-

ter of fact there is no analysis of the concept of freedom of the em-

pirical self at all. On the one hand it makes much of the eternal free-

dom of the transcendent self which, however, is irrelevant to the em-

pirical issues of the freedom to choose and act in the light of con-

sciously adopted ends; and on the other it subjects all activity of the

empirical self to the causality of the three gunas of primal matter.

And yet paradoxically it exhorts and persuades empirical selves to do

thdr alloted duties in the spirit o nonattachment. I t attempts to rea-

son out Arjuna from the mood of despondency and despair, and

rouse him to manly action. But the reason is not a moral one but a

metaphysical one, viz., that the issue has already been decided by

God in the light of the Karmas of the contestants. Arjuna has to be-

3 Gita V. 14; XIII. 30, 32; XIV. 5


11/12


12/12

5

HECONCEPTF CTION

I N

T H E BHAGVAPGITA

they gave an innovating interpretation to the doctrine of the Gita. In

order to make the teaching of the Gita relevant to the problems of

controlled social change one should steer clear between the two ex-

tremes of radical and romantic freedom of the transcendent self, and

the rigid determinism of the empirical self. To be free to decide and

choose and act in a morally and socially significant sense is to take

note of the natural and social conditions of human existence and to

make use of one s own habits, tendencies, and capacities in order to

redirect natural and social processes towards the attainment of de-

sirable goals. It is in this sense of a dynamic awareness of the subjec-

tive and objective conditions alone that the self acquires a creative

edge and becomes a ceqter of spontaneity. I t truly gets poised to dis-

card much of the dead weight of the useless past, to separate the

kernel from the husk, and act in a responsible manner without com-

promising what is best in the past and the present in order to forge

the future that is full of promise and possibility. Reinterpreted in this

manner alone can the classical theory of action of the Bhagvad-Gita

be made relevant to the problems of contemporary India.

C MATHUR

Documents

The Concept of Action in the Bhagvad-Gita