Gita Satsang - Part B of the Summary by Swami Dayananda's Commentary

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

On behalf of all of you I sincerely express my appreciation to

Pujyaswami Dayanandasaraswati for providing his commentary to the

benefit of the advaitin list members.

 

regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

Part V-B : A Summary of the First Six Chapters

 

'TAT TVAM ASI' IS VEDANTA

Tvam means `you,' which means `I' for each person. Therefore, the

nature of `I' is the meaning of the word tvam in the maha-vakya, tat

tvam asi. Vedanta is nothing else but `tat tvam asi,' the statement

that reveals the identity between the jiva and Brahman. In the first

six chapters of the Gita, Krsna analysed this tvam-pada, the word

`you' meaning `I,' and all that is connected to it. And how did he

begin? By saying that atma is neither the subject, karta, nor an

object, karma.

To subject oneself to sorrow, one should be either a karta, the

subject, or karma, an object. But, Krsna said, the atma is not subject

to objectification; therefore, it can never be destroyed. Since atma

is not even available for anyone to look at, where is the question of

doing something to it? Time, kala itself cannot approach the atma and

no other means of destruction can make atma the subject of its

destructive measures. Atma is therefore, definitely not an object,

karma.

Here, it might be said that atma is not an object, perhaps it is the

subject, karta. No, Krsna said, it is neither a direct doer nor an

indirect doer of any action. Therefore, it is free from kartrtva,

doership. It has neither doership nor enjoyership, nor does it have

the status of being an object to anything else. All that is there is

atma, Krsna said, atma that is free from everything and therefore,

free from sorrow.

When Arjuna asked him to describe a wise person, Krsna told him that a

person of wisdom is one who is happy without there being any reason.

Knowing the nature of atma, the svarupa of atma, such a person is free

from any limitation, being identical with Brahman, Isvara. Here, the

topic being tvam-pada-artha, Krsna mentioned the identity of tvam with

Brahman, the tat, of the mahavakya, tat tvam asi, but did not go into

the meaning of tat at length, as he did in the second group of six

chapters dealing with Isvara. Because tvam-pada-artha is equated to

tat-pada, a proper analysis of the meaning of tat is also necessary to

complete the unfoldment of the equation, tat tvam asi.

If the individual is indeed Brahman, this knowledge has to be gained.

Therefore, Arjuna had a doubt about what he should do. Should he just

go with karma or take to a life of sannyasa? Since knowledge would

deliver the goods, he naturally thought he should go for the

knowledge, but in the process of discussing this with Krsna, he was

advised to do what was to be done. Krsna supported his advice with a

number of arguments, saying that from any standpoint — from the power

standpoint, the pain standpoint, or the duty standpoint — there was

nothing that really barred Arjuna from doing what was to be done here

and now. All this was discussed in the body of the second chapter.

And, because Arjuna had a natural doubt, there is a third chapter,

again covering tvam-pada alone.

IF KNOWLEDGE LIBERATES, WHY DO KARMA AT ALL?

In the third chapter, Arjuna asked why he should not take to

knowledge, which for him amounted to taking to the life of sannyasa,

if knowledge is what liberates? For him, sannyasa and knowledge were

identical. He acknowledged that if he were interested in anything

other than knowledge, then of course he should do karma. But he was

not interested in anything else. Therefore, he thought that he should

take sannyasa and pursue knowledge.

Arjuna knew that taking sannyasa was the only way to be absolved from

performing his various duties, that it was a ritual to release you

from all rituals and all other duties as well. In other words, it is

the final ritual. Once this ritual is over, there are no more roles to

play and you are free to pursue knowledge alone. To Arjuna, then, this

seemed to be the most desirable thing to do because he was no longer

interested in the kingdom; he was only interested in moksa. It seemed

to be the only course open to him and, therefore, he thought it

correct.

While telling Arjuna that he should do his duty, Krsna also made sure

that Arjuna understood that knowledge alone liberates, that only the

one who knows is free, and so on. Naturally, then, Arjuna wanted to

know and to know thoroughly. From his question, however, it was very

clear that he had some insight, but that his understanding of karma

and sannyasa was not at all clear. This was why he kept asking Krsna

to tell him which was better, karma or the pursuit of knowledge.

It seemed to Arjuna that Krsna was contradicting himself, praising

knowledge as the means for liberation and, at the same time, asking

him to fight. Because Arjuna was confused, he asked Krsna to decide

which would be better for him. Would karma give him moksa or would

jnana give him moksa?

THE TWO-FOLD LIFE-STYLE

In order to clear up Arjuna's confusion, Krsna began again, saying

that he himself had introduced this two-fold life-style in the

beginning — loke asmin dvividha nis¶ha pura prokta maya anagha

jnana-yogena sankhyanam karma-yogena yoginam. One is called jnana-yoga

or nivrtti-marga and the other is called karma-yoga or pravrtti-marga.

In jnana-yoga, one withdraws (nivrtti) from all activities to pursue

knowledge and, in karma-yoga, one performs activities (pravrtti) with

the right attitude and pursues knowledge also. These same two

life-styles are also found in the first two verses of the

Isavasyopanisad.

Having told Arjuna all this, Krsna described karma-yoga, repeating

what he had already said in the second chapter. He told Arjuna that

karma-yoga is a means for moksa, that it is not something opposed to

moksa, nor is it opposed to sannyasa. Rather, it is another way of

gaining moksa, a way that is available for those who are not prepared

to live the life of a sannyasi.

The life-style known as sannyasa is not an easy one. Why? Because, in

sannyasa, you do not have a field wherein you can express yourself,

and being able to express yourself is what helps you to mature,

Therefore, it is preferable to be in the field, the world, and live a

life of relationship within it. Relationship means playing various

roles in the world whereby you get rid of your ragas and dvesas. This

is why Krsna talked about karma-yoga predominantly in the third

chapter. And who is this karma-yoga for? Not for Isvara. It is for the

jiva, tvam-pada-artha.

KÎâNA AS ISVARA

Then, Krsna told Arjuna that what he had been telling him had been

coming down throughout the ages. He had given this vision to humanity

through the great sages, a few of whom Krsna named at the beginning of

the fourth chapter. Many kings knew it and all the rsis knew it. Even

so, it is not easily available, which is why Duryodhanas are so many.

On hearing this, Arjuna had a problem.

Krsna had said that he had taught those who had lived at the beginning

of the creation, like Vivasvan, etc. How could this be? Krsna was his

contemporary. What was he talking about? Therefore, he wanted to know

who this Krsna really was? In reply, Krsna told him that they both had

had a number of births, and that he, Krsna, knew all of his births,

whereas Arjuna did not — bahuni me vyatitani janmani tava ca arjuna

tani aham veda sarvani na tvam vettha parantapa. In other words, if

Arjuna knew himself, he would be as free as Krsna.

Krsna then told Arjuna that he, Krsna, was not an ordinary jiva, and

that he was an incarnation of Isvara — in other words, an avatara.

Even though he was available empirically in human form, he did not

subject himself to the empirical rules of reality and therefore, he

was not born of karma. He was born because of the prayers of the

people. In fact, he was not even born. Knowing he is never born, he

simply assumed a body.

RENOUNCING THE DOER

He also told Arjuna that this was not only true for Krsna but that it

was true for Arjuna as well. If Arjuna knew he was only assuming a

body, that only a form is born, that he is never born, he would be the

same as Krsna. One has to know that `I,' atma, is never born. This is

what is meant by jnana-karma-sannyasa, the renunciation of karma

through knowledge. Krsna then defined jnana-karma-sannyasa as giving

up kartrtva, doership. And this giving up of kartrtva is not an

action; it is a fact that has to be understood. Atma is already given

up in the sense that atma is already and always was free from

doership. Knowing atma as being free from doership is

jnana-karma-sannyasa, whereas in karma-sannyasa, karma is given up but

the doer is still there giving up the karma.

You may tell everyone that you have given up all your karmas, that you

are a sannyasi, but it is the karta that says this and this karta has

to be dealt with — even if you take to a life of sannyasa. The person

who says, `I have done the last ritual,' is the karta and that karta

is the one who has to be given up. Therefore, Krsna told Arjuna that

doership is what has to be given up.

Strictly speaking, only the person who is able to see actionlessness

in the midst of all activities — karmani akarma yah pasyet — can be

called a sannyasi. This person is a jnana-karma-sannyasi, one who

gives up all action by knowledge, by knowing that atma is not the

doer. To make this even clearer, Krsna said that the fire of

knowledge, jnana-agni destroys all karmas.

Although Arjuna was getting the knowledge from Krsna, still Krsna told

him, as part of the teaching, to gain the knowledge with the help of a

teacher who knows. Approach such teachers, Krsna said, and they will

teach you. Having said all of this, again he told Arjuna to get up and

take to karma-yoga — yogam atis¶ha uttis¶ha. Why? Because karma can

only be given up in terms of knowledge and karma-yoga would prepare

him for that knowledge. Therefore, it is not karma-sannyasa that is

important, but jnana-karma-sannyasa, and the difference between the

two is to be clearly understood here.

Having again been told to take to yoga, Arjuna asked the same

question, using different words, `You praise sannyasa and you also

praise yoga, Krsna. Of the two, please tell me, once and for all,

which one is better — sannyasam karmanam Krsna punaryogam ca samsasi

yat sreyah etayoh ekam tat me bruhi suniscitam.' Here, Arjuna was

saying that now he did not think that Krsna was praising both sannyasa

and karma, but that he still had a problem. He still wanted to know

which one would give him sreyas.

>From this, we see that Arjuna was still beating the same drum, still

harping on the same string of doubt. Therefore, once again, Krsna told

him that both life-styles give moksa, but because sannyasa is not as

simple as giving up all of one's activities, the life of sannyasa

cannot be of any use to a person who is not prepared for it.

Contemplativeness does not come by sheer will alone; in fact, the will

does not come into it at all.

IS THERE REALLY A CHOICE?

Krsna was telling Arjuna here that he could take to sannyasa if he

wanted to, that no one could stop him. But whether he would be a

sannyasi in temperament, in disposition, was anyone's guess. Whereas

karma-yoga would in no way deny him the knowledge. In time, he would

reach Brahman — yoga-yuktah munih brahma na cirena adhigacchati.

Krsna went on to say that the one who is endowed with yoga is one

whose mind is purified and therefore, there is mastery over the sense

organs. This is the preparation needed for the knowledge to become

very clear to the person. Then, the person knows that the self is the

self of all beings and all beings are in the self. Once a person

recognises this fact, then, even though he or she performs action, the

person is not affected by the action, which is renunciation of action

by knowledge.

Therefore, what one is aiming for is to become a knower of the truth,

a tattvavit. And, to become a tattvavit, there is a choice of

life-style, but it is really not much of a choice. In other words, if

you prefer to live a life of sannyasa, thinking it will be more

convenient than a life of karma-yoga, then you had better become a

karma-yogi, Krsna was saying. Whereas, the moment you think you do not

require sannyasa, then you can become a sannyasi. That's how it is;

sannyasa will stick with you if you are ready. But if you are not

ready taking to the life-style itself will not make you a

jnana-karma-sannyasi. Because this point has to be understood, Krsna

kept talking to Arjuna. Otherwise, he would simply have told him that

he was unfit for sannyasa.