Verse 7
Verily, the renunciation of obligatory
action is improper; the abandonment of the same from delusion is declared to be
Tamasic.
An obligatory duty
is that kind of work or performance which is organically related to our very
survival and existence in this world and is interrelated to other beings in the
world.
Our existence is
conditioned by certain obligations to the atmosphere or the environment of the
society in which we are living, and if this point is missed due to any intense
form of selfishness on one’s part—one works for one’s own welfare very
ignorantly, not considering the internal relationship that one bears
consciously or unconsciously with the outer atmosphere—if this ignorance is
going to be the motive behind one’s action, deluded is that person.
Abandonment of such obligatory duties is
considered by the Lord as the lowest and the darkest (Tamasic). Every
individual has his own obligations to himself and to others in society.
Verse 8
He who abandons action on account of the
fear of bodily trouble (because it is painful), he does not obtain the merit of
renunciation by doing such Rajasic renunciation.
Tamasic relinquishment is mentioned as that form of abandonment of action.
There is another
relinquishment, called rajasic tyaga: “Because
it is difficult—it is very painful, it involves a lot of hardship, I have to
work, day and night—therefore, I will not do that work.” This argument for not
doing a work is not actually feasible or tenable.
The reason for not
doing a work should not be merely the fact that it is a strain upon oneself to
do hard work. We have to sweat, and “I do not want to sweat; therefore, I will
not do this work. Physically it is painful, torturous and, therefore, I am
afraid of doing this kind of work or undertaking this project”. When a person
abandons doing a work because it is painful and requires hard labour on their
part, that kind of abandonment of work is called rajasic tyaga. It is not sattvic.
Verse 9
Whatever obligatory action is done, O
Arjuna, merely because it ought to be done, abandoning attachment and also the
desire for reward, that renunciation is regarded as Sattwic!
Sattvic renunciation does not mean renunciation of action. Then, what does
it mean? It is the doing of one’s work because it is something that must be
done under the circumstances in which one is placed.
Kāryam ityeva yat karma
niyataṁ: “Definitely
it has to be done, because it is binding upon me. Yet, I shall do that work but
be free from attachment to the work.” It does not mean that we should be
attached to duty. The performance of duty is an impersonal involvement of
ourselves in a call that is super-individual and it does not call for
attachment.
Attachment is an
emotional clinging to a particular form, event or anything whatsoever; and
duty, being a superior call from a law that is above human nature, cannot be an
object of attachment.
Therefore, when a
person performs a work as a duty incumbent upon that person and yet never feels
that it is ‘my’ work, and he knows that it is not anyone’s work but it is a
work done for the work’s sake, and he does not expect any recompense or fruit
thereof—such an impersonally construed unselfish action done for the sake of
work alone can be regarded as sattvic action. All other kinds of work are rajasic or tamasic.
Love.
