Verse 10
The man of renunciation,
pervaded by purity, intelligent and with his doubts cut asunder, does not hate
a disagreeable work nor is he attached to an agreeable one.
The person who renounces
attachment due the preponderance of the sattva guna in him,
who is very intelligent in perceiving the pros and cons of things, and has no
doubt whatsoever about the way in which work is to be done, hating not painful
work, clinging not to pleasurable work, such a person is really an example
before us.
It does not mean that we should
cling to something because it is pleasant, nor does it mean that we should hate
something because it is not pleasant.
Na dveṣṭy akuśalaṁ karma kuśale nānuṣajjate: The
pleasant form of work does not call for attraction, nor should it evoke hatred
when it is painful work calling for hard labour on our part.
In as much as the ego-sense is absent there is
no impetus to exhibit aversion or attraction for either one or the other and
since all other goals have been relinquished and resigned with the exception of
moksa or final emancipation from
material existence as revealed in Vedic scriptures then one is truly
established in ultimate renunciation.
Thus the conclusion is that relinquishing all
ego-sense of authorship and abandoning any desire for rewards is actual
renunciation and not mere abstention from actions.
(Liberation
is when the mind does not long for anything, grieve about anything, reject
anything, or hold on to anything, and is not pleased about anything or
displeased about anything.)
(Chapter 8, verse 2)
The question is- Agreeable or
disagreeable to WHAT?
It is agreeable / disagreeable to
one’s EGO, dominated by Rajas/Tamas.
And, Ashtavakra says, the one who
has transcended EGO, stands liberated at that very moment and there is no ego
to say, "O Yes, this I shall accept” or to frown, “O No, this I reject”.
Verse 11
Verily, it is not
possible for an embodied being to abandon actions entirely; but he who
relinquishes the rewards of actions is verily called a man of renunciation.
No embodied person can totally be
free from work. The very fact of our being in a body calls for some kind of
engagement because this body is made up of physical matter and, therefore, it
is a form of prakriti constituted
of the three gunas—sattva, rajas and tamas.
In as much as prakriti is always in a state
of disturbance—it is not in a state of equilibrium—and its properties of sattva, rajas and tamas are constantly moving in
a cyclic fashion, they compel the body to also be subject to that kind of
cyclic action because the physical body of a human being, or of anything
whatsoever, is not free from the contingency arising from the operation of the
three gunas.
Abandoning work is, therefore, not
possible as long as we have a body. But we shall be free from the binding
effect of karma, or action, provided we do not look to the effect, or the
fruit, that accrues from the work.
We should do our work because it
is necessary to work for the welfare of everybody, not because we get some
recompense out of it.
Sattvic work
is work done for work’s sake only, whether or not it brings any fruit.
Actually, every duty performed well—in a most unselfish manner—will, of its own
accord, bring a result which is most pleasant, and we need not ask for it.
Love.
