Karma Yoga v/s Nishkama Karma
Karma Yoga, one of the paths towards union with the divine outlined in the Bhagavad Gita, involves a lot more than just Nishkama Karma or 'desireless action'. Karma Yoga is action that is inspired from within by devotion, universal love, surrender to the divine, and the highest knowledge and wisdom. A lot of people seem to think that the essence of Krishna's message to Arjuna in the Gita is 'Nishkama Karma' or 'desireless action'. Then they go on to argue that no action is possible without desire and hence Krishna's message is impossible to implement. In an interview with Sify, Gurcharan Das equates Karma Yoga and Nishkama Karma by saying "Lord Krishna advocates Karma Yoga or Nishkama Karma. The idea of an action for the sake of an action and not for the reward is very attractive."He then dismisses Nishkama Karma saying that it is 'as idealistic as Marxists notion of equality' and it is not practical.
For someone who has spent so many years doing practically nothing except read the Mahabharata, Gurcharan Das seems to be quite ignorant of the Bhagavad Gita and its message. However, he seems to justify his ignorance of the Gita by saying that it is not important because "Gita was originally not a part of the Mahabharat. It was placed in the epic later only because of the Vaishnavite influence on the epic." Presumably according to Das, the Mahabharat is practical enough for him to devote a substantial portion of his life in reading it and writing a book on it, but the Gita is not practical or important because "Gita was originally not a part of the Mahabharat." In his book "The Difficulty of being Good: On the Subtle Art of Dharma”, the core message, as mentioned in the title, is that it is difficult to be good. Moreover, it is difficult to even determine what is good, righteous or what is one duty, because "Dharma is sukshma or subtle." Essentially, the book concludes that after reading the Mahabharata, one is as confused about the notion of Dharma as he was before reading the Mahabharata, and the only conclusion that can be drawn is that 'Dharma is subtle.'
This conclusion comes as no surprise, because the Mahabharata, and the world itself appears to be chaotic, unjust, and unfair to a person who is ignorant. The characteristics of Rajas and Tamas outlined in the Gita can only lead one to believe that selfishness is virtue, and that the world is meaningless. The way to knowledge and wisdom is by reading and applying the message of the Bhagavad Gita. By considering the Gita to be unimportant and impractical, the only thing Das has managed to succeed in doing through his book (apart from increasing his fame and bank balance) is to publicize his ignorance and inability to live a righteous life based on 'Dharma'. The easiest way to wash ones hands of the blame for leading a selfish life motivated only by greed, envy, and desire for power, success and fame is to say that to be unselfish is not only unimportant or impractical, but impossible.
Whereas Das tries to justify his own corporate excesses as relatively selfless by outlining the excesses of Wall Street, Ramalinga Raju, and the Ambanis, other people's excesses do not absolve him for his inability to lead a selfless or righteous life. It is easy to quote paragraphs from English translations of the Mahabharata and separate the quotes with random thoughts and opinions (which are plentiful), but it is a lot more difficult to read the Bhagavad Gita, internalize it, and apply its message in daily life. To understand Karma Yoga and the message of the Gita, one has to become a Karma Yogi. Merely reading pages of text,quoting from them, acquiring fancy degrees and designations, mental contemplation, and writing verbose books cannot make a person learned. The paths of Knowledge and action are one.
posted by Arjun Bala at
1:04 AM
4 Comments:
You have taken up this Yogic topic quite nicely. Would be dropping by your blog more often to read your thoughts on Yoga
pl. expln. how nishkama karma differs from karma yoga. without doing that fulminating against Das only communicates a lot of anger with nothing positive.
As mentioned, Karma Yoga is action that is inspired from within by devotion, universal love, surrender to the divine, and the highest knowledge and wisdom.
Nishkama Karma is not necessarily any of these. Nishkama Karma is selfless action or desireless action. Nishkama karma can be a path towards Karma Yoga provided one is guided by one's own wisdom or by another wise person (e.g., a guru). But Nishkama Karma without the guidance of wisdom can even be destructive and non-righteous. Das mentions the example of some people who worked in concentration camps who did their jobs in a selfless manner without any desire (for killing or otherwise). They were simply doing their duty.
Selfless action is not necessarily inspired action. In the book 'Child Man - Selfless Narcissist', Child Man, is “a part of us which neither listens to the voice of reason, nor easily submits to social and moral conventions. Like a child, it relentlessly pursues whatever catches its fancy and keeps playing with fire. The author Ashok Malhotra calls Duryodhana a 'selfless narcissist'. This is because Duryodhana's actions are mostly not governed by his self-interest. If Duryodhana knew what was good for him, he would not have taken a path that would lead to certain destruction of the entire clan. Now just because an action is not selfish or not in one's self interest, it does not mean that it is inspired, creative or wise. If an action is not based on desire or if the action is not selfish, it does not mean that it is for the welfare of the world, or even that it is righteous.
Karma Yoga is inspired action that is righteous, and that is for the welfare of the world. A Karma Yogi is also a Jnana Yogi because only a wise and truly knowledgeable person can discern righteous action from mere selfless action, non-selfish action, or desireless action.
He who sees action in inaction and inaction in action, is wise among all men.
My comments are somewhat unnecessary but I write to only indicate my pleasure at your analysis. If I don't write about this I feel I'll be doing myself a harm. You seem to have integrated your reading and knowledge quite well. Your explanations are thoroughly convincing and the topics chosen are also quite deep. I've been blogging since December 2009, but it is essentially about my feelings and are quite shallow. But what I've said seems to have represented the truth to me at that point.
I've also tried to follow 'inspired action' but since I was manic depressive, many of those were perhaps of dubious utility, but they were sincere. I find it quite difficult to decide which of those 'inspirations' are to be followed and which are to be avoided.
At times I've also felt that I could interpret something as 'dharmic' as Krishna is supposed to have done and later on realised the foolishness of the whole thing.
Luckily it has not led to any major calamities and I've been saved by the skin of my teeth.
Sometimes this spiritual pursuit scares me, and of late I've tried to be extremely cautious.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home