A Study of the Bhagavadgita : 16- Swami Krishnananda.

=============================================================================

Wednesday 06, Mar 2024 07:20.

Chapter 5: The Karma Yoga Principle of the Bhagavadgita-5.

Post-16.

==============================================================================

This svadharma, this duty on your part, which is based on your own nature, actually means the dependence of your call of duty on the structure of your own individuality, which is made up of the three gunas – sattva, rajas and tamas. Prakriti operates in everyone right from heaven to earth, in the plant kingdom, in animals and in stones. Na tad asti pṛthivyāṁ vā divi deveṣu vā punaḥ, sattvaṁ prakṛtijair muktaṁ yad ebhiḥ syāt tribhir guṇaiḥ (Gita 18.40). Right from heaven down to the lowermost creation there is nothing which is not constituted of the three gunas, so we are of that character. Sattva is purity, equilibrium, transparency, understanding, intelligence, and capacity to decide things in a right manner. Rajas is distraction, motivation in the external direction for more and more agitation, and restlessness. Tamas is rigidity, fixity and wanting nothing. All these three qualities are operating in us, but they are not operating in an equal proportion. It does not mean thirty-three-and-one-third percent of each quality is present in us always. As there is a larger wave and smaller wave in the ocean, so also there is a wave-like movement of these three gunas, the properties of Prakriti, in everything, including our own selves.

These three properties of Prakriti's gunas, which are distributed disproportionately in everyone and are never in equilibrium, decide the difference in one's call of duty. If you are predominantly sattvic in nature, you will be fitted for one kind of work in this world; one type of participation will be expected from you in the scheme of things. If you are predominantly rajasic for some reason or the other, then you will be assigned some job, some work, some duty according to your particular temperament. But suppose you are basically unfit for other physical reasons, such as the preponderance of tamas, etc.; then, you will have to be taken care of in a different way altogether.

Everybody in this world has a duty to perform. You can ask me what this duty is, and why you should do anything. You should not put such questions such as why should you do and why should you not do. Your duty depends upon your automatic involvement in the cosmic setup of things, and so you are not simply saying you shall do or you shall not do. The cosmic setup itself decides in what manner you can be called upon to do your duty. There are degrees and variety in the participation of an individual in the universal scheme, and each person seems to be different from every other person. No two individuals collide or unite to become one individual, though there are similarities. For instance, when we work in a single office, factory or organisation, it may appear we are all doing one uniform type of work, but that is only on the superficial level. Basically there is an independence and a distinction – without difference, we may say – even in a common setup like an office or an organisation, etc. You are all students here. In a way, you are all uniform in your outlook, in your requirement and in your daily duty, but still you have an individuality of your own. One person does not totally merge into another person. Similarly, there is a tremendous variety in the call of duty, and yet it is rooted in a single unity of perspective.

In this call of duty, which is your participation, you should not connect your performance with any fruit or result that may follow from it. Here is a difficulty in understanding the gospel of the Bhagavadgita. We are always prone to think that everything we do should yield some result: “What shall I get if I do this?” The Bhagavadgita will not permit you to raise such a question. Can the legs ask what they will get by walking? If the hands raise a morsel of food and put it in the mouth, do they ask what they get by doing that? “Somebody is eating, and I lift the food.” Would you like to carry somebody's luggage for nothing? And why should the hand lift the food for somebody else's satisfaction? But does the hand put such a question? The spectacles are for the eyes, but the nose bears the burden. Why does the nose bear somebody's luggage? Does the nose refuse? Why does each limb not demand satisfaction for itself and ask what it will get by doing this work? What does the nose get by smelling? The nose does not get anything by smelling. Something else gets it; and something else getting it is equal to the nose getting it, or much more than it expects.

*****

Continued

===========================================================================