Knowledge – the rājasika kind
After explaining the sāttvika wisdom, the best to adorn and enrich any human being, Krishna discusses the other two kinds – the rājasika and tāmasika ones. These also have equal place in the scheme of Nature. An understanding of the world in which one lives, moves and interacts is indispensable for everyone, more so for the spiritual seeker. Moreover, an overall awareness specially helps in evaluating the merits of sāttvika knowledge, comparing it with the rest. To get at the sāttvika level and its propulsions is, no doubt, the constant goal of spiritual sādhanā. Keeping all these in mind, Krishna proceeds with the exposition of rājasika knowledge:
Know that to be the rājasika knowledge by which one perceives the variety and differences in all beings.
One impelled by rājasika knowledge will be disinclined to think beyond whatever the senses report, though his own mind and intelligence, which empower the senses, are themselves imperceptible to the senses. To think that whatever exists in front of the senses is alone true and valid, giving no place and importance to anything beyond, is the grave limitation rājasika knowledge imposes.
One of rājasika knowledge will insist: “Existence is plural; each entity is different from the other. Senses are the ultimate proof for anything present around us. How can there be anything subtler or finer, to permeate the visible existences?” Further, he will argue: “Pṛthaktva, separateness, alone enables perception and helps us gain knowledge. To be distinct, each has to be different from the other. Activity can be there only in a state of difference and plurality.”
Thus, sama-buddhiḥ (equal or uniform perception) Krishna stresses all along, is not acceptable or feasible for one upholding rājasika knowledge.
This differential outlook extends to the area of worship also. Thus he courts a variety of deities for worship. Plurality of Gods and hence the resultant preferences and prejudices towards them, become a rājasika creed. Each God, according to him, has a certain quality and power. Propitiating each would mean a specific benefit.
Ekam sad-viprā bahudhā vadanti (The One Truth alone Brāhmaṇas speak differently) – this Rgvedic statement (1,164.46), has no appeal to the rājasika people. Plurality for them is not a mere sensory creation – it is an objective and subjective truth alike.
Therefore, he will be averse to any thought of the whole existence being a display of the single supreme Reality. But, what is the Truth? What does Svetāśvataropaniṣad proclaim?
There is but One Divine Presence. It is hidden in all beings. It is all-pervading. It is the Self of all. It is the One presiding over all micro and macro activities, individual or universal. It dwells in all beings. It is the witness. It is Consciousness. It is single, not related to anything. It is devoid of all qualities.
While this is the only Truth, rājasika tendency hinders such an exposure, reflection and admission. Variety, difference, plurality, manifoldness – this alone is, according to it the supreme. The earnest seeker has to be attentive to rise above such rājasika constrictions and influences.
Krishna’s analysis is not meant to find out what kind of knowledge is prevalent in others, but to examine oneself and strive to get at the sāttvika wisdom.
Knowledge – the tāmasika kind
That which clings to a single entity as though it is the whole, is unreasonable and trivial, having no basis on Truth, is said to be tāmasika.
One under the grip of tāmasika nature will not be amenable to reason or introspection. Refusing any place for further knowledge, clinging to whatever he likes, he denounces all lofty and graceful thoughts aimed at purity, elevation and expansion. He remains steadfast in this. This impervious habit is applicable to secular as well as religious life.
Under the influence of tāmasika traits, one given to mere idol worship will hold on to that alone, refusing to even hear about any higher level of worship and devotion. Similarly, a religionist will cling to his ideal and argue that all other religions are wrong and harmful.
In fact, all forms of worship revolve around the same God. However logical and self-proven this Truth is, the tāmasika nature will resent any such proposition. Thus it gives rise to so many strong cults and creeds. Many of them even take to fighting between themselves.
Are not all human beings alike, with their body consisting of the same basic elements? They possess the same kind of mind, with the same personal, familial and social feelings and emotions. The intelligence is equally common, though its degree may differ. The pivot of this all, namely the Soul, also is the same.
The same is the truth of the world. The world consists everywhere of the five elements. All things are made of these five alone. Is not sameness and similarity a sure feature of the entire creation? Yet, one with tāmasika tendency will not be ready to recognize this fact. Instead, he will only refuse all thoughts of sobriety and expansion.
Likewise, in individual matters, small or big, the same plight takes over. The epic instance of Sītā, suddenly getting fascinated by the golden deer, despite Lakshmana’s warning that it could well be a product of witchcraft, and Rama agreeing with Sītā to chase the animal, is a striking illustration of how a tāmasika spell can delude men and women of even great wisdom and virtues.
The safeguard against this plight is to be ready to consider other points of view patiently to find out whether any re-evaluation is necessary in one’s own thinking and choice. The readiness to be flexible and consider what others say or hold, is the golden test for freedom from the influence of tamas. By this, the pitfalls of tāmasika traits can be avoided.
Three-fold Classification of Action
After elaborating on the three kinds of spiritual knowledge, Krishna, following his sequence, takes up karma, action, to explain how that too falls into three categories, governed by the three guṇas. Any human activity will carry either a narrow, selfish and constricted note or a broad, unselfish and benevolent character. The first, commonly found, arises from immediate, fleeting considerations. The second, the refined one, will always reflect the graceful depth of understanding, implying purity and magnificence of the Inmost Soul.
It is very enlightening to know how the attitude and aim of an act can mean so much in the effects it produces. This leaves us abundant room to think about whatever we do, and cultivate nobility, expansion and elevation.
In fact, Krishna’s analysis is quite exceptional, for the depth of knowledge and option it emphasizes. It reveals the fundamental truth that to do an act is one thing, but to know about it and realize what it can mean to oneself and the world at large, is altogether different.
Sāttvika action
The perception Krishna discloses must instantly take the seeker’s mind and intelligence to a deep introspection, revealing brilliant depths the human personality contains. As earlier, Krishna first speaks about the sāttvika act, the best any human must strive for and gain. It is imbued with the best of spiritual qualities and refinement, which Krishna has been emphasizing right from the second chapter:
That action which is ordained (by dhārmic concepts), disattached, free of desire and hatred, and not motivated by gains is said to be sāttvika in nature.
An act may carry selfish, narrow or gross outlook, with a limited, short-living character. It can also be something lofty, altruistic, elevating and have lasting dimension. The ultimate effect of any activity is on the actor. The world outside will always get or derive the gross objective benefits of an action. The real enrichment it bestows is always on the actor himself – to his mind, intelligence and ego. This is a point disregarded by many. Krishna wants to redress this sad plight and make people thoughtful and self-enriching in all that they do.
While animals and birds continue to do what they are given to by dint of their instincts and needs, the humans can act with intent, deliberation and choice. With thoughtfulness and understanding, their activities can be made progressively better, broader and elevating.
Good and virtuous actions are always the model and standard for human society. Scriptures and societal conventions generally set these as ideals and disciplines for people. Niyatam refers to this kind of noble, benevolent and self-enriching activities, whether religious or secular.
Saṅga-rahitam denotes that activity which does not spring from or carry the haunting evil of attachment. Krishna has dealt clearly with the evil of attachment and the need to drop it fully (2.48, 3.19, 4.23). Likewise, he has stressed repeatedly the need to be free from rāga-dveṣabhaya – desire, hatred and fear (2.56, 3.34). He has equally been emphasizing that the seeker should not be overpowered or deluded by the subjective results, namely sukha and duḥkha, caused by objective fruition of activities.
An activity free of these conventional defects and blemishes is sāttvika. What does this mean? There is every possibility to examine one’s performance and ensure that it becomes free of psychological and intellectual blemishes, all of which constrict and defile the mind and intelligence. Sāttvika karma or activity must be the ideal for the discreet individual, more so for the spiritual seeker.
Action – the rājasika kind
Now Krishna describes the rājasika type of activity:
That action which is motivated by desires, performed with ego, causing a lot of stress and strain, is said to be rājasika in nature.
Passion for anything, secular or religious, is destructive. It has the effect of disturbing the mind, leading it even to infatuation and extremely harmful sensory indulgences. When such passion motivates an act, it is rājasika. Rājasika action will have no place for others’ sentiments or views. It may hurt others; interfere with them and their activities even. So also, the ego display will be quite evident.
Another factor in rājasika act is that it does not wait for any kind of gentleness and thoughtfulness for improving the performance physically or otherwise. As a result, the exertion, stress and strain it causes will also be enormous.
Action – the tāmasika kind
That action, which causes bondage and decay, involving violence, conceived without considering one’s capacity, and initiated by delusion, is said to be tāmasika in nature.
Tāmasika activity does not care about the consequences it will bring about. There is no thought whether it will cause damage or loss to oneself or injury to others around. It also does not consider whether the actor has sufficient capacity for the purpose. Everywhere delusion is at work. No proper understanding is aimed at. It is more a visible activity, than a well-considered and purposeful one.
Three-fold classification of kartā, the doer
Having described the three categories of jñāna (knowledge) and karma (action) Krishna now explains the three kinds of kartā, the doer.
While taking up any task, the knowledge about the action and the materials with which the task is to be performed, are factors everyone has to know. But these will not by themselves complete the course of performance. One, who owns the knowledge and has employed the materials in the way of a process or pursuit, has to own up the action and its completion.
This source, the person, is in fact an individual with a mind that thrives on emotions, sentiments, thoughts and memories, which have a great role in guiding or governing his performance. If he, the performer, is able to generate healthy and sublime feelings and emotions in performing various activities, the effects would be greatly different. They can be marvelous indeed. If, on the other hand, his feelings and emotions tend to constrict or cloud his own mind, the performance is bound to be adversely affected.
How to instill the right inspiration, joy and persuasion into this actor, his personality, so that whatever is done would have the most benevolent effects? This becomes a very important consideration. Krishna throws light on the subject, using his three-fold categorization.
Sāttvika kartā
The actor must have ceaseless enthusiasm while performing his actions. A mere knowledge of the specific acts and their objective results would not be sufficient to involve the subject-personality of the actor. A study of the actor or performer, in this light, will be a topic by itself, focusing on the human personality – the mind, emotions and outlook.
The subject offers full scope for analysis and findings. Our spiritual thinkers had taken this up right from the Vedic days and had evolved their thoughts. That is how the epic narrations, presenting exemplary personalities, with characteral and behavioural excellences got ingrained into our culture. These became traditional legends and role models for the people of the land, shaping their thoughts, aspirations, ideals and values. This reflects clearly how epic thinkers succeeded in their efforts.
Unfortunately, the relevance and application of these epic discussions have not been sufficiently assessed, especially in modern days. This has brought a gap between our immortal spiritual wisdom and the people of the present. It is the role of the ascetic renunciates to fill the gap by providing the necessary guidance to the society from time to time. In this, is their spiritual fulfillment.
Krishna has been elaborating right from the 2nd chapter about the kartā aspect and how the actor should be elevated, refined and enlightened. Siddhy-asiddhyoḥ samo bhūtvā (by being equanimous in success and failure) is the first tenet Krishna presented after explaining the indestructible nature of the Soul. From then on, he has been emphasizing it as a consistent formula to be incorporated in one’s life and interactions. Samatva-buddhi (sense of equanimity) is the one factor that makes the seeker fit for spiritual enlightenment and redemption. Saḥ amṛtatvāya kalpate (such a one is qualified for spiritual freedom) – these are the words Krishna used in the second chapter (2.15).
Thereafter, Krishna has been speaking about the need to eschew attachment (saṅgaḥ). Rise above desire, fear and hatred (vīta-rāga-bhayakrodhaḥ), be even towards sukha and duḥkha, have dis-attachment, accomplish ego-extinction, be free from the disturbing emotional ripples of the mind, look always to inner contentment – these have been the watchwords of Krishna’s exposition throughout the dialogue. All these denote and imply spiritual qualities, excellences and expression. To be spiritually enlightened is to embody these.
When one has these elevating and edifying thoughts and feelings in doing any work, he is called the sāttvika performer.
Is there so much to think about and categorize the doer or performer? One may wonder! What is meant by the ‘doer’? Any action, as explained already, is first to be thought of in one’s mind. The mind must first of all give effect to the saṅkalpa about what is to be taken up and done. Only then one thinks of himself as an actor and proceeds to act in the physical or oral level.
“I want to do this act and shall do it in this manner. I would like a certain standard to be preserved in my performance. My attitude while doing the act will be such. By doing it I propose to achieve this end. By this act, apart from the objective results it achieves, I, in my inner level, must have a definite enrichment, elevation. How to ensure this?” Thoughts and considerations like these shape the personality of the “doer” or “performer”.
To categorize the actor will be to take into account these subtle inner ingredients. When closely studied, these can be either merely secular and worldly or very lofty and spiritual. In the secular kind, external, gross factors alone will dominate. In the spiritual kind, loftier thoughts and emotions will reign, leading to the emergence of spiritual wisdom.
Remember: the Bhagavad Gita dialogue transpired keeping millions of fighters in Kurukṣetra waiting impatiently. The war was to commence any moment. This adds great significance to the relevance of the discussion.
The external challenge and involvement before and after the dialogue remained the same. But Arjuna’s ‘sense of doership’, the attitude and objective emerging from his mind and intelligence, changed fundamentally. What was supposed to be a mere secular administrative venture, transformed into a determined, overwhelming spiritual endeavour, sādhanā. How potent was the discussion and how startlingly immediate its effect, become evident from this. This is how one has to gauge the effect of spiritual exposition.
Spiritual wisdom always focuses on the subject part of the human personality. It frees the mind, intelligence and ego of all unwelcome constrictions and stains, to imbue them with far greater expanse, elevation and strength.
The difference in performance between a narrow or constricted and broad or expansive mind is quite significant. In fact, it is so exemplary that it cannot be amply described. At any time, the quality of performance differs not because of the change in the bodily limbs of the performer and their potential, but because of the difference in his mind, intelligence and ego that employ these limbs.
Thus Krishna’s discussion on the three categories of doer or performer assumes great relevance and importance:
Free of attachment and ego, imbued with will (inner strength) and fervour, whoever remains unaffected by the fruition and non-fruition of actions, is said to be the sāttvika doer.
Attachment or wrong identification is a basic defect that constricts the mind and its potential. Asāttvika kartā, qualitative performer, will be free of this constriction and taint. Likewise, he will be free from the constricting ego. To do things with ego is like enclosing the vast and free air in a bottle.
Consciousness in us is far more pervasive! If we try to contain or constrict it with the ego-feeling, its vastness and pervasiveness do not come into display at all. Freed from the ego-binding, it will be greatly effective.
Dhṛti (will) and utsāha (enthusiasm) will be considerably more, if the mind is relieved from the clutches of attachment and ego. The fervour arising from a narrow mind is obviously far less than that of a much broader one.
To be unruffled by the fruition as well as the non-fruition of the act is another distinct quality of the sāttvika performer. The ordinary performer will be so obsessed by the expected result, that his mind becomes restless, fearful and agitated. When a work is well done and completed, it cannot but bring its result. Every action is a specific means to a certain end. Between completing an action and its bringing the result, there is no need for any extra factor, except the pañcama (the Fifth) Krishna spoke about earlier.
That pañcama, being beyond the human province, there is no use worrying about it. Usually it will be favourable to the actor, his action and its fruition. But if it becomes otherwise, that has to be accepted as inevitable. Even then, the subject does not call for any undue agitation or affliction.
A performer embodying all these inner enrichments is the sāttvika performer.
When Krishna pictures such a performer, the instant message with its inevitable lesson is that it is possible for anyone to strive for such a sāttvika performance and actualize it. Else, why should Krishna discuss it at all? To be a sāttvika performer is very much within the human reach. It is a question of whether the seeker wants to accomplish that benign status or will resign to remain deluded and ignorant.
Rājasika kartā
Krishna proceeds with the dissertation by describing the rājasika performers:
The rājasika doer is full of desire, always zealously looking for the objective results of actions, covetous, and in that urge given even to violence and impure moves, fervently swinging between joy and sorrow.
In this category, the saṅga or attachmental concerns will be very strong. So the mind becomes passionate, full of desires. As a result, the rājasika kartā thinks only of the external, objective, gross result. He is unable to find any broader relevance and utility for whatever he does.
He is unable to restrain his greed and possessiveness. They begin to overpower him immensely, making him weak. Deluded as he is, he even gets ready to take to violence in gaining his objective. Cleanliness, external and internal, has no appeal for him. Far from being moderate, he indiscreetly indulges in exhilaration, affliction and the like. His mind swings between these opposite emotions. He does not consider these as wrong or disadvantageous. Instead he holds that these are necessary to make him vibrant and active in the world. Such a performer is rājasika.
Tāmasika kartā
Krishna uses very powerful words to describe the tāmasika performer:
Having no self-control and piety, vulgar, obstinate, fraudulent, given to robbing and allied habits, slothful, morose and always postponing matters – these are the characteristics of the tāmasika kartā.
The tāmasika performer miserably lacks inner control and moderation. He does not have any regard for honesty and other human virtues. Far from being cultured and refined, he is vulgar, gross and arrogant. He does not mind being even deceitful.
No sense of gratefulness or regard for anyone or the society occurs to him. He will not mind denying or even robbing others of what is due to them. He is lazy by nature. He is despondent and likes that kind of mental framework. Instead of being prompt and sensitive to matters, he is given to postponement and delays.
Sāttvika traits are generally promotional in character. Tāmasika traits are demotional. And the rājasika features are extreme, given to possessiveness and domination.
By entering into a discussion of this kind, Krishna emphasizes the art and process of dealing with our mind, intelligence and ego. It is something that an intelligent human should necessarily know about. Our body completes its growth in the first twenty years or so of life on this earth. Thereupon it is the sole task of the mind and intelligence to grow, imbibe enrichment and be as best a human model as possible. Spiritual discussions are meant only for highlighting this need for attaining excellence and fulfillment.
Again, the discussion is not to make the individual evaluate or pass judgement on the members of the society. The greater purpose of the discussion is to enable each examine his own personality and know where he stands and what his option should be.
Three-fold classification of buddhiḥ (intelligence)
Krishna’s guṇa-traya-vibhāga (the three-fold quality) discussion becomes comprehensive. First he explained the three-fold division of ‘knowledge’, then of ‘activity’ and then of ‘the doer’. These are lofty concepts, which do not normally occur to anyone. The discussion gives a totally new picture to life and the human personality – what all these can mean and attain.
Krishna includes ‘intelligence’ and ‘will’ also in the guṇa-traya discussion. By this, the seeker comes to know how complex is creation, which is but a full display of Nature (prakṛti). At the same time, the inherent complexity as well as potential of human constitution is also brought forth.
By enumerating the sāttvika, rājasika and tāmasika elements of human personality, Krishna is helping the seeker assess his own inner, spiritual constitution. At the same time, it is a clear persuasion for the seeker to strive for definite improvement and elevation. Once the demeaning and hindering elements are identified clearly, the struggle to get rid of them becomes easy. The knowledge of the enriched and elevated personality equally provides the inspiration to work oneself up. The spiritual goal then becomes facile to pursue and pleasant to attain. The task remains merely that of cultivating the sāttvika characteristics, conducive to wisdom, happiness and eternality.
Sāttvika buddhiḥ
This is where the last chapter stands distinct and excellent. It gives a beautiful exposition of Nature, and at the same time guides one in the path of self-elevation.
That intelligence, Arjuna, which is able to distinguish between ‘involvemental action’ and ‘freedom from action’, what is ‘to be done’ and what ‘not to be done’, what is ‘fearful’ and wherein lies ‘fearlessness’, what is ‘bondage’ and ‘liberation’, is sāttvika.
Sattva-guṇa always brings knowledge, brilliance and happiness. The sāttvika intelligence will naturally be given to discern matters with precision. Thus activities and involvements become two-fold – pravṛtti and nivṛtti. Like preyas and śreyas (pleasant and auspicious), these two also have different impacts and connotations. Pravṛtti involves us irretrievably into the world and worldliness, no matter how religious and ceremonial the act may be. Nivṛtti represents exactly the opposite. It is the pursuit of freedom and release.
Arjuna confessed to Krishna that what he actually wanted was śreyas (felicity), not anything else. For, he said, by that alone he would be able to get rid of the affliction scorching his senses (2.7,8). Thus Bhagavad Gita becomes a nivṛtti śāstra. And it becomes so, not through abandoning the usual worldly activities, but by instilling into them the beautiful spiritual enrichment of sublime and wholesome dedication.
Limitations of ritualistic peformances
All ritualistic performances, prescribed in the Vedas come under pravṛtti, as their results do not lift the performer from the orbit of the three guṇas (traiguṇya viṣayā vedāḥ - 2.45). Muṇḍakopaniṣad denounces the ritualists, as devoid of true discrimination – no lasting or beneficial effect is gained through them (1.2.7 & 1.2.10). Krishna has clearly assessed the rituals and ritualistic orientation as deluding and darkening. He went to the extent of saying that the flair for bhoga and aiśvarya (enjoyment and prosperity), promised by rituals, robs one of discrimination (2.44). How woeful a plight!
The ritualists are tottering under ignorance. They fondly believe that by dint of the rare rituals they ardently perform, they would attain the highest world. But where is such a world? It is assured for the performer only after his death. This is what makes the promise flowery, not fruitful (2.42). Can anyone be sure of events to follow death, as he is about the outcomes before death? Is death at all there for the Soul that enlivens the body (2.19)?
So, none can at any time verify the truthfulness of such promises. Yet, the delusion is strong. Many fall a prey to the ritualistic pronouncements, like moths before fire.
As opposed to this is the tangible pursuit of wisdom that Krishna emphasizes. It has the direct effect on the mind and intelligence of the performer. Pratyakṣa-avagamam, susukham kartum, avyayam (directly perceivable, pleasant to perform, imperishable) – are the words Krishna uses to describe the wisdom path (9.2). The effects are immediate, here and now. They bestow contentment and fulfillment. The sāttvika intelligence knows this distinction between pravṛtti and nivṛtti (involvemental and liberating) – something extremely creditable and desirable.
The next point Krishna brings is about kārya and akārya. This refers to action and non-action. Non-action is not physical inaction, but enlightened activity, wherein the actor does not have ego or possessiveness about performing actions. Thereby he does not get tainted by whatever results follow. Action in inaction and inaction in action are concepts Krishna explained earlier (4.18).
To act is the compulsion by Nature (3.5). And so inaction is not in the scheme at all. Knowing this well, one should take refuge under spiritual wisdom, which takes away the sting from all actional involvements. When narrowness and selfishness are removed, all actions become sublime and spiritual. Such spiritual interactions will not have any binding effects at all (4.20 & 21). This is the crux of nivṛtti karma. Sāttvika intelligence alone will be able to discern this kind of activity or pursuit and make one an accomplished seeker.
Bondage and liberation are the two intriguing concepts, which sāttvika intelligence will be able to unravel clearly. What is bondage? Where lies liberation? How to achieve it? If actions are a demand of nature and none can think of escaping them, then how to strive for freedom? Is it then in and through actions alone? What is meant by activity that is liberating, and what is involvemental? Contemplation on these lines lifts the mind to sāttvika level.
Arjuna thought that the war was sinful. Krishna held that it is not so. Two persons facing the same scene and having full involvement think differently about the event and its consequence. Obviously, the object situation is not what makes the difference. It is the subjective, personal appraisal that works havoc as well as poise. The disparity is in the perception that the intelligence provides. In Arjuna was the rājasika intelligence; in Krishna it was sāttvika. The divergence in their outlook is striking. Kurukṣetra scene itself is quite illustrative for the purpose. Just as Arjuna, on being enlightened by Krishna, changed his stand and got equipped to proceed with the war without fear or bondage, so can everyone elevate himself. This is the message of the exposition.
Life in the world or worldliness as such is something verily to fear, because of the multiple effects it fetches. Krishna describes it as “mighty fear”, mahad-bhaya (2.40).He also made it clear that the activity-ridden world is verily binding (loko’yam karma-bandhanaḥ 3.9). It is to redress this bondage that he spoke about the wholesome transformation of our life and activities into a full-fold sacrifice, Yajña (yajñārthāt-karmaṇaḥ). Within worldliness, there is no redemption from fear at all.
To be saved from fear, the only way is to be spiritually illumined. The sāttvika intelligence alone will be able to know how worldliness binds and how spiritual wisdom removes this bondage. It is rare to find seekers only because the sāttvika intelligence to discern all this is rare.
Rājasika buddhiḥ
Krishna lists the sāttvika category first and then speaks about the rājasika and tāmasika ones:
That intelligence which misconstrues the ‘right’ with the ‘wrong’, the ‘to be done’ with the ‘not to be done’, is rājasika.
As prakṛti consists of sattva, rajas and tamas, its creations also cannot but contain traits of all three. Thus the minds, thoughts, feelings and motivations in the human society will be widely different. It is wrong to expect the whole world always to be good, great and noble or bad, narrow and ignoble. Every time it will no doubt be an abundance of striking differences, which will embody even grave incongruities. Viewed from a wider perspective, all these are necessary to make a complete whole.
See what Krishna speaks about the rājasika intelligence. It is not something that anyone creates in himself or herself. Though imbued with it, none can be held to be its author. Each is displaying what he irresistibly contains. At the same time, the distinction of the human is that everyone has the freedom and potential to disapprove of whatever undesirable and demoting he or she has, and opt for whatever is desirable and elevating. This potential will have its relevance and purpose only when the undesirable elements are first there and recognized as such. This understanding is important.
Thus, in the very understanding of right and wrong, there will be personal differences. One endowed with the sāttvika intelligence always appreciates goodness in others; but the rājasika counterpart will be highlighting defects in others. Both are driven by their own variant natures and instigations.
While the sāttvika intelligence discriminates matters properly and is able to see clearly what represents the good and the bad, the rājasika gets mixed up and even creates havoc all around. In the very concept and acceptance of dharma, righteousness, the rājasika intelligence brings about cardinal distortion, perversion.
It is a fact that the perverted do not know that they are perverted. So too the deluded will not know that they are deluded. If the plight were known to its victims, they could perhaps correct and redress it. But the pity is that one is unable to detect one’s own basic disorder, even when told about it. There can be great resistance in admitting one’s defects and even resentment when pointed out. All this is due to the differing inner qualities, brought about by the guṇas. It is in such a context that Krishna’s guṇa-traya analysis becomes a great source of guidance and correction. Arjuna’s case itself is a typical illustration.
He first asked Krishna to drive his chariot, for surveying the armies and deciding his strategy for fighting. Krishna did as told. As soon as the chariot was stopped in front of Bheeshma, Drona and the rest, Arjuna’s intelligence created untold havoc. He construed everything as wrong. To fight, he felt, was sinful. Duryodhanas, he argued, might have missed to see the wrong and sinfulness of the war, but why should he (Arjuna) and his team do so (1.38 & 39). The whole fighting venture was a colossal sin, he said.
He vociferously argued that the war would lead to prolonged hell (1.44). He summarized his stand: “Krishna, we are out to perpetrate a heinous sin. And what is our motivation for it? Sheer greed for kingdom and royal luxury!” (1.45)
Was Arjuna’s assessment correct? Blaming Duryodhana, he wanted to be unlike him. But, did he not actually confuse between impropriety and propriety, greed and moral compulsion? This is the way rājasika intelligence causes danger.
Krishna took ample pains to make Arjuna realize the wrong in his vision and lead him to the realm of right perception. Rājasika intelligence can precipitate crisis. The instance also reveals that, when properly instructed and if the recipient heeds the message, he can surely rise above the plight, gaining the right vision to save himself.
But understand that Nature has provided for such innate confusion and impropriety as well. It is in this light that Krishna’s analysis becomes significant by revealing how the world is constituted. At the same time, it compels one to assess his plight and rise above it with discernment and resoluteness.
Tāmasika buddhiḥ
Now Krishna describes the tāmasika intelligence:
When the intelligence is enveloped by delusion and as a result regards the ‘wrong’ as ‘right’, and perceives everything contrary to what is, then it is tāmasika.
Tamo-guṇa goes a step further in affecting the intelligence to an utterly dangerous level. It subdues man to such an extent that he thinks impropriety to be propriety. It construes everything in a contrary manner. The effect of tāmasika intelligence is gravely vicious.
Kaikeyi was the youngest of the Ayodhya queens. King Daśaratha liked her most. Manthara, her maid, brought the news of Rama’s coronation to be held the next morning. Kaikeyi was so delighted to hear this that she instantly gifted her maid the necklace she was wearing.
Manthara threw it away sternly with derision, deploring her mistress’s inability to sense the grave impending danger. Rama’s coronation, she thought, would make her queen a poor slave of Kausalya, Rama’s mother. She could not bear to see such a fate. So her plan was to stop the coronation somehow. She felt her mistress still had the power to do it, something Kaikeyi herself did not even imagine and could not believe at first. The queen lent her ears to Manthara’s scheme and persuasions, until at last she was completely won over by her evil doctrines. Thereafter, Kaikeyi did exactly the way Manthara prescribed and lay on the floor to enact the saga that finally led to King Daśaratha heeding her designs for Rama and Bharata.
Daśaratha could neither refuse nor accept the plight. Rama, on knowing the demand from Kaikeyi about his forest life of fourteen years, left the palace the same day, wearing ascetic costume. Seeing his chariot speed from the palace, Daśaratha left his prāṇa (life forces), calling and wailing “Rama, Rama…”.
Was Kaikeyi right in her display and insistence? Was her demand justified by any norm? Did she not, by that, thrust widowhood on herself? She made herself the object of scorn and contempt of Bharata, her own son!
What was gravely wrong, heinous and tragic, Kaikeyi felt was right, pious and benevolent. How could this be? Tāmasika intelligence is behind the whole indiscretion and catastrophe.
There are instances when, on finding his beloved change her stand, the lover gets estranged and takes to the extreme step of even killing her – the very person, whom he loved so much thus far. Can the sweet sentiment of love lose its character so suddenly and be so violent and inconsiderate? How does the same emotion lead one to molestation, putting the very manliness to severe shame and ridicule? This is all due to the havoc that tamas works in the intelligence. The resulting delusion and perversion can go to any extent of causing harm and disorder.
In the 16th chapter, Krishna grouped people into two categories, calling them daiva and asura. The good and divine were listed as daiva, and the bad and heinous came under asura. Now he brings all under a general three-fold categorization, effected by prakṛti’s own sattva, rajas and tamas guṇas. This obviously means that any individual or group can be influenced in varying degrees. The seeker has to look within for the shade of each and strive to effect the necessary change, correction and improvement, for which there is adequate scope imbued in each by prakṛti itself.
As looking in a mirror allows one to be face to face with his own image, so too this analysis based on guṇa-traya enables the seeker to identify the undesirable elements and get rid of them by judicious and sustained effort.
***
(To be Continued - From Essential Concepts in Bhagavad Gita - Volume 6)
