नियतस्य तु सन्न्यासः कर्मणो नोपपद्यते ।
मोहात्तस्य परित्यागस्तामसः परिकीर्तितः ॥ १८.७ ॥

niyatasya tu sannyāsa: karmaṇo nopapadyate |
mohāt-tasya parityāgas-tāmasa: parikīrtita: || 18.7 ||

Sri Krishna has already set forth his views about the performance of yajña, dāna and tapas. He now expounds his thoughts on the remaining, wider range of activities. Our activities and interactions generally fall into two categories: religious and secular. Yajña, dāna and tapas constitute the religious and everything else must be viewed as secular. Secular activities can be various. But primarily they are personal, domestic, professional or social.

Tāmasika renunciation

What is the pronouncement on tyāga and sannyāsa as related to secular activities? Krishna discusses the subject quite elaborately, with his own distinct notes:

Renunciation of action prescribed or otherwise necessary, will not be right. Renouncing it out of delusion or ignorance is clearly said to be tāmasika (induced by tamo-guṇa).

Any action, called for on one account or another, related to one’s life with all its relevance and context, is not to be abandoned, by any standard. This is a very clear statement applying to all activities.

Activities devolving upon an individual are personal, familial and societal. Upkeep of personal hygiene, food intake, exercise, rest and such others are personal. Then come those related to his domestic responsibilities – looking after the welfare of the family members, their education, health, growth and prosperity. To pursue a profession as an essential part of this responsibility forms another important aspect of one’s activities.

Besides these are such activities, wherein one interacts with the society, its members, in various ways for different purposes. Going to zones of trading, offices of administration, abodes of worship, parks, playgrounds or similar avenues of relaxation and other precincts for a variety of needs come under the social group.

In the performance of these secular activities, interactions with individuals and groups or with places and events become necessary. All these activities together make a balanced life. To look after one’s own body, to ensure the welfare of the family members and also to help in ensuring the welfare of the society at large – all these should be given due importance.

Whether it is a personal, familial, professional or social act, whatever needs to be done must be attended to and cannot be devalued or neglected on any account. Abandonment of any act cannot be thought of or effected. Abandoning, relinquishing or eschewing work does not fit in with the fundamental proposition set forth by Krishna in the 3rd chapter – that under the comprehensive hold of Nature none has any freedom to remain inactive. The three guṇas of prakṛti (Nature) are inexorable in their effects on the beings upon the earth.

As Nature enfolds us everywhere, the question of shunning activities does not arise at all. Not knowing this fact, nay truth of Nature, one may be tempted to think of a possible relinquishment of activities, as Arjuna did at first. Only in the thought or idea level such a proposition can be relevant. It will not have any bearing beyond.

Arjuna has not left the war-field. But he certainly felt that he must and would leave. He expressed the idea to Krishna, though in the way of a firm decision or resolution. Krishna instantly questioned, disapproved and spurned it, discussing the subject in all its relevance. That is how the dialogue became a philosophical dissertation. Arjuna articulated his intention, stating the factors that made him think in such lines.

He felt that to fight the war was sinful, religiously speaking. It was not in tune with the normal human emotional responses. Religious perception was against it, as the consequences would mean indefinite damnation in hell. It was greed for kingdom and royal pleasures that motivates armies to fight, he felt.

Yes, if it was all this, then Arjuna would have been right in saying and doing what he proposed. But Krishna looks at the whole proposition from all angles – religious and secular – and finds an altogether different vision, assessment. In discussing these, the dialogue has traversed through 17 chapters and has entered the 18th, the last. “Is there anything called tyāga or sannyāsa then? If so, what exactly is it?” These are the final questions in Arjuna’s mind needing clarification.

Krishna provides the answer, viewing the subject of renunciation in the light in which he had explained it in earlier chapters and adding a few more salient thoughts, so that the vision becomes full, comprehensive. Niyatasya means “prescribed or viewed as necessary in the context of one’s life, with all that it implies.” That is how the personal, familial, professional and social aspects are brought in, to understand the subject. If, for any of these reasons, an action becomes necessary, none should ever think of renouncing or abandoning it.

Vālmīki was an ascetic, a renunciate. Yet, Sri Rama confidently abandoned his wife Sītā near his hermitage, hoping that the compassionate Sage would understand her difficult situation and give asylum. Whether Rama was right or wrong in having thought in this way, is not the discussion here. Vālmīki came to know from his disciples that a cultured woman was found in distress near his hermitage. “She obviously needs your attention and care, venerable sir”, said the disciples to the Master. Vālmīki instantly went to her and decided to give asylum. It was not an involvement of an hour or a day, but of decades and more.

To be sympathetic to others and do whatever is necessary in the context, is characteristic of any good person, especially an ascetic. In fact, it is this ascetic compulsion that makes the Knowers devote their whole time for loka-saṅgraha (social benevolence). Dissemination of spiritual Wisdom is their mission. They author scriptures, conduct yajñas, tutor disciples, host seekers and organize many an activity to further social welfare. What a tremendous task it becomes! Who, except the Knowers can take up such an enlightening mission?

“Prescribed or necessary” has thus a broad, even complex, relevance. Individual’s potential, predilection, emotional or intelligential affinity will determine the “necessary activities”. Some activities everyone has to perform. What these are, alone will differ.

For a Sage, it is the sagely activities. For a fighter and ruler, it is such as are relevant to him. To a Teacher, it will be those related to teaching. For a housewife, it will be whatsoever falls within her orbit. In fact, these individual activities cover a very wide range. Altogether they constitute the complex and comprehensive societal whole.

Spirituality does not permit disregard, laxity or abandonment of any of these. In fact, the earth is itself a great forum in the Universe, where humans as well as non-humans flourish and prosper by their respective activities. The entire wheel of creation has to revolve, helped by every little cog in it. The wheel is not going to stop its revolution any time. This is the truth.

To act is to keep this wheel revolving, to preserve the overall welfare, rhythm and felicity.

Being so, if anyone thinks of abandoning his share or role of activity, it can only be due to a basic delusion in him (mohāt). Delusion can, of course, grip the human mind any time, sometimes in a strange and appalling manner. Such delusional shunning of work also has a place in the scheme of creation. Krishna calls it tāmasika, meaning it is demotional, belonging to the lowest level. Like darkness, slush and dirt, it calls for right identification and cleansing.

What does this mean, in effect, in the context of Arjuna and the Kurukṣetra war? Any thought, for any reason whatever, of leaving the battlefield and shunning the war, adducing whatever reason for the matter, will be totally a delusional step. Spiritual wisdom will not allow it. It condemns it outright. It is but tāmasika, adverse, perverse and anti-evolutional. And yet, tamo-guṇa has also its place – it is part of creation. Laziness is a characteristic of human beings. It does not allow them to work with interest, persuasion and joy. Some will be victims to its hold. What should be noted is that, such victims incur this kind of self-imposed disadvantage. With this, the first part of Krishna’s analysis of the subject is over.