न कर्मणामनारम्भान्नैष्कर्म्यं पुरुषोऽश्नुते ।
न च सन्न्यसनादेव सिद्धिं समधिगच्छति ॥ ३.४ ॥

na karmaṇām-anārambhān-naiṣkarmyaṃ puruṣo’śnute |
na ca sannyasanād-eva siddhiṃ samadhi-gacchati || 3.4 ||

By refusing to take up activity, one does not attain Actionlessness (naiṣkarmya). Nor again by abandoning what is being done, can one think of attaining spiritual perfection (siddhi).

Generally karma follows kāma, desire. In the Knower, there is no scope for any desire at all. His innate self-fullness wipes out all desires and the mind becomes transparent and cheerful. As is the Soul actionless and still, so also does he become. This naiṣkarmya is the highest form of spiritual attainment.

But anārambha (non-beginning) of karma implies keeping away from karma considering it to be troublesome and binding. “Are actions binding? In that case, I will not take up activity at all.” Thinking thus, any one trying to escape active involvement, is regarded as resorting to anārambha. Ārambha means beginning, and anārambha implies its negation. Considering active involvement to be troublesome and antagonistic to naiṣkarmya, if one avoids actions right from the beginning, that by itself does not pave the way for actionlessness.

Naiṣkarmya means the state of Actionlessness. But this does not imply the physical negation of or escape from activity. As the ego that “I am the doer, I am the enjoyer, I am the sufferer” persists in one, the enlightenment that “I am not a doer, not an enjoyer nor a sufferer” will also dawn. Such dawning, such enlightenment, alone will put a stop to doership and enjoyership or sufferership. It is jñāna fruition. The path leading to it is enlightenment. It is not physically stopping any activity.

Then comes the next point of abandoning actions. This refers to instances like Arjuna’s. He had already made the beginning of the Kurukshetra war by preparing for it, reaching the battlefield and even blowing the conch signalling the commencement of the battle. At this stage, with the action already initiated, Arjuna says he would leave the scene and embrace non-active ascetic life. Krishna describes such a step as abandonment of action, active life. Such a sudden abandonment will not lead to spiritual perfection (siddhi). So, do not think of these steps – either non-beginning or abandonment – says Krishna.

Naiṣkarmya is the goal of spiritual life, no doubt. It implies reaching the mental and intellectual sublimity, by which the seeker does not cling to any activity meant to bring any specific gain. Such a one declares: “Neither do I have anything to gain in this world or the other world, nor do I have anything to lose. I have to possess nothing, nor do I have to dispossess anything.”

Generally, an effort proceeds from desire, hatred or fear. In naiṣkarmya, one outlives the very need for doing karma; his mind and intelligence retire fully to the immovable Soul. Parīkṣit’s is one such typical instance. For seven days in succession, he sat in a place and ceaselessly listened to Sukadeva, absorbing whatever the great Saint narrated. His only activity was listening. Every word that he heard drove his mind and intelligence to the Soul. At the end of the seventh day, expressing his gratitude, he took leave of the Sage. Steeped in absorption, becoming unconscious of the surroundings as well as his own body, he got lost in the depth of his being, the precincts of the Soul within.

But are all seekers and Knowers given to such naiṣkarmya? Krishna himself is a unique illustration for active spiritual wisdom. He had been a brahmacārin in Sandeepani Maharshi’s Ashram. Later, as a householderking, he did go to the mountains to plunge himself in full-fledged austerities. In spite of all this, we still find him immensely active everywhere. So, all spiritual seekers need not and should not be given to physical naiṣkarmya.

Vasiṣṭhadeva is another instance of a renowned Knower, who remained active with loka-saṅgraha till the last. He advised the Ayodhya kings in the matter of their righteous rule, and when so needed, he was there to instruct young Rāma and redress his dejection by timely spiritual enlightenment. He never resorted to actionlessness in the sense of an inactive life.

Although Self-knowledge is the same, the Self-knowers are various. Their ways, intensity, the extent and nature of loka-saṅgraha involvement they have, vary. Krishna’s stand is that neither by resorting to anārambha nor by abandoning suddenly whatever involvement is already there, the cause of spiritual perfection is going to be served. On the other hand, it may be affected adversely.