सर्वकर्माणि मनसा सन्न्यस्यास्ते सुखं वशी ।
नवद्वारे पुरे देही नैव कुर्वन्न कारयन् ।। ५.१३ ।।

sarva-karmāṇi manasā sannyasyāste sukhaṁ vaśī |
nava-dvāre pure dehī naiva kurvan-na kārayan || 5.13 ||

Krishna comes back again to the great position of non-doership and non-performership – the core of all spiritual and yogic wisdom, concluding his proposition on sannyasa:

The yogi rests comfortably in the nine-gated city, mentally renouncing all activities, doing, in reality, nothing himself, nor causing another to do.

The same point, described so strongly earlier – namely, “the Knower of Truth thinks ‘I am doing nothing’.....” – is emphasized again. What more? He brings the idea of sannyasa, renunciation, also. Krishna cannot but adore the culture of renunciation. Though he is a kshatriya and he speaks to another kshatriya to inspire him to fight, the grandeur of sannyasa cannot lose its relevance and charm to him. In sannyasa alone is the salvation for the mind, the redemption for the intelligence.

But such sannyasa is a powerful comprehensive realization, in which the non-acting, non-enjoying and non-suffering Soul, the core of one’s being, shines constantly. How to achieve this spirit and state of sannyasa is a different matter. As Krishna himself has explained earlier, it can be through the exclusive jnana-nishtha, or the blended yoga-nishtha

The vision of the Soul alone will bestow the power, quality and strength for renunciation. The seeker must ensure that he aims at this vision and that every step he makes is towards achieving it. Right from the 2nd chapter, words and phrases revealing, without doubt, the impersonal and non-acting Soul stand out with their unquestionable distinction:

To kill, as Arjuna is compelled to in Kurukshetra, and the victim falling dead as a result – the most gruesome act one can think of – both have no power to implicate the Soul and its immortal splendour. Was this not the way he began his sankhya-yoga (2.19)? Such a non-acting, non-involving Soul is what gives life and vigour to the body. But this means no conflict or contrast. On the other hand, it depicts the greatest wonder and mystery (ascarya – 2.29), however intriguing the harmony is!

Let the body be killed, yet the real person does not die. This was the next pronouncement he made (2.20). By this, Krishna was highlighting the absolutely unaffectable nature of the Soul. The task of any seeker or student is to realize this fact and live in its grace and brilliance.

It is the same truth and vision that he reiterates when he pictures the Knower of Truth (tattva-vit) as one who considers all actions as mere interactions between the senses and their objects. These interactions, however close and gross, have no content or essence to involve or affect the Soul-depth of one’s personality (3.28).

How emphatically he points out that to perceive total ‘inaction’ in action alone makes one Wise (buddhiman)! Such a one’s perception of the Soul is so absolute and continuous that no act or its outcome at any level intercepts or dislodges it. Karmas are but a ‘superficial furore’, not a ‘substantial event or episode’. For, no act originates (is initiated) at the core of anyone, nor any alleged outcome penetrates it (4.18).

The other classical phrases like “he does not do anything at all” (4.20), and “even when he does actions freely, no taint or blemish accrues to him” (4.21) again carry the singular truth of the non-acting Soul, wherein alone reigns one’s unmistakable identity. The message is even more exclusive in the words “even when he is acting as he does, he does not get bound by it” (4.22). “All his actions, with whatever results they are aimed at, get dissolved in full” (4.23). Nothing of any action done by the Knower can survive to implicate, involve or torment him by its result or outcome. What a sovereign position yoga wins for the seeker!

Now, to add to this lustrous list, Krishna pronounces “naiva kurvan na karayan – neither doing nor causing another to do.” To understand the truth of the Soul, to imbibe its non-acting character, and in that light to abandon or be freed of all ownership about actions, as a whole, makes one a sannyasin. Sannyasa truly represents the exquisite ability to float in the non-acting sublimity of the Soul, both as redress and as the crowning glory of human life.

Secular aspects of the message

Krishna has beautifully answered Arjuna’s question whether sannyasa is superior or yoga-sadhana is. He upholds yoga-sadhana, and at the same time ensures that it does not deflect the least from the sovereign glory of sannyasa. In fact, the extent to which yoga-sadhana is able to assimilate the principle and majesty of sannyasa, alone determines how effective and useful it is. There is no escaping this basic truth.

True, the freedom to deny and disown all actional involvement reigns within man. And such freedom alone constitutes the content and worth of all spiritual and yogic vision. Where does religion stand then? What happens to the all-powerful and all-knowing God? Is God to be a mute entity, unaware and unmindful of all that transpires in existence? Does he not have the power to mend, bend and move matters, especially in the human world? Will He not employ His will when needed?

Religious thoughts abound in holding God to be Supreme. Everything, minute or majestic, conscious or unconscious, moves only under His dictate and consent. Does spiritual knowledge contradict all the pious religious notions and compulsions?

The questions are, no doubt relevant. That is how spiritual discussions have to inevitably step into religiosity. In this land, the alliance of the two is quite pronounced. Krishna thus enters into a supremely critical analysis of God’s position with reference to the living beings. Earlier he has categorically said that all beings are under the grip of the gunas of Nature (3.5). “To perform action is to conform to the ‘revolving wheel of nature’, and to flout it will be to lead a life of utter degradation,” he said (3.16).

Here now he relates all these facts and truths with a significant addition, clarifying the true relationship the Lord has with the creation. Does the position of God in any way interfere with the impersonal, neutral, Soul in man, nay that man verily is?