All World
Gayatri Pariwar

Yoga: one aspect of akarma

What’ does sannyasa mean, ultimately? Does it mean renunciation of some actions, while doing others? No. Sannyasa has, in fact, been defined as renunciation of all actions freeing oneself absolutely from all actions. But what is meant by not acting? How can we give up all action? Action is a queer thing. It has pervaded all life. Even sitting is an action: ‘To sit’ is a verb. Sitting is not only an action in a grammatical sense, but also in a physical action. If one sits for quite a long time, the legs begin to ache. There is strain in sitting also. When such is the case, how can there be renunciation of all actions? The Lord showed ‘vishwaroop’ [1] to Arjuna. That all-encompassing vision terrified Arjuna and he closed his eyes. But even then the vision did not disappear; the vishwaroop appeared before his mind’s eye. How can one escape from a thing which continues to be visible even after closing one’s eyes? How can one avoid action when it takes place even without ‘doing’ anything?

There is a story of a man who had a lot of precious gold ornaments. He wanted to keep them safely locked up in a box.  His servant got a big iron box made for them. He looked at it and said, “You idiot’! Don’t you have a sense of beauty? Should these valuable ornaments be kept in this ugly iron box? Go and get a good gold box.” The servant did as he was told. The master then ordered, “Now bring a gold lock. Only a gold lock would suit the gold box.” The fellow wanted to hide his gold from other’s eyes. But, what was the result? There was then no need for the thieves to search for the gold; just taking away the box would have been enough.
When not-doing is also a form of doing, how to renounce action which is so all-pervasive?

The way lies in continuing to do all actions in such an ingenuous way that they are shed as soon as you complete them. Only then sannyasa can be attained. How to do an action without letting it stick to you? Look at the sun. It is working continually; even during the night it is working in the other hemisphere. Still one can say that it does not act at all. That is why the Lord says in the Fourth Chapter, “I taught this yoga first to the Sun, and from him the thoughtful and contemplative Manu learnt it.” The sun does no work even while working all the time. This is truly a wonderful state.

Sannyasa: the other aspect of, akarma

But this is only one form of sannyasa, To act, and still not be the doer, is one aspect; while the other aspect is to make the whole world act without doing anything oneself. In this state there is immense power to inspire others to act. This is the beauty of akarma. It is packed with power that is capable of infinite work. Is it not true about the steam as well? When compressed, it does enormous work. It can even move big trains easily. The sun also does no work outwardly, but still works round the clock and is not aware of doing anything. Working day and night and still not doing anything outwardly is one aspect and setting in motion an infinite number of actions without doing anything outwardly is another aspect. This is the two-fold splendor of Sannyasa.

Both the aspects are far from the ordinary. In one aspect, the action is manifest and the state of akarma is hidden. In the other aspect, the state of akarma is manifest, yet endless activity is continuously going on. In this state, akarma is packed with power, resulting in enormous work. This state of akarma is diametrically different from laziness. A lazy man easily gets tired and bored; but a sannyasi, in the state of akarma, concentrates his energy inside him. He does not work with his limbs and organs, but still he inspires work in enormous measure.

Often someone gets angry with us. If it is because of our fault, we go to pacify him. But he refuses to talk to us. How great is the effect of his keeping mum, of this renunciation of the action of speaking! Another man in the same situation may pour abuse on us. Both are angry, but one keeps mum and the other speaks out. Both the reactions express anger. Keeping mum is also an expression of anger and it too works. When a mother or a father stops speaking to the child, its impact on the child is far more decisive than that of any action. Silence can have an effect which speaking can never have. Such is the state of a jnani. His akarma, his being still, accomplishes much; it generates great power. While being in the state of akarma, he does work that no activity can accomplish. This is another type of sannyasa
.
In such type of sannyasa, all enterprise, all frenetic effort ceases. Saint Tukaram describes such a state:


(‘Now all enterprise, all activity has ceased. The body is lying like a little inert bundle at the feet of the Lord. All care is now over; I now feel assured that I shall not be born again. I have not to live now on my own strength, as the Lord has emptied me of my ego. I am no more master of my life; it is His power that moves me. I have been reduced to zero.’)

Tukaram is empty - his sense of ‘I’ has dissolved. But there is tremendous power in that emptiness. The sun gives call to no one; yet, when it rises, birds soar in the sky, lambs begin to prance around, cows head for grazing, shopkeepers open their shops, and farmers start out towards their farms. The whole world is on the move as it makes its appearance on the horizon. The sun’s mere existence is enough; that gives rise to innumerable activities. Its state of akarma has potentiality to stimulate those activities; it is packed with power. Such is the other wonderful aspect of sannyasa.

Yoga and sannyasa are incomparable

In the Fifth Chapter, the two forms of sannyasa are compared with each other. In one form, nothing is done while doing work twenty four hours a day - there is inaction within - and in the other, there is no actual action even for a moment, but still everything is done - it is caused to be done. The former shows how one could speak while being silent within, and the latter shows how one could be outwardly silent and still communicate. Now, there is a comparison between the two. To have a look at them, think over them, and ruminate over them - there is sheer bliss, unprecedented joy in doing so.

In fact, this whole matter is incomparably novel and noble. The idea of sannyasa is indeed grand and sacred. How thankful should we be to him who first thought of ‘such a sublime idea! This idea, one may say, is the highest point reached by human imagination and reason, although man has been, and is even now trying for higher and higher flight. As far as I know, it is the pinnacle of human thought and experience. There is unprecedented joy in the very contemplation of this idea. The joy recedes when we step into the domain of speech and of everyday life. We then feel like having fallen down. I am never tired of talking to my friends about this idea. For years, I have been meditating over it. Language falters in describing it. It is clearly beyond the reach of words.

Doing everything without acting, and doing nothing while ceaselessly acting - how noble, enchanting and poetic the idea is!  What more is there in poetry? All that is known as poetry is dull and insipid before this idea. Compared with the joy, ardour, inspiration and exaltation embodied in the poetry of this idea, the most highly praised poetry pales into insignificance. The Fifth Chapter has thus been raised to a very high plane. Karma and vikarma have been explained upto the Fourth Chapter and then the Fifth Chapter has soared sky-high. In the Fifth Chapter two forms of the state of akarma have been directly compared with each other.  Language falls short in this attempt. Who is greater: a karmayogi or a sannyasi? It is impossible to say who works more. In fact, remaining inwardly inactive while doing everything and doing everything while outwardly remaining inactive, both are forms of yoga. But for the purpose of comparison, one is called yoga and the other is called sannyasa.

Two analogies : Geometry and Mimamsa
 
How are we to compare the two? It will have to be done with the help of some analogies. While doing so, one does have a feeling of falling down from the high altitude of these ideas, but it cannot be helped. In fact, absolute karma - sannyasa and absolute karma -yoga are ideas too magnificent to be expressed in a living person. These ideals cannot be fully realized when one is confined within the body. An attempt to live these ideals here in this world would shatter the body. Hence we have to take illustrations from the lives of great men who had realized these ideals to the extent possible. Analogies are never perfect, but for the time being one has to assume that they are.

It is said in geometry, ‘Let ABC be a triangle.’ Why is the word ‘let’ used here? Because the lines forming the triangle are not really lines according to the definition of a line. A line, by definition, has length but no breadth. How to draw such a line on a blackboard ? Breadth invariably accompanies length whenever one attempts to draw a line. Hence one has to use the word ‘let’. One has to assume that what has been drawn is a line. Is not the same thing applicable in bhaktishastra, the science of bhakti (devotion)? There too the devotee says, ‘Let this tiny idol be the Lord of the universe.’ If someone calls it idiocy, you may ask him, “Is there idiocy in geometry? We are seeing quite a thick line and you are asking us to assume that it has no breadth! ”

Just as certain assumptions are made in geometry, certain assumptions are made in bhaktishastra too. It• asks us to assume that there is God in an idol. If one says that God is indestructible, but the idol could break on being hit, it would not be a thoughtful statement. If assumptions are valid in geometry, why cannot they be so in bhaktishastra? Geometry asks us to assume a point also. Definition of a point is akin to that of Brahman. A point is defined as having neither length, nor breadth, nor thickness. It is without any dimension; still we try to draw it on a blackboard. What we draw is practically a circle, but it is assumed to be a point. A true triangle and a true point exist only in definitions. Yet we have to proceed on the assumption that they actually exist. In bhaktishastra too, we have to postulate the existence of the indestructible all-pervading God in an idol.

What the Mimamsakas (adherents of the system of Mimamsa) have done in this context is striking. Vedas refer to different deities like Indra (the king of the deities), Agni (the god of fire), Varun (the god of rain and water) etc.. While on the subject of these deities a question is asked, ‘What does Indra look like, what is his nature, where does he reside?’ The Mimamsakas answer, the word ‘Indra’ is itself the form of Indra; He resides in the word ‘Indra’. Same is true about Varuna, Agni etc. The words, made up of certain syllables arranged in certain order, are the forms of the deities; the deities are not apart from the words. This concept of the deities having the form of words is indeed charming. In fact, the concept of the deities cannot be contained in any form; it cannot be adequately described. Syllables comprising the words may therefore be taken as adequate representation. What is God like? The answer is, ‘It is like the word ‘God’ containing the syllables G, 0, D.’ The most striking example of this is the letter Om, which means God. A term for God has thus been coined. It is necessary to coin such terms for great ideas which cannot be contained in any concrete material form. It is man’s strong and earnest desire which makes him invent symbolic forms for them.

Notes:

1.    Chapter 11 of the Gita describes the transfiguration of Lord Krishna into vishwaroop, i.e. the supreme, divine, cosmic form.
2.    One of the six systems of Indian philosophy. It is divided into two parts: Poorvamimamsa and Uttaramimamsa. The former is usually referred to as Mimamsa. It deals mainly ‘with the interpretation of the rituals in the Veda.

[Reproduced with kind permission of Paramdham Publication, Pavnar from Chapter 5 of ‘Talks on The Gita’ by Sant Vinoba Bhave, 16th edition (Jan 2005)]