PDA

View Full Version : Action in inaction and Inaction in action in BG



vcindiana
15 October 2008, 05:48 PM
Dear Yajvan:

Some where you discusssed this topic. Can we talk about this again ? I am sorry I lost the exact thread/ post you wrote.

Thank you


Love......VC

yajvan
16 October 2008, 11:34 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~



Dear Yajvan:

Some where you discussed this topic. Can we talk about this again ? I am sorry I lost the exact thread/ post you wrote. Thank you
Love......VC

Namaste vcindiana,

Action and inaction even the wise are bewildered here…Kṛṣṇa, the Bhāgavad gītā, chapt 4 śloka 16.

Yes I think we all will be happy to engage in this dialog. Here are the past posts ( for those that wish to review the subject at hand) for your consideration.

Your post VC on action is here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=17489&postcount=18 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=17489&postcount=18) then posts 19, 20, 21, etc. continue the conversation.

This conversation is also complimented by these posts:
Choice: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1110 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1110)
Actions: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=9894&postcount=9 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=9894&postcount=9)

pranams

vcindiana
16 October 2008, 08:39 PM
Mr.C. Rajagopalachari in his book “BG” puts it nicely this way: “Inaction in Action is to understand and carry out the principle of renunciation of selfish desires while doing the work allotted to or taken up by one.
Here the inaction precedes the actual action. Inaction here means not doing for self or for my own, to stay away from the ego. I understand, in that mind set, I need to strive at best to act upon or work. If I just do something as a matter of duty (action or work), soon I become a machine or a slave. Then I do not think I will find any joy unless I take “Inaction” on myself interest. For me this “Finding Inaction in Action” sounds like an act of sacrifice which is nothing but Love.
I look at my own marriage. Most of us regardless of our religion, take vows at the time of marriage to take care of each other during our well being times as well as during sickness times. It is easy to say I love you to my wife in words. But it is difficult for me to sacrifice MY time and MY energy (My money as well) all the time for her. Honeymoon does not last long. Soon I realize it is all sacrifice, (Inaction) of each other that we build (Action) a solid family and we can find most meaningful and joyful life. Now I understand it is not a matter of “Duty’’ (or just do it, Action).
I wrongfully understood Duty and Dharma were alike as I hear the common expressions... “I took care of my parent as my “Duty”, or it is my “Dharma’’ I need to protect my religion etc...” These Actions mean nothing unless I do not take away (Inaction) my attitude “It is all ME”.

lease next posting about Action in Inaction

Love...........VC

vcindiana
16 October 2008, 08:46 PM
Mr.C. Rajagopalachari then explains Action in Inaction. “To perceive Action in Inaction is to realize that external abstinence by itself does not amount to purity of mind.
Here the Action precedes the Inaction. Inaction here is external abstinence. These are like 10 commandments. (Thou shall not things) or to be “Religious” ….Not to eat meat, not to consume adult beverages, not to steal, not to have illicit sex, not to get to angry , not to look at a woman with lust etc.. Etc... Etc…There is no question; these are IDEAL things with good intention to start with. As I go deeper in these issues, I will get caught up with the false attitude that I alone have perfected in renouncing all the worldly desires and anyone with a little blemish is intolerable. I feel this attitude can lead into myopic eye and Fanaticism. No question is asked!
Krishna tells me to find Action in Inaction, to put my mind in this, to ACTIVELY engage my mind to see whether these INACTIONS I listed are meaningful. He is asking me to understand the limitations of all these grandiose external detachments. I guess He is aking me more to be REALISTIC than IDEALISTIC. Can any of us claim to be a saint and never felt angry even for a fraction of a time in our life time? Can I really be in 100 % vegetarian ? Krishna knows as long as we are humans we can never answer the question HOW GOOD ABSTINENCE IS GOOD ENOUGH TO PLEASE HIM. By engaging my mind ACTIVELY I find it easier to understand my shortcomings, not that I disregard the laws or commandments.
Practically speaking I struggle with this verse, and Krishna is good in telling me that even Wise have hard time to understand, let alone they can practice this. That is good for me. I need to keep practicing.
If any of you find me twisting what Krishna said in BG, my sincere apologies.
Love always endures………………………..VC

yajvan
20 October 2008, 10:34 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~

Namaste


There are a few points I see on this matter…
Actions are the virtue and ownership of the 3 guna-s; One's true nature, Divine nature, the SELF, is uninvolved in actions.

The wise, those established in sattā (Being, Fullness, śaśvat¹) gain freedom from the binding influence of action; knowing the full meaning of action and inaction is another story. Kṛṣṇa said even the wise are bewildered here. He also says Unfathomable is the course of action i.e. its impossible to know the full range of action on the level of intellectual understanding.

Yet the beauty of Kṛṣṇa's teaching is in His sequencing of the teaching. As Arjuna's attention and capacity to understand increases Kṛṣṇa gives Arjuna simpler yet subtler knowledge. His teaching in this verse ( 16, 4th chapter) is shifting from doing to knowing. That is, action and inaction is reviewed by Kṛṣṇa in śloka-s 17-21 (4th chapter) , and was introduced in śloka 16.

Action mentioned by Kṛṣṇa is right action, life supporting effects - this occurs each time when one is possessed of the SELF
Wrong action is possible and part of the state of ignorance
Inaction is the absence of activity. How can this be? When one is possessed of the SELF, the SELF does not act. All actions
are done by the 3 guna-s. Yet in ignorance we think WE are doing the actions ( that is why its called a state of ignorance).
There are two forms of this inaction - the inaction of deep sleep and the inaction of being established in sattā, Being, the SELF.
This is why Kṛṣṇa said inaction should also be understood ( śloka 17).
This is what Kṛṣṇa calls skill in action - a person possessed of the SELF knows "I do nothing" , there is no binding actions i.e.
accumulated ( karma); What then acts ? as mentioned the 3 guna-s.This sets the stage for the next conversation i.e. while acting , one sees inaction. This is śloka-s 18. The senses are engaged in activity , yet the individual that is established in śaśvat (the eternal) remains silent in Being (sattā).

These ideas and concepts are necessary to understand action and inaction before the other śloka-s can be considered.

To consider the notion of action and inaction that Kṛṣṇa offers without considering Being, the SELF, misses the whole point of the conversation with Arjuna. It is like a conversation of deep sea diving, yet never leaving the surface of the ocean. Swimming from one wave to the other. It is the Silence of the depths of the ocean that Kṛṣṇa wishes to bring to the conversation. It is here that inaction in action occurs.


pranams



1. śaśvat शश्वत् - eternal , constant , perpetual , evermore

vcindiana
23 October 2008, 08:03 AM
Thank you Yajavan for your views.

You highlight the word SELF and you say without its consideration this conversation misses the point. Your analogy of deep sea diving is very interesting. Perhaps I can some day write about my own real practical experience of soul I found in the depth of water.

I may be wrong, but it helps my own understanding of what I am about to write.

In this BG Ch 4 16-18, Krishna does not clearly explain what Action is and what Inaction is. He goes even further that even a wise person cannot comprehend.
He does not qualify the word action into good or bad at least in these verses. I think as God it is not His role to define what is right and what is wrong. He leaves these to us. In “Finding Inaction in action” I need to begin with inaction. I need to be fully conscious (I call SELF) and to become unattached, or unbiased, or to say let my ego down. I need to become Inactive as far as my own interest is concerned. More I thought about this, more it becomes clear to me that this is nothing but sacrifice which is also called Love in action. Arjuna as I understood was worried about killing his own family, incurring sin and its implication on his own life (self oriented). But Krishna is telling him about a bigger picture that evil need to be destroyed for the good of the society and he needs to put the house in order.

Finding Action inaction gets even thicker. Here again I need free inner full ACTION packed Conscience (Self) to engage my mind. Inactions in this setting as explained by Mr. C. Rajagopalachari are mere external abstinences. These are ideal and religious things and there is no way any human being however wise he is, can meet all these “Do no ” things. Action packed conscience gives me the discernment and more than anything else it teaches me to humble myself and it tells me it is OK I am not a perfect person. That makes me feel that I need the Grace of God. I think God wants us to be “Good” but He (Does He have a gender?) does not want push morality at gun point. He would rather we figure it out our self. That is Amazing Love.

Love………………VC

atanu
24 October 2008, 12:34 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~
Namaste

There are a few points I see on this matter…
Actions are the virtue and ownership of the 3 guna-s; One's true nature, Divine nature, the SELF, is uninvolved in actions.

The wise, those established in sattā (Being, Fullness, śaśvatą) gain freedom from the binding influence of action;

Namaste Yajvan Ji and VC,

Yesterday we were cruising along the bank of River Yamuna when my elder daughter commented about the dirty Yamuna. The younger daughter replied: "Yamuna is not dirty but scum is seen on Yamuna". We laughed heartlily. The Self is full, pure, and inactive. The sense organs, born of Prakriti -- co-existing on the Self, sieze their respective sense objects and enjoy pain or pleasure.


Om

yajvan
25 October 2008, 11:16 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~



Yesterday we were cruising along the bank of River Yamuna when my elder daughter commented about the dirty Yamuna. The younger daughter replied: "Yamuna is not dirty but scum is seen on Yamuna". We laughed heartlily. The Self is full, pure, and inactive. The sense organs, born of Prakriti -- co-existing on the Self, sieze their respective sense objects and enjoy pain or pleasure . Om

Namaste atanu, VC (et.al)
Thank you for your post and a most valuable example.

This Self, this sattā (Being) is pure as you say and it is the place of perfect stillness. If one is looking for inaction in our actions and behaviors and choices, without being established in the Self, inaction will never be known.

As you mention the Yamuna is pure, what it carries could be considered impure from one point of view.

VC suggests in the last post that Kṛṣṇa does not point out what action is or inaction. I do not think Kṛṣṇa planned on giving Arjuna a list of `things` and tag them accordingly i.e. action in the column and inaction in the other. Yet VC's desire to underand is the motivation behind this and future posts as long as VC's curiosity to remove doubts is his intent.

Kṛṣṇa points out something more profound. He defines the condition of native to see for him/her self what is action and inaction from their personal experience... To do this the native needs to be established in Reality, in sattā. Then that person is established in inaction, as the SELF is beyond the 3 guna-s the field of action.

Kṛṣṇa also says in verse 18 ( 4th Chapter) that the person united with sattā has accomplished all action. That is the final fruit of the collective actions we perform is for the realization of the Self.

So where does action in inaction come in? Verse 20. Kṛṣṇa says 'even though fully engaged in action he does not act at all'.
When one is established in the silence of the Self, this is the condition of Self-referral. One's identity is on that level , not with the body or actions or height, width, color, etc. all productions of the 3 gunas.
That is why one associated and established with the SELF can say I do not act at all ( I = aham), what acts is the 3 guna-s.

This cannot be done on the level of intellectual gymnastics as a concept. This is an actual experience. To try and exercise this ideal as a behavior without establishing the Self becomes an exercise in mental strain. Why so?


This Self-referral, the establishment of sattā in one's behavior remains there 24 hrs a day in wake, dream and sleep. to 'try' to do this creates strain which is the exact reason why the Self does not fully flow at all times in ones awareness. Stresses and strains limit our capacity to experience this Self at all times.

Remove the stresses ( the mud on the windshild) and we see clearly. Some have more mud then others, and it takes time. But the good news is, the SELF is there all the time , it does not leave. Just as the sun shines all the time even when clouds are in the sky. The clouds blow away, and there is the sun in full blaze. Like that the SELF does not have to be built or assembled, it is there. We just need to remove the coverings.


pranams

santosh
02 January 2009, 04:16 PM
Hare Krishna everybody,

The most revered scripture Bhagavad Gita tells us everything that we possibly want to know and more.

BG 4:18 -

"One who sees inaction in action, and action in inaction, is intelligent among men, and he is in the transcendental position, although engaged in all sorts of activities."

This action in inaction and inaction in action is very intricate. Srila Prabhupada explains in his translation of Bhagavad Gita and purport
http://vedabase.net/bg/4/18/en

So inaction does not mean no activity or idleness becuase no one can stop from performing some action. And every activity or action produces karma - either good or bad for which one will get a reaction - good or bad.

Srila Prabhupada explains inaction in action means that action or activity performed which does not produce in any material reaction. Any pure spiritual activity performed falls under this category.

It is further explained in BG 4:20 -

"Abandoning all attachment to the results of his activities, ever satisfied and independent, he performs no fruitive action, although engaged in all kinds of undertakings."

http://vedabase.net/bg/4/20/en

Santosh

atanu
03 January 2009, 04:12 AM
Hare Krishna everybody,

Srila Prabhupada explains inaction in action means that action or activity performed which does not produce in any material reaction. Any pure spiritual activity performed falls under this category.

Namaste Santosh,

As far as I comprehend, all that we see materially is rooted in spiritual activity called sacrifice. It is entirely wrong to imagine of some spiritual activity which has no material reaction.




It is further explained in BG 4:20 -

"Abandoning all attachment to the results of his activities, ever satisfied and independent, he performs no fruitive action, although engaged in all kinds of undertakings."

Santosh

Yes. The crux is here: Abandoning all attachment to the results of his activities -----.

Renunciation of the results is the crux and that IMO, cannot be attained till one is not rooted in the knowledge of Shri Krishna's teaching to Arjuna "---- know that you are not the doer." The ignorant notion of oneself being an individual independent Jiva, committing action after action is the ACTION that binds. The wise renunciation of doership (to prakriti gunas) is INACTION.

--------------------------

Since, ISKCON followers staunchly believe Jiva to be an eternal servant of Lord, so servile actions (surely not always taint free) will never cease. True submission to Lord is not servitude but is Love.

Om

santosh
03 January 2009, 02:54 PM
Yes, every living entity is eternal servant of the Lord. That is the Dharma of the living entity. Dharma meaning inherent constitutional position, just like Dharma of sugar is to be sweet.

The material world is described as perverted/distorted reflection of the spiritual world and the example in this regard is a tree at the bank of a river. The reflection of tree in the river is upside down, but the original tree is not upside down. So the activities of the material world, eventhogh they have their origins in the Spiritual World, they are perverted reflection of their original counterpart most of the time. In Kali Yuga it is very clear to see that.

Spiritual activity means any loving devotional service performed unto the Supreme Lord Krishna or unto any of the Vishnu Tattvas.

Example of that is BG 9:26

patram puspam phalam toyam
yo me bhaktyā prayacchati
tad aham bhakty-upahrtam
aśnāmi prayatātmanah

Translation:

If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I will accept it. Other examples, like cleaning the Temple of Krishna, making garlands (mala) for Krishna etc. These are concrete spiritual activities and they do not result in any Karmic reaction.

So in summary any activity performed as a loving service to Lord is inaction in action.

Bhakti means unmotivated, uninterrupted, loving devotional service unto the Supreme Lord. Love without service is just a dry sentiment. I love you, I love you but I won't do anything for you - that is not love. Love results in service. In everyday practice, we can see if one loves other person, then he/she wants to do something for the other person. Sometimes the word servitude is misunderstood. The word servitude immediately springs up images of Malik-and-Naukar where Malik is usually exploiting the Naukar. Becuase that's the way things are in the material world. However still, there is other side to it for example a mother is serving the child by taking care of the child in every way - feeding the child, cleaning the child etc. But the mother is not servant in the sense of paid servant. She is doing it out of love.

In spiritual context, servitude means loving devotional service to Krishna.

Five types of spiritual rasas (devotional mellows):
1. Shanta Rasa (a bit neutral mood. example of tree or stone in the spiritual world)
2. Dasya Rasa (mood of servitude),
3. Saukhya Rasa (mood of friendship with Krishna)
4. Vatsalya Rasa (mood of parental affection for Krishna)
5. Madurya Rasa (mood of conjugal love with Krishna like that between Krishna and Gopis)

All of the five rasas are exalted however the fifth one is considered most nectaterean according to Srimad Bhagvatam and Bhakti Rasamrit Sindhu. In all of the five rasas, service attitude, meaning lovingly doing things for Krishna, is there.

satay
03 January 2009, 05:47 PM
Admin Note

Hare Krishna Santosh,


Yes, every living entity is eternal servant of the Lord.

I request you once again to qualify your posts by stating that this is ISCKON view and not make general sweeping statements like the above without that quaification.

There is a dedicated section for ISCKON on HDF, please share sri prabupada's knowledge there.

Thanks,