Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

But the realization of Krishna as obtained through devotional exaltation is not sufficient. Work must be performed. The passage 3:4-9 is probably the most profound defense ever given for unselfish work. Arjuna has just asked why, if knowledge is superior to work, one should work at all, especially at such dreadful work as it is his duty to perform. Krishna replies that Yoga may be attained in two ways-through the Yoga of Knowledge for the Sankhyan, and the Yoga of Works for the Yogin. It is worthy of note here that he does not say "Yoga through Faith" or "Devotion" for the Yogin. It is plain that he considers unselfish work as a fundamental necessity for the Yogin. He goes on to say, "Not by abstaining from Karma does man attain the absence of Karma, nor does he reach supreme felicity through renunciation alone. No one at all may remain for even an instant without performing Karma. Everyone is involuntarily caused to do Karma by the qualities that arise in matter. He who restrains the organs of action, but remains with the mind intent upon objects of sense, is said to be one of misguided behavior. But he who, controlling his senses through his mind, enters upon work, O Arjuna, with the organs of action, he, detached, excels in the Yoga of work. Perform work constantly, for work is superior to non-work. Bodily subsistence cannot be obtained through non-work. Elsewhere than in Karma performed for the sake of sacrifice, the world is bound by Karma. Therefore, O Kaunteya, perform work free from attachment."

Further on (4:18) Krishna says, "He who sees work in non-work, and non-work in work, is possessed of knowledge among men. He has accomplished the whole work."

These verses, of great beauty, simplicity, and profundity of thought, give the essence of Krishna's doctrine of non-attachment. It is not the performance of work that causes Karma in the technical sense of potential but not actual deeds and thoughts that will take form

in the future, but only the attachment thereto. When this is conquered, Karma does not cling to the individual, nor does it require future existences to bring about its projection from the mental plane upon the material plane.

Verse 4:18 above calls attention to the fact that work is important because of its unimportance. Existing is synonymous with working-the one cannot be without the other; but work may or may not be done with attachment; and so far as the whole universe is concerned, it makes no difference whether the individual is attached to his work or not. But as regards the individual, salvation cannot be attained while he is attached to what he does. Now to every entity in the universe a task is given, and the frictionless performance of this duty should be the aim of every entity. But wherever there is attachment to work, some alien claim asserts itself. Instead of aiming solely at the performance of his duty, man works for the gratification of senses or mind. All his energy is necessary for the correct performance of his duty, but in thus trying to satisfy other ideals outside of this, his energy is dissipated, his duty not perfectly performed.

Consciousness of one's duty and unreasoning instinct are the means by which nature assures herself of the performance of every necessary action. If man does not work under one of these he must work under the other. But if he does not perform his duty, he is troubled, his conscience gnaws unceasingly; the mind has continually before it the action that should have been done, and worrying over this, becomes attached to it. It is this attachment of the mind that is real work. Instantaneous performance of duty involves no such mental attachment and consequently no Karma. Hence "working is nonKarma and non-working is Karma.”

Attachment is twofold: to the rewards of action and to the belief in personal agency. The jnana-yogin must

be free from both sorts, while the karma-yogin is called upon only to renounce the first. The Buddhist priest should renounce both, and the layman should do likewise as far as he is able.

In making a distinction between people according to their capabilities of renunciation, the doctrine of Krishna seems superior to that of the Buddha. The latter does not lay any particular stress upon non-attachment for the layman. He probably has in mind that true renunciation of the reward of action is very hard, but not impossible for one in worldly life. One may strive to do everything simply because duty requires it, but in the back of one's head there remains the thought that the reward of action is necessary to the performance of one's duty. It is one's duty to support his family, and the more reward he gets the better this duty may be performed; but it would be very hard for him to strive to increase his reward without becoming attached to it.

But in speaking of the saint, the Buddha emphasizes the necessity of complete lack of attachment as fervently as Krishna. In the fire-sermon Buddha says that all things are on fire with the fires of desire, hatred, and infatuation. To these fires are sacrificed all manner of things of sense and mind, with the idea that the fires will be stilled and freedom from burning desires achieved. Such action only makes them grow. The "learned and noble disciple" is freed from passion concerning all things, though his sensations and consciousness are in no way reduced. "Your majesty, he that is not free from passion experiences both the taste of that food, and also passion due to that taste; while he who is free from passion experiences the taste of that food, but no passion due to that taste." (Buddhism in Translations, 421.) In discussing fruitful and barren Karma the Buddha says, "Covetousness infatuation

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

hatred . .

[ocr errors]

are conditions under which deeds are produced." When action is performed under these conditions they will be

sure to ripen, but when action is performed without these, it leaves no Karma. The Buddha compares these three to the water that makes the seed of Karma grow into a future action. If that water is not there the Karma

cannot grow.

A goodly proportion of worldly pursuits rests primarily upon selfishness and ignorance, and it is only upon the renunciation of these that one may attain Nirvana. But this is not possible for everyone, so the Buddha lays down a set of commandments for the guidance of both clergy and laity:

1. Not to kill animals or human beings.

2. Not to steal.

3. Not to lie.

4. Not to drink intoxicating liquors.

5. Not to be unchaste.

6. Not to eat after noon.

7. Not to witness dancing or the performance of
plays.

8. Not to use garlands, perfumes, or ornaments.
9. Not to partake of any worldly vanity, or to sleep
on a bedstead.

10. To dwell in voluntary poverty.

The first five are always to be observed by both laymen and clergy. Six, seven, and eight are to be observed by the laymen on the Sabbath. All the ten are to be observed by the priests.

In none of these commandments is there any mention of non-attachment of the mind, the layman being merely required to absent himself from the world at certain times. In this respect the Gita is superior, for the time to inculcate non-attachment in people is when they are undeveloped mentally, not after the intellect is sufficiently evolved to direct all action. Krishna does the former in requiring at least the renunciation of the rewards of action.

Again, the Buddha requires complete retirement from the world to attain Nirvana in this life, and in so

doing ignores a very important factor in human nature of which Krishna takes cognizance, namely, that for ordinary people lack of desire for things of the world often comes merely from getting tired of them. The Buddha seems to hold that the only way of getting rid of desire for objects of sense is to retire from the world altogether and then, by purely mental effort, to force the emotions and the mind to give up all desire for sensual gratification and useless knowledge. But if an ordinary person were to attempt such a procedure, he would become more mentally attached to physical or mental enjoyments than ever, the absence of any means of gratifying the senses merely increasing the attachment to them. No one can say that the Buddha is wrong, for we cannot tell whether, after a person has renounced the world only because he has become tired of it, desire for worldly things may not spring up again in some future life. Perhaps the voluntary separation from all things of sense and the purely intellectual conquering of desire for them is the only way of overcoming desire. If this is true, Krishna should not encourage the continuance in worldly pursuits.

But so far as our knowledge extends, detachment as regards things of sense is most easily gained among things of sense, not away from them. Krishna favors this method when he insists upon people remaining in the world and doing the duties that are assigned to them there. This is the easiest way of conquering attachment, but, as I say, we have no means of knowing whether or not it is the right one.

It is not quite correct to say that the layman cannot attain Nirvana without entering the Order. He may attain the "fruit of never returning”—that is, to become anagamin, never to be subject to birth upon the earth in the future, but to be reborn in some heaven-world, whence he would pass into Nirvana. But the difficulties to be encountered are innumerable, and entrance into the

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »