Even though at Its touch It thrills the matter equipments into various activities, the fact that the Spirit is actionless is emphasised by the scriptures, and this is not an idea so easy for early students of Vedanta to understand. Therefore, the Upanishads have taken great pains to make us understand that the All-full Infinite, being One-without-a-second in its All-pervasiveness, has nothing to accomplish for Itself. Earlier we have discussed in the Geeta: “it is Nature that acts” (V-14). This Spirit, identifying Itself with “Field” (Prakriti), becomes the “Knower-of-the Field” (Purusha) and it is this “individualised ego” that acts and accomplishes.

Here we are given some logical reasons why the Infinite Consciousness, “THOUGH DWELLING IN THE BODY, NEITHER ACTS, NOR IS TAINTED.” When the local Judge, Shri Gopal Rao, condemns a murderer to be hanged, the Judge is not considered as having committed a murder; the individuality in the Judge can gain no taint. Shri Gopal Rao in the chair acts as the Sessions Judge and it is the Judge who has passed the death sentence.

HAVING NO BEGINNING — That which has a cause alone has a beginning. “No beginning,” means “no cause.” Truth being “that from which everything comes,” it is the Uncaused Cause for all that has been created. That which owes its existence to a CAUSE becomes itself an EFFECT, and every EFFECT is nothing other than its CAUSE “which has undergone a change.” All effects are thus changeable and things that are subject to change must necessarily perish.

HAVING NO QUALITY — That which has no change cannot have any quality since that which has qualities is a substance and all substances are perishable. The Imperishable Infinite, THE CAUSE for everything, Itself caused by nothing, must, therefore, be without any quality.

THIS SUPREME SELF, IMPERISHABLE — The Uncaused Cause for the entire world of phenomena, the Paramatman, which is devoid of qualities must necessarily be, by its own logic, “Imperishable.” The process-of-change, happening in the properties and to the qualities of a thing, is the phenomenon of its decay. That which is Changeless cannot perish. And that which has no quality cannot change!

Therefore, the Beginningless, the Quality-less, the Imperishable Supreme Self, though living in the physical structure, and thrilling the inner matter-field around each embodied creature into the play of life, does not, in Itself, and by Itself, act.

This is one of the subtle concepts in Vedanta which lesser intellects must find rather difficult to grasp. This is a well-recognised difficult portion in the Vedantic literature. But a little effort at reflection can clear the confusions and remove all the difficulties.

HERE THE LORD GIVES SOME PARALLEL EXAMPLES TO ILLUSTRATE THE ACTION-LESS-NESS OF THE SELF AND ALSO THE QUALITY-LESS-NESS OF THE SPIRIT IN ESSENCE, IN SPITE OF THE DISCORDANT AND DEVLISH ACTIVITIES OF MATTER AROUND IT:

Anadivat, being without beginning: Adih means cause; that which has no cause is anadih. That which has a cause undergoes loss of its own characteristics. But this One, being causeless, has no parts. This being so, It does not suffer loss. So also, nirgunatvat, being without qualities: indeed, It si only something possessing qualities that perishes owing to the losss of its qualities. But this One, being without qualities, does not perish. Hence, ayam, this; paramatma, supreme Self; is avyayah, immutable. It suffers no depletion. Therefore It is immutable. Since this is so, therefore, api, although; sarira-sthah, existing in the body-since the perception of the Self occurs in the bodies, It is said to be ‘existing in the body’; even then, It na, does not; karoti, act. From the very fact that It does not act, It na, is not; lipyate, affected by the result of any action. For, one who is an agent of action becomes affected by its result. But this One is not an agent. Hence It is not affected by any result. This is the meaning.

Objection: Who is it, again, that acts in the body and becomes affected? On the one hand, if there be some embodied being other than the supreme Self who acts and becomes affected, then it has been improper to say in, ‘And also understand Me to be the Knower of the field,’ etc., that the Knower of the field and God are one. Again, if there be no embodied being who is different from God, then it has to be stated who is it that acts and gets affected. Or it has to be asserted that the supreme One does not exist. [If the supreme One also acts like us, then He is no God.] Thus, since the Upanisadic philosophy as stated by the Lord is in every way difficult to understand and difficult to explain, it has therefore been abandoned by the Vaisesikas, the Sankhyas, the Jainas and the Buddhists.

Reply: As to that, the following refutation has been stated by the Lord Himself in, ‘But it is Nature that acts’ (5.14). Indeed, Nature, which is nothing but ignorance, acts and becomes affected. In this way empirical dealing becomes possible; but in reality it does not occur in the one supreme Self. It has been accordingly shown by the Lord in various places that there is no duty to be performed by those who adhere to this philosophy of discriminating knowledge of the supreme Reality, who are steadfast in Knowledge, who have spurned actions arising out of ignorance, and who are mendicants belonging to the highest Order of monks. The Lord cites an illustration to show like what It does not act and is not affected: