Those who execute thoroughly all their obligatory duties “because they are to be done” (karyam iti), because to remain without accomplishing them is almost death to them — fall under the Sattwic (pure) variety. They believe that certain acts of ‘relinquishment’ MUST be done, for otherwise, according to them, it is just insufferably indecent. When such persons, under these inspiring ideas, come to serve the community, or work in any field, they provide us with examples of the Sattwic type of ‘relinquishment.’Activities have certain unavoidable encumbrances. All that the Lord says in the Geeta amounts only to this; that we must act on without these encumbrances curtailing and limiting our freedom of action. Thus, the tyaga of the good (Sattwic), or real tyaga, means doing actions with the correct mental attitude.” This may seem strange, but those who have carefully gone through these three stanzas explaining the true type of tyaga, must have understood that all these discussions were not so much on what is to be ‘relinquished’ but as to HOW we must ‘abandon,’ and in WHICH FIELD we must act. In short, Lord Krishna’s concept of Tyaga condemns abandonment of the world and our duties in it. To the Lord in the Geeta, tyaga is a subjective renunciation of all inner selfishness and desire, which limit the freedom of the individual in his field-of-activity. It is something like the abandonment that everyone practises in his dining-room; renunciation of hunger by positively taking the food!

In these three stanzas the abandonment (Tyaga) discussed is not “the ABANDONMENT of actions” but “ABANDONMENT of such things within our subjective personality that block the free flow of our own possibilities.” Tyaga makes an active man a more potential worker in the world.

Acting in the world outside, renouncing both the ego and the ego-centric desires, an individual comes to exhaust his vasanas, and grows in his inward purity.

HOW DOES SUCH A PURE MAN, PURIFIED THROUGH ‘SATTWIC TYAGA,’ GAIN THE HIGHEST SPIRITUAL EXPERIENCE?

Yat, whatever; niyatam karma, daily obligatory duty; kriyate, is performed, accomplished; iti eva, just because; it is karyam, a bounden duty; O Arjuna, tyaktva, by giving up; sangam, attachment; and phalam, the result; ca eva, as well; sah, that; tyagah, renunciation, giving up of attachment and (hankering for) the resutls of daily obligatory duties; matah, is considered; to be sattvikah, based on sattva, arising from sattva. We said that the Lord’s utterance is proof of the fruitfulness of daily obligatory duties. Or, even if the niyakarmas be understood (from the Lord’s worlds) to be fruitless, still the ignorant man does certainly imagine that the nityakarmas (daily obligatory duites) when performed produce for oneself a result either in the form of purification of the mind or avoidance of evil. As to this, the Lord aborts even that imagination by saying, ‘by giving up the result’. Hence it has been well said, ‘by giving up attachment and the result’.

Objection: Well, is not the threefold relinquishment of actions, also called sannyasa, under discussion? As regards this, the renunciation based on tamas and rajas have been stated. Why is the relinquishment of attachment and (desire for their) results spoken of here as the third? This is like somebody saying, ‘Three Brahmanas have come. Of them two are versed in the six auxiliaries [The six auxiliaries are: Siksa (Phonetics), Kalpa (Code of Rituals and Sacrifices), Vyakarana (Grammar), Nirukta (Etymology), Chandas (Meter, Prosody), and Jyotisa (Astronomy).-Tr.] of the Vedas; the third is a Ksatirya!’

Reply: This is not wrong, for this is meant as a eulogy on the basis of the common factor of renunciation. Between renunciation of actions and renunciation. of hankering for results, there is, indeed, the similarity of the fact of renunciation. While on this subject, by condemning ‘renunciation of actions’ on account of its being based on rajas and tamas, the ‘renunciation of desire for results of actions’ is being praised on account of its being based on sattva, by saying, ‘that renunciation is considered to be based on sattva.’ The internal organ of a person who is qualified for rites and duties, who performs the nityakarmas by giving up attachment and hankering for results, becomes pure on account of its being untainted by attachment to results etc. and refined by the nitya-karmas. When it is pure and tranquil, it becomes capable of contemplating on the Self. Since, for that very person whose internal organ has become purified by performing the nityakarmas and who has become ready for the knowledge of the Self, the process by which he can become steadfast in it has to be stated, therefore the Lord says: