Bhagavad Gita Overview Chapter 4

So we begin today with Chapter 4 of the Bhagavad Gita. The different chapters have been given various names by the commentators of the Gita.
Like I mentioned, the Gita is an organic conversation, a natural conversation. It is not that when Krishna is speaking the Gita, he says,
“Now I am beginning the 14th chapter. Now I am beginning the 4th chapter.”
It is a natural conversation that is going on. Based on the themes discerned, the author, that is Vyasadeva, divided it into chapters.
And based on the thematic division, the chapters were made by Vyasadeva.

In the original tradition of the Mahabharata, there are no chapters at all. There are just so many chapters—hundreds of chapters are there.
Sometimes the chapters are there, sometimes they are not. But when the Acharyas write commentaries, based on their analysis, they give particular names to the chapters.

So if we look at the chapters, Chapter 1 has two broad names. One is based on the two sections of the chapter.
One is “Observing the Battlefield,” which in Sanskrit is Sainya Nirikshana Yoga.
Nirikshana means observing. The other name is “Arjuna’s Lamentation,” Arjuna Vishada Yoga.

Now, each of these is considered to be yoga, meaning it is ultimately meant to help us establish a connection with the Divine.
Chapter 2 is generally called either what Prabhupada refers to as Gita-Sa, “Contents of the Gita Summarized,” or it is called Sankhya Yoga. Sankhya is basically the analysis of reality into its components, primarily matter and spirit. Krishna differentiates between the body and the soul.

Chapter 3 generally has one name only, which is Karma Yoga. Krishna talks about Karma Yoga in Chapter 3, and then we move to Chapter 4.
Now, Prabhupada calls this chapter—do you remember?—”Transcendental Knowledge.”
So, Transcendental Knowledge. Now, the Acharyas give this chapter different names.
One of the names is Jnana Karma Sanyasa Yoga, a slightly bombastic name. Jnana Karma Sanyasa Yoga means
the Jnana (knowledge) that enables us to do Karma with a mood of Sanyasa (renunciation).

The next chapter, Prabhupada calls it Karma Yoga: Action in Krishna Consciousness, and it is also simply called Karma Sanyasa Yoga.
Broadly speaking, if you see, the common element in all these chapters is Karma Yoga.
The concept of Karma Yoga is introduced. The Jnana that enables us to do Karma Yoga is introduced or emphasized.
And then, how Karma involves Sanyas—how Karma also involves renunciation.

Yesterday, we discussed acting and renouncing as two different categories.
But Krishna is going to show how these two categories can actually be integrated.
This will be elaborated on in Chapter 5.

Now, in Chapter 4, Krishna begins by moving from, in one sense, a discussion or explanation that is going on.
For any person to choose rightly—the Gita is all about right action.

For right action, two factors are required:

The individual’s intention. The individual needs to be responsible and should want to act rightly.

The social orientation.

For example, in a country that runs smoothly, individuals should not be corrupt.
At the same time, society should be arranged so that those who are honest are rewarded, and those who are corrupt are punished.
If both of these go together, then right action becomes easier.

Krishna actually uses Dharma in both these senses.
Dharma can refer to individual intention and action. When Arjuna is asking about Dharma, he means,
“I want to know what is Dharma,” that is, “I want to know what is the right action for me.”

But in this chapter, a famous verse we will be discussing:
Yada Yada Hi Dharmasya Glanir Bhavati Bharata…
In this, Dharma, as Krishna is referring to, is actually a social arrangement—
more specifically, a socio-political arrangement by which people find it easier to do the right thing.

So that is also Dharma.

So, in one sense, if you consider, we talked yesterday about how many of these concepts, in some ways, are related.
I talked about sacrifice or yajna.

Now, sacrifice is the act of giving up some impulsive pleasure so that we can belong to a larger whole.
That will be a key theme in this chapter. So, I am first introducing the theme of the chapter before we move to the chapter.
That is also related to Dharma.

Now, Dharma can refer to what an individual does for society.
But Dharma can also refer to what society does for the individual.

So, a dharmic society has to work both ways.
Individuals need to do their part in maintaining the social order, whatever order it is.
But then, the social order should also do its part.

For example, if we are paying taxes, then we should be getting electricity, water supply, and other amenities from the government.
If the government is only taking taxes, that is an exploitative government.
On the other hand, if a citizen is only taking facilities and not paying taxes, then that is a deceptive citizen. That is an irresponsible citizen.

So, there has to be this reciprocation between the individual and the larger whole.
Krishna says that, till now, he has talked about how, at an individual level:

The individual should set the right example.

The individual should not instruct other individuals in a way that is disruptive for them.

Individuals should act according to their nature.

Now, that is all important. But doing the right thing is not just the individual’s responsibility.
It is also society’s responsibility.

For example, if somebody has the inclination to become a teacher, but society doesn’t pay teachers at all, then obviously, teachers will never be paid as much as businesspeople. That is just natural.

Vaishyas (businesspeople) are totally into money, so their focus on money will be much more.
But teachers are more Brahminical; they are not as interested in money.
However, you cannot say that they should not care for money at all.

If society does not provide financial support to people who are Brahminically oriented,
then it will be very difficult for them to continue as teachers, even if they are inclined to teach.

On the other hand, consider someone who is a businessman.
Businesspeople are wealth creators—they create wealth for themselves, but they also create wealth for society.

But if society starts putting too many rules, regulations, or taxes, then what happens?
This is what happened to some extent in communism. The whole idea was that the wealthy must be exploited,
and the belief was that the wealthy became wealthy only by exploiting others.

Now, that is possible, but the wealthy could also have become wealthy because they are talented and dedicated.
If society assumes all wealthy people are exploitative and takes away all their wealth to redistribute it to the poor,
what happens is not that everyone becomes equally wealthy—actually, everyone becomes equally poor.

Why? First, there is not enough wealth for everyone to become wealthy.
And second, when you take away wealth from the wealthy, who will create wealth?

Those who could be creators of wealth will also start thinking, “Anyway, I’m not going to get anything from this. Why should I work so hard?”

In communist governments, this is what happens. Essentially, what I’m talking about is that both the individual and society must be fostered together.

We don’t want to go into the specifics of any particular form of government,
but Krishna’s focus here shifts to how the onus is on Arjuna to act according to his nature.

Krishna says, “I have also made arrangements by which society can be organized so that Dharma can be upheld.”
That arrangement is: Krishna says, “I give knowledge to the rulers of society. I do this from the beginning of time.”

So, Chapter 3 focuses more on individual choice, whereas Chapter 4 focuses more on social arrangement.

And how does Krishna create this social arrangement? By giving knowledge and wisdom to the rulers.
Krishna uses a key word here: Rajarishi. Now, Raja means ruler, and Rishi means seer.

This is actually a great combination if it exists.
The king or ruler is one who controls the outer world. But if that person is also a seer, then that is the best situation.
Such a person is a visionary. They see that while material goods are necessary, non-material goods are also important.

People don’t just become happy by providing food, clothing, and shelter. Of course, these are required.
But there are also non-material goods that people need.

The ruler is meant to provide material goods—not just to rule and dominate.
The seer, on the other hand, promotes the non-material good of people, ensuring spiritual growth is also sought.

Krishna says that he gives this knowledge across time or at the start of time.
But what happens? Krishna explains that entropy sets in. He doesn’t use the word “entropy,” but he explains that over time, knowledge gets lost.

Basically, degeneration happens over generations.
The nature of the world is such that there must be constant vigilance and protection.
Even if people are well-intentioned and competent, over time, things naturally start to decline.

When this degeneration happens, Krishna says, “I personally intervene to restore that knowledge.”

Krishna tells Arjuna, “I am giving this knowledge to you because you are also a Rajarishi—a saintly king.”
Specifically, Krishna says, “You are devoted to me. You are a friend to me. You are a worthy candidate for receiving this knowledge.”

At this point, when Krishna starts speaking, Arjuna interrupts, saying, “Wait a minute, wait a minute.”
Arjuna says, “You are talking about the dawn of creation. You are talking about Suryadev.

How did you give this knowledge to Suryadev? He is much older than you.”

Here, what is happening in the Gita is this:
By the power of time, within the narrative of the Gita, Krishna has still not explicitly emphasized that he is God.

In one sense, Arjuna knows about Krishna’s divinity.
But within the narrative of the Gita, Krishna has only briefly mentioned his divinity.

Krishna is a focused teacher. A focused teacher emphasizes the subject, not themselves.

For example, if someone is teaching the Bhagavad Gita,
and they focus on teaching the content of the Gita, then people will listen and learn.

But if that teacher spends a lot of time talking about themselves—
saying, “I have taught the Bhagavad Gita for 25 years; I have spoken here and done that”—then the focus shifts.

Sometimes, it may be necessary to establish credentials.
But the focus should always be on the subject. Teaching should not become an ego trip for the teacher.

In the section on Karma Yoga, Krishna focuses on Karma Yoga, so he doesn’t talk much about his position.
In the Bhakti Yoga chapter, starting from Chapter 7, Krishna will emphasize his position more.

Why? Because Bhakti Yoga involves devotion to a particular person.
To practice Bhakti, it is essential to understand the greatness and beauty of that person.

In Karma Yoga, the focus is on how Karma is to be done.
In Bhakti Yoga, the focus is on how Bhakti is to be done and to whom it is directed.

Generally speaking, when knowledge of any subject is given, there is the means and the end.
This is called the path (sadhan) and the purpose (sadhya).

In Karma Yoga, the means is Karma (specifically Nishkama Karma or detached action).
The end is moksha—liberation.

Liberation is something to be understood as valuable for everyone. Arjuna’s concern is that he doesn’t want to be entangled. Therefore, Krishna does not need to explain the value, importance, or necessity of moksha. While teaching Karma Yoga, Krishna focuses primarily on karma, repeatedly stating that it will lead to liberation. In Bhakti Yoga, the means is Bhakti, and the end is Bhagavan. Both the means and the end are part of the subject. Since Bhagavan happens to be Krishna, he talks about himself.

This raises the question: Does Krishna brag about himself? Is Krishna egoistic? The answer is no. Krishna avoids referring to his position unless the subject requires it. However, because Arjuna specifically asks the question, Krishna explains his position. He says that both he and Arjuna have been through many lives, but while Arjuna has forgotten, Krishna remembers. How is this possible? Because Krishna is the Supreme Lord. He then declares that he has descended to this world to establish Dharma. Krishna elaborates on the arrangement he creates for establishing Dharma and highlights the social order through which individual dutifulness can be facilitated.

Krishna emphasizes that his actions are universal and introduces a verse to illustrate this point:

“ye yathā māṁ prapadyante
tāṁs tathaiva bhajāmy aham
mama vartmānuvartante
manuṣyāḥ pārtha sarvaśaḥ.”

This means, “As people surrender to me, I reward them accordingly. Everyone follows my path in all respects, O Arjuna.” There are two distinct aspects of this verse. First, Krishna is reciprocal—he responds to people based on their level of surrender. Second, Krishna is universal—everyone is on his path. These two characteristics define Krishna’s nature.

One common notion in India is that all paths lead to the same goal. However, this can be logically challenged. If all paths truly led to the same goal, then Krishna teaching the Gita becomes unnecessary. Why would Arjuna need Krishna’s guidance if every action automatically led to the same outcome? Furthermore, in reality, different choices bring different consequences. For example, if someone boards a train to Kolkata, they will go to Kolkata; if they board a train to Delhi, they will go to Delhi.

Impersonalists argue that this metaphor is flawed because the ultimate reality exists everywhere, unlike specific destinations like Kolkata or Delhi. While it is true that the absolute truth exists everywhere, this does not mean that all actions lead to the realization of the absolute. For example, going to a temple to pray helps us feel closer to God, whereas going to a bar and drinking does not bring us closer to God but rather closer to illusion. Although the absolute truth exists everywhere, the perception of that truth is not equally accessible in all places or through all actions. Thus, we must make choices that bring us closer to the Lord.

This is why Krishna emphasizes, “As people surrender to me, I reward them accordingly.” God becomes more perceivable when we move toward truth and less perceivable when we move away from it. Therefore, the idea that “all paths lead to the same goal” is neither logical nor supported by scripture.

To further analyze, the verse states:
“mama vartmānuvartante manuṣyāḥ pārtha sarvaśaḥ.”
Here, vartma means “path,” anuvartante means “follow,” manuṣyāḥ means “people,” and sarvaśaḥ means “all.” The interpretation hinges on whether sarvaśaḥ (all) applies to vartma (path) or manuṣyāḥ (people). It could mean either “all paths lead to me” or “all people are on my path.”

Grammatically, both interpretations are possible. However, contextually, Krishna emphasizes “all people” rather than “all paths.” Before this verse (4.8), Krishna differentiates between the divine and the demoniac. If all paths lead to him, why differentiate between the two? After this verse (4.15), Krishna praises great souls who act on his teachings and attain liberation. Thus, Krishna is not saying that all paths lead to the same goal. Rather, he is stating that all people are on his path, and he rewards them according to how they surrender to him.

That said, the idea that all paths lead to the same goal has some basis. Broadly, paths can be categorized into two types. Some paths are exclusivist, claiming exclusive access to God—like a broadcaster claiming exclusive rights to air the World Cup. These paths insist that only their way leads to God, while others do not.

Exclusivists generally hold the belief that their path is the only way to the truth. This exclusivist mentality often manifests in thought and speech, with claims like, “Our path is the only way.” When exclusivists become extremists, this belief extends to action, leading to intolerance or even violence. For example, exclusivists might say, “If you don’t follow our path, you will go to hell.” Extremists take this further, saying, “Why wait? We’ll help you get there faster.” Broadly speaking, the Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam—embrace and actively propagate exclusivism.

Judaism teaches that the Jews are the chosen people of God. While Jews may not be overtly aggressive, their belief system still promotes exclusivism. Christianity, too, has a history of intolerance, with the assertion that “Jesus is the only way.” Islam, as taught by Mohammed, follows a similar path. Mohammed declared himself the “seal of all prophets,” stating that all prophets culminate in him and no other prophet will come after him. This creates tensions between Christianity and Islam, as both recognize Moses and Jesus as prophets but interpret their roles differently. Christians believe in the second coming of Jesus, who will deliver believers to heaven and condemn others to hell. Muslims, however, believe that Jesus will return to confirm Mohammed’s teachings, rejecting those who do not accept him. This ongoing historical reinterpretation fuels competition among these traditions, each claiming not just superiority but exclusivity.

Opposing exclusivism is pluralism—the belief that all paths lead to the same goal. This idea is often associated with Hinduism, but it represents a deviation from the actual teachings of the Vedas. Every religion, as it spreads across the world, may diverge to varying degrees from its foundational scriptures. While Hinduism is commonly perceived as teaching that “all paths are right,” this idea can become problematic. For instance, if one person’s path is atheism, which denies God’s existence, how can paths to God and atheism both be correct? Clearly, not all paths can lead to the same goal.

The Bhagavad Gita offers an alternative perspective called inclusivism. Inclusivism recognizes one ultimate purpose—to rise to spiritual consciousness and divine love—but acknowledges that there are many paths to achieve this goal. A simple metaphor for inclusivism is a mountain. Exclusivists claim there is only one path to the top, while pluralists believe all paths, regardless of direction, lead to the summit. Inclusivists, however, assert that while many paths can lead to the top, not all paths do; some may lead to valleys, circle the base, or move away from the mountain entirely.

In this metaphor, the mountain’s peak represents spiritual consciousness, centered on love of God, while the base represents material consciousness, focused on love of worldly things. The goal is to ascend from material consciousness to divine consciousness. This ascent is possible through various traditions, including Islam, Christianity, Judaism, the Vedic path, and Krishna consciousness. Srila Prabhupada acknowledged this inclusivity, praising figures like Jesus for their immense love for God. He viewed such devotion as worthy of respect and worship.

A story about Prabhupada illustrates this inclusivist attitude. During a visit to Iran, when the Shahada Namaz prayer began in the background, Prabhupada closed his eyes, folded his hands, and listened prayerfully. When a devotee remarked that it would be better if they were chanting “Hare Krishna,” Prabhupada replied, “No, they are worshiping God in their way, and we are worshiping God in our way.” Bhaktivinoda Thakur similarly taught that when visiting another tradition’s place of worship, one should adopt a mood of respect, appreciating God’s compassion in reaching out to different people in various ways. Such respect can deepen one’s devotion to God in the form they personally know.

Returning to the mountain metaphor, inclusivism emphasizes vertical progression rather than horizontal shifts. Horizontal conversion occurs when someone moves from one point at the base of the mountain to another without ascending. For instance, if a poor Hindu feels excluded due to caste and converts to Christianity after being offered material benefits, this is a horizontal conversion. They remain materialists, merely shifting from Hindu materialism to Christian materialism. Such conversions do not involve spiritual growth but rather a lateral movement within material consciousness.

In contrast, vertical conversion involves moving upward toward the peak of spiritual consciousness. Inclusivism focuses on helping individuals climb the

mountain rather than pulling others down or circling aimlessly at the base. By climbing higher, individuals gain a clearer vision of the ultimate goal, which is love of God. This inclusivist approach allows for mutual respect and inspiration among practitioners of different paths, fostering a shared commitment to spiritual progress.

And this does not lead to any spiritual advancement. This is only for gaining political power, gaining social influence. This increases in an upward scheme. So now, on the other hand, when somebody goes up this path, this is a vertical conversion, where a person is going from being a materialist to being a spiritualist. So, Shri Prabhupada said that this is the conversion. The word conversion itself has got a negative connotation nowadays. But the transformation that we are seeking is this transformation: that we want to elevate people from where they are towards a higher spiritual consciousness.

So in general, in interfaith or when dealing with people of other faiths, Prabhupada had two distinct approaches. If they were nominal followers—nominal means that they were born in that particular faith but they knew nothing about it, they are not really interested in it, they are not following it—then Prabhupada would encourage Krishna manshis. He says, why? Because this path, there can be different paths if you go up the mountain, but that does not necessarily mean all the paths are equally smooth for going up the mountain. Some paths might be easier, some paths might be tougher, some paths might be more rocky, some paths might be more swampy, some paths might be more forested. So different paths can be different.

So in Kali Yuga, by the manshis of Shri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, the path of Krishna consciousness is relatively easier for going up the mountain. And therefore, this path is what is recommended. But if somebody were a dedicated follower, then Prabhupada would focus on the principles of Dharma. For example, if somebody were a dedicated Christian, Prabhupada would encourage them to stop eating meat. How can you claim to love God if you are actually not following the basic principles of Dharma?

So what is happening over here is that the Vedic path is inclusive. Krishna says all people are on my path. What it means is that actually everybody is somewhere on this mountain. But some people are going up the mountain, some people are going around the mountain, some people are going away from the mountain. So if we envision this, we can take it as one path, but if we envision it as like one huge expressway. Now at the top is Krishna. Now some people are going towards Krishna, some people may be going away from Krishna, some people may be sitting wherever they are. Some people may be going crisscross, not knowing where they are going. Some people may just go to sleep where they are. But everybody is on that path. However, it depends on them where they are going.

And Krishna says, for everyone I create arrangements. So those who worship me, they will come to me. Those who are not coming to me next time, if somebody wants quick results, then they may worship the Devatas and they will get quick results. If somebody wants to just make it good in the world, then for them there is a Varanashram system. You act according to your nature and then you can get gradually elevated. So Krishna says, these are all the various social arrangements I have made.

Now when Krishna spoke the Gita, Krishna and Islam were not there. But even when Krishna spoke the Gita, at that time the Shaivites were there, there were different kinds of worshippers there. Now it is important to understand that when the war was fought, the war was fought between the Kauravas and the Pandavas. Now the war was not fought—it was not that the Pandavas were devotees and the Kauravas were non-devotees. Or rather more specifically we would put it this way: it was not that the Pandavas at that time were Vaishnavas and Kauravas were Vaishnavas. It was not like that.

Basically, on the Pandavas’ side there was Drona—not Drona, there was Drupada, and this Drupada was actually a Shaivite. Drupada’s family deity was Lord Shiva. On the other hand, on the Kauravas’ side there was Bhishma, and Bhishma was a Vaishnava. Similarly, there was Bhurishrava. Bhurishrava was also a Vaishnava. So the war was not fought to establish Bhakti. See, the war was fought for Dharma, not Bhakti.

Now what is the difference between the two of these? That, see, Dharma, in this case, you remember what is the meaning of Dharma? Social order. And Bhakti is devotion. So Dharma has to be established, but Bhakti has to be inspired. So established means it can be established, it can even be enforced. But Bhakti has to be actually inspired individually. It is voluntary. So somebody says that I won’t follow the traffic rules. Then you have to be put in jail. Somebody says I won’t chant like Krishna. We don’t have to put that person in jail. If Bhakti is forced, that is not Bhakti. That won’t be love, isn’t it?

So Krishna says I come to establish Dharma. Is Bhakti not important for Krishna? Bhakti is important. But Krishna says Bhakti is to be inspired. Those who come to know me, they will love me and they will attain me. So in 4.7 and 8, Krishna talks about Dharma. And in 4.9 and 10, Krishna talks about Bhakti. Krishna says those who want to follow Dharma, for them there is Dharma. Those who want to follow Bhakti, for them there is Bhakti. So this is Krishna’s principle of reciprocity. Reciprocity means Krishna is saying that as you want, you can follow.

Now if you don’t follow Dharma also, then the way I reciprocate will be by punishing you. If you follow Dharma, I will empower you. If you follow Bhakti, I will liberate you. So there are different ways in which the reciprocation comes up. So reciprocation of Krishna. So if somebody is doing Adharma, then it’s punishment. That is Krishna’s reciprocation. If somebody is following Dharma, then there is empowerment. Every government, every society needs responsible people in society. If somebody is following Bhakti, then there is not just empowerment. Empowerment is what you can say, enchantment. That person will become attracted to me and that will come to me. There will be liberation. Ultimately that person will come to Krishna. That person will become enchanted by me.

So Krishna is reciprocating with different people accordingly. So this is again Krishna’s inclusiveness. Inclusiveness means that there can be not only different paths up the mountain. We remember yesterday we talked that you can go up the mountain at different paces also. Somebody can go slower, somebody can go faster. But Krishna reciprocates with everybody.

So let’s look at: I have begun from the dawn of creation, a system for wisdom’s transmission. Through a chain of saintly rulers across many a generation, that wisdom was lost due to time’s power to cause regeneration. And that wisdom will be restored by my present instruction to you who are a dear friend, rich with devotion.

How did you give wisdom to an ancient seer when to that being by birth you are junior? Many many births both you and I have undergone. My memory of them remains clear though yours is gone. Of all beings I remain the Lord, unborn and unending. Even when in this world of illusion I am descending. It does empower the demoniac who spread Adharma and empower the divine does establish you Dharma. Those who grasp truly the mystery of my birth and action don’t take worry birth but come to me, the supreme destination. Seeking me and giving up attachment, fear, and anger. Gaining wisdom, pure and austere, they attain my shelter. As people approach me, so I reward them one on one. On the path to me without exception is everyone. To other gods some offer devotion because they seek quick gratification. For all people according to their disposition have I created a system of occupation. In all such actions I never indulge in discrimination. Knowing this truth about me, past seekers have attained liberation.

Now, this chapter is a long chapter. This is 1-15 we have discussed till now because this was a very important broad section. Now I will go through the remaining two sections a little faster.

After this, Krishna will say, okay, so I have made the social arrangement. What is the social arrangement? Primarily, it is in terms of giving knowledge and then, of course, creating structures to implement that knowledge. It’s like if there is a pandemic, an expert doctor comes and tells how the patients are to be treated and then helps set up the system by which the patients can actually be treated. Now, the system gets disrupted, the doctor comes back again and sets the system again. So, like that, Krishna has set up the system.

After telling this arrangement of the social system in which knowledge is given, now Krishna will start telling what is the knowledge. That knowledge is essentially about Karma. Karma means about action.

So now we will discuss one of the most entertainingly confusing verses in the Gita. Why entertainingly confusing? It is just fun to recite this verse also, and it is fun to be confused by this verse. So let’s try to recite this. Krishna is saying:
“In action, see inaction.
In inaction, see action.
In action, see inaction.
And in inaction, see action.”

Okay. Such a person is, among human beings, such a person is… And that person, that person is well-situated. That person is well-situated in whatever work they do. They will not get entangled. Let’s recite it together.

So let’s see why this verse is entertainingly confusing. Sometimes, you know that some people are confused. Just see their confused faces—it’s entertaining. Of course, it is enlightening and not confusing. So he is saying: Action, see action in inaction. And see inaction in action. So it is a bit of both a tongue twister and a brain twister. So see: action in action and inaction in action.

Now let’s try to simplify this and understand what it means. The Sanskrit words are Karma and Akarma. Now, Karma has two different meanings. It can literally refer to activity. Everybody does some Karma. That means everybody is active—that is activity. But another meaning of Karma is also action that brings reaction, that causes reaction.

Conversely, Akarma can refer to inactivity. It can also refer to action that doesn’t cause reaction. Once we understand these two different meanings, then understanding this verse will become a little clear.

So what is Krishna saying over here? Sometimes you may do action, but you may get no reaction. And sometimes you may not do action, and still, you will be responsible. You will be getting a reaction. How is that possible?

Let’s consider, say, if there are riots and there is police over there. Now, if the police attack the rioters—attack the rioter, maybe lathi-charge, or they have to shoot in the air, or they use stun guns, if they finally have to use guns—now they attack. Now there is action, but will the police be arrested for that? This attack is action. But there will be no reaction—no bad reaction, no bad action for that. No bad consequence of that.

On the other hand, if the police stay inactive, now what does that mean? They are doing no action—they are doing Akarma. And the police stay inactive during riots. Is that a good thing? No. There will be a reaction, there will be an inquiry. There will be a simple reaction: why did you remain silent at this time?

At first glance, you may say that attacking someone is a bad thing. But in some situations, the activity of attacking may be a good thing. And inactivity when somebody should be attacking will be a bad thing.

This means that, generally, when there are crimes, there are two kinds of crimes. There are crimes of commission. Commission means either you do the crime or you tell others to do the crime. And there is a crime of omission. Omission means you don’t do what you are expected to. Turn a blind eye toward something. By not doing something, a person becomes a criminal.

Now, in the context of the Bhagavad Gita, what does this mean? Krishna is telling Arjuna that if you fight, although you think fighting is a bad thing, if you are fighting to assist me in establishing Dharma, you will not get any reaction. But on the other hand, if you don’t fight, then you are a Kshatriya. That is your duty to fight. If you don’t fight, then you will get a reaction.

Sorry. No. Karma means… See, karma is simple. Good. I need to clarify this. Good that you raised the question. See, basically, one can be just activity in general. So, the other is…

Now, do all activities cause reactions? That is the key point that Krishna is saying.

So, I don’t know how to explain this. What does this mean? What does this mean? In action, see in action. That means you can do action, but get no reaction. So, here, Karmanya means action. And Akarma means that you are doing something, but you are getting no reaction. And then Akarmani Chakarmaya. That means, here… Sorry. Sorry. Action, or you can use the word activity over here. You are active, but you will get no reaction. Here, there is inaction or, in the sense of inactivity, a person is doing nothing but still they will get a reaction. Akarmani Chakarmaya. So, basically, what Krishna is saying here is, don’t just get candid in my experiments. You may think fighting is a bad thing, but not fighting could be a worse thing, because your duty is important. And don’t neglect your duty.

So, let’s look at this. Is anyone good at reading English poetry? Would anyone like to read this?

Knowing this truth about me, past seekers have attained liberation. Which action breeds what result? That is tough to discern. Which action brings liberation? From me, you can learn. In determining, giving reaction, more important than action is the underlying intention. That is the learned vision. Inaction chosen irresponsibly will bring reaction. Action executed responsibly will bring no reaction. Those who act free from selfish desire, have all reactions burned by the fire of wisdom in action, manifested as the mood of sacrifice.

So, a police officer who shoots somebody because they are angry with a neighbor or someone, they will be culpable. But a police officer who shoots somebody is a criminal. Action that is free from selfish desire will not get any reaction. So, the fire of wisdom in action manifested as the mood of sacrifice.

So, what is the mood of sacrifice? That seeks material things only for sustenance, not intelligence. Krishna talks about how, when we work in this world, we are not greedy for material things. When everything is seen, and what is potentially spiritual, all action becomes a sacrifice; nothing remains a mere ritual. This is what Krishna talks about, how various activities can be performed in the mood of sacrifice. To perform sacrifice, the ways are many: intelligence, senses, time, breath, or money. All these and more, whatever we have, can be offered. Though sacrifice done in knowledge is to be preferred. Honoring the remnants of sacrifice brings purification. And the sacrifice, wise and free from vice, reaches liberation.

So now, why is Krishna talking about sacrifice over here? Because sacrifice is a pure activity. Sacrifice, you can say there is some destruction. You put food into it, you put oil into it, it gets burnt. But that burning is not just a reason. Burning is a pure activity, it’s purifying, it’s sacred. So the Acharya has explained, in the verse to this effect, in the Mahabharata also, that the whole Kurukshetra battlefield is like a sacrifice. And Arjuna is the priest. And when the priest is pouring ghee or whatever, the spoon. So, Arjuna’s bow is the spoon. And the Kauravas are the Ahunthi. And the actual battle that is going to happen. The battlefield is the Yagyasthali, and the battle is the fire. So, Krishna is saying, it’s the fire in which this whole battle is going to take place. And then, Krishna says that, the point is that this is the knowledge that he is giving to Arjuna. Krishna says that this is the arrangement for this knowledge I have made. That this in the past was going on, now I am doing it for you. But then, how can people in general know it? Just for that, you need to go to a Guru. And that’s what comes up now after this.

From those who have seen the truth, humbly learn. The knowledge of reality, that will burn. The illusion that anything or anyone exists separate from me. And that knowledge will take you across the ocean of misery to eternity. This wisdom acts as illusion’s ultimate cure. Compared with it, nothing in the world is so pure. This wisdom is gained by the faithful. But it eludes those who are doubtful. Take this, the sword of wisdom, arise and fight. Slay the doubt that stops you from doing what is right.

So Krishna concludes with calling Arjuna to fight. But the fighting is, he is saying it’s not just an outer war against your enemy. You can fight a war with this sword of knowledge against your doubts, against your illusion. And this is the bigger war that the Mahabharata calls everyone to fight.

So, this particular section, to some extent, I rushed through the later part of the section for one main reason. This topic of how we can act without being bound. How does action occur? And how does knowledge keep us free from bondage? That is the subject in the next chapter, in the fifth chapter. So we’ll discuss it over there.

I’ll summarize what we discussed. We discussed in chapter four overview. So we focused on how when Dharma is to be practiced, there is both an individual responsibility and a social responsibility. A social arrangement, you can say. So the individual arrangement was focused on chapter three. And the social arrangement is chapter four.

What is a social arrangement? That is basically the wisdom to reorganize society. Reorganize society in such a way that people can live prosperously and grow spiritually. So that is the wisdom to reorganize society. Krishna says that the system that he creates is from the start of creation, dawn of creation, there is the knowledge that is given across generations. And how is it given? Through saintly kings. They are rulers and seers. So through that, knowledge is given.

Then we discussed how here, specifically, Krishna talks about his position. Krishna’s position is emphasized only in the Bhakti Yoga section. In the Kali Yoga section, it’s not. Because Krishna is a focused teacher. But here, in 4.5 to 15, it is explained because Arjuna asked the question. Because of Arjuna’s question.

And then, here we discussed about how Krishna is both reciprocal and universal. So there we discussed about how, you know, it’s not that all paths are the same goal, or all people are on the same goal, it’s Krishna. So the whole logic we discussed is from a logical perspective and a scriptural perspective. How actually this does not make sense. And then, because choices have consequences.

Then here we discussed about different paths. There can be exclusivists, which hold that my way is the only way. Then there can be pluralists, which holds that all ways are right. But in between is inclusivists, which holds that there is one purpose and many paths. And for that, we discussed the mountain metaphor. That there can be different paths which go up the mountain. But that does not mean that all paths are just going to take us to the mountain.

So here we discussed that conversion, it is horizontal conversion, is not of much use. If somebody is a Hindu materialist, he becomes a Christian materialist. But it is what we want is a vertical conversion. That people become elevated from love of material things to love of God.

And then we discussed about Karma. That Karma can have an activity in general. Or it can be a specific action on that action which causes reaction. And then we discussed the key to that. We discussed the four eighteen words. That basically, Karmandya, Karmaliya, Vashita.

So in this verse, what are the focuses? That intention with which we do action, that is much more important than the action itself. So if our intention is in a mood of sacrifice, then we all can stay pure and we can become liberated. And in fact, all action can be done as a sacrifice. And this we learn from our Gurus. And with this knowledge, you fight and you will win over doubts and delusions that are there inside.

Thank you very much.

Hare Krishna. Hare Krishna. Are there any questions? Okay, we’ll take a few. Please, please. Pramji, you told that in Hinduism, the people of Hinduist idea, they said that there is a single goal, and many paths can lead to that. But in the Shastras, they said that only Krishna Consciousness is the way to reach the important. Where does it say that? Hare Ernaam Ayam Akhi Amala. Well, I don’t know whether you can translate Hare Ernaam into Krishna Consciousness. It is chanting of the names of God. But there are so many names of the Lord, isn’t it? So, Prabhupada said that in different traditions, there are different names of God. So, just chanting the names of God by which we develop love for God, that is the only way. But certainly, it’s not that the Hare Krishna Mantra is the only way. The verse is Hare Ernaam Ayam Akhi Amala. And Hari is the name of God, and Lord Hari has many different names.

What is the difference between dharma, religion, and bhakti? Because dharma is a matter of social order. That’s the confusion that comes up nowadays. The word dharma means religion, but in the Vedic context, dharma means social order. As I said, the Kurukshetra war was not fought because Duryodhana was a non-devotee. It was not that suddenly Duryodhana said, “I’ll chant Hare Krishna, I’ll stop the war.” No, Duryodhana was doing wrong things, and that had to stop. He was not just doing wrong; terrible things he was doing. So, he was a social disruptor; he was causing social havoc. So, dharma is basically the basic harmonious functioning in society. If I belong to, if we stay in a particular country, what are the rules of that country? That is dharma. If you have a particular family, if you have a particular company, that is dharma.

Remember, was it I spoke to all of you or I spoke in a previous chapter? I think I spoke in the last chapter. There are many roles that we belong to. So now, who is the ultimate goal? See now, the word dharma is more a sense of order, order or harmony. Remember, what dharma means, if I’m taking something, if I’m giving something, I should be giving something. So that is how harmony is maintained. Now, if you see, this is a matter of, you can say, it’s logical, it’s rational, it’s ethical. If I’m taking something, I should be giving something. That’s logical. Let’s also say it’s rational, logical, same thing. It is functional. Functional means functionally it’s necessary. But all of these are possible without love. Isn’t it? It’s like I give taxes to my government. That doesn’t mean I love my government. I follow the rules of traffic. That doesn’t mean I love the road traffic system.

Now, bhakti, on the other hand, is a matter of love. So now, when there is love also, there will, it’s like you could say, when there is love, automatically dharma will be there. Because if we love, then also we will naturally follow the order. But love is a higher thing. So, this has to be voluntary. It cannot be forced. How can you force anyone to love anyone? So, love is voluntary. It can be inspired; it is meant to be inspired. So, if we come, we hear about Krishna, we learn about Krishna’s glories, we will feel inspired to love Krishna.

There’s one of the major differences between the Vedic tradition and, say, the Abrahamic religions. Both talk about hell, but there’s a big difference. In the Vedic tradition, in the Abrahamic religions, hell is for non-believers. If you don’t believe in Jesus, you don’t believe in Mohammed, if you don’t believe in whoever it is, Yahweh, you will go to hell. In the Vedic tradition, hell is for wrongdoers. Wrongdoers means, that is, this is the Vedic tradition, the Gita teaching. So, it is not that just because somebody doesn’t chant Hare Krishna, that doesn’t mean they will go to hell. It depends on how they are living. If somebody is in Satvaguna, they can become elevated. If they are in Rajoguna, they will stay stagnated. In Tamoguna, they will get degraded.

So, hell is for those who are doing wrong. So, it is not that Krishna says, “You don’t believe me, how dare you, I’ll send you to hell.” It’s not like that. You see, the world is a place where people have to live cooperatively. If you become a disruptor, then you have to be removed. So, in the Abrahamic religions, hell is for condemnation. They use the word damnation. But in the Vedic tradition, hell is for reformation. Because, condemnation means, because it is permanent. You go to hell and that’s where you want to be forever. In the Vedic tradition, Prabhupada was asked, “Is hell eternal?” Prabhupada said, “Nothing except devotional service, ecstatic devotional service to Krishna. Everything is temporary.” It is temporary. So, in hell, people suffer, but after suffering, they love and then they come out.

So, who goes to hell? It is people who do adharma, they go to hell. Now, will abhaktas go to hell? Not just because they are abhaktas. If the abhaktas do adharma, then they will go to hell. So, if somebody is an atheist, but if they are vegetarian, if they are kind, if they are well-behaved, if they are not doing adharma, that doesn’t mean they will go to hell. There is a clear difference between dharma and bhakti.

What is religion?
It depends on whom you ask. No, because words don’t have fixed meanings. The meaning of words is in context. So, religion, if you look at it from the perspective of etymology, it comes from religare, which actually means to bind back to God. I think it is Greek or Roman. It means bind back to God. So, in that sense, religion is meant to be a path back to God. But in today’s world, religion is often more of a cultural designation. In today’s world, it just refers to, it can refer to how people live, and that includes how people worship. But the worship may be a very small part of it also.

What is that?
One of my friends is a Jew. So, he was trying to share Krishna consciousness with his relatives. His uncle said, “Are you trying to convert me?” He said, “I didn’t know that you belonged to any religion.” He said, “I am a Jew. I am an atheist, but I am an atheist Jew.” Now, the first commandment of Judaism is to love God with all thy heart, all thy soul, and all thy mind. So, if you say that I am a Jew, but I am an atheist, then it has just become a cultural designation. Isn’t it? So, that’s why I said, what does religion mean? It depends on whom you ask. For many people, say among various religions, each religion can be a spiritual search for God, but it can also become a political search for power. So, it is possible depending on who is leading that religion and why people are following that religion.

So, if you consider this particular danger, this is most evident in Islam. Why? There are many Muslims who live very pious lives individually. They give charity and they do their prayers. So, at the individual level, Islam can be a spiritual search for God. But at a societal level, at the social level, very frequently, Islam becomes Islamism, as they say. It becomes a search for power.

Now, why is Islam uniquely dangerous? There is danger there for all religions. But what happens is, in general, in most traditions, the Brahmana and Kshatriya roles are separated. See, in our tradition, there are Brahmana and Kshatriya. They are two separate things. Now, if you see in the Buddhist tradition, Buddha was the Brahmana and Ashoka was the Kshatriya who eventually spread Buddhism, a key person. Jesus was the Brahmana and then Constantine was the king who spread it. He used military power also. But in Islam, Mohammed is both the spiritual teacher and the military leader. So, because that Brahmana and Kshatriya is combined in the very genes of Islam, what happens is, individually, people may follow Mohammed’s teachings, and that may spiritually take them towards God. But collectively, often people look at Mohammed’s military example. And war is a dirty business, and sometimes unethical methods have to be used. This has to be done. So, people follow that example. And so, it can become very much a political search for power.

I am not saying this danger is not there in any other religion. It is possible everywhere. Religion can be used for political purposes by anyone. So, it depends on what somebody is thinking of as religion. There is religion as a spiritual search for God, but how religion is being practiced in society can vary from time, place, and circumstance. Basically, the word has many different meanings.

But even this: if you are going in traffic and not following traffic rules, you won’t exist. Isn’t it? It will accelerate. If you are in a flying plane and don’t follow the rules given by the staff, then you will cause trouble. So, basically, Dharma is that action which keeps us in harmony. So, harmony with our nature, harmony with our situation, harmony ultimately with God. So, Dharma has many different meanings, and that is definitely a meaning. But that meaning also applies here. Dharma doesn’t have only one meaning. Yes.

Hare Krishna, Babaji.
We learned that the wisdom was passed since the dawn of creation by Krishna through Rajrishis. But today we see that there are no Rajrishi examples and those types of rulers. So, is it that the Dharma is corrupted or degraded, and it will be re-established again? Is it related to Kalki Avatar?
Yeah, it’s a good point. It’s not just Kalki Avatar. Chandranath also has counted. And in general, it is that in Kalyuga, the individual responsibility becomes much more. It’s like if the rain is there, you cannot stop the rains. But that doesn’t mean you have to become wet. You can get an umbrella and protect yourself.

So, for us, to expect society to change and become more Dharmic, for the government to be supporting the principle of Dharma, that can happen, but that may not happen soon or that may not happen for long. The individual responsibility has to be much more in Kalyuga. Karma Yoga says that we have the right to do our karma, but we have no right to the result. We are not the cause of the result.

So, for example, if there is a terrorist, he plants a bomb and people die. And the police catch the terrorist, and the terrorist says, “Oh no, I have done the karma, but the reason for the dying of people is not my responsibility. I am not the cause of that.” So, is it that way?

See, when Krishna says that you are not entitled to the result, Krishna is not saying you are not responsible for the result. There are two different things. Basically, it is: this is our action, this is the result. So now, normally speaking, we say action leads to result. If I put my hand in the fire, my hand will burn. However, life is not that simple. Many times, I am into an action, and then there might be a huge result because there is some past action.

So, what this means is that the result that comes is a combination of the present action and the past action. Say, for example, my skin had been burned previously, and then I go a little near fire. The reaction that I will get may be much more severe than somebody else’s skin that has never been burned.

So, what happens right now? The result, it hasn’t come because of the present action? Yes, of course. If I had not gone close to fire, I wouldn’t have felt the burning sensation. But the amount of burning sensation I have felt, that’s not because of my present action. The past action is also there.

So, a terrorist may try to set a hundred bombs, and only one explodes. Why? Because that particular terrorist had some good karma by which whatever action they attempted to do in this world would be successful in that particular context. But now they chose to do bad karma, and for that, they are responsible.

So, it’s a little subtle. See, when Krishna says, “Don’t think that you are entitled to the result,” because you understand that my present karma alone is not producing the result. But that doesn’t mean the present karma doesn’t matter. The present karma matters because I am choosing to do that. So, I’ll be responsible for it.

Now, the idea that we should be detached from the results: detachment is not meant to breed irresponsibility. We discussed earlier that. What is it meant to do? It is meant to actually help us gain maturity. That I should not get too overwhelmed if results don’t come out. In this world, it is a place of duality. Sometimes I may do a little wrong and I may get a lot of suffering. Sometimes I may do a little good and I may get a lot of good results also.

So, the idea is that if we are detached, maturity means that life is such that I may do a little good, so this might be my action. But the reaction might be when I do a little good, I get a little good result. A little good might give me a great good result. But don’t think at this point that I have become a great person. Or when we do a little bad, we get a terrible result. We think I am worthless. No, not necessarily.

It is these dualities, both of these dualities that we are meant to tolerate. We have done something, but the reactions we may get in this life are not always proportional to what we have done. So, don’t get worked up by it. Don’t think that life is unfair. Don’t become proud, thinking we are better than what we actually are. So, understand that there are other factors in me also.

So, thank you very much.
Srimad Bhagavad Gita Ki
Srila Prabhupada Ki
Gaur Bhattaranda Ki Jai