« The Song of God—Volume 1, chapters 1-6
Devotional action is better than renunciation of work (Bg 5.1 to 5.6)
The fourth chapter ended with a direct command: Arjuna should cut off his doubts with the sword of knowledge and fight. This brings back the apparent conflict between devotional work and renunciation. In this opening section of the fifth chapter, Kṛṣṇa clarifies the relationship between devotional action and renunciation. Work performed for Kṛṣṇa without attachment is not opposed to renunciation or knowledge. On the contrary, when properly understood, devotional service includes the essence of both knowledge and renunciation.
Text 1: arjuna uvāca
sannyāsaṁ karmaṇāṁ kṛṣṇa, punar yogaṁ ca śaṁsasi
yac chreya etayor ekaṁ, tan me brūhi su-niścitam
Arjuna said: O Kṛṣṇa, first of all You ask me to renounce work, and then again You recommend work with devotion. Now will You kindly tell me definitely which of the two is more beneficial?
Text 2: śrī-bhagavān uvāca
sannyāsaḥ karma-yogaś ca, niḥśreyasa-karāv ubhau
tayos tu karma-sannyāsāt, karma-yogo viśiṣyate
The Personality of Godhead replied: The renunciation of work and work in devotion are both good for liberation. But, of the two, work in devotional service is better than renunciation of work.
Text 3: jñeyaḥ sa nitya-sannyāsī, yo na dveṣṭi na kāṅkṣati
nirdvandvo hi mahā-bāho, sukhaṁ bandhāt pramucyate
One who neither hates nor desires the fruits of his activities is known to be always renounced. Such a person, free from all dualities, easily overcomes material bondage and is completely liberated, O mighty-armed Arjuna.
Text 4: sāṅkhya-yogau pṛthag bālāḥ, pravadanti na paṇḍitāḥ
ekam apy āsthitaḥ samyag, ubhayor vindate phalam
Only the ignorant speak of devotional service [karma-yoga] as being different from the analytical study of the material world [Sāṅkhya]. Those who are actually learned say that he who applies himself well to one of these paths achieves the results of both.
Text 5: yat sāṅkhyaiḥ prāpyate sthānaṁ, tad yogair api gamyate
ekaṁ sāṅkhyaṁ ca yogaṁ ca, yaḥ paśyati sa paśyati
One who knows that the position reached by means of analytical study can also be attained by devotional service, and who therefore sees analytical study and devotional service to be on the same level, sees things as they are.
Text 6: sannyāsas tu mahā-bāho, duḥkham āptum ayogataḥ
yoga-yukto munir brahma, na cireṇādhigacchati
Merely renouncing all activities yet not engaging in the devotional service of the Lord cannot make one happy. But a thoughtful person engaged in devotional service can achieve the Supreme without delay.
Arjuna is an eternal associate of Kṛṣṇa. He never comes under material illusion. At the same time, however, he agrees to become bewildered under the potency of yoga-māyā, the spiritual potency, and to cooperate in Kṛṣṇa’s pastime of speaking the Bhagavad-gītā for the benefit of us all.
In text 5.1, when Arjuna says “sannyāsaṁ karmaṇāṁ kṛṣṇa, punar yogaṁ ca śaṁsasi,” he uses the word sannyāsa for renunciation, and yoga, in the sense of karma-yoga, work with devotion that Kṛṣṇa explained in the previous chapters. In the philosophy of the Gītā, “work” and “renunciation” are not mutually exclusive. The whole purpose of the text is to teach us to be renounced while working for Kṛṣṇa. However, Arjuna uses the word sannyāsa in the sense of abandoning all material work, like a jñāni retiring from practical life and dedicating himself to philosophical inquiry and meditation. What is better? He wants a definitive answer.
In his purport to text 5.1, Prabhupāda gives us a summary of what has been discussed so far:
“In the Second Chapter, preliminary knowledge of the soul and its entanglement in the material body were explained. How to get out of this material encagement by buddhi-yoga, or devotional service, was also explained therein. In the Third Chapter, it was explained that a person who is situated on the platform of knowledge no longer has any duties to perform. And in the Fourth Chapter the Lord told Arjuna that all kinds of sacrificial work culminate in knowledge. However, at the end of the Fourth Chapter, the Lord advised Arjuna to wake up and fight, being situated in perfect knowledge. Therefore, by simultaneously stressing the importance of both work in devotion and inaction in knowledge, Kṛṣṇa has perplexed Arjuna and confused his determination.”
In the second chapter, Kṛṣṇa offered to Arjuna a logical analysis of the difference between the body and the soul and the best path of action. This type of logical philosophical analysis is called Sāṅkhya. Then, in the second part of the chapter, Kṛṣṇa explained the path of buddhi-yoga, working for Kṛṣṇa without material attachment and with deep philosophical understanding. These instructions were deepened in chapters three and four, where the path of karma-yoga, and the topic of transcendental knowledge and the eternal position of the soul were clarified.
Prabhupāda uses the terms buddhi-yoga and karma-yoga almost interchangeably. Both are translated as “devotional service.” The main difference is the emphasis. “Karma-yoga” emphasizes the devotional work itself, often describing the process as a whole, while “buddhi-yoga” is used when the intelligence, or knowledge behind the work, is emphasized, indicating the mature stage of the process.
In 2.39, when Kṛṣṇa mentions that “O son of Pṛthā, when you act in such knowledge you can free yourself from the bondage of works,” the words connected with this idea are buddhir yoge and buddhyā yuktaḥ, indicating the spiritual intelligence by which action becomes liberating. In 3.3, when Kṛṣṇa says, “Some are inclined to understand it by empirical, philosophical speculation, and others by devotional service,” the word used for “devotional service” is karma-yogena, indicating the process of devotional work. In both cases, however, the conversation is about devotional service. Karma-yoga is not devoid of knowledge, and buddhi-yoga is not devoid of practical action. The difference between the two is mainly a matter of emphasis: karma-yoga stresses the work offered to Kṛṣṇa, while buddhi-yoga stresses the spiritual intelligence by which that work is properly performed.
The purpose of the whole discussion is to take us out of the path of material action and bring us to the platform of devotional service, where we work for Kṛṣṇa, equipped with transcendental knowledge of our eternal relationship with Him. When Kṛṣṇa mentions in chapter three that a person who is situated on the platform of knowledge has no duties to perform, this means he stops working on the material, fruitive platform. Work continues, but now on the spiritual platform of service to Kṛṣṇa. When He says that all kinds of sacrificial work culminate in knowledge, this means that sacrifices described in the Vedas have as their ultimate goal to elevate us to the platform of devotional service.
Both work in devotion and inaction in knowledge are explained, because they are two steps in the same ladder. The first step is to stop material action by the increase of knowledge. Then, the same knowledge should lead us to the platform of service to Kṛṣṇa. Action does not stop; it is spiritualized following the transformation in our consciousness.
Some prefer the path of jñāna, trying to stop material activity through philosophical contemplation. This is also a form of development of knowledge, but it is not on the same level. Prabhupāda often dismisses it as simply “mental speculation.” In most cases, that’s what it is. That’s why he starts his purport to 5.1 by mentioning that “In this Fifth Chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā, the Lord says that work in devotional service is better than dry mental speculation.” When Arjuna mentions “sannyāsaṁ karmaṇāṁ kṛṣṇa”, he refers to this path, questioning if this path of jñāna is better than devotional service.
In text 5.2, Kṛṣṇa answers that the path of jñāna can also lead to liberation. Many great sages in the past took this path. The point is that this path is much less effective, and much more difficult than the path of devotional service Kṛṣṇa recommends in the Gītā. Nowadays, there is practically no one properly following it. The so-called jñānis in modern times are usually Māyāvādīs and different classes of mental speculators that have no idea of the goal of life. Kṛṣṇa refers to sages of previous ages, who would sometimes be able to follow the proper path, while Prabhupāda, in his purport, focuses on the practical situation in modern times.
For a kṣatriya and family man like Arjuna, the path of devotional service is the right process, as Kṛṣṇa insists, and for lesser men, the difference is even greater. Great sages may be able to attain liberation by accepting sannyāsa and following the path of jñāna, but this is not practical for people of our age. Prabhupāda emphasizes this point in his purport to text 5.2, when he mentions that “Therefore, jñāna (or knowledge that one is not this material body but spirit soul) is not sufficient for liberation. One has to act in the status of spirit soul, otherwise there is no escape from material bondage.”
Kṛṣṇa then, in text 5.3, makes again the point that true renunciation is not to renounce the activity, but to renounce the fruits of the activity, performing them as an act of devotion to Him: “One who neither hates nor desires the fruits of his activities is known to be always renounced. Such a person, free from all dualities, easily overcomes material bondage and is completely liberated, O mighty-armed Arjuna.”
Attachment and aversion exist on the material platform. We desire things that are interpreted as pleasant by the mind, and reject what feels unpleasant. This duality shows that we are acting on the material platform, identified with the body and mind. A jñāni may be able to temporarily stop the activities of the senses, but any agitation can cause havoc. Many great sages fall with apsarās, and Saubhari Muni broke his austerities to marry 50 princesses after seeing fish copulating.
A devotee, however, is safe in his renunciation, for he uses his senses to serve Kṛṣṇa. The soul is active by nature, and in the process of devotional service, this natural impulse is simply redirected, in an easy and natural process. When a devotee renounces the fruits of work, this renunciation is also not sentimental. It is solidly grounded in the understanding of the temporary nature of this world and his transcendental relationship with Kṛṣṇa.
Such a devotee is called a nitya-sannyāsī, one who is always renounced. He is the perfect type of renunciant. By using this term, Kṛṣṇa unmistakably answers Arjuna’s question: A devotee becomes a better renunciant without ever abandoning his duties. Real renunciation is not in stopping activity, but in renouncing the fruits and the sense of proprietorship. Mechanical renunciation is artificial; real renunciation means to work for Kṛṣṇa.
To make a show of stopping working is easy, especially when the work is not pleasant, as in the case of Arjuna. To continue working, despite all inconveniences, for a higher purpose, without expecting results, and without considering oneself the doer—that is the real deal.
As Prabhupāda explains in his purport to text 5.3:
“One who is fully in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is always a renouncer because he feels neither hatred nor desire for the results of his actions. Such a renouncer, dedicated to the transcendental loving service of the Lord, is fully qualified in knowledge because he knows his constitutional position in his relationship with Kṛṣṇa. He knows fully well that Kṛṣṇa is the whole and that he is part and parcel of Kṛṣṇa. Such knowledge is perfect because it is qualitatively and quantitatively correct. The concept of oneness with Kṛṣṇa is incorrect because the part cannot be equal to the whole. Knowledge that one is one in quality yet different in quantity is correct transcendental knowledge leading one to become full in himself, having nothing to aspire to or lament over. There is no duality in his mind because whatever he does, he does for Kṛṣṇa. Being thus freed from the platform of dualities, he is liberated – even in this material world.”
Kṛṣṇa goes, however, still further, by claiming that the path of jñāna (Sāṅkhya) is actually non-different from the path of devotional service. This point was already explained. Knowledge can bring one to the stage of spiritual realization, and from spiritual realization one can advance further by practicing devotional service. Jñāna is thus a preliminary path that, when perfected, brings one to bhakti. If, however, one is directly elevated to the platform of devotional service by association with devotees, there is no need to practice jñāna separately, for by serving Kṛṣṇa one gets everything the jñāni obtains, and more. Prabhupāda defines it perfectly in his purport: “The real student of Sāṅkhya philosophy finds the root of the material world, Viṣṇu, and then, in perfect knowledge, engages himself in the service of the Lord. Therefore, in essence, there is no difference between the two because the aim of both is Viṣṇu. Those who do not know the ultimate end say that the purposes of Sāṅkhya and karma-yoga are not the same, but one who is learned knows the unifying aim in these different processes.”
This connection between bhakti and jñāna is further developed by Kṛṣṇa in texts 5.5 and 5.6:
“One who knows that the position reached by means of analytical study can also be attained by devotional service, and who therefore sees analytical study and devotional service to be on the same level, sees things as they are.
Merely renouncing all activities yet not engaging in the devotional service of the Lord cannot make one happy. But a thoughtful person engaged in devotional service can achieve the Supreme without delay.”
In this whole passage, the word Sāṅkhya is used in the sense of analytical study that leads to knowledge (jñāna). At a lower level, it is little more than mental speculation, but on a higher level, Sāṅkhya becomes a process of devotional service that we can study in the teachings of Lord Kapila (Third Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam). The first step is to understand the difference between matter and spirit, and then to become detached from matter. From this point, one practices devotional service to become attached to Kṛṣṇa. Superficially, it appears that there are two separate processes, one leading to detachment and the other to attachment, but this is only until we understand how it works.
Kṛṣṇa elaborates on this point in 18.54: “One who is thus transcendentally situated at once realizes the Supreme Brahman and becomes fully joyful. He never laments or desires to have anything. He is equally disposed toward every living entity. In that state he attains pure devotional service unto Me.”
The goal of the process of jñāna is to bring one to the stage of liberation. Liberation, however, is just the start of another road that brings one to the stage of pure devotional service to Kṛṣṇa. The first stage brings one to the stage of detachment from the material world, while the second brings one to the eternal position of service to Kṛṣṇa. The only purpose of the first road is to bring one to the second. Therefore, two persons in the same position, one coming from the road of jñāna and the other having directly started on the road of devotional service are non-different. This is what Kṛṣṇa means when he says that a person who sees things as they are sees that the position reached by analytical study can also be attained by devotional service.
In text 5.6, however, He again emphasizes the intrinsic difference of the two paths. The path of jñāna is limited; it can help in the beginning, but without the transition to devotional service, philosophy and dry renunciation alone will not make anyone happy, because the soul is active by nature. If activity is stopped externally but we don’t become engaged on the spiritual platform, the mind and senses will again be attracted to material objects. On the other hand, the thoughtful person engaged in devotional service reaches Brahman without delay because his activities are purified instead of suppressed.
Main points in the purports of Śrīla Prabhupāda:
“Arjuna said: O Kṛṣṇa, first of all You ask me to renounce work, and then again You recommend work with devotion. Now will You kindly tell me definitely which of the two is more beneficial?”
a) The second chapter explains the encagement of the soul and how to become free from it by devotional service. The third chapter explains that material duties cease when a person attains the platform of knowledge, and the fourth chapter explains that all types of sacrifices culminate in transcendental knowledge. The fifth chapter explains that devotional service is better than dry renunciation, because it frees one from all reactions, by properly engaging one’s tendency for action.
b) However, in the fourth chapter, Kṛṣṇa also stresses inaction in knowledge, while at the same time urging Arjuna to stand and fight. This perplexed Arjuna.
c) Arjuna understands that renunciation in knowledge implies stopping all forms of fruitive work. The point he is missing is that devotional service is a different category of activity that is entirely on the transcendental platform, producing no material reaction (akarma). He thinks that sannyāsa, renunciation in knowledge, should be free from all kinds of activity, because work and renunciation appear to be incompatible.
“The Personality of Godhead replied: The renunciation of work and work in devotion are both good for liberation. But, of the two, work in devotional service is better than renunciation of work.”
a) Fruitive activities based on sense gratification are the basis of our material bondage. As long as one identifies with the body and works to improve its condition, it’s inevitable to continue transmigrating from one body to the other. This is caused by not knowing our real spiritual identity as a soul. The way to escape it is to develop a taste for devotional service, even though at first the mind may be engrossed in material activities.
b) Just knowledge of the difference between the body and the soul (jñāna) is not sufficient. One has to act like a soul. Acting like a soul means acting in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Without acting spiritually, just dry renunciation is not sufficient to cleanse the heart from material contamination.
c) As long as the heart is not purified, one has to perform fruitive actions. Kṛṣṇa consciousness, however, allows one to act and at the same time remain free from material results. It is a process much superior to dry renunciation, a process in which one can fall easily.
d) Real renunciation means understanding that everything belongs to the Lord. If everything belongs to Kṛṣṇa, where is the question of renouncing? We should instead use everything in His service. This is the perfect form of action in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
“One who neither hates nor desires the fruits of his activities is known to be always renounced. Such a person, free from all dualities, easily overcomes material bondage and is completely liberated, O mighty-armed Arjuna.”
a) A devotee in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness is fully qualified in knowledge, because he knows his eternal position in relationship with Kṛṣṇa. He is beyond material duality, with no desire or hatred for material results.
b) The part cannot be equal to the whole, and similarly, the individual soul cannot become equal to Kṛṣṇa. Correct transcendental knowledge means to understand we are one in quality but different in quantity. Understanding his subordinate position, a devotee does everything for Kṛṣṇa and becomes liberated even while living in this world.
“Only the ignorant speak of devotional service [karma-yoga] as being different from the analytical study of the material world [Sāṅkhya]. Those who are actually learned say that he who applies himself well to one of these paths achieves the results of both.”
a) The goal of Sāṅkhya, analytical study, is to find out the soul of all existence, Viṣṇu. Once the root of the tree is found, the next step is to water the root; in other words, engage in the service of the Lord in perfect knowledge. Therefore, one who is learned sees that the aims of Sāṅkhya and karma-yoga are the same. Both aim to situate one in his eternal position of service to the Lord.
“One who knows that the position reached by means of analytical study can also be attained by devotional service, and who therefore sees analytical study and devotional service to be on the same level, sees things as they are.”
a) The real purpose of philosophical research is to find the ultimate goal of life. The goal is self-realization. Sāṅkhya leads to the conclusion that the soul is not part of the material world. Being connected with the Supreme, one’s actions must be conducted in relation to Him. This leads one to act in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, in his constitutional position.
b) This again shows that Sāṅkhya and karma-yoga are not disconnected. Sāṅkhya means to become detached from matter, while karma-yoga means to become attached to Kṛṣṇa. Detachment from matter and attachment to Kṛṣṇa are one and the same. One who can see this sees things as they are.
“Merely renouncing all activities yet not engaging in the devotional service of the Lord cannot make one happy. But a thoughtful person engaged in devotional service can achieve the Supreme without delay.”
a) There are two classes of persons in the renounced order of life. Māyāvādī sannyāsīs are engaged in the study of the Vedānta-sūtras, following the commentary of Śaṅkarācārya, while Vaiṣṇava sannyāsīs study following the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.
b) Vaiṣṇavas follow the process of pāñcarātrikī-vidhi and have thus many engagements in the worship of the Lord, positively engaging their senses. They are thus happy here in performing their transcendental duties, and have the guarantee of entering the spiritual sky at the end.
c) Māyāvādīs, on the other hand, try to artificially stop all activities. Their process is thus very difficult, because they try to stop material activities without enjoyment on the spiritual platform. As their dry study becomes tedious, they sometimes come to study the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, but without proper understanding, they take no benefit from that as well. They thus sometimes go back to material activities.
d) These sannyāsīs, engaged in speculation about what is Brahman and what is not Brahman, may also come to Kṛṣṇa consciousness, but only after many births. Those who are already engaged in Kṛṣṇa-conscious activities are much better situated.
Read the entire book:
« The Song of God—Volume 1, chapters 1-6
This is a publication for thoughtful readers who want to go deeper into Kṛṣṇa consciousness. I publish daily, trying to offer high-quality spiritual content, and all posts are available to free subscribers. If you wish, you can also choose a paid subscription to support this work.
You can also receive the updates on WhatsApp or Telegram.
If you would like to contribute further, you can find the donation links here.