Giving up Merit and Sin

Dr. Nikhil asked: Padanamaskarams Swamiji! In the recent message given to Smt. Bindiya Chaudhry on December 1, 2018, You have said that greed which causes a person to earn money through corrupt means is sin and that deep analysis is very important in deciding what is sin and what is not sin. In support of this statement, You have quoted the verse from the Gītā “Buddhiyukto jahātīha”. This verse talks about giving up both merit and sin and join yoga since such yoga is skillful action. I am not sure how the verse fits in this context. My understanding of this verse is somewhat in the sense of “Sarvadharmān parityajya…” i.e., the soul who has thoroughly understood spiritual knowledge (buddhiyukto), surrenders to God (yogāya yujjasva) and works for God. He gives up thinking about merit and sin (jahātīha ubhe sukṛta duṣkṛte). Such work is real skillful action since success is assured in God’s work due to God’s unimaginable grace. Also, the servant is free of tension due to faith in God, so, the work also happens efficiently. I seek Your kind clarification in this matter. Your servant. Nikhil

Swami replied:- You are correct in saying that ‘Yoga’ is the main topic of this verse since the third line in this verse says that hence, one shall associate with Yoga (Tasmaat yogaaya…). In the first two lines, the verse means that a person, who is associated with intelligence or analysis leaves both sin (Paapam) and merit (Punyam). The primary step for leaving both types of good and bad deeds is to recognize which is really good deed and which is really bad deed through sharp analysis (Buddhau sharanam...). Unless this primary step is satisfied, the subsequent step, which is leaving both good and bad deeds can’t happen. It is this primary sense of the first step in which I quoted the above verse (Buddhiyukto…). The subsequent step is to leave both good and bad deeds through Yoga after realizing good and bad sides of a good deed and good and bad sides of a bad deed. You have to leave bad sides of both good and bad deeds and this is referred here (Jahaatiiha…).

You have taken this verse along with the above two verses (Duurenahyavaram karma…, Yogasthah kuru karmaani…) and the below verse (karmajam buddhiyukataa hi…) is also to be taken along with the three verses for completing a specific concept called Yoga since these four verses establish the concept of Yoga as the primary topic.

Opponent:- If both good and bad deeds (without looking at good and bad sides of each deed since a good deed is totally good and a bad deed is totally bad) are left, there is no deed leftover. Hence, this means leaving all the deeds. When all the deeds are leftover, there is no need of analysis to distinguish good and bad deeds. Therefore, your primary sense has no place in this verse.

Swami:- You mean that this verse says about leaving all deeds, which is impossible as told by the Gita (nahi kashchchit kshanamapi...). Not only this, the Gita says that one shall do certain deeds like social work (Lokasamgrahamevaapi…), worldly duties for livelihood (shariirayaatraapicha te…) etc. When all the deeds are to be left, how can the Gita recommend certain deeds? This means that there are certain deeds, which are different from good and bad deeds like work to earn, social work etc. If earning for livelihood is not done it is bad deed. By this earning for livelihood is good deed. Similarly, social service. If you say that the deeds recommended by the Gita are also good deeds, in such case, as per your meaning of the above verse (Buddhiyukto…) the recommended duties are also to be left since these duties are good, which must be left as per the verse. But, the Gita orders to do certain duties and the order is clearly seen by using the verbs like ‘Kuru’ (kuru karmaani), ‘Bhava’ (matkarma paramo bhava) coming under the sense of order (vidhi ling). In the above verse the verb (Jahaati) used is only in present tense (vartamana lat). Order surpasses the present tense in implementing force. Hence, proper analysis must be done to recognize good deeds to be done and bad deeds to be leftover. If good and bad deeds are crystal clear by themselves, this verse saying that both good and bad deeds are leftover contradicts the other verses of the Gita. Hence, this verse must mean that the bad side of good deed thought by you as good deed must be leftover. Similarly the bad side of bad deed thought by you as bad deed also must be leftover. This results that both good and bad deeds as per your superficial classification must be leftover after investigating good and bad sides of both good and bad deeds.

Often, people question that since God created bad qualities, souls are trapped by those and do sins. Hence, the creator is indirect sadist to tempt the souls to do sins and punish them for sins. This argument is totally wrong since the so called bad qualities have both meritorious as well as sinful sides. God created these so called bad qualities in view of their meritorious side only and hence, originally these were good qualities only. The souls turned these good qualities into wrong side due to the freedom given to them by God in course of long time after creation since they were bored with long good discipline. But, God pointed out the sinful sides of these good qualities and warned the souls regarding the subsequent punishments. God is coming as incarnations to preach mainly this topic (Pravrutti). In spite of all this, ignorant people blame God! The main three sins, which are the main gates of hell as told in the Gita can be examined to show the meritorious and sinful sides of these sins:-

1) Lust in sex (kaama):- The meritorious side of sex is to generate issues for next generation. The sex with wife is perfectly justified to produce children (Dharmaaviruddhah kaamosmi- Gita). The intensive sex done frequently (lust) with the wife is also justified since the time of release of ovum is uncertain and life of sperm is very short. Hence, the union of both requires frequent trails based on several hindering gynecological factors inviting frequent sex for producing children. Hence, lust has good side. When an unjust worldly bond is selected for sex, it is the sinful side and this is done by the souls based on the freedom, which alone is to be leftover. An ordinary human being of Pravrutti should not leave the total sex blindly without recognizing the internal sub-classification. Very few exceptional souls of Nivrutti like Shankara, Ramakrishna etc., left the total sex not by any forced effort since it was natural subsequent consequence of extreme attachment to God, who are out of the context of Pravrutti or Karmaadhikaara (eligible for worldly work also).

2) Violence (krodha):- The originally created good side is to become angry on students and issues by teachers and parents respectively to guide them to right path in Pravrutti. Even killing a devilish soul is the good side of violence on part of the court (here, law should not be taken into hands by the individual) and God (Vinaashaaya cha dushkrutaam— Gita). Even God Rama, the embodiment of justice and peace is described as the person becoming angry and even killing in proper place (Sthaanakrodhah prahartaa cha— Ramaayanam). The sinful side of this quality is to become angry to hurt or even to kill good people.

3) Greediness (lobha):- The original good side is not to donate to undeserving receivers and to donate deserving receivers. The sinful side of this is to donate to undeserving receivers and not to donate to deserving receivers. Unless you save money avoiding undeserving donations, you can’t do deserving donations since the finance is limited in the case of almost all human beings. Only very few are rich. Even if you are rich, the sinful side of greediness must be avoided and its meritorious side must be implemented. In the Mahaabhaaratam it is clearly told that both donation to undeserving and greediness towards deserving are sins.

The other three vices (Moha, Mada and Maatsarya) have also both good and bad sides. These three limited to their boundaries only are not dangerous to yield punishments in hell. Their consequential deeds may become punishable sins.

4) Fascination (Moha):- Fascination to family is good side in Pravrutti and Moha to God is better side both in Pravrutti and Nivrutti. Moha to unjust illegal bonds is sin in Pravrutti. Moha concentrated only on all worldly bonds is bad side in both Nivrutti and Pravrutti (The only fascination to worldly bonds by itself is not a punishable sin, but, bad since the spiritual progress is stopped. Such extreme moha to worldly bonds without moha to God may lead the soul to do the punishable sin in Pravrutti also.). In overall sense, moha to God is good side and moha to worldly bonds is bad side.

5) Pride (Mada):- The good side is to have self-confidence and the bad side is to have ego. Limited pride is self-confidence like the normal temperature of the body. If the pride grows beyond certain limit, it is ego like the fever with higher temperature. If the confidence drops down below certain limit also, it is like fall of temperature below normal level leading to danger. Undr confidence leads to fear to do even normal works. In Nivrutti, a devotee can be proud of being the disciple of God Datta. But, this pride shall not take negative direction to look down at the other forms of God Datta and this is bad side resulting due to ignorance of spiritual knowledge preached by God Datta.

6) Jealousy (Maatsarya):- The good side is to develop jealousy towards better people and put efforts to reach their level or even to surpass them to become best. Envy in knowledge brings growth (spardhayaa vardhate vidyaa). The bad side is to pull down their legs by false blame to become equal with them or even to suppress them below the one’s own level to become better than them.

Ego and jealousy existing on wrong sides develop repulsion towards the human incarnation in this world and develop repulsion with energetic incarnation after death in the upper worlds. Both these are very important in Nivrutti so that the soul shall not miss God here or there.

Even the good qualities have both meritorious and sinful sides to be found by analysis. To worship God is a good quality and the good side of this is to worship God based on true love without aspiration for any fruit in return from Him. The bad side of this is to worship God based on artificial love for the sake of a fruit from Him. Social service is a good quality which has both good and bad sides. A politician doing social service for getting votes to earn sinful money through a position on winning is the bad side. Social service done by Mahatmaa Gandhi, Mother Theresa etc., with the goal of helping needy souls in the name of God is the good side. In ancient days, Yajna was also the social service done to feed hungry people along with spiritual debates and prayers to God and this was the good side of it. The bad side of Yajna is to do the same Yajna for heavenly pleasures after death (or even for worldly pleasures in this life without spiritual knowledge and devotion to God). The Puurvamiimamsaa is the bad side of Yajna, which was condemned by Shankara.

What is the meaning of the word yoga?—Yoga means simply union (based on the root verb ‘yuj’) or association or attainment. Dhana yoga means attaining wealth. Putrayoga means attaining issues. Hence, the attainable item for which the effort is put must be mentioned before the word yoga as prefix or the word yoga must be defined in that context. Today, it has become a fashion to speak the word yoga independently! In Nivrutti also, yoga is used in full form like Buddhiyoga or Jnaanayoga, Bhaktiyoga, Karmayoga etc. ‘Associate with association’ is the meaning of ‘Yogaaya yujyasva’ uttered in this verse, which has no meaning since it is repetition of union. Hence, the word yoga is immediately defined in the subsequent line as ‘Yoga means talent in actions (yogah karmasu kaushalam)’. This meaning of the word yoga is limited to this verse only and shall not be extended to every place. Here, since the word yoga is used without any prefix, its definition is given. Similarly, the word yoga without prefix is used in saying that one shall do actions by situating in yoga, having no attachment, becoming equal to profit and loss and yoga, here, means equality (Yogasthah kuru karmaani…, Samatvam Yoga…). Hence, whenever prefix is absent, the word yoga is defined in that context and such definition shall not be extended everywhere. Wherever the prefix is used, the meaning is clear and no separate definition for yoga is needed there.

Taking misery and happiness in equal way is told to be yoga (Samatvam yoga uchyate) as you enjoy hot dishes and sweet dishes in meals equally. This does not mean that sweet and hot dishes are one and the same. When you eat sweet dish cold tears of happiness appear and while eating hot dish hot tears of misery appear and hence, the symptoms of enjoyment also differ. But, the end fruit, which is joy, is equal in both. The simile is true in the case of souls, which enjoy both sweet and hot dishes in the final stage (after eating) of enjoyment of the fruit of eating meals, which is joy. But, similarly, the soul can’t enjoy misery and happiness with equal joy in the real world. The reason is that world is real to soul. God can enjoy both misery and happiness in this world equally like the human being (soul) enjoying comedy and tragedy in the cinema. For God world is unreal and hence can enjoy both equally. For the soul cinema is unreal and world is real and hence the soul can’t enjoy comedy and tragedy equally in this real world. Soul is different from God in not having the powers of creation, maintenance and destruction of this world. Even in the enjoyment of tragedy and comedy in the world, the soul is different from God. Hence, monism between God and soul is impossible in any angle and this is the view of Madhva. Monism is possible if God wishes to become the human being due to His omnipotence. Monism in enjoyment also can’t be achieved by the soul even through its effort. Only grace of God can bring such monism (Eshvaraanugrahaadeva…). If God wishes, the soul can become God when God merges with the soul resulting in complete monism. Hence, such equality (Yoga) is in the hands of God only. Such equality in enjoyment is again related to the experience, which is theoretical phase only. Such equality is not in the physical world and hence tragedy and comedy or their symptoms are never equal. This theoretical phase of equality is also related to thought or knowledge only and hence Buddhiyoga is mentioned prominently in these four verses. The physical actions are said to be just inert and pitiable (Krupanaah…) followers of the thought decided by analysis done through intelligence (Duurenahyavaram…). Even though the equality in enjoyment of both happiness and misery (Yoga) is possible only to God in full extent, the soul can try for it by detaching from the fruit of the action (Samgam tyaktvaa…) to certain extent, which in full extent is possible only to God. Since this yoga is very useful in the service of God, God will bless the devotee trying for such equality of enjoyment in this real world. The soul is attached to the fruit due to its inherent limited selfishness and hence putting effort in this direction is also not permanent. For permanent equality in joy to come from both tragedy and comedy in this world, God’s grace is very essential. In the case of a person doing social service, this detachment from fruit exists since it is the work for others. But, full time social work is not possible since selfish work is inevitable at least in the case of work to be done for livelihood. If the word yoga is used without any prefix or definition, it must be taken as the attainment of the grace of God since His grace is needed from the very basic level in Pravrutti and Nivrutti. If you want the word yoga to be used in the sense of attainment of God Himself, only the attainment of relevant incarnation of God becomes the understood meaning of the word yoga.

In the verse “Buddhiyukto…”, yoga is told as the talent in the actions. The talent also belongs to knowledge only and not to the inert actions. The analysis shows us the good and bad sides of both merits and sins. After identifying which is good side and which is bad side as per the analysis given above, the actions are to be done. Without this analysis thinking that a bad quality is totally bad and a good quality is totally good, which ends in total leaving the bad quality or total accepting a good quality and such leaving and acceptance must be leftover (Jahaatiiha…), which is talent or Yoga. In these three verses (Yogasthah…, Duurenahyavaram…and Buddhiyukto…) the service to God (Karmasamnyaasa) is explained. In the fourth verse (Karmajam…phalam tyaktvaa) the sacrifice of fruit of work is mentioned. All these four verses deal with the practical devotion or Karma Yoga to be done for God as Karmasamnyaasa (prior three verses) and Karmaphalatyaaga (fourth verse).

Through sharp analysis by intelligence (Buddhi yukto…) one recognizes which is good side and which is bad side of both merit and sin and involves in or withdraws from the good and bad actions respectively. By this analysis, one leaves the external general classification of sin and merit (decided by mere general and external classification of both categories without discriminating good and bad sides of both categories). For example:- Without analysis one rejects anger totally everywhere without applying anger in proper place also (bad side of good deed). He performs worship to God as good deed for some fruit (bad side of good deed) without knowing that worship shall be done through real love only and not for fruit (good side of good deed). But, by analysis one identifies both good and bad sides of each quality, which is considered as good or bad through ignorant classification. This Buddhi Yoga is leaving total merit and total sin without identifying the inner good and bad sides of both merit and sin. Such leaving of merit and sin as the two general categories is done in the presence of analysis (like not to be angry everywhere or worship God for fruits). On analysis by sharp intelligence, the bad side of anger is only left and the bad side of God’s worship is only left. This is the meaning of leaving (bad sides of) both merit and sin (Jahaatiiha ubhe sukruta dushkrute). Such leaving (bad sides of) both merit and sin by analysis (Buddhiyukto) is the meaning of this verse. This is the identification of actual merit and actual sin and with such sharp talent only the actions are to be done.

The entire Gita is taught on the topic based on fight with grandfather (Bhishma) and teacher (Drona), which may lead even in killing both the most respectable personalities for Arjuna (Katham Bhishmamaham…). Arjuna has taken killing the respectable elders as the sin, which is based on the external ignorant clarification. This sin has both good and bad sides. The good side of this sin is that one should not kill any good person and especially good respectable elders. The bad side of this sin is not to kill respectable elders even if they are bad. Bhishma and Drona did not control Kauravas while they were insulting Draupadi in the court by attempting to make her naked before all. This is the extreme sin. Both these personalities are very powerful and capable to control this climax sin. They kept silent and silence means acceptance, which makes both these persons come under the category of supporter (Anumodaka). Hence, both are sinners and shall be punished according to the sharp classification of merit and sin, which reveal both good and bad sides of both merit and sin. This is the heart of Krishna in this context of these verses.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★