The Gita’s Ethics (A Critical Study)

by Arpita Chakraborty | 2017 | 59,351 words

This essay studies the Ethical Teachings of the Gita, as presented in the Mahabharata in the form of a dialogue between Krishna and Arjuna. Ancient Indian ethics as evolved from the Vedas developed through the Upanisads, the Gita, Mahabharata, Ramayana and finally reached the Dharma-Shastras such as the Manusmriti. As the means to liberation, the e...

Chapter 5 - Conclusion

< Previous

The ethics of the Gita is inseparably connected with metaphysics. Karma determines the form of the material covering the subtle body and the summum bonum of life is to reverse the process by releasing the soul from its covering by gradual stages, through successive births and rebirths and finally get mukti that is emancipation by its absorption in the universal soul.

It would appear to a casual reader of the Gita that several aspects of a problem have been discussed in the Gita without definitely stating which of them it supports. For example, whether the way of knowledge or devotion or action is the best. Similar questions may arise as to whether the Gita supports the worship of the manifested God or unmanifested Absolute, a nature of both of which it discusses. All this questions are indeed legitimate on account of the manner in which the subject has been treated in different portions of the Gita and answers to this question cannot be given unless we appreciate the line of approach taken by the Gita in tackling the most complex and abstruse problems of human nature. This line of approach itself cannot be understood unless we appreciate what were the prevalent options of the day which the Gita either attempted to justify or to modify. It is impossible to grasp the trend of discussion of these problems in the Gita without knowledge of this background. The Gita has, indeed, struck a new path of solving the intricate problems of human conduct but that path being one of the adjustment of the decaying and unsuitable old with the growing feeling of a new way of life, it cannot be fully understood unless we know what the Gita wanted to reconstruct and how it proceeds to do so.

The Gita recognizes that karma or deeds are a binding force. It speaks of karma bandhana (B.G ii.39 iv.14, iv, 41, ix.9). Karma is the causative force in the universe; it brings about rebirth, punarjanma. (xiv.14,xiv,.15).

The Brhadaranyaka Upanisad states elsewhere:

“Even as one acts, even as he behaves, so does he become. The doer of good becomes good, the doer of evil becomes evil…… whatever deeds he performs, that he becomes (or attains)”^[1].

Even in the oldest book of the Rgveda Samhita we come across a clear and direct reference to the word karma^[2] and the word ‘Sukrta’^[3] in the meaning of ‘doing’ and ‘good deed’ respectively. Therefore as we are determined our future according to our karma so our rebirth is also depends upon our karma of the previous life. Samsara is the field of dharma and karma. These are the means which makes accession to knowledge possible. They are the gateways to the self. They are not related to the ultimate reality. However, they are necessary pre-conditions for the experience of pure being.

The Gita states that all the lokas (worlds) in the universe, from brahmaloka downwards, are worlds in which there is rebirth (punarjanma).

The B.G xviii, 60 maintains that the consequences of the karmas have to be experienced.

svabhavajena nibadhah Svena Karmana

“One is naturally bound by one’s karmas” (B.G xviii, 60)

And that the cycle of existence is a fulfillment of the law of karma; bhramayan Sarvabhutani. The creatures are made to go round in Samsara (universe) in accordance with their karmas. In brief, the Gita accepts the doctrine of rebirth in accordance with the quality of actions of a deceased individual; the karmas determine the gati of the soul of an individual. It assumes the personal responsibility of an individual for bearing the consequences of his actions. According to the Gita (v, 14,) God does not create the doer, the deeds, and the consequences of deeds, karmaphala samyoga.

They function automatically:

na kartrtvam na karmani lokasya srjati prabhuh na karmaphala samyogam svabhavastu pravartate.

These (the doer, the deed, and the result of the deed) exist as an inherent feature of life.

The Gita says that desire and anger born of his passion, all consuming and all sinful are the factors responsible for this and these should treat as enemies.

‘karma esha krodha eshah rajoguna-samudbhavah.
maha-shano maha-papma vidhi-enam-iha-Vairinam. (iii, 37)

“This is craving, this is wrath, born of the mode of passion, all devouring and most sinful. Know this to be the enemy here”.

It is within our competence to protect ourselves from these evil factors which lead us to astray. We should ourselves raise our levels, not allowing our stature to recede and go down. No external agent can do this for us, for we are ourselves our friends and foes (vi, 5). For this we must adopt a balanced attitude of life. Our diet and recreation should be moderate. Our inclination to actions has to be temperate and our sleep and wakefulness has to be regulated. This balance and poise shall rid us of all ills. (vi,17). Krishna condemns Arjuna for harbouring unmanly emotion which blinds one to one’s own interests, weakens one for action, and blurs one’s discriminative abilities making him like a dead man. Krishna spends a long time preaching that it is irrational to lament for the death of the body. The message is brought home finally by invoking the esoteric doctrines of the immortality of the soul and rebirth. The essential being of a person, the soul, is declared destructible. After each death it is reborn. It casts away bodies like a man who discards old clothes and gets new one. A wise man does not identify himself with his body.

The overall character of Krishna’s argument is clearly ethical. Krishna makes it clear that for a man in his position it was moral obligation to fight. Its force is to the effect that righteous war must be fought independently of considerations of personal gain or loss. It is his moral duty to fight with the motive of duty alone.

A particular activity becomes out of the mode of human existence when it comes to be subjected to the determination of the law of our self, called dharma. Thus, an action is spiritual only to the extent to which it is determined by our dharma. What awaited Arjuna at the battlefield of Kurukshetra was a certain type of activity, namely, engaging himself in a warfare of. He was so much under the influence of infatuation that he was able to see the futility of his desire to take to renunciation. The law of dharma reasserted itself and Arjuna then was able to realize that acting in accordance with the supreme law of his self was the only way to true peace and tranquility. If dharma has an unconditional and necessary claim on us it is cowardice, therefore, to run away from it.

Therefore, says the Gita,

“He who does not help turn the wheel thus set in motion in this world is evil in his nature, sensual in his delights, and he lives in vain”(iii, 16).

Thus dharma and karma are the two sides of the coin of individual existence. Karma is constituted by what is possible for the newborn by virtue of a long series of past experiences whether they be success or failures. Dharma is defined by the precise character and need of the new existential situation in which birth occurred. The dharma requires a human being whose particular karma makes it possible for him or her to perform the dharma. The key to the spiritual life is indeed the transmutation of karma into dharma. It is the ability to make of the past, as Franklin Roosevelt said, only a prelude to the future-a ‘noble’ future. Nobility, in the deepest and truest sense of the world, is the capacity to serve the purpose of a greater whole-in-the-making; that is, the exteriorization of a new archetypal system of organization whose time to be concretely manifested has come according to the rhythm of social, planetary, or cosmic evolution. Dharma embraces all these factors which contribute to the progress and well being of the individual, society and the world at large. These factors include both the possession of virtues (gunas) and proper discharge of one’s duty (karma). Dharma plays a crucial role in not only ensuring a good life here and now, but also in enabling one to attain the state of supreme good or liberation, from which there is no lapsing back into karma and rebirth. When dharma is followed throughout one’s life, it is not at all possible to do any kind of evil karma, or cause any kind of harm to others, for reaping whose consequences alone any rebirth becomes necessary according to the Hindu world view. Karma or Right Action is basically action that is determined by dharma Actions which are made without taking into account the principles of dharma becomes distorted.

The word dharma is often used as if it were the same as religion. This is unfortunate, and this mistake should be avoided. There is a great difference between dharma and religion. Dharma is law of life and development, and it is based upon the knowledge of the underlying truths of the universe. Religion on the other hand, is predominantly a system of beliefs and practices of rituals and ceremonies; religion also tends to become an institution which pervades the structure of the society. Each religion has its own set of doctrines and system of worship. But dharma has no creed or systems or beliefs; it is based upon knowledge and can be practiced and applied; it can be verified and tested. Dharma is the inner spirit of commitment to abide by the law of life and development. Karma is connected with inner spirit of sacrifice and self-giving. Every action that is involved in inner renunciation of the sense of possession and attachment can rightly be called karma or right action.

The greatest fear of human beings is that of disintegration; this fear impels them to acquire support of objects and relationships by means of which they try to overcome the process of disintegration. It is this acquisition of objects and relationships that creates attachments and sense of possession. Human beings are thus sustained by a net of objects and relationships, the strongest thread of which is the sense of attachment and possession. But however, strong this net may be, it is built by ignorance of true Self. Form when the true Self is realized, one finds that it does not need to have the fear of disintegration, since it is by its very nature permanent and indestructible. Renunciation of attachments and sense of possession is the means by which the true self is realized.

Karma or the Law of Karma is an essential element to the Upanisadic concept of rebirth. The doctrine is as old as the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad, where the principle of karma is regarded as a great secret not to spoken of in public. The law of karma is essentially a law of moral justice. It determines the desert of man in next birth according to the moral justice. It determines the desert of man in next birth according to the moral quality of his actions in the present birth and the merit of these actions. Some sort of determinism is implied in the ethics of rebirth. The acts which have been done cannot be undone. Their fruit in present or future life will certainly be according to the principles of moral justice. But the Law of Karma has been extended so far that even the present action is believed to be determined by past actions. Karma has come to be used as synonymous with fate. This is tantamount to complete determinism in life. The Law of Karma, in popular faith, has come to signify such complete determinism in life. Indian faith and philosophy have been accused of supporting such a depressing view of life. The ethical Law of Karma does not imply complete determination. Action is contingent, temporal and terminating. The fruit of action is also so. The dynamics of past is exhausted in its fruition. Hence action is exhaustible. There will always be scope of fresh and free action in life, in the endless course of rebirth and transmigration. Transmigration implies no more than moral justice in the context of rebirth. It has been extended in popular faith in the form of complete fatalism. The Gita accepts as axiomatic the doctrine of rebirth; the purpose of its message is to teach Arjuna, type of the ordinary man, that knowledge and devotion and the performance of duty without desire form the three fold path to release. Krishna says: ‘O son of Kunti, thou that are bound by past karma. (xviii,60) The after-effects of the action done are the future of that action. We can understand it by various names such as reward, effect, result, fruit, consequences etc. No action vanishes without producing its result. This is the law of nature and no power can prevent it from not doing so. In this way we find that every karma is bound by its past, which itself is the future of some other karma. In this manner all karmas seem to be controlled. Free actions cannot be performed till we change or modify our impressions through knowledge. No doubt, man is an independent being. He may do whatever he likes. If he so chooses he may put his head under the rolling wheels of the moving train or may stab any one he likes. But here also he is not free, but guided by his impressions. He has got his limitations. He cannot change himself into a bird, if a wish occurs to him to be so. He cannot do what he likes. He is bound by some power of his past deeds, which results in the present and affects him by ways of the duration of his life. The pleasurable and painful experiences, the social status, the particular temperament or mental attitude, are generally admitted as effects of man’s karma. Karma is so powerful that it has its lasting effect in the form of latent impressions. It so affects mankind that it causes inequality of people’s fortunes, it determines external conditions and modifies their nature and temperament through the impressions of the past experiences. On the problem how the effects of karma can be annihilated, the investigations into the nature of action reveal that ultimately it is the desire, which makes man fail to recognize the true nature of things and ultimately cause transmigration.

Yajnavalkya says,

“As is his desire, such is his resolve as is his resolve, such the action he performs; According to his action is he correspondingly changed^[4].

The doctrine of transmigration is closely connected with that of karma.

Whatever we are and whatever we do was linked with the past. The body of man, as Deussen writes,^[5] was argued to be built, of two substrata namely ‘Bhutasraya’ (elements) and ‘Kasmasraya’ (ethical substratum). The latter was formed by the action committed in the course of each life and it also determines the character of the new body and life, accordingly. It is therefore different for each soul and for each life course. It is stated in the Satapathabrahmana that everyman is born in the world fashioned by himself^[6]. As karma is the maker of the destiny of man. He holds that man’s next birth depends on his desires as his desires are, so will be his birth to satisfy them. If those desires have been lift in him, he becomes one with Brahman^[7]. In Valmiki Ramayana, dharma is the ideal round which resolves all activities related to different spheres of life. Dharma, not moksa has been considered as the supreme goal of human life. It is the principle to judge human conducts. It is the means as well as the end in itself.

Valmiki, like every moral thinker, believes that there are two forces in this world, the moral and the immoral. But dharma ultimately swallows adharma.

Dharma is the truth or is the basis of truth.

“dharmo hi paramo loke, dharme satyam pratisthitam^[8] ”

Man’s real nature is clouded by his ego which drives his animal urges, attachment, wrath and fear, to covet, to hate and to fear. Yoga, the law of becoming, is eternal and all pervading. Man is God; only he does not know it. He loves fears and is angry. In so far as he does so, his weak, ailing and miserable. But in reality God lives in him and he lives in God. Man can transmute his animal instincts only if he obeys the law of Moral Causation. This law supports the spiritual order of the universe. It is ineluctable, like the law of Gravitation. If the apple falls from the tree it is drawn to the earth not away from it so it is with this law. The law of moral causation is the law of freedom. This freedom can be our only if we realize that the mind is the cause of freedom or bondage. When freedom is attained however, little, the spirit, which is involved in the mind, will radiate steadily the fundamental aspiration such love, truth, beauty, power, calmness, light and freedom. These aspirations distinguish man from animal. The man who has no such aspirations, we call a demon. When mind so fixed on God the mind remains undisturbed like the unwavering flame; all acts are disconnected from desire for fruits and become offerings to Him. To preserve and maintain dharma the mental content has to be first changed. All religions which believe in God as the creator tend to become fatalistic. ‘Will of God’ is the slogan of all religions. Freedom of action as judgment and zeal in action is derived in religious faith in a sort of confusion about the logical implications of faith. In a way freedom is evident in human life. With all his fatalistic faith man believes in effort in action and does it. But human effort has its limitations. When efforts fail, man leaves things to fate. That is perplexing limitation of human existence. The Gita has emphasized action and exhorted man toward it, though a strain of naturalistic and religious fatalism runs in it also.

The axiological importance of both transmigration and Law of Karma is to be estimated philosophically. Transmigration with its idea of infinite existence not only encourages culturalization of life, it also inspires spiritual discipline in life which implies transcendence of empirical limitation senses, ego and intellect. Transmigration forms an empirical schema and temporal link between transient life and real spiritual transcendence. The infinite temporal cycle of rebirths approximates to transcended spiritual eternity of being. The transcendence of death by subtle body reflects a sort of immortality of being. These are cultural and transcendental objectives of life which have hardly been contemplated by Western thinkers but which constitute the crux of Indian speculation and philosophical discipline.

Indian philosophy regards transmigration as travail and not a mere opportunity. Even as an opportunity it is an occasion for greater and greater spiritual effort for liberation i.e. for attaining transcendence of empirical modes of being and also for termination of the cycle of rebirths and the course of transmigration. Transmigration is still a course in time and of time, however endless it may be. Liberation is a timeless principle and realization of transcendental eternity of being and not of infinite duration which transmigration comes about to be. Karma or the Law of Karma is an essential element to the Upanisadic concept of rebirth. The doctrine is as old as the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad, where the principle of karma is regarded as a great secret not to be spoken in public. In that Upanisad, the Law is covertly assumed:

This is what happens to the man who desires. To whatever his mind is attached, the self becomes that in the next life. Achieving that end, it returns again to this world.^[9]

Desire is thus found to be the root cause of action which determined the pattern of man’s life. Later on, it was interpreted by scholars in various ways and thus not finding desire to be extricated.^[10]

The concept of transmigration becomes clearer and more explicit as one of the very important aspects of the doctrine of karma which we come across in the Brhadaranyaka Upanisad which says that at the same time of the death of man ‘Him follow his knowledge, his words and his former consciousness’.^[11]

Chandogya Upanisad as:

“Man is a creature of will. According as he believes in this world so will he be when he is departed”.^[12]

He finds karma to be responsible for the future existence. What we call fate, is the result of our own deeds. Fate is a ruler whom ourselves have made to rule. In other words we can say that fate is the self-created bondage. We alone are responsible for what we do. We cannot blame God or any other people. Thus according to the theory of karma in Indian Philosophy fate is not a blind chance, but is the result of our own work of the past. Free will is a necessary corollary of this theory. The Law of Karma is a like a curious blend of both descriptive and metaphysical elements. On the one hand it states predicatively that if you do so and so, you can accept certain moral results. The Law of Karma is like the principle of causation: every event must have a cause. Karl Potter has summarized this similarity very well of the law of causation he observes:

Thus the “law of causation” is not a law at all, but a principle. As such it serves an extremely important function: it formulates a basic presupposition of scientific inquiry…;

And of the “Law of Karma” is to be thought of as parallel in function to the “law of causation,” it, too, must be viewed as a principle, a principle which formulates a certain program for moral inquiry.^[13]

The point that karma must be an assumption or pre-supposition and that it cannot, as a consequence be proved by any of the valid means of knowledge has been pointed out Eliot Deutsch in his book Advaita Vedanta, A philosophical Reconstruction. Deutsch refers to the Law of Karma as a “convenient fiction”, for it enables the Indian to solve a number of rather baffling problems that would otherwise be insoluble. Among the four or so problems it solves, according to Deutsch, is the general problems of evil:

The last problem for which karma offers a solution is the one most frequently pointed to: the problem of inequality and evil, of why there are such great differences among men in spiritual and mental capacity or why men occupy such different places within the socio-economic order^[14]. To such puzzles the Law of Karma has an answer:

The spiritual and intellectual differences between jivas are result of their conduct. The place in society that they occupy at any one time is the result of their past action.^[15]

And because the Law of Karma itself cannot be established through any of the pramanas or valid means or ways of knowing, we can call it a fiction, but a convenient or useful one. Whether one dubs it a fiction, a principle, a heuristic device, or an assumption, the point is that it is not capable of proof in the ordinary sense but it is accepted nonetheless as an essential element in rebirth theories. Therefore the dilemma action presupposes three things. First it presupposes the law of karma, and the belief that all actions have results that are good or bad, right or wrong. Second, it presupposes that all men must act, and that none can cease from acting. Third, it presupposes that the final or ultimate goal for all beings is to escape samsara, the round of birth and death, in which all creation has become entangled. The dilemma of action simply the universalization of Arjuna’s dilemma previously mentioned, and being universalized, it applies to all men, everywhere and for all time. In effect it says something like this: if one does good acts, this produces good results. If one does evil acts, this produces bad results. Good acts and bad acts will produce these good or bad results. Therefore, the ultimate effect of all acts, good or bad, is bondage to future good or bad results-future necessary rewards or punishments. Therefore, no matter what one does, one in bondage. Putting it more simply: if you good acts, you’re doomed to be reborn to reap the rewards. If you do wicked acts, you’re doomed to be reborn to reap the punishments. You must do either good acts or wicked acts; there is no third possibility (yet). Therefore, you are doomed to be reborn.

Action is a course in time. It is bondage as it binds man to cycle of rebirths, with all the implied suffering which life entails. Thus the doctrine of successive births (samsara), commonly called the transmigration of the soul, is inseparably connected with the theory of inevitable consequence (karman), and became an integral element in Hindu belief. The Gita generally adopts the Sankhya view of karma as modified by its metaphysical doctrine of Purusa and Prakrti being both two different aspects of the absolute.

Its definition of karma taken in its widest meaning proceeds from its combination of the two schools of Sankhya and Vedanta.

“Brahman is the indestructible and Supreme element; it’s essential nature is itself: karma is the name given to the creative force which brings being into existence” (viii, 3).

This is the widest definition of karma as it includes not merely the karma of the individual souls or the karma of Humanity but also that of the cosmic soul. The whole created world is the karma of the Absolute but in the narrower sense of the word; karma means action done by the individual soul on account of its contact with prakriti and its gunas. Wherever there is prakriti or nature, there is karma. The tendency of all karma is to bind a man to nature so that he becomes more and more attached to it.

At the same time, no one can avoid doing karma.

“God does not create actions or their instruments for men. Nor does he bring about the union of actions with their fruits. It is only nature that prevails. Nor does God take away the merit or demerit of any one” (v, 14-15).

“I am the same to all beings; to me there is none hateful or dear”. (ix, 29).

Krishna tells Arjuna:

“It is not that I have never existed, nor thou nor these things, not it is that we shall cease to exist in the future. As the childhood, youth, and old age of this body to the embodied soul, so also is the attaining of another body” (ii, 12-13).

But the nature of the rebirth depends on the quality of karma which it has to be done in its past life. It is sattvika if it is done without love or hatred and without any desire of its fruits and free from attachment. It is rajasika if it is actuated by desires or self-conceit and with much effort and it is tamasika if it is done through delusion without regard to one’s human capacity (xviii, 23-24-25). The Gita preaches that on account of his dual capacity, man is bound as well as free. He is bound by the effects of the past actions of his mind and body according to the inexorable laws of nature, but he is also free inasmuch as he can control and regulate his actions by means of discrimination and determination. He can thus give a turn to the course of his life, in the present as well as in future, for good or for evil. Freedom is the sine qua non of any system of ethics. Hindu ethics is constantly being attacked on this central issue on the grounds of two doctrines which critics claim are denials of individual freedom. This two doctrines are already discussed the doctrine of gunas and Law of Karman. Since the universe is morally structured, it must be assumed that an action without retribution is still in the process of maturation, and that eventually in some future life what has been sown will be reaped. Thus by inference, the theory of samsara or rebirth is deduced from the law of karma as discussed earlier.

There are three areas in which the moral deserts of past lives determine the present. They are one’s psychological constitution, family, and caste, one’s span of life; and one’s activities. By linking the present with the past, the Law of Karma attempts to explicate the mysteries behind individual inequalities, and the problem of suffering. This shows karma is not a strange, extraneous force which determines what shall happen to the individual. Rather, karman is the individual himself, formed by his own past.

Since the individual is the author of the story of his life, karman leaves no room for fatalism. Fate signifies a contradiction of freedom, but karman signifies a polar correlation.

Karman is not the opposite of freedom, but points to the conditions and limits freedom. Karman is the ground of freedom; and freedom participates in moulding karman.

This dynamic relationship between karman and freedom becomes apparent in the twofold results of every action. First, there are the direct results over which one has no control. As stated earlier, one’s physical and mental makeup, family and caste are all predetermined and one has absolutely no option but to accept the given. However, past actions also produce indirect results which form an individual’s natural inclinations. Propensities may prod but do not push the individual in a given direction. Whereas direct results precipitate action, indirect results leave room for reaction. The reaction is a free act, but it is performed within the limits set by nature. This means that the future is conditioned, but it is not determined. The difference between the conditioned state of man and the determined state of animals is the presence of spirit in man. Man, as Radhakrishnan state, is more than a complicated piece of machinery.

The spirit in him can triumph over the automatic forces that try to enslave him. The Gita asks us to raise the self by the self. We can use the material with which we are endowed to promote our ideals. The cards in the game of life are given to us. We do not select them. They are traced to our past karma, but we can call as we please, lead what suit we will, and as we play, we gain or lose. And there is freedom.^[16]

Thus, on the moral and spiritual levels of existence, the Law of Karman is not opposed to freedom. This conclusion reconciles the operation of karman with the spirit of freedom implicit in the scriptures.

The scriptures are full of prescriptions and prohibitions, but, as Ramanuja has pointed out,

“Commandments can be addressed to such agents only as are capable of entering on action or refraining from action, according to their own thought and will.”^[17]

The claim for the freedom of moral and spiritual actions is also supported by the theory that the merits or demerits of actions get depleted in their consequences which are experienced as rewards or punishments. In this way justices is maintained. But if the results of former acts were themselves the seed for some future harvest in this world or the next, that would contradict the whole idea of justice that the law of karman is supposed to uphold. It would be tantamount to rewarding or punishing the individual eternally. This possibility is ruled out by the central tenet of the theory that merits or demerits are dissipated in their results.

What is the quality of a moral or spiritual deed which is free? It is characterized by vairagya or detachment. The theory of detached action is known as niskamakarma. Whereas karman binds the actor to the fruit of his actions through feelings of attraction or repulsion, niskamakarma frees him from bondage because karman without kama has no potency for rebirth. The practical appeal of this quality of action resides in the fact that it is calling not for renunciation of action but renunciation in action. The Gita arrives at this formula by combining the essential elements of two ideals; pravrtti or ‘active life’, and nivrtti or ‘quietism’.

Now we can break this karma bandhana only by the practice of yoga. The word yoga bears many meanings in Sanskrit literature. Derived from the root yuj-, to unite, its first meaning was union; but the word very early began specially to denote that control, or those methods of control, by which alone union with Supreme could be attained; and when Patanjali (for whom there was no Supreme with which to be united) wrote his Yogasutras, he defined yoga as ‘restraint (nirodha) of the modifications of mind (i.2). In Gita, whenever the word is used in a technical sense, with a very few expectations it means control, or some particular method of control: thus, when used in compound with karman, janan, or bhakti, yoga means control as exemplified in right work, right knowledge, or right devotion. If the aim of life is to escape from life, the watchword of life must be Control. For if the wandering senses allowed to dwell unchecked on objects of sense, attachment to those objects will arise and cause continual rebirth. The evil must be checked at its source; mind and sense must be restrained. Control or balance of character, as called yoga.

Therefore, Arjuna is advised to follow his dharma in order to achieve some end in this life or the next:

“Happy are the ksatriyas to whom such an opportunity to fight comes by good luck, as it opens heaven’s gates for them” (ii, 32).

A stage still higher is following dharma for its own sake, or performing one's duty for the sake of duty:

“Fight for the sake of fighting, regarding alike happiness and distress, gain and loss, victory and defeat, thus you shall not incur evil” (ii, 38).

However this stage is also not include an awareness of ultimate good which is, according to the Gita, release from samsara. Those who embody this attitude reach the top of the first tier that is dharma and can progress into the next stage.

The next stage rejects the value of the Vedas, which are considered to be engaged with worldly gains, in favour of a higher ideal-the attainment of brahman:

“As much value as there is in a well, when there is a flood of water on all sides, such is the value of all the Vedas for he who is a knower of brahman” (ii, 46).

This stage may be named ‘action for the sake of the highest good or brahman’, and one who thus acts is situated in the second tier i.e., yoga which is characterized by various yoga processes.

The stage of yoga is characterized by enlightenment and renunciation:

“The enlightened renounces both good and evil deeds here in this world. Therefore, perform yoga for the sake of yoga, as yoga is the skill in action” (v, 50).

Having perfected the stage of yoga, one finally elevates himself to the third tier, that of moksa, and becomes absorbed in brahman.

“He whose happiness is within, whose pleasure is within, and his enlightenment too is within is actually a yogi; with his whole being absorbed in brahman, he attains to extinction in Brahman” (v, 24)

The Gita tells us that the controlling power of action consists in the highest part of human personality that is atma (or self). The senses and the mind are the lower parts of human personality. They are habitation of evils. Freedom in the view of the Gita, thus, means self-government and bondage means non-self-government, that is, acting under the influence of senses and mind. So no one is free according to the Gita unless he does his actions in a detached manner without being compelled or constrained by the forces of non-self. If he does not rise above the relish and the desire, the psychological attachment to the sense objects, he cannot be said to be a free agent. And if he is not a free agent and acts under the influence of the forces of non-self, he will continue to suffer according to the Gita as he is suffering. Of course, without right knowledge renunciation of desires and attachment is not possible. According to the Gita, right knowledge is pre-requisite for the renunciation of desires and attachment. He who has realized true nature of the self (or God) enjoys real bliss of life. For such a person no moral and social obligations are left to be fulfilled. He simply acts for the goodness of people (lokasangraha) in the spirit of perfect detachment, disinterestedness, selflessness and with no desire to reap the result.

The Lord himself acts for the welfare of whole humanity in a detached manner.

“Fix thy mind on Me; be devoted to Me, sacrifice to Me, prostrate thyself before Me; so shalt thou come to Me. I promise thee truly, for thou art dear to Me” (xviii,65).

But unless we know right means to attain eternal bliss, how can we make our life better and meaningful? The Gita tells us that true happiness(bliss) consist in the realization of the highest part of personality, that is, the self which is not possible to realize without doing virtuous deeds and doing of virtuous deeds is possible only when we have knowledge of what is virtue and what is vice. For doing virtuous deeds knowledge of virtues is essential. The varna system which the Gita propounds is based on the philosophy of karma and birth. When people express their disapproval of varna system, it is really caste-system that they are attacking. In fact, varna system, being deeply rooted in human nature (svabhava), makes society healthy, wealthy and progressive. It strengthens social organizations and brings harmony among individuals which facilitate them to get their desired ends.

We are now, thus, in a position to say that there are two things which are required for a good life: knowledge and action. Both are necessary and sufficient conditions. In negation of the either true happiness is not possible to attain according to the Gita. Action without knowledge is blind and knowledge without action is empty. The Gita says that man can become good by performing good deeds. The doer of good never comes to grief. No man voluntarily pursues evil or that which he thinks to be evil. Man performs evil because of ignorance. Knowledge supported by action leads man to the attainment of bliss. If we negate either of them, we are bound to experience miseries and tensions from one life to another. One who gets true knowledge, that is, knowledge of the self goes away from the relish and the desire. As a fire well kindled reduces fuel to ashes, so the fire of knowledge reduces all sufferings to ashes forever and embraces permanent peace. There is nothing purer than knowledge. bhakti (or devotion) is also a form of karma which consists in the disinterested service of God which is not possible without knowledge. So bhakti, too, can be performed only by a true jnanin. When bhakti is performed on the spirit of disinterestedness or detachment, God himself lifts up the devotee from the ocean of birth and death and liberates him from all sins.

Hence we may say that the Gita is the “Gospel of Humanity”. It tells us that to lead a good life one must follow the path of right knowledge and right action. Unexamined life is no life. This is the central idea of the Gita embodied in its all metaphysical, religious and moral teachings. The philosophy of Gita is, undoubtedly, a real wholesome philosophy of our practical moral life.

The Gita’s pre-supposition as Law of Karma and rebirth linked with the svadharma because by nature, by birth and by upbringing we have to follow our dharma. As Arjuna was a ksatrya by birth and upbringing: this educational process which would develop his inborn nature would accord with the dharma for a ksatriya and thus fit him for a station defined by the function of a warrior and or ruler. Due to the workings of the law of karman and the structure of Hindu society, he would be born into a family whose social status would enable his upbringing to be a matter of fitting him for a role in society which fitted the caste of the family into which he was born and which also fitted his nature. The Gita deals with the dilemma of the man who seeks liberation but feels bound by the obligations of his varna. Therefore the solution to this problem is yoga. The word yoga bears many meanings in Sanskrit literature. Derived from the root yuj-, to unite, its first meaning was union; but the word very early began specially to denote that control, or those methods of control, by which alone union with Supreme could be attained; and when Patanjali (for whom there was no Supreme with which to be united) wrote his Yogasutras, he defined yoga as ‘restraint (nirodha) of the modifications of mind (i.2). In Gita, whenever the word is used in a technical sense, with a very few exceptions it means control, or some particular method of control: thus, when used in compound with karman, janan, or bhakti, yoga means control as exemplified in right work, right knowledge, or right devotion. If the aim of life is to escape from life, the watchword of life must be Control. For if the wandering senses allowed to dwell unchecked on objects of sense, attachment to those objects will arise and cause continual rebirth. The evil must be checked at its source; mind and sense must be restrained. Control or balance of character, as called yoga.

Arjuna must perform his duties while renouncing the fruits of his actions in order to escape transmigration and rebirth. The moksa or liberation is the goal for man in the Gita as it was in the Upanisads; and samsara still looms darkly as the alternative to moksa for the unsuccessful yogi searching for liberation, and the law of karma still stolidly stands as the mechanism underlying the principle of samara.But while the Gita recognizes the techniques of the yogas as the ways to liberation and happiness. Released conceived as a condition adequate participation in the culmination of creation. For this to occur Arjuna must grow as active participant and that requires development in his buddhi or that complex power which defines Arjuna in his common humanity. Gita’s path to self-realization is via non-attachment. The moral strength of a man does not lie in withdrawing from the world but in sacrificing the profit motive and selfish tendencies. The Gita, therefore, holds that a man need not go out of this world in search of his moral perfection but he should act without indulging into any short of attachment.

Dharma is that articulation of the normative which is meant, for so long as one is not ready to pass beyond delusion, to provide the ultimate guide in reference to which one is to channel one’s energies into action. Dharma with manifold functions, the most fundamental of which is to help to shape diverse human beings in their growth and to shape them toward a liberation, a freedom, that involves in its own transcendence. That means that Krishna is seeking to foster a social order which assists human beings towards a community of themselves and a unity with all things, whose concreteness holds all creatures on grounds much deeper than the social.

The doctrine of rebirth is also conjoined to the law of retribution. This connection is clearly brought out in the following passage of the Chandogya Upanisad:^[18]

“Those whose conduct has been worthy, they are reborn in higher species i.e, brahamanas, or Ksatriyas or Vaisyas; on the other contrary, those whose conduct has been low are reborn in lower species such as dogs, pigs or chandals. The Gita (vii,6) voices a similar view of transmigration in so far as it is determined by one’s desires, adding however that one’s desire at the moment of death is conditioned by the entire range of life.

Action is must to sustain life. It is sort of instinctive compulsion for survival. In the first stages the actions are for physical survival and once that is assured the actions are for psychological survival, which is basically an extension of the physical instinct for survival. Life of abdication or self denial is truly speaking a self deception. It is contrary to our nature which wants us to survive, to perpetuate and to fulfill. Sanyasa (renunciation) adopted physically, without being in the state of detachment, physically as well as mentally, is sheer escapism. It can only make life without reason. Curbing one’s nature is not conductive to inner harmony also. As the individual tries to constrain himself to an acquired lifestyle it leads to an inner conflict. Hence it cannot give peace of mind. Such a life of surrender can only exude a façade of tranquility. At best whatever real peace so obtained would be superficial and ephemeral. It is also not practically possible for most of the individuals to live so.

Regarding concept of God; it can be raid that the Gita does not propound any theory of God meeting out judgments upon human actions. Nor is there any no concept in the Gita of divine awards and punishments, during or after a person’s life. (v, 15). There is no concept of a Day of Judgment in Hindu philosophy. The God in the Gita is without emotions or preferences. He is detached, ruthless and unaffected. And man is not a mere pawn or puppet in the hands of some divine power. Man retains his options of thought and action, of course within the limitations discussed earlier. God is not concerned about controlling all this. There is also Satan in Hindu philosophy misguiding the individual with his foreign hands. Man is at least free from such divine or extra terrestrial interference in his day-to-day life.

Krishna exhorts Arjuna to fight, to decide his own destiny. This also means to exploit the possibilities of his destiny. In theory of karma destiny does not mean that things are pre ordained. Destiny is what you arrive at. The individuals have their own options and compulsions. They may have an apparent choice of actions also. But no action can be in isolation. There would be billions of other factors, living and non-living, into the action fray also which cause each situation to be so peculiar and unique. They interplay. If one has a destiny, the others have a destiny too. Just as the final outcome is never based on the actions of one individual alone similarly there cannot be an individual isolated destiny. One’s destiny depends not only on his own options but also on the options of others, and that is what makes destiny unpredictable and changeable. Even in the Chandogya Upanisad it is stated that “a dying father bequeaths his karma to his son.^[19] Gita in fact propounds the philosophy of action. If it were not so, Krishna would not have been taught Arjuna the philosophy of karma Yoga. (ix, 7) throughout the discourse of the Gita because the philosophy of karma yoga consists in the practice of the philosophy of niskama karma. The concept of niskama karma of the Gita does not include from its meaning all kinds of desire, it includes from its meaning only the notion of the desire for the fruit of action is conceptually different from that of the notion of the desire for the doing of action. Niskama karma prescribes actions a means for the attainment of some specific ends i.e. moksa and lokasamgraha.

Dharma provides support and direction for one’s acting and living, and field of the kurus is a place in which the dharma of the kurus has its roots. Karma and dharma interact in our life choices moment by moment. We are conditioned by the sum total of past experiences, thoughts, and actions and this is our karma. We say, then, that karma is the universal law of cause and effect. This means that every action has a reaction, every human act has consequences. Though we are surely conditioned by our past, by our karma, we have a responsibility to our particular time and situation, and this is our dharma, our duty, or inner obligation. Distinguishing our conditioning from our responsibility to act beyond the boundaries of that conditioning is the task of a lifetime, or several lifetimes. One might say that dharma, or ‘duty’, offers a moral aspect to our considerations. Duty implies obedience, but the dharmic obedience is to a higher responsibility, and this is its moral dimension. But that responsibility is driven from within rather than by outer authority. As Annie Besant expressed it, karma “pushes us from the past, “but dharma “pulls us from the future”. Dharma in general, which in the Indian context is taken to mean the meticulous accomplishment of religious and social obligations, is considered one of four legitimate goals of human striving and fulfillment (purusarthas). The three others are sensual and aesthetic pleasure (kama, lit. “desire”), material and psychological security and well-being (artha), and the commitment to self-reali8zation and essential freedom (moksa). However, the most radical choice that presents itself is between the secular and the spiritual paths, between a decision to follow the pleasure and prospects of this world (samsara), or to seek spiritual happiness by severing all ties to the world. Dharma is formed from the root ‘dhr’, to hold, and connotes what upholds a thing and supports it in being. In its broadest sense, dharma represents the ethical laws of the universe which regulate the moral life in the same way as the laws of nature govern the physical world.

Since life in the universe is morally structured, a man must bring all of his warring passions under this principle of righteousness, both for his own good and for the good of society. This brings us close to the meaning of dharma in the context of a purusartha. Here it refers to the performance of right action out of a consciousness of moral law. The effects of virtuous actions are conserved as merit which bears good fruit in the future. We have already mentioned that karma and artha are to be regulated by dharma. The rationale for this hierarchy of values is that whereas kama is born or tamas guna (interia), and artha is born of rajas guna (energy), the source of dharma is sattva guna (purity)–the highest of the three fundamental qualities of nature.

The three purusarthas studied thus far represent the ideals of empirical existence. They recognize and provide for the balanced satisfaction of all human desires for worldly pleasures. However, higher than the desires of the empirical self are the aspirations of the spiritual self. Immortality or moska constitutes the fourth and highest purusartha. It is the state of liberation wherein the spiritual self comes into its own. When correctly pursued, kama, artha, and dharma leads to moksa. Moksa is not the denial of these values but their fulfillment.

From a moral perspective, dharma is our duty to the one life. It is not our duty to our self, our family, our employer, or our country isolated from others; it is our duty to all of life. Also, it is a duty that transcends inherited karmic patterns. By nature, by birth, and by upbringing, he is a ksatriya. By nature: for no human being is simply human, but one’s very nature one is a human being with a particular endowment. In the notion of things here involved one with an inborn nature of the Ksatriya type would be someone for whom this particular nature was the fruit of past lives. And this would be so in such way that, due to the workings of the law of karman and the structure of Hindu society, he would be born into a family whose social status would enable his upbringing to be a matter of fitting him for a role in society which fitted the caste of the family into which he was born and which also fitted his inborn nature. By birth and upbringing this educational process which would develop his inborn nature would accord with dharma for a Ksatriya and thus fit him for a station defined by the function of a warrior and or ruler.

Thus Arjuna takes his stand there initially as one for whom that battle, that possible future, and that past series of events leading up to the battle, that actual past, are intelligible, falling within the scope of his orientation and understanding as a Ksatriya. Not only that, but the battle is a righteous one, one for which a Ksatriya is made and one to which he has committed himself as something required and significant. If he wins, he gains a share in kingdom and both honor here and a place in heaven later; if he dies, but has fought righteously, he will be rewarded in heaven. The yoga and svadharma must go together because our dharma is determined by the law of karma and which the result of our past lives is. Law of karma is influencing us svadharma is not only a means for final realization, it has importance in our day to day life also because we can’t lead our life in mere idleness we must do our duty as dharma for which yoga should practice which helps us to do the work systematically. He who does the duty ordained by his own nature incurs no evil (iii, 35). The meaning of this passage is that the first step in the ladder of the religious evolution of a man is to do whatever the scriptures enjoin him to do. Then comes a stage when he asks himself the reason for following texts next comes the stage when he should turn inwards and purify his mind by beginning to think and live religiously. When the mind is thus purified, it becomes a fit vehicle for imbibing the philosophical truths of life and thereafter comes the last stage when knowledge becomes so integrated, that he can even discard formal religion and by achieving in his mind the yoga or union of all the three faculties, he establishes direct relation with God.

The moksa or liberation is the goal for man in the Gita as it was in the Upanishads; and samsara still looms darkly as the alternative to moksa for the unsuccessful yogi searching for liberation and the law of karma still stolidly stands as the mechanism underlying the principle of samsara. But while the Gita recognizes the techniques of the yogas as the ways to liberation and happiness. In the Gita the Blessed Lord says to Arjuna:-that is, “all karma is reduced to ashes in the fire of Knowledge”; and also in the Mahabharata, it has been stated in two places, that:

That is,

“In the same way as a seed, which has been burnt, will not take root, so also when the suffering (of karma) has been burnt by Jnana, it does not have to be suffered for again by the Atman.”

It is recall “Arjuna’s dilemma”: Arjuna must act, but if he does, then the act will produce either bad consequences or good consequences, and both are binding. Thus action with consequences leads to bondage, which leads to samsara, which leads to more bondage…..the round of birth and death goes on and on without surcease. But yoga promises to break the cycle of rebirth: and karma yoga in particular does it by introducing a new technique of action. Karma yoga has been called “the way of actionless action”; it offers the man of action, the man with rajas guna nature, a way of acting in the world that does not lead to bondage. It is only through desirelessness that moksa, the ‘goal’ of the metaphysical stage can be reached, and the goal of karma yoga is precisely that stage of desirelessness. For with nonattachment to the consequences of all actions, the state of desirelessness is achieved. karma yoga is the key to actions that produce bondage, because such actions are not motivated by desire for future state affairs: they become actionless, karmaless actions. Krishna says regarding moksa and karma yoga:

For one thus dead to attachments, who has attained moksa, his thoughts set in true knowledge, doing all of his work as a sacrifice, that man’s actions are completely dissolved(iv,23). The Gita states that it is only after crossing over three modes and raising ourselves higher from their level that we attain liberation and immortality. ‘Gunan-etan-ateetya treen dehi janma-mrityu-jaradukhaih vimuktoamritam-ashnute(xiv,20). Naturally a question arises how to transcend these three modes. A straight question arises how to transcend these three modes. A straight question on this point was put by Arjuna to the Krishna in chapter 14 of the Gita. Krishna replied, “light, passion, and delusion, the three symbols of the three gunas when present should not be despised and when absent should not be craved for. The three gunas should be avoided by being indifferent towards them. We should maintain equanimity and poise in the face of pleasure and pain, likes and dislikes, censure and praise. We should view a clod of earth, a stone and gold alike. Respect and disrespect, friend and foe should be treated alike. Unswerving faith and devotion unto the Divine should be developed and then these gunas are transcended. Such a state makes us fit for becoming ‘brahman’.

The transcendental life is not a new acquisition. Just as the first three purusarthas were organically related to one’s empirical being, moksa,, the fourth purusartha, is intrinsically related to one’s essential being. The self is already perfect, immortal, and free; only its true nature is concealed by maya or cosmic ignorance. Under the spell of maya, all one can see is the chrysalis, but when knowledge penetrates ignorance, the chrysalis is transformed into a butterfly! This transformation is a total experience, involving both a change of intellectual understanding and a change of heart. A whole new consciousness floods the liberated self, pointing to the essential nature of the soul as pure existence (sat), pure consciousness (cit), and pure bliss (ananda).

The transcendental level of life is a post ethical plane of being. Ethics is only significant as long as one finds multiplicity in the world, but on the higher plane of supramundane unity, ethics loses its substance. On this level, all empirical contradictions are transcended-cold and heat, pleasure and pain, praise and blame, but also, good and evil, right and wrong.

The transcendence of ethics in moksa has led to gross misunderstanding with accusations that Hindu ethics is ultimately antinomian. It must be clearly stated, therefore, that though Hindu philosophy teaches that the metaphysical ideal is higher than the ethical ideal, nevertheless, the two are synthetically related. The person who has achieved the mystical state of moksa does not consciously follow the ethical path, but neither can he deviated from it. The path of an enlightened man is paved with virtue. The Gita declares: The holy men whose sins are destroyed, whose doubts (dualities) are cut asunder, whose minds are disciplined and who rejoice in (doing) good to all creatures, attain to the beauties of God.^[20]

The outlook on life underlying the ultimate end of Hindu ethics is fundamentally cosmic. The essential self in man is not only identified with the group, or society, or the nation, or even the whole human race, but it is inclusive of all these and much more! If the nature of the self ended with human identity, we could only expect Hinduism to provide a social conscience, as do the Western religions. But the nature of the self in Hinduism includes all lesser forms of existence, and, therefore, it also has an ecological conscience. The cosmic view of the self is found in such passages are: The essential self or the vital essence in man is the same as that in a gnat, the same as that in an elephant, the same as that in these three worlds, indeed the same as that in the world universe.^[21] The general idea behind this text is that the individual atman is one with the universal brahman. brahman literally means ‘the growing or increasing force’ (brh). This brahman force is manifest uniformly in the divinities of heaven, and in human and animal and plant life on earth. All of these entities live an apparently independent existence, but they all emanate from Brahman and are finally reabsorbed into it. Brahman itself is infinite and is, therefore, greater than the sum of all its manifestations, past, present, and future.

This belief in brahman provides the philosophic basis for the Hindu’s veneration of the natural world. The natural world is not a commodity which man possesses but a community to which he belongs. The universe appears to be material, but it is the universal consciousness or brahman. Since all is one, the conquest of nature cannot be true to reality, and our sense of separateness, isolation, and egotism is the product of ignorance.

The underlying reasoning appears to be: ‘the real enemy is within and that is lust; defeat it by controlling your senses, and in order to do so, you have to exercise karma yoga, or perform your dharmic duty as a yoga practice, i.e, externally fighting while internally seeking enlightenment. The external fighting will also contribute to your internal fighting by which you will vanquish the real enemy within-lust’. This argument sums up by pointing at the relation between action according to dharmic duty, and internal yogic action which aims at spiritual emancipation or moksa.

The most remarkable feature of the Gita is, however, that it gives due weight to the importance of human as an organic whole. If the ultimate ideal to be attained is looked upon as the realization of one’s self as such, the path of intellectual insight (jnana-yoga) is recognized; if God is looked upon as the Supreme Person (Purusottam) and the effecting of a living communion with Him a s the goal to be realized, the path of devotion and self–surrender to Him (bhakti-yoga) is advocated; while the path of disinterested willing or action (karma-yoga) can be adopted by one who believes in the effectiveness of disinterested action alone (niskama-karma) as the means to the attainment of the goal conceived in either of the former or the latter way. Which of these paths we actually embrace in the pursuit of our goal will depend upon the natural bent of our being. (xvii.3.). Yet it is not the particular path which we decide to follow in our spiritual pursuit that matters much in our life, but the spirit in which we discharge all our obligations and seek to bring the ideal within our approach (iv,2.). We are reminded that it is the spirit in which we think, contemplate, and act that determines what we shall be or attain to (viii.6.). Thus looked at, life acquires a higher purpose and a nobler meaning to be recognized and explored only by those who have sacrificed their whole nature for the discovery of the deeper aspects of life.

Therefore, what is thus most conspicuous by its presence in the ethics of the Gita, as in all other ramifications of Indian philosophical thought, is the tendency towards a search for the ultimate end or ultimate en of life, together with an emphasis on the need for exploring all such means as can be most effective in the attainment of this end. As the colophon indicates, the Gita aims primarily at providing the art whereby we can affect union with the ultimate ideal.

An attempt is, therefore, made to transcend the limits of the narrow, private self. Such selfless service of others is based upon the true self to rid itself of false sense of egoism (ahamkara). However much we may dedicate ourselves to the service and welfare of others, we can never claim much success in our spiritual mission if this sense of I-ness is not completely transcended. So long as it continues to hold it’s away over our mind, it will irresistibly militate against all our endeavour to actualize the real nature of our self, thus obstructing the liberation of the springs of that inner spirit the realization which in all its pristine integrity constitutes the ultimate end of our life. But yielding to such protractions and difficulties is against the true spirit of spiritual activism (karmayoga). The Gita encourages us to muster strength and put forth our best efforts, since “in this path no efforts are ever lost, nor is there any obstacle in the way of its coming to fruition; even a little that we may do in the spirit of karma-yoga will save us from great danger (II.40.5 II.7) Conscientious discharging of all social obligations ultimately qualifies the aspirant for enlightenment (jnana), which the Gita conceives as being Brahman (Brahmabhuyam or Brahmabhuta). (v.24, vi.27;xiv.26;xviii.54).

There is a definite attractiveness of the Gita's combining concepts of dharma and yoga-one performs one's duty or dharma with the help of the discipline or the yoga as suggested by his nature. Interpreted without influence of theism it can be said that one definitely needs particular kind of discipline for particular kind of action. Definitely some sort of control and discipline is required for whatever duty one chooses. However, the question again is-whether it is possible to have such view of the Gita's concepts of dharma and yoga without believing in its idea of final goal. yoga in the Gita, however, is not any discipline; it is a way for God realization. In the Gita the ksatriya Arjuna has to follow the path of action or karma-yoga -which is necessarily a path that will lead him to his final goal of moksa. Dharma in the Gita thus cannot be separated from its idea of final goal of life-liberation which in the Gita involves God realization.

If one studies the Gita's ethics part by part and looks at moral action in itself, it seems possible that it can be practiced without having inclination for a certain belief system; one can perform one's svadharma and thereby satisfy his social obligations. But if the construction of the Gita's ethics is considered valid, the Gita's moral action does not seem to be capable of being prescribed to someone who does not accept its belief system that includes Law of karma, rebirth, immortality of soul and finally moksa as the summum bonum.