Kamya Karma – In Gita Verse 18.2 The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: The giving up of activities that are based on material desire is what great learned men call the renounced order of life [sannyāsa]. And giving up the results of all activities is what the wise call renunciation [tyāga].
In Bhagavad Gita Verse 18.2, Krishna states that numerous scholars refer to the renunciation of lustful actions as Sannyasa, while many intellectuals, skilled in contemplation, advocate for the renunciation of the fruits of all actions. Some sages argue that all actions are inherently flawed and thus should be renounced, whereas others maintain that yagya (sacrifice), charity, and penance should not be forsaken.
The term ‘Pandit’ has evolved over time. Historically, ‘Pandit’ signified a wise individual, one who had attained enlightenment. Today, it often refers to a scholar or scientist, someone knowledgeable in scriptures. This shift has led to a certain devaluation of the term, implying a lack of practical experience.
In ancient times, a Pandit was recognised as an individual who had attained profound inner wisdom and enlightenment. Many scholars and wise men regard the renunciation of sensual activities as Sannyasa.
Concerning Kamya Karma, it is crucial to differentiate between actions that are essential and those motivated by desire. Many commentators on the Gita frequently misconstrue actions driven by lust as those mandated by the Vedas. However, genuine renunciation of such lustful deeds requires a clear distinction between indispensable duties and actions fueled by egoistic desires. Fundamental responsibilities, such as procuring food and water, do not fall under the category of lustful deeds and should not be forsaken.
Kamya Karmas are actions born out of lust, such as desiring a larger house purely for egoistic reasons. The pursuit of unnecessary desires complicates life, whereas understanding and fulfilling only essential needs simplifies it. True happiness requires very little, while suffering demands much more.
Many people associate childhood with happiness, primarily because, during that time, there were no attachments or ownership. Children’s needs were simple: they ate when hungry, drank when thirsty, played, and slept when tired. Observing young children, one notices that they derive immense joy from simple things like colorful pebbles and butterfly wings, treasures that they cherish more than any jewel. Their possessions, no matter how trivial, hold great value to them. The moment a child develops a sense of possessiveness, worry begins, marking the end of their carefree childhood. This sense of ownership persists throughout life, often causing stress and longing for the simplicity of childhood.
Renunciation, as advocated by wise men and emphasised by Krishna, involves relinquishing unnecessary desires while fulfilling essential needs. It promotes living simply, focusing on necessary actions, akin to the simplicity of a child’s life.
Different perspectives on renunciation exist. Some scholars advocate for giving up lustful activities, while others suggest renouncing only the fruits of actions. Life’s diversity offers various solutions, and both approaches have their merits.
Mahavir and Buddha represent the first category of individuals. The second category includes figures such as Krishna and Janak. The path of renouncing the fruits of actions, as advocated by Krishna and Janak, is more challenging than renouncing actions themselves. It requires performing duties without attachment to the results, which is more difficult than abandoning actions altogether. This approach demands a higher level of understanding and detachment.
Krishna explains that the path of renouncing the fruits of actions is arduous but rewarding. It requires maintaining satisfaction regardless of the outcomes, understanding that the results are in the hands of a higher power. This path, though challenging, leads to true inner peace and fulfilment.
Tags: Kamya Karma
