The Spiritual Import of the Mahabharata
and the Bhagavadgita

by Swami Krishnananda

We have been familarised with the terms sattva, rajas and tamas many a time through the course of the Bhagavadgita. In fact, these are not independent things external to us. They are not three things that lie outside in space, working in respect of us with an outward impulsion or compulsion. Actually these three forces are pressures exerted from three different sides, and these being mere pressures exerted upon us by the very law of things, they cannot be regarded as substances in themselves. There is a pressure from within, a pressure from without, and a pressure from above. Thus every event is a threefold concatenation of factors. Nothing happens independently by itself, as either a subjective element, an objective substance or a supernatural divinity. Three forces work together—sattva, rajas, and tamas—in everything.

Na tad asti prithivyam va divi devesu va punah, sattvam prakriti-jair muktam yad ebhih syat tribhir gu&naih: There is nothing anywhere—either on earth or in heaven, neither high nor low, whatever be its nature—which is free from the clutches of these three gunas. This is another way of saying that everything is an expression consequent upon a threefold pressure exerted by the law of nature in any particular point in the space-time complex. There is in every person, to give a gross example, an impulsion from within. Every person, every individual has a propulsive inclination from within oneself in some direction, in some manner, for some purpose. But it is not an independent propulsion, because it is conditioned by the existence of an external atmosphere. There is an outward world, other people around us, and many other things. The outward atmosphere of the existence of factors other than one’s own self limits the operation of the inward propulsions. In a similar manner, the effect that the external atmosphere has upon oneself is limited by the outlook that one has from one’s own self. So there is a collision of powers, which may be broadly spoken of as the inward and the outward factors in experience. But this inward and outward bifurcation of experience is again decided upon and determined by a superintending element, which is often known as the adhidaiva. So in some sense we may say that sattva, rajas and tamas are the propulsive features of adhidaiva, adhyatma and adhibhuta.

The Bhagavadgita is very eloquent in its explanation of the manner in which one has to direct one’s conduct and express one’s outlook in relation to these forces. It is always insists, throughout, that we have a sattvic attitude, and not merely a rajasic, or much less a tamasic attitude. The idea behind it is that the supernatural element or the principle of universality is to guide our destiny, our conduct, our actions and our outlook, and we should not be directed by our individual proclivities, idiosyncrasies, instincts, sentiments or desires, nor should all these be decided by the existence of outward objects. Our conduct, our behaviour, our entire outlook, our experiential attitude should not be decided upon by the existence of things outside. Nor should this decision be a consequence of our inward sentiments and ways of looking at things. That is the meaning of saying that it is not enough if we are merely tamasic or rajasic. We have to be sattvic, which means our stand should be on a third superintending, transcendent, universalising feature which is God present—divinity manifesting itself in some form, in some degree, in some intensity of manifestation.

Humanly this attitude is impossible. Ordinarily no human being can think in this manner, because either each one thinks for himself from his own individualised body-mind complex point of view, or it is entirely decided by the factors preponderating outside. We either take our stand on the conditions prevailing outside, or we are propelled by our own prejudices and preconceived judgments. Not for a moment would it be possible for ordinary human beings to stand above these two clutches and take an impartial attitude towards both sides. That impartiality of outlook is called the sattvica bhava. There is the finger of God operating in some element, in some form, and herein is the inner significance of what is known as karma yoga—action based on understanding, and understanding of that collaborating principle operating between the inward and the outward factors, the subject and the object. It is difficult for the mind to grasp and more difficult to put into practice.

These three principles are described in the fourteenth chapter in some detail, which again become the principal features guiding the themes described in the seventeenth chapter. Everything is sattvica, rajasica or tamasica. Whatever we think, whatever we speak, whatever we do, whatever we will—everything conceivable anywhere in any manner is one of these things—sattvica, or rajasica, or tamasica, or it is a mixture of one or two of these things in some proportion. Anyway, there cannot be anything independent of these. That means to say there cannot be anything, anywhere, which is neither subjective, nor objective, or a blend of both.

The more we are able to bring a harmony between the subjective element and the objective features in the gradually ascending series of the manifestations of this principle of universality known as adhidaiva, the more we are able to succeed along these lines, the more we are spiritual, and the more we are moving along the path of God. Else we are individuals—human beings caught up in the cocoon of our own feelings, or conditioned by the existence of outside things. Thus a categorisation has been made in the seventeenth chapter of the activities of our mind, speech and body, the food that we eat and many other things. In fact, anything that is of any meaning in our lives has been classified into either the sattvica, the rajasica, or the tamasica group. We are advised that it not proper for us to work on the basis of the tamas element, or even the rajas element—always the sattva has been praised. That is, the only valuable meaning in this world is the presence of divinity, and divinity is the harmonising principle among the conflicting factors. It is the cementing force in the middle of the gulf that is created in experience by the interference of subjectivity and objectivity.

Our understanding, our volition, our feelings and our actions are therefore sattvic, rajasic or tamasic. The gross understanding or the tamasic, objective-motivated understanding is that which clings to objects as realities in themselves and pours forth all one’s affection upon the objects, transferring oneself into them in some manner, so that there is a loss of personality in the love that one evinces in regard to the object of attachment. This is the lowest kind of understanding of the nature of reality. For the mother, the son is all reality—there no reality more than that. She will die for her son. People die for wealth, people die for name, fame, honour and many other things of that kind. These are examples of how the self within is transferred to outside factors and features that are visibly substantial, or merely psychological or conceivable, and become objects rather than subjects. When one, as a true subject, sell oneself as a belonging of an object outside and are contented to remain as an object rather than a subject, one is in a tamasic condition. This is the worst state of knowledge, where particular things are regarded as universals and one’s concentration goes entirely to these particular elements—whether property, family relations, wealth, name, fame, power, authority, and the like.

The higher understanding is the logical acumen that intellectual geniuses possess. By scientific investigation into the nature of things, they recognise the interconnectedness of all objects and realise that the world is an organism, completeness in itself, rather then a medley of scattered particulars. For the lowest understanding, everything is confusion and nothing has any connection with any other thing, whatsoever. Everything is totally independent of everything else—this is the lowest type of knowledge. “I have nothing to do with you, and you have nothing to do with me, and no object in this world has anything to do with anything else.” This is tamasic knowledge, the lowest type of understanding. So we think we can cling to anything or hate something with impunity, without any kind of nemesis or retribution following there from.

But the higher understanding knows that such a thing is impossible on the very face of it. We cannot love something to the exclusion of something else, because there is an inward relationship of things by a prehensive activity, so that when we touch something, we touch something else also, at the same time, without knowing what we are doing. Any kind of relationship with any particular object or situation at once implies a sort of interference with the positive or the negative prehensions of that particular object with other things in the world. Everything is somehow or other related to everything, whether mediately or immediately. Thus the genius of logical knowledge appreciates the presence of an interrelationship of all things. This is rajasic knowledge, where we maintain the diversity of objects as a reality in itself and yet accede or concede there being an inward collaborative activity going on along the various particulars of this organism of things.