Pearson Edexcel Level 3 Advanced GCE in Religious Studies – Anthology
181
T his disint erest ed ac t ion et hic s might look somewhat like Kant ’s et hic of ‘dut y
for duty’s sake’, or acting from respect for the Law (hence the Cat egoric al
Imperative), but the precise rational-universalizable formulat ion of Kant is absent
here. The Gita’s motivation is not so muc h to make the ‘Good Will’ the determinant
of moral ac t ions but t o c onserve t he Brahmanic al c ult ural base (it s performat ive
ideal) while int egrat ing t he t hreat ening asoc ial et hic of asc et ic renunc iat ion, and
also ac c ommodat ing t he influenc e of a nasc ent devot ionalism, wit h it s t heist ic
orientation. The Gita’s ethic s is both formal and material: one must do one’s duty
according to one’s ‘nature’: but this duty is determined by virtue of the individual’s
plac e in t he larger soc ial whole, ie by dint of t he c lass he or she finds himself
belonging to. Thus the maxim: better one’s duty (though) imperfec t, than another’s
duty well-performed (3.35). As to the spec ific c ontent of the duty and the c riterion
by whic h it s validit y is t o be judged, t he t ext remains largely obsc ure. Nonet heless,
t he promise of liberat ion lies in disint erest edly pursued ac t ion, and a c rude ‘work
et hic ’ (karmayoga), rid of egoism, is suggested, which might appear to justify
presc ribed rit ual ac t ivit y (sac rific e, aust erit ies and giving) (18.5) and killing alike
(18.8).
But the Gita does not overlook the signific ant role that a quasi-rat ional
disc erning fac ulty plays in such a process. For this it develops the yogas (paths) of
buddhi or int elligent-willing and jnana or knowledge (‘gnosis’). T hat t he ‘will’ c ould
at onc e be int elligent and prac t ic al (ie soc ially-at t uned), making for it s moral
aut onomy, is it self an interesting idea canvassed here. Apart from these teachings,
truth, c ontinenc e and non-violenc e (ahimsa), (16.2; 17.14) as well as ‘welfare of
all’ (lokasamgraha) and ‘desiring the good of every living creature’ are underscored
in the Gita (3.20; 5.25). The Gita’s model of an ethic al person, in Krishna’s words,
is one who is:
without hatred of any c reature, friendly and c ompassionate without
possessiveness and self-pride, equable in happiness and unhappiness...
who is dependent on nothing, disinterested, unworried... and who neither
hates nor rejoic es, does not mourn or hanker, and relinquishes both good
and evil. (12.13-17)But as to why one should follow these princ iples, and what one should do if the
c onsequenc es of one’s ac tion or duty are detrimental to the interests of another,
the Gita seems to have little to say. (Cf. Rama Rao Pappu, 1988.) Also, if good and
evil are transc ended and the distinc tion obliterated c an there any longer be an ethic
to speak of? (Can we each be like Nietzsche’s Superman?) Modern Indian
reformers, suc h as Gandhi, have tried to fill in some of the lac unae in the traditional
et hic al t eac hings, symbolized in t he Git a. But before t hat we’ll look at anot her,
c ontrasting, Indian ethic al system.
...