Thank you for this, and the illuminating comments.
“Arjuna is told not to act for any benefit nor to be attached to inaction”, which is the essence of the problem of activity, “maneggiare la vanga a mani vuote”, as Nishitani would put it. There is no question that does not revolve or lead ultimately to that point. I cannot think of anything that is more fundamental, more immediately pressing than the creative element of the present: action “is” the absolute near side.
I wrote about this with some detail in a note called “Active Experience” (action is a realization of space, it is “going through space”) and six months later I found that incredible essay from James on “The Experience of Activity”. What a revelation (the empiricists used to call it a confirmation). I don’t think there is a single page of James that is wasted, but some are undoubtedly exceptional; what he saw, what he understood at the time. “Bare activity -he tells us- would thus be predictable, though there were no definite direction, no actor, and no aim.. [This] is the problem of creation; for in the end the question is: How do I make them be? Real activities are those that make things be, without which the things are not, and with which they are there.. [Life] is a total presence that embodies worth”. Ruskin said that before him, Whitehead afterwards, but it has been expressed innumerable times through the history of humanity in every conceivable way.
Arjuna, once he realises that (not a simple thing to ask as you said), he has to obey. There is no alternative, for “will is obedience, not resolution”.
Adrian: Thanks for the pointer to the essay by James.
Regarding your final remark. There is one further step. After obedience comes conscious dynamic (nor merely static) identification with the sole determinant of the goings on in the world. This, however, is at most hinted at by the Gita. As far as I am aware, it is explicitly and intensively dealt with only by Sri Aurobindo.
Thank you for this, and the illuminating comments.
“Arjuna is told not to act for any benefit nor to be attached to inaction”, which is the essence of the problem of activity, “maneggiare la vanga a mani vuote”, as Nishitani would put it. There is no question that does not revolve or lead ultimately to that point. I cannot think of anything that is more fundamental, more immediately pressing than the creative element of the present: action “is” the absolute near side.
I wrote about this with some detail in a note called “Active Experience” (action is a realization of space, it is “going through space”) and six months later I found that incredible essay from James on “The Experience of Activity”. What a revelation (the empiricists used to call it a confirmation). I don’t think there is a single page of James that is wasted, but some are undoubtedly exceptional; what he saw, what he understood at the time. “Bare activity -he tells us- would thus be predictable, though there were no definite direction, no actor, and no aim.. [This] is the problem of creation; for in the end the question is: How do I make them be? Real activities are those that make things be, without which the things are not, and with which they are there.. [Life] is a total presence that embodies worth”. Ruskin said that before him, Whitehead afterwards, but it has been expressed innumerable times through the history of humanity in every conceivable way.
Arjuna, once he realises that (not a simple thing to ask as you said), he has to obey. There is no alternative, for “will is obedience, not resolution”.
Adrian: Thanks for the pointer to the essay by James.
Regarding your final remark. There is one further step. After obedience comes conscious dynamic (nor merely static) identification with the sole determinant of the goings on in the world. This, however, is at most hinted at by the Gita. As far as I am aware, it is explicitly and intensively dealt with only by Sri Aurobindo.