Spiritual books say, learn to let go. Life says, get up in the morning, go to work, look after the house. The two seem to pull in opposite directions, and many people get tangled trying to hold both: what is to be given up, and what must be carried through whatever happens? In chapter 18 Arjuna asks about this directly, and the Lord's answer sorts out what is to be given up and what is to be kept.
The answer in short: renunciation is giving up actions driven by desire, and relinquishment is giving up the fruit of every action (Gita 18.2). Neither means stopping duty; the word duty appears in neither definition. Sacrifice, giving and self-discipline are not to be abandoned (Gita 18.5), and no embodied being can stop action altogether (Gita 18.11). The one who truly gives up does what ought to be done without clinging to it or to its fruit (Gita 18.9).
The real giver-up is the one who does what is to be done and clings neither to the work nor to its fruit. Here we take the twelve verses in order (Gita 18.1–12) and see where the Lord draws the line between "give up" and "keep".
Where this question comes from
Arjuna asked a close question in chapter 5: is it better to give up action or to practise the yoga of action (Gita 5.1)? The reply, read in Renunciation or Karma Yoga?, was that the true renunciate is inside: one who neither hates nor craves and who works without leaning on the fruit. Before that, the Lord had said that neither inaction nor mere renunciation brings perfection, and that no one can be without action even for a moment (Gita 3.4–5). That point is the subject of Can We Simply Stop Acting?.
At the end of the Gita Arjuna returns to the matter. The Gita is being completed, and he no longer asks which road to take. He wants the two words understood apart, so that whichever road he chooses, the words are clear in his hands. He asks what the two words mean. The Lord defines them, sorts three ways of giving up, and shows what is left when the clinging goes. This topic stands on The Path of Karma Yoga, and the next topic, Freedom Through Action, carries the thought forward.
Arjuna asks for the two words apart (18.1)
संन्यासस्य महाबाहो तत्त्वमिच्छामि वेदितुम् ।
त्यागस्य च हृषीकेश पृथक्केशिनिषूदन ॥ १८.१ ॥
saṁnyāsasya mahābāho tattvam ichchhāmi veditum |
tyāgasya cha hṛṣhīkeśha pṛthak keśhiniṣhūdana || 18.1 ||
Arjuna said: O mighty-armed Krishna, O Hṛṣhīkeśha, slayer of the demon Keśhī, I wish to know the true nature of renunciation (saṁnyāsa) and of relinquishment (tyāga), each one separately.
Arjuna wishes to know the true nature of renunciation and of relinquishment, each one separately. In daily speech the two words run together: whoever has given up something is called a renouncer and also a relinquisher. Arjuna feels there is a difference, and without knowing it, choosing a road is hard. Everything that follows answers this one question. He wants the line drawn so that he can follow it in his own life.
What the two words mean (18.2)
काम्यानां कर्मणां न्यासं संन्यासं कवयो विदुः ।
सर्वकर्मफलत्यागं प्राहुस्त्यागं विचक्षणाः ॥ १८.२ ॥
kāmyānāṁ karmaṇāṁ nyāsaṁ saṁnyāsaṁ kavayo viduḥ |
sarvakarmaphalatyāgaṁ prāhus tyāgaṁ vichakṣhaṇāḥ || 18.2 ||
The Blessed Lord said: The wise understand renunciation (saṁnyāsa) to be the giving up of actions motivated by desire. The discerning declare relinquishment (tyāga) to be the giving up of the fruits of all actions.
The wise understand renunciation to be the giving up of actions motivated by desire. The discerning declare relinquishment to be the giving up of the fruits of all actions. The difference is in what is removed. Renunciation takes away a kind of action, the kind done only to gain something. Relinquishment touches every action, duty included, by taking away the claim on its result.
Take two shopkeepers. The first stops opening on festival days only to earn from extra sales. The second keeps his usual shop and stops quarrelling over the profit. The first has dropped a wish-driven act, and the second has dropped the claim on the fruit. Both have let go of something, and the second has let go of more. The second shopkeeper did not close his shop either. Relinquishment removes no action, but it touches every action, even the duty, because it takes the claim off the outcome.
Two views and the Lord's conclusion (18.3–4)
यज्ञदानतपःकर्म न त्याज्यमिति चापरे ॥ १८.३ ॥
yajñadānatapaḥkarma na tyājyam iti chāpare || 18.3 ||
Some thinkers declare that action should be abandoned as an evil, while others say that acts of sacrifice, charity, and austerity should not be abandoned.
त्यागो हि पुरुषव्याघ्र त्रिविधः संप्रकीर्तितः ॥ १८.४ ॥
tyāgo hi puruṣhavyāghra trividhaḥ samprakīrtitaḥ || 18.4 ||
Hear from Me the conclusion on the matter of relinquishment (tyāga), O best of the Bharatas. Relinquishment, O tiger among men, has indeed been declared to be of three kinds.
Some thinkers say that all action should be given up as an evil. Others say that acts of sacrifice, giving and austerity should not be given up (Gita 18.3). Arjuna had both views before him. The Lord does not take either side. He says, "Hear My conclusion", and tells him that relinquishment is of three kinds (Gita 18.4).
This is how the Lord answers most hard questions in the Gita. He does not choose between "do everything" and "do nothing". He sorts the question: which giving up is right, which is not, and which only looks like giving up. He asks what is held inside, and the next verses sort the three kinds by the motive behind the act.
What must not be given up (18.5–6)
यज्ञो दानं तपश्चैव पावनानि मनीषिणाम् ॥ १८.५ ॥
yajño dānaṁ tapaśh chaiva pāvanāni manīṣhiṇām || 18.5 ||
Acts of sacrifice, charity, and austerity should not be abandoned; they must certainly be performed. Sacrifice, charity, and austerity are indeed purifiers of the wise.
कर्तव्यानीति मे पार्थ निश्चितं मतमुत्तमम् ॥ १८.६ ॥
kartavyānīti me pārtha niśhchitaṁ matam uttamam || 18.6 ||
But even these actions should be performed, giving up attachment and the fruits. This, O Arjuna, is My definite and supreme opinion.
Acts of sacrifice, giving and austerity are not to be given up. They must certainly be done, because they purify the wise (Gita 18.5). In ordinary life they stand for shared work for the good of all, helping others with time and money, and the training of body and mind. Drop any of them and life does not become lighter. It becomes hollow. The first is read in Work as Sacrifice, and the wider view of work for the good of all in Acting for the World. A person who drops these when life gets busy drops the very things that keep the mind clean.
The next verse adds a condition: even these are done giving up attachment and the fruit. The Lord calls this His definite and supreme opinion (Gita 18.6). The practices are kept, and the clinging to them is let go. A person who helps others in order to be thanked has done the act and kept the stain. This agrees with the teaching that karma yogis act, giving up attachment, for the cleansing of the mind (Gita 5.11).
Two wrong ways of giving up (18.7–8)
मोहात्तस्य परित्यागस्तामसः परिकीर्तितः ॥ १८.७ ॥
mohāt tasya parityāgas tāmasaḥ parikīrtitaḥ || 18.7 ||
But renunciation of prescribed duty is not proper. Its abandonment out of delusion is declared to be tāmasic (of the nature of ignorance).
स कृत्वा राजसं त्यागं नैव त्यागफलं लभेत् ॥ १८.८ ॥
sa kṛtvā rājasaṁ tyāgaṁ naiva tyāgaphalaṁ labhet || 18.8 ||
One who gives up an action thinking, 'It is painful,' out of fear of bodily discomfort, performs a rājasic (passion-driven) relinquishment and does not obtain the fruit of relinquishment.
Giving up a prescribed duty is not right. If it is given up out of confusion, the Lord calls it dark (Gita 18.7). If a person gives up an action thinking "it is painful", out of fear of bodily discomfort, the Lord calls it restless, and says he does not obtain the fruit of relinquishment (Gita 18.8).
The outer act is the same in both: a duty is dropped. The reason is what differs. Confusion means that the duty is no longer seen. The person cannot see its point or its need, thinks "what is the use of this work?" and drops it, though he never looked at it properly. The second person drops it because it is tiring. Here restlessness drives the decision: the work wears him out, so he leaves it. Neither has let go of anything inside. Two people who give up the same work, one with understanding and one from fatigue or confusion, end up in different places. The first has only fogged his mind, and the second has only run from a feeling, so the burden is still there.
The three modes of nature that give these their names are read in other topics of chapter 18. Here it is enough to see that the reason for stopping decides what the stopping is.
The clear way of giving up (18.9–10)
सङ्गं त्यक्त्वा फलं चैव स त्यागः सात्त्विको मतः ॥ १८.९ ॥
saṅgaṁ tyaktvā phalaṁ chaiva sa tyāgaḥ sāttviko mataḥ || 18.9 ||
When a prescribed action is performed simply because it ought to be done, giving up attachment and the fruit as well, O Arjuna, that relinquishment is considered sāttvic (pure).
त्यागी सत्त्वसमाविष्टो मेधावी छिन्नसंशयः ॥ १८.१० ॥
tyāgī sattvasamāviṣhṭo medhāvī chhinnasaṁśhayaḥ || 18.10 ||
The relinquisher, pervaded by sattva (purity), wise, and free from doubts, neither hates disagreeable action nor is attached to agreeable action.
When a prescribed action is done simply because it ought to be done, giving up attachment and the fruit as well, the Lord calls that relinquishment clear (Gita 18.9). Three things come together here. The work is done, with the whole mind, because it ought to be done. There is no attachment, so the work does not become "mine" and take hold of the person. And there is no grip on the fruit: the work is finished, and the result is whatever it is. The motive is the duty itself. There is no bargain in it and no fear.
The next verse describes the person. He is clear in mind, wise and free from doubt. He neither hates an unpleasant action nor clings to a pleasant one (Gita 18.10). The test is inner steadiness, and it is not outside. When a hard task comes, does irritation rise? When a favourite task comes, does greed rise? A task is just a task, and the mind is not pushed or pulled by it.
Why only the fruit can be given up (18.11–12)
यस्तु कर्मफलत्यागी स त्यागीत्यभिधीयते ॥ १८.११ ॥
yas tu karmaphalatyāgī sa tyāgīty abhidhīyate || 18.11 ||
It is indeed not possible for an embodied being to abandon actions entirely; but one who relinquishes the fruits of action is called a relinquisher (tyāgī).
भवत्यत्यागिनां प्रेत्य न तु संन्यासिनां क्वचित् ॥ १८.१२ ॥
bhavaty atyāgināṁ pretya na tu saṁnyāsināṁ kvachit || 18.12 ||
The threefold fruit of action — disagreeable, agreeable, and mixed — accrues after death to those who have not relinquished, but never to renouncers.
It is not possible for an embodied being to give up actions entirely. The one who gives up the fruit of action is therefore called the one who has given up (Gita 18.11). The Lord says the same earlier: no one is without action for even a moment (Gita 3.5). Even breathing, eating and thinking are actions. If action cannot be dropped, what is left to drop is the thing that binds, which is clinging to the fruit. The aim is not to hold less work. The aim is to hold less of the work.
The twelfth verse closes the argument. The threefold fruit of action, unwanted, wanted and mixed, comes after death to those who have not given up, and never to renouncers (Gita 18.12). The tradition reads this as the result of deeds going with the doer. It is the tradition's account, and the verse states that the fruit follows those who cling and not those who have let go. The meaning is plain: the fruit we hold stays with us, and the fruit we let go of does not bind.
The twelve verses at a glance
| Verse | What it says | What it asks of us |
|---|---|---|
| 18.1 | Arjuna asks for the two words apart | Know what each word means |
| 18.2 | Renunciation: wish-driven acts; relinquishment: the fruit | Drop wish-driven acts; let go of every result |
| 18.3-4 | Two views set aside; three kinds of giving up | Do not choose "all action" or "none" |
| 18.5-6 | Sacrifice, giving, discipline stay, without clinging | Keep the practices that clean the mind |
| 18.7-8 | Confusion and fear of discomfort are wrong reasons | Ask why you want to stop |
| 18.9-10 | A duty done because it ought to be done | Do it with no bargain and no fear |
| 18.11-12 | Action cannot be dropped; the fruit can | Let go of the claim on the result |
How this fits the rest of the Gita
- The right is to the work and not to its fruit (Gita 2.47). This is the plainest statement of what is kept and what is given up.
- Action is better than inaction, and work done as sacrifice does not bind (Gita 3.8–9). It supports the duties that are not to be dropped.
- The renunciate and the yogi is the one who does what is to be done without leaning on its fruit (Gita 6.1). It joins the two words into one person.
- Giving up the fruit of action brings peace at once (Gita 12.12). It names the gain that the verses here only imply.
- The same teaching reaches the freedom beyond action (Gita 18.49), which is read in Freedom Through Action.
Three common misreadings
"Renunciation means giving up work and duty."
The Lord says the opposite. Sacrifice, giving and discipline must not be given up (Gita 18.5), the prescribed duty is not to be given up out of confusion (Gita 18.7), and no embodied being can give up action wholly (Gita 18.11).
"Giving up the fruit means not caring how things turn out."
The duty is done fully, "because it ought to be done" (Gita 18.9). The relinquisher neither hates the unpleasant nor clings to the pleasant (Gita 18.10). That is steadiness, and it is not carelessness. Care for the work stays, and only the grip on the result goes. The worry about the result goes, and the responsibility for the work does not.
"Giving up what is hard is relinquishment."
A person who drops an action because it is painful does not obtain the fruit of relinquishment (Gita 18.8). Relinquishment is judged by the inner reason, and not by the ease of stopping.
An example: Rohan's list
Here is an example. Rohan runs the accounts of a small office and is worn out. One evening he decides to drop three things: the weekly clean-up of the shared store, which he finds tiresome; his evening walk; and the habit of checking who praised his report.
A friend asks him which of the three is a real giving up. Rohan thinks it over. The clean-up is a duty, and he is dropping it only because it tires him (Gita 18.8), so it stays. The walk keeps his mind and body in order (Gita 18.5), so it stays. Only the praise-checking is a clinging to the fruit (Gita 18.2). That one goes.
At the end of the month he does the clean-up plainly, without complaint, as a thing that ought to be done (Gita 18.9). He walks every evening. He has stopped asking who noticed. He gets through more work by the clock, and his mind is lighter than before. He did not give up a duty. The weight came off where it was really loaded.
A practice for the week
- List what you want to drop.
- For each item, ask: is it a duty, a habit that keeps me clean (Gita 18.5), or an act done only to gain something (Gita 18.2)?
- For each duty you want to drop, ask why. Is it confusion or discomfort (Gita 18.7, Gita 18.8)?
- Do each duty because it ought to be done (Gita 18.9).
- Notice hate for the unpleasant task and craving for the pleasant one, and let both pass (Gita 18.10).
- Let the result go, and note at night what became lighter.
Pick one duty you have been putting off. Do it today without looking for thanks, and without waiting to see how it turns out.
- What am I carrying that is a duty, and what is a clinging?
- Which of my cleansing habits did I drop first when life got busy?
- When I want to quit something, is the reason confusion, discomfort, or clarity?
- What would I do differently today if I held no claim on the result?
Questions readers ask
What is the difference between renunciation and relinquishment?
Renunciation gives up the actions that are done only to gain something. Relinquishment gives up the claim on the fruit of every action, duty included (Gita 18.2). The first removes a kind of act, and the second removes a kind of grip.
Does the Gita ask me to stop doing what I enjoy?
Only the actions done purely out of wanting something are to be given up (Gita 18.2). Duties and the habits that clean the mind stay (Gita 18.5). Enjoyment is not condemned. What is asked is that the mind not cling to the pleasant or hate the unpleasant (Gita 18.10).
Can I give up a duty if I find it painful?
The Lord says that giving up an action because it is painful brings no fruit of relinquishment (Gita 18.8). The question to ask is whether the duty is still yours and why you want to stop. This does not lower the honour of the renunciate's path; that path has its own dignity, as Renunciation or Karma Yoga? shows. But pain is not a reason to give up. It is a place to pass through.
What happens to the fruit of actions that are given up?
The three kinds of fruit follow those who have not given up, and never those who have (Gita 18.12). The one who has let go is not bound by the result. The action happens, and the grip does not.
How is this different from simply not caring?
A careless person takes the work lightly. Relinquishment is care without the grip. The difference lies in how the mind bends before the result, and not in how seriously the work is taken. The duty is done fully because it ought to be done (Gita 18.9). The mind stays steady whatever comes (Gita 18.10).
What these verses give us
The Gita asks what you are giving up, and why. What is to be given up is the wanting and the claim on the result, and the duty stays. Renunciation drops the acts done only for gain. Relinquishment lets go of the fruit of every act, and no embodied being can do otherwise (Gita 18.11). Sacrifice, giving and discipline are kept, and a duty is done because it ought to be done.
For a first reading see the simple reading, and for the close reading with the commentators see the deeper reading. The road continues in Freedom Through Action.