Kant’s Imperative, Niṣkāmakarma and Sakāmakarma in the Bhagavad Gita: A Comparative Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31305/rrjiks.2025.v2.n1.017Keywords:
Niṣkāmakarma, Āpaddharma, Sādhāraṇadharma, Gita, Categorical ImperativeAbstract
This article presents a comparative analysis of Immanuel Kant’s concept of the categorical imperative and the ethical teachings of the Bhagavad Gita, with particular focus on the doctrines of niṣkāmakarma (desireless action) and sakāmakarma (desire-based action). The Gita conceptualises dharma as an inherent duty rooted in the individual’s nature (svabhāva) and expressed through social obligation (varṇadharma, svadharma, and sādhāraṇadharma), whereas Kantian ethics grounds moral obligation solely in rational autonomy. Although both systems emphasise duty, disinterested action, and the irrelevance of consequences to moral worth, they diverge in their foundations and applications. Kant views duty as an unconditional, universally binding moral law, permitting no exceptions, while the Gita allows contextual flexibility through principles such as āpaddharma and prioritises social harmony (lokasaṃgraha). Furthermore, the Gita advocates the performance of action without attachment to its fruits as a means to spiritual liberation and the cessation of rebirth, whereas Kant rejects teleology and situates moral value in goodwill alone. By exploring similarities in dualism, the concept of self, the nature of duty, and the grounds of moral motivation, the article demonstrates that both ethical systems converge in spirit while diverging in philosophical grounding: Kantian ethics is reason-oriented and absolutist, whereas Gita ethics is faith-integrated and context-sensitive. Ultimately, the study concludes that niṣkāmakarma parallels the categorical imperative, yet remains distinct in its theistic orientation and situational elasticity.
References
Kant, I. (1998). Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (M. Gregor, Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1785) DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511809590
Kant, I. (1996). Critique of Practical Reason (M. Gregor, Ed. & Trans.). Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1788)
Radhakrishnan, S. (Trans.). (1993). The Bhagavad-Gita. HarperCollins.
Ganguli, K. M. (Trans.). (2004). The Mahabharata (Bhagavad Gita section). Munshiram Manoharlal. (Original Sanskrit text)
Radhakrishnan, S. (1950). The Bhagavad Gita: With an Introductory Essay, Sanskrit Text, English Translation and Notes. George Allen & Unwin.
Dasgupta, S. N. (1927). Hindu Mysticism. Macmillan.
Prasad, R. (1999). Varnadharma, Nishkama Karma, and Secular Morality. Indian Council of Philosophical Research.
Singer, M. (1972). “The Concept of Karma and Morality.” Philosophy East and West, 22(1), 15–28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1397956
Abraham, W. E. (1962). “Kant's Concept of the Categorical Imperative.” Ethics, 73(1), 20–33.
O’Neill, O. (1985). “Consistency in Action: A Critical Appraisal of Kant’s Moral Theory.” The Aristotelian Society, 86, 45–62.
Bilimoria, P. (2007). “The Hindu Ethics of Duty: A Reassessment.” Journal of Indian Philosophy, 35, 495–518.
Sharma, A. (2002). Hindu Ethics: Purity, Abortion & Euthanasia. State University of New York Press.
Clooney, F. X. (2010). Hindu God, Christian God: How Reason Helps Break Down the Boundaries between Religions. Oxford University Press.
Deutsch, E. (1973). Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction. University of Hawaii Press.
Perrett, R. W. (1985). “Kant and Indian Moral Philosophy.” Philosophy East and West, 35(2), 129–141. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1398534
Whaling, F. (1980). The Rise of the Religious Consciousness: The Gītā and Kant Compared. Scottish Academic Press.
