When you stop clinging, you can either act without wanting rewards, or quietly not act yet still care and feel responsible—both come from the same free heart.
From the Discourses
Passages where Osho speaks to this question — each links to the complete discourse.
Osho, you have just shed light on attachment. Along with that, in the Gita Krishna speaks of two things: sannyas from action—meaning the renunciation of doership in all action—and nishkama karma—doing action with the equanimous intelligence of sameness. So what is the relation or the difference among non-attachment, karmasannyas, and nishkama karma? Please say more about this.
Anasakti yoga—non-attachment—is the root. And this yoga of non-attachment is the third angle; from this angle two angles of life unfold: not-doing while doing, and doing while not-doing. Call one karmasannyas, and the other nishkama karma. Nishkama karma means not-doing while doing. Even while doing there is no craving to do, no insistence on doing; even while doing, non-doing has arrived. Then there is neither sorrow nor hurt; even if no result comes from the doing, there is no despondency; even if all that was done gets undone, there is no pain. That is nishkama karma. Let me open this a little more. Doing while not-doing—this is subtler still. This is what I call sannyas. Doing while not-doing: “I do nothing, and yet...” I come to your door to beg; if you have stolen and you live on stolen bread, you give me stolen bread too. If a person is…
Questioner: you have explained to us beautifully the meaning and significance of non-attachment. Besides non-attachment, krishna has talked about two other things in the geeta: one is sannyas or inaction, and the other is action without attachment to results. Please explain the relationship between non-attachment, sannyas, and action without desire for results.
Krishna speaks of two kinds of action: one is action without attachment, and another is inaction with a sense of involvement in action. These are the two ways of sannyas and action, and it depends on you which way you choose for yourself. Someone can choose doing and yet remain a non-doer, and another can opt for non-doing and yet remain a doer. These are really two types of people in the world, and you have to know your own type. As I see it, a male mind will choose doing and yet remain a non-doer, and a female mind will choose non-doing and yet remain a doer. There is a basic difference between the two minds -- male and female minds. While the male mind is active, the feminine is passive. If a woman has to do something she will do it as if she is not doing. And…
Osho, what is attachment? Why do we become so attached to things, ideas and persons? And is there freedom from attachment?
“So do one thing,” she told the courtesan. “I will pay you whatever you ask. Go to him at midnight. He meditates at midnight—has done so for thirty years. I want to know whether meditation has happened or not before I die. His hut door is only latched; no one ever goes there. Open it and go in. Whatever he says, notice every word and tell me. Go and embrace him—then come back and report. Before I die, I want to be sure that my service was not in vain.” The courtesan went. She opened the door. The monk was startled. He opened his eyes—he had been sitting in meditation—and shouted, “You wicked woman! Why are you here? Get out! What need have you to come at midnight?” But his tongue faltered; his body trembled. The woman had taken her money; she went right in. He cried, “Stay back! Why…
Osho, is action without attachment a practice of sadhana, or is it the effortless flowering of attainment? Please clarify.
All the words man has are such that they say something, explain something—and also create some misunderstanding and confusion. Take, for example, a road that leads to the destination. The moment a man steps onto the road, in one sense he is connected with the destination, because the road is connected to it. If he has walked one step on the road, he has also, in a sense, come one step closer to the goal. But in another sense, where has he reached the destination? He is still only on the road; much remains to be walked. If the destination is a hundred steps away, even after walking ninety-nine steps he is still on the road, not yet at the goal. So sadhana and siddhi are like the road and the destination—and non-attachment (anasakti) is both. When you begin, it is sadhana; when it is complete, it is siddhi. At…
Osho, you have explained karma-sannyas to mean renunciation of action. But in the previous sixth verse, karma-sannyas was said to mean the renunciation of doership in all actions. Please clarify the apparent difference between these two meanings of karma-sannyas.
Buddha used emptiness; Hindu thought used destiny. It said everything is in the hands of the Controller. Some unknown power sends you and the same calls you back. Since we are nothing, why strut about? Why be troubled? There is the Divine—leave it in His hands. Then the doer becomes zero. When we are not the ones doing, whatever He wills, He gets done; if He doesn’t will it, it is not done. The one who surrenders himself completely—his doer is lost. - A third path: to know That which is within us. This is Krishna’s path—to know That which is within. It is also Mahavira’s path. We keep saying “I, I, I” without even bothering to find out who this “I” is. What is it? We never trace it. Enter within. Before you say “I,” find out clearly whom you are calling “I.” The deeper you go within, the…