Karma, Time, and the Absurd: A Comparative Study of Beckett and the Gita

I am writing this blog as part of an academic task assigned by Barad Sir, who has also provided us with a structured worksheet to guide our understanding. The assignment encourages us to read Waiting for Godot through the lens of Indian Knowledge Systems, particularly the Bhagavad Gita, and to think critically and comparatively. Through this blog, I attempt to connect Western Absurd drama with Indian philosophical thought and develop a deeper, culturally rooted interpretation of the text.

Introduction

Modern drama often reflects the anxiety, uncertainty, and fragmentation of twentieth-century life. One of the most significant works in this context is Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett, a play that presents human existence as repetitive, uncertain, and seemingly meaningless. Traditionally, the play is interpreted through the lens of European Existentialism and Absurdism. However, this blog attempts to move beyond a purely Western framework by reading the play through the philosophical insights of the Bhagavad Gita, an important text within Indian Knowledge Systems. By comparing concepts such as karma (action), kala (time), maya (illusion), and detachment with the experiences of Vladimir and Estragon, this study explores how Indian philosophy can offer a deeper and culturally rooted understanding of waiting, hope, and meaning in the modern world.

Section A: Conceptual Warm-Up (Short Answers)

1. Vishada (Existential Crisis)

In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna’s vishada is not mere sadness but a profound metaphysical paralysis arising from ethical confusion and loss of purpose. Similarly, Vladimir and Estragon inhabit a state of existential suspension. Their uncertainty about memory, place, and meaning reflects ontological instability. Unlike Arjuna, however, they receive no revelatory guidance, remaining trapped in unresolved crisis.

2. Absence or Failure of Karma

Krishna’s doctrine of karma privileges purposeful action detached from outcomes. Beckett, however, stages a dramaturgy of deferred action. Decisions are articulated but never actualised; gestures collapse into inertia. The characters’ repetitive deliberations—“Shall we go?”—culminate in immobility. This dramatizes not Nishkama Karma, but the erosion of agency itself, where intention fails to translate into transformative action.

3. Cyclical Time (Kala)

The play’s temporality resists linear progression and instead performs circular recurrence. Act II structurally mirrors Act I, suggesting repetition without teleology. Additionally, the Boy’s recurring message that Godot will arrive “tomorrow” institutes perpetual deferral. While the Gita’s concept of Kala implies cosmic continuity with spiritual evolution, Beckett presents cyclical time emptied of transcendental purpose.

Section B: Guided Close Reading (Text + IKS)

 Reinterpreting the Title: Waiting as Existential Condition

If Godot is understood not as a physical character but as an expectation, the title Waiting for Godot shifts from referring to a person to describing a psychological and existential condition. The focus moves away from the arrival of someone and toward the act of waiting itself. Waiting becomes a mode of being—an endless postponement of meaning. The play therefore foregrounds anticipation as the central human experience, suggesting that existence is structured not by fulfillment but by deferred hope.

 Godot as Maya (Illusion)

Godot can be meaningfully compared with the concept of Maya in the Bhagavad Gita, which signifies illusion or misperceived reality. Like Maya, Godot governs the characters’ perception without ever becoming materially present. Vladimir and Estragon organise their time, actions, and emotional investment around his promised arrival. Their attachment to this unseen figure sustains hope yet perpetuates stagnation. Thus, Godot functions as an illusion that shapes existence while preventing liberation from expectation.

Section C: Comparative Thinking (IKS + Absurdism)

Concept in Bhagavad Gita	Explanation	Parallel in Waiting for Godot
Karma (Action)	Karma signifies necessary, ethical action that sustains both individual dharma and cosmic order. It affirms agency within existential uncertainty.	Beckett dramatizes the erosion of karma. The characters verbalise intention but fail to enact it, revealing a crisis of agency where action is perpetually deferred and existence becomes performative stagnation.
Nishkama Karma	Detached action performed without desire for outcomes; a disciplined mode of engagement grounded in inner steadiness.	Vladimir and Estragon neither act decisively nor detach themselves from expectation. Their waiting is attachment without action, exposing the inversion of Nishkama Karma in an Absurd universe.
Maya	Maya denotes illusion—the misapprehension that binds consciousness to false hopes and transient appearances.	Godot operates as an illusory centre of meaning. Though absent, he structures reality, suggesting that human beings construct metaphysical anchors to endure existential emptiness.
Kala (Time)	Kala embodies cyclical, cosmic temporality that ultimately facilitates spiritual realization.	Time in the play is circular yet sterile. Repetition replaces evolution, presenting cyclical time devoid of transcendence and thus emptied of teleological significance.
Moksha / Liberation	Liberation from attachment, illusion, and cyclical suffering through knowledge and self-realization.	The play denies moksha. The characters remain entrapped within waiting, unable to transcend illusion or assert existential autonomy, thereby intensifying the tragic dimension of Absurdism.

Comparative Reflection: IKS and the Absurd Condition

When read through the philosophical framework of the Bhagavad Gita, Waiting for Godot appears not merely as a drama of absurdity but as a meditation on the failure of spiritual principles. The Gita affirms karma as purposeful and necessary action that sustains both individual and cosmic order. In contrast, Beckett presents a world where intention collapses into inertia. Vladimir and Estragon repeatedly articulate decisions, yet these decisions dissolve into immobility. Action exists linguistically but not existentially, suggesting a crisis of agency.

Similarly, the Gita’s doctrine of Nishkama Karma promotes disciplined engagement without attachment to results. However, the characters in the play neither act nor detach themselves. Their waiting is saturated with expectation; they remain psychologically dependent on Godot’s arrival. This inversion exposes a world in which detachment is replaced by anxious anticipation.

The concept of Maya further illuminates the play’s structure. Godot, though absent, functions as an illusionary centre that organises meaning. The characters’ faith in his arrival resembles attachment to a metaphysical projection. Yet unlike the Gita, where illusion can be overcome through wisdom, Beckett offers no transcendence.

Finally, while Kala (time) in the Gita is cyclical yet spiritually progressive, time in the play is circular but stagnant. Repetition occurs without evolution. Consequently, the possibility of Moksha (liberation) remains unrealised. The characters are trapped within existential recurrence, highlighting the tragic difference between spiritual philosophy and modern absurdity.

Section D: Creative–Critical Task (IKS Integration)

Dialogue: Krishna Explains “Waiting” to Arjuna, the MA English Student

Arjuna: O Krishna, I have been reading Waiting for Godot, and I am troubled. The characters wait endlessly for someone who never comes. Why do they continue waiting? Is there meaning in such waiting?

Krishna: Arjuna, your confusion resembles your earlier vishada on the battlefield. Tell me—what do they wait for?

Arjuna: They wait for Godot. But he never appears. They do not know who he truly is. Yet they believe he will give direction to their lives.

Krishna: Then they are not merely waiting for a person. They are waiting for certainty. They seek meaning from outside themselves.

Arjuna: Yes, Lord. They seem paralysed. They decide to leave, yet they remain. They speak of action, yet they act not.

Krishna: That is because they have abandoned karma. In my teaching, action must arise from inner awareness, not from expectation of results. These men wait for meaning to arrive, instead of creating meaning through action. Their waiting is attachment disguised as hope.

Arjuna: So their suffering comes from attachment?

Krishna: Indeed. When one ties one’s peace to an uncertain future, the present becomes empty. They say, “Let us go,” yet they do not move. Their bodies stand still because their minds are bound to illusion.

Arjuna: Is Godot then Maya?

Krishna: You may interpret him so. Godot governs their perception without ever appearing. Like Maya, he structures their world, yet he remains beyond reach. They are trapped not by reality, but by expectation.

Arjuna: Then what would liberation mean for them?

Krishna: Liberation would mean acting without waiting for external validation. It would mean accepting uncertainty and still choosing action. The Absurd world tests the human spirit. Where there is no divine revelation, one must become responsible for meaning.

Arjuna: I understand now, Lord. The tragedy is not that Godot does not come—but that they do not awaken.

Krishna: Well spoken, Arjuna. True wisdom lies not in waiting, but in conscious action.

How does using Indian Knowledge Systems change my reading of a Western modernist text ?

Using Indian Knowledge Systems significantly reshapes my reading of a Western modernist text by expanding the interpretive framework beyond Eurocentric existentialism. Modernist works such as Waiting for Godot are often approached through themes of alienation, absurdity, and meaninglessness rooted in twentieth-century European philosophy. However, when read through the lens of the Bhagavad Gita, the same text begins to reflect questions of karma, detachment, illusion, and cyclical time. Instead of seeing the play only as a representation of despair, I begin to interpret it as a spiritual crisis arising from the absence of purposeful action. The characters’ paralysis contrasts sharply with the Gita’s emphasis on conscious engagement with life. Thus, IKS does not simply add cultural variety; it introduces an alternative epistemology that challenges the assumption that absurdity is the final truth of human existence. It encourages a comparative mode of reading that is dialogic rather than oppositional, allowing Western modernism to be understood through a broader philosophical horizon.

Conclusion

Reading Waiting for Godot through the philosophical lens of the Bhagavad Gita reveals how cross-cultural interpretation can deepen literary understanding. While Beckett presents a world marked by waiting, repetition, and apparent meaninglessness, the Gita offers a contrasting vision grounded in action, detachment, and spiritual awareness. This comparison does not diminish the Absurd; rather, it illuminates the consequences of a world where purposeful karma and inner realization are absent. The characters’ paralysis becomes more striking when placed beside Krishna’s call to conscious action. Thus, integrating Indian Knowledge Systems into the study of modern drama encourages a more dialogic and decolonial approach to literature. It allows us to move beyond fixed philosophical boundaries and to recognize that human questions about time, hope, and meaning resonate across cultures. Ultimately, this comparative reading transforms waiting from mere existential stagnation into a critical space for philosophical reflection.

Academic Integrity & AI Use Disclosure

This blog represents my original analysis and critical interpretation. Generative AI tools (such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and NotebookLM) were consulted only for brainstorming, structural guidance, and conceptual clarification. All arguments and written responses have been developed independently in accordance with academic integrity guidelines.