Questioner: Dear James, in the Gita, Krishna says to Arjuna, “I am the desire that is not opposed to dharma!” Does that statement mean that the jiva’s desire is okay as long as it is only the desire for moksa? And therefore any other desire is pointless.
James: No. Because fundamentally all desires are for freedom, meaning that I don’t want what I ostensibly want. I want freedom from want itself insofar as desire is suffering. So there is nothing wrong with satisfying one’s worldly desires, although suffering is inevitable owing to the nature of desire itself, which cannot deliver lasting satisfaction. Temporary satisfaction generates dissatisfaction, according to the zero-sum rule.
He’s speaking to Arjuna, whose desires not to injure his friends is perversely contrary to situational dharma because in this extraordinary situation the moral order dictates that they be killed because they are following adharma, although in most situations non-injury is the universal norm. Krishna is making the point that one needs discrimination when it comes to satisfying noble and ignoble desires. The Gita calls it discretion in action.
This is a complex issue because you have people who follow their svadharma rigorously, his teachers Bhisma and Drona, for instance, who were loyal to promises made to Duryodhana’s father and unwittingly ended up fighting for the adharmic principle in this extraordinary situation. Even though they were good men doing the right thing by their own lights, they paid with their lives because they were supporting adharma. Conversely there were righteous men supporting dharma who also paid with their lives.
Questioner: Or does it mean any desire that the jiva [has] is okay, as long as it is not breaking samanya dharma?
James: Yes.
Questioner: Or does it mean that the jiva’s desire is okay as long as it is in line with their svadharma?
James: Yes, but only if it conforms to the universal value or values manifesting in everyday situations. Karma yoga is a moral law. A person may, for instance, have a criminal nature and do criminal acts, yet still suffer even though he is acting in harmony with his relative nature, because universal values are built into every human being. So to forestall suffering he would have bypass his svadharma, his dominant innate tendencies, and conform to universal values.
~ Love, James