There is no contradiction whatsoever in the two statements of Krishna, and there is no room for confusion either.

Its front and back together make up a coin. They really complement each other, they are not at all contradictory. In fact, there cannot be a coin with only one side, it has to have two sides - one opposite to the other. It is true that the one side is the opposite of the other, but they are so inextricably joined that one cannot be without the other. It is difficult to say where the one side ends and the other begins. Of course, they are two opposite sides of the coin, but they are inseparable. Sannyas and yoga are two sides of the same coin. The other thing he says is that when one does not do a thing and yet knows he has done everything, it is sannyas. Krishna says that when one acts as if he does not act at all, it is yoga. BUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO ARJUNA'S INDIVIDUALITY IF HE CONSENTS TO BE JUST AN INSTRUMENT IN THE HANDS OF EXISTENCE? AND YOU SAY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO ACT, BECAUSE ACTION HAPPENS ON ITS OWN. SHANKARACHARYA SAYS IN HIS COMMENTARIES ON THE GEETA, THAT A WISE MAN DOES NOT NEED TO ACT, BECAUSE ACTION BELONGS TO THE DOER. THERE IS YET ANOTHER SIDE TO THIS QUESTION WHICH SEEMS IMPORTANT. HE SAYS THAT A YOGI IS ONE WHO, HAVING ACTED DOES NOT THINK HE HAS ACTED, AND A SANNYASIN IS ONE WHO DOES NOT ACT AND YET ACTION HAPPENS. HE EMPHASIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF INACTION, BUT IT SEEMS TO BE CONFUSING, BECAUSE IT HAS MORE THAN ONE MEANING. BUT SOME CONFUSION SURELY ARISES FROM KRISHNA'S EXPOSITION OF INACTION IN THE GEETA. YOU HAD EXPLAINED TO THE FOREIGN DISCIPLES OF MAHESH YOGI WHEN THEY MET YOU IN KASHMIR LAST YEAR ABOUT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF INACTION IN ACHIEVING SELF-KNOWLEDGE, AND WE HAVE NOW NO CONFUSION ABOUT IT. QUESTIONER: WE ARE GRATEFUL TO YOU FOR YOUR SUPERB EXPOSITION OF ACTION, INACTION AND NON-ACTION.

Krishna the man and his philosophy