Waiting, Meaning, and Action: Waiting for Godot Through the Lens of the Bhagavad Gita

This blog is written as part of an academic assignment given by Dr. Dilip Barad Sir, aiming to explore Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot through the lens of Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS). By bringing the Absurd philosophy of Beckett into dialogue with key concepts from the Bhagavad Gita such as Karma, Maya, Asha, and Kala this response attempts to critically examine themes of waiting, meaning, time, and action. The objective is not only to interpret the play but also to create a comparative philosophical understanding that connects Western existential thought with Indian spiritual wisdom.

1. Arjuna’s Vishada and Vladimir–Estragon’s Existential Crisis 

In the Bhagavad Gita, Arjuna’s vishada arises from moral confusion and fear of meaningless action. Similarly, Vladimir and Estragon experience an existential crisis marked by uncertainty, boredom, and despair. Their endless waiting for Godot reflects confusion about purpose and identity, but unlike Arjuna, they receive no guidance or resolution, remaining trapped in doubt.

2. Absence or Failure of Karma in Waiting for Godot 

Krishna teaches action without attachment to outcomes, but Beckett presents a world where action itself collapses. Vladimir and Estragon repeatedly plan to actleave, change, or even die yet remain motionless. Their actions lead to no result or transformation, portraying a failure of karma and highlighting human paralysis in a purposeless universe.

3. Cyclical Time in Waiting for Godot 

Cyclical time in Waiting for Godot is evident in the near-identical structure of Act I and Act II, where events repeat without progress. Another instance is the boy’s repeated message that Godot will come “tomorrow.” These moments create a loop of waiting, reflecting eternal, non-linear time rather than forward movement

“Godot is not a character but an expectation.”

How does this idea change my understanding of the title Waiting for Godot?

If we understand that “Godot is not a character but an expectation,” the title Waiting for Godot shifts from referring to a person to describing a human condition. The focus is no longer on who Godot is, but on the act of waiting itself. The title then suggests that life becomes defined by expectation waiting for meaning, salvation, change, or fulfillment. Vladimir and Estragon are not simply waiting for someone; they are sustained by hope that something will happen. This interpretation highlights the existential idea that humans often structure their lives around uncertain expectations, even when those expectations may never be fulfilled.

 The statement “Godot is not a character but an expectation” invites a deeper reading of Beckett’s play beyond literal interpretation. Instead of focusing on Godot’s identity, this idea shifts attention to the act of waiting itself and allows a philosophical comparison with concepts from the Bhagavad Gita, especially the nature of hope and attachment. 

I compare  Godot with Gita’s concept of Asha (hope or desire):

The idea that “Godot is not a character but an expectation” fundamentally reshapes the meaning of the title Waiting for Godot. The play is not about waiting for a person who will arrive but about waiting itself as a human condition. Vladimir and Estragon are suspended in hope, postponement, and uncertainty. Their waiting gives temporary structure to their lives, even though it leads nowhere. Godot’s absence highlights how humans rely on expectations to escape confronting the emptiness of existence.

Godot can be meaningfully compared with the Gita’s concept of Asha (hope or desire). In the Bhagavad Gita, attachment to hope binds individuals to suffering and illusion, preventing liberation. Similarly, Vladimir and Estragon’s hope that Godot will come tomorrow keeps them trapped in endless waiting. Their lives revolve around this expectation, yet it never fulfills them. Beckett thus presents hope not as salvation but as a mechanism of delay. Unlike the Gita, which offers detachment as a solution, Waiting for Godot portrays a world where hope persists without wisdom, reinforcing existential stagnation rather than release.

Concept in Bhagavad Gita	Explanation	Parallel in Waiting for Godot
Karma (Action)	The principle that every action has consequences and shapes one’s destiny. Action is necessary and unavoidable in life.	Vladimir and Estragon talk about acting (leaving, hanging themselves), but rarely act. Their inaction contrasts with the Gita’s emphasis on meaningful action.
Nishkama Karma	Performing one’s duty without attachment to the results or rewards of action.	The characters cannot detach from results; they wait for Godot expecting change. Their attachment to outcome prevents genuine action.
Maya	The illusion that makes worldly reality appear permanent and meaningful.	Godot represents illusion—an uncertain hope that gives false meaning to their waiting. Their belief in his arrival sustains a possibly empty reality.
Kala (Time)	Time is cyclical, eternal, and part of the cosmic order.	The play’s repetitive structure and identical acts reflect cyclical time, where days repeat without progress.
Moksha / Liberation	Freedom from ignorance, attachment, and the cycle of birth and death.	No liberation occurs; the characters remain trapped in waiting. Unlike the Gita, Beckett offers no spiritual resolution or escape.

The following reflective note examines Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot through the lens of Indian philosophical thought. By connecting the play’s Absurd vision with key concepts from the Bhagavad Gita, especially Karma and Maya, this response explores how waiting becomes a metaphor for human passivity and the crisis of meaning in modern existence.

“Beckett shows what happens when human beings wait for meaning instead of creating it.”

Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot presents a bleak yet powerful vision of human existence in which meaning is endlessly deferred rather than actively created.

Vladimir and Estragon do not suffer because life lacks meaning; rather, their suffering arises from their passive dependence on an external source Godot to provide it. Beckett exposes the danger of waiting for meaning as something that must arrive from outside instead of emerging through conscious action and responsibility.

This condition can be fruitfully understood through the Bhagavad Gita’s concept of Karma, especially Nishkama Karma action performed without attachment to results. Krishna teaches Arjuna that meaning is not found by avoiding action or 

waiting for divine intervention but by engaging fully in one’s duty with awareness and detachment. In contrast, Beckett’s characters fail to act. They repeatedly decide to leave, to change, or even to end their lives, yet remain motionless. Their waiting replaces action, and hope becomes an excuse for inertia.

Beckett thus dramatizes what happens when hope (Asha) is detached from action. Vladimir and Estragon’s hope that Godot will come “tomorrow” keeps them alive, but it also imprisons them in repetition and stagnation. Unlike the Gita, where hope is disciplined by wisdom and action, Beckett shows hope without direction—empty, circular, and exhausting. Time, instead of leading toward growth or liberation, becomes cyclical and meaningless, reinforcing existential paralysis.

From the Gita’s perspective, the characters are trapped in Maya, mistaking expectation for purpose. Godot becomes an illusion that structures their lives but never fulfils them. Liberation (Moksha) in the Gita comes through self-realisation and detached action; Beckett’s world offers no such escape because his characters refuse to create meaning through choice.

Ultimately, Beckett does not deny the possibility of meaning but critiques humanity’s tendency to wait passively for it. By contrasting Beckett’s Absurd universe with the Gita’s call to action, the play powerfully illustrates that meaning is not something we wait for it is something we must consciously create. before it what i should write

Here is a dialogue where Krishna explaining waiting and meaninglessness in Waiting for Godot to Arjuna as an MA English student:

Krishna: Arjuna, you study Waiting for Godot with great seriousness, yet I sense confusion in your mind. Tell me why do Vladimir and Estragon wait?

Arjuna: They wait for Godot, Krishna. As a student of literature, I feel he represents meaning, salvation, or perhaps God. But the waiting feels endless and empty.

Krishna: You are right to sense that emptiness. Godot is not a person but an expectation. The men wait because waiting saves them from acting. Action demands responsibility, and responsibility creates meaning.

Arjuna: But their hope keeps them alive. Without hope, would they not collapse?

Krishna: Hope without action is bondage, Arjuna. In the Gita, I teach Nishkama Karma—to act without attachment to results. Vladimir and Estragon do the opposite. They abandon action and cling to hope. Their hope becomes an excuse for inaction.

Arjuna: So their suffering comes from waiting itself?

Krishna: Yes. They wait for meaning to arrive from outside through Godot, through tomorrow, through time. But meaning is not granted; it is created through conscious choice. Their waiting turns time into a circle, not a path.

Arjuna: That explains why Act I and Act II feel the same. Time does not move forward.

Krishna: Exactly. When action is avoided, time loses direction. In my teaching, time (Kala) is eternal yet purposeful. In Beckett’s world, time repeats because the self refuses to act. This is Maya mistaking illusion for purpose.

Arjuna: Then is Beckett denying liberation altogether?

Krishna: Beckett shows what happens when human beings forget the path to liberation. There is no Moksha because there is no self-realisation. Vladimir and Estragon wait for Godot to define them instead of defining themselves.

Arjuna: As an MA English student, I see now that Beckett is not preaching despair but warning us.

Krishna: Precisely. The play asks you to choose: will you wait endlessly for meaning, or will you act and create it? The Absurd is not the end—it is the test.

Arjuna: I understand now, Krishna. Waiting is not neutral. It is a choice.

Krishna: And meaning, Arjuna, is born the moment you stop waiting and begin acting.

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

Using Indian Knowledge Systems changes my reading of a Western modernist text by offering an alternative philosophical lens that deepens interpretation rather than limiting it to despair or meaninglessness. When texts like Waiting for Godot are read through concepts such as Karma, Maya, and Asha from the Bhagavad Gita, the focus shifts from mere existential suffering to questions of action, attachment, and illusion. IKS allows me to see the characters’ paralysis not just as a modern condition but as a result of avoiding conscious action. This comparative approach transforms Western modernist pessimism into a dialogue with Indian thought, revealing that the crisis of meaning is not final but arises from human choices.

In conclusion, reading Waiting for Godot alongside the Bhagavad Gita deepens our understanding of both texts and highlights a powerful philosophical contrast. While Beckett portrays the paralysis that arises from passive waiting and misplaced hope, the Gita offers a path of conscious action and detachment as a way to create meaning. The comparison reveals that existential emptiness is not merely a condition of the modern world but a consequence of avoiding responsibility and action. Ultimately, this dialogue between Absurdism and Indian philosophy reminds us that meaning is not something granted from outside it is shaped through awareness, choice, and purposeful engagement with life.