07.01.09
Bazaz: Chap 12, ‘Role of the Gita’…
Bazaz’ The Role of the Bhagavad Gita in Indian History, chap 12, ‘The Skilful Mentor’.
THE social malaise generated by the defeat of the Buddhist Revolution gave rise to several knotty problems which the author of the Bhagavad-Gita was called upon to solve. In the dialogues between Arjuna and Sri Krishna these problems are brought up one by one and dexterously tackled with the main purpose of mopping up the surviving revolutionary elements in the country. The first and foremost problem was the firm determination of Arjuna not to fight; it had to be weakened and the prince persuaded to participate in the war and be instrumental in emas¬culating the kshatriya warrior class. The second problem was the challenge of the materialists and atheists who, though beaten, were still struggling to reassert themselves. It had to be met by reestablishing the supremacy of Brahmin dogmas and beliefs. The third problem was born of the dissatisfaction and sullenness of the toiling masses and labouring intellectuals who refused to work and resorted to non-cooperation by renunciation on a large scale in order to escape the tyrannies and exploitation by the upper castes. There were other problems less important when compared with these three, but by no means trifling such as restoration of the authority of the shastras (scriptures), sanctity of rituals and dignity of caste. To all these adequate attention was paid at the proper place and time in the course
of the discussions in a way that they did not grate upon the ears.
The author of the Gita like all Brahmin thinkers of the
age, realized that the root of the ills lay in the general ~ccept¬ance of the doctrines of Rationalism. As stated earlIer the Samkhya was the dominant philosophy even after the decline of Buddhism. The Shanti Par van of the Mahabharata records:
“There is no knowledge equal to Samkhya nor power equal to
Yoga.”!
So long as the people continued to have faith in the
Samkhya the future of neo-Brahminism could not be bright. But, unlike Badrayana, the author of the Gita, Dvaipayana Vyasa, did not bend his energy to refute the Samkhya and thereby assert the infallibility of theism. He opened his sermon with unqualified appreciation of the Samkhya and even at times questioned the superiority of the Vedas.
Vyasa must have seen that by making a frontal attack on the Samkhya Badrayana had achieved no particular success because the materialist theory of Prakriti had struck deep roots in the Indian soil; it was therefore foolish, even hazardous, to denounce it outright. Though the author of the Gita acknowledges his debt to Badrayana’s Brahma Sutras which he calls “well reasoned and conclusive expressions”2 he does not follow the latter at any rate in the earlier part of the dialogues, in refuting rationalist-materialist theories. An altogether new line of approach has been adopted in the Gita to undermine the forces of irreligion and profanity. The Samkhya is owned and praised but distorted and presented in a form as to make it substantially similar to the Vedanta and, indeed, indisting¬uishable from it.
Admitting that Arjuna was speaking words of wisdom, but without answering his cogent and clearly stated objection against participation in the war, Sri Krishna affection~tely chides him for feeling depressed: “Wise men do not gneve for the dead or for the living, stresses the Blessed Lord.”3
Totally ignoring the issues raised by Arjuna, Sri Krishna jumps headlong into the river of mystic philosophy and theism. He explains in brief what he calls the Samkhya, leaving its details for a later discourse. The burden of Sri Krishna’s
~loquent thesis is that “the soul is eternal, indestructible and Im~easurable while the body is finite.”4 Since that is so, ~rJuna . should not, emphasises Sri Krishna, grieve over the I~pendmg carnage and slaughter of his kith and km: “Even if thou thinkest that the self is perpetually born and perpetually dies (reference is probably to the plurality of s~uls in heterodox thought), even then, 0 mighty-armed (ArJuna), thou should not grieve.”5 Therefore, learn to endure agony and a~guish. “Contact of senses with their objects, 0 son of Kuntt (Arjuna), gives rise to cold and heat pleasure a~d. pai.n. They come and go and not last for ev;r.”6 The kl.llmg m the w~r may be excruciatingly painful but the feelings Will not be lastmg; therefore this is no reason to shirk from fighting.
Now though this may be a philosophy of life, it is certainly not what Kapila taught or other Samkhya teachers maintained. ~ven.Dr. Radhakrishnan has to admit: “The teacher explains m bnef m verses 11-38 the wisdom of the Samkhya philosophy. The ~amkhya does not refer to Kapila’s system but to the teachmgs of the Upanishads.”7 Why should then either Sri Krishna or Dr Radhakrishnan call it the Samkhya and not the Vedanta passes one’s comprehension.
Be that as it may, Sri Krishna felt that even spurious Samkhya was not readily acceptable to Arjuna; therefore the great teacher of neo-Brahminism next resorted to rather uns~iritual method of provoking caste pride and inborn longmg for power of the kshatriya prince. Sri Krishna remonstrates: “Looking to your own duty thou should not t:emble, for there is nothing more welcome to kshatriya than nghteous war. The kshatriya who obtains such a fight unsought like an open door to heaven should be happy. If, hov:ever, you will not carryon this righteous warfare, then ?avmg. c~,st away your own duty and your honour you will Incur sm. 8 Sri Krishna proceeds: “Other men will recount your perpetual dishonour and to one highly esteemed dishonour exceeds death. The great cart-warriors will think that you fled from the battle from fear, and you who was highly thought of ?y them, will be lightly held. Many unseemly words slander¬Ing your strength will be spoken by your enemies. What should be more painful than that; (on the other hand) if you
v .’ •
are slain you will obtain heaven but If you are vlctonous you will enjoy the earth.
.
Apart from the fact whether any war can be nghteous, pa . , . h ., thy of Sri Krishna
fails to meet AfJuna s pOlllt t at It. IS unwor
dent human being to enjoy even the rulershlp of the wl:ole a el~ after shedding blood of near relations and friends besides wor I A” tion thousands of innocent warriors. Simp y put, fJuna s ques
. . Should political rights get precedence over demands of IS. S• K’ h nd
humanity? This remains unanswered by n rIS na ~
Arjuna stands unmoved.
Next the great teacher gives a discourse on Y?ga to t~mpt
the disciple because, as Sri Krishna says, “in thiS there IS n.o loss of effort, nor is there transgression. Even a little of thIS knowledge (of Yoga) protects from great fear.”10 The Yo~a of the Gita, however, does not mean Patanjali Yoga, as pOI.nted out by Dr. Radhakrishnan. Sri Krishna interpret.s It lil .a manner as to support the philosophy of non-dualIsm. It IS the Yoga of knowledge.l1 And what is t~e ess.enc~ of t~at knowledge? Says Sri Krishna: “Thy busl~ess IS V:1th actlOn only, never with its fruits; so let not the frUlt of a.ctlO? be ~hy motive, nor be thou to inaction attached. Dwelhng III un~on with the divine, 0 winner of wealth (Arjuna), reno~nclllg attachments and balanced evenly in success and fallure;
equilibrium is called Yoga.”12 . .
To make his conception of Yoga acceptable, Sn Knshna
accords a high place to it by even undervaluing the Vedas:
“When thy mind bewildered by the Vedic texts shall stand unshaken then shall thou attain Yoga.”13 Such a clever approach’made a dent in Arjuna’s stubborn stand. Fo:getting the basic issue raised by himself, which led to the dialogue, the Pandava Prince started asking for clarification of the philosophy propounded by Sri Krishna. He asks: “What. the mark of him who is stable of mind, steadfast in contemplatIOn, o Keshava (Krishna)? How doth the stable-minded talk, how doth he sit, how walk ?”14 What relevance has this question to his initial objection to fight? one is tempted to ask. Wit~ the rigidity on the part of Arjuna beginning to melt, SrI Krishna puts across for the first time the idea of personal God
which is the heart of the Gita philosophy. He asserts: “0 Arjuna, the excited senses of even a wise man, though he be striving, impetuously carry away his mind, Having restrained them he should sit harmonised, I his supreme goal; for whose senses are mastered of him the understanding is well poised, “15
Sri Krishna’s logic is hardly convincing, On the one hand he frequently urges Arjuna to rise, fight and gain his kingdom, on the other, he affirms that “he who abandons all desires and acts free from longing, without any sense of meanness or egotism, attains to peace,”16 The Pandava Prince sharply reacts to the contradictory statements and asks: “If thou deemest that (the path of) understanding is more excellent than (the path of) action why then do you urge me to do this savage deed ?17 Such utterances of Sri Krishna have further “confused and bewildered Arjuna’s intelligence and he wants to be told decisively what is the thing by which he can attain the highest goOd.”IS Again disregarding the question of war and peace pointedly raised by Arjuna, Sri Krishna gives a different direction to the talk and tries to show that there is no difference between the Samkhya and the Yoga or, in other words, that jnana (wisdom) is not incompatible with karma (action). The greatest emphasis is laid on the importance and desirability of activity; the Yoga is made to excel the Samkhya and belong to remote antiquity, When Sri Krishna claims to have lived and taught this philosophy of Yoga in ancient times, the rationalist Arjuna expresses astonishment which makes the former to expound the theory of avataras (incarnations of God). Delineating the theory Sri Krishna now praises wisdom (know¬ledge): “As the fire which is kindled turns its fuel to ashes, 0 Arjuna, even so does fire of wisdom turn to ashes all action. “19
This vacillation on the part of Sri Krishna in alternately declaring knowledge and action to be superior, causes con¬fusion to Arjuna and he protests: “Thou praisest, 0 Krishna, the renunciation of works (by knowledge) and again their unselfish performance, Tell me for certain which one is the better of the two ?20 Unable to know his own mind or un¬willing to take sides, Sri Krishna declares that “performance of works is better than their renunciation,”21 but, soon after, he asseverates that “it is ignorant people who speak of
‘t’on (Samkhya) and practice of works (Yoga) as
renunc1a 1 • f ‘
‘ffi t not the wise. He who sees that tne ways 0 renunCla-
~1 :r::d, of action are one he (truly) sees.”22 Sri Krishna. takes tlO ‘t to elaborate the philosophy of work wIthout
th’s opportulll y . ,
1 h t h’ch is considered to be the greatest contnbutlOn
attac men WI, “H h d
f the Bhagavad-Gita to perennial phIlosophy:. . e w.o o~s
o k h’ h he ought to do without seeklllg Its fruIt he IS
the wor w IC I’ h th
, h is the yogin not he who does not 19 t e
the sanyasm, e . “23
d fire and performs no ntes.
sacr;”heth~r or not the long expositions of the ne,w-f~ngled
h
. llayed the doubts and removed the confuSIOn III the
t eones a . h f
mind of Arjuna is debatable but it IS safe to say t at ro~
havin
~~w onwards about the other world and the Eternal: “~’::~ no stable foundation for Yoga on account of restles~ness ” “mind is very fickle, it is impetuous, strong and obstma~e, It is difficult to control as the wind,”25 “he,who cannot hImself though he has faith, with the mind wandenng away from Y~:: failing to attain perfection in Yoga, what way does he g d “does he not perish like a rent cloud, fallen from both, an without any hold and bewildered in the path that leads to the
Eternal ?”
Hearing such questions Sri Krishna must have chuckle~ and
when Arjuna asked further: “what is Brahman? What 1~ the Self and what is action? What is said to be the domam of the elements and what is the domain of the gods”27 the gre~t teacher must have felt pleased at the success of his own skill
. A . h d ased to talk about
and art of persuaSIOn. For rJuna a ce
impending wanton bloodshed, revolting selfish~ess ~nd shame-
f
‘th and kin The Pandava Pnnce s stubborn
u massacre 0 . . . Y ,
attitude had flagged and he was noW more mt~rested m OglC
practices and abstract theories of religion than m the welfare of society,
At this stage Sri Krishna throws away the garb, of ma~, assumes Godhood and encourages the disciple, who IS now m proper frame of mind, to proceed further on the path of religion. The mentor takes him into confidence: “To thee w~o does not cavil, I shall declare this profound secret of Wisdom combined with knowledge by knowing when thou shalt ?e released from evil. This is sovereign knowledge, sovereign se.cret, supreme sanctity, known by direct experience, III accord with the law, very easy to practise and imperishable.”28 The supre~e secret is, however, no other than exaltation of Go.d and Im?ortance of reposing complete faith in Him for ultImate delIverance: “Fix thy mind on Me’ to Me be devoted; . worship Me; revere Me, thus havin~ disciplined thyself, with Me as thy goal, to Me shalt thou come.”29 Th~ arrow hits the mark; the critic in Aljuna is vanquished; he acknowledges defeat: “Thou art the Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Abode and the Supreme Purifier the Eternal, D.ivine person, the first of the gods, the Unborn: the AlI.-pervadmg. I hold as true all this that thou sayest to me.”30 Ar]una only wants to know the various aspects of the Blessed Lord .in .which He may be thought of.31 Sri Krishna obliges the disciple by giving a long list of thin as in which God is n:anifested but though Arjuna acknowledge~ again that by “the discourse concerning self”, and “the supreme mystery” revealed to him his bewilderment is gone, yet he desires to see “the divine form of the Blessed Lord, the Imperishable Self. “32 Fully convinced that Arjuna’s imagination is excited to the highest pitch enabling him to have the wildest of wild hall¬ucinations, Sri Krishna describes the fantasy of Vishwarupa (World Appearance) and directs him to see things as desired by the Blessed Lord. But reason and fantasy ill go together and any element of reason in Arjuna will prevent him from indulg¬ing in fantasy. Sri Krishna says: thou canst not behold Me with this (rational or human) eye of yours; I will therefore bestow on thee the (imaginative) eye. Behold my divine power.”33 Deprived of the critical, reasoning facuIty and having been worked into a state of mental frenzy, Arjuna saw shuddering and horrifying pictures through his imagination, and ex¬claimed:
When I see thee touching the sky, blazir,g with many hues with the mouth opened wide, and large glowing eyes: my inmost soul trembles in fear and I find neither steadiness nor peace, 0 Vishnu (Krishna).
When I see thy mouths terrible with their tus~s, .like Time’s devouring flames, I lose sense of the directIOns and find no peace. Be gracious 0, Lord of gods, Refuge of the worlds.34
Frightened and spiritually crushed by these hideous scenes, Arjuna pays unqualified tributes to the Supreme Self in the form of Sri Krishna:
“Prostrate in front of thee, prostrate behind, prostrate on every side of Thee, boundless in power and immeasur¬able in might. Thou dost penetrate all and therefore thou art all. “35 “Thou art the father of tbe world, of the moving and the unmoving. Thou art the
Sri Krishna is not slow in accepting submission and
immediately puts the subdued critic under obligation:
“By My grace thou has.t seep, 0 Arju.na this l.oftiest form, luminous, universal, Illfilllte and pnmal which none but thee has seen before. Neither by the Vedas, nor by sacrifices nor by study nor by gifts nor by ceremonial rites can I with this form be seen in the world of men by anyone else but thee. “37
The real purpose of hypnotising the Pandava Prince is to shatter his iron wiII against fighting and participating in the impending war. Therefore, Sri Krishna pointedly draws the attention of Arjuna to that aspect of the Vishwarupa (World
Appearance) :
“Time am I world-destroying grown mature, engaged here in subduing the world. Even wit~out thee (~hy action) all the warriors standing arrayed m t~e opposmg armies shall cease to be ; thou shalt alone s~rvIve. There¬fore arise thou and gain glory. Conquenng thy foes, enjoy a prosperous kingdom. By Me ~lone are .they slain already. Be thou merely the occaSIOn, 0 Aquna, Slay Drona, Bhishma, Jayadratha, Kama and other great warriors as well, who are already doomed b~ M.e. Be not afraid. Fight, thou sball conquer thy enemies III the battle.”38
The Vishwarupa Darshan (fantasy of the World Appearance) humbled Arjuna. The recorder of the dialogue, Sanjaya, says: “Having heard the utterance of Keshava (Sri Krishna) Kiritin (Arjuna), with folded hands and trembling, spoke in a faltering voice.”39 This proved to be the turning point in Arjuna’s life. The sceptic, questioning, criticising-self in him was dead. Abjectly surrendering to the supernatural, he felt deeply concerned to learn which of the two paths was better, worship of Imperishable and the Unmanifested or of the Personal God.40 Nothing would have given Sri Krishna greater pleasure than to see Arjuna asking for such clarifications because this provided him the opportunity of making his main point namely, the importance of the Vedanta in particular and theism in general. Nevertheless, the Samkhya continues to haunt both the preceptor and the disciple. Arjuna asks for light on the theories of Prakriti and Purusha.41 It is easier at this stage for the great apostle of neo-Brahminism to present the materialist Samkhya in the form of idealist Vedanta as well as the essence of theism. Every word uttered to explain the Samkhya is in glaring distortion of KapiIa’s philosophy and in exaltation of the Vedanta. In the Samkhya prakriti is the cause of the universe and purusha is simply a disinterested spectator. But Sri Krishna makes the purusha as the dominat¬ing factor and prakriti subordinate to it: “He who sees the Supreme Lord abiding equally in all beings, never perishing when they perish he, verily, sees.”42 “When he sees that the manifold state of beings is centred in the One and from just that it spreads out, then he attains Brahman.”43 The three gunas (modes) of the prakriti namely, goodness (sattva), passion (rajas) and dullness (tamas) also are inter¬preted in a way as to prove the truth of the Vedanta viewpoint: “He who is seated like one unconcerned, undisturbed by the gunas without wavering, knowing that it is only gunas that act…he is fit for becoming Brahman.”44 The stage is set for dividing human race into two categories, one whose nature is godlike (daivi) and the other who are of demoniac spirit (asuri). All those who have faith in the Supreme Lord are put in the former category and others like non-conformists, rationalists, atheists and materialists are in-
cluded in the latter. Arjuna, it is no surprise, is specifically declared to be godlike (daivi): “The divine properties are deemed to be for liberation, the demoniacal for bondage. Grieve not thou art born with divine qualities, 0 Pandava.”45
It is no~able that when Sri Krishna comes to give his last and final advice to Arjuna he overrides all the philosophies¬the Samkhya, the Yoga, the Vedanta, and of wisdom and action-and strongly insists on blind faith in Himself (o~ a Personal God) for achievement of liberation.: “RenounclOg mentally all works in Me, intent on Me, resortlOg to ~he. Yoga of discrimination have thy thought ever on Me. ThlO~lOg on
M
e thou shall overcome all obstacles by My grace; but If from
d
I “46
egoism thou will not listen, thou shall be destroye utter y.
Arjuna calmly heard the profuse assurance as w:ll a~ the dire warnings till the last but, significantly, when Sn Kns~na concluded his rhetorical peroration with the wprds “havlOg
h
t “47
reflected on it (my advice) fully, then act as thou c oose~ ‘.
Arjuna kept silent and did not, as expected ~y. t~e ~lvlOe Teacher, readily accept the doctrine, causing mIsgl:”lOgs 10 the mind of the Blessed Lord. Was it that the mlOd of the bewildered intellectual was after all still entertaining doubts and could not make the final choice? The Blessed Lord had
therefore to deliver another oration:
“Listen thou again to My supreme word, most secret of all; beloved art thou to Me, and steadfast of hea~t ; therefore will I speak for thy benefit. Merge thy mlOd in Me, be My devotee, sacrifice to Me, prostrate thyself before Me, then thou shall come even to Me. I ‘pledge thee My truth, thou art dear to Me. Abandonmg all duties come unto Me alone for shelter, sorrow not, I will liberate thee from all sin.”48
These tempting promises, blandishments, flattery and appeal did not go in vain. For Arjuna declared: “Destroyed is my delusion, I have gained knowledge through Thy grace, 0 Immutable One (Krishna), I am firm, my doubts have fled away, I will do according to Thy word.”49 . One is left to wonder if this was a sincere and honest declaratIOn.
The dialogues contained in the Bhagavad-Gita purport~ng to convert a pseudo-rationalist to a fully convinced, god-feanng
believer may be broadly divided into three stages. Krishna had to deal with a critic who, though a converted theist, was labouring under the influence of the Samkhya doctrines. To begin with therefore the neo-Brahminist teacher pays great attention to logical and rational argumentation in order to create a receptive mood in the pupil. Sri Krishna’s appeal is more to intellect than to emotion or sentiment. His style is simple and direct. The discussion is worthy of two intellectuals. The Samkhya- Yoga philosophy was still popular among the people. Therefore, Sri Krishna nowhere opposes it and, indeed, expresses agreement with it advising Arjuna to become a Yogi. Only the Samkhya doctrines are rather timidly presented as if they are no different from the Vedanta.
In the second stage of discussion finding the pupil to be somewhat inclined to understand the teachers’ viewpoint, Sri Krishna becomes more analytical and touches on topics of metaphysics, scriptural ordinances and dharma. He describes various theories about Reality and is toierant of those who disagree with him and is good to all. Here are advanced the Samkhya, Yoga, Mimamsa and Vedanta theories with seeming impartiality and scholastic profundity. The appeal is more or less to logic and reason; the style continues to be unsophistica¬ted and direct.
Entering into the third and the final stage, Sri Krishna appears in his true colour as the irrepressible and uncompromis¬ing spokesman of religion and sacerdotalism. He is no longer subject to cause and effect theory. Logic and reason do not perturb him. He is aware of the fact that Arjuna’s mind has been prepared to receive unquestioningly dogmas and tenets of neo-Brahminism. Therefore, he straightway proclaims the doctrines and peremptorily commands Arjuna to accept them on faith or perish. Every statement bears the stamp of senti¬ment, rhetoric, eloquence and forcible diction. Coherence and consistency are subordinated to indoctrination of the main principles advanced in support of the Vedanta or the theistic philosophy. The hearer or the reader is carried away smoothly along with the current of lucid, sublime and emotional religious discourse. There is no room for argument in this. Conscious of having successfully imposed himself on Arjuna, or for that
matter every student of the sacred poem, the author of the Gita can afford to be assertive, unaccommodating and uncompro¬mising; he relies on demands of faith and loyalty to the scrip¬tures. In the words of G.S. Khair: “He expects them (the students of the Gita) to believe in his teachings implicitly and faithfully. He tries to achieve conviction, not with argument but with the combined weapons of faith, mysticism, divinity, super¬natural powers, terror, admiration, superhuman forms, illusion and an overpowering frightful vision. He is a mastermind and knows thoroughly well the psychology of the common man who is his main audience. Those who believe in him will attain divine proximity, those who will not will go to perdi¬tion.”5o
While nearly two-thirds of the Gita is devoted to the third stage of the discussion the first two stages are dealt with in barely one-third of the poem.
It may be noted that in the discussions at the different stages not only the tone of Sri Krishna’s language changes from argumentative and persuasive to assertive and dogmatic even the way in which the two characters address each other undergoes significant change. Khair has taken sufficient pains to show this. At the first stage Sri Krishna and Arjuna speak on equal terms as friends and comrades. While Arjuna addresses Sri Krishna by his proper name like Keshava, Govinda, Madhava, Janardana etc., in turn Sri Krishna addresses the Pandava Prince in a similar manner as Dhananjaya, Partha, Parantapa, Pandava etc. But later on tbey become unequal, when Sri Krishna assumes the divine posture he is addressed by Arjuna as Adideva, Jagatnivasa, Parmeshwara, Mahayogeshwara, Devadeva, Jagatpati etc. In turn, Sri Krishna calls him by such names as Kurupravira, Kurusreshta, Dehabratamvara etc.
Again, in the beginning Sri Krishna refers to God mostly in third person as someone different from himself. The words used for Him are like tat (that), sa (he), yat (who), yen (by whom) or as Brahman, Purusha, Parmatman, Kshatrin etc. But ip tbe later stages Sri Krishna refers to himself as Supreme Being and Indestructible, Immutable or Imperishable SouJ.51 The author of the Gita was conscious that though the discussions held between Sri Krishna and Arjuna had the specific purpose of removing the latter’s doubts, the poem was composed for the people of India who were as much frustrated and confused as the Pandava Prince, after the defeat of the Buddhist Revolution. Parts of the poem where dialogues are held on high intellectual plain are particularly meant for the educated sections whom the author calls vipashita, kaviya, pandita, buddhiman, muni, yati, jUatman, rishi and yogi. But when the discussion comes down to lower levels of religion and Personal God the addresses are ordinary people-like jana, devvrata, pitrivrate, arta, jignasu, striya, shudra, papkritatma. “The philosopher”, observes Khair, “wanted to carry his message to every section, from top to bottom, of contemporary society. “52