Gospel of the Gita

THE BHAGAVAD GITA

ITS UNIQUE GREATNESS

The Bhagavad Gita is a part of the Mahabhārata which was narrated to King Janamejaya by Vaishampayana, a pupil of Krishnadvaipāyana Vyasa who wrote the epic. We have it on the authority of the epic itself that at one time it contained twenty-four thousand verses and was called the Bhārata: later were incorporated into the body of the work ākhyānas and Upākhyānas historical legends, vedic parables, allegorical narratives and stories of ethical and religious value handed down by tradition from an unknown past. Thus we have the great compilation, Mahabhārata Samhita, comprising a hundred thousand verses excluding the supplement of Harivamsha. We are not here concerned with the conjectures of the date of compilation of this most voluminous mass of epic literature in the world. It is sufficient for our purpose to note that, unlike the ākhyānas and Upākhyānas that are separate blocks unconnected with the main story of the great epic, the Bhagavad Gita forms an integral part of the Bharata war itself It is not that the story of the war as a historical narrative will be incomplete without a place for the Gita in the Bhishma Parva, but the significance of the wisdom taught in it will be missed if we ignore the battlefield and Arjuna’s refusal to fight at the eleventh hour. The import of the Gita’s teachings, the spirit of its theme, will escape us if we ignore the occasion that gave rise to its teachings, even though in themselves they are capable of universal application without reference to the battle of Kurukshetra.

Indeed, the Gita embodies in itself the essential teachings of the Upanishads; but not content with a statement of certain spiritual truths, it proceeds to mark out methods of their application in life in a rare manner that distinguishes it from other scriptures. In it we find at every turn a large, free and flexible spirit, a sympathetic understanding of the views in vogue and a sifting of whatever is of permanent and higher value in the crude notions, customary rites and religious beliefs and conventions, of the social order. We also find in it a free place for the extreme philosophic views that counted at the time and a mass of metaphysical ideas that stimulate to a degree the stress and power of thinking; and in a marvellous manner it finds use for all these in its exposition of spiritual truths, in the practical turn it gives, in the profound principles and methods of the one Yoga it has in view for practice and realisation in life. It gives a fresh impetus to old principles and truths, uses old and current words with extended connotation and when these are found insufficient for its purposes, occasionally resorts to phrasings.

The student of the Gita is familiar with the wide sense it gives to terms like Dharma, Karma, Yajna, Sankhya, and Yoga-which have undergone a magical transformation under the spell of its treatment and are re-born as it were into a vast, rational, philosophic and spiritual sphere from their currency in the local and tempora and scholastic confines of conventional and ritualistic rigidity. It treats of them in an extraordinarily plastic and catholic sense and while recognising the accepted senses and current notions associated with these, it hastens to vivify them into a fresh spirit capable of wider application and far-reaching results. Its manner of condemning the aggressive ritualist, vedavādarata, or of recovering for us the fourfold type of man as the sense and deeper significance of the social order, by the saving phrase of guņa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ,¹⁷¹

The singular and surpassing strength of the Gita lies in its comprehensive outlook and understanding of different types and temperaments; of the higher ideals and truths into which all men are not equally awakened and yet into which it is inevitable all have to grow; of the clash of interests and duties devolving upon man in his attempt to maintain a harmonious relation between his own higher interests and ideals on the one hand and the stern realities of life on the other, between his interests and those of others, between his part as a member of the family and as a member of society or as a member of society and as a creature of the creator. Tolerance and charity are brought home to us when it lays bare the many tangles and conditions of the universally imperfect human nature and the unavoidable conflict in the ways of Dharma, in the law varying with conditions of time, place and occasion, in the not infrequent perplexity in life’s battle confronting man, at once a domestic and ethical entity, a human soul and a spiritual being, with an unknown future ahead leaving a dim past behind.

Centuries have elapsed and the Gita has worn well. Its greatness and title to be looked to as an authoritative scripture were recognised long before the Acharyas, and their Bhashyas on it confirmed its position as one of the three authorities of Vedanta,¹⁷²

THE CRISIS, THE OCCASION

The skies over the battle-field of Kurukshetra were resounding with the echoes of the signal sounds of conches and war-trumpets voicing the preparedness on both the sides of the contending forces. Shri Krishna and Arjuna station themselves in the war-chariot and blow their conches. Everything is ready, the flight of missiles is to begin. Arjuna beholds the army on the enemy’s side, when at his request his Divine charioteer stays the chariot between the two armies. He has to give battle to the forces arrayed against him on the side of the wicked cousin. He has to take up arms against Drona, the Acharya who taught him the use of weapons; against Bhishma, the venerable grandsire; against his kinsmen, cousins, brothers and benefactors. He sees and is suddenly sad, moved to self-pity. Struck with horror, his limbs fail him, his mouth is parched. The whole body shivers, his hair stands erect, the skin burns, the weapon slips, his head reels. He finds evil forebodings too. He is sure that no good could result from the killing of his kinsmen. He finds it impossible to think of kingdom at the cost of the lives of these, his teachers, fathers, friends, sons and relatives.

Nor is this a passing emotion, a sentimental wave. great sin too in fighting and slaying the enemy though he be wicked and guilty of betrayal of friendship and of destroying domestic virtues and family ties. That the malicious Duryodhana persists in such a wrong course of action is no excuse for Arjuna to commit the very crime of which he accuses him.

Again he is oppressed by a sense of the serious consequences of the man-slaughter, this crime against humanity. How would it affect society? Would it not lead to lawlessness and social disorder and the wiping out of holy family traditions, religious rites and sacred customs and place the Kuladharma and Varnadharma in danger ? Aye, the confusion and corruption accompanying and following a war of that kind could not but leave the sublime ideals of sex-purity and chastity offended, and disturb conjugal and communal relations and duties governed by dharma, when the very fabric of society is sure to be shaken to its foundations.

Thus, in the first outburst of feelings, choked up with emotion, Arjuna sums up his objections to fight, in the words “Dharma in danger", and dropping down his bow and arrows he pitifully exclaims: "Ah, how we are resolved upon committing a crime of this magnitude! It is all greed for pleasure. Unarmed I prefer being killed by these my kinsmen armed, who are misguided and over-powered by greed.”

THE OBJECTIONS AND THE APPEAL

The first objections of Arjuna refusing to fight the foe are sudden and unexpected from a warrior aware of his part in the affairs of men. It is obvious that they are personal and domestic and sentimental but claim to have ethical and religious sanction by raising the cry of "Dharma in danger". In these utterances of Arjuna, depressed and despondent at the critical hour, Shri Krishna perceives clearly a confusion of issues, a self-delusion, a forgetfulness of the noble ideals of the hero remarkable for the type of heroism he represents. It ill becomes a warrior of Arjuna’s birth, social standing, temperament and training, to shrink from the fight and refuse to have the honour and joy of doing his part in the task before him.

“This dejection is ignoble, un-Aryan," says the Lord, "surely this your resolve shuts against you the doors of Heaven that are open to the hero that does his part and obeys the law of his being. Indeed, this is infamous. Stand up; impotence does not befit you. How is it that you are weak-hearted at this hour of crisis?”

“How can I attack the venerated Bhishma and Drona ?” cries Arjuna, “I prefer the beggar’s bowl to blood-stained kingdom won by the slaughter of these Gurus, nor is it certain that mine will be the victory in the battle. . . . It is true that faintness has overpowered me. I am confused as to which is Dharma, the law that I should obey; give me the decision. I am thy disciple, I have sought thee for guidance, give me thy word in the matter. But be pleased to know my attitude. My senses are dried up by this anguish; and I do not see if I can be cured at all either by an unrivalled monarchy on earth or by an overlordship of the gods in heaven.”

Here it is necessary to note the three distinct but rapid steps in the development of Arjuna’s psychology before the teacher finds him competent to receive the divine wisdom. It is in crises when onc’s strength is really put to test that one becomes aware of his weakness and defects of which he is normally unaware. Confident, self-reliant and valiant, Arjuna comes into the battle-field and becomes a prey to fears, doubts and despondency. Then having become conscious of his human limitations, ignorance, confusion and weakness, he makes a clean confession of them with courage, strength and total sincerity. Finally, he puts faith in the superior wisdom of his trusted friend and is prepared with an unquestioning obedience to submit to the decisive word of the divine guide to whom he offers to surrender his faltering will and indecisive judgment.

Shri Krishna listens to the words of Arjuna and is satisfied that his inner condition will enable him to receive the wisdom, the secret of action, the knowledge of the Law. When Arjuna first let drop his bow and refused to resist the enemy, he was self-assertive and’ unaware of his weakness and the Lord called upon him to get up and in words that sound like the command of an army officer ordering a soldier to go to the field and do his duty. Could it be really so ? That was perhaps an apt reply, and Arjuna was rightly reminded of his own Dharma, the law of the Kshatriya when he enlarged upon the interests of Kuladharma and Varnadharma. Thus it was brought home to him how his Dharma as a Kshatriya conflicted with the Dharma of the Kula and the Varna, and he was awakened to a clash of Dharmas, the real basis of which he could not comprehend. “My notions of Dharma are confounding enough, dharma-sammoodha-cetah”, cries Arjuna, "teach me, I have sought thee for wisdom; śisyaste ham šādhi mām tvām prapannam."

Hearing the words of Arjuna, the Lord smiles and says in effect: “You speak words of wisdom but are you really wise? The wise do not grieve either for the dead or for the living. You confess that you are weak and perplexed and ask ine to give you my decisive word to guide you aright. You speak of Dharma without knowing what it really is. Now that you submit to my final decision, it is necessary that yours must be an intelligent submission to my word. There is great confusion in your mind about Dharma, which you yourself recognise. Your weakness is manifest in your sorrow and suffering for the living that are certain to die whether you will or will not do what in spite of you, you will be compelled to do by the Kshātra nature in you, the law of your own being, Swadharma. Each one has got to understand his own law of being and act in consonance with it. Surely I will help you to know the Dharma, the supreme law that is to govern all your action. I do appreciate the sincerity and earnestness of purpose with which you surrender your will and judgment to my guidance.

“But I do not want you to follow my lead blindly. You must have an intelligent appreciation of the whole position; you must know the various factors that have brought about the miserable confusion in your mind compelling you at the hour of action to an ignoble and unmanly resolve to withdraw from life’s activity that is yours by the very nature and law and force of your being. And this infamous shrinking, you hope by mistake, would pass under the justifying guise of benevolence and compassion to your kindred, of dutiful reverence to elders and of religious regard for the sacred traditions preserved intact by society which would otherwise run to ruin. You also proclaim your ignorant and egoistic withdrawal as a big sacrifice in the cause of righteousness and are indeed prepared to forego the pleasures of royalty on earth and the coveted company and rulership of gods in heaven!”

At the close of the teaching when Shri Krishna has finished his say and answered the questions and cleared the doubts of Arjuna, the latter feels free to fight and tells the Teacher, "My delusion is dispelled; by your grace, Achyuta, I have recovered my sense.” Now how did he begin to fight the battle? What was his attitude towards the terrible action he was to enter upon ? What became of the ethical scruples and the sense of social danger that troubled him so much and served as a prop and excuse for his hesitation to fight and the resolve to retrace his steps ?

His views of Dharma and Karma are now changed. He is now convinced that erroneous notions held him back from the free course of action dictated by the law of his being. The disillusionment came by the grace of the Divine guide in the light of the wisdom he received. The whole situation now presents a different view. There is a radical change in his outlook and understanding of men and things, of Dharma and Karma, of God, Nature and the meaning of life. He has now a knowledge of the principles of creation, of God, world and soul. And this supreme and authoritative knowledge of the Divine Lord Himself helps him in the part he is called upon to play, not for his personal gain, as he in his first delusion fancied, not for princely pleasures here or for heavenly happiness there. He knows the secret, the law of action and his own nature. His nature is sure to compel him into action whether he wills or not, and that nature of his is an instrument, an executive part of the supreme nature of the Lord. Action is inevitable in life. It is the true law of life to do works in the world in a divine spirit with a spiritual sense. He knows now that to get at the guiding principle of works he should no more think in terms of human relations and duties. Works he has to do according to his nature, but the fruit is to be left to the Lord of Nature that does the work. He is the willing and conscious instrument of the Lord to allow the nature in him to do the work, to fulfil the Law and purpose of the Lord through human life in the world.

In fact, life itself is a battle-field in which the sons of darkness, the Asuras, the ungodly forces of evil and wrong are arrayed against the sons of Lights, the Devas, the spiritual and godly forces of the right and the good. Heroic Arjuna is to fight the battle of the Devas; his sense of good and evil, Dharma and Adharma grows with his developing knowledge of the true nature of the world, of himself and his Lord. He rejects the old notions of his egoistic reasoning from personal attachments and accepts the god-given knowledge of Dharma and Karma, of Yajna, Yoga and Sankhya. This gives him the wisdom that action done in devotion to the Divine helps the human soul to realise its consciousness in the divine glory of disinterested action and that the human soul in conscious union with the Lord of all works, does works, not for itself, but for the Divine Lord of the world as He too does work for the sustenance of the world. Utsideyur ime lokāḥ na kuryām karma ced aham.

THE QUESTIONS AROUND¹⁷³

D.-How is it that all on a sudden Arjuna became grief-stricken? He was a born hero; surely he must have considered the consequences before he shared the decision to fight that his brother Yudhishthira in council was forced to take.

M.-Arjuna was a blessed soul. Indeed his plight was a pity. It is always at a critical hour that the hidden forces of darkness and weakness manifest themselves. It was necessary that he should become conscious of them, and he had a rude awakening. But it was only the darkest hour before dawn. For, was he not immediately to receive the supreme wisdom of the Divine? What was lurking within had to come out. It was a blessing in disguise.

D.-Why should Arjuna be preferred to Yudhishthira by Shri Krishna for giving the teaching?

M.-He was best fitted for the divine work and wisdom. For Yudhishthira was too high above the average, already ruled by high ideals of saintliness and spiritual truth. Arjuna represents a higher type of the average and one aspiring to be ruled by lofty ideals with a large capacity to maintain the balance between the extremes.

D.-If this is all the reason, Shri Krishna could have instructed him on other occasions as they have always been friends.

M.—True. When we study carefully the character of Arjuna in the epic, we can say this is one plausible reason. This is not the only occasion when Shri Krishna gives his counsel to Arjuna. Here the kind of Yoga he teaches determines the choice of the occasion.

D.-It is admitted that they were friends. For that reason could he not have given previous assurance that he would be victorious over the enemy so that he might not have the doubt that he expresses whether he would win at all?

M.-Shri Krishna had given it and Arjuna knew it. At the exhortation of Shri Krishna, Arjuna, preparing to come to the battle-field, offered his worship to the Divine Mother Durga, and received Her blessings and boon of victory. Shri Krishna was present then and re-assured him. You find this notable incident in the closing part of the section preceding the Bhagavad Gita in the Bhishma Parva.

D.-Then how is it that Arjuna retraced his steps and found himself in a pitiable position?

M.-That is the wonder. It brings home to us in a striking manner the truth that even the man of high ideals is liable in moments of trial to be led away by undreamt egoistic tendencies from his avowed ideals that guide him in favourable circumstances. Man by his egoisin asserts and re-asserts under many masks and is casily led astray, in spite of a god’s guarantee, from the assured path of safety until he realises his vanity and ignorance and intelligently gives himself unreservedly to the guidance of a Higher Power as Arjuna gives himself to Shri Krishna.

THE AVATAR

D.-The Gita and the great cpic in many places speak of Krishna and Arjuna as friends in a special sense. What is the character of this friendship?

M.-It represents a deeper truth than what appears on the surface. Of course it is an indissoluble bond of friendship. It is the relation of the aspiring soul and the compassionate Lord.

D.-Is that why they say Krishna and Arjuna are the inseparable Nara-Narayana ?

M.-Yes. Nara is Arjuna. Narayana is Krishna.

D.—How could that be? Nara and Narayana seem to be the names of two Sages.

M.—That is true. The Mahabharata refers to them as having lived in a by-gone age; together they lived an austere life, in Tapas, in the Himalayas; and their names and the very spot had become so sacred that Yudhishthira during his Himalayan visit paid his homage to the holy hermitage.

D.—Then if it is a fact that Arjuna and Krishna were those two sages in a previous incarnation, what are we to understand when we are told that Shri Krishna is an incarnation of Vishnu and Arjuna is born of a part of Indra, Indra-amśa ?

M.-Do you not find in the Gita that Shri Krishna himself says to Arjuna: “You and I have had many births; I know them, but you know not?”

D.-I want to be further enlightened on this subject of the births of God. It is profoundly interesting.

M.—This birth we call Avatar. It is a descent of God into the world to uplift it. Such an intervention from above is necessary at every crucial stage in the upward march of the world’s progress. Now, evolution is a common concept in modern thought. How far the evolution theory of Natural Science is valid is a matter that need not concern us here. But there seems to’be a secret, a philosophic truth, a spiritual sense behind it. The version of the Puranic legends of Avatars, however crude and allegorical in manner, is sufficiently suggestive of the ascending order of the graded development of the world-spirit. Do we not find something in this order of the Avatars beginning with the deluge—Matsya (the fish of the water), Kurma (the tortoise, both of land and water), Varaha (the boar, the beast of the land), Nrisimha, (the lion-man, half human), Vamana, the dwarf, the uncivil, violent and robust Parashurama, the well-disciplined, refined and royal Rama, and Shri Krishna, the yogin of high culture and spirituality ?

THE NARA-NARAYANA IDEAL

D.-Granting that such a divine intervention from above forms part of the general scheme of things, how can we say that Shri Krishna refers to these incarnations, when he speaks of the many births of Arjuna and himself? Does it not mean the previous human births of both of them ?

M.—Surely it does. It was simply to impress upon you the general truth about incarnation, pointing to the need of Divine advent into the world in crises that I referred to it. But here the Lord refers to human affairs and his many human births.

Speaking of his Yoga, he says: “I taught this Yoga to Vivasvān, Vivasvān gave it to Manu, and Manu to Ikshvāku and thus the wisdom was transmitted from age to age. When through the efflux of time the Dharma fades and Adharma prevails, I come down for the establishment of the Law, for the destruction of the wicked and the protection of the virtuous.”

It is natural that Arjuna should be bewildered. How could Shri Krishna who was born yesterday have taught Vivasvan in an ante-deluvian age? Obviously Shri Krishna wants Arjuna to know that he was not confined to this single birth and had many births before.

D.-If Shri Krishna was the sage Narayana and Arjuna was Nara in previous birth, how could we speak of them together as Avatar Nara-Narayana ?

M.-Both are divine in the sense that Nara is the Individual and Narayana, the Universal; the former is the mould of the human soul to work out and express the universality of the Divine, the latter is Parama Purusha, working out His will for His divinc expression in and through the instrument and mould, the human soul, his own individual part, an eternal portion of Himself, amśah sanātanah. Thus the two, Nara and Narayana, are inseparable. The ideal type of the aspiring soul, a willing and conscious instrument is Nara, Arjuna, fostered and carried safe by the moving spirit, the guiding Light, Shri Krishna, Narayana.

D.-Then is Nara-Narayana or Krishna-Arjuna only a symbol?

M.-It is a living symbol, an expression of a great spiritual truth. That does not necessarily mean that there is no historic basis for the story of the Avatar. The story could be of little value to us if the Avatar does not establish in our hearts and minds something of enduring value. Shri Krishna and Buddha and Christ are ideals enshrined in the human heart. Herein lies the meaning and purpose of incarnation, whatever might be the circumstances and details incidental to the outward activity and immediate effect of the life and influence of the Avatar.

D.—What then is the meaning of Krishna Avatar?

M.—The question is more easily asked than answered. People understand it according to their lights. That the destruction of Adharma and the establishment of Dharma is the purpose of true Avatar is a general dictum. It is not simply the destruction of a few thousands or lakhs of men on the Kaurava side representing Adharma that was the object of the Avatar, though that was a need and circumstance of the external conditions under which the message of the Avatar had to be given. Neither did the Kauravas monopolise all Adharma, nor has wickedness in the world been rooted out ever since. Positively, therefore, the character of the Dharma established is the subject of the Gita. This Dharma is understood in many ways and is discussed elsewhere. But one thing we may note here and that is that it is the Dharma of Nara-Narayana, the Krishna-Arjuna Yoga, the conscious union of the human soul with the divine Purusha in life and action. It is the Dharina or law of the human soul to allow itself to be guided by the Divine in life, not in its egoistic interests and for private profits, but for the sake of the Divine, as everything really belongs to Him.

D.-But why should they speak of Nara or Arjuna as an aspect or kalā of Indra, and of Shri Krishna as Parama Purusha, God Himself? What is the meaning of the many gods born into the world? After all, there is only one God.

M.-It is true that God is one and the sages call Him by many It is also true that He is named after His different aspects. But there is a still greater truth and this the modern mind is not yet fully ready to accept. God is the self of all the world and all that exists; and the gods are His various limbs and do their functions, angāni anyāh devatāh.

When I give you a blow with my hands, you may say my hand gives the blow and not any other limb. All the same it is I that give the blow. The gods are distinct powers and personalities of the one God. When you and I can realise our inseparable unity in the divine Being, the gods who are much more powerful and knowing than we are, can they not in their own ways be in realised union with the one God and thus have the title to be worshipped as the Supreme God Himself? But, mind you, those gods do not depend for their existence upon our imagination. Of course there has been the tendency in us not inerely to tolerate with philosophic indifference but positively to encourage the worship of god-forms as a concession to the limitations of the human inind and the yearning of the human heart. Any form can be used as a symbol for worship of the One and the Gita supports it. Yo yo yam tanum bhaktah sraddhayārcitum icchati. But this form-worship has nothing to do with the gods I speak of.

These gods are different from one another just as we are; only they are much more truly and flexibly nearer the one Supreme Being than we. You see the point ?

D.-Then, is it polytheism?

M.-You may please yourself by calling it so; only it is not opposed to monotheism. In fact, you cannot label it as any “ism”. The metaphysical mind of mediaeval India was satisfied with abstract ideas of the ultimate Truth, of the principles of creation, God, world and soul and constructed the philosophic systems of dualism and monism, qualified and unqualified. But the spiritual mind from the Vedic ages down to our own has not troubled itself about any “ism”. It tries and gets the experience and puts it in the language of the age. It does not theorise or hunger for explanation. To it what matters is fact and experience rather than explanation and theory.

D.-What is the fact here about the gods ?

M.-We have a number of hymns which we consider to be records of the religious experiences of the sages and these speak of the distinct character of the gods. As I have already illustrated from the Taittiriya, it is not difficult to reconcile these polytheistic conceptions with monotheistic or even monistic thoughts.

THE TWO SAGES

D.—Then what you say comes to this: that Arjuna who was the sage Nara in a previous birth is an Avatar of the Indra aspect of God.

M.–We need not attempt to fix now the exact sense of the aspect of Indra in the Veda. It is enough if we remember this much. As far as one can see, it is the Mahabharata that first speaks of the theory of avatāra and amśa avatāra.

D.-Do we elsewhere hear of these two sages Nara and Narayana, beyond the references in the Mahabharata ?

M.-Rarely. But there is a sage Nara who is the seer of two hyinns addressed to Indra. He belongs to the house of Bharadvaja. You find him in the sixth Mandala of the Rig Veda. Perhaps this seer Nara, devoted to Indra, was Arjuna in his next incarnation blessed and guided by the Indra spirit.

D.—This is interesting.

M.—You see if one is devoted whole-heartedly to an ideal, he is bound to realise it in the long run. Perhaps there was a certain contact of Indra established in Nara through his devotion and worship before he left the body and thus he was Arjuna in the next incarnation, chosen to express the Indra aspect of the Divine, guided by the Supreme Lord Himself.

D.-Can anything similar be said of the sage Narayana ?

M.-Yes, he is the well-known seer of that wonderful hymn in the tenth Mandala of the Rig Veda, the Purusashukta.

D.-Why should you say wonderful? Every hymn is great in its own way.

M.-But this hynn reveals to us certain sublime truths which moulded the mind and soul of the nation for scores of centuries.

D.-What are they? Can you name a few ?

M.-I shall just suggest briefly one or two points. It is this seer Narayana that gives us the great truth revealed to him, “The Purusha is all this, what has been and what is yet to be.” Look at that grand idea. Don’t you see how much it contains? Our modern thought of the Spirit in “being and becoming" is only a philosophic concept with us. But with Rishi Narayana it was a substantial truth with body and soul, so to say. He was face to face with it. He saw and realised the truth and became one with the Purusha. Again, another grand idea of creation in this hymn is the sacrifice of the Purusha that makes creation possible. That is the ancient imagery. In our language we may say He gave himself to creation and become the world. Again the very body of the Purusha produces the fourfold human type. I have thrown out these suggestions; you can see how the Gita embodies these ideas in the language of the age.

D.-Can you give me references to the ideas stated above ?

M.-Why, it is easy. Shri Krishna referring to Cāturvarnya, the four Varnas, says, "They were created by me on the principle of the divisions of guna and karma, quality and works.” As for the creation idea, you will see in the Gita that the whole creation, Nature, is a small portion of Himself supported by His supreme power, para prakyti, yogamāyā and so on. Again, “I am Uttama Purușa”, says Shri Krishna. This Purushottama idea, considered to be peculiar to the Gita, seems to have been first revealed to the world through Narayana, the seer. Of course in this Mantra of the Rig Veda you do not have the word uttama, but then the context there is, “all this is the one Purusha”. Obviously God is the Uttama Purusha. When the Lord is the Gita authoritatively asserts “I am the Purusha Uttama”, we are reminded of the seer Narayana who realised his oneness with the supreme Purusha. To put it in other words, you may say God the supreme Purusha revealed or realised Himself in the human embodiment of the seer Narayana and since then Narayana has become the great name of Vishnu even as Väsudeva has become the supreme name of God after the incarnation of Shri Krishna, son of Vasudeva.

D.—But the difficulty is, they give a different meaning to the name. Nārāyana is He whose abode is in the Nara, which term means, according to some, "waters”, according to others, "lattwas".

M.-That is the Puranic version. There is a symbolic sense in it. But Nara and Narayana are mentioned together as sages who lived as Tapasvins. But if we can rely upon etymological derivation of words, Nārāyana is the grandson of Nara. Perhaps they lived an austere life together; the former incorporated the supreme Purusha who appeared as Shri Krishna in the Mahabharata time; the latter worshipped and communed with Indra and by his grace and contact did his part in the field of life, Dharma-kshetra, in the field of action, Kurukshetra. For, was it not the interest of Indra, the king of gods ever engaged in giving battle to Asuras, sons of darkness, to keep flying the flag of the sons of Light, of Dharma?

THE GITA AND THE COMMENTARIES

D. Of the three orthodox schools of current philosophic thought, Dvaita, Vishishta-advaita and Advaita, which is the school that best represents the spirit of the Gita?

M.-The question rises a big controversy. Each school claims to give the right interpretation. The Gita had become such an important scripture that a commentary on it was found indispensable for the Acharyas, especially as it contained certain apparently contradictory or irreconcilable statements, in certain places favourable, in others unfavourable to their schools. These Acharyas when they began to write their commentaries had their own rigid systems. It was their object to bring out a philosophic system of the Gita. But each had a school of thought to stand upon and naturally gave greater importance to the passages favourable to his position and treated others not so favourable as auxiliary and of secondary importance.

D.-Do you mean that none of the Bhashyas is faithful to the Gita?

M.-I do not mean that exactly. If some school is nearer the core of Gita’s teachings than others, it is more because of certain aspects of the philosophic position of the school than because of the spirit in which these commentaries are written.

D.-How do you mean? Is the spirit of the Gita then not the same as that of the commentaries? Have we to reject the views of our great Achāryas? Could we be wiser than they?

M.—That the spirit of the Gita is different from that of the commentaries is patent. Where do we find in these our philosophies that catholic, comprehensive and all-inclusive spirit of the Gita? The Gita is used as a battle-field in the commentaries where the authors engaged in controversial refutation of one another try to settle accounts. The Gita intends to solve the problem of life from a divine and ideal viewpoint of man on earth. It gives a new meaning to the problem itself. It uses all the current metaphysical ideas, the many paths of knowledge, bhakti and other yogas, to expound the one yoga it has in view. It is the yoga or union of the human soul with the Divine spirit in life, the Divine driving the chariot and the human willing and acting for the purpose of the Divine. For this, faith and devotion to the Divine, śraddha and bhakti, a dynamic and plastic yet firm and steady will to work, not in egoistic spirit but for God’s purpose in the world, and a knowledge and growing consciousness of the Divine in the All and as the Supreme Self of the All are all necessary. Look at this yoga towards which all the teachings of the Gita converge and compare it with the trenchant formulas of the philosophies and their tendency to drift more and more to hair-splitting.

We can use these views of the Achāryas according to our needs and light. Granting that we are unable to accept or follow their views to the end, we need not necessarily be wiser than they. Perhaps their dialectical warfare and intellectual subtleties with an imposing apparatus of technique in the realm of ideas were a response to the need of their age. We can hardly make any spiritual progress or even intellectual advancement if out of the natural and necessary reverence for the past we blindly believe that “all the great and good are dead and the living are totally depraved”. The Gita discourages the idea that spiritual experiences and possibilities can be exhaustively stated even by the Veda, jijnăsurapi yogasya śabda-brahma ativartate.

Never perhaps in the known history of mankind were there greater opportunities for a wider intellectual awakening to the spiritual possibilities of man than today. Luckily, the days are gone, and are not likely to recur, when the aggressive type of ignorance in the extreme could hold out its hand and say, "All the truths are contained in my scripture. Whatever is not found in it must necessarily be untruth. Therefore it is wicked and presumptuous to differ from the written word of my text. Follow the trodden track. Thus far and no further."

D.—You don’t attach importance to the commentaries ?

M.-I do. The one point of value in them is that after all they accept the spiritual idea, though the trend of thought and the metaphysical bent may not contribute as much to the practical side as to the sharpening of the philosophic intellect. What I mean to say is this. Experience is synthetic; our mind is pre-eminently analytic.

In your zeal to climb the highest heights, you cannot afford to ignore the wider life around you, which too is God’s creation and forms part of the Divine scheme. See the Gita, see how it treats in a practical spirit, how it speaks of Samādhi, Yoga, and Jnāna, to be practised and realised here in life and not as something beyond, to be realised by shunning the world as an evil.

D.-After all it comes to this. Believe the Gita; it embodies the wisdom of Shri Krishna, God Incarnate.

M.-No. To the sceptic, we say, take the Gita for what it is worth for the stuff it contains. It stands on a par, to say the least, with the highest wisdom in any of the world’s great scriptures. But to the man of faith and understanding we would say, don’t be carried away by wrong notions of the extreme sides. Surely it is the wisdom of the Avatar. The man of faith, the aspirant, the seeker after truth need not be disturbed by the views of the sceptic. Intellectual vanity is the most incorrigible of all human vanities. The sceptic boasting of his intellectualism may even accept God in theory and in the same breath, have his fling at “mysticism". The savage in the Sahara does not believe that water can freeze. Of course, he is honest. When he comes out of his desert home he can learn for himself that there are other climes where water really freezes. The dry-as-dust, self-sufficient intellect can but pose as the monarch of the metaphysical realm it surveys and can afford to deny in practice the recorded experiences of the past or present, if these do not fit in with its preconceived notions. But a robust and healthy intellect eagar to be free from prejudices can always be of great help to spiritual growth, if it accepts in practice its limitations, and proceeds in earnest with openness to get at facts by experience and does not rest satisfied with dissection of facts into ideas of the mind.

THE DHARMA

D.-Did not then Arjuna fight the battle as part of the duty of the Kshatriya?

M.-Arjuna was born into the house of the fighting class, the Kshatriya. His temperament and qualities were best fitted to his birth in that age. The Kshatriya Dharma, the duty of the Kshatriya to society, he was forced to accept by an inner Dharma of the type of the human soul in him into which he had an awakening at the instance of his divine friend and teacher, Shri Krishna. There was no clash of the inner Dharma with the outer Dharma of the Kshatriya. Whenever such a clash arises, it is the inner law that should prevail to which preference is always given. This is the burden of the Gita’s song. For it is through the awakening of his soul to the inner law of its being that man has to learn to do works in the world for the Divine and develop his consciousness towards union with the Divine in will, action and love. And nothing could be allowed to stand in the way of the inner law being fulfilled. Arjuna had to ignore the great moral law of non-killing, ahimsă paramo dharmah. He could not shrink from the guru-hatyā, the killing of the gurus, as the supreme Dharma must have its sway over all other human considerations. To check violence with violence was a necessary evil and the ancient social order devised a means by which a high purpose and moral tone and religious sense could govern the heroic type of man, free from ill-will and wileness or anything ignoble. Thus society was regulated and purged of weakness and violence alike, by a choice of the lesser evil of using a select section of the society to guard against the danger of the whole society falling a prey to wickedness and violence. However moralised and sanctified by ethics and religion, this organised homicide could hardly stand the test of a religious standard that professes to develop the finer and ethical sentiments of humanity.

But here, it was not an ethical expediency sanctioned by the practised religion of the social institutions of the day, rather it was a spiritual necessity for Arjuna to rise above the conventional and personal considerations of the conflicting duties and obey the inner law for a divine work. Therefore the sense of the Dharma used here is too broad to be narrowly confined within local and temporal limits. Surely the Gita would not find fault with a Kalikeya Ashvapathi,¹⁷⁴