A History of Indian Literature v1.c9.s7: The Didactic Sections of the Mahābhārata
A History of Indian Literature v1.c9.s7
- Language
- English
The Didactic Sections of the Mahābhārata
v1.c9.s7.1
¹ On the style and contents of these didactic sections *cf.* O. Strauss, ZDMG. 62 1908, pp. 661 ff., and Ethische Probleme aus dem Mahābhārata, Firenze 1912 (from GSAI. 24, 1911).
v1.c9.s7.2
Most of the Itihāsas and Itihāsa-saṃvādas discussed in the preceding chapter are to be found in the numerous and extensive didactic sections of the Mahābhārata. Such sections, now shorter, now longer, are scattered in almost all the books of the Mahābhārata, and they deal with the three things which the Indians term *Nīti*, *i.e.* worldly wisdom, especially for kings, therefore also "politics," *Dharma*, *i.e.* systematic law as well as general morality, and *Mokṣa*, *i.e.* "liberation," as the final aim of all philosophy. These things are, however, not always presented in the form of pleasing narratives and beautiful sayings; we also find long sections containing dry-as-dust discussions, especially upon philosophy in Book XII and upon law in Book XIII.
v1.c9.s7.3
It may already be seen from our outline of the contents that Books XII and XIII have nothing at all to do with the actual epic, but that the events related in Book XIV are connected directly with the end of Book XI. The interpolation of these two extensive books is made possible by the singular legend which we have already considered above. Bhīṣma, pierced by countless arrows, lies on the battle-field, but, as he can determine the hour of his death for himself, decides to die half a year later.¹ The intervening period is used by the mortally wounded hero, who is at the same time a lawyer, a theologian, and a yogin, to lecture Yudhiṣṭhira upon philosophy, morality and law. Book XII begins with Yudhiṣṭhira being in despair because so many brave warriors and near relatives have been massacred. He bursts out into self-accusations, and resolves, in his despair, to withdraw from the world and end his life as a forest hermit. The brothers try to dissuade him from it, and this gives rise to long detailed discussions whether renunciation and retirement from the world, or whether the fulfilment of the duties of a householder and king are right. The wise Vyāsa also is present, and declares that a king should first fulfil all his duties, and retire into the forest only in the evening of his life. However, he refers Yudhiṣṭhira to Bhīṣma, who will instruct him fully in all the duties of a king. So Yudhiṣṭhira, after he has been consecrated as king, actually goes with a great retinue to Bhīṣma, who is still lying on the battle-field, in order to question him first upon the duties of a king, and further upon other matters. The speeches of Bhīṣma upon law, morality and philosophy fill Books XII and XIII.
v1.c9.s7.4
¹ *Cf.* above, p. 363 Note 1. V. V. *Iyer*, Notes of a Study of the Preliminary Chapters of the Mahābhārata, pp. 271 ff. ; and *Oldenberg*, Das Mahābhārata, pp. 76 ff. *Hopkins*, Great Epic of India, pp. 381 ff., applies to these books (XII, XIII) the term "pseudo-epic."
v1.c9.s7.5
The first half of Book XII (*Śānti Parvan*), consisting of the two sections "Instruction in a king's duties" and "Instruction in the law in cases of distress and danger,"² deals above all with the dignity and duties of a king, teachings of politics (nīti) being occasionally inserted, and further also with the duties of the four castes and the four stages of life (āśramas) generally, with duties towards parents and teachers, the right conduct in distress and danger, self-restraint, asceticism and love of truth, the relationship between the three aims of life,¹ and so on. The second half of the book, containing the section of the "Instruction in the duties which lead to liberation,"² is principally of philosophical content. Yet we find here besides long, dry and often confused discussions upon cosmogony, psychology, the principles of ethics or the doctrine of liberation, many of the most beautiful legends, parables, dialogues and moral aphorisms, some of which have already been discussed in the preceding chapter. And though this Book XII as a whole only presents an inartistically jumbled compilation, it yet contains many a priceless gem of poetry and wisdom. This book is of inestimable value, too, as a source for Indian philosophy.
v1.c9.s7.6
² Rājadharmānuśāsanaparvan (1-130) and Āpaddharmānuśāsanaparvan (131-173).
v1.c9.s7.7
¹ Dharma, artha and kāma, cf. above, p. 326 Note.
v1.c9.s7.8
² Mokṣadharmānuśāsana (174 ff.), completely translated in Deussen's "Vier philosophische Texte des Mahâbhâratam."
v1.c9.s7.9
While Book XII can be termed, in a certain sense, a "manual of philosophy," Book XIII (*Anuśāsana-Parvan*) is essentially nothing but a manual of law. Indeed, there are large portions in this book which contain nothing but quotations from, or exact parallels to, well known law-books, *e.g.* that of *Manu*. We shall see in a later section that Indian legal literature, too, consists mainly of metrical text-books and can be classed as didactic poetry. The only distinction between Book XIII of the Mahābhārata and the law-books (Dharmaśāstras) is that in the former the dry presentation is frequently interrupted by the narration of legends, which indeed are mostly extremely silly and insipid.³ While Book XII, even though it did not belong to the original epic, yet was probably inserted at a comparatively early date, there can be no doubt with regard to Book XIII, that it was made a component part of the Mahābhārata at a still later time. It bears all the marks of a later fabrication. Nowhere in the Mahābhārata, to mention only one thing, are the claims of the Brahmans to supremacy over all other strata of society vindicated in such an arrogant and exaggerated manner as in Book XIII. A large part of the book deals with the Dānadharma, *i.e.* the laws and precepts upon generosity; generosity, however, is always to be understood only in the sense of the giving of presents to the Brahmans.
v1.c9.s7.10
³ Of the kind quoted above, pp. 402ff.
v1.c9.s7.11
Besides in these two books, and apart from smaller passages not exceeding one or two cantos, we also find large didactic sections in Books III, V, VI, XI and XIV. We find in Book III (28-33) a long conversation between Draupadī, Yudhiṣṭhira and Bhīma upon ethical questions, in which Draupadī quotes a dialogue between Bali and Prahlāda and a “Nīti of Bṛhaspati.”¹ In the same book we find (205-216) the dissertations of *Mārkaṇḍeya* upon the virtues of women (205 f.), upon forbearance towards living beings (Ahiṃsā, 206-208), upon the power of destiny, renunciation of the world and liberation, upon doctrines of the Sāṅkhya philosophy (210) and of the Vedānta (211), upon the duties towards parents (214 ff.) and others. Book V contains long lectures of *Vidura* upon morality and worldly wisdom (33-40) and the philosophical doctrines of the eternally young *Sanatsujāta* (41-46). In Book VI (25-42) we meet with the famous Bhagavadgītā, to which the *Anugītā* in Book XIV (16-51) forms a kind of continuation or supplement.² The consolatory speeches of Vidura in Book XI (2-7) again move in the province of ethics.
v1.c9.s7.12
¹ III, 32, 61.
v1.c9.s7.13
² The three philosophical poems Bhagavadgītā, Sanatsujātīya and Anugītā have been translated into English by *Kâshinâth|Trimbak Telang in* SBE., Vol. 8, and into German *by Deussen.* “Vier philosophische Texte des Mahâbhâratam.”
v1.c9.s7.14
Of all these didactic portions of the Mahābhārata, none has attained to such popularity and fame as the Bhagavadgītā³ or the "Lord's Song." In India itself there is scarcely any book which is read so much and esteemed so highly as the Bhagavadgītā. It is the sacred book of the Bhāgavatas, a Viṣṇuite sect, but it is a book of devotion and edification for every Hindu, to whatever sect he may belong. The historian Kalhaṇa¹ relates of a king of Kashmir, Avantivarman, who died in 883 A. D., that in the hour of his death he had the Bhagavadgītā read to him from beginning to end, whereupon, thinking of Viṣṇu's heavenly abode, he gladly yielded up his spirit. And he was not the only Hindu to find consolation in this book in the hour of his death. There are many educated Hindus to-day who know the whole poem from memory. Countless are the manuscripts of it which have been preserved. And since it was printed for the first time in the year 1809 in Calcutta, hardly a year elapses without a new reprint of the work appearing in India. Countless also are the translations into modern Indian languages.
v1.c9.s7.15
³ The full title is *Bhagavadgītā upaniṣadaḥ*, “the esoteric doctrines delivered by the Exalted One.” *Bhagavat* “the Exalted One, the Adorable,” is the epithet of the god Viṣṇu incarnated as Kṛṣṇa, who recites to Arjuna the doctrines contained in the poem. Besides "Bhagavadgītā the short title "Gītā" (*i.e.* "the song" *par excellence*) is current in India.
v1.c9.s7.16
¹ Rājatarangiṇī, V, 125.
v1.c9.s7.17
Outside India, too, the Bhagavadgītā has gained many admirers. The Arabian traveller Albērūnī knew the poem perfectly and appreciated it very highly.² In Europe the poem was first made known by means of the English translation by Chas. Wilkins (London, 1785). The critical text-edition by August Wilhelm von Schlegel, which appeared in 1823, with a Latin translation appended, was of great importance. It was through this work that Wilhelm von Humboldt became acquainted with the poem, and his great enthusiasm about it has already been mentioned.³ He placed the Bhagavadgītā far above Lucretius and even above Parmenides and Empedokles, and declared "that this episode of the Mahābhārata is the most beautiful, nay perhaps even the only truly philosophical poem which we can find in all the literatures known to us.” Wilhelm von Humboldt dealt in detail with the poem in a long dissertation of the Berlin Academy (1825-26), “Über die unter dem Namen Bhagavadgītā bekannte Episode des Mahābhārata,”¹ and in a lengthy review of Schlegel’s edition and translation.² It was translated repeatedly into European languages.³
v1.c9.s7.18
² See E. C. Sachau, Alberuni's India, I, p. xxxviii; II, Index s.v. Gītā.
v1.c9.s7.19
³ See above, pp. 17 f. *Cf.* Ges. Werke of W. v. Humboldt, I, pp. 96 and 111.
v1.c9.s7.20
¹ Also *Ges. Werke*, I, 26-109.
v1.c9.s7.21
² In Schlegel’s “Indische Bibliothek,” Vol. II, 1824, pp. 218 ff., 328 ff. Also *Ges. Werke*, I, 110-184.
v1.c9.s7.22
³ English translations by *J. C. Thomson*, Hertford, 1855; *K. T. Telang* (in verse, Bombay, 1875; prose in SBE., Vol. 8); *John Davies* (1882); *Edwin Arnold* (1885); *C. C. Caleb* (1911); *L. D. Barnett* (in Temple Classics). Sanskrit text with English Translation by *Annie Besant* and *Bhagavan Dās*, Benares, 1905. German translations by *C. R. S. Peiper* (1869); *F. Lorinser* (1869); *R. Boxberger* (1870); *P. Deussen* (in “Vier philosophische Texte des Mahābhāratam”); *R. Garbe* (1905, 2nd ed. 1921); and *L. v. Schroeder* (Jena, 1912). For other translations both in Indian vernaculars and in European languages s. *Holtzmann*, Das Mahābhārata, II, 129 ff.
v1.c9.s7.23
The poem is to be found in a place where one would least of all expect it, at the beginning of Book VI, where the descriptions of the great fight commence. All preparations for the battle have been made. The two armies confront each other ready for the fray. Then Arjuna lets his war-chariot halt between the two armies and surveys the hosts of the Kauravas and Pāṇḍavas armed for the fight. And as he sees on both sides “fathers and grandfathers, teachers, uncles and brothers, sons and grandsons, friends, fathers-in-law and companions,” he is overcome by a feeling of deepest pity; horror seizes him at the thought that he is to fight against relatives and friends; it appears to him sin and madness to intend to murder those for whose very sake one otherwise goes to war. When Kṛṣṇa reproaches him with weakness and soft-heartedness Arjuna declares that he is quite at a loss, that he does not know whether it is better to be victorious or to be defeated, and finally he implores Kṛṣṇa to instruct him as to what he should really do in this conflict of duties. Thereupon Kṛṣṇa answers him with a detailed philosophical discourse,¹ whose immediate purpose is to convince Arjuna that it is his duty as a warrior to fight, whatever the consequences may be. Thus he says:
v1.c9.s7.24
¹ On the teaching of the Bhagavadgītā see R. G. *Bhandarkar*, Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism, etc. (Grundriss III, 6), pp. 14 ff.; and J. E. *Carpenter*, Theism in Mediaeval India, London, 1921, pp. 250 ff. Some less known monographs on the Gītā are discussed by P. E. *Pavolini*, GSAI., 24, 1911, pp. 395 ff. [^2): II, 11-13. 18-20. 22. 23. 25, translated by L. D. *Barnett*.
v1.c9.s7.25
"Thou hast grieved over them for whom grief is unmeet, though thou speakest words of understanding. The learned grieve not for them whose lives are fled nor for them whose lives are not fled.
"Never have I not been, never hast thou and never have these princes of men not been; and never shall time yet come when we shall not all be.
As the Body's Tenant goes through childhood and manhood and old age in this body, so does it pass to other bodies; the wise man is not confounded therein........
It is these bodies of the everlasting, unperishing, incomprehensible Body-Dweller that have an end, as it is said. Therefore, fight, O thou of Bharata's race.
He who deems This to be a slayer, and he who thinks This to be slain, are alike without discernment; This slays not, neither is it slain.
This never is born, and never dies, nor may it after being come again to be not; this unborn, everlasting, abiding Ancient is not slain when the body is slain........
As a man lays aside outworn garments and takes others that are new, so the Body-Dweller puts away outworn bodies and goes to others that are new.
Weapons cleave not This, fire burns not This, waters wet not This, wind dries it not........
Unshown is This called, unthinkable This, unalterable This; therefore, knowing it in this wise, thou dost not well to grieve........"[^2)
v1.c9.s7.26
So Kṛṣṇa says: There is no cause for mourning over the imminent murder, for *man* himself, *i.e.* the *spirit*, is eternal and indestructible, it is only the bodies which are destroyed.[^1) And from this he leads on to exhort Arjuna to go forth into the righteous war in the spirit of his duty as a warrior. Happy the warrior to whose lot such a fight falls, which opens the gates of Heaven for him! If he does not fight he burdens himself with shame worse than death. If he falls in the battle, he is assured of heaven; if he is victorious he will rule the earth. Therefore he must in any case fight. However, all the subsequent explanations of the *sage* Kṛṣṇa and later of the *god*, for in the course of the poem it is more and more the *god* Kṛṣṇa who speaks to Arjuna, are in irreconcilable contradiction to this speech of the *hero* Kṛṣṇa. For all the other expositions of the Bhagavadgītā upon the ethics of action culminate in the doctrine that man should, indeed, act according to his duty, but without any consideration for success or failure, without troubling about the possible reward. For it is only such *desire-less* action which is to a certain extent compatible with the real ethical ideal which consists in the giving-up of all works, in non-action, in complete renunciation of the world. In fact, in spite of this, there still runs through the whole poem an unsolved contradiction between the quietistic *morality of asceticism* which points to meditation pursued quite apart from the world and the striving for the highest knowledge as the way to salvation, and the *morality of action* which, at least among the philosophers, has never been properly acknowledged in India. It is true that Kṛṣṇa teaches that there exist two paths to salvation, the path of knowledge and the path of action. But so long as the spirit is bound to the body, it would only be hypocrisy to say that man can live without performing
v1.c9.s7.27
[^1): There is no murder or act of violence which could not be justified by this miserable sophistry. It is surprising that the pious readers of the Gītā do not see this. On the unsolved and insoluble contradiction between the principles of the Gītā and the morality of war forming the starting-point of Kṛṣṇa's speeches, see W. L. *Hare*, Mysticism of East and West, London, 1923, pp. 159 ff.
v1.c9.s7.28
actions. For matter is always connected with Guņas¹ (constituents)—sattva (lightness, goodness), rajas (energy, passion), tamas (darkness, heaviness, ignorance)—through which of necessity actions arise. All that man can do, therefore, is to fulfil his duty without wishes, without desires. For "as the fire is concealed by smoke, as the mirror is covered by dirt, as an embryo is protected by the amnion, so knowledge is surrounded by desire, that eternal enemy of the knower."² Therefore, he who acts without desire approaches the most closely to the real ideal, which lies on the path of knowledge. How high the Bhagavadgītā places *knowledge* as a way to salvation is shown by these verses (IV, 36 f.) :
v1.c9.s7.29
¹ On the Sāṃkhya doctrine of the three Guņas see R. *Garbe*, Die Sāṃkhya-Philosophie, 2nd ed., Leipzig, 1917, pp. 272 ff.; and S. *Dasgupta*, History of Indian Philosophy, I, pp. 243 ff.
v1.c9.s7.30
² III, 38 f. [^3): Translated by K. T. *Telang*, SBE., Vol. 8, p. 62. [^4): VI, 7-19. In a letter to Gentz, Wilh. v. *Humboldt* writes that the former will understand how deeply the Indian poem must have impressed him. “For I am not so unlike the *absorbed ones* (*i.e.* yogins) who are described in it.” (Schriften von Friedrich von Gentz, published by G. Schlesier. Mannheim, 1840, V, p. 300.)
v1.c9.s7.31
"Even if you are the most sinful of all sinful men, you will cross over all trespasses by means of the boat of knowledge alone. As a fire well kindled, O Arjuna! reduces fuel to ashes, so the fire of knowledge reduces all actions to ashes."[^3)
v1.c9.s7.32
And according to the Bhagavadgītā, too, he who, turned away entirely from all earthly things, strives for knowledge in meditation only, is a *yogin*, the ideal of the saint and the sage. The yogin maintains his calmness of soul "in cold and heat, in joy and sorrow, in honour and dishonour." A block of earth, a stone and a lump of gold are alike in value to him. He is one and the same to friends and foes, to strangers and relatives, to good people and bad. Sitting in a lonely place deep in contemplation, "he gazes without moving, at the tip of his nose." 'As a light does not flicker in a place where there is no wind': that is the simile, known from of old, for the yogin, who curbs his thoughts and yields himself entirely to absorption (yoga)."[^4) But while in the Upaniṣads meditation and thought are regarded as the only path to knowledge and salvation, the Bhagavadgītā knows yet another path, that of *Bhakti*, *i.e.* love and devotion towards God.¹ In answer to the question of Arjuna whether he who is unable to lend his spirit absolutely and entirely to abstraction is lost, Kṛṣṇa replies: “No one who has done good is quite lost.” He who has done his duty in this world, is after death born again according to his merits, in a good, pious family, and after several rebirths gradually obtains the capability of becoming a yogin. “And even among all devotees,” says Kṛṣṇa,¹ “he who, being full of faith, worships me, with his inmost self intent on me, is esteemed by me to be the most devoted.” Out of the *love of God* arises the knowledge of God, and true liberation. Kṛṣṇa teaches this again and again:
v1.c9.s7.33
¹ It is this idea of Bhakti which, more than anything else in the Bhagavadgītā, reminds us of Christian ranges of thought. Elsewhere too, the accord with Christian ideas is so marked that the attempt of F. *Lorinser*, in the appendix to his translation (Breslau 1869), to prove Christian influence in the Bhagavadgītā, must not be repudiated from the outset. But Lorinser’s thorough investigation in itself proves that this is parallelism of development, highly interesting for the history of religion, and not a case of borrowing. Lorinser is convinced “that the author of the Bhagavadgītā not only knew and frequently utilised the scriptures of the New Testament, but also wove into his system Christian ideas and views in general,” and he wishes to prove “that this much-admired monument of the ancient Indian mind, this most beautiful and most exalted didactic poem, which can be regarded as one of the most precious blossoms of heathen philosophy, owes its purest and most highly praised doctrines for the most part” to Christian sources. Guided by such tendencies, Lorinser has compared everything which in any way admits of comparison. But of the more than a hundred passages from the Gospels which Lorinser quotes as parallel with passages in the Bhagavadgītā, I have found twenty-five at the most that are of such a kind that a case of borrowing could be at all *thought of*. Not in one single instance, however, is the resemblance such that the supposition of borrowing were more probable than that of an accidental agreement. Mystical love towards God, too, is not limited to Christianity. I need refer only to Sufism, in which it plays no less a part than with the Christian mystics The expositions of Lorinser have indeed convinced few Indologists up to the present. Even A. *Weber*, who himself (“Griechen in Indien,” SBA., 1890, p. 930) traces Bhakti back to Christian influences, is of opinion that Lorinser goes too far. E. W. *Hopkins*, India, Old and New, New York, 1902, 146 ff.) is the only scholar who has expressed a decided opinion in favour of the theory that the Bhagavadgītā was influenced by Christianity. G. *Howells* (The Soul of India, London, 1913, 425 ff.) compares the doctrines of the Gītā with those of the New Testament, and seeks to trace points of agreement, without asserting that the Gītā was dependent on Christianity. Most scholars agree that the doctrine of Bhakti can be explained by earlier Indian teachings, and that the hypothesis of Christian influence on the Bhagavadgītā is unlikely, on historical grounds. *Cf.* J. *Muir*, Ind. Ant., 4, 1875, pp. 77 ff.; A. *Barth*, RHR., 11, 1885, pp. 57 f. (Oeuvres I, 370 f.) and The Religions of India, transl., London, 1889, 220 f.; J. *van den Gheyn*, Le Muséon 17, 1898, pp. 57 ff.; L. J. *Sedgwick*, JBRAS., 23, 1910, 111 ff.; A. B. *Keith*, JRAS. 1907, 490 ff.; *Grierson*, ERE. II (1909), pp. 547 ff.; and esp. R. *Garbe*, Die Bhagavadgītā (2nd Ed.), pp. 66 ff., and Indien und das Christentum, 1914, pp. 227 ff.
v1.c9.s7.34
¹ VI, 47. Transl. by K. T. *Telang*, SBE., Vol. 8, p. 73.
v1.c9.s7.35
“Even if a very ill-conducted man worships me, not worshipping any one else, he must certainly be deemed to be good, for he has well resolved. He soon becomes devout of heart, and obtains lasting tranquillity. (You may) affirm, O son of Kuntī! that my devotee is never ruined. For, O son of Pṛthā! even those who are of sinful birth, women, Vaiśyas, and Sūdras likewise, resorting to me, attain the supreme goal. What then (need be said of) holy Brahmans and royal saints who are (my) devotees? . . . . . ”²
v1.c9.s7.36
² IX, 30-33. Transl. by K. T. *Telang*, SBE., Vol. 8, p. 85.
v1.c9.s7.37
The moral action and all the virtues of the yogin, too, gain their chief value through the love of God:
v1.c9.s7.38
“Hateless toward all born beings, friendly, and pitiful, void of the thought of a Mine and an I, bearing indifferently pain and pleasure, patient,
ever content, the Man of the Rule subdued of spirit and steadfast of purpose, who has set mind and understanding on Me and worships Me, is dear to Me.
He before whom the world is not dismayed and who is not dismayed before the world, who is void of joy, impatience, fear and dismay,
desireless, pure, skilful, impartial, free from terrors, who renounces all undertakings and worships Me, is dear to Me.”³
v1.c9.s7.39
³ XII, 13-16. Transl. by L. D. *Barnett*.
v1.c9.s7.40
The kernel of all the ethical teachings of the Bhagavadgītā, however, is contained in the verse which the commentators rightly call the “quintessence verse”:
v1.c9.s7.41
"He who does My work, who is given over to Me, who is devoted to Me, void of attachment, without hatred to any born being, O son of Pāṇḍu, comes to Me."[^1) ]
v1.c9.s7.42
Here is also expressed what, according to the Bhagavadgītā, constitutes liberation or the highest good: coming to, or union with, God. This is to be understood "as elevation of the soul to a god-like state, as individual perpetuation in the presence of God."[^2) ]
v1.c9.s7.43
There are, then, *three* paths which lead to this goal: the path of dutiful, desireless action, the path of knowledge, and the path of the love of God. And it is at least attempted, though not always successfully, to bring the three paths into harmony with one another. The first path can, indeed, be combined with the third, and the love of God leads to the knowledge of God, thus meeting the second path. Thus the contradictions in the ethical teachings of the Bhagavadgītā can to a certain extent be overcome.[^3) ]
v1.c9.s7.44
There are, however, other contradictions in the poem staring us in the face at every turn. Kṛṣṇa invariably speaks of himself as a *personal god*, as the creator, who is eternal and imperishable, but is nevertheless born into the world or creates himself at such times when a decrease in religion is imminent; this is especially the case in the passages dealing with bhakti (IV, 5 ff.). In other places, again, he teaches that *he* is in all beings, and all beings in *him* (VI, 30 f.). "This All is strung on me, like pearls on a string. I am the taste in the water, O son of Kuntī, I am the light in the sun and moon, the syllable Om in all the Vedas, the sound in the atmosphere and the bravery in men," etc. (VII, 7 ff.). This doctrine, according to which God is separate from the
v1.c9.s7.45
[^1) ]: XI, 55. Transl. by L. D. Barnett. [^2) ]: *Garbe*, Die Bhagavadgîtâ (2nd Ed.), p. 65. [^3) ]: Otto *Strauss*, Ethische Probleme aus dem "Mahābhārata," Firenze 1912 (GSAI. 24, 1911), pp. 309 ff., gives a good summary of the ethics of the Gītā, which he presents as a compromise between the contradictory doctrines.
v1.c9.s7.46
world, though at the same time immanent in it, is taught as a great secret (IX, 1 ff.). There is, however, a third category of passages where Kṛṣṇa is not mentioned at all, but which speak quite abruptly of the brahman (neuter) as the sole and highest world principle in the sense of the monism of the Upaniṣads. Moreover, side by side with verses mentioning the Veda in an almost scornful tone (II, 42 ff.), we find other passages recommending the sacrifices prescribed in the Veda, and even describing the sacrifice as "a magic cow which fulfils all wishes" (III, 10), which is difficult to reconcile with that "desireless action" that is so often praised.
v1.c9.s7.47
This doctrine of desireless action is sometimes described by the term *Yoga*. The same term is, however, used to denote various things. The usual meaning is what is generally understood by Yoga in Indian literature, *i.e.*, the doctrine of absorption, and of the methods by which man can withdraw from the sense-world and become entirely absorbed in the deity. It is in this sense that the Bhagavadgītā is sometimes called a *Yogaśāstra*, or manual of Yoga. This "practical philosophy" of the yoga has its psychological and metaphysical foundation in the *Sāṃkhya*.¹ The Sāṃkhya, however, teaches differentiation between spirit (puruṣa) and matter (prakṛti), plurality of souls, and independence and eternity of matter, and explains the creation as an unfolding of the world from original matter. Now all these are doctrines diametrically opposed to the doctrine of unity taught by the Upaniṣads and the Vedānta. In spite of this, the passages dealing with the brahman, teach the doctrine of universal unity as well.
v1.c9.s7.48
¹ In V, 4 f., it is explained with great emphasis that Sāṃkhya and Yoga are one. In XVIII, 13, sāṃkhye kṛtānte cannot mean anything but "in the Sāṃkhya system." In XVIII, 19, guṇasaṃkhyāna is explained by Śaṅkara as Kâpila Śāstra. Kapila, the founder of the Sāṃkhya system, is called the first of the perfect sages, in X, 26.
v1.c9.s7.49
How can all these contradictions be explained? Scholars are by no means unanimous on this point. Some are content to say that all these contradictions simply result from the fact that the Bhagavadgītā is not a systematic philosophical work, but a mystical poem, and that, in the words of Franklin Edgerton, the most decided and consistent exponent of this opinion, it is "poetic, mystical, and devotional, rather than logical and philosophical." W. von Humboldt had already said: "It is a sage, speaking out of the fulness and inspiration of his knowledge and of his feeling, not a philosopher trained in a school, classifying his material in accordance with a definite method, and arriving at the last principles of his doctrine by a skilful chain-work of ideas."¹ On the other hand, other scholars maintain that there are limits even for mystical poetry, and that the contradictions in the Gītā can better be explained by the assumption that the poem has not come down to us in its original form, but like most parts of the Mahābhārata has only received its present form as a result of interpolations and revisions. Some scholars had assumed that the Bhagavadgītā had originally been a pantheistic poem, which was remodelled later by the devotees of Viṣṇu into a theistic poem. This is very improbable, for in spite of all the contradictions the whole character of the work is predominantly theistic. God appears as an essentially personal god, who, as a teacher, and in human incarnation, requires devotion (bhakti) of his worshippers.
v1.c9.s7.50
¹ "Ueber die unter dem Namen Bhagavadgītā bekannte Episode des Mahābhārata," 1825 (Gesammelte Schriften V, p. 325). The following take up more or less the same point of view: K. T. Telang, SBE., Vol. 8, pp. 11 ff.; E. W. Hopkins, JRAS. 1905, pp. 384 ff., and Cambridge History I, 273; L. v. Schroeder in the Introduction to his German translation; B. Faddegon, Çamkara's Gītābhāṣya, toegelicht en beoordeeld, Diss., Amsterdam 1906, pp. 12 ff.; D. van Hinloopen Labberton, ZDMG. 66, 1912, 603 f.; R. G. Bhandarkar, Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism, etc., pp. 157 ff.; O. Strauss, Ethische Probleme aus dem Mahābhārata. (GSAI. 24, 1911), p. 310; ZDMG. 67, 1913, 714 ff.; A. B. Keith, JRAS. 1913, p. 197; 1915, p. 548; H. Oldenberg, NGGW. 1919, 321 ff., and Das Mahabharata, pp. 39, 43, 70 ff.; J. N. Farquhar, Outline of the Religious Literature of India, London 1920, pp. 90 f.; H. Jacobi, DLZ. 1921, 715 ff.; 1922, 266 ff.; F. Edgerton, The Bhagavad Gita interpreted, Chicago 1925.
v1.c9.s7.51
Taking this for granted, R. Garbe¹ made a direct attempt to reconstruct the original poem, by printing in small type in his translation all verses which he considers unauthentic *i.e.* interpolated from the view-point of the Vedānta philosophy and the orthodox brahmanical religion. I was formerly in entire agreement with Garbe.² However, after repeated readings of the Gītā and the most thorough investigation of the passages cut out by Garbe, I have come to the conclusion that even the original poem did not teach pure theism, but theism tinged with pantheism. I do not now believe that we are justified in pronouncing as interpolated all those passages where Kṛṣṇa speaks of himself as immanent in the world, as for instance the beautiful verses VII, 7 ff. On the other hand, I still agree with Garbe that those passages where mention is suddenly made of the *brahman* (neut.) without any reference to Kṛṣṇa whatsoever, are interpolated (*e.g.* II, 72; V, 6, 7, 10; VII, 29—VIII, 4 etc.), as well as the passages where ritual and sacrifices are recommended or glorified (*e.g.* III, 9-18; IX, 16-19 etc.). I think, too that the original Bhagavadgītā was much shorter, and that the work in its present form contains many more interpolations and additions than are assumed by Garbe. The very fact that the Bhagavadgītā contains exactly 18 Adhyāyas, just as the Mahābhārata is divided into 18 Parvans and as there are 18 Purāṇas, is suspicious.³ Canto XI, where Kṛṣṇa reveals himself to Arjuna in his godlike form, is of the nature of a Purāṇa rather than like the work of the poet of the first sections.
v1.c9.s7.52
¹ In his translation of the Bhagavadgītā, see also ERE. II, 535 ff. and DLZ. 1922, 98 ff.; 605 f.
v1.c9.s7.53
² Also F. O. Schrader, ZDMG. 64, 340, and A. Hillebrandt, GGA. 1915, p. 628, agree with Garbe. *Grierson*, too (ERE. II, 540 f.; Ind. Ant. 37, 1908, 257) agrees with Garbe in counting the passages where "Brahmaism" is taught, among the "later" portions of the Gītā. The scholars mentioned in Note 2 are the opponents of the view adopted by Garbe.
v1.c9.s7.54
³ *Cf. Hopkins*, Great Epic, p. 371.
v1.c9.s7.55
It is this very conviction of mine that the author of the original Gītā was a great poet, that makes me hesitate to attribute to him such verses as XI, 26 ff., where the heroes of the epic are visioned as hanging between the teeth of the god,—a vision by which a further excuse for the killing of the enemy is added to those already given in Canto II: namely Arjuna need not hesitate to kill the enemies, because in reality they have "already been killed (by God)."¹
v1.c9.s7.56
¹ Those scholars, too, who reject Garbe's views, do not all believe in the unity of the Gītā. *Hopkins* (Great Epic, pp. 215, 234 f.) speaks of the Gītā as "clearly......... rewritten by a modernising hand." *Oldenberg*, too, thinks it likely that the earliest Gītā concluded with II, 38, and that Adhyāyas XIII-XVIII are an appendix or appendices (NGGW. 1919, 333 f., 336 f.). See also *Strauss*, Ethische Probleme, pp. 312 f.
v1.c9.s7.57
There can hardly be any doubt that the Bhagavadgītā did not belong to the original heroic poem. It is scarcely imaginable that an epic poet would make his heroes hold a philosophical conversation of 650 verses in the midst of the description of a battle. In all probability the original epic included only a very short dialogue between Arjuna and the hero and charioteer (not the god) Kṛṣṇa. This dialogue was, as it were, the germ from which the present didactic poem grew.² This didactic poem was originally, by its very nature, a text of the Bhāgavatas, wherein the doctrine of bhakti in conjunction with the yoga doctrine of desireless action was taught on the foundation of the Sāṁkhya. There is evidence from inscriptions that, as early as the beginning of the 2nd century B. C. the religion of the Bhāgavatas had found adherents even among the Greeks in Gandhāra.³
v1.c9.s7.58
² H. *Jacobi* (ZDMG. 72, 1918, 323 ff.) has endeavoured to trace in the poem those verses (of Adhyāyas I and II) which belonged to the old epic. But it is not impossible that there was no dialogue whatsoever between Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna in the old heroic poem, and that the whole poem was originally a text independent of the epic, an Upaniṣad, which was inserted bodily into the epic.
v1.c9.s7.59
³ See J. H. *Marshall*, JRAS. 1909, pp. 1053 ff.; J. F. *Fleet*, ib., 1087 ff.; D. R. *Bhandarkar*, JBRAS. 23, 1910, 104 ff.; R. G. *Bhandarkar*, Ind. Ant. 41, 1912, pp. 13 ff.; *Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism*, etc., pp. 3 f.; H. *Raychaudhuri*, Early History of the Vaishnava Sect, Calcutta 1920, pp. 13, 52 f., 58 ff.
v1.c9.s7.60
It is perhaps not too bold to assume that the old Bhagavadgītā was written at about this time as an Upaniṣad of the Bhāgavatas.¹ Its language, style and metre, too, prove the work to be one of the earlier parts of the Mahābhārata. There are references to the Gītā in later sections of the epic,² and the *Anugītā* (XIV, 16-51) is surely nothing but a late imitation and continuation of the Bhagavadgītā, than which it contains a still greater variety of doctrines.
v1.c9.s7.61
¹ According to K. T. *Telang* (SBE., Vol. 8, p. 34) the Gītā is "earlier than the third century B.C.," according to R. G. *Bhandarkar* (Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism, etc., p. 13) it is "not later than the beginning of the fourth century B. C." I agree with *Edgerton* when he says (1. c., p. 3): "All that we can say is that it was probably composed before the beginning of our era, but not more than a few centuries before it."
v1.c9.s7.62
² XII, 346, 11 with "Harigītāḥ" and XII, 348, 8.
v1.c9.s7.63
The Bhagavadgītā was already known to the poet Bāṇa (in the 7th century A.D.) as a portion of the Mahābhārata,³ and side by side with the Upaniṣads and Vedānta-sūtras it formed one of the foundations of the philosophy of Śaṅkara. Most likely it was already in the early centuries A.D. that it received its present form at the hands of orthodox Brahmans; in this form it became and has remained until to-day the most popular religious book for all Hindus. The work owes this great popularity to the very circumstance that the most conflicting philosophical doctrines and religious views are united in it, so that adherents of all schools and sects could make use of it, and even to-day the strictest Brahman is just as much edified by it as the adherent of the Brahmo-Samaj and the believing theosophist under the leadership of Annie Besant.
v1.c9.s7.64
³ K. T. *Telang*, SBE., Vol. 8, p. 28.
v1.c9.s7.65
It is scarcely possible, however, that the Bhagavadgītā can have arisen from the start on the basis of syncretism, as the latter only made its appearance more and more in later times. It is certain that the old and authentic Gītā was the work of a true and great poet. It is on the strength of its poetic value, the forcefulness of its language, the splendour of the images and metaphors, the breath of inspiration which pervades the poem, that it has made such a deep impression on impressionable minds of all ages; and I am convinced that the poetical beauties as well as the moral value of the poem would find still greater appreciation, had the poem not been mutilated by additions and interpolations.¹
v1.c9.s7.66
¹ Attention has of ten been called to the fact that, notwithstanding the many beauties and lofty thoughts, the poem has many weak points. *Cf.* O. Böhtlingk, Bemerkungen zur Bhagavadgītā (BSGW. 1897); E. W. *Hopkins*, Religions of India, pp. 390, 399f, quoted in assent by R. *Garbe*, Die Bhagavadgîtâ, p. 16; and V. K. *Rajwade*, Bhandarkar Com. Vol., pp. 325 ff.
v1.c9.s7.67
Another text-book of the Bhāgavatas is the Nārāyaṇīya (XII, 334-351); this is certainly a later work than the Bhagavadgītā, but even this has been augmented by additions.² It is a work in true purāṇa style, which teaches that perfection can only be attained by bhakti and the grace of God, who appears here under the name of Nārāyaṇa. Here, too, we find the Bhāgavata religion and the philosophy of Sāṃkhya and Yoga mingled with Vedānta ideas. The paradise of the pious devotees of Nārāyaṇa, Śvetadvīpa or "the white island," is described in very fantastical fashion:
v1.c9.s7.68
² See R. G. *Bhandarkar*. Vaiṣṇavism, Śaivism, *etc.* pp. 4 ff., *Grierson*, Ind. Ant. 37, 1908, 251ff., 373ff. Translated into German by *Deussen*, Philosophische Texte des Mahâbhâratam, pp. 748 ff., into Dutch by *C. Lecouterc* in Mélanges Charlos de Harlez, Leyden 1896, pp. 162 ff.
v1.c9.s7.69
The sage Nārada desires to look upon the only god Nārāyaṇa, whose faithful worshipper he is, in his original nature. He therefore raises himself aloft by the strength of yoga, and reaches the divine mountain Meru. Gazing thence to the north-west, he espies north of the ocean of milk the famous "white island" lying 32,000 yojanas from Meru. On this island he sees "white men without sense organs, who take no nourishment, whose eyes do not blink, from whom a most pleasant scent emanates, who are free from all sin, at the sight of whom evil men are dazzled, whose bodies are of bone hard as diamond, who are indifferent both to honour and scorn, like unto the children of heaven in form, endowed with shining strength, with heads in the shape of sunshades. Their voice resembles the rushing of torrents of rain, they have four equal testicles, feet like lotus-leaves, sixty white teeth and eight fangs; they lick their sun-like faces with their tongues, and are full of love for God.” [^1)
v1.c9.s7.70
It seems evident that the “white island” as well as the divine mountain Meru and the ocean of milk, belongs to the province of mythology, and not to that of historical geography. A few scholars have, however, tried to identify the ocean of milk with Lake Issyk-Kul or Lake Balkhash, and the “white island” with a land of “white men” in the north, inhabited by Nestorian Christians,[^2) so that we should have to assume that there was Christian influence in the Nārāyaṇīya. In my opinion, the description of Śvetadvīpa does not remind us of the Christian Eucharist, but of heavenly regions such as Vaikuṇṭha, Goloka, Kailāsa and the Sukhāvatī paradise of the Buddha Amitābha.
v1.c9.s7.71
Though Sāṁkhya and Yoga stand in the foreground of most of the philosophical sections of the Mahābhārata, we nevertheless find everywhere interpolated passages where the Vedānta is taught, and a few longer passages like the *Sanatsujātīya* (V, 41-46) have been inserted with an entirely Vedāntist teaching.[^3) However, as regards poetical value, there is none of the philosophical sections of the
v1.c9.s7.72
[^1): XII, 335, 6-12. A tongue of this kind also belongs to the 32 characteristics of a Buddha, who, however, has only forty white teeth, *e.g.*, Suttanipāta, Selasutta (SBE., Vol. 10, II, p. 101). [^2): *Cf.* *J. Kennedy*, JRAS. 1907, 481f., *R. Garbe*, AR. 16, 1913, 516ff, and Indien und das Christentum, Tübingen 1914, pp. 192 ff., *Grierson*, ERE. II, p. 549. On the other hand, *s.* *Winternitz*, Oesterreich. Monatsschrift fur den Orient, 41, 1915, pp. 185 f., and *H. Raychaudhuri*, Early History of the Vaishnava Sect, pp. 79 ff. [^3): For the philosophical doctrines contained in the Mahābhārata *s.* *E. W. Hopkins*, The Great Epic of India, pp. 85-190, *J. Dahlmann*, Die Saṃkhya-Philosophie als Naturlehre und Erlösungslehre nach dem Mahābhārata, Berlin 1902, *P. Deussen*, AGPh I, 3, pp. 8-144. Contrary to Deussen and Dahlmann, I consider it wrong to speak of an “epic philosophy” as a “transition philosophy” between the philosophy of the Upaniṣads and that of the later systems. The epic proper has no connection with philosophy at all, and the “pseudo-epics” contains a mixture of philosophical doctrines belonging to widely different times.
v1.c9.s7.73
Mahābhārata which could bear the least comparison with the Bhagavadgītā.
v1.c9.s7.74
On the other hand, many a precious gem of Indian poetry is to be found in those didactic pieces which deal with *ethical* questions, *e. g.*, the oft-discussed question regarding the relationship of destiny and human action (karman), or contain general ethical doctrines—without regard to any particular philosophical or religious views. The following translations may serve at least as a small sample of the abundance of beauty and wisdom which lies hidden in these verses of the Mahābhārata:
v1.c9.s7.75
"The wound a foeman's trenchant steel
Inflicts, in time again will heal;
The tree a woodman's axe o'erthrows
Soon sprouts again, and freshly grows;
But never more those wounds are closed,
Which harsh and cutting words have caused."
v1.c9.s7.76
"The gods no club, like herdsmen, wield
To guard the man they deign to shield:
On those to whom they grace will show
They understanding sound bestow;
But rob of sense and insight all
Of whom their wrath decrees the fall.
These wretched men,—their minds deranged,—
See all they see distorted, changed;
For good to them as evil looms,
And folly wisdom's form assumes."
v1.c9.s7.77
"With meekness conquer wrath, and ill with ruth,
By giving niggards vanquish, lies with truth."
v1.c9.s7.78
"Reviling meet with patience; ne'er
To men malignant malice bear.
Harsh tones and wrathful language greet
With gentle speech and accents sweet.
When struck return not thou the blow.
v1.c9.s7.79
Even gods their admiration shew
Of men who thus entreat a foe."
v1.c9.s7.80
"That foe repel not with a frown
Who claims thy hospitable aid;
A tree refuses not its shade
To him who comes to hew it down."
v1.c9.s7.81
"Thou mark'st the faults of other men,
Although as mustard seeds minute;
Thine own escape thy partial ken,
Though each in size a Bilva fruit." [^1)
v1.c9.s7.82
"A man should do with all his might
The good his heart has once designed.
Ne'er let him wrong with wrong requite,
But be to others ever kind."
v1.c9.s7.83
"The good kind actions recollect,
But base injurious deeds forget;
On doing good to others set,
They never recompense expect."
v1.c9.s7.84
"'Tis not for gain, for fame, from fear,
That righteous men injustice shun,
And virtuous men hold virtue dear;
An inward voice they seem to hear
Which tells that duty must be done."
v1.c9.s7.85
"Whene'er thy acts the source must be
Of good or ill to other men,
Deal thou with them in all things then
As thou would'st have them deal with thee." [^2)
v1.c9.s7.86
[^1): Matthew vii, 3f. [^2): V, 33, 77, 80 f., 34, 41, III, 194, 7, V, 35, 11, XII, 146, 5, I, 74, 82, III, 206, 44, II, 72, 7, XII, 158, 58, V, 38, 72 (Roy's edition), translated by J. Muir, *Metrical Translations from Sanskrit Writers*, pp. 93, 9, 88, 110, 85, 81 and 84.
Cites (8)
- Bhagavadgītā — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
- Mahābhārata — Sanskrit
- Nārāyaṇīya — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
- Rājataraṅgiṇī — Kalhaṇa, Sanskrit
- Suttanipāta — Pāli
- Mānava Dharmaśāstra — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit
- Mahābhārata — Vyāsa, Sanskrit
- Sanatsujātīya — Sanskrit