What does Gita Teach?

        SAINTS  WILL  AID

        WHAT DOES GITA TEACH?

Hinduism abounds in scriptures. This profusion itself becomes a source of confusion. Add to this the commentaries, commentaries on commentaries, glosses on them, translations, interpretations,explanations, etc. It is almost impossible to understand the orignal sense of any important scripture. Each tradition follows the interpretation of its own founder Acharya and his parampara.

The prastanatraya- the Upanishads, Brahmasutra and Bhagavad Gita- are the common foundation of all sects of orthodox Hindus; yet none divides them as much as the prastanatraya! The problem starts with the interpretation of the very first mantra of the first Upanishad, and reaches an intense state in the Gita. 

The problem for the modern Hindu is compounded by many factors. Most do not know Sanskrit, and have to depend upon translations. The accuracy of many of the translations is doubtful and questionable. Authorities who are considered Avataras like Sankara, Jnaneswar, Ramanuja differ among themselves. Most commentators want to establish their own pet theories using the words of the Gita.  Most modern translators and commentators lack spiritual experience, and proceed on the basis of linguistic expertise, without  sraddha or dedication to the subject. We are also influenced by the state of modern education and notions. These factors guarantee that it will be extremely difficult to get at the real meaning of the Gita.

Yet, it need not be difficult at all if we adhere to the basic facts. These are:

• Arjuna is confused about Dharma, and asks Krishna about what is beneficial for him: "yat sreya:"
• Krishna proceeds to tell him on the basis of his own Aryan heritage.
• Krishna first explains what he had taught in the early days- (pura prokta) the ancient wisdom: "Dwivida nishta" viz the twofold path of Jnana  and the path of Karma ie Jnana Yoga and karma yoga , vide 3.3
• He explains many aspects of jnana and karma, how karma is to be performed, what kinds of karma are to be done, karma as yajna, karma as yoga etc.
• He explains many other things in answer to questions asked by arjuna.
• But in the end, while concluding the Gita, Bhagavan says CLEARLY, UNAMBIGUOUSLY:

18.61   Arjuna, the Lord dwells in the hearts of all beings, causing all beings , by His Maya, to revolve, as if mounted on a machine.

18.62. O Bharata, take refuge in Him with all thy heart; by His grace you shall attain supreme peace and the eternal abode.

18.63 Thus has wisdom, more profound than all profundities been declared by Me to you.: "jnanam akhyatam guhyad guhyataram"

18.64  Hear again MY Supreme word, the profoundest of all: "Sarva guhya tamam, Me Paramam Vacha:" Bcause you are dear to Me, I will speak what is good for you.

18.65 Occupy your mind with Me, be devoted to Me, sacrifice to me, bow down to Me. You will reach Me, I promise you. You are dear to Me.

Care: See also: 9.34. The same words are repeated, almost entirely!

18.66 Relinquishing all Dharmas take refuge in Me alone. I will liberate you from all sins. Do not grieve.

Sarva dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja

Aham tva sarva papebhyo mokshayishyami ma shucha:

If after studying all this with attention and devotion, some one talks of anything other than surrender to Bhagavan, as the teaching of the Gita, such as karma yoga, jnana yoga etc, he is a fit candidate for the mental asylum.

In the Gita, Bhagavan extolls all spiritual paths. After all, he himself established even Jnana yoga and karma yoga. But this was the old arrangement: "pura". What is new in the Gita is the revelation about the Avatara, Bhagavan as Brahman,and Surrender to Him as the supreme path. Throughout the Gita, wherever Bhagavan talks of Avatara, Bhagavan, Bhakti, he is qualifying the words with supreme adjectives: In the 9th chapter, Bhagavan talks of "Raja Vidya, Raja Guhyam" ie the king of vidyas and the king of secrets and he talks of Bhakti! He promises: " Na me bhakta: pranasyati" 'My devotee is never destroyed'.  He says in 9. 33: " Anityam asukham lokam imam prapya bhajaswa mam" ie 'having attained this transient, joyless world, you worship Me". Then in 9.34, He says: Fill your mind with Me, be My devotee, sacrifice unto Me, bow down to Me; thus having made your heart steadfast in Me, taking Me as the Supreme Goal, you sahll come to Me.

Again in chapter 13 Bhagavan talks of Purushottama and concludes that chapter by calling it " guhya tamam sastram" ie the sastra that is the highest secret. 

Note: These translations are based on Swarupananda's translation, Advaita Ashrama publication.

Arjuna does not ask for "philosophy", but for a rule of conduct, ie dharma. Sri Krishna  provides just that: give up all ideas and discussions about dharma, but surreneder to Me. So Bhagavan has opened up a new path, has performed bypass surgery, as the arteries of spiritual practice were clogged by empty ritualism in the name of karma, and fruitless discussions in the name of Jnana. In the colophon, Gita is called Upanishad, Brahmavidya and Yogasastra. As Brahmavidya, it tells us the ultimate goal to be attained; as Upanishad, it takes us near that goal; as yogasastra it tells us what to do ie how to achieve it. Then, why waste our time in discussing empty philosophy?

Historically, people have dealt with the Gita in the light of their needs at the time. Tilak and Gandhi interpreted it as mainly Karma Yoga, deriving inspiration for the national movement for freedom. In his days, Sankara was engaged in the fight with purva mimamsakas, trying to establish the superiority of Jnana over karma and he has interpreted the Gita as upholding Jnana. Thus, while giving his comments on sloka 18.66, where Bhagavan says 'give up all dharmas and surrender to Me alone', Sankara makes bold to ask:

"In this scripture, the Gita, has Knowledge been established as the supreme means to Liberation, or is it action, or is it both?"

This question itself is absurd: it states the very problem wrongly. Here, Bhagavan is clearly talking of giving up all karmas (dharma) and surrendering to Him. Where does jnana come in here? Sankara is determined to see what he fancies ie the fight between jnana and karma, and totally misses or completely ignores what Bhagavan actually states!

Further down he states: "Knowledge of the Self, however, is exclusively the cause of the highest good". Now, it is true that jnana is a valid means to liberation. But the Gita nowhere states that that is the "exclusive" ie only cause! If anything, the Gita 's position is : surrender to God alone is the exclusive means! eg. 12.8:

Fix your mind on Me only, place your intellect in Me; then you will do doubt live in Me hereafter.

Again, in 8.7:

Therefore at all times, constantly remember Me and fight.  With mind and intellect absorbed in Me, you shall doubtless come to Me.

Again, 8.16:

O son of Kunti, having attained Me, there is no rebirth.

"Mam upetya tu Kaunteya, punarjanma na vidhyate".

We can cite many more instances. It is plain that here Acharya Sankara is beating his own drum in the name of the Gita. He is pursuing his own agenda. The pity is, he is interpreting it in the light of the past, not as Bhagavan himself says in the Gita. We may respect him, but we are not bound to accept his quirks and slips. 

Even the leading followers of Sankara felt uneasy at this position. Madhusudhana Sarasvati, a leading Advaitin and follower of Sankara was one who felt such unease. He writes in his Gudhartha Dipika:

" what is enjoined in general  for brahmacharins, grahastas, vanaprastas and mendicants is taking shelter under God alone, ignoring the rites and duties even when they stand  enjoined. ...since they may have a love for their own rites and duties , therefore for prohibiting that it is said,' abandoning all forms of rites and duties'......

What is intended to be enjoined is taking refuge in God alone......

 ...since the supreme secret of all the scriptures is verily surrender to God,  therefore the Lord has concluded the scripture (Gita) at that itself. For without that (surrender) even monasticism does not lead to yielding  of its own fruit.

.....the Lord's concern is only with taking refuge in God by ignoring even the duties of monasticism.

However, since streadfastness in devotion to God is the means to both (steadfastness in Action and in Knowledge) and is also the fruit of both, therefore it has been summed up last in ' Abandoning all forms of rites and duties take refuge in Me alone'.

Here Madhusudana Sarasvati confesses his discomfiture with Sankara:

But the Commentator (Sankara) has said that ...steadfastness in Knowledge has been summed up in, 'take refuge in Me alone.' Who are we insignificant people to explain the intention of the Venerable One?

Translations of Sankara and Madhusudana Sarasvati quoted here are from the translations of Swami Gambhirananda, publications from Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta.

In dealing with Tyagaraja, it is necessary to remember all this. Tyagaraja is a smarta, following Sankara. But he is preeminently a bhakta, following the Narada way of bhakti. We see the union of Jnana and bhakti in Tyagaraja, as in Narada, as extolled in Bhagavatam. He does not advocate ritualistic karma. His is an approach of simple devotion, absolute dependence on God as father, mother, guru and God. He has provided the most authentic and practical commentary on the Gita, in his his kritis without formally calling it so! In many respects, he is a forerunner of Sri Ramakrishna!