English
The Gita, however, is anxious to secure the saintly equanimity and a perfect, unperturbed nature by the practice of detachment of the mind from passions and desires. When such a saintly equa- nimity and self-contentedness is achieved, the sage is said to be in a state of liberation from the bondage of guna-attachments, or to be in a state of Brahmahood in God. The philosophy of the Gita thus differs materially from the traditional Samkhya philo- sophy on almost every point. On some minor points(e.g. the absence of tan-matras, the nature of the production of knowledge and action, etc.) the Gita philosophy has some similarities with the account of the Samkhya given in the Caraka-samhita, iv. 1, as already described in the first volume of this work?. The question whether the Gita was written under a Vedantic influence cannot be answered, unless one understands what is . exactly meant by this Vedantic influence; if by Vedantic influence 1 4 History of Indian Philosophy, vol. 1, 1922, pp. 213-222. 478 The Philosophy of the Bhagavad-gita [cH. one means the influence of the Upanisads, then the Gita must plainly be admitted to have borrowed very freely from the Upanisads, which from the earliest times had been revered for their wisdom. If, however, by Vedantic influence one means the philosophy of Vedanta as taught by Sankara and his followers, then it must be said that the Gita philosophy is largely different therefrom. It has already been pointed out that, though Brahman is often described in Upanisadic language as the highest essence of God, it is in reality a part of the super-personality of God. The Gita, moreover, does not assert anywhere that Brahman is the only reality and all else that appears is false and unreal. The word maya is, no doubt, used in the Gita in three passages; but its meaning is not what Sankara ascribes to it in his famous inter- pretation of Vedantic thought. Thus in the Gita, vil. 14, maya is described as being of the nature of gunas, and it is said that he who clings to God escapes the grip of the ma@yd or of the gunas. In the Gita, vil. 15, the word maya is also probably used in the same sense, since it is said that it is ignorant and sinful men who, through demoniac ideas, lose their right wisdom under the in- fluence of maya and do not cling to God. In all probability, here also maya means the influence of rajas and tamas; for it has been repeatedly said in the Gita that demoniac tendencies are generated under the preponderating influence of rajas and tamas. In the Gita, xviiI. 61, it is said that God resides in the heart of all living beings and moves them by maya, like dolls on a machine. It has been pointed out that the psychical ten- dencies and moral or immoral propensities which move all men to action are produced under the influence of the gunas, and that God is the ultimate generator of the gunas from the prakrti. The maya, therefore, may well be taken here to mean gunas, as in the Gita, vu. 14. Sridhara takes it to mean the power of God. The gunas are, no doubt, in a remote sense, powers of God. But Sankara’s paraphrasing of it as deception (chadmana) is quite inappropriate. Thus it is evident that the Gita does not know the view that the world may be regarded as a manifestation of maya or illusion. It has also been pointed out that the word “‘ Brahman” is used in the Gita in the sense of the Vedas, of faultless equanimity, of supreme essence and of prakrti, which shows that it had no such crystallized technical sense as in the philosophy of Sankara. The word had in the Gitd all the looseness of Upanisadic XIV] Conception of Sacrificial Duties in the Gita 479 usage. In the Gita the word avidya, so famous in Sankara’s philosophy of the Vedanta, is nowhere used. The word ajfana is used several times (V. 15, 16; X. I1; XIII. 11; xIv. 8, 16, 17; XVI. 4); but it has no special technical sense in any of these passages. It. has the sense of “‘ignorance”’ or ‘‘misconception,”’ which is produced by tamas (ajfianam tamasah phalam, x1v. 16) and which in its turn produces tamas (tamas tv ajfana-jam viddhi, xiv. 8). Conception of Sacrificial Duties in the Gita. The Vedic view of the obligatoriness of certain kinds of sacri- fices or substitution-meditations permeated almost all forms of Hindu thought, excepting the Vedanta philosophy as interpreted by Sankara. The conception of the obligatoriness of duties finds its best expression in the analysis of vzdhi in the Mimamsa philosophy. Vidhi means the injunctions of the Vedas, such as, ‘“‘ Thou should’st perform such and such sacrifices’”’; sometimes these are condi- tional, such as, ““’Those who wish to attain Heaven should perform such and such sacrifices”’; sometimes they are unconditional, such as, ‘Thou should’st say the three prayers.” The force of this vidhi, or injunction, is differently interpreted in the different schools of Mimamsa. Kumiéarila, the celebrated commentator, in inter- preting Jaimini’s definition of dharma, or virtue, as a desirable end (artha) or good which is enjoined by the Vedic commands (codana-laksano ’rtho dharmah, Mimdamsa-sitra, 1. 1), says that it is the performance of the Vedic injunctions, sacrifices, etc. (yagadih) that should be called our duty. The definition of virtue, then, involves the notion that only such a desired end (on account of the pain associated with it not exceeding the associated pleasure) as is enjoined by Vedic commands is called dharma. The sacrifices enjoined by the Vedas are called dharma, because these would in future produce pleasurable experiences. So one’s abstention from actions prohibited by Vedic commands is also called dharma, as by this means one can avoid the undesirable effects and sufferings of punishments as a result of transgressing those commands. Such sacrifices, however, are ultimately regarded as artha, or desired ends, because they produce pleasurable experiences. The im- perative of Vedic commands is supposed to operate in a twofold manner, firstly, as initiating a volitional tendency in obedience to the verbal command (sabdi bhavana), and, secondly, in releasing 480 The Philosophy of the Bhagavad-gita [cH. the will to the actual performance of the act enjoined by the command (arthi bhavana). The propulsion of verbal commands is not like any physical propulsion; such a propulsion only arises as a result of one’s comprehension of the fact that the per- formance of the acts enjoined will lead to beneficial results, and it naturally moves one to perform those acts out of self- interest!. So of the twofold propulsion (bhavana) implied in a Vedic imperative the propulsio:. to act, as communicated by the verbal command, is called sabdi bhavana; and this is followed by the actual efforts of the person for the performance of the act?. The prescriptive of the command (vidht) is comprehended directly from the imperative suffix (iz) of the verb, even before the meaning of the verb is realized. If this is so, it is contended that the im- perative, as it is communicated by the command, is a pure con- tentless form of command. This contention is admitted by the Bhatta school, which thinks that, though in the first stage we have communication of the contentless pure form of the imperative, yet at the successive stages the contentless form of duty is naturally supplemented by a more direct reference to the concrete context, as denoted by the verb with which the suffix is associated. So the process of the propulsion of bhadvand, though it starts at the first instance with the communication of a pure contentless form, passes, by reason of its own necessity and the incapacity of a contentless form of duty to stand by itself, gradually through more and more concrete stages to the actual comprehension of the duty implied by the concrete meaning of the associated verb?. So the com- munication of the contentless duty and its association with the concrete verbal meaning are not two different meanings, but are 1 adrste tu visaye sreyah-sadhanadhigamah sabdaika-nibandhana iti tad-adhi- gamopayah sabda eva pravartakah; ata eva Sabdo "pi na svariipa-mdatrena pra- vartako vayv-adi-tulyatva-prasangat;...arthapratitim upajanayatah sabdasya pra- a Nydaya-mafyjari, p. 342. The Vizianagram Sanskrit Series, Benares, 1895. * Lin-adeh sabdasya na pratiti-janana-matre vyaparah kintu purusa-pravrttav apt; sa cayam lin-adi-vyaparah sabda-bhavanad-namadheyo vidhir ity ucyate sa eva ca pravartakah...yo bhavana-kriyd-kartr-visayah praygjaka-vyaparah purusa-stho yatra bhavana-kriyadyah karta svargadikarmatam Gpadyate so ’rtha-bhavand-ésab- dena ucyate. Ibid. p. 343. = Yady apy amsair asamsprstam vidhih sprsati bhavanam tathapy asaktito ndsau tan-matre paryavasyati anustheye hi visaye vidhith pumsam pravartakah amsa-trayena capirnam nanutisthati bhavandm tasmat prakranta-riipo ’pi vidhis tavat pratiksate yavad yogyatvam apanna bhavand’nyanapeksini. Ibid. p. 344. xIv]_ Conception of Sacrificial Duties in the Gita 481 rather the prolongation of one process of communication, just as cooking includes all the different associated acts of putting the pan on the fire, lighting the fire, and the like!. These two bhavanas, therefore, mean nothing more than the reasoning of the will and its translation into definite channels of activity, as the performance of the sacrifice, etc., and vidhi here means simply the prompting or the propulsion (vyaparah prerana-riipah) ; and it is such prompting that initiates in the performer the will, which is later on translated into concrete action.