प्रकरण 10 ब्राह्मणवादाचे साहित्य

LITERATURE OF BRAHMINISM

assumed the form of a third edition, it was again, like the Mahabharata, made a repository of legends, knowledge, learning, philosophy and other arts and sciences.

With regard to the date of the composition of the Ramayana, one proposition is well established namely that the episode of Rama is older than the episode of the Pandus. But that the composition of the Ramayana has gone on peripassu along with the composition of the Mahabharata. Portions of Ramayana may be earlier than the Mahabharata. But there can be no doubt that a great part of the Ramayana was composed after a great part of the Mahabharata had already been composed. 1 PURANAS The Puranas 2 today number 18. This is however not the original number. According to traditions, there is no reason to doubt, there was only one Purana to start with. Tradition alleges that this Purana was older than the Vedas. The Atharva Veda refers to this Purana and the Bramhanda Puran says that it is more ancient than the Vedas. It was a lore which the King was expected to know for the Satapada. Bramhana says the Adhvaryu was required to recite the Purana to the ‘King on the 10th day of the Yajna.

The origin of the 18 Puranas is attributed to Vyas who it is said recast the original single Purana and by additions and substractions made 18 out of one. The making of the 18 Puranas is thus the second stage in the evolution of the Puranas. The edition of each of these 18 Puranas as published or uttered by Vyas is called the Adi 3 Purana i.e. the original edition as brought out by Vyas. After Vyas composed these 18 Puranas, he taught them to his disciple Romaharsana. Romaharsana prepared his own edition of the Puranas and taught it to his six disciples. Romaharsana’s edition of the Puranas thus becamethe third edition of the Puranas. Of the six disciples of Romaharsana, three: Kasyapa, Savarni and Vaisampayana, made three separate editions which may be called the fourth edition of the Puranas which we call by their names. According to the Bhavishya Purana, the Puranas came to be revised sometime during the reign of King Vikramaditya. 4 1See the Appendix A to Hopkins “The Great Epic of India” for Parallel phrases in the two epics.

2For the account of the Puranas which follows I have drawn upon Kale’s Purananirikshana (Marathi) and Partigar’s Ancient Indian Historical Tradition. 3 Adi Purana does not mean a separate Purana of that name. It means the first edition of each of the 18 Puranas.

4 Who is Vikramaditya ? No one can say.

As to the subject matter of the Puranas. The Purana from the oldest time is a recognised department of knowledge. For instance it was distinguished from Itihas or history. By Itihas what was understood was past occurances connected with a ruling king. By Akhyana was meant the recital of an event the occurance of which one had witnessed. By Upakhyana was meant the recital of something one has heard. Gathas meant songs about dead ancestors and about nature and universe.

Kalpashudhi1 are ancient ways of acting regarding Shraddha and Kalpa. 2 The Purana was distinguished from all these branches of knowledge. The Purana was concerned with five subjects. (1) Sarga (2) Prati Sarga (3) Vamsha (4) Manvantar and (5) Vamshacharitra. Sarga means creation of the universe, Pratisarga means the dissolution of the Universe. Vamsha means Geneology, Manvantar means the Ages of the different Manus, particularly the fourteen successive Manus who were the progenitors or sovereigns of the Earth. Vamshacharitra means the account of royal dynasties. There has been a considerable addition made in the scope and subject matter of the Puranas. For the Puranas which we have are no longer confined to these subjects. In addition to these subjects they contain other subjects which fall entirely outside their prescribed scope. Indeed there has been such a change in the fundamental notion I regarding the scope of the Puranas so that some of them do not contain any treatment of the regular subjects but deal wholly with the new or extra subjects. The extra subjects include the following main topics:

(I) Smriti Dharma which include discussion of:

(1) Varnashrama-dharma, (2) Achara, (3) Ahnika, (4) Bhashyabhasya, (5) Vivaha, (6) Asaucha, (7) Shradha (8) Dravya-Suddhi (9) Pataka, (10) Prayaschitta, (11) Naraka, (12) Karma Vipaka and (13) Yuga Dharma.

(II) Vrata Dharma—Observance of holy vows and holy days (III) Kshetra Dharma—Pilgrimages to holy places and (IV) Dana Dharma—Gifts to holy persons.

In addition to this, there are two other topics the new subject matter with which one finds the Puranas to be deeply concerned.

The first of these two topics relates to sectarian worship. The Puranas are votaries of a particular deity and advocate the cause of 1 Mr. Hazara speaks of Kalpajokti (instead of Kalpashudhi) which means lore that has come down through ages—see chronology of Puranas p. 4. 2 The word Kalpa is used in various senses. (1) Practicable. (2) Proper (3) Able, Competent. The word Kalpa is else used in various senses (1) A Sacred rule (2) A prescribed alternative (3) Made of performing religious rites (4) End of the world, Universal destruction. (5) A day of the Brahma Yuga (6) Medical treatment of the sick and (7) One of the six Vedangas: that which lays down the ritual and prescribes rules for ceremonies and sacrificial acts.

LITERATURE OF BRAHMINISM

a particular deity and the sect devoted to his worship. Five 1 Puranas advocate worship of Vishnu, Eight 2 worship of Shiva, One 3 worship of Brahma, One 4 worship of Surya, Two worship of Devi and One worship of Genesh.

The second topic which the Puranas have made a part of their subject matter is the history of the Avatars of the God. The Puranas make a distinction between identification of two Gods and the incarnation of a God. In the case of identification, the theory is that the God is one although he has two names. In the case of an incarnation, God becomes another being of the man or brute and does something miraculous. In reading this history of incarnations the fruitful source is Vishnu. For it is only Vishnu who has taken Avatars from time to time and done miraculous deeds and we find in the Puranas this new topic discussed in all its elaborate details. It is no wonder if by the addition of these new subjects, the Puranas have been transformed out of recognition.

There is one other matter regarding the authorship of the Puranas which is noteworthy. It relates to the change in the authorship of the Puranas. Among the ancient Hindus, there were two separate sections among the literary class. One section consisted of the Brahmins and another section called Sutas who were non-Bramhins. Each was in charge of a separate department of literature. The Sutas had the monopoly of the Puranas. The Brahmins had nothing to do with the composition or the reciting of the Puranas. It was exclusively reserved for the Sutas and the Brahmins had nothing to do with it. Though the Sutas had specialized themselves in the making and the reciting of the Puranas, although they had acquired a hereditary and a prescriptive right to compose and recite the Puranas, there came a time when the Sutas were ousted from this profession by Brahmins who took it into their own hands and made a monopoly of it in their own favour. Thus there was a change in the authorship of the Puranas. Instead of the Sutas, it is the Brahmins who became their authors.5 It is probably when the Puranas fell into the hands of the Brahmins that the Puranas have been finally edited and recast to make room for the new subjects. The editing and recasting has been of a very daring character. For in doing so they have added fresh chapters, substituted new chapters for old chapters and written new chapters with old names. So that by this process some Puranas retained their earlier 1 (1) Vishnu (2) Bhagwat (3) Narada (4) Vaman and (5) Garuda. 2 (1) Shiva (2) Brahma (3) Linga (4) Varaha (5) Skanda (6) Matsya (7) Kurma (8) Bramhanda 3 Padma.

4 Agni.

5 Partiger.

materials, some lost their early materials, some gained new materials and some became totally new works.

The determination of the date of the composition of the Puranas is a problem which has hardly been tackled.All history written by the Brahmins is history without dates and the Puranas are no exception. The date of the Puranas has to be determined by circumstantial evidence corelated with events the dates of which are well settled. The dates of the composition of the different Puranas have not been examined as closely as those of the other parts of the Brahminic literature. Indeed scholars have paid no attention to the Puranas at all certainly nothing like what they have done in the matter of the Vedic literature. Mr, Hazara’s is the only work I know of in which an attempt is made in the matter of determining the date of the composition of the Puranas. I give below the dates of the Puranas as found by him.

Puranas Date of Composition

1. Markendeya .. .. Between 200 and 600 A. D.

2. Vayu .. .. Between 200 and 500 A. D.

3. Bramhanda .. .. Between 200 and 500 A. D.

4. Vishnu .. .. Between 100 and 350 A. D.

5. Matsya .. .. Part about 325 A. D.

Part about 1100 A. D.

6. Bhagwat .. .. Between 500 and 600 A. D.

7. Kurma .. .. Between 550 and 1000 A. D.

8. Vamana .. .. Between 700 and 1000 A. D.

9. Linga .. .. Between 600 and 1000 A. D.

10. Varaha .. .. Between 800 and 1500 A. D.

11. Padma .. .. Between 600 and 950 A. D.

12. Brahanaradiya .. .. Between 875 and 1000 A. D.

13. Agni .. .. Between 800 and 900 A. D.

14. Garuda .. .. Between 850 and 1000 A. D.

15. Bramha .. .. Between 900 and 1000 A. D.

16. Skanda .. .. After 700 A. D.

17. Bramha Vaivrata .. .. After 700 A. D.

18. Bhavishya .. .. After 500 A. D.

No more precise date can be fixed for the Puranas at any rate for the present. New research in the field may narrow the higher and lower limits of their composition. The difference will only be a difference of degree. It will not be one of subversion of Eras.

LITERATURE OF BRAHMINISM

This short survey is enough to remove any doubt as to the age of this literature that it is post-Buddhistic. The survey establishes one more point of great significance. This literature arose during the period subsequent to the triumph of Brahmins under the leadership of Pushyamitra. The survey brings out one other point. Vyas writes Mahabharata. Vyas tells Bhagwat Gita, and Vyas also writes the Puranas. Mahabharata contains 18 Parvas, the Gita has 18 Adhyayas and the Puranas number 18. Is all this an Accident ? Or is it the result of a design planned and worked out in concert ? We must wait and see.

III THE VEDANTA SUTRAS

The vedanta Sutras of Badarayana as has been pointed out already constitute a department of study on the same line as the Karma Sutras of Jaimini. It is natural to ask how the founders of these two schools of thought comfort themselves towards each other. When one begins to inquire into the matter one comes across facts which are revealing. In the first place as Prof. Belvalkar 1 points out, ‘the Vedanta Sutras are very closely modelled upon the Karma Sutras.’ In the matter of methodology and terminology, Badarayana almost slavishly follows Jaimini. He accepts Jaimini rules of interpreting the text of the Shruti. He uses Jaimin’s technical terms in the sense in which they have been used by Jaimini. He uses the very illustrations which are employed by Jaimini.

This is a matter for small wonder. But what is not a matter for small wonder is the attitude of the two schools towards each other in the matter of doctrine. Let me give an illustration. Badarayana gives the following Sutras2 as illustrative of the position of Jaimini towards the Vedanta.

2. Because (the Self) is supplementary (to sacrificial acts), (the fruits of the knowledge of the Self) are mere praise of the agent, even as in other cases; thus says Jaimini.

“According to Jaimini the Vedas merely prescribe acts to attain certain purposes including Liberation, and nothing more. He argues that the knowledge of the Self does not yield any independent results, as Vedanta holds, but is connected with the acts through the agent. No one undertakes a sacrificial act unless he is conscious of the fact that he is different from the body and that after death he 1 Basu Mallick Lectures, p. 152.

2 Swami Vireswarananda—Brahma Sutras (Advaita Ashram Edition 1936), pp. 408-411.

will go to heaven, where he will enjoy the results of his sacrifices. The Text dealing with Self-knowledge serve merely to enlighten the agent and so are subordinate to sacrificial acts. The fruits, however, which the Vedanta texts declare with regard to Self-knowledge, are merely praise, even as texts declare such results by way of praise, with respect to other matters. In short, Jaimini holds that by the knowledge that his Self will outlive the body, the agent becomes qualified for sacrificial actions, even as other things become fit in sacrifices through purificatory ceremonies.

3. Because we find (from the scriptures such) conduct (of men of realization).

“Janaka, emperor of Videha performed a sacrifice in which gifts were freely distributed” (Brih. 3.1.1.); “I am going to perform a sacrifice, Sirs” (Chh. 5.11.5.). Now both Janaka and Asvapati were knowers of the Self. If by this knowledge of the Self they had attained Liberation, there was no need for them to perform sacrifices. But the two texts quoted show that they did perform sacrifices. This proves that it is through sacrificial acts alone that one attains Liberation, and not through the knowledge of the Self, as the Vedantians hold.

4. That (viz, that knowledge of the Self stands in a subordinate relation to sacrificial acts) the scriptures directly declare, “That alone which is performed with knowledge, faith and meditation becomes more powerful” (Chh. 1.1.10); This text clearly shows that knowledge is a part of the sacrificial act.

5. Because the two (knowledge and work) go together (with the departing soul to produce the results).

“It is followed by knowledge, work, and past experience” (Brih. 4.4.2.). This text shows that knowledge and work go together with the soul and produce the effect which it is destined to enjoy. Knowledge independently is not able to produce any such effect.”

6. Because (the scriptures) enjoin (work) for such (as know the purport of the Vedas).

“The scriptures enjoin work only for those who have a knowledge of the Vedas, which includes the knowledge of the Self. Hence knowledge does not independently produce any result.”

7. And on account of prescribed rules.

“Performing works here let a man wish to live a hundred years” (Is. 2.); “Agnihotra is a sacrifice lasting up to old age and death; for through old age one is freed from it or through death” (Sat. Br. 12.4.1.1.). From such prescribed rules also we find that Knowledge stands in a subordinate relation or work.

LITERATURE OF BRAHMINISM

What is the position of Badarayana towards Jaimini and Karma Kanda Shastras? This is best illustrated by the reply which Badarayana gives to the attack by Jaimini on Vedanta as formulated by Badarayana in the Sutras quoted above. The reply is contained in the following Sutras :1

8. But because (the scriptures) teach (the Supreme Self to be) other (than the agent), Badarayana’s (view is) correct; for that is seen (from the scriptures).

“Sutras 2-7 give the view of the Mimamsakas, which is refuted by Sutras 8-17.

The Vedanta texts do not teach the limited self, which is the agent, but the Supreme Self, which is different from the agent. Thus the knowledge of the Self which the Vedanta texts declare is different from that knowledge of the self which an agent possesses. The knowledge of such a Self, which is free from all limiting adjuncts, not only does not help, but puts an end to all actions. That the Vedanta texts teach the Supreme Self is clear from such texts as the following; “He who perceives all and knows all” (Mu. 1.1.9.); “Under the mighty rule of this immutable, O Gargi” etc. (Brih. 3.8.9.).

9. But the declarations of the Shruti equally support both views. “This Sutra refutes the view expressed in Sutra 3. There it was shown that Janaka and others even after attaining Knowledge were engaged in work. This Sutra says the scriptural authority equally supports the view that for one who attained Knowledge there is no work. “Knowing this very Self the Brahmanas renounce the desire for sons, for wealth, and for the worlds, and lead a mendicant life” (Brih. 3.5.1.). “We also see from the scriptures that knowers of the Self like Yajnavalkya gave up work.” ‘This much indeed is (the means of) immortality, my dear’. Saying this Yajnavalkya left home” (Brih. 4.5.15). The work of Janaka and others was characterized by non-attachment, and as such it was practically no work; so the Mimamsa argument is weak.

10. (The declaration of the scripture referred to in Sutra 4) is not universally true.

The declaration of the Shruti that knowledge enhances the fruit of the sacrifice does not refer to all knowledge, as it is connected only with the Udgitha, which is the topic of the section. (There is) division of knowledge and work, as in the case of a hundred (divided between two persons).

1 Swami Vireswaranand, Brahma Sutras, 411-416.

“This Sutra refutes Sutra 5. “It is followed by knowledge, work, and past experiences” (Brih. 4.4.2.). Here we have to take knowledge and work in a distributive sense, meaning that knowledge follows one and work another. Just as when we say a hundred be given to these two persons, we divide it into two halves and give each man fifty. There is no combination of the two. Even without this explanation Sutra 5 can be refuted. For the text quoted refers only to knowledge and work, which concern the transmigrating soul, and not an emancipated soul. For the passage,” Thus does the man who desires (transmigrate)” (Brih.

4.4.6.) shows that the previous text refers to the transmigrating self. And of the emancipated soul Shruti says, “But the man who never desires (never transmigrates)” etc. (Brih. 4.4.6.).

12. (The scriptures enjoin work) only on those who have read the Vedas.

“This Sutra refutes Sutra 6. Those who have read the Vedas and known about the sacrifices are entitled to perform work. No work is prescribed for those who have knowledge of the Self from the Upanishads. Such a knowledge is incompatible with work.

13. Because there is no special mention (of the Jaimini it does not(apply to him).

“This Sutra refutes Sutra 7. The text quoted there from the Isa Upanishad is a general statement, and there is no special mention in it that it is applicable to a Jnani also. In the absence of such a specification it is not binding on him.

14. Or rather the permission (to do work) is for praising (Knowledge). “The injunction to do work for the knowers of the Self is for the glorification of this Knowledge. The praise involved in it is this : A knower of the Self may work all his life, but on account of this Knowledge he will not be bound by its effects.

15. And some according to their choice (have refrained from all work).

“In Sutra 3 it was said that Janaka and others were engaged in work even after Knowledge. This Sutra says that some have of their own accord given up all work. The point is that after Knowledge some may choose to work to set an example to others, while others may give up all work. There is no binding on the knowers of the Self as regards work.

16. And (the scriptures say that the) destruction (of all qualifications for work results from Knowledge).

LITERATURE OF BRAHMINISM

Knowledge destroys all ignorance and its products like agent, act, and result. “But when to the knower of Brahman everything has become the Self, then what should one see and through what” etc., (Brih. 4.5.15). The knowledge of the Self is antagonistic to all work and so cannot possibly be subsidiary to work.

17. And (Knowledge belongs) to those who observe continence (i.e. to Sannyasis); because (this fourth Ashrama is mentioned) in the scriptures.

“The scriptures declare that Knowledge is gained in that stage of life in which continence is prescribed, i.e. the fourth stage or Sannyasa Asrama. To a Sannayasin there is no work prescribed except discrimination. So how can Knowledge be subservient to work ? That there is a stage of life called Sannyasa we find from the scriputures themselves in texts like : “There are three branches of duty; sacrifice, study and charity are the first;.... All these attain to the worlds of the virtuous; but only one who is firmly established in Brahman attains immortality” (Chh.

2.33.1-2); “Desiring this world (the Self) alone monks renounce their homes “(Brih. 4.4.22). See also Mu. 1.2.11 and Chh. 5.10.1. Everyone can take to this life without being a householder etc. which shows the independence of Knowledge”.

Many such Sutras can be found in Badarayana indicating the attitude of the two schools of thought towards each other. But one is enough as it is so very typical. If one stops to consider the matter the position becomes absolutely clear. Jaimini denounces Vedanta as a false Shastra a snare and a delusion, something superficial, unnecessary and insubstantial. What does Badarayana do in the face of this attack ? He defends his own Vedanta Shastra. What one would expect from Badrayana is denunciation of the Karmakanda of Jaimini as a false religion. Badarayana shows no such courage. On the contrary he is very apologetic. He concedes that Jaimini’s Karmakanda is based on the Scriptures and cannot be repudiated. All that he insists is that his Vedanta doctrine is also true because it has also the support of the Scriptures. Some explanation is necessary for this attitude of Badarayana.

BHAGWAT GITA

The Bhagwat Gita forms part of the Bhishmaparvan of the great epic known as the Mahabharat. The epic is mainly concerned with the struggle for sovereignty between cousins, the Kauravas the sons of Dhritarashtra and the Pandavas the sons of Pandu. Pandu was the

younger brother of Dhritarashtra. But as Dhritarashtra was blind the throne went to Pandu. After Pandu’s death there arises a dispute between his sons and the sons of Dhritarashtra regarding the right of succession. The struggle for sovereignty culminated in the battle of Kurukshetra (near modern Panipat). In this battle Krishna sides with the Pandavas and acts as their guide, friend and philohopher,—nay acts as the charioteer of Arjuna, one of the Pandava brothers and who plays the part of the chief warrior in the battle on the side of the Pandavas. The two armies of the Kauravas and the Pandavas were arrayed for battle on the field. Arjuna in his chariot with Krishna as a driver comes and takes his place in front of the Pandava army. Strong and valiant he gazes at the opposing army of the Kauravas and is struck by the horror of the dreadful fratricidal war in which he will have to kill his cousins and slay those whom he himself revers and to whom he is greatly attached and indebted, He becomes dejected, lays down his weapons and refuses to fight. Krishna begins to argue with him and provoke him to fight. This argument takes the form of a question and answer of a conversation between Arjuna and Krishna at the end of which Arjuna agrees to fight.

At the opening of the Bhagwat Gita we find old Dhritarashtra questioning Sanjaya about the battle. This is because Dhritarashtra the father of the Kauravas who though alive at the time when the battle was fought was a blind man and could not see and know things for himself. For the knowledge of the happenings he had to depend upon the reports of others. Anticipating the difficulty of getting someone to tell Dhritarashtra the authentic story, Vyas the author of the Mahabharata, it is said, bestowed on Sanjaya, the charioteer of Dhritrashtra, the power of knowing all that takes place on the battlefield— even the thoughts in men’s minds—that he may make a faithful report to Dhritarashtra. That is why we find the episode of Bhagwat Gita related as a reply by Sanjaya to questions by Dhritarashtra. But the Gita is really a conversation between Arjuna and Krishna and is rightly called Krishana Arjuna Samvad.

In this Krishna-Arjuna-Samvad—which is the real name of the Bhagwat Gita— the main question over which there was disagreement was to fight or not to fight. There was no other question. This was the one and the only question which was the subject matter of discussion and argument between the two. Starting from this point of view it is obvious that the Gita could never have been intended by Krishna to be the occasion for moral instruction for the general public or the doctrinal exposition of any religious system or the catechism attached

LITERATURE OF BRAHMINISM

to any creed. Yet this is just what the Gita has come to be. Although the occasion was to decide to fight or not to fight, the Gita is said to contain what his religious doctrine Krishna is said to have preached to Arjuna. The first question that crops up is who is this Krishna. To this one gets quite surprizingly a variety of answers from the Gita itself. At the start Krishna appears as a mere man with a completely human personality. He is a warrior by profession. He is a great warrior though he had chosen 1 the humble duty of driving the chariot of Arjuna. From man he grows into superman directing and controlling the war and its frotunes. From superman he grows into a demigod and dictator. When all his arguments fail to move Arjuna to fight, he simply orders him to fight and the frightened Arjuna gets up and does his biddings. From demigod he rises to the position of God and is spoken of as Ishwara.

This shows the growth of the personality of Krishna. But what is important is that in the very same Gita, Krishna stands out as a representative of other forms of God. Four such representative characters in which Krishna appears are clear to any one who happens to read the Gita even casually. Krishna is Vasudeo :

Bhagwat Gita:

Ch.X.37. Of the Vrishnis I am Vasudeva; of the Pandavas, Dhananjaya; and also for the Munis, I am Vyasa; of the sages, Ushanas the sage. Krishna as Bhagwan :

Ch.X.12. The Supreme Brahman, the Supreme Abode, the Supreme Purifier, art Thou.

Krishna is an Avtar of Vishnu :

Ch.X.21. Of the Adityas, I am Vishnu; of luminaries, the radiant Sun; of the winds, I am Marichi; of the asterisms, the Moon. Ch.XI.24. On seeing Thee touching the sky, shining in many a colour, with mouths wide open, with large fiery eyes, I am terrified at heart, and find no courage nor peace, O Vishnu.

XI.30. Swallowing all the worlds on every side with Thy flaming mouths. Thou art licking Thy lips. Thy fierce rays, filling the whole world with radiance, are burning, O Vishnu.

Krishna is also an Avtar of Shankara ;

X.23. And of the Rudras I am Shankara; of the Yakshas and Rakshasas the Lord of wealth (Kuvera); of the Vasus I am Pavaka; and of mountains, Meru am I.

1 This is the result or an arrangement between him and Duryodhan leader of the Kauravas. Before the war actually started Duryodhan approached Krishna to fight on the side of the kauravas. Krishna gave him a choice, have him or have his men the Yadavas. Duryodhan chose the Army of Yadavas. That is why Krishna and the Yadavas fought on opposite sides.

Krishna is Bramhan :— XV. 15. I am centered in the hearts of all; memory and perception as well as their loss come from Me. I am verily that which has to be known by all the Vedas, I indeed am the Author of the Vedanta, and the Knower of the Veda am I.

XV. 16. There are two Purushas in the world,—The Perishable and the Imperishable. All beings are the Perishable, and the Kutastha is called Imperishable.

XV. 17. But (there is) another, the Supreme Purusha, called the Highest Self, the immutable Lord, who pervading the three worlds, sustains them. XV. 18. As I transcend the Perishable and am above even the Imperishable, therefore am I in the world and in the Veda celebrated as the Purushottama, (the Highest Purusha).

XV. 19. He who free from delusion thus knows Me, the Highest Spirit, he knowing all, worships Me with all his heart, O descendant of Bharata. Ask the next question, What is the doctrine that Krishna preaches to Arjuna ? The doctrine preached by Krishna to Arjuna is said to be the doctrine of salvation for the human soul. While the question dealt with by Krishna is one relating to Salvation, Krishna teaches three different doctrines of Salvation.

Salvation is possible by Dnyanmarg as propounded by Samkhya Yog. II.39. The wisdom of Self-realisation has been declared unto thee. Hearken thou now to the wisdom of Yoga, endued with which, O son of Pritha, thou shah break through the bonds of Karma.

Thus is the concluding verse of the discourse on Samkhya Yoga discussed in Chapter II, verses 11-16 and 18-30.

(2) Salvation is possible by Karma marg, V.2. Both renunciation and performance of action lead to freedom : of these performance of action is superior to the renunciation of action. (3) Salvation is possible by Bhakti Marg.

IX. 13. But the great souled ones O son of Pritha, possessed of the Divine Prakriti, knowing Me to be the origin of beings, and immutable, worship Me with a single mind.

IX. 14. Glorifying Me always and striving with firm resolve, bowing down to Me in devotion, always steadfast, they worship Me. IX. 15. Others, too, sacrificing by the Yajna of knowledge (i.e. seeing the Self in all), worship Me the All Formed, as one, as distnct, as manifold.

LITERATURE OF BRAHMINISM

IX. 17. I am the Father of this world, the Mother, the Sustainer, the Grandfather; the Purifier, the (one) thing to be known, (the syllable) Om, and also the Rik Saman and Yajus.

IX.22. Persons who, meditating on Me as non-separate, worship Me in all beings, to them thus ever jealously engaged, I carry what they lack and preserve what they already have.

There are two other features of the Bhagwat Gita which arrests one’s attention.

(i) There is a sentiment of depreciation of the Vedas and Vedic rituals and sacrifices.

II.42-44. O Partha, no set determination is formed in the minds of those that are deeply attached to pleasure and power, and whose disctimination is stolen away by the flowery words of the unwise, who are full of desires and look upon heaven as their highest goal and who, taking pleasure in the panegyric words of the Vedas, declare that there is nothing else. Their (flowery) words are exuberant with various specific rites as the means to pleasure and power and are the causes of (new) births as the result of their works (performed with desire). II.45 The Vedas deal with the three Gunas, Be thou free, O Arjun, from the triad of the Gunas, free from the apirs of opposites, ever balanced, free from (the thought of) getting and keeping, and established in the Self. II.46. To the Brahmana who has known the Self, all the Vedas are of so much use, as a reservoir is, when there is a flood everywhere. IX.21. Having enjoyed the vast Swarga-world, they enter the mortal world, on the exhaustion of their merit; Thus, abiding by the injunctions of the three (Vedas), desiring desires, they (constantly) come and go. INCOMPLETE zz