Interpret the Gita and Mahatma Gandhi

[Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav]

Prof. Dr. Yogendra Yadav

Senior Gandhian Scholar, Professor, Editor and Linguist

Gandhi International Study and Research Institute, Jalgaon, Maharashtra, India

Contact No. – 09404955338, 09415777229

E-mail- [e-mail];

[e-mail]

Mailing Address- C- 29, Swaraj Nagar, Panki, Kanpur- 208020, Uttar Pradesh, India

 

 

Interpret the Gita and Mahatma Gandhi

 

 

1. Only he can interpret the Gita correctly who tries to follow its teaching in practice, and the correctness of the interpretation will be in proportion to his success in living according to the teaching. The Gita was not composed as a learned treatise. It may be a profound one, but in my view the realization of its profound quality depends on the depth of one’s sincerity in putting its teaching into practice. I have read Lokamanya Tilak’s and Shankaracharya commentaries and tried to understand them as well as I could. I am not qualified to pronounce judgement on their learning. If we accept the point of view I have suggested, the question of expressing an opinion on their learning does not arise. The Gita is related to the Vedas and the Upanishads, for it gives the essence of both.
2. The Gita teaches that one should cultivate the state of samatva and explains with every manner of argument the means of doing so, namely, bhakti accompanied with jnana, that is, service of every living creature without thought of reward.
3. The godly heritage, according to the Gita, is that which helps one to attain self-realization. The sign of having acquired such heritage is the wreaking of one’s attachments and aversions, and the means of acquiring it is cultivation of bhakti for the Lord.
4. As far as I have been able to read and understand the teachings of our sacred writers of past times, I don’t think there is any difference of view.
5. A Brahmin and a Bhangi let us suppose are stung by a scorpion. I see that a vaid has arrived to help the former, and another has been sent for. The vaid simply does not look towards the Bhangi who has been crying for help. Both the vaid and the Brahmin hear his cries. If the Brahmin has learnt to regard all beings with an equal eye, he would ask the vaid to treat the Bhangi first. If I were the vaid, I would run to the Bhangi, suck out the poison from the wound and apply to him whatever other remedies I knew. Having done that, I would offer my service to the Brahmin, if he required it, and then attend to my other work. To cultivate an equal eye towards all beings means to serve all people in the world with equal regard.
6. It is not true at all that the Lord teaches in the Gita that one may kill one’s kinsmen. When Arjuna got ready to fight for what he believed to be a just cause, and was overcome with ignorant attachment and weakness, through which he made a distinction between kinsmen and others, the Lord cured him of his attachment and weakness. We can only guess what reply Krishna would have given if Arjuna had protested and said he did not wish to kill at all, whether his opponents were kinsmen or others. It is my humble view, however, that the Gita was not composed to give a direct answer to that question.
7. I have felt that there is a greater spirit of universality and liberalism in the sanatana Vedic dharma.
8. The question, which is the chief religious work, one can answer only for oneself. For me it is the Gita. One distinction at any rate among such works is based on the subjects they deal with, namely, those which lay down codes of conduct and others which state and explain the nature of Godhead. If the question refers to anything more than this, I have not understood it.
9. The difference between the rules of conduct enjoined by the various religions will change from age to age, and as knowledge and the spirit of liberalism grow such differences will diminish.
10. I think this question is involved in question 9. But I shall say this way of further explanation. We should believe that the practices and modes of conduct which we find represented in the Koran, the Bible, the Vedas and other works were the best in those times and lands. If our reason cannot accept them in this age, it is our dharma to change them or abandon them altogether. Only fundamental principles are immutable.
11. In acting towards other people and understanding their faiths one should follow the principle of regarding others as oneself.
12. I think it almost impossible to decide which out of the many interpretations of religious works represents undiluted truth. That is why the Gita has convincingly argued that samanvaya is the best. God alone represents perfect truth. Imperfect man, therefore, should humbly believe that as one’s truth is dear to one, so others’ truths are bound to be dear to them. Hence everyone should follow his own path and others should not hinder him from doing so. People will then follow, of their own accord, that path which is found from experience to be the smoothest.
13. Till we come across a person of experience and of perfect purity in conduct, we should observe the rules of conduct and discipline enjoined in the religious work which we have accepted as our scripture, read it regularly, reflect over it and put its teachings into practice. Those who cannot do even this are ignorant people. Such of them as cannot observe purity in conduct have a protector only in God. I believe in the assurance given in the Gita that even people of this class are saved somehow. Words certainly have a meaning, but there ebbs and floods in the meaning of words as if they had a life of their own.
14. As I understand the problem, without a belief in reincarnation it would be almost impossible to prove that the world is governed by justice. Moreover, one soul cannot have full experience of the world within the span of one life, which is but a moment in a vast cycle of time. I can practically say that I have direct proof every moment of the truth of the belief in reincarnation.
15. Virtue and sin exist in the same sense that light and darkness, happiness and suffering, truth and untruth, do. However, just as there is an unknowable and indescribable Reality beyond the categories of existence and non-existence, so also there is something beyond virtue and sin of which this body can have no experience. The descriptions given in Buddhist writings or in those of the Nyaya and the Sankhya schools of philosophy are not unalterable, but these too, can be understood and accepted from the respective viewpoints.
16. For the development of man’s reasoning faculty, the right influences are certainly essential. To put it scientifically, every society solves the problem in every age for itself.
17. Violence means injuring a creature through bodily action or speech or in thought, with the intention of injuring it. Non-violence means not injuring any creature in this manner. The doctrine of nonviolence propounded in Vedanta literature, as far as I have understood it, seems to me all right. But I cannot say myself whether I have understood the Vedanta teaching correctly, nor can I claim that my study of the Vedanta is deep.
18. For being able to observe brahmacharya, one must keep the mind, speech and body constantly engaged in morally pure activity. We can, therefore, say in a general way that a brahmachari should do the opposite of what householders given to the enjoyment of leasures do. It is my experience that desires in the mind are closely connected with the kind of food one eats, but I know that such desires arise even when one’s food is pure and small in quantity. We may, therefore, say that right food is a great help for the observance of brahmacharya, but that it is not all. The purest food is fruit, which has naturally ripened, eaten in solitude. I have no doubt about this at all. The chief thing is that, if the palate could be controlled, the observance of brahmacharya would become quite easy. We commit two errors in saying that knowledge has reference to the mind and food is connected with the body, which is a material object. The body of a living human being is not altogether inert. And the thing which we call mind and which learns from experience is as closely connected with the body as light is with the sun. A dead body is one from which the mind has gone; such a body does not eat or drink. Thus, it is the mind which eats through the body, and likewise it is through the body that really speaking it acquires knowledge.
19. The universal Soul in which all the souls exist is God. The living creature which does not know that universal Soul and looks upon itself as separate from other creatures is what we call jiva. That universal Soul, though dwelling in all, is not directly experienced; that is its beauty, its miracle, its maya. The true end of human effort consists in crossing that maya and knowing that universal Soul, which is the one source of all. It is not a thing which can be experienced in a manner our reason can understand; how, then, can there be any means of experiencing it? But anyone who has the strength to forget the “I” in him and make himself a cipher can have a glimpse of this universal Soul, though he cannot help someone else to have it too. Such a person is so dazzled by the mere glimpse, and so utterly spellbound, that he merges in it. He feels no desire and no need to describe his supreme bliss to anyone.
20. I have somehow found something for myself by combining all the suggestions made by the authors of Shastras. It is, therefore, quite difficult for me to say which path is acceptable. Shankara is dear to me, and so are Ramanuja, Madhav, Vallabh and others I have relished delicacies from all, but have not been able to satisfy my hunger through what I got from any of them.
21. It may now be seen that the reply to this question is contained in the replies to the preceding questions. Yajna, Dana, tapas, are obligatory duties, but that does not mean that the manner of performing them in this age should be the same as in ancient times. Yajna, Dana, etc., are permanent principles. The social practices and the concrete forms through which they are put into practice may change from age to age and country to country. In my view, for example, the supreme yajna for this country and in this age is the spinning-wheel. The right gift which a seeker of moksha in this country and this age may make is to dedicate his all, body, intellect and possessions, to the service of the country. And, likewise, the right tapas for this country and this age consist in burning with agony at the suffering of countless untouchables and others who are starving for want of food or because of famines. Anyone who performs these three important duties certainly becomes purified and he may even have a vision of God’s cosmic form which Arjuna had.
22. Saguna, nirguna, etc., belong to the speech of human beings trying to express their imperfect knowledge which is sheer ignorance. In truth God is beyond description. Even to call Him nirguna is an utterly vain attempt to describe Him. Since, however, He is a slave of His devotees, He can be described not with a thousand but with an infinite number of epithets, all of which can be applied to him from the point of view of the respective devotees, and it is His supreme mercy that He tolerates them all. There is no error, therefore, in saying that He exists as all bodies, all sense-organs and all other things. We may thus confess our inability to describe Him.
23. I wish to say in all humility that my fasts and other ordeals are inspired by the desire to see God face to face. I fast in order that, even if I go without food altogether, I may have a glimpse of God such as I have described in these answers. But one cannot force oneself to undertake a fast. One must have fitness even for a fast. I am constantly striving for such fitness. But it is possible that I may not acquire it in this life and may even die ingloriously.

 

 

Reference:

Letter to Santoji Maharaj, July 2, 1927