Gita Satsangh: Gandhiji's Message of the Gita After Practice!

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

Before we begin the Satsangh, we do need to prepare our mind to

help us focus. Gandhiji's message emphasizes the importance

of 'faith' in Truth finding. Gandhiji had strong conviction on the

Truth in the words of Lord Krishna in Gita. It is impossible to

practice Gita without faith and reading and understanding Gita is

not just an intellectual exercise. Gandhiji's essay concludes with

this profound statement: " Gita is essentially addressed to the

heart and capable of being understood by the heart. Therefore the

Gita is not for those who have no faith."

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

------------------

 

Gandhiji's Message of the Gita After Practice!

Even in 1888-89 when I first became acquainted with the Gita, I felt

that it was not a historical work, but that under the guise of

physical warfare, it described the duel that perpetually went on in

the hearts of mankind, and that physical warfare was brought in

merely to make the description of the internal duel more alluring.

This preliminary intuition became more confirmed on a closer study

of religion and the Gita. A study of the Mahabharata gave it added

confirmation. I do not regard the Mahabharata as a historical work

in the accepted sense. The Adiparva contains powerful evidence in

support of my opinion. By ascribing to the chief actors super human

origins, the great Vyasa made short work of the history of kings and

their peoples. The persons therein described may be historical but

the author of the Mahabharata has used them merely to drive home his

religious theme.

 

The author of the Mahabharata has not established the necessity of

physical warfare; on the contrary he has proved its futility. He has

made victors shed tears of sorrow and repentance, and has left them

nothing but a legacy of miseries. In this great work the Gita is the

crown. Its second chapter, instead of teaching the rules of physical

warfare, tells us how a perfected man is to be known. In the

characteristics of the perfected man of the Gita, I do not see any

to correspond to physical warfare. Its whole design is inconsistent

with the rules of conduct governing the relations between warring

parties.

 

Krishna of the Gita is perfection and right knowledge personified;

but the picture is imaginary. That does not mean that Krishna, the

adored of his people, never lived. But perfection is imagined. The

idea of perfect incarnation is an after growth. In Hinduism,

incarnation is ascribed to one who has performed some extraordinary

service of mankind. All embodied life is in reality an incarnation

of God, but it is not usual to consider every living being an

incarnation. Future generations pay this homage to one who, in his

own generation, has been extraordinarily religious in his conduct. I

can see nothing wrong in this procedure; it takes nothing from God's

greatness and there is no violence done to Truth. There is a Urdu

saying which means, "Adam is not God but he is a spark of the

Divine." And therefore he who is the most religiously behaved has

most of the divine spark in him. It is in accordance with this train

of thought that Krishna enjoys, in Hinduism, the status of the most

perfect incarnation.

 

This belief in incarnation is a testimony of man's lofty spiritual

ambition. Man is not at peace with himself till he has become like

unto God. The endeavor to reach this state is the supreme, the only

ambition worth having. And this is self-realization. This self-

realization is the subject of the Gita, as it is of all scriptures.

But its author surely did not write it to establish that doctrine.

The object of the Gita appears to me to be that of showing the most

excellent way to attain self-realization. That which is to be found,

more or less clearly, spread out here and there in Hindu religious

books, has been brought out in the clearest possible language in the

Gita even at the risk of repetition.

 

That matchless remedy is renunciation of the fruits of action. This

is the center round which the Gita is woven. This renunciation is

the central sun, round which devotion, knowledge and the rest

revolve the planets. The body has been likened to a prison. There

must be action where there is body. Not one embodied being is

exempted from labor. And yet all religious proclaim that it possible

for man, by treating the body as the temple of God, to attain

freedom. Every action is tainted be it ever so trivial. How can the

body be made the temple of God? In other words how can one be free

from action, i.e. from the tint of sin? The Gita has answered the

question in decisive language: "By desireless action; by renouncing

the fruits of action; by dedicating all activities to God, i.e. by

surrendering oneself to Him body and soul."

 

But desire-less-ness or renunciation does not come for the mere

talking about it. It is not attained by an intellectual feat. It is

attainable only by a constant heart-churn. Right knowledge is

necessary for attaining renunciation. Learned men possess the

knowledge of a kind. They may recite the Vedas from memory, yet they

may be steeped in self-indulgence. In order that knowledge may not

run riot, the author of the Gita has insisted on devotion

accompanying it and has given it the first place. Knowledge without

devotion will be like a misfire. Therefore, says the Gita, "Have

devotion and knowledge will follow." This devotion is not mere lip-

worship, it is a wrestling with death. Hence the Gita's assessment

of the devotee's qualities is similar to that the sage's. Thus the

devotion required by the Gita is not soft-hearted effusiveness. It

certainly is not blind faith. The devotion of the Gita has the least

to do with externals. A devotee may use, if he likes, rosaries,

forehead marks, make offerings, but these things are not test of his

devotion. He is the devotee who is jealous of none, who is fount of

mercy, who is without egotism, who is selfless, who treats alike

cold and heat, happiness and misery, who is every forgiving, who is

always contented, whose resolutions are firm, who has dedicated mind

and soul to God, who causes no dread, who is not afraid of others,

who is free from exultation, sorrow and fear, who is pure, who is

versed in action and yet remains unaffected by it, who renounces all

fruit, good or bad, who treats friend and foe alike, who is

untouched by respect or disrespect, who is not puffed up by praise,

who does not go under when people speak ill of him, who loves

silence and solitude, who has a disciplined reason. Such devotion is

inconsistent with the existence at the same time of strong

attachments.

 

We thus see, that to be a real devotee is to realize oneself. Self-

realization is not something apart. One rupee can purchase for us

poison or nectar, but knowledge or devotion cannot buy us either

salvation or bondage. These are not media of exchange. They are

themselves the thing we want. In other words if the means and the

end are not identical, they are almost so. The extreme of means is

salvation. Salvation of the Gita is perfect peace.

 

But such knowledge and devotion, to be true, have to stand the test

of renunciation of fruits of action. Mere knowledge of right and

wrong will not make one fit for salvation. According to common

notions, a mere learned man will pass as a pandit. He need not

perform any service. He will regard it as bondage even to lift a

little lota (cup). Where one test of knowledge is non-liability for

service, there is no room for such mundane work as the lifting of a

lota.

 

The popular notion of bhakti is soft-heartedness, telling beads and

the like and disdaining to do even a loving service, lest the

telling of beads etc. might be interrupted. This bhakta, therefore,

leaves the rosary only for eating, drinking and the like, never for

grinding corn or nursing patients. But the Gita says: "No one has

attained his goal without action. Even men like Janaka attained

salvation through action. If even I were lazily to cease working,

the world would perish. How much more necessary then for the people

at large to engage in action.?" While on the one had it is beyond

dispute that action binds, on the other hand it s equally true that

all living beings have to do some work whether they will or no. Here

all activity, whether mental or physical, is to be included in the

term action. Then how is one to be free from the bondage of action,

even thought he may be acting? The manner in which the Gita has

solved the problem is, to my knowledge, unique. The Gita says: "Do

your allotted work but renounce its fruit - be detached and work -

have no desire for reward and work."

 

This is the unmistakable teaching of the Gita. He who gives up

action falls whereas he who gives up only the reward rises. But

renunciation of fruit in no way means indifference to the results.

In regard to every action one must know the result that is expected

to follow, the means thereto and the capacity for it. He, who, being

thus equipped, is without desire for the result, and is yet wholly

engrossed in due fulfillment of the task before him, is said to have

renounced the fruits of his action.

 

Again, let no one consider renunciation to mean want of fruit for

the renouncer. The Gita reading does not warrant such a meaning.

Renunciation means absence of hankering after fruit. As a matter of

fact, he who is ever brooding over result often loses nerve in the

performance of his duty. He becomes impatient and then gives vent to

anger and begins to do unworthy things; he jumps from action to

action, never remaining faithful to any. He who broods over results

is like a man given to objects of senses; he is ever distracted, he

says goodbye to all scruples, everything is right in his estimation

and he therefore resorts to means fair and foul to attain his end.

>From the bitter experiences of desire for fruit the author of the

Gita discovered the path of renunciation of fruit, and put it before

the world in a most convincing manner. The common belief is that

religion is always opposed to material good. "One cannot act

religiously in mercantile and such other matters. There is no place

for religion in such pursuits; religion is only for attainment of

salvation, "we hear many worldly-wise people say. In my Opinion the

author of the Gita has dispelled this delusion. He has drawn no line

of demarcation between salvation and worldly pursuits. I have felt

that the Gita teaches us that what cannot be followed out in day-to-

day practice cannot be called religion. Thus, according to the Gita,

all acts that are incapable of being performed without attachment

are taboo. This golden rule saves mankind from many a pitfall.

According to this interpretation murder, lying, dissoluteness and

the like must be regarded as sinful and therefore taboo. Man's life

then becomes simple, and from that simplicity springs peace.

 

Thinking along these lines, I have felt that in trying to enforce in

one's life the central teaching of the Gita, one is bound to follow

truth and ahimsa. When there is no desire for fruit, there is no

temptation for untruth or himsa. Take any instance of untruth or

violence, and it will be found that at its back was the desire to

attain the cherished end. But it may be freely admitted that the

Gita was not written to establish ahimsa. It was an accepted and

primary duty even before the Gita age. The Gita had to deliver the

message of renunciation of fruit. This is clearly brought out so

early as the second chapter.

 

But if the Gita believed in ahimsa or it was included in

desirelessness, why did the author take a warlike illustration? When

the Gita was written, although people believed in ahimsa, wars were

not only not taboo, but nobody observed the contradiction between

them and ahimsa. In assessing the implications of renunciation of

fruit, we are not required to probe the mind of the author of the

Gita as to his limitations of ahimsa and the like. Because a poet

puts a particular truth before the world, it does not

necessarily follow that he has known or worked out all its great

consequences, or that having done so, he is able always to express

them fully. In this perhaps lies the greatness of the poem and the

poet. A poet's meaning is limitless. Like man, the meaning of great

writing suffers evolution. On examining the history of languages, we

notice that the meaning of important words has changed or expanded.

This is true of the Gita. The author has himself extended the

meanings of some of the current words. We are able to discover this

even on a superficial examination. It is possible, that in the

age prior to that of the Gita, offering of animals in sacrifice was

permissible. But there is not a trace of it in the sacrifice in the

Gita sense. In the Gita continuous concentration on God is the king

of sacrifices.

 

The third chapter seems to show that sacrifice chiefly means body-

labor for service. The third and the fourth chapters read together

will give us other meanings for sacrifice but never animal-

sacrifice. Similarly has the meaning of the sannyasa undergone, in

the Gita, a transformation. The sannyasa of the Gita will not

tolerate complete cessation of all activity. The sannyasa of the

Gita is all work and yet no work! Thus the author of the Gita by

extending meanings of words has taught us to imitate him. Let it be

granted that according to the letter of the Gita it is possible to

say that warfare is consistent with the renunciation of fruit. But

after 40 years' unremitting endeavor fully to enforce the teaching

of the Gita in my own life, I have, in all humility, felt that

perfect renunciation is impossible without perfect observance of

ahimsa in every shape and form.

 

The Gita is not an aphoristic work; it is a great religious poem.

The deeper you dive into it, the richer the meanings you get. It

being meant for the people at large, there is pleasing repetition.

With every age, the important words will carry new and expanding

meanings. But its central teaching will never vary. The seeker is at

liberty to extract from this treasure any meaning he likes so as to

enable him to enforce his life the central teaching.

 

Nor is the Gita a collection of Do's and Don'ts. What is lawful for

one may be unlawful for another. What may be permissible at one

time, or in one place, may not be so at another time, and in another

place. Desire for fruit is the only universal prohibition.

Desirelessness is obligatory.

 

The Gita has sung the praises of knowledge, but it is beyond the mere

intellect; it is essentially addressed to the heart and capable of

being understood by the heart. Therefore the Gita is not for those

who have no faith. The makes Krishna say: " Do not entrust this

treasure to him who is without sacrifice, without devotion, without

the desire for this teaching and who denies me. On the other hand

those who will give this precious treasure to My devotees will by

the fact of this service assuredly reach Me. An those who, being

free from malice, will with faith absorb this teaching, shall,

having attained freedom, live where people of true merit go after

death." Source: "The Message of Gita," by M. K. Gandhi, Navajivan

Publishing House, Ahmedabad. (Pages 7-18).