Fwd: [indictraditions] Arvind Sharma on the Bhagavadgita (II)

[Guest guest]

I would like to see this article analyzed from the perspective of intrinsic

svabhava.

Nancy Nayyer a Sri Vaishnava is comparing 18.66 in Ramanuja, Madhva and Srila

Prabhupada in the upcoming JVS.

 

GS

indictraditions

User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82

"David Gray" indictraditions

Mailing-List: list indictraditions ; contact indictraditions-owner

Mon, 18 Dec 2000 17:01:17 -0000

[indictraditions] Arvind Sharma on the Bhagavadgita (II)

Perspectives from the Indic Religious Traditions

 

 

Arvind Sharma

McGill University

 

 

Does the Bhagavadgita uphold the Caste System?

 

A popular misconception about the Bhagavadgita relates to the issue

of caste. It is said to support the caste system. Three verses from

the Gita are often cited in support: (1) verse 31 of Chapter II in

which Arjuna is asked to fight because as a Kshatriya it is his duty

to do so; (2) verse 13 of Chapter IV in which Krishna says that he as

created the four-fold order of the varnas and (3) verse 47 of Chapter

XVIII which states that one should perform one's dharma even if

devoid of merit and rather than follow another's even if well-

performed.

 

Let us now examine each of these verses in context.

 

I

In verse 31 of Chapter II Arjuna is indeed asked to fight because he

is a Kshatriya. Now the question is: how compelling an argument does

Krishna consider it and how compelling an argument does Arjuna find

it to be?

 

How compelling an argument does Krishna consider it? Not very

compelling. He uses the participle api (moreover) while introducing

the argument. It is an additional argument. And it is embedded in a

whole web of other arguments. It is curious that this argument by

duty (svadharma) is followed by an argument by booty - that if you

die in battle you will gain heaven, and if you win you stand to gain

a kingdom. So verse 37 of Chapter II.

 

Thus Krishna does not think that the argument by caste is going to

clinch the issue. It is not that compelling. And obviously Arjuna

does not find it compelling either. He finds it even less

compelling, for he does not respond to it. The key question to ask

then is: why does he not respond to it?

 

The answer is simple. Because he finds that many of the key figures

involved in this battle are not Kshatriyas! In verse 8 of Chapter I

Duryodhana identifies the main warriors on his side. These are (1)

Drona; (2) Bhishma; (3) Karna; (4) Krpa; (5) Ashvatthama; (6) Vikarna

and (7) Saumadatti. In some versions an eighth name, that of

Jayadratha, is added.

 

Let us now examine the background of these warriors. Drona is a

Brahmana; Bhishma qualifies, but barely; his father was a Kshatriya

but his mother is said to have been Ganga; Karna's ancestry is

unknown at this point of the narrative. In fact, he was once faced

down by Arjuna for this reason and was made a king and therefore a

Kshatriya through consecration by Duryodhana (Mahabharata, adiparva,

Chapters 134-136); Krpa is the son of an ascetic, brought up as a

prince; Ashvatthama is a Drona's son, and so a Brahmana; Vikarna (son

of Dhrtarastra); Samadatti (son of king Bhurishravas) and Jayadratha

(king of Sindhu) alone qualify fully as Kshatriyas by birth.

 

The reasons for the tentative nature of Krishna's argument and

the

skeptical response of Arjuna are clear. An appeal that Arjuna should

fight because he is a Kshatriya by birth runs into the following

cognitive dissonances: (1) not all the warriors who have assembled

to fight are Kshatriya; (2) not all the "Kshatriyas" who have

assembled to fight are Kshatriyas by birth. Why should then Arjuna

fight just because he is a Kshatriya? And why is Krishna standing

aloof from the struggle when he too is a Kshatriya?

 

II

 

In Chapter IV Krishna indeed claims that he has created the

caturvarnya (the word is important). Now the question is: (1) what

does Krishna exactly claim he has created and (2) on what basis has

he created what he has created.

 

Krishna claims that he has created caturvarnya, that is, the

collectivity of four varnas. But it can also mean "that which is

characterized by the four varnas" namely, the social universe; and

not the four varnas themselves as such. The statement is a semantic

double-decker.

 

The basis of either (1) the collectivity or (2) that which is

characterized by this collectivity is guna, and karma

(guNakarmavibhaagazaH). The word janma is conspicuous by its absence.

 

Thus even if Krishna has created the four varnas they are not based

on birth but accord with qualities and actions and if he has created

that which is characterized by the "caste-system" rather than

the

system itself, that entity or society contains divisions on the basis

of qualities and actions. In either case birth-ascription is wanting.

 

III

In Chapter XVIII Krishna indeed lauds the performance of the

svadharma. If, however, svadharma is based on guna and not birth,

then the statement that it is better to perform one's dharma though

inferior, as compared to the superior performance of another's dharma

must be understood differently - as follows: "Although one may

consider one's dharma as inferior and think that one will perform

another's dharma better than one's own..., one should perform one's

own dharma", because it alone truly conforms to one's nature. A

statement similar to the above found in the Bhagavadgita is also

found in the Buddhist Dhammapada (XII.166).

 

The question still remains: why is Arjuna not convinced by any shade

of argument based on "caste"? To claim that the Bhagavadgita

supports any version of the varna system is misleading because Arjuna

does not consent to fight so long as such arguments are being

adduced. He only resumes the fight when Krishna says: "Abandon all

dharmas and seek refuge in me alone". It should be carefully noted

that Krishna uses the expression sarvadharmaan: All dharmas. All

dharmas must include varna dharmas if all is to retain its meaning.

 

IV

 

If it is claimed that the Bhagavadgita upholds the caste system then

how are we to explain the paradox that Arjuna decides to fight

precisely when the argument by caste is withdrawn?

 

 

 

 

 

 

indictraditions-