Weighing the Gita

Mohan R. Limaye

Professor Emeritus

Boise State University

The following are strictly my opinions, my interpretations, and my reasons why I believe the way I do.

Even though I have some admiration for the Gita, to me, it is a mixed bag.  

The Gita has always raised more questions for me than has provided me with solutions/answers.  I think the Gita is simplistic in its treatment of ethical dilemmas.  Krishna gives a formulaic answer to Arjuna’s question and doubts, when the latter is troubled by a fine conscience and sensitivity at the start of the Mahabharata war.  Arjuna seems to challenge blind pursuit of caste-based duty. Therefore, saying to him, “You are a Kshatriya; so it’s your duty (Dharma) to fight” is a cavalier, shallow, and not-very-intelligent response.  It’s like the U.S. insisting that (patriotic) Americans fight in Iraq without questioning whether the war is just, worthwhile, or even necessary.  Only a robot will be satisfied with such an answer.  The Mahabharata, the epic itself, however, takes a lot more sophisticated stand and problematizes the issues of good and evil, and duty.  Its characters are a mixture of good and evil, shades of gray.  That’s why the Paandavas (except Yudhishthir), and even Krishna, end up the way they do, and die a not very “noble” or glorious death. 

Additionally, to drive his point home and to “convince/persuade” Arjuna, what does Krishna do?  He has recourse to his power (vishwa-roop-darshan)!  Again, reminds me of a typical American response-- intimidation!  Of course, in the Gita there are his lectures/sermons on various yogas, schools of philosophies, and multiple paths to moksha or liberation.  After such a show of “shock and awe”, and dazzling erudition (vidvattaa), no wonder Arjuna didn’t dare ask Krishna what the relevance of all this discourse was to his initial query.  Arjuna had to respond in the last chapter, “My delusion is all gone, and now I understand (nashto mohaha, smrutir-labdhaa).”   Talk about being bludgeoned into fighting! (I’m indebted to a good friend of mine for some of the ideas in this paragraph.)

When krishna argues that the soul is indestructible and it's only the body that dies or can be killed (to relieve Arjuna of any anxieties or niceties of conscience), the same argument could have been made by the Kauravas also to "justify" their wanting to kill the Paandavas.  The question still remains unresolved: Whose claims to the throne were ethically tenable -- those of the Kauravas or the Paandavas?      

One must bear in mind that none of the Paandavas was a biological son of Pandu.  If this was not common knowledge then, it at least may have been rumored.  So, their case for a share in the kingdom was certainly not an open-and-shut case.  It’s funny that the Paandavas should be looking down upon Karna as a low-caste person (saarathee-putra), while totally “oblivious” (?) to the illegitimacy of their “origin.”  Apparently, low-caste (and premarital?) birth is worse than being the progeny of adulterous relationships among the high-born and the gods!

Anyway, in my opinion, challenging the message and authority of well-respected mainstream texts (like the Gita) is a mark of Hinduism, of independent thinking and inquiry; having to surrender or unquestioningly conform is to me monotheistic tyranny.  Similarly, relying on one text as the sole authority (in this case, the Gita) is quite non-Hindu.  May I repeat that Hindus have many very well known and authoritative “sacred” texts, unlike the monotheists?

Though I’ve always felt that the Gita is overrated for its thought content, I do admire the power and poetry of the first few chapters (adhyaayas).  “As a man discards worn-out clothes (vaasaansi jeernaani)”, II, 22; “Your right is only to work/action, never to the fruits of your action (karmani-eva-adhikaaras-te)”, II, 47 “When it’s night for all others (yaa nishaa sarva bhuutaanaam)”, II, 69, etc.

P.S. In case somebody wonders about my credibility/credentials for criticizing the Gita, let me humbly point out that I studied it in the original Sanskrit in my third year at Ferguson College in Pune.  I owe some of this knowledge , thus, to my studying in a Liberal Arts/Humanities college and to my unorthodox upbringing.