Bhagvad Gita Rahasya or Karmayoga Shastra VOL 02

SR No.: 011090
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Bhalchandra S Sukhtankar
Publisher: R B Tilak Puna
Publication Year: 1936
Total Pages: 767
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 74 MB

Page 35

PROMINENT PERSONALITIES ON THE GITĀ ETC. XXXV
(10) SIR MOHAMMAD IQBAL. I have always held the Bhagavad-Gītā in the highest admiration.
(11) SRI MEHER BABA, The Bhagavad-Gita has exerted a tremendous spiritual influence on humanity at large. As the Blessed Lord Sri Krishna was born a Hindu, the Gita is more often than never regarded as a sacred book of the Hindus; but really speaking, it is a sacred book of not merely the Hindus but of the entire human race. The message that it contains was meant not merely for India, but for the whole world. Let mankind act in accordance with its message, and the universal brotherhood will surely be automatically brought about.
Those who cast doubts on the perfect sainthood of Shri Krishna, know not what they are doing. He was certainly a God-incarnate; and because He was a Sadguru, a Perfect Saint, He was successful in inundating the world with spirituality and lofty spiritual teachings.
-(12) Rao Bahadur Vidvatkulasekhara C. V. VAIDYA, MA., LL.B.
THE AGE OF THE GITA AND GITA-JAYANTI. I propose to place my views on the "Age of the Gītā" as succinctly as possible. When was this unique work composed, is the question which naturally arises in every mind.
The Gītā itself purports to state that it was taught by Lord Sri Krsna to Arjuna, hero of the Mahābhārata War, on the field of battle, before the fight commenced, but when the fighters were actually facing each other, ready to commence the fight. It follows, therefore, that the date of the Gītā is the date of the commencement of the Bhārata fight. This date is the subject of dispute between European scholars, followed by some Indian scholars, and myself. I hold that the date assigned to the fight by all ancient Indian writers, especially astronomers, is the correct one, viz. Mārgaśirsa Suddha 13, Pre-Saka 3180 (3102 B. C.). I will not enter into the details of the controversy here, but merely indicate my grounds.