Indian Antiquary Vol 47

SR No.: 032539
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications
Publication Year: 1984
Total Pages: 386
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 367

GARBE'S INTRODUCTION TO THE BHAGAVADGITA
17
"
Edmund Hardy, Lit. Centralblatt, 1903, No. 38, sp. 1269, points out that he word) bhakti (in its Pâli form bhatti) is to be found in the sense of "love", "self-resignation", in Jâtaka, V. 340, 3, 6; 352, 11, and refers to Theragatha, V. 370, where the word passes into the specific sense of "devotion to God." In this latter sense, might also be mentioned Pânini, IV. 3. 95 in conjunction with (Sutra) 98 (following). From these passages it follows that the word Bhakti has been used in the secular sense of "love", 'devotion", "attachment", in the fourth century B.C., and that during the same period, a way was being prepared for the employmeut of the word to denote the relation of man to God. Even though "the bhakti which is spoken of (in Pâini, IV. 3, 95) be the same as the one treated of in the rules 96 to 100, and is to be understood only in the simple since of "love", "devotion" according to rule 96, it is applicable to inanimate things such as cake or pastry as the Calcutta Scholia explains it "-(Weber, Ind. Stud., XIII. 349, 350), still the connection of the word "Bhakti" with Vâsudeva, in rule 98 is at least [ p. 34] a proof that in Pânini's time the use of the word Bhakti in the sense of "devotion to God" was in process of growth; and the opinion of Patanjali on this passage referred to above (regarding Bhakti with reference to Tatrabhagavat) proves that this sense of Bhakti was quite current in the second century B.C., and indeed much earlier. The supposition that the use of the word Bhakti in a specific religious significance might have been caused by a conception imported from outside, can be thus refuted.
Though indeed "devotion to God" can thus scarcely be claimed (as belonging) to the original Bhagavata religion, still the belief of the Vasudeva-worshippers was in any case permeated by this sentiment before the Bhag. came to be composed; since a new idea is (usually) explained in a manner unlike the one followed in the case of Bhakti as treated in the Bhag., where this conception is ever and anon summoned forth as something self-evident.
If we were now to divide the development of the Bhagavata religion into (different) periods, the first period must reasonably be allowed to last so long as this religion led a solitary life outside (the pale of) Brahmanism. In this first period, which might be reckoned as running from an undeterminable beginning to about 300 B.C., fall, probably, all the religio-historical events discussed hitherto in this section, i.e., briefly put, (a) the founding of the popular monotheism by Krishna Vasudeva, (b) its being philosophically equipped with (tenets of) Samkhya-yoga, (c) the deification of the founder of that religion, and (d) as I believe, the deepening of the religious sentiment on the basis of Bhakti.
The second period is characterised by the brahmanising of the Bhagavata religion and the identification of Krishna with Vishnu. The great popularity of the legends and myths with which the personality of Krishna was surrounded must have excited the interest of the Brahmins; however, the basis for equating Krishna with Vishnu [p. 35] was indeed first given to them, when Krishna was definitively elevated to the dignity of a God from a tribal hero. Against this view it might be objected that just as Râma, as a purely human hero, came to be regarded by the Brahmins as an incarnation of Vishnu, and has become divine primarily in consequence of this identification, why should we not similarly say that Krishra as a (human) hero came to be regarded as an incarnation of Vishnu? To this it is to be replied that the fact of the matter lies indeed very differently in the two cases. Rma, tender, pious and self-resigning, and a rigid moralist was a genuine Brahmanical character, that could more easily be assimilated to the Vishnu-cult than the popular conception of the powerful and active Krishna, about whom the Brahmins indeed knew