Sambodhi 1989 Vol 16

Author(s): Ramesh S Betai, Yajneshwar S Shastri
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 12

called revision of the Gitā by the doctrines of a particular system of thought, would appear to be not only irrelevant to the basic purpose of the Gita but merely intellectual exercises. For, if any mingling of the thought-currents of the day was to be done, and a refined, integrated synthesis was to be worked out, it was done already by the author of the Gitā. This should also mean that we must accept tlic Gitā as it is, as a whole, as "an organic unity" which draws and synthesises all the living elements of Hindu life and thought.
By its official designation, the Gitā is called an Upadişad, because that body of literature is its main inspiration. But the Gitā also accepts the assumptions which are a part of the tradition of past generations and embedded in the language it employs." As a result, "the fratricidal struggle is made thic occasion for the development of the spiritual message based on the ancient wisdom prajna purāni, of the Upanişads" (Ibid; p. 13). Viewed thus, it would be clear, again, that the Mahābhārata context, the dialogue pattern, the lack of a coherent systematic development of thought as in a mctaplıysical essay, the rambling discussion and repetitions and the archaic language too are all elements of the composition of the Gitā and must be treated as such. It is futile to criticise these elements, complain about them, or feel that the Gitā presents, occasionally, a jumble of unwarranted beliefs and profound truths. Dr. Radhakrishnan says that the different opinions about the teaching of the Gītā seem to arise from the fact that in the Giti are united currents of philosophical and religious thought dillused along many and devions courses. Many apparently conflicting beliefs are worked into a simple unity to meet the needs of the time in the truc Hindu spirit, that over all of them broods the grace of God." (Ibid., p. 15). Whether the Gita succcds in this or not is a matter for individual opinion. But the Indian tradition has always felt", Dr. Radhakrishnan tells us, "that the apparently incogruous clements were fused together in the mind of the author and that the brilliant synthesis he suggests and illuminates, though he does not argue and prove it in detail, fosters the true life of the spirit". (ibid., p. 15).
Il, intellectually speaking, the Gitäis brahmavidya and yogaśāstra rolled into one, it follows that the Gita is concerned with the science of reality on the one hand, and with the art of linking the individual with reality, on the other. The first of these concerns, namely of the science of reality, the Giti tackles in the upanişadic spirit by asserting the supreme, transcendental reality of Brahman and the immortality of the soul. The nature of Brahman and Atman is described here in terms and language of the Upanişads. But the aim of the Gilā is not an inquiry into the nature of