Fetching
One moment.
Fetching
One moment.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1INTRODUCTION. 23 influence of the Brahmavas'. For, as stated before, officiating at others’ sacrifices, instructing others, and receiving presents, are here expressly prohibited to Kshatriyas as also to Vaisyas. The result of that is, that the Brahmavas become indispensable to the Kshatriyas and Vaisyas, for upon both the duty of study, of offering sacrifices, and making gifts and presents is inculcated. In his outline of the History of Ancient Religions, Professor Tiele, speaking of the ‘increasing influence of the Brahmans,’ writes as follows: ‘Subject at first to the princes and nobles, and dependent on them, they began by insinuating themselves into their favour, and representing it as a religious duty to show protection and liberality towards them. Meanwhile they endeavoured to make themselves indispensable to them. gradually acquired the sole right to conduct public worship, and made themselves masters of instruction 2.’ And after pointing out the high position thus achieved by the Brahmans, and the low position of the K4nd4las and others of the inferior castes, he adds: ‘Such a position could not long be endured ; and this serves to explain not only the rise of Buddhism, but also its rapid diffusion, and the radical revolution which it brought about*.’ To proceed, however, with our comparison of the Gita and Apastamba. The superiority distinctly claimed by the latter for the Brahmawa is not quite clearly brought out in the Gita. ‘Holy Brahmazas and devoted royal saints’ are bracketed together at p. 86; while the Kshatriyas are declared to have been the channel of communication between the Deity and mankind as regards the great doctrine of devotion propounded by the Bhagavadgita. That indicates a position for the Kshatriyas much more like what the Upanishads disclose‘, than even that which * As to the Kshatriyas the contrast with Manu’s rules is even stronger than with Apastamba’s. See our Introduction to the Gité in English verse, p. cxiil. > P. 120. ® Pp. 129, 130. * See p. §8 infra; and compare with this Weber's remarks on one of the clagees into which he divides the whole body of Upanishads, History of Indian Lacrature, p. 165. See also Muir, Sanskrit Texts, vol.i, p. 08; Max Muller, Upanishads, vol. i, p. Ixxv. 24 BHAGAVADGITA.
2120. ® Pp. 129, 130. * See p. §8 infra; and compare with this Weber's remarks on one of the clagees into which he divides the whole body of Upanishads, History of Indian Lacrature, p. 165. See also Muir, Sanskrit Texts, vol.i, p. 08; Max Muller, Upanishads, vol. i, p. Ixxv. 24 BHAGAVADGITA. Apastamba assigns to them. The fact is further noteworthy, that in the Gita each caste has its own entirely distinct set of duties. There is no overlapping, so to say. And that is a circumstance indicating a very early stage in the development of the institution’. Besides, as already indicated, the duties laid down by Apastamba and Manu as common to Kshatriyas and Vaisyas are the very duties which make those castes dependent to a very great extent on the Brahmamas, Lastly, it is not altogether unworthy of note, that in the elaborate specification of the best of every specics which we find in chapter X, the Brahmaza is not mentioned as the best of the castes, there is nothing to indicate the notion contained in the well-known later verse, ‘The Brahmama is the head of the castes.’ On the contrary, the ruler of men is specified as the highest among men ?, indicating, perhaps, a state of society such as that described at the beginning of the extract from Professor Tiele’s work quoted above. We come now to another point. What is the position of the Gita in regard to the great reform of S&kya Muni? The question is one of much interest, having regard particularly to the remarkable coincidences between Buddhistic doctrines and the doctrines of the Gita to which we have drawn attention in the foot-notes to our translation. But the materials for deciding the question are unhappily not forthcoming. Professor Wilson, indeed, thought that there was an allusion to Buddhism in the Gita’. But his idea was bascd on a confusion between the Buddhists and the Karvakas or matcrialists*. Failing that allusion, we have nothing very tangible but the unsatisfactory ‘ negative argument’ based on mere non-mention of Buddhism in the Gita. That argument is not quite satisfactory to my own mind, although, as I have elsewhere pointed out 5, some of * Cf, Sutta Nipata, p. 32; and also Mr. Davids’ note on that passage in his Buddhism, p. 131. 2 P. 8g infra. * Essays on Sanskrit Literature, vol. iii, p. 150. * See our remarks on this point in the Introductory Essay to our Gita in verse, p. ii seq. * Introduction to Gita in English verse, p. v seq. INTRODUCTION. 25
3Davids’ note on that passage in his Buddhism, p. 131. 2 P. 8g infra. * Essays on Sanskrit Literature, vol. iii, p. 150. * See our remarks on this point in the Introductory Essay to our Gita in verse, p. ii seq. * Introduction to Gita in English verse, p. v seq. INTRODUCTION. 25 the ground occupied by the Gita is common to it with Beddhism, and although various previous thinkers are alluded to directly or indirectly in the Gita. There is, however, one view of the facts of this question, which appears to me to corroborate the conclusion deducible by means of the negative argument here referred to. The main points on which Buddha’s protest against Brahmanism fests, seem to be the true authority of the Vedas and the true view of the differences of caste. On most points of doctrinal speculation, Buddhism is still but one aspect of the older Brahmanism'. The various coincidences to which we have drawn attention show that, if there is need to show it. Well now, on both these points, the Gita, while it does not go the whole length which Buddha goes, itself embodies | protest against the views current about the time of its composition. The GitA does not, like Buddhism, absolutely reject the Vedas, but it shelves them. The Gita does not totally root out caste. It places caste on a less untenable basis. One of two hypotheses therefore presents itself as a rational theory of these facts. Either the Gita and Buddhism were alike the outward manifestation of one and the same spiritual upheaval which shook to its centre the current religion, the Gita being the earlier and less thorough-going form of it; or Buddhism having already begun to tell on Brahmanism, the Gita was an attempt to bolster it up, so to say, at its least weak points, the weaker ones being altogether abandoned. I do not accept the latter alternative, because I cannot see any indication in the Gita of an attempt to compromise with a powerful attack on the old Hindu system; while the fact that, though strictly orthodox, the author of the Gita still undermines the authority, as unwisely venerated, of the Vedic revelation ; and the further fact, that in doing this, he is doing what others also had done before him or about his time; go, in my opinion, a considerable way towards *C£ Max Miiller’s Hibbert Lectures, p. 137; Weber's Indian Literatare, pp. 388, 289; and Mr. Rhys Davids’ excelleut little volume on Buddhism, p 151; and sce also p. 83 of Mr. Davids’ book. 26 BHAGAVADGITA.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
Romanised transliteration as printed by the translator, not the original script. This is what we hold.
1INTRODUCTION. 23 influence of the Brahmavas'. For, as stated before, officiating at others’ sacrifices, instructing others, and receiving presents, are here expressly prohibited to Kshatriyas as also to Vaisyas. The result of that is, that the Brahmavas become indispensable to the Kshatriyas and Vaisyas, for upon both the duty of study, of offering sacrifices, and making gifts and presents is inculcated. In his outline of the History of Ancient Religions, Professor Tiele, speaking of the ‘increasing influence of the Brahmans,’ writes as follows: ‘Subject at first to the princes and nobles, and dependent on them, they began by insinuating themselves into their favour, and representing it as a religious duty to show protection and liberality towards them. Meanwhile they endeavoured to make themselves indispensable to them. gradually acquired the sole right to conduct public worship, and made themselves masters of instruction 2.’ And after pointing out the high position thus achieved by the Brahmans, and the low position of the K4nd4las and others of the inferior castes, he adds: ‘Such a position could not long be endured ; and this serves to explain not only the rise of Buddhism, but also its rapid diffusion, and the radical revolution which it brought about*.’ To proceed, however, with our comparison of the Gita and Apastamba. The superiority distinctly claimed by the latter for the Brahmawa is not quite clearly brought out in the Gita. ‘Holy Brahmazas and devoted royal saints’ are bracketed together at p. 86; while the Kshatriyas are declared to have been the channel of communication between the Deity and mankind as regards the great doctrine of devotion propounded by the Bhagavadgita. That indicates a position for the Kshatriyas much more like what the Upanishads disclose‘, than even that which * As to the Kshatriyas the contrast with Manu’s rules is even stronger than with Apastamba’s. See our Introduction to the Gité in English verse, p. cxiil. > P. 120. ® Pp. 129, 130. * See p. §8 infra; and compare with this Weber's remarks on one of the clagees into which he divides the whole body of Upanishads, History of Indian Lacrature, p. 165. See also Muir, Sanskrit Texts, vol.i, p. 08; Max Muller, Upanishads, vol. i, p. Ixxv. 24 BHAGAVADGITA.
2120. ® Pp. 129, 130. * See p. §8 infra; and compare with this Weber's remarks on one of the clagees into which he divides the whole body of Upanishads, History of Indian Lacrature, p. 165. See also Muir, Sanskrit Texts, vol.i, p. 08; Max Muller, Upanishads, vol. i, p. Ixxv. 24 BHAGAVADGITA. Apastamba assigns to them. The fact is further noteworthy, that in the Gita each caste has its own entirely distinct set of duties. There is no overlapping, so to say. And that is a circumstance indicating a very early stage in the development of the institution’. Besides, as already indicated, the duties laid down by Apastamba and Manu as common to Kshatriyas and Vaisyas are the very duties which make those castes dependent to a very great extent on the Brahmamas, Lastly, it is not altogether unworthy of note, that in the elaborate specification of the best of every specics which we find in chapter X, the Brahmaza is not mentioned as the best of the castes, there is nothing to indicate the notion contained in the well-known later verse, ‘The Brahmama is the head of the castes.’ On the contrary, the ruler of men is specified as the highest among men ?, indicating, perhaps, a state of society such as that described at the beginning of the extract from Professor Tiele’s work quoted above. We come now to another point. What is the position of the Gita in regard to the great reform of S&kya Muni? The question is one of much interest, having regard particularly to the remarkable coincidences between Buddhistic doctrines and the doctrines of the Gita to which we have drawn attention in the foot-notes to our translation. But the materials for deciding the question are unhappily not forthcoming. Professor Wilson, indeed, thought that there was an allusion to Buddhism in the Gita’. But his idea was bascd on a confusion between the Buddhists and the Karvakas or matcrialists*. Failing that allusion, we have nothing very tangible but the unsatisfactory ‘ negative argument’ based on mere non-mention of Buddhism in the Gita. That argument is not quite satisfactory to my own mind, although, as I have elsewhere pointed out 5, some of * Cf, Sutta Nipata, p. 32; and also Mr. Davids’ note on that passage in his Buddhism, p. 131. 2 P. 8g infra. * Essays on Sanskrit Literature, vol. iii, p. 150. * See our remarks on this point in the Introductory Essay to our Gita in verse, p. ii seq. * Introduction to Gita in English verse, p. v seq. INTRODUCTION. 25
3Davids’ note on that passage in his Buddhism, p. 131. 2 P. 8g infra. * Essays on Sanskrit Literature, vol. iii, p. 150. * See our remarks on this point in the Introductory Essay to our Gita in verse, p. ii seq. * Introduction to Gita in English verse, p. v seq. INTRODUCTION. 25 the ground occupied by the Gita is common to it with Beddhism, and although various previous thinkers are alluded to directly or indirectly in the Gita. There is, however, one view of the facts of this question, which appears to me to corroborate the conclusion deducible by means of the negative argument here referred to. The main points on which Buddha’s protest against Brahmanism fests, seem to be the true authority of the Vedas and the true view of the differences of caste. On most points of doctrinal speculation, Buddhism is still but one aspect of the older Brahmanism'. The various coincidences to which we have drawn attention show that, if there is need to show it. Well now, on both these points, the Gita, while it does not go the whole length which Buddha goes, itself embodies | protest against the views current about the time of its composition. The GitA does not, like Buddhism, absolutely reject the Vedas, but it shelves them. The Gita does not totally root out caste. It places caste on a less untenable basis. One of two hypotheses therefore presents itself as a rational theory of these facts. Either the Gita and Buddhism were alike the outward manifestation of one and the same spiritual upheaval which shook to its centre the current religion, the Gita being the earlier and less thorough-going form of it; or Buddhism having already begun to tell on Brahmanism, the Gita was an attempt to bolster it up, so to say, at its least weak points, the weaker ones being altogether abandoned. I do not accept the latter alternative, because I cannot see any indication in the Gita of an attempt to compromise with a powerful attack on the old Hindu system; while the fact that, though strictly orthodox, the author of the Gita still undermines the authority, as unwisely venerated, of the Vedic revelation ; and the further fact, that in doing this, he is doing what others also had done before him or about his time; go, in my opinion, a considerable way towards *C£ Max Miiller’s Hibbert Lectures, p. 137; Weber's Indian Literatare, pp. 388, 289; and Mr. Rhys Davids’ excelleut little volume on Buddhism, p 151; and sce also p. 83 of Mr. Davids’ book. 26 BHAGAVADGITA.
The source text as printed, transcribed diplomatically. Where the source language uses a non-Latin script that reaches us only through a Victorian romanisation, this layer is labelled transliteration, because that is what we hold.
No commentary for this page.