ON REGAINING THE MEANING OF THE "BHAGAVAD GITA"

Author(s): Jayant Lele

Source: Journal of South Asian Literature, Vol. 23, No. 2, BHAGAVADGITA: On the Bi-
centennial of its First Translation into English (Summer, Fall 1988), pp. 150-167
Published by: Asian Studies Center, Michigan State University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40873972 .
Accessed: 17/06/2014 09:31

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Asian Studies Center, Michigan State University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Journal of South Asian Literature.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ON REGAINING THE MEANING OF THE BHAGAVAD GITA

JayantLele

D. D. Kosambi's "Social and Economic Aspects of the Bhagavad-gita"(1962) is a

fascinating document. It is an example of how a creative,imaginative,and eruditemind
worksat a complexhistoricalpuzzle. As he arrangesthe available pieces of evidenceand
interpretsthem,new questions,new possible interpretations and new pieces of evidence
seem to emerge. The puzzle is neverreallycompleted,but a generalenrichmentof sense
seems to occur. It is unlikea scientificpaper whichPeter Medawar describesas a fraud
because it misrepresents science througha formal,highlyidealized account of research
accordingto a set of standardconventions.A reader is denied a glimpseof how research
is done or about whereoriginalscientificinsightscome from.Kosambi'spaper does exactly
the opposite. He raises questionsand produces evidence that suggestsseveral possible
answers. He deals withsome of themwithoutexploringfullythe implicationsof theothers.
The potentialof theseoftencontrary answersis hintedat and thusprovidesa challengefor
othercuriousminds. Thus,he producesa muchmorecomprehensiveframework fora new
understanding of theBhagavadgîtâ(hereafterBG) thanwhatwe beginwith. In the end we
are leftwithsome excitingand as-yet-undiscovered of
possibilitiesforthe reinterpretation
his evidence.

The success of Kosambi's styleis at least in part a consequence of his method. A

critiqueis consistently
historical-materialist applied to the contentsof the BG. Kosambi
begins by situatingthe poem in its context. For the mostpart he applies what Recoeur
would call "theart of suspicion"to the evidencediscovered. He raises the basic question
as to whatfunctionthe BG mayhave servedin its own time. He also wondersabout the
continuingfascinationforit,forcenturiesafteritscompletionand even intomoderntimes.
But the inadequacies of onesided applicationof a materialistcritiqueto historicaland
textualevidencealso become apparent.Manysignificant questionsremainunanswereddue
to a tendencyto practicethe "artof suspicion"withoutsimultaneousrecourseto the "artof
listening."But the veryfactthatsuch significant questionsare raised indicatesKosambi's
to the latterdimensionof a materialistcritique.
sensitivity

Kosambi's Method.

In attemptingto presenta briefaccount of Kosambi's methodI am consciously

violatingthe unityof his presentationin at least two ways: a) I am destroyinghis lively
opennessas he approachesand reproachesthetextand itsinterpreters as I arrangeit under
a set of categoriesand; b) I am takinglibertieswithhis overtpresentationof conceptsand
ideas by assumingthat there is a subterraneanmeaningin his text that can be made
accessible onlythroughour own reinterpretation of his work. Withthesewordsof warning
I offera summaryof the essentialelementsof his methodas follows:

1. Kosambi rejectsthe possibilityof gaininga comprehensiveunderstanding of

a textwithoutlocatingit withinits historicaland material(social and economic) context.
However and despiteclaimsto the contrary(Riepe, 1974), he does not resortto a vulgar,
scientisticreductionism.

2. He is, therefore, the two faces of ideology:a) the commonly

able to identify
weapon in the hands of those who seek to perpetuate
understoodone, as a justifying

150

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
oppressionand; b) its opposite,as the crystallizationof needs, aspirations,and hopes of
those against whom it is used, by unjustappropriatorsof surplus. In the latter sense
ideologies incorporatethe available believable ("croyable dispensable") of each epoch
(Ricoeur, 1978,p. 220). Mythsand symbolshave encrustedin thema sense forwhata new
oughtto be butis not. Kosambi does notexplorethis
andjust societycan be and, therefore,
latterdimensionfully,especiallyin his treatment of theBG. However,his tellingcomment
on brahmanism,"meresuperstitioncannot arise withoutproductiveroots"(1975, p. 250)
showsthathe is sensitiveto thisdimension.He expressesthisdouble dynamicsin termsof
freedomand necessity(ibid., p. 249). Following Marx he argues that freedomlies in
recognizingphysicalnecessity,as such,and in overcomingit throughsocial labor. Social
necessitymayarise in thisprocess,but he faultslaterbrahmanismformakingno distinction
betweenphysicalnecessityand human-madenecessity. It thusrestrictedhuman freedom
and productionof value. Kosambi's reductionof the BG to a textof later brahmanism,
however,violates his own methodand producesforhim some unsolvablepuzzles.

3. The logical consequence of recognizingthe positivedimensionof ideologyis

thatone is able to see ideas as havingthe power to lead the masses to act in the name of
a possible,just society. Ideas thatproclaimor promise a just and humane social order
(dharma) while remaininga tool of oppression on the surface can and do breed
subterraneantendenciestowardsrevoltagainstsuchoppression. Kosambi seems to have a
sense forthisdynamics,especiallywithrespectto a mobile and ever-changing relationship
and continuity between folk (primitive) beliefs and philosophically mediated
universalizations.He explores,forexample,the link between Shiva as a tribalmedicine
man or witchdoctorand the fundamentalcosmicprinciple(p. 2). The essentialunityand
oppositionof what is usuallycalled the Little Traditionand the Great Traditionare not
missedbyKosambi. However,the positivefunctionof ideologyis onlyhintedat. Its fuller
expositionis not attempted. Especially the BG seems to have been excluded fromsuch
considerations.

4. Kosambi does raise the questionof the durationof viabilityof the malignant
face of an ideology. Althoughthereis not a directanswer,it is clear thatit has to do with
the level of developmentof a society,meaningitscapabilityforencompassingand fulfilling
materialneeds and spiritualaspirationsof its members.

5. The internalcontradictionsof a societymanifestthemselvesin struggles, at

timesbetweenrulersas appropriatorsof surplus,and lead to a crisiswhichcan be overcome
only throughradical transformation of a social order and creation of a new synthesis.
Kosambi argues thatsuch a synthesisoccurredin the transitionfrompastoralismand pre-
plough agricultureto a more settledagrariansociety. The unificationof patriarchaland
matriarchalsocieties that emerged in this process, is symbolized,among others,in the
Krishnamyth.

6. The resolutionof a crisis,broughtabout by the heighteningof contraditions

and leading to strugglesbetween active producersand surplusappropriators,impliesan
expanded potential for fulfillingneeds and aspirationsbut also, at the same time, the
for
possibility greater or at least a new formof social oppression.

7. Culture has not only a cumulativecharacter,in the sense of accumulated

layersof beliefs,symbols,myths, and ideas whichKosambi notes as being characteristic
of
Indian society,but is also dynamicand alive in the sense that these beliefsand symbols
remain potent for contemporaryreconstructionand meaningfulaction throughtheir
contextualreinterpretation and criticaldémystification.

151

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 8. The task of critical,historical-materialist analysis for Kosambi, at least
implicitly,is that of recovering,restoring,or regainingthe meaning of the mythsand
symbols,whichare embedded in the cultureof a people. The purposeof sucha restoration
of meaningis to make sense withthosewhoseneeds and aspirationsremainunfulfilled and
yetalive and encrustedin thesesymbols.It is thusthattheactionpotentialof thesesymbols
can be released in pursuitof a new and just social order. Even thoughKosambi stopsshort
of a full-fledgedrestorationof the meaningof theBG, he providesus withsucha challenge
by takingan adversarialstance towardsits text.

The Contextualizationof the BG.

The purpose of placingthe BG in its contextis twofold:

1) To explainwhyit came to be writtenat a specificpointin time,i.e., to identify

the social, economic,and politicalforcesat workleading to its creation.

2) To throwsome lighton its function, i.e., to speculate on its intendedimpact

on the society,and to evaluate whatit did actuallyaccomplish.

Even thoughhe suggeststhe timebracketof 150 AD-350 AD, Kosambi seems to be

convincedthatthe BG was a productof the earlyGupta age. He prefersa date nearerto
350 AD. For evidence he points to BG 5:15 and BG 13:14 as referencesto the early
Vedanta philosophyand to theBrahmasütra.He also arguesthatits "highSanskrit(is) such
as could not have been writtenmuchbeforethe Guptas" (p. 16), but sees the occasional
(BG S:IO,BG 8:11,BG 15:3,etc.) in thetristubh
irregularity of the
meteras uncharacteristic
later,highGupta period. He refersto the revisionsthatseem to have been made to the
Bharata epic in thisage by the "Brahminsbelongingto the Bhrguclan" and concludesthat
"Thiscontextfitsthe Gita quite well"(p. 16).

For the upper classes the Gupta period broughtan unprecedentedpeak in living
standards(Thapar, 1966,p. 136). The conditionof theshudrasalso seems to have improved
somewhatas theygained new religiousand civicrights(Sharma, 1980,p. 316). There was
a generalaura of well-beingin thecore regionof the empire. The prosperity of the Gupta
empire depended both on the conquest of the domains of regional chiefs and on the
extensionof agriculture.The conqueredchiefswere reinstatedaftera promiseof a tribute
buttheyremainedalmosttotallyautonomous. Ploughcultivationwas expandedintofertile
Bengal and the not-so-fertile Deccan. Kosambi describes this extensionof agricultural
economyas "penetration byreligioncombinedwithprivatetrade"which"introduced private
propertyand class structurein formertribalareas undertheguiseof caste" (1975, p. 300-1).
The Gupta kingsencouragedprivateoccupationand exploitationof new areas. The central
authoritypromisedprotectionfrompettywarfareand,to some extent,servicessuchas water
works, trade regulation,and policing of trade routes. Even this was done through
subordinatefeudatoriesand governors. This was the beginningof "the fedualismfrom
above,"whicheventuallybecame transformed intoan era ofautonomousbutstagnantvillage
economies, or "the feudalism from below."

Duringand afterthe Gupta period the demand forrituallysanctionedlegitimacyof

rulershipincreaseddramatically.The emergenceof privatepropertyin land, the shifting
rightsand obligationsforthepaymentof tributebysubordinatefeudatoriesto theoverlords,
and the problemsof channellingthe productivesurplusto the feudatoriesand the new
granteesof land and villagescalled fornew formsof legitimation.Brahminsrespondedto

152

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
this need of the elites of the rulingclasses by takingover the functionsof lower-caste
chroniclersand bards (the sütas and the mãgadhas) and by fabricatinggenealogies and
historicalrecordsthatcould conferlinkswithdivinityor a Kshatriyastatus,in returnfor
grantsto them or to theirtemples. The continuityof the Vedic traditionand that of
politicalpatronageforthe priestlyclass was thusensured.

The Gupta period has often been described as an era of the "brahmanial
renaissance." It was more a period of reassertionof hegemonythan of renaissance of
brahmanism.Whereas renaissanceimpliesrenewal,revitalization, and reinterpretation of
the old, hegemonicappropriationimpliesabsorptionof any potentialforchange into the
legitimationof a social orderthatresemblesthe old in manyof the essentials. In assessing
therole ofbrahmanismand thebrahmins,in thisperiodand in others,a fewessentialpoints
should be kept in mind. Brahminscould not have and did not initiate or direct the
developmentof a systemin anyparticularway. The originsand the progressof its varied
manifestationsmust be firsttraced to the basic changes in productiverelations. The
brahmins,given theirparticularvantage point withinthe social order,interpretedthese
changes in certain specificways. They must also be credited with havingordered and
generalizedthe patternsof changeand recordedthemforcommonuse througha seriesof
textsand manuals. In fulfillingthisfunctiontheyalso ensuredforthemselvesa positionof
preeminencein Hindu society,unmatchedbyanyotherpriestlyclass in a comparablehuman
civilization.

The new flexibilityof thebrahminstowardsthe shudrapeasantrywas matchedbythe

increasein theintensity of untouchabilityand the numbersof thosesubjectto it. Intercaste
mobility had not disappeared but the termdvija and the ritualpurityassociated withit was
increasingly reservedforthe brahmins. Thus emergesa pictureof relativeprosperityand
shared cultureamong the highervarnas,withbrahminscombiningthe privilegeof higher
learning,substantialwealthand ritualpurity.Relativelyflexibleuse ofritualand civicrights
ensured the loyaltyof the shudra peasantryon whose willingcontributionof productive
surplustheirprosperityhad to depend. The rigiddemarcationof untouchableswas often
based on theirtribalorigins,alien speech,and strangemannerof life(Thapar, 1978,p. 45).
Its presence points to the continuingneed for the harshnessof dandanîti,once directed
againstall shudras,now reservedforthosepotentialrebelswhorefusedto completelyaccept
brahminritualismin theireverydaylife. Kosambi places the creationof the BG at the
beginningof thismilieu. He thussees it as essentiallya brahmindocument,created forthe
idle pleasuresof disputationand poetry,byand forthe elites of the uppervarnas. The BG
is thusplaced in termsof structureand quality,althoughsomewhatearlierin time,alongside
the Kãmasutraand the plays of Kalidasa.

For the flowering of theclassical Sanskritliterature,

thepresenceof a patricianclass
thatfavoredSanskritand a priestlyclass whose membersknewit well enough to produce
literarymasterpieceswerebothessential(p. 18). This was clearlytrueof the Gupta period.
From itsbeginningwell-endowedtempleshad begun to growand had soon emergedas the
physicalnucleiofbrahmanicalculture.Highereducationthusbecame fullyinstitutionalized
and thoughit remained the exclusivepreserveof the brahmins,it seems that the more
affluentfromamong the non-brahmins were accommodatedat the lowerlevels of learning.
(Thapar, 1978,p. 142). However,Kosambi's negativejudgementon Sanskritliteratureis
notrestrictedonlyto theproductsof the Gupta period. Because of the brahmincontrolof
the language fromthe earliest times,he offersa more general observation. "At its best,
Sanskritliteratureis exquisite,withan intricatepatternof beauty. Even at itsbest,it does
not give the depth, simplicityof expression,the grandeurof spirit,the real greatnessof
humanitythat one findsin the Pali Dhammapada, The Divine Commedia,or Pilgrim's
Progress.It is the literatureof and fora class, not a people" (1975, p. 283).

153

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Such a blanketjudgementforeclosesthepossibility ofexploringtheinternaldynamics
of brahmanismas well as its relationshipto the changingsocial forcesover whichit could,
at best,exercisea marginaland tenuousinfluence.Differencesbetweenthe literaturesof
differentperiods,in termsof both styleand substance,merelybecome risingand fading
fashions.The relevantquestionhere,of course,is whetherand to whatextenthas theBG
become the victimof this one-sided critique. Its exquisiteness,if any, will have to be
attributed,not to its meaningfulnessfor and embeddedness in the society,but to its
irrelevance.A thoroughly moderndoctrineof 'artforart'ssake' willhave to be transported
centuriesback intoan age of unfractured worldviews. Can the questionof authenticunity
of formand substancebe raised withrespectto twotextsof the same timeperiod in terms
of theirrelationshipto the milieu? Let us explorethisquestionby contrasting the BG to
anotherSanskrittext. In termsof bothitsintentions and impacttheManusmrti presentsan
interestingcontrast.For Kosambi the two seem to belongto approximately the same time
period or, perhaps,the BG came a littlelater (1975, pp. 252, 260).

bothin termsof form

Kosambi is, of course,wellaware of thesubstantialdifference,
and content,between the Manusmrtiand the BG. He describes the formeras "a very
authoritativebrahmandocument"of which"a greatpartis takenup withritualand spiritual
mattersthatmostconcernthepriesthood"(1975, p. 252). For theBG, as forthegreatepic
itself,however,"Thelowerclasses werenecessaryas an audience"(p. 18). This relationship
to the audience is also the onlyway,accordingto him,to explainthe centralrole assigned
to Krishna,in the poem. Since "Krsna,as he appears in theMBH, is singularly ill-suitedto
propoundany reallymoraldoctrine"(p. 19), he "couldhave been of importanceonlyifhis
cult were risingin popularity" of the epic and the poem
(p. 20). This people-orientedness
requiresthatwe reflectcarefullyon the mannerin whichtheyhave been contextualized.

The generallyacceptedtimebracketforManusmrti is200BC-200 AD (Jaiswal,1981,

pp. 19-20). Sharma, however,believes that the earliest chapterswere probablywritten
around 200 AD and offersa revisedtimebracketof 200-400AD (1980, p. 330). Jaiswal
(1981) refersto Sukthankarto pointto theinfluenceof the Bhargavason theMahabharata.
Followinghimand Pisani, she concludes:

The conversionof a popularpoem intoa Dharmasästra,a religiouswork,was

not a casual affairand the redactors of the Mahabharata intended to
rejuvenatethe brahmanicalsocial orderby means of some timelyreligious
and social upheavals. The old orderof the varnawas considerablyweakened
by the adventof the foreignhordesin considerablenumbers;and the rise of
new arts and crafts,which had broughtabout an improvementin the
conditionsof the lower varnas,especiallythe Éûdras,and necessitatedthe
removalof at least some of the disabilitiesimposedupon themin the earlier
scheme of things. The door of Vedic ritesand worshipwas closed to the
Êûdras,so theprogressives amongthebrãhmanastookhold of thenon-Vedic,
popularcultsand preachedbrahmanicalrules of social ethicsthroughthem,
(pp. 12-13)

She also concludeson thebasis of the style,meterand languageof theBG thatit is

connectedwithit so that"thedate
one of the earlierpoems of the epic and is intrinsically
of the BhagavadgM is the date of the Mahabharata"(meaning,around 180 BC). This has
the effectof placingtheBG in theearlypost-MauryaperiodwhereastheManusmrtiwould
seem to have been primarily constructedmuchlater,makingit moreof an earlyGupta age
document. The BG thusbecomes a productof a crisis. The Manusmrtia testamentto its
dissolution.

154

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The period of social upheavalsthatJaiswalis referring to was the culminationof a
numberof dramaticchanges in the productivebase thathad accumulatedover a number
of centuries. The processof change had begun withthe rise of brahmanismitself. By the
timeof the compilationof the Rigveda,a stratifiedsocietyseems to have come intobeing.
Althoughpredominantly pastoral,it had developed a symbioticrelationshipwiththe late
Harappan (post-urban)agricultureand had made majorinroadsinto the wayof lifeof the
outlyingforestdwellers. To Kosambi thisexplainsthe strongpresence of the pre-Aryan
symbols,ideas, and practicesin the laterpartsof the Rigveda. The rise of brahmanism,as
an explanationand justificationof a newlystratifiedsociety,took place in the 'northern
nuclearregion'of the Aryansettlement.The model of successfulcolonizationin thiszone
(NorthPunjab,theIndo-Gangesdivide,and theDoab) was repeatedthroughmigrationinto
the middle Ganga Valley and then to Eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, where the pre-
existingformsof social, religious,and economic organizationhad to be confrontedand
assimilated.

Even in the nuclear regionwherebrahmanismwas dominant,havingproduced an

effectivesynthesisleading to a substantialincrease in the productivesurplus,it was not a
universally accepted worldview. The codificationofpracticeswas generallyacceptedbythe
upper classes witha brahmin'sself-defined role as the custodianof as-yet-undifferentiated
sacred-secularknowledge.While thelinksbetweenthe membersof thehigherstrataof the
previouslydistinctsocieties were thus forgedand strengthened,ritually,socially, and
politically,those lower in the hierarchy,such as the agriculturists and the menials,were
relegatedto a stilllower stratus(Allchin,1983). The mass acceptance of the new social
orderwas predicatedon the substantialenlargementof the productivebase but was never
total. The gradualnessof the transitionhad allowed a large numberof diverse customs,
practices,and symbolsof culturalidentityto survive,especiallyamong the lower classes,
along withthe memboryof a moreegalitarian,even thoughprimitive, past. Kosambi sees
thissynthesis as "thecomparativelypeacefulassimilationof non-AryanIndiansto theAryan
way of life and speech," a variation on the "normal sequence of development from
matriarchy to patriarchy"(1975, p. 86, also see Thapar, 1978, p. 349). The seeds of an
internalcritiqueof brahmanismwere thuslaid in itsemergenceas the ideologyof the new
society.The literatureof the laterVedic period,the earlyUpanishads and the Brahmanas,
are collationsofreflections on Vedic society,oftenpresenting contradictorythoughtsystems.
They carrythe germsof later,more directcritiquesof brahmanism,such as viratoaand
siddha yogasas well as Buddhism,Jainism,and the Shaiva-Vaishnavabranchesof bhakti
(Joshi,1972,pp. 307, 135, 138).

Since themiddleGanga Valleywas "generally outsidethepale ofbrahmanicalnorms"

(Thapar, 1984,p. 110),itproducedseveralnewreligioussectsthatcarrieda universalethical
message,extendingto theentirerangeof castes. But thisintellectualand religiousferment,
originatingin the later and post-Vedic periods (Allchins,1983,p. 360), was not restricted
to the so-called 'heterodox*sects only. The criticalimpulse,characteristicof the Buddha
and Jaina teachingsof the eastern regionwas matchedby the bhagavata and nãrãyaníya
systemsof thoughtand practice in the westernregions. Given their naturalaffinity to
brahmanism,the critiqueincorporatedin the latter,it has been claimed,was muchmilder
and was later absorbed in the orthodoxy(Sardar, 1970,pp. 39-40).

The rise of the cities,the expansion of internaland externalcommerce,and the

transitionto fullfledgedpeasant economyin the middle Ganga Valley were accompanied
by risingproductivesurplusthroughthe expansionof the agrarianeconomyintothe forest
areas. Under the Mauryan empire this surplus was able to sustain the spread of
brahmanisminto new rural areas (to which the brahminsbroughttheir knowledgeof

155

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
agriculturaltechnology)as well as thatof the heterodoxiesin and around the cities. The
empire extended its patronage to both. However, signs of risingcompetitionfor such
patronage were already quite visible. The officialpatronagealso led to prosperityand
increasingexpectationsin the Buddhistand Jaina institutions.

The numbersof rulersincreasedwiththe decline and fall of the Mauryanempire.

Kosambi speaks of a "welterof contendingtribes,kings,invaders." He sees thisas a sign
of the factthatnewvillages,"through continuingeconomicexpansionyieldeda firstsurplus
thatcould supportraidingarmies"(1975, p. 248). This was a period of small kings,each
rulingovera numberofvillages. Already,duringtheMauryanempire,the legitimacy of the
statehad come to depend primarily on administrative and
and politicalstrength,
efficiency
far less on rituallyderivedor traditionalsanctions(Thapar, 1984,p. 352). This pattern
persistedthroughthe post-Mauryanera. None of the major dynastiesseem to have
botheredto claim kshatriya status. This is in starkcontrastto the Gupta period,whenthe
process began, and the post-Gupta period, when "thereis a rush for fabricationof
genealogiesprovingtheSuryavamsi or Candravamsioriginsoflocal dynasties"(Thapar, 1978,
pp. 133-4).

Much of this evidence suggeststhat "thebrahmanicalorder was faced withgrave

internaland external threats,"perhaps before,but certainlyafter, "the rule of Asoka
(Jaiswal,pp. 181, 13). This was, probably,the Kali age, describedas yetto come, in the
severalearlyPuranas. The varna-basedsocietywas "markedby strongsocial conflictsand
underminedby the activitiesof hereticalsectsand the incursionsof the BactrianGreeks,
Sakas, Parthians,and Kusanas" (Sharma, 1980,p. 182). A recognitionof thiscrisisas the
contextof the BG mayhelp us solve some of Kosambi's puzzles.

The placingof theBG in an age in whichthecrisisof brahmanismhad been already

successfully dissolvedmerelystrengthens the criticismof the textas irrelevantto a critical
or revolutionary praxis.It is thendismissedas an otherwiseimprobable"intricate threehour
discourseon moralphilosophy,afterthe battleconcheshad blared out in mutualdefiance
and two vast armieshad begun theirinexorablemovementtowardscollision";improbable,
"exceptto thebrahminbentupon gettinghis nitirevisionsintoa popularlay of war"(p. 17).
This does not satisfactorily resolvethe question,even withinthe metodologicalframework
discussedin the previoussection,as to whythe BG directlyseeks popular legitimacyfor
brahmanismwhile the Manusmrtidoes not. On the otherhand, if the BG was, in fact,a
responseto the crisisof brahmanism,ratherthantheManusmrti, thenJaiswaTsclaim,that
the formerwas an attemptby progressive, reformist brahminsof the Bhrguclan to rethink
the basic tenetsof brahmanism,providesa viable answer. The Manusmrtiappears as a
counterpointto the BG. The popular orientationof the poem and of the epic, in spiteof
theirbrahminauthorship,makes it moreof an immanentcritiqueof brahmanismwhereas
the Manusmrtibecomes, not so surprisingly, a responsefromthe orthodoxupholdersof a
stagnatingtradition."Manu desperatelytriedto preservethe brahmanicalsociety,notonly
byordainingvigorousmeasuresagainstthe Éûdrasbutalso byinventing suitablegenealogies
for the incorporationof foreignelementsinto varna society." He also provides "undue
glorification of the power of the sword(danda)" (Sharma, 1980,p. 182). "Jayaswal(1933)
. . . ascribesManu to the period of brahmanical'counterrevolution' in the age of Sungas"
(ibid., p. 326). In that sense it alone is a document of the rulingclass, while the BG,
essentially,is not.

forKosambi.
Placing of the BG in the earlyGupta period createsotherdifficulties
He is forcedto concludethatthisefforton thepartof thebrahminswas "notsufficient unto
the purpose"(p. 18). He goes one step further of the Gita was
and assertsthat "writing

156

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
possible onlyin a period when it was not absolutelynecessary"(p. 31). This dismissalof
significanceis also inconsistentwith his recognitionof its people-directednessand its
potential for a large number of variantinterpretations fromminds in widelydifferent
societies. His answerthatall of these mindswere those of the membersof a leisure class
is uncharacteristicof his method;it is too mechanistic.So is his judgment,thatthe great
poet-teachers"fromthe commonpeople did verywell withoutthe Gita" (p. 14). In a sense
manyof Kosambi's judgementsadd up to the claim that,despite its effortsat brahmanic
renewal,throughpopularappeal, the masseshave alwaysremainedimmuneto the message
of the BG. Kosambi is not fullypersuaded by thisargument,however,as I hope to show
later. He argues that the one innovationof the BG, bhakti,fittedthe needs of a later
period. It was the religionbest suitedforfeudalism.It ensuredthe totaldevotionof masses
to the local landlordsand kings,regardlessof theirqualityof performance.But even here
he has to contradicthimself,almost immediately,because he has to explain whybhakti
became a source of protestagainst feudal oppression. However, since many of these
judgementsare as muchbased on the contentof theBG as theyare on its context,we shall
take themup again in the nextsection.

This ratherlong excursioninto a reconstruction of ancient Indian social historyis

consistentwithKosambi's own analysis,but also takes intoaccount some of the rethinking
that has occurred in the Marxistscholarshipsince Kosambi. His writingswere always
sensitiveto the positivedimensionsof brahmanism,and hence he was generallyfar less
scientisticin his analysis than some of the other Marxistinterpretersof ancient Indian
history.Of thetwodimensionsofMarxistcriticaltheory,Kosambi was moreof an exponent
of what Ricoeur calls "démystification" and in my view wronglyidentifiesas the only
contributionof Marx (1978, pp. 213-22). The second dimension,present in Marx but
broughtinto clearer focusonlyafterMarxism'sencounterwithphenomenology, resembles
what Ricoeur calls "demythologization," or what I have called 'the immanentcritique.'
Kosambi's effortsin the latterdirectiondo not go far enough and result in a blanket
denunciationof the contentof the BG. How thisambivalencecan be resolved and the
balance between the two dimensionsrestoredthroughthe analysisof thatcontentis the
subjectmatterof the nextsection.

The Contentof the BG.

For Kosambi the major problem withthe BG, "itsfundamentaldefect,"is that it

seems to "reconcilethe irreconcilable"(p. 17). It is a review-synthesisof manyschools of
thoughtwhichare mutuallyincompatible,but thisincompatibility is neverbroughtout (p.
16). Such a moral philosophyhas to be "highlyequivocal" (p. 12). It shows "disdainfor
logical consistency"(p. 31). Several consequences follow fromthis "defect,"the most
importantbeing that "itcould not bringabout any fundamentalchange in the means of
production,nor could its fundamentallack of contactwithrealityand disdain forlogical
consistencypromotea rationalapproach to the basic problemsof Indian society"(p. 31).
Kosambi elaborateson whathe sees as the innercontradictions, suchas thatbetween "non-
killing(ahirrisã)"and "an incentiveto war,"between deridingof yajftasacrificeand the
admissionthatit is the generatorof rainand thusof foodand life. The whole book is seen
as characterizedby "slipperyopportunitism,"a traithe also identifiesin passingas common
among manyBG lovers. He claimsthattheBG promotesmâyãvãdaand concludes: "Once
it is admittedthatmaterialrealityis grossillusion,the restfollowsquite simply;the world
of 'double think'is the onlythatmatters"(p. 17).

157

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 This allegationabout its "illogical,"non-rational and, hence,unscientificcharacteris
centralto Kosambi's strongnegativeevaluationof theBG. It made the workincapable of
revolutionizing the productivebase of the society. In comparisonto an earlier,materially
groundedsynthesis, whichtranscendedthe less productivepastoral,agricultural, and tribal
societiesinto a new,predominantly patriarchal,highlystratified, peasant-agrariansociety,
the synthesisof doctrinesproposedby the BG appears hollow. In contrastto the rational
discourseof Buddhistliterature,whichis associated withthe developmentof an urban,
mercantilecivilization,thisreview-synthesis is illusory.It is not conduciveto radical social
change. In fact,it appears on the scene at a time when the long period of productive
stagnationin Indian societyis about to begin. As an early Gupta-age document,it is
associated withthe decline of the gloriouscommercialcentres,such as Patna, and the
spreadof autonomous,inwardlookingvillages,of a new social orderwhichKosambi (1975)
describesas "feudalismfrombelow." Since its social contextis thatof prosperity, however
transientand concentratedin smaller,administrative urbancentres,the messageof theBG
is seen as thatof mutualtoleranceby incompatiblesectsand doctrines.He thencorrectly
arguesthatsuchtoleranceshowsits malignantfaceas oppressionof theunprivileged under
conditionsof adversity whenitspositivecontribution is needed the most. Kosambi's insight
is valid forour timesas well,because as the experienceof all liberal democraciesshows,
toleranceas a doctrineof uncriticalliberalismis 'repressivetolerance'(Wolf, 1968).

We do not knowfromKosambi's writings what,forhim,is the relationshipbetween

a changingmaterialrealityand the associatedliterarymanifestations.That it is nota one-
wayprocessof merelymirroring the worldis clear,but the dialecticsof theirinterrelation
is neverfullyspelled out. Having decided thatit is not located at a point in timewhena
crisisdeepens,Kosambi's explanationfortheperceivedinnercontradictions is thattheBG
was producedby and has alwaysappealed to the "leisureclass of what,forlack of a better
term,maybe called Hindus." In contrast,saysKosambi,thosewhoprovidedinspirationfor
the masses, "thegreat comparablepoet-teachersfromthe commonpeople did verywell
withouttheGita"(p. 14). Gandhi,Tilak,Aurobindo,Jnanesvar, Ramanuja,and Sankaraare
contrastedhere to Namadev,Kabir,Tukaram,Jayadeva,Caitanya,and Nanak.

The 'fundamental defect'of theBG is thusattributedto itsclass originand its "non-

crisis"social context.Its exquisiteformand stylecan also be explainedaway as reflections
of a culturalindulgenceof the leisureclass: somethingto be savouredforits own sake.
Referenceto a sequel, theAnu-Gîtafollowsimmediately afterthisclaimis asserted. Unlike
the original,thislaterversionis "an incrediblyshoddysecond Gita . . . whichsimplyextols
brahmanismand brahmins"(p. 18). However,thesourceof thisstarkcontrastin form,style,
and substance is not explored. Kosambi also faults the original BG for upholding
varnãSramadharma, and foroffering onlya mildcritiqueof theVedic sacrificialritual.This,
of course,can be explainedin termsof the class interestof its creatorsand believers.

Since the social contextof its originis so closelylinked to the explanationof its
content,it seems legitimateto ask: Is it possible thatKosambi's analysisof the BG would
have followeda different course had he accepted the interpretation of those who see it as
an expressionof the crisisof brahmanismand as a blueprintforovercomingit? Would he
reviewsynthesis
have stilldismissedthis"brilliant" opportunism"?A moredirect
as "slippery
question, from thisnew vantagepoint would be: Is thissynthesismerelyan equivocation,an
apologeticsformõyâvõda,and an irrationalbut cleverattemptto make the masses believe
in an essentiallyinauthenticjustificationof a decadent brahmanism? Kosambi himself
provides some possible clues. Take, forexample, the followingdescriptionof how the
synthesisis accomplished: "The essentialis taken fromeach (doctrine)by a remarkably
keen mindcapable of deep and sympathetic study;all are fittedtogetherwithconsummate

158

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
skilland literaryabilityand cementedbybhaktiwithoutdevelopingtheircontradictions"(p.
29). There is, admittedly, a unityof formand substancehere that cannot be dismissed,
convincingly, brahmincraftsmanship.Onlyby a
as merelya consequenceof self-conscious
ratherstrenuousstretchof imaginationcan one place the BG beside the Kamasutra,the
Arthasãstra, the Meghadüta,and Manu's dharmasastra.It cannot be done withouthaving
to explain away some basic differencesin their inner qualityand their communicative
intentions.

What does it mean whenone says thatthe BG is a productof crisis? The human
conditionproducesauthenticimpulsesthatlead to a quest fora lastingmeaningforone's
everydaylifeexperience. Their universalityis inherentin beinghuman,"inbeingborninto
this world,bound to a body whichis both the self and an apertureto the world in our
finitudeand openness." Birthand death are significant experiencesforall humanbeings
until,of course,theyare eliminatedfrombeing as such or frombeing "instructive destiny"
by being reduced to technicalcontrol(Ricoeur, 1978,pp. 225-27). The quest formeaning
leads human societies to a varietyof paths. Each one of them makes sense in its own
context,each is a productof creativehuman imagination,each is groundedin a specific
materialrealityand a concretelifeexperience. It is the authenticity of each one of these
quests thatmakes communicationbetweenthempossible. That authenticity also produces
a drive towards a synthesisand a transcendence. A synthesisthat increases human
capabilityto enhance and fulfillneeds,desires,and aspirationsof an expanded community
of participantssurvivesand prospers until human creativitymakes its restrictionsalso
redundant. The movementtowardsa new social order startsall over again. Attemptsto
manipulate,persuade,or coerce othersintoacceptingone path as superiorover the others,
effortsto avoid or postponethe transformation of a decayingsocial order,maysucceed for
a while, sometimesfor centuries,as with feudalism;but must fall before a weapon of
critiqueand/ora critiqueof weapons. Messianicmovementscontainwithinthemselvesthis
grainof rationality.They look to a futurethathas become possible.

A futurebecomes possible throughthe everydaycreativeactivityof thinkingand

doing,i.e., throughsocial labour. The needs and aspirationsof a community change in the
contextof the possible future. They acquire the attributeof divinitybecause theyhave a
glimpseof whatcan be, thereforeoughtto be, but is not. A community also has a memory
of the past thathas been overcome,a past thatalso had its possible futurethatbecame
actual. But so farit has neverdone thatin itsentirety.The dreamttotalityof thatfuture,
the divinityof that dream, has usuallygone sour in the actualityof a materiallymore
advanced but a socially more repressiveexistence. This was as true of the post-Vedic
societyas it is of the modern,westernworld. Hence, the possible futurethatis to emerge
out of today's actuality,any actuality,mustalso carryin it the memoriesof yesterday's
possible futurethathas yetto emerge. But the past also changesits meaningforthose in
thepresentbecause theirwayof makingsense has changed. Regainingthe meaningof the
past that is stillrelevant,makingnew sense out of those authenticimpulsesof the past,
bringingthe unconsciousbelief to the level of conscious realization,becomes a task.
Unitingsat withcit to produce ãnanda on this earth calls fora revolutionary praxis. It
acquiresparticularurgencywhenthepresentis engagedin fashioningits own blueprintfor
the future,i.e., whena societyis in the stateof crisis.

Here Paul Ricoeur's two notionsthat:a) "Each epoch permitsa believable and an
unbelievable"and b) "There is also the frameworkthat is naturallybelievable,"become
relevant.We mayadd thatboththebelievableand theunbelievableof an epoch are always
anchoredin thepast,and theonlygenuinelinkbetweenthepast,thepresent,and thefuture
is the "naturally
believable." This "naturally
believable framework"
also translatesforme

159

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
intothe trinityof truth,justice,and freedomin the westerntraditionand to thatof sat,cit,
and ananda, in the Indian. Marx had alreadyhintedat the universality of the formerin the
natural-social,material-spiritual of
simultaneity human social labour. Habermas (1979, pp.
1-68) has sincediscovereditin thestructureofhumanspeech. The progressthroughhistory
of the lattertrinityhas yetto be exploredin similarterms(Lele, 1987).

If theBG is the documentof the social crisisand ifwe accept the obviousinference
that, unlike the Manusmrti,it is not a mere reiterationof brahmanism,withsome minor
concessionsto the richamong the shudras,thenits syncretism beginsto make a new sense.
It standsout as an attemptto bringto lifeall the old dreamsthatare as yetunfilfilled but
have become estranged. The life-giving qualityof the yajna, its affirmationof a once
egalitariancommunity, gainsthesame statusas theexplorationof theatmanas theabsolute
brahmanin the Upanishads. The explorationsin the independentessence ofprakrtibythe
Samkhyans(and themeditationsoftheyogins)withtheirpre-Aryanand perhapsagricultural
origins (Jaiswal, 1981, p. 56) become the subjects of the same desire to regain their
estrangedmeanings. The BG repeatedlystressesthe insightthat all formsof worship,
arisingout of the same naturalfaithwhichis inherentto humannature(17:1-4), have had
the same essential message. Differentreligiouscults may adhere to different objects of
worship,but those objects are only different overt manifestations of the same universal
divinity(9:23). Whatevermaybe the formsof worshipby humans,theyare the same as
long as theyare based on naturalleanings(sattva). The goal shouldbe to strengthen the
authenticquality of the urge to believe (Éraddhã). Such beliefs produce theirdesired
consequences. It is the same all pervasivedivinitythatensuresthe multiplicity of desired
outcomes(7:20-4). In thismannerthe BG rejectsall exclusivistclaims and counterclaims
of particularpaths to the possible future(Joshi,1972,p. 475).

Is this nothingmore than liberal relativismand uncriticaltolerance of religious

pluralismin whicheach one sticksto itsown as the onlyrationalwayand learnsto tolerate
others,instrumentally? This or a variationof thisviewhas oftenbeen assertedas thevirtue
of Hinduism. Kosambi refersto this assertionas being in "theIndian character":"this
processof gatheringmanyworshipswithoutdoingviolenceto any"(p. 28). The refutation
of sucha claim seems to lie in theemphasisin theBG on sraddha,whichI have translated
as theauthentic"urgeto believe." It providesthecriticaledge of authenticity forsortingout
the universalin the particularand the eternal fromthe ephemeral. This emphasis on
sraddhais consistentwithbhakti,"theone innovationin the BG whichpreciselyfittedthe
needs of a later period,"says Kosambi, and translatesit, followingcommon practice,as
"personaldevotion"(p. 31). In our viewit is the "availablebelievable"of the epoch of crisis
and impliesa greatdeal more thanpersonaldevotion.

For Kosambi,bhaktiis the ideologyof feudalism,an era thatwas about to congeal

intocenturiesof stagnationafterthe Gupta age. Afterreflectionon itsoriginsand itslater
dismissalof bhaktias ideologyseems to residein a one-sidedapplicationof
criticalvitality,
the Marxianmethod. To use Ricoeur's terms,it is an act of suspectingthatdoes not allow
forthe suspectingof the premisesof the suspecter. Nor does it allow us to listento the
"naturalbelievable"in bhakti.Jaiswal(1981) tracestheoriginofthetermsbhãgavat,bhakta,
bhakti,and Bhãgavat to the root bhaj which in the Vedic literaturemeans to divide,
distribute,allot, share with,or partake of. She as well as Joshi (1972) emphasize the
importance of the Pancaratras as the worshippersof Narayana and their ritual of
purusamedhato the originsof bhakti. Whetherthe ritualactuallyinvolvedthe immolation
ofpersonor was onlya ritualsymbolization of all beings(Joshi,1972,p. 284)
of thedivinity
is immaterialhere. The essentialpoint,sharedbyboth,is summarizedbyJaiswal(1981, pp.
34-36) as follows:"... Nârãyana standsforthe entiresettlement,the collectiveentityof
man,Nara forthe 'individual'"and

160

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 The cult looks back to an egalitariancommunallifein whichall adult male
membersmusthave been equal participants.The communalcharacterof the
sacrificeis stillretainedin the SatapathBrãhmana,whichstatesthatit was a
sattra,a communal sacrificein whichthere are no priests,the performers
(Yajamãnas) themselvesactingas sacrificialpriests.

She pointsout, however,"... thatthe egalitarianelementsof the cult changed withthe

progressof civilisation,and whatonce symbolisedthe egalitariantotalityof the tribe,came
to signifya god, who not only embodied all that was here in this universe but also
transcendedit."

The BG bringsforwardthe memoryof this egalitariancommunityin a medium

appropriateto its own times. The god thatsignifiesthe totalityof a communityis now a
teacherof pure and authenticknowledge,impartingeducationto an eager and competent
seekerof truth.It is a relationshipof inequalitythatlooks to equalityas thepossible future.
The greatesthonora teachercan expectis beingsurpassedbyhis pupil. This divineteacher
is,at the same time,as Arjunaaptlyputsit,also capable of unlimitedpatienceand kindness,
love and generosityof a fatherto a son, a friendto a friend,a lover to a beloved (9:44).
The intimacyof thisrelationshipis neverallowed to cloud the main purpose of the divine
dialogue: theenlightenment of thosewho have losta sense of directionbecause thepast has
become obsure,and a sense forthe futurehas yetto emerge. Divine compassionextends
to all seekers of wisdom,but the divine love that transcendsthe teacher-pupildualityis
bestowedon the eternallysteadfastmen of wisdom (7:17). If thereis an appearance of
imperiousnessand dogmaticauthority "ofa mightypotentate,sternand functional" (Basham,
1971,p. 330), it merelyheightensthe recognitionof the problem,articulationof the crisis,
and the need forimmediateenlightenment. The sense of crisisis dramatizedto a maximum
by the settingin whichthe dialogue occurs.

Thapar treatstheMahabharataWar as a majortimemarker.It marksthe end of an

epoch. Kshatriyarulershipsare about to make wayforthe monarchicalstatesof the middle
Ganga valley. "The intensivesorrowof thebattleat Kurukshetrais not merelyat the death
of kinsmenbut also at the dyingsociety. . ."(1984, p. 141). Both forthe authorsand the
audiences of the BG, the memoryof thatwar was stillstrongeven thoughthe times had
changed. The crisisof brahmanismin thepost-Mauryanperiodwas a crisisofa social order
thathad lost its legitimacyand its powerto convincethose who producedits surplus. The
expansionintonew territories and theabsorptionof tribalsocieties,theriseof new artsand
crafts,the growthof the cities and the "heterodoxies," invasionsand kingshipsof alien
hordeshad all, together,underlinedthe irrelevanceand hypocrisy of the Vedic ritesand of
mindlessrituals. The need of the timewas fora critiqueof a social epoch thathad become
redundantbut had refusedto die. Its hypocrisyhad to be exposed. At the same time
proposals for a new social order that contained and transcendedwhat the old had
accomplished,had to be explored. A new synthesisthatwould not onlycontainthe old but
also recognizethe diversity of the new,local waysof livingand makingsense (svadharma)
had to be attempted.

The BG is suchan attempt.The stageis set in the firstchapter. The crisis,depicted

as the senselessnessof a war forone who values the community-in thiscase symbolizedby
the extended kin~ratherthan kingshipand pleasure, is clearly articulatedin Arjuna's
question. Joy,in heaven or on earth,is possible ifonlysharedwiththecommunity and not
throughits annihilation. Chapter 2 reveals the true source of agony: what is implicitin
Arjuna's question is made explicit. Its object is not the war at hand but the promise of
heaven in death or the kingdomof the earthat the sacrificeof the community.Hence, the

161

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Lord proceeds to confrontthereal dilemma. Ego-focalpreoccupationwithacquisitionand
comfortis contrastedto the "brahmanwho knows"(2:46). In the same vein the insightful
grasp of the lasting truth,the enlightenment arising froma disciplinedintelligenceis
contrastedto the mindless,self-indulgentactivityof the seekers of immediatepleasure
(eitherhere or in heaven) throughthe prescribed,brahmanicdailypractice(2:49).

Kosambi is naturallypuzzled by the withdrawlof this critique and a strong

justification of the yajnasacrificeand of the Vedic practicewhichoccursin Chapter3. He
sees thisas an exampleof "doublethink," a consequenceof the espousal of mãyãvãda. My
reading of the Chapter 3 suggests that two independent but mutually consistent
interpretations of karmayogaare at workhere. Theyare to be read in viewof the critique
thatwas alreadydeveloped in the previouschapter. Firstof all, the relevanceof karmaas
the Vedic ritualis contextualized.Its Vedic interpretation is presentedas relevantto its
own time,hence the referenceto yajnaas the giverof life(3:14). This is further enforced
bya referenceto Janaka(3:20). At the same timetheuniversalsense of karma,embryonic
in the yajna ritual,is extractedand developed. The dangerof ignoringthe materialbodily
dimensionof humanexistence,so vividin the earlystagesof surplusproduction,is brought
out. The pursuitof theenlightenment cannotbe abstractedfromdailylife. It cannotoccur
in a vacuum. Hence the Lord chastisesthe one who proclaimsthat bodily desires and
senses can be controlledthroughinactionbut stilldwellson themin his mind,forhe is a
hypocrite(3:6), just as much,one mightadd on the basis of Chapter2, as the brahminwho
extolsthe virtuesof yajna so as to fulfilhis own egofocalends. The significance of socially
responsible,materially groundedaction(lokasamgraham), ofsociallabor,is also emphasized.
Throughsucha karmayogaone seeks consciousapprehensionof the materiality of human
existenceand an appropriate,associatedlifepractice. The criterionof choice is no longer
the redundantVedic ritualsas prescribedin the books of the brahminsbut svadharma
(3:35), the appropriateness of whichis determinedbythe actionsof all enlightenedleaders
(Éresthas)and notjust thebrahmins(3:21). In factthe strictures againstcreatingconfusion,
againstproducingfragmentation of the mind,seem to be particularlyaimed at the rigid
brahminsseekingconformity, forthe sage and thewise knowand encouragetheenjoyment
of all social labor (3:26).

The subsequentchapters,whichdeal witha varietyof meaningsystems,(ways of

makingsense of reality)mustalso be read in relationshipto the firsttwochapters.The BG
is generallyassumed to upholdvarnasramadharma.It is blamed fordoing so by Kosambi.
The effortin the poem is towardscreatinga new meaning of varnasramadharmaby
regainingitsessentialkernel,bycapturingtheauthenticity of itslifepractice,fora different
epoch. Kosambi, with his usual identifies
perspicacity, the conceptof brahmanirvãna (2:72,
5:2) withtheBuddhistideal stateofescape fromtheeffectsof karma. "WithoutBuddhism,
GII.55-72 (reciteddailyas prayersat Mahatma Gandhi's asrama) wouldbe impossible"(p.
76). One mustkeep this in mind while interpreting 9:31, 32, 33 as well. The cardinal
principlehere is samatva. This equanimityof consciousnesscharacterizesa supremeyogin
(6:32). The one withoutsuchsamatvabecomes,to use Jnanesvar'swords,a sourceof misery
forthewholeworldbyhisveryexistence(JN 13:662). A surfacetranslationofpäpayonayas,
in (9:32) withreferenceto 'women,vattyas,and Éudras,'2iS"theworkingand producing
classes thatare defiledby theirverybirth"(p. 15), mustbe reinterpreted, in the contextof
the increasingredundancyof the rigidityof these classificationsin actual life. Does it
perhaps refer to such redundancyand to its potential transcendencethroughdivine
intervention?Jnanesvarcomparesthistranscendenceto riversmergingin an ocean while
stillretainingtheiridentity, to sandalwoodand acacia revealingtheiressentialidentityin
fire,to grainsof salt fallingin the ocean fromwhichtheygain theirdistinctidentityin the
firstinstance(JN,9:62, 59, 61). The crucibleof thistranscendencewithoutdissolutionis

162

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
thepersonifieddivinity,thegod whocapturesin himtheegalitariantotalityof a community
lostand a community yetto be regainedat a higherstageof existence.Hence jãti,kula, and
varna, "the formalstructures" of "a lineage system"(Thapar, 1984, p. 51) will become
meaningless(akara) in such a community (9:456). In the lightof the crisisand its critique
thatwere unfoldingat thistimehow are we to interpretthe referencesin 9:33? Its 'pure
brahmins'and 'pious Kshatriyas'are a starkcontrastto the 'defiledbybirth'women,vaishyas
and shudras,of 9:32. Some of thesevaishyasand shudraswere,historianstell us, kingsand
landlordswithbrahminsas theirlegitimizing subalterns.The contrastis poorlyappreciated
ifwe see it as an unchallengedaffirmation of brahminorthodoxy.Is it not morelikelythat
both the authorsof the BG and theiraudiences, manyof whom were of 'defiledbirth,'
sharedthe inevitablesarcasmabout the claim of ease withwhichthe 'noble ones' (!) were
able to attaintheirunitywiththe divine? The keywordsof the stanza,punya and bhakta,
musthave evoked the memoryof the timeswhenthe benign,positiveface of brahmanism
was a reality. The contrastbetweenwhatcan be and is musthave acquired an enormous
amountof critical,explosivepower.

The upholdersof orthodoxies, bothbrahmanicand Marxist,have oftenpreferredthe

surfacemeaningof theseverses,whichis subjectto one of twoimplicitassumptions.Either
the workingclasses are trulydefiledby theirverybirthand knowit or, perhapsworse still,
theyare of inferiorintelligenceand, hence, it is easy to persuade themthattheyare and
thusto manipulatethem. Brahmins,on the otherhand, have eitheralwayscared forthe
unprivileged, out of noblesseoblige,or have been shrewdenoughto turneverymajor social
upheaval to theirown advantage. Kosambi, I am afraid,oftentiltson the side of such
orthodoxy even thoughhis methodologicalrigorpreventshimfromgoingall the way. Thus,
whiletreatingbhaktias the ideologyof feudalism,Kosambi also, on the otherhand,traces
its 'rational'origins,forexample,by asking the question: "WhyKrishna?" Given all his
deeds, as recordedin theMahabharata,he seems,on the surface,totallyunsuitedto preach
a moraldoctrine.Kosambi's explorationof the Krishnamythtakes us throughsome highly
skilledreconstruction and deciphering.The inexplicablechoice of Krishnaby the brahmin
poets makes sense because his mythencapsulates the memoriesof diverse egalitarian,
primitivesocieties,manyof them matriarchalin origin. While Kosambi does not say so
explicitlyhe sees thatto the audiences withwhomthe cultwas risingin popularity,Krishna
stood fora dream,fora past as an era of materialhardshipbut social containment.It also
stood forthe possible futurein whichthe antagonismbetweennatureand societywillhave
been overcome.

The masses,therefore,are not stupid. They are capable of rationaldreams. Such

dreams, embedded as theyare in tradition,provide it with its revolutionarypotential.
Brahmanismis notto be dismissedas eternallymanipulativeeither. It "laidthe foundations
of a class societywhichwas moreprogressivethanmutuallyexclusivewarringtribes."And,
"Indecryingtherole of superstitionwhenit keptIndia backward,it mustneverbe forgotten
thatpriestlyritualand magicalso helped bringcivilizationto anygivenlocality."However,
in notdistinguishing thephysicalfromman-madenecessity,"suchbeliefsturnedintofetters
whenthe class structurehardened"(Kosambi, 1975,p. 249). In spite of these caveats,the
BG stillremainsa monumentof brahminconspiracy,and the greatpoet teachersfromthe
commonpeople are said to have done verywell withoutit. Jnanesvar,a brahmin"whoran
foul of currentbrahmanbelief1(p. 14) is an embarrassmentforKosambi. So should be
Namadev who, althoughnot a brahmin,was his biographerand a devotee. Fortunately,
Kosambi is not persuadedby his own totaldismissalof theBG. In the case of each one of
the brahmininterpreters, absence of any "personalopportunism" is granted(p. 15). Even
in the case of Tilak and Gandhi, Kosambi recognizesthe mass appeal of theirBG inter-
pretationseven thoughhe does not providea systematicanalysisof the social contextsof

163

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
theirefforts(fora preliminaryattempt,see Lele and Singh,1987). In all of these cases a
reluctantrecognitionis grantedforthe factthatchallengesto the real rulingclasses (for
whomthebrahminswere subalternlegitimizers)drewtheirinspirationfromthe interpreta-
tionsof the BG, but "withoutviolence to accepted brahminmethodology" (p. 15).

Similaris the case of bhakti. The linkto feudalismdemandingchains of personal

loyaltyand bhaktipromulgating personal faithand devotion,even to objects withflaws,is
emphasized. But the benign,authenticcommunal side of bhakti is recognizedas well.
Feudalism, in its most malignantphase, more blatantlyviolated than ever the essential
principleof bhakti:thatthe fruitsof social labor shouldbe equally enjoyedby all (p. 32).
This periodalso producedthetextsof malignantbrahmanism.Take forexample,Hemadri's
Caturvargacintãmani: "asa documentofa superstitious leisureclass,none otherknowntoday
willbear comparisonwithit"(pp. 32-33). Then came theprotest.Its two mostoutstanding
examplesare the Varkariand Mahanubhavasampraddyasof Maharashtra. "Howeverthe
reformand its strugglewas never consciouslydirectedagainst feudalism,so that its very
success meant feudal patronage-ultimatelyfeudal decay by diversionof a democratic
movementinto the dismal channelsof conquestand rapine"(p. 35).

Taking inspirationfromKosambi's insightsand ambivalenceI have triedelsewhere

to explore the double dynamicsof critique and hegemonyin the case of the Varkari
sampradaya(Lele 1981, 1987). Contraryto the commonlyheld view that divides Indian
traditioninto "Great"and "Little"or its some otherfunctionalequivalent,I have suggested
thatbhaktiwas explicitlya revoltagainstthisdichotomousview. Values, symbols,myths,
beliefs,and ritualsas well as abstractedphilosophicalmusingsof a tradition,bear in them
as meanings the actualityof everydayexperience and the imaginativeand creative
potentialityof its transition. Polar concepts such as 'Great' and 'Little,'revolutionand
reform,radical and systemsupportivesampradayas,tend to fossilizethe dynamicsof the
ongoingdevelopmentallogic of a tradition(Lele, 1981,pp. 5-6).

The BG and Vaishnavismin general,seem to capturethis logic in the concept of

avatara. The BG uses the termsarjana (4:7). It also claims thatone who comes to know
thisflowof traditionis released fromthe cycleofpunarjarma(4:9). The contrastbetween
the unendingand unlimitedflowof traditionand the acute sense of one's limited,time-
The factthattradition
space bound presencein it,givesrise to the idea of transmigration.
renewsitselfthroughepoch-makingchangesis markedby the deeds of avataras,as divine
interventions in the mundaneaffairsof a materiallyconstitutedworld. Kosambi sees in this
conceptthe messianicaspect of the BG. The "availablebelievable"in Krishna'sassertion
Krishnamyths.
in (4:7): "thenmyselfgive forthI" is constitutedby the manyproto-historic
The assurances offeredin the theoryof incarnation"could also lead the devotee in his
miseryto hope fora new avatara to deliverhim fromthe oppressionin thisworldas he
hoped for salvationin the next"(p. 27). But the message in the BG is not addressed to
singleindividuals;it speaks of the protectionof dharma,the right. Jaiswal(1981, p. 130)
notesthatforShankaraand Ramanuja, it means varnasramadharma.In anycase, it refers
to a just social order,thatthe righteous(sãdhus) dream about. Jnanesvar,interpreting it
foranotherperiod of social crisis,capturesits essence thus:

It is in the naturalflowof things

Since timeimmemorial
That I protectdharmas,one and all
From one epoch to another. (JN 4:49)

and

164

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 I break the bonds of adharma
I tear up the recordsof blemish
I cause the men of truth
To raise the bannerof happiness. (JN 4:52)

Thus for Jnanesvar,the men and women of truth(sajjanas) must themselvescarrythe

of raisingthe flag of happiness. But to be able to do that in an age of
responsibility
adharma,characterizedby ignorance,hypocrisy and dogma (aviveka),theymustfirstraise
the banner of rebellion. When theydo thattheybecome the embodimentof god. The
same message was delivered,even more explicitlyby Tukaram,some fourhundredyears
later:

We, the servantsof god, are softerthanwax

Yet we are harderthanthe thunderbolt
When pleased, we would give away the clothon our arse
But we would lodge a stickon the head of a rogue. (Ag:987)

In Vaishnava bhakti,whichdrawsmuchof itsinspirationfromtheBG, the concepts

of avatara and divinitystandin contrastto the other-worldliness
and fatalismthatis often
associated withthe notionof rebirthin Hinduism. Varkarisants,forexample,wantedto
create the heaven on earth,such thatthe gods would beg fora chance to join the mortals
(Lele, 1987, p. 118). The enormousappeal of bhakti,for the men and women of the
workingclasses,thosedefiledbybirthaccordingto brahminorthodoxy, had itsrootsin this
celebrationof the materiallygroundedspirituality of the promisedheaven on earth. For
theyknowthatit can be createdonlyout of theirdailylifepractice,as a fruitof theirsocial
labor.

Kosambi is right,of course,in remindingus thatthe searchfora lastingmeaningfor

the everydaylife experience,its translationof the possible futureinto divinityand the
authenticurge arisingout of the human conditionto believe (sraddha), have a negative
dimension. An immanentcritiqueof an oppressivesocial order and of its legitimations
seeks to unmaskthe false claims by appealing to theirkernelof truth. It is, therefore,
double-edged. In its very authenticityit also becomes available for hegemonic
appropriation. Authenticdreams can be subjected to false promises,and revolutionary
insightscan be used as new legitimations. It is clear that the message of the BG was
subsequentlyso approrpriatedby brahminorthodoxy. But its other edge could not be
silenced forever. It kept findingnew expressions,in Shankara's critique of decadent
Buddhism,in the partialityshown to Ramanuja by "thepoorer and relativelyplebeian"
masses in their battles against "The richer,aristocraticlandlords"(p. 15) and in the
democraticmass movementof the Varkariswho tookJnanesvar' s interpretation
of theBG
as the foundation. The double dynamicsof ideologyand critiqueis the key to most of
Kosambi's puzzles about the BG.

Kosambi was deeply concernedabout the brahmanizingtendency,whichaffected

many Indian "savants"and distinguishedforeignscholars "whose long and exclusive
concentrationupon brahmindocumentsseems to have impairedtheirabilityto distinguish
betweenmythand reality"(1974, p. 2). Instead,he advocatedand practisedthe methodof
combiningfield work and literaryevidence. His writingshave inspired a number of
historiansand scholarsto re-readthe sources,witha new and incisiveset of questionsin
mind(Thapar, 1978,p. 17). Kosambi stood firmly in the flowof traditionthathe so ably
suspectedand so sensitivelylistenedto. He also suspectedtechnocraticscientism"which
takes slums,worldwars,massivecolonial suppressionand nuclearbombs as logical assets

165

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
of civilization"(1974, p. 27). Today more thanever thatscientismthreatensthe enterprise
thatKosambi had so ablyguidedthroughout his life. In the youthful
scrambleforboarding
thespaceshipthatwouldtake India intothetwenty-first century,historyis oftenturnedinto
caricature,and traditionis served up as entertainment."The more completelythe life-
process,includingleisure,is dominatedby modern social orders,the more all spiritual
phenomenabear the markof the orders"(Adorno,1967,p. 25). Instead of the bleedingof
our substanceinto the sacred to whichFeuerbach objected,we now emptyour substance
into the "technologically available believable." Soon the BG willprobablymake no sense
at all to the new and dominanturban intellectualsin India except throughtelevised
titillationsof theirchauvinisticself-righteousness. Therefore,Kosambi's critiqueof that
false,hegemonic,brahmanicalsense deservesourparticularattention.So does hisreluctant
but pioneeringaffirmation of its revolutionarypotential.

NOTES

All referencesto theBG are to theeditionwithWinthropSargeanttranslation(Albany:The

State Universityof New York Press,1984). Referencesto Jnanesvarare to Srigurusakhare
maharaj sampradayiksarthjnanesvari (Alandi: Kisan Maharaj Sakhare, 1972). The
translationof Tukaram'sstanza is fromNemade (1980). All othertranslationsare by the
author.

REFERENCES

Adorno,Theodor W. Prisms.London, 1967.

Allchin,Bridgetand Raymond. The Rise of Civilizationin India and Pakistan. New Delhi,
1983.

Basham, A. L. The WonderThat Was India. London, 1954.

and Evolutionof Society. Boston, 1979.

Habermas,Jürgen. Communication

Jaiswal,Survira. The Originsand Developmentof Vaisnavism.Delhi, 1981.

Jayaswal,K.P. Manu and Yajnavalkya.Calcutta,1930.

Joshi,Laksmanasastri. VaidicSanskrticaVikas. Vai, 1972.

in Mythand Reality.
Kosambi,D. D. "Social and EconomicAspectsof theBhagavad-Gitan
Bombay,1962.

. "CombinedMethodsin Indology"in Science and Human Progress.Bombay,

1974.

to theStudyof Indian History.Bombay,1975.

. An Introduction

in BhaktiMovements.Leiden, 1981.
and Modernity
Lele, Jayant(ed.). Tradition

. "Jnanesvarand Tukaram:An Exercisein CriticalHermeneutics"in Israel,M.

and Wagle N. K. (eds.) Religionand Societyin Maharashtra.Toronto,1987.

166

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 and Rajendra Singh. "Languageand Literatureof Dalits and Sants: Some
Missed Opportunities"in Narain, Iqbal and Lothar Lutze (eds.) Literature,Social
Consciousnessand Policy. Delhi, 1987.

Nemade, Bhalacandra. Tukaram. New Delhi, 1980.

Ricoeur,Paul. The Philosophyof Paul Ricoeur. (Charles E. Reagan and David Stewart,
eds.). Boston, 1978.

Riepe, Dale. "D.D. Kosambi: Father of ScientificIndian History"in Sharma,R. S. (ed.)

Indian Society:HistoricalProbings.New Delhi.

Sardar,G. B. Sant vangmayacisamajikphalasrti. Puna, 1970.

Sharma,R. S. (ed.) Indian Society:HistoricalProbings.New Delhi, 1974.

. Sudras in AncientIndia. Delhi, 1980.

1966.
Thapar, Romila. A Historyof India. Harmondsworth,

. AncientIndian Social History.Hyderabad,1978.

. FromLineage to State. Bombay,1984.

ofLiberalism. Boston, 1968.

Wolff,Robert Paul. The Poverty

This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:31:13 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions