by A K Bhagwat
The central idea of the Gita-Rahasya was first expressed by Tilak in his speech at Nagpur in 1902. Madhav Shrihari alias Bapuji Aney and a few other students of Nagpur met Tilak at Nagpur station, as he was proceeding to Calcutta to attend the Congress Session in 1902, and requested him to deliver a lecture to the students of Nagpur. On making inquiries of the young enthusiastic students, Tilak learnt that there were many students of philosophy in the Morris College. He therefore agreed to halt at Nagpur during his return journey, and said that he would speak on a subject related to their studies. When he came to Nagpur, an address was presented to him by students of the Morris College and in the speech made in reply, Tilak stated the message of the Gita, which was later on developed in the Gita-Rahasya. He observed: “I shall not deal with the different accepted interpretations of the Gita, such as it teaches Vedanta or it shows the way for salvation. To me it appears that the Gita shows the way of action when the mind is torn in doubts and cannot decide the course of action. Such was the state of Arjuna’s mind at the beginning of the Bharatiya Yuddha and after listening to the Gita, his doubts were removed, his mind became calm and he acted according to the advice of Shri Krishna.” Tilak pointed out the significance of the ethical principles propounded in the Bhagavadgita and showed how they were different from the teachings of Utilitarianism, of moral intuitionism and of Hedonism. Tilak emphasised his view that it was the desire for fruit and not action which bound the individual. He observed that the renunciation of life by fearing the results of action is the escapist way of salvation. He emphasised the significance of and concluded by saying that the Gita awakened the sense of duty in an individual and taught him to act in a disinterested manner. Throughout his speech Tilak put forth that the idea of action and not renunciation was the message of the Gita and drew special attention to (Follow me and fight).
The Gita-Rahasya was written in the Mandalay jail and Tilak got the pencil-written manuscript a few months after he was released. With the help of friends, a fair copy was made and the first Marathi edition was published in June 1915. The first edition of 6,000 copies was almost sold out within a week of its publication,. It has since been translated in Hindi, Gujarati, Bengali, Kannada, Telugu and Tamil almost all the important Indian languages. In Hindi there have been seven editions and in Marathi the sixth edition was published in 1950. The Gita-Rabasya was translated in English in 1935 and the first edition of 10,000 copies has been sold out.
The preface to the Gta-Rahasya, besides stating in brief the main thesis, throws unexpected light on Tilak’s mind. It begins with the famous lines of Saint Tukaram:
(“Humble that I am, I only speak what the saints have already spoken.)” This clearly indicates the modesty of a scholar who realises that nothing in the realm of knowledge is new. It is then stated how in 1872, when he was only 16, he read out to his ailing father the Bhasha-Vivritti, a commentary on the Bhagavadgita. “Though it was not possible to understand the import of the Gita at such an early age, the impressions absorbed at an early age are always lasting and a liking for the Gita was created in my mind.” Tilak then writes, how he read the Gita and the different commentaries written on it in Sanskrit, Marathi and English, how he had his growing doubts as to why he should accept the interpretation that Gita showed the way of salvation, how after setting aside all commentaries and reading the Gita several times, he arrived at the conclusion that Karma-Yoga was the message of the Gita, and how after studying the Mahabharata, other Vedic literature and different works in English, his theory was confirmed in his mind. A reference is next made to his intimate friend the late Shripatibuva Bhingarkar, with whom he discussed the Gita several times. “It is very unfortunate that Buva is not alive to see this book published.” Admitting that it was not possible to deal adequately with the discussion of the ideas about the Gita advanced before him, Tilak writes: “As the poet Moropant said, ‘Old age, which is the spotless white banner carried by the army of attendants of death, is already in sight; my body is exhausted in the struggle with diseases, which are the advance-guard of that army.’ The companions in my life have passed on. I am writing this to communicate to people the information I gathered and the thoughts that have occurred to me, so that someone sharing my purpose in life, might pick up the thread and complete the work.” These words have a deep human significance. A touching reference has been to the partings in life caused by the death of those who were nearest to him. There is, however, no grieving over it. The attitude of Tilak as revealed in these words is one of resigned acceptance. The words also express the faith of an individual who knows that the torch of knowledge is handed over from generation to generation. In conclusion Tilak writes: “The preface ends. It pains me to realise that the subject whose contemplation was ever a source of happiness, is now put forth in the form of a book and thus is parting from me. But these thoughts have occurred to me to be communicated to the next generation and hence I am offering this philosopher’s stone to my readers with the words in Kathopanishad (“Arise, awake and accept these blessings of God.”)
The epilogue of the Gita-Rahasya sums up the arguments advanced earlier, leading to its ultimate message of disinterested action.
The chapter opens with the quotation and it is shown how the Gita enunciated the fundamental principles of action and discussed the metaphysical idea and the ethical basis of action. “The chief object of the Gita is to explain which is the most excellent state of man from the metaphysical point of view and to decide the fundamental principles of ethics with reference to different actions of life.” It is further pointed out how in deciding the ethical problem Kant, in his Theory of Ethics, and Green, in Prolegomena to Ethics, thought it necessary to consider pure reason rather than action. A reference is made to the fact that the message of the Gita was interpreted differently by different schools, some advocating renunciation, others laying all stress on bhakti, etc. Saint Ramdas, however, emphasised the way of action as advocated in the Gita. The discussion is summed up with the remark: “The religion of the Gita, which is a blend of spiritual knowledge, devotion and action, which is fearless and comprehensive... which does not maintain any distinction between classes, castes and countries, but gives ‘release’ to everyone in the same measure and, at the same time, shows proper forbearance towards other religions, is the sweetest immortal fruit of the tree of Vedic religion. The disinterested action which removed the conflict between knowledge and action and converted the entire life into a sacrifice, was the quintessence of all the ethical teachings of the Vedic Dharma.”
In the appendix the Gita has been examined ‘externally’ with reference to the following seven topics: (1) The Gita and the Mahabharata, (2) The Gita and the Upa nishads, (3) The Gita and the Brahmasutras, (4) The Bhagavat Dharma and the Gita, (5) The date of composition of the Gita in its present form, (6) The Gita and the Buddhistic books, (7) The Gita and the Bible.
The problems are discussed in an exhaustive manner. The conclusion arrived at is that the Gita in its present form was an integral and appropriate part of the Mahabharata and not an interpolation. The distinctive features of the Gita are brought out by comparing it with the Upanishads and the Brahmasutras. It is pointed out that originally, i.e., probably about 1400 B.C., the Bhagavata Dharma regarded unattached action as superior to renunciation and only later it changed its aspect and devotion became its main feature. In deciding the date of the Gita, different kinds of evidence are considered and after refuting the arguments of Professor Garbe it is said, “All these evidences cumulatively lead to the conclusion that the Mahabharata and consequently the Gita was in existence about 500 years before the Shaka era.” It is maintained that the Mahayana sect in Buddhism was partly due to the Gita. This evidence led to the conclusion that the Gita existed at least 300 years before Christ.
Tilak refutes the theory of Dr. Lorinser that the Gita was influenced by the Bible and observed in conclusion: “There is a great probability, and almost a certainty that
the principles of Self-identification , renunciation, non-enmity and devotion to be found in the New Testament of the Bible, must have been taken into the Christian religion from Buddhism, and therefore indirectly from the Vedic religion.”
Dignity of Style
The Gita-Rahasya has been written in Tilak’s usual direct and forceful Marathi. Though the subject is highly abstract, there is a wonderful clarity of expression, and the familiar illustrations bring home to the reader the implications even of abstruse ideas. There is an appropriate dignity maintained throughout the discussion and in spite of innumerable allusions, there is no touch of pedantry about it. Prof. V. M. Joshi, a well-known Marathi author and an associate of Tilak, wrote: “Mr. Tilak spares no pains to make himself not only understood, but interesting and instructive. Indeed the present writer was once told by him that he had to spend hours and even days in some cases before he could fix upon any new Marathi word or expression as an equivalent for the corresponding English word or expression... There is no instance in the whole book of 850 pages of that interspersion of English or Anglicised Marathi words which owing to the verbal poverty of some writers disfigure their writings.... Tilak has displayed marvellous power which Marathi possesses of familiarly, smoothly and even elegantly expressing philosophical, ethical or metaphysical ideas, however much their complexity or abstruseness.” Joshi has, however, also pointed out that Tilak’s method, of emphasising the main thesis of the Gita-Rahasya too often, at times appears jarring.
Gita-Rabasya, an Expression of Tilak’s Faith
In the earlier phase of his life, Tilak felt a fascination for the goal of spiritual life as enunciated in the Upanishads, viz. the realisation that the individual soul (Jiva) is, in the ultimate analysis, identical with the universal soul (Brahman). He then came under the influence of western philosophers like Mill and Spencer and began to feel the inadequacy of the ideal of individual emancipation. With a deeper study of the Bhagavadgita, he realised that he need not look up to the west for an emphasis on social duties. The Gita preached the ideal of action for ‘Lokasangraha,’ i.e., for promoting the stability and solidarity of society. The Gita had unequivocally pointed out the social content of the spiritual ideal, and taught the gospel of Karmayoga and not of Sanyasa. Tilak did not believe in the fulfilment of an individual’s destiny apart from society and knew the significance of Mazzini’s saying “We improve with the world.” The Hindu religion at one time gave due consideration to both the aspects of life — the individual as well as the social — as could be seen from the concept of four Ashramas and the system of four Varnas. A growing emphasis was, however, laid on the ideal of individual emancipation and it was only in the Gita that there was a new orientation in the light of social ethics.
Tilak, who was brought up in the orthodox tradition, did not brush aside rituals as unnecessary. But he was aware that as they were mostly to be performed by Brahmins and in some cases by the Kshatriyas, salvation (Moksha) would be possible only for a limited number of people and a bond of spiritual brotherhood could not be created. In the Gita, however, he found that the cult of sacrifice was replaced by the cult of Bhakti, which promised salvation to all irrespective of the differences of caste, sex or age. Tilak had realised that the strength of Christianity lay in the spiritual equality but he also felt that the way of Bhakti as advocated in the Gita also established spiritual equality. Moreover, ritual was not altogether discarded but had significance as a social duty.
Tilak felt convinced that the superiority of the Hindu religion over other religions lay in its tolerance and non-dogmatic attitude. The Brahmanic teachers, however, were dogmatic in their speculations both with regard to ritualism and spiritualism. In the Bhagavadgita, there was a departure from this point of view, and different ways were tolerated so long as the ultimate ideal was the realisation of the supreme reality. Tilak thus found in the Gita a philosophic synthesis transcending the individual and based on the universality of experience.
With his study of the western philosophers Tilak had realised the significance of social ethics, but he felt that the materialistic basis of this ethics would lead to a society of which self-interest — at the most, — enlightened self-interest would be the motive force. He maintained that ethics could not be separated from metaphysics and pointed out that those who thought that the universe could be explained in terms of natural and physical sciences advocated materialistic ethics in which self-interest was the end of man’s efforts; those who took an agnostic position in metaphysics, agreed that there were degrees of happiness and that mental happiness was superior to physical happiness. The metaphysics of the Gita was spiritual and consequently its ethics too were spiritual though its content was social. The action advocated in the Gita was altogether different from self-aggrandisement, and because it was performed in a disinterested manner it created no bonds. The action thus performed in the interest of society implied self-effacement. Tilak, thus, accepted the metaphysical position of Shankaracharya though he differed from him in ethical matters — Shankaracharya considered ethics from the point of view of individual emancipation and hence advocated Sanyasa, whereas Tilak thought of ethics in terms of social duties and hence advocated Karmayoga. Incidentally it may be mentioned that though Shri Aurobindo also regarded Karmayoga as the message of the Gita, he differed from Tilak in that he discarded the metaphysics (Mayavad ) of Shankaracharya. He has pointed out that one cannot think of social duties unless one regards the world as a reality. Tilak accepted the Mayavad with the qualification that Brahman was not without attribute but had many attributes . Though this is not the place for philosophic discussion, we think that the position of Aurobindo was more consistent than that of Tilak.
Thus in his quest for realisation, Tilak saw in the three aspects of the message of the Bhagavadgita — Karmayoga, Lokasangraha and Bhakti — a higher synthesis of different philosophies. Tilak’s own life was full of activity; the world knew him as a practical politician; and yet he was, to quote the words of Mrs. Sarojini Naidu about Gokhale, “a born idealist perpetually seeking some unchanging reality in a world full of shifting disillusion and despair.” The Bhagavadgita perpetually illumined his path, provided him with an incentive to work. In his life, private and public, Tilak must have experienced doubts, agonies, even despair, but with the help of the Bhagavadgita he could emancipate himself from the bondage of his actions and attain a philosophic calm in his life. Giia-Rahasya was, therefore, not a commentary or an interpretation; it was an expression of Tilak’s faith and a quintessence of his experience.
Comments
The Gita-Rahasya evoked different responses from different people. Some of the Shastris criticised Tilak for his departure from the views of Shankaracharya. To them an attempt to interpret the Gita in an original manner was almost a sacrilege if not blasphemy. Another type of criticism was that there was nothing new in the thesis propounded by Tilak. The former criticism has been answered by Tilak himself. So far as the latter criticism was concerned, Prof. V. M. Joshi has given a highly appropriate answer: “The answer is that there is nothing new in the book if ‘new’ means something which never was dreamt of in any philosophy or by any poet or writer. But if these critics are willing to allow any merit to a man for a systematic, thorough and detailed interpretation of the Gita, done in a severely scientific spirit, expressed in an attractive style, embodying all that was valuable in previous commentaries, ancient as well as modern, sifting all arguments and above all exhibiting the doctrine of the book as an organic and artistic whole with its several parts placed in their proper position-then surely Mr. Tilak has great claims upon the gratitude of those who take interest in the subject.”
It is interesting to place side by side the views of two other great ‘Sadhakas,’ Aurobindo and Gandhi, on the Gita-Rahasya.
Shri Aurobindo remarked: “His (Tilak’s) work on the Gita, no mere commentary, but an original criticism and presentation of ethical truths, is a
monumental work, the first prose writing of the front rank in weight and importance in the Marathi language, and likely to become a classic. This one book sufficiently proves that had he devoted his energies in this direction, he might easily have filled a large place in the history of Marathi literature and in the history of ethical thought, so subtle and comprehensive is its thinking, so great the perfection and satisfying force of its style. But it was psychologically impossible for Mr. Tilak to devote his energies in great degree to another action than the one life-mission for which the Master of his works had chosen him. His powerful literary gift has been given up to a journalistic work, ephemeral as even the best journalistic work must be, but consistently brilliant, vigorous, politically educative through decades, to an extent seldom matched and certainly never surpassed. His scholastic labour has been done almost by way of recreation. Nor can anything be more significant than the fact that the works which have brought him a fame other than that of the politician and patriot, were done in periods of compulsory cessation from his life work — planned and partly, if not wholly, executed during the imprisonments which could alone enforce leisure upon this unresting worker for his country. Even these by products of his genius have some reference to the one passion of his life, the renewal, if not the surpassing, of the past greatness of the nation by the greatness of its future. His Vedic researches seek to fix its pre-historic point of departure; the Gita-Rahasya takes the scripture which is perhaps the strongest and most comprehensive production of Indian spirituality and justifies to that spirituality by its own authoritative ancient message the sense of the importance of life, of action, of human existence, of man’s labour for mankind which is indispensable to the idealism of the modern spirit.”