Message of The Gita (Gandhi) PDF

The Message of the Gita
M. K. Gandhi
First Edition: June 1959
Navajivan Publishing House

Ahmedabad 380 014
CONTENTS
1. The Message of the Gita

2. Gita and Nonviolence
3. Yajna or the Science of Sacrifice
4. Central Teaching of the Gita
5. The Place of the Gita in Hinduism
6. Two Discourses on the Gita
7. Gita Jayanti
8. Krishna of the Gita
9. A Janmashtami Discourse
10. Hindu Students and the Gita
11. The Gita in Schools
12. Gita and the Sermon on the Mount
www.mkgandhi.org Page 1
TO THE READER
I would like to say to the diligent reader of my writings and to others who are
interested in them that I am not at all concerned with appearing to be consistent.
In my search after Truth I have discarded many ideas and learnt many new things.
Old as I am in age, I have no feeling that I have ceased to grow inwardly or that
my growth will stop at the dissolution of the flesh. What I am concerned with is
my readiness to obey the call of Truth, my God, from moment to moment, and,
therefore, when anybody finds any inconsistency between any two writings of
mine, if he has still faith in my sanity, he would do well to choose the later of
the two on the same subject.
Harijan, 29-4-'33, p. 2
M. K. Gandhi
Chapter I
Even in 1888-89, when I first became acquainted with the Gita, I felt that it was
not a historical work, but that under the guise of physical warfare, it described
the duel that perpetually went on in the hearts of mankind, and that physical
warfare was brought in merely to make the description of the internal duel more
alluring. This preliminary intuition became more confirmed on a closer study of
religion and the Gita. A study of the Mahabharata gave it added confirmation. I
do not regard the Mahabharata as a historical work in the accepted sense. The
Adiparva contains powerful evidence in support of my opinion. By ascribing to
the chief actors superhuman or subhuman origins, the great Vyasa made short
work of the history of kings and their peoples. The persons therein described may
be historical but the author of the Mahabharata has used them merely to drive
home his religious theme.
2. The author of the Mahabharata has not established the necessity of physical
warfare; on the contrary he has proved its futility. He has made the victors shed
tears of sorrow and repentance, and has left them nothing but a legacy of
miseries.
3. In this great work the Gita is the crown. Its second chapter, instead of teaching
the rules of physical warfare, tells us how a perfected man is to be known. In the
characteristics of the perfected man of the Gita, I do not see any to correspond
to physical warfare. Its whole design is inconsistent with the rules of conduct
governing the relations between warring parties.
4. Krishna of the Gita is perfection and right knowledge personified; but the
picture is imaginary. That does not mean that Krishna, the adored of his people,
never lived. But perfection is imagined. The idea of a perfect incarnation is an
aftergrowth.
5. In Hinduism, incarnation is ascribed to one who has performed some

extraordinary service of mankind. All embodied life is in reality an incarnation of
God, but it is not usual to consider every living being an incarnation. Future
generations pay this homage to one who, in his own generation, has been
extraordinarily religious in his conduct. I can see nothing wrong in this procedure;
it takes nothing from God s greatness and there is no violence done to Truth.
There is a Urdu saying which means, "Adam is not God but he is a spark of the
Divine." And therefore he who is the most religiously behaved has most of the
divine spark in him. It is in accordance with this train of thought that Krishna
enjoys, in Hinduism, the status of the most perfect incarnation.
6. This belief in incarnation is a testimony of man’s lofty spiritual ambition. Man

is not at peace with himself till he has become like unto God. The endeavour to
reach this state is the supreme, the only ambition worth having. And this is self-
realization. This self-realization is the subject of the Gita, as it is of all
scriptures. But its author surely did not write it to establish that doctrine. The
object of the Gita appears to me to be that of showing the most excellent way
to attain self-realization. That which is to be found, more or less clearly, spread
out here and there in Hindu religious books, has been brought out in the clearest
possible language in the Gita even at the risk of repetition.
7. That matchless remedy is renunciation of the fruits of action.
8. This is the centre round which the Gita is woven. "This renunciation is the
central sun, round which devotion, knowledge and the rest revolve like planets.
The body has been likened to a prison. There must be action where there is body.
Not one embodied being is exempted from labour. And yet all religions proclaim
that it is possible for man, by treating the body as the temple of God, to attain
freedom. Every action is tainted, be it ever so trivial. How can the body be made
the temple of God? In other words how can one be free from action, i.e. from
the taint of sin? The Gita has answered the question in decisive language: "By
desireless action; by renouncing the fruits of action; by dedicating all activities
to God, i.e. by surrendering oneself to Him body and soul."
9. But desirelessness or renunciation does not come for the mere talking' about
it. It is not attained by an intellectual feat. It is attainable only by a constant
heart-churn. Right knowledge is necessary for attaining renunciation. Learned
men possess a knowledge of a kind. They may recite the Vedas from memory, yet
they may be steeped in self-indulgence. In order that knowledge may not run
riot, the author of the Gita has insisted on devotion accompanying it and has
given it the first place. Knowledge without devotion will be like a misfire.
Therefore, says the Gita, "Have devotion, and knowledge will follow." This
devotion is not mere lip-worship, it is a wrestling with death. Hence the Gita's
assessment of the devotee's qualities is similar to that of the sages.
10. Thus the devotion required by the Gita is no soft-hearted effusiveness. It

certainly is not blind faith. The devotion of the Gita has the least to do with
externals. A devotee may use, if he likes, rosaries, forehead marks, make
offerings, but these things are not test of his devotion. He is the devotee who is
jealous of none, who is a fount of mercy, who is without egotism, who is selfless,
who treats alike cold and heat, happiness and misery, who is ever forgiving, who
is always contented, whose resolutions are firm, who has dedicated mind and
soul to God, who causes no dread, who is not afraid of others, who is free from
exultation, sorrow and fear, who is pure, who is versed in action and yet remains
unaffected by it, who renounces all fruit, good or bad, who treats friend and foe
alike, who is untouched by respect or disrespect, who is not puffed up by praise,
who does not go under when people speak ill of him, who loves silence and
solitude, who has a disciplined reason. Such devotion is inconsistent with the
existence at the same time of strong attachments.
11. We thus see, that to be a real devotee is to realize oneself. Self-realization

is not something apart. One rupee can purchase for us poison or nectar, but
knowledge or devotion cannot buy us either salvation or bondage. These are not
media of exchange. They are themselves the thing we want. In other words if the
means and the end are not identical, they are almost so. The extreme of means
is salvation. Salvation of the Gita is perfect peace.
12. But such knowledge and devotion, to be true, have to stand the test of
renunciation of fruits of action. Mere knowledge of right and wrong will not make
one fit for salvation. According to common notions, a mere learned man will pass
as a pandit. He need not perform any service. He will regard it as bondage even
to lift a little lota. Where one test of knowledge is non-liability for service, there
is no room for such mundane work as the lifting of a lota.
13. Or take bhakti. The popular notion of bhakti is soft-heartedness, telling beads
and the like and disdaining to do even a loving service, lest the telling of beads
etc. might be interrupted. This bhakta, therefore, leaves the rosary only for
eating, drinking and the like, never for grinding corn or nursing patients.
14. But the Gita says: "No one has attained his goal without action. Even men
like Janaka attained salvation through action. If even I were lazily to cease
working, the world would perish. How much more necessary then for the people
at large to engage in action?"
15- While on the one hand it is beyond dispute that all action binds, on the other
hand it is equally true that all living beings have to do some work whether they
will or no. Here all activity, whether mental or physical, is to be included in the
term action. Then how is one to be free from the bondage of action, even though
he may be acting? The manner in which the Gita has solved the problem is, to
my knowledge, unique. The Gita says: "Do your allotted work but renounce its
fruit—be detached and work—have no desire for reward and work."
This is the unmistakable teaching of the Gita. He who gives up action falls. He
who gives up only the reward rises. But renunciation of fruit in no way means
indifference to the result. In regard to every action one must know the result
that is expected to follow, the means thereto and the capacity for it. He, who,
being thus equipped, is without desire for the result, and is yet wholly engrossed
in the due fulfilment of the task before him, is said to have renounced the fruits
of his action.
16. Again, let no one consider renunciation to mean want of fruit for the
renouncer. The Gita reading does not warrant such a meaning. Renunciation
means absence of hankering after fruit. As a matter of fact, he who renounces
reaps a thousand fold. The renunciation of the Gita is the acid test of faith. He
who is ever brooding over result often loses nerve in the performance of his duty.
He becomes impatient and then gives vent to anger and begins to do unworthy
things; he jumps from action to action, never remaining faithful to any. He who
broods over results is like a man given to objects of senses; he is ever distracted,
he says goodbye to all scruples, everything is right in his estimation and he
therefore resorts to means fair and foul to attain his end.
17. From the bitter experiences of desire for fruit the author of the Gita
discovered the path of renunciation of fruit, and put it' before the world in a
most convincing manner. The common belief is that religion is always opposed to
material good. "One cannot act religiously in mercantile and such other matters.
There is no place for religion in such pursuits; religion is only for attainment of
salvation," we hear many worldly-wise people say. In my opinion the author of
the Gita has dispelled this delusion. He has drawn no line of demarcation
between salvation and wordly pursuits. On the contrary, he has shown that
religion must rule even our worldly pursuits. I have felt that the Gita teaches us
that what cannot be followed out in day-to-day practice cannot be called
religion. Thus, according to the Gita, all acts that are incapable of being
performed without attachment are taboo. This golden rule saves mankind from
many a pitfall. According to this interpretation murder, lying, dissoluteness and
the like must be regarded as sinful and therefore taboo. Man s life then becomes
simple, and from that simpleness springs peace.
18. Thinking along these lines, I have felt that in trying to enforce in one's life
the central teaching of the Gita, one is bound to follow truth and ahimsa. When
there is no desire for fruit, there is no temptation for untruth or himsa. Take any
instance of untruth or violence, and it will be found that at its back was the
desire to attain the cherished end. But it may be freely admitted that the Gita
was not written to establish ahimsa.' It was an accepted and primary duty even
before the Gita age. The Gita had to deliver the message of renunciation of fruit.
This is clearly brought out so early' as the second chapter.
19. But if the Gita believed in ahimsa or it was included in desirelessness, why
did the author take a warlike illustration? When the Gita was written, although
people believed in ahimsa, wars were not only not taboo, but nobody observed
the contradiction between them and ahimsa.
20. In assessing the implications of renunciation of fruit, we are not required to

probe the mind of the author of the Gita as to his limitations of ahimsa and the
like. Because a poet puts a particular truth before the world, it does not
necessarily follow that he has known or worked out all its great consequences,
or that having done so, he is able always to express them fully. In this perhaps
lies the greatness of the poem and the poet. A poets meaning is limitless. Like
man, the meaning of great writing suffers evolution. On examining the history of
languages, we notice that the meaning of important words has changed or
expanded. This is true of the Gita. The author has himself extended the meanings
of some of the current words. We are able to discover this even on a superficial
examination. It is possible, that in the age prior to that of the Gita, offering of
animals in sacrifice was permissible. But there is not a trace of it in the sacrifice
in the Gita sense. In the Gita continuous concentration on God is the king of
sacrifices. The third chapter seems to show that sacrifice chiefly means body-
labour for service. The third and the fourth chapters read together will give us
other meanings for sacrifice but never animal-sacrifice. Similarly has the
meaning of the word sannyasa undergone, in the Gita, a transformation. The
sannyasa of the Gita will not tolerate complete cessation of all activity. The
sannyasa of the Gita is all work and yet no work. Thus the author of the Gita by
extending meanings of words has taught us to imitate him. Let it be granted, that
according to the letter of the Gita it is possible to say that warfare is consistent
with renunciation of fruit. But after 40 years' unremitting endeavour fully to
enforce the teaching of the Gita in my own life, I have, in all humility, felt that
perfect renunciation is impossible without perfect observance of ahimsa in every
shape and form.
21. The Gita is not an aphoristic work; it is a great religious poem. The deeper
you dive into it, the richer the meanings you get. It being meant for the people
at large, there is pleasing repetition. With every age the important words will
carry new and expanding meanings. But its central teaching will never vary. The
seeker is at liberty to extract from this treasure any meaning he likes so as to
enable him to enforce in his life the central teaching.
22. Nor is the Gita a collection of Do's and Don'ts. What is lawful for one may be
unlawful for another. What may be permissible at one time, or in one place, may
not be so at another time, and in another place. Desire for fruit is the only
universal prohibition. Desirelessness is obligatory.
23. The Gita has sung the praises of knowledge, but it is beyond the mere
intellect; it is essentially addressed to the heart and capable of being understood
by the heart. Therefore the Gita is not for those who have no faith. The author
makes Krishna say: Do not entrust this treasure to him who is without sacrifice,
without devotion, without the desire for this teaching and who denies Me. On the
other hand those who will give this precious treasure to My devotees will by the
fact of this service assuredly reach Me. And those who, being free from malice,
will with faith absorb this teaching, shall, having attained freedom, live where
people of true merit go after death.
Young India, 6-8-1931
Chapter 2
Gita and Nonviolence
My first acquaintance with the Gita was in 1889, when I was almost twenty. I had
not then much of an inkling of the principle of ahimsa. One of the lines of the
Gujarati poet, Shamal Bhatta, has taught me the principle of winning even the
enemy with love, and that teaching had gone deep into me. But I had not deduced
the eternal principle of nonviolence from it. It did not, for instance, cover all
animal life. I had, before this, tasted meat whilst in India. I thought it a duty to
kill venomous reptiles like the snake. It is my conviction today that even
venomous creatures may not be killed by a believer in ahimsa. I believed in those
days in preparing ourselves for a fight with the-English. I often repeated a
Gujarati poets famous doggerel: 'What wonder if Britain rules!' etc. My meat-
eating was as a first step to qualify myself for the fight with the English. Such
was my position before I proceeded to England, and there I escaped meat-eating
etc. because of my determination to follow unto death the promises I had given
to my mother. My love for truth has saved me from many a pitfall.
Now whilst in England my contact with two English friends made me read the
Gita. I say made me read', because it was not of my own desire that I read it.
But when these two friends asked me to read the Gita with them, I was ashamed
of my ignorance. The knowledge of my total ignorance of my scriptures pained
me. Pride, I think, was at the bottom of this feeling. My knowledge of Sanskrit
was not enough to enable me to understand all the verses of the Gita unaided.
The friends, of course, were quite innocent of Sanskrit. They placed before me
Sir Edwin Arnold s magnificent rendering of the Gita. I devoured the contents
from cover to cover and was entranced by it. The last nineteen verses of the
second chapter have since been inscribed on the tablet of my heart. They contain
for me all knowledge. The truths they teach are the 'eternal verities'. There is
reasoning in them but they represent realized knowledge.
I have since read many translations and many commentaries, have argued and
reasoned to my heart’s content but the impression that the first reading gave me
has never been effaced. Those verses are the key to the interpretation of the
Gita. I would even advise rejection of the verses that may seem to be in conflict
with them. But a humble student need reject nothing. He will simply say: "It is
the limitation of my own intellect that I cannot resolve this inconsistency. I might
be able to do so in the time to come." That is how he will plead with himself and
with others.
A prayerful study and experience are essential for a correct interpretation of the
scriptures. The injunction that a shudra may not study the scriptures is not en-
tirely without meaning. A shudra means a spiritually uncultured, ignorant man.
He is more likely than not to misinterpret the Vedas and other scriptures. Every
one cannot solve an algebraic equation. Some preliminary study is a sine quo
non. How ill would the grand truth 'I am brahman lie in the mouth of a man
steeped in sin! To what ignoble purposes would he turn it! What a distortion it
would suffer at his hands!
A man therefore who would interpret the scriptures must have the spiritual
discipline. He must practise the yamas and niyamas—the eternal guides of
conduct. A superficial practice thereof is useless. The shastras have enjoined the
necessity of a guru. But a guru being rare in these days, a study of modern books
inculcating bhakti, has, I been suggested by the sages. Those who are lacking in
bhakti, lacking in faith, are ill-equipped to interpret the scriptures. The learned
may draw an elaborately learned interpretation out of them, but that will not be
the true interpretation. Only the experienced will arrive at the true
interpretation of the scriptures.
But even for the inexperienced there are certain canons. That interpretation is
not true which conflicts with Truth. To one who doubts even Truth, the scriptures
have no meaning. No one can contend with him. There is danger for the man who
has failed to find ahimsa in the scriptures, but he is not doomed. Truth—sat—is
positive; nonviolence is negative. Truth stands for the fact, nonviolence
negatives the fact. And yet nonviolence is the highest religion. Truth is self-
evident; nonviolence is its maturest fruit. It is contained in Truth, but as it is not
self-evident a man may seek to interpret the shastras without accepting it. But
his acceptance of Truth is sure to lead him to the acceptance of nonviolence.
Renunciation of the flesh is essential for realizing Truth. The sage who realized
Truth found nonviolence out of the violence raging all about him and said:
'Violence is unreal, nonviolence is real.' Realization of Truth is impossible without
nonviolence. Brahmacharya (celibacy), asteya (non-stealing), aprigraha (non-
possession) are means to achieve ahimsa. Ahimsa is the soul of Truth. Man is
mere animal without it. A seeker after Truth will realize all this in his search for
Truth and he will then have no difficulty in the interpretation of the shastras.
Another canon of interpretation is to scan not the letter but to examine the
spirit. Tulsidas's Ramayana is a Rotable book because it is informed with the spirit
of purity, pity and piety. There is a verse in it which brackets drums, shudras,
fools and women together as fit to be beaten. A man who cites that verse to beat
his wife is doomed to perdition. Rama did not only not beat his wife, but never
even sought to displease her. Tulsidas simply inserted in his poem a proverb
current in his days, little dreaming that there would be brutes justifying beating
of their wives on the authority of the verse. But assuming that Tulsidas himself
followed custom which was prevalent in his days and beat his wife, what then?
The beating was still wrong. But the Ramayana was not written to justify beating
of wives by their husbands. It was written to depict Rama, the perfect man, and
Sita the ideal wife, and Bharat the ideal of a devoted brother. And justification
incidentally met with therein of vicious customs should therefore be rejected.
Tulsidas did not write his priceless epic to teach geography, and any wrong
geography that we happen to come across in Ramayana should be summarily
rejected.
Let us examine the Gita in the light of these observations. Self-realization and
its means is the theme of the Gita, the fight between two armies being but the
occasion to expound the theme. You might, if you like, say that the poet himself
was not against war or violence and hence he did not hesitate to press the
occasion of a war into service. But a reading of the Mahabharata has given me
an altogether different impression. The poet Vyasa has demonstrated the futility
of way by means of that epic of wonderful beauty. What, he asks, if the Kauravas
were vanquished? And what if the Pandavas won? How many were left of the
victors and what was their lot? What an end Mother Kunti came to? And where
are the Yadavas today?
Where the description of the fight and justification of violence are not the
subject-matter of the epic, it is quite wrong to emphasize those aspects. And if
it is difficult to reconcile certain verses with the teaching of nonviolence, it is
far more difficult to set the whole of the Gita in the framework of violence.
The poet when he writes is not conscious of all the interpretations his
composition is capable of. The beauty of poetry is that the creation transcends
the poet. The Truth that he reaches in the highest flights of his fancy is often not
to be met with in his life. The life story of many a poet thus belies his poetry.
That the central teaching of the Gita is not himsa but ahimsa is amply
demonstrated in the second chapter and summarized in the concluding 18th
chapter. The treatment in the other chapters also supports the position. Himsa
is impossible without anger, without attachment, without hatred, and the Gita
strives to carry us to the state beyond sattwa, rajas and tamas, a state that
excludes anger, hatred, etc. But I can even now picture to my mind Arjunas eyes
red with anger every time he drew the bow to the end of his ear.
It was not in a spirit of ahimsa that Arjuna refused to go to battle. He had fought
many a battle before. Only this time he was overcome with false pity. He fought
shy of killing his own kith and kin.
Arjuna never discussed the problem of killing as such. He did not say he would
kill no one, even if he regarded him as wicked. Shri Krishna knows every ones
innermost thoughts and he saw through the temporary infatuation of Arjuna. He,
therefore, told him: "Thou hast already done the killing. Thou canst not all at
once argue thyself into nonviolence. Finish what thou hast already begun." If a
passenger going in a Scotch Express gets suddenly sick of travelling and jumps
out of it, he is guilty of suicide. He has not learnt the futility of travelling or
travelling by a railway train. Similar was the case with Arjuna. Nonviolent Krishna
could give Arjuna no other advice. But to say that the Gita teaches violence or
justifies war, because advice to kill was given on a particular occasion, is as

wrong as to say that himsa is the law of life, because a certain amount of u is
inevitable in daily life. To one who reads the spirit of the Gita, it teaches the
secret of nonviolence, the secret of realizing the self through the physical body.
And who are Dhritarashtra and Yudhishthira and Arjuna? Who is Krishna? Were
they all historical characters? And does the Gita describe them as such? Is it true
that Arjuna suddenly stops in the midst of the fight and puts the question to
Krishna, and Krishna repeats the whole of the Gita before him? And which is that
Gita—the Gita that Arjuna forgot after having exclaimed that his infatuation was
gone and which he requested Krishna to sing again, but which he could not, and
which therefore he gave in the form of Anugita?
I regard Duryodhana and his party as the baser impulses in man, and Arjuna and
his party as the higher impulses. The field of battle is our own body. An eternal
battle is going on between the two camps and the poet seer has vividly described
it. Krishna is the Dweller within, ever whispering in a pure heart. Like the watch
the heart needs the winding of purity, or the Dweller ceases to speak.
Not that actual physical battle is out of the question. To those who are innocent
of nonviolence, the Gita does not teach a lesson of despair. He who fears, who
saves his skin, who yields to his passions, must fight the physical battle whether
he will or no; but that is not his dharma. Dharma is one and one only. Ahimsa
means moksha, and moksha is the realization of Truth. There is no room here for
cowardice. Himsa will go on eternally in this strange world. The Gita shows the
way out of it. But it also shows that escape out of cowardice and despair is not
the way. Better far than cowardice is killing and being killed in battle.
If the meaning of the verses quoted by the correspondent is not still clear, I must
confess my inability to make it so. Is it agreed that the Almighty God is the
Creator, Protector and Destroyer and ought to be such? And if He creates, He has
undoubtedly the right to destroy. And yet He does not destroy because He does
not create. His law is that whatever is born must die, and in that lies His mercy.
His laws are immutable. Where should we all be if He changed them capriciously?
Chapter 3
Yajna or the Science of Sacrifice
Yajna means an act directed to the welfare of others, done without desiring any
return for it, whether of a temporal or spiritual nature. 'Act' here must be taken
in its widest sense, and includes thought and word, as well as deed. 'Others'
embraces not only humanity, but all life. Therefore, and, also from the
standpoint of ahimsa, it is not a yajna to sacrifice lower animals even with a view
to the service of humanity. It does not matter that animal sacrifice is alleged to
find a place in the Vedas. It is enough for us that such sacrifice cannot stand the
fundamental tests of Truth and Nonviolence. I readily admit my incompetence in
Vedic scholarship. But the incompetence, so far as this subject is concerned,
does not worry me, because even if the practice of animal sacrifice be proved to
have been a feature of Vedic society, it can form no precedent for a votary of
ahimsa.
Again a primary sacrifice must be an act, which conduces the most to the welfare
of the greatest number in the widest area, and which can be performed by the
largest number of men and women with the least trouble. It will not, therefore,
be a yajna, much less a mahayajna, to wish or do ill to anyone else, even in order
to serve a so-called higher interest. And the Gita teaches, and experience
testifies, that all action that cannot come under the category of yajna promotes
bondage.
The world cannot subsist for a single moment without yajna in this sense, and
therefore the Gita, after having dealt with true wisdom in the second chapter,
takes up in the third the means of attaining it, and declares in so many words,
that yajna came with the creation itself. This body, therefore, has been given
us, only in order that we may serve all creation with it. And, therefore, says the
Gita, he who eats without offering yajna eats stolen food. Every single act of one
who would lead a life of purity should be in the nature of yajna. Yajna having
come to us with our birth, we are debtors all our lives, and thus ever bound to
serve the universe. And even as a bondslave receives food, clothing and so on
from the master whom he serves, so should we gratefully accept such gifts as
may be assigned to us by the Lord of the universe. What we receive must be
called a gift; for as debtors we are entitled to no consideration for the discharge
of our obligations. Therefore we may not blame the Master, if we fail to get it.
Our body is His to be cherished or cast away according to His will. This is not a
matter for complaint or even pity; on the contrary, it is natural and even a
pleasant and desirable state, if only we realize our proper place in God's scheme.
We do indeed need strong faith, if we would experience this supreme bliss. "Do
not worry in the least about yourself, leave all worry to God,"—this appears to
be the commandment in all religions.
This need not frighten any one. He who devotes himself to service with a clear
conscience will day by day grasp the necessity for it in greater measure, and will
continually grow richer in faith. The path of service can hardly be trodden by
one, who is not prepared to renounce self-interest, and to recognize the
conditions of his birth. Consciously or unconsciously every one of us does render
some service or other. If we cultivate the habit of doing this service deliberately,
our desire for service will steadily grow stronger, and will make not only for our
own happiness, but that of the world at large.
Again, not only the good, but all of us are bound to place our resources at the
disposal of humanity. And if such is the law, as evidently it is, indulgence ceases
to hold a place in life and gives way to renunciation. The duty of renunciation
differentiates mankind from the beast.
Some object, that life thus understood becomes dull and devoid of art, and leaves
no room for the householder. But renunciation here does not mean abandoning
the world and retiring into the forest. The spirit of renunciation should rule all
the activities of life. A householder does not cease to be one if he regards life as
a duty rather than as an indulgence. A merchant, who operates in the sacrificial
spirit, will have crores passing through his hands, but he will, if he follows the
law, use his abilities for service. He will therefore not cheat or speculate, will
lead a simple life, will not injure a living soul and will lose millions rather than
harm anybody. Let no one run away with the idea that this type of merchant
exists only in my imagination. Fortunately for the world, it does exist in the West
as well as in the East. It is true, such merchants may be counted on one's fingers'
ends, but the type ceases to be imaginary, as soon as even one living specimen
can be found to answer to it. No doubt such sacrificers obtain their livelihood by
their work. But livelihood is not their objective, but only a by-product of their
vocation. A life of sacrifice is the pinnacle of art, and is full of true joy. Yajna is
max. yajna if one feels it to be burdensome or annoying. Self-indulgence leads
to destruction, and renunciation to immortality. Joy has no independent
existence. It depends upon our attitude to life. One man will enjoy theatrical
scenery, another the ever new scenes which unfold themselves in the sky. Joy,
therefore, is a matter of individual and national education. We shall relish things
which we have been taught to relish as children. And illustrations can be easily
cited of different national tastes.
Again, many sacrificers imagine that they are free to receive from the people
everything they need, and many things they do not need, because they are
rendering disinterested service. Directly this idea sways a man, he ceases to be
a servant, and becomes a tyrant over the people.
One who would serve will not waste a thought upon his own comforts, which he
leaves to be attended to or neglected by his Master on high. He will not,
therefore, encumber himself with everything that comes his way; he will take
only what he strictly needs and leave the rest. He will be calm, free from anger
and unruffled in mind even if he finds himself inconvenienced. His service, like
virtue, is its own reward, and he will rest content with it.
Again, one dare not be negligent in service, or be behindhand with it. He, who
thinks that one must be diligent only in ones personal business, and unpaid public
business may be done in any way and at any time one chooses, has still to learn
the very rudiments of the science of sacrifice. Voluntary service of other
demands the best of which one is capable, and must take precedence over
service of self. In fact, the pure devotee consecrates himself to the service of
humanity without any reservation whatever.
From Yeravda Mandir, Ch. XIV-XV
Chapter 4
Central Teaching of the Gita
"Is the central teaching of the Gita selfless action or nonviolence?"
"I have no doubt that it is anasakti—selfless action. Indeed, I have called my little
translation of the Gita Anasaktiyoga. And anasakti transcends ahimsa. He who
would be anasakta (selfless) has necessarily to practise nonviolence in order to
attain the state of selflessness. Ahimsa is, therefore, a necessary preliminary, it
is included in anasakti, it does not go beyond it." "Then does the Gita teach himsa
and ahimsa both?" "I do not read that meaning in the Gita. It is quite likely that
the author did not write it to inculcate ahimsa, but as a commentator draws
innumerable interpretations from a poetic text, even so I interpret the Gita to
mean that if its central theme is anasakti, it also teaches ahimsa. Whilst we are
in the flesh and tread the solid earth, we have to practise ahimsa. In the life
beyond there is no himsa or ahimsa"
But Lord Krishna actually counters the doctrine of ahimsa. For Arjuna utters this
pacifist resolve: "Better I deem it, if my kinsmen strike, To face them
weaponless, and bare my breast To shaft and spear, than answer blow with blow.'
And Lord Krishna teaches him to answer 'blow with blow'."
"There I join issue with you," said Gandhiji. "Those words of Arjuna were words
of pretentious wisdom. 'Until yesterday, says Krishna to him, 'you fought your
kinsmen with deadly weapons without the slightest compunction. Even today you
would strike if the enemy was a stranger and not your own kith and kin!' The
question before him was not of nonviolence, but whether he should slay his
nearest and dearest."
Harijan, 1-9-1940
FEARLESSNESS
Every reader of the Gita is aware that fearlessness heads the list of the Divine
Attributes enumerated in the 16th chapter. Whether this is merely due to the
exigencies of metre, or whether the pride of place has been deliberately yielded
to fearlessness is more than I can say. In my opinion, however, fearlessness fully
deserves the first rank assigned to it there, perhaps, by accident. Fearlessness is
a sine qua non for the growth of the other noble qualities. How can one seek
Truth or cherish Love without fearlessness? As Pritam has it, "The path of Hari
(the Lord) is the path of the brave, not of cowards." Hari here means Truth, and
the brave are those armed with fearlessness, not with the sword, the rifle or
other carnal weapons which are affected only by cowards.
THE GOSPEL OF WORK
A visitor asked Gandhiji if he was not putting too much emphasis on the gospel
of work, if not making a kind of fetish of work. Gandhiji replied: "Not at all. I
have always meant what I said. There can never be too much emphasis placed
on work. I am simply repeating the gospel taught by the Gita, where the Lord
says, if I did not remain ever at work sleeplessly, I should set a wrong example
to mankind.' Did I not appeal to the professional men to turn the wheel to set an
example to the rest of our countrymen?"
"Would you do the same thing with say one like Lord Buddha?"
"Yes; without the slightest hesitation."
"Then what would you say about great saints like Tukaram and Dnyanadev?"
"Who am I to judge them?"
"But you would judge Buddha?"
"I never said so. I simply said, if I had the good fortune to be face to face with
one like him, I should not hesitate to ask him why he did not teach the gospel of
work, in preference to one of contemplation. I should do the same thing if I were
to meet these saints."
Harijan, 2-11-1935
Chapter 5
The Place of the Gita in Hinduism
I have admitted in my introduction to the Gita known as Anasakti Yoga that it is

not a treatise on nonviolence nor was it written to condemn war. Hinduism, as it
is practised today or has even been known to have ever been practised, has
certainly not condemned war as I do. What, however, I have done is to put a new
but natural and logical interpretation upon the whole teaching of the Gita and
the spirit of Hinduism. Hinduism, not to speak of other religions, is ever evolving.
It has no one scripture like the Koran or the Bible. Its scriptures are also evolving
and suffering addition. The Gita itself is an instance in point. It has given a new
meaning to karma, sannyasa, yajna, etc. It has breathed new life into Hinduism.
It has given an original rule of conduct. Not that what the Gita has given was not
implied in the previous writings, but the Gita put these implications in a concrete
shape. I have endeavoured, in the light of a prayerful study of the other faiths of
the world and, what is more, in the light of my own experience in trying to live
the teaching of Hinduism as interpreted in the Gita, to give an extended but in
no way strained meaning to Hinduism, not as buried in its ample scriptures, but
as a living faith speaking like a mother to her aching child. What I have done is
perfectly historical. I have followed in the footsteps of our forefathers. At one
time they sacrificed animals to propitiate angry Gods. Their descendants, but our
less remote ancestors, read a different meaning into the word 'sacrifice', and
they taught that sacrifice was meant to be of our baser self, to please not angry
Gods 'but the one living God within. I hold that the logical outcome of the
teaching of the Gita is decidedly for peace at the price of life itself. It is the
highest aspiration of the human species.
The Mahabharata and Ramayana, the two books that millions of Hindus know and
regard as their guides, are undoubtedly allegories as the internal evidence shows.
That they most probably deal with historical figures does not affect my
proposition. Each epic describes the eternal duel that goes on between the forces
of darkness and of light. Anyway I must disclaim any intention of straining the
meaning of Hinduism or the Gita to suit any preconceived notions of mine. My

notions were the outcome of a study of the Gita, Ramayana, Muhabharata,
Upanishads, etc.
Harijan, 3-10-1936
Chapter 6
Two Discourses on the Gita
[The following two discourses were sent by Gandhiji to members of his Ashram
at Sabarmati, from Yeravda Jail.]
I. Bhakti Yoga
I run to my Mother Gita whenever I find myself in difficulties, and up to now she
has never failed to comfort me. It is possible that those who are getting comfort
from the Gita may get greater help, and see something altogether new, if they
come to know the way in which I understand it from day to day.
This day I feel like giving a summary of the twelfth chapter. It is Bhakti Yoga—
realization of God through devotion. At the time of marriage we ask the bridal
couple to learn this chapter by heart and meditate upon it, as one of the five
sacrifices to be performed. Without devotion, action and knowledge are cold and
dry, and may even become shackles. So, with the heart full of love, let us
approach this meditation on the Gita.
Arjuna asks of the Lord: "Which is the better of the two, the devotee who
worships the Manifest or the one who worships the Unmanifest?" The Lord says in
reply: "Those who meditate on the Manifest in full faith, and loose themselves in
Me, those faithful ones are My devotees. But those who worship the Unmanifest,
and who, in order to do so, restrain all their senses, look upon and serve all alike,
regarding none as high or low, those also realize Me."
So it cannot be affirmed that one is superior to the other. But it may be counted
as impossible for an embodied being fully to comprehend and adore the
Unmanifest. The Unmanifest is attributeless, and is beyond the reach of human
vision. Therefore all embodied beings, consciously or unconsciously, are devotees
of the Manifest.
"So", saith the Lord, "let thy mind be merged in My Universal Body, which has
form. Offer thy all at His feet. But if thou canst not do this, practise the restraint
of the passions of thy mind. By observing yama and niyama with the help of
pranayama, asana and other practices, bring the mind under control. If thou
canst not do thus, then perform all thy works with this in mind: that whatever
work thou undertakest, that thou dost for my sake. Thus thy worldly infatuations
and attachments will fade away, and gradually thou wilt become stainless and
pure. The fountain of love will rise in thee. But if thou canst not do even this,
then renounce the fruit of all thy actions; yearn no more after the fruits of thy
work. Ever do that work which falls to thy lot. Man cannot be master over the
fruits of his work. The fruit of work appears only after causes have combined to
form it. Therefore be thou only the instrument. Do not regard as superior or
inferior any of these four methods which I have shown unto thee. Whatever, in
them, is suitable for thee, that make thou use of in thy practice of devotion.
"It seems that the path of hearing, meditating and comprehending, may be easier
than the path of yama, niyama, pranayama and asana, to which I have referred;
easier than that may be concentration and worship; and again easier than
concentration may be renunciation of the fruits of works. The same method
cannot be equally easy for everyone; some may have to turn for help to all these
methods. They are certainly intermixed. In any case thou wishest to be a
devotee. Achieve that goal by whatever method thou canst. My part is simply to
tell thee whom to count a true devotee. A devotee hates no one; bears no grudge
against any one; befriends all creatures; is merciful to all. To accomplish this he
eliminates all attachments; his ego is dissolved and he becomes as nothing; for
him grief and happiness are one; he forgives those who trespass against himself,
as he hungers for forgiveness from the world for his own faults; he dwells in
contentment; he is firm in his good resolves; he surrenders to Me his mind, his
intellect, his all. He never causes in other beings trouble or fear, himself knowing
no trouble or fear from others. My devotee is free from joy and sorrow, pleasure
and pain. He has no desires, he is pure, skilful and wise. He has renounced all
ambitious Gita means the teachings of Shri Krishna to Arjuna. We should read the
Gita with the realization that the Inward Seer, Lord Krishna is ever present in
our breasts, and that, whenever we, becoming as Arjuna in his desire for
knowledge, turn to Him, He is ever ready to shelter us. We are asleep, the Inward
Seer is always awake. He is awaiting the wakening of desire for knowledge in us.
We do not know how to ask. We are not even inclined to ask. Therefore we daily
contemplate a book like the Gita. We wish to create in ourselves a desire for
religious knowledge—a desire to learn spiritual enquiry, while meditating on it.
Whenever under stress we hasten to the Gita for relief and obtain consolation,
it is at once for us a Teacher—a Mother. And we must have faith that with our
head in her lap we shall always remain safe. The Gita shall unravel all our
spiritual tangles. Those who will meditate on the Gita in this way will derive
fresh joy and-new meanings from it every day. There is not a single spiritual
tangle which the Gita cannot unravel. It is a different thing, if on account of our
insufficient faith, we do not know how to read and understand it. We daily recite
the Gita in order that our faith may continually increase and that we may be ever
wakeful. I am giving here the substance of what meanings I have obtained, and
am still obtaining, from such meditations of the Gita, for the help of the inmates
of the Ashram.
When the Pandavas and the Kauravas, with their armies, stand on the battlefield
of Kurukshetra, then Duryodhana, the leader of the Kauravas, describes to the
teacher Drona the principal warriors of both sides. As both the armies prepare
for the battle, their conches are blown, and Lord Shri Krishna, who is Arjuna s
charioteer, drives up their chariot between the two armies. On seeing this Arjuna
becomes agitated, and says to Shri Krishna: "How can I fight these men? Had they
been other persons I would have fought with them forthwith. But these are my
people, mine own! Where is the difference between the Kauravas and the
Pandavas? They are first cousins. We were brought up together. Drona can hardly
be called the teacher of the Kauravas alone. It was he who taught us all the
sciences. Bhishma is the head of our whole family. How can there be a fight with
him? True the Kauravas are murderous; they have done many evil deeds, many
iniquities; they have deprived the Pandavas of their land; they have insulted a
(great and faithful woman like Draupadi. AIL this is their fault indeed, but what
good can come of killing them? They are without understanding. Why should I
behave like them? I at least have some knowledge. I can discriminate between
good and evil; so I must know that to fight ones relatives is sinful. What does it
matter that they have swallowed up the family share of the Pandavas? Let them
kill us. How can we raise our hands against them? Oh Krishna! I will not fight
these relatives of mine." So saying Arjuna collapses in his chariot.
In this way the first chapter closes. It is called 'Arjuna-vishad-yoga'. Vtshada

means distress. We have to experience such distress as Arjuna experienced.
Knowledge cannot be obtained without spiritual anguish and thirst for
knowledge. What good can religious discourses be to a man who does not feel in
his mind even so much as a desire to know what is good and what is bad. The
battlefield of Kurukshetra is only by the way; the true Kurukshetra is our body.
It is at once the Kurukshetra and Dharmakshetra. If we regard it as and make it,
the abode of God, it is the Dharmakshetra. In this battlefield lies one battle or
another always before us, and most of such battles arise out of the ideas, "this is
mine, this is thine." Such battles arise out of the difference between "my people
and thy people''. Hence the Lord will later on tell Arjuna that the root of all
irreligion is attachment and aversion. Believe a thing to be 'mine', and
attachment is created for it. Believe a thing to be 'not mine', and aversion is
'treated—enmity is created. The Gita and all the othei* religious books of the
world proclaim to us that the1 difference between mine and thine should be
forgotten, that is to say attachment and aversion should be relinquished. It is
one thing to say this, and it is another thing to act according to it. The Gita
teaches us to act according to it also.
Chapter 7
Gita Jayanti
I do not know that these jayantis serve the purpose for which they are intended.
Spiritual matters do not admit of the ordinary method of advertisement. The best
advertisement of things spiritual is corresponding action. I believe that all
spiritual compositions owe their effect, first to their being a faithful record of
the experiences of their authors, and secondly, because of the life lived by the
devotees., as far as possible, in accordance which their teachings. Thus the
composers breathe life into their compositions, and the votaries nurse them into
robustness by living them, that, to my mind, is the secret of the hold of the Gita,
Tulsidas’s Ramayana and such other works on the millions. In yielding to Shri
Ketkar’s pressure, therefore, I entertain the hope that those who take part in
the forthcoming celebration will approach it in the proper spirit and with a fixed
intention to live up to the message of the noble song. I have endeavoured to
show that its message consists in the performance of one’s duty with
detachment. The theme of the Gita is contained in the second chapter and the
way to carry out the message is to be found in the third chapter. This is not to
say that the other chapters have less merit. Indeed, every one or them has a
merit of its own. The Gita has been called गीताई (Gitai) by Vinoba who has
translated it verse for verse in very simple yet stately Marathi. The metre
corresponds with that of the original. To thousands it is the real mother, for it
yields the rich milk of consolation in difficulties. I have called it my spiritual
dictionary, for it has never failed me in distress. It is, moreover, a book which is
free from sectarianism and dogma. Its appeal is universal. I do not regard the
Gita as an abstruse book. No doubt learned men can see abstruseness in
everything they come across. But in my opinion, a man with ordinary intelligence
should find no difficulty in gathering the simple message of the Gita. Its Sanskrit
is incredibly simple. I have read many English translations, but there is nothing
to equal Edwin Arnold s metrical translation which he has beautifully and aptly
called The Song Celestial.
Harijan, 16-12-1939
Chapter 8
Krishna of the Gita
Everything related of every hero in Ramayana or Mahabharata I do not take
literally, nor do I take these books as historical records. They give us essential
truths in a variety of ways. Nor do I regard Rama and Krishna as portrayed in the
two poems as infallible beings. They reflect the thoughts and aspirations of their
ages. Only an infallible person can do justice to the lives of infallible beings. One
can, therefore, only take the spirit of these works for only guidance, the letter
will smother one and stop all growth. So far as the Gita is concerned, I do not
regard it as a historical discourse. It takes a physical illustration to drive home a
spiritual truth. It is the description not of a war between cousins but between
the two natures in us—the good and the evil.

***
I have no knowledge that the Krishna of Mahabharata ever lived. My Krishna has
nothing to do with any historical person. I would refuse to bow my head to the
Krishna who would kill because his pride is hurt, or the Krishna whom the non-
Hindus portray as a dissolute youth. I believe in Krishna of my imagination as a
perfect incarnation, spotless in every sense of the word, the inspirer of the Gita
and the inspirer of the lives of millions of human beings. But if it was proved to
me that the Mahabharata is history in the sense that modern historical books are,
that every word of the Mahabharata is authentic and Krishna of the Mahabharata
actually did some of the acts attributed to him, even at the risk of being banished
from the Hindu fold I should not hesitate to reject that Krishna as God incarnate.
But to me the Mahabharata is a profoundly religious book, largely allegorical, in
no way meant to be a historical record. It is the description of the eternal duel
going on within ourselves, given so vividly as to make us think for the time being
that the deeds described therein were actually done by the human beings. Nor
do I regard the Mahabharata as we have it now as a faultless copy of the original.
On the contrary I consider that it has undergone many emendations.
Chapter 9
A Janmashtami Discourse
[The following is a summary of a speech delivered by Gandhiji at Arsikere in

Mysore State.]
We do not know what Shri Krishna's life means for us, we do not read the Gita,
we make no attempt to teach it to our children. The Gita is such a transcendental
book that men of every creed, age and clime may read it with respect, and find
in it the principles of their respective religions. If we thought of Krishna on every
Janmashtami day and read the Gita and resolved to follow its teachings, we
should not be in our present sorry plight. Shri Krishna served the people all his
life, he was a real servant of the people. He could have led the hosts at
Kurukshetra, but he preferred to be Arjunas charioteer. His whole life was one
unbroken Gita of karma. He refused proud Duryodhanas sweets and preferred
humble Vidura's spinach. As a child he was a cowherd and we still know him by
the name of Gopala. But we, his worshippers, have neglected the cow today, the
Adi-Karnatakas slaughter cows and eat beef, and our infants and invalids have to
go without cows milk. Krishna knew no sleep or idleness. He kept sleepless vigil
of the world, we his posterity have become indolent and forgotten the use of our
hands. In the Bhagavadgita Lord Krishna has shown the path of bhakti—which
means the path of karma. Lokamanya Tilak has shown that whether we desire to
be bhaktas or jnanis, karma is the only way; but the karma should not be for self
but for others. Action for one's own self binds, action for the sake of others
delivers from bondage. What can be the altruistic action which can be universally
done, by Hindus, Musalmans, Christians, by men, women and children? I have
tried to demonstrate that spinning alone is that sacrificial act, for that alone can
make us do something in God s name, something for the poorest, something that
can infuse activity in their idle limbs. Lord Krishna has also taught that to be a
true bhakta we should make no difference between a brahmana and a scavenger.
If that is true there can be no place for untouchability in Hinduism. If you are
still hugging that superstition you can cleanse yourself by getting rid of it on this
sacred day of Krishna's birth. He who swears by the Gita may know no distinction
between Hindu and Musalman, for Lord Krishna has declared that he who adores
God in a true spirit by whatsoever name adores Him. The path of bhakti, karma,
love as expounded in the Gita, leaves no room for despising of man by man.
Chapter 10
Hindu Students and the Gita
The other day, in the course of a conversation, a missionary friend asked me, if
India was really a spiritually advanced country, why it was that he found only a
few students having any knowledge of their own religion, even of the
Bhagavadgita. In support of the statement, the friend who is himself an
educationist, told me, that he made it a point to ask the students he met whether
they had any knowledge of their religion or of the Bhagavadgita. A vast majority
of them were found to be innocent of any such knowledge.
I do not propose to take up at the present moment the inference that because
certain students had no knowledge of their own religion, India was not a
spiritually advanced country, beyond saying that the ignorance on the part of
students of religious b6oks did not necessarily mean absence of all religious life
or want of spirituality among the people to which the students belonged. But
there is no doubt that the vast majority of students who pass through the
Government educational institutions are devoid of any religious instruction. The
remark of the missionary had reference to the Mysore students and I was
somewhat pained to observe that even the students of Mysore had no religious
instruction in the State schools. I know that there is a school of thought which
believes in only, secular instruction being given in public schools. I know also
that in a country like India, where there are most religions of the world
represented and where there are so many denominations in the same religion,
there must be difficulty about making provision for religious instruction. But if
India is not to declare spiritual bankruptcy, religious instruction of its youth must
be held to be at least as necessary as secular instruction. It is true that knowledge
of religious books is no equivalent of that of religion. But if we cannot have
religion we must be satisfied with providing our boys and girls with what is next
best. And whether there is such instruction given in the schools or not, grown up
students must cultivate the art of self-help about matters religious as about
other. They may start their own class just as they have their debating and now
spinners' clubs.
Addressing the Collegiate High School students at Shimoga, I found upon enquiry
at the meeting that out of a hundred or more Hindu boys, there were hardly eight
who had read the Bhagavadgita. None raised his hand in answer to the question,
whether of the few who had read the Gita there was any who understood it. Out
of five or six Musalman boys all raised their hands as having read the Koran. But
only one could say that he knew its meaning. The Gita is, in my opinion, a very
easy book to understand. It does present some fundamental problems which are
no doubt difficult of solution-. But the general trend of the Gita is, in my opinion,
unmistakable. It is accepted by all Hindu sects as authoritative. It is free from
any form of dogma. In a short compass it gives a complete reasoned moral code.
It satisfies both the intellect and the heart. It is thus both philosophical and
devotional. Its appeal is universal. The language is incredibly simple. But I
nevertheless think that there should be an authoritative version in each
vernacular, and the translations should be so prepared as to avoid technicalities
and in a manner that would make the teaching of the Gita intelligible to the
average man. The suggestion is not intended in any way to supplement the
original. For I reiterate my opinion that every Hindu boy and girl should know
Sanskrit. But for a long time to come, there will be millions without any
knowledge of Sanskrit. It would be suicidal to keep them deprived of the
teachings of the Bhagavadgita because they do not know Sanskrit.
Chapter II
The Gita in Schools
A correspondent asks whether the Gita may be compulsorily taught in national

schools to all boys whether Hindus or non-Hindus. When I was travelling in Mysore
two years ago I had occasion to express my sorrow that the Hindu boys of a high
school did not know the Gita. I am thus partial to the teaching of the Gita not
only in national schools but in every educational institution. It should be
considered a shame for a Hindu boy or girl not to know the Gita. But my insistence
stops short at compulsion, especially so for national schools. Whilst it is true that
the Gita is a book of universal religion, it is a claim which cannot be forced upon
any on. A Christian or a Musalman or a Parsi may reject the claim or may advance
the same claim for the Bible, the Koran or the Avesta as the case may be. I fear
that the Gita teaching cannot be made compulsory even regarding all those who
may choose to be classed as Hindus. Many Sikhs and Jains regard themselves as
Hindus but may object to compulsory Gita teaching for their boys and girls. The
case will be different for sectional schools. I should hold it quite appropriate for
a Vaishnava school, for instance, to lay down the Gita as part of religious
instruction. Every private school has the right to prescribe its own course of
instruction. But a national school has to act within well-defined limits. There is
no compulsion where there is no interference with a right. No one can claim the
right to enter a private school, every member of a nation has the right
presumptively to enter a national school. Hence what would be regarded in the
one case as a condition of entrance would in the other be regarded as
compulsion. The Gita will never be universal by compulsion from without. It will
be so if its admirers will not seek to force it down the throats of others and if
they will illustrate its teachings in their own lives.
Chapter 12
Gita and the Sermon on the Mount
Though I admire much in Christianity, I am unable to identify myself with

orthodox Christianity- ... Hinduism as I know it entirely satisfies my soul, fills my
whole being, and I find a solace in the Bhagavadgita and Upanishads that I miss
even in the Sermon on the Mount. Not that I do not prize the ideal presented
therein, not that some of the precious teachings in the Sermon on the Mount
have not left a deep impress upon me, but I must confess to you that when doubts
haunt me, when disappointments stare me in the face, and when I see not one
ray of light on the horizon, I turn to the Bhagavadgita and find a verse to comfort
me; and I immediately begin to smile in the midst of overwhelming sorrow. My
life has been full of external tragedies and, if they have not left any visible effect
on me, I owe it to the teaching of the Bhagavadgita.
(From an address to Christian Missionaries, Young India, 6-8-1925)
***
The Gita has become for me the key to the scriptures of the world. It unravels
for me the deepest mysteries to be found in them. I regard them with the same
reverence that I pay to the Hindu scriptures. Hindus, Musalmans, Christians,
Parsis, Jews are convenient labels. But when I tear them down, I do not know
which is which. We are all children of the same God. "Verily verily I say unto you,
not every one that sayeth unto me Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven,
but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven shall enter the
Kingdom," was said, though in different words, by all the great teachers of the
world.
Harijan, 18-4-1936

Message of The Gita (Gandhi) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Message of The Gita (Gandhi) PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Message of The Gita (Gandhi) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Message of the Gita

First Edition: June 1959

Navajivan Publishing House

1. The Message of the Gita

The Message of the Gita

5. In Hinduism, incarnation is ascribed to one who has performed some

6. This belief in incarnation is a testimony of man’s lofty spiritual ambition. Man

7. That matchless remedy is renunciation of the fruits of action.

10. Thus the devotion required by the Gita is no soft-hearted effusiveness. It

11. We thus see, that to be a real devotee is to realize oneself. Self-realization

20. In assessing the implications of renunciation of fruit, we are not required to

Young India, 6-8-1931

Gita and Nonviolence

justifies war, because advice to kill was given on a particular occasion, is as

Young India, 12-11-1925

Yajna or the Science of Sacrifice

From Yeravda Mandir, Ch. XIV-XV

Central Teaching of the Gita

"Is the central teaching of the Gita selfless action or nonviolence?"

And Lord Krishna teaches him to answer 'blow with blow'."

Young India, 11-9-1930

THE GOSPEL OF WORK

"Yes; without the slightest hesitation."

"Who am I to judge them?"

"But you would judge Buddha?"

The Place of the Gita in Hinduism

I have admitted in my introduction to the Gita known as Anasakti Yoga that it is

meaning of Hinduism or the Gita to suit any preconceived notions of mine. My

Two Discourses on the Gita

In this way the first chapter closes. It is called 'Arjuna-vishad-yoga'. Vtshada

Young India, 20-11-1930

Young India, 19-3-1925

Young India, 1-10-1925

[The following is a summary of a speech delivered by Gandhiji at Arsikere in

Young India, 1-9-1927

Hindu Students and the Gita

Young India, 25-8-1927

The Gita in Schools

A correspondent asks whether the Gita may be compulsorily taught in national

Young India, 25-8-1927

Gita and the Sermon on the Mount

Though I admire much in Christianity, I am unable to identify myself with

(From an address to Christian Missionaries, Young India, 6-8-1925)

You might also like