对薄伽梵歌的思考
本译文由人工智能辅助工具生成，可能存在不准确之处。如需查阅权威文本，请参考英文原文。
AI-translated. May contain errors. For accurate text, refer to the original English.
中文
对《薄伽梵歌》的沉思
1897年辨喜驻留加尔各答期间，他大部分时间居住于罗摩克里希纳传教会总部所在的道场（Math），彼时总部设于阿拉姆巴扎。在此期间，数位早已着手准备的青年聚集在他身边，发愿受持梵行（Brahmacharya）与游方僧（Sannyasa）之誓，斯瓦米吉（Swamiji）开始为他们将来的工作作训练，讲授《薄伽梵歌》（Bhagavad Gita）和吠檀多（Vedanta）课程，并引导他们修习禅定（Dhyana）。在其中一次课程中，他以孟加拉语就《薄伽梵歌》作了一番雄辩的讲述。以下是该讲述摘要的译文，摘录自道场日记：
这部被称为《薄伽梵歌》的书，是摩诃婆罗多（Mahabharata）的一部分。要正确理解《薄伽梵歌》，有几件事是十分重要的。第一，它是否确实是摩诃婆罗多的一部分，即归属于毗耶婆（Veda-Vyasa）的著作权是否属实，还是仅仅是被插入这部伟大史诗中的；第二，克里希纳（Krishna）这一名字是否有真实的历史人物；第三，《薄伽梵歌》中提及的俱卢之野大战（Kurukshetra War）是否确实发生过；第四，阿周那（Arjuna）等人是否是真实的历史人物。
首先，让我们看看进行这些探究有什么依据。我们知道，使用"毗耶婆"这个名字的人有许多；其中，谁才是《薄伽梵歌》的真正作者——是巴达拉亚纳·毗耶婆（Badarayana Vyasa）还是德维帕亚纳·毗耶婆（Dvaipayana Vyasa）？"毗耶婆"只是一个称号。凡撰写了一部新往世书（Purana）的人，便以"毗耶婆"之名为世人所知，就像"超日王"（Vikramaditya）一词也是一个通称一样。另一点是，在商羯罗（Shankara）为《薄伽梵歌》撰写了伟大的注疏，使之著名之前，这部书在普通大众中并不广为人知。据许多人说，在此之前很久，菩提耶那（Bodhayana）对它的注疏便已流传。如果这一点能够得到证明，无疑将大大有助于确立《薄伽梵歌》的古老性及其毗耶婆著作权。然而，关于菩提耶那对《吠檀多经》（Vedanta Sutras）的注疏——罗摩奴阇（Ramanuja）以此编撰了他的《吉祥注》（Shri-Bhashya），商羯罗在他自己的注疏中提及并引用了其中的部分内容，达雅难陀斯瓦米（Swami Dayananda）也曾对之进行了广泛讨论——我在游历全印度时，连这部菩提耶那注疏的一个副本都找不到。据说，罗摩奴阇是从他偶然发现的一份被虫蛀的手稿中编撰了他的注疏。既然这部伟大的、菩提耶那对《吠檀多经》的注疏都笼罩在如此浓厚的不确定性之中，那么要证明菩提耶那对《薄伽梵歌》有注疏，简直毫无意义。有人推断，商羯罗才是《薄伽梵歌》的作者，是他将它插入了摩诃婆罗多的正文中。
关于第二个问题，克里希纳的身份也存在很多疑点。在《唱赞奥义书》（Chhandogya Upanishad）的某一处，我们发现提到了克里希纳，即德瓦吉之子（son of Devaki），他曾接受一位名叫"鬼罗"（Ghora）的瑜伽士（Yogi）的灵性教导。在摩诃婆罗多中，克里希纳是德瓦拉迦（Dwaraka）的国王；而在《毗湿奴往世书》（Vishnu Purana）中，我们发现了关于克里希纳与牧女（Gopis）嬉戏的描述。又在《薄伽梵往世书》（Bhagavata）中，关于他的拉莎舞（Rasalila）有详尽的叙述。在我国极古的时代，曾经流行一种名为"爱神庆典"（Madanotsava）的节日（对丘比特的庆祝）。这个节日后来被改造成了"秋千节"（Dola），并被加在克里希纳的名下。谁能如此大胆地断言，与他有关的拉莎舞及其他事物并非也是以同样方式附会于他的呢？在古代，我国很少有通过历史研究来探寻真相的倾向。因此，任何人都可以不加佐证地说出他认为最好的话。另外一点：在古代，人们几乎没有追名逐利的欲望。所以，常常发生这样的事：一个人撰写了一本书，却让它以其导师或其他某人的名义流传。在这种情况下，历史真相的探究者要找到真相，是极为冒险的。在古代，人们对地理毫无知识；想象力恣意驰骋。因此，我们遇到了诸如"甜海"、"乳海"、"酥油海"、"酸奶海"等脑中奇异的创造物！在往世书中，我们发现有人活了一万年，另一人活了十万年！但《吠陀》却说："शतायुर्वै पुरुषः"——"人活百年。"我们在这里该遵从谁呢？因此，要就克里希纳的问题得出正确的结论，几乎是不可能的。
以宏伟人物的真实性格为基础，在其周围堆砌各种想象出来的超人属性，这是人类的天性。关于克里希纳，同样的事情也一定发生过，但他极可能是一位国王。我说"极可能"，是因为在我国古代，主要是国王们最努力地宣扬梵的智慧（Brahma-Jnana）。这里还有另一点需要特别注意：无论《薄伽梵歌》的作者是谁，我们都发现其教义与整部摩诃婆罗多中的教义是一致的。由此我们可以安全地推断，在摩诃婆罗多所处的时代，有一位伟大的人物崛起，以这种新的形式向当时的社会宣扬梵的智慧。还有一个事实浮出水面：在古代，每当一个新的教派兴起，其中也会出现并使用一种新的经典。随着时间的流逝，有时教派和其经典都消亡了，或者教派不复存在但其经典留存了下来。同样，《薄伽梵歌》极可能是这样一个教派的经典，该教派将其崇高而高尚的理念体现在了这部神圣的书中。
关于第三点，即俱卢之野大战的问题，无法提出特别的证明。但毫无疑问，俱卢族（Kurus）和般遮罗族（Panchalas）之间确实发生过一场战争。另外一点：在庞大的军队列阵备战、只等最后信号的战场上，克里希纳和阿周那之间怎么可能进行如此大量的关于智慧（Jnana）、虔信（Bhakti）和瑜伽（Yoga）的讨论呢？难道战场的喧嚣与混乱中，有什么速记员在场，将克里希纳与阿周那之间的每一句话都记录下来了吗？据一些人说，这场俱卢之野大战只是一个寓言。综合其深层含义，它意指在人内心中善恶倾向之间不断进行的战争。这种解释或许也不无道理。
关于第四点，阿周那等人的历史真实性有充分的疑点，原因如下：《百段梵书》（Shatapatha Brahmana）是一部极为古老的书。其中某处提到了所有曾主持"马祠"（Ashvamedha Yajna）祭祀的人的名字；但在那些地方，不仅没有提到阿周那等人的名字，甚至连一点暗示都没有，尽管书中提到了贾纳美杰耶（Janamejaya）——他是帕里克希特（Parikshit）之子，而帕里克希特正是阿周那之孙。然而，在摩诃婆罗多及其他书籍中，却记载说坚战（Yudhishthira）、阿周那等人曾举行马祠祭祀。
这里有一件事应当特别记住：这些历史研究与我们真正的目标——获得引向法（Dharma）的知识——之间并没有关联。即使今天能够证明这一切的历史真实性完全是虚假的，对我们来说也毫无损失。那么你们可能会问，这么多历史研究有什么用呢？它有其用处，因为我们必须追求真理；我们不能让自己被无知所生的错误观念所束缚。在这个国家，人们对这类探究的重要性想得很少。许多教派认为，为了宣扬一件可能对许多人有益的好事，如果谎言有助于这种宣扬，说谎也无妨——换句话说，目的证明手段是正当的。因此，我们发现许多《怛特罗》（Tantras）以"大神（Mahadeva）对帕尔瓦提（Parvati）说"作为开头。但我们的职责应当是让自己信服于真理，只相信真理。迷信的力量，或者说不加探究地信仰古老传统的力量，是如此之大，以至于它把人捆绑得手脚不能动弹；甚至连耶稣基督、穆罕默德以及其他伟大人物，也相信了许多这样的迷信，并无法将其摆脱。你必须时刻将目光固定在真理上，彻底摒弃一切迷信。
现在，让我们看看《薄伽梵歌》中有什么内容。如果我们研究《奥义书》（Upanishads），我们会注意到，在迷失于许多无关紧要的主题迷宫之中，一个伟大真理的讨论会突然出现，就如同在广袤的荒野中，旅人猝然遇见一株精美绝伦的玫瑰，其叶、其刺、其根，交缠一处。与之相比，《薄伽梵歌》就像这些真理被美妙地汇集在一起，各归其位——犹如一串精美的花环，或是一束精选的鲜花。《奥义书》在许多地方详细论述了"信念"（Shraddha），但几乎不提虔信（Bhakti）。而《薄伽梵歌》则不同，虔信的主题不仅被一再提及，而且虔信的内在精神在其中已达到了顶峰。
现在让我们看看《薄伽梵歌》中讨论的一些主要观点。《薄伽梵歌》的独创性何在，使它有别于所有先前的经典？就在于此：尽管在它出现之前，瑜伽（Yoga）、智慧（Jnana）、虔信（Bhakti）等各有其坚定的拥护者，但他们彼此争论，各持自己所选之道为上；从未有人尝试在这些不同的道路之间寻求调和。《薄伽梵歌》的作者是第一个尝试加以调和的人。他从当时存在的所有教派所能提供的最精华之物中，将它们串联在《薄伽梵歌》中。但即使在克里希纳未能在这些争斗的教派之间展现完全调和（Samanvaya）的地方，十九世纪的罗摩克里希纳（Ramakrishna Paramahamsa）也圆满地实现了这一调和。
其次是"无求之业"（Nishkama Karma），即无欲、无执地工作。如今人们以各种方式理解这所意味着的内容。有人说，"无执"意味着变得漫无目的。如果那是它真正的含义，那么无情的禽兽和墙壁才是无求之业的最佳践行者。还有许多人援引惮迦（Janaka）的例子，希望自己同样被视为无求之业的大师！"惮迦"（字面意思为父亲）并非靠着生育孩子而获得那一殊荣；但这些人都想成为惮迦，其唯一的资格不过是做了一群孩子的父亲！不！真正的无求业行者（Nishkama Karmi），既不像禽兽，也不惰惫，也不冷酷。他不是惰性（Tamas）的，而是纯粹萨埵（Sattva）的。他的心中充满了爱与同情，可以用爱拥抱整个世界。世间芸芸众生，通常难以领会他那包容一切的爱与同情。
调和法（Dharma）的不同道路，以及无欲无执地工作——这是《薄伽梵歌》的两个特别之处。
现在让我们读一读第二章的部分内容。
सञ्जय उवाच॥
तं तथा कृपयाविष्टमश्रुपूर्णाकुलेक्षणम् ।
विषीदन्तमिदं वाक्यमुवाच मधुसूदनः ॥१॥
श्रीभगवानुवाच ॥
कुतस्त्वा कश्मलमिदं विषमे समुपस्थितम् ।
अनार्यजुष्टमस्वर्ग्यमकीर्तिकरमर्जुन ॥२॥
क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते ।
क्षुद्रं हृदयदौर्बल्यं त्यक्त्वोत्तिष्ठ परंतप ॥३॥
सञ्जय उवाच॥
तं तथा कृपयाविष्टमश्रुपूर्णाकुलेक्षणम् ।
विषीदन्तमिदं वाक्यमुवाच मधुसूदनः ॥१॥
श्रीभगवानुवाच ॥
कुतस्त्वा कश्मलमिदं विषमे समुपस्थितम् ।
अनार्यजुष्टमस्वर्ग्यमकीर्तिकरमर्जुन ॥२॥
क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते ।
क्षुद्रं हृदयदौर्बल्यं त्यक्त्वोत्तिष्ठ परंतप ॥३॥
"桑贾亚说：
对这个如此被怜悯所攫取、哀叹悲泣、双目充盈泪水的人，马杜苏达纳（Madhusudana）说出了这些话。
薄伽梵（Blessed Lord）说：
阿周那啊，在这危难之时，这般低落的情绪从何而来？这是非雅利安人（un-Aryan）的行为，是可耻的，违背了升天的正道。
帕里塔（Pritha）之子啊，不可沦于软弱！这不配于汝。抛弃这卑微的怯懦，奋起吧，仇敌之灼灼者！"
在以"तं तथा कृपयाविष्टं"开头的诗节中，何其诗意，何其优美地描绘出了阿周那真实的处境！然后，室利克里希纳（Shri Krishna）向阿周那说教；在"क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ"等文字中，他为什么要激励阿周那去战斗？因为阿周那不愿战斗，并非源于纯粹萨埵（Sattva Guna）特质的压倒性主导；带来这种不情愿的，全然是惰性（Tamas）。萨埵特质之人的本性是，无论处于繁荣还是逆境，他都同样安然平静。但阿周那心存恐惧，被怜悯所淹没。他本有战斗的本能和意愿，这一点由他来到战场这一简单事实所证明——他来到那里的目的除了战斗之外别无其他。在我们自己的生活中，也经常可以看到这样的事情。许多人以为自己本质上是萨埵特质的，但实际上不过是惰性（Tamasika）的。许多人过着不洁净的生活，却以为自己是帕拉玛汉萨（Paramahamsas）！为什么？因为《沙斯塔》（Shastras）说，帕拉玛汉萨的生活像惰惫者、疯人，或不洁净的幽灵。帕拉玛汉萨被比作孩子，但在这里应当理解，这种比较是单方面的。帕拉玛汉萨与孩子并非同一，也并无分别。他们只是看起来相似，好比两个极端的极点。一个人已达到超越智慧（Jnana）的境界，另一个人甚至对智慧尚无一点感知。最快速和最微弱的光振动，都超出了我们普通视觉的范围；但一个是极度的热，另一个可以说几乎没有任何热。萨埵（Sattva）与惰性（Tamas）的对立特质亦是如此。在某些方面，它们看起来确实相同，但两者之间相差不可以道里计。惰性（Tamoguna）非常喜欢披上萨埵特质的外衣。在阿周那这里，这位威武的勇士身上，它以悲悯（Daya，即怜悯）的伪装出现了。
为了消除笼罩阿周那的这一迷妄，薄伽梵说了什么？正如我常常宣扬的，你不应该称一个人为罪人而贬低他，而应当使他的注意力集中于他内在无所不能的力量，薄伽梵向阿周那说话的方式也正是如此。"नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते"——"这不配于汝！""你是不朽的真我（Atman），超越一切邪恶。你忘却了自己的真实本性，以为自己是罪人，是受肉身之苦与心灵悲哀折磨之人，你使自己变成了那样——这不配于汝！"——薄伽梵如此说道："क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ"——帕里塔之子啊，不可沦于软弱。世间既无罪，也无苦，既无病，也无忧；如果世间有任何可以被称为罪的东西，那就是"恐惧"；要知道，任何能激发你内在潜力的工作，都是善德（Punya）；而任何使你的身体和心智软弱的事，确实就是罪恶。抛弃这软弱，这怯懦吧！"क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ"——你是英雄，是勇士；这不配于汝。"
我的孩子们，如果你们能向世界宣扬这一信息——"क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते"——那么这一切疾病、悲苦、罪恶和忧愁，将在三天之内从大地的面上消失殆尽。所有这些软弱的观念将无处可寻。而今，恐惧的振动之流无处不在。逆转这一流向：引入相反的振动，看那神奇的转化吧！你是全能的——去吧，去到炮口前，不要畏惧。
不要憎恨最卑微的罪人，愚者；不要看他的外表。把你的目光转向内心，那里居住着至上真我（Paramatman）。向全世界大声宣告："你无罪，你无苦；你是全能力量的宝藏。觉醒吧，奋起吧，彰显内在的神性！"
如果有人读了这一个诗节——"क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते । क्षुद्रं हृदयदौर्बल्यं त्यक्त्वोत्तिष्ठ परंतप॥"——便可获得诵读整部《薄伽梵歌》的全部功德；因为在这一个诗节中，蕴含着《薄伽梵歌》的整个信息。
English
THOUGHTS ON THE GITA
During his sojourn in Calcutta in 1897, Swami Vivekananda used to stay for the most part at the Math, the headquarters of the Ramakrisnna Mission, located then at Alambazar. During this time several young men, who had been preparing themselves for some time previously, gathered round him and took the vows of Brahmacharya and Sannyâsa, and Swamiji began to train them for future work, by holding classes on the Gitâ and Vedanta, and initiating them into the practices of meditation. In one of these classes he talked eloquently in Bengali on the Gita. The following is the translation of the summary of the discourse as it was entered in the Math diary:
The book known as the Gita forms a part of the Mahâbhârata. To understand the Gita properly, several things are very important to know. First, whether it formed a part of the Mahabharata, i.e. whether the authorship attributed to Veda-Vyâsa was true, or if it was merely interpolated within the great epic; secondly, whether there was any historical personality of the name of Krishna; thirdly, whether the great war of Kurukshetra as mentioned in the Gita actually took place; and fourthly, whether Arjuna and others were real historical persons.
Now in the first place, let us see what grounds there are for such inquiry. We know that there were many who went by the name of Veda-Vyasa; and among them who was the real author of the Gita — the Bâdarâyana Vyasa or Dvaipâyana Vyasa? "Vyasa" was only a title. Anyone who composed a new Purâna was known by the name of Vyasa, like the word Vikramâditya, which was also a general name. Another point is, the book, Gita, had not been much known to the generality of people before Shankarâchârya made it famous by writing his great commentary on it. Long before that, there was current, according to many, the commentary on it by Bodhâyana. If this could be proved, it would go a long way, no doubt, to establish the antiquity of the Gita and the authorship of Vyasa. But the Bodhayana Bhâshya on the Vedânta Sutras — from which Râmânuja compiled his Shri-Bhâshya, which Shankaracharya mentions and even quotes in part here and there in his own commentary, and which was so greatly discussed by the Swami Dayânanda — not a copy even of that Bodhayana Bhashya could I find while travelling throughout India. It is said that even Ramanuja compiled his Bhashya from a worm-eaten manuscript which he happened to find. When even this great Bodhayana Bhashya on the Vedanta-Sutras is so much enshrouded in the darkness of uncertainty, it is simply useless to try to establish the existence of the Bodhayana Bhashya on the Gita. Some infer that Shankaracharya was the author of the Gita, and that it was he who foisted it into the body of the Mahabharata.
Then as to the second point in question, much doubt exists about the personality of Krishna. In one place in the Chhândogya Upanishad we find mention of Krishna, the son of Devaki, who received spiritual instructions from one Ghora, a Yogi. In the Mahabharata, Krishna is the king of Dwârakâ; and in the Vishnu Purâna we find a description of Krishna playing with the Gopis. Again, in the Bhâgavata, the account of his Râsalilâ is detailed at length. In very ancient times in our country there was in vogue an Utsava called Madanotsava (celebration in honour of Cupid). That very thing was transformed into Dola and thrust upon the shoulders of Krishna. Who can be so bold as to assert that the Rasalila and other things connected with him were not similarly fastened upon him? In ancient times there was very little tendency in our country to find out truths by historical research. So any one could say what he thought best without substantiating it with proper facts and evidence. Another thing: in those ancient times there was very little hankering after name and fame in men. So it often happened that one man composed a book and made it pass current in the name of his Guru or of someone else. In such cases it is very hazardous for the investigator of historical facts to get at the truth. In ancient times they had no knowledge whatever of geography; imagination ran riot. And so we meet with such fantastic creations of the brain as sweet-ocean, milk-ocean, clarified-butter-ocean, curd-ocean, etc! In the Puranas, we find one living ten thousand years, another a hundred thousand years! But the Vedas say, शतायुर्वै पुरुषः — "Man lives a hundred years." Whom shall we follow here? So, to reach a correct conclusion in the case of Krishna is well-nigh impossible.
It is human nature to build round the real character of a great man all sorts of imaginary superhuman attributes. As regards Krishna the same must have happened, but it seems quite probable that he was a king. Quite probable I say, because in ancient times in our country it was chiefly the kings who exerted themselves most in the preaching of Brahma-Jnâna. Another point to be especially noted here is that whoever might have been the author of the Gita, we find its teachings the same as those in the whole of the Mahabharata. From this we can safely infer that in the age of the Mahabharata some great man arose and preached the Brahma-Jnâna in this new garb to the then existing society. Another fact comes to the fore that in the olden days, as one sect after another arose, there also came into existence and use among them one new scripture or another. It happened, too, that in the lapse of time both the sect and its scripture died out, or the sect ceased to exist but its scripture remained. Similarly, it was quite probable that the Gita was the scripture of such a sect which had embodied its high and noble ideas in this sacred book.
Now to the third point, bearing on the subject of the Kurukshetra War, no special evidence in support of it can be adduced. But there is no doubt that there was a war fought between the Kurus and the Panchâlas. Another thing: how could there be so much discussion about Jnâna, Bhakti, and Yoga on the battle-field, where the huge army stood in battle array ready to fight, just waiting for the last signal? And was any shorthand writer present there to note down every word spoken between Krishna and Arjuna, in the din and turmoil of the battle-field? According to some, this Kurukshetra War is only an allegory. When we sum up its esoteric significance, it means the war which is constantly going on within man between the tendencies of good and evil. This meaning, too, may not be irrational.
About the fourth point, there is enough ground of doubt as regards the historicity of Arjuna and others, and it is this: Shatapatha Brâhmana is a very ancient book. In it are mentioned somewhere all the names of those who were the performers of the Ashvamedha Yajna: but in those places there is not only no mention, but no hint even of the names of Arjuna and others, though it speaks of Janamejaya, the son of Parikshit who was a grandson of Arjuna. Yet in the Mahabharata and other books it is stated that Yudhishthira, Arjuna, and others celebrated the Ashvamedha sacrifice.
One thing should be especially remembered here, that there is no connection between these historical researches and our real aim, which is the knowledge that leads to the acquirement of Dharma. Even if the historicity of the whole thing is proved to be absolutely false today, it will not in the least be any loss to us. Then what is the use of so much historical research, you may ask. It has its use, because we have to get at the truth; it will not do for us to remain bound by wrong ideas born of ignorance. In this country people think very little of the importance of such inquiries. Many of the sects believe that in order to preach a good thing which may be beneficial to many, there is no harm in telling an untruth, if that helps such preaching, or in other words, the end justifies the means. Hence we find many of our Tantras beginning with, "Mahâdeva said to Pârvati". But our duty should be to convince ourselves of the truth, to believe in truth only. Such is the power of superstition, or faith in old traditions without inquiry into its truth, that it keeps men bound hand and foot, so much so, that even Jesus the Christ, Mohammed, and other great men believed in many such superstitions and could not shake them off. You have to keep your eye always fixed on truth only and shun all superstitions completely.
Now it is for us to see what there is in the Gita. If we study the Upanishads we notice, in wandering through the mazes of many irrelevant subjects, the sudden introduction of the discussion of a great truth, just as in the midst of a huge wilderness a traveller unexpectedly comes across here and there an exquisitely beautiful rose, with its leaves, thorns, roots, all entangled. Compared with that, the Gita is like these truths beautifully arranged together in their proper places — like a fine garland or a bouquet of the choicest flowers. The Upanishads deal elaborately with Shraddhâ in many places, but hardly mention Bhakti. In the Gita, on the other hand, the subject of Bhakti is not only again and again dealt with, but in it, the innate spirit of Bhakti has attained its culmination.
Now let us see some of the main points discussed in the Gita. Wherein lies the originality of the Gita which distinguishes it from all preceding scriptures? It is this: Though before its advent, Yoga, Jnana, Bhakti, etc. had each its strong adherents, they all quarrelled among themselves, each claiming superiority for his own chosen path; no one ever tried to seek for reconciliation among these different paths. It was the author of the Gita who for the first time tried to harmonise these. He took the best from what all the sects then existing had to offer and threaded them in the Gita. But even where Krishna failed to show a complete reconciliation (Samanvaya) among these warring sects, it was fully accomplished by Ramakrishna Paramahamsa in this nineteenth century.
The next is, Nishkâma Karma, or work without desire or attachment. People nowadays understand what is meant by this in various ways. Some say what is implied by being unattached is to become purposeless. If that were its real meaning, then heartless brutes and the walls would be the best exponents of the performance of Nishkama Karma. Many others, again, give the example of Janaka, and wish themselves to be equally recognised as past masters in the practice of Nishkama Karma! Janaka (lit. father) did not acquire that distinction by bringing forth children, but these people all want to be Janakas, with the sole qualification of being the fathers of a brood of children! No! The true Nishkama Karmi (performer of work without desire) is neither to be like a brute, nor to be inert, nor heartless. He is not Tâmasika but of pure Sattva. His heart is so full of love and sympathy that he can embrace the whole world with his love. The world at large cannot generally comprehend his all-embracing love and sympathy.
The reconciliation of the different paths of Dharma, and work without desire or attachment — these are the two special characteristics of the Gita.
Let us now read a little from the second chapter.
सञ्जय उवाच॥
तं तथा कृपयाविष्टमश्रुपूर्णाकुलेक्षणम् ।
विषीदन्तमिदं वाक्यमुवाच मधुसूदनः ॥१॥
श्रीभगवानुवाच ॥
कुतस्त्वा कश्मलमिदं विषमे समुपस्थितम् ।
अनार्यजुष्टमस्वर्ग्यमकीर्तिकरमर्जुन ॥२॥
क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते ।
क्षुद्रं हृदयदौर्बल्यं त्यक्त्वोत्तिष्ठ परंतप ॥३॥
सञ्जय उवाच॥
तं तथा कृपयाविष्टमश्रुपूर्णाकुलेक्षणम् ।
विषीदन्तमिदं वाक्यमुवाच मधुसूदनः ॥१॥
श्रीभगवानुवाच ॥
कुतस्त्वा कश्मलमिदं विषमे समुपस्थितम् ।
अनार्यजुष्टमस्वर्ग्यमकीर्तिकरमर्जुन ॥२॥
क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते ।
क्षुद्रं हृदयदौर्बल्यं त्यक्त्वोत्तिष्ठ परंतप ॥३॥
"Sanjaya said:
To him who was thus overwhelmed with pity and sorrowing, and whose eyes were dimmed with tears, Madhusudana spoke these words.
The Blessed Lord said:
In such a strait, whence comes upon thee, O Arjuna, this dejection, un-Aryan-like, disgraceful, and contrary to the attainment of heaven?
Yield not to unmanliness, O son of Prithâ! Ill doth it become thee. Cast off this mean faint-heartedness and arise, O scorcher of thine enemies!"
In the Shlokas beginning with तं तथा कृपयाविष्टं , how poetically, how beautifully, has Arjuna's real position been painted! Then Shri Krishna advises Arjuna; and in the words क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ etc., why is he goading Arjuna to fight? Because it was not that the disinclination of Arjuna to fight arose out of the overwhelming predominance of pure Sattva Guna; it was all Tamas that brought on this unwillingness. The nature of a man of Sattva Guna is, that he is equally calm in all situations in life — whether it be prosperity or adversity. But Arjuna was afraid, he was overwhelmed with pity. That he had the instinct and the inclination to fight is proved by the simple fact that he came to the battle-field with no other purpose than that. Frequently in our lives also such things are seen to happen. Many people think they are Sâttvika by nature, but they are really nothing but Tâmasika. Many living in an uncleanly way regard themselves as Paramahamsas! Why? Because the Shâstras say that Paramahamsas live like one inert, or mad, or like an unclean spirit. Paramahamsas are compared to children, but here it should be understood that the comparison is one-sided. The Paramahamsa and the child are not one and non-different. They only appear similar, being the two extreme poles, as it were. One has reached to a state beyond Jnana, and the other has not got even an inkling of Jnana. The quickest and the gentlest vibrations of light are both beyond the reach of our ordinary vision; but in the one it is intense heat, and in the other it may be said to be almost without any heat. So it is with the opposite qualities of Sattva and Tamas. They seem in some respects to be the same, no doubt, but there is a world of difference between them. The Tamoguna loves very much to array itself in the garb of the Sattva. Here, in Arjuna, the mighty warrior, it has come under the guise of Dayâ (pity).
In order to remove this delusion which had overtaken Arjuna, what did the Bhagavân say? As I always preach that you should not decry a man by calling him a sinner, but that you should draw his attention to the omnipotent power that is in him, in the same way does the Bhagavan speak to Arjuna. नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते — "It doth not befit thee!" "Thou art Atman imperishable, beyond all evil. Having forgotten thy real nature, thou hast, by thinking thyself a sinner, as one afflicted with bodily evils and mental grief, thou hast made thyself so — this doth not befit thee!" — so says the Bhagavan: क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ — Yield not to unmanliness, O son of Pritha. There is in the world neither sin nor misery, neither disease nor grief; if there is anything in the world which can be called sin, it is this — 'fear'; know that any work which brings out the latent power in thee is Punya (virtue); and that which makes thy body and mind weak is, verily, sin. Shake off this weakness, this faintheartedness! क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ। — Thou art a hero, a Vira; this is unbecoming of thee."
If you, my sons, can proclaim this message to the world — क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते — then all this disease, grief, sin, and sorrow will vanish from off the face of the earth in three days. All these ideas of weakness will be nowhere. Now it is everywhere — this current of the vibration of fear. Reverse the current: bring in the opposite vibration, and behold the magic transformation! Thou art omnipotent — go, go to the mouth of the cannon, fear not.
Hate not the most abject sinner, fool; not to his exterior. Turn thy gaze inward, where resides the Paramâtman. Proclaim to the whole world with trumpet voice, "There is no sin in thee, there is no misery in thee; thou art the reservoir of omnipotent power. Arise, awake, and manifest the Divinity within!"
If one reads this one Shloka —क्लैब्यं मा स्म गमः पार्थ नैतत्त्वय्युपपद्यते । क्षुद्रं हृदयदौर्बल्यं त्यक्त्वोत्तिष्ठ परंतप॥ — one gets all the merits of reading the entire Gita; for in this one Shloka lies imbedded the whole Message of the Gita.
文本来自Wikisource公共领域。原版由阿德瓦伊塔修道院出版。