Sie sind auf Seite 1von 20

American Academy of Religion

The "Bhagavad Gt" as Cross-Cultural Process: Toward an Analysis of the Social Locations of a Religious Text Author(s): Gerald James Larson Source: Journal of the American Academy of Religion, Vol. 43, No. 4 (Dec., 1975), pp. 651-669 Published by: Oxford University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1460785 . Accessed: 22/03/2011 15:59
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press and American Academy of Religion are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the American Academy of Religion.

http://www.jstor.org

The Bhagavad Gitd as Cross-Cultural Process: Toward an Analysis of the Social Locations of a Religious Text
GERALD JAMES LARSON

INTRODUCTION

N writing aboutthe problem of religious andthedichotomy legitimation between in The ideation,PeterL. Berger religious activityand religious SacredCanopy in the practical refersto the ". . . rootedness of religion concerns of everyday life."'Says Berger,
The religious legitimations, or at least most of them, make little sense if one conceives of them as productionsof theoreticiansthat are then applied ex post facto to particularcomplexes of activity. The need for legitimationarises in the courseof activity.Typically,this is in the consciousnessof the actorsbeforethat of the theoreticians.And, of course,while all membersof a society are actors within it, only very few are theoreticians(mystagogues,theologians, and the like). The degree of theoretical elaboration of the religious legitimationswill vary with a if large numberof historicalfactors, but it would lead to grave misunderstanding only the more sophisticatedlegitimationsweretaken into consideration.To put it simply, most men in history have felt the need for religiouslegitimation - only very few have been interestedin the developmentof religious "ideas."2 This emphasis on the "rootedness of religion in the practical" raises interesting questions about the methods to be employed in the study of religion, and even more than that, it raises interesting questions about the very nature or existence of religious experience and religious expression. Methods utilized in textual exegesis, theological explication, philosophical criticism, historical interpretation, and social-scientific analysis of religious IPeterL. Berger,TheSacredCanopy(New York, 1969),p. 41. Behind assertion is AlfredSchutz's of "everyday 2Ibid. life,"together Berger's phenomenology with Berger's and Luckmann's of the sociologyof knowledge found in The conceptualization
Social Construction of Reality (New York, 1967), esp. pp. 1-46. GERALD JAMES LARSON is Professor and Chairman of the Department of Religious Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara. He is editor and contributor to Myth in Indo-European Antiquity (Berkeley, 1974). He is currently on the editorial board of the Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophies, and is editor of the Aids to the Study of Religion Series of the American Academy of Religion.

Copyright ? American Academy of Religion

652

GERALDJAMESLARSON

materials- methods, for example, like philological criticism,historical-critical research, documentary and institutional history, sociological analysis, psychoanalyticstudy, structuralanalysis, and so forth - have been remarkably successfulin providingaccess to religiousideation or the theoreticaldimensionof religion,but ratherunsuccessfulin getting hold of the significanceof religionfor "the practicalconcerns of everyday life." Or, putting the matter another way, methods in Religious Studies have been notably successful in dealing with theoretical elaborations about religion by prophets, priests, theologians, and other "specialists"of the sacred, but rather unsuccessful in coping with the unsophisticatedbeliever or practitionerand with issues like transformationand changewhen theoreticalelaborationsareviewedfromwithinthe dailyactivitiesof ordinarylife. Thereare, of course,numerousempiricalapproacheslike functional analysis in field studies, or statistical analysis of opinion surveys and etc., which attemptto assess the significanceof ordinaryactivities questionnaires, and of "everyday" common sense vis-a-vis the more explicit and self-conscious cognitive and normativelegitimationsof a particularsociety or culture,but such approachesseldom attemptto attain or are even able to attain overalltheoretical clarification of the non-theoreticalor pre-theoretical.Such functional and/or empirical studies are necessarily based on limited and frequently eccentric contexts, and it is exceedinglydifficult, if not impossible,with these methods to move from one isolated context to another other than in a serial fashion;for to make meaningfulconnectionsbeyond and betweenpurelyfunctionalor empirical observationsis, of course, to violate the method. Phenomenologicalmethod has been very useful in providinga way of laying bare the essential structuresof religious experience or of the very possibility of religious experience,and in Husserl'sLebenswelt,in Heidegger's"Being-in-thelife"and the world,"and in Schutz'sphenomenologicaldescriptionof "everyday world of "multiplerealities,"importantanalyseshave been made availablein the directionof showing the fundamentalimportanceof the dynamic,commonsense practical world. Speaking of Husserl's analysis of the "life-world," Aron Gurwitschcomments, outside theseveral trends of whatis Inpresent discussions, dayphilosophical and the life-world a central called"analytical occupies summarily philosophy," focal position.Its discovery must be reckoned amongthe most momentous of contemporary accomplishments philosophical thought,an accomplishment andacquisition, to beof significant wesubmit, of enduring valuewhich willprove for the future of philosophy.3 consequence development Phenomenologicalmethod, however,intendsonly the essential,the foundational, or the constitutive,and is incapable,finally, of takingproblemsbeyondthe level of the descriptionof essential structures. As a resultof such limitationsin method, therefore,the student in Religious Studies often ends up either (a) understandingthe religiousideation of the "very few," or (b) getting caught up in seeminglyendless empiricalstudies that permit of highlyeccentricphenomena.Seldomdo our current only limitedunderstanding methods provideaccess to the more dialecticalreligious-ideation-cum-religiousactivityof "mostmen."Moreover,as the sequelwill suggest,these methodological
3Aron Gurwitsch, "Problems of the Life-World" in Phenomenology and Social Reality, Evsays in Memory of Alfred Schutz, ed. Maurice Natanson (The Hague, 1970), pp. 36-37.

THE Bhagavad

PROCESS Gita AS CROSS-CULTURAL

653

limitations are not unique to Religious Studies, but mutatis mutandis are characteristic of other Geisteswissenschaften or "humanstudies"(to use Wilhelm as well.4 Dilthey's terminology) In the present essay I propose, in Part I, to elaborate in somewhat greater detail in a specific researcharea the methodologicallimitationsto which I have beenreferring, and to suggesta new methodfor researchwhichovercomessome of the limitations. In Part II, I shall provide a specific example of how my methodologicalsuggestionoperates.The limitationof an essay-format,of course, makes it impossibleto lay out all of the details of the applicationof the method, but I think that it will be possible to show in a reasonablyconcrete fashion the methodologicaldirection that I would like to pursue. Finally, in a concluding section I shall offer some theoreticalreflectionsabout the methodand perspective which I am suggesting and which I consider to have important "ontological" implications. Two other introductorycomments. (1) Since my own work is in the field of Religious Studies,and more specifically,within South Asian Religious Studies, I shallthroughoutthis essayfocus my commentson South Asianresearchconcerns, althoughI would wantto arguethat the implicationsof my analysisare significant both for Religious Studies as a whole and for the "humanstudies"in general.5 (2) In Part II of this essay in which I offer a specific example of my I choose methodologicalsuggestion, I focus my attention on the BhagavadGTta. the GtWprimarilyfor two reasons: (a) becauseI know the work reasonablywell from having taught it now for severalyears as a second-yeartext in the classical Sanskritsequencethat I teach at the Universityof California,Santa Barbara, and (b) becauseit is one of the few South Asianreligioustexts whichis generallywellknown not simply to specialistsin South Asian religionand thought but also, at least in translation, to most professionals in the humanities and the social sciences.6
PROBLEM PART I: THE METHODOLOGICAL

In doing Religious Studies with a focus on India or South Asia, it becomes apparent immediately to anyone surveying the scholarly literature that the methodological problems of the religionist are also characteristic of the anthropologist, the economist, the sociologist, the indologist, the comparative philologist, and the intellectual historian. The methodological problems that I have in mind are numerous but can be summarized for the sake of this presentationin terms of what I would call five heuristiccharacterizationsthat
4H. A. Hodges, Wilhelm Dilthey: An Introduction (London, 1944), selection 18, "The Peculiar Nature of the Human Studies," pp. 141-43. 5In Parts I and II of this essay my value-premisesare basically those of a scholar and teacher of Religion in a modern, secular, state universitycontext - using the term "Religion"with a capital "R" in the sense that Ninian Smart uses the term in his book, The Phenomenon of Religion (London, 1973), p. 12;that is to say, the academic study of religion that is descriptive-scientificin its activity, the capital "R"serving ". . . to distinguish the study from what it is a study of, namely religion." In the concluding section of the present essay, I go beyond these value-premises to take a philosophical position, and hence move into what Ninian Smart characterizes as "Expression" (p. 13). Finally, the implication of the present essay will be that "Religion"and "Expression"are inseparable, but the distinction is useful for this early phase of my presentation. 61 could have chosen any text or person or movement for analysis, but the use of a well-known text seemed preferable for the purpose of making transparent my methodological suggestion. In

654

GERALDJAMESLARSON

have emergedfrom on-going researchin South Asian materialsand that point to important methodologicalissues. (a) The first would be the dichotomy, known to all researchersin Indian studies, between "text and context."'7 Indologists and humanistsgenerallyhave tendedto studythe ancienttexts (the Vediccorpus,smrtiliterature, Si>stras,and so forth) while the anthropologists, sociologists, economists, et al., have focused primarilyon the context (village studies, urban modernization,analysis of the caste system, and so on). Milton Singer has been pointing to this problem for in Indianstudiesaretroubledby this divorcein twentyyears,and most researchers research publications. Increasingly, efforts are being made to bridge this dichotomy, for it becomes obvious that, when pushed, the social-scientific contextualistmust finally look at the classical texts, and the textualistfools only himselfif he thinksthat he has understoodthe social, cultural,and spiritualreality of a tradition by preparing one more critical edition with learned footnotes. the "text-context" Nevertheless, dichotomyis a usefulheuristicdevicefor pointing to a tendency among researchers in Indian studies, and to a continuing methodologicalproblem. and (b) Second, one might refer to the dichotomy between "orthogenetic" The distinction originated with Redfield and Singer in their "heterogenetic." being those elementsof societal comparativestudy of cities - the "orthogenetic" and cultural structures which can be traced to indigenous sources; the to those elementswhichcome from outsideby meansof diffusion, "heterogenetic" The etc.8 study of Indian society and culture from this perspectiveis conquest, exceedinglycomplex;to givejust one example, even the Vedic heritage,which on one level is clearly orthogenetic,is, in terms of historical origins in the second millenniumB.C.,undoubtedlyheterogenetic.Moreover,in the Indiancontext, it is often more illuminatingto speak in terms of "orthopraxis" and "heteropraxis" rather than in terms of orthogenetic and heterogenetic. Again, however, the is a usefuldevicefor furtherresearch,and dichotomy orthogenetic-heterogenetic calls attention to an obvious methodological problem. (c) Third,one might referto a dichotomy (writtenabout now for over twenty and "non-Sanskritic."9 M. N. Srinivasback in 1952 years) between "Sanskritic" first introducedthe term "Sanskritization" to describea processof social mobility whereinone group improvesits social status vis-a-vis other groups in its area by means of adoptingall-IndiaSanskriticnorms like vegetarianism, teetotalism,the deities, and so forth.10 worshipof "Sanskritic" Baileyhas describedthe processas "social climbing by conforming to an all-Indian standard of respectable behavior."" Sanskritization has also been linked to modernization and
other words, my intention in the paper is not to present new historical or philological information about the Gitui, but rather to cast what is already known into a new methodological and interpretive perspective. 7Milton Singer, "Text and Context in the Study of Contemporary Hinduism," in When a Great Tradition Modernizes (New York, 1972), pp. 39-52. 8R. Redfield and M. Singer, "The Cultural Role of Cities," in Economic Development and Cultural Change (Chicago, 1954), pp. 53-73. 9M. N. Srinivas, Social Change in Modern India (Berkeley, 1966), pp. 1-88. '0Thetheory was first set forth in M. N. Srinivas, Religion and Society among the Coorgs of South India (London, 1952). A revised statement of the theory is to be found in Srinivas' more recent work cited in note 9. For an excellent critical discussion of "Sanskritization," see J. F. Staal, "Sanskrit and Sanskritization," Journal of Asian Studies 22 (1963), pp. 261-75. "Cited in ibid., p. 264.

THE

Bhagavad Gita

AS CROSS-CULTURAL PROCESS

655

westernization,and there is a good deal of empirical evidence that there are dialectically significant connections between these various processes. Sanskritization frequently precedes westernization, and those undergoing westernization sometimesalso pursuemoreintensiveSanskritization. Indologists and historians,however,have pointed out that the term"Sanskritization" is really a misnomer,for the processhas little to do with the Sanskritlanguage.Moreover, the questionarisesas to how the "all-IndiaSanskriticnorm"was derivedand also as to its precise content. Empirical evidence is available to suggest that the Sanskriticnorm is reallya pluralset of normsderivedin certainareas over many centuries(going back evento Vedictimes)from numerouslocal traditionsor what aresometimescalled"littletraditions." The dichotomySanskritic-non-Sanskritic, therefore, or the dichotomy Great Tradition-Little Traditions, although importantdiscoveries,turnout to be basicallyonly heuristicdeviceswhichrequire much additional researchand methodologicalclarification.12 (d) Fourth,one might referto the dichotomybetweendiachronicanalysisand synchronicanalysis.'3This distinction, of course, overlaps and to some degree encompasses the first three, but nevertheless points to an additional set of distinction has referenceprimarilyto the problems. The diachronic-synchronic study of languagewherein such problems as loan-words, phonological change, morphologicalchange, and syntacticpatternsare studied. The extension of this distinction from its proper scientific base in linguisticsto the level of historical study and structural-functional analysis of society and cultureis, again, a useful heuristicdevelopment.The distinction, however,is not much more than a handy tool, a convenient perspective requiring much additional exploration and methodologicalreflection,for as Staal points out, of language are inherently more complexthan processes Cultural processes in role the of The can beassigned Sanskrit change. by analysis played language .... to Hinduism in an anthropological andhistorical it is realized analysis, provided that Hinduism hasa morecomplexstructure thanSanskrit... 14 is what GunnarMyrdalhas called (e) Finally,a fifth heuristiccharacterization "opportunisticbias." In Against the Stream, Myrdal describesthe problem as follows: fortruth, Inoursearch andinthedirection of ourresearch theparticular interests, models and theorieswe are approachwe are choosing,the explanatory andtheconcepts we use,and,consequently, thecourse wefollowin constructing and drawing we are influenced inferences, makingobservations by individual tradition in ourdisciplines and traits, and,besides that,bythemighty personality andprejudices in thesociety inwhich weliveandwork.'5 bytheplayof interests
12The "GreatTradition-Little Traditions"distinction was first suggested by R. Redfield, "The Social Organization of Tradition," The Far Eastern Quarterly 15 (1955-56), pp. 13-21, and later modified. It is discussed at great length, passim, by Milton Singer, When a Great Tradition Modernizes. A useful discussion of the distinction may be found also in A. Bharati, "Great Tradition and Little Traditions: An Anthropological Approach to the Study of Asian Cultures," in Anthropology and Adult Education, ed. Th. Cummings (Boston, 1968), and "Hinduism and Modernization," Religion and Change in Contemporary Asia, ed. R. F. Spencer (Minneapolis,

1971),pp. 67-104. "Sanskrit and Sanskritization," 13Staal, pp. 265ff. 14lbid., p. 273.

15GunnarMvrdal, Against the Stream (New York, 1972), p. 53.

656

GERALDJAMESLARSON

Not only do the leaders of a developing country like India have "opportunistic biases," but so do the economists and comparativeeconomists who set forth various programsor models for modernization. Moreover, even the notions of express a built-in bias that is inextricablyallied "developed"and "developing" with currentforeign-policyconsiderations.Accordingto Myrdal,at the present time, we know very little that is empiricallysignificantabout our "opportunistic for developing biases,"and he suggestsin Against the Streamthat a prerequisite more significanteconomic analysis in the futureis a systematic,interdisciplinary inquiryinto this methodologicalproblem.'6 bias," of course, is not simply a matter of taking account of "Opportunistic althoughto be surethat is an important ideologicaltendenciesamongresearchers, aspect of this methodologicalissue.17 Whatis reallythe deeperissue is the question of interpretation or hermeneutics.In historicaland humanisticstudies, of course, the problem of hermeneuticshas been recognizedfor centuries,but it has been especially since Wilhelm Dilthey and the more recent work of thinkers like Heideggerand Gadamerthat the problem has been given broader and sharper The researcher and his social realityare inextricablyallied with the social focus.8" reality of what he studies. The sociology of knowledge (in the work of Max Scheler,KarlMannheim,and others)has shownthat all thoughtis to some extent socially and historicallyshaped, and psychoanalysisand social psychology have shown the profoundinfluenceof instinctuallongingsand primarysocializationin the developmentof thought.19 and ThomasLuckmannin Moreover,Peter Berger their work entitled The Social Constructionof Realityhave convincinglyargued that an adequatesociology of knowledgemusttake accountof the pre-reflective or in a distribution of That is to pre-theoretical "knowledge" society.20 say, to become adequatelyaware of the mannerin which one'sthought has been shaped by the forces of one's own social and historicalsituationis not simply to become aware of the explicit, self-consciouslegitimationsand ideations of one's time but also to becomeawareof the "intersubjective common-senseworld"and "theworld as consistingof multiplerealities," many aspectsof whicharepowerfulbut subtle, latentor hidden. Similarlatent or hiddenforces are presentin whatwe study,and finally it is not possible to separate the researcherfrom his researchwithout distorting both. Unfortunately,however, as Myrdal points out, we know very little that is empirically significant about the problem of interpretation or hermeneutics,but at least an awarenessof the issue can serve a useful heuristic to purposein continuingresearch.WernerStarkmakesa similarpoint in referring the perspectivesof the sociology of knowledge.
16Ibid.,p. 64. '7Probablythe best treatment of the problem of "ideology"continues to be Karl Mannheim, Ideology and Utopia (London, 1936) and Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge (New York, 1952); see esp. pp. 141ff. for a discussion of the "unmasking of an ideology." '8H. A. Hodges, WilhelmDilthey, pp. 1-108, 109-60; M. Heidegger, Being and Time,trans. J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson (New York, 1962), passim but esp. pp. 449ff.; and Hans-Georg Gadamer, Wahrheitund Methode (Tiibingen, 1965); and see also David E. Linge, "Dilthey and Gadamer: Two Theories of Historical Understanding," Journal of the American Academy of Religion 41 (1973), pp. 536-53. '9For excellent discussions of the development of the sociology of knowledge, see Bergerand Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality, pp. 1-18, 47-128; and Werner Stark, The Sociology of Knowledge (London, 1958), pp. 46-98, 213-44. See also Mannheim, Evsayson the Sociology of Knowledge, esp. Introduction by P. Kecskemeti, pp. 1-32. and Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality, pp. 1-46. 20Berger

THE Bhagavad

PROCESS Gita AS CROSS-CULTURAL

657

ismerely to explore- andexplore of knowledge Thetaskof thesociology byway of realistic between socialsubstructure research.. . - howclosetheconnection in fact is, and consequently how great is the and mental superstructure contributionwhich the study of mental phenomenacan make to the notin of culture anditsdevelopment. It is inconcrete exploration, understanding abstract thatits futuremustlie.21 speculation, As I suggested at the outset these five heuristic characterizationspoint to methodologicalproblemsnot simply in this or that field of inquirybut generally throughoutthe "humanstudies,"including Religious Studies. Moreover,we are in most fields want to find new approachesthat now in a time when researchers might help to illuminatethese methodologicalissues. In other words, we are now in an experimental phase in our work, trying to break away from the methodologicalmodels and normativemind-sets of the past and attempting to devise new methods that allow us to gain access to the richnessand diversityof that humanexperience,but even more than that, to the dynamictransformations occur in human experience,society, and culture. I have not referredthus far to specific issues in Religious Studies, but I think that the connectionsare obvious. Claims are sometimes made that methodologicalproblemsin Religious Studies are somehow unique, and it is the case, to be sure, that the religionist does interrogatehis materialsby tryingto take the religiousclaimsof believerstogether with the resulting effects of those claims on society and culture with full seriousness. Yet I think that it can be argued that our most difficult methodologicalproblemsin Religious Studiesare not reallythat unique and that that I have they center more or less within the five heuristic characterizations bias,"for example, the brieflyindicated. From the perspectiveof "opportunistic study of religion is just now emergingfor the first time from its theological and institutional origins which were and even now still are (a) dominantly European, (b) Jewishand Christian(and within Jewishand Christian,primarily liberal), (c) racially white, (d) male-oriented,etc. Moreover, within Religious Studies we wrestle continuously with such problems as "text and context," "GreatTraditionsand Little Traditions,"and "orthogeneticand heterogenetic," "diachronicand synchronicanalysis,"etc. It maybe useful,therefore,at leastin this experimentalperiodof emergence,to try a somewhatnew methodologicalperspectivewhich would allow us to look at common problemsand to ask questions that lead us in two seeminglyopposite directions: (a) a totalistic or "telescopic" directionthat causes us to reflectupon the whole range of our problems,and (b) a specific or "microscopic" direction that leads us to takeseriouslythe empiricaldata in our culturalstudies.22 Onesuch experimentalmethod might be what I would call "socio-analyticcriticism"or "praxis-analysis."The expressions are my own invention, although the perspectiveis derivedprimarilyfrom the methodologicalreflectionsof Jean-Paul Sartre in his Critiquede la raison dialectique,in which he sets forth a method whichhe calls "totalization," "dialectical knowing,"or the "progressive-regressive method" - a methodwhichinvolvessimultaneouslythe studyof social structure, historical experience, and individual praxis both of the investigatorand that
21Stark, The Sociology of Knowledge, pp. 142-43. 22Theterms "telescopic"and "microscopic"are taken from Singer, Whena Great Tradition Modernizes, p. 253 wherein he is comparing the "telescopic"perspective of Kroeber vis-A-visthe "microscopic"perspective of Redfield.

658

GERALDJAMESLARSON

which is being investigated.23 Sartre himself, of course, derives this methodologioal perspective from Sociology, Psychoanalysis, Marxist philosophy, and his own phenomenological ontology. (I have characterized Sartre'smethod in greaterdetail in an articleentitled"RevolutionaryPraxis and ComparativePhilosophy"in Philosophy East and West.24) I call the approach"socio-analyticcriticism"or "praxis-analysis" in the hope that such phrases indicate a position which transcends either a humanistic/historical or social-scientific preference but which makes use of elements from both. Moreover, I prefer naming the approach "socio-analytic criticism"or "praxis-analysis" in the hope that such a naming will enable one to pursue the methodologicalperspectivewithout getting completely caught up in Sartre'sphilosophicalposition of existentialisticMarxism.25 In any case, I suggest that what I am calling "socio-analytic criticism"or "praxis-analysis" be triedas a methodologicalapproach which involves the following elements: (a) historical and textual research in the framework of an intention reaching for an of the larger,"totalistic" social reality; (b) a focus on praxisboth understanding of the materialbeing studiedand of the researcher;(c) an approachwhichmoves forwardand backward,so to speak, and attemptsto make connections between ancient and modern, "eastern" and "western," and so on; and (d) an approach whichfocuses more on process,transformation, and changein Religious Studies. Moreover,I suggestthatthe methodbe employedusingthe heuristicdevicesthat I have already referredto and which have been derived from actual researchin South Asian traditions (that is to say, "text and context," "orthogeneticand heterogenetic,""Sanskriticand non-Sanskritic,""diachronicand synchronic," and "opportunistic bias") - heuristicdevices,in otherwords,whichcan function as convenient guiding controls in the on-going analysis. Finally, and perhaps obviously, in so far as the focus of research is cross-cultural, the method presupposesthat the researcherhas some familiaritywith the languages of the tradition that he is studying cross-culturallyand also that he has had a culturelearningexperiencein the civilizationas a resultof havingresidedin some partof the civilization being studied for an extended period of time and preferablyon more than one occasion.
23Jean-PaulSartre, Critiquede la raison dialectique (Paris, 1960), pp. 15-111 (section entitled "Questions de methode"). See also English translation of this introductory section in Hazel Barnes, trans., Searchfor a Method (New York, 1963). 241 have characterized Sartre's method in greater detail in an article entitled "Revolutionary Praxis and Comparative Philosophy," Philosophy East and West 23 (July 1973), pp. 333-41. 25By "socio-analytic" I mean an analysis that drives towards getting hold of the total social reality in a particularcontext without losing sight of the interpreter'sown total social reality. Such a "searchfor the synthetic ensemble" can, of course, never be fully achieved, but having such a perspective "opens up" the field of research in a way that usual methods do not allow. With the phrase "praxis-analysis"I am, of course, thinking primarily of the work of Karl Marx, not so much, however Marx's later work but more of his earlier work as set forth in the "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts (1844)," trans. and ed. T. B. Bottomore (New York, 1963). For useful expositions, elaborations, and criticism of Marx's notion of "praxis," see Louis Dupre, The Philosophical Foundations of Marxism (New York, 1966), esp. pp. 120ff.; and, Richard J. Bernstein, Praxis and Action (Philadelphia, 1971), pp. 11-83. For the relation between the Marxist notion of praxis and the sociology of knowledge, see Bergerand Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality, passim. For a short bibliography dealing with works that take up the relation between Marxism, praxis, and Sartre's thought, see my "Revolutionary Praxis and Comparative Philosophy," pp. 333-34.

THE BhagavadGTta AS CROSS-CULTURAL PROCESS

659

PART II: THE METHODOLOGICALAPPLICATION

Turning now to a specific religious document, the Bhagavad Gitt, I shall attemptto illustratethe analyticperspectiveI am suggesting.In the context of this essay, of course, it is not possible to treat the method in greatdetail, but enough can be accomplishedto give a flavor of the procedure.I would also like to stress again, as I did earlier,that I am only experimentingwith the method. I make no imperial claims for it, nor do I think that it should displace some of the more traditionalmethods used in Religious Studies. As is well known, the GUtd is part of the great epic of India, the Mahdbhdrata, which has as its main event the war that takes place in ancienttimes betweenthe related families of the PNndusand the Kurus.26 The setting of the GTtd is the battlefieldof that war, and its content is a long discoursethat takes placebetween Arjuna, general of the army of the Pandus, and Lord Krsna, who is both an incarnationof Lord Visnuand Arjuna'scharioteer.Arjuna,as the battle is about to begin, loses his nerveand refusesto fight, mainlybecausehe sees his kinsmenin both armiesand thinksthat the prosecutionof the war will lead to the destruction of the families,and hence to the destructionof the laws or dharmaof the families. of dharma will lead, according to Arjuna, to the corruption of Destructionr women, mixture of caste, and finally the destructionof society itself. Lord Krsna then takes upon himselfthe task of convincingArjunato fight, using an amazing arrayof arguments including (1) disgraceif he does not fight, sinceafterall he is a warrior; (2) appealingto his sense of duty (dharmaor svadharma); (3) assuring him that a man of wisdom knows that in war he is not really killing the self of anyone, since the self (purusa)is quite separatefrom the materialbody (prakrti) (jifina-yoga); (4) that it is legitimateto performrequiredaction so long as one is not attachedto the fruit or rewardof the action (karma-yoga); and (5) that it is also legitimate to perform required action so long as one acts in a spirit of complete devotion to the Lord (bhakti-yoga). The text has numerous metaphysicaldiscussionswhich representeffortsto synthesizeolder Buddhistand Jain traditions,Sdmkhyaand Yoga traditionsand Vedic-Upanisadic orthodoxy with what appear to be emergingtraditions of theistic devotion. Moreover,the text basically recommendsthe three well-known paths of ji ina-yoga, karmayoga, and bhakti-yogawith rathera clear preferencebeing expressedin several IX.32, XI.55, XII.2, XVIII.55-56,and so forth) for passages (namely 111.30-31, in the theophanydescribedin chaptersXbhakti-yoga,set forth most impressively XII. By the end of the text Arjunais convincedthat he should fight, and the great war begins. From a historical-critical point of view, general scholarly consensus would assertthe following:27 (1) The text was probablyput togethersome time between 200 B.C.and A.D.200-300 with most scholars preferringthe latter date to the
and editions of the Gita are, of course, numerous. Perhaps the most useful are 26Translations the following: F. Edgerton, trans., The Bhagavad GT-td, 2 vols. (Harvard Oriental Series, vols. 3839) (Cambridge, 1944); and R. C. Zaehner, trans., The Bhagavad Gita (Oxford, 1969). The original Sanskrit is available now in a critical edition in V. S. Sukthankar et al., eds. The Mahabhdrata (Poona, 1933-70); and in a separate publication, S. K. Belvalkar, ed. and trans., (Varanasi, 1959), pp. 5-151. SrTmad-Bhagavadgtat 27The critical literatureon the GTtd and the larger epic context of The Mahabhdratais vast. A recent and useful bibliographical guide is J. Bruce Long, ed., The Mahdbhdrata, A Selected Annotated Bibliography (Cornell University, 1974), and specifically on the GTtd,see pp. 14-19. See also the following: W. T. de Baryet al., eds., Sources of Indian Tradition (New York, 1958),

660

GERALD JAMES LARSON

former.28 (2) Although the text shows signs of interpolationand hence to some

degree is composite, it neverthelessappears to have an overall integritywhich wouldargueeitherfor a singleauthoror possiblya group of authorsfrom a similar context. (3) The text as a whole is a later interpolationinto the great epic, and probablyin one of the laterphases of epic redaction. (4) The text was composed as an attempt to synthesize older traditions of Buddhist and Jain thought, Sdmkhya and Yoga speculation, and Vedic-Upanisadicnotions with recent traditionsof Vaisnavadevotionalism,and was thereforeprobablydirectedto an audience of brihmanas and ksatriyas who had come into authority at a time before the Gupta consolidation, who were attempting to revive brahmanical traditionsafter some centuriesof Buddhistdomination,and who were searching for an interpretation of brahmanismthat included Vedic orthodoxy, established dharma, caste regulation, and recently emergent traditions of devotional judgmentas to the piety. (5) Most Sanskritistswould concur with A. Bharati's writtenin simple, elegant and beautifulflokas and it is the finest didactictext of the Mahabhdrata."29 (6) The text has been used historicallywell into medieval times as a justification for Hindu devotionalism along with some degree of orthodox ritualism,although in its original context what Kosambiand Bharati and its lendingitself ". .. to any havecalledrespectively its "superb inconsistency" ideologicalslant"would tend to arguethat the text was anythingbut orthodox.30 Apart from this historical-criticalresearch,which would be one important one aspect of what I am calling "socio-analyticcriticism"or "praxis-analysis," would also have to ask, however,a seriesof additionalquestionsabout the Gitd. beenused Some of these questionswould be the following: (1) How has the GTtd in practicein India, by what social groups, for what purposes? (2) What is the history of the praxis of the text and what continuity and discontinuityis there between past usages and contemporary usages in concrete social situations? (3) What impact has the GTtdhad in Western consciousness and been mediatedto me as a contemporary studentof history? (4) How has the GTtd the academic study of religion and why am I interested in it at all? (5) What bias"does my interestin the Gttdreflector what sorts of valuations "opportunistic am I bringingto my work with the Gltd? (6) Finally, what relationshipis there betweenthesekindsof questionsand the criticaltask of settingforth not only what the Gitd meant then and means now, but even more radically,what the GTtO is!
pp. 203, 279ff.; Joseph Dahlmann, Das Mahabhdrata als Epos und Rechtsbuch (Berlin, 1885); Adolf Holtzmann, Jr., Das Mahabhdrata und Seine Thiele, 4 vols. (Kiel, 1892-95); E. W. Hopkins, The Great Epic of India: Its Characterand Origin(New York, 1901). For the epic in the larger context of India's traditional religious literature, see the standard J. N. Farquhar, An Outline of the Religious Literatureof India (reprint; Motilal Banarsidass, 1967). For a standard treatment of the GTt6 and the epic in the general context of Indian literature, see M. Winternitz, Geschichte der indischen Litteratur, 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1920). For a recent introductory treatment of the total epic context, see J. A. B. van Buitenen, trans., The Mahabhdata 1. The Book of the Beginning(Chicago, 1973), esp. pp. xiii-xliv. Finally, for one of the more recent treatments of the dating of the GTi6and its possible relations to early Buddhism, see K. N. Upadhyaya, Earl' Buddhism and the Bhagavad GTtI(Delhi, 1971), pp. Iff., 16-29, 106-46. see ibid., which argues for an earlier date. 2-But 29A. Bharati, The Ochre Robe (New York, 1970), p. 132. 30Ibid., p. 132; and D. D. Kosambi, The Culture and Civilization of Ancient India in Historical Outline (London, 1965), pp. 114-15.

text's literary worth, that it is ".

. a masterpiece deserving literary attention: it is

PROCESS THE Bhagavad G'ta AS CROSS-CULTURAL

661

These are enormouslydifficultquestionswhich open up not only the entirerange of Indianintellectualand social realitybut also the intellectualand social realityof Europe,of ReligiousStudiesas a field, and of my own personalhistoryand praxis. or "expand" the realityof the These kinds of questions,in other words, "totalize" GCtdmuch beyond its Indian context and yet at the same time invite specific meant and was in its native researchwhich will also illuminate what the G-htd contexts. Given this kind of "totalization,"to use Sartre's terminology (albeit in a context that is differentfromthe content of his work),one could move in a number of directions,but for purposesof this paper I shall develop in a preliminaryway froma broadlyintra-cultural only two directions - first, a discussionof the Gtad perspectivewith a focus on the so-called "middleperiod"in Indian culturaland social history (i.e., from the post-Gupta period down through the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries);and second, a discussion of the Gitdfrom a broadly crossculturalor inter-cultural perspectivebeginningin the latterhalf of the eighteenth century.31 (1) Even though much of secondaryliteratureon the G-td(by both Western and Indian scholars) refers to it as the "New Testament" of the Hindus (characterizations, by the way, which are not only obviously cross-culturalbut also "opportunistically biased"),the Gtat has never at any time had the status of sruti or sacredscripture.32 Only Veda is iruti, and the GftO,much like the Lawsof Manu, is merelyone more text of smrti - i.e., worthy to be rememberedin the tradition. Although, as indicated earlier, evidence is lacking as to the precise context of the text at the time of its composition, the content of the text leads one to think that it was certainlynot an all-India or orthodox statement. Its lack of philosophical precision, its anti-Vedic sarcasms (11.42-44),and its promise of moksa even for women, vailyas and az7dras (IX.32), all clearlysuggestthat it was not a statement of traditional orthopraxis. At the same time, however, its emphasison the correctperformanceof one's dharma,its clearaffirmationof the notion of karma,its recognitionof the obvious purityof brdhmanas(IX.33), and war-contextthe resultof the text's very setting in a legendaryor quasi-legendary brahmanical whichwar was the very establishmentof orthopractical, civilization, all clearly suggest that the text was reaching at least for an orthopractical, normative status. One is tempted to argue that the Gltd is a Sanskritizing statementin Srinivasa's sense, and perhapseven more, that it is one of the earliest of Sanskritization, although there is insufficientsurroundingevidence examples to push this too far. If it could be considereda Sanskritizingeffort, however, it Whatone sees in raisesinterestingquestionsabout the processof Sanskritization. the Gta is a great variety of so-called "little traditions" together with a brahmanical "Great Tradition," about which the author (or authors) is achieves Sanskritic "Great Tradition" ambivalent. Later, of course, the Gittd status, but that status is obviously composite. In other words, the Gttdprovides data for arguing that notions like Sanskritic,non-Sanskritic,and so forth, are reallycomplex, dynamic,and highlyequivocalconstructs.To say this, however,is not to put down these notions, but ratherto suggestthat such constructsdrive us
31Foran interesting discussion of the importance of the "middle period," see van Buitenen, "On the Archaism of the Bhdgavata Purana,"in Krishna: Myths, Rites and Attitudes, ed. Milton Singer (Chicago, 1968), pp. 23-40. 32Seevan Buitenen, Ramanuja on the BhagavadgrTa (reprint; Delhi, 1968), pp. 7-8 for an interesting discussion of the authority of the Gdtaas a smrti-text.

662

GERALDJAMESLARSON

in our work,and to beginto see the to look at the dataagain,to double-back complexnatureof whatwe are studying. incredibly on theGita of southIndia writes hisBhasya Bythetimethatthegreat Sarikara in the ninthcentury,one finds quitea different worldand in many religious theintervening GI-td.33 processes profound Unfortunately, waysquitea different arenotclear,andall onecando is to describe which aboutthesechanges brought is exceedingly thenewcontext. forthenewcontext evenevidence slim,but Indeed, in anycaseatleastsomethings thanthe areilluminating. Rather canbesaidwhich for an orthopractical status,onefindsthe older,popular, epiccontextreaching of brahmanical withall thesubtleties Gitanowin thephilosophicd#stra-context the linked withwhatareto become to it. Onefindsthe Grta exegesis beingapplied most normative orthodoxtradition,namely, texts in the Smartabrahmana certainkey Upanisads The notionof bhakti,though and the Vedanta-satras. has role,andjiia-na clearly recognized, secondary playsa muchmoremoderate, of the old becomethe primary the orthopraxis Moreover, religious experience. Vedicsacrificial on the one hand,by the Smdrta systemhas been superseded, and his householder with his primarily domesticVedicorthopraxis brahmana of the rather restrained and, on the otherhand,by thepractice temple-worship advaitinsannydsins, at least to were who, by organized according tradition, intothe Da'andimis to existdown whichcontinue (theten orders) Sankardcdrya to the present day.34 thesecenturies, is another which however, Running parallel process through will appropriate the Gta in quite a different mannerthe evidence for which in theothergreatBhasya on the Git by Ramanuja, wholivedin appears partly
the last half of the eleventhand the first part of the twelfth century.35 Beginning

in theseventh in theninththrough theeleventh andculminating already century centuriesin south India was the well-known religiousrevivalof the poetsaints- thesouthern onefindsan movement. traditions bhakti Inthesecomplex extensivevernacular devotionalliterature, such Sanskrittexts as the Visnu comingfrom about the tenth century).Sakta and tantricelementsplay an importantrole in this context, but most importantis exuberantbhaktiavailable even to low castes,and havingprobably an urbanbase. spirituality, a sannydsin at Srirangam in the eleventhand twelfthcenturies Ramanuja, andconflates whatwe apparently synthesizes manyof thesetraditions, providing
33For a complete Sanskrit text of Sahikara's GTta Bhdsya, see BhagavadgTtd with Sirikarabhisya, vol. 2 of Works of Sairkaracarya (Delhi, 1964). For complete English translation, see A. Mahadeva Sastry, trans., The Bhagavad-GTtawith the Commentary of SrT Sarikaracarya(Madras, 1972). For Sanskrit text of the GOtawith eleven commentaries, see Shastri Gajanana Shambhu Sadhale, ed., The Bhagavad-GTta with Eleven Commentaries (namely, of Sahikara, Anandagiri, Rdminuja, De ika, Madhava, Jayatirtha, Hanumat, Venkatanatha, Vallabha, Purusottama, and Nflakantha) (Bombay, 1935). 34Fora still useful discussion of the developments in this period, see Farquhar, An Outline of the Religious Literature of India, pp. 50-366 passim. 35Fora nearly complete English translation of Rdminuja's Gtatbhasya, see van Buitenen, Ramanujaon the Bhagavadgftd,pp. 45-176. For background discussions of the bhakti movement and related literature in both north and south India, see the essays by Hopkins, van Buitenen, Dimock, and Singer in Milton Singer, ed., Krishna, pp. 3ff., 23ff., 41ff., and 90ff. For the most recent discussion of Rdmanuja'sthought, see John Carman, The Theology of Ramanuja (Yale, 1974).

Samhitas,and the famous Bhigavata Purana(this latter Purana,the Pdficaratra

THE Bhagavad

PROCESS Gita AS CROSS-CULTURAL

663

the Gitdfrom now knowas Sri Vaisnavism witha Sanskriticbase and interpreting viewsand doing so in a bhaktitheologicalperspective,refutingmanyof Sankara's to note, however,is the mannerof traditionaltextual exegesis. Whatis interesting the radicallynew context in which the Gitdfunctions. The religiouspraxis in the largercontext is deeply personal,openly expressive,socially more inclusive,and yet at the sametime moreclearlysectarian(andtherebysuspectto manyorthodox and the Veddnta-sitrasmake up the brahmanas).Moreover,although the GOitd and the Sri Vaisnavas' efforts, Sanskritizing primarytextual base for Ramanuja's the larger religious context seems to focus more on texts like the Bhagavata Puranain which Krsnais of interestnot so muchas an epic hero or an incarnation of Visnu who instructs Arjuna but more as the playful child, the destroyerof demons, and the young man who sports with gopTs.In later centuriesthis latter tendencycontinuesand when the bhaktirevivalsmake theirway north to Bengal (especiallyin the fifteenthand sixteenthcenturies),the dominantimagesbecome those of the playfulchild and the young lover, and one of the gopis emergesinto great prominence,namely Radh~, who, of course, is nowherementioned in the GOt and who played almost no role in the earlier southern traditions. I have only commented briefly on a few intra-culturalcontexts from the or "praxis-analysis." criticism" I perspectiveof what I am calling "socio-analytic have not referredat all to any of the laterschools in north and south Indiawhich make use of the GOta, nor have I attempted to portray the reactions of these to the interestingissueof varioustraditionsto one another.I havealso not referred possible connections between the Gta, on the one hand, and traditionsof early on Buddhistthought and practiceand later Mahiyina texts like the Lotus-sz7tra, the other.36 With even my limited comments, however, it is hopefully becoming clear that the Gta is more than an ancientsmrti-textwhose historycan be traced is almost a throughsubsequentcenturies.What emerges,rather,is that the GOitd kind of symbolicprocess inextricablyinvolved in a highly complex culturaland social reality wherein religious experience, caste-identity, social mobility via Sanskritization,urbanization, exegesis, and a great many "opportunistic ?.stric biases"politically, socially, and intellectuallyare operative. But thus far I have dimensionsof the Gttd.Let me turnnow only beencommentingon intra-cultural to some cross-culturalcomments. (2) In termsof cross-cultural analysisone could move in severaldirections(for example, contacts with China, Southeast Asia, various invading peoples from CentralAsia, or the coming of the Muslims),but perhapsmost interestingis the encounterwith the GOita by the Britishand subsequentlyEuropeancivilization generallyand the resultingeffectson Indiain moderntimes.This, of course,brings us into a vast area, but all I wish to do here is to offer a few commentsregarding one aspect of the appropriationof the Gta - again, simply to illustrate the methodologicalapproach of socio-analyticcriticism or praxis-analysis. A. Bharatirefers in a number of places in his writingsto the process of "reenculturation." He illustratesthe processby what he calls the "pizza-effect." Says Bharati, The original breadwithoutany trimmings, the pizzawas a simple,hot-baked and Sicilian contadini fromwhomwell over90% of all stapleof the Calabrian
36Upadhyaya, Early Buddhism and the Bhagavad GOtd,passim; and Har Dayal, The Bodhisattva Doctrine in Buddhist Sanskrit Literature (London, 1931; reprint, Delhi, 1970), pp. 31ff.

664

GERALDJAMESLARSON

descend.After World War I, a highly elaborateddish, the U.S. Italo-Americans pizza of many sizes, flavors and hues, made its way back to Italy with visiting kinsfolkfrom America.The termand the objecthaveacquireda new meaningand a new status, as well as many new tastes in the land of its origin, not only in the south, but throughoutthe length and width of Italy.37 A somewhat similar kind of process took place in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries with respect to the Bhagavad G'td. When the British first came into power in India in the eighteenth century, Sanskrit texts like the G-itdwere not in much use except in some devotional circles and among the traditional pandits.38 Some of the officials of the East India Company set about the task of learning Indian languages, including Sanskrit, mainly for the purpose of translating didactic texts and legal treatises related to commerce and governance. Very soon, however, certain men like William Jones, Warren Hastings, Charles Wilkins, H. T. Colebrooke, and Baptist missionary William Cary became interested in Sanskrit and other Indian languages for reasons that went far beyond the commercial and legal interests of the earliest work. One of these additional reasons, incidentally, was purely linguistic: it was noted that Sanskrit had striking similarities to Greek and Latin. This discovery was to have profound implications in the nineteenth century in Germany, France, and England, for it became an important factor in the development of comparative philology, comparative mythology and religion, and Indo-European linguistics. At any rate, one of the first Sanskrit texts chosen for study as a good example of a simple, short didactic text was the Bhagavad Gitdu,and in 1785 Charles Wilkins published the first English translation.39 By a century later, after India had been radically transformed economically, politically, socially, linguistically, and spiritually, and Indians were regularly being sent to England for training for the British government service in India, Sir Edwin Arnold published his lovely poetic rendering of the Gi-tdinto English, entitled The Song Celestial.40 At about this time Gandhi was in London getting his legal training, and he describes his encounter with the G-ttdas follows: Now whilst in Englandmy contact with two Englishfriends made me read the Gita. I say "mademe read"becauseit was not of my own desirethat I readit. But whenthese two friendsasked me to readthe Gitawith them, I was ashamedof my ignorance.The knowledgeof my total ignoranceof my scripturespainedme. .... They placed before me Sir Edwin Arnold's magnificentrenderingof the Gita. I devoured the contents from cover to cover and was entrancedby it. The last
"The Hindu Renaissance and Its Apologetic Patterns,"Journal ofAsian Studies 29 37Bharati, (February 1970), p. 273. 38Thebibliography for the modern period is, of course, vast. Sources that I have especially used are the following: Percival Spear, India, A Modern History (Ann Arbor, 1961), pp. 185ff. and 277ff.; R. C. Majumdaret al., An Advanced History of India (New York, 1967), pp. 623ff.; David Kopf, British Orientalismand the Bengal Renaissance (Berkeley, 1969), pp. 22ff., 145ff., 215ff.; Martin D. Lewis, ed., The British in India (Lexington, Mass., 1962), passim; D. E. Smith, India as a Secular State (Princeton, 1963), pp. 65ff., 139ff., and South Asian Politics and Religion (Princeton, 1966), pp. 3-48, 235-48, and Religion and Political Modernization (New Haven, 1974), pp. 3-28, 135-46. 39Sir Charles Wilkins, trans., The Bhdgavdt-giita, or Dialogue of Kr"sh'ia and Arjddn (London, 1785). 40EdwinArnold, trans., The Song Celestial or Bhagavad GTtu-(Boston, 1896) and reprintedin vol. 2 of F. Edgerton's The Bhagavad GUTd.

THE Bhagavad

PROCESS Gita AS CROSS-CULTURAL

665

nineteen of thesecond onthetablet of my verses havesince beeninscribed chapter heart.Theycontainfor me all knowledge.41 Gandhithereafterstudied the text regularly,and eventuallytook it with him into his work and used it as a primarysource for his theory of truth (satya) and his doctrine of non-violence(ahimnsa). He was able to interpretthe text as asserting must be taken allegorically- that is to non-violenceby claiming that the G-tat our higherand lowernatures the armies on the two battlefield reallyrepresent say, foreverin conflict. Withoutdoubt, however,muchof the popularityof the G-ti in modern India, and one of the reasons for the G-tau's continuing interest as a modernreligiousdocument,is what Gandhiand otherIndiannationalistsdid with the text, turning it into a primary religious symbol of the Indian freedom movement.Yetthis primaryreligioussymbolwas mediatedto Gandhithroughthe of the very nineteenth-century Englishpoetry of Edwin Arnold, a representative in traditionagainstwhich the text was finallydirectedwhen it was re-enculturated its native tradition. Moreover, the text was mediated to Gandhi and the nationalists through a complex set of social forces operating throughout the nineteenthcenturyincludingthe work of WesternSanskritists,the transformation of the Indianeconomy by market-oriented capitalism,technologicalinnovations like the introduction of railroads, the political unification of India, the establishmentof a Western-style educationalsystem, the radical Westernization of Indian intellectuals,the influence (positive and negative) of Protestant and Catholicmissionaries,the establishmentof Britishparliamentary democracyas a becamea model for the IndianNational Congress,etc. In other words, the GTtd primarysymbolfor the Indianfreedom movementand for a new culturalidentity for modern India only after having passed through a radical cross-cultural mediationand transformation.Moreover,it is interestingto note the newcontext out of which the G~td emergesas a cultural symbol or emblem for a revivedand modern Hindu tradition - the context of men like Gandhi, B. G. Tilak, and so forth, all of whom have written on the Aurobindo Ghose, Vivekdinanda, All were (eitherin Indiaor Britain),and, thus all werepart Gctd. English-educated of a new elite, emergingprimarily as a resultof the educationalreformsthat began in 1835 with the victory of Macaulayism.42 All were on the defensive in various ways vis-A-visthe Christian missionaries, who had been allowed to enter the country freely after 1815. All were indebted to the early Britishorientalistswho revived Sanskritlearning, introduced newspapersand printing, encouragedthe developmentof vernacularlanguages,and set forth a classicistand enlightenment ideology that led these new members of the elite to appreciate their ancient traditions.43 All tended to pick up in one way or another the slogan, which still continues to survivein India and throughout Europeand the U.S. (at least on a popular level) of "the spiritual East and materialisticWest." Finally, all were Indiannationalists,influencedeither directly or indirectlyby nineteenth-century British political liberalism, and looking forward to a unified, spiritually regenerated,and politically free India, which could become a kind of spiritual teacheramong the nations. The Gilt in this context, then, is a kind of nationalist tract, as well as a symbol of universal spiritualityto be used as an apologetic
41M.K. Gandhi, in his weekly Young India, 12 November 1925, as quoted in The Message of the Gita (Ahmedabad, 1959). 42Fora useful discussion of Macaulayism, see Kopf, British Orientalism, pp. 215ff. 43Ibid.,pp. 22ff., 145ff.

666

GERALDJAMESLARSON

documentfor the spreadof neo-Hinduideas. It likewisebecomesa rationalization for radicalpoliticalaction (e.g., in Tilak'sinterpretation) and for the development The Gitd thus has of a new corporatework-ethic (in Gandhi'sinterpretation).44 come a long way from its earliest Sanskritizingsmrti-context;in this modern, nationalistcontext it has become indeed symbolic of a radicallynew way of life. This, of course, is only one contextual transformationthat has occurred mediation.Onecould also analyzeits modern, becauseof the GTta's cross-cultural Westernscholarlycontext in whichall of the eruditionof Europeanand American philology and historicalcriticismhave been heapedupon it and resultedin nearly countless translations. One could also analyze its many Westernexpressive or "confessional"contexts - for example, the Gitf according to the Veddnta Society, or accordingto MaharsiMaheshYogi, or accordingto the HareKrishna movement, or according to nineteenth-centuryGerman romanticism, and so forth.45 If one asks, then, precisely what the G-td is, one has to give a plural set of on one level, responses,rangingfrom an ancient smrti-text of the Mahdbhdrata, all the way to its being an emblem of the Indian nationalistmovementand to its or expressivestatementa portion of which can be chanted being a "confessional" as a kind of paja by Americanadherentsof the HareKrishnamovement,on other levels. What the GTti is, finally, is inseparable from its many contextual environments,ancientand modern,Easternand Western,scholarlyand popular, corporateand personal,secularand sacred - contextualenvironmentsthat have emerged in an on-going historical process and will continue to emerge as that historical process unfolds.
CONCLUSION

or "praxis-analysis," criticism" By pursuingwhat I am calling "socio-analytic some ratherinterestingparadoxesor dialecticalnegationsemergeas a resultof the on-going analysis, and as I indicatedin the Introductionto this essay, I want to
44B.G. Tilak, trans., SrTmad-Bhagavidgtad Rahasya (Poona, 1887);and Singer, Whena Great Tradition Modernizes, p. 337, and the full discussion, pp. 335-66. 45An interesting monograph could be written on the GTtdas symptomatic of trends in nineteenth- and twentieth-century European and American scholarly thought. One thinks, for example, of Richard Garbeand Rudolf Otto who applied all the ingenuity of Germanphilological criticism to the text claiming that the GiTt is highly composite with layers of brahmanical reworking. Or one thinks of Paul Deussen and other German historians of philosophy in the nineteenth century who found in the GTta and other classical Indian texts themes and variations on Kantian critical philosophy or decadent departures therefrom. Or one thinks of J. W. Hauer publishing in Germany in 1934 a study of the GTtawith the incredible title, Eine indo-arische Metaphysik des Kampfes und der Tat (Stuttgart, 1934). Or one thinks of the American scholar, Franklin Edgerton, who turns away from all attempts to resolve the metaphysical "contradictions"in the text and invites the reader to approach the GTtd simply as great poetry. And, finally, it is instructiveto take note of what some Marxists have done with the text. Typical is the comment by Kosambi, The Culture and Civilization of Ancient India, p. 209: ... The Gita is honoured oftener than read, and understood far less than it is recited. After such mixed ideas are displaced by clear-cut thinking based on a firm grasp of material reality, the work may still furnish some aesthetic pleasure for its power of expression and peculiar beauty. Thisfinal remark might even serve as epitaph to the whole of ancient Indian culture. (italics mine)

THE Bhagavad

PROCESS Gita AS CROSS-CULTURAL

667

concludeby drawingattentionto some of the more importantof these paradoxes or dialectical problems, which, in my view, raise interesting "ontological" questions. (1) The Bhagavad Gitd which at the outset-appearsto be an intra-cultural documentof ancientIndiabecomesa radicallytransformed cross-cultural process whichfinallytranscendsboth its Indiancontext as well as its non-Indiancontext. Not only are Western scholars dependent on a series of cross-cultural and of the GhSta; historicalmediationsfor their "knowledge" but even more than that, as I have tried to show, without the mediation of the British orientalists, the the riseof a new Indianelite, the poetryof EdwinArnold, victory of Macaulayism, the Bengalrenaissance,and so on, the Gftl would not be "known" in the manner in which it is now "known" even in India.Thus, an importantstep in any adequate assessmentof the natureof the G-td is to recognizethat it is not simplyan Indian document. Putting the matter another way, for a twentieth-century interpreter, whetherin Calcuttaor in Paris, the Gitad is as much an expressionof eighteenthand nineteenth-century classicist ideation and praxis as it is the ideation and in eighteenthpraxis of Gupta brahmanas.Similarly,the emergenceof the G'itd and nineteenth-century Britishconsciousnessis as mucha partof the social reality of Britishimperialism as is the developmentof moderntrade,a mechanizedarmy, and organizedindustrialization.Moreover,even when interpreters seek to grasp the meaningof the Gtad in its originalcontexts in India, priorto its cross-cultural is still mediatedby what Myrdalcalls the "mightytraditionin mediation,the Giitd ourdisciplinesand by the play of interestsand prejudices in the societyin whichwe live and work."Carefulscholarship,of course, can overcome or take account of some or even many of these distortions.The crucialpoint, however,is that even if one is successfulin puttingtogethera reasonablyaccuratepictureof whatthe Gitd was in a particularcontext in history,that can only be an abstractionof what the Grtdis in its fullnessas world-historical expression.In our time, whetherin India or in Europe, the Gtadcan only be cross-cultural. (2) The Bhagavad Gtadwhich at the outset appears to be a self-contained collection of Sanskritversesin eighteenchaptersbecomesa radicallytransformed and radically enlarged conversation unfolding in numerous contextual environmentsas one part of the history of society and culture. The Grtdis no longer one thing over against other things. The analysisnegatesthe G'td'sstatus - i.e., as a text or book or culturaldocument - and makes it as "something" become culturalexpressionvia Safikara,Raminuja, Tilak, Gandhi,Aurobindo, et al. Thus, an importantstep in any adequateasseSsment of the natureof the Gitd is to recognizethat it is not simplya self-contained"object" of study. Whatit is is from its appropriation, or what amountsto the samething;what it is is inseparable in inseparablefrom what it becomes in contextual transformation.The GItad, otherwords, no longerappearsto have an "inside" or an "outside"; its boundaries or limits become inextricablyinvolved with the cultural horizons in which it is used. The Gita transformsor negates those horizons and is in turn transformed and negatedby those horizons. The study of the G'td,then, is a study of these ongoing negations and double negations in which such distinctions as "textcontext," "Great Tradition-Little Traditions," and so forth, are continually overcomeand yet also reconstituted,but reconstitutedonly to be overcomeagain. Moreover,as the G'ti unfolds in historyit becomes a cumulativeconversationin which what sociologists call the "plausibility structures" of culture are symbolicallyarticulatedand acted out. The Gita becomessong, sacredrecitation,

668

GERALDJAMESLARSON

monisticphilosophy,exuberantdevotion, caste identity,maintenanceof dharma, and finally in modern contexts a corporate work-ethic, a neo-Hindu "New Testament,"and a symbol of national liberation. (3) The BhagavadGItawhichat the outset appearsto be a religiousdocument from the past becomesa process of culturalexpressionin my presentawareness. The GItai is a "speaking" which transformsme and changesmy understanding of and it a is whichat the sametime is radicallytransformed in my myself, "speaking" of what is spoken. I realize,however,that my "hearing" of what is very "hearing" spoken is differentfrom that of others,and I realizethat the contextual processes in whichothers"hear" the "speaking" also characterize I cannot, in my "hearing." other words, separatemyself from the process of interpretation.My "hearing" is is one "moment" alwaysin a dynamic,contextualenvironment,and my "hearing" in thatdynamicenvironment.I am not able to be an outsideobserversearchingfor the definitiveinterpretation or meaningof the Gtd. Or to express the point in a different if even I claim to be an outside observersimply tryingto slightly way, identifywhatthe Gftameant in the past, that veryclaimpresupposesa contextual environment which is itself historically mediated and is a "moment"in the cultural-historical the Gtta as a classical philologist or as an process. If I "hear" intellectual historian or as a cultural anthropologist or as a comparative philosopher, my "hearing"in each instance is finally inseparable from the of the Gftd,and my final interpretationinvariablyinvolves my own "speaking" awarenessas situated in a dynamic cultural-historicalprocess. This is not to of the meaningof suggest,however,that thereis no corrector valid interpretation the Gitd,and that the task of interpretation, therefore,is simplythat of collecting varyingviews, includingmy own. It is to suggest, rather,that a corrector valid of the GUta is a muchmorecomplex problemthan at firstappeared. interpretation A corrector valid interpretation involves construingthe Gttdas a cross-cultural process of "speaking"and "hearing"that is mediated through the complex negations of the philologist, the historian, the anthropologist, the traditional pandita, as well as the simple villager who recites the Gtad'sverses without the meaningof the words. In my act of interpretationI "totalize" understanding these negationsand seek to comprehendthe fullness of what the Gtad is as crosscultural process, but my very act of "totalization"in turn "totalizes"me as and transformsmy "interpretation" into an "actof interpreting" that is interpreter itself situatedin a dynamiccultural-historical process. In my act of interpretingI become a participantin the "cumulative conversation"which the GTtO is, just as Safikara,or Ramanuja,or Richard Garbe, or J. W. Hauerare participants.As such I occupy no privilegedposition in the "cumulative conversation."My act of to shift to a spatialmetaphor,is simplyanotherwindow being set in interpreting, of history and culture, a window out of which and into place in the "building" which other interpreters may hopefully wish to gaze.46 (4) The BhagavadGztdwhich at the outset appearsto be a concatenationof religious ideas becomes a process of social and cultural praxis. The Marxist interpreter,D. D. Kosambi,expresses this paradox nicely when he comments, ". . . The Gita is honoured oftener than read, and understoodfar less than it is recited.""47 That is to say, the Gt appears to have been appropriatedmore as
needless to say, I use the word "building"in a deliberately ambiguous way - i.e., as 46Perhaps a verb or a noun or both. 47Seenote 45.

PROCESS THE BhagavadGita AS CROSS-CULTURAL

669

social and cultural praxis than as religious "ideation."This calls to mind the to this essaybetweenthe religiousideationof distinctionmade in the Introduction the "veryfew"and the religiousactivityof "mostmen."At issuehereis not that the is ignored or overlooked, but explicit and self-conscious ideation of the GTtd ratherthat the "ideation" is in context aftercontext re-shapedand re-workedwith the Gttdon a markedlydifferentlevelfrom impunityfor the sake of appropriating that of self-consciousand systematicideation. The explicit ideas, in other words, are continuallynegated for the sake of religiouspraxis, although to be sure the religious praxis is itself dialectically related and, hence, fed by the ideational What appearsto be basic, however,is what might be called a preinterpretation. reflectiveand "totalized" religious praxis which somehow precedes the level of self-conscious religious ideation - a pre-reflective and "totalized" religious praxiswhich resemblessomethinglike the simplefaith or naivedevotionof "most men,"and which somehow legitimatesthe human situation as well as the larger dynamic social reality. One thinks here of Hegel's comment that "the owl of Minervaspreadsits wings only with the falling of dusk,"but one also thinks of observation,as quoted earlier,that "... most menin historyhavefelt the Berger's need for religious legitimation- only very few have been interested in the Although few of us pursuephilosophy in the developmentof religious ideas.""48 lengtheningshadows of evening, most of us pursuereligion in the simple act of faith that enables us to face the dawn. (5) One final paradox or negation. It may appear as if the methodological perspective and procedure that I am suggesting leads finally to a radical as the GOtd "Westernization" of the Gitd.It could be arguedthat I haveinterpreted being profoundlyhistorical,a documentwhich is reallya process, and a process comprehended or "totalized" from the perspective of a radical Sartrean historicism.Perhaps,but what is also the case is that I suspectthe analysisleads also to a point whichstretchesnotionslike "religion," "time," "history," "process," beyond the limits that Western usage would ordinarily allow. One could argue - and I offer this only as a tentative proposal that needs further reflection- that the negationof the GTtd by a radicalhistoricismwith a focus on praxisin turnleads to a second,even moreradicalnegation;namely,that our very and so forth, now call for a notions of "religion," "history,""time,""process," some of the resourcesfor which broader,enriched,and revitalizedinterpretation, will come from the ancient religioustraditions of India. Perhaps"religion" has been broadenedto mean now somethingmore like an enrichednotion of dharma. and "time" arenow betterunderstoodby notionscomingcloser Perhaps"history" to such Buddhist categories as anitya ("radicaltransience")or ksanikavdda ("radicalmomentariness"). Perhaps "process"and "praxis"should now be reexamined from the perspectiveof Indiannotions like karmaor karma-yoga.In otherwords,the "totalization" may bringus backin a provocativeway to the basic itself and to the milieu of ancient Indianthought, wherein, symbols of the GTtd however,both the immediacyof ancient Indiansocial realityand the immediacy of the social reality of our contemporarycategories, methods, and biases are transmutedinto a context that is neitherancient nor modern, neither Christian nor Hindu, neither humanistic nor social-scientific, but which is in some significantsense profoundly human.
48T.M. Knox, trans., Hegel's Philosophy of Right (Oxford, 1953), p. 13; and for the Berger quote, see note 1.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen