Vol. 3 · pages 391–395

378 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES obvious. Often it is expounded without any question by Arjuna and whenever it has been propounded in answer to a question that question has nothing to do with the war. This shows that the philosophic parts of the Bhagvat Gita are not parts of the original Gita but have been added later on and in order to find a place for them, new, appropriate and leading questions have been put in the mouth of Arjuna which have nothing to do with the mundane problems of war. (iv) The third patch on the oriinal Bhagvat Gita consists of verses in which Krishna is elevated from the position of Ishwara to that of Parmeshwara. This patch can be easily detected as being chapters X and XV where Krishna says: (Quotation not mentioned) …….. As I said, to go in for a precise date for the composition of the Bhagvat Gita is to go on a fool’s errand and that if an attempt in that direction is to be of any value, effort must be directed to determine the date of each patch separately. Proceeding in this way it is possible that what I have called the original unphilosophic Bhagvat Gita was part of the first edition of the Mahabharata called Jaya. The first patch on the original Bhagvat Gita in which Krishna is depicted as Ishvara must be placed in point of date sometimes later than Megasthenes when Krishna was only a tribal God,1 How much later it is not possible to say. But it must be considerably later. For it must be remembered that the Brahmins were not friendly to Krishnaism in the beginning. In fact they were opposed to it. 2 It must have taken some time before the Brahmins could have become reconciled to Krishna worship. 3 The second patch on the original Bhagvat Gita having reference to Sankhya and Vedanta must for reason already given be placed later than the Sutras of Jaimini and Badarayana. The question of the date of these Sutras has carefully been examined by Prof. Jacobi 4. His conclusion is that these Sutras were composed sometime between 200 and 450 A.D. The third patch on the original Bhagvat Gita in which Krishna is raised into Parmeshvara must be placed during the reign of the Gupta Kings. The reason is obvious. Gupta kings made Krishna-Vasudev their family deity as their opponents the Shaka kings had made 1 Dr. Bhandarkar in his ‘Saivism and Vaishnavism’ says, “If the Vasudeva Krishna worship prevailed in the time of the first Maurya it must have originated long before the establishment of the Maurya dynasty.” This is an unexceptionable statement. But it seems to me that a distinction must be made between Krishna as a tribal God and Krishna as an universalized Ishwara. The date for the first may be what Dr. Bhandarkar suggests but the same cannot be the date for the second. In the Gita we are concerned with the second. 2 See Shamshastri Memorial Volume. 3 The opposition to Krishnaism has been expressed by so late a person as Shankaracharya. 4 The dates of the Philosophical Sutras or the Brahmans—in the journal of the American Oriental Society—Vol. XXXI 1911.

379 KRISHNA AND HIS GITA Mahadeo their family deity. The Brahmins to whom religion has been a trade, who were never devoted to one God but came forward to worship the deity of the ruling race thought of pleasing their masters by making their family deity into a high and mighty Parmeshvar. If this is correct explanation then this patch on the original Bhagvat Gita must be placed between 400 and 464 A.D. All this goes to confirm the view that the attempt to place the Bhagvat Gita prior in point of time to Buddhism cannot succeed. It is the result of wishful thinking on the part of those who have inherited a positive dislike to Buddha and his revolutionary gospel. History does not support it. History proves quite abnormally that at any rate those portions of the Bhagvat Gita which have any doctrinal value are considerably later in point of time to the Buddhist canon and the Sutras of Jaimini and Badarayana. The discussion of the dates not only proves that the Bhagvat Gita is later than Hinayana Buddhism but is also later than Mahayana Buddhism. The impression prevails that Mahayana Buddhism is later in origin. It is supposed to have come into being after A.D. 100 when Kanishka held the third Buddhist Council to settle the dissension in the Buddhist Church. This is absolutely a mistake. 1 It is not true that after the Council a new creed of Buddhism came into existence. What happened is that new names of abuse came into existence for parties which were very old. As Mr. Kimura has shown the Mahayanist is simply another name for the sect of Buddhists known as Mahasanghikas. The sect of Mahasanghikas had come into being very much earlier than is supposed to be the case. If tradition be believed the sect had come into being at the time of the First Buddhist Council held at Pataliputra 236 years after the death of Buddha i.e., 307 B.C 2 for settling the Buddhist canon and is said to have led the opposition to the Theravad sect of Buddhism which later on came to be stigmatized as Hinayana (which means those holding to the low path). There could hardly be any trace of Bhagvat Gita when the Mahasanghikas later known as Mahayanists came into being. Apart from this what have the Mahayanists borrowed from the Bhagvat Gita? Indeed what can they borrow from the Bhagvat Gita? As Mr. Kimura points out the doctrine of every school of Buddhism is mainly concerned at least with three doctrines: (1) Those which deal with cosmic existence; (2) Those which deal with Buddhology; and (3) Those which deal with conception of human life. Mahayana is no 1 On the whole subject see—A Historical study of the terms Hinayana and Mahayana and the origin of Mahayana Buddhism—by Ryukan Kimura, Cal. University 1927. 2 This is if the date of Buddha’s death is taken to be 543 B.C. and would be 217 B.C. if the date of his death is taken to be 453 B.C.

380 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES exception to this. Except probably on Buddhology the Mahayanists could hardly use the Bhagvat Gita to draw upon So different is the aproach of the two on the other doctrines and even this possibility is excluded by the factor of time. The foregoing discussion completely destroys the only argument that could be urged against my thesis—namely that the Bhagvat Gita is very ancient, pre-Buddhistic in origin and therefore could not be related to Jaimini’s Purva Mimansa and treated as an attempt to give a philosophic defence of his counter-revolutionary doctrines. To sum up, my thesis is three-fold. In other words it has three parts. First is that the Bhagvat Gita is fundamentally a counter-revolutionary treatise of the same class as Jamini’s Purva Mimansa—the official Bible of counter-revolution. Some writers relying on verses 40-46 of Chapter II hold the view that the Bhagvat Gita is (In all the copies available with us, the essay has been left here incomplete, as is seen from the above sentence —Editors.) zz

CHAPTER 14 Analytical Notes of Virat Parva & Udyog Parva VIRAT PARVA 1. The spies sent by Kauravas to search for the existence of the Pandavas return to Duryodhan and tell him that they are unable to discover them. They ask his permission as to what to do.—Virat Parva, Adhya. 25. 2. Duryodhan asks for advice from his advisers. Karna said send other spies. Dushasan said they might have gone beyond the sea. But search for them.—Ibid. —Adhya. 26. 3. Drona said the Pandavas are not likely to be defeated or destroyed. They may be living as Tapasis, therefore send Siddhas and Brahamins as spies—Ibid. Adhya 27. 4. Bhishma supports Drona— Ibid Adhya. 28. 5. Kripacharya supported Bhishma and added—Pandavas are great enemies. But wise man does not neglect even small enemies. While they are in Agnyatavasa you should go on collecting armies from now.— Ibid Adhya. 29. 6. Then Susharma King of Trigarth raised quite a different subject. He said that Kichaka who was the Senapati of King Virat I hear dead, King Virat is to give us great trouble. Kichaka having been dead Virat must have become very weak. Why not invade the Kingdom of Virat ? This is the most opportune time. Karna also supported Susharma. Why worry about the Pandavas, these Pandavas are without wealth, without army and fallen. Why bother with them? They might have even been dead by now. Give up the search and let undertake the project of Susharma—Ibid Adhya. 30. 7. Susharma’s invasion of Vairat. Susharma carries away the cows of Virat. The cow herds go and inform Virat of this and ask him to pursue Susharma and rescue the cows.— Ibid Adhya. 31. 8. Virat became ready for war. In the meanwhile Shatanik the younger brother of Virat suggested that instead of going alone he

382 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES might take with him Rank (Sahadeo) Ballava (Yudhishtira) Santipal (Bhima) and Granthik (Nakula) to help him to fight Susharma. Virat agreed and they all went— Ibid. Adhya. 31. 9. War between Shusharma and Virat— Ibid Adhya. 32. 10. Yudhishthira rescues Virat.— Ibid. Adhya. 33. 11. Announcement in the Virat Nagari that their King is safe.— Ibid Adhya. 34. ENTRY IN VIRAT NAGARI BY KAURVAS 12. While King Virat went after Susharman Duryodhan with Bhishma, Drona, Karna, Krapa, Ashvashthama, Shakuni, Dushashana, Vivinshali, Vikama, Chitrasen, Durmukha, Dushala and other warriers entered the Virat Nagari and captured the cows of Virat and were going away. The cowherds came to the palace of King Virat and gave the news. They need not find the King but they found his son Uttar. so they gave him the news.—Ibid Adhya. 35. 13. Uttar began to boast saying he was superior to Arjuna and would do the job. But his complaint was that there was no one to act his Sarathi. Draupadi went and told him that Brahannada was at one time the Sarathi of Arjuna. Why not ask him? He said he had no courage and requested Draupadi to make the request. Why not ask your younger sister Manorama. So he told Manorama to bring Brahannada— Ibid Adhya. 36. 14. Manorama takes Brahannada to his brothers and Uttara persuades him to be his Sarathi. Brahannada agreed and took the Rath of Uttara in front of the Kauravas— Ibid. Adhya. 37. 15. On seeing the army of the Kauravas Uttara left the Rath and started running away. Arjuna stopped him. The Kauravas seeing this began to suspect that the man might be Arjuna. Arjuna told him not to be afraid— Ibid Adhya. 38. 16. Arjuna took his Ratha to the Shami tree. Seeing this Drona said he must be Arjuna. Hearing this the Kauravas were greatly upset. But Duryodhana said if Drona is right it is good for us. Because it is before the thirteenth year that the Pandavas will have been discovered and they will have to suffer Vanavas again for 12 years.— Ibid Adhya. 39. 17. Arjuna asks Uttara to climb the Shami tree and to take down the weapons.—Ibid Adhya. 40. 18. Uttara’s doubts about the corpse on the Shami Tree—Ibid Adhya. 41. 19. Uttara’s excitement after seeing the weapons— Ibid Adhya. 42. 20. Arjuna’s description of the weapons.— Ibid Adhya. 43.