Thread by @Profdilipmandal

A Thread. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar has written extensively on #Gita and interpreted it for the public too. For Ambedkar, Gita is “Manusmriti in a nutshell.” 🧵👇

Ambedkar believed that the Manusmriti, the Vedas and the Gita are all woven in the same pattern and same threads run through them. He denounces those who say that - “Manusmriti is problematic, but Gita is good.”

According to Ambedkar, the difference is only in the detailing, not in the idea or philosophy. For him, all religious books of Hinduism – other than Upanishads – were written by the Brahmins who injected the same doctrine in all these books.

Ambedkar writes that it is actually Gita in which caste system is systematically ordained and explained. Ambedkar quotes from chapter 18 of Gita (41- 44) –

“O, Parantapa! the respective duties of Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (warriors), Vaishyas (tradesmen) and Shudras (menials) have been individually fixed with reference to the qualities arising from their inherent natures, that is, from Prakriti…”

“The inherently natural duties of a Brahmin are peace, self-restrain, religious austerities, cleanliness, quietness, straightforwardness (humanity). Knowledge (that is, spiritual knowledge), Vijnana (that is imperial knowledge) and Astikya-budhi (that is belief in a future world)

“The inherently natural duty (karma) of the Kshatriya is bravery, brilliance, courage, intentness, not running away from the battle, generosity, and exercising authority (over subject people)…”

“goraksya’ (that is, the business of keeping cattle), and vanijya (that is, trade) is the inherently natural duty of the Vaishya; and in the same way, service is the inherently natural duty of the Shudra.”

Ambedkar concludes that Gita is neither a book of religion nor a book of philosophy. The intent behind writing Bhagavad Gita was to defend certain dogmas of religion on philosophical grounds. Ambedkar, the lawyer, goes on to demolish these dogmas one by one.

The first dogma propounded by Gita is that the body and the soul are separate. It provides a philosophical defence of war and killing in war, and argues that since the soul is eternal and imperishable, it is wrong to say that when a man is killed his soul is also killed

Thus, according to Gita, war and killings should not become grounds for remorse or shame.

The defence of war offered by the Bhagvat Gita proceeds along two lines of argument. One line of argument is that anyhow the world is perishable and man is mortal. The second argument in justification of war is that it is a mistake to think that the body and the soul are one.

The second dogma, according to Ambedkar, is Chaturvarnya (four Varna system), for which Gita provides two defences. The first line of defense is that Varna system is the creation of Supreme God and thus it can’t be questioned.

But as this defence is based completely on blind faith, it can’t withstand the logical ideas, so Gita also provides a philosophical basis to the theory of Chaturvarnya by linking it to the theory of innate, inborn qualities in men.

Ambedkar says that the soul of the Bhagavad Gita seems to be the defence of Chaturvarnya and securing its observance in practice.

Ambedkar goes on to argue that the Gita provided Varna system a philosophic, and therefore permanent, basis which it never had before and without which the system would not have survived to date.

For Ambedkar, Gita is the culprit that made Indians still continue with the system of graded inequality based on birth.

The third dogma, according to Ambedkar, is Karma Kands. Ambedkar said that Gita has removed the ugliness of Karma Kands or rituals by two means.

One, Gita introduces the principle of Buddhi Yoga or Stihtaprajna to the Karma Kands. It gives a basis to the rituals by saying that Karma Kand should not be done under blind faith but Buddhi should be applied.

And two, it introduces the principles of Anasaktior Nishkam, saying Karma should not have any attachment for the fruits (results).

In the Gita, Karma is not speaking of activity or inactivity in general, but of religious acts and observances.

Ambedkar wrote that by ‘Karma Yoga’, Gita means the dogmas contained in Jaimini’s Karma Kanda. He argues that Tilak should be blamed for the misconception that the Bhagavad Gita is an independent self-contained book with no relation to the literature that preceded it.

Ambedkar further explains that ‘Krishna tells everyone (to) do the duty prescribed for his Varna and no other, and warns his devotees that they will not obtain salvation through mere devotion, but through devotion accompanied by observance of duty laid down for his Varna.’

“In short, a Shudra, however great he may be as a devotee, will not get salvation if he has transgressed the duty of the Shudra — namely to live and die in the service of the higher classes,” Ambedkar wrote.

The most important critique of Gita provided by Ambedkar is that it was written to save the Karma Kand and Varna system from the attack of Buddhism.