No, it is not. Then who says it is so? The Christians and Muslims. More so Western critics. But are they competent to be judges of the Indian heritage? I do not think so.
What about the Hindus? They are even worse, for they not only know nothing of their religion, but also, like zombies, continues to imitate the West. Tagore called them ?the shadows.?
The West has been saying that the Gita is all ?mumbo-jumbo?, full of self-contradictions. Such has been the allegation.
What are the facts? It is true great contrariness meet and mingle in the Gita. But this is the way with Hinduism. It affirms and denies.
Hinduism is not a one-time revelation as the Semitic faiths are, but a growing tradition. It has grown with the Hindus. The Lord says in the Gita: Whatever paths men travel in is my path; no matter where they walk, it leads to me. Hindus take pride in their diversity.
Naturally, our rishis have discovered many paths. And it is for each Hindu to choose his path according to his nature. Which is why the Hindu quest for the right path will continue. This is totally beyond the comprehension of Christians and Muslims.
Any quest implies freedom of enquiry and a multiplicity of paths. Thus the Gita does not give us one path, but different paths. Which is why it looks as if the Gita is full of contrary advices by Krishna.
Krishna does not project all the paths. He merely says that they all lead to him. But he chooses three paths: Karma, Jnana and Bhakti. To the Bhakta, he says that his path is the best for him. To the Karma yogi, he says that his path is the best for him. And to the Jnani he says that his path is best for him. He never says that one is superior to the others. If such an impression is gained by reading the Gita, it is a falsification by the priests. Each one according to his nature?this is the Gita principle.
On the inclusive nature of Hinduism, this is what Gandhiji had said: ?What is said of Vyasa'screation (Mahabharata) is equally true of Hinduism as a whole and what is of substance in any other religion is always found in Hinduism, and what is not contained in it is insubstantial and unnecessary.? This explains why the Hindus have refused to convert to Christianity or Islam. They can teach us nothing.
The Gita is the most popular scripture of the Hindus. Gandhiji says: ?When doubts haunt me, when disappointments stare in the face and I cannot see a ray of hope in the horizon, I turn to the Gita and find a verse to comfort me.? This is exactly how the Gita has comforted the Hindus throughout the millennia.
The Gita is the greatest work of a spiritual nature in human history. ?The most beautiful, perhaps the only true philosophical song, existing in any known language,? according to Von Humboldt, a German lover of India.
Our young are eager to imitate the West and defend their ways. But that is because they know nothing of Hinduism.
We are still on the surface of Vedic and other Hindu literatures and yet critics are ready to dismiss our heritage. They can teach nothing, they say, and our young men lend ear to them.
There is an effort to politicise the Gita and streamline Hinduism. That goes against its fundamental ethos, which was to encourage a multiplicity of beliefs.
There is thus nothing that the Hindu has not thought of. Max Mueller agrees. He says that ?the Hindu mind has most fully pondered over the greatest problems of life.?
The most vital issue of our age is whether the future progress of humanity is to be governed by the economic and materialist trends in the West or by a nobler pragmatism, guided, uplifted and enlightened.
Can India provide that ?nobler pragmatism?? It can. It has the best background to do that. But our zombies prefer to play the caliben because they know nothing of Hinduism. Thus a ?nobler pragmatism? can come only from India'snationalist forces.
