एवं बुद्धेः परं बुद्ध्वा संस्तभ्यात्मानमात्मना ।जहि शत्रुं महाबाहो कामरूपं दुरासदम् ॥
evaṁ buddheḥ paraṁ buddhvā saṁstabhyātmānamātmanājahi śatruṁ mahābāho kāmarūpaṁ durāsadam
Thus awakening by the understanding to the Highest which is beyond even the discerning mind, putting force on the self by the self to make it firm and still, slay thou, O mighty-armed, this enemy in the form of desire, who is so hard to assail.
Compiled rendering · Anilbaran Roy
AI translation
His translation
KRISHNA It is craving, it is wrath, the child of Rajoguna, Mode of Passion. Know him for the Fiend, the Enemy of man’s soul here upon earth, a great devourer, a mighty sinner. As a fire engirt with smoke, as a mirror covered with dust, as the unborn child with the caul, so is the universe by him enveloped. By him knowledge is besieged and girt round, O son of Coonty, by this eternal enemy of the wise, this insatiable fire of desire and passion. The senses, the soul and the overmind, these are the places of his session, with these he cloudeth over knowledge and bewildereth the embodied spirit. Therefore in the beginning constrain the senses, O lion of the Bharats, and slay that accursed with the sword of Knowledge and Discernment. High, say the wise, reign the senses, but the heart is higher than they & the overmind is higher than the heart, he who is higher than the overmind, that is He. Thus when thou hast understood Him who is higher than the overmind, slay thy enemy, O strong-armed, even that terrible and invincible one, whose shape is passion.
Essays on the Gita
But the Gita accepts this Stoic discipline, this heroic philosophy, on the same condition that it accepts the tamasic recoil, — it must have above it the sattwic vision of knowledge, at its root the aim at self-realisation and in its steps the ascent to the divine Nature. A Stoic discipline which merely crushed down the common affections of our human nature, — although less dangerous than a tamasic weariness of life, unfruitful pessimism and sterile inertia, because it would at least increase the power and self-mastery of the soul, — would still be no unmixed good, since it might lead to insensibility and an inhuman isolation without giving the true spiritual release. The Stoic equality is justified as an element in the discipline of the Gita because it can be associated with and can help to the realisation of the free immutable Self in the mobile human being, paraṁ dṛṣṭvā, and to status in that new self-consciousness, eṣā brāhmī sthitiḥ. “Awakening by the understanding to3·43 the Highest which is beyond even the discerning mind, put force on the self by the self to make it firm and still, and slay this enemy who is so hard to assail, Desire.” Both the tamasic recoil of escape and the rajasic movement of struggle and victory are only justified when they look beyond themselves through the sattwic principle to the self-knowledge which legitimises both the recoil and the struggle.
“Slay then desire; put away attachment to the possession and enjoyment of the outwardness of things. Separate yourself from all that comes to you as outward touches and solicitations, as objects of the mind and senses. Learn to bear and reject all the rush of the passions and to remain securely seated in your inner self even while they rage in your members, until at last they cease to affect any part of your nature. Bear and put away similarly the forceful attacks and even the slightest insinuating touches of joy and sorrow. Cast away liking and disliking, destroy preference and hatred, root out shrinking and repugnance. Let there be a calm indifference to these things and to all the objects of desire in all your nature. Look on them with the silent and tranquil regard of an impersonal spirit.
Other writings
The Mosaic commandment is consistent in itself & with the spirit of the Decalogue. These Judaic moral Ten Tables start from an uncompromising dualism; their conception of righteousness is the straight road decreed for our walking by a personal Deity as different from His ephemeral creatures as the great eternal ocean from the soon-dried & inconsiderable puddles in a rainswept highway. The particular prohibition of covetousness stands partly on the idea of the morally seemly, the epieikes of the Greeks; much more (and in the Jewish temperament entirely) it rests on the stronger & more mechanical conception of legal justice between man and man, the Greek dikaion. In either case, it proceeds, like all ethics, from an original acceptance of the egoistic outlook on the universe; starting from the symbols I and thou, mine and thine, its aim and business is not to get rid of the ego-sense but to regulate and check those of its fierce and disorderly movements which poison individual peace and disturb social well-being. Even altruistic ethics starts from this fundamental recognition of egoism. Except in the Vedantised teachings of the Buddha, it does not seek to annul,—rather altruism lives & satisfies itself by an inverse satisfaction of the ego. But the whole aim and spirit of the Vedanta is to annul, to kill, to root out the ego-sense. Similarly ordinary ethics seeks to check, scold and limit desire, as an unruly servant, but would shrink from killing it as an enemy. We are, indeed, allowed by some systems to extend and pasture this eternal hunger, others permit us to satisfy it under severe restrictions; but always we must satisfy desire ethically, with justice & decency, with the sense of measure of the Greeks, avoiding the aischron, the adikon, the perversion, or with the religious enthusiasm of the Jews, shunning offence to the Lord of Righteousness. We must indulge it [in] what we possess or can lawfully acquire, our own wives, not the wives of others, our own wealth, not others’ gold and silver and horses and cattle. But in Vedanta, it is wholly improbable that we should have any such ethical & social preaching of the epieikes & the dikaion. The principle of the Vedanta is to make no compromise with the inner enemy, but rather merciless war ending in its utter extinction, jahi shatrum durásadam.
Writings in Bengali
Srihak does not want to tread that path; he is eager to make the country strong through the power of intellect. I have no objection; let everyone act according to their own thoughts and inspirations. The direct point is that for one who considers this intellect to be paramount, the concept of Yoga is nothing but a riddle and self-deception. The very first foundation of Yoga is that there is something beyond intellect, yo buddheḥ paratastu saḥ (He who is beyond the intellect). The development and purification of the intellect are indeed necessary. Either by first realizing God through the self-established vision that opens the closed doors of the intellect, or by experiencing Him in the secret recesses of the heart, and then transcending the intellect. The Gita also says, buddheryah param buddhva samstabhyaatmanamatmana (Knowing Him who is beyond the intellect, steadying the self by the Self). He who is above the intellect, understanding Him with the help of an intellect greater than itself, it is ordained to subordinate the smaller self to the greater Self, the little ‘I’ to the big ‘I’, the human ego to the indwelling Supreme Self (Paramatma Purushottama). The path of the rationalist and the path of the seeker of the Self (atmavadi) are different; the laws of motion, power, and faith are distinct; the language of the traveler is also distinct. Both Srihak and I use the word ‘God’ (Bhagavat), but his intellectual conception of God and my inner experience of Him have not the slightest resemblance. The word is one, the meaning different. What use is argument in such a case? If he writes in English and I in French, with a similar outcome, the same result is likely here. I can understand his English, but why would he understand my French? I understand his state of mind, it is a common human sentiment; it is not that I too did not once have similar thoughts, arguments, and doubts when I was a rationalist, atheist, or agnostic, and had not directly perceived God. My state and direct experience (direct experience) he has not had. When one does not know a thing, the language in which it is expressed is merely the language of empty imagination for him. Srihak’s imagined God is banished from the human mind-field; I have no objection. No one can banish the true God – not Srihak, not Voltaire, not materialistic science. He moves the atheist, He moves the theist too; He is the indweller of all, the all-controller.
শ্রীহক সেই পথ মাড়াইতে চান না, বুদ্ধির বলেই দেশকে বলবান করিতে উৎসুক, আমার আপত্তি নাই, সবাই স্ব স্ব চিন্তা ও প্রেরণার স্রোতে কর্ম্মে লাগুন। সাক্ষাৎ কথা এই বুদ্ধিকেই যে প্রধান বলে তাহার পক্ষে যোগের কথা প্রহেলিকা আত্মপ্রবঞ্চনা ভিন্ন আর কিছুই নয়। যোগের প্রথম ভিত্তি এই যে বুদ্ধির উপরে কিছু আছে, যো বুদ্ধেঃ পরতস্তু সঃ। বুদ্ধির বিকাশ ও বিশুদ্ধতা ত চাইই। হয় প্রথম ভগবানকে বুদ্ধির বদ্ধ দ্বারের উদ্ঘাটনে স্বধানপ্রতিষ্ঠিত দর্শন করিয়া, নয় হৃদয়ের গুপ্ত স্তরে অনুভব করিয়া তাহার পরে বুদ্ধির অতীত হই। গীতায়ও বলে, এবং বুদ্ধেঃ পরং বুদ্ধ্বা সংস্তভ্যাত্মানমাত্মনা। যিনি বুদ্ধির উপরে, বুদ্ধি হইতে মহৎ বুদ্ধির সাহায্যেই তাঁহাকে বুঝিয়া smaller selfকে greater self-এর, ক্ষুদ্র আমিকে বড় আমির, মানুষের অহংকে অন্তরস্থ পরমাত্মা পুরুষোত্তমের বশ করা বিহিত। বুদ্ধিবাদী ও আত্মবাদীর পথ বিভিন্ন, গতির নিয়ম শক্তি আস্থা স্বতন্ত্র, পথিকের ভাষাও স্বতন্ত্র। আমি ও শ্রীহক দুইজনেই ভগবৎ শব্দ প্রয়োগ করি, কিন্তু ভগবৎসম্বন্ধে তাঁহার বুদ্ধির ধারণা আর আমার অন্তরের অনুভব, এই দুইটীর বিন্দুমাত্র ঐক্য নাই। শব্দ এক, অর্থ বিভিন্ন। এই স্থলে তর্কের কি উপকার? তিনি যদি ইংরাজী আমি যদি ফরাসী লিখি, যেমন ফল হয়, এই ক্ষেত্রে সেই ফলই হওয়া সম্ভব। তাহার ইংরাজী আমি বুঝিতে পারিব, আমার ফরাসী তিনি বুঝিবেন কেন। তাহার মনের ভাব আমি বুঝি, মনুষ্য সাধারণের ভাব, আমারও একদিন সেই ধরনের চিন্তা তর্ক সন্দেহ যে হয় নি তাহা নহে, যখন আমিও বুদ্ধিবাদী নাস্তিক বা agnostic ছিলাম, ভগবানকে প্রত্যক্ষ করি নাই। আমার যে ভাব ও প্রত্যক্ষ দর্শন (direct experience) তাহার হয় নাই, জিনিষটী যখন চেনেন না, যে ভাষায় তাহা ব্যক্ত হয়, তাহার পক্ষে শূন্য কল্পনার ভাষা মাত্র। শ্রীহকের কল্পিত ভগবানকে মনুষ্যের মানসক্ষেত্র হইতে বিতাড়িত হন, আমার আপত্তি নাই, সত্য ভগবানকে কেহ বিতাড়িত করিবেন না, শ্রীহকও নয়, Voltaireও নয়, জড়বাদী বিজ্ঞানও নয়। তিনি নাস্তিককেও চালান, আস্তিককেও
Letters
At the same time it is also taught in the Gita that this world is a world of obscurity and ignorance and to attain to the Divine one must overcome certain forces of Nature, such as Desire, which the Gita calls the enemy difficult to overcome. It is in this sense that we speak of hostile forces—those which stand in the way of coming out of the Ignorance and attaining to the consciousness of the Divine.
Remember what is the whole basis of the Yoga. It is not founded upon the vehement emotionalism of the Bhakti-marga to which the temperament of Bengal is most prone, though it has a different kind of Bhakti, but on samata and atma-samarpana. Obedience to the divine Will, not assertion of self-will, is the very first mantra. But what can be a more violent assertion of self-will than to demand the result you desire, whether external or internal, at once, এই মুহূর্তে এই ক্ষনে and not in God’s muhurta, God’s moment? You say that there is complete utsarga, but it cannot be complete, if there is any kind of revolt or vehement impatience. Revolt and impatience mean always that there is a part of the being or something in the being which does not submit, has not given itself to God, but insists on God going out of his way to obey it. That may be very well in the Bhaktimarga, but it will not do on this Way. The revolt and impatience may come and will come in the heart or the prana when these are still subject to imperfection and impurity; but it is then for the will and the faith in your buddhi to reject them, not to act upon them. If the will consents, approves and supports them, it means that you are siding with the inner enemy. If you want rapid progress, the first condition is that you should not do this; for every time you do it, the enemy is strengthened and the shuddhi postponed. This is a difficult lesson to learn, but you must learn it. I do not find fault with you for taking long over it, I myself took full twelve years to learn it thoroughly, and even after I knew the principle well enough, it took me quite four years and more to master my lower nature in this respect. But you have the advantage of my experience and my help; you will be able to do it more rapidly, if you consciously and fully assist me, by not associating yourself with the enemy Desire; jahi kâmam durâsadam, remember that utterance of the Gita, it is a keyword of our Yoga.
