Bhagavadgītā: The Celestial Song

By Raphael Āśram Vidyā Order

The Bhagavadgītā belongs to the VI book of the Mahābhārata, the great Indian epic attributed to the legendary Vyāsa. It is a poetic and philosophical work which in time is placed in the V century B.C. Together with the Brahmasūtra and the classical Upaniṣads it constitutes the Praśthānatraya, the "Threefold Science" of Vedānta.

<

• Language: English
• Publisher: Aurea Vidya
• Release date: Aug 10, 2022
• ISBN: 9781931406420

Raphael Āśram Vidyā Order

Raphael is a Master in the Metaphysical Tradition of East and West. He has written several books on the pathway of Non-duality (Advaita) and has translated a number of key Vedānta texts from the Sanskrit. He has also commented on the Orphic Tradition and compared it to the works of Plato, Parmenides, and Plotinus. Raphael interprets spiritual practice as a 'Pathway of Fire', which disciples follow in all branches of the Tradition; it is the 'Way of Return'. All disciples follow their own 'Path of Fire' in accordance with that branch of the Tradition to which they belong. According to Raphael, what is important is to express, through living and being, the truth that one has been able to contemplate. Thus, for all beings, their expression of thought and action must be coherent and in agreement with their own specific dharma.After more than 60 years of Teaching, in both oral and written format, Raphael withdrew into mahāsamādhi. May Raphael's Consciousness, an expression of the Unity of Tradition, guide and illumine along this Opus all those who donate their mens informalis (formless mind) to the attainment of the highest known Realisation.

Book preview

Aurea Vidyā Collection*

––––––––– 13 –––––––––

* For a complete list of Publications see page 447.

Bhagavadgītā

All Rights © Āśram Vidyā

Via Azone 20 – 00165 Rome, Italy

This book was originally published in Italian in 1974 as Bhagavagītā, Il Canto del Beato, Edited by Raphael, by Associazione Ecoculturale Parmenides (formerly Edizioni Āśram Vidyā) – Seventh Edition 2015.

First Published in English in 2012 by

Aurea Vidyā, New York

Revised Edition 2018

The proceeds from this book – to which there are no Author’s rights – will be used for reprints. The contents of this book may not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher, except for the quotation of brief passages in criticism, by citing the source.

ISBN 978-1-93846-42-0

Library of Congress Control Number 2012906472

On the cover: Paolo Uccello, ‘The Battle of San Romano – Niccolò da Tolentino leading the Florentines,’ National Gallery, London.

Bhagavadgītā

The Celestial Song

by

Raphael

(Āśram Vidyā Order)

If you crave immortality, hold the thunderbolt of rightful action (karmayoga) and tear the doubt that constrains you. This work unveils the secret of ‘non-binding’ action.

Raphael

Table of Contents

Foreword

Preface

BHAGAVADGĪTĀ

Chapter I

Arjuna’s Despair

Reflections on Chapter I

Chapter II

Realization According to Sāṁkhya

Reflections on Chapter II

Chapter III

Karmayoga

Reflections on Chapter III

Chapter IV

In Praise of Jñānayoga

Reflections on Chapter IV

Chapter V

The Yoga of True Renunciation of Action

Reflections on Chapter V

Chapter VI

Dhyānayoga

Reflections on Chapter VI

Chapter VII

The Yoga of Knowledge and Science of Distinction

Reflections on Chapter VII

Chapter VIII

Brahmayoga, the Yoga of the Indestructible Absolute

Reflections on Chapter VIII

Chapter IX

The Yoga of Royal Knowledge and Sovereign Mystery

Reflections on Chapter IX

Chapter X

The Yoga of Sovereign Manifestation

Reflections on Chapter X

Chapter XI

The Vision of the Universal Form

Reflections on Chapter XI

Chapter XII

The Paths Leading to the Divine

Reflections on Chapter XII

Chapter XIII

The Yoga of the Distinction between the Field and the Knower of the Field

Reflections on Chapter XIII

Chapter XIV

The Yoga of the Transcendence of the Three Guṇas

Reflections on Chapter XIV

Chapter XV

Puruṣottamayoga

Reflections on Chapter XV

Chapter XVI

The Yoga of the Distinction between Divine Nature and Āsuric Nature

Reflections on Chapter XVI

Chapter XVII

The Distinction of the Threefold Faith

Reflections on Chapter XVII

Chapter XVIII

The Yoga of Liberation through Renunciation

Reflections on Chapter XVIII

Sanskrit Text

Glossary

Raphael: Unity of Tradition

FOREWORD

The Bhagavadgītā belongs to Book VI of the Mahābhārata, the great Indian epic attributed to the legendary Vyāsa. It is a poetic and philosophical work which in time is placed in the fifth century B.C. Together with the Brahmasūtra and the classical Upaniṣads it constitutes the Prasthānatraya, the ‘Threefold Science’ of Vedānta.

The Bhagavadgītā came to light in a moment of both contrasts and new inner requirements of the Indian people. It contributed to the vitality of the Upaniṣadic flame of Knowledge, while it pacified the prevailing philosophical and spiritual debates of the times. The Gītā clarified the unity of Truth in its multifarious aspects, and in so doing it provided all, in a wise and enlightened way, with the opportunity of following without doctrinal conflicts the most appropriate path for each person.

In the Preface to the book, Raphael indicates four points which are essential for an understanding of the text in the appropriate dimension:

– Traditional understanding of the concept of the Divine.

– Understanding of the moment and event that determined the birth of the Gītā.

– Traditional understanding of the social orders.

– Understanding of the right approach to the various ways leading to the Divine.

The value of the Gītā is paramount, if one just thinks that it hinges on action, which is at the base of life and which cannot be avoided or relinquished by anyone, as it reveals, in a world permeated with movement and conflict, the secret of ‘actionless action.’ From this perspective it can be of fundamental importance to the Westerners, who are essentially more in favour of action than of contemplation.

For one who is on the plane of action not to become enslaved and dominated by activism, it is necessary to comprehend perfect action devoid of the imprisoning attachment/desire, and to transcend individual qualifications. In fact, where the individual, separating ego rules, there also are revealed its aberrant attributes which cause conflict and pain; and, sooner or later, the individual who places himself in such a condition cannot but find, as Arjuna did, his battlefield (kurukṣetra) or his field of discipline and energetic the re-education (tapahkṣetra).

Raphael’s commentary unfolds along a psychological, philosophical and initiatory thread with specific reference to the initiation of the Kṣatriyas (the social order of lawmakers and warriors).

Raphael points out that under certain aspects we are all Kṣatriyas, because we are all engaged in a struggle, at times unequal, between knowledge (vidyā) and ignorance (avidyā).

The Bhagavadgītā, like all authentic traditional teachings, does not indicate quietistic or fatalistic attitudes, or possible flights, but it nails us down to our responsibilities (‘Forced by karma – inherent in your nature – despite your will, one day you will do that which, being now at a loss, you refuse to do,’ XVIII, 60) and to our unavoidable duty/dharma: that of comprehending, transforming and transcending ourselves.

Aurea Vidyā

PREFACE

The Tale of the Gītā

The Gītā is based on the śloka or anuṣṭubh metre, with a few variations on the triṣṭubh metre. It is a poem, and therefore a poetic work. Sir Edwin Arnold has translated into English the Gītā in verse: The Song Celestial, thus conferring to it a strength, beauty and an elevation of form that is truly exceptional.

It is found in the sixth book, Bhīṣmaparvan (Chapters 23-40) of the Mahābhārata, the great Indian epic, which comprises 215,000 verse lines.

Vyāsa is said to be the legendary author of the Mahābhārata. The work describes the episodes of a civil war that took place in Northern India between two branches of the ruling family of Hastināpura. But only one fifth of the poem is dedicated to the narration of the war. The majority of the Mahābhārata deals with ancient legends, myths, interpretation of the law, philosophy and morals. Often there is the inclusion of tales that are practically foreign to it, just as the Bhagavadgītā, the story of Nala and Damayantī, the one of Sāvitrī, etc.

The tale of the Gītā is the following.

On a vast plain of the kingdom of Hastināpura lived two princes, Dhṛtarāṣṭra and Pāṇḍu. Dhṛtarāṣṭra was the firstborn, and since he was blind, the royal succession fell upon Pāṇḍu. Pāṇḍu had five sons called Pāṇḍavas or Pāṇḍuids: Yudhiṣṭhira (or Dharmarāja, the king of Dharma), Bhīma, Arjuna and the twins Nakula and Sahadeva.

The blind, firstborn prince Dhṛtarāṣṭra had one hundred sons. They were called the Kauravas or Kuruids. Duryodhana was the most valorous of them. Pāṇḍu died, and after his death his blind brother Dhṛtarāṣṭra took over the reins of the kingdom, and took into his own family his five nephews, who were educated together with his own sons. Time passed and Yudhiṣṭhira was nominated the presumed heir. At one point, with a sudden military attack, Dhṛtarāṣṭra’s eldest son, Duryodhana, seized power, and attempted to kill Yudhiṣṭhira.

The rivalry between Pāṇḍu’s and Dhṛtarāṣṭra’s sons grew and the kingdom split into two factions, one in favour of the Kauravas and the other of the Pāṇḍavas. Kṛṣṇa, the head of the Yādhava family, was living in a close-by state, and attempted in vain to bring back peace and tranquillity. War was believed to be inevitable.

The two armies confronted each other on the Kurukṣetra (Kuru’s field), well known on account of the ascetic practices of Kuru, a forefather of both contenders. Kṛṣṇa was asked to intervene in the fight. He agreed, and gave the two opposing factions a choice of aid: either his own men, or himself.

The rebel Duryodhana chose the warriors, so that Kṛṣṇa joined the Pāṇḍava as Arjuna’s charioteer.

Prior to the hostilities the blind monarch’s father, Vyāsa, the holy seer (ṛṣi), appeared to Dhṛtarāṣṭra and offered him the possibility of seeing the unfolding of the war through supranatural ‘vision.’

The old king declined. Instead he requested this gift to be bestowed upon his minister, Saṁjaya. Thus, Saṁjaya became a seer, and described to Dhṛtarāṣṭra the phases of the battle.

The Gītā begins with an inquiry. The blind king asks Saṁjaya about the behaviour of both his own and Pāṇḍu’s sons, who are deployed against one another.

On Kuru’s field, in the meantime, the two factions are celebrating a long ceremony and Arjuna, while waiting for the signal to attack, orders his charioteer Kṛṣṇa (who represents the god Viṣṇu in human form) to drive the chariot between the two armies for a clear view of the whole situation. And here, seeing his closest friends, his cousins and his uncles, he is overwhelmed by emotion and distress, to the point of declaring to Kṛṣṇa that he wants to give up attacking his blood relatives and his companions.

At this point Saṁjaya begins the long tale, which unfolds over 18 chapters (adhyāyas) and 700 verses.

The war itself seems to have much preceded in time the compilation of the Gītā, but this action is merely a pretext which presents Kṛṣṇa with the opportunity to begin an initiatory dialogue, leading to realization. We will not focus on the exact date the Bhagavadgītā was written. This is of interest to the historians and the philologists. Here we are concerned with the teaching on which the Gītā is based.

The title of the book is Bhagavadgītā because in the Bhāgavata religion, of which the Gītā expresses one aspect, Kṛṣṇa is called Śrī Bhagavān. In the Mahābhārata it is said that ‘the Bhāgavata religion was transmitted, through tradition, from Vivasvāt to Manu and from Manu to Ikṣvāku.’

Commentaries on the Gītā

The Gītā commentaries are numerous and varied. Often each commentator has drawn from the total Reality included therein that particular aspect of truth which better represents his own school of thought. In any case the oldest, deepest and most extensive commentary is the one by Śaṅkara (788-820).

Śaṅkara’s views were then developed by Ānadagiri, Śrīdhara, Madhusūdana and others.

Other relevant commentaries are those by Rāmānuja (1200), Madhva (1199-1276), Nimbarka (1162), and Vallabha (1479).

Today there are so many commentators that it would take too much space to list them all.

Aim of the Book

The Bhagavadgītā, the classical Upaniṣads and the Brahmasūtra make up the so-called Prasthānatraya, the threefold science of ancient Vedānta. A literal interpretation of the text implies leaving out the true traditional Teaching. In this text, furthermore, there are some contradictory passages which can leave us mystified, but from the viewpoint of traditional Vision these contradictions disappear.

Therefore the Gītā, if comprehended in its true dimension, should not be removed from the orthodoxy of the initiatory Tradition.

There are four essential points to be elucidated. When these are properly discerned, the teaching will acquire an exceptional value of doctrinal synthesis, poetic beauty and ‘initiatory process.’ The four main points are:

1. Traditional understanding of the concept of the Divine.

2. Understanding of the time and events that determined the manifestation of the Gītā.

3. Traditional understanding of the social orders (varṇa).

4. Understanding of the correct approach to the different paths leading to the divine.

These themes dominate the whole structure of the Gītā, and since they are strictly traditional, they may be developed only in the light of the Tradition.

1. Traditional understanding of the concept of the Divine

In a passage of the Yogavāsiṣṭha made up of 27,000 verses, Śrī Rāma asks Hanumān, the great devotee, the Monkey-god:

‘In what way do you adore me?’ Through this question Śrī Rāma allows Hanumān to express the concept of the Divine, according to the traditional Teaching. Hanumān answers thus:

‘As long as I keep the sensation of having a physical body, as long as I cannot be freed of the idea of a physical form, I am your servant, I am but a miserable organizm and an insurmountable abyss separates me from You. If on the contrary I am freed of the notion of the gross body and discover myself as the jīva with an individual consciousness, I talk, I use my mind and make mistakes. At this stage I realize I am part of your superior Body, I have the sentiment of your immanence. If I climb a step further and dominate my mind totally, I discover within myself a spiritual Centre that neither thought nor language may grasp; this superior Centre, that is beyond the empirical world, is the ātman; between You and me there is no longer any difference, or distinction; there exists only Brahman and nothing else but Brahman.’

If one wants to be freed of the idea of the body and operate upon the plane of superior intellect, one moves progressively towards Identity; thus it is possible to move from Dualism to Monism up to Advaita: One-without-a-second. If one wishes to keep the idea of a body, before God one plays the role of a servant, of an adorer, of a devotee, but this dualistic position in any case allows the purification of the ego.

Therefore there are many aspects of the Divine which, from the metaphysical point of view, range from the most ‘tangible’ and ‘concrete’ conception to the most ‘subtle’ and ‘noumenal’ one. The teaching of a different approach to Reality is summed up in the Gītā. But one should not think that this means confusion or disorder on the spiritual plane. The idea of a dogmatic faith or religion, the same for everyone, is absolutely foreign to the Indian Spirit. Each individual differs from another in his mental structure, his aspirations and the level of his needs. (From these needs stem the social orders). So it is necessary for him to find the optimal formula concerning his particular spiritual requirements. It is therefore his karma to find the truth about his state and to live by it, as this constitutes his dharma (duty).

It will be noted later on how Kṛṣṇa allows Arjuna to gradually realize his true condition of consciousness, that of the warrior, and the unavoidable duty (dharma) to support it and reveal it through action.

The traditional Hindu thought thus embraces all the possible consciousness conditions of humanity and resorts to four distinct aspects of the Divine which are suited to the different levels of human understanding:

a)The aspect of the Absolute, nirguṇa Brahman without attributes, the One-without-a-second. Pure metaphysical path. Gauḍapāda’s Aspasrśavāda (the path without supports or without contact) and Śaṅkara’s Advaita Vedānta lead to this daring flight.¹

b)The aspect of the Impersonal God, Nirākāra, without mental representation of any nature. ‘God is spirit and truth.’²

c)The aspect of the Personal God, Ākāra, under the form of a symbol. A path followed by the most fiery, imaginative and devotional minds

d)The aspect of the Incarnate God, Avatāra, who takes up a human form to point the way to mankind.

Aspect of the Absolute

Brahman is not what we usually indicate with the word ‘God.’ It is beyond language, and even thought: it is the absolute as the unconditional, the uncaused, the unchangeable. To realize this implies the disappearance of the whole world of names and forms. Only nirvikalpa samādhi meets That. Such samādhi is not communion, equality, or union; even the word ‘identity’ is inappropriate, because such expression, though sound, implies a movement of thought and consciousness, while in nirvikalpa,³ Brahman remains as One-without-a-second, as the pure Essence. It is the Substratum of any noumenon or phenomenon, of the non-manifest and of the manifest; it is the basis of any possible polarity, including that of finite and infinite. Brahman has no term of comparison, or opposition; it is the abyss where all of the pairs of opposites are annulled and resolved.

To speculate upon the Brahman is impossible: only noetic intuition may grasp its reflection.

Aspect of the Impersonal God

According to this second conception, the Divine may be considered as the causa prima, the source and the principle of anything manifest (ontological aspect), the mathematical One, while Brahman corresponds to the metaphysical Zero. This concept may be likened to the Western concept of God. Christian theology admits the Trinity: God the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost. The same applies to the Hindus, with the Impersonal and Personal aspects and the Avatāra, the divine incarnation or God in the flesh.

Thus the Nirākāra aspect is the impersonal one. God is Spirit and cannot be portrayed by any human representation. It corresponds to saguṇa Brahman with attributes, or to Īśvara, the source of the world of names and forms. Since it is the cause of All, it contains the ‘golden Germ’ from which stems the entire manifestation. In Īśvara everything is already completed. It is, and the following phase of manifestation represents only the unravelling of the latent potential of the first cause.

The mathematical One is the beginning of all numbers, and there is no number that is not based upon the one. One million is made up of so many ones.

The prime cause is the support and the foundation of all unlimited planetary and cosmic forms. With saguṇa Brahman number and geometry are at work, the archetypes are potentially ready. Many yoga paths lead to contact with the prime cause, with principial Unity. To grasp the prime principles, the world of meaning, is to penetrate the essence of the great cause. Expansion of the consciousness in the One-All is the conclusion of many samādhis. To grasp the laws of Being means to understand its evolutionary mechanism, or better still, its unveiling.

Aspect of the Personal God

The Ākāra is the personal aspect of the Divine. In this condition God takes up a form: Śiva, Kāli, etc. These figures are symbolic and not historic. With these symbols there arise devotionalism and cult. The relation between Divinity and the faithful is already a personal one. These figures vary as the frame of the mind of the faithful varies, but, more importantly, they constitute true ideal symbols that are a considerable help with ascetic practices and the transmutation of internal powers.

Aspect of the Incarnate God

From the Symbol God we move to the God in the flesh, to the Avatāra or Messiah, according to the terminology used. Divinity, or better, the divine principle, expresses itself through a suitable human body. At this level individuals can finally see and touch God. God walks among human beings and unveils a specific attribute of his: Love, Knowledge or Will. The faithful, though, and even the disciples of that Incarnation may not rise to the Principle. Instead they stop at the level of the body, the vehicle of the Mediator. This gives rise to the worship and idolatry of mere form; and this implies moving away from the purpose for which the Mediator has become incarnate.

2. Understanding the time and event that determined the birth of the Gītā

The Brāhmaṇas had mainly celebrated devotion toward Divinity and had given pre-eminence to the sacrificial act. There existed a complicated procedure, known to the priests, based upon the principles of Yajur Veda and Atharva Veda.

The wise ones of the Upaniṣads pondered the meaning of these rites, cults and liturgies. They concluded that if man does not reach the very essence of the problem which imprisons him, he cannot free and resolve himself. So from Karmakāṇḍa one moves to Jñānakāṇḍa, the quest that deals with higher Knowledge.

Their emphasis is thus placed upon the human being, as the subject producing incompleteness, and on Brahman, as the aim of Liberation. Ignorance or avidyā is the means that binds the being to the world of becoming, from which it may be freed thanks to Knowledge or realization, rather than by rites and litanies, however valid these may be for much of humanity.

The Upaniṣads are permeated with ‘direct experience,’ expressed in a philosophical and metaphysical way.

This moving away from ritualism was continued by Buddha. In general he is considered as an innovator, but if one follows the thread of Hindu thought, one cannot but discover in Buddha the perpetuator of the Sages of the Upaniṣads. ‘It is not a dogma that I leave you’ – he said to his disciples – ‘but the capacity to find truth in itself and for itself.’

He moved away from the beliefs and rites of the times. If the movement he founded is considered to be heterodox it is because Buddha refused to acknowledge the value of the Vedic Tradition. It was the time when the masses called for a new aspect of the Divine and an inaccessible philosophical thought did not provide an answer to their wish.

Even the intellectual élite, the only one capable of grasping it, was no longer completely satisfied, because within Hinduism different battling doctrinal positions were trying to dominate. At all times, the man in search of the divine has felt the need to be connected to a Tradition and contemplate a concrete ideal in that One to whom devotion is directed.

The concept of ātman and of Brahman, so familiar in the Upaniṣads, was in truth not accessible to most, thus causing a reaction: humanity then wanted to understand, see and touch.

The supreme Being was too distant: there was a need to ‘bring it down’ to the earth, to give it a human form, to be ‘made flesh;’ in this way the devotion and discipline of the faithful would find the appropriate channel to freely manifest.

To nourish this deep aspiration for the first time in Hindu literature there appeared the concept of Incarnation (Avatāra) in an incisive way, in the figures of Rāma and Kṛṣṇa.

The compiler, or compilers, of the Gītā had two aims: one was that of trying to solve the spiritual need of seekers by offering an experiential Ideal of doctrinal life of past times, and the other was to reconcile opposing tendencies that were trying to prevail, one against the other, within Hinduism. This implied harmonizing the following points:

a)Connecting to the orthodox Tradition without trying to create a new school.

b)Avoiding the unilateral mistake of the Brāhmaṇas to increase fideistic ritualism, and at the same time trying to keep away Buddhistic nihilism.

c)Making it possible for the concept of Avatāra not to inspire some fanatical and ignorant cult or a simple and passive devotion to the purely material and bodily aspect of that Avatāra.

d)Keeping alive the flame of knowledge of the Upaniṣads together with its quest for the absolute values of Reality.

e)Calming the philosophical, spiritual disputes of the time and allowing realization of the unity of truth in its multilateral facets, so as to give everyone, in an enlightened and wise way, the opportunity of sharing an innate need of the Indian person: that of finding oneself.

This was the beginning of guidance and initiatory synthesis that was later successfully continued by Śaṅkara.

Thus the Gītā contemplates metaphysics and ethics; it is Brahmavidyā and Yogaśāstra, science of the Real and practice of yoga; it reconciles knowledge and action, sacrificial Vedic cult, the teaching of the Upaniṣads concerning the transcendent Brahman, the bhakti of the Bhāgavata movement and yoga concentration. This marvellous masterpiece of intelligent problem-setting and doctrinal synthesis produced the most significant and incisive event in the Hindu history of the time. So the Bhagavadgītā has represented and still represents the gospel for millions of Hindus, and not only for them. For by its expressive power and its prodigious teaching it has risen to the level of Upaniṣad with all its related implications.

3. Traditional understanding of the social orders (varṇa)

The Gītā affirms that Arjuna, disciple on the path of realization, belongs to the Kṣatriya order. It must be recalled that in Hindu tradition the social organization is divided into four orders that mirror the natural psychological tendencies of individuals.

Therefore, there is the order of Brāhmaṇas (priests) of Kṣatriyas (warriors), of Vaiśyas (traders) and Śūdras (workers). In the West they may be compared to the clergy, to the legislative-executive power, to the industrial-commercial power, to the proletariat.

To the Brāhmaṇa order belong those who are dedicated to ‘priesthood,’ to ‘contemplation’ intended in its true sense, and its essential function lies in conserving and transmitting the traditional Teaching, in which all other social organization finds its basis for action. It constitutes the spiritual authority in its pure state, the strength of wisdom and of truth. By virtue of its function in teaching, in the Puruṣasūkta of the Ṛg Veda (X.90) the Brāhmaṇa order corresponds to the mouth of Puruṣa, as the Universal Man, while the Kṣatriya corresponds to his arms.

So the specific function of a Brāhmaṇa is above all that of knowledge and teaching, and its particular attribute is Wisdom; its mission is that of transmitting knowledge to those who are in a condition to receive it.

Belonging to the priesthood we find other more external functions, such as the performance of rites, etc., but these can be said to be subsidiary.

The Kṣatriya order is made up of warriors or persons of action. Kṣatriya derives from kṣatra meaning ‘strength.’ The word ‘strength’ in fact evokes the idea of power, a power that is shown, in a straightforward way, outwardly, and is made concrete by the use of external tools. Therefore the temporal or regal power is the domain of the Kṣatriyas. It is evident that this power in its different forms (military, judicial, administrative) is exclusively used in action due to the attributes that are inherent in the dharma (duty) of the Kṣatriya.

‘Pure metaphysics’ and Wisdom, strength and ‘traditional sciences’ correspond to the Brāhmaṇas and the Kṣatriyas respectively.

From these two orders of manifestation, which are joined on the plane of the principial Point, a distinction is made between ‘Sacerdotal Initiation’ and ‘Regal Initiation.’ Arjuna is a Kṣatriya and Kṛṣṇa bestows upon him the ‘Regal Initiation,’ the one inherent in his state. But although the predominant teaching is addressed to the kṣatriyas, Kṛṣṇa does not disregard the other orders, since, as was already hinted, the Gītā offers a consistent synthesis of the initiatory teaching.

The Vaiśyas, producers of wealth (traders), and the Śūdras (workers) have a teaching and Initiation corresponding to their condition, and the Gītā may offer them precious instructions.

These remarks lead on to the fourth point.

4. Understanding of the correct approach to the different paths leading to the Divine

To avoid the risk of following a path that is not in line with one’s own inner urge, it is imperative to understand the