THE LIMITING CIRCUMSTANCE AND

HP HTTP TDT?D A HPTIVT/^1 CT?T TP.

lJnLUi T
J-jlJtSlliXxill JLiN vr oHi-Lir :

A STUDY OF SELECTED ESSAYS

OF
RALPH WALDO EMERSON
WITH REFERENCE TO
nQriPTTV OT7I rpTj-Tp TD TJT A S~l A XT A n Cl THTA
1 xjUlLj i ItIIIjUovJx JlI X Ul’ 1 mil JlD±UxLtJ± Vjt±ULxl 1J±

A THESIS
SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
IN THE FACULTY OF LANGUAGES
(ENGLISH)
PANJAB UNIVERSITY
CHANDIGARH
2002

y
. f
... , ;'v \
\-
/<*.
'/ * / XT v
1* \ j
.\
• ?

/, ■
/*

KALWARN SINGH
 Acknowledgements
I express my most deeply felt indebtedness to Professor Shelley
Walia, Chairman, Department of English, Panjab University,
Chandigarh for the scholarly advice and kind treatment I got from him
throughout my research. Under his supervision I feel I have been able
to work independently taking my own time and pace in my work.
I am thankful to the staff of the former ASRC (American Studies
Research Centre), now IACIS (Indo American Centre for International
Studies), Hyderabad for their help in my collection of research materials
from their library. I am extremely grateful to Dr. Isaac Sequeira (Senior
Academic Fellow) and Professor Nageshvar Rao (the Research
Consultant), the worthy scholars at the Centre, who expressed their
complete support for the topic of my research and wished me all success.
I thank the staff of the Vishveshvaranand Library, Panjab
University, Institute of Sanskrit and Indological Studies, Hoshiarpur
and the staff of the library of the English Department, Panjab University,
Chandigarh for their assistance to me in obtaining books required for
my research.
I feel greatly obliged to late Dr D.S. Tatke, Ex-Head of English
Department at Vikram University, Ujjain, my teacher at PGDTE
(CIEFL) Course (1992-93) and Dr Harsharan Singh Ahluwalia, my
guide in M.Phil. (1984-85) at Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar
for the inspiration graciously provided by them for my research on
Emerson and the Gita.
I express my gratitude to S. Ardaman Singh Parmar (retired
Principal, GNK College, Daroli Kalan, Jalandhar) who has always
wished me well since the days he was my teacher.
I thank Dr Sudip Manhas of the Department of English, Panjab
University, Chandigarh for her moral support to me.
 1 am indebted to the Principal, SGGS Khalsa College, Mahilpur
(Hoshiarpur) and his staff and my colleagues, for their co-operative
and friendly attitude towards me which enabled me to work peacefully
and steadily. I am thankful to Prof. Kailash Sood and Mr. Jitender Sood
(Chief Editor and Editor of The Hoshiarpur Times) for getting my thesis
typed.
At the end I thank the Self immortal, God, the Almighty Father
for enabling me to undertake and complete the gigantic task of my
research.

i
(S
u 1
Dated: cT C — FAKALWARN SINGH
 CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgements
Vn1*^

Chapter I : Introduction 1

Chapter II : The Emersonian World :

The Limits of Liberty 13

Chapter III : The Bhagavadgita :

The Limiting World and
The Liberating Self 73

Chapter IV : Two Ways of Life :

Proximity and Distance 121

Chapter V : Conclusion 179

List of Works Consulted 201

Chapter I
 Introduction
At the bottom of Emerson’s philosophy all meaningful and rightly
directed action of human beings is seen as originating in God and
proceeding therefrom. One can attain perfection through a life in God.
God in Emerson’s scheme of things is the Self of everything that is in
existence. Great progress is possible for human beings in all walks of
life if they get in tune with this Self which is within them. But Emerson
laments that people are not aware of this possibility of man becoming
God, and are busy in futile pursuits:
None assayeth the stern ambition to be the Self of the nation
and of nature, but each would be an easy secondary to some
Christian scheme, or sectarian connection, or some eminent
man.
This in a nutshell is also the philosophy of self-reliance for which
Emerson is so well-known.
This philosophy of man transcending the limits of his worldly
j • • •
I existence and getting in touch with God came to be called
‘Transcendentalism’ in the nineteenth century. The idea was that the
individual is basically good and worthy of attention (because of his
connection with God) and not sinful and wretched as the Puritans
believed. Paul F. Boiler, Jr. in his book American Transcendentalism
points out that the Transcendentalists wanted the “individual to act
boldly, independently, and creatively”; however, “at the same time they
|iad located the source for individual vitality in Universal Spirit.”2
\ Incidentally, in the Bhagavadgita we come upon a similar
position on life with regard to God. Emerson was a relentless thinker
who wanted to discover a philosophical system behind human
existence on earth. In his attempt to find answers to the questions
that agitated his mind, he consulted the Bhagavadgita, too. It seems
l
the reading of it (may have) influenced his thought. And hence,
perhaps, the resemblance in thinking.
Arthur Christy in his book The Orient in American
Transcendentalism, which according to him is “a study of the
beginnings of American interest in Oriental thought” writes: “It was
not until about Emerson’s time that the Oriental was more than a heathen
and his religious literature more than foolishness.”3 He writes further:
The tide turned with the growth of the Transcendental
Movement in the large sense, for which Emerson, a man
fundamentally individualistic and unfettered by the creed
of any school, was nevertheless the chief literary
spokesman.4
According to Christy, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David
Thoreau and Amos Bronson Alcott were among the men associated
with the Transcendental Movement, “the three men at one time friends
and neighbors in Concord.”5 The Bhagavadgita was “more influential”
than any “one Oriental volume that ever came to Concord.”6 And this
is proved by “the manner and frequency in which the Concordians
spoke of it.”7 According to Sanborn “for years Emerson was one of the
very few Americans who owned a copy, and this was even more widely
used than that in the Harvard College Library.”8 Christy believes “Alcott
and Thoreau caught the Oriental contagion from Emerson.” These
“three men had read the Orientals before they published a single book.”9
There is still more evidence to believe that Emerson was
acquainted with the Gita before he wrote and published any book.
Emerson published his first book Nature in 1836. Robert D. Richardson,
Jr. writes: “In May 1831 ...three months after Ellen [his wife]’s death,
Emerson found another scripture in the Bhagavad Gita as described
by the French philosopher Victor Cousin.”10 Kenneth Walter Cameron

2
writes that in 1832 Henry Gotfried Linberg “translated and published
part one” of Victor Cousin’s work the History ofPhilosophy in which
in Lecture III Cousin deals with the Bhagavad Gita “and Emerson
purchased the Volume for his library before leaving on his first European
voyage in December of that year.”11 Cameron also tells that Emerson
“owned in the original French” Cousin’s the “Cours de Philosophy,
consisting of the lectures of 1828-30,” “soon after its publication.”12
v

Richardson writes further about Cousin’s work:

From Cousin’s brilliant short treatment of the argument
between Arjuna and Krishna, Emerson now learned that
I India possessed powerful sophisticated scriptures of its
lown, religiously as well as ethically a match for the
Christian scriptures.13
Richardson adds: “From now on Emerson always thought of the
Bhagavad Gita as a scripture of equal standing with the Gospels.”14
That Emerson liked and valued the Gita is also confirmed by
Charles Malloy, an admirer of Emerson, who while discussing his poem
*

“Brahma” refers to an incident in 1848 when he (Malloy) spent “a

delightful evening” with Emerson who in course of their conversation
said, “I want you to read the ‘Bhagavad Gita ’ and I will lend you this
book.”15 And Malloy adds : “Emerson found and took what belonged
to him in the ‘Bhagavad Gita ’ and that was luster and transcendency.”16
This translation of the Gita which Malloy refers to is by Charles
Wilkins, the first ever translation of the Bhagavadgita into English.17
To touch briefly the idea of resemblances in thinking as it appears
in the Gita and in Emerson, it would be useful to take up the idea of the
oneness of all things rin God. Emerson sees in nature this oneness and
becomes one with God thus:
Standing on the bare ground [in the woods], -my head

3
 bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space, -
all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent eye­
ball ; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal
Being [Self/God] circulate through me; I am part or particle
of God (W,I,10).
In the Gita Krishna, who speaks as God himself, describes to Arjuna
the man, united with God, in the following words which point to the
oneness of things :
The man whose mind is endued with this devotion, and
looketh on all things alike [sees God in them], beholdeth
the supreme soul [Self/God] in all things and all things in
the supreme soul. He beholdeth me in all things and
beholdeth all things in me, I forsake not him, and he
...dwelleth in me in all respects, even whilst he liveth.18
To make our comparison further explicit we can refer to Victor
Cousin’s description of the Gita in which Krishna advises Arjuna thus:
“Relations, friends, men, beasts or stones all are one. A perpetual and
eternal energy has created all which you see and renews it without
cessation.” And “This scene struck Emerson- it is the kernel of his
poem ‘Brahma’.”19 The idea of the “essential oneness of all things” is
“fundamental conviction” with Emerson. The idea of oneness has found
expression in various ways. In the Bhagavadgita it is referred to as the
atma, the true self shared by us all.20
f

In the Gita the Self is seen as incorruptible : “Nothing corrupts

this imperishable Self.”21 The ideal man “the man of poise” is one who
“is content in the Self by the Self/He is steady” (Lai 22). He lives in
the Self. And Krishna’s advice to Arjuna is : “be firm in your Self’
(Lai 21). Emerson in his note book called Orientalist wrote about the
‘Hindoos’ : “The highest object of their religion was to restore that

4
bond by which their own self (atman) was linked to the Eternal Self
(Parmatma).”22 (This idea of the self in man and the divine self which
are ultimately one will be discussed in detail in the coming two chapters
of this thesis.)
Now in both cases, in Emerson and in the Gita, one can ask what
stands between man and his true Self (God), and what is this Self itself?
My thesis seeks to search out answers to these cardinal questions. On
the basis of this enquiry the impact of the Gita on Emerson’s writings,
too, can be explored; However, such an exploration will be possible
only through a close study of both - his writings and the Gita. While
making a comparative study, it cannot, though, be forgotten that the
Gita’s was not the only influence on him.
My study of the critical writings on Emerson has revealed to me
that no comprehensive comparison between Emerson’s essays and the
Gita, with regard to their respective philosophical positions on human
life and its problems on earth, has been attempted. Accordingly, the
present thesis seeks to study in depth some of the most representative
of Emerson’s essays to find out his ideas on human life, its problems
and their solutions. This thesis seeks to study the Gita, too, in depth
with regard to the stand taken in it about the life of human beings, its
problems and their solutions. A comparison is then to be undertaken
to detect the impact of the latter on the former, if any and to note the
differences and resemblances in thought.
My aim is to examine human problems, visualized in Emerson’s
essays and in the Gita, as limits on human freedom of action. The title
of the thesis refers to this aspect of the problem as the “Limiting
Circumstance.” The solutions suggested in both cases, will be identified
through a careful scrutiny of the text of Emerson’s essays and the Gita.
A comprehensive comparison will be attempted at the level of problems
Ns.

5
and their solutions. Since the solutions will be inevitably linked to the
Self (the self-existing God), as we have foreseen in the preceding brief
discussion, I have referred to this ‘Self’ as the “Liberating Self’ in the
title of this thesis. In short, the thesis is to deal with human limitations
and human capabilities.
As the thesis will also establish, the essays I take up carry the
core of Emerson’s philosophy. “History” and “Fate” will bring out the
importance of “Self-Reliance” in life. “Compensation,” “Spiritual
Laws,” and “The Over-Soul” will give us an insight into the spiritual
side of human life. “Circles” and “Experience” will point out the
contrariness of life. “Plato” and “Napoleon” will make it possible for
the idealist and the pragmatist to co-exist. In addition, Emerson’s essays
“Nature,” “The American Scholar,” “An Address Delivered before the
Senior Class in Divinity College, Cambridge,” “The Transcendentalist,”
“Uses of Great Men,” and “Illusions” have been analysed to get a
comprehensive view of Emerson’s outlook on life. Wherever necessary,
other writings of Emerson including poems would find references in
the thesis.
As for the Bhagavadgita, I have used four translations as the
basis for my study and observations. These are by
1. S. Radhakrishnan
2. Charles Wilkins
3. K.T. Telang
4. P. Lai23
In addition, various other translations have been consulted for the sake
of further clarity. For the pupose of comparisons, I have used Charles
Wilkins’ translation since this work was Emerson’s favourite. The aim
of the thesis is the interpretation of the text in terms of agreements and
disagreements at the level of thought. The ultimate aim of the thesis is

6
to emphasise certain values of universal significance for the common
good of mankind in our times. It sets out to examine, finally, the cultural
influence of Emerson’s writings in the Western context.
The second chapter of my thesis, entitled ‘The Emersonian World:
The Limits of Liberty,’ seeks to find out in Emerson’s thought how far
man is free to shape his destiny and what hinders his progress to
happiness and success. The third chapter sets out to analyse the
philosophy in the Gita with regard to those factors in human life which
limit human action towards happiness and success. It also seeks to
find out what is needed to be done for a peaceful and happy life. The
phrase ‘Limiting World’, in the title, refers to the problems in this world.
Chapter IV, entitled ‘Two Ways of Life: Proximity and Distance,’
aims to bring together face to face the two ways of life studied in the
preceding two chapters. In his “Preface” to The Bhagavadgita S.
Radhakrishnan remarks :
Every scripture has two sides, one temporary and
perishable, belonging to the ideas of the people of the period
and the other eternal and imperishable, and applicable to
all ages and countries.24
This is true in the case of Gita. But it is true in the case of other serious
writings as well. So, while making the comparative analysis, this chapter
seeks to locate the eternal and the imperishable in both subjects of
study. The resemblances and differences in thought are at the centre of
the discussion here. An effort has been made to locate the extent of the
impact of philosophy of the Gita on Emerson’s views on life, its
problems and their solutions. I have tried to take a wide ranging
approach here in the inter textual analysis and the major issues
concerning the relationship of culture, race and values have also been
considered.

7
 The last chapter seeks to sum up the conclusions drawn in
different chapters. The aims of the thesis, along with its findings, are
finally stated, bringing out what seems to be the explicit and implicit
influence of Indian religious thought as expressed in the Gita on
Emerson’s idea of the Self and the cultural context in which he wrote.
To state every hing briefly, my thesis is philosophical in its
approach. Emerson’s philosophy is compared with that of the Gita. An
attempt has been made to view Emerson’s philosophy and that of the
Gita also in the larger context of transcendentalism of which Emerson
is regarded as the chief literary spokesman, and about which it is said
that the American thinking has been shaped by it.

8
 NOTES

1. Ralph Waldo Emerson, “An Address : Delivered before the Senior

Class in Divinity College, Cambridge, Sunday Evening, July 15,
1838,” The Complete Works ofRalph Waldo Emerson, ed. Edward
Waldo Emerson, centenary edition, vol. I (Boston : Houghton
Mifflin, 1903-04) 145. Henceforth abbreviated as W. In
T
r

subsequent references to Emerson’s writings the volume no and

the page number preceded by ‘ W’ will be given, in each case, at
the end of the text quoted. (Some scholars use CW as the
abbreviation for The Complete Works ofEmerson, whereas some
other scholars use W instead. I choose W since CW in this thesis
stands for Charles Wilkins’ translation of the Gita.)

2. Paul F. Boiler Jr., American Transcendentalism, 1830-60: An

Intellectual Inquiry (New York : G.P. Putnam’s and Capricorn,
1974)163.

3. Arthur Christy,’ The Orient in American Transcendentalism (New

York : Columbia UP, 1932) VII.

4. Christy VII.

5. Christy VIII.

6. Christy 23.

7. Christy 23.

8. Christy 23.

9. Christy 48.

9
10. Robert D. Richardson, Jr., Emerson : The Mind on Fire (Los
Angeles : U of California P, 1995) 114.

11. Kenneth Walter Cameron, Emerson the Essayist: An Outline of

His Philosophical Development Through 1836 with Special
Emphasis on the Sources and Interpretation of Nature, vol. I
(1945 ; Hartford : Transcendental Books Drawer, 1972) 309.

12. Cameron 304.

13. Richardson 114.

14. Richardson 115.

15. Charles Malloy, “A Study of Emerson’s Major Poems,” American

Transcendental Quarterly 23. II (1974) 61.

16. Malloy 61.

17. Incidentally, this translation of the Bhagavadgita came as part of

a larger design of the Colonialists in India to serve their private
ends. In 1783 Sir William Jones came to Calcutta from England
as a judge of the Supreme Court. He and Warren Hastings,
together, founced the Asiatic Society of which Warren Hastings
made him the President. The Society aimed at finding out ancient
Indian writings in Sanskrit and getting them translated into
English for a better understanding of the Indian people and their
culture. William Jones himself translated the Laws of Menu in
order to have a knowledge of the legal system of the natives of
India (See Christy p. 38). This work earned him the title of the
Father of English Oriental studies (See Christy p.38). The colonial
designs behind these Oriental studies become evident if we have
a look into a letter that Warren Hastings attached to the translation
of the Bhagavadgita by Charles Wilkins for forwarding it to

10
 Nathaniel Smith, the senior-most official of the East India
Company, with a request to have the translation published. In
the following lines in the letter Warren Hastings outlines the
benefits that would accrue from the publication of such
translations: .

Every accumulation of knowledge, and especially such as

is obtained by social communication with people over
whom we exercise a dominion founded on the right of
conquest, is useful to the state : it is the gain of humanity .
. . it attracts and conciliates distant affections; it lessens
the weight of the chain by which the natives are held in
subjection; and it imprints on the hearts of our own
countrymen the sense and obligation of benevolence (See
Warren Hastings’ letter to Nathaniel Smith in American
Transcendental Quarterly 20.1 (1973) p.13).

18. The Bhagavat-Geeta : or Dialogues ofKreeshna and Arjoon in

Eighteen Lectures, trans. Charles Wilkins (Landon : C Nourse,
1785) [Published in] American Transcendental Quarterly 20.1
(1973) : 65. In all subsequent references to this text, the page
number (s) will be provided against the text quoted, preceded by
the abbreviation C.W.

19. Richardson 115.

20. Richardson 334.

r

21. The Bhagavadgita, trans. P. Lai (Delhi : Hind Pocket Books,

1965) 17. This translation is in verse. In subsequent references,
the text quoted from this book will carry at its end the page
number (s) preceded by the word Lai.

22. See Notes’ p. 426 in W, VI.

ll
23. The publication details of the these books are given in the ‘notes’
to their first references in the thesis. These details are also
available in the ‘List of the Works Consulted’ in the ‘Primary
{

Sources’ section.

24. The Bhagavadgita, trans. S. Radhakrishnan (1948; London :

George Allen and Unwin; New Delhi: Harper Collins, 1998) 5.

r
Chapter II
 The Emersonian World : The Limits of Liberty

Emerson perceives great scope for human progress through help

from God in this world. In his early writings his optimism is apparently
boundless, though, his later writings reveal that by and by he came to
discover more limits to human capacity for action aimed at advantage.
In the present chapter, however, I have tried to take stock of the limits
or limitations operating in human life in this world, as revealed in all
the essays taken up in this study, irrespective of the period to which
they belong in Emerson’s life. This, I believe, would give us an over-
9-

all view of Emerson’s world (as perceived by him in his imagination

and as revealed in his writings), its problems and their solutions as
suggested by him. In short, we shall examine the extent of the possible
human liberty (as visualised by Emerson) to act profitably for a happy
and successful life in this world. First, different difficulties experienced
by human beings will be discussed. Various factors causing problems
will be taken into account. Afternnalysing these problematic situations
we shall study the liberating Self, i.e. God in this world who is to provide
human beings liberation from all sorrow and difficulties of life.
Before we proceed to analyse Emerson’s world as created in his
t

writings, (it seems ) we need to look into different aspects of his career
as a prose writer, notwithstanding the fact that this thesis is primarily
philosophical in its approach. Emerson was born in a family of ministers
on 25 May 1803. His father, William, was minister of the First Church
in Boston, church of John Winthrop and John Cotton. He died on 12
May 1811 when Emerson was about eight years old. Following the
family tradition, Emerson was elected assistant minister to the church
of the Mathers, Second Church in Boston in 1829 and very shortly he
became the sole minister of that church. He, however, resigned his

13
pulpit in September 1832 following his serious differences with his
congregation on the administration of the ceremony of Lord’s Supper.
Free thinking man as he was, he did not want to follow the traditional
ritual in a blind manner. He felt that this ritual did not have even the
scriptural sanction. The Bible, he thought, emphasised Spirit and not
form. The first fault which Emerson found with the Lord’s Supper was
that even Jesus had participated in the Pass-over feast as part of tradition
and did not want to make an institution of it. Secondly, it was not
proper for Unitarians to follow a ritual which originated in an alien
culture and which was a mere formality, having nothing to do with the
Spirit.1
After his resignation from the ministry at Second Church, for
many years he occupied “various pulpits as a visiting minister; he did
not resign from the ministry as such.”2 Emerson’s style in writing
resembles that of a speaker addressing his audiences, perhaps, because
of his career as a minister. As a minister he was the representative of
the seventh generation in his family. Every direct descendant of the
family of American Emersons before him was a minister. And he was
expected to continue-the tradition.3
He started his career as an essayist with the publication of his
Nature (1836). He later wrote and published poetry, too, but he is known
mainly as a prose writer. However, he is described by many critics as a
writer of poetic prose. James Russell Lowell observes: “The bother
with Emerson is, that, though he writes in prose, he is essentially a
poet.”4 Lowell praises Emerson’s skill at creating highly effective
phrases in his writings thus: “His eye for a fine telling phrase that will
carry true is that of a backwoodsman for a rifle.” Lowell adds that
Emerson’s diction is “so rich and so homely” that in our times we do
not find any match foi* it; “it is like home-spun cloth of gold.”5 Emerson

14
himself, too, admits that he is a poet though he writes in prose. In a
letter written by him.to his wife, Lidian, in 1835 he remarks that he is
“born a poet” though “of a low class” but undoubtedly he is a poet.
That is his nature and vocation. He adds: “My singing to be sure is
very ‘husky’ and is for the most part in prose.”6 Incidentally, in the
Gita,too, we find beautiful phrases used also as similes and metaphors.
In Charles Wilkins’ translation of the Gita (Emerson’s favourite), which
is in prose, we come upon prose which is poetic in quality. In chapter
IV I shall compare Emerson’s prose with that in Charles Wilkins’
translation.
There are, however, scholars who are critical of Emerson’s
(poetic) prose. They find fault with the sequencing of sentences in his
essays. Morse Peckham says that it is known to everyone that the Essays
are “assembled from here and there in the Journals [the diaries Emerson
kept]” and that “they are disjointed.” It is easy to remove any sentence
from anywhere without doing any harm to the preceding or the
following sentence. Peckham is very severe in his criticism of
Emerson’s style in prose. He points out that it seems Emerson’s essays
do not have any argument, or sustained discourse. We find “only a
series of sentences stitched together under various grandiose titles of
such a kind that almost any sentence could appear in any essay.”7Even
about the Gita it has been pointed out that different verses in it are not
logically linked to one another and many can be removed without
making any difference to the context of the text.
In line with the criticism of Emerson’s style in prose discussed
so far, David Shimkin compares “the design of an Emerson essay” to
“the model of a child’s playgroundwin which we find toys lying
haphazardly here and there. The child is delighted to think of them all
and then takes up one and becomes busy with it with all his attention,

15
and then he moves to another which takes all his attention. A lesson
comes to him from each of the toys. Shimkin believes that reading
through one of Emerson’s essays is an experience of “a kind of
intellectual or psychological movement” which can be compared to a
child’s movement “through a playground.”8 Shimkin is of the view
that in Emerson’s sentences we also find objective and subjective truth.
He plays with certain thoughts in a “professional, adult” manner. Some
design can be traced in his movement from one.sentence to another
with the help of discursive logic “particularly that of philosophy.” Still,
it is not certain that any sentence is taken by him “much more seriously
than a child takes a toy.”9
The movement, however, takes place in Emerson’s essay with
the help of symbols. The symbols help in weaving sentences into a
unified design.10 Discussing the difficulty of understanding Emerson,
it may be noted here that it seems he has got a composite philosophy,
which is discussed in this thesis. Everything he says seems to have a
reference to it. And all ambiguities and all disconnections between or
among his sentences' disappear and his meaning comes up when we
read his writings in the light of this philosophy. The Gita certainly
seems to have played a significant role in the formation of this
philosophy. This thesis seeks to emphasise this point. Even in the Gita
one may make movements like a child playing with toys in a playground
as Shimkin points out about Emerson. But once one understands the
underlying idea, the scattered verses begin to make sense. But this is
not easy for everyone.
Emerson’s “Compensation” and “Experience” have been
particularly criticised by some scholars for their artistic weaknesses as
essays. Roland F. Lee calls “Compensation” art artistic failure. He
discovers in it poor art though he says it is known as poor argument.

16
Lee says he does not intend to accuse Emerson of incompetence but he
does want to suggest that Emerson attempts to do too much in the
essay and also tries to say “something that almost or completely defies
intellectual formation.”11 Lee, however, saves the essay from total
rejection by saying that poor execution does not mean poor
conception.12 My study of the essay, however, reveals that though the
essay does not give evidence of any outward structure, it is inwardly
united by the philosophy presented in it. And what matters in Emerson
is his philosophy and the zeal with which he presents it. Many may,
however, not agree with him on certain points.
About Emerson’s essay “Experience” Kyle Norwood remarks
that its structure is “still open to argument.” Kyle refers to two objections
made against the essay. First, the sequence of the (seven) lords of life
(facets of human life) discussed in the essay seems arbitrary and lacking
order. Second, the essay seems to swing between extremes of scepticism
and idealism or optimism and pessimism, with no final word in favour
of either.13 Kyle, however, at the end of his long critical essay on
“Experience” concludes that the essay does have something to say to
us. It seeks to demonstrate how “discontinuities and uncertainties” of
our present experience “can lead to higher insight.”14 Richard R O’
Keefe observes that “Experience” is “a philosophical essay” and that
“philosophical tools” are needed to examine it.15 The present chapter,
too, examines this essay in some detail and attempts to explain the
ambiguity in it.
In our discussion of Emerson’s style, it has also to be noted that
he was not so indifferent to the ordering and sequencing of his thoughts
as he is believed to be. He also wrote carefully (with the care that his
genius could afford) and even revised his writings to make them better
in thought and form. He looked for suitable words and then used them.

17
Paul Lauter refers to his revision of his Essays (First Series) (earlier
published in 1841) in 1846-47. The most of the changes he made are
of deletions of unwanted matter. Changes in punctuation and grammar
are not many since the first (earlier) edition was printed very carefully.
Mottoes are added to the seven of eight essays (“Compensation” gets
two).
The adverbs like ‘precisely, continually, yet, only, so, all and
always’ stand removed. A sizable number of contrasts, similes,
illustrations and phrases involving trite repetition of ideas are dispensed
with. Lauter illustrates the changes in detail in his critical essay on this
subject and emphasises that the changes in language “were aimed at a
more direct, plain prose.”16 About five hundred verbal changes are made
in the revised edition, in addition to the changes in punctuation.17 It is
definitely indicated by these changes that Emerson did not want “to
remain a passive organ of his initial promptings.” Though he obeyed
the intuitions of his heart, “he worked with skill and ardor” to make
his perceptions clear and intelligible to his readers “as vitally as he
could.”18
r

Emerson’s own theory of language, explained in Nature, also

throws light on his method as a writer. He believes that language is a
use of nature among many of its other uses. Nature reacts to man through
his language, too. If a man is corrupt, his language is also corrupted.
When he is not simple, honest and innocent and is motivated by desires
to become rich and powerful, and when he seeks pleasure and praise,
he is unable to produce new imagery. Even the old words in his hands
“lose all power to stimulate the understanding or the affections” (W, I,
30). The wise man, however, knows the secret of language and,
therefore, pierces the “rotten diction” of those about him and fastens
r

“words again to visible things” and creates “picturesque” language

18
(language we have noted is a use of nature which is in turn is an
instrument of God.) which instantly certifies that the man using it is
“in alliance with truth and God” (W, 1,30). Imagery in this case comes
spontaneously to man and it is properly created. “It is working of the
Original Cause [the Self in this thesis] through the instruments he has
already made” (W,I,31). It seems from these views of Emerson that he
himself, perhaps, through his use of language was trying to make
himself an instrument of the Original Cause. Our discussion of the
liberating Self in this chapter later will make this point very obvious.
As for the influences on Emerson’s intellectual growth as a writer,
some scholars believe that the Greek thought, that came to him through
Plato and his disciples, called Neo-Platonists, was “the most important
factor.”19 This thesis, however, seeks to emphasise that the
Bhagavadgita seems to have played a major role in the formation of
his philosophy. Its thought is reflected in his position on life on many
points.
In terms of philosophy, Emerson’s approach to life can be
contrasted with that of his contemporary, Melville. If Emerson sees
the universe to be governed by a benevolent force (as it happens in the
Gita, too), Melville, in sharp contrast, believes the reverse of it. In
Melville’s view evil is a “dominant, inscrutable force in the universe”
and, as a result, human life lacks unity and harmony and is not
meaningful. Emerson does not subscribe to this view because in his
view evil is “itself a dimension of the cosmic evolutionary scheme.”20
Emerson’s idea of evil is discussed in detail later in this chapter.
Emerson’s philosophy of life became known in the nineteenth
century as transcendentalism (as also noted in the first chapter of this
thesis) since he was the author and chief spokesman of the movement
so named. The movement was in its nature literary, philosophical,

19
religious, social and political. It had a far reaching effect and it
“continues to change -- individual American lives” even today.21 To
understand Emerson’s philosophy is obviously to understand what
transcendentalism should be all about And this thesis offers ample scope
for such an understanding.
Emerson’s approach to life has been described as idealism and
pragmatism both since he will not allow man to be lost in ideas alone.
For everything he says, he claims, there is a practical test available in
life, which, however, it seems, is possible for only those who are like
r

him. Perhaps, for that reason there is great confusion about him. The
idealists call him a pragmatist, and the pragmatists call him an idealist.
“It is safe to say that one is wrong but it is safer to say that both are
right.”22 We may say that he is an idealist in a pragmatic way. He
recommends putting of his ideas into practice, though they may
sometimes seem difficult to handle. (In the Gita, too, we find
pragmatism and idealism combined together. Our next chapter will
clarify this point.)
Some writers relate Emerson’s ideas to psychotherapy. William
E Bridges feels that a vague therapeutic effect of the reading of “Self-
<

Reliance” on disheartened and diffident people has always been felt.

Bridges suggests that Emerson should be considered as a forerunner
of psychotherapists like Carl Rogers, Erich Fromm, and Frederic Peris,
and theologians like Martin Buber and Paul Tillich, who are concerned
with “the potentialities of, and the dangers to selfhood.”23 Gay Wilson
Allen relates Emerson’s philosophy with the Unconscious and suggests
that Emerson’s Soul (Self in this thesis) may possibly be substituted
for the word Unconscious as it has been proved in the past that it exists.24
Incidentally, the Gita, too, is said to have a therapeutic effect on people
with a low morale, and even the concept of the Self in it is related by

20
some to the concept of the Unconscious.
At the end of our discussion of Emerson as a prose writer, we
can consider him in the role of a teacher. He seems determined to teach
mankind the right way (as he believes it to be) to live in this world.
Merton M. Sealts, Jr. is of the view that many men and women in the
nineteenth century from different occupations, with different
educational backgrounds regarded him as “their teacher and benefactor”
who was in their contact through his books or lectures.25 Stephen E
Whicher at the end of his book on Emerson, entitled Freedom and
Fate, calls Emerson a devoted moralist and an honest man and regrets
Yvor Winters’ remark that “at the core” Emerson “is a fraud and a
sentimentalist.” Whicher says that Emerson believed in the dignity of
human life. His utter rejection would mean rejection of mankind.26
Incidentally, we have now to see what he has to tell us. We now turn to
the limits of human freedom in Emerson.
The first most significant and central limit operating on human
beings in their pursuit of happiness and success in Emerson’s world is
that they have to lead a life given to virtue. Virtue here refers to whatever
seems just and right to the individual following the dictates of his
conscience. In nature there is a system of perfect justice. There works
a perfect system of cause and effect and it includes the ethical side of
human life, too. Emerson expounds this theory most clearly in his essay
“Compensation.” He points out that all things are moral. The soul of
God is within us. It is the law outside and a sentiment within us. This
soul resides in this world and the world was created by it. The world is
being governed by it justly. It does not postpone justice. In its system
all secrets are told and all crimes are punished. All wrongs are corrected
silently and certainly (W, II, 102). Emerson emphasises that retribution
is the universal necessity (W, II, 102). Every act first occurs in nature

21
but later it brings its result in the form of circumstance. People regard
the circumstance as the retribution (the limiting circumstance in the
light of the title of this thesis). God ensures that justice is done. Human
understanding can see the “retribution in the circumstance” (W, II, 103).
However, this process of retribution takes its time and may take
a number of years to appear. But the effect is hidden in the cause.
Crime and punishment have a common origin. The result is already
present in the cause. In “Fate” Emerson says that fate as the law of the
universe requires justice in man and strikes always sooner or later when
man fails to do justice (W, VI, 21). Napoleon whom Emerson liked so
much for his bravery and enterprise ultimately earns his disfavour
because of the lack of a moral purpose in his life. Commenting on his
rise resulting in his downfall Emerson remarks that Napoleon failed
because he wanted “to live and thrive without moral principle.”
However, the eternal system of justice cannot allow anyone to play
tricks with it (W, IV, 258).
So this limitation of a virtuous life is our fate. This “limitation is
impassable by any insight of man” (W, VI, 21). It cannot be by-passed
without inviting trouble. Emerson was a great moralist. Perhaps, his
own life, virtuous and upright, prompted him to express such views as
we have just examined. Phillips Russell in his book Emerson : The
Wisest American remarks that Emerson’s life was transparent like glass
and clear like spring water and in his long life spread over a large part
of the nineteenth century we do not find anywhere any proof of any
sin, of commission or omission.27
It is to be noted that in Emerson’s theory of compensation
(whereby all virtue is rewarded) he has travelled far away from the
traditional Christian views about good and evil. Arthur Christy in this
regard remarks that Emerson did not at any time write about liberation

22
of man from his sin by means of grace and Christ’s sacrifice made in
atonement for human sins. He stressed that the law administers itself
in a mechanical way and that the law controls the universe, not chaos.28
The law of compensation prevails without fail and without any regard
for mercy. Henry F. Pommer regards Emerson’s idea of compensation
as more acceptable than the traditional Christian views on good and
evil. He writes that to most of us the idea of the automatic compensation
working in this world is more convincing than the idea of all good and
evil as coming from God fulfilling his designs aimed to punish, reward,
warn or tempt his people.29
' Paul F. Boiler has, however, something different to point out
about Emerson’s theory of compensation. He remarks that Emerson’s
law of compensation is “least acceptable of all Transcendental
doctrines.” Critics have found it shallow and unconvincing and they
have condemned Emerson for ignoring the harsh realities of life and
for failing to admit that we do not always get good for good and evil
for evil. Emerson has been criticised also for “elevating justice above
pity, mercy and love.’’30 This idea of perfect justice prevailing in human
life in Emerson, however, comes very close to the theory of Karma in
the Gita. The Gita, too, stresses that all human action is being judged
closely in nature and justice is being meted out to human beings in
their life at all times. In chapter IVI shall compare Emerson’s position
on this point with that in the Gita. The coming chapter will analyse the
theory of Karma in the Gita.
Next comes the second limit on human action aimed at happiness.
This limit is related to the first. We human beings in our search for
happiness seek gratification of the senses. We seek “the pleasure of the
senses” without regard to the “needs of the character” (W, II, 103). We
are permitted to draw moderate pleasure (in nature) with our senses.

23
But we take delight in violating the freedom given to us. The soul (of
God in us) allows us to eat but our body likes feasting. The soul wants
that man and woman should become one in flesh and soul but the body
wants to join the flesh only. The soul wants the body to act in the
interest of virtue alone but the body wants to serve its interests
exclusively (W, 11, 103, 104).
Man’s surrender to the gratification of his senses is described by
Emerson as a revolt against God and it takes him away from him. The
disease of this rebellion and separation begins in the will and infects
the intellect at once and eventually one fails to see God in every object
(W, II, 105, 106). He sees the sensual attraction of an object but is
unable to see the sensual damage. He is attracted by the desire for
bodily pleasures. The mermaid’s head is visible to him but he fails to
see the dragon’s tail. He thinks he can have what he wants and avoid
what he doesn’t want (W, II, 105, 106). In “Experience” Emerson says
that people desire to escape from the results “of their vices but not
from the vices.” In such a case they are better advised to give up their
indulgence in sensual pleasures (W, III, 81-82). Emerson’s
condemnation of the gratification of senses reminds us of the Gita
wherein throughout man is warned against giving in to the pleasures
related to the senses'as they alienate him from God. In chapter IV I
shall compare the two positions. In the next chapter I shall explain the
stand taken in the Gita.
This second limit on human liberty to act profitably is aggravated
by the third which again comes from the nature itself. Some men are
materialistic (or sensual) from birth. In his essay “Fate” Emerson says
that people have a moral or material bias from birth. They are “uterine
brothers with this diverging destination” (W, VI, 12). Why is it so?
The question is difficult to answer. Emerson points out that the Hindus

24
believe that this is because of the deeds committed by people during
their previous births in this world (W, VI, 12). But this is only ‘a poetic
attempt’ to explain this situation. Emerson explains it in his own way,
but puts the blame on the individual as the Hindus do. He remarks that
the history of the individual explains his present condition and the
individual, too, knows that he is himself “a party to his present estate”
(W, VI, 13). This, however, does not seem to explain how a man with
a moral or material bias is party to his present estate. This idea of the
legacy of moral or material bias from birth appears in the essay “The
r

Transcendentalist”, too. Emerson observes that as thinkers mankind is

divided into two sects, Materialists and Idealists (W, 1,329).This notion
of mankind being divided into two clear categories from the time of
birth itself is put forward in the Gita, too. The Gita, being a scripture
emanating from a different socio-cultural background, however, sees
moral and immoral people as existing from birth. I shall compare the
two positions in chapter IV.
The fourth limit on human liberty to act arises from the human
senses which, if not used wisely, obstruct the individual’s perception
of the reality of things in this world of appearances. In Emerson’s
opinion the Idealists are in a better position to deal with this limit in
nature. The Materialists base their observations on the “data of the
senses,” while the Idealists regard the senses as “not final” and they
believe that the senses give us impressions of things, but they can’t tell
about the things themselves (W, I, 329). The Materialists deal with
facts, history, the force of the circumstances and the physical needs of
man (W, 1,329). The Idealists, on the contrary, believe in the capability
of thought and of will. They believe in inspiration, miracle, and
individual improvement (W, I, 330). The Materialists lead a life at the
level of appearances .alone.

25
 It is Emerson’s belief that with regard to senses the approach of
the Materialist and the Idealist, in each case, is natural but he seems to
favour the idealistic approach since, according to him, it is based on
the right use of the senses.31 The Idealist of Emerson allows the
impressions of sense and agrees to their coherent use and beauty (W, I,
330). But for himself he asserts that he affirms facts which are not
influenced by the illusions of sense. His facts are not open to doubt, he
claims. They are superior to “material facts” and one “only needs a
retirement from the senses to discern” them (W, 1,330). The Emersonian
idealist is not, however, cut off from outer reality of the world. The
sensuous fact is not ignored by him. He realises the presence of a table,
a chair, or the wall in a room but he will not stop -there (W, I, 330).
It is Emerson’s conviction that the worldly life, lived merely at
the level of senses in an interaction with the material objects in this
world, hides the real self of man and keeps him ignorant of the ultimate
reality of the universe. The materialistic life in which the individual is
not aware of the higher ends of life is meaningless and is just a waste
of time. In his essay “Uses of Great Men” Emerson points out that if he
works in his garden and prunes an apple tree, he is sufficiently occupied
and may continue in that job and a day would slip from his hands with
little gain to him. He might go to Boston or New York and may remain
engaged in his affairs and the day would pass but he is “vexed” by the
realisation of the price he has paid to gain “a trifling advantage” (W,
IV, 21).
In the essay “The Over-Soul” this idea is made very clear. We
are told that the eating, drinking, planting, counting man misrepresents
himself (W, II, 271). We are to respect not this man “but the soul,
whose organ he is” and he would do better to “let it appear through his
action” (by penetrating the life of senses) (W, II, 271). This idea of the

26
senses hiding the real self of man occurs in the Gita also. The life of
senses conceals the reality of the universe beneath it. I shall compare
Emerson’s position on this point with that in the Gita in chapter IV.
Closely related to the limit of human senses is the next limit (in
our study) of illusion created by nature. Human senses are handy
instruments for nature to create an illusion of reality in this world.
There is transience and instability in human perception. Man is not
free to perceive reality directly. In the essay “Circles” we get a glimpse
of this illusion created by nature through senses. Man moves from one
thought to another and is unable to take roots in a particular system of
thought. A change of perception keeps him under threat always. Today
one may write what one pleases on a particular subject about which
yesterday one had no fruitful ideas. And yet a month later one may
regret one’s own writing of today and find no substance in it. Emerson
complains under such a situation thus : “I am God in nature ; I am a
weed by the wall” (W, II, 306-07). In the essay “The Over-Soul” we
are told that one hour in life differs from another in “authority and
subsequent effect.” Life for the most part is full of uncertainty. The
present moment cannot exactly predict what is to happen next (W, II,
268).
The idea of illusion in life is given quite explicitly in
“Experience.” The very beginning of the essay is marked by diffidence
about the dependability of human perception. Emerson imagines that
we are on a stair-case where there are stairs we have climbed and there
are many yet to be climbed and we do not know our destination. We
move like ghosts through nature (W, III, 45). “Experience”, incidentally,
is one singularly pessimistic essay of Emerson. In it we find the anti­
climax of the theory of self-reliance. I shall discuss this essay in some
detail later in this chapter. Here, we deal with ‘Illusion’ alone. Illusion

27
is one of the seven lords of life described in “Experience.” It keeps
man fumbling and tumbling in life. One dream in life leads to another
and illusion has no ehd (W, III, 50). Life is a chain of moods (W, III,
50). Our perception is highly subjective. Nature keeps it such. In nature
we find “the necessity of a succession of moods or objects” (W, III,
55). (In the Gita in the three qualities of nature a succession of moods
is provided to man.) Illusion in nature keeps human perception unsteady.
The essay “Illusions” examines human life and finds all human
beings “victims of illusion.” Illusion covers childhood, youth, adulthood
and old age invariably, and (as a result) everyone is pursuing one fantasy
or another (W, VI, 313). Emerson refers to London, Paris, Boston and
San Francisco and observes that the masquerade of illusion is at its
peak there. What is interesting is that this illusion comes from God:
“Great is paint; nay, God is the painter” (W, VI, 312, 13).
Illusions are available in nature according to the quality of the
individuals. For intellectuals there exists a fine bait to delude them
with, and something is there for drunkards, too (W, VI, 313). Women
also create illusion and become victims of illusion (W, VI, 315). There
is also the illusion of love. Illusion does not spare even the elect and
deceives even the performer of the miracle (W, VI, 320) Quite
interestingly, we find the idea of illusion as coming from God and
deceiving all human beings of all age-groups and types in the Gita,
r

too, in its concept of the three qualities (gunas) of nature. I shall compare
Emerson’s stand on this point with that of the Gita in chapter IV of this
thesis. Chapter III will explain the idea as it appears in the Gita.
Though Emerson believes that the world is in the tight grip of
illusion, he believes that the law of compensation continues to have its
sway in human life. Though life seems to be a series of dreams, poetic
justice is done in life invariably. The good are rewarded and the evil

28

t
are punished. The good men have good visions but the undisciplined
are “whipped with bad thoughts and bad fortunes” (W, VI, 322). The
r

essay “Illusions” is concluded with the idea that chance or anarchy

have no place in the universe. Justice is certainly done. The people
who disobey the laws of virtuous conduct lose their grasp on the reality
of the universe. There is God’s unifying identity behind the illusive
variety of his nature. Towards the end of the essay “Illusions” Emerson
praises the Hindus for being able to see essential identity behind the
illusion of variety in nature. He also praises the Hindus for believing
that blessedness of man lies “in being freed from fascination” of illusion
(W, VI, 324).Incidentally, this idea of freedom from fascination or
illusion occurs in the Gita, too. The ideal man is one who is free from
r

illusion (caused by the three qualities of nature). It is also stressed that

those under illusion suffer and are punished severely for their being
so. I shall analyse this idea in chapter III, and in chapter IV I shall
compare it with Emerson’s concept of illusion.
Frederic Ives Carpenter calls the essay “Illusions,” “the most
eloquent essay” of The Conduct of Life. Carpenter also points out (as
we, too, have seen) that the basic idea is that illusions are disconnected
experiences and this idea is given in his earlier essay ‘Experience’,
too.32 Carpenter believes that according to Emerson illusions are the
only way to achieve wisdom and truth.33 I, however, believe that
according to Emerson they are an impediment that needs to be
overcome. They may serve as a stepping stone. Carpenter, however,
seems right when he remarks : “‘Illusions’ [the essay] is rather a poetic
description of the psychological experience of illumination.”34 One
can get glimpses of reality when one pierces the illusions and looks at
what is underneath.
The next limit on human action aimed at progress in life is

29
embodied in human constitution which varies from individual to
individual. It refers to the psychological make-up of the individual.
Every human being has a constitution (a certain mental make-up or
disposition) inherited in nature from birth. Sometimes in Emerson’s
*

writings it is, it seems, the result of the deeds committed by a person in

past lives. However, nothing has been made explicit on this point.
Nevertheless, it is made amply clear that every soul in human form
brings certain qualities of head and heart at the time of birth. God has
some secret aim for each soul. Consequently, it is incumbent on
everyone to do one’s best to look for and carry out the role for which
one is designed in nature. In “Self-Reliance” this idea is made very
clear. The limits decided by the constitution of a person are quite real.
In everybody’s life there comes a time when he realizes “that envy is
ignorance and imitation is suicide” and “that he must take himself for
t

better for worse as his portion” (W, II, 46).

Everyone in this world is put in certain circumstances from his
birth. In his memory there is the pre-established harmony designed to
help him express the “divine idea” which he “represents” (W, II, 46-
47). Each individual gets a particular place in society and a particular
connection of events, which are given to him by the divine providence.
The society of one’s contemporaries is something given in nature (W,
II, 47). Emerson calls it “the transcendent destiny.” It requires man to
give expression to the constitution he obtains in nature at the time of
his birth. For himself Emerson says that no law is sacred to him except
that of his nature. He chooses his right or wrong according to his
constitution (W, II, 50).
By obeying one’s constitution, one can become an instrument of
God and thus can make himself infinitely great. In “Fate” we get the
idea that nature knows what should be done and when. It puts its power

30
into a hero or a shepherd and plants him where he is needed (W, VI,
39). Dante and Columbus, the Italians of yesterday are now Russians
and Americans to-day. It seems Emerson wishes us to strive to become
what nature would like us to be. We can test ourselves in the hope that
we could also, perhaps, become as great as Dante or Columbus.
One’s constitution decides one’s occupation. This idea has been
repeatedly stressed by Emerson in a number of essays. In “Spiritual
Laws” he tells us that every man has “his own vocation.” The call for
it is embodied in his “talent” (W, II, 140). There is one direction in his
life in which a vast space is open to him to make progress. There is
present in him the inclination to do something which seems easy and
good to him to do and this something no other man can do. Everyone
is required to do something unique (W, II, 141). In “Illusions” Emerson
tells us that those who distinguish themselves in this world know how
to take advantage of “a certain fate in their constitution” (W, VI, 317).
Interestingly, in the Gita, too, an individual gets his occupation decided
by his constitution. Mankind is divided into four categories. Arjuna,
the protagonist, belongs to one Kshatriya category. He is required to
do justice to the duty enshrined in his constitution as a Kshatriya and
thus become an instrument of God. I shall discuss the Gita’s idea of
human constitution in the next chapter and compare Emerson’s stand
on this point with that in the Gita in chapter IV.
The factor of heredity also affects human constitution in Emerson.
In “Fate” Emerson remarks that men are made by their mothers (W,
VI, 10). A digger of ditches cannot explain Newton’s laws. Overwork
and extreme poverty affects the organs of his brain very badly in the
course of generations. Discussing this limit on human freedom to act
to one’s advantage Emerson becomes quite pessimistic and remarks
that all the privilege or legislation in this world cannot turn the poor

31
labourer into a poet or a prince (W, VI, 11). At this point it seems we
have come to the anti-climax of the theory of self-reliance. In the Gita,
too, a similar anti-climactic situation is reached, though in different
circumstances. The evil-doers go on degenerating in course of several
births and become eventually almost incorrigible.
Closely related to the limit of constitution are two limits of
temperament and subjectiveness in human beings. These are mentioned
in “Experience.” These limits certainly adversely affect the human
freedom to act for one’s benefit. These, however, can be managed with
tact.
A defective temperament has many disadvantages. It makes
fortune and talent useless (W, III, 50). Emerson lists a few
temperamental defects. Falling asleep in a chair, becoming egotistic,
becoming greedy for money and food and begetting a child in boyhood,
becoming short-tempered- “too cold or too hot” and “too irritable by
pleasure and pain” are worth-mentioning (W, III, 50-51). These defects
are caused by excess or idiocy. In addition to neutralizing the promise
of genius, temperament also contributes to the creation of illusion in
life. It shuts a person in a prison of glass which is not visible to the
individual. Emerson believes that everybody is a prisoner of a given
temperament whose boundaries he will never cross. And this is the
“law” on the plane of ordinary life (W, III, 52). All divinity is put to
rout by temperament.
The limitations created by temperament can, however, be
overcome through'virtue. Virtue can successfully overpower
temperament which is the “veto or limitation power in the constitution”
(W, III, 54-55). Incidentally, in the Gita, too, the individual’s
temperament has a significant role to play in human life. The defects
of temperament similar to those we have discussed in Emerson arise in

32
a human being imagined in the Gita when he (or she) is under the
influence of the Rajas and Tamas qualities of nature. Virtue in Emerson
looks similar to the Sattva quality of nature in the Gita which when
present in human beings obliterates the influence of other two qualities.
Next, subjectiveness of human beings affects their progress in
r

life adversely. Emerson believes it to be the result of the fall of man. It

separates man from God. Everyone looks at things from his own angle.
As one is so one sees. Every evil or good thing is the shadow of the
individual (W, III, 76). Owing to subjectiveness one is unable to have
an impartial and unbiased (neutral) view of the reality of life. The moral
that can be drawn from this discussion of subjectiveness is: As a person
is so he sees (W, III, 79). Subjectiveness is related to human constitution.
A man looks at this world as his constitution dictates to him. His
subjectiveness is his “constitutional necessity” to behave in a particular
manner (W, III, 81). The idea of subjectiveness as a limiting factor in
r
!

human progress occurs in the Gita, too. A man’s susceptibility to the

influence of the three qualities of nature is his subjectiveness. One
quality or the other dominates in his behaviour at all times. I shall
discuss this point in the coming chapter.
Travelling for entertainment is another limiting factor in the
pursuit of happiness in human life. It is a great human weakness.
Emerson condemns it calling it a fool’s paradise (W, II, 81). A person
travelling for amusement tries to make himself happy in vain. He has
no stability (of mind) within and he simply moves from ruins to ruins
(W, II, 81). True happiness has to flow from within the individual.
This idea is very prominent in the Gita. One is advised not to adopt a
wavering attitude in life.
Praying for material gains is still another limiting factor in human
behaviour in pursuit of happiness in life. Emerson disapproves strongly

33
of it and points out that one ought to ask for no private benefits. Praying
for a selfish end is mean and thievish (W, II, 77). It is vicious to ask for
a particular object through prayer for personal aggrandisement (W, II,
77). Throughout in the Gita man is advised to work without the desire
for fruit. It is stressed that material gains cannot make mankind happy.
In chapter IV I shall compare Emerson’s position on this point with
that in the Gita. In the next chapter I shall analyse the stand taken in
the Gita with regard to the material pursuits of mankind.
Next, we find society, on the whole, working under a heavy
handicap in nature. It does not ever make any progress. It has its gains
but the price paid by it neutralises them. It moves from barbarous
behaviour to civilised behaviour. It becomes scientific and rich even,
but, in this change we do not find “amelioration” (W, II, 84). For
everything society gains nature takes something from it. Emerson
compares the white man who is well-read and well-dressed with the
tribal New Zealander and remarks that the white man has suffered a
great loss in health. He has become physically weak (W, II, 84). The
man in the civilized world has a coach, but he has lost the strength of
his feet. About races Emerson says that they are not progressive in
time (W, II, 86). This we read in “Self-Reliance” (published in 1841).
However, by the time Emerson came to write “Fate” (1860) it seems
he changed his mind on this point. Now he writes that there is
“melioration” in Fate. The universe has “its ascending effort” (W, VI,
35). And he further writes that the former worse races are no more and
the second and imperfect races are disappearing or are improving (W,
VI, 35-36).
We find in Emerson’s writings changes of perception of this kind
in course of time. He was bold enough to revise his thought if he felt
he should. If in “Self-Reliance” (1841) he said: “Let a man then know

34
his worth, and keep things under his feet... in the world which exists
for him” (W, II, 61), in “Experience” (1844) when he felt that illusion
had its sway in life, he remarked: “The individual is always mistaken .
.. it turns out somewhat new and very unlike what he promised himself’
(W, III, 69-70). In “Self-Reliance” if he advised at the end of the essay
that one should depend on “Cause and Effect, the Chancellors of God”
(W, II, 89), in “Experience” he says: “Nature hates calculators; her
methods are saltatory and impulsive” (W, III, 68), and further- “nothing
is of us or our works- that all is of God. Nature will not spare us the
smallest leaf of laurel” (W, III, 69). Now what are we to do with the
conflicting stands like these? The answer is that they are in keeping
with his philosophy.
Emerson felt that one limitation in human perception of reality
comes from the individual’s effort to be consistent in his utterances or
thought. He says: “With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to
do” (W, II, 57). His stand on consistency is given in the following
words: “Speak what you think now in hard words and tomorrow speak
what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict
everything you said today” (W, II, 57). And, further, if one fears one
would be misunderstood one must not bother: “To be great is to be
misunderstood” (W, II, 57-58). Edward Wagenknecht explains the
changes in Emerson’s perceptions thus: “Emerson perceived truth and
proclaimed it; he did not reason or winnow it out; and when he changed
his mind, it was simply because he had intuited further or differently.”35
The issue of the changes of perception in Emerson can be finally
resolved if we take an over-all view of his philosophy. His basic stand
on human life, its problems and their solutions remains unchanged.
This will become clear also from our discussion of the ‘Liberating
Self’ in this chapter. To Warren Staebler, however, Emerson was like

35
nature holding unity in diversity with his thought always having an
under-lying unity: “At the same time he was very much like nature in
exhibiting the one in the many; no matter what the seeming variation,
in a sense he was always singing the same old tune.”36 Staebler further
points out: “What is interesting, then, in the later essays, along with
signs of difference, is the evidence of thought unchanged.”37
Emerson’s view of human problems and their solutions does not
change. Till the end he continues to believe in the need of human
dependence on the Self. As regards his attitude to society as not capable
of change (his earlier stand) and as subject to melioration in nature
(his later stand), it seems, both these stands find their parallels in the
Gita. Looked at from one angle society in the Gita seems incapable of
change since the evil people seem incurably involved in evil doing in
course of their many births, with each birth reinforcing their evil
behaviour. This reminds us of Emerson’s remarks that society never
advances and that the change is not melioration. Looked at from another
r

angle, the society of humans in the Gita seems capable of change since
God is taking care of the world and also intervenes when there is too
much deterioration.
Next in our discussion of the limiting circumstance for human
beings in life come their defects of indifference towards the present
time and (their) cowardice. In “Self-Reliance” Emerson complains that
man is cowardly and regretful. He is not upright (W, II, 67). He is
worried about the future and has complaints about the past. He
postpones the matters or looks back at past remorsefully or tries to
look into the future but pays no attention to the needs of his present
r
f

wherein lies the secret of his progress in life (W, II, 67). The Gita is
written specially to emphasise the need for man to respond to the
exigency of the hour. I shall discuss this point in the coming two

36
chapters.
Conformity to the ways of society is another defect that human
beings carry in them. Society requires its members to conform strictly
to its customs and traditions. The individual is forced to surrender his
independence and judgement to the society in which he lives.
Conformity is regarded as a virtue in society. Society is averse to self-
reliance among its members. It does not like innovation. As a result,
human beings become “a mob” (W, II, 71). There is no chance for
happiness and success for them as they lose initiative and creativity
through their conformity to the ways of society.
About society’s dislike of the individual’s assertion of the liberty
of thought and action Emerson remarks in “Circles” that the new
statement is never liked by the old and those abiding by the old regard
the new as “an abyss of scepticism” (W, II, 305). Society wants its
members to remain slavish and conservative in their outlook. It wishes
them to become blind imitators of its ways. It may be inferred from
these views of Emerson that, perhaps, because of these views of his
(because of his non-conformity) he was able to accept the philosophy
of the Gita in his life and was able also to use it creatively in his writings.
In the Gita, too, conformity to the ways of society is condemned both
directly and indirectly. The materialistic attitudes of the people of the
time stand condemned outright. The traditional ways of worship are
also attacked. I shall compare Emerson’s stand on conformity in society
with the Gita’s stand in chapter IV.
Dealing with human shortcomings, we come to the defect of our
too much reverence for great men and outstanding books of the past or
present. This is an extension of our tendency to conform to the ways of
society. The so-called “high and worthy,” Emerson feels, have “speedy
limits” which we see if we pay attention. They are rich, noble and

37
great just because we think them to be so, but we shouldn’t be deceived
about them (W, II, 307). The great men have their limitations and,
therefore, do not deserve to be imitated slavishly. Emerson makes his
position very clear in this situation. He tells us that when we find
limitations of people we lose interest in them (W, II, 308). In “Uses of
Great Men” he says that we should not look for completeness in men
and should rather accept their social quality as delegated (to them) in
nature (W, IV, 34). The individual is coming out of his limits into a
multifarious life (W, IV, 35). Even Jesus is regarded by Emerson as
one not to be followed blindly. He condemns too much reliance of
Christians on him. In “The Over-Soul” he says that the faith relying on
authority is no faith. This reliance points to the downfall of the religion.
Jesus for centuries has held “a position of authority.” But Jesus’
grandeur is no match for the “immense possibilities” of man (W, II,
295). Emerson, however, does not discount the inspiration we can draw
from great men, but that is the limit (W, II, 296).
To conclude this point, Emerson feels that no human being can
be a perfect model for emulation. So any attempt to imitate others
blindly will prove to be a great limitation in the path to progress and
success in life. The Gita, too, unreservedly stresses this point. Even
the gods in the Gita, like mankind in general, have their limitations
and are subject to the influence of the three qualities of nature. I shall
explain this point in chapters III and IV.
Incidentally, the next limit on human liberty to act independently
(in our study) is that of the established religion. People in general tend
to become blind followers of their religion. This, again, is conformity
in society. In the “Divinity School Address” addressing the prospective
ministers Emerson advises them to act independently and to discard
the models which they consider good or which others treat as sacred

38
(W, I, 145). He adds that imitation leads to a mediocre achievement in
life (W, I, 145). Emerson lists two defects of historical Christianity in
this essay. The first is that it has exaggerated the personality of Jesus
in an obnoxious way (W, I, 130). The second defect is that God is not
treated as present and alive now. The revelation is treated as if it were
a thing of the past and as if God were no longer alive (W, I, 134).
In Christianity Jesus is regarded as a mediator between man and
God. God represents moral perfection and man is regarded “not only
as morally weak but as morally blameworthy.” The fellowship between
God and man is disturbed by sin and is restored by Jesus who “alone is
the Mediator.”38 There can be no direct approach to God (in
Christianity). In Emerson’s opinion the established religion has a
limiting effect on human search for truth, peace and progress. It prevents
man from making a direct approach to God. In the Gita, too, the
established religion of the time comes under heavy criticism. The
followers of the Vedas and the gods are seen in a bad light. It is suggested
that the Vedic approach to life is traditional. In chapter III I shall explain
this point. In chapter IV Emerson’s position on this point will be
compared with that in the Gita.
Next comes the problem of human suffering in this world. The
r

life in this world is not an easy-going affair. Every home looks good
and allright until we come to know about it. There is “tragedy” all
around. There are “moaning women and hard-eyed husbands.” We find
people asking for news as if they never had any good news (W, III,
47). In this way the world is full of misery. In the Gita, too, life is seen
as full of suffering and sorrow.
The difficulty created by the constant confrontation between man
and nature also affects human progress in a bad way in Emerson. The
dual nature of life on earth does not allow human life to become an

39
easy affair. Nature antagonises man and nature is not a sentimentalist
(W, VI, 06). It may drown a man or a woman or swallow a ship
unfeelingly (W, VI, 06). A man may be frozen like an apple in nature.
Diseases, the elements, fortune, gravity, lightning -all have to be faced
in life. (Interestingly, fortune is listed by Emerson as a force in nature.)
These have no respect for any persons. Discussing this aspect of nature
Emerson is compelled to remark that Providence is a bit rude in its
approach (W, VI, 07). Its system has snakes and tigers. There may be
earthquakes, volcanos and changes of climate. Emerson repeats his
earlier observation (with a slight shift in emphasis) that Providence
achieves its end by means of wild, rough and incalculable methods
(W, VI, 08). We cannot shut our eyes, he says, to this aspect of nature
(W, VI, 08).
The duality in nature is embodied in the struggle between matter
and mind. Nature and Thought are like two boys pushing each other.
In human life matter and mind are engaged in an eternal struggle (W,
VI, 43). Man has to use his thought to overpower the forces in nature.
Commenting on these difficulties in nature Emerson remarks that these
“odious facts” are an inseparable part of human life (W, VI, 19).
Surrounded by the difficulties of life in nature, man has to learn the art
of dealing successfully with them through experience (W, VI, 19-20).
In the Gita, too, mankind is observed as experiencing joy and sorrow
as a result of the contact between matter and spirit. Man is advised to
learn to deal effectively with the influence of nature on him. The coming
two chapters will analyse this point.
Examining human problems in Emerson’s view of life on earth,
we come upon the problem of evil in society. In Emerson’s system evil
has no existence. Man’s faulty conceptions about evil create difficulty
for him. Evil is a non-entity. It is darkness resulting from the absence

40

V
of light. Evil is the absence of good. This is the ultimate reality about
it. In “Experience,” as we have already noted, Emerson says that every
evil or good thing is our own shadow (W, III, 76). Further in this essay
he remarks: “there is no crime to the intellect” (W, III, 79). Saints are
unhappy because they look at sin “from the point of view of conscience
and not of intellect” (W, III, 79). This is a confusion of thought. From
the angle of thought sin is “a diminution or less” but “seen from the
conscience or will, it is pravity or bad’ (W, III, 79). A man, who is
thoughtful and also dispassionate, views sin as a short-coming but one,
who has a conscience which is inclined to view a shortcoming as evil,
regards it as depravity. To intellect sin (evil) is “shade, absence of light,
and no essence” whereas to conscience it is “essential evil” (W, III,
79). In “Fate” Emerson calls evil the good in the making which means
the same as we have just discussed. It means the absence of good. But
it is expected that the presence of good will fill the vacuum. Evil in
Emerson is just a shortcoming that can be removed. It is not permanent
as Christians believe it to be.
F.I. Carpenter, in his book Emerson Handbook, discussing the
idea of evil in Emerson remarks that in his writings he does not tell us
“simply and clearly” what evil is or whether the good prevails on evil
in this world or whether the good will have a victory over the evil in
course of time.39 Carpenter, however, feels Emerson interpreted evil as
a mystic. In the denial of “the reality of evil in the conventional sense”
“Emerson’s interpretation was fundamentally that of the mystic.”40 But
“besides being a mystic” he “was also a child of the nineteenth century.”
And “as a romantic he often declared that good (in the conventional
sense) would surely triumph over evil in history.”41 He more often,
however, “sought to mediate between the purely mystical and the purely
conventional interpretations and to preach the potential inner victory

41
of good over evil in the soul of man.” He sought to preach “the possible
future victory of good over evil in the life of humanity.”42
Emerson has been vehemently criticised for his views about evil.
He has been charged with lacking the vision of evil. Discussing such
objections, Newton Arvin in his article “The House of Pain” quotes
James, who said that Emerson “had no great sense of wrong,” “no
sense of the dark, the foul, the base,” and himself joins in the
condemnation of Emerson very enthusiastically. He points out that there
are a hundred of such objections as the one made by James. Emerson,
he adds, has no vision of evil. Arvin wonders how Emerson can be
read with any respect in our times, and even suggests that Emerson
may not even be read at all.43
Commenting on Emerson’s ideas about evil, Henry B. Parkes
says that Emerson’s mistake seems to have originated in his own
character. “He was an optimist because he was himself innocent of
evil.”44 F.I. Carpenter, however, defends Emerson on different grounds.
He says that “the mystical interpretation of the evil” is unpopular
because “it is difficult for an individual to look upon his own pain and
death with godlike equanimity” but this “in no way invalidates it.”45
We confuse the romantic with the mystic when we deride the mystical
interpretation of the evil.
A romantic, like a child ignorant of pain and evil, believes that
these do not matter and they don’t exist but the mystic experiences and
understands them and knows them and goes “beyond them.” His is a
hard-earned vision. Like all mystics Emerson “had lived through many
long years of pain and tragedy and developed his philosophy as a
result.”46 Carpenter refers to the incident of Emerson recovering from
tuberculosis when he was 24 and when he entered in his journals: “He
has seen but half the Universe who never has been shown the house of

42
Pain.”47 This means that adversity is a great teacher. I shall try to throw
some more light on the mystical aspect of Emerson’s philosophy of
evil in our discussion of the liberating Self.
Emerson’s idea of evil is similar to that in the Gita. Evil is treated
r

in the Gita as something that occurs due to the absence of wisdom or

virtue. It is not something eternal or permanent as far as human effort
to deal with it is concerned. I shall analyse this point in the next chapter
and shall compare Emerson’s viewpoint with that in the Gita in chapter
IV.
Last in our discussion of the limits of human liberty to act
independently, we discuss the idea of the transmigration of souls in
Emerson’s system. Though vague and left to inference for the most
part, the idea occurs in some of his essays. The most outstanding
example is in “History” (1841). Emerson suggests that we should do
something to get rid of this cycle of birth and death to which we are
subject: “Ah! brother, stop the ebb of thy soul, ebbing downward into
the forms into whose habits thou hast now for many years slid.” And
just one sentence ahead of this statement he remarks: “The
transmigration is no fable. I would it were” (W, II, 32). In “Spiritual
Laws” we find a vague reference to some such happening. Plato, we
are told, is read by a dozen people at a particular time but still for the
new generations for such a small number his writings become available
and it seems God brings them for these people (W, II, 154). Every age
has readers of Plato. r

In our discussion of human constitution we have already noted

how Dante and Columbus are Russians and Americans today (W, VI,
36). In “The Over-Soul,” however, we are told that everytime the soul
creates it creates new persons. She looks forward and does not have
any dates or persons special to it (W, II, 274). In “Experience” Emerson

43
 r

looks forward to a happy prospect ahead of him in America and

expresses his desire to die and take birth again in this new but still far-
off America (W, III, 72). Emerson’s final stand on transmigration of
souls remains ambiguous. In “The Over-Soul” he refers to the questions
about the immortality of soul, the employments of heaven, the state of
sinner, etc. and remarks that Jesus left no answers to such questions
and even God does not have any answer for them. These questions
about the future are an admission of sin (W, II, 284). In the Gita, in
sharp contrast, we find a very clear stand taken with regard to the
transmigration of souls.
By now our examination of the limitations faced by human beings
in their life in their pursuit of happiness and success in Emerson’s
world is complete. It is now to be seen how one can be liberated from
the sorrow arising from the difficulties one faces in life. As noted briefly
at the beginning of this chapter, the help from God is available to man
in Emerson for an end to all his problems. In the first chapter we have
already noted, though briefly, that God is the Self of mankind or even
of everything that is in existence. This Self of God would liberate, and
is accessible to all. The Self is eternal and, therefore, always available.
This Self is referred to in Emerson’s writings by different names.
It is referred to mainly as the Over-Soul, the Universal Soul, the
Universal being, the Universal Spirit, being and soul. In “Self-Reliance”
which carries the central idea of Emerson’s philosophy he talks of a
universal reliance on this Self: “Who is the trustee? What is the
aboriginal Self, on which a universal reliance may be grounded?” (W,
II, 64). In “The Over-Soul” he imagines man becoming God through a
reliance on this Self. He remarks that the simplest person “becomes
God” when he worships God sincerely with honest conduct. However,
Emerson feels that this process of reliance on “this better and universal

44
self,” this becoming God, is forever inscrutable (W, II, 292). This Self
is astonishing and awe-inspiring (W, II, 292). Incidentally, this reference
to God as Self in these two essays prompted me to use the word ‘Self’
as referring to God in the title of my thesis.
The Self is present in all human beings equally. Emerson has not
explained why the Self is so distributed into mankind into individual
selves. However, we are given to understand that this vast world of
human pleasure and pain exists as a result of this separation of individual
selves from the central Self. Emerson sees the Self in society. He says
he lives in society and people answer to thoughts in his mind. They
obey the instincts which he obeys and this certifies their “common
nature” to him (W, II, 276). He further notes that “the separated selves,”
the other souls, catch his attention in an unrivalled way. He concludes
on the situation with the observation that they stir in him the feelings
of love, hatred, fear, admiration and pity and eventually these feelings
decide the character of life in our society and it is reflected in the mutual
human cooperation or conflict (W, II, 275-76). Mankind thus interacts
and lives on. In the Gita the Self is present in mankind in the form of
the separated selves as in Emerson, and human life is characterised by
the feelings of aversion or affection in almost the same way as Emerson
explains it here. Our next chapter seeks to make this point amply clear.
Incidentally, Emerson’s idea of ‘self’, apart from its divine
connections, comes closer in its definition to the modern concept of
the self. Charles Taylor gives us the modern concept of the self in his
Sources ofthe Self: The Making ofModern Identity. He points out that
we refer to “a human being as a self.” He adds that “we speak of people
as selves, meaning that they are beings of the requisite depth and
complexity to have an identity.”48
The Self is one and despite its separation into different selves

45
remains one in the form of the universal soul. All human beings are
connected to this one soul. The Self has got the integrated oneness like
that of the electric current. Man’s tragedy is that he is not aware of the
presence of the Self in him and fails to take advantage of it. Every
human being has within him the Self though almost in all human beings
it is “obstructed and yet unborn” (“The American Scholar,” W, I, 90).
Kenneth Walter Cameron in his book Young Emerson’s Transcendental
Vision points out that the Self is beyond human understanding but it is
“also within man - an ‘incarnate Logos’ in every human being.”
However, in most cases it remains inactive and unawakened and as a
result people “are bestial.”49 Man in the Gita also in general remains
unaware of the presence of the Self in him and is, therefore, demoniac
and has an evil destiny.
Man has to learn to depend on the Self in him, rather one has to
learn to live in the Self. Cameron explains it thus: “The real SELF in
man is that ‘higher self’ or ‘true self’ — that fragment of the
Transcendent (and now incarnate) Deity-with-him... .When awake or
alive, this inner Godhead is the great guide of life — nay, is LIFE.”50 In
the Gita man is advised to live in the Self. One who gets in touch with
the Self within begins to live in it. In the coming chapter this point is
analysed.
Man in Emerson is supposed to live and make progress in nature,
of which he is a part. Nature refers to everything that is in existence,
animate or inanimate. It is the power of the Self in physical operation.
There is an onward movement in nature with an unlimited scope for
human progress. It is for man to fall into line with nature and fulfil the
Self’s design through it. In the “Uses of Great Men” amelioration is
seen as the destiny of organised nature. There is no limit to the scope
for progress in human life. “It is for man to tame the chaos.” When

46
alive on earth he has to make scientific and cultural advances (W, IV,
35). In man’s victories over nature he acts as its (nature’s) instrument
since he is part of it. He is a participant and a representative both. He
knows nature because “he has just come out of nature” (W, IV, 11). In
the Gita the Self is the author of nature and also operates through it. In
its supervision nature turns out the animate and the inanimate. Entire
human existence and behaviour is seen as resulting from nature. This
point is explained in the next chapter. In chapter IV I have compared
Emerson’s position with that in the Gita.
Nature and man in Emerson exist only due to the Self. Man has
to look for the Self’s design in nature and act accordingly. Cameron
remarks that man and nature deserve respect only because the
Transcendent Spirit (the Self) shines or flows into them or stays in
them because of their being its creation. Being matter alone they are
lifeless. “Only as God is in them are they alive.”51 (This idea is very
conspicuous in the Gita. It is pointed out that nothing animate or
inanimate has any existence without the Self.)
Man’s life lived according to the principles embodied in the Self
(which we are to discuss shortly) would make the nature around him
friendly and the world a paradise for him. Cameron points out that the
natural world around us can be made a paradise if we make the “higher
SELF” operative in us by removing all the obstacles from its way. We
can do so by relying “on the highest intuitions from the Inner Voice.”
The natural world then becomes friendly because it is “a remoter
incarnation” of the Self and it depends on man’s spiritual preparation
for its operation.52 Nature would turn inimical, however, if man turns
away from a life in the Self. The outer world would become
characterised by “war and hate.”53 This idea is present in the Gita, too.
The Self is the friend of one who is noble and in tune with it from

47
within. It turns inimical to the one who is not spiritually alive. In the
next chapter I shall analyse this point.
Man, however, is free to choose his course of action in life.
Discussing the limits of fate Emerson tells us in “Fate” that freedom is
given to man necessarily. If one chooses to believe that everything in
human life is Fate then man’s freedom is “a part of Fate” (W, VI, 23).
In man there is always present the instinct to choose and act. One is
free as far as one’s thought goes. Man is as free as he thinks himself to
be free (W, VI, 23).
But as we havenoted in our discussion of the human limitations,
Emerson would not have man in his world absolutely free. He
enumerates the limits and suggests that one should not pay attention to
Fate but should look to the other side. He adds that too much obsession
with the limits in nature would be “meanness” (W, VI, 23). Discussing
freedom available to man in Emerson’s world it would be useful to
mention the following opinion of Edward Wagenknecht : “The
Emersonian ideal is that of the man who is free to do as he likes but
who chooses to do what is right and in harmony with the Will of God.”54
The greatest limit that Emerson would impose on human freedom
to act and the greatest liberating circumstance he would prescribe for
human life is a life of virtue which means doing the right and ensuring
justice in one’s dealings with others. This links one to the Self, the
source of all virtues, and liberates one from one’s petty worldliness. In
“The Over-Soul” we are told that one is open from one side to God’s
attributes which are Justice, Love, Freedom and Power (W, II, 271 -
72). When one is simple and honest one is linked to the Self and one
obtains not a particular virtue, but all the virtues (W, II, 271-72). One
enjoys life in the Self and becomes absolutely virtuous.
In the “Divinity School Address” the Self is referred to as Virtue,

48
Truth, and the Right. A man who has the sentiment of virtue would
affirm in his prayer to the Self that he loves the Right and that the
Truth is beautiful within and without always. He will pray: “Virtue, I
am thine; save me, use me, thee will I serve, day and night.” He will
insist that he wants to be virtue. The aim here is a merger in the Self.
With such a prayer Emerson says the Self is pleased, and thus the aim
of all creation is fulfilled (W, I, 120-21). So this is the ideal for man- a
complete surrender to the Self and a merger in it. A man living in the
Self is the master of nature. Nature becomes his servant. Nature is
where he is (W, II, 60). This is because he is virtuous like the Self and
lives in the Self. In the Gita the man who is virtuous is dear to the Self.
The Self is virtue itself and also protects it. The Self wants complete
surrender of man to it. One who gets in touch with the Self gets a life in
the Self, and nature becomes his servant. He is trigunatita, one who
has mastered the three qualities of nature. In the next chapter I shall
explain this point. In chapter IV I shall compare Emerson’s position
with that in the Gita.
By now we have reached the centre of Emerson’s philosophy - a
complete surrender to the Self to allow the Self to act through us. Man
becomes immensely powerful and knowledgeable when he does so. In
“The Over-Soul” we are told that when one surrenders oneself to the
“Supreme Mind” one relates oneself to “all its works” and one gets
access “to particular knowledges and powers” (W, II, 278). In the Gita,
too, the Self contains the knowledge of everything that happens or
should happen in this world. And one having access to the Self knows
what ought to be done. Truly useful guidance in life lies in a life in the
Self. I shall analyse this point in the next chapter.
The life in the Self is described by Emerson further. We have to
keep our human mundane self away from the divine Self within us to

49
allow it a passage to shine through us. This would give us the greatest
advantage. When we allow the Self in us to operate through us we
come to have a knowledge of “everything and every man.” The Self
“the Maker of all things and all persons stands behind us and casts his
dread omniscience through us over things” (W, II, 280). In “Uses of
Great Men” Emerson tells us that when a genius expresses the Self
(within), his “opaque self’ is penetrated by the light of the Self, the
First Cause within him (W, IV, 35). The gain of the man surrendering
to the Self is in proportion to his surrender. The enlightenment provided
by the Self is in proportion to the preparation one gives the evidence of
for the Self to act through him (W, II, 280). This happening has got
supreme importance in view of nature. The Self’s guidance of the
individual is the greatest happening in nature (W, II, 280). This it ought
to be. It is man becoming God.
We return to the point where we began. Man is required to be
good and virtuous to qualify for a life in the Self. A doer of a good
deed is “instantly ennobled.” Man is liberated through good deeds.
This liberation resides injustice. This would give man the safety, the
majesty, and immortality of the Self. In the “Divinity School Address”
we are told that a just man is as far God as he is just. That man through
justice becomes a recipient of God’s safety, immortality and majesty
(W, I, 122). When we believe this to be true we have the religious
sentiment in us, and to have it is for man a matter of his greatest
happiness (W, I, 124). In Nature this process of liberation from the
worldly view of things is described very clearly. In the Self we see
Justice and Truth. And, as a result, the absolute is apprehended. And it
seems we exist from now only. We are immortalised (W, I, 57). Quite
like this, in the Gita, a very clear possibility of man getting liberated
through a shelter in the Self is held out. A man while doing all the

50
duties of his daily life can apprehend the Self in him in such a way that
*

the Self is in him and he is in the Self all the time. In the next chapter
I shall explain this stand in the Gita.
When one apprehends the absolute in the Emersonian world one
gets into the presence of the ideas which have existed with the Self
from the beginning. Emerson tells us in Nature that these ideas “are
the thoughts of the Supreme Being.” These existed when the task of
creation of the universe was done. The Self used these ideas (W, I, 56-
57). When we are in the presence of these ideas we find that “the
outward circumstance [the limiting circumstance in the context of our
thesis] is a dream and a shade” (W, I, 56). The limiting circumstance is
f

overpowered and neutralised when one is at one with the Self.

The process of the liberation of man from the worldly sorrows is
also described by Emerson as ‘intuition’ or ‘insight.’ It proceeds from
the Self. One has simply to keep oneself ready to receive it by leading
a righteous life. In “Self-Reliance” we find that the great men have the
Self, the absolutely trustworthy, working through them in this way (W,
II, 47). In “The Over-Soul” we are told that the Self would make its
own choice of the individuals for inspiration from it (W, II, 269-70).
So readiness is all.
Now, incidentally, what can be the special characteristics of a
person under inspiration? The inspired person will have a lyrical and
sweet speech like the rising wind (W, II, 270). In “Self-Reliance”
Emerson tells us that such a person (as is inspired) will have a sweet
voice like the brook’s murmur or the corn’s rustle (W, II, 68). In the
Gita in chapter XVII it is pointed out that a virtuous man has benignity
of speech and mildness of temper as his special traits.
For attainment of a life in the Self in “Self-Reliance” we are told
that intuition links man to the Self. (The other words used for intuition

51
are Spontaneity and Instinct.) The process of intuition, Emerson tells
r

us, can’t be explained with the help of examples from experience (W,
II, 68). All persons in the past who had intuition are a thing of the past
for the Self now. When “the hour of vision” (the other name for
intuition) arrives the soul of man is liberated from passion and it
“beholds identity and eternal causation, perceives the self-existence of
Truth and Right,” and becomes calm with the knowledge “that all things
go well” (W, II, 69). One sees the undisturbable order of the universe
with the Self in it and is finally liberated, i.e. becomes calm. The vast
expanse of nature which includes the Atlantic Ocean, the South Sea
and the long intervals of time, years and centuries - all becomes
r f

unimportant (W, II, 69). One feels completely at peace with oneself
and the world. One comes to have a glimpse of the eternity of the Self.
When one has the vision of the Self, one comes to know that the
Self is in a state of becoming. It abandons the past for ever. All past
riches and reputation mean nothing to it. It confuses the saint with the
rogue, and pushes Jesus and Judas “equally aside” (W, II, 69). This
seems to be an unaffected and neutral view of life of mankind wherein
one is far above the mere ethical consideration of human life and sees
the Self behind or in everything.
When Emerson reaches this point in “Self-Reliance” he suddenly
asks why we talk too much of self-reliance then. He then himself
explains it. Talking of reliance, he explains, is an insufficient way of
putting the things. We need rather to speak “of that which relies because
it works and is” (W, II, 69-70). The Self in this light is the creator
working through his creation with a well-calculated design. The Self
in the Gita, too, is seen as eternal as we have seen here in Emerson. In
one respect, it also makes no distinction between the good and the evil
and is neutral. It is at the same time also seen as working through

?
52
mankind with a well-calculated design. These points are explained in
the next chapter.
The point that .the Self relies on mankind (as Emerson puts it)
may mislead the lay man about the philosophy of self-reliance. Is it
really self-reliance? A distinction here will have to be made between
man’s mundane self and his divine Self. We must be very clear that it
is reliance on this divine Self that matters to Emerson. Newton Dillaway
explains this point very well in his book Prophet ofAmerica: Emerson
and Problems of Today. He points out : “ ‘Self-Reliance’ is not an
endorsement of rugged individualism, which is reliance on lower self,
but an endorsement of true individualism, which means an emergence
of Self from the self of rugged individualism.”55 About the Self in
Emerson Dillaway remarks : “This God in us he calls the Self. If you
know his mysticism, you could not possibly mistake this Self for
anything but the Universal Self.”56
The vision of Emerson which we have just discussed in the
preceding paragraphs seems to be mystical. Judas and Christ get an
equal treatment and both have together become a thing of the past. The
Self dispassionately continues to be busy in creation and destruction.
Carpenter believes that Emerson “described his aesthetic, natural
experience in mystical terms.”57 Carpenter seems right. He points out
that Emerson’s “experience was identical with that of all mysticism in
two essentials : it was ‘an ecstasy’ and it gave the conviction of‘union
with God’.”58 A mystic has an experience wherein “the soul seems to
go beyond the body and to achieve identification with God.” The limits
of individuality are transcended by the individual who “feels himself
part of the whole : the Self sees the partial self in perspective and
shares the omniscience of God, or the Over-Soul.”59
In “The Over-Soul” throughout we have a taste of Emerson’s

53

r
mystical experiences of this kind. His mystical liberation from the
worldly cares seems evident to the reader. He says that he finds himself
a pensioner. He is the effect and not the cause. He watches the spectacle
of his life surprisedly and puts himself “in the attitude of reception”
(W, II, 268). He goes ahead and discovers, while in complete union
with the Self, that seeing and the object seen, the spectator and the
spectacle, the subject and the object are the same. He explains that the
sun, the moon, the animal, the tree are the glittering parts of the soul
which is “the whole” (W, II, 269). The Gita also sees the Self in
everything- in the sun, the moon, the animal and the tree. It also sees
the Self in the spectacle and the spectator. Apart from this it also insists
that the universe is being governed well in the system of the Self and
?

that when one realises this one is liberated from the sorrow arising
from one’s ignorance of the universal facts in the system of the Self.
These points are explained in the next chapter.
The union of man with the Self brings joy to man. When the
individual soul “mingles with the universal soul” it experiences awe
and delight (W, II, 282). This is its liberation obtained through its union
with the Self. The individual who unites with the Self is filled with
enthusiasm of a particular kind which is the necessity of his constitution.
The length and quality of this experience is determined by the state the
individual finds himself in. He may feel an ecstasy or may undergo a
trance or may have some other extra-ordinary inspiration. The intensity
of the enthusiasm experienced will vary from individual to individual.
The “faintest glow” of this happiness is visible on the faces of human
beings when they perform some virtuous action in life and have
“virtuous emotion” which is the basis of their mutual co-existence in
society (W, II, 281). The conclusion is the same as ever before- the
Self is virtue and it liberates. The idea that a union with the Self affords

54

?
extra-ordinary pleasure to the individual is present in the Gita, too. It
is stated that no other pleasure in the world can equal it. I shall analyse
this aspect of the Self in the Gita in the next chapter.
We have discussed how in Emerson the Self liberates the
individual and what the individual is supposed to do to get liberated.
We have so far studied the merit of a virtuous life and the process of
the union with the Self resulting in knowledge (and happiness) for the
individual to cope with different situations in life. Before we move to
the next point, the question arises as to how one would come to know
in getting liberated that one is relying on one’s higher Self and not on
the mundane self which is under the influence of senses and the illusion
created through them in nature. Emerson seems to be aware of this
question. He tells us that foolish people may ask how we know what
we say is truth and not an error of our own (W, II, 279). Emerson has a
brief answer (to this’question) leaving everything to our good sense
and discretion: “We know truth when we see it” (W, II, 279). However,
his answer to the suggestion that his inspiration may not be from the
Self, rather, it may be from below is that it does not seem to him to be
such, but then, he aggressively remarks (in “Self-Reliance”) that if he
is the Devil’s child he “will live then from the Devil” (W, II, 50). From
this assertion one can estimate the strength of the faith Emerson has in
his reliance on the Self.
Nevertheless, he guides us how to rely on the higher Self. He
says (as we have noted earlier, too) that the only right is what is after
his constitution and the only wrong is what is against it (W, II, 50). So
to attain liberation from the worldly worries the individual ought to do
his duty embodied in his constitution. However, in obeying one’s
constitution one is required to be exceptionally bold. One has to carry
oneself in the face of all opposition in such a manner that one treats

55
every obstacle as short-lived and nominal (W, II, 51). While obeying
constitution, one has also got to make sure that one would not “attempt
another’s work, nor adopt another’s facts” (W, III, 81). One wouldn’t
imitate anyone. This would be true self-reliance. In our discussion of
human limitations we have already discussed what constitution is. In a
nutshell, it means the original disposition of the individual as provided
to him by the Self to perform the duty for which he is designed in this
world. Man in this way becomes his own “taskmaster” (W, II, 75). In
the Gita each individual has got his occupation determined for him
through his constitution. One is strictly advised to follow only one’s
own constitution. One is also advised not to attempt another’s work
(as it is in Emerson). This aspect is examined in the next chapter.
Emerson has laid considerable emphasis on duty for everyone.
In “Self-Reliance” advising against travelling for pleasure he remarks
that when one is manly one realises “that duty is our place” (W, II, 81).
Next, the qualities given to man by nature are his real property, different
from his material assets. He acquires them by necessity (the will of the
Self) always. The Self in him as enshrined in his constitution is his real
property and it is not affected by mobs, rulers, revolutions, fire, storm
or bankruptcies (W, II, 88). This property breathes with him wherever
he happens to be. The Self in man is viewed in a similar light in the
Gita, too. In chapter II it is pointed out that a weapon cannot divide it,
fire cannot burn it, water cannot corrupt it and wind cannot dry it away.
It can’t be affected by any dangers in this world.
In doing one’s duty one has to avoid being emotionally attached
to others. One has to cultivate detachment from this world. One ought
to practise non-conformity in society. One must, Emerson advises in
“Self-Reliance,” tell one’s father, mother, wife, brother or friend that
one has so far lived with them “after appearances.” One must declare

56

r
that one belongs to the Truth from now onwards (W, II, 72). Of course,
one is here obeying the Self. No doubt, one has to care for one’s parents,
one’s family and, be the faithful husband of one’s wife but this is all to
be done in “a new and unprecedented way” (W, II, 73). Detachment
from this world is very strongly recommended in “Self-Reliance.”
Emerson tells us that there may be times in our life when the whole
world may appear to be conspiring against us drawing our attention to
trifles. Friends, clients, children, sickness, fear, want, charity, all may
try to disturb our calm but we must keep our state and should save
ourselves from falling into their trap (W, II, 72). Detachment from the
world is central to the philosophy of the Gita. While doing one’s duty
one must remain detached from the world. This aspect of the philosophy
of the Gita is analysed in the next chapter.
Next, a particular company is recommended to a person who
aspires to rely on the Self and be liberated. Emerson points out that
there is a class of persons who are very dear to him and for whom he
f

will go to prison if necessary (W, II, 52). He wants noble company,

true in the same truth with him and he says he would shun any other
company (W, II, 73). In the Gita, too, a company that has faith in the
Self is lauded.
While doing one’s duty, one must also be prepared to face the
consequences of one’s actions since one reaps what one sows. To avoid
disappointment in life, one must give as much as possible, besides
doing one’s duty. One must return the benefits one receives in nature.
Whoever returns these benefits the most is great. But that man is base
who receives but makes no returns (W, II, 113). The Gita, too, stresses
that the benefits received in nature must be returned in some form in
life.
Next, to be liberated from worries in life, one must also be humble

57
in dealing with others. A great man is always ready to be small in
dealing with others. He learns even when he faces ill-treatment and
defeat. He becomes aware of his shortcomings and this cures him “of
the insanity of conceit” (W, II, 117-18). And one must also not blame
others while doing one’s duty. Being blamed should be welcome as
safety in being blamed is greater than in being praised. Emerson says
he does not like his defence in a newspaper (W, II, 118). In “Experience”
he says that it is possible to object to every course of action in life but
it would be practically wise to be indifferent to the making or answering
of objections (W, III, 59). One must be prepared to welcome whatever
comes of life. Life can’t be intellectually or critically analysed. “Its
chief good is for well-mixed people who can enjoy what they find,
without question” (W, III, 59). Fault-finding can do no good. Emerson
advises that one should not craze oneself with thinking and should go
about one’s business anywhere (W, III, 59). The Gita also stresses that
one should be humble and unmoved in the face of praise or blame.
One should give up haughtiness. It recommends that one ought to
welcome whatever comes in life. In the next chapter I shall analyse
this point.
For liberation by the Self from all worries, manual labour or
physical action is as good as intellectual activity in life. Emerson says
that intellectual pursuits in life cannot take the place of pursuits of
“muscular activity” (W, III, 58). However, in “Experience” itself
T

Emerson also admits that knowing would be preferable to him if only

he could know. He admits that people disapprove of knowing and “urge
doing.” But he is happy with knowing if only he could know. Knowing
a little would be something invaluable in this world (W, III, 84). We
may, it seems, safely conclude from this position that Emerson is in
favour of both- men of action and men of knowledge e.g. Napoleon

58
 r

and Plato, though his appraisal of them both shows he has seen through
their limitations as well. In the Gita the men of knowledge and men of
action both have been treated equally. Both achieve the same end of
getting liberated by the Self if they are sincere in their approach. This
point is analysed in the next chapter.
On the way to one’s liberation from the worldly problems, the
next requirement is that one ought not to expect quick results from
one’s actions. In “Experience” Emerson points out that if anyone asks
him about the fruit he has got in his life he would say that a private
fruit is sufficient to him. This ‘fruit’ is his realisation that he “should
not ask for a rash effect from meditations, counsels and the hiving of
truths” (W, III, 83). This realisation is based on the knowledge that the
Self is eternal and that one life time is easily lost while trying to extract
advantages from the Self (W, III, 83). He, nevertheless, feels that he
gets the fruit of his actions in a plentiful manner. It is far greater than
his merit deserves. Even his merit with which he earns the fruit is a gift
from the Self. His merit, too, is being received by him (W, III, 84).
Looking for fruit of one’s actions is atheistic. Emerson remarks
that it seems an apostasy to him to hanker after “an overt or practical
effect” (W, III, 84). This idea is repeated further in slightly different
words. He says that he would joyfully pass his time and welcome
whatever it brings to him. He is thankful for the small gains allowed
to him by the Self. And still further, he points out that he compared
notes with one of his friends who expects extraordinary things in life
and is unhappy when his expectations are not met. He adds that he
(himself) is just his opposite “expecting nothing” and “always full of
thanks for moderate goods” (W, III, 62). This emphasis on the need to
control one’s habit oflooking for fruits of one’s actions cannot be under­
emphasised in Emerson. He declares that we get plentiful when we

59
“take the good we find, asking no questions” (W, III, 62). The Gita,
too, emphasises that man in this world should work without expecting
any reward for his actions. It also emphasises that one should be happy
with whatever one gets in life. And it also stresses that merit comes to
man from the Self alone. These points are analysed in the next chapter.
Discussing the approach to the liberating Self, it will be useful
to mention that, though, quite inadvertently and by chance, the essays
“Self-Reliance,” “Experience,” and “Fate” turn out to be carrying what
we call in philosophy a pattern of thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis. In
“Self-Reliance” the Self is within easy access of the individual, if a
serious attempt is made. The obstacles in the way are not very difficult
to tackle. One has to just rely on the Self. In “Experience,” on the
contrary, we find an anti-climax of this theory of “Self-Reliance.” Man’s
approach to the Self is badly obstructed by the seven lords of life in
nature which are (in the order in which Emerson discusses them):
Illusion, Temperament, Succession, Surface, Surprise, Reality, and
Subjectiveness. In “Fate” freedom and fate are reconciled, and, as a
result, we get a synthesis. The Self appears as the Beautiful Neccessity
which provides mankind a life characterised by freedom and fate both.
Of the seven lords of life (mentioned in “Experience”), who
provide the anti-climax to the philosophy of self-reliance, the Illusion,
Temperament, and Subjectiveness have already been discussed in this
chapter. Succession, the third (in Emerson’s list of the lords) lord of
life in nature, refers to the changing moods of human beings. The
inspiration flowing from the Self is not consistent within the mind of
one individual. It cannot be used by him at will. It is scattered over the
minds of a large number of people. The Self speaks sometimes from
one and sometimes from another mouth. The Power of the Self, like a
bird moving from one branch to another in a tree, “abides in no man,

60
and in no woman, but for a moment speaks from this one; and for
another moment from that one” (W, III, 58). Next, the lord Surface
refers to the hard surface of appearances in nature, which is difficult to
pierce to get at the reality behind them. This lord is similar to Illusion.
Next, the lord Reality appears in glimpses to human beings. This lord
resembles the lord Succession in its action. Surprise is the next lord. It
continues to surprise people. Man does not know what may happen
the next moment. The element of unpredictability in life is embodied
in this lord. The seven lords unitedly represent seven types of difficulties
for man in life. These are seven difficulties faced by man on his way to
the Self.
Towards the end of the essay (“Experience”) Emerson is
reconciled to the sorrow he expresses through the seven lords of life.
He calls the Self (by the name) Fortune now. He declares that he
worships with awe the great Fortune (W, III, 83). Here we remember
that in “Self-Reliance,” towards the end of the essay, Emerson called
the gains of Fortune unlawful.
It is generally believed that the death of Emerson’s son Waldo in
1842 had much to do with his philosophy in the essay “Experience”
(1844). The essay is aclimbdown from the philosophy earlier expressed
in “Self-Reliance.” That Emerson’s optimism has faced a setback in
“Experience” is clear but there is enough in the essay to show that
Emerson emerges stronger and wiser. Towards the end of the essay he
makes an appeal for patience and expresses the hope that “we shall
win at last” (W, III, 85). He stresses that justice will yet have its victory.
(W, III, 86). The last lines are significant and carry a re-assertion of the
philosophy of self-reliance. It is pointed out that the true romance in
the existence (of the world) will be realised when genius is transformed
“into practical power” (W, III, 86).

61
 1
§

Commenting on the difficulties perceived in “Experience” with

regard to one’s access to the Self, Richard Lee Francis remarks : “Thus
the early Emersonian expectation to project a meaningful structure for
human life by odering the self and extending that order to all other
selves cannot simplistically be achieved.”60 But this “did not discourage
r

Emerson to the point of despair or cynicism ... It meant an acceptance

of limitations.”61 According to David W. Hill, the seven lords of life
refer to the phases in the development of Emerson’s personality: “They
are steps towards a usable self [of Emerson here], contributions towards
the artfully constructed voice which closes the essay.”62 Hill calls the
lords of life “the seven ways of looking at a self.”63 The self here refers
to a human being carrying the Self (God) in him. Hill comments on the
theme of the essay thus: “While spiritual illumination is available to
people in exhilarating moments of vision, that fact is not of very much
help to us most of the time.” The lords “are the tonal variations on this
theme.”64
I have found in my study of “Experience” that in his search for
the (liberating) Self Emerson felt certain difficulties very poignantly
and listed them as seven lords of life. In the Gita three types of
difficulties are seen for man in the three qualities of nature which need
to be overpowered for access to the Self. It seems Emerson has emulated
the Gita in “Experience” and has discovered not three but seven
difficulties on his way to the Self. The three qualities of nature are
discussed in chapter III in detail. In our discussion of the liberating
Self the following remarks of Emerson in “Experience” which changed
the course of his philosophy of self-reliance and took it towards the
Beautiful Necessity of “Fate” deserve mention:
I would gladly be moral and keep due metes and bounds,
which I dearly love, and allow the most to the will of man,

62
S*/3 SZ 3
 but I have set my heart on honesty in this chapter, and I
can see nothing at last, in success or failure, than more or
less of vital force supplied from the Eternal. The results of
life are uncalculated and uncalculable (W, III, 69).
We remember here ‘Emerson’s call at the end of “Self-Reliance” to
depend on Cause and Effect, the Chancellors of God. There is now a
shift from the individual to the Self. It is the Self that would (ultimately)
liberate.
In “Fate” Emerson tries to bring freedom and fate together. He
makes an attempt to reconcile them. The individual is to proceed taking
all responsibility for success or failure upon himself. The event is the
print of his form. It fits him like his skin (W, VI, 42). And, further, it
seems luck has produced him but he is responsible for what he is (W,
VI, 42). But the individual at the same time has to depend on the Self
which is the Blessed unity which keeps a balance between nature and
souls in a perfect manner and which makes use of every atom for a
universal purpose (W, VI, 48). One has to work for this ‘universal end’
for which one is made, and this would liberate him from the worldly
worries and problems. It is declared in the Gita that man is free to act
and gets the result of his actions, and nature and human beings are
under the perfect control of the Self. There is unity in diversity. The
r

individual in his own interest, however, should allow himself to be

used by the Self. This would liberate him fully and allow him the
freedom to act which resides in the Self.
The Self in “Fate” is worthy of worship as the Beautiful Necessity.
Three times at the end of the essay, Emerson makes an appeal to his
readers to worship the Necessity. In our expectation from life Emerson
wants us to be moderate and reasonable. It is interesting to note how
he defends the existing system for human beings in nature. He tells us
r

63
that man cannot be free to exercise his fantastic will to overturn “the
law of things.” It would be like a child pulling down the sun if it were
allowed (W, VI, 48-49). In defence of the freedom given to man by the
Self Emerson says further that if one could disturb the order of nature
under the influence of a whim none would accept life on earth (W, VI,
49). It is interesting that in the Gita, too, the system of the Self has
been defended and profusely admired by Arjuna. Reverence is
expressed again and again for the Self and the Self is declared to be
worthy of worship.
Emerson seems to waver between freedom and fate. There is
fated freedom for man. In that one has to rejoice. That is one’s liberation
given by the Self from the tyranny of one’s circumstances. Stephen E.
Whicher in his book Freedom and Fate: An Inner Life ofRalph Waldo
Emerson calls it Emerson’s “dualism” which he always retained. Life
is not single for him. “Beyond his humanism lies his superhumanism.”65
Stephen E. Whicher also uses the term ‘double consciousness’
for Emerson’s dualism. He says that as soon as Emerson discovers “a
God at the heart of the self’ which heals “the division of God and
man,” “the self splits into two.” And the consequence is “his habitual
recognition of the ‘double-consciousness’ of man.”66 Whicher refers
to an incident in 1833 when Emerson announced “his revelation” to
his audience. It was in the following words:
I recognise the distinction of the outer and the inner self -
— of the double consciousness . . . ; that is there are two
seifs . . . ; within this erring passionate mortal self, sits a
supreme-calm immortal mind.67
It may be remembered here that Emerson came into contact with the
philosophy of the Gita first in 1831. It may be that Emerson got the
idea of the double consciousness from the Gita. I have briefly referred

64
to this possibility in chapter IV and V, too.
To conclude the discussion on the liberating Self, I wish to briefly
refer again to Emerson’s idea of the Beautiful Necessity (the Self
immortal) in “Fate.” This Necessity is present in every thing that exists.
It is in both the plaintiff and defendant. It is in friend and enemy. It
pervades food and its eater. It is the law that rules. It is beyond
comprehension. It emboldens man to believe that he cannot avoid “a
danger that is appointed, not incur one that is not” (W, VI, 49). It invites
the pure in heart to draw infinite power from its omnipotence (W, VI,
49). The Beautiful Necessity, the Self, with all these characteristics, it
seems, certainly has the potential to liberate the individual from his
sorrows. There is no need to be afraid of the enemy. There is no need
to be afraid of any dangers. Nothing untoward can happen to the
individual. One is safe in one’s shelter with the Self. Almost exactly,
this is the very position taken in the Gita with regard to the Self. One is
advised to have unflinching faith in the guidance by the Self. One has
to be the same to friend or enemy. One cannot escape the fate that is
appointed. In the next chapter I shall try to delineate the above points
with the help of textual references from the Gita.
We close with Emerson’s liberating technique of the “double
consciousness” as recommended in “Fate” for the benefit of all towards
the end of the essay. This technique, according to Emerson, is the key
or the solution to the problems of human life. It is “one solution to old
knots of fate, freedom and foreknowledge” (W, VI, 47). The technique
is simple. One must have faith in the Self and face all the difficulties in
life bravely. When man is victimised by fate, when he has difficulty in
thinking rightly, when he is peevish, when he is selfish in temper, when
his egotism is reflected in his conduct or when the vice of his race
spoils his chances of progress in life “he is to rally on his relation to

65
the universe” (W, VI, 47). He has to take shelter in the Self.
When one takes refuge in the Self, one leaves “the daemon,”
one’s mundane self, to suffer and takes sides with the “Deity,” the Self
which liberates. In this exercise one is aware of one’s suffering but one
is not affected by it since one knows that it is not meaningless. It comes
from the Self which derives “universal benefit” by this “pain” (W, VI,
47). This is double consciousness. In a way it is transcending of human
suffering, well-stressed in the Gita. The experience of Yoga in the Gita
is just like it. One performs all the duties of life but remains joined
with the Self and disconnected from pain. The Self will liberate man
when he adopts the technique of double-consciousness.
To the liberated man nature is friendly. It is an embodiment of
philosophy and theology. There is no need to be afraid of it (W, VI,
49). Man is part of nature. He is made of the elements nature is made
of. (Nature in the Gita, too, is ‘philosophy and theology embodied’ as
it is described in “Fate”- W, VI, 49. It provides body to the soul and
then the testing environment. It also attaches results to human actions,
good or bad. To the man liberated by the Self nature is friendly.) If the
limiting circumstance is provided by nature, liberation is provided by
the Self. In the last analysis, nature is the testing situation presented by
the Self to its prime creation, the humanity. In the coming chapter the
philosophy of the Gita will be analysed to discover a similar stand in

66
 NOTES

1. Wesley T. Mott, “Emerson and Antinomianism: the Legacy of

the Sermons,” American Literature 50.3 (1978): 370, 387.

2. Mott 390.

3. Evelyn Barish, “The Moonless Night,” Emerson Centenary

Essays, ed. Joel Myerson (Carbondale and Edwardsville:
Southern Illinois UP, 1982)3.

4. James Russell Lowell, “Emerson the Lecturer,” The Recognition

of Ralph Waldo Emerson: Selected Criticism Since 1837, ed.
Milton R Convitz (Ann Arbor: Michigan UP, 1972) 44.

5. Lowell 44.

6. This letter of Emerson is quoted by John Q Anderson in his

“Introduction” in The Liberating Gods : Emerson on Poets and
Poetry (Florida: U of Miami P, 1971) 12. The source mentioned
is Letters, I, 435.
r (

I. Morse Peckham, “Emerson’s Prose,” American Transcendental

Quarterly 21.11 (1974): 65-66.

8. David Shimkin, “Emerson’s Playful Habit of Mind,” American

Transcendental Quarterly 62 (1986): 9.

9. Shimkin 9.

10. Shimkin 10.

II. Roland F Lee, “Emerson’s ‘Compensation’ as Argument and as

67
 Art,” New England Quarterly XXXVII.3 (1964) : 292.

12. Lee 305.

13. Kyle Norwood, ‘“Somewhat Comes of It AH’: The Structure of

Emerson’s ‘Experience’,” American Transcendental Quarterly
9.1 (1995) :21.

14. Norwood 38.

15. Richard R O’ Keefe, “‘Experience’ : Emerson on Death,”

American Transcendental Quarterly 9.2 (1995) : 123.
r

16. Paul Lauter, “Emerson’s Revision of Essays (First Series),”

American Literature. 33.2 (1961) : 146.

17. Lauter 143.

18. Lauter 158.

19. John S. Harrison, Preface, The Teachers ofEmerson (New York:

Haskell, 1966) n.p.

20. Peter A Obuchowski, “Emerson, Evolution, and the Problem of

Evil,” Harvard Theological Review 72.1 -2 (1979) : 152.

21. Richardson 250.

22. Ray Benoit, “Emerson on Plato: The Fire’s Centre,” American

Literature XXXIV.4 (1963) : 487.

23. William E Bridges, “Transcendentalism and Psychotherapy :

Another Look at Emerson,” American Literature. 41.2 (1969):
158.

24. Gay Wilson Allen, “Emerson and the Unconscious,” American

68
 Transcendental Quarterly 19.1. II (1973):26.

25. Merton M Sealts, Jr., “Emerson as Teacher,” Emerson Centenary

Essays 180.

26. Stephen E Whicher, Freedom and Fate: An Inner Life of Ralph

Waldo Emerson (1953; Philadelphia: Philadelphia UP, 1957) 173.

27. Phillips Russell, Emerson: The Wisest American (New York:

Brentano’s, 1929) 298.

28. Christy 105.

29. Henry F. Pommer, “The Contents and Basis of Emerson’s Belief

in Compensation,” Critical Essays on Ralph Waldo Emerson,
ed. Robert E Burkholder and Joel Myerson (Boston: G.K. Hall,
1983)296.

30. Paul F. Boiler, Jr. American Transcendentalism, 1830-1860 : An

Intellectual Enquiry (New York: G.P. Putnam’s and Capricorn,
1974)154.

31. Senses here refer to the senses of touch, smell, hearing, sight
and taste, used by the mind in an integrated manner. It was the
belief of the Transcendentalists like Emerson that one ought go
beyond (or behind) these senses to perceive the reality since these
refer only to that which simply appears and is not permanent and
real.

32 . Frederic Ives Carpenter, Emerson Handbook (New York :

Hendricks, 1953) 67.

33. Carpenter 67.

34. Carpenter 67.

69
35. Edward Wagenknecht, Ralph Waldo Emerson: Portrait of a
Balanced Soul'(New York : Oxford UP, 1974) 6.

36. Warren Staebler, Ralph Waldo Emerson, ed. Arthur W. Brown

and Thomas S Knight (New York: Twayne, 1973) 188.

37. Staebler 188.

38 . “Definition of Christianity,” Encyclopaedia of Religion and

Ethics. 1932 ed.

39. Carpenter 143.

40. Carpenter 143.-

41. Carpenter 143.

42. Carpenter 143.

43. Newton Arvin, “The House of Pain,” Emerson A Collection of

Critical Essays, ed. Milton R Convitz and Stephen E Whicher
(Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice Hall, 1962) 47.

44. Henry B. Parkes, “Emerson,” Emerson: A Collection ofCritical

Essays 122.
*

45. Carpenter 144.

46. Carpenter 144.

47. Carpenter 144.

48. Charles Taylor, Sources ofSelf: The Making ofModern Identity

(Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1989) 32.

49. Kenneth Walter Cameron, Young Emerson’s Transcendental

70
 Vision: An Expositiion ofHis World View with an Analysis ofthe
Structure, Background and Meaning of Nature (1836) (Drawer
Harford : Transcendental Books, 1971) 09.
A y

50. Cameron 09.

51. Cameron 09.

52. Cameron 09.

53. Cameron 09.

54. Wagenknecht 230.

55. Newton Dillaway, Prophet of America: Emerson and the

Problems of Today (Boston : Little, Brown, 1936) 58.

56. Dillaway 58.

57. Carpenter 118.

58. Carpenter 118.

59. Carpenter 118-119.

60. Richard Lee Francis, “The Poet and Experience: Essays Second
Series,” Emerson Centenary Essays 105.

61. Francis 105.

62. David W. Hill, “Emerson’s Eumenides: Textual Evidence and

the Interpretation of‘Experience,’ ” Emerson Centenary Essays
109.

63. Hill 109.

71
 The Bhagavadgita : The Limiting World
and the Liberating Self

The Bhagavadgita is held in high regard in our times as a sacred

book of the Hindus and also as a book of philosophy. It seems to take
a comprehensive view of human life with regard to its blessings and
misfortunes. It sees man working in an environment which restricts
his efforts directed at happiness and success in life. God is the creator
of this environment. Very mysteriously certain temptations, weaknesses
and restrictions have been put in the system in which man is made to
exist and live. As also briefly noted in the first chapter of this thesis,
God, the creator, is the Self (soul) of mankind or even of everything
that is in existence and (on being approached) can liberate the human
beings from their troubles.
In the light of this stand taken in the Gita with regard to human
life, the phrase 'the Limiting World' in the title of this chapter refers to
the limitations mankind faces in its pursuit of a happy and Successful
life, and the phrase 'the Liberating Self refers to God who would
liberate. After giving introductory information about the Gita, this
V

chapter seeks first to point out the limiting circumstance in life, i.e. the
factors that limit man's freedom to direct his destiny according to his
will. Then it sets out to identify the Self that liberates man when he is
in trouble. I have, on the basis of a close study of the text of the Gita,
tried to spell out what man is supposed to do to get access to the Self to
seek help from it. I have also made an attempt to describe the nature
and process of liberation effected by the Self in favour of human beings
beset with difficulties. On the whole, this chapter aims to take stock of
human strengths and weaknesses with reference to the philosophy of
the Gita.

73
 The philosophy presented in the Gita has been variously
commented upon by different learned people. Mahatma Gandhi once
pointed out that it often comforted him when he was completely helpless
and was overwhelmed by sorrow.1 According to S. Radhakrishnan,
millions of Hindus have been comforted by this book in course of
centuries and "it serves even today as a light to all who will receive
illumination from the profundity of its wisdom".2 Aldous Huxley is of
the view that the philisophy of the Gita is "Perennial Philosophy"
and it has lasting value for all human beings.3
There are contrary voices too. According to K.T. Telang, the
philosophy provided in the Gita is "non-systematic," and is
characterized by "real inconsistencies". One finds a number of half-
truths scattered here and there. These half-truths are evidently
r

irreconcilable.4 Warren Hastings finds many passages in the Gita

redundant and still many others he finds obscure, absurd, barbaric and
characterised by a perverted morality.5 In this thesis, however, our
concern is, for the most part, the overall philosophy of the Gita, which
we need for its comparison with the philosophy of Emerson. And it is
not difficult to have a global view of the thought in the Gita.
The Gita comprises 700 verses divided into eighteen chapters
and is part of the well-known Indian epic, the Mahabharat. The
epic, written in Sanskrit verse, describes a bloody war between two
royal families, related by blood, the Pandavas and the Kauravas. Arjuna
t

is an outstanding warrior on the side of the Pandavas (supposed to be)

waging a righteous war with the assistance of Krishna, believed to be
an incarnation of God. On the first day when the war is about to begin
Arjuna is horrified at the sight of his cousins, friends, teachers and
grand uncles standing in front of him ready to fight from the opposite
side. He shudders at the prospect of having to kill them in the battle

74
which is soon to begin. He breaks down, apparently overcome by
feelings of pity and a sense of sin. He expresses his inability to take
part in the battle to Krishna who is with him as his charioteer. It is here
that the Gita comes into the picture. Krishna, through a sustained
dialogue with Arjuna, persuades him to participate in the war. The
corpus of the dialogues between the two forms the Gita. Krishna
answers every question asked by Arjuna.
The advice given by Krishna turns out to be a comprehensive
comment on what human life is and how it ought to be lived. By its
very name the Bhagavadgita means the the Geeta (song) of'Bhagavat'
[one of Krishna's names]6 It is God's song sung by himself explaining
the system created and run by him.
The exact date or period when the epic Mahabharata was written
is not known. Romesh C. Dutt is of the view that the epic describes a
war fought in the thirteenth or fourteenth century before Christ.7 For
centuries, however, the epic had no written form. S. Radhakrishnan
believes that, perhaps, it was about 1100 B.C. or so that the epic came
to be written.8 Even the name of the author is not known. Vyasa is
believed to be its legendary compiler and it is believed that the Gita
was written by him.9
The Gita was first translated into English, as noted in the first
chapter of this thesis, too, by Charles Wilkins in 1785.Wilkins at that
time was working on his translation of Mahabharata. After the first
translation into English, in course of time, the Gita came to be translated,
by many writers in Etirope, into English and many other languages. In
about 1880 "the Gita was almost as easily accessible to the West as it
was to the average Hindu in India."10 Emerson died in 1882. It seems
his times saw the spread of the philosophy of the Gita in Europe. He
was, however, fond of Wilkins' translation of the Gita. In this thesis, as

75
noted in the first chapter, too, I have made use of this translation for
the purpose of comparison between Emerson's philosophy and that in
the Gita. Warren Hastings, who played the most important role in getting
Wilkins' translation published, praises this translation in prose and
remarks that "he should not fear to place" it "in opposition to the best
French versions of the most admired passages of the Iliad and Odyssey."
He even ranks it with the first and sixth books of Milton.11
A translator's task usually is a very difficult one. His job is, as
far as possible, to keep close to the original text in terms of its meaning
and style. Larson is of the view that translations of the Gita into so
many languages have had a diminishing effect on it. He points out that
"when she is taken out of India to live permanently in a different medium
— whether Latin or German or French or English — she becomes
diminished."12 Sharpe also expresses a similar view when he remarks
that, perhaps, the translator is always a traitor to the original. But he
adds that in respect of the Gita we need not worry at all. The language
used in the Gita, viewed from Sanskrit standards, does not pose any
very serious problem. There may be some controversial points in the
text but "any translation that is not hopelessly incompetent" will pass
on "the general impression of the Gita's contents to the inquisitive
reader."13
As a literary work of art, as available in translation, the Gita has
been viewed by Western writers from two different positions. Either it
has been seen "as a piece of archaic literature" which needs dissection,
analysis and appreciation in an "essentially remote religio- historical
context."14 This I think should prove rather unfruitful for the most part
since this sort of enquiry cannot bring out anything substantial about
the philosophy of the Gita for the benefit of mankind. The second
angle from which the Gita has been looked at (in the West) regards it

76
"as an exotic insight into the ultimate mystery of the universe — a
scripture which is Hindu only incidentally."15 This way of looking at it
seems to have its advantages. In our times when the world is fast moving
to become essentially a global village, I feel, even the word 'exotic'
needs to be dropped while referring to the Gita. The Gita seems to
r

provide (if properly understood as Emerson, perhaps, did) a philosophy

which can provide solace and stability to mankind riven by the tensions
resulting from excessive competition.
The foreign connection of the Gita has, however, had its role in
the levels of understanding of the Gita in the West. Emerson may,
though, be considered an exception since for his purposes he did not
face any difficulty in understanding and appreciating it. Hastings calls
it "a very curious specimen of the Literature, the Mythology, and
Morality of the ancient Hindoos."16 Larson calls it "a beguiling,
seductive, naturally beautiful and altogether elegant daughter in the
Hindu extended family of Sanskrit texts."17 Even Charles Wilkins,
whose translation can be viewed as one of the best, refers to the
difficulties he faced in understanding the text of the Gita. He makes an
appeal to his reader to tolerate "the obscurity of many passages, and
the confusion of sentiments" which characterises the whole text
presented to the reader. He says he has explained many points in his
'Notes' but he feels they are inadequate to provide clarity.18 Wilkins,
however, attributes part of the problem to lack of professional expertise
among the Hindu scholars. He notes that even "the most learned
Brahmins of the present times" have not perfectly understood the text.19
Some writers praise the Gita for its technical and conceptual excellence.
Hastings calls the Gita "a performance of great originality." He praises
its "sublimity of conception," its "reasoning and diction." He says it is
not lacking in method or perspicuity.20

77
 One important aspect of the Gita for the West, noted by Charles
Wilkins, is that he found (perhaps, others like him, too, found it) that
Brahmins were very reluctant and cautious about making the Gita
known to foreigners or the followers of other religions or even the
r

vulgar in their own society.21 Hastings attributes this kind of behaviour

among Brahmins to the treatment they got from the Muslim rulers of
India who made fun of their religion and who also used their sacred
writings as a pretext for their atrocious policies towards them.22
If we examine the structure of the Gita, we do not find a logical
plan followed in it. After the first chapter which shows Arjuna's refusal
to fight on the battle-field, the second chapter begins logically with
Arjuna's request to Krishna to tell him what is best for him to do as he
is himself extremely nervous. Krishna begins his answer with the advice
that the wise men do not grieve either for the dead or for the living
because the soul in man is not subject to destruction. The development
of the theme is on the right track till Krishna chides Arjuna in the name
of his honour and asks him to shun cowardliness. But then comes the
turning point. He begins to discuss the Samkhya philosophy and the
Vedas. And then the general philosophy of human life is taken up.
This shift in tone takes the rest of the Gita towards a long discussion
of what a man is supposed to do in his life. This teaching has little to
do with the battlefield.
Chapters III discusses Samkhya, the Gyanyog and the practical
doctrine, Karamyog,together. Chapter IV discusses the path of the
renunciation as required from an ideal man. Chapter V deals with the
advice that one ought to forsake the fruit of one's action. One should
work without a selfish desire. Chapter VI discusses the Self, the Soul,
that governs the universe. Chapter VII discusses nature and its three
qualities.Chapter VIII discusses the Self again as Pooroosh. Chapter

78
IX again refers to the qualities of the Self. Chapter X deals with the
diversity of the nature of the Self. Chapter XI makes a physical display
of the Self in an awe-inspiring and terrifying form. Chapter XII
discusses the visible and invisible forms of the Self. Chapter XIII
discusses the body in relation to the presence of Self in it. Chapter
r

XIV again discusses the three qualities of nature. Chapter XV describes

the Self as Poorooshottama . The relationship of the body and Soul is
again discussed here.
Chapter XVI discusses good and evil people in this world.
Chapter XVII discusses the three qualities of nature (again) as reflected
in different activities of human beings in their day to day life in society.
Chapter XVIII, the last chapter, repeats in brief almost every important
piece of advice tendered in the preceding chapters. The structure of
the Gita in this way does not follow any definite plan. Even within
each of the chapters the subject of discussion is not logically followed.
*

Many ideas get mixed up and are repeated every now and then. (As
noted in the preceding chapter in this thesis, Emerson, too, does not
follow any definite plan in the development of his themes in his essays.)
A careful reader, however, can follow the general philosophy and the
emphasis, explicit or implicit. We can now move to our analysis of the
Gita with respect to the world created in it.
We now take up the limits on human freedom to act in the world
of the Gita and the probems human beings face in life. The first limit is
that of virtue. In his pursuit of happiness man must obey certain rules
in nature. He has to be righteous in his conduct. In chapter XVI in
the Gita mankind has been divided into two categories: the good and
the evil. The evil doers, we are told, have to pay for their bad conduct
by taking birth again and again on this earth. This is their "evil destiny,"
their punishment, which confines them to the cycle of birth and death

79
on earth (C.W. 115, XVI, 5).23 Krishna says that he puts the evil doers
into the wombs of evil minded and beastly persons (C.W. 117, XVI,
19). And, ultimately, after many such evil births in the families of
wicked people they go to the most unpleasant parts in the hell (C.W.
117, XVI, 20).
The evil are ignorant of virtuous conduct. They know not how to
restrain themselves from doing wrong. Their conduct is untruthful,
impure and immoral (C. W. 116, XVI, 7). That the Self in the Gita
prescribes a life of virtue for human beings is also evident from the
fact that the Sattwic people, the virtuous ones (described in detail in
chapter XIV and chapter XVII in particular) go after their death straight
to a region in heaven where the sinless "acquainted with the Most High"
dwell. However, their going to this place is subject to their dying in the
Sattwic conduct, i.e-. they must die virtuous (C.W. 108, XIV, 14).
Alongwith this automatic reward of virtue and punishment of vice,
there is also personal intervention of the Self in human affairs to ensure
an upper hand of virtue. In chapter IV it is pointed out by Krishna that
from time to time when there is decline of virtue and rise of wickedness
in society he intervenes to destroy the wicked and protect and preserve
the virtuous (C.W. 52, IV, 8). In Emerson we have already seen in the
preceding chapter that great stress has been laid on the reward of virtue
and punishment of wickedness in the system of the Self. To be happy
and successful in life one must be virtuous (This is the theory of Karma
in the Gita and the law of compensation in Emerson.)
The second limit on man's freedom of action, as my study of the
Gita reveals, is closely related to the first one. It is that man should
draw moderate pleasure from his senses. Man's desire to please his
senses has been identified as evil and has been repeatedly condemned
in the Gita. From chapter II onwards with the exception of chapter X

80
a relentless condemnation of man's desire for the gratification of his
senses continues till the end. Towards the end of Chapter II that man is
praised who has given up all cravings of the flesh and who walks with
controlled desires (C.W. 43, II, 71). In chapter III we read that the life
of a person looking for the "gratification of his passions" is useless
(C.W. 46, III, 16). In chapter III, further, lust or passion bom of physical
cravings is seen as impelling men to commit crimes. (C.W. 49, III, 37).
In chapter XVI the "gratification of sensual appetites" is again rejected
(C.W. 116, XVI, 11). And, further, lust, anger and greed are described
as three passages to hell (C.W. 118, XVI, 21-22). This position taken
in the Gita with regard to human passions is similar to the one Emerson
takes in his writings in this respect.
The next problem with the human beings is that in nature they
are born with a divine or demoniac bias. This limit on human freedom
of action is also related to the first. As noted before, in the absence of
a virtuous life during one life time, people in their next birth are born
in the families of evil people. These people have an inherently demoniac
bias. These people are born with an evil destiny (C.W. 115, 16, XVI,
7). At the same time, the people with good deeds in their past births are
in their subsequent births blessed with a noble nature, a divine bias. So
this limitation is born with man and two kinds of destiny work in this
world (C.W. 115, XVI, 6): the good and the evil. (This limit, however,
can be tackled by turning to virtue in life).
According to the Gita, people, busy in materialistic pursuits
and running after sensual pleasures, are born under the evil destiny.
They have no faith in the Self. They believe that sex gave birth to life.
They are the misguided souls working for the ruin of this world. They
resort to unjust practices for acquisition of wealth to gratify their
excessive desires. (C.W 116, XVI, 8 to 12). They are given to anger,

81
pride, slander and disparagement (C.W. 117, XVI, 18). In Emerson,
too, people are seen as born with moral or materialistic bias. In the
next chapter I shall compare the position taken in the Gita with that in
Emerson.
The next limit on human freedom is related to the perception of
the reality of life. The human beings are not easily permitted to look
into the nature of the universe. They cannot look behind the world of
appearances. The five senses of touch, smell, hearing, sight and taste,
assisted by the mind, give them the experience of what is transitory
and impermanent They face in their life heat and cold, pleasure and
pain, but such experience comes and goes and remains transitory (C.W.
36,11,14). Senses induce liking or disliking for things. The wise man
should realize that affection or dislike both are his adversaries (C.W.
48, III, 34). From the birth itself the human reason is attracted or
repelled due to contending feelings of love or hatred (C.W. 72, VII,
27). God has concealed himself behind the world of the senses
*

(appearances). Krishna says, he is not apparent to all because he is

hidden by the "supernatural power" he has in him (C.W. 72, VII, 25).
This power of the Self is "yogamaya", the illusion. It works by means
of the senses. In Emerson, too, (as we have noted earlier) the Self is
hidden behind the life of senses of mankind.
Illusion created by nature with the help of senses is a serious
problem for human beings. It is a gigantic limit on man's freedom to
act. Illusion is produced by nature through its three gunas (qualities).
It causes a man to move from one experience to another without giving
him a stable vision of the ultimate reality of life. Senses play a pivotal
role in the creation of this illusion by nature.
The three gunas (qualities) of nature are Sattwa (truth, goodness),
Rajas (passion) and Tamas (darkness, dullness). They exist along with

82
with the body (C.W. 109, XIV, 20). At a given time, a man is either
doing something good and virtuous or he is involved in a materialistic
pursuit aimed at personal gain or he is simply indolent, gloomy and
ignorant of what to do. Respectively these are three states of mind and
body, called Sattwa, Rajas or Tamas. When one is under the influence
of one of these qualities (of nature) the other two remain dormant. S.
Radhakrishnan explains this point thus: "The three modes are present
in all human beings, though in different degrees . .. and in each soul
one or the other predominates."24
Of the three qualities, the two - the Rajas and the Tamas create
problems in society. Under the influence of the Rajas quality of
nature "covetousness" characterises human behaviour (C.W. 109,
XIV, 17)„ One takes to hard work, with excessive desire and no self-
control (C.W. 108, XIV, 12). Crimes are committed when this quality
of nature prevails in society. The Tamas quality gives man gloominess,
sottishness and distraction of thought (C.W. 108, XIV, 13). Quite
interestingly, it has been asserted in the Gita that a man's death (while)
*

under the influence of the Rajas quality of nature will give him a birth
among those people who are like him. The same will happen in the
case of death in the Tamasic quality: a birth among the Tamasic people.
A death under the Sattwic quality of nature, as noted earlier, will,
however, send the soul to those parts in heaven where purified souls
having knowledge of the Self dwell (C.W. 108-09, XIV, 14, 15). One
gets the company of godly people there.
This illusion, the influence of the three qualities of nature, with
which human beings interact according to their bias, is (as noted also
earlier) the Selfs "divine and supernatural power," Maya, and it is
difficult to overpower it (C.W. 70, VII, 14). It bewilders all (C.W. 70,
VII, 13). The gods and human beings, all with no exception, are subject

83
to it (C.W. 130, XVIII, 40). In chapter II Krishna advises Arjuna to be
free from this influence (of the three qualities of nature) (C.W. 39, II,
45). The stupid and the wicked continue in stupidity and wickedness
because their understanding is confused by this supernatural power,
the illusion (C.W. 70, VII, 15). In Emerson (as noted earlier) illusion is
extremely powerful and it takes all human beings under its sway. I
shall compare EmerSon's position on illusion with that in the Gita in
the next chapter.
The next determining factor of the human freedom to act is the
individual human constitution. As a man is by his constitutional (mental
and physical) make-up, so shall his ability to conduct himself in life
be. The Gita divides entire humanity into four kinds of people. Krishna
says in chapter IV that four kinds of people were created by him as
mankind and they had distinct "principles" and "duties" (C.W. 52, IV,
13). These four kinds of people are mentioned in chapter XVIII:
Brahmins (those given to learning), Kshatriyas (the warlike, meant to
protect others from assault and injustice), Vaishyas (the traders and
farmers), and Sudras (the servants doing menial jobs). The "duties" of
these four types of people are in each case in accordance with "the
qualities which are in their constitutions" (C.W. 130, XVIII, 41). Each
individual in God's creation is born with an aim to fulfil, which is
predetermined. One has to do the duty embodied in one's constitution.
S. Radhakrishnan explains this situation thus: "Each individual has
his inborn nature, svabhava and to make it effective in his life is his
duty, svadharma".25 The destiny of the individual is to realize "this
divine possibility."26 In chapter VIII this particularity of human make-
r

up is referred to as "Adhee-atma," which is "Swa-bhab or particular

constitution, disposition, quality or nature" (C.W. 73, VIII, 3). (It is
born with man)

84
 The performance of one's own duty decided by one's birth in a
particular family makes one perfect if one is happy and satisfied with
one's work (which is to be continued in turn by all the descendants of
the family in future) (C.W. 130, XVIII, 45). In chapter II Krishna
persuading Arjunato take part in the battle advises him to pay attention
to the duties of his particular type. He further tells him that for a
Kshatriya no duty is superior to fighting. If he did not perform his duty
as a Kshatriya he would be guilty of abandoning his duty and honour
and this would be criminal (C.W. 38, II, 33).
It may be noted here that some critics of the Gita believe that its
philosophy is meant to be used by the upper classes "as a weapon"
against the "disinherited, exploited and downtrodden millions" by
"inculcating ideas of patience and contentment" in them.27 The Vaishya
and the Sudra are (also) expected to be happy with their respective
duties assigned in nature. It seems reasonable here at this point to believe
(suspect) that dividing people in their entirety into four types and then
asking them to stick to those types strictly in course of their future
generations has got some intrigue in it. By no stretch of imagination
can a rationally thinking individual in our times be expected to subscribe
to this sort of arrangement in society calling it divinely ordained.
However, the general import of the philosophy of the Gita in its totality
underlines the welfare of all mankind. The Yogi, the ideal man of the
Gita/is "interested in the good of all mankind" (C.W. 60, V, 25). The
division of society into four types seems to be peculiar to the times of
the Gita and it seems (to some) to carry a kind of social injustice.
The emphasis on one's duty, pertaining to one's calling (decided
by one's birth) is accompanied in the Gita by a condemnation of those
ascetics who abondon all action in their search for happiness. It is
pointed out that complete renunciation of action is indeed impossible.

85
 t

None can be inactive even for a moment. The three qualities of nature
present in man keep him in action at all times. Moreover, in complete
inaction, it will not be possible to take care of one's body. (C. W. 44-45,
III, 4, 5, 8). Hence being active, doing one's duty, is the best choice.
The individual human constitution, besides having been made
by the Self already in one of the four modes in each case (as we have
discussed), is also affected by a man's deeds in the previous lives.
Accordingly, the individual temperament may be Sattwic, Rajasic or
Tamasik, or we can say there may be Sattwic, Rajasik or Tamasik people
in the vast humanity in continuation of their previous lives. The faith
of human beings respectively is of three types according to influence
of the three qualities of nature on them and it is "produced from the
constitution" to which they are subject (C.W. 119, XVII, 3). Chapter
XVII gives a detailed description of people with three kinds of
temperaments. Their tastes and preferences have been mentioned. The
Sattwic people worship the gods and eat food which protects them
from sickness and increases the length of their life. They are respectful
to Brahmins, experts and learned men. They are just, kind and soft-
spoken. It seems in some respects they have the qualities most desired
in a civilized society. The people with a Rajasik temperament are
ungodly, hypocritical and greedy, whereas those with a Tamasik
temperament are ignorant and foolish.
The human constitution is subject to change with regard to the
qualities of head and heart. There may be improvement or deterioration.
A man, noble and spiritually inclined, gets the reward for his "virtue"
in some heaven and is later given a birth in a pious and honourable
family, may be in the house of some learned Yogee. He is given his
previous merits which he possessed in his former life time. He then
starts working for perfection. After many births of this kind he becomes

86
perfect. However, this kind of perfection is most arduous to achieve
(C.W. 67, VI, 41-45). The deterioration in the human constitution is
already very clear to us in the fate of the people born under the evil
destiny.
I conclude the discussion of the constitution with the idea that
the virtue or vice of a person goes on accumulating in course of different
life times and becomes an impelling force in one's constitution. And
this force asserts itself in the performance of one's the duties. Krishna
in the last Chapter tells Arjuna that he will have to fight. The principles
of his nature will compel him to fight. He will be forced by the "duties"
of his calling to act and he will of himself do that which he wants to
shun ignorantly (C.W. 132, XVIII, 59-60). The idea that all human
beings are subject to their constitution in nature is common in Emerson
and the Gita. I shall compare Emerson's position on this point with
that in the Gita in the next chapter.
Cowardice and indifference to the needs of the present can be
included next in the list of the limiting factors in the liberty of man to
act gainfully. Castigating Arjuna for exhibiting weakness on the
battlefield Krishna tells him that by becoming cowardly and indifferent
to his duty as a Kshatriya he will make himself condemnable and people
will think that his withdrawal from the battlefield was provoked by
fear. His enemies will make fun of him. And this would be extremely
horrible (C.W. 38, II, 33-36). In Emerson, too, though in a different
context, cowardice and indifference to the present are seen as human
limitations.
Next, lack of faith in the Self is another limitation which will
affect a man's efforts to gain happiness in life. The man having no faith
in the Self is sure to be met with misfortune and failure. The man who
treats God and morality with disrespect is lost. He is bereft of reason

87
and is doomed (C.W. 48, III, 32) The condemnation of the doubtful
and the faithless is very severe in chapter IV. The man with a doubtful
mind cannot enjoy this world or that which is above. He will have no
"happiness" anywhere (C.W. 56, IV, 40). In Emerson, too, lack of
faith in the Self is regarded as the cause of great suffering to mankind.
Perhaps, because most of the people in this world lack faith in
God and pursue sensual pleasures and commit crimes, this world is a
miserable place. This is another limitation for mankind, another limiting
circumstance to cope with. That this world is unfortunately situated
has been categorically stated. In chapter VIII the world is described as
the dwelling house of pain and sorrow (C.W. 75 VIII, 15). The verse in
question in the original Sanskrit text uses the word "duhkhalayam"
(the house of sorrow) to describe this world. In chapter IX again there
is a similar reference. Krishna advises Arjuna to regard this world as
"a finite and joyless place" (C.W. 82, IX, 33). In the preceding chapter
we have noted that in Emerson the world is regarded as a place of
sorrow and suffering.
As already noted, the author of the Gita believes in the
transmigration of human souls. This is the greatest limitation in the
world of the Gita. One is not cleared of one's account in one life-time
in respect of one's good or bad deeds, rather, there is a painful cycle of
birth and death linked to the human rewards and punishments. The
soul in man is immortal. It is eternal, incomprehensible and
incorruptible. It changes bodies like clothes. The old garments are
thrown away and the new are worn. Every time the soul in the mortal
body experiences infancy, youth and old age (C.W. 36, II, 13). The
whole of this affair is known as the theory of Karma. By now, I have
discussed those limitations of humanity in the Gita which in my view
are of universal nature. They seem to involve the whole of the world. I

88
have now to examine the problems peculiar to the people of the times
when the Gita was composed.
The first local problem affecting the human freedom to act is the
sin one would incur if one killed one's own near and dear ones in
whatever circumstances. Arjuna seems to be fully aware of it and raises
it as an argument in favour of his insistence on not participating in the
battle. He believes that if he killed his relatives the eternal rites due
from their families to their ancestors would be neglected. The male
members are needed to make offerings to the ancestors (of their families)
with the help of the priests. In the absence of the offerings, the ancestors
would starve and fall from the Peetreelok (a certain region somewhere
in the space where the deceased, who have left children behind on
earth, would stay to get rewards for their virtuous deeds). There will
be a crisis when the male members of the families are not alive to
make the offerings. The women are not entitled to do this job.28 The
fore-fathers on being denied the gifts of cakes and water would fall
into the hell (C.W. 32, I, 42). About the offerings required by the
ancestors (for their survival) S. Radhakrishnan remarks: "It refers to
the belief that the deceased ancestors require these offerings for their
welfare".29
The next problem is that of the women being corrupted through
their intermingling with men of other castes, their own husbands being
dead. Such women would give birth to the spurious brood called Varn-
shankar (C.W. 32,1, 41). This confusion of caste would provide Hell
to those who are killed and also to those who killed them (C.W. 32,1,
42). The spurious brood would not be fit to make offerings to the
ancestors of the family. These two problems can be understood. The
first problem, it seems, was created by the priests who received the
offerings made to the ancestors. The second problem, perhaps, arose

89
out of the effort of the powerful segments of the society to maintain
their hereditary superiority and social pride. In the social stratification
the Brahmins and Kshatriyas were at the top.
Incidentally, Krishna makes no direct answer to these two
problems raised by Arjuna. However, his indirect answer to these
problems is available in his advice to Arjuna that he should not worry
about the fate of the soul after death since it is immortal. It can't be cut
r

by a weapon or burnt by fire or corrupted by water or dried by the

wind (C.W. 37, II, 23). This point is further strengthened with the idea
that the former state of human beings is not known and their future
state can't be found out but only "the middle state" is apparent (C.W.
37, II, 28). So for Arjuna there seems to be no need to worry about the
fate of human soul after death. Still another point put forward by Krishna
in favour of (righteous) violence is that every being that is born is
certain to die and all beings who die are certainly subject to regeneration
(C.W. 37, II, 27) (So it can be inferred that there is no sin involved in
killing the members of one's family).
When we reconstruct the world in the Gita on the basis of
information available in the text, we find the next handicap, the people
of the time faced in their life (may be with or without their knowing or
realizing it), was their division into four castes through custom and
tradition. There was no interchanging of occupations acquired through
birth. The occupations decided by birth are clearly stated in the Gita as
divinely ordained and any change in them is strictly forbidden: "A
man's own calling with all its faults, ought not to be forsaken" (C.W.
131, XVIII, 48). In our study of the human constitution, we have already
become familiar with the four kinds of people created by God.
The inborn qualities of these four kinds of people are described
in Chapter XVIII. The Brahmin's natural duty is peace, self-restraint,

90
zeal, purity, patience, rectitude, wisdom, learning and theology. The
Kshatriya's natural duties are bravery, glory, fortitude, rectitude, not to
run away from the field, generosity and princely conduct. The Vaishya's
natural duty is cultivation of land, tending of cattle, and buying and
selling of things. The Shudra's natural duty is "servitude" (C.W. 130,
XVIII, 42, 43, 44). S. Radhakrishnan is of the view that this "fourfold
order is not peculiar to Hindu society. It is of universal application.
The classification depends on types of human nature".30 It seems,
O'
however, it is not easy to agree with this view of Radhkrishnan.
Mankind, it seems, can not be mechanically divided into any four or
any number of types.
The next limitation of the society of the time was that the people
of the time were confused about whether to follow the Vedas and
worship the Vedic gods or worship Krishna. Though the author of the
Gita is very emphatic in his assertion that only Krishna is really worthy
of worship by people, he gives contradictory signals to the people
r

with regard to the Vedas and the worship of the Vedic gods. This
indicates that a good number of people still followed the Vedas and
worshipped the gods. There are verses in the Gita which criticize the
Vedas and belittle the Vedic gods but at the same there are other verses
(in different chapters) which extol the Vedas and the Vedic gods.
Incidentally, it may be noted here that people in Emerson's times, too,
were (and even in our times they are) confused about their object (s) of
worship or ways of worship.
First, we can examine briefly the verses which criticize the Vedas.
In chapter II the followers of the Vedas are described as "tainted with
worldly lusts". They prefer a temporary pleasure of heaven (which
will be available through the worship recommended in the Vedas) to
eternal absorption (which the followers of Krishna will obtain) (C.W.

91
39, II, 42-44). The absorption means a permanent merger in God. The
Vedas deal with the the objects subject to the influence of the three
qualities of nature (C.W. 39, II, 45). Verse No 46 also belittles the
Vedas. In verse 53 Arjuna is told that when his intelligence will come
out of the bewilderment caused by the Vedic texts and become stable
in spirit, he will "attain to insight". In chapter XI in verse No 48 Krishna
after showing his divine form to Arjuna tells him that this vision of his
cannot be made possible by the Vedas, gifts sacrifices, etc. (C.W. 96).
Towards the end of the chapter, Krishna tells Arjuna that he is not to be
seen as he has seen him even with the help of the Vedas (C.W. 97, XI,
53).
In sharp contrast to this, regular reading of the Veda which purifies
the speech is recommended (XVII, 15, C.W. 121). The Vedas, the
Brahmins and the sacrifices are stated as established by God (XVII,
23, C.W. 122). In chapter XVIII the rituals of sacrifice, gifts and penance
are advised to be performed as they purify the wise (XVIII, 5, C.W.
124).
The attitude of the author of the Gita towards the gods is marked
by similar confusion. (Perhaps, it represents the confusion prevalent
in those times.) First we can see how the gods have been humbled. In
chapter IX we are given to understand that the gods have their respective
heavens to which their devotees go to receive the rewards of their
worship but as soon as the rewards earned by the devotees are paid up
"they sink again into this mortal life" and because they practise "the
religion pointed out by the three Veds" they become subject to the
birth and death on earth again. The worshippers of the Vedic gods,
thus, receive a temporary reward. (C.W. 81-82, IX, 20, 21). It may be
noted here that the Gita mentions only three Vedas, probably because
only three were then in existence. The Atharva Veda is not mentioned.

92
 It is stressed in the Gita that since Krishna is supreme in authority,
the worshippers of the other gods, too, involuntarily worship him. The
rewards granted by the gods are actually granted by Krishna only but
because the people are ignorant of the true nature of Krishna and because
they don't worship him directly they go to and stay and then fall from
heaven belonging to the god they worship. They fall only to be reborn
on earth (C.W. 82, IX, 23,24). Only the worshipper of Krishna will be
liberated from the cycle of birth and death for ever (C.W. 82, IX, 25).
He will obtain a merger in Krishna's spiritual nature.
In chapter VII the worshippers of other gods are regarded as
short-sighted men. It is also pointed out that those whose understandings
are drawn away by this and that pursuit worship the gods (C.W. 71,
VII, 20). Krishna, however, is magnanimous and democratic and allows
the worship of the gods to continue and (quite interestingly) even
encourages it. If anyone is desirous of worshipping a god in faith
Krishna alone inspires him with that steady faith which he needs to
please the god of his choice and he obtains the object of his wishes as
it is appointed by Krishna. (C.W. 71, VII, 21, 22). The reward of such
a devotee is, however, finite. (C.W. 71, VII, 23). These gods whom
people worshipped in the times of the Gita are, as we have already
noted, also subject to the three qualities of nature, besides being
otherwise subordinate to Krishna. It seems the idea that Krishna even
secretly encourages or allows the worship of other gods is born of the
author (of the Gita)'s belief that the prevalence of the worship of so
many gods in society cannot be continuing without the implicit consent
(approval) of the Almighty Krishna.
t

In sharp contrast, there are verses in the Gita which praise the
worship of the gods. In chapter XVII the Sattwic people are described
as the worshippers of the gods (C.W. 119, XVII 4). And further, the

93
worship of the gods is regarded as the penance of the body (XVII, 14,
C.W. 121). In chapter III the worship of the gods is very strongly
recommended and whole-hearted sacrifices to them are advised in
verses 11 to 16. Those who do not make sacrifices to the gods are
called thieves and evil in nature. Sacrifices to the gods bring rain from
them and rain produces food for the living creatures. We are given to
understand specially in verses 11 and 16 that the gods need the sacrifices
for their welfare and the life in this world depends on the gods for its
sustenance. The gods and the human beings depend on each other:
"By this [ritual of sacrifice] foster ye the gods and let the gods foster
you; thus fostering each other you shall attain to the supreme good"
(III, 11, C.W. 45). In verse 31 it is pointed out that those who eat what
is left from the sacrifice are released from all sins (III, 13).
To understand properly the people's faith in the gods of the time
and to trace the history of the ritual of sacrifice, in brief, we may refer
to Prem Nath Bazaz's book The Role of the Bhagavadgita in Indian
History. In chapter "Sacerdotal Supremacy" Bazaz tells us about the
origin of the ritual of sacrifice. The Vedic gods were at the beginning
human beings more powerful and wealthy than the other people in
society. The people approached them in times of need. In course of
time, being human, they ceased to exist. The position of these influential
persons changed. They were transformed into heavenly deities. Since
by this time they were no more alive, they became inaccessible. They,
however, were imagined as having shapes like human beings and being
human in shape they were thought to be "susceptible to flattery" and
r

they could be pleased by gifts. Prayers and oblations were offered to

them so that they might direct the natural phenomenon controlled by
them for the welfare of people.31
A priestly class came into being to convey the offerings from the

94
earth to these gods in heaven. The Brahmin acted as the intermediary
between the miserable people and the mighty gods.32 The Brahmins
received fee for performing the ritual of sacrifice. The offerings, too,
became their property. "The Vedic literature is full of praises for
payments made to the priests as remuneration for presiding over the
sacrifices."33 In verse No 33 in chapter IV in the Gita, however, it is
pointed out that the sacrifice of knowledge, i.e. giving of it to others is
better than any material sacrifices (IV, 33, C.W. 55). The sacrifice of
knowledge was, however, in those days the exclusive right of the
Brahmins. This knowledge obviously was about the ways to be adopted
to please the gods.
From the contradictory approach towards the gods in the Gita it
appears that author of the Gita wanted to establish the supremacy of
Krishna over those gods but he carefully avoids a direct confrontatipn
with their worshippers. His is a method of persuasion. Those in search
of immortality, he points out, must turn to Krishna, the one supreme
God, the Self. Charles Wilkins is of the view that the author's aim was
to bring down Polytheism or at least he wanted to persuade the people
to understand that one God was present in the images which they
worshipped.34 As we find in the Gita a struggle to liberate the people
of the time from their traditional ways of worship, in Emerson we find
a continuous effort to extricate people of his time from the old fashioned
ways of thinking and behaving. I shall analyse this point in the next
chapter.
By now I have completed my examination of the limitations of
human life according to the Gita. I have now to analyse what the Self
is and how it can liberate man from his suffering. The Self in the Gita,
as we already know, is God with all his omnipotence, omniscience and
omnipresence. The Self has been referred to by different names. It is

95
the soul (C.W. 36, 37, 85), the Supreme (C.W. 43), the Deity (C.W. 45,
59, 98, 122), the creator of mankind (C.W. 52), Brahm, the Supreme
(C.W. 55, 65, 73, 110), Brahm the Almighty (C.W. 58), the Almighty
(C.W. 59), Brahm (C.W. 59, 103, 105), the incorporeal Brahm (C.W.
60), God (C.W. 65, 90, 105), the supreme soul (C.W. 65) the Supreme
Being (C.W. 74, 76, 105), the Param Pooroosh (C.W. 74),
Poorooshottama (C.W. 113, 14), the Parmatma or supreme soul (C.W.
113), Haree (C.W. 90), Veeshnoo (C.W. 92), God of Gods (C.W. 92),
the incorruptible Being (C.W. 94, 105), the ancient Pooroosh, and the
supreme supporter of the universe (C.W. 94), the superior spirit (C.W.
102), the supreme spirit (C.W. 105), the universal spirit of all things
(C.W. 112), Eeshwar (C.W. 46,62,110), and Self (C.W. 46,62,110, II,
23,24, III, 17,43). As noted in the previous chapter, in Emerson, too,
God has been referred to by different names. I shall discuss this point
in brief in the next chapter.
The Self is the author of the system in which we exist. In chapter
IX Krishna tells Arjuna that in this chapter he will acquaint him with a
most mysterious secret, a sovereign mystery and a sovereign art, gaining
the knowledge of which he will be liberated from "misfortune" (C.W
78, IX, 1, 2). He then reveals (the mystery) to Arjuna that he is the
father and mother of this world, the grandsire and the preserver. Nature
works in his supervision and produces the living and the non-living.
He is at the core the creator of the universe (C.W. 79, IX, 10). S.
Radhakrishnan is of the view that Krishna "is here represented as the
Supreme Self who pervades the universe, who, supports all beings."35
The Self is described as the goal of /wisdom in chapter XIII. Its
understanding will give immortality to man (C.W. 103, XIII, 12). It is
beginningless. It has hands and feet everywhere. It operates through
all faces, heads, and eyes. It is all pervasive. It sits in the middle of the

96
world occupying the enormous whole. It is without any organ, yet it is
within all the organs. It is attached as well as unattached and even
though it has no quality, it partakes of every quality. It is inside as well
as outside. It is stationary as well as moveable in all nature. It is difficult
to grasp. It is far as well as near. At the same time it is divided as well
as undivided everywhere in everything. It rules all things. It destroys
and produces simultaneously. It is all light and contains no darkness. It
"preside* in every breast" (C.W. 103, XIII, 13 to 17).
The art (the sovereign art of liberating oneself from misfortune
referred to in chapter IX) involved in the mystery of the Self for human
beings is that in their own interest they should do everything for the
Self, i.e. whatever they do, eat, sacrifice, give or whatever they are
enthusiastic about, they should offer it to the Self. (C.W. 81, IX, 27). It
is like working for the Self. We come across this idea in chapter III,
too. It is pointed out there that this busy world is moved by other motives
and not by the worship of the Deity (which is possible by doing one's
work for him). The people of this world should give up all selfish
purposes and "perform" their "duty for him alone" (C.W. 45, III, 9).
The idea is that the work done for the Self is its true worship.
When one does one's work thinking it to be one's duty to the
Self, one is liberated from one's worldly connections, the roots of
sorrow. Normally in our life we are worried about the consequences of
our actions since we have a desire for reward. The non-fulfilment of
this desire causes pain. But when we give up desire for and attachment
to the results of our actions, be they favourable or unfavourable, and
when we act thinking that we are working for the Self and not for a
personal gain, we are liberated from all our worries. We are thus saved
from the "good and evil fruits" and "the bonds of works" (C.W. 81, IX,
28). This is the path of the renunciation of the personal will.

97
Jr
 The major emphasis in the Gita is actually on the point that one
has to obey the Self and become its instrument by seeking direction
from it to solve all one's problems. Krishna's call is very demanding in
this respect. He advises Arjuna to be of his mind, to be his servant, his
adorer, bowing down before him making him his asylum (C.W. 82, IX,
*

34). Arjuna is advised to shun every other religion and fly to Krishna
who will liberate him from all his transgressions (C.W. 133, XVIII,
66). He will then by Krishna's "divine favour surmount every difficulty
which surroundeth" him (C.W. 132, XVIII, 58).
Obedience to the Self is the only infallible and necessary recourse
available to man for the Self knows what ought to be done. In chapter
XI Arjuna is told that his enemies have already been killed. He is
required to become only "the immediate agent" to kill them. The
predetermination in this divine scheme of things is unmistakable. Arjuna
is told that he should fight and he will be victorious (C.W. 93-94, XI,
r

33, 34). The idea that one should obey the Self is central to Emerson's
philosophy. I shall compare the two positions in the next chapter.
One ought to do what the Self wants one to do through one's
calling. One's constitution would decide what is necessary for one to
do. However, one ought to be cautious that one's personal will does
not intervene to break the connection between oneself and the Self. In
chapter XVIII Arjuna is advised to give up his confidence in his own
self-sufficiency which impels him to avoid his duty as a Kshatriya. In
refusing to fight (he is told) his determination is fallacious. He will
have to fight. In Emerson it has been made very clear that one ought
not to interfere in the intuitive guidance one gets from the Self. One
ought to get aside to let the Self act through oneself.
The Self is the divine necessity which would get things done
through man. Arjuna is told that being confined to action by the duties
of his calling, he would involuntarily do that from necessity, which he
wanted, "through ignorance to avoid" (C. W. 132, XVIII, 59,60). Even
killing is permitted to a person obeying the Self. A man who gives up
pride in his own personality and keeps his judgement unaffected may
kill a world of people. He neither kills nor is he bound thereby (C.W.
126, XVIII, 17). It is actually the Self that has acted through him. The
divine necessity embodied in the Self is responsible also for the
existence of the universe for crores of years (the day of Brahma) and
for its dissolution extending for crores of years (the night of Brahma)
(C.W. 75, VIII, 17-19). In chapter XI Krishna declares that he is Time,
the destroyer of mankind (C.W. 93, XI, 32). In Emerson we have noted
in the preceding chapter that the Self is the Beautiful Necessity working
with a purpose in the universe.
To be able to receive guidance from the Self, the limitations
presented by nature will have to be tackled. In our study of human
limitations we have already noted that man is subject to the influence
of the three gunas of nature. At a particular point of time one is under
the influence of one guna (quality) of nature or the other. Nature operates
through the human body creating such an illusion for man that he thinks
he is the doer, whereas all the time it is nature. In the human seeing,
hearing, touching, smelling, eating, moving, sleeping, breathing,
talking, quitting, taking, opening and closing of eyes only the "faculties"
react to "their several objects" (C.W. 58, V, 8, 9). It is a life guided by
senses. This life of senses forms the major part in the life of man in
Emerson.
The role of nature with regard to human beings in the Gita seems
threefold. It creates their bodies and acts through them with its three
qualities: the Sattwa, Rajas and Tamas. As a result, at a given time they
are spiritual, materialistic or indolent, in each case. Secondly, it provides

99
them (at the same time) the infrastructure to work with, i.e. the matter:
"the various component parts of the matter and their qualities are co­
existent with Prakreetee" (C.W. 104, XIII, 19). Thirdly, nature connects
the human deeds with their results, good or bad according to their nature.
It also determines on .the basis of merits and demerits whether the birth
of a person next time shall be in a good or evil body (C.W. 104, XIII,
21). The Self is the same to all mankind. None is "worthy" of its "love
or hatred" (C.W. 81, IX, 29). Here a contradiction may be noted with
regard to this point. In chapter XII the servant dear to Krishna is
described.
The point most relevant to our discussion of nature here is that
the Self in man is under the influence of the three qualities of nature.
The Self is present in all human beings. In chapter X Krishna tells
Arjunathat he is the soul which stands in the bodies of all beings (C.W.
85, X, 20). In the last chapter, too, this idea is repeated. The Self resides
in the heart of every living being (C.W. 133, XVIII, 61).
It has not been explained why the Self allows itself to be so
distributed among the human beings, adopting the influence of the
three qualities of nature. We are, nevertheless, given to understand
that the entire existence came into being as a result of the interaction
between the nature and the Self, Prakreetee and Pooroosh, who are
without beginning (C.W. 104, XIII, 19). Everything in nature is
produced, whether animate or inanimate, from a union of (Kshetra and
Kshetragna) matter (Prakreetee) and spirit (the Self) (C.W. 105, XIII,
26). We noted in the preceding chapter that in Emerson the Self is
distributed among human beings, and because of the separation from
the original Self they have become the separated selves. We also noted
that matter and spirit together have brought life into existence. I shall
compare Emerson's stand on these points with the stand in the Gita in

100
the next chapter.
In chapter XIII the body of a living being is called Kshetra, the
field, and the Self that resides in it is described as Kshetragna, the
Knower of the field. Wisdom or Gyan is the knowledge of Kshetra and
Kshetragna. The man, who knows his body (the part of nature in it)
and the Self in it, is wise. The Self in the (human) body when bound by
the modes of Prakrti or nature is called Kshetragna but when freed
from the modes "the same self is called the Supreme Self."36 This is the
philosophy of Advaita Vedanta.37 The Self is non-dual (indivisible)
whether inside or outside man, whether in one or another man: "All
are that Self, that One."38 The Self in man is to be freed from the three
qualities of nature or in other words man has to subdue the three qualities
of nature in him so as to allow the Self within to prevail through him.
This brings us to what seems to be the most intriguing aspect of
the philosophy of nature in the Gita. The Self is in every human being.
Is it the Self that would liberate the human beings from nature or are
the human beings going to liberate the Self (in them) from nature?
Within chapter XIII itself there seems to be a baffling contradiction in
this regard. On one hand, we are told that the Self is "the great God, the
most high spirit, who in this body is the observer, the director, the
protector, the partaker" (C.W. 104, XIII, 22). And, then, after a few
intervening verses, we are told: "This supreme spirit and incorruptible
being, even when it is in the body, neither acteth, nor is it affected,
because its nature is without beginning and without quality (C.W. 105,
XIII, 29, 31). This seeming contradiction, this paradox, can, however,
be explained. The Self is so extraordinary in its quality that it can be
both with and without quality, divided as well as undivided at the same
time.
The Self in man when not under the influence of the three qualities

101
of nature can become the light of his life. In other words, when man
overpowers the three qualities of nature in him, his human self merges
in the Self and the Self guides him in his life thereafter. V.G. Rele is of
r

the view that "the goal to be reached by all is the merging of the
individual self in THAT from which it emanated."39 In the preceding
chapter we noted that in Emerson a withdrawal from the senses is
required for an access to the Self. The three qualities of nature in man
in the Gita operate through senses. A withdrawal from them would
make the access to the Self possible.
In chapter XIV the man who has overpowered the influence of
nature in his body is described. He is called trigunatita. He obtains a
life in the Self. He is united with the Self. He does not dislike the three
qualities of nature when they exercise their influence on him nor does
*

he mind the absence of this influence. In the presence of the qualities

he stays unaffected and neutral like one who belongs to no party. He is
"self dependent" (He depends on the Self in him). In pleasure and pain
he stays the same. Iron, gold and stone are not different to him. Dislike
or love from others is the same to him. He is the same whether praised
or blamed. To him honour and disgrace, friend and the foe are the
same. He gives up all enterprise (perhaps, he shuns all undertakings
aimed at personal gain) (CW 110, XIV 22-27). Here, it is to be noted
that rising above the three qualities of nature also includes rising above
the sattwic quality qf nature which is all goodness and virtue. S.
f

Radhakrishnan explains this point thus: "Even sattvika goodness is

imperfect since this goodness has for its condition the struggle with its
opposite."40 Such a man as overpowers the gunas, when he serves the
Self alone with due attention, is worthy to be absorbed in Brahm, the
supreme, the Self. He attains a life in the Self.
The person aspiring for a life guided by the Self is also supposed

102
to possess Gyan or wisdom, too, which is described in chapter XIII.
(Certain qualities of character mentioned in this chapter and those we
have just discussed overlap.) The wisdom includes many traits of
character. It means being free from egotism, being unhypocritical,
uninjurious, patient, just, respectful to experts and teachers, chaste,
steady, self-controlled, unaffected by the objects of the senses, knowing
the reality of birth, death, destruction, sickness, pain and defects
(regarding these as evils of mortal life), unattached to children, wife
and home, even-minded upon the arrival of every event whether looked
for or not, worshipping the Self alone, paying reverence in a private
place, avoiding the society of man, with the mind absorbed in the Self
and aware of the advantage to be drawn from the knowledge of the
Self. (C.W. 102, XIII, 7-11). This wisdom will make a man perfect.
Complete devotion to the Self, mentioned every now and then in
t

the Gita, is the most important pre-condition for a life in the Self. The
Self will at all times be easily available to one who thinks constantly
of the Self with the mind undiverted by another object (C.W. 75, VIII,
14). The Self is pleased to help those persistently serving it, and happily
inspires them with such understanding as they need for an access to it
and very kindly removes the darkness of their ignorance and replaces
it with wisdom (C.W. 84, X, 11). And when their souls are rid of
ignorance their wisdom begins to glitter again and the Deity [the Self]
appears (C.W. 59, V, 16). Complete surrender to the Self, with full
faith in it, is required in Emerson, too, for access to the Self. I shall
elaborate this point in the next chapter.
In chapter XII the qualities of the servant dear to Krishna are
mentioned. To be able to lead a liberated life guided by the Self these,
too, may be useful. In this chapter again we find a repetition of certain
qualities already considered by us. I include them here to underline the

103
emphasis on them through repetition in the Gita. The man dear to
Krishna is not inimical to anyone. He is the friend of the whole creation.
He has mercy. He is not arrogant and selfish. To him pain and pleasure
are the same. He bears wrongs patiently. He is satisfied. He has subdued
his passions. He is devoted to the Self alone with his mind and
understanding. He is not afraid of anyone nor is anyone afraid of him.
Joy and impatience do not affect him. He has no fear of harm. He does
not expect. He is fair, holy, unbiased and undistracted. He has given up
every enterprise. He neither grumbles nor feels delighted. He does not
feel the lack of anything. He forsakes both good and evil fortune. In
friendship or hatred, in honour or dishonour, in cold or heat, in pain or
pleasure, he stays the same. He does not wait for anything to happen.
Praise and blame are one to him. He speaks little. He is happy "with
r

whatever cometh to pass." He owns no particular home. He has a stable

mind. Krishna concludes this list of the qualities with the remark that
those who serve him faithfully before all others (the other gods) are
his dearest friends <C.W. 99-100, XII, 13-20).
Examining the pre-requisites for a life in the Self, we may come
to chapter XVI where the people with the divine destiny are described.
Most of the qualities that find a mention here are just a repetition of
what has been said in other chapters. However, the qualities that stand
out are - exemption from fear, a purity of heart, freedom from doing
wrong, freedom from anger, freedom from slander, universal
r

compassion, exemption from the desire of slaughter, dignity,

unrevengefulness and a freedom from vain glory (C. W. 115, XVI, 1,2,
3).
The man leading a life in the Self is also described in chapter V.
He sees the Self everywhere and in everything. He sees it in the learned
Brahmin, in the ox, in the elephant, in the dog and also in the eater of

104
the flesh of dogs. This vision of equality gives him "eternity"
(immortality in Emerson), a life in the Self even in this world. In the
state of eternity he puts his "trust" in the Self. He "confideth" in the
Self and his mind is stable and free from indiscretion. The same to him
are adversity and prosperity. With his soul fixed in the Self, he enjoys
undiminishing pleasure. He is "happy in his heart." His mind is at rest
since he has controlled the lust, fear and anger in him. He is "enlightened
within." He is a Yogee, The Self is predisposed to help persons like
him who have knowledge of their "own souls" (C.W. 58, 59, 60, V, 10,
18 to 21,23,24, 26, 28). The ideal man imagined in Emerson's Nature
and "Self-Reliance" has the very same qualities in him.
The Yogee, the man living in the Self, is described further in
chapter VI. Since he has renounced the fruit of his actions (the point
already discussed), he is a Sannyassee and Yogee both. He raises
"himself by himself. " He is the same in heat, cold, pain, pleasure, honour
and disgrace. His passions are subdued. To him gold, iron and stones
are not different. He is the same among the enemies, friends, saints,
sinners, or any type of people. The idea of the sameness of attitude in
heat, pain, pleasure, adversity, prosperity, etc. along with the idea of
being the same towards the enemy, friend, etc. occurs in the Gita
repeatedly. I have presented it as such to keep the emphasis in the Gita
on these points intact and authentic in this thesis. The idea is to preserve
the spirit in which the Gita was written and to pinpoint the emphasis
at the same time.
The Yogee eats and sleeps moderately. He is delighted in his
own soul. He beholds the soul. He receives unlimited pleasure which
is far better than the pleasure that comes from the senses. No pain can
affect him. The yog is "disunion from the conjunction of pain." The
Yogee beholds the Self "in all things" and "all things" in the Self. He

105
believes in “unity”. The Self never deserts him. He “dwelleth” in the
Self “in all respects, even whilst be liveth.” He treats the pleasure and
pain of others as his own and becomes a supreme Yogee (C.W. 62 to
66, VI, 1, 5, 8 to 23, 29 to 32). In the preceding chapter we have noted
that Emerson emphasises the need of a life in the Self. Man through
reliance on God becomes God himself.
Chapter VI also mentions a physical exercise for establishing a
connection with the Self. In private the Yogee sits at a neat place which
is moderately raised from the ground. He takes under him the sacred
grass koos covered with a skin or a piece of cloth. He fixes his mind on
the Self, with his head, neck and rest of his body unmoved, and with
eyes looking steadily on the point of his nose. He then brings his mind
under control and obtains, “happiness incorporeal and supreme” in the
Self. (C.W. 63, 64,VI,11-15)
In chapter XII the worship of the Self, both as the personal Lord
(Krishna who incarnated himself as a man) and as the Imperishable
and Unmanifested, is treated as good. However, those worshipping the
invisible form face a harder task because an invisible path is difficult
to be found by corporeal beings. It is pointed out for the convenience
of the devotees that if the concentration method is difficult, simple
devotion coupled with trust in the Self in a humble spirit would do, if
one forsakes the fruit of one’s action (C.W. 98, 99, XII, 2, 3, 5, 9, 10).
One is then sure to attain a life in the Self.
While examining the ways to be adopted so as to let the Self
prevail through us to liberate us from our sorrows, we come across a
strange situation in chapter VI. The Self is either to act as a friend or as
an enemy. The Self will be friendly to him who does not allow the soul
in him (the Self embodied) to be "depressed," and raises himself with
his own help. However, the Self takes delight as an enemy of him who

106
does not realize the Selfs presence in him (C.W. 62, VI, 5, 6). S.
Radhakrishnan is of view that “the true Self becomes the enemy of our
ordinary life” when we are unaware of its “pointlessness”, “irrelevance”
and “squalor” but "if our personal self offers itself to the Universal
Self, then the latter becomes our guide and teacher.” 41 We have the
*

liberty to rise or fall.42 This negative aspect of the Self in the Gita is
available in Emerson as the negative power of the circumstance. Man
becomes his own enemy by moving away from the principles embodied
in the Self. I shall try to throw more light on this point in the next
chapter.
Living in the Self and seeking guidance therefrom also requires
not imitating others while doing one's duty. In chapter XVIII it is pointed
out that perfection is attained by being contented with one's own
particular lot and duty. One has to make an offering of this particular
work to the Self. One's own duty (decided by one’s constitution)
“although not free from faults,” is to be preferred much more to that of
anybody else which might be convenient to pursue. One’s “own calling”
shouldn’t be given up. (C.W. 130-131, XVIII, 45, 47). In matters of
religion, too, no imitation of others is acceptable to the Self. In chapter
III we are told that a man’s “own religion” is better than that of anybody
else, howsoever well-pursued it may be. Dying pursuing one's own
faith is good (C.W. 48-49, III, 35). In the preceding chapter we have
noted that Emerson regards imitation as suicide.
However, perhaps, in matters of general conduct, one ought to
become a model for others. In chapter III it is pointed out that a man of
low intelligence imitates his superior in his action. The learned man
should, therefore, work diligently and do "all the duties of life" so that
others with lesser refinement (lower intelligence) should learn a lesson
from him in industrious performance of duty (C.W. 46-47, III, 21,25).

107
In Emerson much emphasis has been laid on the doing of one's duties
whole-heartedly.
The company of the better people is recommended for the sake
of knowledge of the Self. Arjuna is advised in chapter IV to seek
wisdom making himself humble, inquisitive and attentive. The learned
will educate him (C.W. 55, IV, 34). In chapter X a particular company
of people is praised. They are embued with spiritual wisdom. They
worship the Self whole-heartedly with their minds absorbed in the Self.
They make merry amongst themselves, taking pleasure in speaking of
the Self and feel delighted in teaching one another the doctrine of the
Self (C.W. 84, X, 9). Emerson, too, prefers a particular company of
people. For them he says he is ready to make any sacrifice in life. I
shall compare Emerson's position on this point with that in the Gita in
the next chapter.
Considering the ways necessary for the Selfs guidance of the
individual, if we integrate the philosophy of the Gita on the basis of
the study of all the chapters, we also come upon three steps or stages in
it: action, knowledge (wisdom) and devotion, respectively known as
Karma Yoga, Gyanyoga and Bhaktiyoga. Action relates to the doing
of one's duty. Wisdom or knowledge requires the same to be done for
the Self, i.e. it should be selfless action. And devotion means love for
the Self and a complete surrender to it.
In chapter II wisdom (knowledge of the Self) is stated to be
superior to action: " The action stands at a distance inferior to the
*

application of wisdom". Arjuna is advised to seek shelter in wisdom

only. The wise men abondon all thought of the fruit which is produced
from their actions (C.W. 40, II, 49, 51). In chapter III the emphasis is
shifted to action since without it even the maintenance of the body is
not possible. The wisdom and action, however, merge in the following

108
words : " The man who doeth that which he hath to do, without
affection, obtaineth the Supreme" (C.W. 46, III, 19).
Gyanyoga means complete knowledge of the nature of the Self.
Karmayoga means doing one's duty. Certain sannyasees (ascetics) in
times of the Gita believed in entire abandonment of action, and in doing
so they thought they could realise the Self by way of knowledge. This
was known as the speculative doctrine. In chapter V it is pointed out
that the path of action is regarded as superior. However, it is further
pointed out that the speculative and practical doctrines are but one.
Both are "equally the means of extreme happiness " (C.W. 57, V, 2, 5).
To sum up, duty for the Self, knowledge of the Self and devotion
to the Self are necessary for an ideal life. Sri Aurobindo believes that
these are three steps in the journey of the human self into the supreme
Self. The first step is" the selfless sacrifice (offering) of works [ to the
Self]". The second step is " the selfless realisation and knowledge of
the true nature of the Self and the world." (Here the action continues
with knowledge.) The third step is "adoration and seeking of the
supreme Self."43 On the whole, this is " the triune way of knowledge,
works and devotion."44 There have been controversies about the
emphasis in the Gita with regard to these three stages or steps whatever
we call them. For a layman there is great confusion in the text. Even
scholars do not agree with each other. Some believe the emphasis is on
action, the others believe it is on knowledge, still others believe it is on
devotion. Some strike a compromise and declare that all the three are
necessary for access to the Self. The scope of my thesis does not permit
me to enter any further into this controversy here. An over-all picture
of the Gita is already very clear to us.
The ideal presented in the Gita is not easy to achieve. The "seeker
is to realize the possibilities in him by a vigorous discipline"45. But the

109
results of such an effort are going to be marvellous: " When these
possibilities are realized, man becomes a superman."46.
A life in the Self has evidently four major advantages. The first
three, it seems, belong to the whole of mankind. The fourth belongs to
those who believe in the theory of the transmigration of souls. The
r

first advantage is that it ensures a virtuous life in society since the Self
is committed to act to preserve the just and destroy the wicked for "the
establishment of virtue" (C.W. 52, IV, 8). The second advantage is that
it will ensure excellence in different walks of life. In chapter X Krishna
says that a portion of his glory is responsible for every distinction and
pre-eminence in this world (C.W. 88, X, 41).
The third advantage is that it is going to liberate man from all the
troubles of the world. One's merger in the Self (contingent on one's
efforts for it) will provide for " happiness " which is available in the
Self. In this " happiness supreme " one is going to find " an exemption
from all his troubles. " And when one's mind is in possession of this
happiness it receives wisdom from every side (C.W. 42, II, 61-65).
One is freed from all the worries of the world. This state of mind is
called brahmisthiti (II, 72)," the divine dependance". When one attains
this life in the Self, "this confidence in the supreme" (C.W. 43, II, 72)
one is at peace with oneself and the world, and then one cannot go
astray. This in a nutshell is also the philosophy of self-reliance in
Emerson.
The fourth advantage gained from a life in the Self is the liberation
of the individual, forever, from the cycle of birth and death on earth. It
is called brahmnirvana (II, 72). One attains it if one manages to die in
the state of brahmisthiti. One will then get mixed in the incorporeal
nature of the Self (C.W. 43, II, 72).
To understand fully the idea of brahmnirvana in the Gita we need

110
to refer to the theory of Karma. It is the belief of the author that whatever
one does in life with a desire for reward is sure to bring its results,
good or bad, depending on the nature of one's action. (We have already
noted that nature connects one's deeds with their results and accordingly
one's next birth is brought about.) The results of one's actions during
one life time continue to accumulate and they are called accumulated
(sanchit) Karma. One is born again to receive the (pending) results of
this one life time. Added to it are the already pending results of the
previous life times. Each life time has its accumulated Karma. This
vicious cycle goes on. If one starts doing one's work (of course, for the
Self) giving up the desire for its fruit, one's action would not yield its
results. And if this practice is continued for a few life times all the
accumulated Karma in one's account will be exhausted and no new
Karma will be generated for future manifestation. When there is no
Karma left to yield its results, one's account is clear and one is liberated
a
for ever and is absorbed in the eternal nature of the Self. The
renunciation of the fruit of one's works, Karma-phal-tyaga, thus can
work wonders: "The men of this world, with this phal-tyaga, are
liberated from rebirths after the exhaustion of the Sanchit Karma."47
In chapter VII four kinds of good people are mentioned as existing
in this world: the distressed, the inquisitive, the wishers after wealth,
and the wise. The wise among these attain the brahmnirvana after many
births. But the wise man is difficult to find (C.W. 71, VII, 16 to 19).
Krishna says that he regards the wise man even as himself, because his
devoted spirit "dependeth upon" him only as his final support (C.W.
71, VII, 16 to 19). (Emerson's self-reliant man does not seem different
*

from this wise man in the Gita.)

The Self has also an aspect special to the times of the Gita. The
people are advised through Arjuna to offer gifts in charity to the priests

ill
(XVII, 13, 20, 22) and to make sacrifices to the gods in return for the
favours they obtain from them. The gods being remembered in worship
grant the wishes of the people. He is a thief who does not make offerings
to them (C.W 45, III, 12). In those times this was considered necessary
to obtain a life in the Self. The Self is described in chapters VII, IX, X
and XI by means of the terms and names familiar to the people of the
time. The Self is declared to be the syllable Aum in all the Vedas (chapter
VII, 8). It is the sacrifice, the provision, the fire, the victim, the Rig,
Sam and Yajur Veds (C.W. 80, IX, 16, 17). In chapter X the Self is
described as Veeshnoo, the Sun, Shankar, Bhreegoo, the Himalaya,
Narada, Amrita, Prahlad, lion, Ram, the Ganga, fame, fortune, Vyas,
etc. (21, 23, 25, 30, 31, 34, 37). The description concludes with the
idea that the divine distinctions of the Self are without end. Those
mentioned are just examples (C.W. 88, X, 40). Interestingly, in the
verse 27 the king is given as a divine distinction of the Self. It may be
noted here with interest and wonder that Emerson, too, quite in a similar
way, remarks in "Compensation" that Jesus and Shakespeare are
'fragments of the soul,' the Self (W, II, 124). To use the terminology of
the Gita, they are the divine distinctions of the Self.
Chapter X is also special in its effort to place the entire human
experience of good and evil, of agreeable and disagreeable, in the
concept of the Self. Krishna declares that various qualities, pertaining
to natural beings, such as reason, knowledge, unembarrassed
judgement, patience, truth, humility, meekness, pleasure and pain, birth
and death, fear and courage, mercy, equality, gladness, charity, zeal,
r

renown and infamy, all clearly come from him (C.W. 83, X, 4, 5).
Perhaps, in this statement the nature's delegated activity is ignored.
Pleasure and pain, renown and infamy, all fall in nature's jurisdiction.
They are felt only because one is under the illusion created by nature.

112
Krishna adds that he is creator of all things and all things proceed from
him (C.W. 84, X, 8). We have noted in the preceding chapter that in
Emerson, too, there is an attempt to reconcile the opposites of life in
the concept of the Self. The friend and the enemy co-exist there in one
identity of the Self. I shall compare Emerson's stand in this context
with that in the Gita in the coming chapter.
The author of the Gita has lavishly praised the system of the Self
in this world through Arjuna in chapter XI. When he sees Krishna's
divine form (displayed physically to him to instil courage in him and
to convince him of the reality of the Self) he exclaims to Krishna that
he (Krishna) is "the never failing and eternal guardian of religion"
(C.W. 91, XI, 18). He knows all things, and is worthy to be known
(C.W. 94, XI, 38). Arjuna expresses his appreciation of Krishna's
grandeur thus: "Reverence be unto thee a thousand times repeated!....
Thou includest all things, wherefore thou art all things!" (C.W. 95, XI,
40). This praise of the Self reminds us of Emerson's praise of the
Beautiful Necessity, the Self in "Fate." The Beautiful Necessity includes
all things.
In the Gita, with respect to the philosophy of the Self, there is
also available, though quite inadvertently and without design, a
philosophical pattern of thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis. A close study
of the text reveals it. The thesis is that the Self is present in all human
beings for their benefit. The anti-thesis is that still there are demoniac
people in the world. The provision of the access to the Self has not
given its benefits to all mankind since everybody is not aware of the
presence of the Self in him. Nature keeps human beings alienated from
the Self by means of the illusion created by its three qualities, and, as a
result, evil people exist and make their presence felt in society. The
synthesis is that the Self is very keen to accept those gone astray. Even

113
the most evil persons as soon as they seek shelter in it are welcome.
One whose conduct is evil can, by turning to Krishna, become
honourable and just. "And he soon becometh of a virtuous spirit" (C.W.
82, IX, 30). According to the philosophy of the Gita, evil is just an
illusion created by nature. As soon as one is free from this illusion one
becomes noble and virtuous. He is then re-united with the Self from
which he got alienated through temptation. A philosophical pattern of
thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis is also available in Emerson, in a quite
similar way as we have seen in the Gita. In the next chapter I shall
compare the two positions.
The Gita was written, probably, to uplift the people of time
morally and spiritually. Arjuna assisted by Krishna (God in human
form) is to fight a righteous war in which his victory is pre-determined.
The good is to triumph over evil. Defending righteous violence Krishna
argues that this sort of killing is harmless since it does not touch the
soul and Arjuna need not worry about the sin involved in killing. The
men killed in the war are certain to be re-born. Moreover, Krishna, too,
is born to destroy the wicked on earth and it is Arjuna’s holy duty, too.
In this defence of violence, however, there appears a snag. To some
readers of the Gita this justification of violence is immoral and anti­
social. J.P. Jones objects to the argument that "no evil" one does to
another "is of any moment" because it cannot "touch his soul" which is
immortal.48 He points out that the argument - "In the destiny of a soul
what can the destruction of one of its bodies signify?" - is "subversive
of morality and of social order."49 The teachings in the Gita, in their
entirety, seem, however, (as we have seen in this chapter) to be addressed
to every human being on behalf of the Self, very keen to liberate the
masses from their problems in their day-to-day life. Violence is not (as
it is thought) preached outright. It has to be in the interest of virtue

114
alone and only one united with the Self is permitted to commit it for
the establishment of justice. And, at the same time, it is not very easy
to attain a union with the Self. So righteous violence, permitted in the
Gita, has a very hard code to observe.
The author of the Gita wants his philosophy of the liberating
Self to reach out to a maximum number of people in this world. To
achieve this end, however, he makes a cautious approach. At the end
of the Gita Krishna tells Arjuna that if any one teaches the philosophy
of the Gita to his 'servant', his devotee and procures his services for
him (Krishna), he will be, as a reward for this act, liberated for ever
from the cycle of birth and death on earth (C.W. 133, XVIII, 68).
Services for Krishna (most desired by him) refer to leading a life devoted
to the principles embodied in him (the Self), which would liberate man
from all his troubles in his life. Krishna adds that the winning of
devotees for him cannot be equalled by any other service for him (C.W.
133-134, XVIII, 69). Furthermore, the reading of the Gita or even the
hearing of the teachings of the Gita faithfully and unquestioningly
will ensure for the'devotees "the regions of happiness" (place
somewhere in the space to reward the 'virtuous' people) (C.W. 134,
XVIII, 71).
It is, however, clearly stated at the end of the Gita that the
philosophy of the Gita is not to be made available to one who is not
devoted to Krishna and who is not eager to learn. It is also not to be
given to one who does not like Krishna (C.W. 133, XVIIII, 67). It
seems Emerson acted upon this injunction in the Gita and did not
disclose having read the Gita in its entirety till 1845 by which time he
had prepared his readers (or listeners) to receive its philosophy. In our
times, however, a good number of translations of the Gita are available
in different languages. Gerald James Larson informs us that in his library

115
he has forty-two English translations of the Gita.50 It seems the Gita
has come a long way quite on expected lines in the service of humanity.

116
 NOTES

1. Quoted by Eric J. Sharpe in The Universal Gita: Western Im­

ages of the Bhagavadgita (London: Duckworth, 1985) 114.

2. Radhakrishnan, Introductory Essay, The Bhagavadgita 11, 12.

3. Quoted by Radhakrishnan in the above mentioned essay on page

12.

4. Kashinath Trimbak Telang, Introduction to Bhagavadgita, The

Bhagavadgita, trans. Kashinath Trimbak Telang (1882; Delhi:
Motilal Banarsi Dass, 1965) 12-13.

5. Warren Hastings, "To Nathaniel Smith, Esquire," American Tran­

scendental Quarterly 20.1 (1973): 07. (Added to Wilkins' trans­
lation of the Gita which is published in this journal.)

6. Hastings 6.

7. Romesh C. Dutt, Translator's Epilogue, The Mahabharata (1944;

Bombay: Jaico publishing, 1966) 177.

8. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, vol.I (1923; New York:

Macmillan Co, 1962)480.

9. Rashakrishnan, Introductory Essay, The Bhagavagita 14.

10. Sharpe, The Universal Gita 68.

11. See Hastings' letter to Nathaniel Smith, Esq., published with

Wilkins' translation of the Gita in American Transendental Quar­
terly 20.1 (1973): 10. (Hastings, perhaps, refers to the Paradise

117
 Lost here.)

12. Gerald James Larson, "The Song Celestial: Two Centuries of

the Gita in English," Philosophy East and West XXXI.4 (1981):
514.

13. Sharpe ["Introduction"] XVI.

14. Sharpe XIII.

15. Sharpe XIII.

16. Hastings 5.

17. Larson 513.

18. Wilkins 24-25. (See the Translator's Preface.)

19. Wilkins 25.

20. Hastings 10-11.

21. Wilkins 23.

22. Hastings 15.

23. The second reference in the brackets is to the original text as

explained in S Radhakrishnan's translation which may be con­
sulted for further clarification of the point in question. The chapter
number is followed by the verse number. This pattern will be
followed in the rest of the thesis. In a few cases, there may be
slight differences of interpretation in Radhakrishnan's work but
t

this does not affect us. I am quoting from Charles Wilkins' trans­
lation exclusively since it was read by Emerson. Only in cases,
where the text quoted is immediately followed by the chapter

118
 number and the verse number, the direct reference will be to
Radhakrishnan’s translation.

24. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita, 319.

25. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita 364.

26. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita 364.

27. Prem Nath Bazaz, The Role of the Bhagavadgita in Indian His­
tory (New Delhi: Sterling, 1975) IX (Introduction).

28. Telang41.

29. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita 93.

30. Radhakrishnan 364.

31. Bazaz, 21-22.

32. Bazaz 22.

33. Bazaz 22-24.

34. Wilkins 24.

35. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita 242.

36. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita, 191.

37. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita 191.

38. Sri Aurobindo Ghose, Essays on the Gita: First Series, 2nd ed.
(Calcutta: Arya, 1926) 89.

39. Vasant G Rele, Bhagavad-Gita: An Exposition on the Basis of

Psycho-Philosophy and Psycho-Analysis, 2nd ed. (Bombay: D.B.
119
 Taraporevala Sons, 1941) 2.

40. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita 322-23.

41. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita 189-90.

42. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita 190.

43. Ghose 54.

44. Ghose 54.

45. M.N. Sircar, Mysticism in the Bhagavad-Gita (New Delhi: Clas­

sical, 1977)199.

46. Sircar 199.

47. Rele 157.

48. J.R Jones, India's Problem: Krishna or Christ (New York: 1903)
104. Quoted (by Sharpe) in The Universal Gita: Western Images
of the Bhagavadgita on page 101.

49. Jones, The Universal Gita 101.

50. Larson 523.

120
Chapter IV
 Two Ways of Life : Proximity and Distance

In the previous two chapters I examined two philosophies of life

with regard to human limitations and potentialities. The differences of
time and cultural backgrounds notwithstanding, these two approaches
to life have much in common in their perception of the human condition.
The basic common assumption is that human beings are part of a certain
system of life working eternally in the careful supervision of its creator,
the Self, present within the system itself to keep it going smoothly and
purposefully (in a direction known best only to the Self itself). The
system has certain inbuilt testing situations and also concessions. If
circumstances tend to have a limiting influence on human freedom to
act, the Self offers to liberate the struggling mortal from all trouble
that may lie on the way.
It is assumed, in Emerson and in the Gita, that mankind is in
need of help that the Self may provide. Commenting on the assumptions
of Emerson's philosophy of "Self-Reliance" Lou Ann Lange remarks
that they “suggest that he thought that men were in need of help. They
indicate, too, that he believed the help was available and that men were
in a position to assist in their own rescue"1. In the Gita towards the end
Arjuna tells Krishna that by his “divine favour” the confusion of his
mind is removed and he has gained understanding. He will, in future,
act according to his advice. (C. W. 134 XVIII, 73). Allegorically, Arjuna
r

seems to be speaking thus for mankind.

In the system of the Self in Emerson and in the Gita mankind is
supposed to face certain limitations. Some of these are inevitably in
the system. One may depend on the Self, of course, in the face of all
sorts of circumstances in life and achieve success and happiness. In
this chapter I set out to first compare the limitations faced by human

121
beings in their life as visualized in Emerson and in the Gita. Then I
shall compare the concept of the Self in both. Alongside this, I shall
try to assess, on the basis of the similarities of perception, the influence,
if any, that the reading of the Gita might have had on Emerson.
In the present study the first limitation of man (on which Emerson
and the Gita have a common stand) is that he must lead a virtuous life
which means he should be honest, just, dutiful and helpful to fellow-
beings. This relates to the social utility of man. This limitation is
inevitable in the system of the Self. Emerson says in “Fate” that this
“limitation is impassable by any insight of man.” In the ultimate
analysis, human insight and the freedom of will are subject to it (W,
VI, 21). The universe is being governed justly. No wrong-doing will
go unpunished. In “Compensation” Emerson points out that justice is
always done. All crimes are punished and all virtues are rewarded.
There is redressal for all wrongs; silently and certainly it works at all
times (W, II, 102). In “Fate” we are told that Fate requires man to be
just and “always strikes” sooner or later if man fails to do justice (W,
VI, 21).
In the Gita in chapter IV Krishna declares that he personally
intervenes and awards punishments to the wicked whensoever “virtue”
suffers a decline and vice and injustice predominate in human society.
He makes himself felt in all ages to preserve the just, destroy the wicked
and establish “virtue” (C.W. 52, IV, 8). In chapter XVI mankind is
seen as existing in two broad categories with good and evil destiny.
r

Those with the evil destiny do not know how to “proceed in virtue”
and “refrain from vice.” They are not pure, truthful and moral (C.W.
116, XVI, 7). Krishna says that he casts evil persons into the wombs of
evil-minded people on earth for their subsequent births, and they go to
the worst hell at last (C.W. 117, XVI, 19, 20). The evil doers remain

122
confined to the cycle of birth and death for ever as punishment.
This theory of rewards and punishments is known as
Compensation in Emerson and Karma in the Gita. Commenting on the
the influence of the philosophy of Karma on Emerson, Arthur Christy
points out (in his book The Orient in American Transcendentalism)
that the doctrine of Karma “finds its reflection in Emerson in his doctrine
of Compensation.” As Emerson advanced in age he found the Greek
interpretation of fate as too easy-going. He found that the Bhagavadgita
and the Upanishads approved of his own theory. He “found in fact that
Karma and Compensation were practically two coins of the same
mintage.” And when he came upon the Mohammedan Kismet he
thought it was Karma because it was Oriental.2 Through his theory of
Compensation Emerson had come far away “from the theism of his
time.” He “never wrote of escaping from one's sin through the grace
and atonement of Christ.”3 The decrees of Allah and Calvin's God are,
he noted, autocratic, ’whereas among the Hindus what one receives is
the fruit of one's own actions, a harvest arising from the actions
pertaining to a previous life.4 Emerson has been criticised more for
this law of Compensation than for any other element in his
Transcendental system. The well-to-do people are not always innocent
of any crime, and those suffering are not always the sinful.5
The next common limitation on human freedom to act, in
Emerson and in the Gita, is that in their pursuit of pleasures related to
senses humans should not try “to gratify the senses.” Rather, they should
suit their pleasure of the senses to their moral needs (W, II, 103). The
test of man lies in the “solution” of this “problem.” Man has to learn to
separate what is sensually sweet, strong and bright from what is morally
sweet, deep and fair in life. This limitation is ordained in nature and is
closely related to the one we have just studied. In us we have a tendency

123
to seek inordinate pleasure. The soul (the Self) permits moderate eating
but the body likes to feast. It requires man and woman to be one flesh
and soul, but the body seeks physical pleasure alone and joins “the
flesh only” (W, II, 103, 04). Emerson regards man's devotion to the
gratification of his senses as a rebellion against the creator and a
separation such that one does not see God complete in every object.
One sees only the sensual attraction of an object but one doesn’t see
the hurt it contains. (W, II, 105, 06). In “Compensation” Emerson tells
us that men wish to be wealthy, powerful and famous and thus want to
become great but they cannot have the sweet leaving out the bitter.
Their sensual pursuits cannot make them happy. (W, II, 104).
Throughout the Gita the human desire to gratify the senses has
w w r

been seriously deplored. At the end of chapter II one, who gives up

“all lusts of the flesh” and walks with controlled desires, is praised
(C.W. 43, II, 71). In chapter III the man who takes delight in “the
gratification of his passions” is regarded as “sinful” and living in vain
(C.W. 46, III, 16). Later in this chapter it is pointed out that lust born of
physical cravings induces man to commit crimes (C.W. 49, III, 36,
37). In chapter XVI the “gratification of sensual appetites” is strongly
disapproved of. Lust and greed are regarded as passages to hell. It is
pointed out that people who are given to the “gratification of their
inordinate desires,” who regard it as most important and who seek to
accumulate wealth through unjust means will sink into the Narak (hell)
of impurity at last (C.W. 116-17, XVI, 8, 10 to 16). It is interesting to
r

note that the word gratification has been used three times (with a
negative connotation) in this chapter while referring to sensual
pleasures. It may be noted here that in Emerson and in the Gita man’s
turning to the gratification of his senses takes him away from the Self
which is within him hiding behind the life of senses. Without access to

124
this Self there can be no happiness for him.
Next, in Emerson and in the Gita, praying, craving and working
for material gains is rejected altogether. To Emerson prayer aimed at a
“private end” is a mean and thievish act. Prayer asking for a particular
thing which is not for the benefit of all is “vicious” (W, II, 77). It
seems that Emerson/perhaps, advocates working without a desire for
a personal reward. He remarks that a man united with God “will not
beg.” All action will seem prayer to him. All people working will seem
to him to be praying (W,II,77). Emerson regards reliance on property,
which is implied in one’s working and praying for personal gain, as
want of self-reliance. People assess each other on the basis of property
each owns and not on the basis of character (W,II, 87). But this is not
the right approach. This dependence on material possessions cannot
bring any happiness to them. This limitation on human freedom to act
to gain happiness and success cannot be by-passed in Emerson and in
the Gita.
This limitation on man seeking happiness and success is stressed
throughout the Gita. The ideal man, the truly happy man, is stated to
be one to whom iron, stone and gold are the same (C.W. 110, XIV, 24).
As for property, it does not even have a definite home (C.W. 100, XII,
19) . As regards his work, he gives up “the desire for a reward of his
actions; he is always contented and independent.” He may be busy in
work but to him it would seem he is not doing anything (C.W. 53, IV,
20) . This is because he is not working for a reward. He works selflessly.
He is not selfish (C.W. 132, XVIII, 53). Here, while comparing
Emerson’s philosophy with that of the Gita, one cannot afford to be
too exacting. Nevertheless, it seems that there is a deep echo of the
philosophy of the Gita in Emerson. Emerson and the Gita both want
man to work without the desire for a personal reward. To many people

125
in India this seems to be the only lesson put forward in the Gita: Karam
kiye jao, Phal ki iccha mat rakho.
The next limitation ordained in nature, common in Emerson and
the Gita, is that human beings are born with a moral or material bias.
In “Fate” Emerson writes : “People are bom with moral or with material
bias; uterine brothers with this diverging destination” (W, VI, 12).
Emerson refers to the Hindu explanation of this phenomenon which
says that this is because of the deeds committed in a state of prior
existence. But this is, he says, only a poetic way to explain fate. This
poetic attempt, however, is made in the Gita. It is declared in chapter
XVI that “two kinds of destiny prevail” in the world. There are people
born with a divine destiny, who have a strongly moral bias and there
are others bom “under the influence of evil destiny,” who have a material
bias and who pursue material gains and sensual pleasures. (C.W. 115-
16, XVI, 6). It is very' clearly stated that the births with the good or evil
destiny are the result of deeds committed in the previous lives. (It may
be that Emerson had the Gita in his mind when he wrote of the Hindu
poetic way to explain fate).
If we compare Emerson's position with that in the Gita, we find
that he does not seem to believe in previous lives but he does believe
that the birth of a person decides the moral or the material bias that he
or she is going to have in life. Emerson’s own explanation of this
phenomenon is equally poetic (to use his own word) as it is in the Gita.
He tells us that in what one is at present one is a party and one knows
it (W, VI, 13). But this position does not go well with his own insistence
that men are born with a diverging destination. How can a person be a
party to his bias at birth? The idea of moral or material bias of human
beings is put forward in “The Transcendentalism” too, wherein mankind
is seen as always divided into two categories as thinkers : Materialists

126
and Idealists (W, I, 329). Emerson, however, is less harsh on the
materialists while in the Gita they are literally bound for hell.
The next limitation on freedom of action in life, in Emerson and
in the Gita, originates from human senses again. The senses obstruct
the vision of the reality in nature and provide man a life of appearances
alone. In chapter II and III in this thesis we have already discussed this
r

point in some detail. In “The Over-Soul” Emerson points out that senses
stand between man and the Self. The light which from within or behind
shines through us on the things in this world enlightens us to
acknowledge “that we are nothing, but the light is all.” He adds that a
man hides within him all wisdom and all good. The senses separate in
man the human from the divine. The “eating, drinking, planting,
counting man” does not truly represent himself (W, II, 271). The senses
bind man to the life of time and space and close the door on the eternity
(the Self). The “influence of the senses” on “most men” is such that it
overpowers “the mind” and makes the obstacles of time and space
appear real and insuperable. It would be madness to allow oneself to
be hindered by “these limits” (W, II, 272). The scale of the soul is one,
and the senses and understanding have quite another scale (W, II, 273).
This limitation, though ordained, gives way if there is constant struggle
to overpower it.
In the essay “The Transcendentalist” we find that the idealist
knows the secret of the senses. He affirms facts untouched by “the
illusions of sense.” These are the facts which can be discerned only
through “a retirement from the senses” (W, 1,330). The materialist, on
the contrary, leads a life only at the level of the senses. He makes fun
of the idealist and calls him a star-gazer or a dreamer. But Emerson
says it is easy to make him aware that he, too, is a phantom living
among phantoms (W, I, 331).

127
 The secret of the senses is given in the Gita in chapter V. It is
pointed out that the man having knowledge of the reality of “things”
on account of his alertness knows that “in seeing, hearing, touching,
smelling, eating, moving, sleeping, breathing, talking, quitting, taking,
opening and closing his eyes he doeth nothing.” Only his “faculties”
are “employed in their several objects” (C.W. 58, V, 8, 9). The reality
lies underneath the life of senses. Interestingly, here we find in the
Gita a close proximity to Emerson’s description of the life of senses
discussed in the preceding second last paragraph. We have noted that
(in Emerson) eating, drinking, planting, counting man does not in fact
represent himself. The senses in the Gita subject man to a transitory
experience (of time and space in Emerson). They acquaint him with
heat and cold, pleasure and pain but this experience is “transient and
inconstant” (C.W. 36, II, 14). It hides the Self behind it. The senses
produce affection or dislike. The wise man knows both these to be his
“opponents” (C.W. 48, III, 34). The individual is attracted or bewildered
because of different sensibilities which oppose each other (C.W. 72,
VII, 27).
Senses in Emerson and in the Gita create an illusion of reality
and prevent man from knowing the ultimate reality. In the essay
“Illusions” Emerson points out that among mankind he finds “victims
of illusion” in all stages of life. The life of illusion begins with
childhood, and continues through youth, adulthood and old age. The
young and the old alike, all are moved by one illusion or another (W,
VI, 313). Nature affords illusions according to persons. Nature affords
a fine bait to deceive an intellectual and has something to amuse and
dupe a sot, too. Illusion deceives even the performer of the miracle and
the elect are no exception to it (W, VI, 319, 20) Illusion engulfs all.
Emerson himself was no exception. He confesses in “Circles” that he

128
has infirm faith, and his will is not strenuous. He is God in nature and
he is a weed beside the wall (W, II, 307). In “Experience” he complains
that life is a continuation of moods. As we pass through these moods,
they are like lenses of various colours painting the world in their own
way (W, III, 50). The climax of the life of illusions is reached when
Emerson says that the individual is always mistaken. He gets quite the
contrary of what he expects (W, III, 70).
Behind the life of illusion there is the reality with no disunity in
it. Emerson praises the Hindus for their perception of this essential
unity of the universe. He also admires them for regarding variety as
illusion. He praises them also for their belief that blessedness of man
lies “in being freed from fascination” of illusion (W, VI, 324). He
appreciates that they believe that the notions of ‘I am’ and ‘This is
mine’ are caused by Maya (W, VI, 324). It seems (to me that) the life
of illusion is a kind of test for human beings since the law of
Compensation also operates simultaneously with it (W, VI, 322) (even
if the individuals labour under illusion). This inference is strengthened
by the fact that the illusion is created by the Self. In his essay “Illusions”
Emerson makes this point very clear. He tells us that “fascinations”
have a very long chapter. “Great is paint; nay God is the painter” (W,
VI, 313). He describes the illusive power of the Self thus: “At the top
or at the bottom of all illusions, I set the cheat which still leads us to
work and live for appearances” (W, VI, 323). This cheat in Emerson is
the supernatural power of Krishna in the Gita.
In the Gita we find that the life of illusion is created by the Self.
The Self remains hidden behind the illusion created by it. Krishna points
out that he is not visible to all, because he is “concealed by the
supernatural power” that is in him (C.W., 72, VII, 25). This power is
yogmaya, the illusion. The idea of illusion as fascination occurs in

129
chapter VII. It is pointed out that all human beings become subject to
the contrary sensations of love and hatred (affection and dislike) right
from birth and consequently are “fascinated or perplexed.” They obtain
full knowledge of the reality of the universe only on “being freed from
the fascination” which arises from these “contending passions” (C.W.
72, VII, 27, 28). It is interesting to note here that the phrase “being
freed from the fascination” here in the Gita is available as “being freed
from fascination” in Emerson (W, VI, 324) with the single omission of
the article ‘the.’ This similarity of description of a situation in life in
Emerson and in the Gita is not the only indication at this point that,
perhaps, the phrase comes from the Gita. Emerson’s praise for the
Hindus in this particular context also points to it.
The idea in Emerson that the human mind keeps moving from
one thought to another is implied in the theory of the illusion created
by the three qualities of nature operating on man in the Gita but it is
also separately presented in chapter VI. Arjuna describes mind as strong,
stubborn, turbulent and unsteady by nature and unrestrainable like wind.
Krishna adds that it is difficult to confine it (C.W. 66, VI, 34, 35). The
three qualities of nature, the Sattwa (truth and goodness), Rajas (passion
and materialism), and Tamas (dulness and melancholy) keep human
mind occupied in turns at all times. At a given time one quality or the
other exclusively exercises its influence and determines human
behaviour. The “influence of these qualities” bewilders the whole world
(C.W. 70, VII, 13). This illusion is hard to overpower since it belongs
to the Self: “This my divine and supernatural power ... is hard to be
overcome” (C.W. 70, VII, 14). In heaven or on earth, among the gods
and the human beings, there is none, except the Self, who is unaffected
by the influence of these three qualities (which create illusion) (C.W.
130, XVIII, 40).

130
 At a particular, time one may be busy doing good to others, or
doing good to himself by seeking material gain and physical pleasure
or one may just be ignorant, lethargic and inactive. In chapter III in
this thesis we have discussed the influence of the three qualities in
some detail. Discussing the idea of illusion in the Gita, it has also to be
noted that even if the human beings are working under an illusion
(created by the three qualities of nature) they are subject to the law of
Karma. It seems to be a test for them since the Self is behind the illusion.
(When one overpowers the three qualities of nature one becomes
acquainted with the Self and is also, in course of time, liberated from
the cycle of birth and death on earth.)
In “Experience” we have a parallel situation to compare to the
one we have just discussed. Emerson points out that though “it is our
constitutional necessity” that we see “things under private aspects, or
saturated with our humors,” God is “yet” the “native of these bleak
rocks” (W, III, 81). God is the mystery behind private behaviour. The
bleak rocks of our behaviour here refers to the separation inflicted by
illusion in nature between the human and the divine. In the Gita these
bleak rocks are the influence of the three qualities of nature operating
on man at all times with the Self concealed underneath. The concept of
the human quality of subjectiveness which is one of the seven lords of
life in “Experience” (discussed in this thesis in chapter II) comes very
close to the idea of the influence of the three qualities of nature on man
in the Gita.
On comparing the idea of illusion in Emerson with that in the
Gita we come upon the following similarities of perception. First, the
Self is the creator of illusion. Second, illusion is very powerful and
engulfs and bewilders all mankind. Third, the law of Compensation or
Karma remains in force despite mankind being under nature’s illusion.

131
And fourth, the Self is concealed behind illusion. As for the
dissimilarities, in Emerson we find no mechanical categorization of
illusion (into three parts). In “Experience,” no doubt, Emerson has
tried to describe the power of nature under the seven lords of life,
which categorization is similar to the mechanical categorization of
illusion in the Gita. And there is also no promise of liberation from the
cycle of birth and death for those who overpower illusion. We may add
here that one striking similarity regarding the supposed purpose of
illusion in Emerson and in the Gita is, perhaps, that it tests and
disciplines mankind.'About illusion in Emerson Carpenter points out
in his book Emerson and Asia: “Experience of the illusions of reality
disciplines man to the understanding of the true meaning of life"6.
About the influence of the Hindu philosophy of illusion on
Emerson's concept of illusion Carpenter says that its one indication is
“the frequency with which he mentions Maia, the Hindu goddess of
illusion in this connection” in his writings7. Carpenter adds: “As in his
later essays, so in his later journals, the Hindu doctrine of Illusions is
often considered”8. According to Christy, “one of the first principles
in Hindu thought to attract Emerson was that of Maya. Much in his
own philosophy approximated the Hindus concept”9. Christy adds: “He
called his own thoughts the doctrine of illusion, but he recognized
their resemblance to Maya, and he admitted that the Hindus had treated
the subject with the greatest catholicity.”10 The Hindu doctrine of Maya
“found a large place” in his “thought”11.
In the Gita, as we have noted already, the illusion created by the
three qualities of nature is the yogmaya, ‘the supernatural power’ of
Krishna. The exact verse referring to it may be examined here:
daivi hy esa gunamayi
mama maya duratyaya

132
 mam evaye prapadyante
t

mayam etam taranti te (VII, 14)

This divine maya of Mine, consisting of the modes [three
qualities of nature] is hard to overcome. But those who
take refuge in Me alone cross beyond it.
In the ‘Notes’ to the chapter VIII of the Gita Charles Wilkins explaining
the Hindu concept of creation refers to a metaphysical work which
X 1 r

represents God as Maha-Pooroosh, the great man or prime progenitor,

and Prakreetee, nature or first principle, as a female. God in conjunction
with Prakreetee creates the world with his “Maya or supernatural
power” (C.W. 142). The Self created the world (of illusion) with his
Maya. The illusion itself is Maya, we have already noted. The point to
be noted here is that the word Maya occurs in Charles Wilkin's
translation of the Gita, the book so much liked and read by Emerson.
The concept of illusion is the basis of the philosophy of Emerson
and that of the Gita. About Emerson it is also said that the “concept is
so close, so native to all his thinking that it seems to him to be a fixed
rule and theory of life.”12 In the Gita overpowering of illusion is essential
for a union with the Self: “When the soul hath surpassed these three
qualities” it is liberated from birth and death, old age and pain, and
becomes immortal through its union with the Self (C.W. 109, XIV,
20). It seems Emerson was influenced by the concept of illusion in the
Gita. Our comparisons of the similarities in thinking on this point
indicate this. It may, however, be remembered here that Emerson
became familiar with the idea of illusion through his study of Vishnu
Purana and the Upanishads, too, which works might have helped him
in understanding the concept fully.
In our times, too, the Hindus in general continue to believe that
life in the world is unreal and is a mere illusion. It is God’s sport, his

133
‘Leela’. The illusion of this ‘Leela’ is, however, so immense that they
are confused between God and the gods, and they believe there are as
many as thirty three crore gods and each god has his own heaven
exclusively designed for his worshippers. There are goddesses, too,
dwelling in conjugal relationship with these gods. The Gita, however,
describes these gods to be subject to illusion as the human beings
are.The Hindus it seems have ignored for the most part this assertion
in the Gita and continue the worship of gods of their choice. It may be
noted that the Gita makes no mention of any goddesses. The Gita
stresses the worship of one God, who is supreme.
The next limitation on man's freedom to decide his fate (common
in Emerson and in the Gita) arises from his constitution in nature. Each
individual on earth has a unique constitution (mental and physical
make-up) given to him by nature. Emerson sees its origin in the divine
plan of the Self and in the Gita, it seems, it is partly the divine will and
partly the result of the deeds of the individual in the previous lives.
The constitution of an individual decides the role he is supposed
to play in this world. In “Self-Reliance” Emerson speaks of the “divine
idea” represented by each of us (W, II, 46,47). In everybody's life, he
tells us, there comes a time when he realizes that to be envious is to be
ignorant and to imitate is to commit suicide and that he himself carries
for better or worse “his portion” (W, II, 46). One must trust oneself,
one's constitution, one’s portion, to be successful and happy in life.
Emerson says: “Trust thyself.” For himself he says that the only right
is what is after his constitution and the only wrong what is against it
(W, II, 50).
The constitution is designed to suit the particular environment
in which the individual is placed. He is given his plot of ground to till
(W, II, 46). This point is elaborated. He is impressed much by one

134
face, character or fact but not by another. His memory is carved in
relation to his future (W, II, 46). The course of action in these
circumstances is explicit. He must accept the place “the divine
providence” has decided for him through the society of his
contemporaries and events that he will face in life (W, II, 47). The
divinely ordained role for each is “the transcendent destiny” and must
be accepted (W, II, 47)
In “Spiritual Laws” Emerson points out that everyone is given
his vocation. It lies in his talent (W, II, 140). There is a side in his life
where there is an open space for him to go. His “faculties” guide him
quietly to that direction to do his best there (W, II, 140). It is also
suggested in this essay that the Self incarnates itself in each individual
with a unique job to perform. The talent and the call of vocation in the
individual is determined by “his organization, or the mode” adopted
by the general soul (in all cases) for incarnation in him (W, II, 141).
The course of action chosen according to the constitution will decide
the right and the good for the individual, and “the state or circumstance”
(which also limits his freedom but is) suitable to his constitution will
be heaven for him (W, II, 140). In the essay “Illusions” it is pointed out
that the people who attain distinction in this world have the knack of
using a “certain fate in their constitution” (W, VI, 317).
Temperament and subjectiveness are two limitations of a
constitution. In “Experience” Emerson calls temperament (with
negative qualities) the veto or limitation power in the constitution (W,
III, 54). Bad temperament may disturb altogether man’s connection
with the Self (W, III, 52). As for subjectiveness, one sees as one is (W,
III, 79). Subjectiveness, as noted earlier, is the “constitutional necessity”
of human beings and under its influence things are seen privately and
f>

the result is that every good or evil thing is the individual’s own

135
“shadow” and his vision becomes distorted (W, III, 76). Temperament
and subjectiveness are the factors which alienate man from the Self.
The concept of the individual human constitution is formally
introduced in the Gita in chapter IV. The entire human population is
divided into four broad categories or types (Brahmins, Kshatriya,
Vaishya and Sudra). Krishna says that in his creation of entire mankind
he brought forth four types of people whose “principles” and “duties”
distinguished them from one another (C. W. 52, IV, 13). The four kinds
of people are mentioned along with their duties in chapter XVIII. (In
chapter III in this thesis we have discussed these duties.) It is added
that the duties of these four kinds of people are according to “the
qualities which are in their constitutions” (C.W. 130, XVIII, 41). In
chapter VIII the peculiarity of the individual human make-up is referred
to as “Adhee-atma”, which is “Swabhab or particular constitution,
disposition, quality or nature” (C.W. 73, VIII, 3). It is born with man.
It has been strongly recommended in the Gita that, in one's own
interest, one ought to faithfully perform the duty decided by one's
constitution. One-would attain “perfection” if one accepts
uncomplainingly one’s “particular lot and duty” (C.W. 130, XVIII, 45).
In chapter II Krishna draws Arjuna's attention “towards the duties" of
his “particular tribe” (the Kshatriya). He tells him that if he did not
“perform the duty” of his “calling” he would make himself guilty of “a
crime” (C.W. 38, II, 33).
It is not explained in the Gita why a particular individual
constitution belongs to one of the four types. However, once the
individual is bom into one of the four types he becomes subject to the
influence of the three qualities of nature. According to his subjectiveness
(his susceptibility to the influence of these qualities) his temperament
is determined. He may become self-controlled and noble, or passionate

136
and hyper-active, or lethargic and melancholic, etc. Even the faith of
the individual is to be “produced from the constitution” under the
influence of the three qualities of nature (C.W. 119, XVII, 3). The sum-
total of the individual's constitution is carried forward by the individual
soul in course of its subsequent births. According to the deeds of the
individual his constitution either improves and becomes subject to
favourable destiny or deteriorates and remains confined to the evil end.
The force of character is thus cumulative in the Gita. Krishna tells
Arjuna that even if he refuses to fight in the battle principles of his
nature will make him fight. The duties of his natural calling will confine
him to action and he “will involuntarily do that from necessity,” which
he wants to avoid due to ignorance (C.W. 132, XVIII, 60). So
constitution has a cumulative power in the Gita.
From our discussion of the human constitution in Emerson and
in the Gita we find the following conceptual similarities. First, each
individual in nature obtains a particular constitution at his birth. Second,
it is in the interest of the individual to choose his calling according to
the inclination present in his constitution. Third, the individual's
temperament may carry certain defects or qualities in life, which become
part of his constitution. Fourth, the individual's susceptibility to different
influences in society has a bearing on his present and future. Fifth, the
character of a person has a cumulative force and it affects the
constitution. Emerson says: “the force of character is cumulative. All
the forgone days of virtue work their health into this” (W, II, 59). Fifth,
the Self is the author of the constitution one obtains at birth.
One important point about constitution, in Emerson and in the
Gita, requires a separate consideration. It is that one ought to follow
one's own constitution and should not imitate others in one's work.
Emerson says in “Self-Reliance” that we should insist on ourselves

137
 r

and never imitate. We can present our gifts at all times with the force
accumulated in us in all our life but “an adopted talent of another” will
lead us nowhere (W, II, 83). In the Gita in chapter XVIII Krishna points
out: “The duties of a man's own particular calling” even if “not free
from faults”, are far better for pursuit than the duties of another,
howsoever well-pursued they might be (C.W. 131, XVIII, 47). The
following words from “Self-Reliance” seem to be complementary to
the above admonition: “Do that which is assigned you, and you cannot
hope too much or dare too much” (W, II, 83).
As for the dissimilarities of perception, they are very obvious.
Emerson would not talk of transmigration nor would he divide mankind
into four types. He views the law of Karma with respect to only the
present life time. To him virtue or vice breathe in us every moment (W,
II, 58).
Next limitation faced by mankind, common in Emerson and in
the Gita, is that human life is generally full of sorrows and difficulties.
In “Experience” Emerson remarks that every house seems to us to be a
place of happiness until we come to know about it. We find “tragedy”
around us. We come across sorrowful women and cruel husbands. The
people ask for news as if all the time they have no good news (W, III,
47). Further, in “Fate” he tells us that nature is not a sentimentalist.
The elements, diseases, fortune, gravity, lightning have no respect for
persons. The earthquakes kill men indiscriminately. Then there are
alterations of climate. He concludes this point with the idea that
Providence uses “a wild, rough road” to achieve its aims (W, VI, 7, 8).
In the Gita the world is described as “the finite mansion of pain and
sorrow” (C.W. 75, VIII, 15). In chapter IX again Krishna calls this
world “a finite and joyless place” (C.W. 82, IX, 33) Here while
comparing the two positions on life, it becomes clear that the Gita

138
paints a darker picture of life. This too much emphasis on the seamy
r

side of life can, however, be explained in the light of the declared aim
of the Gita, which is to prepare people for a liberation from the cycle
of birth and death on earth. Nevertheless, it is a pessimistic response to
the limiting circumstance in life. This pessimism of the Gita is visible
in the day to day life of Indian people even today. The injunction of the
Gita that one should work without the desire for a reward may be partly
responsible for it. When we look for nothing in return for our efforts
except the bliss imagined to be available in the inscrutable Self our
zest for fruitful work may dwindle away and we may consequently
lose interest in life. There is, however, it seems, in this philosophy a
possibility of infinite zest for life, too, provided people are enlightened
enough to understand it in the right spirit. This possibility is hinted at
in the point which follows. Our limitations can become our strengths.
Next limitation for human beings in nature (in Emerson and in
the Gita) is that the soul of the Self is eternally bound to the human life
through the human bodies and is destined for an eternal interaction
with matter. In Emerson we find that “matter and mind are in perpetual
tilt and balance” (W, VI, 43). Man has to use his thought (originating
in the Self) to tackle the forces in nature (W, VI, 19). Man learns to
deal with nature through experience (W, VI, 19-20). In the Gita the life
is made up of a combination of Prakreetee (nature) and Pooroosh (the
Self), both of which are beginningless. The progress of man in nature
is actually the progress of the Self. The “various component parts of
matter and their qualities are co-existent with Prakreetee” (C.W. 104,
XIII, 19). With the interaction between the Self (in man) and nature,
the experience of pain and pleasure comes into being. The Pooroosh is
that principle which is operational in the sensation of pain and pleasure.
The point is further clarified: “The Pooroosh resideth in the Prakreetee

139
and partaketh of those qualities which proceed from the Prakreetee”
(C. W. 104, XIII, 20,21). It is pointed out to make the idea more obvious
that everything in nature, animate or inanimate is produced from a
union of “matter” (Prakreetee) and “spirit” (the Self) (C.W. 105, XIII,
26). It is the Self in us that lives on in us. The following lines from
“Fate” are complementary to our discussion on this point:
On one side elemental order, sandstone and granite,
rockledges, peat-bog, forest, sea and shore; and on the
other part thought, the spirit which composes and
decomposes nature, here they are, side by side, god and
devil, mind and matter, king and conspirator, belt and
spasm, riding peacefully together in the eye and brain of
everyman” (W, VI, 22, 23).
From here onwards we shall take into consideration those human
limitations for which (it seems) human beings themselves are directly
responsible. In a way we discuss now human weaknesses as identified
in Emerson and in the Gita and which indicate common perception.
First in this series comes the mental unrest of man. In Emerson this
surfaces in the human habit of travelling for amusement and change of
mood. Such travelling he believes is a fool's paradise. One is in ruins
within and moves from ruins to ruins (W, II, 81). In the Gita this
limitation is anticipated. The man dear to Krishna is one having an
undistracted mind. He neither rejoices nor finds fault and he is “pleased
with whatever cometh to pass.” He has a steady mind (C.W. 100, XII,
16, 17, 19).
Second, cowardice and indifference to the needs of the present
are seen as two major limitations of man. In “Self-Reliance” Emerson
complains that man is cowardly and apologetic. He has no courage to
say that he thinks that he exists (W, II, 67). He ignores his present and

140
lives in the past or future (W, II, 67). In the Gita the very context in
which Krishna happens to advise Arjuna stresses the undesirability of
cowardly indifference to need of the hour. The comparison here is more
symbolic than literal. Krishna tells Arjuna that his flight from the
battlefield will make him detestable, even among those by whom he
was to be respected. It will be seen as occasioned by fear (C.W. 38, II,
35). In chapter II Krishna emphasising the present tells Arjuna that for
a human being only his present is important (C.W. 37, II, 28).
Next, lack of faith in the Self is regarded as a weakness and a
source of trouble. If one has no faith in the Self one cannot be happy or
successful. In “Compensation” Emerson regrets that we lack faith in
the power of the soul. We do not believe it to be properly eternal and
omnipresent (W, II, 125). He emphasises that our faithful love for the
Self can rid us of “a vast load of care.” He exclaims: “O my brothers,
God exists.” Nature has at its centre a soul (W, II, 139). He concludes
this point with the suggestion that everything around us teaches us
faith (W, II, 139). In the Gita the man lacking faith in the Self is regarded
as lacking reason (C.W. 48, III, 32). In chapter IV it is declared that the
man with a doubtful mind, having a wavering faith in the Self, can
neither enjoy this world nor that which is above. He will have no
“happiness” (C.W. 56, IV, 40).
Attachment to society and its ways of thinking and behaving is
seen as another human weakness causing trouble. In “Self-Reliance”
Emerson asks us not to live according to the wishes of people since
they are deceived and they deceive. We need even to keep off our family
members, father, mother, wife, brother, and friends. By paying attention
to the prejudices of others we give them a chance to annoy us. We have
to remember that no man can come near us “but through” our “act”
(W, II, 72). Emerson names this weakness of paying attention to society

141
as conformity.
In the Gita in chapter XII Krishna defines wisdom as “exemption
from attachments and affection for children, wife and home” (C.W.
102, XIII, 8,9). As regards one's attitude to society, one ought to guard
against its influence. In chapter XII the man dear to Krishna is he who
is “the same in friendship and in hatred, in honour and dishonour.” To
him “praise and blame are as one” (C.W. 100, XII, 18, 19). Society in
Emerson and in the Gita is seen as exercising a weakening influence
on the development of the individual.
Too much reverence and regard for great men or books is seen as
yet another drawback of man. In “Circles” Emerson remarks that he
knows and sees very well the limitations of people known as great and
worthy of regard (W, II, 307). He adds that we lose interest in others
when we become aware of their “limitations” (W, II, 308). In “Self-
Reliance” he calls upon us to rebel against the intrusion of men, books
and institutions (W, II, 71). In the Gita the people of the time are advised
to stop paying excessive attention to the gods and the Vedas. The gods
are reported as having heavens which can't liberate mankind from the
cycle of birth and death and rather, they perpetuate it. The gods
themselves are, unlike Krishna, subject to the influence of the three
qualities of nature just as the human beings are (C.W. 130, XVIII, 40).
The Vedas, too, can't provide liberation. They deal with the objects of
the senses. In chapter III in this thesis we have discussed these points
in some detail. In chapter X Krishna shows Arjuna his expanded form
and declares that the Vedas or sacrifices to gods could not make that
sight of him possibleto Arjuna or anyone else (C.W. 96, XI, 47,48). In
Emerson and in the Gita the individual is advised to make a first hand
approach to the Self. Here, it may be noted that the gods in the Gita
seem to be doing what the great men do in Emerson, i.e. they make the

142
individual traditional and imitative. They limit the scope of individual
initiative. The Self in man would be available to him when the
roadblocks of traditionalism and imitation are removed. It may,
however, be remembered that the company of spiritual people is
recommended in Emerson and in the Gita both. This point is explained
in the discussion of the liberating Self in this chapter.
The established religion is still another limitation for human
beings in their search for happiness and success in life. Emerson notes
two defects of historical Christianity. The first is the exaggerated
position of authority given to Christ and the second is the treatment of
revelation as given in olden times and finished as if God, the Self,
were not alive now (W, I, 130). Emerson believes that the established
religion gives the individual too little importance. His “philosophy was
a reaction against Unitarianism, which had too low an opinion of human
nature”13. He “taught” a “universal religion above names and dates
and places, and beyond creed, race and colour.”14 In the times of the
Gita the established religion of the time was represented by the gods
and the Vedas. The Gita castigates it in a way which is little short of a
direct attack. The Vedas and the gods, as we have noted, are disparaged
beyond repair. At the end Krishna advises Arjuna to give up all forms
of the established religion and turn to him: “Forsake every other religion
and fly to me alone” (C.W. 133, XVIII, 66)
Next, in Emerson and in the Gita, we find a close proximity in
thought regarding evil as a limitation of mankind. Emerson believes
that evil has no essence. It is man-made and does not actually exist as
a force. In the traditional Christianity, however, it is a recognizable
force represented by Satan who has got a (supposedly) perceptible
personality for ever to be seen as working through the misdeeds of the
evil-doers. Satan is the eternal opponent of God leading mankind away

143
from him in revenge for the special status given by him to his Son in
heaven. In “Experience” Emerson calls evil “shade, absence of light,
and no essence” (W, III, 79). In “Fate” he even calls it good in the
making (W, VI, 35). (In chapter II in this thesis we have discussed this
point in detail.) Evil is a shortcoming resulting from the interaction
between matter and spirit. It is absence of knowledge and wisdom. In
the Gita, too, it is so. Evil has no essential existence. It is only part of
the illusion created by the three qualities of nature. As soon as one
steers clear of the influence of the these qualities, one is free from evil.
One is united with the Self. This point is explained in the discussion
relating to the liberating Self in this chapter. The unreality of evil as a
force is stressed in the Gita. It is made clear tht evil has scope for
becoming good. If anyone who has always been an evil doer turns to
Krishna, “he is as respectable as the just man.” He soon becomes
virtuous and obtains eternal happiness (C.W. 82, IX, 30, 31). In
Christianity man is sinful from the beginning. Adam, the first man,
disobeyed God and became subject to sin and death. His descendants,
without exception, carry a body which is the product of the original
sin. Jesus, the son of God incarnated himself as a man and atoned for
the sins of man by sacrificing his life. Man, however, continues to be
sinful and can hope to be saved by Jesus on the day ofjudgement when
the whole world will come to an end.
At the end of our discussion of the limitations faced by human
beings in this world we may discuss the idea of transmigration of souls.
In the Gita it is treated as inevitable and real. It occurs in almost every
individual case because the individual has not tried sincerely to avoid
it. We have discussed this point in detail in chapter III in this thesis. In
Emerson the idea is left vague and open to conjecture. In “History” he
remarks that “transmigration is no fable. I would it were” (W, II, 32).

144
According to Christy this doctrine “cannot be regarded as a matter of
belief in Emerson.” He “played with it both seriously and
humorously.”15 Emerson, however, believes that the soul of the Self
moves onward incarnating itself in the succeeding generations of
mankind and is eternally bound to the humans. However, in his
published work it is not indicated “that he ever considered” how “the
soul is incarnated into new forms.”16 Emerson believes like the Gita
that the Self is present in everything that exists. To Emerson the
evolution is “a symbol of upward march of the soul.”17 In the Gita this
is implied (The Self is eternal). The soul moves forward through the
transmigrational process.
In Emerson and in the Gita the Self is all knowing and knows
what it ought to do next or what has happened in the past.In the Gita in
chapter IV Krishna tells Arjuna that in former times he had given the
philosophy of the Gita to Veevashwat who had handed it to Manoo
and Manoo gave it Eekshwakoo and thus passing from one to another
then came a time when it was lost. And now it was Arjuna’s turn to
¥

receive it. When Arjuna questions him that Eekshwakoo was born long
before he (Krishna) was born and how it became possible for him to
preach his doctrine even before him, Krishna answers that both of them
(he and Arjuna) have passed through many births. He clarifies to Arjuna:
“Mine are known unto me; but thou knowest not thine” (C.W. 51, IV,
1 -5). In the essay “Swedenborg” Emerson suggests a similar perception:
The soul having been often born, or, as the Hindus say
travelling the path of existence through thousands of birth
having beheld the things which are here, those which are
in heaven and those which are beneath, there is nothing of
r

which she has not gained the knowledge: no wonder that

she is able to recollect, in regard to any one thing, what

145
 formerly she knew (W, IV, 95, 96).
Incidentally Krishna knows what he formerly knew and taught to
Veevashwat. It looks probable that, perhaps, Emerson had Krishna in
his mind when he wrote the above words.
We shall now discuss the idea of Self in Emerson and in the Gita
and explore the conceptual nearness and distance. Self in both cases
seems to offer panacea for all human ills. It seems it seeks to liberate
human beings from all their troubles that come in their way. In “Self-
Reliance” Emerson calls it “the aboriginal Self” holding out the promise
of a universal reliance on it (W, II, 63). In the Gita this reliance on the
Self is called “divine dependance”. It is pointed out that a man who
has “this confidence in the Supreme” does not go astray (C.W., 43, II,
72). The phrase “divine dependance” in the Gita comes very close to
the phrase “self-reliance” in Emerson. It seems very probable,
considering the similarities of perception, that Emerson, perhaps, took
a hint for his phrase self-reliance from this phrase in the Gita. The
possibility of Emerson having read Charles Wilkins’ Gita before writing
“Self-Reliance” is discussed in chapter V of this thesis.
The Self is within the individual and is thus accessible to all.
The individual has to learn to let it act through him and solve his
problems. In “Self-Reliance” Emerson points out that talking of self-
reliance is an inadequate way of saying it. We should rather talk about
the Self, “that which relies because it works and is” (W, II, 69,70). We
are not to rely on the Self, rather we have to make ourselves worthy of
reliance by the Self. The Self should rely on us. Self-reliance in this
way becomes Self-obedience or obedience to the Self. In the Gita the
idea is made very explicit. The Self, Eeshwar, is in the heart of every
living being and moves all things with his supernatural power. And we
should take shelter only with him always (C.W. 133, XVIII, 61, 62).

146
This means obedience to the Self at all times.
One important aspect of the philosophy of Self in Emerson and
in the Gita is that (in respect of both) preaching and teaching is the
basic aim. About Emerson it is pointed out: “The teacher is always
about to be the preacher; the lecture or the essay is never far from
being the sermon.”18 About the Gita it is said: “It is a book conveying
lessons of philosophy, religion and ethics.”19 Consequently, in Emerson
and in the Gita we find a devotional attitude to the Self, committed to
justifying the ways of the Self to man.
Before I proceed further, a brief analysis of style and language
in Emerson and in the Gita will be in order. Emerson writes in a simple,
conversational sty le which addresses the reader or the audience directly.
In the Gita, too, the style is conversational though the conversation
with all its philosophical complexity takes place mainly between two
characters in the epic of Mahabharata. The presentation of ideas has a
dramatic element in it. The technique followed is that of each question
being followed by an answer. There is a continuous repetition of many
ideas throughout. The hearer or the reader is always in the mind of the
author.
In Emerson, too, ideas are repeated off and on. Emerson has,
however, the knack of saying the same or similar things with the help
of many different words and sentences. There is a continued zest in the
writing throughout which is imperceptibly transferred to the reader,
too. The Gita, too, carries an atmosphere of zeal which catches the
reader instantly. Charles Wilkins (whose translation was Emerson’s
favourite) deserves praise for his easy to understand rendering of the
Gita. The repetition of ideas in Emerson and in Gita can be understood
t

better in the light of the commitment in both to preaching and teaching

the philosophy of the Self.

147
 As already noted in chapter II of this thesis, Emerson’s sentences
in his paragraphs and his paragraphs in his essays, on the whole, do
not seem to be written according to any logical order. His themes in his
essays do not appear to have been handled through a well-ordered
structure. Perhaps, because of this quality of his writings, some critics
believe he has no philosophy of life to present to his reader. George
Santayana remarks : “At bottom he had no doctrine at all. The deeper
he went and more he tried to grapple with fundamental conceptions,
the vaguer and more elusive they became in his hands.”20 To say that
Emerson had no philosophy at all seems to be very unfair. This thesis
rather seeks to take a comprehensive view of it.
In the Gita, too, as also noted in the preceding chapter (of this
thesis), it seems, chapters have not been written systematically. The
thought does not seem to follow in an orderly way through different
verses. Each chapter seems to be lacking in unity and coherence and
one does not get the impression of a systematic philosophy. There are
critics who condemn this style severely. Prem Nath Bazaz observes:
“But the Gita doctrine is neither integration of different philosophies,
nor synthesisation of diverse faiths. It only creates a bizzare amalgam.”21
Bazaz believes that the author of the Gita jumps from “one topic to
another” and is unable “to make a point or evolve a formula” and, as a
result, “lands himself into innumerable contradictions and
inconsistencies.”22 This, however, seems too much of criticism, though
Bazaz may be right to a certain extent. The scope of this thesis does
not, however, permit me to go any further into this aspect of the style
in the Gita. In Emerson and in the Gita, it seems, the unsystematic
approach (as it appears to the critics) may have sprung from the very
subject they deal with, i.e. the mysteries of the universe. And it looks
almost impossible for anyone to give (perfectly) logical explanations

148
for them. The style in both cases then (it seems) has got to be discursive.
Emerson’s prose, as also noted in chapter II of this thesis, has a
poetic quality. It seems poetic in appearance and effect. It is beautiful,
elegant prose, and the images it creates seem highly appealing and
imaginative. In the Gita, too, (here)in Wilkins’ translation, we come
upon beautiful phrases making the prose look poetic in quality. I have
chosen two passages, one each from Emerson and the Gita, for
comparison of the poetic quality of prose in them and also for a
discussion of other stylistic features notable in them. We not only find
similarities in style, we also find similarity of thought. The first passage
comes from Emerson’s “Self-Reliance,” while the second passsage is
from chapter II in the Gita:
What I must do is all that concerns me, not what the people
think. This rule, equally arduous in actual and in intellectual
life, may serve for the whole distinction between greatness
and meanness. It is the harder because you will always
find those who think they know what is your duty better
than you know it. It is easy in the world to live after the
world’s opinion; and it is easy in solitude to live after our
own [as a misguided Sannyasi does in the Gita]; but the
great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps with
perfect sweetness the independence of solitude (W, II, 53-
54). (This also seems to be the main lesson in the Gita.)

A man is said to be confirmed in wisdom, when he

forsaketh every desire [may be even to please others] which
entereth into his heart, and of himself is happy, and
r

contented in himself. His mind is undisturbed in adversity

[even when people might find fault with him], he is happy

149
 and contented in prosperity, and he is a stranger to anxiety,
fear, and anger [experienced while dealing with others].
Such a wise man is called Moonee. The wisdom of that
man is established, who in all things is without affection;
and having received good or evil, neither rejoiceth at the
one, nor is cast down by the other. His wisdom is confirmed,
when like the tortoise, he can draw in all his members [this
may refer to the independence of solitude in Emerson],
and refrain them from their wonted purposes. The hungry
man loseth every other object but the gratification of his
appetite, and when he is become acquainted with the
Supreme, he loseth even that. The tumultuous senses hurry
away, by force, the heart even of the wise man who striveth
to restrain them. The inspired man, trusting in me, may
quell them and be happy. The man, who hath his passions
in subjection, is possesed of true wisdom (C.W.41-42)
(Besidescarrying the central idea of the Gita, this passage
seems to remind us of Emerson’s philosophy of Self-
reliance.)
In respect of their language and style, these two passages seem to be
the work of the same author. The word-order and the syntax in both
seems to illustrate the poetic quality of the prose in them. We can now
examine the two passages rather closely. Both make use of a particular
kind of superlatives. Emerson uses the words like- all, equally, whole,
always, perfect. In the passage from the Gita we find- every, all, all,
every, Supreme, true. All of these words are very frequently used in
Emerson. Next, we find value-based superlative phrases used in both
passages (which additionally seem to carry poetic emphasis in them).
In Emerson we find the phrases like- all that concerns me, the whole

150
distinction, greatness and meanness, the world’s opinion, great man,
the crowd, perfect sweetness, independence of solitude. To match these
expressions, in the Gita we come upon the phrases like- confirmed in
wisdom, happy and contented in himself, undisturbed in adversity,
happy and contented in prosperity, a stranger to anxiety, fear and anger,
r

without affection, every other object, acquainted with the Supreme,

possessed of true wisdom.
Next, in both we find expressions denoting dogma and authority.
In Emerson the notable examples are-1 must do, This rule, may serve
for the whole distinction, It is the harder, you will always find, It is
easy. In the Gita to match these expressions we find: A man is said to
be, Such a man, The wisdom of that man, His wisdom is, he can draw,
The hungry man loses every other object but, may quell them and be
happy, is possessed of true wisdom. Further, in both we find some
words used with their possible antonyms. In Emerson I is constrasted
r

with people, actual with intellectual (in this particular context),

greatness with meanness, arduous, the harder with the better and easy,
the world’s with our own, and finally, the crowd is contrasted with
solitude. In the Gita we find the contrast between adversity and
prosperity, and (between) good and evil. In addition, Rejoiceth is
contrasted with cast down.
Further, we find (rather interestingly) Emerson uses the word
‘you’ in this passage for his reader, while Krishna in the Gita, who is
speaking to Arjuna, instead of ‘you’ uses the word ‘he’ to make his
point clear. The object of the speakers in these two passages is to
persuade and coax the reader or the hearer to strive to become ‘the
great man’ (in Emerson) and the ‘wise man’ (in the Gita). This
comparison of style and language brings the prose written in Emerson
very close to that in the Gita. I have no observation to make and no

151
conclusion to draw at this particular point in our discussion except that
the prose style in Emerson and in Wilkins’ translation of the Gita is
very similar. I leave the rest to inference. We can now move to the
discussion of the concept of Self in Emerson and in the Gita.
To understand and compare the concept of the Self in Emerson
and in the Gita it may be useful to find answers to the following three
questions: What is the Self? When would the Self liberate (help) the
man in trouble? (and) How would it liberate?
First, what constitutes the Self? The incomprehensibility of the
Self is an admitted fact in Emerson and in the Gita both. In “The Over-
Soul” Emerson exclaims that the philosophy of six thousand years in
the past has not been able to explore the power and the vastness of the
soul. Its experiments have left ultimately the enigma unresolved (W,
II, 267, 68). In the Gita the Self proves equally elusive. It is pointed
out that the soul is regarded by some as a wonder while some speak or
hear about it with very great surprise. However, none knows it though
it may have been described to him (C.W, 37, 38, II, 29).
The Self is its own creator and has created everything. Emerson
calls it the ultimate fact, the ever-blessed One and points out that self­
existence is the quality of this Supreme Cause (W, II, 70). In the Gita
the Self is described as that which has no beginning and is Supreme
(C.W. 103, XIII, 12). In chapter X the Self as the creator is described
as the beginning, the middle and the end of all things (C.W. 85, X, 20).
The Self is all-knowing and knows what ought to be done and
gets it done or, as noted earlier, rather does it. In “Uses of Great Men”
Emerson tells us that when we understand the central identity of the
individuals we come to know that substance which makes them ordains
and does things (W, IV, 33). To get its work done the Self has made the
individuals as different from one another with distinct jobs for each.

152
Each soul, which is sent into nature, it seems, has been given some
virtues and powers which are not interchangeable. It seems the Self
writes ‘not transferable’ and fit for this journey only “on these garments
of the soul” (W, IV, 28). (The garments refers to human bodies here.)
And the result is that one is what one is and so one remains (W, IV, 28).
In the Gita as we already know the Self has created four broad categories
of individuals whose qualities are non-transferable and it it is ordained
for them that everyone who is happy with his own particular lot will
attain perfection (C.W. 130, XVIII, 45). We have discussed this point
briefly, earlier, with regard to human constitution. The idea of the human
bodies as garments of the soul as discussed by us in Emerson occurs in
the Gita in chapter II thus: “As a man throweth away old garments,
and putteth on new, even so the soul, having quitted its old mortal
frames entereth into others which are new” (C.W. 37, II, 22). It may be
noted here that beyond the semantic similarity of perceptions in
Emerson and in the Gita, we also find lexical similarity in expression
at certain points. The use of the word “garments” for human bodies is
one example. Earlier we have noted that the word constitution has been
used a number of times in both to denote mental make up. In our
discussion of illusion we noted that a phrase used in Charles Wilkins’
translation of the Gita occurs in Emerson’s essay “Illusions”.
The idea that the Self is behind all human beings, getting things
done through them (according to its inscrutable will), is further available
in the following two references to the Self in Emerson and in the Gita.
In “The Over-Soul” Emerson writes that it is evident that the soul in
mankind is not an organ, but gives life to and uses all organs. It is not
a function of human mind like memory, calculation, or comparison,
rather it makes use of “these as hands and feet” (W, II, 270). In the
Gita we read about the Self: “It is all hands and feet; it is all faces,

153
heads and eyes.” It is all ears. It sits in the middle of the world and
possesses the whole (C.W. 103, XIII, 13 to 17). In the above references
the use of the phrase “hands and feet” with respect to the working of
the Self in Emerson and in the Gita is significant. It corroborates my
observation made in ,the preceding paragraph.
The Self is referred to by different names in Emerson and in the
Gita. To Emerson it is the Over Soul, the Universal Soul, God, the law,
being, the Universal Being, the Deity and soul, etc. In the Gita it is the
soul, the Supreme, the Deity, Brahm, God, Eeshwar, the supreme soul,
the Supreme Being, the Parmatma or supreme soul, the supreme spirit,
the universal spirit, etc. The similarity in the use of names for the Self
is noteworthy here. The Universal Being in Emerson and Supreme
Being in the Gita come very close to each other. Deity is yet another
word commonly used. Soul, too, is used in both. The name the Universal
Soul looks very close to the universal spirit and the supreme soul.
Emerson's term Over- Soul seems to be an English version and an
adaptation of the “Parmatma or supreme soul” (C.W. 113) of the Gita.
This looks probable going by the similarities of perception that we
have noted in this thesis. Bliss Perry, however, explains it the other
way: “As far as we know Emerson coined the word Over-Soul, but he
had the pleasure of discovering that the Hindu philosophy had a
precisely equivalent term (parmatman) for the same conception”23
The Self in Emerson and in the Gita is the reservoir of all socially
desirable qualities. Virtue in Emerson approximates all of them. The
Self is all virtue. In “Self-Reliance” Emerson says that virtue is
“Height”. Those who have virtue in them will rule the world. A man or
a group of men responsive to the principles of virtue will by nature’s
law have their sway on the whole world. All people and all countries,
if not virtuous, will come under their control (W, II, 70). In “Spiritual

154
Laws” Emerson stresses that the Self is virtue. He points out that it is
sublimely proper to describe God as saying, I AM (W, II, 160). (The
suggestion here seems to be that God says-I am virtue and hence I
prevail) Interestingly, whether Emerson had Krishna of the Gita in his
mind or not, we find in the Gita in chapters-VII, IX, X and XI many
expressions beginning with the word- ‘I am’. As for the power of virtue
to rule the world, the Gita is written specially to stress this point. Krishna
is born to preserve and establish virtue (C.W. 52, IV, 7, 8) and has
virtue in him (C.W. 107 XIV, 02). The use of the word virtue with
respect to the quality of the Self and the quality desired by the Self is
common in Emerson and in the Gita.
The concept of the Self as the upholder of virtue becomes elusive
in Emerson and in the Gita when in both we find a deliberate attempt
being made to include in the Self the good and evil on equal footing. In
“Self-Reliance” Emerson says that the Self is moving forward, in a
state of becoming, and, therefore, always brings down the past, reduces
all riches to poverty, turns all reputation to shame, confuses the saint
with the rogue, and pushes Jesus and Judas equally aside (W, II, 69). It
seems the Self is represented as amoral and neutral here. This idea is
taken forward in Emerson's philosophy. In “Fate” towards the end he
praises the Self as the Beautiful Necessity which mixes all together so
as to ensure that plaintiff and defendant, friend and enemy, animal and
planet, food and eater are one in kind (W, VI, 49). Three times Emerson
makes an appeal to his reader to make altars for the Beautiful Necessity.
According to David M Robinson, in “Self-Reliance” wherein Emerson
says “if I am the Devil's child, I will live then from the devil” “the idea
of self is elevated above any notion of right and wrong”24.
In the Gita, too, we find the Self in a seemingly amoral and neutral
position. In chapter IX Krishna says that he is the same to all mankind.

155
None is worthy of his love or hatred (C.W. 81, IX, 29). In chapter II it
is pointed out that those endued with true wisdom do not pay attention
to good and evil in this world (C.W. 40, II, 50). In chapter V it is
pointed out that the Self does not create the powers or the deeds of
humanity. Nor does it receive the “vices” or the “virtues” of anyone
(C.W. 59, V, 14, 15). It is nature which connects rewards and
punishments with the deeds of mankind. In chapter X the Self is seen
as the common source of pleasure and pain, birth and death, fear and
courage, and renown and infamy (C.W. 83, X, 4, 5). Krishna declares
that these all “distinctly” come from him and these are the various
qualities of natural beings. Further, the wise man of the Gita is required
to be neutral, free from enmity and same in friendship and in hatred
(C.W. 99, 100, XII, 15, 18), the same to the friend and the foe (C.W.
110, XIV, 25). In chapter X Krishna is shown as containing the good
and the evil. He says he is gaming among frauds. He is glory of all
glorious things. He is the essence of all qualities (C.W. 87, X, 36). And
further, he is the rod among rulers and policy among those who seek
victory (C.W. 87, X, 38).
In Emerson and in the Gita all that we find in life, the good and
the bad, is seen as related to the Self. (If the Self is to be represented as
the omnipresent author of everything, this becomes a compulsion, a
necessity.) It is said that once Carlyle took Emerson on a badly upsetting
trip through the London slums and then exclaimed: ‘Well, do you
believe in a devil now?’ Emerson remained as cheerful as ever. To
Carlyle his undisturbed cheerfulness about the world was a strange
and amusing sight but his wife Jane felt annoyed at it.25 Eliot Norton
who was in their company was also very upset and he remarked “that
if Emerson went to hell by mistake he would probably deny its existence
or pronounce it the abode of good and realm of order”26.

156
 However, Emerson had, perhaps, discovered the (liberating) Self
within him and within it the entire limiting circumstance that mankind
finds so difficult to cope with. In “Fate” Emerson says that earlier we
believed positive power to be all but now we have learnt that negative
power or circumstance is half (W, II, 15). In the Gita the negative
power of the circumstance is thus present in the Self: “ Self is the
friend of the self [in man] ; and in the like manner, self is its own
\

enemy.” The Self (perhaps) is the enemy within the brute, and outside
it is the enemy he creates. It is further pointed out: “Self is friend of
him” who has subdued himself with his own help but like an enemy
the Self takes pleasure “in the enmity of him” who has no soul (i.e.
who does not respond to the positive power of the Self within him
faces hostile circumstances in life) (C.W. 62, VI, 05, 06). The use of
the word ‘self’ as referring to God’s presence in man as man’s spiritual
self is noteworthy in the above lines quoted from Charles Wilkins’
translation of the Gita which Emerson read frequently and sent to his
friends to read. We can conclude this point. In Emerson and in the Gita
man has within him the positive and the negative power of the Self. He
can turn to the good or the evil in himself. On the whole the Self is one.
The next question to answer is: When would the Self liberate the
troubled man? It relates to the circumstances leading to an access to
the Self. In Emerson and in the Gita the difficulty of access to the Self
has been fully recognized. In “The American Scholar” Emerson points
out that the soul of the Self in almost the entire humanity is yet
obstructed and unborn (W, I, 90). In the Gita in chapter II it is admitted
that the wise man who has access to the Self is difficult to find (C.W.
71, VII, 19).
The Self (in Emerson and in the Gita) has provided mankind
with freedom of action. Man is free to choose between what he thinks

157
to be the right and the wrong. In “Fate” Emerson says that freedom is
necessary. A man is free to the extent he thinks himself to be free (W,
VI, 23). In the Gita at the end of the long advice to Arjuna Krishna
calls upon him to think over it well in his mind, and then act as it seems
best to him (C.W. 133, XVIII, 63). Even the evil man is free to turn to
good. Krishna says that if any one who has always done evil turns to
him he becomes respectable like the other righteous people (C.W. 82,
IX, 30).
The provision of freedom of action notwithstanding, the Self in
Emerson and in the Gita lays the virtuous action as the first condition
for man for access to it. The second requirement is that of doing the
assigned duty by carrying out honestly the dictates of the constitution.
Great stress is laid on the duty as assigned to everyone. In “Self-
Reliance” Emerson says that we should do our work to reinforce
ourselves (W, II, 54). Social responsibilities towards father, mother
cousin, neighbour, town, cat and dog are included in duty. When one
r

does one's duty sincerely one allows the Self to act through oneself. In
“The Over-Soul” Emerson tells us about this “secret of nature.” He
advises that we should work and live, work and live and all unawares
the onward-moving soul will build and forge for itself a new situation
and the question and the answer will become one (W, II, 284-85). When
this stage is reached one no longer questions or doubts one's doing
since it comes from the Self. Emerson stresses that all philosophy and
nature reveals to man that the Self “dwells with him” and the sources
of nature lie in his own mind, when the sentiment of duty is in him (W,
II, 294). The emphasis on the performance of one’s duty cannot he
*

underestimated in Emerson. It links man to the Self.

The Gita is all about duty and its diligent performance. Its basic
aim is to turn Arjuna back to his duty. In addition, it philosophises on

158
the duty of man towards the Self. The duty in the Gita like the duty in
Emerson includes social respon^bilities. The learned men work hard
A

and perform all the duties of life, and set an example for others to
follow (C.W. 47, III, 26). In chapter II Krishna calls upon Arjuna to
perform the duty of his calling (C.W. 38, II, 33). It is the duty assigned
to him through his constitution. When one does the duty assigned and
controls oneself the Self becomes one's eternal guide. Krishna says
that he does not forsake such a person and he in turn does not forsake
him and he “dwelleth” in him (Krishna) “in all respects even whilst he
liveth” (C.W. 65, VI, 30, 31). The use of the word “dwelleth” is
noteworthy here in connection with the access to the Self. In the
preceding paragraph already we have noted that in Emerson the Self
“dwells” with him who does his duty sincerely. In addition to the
semantic similarity of perception here between these two words we
take note also of the lexical similarity. I come back to the point. The
stress on the duty is so great in the Gita that even the Self is bound to
the moral duties. Krishna says that he lives in the exercise of the moral
r

duties. If he did not attend to these duties everybody would follow his
example and would fail in his duty (C.W. 47, III, 22 to 24).
The next important condition for access to the Self is the practice
of detachment in life while performing the duties. In “Self-Reliance”
Emerson says he would practise detachment in his relations with his
parents and relatives. He would conduct these relations in “a new and
unprecedented way” (W, II, 73). He calls it “isolation” and “elevation”
but it would not be “mechanical”. The world may sometimes conspire
against us, he says, with trifling matters. Friend, client, child, sickness,
fear, want, charity all at once may present difficulties to us. But in this
t

situation one must keep one's state of mind unaffected and must save
oneself from getting confused (W, II, 72). Life attached to one’s father,

159
mother, wife, brother or friend is one lived “after appearances,”
therefore, one ought to practise detachment in life and lead a life of
truth in the Self (W, II, 72).
In close proximity to this stand in Emerson, we find in the Gita
throughout great emphasis being laid on detachment from this world
as a pre-condition for access to the Self. In chapter XIII wisdom is
described as detachment from the objects of the senses (appearances
in Emerson). It also includes the realisation that birth, death, destruction,
sickness, pain and shortcomings are inevitable. It also requires man to
be detached from “children, wife and home”and even-minded at the
happening of every event whether favourable or unfavourable (C.W.
102, XIII, 8, 9). In chapter XII detachment from the world is regarded
as desired by the Self. One ought to regard pain and pleasure as the
same and be tolerant of wrongs. In friendship or in hatred, in honour
or dishonour, in cold or heat, one ought to be the same. One ought to
treat praise and blame with indifference (C.W. 99-100, XII, 13 to 19).
Detachment from the world also seems to include, in Emerson
and in the Gita, the giving up of the pursuit of material gains. We have
already noted that pursuing material gains is a limitation that ought to
be overpowered. To put it briefly, reliance on property is the want of
self reliance in Emerson (W, II, 87) and in the Gita the ideal man
(worthy of access to the Self) regards gold, iron and stones as not
different (C.W. 63, VI, 8). Our comparison between the two positions
here seems to highlight that Emerson comes very close to the Gita in
his insistence on detachment from the worldly relations and possessions.
In the preceding paragraphs we noted that home, children, wife, friends
and suffering are noted in both as worthy to be dealt with in a detached
manner. It seems very probable on the basis of the comparison being
carried out in this thesis that the words “isolation,” “elevation” and “a

160
new and unprecedented way” (which is not “mechanical”) seem to
have been prompted in Emerson by his reading of the Gita for his use
in his philosophy of the Self. This is, it seems, using of an old philosophy
in a new way in modern times.
Next, for access to the Self, even the desire for and expectation
of the fruit of one's action is to be given up. Emerson points out in
“Experience” that hankering after an overt or practical effect seems an
apostasy to him (W, III, 84). About himself he says that he is grateful
for small gains. He adds that he compared notes with a friend who
expects too much in life and feels disheartened when he does not get
the best results. On comparison he says he found that he himself begins
“at the other extreme, expecting nothing” and feeling grateful for
moderate gains (W, III, 61-62). He suggests that if one takes the good
one finds without asking any questions, one will have plentiful in life
(W, III, 62). (This seems to be an adapted application of the wisdom of
the Gita in the modern times). About the fruit that he wishes to have in
life he says that he finds a private fruit sufficient. This fruit is the
realization that he should not look for immediate results from his
contemplation, advice and reception of truths. He adds that he finds it
deplorable to ask for consequences of his efforts on a town and county,
“an overt effect” at an early date. He concludes his point with the idea
that all he knows is reception, he is and he has (W, III, 85). It seems
very probable here that, perhaps, Emerson had the philosophy of the
Gita in his mind when he expressed the above-mentioned views. He
welcomes whatever comes as a result of his efforts. It is interesting to
note here that the results which he talks about relate to his efforts as a
lecturer to audiences and as a thinker for himself. He refers to personal
experience to stress his point.
In this position Emerson comes very close to the Gita which

161
says that man's trouble is rooted in his desire for the fruit of his actions.
The Gita emphasises that one should do one's duty without the desire
for a reward. Human sorrow originates in the desire for fruit: “the
miserable and unhappy are so on account of the event of things.” This
happens to Emerson’s friend with whom he compared notes. The wise
men are those who have given up all thought of the fruit which is
produced from their actions (C.W. 40, II, 49, 51). This is a condition
necessary for access to the Self. The wise man is he who has given up
“good and evil fortune”. He is unexpecting about the event of things
and is happy with “whatever cometh to pass” (C.W. 99-100, XII, 16,
17, 19). The discussion in the preceding paragraph seems to amply
display that Emerson’s position is not different from this.
Next, in one's preparation for access to the Self, it seems, one
needs to prefer a particular company of people. In “Self-Reliance”
Emerson refers to a class of people with whom he has spiritual affinity
and whom he likes wholeheartedly. He is ready to go to prison for
them if required (W, II, 52). This company is noble and true in the
same truth with him. About the other kind he says that they should
cleave to their companions while he will seek his own company (W, II,
73). In the Gita Arjuna is advised to seek a particular kind of people,
“learned men,” to seek wisdom from them with humility, questions
and attention (C.W. 55, IV, 34). In chapter X a particular company of
people is admired. These people are full of spiritual wisdom and they
are with their very hearts and minds devoted to the Self. They make
merry among themselves taking pleasure in talking of the Self and in
teaching one another the doctrine of the Self (C.W. 84, X, 9).
Here it is to be noted that neither Emerson nor the Gita would
like us to stop here. The human company has its limitations. As noted
before, in the Gita we find that a wise man is hard to be found. And in

162
Emerson the position is made very clear in “Uses of Great Men.” He
remarks that at last we shall stop looking for completeness in men and
we shall be happy with their social and delegated quality (W, IV, 34).
So what is one left to do? One ought to depend on the Self for infallible
guidance which will make one’s temporary, prospective and opaque
self bright with its light (W, IV, 34, 35).
To be acceptable to the Self, in Emerson and in the Gita, it is
also required that one returns the benefits that one receives in nature.
Emerson says that he who gives to others the most benefits is great and
that man is mean who receives favours and makes no returns (W, II,
113). In the Gita, however, the benefits received in nature are to be
returned to the gods (and deserving men) with acts of sacrificial rituals.
A man not making these returns is a thief and the men of his sort are
selfish and sinful (C.W. 45, 46, III, 12, 13).
For access to the Self the man of learning and the man of business,
both, are suitable. In’ “Experience” Emerson says that an intellectual
type of life will not take the place of a muscular type of life (W, III,
58). For himself, however, he would prefer the intellectual type. He
points out that people condemn knowing, and recommend doing. But
he is very content with knowing, if only he could know. He further
says that knowing a little is worth the expense of the world (W, III,
84). The above mentioned opinion of Emerson, examined without
reference to the Gita, would mean simply that Emerson prefers the
profession of a lecturer to any other occupation. But Emerson noted
the following lines from the Gita (translated by Charles Wilkins) in
r

his journals: “Children only and not the learned speak of the speculative
and practical doctrines as two. They are but one, for both obtain the
self-same end” (C.W. 57, V, 2,4, 5)27. Not long after making this entry
Emerson noted in his journals his views about the Gita:

163
 It was the first of books, it was as if an empire spoke to us,
nothing small or unworthy, but large, serene, consistent,
the voice of an old intelligence which in another age and
climate had pondered over and thus disposed of the same
questions which exercise us28.
There was, and even today there is, to some a famous dispute
about whether one ought to choose for oneself a contemplative way of
life like that of mystics and ascetics or whether one should live with
full involvement in all aspects of social and family life29. The first way
is generally known as the way of knowledge and the second the way of
action30. The Gita deals with this controversy. In chapter V specially
both types of people are said to be suitable for access to the Self: “the
desertion and the practice of works are equally means of extreme
happiness” (C.W. 57, V, 2). In Emerson we find, it seems, an adaptation
of this resolution in the Gita, whereby in modern times he finds that
men of learning and men of business stand on equal footing in the
system of the Self. Both can have access to the Self.
Last in our discussion of what is required for access to the Self
comes the most important point in Emerson and in the Gita, namely
while doing one's duty one should give up the self sense, the pride that
one is the doer of things. When one does something it is only his senses
which make him do it. One should come out of the illusion created by
the senses. One has to make a complete surrender of one's ego, one's
human self to the Self. In “The Over-Soul” Emerson tells us that in
eating, drinking, planting, counting, etc. man does not represent himself
»

because in these activites his human will is operative. Actually for

access to the Self, he should not interfere with his thought and should
act fully and see how things stand in God (W, II, 280). The phrase
“things stand in God” is significant here. In the Gita the enlightened

164
and devoted man sees “the supreme soul in all things, and all things in
the supreme soul” (C.W. 55, VI, 29). He sees how things stand in the
soul. The use of the preposition ‘in’ is notable in the Gita and in
Emerson in relation to the Self. One needs to get into the Self and live
from there as the Self is invisibly present in everything. This would
become possible when one breaks the barriers of the senses which make
our worldly self. Like the Gita Emerson tells us that the thought coming
from the Self (within) should prevail. We should keep our worldly self
aside. The “blindness of intellect begins when it would be something
of itself” (W, II, 271). He repeats the idea: “The weakness of will
begins when the individual would be something of himself ” (W, II,
271). Newton Dillaway expains this point thus: “Emerson was trying
to push us out of our lower selves into our Self, the intimate
consciousness of the divine presence in ourselves”31. According to
Gustaaf Van Cromphout the purpose of Emerson's concept of history
was “progressively to enable man to escape from history, to escape
from that compromise with time and nature into the freedom which is
in the spirit”32. It seems Emerson believes that we should give up the
self sense which we have acquired through past experiences. We are
what history or tradition has made us. We need to be liberated from the
tradition in us, which forms our mundane self.
In the Gita it is repeatedly stressed that one ought to give up the
self sense and make a complete surrender to the Self. The seeing,
hearing, touching, smelling, etc. are the activities of the senses which
form the mundane self of man. These belong to nature and are regulated
by its three qualities. A withdrawal from nature into the Self is required.
In chapter XIV Krishna points out that one who sees no other agent
than the three qualities of nature (discussed in detail in chapter III in
this thesis) and discovers that the Self is above them finds the Self at

165
last. The Gita stresses obedience to the Self. Even if one commits
violence on a large scale one would not be guilty if one commits it at
the behest of the Self, giving up one's self sense (C.W. 126, XVIII,
17). Sri Aurobindo sums up the argument in the Gita thus : “Know
then your self; know your true self to be God ... live in the self, live in
your supreme spiritual nature . . . deliver all you are and do into his
hands for the supreme and the universal spirit to do through you his
own will and works in the world.”33 The lower self is to be mastered by
the higher, the natural self by the spiritual. This “is the way of man's
perfection and liberation.”34 This summing up of the argument in the
Gita incidentally seems to sum up Emerson’s philosophy, too, quite
accurately.
To sum up our discussion of when the Self would liberate, we
can say that in Emerson and in the Gita for liberation by the Self one
needs to be virtuous, dutiful, detached from the world, stable and
contented, accompanied by good people, generous, dedicated, humble
and unselfishly receptive to the dictates of the Self.
The last question to answer in our discussion of the Self is: How
would the Self liberate man from his troubles? The answer to this
question relates to the effect of the access to the Self. In Emerson and
in the Gita, the individual, it seems, will have the following three
advantages on his access to the Self.
First, he would know what to do in life. He will have a direction
in life and knowledge to proceed with. In “The Over-Soul” Emerson
r

tells us that when the heart gives itself upto the Supreme Mind it relates
itself to all its works. Man comes to have “particular knowledges and
powers” (W, II, 276). He comes to know “the particular thing and
everything and every man.” The “Maker of all things and all persons”
stands behind him and casts “his dread omniscience” through him “over

166
things” (W, II, 280). In the Gita this idea is conveyed through many
verses. In chapter X Krishna says that everything worthy of distinction
and pre-eminence is the produce of the portion of his glory (C.W. 88,
X, 41).
The second advantage is of a social nature. The individuals having
t

access to the Self will be able to form a civilized society of the highest
order. Since the Self is the reservoir of virtue, they will be virtuous.In
“The Over-Soul” Emerson tells us that Justice, Love, Freedom and
Power are attributes of the Self. These they will understand and acquire
(W, II, 271,72). In the Gita, as we already know, the Self is the protector
and preserver ofjustice and virtue. One liberated by the Self will become
just and virtuous. And from what passes in his own heart, whether it is
pain or pleasure he would see the same in others (C.W. 66, VI, 32).
Those liberated in this way will form a just and virtuous society.
The third advantage will be that the individual will be happy and
t

at peace with himself and the world. Peace comes to him from knowing
that he is safe in his shelter with the Self. This, however, pre-supposes
a complete union with the Self, called Yog in the Gita. One who has it
sees the Self everywhere and in everything. There is no fear of anything
going wrong. It is a life in the Self. In “Self-Reliance” the human soul
linked to the Self sees in everything identity and eternal causation. It
perceives Truth and Right to be self-existent and it becomes calm with
the knowledge “that all things go well” (W, II, 69). Nothing can ever
go wrong.This realization brings peace and stability in life. In “Fate”
we find that the Self, the Beautiful Necessity makes man courageous
*

with the thought that he cannot avoid a danger that is appointed nor
can he “incur one that is not” (W, VI, 49). Nothing in this world is then
to be feared. Ultimately, whatever comes will be the will of the Self
and a man’s happiness lies in compliance with it.

167
 This protective and safe shelter provided by the Self to the
individual is also mentioned in the Gita. The Self is referred to as
“divine necessity” in chapter VIII (C.W. 75, VIII, 19). In chapter IX
the Self is described as “the journey of the good; the comforter,” “the
r

resting place,” “the asylum and the friend” (C.W. 80,IX, 18). The Self
makes man its agent and gets its will carried out. (There are obviously
certain dangers appointed for him.) In chapter XIII the Self is described
as “the ruler of all things” (C.W. 103, XIII, 16). (In “Fate” we have
seen that the “Law rules throughout existence.” - W, VI, 49.) In chapter
XI Krishna tells Arjuna that all his enemies have already been killed
by him and he has only to become the immediate agent: “They are
already, as it were destroyed by me. Be thou alone the immediate agent”
(C.W. 93, XI, 33). He adds that none of the warriors arrayed against
him will remain aliv§ (C.W. 93, XI, 32). This situation compares well
with the idea of “the self existence of Truth and Right” and “all things
go well” in “Self- Reliance” (discussed in the preceding paragraph).
And this compares well also with the idea of the Deity in “Fate” deriving
universal benefit by a man's pain (W, VI, 47). It still compares well
with the idea in “Fate” that one cannot avoid an appointed danger.
Commenting on the law of Karma of the Hindu scriptures Promod
Kumar Saxena remarks: “The Indian solution to the problem is to make
the divine will one’s own”and a man taking “his stand on his Immortal
and Infinite self” finds that “the law of cause and effect has merged in
the Absolute” and it is not “a forceful compulsion.”35 It gives immense
peace and sense of security to believe that one is acting as an agent of
the Self.
It has been stressed in Emerson and in the Gita that a complete
disconnection from pain is possible through one’s union with the Self.
One knows no pain when one is united with the Self. In “Spiritual

168
Laws” Emerson points out that the soul (of the Self) in man knows no
“deformity or pain.” It is regrettable that man has not learnt to describe
his condition as lightly as it is possible. Through a union with the Self
one can realize that it is only “the finite” in him that suffers while “the
infinite” in him lies smiling within (W, II, 132). The suffering relates
only to the physicaTlevel of our existence. This idea is taken up in
“Fate” again as double consciousness. The technique of double
consciousness requires that a man should allow the finite side of him
to suffer and should take shelter with the Deity, the Self in him. (I have
analysed this idea in detail in chapter II in this thesis.) The Self derives
universal benefit from his “pain” (W, VI, 47). So complete safety against
pain is available with the (liberating) Self.
In the Gita a similar way to liberation from pain is suggested.
On one’s union with the Self the individual receives “boundless
pleasure” which having attained he regards no other gain as equal to it
and in that state of mind “he is not moved by the severest pain.” This is
a state of the “disunion from the conjunction of pain” called Yog,
“spiritual union or devotion” (C. W. 64,65, VI, 20 to 23). The suffering
exists at the level of the lower self alone. In Emerson and in the Gita
the existence of pain is pre-supposed for man in his life and the Self is
believed to be capable of providing liberation from it. The use of the
word pain is noteworthy. It seems that, perhaps, Emerson’s double­
consciousness is an adaptation of the Yoga of the Gita in modem times.
Incidentally, in Emerson and in the Gita, though without any
pre-conceived design, we find a philosophical pattern of thesis, anti­
thesis and synthesis. The common thesis is that the Self is within man
and man must take an advantage of it and solve all of his problems
easily. The anti-thesis is that access to the Self is seriously obstructed
by the Self itself. There is illusion as a barrier. A man united with the

169
Self is yet a distant possibility. Man himself, too, has many infirmities
in him. The synthesis is that there is still hope. It is possible for every
man to have access to the Self. The Self is ready to help everyone
always.
From our study and analysis of the similarities of perception in
Emerson and in the Gita, we may conclude that it seems Emerson was
powerfully influenced by the philosophy of the Gita. The Gita is “the
most important Hindu scripture that profoundly impressed Emerson.”36
To him it was “a transnational book and he held it in high esteem.”37
When asked by L.F. Dimmick if he wanted to bring out an American
edition of the Gita (translated by Charles Wilkins, London, 1785) “he
replied that he did not want to give it to people indiscriminately who
were not prepared to receive it.” He felt that if he did that “he would
surely make the high worth of the book cheap by enabling it to reach
vulgar hands.”38 By not presenting it to the so called vulgar, Emerson,
perhaps, had deferred to the wishes of Krishna, who towards the end
of the Gita, advises Arjuna that this philosophy is “never to be revealed”
to anyone who is not devoted, who is not his (Krishna’s) servant, who
does not want to learn or who hates him (C.W. 133, XVIII, 67). This
injunction may also, perhaps, have been the cause of Emerson not
disclosing having read the Gita for a long time. He had to first prepare
his readers or audiences to receive this wisdom. His first work Nature
made the beginning and introduced his audiences and readers to this
wisdom. The culmination came with the “Self-Reliance.” It was only
when he was convinced that people had received the philosophy of the
Gita warmly that he made known to them that there was a book which
he wanted them to read. And he then lent this book to many of his
friends.
To conclude the discussion of the liberating Self, it will be useful

170
to briefly analyse the distance between the Self in Emerson and the
Christian God and the proximity between the Self in Emerson and the
Self in the Gita. Emerson’s first published work Nature declares that
none can set bounds to the possibilities of man. Man “is himself the
creator in the finite” and “has access to the entire mind of the Creator,”
the Self (W, 1, 64). This very remark takes Emerson’s Self away from
the Christian God and brings it closer to the Self in the Gita. The Gita
declares man to be the creator in the finite. We have already seen this
in this chapter and also in the preceding chapter. Still to recapitulate,
in the Gita in chapter XVIII it is pointed out that when a man is devoted
to the Self giving up all the negative qualities like cruelty, pride, lust,
anger, greed, selfishness, etc. he is prepared for becoming Brahm, the
Self. And “being as Brahm” he attains peace of mind and also “supreme
assistance” from the Self, to be at last absorbed in its nature (C.W. 132,
XVIII, 50 to 55). This is access to the entire mind of the creator. Krishna
makes the promise .of this access more obvious to Arjuna in his
assurance to him of his liberation from all troubles with his help. Arjuna
by Krishna’s divine assistance will “surmount every difficulty” which
surrounds him (C.W. 132, XVIII, 57, 58).
The Christian God though offers help in all difficulties does not
allow man to become exactly like him, however hard he may try. He is
“separate from sinners and exalted far above them.”39 Though
Christianity treats man as an image of God “it starts with man as a
sinful creature and he can get redemption from his sins only if God
bestows favour on him.”40 Man is a finite being and cannot even dream
of becoming God or God-like “and since God is infinite he can never
be fully seen in the finite, nor ever identified with it.”41 In Christianity
duality or plurality is an essential feature in the “relationship within
the Godhead (in the Trinity), and between God and man, in grace and

171
worship.”42 God is omnipotent, omniscient and entirely holy, while no
“man has any of these attributes.” Man is imperfect, commits errors
and falls sick. He may be made holy by God in the next life. He may be
“united with him, but not completely identified with him.”43 In the
Gita and in Emerson thin partitions divide the bounds between man
r

and the Self. If we go to the bottom of the reality, we realize this. In

“The Over-Soul” Emerson tells us that there is no “bar or wall in the
soul” where man as the effect stops and God, the Self, as the cause
starts. The walls are removed. Man lies on one side open to the
“attributes of God” (W, II, 271-72). This is direct access to the Self.
In the preceding discussion the proximity between the Self in
Emerson and the Self in the Gita and the distance between the Self in
Emerson and the Christian God have become very obvious. In Emerson,
it seems, two cultures came into direct contact and Emerson, being an
unorthodox and free-minded intellectual, was superbly enthused by
his discovery in the Gita that man can discover his God within himself
and can become God walking in flesh and blood (human form) which
was regarded by the Christians as the product and home of sin and far
removed from God. On being liberated from the traditional concept of
God, Emerson’s enthusiasm knows no bounds. Though this outburst
of joy is visible in all his published writings, it is very outstanding in
his essays -“The American Scholar,” “The Divinity School Address,”
“Self-Reliance” and “The Over-Soul.” In “The Over-Soul” he remarks
that the simplest person who worships God with integrity becomes
God (W, II, 292). He adds that when we break “our God of tradition”
and cease from “our God of rhetoric” then God will fire our heart with
his presence (W, II, 292).
In “Compensation” he points out that the exclusionist in religion
in trying to shut out others harms himself by shutting the door of heaven

172
on himself (W, II, 110). It goes to the credit of Emerson that he had an
open mind and was tolerant in his search for truth. There are many
passages in the Gita which emphasise the performance of rituals and
seem to bury the real philosophy underneath them. But this did not
distract Emerson from getting at the truth in the Gita.
All literature, in whatever form and in whichever language, has
got inevitable links to the varied experiences of mankind. Emerson
thought very deeply on life and gave artistic expression to his
philosophy through his essays and verses. Thousands of years ago,
someone, who wrote the Gita, too, meditated deeply on life and gave
artistic expression to his thought through verses. This thesis has
discussed how the thought in Emerson resembles the thought in the
Gita and how the influence of the latter on the former can be inferred.
This inference has also a deeper aspect. The United States as a country
was very young at the time of Emerson’s birth. It was weak and poor
and was struggling to be rich and strong.44 Emerson provided inspiration
and courage to the people of his country “through his writings in prose
and verse.” He told his countrymen how they might look at life around
them in a new way.45 It was, of course, the philosophy of the liberating
Self that he gave them. It points to the infinite inner strength present in
man for his use in dealing with his circumstances. The world was
different when Emerson left it “and part of that difference he brought
about.”46 That is not a small achievement. He “breathed new life into
his own generation.” He provided stimulation and excitement to people
and this process still continues. “On its highest moral and spiritual
levels, American life was, in essence, changed because Emerson
lived.”47 There seems to be a progress from difficulties towards success
in the American life, in this way, in part as a result of Emerson’s efforts.
And the Gita, certainly, seems to have played a part in Emerson’s

173
extraordinary achievement as a writer and in his contribution to his
country. Incidentally, this also demonstrates how literature influences
Xlife
X x»^^ •

174
 NOTES

1. Lou Ann Lange, “Introduction,” The Riddle ofLiberty: Emerson

on Alienation, Freedom and Obedience (Atlanta, Georgia: Schol­
ars, 1986) XXII.

2. Christy 98, 103.

3. Christy 104, 05.

4. Christy 101.

5. Christy 98.

6. F. I Carpenter, Emerson and Asia (New York: Haskel, 1968) 130-

31.

7. Carpenter Emerson and Asia 132.

8. Carpenter Emerson and Asia 133.

9. Christy 86.

10. Christy 86.

11. Christy 88.

12. Christy 88.

13. Henry B. Parkes, “Emerson,” Emerson: A Collection of Critical

Essays 124.

14. Dillaway318.

15. Christy 105.

175
16. Christy 112.

17. Christy 112.

18. James M. Cox, “Emerson: The Circles of the Eye,” Emerson

Prophecy, Metamorphosis and Influence, ed. David Levin (New
York: Columbia UP, 1975) 78.

19. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, vol. 1519.

20. George Santayana, “Emerson,” Emerson: A Collection of Criti­

cal Essays 31.

21. Bazaz 200.

22. Bazaz 198.

23. Bliss Perry, Emerson Today (N.P.: Archon Books, 1969) 79.

24. David M Robinson, Emerson and the Conduct ofLife: Pragma­

tism and Ethical Purpose in Later Work (Cambridge: Cambridge
UP, 1993) 172.

25. Paul F. Boiler, Jr. 139.

26. Boiler, Jr. 139.

27. Eric J. Sharpe, The Universal Gita 24.

28. Sharpe 24 (quoted from Christy p. 23), still quoted from Emerson,
Journals, IV, 416).

29. Sneh Pandit,. “Doctrine and Analysis of Karma in the

Bhagavadgita^ Panjab University Research Bulletin XVI.
1(1985): 95.

176
30. Pandit 95.

31. Dillaway 59.

32. Gustaaf Van Cromphout, “Emerson and the Dialectics of His­

tory,1” PMLA 91.1 (1976):64.
33. Sri Aurobindo Ghose, Essay^on the Gita: Second Series (Cal­
cutta: Arya Publishing, 1928) 468.

34. Ghose Essays on the Gita: First Series 320.

35. Promod Kumar Saxena, “A Note on Emerson and ‘Ex Oriente

Lux,” Literary Criterion V. 4 (1965): 53.

36. Umesh Patri, Hindu Scriptures and American Trans cendental-

ists (New Delhi: Intellectual Publishing, 1987) 62.

37. Patri 62.

38. Patri 62 (Paraphrased from Emerson, Letters, IV, p. 350-51).

39. Geoffrey Parrinder, Upanishads Gita and Bible: A Comparative

Study of Hindu and Christian Scriptures (London: Faber and
Faber, 1962) 42.

40. H.V. Divatia, The Art of Life in the Bhagavad Gita (Bombay:
Bhartiya Vidya, 1951) 131.

41. Parrinder 44.

42. Parrinder 44.

43. Parrinder 45.

44. James Playsted Wood, Trust Thyself: A Life of Ralph Waldo

111
 Emerson for the Young Reader (New York : Pantheon, 1964) 3.

45. Wood 4.

46. Wood 4.

47. Wood 4-5.

178
Chapter V
 Conclusion

Emerson is an extraordinary optimist. He regards even evil as

good in the making. And nature, in which all good and evil co-exist, is
to him an embodiment of philosophy and theology (W, VI, 49). It seems
Emerson's world is a large classroom in which the students learn by
making errors. The creator of this classroom of the world is the Self
that teaches by the method of rewards and punishments. This favourite
method of the Self is the law of Compensation in Emerson's
terminology.
We find great optimism in the Gita, too, even with regard to evil.
In chapter II we are told: “Men who are endued with true wisdom are
unmindful of good and evil in this world” (C.W. 40, II, 50). The law of
Karma is the way of the Self in the Gita to reward the good and punish
and correct the evil doing. There is ample scope for the evil to become
good. In chapter IX Krishna says: “If one whose ways are ever so evil,
serve me alone, he is as respectful as the just man ... he soon becometh
of a virtuous spirit” (C.W. 82, IX, 30, 31).
Many scholars have criticised Emerson for what they call his
shallow vision of evil in this world. They argue that he ignored injustice,
pain and suffering in this world and considered these as part of the
Beautiful Necessity, the Self. It seems, however, that Emerson had
formulated a philosophy of the Self, the liberating Self, as we may call
it, which kept him optimistic throughout his life and enabled him to
deal successfully even with the misfortunes in his life. Christy seems
right when he points out about him: “He saw evil and he suffered pain,
but they could not touch him” and “even the loss of a bride and his first
born in a brief time left no deep scar.”1 His philosophy of the Self
sustained him. In his life “it was no blindness to pain and suffering
179
that made him forget the rain soaked, barefooted Manchester child.”
The reality is different. “His optimism, instead of being blindness or
indifference, is a most persistent type of therapeutics.”2 It is the Self
that has liberated him from a world view of suffering in this world.
“To him this is the best of all possible worlds, and the best of all possible
times.” There is no “disorder or evil.” The “order is the absolute law”
and “disorder is but a phenomenon.”3
Emerson did not hold the Self responsible for evil and he did not
either choose to blame Satan for it as it occurs in the Persian mythology
or as his ancestors had done. “Had he done so, he would have been
traitor to his belief in the Universal Oneness of ‘The Over-Soul’.”4
The Over-Soul, the Self, the Beautiful Necessity carries in it the
disparate elements and “secures that all is made of one piece; the
plaintiff and defendant, friend and enemy, the animal and planet, food
and eater are of one kind” (W, VI, 49). Emerson at the end of his essay
“"Fate"” suggests three times that we should build altars to the Beautiful
Necessity (W, VI, 48, 49). The Self contains all and is the “Law” that
“rules throughout existence” (W, VI, 49).
The Self in the Gita is akin to the Self in Emerson. It contains
all- the good and the evil, and is regarded as worthy of worship. In
chapter X Krishna points out that the “various qualities incident to
natural beings” like “humility, meekness, pleasure and pain; birth and
death, fear and courage . . . renown and infamy, all distinctly come
from me” (C.W. 83, X, 4, 5). In chapter XI the Self is praised lavishly
by Arjuna: “Reverence ! Reverence be unto thee a thousand times
repeated! Again and again Reverence. . . O thou art all in all! . . . Thou
includest all things, wherefore thou art all things” (C.W. 95, XI, 40).
This praise is similar to Emerson’s praise for the Beautiful Necessity.
In chapter VIII the Self is referred to as “divine necessity” in the Gita,

180
too (C.W. 75, VIII, 19).
The Self in Emerson works through nature which is created by
it. The human beings exist and live in it. It is (as also noted earlier) the
visible and the invisible side of the Selfs creative power working
eternally in the universe according to the will of the Self. It is the “result”
of the “final cause of this world” and offers mankind “a multitude of
uses.” It is “not only the material, but is also the process and the result”
(W, I, 12, 13). In the Gita, too, as in Emerson,the human beings exist
and operate in nature which embodies the system of the Self for them.
In chapter IX Krishna says: “This whole world was spread abroad by
me in my invisible form . . . My creative spirit is the keeper of all
things . . . Understand that all things rest in me.” It is added: “By my
supervision nature produceth both the moveable and the immoveable .
.. from this source...the universe resolveth” (C.W. 78, 79, IX, 4, 5,10).
In their life in nature, the human beings in the world of Emerson
and in the world of the Gita, face certain limitations, a few of which
are ordained and inescapable. In chapter II we studied the limitations
of human beings with respect to Emerson's philosophy of life, and in
chapter III we studied the human limitations as visualized in the Gita.
In chapter IV we compared the two view points. In addition, we studied
also the concept of the Self separately first and then together. Our
findings can now be summed up.
In Emerson and in the Gita we have tried to find out how far
man is free to act in pursuit of happiness and success and what
difficulties or conditions lie on the way. We shall first sum up the
common points in Emerson and in the Gita with respect to the limiting
circumstances in human life. The first condition laid down in the system
of the Self for man is that he has to lead a life devoted to virtue (which
comprises the sum-total of the socially desirable qualities like honesty,

181
justice, humility, welfare of mankind, dutifulness, etc.)- About this
condition for human beings Emerson says: “The limitation is impassable
by any insight of man” (W, VI, 21). In the Gita Krishna says that he
appears from age to age “for the preservation of the just, the destruction
of the wicked and the establishment of virtue” (C.W. 52, IV, 7, 8).
Next, the pleasures of the senses have to be moderately enjoyed.
In Emerson the surrender to the gratification of the senses is treated as
a revolt against the Self (W, II, 105,06). In the Gita this point is stressed
throughout. In chapter II the man who abandons all “lusts of the flesh”
and who “walketh without inordinate desires” is regarded as ideal (C.W.
43,11,71).
Though this condition is laid down, human beings, quite
intriguingly, have a moral or a material bias from birth (W, VI, 12).
The Gita mentions two types of people as born in this world: those
born with a divine destiny and those born with an evil destiny (C.W.
115,16, XVI, 7). A difference of opinion has to be noted here. Emerson
would not condemn the people with a material bias so severely as the
Gita does. This is a cultural difference. In the Gita those having a
material bias are the people with an evil destiny and are bound for hell.
The next limitation of human beings ordained in nature is that
they lead generally a life at the level of appearances, a life of illusion
created by the senses, which obstructs their vision of reality. “Children,
youths, adults and old men, all are led by one bawble or another” (W,
VI, 313). The illusion is created by the Self through nature: “The chapter
of fascinations is very long. Great is paint, nay, God is the painter” (W,
VI, 312, 13). In the Gita the life of illusion comes directly from the
Self. Krishna says that the “whole of this world” is “bewildered by the
influence” of these “three-fold qualities of nature,” which create
illusion. He adds : “This my divine and supernatural power is hard to

182
be overcome” (C.W. 70, VII, 13, 14).
Next, each human being has a particular constitution designed
for him or her in nature. Emerson remarks in “Illusions”: “Men who
make themselves felt avail themselves of a certain “f ate in their
constitution which they know how to use” (W, VI, 317). In the Gita
mankind is divided into four categories-Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vasya and
Sudra, who have their “respective duties” “determined by the qualities
which are in their constitutions” (C.W. 130, XVIII, 41).
Constitution is an important factor in the making of an individual
in Emerson and in the Gita. Emerson would not, however, divide
mankind into any categories as the Gita does. He, however, regards
temperament and subjectiveness as two determinants of human
constitution. Temperament is the “veto or limitation power in the
constitution” (W, III, 54) and subjectiveness is “our constitutional
necessity of seeing things under private aspects, or saturated with our
humours” (W,III, 81). In the Gita, too, temperament and subjectiveness
affect the constitution. They are the result of the individual’s interaction
with the three qualities of nature according to his susceptibility to their
influence. Heredity is yet another factor in the constitution in Emerson.
“Men are what their mothers made them” (W, VI, 10) and we can't
“expect poetry from this engineer or a chemical discovery from that
jobber” (W, VI, 10). In the Gita this approach is made from a different
angle. The individual decides his own heredity in the course of his
several life times.
Being unsteady and moving away from the place of one’s duty is
the next limitation. In Emerson this shortcoming surfaces in the human
habit of travelling for pleasure which is “a fool’s paradise” (W, II, 81).
In the Gita this state of mind is described as “distraction of mind.” It is
suggested that one ought to be “pleased with whatever cometh to pass”

183
and one should be “of a steady mind” (C.W. 100, XII, 16,19). Craving
and praying for material gains is another limitation of human nature.
Emerson says that “prayer as a means to effect a private end is meanness
and theft” (W, II, 77). In the Gita the pursuit of material gains is severely
condemned throughout. One is advised to work without the desire for
fruit.
Cowardice and indifference to the needs of the present, too, are
part of the limiting circumstance for human beings. (They limit the
individual's chances of success and happiness), In Emerson and in the
Gita it is strongly stressed that one ought to guard against these defects.
Next, lack of faith in the Self, attachment to one's family, friends and
society and having an excessive regard for great men and books (and
their slavish imitation), all these are condemned as shortcomings to be
got rid of. The gods and the Vedas in the Gita and the great men and
books in Emerson are regarded as unworthy of slavish regard or
imitation. In pursuit of happiness and success, the established religion
is yet another drawback in human life. The historical Christianity in
/

Emerson is what the religion represented by the Vedas and the gods is
in the Gita. The established religion bewilders and misleads man and
makes him a slave to tradition.
The next limitation faced by mankind is that life in this world is
generally full of sorrow and suffering. In “Experience” Emerson says:
“Every roof is agreeable to the eye until it is lifted” (W, III, 47). In the
Gita in chapter VIII the world is described as “the finite mansion of
pain and sorrow” (C.W. 75, VIII, 15). In the verse in question the world
is referred to as “duhkhalyam” the house of sorrow (pain). It may,
however, be noted here while listing the similarities of perception that
the Gita genuinely regards the world as a sorrowful place, with the
determined aim to liberate mankind from the cycle of birth and death,

184
but in Emerson the criticism of life in this world is just a passing phase.
This limitation in Emerson is not so great as it is in the Gita.
The next human limitation is that there is an eternal struggle
going on between the spirit and matter in life : “mind and matter are in
perpetual tilt and balance” (W, VI, 43). There are “odious facts in
nature”. This is "Fate", “the element running through entire nature,
known to us as limitation” (W, VI, 19,20). There are the “diseases, the
elements, fortune, gravity, lightning” and they “respect no persons.”
Emerson concludes this point: “Providence has a wild, rough,
incalculable road to its end” (W, VI, 7, 8).
In the Gita, we find that the world has come into being through
a union of Prakreetee and Pooroosh, the matter and spirit: “The
Pooroosh resideth in the Prakreetee and partaketh of those qualities
which proceed from the Prakreetee.” With the interaction between
Pooroosh and Prakreetee the mankind has the experience of pleasure
and pain because the Pooroosh is the “principle which operateth in the
sensation of pain and pleasure” (C.W. 104, XIII, 20, 21).
Evil is the next limitation of mankind. It has, however, no essence
or independent existence. It is darkness, the absence of light. It is just
the absence of knowledge or virtue. This point is unequivocally stressed
in Emerson and in the Gita. There is no permanent existence of evil.
The last point in our discussion of the similarities of perception relating
to human limitations is that the eternal soul of the Self is eternally
bound to the human beings who are mortal. Mortality is the fate of all
human beings. In the Gita salvation is possible for individuals, and at
the end of many births there can be an eternal absorption in the Self,
which is, of course, a remote possibility. Emerson, however, is
concerned only with this life.
We now take up the concept of the (liberating) Self. In Emerson

185
and in the Gita the Self offers hope to human beings of their liberation
from all their troubles in life. About the inevitable limitations of human
life Emerson says in “Fate”: “The too much contemplation of these
limits induces meanness.” One ought to look “the other way.” The
“practical view is the other” (W, VI, 23). The other way is the Self that
liberates.
As we have noted already, the Self in Emerson and in the Gita is
concealed behind the human self. As early as in 1837 Emerson felt this
difficulty very seriously and wrote in his journals: “As a plant in the
earth so I grow in God. I am only a form of him ... I can even with a
mountainous aspiring say, I am God, by transferring my Me out of the
flimsy and unclean precincts of my body, my private will.” But the
problem is “yet why not always so?”5 He writes further, “that in certain
moments I have known that I existed directly from God, and am, as it
were his organ. And in my ultimate consciousness AM He.” But then
“the contradictory fact is familiar, that I am a surprised spectator and
learner of all my life.”6
The ‘flimsy’ and ‘unclean precincts’ of‘body’ and ‘private will’
of the above passage are indicated in the Gita as operations of the
senses in life in “seeing, hearing, touching, smelling, eating, moving,”
etc. (C.W. 58, V, 8, 9) and these make the mundane self of man.
Emerson’s idea of himself as the organ of the Self is practically available
in the Gita in Krishna’s advice to Arjuna to become his agent: “Be
thou alone the immediate agent” (C.W. 93, XI, 33). (The resemblances
of ideas, perhaps, point to the influence of the Gita, which we shall
discuss a little later.)
Despite the difficulties perceived by Emerson on the way to the
Self, he did not allow his faith in the Self to break. Rather, it seems he
overpowered the difficulties in his way to a considerable degree. This

186
becomes evident in “Self-Reliance.” Emerson's transcendental vision
of the Self is noteworthy in the following lines (:“my perception of it
is as much a fact as the sun,” W, II, 65 and): “The soul raised over
passion beholds identity and eternal causation, perceives the self­
existence of Truth and Right and calms itself with knowing that all
things go well” (W, II, 69). Even in “Experience” which is the saddest
of his essays he admits that he receives from the Self more than he
deserves: “The benefit overran the merit the first day and has overrun
the merit ever since. The merit, itself, so called, I reckon part of the
receiving” (W, III, 84).
It seems, as the time passed, Emerson was liberated fully by the
Self. He writes in “Fate” that that day is “the great day of the feast of
life” when one’s eyes from within open to the oneness of things and to
the omnipresence of the Self. Then one “sees that what is must be and
ought to be, or is the best” (W, VI, 25). (This happens when one’s
mundane self is fully overpowered and one sees the Self everywhere.)
The state of mind referred to above seems to be the state of complete
liberation from the troubles of life. In the Gita in chapter XII the man
dear to Krishna is described as one who is of a steady mind and who
accepts life as it is and is “pleased with whatever cometh to pass” (C. W.
100, XII, 19). In chapter VI the man united with the Self is described
as one who “looketh on all things alike, beholdeth the supreme soul in
all things, and all things in the supreme soul” (C.W. 65, VI, 29). It is
also pointed out: “Supreme happiness attendeth the man whose mind
is thus at peace” (C.W. 65, VI, 27).
Emerson elaborates his experience (of his union with the Self)
further in "Fate": “This beatitude dips from on high down on us and
we see. It is not in us so much as we are in it” (W, VI 25). He repeats:
“It is not in us, but we are in it. It is of the Maker, not of what is made”

187
(W, VI, 26). He adds: “where it shines nature [the mundane self of man
included] is no longer intrusive . . . The world of men show like a
comedy without laughter: populations, interests, government, history,
it is all toy figures in a toy house” (W, VI, 26). This is “the majesty into
which we have suddenly mounted, the impersonality, the scorn of
egotisms ... now we are as men in a balloon, and do not think so much
of the point we have left or the point we would make, as of the liberty
and glory of the way” (W, VI, 27). This seems to be the state of mind
of the man liberated by the Self from all the worries in life.
In the Gita we find a similar quality and measure of liberation of
the individual from his difficulties in life. The man who overcomes his
mundane self and unites with the Self is able to obtain “happiness
supreme.” “In this happiness is born to him an exemption from all his
troubles; and his mind being thus at ease, wisdom presently floweth to
him from all sides” (C.W. 42, II, 64, 65). He becomes “acquainted
with that boundless pleasure which is far more worthy of understanding
than that which ariseth from the senses and he is not moved by the
severest pain” (C.W. 64, 65, VI, 21, 22). In chapter III such a man is
described as “self-delighted”, “self-satisfied” and “happy in his own
soul” “and there is not, in all things which have been created, any
object on which he may place dependance.” He has “no interest either
in that which is done, or that which is not done” (C.W. 46, III, 17,18).
To him heat, cold, pain, pleasure, honour, disgrace make no difference.
To him “gold, iron and stones are the same” (C.W. 63, VI, 7, 8). Friends
and enemies or “those who stand aloof or go between” are “the same”
to him (C.W. 63, VI, 9).
The basic condition for a union with the Self in Emerson and in
the Gita is the coming out of the individual from the influence of the
mundane self in him. His mundane self is (his false individuality or)

188
that part of him which keeps him attached to the world, its attractions
and expectations under the influence of nature’s illusion. “The
superficial results of the action of the [mundane] self must be
distinguished from the less visible but more profound thoughts of the
Self.”7 Emerson emphasises the choice of the “constitution” which is
the choice of the Self within. “Such choosing is a kind of affirmation
of the innate and universal Self, a realization of it.”8 In the Gita the
man, who overpowers within himself the influence of the three qualities
of nature, which make his mundane self, is united with the Self. He is
supposed at the same time to follow his constitution.
As the three qualities of nature through their influence on man
decide the nature and quality of his mundane self in the Gita, the
influence of the tradition in society decides the nature and quality of
the mundane self of man in Emerson. One's overcoming of this self
and the consequent union with the Self is all Emerson's
Transcendentalism is about. Emerson “once suggested that if a person
/

wished to know what Transcendentalism was he should empty his mind

of everything coming from tradition and the rest would be
Transcendentalism.”9 That means a life in the Self through a union
with the Self.
th
Transcendentalism was the movement, in the 19^century U.S.A.,
started by Emerson to propagate his philosophy of the Self. According
to Donald M Koster he was the “foremost spokesman” of American
Transcendentalism.10 The word ‘Transcendentalism’ was first used by
Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher “to designate the intuitive
method of reaching truth.”11 Kant died in 1804 (about a year after
Emerson's birth ).Emerson’s transcendentalism was, however,
something of his own making. Denton J. Snider remarks in this regard
that “let it be said that it is doubtless Emerson's own designation of his

189
own idea, even if he found, as he says, the term already in German
philosophy.”12 Snider says that we have “an early glimpse of its
existence hinted in a letter to Carlyle, dated March 12, 1835, in which
Emerson speaks of The Transcendentalist, the name of a new journal
about to be started, in which he has evidently a good deal of interest.”13
And “even a kind of Transcendental club, composed of a group of
young men, of whom he seems to be the disguised motive power, peeps
out modestly in the same letter.”14 And if we want to “fix the birth time
of the American period bearing that name, it would be somewhere
near the publication of Emerson's Nature (1836) or the appearance of
the first number of the Dial (July, 1840), or the formation of the Brook
Farm Institute or Community as it was oftenest called, near Boston
(1841).”15
At the beginning, Transcendentalism was a derisive term in New
England but it “came in time to be accepted with pleasure and pride by
its exponents.”16 The ideas presented by it came to be known as “the
Newness, the New Views, the New School, the Intuitional philosophy
and the Movement.”17 It started “as a revolt against historical
Christianity.” It was “a protest movement within the Unitarian Church
in New England.” It embodied a “quest for authentic religious
experience” and it “rejected forms, creeds, rites and verbal
explanations’.’ Rather, “it sought to penetrate to the heart of things by
a direct immediate encounter with realityC18 To us Transcendentalism
means Emerson's philosophy of the liberating Self which seeks to
transcend the bounds of human troubles. The Unitarians of the time,
however, helped Emerson in bringing his philosophy to the forefront,
Transcendentalism shared three fundamental ideas with the Unitarians
in its opposition to the Calvinism. It rejected the idea of the Trinity and
declared its belief in one God. Jesus is his son and messenger and is

190
human and not divine. Secondly, it “opposed the exclusive and sectarian
nature of Calvinism,” and thirdly, it “opposed most emphatically the
Calvinist emphasis on sin and on its violent punishment in fire.”19
Although all Emerson's writings may be termed as transcendental
in nature, some of his works have been considered as specially
important in their contribution to the movement. Perry Miller believes
that “an anthology of the basic texts of Transcendentalism would
perforce include” his “little book of 1836, Nature, his two seminal
orations—The American Scholar of 1837 and the Divinity School
Address of 1838”and “his classic essays— ‘Self-Reliance,’ ‘The Over-
Soul,’ ‘Fate,’ and ‘Experience’.”20 According to Brian M Barbour,
Emerson's ^Nature* is the “original and probably the best systematic
expression of the transcendental philosophy.”21
From the resemblances between Emerson's transcendental
philosophy and the philosophy in the Gita it seems that the reading of
the Gita had its impact on him to a considerable degree. There are,
however, critics who believe that Emerson had formulated his
philosophy in full before he read the Gita. F. I. Carpenter examines the
list of Emerson's readings and points out that the Gita appears in 1845.
But at the same time he also mentions that in 1830 among his notes is
listed The Mahabharat, one of the sacred books of India.22 Examining
his various sources, Carpenter concludes: “Thus gathering the evidence
together, we find that probably Emerson had read no complete book of
Hindu literature before 1836” when he published his Nature “which
has been said to contain all of his philosophic ideas in miniature.”23
Here it will be quite useful to pin-point the resemblances of ideas
between Emerson’s Nature and the Gita in brief. Emerson says: “ I am
nothing, I see all; the currents of the Universal Being, circulate through
me, I am part or particle of God ” (W, 1,10). This idea is very pronounced

191
in the Gita. We need'nt illustrate it here. Next, the theory of action in
the Gita is reflected when Emerson says: “A man is fed not that he
may be fed, but that he may work” (W, I, 14). Next, in Emerson and in
the Gita man is linked to the uses of nature through his senses. Exploring
uses of nature Emerson says “Commodity” in nature means “advantages
which our senses owe to nature.” This benefit is “temporary and
mediate, not ultimate” (W, I, 12). The life of senses, in Emerson and in
the Gita, has to be transcended. Emerson explains further: “Nature is
thoroughly mediate. It is made to serve. It receives the dominion of
men as meekly as the ass on which the saviour rode” ( W, I, 40 ). The
three qualities of nature in the Gita serve the same purpose for man.
They serve man readily but they create an illusion which needs to the
overpowered. Their benefit is, to use Emerson's words, ‘temporary
and mediate.’ In that respect nature is unreal. In the ultimate analysis,
because the Self is in everything, in Emerson and in the Gita, there is
unity in diversity. And Emerson says: Nature has unity, “the unity in
variety” (W, I, 43). The “senses” believe in “ the absolute existence of
nature.” This is “despotism of the senses, which binds us to nature as if
we were part of it.” This compares well with the overpowering
influence of the three qualities of nature on man.
Emerson points to the enlightenment (in the Gita it occurs when
one rises above the influence of three qualities of nature and becomes
trigunatita, one with the Self): Thought “shows us nature aloof, and as
if it were afloat” (W, 1,49). And further: “ The best moments of the life
are these delicious awakenings of higher powers and the reverential
withdrawing of nature before its God ” (W, I, 50). This compares well
with the following lines in the Gita: “ When he who beholdeth
perceiveth no other agent than these qualities of nature and discovereth
that there is a being superior to them, he at length findeth my nature.”

192
And “when the soul hath surpassed these three qualities which are co­
existent with the body, it is delivered” (C. W. 109, XIV, 19,20). It unites
with the Self on the withdrawal of the nature from it.
Still, there is more to compare. Man, Emerson says, is “entitled
to the world by his constitution” (W, I, 20). We already know that the
Gita stresses this point. Then, the Self is for all, for everyone. It is “not
mine or thine, or his, but we are its. We are its property and men” (W,
I, 27). Everyone belongs to the Self. The Gita stresses this point. The
desire for personal gain is condemned in the Gita and it is stressed that
it blocks the individual's access to the Self. And Emerson says that the
“simplicity of character and sovereignty of ideas is broken up by the
prevalence of secondary desires, the desire of riches, of pleasure, of
power, and of praise” (W, I, 30).
Then, there is a reference to Viasa (W, I, 58) who is acknowledged
as a philosopher with Berkeley. The Brahmins are included in the class
of “every fine genius” “since the world began” (W, I, 34). Next, the
soul, the part of Self in man, “is not hot or passionate at the appearance
of what it calls its own good or bad fortune, at the union or opposition
of other persons. It has no enemy. It accepts whatever befalls, as part
of its lesson. It is a watcher more than a doer, and it is a doer, only that
it may the better watch” (W, I, 60). This seems to be a commentary on
the philosophy of the Gita. This also compares well with the Gita's
idea of “the great God, the most high spirit, who is this body in the
observer, the director, the protector, the partaker” (C. W. 104, XIII, 22).
Even a biographical search into Emerson's life reveals that,
perhaps, the Gita influenced him very powerfully. As noted in the first
chapter, in May 1831 Emerson came to be acquainted with philosophy
of the Gita (as presented by Victor Cousin). He was highly impressed
by it. It may be that it, perhaps, supported him in his decision to resign

193
*

his pastorate in 1832. It is also possible that when he proceeded on a

European voyage on Dec. 25, 1832 and also visited England, he got a
copy of Charles Wilkins’ translation of Gita which had been in those
days in the book market in that country since 1785. For a person like
Emerson it looks simply unbelievable that on his tour to England he
would not look for a translation of the Gita (keeping in mind the fact
that he had even a French version of Victor Cousin's work on the Gita
before leaving on his tour, in addition to its English translation by
Henry Gotfried Linberg). Still, it is, however, intriguing why Emerson
in a letter written to Miss Elizabeth Hoar in 1843 “states that ‘The only
other event is the arrival in Concord of the Bhagavat Gita, the much
renowned book of Buddhism [!], extracts from which I have often
admired, but never before held the book in my hands.”24 We can leave
this point for future researches. Experts in stylistic linguistics, too, can
analyse Emerson's texts and compare them with Charles Wilkin's
translation of the Gita to solve this riddle.
Future researches on Emerson may also concentrate on the change
of thought in Emerson's writings in his journals, etc. after May 1831,
the time when Emerson first became acquainted with the Gita. One
pointer to this need comes from one of Emerson's journals in which in
1826 he tells us that he doubts even the existence of God and has got
serious reservations about what is preached in churches: “But now it
must be admitted I am not certain that any of these things are true. The
nature of God may be different from what he is represented. I never
beheld him. I do not know that he exists.”25 Now, what gave Emerson
the philosophy of the Self in 1836 in Nature needs to be explored.
What caused the sea-change that is visible in the writings that followed?
It seems we cannot say that it was Plato's influence, though it
had its role. According to Christy, “Emerson was definite in his

194
conviction that the basis of Plato's thought was Oriental.”26 Emerson
himself remarks about Plato that “he has not a system. The dearest
defenders and disciples are at fault. He attempted a theory of the
s
universe and his theory is not complete or Self-evident.” He adds: “One
man thinks he means this, and another that; he has said one thing in
one place, and the reverse of it in another place” (W, IV, 76).
It seems that the study of the Gita revolutionized Emerson's
thought in the presence of other influences on him. Charles Malloy
whom Emerson lent his copy of the Gita (translated by Charles Wilkins)
tells us that Emerson told him: “I am a great borrower. I read all sorts
of books, and take what belongs to me.”27 Emerson, perhaps, took what
he thought was the best in the Gita (and left out the rest). However,
Sharpe is of the view: “However much Emerson may have admired
the Gita, he absorbed no more than its general atmosphere. His
philosophy had been formed before he had read it.” “He accepted it as
a valuable confirmation of what he had already come to believe about
the innermost essence of the universe”. About the Over-Soul Sharpe
says: “And where better to perceive it than in the pages of the Gita?m
Partap Chander Mazoomdar remarks about Emerson: “He seems to
some of us to have been a geographical mistake. He ought to have
been born in India.”29 According to F.I. Carpenter, he “is probably the
founder of the modern school of Comparative Religion, in America.”30
A professor of Comparative Religion in a Western University, a
Canadian by birth, when asked about his attitude to Emerson said:
“Well, I named my first son after him.”31
Taking stock of the impact of the Gita on Emerson, it may also
be noted that his poem “Brahma,” too, is remarkable for its affinity
with the Gita. It was published in the first number of the Atlantic
Monthly in 1857. “To the reader of the Bhagavat Gita ‘Brahma’ seemed

195
a wholly admirable epitome or condensed statement, of that wonderful
book.”32 It is possible to “illustrate each stanza by parallel passages
from the Indian episode.”33 According to Malloy, “The Bhagavat Gita
is condensed into the poem ‘Brahma’.”34 In the style of the Gita's
Krishna Emerson makes his Brahma speak out: “I am the doubter and
the doubt, /And I the hymn the Brahmin sings and one to me are shame
and fame” (W, IX, 195).
It seems Walt Whitman, too, was influenced by the Gita and he
even began to speak like Krishna himself. “Emerson noted that
Whitman's reiterated I was much like the communal T of Krishna.”35
Perhaps “much of his Oriental tinge may be attributed to the influence
of Emerson.”36 Incidentally, the influence of the Transcendental
Movement of which Emerson was the founder and chief spokesman
(and who in turn had been influenced by the Gita) has been far reaching
and has extended beyond his times. The movement was not only “an
important factor in American life, but it set the tone intellectual moral,
spiritual— for an entire generation of Americans.” Its “impact, although
inestimable, can be felt even to the present day.”37
Emerson and the Gita, beyond the resemblances of thinking
between them about human limitations and strengths, have a message
for mankind. It is that human life no doubt has its difficulties, but in
man lies the power of the creator to deal with them. Man is eternally
potent to deal with his circumstances, and can go on advancing infinitely
into the direction of improvement and perfection. The Self in the
universe is disguised in man. There is guidance and liberation from
troubles for everyone who opts for it. In “Fate” Emerson says: “A
breath of will blows eternally through the universe of souls in the
direction of the Right and Necessary.” Only the individual effort
matters: “Always one man more than another represents the will of the

196
Divine Providence to the period ” (W, VI, 28). On parallel lines the
Gita says: “Eeshwar resideth in the breast of every mortal being,
revolving with his supernatural power all things.” The choice for the
individual is: “Take sanctuary then, upon all occasions with him alone”
(C.W. 133, XVIII, 61,62). In the Self lies the key to success, happiness
and a solution to all our problems.

197
 NOTES

1. Christy 121.

2. Christy 121.

3. Christy 119.

4. Christy 121.

5. Emerson, Emerson in His Journals, ed. Joel Porte (Massa

chussetts: Belknap P of Harvard UP, 1982) 164.

6. Emerson 165.

7. David M Robinson, Emerson and the Conduct of Life:

Pragmatism and Ethical Purpose in the Later Work (Cambridge:
Cambridge UP, 1993) 19.

8. M. Robinson 18.

9. Boiler, Jr. 34.

10. Donald N Koster, Transcedentalism in America (Boston, Twayne,

1975) 97.

11. Thomas Wentforth Higginson, Part of a Man’s Life (Boston:

Houghton, Mifflin, 1905) 3.

12. Denton J Snider, A Biography of Ralph Waldo Emerson (Saint

Louis: William Harvey Minor, 1921) 152.

198
13. Snider 152.

14. Snider 152, 53.

15. Higginson 3, 4.

16. Boiler, Jr. 34.

17. Boiler, Jr. 34.

18. Boiler, Jr. 1.

19. Carpenter, Emerson Handbook 129, 30.

20. Perry Miller, “Foreword,” The American Transcendenta-lists:

Their Prose and Poetry, ed. Perry Miller (Gardencity, New
York:Double Day Anchor, 1957) X.

21. Brian M. Barbour, “Introduction,” American Transcenden-talism:

An Anthology of Criticism, ed. Brian M. Barbour (Notre Dame,
London: U of Notre Dame ,1973) 10.

22. Carpenter, Emerson and Asia 106.

23. Carpenter, Emerson and Asia 108.

24. Carpenter, Emerson and Asia 107.

25. Emerson, Journals ofRalph Waldo Emerson, ed. Edward Waldo

Emerson and Waldo Emerson Forbes, 10 vols. (Boston and New
York: Houghton Mifflin Co. 1909-14) II, 159. Quoted in A Study
of the Journals of Emerson by Jan Michalski (M.A. 1976)
Graduate Division of Wayne State University, Detroit Michigan,

199
 1976, on page 8.

26. Christy 51.

27. Charles Malloy, “A Study of Emerson's Major Poems,” American

Transcendental Quarterly 23,11 (1974) 61.

28. Sharpe, The Universal Gita 26.

29. Pratap Chander Mazoomdar, “Emerson as Seen From India,” The

Genius and Character ofEmerson : Lectures at Concord School
of Philosophy (1885; New York: Kennikat, Port Washington
,1971).

30. Carpenter, Emerson and Asia 247-48.

31. Carpenter, Emerson and Asia, 248.

32. W.T. Harris, “Emerson’s Orientalism,” The Genius and Character

ofEmerson: Lectures at the Concord School ofPhilosophy 373.

33. W.T. Harris 373.

34. Malloy 62.

35. Carpenter, Emerson and Asia 250.

36. Carpenter, Emerson and Asia 250.

37. Koster 1.

200
 LIST OF WORKS CONSULTED

PRIMARY SOURCES

RALPH WALDO EMERSON

The Complete Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Edward Waldo

Emerson. Centenary Edition. 12 vols. Boston: Houghton Mifflin,
1903-04.

The Correspondence of Emerson and Carlyle. Ed. Joseph Slater. New

York: Columbia UP, 1964.

The Early Lectures of Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1833-42. Ed. Stephen E.

Whicher, Robert E. Spiller and Wallace E. Williams. 3 vols.
Cambridge : Harvard UP, 1959; Harvad UP, Belknap P, 1964-
72.

The Journals of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Edward Waldo Emerson

and Waldo Emerson Forbes. 10 vols. Boston : Houghton Mifflin,
1909-14.

The Journals and Miscellaneous Notebooks of Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Eds. William H. Gilman, et al. 16 vols. Cambridge : Belknap P
of Harvard UP, 1960-82.

Emerson in His Journals. Ed. Joel Porte. Massachussetts : Belknap P

of Harvard UP, 1982.

The Letters of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Ralph L Rusk, et al. 8 vols.
New York: Columbia UP, 1939-91.

Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Richard Poirier. Oxford, New York: Oxford

201
«

UP, 1990.

THE BHAGAVADGITA

The Bhagavadgita. Trans. S. Radhakrishnan. 1948. London: George

Allen and Unwin; New Delhi: Harper Collins, 1998.

The Bhagavadgita. Trans. P.Lal. Delhi: Hind Pocket Books, 1965.

The Bhagavadgita. Trans. John Davies. 1882. London: n.p., 1893;

Calcutta: Susil Gupta (India), 1954.

The Bhagavadgita. Trans. Swami Chidabhavananda. 1965.

Tirupparaitturai (Tamil Nadu): Sri Ramakrishna Tapovanam,
1977.

The Bhagavat-Geeta: Or Dialogues of Kreeshna and Arjoon in

Eighteen Lectures. Trans. Charles Wilkins. London: C Nourse,
1785. American Transcendental Quarterly 20.1 (1973): 1-156.

The Message of the Gita: A New Translation and Summarisation in

Simple and Easy-to-Understand English. Trans. Keshob Kanto.
Calcutta: Bolanath Borooah Educational Trust, 1966.

Shrimad Bhagavad Gita: The Solution of Life Problems. Trans. Bengali

Baba. 2nd ed. Poona: Rajendra Ambadas Bharat, 1950.

The Bhagavadgita: with The Sanatsugatiya and Anugita. Trans.

Kashinath Trimbak Telang. Oxford: Clarendon P, 1882. Delhi:
Motilal Banarsidass, 1965.

Bhagavadgita As It Is. Trans. A.C. Bhaktivedanta. New York: Collier

Books. London: Collier-Macmillan, 1972.
202
SECONDARY SOURCES

RALPH WALDO EMERSON

BOOKS

Alcott, A. Bronson. Ralph Waldo Emerson: An Estimate of His

Character and Genius. New York : Haskell, 1981.
£
Allan, Gay Wilson. Waldo Emerson: A Biography. New York: Viking,
1981.

Barish, Evelyn. Emerson : The Roots of Prophecy. Princeton, New

Jersey: Princeton UP, 1989.

Bishop, Jonathan. Emerson on the Soul. Cambridge, Massachusetts:

Harvard UP, 1964.

Boiler, Paul F. Jr. American Transcendentalism, 1830-1860: An

Intellectual Inquiry. New York: G.P. Putnam’s and Capricorn,
1974.

Cameron, Kenneth Walter. Young Emerson s Transcendental Vision:

An Exposition ofHis World View with an Anaylsis ofthe Structure,
Background and Meaning of Nature (1836). Drawer Hartford:
Transcendental Books, 1971.

.....................-.......................... The Transcendentalists and Minerva:

Cultural Backgrounds of the American Renaissance with Fresh
Discoveries in the Intellectual Climate of Emerson, Alcott and
Thoreau. 3 vols. Hartford: Transcendental Books, 1958.

203
------------- ----- --------- . Emerson, the Essayist: An Outline of His
Philosophical Development Through 1836 with Special Emphasis
on the Sources and Interpretation of Nature. 2 vols. 1945.
Hartford: Transcendental Books, 1972.

Carpenter, Frederic Ives. Emerson Handbook. New York: Hendricks,

1953.

-------------------------- ... Emerson and Asia. New York: Haskell, 1968.

Cayton Mary Kupiec. Emerson's Emergence: Self and Society in the

Transformation of New England 1800-1845. Chapel Hill and
London: U of North Carolina P, 1989.

Christy, Arthur. Orient in American Transcendentalism. New York:

Columbia UP, 1932.

Conway, Moncure Daniel. Emerson: At Home and Abroad. Boston:

James R Osgood, 1882.

Cooke, George Willis. Memorabilia of the Transcendentalists in New

England. Hartford: Transcendental Books, 1973.

Dillaway, Newton. Prophet ofAmerica: Emerson and the Problems of

To-day. Boston: Little, Brown, 1936.

Emerson, Edward Waldo. Emerson in Concord. Detroit: Gale Research,

1970.

Firkins, O.W. Ralph Waldo Emerson. New York: Russell & Russell,
1965.

Foy, Rena Lee Williams. The Philosophy of Ralph Waldo Emerson

204
 and its Educational Implications. Michigan: Ann Arbor U of
Microfilms, 1971.

Frothingham, Octavius Brooks. Transcendentalism in New England:

A History. New York: Harper and Brother, 1959.

Garnett, Richard. Life of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Folcroft: Folcroft

Library Editions, 1974.

Goddard, Harold-Clarke. Studies in New England Transcendentalism.

New York: Humanities, 1969.

Gonnaud Maurice. An Uneasy Solitude: Individual and Society in the

Work of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Trans. Lawrence Rosenwald.
Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton UP, 1987.

Gougen, Len. Virtue's Hero: Emerson, Antislavery, and Reform. Athens:

Georgia UP, 1990.

Gray, Henry David. Emerson: A Statement of New England

Transcendentalism as Expressed in the Philosophy of Its Chief
Exponent. New York: Frederick Ungar, 1965.

Harrison, John S. The Teachers ofEmerson. New York: Haskell, 1966.

Higginson, Thomas Wentforth. Part ofa Man s Life. Boston: Houghton,

Mifflin, 1905.

Hodder, Alan D. Emerson's Rhetoric ofRevelation: Nature, the Reader,

and the Apocalypse Within. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania UP,
1989.

Hughes, Gertrude Reif. Emerson's Demanding Optimism. Baton Rouge

205
 and London: Louisiana State UP, 1984.

Hutchison, William R. The Transcendentalist Ministers: Church Reform

in the New England Renaissance 1959. Boston: Beacon, 1965.

Jacobson, David. Emerson's Pragmatic Vision: The Dance of the Eye.

Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania UP, 1993.

Koster, Donald N. Transcendentalism in America. Boston: Twayne,

1975.

Lange, Lou Ann. The Riddle of Liberty: Emerson on Alienation,

Freedom and Obedience. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars, 1986.

Leary, Lewis. Ralph Waldo Emerson: An Interpretative Essay. Boston:

Twayne, 1980.

Me Aleer, John. Ralph Waldo Emerson: Days of Encounter. Boston:

Little Brown, 1984.

Michalsld, Jan. A Study ofthe Journals ofRalph Waldo Emerson. Diss.

Wayne State U, Detroit, Michigan, 1976.

Michaud, Regis. Emerson: The Enraptured Yankee. Trans. George Boas.

London: Harper and Brothers, 1930.

Myerson, Joel. The New England Transcendentalists and the Dial.

London and Toronto: Farleigh Dickinson UP, 1980.

Neufeldt, Leonard. The House ofEmerson. Lincoln and London: U of

Nebraska P, 1982.

Packer, B.L. Emerson's Fall: A New Interpretation ofthe Major Essays.

206
 New York: Continuum, 1982.

Patri, Umesh. Hindu Scriptures and American Transcendentalists. New

Delhi: Intellectual, 1987.

Paul, Sherman. Emerson's Angle of Vision: Man and Nature in

American Experience. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1952.

Perry, Bliss. Emerson Today. N.p.: Archon Books, 1969.

Porte, Joel. Representative Man: Ralph Waldo Emerson in His Time.

New York: Oxford UP, 1979.

Rao, Adapa Ramakrishna. Emerson and Social Reform. New Delhi:

Arnold Heinemann, 1980.

Richardson, Robert D. Jr. Emerson: The Mind on Fire. Berkeley, Los

' Angeles: U of California P, 1995.

Roberson,,Susan L. Emerson in His Sermons: A Man-Made Self.

Columbia: U of Missouri P, 1975.

Robinson, David. Apostle of Culture: Emerson as Preacher and

Lecturer. Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1982.

Robinson, David M. Emerson and The Conduct of Life: Pragmatism

and Ethical Purpose in the Later Work. Cambridge: Cambridge
UP, 1993.

Rusk, Ralph L. The Life of Ralph Waldo Emerson. 1949. New York:
Columbia UP, 1964.

Russell, Phillips. Emerson: The Wisest American. New York:

Brantano’s, 1929.
207
Snider, Denton J. A Biography ofRalph Waldo Emerson. Saint LOUIS:
William Harvey Miner, 1921.

Staebler, Warren. Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Arthur W. Brown and

Thomas S. Knight. New York: Twayne, 1973.

Steele, Jeffrey. The Representation of the Self in the American

Renaissance. Chapel Hill: U of North Carolina P, 1987

Taylor, Charles. Sources of the Self: The Making of Modern Identity.

Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1989.

Thottackara, Daniel J. Emerson the Advaitin: A Study of the Parallels

Between Emerson s and Sankara s Advaita Vedanta. Bangalore:
Asia Trading, 1986.

Updike, John. Emersonianism. Cleveland: BITS, 1984.

Wagenknecht, Edward. Ralph Waldo Emerson: Portrait ofa Balanced

Soul. New York: Oxford UP, 1974.

Whicher, Stephen E. Freedom and Fate: An Inner Life ofRalph Waldo

Emerson. 1953. Philadelphia: Philadelphia UP, 1957.

Wood, James Playsted. Trust Thyself: A Life ofRalph Waldo Emerson

for the Young Reader. New York: Pantheon, 1964.

Woodberry, George Edward. Ralph Waldo Emerson.

New York: Macmillan, 1907

208
BOOK ARTICLES

Anderson, John Q. Introduction. The Liberating Gods : Emerson on

Poets and Poetry. Florida : U of Miami P, 1971. 11-13.

Arnold, Matthew. “Emerson.” The Recognition of Ralph Waldo

Emerson: Selected Criticism since 1837. Ed. Milton R. Convitz.
Ann Arbor: Michigan UP, 1972. 66-74.

Arvin, Newton. “The House of Pain.” Emerson: A Collection ofCritical

Essays. Ed. Milton R. Convitz and Stephen E. Whicher.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1962. 46-59.

Barbour, Brian M. Introduction. American Transcendentalism : An

Anthology of Criticism. Ed. Brian M. Barbour. Notre Dame
London: U ofNotre Dame P, 1973. 01-05.

Barish, Evelyn. “The Moonless Night.” Emerson Centenary Essays.

Ed. Joel Myerson. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern
Illinois UP, 1982. 1-16.

Barton, William B. “Emerson's Method as a Philosopher.” Emerson's

Relevance Today: A Symposium. Ed. Eric W. Carlson and J Lasley
Dameron. Hartford: Transcendental Books-Drawer, 1971. 20-
28.

Brownson, Orestes Augustus. “Emerson's Essays.” Critical Essays on

Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Robert E Burkholder and Joel
Myerson. Boston: G.K. Hall, 1983. 73-84.

Buell, Lawrence. Introduction. Ralph Waldo Emerson: A Collection of

Critical Essays. Ed. (Lawrence) Buel. Englewood Cliffs. New
Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1993. 1-12.
209
------------------ “First Person Superlative: The Speaker in Emerson's
Essays.” Emerson's Relevance To-day: A Symposium. Ed. Eric
W. Carlson and J Lasley Dameron. Hartford: Transcendental
Books-Drawer, 1971. 28-35.

Carlyle, Thomas. Preface to Essays, First Series (1841). The

Recognition ofRalph Waldo Emerson: Selected Criticism Since
1837. Ed. Milton R. Convitz. Ann Arbor: Michigan UP, 1972.
19.

Carpenter, Frederic Ives. “Transcendentalism.” American

Transcendentalism: An Anthology of Criticism. Ed. Brian M.
Barbour. Notre Dame London: U of Notre Dame P, 1973.23-33.

Cox, James M. “R.W. Emerson: The Circles of the Eye.” Emerson,

Prophecy, Metamorphosis and Influence. Ed. David Levin. New
York: Columbia UP, 1975. 57-81.

Detweiler, Robert. “The Over-Rated Over Soul.” Critical Essays on

Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Robert E Burkholder and Joel
Myerson. Boston: G.K. Hall, 1983. 307-09.

Francis, Richard Lee. “The Poet and Experience.” Emerson Centenary

Essays. Ed. Joel Myerson. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UP,
1982.93-106.

Frost, Robert. “On Emerson.” Emerson: A Collection ofCritical Essays.

Ed. Milton R. Convitz and Stephen E. Whicher. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1962. 12-17.

Frothingham, Octavius Brooks. “Emerson the Seer.” The Recognition

of Ralph Waldo Emerson: Selected Criticism Since 1837. Ed.
Milton R. Convitz. Ann Arbor: Michigan UP, 1972. 50-59.
210
Gonnaud, Maurice. “Emerson and the Imperial Self: A European
Critique.” Emerson: Prophecy, Metamorphosis and Influence.
Ed. David Levin. New York: Columbia UP, 1975. 107-28.

Gross, Theodore L. “Under the Shadow of Our Swords: Emerson and

the Heroic Ideal.” The Recognition of Ralph Waldo Emerson
Selected Criticism Since 1837. Ed. Milton R. Convitz. Ann Arbor:
Michigan UP, 1972.211-223.

Harris, W. T. “Emerson’s Orientalism.” The Genius and Character of

Emerson: Lectures at the Concord School of Philosophy. Ed. F.
B. Sanborn. 1885. New York: Kennikat, Port Washington, 1971.
372-85.

Harrison, John S. Preface. The Teachers of Emerson. New York :

Haskell, 1966. N. pag.

Hill, David W. “Emerson’s Eumenides: Textual Evidence and

Interpretation of‘Experience’”. Emerson Centenary Essays. Ed.
Joel Myerson. Carbondale: South Illinois UP, 1982. 107-21.

Hochfield, George. “An Introduction to Transcendentalism.” American

Transcendentalism: An Anthology of Criticism. Ed. Brian M.
Barbour. Notre Dame London: U of Notre Dame P, 1973. 35-51.

James, William. “Address at the Emerson Centenary at Concord.”

Emerson. A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Milton R. Convitz
and Stephen E. Whicher. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall,
1962. 18-23.

Lowell, James Russell. “Emerson the Lecturer.” The Recognition of

Ralph Waldo Emerson: Selected Criticism Since 1837. Ed. Milton
 R. Convitz. Ann Arbor: Michigan UP, 1972. 43-49.

Mazoomdar, Partap Chander. “Emerson as Seen From India.” The

Genius and Character ofEmerson : Lectures at Concord School
of Philosophy. Ed. F.B. Sanborn. 1885. New York : Kennikat,
Port Washington, 1971. 365-71.

Miller, Perry. Foreword. The American Transcendentalists: Their Prose

and Poetry. Ed. Miller. Garden City, New York : Double Day
Anchor, 1957. ix-xi.

Parker, Theodore. “The Writings of Ralph Waldo Emerson.” Critical

Essays on Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed. Robert E. Burkholder and
Joel Myerson. Boston: G.K. Hall, 1983. 144-47.

Parkes, Henry B. “Emerson. ” Emerson : A Collection of Critical

Essays. Ed. Milton R. Convitz and Stephen E. Whicher.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice Hall, 1962. 121-35.

Poe E(dgar) A(llan). “RW. Emerson.” Critical Essays on Ralph Waldo

Emerson. Ed. Robert E Burkholder and Joel Myerson. Boston:
G.K. Hall, 1983.91.

Pommer, Henry F. “The Contents and Basis of Emerson’s Belief in

Compensation.” Critical Essays on Ralph Waldo Emerson. Ed.
Robert E. Burkholder and Joel Myerson. Boston : G.K. Hall,
1983.288-97.

Porte, Joel. “Nature as Symbol: Emerson's Noble Doubt.” Emerson's

Nature: Origin, Growth, Meaning. Ed. Merton M. Sealts, Jr. and
Alfred R. Ferguson. 2nd ed. 1969. Carbondale and Edwardsville:
Southern Illinois UP; London and Amsterdam: Feffer and

212
 Simons, 1979. 145-49.

Railton, Stephen. “Seeing and Saying: The Dialectic of Emerson's

Eloquence.” Emerson and His Legacy: Essays in Honour of
Quentin Anderson. Ed. Stephen Donaldio, Stephen Railton and
Ormond Seavey. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Souther Illinois
UP, 1986.

Santayana, George. “Emerson”. Emerson: A Collection of Critical

Essays. Ed. Milton R. Convitz and Stephen E Whicher.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1962. 31-38.

Sealts, Merton M., Jr. “Emerson as Teacher.” Centenary Essays. Ed.

Joel Myerson. Carbondale: Illinois UP, 1982. 180-90.

Whicher, Stephen E. “The Dream of Greatness.” Ralph Waldo Emerson:

A Collection of Critical Essays. Ed. Lawrence Buell. Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1993. 61-76.

........................ . “Emerson's Tragic Sense.” Emerson: A Collection of

Critical Essays. Ed. Milton R. Convitz and Stephen E Whicher.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1962. 39-45.

Whitman, Walt. “Emerson.” The Recognition ofRalph Waldo Emerson:

Selected Criticism Since 1837. Ed. Milton R. Convitz. Ann Arbor:
Michigan UP, 1972. 63-65.

213
JOURNAL ARTICLES

Adams, Richard R “The Basic Contradiction in Emerson.” Emerson

Society Quarterly 55A (1969): 106-110.

Allen, Wilson Gay. “Emerson and the Unconscious.” American

Transcendental Quarterly 19.1.II (1973): 26-30.

Banta, Martha. “Gymnasts of Faith, Fate and Hazard.” American

Transcendental Quarterly 21.1 (1974): 6-20.

Benoit, Ray “Emerson on Plato: The Fire’s Centre.” American

Literature 34.4 (1963): 487-98.

Birch, Thomas D. “Toward a Better Order: The Economic Thought of

Ralph Waldo Emerson.” New England Quarterly LXVIII.3
(1995): 385-401.

Bridges, William E. “Transcendentalism and Psychotherapy: Another

Look at Emerson.” American Literature 41.2 (1969): 1 57-77.

Carpenter, Frederic I. “American Transcendentalism in India.” Emerson

Society Quarterly 31.2 (1963): 59-62.

Clark, James Freeman. “The Religious Philosophy of Ralph Waldo

EmersonT American Transcendental Quarterly 17 (1973): 38-
40.

Cromphout, Gustaaf Van. “Emerson and the Dialectics of History.”

PMLA91A (1976): 54-65.

Das, S.P. “Beginning of American Transcendentalism.” Indian Journal

ofAmerican Studies 1.3 (1970) 15-22.

214
 ---- . “Emerson’s Concept of Man.” Literary Criterion 8.2 (1968):
13-20.

Ghose, Sisir Kumar. “Transcendence Now: Some Thoughts Emerson

Would Have Liked.” Literary Criterion Emerson Centenary No.
2 XVIII. 1 (1983): 75-89.

Gougen, Len. “Emerson, Carlyle and the Civil War.” New England
Quarterly LXII.3 (1989): 403-23.

Grusin, Richard A. “Put God in Your Debt : Emerson’s Economy of

Expenditure.” PMLA 103.1 (1988): 35-44.

Guha, Naresh. “Waldo Among Brahmins.” Literary Criterion Emerson

Centenary No. 1 XVII.4 (1982): 30-42.

Gupta, R.K. “Emerson and the American Image of India.” Literary

Criterion Emerson Centenary No. 2 XVIII.l (1983): 108-18.

Hendrick, George. “Emerson and Gandhi.” Emerson Society Quarterly

2.1 (1956): 7-8.

Keefe, Richard R.O’. “ ‘Experience’ : Emerson on Death.” American

Transcendental Quarterly. New Series 9:2 (1995): 119-29.

Kloeckner, Alfred J. “Intellect and Moral Sentiment in Emerson’s

Opinions of ‘The Meaner Kinds’ of Men.” American Literature
30.3 (1958): 322-38.

Lai, Malashri. “Emerson’s ‘Indian Superstition’ and the Unitarian

Outreach.” Indian Journal ofAmerican Studies 22.1 (1992): 1-8.

Lauter, Paul. “Emerson’s Revision of Essays (First Series).” American

215
 Literature 33.2 (1961): 143-58.

Lee, Roland F. “Emerson’s ‘Compensation’ as Argument and As Art.”

New England Quarterly XXXVII.3 (1964): 291-305.

Leverenz, David. “The Politics of Emerson’s Man-Making Words.”

PMLA 101 (1986): 38-55.

Malloy, Charles. “ ‘Brahma’ : A Study of Emerson’s Major Poems.”

American Transcendental Quarterly. 23.11 (1974): 60-66.

McClumpha, C.F. “Emerson and Transcendentalism.” American

Transcendental Quarterly. 22.3 (1974): 121-22.

Mott, Wesley T. “Emerson and Antinomianism: The Legacy of the

Sermons.” American Literature 50.3 (1978): 369-97.

Mulder, William. “The Other Emerson: Emerson's ‘Experience’ as the

Trial By Existence.” Literary Criterion XVII.4 (1982): 7-21.

Nagarjun, S. “Emerson and Advaita: Some Comparisons and

Contrasts.” American Transcendental Quarterly?) A (1989): 325-
36.

Narsimhaiah, C.D. “Emerson Centenary Symposium: Introduction.”

Literary Criterion XVII.4 (1982): I-V.

Norwood, Kyle. “‘Somewhat Comes of It All’: The Structure of

Emerson’s ‘Experience.’” American Transcendental Quarterly
9.1 (1995): 21-39.

Obuchowski, Peter A. “Emerson, Evolution, and the Problem of Evil.”

Harvard Theological Review. 72.1.2 (1979): 150-56.

216
Peckham, Morse. '"Emerson’s Prose.” American Transcendental
Quarterly 21.11 (1974) : 64-74.

Prettyman, Gib. ‘“Working After His Thought’: Emerson's The Conduct

ofLife,American Transcendental Quarterly 1A (1993): 45-63.

Ramaswami, S. “Emerson: The Ambivalence of His Self-Reliance.”

Literary Criterion Emerson Centenary 2 XVIII. 1 (1983). 98-107.

Rao, C. Subba. “Self-Reliance and Swadharma.” Literary Criterion

m/

Emerson Centenary No.2 XVIII.1 (1983): 90-97.

Rao, G. Nageshwar. “Poetry of Insight: An Approach to the Poetry of

Emerson.” Literary Criterion XVIII. 1 (1983): 119-31.

Saxena, Pramod Kumar. “A Note on Emerson and ‘Ex Oriente Lux.’”

Literary Criterion VIA (1965): 48-55.

Shimkin, David. “Emerson’s Playful Habit of Mind.” American

Transcendental Quarterly 62 (1986) : 3-16.

Whitaker, Thomas R. “The Riddle of Emerson's Sphinx.” American

Literature 27 (1955-56): 179-95.

217
THE BHAGAVADGITA

BOOKS

Bazaz, Prem Nath. The Role of the Bhagavad Gita in Indian History.
New Delhi : Sterling, 1975.

Brooks, F.T. Studies in the Bhagavad Gita: Sannyasa or The One

Salvation of Organic Work. Madras: Vyasashrama, 1911.

Divatia, H.V. The Art ofLife in the Bhagavad-Gita. Bombay: Bhartiya

Vidya, 1951.

Gandhi, M.K. Gita The Mother. Ed. Jagdish Chander. Lahore: Indian,
1947.

-------------- - T— he Teachings of the Gita. Ed. Anand T. Hingorani.

Bombay: Bhartiya Vidya, 1962.

Ghose, Sri Aurobindo. Essays on the Gita: First Series. 2nd ed.
Calcutta: Arya, 1926.

------------------------. Essays on the Gita: Second Series. Calcutta: Arya,

1928.

Mehta, Rohit. From Mind to Super Mind: A Commentary on the

Bhagavad Gita. Ahmedabad: New Order, 1972.

Munshi, K.M. Bhagavad-Gita and Modern Life. Bombay: Bhartiya

Vidya, 1955.

Parrinder, Geoffrey. Upanishads, Gita and Bible: A Comparative Study

of Hindu and Christian Scriptures. London: Faber and Faber,
1962.
218
Radhakrishnan. Indian Philosophy. 1923. 2nd ed. vol. I. New York:
Macmillan; London: George Allen and Unwin, 1962.

Ramdas, Swami. Gita Sandesh: Message ofthe Gita. Bombay: Bhartiya

Vidya, 1976.

Ranade, R.D. Bhagavadgita As a Philosophy of God-Realisation.

Bombay: Bhartiya Vidya, 1965.

Rele, Vasant G. Bhagavad-Gita: An Exposition on the Basis ofPsycho-

Philosophy and Psycho-Analysis. 1928. Rev. ed. Bombay: D.B.
Taraporevala, 1941.

Sharpe, Eric J. The Universal Gita: Western Images ofthe Bhagvadgita.

London: Duckworth, 1985.

Sircar, M.N. Mysticism in the Bhagavad-Gita. New Delhi: Classical,

1977.

Virajeshvar. Science of Bhagavadgita: A Study of Ancient Wisdom

through Modern Science. Delhi: Spiritual India, 1977.

Wilkins, W.J. Hindu Mythology. Delhi: Delhi Book, 1972.

219
ARTICLES IN BOOKS

Baba, Bengali. Preface. Shrimad Bhagavad Gita: The Solution ofLife

Problems. Trans. Baba. 2nd ed. Poona City: Ramchandra
Ambadas, 1950. 04-21.

Burway, M.W. Preface. Introduction. The Bhagavad Gita. Trans.

Burway. New Delhi: Asian, 1981. i-ix. 1-10.

Dutt, Romesh C. Translator's Epilogue. The Mahabharat. Trans. Dutt.

1944. Bombay: Jaico, 1966. 177-88.

Hastings, Warren. “To Nathaniel Smith, Esquire” [a letter dated 4th

October, 1784]. The Bhagvat-Geeta or Dialogues ofKreeshna
and Arjoon. Trans. Charles Wilkins. [Published in] American
Transcendental Quarterly 20.1 (1973): 5-16.

Kanto, Keshob. Preface. The Message of the Gita: A New Translation

and Summarisation. Trans. Kanto. Gauhati, Assam: Bholanath
Borooah, 1966. ix-xi.

Radhakrishnan, S. Introductory Essay. The Bhagavadgita. Trans.

Radhakrishnan. London: George Allen, 1948. New Delhi: Harper
Collins, 1998. 11-78.

Telang, Kashinath Trimbak. Introduction. The Bhagavadgita. Trans.

Telang. Oxford: Clarendon P, 1882. Delhi: Motilal Banarasidass,
1965. 1-36:

Wilkins, Charles. The Translator's Preface. The Bhagvat-Geeta, or

Dialogues of Kreeshna and Arjoon in Eighteen Lectures with
Notes. Trans. Wilkins. American Transcendental Quarterly 20:1
(1973): 23-26.
220
ARTICLES IN JOURNALS

Joshi, K.S. “On The Meaning of Yoga.” Philosophy East and West
XV.l (1965): 53-64.

Kapoor, Veena. “An Interpretation of Action in the Bhagavadgita.”

Panjab University Research Bulletin XVII.2 (1986): 141-47.

Larson, Gerald James. “The Song Celestial: Two Centuries of the

Bhagvad Gita in English.” Philosophy East and West XXXI.4
(1981): 513-41.

Minor, Robert N. “The Gita's way as the only way.” Philosophy East
and West XXX.3 (1980): 339-54.

Pandit, Sneh. “Doctrine and Analysis of Karma in the Bhagavadgita.”

Panjab University Research Bulletin XVI.I (1985): 95-101.

Ram, Alur Janaki. “Arjuna and Hamlet: Two Moral Dilemmas.”

Philosophy East and West XVIII. 1.2 (1968): 11-28.

Reichenbach, Bruce R. “Karma, causation, and divine intervention.”

Philosophy East and West XXXIX. 2 (1989): 135-49.

Stace, Walter T. “Oriental Conceptions of Detachment and

Enlightenment.” Philosophy East and West 2.1 (1952): 20-30.

^ H 3.^ 3,

221