Just how important is the context in which something is saidIJ How bound is a word to the time and place in which it is uttered, to the person saying it and to the person(s) addressedIJ I got some understanding on this issue from a doctor in the dispensary of Patna University some time in the early 1990s. The doctor was also a highly accomplished yoga teacher and had a keen spiritual insight. He was a product of the world renowned Bihar School of Yoga based in Munger in Bihar and ran a yoga training centre in the dispensary for university teachers and students.
While I was discussing something with him one day, a man dropped in to seek his advice on some spiritual matters. One of the questions he asked was: "lord Krishna says a lot of things in the Gita which He does not Himself follow. Is Krishna fair doing thisIJ" The yoga teacher-cum-doctor replied: "One, the Gita is not meant for us in our times. It was something communicated to Arjun to fulfill a specific need on a certain occasion and time. It is meant for Arjun's consumption. Second, when Krishna tells Arjun that certain things should be done or not, the instructions are meant for someone at a certain level of understanding and accomplishment. But these instructions are not for the lord Himself, for He knows all and is God Himself. It is like this. If some live electricity wires are hanging loose with their ends exposed, the electrician might tell people to not touch any of the wires. But he himself will handle them because he knows about the wires and how the connections can be mended."
This satisfied the elderly gentleman and he left us. I complimented the doctor for giving a good answer to the senior citizen's question. The doctor replied: "The first naïve person was that gentleman because he became content with my reply. The second naïve person was me, for I attempted to answer his question. The Gita is God's own word. What can we, mere mortals, understand about itIJ We can never truly understand God or why He says or does something. But that gentleman asked something and I gave an answer just for the sake of it. Even I don't know whether my answer is correct or not."
I grant that we cannot really commentate on the Gita. Its meaning keeps changing as those who read it change. My conclusion may be wrong but one thing that the doctor said makes a lot of sense to me even now, after all these years. He said the Gita is meant for a specific person in a given context at a particular time and place. It is meant to be used and thrown then. By thrown I mean gotten over with, not carried over for use in a different context by a different person at a different time and place. The Gita was delivered with spontaneity and its relevance is defined by and confined to the persons participating in it when it was delivered, and their context, time and place. It does not apply in a simple transference to other persons with other contexts, at other times and places.
The entire Gita has a specific purpose. Arjun was running away from his duty to fight prior to the battle of Kurukshetra. Arjun's state of mind and the time and place he was in are clear in the first chapter of the Gita. The purpose of the Gita is to prepare Arjun for battle. Krishna's advice to fight is for Arjun in a given situation defined by the time and place he was in. Gita should be seen in this context.
But, the words of the Gita were preserved and are now being used by people very different from Arjun, in contexts, times and places worlds away from the original. It is said the Gita should always be read and interpreted with the help of an able guide. But to truly get the meaning and benefits of the Gita, the guide should not just be good, he should be of the level of lord Krishna. And, how do we find someone like HimIJ
This problem of subject, context, time and place applies to all words and texts. We see how often people complain that the meaning of something they had said was distorted because they were quoted out of context. The complaint is often made against the media and while much of the complaining can be said to be an attempt to evade controversy, the media often commits the mistake of quoting people out of context, sometimes unwittingly, sometimes knowingly to generate controversy and increase readership.
I am not sure about the date of this story, but this happened when a Pope visited las Vegas in the US. The local tabloid media was determined to create ruckus with the Pope at its centre, but how does one get the Pope to say something outrageousIJ Well, where is a will, there is a quote. When the Pope landed in las Vegas, one of the first questions a reporter asked him was, "Will you visit the nightclubs of las VegasIJ" The Pope was startled by the question and asked, "Are there nightclubs in las VegasIJ" The next day, a tabloid screamed on its front page: The first question the Pope asks after landing in las Vegas, "Are there nightclubs in las VegasIJ" Technically correct and sound but still a travesty of truth.
I feel all words are bound by the subjects or people party to it, and their context, time and place. A word is a natural entity, a flower that exists, blooms and draws life from the surroundings in which it is born. If this flower is plucked, preserved in a book or through any other means and served in a surrounding different from the one in which it first existed, you get the letter of the word, but not its essence, its meaning, its spirit. That is the tyranny of not just the written word, but any recorded word. The spontaneity of its occurrence is lost and it begins to be things it was not meant to.
This happens in telephonic talks too. People talking over phone share the same time but not the same place and, hence, context. This often creates misunderstanding and at times, discord too. For instance, I am in Patna and elated about something. I want to share my joy with my friend in Delhi and call him up. I speak to him as if he is standing in front of me. But he is surrounded by office colleagues and feeling down due to some development. My enthusiasm reaches him but he does not reciprocate.
In the same way, his depressed disposition reaches me, but since I am removed from its context, I can't really relate to it. There is mismatch in the whole interaction that is jarring for both of us. We share the text, but not the context. With the phone, it is also not possible to catch the non-verbal signals delivered by a person during conversation. Apart from the conversation, these signals have a lot to do with the spatial context of a person. And experts say only about 35 per cent of communication is verbal. The rest is non-verbal.
To me, the Word is for here and now, never for there and then.
amitshekhara@gmail.com