Guest guest Posted July 3, 2003 Report Share Posted July 3, 2003 praNAm prabhujis Hare Krishna I have a serious (you may call it mischievous) doubt here. My question is, in gIta, even after krishna's valiant effort to enlighten arjuna through 17 chapters (krishna's upadEsha starts from II chapter) & from 650 & odd shlokas (leave sanjaya uvAcha, arjuna uvAcha etc.), arjuna again deluded by the influence of kAla & dEsha & succumbed to ahankAra mamakAra when he fought with babruvAhana (arjuna-chitrAngada's son) & tAmradhvaja & hamsadhvaja during ashvamEdha digvijaya yAtra (post kurukshEtra era). Is all krishna's efforts in vain?? looks like naughty question, but we have to think it over seriously is it not?? There is no guarantee that we will attain permanent jnAna even it is received from vEda puruSha?? What are your thoughts on this prabhujis?? I know I may get the replies like *first think about yourself* then you analyse whether arjuna was a jnAni or not, etc. But I am very specific here to get the meaningful answer. Kindly help me. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2003 Report Share Posted July 3, 2003 Namaste Bhaskarji, "- bhaskar.yr Is all krishna's efforts in vain?? looks like naughty question, but we have to think it over seriously is it not?? There is no guarantee that we will attain permanent jnAna even it is received from vEda puruSha?? " What I heard from a teacher was that Arjuna didnt understand the teachings of Sri Krishna completely. It was Sanjaya who actually understood the complete essence of Bhagavan's teachings ! Attainment of jnAna depends on the one who is receiving it rather than the one who is giving it. Just as rice will grow only in a paddy-field, and not in a desert ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 4, 2003 Report Share Posted July 4, 2003 What I heard from a teacher was that Arjuna didnt understand the teachings of Sri Krishna completely. > praNAm prabhuji > Hare Krishna > But at the end arjuna says"nashtO mOhaH smutirlabdA! tvatprasAdAnmayAchuta!! sthitOsmi gata samshayaH! karishye vachanaM tava!! was arjuna pretending here that he understood gita completely prabhuji?? that too in front of omniscient bhagavan himself prabhuji?? > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! > bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2003 Report Share Posted July 5, 2003 On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 bhaskar.yr wrote: > > praNAm prabhujis > Hare Krishna > > I have a serious (you may call it mischievous) doubt here. My question is, > in gIta, even after krishna's valiant effort to enlighten arjuna through > 17 chapters (krishna's upadEsha starts from II chapter) & from 650 & odd > shlokas (leave sanjaya uvAcha, arjuna uvAcha etc.), arjuna again deluded by > the influence of kAla & dEsha & succumbed to ahankAra mamakAra when he > fought with babruvAhana (arjuna-chitrAngada's son) & tAmradhvaja & > hamsadhvaja during ashvamEdha digvijaya yAtra (post kurukshEtra era). Is > all krishna's efforts in vain?? looks like naughty question, but we have > to think it over seriously is it not?? There is no guarantee that we will > attain permanent jnAna even it is received from vEda puruSha?? What are > your thoughts on this prabhujis?? > > I know I may get the replies like *first think about yourself* then you > analyse whether arjuna was a jnAni or not, etc. But I am very specific > here to get the meaningful answer. Kindly help me. > > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! > bhaskar > namaste. We do not really know about Arjuna's jnAnam following the bhagavadgItA teachings. We do not really know about anyone's (except one's own) jnAnam. This point is made very clear by shri shankara in VivekacUDAmaNi. We can only guess whether X is a jnAni or Y is not a jnAni, etc. We cannot be sure. In mahAbhArata story, there are various characters: arjuna, kriShNa, yudhiStara, duryodhana, etc. All of them play their assigned roles. We can say that one with jnAnam is one that knows that he/she is acting a role. It is impossible to say whether arjuna, yudhiShTara, or even kriShNa are identifying with the role or they know that they are acting the role. Even their saying that they are acting the role is not proof itself because that particular saying may be part of the story itself. What I am trying to say is: there is no apriori way in which we can know whether someone else is identifying with the role or simply knows that he/she is playing the role. Having said that, let us look at the role of arjuna post-bhagavadgItA teaching. ArjuNa was very much grieved at abhimanyu's death, his revenge-seeking on saindhava, and some of his actions post-kurukshetra war all suggest that the BhagavadgItA teaching did not make him what we think is the behaviour of a jnAni. Yet, how do we know that this is not role-acting ? We can never know that. Hence the question, in my view, is not answerable. Regards Gummuluru Murthy - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 7, 2003 Report Share Posted July 7, 2003 Hence the question, in my view, is not answerable >praNAm prabhuji >Hare Krishna > thanks for your kind clarification prabhuji. Yes, most of the time we think that we know the answer for the questions which are unanswerable. But prabhuji, dont ShAstrAs help us to find out the answer to all these puzzling questions?? Krishna clearly states in BG lakShaNas of a sthitapragna, from this can we not ascertain whether arjuna achieved this state after gItOpadEsha prabhuji?? pls. clarify. > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! > bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 9, 2003 Report Share Posted July 9, 2003 Namaste: Here is how Mahatma Gandhi summarizes his impression of Gita in the opening paragraph of his book, "THE MESSAGE OF THE GITA." ======================================================== " Even in 1888-89, when I first became acquainted with the Gita, I felt that it was not a historical work, but that under the guise of physical warfare, it described the duel that perpetually went on in the hearts of mankind, and that physical warfare was brought in merely to make the description of the internal duel more alluring. This preliminary intuition became more confirmed on a closer study of religion and the Gita. A study of the Mahabharata gave it added confirmation. I do not regard the Mahabharata as a historical work in the accepted sense. The Adiparva contains powerful evidence in support of my opinion. By ascribing to the chief actors superhuman or subhuman origins, the great Vyasa made short work of the history of kings and their peoples. The persons therein described may be historical but the author of the Mahabharata has used them merely to drive home his religious theme." Everyone may not agree with Gandhiji's point of view on Gita and Mahabharat. But we can agree with Gandhiji for his admiration of Sage Vyasa for placing the entire discourse of Gita in the middle of the war between two groups with opposite Dharmic values. Sage Vyasa did appear to use the story of Mahabharat with the dramatization of a long conversation between Lord Krishna and Arjuna to drive home his philosophical theme. Also it seems that Sage Vyasa intentionally or unintentionally provided dramatic incidents during and after the war that injected (mischievous) doubts, suspicions and confusions in our minds. Such doubts only confirm that we have not reached the level of spiritual maturity to understand the true intentions of Sage Vyasa. Just like the movie watchers in theaters, our thoughts got diverted to the character of Arjuna and we want our role model to become a Stithaprajna (person with the stable mind) instantaneously at the end of chapter 18. Suppose if Sage Vyasa transformed Arjuna as a Stithaprajna in Mahabharat immediately after the Gita discourse, his religious theme would have lost its value and charm! Lord Krishna's Gita discourse had two goals: (1) In the short-run, He wanted to bring stability to Arjuna and convince him take back the weapons and fight the war. (2) In the long-run He expected Arjuna to reach the highest plateau of spiritual maturity to become a Stithaprajna. Being the greatest teacher, he was quite successful in clearing the mind of Arjuna filled with doubts. The message of Gita is quite clear with respect to the achievement of Self-realization. The teacher can help the students in understanding the virtues of a Stithaprajna and but the responsibility becoming a Stithaprajna truly rests with the students! Also we have no way to test or judge whether Arjuna is self-realized or not. Only Arjuna (and probably Lord Krishna) knows whether he is a Stithaprajna! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote: > > praNAm prabhujis > Hare Krishna > > I have a serious (you may call it mischievous) doubt here. My question is, > in gIta, even after krishna's valiant effort to enlighten arjuna through > 17 chapters (krishna's upadEsha starts from II chapter) & from 650 & odd > shlokas (leave sanjaya uvAcha, arjuna uvAcha etc.), arjuna again deluded by > the influence of kAla & dEsha & succumbed to ahankAra mamakAra when he > fought with babruvAhana (arjuna-chitrAngada's son) & tAmradhvaja & > hamsadhvaja during ashvamEdha digvijaya yAtra (post kurukshEtra era). Is > all krishna's efforts in vain?? looks like naughty question, but we have > to think it over seriously is it not?? There is no guarantee that we will > attain permanent jnAna even it is received from vEda puruSha?? What are > your thoughts on this prabhujis?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 praNAm Sri Ramachadra prabhuji Hare Krishna > Thanks a lot prabhuji for your kind reply. Such doubts only confirm that we have not reached the level of spiritual maturity to understand the true intentions of Sage Vyasa. > yes prabhuji, I humbly admit that though I've gone through gIta several times, still gita has not gone through me!! Just like the movie watchers in theaters, our thoughts got diverted to the character of Arjuna and we want our role model to become a Stithaprajna (person with the stable mind) instantaneously at the end of chapter 18. > prabhuji my question was not on spontaneous result of gItOpadEsha on arjuna. Ofcourse, we know that arjuna gained instant jnAna (should I say with a prefix kshaNika) to perform his svadharma. But my question is how long it (jnAna) last in arjuna!! Suppose if Sage Vyasa transformed Arjuna as a Stithaprajna in Mahabharat immediately after the Gita discourse, his religious theme would have lost its value and charm! > I am not clear here prabhuji, pls. elaborate. You mean to say a stithapragna cannot perform karma?? Lord Krishna's Gita discourse had two goals: (1) In the short-run, He wanted to bring stability to Arjuna and convince him take back the weapons and fight the war. (2) In the long-run He expected Arjuna to reach the highest plateau of spiritual maturity to become a Stithaprajna. > prabhuji, as we know krishna achieved only (1) inspite of his sincere effort to make arjuna a stithapragna, arjuna behaved like an ordinary human being who is under the influence of shOka-mOha during abhimanyu episode & ashwamEdha yAga. Being the greatest teacher, he was quite successful in clearing the mind of Arjuna filled with doubts. The message of Gita is quite clear with respect to the achievement of Self-realization. The teacher can help the students in understanding the virtues of a Stithaprajna and but the responsibility becoming a Stithaprajna truly rests with the students! Also we have no way to test or judge whether Arjuna is self-realized or not. Only Arjuna (and probably Lord Krishna) knows whether he is a Stithaprajna! > But we are ready to analyse & calibrate the immaturity of the spiritual aspirants by scrutinising their outward action is it not prabhuji?? when we apply the same rule (arnuna's behaviour after gItOpadEsha) to discuss arjuna's paramArtha jnAna, we simply say waving our hands we cannot adjudge whether arjuna was a jnAni or not... why this discrepancy prabhuji?? when you have a yard stick to measure the spirituality in an aspirant, why we cannot decide whether arjuna gained ultimate jnAna or not based on scriptures... that is my humble question prabhuji. Kindly pardon me to be too fussy here. Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Namaste Sri Bhaskar Prabhuji: There is clear distinction between the characters - Sri Rama of Ramayana and the Arjuna of Mahabharat. The Rama of Ramayana was the Parabrhaman who took the avatar to demonstrate what is 'human dharma.' The Arjuna of Mahabharat was a 'jiva' who forgot his 'swadharma' at the critical time of war due to incorrect perception of 'life' and 'death.' Fortunately, he was able to regain his 'true divine nature' through Divine intervention. Rama of Ramayana is considered the role model for human behavior. In contrast the role of Arjuna in Mahabharat was a demonstration of human pitfalls of incorrect perception of 'karma and dharma.' Those who come from India should be aware that all over India, staging the drama of Ramayana or conducting week long discourses of Ramayana is always popular. In contrast, the story of Mahabharat did not get the same attention and attraction like Ramayana. As I have said before in a previous post - The story of Ramayana is being repeated because we all have the desire to acquire the virtues of Rama. I don't believe that we are eager to treat Arjuna as the role model for all of his behavior in Mahabharat. The story of Ramayana is centered on character - Rama the symbol of perfect human behavior. The story is quite simple and the morals are quite easy for everyone to understand and follow. The story of Mahabharat illustrates the existence of contrasting characters in human life exhibiting both 'evil' and 'good.' The story is quite complex and not that easy for everyone to grasp. This may partly explain why Sage Vyasa injected Bhagavad Gita (the perfect manual manual for human behavior) in the middle of Maharabharat to help us to accomplish our roles. Many authors including Dr. Radhakrishnan have noted that 'Mahabharat War' was a symbolic representation of our internal struggle between the 'evil' and 'good' thoughts. The discriminating intellect (Arjuna) was guided by the Atman (Lord Krishna) to fight and drive out the evil thoughts and retain the good thoughts. In Hindu philosophy, the mind is considered as the collection of thoughts (both evil and good) and if the evil thoughts are driven out, it gets purified. Hindus also believe that at the peak of spiritual maturity, mind will be left with no thoughts and the 'world of mAyA' gets dissolved. I believe that the author of Mahabharat did not intend to transform Arjuna as a Stithaprjana. But he did want to convey that a clearer understanding of human dharma through Gita had the effect of convincing Arjuna to wake up and play his ordained role! Your remark that "I've gone through Gita several times, still has not gone through me!" can be extended further. Most of us have listened to the recital of Gita several times. Actually Gita has through us several times through the right ear but got out without any impact through the left ear! Next time when listen to Gita, we should be careful to keep one of the ear closed to keep Gita stay within!! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote: > praNAm Sri Ramachadra prabhuji > Hare Krishna > > > Thanks a lot prabhuji for your kind reply. > > Such doubts only confirm that we have not reached the level of > spiritual maturity to understand the true intentions of Sage Vyasa. > > > yes prabhuji, I humbly admit that though I've gone through gIta several > times, still gita has not gone through me!! > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Many authors including Dr. Radhakrishnan have noted that 'Mahabharat War' was a symbolic representation of our internal struggle between the 'evil' and 'good' thoughts. The discriminating intellect (Arjuna) was guided by the Atman (Lord Krishna) to fight and drive out the evil thoughts and retain the good thoughts. > praNAm prabhuji > Hare Krishna > prabhuji IMHO if the authors say kurukShEtra was mere a symbolic representation of dharma & adharma, they have the onus to show us the whole epic of mahAbhArata is symbolically written. They cannot pick & chose some incidents authentic & some are symbolic to match their comfor zone. Which is the yard stick they use to bifurcate which is symbolic & which is actual incident?? Sri Sadananda prabhuji, some months back had written a mail giving us the dates of mahabhArata episodes. I dont know which are symbolical dates in it then!! > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! > bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 10, 2003 Report Share Posted July 10, 2003 Namaste Bhakser Prabhuji: Historical Places such as KurkShEtra and Indraprasta do exist and no one denies those historical facts including the War. You seem to have a misperception of the inference by the scholars regarding symbolism. The reference is specifically with respect to the conversation between Arjuna and Lord Krishna in the middle of a Big war. It is quite possible to hypothesize that the conversation is symbolic to get the metaphysical message buried underneath. The authors claims are just hyptheses but with good intentions and those hypotheses do bring better insights of Bhagavad Gita as a manual for human behavior. Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, bhaskar.yr@i... wrote: > > > prabhuji IMHO if the authors say kurukShEtra was mere a symbolic > representation of dharma & adharma, they have the onus to show us the whole > epic of mahAbhArata is symbolically written. They cannot pick & chose some > incidents authentic & some are symbolic to match their comfor zone. Which > is the yard stick they use to bifurcate which is symbolic & which is actual > incident?? Sri Sadananda prabhuji, some months back had written a mail > giving us the dates of mahabhArata episodes. I dont know which are > symbolical dates in it then!! > > > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!! > > bhaskar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.