re:re:cause of decline

[Guest guest]

namaskaar benji,

as you said--

You are certainly right that Hinduism in the Gita avoids pacifism for those

whose duty it is to defend the country. This point sometimes gets lost on those

who stress Gandhi's love of peaceful methods of conflict resolution (when

possible).

i think every hindu grantha avoids pacifism otherwise indian society would not

have been divided into four categories, kshatriyas being the warriors meant for

protecting others. pacifism would have avoided such categorisation.look, Krishna

also said the same--

Further, having regard to thy own duty, thou shouldst not waver, for there is

nothing higher for a Kshatriya than a righteous war.

you also said--

However, I must disagree with you slightly in one respect. I do

believe that at the ultimate level, God's will controls all events.

However, this does not deny free-will at the phenomenal level

So if pressed, I would say that there is no free-will, but we should behave as

though there is and do the right thing.

i totally agree with you ben ji that there is no free will. all in God's

hands.His will being the supreme. if anything good happens, it is His will & if

anything bad it's His will too. muslim invasion was also God's will. their

cruelity was also God's will. but i just said that we should not say this to

anyone who can not understand(i think we should be careful while saying this

outside advaita list, lolz). people are ought to misunderstand this.

instead, we should say though it was God's will that we are under attack we

perform our duties for our motherland is also God's will.

so let's not run away from it.

or, if one can understand like arjuna, he should be told as Krishna told him--

 

I am(God is) the mighty world-destroying Time, now engaged in destroying the

worlds. Even without thee, none of the warriors arrayed in the hostile armies

shall live.

Therefore, stand up and obtain fame. Conquer the enemies and enjoy the

unrivalled kingdom. Verily, they have already been slain by Me; be thou a mere

instrument, O Arjuna

Drona, Bhishma, Jayadratha, Karna and all the other courageous warriors—these

have already been slain by Me; do thou kill; be not distressed with fear; fight

and thou shalt conquer thy enemies in battle.

who can kill whom? as Krishna says to arjuna you are just the instrment, all of

them already been killed by me.He also said to him before--

He who takes the Self to be the slayer and he who thinks He is slain, neither of

them knows; He slays not nor is He slain.

for a jnani there is no violence even if he slays anyone because he knows he can

not kill anyone, he just being an instrument working according to God's will.

just like, Krishna being always surrounded by the gopis is still a brahmachari,

and sage Durvaasa having his meals of milk & ghee still eats grass(please read

Gopalatapniyopnishad,http://celextel.org/ebooks/upanishads/gopala_tapaniya_upani\

shad.htm) in the same way, jnani even on being a slayer never slays.

you said--

This point sometimes gets lost on those who stress Gandhi's love of peaceful

methods of conflict resolution (when possible).

there had been much controversy on Mahatma Gandhi on being right or wrong.i

would like to say something on this in spiritual respect which i listened from

the famous saint Morari Bapu. but for this we will have to come to a shloka from

yoga sutras of Patanjali which says--

when one is firm in non-violence hostility ceases in his presence.

sage valmiki was one, firm in non violence. it is said that deer & lions grazing

grass together in His tapovana(forest around Him). same is said for Chaitanya

Mahaprabhu too.

Morari Bapu has said that Mahatma Gandhi was not firm in non violence. He said

that Gandhiji was in a city(i don't remember which) & even in his presence

hindu-muslim riots started there & then Gandhiji himself accepted that He lacked

somewhere in the practice of non-violence, He was not firm in non-violence.

you said--

Really, the ahimsa of Buddhism and Jainism is appropriate for monks

only. If Buddhism went wrong, it was in failing to distinguish

between the duties of monks and priests, on the one hand, and

citizens on the other.

i truly agree with you in this respect too

with regards,

gautam.