Gita In Daily Life - Chapter-1

[Guest guest]

Namaste all.

 

This is in continuation of Part-1 of Ch-1.

Reference:

http://www.escribe.com/culture/advaitin/m25352.html

 

1) Gita in daily life - Practical aspect #1:-

"Following of dharma"

-------------

Summary:King Duryodhana, desirious of success at any

cost, compares the strengths of each army [1:2] and

keeps losing at every step, while pandavas, guaranteed

of success at every step due to their following of

dharma, remain unagitated even when war is about to

start.Duryodhana lost 2 times already [1:10, 18]

and Arjuna won already [1:20] in their minds.

 

In daily life: Following of dharma gives victory

at each and every step, eventhough one may

lose in the short-term materially whereas not

following it is a loss at every step eventhough

short-term gains may be present.

 

2) Gita in daily life - Practical aspect #2:-

"Personal gain vs dharma"

-------------

Summary:Arjuna understand that, with his gandiva,

hw would conquor all and due to compassion

to all those he would conquor and to the

ancestors, he forgets dharma.

 

In daily life: When personal gains are placed

above dharma, one is bound to take personal

responsibility and thus resulting in continuous

dilemmas over what is the correct thing to do

and whether to take up the task which is

resulting in personal gains.

 

3) Gita in daily life - Practical aspect #3:-

"Correct understanding of dharma"

------------

Summary: Arjuna, a great accomplisher normally,

throws away all his will to do anything at all,

due to not having a grasp over what is dharma.

 

In daily life: Firstly, one has to do some

contemplation and study to understand dharma.

--------------

--------------

 

I would request other members to share their

views in adding more aspects relevant to

daily life, or adding further insights

to the above.

 

 

With Love & Regards,

Raghava

 

______________________

India Matrimony: Find your partner online.

http://.shaadi.com/india-matrimony/

[Guest guest]

--- Sri Raghavarao Kaluri wrote:

> In daily life: Following of dharma gives victory

> at each and every step, eventhough one may

> lose in the short-term materially...

 

It depends on what you mean by "short-term". For many, the

"short-term" may stretch to include entire life. From material

perspective, one can find many dharmic people suffering all their

lives; not just in the "short-term". Similarly, one can find many

adharmic people prospering all their lives. Clearly, the promise of

victory in the material sense is specious at best, unless the word

"short-term" is defined very imaginatively. What is more important to

understand is that following of dharma is not for any material reward

whatsoever. If it comes-- it is prasada; if it doesn't-- still, it is

prasada. So, let us dedicate ourselves to dharma --not in the hope of

any "long-term" victory, but-- without caring for whether it brings

victory or loss, in the short-term or long-term, materially or

non-materially. Following of dharma has to be its own reward. It need

not depend upon any extraneous incentives such as material victory in

the long-term.

 

Regards.

> whereas not

> following it is a loss at every step eventhough

> short-term gains may be present.

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

That was a good beginning, Raghava-ji.

 

Let me add one observation. There are three key ideas in the first

chapter which later, along with others, form the undercurrent of

Krishna's teaching. They are:

 

1. 'Overcome by compassion' (*kRRipayA parayAviShTaH* I-27): This

blindedness by the overpowering of compassion is what Krishna is

going to argue against. Compassion is a virtue alright. But when

compassion overpowers you you are only giving in to attachment.

Well, that is going to be one central theme in all the succeeding

chapters.

 

2. 'The great bow (of Arjuna) slips off from (my) hand' (*GANDIvaM

sramsate hastAt* I - 30) and similar statements from Arjuna that

indicate his extreme excitement. This over-excitement influenced by

the events happening around you or to you is to be curbed -- this

is going to be another central theme in the teaching. And as a cure

for this, Krishna is going to emphasize 'Equanimity'.

 

3. 'I do not want to kill these (my kith and kin)' (*EtAn na hantum

icchAmi* I - 35). This statement of Arjuna is very characteristic

of all of us. Without pondering about the implications we keep

saying 'I am going to do this', 'I do not want to do that' and so

on. This, Krishna, is going to establish in his teaching, smacks

only of the dominance of ego in us and this has to be curbed,

because, according to Krishna, nothing is in Arjuna's (our) hands.

 

Thus three major teachings of the Gita have their seed-ideas

planted in Arjuna's words and every one of us can tune in with them

as if they are our own statements in daily life!

 

PraNAms to all advaitins

profvk

[Guest guest]

Namaste, A very basic question. Did Krishna actually spoke in Sanskrit on the

battlefield or is it because Vyasji wrote everything is Sanskrit ?

 

thanks,

 

Shailendra

 

 

 

 

Better first dates. More second dates. Personals

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

A interesting and important point to note about the first chapter is

that Sri Sankara did not comment on this chapter at all.

 

There are a number of historic questions regarding the Gita event

itself:

 

Questions such as whether dialogues really took place on the

battlefield at all, what were the two armies doing when the dialogue

was taking place, whether the battlefield was big enough considering

the size of the armies, how did Vyasa see all this etc etc.

 

Swami Paramarthananda in His classes on Gita (current class audio is

being posted weekly on the web at www.yogamalika.org) says:

 

By choosing not to comment on the first chapter, Sri Sankara has

left the reader to choose their own interpretation about the

historical validity or otherwise of the event.

 

But the commentary only covers the actual teaching and spiritual

message which Sri Sankara considered to be of paramount importance.

 

 

regards

Sundar Rajan

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Sundar Rajan" <avsundarrajan>

wrote:

>

> Namaste,

>

> A interesting and important point to note about the first chapter is

> that Sri Sankara did not comment on this chapter at all.

>

>

> But the commentary only covers the actual teaching and spiritual

> message which Sri Sankara considered to be of paramount importance.

>

 

Namaste,

 

It would also be important to emphasize that Shankara wrote an

Introduction to the Gita Bhashya itself, which is sadly neglected. The

(Adhyasa) Introduction to the Brahma Sutra Bhashya is always quoted,

but not the one to the Gita!

 

Congratulations to Raghava-ji on setting the right tone to the

beginning of the topic with 'Dharma', the first word of the Gita.

In the verse 18:70, Krishna describes the dialogue as 'dharmyaM

saMvAdam', studying which one has performed veritably the

'j~nAna-yaj~na'. The verses 12:13-20 also have been described as

'dharmya amRRitam' & dharmAShTkam.

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Sundar Rajan" <avsundarrajan>

wrote:

>

> Namaste,

>

> A interesting and important point to note about the first chapter is

> that Sri Sankara did not comment on this chapter at all.

>

 

Namaste.

 

Strictly speaking, this is not correct. Sri Sankara does make a

summary comment on the verses 1-2 to 2-10 in his bhashya.

 

Harih Om!

Neelakantan

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Ravi Shivde <shivde@s...> wrote:

> Namaste all.

>>

> But that is only a part of the confusion. Apart from one's

professional

> duty, there are several other roles to play and 'duties' to

fulfill. Like

> 'family', 'citizen', 'human being' etc. These duties are also

Dharma. Many

> of these or incompatible or conflicting. One finds it very

difficult to

> decide which 'duty' takes precedence over others. Gita advises us-

> ' Niyatam kuru karma twam'.

>

> What is exactly meant by Niyatam? Is it 'predefined?'.

>

> Ravi

 

Namaste

 

Before I take up the question about 'niyataM karma' raised above (in

another thread: Dharma - perplexing), I would like to sort out a

procedural matter.

 

'Gita in Daily Life' started with Chapter 1 and the thread 'Dharma -

perplexing' takes up the matter and raises questions which are

certainly legitimate questions about 'Gita in Daily Life', but

appear to belong deeply to the content of later chapters of the Gita

(particularly 3rd and 4th). The procedural question is: Should we

take these matters right now or should we wait until the leader of

the discussion gets to Chapter 3.

 

The answer 'We should wait' has a point: namely, we do not know what

plan the leader of the discussion has in terms of his introducing

the contents of the different chapters. By taking up now itself all

questions irrespective of their content that naturally will occur

in the discussion of later chapters, we might be distracting

ourselves and thereby might be dissipating our concentration.

 

The answer 'We should not wait' has also a point: namely, By

postponing crucial issues which are naturally raised by interested

readers we might be dampening the interest and very probably the

spontaneous questions that are raised may not be effectively

answered when they are dealt with much later in the discussion,

because we might have forgotten the context of the question.

 

I propose to side with the answer 'We should not wait' because, good

questions are usually less frequent. The earlier they are answered

the better it will be for the general understanding. So here I am,

taking up the question of 'niyatam karma'.

 

The word of course means 'predefined' or 'prescribed'. Here I would

like to quote Aurobindo. "niyataM kuru karma tvam" occurs in III -8.

He translates it as "Do thou do *controlled* action". I quote below

his special comments on this line:

 

*I cannot accept the current interpretation of 'niyataM karma' as if

it meant fixed and formal works and were equivalent to the

vedic 'nitya-karma', the regular works of sacrifice, ceremonial and

the daily rule of vedic living. Surely 'niyata' simply takes up

the 'niyamya' of the previous verse (III -6). Krishna makes a

statement "he who controlling the senses by the mind engages with

the organs of action in Yoga of action, he excels" -- *manasA

niyamya Arabhate karmayogaM* and he immediately goes on to draw from

the statement an injunction to sum it up and convert it into a

rule. "Do thou do controlled action" - 'niyataM kuru karma

tvaM'. 'niyatam' (Shloka 7) takes up the 'niyamya' of shloka 6 and

kuru karma (shloka 7) takes up the 'Arabhate karma-yogam' of shloka

6. Not formal works fixed by an external rule, but desireless works

controlled by the liberated buddhi, is the teaching of the Gita.*

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

> Namaste, A very basic question. Did Krishna actually spoke in Sanskrit on

the battlefield or is it because Vyasji wrote everything is Sanskrit ?

 

Namaste all!

 

Shailendraji,

 

Sanskrit was very much the spoken language of the time, used by members of

higher classes of the society. Ladies, and menials usually spoke Prakrit (a

slang).

 

At least that is the situation portryated in dramas of Bhasa and Kalidas.

 

Scholars on our list can elaborate further.

 

Ravi Shivde

[Guest guest]

>

> Shailendraji,

>

> Sanskrit was very much the spoken language of the time, used by

members of

> higher classes of the society. Ladies, and menials usually spoke

Prakrit (a

> slang).

>

> At least that is the situation portryated in dramas of Bhasa and

Kalidas.

>

> Scholars on our list can elaborate further.

>

> Ravi Shivde

 

Namaste:

 

All the ancient writings do give us the impression that the spoken

language at least among the higher classes was Sanskrit.

 

But, in a lighter vein, let me recall an anecdote from the

Mahabharata and then ask you the same question which Shailendra-ji

asked. In the Mahabharata war Yudhishtira was made to convince

Dronacharya that his son Ashwattama has been killed, so that Drona

would lay down arms. For this Krishna suggested the killing of an

elephant by name Ashwattama. That was done. And when Dronacharya

wanted the confirmation from Yudhishtira of the news of the death of

his son, Yudhishtira said Ashwattama has been killed but he also

added in a lower tone, the word 'elephant'.

In Sanskrit language this came out like this. "Ashwattama hataH

kunjaraH". The first two words were spoken by Yudhishtira in normal

voice and tone but the third word which denoted the elephant was

said in such a low tone that Drona did not hear it. And then of

course Drona laid down his arms and the story goes forward.

 

But now let us come to this Sanskrit usage. It was the flexibility

of the Sanskrit language which helped Yudhishtira say "Ashwattama

hataH .....kunjarah" and still get away with it. The

word 'kunjaraH' denoting 'elephant' and the word 'Ashwattama' which

is the elephant's name could be separated in the sentence and still

the Sanskrit sentence makes the sense that Yudhishtira wanted of it.

Try this in some other language. You would fail to make sense if you

wanted to be in Yudhishtira's position who was drawn into tricking

Drona. In the languages that I know the verb 'killed' cannot be used

to separate 'Ashwattama' and 'the elephant'

 

Now my comment. The incident of this tricky sentence which made

Drona lay down his arms is important for the plot of the

Mahabharata. There was no other way of having Drona killed except to

make him lay down his arms. And without the exit of Drona there was

no hope of the further story of the Mahabharata.

 

I therefore feel there is every plausibility of Sanskrit having been

the spoken language in those times!

 

Take it lightly. Don't start arguing with me!

 

PraNAms to Sanskrit lovers and to Vyasa!

profvk