Who Wrote Bhagwadgita ?

[ronin]

when ever someone mentions Gita we associate it with Lord Krishna. But very few of us know who the original author was. Iskon devotees are extorting bagfuls from foreigners by hiding this secret from them that Krishna just preached geeta. Even common mass in India does not know this fact. Where ever the author in Geeta has written to surrender to supreme god, it is assumed that Krishna is the supreme God.

 

Krishna does not have a copyright on Geeta. He never wrote Geeta. Geeta was already written before the war of Mahabharata. Krishna just preached it. It was written by Vyas Muni on the banks of Saraswati. So all those verses which Iskon devotees quote do not point at Krishna as a superior God. The original writer of gita was Vyas Muni & he should not be deprived of his credit.

 

See links below.

 

http://www.urday.com/gita.html

 

http://www.vedmandir.com/content/que...-april-21-2009

[ronin]

I'm not against Lord Krishna, but against those corrupt people who are robbing innnocent foreigners by using this propaganda that Krishna refers to himself as ultimate god in Geeta & depriving a great sage "Vyas Muni" for its credit.

 

If anybody has any important details plz contribute.

[theist]

What nonsense talk. Vyas wrote the conversation between two individuals that had not yet occured?

[ronin]

And what do you have to say about this. This guy even disagrees that Mahabharata was an event. And he has explained it so beautifully indeed.

 

http://www.geocities.com/yogirajharkare/atha.htm

[gHari]

Bhagavad-gita 4.1:

 

The Personality of Godhead, Lord SrI KRSNa, said: I instructed this imperishable science of yoga to the sun-god, VivasvAn, and VivasvAn instructed it to Manu, the father of mankind, and Manu in turn instructed it to IkSvAku.

Of course, one who has read and accepted the revelations in the Srimad Bhagavatam of Vyasadeva will know that Vedavyasa is none other than Sri Krsna.

 

Further, we must remember that the "Nitya-lila" of Sri Krsna has Him performing the speech at the Battle of Kuruksetra in every one of the practically innumerable universes in the material cosmos, one after another.

[Guest guest]

aham sarvasya prabhavo

mattah sarvam pravartate

iti matva bhajante mam

budha bhava samanvitah

 

I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emantes from Me. The wise who know this engage in my devotional service and worship me with all their hearts.

 

bahunam janmanam ante

jnanavan mam prapadyante

vasudeva sarvam iti

sa mahatama su durlabha

 

After many births and deaths who is actually in knowledge surreners unto Me, knowing Me to be the cause of all causes and all that is. Such a great soul is very rare.

[theist]

 

And what do you have to say about this. This guy even disagrees that Mahabharata was an event. And he has explained it so beautifully indeed.

 

http://www.geocities.com/yogirajharkare/atha.htm

If this is directed to me I also doubt the Mahabharata as history. I don't accept many things including a literal battle of Kurukshetra.

 

I object to your claim as to actually know when and by whom the Mahabharata was actually written and that people are mistaken by associating the Bhagavad-gita with Krishna.

 

You said:

 

 

when ever someone mentions Gita we associate it with Lord Krishna. But very few of us know who the original author was. Iskon devotees are extorting bagfuls from foreigners by hiding this secret from them that Krishna just preached geeta. Even common mass in India does not know this fact. Where ever the author in Geeta has written to surrender to supreme god, it is assumed that Krishna is the supreme God.

Krishna does not have a copyright on Geeta. He never wrote Geeta. Geeta was already written before the war of Mahabharata. Krishna just preached it. It was written by Vyas Muni on the banks of Saraswati. So all those verses which Iskon devotees quote do not point at Krishna as a superior God. The original writer of gita was Vyas Muni & he should not be deprived of his credit.

 

Clearly Krishna is the Supreme subject matter of the Gita. Good Lord man, are you desperate to argue that you would try to make this a point of controversy?

[Kali_Upasaka]

Vyasa means a compiler. The Vedas, Mahabharata, Bhagavd Gita and other scriptures were compiled by Vyasas centuries (may be even thousands of years) after they were composed. So we can not attribute these to a single author.

 

I do not think any Hindu doubts that these were Krishna's words. This is the common belief of all the Hindus.

 

In the Vedas there are three categories of mantras.

 

Paroksha Krita - Object of praise referred to in an indirect way - Third person.

 

Prathyaksha Krita - Object of praise referred to in a direct way -Second person.

 

Adyatmic Krita - When the Upasak identifies himself with the object of praise. - The Vak Sukta ( Devi Sukta) by Vak Ambirini in Rig Veda belongs to this category.

 

Bhagavad Gita also belongs to this category.

[sant]

 

I'm not against Lord Krishna, but against those corrupt people who are robbing innnocent foreigners by using this propaganda that Krishna refers to himself as ultimate god in Geeta & depriving a great sage "Vyas Muni" for its credit.

 

ronin mind your language i know you have a dirty mind.

who youre trying to refer.

krishna is the supreme is accepted by mostly all jagadgurus.

so dear please stop.

[theist]

 

Vyasa means a compiler. The Vedas, Mahabharata, Bhagavd Gita and other scriptures were compiled by Vyasas centuries (may be even thousands of years) after they were composed. So we can not attribute these to a single author.

 

Compiler!!! I never heard this before. Thank you so much Kali-upasaka.

[Sonic Yogi]

and we wonder why the great mystics and ascetics most always talked in parables and metaphor?

 

Maybe they just didn't want to spill the beans in front of the unbaptized.

[Kali_Upasaka]

As matter of intellectual curiosity to find the answer to the question who wrote the Bhagavad Gita, please read the Chandogya upanishad.

This is one of the "primary" (mukhya) Upanishads. Together with the Jaiminiya Upanishad Brahmana and the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad it ranks among the oldest Upanishads.

 

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/hinduism/upanishads/chandogya.asp

 

Here it clearly states that Ghora Angirasa taught Krishna Devakiputra the principles enunciated therein. There is a lot in common between Chandogya Upanishad and Bhagavad Gita. Bhagavad Gita goes much further.

 

This clearly establishes the authorship of the Bhagavad Gita by Krishna.

 

It is in the Adyatmic Krita form which I mentioned in my earlier post.

 

Again as I said only an intellectual discussion.

 

You may also read the story of Paundraka Vasudeva in Mahabharata.

 

Source: Vaishnavism: Vasudeva-Krishna and Bhagavatism - A religious history of ancient India Volume II by S.R. Goyal. ( a prescribed text book)

[kaisersose]

 

As matter of intellectual curiosity to find the answer to the question who wrote the Bhagavad Gita, please read the Chandogya upanishad.

 

The major traditions of Vedanta do not equate the Chandogya Krishna with THE Krishna. I dont think any of these traditions object to the fact that Krishna and Rama are completely absent in legitimate/extant Sruti.

 

Krishna says in the Gita that it is an ancient science that was lost. By his own admission then, it was not a new revelation that was unavailable before the war. Technically, since these concepts are rooted in Sruti, they are beginningless and without authorship. When packaged as a Gita, it does have an author. We will never know for sure the identity of this author or authors and in the absence of such evidence, we have to assume it was one guy and this guy was the author of the Mahabharata.

 

Cheers

[Kulapavana]

According to both scholars and traditionalists, Mahabharata, from which Gita is extracted, is a fairly ancient text (present version is most likely about 2000 years old).

 

Even if we question the identity of a person who gave it the form we all know today, it is the value of the content that is really important. And that content is certainly grounded in very old (one could say timeless) traditions, like yoga, sankhya, and bhakti.

 

Whoever wrote it did a fantastic job. It is a fascinating book on all accounts. I have read the full Ganguli translation of Mahabharata and I can safely say that it was the most interesting book I have ever read, and I have read a lot of books in my life.

[Amlesh]

Sri Ganesha wrote Maha Bharata while Sri Vyasa was reciting those slokas.

[Sephiroth]

 

and we wonder why the great mystics and ascetics most always talked in parables and metaphor?

 

Maybe they just didn't want to spill the beans in front of the unbaptized.

 

Or perhaps their words have fell to the deaf ears.

Those who does not wish to hear, shall not hear it.

[chandu_69]

 

and we wonder why the great mystics and ascetics most always talked in parables and metaphor?

 

Maybe they just didn't want to spill the beans in front of the unbaptized.

 

Very true.Seeing the 'intellectual' thoughts freely bandied about in this forum I am coming around to the view the sages were indeed correct in putting restrictions on the uninitiated.

[Sephiroth]

 

Very true.Seeing the 'intellectual' thoughts freely bandied about in this forum I am coming around to the view the sages were indeed correct in putting restrictions on the uninitiated.

 

In the World today, a lot of people do not care about Spiritualism and being closer to God. All they care is to be allowed in some "group" (become groupie as they called) and they will walk around, stating how they are "enlightened" for being in that group.

 

You ask people to work hard, meditate hard and suffer a little to get closer to God, and you will find this people turn around and find another group which "sells" Spiritualism for a better price.

 

Sages do not entertain fools.

[Amlesh]

 

In the World today, a lot of people do not care about Spiritualism and being closer to God. All they care is to be allowed in some "group" (become groupie as they called) and they will walk around, stating how they are "enlightened" for being in that group.

 

You ask people to work hard, meditate hard and suffer a little to get closer to God, and you will find this people turn around and find another group which "sells" Spiritualism for a better price.

 

Sages do not entertain fools.

True.

[Haridasdasdas]

I hope the administrators will delete this ridiculous and inflammatory thread.

 

Krishna says 'Aham sarvasya prabhavo'

 

'I am the source of all the worlds.' More or less.

 

So why did he say 'aham' if he was not referring to himself?

 

Clearly the OP is not very intelligent, and may not have read Bhagavad Gita.

[Sephiroth]

This thread is ridiculos and inflammatory ONLY to the ignorant ones. Those who wished to learn and accept that they are trapped in an illusion now will learn many things.

 

Truth can be learnt ONLY by examining things which one does not like to examine, NOT by turning one's back to it. Good example here could be Gautama Buddha who discard EVERYTHING to seek the Truth.

 

Ignorant people like to turn their backs on their problems and dislike others pointing out their mistakes or advising them. For people like this, as long as no one tells them that they are ignorant, they are happy and blissful.

[rashmipittsburgh]

 

This thread is ridiculos and inflammatory ONLY to the ignorant ones. Those who wished to learn and accept that they are trapped in an illusion now will learn many things.

 

Truth can be learnt ONLY by examining things which one does not like to examine, NOT by turning one's back to it. Good example here could be Gautama Buddha who discard EVERYTHING to seek the Truth.

 

Ignorant people like to turn their backs on their problems and dislike others pointing out their mistakes or advising them. For people like this, as long as no one tells them that they are ignorant, they are happy and blissful.

 

 

Jai shree krishna!! i wanna tk smething can u pls send me yr mail id.

[Sephiroth]

Whatever it is, you can use PM. Just click on my name, and you will find an option to send a private message.

[Haridasdasdas]

 

This thread is ridiculos and inflammatory ONLY to the ignorant ones. Those who wished to learn and accept that they are trapped in an illusion now will learn many things.

 

Truth can be learnt ONLY by examining things which one does not like to examine, NOT by turning one's back to it. Good example here could be Gautama Buddha who discard EVERYTHING to seek the Truth.

 

Ignorant people like to turn their backs on their problems and dislike others pointing out their mistakes or advising them. For people like this, as long as no one tells them that they are ignorant, they are happy and blissful.

In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says he is God.

 

I don't care how you interpret that, whether it is literal, whether he is this part of god, this avatar, what is God outside of him, but it is quite plain and simple.

 

What does aham mean?

 

10.8

aham sarvasya prabhavo

mattah sarvam pravartate

iti mattva bhajante mam

buddha bhava samanvitah

 

Krishna is not referring to someone else, regardless of how you interpret His identity.

 

4.1

Sri Bhagavan Uvaca

imam vivasvate yogam

proktavan aham avyayam

vivasvan manave praha

manur iksvakave bravit

 

How can you say it is someone else's Gita? It was not written by Krishna, it was spoken by Krishna, nobody is claiming that he wrote it down.

 

Yes, the OP is inflamatory, please read his origional post. I wasn't calling you inflammatory, but Ronin's comments that Iskcon devotees are liars or something is just ridiculous.

[Sephiroth]

 

Krishna is not referring to someone else, regardless of how you interpret His identity.

 

How can you say it is someone else's Gita? It was not written by Krishna, it was spoken by Krishna, nobody is claiming that he wrote it down.

 

Yes, the OP is inflamatory, please read his origional post. I wasn't calling you inflammatory, but Ronin's comments that Iskcon devotees are liars or something is just ridiculous.

 

Sigh ... after all those talks about Sri Krishna, Bhavagad Gita and God (Bhagavan), YOU STILL FAIL TO UNDERSTAND BASIC THINGS IN HINDUSM AND BHAVAGAD GITA.

 

You are looking at the flesh of Sri Krishna and FAILED COMPLETELY to understand what He have been saying. And you do not care because to do so, it is to requestion yourself. Tell me this - will such approach lead you to answers?

 

When He claims that He is God, and that He have taught the Sages throughout Time, He was stating Maha Vishnu (from which He came from). He was stating Maha Vishnu (His Soul) as the performer of all those deeds. Sri Krishna is just another physical manifestation of Maha Vishnu in His countless Avatars - like the Kurma, Narashima and Sri Rama.

 

Yet, why is it that you can see duality here when there is only One? I believe you (and many others) have been fooled by illusions of "God in Twoness" as it is presented (and confused everyone) in Christianity, when Jesus is separate from God (of Christianity) and yet he is still a god.

 

As for Sri Krishna writting it down - it is not written by Him. 5,000 years ago, India have yet to have writing skills and most of the religious texts were brought down through the generations by oral presentations (by Brahmins).