[Jagannath] Why are you all sleeping?

March 24, 2000

Namaste Nimmi Ragavan,

Jaya Jagannatha!

>Someone attempting to communicate a new concept will attempt to do so in terms of the mind set of the >receiver. Here Krsna's comment may be considered as one who understands the mindset and values of the >hearer - i.e. Arjuna.

Here there is no question of the new concept. Krishna spoke Bhagavad Gita first time since the creation of this universe around 120 millions years ago. Srila Prabhupada writes in the purport to Bhagavad Gita verse 4.1:

" In the Mahabharata (Santi-parva 348.51–52) we can trace out the history of the Gita as follows:

treta-yugadau ca tatovivasvan manave dadaumanus ca loka-bhrty-arthamsutayeksvakave dadau

iksvakuna ca kathitovyapya lokan avasthitah

“In the beginning of the millennium known as Treta-yuga this science of the relationship with the Supreme was delivered by Vivasvan to Manu. Manu, being the father of mankind, gave it to his son Maharaja Iksvaku, the king of this earth planet and forefather of the Raghu dynasty, in which Lord Ramacandra appeared.” Therefore, Bhagavad-gita existed in human society from the time of Maharaja Iksvaku.At the present moment we have just passed through five thousand years of the Kali-yuga, which lasts 432,000 years. Before this there was Dvapara-yuga (800,000 years), and before that there was Treta-yuga (1,200,000 years). Thus, some 2,005,000 years ago, Manu spoke the Bhagavad-gita to his disciple and son Maharaja Iksvaku, the king of this planet earth. The age of the current Manu is calculated to last some 305,300,000 years, of which 120,400,000 have passed. Accepting that before the birth of Manu the Gita was spoken by the Lord to His disciple the sun-god Vivasvan, a rough estimate is that the Gita was spoken at least 120,400,000 years ago; and in human society it has been extant for two million years. "

Knowing this we can see that Krishna repeated what He told before to sun-god Vivasvan, so the point that Krishna maybe was considering Arjuna's mindset and therefore changed what He previously told to Vivasvan is very unlikely and is also confirmed by His statement in the verse 4.2 of Bhagavad Gita where Krishna says: " 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". Word "this" is important here because Krishna points out that "this imperishable science" He instructed to Vivasvan which means that he is talking about same science to Arjuna also, not that he instructed Vivasvan one thing and Arjuna something different.

>It should not necessarily be taken as reflecting Krsna's opinions (BTW does God have 'opinions'? It seems >rather incongrues to me).

I will answer with a question: Why God wouldn't or shouldn't have opinions?

>As I personally do not to any considerations of caste, creed, authority, or even gender (these I >consider to be part of the maya we are caught up in

I wrote the same on the beginning of discussion about Chanakya Pandit.

>- direct experience seems to me the only possible means of knowledge),

What type of knowledge are you referring to here?

> to me this whole discussion seems as pertinent as the medieval christian debates on how many angels can >dance on the head of a pin. This is now recognized as a rather strange stage in their development but I am >sure they did not think so then. (Though I must say there have been equally strange developments in some >discussions today - have you heard about the current trend on 'possessed PCs'? Apparently a possessed >PC can make anyone using it access pornographic sites etc. Dangerous stuff this modern technology!).

I cannot comment on discussions between Christians. Here we are discussing things that were supposed to be relevant to all SJVC members, which is origin and relevance of the parampara that SJVC is coming in. You have taken couple of statements and put them in different context. If you read all posts connected to this topic you may have different opinion.

>Seriously, I think it is important to separate the original message propounded by a great teacher, whether >Krsna, Christ, Mohammed from the power structures that grow up using those ideas (which have great >persuasive power) to mould and control society (even with the best of intentions).

I don't see the connection between power structures that grow up using the ideas of Krsna, Christ or Mohammed with SJVC or Jyotish.

>Unfortunately this has been true of all major world religions, and some of the developments have been >diametrically opposed to the ideas of the original founding teacher. We now consider the exhortation made >by Mohammed on female circumcision rather barbaric, but at the time he made them, apparently a far more >horrific form of circumsicion was in effect and he attempted to persuade society to accept a more moderate >version so that it would not do as much damage to women. Each teacher does form new ideas in a way that >would facilitate acceptance of a society in a particular state and time.

The point is that Islam has it's own rules that are different from Vedic tradition. Here we are talking about Vedic sciences. Also I didn't study Islam much so I cannot comment on your statements.

>Which is why I think that in interpreting Krsna's teachings in todays age, we should be careful not to take it >verbatim, as a message intended for one audience in one time may have entirely different meanings in >another.

The meaning of Krishna's words are always the same, eternal and as He says imperishable. Only consciousness of the people is degrading to the point that they cannot take some things any more. Today if you say to someone that he should get up and 4AM and take bath, than do the pujas and meditation he will probably say that you are insane. Only less than 100 years ago this was natural for most Hindus. So what is changing, people's consciousness or the scriptures? Now if you want to put this in the context of present age we should probably tell people that they should get up no later than 10AM and do 2.3 minute puja and 4.5 minutes of meditation have quick breakfast, take kids to school and rush to job. We could call it Yoga for the 21st century which would be fine, but has no connection or relevance to Bhagavad Gita and Krishna's definition of yoga, so what is the use of it except to put people in illusion and make them feel happy. It can be also called cheating.

Instead of trying to fit Krishna's words in our mindset why not try to fit our mindset in Krishna's words? Read Bhagavad Gita with this attitude and you'll see how easy it will be to understand it.

>I personally understand it as someone trying to couch an idea within the context of that period. Especially >given the presumably short time frame and extremely stressful circumstances under which these complex >and new ideas had to be conveyed.

I don't understand about which new ideas you are thinking?

Hare Krishna,

Dina-natha Das.