Guest guest Posted May 18, 2003 Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 StEvE123617 hindu Sunday, May 18, 2003 10:04 question about hinduism in the discussion between krishna and arjuna in the bhagavad-gita, Krishna lays out a theology of action for arjuna. do you feel that this action is moral, amoral, or immoral, and why? Also, could you please explain to me the theological reasoning behind Krishna's advice? Does this advice lead to desirable moral results?? please respond as soon as possible, I would really like to know thank you very much steve volkert ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~response~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dear Steve I have taken the liberty of sending this question to our list. The topic is very interesting and will generate a variety of replies which will be forwarded to you. jay Vivekananda Centre London Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2003 Report Share Posted May 19, 2003 Namaste, The shortest answer may be: Arjuna's arguments for considering his role in the war as immoral are stated in the 1st chapter, and the beginning of the 2nd. Krishna's counterpoints for the ethics and morals of performing one's duties, no matter how unsavory from the human viewpoint, are summarised in the 2nd and 18th chapters. Krishna's summary of the entire wisdom of the upanishads of how to transcend the duality and achieve the unity of Divine Consciousness is spelled out across all the chapters. Regards, Sunder Ramakrishna , " Vivekananda Centre " <vivekananda@b...> wrote: > > StEvE123617@a... > hindu@b... > Sunday, May 18, 2003 10:04 > question about hinduism > > > in the discussion between krishna and arjuna in the bhagavad- gita, Krishna lays out a theology of action for arjuna. do you feel that this action is moral, amoral, or immoral, and why? Also, could you please explain to me the theological reasoning behind Krishna's advice? Does this advice lead to desirable moral results?? please respond as soon as possible, I would really like to know > > > thank you very much > steve volkert > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~response~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > Dear Steve > > I have taken the liberty of sending this question to our list. > The topic is very interesting and will generate a variety of replies > which will be forwarded to you. > > jay > Vivekananda Centre London Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2003 Report Share Posted May 19, 2003 That is a great question, thank you for bringing this up because I have had this question on my mind for a long time.Vivekananda Centre <vivekananda wrote: StEvE123617 hindu Sunday, May 18, 2003 10:04 question about hinduism in the discussion between krishna and arjuna in the bhagavad-gita, Krishna lays out a theology of action for arjuna. do you feel that this action is moral, amoral, or immoral, and why? Also, could you please explain to me the theological reasoning behind Krishna's advice? Does this advice lead to desirable moral results?? please respond as soon as possible, I would really like to know thank you very much steve volkert ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~response~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dear Steve I have taken the liberty of sending this question to our list. The topic is very interesting and will generate a variety of replies which will be forwarded to you. jay Vivekananda Centre LondonSri Ramakrishnaye NamahVivekananda Centre Londonhttp://www.vivekananda.co.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 19, 2003 Report Share Posted May 19, 2003 This question is more a moral issue than a theological issue. Now as for as Sri Krishna is asking Arjuna to fight rather than quit does not mean that he is advocating violence. Krishna has sensed Arjuna's problem, who seeing his cousins and others for whom he had great respects, became cold feet at the last moment. He lost all sense of proportion and forgot all the insults and injustice that Kauravas had done to his family and his wife Draupadi. Sri Krishna saw in Arjuna sheer cowardice and not love that had prompted him to quit the battlefield. We also have to see that everything possible had been done to avoid the war. Sri Krishna himself had gone to the other side to plead for giving just five villages to the Pandava brothers. But the Kauravas were determined. So the war was the last resort. There was another moral issue. Arjuna was from a Khastriya caste whose duty was to maintain the rule of law. By refusing to fight would completely disturb the established order of the caste system as was practiced at the time. It would have set a wrong precedence that those who have set for fighting and save the honor for their country and life and property of their citizens should refuse to fight. So there is nothing wrong in the advice that Sri Krishna gave to Arjuna. Finally, it is interesting that except for the first two chapters, there is nothing said in the rest of the sixteen chapters Bhagawad Gita about the war. There is a parallel here as to what Mahatma Gandhi, the modern apostle of nonviolence, had said. In one instance the police had assaulted village women while the men kept looking because they were following nonviolence. Gandhi severely rebuked those men and said it was cowardice and not nonviolence. Similarly, keeping quiet at the so-called modern freedom fighters while they kill innocent women and children and doing nothing would be cowardice also. Umesh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2003 Report Share Posted May 20, 2003 Namaste, Swami Vivekananda says " It is not that you can find men who have no other faculty than that of work, nor that you can find men who are no more than devoted worshippers only, nor that there are men who have up more than mere knowledge. These divisions are made in accordance with the type or the tendency that may be seen to prevail in a man. We have found that, in the end, all these four paths converge and become one. All religions and all methods of work and worship lead us to one and the same goal. " --- Sunder Hattangadi <sunderh wrote: > Namaste, > > The shortest answer may be: > > Arjuna's arguments for considering his role in the > war as immoral are > stated in the 1st chapter, and the beginning of the > 2nd. > > Krishna's counterpoints for the ethics and morals of > performing one's > duties, no matter how unsavory from the human > viewpoint, are > summarised in the 2nd and 18th chapters. > > Krishna's summary of the entire wisdom of the > upanishads of how to > transcend the duality and achieve the unity of > Divine Consciousness > is spelled out across all the chapters. > > Regards, > > Sunder > > > > > Ramakrishna , " Vivekananda > Centre " > <vivekananda@b...> wrote: > > > > StEvE123617@a... > > hindu@b... > > Sunday, May 18, 2003 10:04 > > question about hinduism > > > > > > in the discussion between krishna and arjuna in > the bhagavad- > gita, Krishna lays out a theology of action for > arjuna. do you feel > that this action is moral, amoral, or immoral, and > why? Also, could > you please explain to me the theological reasoning > behind Krishna's > advice? Does this advice lead to desirable moral > results?? please > respond as soon as possible, I would really like to > know > > > > > > thank > you very much > > > steve volkert > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~response~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > Dear Steve > > > > I have taken the liberty of sending this > question to our list. > > The topic is very interesting and will generate > a variety of > replies > > which will be forwarded to you. > > > > jay > > Vivekananda Centre London > > > The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 20, 2003 Report Share Posted May 20, 2003 for the answers to your questions, i think a good book to read is - " Universal Message of the Gita " by Swami Ranganathanandaji. this question troubled me too and i was satisfied by the explanation given by Swamiji. I shall try to put my understanding here. But please read the source for a better explanation. The purpose of life is to evolve to a stage that we behold the Atman which is our true nature. Once the purpose is clear, then we can decide on various courses of actions. Regarding actions, we need to act in a way which strengthens us, makes us evolve. There is a beautiful concept of " adhikar-bheda " -- instructions depending on the current social context and evolution of an individual. Now, for some people, ahimsa is prescribed whereas for others it is not prescribed. Most of us are drawn towards love and not towards conflict. So, most of us like teachings which are ahimsa-oriented. Example - " love thy neighbour as thyself " . Example - " If somebody strikes one cheek, turn the other cheek towards him " . But, there is a pitfall here. It seems that in our social context, ahimsa cannot always be practised. Example - if somebody acts in an inappropriate manner with your parents or your wife, will you stand with a loving heart ? Example - if somebody snatches away your son, will you offer your daughter also ? So, we have a social structure where some people have a " dharma " or duty which entails violence. We have people in the army. And we have a police force. If such people, after accepting their position, in times of war or in times of a robbery, suddenly start showing a feeling of love and forgiveness towards the offender, then how can the social structure stand ? The Gita says - whatever be your duty, if you perform it in the right spirit, it can lead to your evolution and lead you to perfection. The right spirit means (a) getting over selfishness ; (b) being even-minded in success and failure (samatvam yoga uchyate); © working with efficiency (yoga karmasu kaushalam) ; (d) etc. etc. So, even by acts of violence, we can evolve and reach perfection. Another place which emphasises this is the " Vyadha Gita " . In this, an ascetic takes spiritual instructions from a butcher. This is to show that even though the person's " dharma " or duty was to butcher animals, he could evolve to a higher spiritual plane than an ascetic who renounced home and hearth (but could not renounce his selfishenss/ " unripe ego " ). Gita teaches us how to act. How to act in a way which will take us to perfection. If you act in the right way, then either via violence or via non-violence you will reach the goal. Now regarding the particular case of Arjun. His duty was that of a fighter. All his life, he had been violent. He had come to the battlefield with that mission. But then due to some reason, he lost his nerve. His mouth became parched, his hands started to tremble, he started to swoon. Our minds play neat tricks on us. So did his. And so, he started talking in the most beautiful words of non-violence. Krishna noticed this and thus his speech starts with a smile on his face. And he noticed that it was not a heart overflowing with love which was making Arjun swoon, but weakness. So, his first words were - " from where has this weakness/confusion come to you ? why do you yield to weakness/unmanliness. be strong. get up and fight. " Regarding " adhikar-bheda " , Swami Vivekananda said that according to him, for a monk, the path is pure ahimsa. For a householder, he has to protect people who are his dependents. So, the path is not pure ahimsa. Initially a householder should only hiss and not bite. But if that is not sufficient, biting and beating are also required. I read recently words of Swami Vireshwaranandaji. He was the 10th president of the the Ramakrishna Math and Mission. He said that even for a monk, if the property belongs to the Math, he should fight to preserve it. If somebody snatches a monk's personal effects, then a monk can practise pure ahimsa. These were some thoughts. But please read " Universal Message of the Gita " by Swami Ranganathanandaji. You can buy it here : http://www.vedanta.com/getpage.cfm?file=titles/10000776.html --- Vivekananda Centre <vivekananda > > in the discussion between krishna and arjuna in > the bhagavad-gita, Krishna lays out a theology of > action for arjuna. do you feel that this action is > moral, amoral, or immoral, and why? Also, could you > please explain to me the theological reasoning > behind Krishna's advice? Does this advice lead to > desirable moral results?? please respond as soon as > possible, I would really like to know > > The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. http://search. 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.