PDA

View Full Version : Contradictions in Gita



rcscwc
01 September 2009, 08:37 PM
Are there any?

grames
02 September 2009, 01:26 AM
Are there any?


None. Gita is crystal clear about the message but, if you read interpretations then yes the possibilities of contradictions are many :)

rcscwc
02 September 2009, 02:01 AM
Sure. But you know that commentaries are not GITA. They have to have some subjectivity of the interpreter.

Finally, it is DIY all the way.

grames
02 September 2009, 03:17 AM
Many support the idea of DIY but Gita itself recommends the idea of listening the Gita from a learned Guru :)

But if you have time to learn all three plus one veda, and 108 upanishads and then come back to Gita, may be you can understand what Gita is conveying with out doubt. :) But the learning of Veda, Upanishad etc.. again require a Guru.

Do you think you can first translate all the slokas all by yourself? And then understand the meanings along with the contexts and historical and eternal truths imbibed in them? For me, it is not at all possible so why i seek a Guru for the true understanding.


Sure. But you know that commentaries are not GITA. They have to have some subjectivity of the interpreter.

Finally, it is DIY all the way.

RamaRaksha
03 September 2009, 02:46 AM
We are constantly dealing with contradictions in our daily life. There are many sayings that contradict each other "Fortune favors the brave" & "Fools rush in where wise men fear to tread". Hold on to life fast but don't be afraid to let go.

I do believe that the Gita does have a few of contradictions, but we may be taking them out of context and situation. In fact i do believe that we misintepret our shastras.

grames
03 September 2009, 07:31 AM
It may be just a belief!

What about the aspect of finding the truth? Experiencing it and then accepting whether it has contradictions or not?

We are wise! Aren't we?

Sixth sense is very special!

bhaktajan
03 September 2009, 11:04 AM
WOW!

What Contradictions????

Did someone say Contradictions???

Are these famous Contradictions??

Does wikipidea mention these Contradictions?

kd gupta
05 September 2009, 10:19 AM
Are there any?
Again the matter of confusion and consciousness….
See the confusion…
tasmaad yogee bhavaarjuna….therefore, be thou a
Yogi, O Arjuna!

Now what is the posture of Yogi…

Shuchau deshe pratishthaapya sthiramaasanamaatmanah;
Naatyucchritam naatineecham chailaajinakushottaram.
In a clean spot, having established a firm seat of his own, neither too high nor too low,
made of a cloth, a skin and kusha grass, one over the other,

Then again Krsn wants…

maamanusmara yudhya cha;…. Therefore, at all times remember Me only and fight.


Now again see that there is no Abhimanyu….

Amee cha twaam dhritaraashtrasya putraah
Sarve sahaivaavanipaalasanghaih;
Bheeshmo dronah sootaputrastathaa’sau
Sahaasmadeeyairapi yodhamukhyaih.
All the sons of Dhritarashtra with the hosts of kings of the earth, Bhishma, Drona and
Karna, with the chief among all our warriors,

Now see the consciousness of Krsn…..

Dronam cha bheeshmam cha jayadratham cha
Karnam tathaa’nyaanapi yodhaveeraan;
Mayaa hataamstwam jahi maa vyathishthaa
Yudhyaswa jetaasi rane sapatnaan.
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.

Jayadrath is there .

bhaktajan
05 September 2009, 03:14 PM
Oh kd gupta,

now I am confused kd gupta and have lost all composure because of weakness ---in this condition I am asking YOU kd gupta to tell me clearly what is the contradiction?

You are pointing out a contradiction, right?

I fail to see the contradiction.

The dialogue that started after the conch horn(s) "Start signal" was sounded just after Sunrise on the morning of Mokshada ekadasi cir. 3200 BC ---a dialogue that starts by scoulding Arjuna on wards into all the strategies available for Arjuna to take under consideration.

Arjuna was a Warrior & a General in his own right, being "progressivelly" and "pragmatically" and "philosophically" advised by a mantri (advisor) of the Ultimate Order, Bhagavan Sri Krishna.

We are greatfull for Arjuna's fatefull state-of-indecision. Arjuna's quagmire/dilemma was humaities benediction.

Arjuna paved the way for a Purana that records a most succinct/brief/High-stake dialogue that any generation of warrior in any epoch would 'die for'.

The Bhagavad-gita is the sweetest Chaplin's manual ever in the history since warring had first occurred in ancient antiquity.

The Conversation went back and forth, progressiny through all Arjuna's protestations & excuses & laments & indesicion. Requested Questions were asked ---Krishna responds with explaination(s) of the progressive grades of Dharma ---all the way up to the point where Krishna says to Arjuna: "Now that's my Opinion. Now You choose want you want to do"


I fail to see any contradictions.

kd gupta
06 September 2009, 08:56 AM
PL. dont worry
There is solution of every confusion and contradiction, if arises.
See gita is for consciousness always similarly as ganga is for washing the sins and not the sand.
Thank you for your positive attitude .

RamaRaksha
08 September 2009, 02:27 AM
Let me take a stab at this. Let me state at the outset that our interpretation of the Gita could be wrong. Over time the meaning of certain words change as well as values. What seems right at one time may not be so at another. These are just a few that have puzzled me at times:

1. Krishna says not to think that arjuna will be responsible for killing the kauravas, they are already dead, killed by Krishna. But that takes away individual responsibility, runs contrary to the laws of karma. Arjuna is responsible for any acts that he had committed.

2. This may not be a contradiction, as the Gita is being told for the benefit of all mankind not just for Arjuna. Krishna implores Arjuna not to cry for the dead, try to see sadness and happiness the same way. Yet throughout the Mahabharata no such behaviour is indicated by either the pandavas or even Krishna himself. Arjuna cries for the slain Abhimanyu and vows to kill the person responsible, throughout the war, the Pandavas repeatedly bring forth the crimes committed by the kauravas.

3. The person who removes all desires from his mind is the ideal person, a person should not run after desires or the pleasures of the senses, yet Arjuna is told that if fights and dies in the war he will go to heaven, but if he emerges victorious, he can enjoy the pleasures of becoming the king and ruling the land.

Again this ideal is not followed - When Yudhishtira asks for just 5 villages, none of his brothers support him. Led by Draupadi, this was one time when the brothers failed to support their elder brother. They must have their kingdom back, the injustices done to them must be avenged.

Personally i disagree with this - one should have desires, but one should not let them take control over you. A desireless person is a useless person, waiting for death, only looking out for himself as he awaits Moksha.

What if India had a few more Tata's, Nilakaneni's, or Ambani's? These people fueled by their desires, have enriched themselves but have also bettered the life of millions! Millions go to bed with their belly full thanks to these gentlemen. The greatest evil of mankind is not war, but poverty, and until that is eradicated, India will continue to have problems.

4. An example of the wrong interpretation of the Gita - People frequently quote that win or lose, gain or loss, Happiness or sadness - they all should be viewed the same. The mistake here is to think that they are the same, not so, remember they should be "viewed" or react to them the same way.

A person who gets top marks in his class is in no way equal or the same as a person who failed the class. You get top marks or win a match, because of the hard work, the sacrifice, that you put in. There was a time in college when i got bad marks in a test, i remember crying over the marks sheet, thinking of dying at some point. That is what the Gita is warning us about, not to overreact.

If you play a match, say tennis match, for example and if you are winner, don't shout and dance around, don't mock your opponent, behave in a casual manner, congratualte your opponent for playing a good game. And if you are the loser, try to control your feelings, congratulate the winner, but vow to do better the next time.

5. Finally the whole war itself was conducted in an Adharmic way by the pandavas. Having Krishna on their side one would think that the pandavas need not have to resort to unseemly tactics, but that did not happen.

Duryoudhana assumed correctly, that as long as he had Bheeshma on his side, there was not way he could lose. With Krishna's help the pandavas could defeat the rest of the kauravas, but even Krishna could not defeat Bheeshma. He had already faced him once as Parasurama, faught a battle with Bheeshma but was unable to defeat him. In the end, they had to seek the advice of Bheeshma in order to defeat him. This part is a bit strange because I don't understand how Duryodhana was not informed of the meeting of the pandavas with Bheeshma, after all, it's not every day that your enemy comes calling on your commander-in-chief!

And then comes the killing of Drona, Karna, and finally Duryodhana, all killed by the use of trickery or unadharmic tactics. It was agreed upon at the outset of the war that an armed fighter would not face an unarmed one, yet that was how Karna was killed. Both Drona and Duryodhana were killed by the means of using trickery and underhanded tactics.

bhaktajan
08 September 2009, 10:03 AM
"Let me take a stab" ---Hmm, Can't we just talk this over?

1. Krishna says arjuna will NOT be responsible for killing the kauravas, they are already dead, killed by Krishna. But that takes away individual responsibility, runs contrary to the laws of karma. Arjuna is responsible for any acts that he had committed.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
A policeman runs to the scene ---the troubled person is sufferring from their own past karma [policeman knows this fact about the troubled person] ---yet the policeman runs faster toward the troubled person --Why? Because it is their dharma. The policeman is running toward the danger.

.............................................
Arjuna is the one to blame for any so-called 180 degree contracdictions.

Maybe Krishna arranged for the wrong soul to be Arjuna, cause he acted like such a coward?

Do you realise the extreme urgency of the moments when the Gita was spoken --the awkward inaction by Arjuna required quick thinking dense & rapid disertations on the nature of Action. The five topics of the Gita [Isvara, Jiva, Karma, Kala, & Prakriti] were glossed over while all the Vedic Injunctions were cited in regards to the options open to changing 180 degrees one obligated Duties.

Arjuna started contradicting his duties at the very beginning of the Gita. The gita is about a Man/General/Sage-Warrior who neglected to do his duty, Arjuna contradicted his call to duty where he was the lead principal.

Be a teacher! If you cannot be a teacher ---be a student! ~Contradiction? Or opposite sides of the same coin?

bhaktajan
08 September 2009, 10:18 AM
"killed by the use of trickery or unadharmic tactics."

Yet the audience cheers and cheers and shed tears and clap and retell the story over and over again . . .

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
The sentiment to consider foremost is "your favorite character's" exploits.

The sentiment that is evoked in a spectator of the Mahabharata is what that geniously merciful epic saga must do to faithfully report the news.

Real life is tragic and painful ---'truth is stranger than fiction' ---"Irony" is man's guide to history's cornerstones.

RamaRaksha
09 September 2009, 05:26 AM
"Let me take a stab" ---Hmm, Can't we just talk this over?

1. Krishna says arjuna will NOT be responsible for killing the kauravas, they are already dead, killed by Krishna. But that takes away individual responsibility, runs contrary to the laws of karma. Arjuna is responsible for any acts that he had committed.

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
A policeman runs to the scene ---the troubled person is sufferring from their own past karma [policeman knows this fact about the troubled person] ---yet the policeman runs faster toward the troubled person --Why? Because it is their dharma. The policeman is running toward the danger.

~Contradiction? Or opposite sides of the same coin?

LOL, yes your wording was much better.

Your example was incorrect, the policeman did not cause the accident. If he had stayed put and not helped out, then he is responsible for not acting, incurring bad Karma. The very essence of Kama is about taking responsibility for our actions. So many people have gotten in to the habit of blaming God, or asking God for help when things go wrong. All God can do is give us strength and guidance, we have to fight our own battles. That is quite evident in the Mahabharata, the Pandavas fought the battle, Krishna was simply the adivisor.

I will say it again, Hinduism/Buddhism are Teacher religions. A Teacher's job is not to give you the answer to a problem that is vexing you, but give you guidance and the tools to be able to solve the question on your own.

When Arjuna killed a downed Karna, the responsibility is his alone, regardless of the advice he received from Krishna.

RamaRaksha
09 September 2009, 05:33 AM
"killed by the use of trickery or unadharmic tactics."

Yet the audience cheers and cheers and shed tears and clap and retell the story over and over again . . .



What was the old saying, even if a thousand men were to call a crow a parrot, it's still a crow? or something like that. At one time, northern europeans used to pray to a God called ODIN, how many of them do so now? Times change, people will change.

Don't get me wrong. Discussing the faults of a story, does not lesson its appeal, in fact it might actually enhance it. I am glad I am born a Hindu, so that I have the freedom to freely express my thoughts, in some of those other religions, would be asking for my head by now.

The X factor here is that we are talking about events that happened quite a while ago. As I initially stated, values & rules change over time. In today's war it is quite common to kill people from behind, times change, values change.

atanu
09 September 2009, 08:50 AM
1. Krishna says not to think that arjuna will be responsible for killing the kauravas, they are already dead, killed by Krishna. But that takes away individual responsibility, runs contrary to the laws of karma. Arjuna is responsible for any acts that he had committed.


Dear RamaRaksha,

Let us take another perspective. What will karma attach to in absence of an individual?

Om Namah Shivaya

RamaRaksha
09 September 2009, 10:38 AM
Dear RamaRaksha,
Let us take another perspective. What will karma attach to in absence of an individual?
Om Namah Shivaya

I am not sure i understand. Please expand on your thoughts

atanu
09 September 2009, 11:11 AM
I am not sure i understand. Please expand on your thoughts

Namaste RamaRaksha,

What happens in case of stitha Pragnya yogi, who is not situated in or associated with the panchakosha but is settled as Pragnya -- say in waking deep sleep?

Om Namah Shivaya

bhaktajan
09 September 2009, 11:18 AM
What happens in case of stitha Pragnya yogi, who is not situated in or associated with the panchakosha but is settled as Pragnya -- say in waking deep sleep?
.........................................................................
OMG Folks,

Sri Advaita-acarya, 500 years ago, heard talk like this ---so he prayed for an avatara to appear. The avatara Came and went and still we hear the same wordage.

Can I look up the following words in the Gita: 'stitha'; 'Pragnya'; 'panchakosha'; 'waking deep sleep'?

proudhindu
11 September 2009, 02:06 AM
Your example was incorrect, the policeman did not cause the accident. If he had stayed put and not helped out, then he is responsible for not acting, incurring bad Karma.

Phalguna(arjuna) is in a similar position.Arjuna is not the cause of war. AT the battlefield Arjuna as a kshatriya has to defend the Army and his desire to renounce his duty as a kshatriya was the reason for GITA.


The very essence of Kama is about taking responsibility for our actions.

That is right.Arjuna wants to shirk his responsibility which is bad karma.

The essence of the verse where krishna told to Arjuna that he is NOT responsible for killing of Kauravas is to highlight the point that Arjuna

has to perform his duty and when one performs his duty he is free from karmic reactions.

If killing evil is bad karma then no body should be joining defense or security forces ;)