With due regard to Sahasranama's opinion that "The Bhagavad Gita has a long track record in the Hindu tradition itself and it's unlikely that a scripture so widely venerated as the Bhagavad Gita could have been unknowingly adulterated" it is my submission that he may please read my Bhagvad-Gita: Treatise of self-help, in rhythmic verse, sans 110 slokas that I consider as interpolations (for reasons indicated therein) to make his own judgement, and here is the link to it - http://self.gutenberg.org/eBooks/WPL...se%20Self-Help.
In respect of Philasoraptor's question - "do you have any process even remotely compatible with the scientific method by which to to prove that the Gita is interpolated, especially in the way in which you claim it has been" I would like to submit that while going through my aforesaid work, it should be apparent for any that my methodology in marking 110 slokas as interpolations has been logical reasoning, which one agree or not.
To ShivFan's question "which came first, the Bhagavad Gita or the Upanishads?" the answer lies in the endorsement at the end of each Chapter of the Gita that it is the quintessence of the Upanishads. About whether "the Upanishads were the works of humans, the verse of men" I would like to quote from Jawaharlal Nehru's Discovery of India thus -
"It has always seemed to me a much more magnificent and impressive thing that a human being should rise to great heights, mentally and spiritually, and should then seek to raise others up, rather than that he should be the mouthpiece of a divine or superior power. Some of the founders of religions were astonishing individuals, but all their glory vanishes in my eyes when I cease to think of them as human beings. What impresses me and gives me hope is the growth of the mind and spirit of man, and not his being used as an agent to convey a message.
Mythology affected me in much the same way. If people believed in the factual content of these stories, the whole thing was absurd and ridiculous. But as soon as one ceased believing in them, they appeared in a new light, a new beauty, a wonderful flowering of a richly endowed imagination, full of human lessons. No one believes now in the stories of Greek gods and goddesses and so, without any difficulty, we can admire them and they become part of our mental heritage. But if we had to believe in them, what a burden it would be, and how, oppressed by this weight of belief, we would often miss their beauty. Indian mythology is richer, vaster, very beautiful, and full of meaning. I have often wondered what manner of men and women they were who gave shape to these bright dreams and lovely fancies, and out of what gold mine of thought and imagination they dug them.
Looking at scripture then as a product of the human mind, we have to remember the age in which it was written, the environment and mental climate in which it grew, the vast distance in time and thought and experience that separates it from us. We have to forget the trappings of ritual and religious usage in which it is wrapped, and remember the social background in which it expanded. Many of the problems of human life have permanence and a touch of eternity about them, and hence the abiding interest in these ancient books. But they dealt with other problems also, limited to their particular age, which have no living interest for us now.
Many Hindus look upon the Vedas as revealed scripture. This seems to me to be peculiarly unfortunate, for thus we miss their real significance - the unfolding of the human mind in the earliest stages of thought. And what a wonderful mind it was! The Vedas (from the root vid, to know) were simply meant to be a collection of the existing knowledge of the day; they are a jumble of many things: hymns, prayers, ritual for sacrifice, magic, magnificent nature poetry. There is no idolatry in them; no temples for the gods. The vitality and affirmation of life pervading them are extraordinary. The early Vedic Aryans were so full of the zest for life that they paid little attention to the soul. In a vague way they believed in some kind of existence after death.”
While i hope that the above shows the slant of my intellectual bent of mind, I see that the 'hoped for debate' over the soundness or otherwise of my premises of interpolations has not taken off yet, bogged down in the held-beliefs. I appeal to all that they may go through my thesis to see the veracity of my theory for a meaningful discussion.
Regards,
BS Murthy
Bookmarks