View Poll Results: Isn't Bhagvad-Gita's discourse sans 110 interpolations unambiguous?

Voters
3. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    1 33.33%
  • No

    1 33.33%
  • Can't say

    0 0%
  • I haven't tried yet

    1 33.33%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

  1. #11

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    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

  2. #12
    Join Date
    December 2007
    Age
    63
    Posts
    3,218
    Rep Power
    4728

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    Namaste Murti ji,

    I have full sympathy with Mr Edwin Arnold that he is unable to see the coherence in Bhagwad Gita. Actually, I cannot blame him solely as I too found getting lost while trying to study the scripture seriously. It appeared to me that Lord Krishna is not consistent in his teachings. However, slowly, I was able to see the whole picture.

    I am unable to say whether Bhagwad Gita is as it was told by Lord Krishna. No one can say this. However, at the same time, there is no irrefutable proof that Bhagwad Gita is indeed interpolated. On this forum itself, one of our friends, raised issue that many of Upanishads can be spurious declining to accept even the authority of Muktika Upanishad. Now, where does this lead us to ? What should we accept as the Truth and what should we discard as interpolation ? May be we should discard what Mr Edwin wants to show as the True Gita ... who knows ?

    Again, Lord Krishna spoke extempore and therefore, some deviations while speaking spontaneously cannot be ruled out. The only thing is one assertion made at one place must not be rejected at another place. Looking from that angle, Edwin's assertion doesn't strictly show that there are clear contradictory verses ... he thinks that they are.

    Bhagwad Gita talks about Bhakti Yoga, NishkAm Karma yoga, Advaita and touches upon various other dhArmic issues which are quoted as authority by almost all Hindus cutting across sectarian beliefs. The author has taken an assumption that the Bhagwad Gita should speak only on NishkAm Karma is just an assumption. Yes, that would perhaps have served Arjuna's purpose and the purpose of war ... but it would not have served the purpose of innumerable humans who seek almost all spiritual answers from this holy scripture. So, War was an extremely rare opportunity and Lord Krishna decides to give message in a condensed form for the benefit of people who may be adherents of many paths.

    Why do the verses look contradictory in meaning ? This is because we fail to see the entire message from God's perspective. People have different requirements in spirituality ... what is prescribed at one stage becomes redundant or even prohibited at another stage. He is not God only to one special sect ... one particular set of belief systems. He is God's 100% incarnation. He asserts the validity of Karma-kAnda (various types of Yajna which non-palatable to the author) but says that it is like a small pond when one has found a gigantic water body. So, he does say that one should not be too involved into ritualistic practices described in Vedas but the same is not completely denied. We must be ready to come out of Childish thinking that there can be either White or Dark Black pattern in spirituality. It is definitely not. If you stick to that childish thinking, you would come to similar conclusions as Edwin has come to.

    One must be able to see the Truth in its entirety. There are different levels of Truth and that must be accepted. This is why God says that even the JnAni should act for the sake of Loksangraha ... why so ? Because the common people would get lost and would fall. Advaita is taught throughout the VedAntic scriptures but how many are there who understand this highest philosophy ? Upanishads say that teaching the highest Truth to undeveloped minds is like pushing them into hell. So, how to tell the Truth which is coming from the Supreme Godhead who ever incarnated with 100 % Godliness and preached like this ? It is not easy. For the common people, the Truth of Karma-kAnda holds true but not for the JnAnis. For a JnAni there is no karma, no karmaphala, no heaven and no hell. It doesn't mean that they don't mean anything to the common people.

    You have stated that caste system is encouraged by Lord Krishna. Lord Krishna nowhere says anything about caste system. The Varna system and caste system are two different things altogether. He says that Varna system was designed by Him based on Guna and Karma. Please note that Caste is based on birth and not on Guna and Karma. What whould be the Guna and karma of different Varnas is elaborated in Chapter 18 of Bhagwad Gita. If you see that it becomes very clear that the Varna system cannot be based on births. Yes, the Brahmins are charged with manipulating many scriptures for propagating the caste system and I have found irrefutable proof of this in Manusmriti when matched with the historical facts and also the writings within Manusmriti. Manusmriti also is not in line with Vajrashuchika Upanishad.

    If we start doubting our scriptures like this ... what is wrong in writing one's own Bhagwad Gita (if not accepting the Bible or the Quran) and stick to it ? Will this be acceptable ? This is what the author is doing. I wonder why the author failed to write anything against Q'uran ? Because he would be made six-inches short from top by the Muslim extremists ! You can play with Bhagwad Gita only. Why ? We are a peace loving people who can maintain calm even if one raises doubts against one of our most revered scriptures !

    Thanks but no thanks for all the trouble taken for enlightening us Hindus !

    OM
    "Om Namo Bhagvate Vaasudevaye"

  3. #13

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    हरिः ओम्


    Namaste BS Murthy,

    Quote Originally Posted by BS Murthy View Post
    Chapter – 11: Owing to the improbability of their being, s9-s14, make an amusing reading.
    Here within lies the root of the misinterpretation, lack of both vision and insight.
    I actually found your comment to be quite painful, it reminded me of the treatment I received in Great Britain, having realised
    the same effects to which this chapter pertain, the very nature of reality; incidentally this is full concurrence with the latest
    doctrine of modern physics; the realisation of improbability is the key in the understanding of matter ...

    Might I humbly suggest that; physics is a subject toward which you might consider the application of your obvious intellect.
    To bring to your perspective, a little more light upon these sloka.
    Might I sudgest that you read a little: Quantum Electro Dynamics, without which; the computer upon which you are writing
    would not work.


    praṇāma

    mana


    ॐ नमः शिवाय
    Last edited by Mana; 02 February 2013 at 02:34 AM.

  4. #14

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    Dear Self seeker:
    Thanks for your interaction in respect of my article.
    1) For your poser - If we start doubting our scriptures like this ... what is wrong in writing one's own Bhagwad Gita - my submission is that I have no doubt about the value the Gita to mankind at large, in fact I have subtitled my translation as 'Treatise of self-help" but my objection is to the interpolations that make it seem sectarian and my endeavour has been to make the classic cosmopolitan by ridding it of the same. Please do read the 590 wonderfully rhythmic verses of my Bhagvad-Gita: Treatise of self-help and you would be surprised to see the great discourse in a fresh light - http://self.gutenberg.org/eBooks/WPL...se%20Self-Help

    2) On your premise - I wonder why the author failed to write anything against Q'uran ? Because he would be made six-inches short from top by the Muslim extremists ! - you may like to read my "Puppets of Faith: Theory of communal strife" that highlights the Islamic debilities, which is being serialized by Boloji.com to the appreciation of Muslim readers as well - http://www.boloji.com/index.cfm?md=C...rticleID=13503.
    Regards,
    BS Murthy

  5. #15
    Join Date
    February 2011
    Location
    st louis, usa
    Posts
    695
    Rep Power
    1519

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    But then interpolations if they are mundane/ harmless, but just dilutes or minimally distorts the storyline or appear mere irritants or out of place, then in that case we may have to put up with them and move on without minding the allegations. In contemporary academic circles a brief debate is permissible, because that’s what the academics do, to critically analyze a theory, study or similar other original work. Closed door debates among hindu acharyas (scholars) were the norm from ancient times, from the very vedic times if you will.For example, vaishnavas and shaivas have had such heated debates for centuries, so did the advaitins and dvaitins. As above said only genuine indophiles or friends of Hinduism are to be engaged in such high levels of ‘invitees only’ type seminars. Individuals with questionable motivations should be kept out, the track record of any critic ought to be scrutinized. Maxmueller himself turned antihindu in his later years to the chagrin of his hindu friends, hindus accepted him too soon and paid a price for the same. Hindus have to be weary of ‘outsiders’ before inviting them to the academia.

    As for as ‘non mundane’ interpolations are concerned, the most damaging ones for Hinduism were those that are included in the chapters of varna bheda in my opinion. Not just interpolations even frank doctoring of ancient verses took place in order to propel a few sets of hindus over the ‘others’ and, making these ‘others’ look like ‘born sinners’ (as they often mention in one abrahamic faith)!I In these chapters Varna was reduced to a synonym status of jati or kula to begin with. Firstly in later era, a couple of jatis/kulas were redefined as wholesome varnas, simultaneously conveniently lumping the other hundred jatis into one single varna, only to make it the punching bag. The distortions happened over a period of several hundred years. A lot of discussion had taken place on this subject already so it is sensible not to extend it any further. Namaste.
    Last edited by charitra; 02 February 2013 at 08:18 AM.

  6. #16

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    Quote Originally Posted by devotee View Post
    On this forum itself, one of our friends, raised issue that many of Upanishads can be spurious declining to accept even the authority of Muktika Upanishad. Now, where does this lead us to ? What should we accept as the Truth and what should we discard as interpolation ? May be we should discard what Mr Edwin wants to show as the True Gita ... who knows ?
    Namaste,

    Since I am the "friend" you are referring to, let me once again correct your misrepresentation of my views. I argued that the authority of certain texts going by the name of "Upanishads" which were not quoted by any of the traditional acharyas and don't appear to have an existing oral tradition, is not clear, and that the burden of proving their authenticity most reasonably rests on the person whose views depend solely on them. As I recall, you acted quite indignant at the thought, and were similarly indignant when I asked you to demonstrate the authority of other obscure smritis you quoted. The take-home message apparently being that any text you quote, no matter how peripheral to tradition, has to be accepted as authoritative solely because you say so.

    I'll make you a deal, since my opinion on these non-principal "Upanishads" is far less definite than you make it out to be. If you can show me where the upanishad has been quoted by acharyas of at least two different sampradayas, then I will take it as presumptive evidence that the upanishad is indeed authentic.

    As an aside, when you lose a discussion elsewhere, using it to toady up to a Max Mueller/P. Sinha disciple is really quite petty.

    regards,
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  7. #17

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    Quote Originally Posted by philosoraptor View Post
    1. P. Sinha's work was discredited years ago. He is not an insider, but rather an academic with Neo-Vedantic leanings.
    Discredited by whom? It sounds like an insider is anyone who aligns with us and everyone else is an outsider. If so, obviously, outsiders will get everything wrong and insiders can do no wrong.

    2. Madhva did acknowledge interpolations in the Mahabharata in general, but NOT specifically in the Bhagavad-gita. Why would he, since he commented on the entire Gita?
    Agreed. The point is, interpolations do happen and the fact has been attested to - by someone you would consider an "insider". Once, we acknowledge this, it is perfectly possible that the BG contains interpolations because it is part of the Mbh.

    Now the Mbh itself makes an astounding admission that it originally consisted of merely 8800 verses (as Jaya) and was eventually blown up into a 100,000 verses. On what basis, can we be absolutely sure that the Gita (in its whole) was a part of the original 8800 verses? The truth is, we cannot as the odds are less than 8%. As this expanded form was already in place much before the time of Madhva, he did not have a way to know about it and neither do we.

    An insider, due to his biases, is blocked from an objective analysis, while an outsider has no such encumberances. While, the outcome of the research can be dismissed for lack of evidence, there is no point in suspecting motive, just because we dislike the idea of an interpolated Gita.

    3. We're talking about the Bhagavad-gita, not the Bhagavatam or Ramayanam, both larger texts with very different issues, and neither of which (unlike the Gita) are considered part of the prasthana-trayi.
    They are all from the same source - more or less. There is not much a case to assign more authenticity to the Gita than to the Ramayana - except that the Gita was part of the Vedanta canon.
    http://lokayata.info
    http://shivsomashekhar.wordpress.com/category/history/

  8. #18
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    71
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    223

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    hari o
    ~~~~~~

    namasté


    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    The notion that the bhāgavad gītā offers 'the practice of disinterested action' is completely foreign to me. I find no dis-interest in any of the words. It is the notion of 'skill in action'. This as I see it, is the nector that can be squeesed out in chapters 1 through 6.
    I was hoping this would be addressed .The notion of dis-interested action perhaps is an academic view of a most practical notion on how one should engage in action. It misses ( as it seems to me) some of the core teachings , but more importantly, the fruit of those teachings... being established in karma yoga.
    To a 'bystander' one may look to another as a dis-interested actor, but to the muni that lives this way of life, it is the 3 guna-s that are doing all things, while one remains settled in the Self ( ātmā).

    iti śiva
    यतसà¥à¤¤à¥à¤µà¤‚ शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṠśivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  9. #19

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    Quote Originally Posted by shiv.somashekhar View Post
    Discredited by whom? It sounds like an insider is anyone who aligns with us and everyone else is an outsider. If so, obviously, outsiders will get everything wrong and insiders can do no wrong.
    I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were actually serious about P. Sinha and "Bhagavad Gita As It Was." I'm surprised that I have to explain to you why someone with an obvious sectarian bias would have problems producing credible scholarship. Here is one review of this author's work which uses his own words to reveal his clear Neo-Vedantic, "all religions are valid" bias.

    Agreed. The point is, interpolations do happen and the fact has been attested to - by someone you would consider an "insider". Once, we acknowledge this, it is perfectly possible that the BG contains interpolations because it is part of the Mbh.
    No, the point is that there is no scientific evidence to suggest interpolation in the Bhagavad-gita, especially of the verses that P. Sinha and others claim to have been later additions. The Gita isn't the rest of the Mahabharata. As it has a very well-developed tradition of commentary, it's been well-preserved, such that the text you get from any sampradaya will be identical to the text as received in other sampradayas. By contrast, the Mahabharata is available in multiple, different, and contradictory recensions, which is why you can easily assert that it (the rest of the Mbh other than Gita) has suffered interpolation.

    The problem with Sinha, and others of his ilk, is that they like radical universalism, impersonalism, Advaita, Neo-Advaita, and Buddhism. They see beauty in the idea of working without desire for the fruits, but the idea of doing this by dedicating the fruits to a Supreme Deity is repulsive to them, and is likely to lead to a knee-jerk reaction of crying "sectarianism!" Now, I don't follow ISKCON, but I don't think you have to be an ISKCON follower to acknowledge the fact that the Gita is a devotional text upholding the view that Krishna is a Supreme Deity, and more specifically, the same Supreme Deity who is glorified in the Upanishads. Now, the nay-sayers may not like that, but that's the reality. So now they argue that the devotional verses acknowledging Krishna's supremacy are interpolated. Fine, but where is the evidence? That it satisfies their sectarian needs does not make it true. In fact, when you look at the verses he argues are interpolated, it's obvious that they were chosen primarily because of the Vaishnava-theism which they support. Without them, Krishna is merely a normal human being, and it's hard to understand how the gita remains a "divine discourse."

    Now the Mbh itself makes an astounding admission that it originally consisted of merely 8800 verses (as Jaya) and was eventually blown up into a 100,000 verses. On what basis, can we be absolutely sure that the Gita (in its whole) was a part of the original 8800 verses? The truth is, we cannot as the odds are less than 8%. As this expanded form was already in place much before the time of Madhva, he did not have a way to know about it and neither do we.
    Again, none of this is even remotely conclusive. The Gita itself states (4th chapter) that this knowledge was also passed down in the remote past to Vivasvaan. Thus, there are internal references to its own antiquity. Now if you argue that this reference could be interpolated, I could similarly argue that the claims about its length are also interpolated. Again - not conclusive. But as far as the Gita being in the primeval Mahabharata, that's easy to believe if you accept the widely-held view that the Gita is the essence of the Mahabharata.

    An insider, due to his biases, is blocked from an objective analysis, while an outsider has no such encumberances.
    Wow, seriously?

    Either you have no idea how real Indologists work, or you are just letting your own biases show.

    I could fill pages with my own observations of academic bias, both within Indology and in other humanities. Fortunately, others like Rajiv Malhotra have already done a good job exposing the conceits of the academic community with regard to Hinduism here and here, among other places.

    Everyone knows that the Indology community is an exclusive club, and you don't get in without towing the party line. The same is true of many disciplines in the humanities and even the physical sciences. We have members here who can attest to the bias of existing authorities in Indology, such that they have to conceal their own religious interests while training so as to avoid tipping the boat and endangering their own job prospects. This is not to say that I don't see value in a truly "objective," outsider's perspective. I've just come to realize over the years that objectivity is an often sought-after, but rarely practiced, ideal. Most people have a bias, and what counts at the end of the day is how well they support their views with evidence..

    They are all from the same source - more or less. There is not much a case to assign more authenticity to the Gita than to the Ramayana - except that the Gita was part of the Vedanta canon.
    And the fact that the Gita is available in only one form, while the Ramayana and other texts have multiple, different recensions....
    Philosoraptor

    "Wise men speak because they have something to say. Fools speak because they have to say something." - Plato

  10. #20
    Join Date
    February 2012
    Posts
    1,525
    Rep Power
    2741

    Re: Mundane distortions in the Divine discourse - On interpolations in Bhagvad Gita

    Quote Originally Posted by BS Murthy View Post
    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.
    Namaste BS Murthy

    Thank you for addressing my question, if I am understanding correctly your viewpoint, it seems you are saying that within the BG - specifically at the end of each chapter - there is Sanskrit verse that "is the quintessence" (e.g. same format also, perhaps?) of the Upanishads.

    I am going to take a little time to investigate this. It appears that verses of the BG then, are milking the cow of the Upanishads. And thus the Upanishads are older than the events of the Gita. The Upanishads are the "end of the Vedas" (and much of where we find Vedanta is based upon).

    If we see the Upanishads in the BG, then Krishna was milking the cow of the Upanishads.... yes?

    If the Upanishads are the essence of, and come from, the Divine, then Krishna was milking the cow of the Divine.

    But if the Upanishads are, yes divinely inspired, but yet the verses of men nevertheless (even though from the most elevated of men), then one might say Krishna was milking the cow of divinely inspired men.

    Which makes more sense?

    And also, if there is a distinction between the essence of the message in the BG that does not seem "Upanishadic" in tone, and the essence of the message in the BG that is obviously milking the cow of the Upanishads - then would you think one or the other was introduced (later)?

    Om Namah Sivaya

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. A Personal Library of Hindu Sanskrit Texts Translations
    By saidevo in forum Dharma-related Websites
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 30 September 2018, 06:06 AM
  2. Jnana Marg
    By Bishawjit in forum Jnana
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: 15 February 2013, 08:28 AM
  3. A Personal Hindu Library
    By saidevo in forum Dharma-related Websites
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 17 March 2009, 12:31 AM
  4. Historical Context of the BG
    By Agnideva in forum Bhagavad Gita
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 21 January 2007, 10:09 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •