Hello all,
Let us discuss the following.
Premise 1: Krishna advises Arjuna to act without desire.
Premise 2: Desire is a necessary condition of action.
Conclusion: Therefore, Krishna's advice is a contradiction.
Regards,
WM
Hello all,
Let us discuss the following.
Premise 1: Krishna advises Arjuna to act without desire.
Premise 2: Desire is a necessary condition of action.
Conclusion: Therefore, Krishna's advice is a contradiction.
Regards,
WM
Hello, wundermonk..
Would you provide us exact references for premise 2 ? While reading Bhagavad Gita, I didn't find such premise, at least by directly.
As you think, 'Desire is not a necessity for action. Krishna says that controlling desire is difficult task but not impossible. He places Sanyasa(Detachment from samsara) & Buddhiyoga( Detachment from samsara without desiring fruits of action) on the same level. He refuted those so called pandits who say action can't be done without desire. He explains Arjuna without desire, you should follow your duty and never desire for any positive or negative fruits. You should burn your desires about fruits in the Yadnya which is none other than Vishnu. You should think that god alone acts under the influence of destiny and you're aloof from your body & Maya. In advanced version of gita, Uddhava Gita, Krishna instructs to consider the self indifferent from Brahman. Who contemplates oneself as Brahman, without much delay he gets established in Brahman, he becomes Brahman himself.
Jai Krishna Govinda..
Hari On!
Reference for Premise 1: Krishna advises Arjuna to act without desire.
Reference for Premise 2: Desire is a necessary condition of action.Originally Posted by BG 2:47
Originally Posted by BG 2:37
This doesn't mean Desire is necessary condition of action. You have wrongly perceived this. I think we should not interpret all verses of Bhagavad Gita individually without looking into contexts.
In earlier verses it is mentioned that Arjuna doesn't wish take any bow against his own relatives. He was frightened by the sins that could have been incurred after killing them. He thought that he would go to hell if he do this hilarious act. Arjuna at that time was confused about his own duty and he forgot the duty of Kshatriya-Varna. Then he requested shri Krishna to take him as his Shishya. At first, generally, Guru teaches Shishya according to his Mind. He has to come in the lower level according to shishya's level of understanding. In the same way, Krishna told Arjuna to give up this false notion of fear about Hell. Kshatriya never incurs a sin when he follows his duty. Performing one's own duty according to varna is the door to heaven. In fact if you don't follow this duty you'll incure the sins. Actually happy are warriors who come by a war like this. In this battle, you'll either get killed or win..So if you follow your duty to follow battle, there's no any harm to you in either case. If you win, you'll enjoy the earth and if you get killed, you'll enjoy the heaven.... How did you come to be deluded that you will incur sin by performing your duty? Will a person who crosses a river in a boat get drowned? Will a person walking straight on a highway stumble? But he who does not know how to walk properly will miss his footing.
If a person drinks milk mixed with poison, he will surely die; likewise a person incurs sin if he does his duty with the motive of gain.
So Arjuna, wake up...Stand up with a bow in your hand and fight with valour. Hold alike pleasure and pain, gain and loss, victory and defeat, and get ready for battle; then you will not incur sin.
Shri Krishna is scolding his dearest shishya Arjuna " You grieve and yet spout words of wisdom. Where is Grief for you? "
Last edited by hinduism♥krishna; 30 April 2014 at 07:16 AM.
Hari On!
In most theories of motivation and action (both Western as well as Indian), action necessarily implies the pre-existence of desire. For e.g. according to Manusmriti:
Belief -- > Desire* -- > Action.
Nyaya and Vedantin had a long series of dialectics along the following lines.
Why should the mumuksu pursue the goal of moksha? Because it is a state of absolute bliss (as per Vedanta) or it is a state of absence of pain (as per Nyaya). However, one requires to first desire this state of absolute bliss/absence of pain, in order to undertake the means for attaining moksha.
* - one possibly needs to differentiate different types of desire. Are there certain permissible desires (such as the desire to attain moksha) and certain impermissible desires (such as the desire for excessive wealth and sense pleasures)?
This I agree with.At first, generally, Guru teaches Shishya according to his Mind. He has to come in the lower level according to shishya's level of understanding.
Last edited by satay; 30 April 2014 at 04:11 PM.
satay
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté
You are speaking clearly on this satay...( well done).
Kṛṣṇa says the following in the Bhāgavad gītā (chapter 2, 47th śloka)
karmaṇi evādhikāras te
mā phalesu kadācana
mā karma-phala-hetur bhūr
mā te saṅgo'stv akarmaṇi
This says, you certainly (eva) have ādhikāra (claim , right , privilege, control) of your (te or ti) karmaṇi (of your actions) , but never or not (mā) of its fruits (phalesu) .
For some reason this tends to cause some people consternation, yet it seems straight forward as I see it.
iti śivaṁ
Last edited by yajvan; 30 April 2014 at 02:57 PM.
यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
because you are identical with śiva
_
Excellent. So, we have two types of desires:
(1) Desires for ends/fruits.
(2) Desires for means to ends/fruits.
So, Krishna is against desires of type (1) but favours desires of type (2).
Is there any evidence of desires of type (2)? Do humans ever engage in action purely motivated by desires of type (2)?
Nityakamas are those injunctions/vidhis of the Vedas for which there is no prescribed fruit.
Non-performance of Nityakarmic vidhis leads to acquisition of demerit. While performance of these same vidhis does not lead to any new acquisition of merit. So, by default, the expectation of God is that we do our work/duty. Merit is not acquired by doing duty. Only demerit accrues by non-performance of duty.
Lokasamgraha (for the benefit/welfare of the world) is enjoined in BG 3:25:
Is "welfare of the world" a karmaphala (desire for a result)?Just as the ignorant, attached to their work, act, O Arjuna, so too the learned should act without any attachment, and only for the welfare of the world.
Namaste Wm,
It seems that when Krishna is asking Arjuna to fight without desire or being the same to dualities, it is only the material/temporary desires that He is talking about. The mumukhsu performs his duties with the desire of self realization and eternal union with Krishna.
In start of Chapter 3, Arjuna asks for instructions by which he can attain the highest- that is his desire for which Krishna describes the "path" taken by the yOgis to be liberated from the temporary worlds, to attain the Atma and get freed of birth and death. So, when an ordinary Kshatriya performs his duty for various temporary benefits like heaven etc., the karma yogi performs the same duty by renouncing doership and fruits of action with the desire of attaining everlasting abode. When one progresses to Bhakti yoga, he too desires eternal union with Him which is obvious.
So, it looks like the desire is very much there.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks