Great Questions...

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

Have you heard or listened or read a question that made you think, Wow what a great question. For me I find them to be the ones that are potent, or profound. I find some to be so simple in the questioning , yet the answer turns out to allow the truth on multiple levels to come out. There are many like this and wondered if you care to share some that you have heard.

Let me start if I may by the following:
In the muṇḍaka¹ upaniṣad Śaunaka approaches his teacher and asks,
venerable Sir, by knowing what does all the world become known?

He is asking, what one thing can I know, that I will know ( the nature) all things? With this one simple but profound question, he is asking about brahmavidyā.

Do you have any you care to offer? It can be of any nature or subject you wish to offer.

praṇām प्रणम्

words
muṇḍaka मुण्डक - shaved , shorn ; the shaved ones (saṃyasin);
This upaniṣad comes from the Ātharva Veda.

[satay]

Namaskar,

I was visiting a philosophy professor in India last month. He has written several books translating sastric works. He told me that as he presented his translation of the Gita to the President of India, he was asked the following question by the President before the President even looked at his book.

• Mahabharata gives details of the massacre that took place due to a family dispute. Crores of people were slaughtered. Why is God telling Arjuna to slaughter his loved ones? Why God never spoke a word about the tactics of war but going on an on about yoga and the nature of man? Shouldn’t God be instructing Arjuna on the tactics of war instead? Why God doesn’t speak a word about the actual war in the Gita?

Then the professor posed the above and the following questions to me. Told me not to provide an answer right now but to begin my studies of the hindu sastra but keep these questions in mind. The answers will come to you automatically he said.

• Don’t you think hindu God’s have a weird behaviour? For example, when the evil spirit bhairon is after Durga, she goes and hides in the mountains. What kind of Gods are these? They hide when the evil spirits are after them? They cut off their son’s head and place an elephant head over his shoulders? What’s all this?

[devotee]

Why is God telling Arjuna to slaughter his loved ones? Why God never spoke a word about the tactics of war but going on an on about yoga and the nature of man? Shouldn’t God be instructing Arjuna on the tactics of war instead? Why God doesn’t speak a word about the actual war in the Gita?

Namaste Satay,

Let me make an humble attempt.

i) Why is God telling Arjuna to slaughter his loved ones ?

Ans : May be the professor didn't know the answer. However, Satay must be aware of it, I am sure. If someone asks this question, it means he has never read the B.G. Asking this question after reading B.G. is akin to asking "who was Sita ?" after listening to the Ramayana !

ii) Why God never spoke a word about the tactics of war but going on and on about yoga and the nature of man? Shouldn’t God be instructing Arjuna on the tactics of war instead? Why God doesn’t speak a word about the actual war in the Gita?

Ans : Arjuna had everything with him to go for the war. He was brave, the best archer, one of the best warriors of his time. He didn't need tution on war tactics. What he needed most was the "will & motivation" to fight with his full capacity. He considered 'killing" (that too of his own relatives) a sin & therefore, he was not in a perfect mental condition for the war. So, God taught what he needed at that time. Does anyone really think, Arjuna needed a lecture on how to fight ? He was already an expert of that field !

iii) Don’t you think hindu God’s have a weird behaviour? For example, when the evil spirit bhairon is after Durga, she goes and hides in the mountains. What kind of Gods are these? They hide when the evil spirits are after them? They cut off their son’s head and place an elephant head over his shoulders? What’s all this?

Ans : First of all, in Hinduism there is a difference between 'devas' (god ?) & the God (the Supreme Lord). Devas are the beings (taijsa state) who live in the heaven & once their karmic period is over, they come back again to the Mirtyuloka. So, they are not much different from the human beings in so many aspects.

There are wars when the Devas flee from the battlefield. However, there are not many instances when the Supreme Godhead like Lord Shiva & Lord Vishnu or Ma Durga have fled from war. There was once the case of BhasmAsur when Lord Shiva didn't fight .... that was because BhasmAsur was a devotee of Lord Shiva (it would have given a wrong signal, if a devotee was killed by the same God whom the devotee worshipped) & also enjoyed boon from him which made it difficult to defeat him in the usual way of fighting .... In such a case, fighting would have created only destruction & not the end of the evil & also would have sent a wrong signal to the devotees. So, he thought it bettet to leave it for Lord Vishnu. In fact, this was the reason that Lord Shiva refused to help Rama against Ravana directly but helped Rama in killing Ravana through the incarnation of Lord Hanuman (who is considered an "ansha" of one of the rudras of Lord Shiva) .

I have not heard of Ma DurgA running away from Bhairava. (It was Ma PArvati running away from BhasmAsur). First of all, Bhairava is not an evil spirit but a Gana of Lord Shiva. However, you have mentioned "Bhairon" & not Bhairava. I am not aware of any other "Bhairon" --- please update me. And it was not an evil spirit who cut off the head & placed an elephant's head on Ma PArvati's son (i..e Lord Ganesha) ... it was done by Lord Shiva himself. Or are you referring to some other story ?

There is another story of Lord Krishna running away from battlefield .... but that running away was also an effort not to hurt the glory of the devotee (God always enjoys getting defeated by his true devotees).... he knew how to kill him without fighting directly ! Lord Krishna had nothing to prove by trying to kill a devotee by his own hands ( an egoist approach).

Regards,

OM

[atanu]

Namaste Satay,

Let me make an humble attempt.

i) Why is God telling Arjuna to slaughter his loved ones ?

Ans : May be the professor didn't know the answer. However, Satay must be aware of it, I am sure. If someone asks this question, it means he has never read the B.G. Asking this question after reading B.G. is akin to asking "who was Sita ?" after listening to the Ramayana !

ii) Why God never spoke a word about the tactics of war but going on and on about yoga and the nature of man? Shouldn�t God be instructing Arjuna on the tactics of war instead? Why God doesn�t speak a word about the actual war in the Gita?

Ans : Arjuna had everything with him to go for the war. He was brave, the best archer, one of the best warriors of his time. He didn't need tution on war tactics. What he needed most was the "will & motivation" to fight with his full capacity. He considered 'killing" (that too of his own relatives) a sin & therefore, he was not in a perfect mental condition for the war. So, God taught what he needed at that time. Does anyone really think, Arjuna needed a lecture on how to fight ? He was already an expert of that field !

iii) Don�t you think hindu God�s have a weird behaviour? For example, when the evil spirit bhairon is after Durga, she goes and hides in the mountains. What kind of Gods are these? They hide when the evil spirits are after them? They cut off their son�s head and place an elephant head over his shoulders? What�s all this?

Ans : First of all, in Hinduism there is a difference between 'devas' (god ?) & the God (the Supreme Lord). Devas are the beings (taijsa state) who live in the heaven & once their karmic period is over, they come back again to the Mirtyuloka. So, they are not much different from the human beings in so many aspects.

There are wars when the Devas flee from the battlefield. However, there are not many instances when the Supreme Godhead like Lord Shiva & Lord Vishnu or Ma Durga have fled from war. There was once the case of BhasmAsur when Lord Shiva didn't fight .... that was because BhasmAsur was a devotee of Lord Shiva (it would have given a wrong signal, if a devotee was killed by the same God whom the devotee worshipped) & also enjoyed boon from him which made it difficult to defeat him in the usual way of fighting .... In such a case, fighting would have created only destruction & not the end of the evil & also would have sent a wrong signal to the devotees. So, he thought it bettet to leave it for Lord Vishnu. In fact, this was the reason that Lord Shiva refused to help Rama against Ravana directly but helped Rama in killing Ravana through the incarnation of Lord Hanuman (who is considered an "ansha" of one of the rudras of Lord Shiva) .

I have not heard of Ma DurgA running away from Bhairava. (It was Ma PArvati running away from BhasmAsur). First of all, Bhairava is not an evil spirit but a Gana of Lord Shiva. However, you have mentioned "Bhairon" & not Bhairava. I am not aware of any other "Bhairon" --- please update me. And it was not an evil spirit who cut off the head & placed an elephant's head on Ma PArvati's son (i..e Lord Ganesha) ... it was done by Lord Shiva himself. Or are you referring to some other story ?

There is another story of Lord Krishna running away from battlefield .... but that running away was also an effort not to hurt the glory of the devotee (God always enjoys getting defeated by his true devotees).... he knew how to kill him without fighting directly ! Lord Krishna had nothing to prove by trying to kill a devotee by his own hands ( an egoist approach).

Regards,

OM

I think it an excellent post. There is no defeat or retreat for the Supreme and the knower of Brahman.

Regards

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté
regarding other great questions...

In the Bṛhadaraṇyaka Upaniṣad the ṛṣi Yajñavalkya talks that a man is similar to a tree i.e. the skin is like the outer bark, the hair on his head like the leaves, etc.
He then asks the assembly of brāhmaṇa-s¹ who have just been questioning him for some time, the following: Since the tree when felled ( cut down) grows anew from its root, from which root does the mortal too, when cut down by death, grows anew (or grows again) ?

He gives the assembly a few more pieces of information, as he says If together with the root the tree is uprooted ( that is the tree is cut and the roots area also removed) it would not grow again; from which root, the mortal, when cut down by death grows up? If you say 'he is never born' (again) I say (Yajñavalkya) no. He is born again (after death). Who brings him forth?


praṇām

words

brāhmaṇa ब्राह्मण one who has divine knowledge; a Brahman , a man belonging to the 1st of the twice-born classes ; also as a noun the brāhmaṇa-s are a portion of the veda (distinct from its mantra and upaniṣad portion), consisting of a class of works called brāhmaṇas. They contain rules for the employment of the mantras or hymns at various sacrifices , with detailed explanations of their origin and meaning and numerous legends.

[satay]

Namaskar devotee,

Namaste Satay,

Let me make an humble attempt.

i) Why is God telling Arjuna to slaughter his loved ones ?

Ans : May be the professor didn't know the answer.

Thank you for the post.

Please note that there was no malice intended in the professor's questions. He and I are both Hindus. If my post created the impression that the questions were asked in an insulting tone by the professor then that was my fault and I should have worded my post in a better tone.

The questions were not meant to be answered right on the spot. They were not an exercise by the professor to show that he knew more than I did becuase he had written many books on the subject etc. It was to give me a background theme to have in mind as I start my study. They are meant to be pondered upon and meditated upon. Not to intellectually be ripped apart.

In hindsigth, I see that my post and the questions are not in alighnment with the theme of this thread.

[devotee]

Namaste,

Thanks Atanu !

Sorry Satay, I think there was no need for me to be too prompt ! I didn't think too much about the Professor. Yes, I was a bit surprised.

I also have a question which always bothers me.

If this World is nothing but a dream of the great Dreamer, why this dream is made more like a nightmare than a sweet dream ? Was it really necessary to fill this world with so much pains & sufferings ? What was the harm in creating a little better world where everyone would have sufficient food to eat, a home -- the basic necessities of life ? Pain is ok to keep one alert but, imho, God forgot to have a proper sense of proportion when he decided to create this world !

OM

[saidevo]

Namaste everyone.

This thread is beautiful! The questions and their import are great for spiritual inquiry! Thanks to Yajvan and Satay for the questions and Devotee and Atanu for their answers.

I also have a question which always bothers me.

If this World is nothing but a dream of the great Dreamer, why this dream is made more like a nightmare than a sweet dream ? Was it really necessary to fill this world with so much pains & sufferings ? What was the harm in creating a little better world where everyone would have sufficient food to eat, a home -- the basic necessities of life ? Pain is ok to keep one alert but, imho, God forgot to have a proper sense of proportion when he decided to create this world !

Suppose you write a novel. Would you populate your fictional world with just good or mix it with bad in things, characters and incidents? If you would mix good and bad, why should it be so? Why can't you write a pure novel with goodness only that you might enjoy even if the world ignores it? In one sense a novel could be deemed as an extension of its author, but would this mean that the author has all the good and bad of the characters of the novel?

No, the author is certainly good in nature and wiser than his/her characters but still he/she makes them what they are for his/her own sporty enjoyment. In doing so, the author is exploring himself/herself with a view to better knowledge of the changing self and the unchanging Self underneath it.

When we dream, we have no control over the world we create. When God dreams out creation, he has perfect control over everything and is always conscious of his dream, which is why we have the maya of the world, though it is difficult for us realize it as such. And remember, God is the only member of the audience witnessing his own play; we are only the characters in the play, with no independent life.

[atanu]

Namaste,

Thanks Atanu !

Sorry Satay, I think there was no need for me to be too prompt ! I didn't think too much about the Professor. Yes, I was a bit surprised.

I also have a question which always bothers me.

If this World is nothing but a dream of the great Dreamer, why this dream is made more like a nightmare than a sweet dream ? Was it really necessary to fill this world with so much pains & sufferings ? What was the harm in creating a little better world where everyone would have sufficient food to eat, a home -- the basic necessities of life ? Pain is ok to keep one alert but, imho, God forgot to have a proper sense of proportion when he decided to create this world !

OM

Namaste Devotee,

Good answers have already been given for your query, which bothers most of us and which impels us to dig deeper. I wish to augment with two more points.

First, who says that the world is created unequal and painful? The world does not say that it is unequal. Neither does Brahman say so. A third factor (entity) perceives the ills and goods. Second, why everyone, while being devoid of all possesions and while being devoid of the body-mind, in deep sleep, is blissful?

The reality called Brahman is inherently saman, but an unequal mind, perturbed by unequal thoughts find the world unequal and painful. Our memories again and again draw us to the wrong idea "I am this" and subsequent perceptions. The practise of meditation to unite the mind with saman Brahman does only remove the error.

Where there is perception of another there is fear and other ills. As in dream, the dream seems very real, in waking life, which is another dream of mind (and not of Brahman's), the perception of 'otherness' is so real. In dream, a bread being eaten is so real. In waking life also, the bread being eaten is so real. No one, while dreaming, can ascertain that the nighmare is a nightmare. So, being in the waking dream, it is not possible to ascertain that the ills are the mere nightmares of the mind. Unbroken yoga can only remove the errors of perceptions that karma is eternal, avidya is eternal, "I am a doer", and that "Brahman is creator".


Om Namah Shivaya