Namaste and pranaams..
As you all know, the Anugita is the 2nd discourse by Shri Krishna to Arjuna in the epic Mahabharata. Though not as lucid and beautiful as the Bhagavad Gita, it contains quite a lot of information about the nature of Brahman. The text of the Anugita can be found here.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/m14/m14016.htm
'Vasudeva said, 'I made thee listen to truths that are regarded as mysteries. I imparted to thee truths that are eternal. Verily, I discoursed to thee on Religion in its true form and on all the eternal regions. It is exceedingly disagreeable to me to learn that thou didst not, from folly, receive what I imparted.
The recollection of all that I told thee on that occasion will not come to me now. Without doubt, O son of Pandu, thou art destitute of faith and thy understanding is not good.
It is impossible for me, O Dhananjaya, to repeat, in detail, all that I said on that occasion. That religion (about which I discoursed to thee then) is more than sufficient for understanding Brahma
. I cannot discourse on it again in detail. I discoursed to thee on Supreme Brahma, having concentrated myself in Yoga. I shalt now, however, recite to thee an old history upon the same topic.
My questions are:
1) Why was Krishna unable to recollect the Bhagavad Gita ?
2) What does He mean by "I discoursed to thee on Supreme Brahma" ? Is He indirectly saying that He is not Brahman? Why doesn't He say, " I discoursed to thee on
MYSELF" ?
3) Did Krishna act as a messenger of Brahman in the Kurukshetra war ?
4) Could Anugita may be a later addition or an interpolation in the epic?
My sincere apologies if I have hurt the beliefs of any member.. Krishna is my God as well, but this passage in the Mahabharata makes me question His absoluteness.
Regards,
Madhav
Bookmarks