There was quite a gap after I finished reading Adhyaya 3 - so much so that I feared I was destined to abandon the project once more. But then I started reading 1-2 shlokas
at a time and got back into the regime. I have also decided to note
down my comments as I read so that I don't have to go back and look them
up later.
My first comment is about the purport for Text 1. The shloka doesn't mention it but the purport goes like this:
Bhagavad Gita has to be accepted as it is, from thd disciplic succession, and it is described herein that the Lord spoke to the sun-god, the sun-god spoke to his son Manu, and Manu spoke to his son Iksvaku.
Okay, let's say this disciplic succession was exactly the same as described here. But doesn't that make it all the more necessary to NOT accept Gita as it is? After all, there is a real possibility that things could have got lost in translation across centuries - given that there were 32 people involved in the succession chain, if the list at the end of the introductory chapter is anything to go by. It also means that there is really no need of any 'purport' because however one might try, it is humanely impossible to keep one's views, opinions and judgement out of it. The chances of one misunderstanding something are more when one is told to accept what is told as it is. No way!
This Adhyaya contains 2 of my favorite verses of the Gita (I must confess though that the reason I know them by heart is B. R. Chopra's TV series Mahabharata!) . The first of them (#7) is:
यदा यदा हि धर्मस्य ग्लानिर्भवति भारत|
अभ्युत्थानमधर्मस्य तदात्मानं सृजाम्यहम|
I was glad when I came across the following in the accompanying purport:
It is not a fact that the Lord appears only on Indian soil. He can manifest Himself anywhere and everywhere, and whenever He desires to appear.He speaks as much about religion as can be understood by the particular people under their particular circumstances. But the mission is the same - to lead people to God consciousness and obedience to the principles of religion. Sometimes He descends personally, and sometimes he sends his bonafide representative in the form of His son, or servant, or Himself in some disguised form.
These lines kind of rhymed with what I have always believed - God appears in the form that the devotee chooses and that's why we have different religions all talking about their own scriptures, rituals and beliefs.
I looked forward to reading the purport of my other favorite verse (#8):
परित्राणाय साधूनां विनाशाय च दुष्कृतां!
धर्मसंस्थापनार्थाय संभवामि युगे युगे!
I agreed with most of the purport except a few lines at the end. 'As stated in the Srimad-Bhagawatam, the incarnation in the Age of Kali is Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who spread the worship of Krsna by the Sankirtana movement and spread Krsna consciousness throughout India'.
Here, another confession is in order. I don't much care for the modern age swamis and sadhus. So I had skipped the section giving their names and photos at the beginning of this book. This line made me go back and find out just who this Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu was. Turns out that he is the founder of the ISKON movement. His name was mentioned in the ancient text Srimad-Bhagawatam? How is that possible? I read that line again and realized that the Srimad-Bhagawatam talks about Krsna's incarnation in every age. And it is the author's interpretation that this 'incarnation in the Age of Kali is Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu'.
My suspicion was confirmed by the following lines at the very end of the purport:
Lord Caitanya as the incarnation of Krsna, the Personality of Godhead, is described secretly but not directly in the confidential parts of the revealed scriptures, such as the Upanisads, Mahabharata and Bhagavatam.
Guess the author has committed the same crime that he accuses mundane wranglers of committing (Page 217) - speculating on the Gita in their own ways.
The Chaturwarna system is mentioned in verse 13 as follows:
चातुर्वण्यं माया सृष्टं गुणकर्मविभागाश:|
तस्य कर्तारमपि मां विध्द्यकर्तारमव्ययम|
Translation:
According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society are created by me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the non-doer, being unchangeable.
It is clearly mentioned that the Chaturwarna system is based on nature of human beings, and not on one's birth. So, if a Brahman's child displays aptitude and inclination to follow the duties of a Kshatriya, he or she can do so and vice versa. One doesn't need to follow a particular profession just because one is born to parents who practice it. Wonder who twisted the definition of Chaturwarna and how.
My first comment is about the purport for Text 1. The shloka doesn't mention it but the purport goes like this:
Bhagavad Gita has to be accepted as it is, from thd disciplic succession, and it is described herein that the Lord spoke to the sun-god, the sun-god spoke to his son Manu, and Manu spoke to his son Iksvaku.
Okay, let's say this disciplic succession was exactly the same as described here. But doesn't that make it all the more necessary to NOT accept Gita as it is? After all, there is a real possibility that things could have got lost in translation across centuries - given that there were 32 people involved in the succession chain, if the list at the end of the introductory chapter is anything to go by. It also means that there is really no need of any 'purport' because however one might try, it is humanely impossible to keep one's views, opinions and judgement out of it. The chances of one misunderstanding something are more when one is told to accept what is told as it is. No way!
This Adhyaya contains 2 of my favorite verses of the Gita (I must confess though that the reason I know them by heart is B. R. Chopra's TV series Mahabharata!) . The first of them (#7) is:
यदा यदा हि धर्मस्य ग्लानिर्भवति भारत|
अभ्युत्थानमधर्मस्य तदात्मानं सृजाम्यहम|
I was glad when I came across the following in the accompanying purport:
It is not a fact that the Lord appears only on Indian soil. He can manifest Himself anywhere and everywhere, and whenever He desires to appear.He speaks as much about religion as can be understood by the particular people under their particular circumstances. But the mission is the same - to lead people to God consciousness and obedience to the principles of religion. Sometimes He descends personally, and sometimes he sends his bonafide representative in the form of His son, or servant, or Himself in some disguised form.
These lines kind of rhymed with what I have always believed - God appears in the form that the devotee chooses and that's why we have different religions all talking about their own scriptures, rituals and beliefs.
I looked forward to reading the purport of my other favorite verse (#8):
परित्राणाय साधूनां विनाशाय च दुष्कृतां!
धर्मसंस्थापनार्थाय संभवामि युगे युगे!
I agreed with most of the purport except a few lines at the end. 'As stated in the Srimad-Bhagawatam, the incarnation in the Age of Kali is Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, who spread the worship of Krsna by the Sankirtana movement and spread Krsna consciousness throughout India'.
Here, another confession is in order. I don't much care for the modern age swamis and sadhus. So I had skipped the section giving their names and photos at the beginning of this book. This line made me go back and find out just who this Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu was. Turns out that he is the founder of the ISKON movement. His name was mentioned in the ancient text Srimad-Bhagawatam? How is that possible? I read that line again and realized that the Srimad-Bhagawatam talks about Krsna's incarnation in every age. And it is the author's interpretation that this 'incarnation in the Age of Kali is Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu'.
My suspicion was confirmed by the following lines at the very end of the purport:
Lord Caitanya as the incarnation of Krsna, the Personality of Godhead, is described secretly but not directly in the confidential parts of the revealed scriptures, such as the Upanisads, Mahabharata and Bhagavatam.
Guess the author has committed the same crime that he accuses mundane wranglers of committing (Page 217) - speculating on the Gita in their own ways.
The Chaturwarna system is mentioned in verse 13 as follows:
चातुर्वण्यं माया सृष्टं गुणकर्मविभागाश:|
तस्य कर्तारमपि मां विध्द्यकर्तारमव्ययम|
Translation:
According to the three modes of material nature and the work associated with them, the four divisions of human society are created by me. And although I am the creator of this system, you should know that I am yet the non-doer, being unchangeable.
It is clearly mentioned that the Chaturwarna system is based on nature of human beings, and not on one's birth. So, if a Brahman's child displays aptitude and inclination to follow the duties of a Kshatriya, he or she can do so and vice versa. One doesn't need to follow a particular profession just because one is born to parents who practice it. Wonder who twisted the definition of Chaturwarna and how.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment