Bhagavad-Gita

Bhagavad-Gita ("The Divine Song," or "Song of God") is one of the most central books of Hinduism, and, perhaps, one of the most profound books in the world's philosophy and history of religion.

It's a book of tremendous power.

One of the most popular editions of the book was published by the International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), better known to the world as the "Hare Krishna" movement.

The text itself is relatively short, but in the ISKCON edition it is combined with extensive commentaries by Srila Prabhupada (the founder of ISKCON) to every verse, as well as his preface and introduction. Srila (or Swami) Prabhupada is a literalist - and, that combined with his extensive Vedic education, enables him to provide a lot of supplementary material in his commentaries, which is rather precise - that is the "virtue," if such may be of literalists.

What's the usefulness of this book to the Work and to this forum, some may ask?

The answer which I would like to provide is that self-remembering is, for what it's worth, a stepping-stone, a preparation to Krishna Consciousness.

The central idea of the book is, as stated above, the development of Krishna Consciousness, that is, the ability to permanently focus your mind on the Higher Level of Being. You can consider Krishna as being 7D or even higher.

Another Work idea that I apply to the study of the book is that of the 5 "rooms" in our "home," that is, the machine, or our lower body.

According to Gurdjieff, a man #4 is able to work in all the "rooms" simultaneously - that is, in the Emotional, Intellectual, Moving, Instinctive, and Sexual Center. In other words, since the 4th Way is a kind of combination, or "distillation," of the other three ways (the Way of the Fakir, the Way of the Monk, and the Way of the Yogi), a man #4 should be able to use, virtually, any practice of the other three ways, if they are useful in his work on him/herself.

The concept of bhakti, or unconditional love of God, is, maybe, the property of the Way of the Monk, or man #2. However, this doesn't mean that a man #4 should consider it below him/herself.

A similar idea has been referred to by P. D. Ouspensky, when talking about the book "The Way of the Pilgrim" and the practice of "constant prayer" referred to in it.

Bhagavad Gita is full of practical advice and direct recommendations for life and activity.

The concentration of high philosophical ideas, indisputable from the logical point of view, is so high in this small text, that it is easy to comply with the idea that it is a "sacred text," that is a text at least spoken from a higher level than that of man.

If you have a chance to read it, don't miss it.

And to conclude, I would like to quote one verse from Bhagavad-Gita:
"Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among men, I perpetually cast into the ocean of material existence, into various demonic species of life."

-- Bhagavad-Gita As It Is, ch. 16, 19
 
How about getting and reading this book and reporting back:

Bhagavad Gita A Critical Study: Philosophy behind Hindutva explained


http://www.amazon.com/Bhagavad-Gita-Critical-Study-Philosophy-ebook/dp/B00TMIMS2E/ref=sr_1_110

This authentic, scholarly study on the Hindu holy book Bhagavad Gita sheds new light on the philosophy of modern Hinduism. Bhagavad Gita is preaching a non-ethical society and a philosophy that justifies any means - murder, cheating and falsehood - to attain political goals. Enjoying ever new popularity, the ancient text could turn out an ideal tool to lead India to a Hindu theocracy.

The author is interesting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanal_Edamaruku
 
Laura said:
How about getting and reading this book and reporting back:

Bhagavad Gita A Critical Study: Philosophy behind Hindutva explained


http://www.amazon.com/Bhagavad-Gita-Critical-Study-Philosophy-ebook/dp/B00TMIMS2E/ref=sr_1_110

This authentic, scholarly study on the Hindu holy book Bhagavad Gita sheds new light on the philosophy of modern Hinduism. Bhagavad Gita is preaching a non-ethical society and a philosophy that justifies any means - murder, cheating and falsehood - to attain political goals. Enjoying ever new popularity, the ancient text could turn out an ideal tool to lead India to a Hindu theocracy.

The author is interesting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanal_Edamaruku

Thank you for that link. The author does sound interesting and courageous.

Look forward to see if Arpaxad will do us the favour and read this book and report back. It appears that at least somebody have critically evaluated the Bhagavad Gita.
 
The author sounds like the Richard Dawkins of India. It's not a bad idea to prevent religious scammers from taking advantage of the gullible, but he might be throwing out the baby with the bathwater, just like Dawkins. The Rationalist movement is also biased to a certain extent imho.

Regarding the Bhagavad Gita, from what I've read it is a mixture of half-truths mixed with disinformation just like the Bible or the Quran, which makes it particularly easy to misuse for political purposes.

When I read about the 7 densities, I thought of the 7 Spheres or Swargas mentioned therein:

7th Sphere, Satyaloka

The foremost of these is Satyaloka, the Sphere of God - the only Real Substance, Sat, in the universe. No name can describe it, nor can anything in the creation of Darkness or Light designate it. This sphere is therefore called Anama, the Nameless.

6th Sphere, Tapoloka

The next in order is Tapoloka, the sphere of the Holy Spirit, (1) which is the Eternal Patience, as it remains forever undisturbed by any limited idea. Because it is not approachable even by the Sons of God as such, it is called Agama, the Inaccessible.

5th Sphere, Janaloka

Next is Janaloka, the sphere of spiritual reflection, the Sons of God, wherein the idea of separate existence of the Self originates. As this sphere is above the comprehension of anyone in the creation of Darkness, Maya, it is called Alakshya, the Uncomprehensible.

4th Sphere, Maharloka

The comes Maharloka, the sphere of the Atom, the beginning of the creation of Darkness, Maya, upon which the Spirit is reflected. This, the connecting link, is the only way between the spiritual and the material creation and is called the Door, Dasamadwara.

3rd Sphere, Swarloka

Around this Atom is Swarloka, the sphere of magnetic aura, the electricities. This sphere, being characterized by the absence of all the creation (even the organs and their objects, the fine material things), is called Mahasunya, the Great Vacuum.
2nd Sphere, Bhuvarloka

The next is Bhuvarloka, the sphere of the electric attributes. As the gross matters of the creation are entirely absent from this sphere, and it is conspicuous by the presence of the fine matters only, it is called Sunya, the Vacuum Ordinary.
1st Sphere, Bhuloka

The last and lowest sphere is Bhuloka, the sphere of the gross material creation, which is always visible to everyone. (Sri Yukteswar Giri, HS, 33-4.)
 
Eulenspiegel said:
The author sounds like the Richard Dawkins of India. It's not a bad idea to prevent religious scammers from taking advantage of the gullible, but he might be throwing out the baby with the bathwater, just like Dawkins. The Rationalist movement is also biased to a certain extent imho.

Very true. But it is useful to read the critics. I looked for a good, scholarly, even-handed critique and didn't find one. But, that's not too surprising since it is the "sacred scripture" of India. It's only been recently that good, critical studies of the OT and NT have started coming out in the West.

Eulenspiegel said:
Regarding the Bhagavad Gita, from what I've read it is a mixture of half-truths mixed with disinformation just like the Bible or the Quran, which makes it particularly easy to misuse for political purposes.

Yes, and the same is true for the Koran, the OT and NT in the West and Middle East.

The only thing that should really interest us FIRST of all, is a critical study of a text. You can't work with a text as a believer. Writing things like "one of the most profound books... book of tremendous power" gives away the fact that you are dealing with a believer and not an objective assessment.
 
Using an exoteric "critical study" like so has no weight whatsoever, and rather takes away from your argument in general.

Although I'm no fan of Pradhupada, for his literalist/zealot vibe (he's a radical Bhakti guy), for an in-depth and balanced edition I'd recommend Sri Swami Sivananda's edition (freely available here: _http://www.dlshq.org/download/bgita.pdf ) and for the most advanced, applied version relevant to the Work - more practical by far than most of the books on the recommended list, imho - go to Michael Beloved's Brahma Yoga Bhagavad Gita, a channeling of Sri Mahasiddha Swami Nityananda.

And I'll refer you to my sig below, too.
 
United Gnosis said:
Using an exoteric "critical study" like so has no weight whatsoever, and rather takes away from your argument in general.

An exoteric critical study is where one must begin when studying belief systems. If you don't agree, then I guess you are in the wrong bar. I don't believe the Cs, either.

What is needed are studies similar to those done on the OT by the Copenhagen school. See here:
https://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,39959.0.html

And studies similar to the "Christ Myth" work done by G. A. Wells, Price, Zindler, Doherty, Carrier etc.
 
I will obtain it and read it. Not that I am a believer or Hindu, either; but rather that the Gita offers the most integrated, practical roadmap to the work that I've ever found anywhere. Practical application of concepts like selfless service, self-remembering and inner posture of devotion to Truth are naturally derived from its cosmology and effortlessly explained, in a manner way less contrived than Gurdjieff's, for that matter. It would be a shame for you to dismiss it so readily.

As an interesting note, I first tried reading the Bhag. Gita under Pradhupada's commentary, shortly after receiving a spontaneous satori and seeking to grasp the meaning of the experience under rational terms. His zealot vibe turned me off. It is only after studying Vedanta further, especially the Upanishads and Shankara's Crest Jewel of Discrimination (the Vivekachudamani) that the Gita presented itself again to me, under the form of Sivananda's commentary, which is much more secular and concerned with the practical implications of the Work. As I said earlier, it seemed the me the most seemless ontological derivation of ethics and growth techniques out of a cosmology that is fundamentally compatible with yours, non-dual Satchitananda being a direct equivalent of the C's 7D.

As I said, I will strive to obtain the critical study. Yet just from the summary - and the author's bio - I can feel that not only did he throw out the baby with the bathwater, but he failed to see there was a baby in the first place.
 
It seems that one can find a bit more in the scholarly line by searching under Mahabharata.

Wikipedia notes:
There have been many attempts to unravel its historical growth and compositional layers. The oldest preserved parts of the text are thought to be not much older than around 400 BCE, though the origins of the epic probably fall between the 8th and 9th centuries BCE. ...

The Mahabharata is the longest known epic poem and has been described as "the longest poem ever written". Its longest version consists of over 100,000 shloka or over 200,000 individual verse lines (each shloka is a couplet), and long prose passages. About 1.8 million words in total, the Mahabharata is roughly ten times the length of the Iliad and the Odyssey combined, or about four times the length of the Ramayana. ...

The text has been described by some early 20th-century western Indologists as unstructured and chaotic. Hermann Oldenberg supposed that the original poem must once have carried an immense "tragic force" but dismissed the full text as a "horrible chaos." Moritz Winternitz (Geschichte der indischen Literatur 1909) considered that "only unpoetical theologists and clumsy scribes" could have lumped the parts of disparate origin into an unordered whole. ...

The oldest surviving Sanskrit text dates to the Kushan Period (200 CE). ...

The earliest known references to the Mahabharata and its core Bharata date to the Ashtadhyayi (sutra 6.2.38) of Pāṇini (fl. 4th century BCE) and in the Ashvalayana Grhyasutra (3.4.4). This may mean the core 24,000 verses, known as the Bharata, as well as an early version of the extended Mahabharata, were composed by the 4th century BCE.

A report by the Greek writer Dio Chrysostom (c. 40 - c. 120 CE) about Homer's poetry being sung even in India seems to imply that the Iliad had been translated into Sanskrit. However, scholars have, in general, taken this as evidence for the existence of a Mahabharata at this date, whose episodes Dio or his sources identify with the story of the Iliad. ...

Between 1919 and 1966, scholars at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Pune, compared the various manuscripts of the epic from India and abroad and produced the Critical Edition of the Mahabharata, on 13,000 pages in 19 volumes, followed by the Harivamsha in another two volumes and six index volumes. This is the text that is usually used in current Mahabharata studies for reference. This work is sometimes called the "Pune" or "Poona" edition of the Mahabharata. ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahabharata

Plenty of references there to start digging.

I would suggest that the tale(s) and many of the ideas came down from the steppes in a similar way that the foundations of the Epic of Gilgamesh (a couple thousand years older) came to Mesopotamia. In fact, it may have come via Mesopotamia. There was a terrible global disruption in 2300 BC and much of Inda was decimated. The cultures that appear on top of the destruction layers are rather different and give evidence of having migrated.

The themes of the epic are similar to those of the Iliad so one suspects some connections; prolly via Mesopotamia since Gilgamesh has a definite affinity with "Homer". Working out who's on first is probably not possible but it's interesting to speculate about it.
 
I just wanted to chime in here in support of the idea of reviewing texts that are critical of, even against, something a person is interested in studying. If there are unhappy people troubling themselves to express their criticisms and disappointments with Bhagavad-Gita, Quantum Theory, specific parts of the Bible, or anything else, then it may be a sign that the authors of the texts that are being criticized didn't cover something important and it may be worth the effort to find out what and why. At least the critic is interested (though negative and with something solid to say about it). It's total indifference that makes someone's efforts useless, I think. And baseless emotionalisms posing as an argument are just distractions.

About Bhagavad-Gita, I don't know enough to speak intelligently, but I have read that the strongest argument for it says that it is as valid as science and should be considered science, but others say that if that is true, then you have to look very hard to find any connections to science. So, why the discrepancy in views? And superficial answers that resemble accusations that readers are just dumb, infidels or savages doesn't satisfy me personally.

This practice of using other people's critical work alongside a study of work presenting a positive light on a subject is accepted in other contexts as well. Heck, it's even a way to generate topic ideas for general interest blogging.

The advice usually given is:

1) Pick a topic
2) Find a book to read on the subject and review it or
3) Go to Amazon and read the positive AND negative reviews on a particular book - especially the negative reviews. Find out what the critic didn't like and what would have made that author's work better.
4) Write a post filling in the gap with the missing information
5) Watch as the comments on your post multiply, indicating people really are interested, but have gotten tired of reading the same ol', same ol'.
6) Profit!

So, if someone is telling the truth, would they want to shield a work from even the most intense inspection? What would they have to fear if they were speaking the truth in the first place, and if they were speaking the truth, a good critical analysis could only confirm it, no? Perhaps a problem is really with followers who might not be comfortable having their own ignorance exposed...even when it's an opportunity to correct the situation?

Back to more knowledgeable members...
 
I am quite familiar with the Bhagavad Geeta. My personal opinion is that there are parts of the text which convey wisdom and are quite inspiring. Yet, the complete Bhagavad Gita text, when read carefully, reveals many contradictions. These contradictions are usually glossed over and explained away by various commentators who mostly interpret the text according to their particular "line of force". This has been true in the past history of India, and it holds true today.

The Bhagavad Geeta is arguably the most popular Hindu religious text in the West today and for anyone who has read a version of the book or commentaries on it interpret it on the basis of fictitious events based on the epic Mahabharata. The context is quite important in interpreting old texts, especially one which is written in an archaic multi-level and multi-valued language like Sanskrit. The only account I have read which has tried to question the context of the Geeta, provide a rational explanation for the contradictions in it and speculate how these have affected the history of India is "The Untold Story of the Bhagavad Gita - Revealing the True Intent and Spirit of the Bhagavad Gita in its Historical Context", by Dr Prabhakar S Kamath. It is available in Amazon. However, I would suggest that if anyone is interested in this topic, watching the following video where the author gives an overview of his work is a good place to start.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff63aD_WH-U
 
arpaxad said:
Bhagavad-Gita ("The Divine Song," or "Song of God") is one of the most central books of Hinduism, and, perhaps, one of the most profound books in the world's philosophy and history of religion.

It's a book of tremendous power.

One of the most popular editions of the book was published by the International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), better known to the world as the "Hare Krishna" movement.
Once I talked to ISKON person for more than half an hour to understand his arguments - "only his Guru had the original copy of Gita and only he translated it correctly" etc. I end up asking how does he knows it is authentic version. After that our discussion didn't go any where.

Interestingly, Paramahansa Yogananda has his own commentaries on Gita which he seems to have written in 1940's(that's what told) and asked his disciples not release it until 1990's as the people are not ready. The crux of his book is 100 evil kaurava's in Mahabharat , 5 good Pandava's are characteristics in our Psyche's that battle for supremacy. It's like little 'I' of 4th way.
Eulenspiegel said:
The author sounds like the Richard Dawkins of India. It's not a bad idea to prevent religious scammers from taking advantage of the gullible, but he might be throwing out the baby with the bathwater, just like Dawkins. The Rationalist movement is also biased to a certain extent imho.
I have heard enough people's contribution in exposing the many false guru's irrespective of religious denominations. Probably Atheism has nothing to do with it.

Laura said:
Bhagavad Gita A Critical Study: Philosophy behind Hindutva explained
http://www.amazon.com/Bhagavad-Gita-Critical-Study-Philosophy-ebook/dp/B00TMIMS2E/ref=sr_1_110
Thank you for mentioning the book. This little book is a interesting damning book. I read the concept of modern Hinduism as we see as a Brahminical revivalism of vedic caste system after fall of Mauryan empire which promoted Buddhism (2000 yrs back) before. This went little further in exposing the religious aspects. I tend to think Hindutva as the recent fanatical version of Hinduism for political purposes. After reading the above mentioned book I started to wonder, probably it is not. Probably It is always like that.

He writes how the text only benefits Brahmins( priests) and ruling class. As a proof, he shows
- Contradictions in different slokas to lure the different denominations of Buddhists, Jains, low caste people etc.
- Praise of upper castes and suppression of lower castes ( Ironically there are some instances in Ramayana too has similar discriminations )
- Women as inferior race
- some deeds which Krishna did during wars is outright cheating. Krishna's relationship with somany Gpikas' etc. These are observed by everybody.
- Traces of other religious beliefs in revived hinduism (completely different from old Veda's w.r.t to gods and rituals)
- Why so called years depicted in each yoga doesn't make sense
- Falsehood in depicting it as a Historical fact and the war depicted as Kurukshetra relegated to small region in North India ( There are authors who concluded the same. Despite occasional promotion, Gandhi and other people of his movement thought this is a historical fiction)
- Religious persecutions of Buddhists ans other rationalists after the fall of Mauryan empire.

In short
1994-10-20
Q: Who was the Queen of Sheba?
A: Fictional.
Q: Did a great queen come to visit King Solomon?
A: Alien influence.
Q: Who was Arjuna?
A: Same as Sheba.
It looks, like Arjuna, Krishna (the two main players in Bhagavad Gita) is also fictional.
 
The Bhagavad Geeta (BG) is neither a divine revelation nor a single, consistent and coherent form of written work. Textual analysis clearly shows different authors with different agenda composing the various slokas. I will attempt to give a summary of the main actors playing a role in the development of the BG. This thread has some more background details
http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,29300.0.html

The key actors are
- Vedic (ritualistic) Brahmanism
- Post Vedic non-ritualistic Upanishads
- Monotheistic Bhagavatism

The adherents of each of these three philosophies waged a war for the "hearts and minds" of the people in India and the BG was one of the scholastic battlegrounds. Each group had its own slokas inserted into the text at different times which resulted in frequent context switches in the BG . Later commentators have tried to homogenize the text picking the parts which suited their line of force. The ones who had their final say on the document which is popular today were the adherents of Bhagavatism.

The narrative background of BG

The core of BG is set in a section of the fictional Mahabharata epic, where a major war is about to be fought between two royal houses which are related to each other. The chief warrior of one side, Arjuna, when confronted with the prospect of killing his own relatives and teacher who were on the other side, suffered great doubt. Krishna, another warrior prince who had volunteered to be Arjuna's charioteer, provides Arjuna with advice to dispel his doubts. What Krishna said to Arjuna is recorded as the BG.

Dr Kamath thinks that the historical context here is the revered Indian emperor Ashoka and his conversion to Buddhism. Ashoka had to kill his brothers and other relatives to ascend to the throne. Later he waged war to satisfy imperial ambitions. It is said that in the battlefield of Kalinga, Ashoka was horrified at the carnage. He questioned his dharma (right action) as a Kshatriya (warrior) as taught by Vedic Brahmanism, the religion he grew up in. He was tormented by the question of right and wrong. We could perhaps say that he reached a stage of bankruptcy mediated through conscience. He found peace in the non-hierarchical and non-ritualistic (a topic for another thread perhaps) Buddhism and adopted it.

Vedic Brahminical Influence on BG

Losing patronage of the most powerful Indian monarch was a serious setback to the adherents of Vedic Brahmanism, more specifically the Brahmin caste who had the most to gain from this religion. They were temporarily down but not out. If they could ride out the storm of Ashoka, they could make a comeback.

The core 77 sloka section of BG called "Arjuna Vishada" or "The Sorrow of Arjuna" is primarily composed by the adherents of Vedic Brahminism. Krishna is not a God but a defender of the Vedic tradition in this section. He advises Arjuna to fulfill his dharma (right action) as a Kshatriya (warrior caste). Arjuna in his doubt serves as the negative model of the warrior, a resemblance to Ashoka in the post Kalinga war days. The Brahminists wished to restore the status quo for posterity, and Krishna here is seen defending tradition and rebuking Arjuna for neglecting his duties. And though I have not read Sanal Edamaruku's 90 page critical study on the BG, judging by comments of his at an interview on the web, I would guess that these are the sections he would perhaps highlight in his criticism of BG. Such criticism would be justified but that would not be the full story.

Upanishadic Influence on BG

Now as Vedic Brahmanism was becoming unpopular due to demands of ever-increasing ostentatious sacrifices to Gods (and by extension, their representatives on earth, the Brahmin caste) for gaining merit, there was an internal reform movement brewing amongst their own tradition. What Buddhism and Jainism did from the outside, the Upanishadists attempted to do from inside the Vedic religion. The Upanishadists replaced yagna (ritual sacrifice to Gods) with yoga. They also set up a genderless supreme entity Brahman who superseded all Vedic nature Gods. They combated the caste system by introducing the concept of Atman (Self) which was a reflection of Brahman and present in all, irrespective of caste. The Upanishadists used the BG to propagate their views. In their slokas, Krishna at first appears as a Upanishadic guru who preaches against vulgar ostentatious ritualism. Later he turns into the Lord of Beings, supplanting the Vedic creator god, Brahma, ostensibly to counter some resurgent Vedic Brahministic activity. Some of the most appealing advice in the BG comes from this Upanishadic Krishna. The Upanishadic Krishna introduced Jnana-yoga (the yoga of knowledge), Karma-Yoga (the yoga of service or work), Buddhi-Yoga (yoga of intellect or reason) in the BG.

The Upanishadists did not want to outright humiliate the tradition they came from. Instead they used coded language decipherable to those who could see to criticize the tradition and further their ideas. One analogy would be where a father scolds his good son with a wink knowing he is blameless in the presence of his wayward cousin,who is the real target of the admonitions. This may sound strange to modern western ears but this is a peculiarity of many eastern cultures. The subterfuge used by the Upanishadists was also practical in nature. The Brahminical system was alive and well and direct confrontation with it was not likely to be successful. So they crafted their messages such that a literalist interpretation would not raise serious objections from the dominant tradition, yet their message could be passed down to future initiates. It is here that BG comes close to the idea of legominism of Gurdjieff.

Bhagavatism



The Upanishadists with time lost ground to the traditional Vedic Brahminism. Their more intellectual approach could not win over the masses who were not prepared for it. The Brahmin caste, who were intellectually capable of grasping the Upanishadist position, were not prepared to give up their privileges. The wily Vedic Brahminists gradually subsumed the Upanishadist position by labeling their written material as Vedanta (end of the Vedas) and adding their own material to the mix. Today, most people consider the Upanishads as a reformation and enhancement of the original Vedic doctrines, not something that seriously challenged orthodoxy.

While this battle between Vedic Brahminists and Upanishadists was on-going ....

[quote author=The Untold Story of the Bhagavad Gita]

At this critical moment for Upanishadism the adherents of the monotheistic, non-ritualistic and classless sect known as Bhāgavata Dharma, complete outsiders to polytheistic, ritualistic and class-obsessed Brāhmanic culture, entered the fray on the side of the Upanishadists. The Bhāgavatas and Upanishadists had a lot in common. Upanishadists were monists: One Supreme Being (Brahman) who is Nirguna (without attributes); Bhāgavatas were monotheistic: One Supreme Lord (Vāsudeva) who is Saguna (full of attributes). Upanishadists worshipped Brahman by Yoga; Bhāgavatas worshipped Lord Vāsudeva by Bhakti (worship by adoring devotion). Upanishadists disliked rituals; Bhāgavatas hated them. Upanishadists promoted equality of all people. So did Bhāgavatas. Just as Upanishadists had sent forth terrifying Brahman armed with Yoga to drive off the Vedic gods, now Bhāgavatas sent forth to the battlefield of Dharma Vāsudeva, the God of gods (11: 13), of terrifying appearance, awesome powers and deadly weapons (11: 17, 24-25) to annihilate Brāhmanism, and establish in its place all-encompassing Bhāgavata Dharma dedicated to the welfare of all people. Nothing short of display of Universal Form (Vishwaroopa Darshana) was necessary to scare heaven and hell out of the ritualists.

The Bhagavata Creed

Bhāgavatism was an ancient monotheistic creed centered on Lord Vāsudeva, God of gods, and its mode of worship was known as Bhakti, which in practice meant adoring devotion to Lord Vāsudeva alone. Bhāgavata creed was the first monotheistic creed of India that we know of. This cult was popular in western part of north India at least three centuries before the Christian era. Lord Vāsudeva was declared as ‘God of gods’ on the pillar of Heliodoros situated in Besnaga, five miles from Sānchi, Madhya Pradesh, India. This pillar, dated around 113 B. C., bears the inscription:

This Garuda flagpole of Vāsudeva, the God of gods was erected here by the Bhāgavata (devotee) Heliodoros the son of Dion, a man of Taxila sent by the Great Yona (Greek) King Antialkidas, as ambassador to King Kāsiputra (Savior son of princes from Kāsi) Bhāgabhadra, in the fourteenth year of his reign.

Some translators of this inscription have described Heliodoros as worshipper of Vishnu. This assumption is baseless as it is retroactive. Vaishnavism (Vishnu Creed) was still centuries ahead in the making. The fact is that there is no mention of Vishnu in this inscription. The fact is that there is no mention of Vishnu in this inscription. Even in the Bhāgavata Gita, Vishnu was merely the first of many Adityas (Sun gods, 10: 21), before a Brāhmanic poet interpolated two mole shlokas (11: 24, 30) in which Arjuna refers to Lord Krishna as “O Vishnu!” His goal was to promote their minor Vedic god, an ally of war god Indra in the Rig Veda, to the position of Supreme God and demote Krishna as merely one of His Avatāras.
...........
<more evidence from ancient artifacts and documents>

With all these evidences in mind, it is not hard to imagine that the Bhāgavata revolution in the Bhagavad Gita, with the goal to establish an all inclusive, egalitarian, ritual-free and monotheistic Dharma centered solely on Vāsudeva-Krishna might have taken place some time in the first century B. C. Bhāgavata Lord Krishna identifies Vāsudeva as Supreme God by stating, “Vāsudeva is all this is” (7: 19), echoing the Upanishadic dictum, “Brahman is all this is.”

................

By and by Bhāgavatas combined Buddhiyoga of Upanishads with Bhakti of Bhāgavata creed and came up with Bhaktiyoga (10: 10; 18: 55-58). In an effort to eliminate elaborate and complex Yajnas and rituals, Bhāgavatas recommended the simple ritual such as “offering with Bhakti and purity of heart a leaf, a flower, a fruits or water” (9: 26).

[/quote]

Further down this road, Lord Krishna replaces the formless genderless Brahman of the Upanishadists as the supreme deity and he is also present in the heart of all living beings as Atman.This is the reason why ISKCON uses BG as their primary text today. Other denominations of Hindu religion, including the Vedantic (Upanishadic) schools also use the BG as a religious text. I have read interpretations of the BG coming from modern (imo) Upanishadic mindsets where there are strong parallels with certain aspects of 4th Way literature. It can potentially be an useful learning text for someone willing to delve seriously into Indian philosophy.

Hopefully there is some value justifying the length of this post.
 
A mixed-breed posing as purebred? No wonder us ordinary people pay a premium price for ordinary performance from our favored traditions.
 
obyvatel said:
The Bhagavad Geeta is arguably the most popular Hindu religious text in the West today and for anyone who has read a version of the book or commentaries on it interpret it on the basis of fictitious events based on the epic Mahabharata. The context is quite important in interpreting old texts, especially one which is written in an archaic multi-level and multi-valued language like Sanskrit. The only account I have read which has tried to question the context of the Geeta, provide a rational explanation for the contradictions in it and speculate how these have affected the history of India is "The Untold Story of the Bhagavad Gita - Revealing the True Intent and Spirit of the Bhagavad Gita in its Historical Context", by Dr Prabhakar S Kamath. It is available in Amazon. However, I would suggest that if anyone is interested in this topic, watching the following video where the author gives an overview of his work is a good place to start.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ff63aD_WH-U
This book seems to go between the layers of onion(History of Hinduism). Thank you for mentioning.
 
Back
Top Bottom