Related Posts

Ancient Wisdom, Modern relevance – śrī-bhagavān uvāca
Posted by

Ancient Wisdom, Modern relevance – śrī-bhagavān uvāca

Krishna Speaks at Battlefield

Śrī-bhagavān uvāca means “The Supreme Personality of Godhead said”.

Bhagavān is how Lord Krishna is addressed by Srimad Bhagavad Gita. It means one who has the six opulences, namely Wealth, Strength, Fame, Beauty, Knowledge and Renunciation, unlimitedly. If you read the list carefully, you will see that almost all so-called celebrities of this world are known for having the opulences stated above, one or more at any time. But even they do not compare to Bhagavān, who is the Lord of everything that is and has all the opulence in unlimited quantity.

In my last article, we saw how Arjuna is overcome by grief and refuses to take up arms against his kinsmen. Being such a ‘nice person’, one would have thought that Lord Krishna, as God, would have been very happy and said “Arjuna, I am so proud of you! You are non-violent! That’s just great!”

Did he? NO. Krishna, in fact, scolds Arjuna in the strongest of words. Here it is, Bhagavad Gita Chapter 02, verse 2-3:

śrī-bhagavān uvāca
kutas tvā kaśmalam idaḿ
viṣame samupasthitam
anārya-juṣṭam asvargyam
akīrti-karam arjuna

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: My dear Arjuna, how have these impurities come upon you? They are not at all befitting a man who knows the value of life. They lead not to higher planets but to infamy.

klaibyaḿ mā sma gamaḥ pārtha
naitat tvayy upapadyate
kṣudraḿ hṛdaya-daurbalyaḿ
tyaktvottiṣṭha parantapa

O son of Pṛthā, do not yield to this degrading impotence. It does not become you. Give up such petty weakness of heart and arise, O chastiser of the enemy.

I do not think that Krishna’s words need any explanation here.

Arjuna is shocked! He asks Krishna how can he encourage slaying men worthy of worship, being his teachers. He declares it’s better to live of begging than to live at the cost of these great souls. Then he accepts that he is confused with miserly weakness and that he is now Krishna’s disciple and then requests Krishna to dispel his grief. Then he says “Govinda, I shall not fight” and became silent.

What comes next is a very, very important section of Bhagavad Gita. The Supreme Lord begins his instruction to his surrendered devotee. Since his instructions carry the essence of the entire Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 02 is termed as a summary of the contents of the Bhagavad Gita. This will be quite a long article if I were to address all the instructions, so I will summarize on the main topics that are being addressed.

Lord Krishna begins with the explanation of the soul or atma by reprimanding Arjuna and calling him unwise for speaking like a learned man (because he made so many emotional arguments) but grieving for things that don’t deserve grief and also that the wise lament neither for the living nor for the dead. The very next statement he makes to Arjuna on this topic is this:

na tv evāhaḿ jātu nāsaḿ
na tvaḿ neme janādhipāḥ
na caiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ
sarve vayam ataḥ param

“Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.” – BG2.12

This statement is a damning rebuttal of the theory which states that all souls merge in to the brahma-jyoti, losing their identity, and also of the theory where individuality is said to be an effect of illusion or Maya. In a way, it also is a statement that refutes the theory of evolution, where life is proclaimed to come from matter and has no purpose or prior or future existence. The next statement explains the core principle of Transmigration of the Soul:

dehino ‘smin yathā dehe
kaumāraḿ yauvanaḿ jarā
tathā dehāntara-prāptir
dhīras tatra na muhyati

“As the embodied soul continuously passes, in this body, from boyhood to youth to old age, the soul similarly passes into another body at death. A sober person is not bewildered by such a change.” – BG2.13

So, what are the characteristics of this spirit soul? In Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 2, verses 16-25, this is described clearly. A spirit soul is eternal, indestructible, cannot be cut in to pieces, cannot be burnt by fire, cannot be moistened by water or withered by wind, immutable, invisible and inconceivable.

And so, Lord Krishna says to Arjuna that he shouldn’t lament for the person who dies, since it’s only the body that is slain. After that, Krishna explains why Arjuna must fight, by telling how people would speak ill of Arjuna if he didn’t do his duty, and how the generals would think him to be weak. Krishna also begins talking about how Arjuna should do his duty for the sake of doing it, without considering the result. This, Lord Krishna says, would let Arjuna avoid sin.

He also conveys to Arjuna that what he has heard till now was only from the analytical point of view. So, Krishna begins explaining the same principles in terms of working without fruitive results. It is in this section he speaks the famous verse 47 in Chapter 02 (made popular, thanks to the Mahabharata serial on TV and countless pseudo-philosophers who claim this as the essence of Bhagavad Gita)

karmaṇy evādhikāras te
mā phaleṣu kadācana
mā karma-phala-hetur bhūr
mā te sańgo ‘stv akarmaṇi

“You have a right to perform your prescribed duty, but you are not entitled to the fruits of action. Never consider yourself the cause of the results of your activities, and never be attached to not doing your duty.”

The Acharyas explain that the Lord is talking about prescribed duties here, but we normally, wrongly, take this to mean that Krishna is talking about day to day mundane activities. So, one must do his prescribed duty, without attachment to success or failure. Allow me to deal in this a bit more. Lord Krishna does not say here that results are to be ignored or that we should carry out our duties carelessly. Since the Supreme Lord is the proprietor of everything, he owns the results too. We must understand that our self is just one of the five factors that influence action. This is from Chapter 18, verse 14.

adhiṣṭhānaḿ tathā kartā
karaṇaḿ ca pṛthag-vidham
vividhāś ca pṛthak ceṣṭā
daivaḿ caivātra pañcamam

“The place of action [the body], the performer, the various senses, the many different kinds of endeavor, and ultimately the Supersoul — these are the five factors of action.”

So, unless the results are dedicated to the Supreme Lord, Krishna, then that work causes bondage and suffering. How we should understand this is simply that as a spirit soul, we have to be engaged in activity. We have capacity for work and are intermediate causes, but material nature creates result and it is controlled by Lord Krishna. This is mentioned in Chapter 09, verse 10.

mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ
sūyate sa-carācaram
hetunānena kaunteya
jagad viparivartate

“This material nature, which is one of My energies, is working under My direction, O son of Kuntī, producing all moving and nonmoving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again.”

So, we don’t really have a claim over results which are actually created by something which is not under our control. If we align our freewill through actions based on the Lord’s instructions, it does not cause any bondage.

One other important point to be noted from Krishna’s response is how he explains the root cause of all problems. Let’s hear it from him directly, shall we?

Lord Krishna says in Chapter 02, verses 62-64:

“While contemplating the objects of the senses, a person develops attachment for them, and from such attachment lust develops, and from lust anger arises. From anger, complete delusion arises, and from delusion bewilderment of memory. When memory is bewildered, intelligence is lost, and when intelligence is lost one falls down again into the material pool. But a person free from all attachment and aversion and able to control his senses through regulative principles of freedom can obtain the complete mercy of the Lord.”

So, Lord Krishna declares that attachment and the lust that arises from it to be the real problem. The senses must be engaged in some real activity, and if they are not used in the service of the Supreme Lord, then they will be engaged in service of materialism. But for a person who is devoid of attachment or aversion and follows the regulative principles properly, he can achieve the highest state of becoming conscious of the Supreme Lord. Artificial renunciation won’t help when the desire to enjoy is still present in the mind and even the slightest agitation of the mind will pull down a person who is even on the verge of the ‘liberation’ often spoken about as the goal of life.

I will end this article with one of the verses which has influenced me in my personal life very much. Srimad Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 02, verse 66:

nāsti buddhir ayuktasya
na cāyuktasya bhāvanā
na cābhāvayataḥ śāntir
aśāntasya kutaḥ sukham

“One who is not connected with the Supreme [in Kṛṣṇa consciousness] can have neither transcendental intelligence nor a steady mind, without which there is no possibility of peace. And how can there be any happiness without peace?”

This relates directly to how I started writing this sequence of articles, on request from our very own Lakshmi Rajan. I started off by saying everyone wants to be happy, forever. And above is the clear solution to that! Without the mind being peaceful, there can be no happiness. And for the mind to be peaceful, one must be on the devotional platform.

So, how does Arjuna respond to Lord Krishna and what question he put forth to the Lord? What does Lord Krishna say about Karma Yoga? These I will address in the next article, which should be ready by early next week.

This completes the brief summary of Chapter 02 of Srimad Bhagavad Gita. I have tried to compress the whole chapter of 72 verses in to less than 1800 words. So if I have missed out on any important aspects or given incomplete explanations, it is only due to my fault and oversight, for which I pray forgiveness and understanding from my teachers as well as the readers. Please do not hesitate to ask for any clarification as required and I will try to clarify to the best of my ability.

0 13 November, 2009 Bhagavad Gita-as i learned November 13, 2009

About the author

A techie by profession but spiritual by nature. Ambi writes about the ancient wisdom of our Indian culture in a way the modern generation can easily understand. Oh ya, his comments are as interesting as his posts and his posts always trigger healthy debates.

View all articles by Ambi

39 comments

  1. mahesh kalaal

    Hi….

    I appreciate your efforts in bringing out Geetha in Blogosphere.
    I have some questions.

    1. If anger and lust are to be overcome, why did God create humans with those instincts. Is his creation imperfect?
    2. Also, seems like Geetha(Intelligent Design Theory) contradicting Evolution process. Have you read ‘Origin of Species’ by Charles Darwin?
    3 . Can total Geetha be discussed on pure terms of Logic and Rationality ?(like the wise one of Work and Result).

    1. Ambi

      Mahesh:

      Q1) This is a misleading question, in the sense that it tries to connect the existence of such feelings to the quality of perfection. How do the Acharyas explain this? The jiva, or spirit soul, is in a position of loving service to God by it’s constitutional position. But under the influence of the material nature, through this creation, that love is transformed in to lust… which in turn begets anger and so on. I don’t know where people get an idea that God means he is feeling-less,… he is the source of ‘everything’, as per the Vedas.

      I will get to explain these things in forthcoming articles, so please be patient.

      Q2)The Vedas postulate that life does not arise from matter, whereas Darwin’s theory is based upon an idea that life does come from matter. When the base principles are different, the conflict is expected. I am no expert on Darwinian theory, but what I do have seen is that Darwin’s theory hinges on ‘chance’ occurrences.

      There are SO many biological processes that go in to creating the many variations that we see now in the living world… all the processes are extremely complex (irreducible even) and controlled by tight parameters (as modern science is discovering). To ‘assume’ that these occurred just by chance and ignore evidences that suggest otherwise, is not exactly ‘scientific’ thinking.

      Q3) Why not? There are some self-proclaimed ‘Vedantists’ and pseudo-philosophers who consider Mahabharata as just an allegory and treat it’s teaching as such. They leave out everything about Krishna and Arjuna and make it look like some dry philosophical book. To that they add their own speculative ideas and present scholarly looking books.

      But that defeats the spirit of the Bhagavad Gita, as described in the first 2 articles I posted. So, while one can become an expert at sophistry and mundane information from such a study, it cannot and will not become knowledge.

      Logic and Rational thinking are all good. But if one assumes a de-facto stance that ‘everything’ will have to be explained by ‘logic’ which WE have contrived based on our limited senses and understanding, that position is flawed.

      Feel free to debate on this. I look forward to it.

  2. mahesh kalaal

    Hi…

    1. I am leaving this as you said we will have more discussions in coming topics.

    2. There are so many biological processes that go in to creating the many variations ……………that these occurred just by chance and ignore evidences that suggest otherwise, is not exactly ’scientific’ thinking.

    –> Yes, many complex processes, but they did not emerge at one instance. For example, if you take amoeba, it is uni-cellular, much simpler than the evolved humans. Also, the complexity is with relative to human thinking. It is not absolute. The ‘appendix’ in our bodies is the best example of evolution.
    The camel has adapted to the desert surroundings over the years and hence it deviated from its cousin horse by having a hump, special nostrils, legs,eyelids to survive in the desert. Now, you may say, God has created(not evolved) the camel in that way to suit for the desert living. My questions is why did God create the desert first of all. Why didn’t he create green plains all over the world. Intelligent Design should create intelligent forms. If you go by Geological studies deserts were formed due to geographical, atmospheric-al and tectonic variations and consequently all living creatures adapt to the surroundings for their survival. Survival of the fittest.

    Also, regarding the complexity of human biology, please do refer once both the Advaitam and Vishishtadvaitam which clearly demonstrate the reason behind the complexity of biological systems in a pure scientific way.

    If the domain of science says that Water is combination of Hydrogen and oxygen. Everyone from that chemistry domain says the same about water(Objectivity). My question is , why do i hear varied and diversified interpretations of Geetha form different intellectuals of our vedas(quite subjective)

    1. Ambi

      Mahesh,

      Even sequentially, the odds of such a process happening are mind boggling. I have a case study which basically calculates the probability of such an occurrence. I will post it once I get to home today.

      The supposed “uselessness” of appendix is controversial. There are many that hypothesize that it has lymphatic or endocrine or neuro-muscular functionality and there are others who disagree with this view. Thus it cannot be used as a case to defend evolution. In future, I am sure, scientists would alter their stance on its use; They did it with the pineal gland that once considered as a vestigial remnant from evolution.

      What you say in the case of camel and horse and geographical studies, while the theory suggests that both may share common traits, is it logical to infer that a horse became a camel merely by staying in a desert?

      “My questions is why did God create the desert first of all. Why didn’t he create green plains all over the world. ”

      Because I haven’t heard a direct answer from my teachers specifically on this, I will give an answer which I belive would be correct, but I will have to check again. It is taught that each spirit soul takes up a body based on it’s disposition and the karma it needs to live through. The soul ‘evolves’ through different species to the level of human existence and beyond that too. Certain species of life can live only in certain environments (not the other way around)… and so, that might be a possible reason for the variety in environments.

      Interestingly, BG2.24 states the soul to be sarva-gataḥ, meaning, present everywhere. Acharyas teach this as life is present everywhere… just not in the bodily composition as we see here on Earth. What do you make of this?

      “Intelligent Design should create intelligent forms”

      What makes you think that the currently existing life forms are not intelligent? One look at the way a small sparrow builds its nest can prove otherwise. While they lack the faculty of reasoning between ‘right’ and ‘wrong’, we cannot term them to be lacking intelligence.

      “Also, regarding the complexity of human biology, please do refer once both the Advaitam and Vishishtadvaitam which clearly demonstrate the reason behind the complexity of biological systems in a pure scientific way.”

      I did not understand this para from your comment. What exactly are you asking me to do?

      The reason for diversified interpretations of Gita or the Vedas is simply because everyone has their own degree of involvement, devotion, influence by the 3 modes of material nature, ego etc… and it has also got to do with lack of sufficient lack of vocabulary in English or any other language to capture the meaning of sanksrit words wholly.

  3. mahesh kalaal

    Hi…

    1.and it has also got to do with lack of sufficient lack of vocabulary in English or any other language to capture the meaning of sanksrit words wholly.

    –> Am talking about all the sanskrit pundits who give different interpretations in their books and lectures. Please may i know about your revered teacher/guru?

    2. is it logical to infer that a horse became a camel merely by staying in a desert?

    –> Horse would not become a camel immediately after entering a desert, rather, it will take generations to evolve into camel depending upon the survival of the fittest. It depends on genetical changes which transform the changes fomr generation to generation.
    All people living at equator are black to adapt themselves to the hot weather, All Arctic humans are white to adapt themselves to cold. But If a white from Norway enters Central Africa, his colour will not become black immediately, but it will reflect in his coming generations.

    3.“Intelligent Design should create intelligent forms

    –> My question is regarding the non living forms. Example, why did nt he create stable tectonic plates by which he can avoid giant Tsunamis

    4.Advaitam and Vishishtadvaitam

    –> They both clearly demonstrate the life functioning and compatibility of energy and matter in scientific way.

    5. Appendix.

    –> Yes, there are two opinions. The point you said is in research now and the studies reflect the adaptability of appendix to the new circumstances in the process of evolution. I will let you know the technical details from my MBBS friends.

    ***6) The sequence of Dashavatarams of Vishnu clearly depict the process of evolution(fish, tortoise, pig. humans….). Think once and let me know your response on this specific issue.

    7) How do you explain the rodents of cow size(their skeletons have been excavated recently) that existed millions of years before.

    1. Ambi

      Mahesh,

      I have seen a trend in the ‘scientific’ community that any idea or even evidence that does not meet the mainstream thought is discarded and the person suggesting it is made an outcast… no matter how authentic that evidence might be. This is more so true with respect to archaeology.

      Leave alone rodents the size of cows, there were so many other ‘huge’ species which have been recorded in Srimad Bhagavatam. I can give you references if you are interested… canto 8, chapter 10, verses 10-12, Canto 5, chap 23, verse 3 etc. for instance. Vedic definition of species is different. It mentions 8,400,000 species of life and all of them are repeatedly created after every partial or total cosmic devastation.

      There are scientists who search for such anomalies… but because any proof they find would damage existing accepted paradigms, they are never considered as ‘qualified’ scientists. Seeing how we do not know about all existing life forms, I find it a bit narrow minded.

      You have given an example of skin color change. Here’s something to consider. Without getting in to Differential pigment synthesis or stuff like that, we can say that the change in temperature may affect the body color (this is just adaptation, by design, hmmm?) but is not sufficient enough to cause a generation of totally different race/ethnicity, even over a period of time.

      “4.Advaitam and Vishishtadvaitam –> They both clearly demonstrate the life functioning and compatibility of energy and matter in scientific way.”

      Before I respond to this, Can you please elaborate on what is the explanation you speak of?

      “3.“Intelligent Design should create intelligent forms –> My question is regarding the non living forms. Example, why did nt he create stable tectonic plates by which he can avoid giant Tsunamis”

      I assume you are asking this question from the point of view that humans are suffering and if God could have done it in a better way, this won’t have to be. We are leaving out a major factor: US. Our karma, individual and collective, orchestrates so many things, and unraveling those laws is not simple. Vedas say nothing happens by chance, so could it be possible that these are also ‘meant’ to happen? Could these tsunamis and earthquakes be a collective ‘reaction’?

      This does not however mean to coldly dismiss those deaths by “they deserved it” kind of statement. Rather, one must realize the helpless state we are in, have compassion for other living beings and take deeper shelter of God.

      “***6) The sequence of Dashavatarams of Vishnu clearly depict the process of evolution(fish, tortoise, pig. humans….). Think once and let me know your response on this specific issue.”

      Radha Chandran has already written an article explaining this idea. I can only say that this is pure speculation. Our intelligence and mind are adept at pattern matching, no? But let’s see what Srimad Bhagavatam has to say on this, so check this out: vedabase.net/sb/1/3/en (add a http:// in front if needed)

      I primarily follow the teachings of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami, and masters in his disciple line.

  4. mahesh kalaal

    Hi….

    I think there is a mismatch between the subjectivity and the objectivity.

    Lets start from the scratch..

    God creation this universe.
    1 So, why did he create souls?
    3. Gods and just souls around praising him. Was not this stable environment enough for him?
    3. Did he create matter too. Why ?
    4. If at all he created matter and souls, why so much imperfection?. Does he have control over his creation or As Einstein said “God cannot play dice”
    5. What about the question …. from where/how/why did God born ?
    If an intelligent God is needed to create this intellegent world, then isnt it valid to say that another intellugent super power needed to create that so called intelligent god?
    6. Why did he create the mechanism of souls transformation into bodies/matter. that too, different forms.

    1. Ambi

      You make it sound so bad… just souls around, praising him. Lol. Ok, I am about to start for home… will respond from there.

    2. Ambi

      Ok, here goes. A bit of God 101.

      Q1) God did not create any souls. They are just part and parcel of him. Did you read my second article fully?

      Q2,3) I will give you exactly what my teachers say:

      The purpose of our existence is in our relationship with the Supreme Lord, and in serving Him, both the Lord and the living entity experience transcendental bliss. However, when the individual soul forgets his real position and comes to the material world (created of matter). This punishment by the material energy is not cruelty on the part of the Supreme Lord; rather that is another feature of his mercy to help the living entity reinstate himself in his original position. This is just like a father who might ‘punish’ his child in order to train him: the chastisement is another feature of the father’s love and is for the child’s benefit. There would be no meaning to argue why one should beget a child and then punish the child!

      Q4) Please define what you term as imperfection. It is only in our own imperfect senses that the defect lies. God does have control over his creation… but he does not necessarily intervene always in the laws he has set forth.

      And yes, he can play dice too, otherwise, we won’t be able to.

      Q5) By definition, God does not have a beginning or cause. It is pointless to argue about who created God.

      Q6) Connect this to the response for Q2&3. The Vedas explain that each soul gets a body based on its propensity to enjoy. If one likes to eat much, it gets a body suited for that. If one likes to sleep much, it gets a body suited for that.

      If you want some references on the siddhanta I follow, go here: http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/vedicsociety/ebooks.html
      There are a number of ebooks in the given site, read them at your convenience.

      1. Ambi

        Q6) Contd… With each form of existence, the soul gets a chance to evolve to a higher level. And the middle level in that spiritual evolution is human form, where one gets the faculty of critical reasoning. And from this state, a soul can clear its knowledge of its actual position and stop coming in to the continuous cycle of birth and death, and gets out of this material existence.

      2. mahesh kalaal

        1.The purpose of our existence is in our relationship with the Supreme Lord, and in serving Him

        –>Why should we serve HIM?
        Bonded labour?
        Slavery?
        Sycophancy?

        2.However, when the individual soul forgets his real position and comes to the material world (created of matter).

        –> Why will it forget?
        Why did God create such provision?
        Why cant he amend his laws if at all they are leading to chaos and misery?
        So does it mean that physical matter is more influential than God?

        3. There would be no meaning to argue why one should beget a child and then punish the child!

        –> First of all why we are comparing man and god though human parameters and criteria.
        Man has limited control over his childs creation(thousands of sperms and you do not know which one will fertilise with the egg). So, does God also dont have control over his creation?. IS he abide to some randomness? Why dont he create perfect things and avoid the situation of showering Mercy?
        Why cant he control the punishment of material world on souls?

        5.God did not create any souls. They are just part and parcel of him
        So, you mean to say that , being a soul, I am also a part of God. So, total universe is God. So God is discussing(not arguing) with other God(ok, God with himself).

        1. Ambi

          You are committing the same mistake as I have pointed out several times in my comments on Radha Chandran’s articles.

          Logic 101 — Because the soul is part and parcel of God, soul does NOT become God, nor does the creation become God.

          Since you are very interested in the Bhagavad Gita, here you go:

          BG 9.4: By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in them.

          BG 9.5: And yet everything that is created does not rest in Me. Behold My mystic opulence! Although I am the maintainer of all living entities and although I am everywhere, I am not a part of this cosmic manifestation, for My Self is the very source of creation.

          You question the very reason for creation and existence. These questions that you have asked, I have asked too and so many millions have asked over millions of years. Typing out answers to these is extremely time consuming.

          Instead of just trying to put forth the same old questions which are used by atheists, who think it is brilliant to ask such questions when they do not even have superficial knowledge of the subject matter at hand in the Vedas, why should you not sincerely approach a qualified spiritual master and ask him?

          So, I am going to suggest that you read through the books I have linked in one of my comments… Here’s the link

          http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/vedicsociety/ebooks.html

          While I will NOT question your sincerity in the search for truth, If just on a whim you are not ready to spend a bit of time on these books, know that it is to your loss.

          1. mahesh kalaal

            Okay Sir…..
            Thanks for your advice.

            I will approach a qualified spiritual master and read those books.
            Hey am getting few more doubts..
            1. Who is Qualified?
            2. Who is Spiritual
            3. Who is master ?

            Anyways, thanks for your precious time and efforts to answer my questions with patience.
            Keep spreading the wisdom, knowledge and essence of vedas(other scriptures too).

            Will come back to you once I get enlightenment.

            Thanks a lot again :)

  5. mahesh kalaal

    Leave alone rodents the size of cows, there were so many other ‘huge’ species which have been recorded in Srimad Bhagavatam. I can give you references if you are interested… canto 8, chapter 10, verses 10-12, Canto 5, chap 23, verse 3 etc. for instance…..

    –> recorded?. So every creature in mythology is existing just because it was mentioned through imaginations . Have your ever read about Kangaroos, seals, Emu. kiwi in our scriptures. No. Why?.
    All the animals that assist all the gods are from Indian sub continent? Why?

    It mentions 8,400,000 species of life and all of them are repeatedly created after every partial or total cosmic devastation.

    –>May I have the further details of devastation(valid dates)?
    Did every devastation destroy the souls or the souls continue?.
    Were the number of souls constant all the time from creation to devastation?

    I will let you know the details of advaitham stuff once you clarity my doubts

    Sorry, if i am asking too many questions in a random way. I want to believe Geetha convincingly without any doubts in mind.

    1. Ambi

      So, if you have already concluded that Bhagavatam and Bhagavad Gita are just mythology, how come you say you want to believe in Gita convincingly?

      You do not have to explain Advaita to me. I was merely asking as to how you think it provides a scientific reasoning.

      1. mahesh kalaal

        I want to believe the validity and rationality of the sayings. It doesnt matter to me whether it was said by Krishna or Solomon or Mohammed or a farmer.
        Rigveda says “Lets noble thoughts flow from all directions”.
        For me, religion is one of the means to reach the end.

        Okay . Sure. I will not explain Advaitha.:).
        May I know why do you feel that God and Science are poles apart.?
        Take Gravity. Lets take it in Creation aspect. I think you will accept that God created Earth and its Gravity.
        Now, i say whether Newton discovers it or not, Gravity remains. I mean to say ages before the sciences arrived, The science of God existed. I say God is a scientist. So, I want to learn all the scientific intentions of vedas and scriptures

        One more Question…
        Can we study vedas in Spiritual, philosophical and Scientific aspects, comprehensively?

        1. Ambi

          I missed out on this statement by you.

          “May I know why do you feel that God and Science are poles apart.?”

          Where did I say that?

          When said that God is the cause for everything, it means ‘science’ as it is in nature. We are merely discovering aspects of science as of now.

          The only problem is the modern day scientists and their ‘theories’. For all the claims of scientific advancement and such, I am pretty sure that no scientist would be capable of showing the actual proof of life being created from matter or stop aging, disease and death.

          But they would also not submit themselves to the process by which they can understand the workings of nature or God from a different dimension.

          For all practical reasons, ‘modern science’ is sort of a ‘religion’ with its own high priests, dedicated books, initiates and rituals.

    2. Ambi

      Please read my articles fully before asking the soul related questions.

      Soul *are* not created or destroyed. So yes, the number remains the same, but how many are in the material manifestation and how many are in the spiritual realm… that one can only speculate.

      You want to have (valid) dates? You mean dates which you find acceptable… right?

      I can give you only what has been given already.

      According to the Puranas (Vedic histories), there have been innumerable creations in the course of cyclical time. The basic unit of Vedic cyclical time is the day of Brahma, which lasts 4.32 billion years. The day of Brahma (also called a kalpa) is followed by a night of Brahma, also lasting 4.32 billion years. The cycle of days and nights of Brahma toes on for Brahma’s lifetime of one hundred years (36,000 nights), equivalent to 311.04 trillion of our human years. During the day of Brahma, life, including human life, is manifest. During the night of Brahma, life is not manifest.

      So, according to the vedic calculations, we are 2 billion years (roughly half) in to the current day of brahma… which is approximately the same timeline when scientists claim life appeared on earth. The difference is, they claim only single celled organisms lived, but the puranas state otherwise.

  6. mahesh kalaal

    Hunch??

    Yeah, even i did expect. You are correct. It do happens every time i come across the subjective interpretation?
    Am i disturbing your work?
    If so, just give me references . I will find them at Ramakrishna mutt . I will ask if i get further doubts.

    1. Ambi

      You will not find any references that I give in Ramakrishna mutt. But before going there, can you please tell me:

      1) what is your profession?
      2) your qualifications?
      3) Why did you chose your particular line of study?

      1. mahesh kalaal

        Hi…..

        1.I am a student as of now, preparing for IAS exams (left my job in a MNC)
        2. I am done with B.Tech Computers
        3.My options for civils are Public administration and Anthropology. So we study Evolution of humans physically(biological), socially, culturally(God, language, family,)

        I have lots of interest and passion to know about vedas and other scriptures(their contemporary and validity). But every time I found subjective interpretations rather than absolute answers. I am not into isms thing. Till now, i found some of the teachings of Geetha(Work and result concept) and few quotes from vedas very much valid. I cannot accept the irrationality of myth. I thought you will come out of the bounds of vedas and myth to give me answers. I dont want to hurt your religious sentiments through my questions. I am not an Atheist, I am Agnostic. Yes, I dont believe in God, I study the concept of God. My intention is not to prove you wrong and vice versa, but to have some rational discussion (i know even you encourage this). In fact you are doing a rational and noble effort(keep going) in bringing out the philosophical and spiritual wisdom of our scriptures to the readers. India needs more such deeds in this era of brutal consumerism and harsh globalisation. Great work.
        Thanks a lot. :)

        1. Ambi

          The reason I asked you for your qualifications and such is this:

          Ultimately everything we do is to get a job, family and ‘settle’ down.. whatever it means. But for doing that one does not study anything and everything. Nowadays, whether they are interested or not, people get to study comp. science… but they are ready to spend 14 years in school (without choice, your parents decide that), 4 or 6 years in college and then get a job, have to spend 10years to be termed as an expert and so on.

          When it comes to spiritual science, people want instant answers. You claim that I stay within the bounds of vedas and myth… did you make a honest attempt to go beyond the realm of ‘modern science’?

          I quote one of my teachers: A true scientist would never prematurely declare, “I do not believe that I have a soul or spirit to survive my death.” Rather, he would enthusiastically embrace a standard technique accepted by respected and recognized men of spiritual science. Such a scientist and sincere seeker of truth would then, in the interests of science, submit himself to that process and make himself the object of experimentation. Only after he had perfectly applied all the practices and techniques to himself, under the guidance of an authorized professor of spiritual science, would he dare make judgmental remarks about the subject in question. Theory, observation and experimentation are the true methods of science, and they apply equally to spiritual science”… which to me is a pretty rational method.

          If you had done that AND THEN termed the vedas and puranas as myth, then I might give credit to you that you have been a serious student. Just hearing bits and pieces from day-to-day philosophers (or ‘rational’ scientists) won’t do.

          If you do a careful reading of the scriptures, you can appreciate the depth of knowledge our sages of past had on so many subjects.

          Anyway, don’t worry about hurting sentiments, my friend. I have seen much worse and handled this kind of dialogues for the past 10 years.

          What I am asking people to be is ‘non-sentimental’ in seeking spiritual truth or in modern science. Unfortunately, that seems to be the norm nowadays.

          Again, I quote my teachers: “Vedic knowledge is not dogmatic; it is also scientific i.e. there is room for experimentation and direct verification, provided one is willing to go through the prescribed training and follow standard procedures – much as in any discipline, including modern science. But the scope of modern scientific research is too constricted to explore these aspects of reality. Most lamentably, instead of admitting that they are working merely with sketchy theories and hypothesis, most representatives of science tend to portray a graphic picture of the nature of things as if with absolute certainty. This not only misleads laymen but also serves to shut science off from higher levels of reality. One final comment: we should not imagine that the sages of ancient India were grossly ignorant of the nature of the world and have constructed some irresponsible fantasy or mythology – as modern anthropologists often portray. Considering the gravity of the subject matter discussed in the Bhagavatam or Bhagavad-gita, these descriptions are certainly worthy of serious attention and scientific study and should not be lightly dismissed, even if one is unable to accept them at face value.”

  7. Ambi

    Now that I have answered your questions, I await your explanation on how you made this statement:

    “4.Advaitam and Vishishtadvaitam –> They both clearly demonstrate the life functioning and compatibility of energy and matter in scientific way.”

    A word of caution. When you say Advaita and Vishishtadvaita, I hope you are going to explain with the teachings of Sripad Adi Sankaracharya and Sripad Ramanujacarya and their disciplic lines.

      1. mahesh kalaal

        Okay Sir…..
        Thanks for your advice.

        I will approach a qualified spiritual master and read those books.
        Hey am getting few more doubts..
        1. Who is Qualified?
        2. Who is Spiritual
        3. Who is master ?

        Anyways, thanks for your precious time and efforts to answer my questions with patience.
        Keep spreading the wisdom, knowledge and essence of vedas(other scriptures too).

        Will come back to you once I get enlightenment.

        Thanks a lot again :)

        1. Ambi

          Being sarcastic doesn’t and won’t help you. In being so, you simply miss out on the import of what I have said until now.

          Read the books that I have linked to. I have read the very same books when I started on this path. They answer every single question you have asked and much more.

          Thanks for your interaction. If not for anything else, I am pretty sure that at least some will be benefited from this whole discussion.

          1. mahesh kalaal

            Hi Sir….

            I am not sarcastic here….
            I thought it is better to learn some basics at least before i raise some doubts…
            I will try to read those books…..
            Thanks again :)

        2. Ambi

          @Mahesh:

          You still haven’t explained the statement you made:

          ““4.Advaitam and Vishishtadvaitam –> They both clearly demonstrate the life functioning and compatibility of energy and matter in scientific way.””

          I was born in a family that is staunchly advaitic. I was a follower of advaita too until about 10 years ago but I follow Dvaita philosophy by the effect of knowledge I have received.

          So, I would very much like to see how you substantiate your theory, especially when you make a claim that you do not subscribe to the entirety of Vedas and irrational myths of puranas… which are the basis for both siddhantas you have mentioned.

          1. mahesh kalaal

            Hi sir….

            Yeah….. i wanted to explain whatever the little stuff i had known..

            But as you said i may miss the comprehensiveness and the holistic aspect of my questioning…

            I will definitely come back to you once i reach the platform to question you.
            BTW, what can starters like me can explain the Dvaithic/Advaithic pundits like you. I mean it sir. I assure you that am not sarcastic here.

            Please do continue your noble work of enlightening us. Thanks again :)

          2. Ambi

            Mahesh,

            Please don’t call me ‘sir’ and such. I am not that old… going by your photo on your blog, I am probably around the same age group as you.

            Nor am I a ‘pundit’ as you have mentioned. I just got an early start on the spiritual path while I was studying engineering. And whatever little I know is by the mercy of my teachers and I have a very, very long way to go to internalize the full import of their teachings.

            We are brainwashed everyday by the colorful but misleading proponents of ‘modern’ lifestyle and this is causing more damage than good to us, both physically and mentally.

            So all I am trying to do here is get people to understand what a wealth of knowledge and means for purposeful, peaceful existence they are missing on by ignoring our ancient legacy.

            Again, I implore you (and everyone reading this comment) to please give just one honest, sincere reading of the books I have linked to.

  8. Pingback: Ancient Wisdom, Modern relevance – Guru | Ginger Chai

  9. Daniel

    Dear Friend,

    I went through all your article. Quiet impressive. I have studied a bit about Hinduism during my study days. My question is you mentioned Krishna is the true form of God and you also mentioned about the authority of Vedas but I learnt that the Krishna is never mentioned in Vedas. Isn’t it contradictory?

    1. Ambi

      Daniel,

      I am not an expert in the 4 ‘Vedas’ solely… so I will not get in to whether the Vedas actually do or do not have such a mention.

      The conclusion given on Krishna is as per the knowledge given in Bhagavad Gita and Bhagavatam and several of the smriti shastras.

      What we can be sure of is if one takes the conclusion of either of Shruti or Smriti shastras and rejects the other, that itself is against the conclusion of the Vedas.

      But I would like to know one thing. When you say you ‘learnt’ that Krishna is never mentioned in Vedas, may I ask where or from who did you learn it?

  10. Pingback: Ancient Wisdom, Modern relevance – Perfection of Yoga | Ginger Chai

Comments are closed.

Facebook Comments

Show us your like!