Read on Twitter
The Bhagwad Gita is one of the primary texts of Sanatana Dharma (aka Hinduism). It is a revealed text, i.e. it was narrated by the Supreme Being itself.
+
+
+
When Adi Sankara endeavored to ease the path to Dharma for ordinary people, he wrote commentaries on the Upanishads, the Brahma-sutras, and finally the Gita. This was part of a specific intent.
+
When Adi Sankara endeavored to ease the path to Dharma for ordinary people, he wrote commentaries on the Upanishads, the Brahma-sutras, and finally the Gita. This was part of a specific intent.
+
+
The Upanishads represent the core philosophy of Sanatana Dharma. You can think of it as a pure science.
The Brahma-sutras represent the clarifications and reconciliations of 'apparent' differences between different understandings of the Upanishads.
+
The Upanishads represent the core philosophy of Sanatana Dharma. You can think of it as a pure science.
The Brahma-sutras represent the clarifications and reconciliations of 'apparent' differences between different understandings of the Upanishads.
+
+
The Gita represents the "Anubhuti" part of Adi Sankara's Shruti (Upanishads), Yukti (Brahmasutras), and Anubhuti (experience).
You have understood the science, you have clarified your doubts, but only Gita tells you how to experience the philosophy. The Gita is technology.
+
The Gita represents the "Anubhuti" part of Adi Sankara's Shruti (Upanishads), Yukti (Brahmasutras), and Anubhuti (experience).
You have understood the science, you have clarified your doubts, but only Gita tells you how to experience the philosophy. The Gita is technology.
+
+
While undoubtedly The Gita is a spiritual text for Hindus, its message is open to everyone who is thirsty, and deserving of it. Irrespective of their birth religion, or belief.
+
While undoubtedly The Gita is a spiritual text for Hindus, its message is open to everyone who is thirsty, and deserving of it. Irrespective of their birth religion, or belief.
+
+
The brilliance of the Gita is such that its authority stands on its own merit. I.e. even if someone disputes the existence of Lord Krishna, or professes atheism, He/ she can still drink from the sweet, cool waters of the Bhagwad Gita. Gita's message stands on its own.
+
The brilliance of the Gita is such that its authority stands on its own merit. I.e. even if someone disputes the existence of Lord Krishna, or professes atheism, He/ she can still drink from the sweet, cool waters of the Bhagwad Gita. Gita's message stands on its own.
+
+
It is often seen that people are advised to start reading the Gita from the 2nd Chapter. I do not subscribe to this view. The Gita is essentially an answer to the question. The question is posed in Chapter One.
+
It is often seen that people are advised to start reading the Gita from the 2nd Chapter. I do not subscribe to this view. The Gita is essentially an answer to the question. The question is posed in Chapter One.
+
+
To start an answer without first understanding the question, is not the logical way to go about anything. If Chapter 1 was unimportant then Gita would have been of 17 chapters only. The fact that Chapter 1 forms part of the text, we simply cannot ignore it.
+
To start an answer without first understanding the question, is not the logical way to go about anything. If Chapter 1 was unimportant then Gita would have been of 17 chapters only. The fact that Chapter 1 forms part of the text, we simply cannot ignore it.
+
+
Without further ado, remembering Sri Ganesha, the parents, the pitrus, and thanking Lord Krishna, lets begin.
+
Without further ado, remembering Sri Ganesha, the parents, the pitrus, and thanking Lord Krishna, lets begin.
+
+
1.1
धृतराष्ट्र उवाच |
धर्मक्षेत्रे कुरुक्षेत्रे समवेता युयुत्सवः |
मामकाः पाण्डवाश्चैव किमकुर्वत सञ्जय ||1||
Drithrashtra says:
Sanjaya, in the dharma kshetra of kurukshtra, where MY sons, and the Pandavas, have gathered with the desire to fight, what are they doing?
+
1.1
धृतराष्ट्र उवाच |
धर्मक्षेत्रे कुरुक्षेत्रे समवेता युयुत्सवः |
मामकाः पाण्डवाश्चैव किमकुर्वत सञ्जय ||1||
Drithrashtra says:
Sanjaya, in the dharma kshetra of kurukshtra, where MY sons, and the Pandavas, have gathered with the desire to fight, what are they doing?
+
+
Now, I would like to highlight a question, that is seldom asked.
If Gita is a conversation between Arjuna and Krishna, why would the sacred text start off with a question from Dhritrashtra?
+
Now, I would like to highlight a question, that is seldom asked.
If Gita is a conversation between Arjuna and Krishna, why would the sacred text start off with a question from Dhritrashtra?
+
+
I see Gita has giving its message in several ways. The answer to this question can be seen when one looks at the last shloka of the Gita (18.78).
The last shloka is spoken by Sanjaya, who is the intermediary between the events of war, and Dhritrashtra.
+
I see Gita has giving its message in several ways. The answer to this question can be seen when one looks at the last shloka of the Gita (18.78).
The last shloka is spoken by Sanjaya, who is the intermediary between the events of war, and Dhritrashtra.
+
+
The last shloka by Sanjaya roughly translates as:
Where there is Yogeshwara Krishna, and Arjuna the archer, there is fortune, victory, prosperity and opulence.
+
The last shloka by Sanjaya roughly translates as:
Where there is Yogeshwara Krishna, and Arjuna the archer, there is fortune, victory, prosperity and opulence.
+
+
The beginning of Gita with a Q from Dhritrashtra, and the end of Gita with a statement from Sanjaya, wraps up their conversation. If you ignored the 698 shlokas in between the first, and last shloka, it can be a complete conversation in itself.
+
The beginning of Gita with a Q from Dhritrashtra, and the end of Gita with a statement from Sanjaya, wraps up their conversation. If you ignored the 698 shlokas in between the first, and last shloka, it can be a complete conversation in itself.
+
+
Why? Because the real question that Dhritrashtra has is "will my sons win the battle or not?". He is merely couching it in other words. Sanjaya's last statement answers this unasked/ implied question with a resounding 'no'.
+
Why? Because the real question that Dhritrashtra has is "will my sons win the battle or not?". He is merely couching it in other words. Sanjaya's last statement answers this unasked/ implied question with a resounding 'no'.
+
+
The next question is, why would Dhritrashtra use dharma-kshetra and kurukshetra to describe the battle field. Kurukshetra is a geographical location, so that is understandable. But why add an adjective "dharmakshetra" as well?
+
The next question is, why would Dhritrashtra use dharma-kshetra and kurukshetra to describe the battle field. Kurukshetra is a geographical location, so that is understandable. But why add an adjective "dharmakshetra" as well?
+
+
The use of this word actually shows the delusion of Dhritrashtra. He was blind not just physically, but also as a symbol of his attachment to the material world.
He uses the word dharmakshetra because he genuinely believes that dharma, or what is right, is being served.
+
The use of this word actually shows the delusion of Dhritrashtra. He was blind not just physically, but also as a symbol of his attachment to the material world.
He uses the word dharmakshetra because he genuinely believes that dharma, or what is right, is being served.
+
+
He thus appears to believe that the Kauravas have just cause to fight the Pandavas. He considers his clan, as upholding dharma, and by extension, the Pandavas as adharmics.
+
He thus appears to believe that the Kauravas have just cause to fight the Pandavas. He considers his clan, as upholding dharma, and by extension, the Pandavas as adharmics.
+
+
His delusion is further highlighted by the words, "maamakah - pandava". Mine and the other. Mine and someone else's. This is the essence of Maya. Someone seeing himself as separate from others is the root of all greed, and attendant pitfalls.
+
His delusion is further highlighted by the words, "maamakah - pandava". Mine and the other. Mine and someone else's. This is the essence of Maya. Someone seeing himself as separate from others is the root of all greed, and attendant pitfalls.
+
+
In fact, one can see this as a question one's ego, asks one's soul. Dhritrashtra (ego - blind) is anxious about an adverse outcome, and asks one true self (Sanjaya, or Sam-Jaya - victorious over self). The true self which sits in a saakshi bhaava as indeed Sanjaya was.
+
In fact, one can see this as a question one's ego, asks one's soul. Dhritrashtra (ego - blind) is anxious about an adverse outcome, and asks one true self (Sanjaya, or Sam-Jaya - victorious over self). The true self which sits in a saakshi bhaava as indeed Sanjaya was.
+
+
The first shloka is about a man, who deluded by his ego, and now facing adversity, is asking his true self a question that he thinks may bring him solace. But the true self answers the question, in the last shloka of the Gita, as I described earlier.
+
The first shloka is about a man, who deluded by his ego, and now facing adversity, is asking his true self a question that he thinks may bring him solace. But the true self answers the question, in the last shloka of the Gita, as I described earlier.
+
+
Dhritrashtra is not any different from ordinary folks, who in their heart of hearts may know what is right and what is wrong, but look for solace in delusion, and hope that their inner true self will play along. It never does.
+
Dhritrashtra is not any different from ordinary folks, who in their heart of hearts may know what is right and what is wrong, but look for solace in delusion, and hope that their inner true self will play along. It never does.
+
+
Now to the next shloka.
+
Now to the next shloka.
+
+
1.02
सञ्जय उवाच ।
दृष्ट्वा तु पाण्डवानीकं व्यूढं दुर्योधनस्तदा ।
आचार्यमुपसङ्गम्य राजा वचनमब्रवीत् ।। 2।।
Sanjaya replied: Having seen the battle array of the Pandava army, King Duryodhana approached his teacher (Drona) to speak
+
1.02
सञ्जय उवाच ।
दृष्ट्वा तु पाण्डवानीकं व्यूढं दुर्योधनस्तदा ।
आचार्यमुपसङ्गम्य राजा वचनमब्रवीत् ।। 2।।
Sanjaya replied: Having seen the battle array of the Pandava army, King Duryodhana approached his teacher (Drona) to speak
+
+
As Dhritrashtra would naturally be more worried about his sons (since in his soul he knows they are wrong), Sanjaya begins with the Kaurava camp.
+
As Dhritrashtra would naturally be more worried about his sons (since in his soul he knows they are wrong), Sanjaya begins with the Kaurava camp.
+
+
Interestingly, we see first movement in the Kaurava camp. A case of the jitters perhaps? And movement from none other than Duryodhana. And what is he doing?
+
Interestingly, we see first movement in the Kaurava camp. A case of the jitters perhaps? And movement from none other than Duryodhana. And what is he doing?
+
+
Just as a frightened child may let go of all ego and rush to his elders when in trouble, Duryodhana seems to be running to his teacher, who was leading his army.
+
Just as a frightened child may let go of all ego and rush to his elders when in trouble, Duryodhana seems to be running to his teacher, who was leading his army.
+
+
Sanjaya hints at Duryodhana being the frightened child, by specifically highlighting him as "Raja" or "King". While Sanjaya says, "Duryodhana saw the pandava army", he cleverly changes the objects in his next sentence by saying:
"Raja went to aacharya"
+
Sanjaya hints at Duryodhana being the frightened child, by specifically highlighting him as "Raja" or "King". While Sanjaya says, "Duryodhana saw the pandava army", he cleverly changes the objects in his next sentence by saying:
"Raja went to aacharya"
+
+
Sanjaya deliberately highlights the status of who approached whom. He doesnt say a student approached his teacher, or duryodhana approached Drona. He says, "A king went to a teacher", (instead of normal course of a king summoning his subordinates).
+
Sanjaya deliberately highlights the status of who approached whom. He doesnt say a student approached his teacher, or duryodhana approached Drona. He says, "A king went to a teacher", (instead of normal course of a king summoning his subordinates).
+
+
How beautifully Sanjaya has highlighted the nervousness in Duryodhana. You must keep in mind that Sanjaya is speaking to another king, and must maintain tact when giving unpleasant information. You see this tact repeatedly from Sanjaya in the Gita.
+
How beautifully Sanjaya has highlighted the nervousness in Duryodhana. You must keep in mind that Sanjaya is speaking to another king, and must maintain tact when giving unpleasant information. You see this tact repeatedly from Sanjaya in the Gita.
+
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
+
पश्यैतां पाण्डुपुत्राणामाचार्य महतीं चमूम् ।
व्यूढां द्रुपदपुत्रेण तव शिष्येण धीमता ।। 3।।
Teacher, see this vast army of the sons of Pandu, led for battle by your intelligent student who is the son of Drupad.
+
पश्यैतां पाण्डुपुत्राणामाचार्य महतीं चमूम् ।
व्यूढां द्रुपदपुत्रेण तव शिष्येण धीमता ।। 3।।
Teacher, see this vast army of the sons of Pandu, led for battle by your intelligent student who is the son of Drupad.
+
+
Duryodhana is wily. See the words he uses in his conversation with Drona.
He addresses Drona as 'teacher', to remind him that he is also a student of Drona, just as Drishtadyumna is.
+
Duryodhana is wily. See the words he uses in his conversation with Drona.
He addresses Drona as 'teacher', to remind him that he is also a student of Drona, just as Drishtadyumna is.
+
+
His saying "vast army" seems to be a taunt since by all accounts the Pandava Army was much smaller than the Kaurava army.
+
His saying "vast army" seems to be a taunt since by all accounts the Pandava Army was much smaller than the Kaurava army.
+
+
The interesting thing is he addresses the pandavas as "sons of Pandu" as if to remind Drona that they are different from us.
Even more interesting is him calling Dristhadyumna as "Son of Drupad".
+
The interesting thing is he addresses the pandavas as "sons of Pandu" as if to remind Drona that they are different from us.
Even more interesting is him calling Dristhadyumna as "Son of Drupad".
+
+
We know that Drona and Drupad, though both students of the same guru had grown apart after Drupad insulted Drona needlessly in front of an audience. Drona had even used his students to defeat and humble Drupad.
+
We know that Drona and Drupad, though both students of the same guru had grown apart after Drupad insulted Drona needlessly in front of an audience. Drona had even used his students to defeat and humble Drupad.
+
+
Duryodhana is exploiting any residual ill feelings that Drona may have towards Drupad by highlighting that his student heading the pandava army, is also the son of Drupad.
+
Duryodhana is exploiting any residual ill feelings that Drona may have towards Drupad by highlighting that his student heading the pandava army, is also the son of Drupad.
+
+
Note that Duryodhana concedes that Drupad's son is intelligent. Of course, how could he not be. After all his teacher is Drona!
How carefully the words are being chosen!
+
Note that Duryodhana concedes that Drupad's son is intelligent. Of course, how could he not be. After all his teacher is Drona!
How carefully the words are being chosen!
+
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
+1.04-1.06
अत्र शूरा महेष्वासा भीमार्जुनसमा युधि
युयुधानो विराटश्च द्रुपदश्च महारथ: || 4||
धृष्टकेतुश्चेकितान: काशिराजश्च वीर्यवान् |
पुरुजित्कुन्तिभोजश्च शैब्यश्च नरपुङ्गव: || 5||
युधामन्युश्च विक्रान्त उत्तमौजाश्च वीर्यवान् |
सौभद्रो द्रौपदेयाश्च सर्व एव महारथा: || 6||
+
अत्र शूरा महेष्वासा भीमार्जुनसमा युधि
युयुधानो विराटश्च द्रुपदश्च महारथ: || 4||
धृष्टकेतुश्चेकितान: काशिराजश्च वीर्यवान् |
पुरुजित्कुन्तिभोजश्च शैब्यश्च नरपुङ्गव: || 5||
युधामन्युश्च विक्रान्त उत्तमौजाश्च वीर्यवान् |
सौभद्रो द्रौपदेयाश्च सर्व एव महारथा: || 6||
+
+
They have many powerful warriors (Yuyudhan, Virat, and Drupad, equal in military prowess to Bheem & Arjun. There are also accomplished heroes like Dhrishtaketu, Chekitan, the gallant King of Kashi, Purujit, Kuntibhoj, and Shaibya—all the best of men.+
They have many powerful warriors (Yuyudhan, Virat, and Drupad, equal in military prowess to Bheem & Arjun. There are also accomplished heroes like Dhrishtaketu, Chekitan, the gallant King of Kashi, Purujit, Kuntibhoj, and Shaibya—all the best of men.+
+
In their ranks, they also have the courageous Yudhamanyu, the gallant Uttamauja, the son of Subhadra, and the sons of Draupadi, who are all great warriors.
+
In their ranks, they also have the courageous Yudhamanyu, the gallant Uttamauja, the son of Subhadra, and the sons of Draupadi, who are all great warriors.
+
+
I have clubbed 3 shlokas because they are part of the same conversations (and also to cover up for days that I might miss intermittently).
+
I have clubbed 3 shlokas because they are part of the same conversations (and also to cover up for days that I might miss intermittently).
+
+
Duryodhana is pointing out to Drona the warriors on the Pandava side. Interestingly, I detect some passive aggression here when Duryodhana names other warriors, but conspicuously leaves out the main five Pandavas! Such pettiness.
+
Duryodhana is pointing out to Drona the warriors on the Pandava side. Interestingly, I detect some passive aggression here when Duryodhana names other warriors, but conspicuously leaves out the main five Pandavas! Such pettiness.
+
+
The use of the phrase "Son of Subhadra" to refer to Abhimanyu is telling. Few know that Subhadra (who is Balrama/Krishna's sister) was slated to be married to Duryodhana. This match was fixed by Balarama.
+
The use of the phrase "Son of Subhadra" to refer to Abhimanyu is telling. Few know that Subhadra (who is Balrama/Krishna's sister) was slated to be married to Duryodhana. This match was fixed by Balarama.
+
+
However due to machinations by Krishna and Arjuna, she ended up getting married to Arjuna. By saying "SAubhadreya", Duryodhana is hinting that this is not a mere fight for a kingdom, but the Pandavas have given him more reasons to fight.
+
However due to machinations by Krishna and Arjuna, she ended up getting married to Arjuna. By saying "SAubhadreya", Duryodhana is hinting that this is not a mere fight for a kingdom, but the Pandavas have given him more reasons to fight.
+
+ The mention of Satyaki (Yuyudhana) is interesting as well. Satyaki is trained by Arjuna in archery. So Duryodhana is trying to instigate Drona...by implicitly asking "Is Arjuna a better teacher than you?"
+
+
+
Reference to Virata seems to be to remind Drona of the Virata parva in which Arjuna alone defeated the entire Kaurava entourage, many of whom were trained by Drona.
It seems each name has been selected to rouse Drona into an anger that will consume the Pandavas.
+
Reference to Virata seems to be to remind Drona of the Virata parva in which Arjuna alone defeated the entire Kaurava entourage, many of whom were trained by Drona.
It seems each name has been selected to rouse Drona into an anger that will consume the Pandavas.
+
+
But the bigger point that is unnoticed here is this:
WHY does Duryodhana need to do this? It suggests that the Kaurava army (esp Drona) is not as enthused about the war as Duryodhana likes. You need cheerleaders only when the competition isnt motivation enough, right?!
+
But the bigger point that is unnoticed here is this:
WHY does Duryodhana need to do this? It suggests that the Kaurava army (esp Drona) is not as enthused about the war as Duryodhana likes. You need cheerleaders only when the competition isnt motivation enough, right?!
+
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
+ 1.07-1.09
अस्माकं तु विशिष्टा ये तान्निबोध द्विजोत्तम |
नायका मम सैन्यस्य संज्ञार्थं तान्ब्रवीमि ते ||
भवान्भीष्मश्च कर्णश्च कृपश्च समितिञ्जय: |
अश्वत्थामा विकर्णश्च सौमदत्तिस्तथैव च ||
अन्ये च बहव: शूरा मदर्थे त्यक्तजीविता: |
नानाशस्त्रप्रहरणा: सर्वे युद्धविशारदा: ||
+
अस्माकं तु विशिष्टा ये तान्निबोध द्विजोत्तम |
नायका मम सैन्यस्य संज्ञार्थं तान्ब्रवीमि ते ||
भवान्भीष्मश्च कर्णश्च कृपश्च समितिञ्जय: |
अश्वत्थामा विकर्णश्च सौमदत्तिस्तथैव च ||
अन्ये च बहव: शूरा मदर्थे त्यक्तजीविता: |
नानाशस्त्रप्रहरणा: सर्वे युद्धविशारदा: ||
+
+
I club some of the shlokas because they form part of the same flow of utterances. Note that I am not putting a word for word grammatical translation because that sometimes gets unwieldy.
+
I club some of the shlokas because they form part of the same flow of utterances. Note that I am not putting a word for word grammatical translation because that sometimes gets unwieldy.
+
+
But, o best among brahmanas, I shall now recount the best warriors from our side: Yourself, Bhishma, Karna, and Kripa who always victorious. Ashwatthama, Vikarna, Saumadatti, and Jayadratha. There are many other braves skilled in war with many weapons, fighting for me.
+
But, o best among brahmanas, I shall now recount the best warriors from our side: Yourself, Bhishma, Karna, and Kripa who always victorious. Ashwatthama, Vikarna, Saumadatti, and Jayadratha. There are many other braves skilled in war with many weapons, fighting for me.
+
+
These verses give the reader, and the listener (Dhritrashtra) a peek into the mind of Duryodhana. He is clearly unnerved by the scenario in front of him, and see how skillfully the Gita reveals his mental state and his huge ego at the same time.
+
These verses give the reader, and the listener (Dhritrashtra) a peek into the mind of Duryodhana. He is clearly unnerved by the scenario in front of him, and see how skillfully the Gita reveals his mental state and his huge ego at the same time.
+
+
The addresses Drona as a brahmana. Since Drona was leading an army of kshatriyas, this was an attempt by Duryodhana to 'show him his place'. Quite an ungrateful person since Duryodhana's teachers of weapons and warcraft were a Brahmin, and a Yadava (Balrama) respectively.
+
The addresses Drona as a brahmana. Since Drona was leading an army of kshatriyas, this was an attempt by Duryodhana to 'show him his place'. Quite an ungrateful person since Duryodhana's teachers of weapons and warcraft were a Brahmin, and a Yadava (Balrama) respectively.
+
+
He of course tries to cover it up by adding "BEST AMONG" to the varna reference. He then takes Dronas name first when recounting the great warriors in the Kaurava army. A bit like praising the boss on his face. This small gesture shows that Duryodhana is not used to...
+
He of course tries to cover it up by adding "BEST AMONG" to the varna reference. He then takes Dronas name first when recounting the great warriors in the Kaurava army. A bit like praising the boss on his face. This small gesture shows that Duryodhana is not used to...
+
+
...praising others, and usually has been the recipient of praise. He isnt used to doing this. He naturally names Bhishma next. The order after this is surprising. He says Karna and then Kripa. Why is this surprising?
+
...praising others, and usually has been the recipient of praise. He isnt used to doing this. He naturally names Bhishma next. The order after this is surprising. He says Karna and then Kripa. Why is this surprising?
+
+
Because Karna was not even fighting in the war for the first few days. And to name Karna before Kripa who is the Kauravas kulguru and senior to Karna in age, and also the brother in law of Drona is really odd. This is the ego of Duryodhana speaking.
+
Because Karna was not even fighting in the war for the first few days. And to name Karna before Kripa who is the Kauravas kulguru and senior to Karna in age, and also the brother in law of Drona is really odd. This is the ego of Duryodhana speaking.
+
+
His friend karna, his pick, his protege is named along with august warriors like Drona, Bhishma, and Kripa. And named BEFORE Kripa.
Duryodhana quickly realises the folly his pride made him do. And tries to cover up by adding an adjective "undefeated" behind Kripa's name.
+
His friend karna, his pick, his protege is named along with august warriors like Drona, Bhishma, and Kripa. And named BEFORE Kripa.
Duryodhana quickly realises the folly his pride made him do. And tries to cover up by adding an adjective "undefeated" behind Kripa's name.
+
+
He starts the next list with Ashwatthama, again cozying up to Drona, who is Ashwatthama'a father. Ideally Karna should have been placed in this list.
The next name Vikarna is interesting as well.
+
He starts the next list with Ashwatthama, again cozying up to Drona, who is Ashwatthama'a father. Ideally Karna should have been placed in this list.
The next name Vikarna is interesting as well.
+
+
Because while Vikarna is Duryodhana's younger brother he had actually opposed Draupadi's insult in the game of dice. Mentioning him is perhaps Duryodhana's way of saying "look someone who even opposed me when I was insulting Draupadi, is today fighting for me".
+
Because while Vikarna is Duryodhana's younger brother he had actually opposed Draupadi's insult in the game of dice. Mentioning him is perhaps Duryodhana's way of saying "look someone who even opposed me when I was insulting Draupadi, is today fighting for me".
+
+
Saumadatti is the son of Somadatta. Somadatta had once fought a battle to win the hand of Devaki, Lord Krishna's birth mother. He had lost, and Devaki was wedded to Vasudeva. Duryodhana is naming him is to point out that others have 'just' cause as well to fight.
+
Saumadatti is the son of Somadatta. Somadatta had once fought a battle to win the hand of Devaki, Lord Krishna's birth mother. He had lost, and Devaki was wedded to Vasudeva. Duryodhana is naming him is to point out that others have 'just' cause as well to fight.
+
+
Jayadratha is another old enemy of the Pandavas, having failed in an attempt to kidnap Draupadi as per some accounts.
+
Jayadratha is another old enemy of the Pandavas, having failed in an attempt to kidnap Draupadi as per some accounts.
+
+
Interestingly, 1.09 is like a "etc etc shloka" saying we have many more braves etc. Which is surprising because Duryodhana actually names fewer notable warriors on his side, than he had named on the enemies side.
Ego? or bewilderment? or perhaps both.
+
Interestingly, 1.09 is like a "etc etc shloka" saying we have many more braves etc. Which is surprising because Duryodhana actually names fewer notable warriors on his side, than he had named on the enemies side.
Ego? or bewilderment? or perhaps both.
+
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
+ 1.10
अपर्याप्तं तदस्माकं बलं भीष्माभिरक्षितम् |
पर्याप्तं त्विदमेतेषां बलं भीमाभिरक्षितम् || 10||
Our vast/large army is protected by Bhishma
Whereas their limited army is protected by Bhima.
+
अपर्याप्तं तदस्माकं बलं भीष्माभिरक्षितम् |
पर्याप्तं त्विदमेतेषां बलं भीमाभिरक्षितम् || 10||
Our vast/large army is protected by Bhishma
Whereas their limited army is protected by Bhima.
+
+ The comparison of army size is factual. Kauravas had 11 akshauhinis while the Pandavas had 7. But given that it comes on the back of Duryodhana being able to name more warriors on his enemy's side than his own, it seems a little like compensation.
+
+
+
The next comparison is notable. He compares Bhishma with Bhima. On one level. Bhishma is known for his restraint, its literally personified in his name "Bhishma", and Bhima is known for his huge appetite and impulsive nature. So is it merely a comparison of opposites?
+
The next comparison is notable. He compares Bhishma with Bhima. On one level. Bhishma is known for his restraint, its literally personified in his name "Bhishma", and Bhima is known for his huge appetite and impulsive nature. So is it merely a comparison of opposites?
+
+
Maybe, but maybe not. Some accounts suggest that Bhima (and not Arjuna) was the warrior that the Kauravas feared the most. If readers recall, it was Bhima, not Arjuna, that the Kauravas had tired to poison as children.
+
Maybe, but maybe not. Some accounts suggest that Bhima (and not Arjuna) was the warrior that the Kauravas feared the most. If readers recall, it was Bhima, not Arjuna, that the Kauravas had tired to poison as children.
+
+ And finally it was he who killed both Duryodhana and Duhshasana. It was again he who Dhritrashtra tried to crush in his bear hug after the war was over. So on one level Duryodhana may want to show that he is highlighting Bhimas lack of restraint vs. Bhisma's control, ... +
+
But at least I believe Duryodhana is betraying his real fear in making this comparision. The fact that Duryodhana says to his general Drona, that the army is under Bhishma's protection and not Drona's also reveals his nervousness.
+
But at least I believe Duryodhana is betraying his real fear in making this comparision. The fact that Duryodhana says to his general Drona, that the army is under Bhishma's protection and not Drona's also reveals his nervousness.
+
+
+ Again, Duryodhana realises his folly, and worried that he might have insulted Drona and other warriors in his army, he tries to make up for it in the next Shloka. One can only imagine the flutter in Duryodhana's mind to be this inarticulate!
+
+ Again, Duryodhana realises his folly, and worried that he might have insulted Drona and other warriors in his army, he tries to make up for it in the next Shloka. One can only imagine the flutter in Duryodhana's mind to be this inarticulate!
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.11
अयनेषु च सर्वेषु यथाभागमवस्थिता: |
भीष्ममेवाभिरक्षन्तु भवन्त: सर्व एव हि || 11||
All you respectable sirs, please protect Bhishma from where ever you have been positioned in the array.
+
अयनेषु च सर्वेषु यथाभागमवस्थिता: |
भीष्ममेवाभिरक्षन्तु भवन्त: सर्व एव हि || 11||
All you respectable sirs, please protect Bhishma from where ever you have been positioned in the array.
+
+
This is the verse to make-up for any egos that might have been hurt as Duryodhana singled out Bhishma as being the protector of his forces. That too while addressing Drona!
+
This is the verse to make-up for any egos that might have been hurt as Duryodhana singled out Bhishma as being the protector of his forces. That too while addressing Drona!
+
+
He tried his best to give importance to all by trying to say, while Bhisma is the protector of all of us, he relies on all of us to protect him. To be fair Bhisma was the general of the forces, but not the first person that Duryodhana had run to in his bewilderment.
+
He tried his best to give importance to all by trying to say, while Bhisma is the protector of all of us, he relies on all of us to protect him. To be fair Bhisma was the general of the forces, but not the first person that Duryodhana had run to in his bewilderment.
+
+ 1.12
तस्य सञ्जनयन्हर्षं कुरुवृद्ध: पितामह: |
सिंहनादं विनद्योच्चै: शङ्खं दध्मौ प्रतापवान् || 12||
For his (Duryodhana's) enthusiasm, the eldest among the kurus, the grandsire (Bhishma) blew his conch, loud like a lion's roar.
+
तस्य सञ्जनयन्हर्षं कुरुवृद्ध: पितामह: |
सिंहनादं विनद्योच्चै: शङ्खं दध्मौ प्रतापवान् || 12||
For his (Duryodhana's) enthusiasm, the eldest among the kurus, the grandsire (Bhishma) blew his conch, loud like a lion's roar.
+
+
Bhishma realised the nervousness of Duryodhana and without saying anything to him blew his conch to rouse 'harsham' in him. The shloka refers to him as the eldest among the kurus, because it wants to highlight that Bhishma was seeing Duryodhana as a child from his family.
+
Bhishma realised the nervousness of Duryodhana and without saying anything to him blew his conch to rouse 'harsham' in him. The shloka refers to him as the eldest among the kurus, because it wants to highlight that Bhishma was seeing Duryodhana as a child from his family.
+
+
And with a view to cheer him, he blew his conch (shankha). Worth noting that while the Gita names the conchs of the pandavas in later verses, Kaurava conches are not names. Perhaps to highlight that they will in the wrong, as the conch is an auspicious object. Such detail!
+
And with a view to cheer him, he blew his conch (shankha). Worth noting that while the Gita names the conchs of the pandavas in later verses, Kaurava conches are not names. Perhaps to highlight that they will in the wrong, as the conch is an auspicious object. Such detail!
+
+
Now on to the next shloka
(errata: In case I may have inadvertently mentioned Drona as the first general, kindly correct it, Bhishma was the first general (day 1-10), Drona (11-15), Karna (16-17), and Shalya (18)).
+
Now on to the next shloka
(errata: In case I may have inadvertently mentioned Drona as the first general, kindly correct it, Bhishma was the first general (day 1-10), Drona (11-15), Karna (16-17), and Shalya (18)).
+
+
1.13
तत: शङ्खाश्च भेर्यश्च पणवानकगोमुखा: |
सहसैवाभ्यहन्यन्त स शब्दस्तुमुलोऽभवत् || 13||
Immediately conches, drums, trumpets, and horns blared forth with a overwhelming sound!
+
1.13
तत: शङ्खाश्च भेर्यश्च पणवानकगोमुखा: |
सहसैवाभ्यहन्यन्त स शब्दस्तुमुलोऽभवत् || 13||
Immediately conches, drums, trumpets, and horns blared forth with a overwhelming sound!
+
+
Just as Bhishma blew his conch in response to Duryodhana's thinly veiled nervousness, the entire Kaurava army played their war instruments. "Immediately", suggests it was almost a reflex action, and the sound restored some calm to Duryodhana!
+
Just as Bhishma blew his conch in response to Duryodhana's thinly veiled nervousness, the entire Kaurava army played their war instruments. "Immediately", suggests it was almost a reflex action, and the sound restored some calm to Duryodhana!
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.14
तत: श्वेतैर्हयैर्युक्ते महति स्यन्दने स्थितौ |
माधव: पाण्डवश्चैव दिव्यौ शङ्खौ प्रदध्मतु: || 14||
Then Madhava (Krishna) and Arjuna seated in magnificent chariot with white horses, blew on their divine conches.
+
तत: श्वेतैर्हयैर्युक्ते महति स्यन्दने स्थितौ |
माधव: पाण्डवश्चैव दिव्यौ शङ्खौ प्रदध्मतु: || 14||
Then Madhava (Krishna) and Arjuna seated in magnificent chariot with white horses, blew on their divine conches.
+
+
Sanjaya's love for Krishna and Arjuna can be seen from the little things. He actually describes their chariot as magnificent, and pulled by handsome white steeds. He also says Krishna/ Arjuna blew on their "Divine" conches, a prefix he did not use for Bhishma's conch.
+
Sanjaya's love for Krishna and Arjuna can be seen from the little things. He actually describes their chariot as magnificent, and pulled by handsome white steeds. He also says Krishna/ Arjuna blew on their "Divine" conches, a prefix he did not use for Bhishma's conch.
+
+
The chariot was naturally glorious given that it was given to Arjuna by Agni, the deity of fire. This was given after Agni was pleased by Arjuna by offering him the entire Khandava forest for his consumption. Pleased with the offering, Agni gifted Arjuna with many things,
+
The chariot was naturally glorious given that it was given to Arjuna by Agni, the deity of fire. This was given after Agni was pleased by Arjuna by offering him the entire Khandava forest for his consumption. Pleased with the offering, Agni gifted Arjuna with many things,
+
+
Including his bow Gandeeva, and the chariot and the horses. The horses were named: Saibya, Sugriva, Meghapuspa and Balahaka. Not to mention Sri Hanumana himself who sat at the pennant of Arjuna's chariot. What a sight to behold!
+
Including his bow Gandeeva, and the chariot and the horses. The horses were named: Saibya, Sugriva, Meghapuspa and Balahaka. Not to mention Sri Hanumana himself who sat at the pennant of Arjuna's chariot. What a sight to behold!
+
+
It is worth noting that the name "Madhava" is used to refer to Krishna. In Adi Sankara's commentary on Vishnu Sahasranaama, Madhava means all of the below: a) Husband of Lakshmi (all that is auspicious) b) He who is seen through Madhuvidya (Brihad. Ar. Chandogya upnshd.)
+
It is worth noting that the name "Madhava" is used to refer to Krishna. In Adi Sankara's commentary on Vishnu Sahasranaama, Madhava means all of the below: a) Husband of Lakshmi (all that is auspicious) b) He who is seen through Madhuvidya (Brihad. Ar. Chandogya upnshd.)
+
+
c) He who is known through Ma(auna) + Dh(yana) + Yo(ga). I dont know why Sanjaya would refer to Krishna like this, but I suspect it is to highlight the divinity of Krishna while narrating the proceedings to Dhritrashtra.
+
c) He who is known through Ma(auna) + Dh(yana) + Yo(ga). I dont know why Sanjaya would refer to Krishna like this, but I suspect it is to highlight the divinity of Krishna while narrating the proceedings to Dhritrashtra.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.15
पाञ्चजन्यं हृषीकेशो देवदत्तं धनञ्जय: |
पौण्ड्रं दध्मौ महाशङ्खं भीमकर्मा वृकोदर: || 15||
अनन्तविजयं राजा कुन्तीपुत्रो युधिष्ठिर: |
नकुल: सहदेवश्च सुघोषमणिपुष्पकौ || 16||
+
पाञ्चजन्यं हृषीकेशो देवदत्तं धनञ्जय: |
पौण्ड्रं दध्मौ महाशङ्खं भीमकर्मा वृकोदर: || 15||
अनन्तविजयं राजा कुन्तीपुत्रो युधिष्ठिर: |
नकुल: सहदेवश्च सुघोषमणिपुष्पकौ || 16||
+
+
Hrishikesha (Krishna) blew the Panchajanya, Dhananjaya (Arjuna) blew Devadatta, Vrukodada (Bhima) of great deeds blew the great conch Paundra.
King Yudhishtira, son of Kunti, blew the Ananta-vijaya. Nakula blew the Sughosha, and Sahadeva the Manipushpaka.
+
Hrishikesha (Krishna) blew the Panchajanya, Dhananjaya (Arjuna) blew Devadatta, Vrukodada (Bhima) of great deeds blew the great conch Paundra.
King Yudhishtira, son of Kunti, blew the Ananta-vijaya. Nakula blew the Sughosha, and Sahadeva the Manipushpaka.
+
+
Here Sanjaya talks about how the Pandavas blew their own conches to counter the war beats coming from the Kaurava camp. But see how carefully he details the events in the case of Pandavas.
+
Here Sanjaya talks about how the Pandavas blew their own conches to counter the war beats coming from the Kaurava camp. But see how carefully he details the events in the case of Pandavas.
+
+
Krishna is referred to as Hrishkesha. Adi Sankara defines this as "He who controls his senses", alternatively as "he who delights the world in the form of the Sun and Moon". I feel that Sanjaya meant it more as "controller of senses" though. Why?
+
Krishna is referred to as Hrishkesha. Adi Sankara defines this as "He who controls his senses", alternatively as "he who delights the world in the form of the Sun and Moon". I feel that Sanjaya meant it more as "controller of senses" though. Why?
+
+
Because Krishna as the ultimate controller of senses, stands in sharp contrast to Duryodhana who is a slave to his. Who can forget the stmt attributed to Duryodhana:
Jaanami dharmam na cha me pravrutti
Jaanamyadharmam na cha me nivrutti!
+
Because Krishna as the ultimate controller of senses, stands in sharp contrast to Duryodhana who is a slave to his. Who can forget the stmt attributed to Duryodhana:
Jaanami dharmam na cha me pravrutti
Jaanamyadharmam na cha me nivrutti!
+
+
The name of Krishnas conch is paanchajanya, and there is a story associated with how he procured it and named it (related to rescuing the son of his teacher Sandipani from a Asura). But I feel there can be another interpretation of this name.
+
The name of Krishnas conch is paanchajanya, and there is a story associated with how he procured it and named it (related to rescuing the son of his teacher Sandipani from a Asura). But I feel there can be another interpretation of this name.
+
+
A conch follows the golden ratio, a hidden pattern in all of existence. A blueprint of creation, one can say. The Paancha - in the name can be interpreted to be
"Five". There are five vayus in our body: Prana, Apana, Udana, Samana, Vyana.
+
A conch follows the golden ratio, a hidden pattern in all of existence. A blueprint of creation, one can say. The Paancha - in the name can be interpreted to be
"Five". There are five vayus in our body: Prana, Apana, Udana, Samana, Vyana.
+
+
Can then the name of the conch be a symbolic representation of creation. i.e. when Krishna blows into the conch, which is in a a golden ratio, the five vayus that make up the creation are born (Janya)? Intriguing isnt it? And people skip the first chapter!!
+
Can then the name of the conch be a symbolic representation of creation. i.e. when Krishna blows into the conch, which is in a a golden ratio, the five vayus that make up the creation are born (Janya)? Intriguing isnt it? And people skip the first chapter!!
+
+
Sanjaya refers to Arjuna as Dhananjaya, the victorious. Arjuna's conch Devdatta was also a gift form the lord Varuna (if I recall correctly).
Sanjaya refers to Bhima as Vrukodara. Vrukodara implies someone who is capable of digesting a lot, a sign of good health! He also,
+
Sanjaya refers to Arjuna as Dhananjaya, the victorious. Arjuna's conch Devdatta was also a gift form the lord Varuna (if I recall correctly).
Sanjaya refers to Bhima as Vrukodara. Vrukodara implies someone who is capable of digesting a lot, a sign of good health! He also,
+
+
Refers to Bhima as doing Bheemkarma...great or terrible deeds. Look at the love being showered on the Pandava side by Sanjaya!
+
Refers to Bhima as doing Bheemkarma...great or terrible deeds. Look at the love being showered on the Pandava side by Sanjaya!
+
+
The extra embellishment of Bhima from Sanjaya seems to be to counter the jibe from Duryodhana on Bhima when contrasting him with Bhisma.
+
The extra embellishment of Bhima from Sanjaya seems to be to counter the jibe from Duryodhana on Bhima when contrasting him with Bhisma.
+
+
He next refers to Yudhishtira in a way that shows him as not lower in status to Duryodhana. Just as Sanjaya referred to Duryodhana as Raja in an earlier shloka, he refers to Yudhishtira as Raja as well. In addition he calls him "Kunti-putra", to highlight that
+
He next refers to Yudhishtira in a way that shows him as not lower in status to Duryodhana. Just as Sanjaya referred to Duryodhana as Raja in an earlier shloka, he refers to Yudhishtira as Raja as well. In addition he calls him "Kunti-putra", to highlight that
+
+
he is the son of Kunti, the wife of Dhritrashtra's younger brother. Finally he names Yudhisthira's conch...Ananta-Vijaya, the unending victory.
Nakula and Sahadeva also blew their respective conches the Sughosha and Manipushpaka.
+
he is the son of Kunti, the wife of Dhritrashtra's younger brother. Finally he names Yudhisthira's conch...Ananta-Vijaya, the unending victory.
Nakula and Sahadeva also blew their respective conches the Sughosha and Manipushpaka.
+
+
Every word, every proper noun, every adjective has been used carefully by Sanjaya. In actuality, we can consider Sanjaya as one of the narrators of the Gita, since in Chapter 1 he is describing in his own words what is happening and not merely repeating words.
+
Every word, every proper noun, every adjective has been used carefully by Sanjaya. In actuality, we can consider Sanjaya as one of the narrators of the Gita, since in Chapter 1 he is describing in his own words what is happening and not merely repeating words.
+
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
+
काश्यश्च परमेष्वास: शिखण्डी च महारथ: |
धृष्टद्युम्नो विराटश्च सात्यकिश्चापराजित: || 17||
द्रुपदो द्रौपदेयाश्च सर्वश: पृथिवीपते |
सौभद्रश्च महाबाहु: शङ्खान्दध्मु: पृथक् पृथक् || 18||
+
काश्यश्च परमेष्वास: शिखण्डी च महारथ: |
धृष्टद्युम्नो विराटश्च सात्यकिश्चापराजित: || 17||
द्रुपदो द्रौपदेयाश्च सर्वश: पृथिवीपते |
सौभद्रश्च महाबाहु: शङ्खान्दध्मु: पृथक् पृथक् || 18||
+
+
And the king of kashi wielding a great bow, and the maharathi Shikhandi, Drishtadyumna, and Virata, and Satyaki the undefeated.
Drupad, and the Sons of Draupadi, and the son of Subhadra (Abhimanyu) the mighty armed, together blew their conches.
+
And the king of kashi wielding a great bow, and the maharathi Shikhandi, Drishtadyumna, and Virata, and Satyaki the undefeated.
Drupad, and the Sons of Draupadi, and the son of Subhadra (Abhimanyu) the mighty armed, together blew their conches.
+
+
Again the names chosen by Sanjaya to narrate here are with intent. The king of Kashi is mentioned because the three princesses abducted by Bhisma (Amba, Ambika, Ambalika) for his king Vichitravirya, were from Kashi. Due to circumstances then Amba committed suicide.
+
Again the names chosen by Sanjaya to narrate here are with intent. The king of Kashi is mentioned because the three princesses abducted by Bhisma (Amba, Ambika, Ambalika) for his king Vichitravirya, were from Kashi. Due to circumstances then Amba committed suicide.
+
+
Thus Kashi had a reason apart from allegiance to the Pandavas to stand up to Kurus. Amba had taken re-birth as Shikhandi who was sworn to be the cause of Bhishma's death. Again, another divine coincidence. Shikhandi was also the brother/ sister of Dristhadyumna.
+
Thus Kashi had a reason apart from allegiance to the Pandavas to stand up to Kurus. Amba had taken re-birth as Shikhandi who was sworn to be the cause of Bhishma's death. Again, another divine coincidence. Shikhandi was also the brother/ sister of Dristhadyumna.
+
+
And we know from the 3rd shloka, he was the son of Drupad and the general of the Pandava army, ordained to be the cause of Drona's death.
+
And we know from the 3rd shloka, he was the son of Drupad and the general of the Pandava army, ordained to be the cause of Drona's death.
+
+
Without going into each name, the reader gets the gist now of what is happening. Just as Duryodhana is implying that there are people fighting for him, but for their own reasons as well, Sanjaya is saying this is true for both sides.
+
Without going into each name, the reader gets the gist now of what is happening. Just as Duryodhana is implying that there are people fighting for him, but for their own reasons as well, Sanjaya is saying this is true for both sides.
+
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
+ 1.19
स घोषो धार्तराष्ट्राणां हृदयानि व्यदारयत् |
नभश्च पृथिवीं चैव तुमुलोऽभ्यनुनादयन् ||
The tumultuous sound pierced the hearts of the associates of Dhirtrashtra by filling the sky and earth with its echoes.
+
स घोषो धार्तराष्ट्राणां हृदयानि व्यदारयत् |
नभश्च पृथिवीं चैव तुमुलोऽभ्यनुनादयन् ||
The tumultuous sound pierced the hearts of the associates of Dhirtrashtra by filling the sky and earth with its echoes.
+
+
Note that while the sound from the Kaurava camp only served to elicit an even more tumultuous response from the Pandavas, the sound from Pandavas made the Kauravas nervous.
+
Note that while the sound from the Kaurava camp only served to elicit an even more tumultuous response from the Pandavas, the sound from Pandavas made the Kauravas nervous.
+
+
The term used for Kauravas is "dhārtarāṣhṭrāṇāṁ" which roughly translates to "belonging to Dhritrashtra". This suggests that Dhritrashtra was also complicit in what has led to this war.
+
The term used for Kauravas is "dhārtarāṣhṭrāṇāṁ" which roughly translates to "belonging to Dhritrashtra". This suggests that Dhritrashtra was also complicit in what has led to this war.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.20
अथ व्यवस्थितान्दृष्ट्वा धार्तराष्ट्रान् कपिध्वज:
प्रवृत्ते शस्त्रसम्पाते धनुरुद्यम्य पाण्डव:
हृषीकेशं तदा वाक्यमिदमाह महीपते ||
+
अथ व्यवस्थितान्दृष्ट्वा धार्तराष्ट्रान् कपिध्वज:
प्रवृत्ते शस्त्रसम्पाते धनुरुद्यम्य पाण्डव:
हृषीकेशं तदा वाक्यमिदमाह महीपते ||
+
+
King, then seeing those belonging to Dhritrashtra in their positions, with weapons ready, Pandu's son who had Hanumana's insignia, raised his bow, and said to Hrishikesha the following:
+
King, then seeing those belonging to Dhritrashtra in their positions, with weapons ready, Pandu's son who had Hanumana's insignia, raised his bow, and said to Hrishikesha the following:
+
+
Finally one of the primary characters in the Gita is ready to speak. Sanjaya addresses the Arjuna as the son of Pandu, and the Kauravas as belonging to Dhritrashtra. He is making it clear to his king that he is not blameless in this.
+
Finally one of the primary characters in the Gita is ready to speak. Sanjaya addresses the Arjuna as the son of Pandu, and the Kauravas as belonging to Dhritrashtra. He is making it clear to his king that he is not blameless in this.
+
+
Again, Sanjaya refers to Krishna as "Hrishikesha" meaning master of ones senses. This may be to contrast the nervousness on the Kaurava side with the fact that the ultimate master of the senses is holding the reins on the Pandava side.
+
Again, Sanjaya refers to Krishna as "Hrishikesha" meaning master of ones senses. This may be to contrast the nervousness on the Kaurava side with the fact that the ultimate master of the senses is holding the reins on the Pandava side.
+
+1.21
अर्जुन उवाच |
सेनयोरुभयोर्मध्ये रथं स्थापय मेऽच्युत ||
Arjuna says:
O Achyuta, place my chariot between both the armies.
+
अर्जुन उवाच |
सेनयोरुभयोर्मध्ये रथं स्थापय मेऽच्युत ||
Arjuna says:
O Achyuta, place my chariot between both the armies.
+
+
A third name for Krishna being used now. After Madhava, Hrishikesha, it is now Achyuta.
Achyuta means someone who is not shaken from this position, whose path is unswerving. He who is steadfast.
To Achyuta, Arjuna requests to move the chariot in the middle of the field.
+
A third name for Krishna being used now. After Madhava, Hrishikesha, it is now Achyuta.
Achyuta means someone who is not shaken from this position, whose path is unswerving. He who is steadfast.
To Achyuta, Arjuna requests to move the chariot in the middle of the field.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+ 1.22
यावदेतान्निरीक्षेऽहं योद्धुकामानवस्थितान् |
कैर्मया सह योद्धव्यमस्मिन् रणसमुद्यमे ||
Until I survey these those who are lusting for battle, with whom I must fight.
Here Arjuna answers a reader's silent Q: "Why does he want Krishna to take the ratha ahead?"
+
यावदेतान्निरीक्षेऽहं योद्धुकामानवस्थितान् |
कैर्मया सह योद्धव्यमस्मिन् रणसमुद्यमे ||
Until I survey these those who are lusting for battle, with whom I must fight.
Here Arjuna answers a reader's silent Q: "Why does he want Krishna to take the ratha ahead?"
+
+
By "Until" I think Arjuna means take the chariot to the middle until I can see who is on the other side. He uses the word "Yoddhu - Kaaman", which is lusting (kama) for battle. Most translations use "intent for fighting" for this term, but I feel lusting for battle,
+
By "Until" I think Arjuna means take the chariot to the middle until I can see who is on the other side. He uses the word "Yoddhu - Kaaman", which is lusting (kama) for battle. Most translations use "intent for fighting" for this term, but I feel lusting for battle,
+
+
is more appropriate. Because after even the offer for taking just 5 villages instead of the entire kingdom is rejected in favour of a bloody war, I can understand Arjuna seeing this as nothing must blind lust for war from the Kauravas.
+
is more appropriate. Because after even the offer for taking just 5 villages instead of the entire kingdom is rejected in favour of a bloody war, I can understand Arjuna seeing this as nothing must blind lust for war from the Kauravas.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.24
सञ्जय उवाच |
एवमुक्तो हृषीकेशो गुडाकेशेन भारत |
सेनयोरुभयोर्मध्ये स्थापयित्वा रथोत्तमम् ||
Sanjaya says:
O scion of Bharata (Dhritrashtra), Hrishikesha (Krishna) on being told by Gudakesha (Arjuna) placed the excellent chariot between the two armies.
+
सञ्जय उवाच |
एवमुक्तो हृषीकेशो गुडाकेशेन भारत |
सेनयोरुभयोर्मध्ये स्थापयित्वा रथोत्तमम् ||
Sanjaya says:
O scion of Bharata (Dhritrashtra), Hrishikesha (Krishna) on being told by Gudakesha (Arjuna) placed the excellent chariot between the two armies.
+
+
Now Sanjay is relating what he sees on the battlefield. Krishna took his chariot forward and kept it in between the two armies. The name used for Krishna is Hrishikesha, a name we have examined before.
+
Now Sanjay is relating what he sees on the battlefield. Krishna took his chariot forward and kept it in between the two armies. The name used for Krishna is Hrishikesha, a name we have examined before.
+
+
For Arjuna, Sanjaya uses the adjective Gudakesha. Most translations of the Gita translate this word to mean "Someone who has conquered sleep/sloth". The way they derive this meaning is गुडाका+ईश.
+
For Arjuna, Sanjaya uses the adjective Gudakesha. Most translations of the Gita translate this word to mean "Someone who has conquered sleep/sloth". The way they derive this meaning is गुडाका+ईश.
+
+
However the straight forward meaning of Gudakesha is "thick haired one". Its is difficult for me to conclude on how Sanjaya meant for this adjective to be interpreted. It would seem odd for Sanjaya to refer to Arjun by something as ornamental as "thick hair", just as the...
+
However the straight forward meaning of Gudakesha is "thick haired one". Its is difficult for me to conclude on how Sanjaya meant for this adjective to be interpreted. It would seem odd for Sanjaya to refer to Arjun by something as ornamental as "thick hair", just as the...
+
+
...battle is about to begin. So I believe the translation as "one who has conquered sloth" is correct. Just as Hrishikesha can be literally translated as "bristling haired one", and is frequently done so as well by some western translators. But in the context of the Gita,
+
...battle is about to begin. So I believe the translation as "one who has conquered sloth" is correct. Just as Hrishikesha can be literally translated as "bristling haired one", and is frequently done so as well by some western translators. But in the context of the Gita,
+
+
We must look to the spiritual authority of Adi Sankara and his commentary on Vishnu Sahasranaama, where the translation is Hrishika (senses) + Isha (lord), ie lord of senses or controller of senses, as we have done earlier.
+
We must look to the spiritual authority of Adi Sankara and his commentary on Vishnu Sahasranaama, where the translation is Hrishika (senses) + Isha (lord), ie lord of senses or controller of senses, as we have done earlier.
+
+
So why did Sanjaya use this word to descrive Arjuna. One can say simply to rhyme Hrishikesha with Gudakesha, but that would not be correct. I think Sanjay wanted to highlight the state of complete alertness in Arjuna. This is another esoteric way to look at this:
+
So why did Sanjaya use this word to descrive Arjuna. One can say simply to rhyme Hrishikesha with Gudakesha, but that would not be correct. I think Sanjay wanted to highlight the state of complete alertness in Arjuna. This is another esoteric way to look at this:
+
+
When the horses of the senses (sight, sound, smell+taste, touch) are restrained by the true self who is the charioteer (Krishna, the controller of senses), the doer (Arjuna) will be in the state of complete awareness (no sloth/ ignorance).
Interesting, huh?!
+
When the horses of the senses (sight, sound, smell+taste, touch) are restrained by the true self who is the charioteer (Krishna, the controller of senses), the doer (Arjuna) will be in the state of complete awareness (no sloth/ ignorance).
Interesting, huh?!
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+ 1.25
भीष्मद्रोणप्रमुखत: सर्वेषां च महीक्षिताम् |
उवाच पार्थ पश्यैतान्समवेतान्कुरूनिति ||
(with the chariot placed) in front of Bhishma. Drona, and all other kings (Krishna) said, O Partha (Arjuna) behold these assembled descendents of Kuru.
+
भीष्मद्रोणप्रमुखत: सर्वेषां च महीक्षिताम् |
उवाच पार्थ पश्यैतान्समवेतान्कुरूनिति ||
(with the chariot placed) in front of Bhishma. Drona, and all other kings (Krishna) said, O Partha (Arjuna) behold these assembled descendents of Kuru.
+
+
Given that the chariot is placed in the centre of the battlefield, it is not surprising that it is directly in front of the two main warriors of the Kaurava camp...Bhishma and Drona.
+
Given that the chariot is placed in the centre of the battlefield, it is not surprising that it is directly in front of the two main warriors of the Kaurava camp...Bhishma and Drona.
+
+
Krishna refers to Arjuna as Partha. Partha indicates "son of Pritha". Pritha is the actual name of his mother Kunti. Kunti was born to Surasena, who named her Pritha. Surasena also had another child who he named Vasudeva, the birth father of Lord Krishna on earth.
+
Krishna refers to Arjuna as Partha. Partha indicates "son of Pritha". Pritha is the actual name of his mother Kunti. Kunti was born to Surasena, who named her Pritha. Surasena also had another child who he named Vasudeva, the birth father of Lord Krishna on earth.
+
+
Surasena gave his daughter Pritha to his relative Kuntibhoja who was childless. And from Kuntibhoja came the name Kunti. This is how Krishna and Arjuna are actually cousins, because Arjuna's mom is the "aatya" of Krishna.
+
Surasena gave his daughter Pritha to his relative Kuntibhoja who was childless. And from Kuntibhoja came the name Kunti. This is how Krishna and Arjuna are actually cousins, because Arjuna's mom is the "aatya" of Krishna.
+
+
Now why did Krishna address Arjuna as Pritha. My guess is that he knew that Arjuna was perhaps having second thoughts about the battle. Because he wanted to see who was on the other side, and may be overcome with emotion.
+
Now why did Krishna address Arjuna as Pritha. My guess is that he knew that Arjuna was perhaps having second thoughts about the battle. Because he wanted to see who was on the other side, and may be overcome with emotion.
+
+
So Krishna addressed him in a way to tie his identity, and remind him, of his maternal side of the family. This is further corroborated when Krishna addresses his opponents as "Kurun" ie descendants of Kuru, to underplay the familial relationship between Arjuna and Kauravas.
+
So Krishna addressed him in a way to tie his identity, and remind him, of his maternal side of the family. This is further corroborated when Krishna addresses his opponents as "Kurun" ie descendants of Kuru, to underplay the familial relationship between Arjuna and Kauravas.
+
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
Now on to the next Shloka.
+
+1.26
तत्रापश्यत्स्थितान् पार्थ: पितृ नथ पितामहान् |
आचार्यान्मातुलान्भ्रातृ न्पुत्रान्पौत्रान्सखींस्तथा |
श्वशुरान्सुहृदश्चैव सेनयोरुभयोरपि || 26||
+
तत्रापश्यत्स्थितान् पार्थ: पितृ नथ पितामहान् |
आचार्यान्मातुलान्भ्रातृ न्पुत्रान्पौत्रान्सखींस्तथा |
श्वशुरान्सुहृदश्चैव सेनयोरुभयोरपि || 26||
+
+
Then Partha saw among BOTH armies, uncles, grandfathers, teachers, maternal uncles, brothers and cousins, sons, grandsons, friends, and fathers-in-law.
+
Then Partha saw among BOTH armies, uncles, grandfathers, teachers, maternal uncles, brothers and cousins, sons, grandsons, friends, and fathers-in-law.
+
+
Sanjaya didnt just say, Arjuna saw people he knew, he detailed the relationships. Because Arjuna was no longer seeing them as soldiers, but he was relating them to himself. So and So is my cousin, so and so is my grandfather, etc.
+
Sanjaya didnt just say, Arjuna saw people he knew, he detailed the relationships. Because Arjuna was no longer seeing them as soldiers, but he was relating them to himself. So and So is my cousin, so and so is my grandfather, etc.
+
+
Also, Arjuna did not see just the Kaurava side. The word 'Ubhayo' in the shloka means, he saw these relations in both his own army, and that of his enemy's.
+
Also, Arjuna did not see just the Kaurava side. The word 'Ubhayo' in the shloka means, he saw these relations in both his own army, and that of his enemy's.
+
+
Look at the beauty in this shloka. The Gita begins with Dhritrashtra highlighting "mine and others" (Mamakah, Pandava, do you remember?). And Arjuna's sorrow begins with "This is mine, and that is also mine".
+
Look at the beauty in this shloka. The Gita begins with Dhritrashtra highlighting "mine and others" (Mamakah, Pandava, do you remember?). And Arjuna's sorrow begins with "This is mine, and that is also mine".
+
+
"Mine and not mine" is highlighted as a delusion. But here Arjuna's "mine and also mine" is also highlighted as a delusion. The reason is, who is this "me" that something belongs to, or doesnt belong to, is unclear to both Dhritrashtra, and Arjuna both!
+
"Mine and not mine" is highlighted as a delusion. But here Arjuna's "mine and also mine" is also highlighted as a delusion. The reason is, who is this "me" that something belongs to, or doesnt belong to, is unclear to both Dhritrashtra, and Arjuna both!
+
+
The shloka, if properly understood this way is a wake up call to deluded minds, often labouring in false piety. Dhritrashtra's delusion was limited to his children. Arjuna's delusion was a bit more expansive and covered both sides of the family. But it was still delusion!
+
The shloka, if properly understood this way is a wake up call to deluded minds, often labouring in false piety. Dhritrashtra's delusion was limited to his children. Arjuna's delusion was a bit more expansive and covered both sides of the family. But it was still delusion!
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+ 1.27
तान्समीक्ष्य स कौन्तेय: सर्वान्बन्धूनवस्थितान् |
कृपया परयाविष्टो विषीदन्निदमब्रवीत्
On beholding these relatives (bandhu) Kaunteya (Arjuna) became possessed with compassion, and said the following.
+
तान्समीक्ष्य स कौन्तेय: सर्वान्बन्धूनवस्थितान् |
कृपया परयाविष्टो विषीदन्निदमब्रवीत्
On beholding these relatives (bandhu) Kaunteya (Arjuna) became possessed with compassion, and said the following.
+
+
Note, now Arjuna who was referred to as Partha in the last couple of shlokas both by Krishna and Sanjaya, now suddenly becomes "Kaunteya" in this one. It highlights a change in mindset of Arjuna who is again identifying with the entire Kuru family after seeing his relatives.
+
Note, now Arjuna who was referred to as Partha in the last couple of shlokas both by Krishna and Sanjaya, now suddenly becomes "Kaunteya" in this one. It highlights a change in mindset of Arjuna who is again identifying with the entire Kuru family after seeing his relatives.
+
+
Also note that the word used for relatives is "Bandhu", Bandhu can mean those who are bound to you. It is indeed Arjuna's binding to his family, feelings of me and mine, etc that this compassion has come.
+
Also note that the word used for relatives is "Bandhu", Bandhu can mean those who are bound to you. It is indeed Arjuna's binding to his family, feelings of me and mine, etc that this compassion has come.
+
+
But this isn't a planned compassion, not at all. The word used is "Avishta", which is the root of "Avesha" as well. To become possessed, or overwhelmed. Arjuna became possessed with GREAT (paraya) compassion (Kripaya).
+
But this isn't a planned compassion, not at all. The word used is "Avishta", which is the root of "Avesha" as well. To become possessed, or overwhelmed. Arjuna became possessed with GREAT (paraya) compassion (Kripaya).
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.28-1.30
अर्जुन उवाच |
दृष्ट्वेमं स्वजनं कृष्ण युयुत्सुं समुपस्थितम् |
सीदन्ति मम गात्राणि मुखं च परिशुष्यति |
वेपथुश्च शरीरे मे रोमहर्षश्च जायते |
गाण्डीवं स्रंसते हस्तात्त्वक्चै व परिदह्यते |
न च शक्नोम्यवस्थातुं भ्रमतीव च मे मन: |
+
अर्जुन उवाच |
दृष्ट्वेमं स्वजनं कृष्ण युयुत्सुं समुपस्थितम् |
सीदन्ति मम गात्राणि मुखं च परिशुष्यति |
वेपथुश्च शरीरे मे रोमहर्षश्च जायते |
गाण्डीवं स्रंसते हस्तात्त्वक्चै व परिदह्यते |
न च शक्नोम्यवस्थातुं भ्रमतीव च मे मन: |
+
+
Arjuna says: O Krishna, seeing my people who have assembled to fight, my limbs have become weak and my mouth is dry. My body is trembling, and my hairs stand on end. The Gandiva is slipping from my hands, and I am unsteady, and my mind is confused.
+
Arjuna says: O Krishna, seeing my people who have assembled to fight, my limbs have become weak and my mouth is dry. My body is trembling, and my hairs stand on end. The Gandiva is slipping from my hands, and I am unsteady, and my mind is confused.
+
+
The Gita highlights the situation of Arjuna quite well here. Notice that Arjuna addresses Krishna, as "Krishna". No fancy adjectives, no searching for alternative names. Arjuna addresses him just as he knows him.
+
The Gita highlights the situation of Arjuna quite well here. Notice that Arjuna addresses Krishna, as "Krishna". No fancy adjectives, no searching for alternative names. Arjuna addresses him just as he knows him.
+
+
The symptoms described are classic ones of a Panic attack. In fact if readers google symptoms of a panic attack right now, they will see how many match. Head spinning, unsteady body, confusion, trembling, etc.
+
The symptoms described are classic ones of a Panic attack. In fact if readers google symptoms of a panic attack right now, they will see how many match. Head spinning, unsteady body, confusion, trembling, etc.
+
+
For those who have undergone the horrific experience of a panic attack, they would know the extreme feeling of dread that accompanies it. A disconnect from reality often occurs and the person is convinced that they are dying. Now imagine the situation of Arjuna.
+
For those who have undergone the horrific experience of a panic attack, they would know the extreme feeling of dread that accompanies it. A disconnect from reality often occurs and the person is convinced that they are dying. Now imagine the situation of Arjuna.
+
+
It is also important to note that this was not a considered fear but a fear or panic that took over Arjuna, almost possessed him. It was not that Arjuna first thought of the consequences of war and then got scared by it, no!
+
It is also important to note that this was not a considered fear but a fear or panic that took over Arjuna, almost possessed him. It was not that Arjuna first thought of the consequences of war and then got scared by it, no!
+
+
This point must be kept in mind as we proceed with the Gita. Because you will see Arjuna's fear came first, and he looked for reasons afterwards. This is often how people deal with life. Make their mind up first, and then look for data to support it.
+
This point must be kept in mind as we proceed with the Gita. Because you will see Arjuna's fear came first, and he looked for reasons afterwards. This is often how people deal with life. Make their mind up first, and then look for data to support it.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+ 1.31
निमित्तानि च पश्यामि विपरीतानि केशव |
न च श्रेयोऽनुपश्यामि हत्वा स्वजनमाहवे ||
And I see the omens are adverse, O Keshava.
And I dont see any good (shreyas) from killing my own people in battle.
+
निमित्तानि च पश्यामि विपरीतानि केशव |
न च श्रेयोऽनुपश्यामि हत्वा स्वजनमाहवे ||
And I see the omens are adverse, O Keshava.
And I dont see any good (shreyas) from killing my own people in battle.
+
+
Arjuna now having decided that he is not going to fight, is now giving reasons to justify his decision. How often do we hurry to make a decision or voice an opinion based on partial information, or ignorance. And once an opinion is expressed it becomes part of your ego.
+
Arjuna now having decided that he is not going to fight, is now giving reasons to justify his decision. How often do we hurry to make a decision or voice an opinion based on partial information, or ignorance. And once an opinion is expressed it becomes part of your ego.
+
+
Here, by ego I mean, the sense of self. You ego is what makes you, you. Or what you 'think' makes you, you. Once an opinion becomes part of your ego, you will defend it no matter what. Automatically, you will only look at information that suits you. Those who disagree,
+
Here, by ego I mean, the sense of self. You ego is what makes you, you. Or what you 'think' makes you, you. Once an opinion becomes part of your ego, you will defend it no matter what. Automatically, you will only look at information that suits you. Those who disagree,
+
+
will become enemies. Something similar has happened with Arjuna. He panicked. And decided he will not fight. Now he will give reasons afterwards. We do this regularly now a days.
+
will become enemies. Something similar has happened with Arjuna. He panicked. And decided he will not fight. Now he will give reasons afterwards. We do this regularly now a days.
+
+
Arjuna first goes into omens (though he does not specify them in the shloka), saying they are adverse. This is the unknown fear that creeps up on you when you are about to embark on a task that you think is very big for you.
+
Arjuna first goes into omens (though he does not specify them in the shloka), saying they are adverse. This is the unknown fear that creeps up on you when you are about to embark on a task that you think is very big for you.
+
+
Then he says, I also dont foresee any good, from killing my own people. He doesnt say "there is no benefit (to me)", he says there is no "shreyas", i.e. greater good. Will write more on shreyas as the twet series continues.
+
Then he says, I also dont foresee any good, from killing my own people. He doesnt say "there is no benefit (to me)", he says there is no "shreyas", i.e. greater good. Will write more on shreyas as the twet series continues.
+
+
He addresses Krishna as Keshava. When panicking Arjuna said Krishna, but now again he is back to using alternative names. This may be a way of showing that Arjuna has made up his mind to not fight unconsciously, but now his logical mind is functioning again, to corroborate it.+
He addresses Krishna as Keshava. When panicking Arjuna said Krishna, but now again he is back to using alternative names. This may be a way of showing that Arjuna has made up his mind to not fight unconsciously, but now his logical mind is functioning again, to corroborate it.+
+
Keshava can mean (per Adi Sankara) a) someone whose hairs are beautiful, b) Ka (Brahma), A (Vishnu), Isha (Rudra), combination of trimurtis, c) Slayer of the Asura names Keshin.
+
Keshava can mean (per Adi Sankara) a) someone whose hairs are beautiful, b) Ka (Brahma), A (Vishnu), Isha (Rudra), combination of trimurtis, c) Slayer of the Asura names Keshin.
+
+
Why would Arjuna use Keshava? In what sense? I doubt it is in the context of Krishna's hair. Perhaps not even in the context of Krishna being the trimurti combined, because Arjuna doesnt know that for sure yet. So is it in the context of killing the demon Keshi?
+
Why would Arjuna use Keshava? In what sense? I doubt it is in the context of Krishna's hair. Perhaps not even in the context of Krishna being the trimurti combined, because Arjuna doesnt know that for sure yet. So is it in the context of killing the demon Keshi?
+
+
That might be the case, because Keshi was sent by Krishna's own uncle Kamsa to kill Krishna when he was a child. Is Arjuna trying to relate his own pain of fighting with his uncles etc with Krishna having fought his uncle?
+
That might be the case, because Keshi was sent by Krishna's own uncle Kamsa to kill Krishna when he was a child. Is Arjuna trying to relate his own pain of fighting with his uncles etc with Krishna having fought his uncle?
+
+
There is also another way to look at this. Even though Arjuna did not know the extent of Lord Krishna's divinity., he knew that Krishna was not a mere mortal. Was he calling him Keshava in the sense of trimurti personified to mollify him?
+
There is also another way to look at this. Even though Arjuna did not know the extent of Lord Krishna's divinity., he knew that Krishna was not a mere mortal. Was he calling him Keshava in the sense of trimurti personified to mollify him?
+
+
When visiting a govt office to get some work done, we address everyone from guard to head as "sir or saheb". Is Arjuna trying to do the same here, to make Krishna more receptive to his logic of why he should not fight. So many layers here.
+
When visiting a govt office to get some work done, we address everyone from guard to head as "sir or saheb". Is Arjuna trying to do the same here, to make Krishna more receptive to his logic of why he should not fight. So many layers here.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.32-1.33
न काङ्क्षे विजयं कृष्ण न च राज्यं सुखानि च |
किं नो राज्येन गोविन्द किं भोगैर्जीवितेन वा ||
येषामर्थे काङ्क्षितं नो राज्यं भोगा: सुखानि च |
त इमेऽवस्थिता युद्धे प्राणांस्त्यक्त्वा धनानि च ||
+
न काङ्क्षे विजयं कृष्ण न च राज्यं सुखानि च |
किं नो राज्येन गोविन्द किं भोगैर्जीवितेन वा ||
येषामर्थे काङ्क्षितं नो राज्यं भोगा: सुखानि च |
त इमेऽवस्थिता युद्धे प्राणांस्त्यक्त्वा धनानि च ||
+
+
O Krishna I do not long for victory, nor kingdom, nor pleasures (sukha). O Govinda, what need is there of a kingdom, or enjoyments, or life itself?
Those for whom kingdoms, enjoyments are seeked after by us are standing in battle positions risking their lives and wealth!
+
O Krishna I do not long for victory, nor kingdom, nor pleasures (sukha). O Govinda, what need is there of a kingdom, or enjoyments, or life itself?
Those for whom kingdoms, enjoyments are seeked after by us are standing in battle positions risking their lives and wealth!
+
+
The ensuing shlokas are VERY important, because despite his confusion, desperation, fear, Arjuna demonstrates that he possesses the qualities required to be a competent person to imbibe the Gita, i.e. Adhikara.
+
The ensuing shlokas are VERY important, because despite his confusion, desperation, fear, Arjuna demonstrates that he possesses the qualities required to be a competent person to imbibe the Gita, i.e. Adhikara.
+
+
Arguably, he has begun demonstrating it already in an earlier shloka when he contends that the fighting will not help attain shreyas, ie. the greater good. He does not say "no personal benefit" as the reason. But these shlokas outline qualities very clearly. Read on!
+
Arguably, he has begun demonstrating it already in an earlier shloka when he contends that the fighting will not help attain shreyas, ie. the greater good. He does not say "no personal benefit" as the reason. But these shlokas outline qualities very clearly. Read on!
+
+
He first tells Krishna, that he (Arjuna) does not want worldly things. Here he doesnt mean Krishna in terms of his dark blue/black colour, but he means it in the more expansive sense of the term. Per Adi Sankara's bhasya on Vishnu Sahasranaama, we know...
+
He first tells Krishna, that he (Arjuna) does not want worldly things. Here he doesnt mean Krishna in terms of his dark blue/black colour, but he means it in the more expansive sense of the term. Per Adi Sankara's bhasya on Vishnu Sahasranaama, we know...
+
+
...Krishna means existence, intelligence, bliss (Sat-Chit-Ananda). Per Vyasa, "Krish" means existence, and Na, means bliss. The union of Krish-Na is the eternal Brahman.
Arjuna is saying "you are completeness, everything is in You, so why bother for a measly kingdom?!"
+
...Krishna means existence, intelligence, bliss (Sat-Chit-Ananda). Per Vyasa, "Krish" means existence, and Na, means bliss. The union of Krish-Na is the eternal Brahman.
Arjuna is saying "you are completeness, everything is in You, so why bother for a measly kingdom?!"
+
+
In the next line of 1.32, he uses "Govinda", he asks the same question. Why Govinda? Govinda has multiple meanings.
1. Knower (Vinda) of Earth (Go) when it was hidden by an Asura (perhaps referring to His Varaha avatar)
2. Lord of Cows
3. One who confers speech
+
In the next line of 1.32, he uses "Govinda", he asks the same question. Why Govinda? Govinda has multiple meanings.
1. Knower (Vinda) of Earth (Go) when it was hidden by an Asura (perhaps referring to His Varaha avatar)
2. Lord of Cows
3. One who confers speech
+
+
'Vid' means "to know". The further alternative meanings of of "Go" are:
4. Svarga
5. Arrows (weapons)
6. Cattle
7. Speech (Vedas)
8. Thunderbolt (vajra)
9. 6 directions
10. Eyes
11. Sun
12. Earth
13. Waters
+
'Vid' means "to know". The further alternative meanings of of "Go" are:
4. Svarga
5. Arrows (weapons)
6. Cattle
7. Speech (Vedas)
8. Thunderbolt (vajra)
9. 6 directions
10. Eyes
11. Sun
12. Earth
13. Waters
+
+
In what sense has Arjuna used the word then? I think it is in the same sense of how he used Krishna. As the knower/ finder of Earth, Arjuna expects Krishna to understand that this is one kingdom they are talking about. Is it really worth it?!
+
In what sense has Arjuna used the word then? I think it is in the same sense of how he used Krishna. As the knower/ finder of Earth, Arjuna expects Krishna to understand that this is one kingdom they are talking about. Is it really worth it?!
+
+
In 1.33 Arjuna further talks about the futility of winning this war, because, he says, we generally aspire for wealth for our near and dear ones. But today, I am going to have to kill my near and dear ones for this wealth. So the question is, who am I doing it for?
+
In 1.33 Arjuna further talks about the futility of winning this war, because, he says, we generally aspire for wealth for our near and dear ones. But today, I am going to have to kill my near and dear ones for this wealth. So the question is, who am I doing it for?
+
+
Arjuna doesnt want it for himself, so whats the point of killing those for whom wealth and pleasures are desired?!
+
Arjuna doesnt want it for himself, so whats the point of killing those for whom wealth and pleasures are desired?!
+
+
Three key points to be noted here. Arjuna does not care for:
a. victory, or even life itself
b. pleasures and enjoyments
c. kingdom
So what qualities is Arjuna displaying here?
+
Three key points to be noted here. Arjuna does not care for:
a. victory, or even life itself
b. pleasures and enjoyments
c. kingdom
So what qualities is Arjuna displaying here?
+
+
He is saying he has dispassion for worldly gains (kingdom), he is saying he doesnt care for enjoyments this demonstrating control of external organs (dama), and his not caring for victory or life means he has control of internal organs (sama).
+
He is saying he has dispassion for worldly gains (kingdom), he is saying he doesnt care for enjoyments this demonstrating control of external organs (dama), and his not caring for victory or life means he has control of internal organs (sama).
+
+
Thus Arjuna has demonstrated at least three out of the seven primary qualities required to become an adhikari to receive the Gita. An 'adhikari' will demostrate his qualities even at his weakest. This is a key thing to note.
+
Thus Arjuna has demonstrated at least three out of the seven primary qualities required to become an adhikari to receive the Gita. An 'adhikari' will demostrate his qualities even at his weakest. This is a key thing to note.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+ 1.34-1.35
आचार्या: पितर: पुत्रास्तथैव च पितामहा: |
मातुला: श्वशुरा: पौत्रा: श्याला: सम्बन्धिनस्तथा ||
एतान्न हन्तुमिच्छामि घ्नतोऽपि मधुसूदन |
अपि त्रैलोक्यराज्यस्य हेतो: किं नु महीकृते ||
+
आचार्या: पितर: पुत्रास्तथैव च पितामहा: |
मातुला: श्वशुरा: पौत्रा: श्याला: सम्बन्धिनस्तथा ||
एतान्न हन्तुमिच्छामि घ्नतोऽपि मधुसूदन |
अपि त्रैलोक्यराज्यस्य हेतो: किं नु महीकृते ||
+
+
Teachers, uncles, sons, grandfathers, maternal uncles, fathers-in-law, grandsons, brothers-in-law, and other relatives. O Madhusudana, even if we die by them, I do not want to kill them, even for the sake of kingship of the three worlds, leave alone just the Earth!
+
Teachers, uncles, sons, grandfathers, maternal uncles, fathers-in-law, grandsons, brothers-in-law, and other relatives. O Madhusudana, even if we die by them, I do not want to kill them, even for the sake of kingship of the three worlds, leave alone just the Earth!
+
+
1.34 is just a continuation of the prior shloka 1.33, where Arjuna had said "those for whom wealth etc is desired, whats the point of killing them to get it?". Here he is merely elaborating who he means by "those for whom..." ie teachers, uncles, sons etc.
+
1.34 is just a continuation of the prior shloka 1.33, where Arjuna had said "those for whom wealth etc is desired, whats the point of killing them to get it?". Here he is merely elaborating who he means by "those for whom..." ie teachers, uncles, sons etc.
+
+
Now Arjuna anticipates a question, "If you dont kill them, they are anyway ready to kill you, they arent having second thoughts like you are!"
He answers this unasked question in 1.35 by saying, its better to killed by them because forget just hastinapura,
+
Now Arjuna anticipates a question, "If you dont kill them, they are anyway ready to kill you, they arent having second thoughts like you are!"
He answers this unasked question in 1.35 by saying, its better to killed by them because forget just hastinapura,
+
+
I would not kill them even if it was for the ownership of the three worlds!
Arjuna here highlights the fourth of the seven primary signs of Adhikara. It being "dispassion for otherworldly gains".
+
I would not kill them even if it was for the ownership of the three worlds!
Arjuna here highlights the fourth of the seven primary signs of Adhikara. It being "dispassion for otherworldly gains".
+
+
Remember, in 1.32 Arjuna had shown dispassion for WORDLY gains (he said he did not desire a kingdom). In this shloka, Arjuna is saying he doesnt want swarga and paatala either!
+
Remember, in 1.32 Arjuna had shown dispassion for WORDLY gains (he said he did not desire a kingdom). In this shloka, Arjuna is saying he doesnt want swarga and paatala either!
+
+
Here Arjuna addresses Krishna as Madhusudana. The name Madhusudana comes from Krishna having killed/ destroyed the Asura/demon Madhu who had stolen the vedas from Brahma.
+
Here Arjuna addresses Krishna as Madhusudana. The name Madhusudana comes from Krishna having killed/ destroyed the Asura/demon Madhu who had stolen the vedas from Brahma.
+
+
The usual translations of this shloka will tell you this interpretation only, and then perhaps link it to saying that Arjuna was hinting that this war was un-Vedic. I however humbly want to put forth an alternative explanation to this name when used in the current context.
+
The usual translations of this shloka will tell you this interpretation only, and then perhaps link it to saying that Arjuna was hinting that this war was un-Vedic. I however humbly want to put forth an alternative explanation to this name when used in the current context.
+
+
I interpret it here as Madhu-Sudana. Not the demon Madhu, but Madhu as in sweet, pleasant. Madhu also means falsehood or ignorance that is sweet. Ignorance is bliss? :). And sudana meaning destruction.
+
I interpret it here as Madhu-Sudana. Not the demon Madhu, but Madhu as in sweet, pleasant. Madhu also means falsehood or ignorance that is sweet. Ignorance is bliss? :). And sudana meaning destruction.
+
+
He is addressing Krishna as Madhu-sudana to remind Krishna of this role as destroyer of falsehoods or maya, however sweet it might be.
Imagine the mental state of Arjuna, that he feels Krishna has forgotten his role!
+
He is addressing Krishna as Madhu-sudana to remind Krishna of this role as destroyer of falsehoods or maya, however sweet it might be.
Imagine the mental state of Arjuna, that he feels Krishna has forgotten his role!
+
+
Arjuna's confusion arises from the fact that he is seeing the problem from his limited point of view. He thinks the war is being fought over the kingdom, which is land. On becoming king, their ego will get a boost. Then they will have money and pleasures.
+
Arjuna's confusion arises from the fact that he is seeing the problem from his limited point of view. He thinks the war is being fought over the kingdom, which is land. On becoming king, their ego will get a boost. Then they will have money and pleasures.
+
+
All this Arjuna is mentally classifying as "Madhu". And then he is saying, I do not value all this. So whats the point of fighting. And you should know better Krishna, because you are Madhu-Sudana, Arjuna seems to be saying without spelling it out.
+
All this Arjuna is mentally classifying as "Madhu". And then he is saying, I do not value all this. So whats the point of fighting. And you should know better Krishna, because you are Madhu-Sudana, Arjuna seems to be saying without spelling it out.
+
+
Arjuna thinks Krishna's job is take Arjuna away from these worldly thinks, and yet he sits driving him right into the middle of a battlefield to win a kingdom! Arjuna is reminding Krishna, of what he thinks Krishna as forgotten! +
Arjuna thinks Krishna's job is take Arjuna away from these worldly thinks, and yet he sits driving him right into the middle of a battlefield to win a kingdom! Arjuna is reminding Krishna, of what he thinks Krishna as forgotten! +
+
One can only smile at this level of delusion. And it is a level of delusion that we display regularly. When we turn our yogic and puranic spiritual personalities into superheros or tribal lords. We want God to fit into OUR definition of what He should be.
+
One can only smile at this level of delusion. And it is a level of delusion that we display regularly. When we turn our yogic and puranic spiritual personalities into superheros or tribal lords. We want God to fit into OUR definition of what He should be.
+
+
But we forget, that our intelligence, memory, and experiences are limited. Thus our ability to grasp reality completely is limited. A child may see a doctor stabbing him with a long pin as a cruel demon, and the child would be right based on all the information he has.
+
But we forget, that our intelligence, memory, and experiences are limited. Thus our ability to grasp reality completely is limited. A child may see a doctor stabbing him with a long pin as a cruel demon, and the child would be right based on all the information he has.
+
+
But the doctor with his superior intelligence, more experience, knows that this momentary pain will save thw child from a life long pain and thus inflicts it.
What Arjuna sees as pain is actually pleasure, and what he perceives as pleasure, is actually pain. Fascinating?
+
But the doctor with his superior intelligence, more experience, knows that this momentary pain will save thw child from a life long pain and thus inflicts it.
What Arjuna sees as pain is actually pleasure, and what he perceives as pleasure, is actually pain. Fascinating?
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+ 1.36-1. 37
निहत्य धार्तराष्ट्रान्न: का प्रीति: स्याज्जनार्दन |
पापमेवाश्रयेदस्मान्हत्वैतानाततायिन: ||
तस्मान्नार्हा वयं हन्तुं धार्तराष्ट्रान्स्वबान्धवान् |
स्वजनं हि कथं हत्वा सुखिन: स्याम माधव ||
+
निहत्य धार्तराष्ट्रान्न: का प्रीति: स्याज्जनार्दन |
पापमेवाश्रयेदस्मान्हत्वैतानाततायिन: ||
तस्मान्नार्हा वयं हन्तुं धार्तराष्ट्रान्स्वबान्धवान् |
स्वजनं हि कथं हत्वा सुखिन: स्याम माधव ||
+
+
O Janardana, what pleasure can we derive from killing Dhritrashtra's sons? Only sin (papam) will accrue to us by killing these "Aatatayins"
Hence it doesnt suit us to kill Dhritrashtra's sons, our brothers/ friends, our own kinsmen. O Madhava, how can we be happy doing it?
+
O Janardana, what pleasure can we derive from killing Dhritrashtra's sons? Only sin (papam) will accrue to us by killing these "Aatatayins"
Hence it doesnt suit us to kill Dhritrashtra's sons, our brothers/ friends, our own kinsmen. O Madhava, how can we be happy doing it?
+
+
While both shlokas are framed as Qs, Arjuna means them as rhetorical Qs. He isnt asking for an answer from Krishna, he is simply framing his statements as Qs, perhaps out of fear or respect for the Lord.
+
While both shlokas are framed as Qs, Arjuna means them as rhetorical Qs. He isnt asking for an answer from Krishna, he is simply framing his statements as Qs, perhaps out of fear or respect for the Lord.
+
+
First Arjuna addresses Krishna as Janardana. The literal translation of it is Jana-ardana, the tomentor/ afflicter/ oppressor of men. While some translators slip in the word "wicked" in front of men, I do not believe it is correct.
+
First Arjuna addresses Krishna as Janardana. The literal translation of it is Jana-ardana, the tomentor/ afflicter/ oppressor of men. While some translators slip in the word "wicked" in front of men, I do not believe it is correct.
+
+
Is it true that only the wicked suffer? Of course not. Even Sri Rama and Sri Krishna suffered. We see good people facing hurdles around us everyday. Who is tormenting them? It is their karmas, as per the system ordained by Sri Krishna.
+
Is it true that only the wicked suffer? Of course not. Even Sri Rama and Sri Krishna suffered. We see good people facing hurdles around us everyday. Who is tormenting them? It is their karmas, as per the system ordained by Sri Krishna.
+
+
This is the beauty of Hinduism, where even in torment, we see God. Unlike other faiths which attribute death, sickness, worry etc to another entity (Satan/Shaitaan) who is as powerful as God, Hindus see God in everything.
+
This is the beauty of Hinduism, where even in torment, we see God. Unlike other faiths which attribute death, sickness, worry etc to another entity (Satan/Shaitaan) who is as powerful as God, Hindus see God in everything.
+
+
God cant be omnipresent, if he is absent from your sorrows, isnt it?
Remember, Swami Tulsidas was given darshana of Hanumana, and then Rama, by a Pisacha! Hinduism sees redemption in even Pisachas, and exotls humans as the highest birth!
+
God cant be omnipresent, if he is absent from your sorrows, isnt it?
Remember, Swami Tulsidas was given darshana of Hanumana, and then Rama, by a Pisacha! Hinduism sees redemption in even Pisachas, and exotls humans as the highest birth!
+
+
Coming back:
Arjuna uses Janardana perhaps to subtly hint that Krishna may not be identifying with Arjuna's sorrow because He is anyway the oppressor of men.
Arjuna also seems to have changed tack from saying "I dont desire the things I will get from the war", to...
+
Coming back:
Arjuna uses Janardana perhaps to subtly hint that Krishna may not be identifying with Arjuna's sorrow because He is anyway the oppressor of men.
Arjuna also seems to have changed tack from saying "I dont desire the things I will get from the war", to...
+
+
..saying, "actually this might be bad for us". Bad, how? We will accrue sin if we slay the aatatayin. Its interesting that he uses the word Aatatayin, because if you look up the meaning of the word, it can mean "warrior", or it can mean "terrorist" or "one about to kill".
+
..saying, "actually this might be bad for us". Bad, how? We will accrue sin if we slay the aatatayin. Its interesting that he uses the word Aatatayin, because if you look up the meaning of the word, it can mean "warrior", or it can mean "terrorist" or "one about to kill".
+
+
The reason Arjuna has used a confusing word is to perhaps preempt the obvious objection that "its not sin to kill a terrorist, or someone who is about to kill you".
Indeed, Manu says "a atatayin should be killed without the slightest compunction and without considering...
+
The reason Arjuna has used a confusing word is to perhaps preempt the obvious objection that "its not sin to kill a terrorist, or someone who is about to kill you".
Indeed, Manu says "a atatayin should be killed without the slightest compunction and without considering...
+
+
...whether he is a Guru, aged, young, or a learned brahmin. For on such occasions, the killer does not incur the sin of killing but the atatayin is killed by his own paapkarmas.
In fact modern jurisprudence also gives special consideration to self defence.
+
...whether he is a Guru, aged, young, or a learned brahmin. For on such occasions, the killer does not incur the sin of killing but the atatayin is killed by his own paapkarmas.
In fact modern jurisprudence also gives special consideration to self defence.
+
+
But just like Duryodhana bit his tongue during his monologue, Arjuna seems to have done the same, because in the next line, Arjuna addresses Krishna as "Madhava" and repeats the exact rhetorical Q in 1.36.
Maybe Arjuna thought that "Janardana" was a bit too harsh.
+
But just like Duryodhana bit his tongue during his monologue, Arjuna seems to have done the same, because in the next line, Arjuna addresses Krishna as "Madhava" and repeats the exact rhetorical Q in 1.36.
Maybe Arjuna thought that "Janardana" was a bit too harsh.
+
+
He asks the same Q using the word Madhava, the meaning of which we have seen earlier. And here I think Arjuna means it as Husband of Lakshmi. The holder (DHa) or all that is sweet (Ma).
+
He asks the same Q using the word Madhava, the meaning of which we have seen earlier. And here I think Arjuna means it as Husband of Lakshmi. The holder (DHa) or all that is sweet (Ma).
+
+
I think Arjuna also wants Krishna to contrast his own role as the oppressor of men, and also the holder of sweetness, to gauge what Arjuna is going through. Clearly some complex emotions being conveyed here.
+
I think Arjuna also wants Krishna to contrast his own role as the oppressor of men, and also the holder of sweetness, to gauge what Arjuna is going through. Clearly some complex emotions being conveyed here.
+
+
And now on to the next shloka.
+
And now on to the next shloka.
+
+ 1.38-1.39
यद्यप्येते न पश्यन्ति लोभोपहतचेतस: |
कुलक्षयकृतं दोषं मित्रद्रोहे च पातकम् ||
कथं न ज्ञेयमस्माभि: पापादस्मान्निवर्तितुम् |
कुलक्षयकृतं दोषं प्रपश्यद्भिर्जनार्दन ||
+
यद्यप्येते न पश्यन्ति लोभोपहतचेतस: |
कुलक्षयकृतं दोषं मित्रद्रोहे च पातकम् ||
कथं न ज्ञेयमस्माभि: पापादस्मान्निवर्तितुम् |
कुलक्षयकृतं दोषं प्रपश्यद्भिर्जनार्दन ||
+
+
Even though they, due to their mind being infected by greed, do not see the evil in annihilating their lineage (kula-kshayam), or to cheat their friends,
why cant we, O Janardana, who know the evil that comes from destroying one's lineage, abstain from this sin?
+
Even though they, due to their mind being infected by greed, do not see the evil in annihilating their lineage (kula-kshayam), or to cheat their friends,
why cant we, O Janardana, who know the evil that comes from destroying one's lineage, abstain from this sin?
+
+
Arjuna displays another qualification of his Adhikara. By point out that the Kaurava's side is not thinking clearly due to their mind being afflicted by greed, he is indirectly showing that greed for the kingdown etc has not affected his own thinking. He is free from greed.
+
Arjuna displays another qualification of his Adhikara. By point out that the Kaurava's side is not thinking clearly due to their mind being afflicted by greed, he is indirectly showing that greed for the kingdown etc has not affected his own thinking. He is free from greed.
+
+
But I want to also point out that these shlokas bring out another failing of the human condition, especially one that afflicts so many of us today.
How often do we let bad behaviour pass by thinking, "at least I am not like that". So many families have a child who
+
But I want to also point out that these shlokas bring out another failing of the human condition, especially one that afflicts so many of us today.
How often do we let bad behaviour pass by thinking, "at least I am not like that". So many families have a child who
+
+
becomes a burden on the family by not carrying on his or her duties as a son or daughter. Others have to bear the financial and reputational brunt of this one person's behaviour and irresponsibility.
+
becomes a burden on the family by not carrying on his or her duties as a son or daughter. Others have to bear the financial and reputational brunt of this one person's behaviour and irresponsibility.
+
+
How often does it happen in societies, where a section becomes a burden on it, and other simply carry on with their lives thinking "what has it got to do with me, I am law abiding, I am moral, I will just stay in my lane and ignore this behaviour".
+
How often does it happen in societies, where a section becomes a burden on it, and other simply carry on with their lives thinking "what has it got to do with me, I am law abiding, I am moral, I will just stay in my lane and ignore this behaviour".
+
+
Since we know that finally the outcome of the Gita is that Arjuna decides to fight, we can surmise that neither did Krishna accept Arjuna's this excuse, nor did Arjuna hold on to it after Krishna convinced him.
+
Since we know that finally the outcome of the Gita is that Arjuna decides to fight, we can surmise that neither did Krishna accept Arjuna's this excuse, nor did Arjuna hold on to it after Krishna convinced him.
+
+
Remember, in the Prashtanatrayi of Upanishads, Brahmasutras, and Gita, Gita is the actionable part. It is technology. It is a call to action. If you truly imbibe the Gita, you can no longer say "whats it to me? that person will face his karma for his misdeeds",
+
Remember, in the Prashtanatrayi of Upanishads, Brahmasutras, and Gita, Gita is the actionable part. It is technology. It is a call to action. If you truly imbibe the Gita, you can no longer say "whats it to me? that person will face his karma for his misdeeds",
+
+
You can no longer be a passive observer of injustice and crime. Remember, Krishna is God himself. He could have annihilated the entire Kaurava army by simply making a sankalpa, without lifting a finger. But still he spent time and efforts, and 700 verses of the Gita,
+
You can no longer be a passive observer of injustice and crime. Remember, Krishna is God himself. He could have annihilated the entire Kaurava army by simply making a sankalpa, without lifting a finger. But still he spent time and efforts, and 700 verses of the Gita,
+
+
to convince Arjuna to fight. Gita asks us to indulge in the right action, it is not a book to be used for meditation. It is a book for action, for experience, for anubhuti.
Another point that is painfully obvious now to those of us who can honestly introspect,
+
to convince Arjuna to fight. Gita asks us to indulge in the right action, it is not a book to be used for meditation. It is a book for action, for experience, for anubhuti.
Another point that is painfully obvious now to those of us who can honestly introspect,
+
+
Arjuna's lofty proclamations that "they are doing evil, but we know better, so lets surrender", are coming from a place of fear, of cowardice. Our turning a blind eye to what is happening in society is also out of cowardice. We may cloak it in whichever intellectual argument+
Arjuna's lofty proclamations that "they are doing evil, but we know better, so lets surrender", are coming from a place of fear, of cowardice. Our turning a blind eye to what is happening in society is also out of cowardice. We may cloak it in whichever intellectual argument+
+
or philosophy to assuage our ego, but it doesnt change the fact, that inaction stems of fear, ignorance, cowardice, and not from faith, strength, or purpose. As your read the Gita, dont read it like a book, treat it as an instruction manual for life.
+
or philosophy to assuage our ego, but it doesnt change the fact, that inaction stems of fear, ignorance, cowardice, and not from faith, strength, or purpose. As your read the Gita, dont read it like a book, treat it as an instruction manual for life.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.40
कुलक्षये प्रणश्यन्ति कुलधर्मा: सनातना: |
धर्मे नष्टे कुलं कृत्स्नमधर्मोऽभिभवत्युत ||
From the destruction of lineage, traditional rituals carried on for long are extinguished. When rituals/ traditions are destroyed, adharma or inappropriate paths overcome the family.
+
कुलक्षये प्रणश्यन्ति कुलधर्मा: सनातना: |
धर्मे नष्टे कुलं कृत्स्नमधर्मोऽभिभवत्युत ||
From the destruction of lineage, traditional rituals carried on for long are extinguished. When rituals/ traditions are destroyed, adharma or inappropriate paths overcome the family.
+
+
From arguing that he is not interested in benefits that will accrue to him from winning the battle, Arjuna is now highlighting the side effects of the battle. No action can be judged as good or bad, simplistically speaking, based on just its direct impact. This is true.
+
From arguing that he is not interested in benefits that will accrue to him from winning the battle, Arjuna is now highlighting the side effects of the battle. No action can be judged as good or bad, simplistically speaking, based on just its direct impact. This is true.
+
+
Otherwise doing black magic/ other immoral methods to destroy your enemies which provides direct benefits to you would be judged as a 'good' action. But its not, because its side effects are no beneficial to you, or society.
+
Otherwise doing black magic/ other immoral methods to destroy your enemies which provides direct benefits to you would be judged as a 'good' action. But its not, because its side effects are no beneficial to you, or society.
+
+
What Arjuna said makes a lot of sense as well. He is saying, if elders are taken out of the equation, or for some reason elders in their ignorance, laziness, ego, or quest to be progressive, do not pass on the sanatana traditions to their children, then the lineage itself
+
What Arjuna said makes a lot of sense as well. He is saying, if elders are taken out of the equation, or for some reason elders in their ignorance, laziness, ego, or quest to be progressive, do not pass on the sanatana traditions to their children, then the lineage itself
+
+
is that the risk of being destroyed or led down the path of adharma. Dharma is incorrectly translated by many authors as "religion". Dharma comes from the root "Dh" which means to hold, support, or sustain.Dh-arti. Dh-arna etc. What sustains is Dharma, what decays is adharma.
+
is that the risk of being destroyed or led down the path of adharma. Dharma is incorrectly translated by many authors as "religion". Dharma comes from the root "Dh" which means to hold, support, or sustain.Dh-arti. Dh-arna etc. What sustains is Dharma, what decays is adharma.
+
+
And do we not see this happening in society around us today? How many of those reading do something for their pitrus? How many light a lamp in front of their Devghar in the evening? Heck, how many have a devghar at all!?
Arjuna makes great points in the follow on shlokas too
+
And do we not see this happening in society around us today? How many of those reading do something for their pitrus? How many light a lamp in front of their Devghar in the evening? Heck, how many have a devghar at all!?
Arjuna makes great points in the follow on shlokas too
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
+1.41
अधर्माभिभवात्कृष्ण प्रदुष्यन्ति कुलस्त्रिय: |
स्त्रीषु दुष्टासु वार्ष्णेय जायते वर्णसङ्कर: ||
+
अधर्माभिभवात्कृष्ण प्रदुष्यन्ति कुलस्त्रिय: |
स्त्रीषु दुष्टासु वार्ष्णेय जायते वर्णसङ्कर: ||
+
+
O Krishna, when adharma overcomes (literal translation of Abhibhava is rape), the women of the lineage become corrupted. O descendant of Vrishnis, when women are corrupted, progeny from mixture of Varnas is born.
+
O Krishna, when adharma overcomes (literal translation of Abhibhava is rape), the women of the lineage become corrupted. O descendant of Vrishnis, when women are corrupted, progeny from mixture of Varnas is born.
+
+
I see many authors feel uncomfortable when translating this verse from the Gita. Primarily because it talks of women, and mixture of varnas, which many people confuse with caste.
+
I see many authors feel uncomfortable when translating this verse from the Gita. Primarily because it talks of women, and mixture of varnas, which many people confuse with caste.
+
+
Few things to remember. This verse is posed by Arjuna, and not Krishna. This is Arjuna's understanding of how things will go downhill, not God's. Secondly, he is right in placing so much importance on women for the purposes of sustenance of dharma.
+
Few things to remember. This verse is posed by Arjuna, and not Krishna. This is Arjuna's understanding of how things will go downhill, not God's. Secondly, he is right in placing so much importance on women for the purposes of sustenance of dharma.
+
+
In effect, he is saying "the hand that rocks the cradle, rules the world", which I guess is the politically correct way of saying the same shloka.
Remember, when the Devas felt helpless to uphold dharma, they went to the Divine mother to battle Rakshasas for 9 nights.
+
In effect, he is saying "the hand that rocks the cradle, rules the world", which I guess is the politically correct way of saying the same shloka.
Remember, when the Devas felt helpless to uphold dharma, they went to the Divine mother to battle Rakshasas for 9 nights.
+
+
As such, the theme of a 'woman' being the ultimate obstacle for adharma to overcome is well accepted within dharma.
He is saying, when men dont follow dharma, why will women? And it is when women dont follow it, intermingling of varnas will happen, leading to progeny...
+
As such, the theme of a 'woman' being the ultimate obstacle for adharma to overcome is well accepted within dharma.
He is saying, when men dont follow dharma, why will women? And it is when women dont follow it, intermingling of varnas will happen, leading to progeny...
+
+
...that will grow up without a clear path for themselves, and contribute to further instability for themselves, and society (hence, adharma).
This verse does not reference caste at all, because if it was caste, Arjuna would have said "Jaati". Also it is important to...
+
...that will grow up without a clear path for themselves, and contribute to further instability for themselves, and society (hence, adharma).
This verse does not reference caste at all, because if it was caste, Arjuna would have said "Jaati". Also it is important to...
+
+
...note that Arjuna is speaking with Krishna. Krishna is brought up a cowherd, from a Yadava family. It is impossible that Arjuna would try to through caste status in the face of Krishna though this verse while still seeking guidance!
+
...note that Arjuna is speaking with Krishna. Krishna is brought up a cowherd, from a Yadava family. It is impossible that Arjuna would try to through caste status in the face of Krishna though this verse while still seeking guidance!
+
+
So in what sense does Arjuna use the word "varna"? I think he means it in the sense of 'appropriateness". He senses that children brought up in families that have no rooting, no stability, will be prone to choosing an partner who is inappropriate for them, and also
+
So in what sense does Arjuna use the word "varna"? I think he means it in the sense of 'appropriateness". He senses that children brought up in families that have no rooting, no stability, will be prone to choosing an partner who is inappropriate for them, and also
+
+
similarly unstable. This will lead to progeny that is caught up in this vicious cycle, and the entire lineage will spiral downwards.
Finally, while Arjuna only mentions women in this verse it is obvious that he means men as well. Why? Because he mentions inappropriate...
+
similarly unstable. This will lead to progeny that is caught up in this vicious cycle, and the entire lineage will spiral downwards.
Finally, while Arjuna only mentions women in this verse it is obvious that he means men as well. Why? Because he mentions inappropriate...
+
+
...mixtures producing progeny. Since only a male and female couple will produce progeny en masse, it is obvious that Arjuna considered even males in that verse.
By why the focus on women then? As I mentioned earlier, "the hand that rocks...".
+
...mixtures producing progeny. Since only a male and female couple will produce progeny en masse, it is obvious that Arjuna considered even males in that verse.
By why the focus on women then? As I mentioned earlier, "the hand that rocks...".
+
+
Even today you will see religious conversion attempts largely targeting women, whether by force or by guile. It is thus well accepted that women are the real bulwark of dharma. Just as Duryodhana singled out Bhima as his enemy in the starting verses,
+
Even today you will see religious conversion attempts largely targeting women, whether by force or by guile. It is thus well accepted that women are the real bulwark of dharma. Just as Duryodhana singled out Bhima as his enemy in the starting verses,
+
+
Arjuna identifies dharmic women, as the biggest enemy of adharma.
Arjuna addresses Krishna as Varshaneya, to remind him of his lineage, when he was highlighting problems to lineages due to the war.
+
Arjuna identifies dharmic women, as the biggest enemy of adharma.
Arjuna addresses Krishna as Varshaneya, to remind him of his lineage, when he was highlighting problems to lineages due to the war.
+
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
Now on to the next shloka.
+
