We have upgraded Pariprashnena! Login is done with email OR username + usual password now. Any problem or doubt please email pariprashnena@gmail.com
Bhagavad-gita
  • onkar
    Hare Krishna, Is there any scientific proof (except Faith on disciplic succession systems) that the bhagavad gita
    which we have today containing 700 verses(approx) is the same gita which was written by Srila Vyasa or spoken by Krishna to Arjuna.

    OR in other words

    How can we prove to scientists with the help of science, archaelogy or history that BG (700 verses) and SB (18,000 verses) which we have today are the same as written by Srila Vyasa and that there are no interpolations in them?
  • radhav
    Sorry don't have an answer - but only more questions..

    1) one of the English translation of Tattva Sandarba claims that SB does not have exact 18,000 verses - but more like 14k verses - if you add all the "uvacha" words you will get 18K.
    2) I have also wondered who wrote the first verse of SB ? Only in the fourth verse, Saunuka Rishi gets introduced.... "faith" based answer is that - it does not matter. But based on this article http://connect.krishna.com/node/247 which is based on Bhati Vinode Takur's Krishna Samhita, the version of SB we have was completed around 900 AD (several thousand years after the incident took place) !!! I have read that Ramanujacharya did not write much about SB (does not mean that he was not exposed to it) but Madhvacharya who appeared few hundred years after Ramanujacharya wrote about SB.
  • VEDAVEDA
    BG variations: http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/encyclopedia/sastras-studies1.htm#5

    The argument that SB is post-Ramanuja fails.

    http://veda.harekrsna.cz/library/Antiquity_of_Bhagavatam_MA_thesis_summary.zip

    Recently I found two SB verses (10.47.7-8) quoted (though not verbatim) in Nitisastra (2.17-18). SB is also mentioned in Ns 9.11. Canakya lived in 350-275 BCE.
  • radhav
    >The argument that SB is post-Ramanuja fails

    the 900 AD date is from Krishna.com article which is supposed to be based on Krishna samhita by Bhakti Vinode Takur.

    I guess the 900 AD is the "first print" (rather palm leaf scribed) version and pior to that there were many "audio releases" by 4 kumaras and Narad Muni!!

    I think this stuff is beyond my comprehension and will leave to th experts to arugue ...
  • Kula-pavana
    onkar:

    How can we prove to scientists with the help of science, archaelogy or history that BG (700 verses) and SB (18,000 verses) which we have today are the same as written by Srila Vyasa and that there are no interpolations in them?


    Even if we proved scientifically that the current version of the Gita is indeed 5000 years old, you would still be lacking a proof that these verses exactly reflect conversation which took place between Krsna and Arjuna, and even more importantly, that Krsna is indeed the Supreme Personality of Godhead and thus His words are the Absolute Truth.

    So... what is a doubting bhakta to do? It is rather simple... you study the Gita we have today, apply it's instructions in your life - and OBSERVE THE RESULTS. This is the ultimate proof of validity - effects you can observe. Everything else can be faked. Religions that make you wait for their results untill AFTER you die are basically CHEATING. Remember that and nobody will be able to fool you for very long.
  • Baker
    Kula-pavana:
    So... what is a doubting bhakta to do? It is rather simple... you study the Gita we have today, apply it's instructions in your life - and OBSERVE THE RESULTS. This is the ultimate proof of validity - effects you can observe.


    But how can one know, with any certainty, that the observed effects indeed came from applying those instructions? This is still empiricism, it is still claiming that one's mind and experience/practice are sufficient to adequately understand causation. Which puts us right back into the scientists' camp, with the same old doubts and fears that we might actually be totally wrong.
  • Kula-pavana
    Baker:

    But how can one know, with any certainty, that the observed effects indeed came from applying those instructions? This is still empiricism, it is still claiming that one's mind and experience/practice are sufficient to adequately understand causation.


    At least in my own experience, when it happens, you know exactly the cause and effect. And to what else can you attribute such changes? Weather? Normal aging process? Nonsense... specific changes take place due to specific practices. And on top of that you have experieces of people who took up this process over the last 5000 years.
  • Baker
    Kula-pavana:
    At least in my own experience, when it happens, you know exactly the cause and effect.


    I couldn't relate.[br]


    [br]
    And to what else can you attribute such changes? Weather? Normal aging process?


    Karma, influence of other beings, accident ...[br]


    [br]
    Nonsense... specific changes take place due to specific practices. And on top of that you have experieces of people who took up this process over the last 5000 years.


    Oh well. I suppose in the end it all comes down to why one wants to be right, about anything, or about some specific case of causation. Trying to prove oneself to someone who just doesn't care about one is ... impossible.
  • Kyros
    Baker:
    [quote]
    Kula-pavana:
    So... what is a doubting bhakta to do? It is rather simple... you study the Gita we have today, apply it's instructions in your life - and OBSERVE THE RESULTS. This is the ultimate proof of validity - effects you can observe.


    But how can one know, with any certainty, that the observed effects indeed came from applying those instructions? This is still empiricism, it is still claiming that one's mind and experience/practice are sufficient to adequately understand causation. Which puts us right back into the scientists' camp, with the same old doubts and fears that we might actually be totally wrong.[/quote]
    These are the qualities you develop if you put to practice the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita.
    [br]
    [br]
    BG 12.13-14: One who is not envious but is a kind friend to all living entities, who does not think himself a proprietor and is free from false ego, who is equal in both happiness and distress, who is tolerant, always satisfied, self-controlled, and engaged in devotional service with determination, his mind and intelligence fixed on Me — such a devotee of Mine is very dear to Me.
    [br]
    [br]
    BG 12.15: He for whom no one is put into difficulty and who is not disturbed by anyone, who is equipoised in happiness and distress, fear and anxiety, is very dear to Me.
    [br]
    [br]
    BG 12.16: My devotee who is not dependent on the ordinary course of activities, who is pure, expert, without cares, free from all pains, and not striving for some result, is very dear to Me.
    [br]
    [br]
    BG 12.17: One who neither rejoices nor grieves, who neither laments nor desires, and who renounces both auspicious and inauspicious things — such a devotee is very dear to Me.
    [br]
    [br]
    BG 12.18-19: One who is equal to friends and enemies, who is equipoised in honor and dishonor, heat and cold, happiness and distress, fame and infamy, who is always free from contaminating association, always silent and satisfied with anything, who doesn't care for any residence, who is fixed in knowledge and who is engaged in devotional service — such a person is very dear to Me.
  • Kula-pavana
    Baker:
    I suppose in the end it all comes down to why one wants to be right, about anything, or about some specific case of causation. Trying to prove oneself to someone who just doesn't care about one is ... impossible.


    It is not about trying to prove anything to someone else. It is all about proving something to yourself. I came to Krsna consciousness over 30 years ago from really serious yoga practice. I practiced yoga for several years, gradually experiencing the effects of my practices. It took patience, time, and self discipline, but the effects were very tangible and undeniable. With bhakti-yoga it was no different.
  • VEDAVEDA
    > Which puts us right back into the scientists' camp, with the same old doubts and fears that we might actually be totally wrong.

    Yet even scientists don't stop their experiments but constantly try to improve them, eliminating outside factors as far as possible. That's the idea of determination, drdha vrata. And they get some results, otherwise they wouldn't get support.
  • Baker
    Kyros:
    [quote]
    These are the qualities you develop if you put to practice the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita.
    [br]/.../[br]


    But who is the authority on distinguishing whether someone really is like that or not?[br]

    [br]Different people often have different ideas about what "kind friend to all living entities" is, for example. They may witness the same event, the same behavior, and one says it was an act of kindness, another it was cruelty. [br]
    So who is right?[br]


    [br]

    Kula-pavana:

    It is not about trying to prove anything to someone else. It is all about proving something to yourself. I came to Krsna consciousness over 30 years ago from really serious yoga practice. I practiced yoga for several years, gradually experiencing the effects of my practices. It took patience, time, and self discipline, but the effects were very tangible and undeniable. With bhakti-yoga it was no different.


    Have you ever encountered any opposition from the devotees, who claimed that what you experienced was wrong, illusiory, who told you you have no clue what you're doing and that what you think is bhakti actually is not bhakti, just your wishful thinking?
  • Baker
    VEDA:

    Yet even scientists don't stop their experiments but constantly try to improve them, eliminating outside factors as far as possible. That's the idea of determination, drdha vrata. And they get some results, otherwise they wouldn't get support.


    Sure. But what keeps the scientists going, what do they hope to achieve?
  • VEDAVEDA
    For some it's primarily a quest for knowledge, for others just money and prestige. But the point here is to go on, trying for one's best.
  • Kula-pavana
    Baker:

    Have you ever encountered any opposition from the devotees, who claimed that what you experienced was wrong, illusiory, who told you you have no clue what you're doing and that what you think is bhakti actually is not bhakti, just your wishful thinking?


    Not really. But even if I did, why should I trust them more than I trust myself?
  • Baker
    Kula-pavana:

    Not really. But even if I did, why should I trust them more than I trust myself?


    Because in order to make progress in Krishna consciousness, one needs to please devotees.
  • Baker
    VEDA:
    But the point here is to go on, trying for one's best.


    But what is that "one's best"?
  • Kula-pavana
    Baker:
    [quote]
    Kula-pavana:

    Not really. But even if I did, why should I trust them more than I trust myself?


    Because in order to make progress in Krishna consciousness, one needs to please devotees.[/quote]

    Pleasing the devotees is one thing, doing something you perceive as wrong is another. You may politely nod when they tell you things you do not believe in. That should please most of them.
  • Baker
    Kula-pavana:
    Pleasing the devotees is one thing, doing something you perceive as wrong is another. You may politely nod when they tell you things you do not believe in.


    But that would be lying, would it not? And every lie sooner or later becomes revealed. Moreover, if I don't believe everything they say, this means I do not fit in - and if I do not fit, then I should not be there, should I?
  • Kula-pavana
    Baker:
    [quote]
    Kula-pavana:
    Pleasing the devotees is one thing, doing something you perceive as wrong is another. You may politely nod when they tell you things you do not believe in.


    But that would be lying, would it not? And every lie sooner or later becomes revealed. Moreover, if I don't believe everything they say, this means I do not fit in - and if I do not fit, then I should not be there, should I?[/quote]

    That nodding simply means: I appreciate your concern.
    You should not believe automatically in everything people tell you. Whether you belong somewhere simply depends on your desires. Devotees are not perfect, give them a break.
  • Kyros
    Baker:
    [quote]
    Kyros:

    These are the qualities you develop if you put to practice the teachings of the Bhagavad Gita.
    [br]/.../[br]


    But who is the authority on distinguishing whether someone really is like that or not?[br]

    [br]Different people often have different ideas about what "kind friend to all living entities" is, for example. They may witness the same event, the same behavior, and one says it was an act of kindness, another it was cruelty. [br]
    So who is right?[br][/quote]
    [br]
    The qualified person is right.
  • Baker
    Kyros:
    The qualified person is right.


    But how does one know then, how can one see in oneself whether one has developed any positive qualities (mentioned earlier) - if one is not qualified?

    [br]Suppose a person practices in accordance with scriptural instructions (at least she thinks she is), and she thinks she has become friendlier / or she thinks she has become more cruel.[br]
    How can she tell whether her acting on the instructions is bearing any fruit or not, given that she is not qualified?
  • Baker
    Kula-pavana:
    You should not believe automatically in everything people tell you.


    But many take offence if I don't![br]


    [br]
    Whether you belong somewhere simply depends on your desires.


    But my desires may be wrong ...[br]
    I want to do the right thing, whatever it is. But when it comes to religion, some things that are said to be "right" just seem wrong, repugnant or impossible to do for me. I try to adjust my desires accordingly, it usually involves a lot of teeth-gritting, but often, I just end up confused and frustrated.
  • dweller-in-peace
    >How can she tell whether her acting on the instructions is bearing any fruit or not, given that she is not qualified?

    When a thirsty person finds water, she drinks that water and her thirst is satisfied, she need not to ask others whether her drinking of water is bearing any fruit or not. The question is how intense the thirst is?
  • Baker
    dweller-in-peace:
    >How can she tell whether her acting on the instructions is bearing any fruit or not, given that she is not qualified?

    When a thirsty person finds water, she drinks that water and her thirst is satisfied, she need not to ask others whether her drinking of water is bearing any fruit or not. The question is how intense the thirst is?


    I hear such comparisons often, but I seem to be unable to relate to even the visceral ones. When I am hungry, thirsty, or in pain, even though I may eat, drink or take care of the injury, I don't really feel any satisfaction or relief. I mean, I notice that the hunger, thirst or pain go away, but I still feel dissatisfied. Sometimes, I don't even eat or drink, because I suspect it is not really going to make anything better anyway, so why bother with it.[br]

    [br]I know I am supposed to feel satisfied by the chanting, the prasadam, the associacion, and so on - but I don't. To me, the whole situation is not that much different from the one where some people expected me to eat meat, drink coffe etc. and do "all the things that normal people do" and to feel satisfied by that - but I didn't. I feel like I am a bottomless abyss of dissatisfaction.
  • dweller-in-peace
    >I know I am supposed to feel satisfied by the chanting, the prasadam, the associacion, and so on - but I don't.
    >I feel like I am a bottomless abyss of dissatisfaction.

    It could be because of your previous practice of Budhism and Sunyavada. It is easy to write on a blank slate as compare to a slate on which different writings are there. Then all the tangles have to be sorted individually.

    A spiritual guide/master can help.
  • Baker
    dweller-in-peace:
    It is easy to write on a blank slate as compare to a slate on which different writings are there.


    How do you mean this?[br]

    [br]That people who have the right attitude to Krishna consciousness are like blank slates on which it is easy to write - hence they are satisifed by the activities of KC?[br]

    [br]And I know there are those mainstream ideas about Buddhism being voidist and all that - but in my experience, this is not accurate, nor was it what I practiced. There were basically two points: 1. things such as the body, emotions, perceptions are not the self, 2. there are things one should not speculate about, the self being one of them (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.077.than.html). In the mainstream reception of Buddhism, this seems to be interpreted to mean there is no self at all; but Buddhist schools themselves do not agree over this (in fact, there is a lot of fighting going about this).
  • VEDAVEDA
    > But what is that "one's best"?

    Determined effort guided by sincerity and devotion. It's measure varies. When building bridge to Lanka, monkeys were carrying huge boulders, while one spider was carrying a tiny sand grain. Sri Rama noticed him and was pleased.
  • dweller-in-peace
    >That people who have the right attitude to Krishna consciousness are like blank slates on which it is easy to write - hence they are satisifed by the activities of KC?

    Each individual is unique and have their own challenges to advance in krsna consciousness. This is the role of Guru to find out what are the challenges disciple is facing and all his effort is to bring her closer to Krsna.

    Material world is ocean of nesciance. Other shore is spiritual world. But the ocean needs to be crossed. You can have scriptures but they are just like a boat. One can try to cross the ocean on their own in the boat of scriptures. But that will be risky. Guru is the expert boatman who knows about both the shores and this ocean as well. Journey can be much smoother if one can find the right boatman.
  • Baker
    But one has to qualify to be eligible to get the advice of a spiritual master. I don't know how to qualify for that - I don't know how to manage to regularly chant sixteen rounds etc. without burning out from the stress of gritting my teeth. The devotees keep telling me to "just grit my teeth and bear it", to "just do it", to "just beat my mind into submission" - but I can't do that for long.

    Or they tell me it's all about my free will and my desire - but that doesn't really mean anything to me, it just opens up a heap of questions.
  • VEDAVEDA
    While chanting teeth normally don't touch.
  • portnoyportnoy
    Interestingly Pradyumna once explained to me that the diacritic mark under the "n" in Krsna signifies that it is not a "dental" but a "palatal"; i.e. the tongue does not touch the back of the upper teeth when vibrating the "na" but rather the tongue curls somewhat and touches the upper palate.
  • dweller-in-peace
    >But one has to qualify to be eligible to get the advice of a spiritual master.

    One need not to be qualified to get advice or to follow the path of krsna consciousness. But if you become Krsna conscious, you will become qualified. So to be qualified is not the first condition, it is the end result.
  • dweller-in-peace
    >I don't know how to qualify for that

    Bhakti is unconditional. To be qualified is not a pre-requiremetnt but a consequence. Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu has declared:

    "O my Lord, Your holy name alone can render all benediction to living beings, and thus You have hundreds and millions of names, like Krsna and Govinda. In these transcendental names You have invested all Your transcendental energies. There are not even hard and fast rules for chanting these names."
  • My dear Bhaktine baker please accept my kind wishes for your devotional progress.The process of understanding Kṛṣṇa and his bhagavad gita, its origins and its unique authenticity is easily acheived by sevonmukha — by rendering service to krishna or his devotee..
    Sevonmukhe hi jihvādau. Realization of the validity of krishna and his devotional service is possible by rendering service, beginning with the tongue. The tongue has two functions — to vibrate and to taste. So if one repeatedly hears and vibrates the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra and tastes prasāda, food offered to Kṛṣṇa, by this very simple method one will realize Vāsudeva, and the sublime authentic nature of bhagavad gita and its prime speaker lord sri Kṛṣṇa.
    Kṛṣṇa will reveal Himself to you personally and his relevance for our daily lives with naturally manifest.
    Naturally and intrinsically also krishna is gifted very easily ,generally from a senior devotee to an inexperienced bhaktine or bhakta in the form of freshly cooked prasdam.
    This ancient and sublime sharing process is wonderfully shared and kept sacred by those who purely prepare ,cook and offer their ''offerings'' called bhoga to krishna in the form of the diety...or krishna and his servant ....the spiritual master situated within the mind and heart.
    What appears to be your problem,in my humble opinion is that you need to receive the mercy of his sincere preaching servant.Personally ....that means you need to seek out female or male devotees who can and want to share krishna with you.They should be enthusiastic to take prasadam and never tire from krishna katha and his sweet glories!....your servant .
  • borokrsnadasa
    This is not strictly logical. In other words if you take apart something using your logic, it will not work as it supposed to do, one needs to understand Gita in the wholeness of cultural and yogic framework, not based on limited logic or limited experience. And that included archeological and numerical consideration.
  • Baker
    dweller-in-peace:
    >But one has to qualify to be eligible to get the advice of a spiritual master.

    One need not to be qualified to get advice or to follow the path of krsna consciousness. But if you become Krsna conscious, you will become qualified. So to be qualified is not the first condition, it is the end result.


    That hasn't been my experience. One of my first impressions at the nama-hatta was that I would need to be sure about all kinds of things before going there would make for a meaningful experience.[br]

    [br]And to get on topic - the scientists seeking proofs about the historicity of the scriptures would likely experience similar quandaries as myself.
  • maah!maah!
    Hare Krishna. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

    Srimad Bhagavad Gita As It Is, 1972 edition, by His Divine Grace A C Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada is not just one of many English translations of a recorded historical discussion from 5,000 years ago, it is divine medicine for curing the conditioned soul of false identification with the material body, mind and world and removing his causeless unwillingless to devote himself to the transcendental service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Sri Krishna.

    Srila Prabhupada, Introduction Bhagavad Gita As It: "Just what is the Bhagavad-gita? The purpose of Bhagavad-gita is to deliver mankind from the nescience of material existence. Every man is in difficulty in so many ways, as Arjuna also was in difficulty in having to fight the Battle of Kuruksetra. Arjuna surrendered unto Sri Krsna, and consequently this Bhagavad-gita was spoken. Not only Arjuna, but every one of us is full of anxieties because of this material existence. Our very existence is in the atmosphere of nonexistence. Actually we are not meant to be threatened by nonexistence. Our existence is eternal. But somehow or other we are put into asat. Asat refers to that which does not exist."

    Definition of Science:
    Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is, in its broadest sense, any systematic knowledge-base or prescriptive practice that is capable of resulting in a prediction or predictable type of outcome. In this sense, science may refer to a highly skilled technique or practice. quoted: Wikipedia

    The Science within Srimad Bhagavad Gita As It Is:
    Srila Prabhupada: "We are preaching Krishna consciousness. That is on the basis of Bhagavad-gita. So the beginning of Bhagavad-gita is the teaching of transmigration of the soul. Dehino 'smin yatha dehe kaumaram yauvanam jara, tatha dehantara-praptih [Bg. 2.13]. So that is our first concern, dehantara-praptih. This body will not exist, and we have to accept another body. Krishna says, dehantara-praptih, "another body." Now, there are 8,400,000 different types of body. Which body I am going to accept, there is no education. So I am kept in darkness. So what is the value of my education?

    It is science. Tatha dehantara-praptih [Bg. 2.13]—that is applicable both for Hindu, Muslim, Christian, everyone. Just like a Hindu child and a Muslim child. Does it mean that Hindu child will not grow to become young man? Only the Muslim will grow? The dehantara-praptih—a child becomes a boy—that is equally applicable to the Hindus, to the Muslim, to the Christian, to everyone."

    The scientific outcome of Srimad Bhagavad Gita As It Is:
    If you look at the result of hundreds of thousands of souls who read Srimad Bhagavad Gita As It Is regularly and with faith, it becomes evident that this supremely holy ancient discourse, presented again by Sri Krishna Himself through His empowered devotee, Yuga Dharma Acarya His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada, has indeed proven to do what it intends to do-dispell material bodily identification and inspire surrender unto the lotus feet of Sri Krishna, which is the last instruction of Srimad Bhagavad Gita itself. Chapter 18, Verse 66. "Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reaction. Do not fear."

    Srila Prabhupada, Introduction Bhagavad Gita As It Is:
    "Bhagavad-gita is also known as Gitopanisad. It is the essence of Vedic knowledge and one of the most important Upanisads in Vedic literature. Of course there are many commentaries in English on the Bhagavad-gita, and one may question the necessity for another one. This present edition can be explained in the following way. Recently an American lady asked me to recommend an English translation of Bhagavad-gita. Of course in America there are so many editions of Bhagavad-gita available in English, but as far as I have seen, not only in America but also in India, none of them can be strictly said to be authoritative because in almost every one of them the commentator has expressed his own opinions without touching the spirit of Bhagavad-gita as it is.The spirit of Bhagavad-gita is mentioned in Bhagavad-gita itself. It is just like this: If we want to take a particular medicine, then we have to follow the directions written on the label. We cannot take the medicine according to our own whim or the direction of a friend. It must be taken according to the directions on the label or the directions given by a physician. Similarly, Bhagavad-gita should be taken or accepted as it is directed by the speaker Himself. The speaker of Bhagavad-gita is Lord Sri Krsna. He is mentioned on every page of Bhagavad-gita as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Bhagavan."
Add a Comment

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

In this Discussion