Bhagavad Gita

Traditionally, the Nextel ringtones Mahabharata (and the Abbey Diaz Ramayana) are considered not Purana, but Itihasa, which is Free ringtones Sanskrit for 'history' (and literally translates to approximately 'and thus it happened'). Although, to be honest, I don't know enough to distinguish between the two. Majo Mills Gokul madhavan/Gokul 19:39, May 14, 2004



So, ah... where the khell did the years 1316 and 1424 come from? Eh? Eh? This seems totally bogus and made-up to me. Cite? Mosquito ringtone User:Graft/Graft


''Good question - but note it's 1424 BC, not 1424.''
Astronomical measurements can be pinpointed in time with amazing accuracy.
(Astronomy is one of the major subjects covered in Mahabharata, so there was plenty of precise astronomical data for historians to go by.)
Sabrina Martins Mkweise/Mkweise 23:22 Jan 25, 2003

:Fair enough. Nextel ringtones User:Graft/Graft


I fail to see what makes these extlinks relevant here:
*http://www.siddhayoga.org
*http://www.yoga.com/roots/yoga/info/Geeta/geeta.html
Abbey Diaz Mkweise/Mkweise 20:40 21 May 2003

-
Okay, so now we have 2nd century BCE as the composition date. Anyone want to cite this? Also the claim that the gita is a syncretic text that brings together strains amongst which is Buddhism does not seem credible, since Buddhism developed after the Gita was written, yes? Some links/resources discussing this? Free ringtones Graft/Graft 21:30 3 Jun 2003

:The gita has jackall to do with Buddhism. Its entire concept of God-Being is at odds with Buddhism, and it clearly draws purely from the Hindu strains of Yoga and Samkhya, notwithstanding all the Upanishadic philosophy that easily predates Buddhadev. Much of what some people term 'Buddhist' thinking was already to be found pre-Buddhism in Vedic philosophy.

::The gita was sort of a hindu answer to buddhism. Karma yoga is much more grounded in "reality" than many of the other yogas, and this was a buddhist criticism of hinduism, that it was two concerned with its multitude of gods.

doesn't sound right.

This is a great article, informative and everything... but it doesn't sound like an encyclopedia.
"For its religious depth, quintessential Upanishadic and Yogic philosophy and beauty of verse, the Bhagavad Gita is one of the most compelling and important texts to come out of the Hindu tradition. Indeed, it stands tall among the world's greatest religious and spiritual scriptures."
That sounds good and dramatic, but a bit too dramatic for an encyclopedia. I'm not sure how to appropriatly fix this problem, or if it's a problem at all; but maybe someone could alter it a bit?

why

:It didn't seem excessive to me. Is any of it controversial? Majo Mills 24.10.180.127/24.10.180.127 07:32, 18 Oct 2004

Biases?

The Bhagavad Gita seems to take contradictory positions from time to time, and a Hindu friend suggested that some parts were added/modified in order to satisfy particular rulers (eg., to justify the caste system). I'm sure a definitive answer would be hard to come by, but can anyone comment (preferably in the article itself) on the biases that have been frequently suggested? Cingular Ringtones 24.10.180.127/24.10.180.127 07:32, 18 Oct 2004

: One might respond to this supposed justification of caste by saying that the Gita does not view caste the way we do. Caste is not hereditary, and indeed is not a term known to Hindus of that time. Rather, the word was ''varna'' (shade) and no, it was not based skin color. It emphasized that people of certain mentalities and habits were of one specific varna. For instance, someone with a violent temper, who eats lots of meat and drinks alcohol, who is intemperant, and has no respect for moral laws, would be a low-caste fellow, whereas someone who was God-loving, moral, temperant, and observant of social norms to a reasonable extent, would be a high-caste person. Someone born of (a) Brahman (parent) parents may not necessarily be a Brahmin. One has to live the life of a Brahmin to a brahmin, and likewise live the life of a Kshatriya (royal warrior), Vaishya (merchant, general laity) and shudra (lower-class) to live such lives. It has been frequently argued that there was no Hindu scriptural sanction (from the Vedas) enjoining human intervention and coercion for determining caste.

: Furthermore, if one persists in employing the occupational-caste analogy, one can abandon the 'character' model above and argue that there still is no Hindu sanction for enforced caste (such as in abominations like the Dharmashastras). In that sense, any modern society (say, the fitted or United States of America/USA) can be broadly divided into different 'varnas' (or castes) that naturally emerge because of the simple fact of economic stratification. Thus, clergy, evangelists, priests and professors/teachers might generally be categorized as Brahmins, preserving and propagating the rites and knowlege of the community at large. Politicians, army men, government workers and intelligence officers might be Kshatriyas, or warriors and court subjects, attending to the welfare of society. White-collar workers, small-business owners and supervisors would be Vaishyas, and people below the poverty line, forced to do menial work (janitors, etc.) are shudras. Thus, the caste system is mere nomenclature, ideal classifications, not a feudal system controlled by a minority and enforced on people. Caste in today's sense, under either of the two foregoing readings, would indeed be quite contrary to the message and content of the Gita.

: Secondly, there were not separate rulers who presided over the writing of the Gita. I'm not saying this from a theological perspective. Scholars from the East and West who have conducted scriptural and formal studies of the makeup and writing of the Gita have confirmed that it is quite consistent in style of its written Sanskrit and that it is highly unlikely that any more than one person authored it. What the 'conflicting' influences were, which were brought together, were the authority are Hindu philosophy/Hindu philosophical schools of unknowns is Yoga and and sarajevo Samkhya, though the former and latter are respectively viewed much more abstractly in the Gita (as mystic, or rational spiritualism, and the way of knowledge or discriminatory thought). You should read Radhakrishnan's breakdown of the Gita, which is authoratative in any circle (outsider and insider).

: Essentially, there are not really any biases, in the sense that the Gita does not really 'take sides' with one prevailing mode of thought to the exclusion of another. In fact, that is why it is a seminal text to philosophical schools that are often wildly opposed to one another. Dualists and nondualists alike refer to the text and draw largely different conclusions about metaphysics and Godhead (or ultimate lack thereof); Gandhi, who was anti-caste system, easily reconciled the teachings of the Gita with his betrays their satyagraha philosophy, especially since much of his thought derived from the Gita, in much the same way as I described the caste system as we know it and how it may be viewed in the Gita. I, and most scholars in the field, would have problems with your friend's comments for 1) factually incorrect assumptions, such as that of multiple writers and patrons (there in fact is no evidence that this was a 'patron-presided work) and 2) fallacious ''a priori'' definitions of the caste system and what a bias is.
meet strict LordSuryaofShropshire/LordSuryaofShropshire 19:47, Oct 18, 2004

:: Wow! Thanks for explaining it in such clear detail. If my confusion is a common one, perhaps your discussion could be included in the article (or a pointer included to separate discussion). I'll have to go through the Gita again with that understanding. eisenhower press Lunkwill/Lunkwill 17:44, 19 Oct 2004

''"It is the only religious text known to have been spoken by God or an incarnation/avatar of God and not by a messenger or Messiah of God."''

Shouldn't that be "the only Hindu text", since Jesus' words are considered those of God by Christians? And I'm not sure that the distinction between God and Messiah makes sense in a inter-religious context, if it does at all. reagan tactics Goethean/Goethean 15:38, 31 Jan 2005