Is Arjuna a coward ?

namaste,

The dictionary definitions are:

coward = one who lacks courage to meet danger or difficulty.

courage = the quality of mind that enables one to encounter difficulties and

danger withfirmness or withou fear.

With these meanings, Swami's use of the word seems quite proper!

" enlightened self-interest, svadharma , leading to a cowardly act "

is like turning the language topsy-turvy![Do you REALLY mean this?]

Sanjaya's view ' kR^ipayaa parayaavishhTo ' [ overcome by compassion]

is in fact realised by Arjuna as ' kaarpaNyadoshha upahatasvabhaavaH '

[nature weakened by the taint of poverty of spirit] later on.

Regards,

s.

>Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy

>advaitin

>advaitin

> Is Arjuna a coward ?

>Tue, 15 Feb 2000 10:07:00 -0330 (NST)

>

>

>

>namaste.

>

>Swami Chinmayanandaji, in his commentary on BG 1.31 and BG 1.34

>(as presented by shri Madhava), attributes cowardice to Arjuna.

>

>

>

>

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

namaste.

Swami Chinmayanandaji, in his commentary on BG 1.31 and BG 1.34

(as presented by shri Madhava), attributes cowardice to Arjuna.

I like to pose a question here to members of the List "Is Arjuna

a coward?" based on his behaviour on the battle field at that stage?

As I understand, we call a person a coward if he runs away from duty

in order to protect himself, his own life, or lives on his own side,

so that under more favorable conditions (to him), he would not mind

pursuing the war. That is, enlightned self-interest (swArdham) leads

to a cowardly act. I am sure there are other ways in which cowardice

can be defined.

I did not get the impression, reading the BG verses till then or of

the war preparations until then, that Arjuna is a coward. Arjuna's

viShAda yoga has come about because he does not want to kill his

friends and relatives on the opposite side. That is what was stated

in the verses. That is not cowardice. What has aflicted Arjuna is

a delusion that what he is about to do (killing friends and relatives

on the opposite side) is a wrong thing to do. He is not covering up

his desire to run away from the battle field with a trumped up noble

cover of saying that he does not want to kill elders on the other side.

He genuinely felt that killing the elders on the opposite side is a

bad thing to do. His stated reasons and his genuine feelings are the

same. And we need Krishna's gItA lessons to point out to Arjuna and

to us that Arjuna's genuine feelings which Arjuna expressed, are wrong

and are based on wrong presumptions.

The reason I want to make this point is: Many of us, at various stages

in our lives, have faced circumstances similar to Arjuna where genuinely

we felt whether what we are doing is the right thing to do. Arjuna is

not cheating himself in expressing those views and we have not either,

when we faced similar doubts. On the other hand, a coward, as I see,

is cheating him/herself, not being honest to him/herself.

Any pro- and contray- points are appreciated.

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

------

arjuna is not a coward---but being overtaken by confusion has come

temporarily under cowardice---hence the lord also in the course of the

gita--repeatedly reminds him as "o savyasachino bull among men"

etc.etc...

arjuna's vishada is also termed as a yoga---meaning this is also a very

important step in moving towards the lord.......this comes to every sadhaka

in his sadhana and brings about self-surrender....what

arjuna experienced was the doubt that arises in a moderately advanced

soul....

bhima did not get this doubt...yudhistra was already highly advanced---this

is the doubt which must come to evry normal sincere man in course of

evolution and then.....religion begins for him--rgds--devendra

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Greetings Murthyji:

We also have several choices - we could call Arjuna a coward, courageous,

ignorant and even a Jnani. We can also develop intellectual frameworks to

justify each of those statements. However, we do not want to second guess Swami

Chinmayanandaji and let us gather the facts that support his contention.

First, Arjuna had ample of opportunities to express his opinion about the

consequences of the war before. He was coward to express to his opinion at the

right moment to the right people.

Second, Arjuna fought many wars and killed many and he was fully aware about the

pitfalls of war.

Finally, a warrior of Arjuna's calibre had no reason to show fear and grief on

the battle field. Arjuna, the role model of Pandava's army failied to fulfill

his responsibility when he threw the Kandip on the ground. A warrior who

surrenders his/her weapons in front of the enemy army before the fight

symbolizes an act of cowardice of the highest order!

The higher our expectation on Arjuna's behavior, we are more likely to lable him

as coward. We expect higher level of discipline and determination to fulfil his

commitment to fight, win and restore 'Dharma.' An iota of action lower than

heroic from Arjun qualifies him to be called a coward!

Ram Chandran

>Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy

>

>namaste.

>

>Swami Chinmayanandaji, in his commentary on BG 1.31 and BG 1.34

>(as presented by shri Madhava), attributes cowardice to Arjuna.

>I like to pose a question here to members of the List "Is Arjuna

>a coward?" based on his behaviour on the battle field at that stage?

Let me make some additional clarifications. Arjuna is not coward but his action

at the battle field (throwing the Kandeep on the ground) is a cowardly action.

At different points of time, we get labels attributed to our action.

One who drinks is a drunkard,

One who steals is a thief,

One who cheats is a cheater,

One who dreams is a dreamer,

One who acts foolishly is a fool,

One who wins is a winner,

One who loses is a loser,

One who throws the weapon in the battle field is a coward.

These labels are attributed to the associated actions and our personalities

change from time to time. All such labels are momentary expression of our

judgement. All such judgements are always subject to error and that is our

limitation. We have both the positive and negative sides of our personality and

all these are our own creation due to ignorance. When we lose all judgemental

personalities, we gain wisdom and our true divine personality emerges!

Arjuna was one of the greatest warriors in the battlefeld. He had no fear of

warfare , or killing enemies or getting killed himself. However here, he could

not bear the thought of losing his dear ones. Therefore he was a coward from an

emotional point of view. In the spiritual path, one must be a hero physically,

intellectually and emotionally. Arjuna was a hero in the first two. He was

brillaint archer and he was also a good debater. However he was sensitive and

weak in his emotions and shirked from duty when emotional pain is the result and

hence he might be refered to as a coward.

In the Gunatrayavibhaga yoga, Sri Krishna says , one who does not do his duty

because of the pain of its outcome does a Rajasic sacrifise and I feel this was

Arjuna's state of mind.

Om,

Anand

A FREE web-based e-mail service brought to you by the PC World Technology

Network.

Get your FREE account today at http://www.myworldmail.com

Greetings Anand:

I fully agree with your excellent observation on the pitfalls of Arjuna's

emotional attachments. This is an important point because detachment is one of

the fundamental message of Gita. Vyasa beautifully portrayed the character of

Arjuna to illustrate how a great warrior such as Arjuna was not able to overcome

emotions. Interestingly, Arjuna who was overwhealmed with emotions did not lose

his buddhi and he rightly approached Krishna for Guidance. He understood his

helpless condition and he exhibited his determination to get back his divine

personality.

One part of his personality was responsible for throwing the arms on the ground.

His divine personality came for his rescue and he courageously surrendered his

surrendered his ego to the Divine.

regards,

>"Anand Natarajan" <anandn

>

>Arjuna was one of the greatest warriors in the battlefeld. He had no fear of

warfare , or killing enemies or getting killed himself. However here, he could

not bear the thought of losing his dear ones. Therefore he was a coward from an

emotional point of view. In the spiritual path, one must be a hero physically,

intellectually and emotionally. Arjuna was a hero in the first two. He was

brillaint archer and he was also a good debater. However he was sensitive and

weak in his emotions and shirked from duty when emotional pain is the result and

hence he might be refered to as a coward.

namaste,

Most sincere apologis.

Regards,

s.

>Gummuluru Murthy <gmurthy

>advaitin

>advaitin

>Re: Is Arjuna a coward ?

>Wed, 16 Feb 2000 10:11:27 -0330 (NST)

>

>

>On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Sunder Hattangadi wrote:

>

> > "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh

> >

> > [...]

> >

> > " enlightened self-interest, svadharma , leading to a cowardly act "

> > is like turning the language topsy-turvy![Do you REALLY mean this?]

> >

> > [...]

>

> > Regards,

> >

> > s.

> >

>

>namaste.

>

>Obviously, my original post is mis-read by shri Sunder.

>

>I equated enlightened self-interest to svArtham, not svadharma.

>I request to please refer to my post again.

>

>Regards

>Gummuluru Murthy

>--

>

>

>

>

>

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

On Tue, 15 Feb 2000, Sunder Hattangadi wrote:

> "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh

>

> [...]

>

> " enlightened self-interest, svadharma , leading to a cowardly act "

> is like turning the language topsy-turvy![Do you REALLY mean this?]

>

> [...]

> Regards,

>

> s.

>

namaste.

Obviously, my original post is mis-read by shri Sunder.

I equated enlightened self-interest to svArtham, not svadharma.

I request to please refer to my post again.

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

--

namaste.

I am putting the following points, not that much to prolong the

discussion, but to tie down what I think are some loose ends.

I am thankful for all the comments on this question. I have already

stated what my thinking is in my original post in this thread.

In addition to what shri Devendra Vyas mentioned, I like to make

these additional points.

I do not think Arjuna is a coward, or he behaved cowardly in

the early stages of the bhagavadgItA upadesha. He can be branded

a coward if he acted in the following hypothetical ways (1 and 2).

Please note these two cases (1 and 2 below) are hypothetical and

did not take place. But for defining what I think is cowardice,

I am putting the scenarios here.

1. Arjuna asks Krishna to bring the chariot in between the two

armies. Krishna brings the chariot to in front of where BhIShma,

Drona and other great kaurava warriors are. Arjuna is afraid at

seeing this mighty kaurava army. He pleads to Krishna " Krishna,

the kaurava army is mighty. They can kill me and my brothers.

I do not have any desire for kingdom. If I and my brothers are

alive, we can live in the forests and get on with this life.

Please take me away from the war. I am afraid."

2. When Krishna brings (Arjuna's) chariot to in front of BhIShma,

Drona and other kaurava warriors. After seeing the mighty kaurava

army, Arjuna would sense that pANDava army is going to get defeated

by the kauravas and that thre is every liklihood that he and his

brothers would be killed by the kauravas. So, he does not want to

pursue the war. But, as a warrior of repute, he cannot run away

from the battle field. So, he devises an ingenious scheme whereby

he couches his main desire (not to fight the war because he is afraid

he may loose) in terms of what appears to be a noble gesture, that he

does not want to kill the kauravas. So, he pleads with Krishna that

he (Arjuna) would not fight the war.

The above two are hypothetical situations and did not take place.

In both these situations, we can brand Arjuna a coward. Further

anyone in Arjuna's situation in cases 1 and 2 is not fit to receive

BG upadesha. BG is not meant for treating such cases either. BG is

at a much higher plane.

What actually happened on that battlefield is: Arjuna came down

to the battlefield to fight. But then, after seeing his teacher,

grandfather, cousins and friends on the other side, he had a

genuine doubt "Is it his dharma to fight the war and kill all

these relatives and friends?" That is a much higher and subtler

doubt than the cowardice of situations 1 and 2 above. Please

note that in all of Arjuna's sayings, the safety of his and his

brothers and the danger that they may die is never there in his

words. He never expressed any doubt that he may loose the war.

His main concern is: is it his dharma to kill all the friends

and relatives on the other side? Arjuna's doubt is a very

genuine doubt which requires the full gItA to clarify. We,

the ordinary mortals, cannot say in a unified voice "Arjuna,

what you are doing is wrong, you are a coward, you should

fight.". If we say the above, then we do not need gItA-

upadesha. It is only the all-learned like Krishna, who sees

what is Arjuna's dharma.

You may recall, Krishna addressing Arjuna by various names

throughout bhagavadgItA. Many commentators have found the

appropriateness of each name at that juncture of Krishna's

teaching. Krishna even calls Arjuna "klaibya" to prick and

awaken manliness in Arjuna. But, as I recall, Krishna never

called Arjuna, a bhIra, a coward. That speaks volumes.

Further, as shri Devendra Vyas said, Krishna did not teach

bhagavadgItA to anyone else. He chose Arjuna to receive the

upadesha. That is, in Krishna's estimate, Arjuna is ripe for

receiving the lesson. Certainly, Krishna did not choose a

coward for receiving this great teaching.

Arjuna's doubt is a much subtler one than cowardice. Arjuna's

problem can be stated simply as: If he(Arjuna) kills his

own friends and relatives and elders, is he not losing both

the present world and the future worlds ? The feeling that

I am the killer; the feeling that I am killing my friends,

relatives and elders; the feeling that I will be loosing

both the present world and the future worlds by these

killings; this is the crux of Arjuna's doubt. That is a

far cry from Arjuna being a coward. Arjuna's doubt is a

very subtle doubt. Thus branding Arjuna as a coward, and

an ordinary human is missing the eligibility criteria for

bhagavdgItA altogether. That is the way I understood

Arjuna viShAdayoga.

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

--

>

> Gummuluru Murthy [gmurthy]

>

> I do not think Arjuna is a coward, or he behaved cowardly in

> the early stages of the bhagavadgItA upadesha. He can be branded

> Arjuna's doubt is a much subtler one than cowardice. Arjuna's

> problem can be stated simply as: If he(Arjuna) kills his

> own friends and relatives and elders, is he not losing both

> the present world and the future worlds ? The feeling that

> I am the killer; the feeling that I am killing my friends,

> relatives and elders; the feeling that I will be loosing

> both the present world and the future worlds by these

> killings; this is the crux of Arjuna's doubt. That is a

> far cry from Arjuna being a coward. Arjuna's doubt is a

> very subtle doubt. Thus branding Arjuna as a coward, and

> an ordinary human is missing the eligibility criteria for

> bhagavdgItA altogether. That is the way I understood

> Arjuna viShAdayoga.

>

> Regards

> Gummuluru Murthy

Dear Murthygaru,

I beg to disagree.

There is a saying "Is there a problem? No problem. Just keep postponing

them as long as you can. One day, death will arrive, and the problems that

are bothering you will go away automatically". People, who think in this

kind of manner, are branded as suicide maniacs. To make it simple, they

can't just face problems!

A problem can be of two kinds, (1) That which you face because of the

external forces e.g. Earth quakes, war, floods etcetera... (2) That which

you face as a consequence of your own actions. e.g. Telling lies, Killing,

Stealing.

In my opinion, Arjuna falls in to the second category. He has faced a

problem, right in the battle field. Actually, why is he there at all?

Because of his own actions. He wanted to fight the war, gathered a lot of

armour, very well prepared for a war. Had Arjuna wanted *not* to fight, he

had a choice of forgetting the war in the first place. He could have simply

told his eldest brother Dhramaraja to forget about all that. But he didn't.

He knew, from the beginning that he has to face Bhishma and Drona in the

battlefield. This he mentions at various places even before war, in

Mahabharata.

Now that Arjuna is in the battlefield, he went and faced his own kith and

kin. Then he got a problem, the problem is the *affection* that he has

towards *his* people. Remember the word "dRshTvEmam *sva*janam Krishna.."

Arjuna used the word "My own". That *My own* is his problem. That

identification, which was hidden in the abyss of his heart, came up --- only

because of thinking of the aftermath of the war. Arjuna thought that he had

a choice (1) To fight (2) Not to fight. In deed, he falsely thought that

*by* not fighting he will allow everybody to live. He thought it is a wise

decision. At the same time, his intellect must be pricking him about taking

a U turn at the right moment! This is what was Arjuna's problem. To fight

or not to fight. It was a right problem which arouse in the wrong time.

That is why Arjuna --- in stead of facing his own inner problem; which is

generated as a consequence of his own actions --- did choose to run away.

He just wanted to run away from his problem, so that he need not think of it

again. NOW that is what I consider as a cowardice!

There are people who, when face problems at their household, run away and

take Sanyasa! There are also the people who, when face problems at their

household, try to kill themselves. Both are cowards, who can't just face

their problems. They are cowards! Arjuna is no better than them.

HERE IS A STORY: (Draw your own conclusions :-))

There was a cunning fox which had fallen short of money.

So it went and asked the Earth "Oh Earth, Oh Earth, could you please loan me

one Dollar?"

Earth replied: "Oh, Fox I don't mind loaning you money.. But you should tell

me on when could you repay the loan?"

Fox said: "Oh Earth, I am so grateful for your kind consideration. I shall

return back your money, along with interest by tomorrow morning."

Earth agreed for this and gave a Dollar to the Fox as a loan. Fox felt very

happy. It spent all that money by evening.

In the evening, the Fox started thinking, "why should I repay the money back

to Earth. Earth has got a lot of money --- so even if I don't pay it back,

Earth will not fall short of money."

Fox has decided not to repay the money back to Earth. It wanted to hide

from Earth. Since it knows that the Earth will ask back the money in the

Morning. It left its Foxhole in the night and started running.

It ran... It ran... And it ran so far and became tired. By the time it was

dawn it ran few hundred kilometres. It stopped there and thought "Lo! Now

the Earth can not come this far to ask back the money..."

But the Earth came there and asked "Oh Fox, why are you running where is my

money?"

Listening to this Fox immediately started running away again. Thinking of

not to pay the money back to Earth.

It ran... It ran... And it ran so far and became tired. By the time it was

noon it ran again few hundred kilometres. It stopped there and thought "Lo!

Now the Earth can not come this far to ask back the money..."

But the Earth came there and asked "Oh Fox, why are you running where is my

money?"

Like this Fox ran and ran finally because of the fatigue, it puked blood and

fell dead....

Poor thing never realized that it took loan from the very same Earth which

is all pervading, where could it run away? Where ever it runs it is still

on the Earth... Isn't it :-)

Regards,

Madhava

Greetings Murthyji:

Your enthusiastic support for Arjuna's cause is quite refreshing. You have

correctly constructed several logical scenarios in support of your contentions.

Most of the discussants will agree that Arjuna is not coward. The reference was

specifically with respect to one of his action - throwing the Kandeep on the

ground. The character of a person can never be decided by one action based on

personal beliefs and perceptions. It is quite conceivable to develop alternative

frameworks by which one can justify calling Arjuna's action as a cowardly

action.

In real life, when our child acts foolishly, we don't hesitate to call our child

a fool. On most of the other occasions, we happily tell our friends that our

child is a 'Brahaspathi'(most intelligent). When Swami Chinmayanandaji called

Arjuna a coward, he really didn't mean (you are well aware about this fact). In

the rest of the chapters, he never hesitated to praise him for his intelligence

and bravery. The reason that he called him a coward is to get the attention of

the audience. His entire commentary is based on his lectures in front of the

audience. Those who have attended his discourses know his gifted talent in

keeping the attention of his audience.

I fully agree with your concluding comments and beatutiful observations. I am

looking forward to more of your thoughtful questions and observations during the

rest of Gita Satsang.

regards,

Ram Chandran

On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Ram Chandran wrote:

> "Ram Chandran" <chandran

>

> Greetings Murthyji:

>

> Your enthusiastic support for Arjuna's cause is quite refreshing. You have

correctly constructed several logical scenarios in support of your contentions.

>

namaste shri Ram Chandran,

As usual, you have a beautiful way of bringing the discussion

into focus.

I am not supporting Arjuna's cause or Arjuna's argument that

he should not fight. I am trying to bring Arjuna's main question

into focus. Of course, his question is based on the delusion.

As I understand, his delusion (for which gItA is the answer)

is the following:

1. that he (Arjuna) is the doer of the actions (that is,

he is going to be the killer of the friends and relatives

2. that he (Arjuna) is the enjoyer of the fruits of actions

(that is, by doing the killings, he is going to reap the

benefits or otherwise in the present world and the future

worlds for his actions)

That is, there is an ego problem aflicting Arjuna, for which

gItA is the answer.

3. The other delusion from which Arjuna is suffering is the

recognition of friends and relatives on the enemy side

(which made him re-think his responsibilities). It implies,

if the kaurava side does not have his friends and relatives,

he would have no compulsion against the war. That is, Arjuna

is seeing some as relatives and friends and some as enemy.

gItA has an answer to this delusion as well. I want to highlight

these delusions of Arjuna, but somehow, it seems, the discussion

went on whether or not Arjuna is a coward. Arjuna's viShAdayoga

arises out of his delusions of the ego-problem, and not out of

whether he is a courageous or a cowardly person.

>

> When Swami Chinmayanandaji called Arjuna a coward, he really didn't mean (you

are well aware about this fact). In the rest of the chapters, he never hesitated

to praise him for his intelligence and bravery. The reason that he called him a

coward is to get the attention of the audience. His entire commentary is based

on his lectures in front of the audience. Those who have attended his discourses

know his gifted talent in keeping the attention of his audience.

>

It was never my intention to find fault in swami Chinmayanandaji's

commentary. As my previous posts indicate, I have the highest respect

and regard for swamiji's overall efforts on uplifting spirituality

in humans. I was in the audience for many of his lectures and his

lectures are certainly spell-binding. If my comments came up as a

criticism or slighting of swamiji's efforts, my humble apologies.

> I fully agree with your concluding comments and beatutiful observations. I

am looking forward to more of your thoughtful questions and observations during

the rest of Gita Satsang.

>

> regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

>

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

---

I find Sri Murthyji's points to be compelling, especially the following

observation he makes.

"You may recall, Krishna addressing Arjuna by various names

throughout bhagavadgItA. Many commentators have found the

appropriateness of each name at that juncture of Krishna's

teaching. Krishna even calls Arjuna "klaibya" to prick and

awaken manliness in Arjuna. But, as I recall, Krishna never

called Arjuna, a bhIra, a coward. That speaks volumes."

I do not think Murhyji is slighting other commentaries and interpretations

but simply giving us his informed and well reasoned opinion on the matter.

Love

Harsha

yes sir--thank you for getting me right---arjuna and krishna were the

nar-narayana pair --what more to say.....

equating in the foll way--

drunk ---drunkard

one who flees---coward

is taking a too simplistic view of the matter---rgds--devendra

i would like to repeat myself---each chapter of the gita is a yoga--let us

remember that.....

and

>awaken manliness in Arjuna. But, as I recall, Krishna never

>called Arjuna, a bhIra, a coward. That speaks volumes.

>

>Further, as shri Devendra Vyas said, Krishna did not teach

>bhagavadgItA to anyone else. He chose Arjuna to receive the

>upadesha. That is, in Krishna's estimate, Arjuna is ripe for

>receiving the lesson. Certainly, Krishna did not choose a

>coward for receiving this great teaching.

>

>Arjuna's doubt is a much subtler one than cowardice. Arjuna's

>problem can be stated simply as: If he(Arjuna) kills his

>own friends and relatives and elders, is he not losing both

>the present world and the future worlds ? The feeling that

>I am the killer; the feeling that I am killing my friends,

>relatives and elders; the feeling that I will be loosing

>both the present world and the future worlds by these

>killings; this is the crux of Arjuna's doubt. That is a

>far cry from Arjuna being a coward. Arjuna's doubt is a

>very subtle doubt. Thus branding Arjuna as a coward, and

>an ordinary human is missing the eligibility criteria for

>bhagavdgItA altogether. That is the way I understood

>Arjuna viShAdayoga.

>

>Regards

>Gummuluru Murthy

>--

>

>

>

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

SEE --WE CAN'T CALL a person of arjuna's calibre an outright coward...

gummulurji is right-- it is at a much subtler level---

furthermore thou it is true that arjuna throws the gandiva and says he will

not fight---basically he is not asking krishna;;;"whether to fight or not

fight"

he says "my mind is in confusion about my duty---you tell me wherein lies my

welfare"---arjuna's cowardice is a symptom of a deeper malaise

-----in the 1st chp--arjuna says of what is a kingdom to me---he has

enjoyment as his goal----hence he is confused---he has reached a stage of

evolution where he is begining to tire of the finite-----then the lord

shows;;;;"my dear boy...enjoyment can never be the goal

--is not the goal---the goal is the infinite " and then once he gets the

proper knowledge & the same(?) arjuna stands once again and fights like a

loin........like i said this doubt comes to every soul once----is this worth

it?? what is life???etc...etc...and then the spiritual journey

begins........gita is nothing but the spiritual saga of a sadhaka from start

to end---rgds--dev

>"Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava

>advaitin

>advaitin

>RE: Is Arjuna a coward ?

>Wed, 16 Feb 2000 17:41:38 +0300

>

>"Madhava K. Turumella" <madhava

>

>

>

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

Devendra Vyas <dev_vyas74 wrote:

"Devendra Vyas" <dev_vyas74

yes sir--thank you for getting me right---arjuna and krishna were the

nar-narayana pair --what more to say.....

equating in the foll way--

drunk ---drunkard

one who flees---coward

is taking a too simplistic view of the matter---rgds--devendra

i would like to repeat myself---each chapter of the gita is a yoga--let us

remember that.....

and

>awaken manliness in Arjuna. But, as I recall, Krishna never

>called Arjuna, a bhIra, a coward. That speaks volumes.

>

>Further, as shri Devendra Vyas said, Krishna did not teach

>bhagavadgItA to anyone else. He chose Arjuna to receive the

>upadesha. That is, in Krishna's estimate, Arjuna is ripe for

>receiving the lesson. Certainly, Krishna did not choose a

>coward for receiving this great teaching.

>

>Arjuna's doubt is a much subtler one than cowardice. Arjuna's

>problem can be stated simply as: If he(Arjuna) kills his

>own friends and relatives and elders, is he not losing both

>the present world and the future worlds ? The feeling that

>I am the killer; the feeling that I am killing my friends,

>relatives and elders; the feeling that I will be loosing

>both the present world and the future worlds by these

>killings; this is the crux of Arjuna's doubt. That is a

>far cry from Arjuna being a coward. Arjuna's doubt is a

>very subtle doubt. Thus branding Arjuna as a coward, and

>an ordinary human is missing the eligibility criteria for

>bhagavdgItA altogether. That is the way I understood

>Arjuna viShAdayoga.

>

>Regards

>Gummuluru Murthy

>--

>Arjuna represents the typical student who is fit for Geeta teaching.He was in

Vishada i.e. Visha + ada as if he ate poison. If the world of objects appear

like poison for any reason, and in that condition, if he turns to the God within

for succour, he becomes surely eligible to get the teachng from the Lord. Arjuna

describes his own condition in 19 slokas in the first chapter. If we examine

their essence, we can see that the first set of symptons were sweating, mouth

becoming dry, trembling of the body, unable to stand are signs of pure terror.

Next is the consideration for his relatives. It is attachment. Next comes the

idea that when all the men die, old people, women and chilren remain without

guidance and the socity will become corrupt. Next comes the idea of adharma. The

dead ancestors will not receive their oblations and the man who causes it falls

into hell. Another idea is by killing even the evil doers one gets only sin.

Final phase is where he offers non-violent resistence. Thus his character is

purposely made so complex to indicate to us that any one for any reason, in

sorrow turn to the Lord, the teaching of the Lord will be avaialbel to him.

Please click above to support our sponsor

Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy focusing

on non-duality between mind and matter. Searchable List Archives are available

at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ Contact Email Address:

advaitins

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.