Sri Nara asked:- (post #31)
“How can you tell that Krishna's condemnation was a blanket one covering everything Arjuna said? Krishna was only condemning his decision to not fight. The kasmalam is simply Arjuna's despondency to fight, not the words he spoke. In fact Krishna says you speak the words of wise men (Ch 2 .11). So, Krishna considers Arjuna's words as wise, but condemns only his action of refusing to fight.”
Sri Nara,
Greetings to you. (My wife saw our discussion and gave me the Tamizh BG to refer! Here we go again).
If Arjuna started delivering the arrows at Kurukshetra left, right and middle on command on the day one, as you rightly said, Krishna would have spared the huge lecture to Arjuna and focused on driving the chariot. But Arjuna was just a normal everyday human being. He could not do that. (Why Arjuna was the recipient of BG? I read a nice reason for that. But that would be different discussion altogether).
Krishna’s condemnation was not just for his hesitation to fight. I request the readers to refer post #22, posted by Sri Nara, for the following message here.
In BG, chapter 1, from slokam 41 to 46, Arjuna indeed was worried about mixing of varna, pitru srartam, fighting kith and kin and the need for fight altogether. Krishna addressed every single concern in the chapters followed in BG. Krishna did not limit his advice to Arjuna just to get him to fight; he preached him long and in detail about various materialistic and spiritualistic matters. Arjuna decided to fight at the end. Had Krishna not addressed every single concern raised by Arjuna, then you would have been right. Since all the concerns were addressed, ‘kasmalam’ included all the concerns.
Sri Nara said:- (post # 31)
“In fact Krishna says you speak the words of wise men (Ch 2 .11).” (in this quote, ‘you’ denotes Arjuna).
Sri Nara, you must be playing games with me!
Asocyan anvasocas tvam prajna-vadams ca bhasase
Gatasun agatasums ca nanusocanti panditah (BG 2:11)
Krishna criticises Arjuna in this slokam. Krishna says, ‘Arjuna, you lament for unworthy persons; at the same time, you speak like a learned person’. In other words, Krishna criticises Arjuna’s wavering mind. Is that a compliment? I don’t think so.
Sri Nara said:- (with reference to BG 4:32). (post #31).
“It looks like you have your own interpretation and you are trying to come up with an argument to make it fit with the text. But that is putting the cart before the horse.
Further, you have recognized the problem with your interpretation yourself. First of all, I do not agree with a blanket condemnation of all prostitutes. It is the men who take advantage of women in this way who are to be condemned. In any case, as you rightly observe, why must the child bear this tag?”
Whether it is my cooked up interpretation or the meaning I found from the dictionary; irrespective to that, I concur with you about the degraded situation women found themselves in those days. (Trust me, I had to eat patched up food for 4 days and lost other perks because of this one slokam!). Attaining mukthi was a big deal in those days (in these days too!). By reiterating to Arjuna that the underprivileged in the society (of those days) would also attain mukthi, Krishna actually promoted respect for the under privileged. (Debating on this slokam is a piece of cake for me! I debated with the undebatable on this slokam! This slokam will be used to my advantage in the future debates too).
Sri Nara said:- (post #31).
“When it comes to interpretations, there is unanimity among the three mainstream commentators, namely, Shankara, Ramanuja, and Madhwa. They all say this is about birth.”
With humble due respects to all the acharyas mentioned by you, sir, why should I not think differently? In fact, if you refer to my message in post #23, in this same thread, none of the acharyas commented in the way I understand. Acharyas were restricted to society sastras and sampradyams. I have no such restriction. Shall we say that I think differently? When I can not logically defend my thoughts, I am more than happy to change my opinions.
Sri Nara said:- 9post #31).
“But this (debate) is about whether BG says Varna is birth based,” (the word ‘debate’ in parenthesis is added by me without changing the meaning of the quote).
Sir, of course BG says about the birth based varna followed by the society at that time only to condemn such ill conceived thoughts. That was why it was stressed in 4:13, the basis for the varna classification. BG does not promote or condones varna based by birth.
Over to you, please…
