/lit/ - Literature

I'll definitely be checking in on these threads after get past this whole beginning bit where they name all the conch shells.

>>12130802
Fuck off degenerate scum, this book has done irreversible damage to India, shove it up your ass.
T. Pajeet

Praise Krishna and come and join us lads

>>12130827
>He doesn't have a transcendental conch shell
C'mon don't be such a shudra

>>12130863
I mean, yea, I would like one. Don't know what the point of that sequence is in the text, though.

Sanjaya's report starts with Duryodhana (Kaurava) speaking to his teacher Drona, a great warrior. Duryodhana is the eldest of the Kaurava brothers and has severly provoked the Pandavas (including Arjuna) previously in the epic. The insult that sets up the battle is getting the Pandavas exiled for 13 years, and then refusing to share the inheritance of their kingdom after their return from exile.

Some interesting observations before getting onto Arjuna's despondency:

Krishna is Arjuna's charioteer, as well as his guiding mentor and friend. As the Gita reveals, he is also God himself. The image of the person as a chariot is a common one in Indian religion, e.g. Katha Upanishad 3.3 (Patrick Olivelle translation)

>Know the self as a rider in a chariot,
>and the body, as simply the chariot.
>Know the intellect as the charioteer,
>and the mind, as simply the reins."

This imagery could imply either a non-dual (advaita) view of God and the Self as one, or a more qualified non-dual (vishishtadvaita) view of God pervading the Self as its ultimate support and controller.

Also a note on verse 1.10, as written the text has Duryodhana (Kaurava) saying that his own force is insufficient, while the Pandava force is sufficient. This doesn't match up with earlier verses which say the Kaurava army is larger than the Pandava one, and doesn't match up with Duryodhana's usual boastfulness. Some interpreters take the word that normally means "insufficient" to mean "unlimited" in this context (e.g. S. Radhakrishnan, B.S. Miller), others reverse the order of the description to have Duryodhana say his own force is the sufficient one (e.g. W.J. Johnson, G. Flood & C. Martin). Others leave the text but gloss it as meaning that the presence of the hero Bhishma on the Kaurava's side more than makes up for their inadequade army (e.g. F. Edgerton), others leave the text as it is (e.g. R.C. Zaehner).

Interestingly, Ramanuja interprets Duryodhana's description of his army as him losing heart right before the battle, triggering his great-uncle Bhishma to blow his horn as encouragement in 1.10. See Ramanuja's commentary on 1.19

>>12130881
It's listing off all the heroes of both sides amping themselves up for the fight. The traditional audience would know all the characters, everyone getting ready signals the carnage is about to start, but this is subverted by the sidetrack into a dialogue.

>>12130832
t. butthurt dravid

>>12130928
*Correction: Bhishma blows his conch in 1.12
---
Arjuna refusing to fight (1.28-47) is a surprise in the narrative, as he's a great warrior and his family have been building up to this conflict throughout the epic. There are at least two themes behind his decision. One is the preservation of family dharma (duty or virtue or divine law), he knows that protecting his relatives is part of his svadharma (personal duty/virtue/law) and forsees a cursed existence for both sides of the family if he fights.

He also wants to avoid these negative consequences through renunciation and inaction. He sees giving up action (karman) as the only solution (1.32, 35, 46-47). As we'll see in subsequent chapters, Krishna argues against this course, and even says that total incation is impossible in the natural world, see Gita 3.5 "No one exists for even an instant without performing action; however unwilling, every being is forced to act by the qualities of nature." (B.S. Miller trans.)

>>12130995
Yeah that's true but you're citing from chapter 3 and i thought we were gonna discuss chapter 1 today?

Another interesting verse:

Gita 1.44
This verse seems to say that those who disrupt family dharma will be eternally damned to hell, which would go totally against the theory of karma and rebirth. Negative karma is worked out through hellish punishments, after which one returns to a mortal rebirth. In light of this, the phrase for "eternally damned to hell" is usually interpreted as meaning "certainly damned to hell" and is just a hyperbole or unusual use of the word. See the different translations of Gavin Flood (eternal) and W.J. Johnson (certain)

1.44 - Gavin Flood
>Men whose familial laws have been obliterated, O Krishna, are damned to dwell eternally in hell, as we have often heard.

1.44 - W.J. Johnson
>For men whose family have been obliterated we have heard that a place in hell is certain, Janardana [Krishna]

>>12131002
It seems overly restrictive to not relate chapter one to other chapters, doesn't it?

>>12131028
>It seems overly restrictive to not relate chapter one to other chapters, doesn't it?

Yeah you're right, agreed

>>12131028
No no i don't think it means that they go "eternally" to hell but rather a period of time. Let me look up the line to prove my point.

>>12130995
To add to this, the Gita is usually thought to be post-buddhist. Arjuna wanting to renounce action and getting rebuked is probably a jab at the heterodox renouncer (shramana) traditions: Buddhism and Jainism. Jains especially sought to renounce all action and thus avoid attracting any accumulation of karma. Being an orthodox Hindu text, the Bhagavad Gita is clearly against this, and Krishna offers a very clever solution in later chapters.

>>12131045
I've only seen it interpreted as something imperitive (certain to live in hell, must live in hell, etc.) or as an eternal period of time (but meant as a hyperbole). More information on that would be awesome though.

>>12131028
The whole argument from the beginning is that Arjuna shouldn't kill these people because they are part of his family. That's what he's talking about here. He's connecting the dots together, so you can see that by killing the enemy in the battlefield he would be sending himself to hell (as you can see according to the text, not necessary for eternity but at least a period of time). You see he says when a person subverts dharma he goes to dwell in hell.

>>12131055
>'ve only seen it interpreted as something imperitive (certain to live in hell, must live in hell, etc.)

Exactly on point, this is my interpretation of the text.

Now later on of course the Lord will explain that Arjuna is wrong and won't actually go to hell if he kills the Kauravas because [reasons].

>>12131061
Yeah that's pretty much what I understood it as.

>>12131066
Definitely. Also that his women will become corrupt and the varnas will intermingle! But it turns out fine if he follows Krishna's teaching, although he forgets all of it so it has to be repeated in the Anugita, lol.

>>12131107
Basically they had rules at the time that lovers were only supposed to marry within the caste which is called varna and Arjuna is making some kind of argument that the varna will be mixed when women are corrupted, which i guess makes some sense. To use it doesn't make sense because we don't have a caste-based system which is a damn shame but what can you do.

>>12130832
What?? How?
I didnt know people existed that didn't appreciate this book.

>>12131132
I wonder how much it was enforced in practice. I've read in some history books that there were Shudra and Vaishya kings who presumably intermarried with Kshatriyas. Also there's cases like the Rajputs who claimed to be Kshatriyas but have suspect lineages. Also, all foreigners would be avarna as far as I know, but the Greek Bactrians did fine as rulers and some even worshipped Hindu gods.

>>12131233
It sure is interesting to speculate and the important part to notice is that this system was traditional which means they saw that you were born into a specific caste or varna and then you were supposed to do that thing for the rest of your life so say you were born a kshatriya then you were supposed to do politics for your entire life and your children as well, because you would have to marry a woman from a another kshatriya family and so on. This is the way the society was structured and "going your own way" was heavily frowned upon and even seen as irreligious (because it's "subverting family dharma")

I think the thread deserves a bump. If more ppl wanna join the discord then you are welcome

I'm looking forward to the insanity of chapter 11

>>12130942
Look up Bihar, UP and gujarat, retard.

>>12131158

Just try living in India dude, not in south but in North, not in some monastery or metropolitan city but in hardcore Hindu third world state like UP, Gujarat or Bihar

>>12132747
tell me more? I lived in the south when young, curious about the differences

I have a copy of Sri Prabuphada's commentary (I was approached by a Krishna Consciousness guy selling his books)..

Is it an okay translation/commentary to read? I would rather read a physical copy than one of the pdfs in the OP

I have a German language version from 1946 but I can't read German...

>>12133876
You could do worse desu but just be aware that it bases itself in a school of Vedanta (which is in effect taking a theological position on the meaning of the Bhagavad-Gita), which is somewhat removed from what has been traditional throughout history. Advaita and Vishishtadvaita were standard for most of history and then Dvaita and the Achintya Bheda Abheda (which Prabhupada bases himself in) are both late comers and have never been as widespread as the first two. This is not to say those schools are illegitimate and some people find their philosophy to be really interesting but it's just something to be aware of. Some people think that Achintya Bheda Abheda is almost like Vishishtadvaita because they both mainly venerate Vishnu/Krishna but Vishishtadvaita is actually much closer to Advaita despite how much time Ramanuja takes to distinguish himself from and refute Shankara's views (like Madhvacharya, Ramanuja first studied under an Advaita teacher before he founded his own school).

It goes like this

Advaita - Gaudapada ~ 500 AD (later elaborated by Shankara in 8th century)
Vishishtadvaita - Ramanuja - 11th century
Dvaita - Madhvacharya - 13th century
Achintya Bheda Abheda - Mahaprabhu - 15th century (this is roughly Prabhupada)

>>12133876
>>12133944
Yes, and Prabhupada is more specifically from Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition starting with Chaitanya in the 16th century. They worship Krishna as the supreme Godhead and are more focused on bhakti than philosophy. Their commentaries are strongly slanted to their view of exclusive Krishna worship, and Krishna as Bhagavan (personal God or Lord), for them he is not an avatar which is different to other Vaishnavites.

I would read the translation and take the commentary with a pinch of salt.

>>12133944
>>12133999
Checked. Thank you very much for you elaborations.

>>12132936
There are fanatics in the "cow belt" of northern India who dominate politics there. Stuff like riots over cow slaughter, forcing Hindu education in schools, and lynching non-Hindus, as well as lower-key superstitious thinking like believing random rumors about astrological events. Look up the destruction of Babri Masjid and the Gujarat riots.

That said, I don't think the Bhagavad Gita is responsible for those. Even if it were, that wouldn't stop it from being very interesting.

>>12134043
Are you Indian, OP, or just interested in the culture? Anyway thank you for putting together the thread. I am Indian and Hindu, yet have never read the Bhagavad Gita yet. One day I will.

>>12132747
I was just memeing.
In all seriousness why do you think the Gita has done so much harm?
I'm part Indian and I want to know more about my heritage.

It's a good idea to read a summary of the Mahabharata or watch the Peter Brook's dramatization to know the general sequence of events leading up to the war in the Gita, and to have greater context of Krishna's character. He was quite a deceitful person.
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhqkRGISQr8

>>12130802
I'm busy the next couple days but I'll pop into the discord later and try to hop on this ride.

I'm a fan of having a good physical copy of what I'm reading. Anyone have any recommendations re: specific edition etc.?

>>12135591
You're not the faggot who ruined the Man and Technics reading group, are you?

>>12135609
I have no idea what that is, so no, but I did start and sustain (and murder upon completion, as is appropriate) the Moby-Dick reading group a month or two ago.

>>12135591
There are so many translations, it's hard to recommend one. Barbara S. Miller's (linked in OP) is probably the most accessible while remaining fairly accurate. I like W.J. Johnson's translation (Oxford) which is more academic but still aimed at general readers.

There's no point in reading it if you don't know sanscrit right? Like reading the qu'ran in english

>>12136020
No, you can still pretty clearly understand most Hindu texts in English translation as long as it's a high quality translation and you have an understanding of the doctrines already. Unlike Arabic or Chinese for example Sanskrit is Indo-European and many of its words have similar structure or roots to the equivalent words in European languages. It is true that for certain terms there is no direct equivalent but this is why these terms are often left untranslated in Hindu texts so that's not a huge issue. In order to understand the denser Hindu philosophy texts you will have to learn the context and layers of meaning behind several dozen Sanskrit words anyway, but once you have this it's fairly easy to grasp the texts and especially the traditional commentaries which make them more accessible

>>12130802
bump

Is there some hierarchical picture of the who's who in the Gita? Reading all these names is confusing as all fuck. I had the same problem with the Iliad but someone posted that picture of Greece that shows where each hero/leader comes from and on which side they fight. I only discovered it after I finished reading the Iliad but I'm sure it will come handy in the future.