Scan barcode
painofboredom's review against another edition
4.0
Bhagavad Gita is a work which is very interesting on a intellectual level in the way it conceptualises the self the universe and god
But I strongly disagree with the almost fatalist attitude it promotes towards life and it's advocation of varna system (Indian stratification of society)
Gonna summarise what the Gita has to say below and my two problems with it :-
1.
Gita states that the atman(self/soul) is eternal unchanging unborn and indestructible
It changes bodies the way one changes clothes in a continuous cycle of death and rebirth
The atman comes from the brahman (universe/the ultimate reality/god?)
And the ultimate goal of all beings is the eventual union of the atman(self) with Brahman (the universe) i.e the ultimate salvation/liberation/moksha
It states that there are 3 paths to moksha :-
Path of knowledge
Path of action
Path of devotion
But it also argues all the three paths are one and the same and lead to the same place
The Gita promotes complete detachment from the material world
Detachment from emotions and aim/fruit of your actions
Action done purely "selflessly" (for the sake of cosmic balance?)
You are to do your "duty/dharma" that's been prescribed to you without a sense of "self" and you will attain the ultimate salvation i.e union with Brahman and freedom from cycle of death and rebirth
The very same can also be attained by the way of "devotion"
You have to submit the "self" to Krishna/THE God completely and he will take you unto him and liberate you from samsara (cycle of death and rebirth)
It also advocates strongly for non violence unless it's for the sake of "dharma"
But it also implies you don't have agency
And that even in the act of non action you are not the agent
You're driven by your inherent nature that you neither have awareness of or control over
So the gita advocates for "action with insight" over non-action and resignation
It has parallels to stoicism
And there lies my first problem
There's no way around this that it suggests one has no choice either way and the best way is to do what you're meant to do but with the insight that you are not in control
And if you do this then hopefully the god will free you from samsara
It's very easy to take all the above and think a attitude of resignation and submission to life is what's meant
This is not an ideal way of life for the masses
Though i do think this attitude is and can be helpful under specific context and circumstances namely during times of crisis or when faced with difficult decision
But it's not way of life meant for the general populace at all times
2.
It also discusses "samkhya" philosphy
In which there exists Prakriti (nature = material/feminine)
And Purusha (the spirit, the potential consciousness - masculine)
Nature by itself is inert and it's the union between the two that gives birth to all beings
Which all possess characteristics based on the mixture of 3 fundamental gunas(quality) in different proportions that comes from the feminine/material side of the equation
And the eventual stratification of society is based on these inherent characteristics with which one is born
And there arises my second major issue with it
Despite Krishna promising ultimate salvation to all regardless of birth (high or low) it doesn't stop Gita from showing extreme preference for the upper class
There's even a section where he's describing the inherent good characteristics of all the varna and he ends up exhausting every adjective in the description of the first two that he has nothing left to say about the other two castes/varnas
Of course at the end of day I can digest all this by rationalising that it's a 2500 year old work written by the people who were at the top of this hierarchy
I can also decide to pick and choose elements of it considering that the old varna system does not and cannot function in modern times
But still I can't help but feel disappointed by this aspect of it
I'm gonna re-read it again while going through all of Mahabharata and hopefully I'll like it more
But I strongly disagree with the almost fatalist attitude it promotes towards life and it's advocation of varna system (Indian stratification of society)
Gonna summarise what the Gita has to say below and my two problems with it :-
1.
Gita states that the atman(self/soul) is eternal unchanging unborn and indestructible
It changes bodies the way one changes clothes in a continuous cycle of death and rebirth
The atman comes from the brahman (universe/the ultimate reality/god?)
And the ultimate goal of all beings is the eventual union of the atman(self) with Brahman (the universe) i.e the ultimate salvation/liberation/moksha
It states that there are 3 paths to moksha :-
Path of knowledge
Path of action
Path of devotion
But it also argues all the three paths are one and the same and lead to the same place
The Gita promotes complete detachment from the material world
Detachment from emotions and aim/fruit of your actions
Action done purely "selflessly" (for the sake of cosmic balance?)
You are to do your "duty/dharma" that's been prescribed to you without a sense of "self" and you will attain the ultimate salvation i.e union with Brahman and freedom from cycle of death and rebirth
The very same can also be attained by the way of "devotion"
You have to submit the "self" to Krishna/THE God completely and he will take you unto him and liberate you from samsara (cycle of death and rebirth)
It also advocates strongly for non violence unless it's for the sake of "dharma"
But it also implies you don't have agency
And that even in the act of non action you are not the agent
You're driven by your inherent nature that you neither have awareness of or control over
So the gita advocates for "action with insight" over non-action and resignation
It has parallels to stoicism
And there lies my first problem
There's no way around this that it suggests one has no choice either way and the best way is to do what you're meant to do but with the insight that you are not in control
And if you do this then hopefully the god will free you from samsara
It's very easy to take all the above and think a attitude of resignation and submission to life is what's meant
This is not an ideal way of life for the masses
Though i do think this attitude is and can be helpful under specific context and circumstances namely during times of crisis or when faced with difficult decision
But it's not way of life meant for the general populace at all times
2.
It also discusses "samkhya" philosphy
In which there exists Prakriti (nature = material/feminine)
And Purusha (the spirit, the potential consciousness - masculine)
Nature by itself is inert and it's the union between the two that gives birth to all beings
Which all possess characteristics based on the mixture of 3 fundamental gunas(quality) in different proportions that comes from the feminine/material side of the equation
And the eventual stratification of society is based on these inherent characteristics with which one is born
And there arises my second major issue with it
Despite Krishna promising ultimate salvation to all regardless of birth (high or low) it doesn't stop Gita from showing extreme preference for the upper class
There's even a section where he's describing the inherent good characteristics of all the varna and he ends up exhausting every adjective in the description of the first two that he has nothing left to say about the other two castes/varnas
Of course at the end of day I can digest all this by rationalising that it's a 2500 year old work written by the people who were at the top of this hierarchy
I can also decide to pick and choose elements of it considering that the old varna system does not and cannot function in modern times
But still I can't help but feel disappointed by this aspect of it
I'm gonna re-read it again while going through all of Mahabharata and hopefully I'll like it more
wghams's review against another edition
4.5
Great text. The Gita itself is captivating, the setting is gripping and makes for the perfect place to understand how to win the spiritual war in oneself through a dialogue between you and your "real self". The Chapter with Krishna's vision is particularly haunting and remains with me. Easwaran's foreward really helped understand the text better, and each chapter is explained well.
egzotermine's review against another edition
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
maur_damar's review against another edition
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
aligrint's review
4.0
Surprisingly accessible. Definitely an interesting perspective on power and attachment in (everybody's, including god's) action.