Never read religious texts before, but I remember Oppenheimer's famous quote, "Now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." What stuff might be interesting in Bhagavad Gita for a scientist like him?
I thoroughly agree that the central idea of the Bhagavad Gita is to do your job without unnecessary worry or anxiety about the outcome. I've seen similar ideas in Epictetus's Enchiridion (put yourself to things in your control and forget about things beyond your power) and more recently in the notion of "separation of tasks" central to Alfred Adler's works. Irrespective of the source, the idea of focussing on my job without worrying about the outcome has been immensely helpful to me in moments of great anxiety and uncertainty.
Krishna tells Arjun (the warrior being mentioned here) that it doesn’t matter that it’s your kinsmen including some which are the salt of the earth on the other side. You fight them because they are standing for adharma (injustice) and you should always stand for dharma (justice) no matter the personal cost.
The right thing to do is not universal. Dharma doesn't place the same responsibilities on a king and a peasant. Your dharma is dependent on your role in the larger order and thus on your caste. The Mahabharata itself has more than a hundred references to Kshatriya dharma which is unsurprising given its martial context.
Krishna kind of receives it with a shrug, and eventually his own clan is annihilated by infighting and all the principal heroes of the tale save Yudistra perish with only the briefest and half-hearted eulogy that elucidates their main tragic flaw, like Arjuna’s vanity. In fact, Krishna’s whole purpose for incarnating is said to be a mission to “unburden the Earth” of these Kshatriyas and the ceaseless conflicts they brought to the world.
So in a way the story is as much about the importance of Dharma as it is about the passing (and possible follies) of that rigid conception of Dharma from the world. The end of the conflict ushers in the Kali Yuga, an aeon of strife in which it is stated explicitly that what is and is not dharmic conduct becomes difficult to parse.
Facinating. I've never heard of this interpretation before. Do you have any sources that discuss this? A quick Google search didn't show anything.
The reasons why the Earth was "burdened" is up for interpretation. The commentary I linked comes from a pretty hardline "Krishnaist" point of view which is a bit on the messianic and manichean side. But wiping out all the "fallen" kshatriyas is one of the traditionally understood purposes for the Krishna incarnation.
It's hard to deny that at the end of the Mahabharata literally all the Kshatriyas are dead, including Krishna's own clan who wipe themselves out as a result of having some sort of senseless frenzy come over them. The only one who survives the age is one of Arjuna's grandsons, from whom all subsequent Kshatriya lineages are said to derive. (Although most modern ones are actually various sequences of steppe invaders who got integrated into Hindu society).
So, the source does not support your claim in any way, by your own admission?
The source is pretty much just reiterating the Gita's line: Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion – at that time I descend Myself.
>But wiping out all the "fallen" kshatriyas is one of the traditionally understood purposes for the Krishna incarnation.
Traditionally according to who? I have not heard this interpretation even once, and you have failed to procure a source.
You could just read it yourself and see that it does say he was there to wipe out the Kshatriyas. What's up for interpretation is what "burdened" means. You will find most religious texts leave many things like this up for interpretation because they're the outputs of evolving, oral traditions and not fixed technical manuals.
> I have not heard this interpretation even once
Then I have serious doubts as to how knowledgable you are on the subject. This is given as the central reason for the events of the Mausala Parva and why the hunter who ends up killing Krishna is held blameless for simply executing the last step in Krishna fulfilling his Dharma. The whole of the Mahabharata is about the concept of yagna/sacrifice, the eradication of the old to make way for the next Yuga.
Let me remove all your doubts and assure you that I have absolute no knowledge of the subject whatsoever, apart from what comes from being born in a not-particularly-religious Hindu family. I never claimed any special knowledge nor do I need any to be able to verify your claim.
You are making a straightforward, factual claim that it is the accepted view that the whole purpose of Krishna was to wipe out the Kshatriyas. I am not even asking you to establish that this is the accepted view, which is your full claim. I am just asking for one source that reiterates the same view.
I have skimmed through the article several times and I could not find anything suggesting that. Can you please quote the relevant sentence/paragraph from the article?
Forget linking to the right chapter of the book, you had not even linked to the right book. How did you expect anyone to verify your claim!?
It clarifies on the way of the world, the duties of a human being, on how to decide what is right and wrong (or what is sin and not).
Ultimately, it posits that what we suffer as humans, are essentially results of our own actions (karma). However these effects are not limited to the lifetime of the human form (because Gita posits that the human body is perishable, but the soul is non-perishable and carries forward the karmic effects).
It puts the cause of human suffering on humans themselves and posits that to escape this never ending cycle of cause-reaction, detachment is the only way forward.
Gita then explains what is detachment. How to be detached from our actions, thereby breaking the cycle of re-birth and ending our suffering.
So, in the context of Oppenheimer, I speculate that his reading of Gita made him aware of his actions and the karmic effects of it on his soul.
Background Note : Hinduism puts forth that this universe and our existence is not the outcome of some being / God. As, logically, speaking, if the universe came to be from the actions of some superior being, then it is implied that some higher being made this superior being, and the hierarchy goes on without end. Hinduism posits that this is absurd and that the universe is nothing but god. Every molecule, every atom, every soul is an expression of god.
Your statements are directly refuted by the Gita itself:
BG 10.39: I am the generating seed of all living beings, O Arjun. No creature moving or non-moving can exist without me.
BG 10.42: What need is there for all this detailed knowledge, O Arjun? Simply know that by one fraction of my being, I pervade and support this entire creation.
BG 10.8: I am the origin of all creation. Everything proceeds from me. The wise who know this perfectly worship me with great faith and devotion.
There is no problem of infinite regress when God is defined as the uncaused cause.
Neither is a scripture being both religious in nature and philosophical a mutual exclusivity.
Only somebody who has never read the Gita can say this.
There shouldn't be an implication that science and religion are at odds - perhaps the cartoon interpretation of religion by some segments of intellectual society, but scientists of old were often struggling to reconcile their desire of increased knowledge of the physical world with their faiths.
Isaac Newton for example, wrote more papers about religion than he did about science and math[0]:
How much of Newton’s writing has survived?
A huge amount. There’s roughly 10 million words that Newton left. Around half of the writing is religious, and there are about 1 million words on alchemical material, most of which is copies of other people’s stuff. There are about 1 million words related to his work as Master of the Mint. And then roughly 3 million related to science and math.
This, then, would have less to do with the explosive power of the Trinity test, and more to do with the decaying remnants of missile silos, which are already ruins.
https://web.archive.org/web/20131126020921/http://www.amphil...
(Varnas are obviously a little different from its contemporary form - caste, but also shares many essential features. Namely, pre-determination of social status and broad occupations based on birth and endogamy, although it's more like a woman from a higher varna can not marry a man from a lower varna.)
Why is Arjuna's dharma to fight? Because he is a Kshatriya. Why shouldn't Arjuna worry about what consequences the war might have on his family and society? Well, because Krishna himself is the upholder of Varnashrama Dharma. Arjuna should only worry about doing his duty, and not worry about such lofty matters.
No! That is a very shortsighted and narrow view of a complex and nuanced subject.
For details, I recommend that you look into the works on Dharma and Ashrama System by the noted Indologist Patrick Olivelle.
A specific Worldview and cultivating a Mindset to go with it which takes Death and Total Destruction as part of a Universal Lifecycle.
Whole of Bhagvad Gita was spoken during the Mahabharata War. It contains some overall guidance i.e. it can be applicable to normal day life as well as situational guidance on the context of the going war.
It was all justified by someone who goes by name Krishna in ancient text. Krishna origin is questionable as he's not one person throughout his history but fusion of multiple personalities which existed in past.
Krishna could as well be a master manipulator who convinced other's that God and him are actually just one. Many Kings of that time actually did try to become God the prime example was Pondrak who believed he's the real Vasudev. His version couldn't survive because he lost the battle against Krishna.
Mahabharata is not useful to for an average person, reading it will not enlighten you or anything. It's not a guide on how to live your life, it has many flaws, questionable ethics and morality defined in the text, bringing God into it to make beyond contest.
If it had anything of use, India where this religious text is most popular would be epicenter of good behavior, technological advancements, ethics and morality. Is it? No it's far away from it.
Before anyone questions my religion, I am Hindu from north India (Uttarakhand Purohit clan to be specific)
2. Then you discount Krishna being not real.
Do you see the obvious logical contradiction? Btw, unlike Christianity, Hinduism doesn't rely on Mahabharta being real. So this angle is a common attack from Christians.
Your previous comment:
> 666 is number of the beast. I wonder how many thiest scientists would have refused to work on it if they were to use 666
Why would a non-Christian believe that?
You are probably new to the site and don't know that people can see your past comments.
Your language perfectly mirrors the one used by missionaries in India (studied at one such school but didn't get baptized).
Expecting anything to be "epicentre of good behavior" is wrong to begin with because every person is different no matter what any text/information/knowledge the person has access to and ancient India (as that is what we're talking about here) did have stable economies as well as kingdoms. Was it perfect? No, because nothing is.
India had pretty significant technological advancements and all you have to do is Google Search for it.
You have absurd definition of "anything of use". If you want everything to be perfect, then bad luck, there isn't such place to go for you.
Can you please elaborate.
>Before anyone questions my religion, I am Hindu from north India (Uttarakhand Purohit clan to be specific)
What Vedanta school of interpretation are you talking about.
PS: Book link - https://www.amazon.in/Ambedkars-India-B-R-Ambedkar/dp/938702...
https://thediplomat.com/2017/02/steve-bannon-dharma-warrior-...
Modern Example: Steve Bannon was defined as Dharmic warrior by Indian Consul General to US.