PREFACE
Bhagavada-Gita is the most revered scripture of the Hindus. Commenting on Gita, Pandit Sunderlal writes: “The portion of Mahabharata’s Bhisma Parva covering Chapters 25 to 42 is called The Gita. In these 18 chapters is recorded the conversation which took place between Sri Krishna and Arjuna during the first stage of the war of Mahabharata. On the tenth day of the war, it is stated Sanjaya related this conversation to Dhrtarashtra. He said that he, by the kindness of Vyasa, had heard it from the very mouth of Sri Krishna himself (18:75). It is written in the second chapter of Bhisma Parva that Vyasa had bestowed upon Sanjaya the spiritual eye by which he, sitting away from the scene of war, could both see the battle and hear the conversation. Critics have doubted whether it was natural for Sri Krishna and Arjuna to carry on such prolonged conversation of a serious nature when the contending armies were against each other, and whether it was ever possible for Sanjaya to see the battle ground from a far off region and hear the prolonged serious conversation between Sri Krishna and Arjuna and remember all the slokas (verses) aright. The controversy that has raged over this was so acute that one critic has, out of seven hundred slokas, selected one hundred, a second critic thirty six, a third twenty eight and a fourth but seven as the slokas likely to have been uttered on the battle-field by Sri Krishna and which later on were developed into seven hundred. As a way out, several scholars have offered the theory that the entire picture of the war is an allegory portraying the eternal conflict in the mind of man between good and evil.”
In this connection one may agree with Lokmanya Bal Gangadhara Tilak who says: “Those who are only interested in the spiritual aspect of the story, need not enter into any disputations over the outer form in which it is expressed. Whether the battle described in the Mahabharata ever actually took place, whether Sri Krishna and Arjuna ever held a conversation on the battle-field, whether Sanjaya was endowed with any inward eye or not, it is clear that the stanzas of the Gita were composed neither by Sri Krishna and Arjuna nor by Sanjaya. These were actually composed by Vyasa. To regard the Gita as having been expressed in the present form by Sri Krishna and Arjuna or on the other hand, to apply to it the canons of dialectics, does not seem to be an appropriate approach to the Gita. In its own grand manner, and in keeping with the condition of life prevailing in the time of its compositions, the Bhagavad Gita, which is the essence of Upanishads and because of which we need not read other scriptures, presents to the perplexed souls of all times a beautiful and valuable message.”
Whatever the critics might say, we are of the firm opinion that Gita is original to the full. Such continuity, such division of the subjects and the manner in which each subject has been treated confirms that either the entire Gita has to be accepted as emanating from one source or nothing at all. The chief reason that has confounded the critics time and again is the fact that the entire discussion took place in between the two warring armies and with arrows flying past from both sides. They get more perplexed when they are unable to comprehend how the subject of Gita, which deals with spirituality, fits with the overall background of the war. As you progress reading this commentary, you will find that the discussion being carried out by Krishna and Arjuna was of interest to both the warring factions, as this discussion was the basis of the entire fight. This discussion was to decide who would fight from Krishna’s side and who would favour the Kauravas. Those who preferred to remain neutral are condemned by Krishna himself. With this background in mind, you only need your imagination to visualize that both the armies must have waited anxiously to see the outcome of this discussion, as this was to decide whether Arjuna, the greatest of the warriors of the period, would fight alongside Krishna or not. You will notice yourself, as you proceed with reading of our commentary, that control of throne or territories was not the chief reason for war, as is generally believed to be.
During the course of discussion between Krishna and Arjuna, there is reference to various faiths that prevailed during those times, as well as to different religious thoughts, methods of worship, rites and rituals, superstitions and philosophic notions that were in vogue. Gita examines the validity of each one of them. Any worship that does not culminate in the Supreme Absolute God is condemned; even so it is the worship of the deities named in the Vedas – the most sacred scriptures of the Indo-Aryans. It argues that self-control and righteousness form the first steps in the spiritual progress and are enjoined by every faith. It states that salvation lies in elevating one’s self to such an extent that our self becomes one with the Paramatma or Manifest Self of God. This Manifest Self of God has a direct link to the higher self inside us and is also responsible for providing consciousness. Gita insists on seeing one Parameshwara (Supreme God) in all things - animate and inanimate. In the end, it points the way, through the purification of one’s soul and exercising of complete control over it, of passing from one lower stage to a higher stage. That indeed is the theme of the Bhagavad Gita.
The real issue can be understood if we minutely study the reasons that Arjuna places before Krishna for consideration. He says:
“If I take part in this battle, our entire family will perish. With their destruction, will disappear their ancient customs and rites and rituals that regulate their life (I.40). And when these disappear, there will remain nothing to offer guidance and serve as moral checks to those who survive, more particularly to the woman folk among them. In consequence, corruption will prevail and women’s morality will get undermined. (I:41). Once this happens, inter-mixture of castes will follow, and there will remain then no distinction between one caste and another. And when such an intermixture takes place, those that have caused the destruction of their families, as well as those that survive, will go to Hell; Even their ancestors will go there, because there will be left no one of their progeny with racial purity qualified to perform the rites of food and water for the upkeep of their souls. As a result of the sins of the destroyers of the families, the traditional rites, rituals, and laws will be destroyed once for all. (I:43). We have been hearing from time immemorial that those whose rites and rituals are thus destroyed, Hell becomes their permanent abode (I.44). It will therefore be a heinous sin for us to take part in this battle.”
This passage from Arjuna gives us some idea about the beliefs of the people. Fact is that people had digressed from the true Vedic teachings and their religion was all but rituals. Moreover, the rituals were not being performed for paying oblations to the Absolute God. Instead, the Vedic deities were being worshipped as gods. The core religious teachings were being ignored and people were of the opinion that through performance of various rituals, they had performed their duty. Outside of these rituals, their life was spent mostly in materialistic pursuits. Entertainment, be it sex or playing of dice, was common. Morals were low, deceit and treachery common. The priests were all-powerful and were blindly followed. This gave them power over the kings as well. Consequently, the priests were playing in wealth and power.
The digression from the true path had been to such an extent that God felt the need to send a new Messenger or Avatar in the form of Krishna. Once Krishna reinforced the teachings regarding the One God, it appeared as if he was introducing an altogether new religion. This has happened time and again in history and Krishna’s case was no exception. People regarded the religion inherited from their forefathers as the true religion, without applying their reason or intellect. With time, they got deviated from that true path, and there was need for Krishna to come with the teachings of the true path again. Yet, instead of recognizing their faults and going back to the true religion, they rigidly adhered to their dogmas and beliefs and when Krishna reintroduced the true path, they came up in arms against him.
Arjuna too had grown up following the deviated understanding of Vedas, which the people considered as true Vedic teachings. That is why there were doubts in his mind. As you can see from Arjuna’s words quoted above, he appears worried about the ancient customs, rites and rituals getting extinct. He is worried about the caste getting corrupted. He is worried about none remaining to offer rice and water to the forefathers. His words suggest he believed these things were required for the upkeep of the soul. Thus degradation had reached such a level that instead of righteous living, such acts were considered important for the soul. Not only this, Arjuna was shirking from his duty under the pretext of performing the rituals. After all, ancient customs, rites and rituals were governing the lives of the people. It was generally believed that rites and rituals lead to heaven and those who didn’t perform them went to hell. Nobody gave a thought as to how putting oil or ghee in fire could check a person from moral degradation.
Fact is that Vedic religion had deviated with time. Vedas had introduced the Devatas and people waited for the time when the Devatas would come. When this wait grew longer, deviations crept in. Myths and legends were built around the persona of the Devatas. Rituals were initiated, perhaps initially to remember them, which grew more and more dogmatic with time. There were some who even began to doubt the identity of the Devatas. We have seen in the Puranas how some, tired of the wait, said there were no Devatas. The priests too played a role in establishment of this ritualistic religion, as this gave them both power and money. With time, these vices grew further and some started regarding the Devatas as gods. As the priests grew richer in money and clout, they began to control the kings and the kshattriyas (the fighter caste). All this was happening in the name of the Devatas. Such was people’s faith in them. The example of this blind faith can also be seen from the fact that the rich and the powerful, including the priests, began to pass the blame of their sins on the Devatas, and the general people believed these stories as true. So much so that even today myths regarding Devatas getting obsessed with a maiden and producing son or daughter are talked about.
Following a ritualistic life and entertainment were the chief occupation of people. Chaucer (a form of dice) was the chief mode of passing the time. Betting was also common. So much so that these two evils have come down in history and are even performed as a ritual around Diwali. Gita itself has authenticated that these vices were at their peak during those time. Not just on Diwali alone, but people were engaged in these modes of entertainment most of the time. A cursory look at Upanishads and Puranas will reveal several other evils that prevailed in the society. Even Gita confirms that when evil predominates good, need is felt to send an avatar. If Krishna had to come as an avatar, it meant those were some of the worst times in terms of adherence to righteousness and right beliefs. It is unfortunate that some of us consider the beliefs and practices of those very people of Krishna’s time as true dharma.
Vedas were truly lofty in nature, people had interpreted them differently. Though for them they were the divine books. They were obsessed with what was stated in the Vedas (2:42). Belief in them was rooted in their minds. That was the case with Arjuna too (2:53). Talks on Vedas used to be immensely appreciated (2:42). People of the times believed that there was nothing superior to the Vedas (2:43). Krishna acknowledged the lofty status of the Vedas and its content but admonished the lack of understanding of the Vedas and the rites and rituals that had got built around them, thereby forgetting the true God. What the people had actually adopted from the Vedas for guidance in life was nothing but external rites and rituals such as Yajnas, Havana, japa, tapas, puja path, daan, etc. (1:43; 2:20, 22; 11:48-53, 20, 21-29). Otherwise, getting pleasure and comfort in life and to gratifying their worldly desires constituted their main goal of life. Another of their highest aim was to secure the pleasures of Paradise and to raise themselves to the position of the most favoured in the Life Beyond (9:20-21, 2:43-44). Yajna was of several kinds (4:32). And Yajna too, we have seen in our study of the Vedas, was based on misconceived notions. During the course of the practice of Vedic and Smriti ceremonies, various kinds of Mantras were recited and ‘ghee’ and different articles of food offered (9:16; 4:24) and the Soma juice drunk (9:20). We have proved in our study of the Vedas that even drinking of Soma was wrongly understood.
In addition to worshipping the Devatas as gods, other gods too had been introduced. Deities were regarded equivalent to the Parameshwara (God); at times the God was totally forgotten. People had begun to invoke them for the fulfilment of their various desires. Worldly comfort formed objects of their appeals. Various attempts were being made to please deities. In their names, various objects were being offered as sacrifices (3:11-12; 4:12-25; 7:20-23). Flowers, leaves, fruits and water also formed the objects of their offerings. Besides, deities, ghosts, and devils as well as the illustrious ancestors and mythical characters were worshipped. (Chapter XI).
The people of the times believed in omens too (1:31). It is clear from the second, sixth, ninth and the succeeding chapters that people of those days were concerned only with the external forms of religious rites and rituals instead of internal purity. Sanyasis, for example, were prohibited from touching fire and required to do or not to do this or that thing (1-6). In short, there were various sects and faiths in the region during those days (18:66). Some people believed in miracles and pursued two methods to attain them, one by making offerings and the other by going to solitude and becoming ascetics.
From philosophical point of view, two conflicting thoughts existed in the land to which constant reference is made in the Gita (2:3; 3:3; 13:24). The followers of the thought of Sankhya Marg laid emphasis on devotion instead of external observance of rites and rituals, and considered devotion the only way to attain salvation. They had removed the Devatas altogether from life, around whom the entire post-Vedic religion was based. They regarded every ritual as evil and prohibitive (3:18) and went to live in the forests, forsaking their social obligations and families. The followers of another thought believed in the observance of rites and rituals, built around the Vedic hymns and their characters. They were of the opinion that observing these rites and rituals led to salvation.
Krishna has deftly shown in Gita the evils that had come to get associated with both of these. This is something that the writers and commentators in general have failed to notice. This is perhaps because both these groups continue to survive even today and the various scholars either adhere to one view or the other. Reading the Gita with us will prove all our claims.
Since Arjuna had grown up in an atmosphere where rituals dominated all religious exercises, he still had a soft corner towards that. Moreover, he was the greatest of warriors of the time and his support to any side was to tilt the balance. Everybody, including the Kauravas, was anxious to know which side Arjuna would take. There might have been some more who were still confused as regard to some aspects of Krishna’s teachings. Therefore, it can easily be inferred that everybody waited with bated breaths to see the outcome of the discussion between Krishna and Arjuna, when the two came in between the two confronting armies and discussed the issue.
We will prove time and again during this commentary that the war was over understanding of religion. The subject of conquest or gaining control over territory is not mentioned even once in Gita. This is the subject that was put forth by the epic Mahabharata, whose source is altogether different. Whereas Gita is Krishna’s discussion with Arjuna, Mahabharata is an epic that narrated the incidents attached to the war between Kauravas and Pandavas. There are historical evidences available that Mahabharata and Gita were initially different compilations and it was only at a later stage that Gita was inserted in between the pages of epic Mahabharata.
From this discussion we can conclude that since the subject of discussion between Krishna and Arjuna was a crucial issue to all, it was but natural that the hostilities might have been stopped when the discussion progressed.
Before you proceed reading, we want you to stop... and ponder for a moment. Are your reasoning faculties open? Have you detached yourself from all your present beliefs? Detachment and certain degree of spirituality is essential to understand such sublime topics. Be prepared to read some observations that have never been made so far. You will have to read the BOOK “One God, One Religion” to see the proofs on which we have based our arguments while trying to understand Gita. Therefore, if you have not yet read the BOOK, kindly do so before you proceed reading this.
Kindly remember, the author does not wish to thrust any observations upon you. Whatever conclusions the author reached after sincere study of several years have been put before you. You might see motive but there is none other than reaching the truth... the true religion of God. If you disagree, the sanest response will be to put aside this and start reading the commentary that you trust the most. If you really wish to disagree, do it with written words... as we expect our readers to be intellectually and spiritually inclined.
......................................................................................
KRISHNA MISUNDERSTOOD
“Krishna Misunderstood” is a Chapter in the BOOK “One God, One Religion”. We use the content again here in this commentary as it is relevant for our study. It says:
It is evident from the Puranas that people of the time of Krishna did not recognize him, as he ought to be recognized. Some would say this couldn’t be possible; when millions of people worship him now, how is it possible that those in his period were not doing the same.
Fact is that being on the side of Krishna in those times meant following a certain way of life. One had to be spiritually inclined, truthful, just and righteous, if one wished to come to Krishna’s side. He had to believe in One God to such an extent that all material things in life were to become immaterial. He had to improve his conduct and nature and, upon doing so, he had to work to remove evil from the society, even if it meant suffering material losses. Since the physical body was immaterial, as per Krishna, it didn’t matter if the person died in the pursuit.
Even today, if Krishna’s teachings are to be truly followed, many of his seemingly most ardent followers would desert him. As long as nothing is demanded in return, it is always easy to call oneself a believer or worshipper. Suppose Krishna was to come again and say that all his believers would henceforth consider fighting all injustice, evil and cruelty as their duty, even if it means giving a few sacrifices, just as Krishna himself did all through his life. How many of us would remain steadfast on Krishna’s side?
If Krishna would come to say that from now onwards all have to compulsorily spend a good portion of their earnings to feed the poor and take care of those who are ill or in need of attention, how many of us would be willing to do so? In fact, in all likelihood, Krishna would not accept our money, as a great portion of it is ill gotten, which we so heartily shower on Krishna’s idols. Some of the biggest spenders of charity are those who do not even think for a minute while earning whether their money is truthfully obtained or not. All is permissible in business or life, outside of the mandirs. Are these Krishna’s teachings?
If the story described in the Puranas is true, then Krishna’s own brother Satrajit and others doubted Krishna and accused him of killing his brother Prasena, to obtain the wonderful gem. The canard was spread to such an extent that Krishna, in order to quell all those views that were circulating, had to go to the forest, along with some of his Yadava friends. He followed the footprints of his brother’s horse, and then those of the lion who killed him, and then those of the king of bears who killed the lion, and reached the mouth of the cave. He went inside the cave where he had to fight for 21 days with Jambawat, the king of bears, for the possession of the gem. And the ‘intensity’ of his Yadava friend’s love for Krishna can be understood by the fact that none accompanied Krishna inside the cave; they waited outside for seven days and then concluded that he must have met his death in the cavern. “It could not have required so many days,” they thought, “to overcome an enemy;” (says a narration) and accordingly departed and returned to Dwaraka, and announced that Krishna had been killed.
Can there be a greater proof required to tell that there were only a few who were truly on Krishna’s side when he was present as a person in this world? It is easy to say now that we are his followers, but let a time come when Krishna descends to test our integrity towards him and his God, and many of us would start finding excuses or routes to escape. Isn’t it true that being with Krishna means accepting his message as true and leaving all attachments with the material world to become one with God through the path shown by him? Yet, majority of his followers continue to be besotted with Satanic or material desires and yet call Krishna as their own!
Upon hearing of Krishna’s death while fighting Jambawat in the cave, even his relatives performed all the ritual rites suited to the occasion without even bothering to check Krishna’s well-being. Far better than them was Jambawat, who was self-confessedly born of brute origin and who realized Krishna’s virtues in the course of his fight and prostrated before him. Krishna told him that he had descended to take upon himself the burden of the earth and Jambawat offered to him his daughter Jambawati as wife and returned the Syamantaka jewel so that Krishna “could clear his reputation.”
Krishna returned the jewel to his brother and “was exonerated from the crime of which he had been falsely accused.” When Satrajit reflected that he had been the cause of the aspersion upon Krishna’s character, he gave his daughter Satyabhama to Krishna as wife. (Those who fight over gotra for marriage should note that Satrajit has been described as Krishna’s brother). But marriage to Satyabhama too became cause of enmity and people like Akrura, Kritavarman and Satadhanwan became Krishna’s foes.
It is mentioned that Akrura, though conniving against Krishna, knew his greatness. This shows that despite the true knowledge, ego or self-interest often hinders the person’s coming to the right path.
Even Balabhadra, his brother, doubted Krishna’s intentions and was of the opinion that Krishna was pursuing Satadhanwan for material wealth. Balabhadra flew into a violent rage and said to Krishna, “Shame light upon you, to be thus greedy of wealth! I acknowledge no brotherhood with you. Here lies my path. Go whither you please; I have done with Dwaraka with you, with all our house. It is of no use to seek to impose upon me with thy perjuries.”
Does all this not prove our claim? Also it is worthwhile to note that while Gita is replete with the highest teachings relating to self and God, the incidents described about Krishna’s life in Puranas sometime belittle his personality. This is another reason why we wish to believe that Puranas are not the same and they went through editing at some point of time.
Chapter XV of the Vishnu Purana says that when the powerful being resided in this world of mortals, he had 16,100 wives. By these the Universal form, which is without beginning, had 180,000 sons.
Does this fit with your reason? They are hell-bent on proving Krishna as superhuman so that they do not have to follow his way of life.
The description in Vishnu Purana is not centred on wives alone. Sons too are mentioned. This refutes the argument given by those who claim that Krishna had several wives because they had been gifted to him. Krishna was also producing children and if we divide 180,000 sons with 16,100 wives, it would come to each wife having an average of more than 11 sons. Daughters are not counted because that was immaterial to the writer of Purana.
It is beyond the nature of a kind person like Krishna to marry a woman and leave her uncared and unloved. Accepting what has been said in the Purana would amount to accepting several more absurd theories. Krishna was to give 10 minutes each to 45 wives each day if he was to spend only 10 minutes each with his 16,100 wives during a year. Moreover, if we believe that he was spending 10 minutes each with 45 of his wives per day, it would amount to saying that Krishna was spending 450 minutes daily performing this chore, thereby meaning that seven-and-a-half hours daily were being spent catering to the needs of wives alone. This was when Krishna was giving only 10 minutes of his time in a year to each of his wives. Believe us, this is just one small reason which shows that the Puranas are not in their original form anymore and talk of myths and legends that have no roots in truth. The very fact that some of them talk of the temples, which were constructed as late as the 10th century A.D., also confirms our view. There are a lot many other proofs that can be given, so much so that an entire book can be written on the subject.
Let us understand Krishna’s teachings from Gita and not from Puranas, Mahabharata or any similar source!
......................................................................................
This Chapter too has been taken from the BOOK “One God, One Religion” (Part-I).
We all know that Bhagavada-Gita and Mahabharata do not have the same authorship. This is in spite of the fact that Gita occupies a portion of the epic, Mahabharata. While Gita is surely a divine text, Mahabharata is a grand poem written by a human being like you and us. The poem Mahabharata was separate from Gita till several centuries and it was only later that Gita was inserted into the text of Mahabharata. Several scholars and historians agree on this. Whether this was done to increase the value of the epic Mahabharata or to decrease the value of Gita cannot be said with certainty. However, both the ends were achieved. Today, Hindus regard the myths and legends talked about in the epic Mahabharata as true while Gita has lost the importance that it ought to have. Does this not speak of vested interests having their say in the affairs of religion?
Another point that gives credence to this view is the quote from the Vishnu Purana, which says that Vyasa, after writing the Puranas, sat down to write the Mahabharata so as to add to the bulk of the scriptures. Doesn’t this raise eyebrows? Why would somebody write a long narrative just to add to the bulk of the overall literature? Why didn’t the author of the Vishnu Purana give another reason for Vyasa writing the Mahabharata? Doesn’t the wordings given in the Vishnu Purana smell of an ulterior design? Another point that gives weight to our view that Puranas are not the same is the very fact that while it is being said that the Mahabharata was written later than the Puranas, the very incident talking of Vyasa writing the Mahabharata after the Puranas form part of narration of one of the Puranas. Clearly, somebody at some time in history sat down to add this line in the text of the Puranas. How can you explain this unless you accept our view that at least some portions of the Puranas got altered at a later date?
Another point is that the content of Gita is altogether different from the rest of Mahabharata. Whereas Gita preaches spiritualism of the loftiest nature, the rest of the pages only belittle that spiritual view and preach materialism. Our view is that there is also an attempt to degrade the personality of Krishna in Mahabharata. We would perhaps never know whether this was done by design or was just the consequence of foolish interpretation of Krishna’s actions. A study of the manner in which the teachings of the Prophet Mohammad have been changed by those calling themselves Muslims is necessary to show how vested interests take control of the situation and bring alterations in the content at their will. The Caliphs post-Prophet Mohammad, who ruled in the name of Islam, had realized that since Islamic teachings do not support the material life that they would have liked to live, they would either have to bring the teachings down to their way of living or raise their character to the level of true Islam if they wanted to continue ruling over the masses. The former was the easiest thing to do!
This is also the reason why the true inheritors of Prophet Mohammad’s legacy - the Ahlulbayt - were not recognized by the selfish people of the period and all attempts were made to kill the Prophet’s progeny and to dilute his teachings. All these acts were committed in the name of Islam and several ignorant men, to this day, have been unable to see through their designs. Truly, Islamic teachings had nearly been hijacked and changed and those with vested interests nearly succeeded, within 50 years of Prophet Mohammad’s death, until Husain rose up to draw a clear divisive line between true teachings and those propagated by Yazid in the name of Islam.
We have seen in the BOOK how Zulmat (the satanic forces) use the same time-tested methods again and again. Show the glamours of the world to some and make them fall to the capricious invites of the pleasures of the senses. Corrupt the religious beliefs, literature, etc. in case of those who are devout but do not apply their mind. Make the people raise the status of individuals who brought the teachings so that they gain loftier positions, at times loftier than God. Change the essence of religion through incorporating rites, rituals and dogmatic beliefs. If that is not all, make some of your trusted lieutenant’s raise a war on the true followers, so as to subdue them or kill them.
This explains why those who called themselves Muslims killed members of Prophet Mohammad’s household. Once all other tactics got exhausted, they finally decided to eliminate the true champions of Mohammad’s legacy. Had it not been for Husain’s sacrifice, the Islamic teachings had been corrupted beyond recognition within 50 years of the Prophet’s death. All the time-tested tortures and hardships that satanic mind could have conjured together through its centuries of experience in this world were inflicted on Husain and his followers. The hatred, owing to vicious propaganda against those who truly followed Mohammad’s teachings, was present to such an extent among the so-called Muslims of the time that even women and children in Husain’s family were not spared. Yet, all this failed. Karbala thwarted their designs, so much so that the very teachings they were trying to suppress erupted like a volcano, which took the true teachings of Islam not only across the Islamic world but also beyond its frontiers.
The imposed war against Krishna too was a design to kill the teachings right when they were being delivered. Today, an attempt is made by some to portray that those on the Krishna’s side as well as on Kaurava’s side were equally religious but had differences of opinion in regard to the mode of worship. They say this perhaps because there are still a large number of people whose religion is the same as that of the Kaurava – blind and full of rites and rituals. Was it religion governing the likes of Drona, Bhishma and Duryodhana that Draupadi was undressed in public view? Despite this, the three continued to enjoy their high positions in court; it’s possible they were even present in court when this act was committed? Was it religion governing them that the Pandava’s tent was burnt while they were inside? Drona and Bhishma and the priests knew that consequent to Pandava becoming believers of Krishna’s teachings, which propagated One God and nothing else, their own revered positions were at stake. They told the blind followers like Duryodhana that Krishna and his followers were corrupting their faith. Clearly, their religion too was false, something that neither they nor their like-minded descendants today would be willing to accept.
The Gita has more than 20 verses (distributed in seven Chapters) wherein Renunciation of the Fruits of Action has been talked and yet most of the commentators of Gita believe that Krishna sided with one of the two warring factions, who were fighting for the possession of territory. It is extremely sad! Gita talks of strict adherence to righteousness and truth, even if it is at the cost of life, yet the epic Mahabharata portrays Krishna as someone who had no respect for the rules of the battlefield and shows that Karna and Bhishma were both killed by deceit. There are countless such incidents in Mahabharata that show Krishna acting contrary to the very teachings in Gita. Our view is that all through the epic Mahabharata, its writer has sided with the Kauravas. It has tried to restore some of the lost respect for those fighting against Krishna whereas Krishna has minced no words in Gita to pronounce them evil, deviated, unrighteous and worthy of being killed. No, Mahabharata was not a war between princes, as the epic Mahabharata would like us to believe. It was truly a war between right and wrong, between forces of justice and injustice, virtuous and evil.
All through, Mahabharata portrays Drona, Bhishma and Duryodhana as heroes, even if they are the side-heroes, and Krishna is the main hero. Fact is that if you read the Mahabharata carefully, you will find that it only attempts to restore some respect for the Kauravas. At the same time, it tries to bring down the position of Krishna by showing him as one who backs out from his promises, one who flaunts all the rules of battleship thereby revealing the wickedness behind the acts, one who gives false advice so as to win and one who supports the Pandava’s for the great fight for the throne. Towards the end, Mahabharata shows Kaurava in heaven and for a moment even goes on to say that Pandava were being burnt in the hell. Bhima is portrayed as a ferocious eater and one who was savage in deeds. Five husbands are assigned to Draupadi and it is mentioned that she used to live in the houses of all brothers, one by one, each succeeding day. Yet, one son each is assigned to all the brothers. How did they know who was whose son?
It is unfortunate that we are yet to see through these designs and accept all literature as equally sacred and divine, even if it is Kamasutra and even if it is the epic - Mahabharata.
The same would have been the fate of Islamic teachings without Karbala. With no Karbala after Krishna, it can well be assumed how the evil forces must have succeeded in eliminating the distinction between the true and false teachings; how all literature became sacred when it came out of nearly 1000 years of oblivion during the period of Buddhist supremacy and how the evil minds largely succeeded in their designs.
In contrast to the view of most commentators who view Gita and Vedas talking of dissimilar and even contradictory subjects, our view is that Gita upholds the true teachings of Vedas to the maximum; if it criticizes anything, it is the misinterpretations that had been done by the time of Krishna and the deviations that had occurred from the pure Vedic teachings. People digressed from the teachings of the Vedas, so much so they became ritualistic and started worshipping several forms of God; a bit of further deviation lead to the Devatas and Devis being worshipped as gods and goddesses. Then came Gita - an attempt to return to the Almighty One God - and asking the followers to ‘stand up and fight’ against the evil practices and deviations that had crept in their lives. The fact that Krishna had to indulge in a fight against a mighty army is another evidence that his teachings were not accepted easily and he had to labour hard to impart them.
We must remember that in those times, the nobility, the kings and the priests were chiefly responsible for an idea or thought to pervade through the masses who mostly followed it as a rule. Several history books recount how the priests had confined religious rituals to a few and the masses were not supposed to attend them. In fact, they watched from a distance, grasping whatever they could from that distance.
From this viewpoint, the fight between Kaurava and Pandava gains significance. Krishna had been able to influence Arjuna and the rest of Pandava, who had become champions of his cause. The fact that Arjuna himself talks of a time when he used to make fun of Krishna’s teachings is a proof of this. Kaurava continued to adhere to the religion of their forefathers, who were mightily influenced by several leading priests of the time. These priests never wanted the power that they had gained over the masses slipped from their hands. People followed them blindly. This is the reason why Arjuna was reluctant to fight those revered people among the masses; a view that he himself had maintained till sometime back.
Nothing can be said with certainty though as that was the period when writing had not developed and historical accounts were not kept. What is most certain, however, is that Krishna’s teachings too were disobeyed which lead to another revolution by Lord Buddha, which was to later sweep the entire territory of India and up to Sri Lanka.
We have said earlier that the views of the nobility were generally accepted as views of the majority. You might not digest this easily. But the fact is that Buddhism was struggling to find roots until King Ashoka embraced the religion. Thereafter, it spread much faster, that too till Sri Lanka and Burma. Similarly, when the Iranian kings embraced Islam, they saw to it that the rest of the people followed suit. However, this is not the desired way as it brings people of all type of thinking into the religious fold.
Since Buddha too was confronted with materialism all around, his teachings naturally practiced simple living. Unable to understand this, the Buddhists went to the other extreme of renouncing the world and leading a monastic life. In general, it was against the human tendency to lead a life of renunciation of this kind. A silent and gradual backlash led to the decline of Buddhism and people returned to the old customs and manners.
The original Mahabharata had been composed in and around third century B.C., a few centuries later than the time of Buddha. But its relevance grew with time and, as Nataraj Guru writes, it was brought to its present form by some follower of the Vedanta in the second century A.D., when the decline of Buddhism had begun. Later, the commentaries by Sankara (788-826 A.D) followed by Ramanuja (1017-1137 A.D.) and Madhava (1199-1317 A.D.), led to the building of what is known as the Gita literature of today.
Nataraj Guru writes: “About the period when the Guptas ruled, when Buddhism was in decline in India, largely owing to political reasons, there was a spiritual vacuum in the land. The monastic life of the Buddhists had to give way to a revalued and readjusted form of spiritual life. The heterodox rationalism of the Buddhists had come to be discredited and there was no valid philosophy to displace it. In its latest form, the Gita was itself a fulfilment of the spiritual need of the times and Sankara’s commentary on the Gita came just at that period when there was a certain anarchy and confusion of spiritual values in the mind of the ordinary people. Vedic ritualism also tended to be discredited among the masses and the regulating influence so necessary to keep people from falling into an era of decadence of norms and standards of a just or truthful life was absent. By his comments Sankara was able to give stability and continuity to the flow of righteous teaching down through the succeeding generations. His importance as a commentator of the Gita is thus unique, representative and comprehensive.”
It is a period of more than 1000 years between the Mahabharata being composed and attempts made to write its commentary. And there is still greater gap between the actual event described in Mahabharata (viz. the war between Kaurava and Pandava) and composition of Gita. If there are certain missing links, this is the reason for it.
This long period made the people forget certain vital links as regards to comprehension of Gita and when attempts were made at a later stage to replace Buddhism with another philosophy, Krishna was picked up, but unfortunately, along with all the myths and wrong notions that had penetrated during the long centuries of neglect and ill-use.
Isn’t it unfortunate that, unable to clearly comprehend several passages of the Gita or find examples that can be put into practice, Sankara and later Nataraj Guru, both came to the conclusion that “Gita is far from the category of Smartha (obligatory religious) literature? It is this notion that we wish to discard. If Gita is not a book of obligatory conduct then what book is? Whether those books which are filled with rituals, talking about innumerable gods and how to please them or those which touch just a few aspects of human life alone, would be labelled as Smarthas? Gita teaches Brahma Vidya (Science of the Absolute) and following it to its entirety will only lead to emergence of Absolute or Complete Men.
It is extremely unfortunate that in order to prove this theory, the commentators of Gita have even went to the point of calling the writer of Gita as influenced by other school of thoughts, without realizing that the writer of Mahabharata may have been Vyasa or anybody, Gita is the utterance of Paramatma Itself, through the mouth of Krishna. If you are to believe what various commentators have written then you will have to either conclude that Gita is not the utterance of Krishna and it is all fiction created by another writer, or be prepared to accept that Krishna said something and the writer later changed it as per the needs of time, or say that Krishna’s thoughts were governed by the thinking of the time – all things that this writer refuses to accept.
In the introduction to his commentary on Gita, Nataraj Guru has devoted a chapter “The Reason for Mistake of Treating the Gita as a Work of Obligatory Nature” in which he says: “If we ask why the contents of the eighteen chapters and the 700 verses of the Gita have been so puzzling that most commentators have tended to treat it as a book on obligatory, religious or traditional lore, instead of treating it, as it highly deserves to be, on par with the most authoritative writings pertaining to pure contemplative wisdom, the reasonable answer is that the author of Gita was faced with taking cognizance of the existing schools of spiritual thought and practice of his own time, like any writer.”
Most unfortunate indeed! Nataraj Guru agrees to his inability to understand the content of Gita by saying that the 700 verses of the Gita are puzzling. This is perhaps due to his inability to find men who could befit Gita’s description; something that we have done in the BOOK. It is quite ironical that “the most authoritative writing pertaining to pure contemplative wisdom” is not obligatory. Was Krishna just doing plain rhetoric or ‘big talk’ as we are used to saying, that too in the midst of the clamour of swords and arrows flying nearby, and there was no obligation for Arjuna (or us) to follow? Or was the obligation merely for Arjuna, and not for us? Or is Krishna meant, as is unfortunately being done in our houses, only for being put up as idol to be worshipped, that too an idol of his childhood days, when he might not have been in position to give such conclusive and authoritative statements “pertaining to pure contemplative wisdom”?
......................................................................................
NEITHER GITA NOR VEDAS HAVE BEEN CORRECTLY UNDERSTOOD
We had made a passing reference earlier that lack of application of our reasoning faculties was the chief reason for the fight of Mahabharata. We have also given a few points there why it cannot be expected from Krishna, considering the absolutist nature of teachings with which he is associated with, that he would be a part of a fight for capture of territory or kingdom. How sad it is that he is portrayed with using deceitful means to win? How can we take this as true when the teachings of Gita are totally in contrast to this? Arjuna is told that it does not matter whether he gets killed or emerges victorious and it is obligatory on him to follow his duty. The war has been described as righteous.
How can a war for territory be a righteous one? Can the God-ordained duty be to capture the kingdom for the sake of merely becoming the king? Fact is that we are yet to understand Gita truly.
The subject of the Devatas was introduced by the Vedas. They were introduced as the supreme Divine Beings, higher than the rest of the God’s creation. With time, however, the Vedic teachings got corrupted, and the Devatas began to be worshipped as gods. Not only the Devatas, yakshas, rakshasas, pretas and bhutas too were introduced as gods, and people were worshipping them as well. Inability to understand truly the content of the Vedas led to emergence of several false myths in regard to the Devatas. Several stories also got attributed to the Devatas which corrupted their true identity. This can be understood by the generally accepted view about Indra, who is portrayed in the myths as one who moves about producing children, and perpetually remain drunk under the effect of Soma-juice.
We have shown in the BOOK how these myths developed and how the teachings of the Vedas had changed completely till the time of Krishna. The Vedas too had presented the concept of One God but that got changed with time and the status of divinity was bestowed upon an entire group, and this included the Devatas. Elaborate rituals were being performed by the priests in worship of these Devatas and others; these priests were in fact responsible for corrupting the teachings. So much so that an elaborate institution had developed where the chief gainer was the priest. People performed all these rituals thinking that they would lead them to heaven. The priests who, as we have said, were the chief beneficiaries, both in terms of wealth and social status, further propagated the belief. Outside of these rituals, the Absolute God or even the Devatas were forgotten. People indulged in all types of vices and the concept righteousness was lost altogether. They indulged in entertainment extensively. While their days were spent in playing dice, they also indulged in sex heavily, so much so that the line between permissible and non-permissible got obliterated. Society was full of illegitimate children. More grievously, the illegitimate children of the priests and the nobility were ascribed to the gods (read Devatas). The common people, accepted all these absurd stories as true, as they were endorsed by the official propaganda machinery and often also had the tacit approval of the high priests. Stories abounded of arms and help from the gods (read Devatas) and they were often created to terrorize the common people against rebellion or install fear on the neighbouring kings, lest they contemplate attacking their neighbours. People were officially appointed to sing praises of the kings all through the kingdom. This lead to creation of several absurd stories, which have unfortunately found place in our literature, some of which is even regarded as sacred.
Such were the conditions that necessitated the coming of another Avatar or Messenger in the form of Krishna. He re-introduced the concept of One Absolute God and criticized the people who had taken to worship of several gods. As regards to Devatas, their value was retained as Divine Lords, but as those created by God and not gods. This explains why time and again they are described as the created ones and the Absolute God – the Creator. Krishna also stressed that worship is not just a ritual to be performed at certain time of the day. The entire life has to be led in remembrance of God. Not only did he try to remove the evils associated with oblations and ritual sacrifices but also criticized those who had taken to sannyasa. He showed the middle way, exactly the same that is taught by true Islam which talks of Sirat-e-Mustaqeem - the Straight Path. Righteousness was held in high esteem and all actions were to be performed for God. Man was told to look inside him and identify his own soul with the Self of God. This alone, it was said, could lead to salvation.
Krishna reintroduced ‘reason’, something that had been forgotten altogether in the midst of blind worship, and people had started accepting all fabricated stories as true. He criticized blind worship, which devoid of reason, was the root-cause of evil to generate. Recognizing the inner self and not the outer temple were henceforth given more prominence. Remembering God in all actions rather than during the rituals was portrayed as the true path to salvation. At the same time the evils of a forest life were elaborated upon, something that many commentators find hard to digest even today.
There was bound to be opposition. The chief losers from adherence to Krishna’s teachings were the priests. They had got used to wealth, prestige and power to such extent that they even controlled the actions of kings. Who would have come to them after Krishna’s teachings, as per which each person was to be valued on the basis of his actions rather on birth or position in society? Like always, attempt was made to subjugate the truth through violence, which was fanned further because of the state-owned propaganda machinery that was put to work. The likes of Drona and Bhishma instigated the blind-followers like Duryodhana by telling him that the age-old concepts of religion were being challenged. Duryodhana and others like him, who had grown worshipping the Devatas and others as gods and considered certain set of rituals and beliefs as the roots of their religion, failed to apply reason or confine Krishna’s teachings to intellectual discussion. They could think of only one way through which Krishna’s teachings could be suppressed; that was to physically eliminate those who were the champions of these teachings. It perfectly reflects the state of their mind that saw everything from a materialistic point of view.
It is evident from Gita that Bhishma and Drona identified the truth but did not accept it lest they would lose their high positions. Duryodhana and the rest were blind followers. Arjuna had come to Krishna’s side but there were still certain doubts that had remained in his mind. Had he had his way, he would have refrained from fighting. This is truly reflected in the act of his throwing away his bow and arrow. Krishna not only removed the doubts that came up but also showed him that as a true disciple of Krishna, it was his duty to fight when God had ordained him to do so. Now that he had chosen to come on the true path, it didn’t matter whether he died or emerged victorious. All of us need to continue performing our duties, unmindful of the consequences.
If you read the Gita again, you will find that the subject of Devatas perpetually persists in the background. Those in the Kaurava’s camp worshipped them as gods. Arjuna too, like others who had accepted Krishna’s teachings, had till then followed the deviated version of Vedic teachings. That is why Krishna is found to be upholding the sanctity of Vedas, and yet is criticizing its followers. He is upholding the high position of the Devatas and yet is stressing on the use of reason and wisdom, to know their true position and discard the fabrications that had got attached with time.
Unable to understand this and seeing the revered sages of the period - Drona and Bhishma - on the Kaurava’s side has confused the scholars, including the writer of Mahabharata. All of them have tried to show both the warring groups differing in their respective beliefs but following the true path. Can this be true? Can the true path have two versions? If there are two contradictory paths, it means that one of them is far from truth. Untruth can be at war with untruth but it is not possible that truth comes to stand up in opposition to truth.
As you read, you will realize for yourself that we have been unable to understand the true content of our scriptures till date. However, before we begin, we would like to clear one point. As per our observation, there are three people doing the talking in Gita. First is Sanjaya who is narrating all that he saw transpiring between Krishna and Arjuna on that fateful day in the battlefield. Second is Arjuna himself who has some doubts regarding his religious beliefs and validity of the war that is about to commence and is repeatedly asking questions from Krishna. Third is Krishna himself, whose character and great personality remains a subject of study. From the responses that Krishna has given, it is clear that the one who is responding enjoys a far higher position than what was apparent to Arjuna during the initial phases of discussion and may well have some role to play in the creation of this universe. The tone and wordings that have come out from Krishna’s mouth have confounded the minds of scholars till this day.
So who is Krishna? Is he God himself? Or is he an imaginary character created by Sage Vyasa to convey the teachings? This second hypotheses has to be discounted because we know for sure that Krishna actually lived on this earth (there are proves of Krishna’s presence in Puranas), and so did Arjuna, who fought in the epic battle of Mahabharata.
The other theory that Krishna is God Himself, who took birth on earth in human form, is accepted by most of the commentators. However, we are sure that a large majority would find difficulty in accepting this theory as true, considering the fact that Krishna’s life too ended like mortal human beings. Moreover, if we accept this as true, we will have to accept that people were at war against God and God had to make efforts to bring them back to the right path. Is God, who is regarded as the Creator, so weak that He needs to take birth to bring the people back to His path? Does God need assistance from humans in order to accomplish His tasks? Further, what is it that God would gain if more people begin to worship Him? After all, He is the Creator who created them and He is the Destroyer who will put them to death. Yet, bringing them to right path is a task that seems troublesome to God as well. More ironically, the fact that several people didn’t accept Krishna’s teachings during his lifetime and a lot many died fighting against him would amount to saying that God failed in His attempt to lead people to His own path.
In the light of the study of Vedas, Upanishad and Puranas, we are in position to shed further light on the subject. As you have seen from the study of these scriptures in the BOOK, the Non-Manifest God created a Manifest Form, which was all powerful and through whom all the beings were created. This Manifest Form could have been in the form of a light or power and was subordinate only to the Non-Manifest, Imperishable and Absolute God. The Manifest Form led to the creation of Devatas, who were made of Light (or Noor, as per the Muslims). The word Noor means Light. We have seen in the BOOK how the word Devata too means something illuminated. Fourteen Devatas (which included a Devi) were born out of a process in such a manner that all were exactly identical to each other and also exactly identical to the One Noor from which the division took place. This is what the Upanishads say. Mohammad too has referred to the same process and described all fourteen to be identical. He said:
The first is Mohammad, the last is Mohammad, the Middle is Mohammad and all are Mohammad
These fourteen Devatas (of whom one is Devi), who were created out of the Noor created by the Manifest Self or Paramatma which was Itself created by the Absolute God are the guardians of the fourteen spheres and also the rulers of our organs of action and senses. Again, these are the words of the Upanishad. All this and much more information is available in the existing translations of Upanishads and Puranas. So much so that the word Aum, we have proved in the BOOK, refers only to them and the Gayatri Mantra too talks of them. In the case of the Vedas, we have shown how the verses have been grossly misinterpreted, so much so that they sometimes present silly meanings and at times contradict each other. We have shown clearly how the Vedas are talking of nothing else but of a future time when these Devatas would come to live on this earth in human form.
The greatest mistake that we commit, governed as we are by our materialistic minds, is that we see these Devatas as having a body forgetting that they are the names of certain powers, in the form of Light or Noor; the Noor descends on earth in pious human bodies to lead and guide its towards the true path. The acts of Devatas therefore are truly the acts of the Manifest Self (Paramatma).
It is evident that the Manifest Self of God too is a creation, whose Noor divided to create the fourteen Devatas, who are being eulogized throughout the Vedas. The wise sages of yore knew that they would perhaps not be living when these Devatas would together take birth in human bodies. At a time when there was no developed form of writing, they must have been surely concerned that the Vedic wordings might get lost with time. Therefore, they wisely linked the Vedic mantras to various rituals and thus ensured that the words of God do not change. We must be thankful to those sages because of whose intelligence and foresight, the original wordings of the Vedic hymns remained intact and all the digression was confined to interpretation of those hymns. Had they not taken this important step of linking the hymns of Vedas with various rituals, the text too would have changed with time and it would have become impossible to find the true meaning of the Vedic hymns.
We are sure a great number of people won’t subscribe to our view. Even if they don’t, the truth remains that no Hindu of present times knows the true identity of the Devatas in spite of the fact that they are subject of discussion in the entire Vedas and Vedas form the heart of all Hindu scriptures. This itself is an invitation to ponder upon the fact that the truth lies somewhere else and not in our present beliefs.
Gita as well as the Upanishads say that salvation is achieved when a person recognizes this Manifest Self and reaches God through this route. It is said that freedom from the cycle of birth and rebirth is achieved only when this Manifest Self is recognized. Jesus too referred to the same and talked of a future period when the Spirit of Truth would arrive on this earth. Muslims are unanimous that this was reference to future coming of Mohammad though our view is that Jesus was referring to the coming of fourteen Devatas on this earth, who together comprise the Noor of the Manifest Self. The 14, when they came on earth in human bodies, were called Ahlulbayt. Muslims quote several sayings of Prophet Mohammad wherein it is said that those who identify themselves with these Ahlulbayt or 14 Masooms get freed (nijaat is the Arabic word that is used) and attain salvation. What this nijaat means is something that Muslims won’t be able to explain. Taking cue from the Upanishads, we can safely say that this nijaat or freedom is actually freedom from the cycle of birth and rebirth and if Islam did not talk about the subject of rebirth elaborately, it is because those fourteen Devatas, treading whose path salvation was to be achieved, were being presented in front of the adherents.
Upanishads mention clearly that the Devatas took upon themselves the responsibility of leading all creations to God. We are sure that everybody would accept that God is not to gain from our worship. Eventually, it is we who are to gain when we follow the path shown by the Devatas. As we know, this gain would be in the form of freedom from the cycle of birth and death and permanent stay in heaven. This heaven too is referred to in Gita as Indra’s heaven and we have proved in the BOOK that Indra is none but Mohammad, when he would take birth on this earth. Muslims too talk of a heaven belonging to Mohammad. Fact is that Mohammad himself has talked of Hasan and Husain as the leaders of the youths of heaven and Fatima as the leader of women of heaven.
Hasan, Husain, Fatima, Ali along with Mohammad and nine others comprise the fourteen Ahlulbayt. And we have shown clearly in the BOOK how these fourteen Ahlulbayt are the same as the fourteen Devatas and the incidents from the lives of the fourteen Devatas that are described elaborately in the Vedas are exactly the same as those which were to happen in the lives of these fourteen Ahlulbayt, when they took birth in human form.
It is evident therefore that the Vedic people, who were later given the name Hindus, knew much in advance about these Devatas and were in actuality waiting for them to arrive. The information available in Upanishads and Puranas about the origin and role of these Devatas, prior to their taking birth at a particular place in Arabia, is far more extensive and elaborate than the entire Islamic literature put together. Fact is that their knowledge of the true religion of God predates the people of Arabia and all those who were to later call themselves as Muslims, and who have yet not understood the true importance of Ahlulbayt and their role in showing the straight path to God. Whether the Muslims have accepted or rejected the fourteen Noors (Devatas), who together comprise the one Noor of the Manifest Self of God, fact remains that the Vedic people worshipped them far more intensely and knew far more about their true identity than all the Muslims of present.
After reminding you of this background, we come to the subject of Krishna so as to explain why it appears from Krishna’s wordings that he has some role to play in the creation of this universe. But to do so, we would have to go back to the subject of Devatas again.
As we have seen in the BOOK, the fourteen Devatas (including the one Devi) took upon themselves the task of leading the entire cosmos towards the worship of God. If you have read the BOOK, you must have read the last hymn of Yajur Veda which refers to the fourteen Devatas by name and also says that the sun, the moon, the earth, the stars – all are engaged in praising the hymns of God. Mohammad proved the same in his lifetime when he showed that even pebbles, when they came on his hands, started chanting praises of God. This incident can be seen widely mentioned in the various books of traditions of Muslims. A lot many other miracles performed by the Prophet, like the return of the sun and dividing of the moon into two, have also been mentioned in some historical accounts.
Gita says that man was created to become Purushottama or the Highest of Beings (Ashraful Makhlooqat in Arabic). However, at the same time, he had elements of becoming the worse of all creations. Upanishads have not even left this subject remain untouched and mention how the higher elements of our self have some direct link with the fourteen Devatas (the fourteen Devatas together form the Manifest Self or Paramatma) while the lower elements lead us towards materialism and eventual destruction. Dua-e-Kumayl, a prayer to God attributed to Ali, mentions the same when it talks of a clear relationship between the higher elements of our self and the fourteen Ahlulbayt. It is not beyond comprehension that the Muslims in general have not understood the role of Ahlulbayt in our life. Fact is that the Shia scholars too, who hold on to Dua-e-Kumayl in high esteem, have been unable to reach upon a satisfactory explanation of this description.
Various chapters of Gita discuss this relationship between our self and the Manifest Self of God, which is the Fourteen Devatas or Noor of Ahlulbayt, in a more elaborate manner. Therefore be prepared to read more on the subject. What we wish to mention here is that the Manifest Self of God started sending Prophets and Messengers in this world when it saw that man had deviated from the true path that led to God. Shia Muslims too are in agreement of this to some extent when they claim that Ali was the teacher of all the Prophets prior to Mohammad. However, this is more a matter of faith than any documented proof. What all Muslims agree upon is that the Noor (spirit or light) of Mohammad was in existence from the time prior to the creation of Adam. And Shias use a quote of Mohammad to claim that it were the Noors of these Ahlulbayt which were shown to Adam at the time of his creation; something that is also referred to in the Quran. Hadees-e-Qudsi too talks of a direct relationship between God with Mohammad and also talks of presence of Ali at the time of meraj (Mohammad’s ascent to the company of Manifest Self).
As regards to the relationship of the Manifest Self with the Prophets, Quran (Surah Ghafir, Ayat 15) clearly states that the rooh or spirit is responsible for all guidance. This is nothing but the Paramatma of Gita. Allama Tabatabai too agrees to this but says in Tafseer-e-Meezan that this rooh (spirit) is put inside those chosen as rasools (Messengers). Another proof of this is that it was the rooh (spirit) that was blown inside the Adam – the Messenger. Surah Nabah (Ayat 37) of the Quran further states that rooh is a manifest identity and talks of a time when this rooh will stand with the angels in a queue.
In spite of all this, the true nature of relationship of God with Ahlulbayt (Devatas, who together comprise the Manifest Self) on one hand and the relationship between Ahlulbayt with the Prophets can be understood only through a detailed reading of the Upanishads and Vedas. Muslims continue to grope in dark regarding various explanations in regard to their Prophet and his progeny while all the information is vividly present in the pages of Vedas and Gita. However, we have shown in the BOOK that Quran too vividly shows the presence of Manifest Self as an entity between God and us.
The Upanishads leave no doubt as regard to the existence of a direct relationship between the Messengers and Avatars with Paramatma or the Manifest Self. It is the Paramatma which puts its spirit in the pious souls and they become Avatars or Messengers. It is the Paramatma which through Devatas (Noor of Ahlulbayt) has taken upon itself the task of leading the entire mankind to the worship of God.
The direct relationship between the Devatas and messengers can also be proved from the help and assistance that the messengers sought from these Devatas, time and again. Rama prayed to one of them when faced with the problem of crossing the sea and hence was guided. He is also believed to have given Sita in the protection of AgniDeva. Krishna too, in Mahabharata, has been described to have some relationship with AgniDeva. Not only this, Buddha too was guided by BrahmaDeva on more than one occasion and also by VayuDeva (Noor of Ali – one of the Ahlulbayt) once, while he was asleep. Prophet Sulayman (Solomon) sought the help of Ahlulbayt and so did Nooh (Noah). And even Jesus talked of the coming of spirit of truth and Mahdi is still referred to as Baqiatullah (the remaining part of the spirit of Allah, which is nothing but the part of the Manifest Self of God or Paramatma – the Highest Spirit).
Fact is that Muslims know very little about the constitution of rooh or spirit, even though Quran has talked about it on few occasions. The spirit mentioned in Quran is nothing but the Divine Spirit (Paramatma) or the Manifest Self created by God as an intermediary between man and the Absolute Non-Manifest God. Since Mohammad and Ali – we have proved in the BOOK from Upanishads and Vedas – are constituents of that Divine Spirit in their Noor state, it has been stated that the messengers and prophets of God would be standing under the standard of the Prophet Mohammad, which will be in the hand of Ali, on the day of resurrection.
We do not know yet how the spirit moved from Messenger to Messenger, but it is certain that all the Messengers had a direct relationship with the Manifest Self. Buddha was seeking to develop the same relationship with the Manifest Self in the name of enlightenment, when he threw his food in the river saying that if he was to attain enlightenment then the food should move upstream, otherwise it should flow down the stream as it usually happens. Krishna too either had that relationship with the Manifest Self or it developed that relationship because of the strength of his character; it is due to this that he is referred to as Avatar. In short, descent of Noor or Light of Devata in pious body on earth, either at the time of birth or later, makes a person an Avatar.
Since an Avatar or Messenger had developed a direct relationship with the Manifest Self of God – the Paramatma – there were times when the Manifest Self, who is responsible for creation and sustenance, spoke directly from their mouth. In other words, the material body of the Avatar became an office of the Manifest Self, which was used by the Self to propagate its message regarding the true path.
Our view is that, in Gita, while apparently Arjuna is speaking to the personality of Krishna that he knew for long, the answer is coming from that Manifest Self of God, who is responsible for appointing Krishna as His Messenger. Sanjay watching from a distance is unable to understand this dynamics and is relating whatever he is seeing. Arjuna too has doubt initially and is misled into thinking that Krishna is speaking as God Himself. However, in the midst of the discussions, particularly when Krishna shows the divine sight to Arjuna so he could see an image of the Paramatma, all doubts get cleared in Arjuna’s mind and he is able to understand the true identity of Krishna in relation to the Manifest Self of God (Paramatma) and God.
There remains no doubt now that the Manifest Self of God or Paramatma is ceaselessly working from time immemorial to lead the entire cosmos to the worship and supplication of the Almighty God. Since God has nothing to gain from this worship, He does not play a direct role in making us worship Him. It is the Manifest Self of God (which comprise of the 14 Devatas identical to each other) that is working to lead us to the Non-Manifest or Absolute God. Thus, the fourteen Devatas or Ahlulbayt are those Divine Powers who together comprise the One Noor of the Manifest Self.
We are aware that Muslims would find it hard to digest this just as Hindus would find hard to accept that the Ahlulbayt of the Muslims and the Devatas of the Vedas are one and the same. But we are sure that Muslims would have no choice but to accept the truth. Without this, it is not possible for them to explain why God is sometimes referred to in Third Person in the Quran and sometimes in the First Person. Upon understanding this difference, there remains no doubt that the Manifest Self is doing the talking in Quran, and it this Manifest Self (which refers to itself as ‘we’, in plural) that is talking of its role in creation, birth, death, sending of prophets, etc. but when the subject of worship and subjugation is discussed, it is reserved for Allah or Ishwar - the Absolute God. (Read our book ‘Muslims and the Straight Path’ for more on this)
As you read along us this commentary of Gita you will find that Gita has unveiled this relationship between the Absolute God, the Manifest Self, the Messengers and common men to the utmost. The true relationship between the self inside us, the Manifest Self of God and the Absolute God gets resolved upon studying the Gita.
Leaving this puzzle midway, we proceed with the explanation of the first chapter of Gita.
No comments:
Post a Comment