Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami and Bhagavad Gita

[Bhakta of God]

Namaste all.
Now I will copy something from the book Living with Siva, Hinduism's Contemporary Culture
by Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami(1927-2001) who was a great guru of monistic Shaiva-Siddhanta.




What I will copy will show what this great hindu guru though about Bhagavad Gita.
By http://www.himalayanacademy.com/reso...lws_ch-40.html

Wednesday
LESSON 276
Justification For Conflict
One of the most famous of Hindu writings, the Bhagavad Gita, is often taken as Divine sanction for violence. It basically says that for the kshatriya, or soldier, war is dharma. Lord Krishna orders Arjuna to fight and do his kshatriya dharma in spite of his doubts and fears that what he is about to do is wrong, despite his dread of killing his own kinsmen. Arjuna says, "If they whose minds are depraved by the lust of power see no sin in the extirpation of their race, no crime in the murder of their friends, is that a reason why we should not resolve to turn away from such a crime -- we who abhor the sin of extirpating our own kindred? On the destruction of a tribe the ancient virtue of the tribe and family is lost; with the loss of virtue, vice and impiety overwhelm the whole of a race. ...Woe is me! What a great crime are we prepared to commit! Alas that from the desire for sovereignty and pleasure we stand here ready to slay our own kin! I would rather patiently suffer that the sons of Dhritarashtra, with their weapons in their hands, should come upon me and, unopposed, kill me unresisting in the field."

Krishna gradually convinces Arjuna to fight, beginning with the following argument. "Death is certain to all things which are born, and rebirth to all mortals; wherefore it doth not behoove thee to grieve about the inevitable. ...This spirit can never be destroyed in the mortal frame which it inhabiteth, hence it is unworthy for thee to be troubled for all these mortals. ...Thine enemies will speak of thee in words which are unworthy to be spoken, deprecating thy courage and abilities; what can be more dreadful than this! If thou art slain, thou shalt attain heaven; if victorious, the world shall be thy reward; wherefore, son of Kunti, arise with determination fixed for the battle. Make pleasure and pain, gain and loss, victory and defeat, the same to thee, and then prepare for battle, for thus and thus alone shalt thou in action still be free from sin" (from Chapter 1, Recension by W. Q. Judge, Theosophical University Press).

Hindus for a long time have taken this text as justification for war and conflicts of all kinds, including street riots and anarchy. It is indeed unfortunate that this particular composition has been championed to represent Hinduism rather than the four Vedas. At the turn of the twentieth century, the Bhagavad Gita was not yet a popular book in America and Europe, but the Upanishads and Vedas were. When I was growing up in Hinduism, at about fifteen years of age, the Gita was being slowly introduced in America and became an embarrassment in metaphysical circles throughout the country, as something to explain away. "How could a religion based on ahimsa and such high ideals promote as a major scripture a story based on ruthless internecine war and violence?" Arjuna could be considered history's first conscientious objector.

Mystical seers, both Hindus and Western teachers, at that time, in an attempt to justify the Gita as scripture, explained that Krishna represented Arjuna's higher self, and Arjuna himself was his lower self, or the external ego. Krishna encouraged Arjuna to kill out attachments to family, friends and foes, to become a yogi and realize Parabrahman. Teachers attempted to satisfy the minds of their followers that, in fact, the Bhagavad Gita was an allegory of man's struggle within himself toward the highest realizations. Unconvincingly, contemporary swamis and astute commentators tried to justify God Krishna's urging his devotee to kill his friends, his relatives and his guru, that all would be well in the end because the soul never dies. I was never satisfied with this and found no alternative but to reject the book altogether, despite its many lofty chapters. I agree fully with those awakened Indian swamis who have called it kolai nul, the "book of carnage," a book that gives divine sanction to violence.

The Bhagavad Gita was also known at that time as a historical poem, not a divinely revealed scripture at all. It is smriti, specifically Itihasa, meaning a man-made history, a poem excerpted from the Mahabharata epic. But all that aside, no matter how it is interpreted, whether it is revered by millions of Hindus or not, let us not be mistaken that the Bhagavad Gita gives permission for violence. The Mahabharata itself says, "Ahimsa is the highest dharma. It is the highest purification. It is also the highest truth from which all dharma proceeds" (18.1125.25). An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth is definitely not a part of true Hindu doctrine.