02-05-2007, 12:29 AM
Conn Hallinan has clearly never read the Gita. His only acquaintance with the names of Vishnu and Gita, and with a purposefully chosen statement from the latter, probably comes from Wendy Doniger's celebrated remark (in psecular circles) on the scripture. Something to the extent of "Gita encourages war. <!--emo&:blink:--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='blink.gif' /><!--endemo--> I am a pacifist" - thus spake Doniger.
More and more, I realise how western journalists are rather 'intellectually' matched with our own bunch of incompetents: journalists working in the psecular Indian English-language media. Nor are bigoted western scholars of Indology, including the likes of Doniger et al, any more able than their psecular counterparts in India (our 'eminent' historians come to mind).
Scholarship and journalism seem to be big jokes to these people. The only reason they have any standing at all must be because they are given a voice: western newspapers need to have some output so they give them a column or assign them an article to write.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"The Supreme Lord said: I am death, the mighty destroyer of the world, out to destroy."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Don't know the accuracy of this translation, but in the verse of the Gita that this statement appears to be referring to, Krishna describes the aspect of himself that represents Time. Time, which annihilates all things.
This is of course 180 degrees opposed to the images of the petty, jealous and vengeful demonic babblegod that Conn Hallinan apparently wants to conjure up in the minds of his readers with his selective citing: the babblegawd that goes after communities tolerating the existence of polytheists in their midst or people who forget to observe the sabbath, and the like. In the babble, gawd actively genocides large parts of mankind (and animal kind as collateral damage) for such violations of biblical law.
Mahavishnu, as per the Gita, in his form as Time, merely brings to an end all that is created in the Cosmos. Every material element or mortal creature (that is, the body, as the soul is immortal) will eventually die/be destroyed. Death of the material is the inevitability that any and every human is aware of. So yes, as Time, Brahman does destroy all. And Krishna is merely reminding Arjuna of this indiscriminate aspect of the Divine.
And it is in this context that Arjuna learns that he ought not to be so attached to familial relations as to lose sight of his duty to uphold Dharma. All creatures and things meet their end eventually (in Time), and therefore no amount of attachment to them is going to prevent the destruction of their physical form. Krishna tells Arjuna that come what may, Bhishma and the others will be destroyed in this war (in order for Dharma to triumph). Arjuna might as well face that he will lose his relatives - the wheels are already in motion in the Cosmic design - and he is given the choice to become the instrument of Brahman in accomplishing this.
(This is my understanding from memory. Bad explanation, so read the Gita instead, which is quite clear.)
More and more, I realise how western journalists are rather 'intellectually' matched with our own bunch of incompetents: journalists working in the psecular Indian English-language media. Nor are bigoted western scholars of Indology, including the likes of Doniger et al, any more able than their psecular counterparts in India (our 'eminent' historians come to mind).
Scholarship and journalism seem to be big jokes to these people. The only reason they have any standing at all must be because they are given a voice: western newspapers need to have some output so they give them a column or assign them an article to write.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->"The Supreme Lord said: I am death, the mighty destroyer of the world, out to destroy."<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->Don't know the accuracy of this translation, but in the verse of the Gita that this statement appears to be referring to, Krishna describes the aspect of himself that represents Time. Time, which annihilates all things.
This is of course 180 degrees opposed to the images of the petty, jealous and vengeful demonic babblegod that Conn Hallinan apparently wants to conjure up in the minds of his readers with his selective citing: the babblegawd that goes after communities tolerating the existence of polytheists in their midst or people who forget to observe the sabbath, and the like. In the babble, gawd actively genocides large parts of mankind (and animal kind as collateral damage) for such violations of biblical law.
Mahavishnu, as per the Gita, in his form as Time, merely brings to an end all that is created in the Cosmos. Every material element or mortal creature (that is, the body, as the soul is immortal) will eventually die/be destroyed. Death of the material is the inevitability that any and every human is aware of. So yes, as Time, Brahman does destroy all. And Krishna is merely reminding Arjuna of this indiscriminate aspect of the Divine.
And it is in this context that Arjuna learns that he ought not to be so attached to familial relations as to lose sight of his duty to uphold Dharma. All creatures and things meet their end eventually (in Time), and therefore no amount of attachment to them is going to prevent the destruction of their physical form. Krishna tells Arjuna that come what may, Bhishma and the others will be destroyed in this war (in order for Dharma to triumph). Arjuna might as well face that he will lose his relatives - the wheels are already in motion in the Cosmic design - and he is given the choice to become the instrument of Brahman in accomplishing this.
(This is my understanding from memory. Bad explanation, so read the Gita instead, which is quite clear.)