The REAL End...

This was a unique book i read. It wasn't about romance, spy detective plots, some Micael Bay super-action book, teenage vampires, or about wizards and dragons.
No, i was about teachings, and only teachings. I didn't realize this until later in the book. Anyways, the story that Krishna is trying to covince Arjuna to fight in a war in which he doesn't want to. In the process, Arjuna learns a whole load of divine stuff, and in the end, is convinced to obey Krishna, especially after Krishna decided to show that he was a god and shows his superiority. Psst. Show-off.

Some of the arguments that Krishna provided were very deep and convincing that it even made me agree sometimes. Yet, I will not be becoming Hindu.

Although I somewhat enjoyed reading this book, I'm not actually looking forward to another piece of writing like that. I believe I read enough Hindu writing for a lifetime.

The REAL End

of the Bhagavad-Gita

The Allmighty Show Off

Krishna shows his universal form to Arjuna. He tells Arjuna that all the warriors are meant to die, and killing them would only change his destiny by making him king. Also, Krishna mentions that those who understand him are to not come back to the material world. He shows his importance through telling many things to Arjuna, such as telling him that he is the universe and stuff.

It appears that Krishna is using 'ethos' (persuasion through character) to persuade Arjuna. He is making himself 'trustworthy' by emphasizing that he is a god and that he knows the way the universe is (He IS the universe. -_-).

When Krishna mentioned that it would only change his destiny, I don't think it is entirely true, for the warriors were meant to die later, and maybe that would have affected their destiny. Is there such a thing as changing destiny? Destiny means that there is already a path destined for you. Weird.

If Krishna is so powerful and a know-it-all, why isn't he doing what he believes is right? Is it because he is meant to teach others of the divine yoga? I guess so. Never mind. Case closed.

Although Krishna is showing off and doing all kinds of stuff to try to convince Arjuna to kill, it seems it's not changing Arjuna's will; it's only giving him more questions and confusing him more. Although Krishna is a god and everything, I still don't want Arjuna to kill. I want him to keep the peace between the families and stop it through non-violence. Sorry Krishna.

Rebirth?

The Karma Ghost - by Blob Maker Productions :)

This is a totally unrelated animation video. I just put it up because it is cool and the title includes the word 'karma'. Yes, I'm weird.

I think I'm the only one that finally noticed that the whole book will be about teachings. As in, they will not enter war until maybe the end.

Krishna keeps teaching Arjuna about yoga, such as the path of knowledge: the jnana yoga. He is later also told that when he dies, he should think of the divine, or he will go through the suffering of rebirth. Krishna keeps mentioning about how yoga is important for life and how it must be done.

I agree with most of the things that Krishna is telling Arjuna to convince him, and it appears that the things he is saying has a very deep meaning. Yet, some of the things he said sounded a little weird for me. For example, he said that reincrnation would bring suffering, but think logically: Based on the information given by the text, we are people who have lived before, and we apparantly can't remember it. This is more of a second (or more) chance to live a better life. Something like that.

Anyways, I don't have much on my mind now; I'm thinking about muffins. So that's the end of my very-short-and-simple-talk-about-rebirth-and-other-stuff-concerning-the-text.

Between Acting and Inacting

Arjuna is still arguing with Krishna. When will they end? Anyways, Arjuna thinks that knowledge is more important than action, but Krishna convinces him that to gain wisdom, one must go through action. (Karma Yoga) Also, he talks about how it has to be done with self-awareness. He explains how he has been teaching yoga for a very long time. They keep talking about how action is better than renunciation and so on.

I like how the ideas and thoughts given are very deep and convincing. Yet, I still see it somewhat wrong that Krishna is trying to persuade Arjuna to kill.

But now, Krishna is accepted as one of the main 'good' characters, and appears to be the 'right' character, making him more believable to the readers than it was in the first teaching.

I think it is pretty weird that they have still not had some action despite the time the story has been continuing for. I guess this shows how this is a teaching book and not a novel. This can also be seen from that the divisions are not called chapters but teachings.


In my personal opinion, I would still prefer that Arjuna wouldn't kill. Why? I don't know.

Who is Right?

Dhritarashtra and Arjuna are entering war on each other to decide who will be the kingdom's successor. (They are of the same family.) Arjuna hesitates before war, for he thinks it would be a great sin to kill his family.

Today, I'm going to focus on the question, 'Who is right?'. In the beginning, It is shown that Arjuna is supposed to be the rightful owner of the kingdom, and Dhritarashtra is trying to his son, Duryodhana. As we read this, it is quite obvious that Arjuna is the 'good guy', but is that true?

I think that it is thought so, simply because Arjuna is the protagonist. If Dhritarashtra was the protagonist instead, we might have thought something like this: Since Dhritarashra is stronger and more capable than Arjuna, he should be the right owner. So, in a way, this story is biased in favor of the protagonist.

Next, let's talk about how Arjuna thinks it is wrong to kill his kin and Krishna (the charioteer) doesn't. Who is right? The fact that Arjuna is the protagonist adds up to his somewhat noble thinking, making most of us think that he is right. Yet, this one is not quite like the first one, for both of them are considered on the 'good side', and this is simply an argument. According to my teacher, arguments are good. Fighting is not. People will think that one person is right but that the other person also makes sense.

Anyways, this is one weird, hard-to-understand, hard piece of writing. I look forward to keep reading it in the near future.