Acharya Prashant: So, what is the setting of the Bhagwat Gita? The Bhagwat Gita is a part of the epic, Mahabharata, which is a story of princely clans, running over many generations. So, one side, one group of allies by the name of Pandavas, are ranged against their cousin brothers, by the name of Kauravas. The setting is a battlefield. Krishna, is the Charioteer, of the lead warrior amongst the Pandavas, his name is Arjun. We must go deeply into the setting, first of all.
There is a conflict, in which, brothers, relatives, acquaintances, have all been set up against each other. Arjun’s great grandfather is on the opposite side. Many of Arjun’s friends, are on the opposite side. Hundreds of his cousin brothers are on the opposite side. The teacher, who taught him all his martial skills, is on the opposite side. The teacher’s son too, is on the opposite side. Continue reading →
Acharya Prashant: The source and the manifestation-the progeny and the material, the body and the actions of the body-the kala, are all one.
The ‘source’ refers to the origin of it all. ‘Kala’ refers to activity or movement. ‘Sharir’ obviously refers to the body or the material. The source, the material and the movement all are one. They can be one only if you stop expecting that the source lies elsewhere. Please understand what is being said. If the source is one with the rock as well as the movement of the rock, then do you need to transform the rock into a temple? If the source is one with all this, then the source is just one with the fact of all this. Then you don’t need to have a creator God. Continue reading →
AP: Obviously, if you are following just the commands, the dictates, of somebody else then it is slavery; slavery in the sense that obviously you have no freedom. Somebody else is on top of you, pushing you, guiding you, compelling you or luring you, to be in a certain way, to act in a certain way, then we can obviously see that is slavery. But it is important to see what looks like opposite of this is not really freedom.
If I say that following others is slavery, then mind quickly wants to conclude that following oneself is freedom. No, following oneself is slavery even deeper, because what we call as oneself is usually just an aggregate of the influences of others, influences of others that have been internalized. Influences so ancient, so common and so pervasive that one doesn’t call them influences anymore, one calls them as one’s individuality. One says that – this is me, and now because the effect of others upon you gets your own support, so it becomes very difficult to treat.