Reading the Bhagavad Gita, Chapters 17-18 and Conclusion

Chapter 17:

“Arjuna asked: My Lord! Those who do acts of sacrifice, not according to the scriptures but

nevertheless with implicit faith, what is their condition? Is it one of Purity, of Passion or of

Ignorance?

Lord Shri Krishna replied: Man has an inherent faith in one or another of the Qualities –

Purity, Passion and Ignorance. Now listen.

The faith of every man conforms to his nature. By nature he is full of faith. He is in fact

what his faith makes him.

The Pure worship the true God; the Passionate, the powers of wealth and magic; the

Ignorant, the spirits of the dead and of the lower orders of nature."(p.45)

As an oxygen breather and plant eater, yes, I'm a devotee of cyanobacteria.

Second, we appear to have a rather large translation problem in the English.  Either that, or Krishna is reinterpreting the "implicit faith" of Arjuna's question.  Because it seems to me that Arjuna's "nevertheless" implies that the intentions are right, even if they haven't gotten the details of what kind of flowers to offer right.  But Krishna's interpretation seems to be that such a thing is impossible: if a person is pure, they will observe the letter as well as the spirit of the religion, otherwise not:

"Sacrifice is Pure when it is offered by one who does not covet the fruit thereof, when it is

done according to the commands of scripture, and with implicit faith that the sacrifice is a

duty.

Sacrifice which is performed for the sake of its results, or for self-glorification – that, O best

of Aryans, is the product of Passion.

Sacrifice that is contrary to scriptural command, that is unaccompanied by prayers or gifts

of food or money, and is without faith – that is the product of Ignorance...

Worship of God and the Master; respect for the preacher and the philosopher; purity,

rectitude, continence and harmlessness – all this is physical austerity.

Speech that hurts no one, that is true, is pleasant to listen to and beneficial, and the

constant study of the scriptures – this is austerity in speech.

Serenity, kindness, silence, self-control and purity – this is austerity of mind.

These threefold austerities performed with faith, and without thought of reward, may

truly be accounted Pure.

Austerity coupled with hypocrisy or performed for the sake of self-glorification,

popularity or vanity, comes from Passion, and its result is always doubtful and temporary.

Austerity done under delusion, and accompanied with sorcery or torture to oneself or

another, may be assumed to spring from Ignorance."(pp.45-46)

So I think Krishna is saying you can get the appearance right without your heart being right, but your heart cannot be right without the appearance being right?  Except he said previously, in chapter 7 and again in chapter 9, that it's okay to not get the forms right: as long as your heart is truly devoted to your worship you will get proportionate rewards.  So, multiple authors who hadn't read the previous parts with much attention?  Single author who forgot what he said previously?  Different versions of an oral tradition smashed together into one long work without regard for coherence?  Just a translation problem into English?  Your hypothesis, gentle reader?

But the chapter does condemn torture.  That's something.   Also, you can tell whether a person is pure, passionate, or ignorant by what foods they eat:

"The food which men enjoy is also threefold, like the ways of sacrifice, austerity and
almsgiving. Listen to the distinction.
The foods that prolong life and increase purity, vigour, health, cheerfulness and happiness
are those that are delicious, soothing, substantial and agreeable. These are loved by the
Pure.
Those in whom Passion is dominant like foods that are bitter, sour, salty, over-hot,
pungent, dry and burning. These produce unhappiness, repentance and disease.
The Ignorant love food which is stale, not nourishing, putrid and corrupt, the leavings of
others and unclean."(p.45)

Chapter 18:

“Arjuna asked: O mighty One! I desire to know how relinquishment is distinguished from

renunciation.

Lord Shri Krishna replied: The sages say that renunciation means forgoing an action which

springs from desire; and relinquishing means the surrender of its fruit.

Some philosophers say that all action is evil and should be abandoned. Others that acts of

sacrifice, benevolence and austerity should not be given up.

O best of Indians! Listen to my judgment as regards this problem. It has a threefold aspect.

Acts of sacrifice, benevolence and austerity should not be given up but should be

performed, for they purify the aspiring soul.

But they should be done with detachment and without thought of recompense. This is my

final judgment.

It is not right to give up actions which are obligatory; and if they are misunderstood, it is

the result of sheer ignorance."(p.47)

Obligatory...on whose say-so?  What qualifies as obligatory, and why?  I do not agree with this blanket statement without further definition and qualification.

"But since those still in the body cannot entirely avoid action, in their case abandonment of

the fruit of action is considered as complete renunciation."(p.47)

At least Krishna is somewhat reasonable here.

"I will tell thee now, O Mighty Man, the five causes which, according to the final decision

of philosophy, must concur before an action can be accomplished.

They are a body, a personality, physical organs, their manifold activity and destiny.

Whatever action a man performs, whether by muscular effort or by speech or by thought,

and whether it be right or wrong, these five are the essential causes.

But the fool who supposes, because of his immature judgment, that it is his own Self alone

that acts, he perverts the truth and does not see rightly.

He who has no pride, and whose intellect is unalloyed by attachment, even though he kill

these people, yet he does not kill them, and his act does not bind him."(p.47)

So, there is no free will and therefore no accountability.  And therefore neither sin nor purity either.  Why are you having this conversation at all?  Do gods not have freewill either? 

The next section assigns the triadic subdivisions of purity, passion, and ignorance to knowledge, reason, intellect, and pleasure.  Nothing new or unexpected, but I want to beat the lack of accountability yet more:

"An obligatory action done by one who is disinterested, who neither likes nor dislikes it,
and gives no thought to the consequences that follow, such an action is Pure...
An action undertaken through delusion, and with no regard to the spiritual issues
involved, or the real capacity of the doer, or to the injury which may follow, such an act
may be assumed to be the product of Ignorance."(p.48)

Neither purity nor ignorance cares about harm or consequences, apparently!

Next we have an apologetic for discrimination based on birth, regardless of ability or merit:

"O Arjuna! The duties of spiritual teachers, the soldiers, the traders and the servants have
all been fixed according to the dominant Quality in their nature...

It is better to do one’s own duty, however defective it may be, than to follow the duty of
another, however well one may perform it. He who does his duty as his own nature
reveals it, never sins."(p.49)

Next we have yet another restatement of how one attains holiness by renouncing attachment and devoting oneself wholly to Krishna.  Finally, Krishna tries to tell Arjuna that he has no choice but to fight, only to admit a few lines later that Arjuna does have a choice:

"O Arjuna! Thy duty binds thee. From thine own nature has it arisen, and that which in thy
delusion thou desire not to do, that very thing thou shalt do. Thou art helpless.
God dwells in the hearts of all beings, O Arjuna! He causes them to revolve as it were on a
wheel by His mystic power.
With all thy strength, fly unto Him and surrender thyself, and by His grace shalt thou
attain Supreme Peace and reach the Eternal Home.
Thus have I revealed to thee the Truth, the Mystery of mysteries. Having thought it over,
thou art free to act as thou wilt...

"Arjuna replied: My Lord! O Immutable One! My delusion has fled. By Thy Grace,
O Changeless One, the light has dawned. My doubts are gone, and I stand before Thee
ready to do Thy will.”(pp.50-51) 

End chapter 18, end the Bhagavad Gita.

I am angry and disappointed with Arjuna, but I cannot say I expected any other outcome.  I am disappointed in the Bhagavad Gita, but I knew that from page 3.  It has many fine-sounding words, but we can show much more compassion and fairness and reason and peace-making on our own than is found in the Gita.

This is what I wanted Arjuna to say at the end:

" 'I shall tear these stars from out the heavens,' he stated, 'and hurl them in the faces of the gods, if that be necessary.  I shall blaspheme in every Temple throughout the land.  I shall take lives as a fisherman takes fish, by the net, if this be necessary.  I shall mount me again up to the Celestial City, though every step be a flame or a naked sword and the way guarded by tigers.  One day will the gods look down from Heaven and see me upon the stair, bringing them the gift they fear most.  That day will the new Yuga begin.' "

                                                                                  -Lord of Light, pp.38-39, by Roger Zelazny