Vedas Vs Gita 4q21t

1

VEDAS vs GITA Vedic Religion was the original Hinduism. It only recognized Vedas as Divine Words. But it was different from the Hinduism known latter which recognizes a number of other books , which the original Hinduism did not.Vedic religion was an other religion . It may be called the oldest religion in India. But with the age of time different religions emerged in India.How ever with the emergence of each religion, it was not the custom to declair each new religion out of the folds of Hunduism. The Gitaic religion was another religion different from Vediv religion. It is a different case that the Gitaic religion accepted Vedas and Upinishads but it is a Non Vedic religion. Unfortunately this religion gained majority And Vedic religion became a minority. CONTRADICTION IN VEDAS AND GITA COMMON FEATURES The Bhagvad Gita and the Vedas are well known religious scriptures within the large collection of Hindu texts, they stand out from others because they are considered to be the direct words of God, in contrast to to other Hindu scriptures which are known to be written by men.

DIFFERENCES ANDALLEGED COMMONESS Common Hindus are made to believe that both these scriptures are inspired by the same God. The logical implication of such a belief is that there should not be any inconsistencies between them. However a thorough analysis of both these scriptures reveals that they contradict each other even in the most fundamental issues.Both of these religious books have different norms and concepts. A large portion of teachings and preachings of Gita are absent from Vedas , as if Vedas are ignorant of them. Similarly portions of four Vedas are absent from Gita, The difference of Gita from Vedas is just like the differences of Hebrew Bible from Gita. Further the Gitaic God is not a Vedic God. It is purely Non Vedic God. Gita invented a new God and presented entirely new concepts making dramatic changes in the vedic religion. Gitaic God is more powerful then a number of Vedic Gods and gods.

Now The Gitaic God became the Original God and all the Vedis Gods and gods became not only his subordinates but also His subsjects as1 well.

Gita although did not rob the status of

2

Vedas from being the Head of Holy Books of Hinduism but took all the powers from them and made the

puppets in hand of Gita. Looking carefully it implicitly claims that Vedas are

nolonger VALID AND ARE JUST RALICS OF THE PAST. Gita made Vedas a city of ruins. Now Vedas cease to be the Supreme Holy Scriptures of Hinduism. If they are stydied the should be studied in light of Gita , And Gita should not be studied in light of Vedas.

WHAT DID GITA DO TO VEDAS:= Arya Samaj believe that Vedas Preach Monotheism , and if Vedas are studied independent of Arya Samaji Commentaries of Vedas they appear to preach a sort of Heno-Polytheism in which there is One God the Supreme and Eternal , and this God when made the Universe also made a number of lower gods. How ever in light of some Indian Philosophy all these lower gods are not just made like other parts of the universe but are Manifestations or Incarnations of the One and Only God of Vedas. But Vedas does not shew that these gods are Manafistations or Incarations or both. Reliable Upiishads [ which are ten in number] tell that this Vedic God is Omnipresent and Immence. But different commentaries and interpretations of Vedas does not change the basic nature of Vedas. On the contrary Gita first targets the Vedic God and then targets Upnishads.

Gita is not an original work like Vedas but a synthesis . The author who so ever he was had the knowledge of several pre existing Sanskrit Scriptures .

Thus Bhagavad Gita combines many different elements from different Sanskrit works like and Vedanta philosophy. In matters of religion, its impo rtant contribution was the new emphasis placed on devotiUpanishads,Puranas, Itihasa, Vedangas,

etc.

2

3

Vedas remained a central path in Hinduism for a time.But then new religions began to appear in Hinduism. One of them is what may be termed as Gitaism. It tried to augment the , incarnative theism and transcendentalism of the Upanishads resulting , a God of personal and human characteristics identified with the Brahman of Upnishashad a God with out these characterstics. Thus identifying two opposite concepts impossible to be identified. The Bhagavad Gita thus gives a typology of the three dominant trends of Indian religion: dharma-based householder life, enlightenment-based renunciation, and devotion-based theism. All of these are absent from Vedas .Things does not stop here that Gita preach a number of new things but the problem is that Gita claims that its central Character is the Incarnation or Manifestation of the Supreme Personality Of Godhead Of Vedas and Upnishads the BARAHMAN or Barmh. In this way Gita begins to rule over Vedas and Vedic gods as well as Vedic God. Authorship of Gita:=

A careful examination the works of various well known scholars ; both Indian as well as western, it is proved that Gita is not the work of a single author but various authors with different schools of thought, is post-Buddhist and was written to counter Buddhism. The traditional view that there was a single writer is weak.

Chracter of the Central Character of Gita:= Anyone who makes a comparative study of the verses of the Gita, devoid of religious blinkers, will find the character of Krishna coming across as very cynical, evasive, inconsistent, shifting philosophical stances according to convenience, mixing ideas of differing schools of thought at will (Sankhya, Yoga, Vedanta) without any care or regard for their cogency and coherence. How such an opportunistic and willful entity (seen together with his role in the Mahabharata) be ed off as a God ,and that too raised to the towering heights of religious and devotional frenzy, may forever remain one of the greatest enigmas of Hindu culture.

Argument in circle: 3

4

Gita demands its reader to accept it as a Divine Word and then view Vedas through it . If its demand is accepted then Vedas reduce to subordinate to Gita, and if its demand is rejected Gita immediately reverts to a forgery and a fabrication. If Gita is rejected then it appears clearly that all of its teachings which are alien for Vedas become unautorative and fictious. Procedure of Gita. Gaita tries to equate it self or make it superior to Vedas by claiming the Divinity for the central figure Krishna.

Was Krisna God or his claim for being a God or Incarnated God is not true is key to the problem of superiority of Gita over Vedas. If Krishna was a God or a God Incarnate then Gita becomes either equal to Vedas or ever superior to them. If not then Gita becomes a book of fanatical Philosopher. But is there any Evidence from Vedas about the divinity of Krishna. There is none. There is no prophecy of Krishna in four Vedas. This means that Gita is independent of Vedas.As per rule Gita wins freedom from Vedas , and an ultimate interpreter of them. But neither Gita nor the Divinity of Krishna canbe proved from Vedas. This disproves the claim of Gita that its central Character Krishna is God or Incarnated God or God Incarnate, what so ever. If Vedic God is Unincarnable then all the quotations ascribed to Krishna in Gita , that he is God i.e Supreme Personality of Godhead becomes untrue, implying that entire Gita in Unreliable in Particular and Maha Bharta in General. Pandit Dianand how ever was convinced that Great war of India did occur , but if his claim was based on Maha Bharta , it cannot be accepted .For Maha Bharta itself is unreliable. If there was an Indian war even then it would not be so great as alleged by Maha Bharta.But to accept that such a war did occur in the past cannot be certain just because of Maha Bharta.

OTHER CONFLICTS At several places in the Vedas, emphasis is laid on desires and wishes. In many verses desires and wishes are expressed and prayers are made to fulfill the wishes.

In contrast to this the Gita denouces keeping desires and expressing them. It vehemently ridicules those who pray to God for fulfillment of desires.

4

5

Nature of Gita from Vedas is so different that both types of these scriptures cannot be said to be of the same religion. This does prove that a new religion was born in India which tried to displace Vedas from their position AND to plant Gita by removing Vedas. Gitaic religion was successful in throwing the pillars of Vedas. Gita was successful in throwing down Vedic religion, it not only minimized the importance of four Vedas in also attacked the sanctity of Upnishads. The influence of Gita s so great that the Vedic religion soon ended and a new religion emerged which took Vedas just as academic books , making them inert and idle, just for scholars. It was the most powerful conspiracy against the Vedas and Rliable Upnishads.

“There is no doubt that Gita rejects the Vedas and Vedic principles. It contains many teachings opposed to the Vedas. A book which compares divine Vedas to a small pit of water and claims that the Vedas teach nothing but three modes of material nature, how can we accept such a book?”

Gita either disposed Vedic Gods or made them lower gods and presented a new non vedic God who was not known to the Vedas. Actually it became the New Testament of Sanskrit Scriptures.How ever the Greek New Testament does acknowledge Hebrew Bible yet is is a different planet. But Gita is a different World.

SCILENT CONFLICTS:: Gita preaches transmigration and reincarnation theories. But Vedas do not mension them as if they are ignorant of them. As these are the central doctrine of religion of Gita. For sake of argument let is assume that Gita and Vedas both were from one and same God , then if salvation is related to Transmigration then their

5

6

absence from Vedas is not just the absence of a thing present Gita but a scilent conflict. This is not possible if Vedas and Gita are from one and Same Vedic God.

Similarly gods of Vedas are neglected in Gita, as if Gita considers them unworthy to mention. This is an other conflict. This is very important one. If such silent conflicts had existed in Vedas , it would have been the case of internal conflict of four Vedas. This does shew that Vedas conflict Gita, and Gita conflicts Vedas both silently and Non-silently.

An Apology:-

When ever inconsistency ,contradictions,improbabilities BETWEEN Gita and Veda are shewn it is responced that:=

1]The Gita can only be understood, like any other great work of the kind, by studying it in its entirety and as a developing argument. But it may be recalled that:= 1] Text of Gita is not preserved as text of Vedas are.

With the Vedas the ancient Hindus were very careful to on the scripture with no interpolations. The same can not be said of the Gita. It seems that at one time there was 745 verses now there are 700.

2] Commentary of Gita differs 

Gita is replete with contradictions both at the fundamental level and at the highest level of philosophical discourse. What has been said in the previous chapter, is contradicted in the very next chapter. This is the fundamental complaint against the Gita, and this fact would appear to be ironic given the fact that the Gita was 3]

6

7

originally written to reconcile the differences between two of the six major ancient Indian philosophies (Darshans) that evolved over the early years of Hinduism and became integral parts of ancient Indian religious literature. 

1] Contradictions in many of its verses, with some verses in the same chapter contradicting each other and verses in one chapter being negated by verses in another chapter.



2] Lack of

coherence of narrative between the verses in a chapter, verses disconnected

from or having no relation to the primary idea of a chapter 

3] Lack of orderliness in the sequencing of chapters, where one gets a feeling that the current Chapter IV should have come before Chapter III



4] Inclusion of verses that are repugnant to human values even going by old primitive standards (verses 9.11, 9.32 and 9.33)



5] The Gita purported to achieve at the level of philosophical and religious discourse. This fact is crucial not only for the understanding of the principal themes of the Gita but also to locate the essence of the Gita in the overall picture of ancient Indian doctrines. The Gita attempted, for the first time, to reconcile the teachings of two very abstract Indian religious doctrines into one whole. The task was a formidable one. This does shew that Gita was just a deliberate attempt to reconcile non Vedic ideas which has some how evolved in Indian MINDS. In order to validate its reconciliation the it was claimed that its Central Figure Krishna is God or God Incarnate.

6] Once it was accepted that Gita is of Divine Origin Believers in Gita attempted th remove all the contradictions by taking different commentaries and explanations of contradicting proof texts of Gita. If Gita was considereds pof human origin they would not have done this. Thus the intelligent scheme worked perfectly.

7

8

7] Gita owes to Upnishads but manipulate them as it likes it. Gita is not upanishadic in strict

sInce.Upanishads are more of philosophical works dealing with states of consciousness. This shews that Gita was a work of a lower Philosopher/ Philosophers.. 8]

It is said that Ved Vyasji composed the Bhagvatam is in Bhagvatam itself. After compiling

the Vedas, still he had a feeling of ?"emptiness" or "not satisfied". Sage Narada asked him to compose a Scripture with divine leelas of Pragat God's Avatar in its center. After composing the leelas of Lord Krishna he gets that feeling of "fullness" spiritually. Meaning, knowing Pragat God Himself in a human form is the end of all Sadhanas. This is a proof that Gita is an other religion. A religion which claims that Vedas are simple ,crude, un philosophical, and of little value. The problem that Vedas are pre existed Ved Vyasji , and they did not required him. Further the ascription of Gita as Gita is now cannot be ascribed to Vyasji with certainity. As Vedas are independent of Vyasji , one must clomment at Gita to be a book of an other religion which emerged in India attempted to merge in Hinduism. 8] Gita may be a great work , but this is not the question , the question is that whether Gita and its central character Krishna are Divine or a product of human mind. 9] When different commentaries and other eulogies of the Gita, is critically studied it is found that the authors seemed to look at the verses in isolation and whether unintentionally or not, ignore its relations to other verses and chapters and even Upnishads the original sources of Gigta.

10] As Gita tried to ride on Vedas , these Gitaists tries that that their commentators ride upon Gita. When there is a contradiction shewn they owe to commators instead of the verses. 11] It is very strange to see that those who do not have knowledge of Sanskrit try to satisfy them selves by saying Gta is more deep then pure literalism. But they cannot shew how and why. They are satisfied with this type of dogmas. But when asked what authority they have , they cannot c=answer.. 12] It means that each and every verse of Gita should be seen in the light of all the verses of Gita. Granted but this cannot be accepted unless the alleged meaning of a veses is proved by using all the related verses. The method must be shewn other wise this claim is with out any proof . For an example if it is claimed that a verse of Gita is not in its literal meaning , and the meaning from the verse is yield in light of other verses ,Of Gita then it must be shewn who the alleged meaning is yield by using other verses of Gita. It is only then one may accept or reject the socalled meaning ascribed to a verse. One must see the deduction of the allegednon literal meaning critically.. Just a claim is unacceptable. As 8

9

far as the derivation steps are not presented for each verse , such a claim is inconvincing.. A single flaw in the derivational steps may result in the inaccuracy of the non literal meaning.

 Is Gita an original work:=

 The Bhagavad-Gita borrows ideas, phrases, and even sentences from Upinshads and Indian Philosophical thoughts. This robs the originality of Gita. Its author who so ever he was was aware of Upnishads and different Indian Philosophical systems. He composed Gita from them .borrowing materials from them and Manupolating them some time according to his Philopophical System. One may not be surprised since Upnishads did give rise to different Philosophical systems in India. The sources of the GITA be reduced to THREE: 1]UPNISHADS . 2] INDIAN PHILOPHICAL SYSTEM 3]INDIVIDUAL PHILOSOPHY

IS GITA AN UPNISHAD “By its official designation, the Gita is called Upanishad, since it derives its main inspiration from the remarkable group of scriptures, the Upanishad.” – The Bhagavadgita. But it is not. Upnishads are well known works. Gita does excludes them. We have not included it in Upnishads.It is at best Smirti which acts like Shruti. But it fails to be so. If it is included it is among unreliable ones. It is a Purana but not an Upnishad.

9

10

Agenda of Gita:= There are several agenda of Gita. First it appear that it tried to advocate immorality. One may see Gita in context of Maha Bharta , not independent of it.

1]If Krishna was a God or God Incarnate then :=1) he cursed his son Samba for committing incest with Krishna’s 16000 wives. 2)his second Pradyumna also showed no respect to Krishna when he made love to his foster mother Mayadevi and later married her. Thus let alone others even his own family showed no respect to Krishna. Narla concludes following by quoting the words of Sitanath Tattavabhushan “if all that the Mahabharata and the Puranas say about him [Krishna] is true, he cannot have been the incarnation of God”. But this is the agenda of Gita that each prince should capture the wives and concubines of his father after him. If it can be done with the spouses and concubines of Incarnated God it can be done so for any king of India. 2] Krishna was projected as God to counter the supremacy of Vedas. Gita was written to arrest the strict followers of Vedas . 3] Gita was written to make the downfall of Upnishads. After all if God himself speaks , who needs Upnishad to study.?? 10

11

4] Gita embeds tricks, trachery, deceit ,murders, violence etc. Gita is full of them and promotes them. It used all sorts of tricks to crumble down Vedaism and original followers of Vedas. 5] Gita was also used to encounter Buddhism as well. It single handedly fought with Vedas and Buddhism. 6] Gita plays tricks with Vedas. It did not denied Vedas directly and explicitly, and accepted them as former words of God, but cleverly made them useless. 7]

Some critics of the Gita have labored to point to the sectarian agenda of the BG as the most realistic basis of its

composition beneath all its specious and pretentious gloss and dross of philosophy, metaphysics and devotional appeals. This sectarianism is obviously against Vedic sect as well.

THE INFLUENCE OF GITA:=

GITA CHALANGED SUPERMACY OF VEDAS AND UPNISHADS:=

[please note Gita is not included in Upnishad in this article]

Gita tried to replace Vedas by Itself and to revert Upnishads to hapazad thoughts. It did the following harms to Vedas:=

1] It convinced its believers that Vedas were imperfect.

11

12

2]It confined the validity of Vedas to the Vedic Period.

3] Gita claimed its own need . A need which cannot be neutralized be Vedas .

4] It convinced its believers that Gita is the more perfect form of Words of God, that is why Vedas

Are assistants and subordinates of Gita.

5]Gita convinced its believers that what so ever is preached in Gita is far more superior that what so ever is preached in Vedas.

6] It convinced its believers that extract of Vedas are present in Gita , so they are needed not to be studied in particular. This made believers in Gita to neglect Vedas PRACTICALLY and Actually.

7]This made believers of Gita to be the ultimate criteria of selection of an explanation from a number of explanations of Vedas and Upnishads.

8] By claiming Divinity for the central figure of Gita i.e Krishna Gita neutralized all the Vedic gods wheter they were just names of one God or suppostumic gods.

9] Although Gita did not revert Vedas to nothingness explicitly but did the very same thing implicitly and trickly. This was a more powerful method to cut the believes on Vedas indirectly.

10]Gita convinced its believers that Superior Knowledge of Gita is absent from Vedas.

11] What so ever it did to Vedas , it also did to Upnishads.

AN ATTEMPT TO FREE VEDAS AND UPNISHADS FROM GITA 12

13

Pandit Dianand Sarsuti who attempted to reform Hinduism , rejected a number of Hindu Sanscrit scriptures but did not condemned Gita as a fabrication in clear and explicit words , and a heresy to ancient Vedic religion. He very softly rejects it. He should have declared Gita in particular and

Maha Bharta in general as JAAL GARANTH [FABRICATIONS].

Problem of lack of Courage Although Arya Samajis rejects the incarnation of Vedic God in several human beings and Manifestation of Vedic God in Super Human Beings, but he did not find courage to reject Gita in to to as a heretical work of a new religion. The reason appears to be that the moment he would have rejected Gita as a book of a New religion , even he would have a loss of followers. This may be seen that some Arya Samajis tried to make a Vedic Version of Gita by manipulating contents of Gita. But this only shews that they lacked the courage to declare Gita as pure fabrication. Or a Non Hindu book.

Arya Samajis do accept that the believes of Incarnations and Manifestations od God in human and Super HUMAN BEINGS AS IMPOSSIBLE and out of Power of God. So If Gita preaches that God Incarnated in Krishna then this preaching cannot be true; consequently Gita cannot be true.

Pandit Dianand in his work S-thyarath P-r cash , chapter 11 had said:=

Question: We know that the God is Bodiless , but he assumed the forms of Shiva , Vishnu etc. and then incarnated in Rama , Krishna.

13

14

For that reason there idols are made. Are these also lies.

Answer:= Yes , yes , they are liesbecauseit is told in Vedas, that God is above being begotten, death and Assumption of Bodily forms…….

This is a proof that Arya Samajis cannot believe in Gita , since Gita contradicts Vedas on these issues.[It is a free tranlation]

AN ATTEMPT TO SAVE GITA:=

A few rationalists have tried to interpret Gita otherwise , that Krishna did not claimed to be God, and such claims are either fabrications some how crept inGita or Misunderstood be its commentators. They think that Krishna was only a made sign of God , but the poetic form of Gita was taken in literal meaning. Any how the challenge of Gita to Vedas is clear even under this interpretation.

Vedas and Upnishad constitute old Hindunism. Vedic God is not mentioned in Vedas in detail. If one neglect Pandit Dianand ‘s interpretations V edas only shew One God and several gods.

Vedas do not shew any inclination towards the Eternity of Spirits , Point Masses and Space. Upnishads how ever explain Vedic God in some detail. But Vedas do not consider vedic gods as manifestations and incarnations of Vedic God. [Upanishads how ever made this Vedic God Omnipresent and Immense /immanent, God]. Vedas only consider gods as made things.

14

15

Epilogue:= If some one believes in Gita then it is implied to believe in the supremacy of Gita over Vedas and inferiority of Vedas . And substance of all Substances and accidents. But this where they all stop. A philosophy of Barahman is developed from this. But Gita is a different world. It is a world of contraries and contradictions.

GITA NOT THE MILK OF VEDAS:= Gita is said to be milk of Vedas. But Gita cannot be milk of Vedas. If one milks Vedas their milk cannot be Gita. Gita is the milk of Heresy. It does takes material from Upnishads but changes them as it likes it.

15