Dear James,
I would like you to clarify your statement, “Remember, Arjuna also knew he was the Self, but Krishna, out of great compassion and wisdom as a teacher, knew that he was not yet ready to accept that fully and so taught him Karma Yoga.” But Krishna taught him because Arjuna didn’t know that the was the Self.”
I’m helping the fellow you asked me to teach to point out that he is in good company, in an attempt to help him depersonalize his experience. I said that Arjuna “had faith in Krishna and his wisdom (Vedanta)” but I like it this way better, assuming it is accurate. Thanks.
Information or Knowledge?
James: It’s confusing but accurate. The key words are “knew he was the Self.” He only knew it intellectually at the time, in that he had been informed by a reliable witness i.e. Krishna as scripture that there was such a thing as the Self, but he had no idea how it applied to his situation. It wasn’t practical knowledge that could help him win the war that was about happen. It was only information. Remember, the Gita is a metaphor meant to bring knowledge.
So he had to start from the beginning and learn how to conduct himself in the world. Therefore, it is appropriate for him to learn karma yoga. He was in the pickle he was in because he wasn’t acting appropriately in the world. How so?
Arjuna was “trusting,” as befits a person with a fair degree of sattva. But one person’s trust is another person’s gullibility. He knew that Duryodana was a scoundrel, everyone in the kingdom did, yet he gave him the benefit of the doubt, partied with him and his uncle, Shakuni, who was a real crook, and agreed to play craps with them. He was probably inebriated as well. And when his pile of chips started to dwindle, he kept doubling down and asking the house for more credit, as do people who hate to lose. Remember he was a great competitor. He won all the contests. In one contest another warrior sent an arrow into the heart of the target and everyone though he had gotten the best of Arjuna. But Arjuna confidently said, “Watch this!” and split his competitor’s arrow down the middle with his own arrow. He was that good.
But when rajas and tamas team up in festive circumstances, discrimination is in short supply. Shakuni aka Maya, beautiful intelligent ignorance, was a totally rational calculating materialist. Nobody pulled the wool over his eyes. So he took advantage to curry favor with his nephew who was rich and powerful. He came to the party with shaved dice, so the odds were stacked in his favor. Yudhishthira, Arjuna’s older brother (sattva) and the leader of his clan, was also drunk and gullible. If he had been following his nature, he would have insisted on examining the dice.
Spiritual people have a fair degree of sattva which makes them aware of their suffering and willing to do something other than indulge in the usual distractions, to relieve it. So when they hear about somebody who is high on an epiphany they get drunk on the idea of liberation and climb on the moksha bandwagon. At least materialist ravers know they are high on a chemical, but spiritual ravers, who often have self-esteem issues, tend to gravitate to relationships with parental archetypes to slake their insecurities. Once they get a little high from the relationship, it’s in for a penny, in for a pound and without fail they come to regret it. In terms of the Gita metaphor, they are “exiled,” meaning cut off from their wisdom, for many years.
A person has to have come to the conclusion that objective problems i.e. conflict is actually a subjective conflict brought on by ignorance of one’s primary identity, will only hear the teachings, as they are meant to be heard, once he or she is qualified. Ergo, karma yoga and Vivekachoodamani. But it takes a long time for most people to understand the value of “unpersonhood.”
It is sometimes difficult to be honest with others, not to mention being honest with oneself. People invariably need the moral high ground and can’t admit that they are foolish. It doesn’t look good. So they will couch their gullibility as fairmindedness or open-mindedness. One shouldn’t be afraid to question a teacher…up to a point. Most inauthentic teachers don’t allow any kind of questioning or criticism. They have things set up to winnow out mature people. They want sheeple. They have self-esteem issues of their own and need to maintain “control” or they lose their mojo. They become incredible shrinking gurus once their flock deserts them. Enough already. Anyway, there is a difference between information, which is unreliable, and knowledge, which isn’t. So you can use my statement.
