The Bhagwad Gita on duty and action

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by S.A.M., Aug 21, 2009.

  1. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    From another thread,

    The essence of the Gita is that if you are doing your prescribed duty, then the results of your action are not your primary consideration. In the context I was using, suppose there is a biologist who is researching cancer and instead discovers a biological weapon which is then used to kill many people. His duty was to conduct research not determine its consequences, as long as he was honest in his motivations.

    In the context of the Gita, revealed by Krishna to Arjuna on the battlefield between the Pandavas and Kauravas, he is fighting with his brothers to win back his rights. Its his duty to do so

    Does that make sense?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Perhaps lightgigantic could give more details.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2009
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    It seems to me this means just to do good things, and not think about the reward, which is basically humble and proper.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    I have to shoot off soon, so I can't offer much at the moment.

    First off, its not clear why Enmos considers it dangerous.

    Every occupation is surrounded by issues of prescribed duty (and which enable us to coin them as "bad" or "good" or something in between)

    For instance if we accept that one duty of a parent is to protect her child, we have the means to determine how they stand in that regard. If a person doesn't have a child, we don't have the means to apply that occupation to them.

    So if you draw up the duty of person (whether they be a scientist or a general), you have the means to determine their scope for action.

    So as far as arjuna is concerned, his nature was to fight (as a ksatriya). So Krishna's argument is that even if he refrains from this fight, the circumstances of his nature will direct him to conflict in the future.

    The only question that remains is for what reason (or result) the fighting should be done or not done. Arjuna offers the argument that he doesn't see any fruit for himself in the action, and krishna counters that that is a miserly outlook.

    However, as one commentator on this verse notes

    The concept of duty—dispassionate, proper actions whose performance is its own reward—is becoming increasingly foreign to modern society.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Amen
     
  8. PsychoticEpisode It is very dry in here today Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,452
    I think there's a difference in prescribed duty and perceived duty. Although one could perceive a prescribed duty, it is not the same.
     
  9. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    I don't care. You're still not getting my theory, so sod off.
     
  10. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    In an objective sense it does make sense, although I can't imagine you would be alright with a soldier that killed innocent civilians by order of his superior and uses the Gita as his excuse. In my opinion there is always moral responsibility, no matter what you do or under who's order you do it.
     
  11. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Ok, I thought it was obvious.
    So if I consider something my duty, I cannot be held responsible for the results of my actions carrying out my perceived duty ?
     
  12. Doreen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    I don't know about Enmos' reasoning, but the problem is that 'duty' is often determined by authority figures, who in turn can be, and often are, moral monsters. The Gita is letting people off the hook, as can be seen by the carnage the main character participates in, since they do not have to question the morality of those determining their duty.

    The Nazi defense that they were following orders.

    Once you open the door and demand that the individual question the morality of the authority figures you set in motion processes that were not at all the intentions of the writers of that work.
     
  13. Doreen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    Ah, I see our concerns are similar. It is even worse than the way you word it here. Here it sounds like the person simply comes up with their own notion of duty. In fact the idea is generally to follow some authority figure's idea of duty. And we all know what these authority figures can be like. The Gita has functioned as a very conservative document. Which is a crap shoot. If it conserves oppression, murder, injustice, classism, sexism...then it is fucked up.
     
  14. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Yes, great example. That's what I meant.
     
  15. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Who's ideas are the duties that follow from religion ? That's where it gets real uncomfortable.
     
  16. Doreen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    So the Israeli soldier doing his or her duty making sure no one interferes with the bulldozer destroying Palestinian homes would be morally OK? Given that he or she is doing his or her duty?

    And before you come back that they have duty to some other principle or authority, give the BG another read. There is no, I repeat no, room for individuals questioning systemic abuse in the BG. It is a conservative document. And one that posits a rather callous 'deity'.
     
  17. Doreen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    So it is better if they come from capitalism, communism, the urge to land grab, racism, etc.?

    I see secular authorities just as capable of creating notions of duty that are immoral.
     
  18. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    The point I was making is that there is no clear authority in religion that can be held responsible.
    What are we going to do ? Drag God to The Hague ?
     
  19. Doreen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,101
    This is a good point. But ideals fall into the same category....growth, GNP, 'the people', 'democracy', 'the war on drugs', 'free markets', the oppression of the producing class, containment, preventing the dominoes
    are ideas that have been used to kill millions.

    These ideas have their priests and most of these never see a courtroom.

    The ones in the US get to marry tall skinny much younger women and carry on like they are part of every administration - I'm thinking of Kissinger - or have libraries built for them, get paid the rest of their lives, and get treated like heroes - fill in the blank of whatever President you consider heinous.

    We can't seem to get, for example, Neo Con ideals of economy, to the Hague
    either.
     
  20. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    I think it's different. These ideals cannot exist on their own, they have to be supported by the head of the state etc.
    Religion, on the other hand, doesn't really need priests etc. The word of God (bible) is enough for people to figure out their duties in life. What I mean is, when you blame the priests they will point at the sky.
    And no one will take, and will be forced to take, responsibility for what ideals some nutjob gets from the bible. And the nutjobs are protected by the Gita.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2009
  21. PsychoticEpisode It is very dry in here today Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,452
    God should be court-martialed for dereliction of duty.
     
  22. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    If he believes his duty is to bulldoze a Palestinian home and that this is his prescribed duty then yes. Does he?

    For example, were German soldiers who exterminated the Jews doing it because they wanted to kill them or because they were following orders? I thought the retroactively applied Nuremberg laws were not correct. Did you?


    Duty is callous. It has no room for sentiment.
     
  23. parmalee peripatetic artisan Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,266
    Ah, the banality of evil.
     

Share This Page