BG 02.06 na caitad vidmah kataran no gariyo... cited

Expressions researched:
"na caitad vidmah kataran no gariyo" |"te 'vasthitah pramukhe dhartarastrah" |"yad va jayema yadi va no jayeyuh" |"yan eva hatva na jijivisamas"

BG Chapters 1 - 6

BG 2.6, Translation and Purport:

Nor do we know which is better—conquering them or being conquered by them. If we killed the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, we should not care to live. Yet they are now standing before us on the battlefield.

Arjuna did not know whether he should fight and risk unnecessary violence, although fighting is the duty of the kṣatriyas, or whether he should refrain and live by begging. If he did not conquer the enemy, begging would be his only means of subsistence. Nor was there certainty of victory, because either side might emerge victorious. Even if victory awaited them (and their cause was justified), still, if the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra died in battle, it would be very difficult to live in their absence. Under the circumstances, that would be another kind of defeat for them. All these considerations by Arjuna definitely proved that not only was he a great devotee of the Lord but he was also highly enlightened and had complete control over his mind and senses. His desire to live by begging, although he was born in the royal household, is another sign of detachment. He was truly virtuous, as these qualities, combined with his faith in the words of instruction of Śrī Kṛṣṇa (his spiritual master), indicate. It is concluded that Arjuna was quite fit for liberation. Unless the senses are controlled, there is no chance of elevation to the platform of knowledge, and without knowledge and devotion there is no chance of liberation. Arjuna was competent in all these attributes, over and above his enormous attributes in his material relationships.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Lecture on BG 2.1-10 and Talk -- Los Angeles, November 25, 1968:

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Nor do we know which is better, conquering them or being conquered by them. The sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, whom if we killed we should not care to live, are now standing before us on this battlefield (BG 2.6)." Purport. "Arjuna became perplexed in this connection, not knowing whether he should execute the fighting with the risk of committing unnecessarily violence, although it is the duty of the kṣatriyas, or whether he should not and prefer instead to live by begging, because if he did not conquer the enemy, begging would be the only means left for his living. There was no certainty of victory because either side might emerge victorious."

Prabhupāda: These are his causes of perplexities, how he was thinking, that has been tried to be explained. Yes, go on.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Even if there were victory awaiting them, because their cause was justified, still if the sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra should die in battle, it would be very difficult to live in their absence. Under the circumstances that would be another kind of defeat. All these considerations by Arjuna definitely proved that he was not only a great devotee of the Lord but that he was also highly enlightened and had complete control over his mind and senses. His desire to live by begging although he was born in the royal household is another sign of detachment. He was fully in the quality of forbearance as all these qualities combined with his faith in the words of instruction of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, his spiritual master, give evidence. It is concluded that Arjuna was quite fit for liberation. Unless the senses are controlled, there is no chance of elevation to the platform of knowledge, and without knowledge and devotion there is no chance of liberation. Arjuna was competent in all these attributes over and above his enormous attributes in his material relationships."

Prabhupāda: Go on. (coughs)

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: "Now I am confused about..."

Prabhupāda: Yes, what is there?

Lecture on BG 2.1-11 -- Johannesburg, October 17, 1975:

He is addressing Kṛṣṇa as arisūdana, the killer of the enemies. He says, "But in my case, I have to fight with Bhīṣma, Droṇācārya. They are my well-wisher, and how can I kill them? It is my duty to offer my respect, touching their feet, and You are enticing me to pierce their body with arrow? So, of course, You have killed so many enemies, but You have killed enemies. Why You are inducing me to kill my grandfather and my teacher?" Of course, Arjuna, also intelligent. He replied that "You cannot accuse me as anārya. This is the consideration. Therefore I am hesitating to fight." Then he says,

gurūn ahatvā hi mahānubhāvān

śreyo bhoktuṁ bhaikṣyam apīha loke

hatvārtha-kāmāṁs tu gurūn ihaiva

bhuñjīya bhogān rudhira-pradigdhān

(BG 2.5)

"They are not only my grandfather. They are guru. And mahānubhāvān, very great personality, Bhīṣmadeva, Droṇācārya. So if I kill them and if I live prosperously, taking the kingdom, do You think it is all right that I live on the blood of my guru and great personalities? Do You think it is all right?" Of course, he says,

na caitad vidmaḥ kataran no garīyo

yad vā jayema yadi vā no jayeyuḥ

yān eva hatvā na jijīviṣāmas

te 'vasthitāḥ pramukhe dhārtarāṣṭrāḥ

(BG 2.6)

"Kṛṣṇa, actually I am puzzled. It is my duty to fight, but now I am puzzled whether I shall fight or not fight because, after all, the other side, they are my relatives, family members, dhārtarāṣṭrāḥ. Dhṛtarāṣṭra is my elder brother of my father, and his sons they are my cousin-brothers. So I am puzzled whether I shall fight." He plainly explained his position that "Not that I have become anārya. I have got sufficient strength. I can fight, but I am puzzled whether I shall fight in this case or not."

Lecture on BG 2.2-6 -- Ahmedabad, December 11, 1972:

Hatvārtha-kāmāṁs tu gurūn ihaiva bhuñjīya bhogān rudhira-pradigdhān. (BG 2.5) So Arjuna is giving his nice argument that "If I kill my such great-grandfather and such noble, my teacher, then after killing them, if I enjoy this world, it will be mixed with blood and fire. So I cannot fight. I can..." Arjuna clearly declined to fight. Then again he said,

na caitad vidmaḥ kataran no garīyo

yad vā jayema yadi vā no jayeyuḥ

yān eva hatvā na jijīviṣāmas

te 'vasthitāḥ pramukhe dhārtarāṣṭrāḥ

(BG 2.6)

He said that "After killing my family men..." Dhṛtarāṣṭra, dhārtarāṣṭrāḥ, pāṇḍavāḥ... Dhṛtarāṣṭra and Pāṇḍu, they were two brothers, and their sons, cousin-brothers. So generally, people want to increase his material opulence to show to his friends and relatives. When one person constructs a very new, very nice house, he invites his relatives and his friends to show them that "Now I have become so opulent." So Arjuna is thinking in that term, that "Suppose I conquer over and I get the kingdom. But if my relatives and brothers are dead, whom shall I show?" This is another kind of vairāgya. How this material relationship makes one foolish, Arjuna is playing the part of a foolish man, and Kṛṣṇa will chastise him. We shall see later on. Thank you very much. Hare Kṛṣṇa.

Lecture on BG 2.6 -- London, August 6, 1973:

Pradyumna (leads chanting, etc.):

na caitad vidmaḥ kataran no garīyo

yad vā jayema yadi vā no jayeyuḥ

yān eva hatvā na jijīviṣāmas

te 'vasthitāḥ pramukhe dhārtarāṣṭrāḥ

(BG 2.6)

Translation: "Nor do we know which is better-conquering them or being conquered by them. The sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, whom if we killed we should not care to live, are now standing before us on this battlefield."

Prabhupāda: So these two groups of cousin-brothers... Mahārāja Pāṇḍu had five sons and Dhṛtarāṣṭra had one hundred sons. So it is family, the same family, and it was understanding between them that when others beyond the family would come to attack them, they would join, 105 brothers, and fight. But when there was fight amongst themselves—one side, hundred brothers; one side, five brothers. Because a kṣatriya family, it is to be understood they must go on fighting. Even in their marriage there would be fighting. Without fighting, no marriage takes place in kṣatriya family. Kṛṣṇa had 16,108 wives, and almost in each time He had to fight, to gain the wife. It was a sporting. For kṣatriya to fight, it was a sporting. So he is perplexed whether this kind of fighting he should encourage or not.

There is a proverb in Bengal, khābo ki khābo nā yadi khāo tu pauṣe. "When you are perplexed, Whether I shall eat or not eat,' better not eat." Sometimes we come to this point, "I am not very hungry, whether I shall eat or not eat?" The best course is not eat, not that you eat. But if you eat, then you can eat in the month of December, Pauṣa. Why? It is... In Bengal... Bengal is tropical climate, but when it is winter season, it is advised that "If you eat it is not so harmful because it will be digested." The night is very long, or the cold season, the digestive power, is nice. So when we are confused, "to do or not to do," jābo ki jābo nā yadi jāo tu śauce: "When you think, 'Whether I shall go or not?' better don't go. But when it is a question of answering the call of nature, you must go." Jābo ki jābo nā yadi jāu tu śauce, khābo ki khābo nā yadi khāo tu pauṣe. These are very common sense. Similarly, Arjuna is now perplexed, "Whether I shall fight or not fight?" That is also everywhere. When there is declaration of war between the modern politicians, they consider... Just like in the last Second World War, when Hitler was preparing for war... Everyone knew that Hitler was going to retaliate because in the first war they became defeated. So Hitler was again preparing. One, my God-brother, German, he came in 1933 in India. So at that time he informed that "There must be war. Hitler is preparing heavy preparations. War must be there." So at that time, I think, in your country the Prime Minister was Mr. Chamberlain. And he went to see Hitler to stop the war. But he would not. So similarly, in this fight, to the last point, Kṛṣṇa tried to avoid the war. He proposed to Duryodhana that "They are kṣatriyas, your cousin-brothers. You have usurped their kingdom. Never mind, you have taken some way or other. But they are kṣatriyas. They must have some means of livelihood. So give them, five brothers, five villages. Out of the whole world empire, you give them five villages." So he... "No, I am not going to part with even an inch of land without fight." Therefore, under such condition, the fight must be there.

Lecture on BG 2.6 -- London, August 6, 1973:

Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura recommends, krodha bhakta-dveṣī-jane: "Those who are envious of God or God's devotee, you can utilize your anger upon them." You can utilize. The anger you cannot give up. Our business is how to utilize it. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Everything has to be utilized. We do not say that "You stop this, stop that." No. Kṛṣṇa says, yat karoṣi, yaj juhosi, yad aśnāsi, yat tapasyasi kuruśva tad mad-arpanam (BG 9.27). Yat karoṣi. Kṛṣṇa does not say that "You do this, you do that." He says, "Whatever you do, but the result should come to Me." So here the position is that Arjuna is to fight not for himself, but he is only thinking in terms of himself. He says, te avasthitaḥ pramukhe dhārtarāṣṭrāḥ, yān eva hatvā na jijīviṣāmas: (BG 2.6) "They are my brothers, relatives. If they die... We do not wish to die. Now they are in my front. I have to kill them?" So still he is thinking in terms of his own satisfaction. He is preparing the background—how materialistic persons, they think in the terms of personal satisfaction. So that has to be given up. Not personal satisfaction, Kṛṣṇa's satisfaction. That is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Whatever you do, it doesn't matter. You have to test it, whether you are doing it for Kṛṣṇa. That is your perfection. Not only perfection, that is the perfection of your mission of human life. This human life is meant for that purpose. Because less than human form, the animal life, they are trained, perfection of sense gratification, personal satisfaction. They have no such feeling that "Other animals also..." When there is some eatable, one dog, he will think "How I can get it?" He will never think how other dogs also will be able to take it. This is not animal nature. Animal nature means their own satisfaction. There is no question of "My friend, my family members." Even, they do not share even with their own children. You might have seen. If there is some foodstuff, the dog and the dog's children, everyone is trying to take in his own side. This is animal. So when this thing is changed for Kṛṣṇa, that is human life.

Lecture on BG 2.6 -- London, August 6, 1973:

That is the distinction between animal life. So that is very difficult also. Therefore the whole education is there, Bhagavad-gītā, how to teach people, "Act for Kṛṣṇa, act for God, not for your personal interest. Then you'll be entangled." Yajñārthāt karmaṇaḥ anyatra loko 'yaṁ karma-bandhanaḥ (BG 3.9). Anything you do, it will produce some reaction, and you have to enjoy or suffer that reaction. Anything you do. But if you do for Kṛṣṇa, there is no more reaction. That is your freedom. Yogaḥ karmasu kauśalam (BG 2.50). That is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā. Yoga, when you are in contact with Kṛṣṇa, that is the secret of success in this material world, working. Otherwise whatever you are doing, whatever you are working, it will produce some reaction and you will have to enjoy or suffer.

So here again, the same thing. Arjuna is thinking in terms, na caitad vidmaḥ kataran no garīyo (BG 2.6). So he is perplexed, "Which one, which side will be glorious? I shall stop fighting or not fighting?" In the next verses it will be seen... When you are in such perplexity, "what to do and what not to do," so in order to get right direction, you must approach the spiritual master. That will be done in the next verse. Arjuna will say that "I do not know. I am now perplexed. Although I know it is my duty as kṣatriya to fight, still I am hesitating. I am hesitating in my duty. So therefore I am perplexed. So Kṛṣṇa, therefore I submit to You." Formerly he was talking just like friend. Now he will be prepared to take lesson from Kṛṣṇa.

So our the whole instruction of Bhagavad-gītā is that: You should not act for yourself; you should simply act for Kṛṣṇa. So even fighting for Kṛṣṇa, or even doing something still abominable for Kṛṣṇa... Just like the gopīs. The gopīs were captivated by Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa was a young boy, very beautiful, and the gopīs were young girls. That is the superficial... Actually, the gopīs are eternal associates of Kṛṣṇa. Ānanda-cinmaya-rasa-pratibhāvitābhiḥ (Bs. 5.37). They are expansions of Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa's pleasure potency expansion. They are meant for Kṛṣṇa's pleasure. They are not ordinary women. But superficially, just to teach us how to love Kṛṣṇa at the risk of anything... Therefore gopīs, when they were attracted by Kṛṣṇa at midnight... Kṛṣṇa was playing flute, and they became attracted and they left home. Some of them were locked up. They gave up their life even. They were so much attracted.

1976 Conversations and Morning Walks

Garden Conversation -- June 15, 1976, Detroit:

Prabhupāda: Let the rain fall. (laughter)

Hari-śauri: (continues reading; Prabhupāda says something and devotees laugh) (break)

Jayādvaita:

na caitad vidmaḥ kataran no garīyo

yad vā jayema yadi vā no jayeyuḥ

yān eva hatvā na jijīviṣāmas

te 'vasthitāḥ pramukhe dhārtarāṣṭrāḥ

(BG 2.6)

"Nor do we know which is better-conquering them or being conquered by them. The sons of Dhṛtarāṣṭra, whom if we killed we should not care to live..."

Prabhupāda: Disturbing? (laughs) They can come here, that side.

Dhṛṣṭadyumna: They were going to guard you, Śrīla Prabhupāda.

Prabhupāda: Guard me? Why?

Dhṛṣṭadyumna (children come in): From the rain.

Prabhupāda: No. It is all right. You sit down. It is fine, you can sit. No, no.

Hari-śauri: Sit over this side.