Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


According to Vedic civilization, that is dharma-yuddha, religious fight. When the actual need is there to fight, we must fight. Not that when there is need of fight, one becomes nonviolent

Expressions researched:
"According to Vedic civilization, that is dharma-yuddha, religious fight. When the actual need is there to fight, we must fight. Not that when there is need of fight, one becomes nonviolent"

Lectures

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Krsna is trying to convince Arjuna. Our war means... According to Vedic civilization, that is dharma-yuddha, religious fight. When the actual need is there to fight, we must fight. Not that when there is need of fight, one becomes nonviolent. Just like yesterday in the evening, when we were talking with Dr. Shoemaker, so they were supporting that "Why should you kill any animal who is coming to... If you are determined not to kill..." We were talking of not killing, that why should you kill one animal who is coming to attack? No. You must kill. That is necessity. You should not go to the forest to find out some living entities, living beings, to kill. That is not your business. That is hiṁsa. But if a tiger comes to attack you, you must kill. That is self-defense. And that is not hiṁsa. So a devotee knows, a Kṛṣṇa conscious person knows when to kill and when not to kill. But it is not that because we accept not killing, therefore in every case, killing should be stopped. No. If there is necessity, killing should be accepted. Therefore Arjuna decided not to kill, not to fight. And Kṛṣṇa says that "This is anārya-juṣṭam. this kind of decision is made by the uncivilized rascal."
Lecture on BG 2.2 -- London, August 3, 1973:
So Bhagavān is criticizing. Arjuna became a very good man: "Why shall I...? Oh, I cannot kill my kinsmen." From material point of view, people will very much appreciate, "Oh, here is Arjuna. He's so nice, nonviolent. He is foregoing his claim. He has given up his astra, bow and arrows. He's no, no longer fighting. He has decided not to fight with kinsmen, kill his own men." So from material point of view, Arjuna is supposed to be very, very good man. But the Supreme Person, Kṛṣṇa, what does He say? Anārya-juṣṭam: "You rascal, you are speaking like anārya." He'll say rascal later on. He posed himself to be very good man, but when he comes to the test of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He refuses to accept him as a good man. He's saying that "You are anārya." There are two kinds of men: anārya and ārya. Āryan. Āryan means advanced in knowledge. He's called Āryan. And anārya means uncivilized. So immediately He rebukes him, anārya-juṣṭam. "You are talking just like non-Āryan, uncivilized person." People are very much, nowadays, eager how to stop war. But Kṛṣṇa says... (break) ... at any case is not required. There is necessity of war. Just like He's trying to convince Arjuna. Our war means... According to Vedic civilization, that is dharma-yuddha, religious fight. When the actual need is there to fight, we must fight. Not that when there is need of fight, one becomes nonviolent. Just like yesterday in the evening, when we were talking with Dr. Shoemaker, so they were supporting that "Why should you kill any animal who is coming to... If you are determined not to kill..." We were talking of not killing, that why should you kill one animal who is coming to attack? No. You must kill. That is necessity. You should not go to the forest to find out some living entities, living beings, to kill. That is not your business. That is hiṁsa. But if a tiger comes to attack you, you must kill. That is self-defense. And that is not hiṁsa. So a devotee knows, a Kṛṣṇa conscious person knows when to kill and when not to kill. But it is not that because we accept not killing, therefore in every case, killing should be stopped. No. If there is necessity, killing should be accepted. Therefore Arjuna decided not to kill, not to fight. And Kṛṣṇa says that "This is anārya-juṣṭam. this kind of decision is made by the uncivilized rascal." Anārya-juṣṭam asvargyam akīrti-karam (BG 2.2). So many things, He says. Asvargyam. Because the aim of human life should be to make progress. That is called ārya, progressive march.

Now we have got this human form of body, progressing from the lowest species of life in aquatics, then trees, plants, insects, birds, beasts, 8,400,000... Now I have got this civilized form of body. Then, the, my endeavor should be how to make further progress. The further progress is described in the Bhagavad-gītā, that you can go to the higher planetary system. Ūrdhvaṁ gacchanti sattva-sthāḥ (BG 14.18). Ūrdhvam, higher planetary system. Madhye tiṣṭhanti rājasaḥ. Madhye, in the middle planetary system, those who are contaminated with the passion quality, they remain. And jaghanya-guṇa-vṛtti-sthā adho gacchanti tāmasaḥ. And those who are miscreants, jaghanya-guṇa-vṛtti-sthāḥ, most hatefully accustomed, these hatefully accustomed, illicit sex, meat-eating, gambling, intoxication... These are habits of hateful nature. So jaghanya-guṇa-vṛtti-sthāḥ adho gacchanti tāmasaḥ, they go down. Either become animals or... There are seven kinds of lower planetary systems: tala, atala, nitala, pātala, talātala, rasātala, like that. So ārya means must make progress. Anārya means one who does not know what is progress of life. They think there is no life after death. "So I have got this life now. Let me enjoy my senses to the best capacity." This is anārya, demon. "Eat, drink, be merry and enjoy." Because as soon as the body will be finished, the senses also will be finished. Now let me use the senses. (?). So anārya, they do not know that there is life after death. They think that as soon as... (break) Big, big professors, in Europe, they say like that, "After death, everything is finished." Cārvaka Muni's theory. This kind of theory was accepted long, long ago. In the Vedic culture. Not accepted, was heard. Never it was accepted. Cārvaka theory. Cārvaka theory was atheist. He was not... (break) So his philosophy was atheistic philosophy. He used to say that bhaṣmi bhūtasya dehasya kuto punar āgamaḥ, means bodily concept of life, talking of this body, deha, that it is burned into ashes. So he used to say, "When the body is burned into ashes, then where is the chance of coming back?" That means he had no information of the soul.

Page Title:According to Vedic civilization, that is dharma-yuddha, religious fight. When the actual need is there to fight, we must fight. Not that when there is need of fight, one becomes nonviolent
Compiler:Krsnadas
Created:20 of Dec, 2011
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=1, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:1