or it, I stray myself away from it. Most of the time, if it works, it helps me from a lot of possible danger in the future. Yet even that belief, there can be a contradiction on my part, as there are a lot of in the book. If one stays away from passion, how can one strive at anything in life? Does this message preach that we as human beings should turn away our desire of going to school, for example? Also, a lot of people turn their passion of something into a work of art. Where would Picasso be without his passion for painting? Where would Mozart be without his passion for music? Another contradiction is noticed on the same page, just a couple paragraphs below, The senses, mind, and understanding are said to harbor desire; with these desire obscures knowledge and confounds the embodied self. Mistake me if Im wrong, but doesnt knowledge come from understanding? If this is true, then understanding cannot be a cause of obscuring knowledge, since understanding causes knowledge itself. As I read on, I didnt know if I was getting the true meaning of the book, or just the meaning as Ms. Miller saw it. It really felt like the writing was modernized for western readers. I wasnt sure if this epic was a book that defined Hinduism, or a book that used Hinduism as a pivot for its ideas. There were a lot of things that contradicted with the Hindu views, such as the term hell which really has no meaning in Hindu belief, yet is included as a punishment that Krishna will give if humans dont follow his teachings. Hinduism is based on reincarnation, and hell is really a term used in more modern religions such as Christianity and Islam. On a brighter note, I finished the book knowing that some of my past beliefs like trying to abstain from sensual objects are very common to the teachings provided in this book. This is very important because it is proof that although one may have a set faith in one religion or belief, it doesnt necessarily mean that one...
