What does the term Gita wisdom refer to in your Gita-daily articles, when it refers to points not present in the Gita?

In some places you refer to Gita wisdom saying things that are not explicitly stated in the Gita. eg. Gita wisdom compares time to a snake.

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Question.
What exactly does the word Gita Wisdom refer to in your Gita Daily articles? Sometimes it refers to points that are not present in the Bhagavad Gita. For example, in the Gita Daily article, you say that Gita Wisdom compares time to a snake. But this example is not there in the Bhagavad Gita.
Answer. I use the word Gita Wisdom in a not a fragmented sense, but in a connected sense to refer to the whole body of wisdom that has built around the Gita. So, to illustrate the points of the Gita, other examples which may not be explicitly there in the Gita are also included.
For example, Vaishnava Prabhupada uses the word Vedas. The Vedas say this, Vedas say that. It may not be in a technical point of view.
It may not be there in the four Vedas. And quite often, it is not there in the four Vedas. So, Vaishnava Prabhupada is using the word Vedas.
He uses it in a generic sense to refer to the whole body of Vedic wisdom. So, the idea that a text exists separate from its context is a modern concoction which is not supported in the Vedic tradition. The Vedic tradition recognizes that we have to understand a text in its context.
So, the Bhagavad Gita, the Bhagavatam, they all form a worldview. And at times, one may draw from the broader worldview to substantiate specific points or to illustrate specific points. So, for example, chronologically, if we see, the Bhagavad Gita is spoken first and Bhagavatam is spoken later.
But then, Srila Prabhupada quotes from the Bhagavatam to support the Bhagavad Gita. So, a later book is used to support an earlier book. And conversely, Prabhupada uses the Bhagavatam to support the Bhagavad Gita.
In the Bhagavatam, he uses Bhagavad Gita. So, now, does it really matter what came first and what came later? Generally speaking, we would say that an existing body of knowledge, if it is to be explained, how should it be explained? Should it be explained based on its own status or should it be explained on what preceded it or should it be explained based on what succeeded it? Actually, we understand that knowledge is a continuum. And Srila Prabhupada doesn’t get into chronology too much.
You know, for example, when Krishna is interacting with the gopis, and Prabhupada is writing Krishna book, and he is quoting Bhagavad Gita and the gopis conversing with Krishna, and the Bhagavad Gita was not even spoken at that time. So, what Srila Prabhupada is doing essentially over there is, actually, in the Krishna book is summary study. And in the summary study, the essential point is to gain a clear understanding of the underlying concepts.
It’s not a technical analysis going on over there. So, those points, even if the specific verses of the Gita have not been quoted at that time, Gita itself is eternal wisdom. Krishna says that, I have spoken this earlier to the sun god also.
Now, the manuscript of what Krishna spoke to sun god is not available to us. But in Krishna to Arjuna, I have spoken this message. So, essentially, we understand it will be the same message.
Some contextual differences might be there. So, Srila Prabhupada, to explain the gopis’ conversation with Krishna, quotes the Bhagavad Gita. It doesn’t matter, because the gopis’ talks are based on principles, and those principles were known even before the historical incident of Krishna and Arjuna discussing the Gita on the battlefield.
So, like that, Gita wisdom is a term which I use to refer to general points, which are overall accepted by the Vedic worldview. If I’m quoting from the Bhagavad Gita itself, then I use specifically the Bhagavad Gita so-and-so verses, the Gita so-and-so says. So, we don’t support a fragmented worldview, a fragmented view of scripture when one scripture has to be consulted, considered independent of its context and the worldview of that context.
So, for the sake of referencing, I’ll use Bhagavad Gita and the verses, but for a generic reference to the Vedic body of wisdom, I’ll use Gita wisdom. So, specifically, the comparison of the time with a snake is quite common in the Vedic literature. It comes repeatedly in the Bhagavatam.
It comes in other Puranas also. Kaalasarpa is a standard phrase. It comes in the Itihasas also.
So, in principle, it is not in contradiction with the essential message of the Bhagavad Gita that time creeps in and takes away everything. That death is inevitable and death is coming to us steadily. And Shri Prabhupada says, it is not that we die at a particular moment.
We are dying constantly, Shri Prabhupada’s explanation of this verse indicates that the Kaalasarpa metaphor is compatible with this particular context also, specifically, in addition to being overall in agreement with the context of the Bhagavad Gita. So, Gita wisdom is a general reference to the spiritual wisdom that is given in the tradition to which the Bhagavad Gita belongs. Thank you.