A Comparison Of Love In Symposium And Plato's Symposium

Love in Symposium and The Bhagavad-Gita

The Bhagavad-Gita and Plato’s Symposium both originate from two vastly different cultures, with the former being archetypal of Eastern thought and the latter existing as a foundation of Western philosophy. Despite their differences in origin, there is significant overlap in the ideas presented in the two texts. Both The Bhagavad-Gita and Symposium vilify desire to a certain extent, stating that abstinence from desire is the only way to pursue knowledge with clarity. However, the philosophies of the two texts diverge with respect to the relationship between desire and power, with The Bhagavad-Gita viewing desire as weakening the individual and Symposium presenting it as a means for empowerment.

In Symposium,

This belief is demonstrated in The Bhagavad-Gita when Krishna states, “knowledge is obscured / by the wise man’s eternal enemy, / which takes form as desire” (3.38). The use of the intensely negative phrase, “eternal enemy” suggests that knowledge and desire exist in extreme and constant opposition to each other. The belief in the pursuit of desire and the pursuit of knowledge as mutually exclusive is highlighted in Symposium through the relationship between the lover and the beloved. The lover-beloved relationship is expounded upon in the introduction to Symposium, with the statement, “Once won, the beloved was not expected to enjoy the sexual act; on the contrary, enjoyment was the sign of a depraved nature” (xv). In order to properly fulfill his role in the relationship, the lover is expected to abstain from sexual desire, which points to vilification of common love and the conflict between desire and knowledge. Moreover, the belief that enjoying the sexual act made the beloved of “a depraved nature” points to the extreme disapproval of the beloved’s possession of desire and highlights the necessity of the absence of desire on the beloved’s behalf. The idea of desire as detracting from the beloved’s pursuit of knowledge is evidenced when Alcibiades, speaking on his feelings for Socrates,

Namely, Symposium presents heavenly love as a means of empowerment, which contrasts the The Bhagavad-Gita’s philosophy of love as a barrier from what is right, a concept exemplified through Arjuna’s struggle to take up arms against his cousins. Pausanias praises the ability of love to better the individual, stating, “There is a certain guidance each person needs for his whole life, if he is to live well; and nothing imparts this guidance - not high kinship, not public honor, not wealth - nothing imparts this guidance as well as Love” (10). The description of love as a means to “live well,” portrays love as a positive force which leads to self-improvement. This image of love is further reinforced when Pausanias lists the virtuous concepts of “high kinship,” “public honor” and “wealth,” and subsequently denies their value in the face of love, highlighting love’s power and ability to do good. Pausanias goes on to further venerate love when he states that a society of lovers “would be the best possible system of society, for they would hold back from all that is shameful, and seek honor in each other’s eyes” (10). The the strong language in the phrase,“best possible,” highlights Pausanias’ conviction in love as positive force. Moreover, his statement that love will cause people to “seek honor” and “hold back from all that is shameful,” highlights