mr de borrowed other translations... he didn't think plagiarism was possible since everything comes from krishna
This material world is full of confusion, it is designed to make you turn away from God, and yes everything comes from krishna, that does not mean everything will take you to Him.
The Gita isn't private property...in the ultimate sense, it can't be "plagiarized". It's eternal knowledge and the property of every living entity. Yes, different teachers may translate a verse or borrow a translation of a verse...that doesn't make it wrong to do so; in fact, doing so is really in the spirit of Hinduism...there's no central authority or Pope confirming what is right or wrong. In SP's case, the importance lies in the purports...really, most versions of the Gita read pretty much the same, the big difference being that one category is structured and translated in prose style, the other category rendered loosely and poetically. I somehow don't think that Srila Prabhupada was the first or even the millionth guru to borrow verse translations or transliterations...and once again, so what...he got the Hare Krishna mantra and the message of Krishna across in the west in a way that had never been done before. Since I was an architect in my working life, I can easily relate the Sanskrit vocabulary of the Gita to the visual vocabulary of classical architecture...both originated a very long time ago and were documented in ancient times, and both have been restated many times, while retaining the recognizable form of the established "originals", and neither vocabulary is private property in any sense.
I don't care if his translations agree with other sri vaishnavas. It is not linguistically correct as far as I can tell. A million people agreeing with him does not change that, not until someone can give me a clear and correct etymological construction that would deliver that meaning. And his gita translations and bhagavatam translations also have this stain in many places.
Why wait? Go explore, the world is yours my friend. I am confident that if you really do some research in your spare time, you will find many schools of vaishnava thought saying the same thing, go pick up a translation from the Ramanuja line and try it. There is one I think- thats being published by Ramakrishna math or some organization( if I am not wrong, hopefully). I go to a sat sang here in New York and we use the same Gita, I know a doctor who went to an ashram near Sri Rangapuram... If you want, I will ask him the name of the ashram.
Bhaskar...I've got links to some "Traditional" Gaudiya Vaisnava websites...these devotees are followers of dvaita philosophy but are of different disciplic branches than Srila Prabhupada's, from the time of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to today. Much less westernized; you might find these interesting philosophically and perhaps there's some info on other Gita translations.
This sounds like rhetoric. There are not a million translations of the Gita, not even a thousand. There are also problems with SP's version. An instance that came up on another thread is the meaning of the word 'Dharma', which SP translates as 'religion'. But that doeasn't make any sense. Take the word 'Svadharma' for example. This means one's true inner and outer path of duty etc, one's 'law of action' determined by karma. It doesn't mean ones own personal 'religion'. Further, SP claims that the sole subjsct matter of the Gita is Bhakti - thus marginalizing both Jnana and Karma. The result is an unbalanced view of the Gita. Or at least the view of only one sect - it misses the universality of the Gita.
I agree so far. The trouble is that some would actually make Srila Prabhupada 'Pope' if you see what I mean. Quoting him as the sole or final authority. Thats how it seems to me anyway. I've mentioned before my feeling that often SP followers criticize other paths and gurus without having any knowledge of them. That comes precisely from never looking at any other interpretation or line of yoga. Because they think Prabhupada said all that there is to say, they remain blinkered in their vision. This doesn't apply to all who follow Prabhupada - but I'm afraid it does apply to a significant number. In general, I think that unless one is prepared to learn Sanskrit, it's a good idea to compare two or three versions of the Gita in order to arrive at a better understanding. Often I've found that what is made clear in one version isn't in another and vica versa.
Guys, I can't state it any better than the Foreword to the 1972 edition of SP's Bhagavad-gita As It Is does: The Bhagavad-gita is the best known and the most frequently translated of Vedic religious texts. Why it should be so appealing to the Western mind is an interesting question. It has drama, for its setting is a scene of two great armies, banners flying, drawn up opposite one another on the field, poised for battle. It has ambiguity, and the fact that Arjuna and his charioteer Krsna are carrying on their dialouge between the two armies suggests the indecision of Arjuna about the basic question; should he enter battle against and kill those who are friends and kinsmen? It has mystery, as Krsna demonstrates to Arjuna His cosmic form. It has a properly complicated view of the ways of the religious life and treats of the paths of knowledge, works, discipline and faith and their inter-relationships, problems that have bothered adherents of other religions in other times and places. The devotion spoken of is a deliberate means of religious satisfaction, not a mere outpouring of poetic emotion. Next to the Bhagavata-purana, a long work from South India, the Gita is the text most frequently quoted in the philosophical writings of the Gaudiya Vaisnava school, the school represented by Swami Bhaktivedanta as the latest in a long succession of teachers. It can be said that this school of Vaisnavism was founded, or revived, by Sri Krsna-Caitanya Mahaprabhu (1486-1533) in Bengal, and that it is currently the strongest single religious force in the eastern part of the Indian subcontinent. The Gaudiya Vaisnava school, for whom Krsna is Himself the Supreme God, and not merely an incarnation of another deity, sees bhakti as an immediate and powerful religious force, consisting of love between man and God. Its discipline consists of devoting all one's actions to the Deity, and one listens to the stories of Krsna from the sacred texts, one chants Krsna's name, washes, bathes and dresses the murti of Krsna, feeds Him and takes the remains of food offered to Him, thus absorbing His grace; one does these things and many more, until one has been changed: the devotee has become transformed into one close to Krsna, and sees the Lord face to face. Swami Bhaktivedanta comments upon the Gita from this point of view, and that is legitimate. More than that, in this translation the Western reader has the unique opportunity of seeing how a Krsna devotee interprets his own texts. It is the Vedic exegetical tradition, justly famous, in action. This book is then a welcome addition from many points of view. It can serve as a valuable textbook for the college student. It allows us to listen to a skilled interpreter explicating a text which has profound religious meaning. It gives us insights into the original and highly convincing ideas of the Gaudiya Vaisnava school. In providing the Sanskrit in both Devanagari and transliteration, it offers the Sanskrit specialist the opportunity to re-interpret, or debate particular Sanskrit meanings--although I think there will be little disagreement about the quality of the Swami's Sanskrit scholarship. And finally, for the nonspecialist, there is readable English and a devotional attitude which cannot help but move the sensitive reader. And there are the paintings, which, incredibly as it may seem to those familiar with contemporary Indian religious art, were done by American devotees. The scholar, the student of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, and the increasing number of Western readers interested in classical Vedic thought have been done a service by Swami Bhaktivedanta. By bringing us a new and living interpretation of a text already known to many, he has increased our understanding manyfold; and arguments for understanding, in these days of estrangement, need not be made. Professor Edward C. Dimock, Jr. Department of South Asian Languages and Civilization University of Chicago The fact is established that SP's works stand on their own as legitimate translation and commentary by a bonafide representative of a very old Indian devotional tradition. You can read Srila Prabhupada's works, dissect them for translational and linguistic inconcistencies, take them to the used bookstore, or let them gather dust...whatever pleases you. There are hundreds of Gita translations and commentaries out there...pick the one you like, and use it. Bill, you, Bhaskar, and everyone else here know that I'm not coming from the "SP for Pope" point of view.
I agree with that last thing you said. SP does not work for, nor do other Gaudiya math translations of books such as sri krishnakarnamritam, which are given unwarranted sexual tinge. What works for is RK math publications, which are accurate linguistically, creative and thoughtful in commentary and faithful to the parampara also. At this point, however, I am trying to cut down on reading and focus more on meditation, for the books are wonderful, but I have gained the knowledge needed, now what remains is to experience that truth, which cannot be given by any books. A pole vaulter must drop the pole.
I don't think that, the scriptures say that it is, it is all maya that wants you to turn away from God. You see naturally, everyone belongs to what we should call "Sat-Chit-Ananda"- I think this translates to "Knowing, being, Bliss" but I am not sure. Anyway, It means that when we are God realized, nothing is really hidden, everything is known and everything makes sense and we are all in complete bliss, but this material world, along with countless others is just the opposite... hence the point- God hides from us in this material world.
I don't think you are at all Spook! I have met some though.....anyway - From Sri Aurobindo's Introduction: "The thought of the Gita is not pure monism although it sees in the one unchanging, pure, eternal Self the foundation of all cosmic existence, nor Mayavada although it speaks of the Maya of the three modes of Prakriti omnipresent in the created world; nor is it qualified Monism although it places in the One his eternal supreme Prakriti manifested in the form of the Jiva and lays most stress on dwelling in God rather than dissolution as the supreme state of spiritual consciousness; nor is it Sankhya although it explains the created world by the double principle of Purusha and Prakriti; nor is it Vaishnava Theism although it presents to us Krishna, who is Avatar of Vishnu according to the Puranas, as the supreme deity and allows no essential difference nor any actual superiority of the status of the relationless Brahman over that of this Lord of all creatures. Like the earlier spiritual synthesis of the Upananishads, this later synthesis at once spiritual and intellectual, avoids naturally every such rigid determination as would injure its universal comprehensiveness. It's aim is precisely the opposite of the polemist commentators who found this scripture established as one of the three highest Vedantic authorities and attempted to turn it into a weapon of offence and defence against other schools and systems. The Gita is not a weapon for dialectical warfare; it is a gate opening on the whole world of spiritual truth and experience and the view it gives us embraces all the provinces of that supreme region. It maps out, but it does not cut up or build walls or hedges to confine our vision."
That's a great and comprehensive quote from Sri A...I picked up on the same philosophical spirit from the Roy book about Sri Krishna Prem. Sri A says in a very beautiful way that the Gita is eternal and the property of all, and doesn't belong exclusively to any "ism". SP was a staunch Vaisnava theist but also said that the Hare Krishna maha-mantra is eternal and universal property...any and all "isms" can chant it, no qualifications necessary.
