PDA

View Full Version : Best Gita version



kamaferro
02 November 2014, 10:48 PM
Which Gita do you recommend as best translation and commentary ? Thanks

hinduism♥krishna
05 November 2014, 03:27 AM
Which Gita do you recommend as best translation and commentary ? Thanks

Bhagavad Gita by vaishnawa sant Dnyaneshwara or by Bhagavan ShankarAchArya...

One suggestion: Avoid reading BG of modern philosophers and Gurus.

Thank You

kamaferro
05 November 2014, 03:33 AM
Bhagavad Gita by vaishnawa sant Dnyaneshwara or by Bhagavan ShankarAchArya...

One suggestion: Avoid reading BG of modern philosophers and Gurus.

Thank You


thanks what about Sivananda, or Swami Chidbhavananda. or The Song of God by Swami Prabhavananda. ? I don't want something complicate to understand I am just starting. Thanks

silence_speaks
05 November 2014, 05:27 AM
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=5128&highlight=swami+paramarthananda

yajvan
05 November 2014, 11:36 AM
hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté


Which Gita do you recommend as best translation and commentary ? Thanks
What I have learned is to read many views... one view is interesting, yet many views allows the mind to compare and contrast ideas, notions, etc.
So , what may be a few of these offers ? ( Again, this is not a reading assignment, just ideas for ones consideration)

mahaṛṣi mahesh yogī's commentary chapters 1 to 6
abhinavagupata's commentary on the bhāgavad gītā
Śrī Jñānadeva's Bhāvārṭa Dīpikā some call Jñāeśvarī ( his commentary the bhāgavad gītā)
S.rādhākṛṣṇan has a different view on this matter but worth a look
mahābhārata by Kisari Mohan Ganguli, as the gita is part of this
svāmī prabhupāda's bhāgavad gītā as it isWe know the the bhāgavad gītā is divided into 18 chapters. Why 18 chapters not 12 or 21 or 15 or 9? A point of view is is offered here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=21869&postcount=7 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=21869&postcount=7)

We also note that the bhāgavad gītā is from the mahābhārata , bhīṣma¹ parva, consisting of the 25th through 42nd chapters. There are some that see the bhāgavad gītā parva (section) starting at chapter 13, were sanjaya rushes to the king dhṛtarāṣṭra¹ to depict for him the actions that are taking place on the battlefield. Many say the bhāgavad gītā consists of 700 verses, others say 701. We even find some with 748 verses.

iti śivaṁ

words


bhīṣma happens to be one of the twelve most knowledgeable people on dharma. The bhAghavataM says that there are only twelve men in the whole world who know the ins and outs of dharma in all its subtlety. These twelve are: BrahmA, the Creator; Narada, the roving sage; Lord Siva; Lord SubrahmaNya; the sage Kapila; Manu the law-giver; the boy-devotee Prahlada; King Janaka; bhīṣma; King Bali; the boy-sage Suka, the reciter of the bhAgavatam; and Yama, the Lord of Death and Dispenser of Justice.
Thus bhīṣma happens to be one of the twelve most knowledgeable people on dharma. It was fitting therefore that when yudhiṣṭhira at the end of the mahābhārata war wanted to know all the subtleties of all the different types of dharma, he was directed to go to bhīṣma by Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself. More on bhīṣma here: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=15089&postcount=2 (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=15089&postcount=2)
dhṛtarāṣṭra was the eldest son of vyāsa by the widow of vicitra-vīrya (brother of pāṇḍu and vidura) and born blind; husband of gāndhāri and father of 100 sons of whom the eldest was duryodhana

dhṛtarāṣṭra means whose empire is firm , a powerful king - from dhṛta धृत held born or maintained + rāṣṭra राष्ट्र kingdom, realm , empire , dominion , district , country

Viraja
05 November 2014, 03:20 PM
One suggestion: Avoid reading BG of modern philosophers and Gurus.

Thank You

May I know who are those "modern philosophers and gurus" and why is it that one must avoid them, what is it that you found 'wrong' in their giving?

Also, is it wrong for someone to be a 'philosopher' or a 'guru' if the times are 'modern'?? You sound as if someone is wrong just because they belong to modern times. For your information, the modern times, i.e. the past 100 yrs are much, much better when coming to some social evils such as caste-ism, even when compared to the times of sant Jnaneshwar. So I would say, if 'modern times' alone are a determining factor to decide who is 'good' and who is 'bad', then using this 1 parameter alone, I would say a 'modern day' philosopher or guru is better than Jnaneshwar, as he/she has got better influences from the society.

Believer
05 November 2014, 04:35 PM
Namaste,


Which Gita do you recommend as best translation and commentary?
Now that is subjective. Whichever translation jives with one's previous conditioning will sound most logical and be deemed as the best.

Lot of good, detailed advice has been provided. Since you are a beginner and want to get your feet wet, I would say just start with the ISKCON version by A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prubhupadji. Once you have a grasp of the basics and understand the underlying Hindu philosophy, then you can shop around for what sounds best to you, per your prior conditioning.

Pranam.

markandeya 108 dasa
05 November 2014, 05:29 PM
Pranams,

Bhagavad Gita is such a blessing to me. Whatever version we read if we read it with attention it will lead us to want to investigate more. My Gurudeva said that one should just not read but ponder, meditate on the verses, let them sink in.

I read several versions and I find it interesting to see how different translations only add more depth and meaning.

I am now just going through a modern translation Tat Tvam Asi The Universal Message in The Bhagavadgita By Pathikonda Viswambara Nath

If I sometimes read a contradiction, I don't dismiss it but rather put it on the shelf and hope to understand it better when I advance more.

The great thing about Sri Bhagavad Gita is that there are so many "aha" moments, so many inspirations and it just gets deeper and deeper.



I think comparative study brings a wealth of depth to understanding the unlimited glories and wisdom of Gita, there is something there for everyone.

I like one story, I forget the source. Please forgive any errors but the message I hope will resonate.




Once there was a Brahmin in South India who used to read Bhagavad Gita upside down, he always had a tear in his eye and was constantly crying whenever he touched Gita , even though he read Gita upside down.

The other Brahmins teased him as being foolish and Sri Chaitanya Maha Prabhu went to this Brahmin and asked why He reads Bhagavad Gita upside down and was crying.

The Brahmin replied that his Guru had instructed him to read Gita, but he was illiterate and could not read.

So why is it that you cry every time that you are reading Gita. Maha Prabhu gently asked him.

He replied, when ever I see Lord Sri Krsna The Supreme Lord being the humble servant of his Devotee Arjuna and driving His chariot, my heart swells up and tears flow from my eyes in such wonder of how merciful Sri Bhagavan Krsna is.

Sr Chaitanya Maha Prabhu embraced this poor illiterate Brahmin in his arms and declared that he truly understood the message of Gita.

I think this story is very touching.

Ys

Md

hinduism♥krishna
05 November 2014, 08:53 PM
May I know who are those "modern philosophers and gurus" and why is it that one must avoid them, what is it that you found 'wrong' in their giving?

Also, is it wrong for someone to be a 'philosopher' or a 'guru' if the times are 'modern'?? You sound as if someone is wrong just because they belong to modern times. For your information, the modern times, i.e. the past 100 yrs are much, much better when coming to some social evils such as caste-ism, even when compared to the times of sant Jnaneshwar. So I would say, if 'modern times' alone are a determining factor to decide who is 'good' and who is 'bad', then using this 1 parameter alone, I would say a 'modern day' philosopher or guru is better than Jnaneshwar, as he/she has got better influences from the society.

Hello..

Try to respect vaishnawa sant. Say 'Sant Dnyaneshwar'

Regards

hinduism♥krishna
05 November 2014, 09:20 PM
thanks what about Sivananda, or Swami Chidbhavananda. or The Song of God by Swami Prabhavananda. ? I don't want something complicate to understand I am just starting. Thanks

Hello..

Yeah, they're also good. But my recommendation is Dnyaneshwari- BhavarthA DeepikA' by Bhagavan Dnyaneshwar, who wrote it at the age of 16.

It's not complicated at all. It's full of nectar of Bhakti and vedanta in simple language. His intention itself was to teach gita to common masses.

Bhagavad Gita supports Advaita Vedanta. This can be concluded from Yoga vashishtha ramayana in which VashishthA explains Lord Rama, what shri Krishna, avatara of Vishnu, will teach ArjunA at the Kurukshetra.

Once you read GitA, you should read Uddhava GitA- last advaitic discourse of Krishna. No doubt, thereafter, you would have nothing left to know more.

Thank You

kamaferro
06 November 2014, 12:41 AM
Namaste,


Now that is subjective. Whichever translation jives with one's previous conditioning will sound most logical and be deemed as the best.

Lot of good, detailed advice has been provided. Since you are a beginner and want to get your feet wet, I would say just start with the ISKCON version by A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prubhupadji. Once you have a grasp of the basics and understand the underlying Hindu philosophy, then you can shop around for what sounds best to you, per your prior conditioning.

Pranam.


Thanks but many sre warning me read ALL BUT AVOID ISKCON because want to picture Krishna as the Supreme and created a new religion, I am not sure but even very knoledgeable people in India told me the same there should be a reason why all ok and not ISKCON !!!!!!

kamaferro
06 November 2014, 12:52 AM
Hello..

Yeah, they're also good. But my recommendation is Dnyaneshwari- BhavarthA DeepikA' by Bhagavan Dnyaneshwar, who wrote it at the age of 16.

It's not complicated at all. It's full of nectar of Bhakti and vedanta in simple language. His intention itself was to teach gita to common masses.

Bhagavad Gita supports Advaita Vedanta. This can be concluded from Yoga vashishtha ramayana in which VashishthA explains Lord Rama, what shri Krishna, avatara of Vishnu, will teach ArjunA at the Kurukshetra.

Once you read GitA, you should read Uddhava GitA- last advaitic discourse of Krishna. No doubt, thereafter, you would have nothing left to know more.

Thank You

Thanks a lot where is best place to buy I don't think can find in Malaysia maybe in India online important that is written clear and simple English.

Before I found yours I posted same question in IndiaMike one member replied

Krishna is not the Absolute, Brahman is Absolute Consciousness & we are all Consciousness, chapter 6 is actually about us Atman realizing through meditation that we are that Brahman, in other words through focussed attention of Awareness in Atman we become absorbed in it, then Atman=Brahman so to speak.

The As it is Krishna is not the Absolute, Brahman is Absolute Consciousness & we are all Consciousness, chapter 6 is actually about us Atman realising through meditation that we are that Brahman, in other words through focussed attention of Awareness in Atman we become absorbed in it, then Atman=Brahman so to speak.

The As it is wallahs (ISCKOM) try to twist these words by interpreting it in the following way & turning Krishna into the absolute;

"Thus practicing control of the body, mind and activities, the mystic transcendentalist attains to the kingdom of God [or the abode of Krsna] by cessation of material existence."

What is this abode of Krishna?

Krishna says abide in Me, by this he means Self (Brahman) & not I am God/Absolute. try to twist these words by interpreting it in the following way & turning Krishna into the absolute;

"Thus practicing control of the body, mind and activities, the mystic transcendentalist attains to the kingdom of God [or the abode of Krsna] by cessation of material existence."

What is this abode of Krishna?

Krishna says abide in Me, by this he means Self (Brahman) & not I am God/Absolute.


So I have to avoid such book. I have to start somewhere and get confused you tell me to avoid Sivananda etc if you said can also and by the one you are suggesting. Wow.

Thanks a lot

Viraja
06 November 2014, 06:10 AM
Hello..

Try to respect vaishnawa sant. Say 'Sant Dnyaneshwar'

Regards

Yes, that is how everyone feel about their guru and don't want to hear nonsense otherwise.

(If you truly had reasons and felt that you should change society's ways of looking up at some personalities, you would rather be someone who acts at the level of the society).

silence_speaks
06 November 2014, 06:36 AM
A simple book for modern minds: Holy Gita, by Swami Chinmayananda.
That should make many a concepts clear.

Swami Dayananda Saraswathi ji's "Bhagavad Gita Home Study course" can be a real good set of books to read. but it is very bulky.

:) Shankara's original bhasya read with the aid of a teacher is the best :D

Believer
06 November 2014, 09:46 AM
Namaste,

Did any of you read this,

I am just starting

before jumping in with both feet to innundate a newcomer? Long discourses and recommending something which may not be easily available in the West is bad advice. Let the person settle down and then you can impress upon him to read literature from YOUR guru. :) It is despicable when the posts turn from what the OP requested to a debate about the relative holiness of your guru. And then we want the world to treat us as enlightened people who are the keepers of vast amount of spiritual knowledge?

Pranam.

kamaferro
08 November 2014, 10:55 PM
A simple book for modern minds: Holy Gita, by Swami Chinmayananda.
That should make many a concepts clear.

Swami Dayananda Saraswathi ji's "Bhagavad Gita Home Study course" can be a real good set of books to read. but it is very bulky.

:) Shankara's original bhasya read with the aid of a teacher is the best :D

in your opinion better Swami Shivananda or Chinmayanda Thanks so much

kamaferro
08 November 2014, 11:01 PM
Namaste,


Now that is subjective. Whichever translation jives with one's previous conditioning will sound most logical and be deemed as the best.

Lot of good, detailed advice has been provided. Since you are a beginner and want to get your feet wet, I would say just start with the ISKCON version by A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prubhupadji. Once you have a grasp of the basics and understand the underlying Hindu philosophy, then you can shop around for what sounds best to you, per your prior conditioning.

Pranam.


is strange that you recommend BG as it is all people are telling me in India of certain stature buy anyone not ISCKOM . Why ?

ISCKOM is like concentrating on Krishna as the absolute.

I was asking here advice out of the above Gita any other that is goof for me inv iew so many edition out there Thanks

silence_speaks
10 November 2014, 10:42 PM
in your opinion better Swami Shivananda or Chinmayanda Thanks so much

Dear Kamaferro ji,
:)

I feel Swami Dayananda Saraswati ji's Bhagavad Gita home study course is the best, followed by Chinmayananda ji's work.

My suggestion is : if you can listen to a swami paramarthananda ji or dayananada ji on gita it would be very useful.

Love!
Silence

devotee
11 November 2014, 01:37 AM
Namaste,

In my opinion, you can rely on this translation http://www.gitapress.org/books/gita/455/455_Gita_Roman.pdf to begin with. Though this translation is also not without blemish but much much better than ISKCON's translation.

OM

kamaferro
11 November 2014, 04:00 AM
Namaste,

In my opinion, you can rely on this translation http://www.gitapress.org/books/gita/455/455_Gita_Roman.pdf to begin with. Though this translation is also not without blemish but much much better than ISKCON's translation.

OM

others not in this forum suggest http://www.chennaimath.org/istore/product/srimad-bhagavad-gita-sridhara-ordinary/



at this point I have to start somewhere, everyone suggests according own view it seems this a good non-sectarian text which is also objectively translated in a scholarly responsible way

markandeya 108 dasa
11 November 2014, 03:38 PM
Pranams,

All is said in a positive way :)

Believer

before jumping in with both feet to innundate a newcomer? Long discourses and recommending something which may not be easily available in the West is bad advice. Let the person settle down and then you can impress upon him to read literature from YOUR guru. :) It is despicable when the posts turn from what the OP requested to a debate about the relative holiness of your guru. And then we want the world to treat us as enlightened people who are the keepers of vast amount of spiritual knowledge?These are very wise words, and all the previous mentioned versions of Gita hold credit, but which one is best for each individual is impossible to say. Religion is by design, not just for one person but for the whole. No two conditions of the Jiva are the same, if the Acharyas and Sadhu's know this then surely we have to mirror that attitude.

No matter which version one reads then his/her spiritual journey has begun and imho the questions of the validity should then be based on the content in philosophical terms, and if that discussion is then either helping us to get closer to truth or is it making us more philosophically complicated. At the end of the day we cannot fully know what is the complete absolute truth because the subject is so huge.

I myself have gone through many full circles in understanding Bhagavad Gita, which always seems to tell me something new, something that I did not know before is revealed in the same passage I have read before seems fresh and new, and that wonderful aha moment comes and serves its purpose.

Ys

Md

Anirudh
11 November 2014, 03:59 PM
Namaste HDF

Why is there an urge to give unwarranted suggestions. Neither I know Dhyaneshwar nor I have heard about Udhava Gita until some one spoke about it at HDF. If I am a beginer why would I care to get into Advaita doctrines. What I wish to stress is, every beginner has a learning curve. Why should one try to force advanced concepts down the throat, when that wasn't requested at all?

I agree with Believer ji and Devotee ji.

@ HLK

Namaste,

Wouldnt it be better if the advices that are offered meet the OP's requirements.

We can debate how the same Srimad Bhagavat Gita supports Dvaita or V'Advaita or any other school of thought but defenitely not by hijacking this thread.

Believer
11 November 2014, 07:58 PM
Namaste,


......it seems this a good non-sectarian text which is also objectively translated in a scholarly responsible way

A non-sectarian, scholarly translation of any scriptural text is its dead body. Scholars may translate a novel, but not a spiritual concept. Only an acharya, a swami, an adherent who has felt the spiritual power of the words can show you the light of the divine song. So, please select whatever you want to read and be at peace. We, as a group, seem to have failed you in selecting what to read as your first translation.

Pranam.

hinduism♥krishna
11 November 2014, 09:11 PM
is strange that you recommend BG as it is all people are telling me in India of certain stature buy anyone not ISCKOM . Why ?

ISCKOM is like concentrating on Krishna as the absolute.

I was asking here advice out of the above Gita any other that is goof for me inv iew so many edition out there Thanks

Hello friend ..

I agree and we also know why they aren't recommending Iskcon's. You can pm me.

Your first preference is simple language and I think Sant Dnyaneshwara's fits in it. Do try.

Thank You hari om

kamaferro
12 November 2014, 02:26 AM
Namaste,



A non-sectarian, scholarly translation of any scriptural text is its dead body. Scholars may translate a novel, but not a spiritual concept. Only an acharya, a swami, an adherent who has felt the spiritual power of the words can show you the light of the divine song. So, please select whatever you want to read and be at peace. We, as a group, seem to have failed you in selecting what to read as your first translation.

Pranam.

Namaste they suggested to use non sectarian this version is from Ramakrishna Mat

Quite confusing at the end will choose one and finish the story

we are here to share not to say our forum cannot help.

kamaferro
12 November 2014, 02:37 AM
Pranams,

All is said in a positive way :)

Believer
These are very wise words, and all the previous mentioned versions of Gita hold credit, but which one is best for each individual is impossible to say. Religion is by design, not just for one person but for the whole. No two conditions of the Jiva are the same, if the Acharyas and Sadhu's know this then surely we have to mirror that attitude.

No matter which version one reads then his/her spiritual journey has begun and imho the questions of the validity should then be based on the content in philosophical terms, and if that discussion is then either helping us to get closer to truth or is it making us more philosophically complicated. At the end of the day we cannot fully know what is the complete absolute truth because the subject is so huge.

I myself have gone through many full circles in understanding Bhagavad Gita, which always seems to tell me something new, something that I did not know before is revealed in the same passage I have read before seems fresh and new, and that wonderful aha moment comes and serves its purpose.

Ys

Md

Namaste
I agree because I am very new to all this, people supposed to be more expert in spirituality warned me about BG as it is ISKCOM etc.
And also it would be better to take a non sectarian simple edition like the one I mentioned http://www.chennaimath.org/istore/product/srimad-bhagavad-gita-sridhara-ordinary/

so please understand my confusion I just buy this one or any other I feel comfortable

Thanks

kamaferro
12 November 2014, 02:47 AM
Namaste,



A non-sectarian, scholarly translation of any scriptural text is its dead body. Scholars may translate a novel, but not a spiritual concept. Only an acharya, a swami, an adherent who has felt the spiritual power of the words can show you the light of the divine song. So, please select whatever you want to read and be at peace. We, as a group, seem to have failed you in selecting what to read as your first translation.

Pranam.

Namaskar

Sridhara’s gloss on the Gita adheres to the Advaitic position, but lays stress on Bhakti also. It is a simple commentary that helps the easy understanding of the text. -

silence_speaks
12 November 2014, 02:52 AM
Dear kamaferro,
:) The scripture is supposed to act like a mirror where you can see your own face.

The truth of the pudding is in eating. One cannot get the vision of the scripture through reading literal translation. Shankara starts his Bhagavad gita translation by stating that its not easy to understand the true vision of the scripture without the aid of a teacher.

When you study the scripture ... you should stand transformed ... once and for all. Thats the power of the vision of the scripture. if instead one reads the scripture but does not get the vision that is conveyed one continues his or her search.

thats why its important to get the vision from a true acharya ... and thats the reason why i suggested swami paramarthananda ji's lectures [or swami dayananda's bhagavad gita home study course] ... if you can follow what he is saying and get the vision of the scripture ... you shall stand transformed once and for all. Thats the power.

There is no point in listening to people who will at best provide certain beliefs ! For example : Atma has no death .... when this is said, one has to see that ! Otherwise its only a belief. Atma means you. You are deathless ! How ? one has to be able to get this vision...

Whats the use of trying too many things ? Read and see for yourself if the teacher is providing more beliefs or a vision through which you stand liberated.

Love!
Silence

kamaferro
12 November 2014, 04:18 AM
thanks and Namaste

than I can always choose Shivananda or Chinmayanda I think more or less the same

Whihc is the title of book of swami paramarthananda ji'

brahma jijnasa
12 November 2014, 09:20 PM
Namaste


Krishna is not the Absolute, Brahman is Absolute Consciousness & we are all Consciousness ...
... The As it is wallahs (ISCKOM) try to twist these words by interpreting it in the following way & turning Krishna into the absolute
... Krishna says abide in Me, by this he means Self (Brahman) & not I am God/Absolute. try to twist these words by interpreting it in the following way & turning Krishna into the absolute;
... Krishna says abide in Me, by this he means Self (Brahman) & not I am God/Absolute.

So I have to avoid such book.

:)
Yes, you can avoid this book and then you will become a "knowledgeable" as these people are "knowledgeable" who told you to avoid it. Happy life with that.

Nobody is turning Lord Krishna into absolute, Self (Brahman), because He is this absolute or Self (Brahman).
Lord Krishna is described in the Bhagavad gita 10.12 as paraḿ brahma paraḿ dhāma ... ādi-devam ajaḿ vibhum, which means that He is Supreme Brahman or the Absolute (supreme truth, or Absolute truth), ie Parabrahman (paraḿ brahma), but also God or deva (ādi-devam).

So let some "knowledgeable" people say that Lord Krishna is not Supreme Brahman and God, but that is not stated in the Gita!


Thanks but many sre warning me read ALL BUT AVOID ISKCON because want to picture Krishna as the Supreme and created a new religion, I am not sure but even very knoledgeable people in India told me the same there should be a reason why all ok and not ISKCON !!!!!!

is strange that you recommend BG as it is all people are telling me in India of certain stature buy anyone not ISCKOM . Why ?

It is not that all these "knowledgeable" people are so much knowledgeable as you may think. First you yourself have to become knowledgeable that you could assess who in the world really is knowledgeable and who is not. Don't believe everything some supposedly "knowledgeable" people will tell you.


at this point I have to start somewhere, everyone suggests according own view it seems this a good non-sectarian text which is also objectively translated in a scholarly responsible way

Actually this is one big illusion and folly that often think people who are newbies to Hindu Dharma. I wrote about it earlier: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?p=105681#post105681

There are no such a thing as a non-sectarian and non-biased translations of scriptures because all translations are more or less sectarian and biased, made according to a particular Hindu Dharma school or tradition (sampradaya).


PS.
See above Bhagavad gita 10.12 quote at Srila Prabhupada's (A. C. Bhaktivedanta Svami) edition.
I would recommend you to thoroughly study exactly this A. C. Bhaktivedanta Svami's edition of the Bhagavad gita translation and especially pay attention to the commentary, and do not believe everything you're told by some supposedly "knowledgeable" people.



regards

hinduism♥krishna
13 November 2014, 08:34 AM
Namaste, everyone. Accept my humble post.


Just wanna add some things I got in my mind. Knowledgeable are those, at least in case of knowing Krishna/Vishnu, who've read Vishnu Puruna carefully.

There, obviously as name of Purana suggests, everything about Vishnu is explained. Which is his absolute abode, who's he etc..

Vishnu Purana clearly states Vishnu as formless and incarnation of paramatma. His supreme abode- very subtle, infinite, partless, unmanifest, beyond form and name or any attribute..

Krishna is Brahman. No one rejects it. Krishna is brahman & Krishna's form is Brahman, these two statements are different things and knowledge about Brahman helps to understand this. No any scripture mention Krishna's form as brahman, in fact he's been described as formless ..

Only knowledge can reveal god beyond form. Material eyes can see only his limited form but knowledge unveils his real nature- one with the self- eternal, omnipresent, unmanifest..

Hari Om

silence_speaks
13 November 2014, 08:50 PM
thanks and Namaste

than I can always choose Shivananda or Chinmayanda I think more or less the same

Whihc is the title of book of swami paramarthananda ji'


Dear Kamaferro,
:)

Chinmayananda.

Paramarthananda ji's lectures are available online. Please take them.
Love!
Silence

Anirudh
13 November 2014, 10:03 PM
Namaste Brahma Jijnasa ji

There are no such a thing as a non-sectarian and non-biased translations of scriptures because all translations are more or less sectarian and biased, made according to a particular Hindu Dharma school or tradition
(sampradaya).

This post is bit off the topic.

If we accept this truth there wont be any "knowledgeable" fight.

Although Sri Vaishnavism found me than me finding Sri Vaishnavism , Jignayasu ji and Grames ji cleared most of my doubts related to Sri Vaishnavism.

In my experience knowledgeable person is not the person who has more authoritative information on a particular topic but that person who is humble enough to go down to the level of the student and clarifies without hurting or on the others expense.

There is a thin line of difference between my position and Abrahamic foundations. Hope members wont see my statements in the Abraham way.

Anirudh
13 November 2014, 10:12 PM
Which Gita do you recommend as best translation and commentary ? Thanks

Namaste

Why dont you consider rephrasing the question, because every school has its own preference. I tend to believe this question is not going to add value to HDF.

silence_speaks
13 November 2014, 10:29 PM
What is sectarian or biased translation ?
There is Truth ... and the translation either speaks the Truth or does not speak. Any twisting of truth is not presenting the truth at all!!

It is not a modern management session where ...

"Is this a shadow or a ghost Sir?"

the teacher thinks : if i say its shadow, the person who thinks it is a ghost is not yet ready for it and may feel hurt. And if i say its a ghost, i would by telling a lie ... so let me say "well ... its between a shadow and a ghost .... both are right" !!

There are no half truths.

Love!
Silence

silence_speaks
13 November 2014, 10:35 PM
And Friends,
:)
... when people say, " please don't tell so curtly(they mean directly), i feel hurt" ... friends ... scriptures are not to massage ego! Not to tell soft nice things ... like, please continue ur attachment to the world ... etc!

Bhajagovindam says "ur dukrunkarana mantra does not help at the time of death" ... the paninian grammarian, is hurt ! his grammar rule does not help ? All his life he did something and shankara is dismissing it .... so sarcastically ??

Truth is direct ... it calls a spade a spade !! They tell directly ... if one's ego gets hurt because of the directness ... it has to be corrected ... not the scriptures !! one does not modify the truth to suite one's needs.

This does not violate compassion... the highest good is in knowing the truth !!

Love!
Silence

kamaferro
14 November 2014, 01:49 AM
Namaste

Why dont you consider rephrasing the question, because every school has its own preference. I tend to believe this question is not going to add value to HDF.


Namaskar

big drama was just a simple question what I have understood I agree every Gita has own school but if you see my previous post people suggested the one of Ramakrishna Mat scholar way Srimad etc. If my post has no value just accept or I must leave this forum

kamaferro
14 November 2014, 01:59 AM
And Friends,
:)
... when people say, " please don't tell so curtly(they mean directly), i feel hurt" ... friends ... scriptures are not to massage ego! Not to tell soft nice things ... like, please continue ur attachment to the world ... etc!

Bhajagovindam says "ur dukrunkarana mantra does not help at the time of death" ... the paninian grammarian, is hurt ! his grammar rule does not help ? All his life he did something and shankara is dismissing it .... so sarcastically ??

Truth is direct ... it calls a spade a spade !! They tell directly ... if one's ego gets hurt because of the directness ... it has to be corrected ... not the scriptures !! one does not modify the truth to suite one's needs.

This does not violate compassion... the highest good is in knowing the truth !!

Love!
Silence

Silence Namaste

just wanted to tell I like the way you say things and even if I am a very humble beginner I agree with you "Truth" is "Truth"

Many people just told me read any Geeta whichever you like for many reasons but not Iskcom that why as a simple beginner I asked if there was the best version of Geeta. Now I understand everyone has own opinion, Gurus etc. Some people told me the one I mentioned in my previous post no sectarian etc.

Love and light

Anirudh
14 November 2014, 11:13 AM
Before this thread meet an unexpected closure ...

Although there cant be multiple contrary truths about the same thing, no one ( I mean what I am saying ) has ever made everyone to accept or understand a SINGLE version of truth.

People who consider their version of truth as the ultimate should understand another person following a different faith too believe the same.

Does it mean there are many truths?

If yes, there is No scope for discussion.

If no, how can one verify the correctness of a truth?

Is there anyone in this forum who can provide evidence(s) acceptable to the entire man kind?

I think even Zakir belonging to the peace TV is technically a human. Will he accept Hinduism?

Are folks with abundance confidence on their version of truth ready to (who are more than ready to call a spade as spade) transform peace loving Zakir?

Will they? If yes, I bow my head in respect.

If no, I see two possibilities ...

1) Is Zakir not in their circle of influence or 2) they dont confidence on their version of truth?

If Zakir is not in their circle of influence, it implies they too evaluate before betting on their version of truth.

There is No need to discuss on the second part.

I will wait... :-)

silence_speaks
14 November 2014, 11:20 AM
There is no My - Version of Truth ! There is Truth.

If it is "My Version", that itself is sufficient proof that it is not the Truth !!



Is there anyone in this forum who can provide evidence(s) acceptable to the entire man kind?
;) Anirudh ji, I can ... not to the entire mankind, but to an inquiring person... since whence has entire mankind come into picture ? No one can convince everyone... only a seeker can know... if you are a seeker, yes truth can be revealed to you... but you are probably too angry with me to talk to me directly! So if you are going to address me as "HDF FORUM" , i will not provide any evidence! If you have the desire to know ... come prepared ... be ready to listen ... patiently ... and "Seek Truth", i will help you discover for yourself! ;) Why should you believe me ? You need not !! :D but a person who is thirsty for truth has no choice !! Ofcourse you need not ... you may continue with ur usual refrain "Keep off my way" :D LOL!

Hey I do respect your "PERSONAL SPACE" :) .... u need not see the reply also , there are options in HDF I presume.

Love!
Silence

Anirudh
14 November 2014, 12:37 PM
Friends, I am honest, not harsh!


Namaste Silence Speaks ji

I can't judge whether you are honest or not.

But when you are making a statement or quoting someone in a public forum, you are signing a contract with the reader.

#1. Because you will have no idea about the readers mindset, it is your responsibility to convince your reader or put a note stating your post is addressed to a particular audience.

#2. If you have no conviction on your or quoted statements it is mere a cut and copy. If you have conviction on the statements then for a typical Zakir who doesn't believe in your school of thoughts /statements, there is no difference between Silence Speaks and Shree Shankaraacharya.

So if you argue the quoted statements aren't mine and hence I owe nothing to the reader, then you loose your credibility from Silence Speaks ji to handle.

But on the contrary if you have no conviction on what you wrote or quoted, I mean the Zakirs won't take you serious at all.

#3. Is Advaita based on Bible or Koran ? Is V'Advaita based on Pagan literature or Zen wisdom? As per my understanding it seems there are 6 or 8 philosophical views derived from the same base scriptures. Which is correct and who will decide that? You or me or the peace loving Zakir?

#4. I am happy with my altar, my spritual interests and philosophies etc. Before replying me read NOW from #1.

#5. Before criticizing Zakir understand Zakir or the reader who differs from YOUR point of view (now you don't hide behind some Achaarya).

#6. Till the day you convince all heads of all different sects, you have no authority to claim YOUR words as FINAL or TRUTH. Till then there are multiple truths.

We have to co exist so we have defined laws to protect ourselves from endless and pointless fighting.

Hope this is not a difficult post to grasp considering the tapasya you have (claimed to have) performed to get the vision which you wish to share with others.

Namaste S.S ji


I shall edit the same post tomorrow to reply you in detail.

As a quick reply, let me put you in ease... I am not angry. But I can assure a thing... You ll definitely find it extremely difficult to convince me even if you apply your entire wisdom.

Lets say you have one million euros in your bank account and unfortunately drifted into space like an artificial comet stuck some 10000 light years away. Now tell me what's the use of one million euros to you ?

silence_speaks
14 November 2014, 08:27 PM
Dear Anirudh ji,
:) Namasthe!

Glad to have your direct reply _/\_.

I am Ever At Ease.

सुखमास्ते सुखं शेते
सुखमायाति याति च।
सुखं वक्ति सुखं भुंक्ते
व्यवहारेऽपि शान्तधीः॥१८- ५९॥

Happy he stands, happy he sits, happy sleeps and happy he comes and goes. Happy he speaks, and happy he eats. Such is the life of a man at peace.॥59॥


Love!
Silence

Believer
15 November 2014, 04:24 AM
Namaste SS,

That is a beautiful verse. Thanks.



व्यवहारेऽपि शान्तधीः॥१८- ५९॥


Can you break down the conjugated words in the above line and provide the literal meaning of the words?

Pranam.

silence_speaks
15 November 2014, 05:08 AM
Dear Believer,
:) Namasthe!

That verse is from Ashtavakra Gita (chapter 18):

व्यवहारे (in Vyavahara or day to day activities) अपि (too, even) शान्त (calm) धीः (Intellect) (The one with a resolved intellect ... an intellect that has "Settled" -- A Stithapragnya --- or simply the one with peaceful mind)

The meaning of the total verse:
sukam happily, aaste - sits, sukam happily, shete - sleeps, sukam - happily , aayaati - comes, sukam happily, yaati - goes, ca and , sukam happily, vakti - speaks, sukam happily, bhu.nkte - eats, vyavahare api shanta dhi ... people whose intellect is ever calm even when in activities!!


Love!
Silence

SuperPollito
16 November 2014, 12:31 AM
Namaste,

My first introduction to Sanatana Dharma was by Sri Ecknath Easwaran's translation of the Gita. I have not yet seen many other translations, but I surmise his translation may not be as in depth as some, but it is beautifully written and at least for me (white guy, raised Baptist), really changed my life.

Aum namah Shivaya.

silence_speaks
17 November 2014, 12:20 AM
Dear Anirudh ji,
:) Namasthe!



Namaste Silence Speaks ji

I can't judge whether you are honest or not.



I did not want you to judge or verify. Its merely a statement of fact.... only i can know whether or not its true :)





But when you are making a statement or quoting someone in a public forum, you are signing a contract with the reader.

#1. Because you will have no idea about the readers mindset, it is your responsibility to convince your reader or put a note stating your post is addressed to a particular audience.



Yes. So I have made it a point to write, wherever I can, that he audience is one who is "open to investigate into what I said and does not find it repulsive"




#2. If you have no conviction on your or quoted statements it is mere a cut and copy. If you have conviction on the statements then for a typical Zakir who doesn't believe in your school of thoughts /statements, there is no difference between Silence Speaks and Shree Shankaraacharya.



I do not state anything that "I do not know". But saying that "This statement is from Shankara" is not disowning it up. It is just to state that what you perceive as "harsh" may not be really "harsh" or may be because of a subtler reason.




So if you argue the quoted statements aren't mine and hence I owe nothing to the reader, then you loose your credibility from Silence Speaks ji to handle.

But on the contrary if you have no conviction on what you wrote or quoted, I mean the Zakirs won't take you serious at all.



Seriously, who is Zakir ? :)


For example "You cannot loose weight unless you reduce your eating" ... if i tell this to a person who believes in eating pills to reduce weight.
the person feels angry.
I then say, don't be angry ... its not me, the doctors saying that ....
that is not to disown my original statement ! It is just to convey that you need to be more open to that statement and not see it as "hurting" ... in other words its intention is good. If asked, i would explain !

I do quote Shankara and various Rishis to convey a point ! Often a harsh statement looks to be inappropriate and a soft statement appears appropriate ... this may not be the case .... by citing that its from Shankara, i am just stating to a person who revers shankara to be more open ... though on the face of it it seems harsh ... it is with a good intention. If asked, it can be explained.




#3. Is Advaita based on Bible or Koran ? Is V'Advaita based on Pagan literature or Zen wisdom? As per my understanding it seems there are 6 or 8 philosophical views derived from the same base scriptures. Which is correct and who will decide that? You or me or the peace loving Zakir?



One Reasons out and decides. You do not ask "Quantum Theory is based on Quran or Bible"! The question whether Quantum theory is correct or not ... you do not decide based on "peace loving Zakir"




#4. I am happy with my altar, my spritual interests and philosophies etc. Before replying me read NOW from #1.

#5. Before criticizing Zakir understand Zakir or the reader who differs from YOUR point of view (now you don't hide behind some Achaarya).

#6. Till the day you convince all heads of all different sects, you have no authority to claim YOUR words as FINAL or TRUTH. Till then there are multiple truths.



You cannot convince all. Even on a Scientific point you cannot. Leave alone philosophic point. Because not everyone goes by reason. People go by emotions and beliefs. So question of convincing all ... is not appropriate.

I speak from my understanding and with through reasoning. So there is no place for emotions there.

all views are not correct. There are wrong views. And A sincere and inquiring person, investigates and negates what is inappropriate!




We have to co exist so we have defined laws to protect ourselves from endless and pointless fighting.


Hope this is not a difficult post to grasp considering the tapasya you have (claimed to have) performed to get the vision which you wish to share with others.



Do you see all this "tapasya" etc ? I have never claimed i did some tapasya :)! There is no need to protect "wrong notions"!

I am sure Zakir may not agree ... i do not care ... coz he does not need to agree ! If he is inquiring and ready to Face the Truth with open mind... he will. But if he is with a closed mind who feels hurt at every idea that is being rejected ... he will not ... and my posts are not for such a person.

Love!
Silence

Findusam
17 November 2014, 01:05 AM
Krishna is not the Absolute, Brahman is Absolute Consciousness & we are all Consciousness, chapter 6 is actually about us Atman realizing through meditation that we are that Brahman, in other words through focussed attention of Awareness in Atman we become absorbed in it, then Atman=Brahman so to speak.

Yes, we are Brahman. Krishna is also Brahman. What's the difference? Krishna is param brahma, the Supreme Brahman:

arjuna uvaca
param brahma param dhama
pavitram paramam bhavan
purusam sasvatam divyam
adi-devam ajam vibhum

"Arjuna said: You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the ultimate abode, the purest, the Absolute Truth. You are the eternal, transcendental, original person, the unborn, the greatest."

So this is Arjuna's opinion, and he is the highest authority on Bhagavad-Gita because he heard it directly from Krishna. He also says that great sages such as Narada, Asita, Devala and Vyasa confirm this.

Krishna is not the Absolute? mattah parataram nanyad kincid asti dhananjaya "O conqueror of wealth, there is no truth superior to Me." It doesn't require much twisting of words to establish that Krishna is Supreme and Absolute. The twisting of words is required when the opposite is to be established.


The As it is wallahs (ISCKOM) try to twist these words by interpreting it in the following way & turning Krishna into the absolute;

"Thus practicing control of the body, mind and activities, the mystic transcendentalist attains to the kingdom of God [or the abode of Krsna] by cessation of material existence."

What is this abode of Krishna?

Krishna says abide in Me, by this he means Self (Brahman) & not I am God/Absolute. try to twist these words by interpreting it in the following way & turning Krishna into the absolute;

"Thus practicing control of the body, mind and activities, the mystic transcendentalist attains to the kingdom of God [or the abode of Krsna] by cessation of material existence."

What is this abode of Krishna?

Krishna says abide in Me, by this he means Self (Brahman) & not I am God/Absolute

Who's twisting words here? The direct meaning of 'Me' means Krishna Himself, and not some "unborn within Krsna" which I've heard before. Krishna doesn't talk about any such thing, but simply says 'Me'. And Krishna's within and without is the same, because He is Absolute. You say He's not Absolute, but Krishna says He is. Arjuna says He is. Who are we going to listen to here?



So I have to avoid such book.

If you want some indirect interpretation of what Krishna means when He says 'Me', then you have to avoid such a book, yes. 'Me' means person, individual, that's the direct meaning.

devotee
17 November 2014, 05:21 AM
Namaste friends,

I have seen bitter fights on this forum being fought by some sects of Krishna devotees against Advaitins and there are many threads where we can find them. Can we say that Advaitins are wrong and Krishna devotees are right ? Or can we say that Krishna devotees are wrong and only Advaitins are right ? I am not sure if anyone here on this forum is Self-realised or God-realised. "Silence Speaks" and "Anirudh" may please forgive me if they are.

If someone is Self-realised then let him talk with a word of finality on Advaita and I won't mind. If someone has met God and he talks with a word of finality in his tone on Bhakti, then I don't mind. If one who is talking on Advaita is not Self-realised and the other one who is talking on Bhakti is not God-realised (not met God), then please shed your ego and give due respect to all other paths of Hindu Dharma.

My dear friends, please don't show off your "knowledge" of Physics to a student of Music. VedAnta doesn't talk only on Advaita or on Bhakti. If it were, then there would not have been six schools of VedAnta. The same scriptures have been interpreted by different schools in different ways. It is the fact that Gaurang Prabhu took dikshaa under an Advaitin and yet promoted Bhakti. Let's not forget that a majority of Hindus treads Bhakti Path and not Advaita. Are they all wrong ? Are they going towards their doom ? If that is so then Lord Krishna's words, "That Purusha can be attained only by intense bhakti" (BG) must be wrong.

"Right" and "Wrong" are relative terms. What is right from one point of reference is wrong from another point of reference. So, when someone sees something is right and when you see that the same thing is wrong ... it is due relative reflections from different reference points. We must respect that.

OM

silence_speaks
17 November 2014, 05:35 AM
Dear Devotee ji,
:) Namsthe!


Namaste friends,

I have seen bitter fights on this forum being fought by some sects of Krishna devotees against Advaitins and there are many threads where we can find them. Can we say that Advaitins are wrong and Krishna devotees are right ? Or can we say that Krishna devotees are wrong and only Advaitins are right ?



A person is neither right nor wrong. An idea is either right , or wrong, otherwise its not well formed!!





I am not sure if anyone here on this forum is Self-realised or God-realised. "Silence Speaks" and "Anirudh" may please forgive me if they are.

If someone is Self-realised then let him talk with a word of finality on Advaita and I won't mind. If someone has met God and he talks with a word of finality in his tone on Bhakti, then I don't mind.



Muktha abhimani muktho hi ... says Ashtavakra gita : A person who has the firm conviction (along with clarity) that he is free is free indeed.

Drda nischayam eva atra prathamam karanam bhavet ... says Ribhu gita ... Firm Conviction is the direct cause!


But how will you understand whether or not the other person is Self Realized ? He or she has to claim :)! Its better you see it through their conviction and clarity, ... rather than he making a claim and you believing or disbelieving ... see what he is saying and discover it in your own life here and now !!

[quote=devotee;121852]

If one who is talking on Advaita is not Self-realised and the other one who is talking on Bhakti is not God-realised (not met God), then please shed your ego and give due respect to all other paths of Hindu Dharma.



How is it shedding ego to say "everyone is right" ? :)

"if you want to learn a subject, there are no shortcuts you have to exert yourself" ... is this not rejecting all short cut methods ? And in doing so, is it being egoistic ? Another person says "yes you can learn a subject by reading a guide book" ... is he being honest in the first place ??




My dear friends, please don't show off your "knowledge" of Physics to a student of Music. VedAnta doesn't talk only on Advaita or on Bhakti. If it were, then there would not have been six schools of VedAnta. The same scriptures have been interpreted by different schools in different ways.



How do you know all those interpretations are correct ? :) !
Shankara establishes Advaita and in doing so rejects other schools. People who claim all paths lead to God are confused ! they do not know what they are talking about !!

Love!
Silence

Believer
17 November 2014, 10:51 AM
Namaste SPollito,

Welcome to the forum.


Sri Ecknath Easwaran's translation of the Gita..............is beautifully written and at least for me (white guy, raised Baptist), really changed my life.

Now that is a testimonial worth its weight in gold. :)
OP should heed the inherent advice.

Pranam.

Anirudh
19 November 2014, 11:37 PM
Namaste Silence Speaks ji

I haven't observed a better version of "old wine in a new bottle" kind of reply than the one you have offered on 17 November 2014 11:50 AM in my 1+ years of association with HDF.

Trusting heavily on your post on 15 November 2014 07:57 AM , hope you wont take offence if my future communications address you as handle.

Rest when opportunity and time permits.

silence_speaks
20 November 2014, 12:26 AM
Namaste Silence Speaks ji

I haven't observed a better version of "old wine in a new bottle" kind of reply than the one you have offered on 17 November 2014 11:50 AM in my 1+ years of association with HDF.

Trusting heavily on your post on 15 November 2014 07:57 AM , hope you wont take offence if my future communications address you as handle.

Rest when opportunity and time permits.

Dear Anirudh ji,
:) I may not like being addressed as handle or being criticized but I have enough maturity to maintain total equanimity in all circumstances. So please go ahead and address me as a handle if that fits your philosophy and makes you happy! I will continue my way. I am not so weak as to spoil my equanimity or get offended at someone else's way of addressing me , esp in a online discussion community.

I can maintain my equanimity with respect to praise and blame [this does not mean they are the same... mark the difference]

There is no "new" bottle. I never said i will say something new ! BTW, I hypothesize that you have not understood the message I was conveying :) ! I do not mean to be harsh again, i am just stating that there are strong indicators i can see in this regard and suggesting that ! And most important: I do not request your responses ! I respond wherever I feel like ... you obviously, will choose your own way. I always rebut the point, never a person! Even if someone says the worst thing ... i reject the idea and not the person, thats my philosophy...

Love!
Silence

Anirudh
20 November 2014, 03:10 AM
Namaste Devotee ji

I echo most part of your post.

I am not God Realized. Neither I have problems with Advaita or Advatins.

I pitch in only when unwarranted suggestions or statements that dont fit the particular forum are made. I can very well ignore, but ignoring such statements has given endless opportunities to few to go on and on.

Having said that, understand certain elements can't be changed.

I some times inclined to concur with a saying "no better enemy for a woman than woman herself"....


Namaste friends,

I have seen bitter fights on this forum being fought by some sects of Krishna devotees against Advaitins and there are many threads where we can find them. Can we say that Advaitins are wrong and Krishna devotees are right ? Or can we say that Krishna devotees are wrong and only Advaitins are right ? I am not sure if anyone here on this forum is Self-realised or God-realised. "Silence Speaks" and "Anirudh" may please forgive me if they are.

If someone is Self-realised then let him talk with a word of finality on Advaita and I won't mind. If someone has met God and he talks with a word of finality in his tone on Bhakti, then I don't mind. If one who is talking on Advaita is not Self-realised and the other one who is talking on Bhakti is not God-realised (not met God), then please shed your ego and give due respect to all other paths of Hindu Dharma.

My dear friends, please don't show off your "knowledge" of Physics to a student of Music. VedAnta doesn't talk only on Advaita or on Bhakti. If it were, then there would not have been six schools of VedAnta. The same scriptures have been interpreted by different schools in different ways. It is the fact that Gaurang Prabhu took dikshaa under an Advaitin and yet promoted Bhakti. Let's not forget that a majority of Hindus treads Bhakti Path and not Advaita. Are they all wrong ? Are they going towards their doom ? If that is so then Lord Krishna's words, "That Purusha can be attained only by intense bhakti" (BG) must be wrong.

"Right" and "Wrong" are relative terms. What is right from one point of reference is wrong from another point of reference. So, when someone sees something is right and when you see that the same thing is wrong ... it is due relative reflections from different reference points. We must respect that.

OM

devotee
20 November 2014, 03:28 AM
Namaste Anirudh,



I echo most part of your post.

I am not God Realized. Neither I have problems with Advaita or Advatins.

I pitch in only when unwarranted suggestions or statements that dont fit the particular forum are made. I can very well ignore, but ignoring such statements has given endless opportunities to few to go on and on.

Having said that, understand certain elements can't be changed.

I some times inclined to concur with a saying "no better enemy for a woman than woman herself"....


It is good. Even if one party understands, unnecessary fights over ego-show-off events can be avoided.

Thanks.

OM

R Gitananda
20 November 2014, 08:16 AM
namaste

I own several Gita's now and have owned many more previously. Currently I am partial to Bhagavad Gita The BELOVED LORD'S Secret Love Song by Graham M. Schweig, PhD because it has been translated into beautiful English poetry. There is also a transliteration of the Sanskrit. There is no verse by verse commentary but there are helpful margin footnotes where needed.

Hari Aum



Which Gita do you recommend as best translation and commentary ? Thanks

hinduism♥krishna
22 November 2014, 03:44 AM
Hello friend ..



Yes, we are Brahman. Krishna is also Brahman. What's the difference? Krishna is param brahma, the Supreme Brahman:

What? Jiva is also mentioned as param brahma. (BP 12.5.11). So such distinction doesn't make any sense at all.

In Vedanta, Brahman and parabrahman are the same things. Veda declares Brahman as the highest reality.


arjuna uvaca
param brahma param dhama
pavitram paramam bhavan
purusam sasvatam divyam
adi-devam ajam vibhum

"Arjuna said: You are the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the ultimate abode, the purest, the Absolute Truth. You are the eternal, transcendental, original person, the unborn, the greatest."

Wrong translation. There's no 'personality' word in original Sanskrit verse. In vedanta, purusha doesn't mean person having two hands like that.

Besides, I can show you various verses from scriptures where jiva is declared as supreme absolute abode, param Brahman.


So this is Arjuna's opinion, and he is the highest authority on Bhagavad-Gita because he heard it directly from Krishna. He also says that great sages such as Narada, Asita, Devala and Vyasa confirm this.

That is not arjuna's opinion. It's your interpretation.


Krishna is not the Absolute? mattah parataram nanyad kincid asti dhananjaya "O conqueror of wealth, there is no truth superior to Me." It doesn't require much twisting of words to establish that Krishna is Supreme and Absolute. The twisting of words is required when the opposite is to be established.

Krishna is one with Brahman. So obviously, arjuna is addressing this to all-pervading Brahman. Arjuna has realized who's is Krishna in human form. He realizes him as formless eternal unmanifest brahman beyond any form and name.



Who's twisting words here? The direct meaning of 'Me' means Krishna Himself, and not some "unborn within Krsna" which I've heard before.

Me of Krishna is always all-pervasive ness. It's not bound by form. Me is not his form but his soul. If me was really of Krishna's form, then Krishna wouldn't have merged himself in Brahman at the time of his death. :cool:


If you want some indirect interpretation of what Krishna means when He says 'Me', then you have to avoid such a book, yes. 'Me' means person, individual, that's the direct meaning.

Gita can be best understood by Vedanta, not by some absurd direct interpretation.

kamaferro
23 November 2014, 03:33 AM
Namaste SPollito,

Welcome to the forum.



Now that is a testimonial worth its weight in gold. :)
OP should heed the inherent advice.

Pranam.

Namaste
I was considering this book but read comments saying is very misleading comparing to real Gita

Believer
23 November 2014, 09:30 PM
Namaste,


I was considering this book but read comments saying is very misleading comparing to real Gita
In the amount of time that you have taken to seek everyone's opinion, you could have given a couple of different translations a cursory read to figure out if you thought that either one of them was speaking to you. NO ONE will be able to give you the version that you will feel comfortable with. We are all biased, in one way or the other. Some of us even think of ISKCON version as a cyanide pill, :) although no one has died from it so far. So, just pick one and read it. If you like it, read it again at a slower pace to get to a deeper level. If not, then try another author. YOU have to decide which version suits you. Others may try to sell you the one authored by THEIR guru, which will always be the best for them.

It is heartening to see that you are getting so many suggestions and people are trying to help you to raise your level of consciousness. But for a person who is going to be reading his first version, it is just an introduction. After the basics have been familiarized with, a selection can be made for in-depth study. I haven't seen anyone start swimming without first getting his feet wet.

Pranam.

kamaferro
24 November 2014, 04:25 AM
Namaste,


In the amount of time that you have taken to seek everyone's opinion, you could have given a couple of different translations a cursory read to figure out if you thought that either one of them was talking to you. NO ONE will be able to give you the version that you will feel comfortable with. We are all biased, in one way or the other. Some even think of ISKCON version as a cyanide pill. :) So, just pick one and read it. If you like it, read it again at a slower pace to get to a deeper level. If not, then try another author. YOU have to decide which version suits you. Others may try to sell you the one authored by THEIR guru, which will always be the best for them.

It is heartening to see that you are getting so many suggestions and people are trying to help you to raise your level of consciousness. But for a person who is going to be reading his first version, it is just an introduction. After the basics have been familiarized with, a selection can be made for in-depth study. I haven't seen anyone start swimming without first getting his feet wet.

Pranam.

Namaste Believer I fully agree with you I must start somewhere and will decide from my heart and see I think Chinmayananda I glance thorough and start
I have always time to compare with other and get deeper. I am sorry but I am not expecting to find the true edition everyone will sell his own opinion I am interested in the essence I must start somewhere

Thanks so much very wise

silence_speaks
25 November 2014, 07:02 PM
Namaste Believer I fully agree with you I must start somewhere and will decide from my heart and see I think Chinmayananda I glance thorough and start
I have always time to compare with other and get deeper. I am sorry but I am not expecting to find the true edition everyone will sell his own opinion I am interested in the essence I must start somewhere

Thanks so much very wise

Dear kamaferro ji,
:) Please do not just glance through. Study with your heart and soul in it.

Love!
Silence

kamaferro
26 November 2014, 12:16 AM
Dear kamaferro ji,
:) Please do not just glance through. Study with your heart and soul in it.

Love!
Silence

Hari Om of course Silence otherwise no use Thanks

kamaferro
18 December 2014, 03:23 AM
Dear kamaferro ji,
:) Please do not just glance through. Study with your heart and soul in it.

Love!
Silence


I read this book VEdanta Treatise of Parthasarathy ok simple a bookshop in India suggested to read. If we are Divine, I think that is the essence of VEdanta than we should have the qualities attributed to God. I ask you do you pray, do you believe there is a supreme reality called God the creator or what ? For me very confusing because I always believed in God whatever form and even Vedanta followers pray to God, Shiva, Ganesh whatever. So please explain all this confusion, we come from God but how to be God, then we pray to ourselves. Prayers are powerful, miracles exists who does it we ? Thanks quite confused

Anima Deorum
18 December 2014, 05:36 PM
The best Gita translation is the one you love to read. There are many good ones besides that, as well. Some are free for download.

Personally, I favor Swami Sivananda's more abstract and Advaitic rendition. However, I also adore Prabhupada's Dvaitic streak. I read both versions, alternately.

I have been reading the Gita for almost two years and am nearly finished with the first time through! I'm very happy to study Krishna's philosophy. I would like to memorize it someday (or maybe just a chapter).

All the best!

luttapi
18 December 2014, 10:14 PM
Personally, I consider the Holy Gita of Swami Chinmayananda (http://www.amazon.com/The-Holy-Geeta-Swami-Chinmayananda/dp/817597074X) as the most appropriate interpretation for our time.

We also have a learning tool (http://gita.eu5.org) containing the English translation from this book.


Bhagavad Gita (http://goo.gl/j4OdLP) for Google Chrome on Windows/Mac
Bhagavad Gita (http://goo.gl/Qn7XYo) for Android phones and tablets

Shivambrahmin
28 April 2015, 05:43 PM
Georg Feuerstein's Bhagavad Gita is by far the best I have come across.

deafAncient
01 May 2015, 07:33 AM
Namaskāra to all,

Many thanks for posting here to give different perspectives on different versions of the BG. I have As It is, Winthrop Edition, and a version with the commentary of Śri Śaṅkarācārya. I will read these three over the course of the years. Many thanks for the Aṣṭāvakra and the Uddhava Gitas, as I did not know they existed. I have them, now.

_Ash
03 May 2015, 01:01 AM
Bhagavad Gita As It is is best for beginners. (Theistic version)

Additionally you can also read Swami Sivananda's translation, its good too.

deafAncient
03 May 2015, 10:02 PM
Namaste Ash,

What does that mean when you say that BG As It Is is a theistic version? Please explain what that means as compared to other more traditional versions.

Edit: Swami Sivananda's BG version appears to be a very abridged version of only 154 pages. I want the full story.

Praṇāma

_Ash
03 May 2015, 10:46 PM
Namaste Ash,

What does that mean when you say that BG As It Is is a theistic version? Please explain what that means as compared to other more traditional versions.

Edit: Swami Sivananda's BG version appears to be a very abridged version of only 154 pages. I want the full story.

Praṇāma

Namaste deafAncient

Swami Prabhupada's translation and Commentary(detailed) are Theistic ie, more Devotional, Bhakti Oriented. Even Sri Madhva's version was kinda similar too (Though i've only read a few verses from his Gita bhasya). Some may find Prabhupada's aggressive refutations (attacks) on Mayavada/Advaita Philosophy disturbing, leaving that aside, its fine.

I believe both are good for beginners.

Hare Krishna

_Ash
04 May 2015, 06:09 AM
Namaste deafAncient,

Prabhupada gives more emphasis on Devotinal Service to Krishna as Supreme Personality of Godhead, his commentaries(quite detailed) are more bhakti oriented.

nightingalestore
15 May 2015, 03:05 AM
Hello Friends,

Bhagavad gita book is the wonderful gift for me. Lord Krishna updesh is very nice.. In bhagavad gita Dharma, adharma, vaaimai, sathiyam everything is explained. Bhagavad gita book is for all kind of people. In my side suggested and used nightingale bhagavad gita various versions. Now the bhagavad gita book is avilable in largest edition with the meanings in hindi and english.

Stonelands
06 June 2015, 09:17 PM
For what it's worth, Prapupada's Bhagavad Gita As It Is left me with more of an impression for his intense dislike of Advaitins than it did for his love of Krishna and this is from someone who spent nearly a year within the Hare Krishna movement.

But you should still give it a read although I'd balance it with some other versions. I'm finding that Sivananda's version isn't bad.

Skull
19 August 2015, 10:39 PM
Whichever version inspires one toward the selfless Self is the 'best'. There may be more than one.

A recent one, in three volumes, I find uplifting is by Swami Ranganathananda.