In my useless & fallen & conditioned by maya opinion:
All that Scott must face up to is the question:
Is this true, or not true?: A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami a guru who is in a line of disciplic succession going all the way back to Krishna"
True. He is a guru who is in a line of disciplic succession going all the way back to Krishna.
Bodhinata Velyanswami is a guru in the Nandinatha Sampradaya, which came from the Nath Sampradaya, which was founded by Shiva Himself.
Is this true, or not true?:
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami,a] followed in every Swami's tradition of, 'Wrighting his own Commentary of the Gita'; and,
Many Swamis wrote commentaries on the Gita. Prabhupada was (to my knowledge) the only Swami who claimed that his translation was the only authentic one.
b] A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami titled his Commentary of the Gita: 'Bhagavad-gita, As-It-Is'.
True. He named it as such to indicate that the Gita is not interpreted allegorically, as some translators do. However, the copy of the Gita that I have is not interpreted allegorically. It makes reference to Iswara, the Sanskrit term for "God".
c] Lord Shiva is the Chief Vaishnava.
False. Read the Shiva Purana.
From the book "Dancing with Siva" by Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami:
"As Primal Soul, Siva is the five-fold manifestation: Brahma, the creator; Vishnu, the preserver; Rudra, the destroyer; Maheshvara, the veiling Lord, and Sadashiva, the revealer. He is our personal Lord, source of all three worlds."
Why are you the Admin here, and setting the rules on this 'HINDU' forum?
Jai Shree Krishna
Dear Ji,
I am not doing any admin or even will try that. But, instead of throwing some judgments and mere opinions, i asked whether the person who wants to lodge such judgments can provide substance and if not, just keep cool. What is the point in discussiing on a "judgement" when it is already 'fixed' in the mind.
Many Swamis wrote commentaries on the Gita. Prabhupada was (to my knowledge) the only Swami who claimed that his translation was the only authentic one.
He didnt say his one is the only authentic one.
http://vedabase.net/bg/preface/en
"If personally I have any credit in this matter, it is only that I have tried to present Bhagavad-gītā as it is, without any adulteration. Before my presentation of Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, almost all the English editions of Bhagavad-gītā were introduced to fulfill someone's personal ambition. But our attempt, in presenting Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, is to present the mission of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. Our business is to present the will of Kṛṣṇa, not that of any mundane speculator like the politician, philosopher or scientist, for they have very little knowledge of Kṛṣṇa, despite all their other knowledge. When Kṛṣṇa says, man-manābhava mad-bhakto mad-yājīmāḿnamaskuru [Bg. 18.65], etc., we, unlike the so-called scholars, do not say that Kṛṣṇa and His inner spirit are different. Kṛṣṇa is absolute, and there is no difference between Kṛṣṇa's name, Kṛṣṇa's form, Kṛṣṇa's qualities, Kṛṣṇa's pastimes, etc. This absolute position of Kṛṣṇa is difficult to understand for any person who is not a devotee of Kṛṣṇa in the system of paramparā (disciplic succession). Generally the so-called scholars, politicians, philosophers, and svāmīs, without perfect knowledge of Kṛṣṇa, try to banish or kill Kṛṣṇa when writing commentary on Bhagavad-gītā. Such unauthorized commentary upon Bhagavad-gītā is known as Māyāvāda-bhāṣya, and Lord Caitanya has warned us about these unauthorized men. Lord Caitanya clearly says that anyone who tries to understand Bhagavad-gītā from the Māyāvādī point of view will commit a great blunder. The result of such a blunder will be that the misguided student of Bhagavad-gītā will certainly be bewildered on the path of spiritual guidance and will not be able to go back to home, back to Godhead."
True. He named it as such to indicate that the Gita is not interpreted allegorically, as some translators do. However, the copy of the Gita that I have is not interpreted allegorically. It makes reference to Iswara, the Sanskrit term for "God".
He named it such to indicate that it has stuck with the spirit of the gita - hasnt tried to minimise bhakti or present it as some stepping stone nor explain away the personality of Krsna.
http://vedabase.net/bg/introduction/en
Bhagavad-gītā is also known as Gītopaniṣad. It is the essence of Vedic knowledge and one of the most important Upaniṣads in Vedic literature. Of course there are many commentaries in English on the Bhagavad-gītā, and one may question the necessity for another one. This present edition can be explained in the following way. Recently an American lady asked me to recommend an English translation of Bhagavad-gītā. Of course in America there are so many editions of Bhagavad-gītā available in English, but as far as I have seen, not only in America but also in India, none of them can be strictly said to be authoritative because in almost every one of them the commentator has expressed his own opinions without touching the spirit of Bhagavad-gītā as it is.
The spirit of Bhagavad-gītā is mentioned in Bhagavad-gītā itself. It is just like this: If we want to take a particular medicine, then we have to follow the directions written on the label. We cannot take the medicine according to our own whim or the direction of a friend. It must be taken according to the directions on the label or the directions given by a physician. Similarly, Bhagavad-gītā should be taken or accepted as it is directed by the speaker Himself. The speaker of Bhagavad-gītā is Lord ŚrīKṛṣṇa. He is mentioned on every page of Bhagavad-gītā as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Bhagavān. Of course the word bhagavān sometimes refers to any powerful person or any powerful demigod, and certainly here bhagavān designates Lord ŚrīKṛṣṇa as a great personality, but at the same time we should know that Lord ŚrīKṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as is confirmed by all great ācāryas (spiritual masters) like Śańkarācārya, Rāmānujācārya, Madhvācārya, Nimbārka Svāmī, ŚrīCaitanyaMahāprabhu and many other authorities of Vedic knowledge in India. The Lord Himself also establishes Himself as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in the Bhagavad-gītā, and He is accepted as such in the Brahma-saḿhitā and all the Purāṇas, especially the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, known as the BhāgavataPurāṇa (kṛṣṇas tubhagavānsvayam). Therefore we should take Bhagavad-gītā as it is directed by the Personality of Godhead Himself. In the Fourth Chapter of the Gītā (4.1-3) the Lord says:
....
"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. All the great sages such as Nārada, Asita, Devala, and Vyāsa confirm this truth about You, and now You Yourself are declaring it to me. O Kṛṣṇa, I totally accept as truth all that You have told me. Neither the demigods nor the demons, O Lord, can understand Your personality."
After hearing Bhagavad-gītā from the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Arjuna accepted Kṛṣṇa as paraḿbrahma, the Supreme Brahman. Every living being is Brahman, but the supreme living being, or the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is the Supreme Brahman. Paraḿdhāma means that He is the supreme rest or abode of everything; pavitram means that He is pure, untainted by material contamination; puruṣam means that He is the supreme enjoyer; śāśvatam, original; divyam, transcendental; ādi-devam, the Supreme Personality of Godhead; ajam, the unborn; and vibhum, the greatest.
Now one may think that because Kṛṣṇa was the friend of Arjuna, Arjuna was telling Him all this by way of flattery, but Arjuna, just to drive out this kind of doubt from the minds of the readers of Bhagavad-gītā, substantiates these praises in the next verse when he says that Kṛṣṇa is accepted as the Supreme Personality of Godhead not only by himself but by authorities like Nārada, Asita, Devala and Vyāsadeva. These are great personalities who distribute the Vedic knowledge as it is accepted by all ācāryas. Therefore Arjuna tells Kṛṣṇa that he accepts whatever He says to be completely perfect. Sarvam etad ṛtaḿmanye: "I accept everything You say to be true." Arjuna also says that the personality of the Lord is very difficult to understand and that He cannot be known even by the great demigods. This means that the Lord cannot even be known by personalities greater than human beings. So how can a human being understand Lord ŚrīKṛṣṇa without becoming His devotee?
Therefore Bhagavad-gītā should be taken up in a spirit of devotion. One should not think that he is equal to Kṛṣṇa, nor should he think that Kṛṣṇa is an ordinary personality or even a very great personality. Lord ŚrīKṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. So according to the statements of Bhagavad-gītā or the statements of Arjuna, the person who is trying to understand the Bhagavad-gītā, we should at least theoretically accept ŚrīKṛṣṇa as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and with that submissive spirit we can understand the Bhagavad-gītā. Unless one reads the Bhagavad-gītā in a submissive spirit, it is very difficult to understand Bhagavad-gītā, because it is a great mystery.
If PrabhpAd's Gita goes all the way back to Brahma and KRshna, Swami Shivananda, Chidbhavananda, Krshnananda , Chinmayananda go all the way back to Shiva.
If BhagvAn Shri Krshna's Name, Form, Qualities, Pastimes and Tattva are the same as Krshna (wonder why His Tattva is not mentioned often),
depending on the jiva's flavour and taste , one focuses on His Transcendental Form, another on His Holy Name, NAmaPrabhu, and another one on His Tattva.
Its all Sat.
PrabhupAd's and all of Vaishnav emphasis is really on scholars that say Krshna is an ordinary human.
THAT is wrong.
As long as He is taken as Ishvar, Parameshvar, even the same as SadAshiv, and one focuses on His message
1. What He is ( more than, or in additional to the form He shows us earthlings for our benefit ) - Adi Purush, Parameshwar, ParaBrahman, akshar , avyay, kshetradnya, paramgati, .......
2. What He wants us to do , what He expects from us
that should be Ok.
The wise who are listening to our conversations look at all this as an amusing Leela, fighting over the same Truth-elephant, using different language to say the same things and thinking we are debating....
The KEY : A novice seeker must find what approach is the most pleasant , soothing and mostly natural , in the direction of the flow for them, and not against the current.
This is needed till we shed the ornamental name-shape-form concepts.
Although, Of course , "My First Gita" will be in accordance with my past Karma although I think I chose it In many cases, the Gita "landed" in our hands. We think it was not pre-arranged ? However, as we go deeper, discrimination is possible.
Are there any fans of DnyAneshwari here ? Just curious.
May we all flow in the direction of our manas-Ganga that flows from His Lotus Feet - attached picture.
P.S. Let us pray to the AntaryAmi , our dearmost inner Self, that may He lead us, guide
us to light , which resides at the deep root of His Heart. May Lakshmi at the door to His Heart extend Her motherly love and grant us this privilege.
Last edited by smaranam; 26 February 2010 at 10:07 AM.
Reason: Post Script
Originally Posted by bhaktajan
Bookmarks