Hinduism and NonViolence

[Water]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté


Can you offer the śloka where Kṛṣṇa-ji says these words?

praṇām

2:2, here is the passage that is often translated as "coward" or similar,

"sri-bhagavan uvaca
kutas tva kasmalam idam
visame samupasthitam
anarya-justam asvargyam
akirti-karam arjuna"

Extremely short, summarized translation in my own paraphrasing -
"Where has this behavior come from? It is not honorable and is the cause of infamy and shame."

English "coward" adjective -
- lacking courage; very fearful or timid.
- person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, opposition, pain, etc.; a timid or easily intimidated person.

Refusal to fight is being timid in the face of opposition. I can understand the logic in the translation. Definitely consider that coward may be interpreted as a "fear of fighting" - but that is not the singular definition. It can simply be a refusal to fight without fear nor intimidation.

Do you think it is an erroneous translation? I repeat it only because I have seen it's repetition in many sources from ISKCon texts to the public works of Vivekananda.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

2:2, here is the passage that is often translated as "coward" or similar,

"sri-bhagavan uvaca
kutas tva kasmalam idam
visame samupasthitam
anarya-justam asvargyam
akirti-karam arjuna"

Extremely short, summarized translation in my own paraphrasing -
"Where has this behavior come from? It is not honorable and is the cause of infamy and shame."

Do you think it is an erroneous translation? I repeat it only because I have seen it's repetition in many sources from ISKCon texts to the public works of Vivekananda.

Yes, this is the verse (śloka) I thought you were referring to. I am not fond of the translation that was offered above.

One first must be aware of kṛṣṇa-ji's teaching method. He plans on lifting-up arjun ( some write arjuna) from
his condition of inaction to action - preparedness to fight.

He asks , kutas - where from ? from what cause or motive ? from where does this kaśmala arise?
This is the key word and does not imply cowardly-ness. My teacher has used the word blemish as the
defintion of kaśmala. Why so ? Because mala is an 'impurity' and kaś is 'to move, to approach' .
Hence this kaśmala is movement to impurity, to blemish. Yet kaśmala also means timid.

So, Kṛṣṇa-ji is asking where did this blemish, this impurity of being timid arise from? One must be aware
that it is kṛṣṇa-ji's motive to uplift and prepare , not to find fault. He would therefore not call arjun a coward
as the effect of this would be degrading and not give the effect He is looking for.

He is getting arjun's attention and in the next verse ( 3rd śloka ) He calls him pārtha ( son of pṛthā) .
Why so ? This again is kṛṣṇa-ji's perfect skill as the teacher. We can address this if there is interest.

praṇām

[Water]

Many thanks for the insight you have provided.

I interpreted the translation to not quite be offensive or degrading. I understand that the word is generally used extremely negatively and implies an insult about a person's unreasonable fear... there is also a somewhat neutral application that implies a personal self-defeat or distaste for the task.

It also seems fitting for the scenario - immediately before battle, someone is told they are acting in a timid way to cause shame and infamy. There is a single English word that immediately comes to mind.

Maybe there is a more tactful translation that maintains the message? Blemish is somewhat unwieldy and does not flow well in speech.

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam

If i may offer my own understanding, that it could not be coward for in the nest verse the 4th line he says and i quote

klaibyam ma sma gamah partha
naitat tvayy upapadyate
ksudram hrdaya-daurbalyam
tyaktvottistha parantapa

O son of Prtha, do not yield to this degrading impotence. It does not become you. Give up such petty weakness of heart and arise, O chastiser of the enemy.

PS. sorry i jumped ahead as Yajvanji had already offered slok no 3 for further consideration


Jai Shree Krishna

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namasté

Many thanks for the insight you have provided.
Maybe there is a more tactful translation that maintains the message?

Yes, I see what you say, yet there is one thing that could be missed when reading the Bhāgavad gītā - it is perfect knowledge. Hence if it is perfect each word then can be viewed in its wholeness from the 6 systems of Indian philosophy - this is called saḍ darśana or the 6 schools of vision, seeing, sight. We know them as :

• śāṁkhya
• yoga
• vedānta
• mīmāṃsā
• nyāya
• vaiśeṣika.

The 6 darśana-s दर्शन (seeing, looking, knowledge, traditional doctrine or precept , collection of such doctrines) are so complete in themselves, that many people took the 6 to be different views. This is not the case. The six when taken as whole give a 360º view of Reality.


Now if that in and of itself were not enough, each śloka can also be viewed on 3 different levels:

• The physical level - this would be the fight of good vs. bad, right and wrong, the big oppressing the small, the strong oppressing
  the weak. One could say this occurs on the individual, social, national levels and can be seen via the senses.

• The mental level - that of thoughts, ideas, tendencies, behaviors, traits, manas or mind, intellect (buddhi), etc. We can even place meditation on this level. The ~battle~ of the senses drawing one into the field of matter vs. inward to calmness, to steadiness towards the direction of the Self.

• The spiritual level - this is the level of the devata, yet we as spiritual beings can also be found here as one experiences samādhi, perfect silence, etc. Now we have that tendency for union ( yukti, yoga) with the Supreme, yet the ego may get in the way , or the subtler kośa's¹ or even other impulses of nature that may restrict this ability

This is how skillful the muni veda vyāsa¹ has taken this knowledge. I have not found any knowledge other then sanātana dharma that takes such a profound view of reality to this level.

praṇām



words/references

• veda vyāsa - the one who compiled the veda-s and is also known as kṛṣṇa dvaipāyana; for more insight on vyāsa see this HDF post: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=49765&postcount=35
• kośa - these are coverings over the Self. Some say there are 3 others say 5. The ānanda-maya kośa or sheath of bliss , the kāraṇa-śarīra or causal frame , the vijñāna-maya or buddhi-maya or mano-maya or prāṇa-maya kośa , " the sheath of intellect or will or life-force , the sūkṣma-śarīra or " subtle frame , the anna-maya kośa , the sheath of nourishmen , the sthūla-śarīra or gross frame i.e. the phyical body level and components

[Water]

O son of Prtha, do not yield to this degrading impotence. It does not become you. Give up such petty weakness of heart and arise, O chastiser of the enemy.

I don't understand how this proves the common translation as mentioned above.

sanātana dharma that takes such a profound view of reality to this level.

Exceptional information. To be honest, I don't yet fully understand how to apply it and reach the same result... some day, I hope to.

Bearing all of the above in mind to the extent I am able and the more I consider it myself, it does seem like an odd translation. I am curious as to why it is so pervasive. I will try to refrain from considering it literal and avoid using that translation in the future.

Thanks!

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam all

I don't understand how this proves the common translation as mentioned above.

may be not directly but it has a bearing

in your post no 2, you made a statement ‘Shree Krishna called Arjun a coward’ that would be misleading, because Lord Krishna is posing a question in this particular sloka.

Now under what circumstances this question arises? To find the context we have to refer to chapter one, aptly titled as Arjuna vishaad yog.

I hope we can agree that this question of Lord Krishna would arise from arjuns lamentation or moha.
I think it would be safe to mention, Arjun did not express any cowardice, or show any timidity in chapter one, nor was he afraid or overwhelmed by the size off the Kaurava army, he had faced them single handed in the past.
In that circumstance the use off the word coward would not be appropriate,

As to the popular use off the word coward for that sloka, is news to me, not that it should makes any difference, I had never until now come across it and I have read many or referred to it.
My own Guajarati version translate it as Moha, Gyanesvari gita says the same, Gita society uses dejection, Prabhupad translates as kasmalam--dirtiness, impurity


Jai Shree Krishna

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

namast�

Ganeshprasad writes,

Arjun did not express any cowardice, or show any timidity in chapter one,

This no doubt is true. Yet I would also like to remind the astute HDF reader that the bhāgavad gītā is composed in 700 verses ( some argue 701). Yet this is 0.70% of the mahābhārata's 100,000 śloka-s. If one reads arjun's actions and adventures throughout the mahābhārata one will quickly see there is not one second that he yields to cowardness.






praṇām

[Water]

As to the popular use off the word coward for that sloka, is news to me, not that it should makes any difference, I had never until now come across it and I have read many or referred to it.

As you mentioned in another thread... it is but a Google search away!

It was even covered on another forum with what seems to be the opposite answer (it does note the source of the translation in the original question):

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/a...na-coward.html

From commentary from Vaisnava Sampradayas:

http://www.bhagavad-gita.org/Gita/verse-02-34.html

Yet another source (it is worth noting that the translation here is "do not act like a coward")

http://www.lord-krishna.com/The-Bhag...habharata.html

Some random English resource:

http://www.santosha.com/philosophy/gita-chapter2.html

From one compilation of teachings from A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada (it is worth noting it reads "other people will call you a coward")

http://www.vaniquotes.org/wiki/Both_as_friend_and_philosopher_to_Arjuna,_Lord_Krsna_now_gives_His_final_judgment_regarding_Arjuna's _refusal_to_fight

..... and quite literally hundreds of thousands more results available instantly online.

One of the little ISKCon books I have (it's missing the outside covers and some pages - it was given to me in that condition....) includes the same translation. I was under the impression at least one of the English translated Mahabharta/Gita book sources I have uses the same translation (I have/have had roughly 5.....).

I would like to reiterate again that I think the translation is not to the very negative "coward" (ex: fearful of battle, afraid, refusing to fight because of terror, not having confidence, not being courageous) is probably not what the translators intended. I think they meant "coward" only in the sense of unwilling to fight.

Personally, as I've said, I will avoid using that translation again. The arguments presented here are pretty clear as to why it is inappropriate. The links above are for reference only and I do not intend to debate them.

If you do have a suggestion for "the best" translation - please let me know!

Thanks!

[Sādhaka]

Namaste,
Interesting debate. I have to thank water for bringing those up so that I myself can gain more knowledge on hinduism from my peers

OM