|
Post by malati on Jan 18, 2011 2:06:07 GMT -6
Gerard said: I don't think the translator we know as Advaita Das is E. Bryant. Advaita Das is a Dutch High School drop-out who tried to translate for a while, I don't think he is still active as translator, mainly as a blogger (madangopal).
Why include the expletive, "high school drop-out", about Advaitadas? He is one of the first westerners to translate GV literature.
His translations may not be perfect but given that english is not his native language, he did'nt do that bad. He has a very good grasp of the GV teachings and though his translations of the verses might be odd or stilted at times, I dont think the big picture of the GV teachings has been lost in all his projects.
Although lacking in higher formal education, Advaitadas is a very intelligent guy; he has the genes. His brother is a medical doctor and his father is a dentist.
Nitaidas
You are right, in my opinion "bhakti" is the most difficult word to translate into english because well, that is the core of the whole GV philosophy, upon which everything revolves. The word "devotion" alone will not be able to convey the erotic, esoteric, aesthetics contexts of the word "bhakti".
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Jan 19, 2011 9:38:54 GMT -6
Gerard said: I don't think the translator we know as Advaita Das is E. Bryant. Advaita Das is a Dutch High School drop-out who tried to translate for a while, I don't think he is still active as translator, mainly as a blogger (madangopal).
Why include the expletive, "high school drop-out", about Advaitadas? He is one of the first westerners to translate GV literature. His translations may not be perfect but given that english is not his native language, he did'nt do that bad. He has a very good grasp of the GV teachings and though his translations of the verses might be odd or stilted at times, I dont think the big picture of the GV teachings has been lost in all his projects. Although lacking in higher formal education, Advaitadas is a very intelligent guy; he has the genes. His brother is a medical doctor and his father is a dentist. I'm not impressed with the fact that Advaita Das' father was a dentist. I never use my ancestors' nobility & achievements to explain my failures. I knew Advaita Das personally (I made a critical remark about Rupa Goswami once and from that day we are not on speaking terms anymore) and he was never able to answer one question I posed. He has read quite some books - who hasn't? - but his "knowledge" remains bookish and not based on any experience. (There are other reasons also but that might amount to gossip.) This also applies to academics in general of course but they have at least a thorough knowledge of the languages and the history of the religions involved. That can not be said of Advaita Das because he is a High School drop-out and self-taught people have the tendency not to read the books they don't like but actually should study too. As far as I know most of Advaita Das' translations are done again but I'm glad there are people who read his translations. They say, better something than nothing. I can't argue with that.
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Jan 19, 2011 9:47:53 GMT -6
I would of thought that Krsna book was the original fairy tale, and may be the only one where all really do live happily ever after. Yes, I should not have used the word fairy-tale here. In my opinion Prabhupad's take on Krishna's stories actually lack the profundity and the esoteric knowledge (here we are again!) entailed in fairy-tales.
|
|
|
Post by malati on Jan 20, 2011 3:41:43 GMT -6
Gerard: I'm not impressed with the fact that Advaita Das' father was a dentist. I never use my ancestors' nobility & achievements to explain my failures.
So why juxtapose in the one sentence Advaitadas’ doing translation work with his being a high school drop-out ? He was in H.S. 40 years ago, so I dont really know the relevance of the description in regard to the present Advaitadas , the man, other than as a put-down.
Gerard: He has read quite some books - who hasn't? - but his "knowledge" remains bookish and not based on any experience. (There are other reasons also but that might amount to gossip.)
Not based on experience??... Who are you to judge him? And who exactly among the westerner –devotees can be considered a “perfect Vaishnava”?
Gerard: This also applies to academics in general of course but they have at least a thorough knowledge of the languages and the history of the religions involved. That can not be said of Advaita Das because he is a High School drop-out and self-taught people have the tendency not to read the books they don't like but actually should study too.
The most esoteric siddhanta of GVism can be found in its poetry, and narratives. Therefore in my opinion, we dont need to read Aquinas, Aristotle or Kant to understand the esoterics of GVism. Anyone who has the inclination, aptitude, inspiration to write or translate, a very good grasp of the teachings, who speaks and reads reasonably well the the target languages because he/she has immersed himself in their respective cultures and has some emotional investment in the work can come up with descent work. Many prominent writers didn’t go to writing schools to be one.
I’m sure even with his academic qualification, Nitaidas will not be able to come up with his high quality translation works if he didn’t have the talent and inclination for such kind of work and had not experienced the Indian culture.
I’m not against formal education—it actually hastens acquisition of knowledge. I myself have some pieces of such kind of papers. But we have to admit that formal education alone will not suffice. Many GV acharyas who had/have expounded exquisitely the GV philosophy didn’t/dont have higher formal education.
Let’s be objective of our criticisms of someone’s translation work by giving concrete examples so we can all learn from them.
I’m not saying Advaitadas’ works do not need improvement because they sure do need a rewrite and I’m not defending him for personal reasons because he has issues with me too. But let’s be objective and not take it personally.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jan 20, 2011 11:42:57 GMT -6
(I made a critical remark about Rupa Goswami once and from that day we are not on speaking terms anymore) Yes, Advaita carries his grudges with him for a long time. He is the Rodney Dangerfield of CV: "I don't get no respect!" Still, ya gotta love him. He tries his best. There is no point in dissecting his work. Better we learn from his mistakes and make our own work better. In that sense he is also an acarya of sorts. Malatidi, I have to disagree with you here. All of the great acaryas were well educated. Rupa and Sanatana and their nephew Jiva had the best educations their times permitted. They knew Persian and Arabic, they knew logic and aesthetics, they knew mimamsa and vedanta. That is what made some such effective communicators. They were the ones able to capture the magic of Mahaprabhu and make it available to future generations. Who I wonder do you have in mind when you refer to CV acaryas who were uneducated? In today's world it is even more important for the representatives of this tradition to be well educated, not just in other traditions, but in science and philosophy, literature and literary criticism. psychology and sociology and so forth, too. It is not just important for communicating with a modern audience and passing the tradition down to the next generations, or in order to "defeat" the materialist scientists as some (in my view) misguided Don Quixotes think. It is because these other sciences and views are manifestations, however partial or incomplete, of the truth and our highest calling as CV is satyam param dhimahi. "Let us meditate on the highest truth." We cannot bury our heads in the sands of CV literature and ignore the rest of the world.
|
|
|
Post by malati on Jan 21, 2011 4:29:14 GMT -6
Nitaidas:Malatidi, I have to disagree with you here. All of the great acaryas were well educated. Rupa and Sanatana and their nephew Jiva had the best educations their times permitted. They knew Persian and Arabic, they knew logic and aesthetics, they knew mimamsa and vedanta. That is what made some such effective communicators. They were the ones able to capture the magic of Mahaprabhu and make it available to future generations. Who I wonder do you have in mind when you refer to CV acaryas who were uneducated?
Nitaidas
Ok, point taken about Sri Rupa and Sanatan. I didnt say uneducated re some CV acharyas, I said higher formal education. I was making the point that education alone does not guarantee success. In all areas of life, how one applies himself to the task at hand, to the calling in his/her life are very important factors for success.
Advaitadas has some qualities and experiences that he applied into his translation works. I think his biggest mistake was translating them into a language which is not his native language. If he translated them into Dutch, he could have achieved better results.
The acharyas I have in mind in this century that have very well expounded the GV siddhanta and have big following yet, do not have higher formal education like for example, Satyanarayan das (PhD)or Haridas Shastri, are:
Sri Ananta das Babaji-- he was a simple former school teacher
Narayan Maharaj - a former policeman prior to becoming a monk - I have read that in his official biography before they deleted that in all his biographies, for what reason, I have no clue about.
Sadhu Baba -Nikunja Gopal - though a bright student he was not very interested in the structuredness of school life.
Tripurari Swami - his take on GVism is rather unique. I do like his writings.
To be honest, that is why I'm so disappointed at the turn in your life, Nitaidas. You have some good qualities that can make you a fine guru. Unfortunately you turnaround will not make that possible for us.
Also Jagat wasted his potential with his "immoral" and parochial ideas.
Nitaidas:In today's world it is even more important for the representatives of this tradition to be well educated, not just in other traditions, but in science and philosophy, literature and literary criticism. psychology and sociology and so forth, too. It is not just important for communicating with a modern audience and passing the tradition down to the next generations, or in order to "defeat" the materialist scientists as some (in my view) misguided Don Quixotes think. It is because these other sciences and views are manifestations, however partial or incomplete, of the truth and our highest calling as CV is satyam param dhimahi. Let us meditate on the highest truth. We cannot bury our heads in the sands of CV literature and ignore the rest of the world.
I absolutely agree. But how can you expect a rasika guru to disturb his meditation on the lila and read Time magazine? His effulgence will attract everyone. Let his devotees deal with that. I think that is the case with Tripurari Swami. At some point a lover of Krishna has to stop being an intellectual and become a rasika.
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Jan 21, 2011 8:55:18 GMT -6
Sorry to hear that you have not been able to replace or fix your computer. I hope it gets resolved soon. Anything we can do to help? I've got some extra parts. Thanks very much for the offer, Nitaiji, but I'll manage, although I still don't know (after almost three weeks) whether they have to replace the hard disk. *** Perhaps it is a good idea to split off the subject of translation issues and put them in a seperate thread?
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Jan 21, 2011 9:22:20 GMT -6
Gerard: I'm not impressed with the fact that Advaita Das' father was a dentist. I never use my ancestors' nobility & achievements to explain my failures.So why juxtapose in the one sentence Advaitadas’ doing translation work with his being a high school drop-out ? He was in H.S. 40 years ago, so I dont really know the relevance of the description in regard to the present Advaitadas , the man, other than as a put-down. [/size] [/quote] I explained that a few lines down, I thought, with: "This also applies to academics in general of course but they have at least a thorough knowledge of the languages and the history of the religions involved. That can not be said of Advaita Das because he is a High School drop-out and self-taught people have the tendency not to read the books they don't like but actually should study too." Anyway, I read some of his translations, they contained no poetry or feeling, just dry as sand. I don't know Bengali so I'm not able to give examples but I just can't imagine that the original texts were as dry as his translations, but of course that is also a possibility. I certainly did not want my reply seem like a personal attack on Advaita das, because I like him, he is a very cheerful and likeable person and we had some some good talks. But as I said I don't want to get into gossip because there are also some problems with him. (Apart from the fact that I did not get one answer, but of course he is not obliged to give any - and furthermore because of my personal disappointments I don't expect answers to the questions I have, although I have to admit there are some people that know about bhakti, which might be all one needs. Not many Hindu seem very interested in trying to explain the strange stories in Mahabharata or Bhagavata Purana, with the exception of some shallow allegorical interpretations.)
|
|
|
Post by gerard on Jan 22, 2011 5:24:16 GMT -6
Perhaps the sastras is a collection of allegories. Ramayana is difficult not to read as an allegory, with Sita devi as the human soul carried off to the golden city of materialism by the demon of Ego, Ravana, where she will be delivered by God.
Or, a small example of allegory, the hunter JarA sneaks up on Sri Krishna, shoots Him in the foot and He "dies". JarA means "old age".
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jan 22, 2011 11:16:28 GMT -6
Nitaidas:Malatidi, I have to disagree with you here. All of the great acaryas were well educated. Rupa and Sanatana and their nephew Jiva had the best educations their times permitted. They knew Persian and Arabic, they knew logic and aesthetics, they knew mimamsa and vedanta. That is what made some such effective communicators. They were the ones able to capture the magic of Mahaprabhu and make it available to future generations. Who I wonder do you have in mind when you refer to CV acaryas who were uneducated? Nitaidas Ok, point taken about Sri Rupa and Sanatan. I didnt say uneducated re some CV acharyas, I said higher formal education. Do you mean by "higher formal education" college or grad school? I took it to mean college, that is, an education beyond high school. This is true, but a good education is certainly a great help and a great boost towards reaching one's goals. For someone who wants to write about CV in any meaningful manner it is indispensable. His command of English is pretty good, but he translates like someone who only knows Indian English, like Bhaktivedanta, in other words. Some people may find that charming, but I think it is a butchering of the English language. A bigger concern is accuracy and I don't think his translations are very accurate. My impression is that he translated through other Bengali translations and as I have said those are often terrible. not really translations at all. One has to have a college education to be a school teacher. That is in my opinion higher formal education. You try to cloak that fact by calling it "simple." There is nothing simple about teaching school. This guy is a phony and does not qualify as someone who has taught CV well. He is certainly no acarya in any sense of the word. Rather he is one of the prime sources of apasiddhanta and Vaisnava aparadha. How is that being an acarya? In order to be an acarya does one simply have to have some foolish followers who think one is so? I was unaware that Sadhu Baba wrote any books. What has he written? He was perhaps an acarya in a different sense. He never left any teachings accessible to the world at large, but he taught by his actions. My gurudev was the same way. Formally uneducated, his life and soul was bhajan. He taught by showing us, his disciples, his great enthusiasm for that and how to do it well. He never wrote anything either. Another phony. He has never taught CV well. Another source of apasiddhanta and Vaisnava aparadha, what to speak of guru-avajna (disrepect for the guru by never being properly initiated). Is being an acarya a matter of having followers? Democracy decides who is to be acclaimed an acarya? Has it ever occurred to you that I don't want to be a guru? I am only interested in pursuing the truth. I was burned by a snake-oil salesman (Bhaktivedanta) when I was younger and now I never accept anything as true without good evidence. Your problem is that you want a guru who will tell you what you want to hear. That is not the sincere stance of a disciple. A real guru should surprise you and shock you and make you see things differently. You want a guru who will tell you what you already believe. In other words, you think you already know what the truth is (and basically don't really need a guru). Perhaps that is why you got initiated the way you did. No back talk from a pesky, in your face gurudev. If you want someone to tell you that the Bhagavata is 5000 years old and was written by Vyasa, you should go to one of those lying phonies. If you want someone to tell you that Krsna actually spoke the Bhagavad-gita, you should go to one of the lying phonies. If you want someone to tell you that sun is closer to the earth than the moon, you should go to one of those lying phonies. I have studied and meditated on this tradition for longer than you have been alive and some of it I accept as potentially true and some of it as manifestly false. I am not going to present what I believe to be false as if it were true. I can't imagine someone as intellectually honest as Sri Jiva sitting here in my place, knowing what we know today, doing it any differently from me. Perhaps he would do it a lot quicker, because he was so much more intelligent than me. The two real counter examples to my claim in favor of higher formal education you did not cite, probably because you don't know very much. Sri Kanupriya Goswami was never formally educated and yet he writes about CV with an incredible fidelity and authority. He is recognized as the Namacarya of the 20th century. The other that just occurred to me is Sri Hrdayananada Das Babaji. He only had a third grade education and yet he writes beautifully in Bengali about the Holy Name and other esoteric topics. His disciples Visakha dasi and Sakhicaran das are members of this forum. Clearest evidence yet that Tripurari is not a rasik and never will be. On the other hand, one who really has developed bhava is not dependent on literature or a visualization practice to experience bhakti-rasa. He or she may simply look at the blue sky and fall off her camel.
|
|
|
Post by malati on Jan 22, 2011 20:22:01 GMT -6
As I think, I have made my points already in my replies above and they are running-up and as I don’t want to be seen as someone inciting unfair judgment on gurus who are doing good works for the spread of Krishna consciousness I will have to zipped off from this topic now. Besides whatever you think of these personalities are only your opinions as much as everyone else has their respective opinions.
However, I find your 2 questions interesting so I will respond to them.
You ask: Is being an acarya a matter of having followers?
Of course not. But you will have to agree with me that an individual that can attract followers MUST have some qualities/attributes that people find attractive. That Tripurari Swami can attract followers only goes to show that there is something more to him than an ordinary devotee has. Afterall, you can fool people sometimes but not all the time.
Then you ask: Democracy decides who is to be acclaimed an acarya?
Of course not, because “democracy” is just a principle; it is impersonal – it has no desires, thoughts, intentions, etc. But people living within that system have desires, thoughts, intentions and motivations. And democracy is a favourable landscape where people with thinking faculties can fully examine the ideas put forward by persons claiming to have higher knowledge and decide accordingly if such ideas are logically coherent. By the same token a person who thinks he/she has something to offer can do so at liberty. Therefore democracy is a very favourable condition in the market of ideas. That many people believe, after considerable thought, that one is an acharya does not follow that a person is NOT truly and rightly an acharya.
BTW, the absence of your comment to my comment about Jagat is conspicuous. You have a PM from me about the book.
Kind regards
|
|
|
Post by openmind on Jan 23, 2011 5:54:22 GMT -6
Of course not. But you will have to agree with me that an individual that can attract followers MUST have some qualities/attributes that people find attractive. Osho (Rajneesh Bhagwan) attracted a lot more followers than Iskcon, and his disciples still publish their literature and recruit members, years after the exposure of all the scandals that had been going on in their organization. Let us not forget Sai Baba, either. Iskcon gurus like Harikesa, Bhavananda, what to speak of Kirtanananda attracted thousands of zealous followers. Lady Gaga has hundreds of thousands of fans all over the world. Yes, these persons all have some attractive qualities, no doubt of that. But using their fame or the number of their followers as an evidence of their greatness is somewhat... strange.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jan 23, 2011 11:31:13 GMT -6
Openmind is surely right here. Some people have charisma. It is not a sign of spiritual advancement. It is the sign of a strong personality. That is all. There is also such a thing as institutionalized charisma which means that the charisma comes with the position one occupies in an organization. Even people with weak personalities who become somehow leaders of powerful organizations assume that charisma almost like putting on a set of clothes (in fact that is often involved). It is not an indicator of their having something "more."
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jan 23, 2011 12:32:49 GMT -6
As I think, I have made my points already in my replies above and they are running-up and as I don’t want to be seen as someone inciting unfair judgment on gurus who are doing good works for the spread of Krishna consciousness I will have to zipped off from this topic now. Besides whatever you think of these personalities are only your opinions as much as everyone else has their respective opinions. I don't think my judgments of those gurus are unfair. It is a fact that they are not initiated into any authentic lineage of CV and therefore they are not really members of this tradition. Do you deny this? It is not my opinion. It is a fact. Those who are not fooled surely leave. The ones who stay can possibly be fooled all the time. This is of course the point I was making. One does not become an acarya by popular vote. So having followers and even lots of them is no sign that one is an acarya. There are three reasons why these "gurus" cannot be acaryas: 1. They are not properly initiated 2. They have engaged in Vaisnava aparadha in their writings and speeches 3. Their writings contain apasiddhanta (that is the opposite of siddhanta). These are facts, not opinions. Do you still think they can be acaryas? What can I say about jagat? He at present prefers sahaja dharma to Vaisnava dharma. His struggles with sexuality may be more intense than the rest of us. Sahaja dharma may help him conquer it. Long periods of copulation without ejaculation and that combined with japa and meditation on Radha and Krsna. Surely he will gain control of his urges. He is still extraordinarily learned. He forgets more about CV in fifteen minutes than many of us will ever know. He is duly initiated by Sri Lalita Prasad Thakur and I am sure that his caittya guru will guide him back into the fold eventually. You are a fine lady, malatidi. Please do not take anything I have said too personally.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2011 3:03:36 GMT -6
Jay Nitai,
Jay Nitai Nitai Das Ji. Hope you are doing great !! Hope everybody in this board is doing well and are in their Bhajana Kushal.
I have returned back to India and getting settled to my position slowly. Hopefully would be able to post more on my latest Brindavan trip.
BTW,
I thought of responding few points posted by Nitai Das Ji.
If you want someone to tell you that the Bhagavata is 5000 years old and was written by Vyasa, you should go to one of those lying phonies. If you want someone to tell you that Krsna actually spoke the Bhagavad-gita, you should go to one of the lying phonies.
We have to be very carefull in chosing our word, specially while writing. "Lying Phonies" to all great previous acharyaas with lack of due thought definitely would not help us in the path of "Satyam Param Dhimahi" but surely would stop us because of Aparadha which we are so concerned in this board from other sources.
Rather we can give due thought and consider it's validity. I was doing some serious study on that point since I returned from US. I would urge Sri Nitai Das Ji to open a new thread and cited the example and argumements in favour of his claim. Possibly refuting Sri Valdeva's Siddhdhanta Darpan point by point can be one such steps.
I also would urgue Sri Nitai Das Ji to go through introduction of Prabhupad Sri RadhaVinode Goswami's Bengali Srimad Bhagavatam written by another stalwart Prabhupad Sri Narayan Chandra Goswami and refute his arguments too. We may consider other sources as well as apropriate.
It may take some time , but would be a worthwhile reseach and exploration rather than going by hearsay.
Jay Nitai
PS: to Sri Nitai Das Ji and JD Ji,
As you two were looking for a good picture of Sri Kanupriya Goswami for your publication, I finally had one from his residence by the well wishes of his nephew and disciple Prabhupad Kishore Ray Goswami. Let me know how you want to have it from me.
|
|