tattva-sandarbha of Sri Jiva

[Nitaidas]

Here is a project I began a while back and got myself bogged down in the details of the commentaries. That tends to happen to me. I want to revisit this project, but starting with the main text and then filling in more and more commentarial niceties later. Anyway, here is where things stood by the time I got distracted by some other project.

Tattva-sandarbha

[Nitaidas]

Since this relates to the very first topic of the Tattva-sandarbha, I though I would post it here.

[Nitaidas]

Picking up where I left off:

कोपि तद्बान्धवो भट्टो दक्षिणद्विजवंशजः|
विविच्य व्यलिखद्ग्रन्थं लिखिताद् वृद्धवैष्णवैः|| ४||


ko'pi tadbAndhavo bhaTTo dakSiNadvijavaMzajaH|
vivicya vyalikhad granthaM likhitAd vRddhavaiSNavaiH|| 4||

One of their {Rupa and Sanatana's] friends, a BhaTTa [Gopala Bhatta] born in a family of Southern brahmanas wrote a book, after some consideration, from the writings of the old Vaisnavas. (4)

[Sri Jiva lists the "old" Vaisnavas as as Sri Ramanujacarya, Sri Madhvacaraya, Sridhara Swami and others. Thus, he says, Gopala Bhatta did not make it up out of his own imagination.]

[Nitaidas]

Alright! One more. These are short and there are much more complicated passages coming.

तस्याद्यं ग्रन्थनालेखं क्रान्त-व्युत्क्रान्त-खण्डितम्|
पर्यालोच्याथ पर्यायं कृत्वा लिखति जीवकः|| ५||


tasyAdyaM granthanAlekhaM krAntavyutkrAntakhaNDItaM|
paryAlocyAtha paryAyaM kRtvA likhati jIvakaH|| 5||


His first composition was ordered, disordered and incomplete. Thus, examining that a little jIva orgainized it and (re-)wrote it. (5)

[Sri Jiva's humility is touching. So Gopala Bhatta's work was reworked and completed by Sri Jiva. How many other authors would be so honest? I hear that Radhakrishnan stole his students' work unabashedly. One of them was quite brilliant: Jadunath Sinha. Jaya Sri Jiva!]

[Nitaidas]

And a little more tattva:

यः श्रीकृष्णपदाम्भोज-भजनैकाभिलाषवान् |
तेनैव दृश्यतामेतद अन्यस्मै शपथोर्पितः || ६||


yaH zrIkRSNapadAmbhoja-bhajanaikAbhilASavAn|
tenaiva dRzyatAmetadanyasmai zapatho'rpitaH || 6||

One whose only desire is to worship the lotus feet of Sri Krsna, let him (or her) alone view this book. A curse is offered to anyone else. (6)

[We've discussed this one before. Very strange indeed. In his gloss Sri Jiva says "only means main." Thus one's main desire should be to worship Sri Krsna, not necessarily ones only desire. That could be a significant editorial change. ]

[spiritualbhakti]

do you have the translation by SatyaNarayanadas?
if not, i can send.

[Nitaidas]

Sept 26, 2010 16:52:22 GMT -6 spiritualbhakti said:

do you have the translation by SatyaNarayanadas?
if not, i can send.

Yes, I have a copy already. And Stuart Elkman's too. I probably even have Tripurari's somewhere (he sent me a copy for me to say nice things about. Needless to say, I was unable. Or was that his book on rasa? I forget now). Anyway, I am sorry to say that much as I like Satyanarayana Das his Tattva-sandarbha translation is a bunch of baloney. He was still in ISKCON when he did it. So, perhaps that is his excuse. I hope he has grown up since then and matured as a scholar. I suspect he has, though I have not seen his other Sat-sandarbha translations. Why is it a bunch of baloney? Because one will never understand Sri Jiva or his work by reading it. It is intellectually dishonest, a charge I make against just about all IGM presentations of CV texts. Just look at how he has translated the verse I just translated:

"This book may be studied only by one whose sole desire is to serve the lotus feet of Lord Sri Krsna. I warn everyone else not to read it."

This is just wrong. Sri Jiva does not warn everyone else not to read it. He offers them a curse. SN intentionally distorts what Sri Jiva says here. This is dishonest in my opinion and his commentary on that verse adds insult to injury. He doesn't think his readers are intelligent enough and thoughtful enough to handle what Sri Jiva really says. His translation will smooth your feathers and put you into a sound sleep, but it will not stir one thought in your head. I can pretty much guarantee you that you will never understand Sri Jiva or his works by reading translations such as this.

The solution is simple: avoid all IGM translations. Bhaktivedanta Swami barely knew enough Sanskrit to translate the Gita, a relatively easy text, and even that translation is full of mistakes and buffo. Moreover, there was not (nor is there now) anyone in the GM who could be trusted to give an honest translation and discussion of any of the texts. Those who were left long ago with Puri Das or shortly thereafter.

The question remains, however, has SN's change of allegiance changed him? I certainly hope so, but that cannot be assumed. If he persists in producing dribble like his TS translation, well it will be a shame. A great service will have been turned into a great disservice.

My translations at least are honest. I may not always understand what the original text says, but I will not hide or censor the text and invent long commentaries to support the position I would like to be true. We have to start with what the text actually says and allow that to challenge us, even shock us. We don't need any well-meaning buffoons masticating the text for us.

If you want a good honest translation read Elkman's.

[gerard]

And translations like that blur and distort the tradition of theologizing. Ramanuja curses Shankara and friends to hell in the beginning of his comm on the Vedanta Sutra for instance.
At the moment I'm reading Narayana Maharaja's translation of the Brahma-samhita. Even in the word-for-word translation so many things are added, it's terrible, all they want is to write their interpretation (the true siddhanta of course) into a text. Why not put all his ideas in the commentary and try to make a real translation?
Or is that just a strange fad of westerners? I think it is a form of shastra-ninda.

[Nitaidas]

Sept 27, 2010 10:00:44 GMT -6 gerard said:

And translations like that blur and distort the tradition of theologizing. Ramanuja curses Shankara and friends to hell in the beginning of his comm on the Vedanta Sutra for instance.
At the moment I'm reading Narayana Maharaja's translation of the Brahma-samhita. Even in the word-for-word translation so many things are added, it's terrible, all they want is to write their interpretation (the true siddhanta of course) into a text. Why not put all his ideas in the commentary and try to make a real translation?
Or is that just a strange fad of westerners? I think it is a form of shastra-ninda.

Hey, gerardji. You may be as crusty a curmudgeon as I am. Good for you! I have never read any of Narayana Maharaja's works and I never will for exactly the reasons you just gave. Same complaint with Gopiparanadhana's translation of Sanatana's Brhad-bhagavatamrta. He blends his own views in with those of Sri Sanatana as if Sanatana were one of his guru-brothers, just another numb-skulled Hare Krisna. It is fine to have your views, but they should be separated out so that they are not confused with Sri Sanatana's, and so that they can be skipped over if the reader is so inclined. Now that book has been rendered useless (except for propping open doors, perhaps) and has to be done over.

[Deleted]

Sept 26, 2010 16:06:41 GMT -6 Nitaidas said:

And a little more tattva:

यः श्रीकृष्णपदाम्भोज-भजनैकाभिलाषवान् |
तेनैव दृश्यतामेतद अन्यस्मै शपथोर्पितः || ६||


yaH zrIkRSNapadAmbhoja-bhajanaikAbhilASavAn|
tenaiva dRzyatAmetadanyasmai zapatho'rpitaH || 6||

One whose only desire is to worship the lotus feet of Sri Krsna, let him (or her) alone view this book. A curse is offered to anyone else. (6)

[We've discussed this one before. Very strange indeed. In his gloss Sri Jiva says "only means main." Thus one's main desire should be to worship Sri Krsna, not necessarily ones only desire. That could be a significant editorial change. ]

Jay Nitai,

Nitai Das Ji , you may want to take a look into Sarvasambadini of Sri Jiva Giswami by Sri Rasik Mohan Vidya Bhusan . You may like Sri RashikMohan Vidyavhushan Jis comment on this verse along with explanation with Baladeva.

Jay Nitai

[Nitaidas]

Thanks, Subrataji. I will have a look at it. I know you have been studying the Sarva-samvadini edited and translated (into Bengali) by Sri Rasikamohan Vidyabhusana. Please feel free to cite from that book when you feel so inclined. I am sticking mostly to the main text at this point and peeking into the SS only from time to time.

[spiritualbhakti]

And this whole time i thought i had "the" translation.
I don't want to read interpertations and opinions but the words of the goswamis.
I guess I should study sanskrit but
I know the scholar to turn to when it comes to sanskrit works.
(hint,hint)

[spiritualbhakti]

aww man i was going to get that edition of Brihad Bhagavatamrita, i guess ill pass.
Is your edition complete Nitai das?

( sorry to interrupt your post)

[Nitaidas]

Sept 27, 2010 17:23:26 GMT -6 spiritualbhakti said:

And this whole time i thought i had "the" translation.
I don't want to read interpertations and opinions but the words of the goswamis.
I guess I should study sanskrit but
I know the scholar to turn to when it comes to sanskrit works.
(hint,hint)

Don't bother with Sanskrit, spiritualbhakti. It is too hard and life is too short. Spend the time on harinama japa or kirtana. Sorry if I came off heavy-handed or arrogant in my remarks about SN's TS. He really is a brilliant scholar and I have high hopes of his translations of the rest of the Sandarbhas being valuable contributions. I was just disappointed with the TS. I think another of his translations have come out. Do you have it? Maybe the Bhagavat-sandarbha or Paramatma-sandarbha.

We should put together a list of books that every literate modern Vaisnava should read. Perhaps with gerardji's help and the help of some of the others like subrataji, madanmohanji, jd33,. masikadharma. malati and others we can come up with a study list for you. It would be good for all of us. I will start another thread for that.

[Nitaidas]

Sept 27, 2010 17:26:17 GMT -6 spiritualbhakti said:

aww man i was going to get that edition of Brihad Bhagavatamrita, i guess ill pass.
Is your edition complete Nitai das?

( sorry to interrupt your post)

Not complete, sb, but further along than the one posted here. I will clean that up and post an updated version. It is an important text and needs a faithful rendition of both the text itself and its commentary.

I saved you some money. That sucker is expensive. As for the TS, just continue to follow this thread. The whole thing will eventually be here. If I do just a verse or two or a short passage, take that as something to meditate on the rest of the day or until the next passage appears. One could write volumes on each word. Take time to think about them and if you have questions, ask them. If I don't have the answer, someone else might.