|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 11, 2011 22:41:14 GMT -6
I know Devanagari, but not Bengali. Yes I will look them up. It will give a good motivation to learn Sanskrit faster. Good. I can send you some Devanagari pdfs containing the commentaries. If you wanted to start typing them in your spare time, it would begin to familiarize you with the language and vocabulary. How do you plan to study Sanskrit? Do you want some advice? |
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on May 12, 2011 1:46:24 GMT -6
Good. I can send you some Devanagari pdfs containing the commentaries. If you wanted to start typing them in your spare time, it would begin to familiarize you with the language and vocabulary. How do you plan to study Sanskrit? Do you want some advice?[/quote]
I studied some basics a while back. Right now I am learning some through a weekly sanskrit group meetings. I would love to have your advice in the best way to pick up quickly.
Yes, do send me the pdfs. I was using the gmail translator to type it. You suggest I use word after downloading the fonts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 12, 2011 12:58:23 GMT -6
Good. I can send you some Devanagari pdfs containing the commentaries. If you wanted to start typing them in your spare time, it would begin to familiarize you with the language and vocabulary. How do you plan to study Sanskrit? Do you want some advice?[/quote] I studied some basics a while back. Right now I am learning some through a weekly sanskrit group meetings. I would love to have your advice in the best way to pick up quickly. Yes, do send me the pdfs. I was using the gmail translator to type it. You suggest I use word after downloading the fonts? What book are you using? I would recommend using the set of books by Aklujkar, Sanskrit: An Easy Introduction to an Enchanting Language. It is about five volumes long and it comes with Audio tapes (maybe CDs by now). If you go through that set you will have a good solid basis for working with Sanskrit texts. It used to be available from Svadhyaya Publications, 5346 Opal Place, Richmond, B.C. Canada V7C 5B4 Also check my teacher's book, Laghu-pada-parijata, posted on this forum under the The Study of Sanskrit board. I will finish another couple of chapters. Use this latter as review and to expand your vocabulary. I will keep adding more chapters. It is rather encyclopdedic. Better for classroom work, rather than self-study. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 12, 2011 13:37:01 GMT -6
I would like to assemble a team to work on the Bhagavata translation. We need the following:
1 Qualified translators
2 Copy Editors
3 Text typists
4 Typesetters (familiar with XeTeX or willing to learn)
5 Proofreaders (for both Sanskrit and English)
6 Graphic Designers (for covers and possibly artwork inside)
7 PR to get the books reviewed when they come out, to create and keep up a website for orders, work on a catalogue, etc
8 Financial supporters (just daydreaming here, but it would be nice)
Anyone want to play a part?
So far we have:
Translators - me,
Text typists - Vivek,
Copy Editors - my wife Betsy
Typesetters - me
Proofreaders - JD
Graphic Designers -
PR -
Financial Support -
We need many more in each category.
|
|
|
|
Post by malati on May 12, 2011 16:23:17 GMT -6
Nitaidasji
Very good project. Unfortunately I cant be of any help. I just have too much on my hands at this stage. Besides, to be honest , I want to see the product first before I can endorse it.
Also, I have the cookbook still going on the burner.
My questions:
Why did you say this in your intro?
The kind of Vaiṣṇavism the Bhāgavata presents is an earlier
version of Vaiṣṇavism in which advaita and dvaita were complementary, or
at least not thought of as at odds with each other....... There is no doubt that for
Śrīdharasvvāmin the advaita tradition had found an important place for bhakti.
Isn’t that for the non-dualist the goal is to merge with the impersonal Brahman and Brahman is often described as neti neti, not this not this, although Brahman is described as the origin of this and that.
As far as I understood, even in the non=dualists practical lives, bhakti is not a very prominent concept. Sure they try to attain the highest state or reality ( called samadhi or turiya, I am not sure of the distinction) by meditation but I think it is not correct to say that in doing meditation they are doing bhakti (as understood in the GV concept) , because of the lack of imagery involved in their conception of “God”. We can say it in simple terms. If you dont know the nature (the ontology, maybe you will permit me use the term this time) of God or better yet, if God is beyond nature, how can one do bhakti? How can one please him or love him? So I think bhakti is not a prominent concept to them. Besides, to them jiva is God except that the jiva has not realized it.
I dont know that dvaita , advaita were complementary or not at odds with each other in the earlier Vaishnavism but I think it is more in the degree of prominence in the theology or even in the practical application of it in their lives.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 12, 2011 21:50:11 GMT -6
Nitaidasji Very good project. Unfortunately I cant be of any help. I just have too much on my hands at this stage. Besides, to be honest , I want to see the product first before I can endorse it. Also, I have the cookbook still going on the burner. tant pis! This is just your IGM brainwashing speaking. Bhakti is indeed important for the Advaita tradition beginning with Sankara, increasing in importance with Sridhara Swami, and culminating with Madhusudana Sarasvati who wrote a whole treatise on it, the Bhakti-rasayana. Bhakti is regarded as a means to mukti, rather than as an end in itself in the Advaita tradition. But this is true of all the other Vaisnava traditions, too, except for the Caitanya tradition. The Vaisnavism of the Bhagavata is not exactly the same as the Vaisnavism of CV. The Vaisnavism of the Bhagavata was a Vaisnava Advaita, but the Vaisnavism of the Caitanya tradition is a dvaitadvaita. The advaita is still there, but it is less important or prominent. Much happens in the period between the composition of the Bhagavata is around the 5-6th cents CE and the appearance of Madhavendra Puri and his disciples. The Gita-govinda has been written, Krsna-karnamrta, Candidas has written the Sri Krsnakirtan, Vidyapati his songs, etc. These erotic and vernacular works and traditions influence the Sanskritic traditions and thus we have the blossoming of Madhurya in the CV of the 16th century. But these things cannot be read back into the Bhagavata and attributed to it. Therefore, we have to listen carefully to what the Bhagavata tells us apart from its later commentators' interpretations of it. If the work is done properly we will see each layer of the development of bhakti as it appears. First layer: the Bhagavata itself Second layer: Sridhara Third layer: Srinatha Cakravartin Fourth layer: Sri Jiva Fifth layer: Visvanatha It will be like looking at the rings of a tree to trace the history of the environment. These different levels are not all the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 13, 2011 10:53:19 GMT -6
Of course, I forgot to mention the pre-Bhagavata layer or perhaps several layers. That is a fascinating subject about which I know very little. The Bhagavata demonstrates that it is the result of many centuries of reflection and practice. Are there any reflections of this fertile period in the surviving texts? We might look at the Hari-vamza and the Visnu Purana for indication of the earlier state of affairs, and indeed, the VP is important for the theological efforts of Sri Jiva. He uses an important passage of the VP as his spring board when he formulates the famous Acintya-bhedAbheda argument. The Hari-vamza's relationship to these other texts is less clear. It seems to be rarely referred to and when referred to it is not used in a particularly seminal way. Yet, it is there in the backs of CV minds. I once saw a wonderful Bengali "translation" of the Harivamza done sometime in the 18th century perhaps. Clearly heavily influenced by CV and the result was a very rasika text that must have pleased many a listening audience. The details of its relationship to the original are unknown to me. It might be a very loose translation with many additional episodes mixed in. Anyway, the Harivamza clearly garners some respect from the CV tradition. Also, I noticed a book by Syamlal Goswami on Krsna-lila when I was working in the British Library that was essentially a translation of the first 40 chapters of the Dasama Skandha. Nevertheless, the good Goswami would periodically note differences between the Bhagavata account of the life of Krsna and that of the Harivamza. Again, it is a presence in the CV consciousness.
I am especially fascinated by the suggestion that Mahayana Buddhism had an influence on the VP and the BHP. That is a line of research I would like to pursue in more detail. Which threads of Mahayana? Any particular texts? Which ideas get carried over? Etc. etc.
I know, pretty boring stuff for all of those who just want to read a nice story and close their eyes and dream.
|
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on May 13, 2011 11:30:19 GMT -6
Of course, I forgot to mention the pre-Bhagavata layer or perhaps several layers. That is a fascinating subject about which I know very little. . That is amazing, Nitai ji! At least someone in CV tradition is honest enough to say that he knows little about this subject. Most people are pretty confident about everything  Now the origin of brainwashing can be found in the CC where CM seems to be chastising Sri Advaita for even quoting Yoga Vasista heavily. And again he asks everyone to not even read impersonal commentators (who will read sridhara swami then?  and he says here Cc. Madhya 6.169 mayavadi-bhasya sunile haya sarva-nasa . Who knows why Kaviraja has put so much poison in his CC. I mean why are we reading Sridhara swami if it is so dangerous. Also Baladeva Vidyabhusana misrepresents sridhara swami by saying that he offered to bait to impersonalists though internally sridhara swami was a vaisnava (the traditional definition of it). Again I find it unfair to blame it on IGM alone. The source of the poison has been implanted long before. Another thing, I think dvaitadvaita is a terminology used to described nimbarkis if I am correct. So is it alright to use it for sri jiva's philosophy also? I had downloaded the sanskrit pdf file you have online. Actually I was following the course designed by www.samskritabharati.org/ because I get to speak to people in Sanskrit. I just started it couple of months back. Thanks for your suggestion. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 13, 2011 12:21:47 GMT -6
Now the origin of brainwashing can be found in the CC where CM seems to be chastising Sri Advaita for even quoting Yoga Vasista heavily. And again he asks everyone to not even read impersonal commentators (who will read sridhara swami then? and he says here Cc. Madhya 6.169 mayavadi-bhasya sunile haya sarva-nasa . Who knows why Kaviraja has put so much poison in his CC. I mean why are we reading Sridhara swami if it is so dangerous. Also Baladeva Vidyabhusana misrepresents sridhara swami by saying that he offered to bait to impersonalists though internally sridhara swami was a vaisnava (the traditional definition of it). Again I find it unfair to blame it on IGM alone. The source of the poison has been implanted long before. What you say is, of course, true. The CC begins a new era in the spread of CV. I suspect that the tone and attitude of the CC was the result of intense competition. When Sanatana and Rupa settled in Vraja they were practically alone. The only other tradition that was there was the Vallabha tradition centered at that time in Mathura. Sanatana and Rupa used to go visit the sons of Vallabhacarya like Vitthala. They were great friends and sangis. Somehow that attitude changed with the third generation. By then the Nimbarkis and Radhavallabhis and Haridasis and so on and so forth had moved in and were in competition with the CV. Competition both for space and followers is what sours the CV, I think. Add to that a good dose of ethno-chauvanism and you have the CC. Oh and don't forget that big serving of ignorance about the Advaita tradition, partially unavoidable, but also partially willful. I know that mainstream CV is often also brainwashed by the CC, but I think the IGM has made it their very banner. They are the ones who rage so loudly about mayavadis. It is good drama when one is trying to drum up a following. The IGM not only banned books by mayavadis, but also books by any other Vaisnavas, including those by mainstream CV authors. Now that is fanaticism! My sense is that mainstreamers don't get so worked up over the mayavadis. Perhaps it is because pracara is not so heavily emphasized in mainstream CV. Practice receives greater emphasis and higher respect. If people speak it is Krsna-katha that they speak of, not the blasting of other traditions or the mayavadis. Sure. Bhedabheda and dvaitadvaita are the same thing. Good. Yes, speaking is good, but one's knowledge of Sanskrit gained from speaking will never reach up to the kind complex and sophisticated Sanskrit of any of the classic texts. One can speak Sanskrit without hardly ever using any verbs and the verbs are the hardest part of Sanskrit grammar and the clearest indicator of someone who has mastered the language. |
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on May 13, 2011 13:00:37 GMT -6
So Sri Rupa and Sanatana did not consider Vitthala an asura even though he did not accept CM as God? Pretty different from the tone in Chaitanya Bhagavat or CC on this issue. I wonder if Sri Rupa and Sri Sananatana really considered themselves to be nitya siddhas and they would approve of what Kavi Karnapura and other following them made them out to be and CV became more and more like a belief system.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ekantin on May 14, 2011 16:58:08 GMT -6
Anyone want to play a part? So far we have: Translators - me, Text typists - Vivek, Copy Editors - my wife Betsy Typesetters - me Proofreaders - JD Graphic Designers - PR - Financial Support - We need many more in each category. I had been meaning to ask what had happened since the last time we had a volunteer drive, and what had come of it. Anyhow I can sign myself up again for what I did last time - proofreading (I have done similar work at local newspapers and local publishers). |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on May 14, 2011 17:55:47 GMT -6
Anyone want to play a part? So far we have: Translators - me, Text typists - Vivek, Copy Editors - my wife Betsy Typesetters - me Proofreaders - JD Graphic Designers - PR - Financial Support - We need many more in each category. I had been meaning to ask what had happened since the last time we had a volunteer drive, and what had come of it. Anyhow I can sign myself up again for what I did last time - proofreading (I have done similar work at local newspapers and local publishers). Nothing, I'm afraid. I did not follow it up the way I should have. If people can make sophisticated operating systems like Linux or FreeBSD working in various parts of the world and coordinating their efforts, we should be able to do the same produce a first class edition/translation of works like the Bhagavata or the Bhagavad-gita or the works of Sanatana. Good. It would be great to have you go through the Bhagavata translation that I just put up and point out any flaws. I would like you to do that for the Gita, too. That is the closest to completion. I am trying to wrap that up now. I guess I should work out a flow chart for these works to go through and then see each of them through it. Composition--->Translation---> Typesetting---> Editing--->Correcting---> Proofreading---> Cover Design---> Submission to Printer---> Final (bound) Proof Generation---> Approval The Bhagavata has not yet been through editing. But the Gita has. I will post that today or tomorrow for you to proofread. Let's leave the Bhagavata for now, unless you spot something that can be fixed now. Thanks, Ekantin. |
|
|
|
Post by ajhi2 on May 25, 2011 10:07:59 GMT -6
i'd very strongly recommend or advise not to categorize literature and art into the category of erotics. also, its bad to use those words in books associated with religion in commentary.
common sense, if you are going to spread the literature through the West, one would know the connotation of the word 'erotic'. Similar to porn unfortunately. it's unpredictable how john doe could react.
In fact, when i was looking at playboy magazine while in my apartment with my roommate, i couldn't find the word erotic or porn anywhere in the magazine. wonder why.
IMO, stick to art or love poetry taxonomy.
older organizations classify literature in theology and philosophy.
|
|
|
|
Post by vkaul1 on Jun 6, 2011 11:41:05 GMT -6
Satyanarana ji responded to some of my points on those three chapters. I do not know what to think of them Nitai ji. Perhaps you can comment on his note on the critical edition. Dr Neal Delmonico wrote to me," those three chapters 12-14 of the 10th Skandha have been removed from the critical edition's version of the skandha and placed in an appendix. I have never seen any such edition. I have many commentaries of Bhagavata in my library, even critical editions. Even those who claim these three chapters as interpolation, like Vallabhacharya, did not put them in appendix.Let us consider another piece of evidence, this time from the commentary of ShrIdhara SvAmi, which all Gaudiyas consider authoritative. In the Ma~Ngala shlokas of his BhAvArtha-dIpikA commentary on BhAgavata, ShrIdhara mentions the number of chapters in the BhAgavata as "dvA-triMshat tri-shatam" or 332. But it turns out that upon adding the 3 chapters (12-14) from the 10th canto, the number of chapters becomes 335, not 332. This can be verified by adding up the chapters of each canto in the recension of Prabhupada - vedabase.net/sb . How then should one understand why ShrIdhara wrote 332, but ended up commenting on the extra 3 chapters as well? Because many scholars have translated Shridhars words as 335 and not 332. One such example is Vamshidhara who wrote an explanation of Sridhara's Bhavartha-Dipika called Bhavartha-dipika-prakasha. He is not a Gaudiya scholar. Otherwise it does not make sense that Shridhara comments on these three chapters and does not say that they are interpolated. He cold have written just one word - priksipta - to indicate that they are interpolated. I n Vraja there is village called chomuha (lit. fourheaded) to commomerate this pastime. Of course this could be an invention of Gaudiyas, one might argue.
TheBhagavatam is supposed to have 18000 shlokas and this will not be possible if u remove these three chapters. Many other puranas including Bhagavtam itself state that it has 18000 shlokas.
Bopdeva was in 12th century, much before Gaudiyas were born, he wrote Harililamrita in which he lists Brahma Vimohan lila. For some time some scholars even thought that Bopdeva wrote Bhagavata. |
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jun 7, 2011 19:10:49 GMT -6
It is really quite surprising that Dr Satyanarayana was given a PhD in Sanskrit by some university in India and he never learned what a critical edition is. Maybe he doesn't know that there is a critical edition of the Bhagavata produced by the B. J. Institute of Learning and Research in Ahmedabad, a labor of love lasting over fifty years. I didn't know about it until a couple of years ago. But not to know that a critical edition is an edition based upon a sampling of the major manuscripts of a text in all the major scripts and that passages that are not found in the majority of them are placed in appendices as interpolated is really pretty foolish. No really historical understanding of the fortunes of a text can be reached without a critical edition. That said, we should not neglect those portions of the text that are found to be interpolated. They have histories too and maybe important stories to tell us about about how the text was received, added to and transformed to meet certain challenges and maybe even hints about who dared add a passage to such a text.
And the argument that without those chapters there would not be 18000 verses in the Bhagavata is about as dumb and desperate as they get. With or without those chapters there are no where near 18000 verses in the Bhagavata. That number is just an approximate guess. This is beneath SN. It must have been from one of his chelas.
Anyway, someone should buy SN a copy of the critical edition of the Bhagavata and let him see for himself. Mine was sent all the way from India.
|
|
and he says here Cc. Madhya 6.169 mayavadi-bhasya sunile haya sarva-nasa . Who knows why Kaviraja has put so much poison in his CC. I mean why are we reading Sridhara swami if it is so dangerous. Also Baladeva Vidyabhusana misrepresents sridhara swami by saying that he offered to bait to impersonalists though internally sridhara swami was a vaisnava (the traditional definition of it). Again I find it unfair to blame it on IGM alone. The source of the poison has been implanted long before.