Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!udel!princeton!bbt.se
From: hks@bbt.se (Harikesa Swami)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Creator Rights
Message-ID: <1950@idunno.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 17 Aug 90 19:26:06 GMT
References: <1885@idunno.Princeton.EDU>
Sender: mukund@idunno.Princeton.EDU
Organization: The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust
Lines: 98
Approved: mukund@idunno.Princeton.EDU

In article <1885@idunno.Princeton.EDU>
mtxinu!sybase!gumby!mani@ucbvax.Berkeley\ .EDU (Mani Varadarajan) writes:

P. Garbha writes:

>>Krishna over and over again points out that He more than Brahman, that
>>He is the person behind Brahman. That just worshiping Brahman is not
>>as good as worshiping Him with love. (bhakti)

>Why are you constantly assuming that Krishna and Brahman are
>different? 

You have misunderstood what P.Garbha has written.  He does not assume that
Krsna and Brahman are different, rather that Krsna is the personality behind
Brahman.  As stated in the Bhagavad gita itself, brahmano hi pratisthaham; "I
am the basis of the impersonal brahman."  Krsna is the source of Brahman. 
Brahman is the energy of Krsna who is the energetic source.  Brahman is the
effulgence emanating from the Supreme Personality, and as the energy of the
Lord it is not different from Him.  Therefore They are not two different
entities, rather two aspects of the same absolute truth.  But according to
the Gita, Krsna is the source of Brahman.

>I think I have enough knowledge of Sanskrit and Hindu religious
>texts to know what's a distortion and what's not. All one has
>to do is open up Prabhupada's commentary on the Gita and see
>what he has done; disclaimer: Prabhupada is a great devotee of
>God, but I think that his devotion has blinded his
>scholarship--no disrespect intended.

This, sir, is your biased personal opinion.  It is not the opinion of the
thousands of scholars in the US and other countries that have praised
Prabhupada's literatures of being of a high standard and quality.  The
commentaries of Prabhupada's gita follow strictly in line with what Krsna
Himself has said in the Bhagavad gita.  You are speaking wildly, without
attempting to prove what you are stating.   Prabhupada is a mature scholar,
not a new boy who is trying to translate an ancient text.  His inclusion of
'extra' phrases into the text of the translations is to amplify the original
intention of the speaker, not to cloud the original intention.  One simply
has to understand what the BG is saying to understand that this is so.  I
suspect that you do not understand what is said in the BG, otherwise how can
you misinterpret so badly the intention of Krsna?  Again and again through
the gita Krsna is proclaiming that He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead,
and if Prabhupada amplifies that, what is the wrong?  

Here is what some of your academic superiors say about Prabhupada's version
of the gita,

"There is little question that this edition is one of the best books avail-
able on the Gita and devotion.  Prabhupada's translation is an ideal blend of
literal accuracy and religious insight."  Dr. Thomas J. Hopkins, Chairman,
Dept. of Religious studies, Franklin and Marshall College.  

Indeed, 'an ideal blend of literal accuracy and religious insight.'  Because
you seem to display a lack of religious insight, you fail to see the good
points in the book.  You seem worried that P.Garbha is a Hare Krsna devotee
and you seem to enjoy the role of a policeman informing the other network
members that he is so, as if this was a fault, but sir, this is a conference
on religion, and it seems that it requires more input from religious minded
personalities with insight into the religious themes of the East.  Your input
is also welcome, but why do you impugn the input of a devotee of a great
tradition as if he were something bad?  You are displaying your own biases
which are not necessarily welcome in the conference.

Here is another quote from a Professor of Philosophy, "His Divine Grace
A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada is, of course, profoundly sympathetic to
the theme.  He brings to it, moreover, a special interpretive insight, a
powerful and persuasive presentation in the bhakti [devotional] tradition.-
...The Swami does a real service for students by investing the beloved Indian
epic with fresh meaning.  Whatever our outlook may be, we should all be
grateful for the labor that has led to this illuminating work."  Dr. Geddes
MacGregor, Emeritus Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, University of
Southern California.

To save the net people money, I have only quoted two Professors, but there
are thousands of reviews that echo the same sentiments.  You stand in a
minority group of narrow minded persons who cannot see past a literal
translation due to their inability to enter into the spirit of a text.  Stand
aside and let the others see what a gift there is to receive from these books
and stop trying to block the way.  The others on the net have their own
intelligence, and when they read the books of Srila Prabhupada they can make
up their own minds as to what is the quality of the work.  They don't need
you standing in their way pushing them in your own direction.

>Prabhupada's commentaries also show a severe
>lack of knowledge of traditional commentaries; see, for
>example, his commentary on the Isa Upanisad, which, as any
>introductory Sanskrit student can see, is *absolutely*
>overinterpreted to the point of error.

Yes dear readers, please see the book called Isopanisad.  Make up your own
mind.  Why be blinded by the smokescreen of scholarly adolescence put up by
foolish persons who themselves have never won any scholarly acclaim.  An
introductory sanskrit student has no right to comment on the mature works of
an accomplished scholar.  Let us discuss the 'errors' in the commentary of
the Isopanisad and let the net people make up their own minds as to who is
correct and who is not.  

Harikesa Swami