The Bhagavad Gita is one of the most widely read spiritual texts in the world, but reading it in translation can feel like navigating a maze. Why do the same Sanskrit verses yield such different meanings in the hands of different translators? The answer lies in philosophical bias, theological stance, interpretive traditions, and even historical context. In this post, we explore several verses where the differences are striking, offering side-by-side comparisons and some insight into why they diverge.
1. Bhagavad Gita 2.47
Verse (Sanskrit):
karmany-evadhikaras te ma phaleshu kadachana
ma karma-phala-hetur bhur ma te sango 'stv akarmani
Swami Prabhupada (Bhakti Yoga):
"You have a right to perform your prescribed duty, but you are not entitled to the fruits of action. Never consider yourself the cause of the results of your activities, and never be attached to not doing your duty."
Eknath Easwaran (Modern Vedantic):
"You have the right to work, but never to the fruit of work. You should never engage in action for the sake of reward, nor should you long for inaction."
Sri Aurobindo (Integral Yoga):
"Thy business is with the action only, never with its fruits; so let not the fruit of action be thy motive, nor be thou to inaction attached."
Commentary:
Prabhupada emphasizes duty as service to God, consistent with Bhakti. Easwaran and Aurobindo highlight detachment in a more impersonal or psychological sense.
2. Bhagavad Gita 4.7
Verse (Sanskrit):
yada yada hi dharmasya glanir bhavati bharata
abhyutthanam adharmasya tadatmanam srijamy aham
Swami Sivananda:
"Whenever there is a decline of righteousness, O Bharata, and a rise of unrighteousness, then I manifest Myself."
Swami Prabhupada:
"Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice, O descendant of Bharata, and a predominant rise of irreligion—at that time I descend Myself."
Mahatma Gandhi:
"Whenever righteousness declines and unrighteousness increases, I create for myself a body."
Commentary:
Gandhi's reading is symbolic and de-emphasizes divine incarnation. Prabhupada focuses on Krishna as personally incarnating, in line with Gaudiya Vaishnavism.
3. Bhagavad Gita 9.22
Verse (Sanskrit):
ananyas chintayanto mam ye janah paryupasate
tesham nityabhiyuktanam yoga-kshemam vahamy aham
Swami Prabhupada:
"Those who always worship Me with exclusive devotion, meditating on My transcendental form—to them I carry what they lack and preserve what they have."
Sri Ramanuja:
"I bring to them what they lack and preserve what they have."
Eknath Easwaran:
"Those who worship Me with love, I give them what they need and protect what they have."
Commentary:
"Yoga-kshema vahamy aham" is translated more literally by Prabhupada, suggesting divine intervention. Others present it more metaphorically.
4. Bhagavad Gita 18.66
Verse (Sanskrit):
sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam sharanam vraja
aham tvam sarva-papebhyo mokshayishyami ma shucah
Swami Prabhupada:
"Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me. I shall deliver you from all sinful reactions. Do not fear."
S. Radhakrishnan:
"Abandon all duties and come to Me alone for shelter. Be not grieved, for I shall deliver you from all sins."
Mahatma Gandhi:
"Having given up all duties, come to Me alone for shelter; I shall deliver you from all sins. Do not grieve."
Commentary:
Prabhupada emphasizes renunciation of all forms of religion except devotion to Krishna. Other translators interpret "sarva-dharman" more broadly as worldly duties or rituals.
5. Bhagavad Gita 15.7
Verse (Sanskrit):
mamaivamsho jiva-loke jiva-bhutah sanatanah
manah-shashthanindriyani prakriti-sthani karshati
Swami Prabhupada:
"The living entities in this conditioned world are My eternal fragmental parts. Due to conditioned life, they are struggling very hard with the six senses, which include the mind."
Swami Sivananda:
"A portion of Mine only becomes the eternal soul in the world of living beings and draws (to itself) the five senses with the mind as the sixth, which abide in Nature."
Commentary:
This verse raises theological questions: Are jivas eternally individual (Dvaita) or merely reflections of Brahman (Advaita)? Prabhupada maintains strong individuality; Sivananda allows ambiguity.
Why These Differences Arise
Philosophical Commitments:
Advaita Vedanta (e.g., Shankara, Sivananda) leans toward unity and impersonality.
Dvaita and Vishishtadvaita (e.g., Ramanuja) maintain eternal soul-God distinction.
Bhakti traditions (e.g., ISKCON) stress personal devotion to Krishna.
Purpose of Translation:
Prabhupada's is a theological commentary for practitioners.
Easwaran and Radhakrishnan aim at academic or spiritual seekers.
Cultural Contexts:
Gandhi interprets symbolically, using the Gita for ethical and nationalistic guidance.
Linguistic Flexibility of Sanskrit:
A single word like "dharma" can mean duty, righteousness, religion, or nature, depending on the translator's lens.
Conclusion
Reading multiple translations of the Bhagavad Gita isn't just educational—it's essential. Each version brings a unique voice, a distinct philosophical vision, and a different doorway into Krishna's teachings. By comparing them, we not only get closer to the original intent but also deepen our own understanding of the paths available to the seeker.
What translation has resonated most with you, and why? Share your thoughts below.
Disclaimer: AIGC.
No comments:
Post a Comment