Sit Properly

Each week I select a verse from the Bhagavad-gita and compare/contrast four different translations. These translators all subscribe to the Gaudia-Vaisnava philosophy. This examination isn’t to prove one more superior to another, but to highlight the similarities and learn from the differences in ideologies.

The four Gitas are:
-Bhagavad-gita: As It Is by Srila Prabhupada (1972 edition)
-Bhagavad-gita: It’s Feeling and Philosophy by Tripurari Swami
-Srimad Bhagavad-gita by Narayana Maharaja
-Bhagavad-gita: The Beloved Lord’s Secret Love Song by Garuda dasa (Graham Schweig)

More on this can be found here.

I think what I’m doing right now with this series is trying to visit some chapters that I’ve neglected. Last week, I hit the fifth chapter and this week, I’ll hit the thirteenth.

The thirteenth chapter, called “Deliberation on Matter and Spirit” by Tripurari Swami and “Nature, the Enjoyer, and Consciousness” by Srila Prabhupada is a fairly esoteric chapter. In honesty, it’s not a chapter I find myself wading through too often. Earlier in the chapter, even Krishna referenced the Vedanta-sutra. This is some heavy stuff.

In verses 8 – 12, Krishna lays down a laundry list of what is “knowledge.” He then explains Brahman, the spirit (most like the “Holy Ghost” in Christian theology). Such phrases like “He is outside and inside all beings” and “He is knowledge, He is the object of knowledge, He is the goal of knowledge” are thrown around. He is situated in everyone’s hearts as what is termed “Supersoul” (paramatma). This is where our true equality lies.

Bhagavad-gita, Chapter 13, Verse 28

One who sees the Supersoul accompanying the individual soul in all bodies and who understands that neither the soul nor the Supersoul is ever destroyed, actually sees.
-Srila Prabhupada

One who sees the Supreme God abiding equally in all beings – not perishing when they perish – truly sees.
-Tripurari Swami

Only one who sees Paramesvara equally in all beings, as the imperishable seated within the perishable, actually sees.
-Narayana Maharaja

Indeed, seeing the same
    supreme Lord fully
    established everywhere,
One does not harm
    the self by the self -
    from there one reaches
    the highest goal.
-Garuda dasa (Graham M. Schweig)

In his purport for this verse, Srila Prabhupada first leaves out the term “Supersoul” and uses the “soul’s friend” and “friend of the soul” instead. He then uses the term “Supersoul.” Narayana Maharaja, possibly following Srila Prabhupada’s lead, does the same (their purports are similar). I like this term “friend of the soul” quite a lot. So often in our spiritual pursuits we focus on many different aspects of God, sometimes forgetting that He is our friend. We can see Him as father or as a teacher or just some spiritual blob, but it’s all too easy to forget Him as friend.

The first two lines, samam sarvesu bhutesu / tisthantam paramesvaram, is basically “God [as Paramesvara - the supreme controller] equally in everyone….”

The translators start with “One who sees…” which comes from the first half of the fourth line: yah pasyati.

Srila Prabhupada choses to use the word “Supersoul” in his translation: “One who sees the Supersoul accompanying the individual soul in all bodies….” Narayana Maharaja, as he often does, keeps the original Sanskrit paramesvara, translating: “Only one who sees Paramesvara equally in all beings….” Tripurari Swami sort of splits the difference, “One who sees the Supreme God abiding equally in all beings….” Garuda dasa, in turn, keeps God, but translates sarvesu as “everywhere” rather than “in all beings.” While both are true, the former is more specific.

The differences between Paramesvara, the Supersoul and the Supreme God are mere details. Here, Krishna has just described the Supersoul. Srila Prabhupada was referring to that. And Narayana Maharaja just stuck with the original while Tripuari Swami (and Garuda dasa) broadened it, reinforcing that the Supersoul is God.

The third line is a very poetic play on words vinasyatv avinasyantam. Vinasyatsu means “in the destructible” or “in the perishing.” Here, it means “in the body,” which is destroyed at death. Avinasyantam means the opposite, “in the indestructible” or “not perishing.”

This is in reference to the first two lines. The “not perishing” part describes God. The “perishing” part describes our bodies. It is not, of course, describing our souls, which do not perish. Here, Krishna is speaking on the level of bodily identification. Because of language, we say things like “someday we will die,” when we know that essentially that’s not true. Someday our bodies will die. We will go on because we are eternal. Here, Krishna is speaking like this.

Srila Prabhupada translates the verse using this idea. Though the original Sanskrit is more closely followed by Narayana Maharaja and Tripurari Swami, the purport of the verse is explained within Srila Prabhupada’s verse: “…and who understands that neither the soul nor the Supersoul is ever destroyed….” The soul, the jiva, is not mentioned in this verse, but for the sake of clarity, Srila Prabhupada chose to translate it as if it were.

Tripurari Swami puts it, “not perishing when they perish.” And Narayana Maharaja as it “as the imperishable seated within the perishable.”

Garuda dasa’s translation takes a wild left turn here. From what I can gather, as he starts the third line of verse 28, he instead moves to the third line of verse 29. Here, he has, “One does not harm the self by the self,” which is part of the next verse.

In his 29th verse, he then jumps back to the actual 28th verse, translating, “One who sees this, and thus sees that the self is not the creator of action….” The word “self” doesn’t appear in the original Sanskrit, though sah, meaning “he” does. In the next verse, “self” appears as the word atmanam. My guess is that Garuda dasa was referring to that.

The final line is yah pasyati sa pasyati. The first half of that line was moved to the beginning of the verse as “One who sees.” The last half closes our verse, reemphasizing “sees” with the repetition of the word pasyati. Here, it is agreed that it means “actually sees” or “truly sees,” obviously indicating that this seeing isn’t your plain old material sight.

Garuda dasa translates this part as “the one [truly] sees” (his brackets). He does this in the 29th rather than 28th verse. But whichever way he chooses to put this, the original purport of the verse remains clear.

It may be easy for us to see God everywhere. I had a relative who would always talk about God and about how God was everywhere. He would see God in the mountains, in the sunrise, in pretty much everything. I always really liked that (even if it were a bit cringe-worthy in the hokeyness department). But seeing God in every person is a bit of a different thing.

Even more difficult is seeing, as Srila Prabhupada puts it, God as that individual soul’s friend residing along side that individual soul. Coming to terms with what that means, it makes it much harder to hate and be prejudiced against people. Of course, we’re not just talking about people here.

To paraphrase Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, we are to know that God is dwelling within all perishable bodies. When those bodies die, neither God nor the soul within that body dies. We are eternal just as God is eternal. Neither of us perish. One who sees this, truly sees.

Related posts:

1. Bhagavad-gita: Those who have love of God, receive love of God (4.11)
2. Bhagavad-gita: a contradictory verse? (9.29)
3. Bhagavad-gita: a wise, sober, self-realized person is not bewildered (2.13)
4. Bhagavad-gita: We Can Only Understand Krishna Through Love (18.55)
5. Bhagavad-gita: Without the desire for gain (3.30)