chekitan@bahnhof.se (Jahnu) wrote:
>On Sat, 09 Oct 1999 18:25:46 GMT, dturina@geocities.com (Danijel
>Turina),wrote:
>>What is an authorized translation? 
>
>A translation that is authorized in parampara. Parampara means that
>the the translation is authorized by the chain of spiritual masters
>leading all the way back to Krishna.

This is badly defined, to put it very mildly. Why is that? First of
all, we have to define what's the "active compound" of authority, and
what's just envelope it comes in. The way you put it (actually the way
Prabhupada seems to put it), the disciplic succession adds up to this:
God said something to someone, then he repeated that to his disciple,
who remembered everything and repeated it accurately to the next
disciple and so on, until the present day. That view is simply absurd.
I've seen a lot of parampara bragging on the Kundalini list, and
someone (Kurt Keutzer) said that hardly any disciplic succession in
the world today goes more than 500 years back without interruptions.
Tracing something to Brahma or Krsna in the light of those facts is
ridiculous. Buddhists, for instance, have serious difficulties in
tracing their lineages back to the Nalanda university; I don't think
that anyone can trace his lineage directly to Buddha. Similarly,
nobody can trace a lineage to Krsna, and that's a fact. Vaisnava
successions trace back to Caitanya, who founded the whole thing.
Similarly, advaita successions trace back to Sankaracarya. It's true
that those great masters had their gurus, but _they_ were the ones who
introduced the real thing, not their gurus, they were the inventive
ones who were able to bring out a new perspective.
If a lineage is that important to you, then Maharishi's comment of
gita is at least as authorized as Prabhupada's, since Maharishi's guru
was Brahmananda Sarasvati, Sankaracarya of the Jyotir math, which is
practically the highest title in India, AFAIK. He, too, has a very
long lineage:

narayanam padmabhavam vasistham
saktim ca tatputra parasaram ca
vyasam sukam gaudapadam mahantam
govinda yogindra mathasya sisyam
sri sankaracarya mathasya padmapadam
ca hastamalakam ca sisyam
tam trotakam vartikaram anyan
asmad gurun santat mantosmi

sruti-smrti-purananam
alayam karunalayam
namami bhagavad-padam
sankaram loka-sankaram

sankaram sankaracaryam
kesavam badarayanam
sutra-bhasya-krtau vande
bhagavantau punah punah

yad-dvare nikhila nilimpa-parisad
siddhim vidhatte-anisam
srimad-sri-lasitam jagadguru-padam
natvatma triptim gatah
lokajnana payoda-patan-dhuram
sri sankaram sarmadam
brahmananda sarasvatim guruvaram
dhyayami jyotirmayam.

(badly copied from "Maharishi Mahesh Yogi on Bhagavad-gita")

But what does that all mean? Nothing, of course. The lineage means
only that he studied with Brahmananda Sarasvati from Sankaracarya's
tradition of Vedanta, but that fact alone would be meaningless without
personal experience of the sublime reality that Krsna revealed to
Arjuna. Since he has that experience (it is obvious from his writing),
he can comment it, say what it really is, describe some details, lead
someone to that same experience. The lineage isn't about memorizing
the message, it is about training pointed towards the realization of
the highest truth. If that realization is achieved, then the lineage
can go on uninterrupted. But if it is not, it's just an empty show,
and being a member of such an empty lineage is nothing to brag about.
What is a lineage good for if the highest reality remains unseen?
Nothing. So, the lineage is no merit, the personal enlightenment is
the merit. Lineage is just one possible way to achieve enlightenment.
I suggest that you take Maharishi's translation and compare it to
Prabhupada's yourself, and make your own judgment.

>>In my book, a translation of a holy
>>text is accurate if several conditions are fulfilled: 
>
>
>
>It doesn't matter what it means in your book. Your book is obviously
>not authorized, since it is a product of your mind. 

Of course it's a product of my mind. The question is what is the
source of my mind? Where does it come from? In what is it founded?
These are the relevant questions. Of course something had to go
through my mind in order to be written, but where did it originally
come from?

>The truth can
>never be ascertained merely by the mind or the intelligence, we need
>the mercy of Krishnas representatives. Without surrendering to their
>version you can just forget about knowing the imports of the Vedas.

Of what use would such understanding be? You hear and you believe.
Fine. But then you have to realize the truth yourself, in order to
_really_ understand.

>Without the aid of the spiritual masters like  Srila Prabhupada you
>will be locked up in your own mental concoctions.

I don't think that Prabhupada can be of any help there. His books were
just an aggravation in my spiritual growth. They limit reality, put it
in a little box that can be controlled by the mind. Prabhupada's
universe doesn't exist outside the mind, so in order to be faithful to
Prabhupada, one must be voluntarily enslaved by the mind, by the
mental picture projected upon the universe. I rejected that sort of
limitations permanently years ago. The reality is what remains when
you turn off the mind. When you forget the parampara and all sorts of
intellectualizations. The reality is what is. The flow of reality that
is beneath the mind, that is the foundation of the mind. The calm
water below the waves of superficial consciousness. That is the
reality that flows out through the entire creation, through infinite
universes, galaxies, stars, planets and specks of dust. This is the
reality that sings through all the holy scriptures, remaining unbound
by them. This is the living God. That is what one must know, and by
that knowledge one is enlightened, not by blindly following a
preacher. Yesterday I flamed a student for imitating me in her
writing. Imitating is a serious mistake, because it separates one from
the inner creativity and brilliance. What is better, to eat an apple
yourself, or to have someone chew it up for you and then give it to
you? Knowledge has to be obtained directly, although guidance is
always necessary.

-- 
Web (Kundalini-yoga): http://danijel.cjb.net