Not authoritative - Revision history

Stritama at 09:37, 20 December 2012

2012-12-20T09:37:03Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:37, 20 December 2012
Line 1:		Line 1:
			<div id="compilation">
			<div id="facts">
	{{terms\|"not actually authoritative"\|"not authoritative"\|"none can be said to be authoritative"}}		{{terms\|"not actually authoritative"\|"not authoritative"\|"none can be said to be authoritative"}}

Line 17:		Line 19:
	{{toc right}}		{{toc right}}

	[[Category:Authoritative]]		[[Category:Authoritative\|2]]
			</div>

	== Srimad-Bhagavatam ==		<div class="section" id="Srimad-Bhagavatam" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam"><h2>Srimad-Bhagavatam</h2></div>

	=== SB Canto 9 ~~===~~		<div class="sub_section" id="SB_Canto_9" text="SB Canto 9"><h3>SB Canto 9</h3></div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~q_heading~~">~~'''~~Although there are many so-called Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, some of them are not actually authoritative.~~'''~~</~~span~~>		<div class="quote" book="SB" link="SB 9.10.3" link_text="SB 9.10.3, Purport">
			<div class="heading">Although there are many so-called Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, some of them are not actually authoritative.</div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~SB-statistics~~">'''[[Vanisource:SB 9.10.3\|SB 9.10.3, Purport]]:''' Unless one is tattva-darśī, in complete knowledge of the Absolute Truth, one cannot describe the activities of the Personality of Godhead. Therefore although there are many so-called Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, some of them are not actually authoritative. Sometimes Lord Rāmacandra's activities are described in terms of one's own imaginations, speculations or material sentiments. But the characteristics of Lord Rāmacandra should not be handled as something imaginary. While describing the history of Lord Rāmacandra, Śukadeva Gosvāmī told Mahārāja Parīkṣit, "You have already heard about the activities of Lord Rāmacandra." Apparently, therefore, five thousand years ago there were many Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, and there are many still. But we must select only those books written by tattva-darśīs (jñāninas tattva-darśinaḥ [Bg. 4.34]), not the books of so-called scholars who claim knowledge only on the basis of a doctorate. This is a warning by Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Ṛṣibhis tattva-darśibhiḥ. Although the Rāmāyaṇa composed by Vālmīki is a huge literature, the same activities are summarized here by Śukadeva Gosvāmī in a few verses.</~~span~~>		<div class="text">'''[[Vanisource:SB 9.10.3\|SB 9.10.3, Purport]]:''' Unless one is tattva-darśī, in complete knowledge of the Absolute Truth, one cannot describe the activities of the Personality of Godhead. Therefore although there are many so-called Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, some of them are not actually authoritative. Sometimes Lord Rāmacandra's activities are described in terms of one's own imaginations, speculations or material sentiments. But the characteristics of Lord Rāmacandra should not be handled as something imaginary. While describing the history of Lord Rāmacandra, Śukadeva Gosvāmī told Mahārāja Parīkṣit, "You have already heard about the activities of Lord Rāmacandra." Apparently, therefore, five thousand years ago there were many Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, and there are many still. But we must select only those books written by tattva-darśīs (jñāninas tattva-darśinaḥ [Bg. 4.34]), not the books of so-called scholars who claim knowledge only on the basis of a doctorate. This is a warning by Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Ṛṣibhis tattva-darśibhiḥ. Although the Rāmāyaṇa composed by Vālmīki is a huge literature, the same activities are summarized here by Śukadeva Gosvāmī in a few verses.</div>
			</div>

	== Lectures ==		<div class="section" id="Lectures" text="Lectures"><h2>Lectures</h2></div>

	=== Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures ~~===~~		<div class="sub_section" id="Bhagavad-gita_As_It_Is_Lectures" text="Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures"><h3>Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures</h3></div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~q_heading~~">~~'''~~Of course there are many translations, but of those I have seen, not only in America but those also in India, none can be said to be authoritative, because in almost every one of them the author has expressed his personal opinion through the commentaries without touching the spirit of the Bhagavad-gītā as it is.~~'''~~</~~span~~>		<div class="quote" book="Lec" link="Lecture Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 (New-2003)" link_text="Lecture Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 (New-2003)">
			<div class="heading">Of course there are many translations, but of those I have seen, not only in America but those also in India, none can be said to be authoritative, because in almost every one of them the author has expressed his personal opinion through the commentaries without touching the spirit of the Bhagavad-gītā as it is.</div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~LEC-statistics~~">'''[[Vanisource:Lecture Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 (New-2003)\|Lecture Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 (New-2003)]]:''' An American lady asked me to recommend an English edition of the Bhagavad-gītā which she could read. I was unable to do so in good conscience. Of course there are many translations, but of those I have seen, not only in America but those also in India, none can be said to be authoritative, because in almost every one of them the author has expressed his personal opinion through the commentaries without touching the spirit of the Bhagavad-gītā as it is.</~~span~~>		<div class="text">'''[[Vanisource:Lecture Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 (New-2003)\|Lecture Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 (New-2003)]]:''' An American lady asked me to recommend an English edition of the Bhagavad-gītā which she could read. I was unable to do so in good conscience. Of course there are many translations, but of those I have seen, not only in America but those also in India, none can be said to be authoritative, because in almost every one of them the author has expressed his personal opinion through the commentaries without touching the spirit of the Bhagavad-gītā as it is.</div>
			</div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~q_heading~~">~~'''~~That that is authoritative, and others they are not authoritative. ~~'''~~</~~span~~>		<div class="quote" book="Lec" link="Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973" link_text="Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973">
			<div class="heading">That that is authoritative, and others they are not authoritative.</div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~LEC-statistics~~">'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973\|Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973]]:''' So this tattva-darśī, tattva, this word you should learn very nicely. That that is authoritative, and others they are not authoritative. They are simply speculation. Speculation means mental platform; it has no value. As this body is also nonpermanent, the mind is also flickering. Mind is flickering, accepting something and rejecting something. The same thing now accepted, again rejected. This is mind's business. So mind cannot be tattva-darśī. Of course we have to think with mind, but under the direction of authority. Then we can reach real tattva.</~~span~~>		<div class="text">'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973\|Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973]]:''' So this tattva-darśī, tattva, this word you should learn very nicely. That that is authoritative, and others they are not authoritative. They are simply speculation. Speculation means mental platform; it has no value. As this body is also nonpermanent, the mind is also flickering. Mind is flickering, accepting something and rejecting something. The same thing now accepted, again rejected. This is mind's business. So mind cannot be tattva-darśī. Of course we have to think with mind, but under the direction of authority. Then we can reach real tattva.</div>
			</div>

	=== Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures ~~===~~		<div class="sub_section" id="Srimad-Bhagavatam_Lectures" text="Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures"><h3>Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures</h3></div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~q_heading~~">~~'''~~Now, by ordinary common sense knowledge, if I say, "There is no next birth," that is not authoritative.~~'''~~</~~span~~>		<div class="quote" book="Lec" link="Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- New Vrindaban, September 7, 1972" link_text="Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- New Vrindaban, September 7, 1972">
			<div class="heading">Now, by ordinary common sense knowledge, if I say, "There is no next birth," that is not authoritative.</div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~LEC-statistics~~">'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- New Vrindaban, September 7, 1972\|Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- New Vrindaban, September 7, 1972]]:''' Now, by ordinary common sense knowledge, if I say, "There is no next birth," that is not authoritative. Because authoritative knowledge is... Suppose from Bhagavad-gītā, next life is accepted. Tathā dehāntara-prāptir dhīras tatra na muhyati [Bg. 2.13]. The beginning of Bhagavad-gītā is to teach that soul is eternal, it is migrating from one body to another, so there is next life. That is also authoritative knowledge. But if somebody says that "There is no birth," that is not authoritative. That is a layman's statement.</~~span~~>		<div class="text">'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- New Vrindaban, September 7, 1972\|Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- New Vrindaban, September 7, 1972]]:''' Now, by ordinary common sense knowledge, if I say, "There is no next birth," that is not authoritative. Because authoritative knowledge is... Suppose from Bhagavad-gītā, next life is accepted. Tathā dehāntara-prāptir dhīras tatra na muhyati [Bg. 2.13]. The beginning of Bhagavad-gītā is to teach that soul is eternal, it is migrating from one body to another, so there is next life. That is also authoritative knowledge. But if somebody says that "There is no birth," that is not authoritative. That is a layman's statement.</div>
			</div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~q_heading~~">~~'''~~So far we are concerned at the present moment, whatever knowledge we are giving or accepting, they are more or less false knowledge. Not authoritative knowledge.~~'''~~</~~span~~>		<div class="quote" book="Lec" link="Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973" link_text="Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973">
			<div class="heading">So far we are concerned at the present moment, whatever knowledge we are giving or accepting, they are more or less false knowledge. Not authoritative knowledge.</div>

	<~~span~~ class="~~LEC-statistics~~">'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973\|Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973]]:''' Nigama means Vedic literature. Veda, Veda means knowledge. Vetti veda vidoḥ vinte vid vicaraṇe. So vid-dhātu, those who are Sanskrit scholars here, they'll understand. Vid means to know, knowledge. So Vedic literature means to receive knowledge, authoritative knowledge. Not false knowledge. False knowledge, there is difference between false knowledge and authoritative knowledge. So far we are concerned at the present moment, whatever knowledge we are giving or accepting, they are more or less false knowledge. Not authoritative knowledge.</~~span~~>		<div class="text">'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973\|Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973]]:''' Nigama means Vedic literature. Veda, Veda means knowledge. Vetti veda vidoḥ vinte vid vicaraṇe. So vid-dhātu, those who are Sanskrit scholars here, they'll understand. Vid means to know, knowledge. So Vedic literature means to receive knowledge, authoritative knowledge. Not false knowledge. False knowledge, there is difference between false knowledge and authoritative knowledge. So far we are concerned at the present moment, whatever knowledge we are giving or accepting, they are more or less false knowledge. Not authoritative knowledge.</div>
			</div>
			</div>

Jai at 08:25, 13 February 2009

2009-02-13T08:25:54Z

New page

{{terms|"not actually authoritative"|"not authoritative"|"none can be said to be authoritative"}}

{{notes|}}

{{compiler|Visnu Murti| Jai}}

{{complete|ALL}}

{{first|07Dec08}}

{{last|13Feb09}}

{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=1|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=4|Con=0|Let=0}}

{{total|5}}

{{toc right}}

[[Category:Authoritative]]

== Srimad-Bhagavatam ==

=== SB Canto 9 ===

'''Although there are many so-called Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, some of them are not actually authoritative.'''

'''[[Vanisource:SB 9.10.3|SB 9.10.3, Purport]]:''' Unless one is tattva-darśī, in complete knowledge of the Absolute Truth, one cannot describe the activities of the Personality of Godhead. Therefore although there are many so-called Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, some of them are not actually authoritative. Sometimes Lord Rāmacandra's activities are described in terms of one's own imaginations, speculations or material sentiments. But the characteristics of Lord Rāmacandra should not be handled as something imaginary. While describing the history of Lord Rāmacandra, Śukadeva Gosvāmī told Mahārāja Parīkṣit, "You have already heard about the activities of Lord Rāmacandra." Apparently, therefore, five thousand years ago there were many Rāmāyaṇas, or histories of Lord Rāmacandra's activities, and there are many still. But we must select only those books written by tattva-darśīs (jñāninas tattva-darśinaḥ [Bg. 4.34]), not the books of so-called scholars who claim knowledge only on the basis of a doctorate. This is a warning by Śukadeva Gosvāmī. Ṛṣibhis tattva-darśibhiḥ. Although the Rāmāyaṇa composed by Vālmīki is a huge literature, the same activities are summarized here by Śukadeva Gosvāmī in a few verses.

== Lectures ==

=== Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures ===

'''Of course there are many translations, but of those I have seen, not only in America but those also in India, none can be said to be authoritative, because in almost every one of them the author has expressed his personal opinion through the commentaries without touching the spirit of the Bhagavad-gītā as it is.'''

'''[[Vanisource:Lecture Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 (New-2003)|Lecture Introduction to Bhagavad-gita As It Is -- Los Angeles, November 23, 1968 (New-2003)]]:''' An American lady asked me to recommend an English edition of the Bhagavad-gītā which she could read. I was unable to do so in good conscience. Of course there are many translations, but of those I have seen, not only in America but those also in India, none can be said to be authoritative, because in almost every one of them the author has expressed his personal opinion through the commentaries without touching the spirit of the Bhagavad-gītā as it is.

'''That that is authoritative, and others they are not authoritative. '''

'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973|Lecture on BG 2.16 -- London, August 22, 1973]]:''' So this tattva-darśī, tattva, this word you should learn very nicely. That that is authoritative, and others they are not authoritative. They are simply speculation. Speculation means mental platform; it has no value. As this body is also nonpermanent, the mind is also flickering. Mind is flickering, accepting something and rejecting something. The same thing now accepted, again rejected. This is mind's business. So mind cannot be tattva-darśī. Of course we have to think with mind, but under the direction of authority. Then we can reach real tattva.

=== Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures ===

'''Now, by ordinary common sense knowledge, if I say, "There is no next birth," that is not authoritative.'''

'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- New Vrindaban, September 7, 1972|Lecture on SB 1.2.9 -- New Vrindaban, September 7, 1972]]:''' Now, by ordinary common sense knowledge, if I say, "There is no next birth," that is not authoritative. Because authoritative knowledge is... Suppose from Bhagavad-gītā, next life is accepted. Tathā dehāntara-prāptir dhīras tatra na muhyati [Bg. 2.13]. The beginning of Bhagavad-gītā is to teach that soul is eternal, it is migrating from one body to another, so there is next life. That is also authoritative knowledge. But if somebody says that "There is no birth," that is not authoritative. That is a layman's statement.

'''So far we are concerned at the present moment, whatever knowledge we are giving or accepting, they are more or less false knowledge. Not authoritative knowledge.'''

'''[[Vanisource:Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973|Lecture on SB 7.6.1-2 -- Stockholm, September 6, 1973]]:''' Nigama means Vedic literature. Veda, Veda means knowledge. Vetti veda vidoḥ vinte vid vicaraṇe. So vid-dhātu, those who are Sanskrit scholars here, they'll understand. Vid means to know, knowledge. So Vedic literature means to receive knowledge, authoritative knowledge. Not false knowledge. False knowledge, there is difference between false knowledge and authoritative knowledge. So far we are concerned at the present moment, whatever knowledge we are giving or accepting, they are more or less false knowledge. Not authoritative knowledge.