Category:Commentaries on the Bhagavad-gita: Difference between revisions
Created page with " Category:Commentation Category:Bhagavad-gita Category:Bhagavad-gita - Umbrella Category Category:Meanings and Explanations - Umbrella Category Category:All..." |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Category:Commentation]] | [[Category:Commentation]] | ||
[[Category:Commentaries]] | |||
[[Category:Bhagavad-gita]] | [[Category:Bhagavad-gita]] | ||
[[Category:Bhagavad-gita - Umbrella Category]] | [[Category:Bhagavad-gita - Umbrella Category]] | ||
[[Category:Meanings and Explanations - Umbrella Category]] | [[Category:Meanings and Explanations - Umbrella Category]] | ||
[[Category:All Categories - Vaniquotes]] | [[Category:All Categories - Vaniquotes]] | ||
Latest revision as of 11:07, 12 May 2018
Subcategories
This category has only the following subcategory.
Pages in category "Commentaries on the Bhagavad-gita"
The following 94 pages are in this category, out of 94 total.
A
- A Krsna conscious person should not be bewildered by fools; he should avoid all unauthorized commentaries and interpretations on Bhagavad-gita and proceed in Krsna consciousness with determination and firmness. BG 1972 purports
- A person may be a very good scholar from the material point of view, but that does not qualify him to comment on Bhagavad-gita. In order to understand Bhagavad-gita, we have to accept the principle of disciplic succession - parampara
- A pure devotee is not confused by misguiding commentaries on Bhagavad-gita because he knows what is what. BG 1972 purports
- Accompanied by Satya Tirtha, Madhvacarya went to Badarikasrama. It was there that he met Vyasadeva and explained his commentary on the Bhagavad-gita before him. Thus he became a great scholar by studying before Vyasadeva
- All the commentaries in the market, they are simply presentation of the particular commentator's personal view. That is not Bhagavad-gita. If you want to understand Bhagavad-gita, then you should understand as they are said
- Almost every one of them have expressed their own opinion through the commentation of the Bhagavad-gita without touching the spirit of Bhagavad-gita As It Is
- Arjuna accepts Sri Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and any commentary on the Gita following in the footsteps of Arjuna is real devotional service to the cause of this great science. BG 1972 purports
- As soon as the parampara system is not accepted, the so-called commentary on Bhagavad-gita is lost or rotten. So you are interested with the rotten commentary of so-called politicians, scholars. So how you'll get the benefit? Therefore it is chaotic
- Asuras, instead of accepting these instructions (of Bhagavad-gita) directly, make commentaries according to their own whimsical ways and mislead everyone, without profit even for themselves
B
- Because Bhagavad-gita is wrongly preached all over the world by nonsense commentation, we want to rectify it. Therefore our society is specially named "Krishna conscious"
- Bhagavad-gita is not a new thing, a new adventure. And the person who spoke Bhagavad-gita to the sun-god, does it mean that He left something to be commented by some, these mundane men to understand the meaning of the Bhagavad-gita?
- Big scholar, Dr. Radhakrishnan, while commenting on the verse man-mana bhava mad-bhakto mad-yaji mam namaskuru (BG 18.65), he says that it is not to Krsna the person. Just see
- By the time he came to the Ananda-matha from Badarikasrama, Madhvacarya had finished his commentary on the Bhagavad-gita. His companion Satya Tirtha wrote down the entire commentary
E
- Even big scholars cannot understand Krsna, yet they dare comment on the Bhagavad-gita. Reading the Bhagavad-gita means understanding Krsna, yet we actually see many scholars making blunders in trying to understand Krsna
- Even in this age we find some so-called scholars commenting on Bhagavad-gita who are envious of Krsna
- Even Sankaracarya, the most elevated impersonalist, says in the beginning of his commentary on the Bhagavad-gita: narayanah paro ’vyaktat
- Even Sankaracarya, who is a impersonalist, he has accepted Lord Krsna as the supreme Narayana. In his comment on Bhagavad-gita he says, narayanah parah avyaktat: "Narayana is beyond this material creation."
- Even such an impersonalist as Acarya Sankara has said in the beginning of his commentation on the Bhagavad-gita that Narayana, the Personality of Godhead, is beyond the material creation
- Even the most erudite scholars write on Bhagavad-gita very inaccurately. Because they are envious of Krsna, their commentaries are useless. BG 1972 purports
G
I
- I understand that some rubbish commentaries upon Bhagavad-gita are allowed to be studied in every university, so if you can replace our Bhagavad-gita As It Is it will be a great advancement for our missionary activities
- If you do not understand Krsna, if you do not surrender to Krsna, then you are simply wasting your time. There is no meaning of writing big, big comments on Bhagavad-gita, uselessly waste you time and waste others' time
- If you take Bhagavad-gita as it is, you become self-realized, liberated soul. But the misfortune is that we become more than Krsna, and we want to comment Bhagavad-gita in our own way. That is our misfortune
- Impersonalist commentators on the Gita unreasonably assume that Brahman takes the form of jiva in the material world, and to substantiate this they refer to Chapter Fifteen, verse 7, of the Gita. BG 1972 purports
- In his commentation on the Bhagavad-gita, Sripada Sankaracarya accepted Lord Krsna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but later on he commented from the impersonalist's view
- In India there are 645 different commentaries on the Gita. One professor has proposed that Krsna is a doctor and Arjuna is His patient and has made his commentary in that way
- In the beginning of his commentary on the BG, Sankaracarya says that Narayana is transcendental to this manifested and unmanifested creation, and in the same commentary he says that the SPG, Narayana, is Krsna appearing as the son of Devaki and Vasudeva
- In the Bhagavad-gita a comment has been made on such foolish scholars (casual readers of the Vedas) (avipascitah)
- In the meantime I have also prepared a commentary on the Bhagavad-gita purely on Bhakti principle and when published it will be an unique publication of Bhagavad-gita as it is
- In the West also Bhagavad-gita is accepted as a great book of philosophy, and many great scholars and philosophers in the West have read it and commented upon it
- In, in the market you'll have so many commentaries of the Bhagavad-gita. In India we have counted, there are about six hundred and forty-five different commentaries of Bhagavad-gita
- It is not our business to amend the words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead or make additions or alterations, as it has become a custom for many so-called scholars and svamis who comment on the words of Bhagavad-gita
- It is sometimes found that even demoniac persons who are envious of Krsna take to the profession of explaining BG in a different way to make business, but anyone who desires actually to understand Krsna must avoid such commentaries on BG. BG 1972 pur
- It is sometimes found that persons who are worshiping Krsna in a different way, take to the profession of explaining BG in a different way to make business, but anyone who desires actually to understand Krsna must avoid such commentaries on BG. BG 1972 p
M
- Many acaryas have commented on Bhagavad-gita - there is Ramanujacarya, Madhvacarya, even Sankaracarya - but never said that Bhagavad-gita is proof of nonviolence
- Many other commentators due to poor fund of knowledge tamper with the lines of Bhagavad-gita and twist the meaning for their personal motives, but we do not do like that. We present it exactly as it is; without any additions or subtractions
- Mental speculation that leads one away from the Supreme Lord is a serious sin, and one who does not know Krsna should not try to comment on Bhagavad-gita. BG 1972 purports
N
- Nistha implies that one should accept the words of Bhagavad-gita, the words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, as they are, without any deviation or nonsensical commentary
- Nondevotees simply waste their time reading Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam, and we have often mentioned that so-called scholars, politicians and philosophers simply give misleading commentaries when they try to interpret Bhagavad-gita
O
- One famous scholar wrote in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gita that one does not have to surrender to Lord Krsna or even accept Him as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but that one should rather surrender to - the Supreme within Krsna
- One who misinterprets Bhagavad-gita, twisting out some meaning for his sense gratification, is a non-Aryan. Therefore commentaries on Bhagavad-gita by such persons should be immediately rejected
- Only the fools and rascals deride the Supreme Personality of Godhead Lord Krsna. Such fools take it upon themselves to write commentaries on the Bhagavad-gita without an attitude of service to the Lord. BG 1972 purports
- Ordinary person with some academic career, they think they are very learned, they can comment on Bhagavad-gita. Oh, that is not possible
- Our Krsna consciousness movement is to request you to read this Bhagavad-gita as it is. Do not try to comment upon it indigenally
S
- Sankaracarya, in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gita, has accepted Narayana as the transcendental Personality of Godhead who appeared as Krsna, the son of Devaki and Vasudeva. Therefore this matter may be difficult to understand
- So many big, big scholars, they have written comment on Bhagavad-gita, but they, still they have proved that they're rascal number one. Because they did not follow the process of understanding Krsna, therefore they could not understand
- Some commentators on the Gita say that one who worships a demigod can reach the Supreme Lord, but here it is clearly stated that the worshipers of demigods go to the different planetary systems where various demigods are situated. BG 1972 purports
- Somehow or other they try to take Krsna out of Bhagavad-gita. They will comment on Bhagavad-gita, but in their commentaries there will never be mention of Krsna
- Sridhara Svami, Ramanujacarya, Visvanatha Cakravarti, Baladeva Vidyabhusana. So many great scholars, they have commented upon Bhagavad-gita. So try to understand Bhagavad-gita as it is. That is the real necessity of life
- Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura, in his commentary on Bhagavad-gita, has especially stressed the instruction of the spiritual master
- Sripada Sankaracarya, who is supposed to be the leader of the impersonalist school of philosophers, has admitted in the beginning of his comments on Bhagavad-gita that Narayana, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is beyond the material creation
- Sruti means that one should hear from the authority. One should not construe some interpretation for his personal interest. There are so many commentaries on Bhagavad-gita that misinterpret the original text. BG 1972 purports
T
- That (introduction to Sankara's commentary to Bhagavad-gita) is explained. Sankara is the incarnation of Lord Siva. He has no fault. He has simply executed the order of the Supreme Lord
- That is the first thing, acaryopasanam. But these rascals, they do not do that. They have no acarya; still, they write comment on Bhagavad-gita
- The Bhagavad-gita is an important Vedic literature that has been taught for many years, but because it was commented upon by unscrupulous rascals, people derived no benefit from it, and no one came to the conclusion of Krsna consciousness
- The fools and rascals, they try to comment on the Bhagavad-gita by their ABCD scholarship. That is not possible. It is sabda-brahman. It will be revealed to the person who has devotion to Krsna. Yasya deve para bhaktir yatha deve
- The impersonalistic commentary on the Bhagavad-gita is therefore disastrous because, without understanding the transcendental pleasure of the Gita, the impersonalist wants to interpret it in his own way
- The unauthorized commentary upon Bhagavad-gita is known as Mayavadi-Bhasya, and Lord Caitanya has warned us about these unauthorized men (who try to banish or kill Krsna when writing commentary on Bhagavad-gita). BG 1972 Preface
- The whole thing is instructed in the Bhagavad-gita and if we accept the teachings of Bhagavad-gita, as it is without unnecessary commentary on it, then our spiritual movement will be successful
- The yogis and jnanis are confused in their attempts to understand Krsna, although the greatest of the impersonalists, Sripada Sankaracarya, has admitted in his Gita commentary that Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. BG 1972 purports
- There are a number of editions of this great book of knowledge (Bhagavad-gita). Some of them have commentaries by the devotees, and some of them have commentaries by the demons. BG 1972 purports
- There are about six hundred different types of editions commenting on Bhagavad-gita. But according to Bhagavad-gita, all these six hundred editions in different, studied from different angle of vision, they are all absurd and nonsense
- There are many philosophers who write comments on the Bhagavad-gita but have no faith in Krsna. They will never be liberated from the bondage of fruitive action. BG 1972 purports
- There are so many commentaries on Bhagavad-gita that misinterpret the original text. The real import of the word should be presented, and that should be learned from a bona fide spiritual master. BG 1972 purports
- There are so many commentators on Bhagavad-gita, but nobody has pointed out what is the real business of Bhagavad-gita
- There are so many editions of Bhagavad-gita. So our Krsna consciousness movement is to request you to read this BG as it is. Do not try to comment upon it whimsically. Therefore we are publishing Bhagavad-gita as it is, without any imperfect comment
- There are so many, the politicians, the scholars, they are commenting Bhagavad-gita in so many ways, but they are misled. Because they are not devotee of Krsna, they cannot poke their nose in the Bhagavad-gita. It is not possible
- There are so-called Vedantists, they avoid Krsna. They'll write comments on Bhagavad-gita, avoid Krsna. This is going on
- There are those who are not attached to the personal form of Krsna. They are so firmly detached that even in the preparation of commentaries to Bhagavad-gita they want to distract other people from Krsna
- There is no difference between Bhagavad-gita and Bhagavan. Sabda-brahman. So Bhagavad-gita should not be taken as ordinary literature, that one can comment on it by so-called ABCD knowledge. No. That is not possible
- They (so-called scholars and commentators) feel compelled to write commentaries on Bhagavad-gita and other historical records
- Thus (commentary of BG, Sankaracarya says that Narayana is transcendental to this manifested & unmanifested creation, and in the same commentary he says that the SPG, Narayana, is Krsna) in this respect there is little difference of opinion about Krsna
- To become Krsna conscious is not very difficult job. Simply you have to follow the direction. That's all. But if you manufacture your own meaning, commentation on Bhagavad-gita, then you are deviated. You are lost
U
- Unfortunately, before this in the Western countries there was so many translation of Bhagavad-gita, but everyone's attempt is to make Krsna - minus Bhagavad-gita. They are commenting Bhagavad-gita without Krsna; kingdom of God without God
- Unintelligent commentators on the Gita try to divert the mind of the reader to other subjects, but there is no other subject in Bhagavad-gita but devotional service. BG 1972 purports
- Unless one is fully qualified in Vaisnava behavior and authorized by superior authority (the Supreme Personality of Godhead), one cannot write Vaisnava literatures or purports and commentaries on Srimad-Bhagavatam and the Bhagavad-gita
W
- We can go on reading Bhagavad-gita life after life, and we may write a thousand and one commentaries on it, but all such attempts will prove futile - if we are not at all able to grasp this genuine message of Sri Krsna, the teacher of Bhagavad-gita
- We followed the principles especially explained by Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura in his commentary on the Bhagavad-gita verse beginning vyavasayatmika buddhir ekeha kuru-nandana - BG 2.41
- We have several times discussed this point that the so-called scholars, politicians and philosophers, they read Bhagavad-gita and comment in a different way. This is their foolishness
- We have to discuss about Krsna amongst the Krsna's devotees, not outsiders, outsiders they cannot understand Krsna. They simply waste their time by commenting on Bhagavad-gita because they are mudhas they cannot understand Krsna
- We present Bhagavad-gita as it is, as Krsna says. We don't allow any rascal to comment upon Bhagavad-gita in a different way. That is our Krsna consciousness movement. This is very natural
- Whatever I am speaking, it is there in the Bhagavad-gita. Unfortunately, Bhagavad-gita has been misinterpreted by so many commentators that people have misunderstood the Bhagavad-gita. Actually, Bhagavad-gita means to develop Krsna consciousness
- When Krsna says, man-mana bhava mad-bhaktah (BG 18.65) - "Always think of Me, become My devotee, and surrender unto Me" - the so-called scholars comment that it is not to Krsna that we have to surrender. That is envy
- While there (in Badarikasrama), he (Sankaracarya) wrote a commentary on the Brahma-sutra, as well as on ten Upanisads and the Bhagavad-gita. He also wrote Sanat-sujatiya and a commentary on the Nrsimha-tapani
- Without understanding Krsna from the authority of a pure devotee, one should not try to comment upon Bhagavad-gita. BG 1972 purports