The Astavakra Gita/Samhita

[Guest guest]

On Fri, Jun 04, 1999 at 08:50:56AM -0000, Ramakrishna wrote:

 

-> " If one thinks of oneself as free, one is free, and if one thinks of oneself

-> as bound, one is bound. Here this saying `Thinking

-> makes it so' is true " 1.11 Ashtavakra Gita

->

-> Doesn't the above verse remind you of Swamiji's teachings? Many a time you

-> would have found the gist echoed in his teachings. Does anyone in the list

-> know why this text in quite unpopular? Thanks.

 

I couldn't really say. Satkari Mukerjee's preface to the 1996 Advaita

Ashrama edition (available through import through the Vedanta Society)

states:

 

" ...the present book stands in a class apart (from ambiguous texts).

Whether you agree or not, you are not left in suspense or doubt as to what

it means. It gives a candid, unhesitating, unblushing, and unapologetic

presentation of the cardinal principles of Vedanta, without consideration

for and concession to our realistic dispositions. No wonder that it is a

_vade-mecum_ for the monks of Shankara's orders. Of course it has not

been widely popular with householders because it refuses to cater to their

instincts or to make allowances for the exigencies of social or political

circumstances. " (xii)

 

From my brief and marginally unqualified once-over of the text, it seems

to me that this is one of those texts -- such as the Gita, in many ways --

which would be immensely difficult to translate. The Gita is at least

amenable to a large audience, and was popular enough in the western world

over the past 125 years that many translations have arisen and, through

trial and error, good ones have flourished. The Astavakra Samhita, on the

other hand, uses *many* semantically weighty philosophical terms which

read simply in Sanskrit to those who know the language but are somewhat

difficult to render into English without some meaning being lost. Then we

have an assertive book with no " folklore " aspects to it, which would (like

most of the acharyas' texts) irritate many close-minded westerners. End

result: little reason for a translation. The most " experienced " religious

would be able to read it in Sanskrit, and the less experienced would seem

better served by a less difficult text.

I'm not sure why Mukerjee would feel that a sensational text might

be unpopular -- sensational movies certainly aren't -- but to each his

own, I suppose.

BTW- Slightly off topic, but those of you who might be interested

in (for comparison, debate, or other purposes) the texts of Sri Madhva

would be well served to visit www.dvaita.org, which is operated by

extremely knowledgeable scholars who are always happy to answer questions

about the texts or philosophy. In particular, I'd like to direct anyone

and everyone to Shrisha Rao's FAQ, available on the page, which outlines

the philosophy of Tattvavaada in a very straightforward and impressive

fashion. Even those of you who are full-blooded Advaitins might enjoy the

Vaishnava FAQ, or many of the transliterated texts/stotras stored online

and available for anyone to download. I myself will be contributing a lay

commentary on the Pramana-Lakshanam fairly shortly.

 

 

 

Peace,

 

Tom Head

tlh

http://www2.netdoor.com/~tlh

 

" Being properly distracted for a moment is child's play; being

rightly distracted for a lifetime is an art. "

-- Douglas Adams