Periyava Golden Quotes-886



சைவ போஜனமே பண்ண வேண்டிய ஜாதிக்காரன் அசைவ போஜனம் அநுமதிக்கப்பட்ட ஜாதியாருடன் சேர்ந்து சாப்பிட்டால் என்ன ஆகும்? அந்நிய பதார்த்தத்தில் இவனுக்கு ஒரு ஆசை உண்டானாலும் உண்டாகக் கூடுமல்லவா? நியமம் தப்ப இடமுண்டாகிவிடும் அல்லவா? ‘ஸம பங்க்தி’யினால் ஸமத்வம் கொண்டு வருவதாகச் சொல்லிக் கொண்டு, கிழங்கையும், பழத்தையும் தின்று கொண்டு கிடக்க வேண்டிய ஒரு ஸந்நியாசியை, முள்ளங்கி வெங்காய வாஸனை சபலப்படுத்துகிற பொதுப் பங்க்தியில் கொண்டு உட்கார்த்தி வைத்தால் அவனுடைய பெரிய லக்ஷ்யத்துக்கே அல்லவா ஹானி வந்துவிடும்? இம்மாதிரி ஒரு ஜாதிக்காரன், அல்லது ஆச்ரமக்காரனின் தர்மம் கெட்டுப் போவதால் பாதிக்கப்படுவது அவன் மட்டுமில்லை; இதனால் அவன் செய்கிற கார்யம் கெட்டு அவனால் ஸமூஹத்துக்கு கிடைக்கிற நன்மையே போய்விடுகிறது என்பதைச் சீர்திருத்தக்காரர்கள் கொஞ்சம் யோசிக்க வேண்டும். – ஜகத்குரு ஸ்ரீ சந்திரசேகரேந்திர சரஸ்வதி ஸ்வாமிகள்

If a person of a particular caste who is prescribed only vegetarian food by the Sastras eats along with people who are permitted to eat non-vegetarian food – what will happen? Is it not possible that he gets tempted by the ‘other’ food? Is there not a chance that he will deviate from his discipline? Under the presumption of bringing about ‘equality’, if a Sanyasi who has to consume only roots and fruits is made to sit in a common pankthi where he is tempted with the smell of radish and onions, his entire ideal will be destroyed isn’t it? When a person belonging to a particular caste or ashrama (like sanyasa ashrama) wavers form his dharma, he alone is not affected. His mission is also affected and the welfare that the society would accrue from that mission is also lost. Reformists should ponder on this aspect. – Jagadguru Sri Chandrasekharendra Saraswathi Swamigal



Categories: Deivathin Kural

Tags:

13 replies

  1. Ji, Thank you for the changes and for the Service you and your team do to all Asthikas in the world!

  2. Jaya Jaya Sankara Hara Hara Sankara. Pahi Pahi sri Sarvesvara. Janakiraman. Nagapattinam

  3. For a person who knows both Tamil and English, it will be clear that the English translation does not capture what Mahaswamin has said in Tamil , with 100% fidelity. We should be faithful in translating what he said and not we would like to see. If possible, please request the volunteers to pay particular attention to this.

    • Dear Sri Lakshmanan ji

      With respect to your above comment, I don’t find any inaccuracy of translation as you specified. It gave the extract in toto.

      A translator will never and should never attempt to translate the stuff as it is said in the orginal, is the thumb rule (a basic, you may call it). Translation should be done to the target language with its nativity with keeping the indepth meaning of source language intact, I think the above translation is absolutely justified.

      Did you mean, some erlier stuff in this blog, by the way?

    • +Lakshmanan. You have a point. While the translation given is not basically wrong, it lacks certain elegance and finesse, and does not conform to proper English idiom and usage. But this is only to be expected, since probably the translators are not professional writers. And to that extent their work deserves appreciation, though we should surely aim at higher standards if we want the message to reach a wider ,discerning non-Tamil audience. If it is worth translating, it is worth doing it professionally!
      Volumes 1 and 2 of Deivattin Kural have been rendered into English by RGK (who was a professional writer-journalist) and published by Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan with the title “Hindu Dharma”. There is another work “Introduction to Hindu Dharma” edited by Michael Oren Fitzgerald and published by World Wisdom Books (with an Indian edition by Motilal Banarsidass) . While RGK’s work will appeal to a pan-Indian audience (who are brought up largely on Victorian English), the latter book aims at the international audience and hence its language and editing are more modern. Both books carry notes ,references, and glossary, RGK’s being more elaborate. We would have a ’rounded’ feeling in translation only when certain expressions are explained in notes, but we can understand that this may not be possible in short pieces.

      • Sir,

        I have read the book Hindu Dharma published by Bharathiya Vidhya Bhavan. I’m not sure if you have read it completely and validated against the source, Deivathin Kural. In the preface of the book I saw the contents were translated by BITS students and it certainly does reflect in translations. Most of the translations are done at a summary level or does not align closely to the source. For eg. check the first few chapters of Vaidheeka Matham and you will understand what I mean. I have not read the other book you have mentioned.

        These are the reasons why I opted for dedicated volunteers who are interested to do translations. I do not see anything wrong with the above translation. It certainly conveys what Sri Periyava says which is what is more important for non-Tamizh readers. As you also mentioned, these chapters are broken and converted into quotes so one may not get the ’rounded’ feeling you are referring too. When we read the chapters and the translations as a whole which is also published as part of Gems series we may be able to appreciate it a bit better. Rama Rama

    • Sir,

      I think your criticism is a bit harsh and not really constructive. Since this is a translation that contains only a couple of lines you could have as well translated and let us know where the shortcomings are…. As Shri Balaji mentioned, I do not see anything wrong with the translation. It certainly conveys the meaning as well as intent of Sri Periyava says which is very important than non-Tamizh readers. We need to understand Sri Periyava messages reaches correctly (of course it should stay close to the source) and not really focus way too much on the semantics.

      Let our criticism be constructive and be a pat on the back of the dedicated/volunteers who do this with a lot of dedication and utmost care. I can say this with a lot of conviction since I have been working with them closely for the past 2+ years. Rama Rama

      • Ji, I understand your defensiveness and not trying to engage in the kernel of what I am trying to convey. After all, yeoman work is done by you and the team and it is disheartening to have random dogs like me throwing stones at you.

        Give you 2 examples not to belabour the point : ஜாதிக்காரன் certainly does not translate to a person in English. There is a specific reason Periyava uses this term.
        அசைவ போஜனம் அநுமதிக்கப்பட்ட ஜாதியாருடன் Implies sastras permit certain castes to have non vegetarian food. The translation says it is as people who consume non veg food (as if it is their choice) which is definitely not what he meant.
        As I said these are nuances. May be you think the broad gist is enough for non Tamil audiences.
        If you take your emotion out ( feeling my statement is harsh) and reflect, there is probably a kernel of truth.

        You have listened to Dr.Veezhi mama talk about how precise Periyava was in his words in both English and Tamil ( beaming countenance of Dakshinamurthy … as an example to wit. And how he asked in Tamil if the student understood a portion of Bhamati, escalating his questions with different nuances each time)

      • Ji, one more point and I will shut up. There are the translated Deivatin Kural books in English by BVB which do a much better job in conveying the precise intent. Perhaps, your volunteer team can consult those instead of reinventing the wheel. If copy right is an issue, can certainly learn from them on the nuances.

        Since you are all about “constructive criticism” ( though I believe it is the attitude of the listener that determines if any criticism is constructive or not), I thought I will add my 2c here.

      • Sir,

        Thanks for the detailed feedback. Points noted. Sir, don’t call yourself as dog throwing random stones at us. If you think something needs to be fixed please let us know in the comments section and we will fix it. After all it is all a team effort and together we can make these translations better. That is the way I see it.

        One thing I don’t agree is BVB Hindu Dharma conveying the precise intent of Periyava said. In my one of the above responses I have mentioned about the vaitheega matham section where the translations of many the chapters are way off and at a summary level. If you compare the source and the translation you will see the difference yourself. My intent initially was to leverage those translations but given the reasons above I started engaging dedicated volunteers. Thanks again. Rama Rama

    • Sir,

      Based on your feedback I have made the necessary corrections. Pl. let me know if it is better. Rama Rama

      • Sir, you are right. I gave the example of ‘Hindu Dharma’ only to show how other translations have been done. Not that I fully agree with it, or think that it is comprehensive. Mahaperiyava was not an ordinary speaker, and he employed pure Indian (Hindu )idiom, usages, Sastric expressions and many more from the day to day language of cultured Brahmin community. While we may convey the gist, it is almost impossible to convey the real flavour of the original.
        Unfortunately, in the present state of education in Tamil Nadu, even the Brahmin community is unable to understand the Tamil original of Mahaperiyava. So we see attempts to dilute the contents to suit present Tamil usage. For example , Kalaimagal Karyalayam has republished the 1932/33 Madras speeches of Mahaperiyava in a toned down version and they say this is a concession to our inability to follow the original Tamil of Mahaperiyava! If we compare it with the original publications brought out by Kamakoti Kosastanam, or the 1933 edition of Kalaimagal office, we see the difference in the depth conveyed. So, while we are not even able to follow the original language of Mahaperiyava in Tamil, where is the question of an adequate translation? Mahaperiyava is beyond translation. One has to read it in the original அவ்வாறறிவார் அறிகின்றதலால் எவ்வாறு பிறருக் கிசைவிப்பதுவே!
        In the circumstances, I have said that the present translation deserves appreciation.
        RGK’s translation is an English rendering of the gist , and not the detailed, literal translation. And in this it succeeds in conveying the essential thoughts and arguments of Mahaperiyava to those who do not know Tamil. Most English knowing Hindus of North India have no proper idea of the correct orthodox view in these matters. It is here that RGK’s rendering fills a felt need.
        You are also right about the coverage of Vaidheeka Matam. But Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan had brought out a separate publication on “The Vedas” in 1988. This was translated by Sri N.S.S.Rajan and finally edited by Sri N.Anantharama Iyer. In these translations we are fortunate that they were done by practising Hindus, and not mere academics.

        Mahaperiyava’s language is conversational, and not literary. It is informal, and direct, and not ornamental. While Deivattin Kural captures and conveys this thought and flavour in Tamil as they are, it will be almost impossible to capture it adequately and convey it properly in English. A proper translation will in fact be transcreation. For example, the Bengali writings of Mahendranath Gupta on the life and teachings of Sri Ramakrishna [Sri Ramakrishna Kathamrita] were translated by Swami Nikhilananda, but the main work of editing was done by Joseph Campbell who was a great scholar, and Miss Margaret Woodrow Wilson. The Bengali poems were rendered into English by John Moffitt Jr who was himself a poet. So we have an English translation which conforms to the English idiom. This work is so excellent that though translated in 1942, no one has dared to touch it. If I hold any translation as ideal, it is this. [But even this excludes portions of the original Bengali which non-Bengalis or non-Hindus cannot understand or appreciate.]

        While on the subject I may share another thought with you. The several volumes of Deivattin Kural were published as and when new material came to Ganapati Anna. No one knew in advance how many volumes it would run into. So there is lot of material on some subjects in many volumes. Now that the whole matter is contained in 7 volumes, there is need to reorganise the volumes, streamlining the subject matter. For example, Sri S.V.Radhakrishna Sastrigal collected all the material on Vinayaka and brought out a separate volume! I wrote many times to the Tamil publishers, but they do not even acknowledge. This is our Indian standard.

        We do appreciate the efforts being made, but our anxiety is to achieve such standards of excellence that Mahaperiyava deserves.

      • Totally agreed Shri Najappa sir, we are striving our best with multiple layers of proof checking. Regarding organizing the content based on the subject matter that has been one of my dreams too. All of these will take time some time and effort. With his grace we will get that done as well. Any feedback on the translation please let us know in the comments and we will fix it.

        Thanks for your feedback and thoughts. Rama Rama

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: