10

Most translations I find online, that are comprehensive, for the Bhagavata Purana, are related to the International Society for Krishna Consciousness. Are there any non-ISKCON related translations?

Theologically, I find this bothersome, because ISKCON presents Krishna as being the Supreme Godhead from whom all the Vedic deities flow (including Vishnu).

From what I understand, though, the Purana, read in isolation, doesn't present Krishna as being "the God Himself." Rather it purports that God (Vishnu) has many Avatars, and that in order to spawn these Avatars, God takes form of the Original Person, and that from this Original Person come the 22 named-Avatars (Vyasa, Dattatreya, Krishna et al.). The Purana makes the unique claim that Krishna is "the God Himself." Meaning that Krishna is Vishnu's full manifestation. The Purana does not claim that Krishna exists in isolation from Vishnu, or that Vishnu comes from Krishna.

The relationship is still one-way, from Vishnu comes all the Avatars, and the complete Avatar is Krishna.

ISKCON's translation is biased, however, and will therefore consistently translate any texts they find in order to retroactively fit these biases, they will claim that the fourth Yuga-Avatar is in fact "light" or "bright" complexioned (i.e. "golden" complexioned), yet a strict translation of the Purana does not say this. ISKCON's translation: "in the fourth Yuga (Kali Yuga), although the Lord Himself is not black... (akrsnam)."

Yet the actual translation reads:

In his discussion of the yuga-avatara for Kali Yuga, Krsnadasa diverges from Rupa's description of his color as black (krsna), which accords with the description of this avatar in Bhagavata 11.5.32 as "black in color (krsna-varna) though not black (akrsna) by virtue of his luster."

Anyway, I still haven't found any comprehensive translations of the Purana not tainted by ISKCON's (seemingly Gaudiya-related) biases.

There are some translations I have found on the Amazon Kindle store but they are not comprehensive, nor are they word-for-word.

Taken from here: (http://krishnamurti.abundanthope.org/index_htm_files/The-Bhagavata-Purana.pdf)

James Yen
  • 405
  • 3
  • 10
  • there are other hardcopy translations, but not online... – Swami Vishwananda Nov 26 '16 at 03:53
  • 4
    That Chaitanya "fellow" is a revered saint even by other sects in India, and nowhere is it stated that one has to compulsorily 'kill miscreants' and 'engage in amorous love affairs' to be an avatara. Rather swooning at the remembrance of the Lord is a symbol of greatest devotion. – Surya Nov 26 '16 at 07:55
  • @SwamiVishwananda, yeah I found several on Amazon under "Srimad Bhagavatam" or "Bhagavata Purana" but the vast majority of of them seemed to be abridged or summarized translations. One of them I bought on Kindle states the following: "Only the more generally interesting portions of the work—amounting to somewhat less than half of the whole—are included in the present version. Of this version, again, about half is summary and paraphrase rather than translation;" – James Yen Nov 26 '16 at 16:32
  • 2
    James, if you mean no disrespect towards Chaitanya Mahaprabhu please delete it from your post, majority of Vaishnavas are ISKON people and they will take it as a blasphemy directed to their God figure. – Yogi Nov 26 '16 at 17:45
  • 3
    @Yogi Do you mean Vaishnavas on this site or Vaishnavas in general? Because I think there are far more Sri Vaishnavas in the world than Gaudiya Vaishnavas. – Keshav Srinivasan Nov 27 '16 at 08:52
  • @KeshavSrinivasan Sorry about that, but we have to agree that a lot of vaishnavas are ISKON people as well and many of the smartha people especially Bengali people worship Chaitanya Mahaprabhu as a saint or god. – Yogi Nov 27 '16 at 09:51
  • I am just replying to James claims on the interpretation of Krsna-varnam. The Goswamis do not interpret varna to mean color, but varna here means to speak, or it means class (caste). Krsna-varnam here means One who is in the same class as Krsna (an Avatar) and it also means One who always speaks the Name of Krsna (performs Kirtan). then the next line tvisakrsnam means not-black or golden. This is consistent the description of the Kali Yuga Avatar as Golden (see Bhagavatam 7.9.38 and 10.8.13). When we take this into account, it provides a very reasonable argument for the avatar of Chaitanya – Nitai dasa Nov 28 '16 at 23:52
  • 1
    Furthermore, Lord Chaitanya did not kill demons, but rather He destroyed the demonic nature within the demons. He established the Yuga Dharma of Hari Nama Sankirtan, and descended to protect His devotees like Adwaita Acharya and Srivasa Thakur. Even the supposed translation you posted for the verse in question is not even a translation. Both Krsnadas and Rupa supported the claim that Lord Chaitanya was an avatar. – Nitai dasa Nov 28 '16 at 23:55
  • Why does Rupa Goswami not explicitly identify Caitanya with the fourth yuga-avatara? He also describes the yuga-avataras in the following sequence: white, red, dark-blue (blue-black), and then black. I'm not entirely against the idea of Caitanya being an Avatar for two reasons: 1) the translation makes sense: "black in color (krsna-varna) but not-black (akrsna) by means of his luster." So perhaps Caitanya's "golden," "shining," and "bright" complexion is what is to referred to here. 2) most of the Goswami's theological works and the works of the Gaudiyas in general I find to be incredibly accu – James Yen Nov 29 '16 at 00:09
  • rate. Elsewhere I read that the Padma Purana says that Krishna is the origin of Vishnu, so maybe the purnavatara point I made is moot. – James Yen Nov 29 '16 at 00:12
  • @JamesYen Rupa Goswami does attribute avatari (not avatar, but rather the source of all avatar) status of Lord Chaitanya. In everyone most of His works, Rupa Goswami has claimed the divinity of Lord Chaitanya. However the reason why Lord Chaianya is not considered a Yuga Avatar, by Srila Rupa Goswami, is because in this specific Kaliyuga, where Swayam Bhagavan Sri Krsna appears, the Golden normal Yuga Avatar (called Gaura-Narayana) does not appear. Rather, the Avatari Krsna and Radha combined and descend as Lord Chaitanya. In this chaturyuga cycle Lord Chaitanya takes the function of the yuga. – Nitai dasa Nov 30 '16 at 00:18
  • avatar and also avatari role. In Bhagavatam (10.8.13) the color of avatar is given as white, red, yellow and syama (blue-black). Since Syama refers to Krsna, White refers to Satya, and Red refers to Treta, Yellow must refer to Lord Chaitanya. If you read verse 91 of Laghu Bhagavatamrta, Rupa Goswami alludes to another avatar whose color is that of the patala flower (yellow). Later in his Bhaktirasamrta Sindhu He writes tasya hareh pada-kamalam vande chaitanya-devasya (He who is Hari, I bow to the lotus feet of Lord Chaitanya). Verily the we give Gauranga a status higher then a yuga avatar – Nitai dasa Nov 30 '16 at 00:26
  • Basically what I am trying to say, is that Lord Chaitanya is not given the role of only a yuga avatar and that is why he doesn't appear in the traditional list of yuga avatars by Rupa Goswami. All of the Goswamis and even Chaitanya's contemporaries like Sarvabhauma Bhattacharya claimed Him to be Hari Himself. – Nitai dasa Nov 30 '16 at 00:28
  • I often see people discussing on various Hindu forums how, as they say, Iskcon edition of the Bhagavatam is biased to Iskcon philosophy, namely biased to Gaudiya Vaishnavism, and then they say "Oh, I'll not read that but I'll rather read the Gita Press edition of the Bhagavatam because it's not biased". And when I read Gita Press edition I see it's biased towards Advaita. :) Thus it's just a folly in certain people's minds that there are so called "unbiased" translations in this world. ... – brahma jijnasa Jan 06 '19 at 17:28
  • ... Actually they are all biased towards some philosophy or a tradition, or to the personal understanding of the translator who happens to tried to render it from Sanskrit to some other language. Whatever book you take in your hands you should know it's biased towards something. It's just a question biased towards what. – brahma jijnasa Jan 06 '19 at 17:29
  • @brahmajijnasa ha ha, somehow people don't get it :) If you speak advaita or just repeat commonly held notions, you are considered neutral, else it is biased :( –  Jan 07 '19 at 06:29
  • 1
    @RaRe Yes, if you say "we are all one" or "Krishna is an avatara of Vishnu" then you are unbiased fellow Hindu, but if you say "we are eternally different" or "all Vishnu forms are avataras of Krishna" then you are weird and biased. :) – brahma jijnasa Jan 07 '19 at 19:55
  • 2
    @brahmajijnasa I answered recently this https://hinduism.stackexchange.com/q/30209/16618. If at all you have to call biased, we should call others biased, the reason being the sect's philosophies were made long before without help of Bhagavatam. They interpret bhagavatam to fit with their philosophies. Whereas Gaudiya and Vallabha sect who based their philosophy based on bhagavatam have correctly concluded Krishna is source of all including Maha Vishnu. :) but don't tell me all these, I have made up my mind get away from here.. –  Jan 08 '19 at 03:18
  • to understand srimad Bhagavatam you should have mastered Upanishad, vedas.. otherwise one would understand incompletely.. basically katha Upanishad clearly say one should not distinguish between moola roopa (sat chit Ananda) to any of the avatar roopa as avesha or lesser, if one does, all his spiritual gain will go like rain water which fell on top of hill.. – Prasanna R Jan 21 '19 at 07:39
  • Muhammad was definitely paler than Chaitanya. Because Muhammad was light-skinned by the standard of Arabs, and Chaitanya was light-skinned by the standard of Indians. – Terjij Kassal Dec 24 '22 at 00:25

6 Answers6

11

Check the following translation by Motilal Banarsidass Publishers. But it doesn't appear to be a word-for-word translation.

https://archive.org/details/BhagavataPuranaMotilalEnglish

If you see below the translation of the very first verse, the footnotes list some 7 different commentaries on the verse.

The same tr. is also available for download in this answer (at the end) and also on West Bengal Public Library Network.

Community
  • 1
Say No To Censorship
  • 30,811
  • 17
  • 131
  • 257
5

There is Bhagavata Purana With English Translation by Gita Press. It can be found on Archive in below links:

As mentioned in sv.'s answer, other translation is Bhagavata Purana Motilal English (only English translation, no Sanskrit verse).

YDS
  • 24,276
  • 2
  • 58
  • 123
2

Shrimad Bhagwad Mahapurana is interpreted by many according to their inherent beliefs and Philosophy

Similar Discussion(on Bhagwata purana other than ISKCON version)

AC Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada is the only English commentator on Bhagwatam, that is why his commentary is all over the Internet and most widely studied English commentary on Shrimad Bhagwatam.

Neutral Translation/Transliteration

A beautifully compiled book by Gita Press Gorakhpur publication house in Hindi language, you have to buy Vol1 and Vol2.

Acceptable Transliteration

This is unbaised with transliteration, but when you will go deeper into the Vedabase AC Bhaktivedanta Prabhupada's translation links you will find out the same ISKCON stuff.

Intl' Gita Society Transliteration (prone to errors because the authors are not professional students)

Another Good one

Sanskrit Commentaries

Compilation of all possible Vaishnava commentaries(note that Advaita with ishta devta Shriman Narayana(Vishnu) is considered as vaishnava sampradaya)

There is a Sanskrit commentary on Shrimad Bhagwatam known as Bhagwat-Chandrika by Veraraghavacharya which is based on Vishitadvaita philosophy and is found in the aforementioned Sanskrit compilation.

Yogi
  • 10,470
  • 5
  • 55
  • 104
  • 1
    @Student Thanks for the edit but are you sure that the link is legal and is freely available to all. – Yogi Nov 25 '16 at 20:41
  • That same book is available in parts from here http://vishnudut1926.blogspot.in/2014/02/shreemad-bhagavatam-skandhas-001-012.html – Student Nov 25 '16 at 20:57
  • 1
    @Student We cannot link that book(directly or indirectly) it is a copyright issue, since we are distributing it for free without permission from publishers and authors. – Yogi Nov 25 '16 at 21:01
  • Ok. Then better remove it – Student Nov 25 '16 at 21:06
  • 1
    @Student I had a chance to add a similar link from vedpuran website but for the same copyright reason I've removed it. I suggest that you should delete the comment with vishnudut link – Yogi Nov 25 '16 at 21:08
1

An excellent translation was done by Dr. Mahanambrata Brahmachari to BENGALI available from the Mahanaam Angan, Kolkata

0

Madhav sampradaye has bhagwat tatparya nirnaya on shrimadbhagwat puran

Shridhar Swami also has given bhasya on shrimadbhagwat puran

And Shri ramananda sampradaya also has bhasya on shrimadbhagwat puran esp Shri ramanand sampradaye Rasikacharya madhuracharya---- shri ram tattva prakash and other books where he has shown that krishnastu bhagwan swaym...1.3.28 also refers to shri ram as well along with krishna.

Rambhakt Niroj Prasad
  • 1,076
  • 2
  • 17
0

There is a sloka in Srimad Bhagavatam that explains this:

ŚB 1.3.28

एते चांशकला: पुंस: कृष्णस्तु भगवान् स्वयम् ।

इन्द्रारिव्याकुलं लोकं मृडयन्ति युगे युगे ॥ २८ ॥

ete cāṁśa-kalāḥ puṁsaḥ

kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam

indrāri-vyākulaṁ lokaṁ

mṛḍayanti yuge yuge

Synonyms

ete — all these; ca — and; aṁśa — plenary portions; kalāḥ — portions of the plenary portions; puṁsaḥ — of the Supreme; kṛṣṇaḥ — Lord Kṛṣṇa; tu — but; bhagavān — the Personality of Godhead; svayam — in person; indra-ari — the enemies of Indra; vyākulam — disturbed; lokam — all the planets; mṛḍayanti — gives protection; yuge yuge — in different ages. Translation

All of the above-mentioned incarnations are either plenary portions or portions of the plenary portions of the Lord, but Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the original Personality of Godhead. All of them appear on planets whenever there is a disturbance created by the atheists. The Lord incarnates to protect the theists.

https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/1/3/28/

Atma 10008
  • 21
  • 1