Is Srila Prabhupabada's Translation of Srimad Bhagavatam Reliable?

Srila Prabhupada has certainly put in a lot of efforts in writing commentaries on the Bhagavatam. In point of fact, he was the first Hindu who had managed to write detailed commentaries on the most important Hindu scripture. In a word, no one else has ever done the way that Prabhupada has:  giving comments on every verse in the huge scripture. As to whether he had remained steadfastly faithful to the import of the text, please look at the reviews of the individual Cantos below.

Canto 1

Notwithstanding that, however, there is no gainsaying that Prabhupada had, in truth, indulged in undisguised purposeful sectarian misinterpretations of Srimad Bhagavatam. A close study of the text will reveal, even to a casual lay reader, that the founder of ISKCON had undertaken the task with the determination to misrepresent the actual teachings of the Bhagavatam, giving it a vaishnavite overtone. The following are some examples of his bias mistranslations: His commentary on 1:13:4, and His views at pgs. 183, 534, 568, 778, 884.

Canto 2 and Canto 3 Part 1

Except for Srila Prabhupada's obvious sectarian bias and some purposeful misinterpretations, the translation, in general, is fine.

Canto 3 Part 2

Prabhupada, as He has done in the rest of the earlier Cantos, has put in a lot of effort in writing commentaries on the verses in this canto, too. However, one who does a close study of the actual sanskrit texts in the purana, and of his commentary on them cannot ignore the obvious evidence that Prabhupada is not only bias but is also purposefully sectarian.

The above aside, his commentaries on Hindu scriptures, on the whole, cannot be relied upon for accuracy. They have unpardonable taint of sectarian overtone. The following are some examples of this charge in this canto:

1. Purposeful misinterpretations and misinformation/disinformation: pgs. 144, 406, 626, 557, 558, 562, 563, 564.

2. Interpolations: pgs. 181, 376, 559, 564.

3. Self-contradiction: pg. 626.

He has tried way too hard to make light of the verses on the importance of Astanga-Yoga and Kundalini Yoga. Evidence of this can be found on pages 555-558, 560, 561, 574-594, 625, 142, 237, 376, 515, 565.

Anyone who reads this canto should carefully study the actual verses in the text, and alongside examine Prabhupada's commentaries on them --- otherwise, one is more than likely to be seriously misguided, misinformed and led into error, away from the right path of Hinduism. And, for those who are not reading for spiritual reasons, but for reasons to acquire information on Hinduism or Hindu texts, they will be end up getting only misinformation and disinformation.

Canto 4

Of the four cantos that I have read, this is one of the interesting ones. In fact, the most interesting and informative. It has the answers to some of the following questions:

1. Why an impious or worthless child is born of good parents?

2. Why the earth refuses yield good crops?

3. How fraudulent sanyasis (=monks) came to be?

Despite the above, however, the translations and commentaries have been enormously marred for the following reasons:

1. Unfair sectarian bias is evident in the translation and especially commentaries.

2. There are too many purposeful inaccuracies and (sadly) unforgiveable lies in Prabhupada's interpretations. In the following pages, one will find the evidence of my accusation: pgs. 139, 152, 136, 229, 355, 441, 28, 77-79, 135, 40 (interpolation), 159 (interpolation), 77, 80, 618.

Of all his purposeful misinterpretations, misinformation, disinformation and lies, the following is the worst: issue of sayujya mukti (=merging with God). Prabhupada, like in many previous Cantos, where He has insisted that this stage of liberation is "hellish" and undesirable, in this Canto (on page 441) declares that "sayujya mukti...is not actually 'mukti' because from (it) one may again fall down to this material world." 

To substantiate his claim, he cites Bhagavatam 10:2:32, where he claims there is a proclamation that people who attain the said mukti will return to this earthly plane. If one makes a close study of the scriptures and his citations (especially if one looks at the actual sanskrit sloka in 10:2:32), one will know that Prabhupada is either lying or is wilfully purveying wrong information. Let me corroborate my point:

1. On page 274 of Canto 4 Chapter 7, verse 35 says that the Lord's pastimes are "as good as the pleasure of MERGING IN THE ABSOLUTE". (The clause in capital letters refers to "sayjuya mukti"). If it is as pleasurable as being in the company of the Lord, viz., the other three stages of muktis, how could "merging" be deemed "hellish"?

In Canto 1, Chapter 9, verse 43-44, we discover that Bhismadev merged with God, i.e., attained "sayujya mukti" --- obviously, it cannot be inferred that Bhismadev was destined to return to earth, to take another birth! (But Prabhupada, knowing this difficulty of explaining why the sanskrit sloka in the above verse said that Bhisma merged with God, tried to explain it away, very unconvincingly, that Bhisma actually attained Vishnu loka without merging. "Attaining the loka" is not the same as "merging with the Lord". 

On the other hand, if Bhismadev has, indeed, first attained "sayujya mukti" and had later, by the will of God attained "Sarupya mukti", it would have been explicitly mentioned in the scriptures, just the way that it had been in the case of Aghasura, who first "merged" and "entered into Krishna's body" (10:12:33), and later, by the will of God attained Sarupya mukti (10:12:38). There is no evidence of the same having occurred in the case of "pithmaga", Bhismadev. That was, therefore, being untruthful of Prabhupada for lying about 1:9:43-44.

As with all other previous cantos, Canto 4, too, cannot be used by researchers and scholars, and even by serious Hindus to get accurate information about spiritual life and sadhana. So far, the cantos contain some useful information, which is sprinkled here and there in the cantos, but principally lack in accuracy, as the evidence above shows.

Canto 5

This is an interesting Canto because it talks about the planets, cosmology and hellish planets. If not for the instances of Prabhupada's taints of sectarian bias, this would have been a good read. Compared to the previous Cantos, this contains fewer of his interpolations, misinterpretation and purposeful prevarications.

Canto 6

Compared to the previous five Cantos, this Canto contains the most number of shocking interpolations, nauseating mistranslations and Prabhupada's purposeful misinterpretations.

As a scripture, the Canto's first three chapters are very informative, useful and instructive. The rest of the Canto, although contains some interesting nuggets of facts about spiritual life and details concerning sadhana and spiritual practices, is not very useful to sadhaks in general.

What grossly impairs the quality and integrity of the translation, and even spoils and vastly diminishes the perfection of the scripture is Prabhupada's unpardonable sectarian prejudice and distasteful and odious bigotry. If anyone reading this is interested in getting more details of this observation, I shall be more than happy to cite the examples in the work when you contact me.

If one learns to ignore the obvious partiality and bias in Prabhupada's commentaries, something which is often difficult for people who are not quite au fait with Hinduism and her scriptures, one can derive a lot of marvelous benefits from the history of Ajamila covered in Chapter 1 to 3. There is, for example, valuable information on Japa (=chanting) and satsang (=associating with people in god-consciousness).

If anyone uses this text for the purposes of discovering Hinduism, and its right and proper teachings, he will only be thoroughly misled and misguided. It is one of Prabhupada's dangerous texts that propagate falsehood about spirituality and particularly Hinduism.

Canto 7

This Canto again contains Prabhupada's egregious translation of and prejudicial commentaries on the scripture.

This Canto contains quite a number of his sectarian biases, parochial misinformation, and most important of all, his purposeful interpolations, and mistranslations of a number of important verses in the scripture. For instance, he purposefully mistranslated 7:15:72, interpolating the expression "the glories of other demigods..." after the verb "singing", when he defined the Sanskrit word "gayan". The same verb had, however, been defined as only "singing" in 1:6:38, 3:2:34, 5:14:38, in 21:13 of Madhya.

Obviously, Prabhupada's intention was to denigrate other deities, and also at the same time to make this verse not to contradict 6:2:14, 6:2:19, 6:2:49, and Canto 5 (pgs. 855, 887). This is a very serious disservice that Prabhupada had done to the people who trusted and trust him.

Other than the above, there are also many other examples of his mischief in the same Canto. This is not a Canto that anyone should read to acquire proper, authoritative and authentic understanding of Sanatana Dharma and of the purana.

Canto 8

As usual, prabhupada did not hesitate in being a sectarian. He lied a lot about Lord Shiva via his mistranslation, interpolation, purposeful misinterpretation and misinformation.

This is not a text for serious researchers who want to discover the truths or Truth about Sanatana Dharma.

Canto 9

In this Canto, Prabhupada has excelled in mistranslating and misrepresenting the text.

Canto 10

This Canto, too, has been marred by Prabupada's mistranslation and sectarian bigotry.

Although the commentaries on the this text were not written by Prabhupada, it did not lack his bigotry, unashamed interpolations.

Quite like all other copies of the Bhagavatam by Prabhupada, this copy of the the tenth Canto, too, vividly scintillates with warped sectarian bias, for which the Hare Krsnas are always known. A good example is 10:89:57 where the translator (Prabhipada's disciple) purposefully misinterpreted "atamanam" to mean "to Himself", a sense which has never used in any known Sanskrit literature. The same lexeme has been used in Gita 13:25 and 6:29 to mean "the Supreme Soul". [To avoid the obvious meaning that Lord Krishna paid homage to Lord Vishnu, the translator in his perfect Hare-Krsna-bigotry, has purveyed wrong information about the text in question.]

Canto 11 Part 1

The translation and commentaries are not canonical. Sri Krishna's message in Chapters 7 to 29 is valuable, however.

Canto 11 Part 2

The commentaries have chronically and unapologetically been discriminatory, bias and sectarian. Bigotry aside, the translations and commentaries contain an unconsciouable number of purposeful mistranslation and grave interpolations, done with the principal purpose of misrepresenting the teachings of Sri Krishna and Hindu Dharma. Therefore, scholar, serious students and even true seekers of God, who want to understand the true teachings of Sanatana Dharma and Sri Krishna, are strongly advised not to rely on this publication's translations, transliterations and commentaries on Srimad Bhagavatam.

Please contact me for proofs of my assertions.

Notwithstanding the above, the 11th Canto is one of the best Cantos of the texts. It contains Uddhava Gita, where God's advice to sincere seekers can be found in abundance. Anyone who wants to get an even better understanding of Cantos 10, 11 and Uddhava Gita ought to study Swami Sivananda's "Lord Krishna, His Lilas and Teachings", which is a better translation of and commentary on the said Cantos and texts.

Canto 12

___________________________________________________________________________________

Note from the author:

 

Background to My Considered Views on ISKCON’s Work: I should like to tell you a little bit about why and how I have come to the incontrovertible conclusion that Srila Prabhupada’s translation and commentaries are, in the main, sectarian, and to a small extent, quite inaccurate — I have known the Hare Krsna movement for about one score and 10 years; in point of fact, I had had even been part of the congregation for a length of time to understand its philosophy, the founder’s bias and myopic outlook of spirituality. During this time, I have had vast exposure to various and varied sampradayats and teachers.

I have read most of Srila Prabhupada’s book, including his Bhagavad Gita As It Is. And, by the mercy of Guru and God, I have had the opportunity to, not read, but peruse the ISKCON’s rendition of the Srimad Bhagavatam.

The Bhagavatam, without doubt, is an exemplary text; however, it has been unaccountably marred by Srila Prabhupada’s sectarian commentaries.

Other Translations:

There are a number of translations of the erudite work; some have commentaries in English. You may read the English translations while you listen to the commentaries on the text from some respected, creditable and reliable Swamijis like Swami Mukundananda and Swami Sivananda, who can be depended upon for their objective and highly spiritual views on the text as well as on spirituality.

Reliable Translations

1. Srimad Bhagavatam by Kamala Subramaniam.

(The translator is not an archarya but she strictly followed the tenets of Hinduism. This work is written in prose, following very closely to the original verses).

2. Srimad Bhagavata Mahapurana with Sanskrit Text and English (Vol 1 & 2) Translation by Gita Press. (The publisher is known for its objective and non-sectarian translations).

3. Srimad Bhagavata/The Holy Book of God Hardcover by Swami Tapasyananda (from Ramakrishna math): The “math” is mainly advaitins, who follow Sri Sankara’s Monism. I should say one has to read Ramakrishna Mission’s books, especially translated works with care and caution. It very heavily relies on the translations of Indologists like Max Muller, who is know for misrepresentations and misinformation.

Smaller Translations

4. Lord Sri Krishna, His Lila & Teachings- by Sri Swami Sivananda: (This work is a detailed commentary on Cantos 10 and 11 of the Bhagavatam).

5. A Summary of the Bhagavatam by Swami Krishnananda (a direct disciple of Swami Sivananda: https://www.swami-krishnananda.org/bhagavata.html

6. Discourses on Shrimad Bhagavata by Swami Tejomayananda (a direct disciple of Swami Chinmayananda)

7. Concise Srimad Bhagavatam by Swami Venkatesananda (a direct disciple of Swami Sivananda)

Commentaries on the Bhagavatam

1. Swami Mukundananda has given a series of discourses on the Bhagavatam: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3EKhLg5ZuI

https://www.jkyog.org/store/product/shreemad-bhagavat-mahapuran-set-6-dvds

I hope the above is of some use in your spiritual journey. Please let me know if you need more clarifications.