Having looked, read and thought about this shloka again and listened to your video, here are my thoughts. There are 2 important parts to this shloka. The first is regarding (guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ). If you write: "about the two spheres of the qualities and action", are you not saying: two spheres of the qualities and two spheres of the action? Here I am asking not about Sanskrit, rather the English. This is how I interpret that sentence fragment in English. If you say "two spheres, qualities and actions, " then it has a different meaning (which I think is closer to what you are attempting to say). Here is how Baba Hari Dass performed his word by word translation of guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ = “of the divisions of qualities and functions.” Whereas your word by word translation is: guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ = “in the two roles, in the two spheres, in the two shares.” So, I ask you: where do you get the two from? In the verse itself BHD translate this part as: “the division of the true character of the gunas and their functions”. He adds in “true character” which doesn’t need to be there. Take it out and you have: “the division of the gunas and their functions”. (Or actions instead of functions if you like.) So, is two roles or division the better way to say it? Then is “of the gunas and their functions” or “of the qualities and action”, the better way to say it. Guna and qualities are the same, but action and function is slightly different. And, I think both words can work. So pick the one you think best. If you keep the action, then the sentence could read: “the division of the gunas and their and action”. Substitute qualities for gunas if you like, but the gunas are such an all important Sanskrit word, that I don’t think you need to continually translate it into English. Some Sanskrit terms we have to accept that there is no English equivalent. Gunas is one of them. Qualities or modes really does not cut it. We simply hae to learn this Sanskrit word if we are to study the Gita, Samkya yoga or the Yoga Sutras. And the term guna is primarily a stable word, unlike Dharma which has several meanings in different settings. Gunas however do work or act or revolve in two ways. They work in the material plane (they are in all material objects), and they work in the more subtle plane of thoughts, senses and emotions. In this aspect it is the ever present senses reaching out to the objects of the senses that helps to create our thoughts and feelings. So, this is where the translators are going to repeatedly say: gunas in or of the senses and gunas in or of the objects. The mind works through the senses. The senses bring in information to the mind. (which is why I suspect some translators erringly use mind in their translation of this verse.) These ideas lead us into the next important part of this shloka. The second important part of this verse is: (guṇā guṇeṣhu vartanta). You have: “The gunas work among the gunas” BHD has: “the gunas as senses move among the gunas as objects”. Which is similar to Sivananda’s translation and Jeffery Armstrong (Kavindra Rishi), Jayadayal Goyandka, Gita Press, Bhagavad-gita.org, and even Mukundananda writes something similar, but not as clearly. The thing here is that if you say: “The gunas work among the gunas” (as a literal translation) what does it mean? These other translators understand that the gunas operating as senses contact the objects of the senses (which are also the gunas acting as objects!). So, although I can see you trying to make a literal translation, you seem to be doing so at the expense of providing the meaning. In other words, Sri Krishna is not saying: the gunas in material objects work or revolve or act or move among the gunas in material objects. It doesn’t make sense. Nor does: the gunas operating as the senses work or revolve or act or move among the gunas in the senses. You pretty much need: "as the senses" and "as the objects". So, you could translate this shloka as: “But the one who knows the truth (tattva-vit tu), O Mighty-Armed (Arjuna) (mahā-bāho), about the division of the gunas and their and action (guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ), having thought (matvā), “The gunas as the senses work among the gunas as objects,” (guṇā guṇeṣhu vartanta) is not attached (na sajjate). and then you have what I think is a more accurate translation. (note: I put parenthesis around Arjuna since that is not in the sloka itself.) I think you are getting a bit off track by reading so many translations. Just use a few that are consistently the best: Seargent, Gita Press, Nikhilananda, BHD if you can get it and whoever else you consider the top translators. (Toss the others away, or use them sporadically.) Then you may be more able to understand why certain things are translated a certain way. Or why some words are added to the strict literal translation. Not to add something not there, or to change the meaning. Rather to clarify and make it understandable in English. Thank you for helping me to dig into this stuff. I would not be doing so otherwise!
@@allowah Thanks! Putting it all together, I come up with this: However O Mighty-armed one (mahā-bāho), the knower of truth (tattva-vit tu) regarding the division of the gunas and their actions (guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ), and knowing that (matvā) the gunas as the senses work among the gunas as objects (guṇā guṇeṣhu vartanta), is not attached (na sajjate).
It's a very good translation! Thank you for putting your focus on this and giving me very quality feedback. Like I said on the phone today, and you agreed, honest feedback isn't always so easy to come by, so I really appreciate what you've been doing! I am definitely not set on my own translation, I see it all as a work in progress. In this case, I do think it's important to translate this verse in the context of the entire chapter (and Gita as a whole), but specifically, to translate it in light of the verses immediately before and after it. We can talk more about these things when we're together next, I'd love to see what you have for the other verses, too. Mahalo brah : )
Having looked, read and thought about this shloka again and listened to your video, here are my thoughts. There are 2 important parts to this shloka. The first is regarding (guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ).
If you write: "about the two spheres of the qualities and action", are you not saying: two spheres of the qualities and two spheres of the action? Here I am asking not about Sanskrit, rather the English. This is how I interpret that sentence fragment in English. If you say "two spheres, qualities and actions, " then it has a different meaning (which I think is closer to what you are attempting to say).
Here is how Baba Hari Dass performed his word by word translation of guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ = “of the divisions of qualities and functions.”
Whereas your word by word translation is: guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ = “in the two roles, in the two spheres, in the two shares.”
So, I ask you: where do you get the two from?
In the verse itself BHD translate this part as: “the division of the true character of the gunas and their functions”. He adds in “true character” which doesn’t need to be there. Take it out and you have: “the division of the gunas and their functions”. (Or actions instead of functions if you like.)
So, is two roles or division the better way to say it? Then is “of the gunas and their functions” or “of the qualities and action”, the better way to say it. Guna and qualities are the same, but action and function is slightly different. And, I think both words can work. So pick the one you think best. If you keep the action, then the sentence could read:
“the division of the gunas and their and action”. Substitute qualities for gunas if you like, but the gunas are such an all important Sanskrit word, that I don’t think you need to continually translate it into English. Some Sanskrit terms we have to accept that there is no English equivalent. Gunas is one of them. Qualities or modes really does not cut it. We simply hae to learn this Sanskrit word if we are to study the Gita, Samkya yoga or the Yoga Sutras.
And the term guna is primarily a stable word, unlike Dharma which has several meanings in different settings. Gunas however do work or act or revolve in two ways. They work in the material plane (they are in all material objects), and they work in the more subtle plane of thoughts, senses and emotions. In this aspect it is the ever present senses reaching out to the objects of the senses that helps to create our thoughts and feelings. So, this is where the translators are going to repeatedly say: gunas in or of the senses and gunas in or of the objects. The mind works through the senses. The senses bring in information to the mind. (which is why I suspect some translators erringly use mind in their translation of this verse.) These ideas lead us into the next important part of this shloka.
The second important part of this verse is: (guṇā guṇeṣhu vartanta).
You have: “The gunas work among the gunas”
BHD has: “the gunas as senses move among the gunas as objects”. Which is similar to Sivananda’s translation and Jeffery Armstrong (Kavindra Rishi), Jayadayal Goyandka, Gita Press, Bhagavad-gita.org, and even Mukundananda writes something similar, but not as clearly.
The thing here is that if you say: “The gunas work among the gunas” (as a literal translation) what does it mean? These other translators understand that the gunas operating as senses contact the objects of the senses (which are also the gunas acting as objects!). So, although I can see you trying to make a literal translation, you seem to be doing so at the expense of providing the meaning. In other words, Sri Krishna is not saying: the gunas in material objects work or revolve or act or move among the gunas in material objects. It doesn’t make sense. Nor does: the gunas operating as the senses work or revolve or act or move among the gunas in the senses. You pretty much need: "as the senses" and "as the objects".
So, you could translate this shloka as:
“But the one who knows the truth (tattva-vit tu), O Mighty-Armed (Arjuna) (mahā-bāho), about the division of the gunas and their and action (guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ),
having thought (matvā), “The gunas as the senses work among the gunas as objects,” (guṇā guṇeṣhu vartanta) is not attached (na sajjate).
and then you have what I think is a more accurate translation. (note: I put parenthesis around Arjuna since that is not in the sloka itself.)
I think you are getting a bit off track by reading so many translations. Just use a few that are consistently the best: Seargent, Gita Press, Nikhilananda, BHD if you can get it and whoever else you consider the top translators. (Toss the others away, or use them sporadically.) Then you may be more able to understand why certain things are translated a certain way. Or why some words are added to the strict literal translation. Not to add something not there, or to change the meaning. Rather to clarify and make it understandable in English.
Thank you for helping me to dig into this stuff. I would not be doing so otherwise!
Amazing work, brother, thank you! I will respond soon.
@@allowah Thanks! Putting it all together, I come up with this:
However O Mighty-armed one (mahā-bāho), the knower of truth (tattva-vit tu) regarding the division of the gunas and their actions (guṇa-karma-vibhāgayoḥ), and knowing that (matvā) the gunas as the senses work among the gunas as objects (guṇā guṇeṣhu vartanta), is not attached (na sajjate).
It's a very good translation! Thank you for putting your focus on this and giving me very quality feedback. Like I said on the phone today, and you agreed, honest feedback isn't always so easy to come by, so I really appreciate what you've been doing! I am definitely not set on my own translation, I see it all as a work in progress. In this case, I do think it's important to translate this verse in the context of the entire chapter (and Gita as a whole), but specifically, to translate it in light of the verses immediately before and after it. We can talk more about these things when we're together next, I'd love to see what you have for the other verses, too. Mahalo brah : )