Prabhupada’s Disappearance Day was held at the Palace a few days ago. I know there is now some fancy Sanskrit name for the occasion but I will probably never use it. I think that the next acharya will be someone who follows the preISKCON vaisnava tradition of using a liturgy in the local language, which in this case would be English.
While Prabhupada succeeded in firmly establishing a beachhead in the English speaking world for Krishna Consciousness, the next stage will be to move it from being an anomaly to becoming more widespread.
Practically what is keeping the movement going now is a lot of participation from 1st generation immigrants from India, and that will only last about a generation — their kids will be Westernized and then we will be back to having to make inroads into American culture in any case.
To make it accessible it has to be understandable to average people. Calling Prabhupada’s Disappearance Day some Sanskrit term is a step in the wrong direction, IMHO.
Before we threw the flower petals in the ritual, there was a long Sanskrit prayer that I basically didn’t know what it meant. That is when I was thinking how much better it would have been if it was in English so everybody could understand it. I was wondering if even the Hindu guests had any clue what it was trying to convey.
I could get the emotional content, and sure, if I really wanted to, I could go look up the translation, but most people aren’t going to take that trouble and the use of Sanskrit is exclusionary, which makes it ineffective preaching IMHO. I would guess the under representation of Americans in most ISKCON temples could be taken as proof for my premise.
Anyway, the current manifestation of ISKCON probably lacks the will to initiate this but I feel confident that eventually it’ll happen.
November 5, 2008 at 9:15 am
Could not agree more.
Go to my website for English translations of many songs (under ‘bhajans’), including all of the morning and evening programme.
We always sing the prayers in English now in my house.
yhs
KDd
November 5, 2008 at 10:00 am
In London in 1969 Prabhupada plainly stated that there was no need to understand the language (Begin quote):
Prabhupada opened his windows, sat down at his harmonium, and sang bhajans. As he sang with closed eyes, his head shaking, he played the harmonium, and Yamuna sat at the bottom of the stairs, crying tears of appreciation. Prabhupada had been singing for a while when he stopped and called for Yamuna.
“Do you enjoy my kirtan?” he asked.
“Yes,” she nodded, “very much.”
“The prayers of Narottama Das Thakur,” he said, “This sound is above the material platform. It is directly from the spiritual platform. And there is no need of understanding the language. It is just like a thunderburst. Everyone can hear the sound of thunder—there is no misunderstanding. Similarly, these songs are above the material platform, and they crack like thunder within your heart.” (End quote)
Satsvarupa dasa Goswami, Srila Prabhupada-lilamrta, vol. 4, “Around the World” (Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, Los Angeles: 1982), 48.
November 5, 2008 at 10:56 am
I’ve always been really torn on this issue. While Prabhupada probably said that there was no *need* to understand the language, it’s in our nature as curious lil critters to understand the language.
However, I like tradition in religion. I think it’s great that some Catholic churches still say the Latin mass. But with them and with us, I think the English translations should be readily available. Not just tucked away in some book or on some website.
There should be a way to combine the two. Best of both worlds.
November 5, 2008 at 4:05 pm
I first began studying Bhagavad-gita As It Is because I wanted to learn Sanskrit. It is the language of spiritual communication, literally “crafted to perfection.” I’m just a beginner, but I always get a thrill when reading Devanagari. Srila Prabhupada thought learing Sanskrit was important. I wish we would see much more of it. Why not learn it?
Concerning the “no need to understand the meaning,” that is because the Sanskrit mantras uttered by the Lord and the acaryas are so potent that one can benefit without knowing the meaning. That means it’s the English that is not necessary.
November 6, 2008 at 4:06 am
Many of our songs are in Bengali not Sanskrit. Maybe for Sanskrit songs there is some benefit in the pure sound vibration, but I wonder how many of us even pronounce it properly. One time some devotees were singing “sri goru” rather than “guru” and Prabhupada laughingly pointed out that they were calling him a cow.
Krishna is ‘bhava grahi janardana’, which means he accepts the essence, the bhava of the worship. Hard to evoke real bhava when you have little idea of the meaning of the words you are singing. Of course we can memorise translations but if the song is not in our native language it is hard to get the bhava as we sing. At least that is my experience.
The pure sound vibrations of the Gita and Bhagavatam are indeed purifying and powerful but Srila Prabhupada went to a great deal of trouble to render them into English for our benefit.
Prabhupada did in fact indicate that he wanted worshippers to understand the meaning of the prayers.
You cannot understand the meaning of the Indian songs and simply parrot like chanting of these songs has no value.
Letter to: Damodara Pandita — New York 17 July, 1976
There are other such statements regarding even our own prayers which I do not have time to locate at present.
As far as combining both languages – as I say I have translated many songs into English verses that can be sung to their standard tunes, so you can sing first the Sanskrit, (no cows please :-) and then the English right after.
Hope this helps
yhs
KDd
November 6, 2008 at 3:45 pm
Gosh… on the issue of native language, I had an experience as a youth. I was a very serious and devout Catholic… an altar boy in fact. The Mass was in Latin and the priest and the congregation faced God. Latin was mystical and had a “holy vibe” . The mystery was part of the attraction. After all it was God. When they had the priest face the congregation and said the Holy Mass in English catholics left the church in droves. It became mundane, boring and predictable. Sort of an “oh is that what they are actually saying?” …
The same might occur if the Sandskrit is put into English….
November 6, 2008 at 11:16 pm
In Japan in 1970 Prabhupada extolled the purifying power of the sound of Sanskrit:
Prabhupada opened a Sanskrit volume of the Tenth Canto of Srimad-bhagavatam and, for the next two hours, chanted the Sanskrit verses. “You cannot understand the Sanskrit,” he said, “but I know you can feel. The verses are so potent that just by hearing one can be purified.”
Satsvarupa dasa Goswami, Srila Prabhupada-lilamrta, vol. 4, “Around the World” (Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, Los Angeles: 1982), 48.
November 7, 2008 at 3:54 am
No need to stop singing in Sanskrit or Bengali, especially in our temples, but why not the English as well? After all, Prabhupada’s mission was to preach in English and we have to carry that on.
But I would suggest that the “thunder” effect in the heart requires a person of purity chanting with full bhava.
Here’s a few quotes from Srila Prabhupada:
You have asked about singing the prayers of Narottama Thakura and yes, they are very much approved in any language.
SPL Hamsaduta — Los Angeles 12 December, 1968
Regarding your request to sing prayers in English, this is nice suggestion, and you may do it. So far as the songs that you have written, you may send me a copy of them and I shall see them. In Montreal also they are writing songs in the popular Western style of music and it is coming very nicely.
SPL Harer Nama — Allston, Mass 30 April, 1969
I am very glad to learn that he (George) has given up composing nonsense songs, it is a great advancement of his spiritual life. But as he has got the aptitude for writing songs, I shall be very glad to give him many such themes of songs on which he can write in his own language and expression.
SPL Syamasundara — Los Angeles 25 February, 1970
November 7, 2008 at 6:20 am
Prabhupada had on occasion approved of translating the Vaishnava prayers into English.
He wrote, “Translation of prayers into English is good.” 1
Another time he wrote, “Regarding your request to sing prayers in English, this is nice suggestion, and you may do it.” 2
Prabhupada emphasized that the devotee’s motivation was important, not so much the language, “Yes you can sing prayers in Sanskrit, but prayers in English can be also pronounced because the Lord accepts the motive not the pronunciation of the language. He wants to see spiritual motive. Even if some effectiveness is lost in translation, if the motive is there, it will make no difference.” 3
Prabhupada once told a disciple that singing in foreign languages without understanding the meaning of the words was useless: like a parrot chanting. He wrote to Damodar Pandita Das in New Vrindaban, “Concerning the recording of Krishnadasa Babaji, how can I make any judgment as I have not heard them. However, you should just go on chanting Hare Krishna mahamantra and the Panchatattva mantra and don’t divert your attention. You cannot understand the meaning of the Indian songs and simply parrot like chanting of these songs has no value.” 4
Endnotes
1 A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, from a letter to Damodar, October 13, 1967.
2 A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, from a letter to Harer Nama, April 30, 1969.
3 A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, from a letter to Madhusudana, February 1, 1968.
4 A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, from a letter to Damodar Pandit, July 17, 1976.
November 7, 2008 at 8:52 am
Thanks guys for more eloquently expressing my reasons for wanting an English liturgy.
Ed: The difference may be that what the Catholics were saying wasn’t all that interesting once translated. :-)
No one is talking about translating the mahamantra as hare krishna is English for hare krishna.
In our case, the temples are already empty so the reverse dynamic might occur.
Catholics left because the familiar they were raised with was changed, Westerners may avoid a foreign language liturgy for the same reason — it is unfamiliar.
In any case, as the point was made, it isn’t necessary to stop one to have the other. Plenty of room for both.
Catholics have one hour a week of liturgy, we have hours a day.