We all heard about others creating hurdles/obstacles for others.  Several times we also create obstacles for ourselves.  In Hinduism even God creates ‘obstacle’ as the Lord of Vigna viz., Vigna + Ishwar [Ganapathi] creates obstacle for so many reaching heaven so that it won’t be overcrowded.  But have you ever heard about a Hindu ‘Convert’ creating ‘OBSTACLE’ even to God [of Muktiveda].  If you don’t believe this, read the following article by him and my response to it in Part Two.

 

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to provide an analysis of a popular Ganesha Shloka that has been repurposed by Bhaktas to be used in a shanti puja.  The motivation of this analysis is the conviction that truth really matters, the means as well as the end matter.  When Jesus says in John 8:32, “and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free”, as his followers, we need to place a high value on what is true.

Authors

There are three authors that are pertinent to this discussion:

1. Original author of the Shloka: This author is unknown.
2. Author of the changed Shloka: Swami Dayanand Bharati
3. Author of this paper: Satya Krishnamurthi

Methodology

The following methodology is adopted in the analysis.  First, the original sanskrit Shloka is translated word by word, the overall meaning put together, the changed version translated word by word, a critique of the changed version given followed by personal opinions of the author of this paper on the dangers of such a repurposing.

Background on the author of this paper (SK)

Since all of us have biases and backgrounds, this is pertinent.

1. The author grew up in a very orthodox brahmin home whose grandfather was a well known pandit in Sanskrit and the vedas.
2. The author’s father is a scholar in Sanskrit and the vedas.  His father has spent the last 25 years of his life pouring into the study of Hindu scriptures.
3. The author himself was on the path to becoming a sanyasi and received training in Hindu theology and practices until the age of 12.
4. The author studied Sanskrit until grade 10 but doesn’t know Sanskrit and is not able to translate any of the shlokas.  Since the author grew up around Sanskrit, he has basic understanding of the language structure as well as what some words mean.
5. The translation was done entirely by getting help from internet sources.  The author did check with his father on the integrity of the translation and the overall meaning of the shloka. The original Shloka and its translation शुक्लाम्बरधरं विष्णुं शवशिर्णं चतणर्णुजम् ।

प्रसन्नवदनं ध्यायेत् सिुविघ्नोपशान्तये ॥

Shukla-Ambara-Dharam Vishnnum Shashi-Varnnam Catur-Bhujam |

Prasanna-Vadanam Dhyaayet Sarva-Vighno pashaantaye ||

Sanskrit	English
Shukla	Bright or white
Ambara	Clothes.  Ambara has an alternative meaning of sky but in this context, clothes is the correct application
Dharam	To wear
Vishnum	All-pervasive, one who is everything and inside everything
Shashi-Varnam	One who is the color of the moon
Catur-Bhujam	Who with four arms
Prasanna	Compassionate or gracious
Vadanam	Face
Dhayaayet	To meditate
Sarva	All
Vighna	Obstacles
pashaantaye	To ward off or remove

English meaning of the shloka

1.  (We Meditate on Sri Ganesha) Who is wearing White Clothes, Who is All-Pervading, Who is Bright in Appearance like the Moon and Who is having Four Arms,

2: Who is having a Compassionate and Gracious Face; One should Meditate on Him to ward of all Obstacles.

I think it is worthwhile to look at the meaning and ask some questions:

1. Should we repurpose this as followers of Christ?
2. Is it right to do so? Is it operating with integrity to Christ as well as to the original author of this Shloka?
3. Is there a need to repurpose this?
4. If the need is ascertained, how do we ensure that the changed version is true, meaningful and serves the larger purpose of glorifying God and Christ?

Changed version of the Shloka (changed words in red)

Suklaam bharataram muktheshvaram sveta varnam krupaa bhujam

Prasanna vadanam dhyaayet sarva vignopa shantaye 

Original version of the Shloka (changed words in green)

Shukla-Ambara-Dharam Vishnnum Shashi-Varnnam Catur-Bhujam |

Prasanna-Vadanam Dhyaayet Sarva-Vighno pashaantaye ||

Lets look at each of the three words that have been changed and their meanings.

1. Vishnnum has been changed to muktheshvaram: The intent here is replace Vishnu with Jesus, who is named by bhaktas as Muktheshwar.
2. Shashi has been changed to Sveta: Sveta means “white”, perhaps to represent the purity of Christ
3. Catur has been changed to krupaa: Krupaa means kindness, perhaps referring to Christ’s attribute of kindness.

Now, let us put the meaning of the new version. (changed meaning in red)

1.  Who is wearing White Clothes, Lord Jesus, Who is white, Who is having Kind Arms,

2: Who is having a Compassionate and Gracious Face; One should Meditate on Him to ward of all Obstacles.

Critique of the changed version:

1. In the original Sanskrit, the first word is Shukla beginning with a “Sha” but in the changed version, it is Sukla with a “Sa”.  
2. The splitting of the first two words is after Shukla but in the changed version, it is after Suklam. 

That creates two words, Suklam and Bharataram, which is completely different than Shukla, Ambara and Dharam which is three words.  The three words in the original makes sense, “bharataram” in a non-word in sanskrit, see Appendix at the end.

• Even if we ignore the fact that “bharataram” is a non-word, the first verse in the changed version is non-sensical.  It is saying, Lord Jesus, who is white and wearing white clothes has kind arms.  I can give the author of the changed version the benefit of the doubt that he is meaning to use the word “bhajam” who could mean devotion. If that was the case, it would mean something like, “Lord Jesus, who is white and wearing white clothes, has kind devotion” which is worse.

• Even if we ignore the poor and dangerous misappropriation of the first verse, from a biblical standpoint, can we apply the second verse as is:  Does Jesus say that if we meditate on him, he will ward off all obstacles.  On the contrary, he said that we will have many troubles (John 16:33) but his promise is that he will be there with us to carry our burdens (Matt 11:28-30).  Peter and Paul talk about the sufferings refining us with no promise of all obstacles being removed. 2 Cor 4:17, 2 Tim 3:12, Luke 14:27 to name a few.

• On the question of integrity, this is plagiarism.  It is a poor copy, deceptive and also criminal to do this.  My son recently wrote a song to Christ.  It was 100% his original work.  How low would we consider someone who stole his song, changed a few words and sang it to Allah or Krishna?  If they were in school doing such work, we would throw them out of the school.  If there was a way, we would press charges against them.

Warnings from the author of this paper

1. We cannot take these things lightly when it comes to eternal matters.
2. We need to stand before God and give an account of what we do and whether we get caught or not, He knows all things and sees all things.
3. These methods not grounded in truth cannot be blessed by God.  Let us instead stay true to His word, humble ourselves before Him and seek His face.  He will bring the harvest he desires.

Conclusion

The above analysis is portraying symptoms of a larger problem.  We need to have proper accountability on who we promote and what ideas we adopt.  We need to question everything and only let those things which are true, noble, honoring to Christ. The damage is extensive when we blindly follow someone and adopt methods not vetted by scripture.  As we seek to glorify Jesus in our lives, let us repent of the old ways and start afresh, it is never too late with Him.  He is faithful to forgive and restore us if we seek Him with all our heart, soul, mind and strength (Matt 22: 37)

I would appreciate your feedback and critique of this paper.  Please do so by writing to

Appendix

Meaning of the Sanskrit word: Bharataram.

No result found.