What is your opinion on pic related?

it lays out the tenets of Hinduism which are pretty consistent across the different sects (Vaishnavism et al) and establishes a profoundly interesting religious doctrine. Personally it's been enormously helpful for me spiritually -- even if it didn't turn me Hindu -- and it's only about 90 pages. I'd read it when you have the chance

Personally I'd recommend Eknath Easwaran's translation. Comes with a good introductory section which covers the basics and offers historical context. It's also well-written. He does pull the thing many Alan Watts -esque youtube comment section posters do with the whole "dude hinduism is quantam physics/relativity" which makes me roll my eyes but eh still. I suppose a compelling argument could be made for such.

l would guess because it's a strongly sectarian edition. the "as it is" is the hare krsna ppo proselytizing text

What do you think started that phenomena of Indians proclaiming their scriptures to have originated the concepts of modern, relatively obscure disciplines like quantum mechanics? I'm Indian myself, and find it tremendously amusing to watch. I read Youtube comment sections all the time, filled with such kinds of ideologues. And it always gives me a chuckle. :P

Gandhi has nothing to do with the Gita, user. He's a modern political figure (modern in terms of history of India, anyway), and an image of his statue is in no way representational of the Gita. No one in India, or with any reasonable understanding of world history and politics, would ever think to relate the Gita to Gandhi.
The cover screams like someone bringing two very different entities together because they're related to India.

Might just be the summit of Aryan spirituality, that or the Buddha's doctrine.

The spread of eastern religion and philosophy across the West as an aspect of the growing popularity of "alternative lifestyles" in the 20th century. Allan Watts is a touchstone of this. With this came people comparing such philosophy to physics.

In all honesty I think it does have some bearing. At least in principle. Easwaran argues that once you strip each view of the world of its language and context and look at the underlying meaning behind Hindu metaphysics and contemporary cosmology and physics they have a similar quality.

*ahem*
the mahabharata proves the aryans used brahmastra class nuclear weapons to flatten the hrappan fags in the bronze age
*dabs*

Gandhi was an influential spiritual leader who spent much of his life and time as a "modern political figure" meditating on and interpreting religious texts, namely the Bagavid Gita. If you didn't have crippling autism you'd know that his entire mantra and policy of non-violence stemmed from the teachings of works such as the Gita.

It's just a cover, and in all honesty it's a fine cover.

>Some shitty fan-art of the Gita's contents is okay but a representation of someone who actually applied the Gita's teachings to the real world and effected immense change is not okay
Read his Discourses on the Gita, user.

Not them but Gandhi was a literal wife-beater, and a public performer who masqueraded as being perfectly loving and pacifist while outside, when his own family saw a much different side of him. Just wanted to say that I personally have distaste for him. Whether he was a good writer is still possible.

Just because he meditated on it doesn't mean he should be in the front cover of it.

Besides Gandhi was a little pervert. This book is a very important cultural artefact. It would be like putting a Greek politician on the cover of The Iliad or something

based

It's just a book cover. It's fairly inconsequential. Pretty much all modern translations of the Gita with introductory segments will likely mention Gandhi anyways. He is a figure immediately recognizable in the Western world and if the goal is to disseminate Eastern values to an unfamiliar audience it makes sense why he'd be on the cover.

I'm an Indian Hindu, user. I am very, very aware of both Gandhi and the Bhagavad Gita. You do not need to "educate" me.

You can stop justifying it. And stop shifting the goal posts for something so small. I know it's just a cover, but it was still bad decision to make Gandhi the cover of a version of the Bhagavad Gita. No one looks at Gandhi and thinks of bhagavad gita lmao. It's seems so silly, and almost uneducated, to put a relatively recent political figure on the cover of a millenia old religious text. I understand why Gandhi was made the cover, and it makes sense for a western audience, but I still think its a pretty shit idea.

You’re talking to the same person. I never shifted the goal post, I’ve been stating that the chosen cover art for a translation of an ancient text which predates cover art to begin with is pretty unimportant since this began.
>it’s just a cover

We can just agree to disagree. Im not trying to come across as pedantic or “educate you” in any measure. I was just pointing out that Gandhi’s discourses on the Gita have been fairly influential and, from what I’ve read, have found mention in many modern translations of the text. Hence his appearance on the cover. In all honesty I find it a more suiting cover than some nebulous western orientalist cover featuring a meaningless Mandela and/or mishmash of Indian art/culture, which is a fairly common sight in the Eastern Religion section at Barnes and Nobles.

Fair enough, user. Seems we're coming from different places. Agree to disagree.

>It would be like putting a Greek politician on the cover of The Iliad or something
Lombardo did much worse than that.

Attached: The-Iliad.png (384x536, 175K)

HOLY SHIT my sides
Lombardo is a fucking INSANE man

This works however, unlike that Gandhi statue pic. It generally conveys the same feel as the Illiad, given it’s a book about a war (in essence), and thus I suppose, advertises it accurately.

shirley you can't be serious
whats this guys deal kek?

As a Pajeet, why do you think India is such a cesspool of filth, depravity, etc. Both high and low classes are obnoxious and superficial. I find this hard to reconcile with it's rich cultural history. I'd unironically think that it'd be a superpower by now. What went wrong? Was it just the British or what?

Lombardo is a pretty cool guy. He actually has a galaxy brain. He also has a drum.

youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1427&v=QFAjkf6tk60

Attached: 9780872204843_p0_v1_s550x406.jpg (263x406, 13K)

Wtf HACKett?

Attached: euripides_bacchae_165x260_1.png (308x308, 67K)

it's not it's gay

>big fan of mythology in general
>only basic oversight in Hindu
I have to catch up on this. To my understanding it gets very shonen like with power levels and the like.
Also best Fate boy.

Attached: Karna1.png (512x724, 331K)

>To my understanding it gets very shonen like with power levels and the like.
Not exactly like that, but characters do gain boons or weapons once in awhile that lets them do crazy shit. I suggest starting with the Ramayana, unabridged if at all possible.

>Ramayana
How long approximately are the Ramayana and Mahabkharata unabridged? I mean in pages/books

My version of the Ramayana is about 1,500 pages or 3 volumes. The Mahabharata is 10 times the length of the Iliad and the Odyssey combined.

The Ramayana is pretty fun. The Mahabarhata like 14,000 pages and I'd recommend reading the Penguin abridgment along with the Buck abridgment to have some context for The Gita.

That sounds really fun. I love books that don't end fast.

>ywn read Robert Oppenheimer’s translation of the Bhagavad gita