Deva ≠ ‘demigod’ | Indra, Brahma, Shiva are not “demigods” | Eng 

In my opinion We should simply write Bhagwan, Devta or Ishwar instead of Translating them into English.. just like Muslim never translate Allah, Rab into English.

O Iskonn😀. A lot of translations to serve the agenda rather than a text.

I am an ISKCON Devotee (or should I say I am trying to be one of the servants at ISKCON), and I am grateful for the clarification provided herein. Yes it may be true that 'Deva' does not literally mean demingod. But what I think also needs to be clarified here is the purpose of translating the Bhagavad Gita. A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami never posed himself as a Sanskrit Scholar (yet he managed to translate immense amount of Vedic literature but we are not discussing that here). He was a preacher and a trailblazer of the Bhakti Yoga, as he comes from the Bramha-Madhva-Gaudiya Sampradaya. His mission was to preach the message of Bhakti throughout the world as given by Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita, as I must mention, he was immensely successful opening 108 temples in mere 10 years and making thousands of people begin their journey on the path of Bhakti Yoga (considering his ripe old age of 70 and 2 heart attacks while on a cargo ship all alone). The Bhagavad Gita has been accepted by all Vaishnava Sampradayas and Acharyas as Bhakti-conclusive. The final instruction of Krishna is to become his devotee and surrender unto him. A.C Bhaktivedanta swami's attempt was to thus present the Gita as bhakti centric. He is seeing and presenting Bhakti, the heart of the Gita, throughout the gita. And isn't that also a symptom of pure devotion to the Supreme Lord Narayan? That is why I appreciate the fact that the presenter in the video has said, "from a Sanskrit Perspective." Yes, maybe from a Sanskrit perspective the translations may not be justified, but from the principle perspective, it is absolutely justified. Similar is the case with Madhvacharya's commentary. The vision of A.C Bhaktivedanta swami is not make sanskrit scholars, but make people simple pure hearted devotees of krishna. In a scripture known as Chaitanya Charitamrit, there is a story of a Brahmin, who is illiterate. This illiterate brahmin cannot even read, but is crying and weeping when he "reads" the Gita. Others laugh at him wondering how is he reading the Gita when he is illiterate? When the brahmin is confronted by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (incarnation of Krishna) he replies that as his guru ordered the brahmin to read, he is trying. Although illiterate, as soon as he opens the Gita, he sees Lord Krishna driving Arjuna's chariot and weeps in seperation from the lord. Mahaprabhu embraces him and replies, "You are reading Bhagavad-gītā in the true sense." The purpose of shastra is not to become an erudite scholar, it may be a side effect but certainly not the goal. As Adi Shankaracharya writes, "bhaja govindaḿ bhaja govindaḿ govindaḿ bhajamūḍhamate saḿprāpte sannihite kāle nahi nahi rakśati" Translation: Worship Govinda, Worship Govinda, Worship Govinda. Oh fool! Rules of Grammar will not save you at the time of your death All the knowledge, of grammar, logic etc, is understood to be used in service of Sriman Narayan, and A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami does exactly that! For which I think all Sanatanis must honour him! When our grandfathers decide to retire, that is the age when Swami ji embarked on a seemingly impossible mission....ALL ALONE! He started ISKCON, which has helped MILLLIONS during natural calamties and pandemics, IN ADDITION TO THEIR SPIRITUAL CARE. The reason I have mentioned all of this is because 90% of the viewers (many so called hindus) are suffering from lust (India is one of the top countries watching pornography), anger, greed, pride etc. (India's rank on happiness index is 146 EVEN BELOW PAKISTAN) and their so called love for Sanatan is limited to waving orange flags and simply posting, "#sanatani" on social media, but here is a man, called A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami, who has actually done something for Sanatan Dharma, and that ought to be honored by us. I have said all this because, so many innocent and genuine people will be misguided and perhaps even leave the bigger mission just on the accord of mere grammatical translation shifts, which by the way are not SO WRONG THAT IT WILL COMPLETELY TEAR APART THE MESSAGE OF THE GITA. Millions have read Gita As it is by Bhaktivedanata Swami and have become people leading a pious life, and that is what truly matters. Hare Krishna! Jai Srila Prabhupad! pls watch (ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-gy1R7OHymMU.html) and (ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-05n9OditPgA.html) and (ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pk0RF93jSyY.html)

ISCON wants to put Krishna above all, addressing their Foreign Christian audience who NEED one God

This video makes it very clear the significance of Sanskrit non translatables. Babaji has co-authored a book with Rajivji Malhotra in this subject. Another strong reason to learn Sanskrit and avoid translations , especially English 🙏

Thank u sir from Nepal. I was waiting for this video since long. I used to go to Iskon a few years back. But the use of word demigod haunted me. Krishna is always aradhya for me. But to degrade Shiva and Mahamaya Durga as demigods is always unacceptable.

Interesting video. Rajiv Malhotra made a series of videos on the topic of ‘Sanskrit non translatables’ . One of them dealt with the word deva which is mistranslated as gods/angels in English. You will enjoy these videos. Keep up the good work mr Mishra.

Respected Nityananda Misra ji, Bhaktivedanta Swami's translation firstly is not a chaya anuvada (literal translation) its a bhava anuvada. Bhaktivedanta Swami was well aware of these dictionaries and kept them for his reference while translating the Bhagavad-Gita. He also has many other translations of other acaryas as well. But he purposefully chose the word demigod to make the point that Krishna is actually God (Bhagavan) which is what is being said in Bhagavad-Gita itself. "Sri Bhagavan uvaca ...etc.." He didn't want the literal translations to create a confusion in the western audience who are not even aware of the basic sanskrit terms or their meanings. In ISKCON we believe that Krishna is GOD. He is Supreme Lord. In Santana Dharma already people are confused with the conclusions of Bhagavad-Gita. And Sankaracarya parampara give altogether a different meaning for Bhagavan. They refer Brahmajyoti as Bhagavan. Srila Prabhupada was very emphatic in putting forth his conclusions. Especially with regard to the position of Krishna. 1. Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. 2. All other devatas are subordinate to Krishna. He wanted that there should not be any sort of confusion in undertaking these 2 points. If deva is translated as God then we are putting Krishna on the same level as other devatas. Which is against our point. He purposefully put aside the sanskrit dictionary meanings which would otherwise create confusion in the readers wrt understanding the fundamental point that Krishna is the Supreme Lord or GOD. That is the reason Bhaktivedanta Swami's Bhagavad-Gita has become so popular especially in conveying the point that Krishna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead and unalloyed devotion to Krishna is the purpose of life. Now you may not care for this!! The English language is defective in its own way and Bhaktivedanta swami had made best use of the defective English words without compromising the concepts that he wanted to present. This is not at all appropriate to tell that Bhaktivedanta Swami's translation is incorrect. You are demeaning a very great personality who had achieved unimaginable feats in the history of Sanatana Dharma wrt the preaching and the volume of impact he has done to the society. I would urge you to read the biography of Bhaktivedanta Swami and know more about him before making such comments that would spread negative views about ISKCON and Swami Prabhupada. 🙏🙏🙏

Not want to accuse anyone here but ISKON and BAPS have active efforts to package Sanatan Dharam as Abrahamic faiths. This is how they plan to increase following. That's where this discussion about "someone is inferior since gave in to physical relationship". In Abrahamic faiths, you are born off sin...you know the reason why. In Dharma sexual-reproduction is a riun (debt) of one born on this planet. Just like you perform Dharma, you also have to fulfill return to all the riun too. Now the issue with this is, are you really doing any service if you are just package Dharma as faith and selling to those who are trying to run away from the mess their life already is in.

मैंने आपकी कई videos पर comment किया है। मुझे बहुत आवश्यकता है। आपका बहुत बहुत आभार।

Sorry Sir! There are certainly non translatables in Sanskrit and देवता is one of them. No English word can define देव in one word. Prabhupad's translation may not be perfect but his intent was to transform the society. Regarding position of Lord Shiva and other devtas, a sampradaya has right to present is view based on shastra. It is not just Bhakti Vedanta Swami Prabhupada. Go read Brihad Bhagavatamrita written by Sanatan Goswami. He has given quotations for the view of all the Gaudiya Vaishnavas. Here is a quotation from Kulashekhar Alwar from his Mukund Mala stotra from Ramanuj Sampraday. pṛthvī-reṇur aṇuḥ payāḿsi kaṇikāḥ phalguḥ sphulińgo laghus tejo niḥśvasanaḿ marut tanutaraḿ randhraḿ su-sūkṣmaḿ nabhaḥ kṣudrā rudra-pitāmaha-prabhṛtayaḥ kiṭāḥ samastāḥ surā dṛṣṭe yatra sa tārako vijayate śrī-pāda-dhūli-kaṇāḥ He says for a devotee once Sri Vishnu is seen suras or devtas become like insect, rudra and Brahma look insignificant.. Well certainly Kulashekhar Alwar did not disrespect the devtas here but it is his nishtha towards Mukunda.

द्वौ भूत-सर्गौ लोके 'स्मिन्, देवासुर एव च। विष्णु-भक्त: स्मृतो देव असुरस तद -विपर्यय :।। ( पद्म पुराण ) Reference from Padam Puram that how followers of Lord Vishnu are Deva and those who oppose Lord Vishnu are Asura.

The only reason i think why श्रीला प्रभुपाद did the wrong translation of the word 'dev' is because he wanted the western countries to follow gaudiya vaishnav sampradaya(iskcon) and those people didn't knew the difference between dev , bhagwan , parmatma, परब्रह्म and maybe at that time श्रीला प्रभुपाद was unable to find right words for dev, bhagwan, parmatma etc and now its stuck in the mind of foreign iskcon followers and even hindus who follow iskcon...

Pranaam Nityānanda Miśra ji,I like the start of the video with calendar widget in the top left. Which calendar app/program do you use or recommend?

aapse anurodh hai ki iskcon ki bhagvadgeeta ki wrong traslations pr bhi ek video bnaiye

I have read Srila Prabhupada's books. Much needed video 🙏🏻❤️🕉️ Namo vah 🙏🏻

This issue can be easily clarified by placing it within the appropriate context, which revolves around discerning between visnu-tattva and jiva-tattva, essentially addressing a matter of natural hierarchy. Referring directly to the Vedic shastras rather than relying on any Sanskrit dictionary with secular academic interpretations, we find support in the first verse of the fifth chapter of the Brahma Samhita, which states, "īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ anādir ādir govindaḥ sarva-kāraṇa-kāraṇam." The transcendental origins of everything is Svayam Bhagavan Shree Krishna. Similarly, the Bhagavata Purana 1.3.28 declares, "kṛṣṇas tu bhagavān svayam", that He is the origin of all incarnations. For those well-versed in the Bhagavad-Gita, there can be no doubt that Krishna is One without a Second and that everything originates from Him, ahaṁ sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ sarvaṁ pravartate. As vishnu-tattva, He is non-different from Rama, Baladeva, Narasimha, Laksmidevi, and all other innumerable transcendental forms of Svayam Bhagavan. All the material universes are populated by jiva-tattva - the infinitesimal living beings, equal to the Lord in quality, but not quantity, all having bodies composed of material elements, subject to creation and destruction. This includes the devas with one exception, Shiva, who has his own tattva, siva-tattva, which is like Vishnu just like yoghurt is like milk. So, among all these living jivas, some have the temporary bodies and names of "gods", though referred to as "demigods" to distinguish them as powerful jivas from the forms of Vishnu. Below the devas, or demigods, are the upadevas, or "sub-demigods," and so forth, for the duration of the universes. Understanding this context from shastras and the purpose of existence is paramount. In the Bhagavad-Gita, Lord Krishna states, "vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyo vedānta-kṛd veda-vid eva cāham," emphasizing that He has provided the Vedas to enable us to understand Him. Unfortunately, the creator of the referenced video has missed this central point, exemplifying what Bhagavan Shree Krishna refers to in the Bhagavad-Gita 7.15 as "māyayāpahṛta-jñānā".

Calling Deva as demigod is nonsense, absurd and obnoxious!

Authorities on the Bhagvadgita do not have much respect for the English translation ISKON version.

Iskon is not sanatan. They have created a new religion of their own by borrowing our Hari so that they may gain his unsuspecting followers. Sanatan has a tradition of guru, sadhu, rishi, muni, maharishi, acharya etc. Where did sanatan ever have titles like "his holiness"? Like typical corporate people, they have given themselves some very fancy titles, borrowed our Gita and turned their newly created religion into an abrahamic like monotheistic affair. I saw some videos where they said Hari does not want us to take the name of any other God or Goddess. Since when did Hari become so insecure?

Brilliant video 👏 now I guess passionate Iskconites will cope hard to justify Prabhupada's mistranslations and bluffs in order to critic Nityanand sir for this video

I am admiring the painting behind you. The shape of the flowers are fascinating.

Iskon version of Bhagvadgeeta is not good. They should have used certain sanskrit words without translation in to English. Like Dharma, Bhagawan, Devas, etc

Jaya Shri Rama prabhu, I understand your concern about using the word 'demigod' for Devas because it means Greek half-human half God . However, anyone who is part of ISKCON, never thinks of Devas like the Greek counterparts. Instead, they know Devas to be those living entities who are neither free from influence of time, nor are like humans. So why should we dwell on this issue if the intended meaning is understood? Srila Prabhupāda uses different word for Devas. This means that he was only trying to find the best English counterpart for the Saṃskṛta word. In his early work (Gītā), he uses demigod as his English-speaking disciples tell that this is the word closest to Deva in English. Later, he also uses the English word God & Saṃskṛta word Īśvara for them, for example in Shrimad Bhagwatam: “The Sanskrit word īśvara(controller) conveys the import of God, but the Supreme Person is called the parameśvara, or the supreme īśvara. The Supreme Person, or parameśvara, is the supreme conscious personality, and because He does not derive any power from any other source, He is supremely independent. In the Vedic literatures Brahmā is described as the supreme god or the head of all other gods like Indra, Candra and Varuṇa, but the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam confirms that even Brahmā is not independent as far as his power and knowledge are concerned.” So this 'demigod' controversy seems to be more of a misunderstanding. Hopes you understand the condition, the intent & the bhāva of Prabhupāda. Jaya Shri Ram 🙏

In my dictionary....the other words for the Iskon are 'spineless' , 'jokers' , 'cult of narcissist'....😊😊

ISKCON devotees have become so rigid due to blind faith in Srila Prabhupada, they just don't want to accept the world has changed, and they need to adapt. They need to understand Srila Prabhupada was not a great Sanskrit scholar nor he was a great expert of different shastras. He had a great understanding of his sampradayic notions he followed, but he was no expert of overall Vedic philosophies. And his faith in fulfilling his guru's desire was commendable.

🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:00 *📚 The term "demigod" in Sanātana Dharma lacks an equivalent in Sanskrit scriptures, differing interpretations exist.* 01:10 *📖 Sanskrit word "deva" and "Sur" are often translated as "demigods," but debate exists on whether they should be translated as "Gods."* 02:06 *💬 Interpretations of texts like the Bhagavad Gita vary, some translations use "demigods" while others use "Gods" for "deva" and "Sur".* 03:09 *🌟 Some interpretations suggest a hierarchical view among celestial beings, with demigods like Shiva depicted as subservient to devotees of Krishna.* 04:07 *📜 Rituals mentioned in Vedas direct worship towards specific demigods, indicating a belief in their existence and relevance.* 05:00 *🔍 Scriptures categorize demigods into primal and administrative, with Vishnu as chief of the primal demigods and Indra as chief of the administrative.* 07:23 *📚 Various translations of Sanskrit texts differ in translating terms like "demigods," adding complexity to their interpretation.* 10:19 *📚 Sanskrit dictionaries translate "deva" and "Sur" as "Gods" or "Celestial deities," not as "demigods."* 13:34 *📚 Sanskrit provides terms like "Upadeva," "upadevta," "dev-yoni," and "Aadha-deva" for demigods, distinct from "deva" and "Sur."* 16:28 *🎓 Use of "demigod" for terms like "daa" and "Sur" lacks support from Sanskrit dictionaries, causing confusion in interpretation.* Made with HARPA AI

Thanks a tonne . We need more voices like you

Thank you for enlightening

hopefully this comes across some of the iskon sanyaasi who otherwise are so active on RU-vid and social media like swami amogh leela and others

Is it necessary to translate, nouns, especially collective nouns, to english, Like translating RAAKSHAS, YAKSH, DEVTA, ASURS,etc?

सनातन ग्रंथों में 'जाति' शब्द का किन-किन प्रसंगों में प्रयोग हुआ है और उनके अनुसार 'जाति' की क्या परिभाषा है, कृपया इस पर एक चलचित्र बनाएं🙏✨

Very nice episode.

the Iskcon people gave Krishna bhakti attributes of Abrahamic cults, elevating the figure of Krishna as that of YHWH/Allah in a lot of ways. (however the morality remains strictly dharmic). Although this seems problematic, we must take the Western society into consideration. To bring Westerners into the Hindu fold, people who grew up in an Abrahamic society it is very difficult to make Dharmatva enticing to them. A Krishna figure understood by the Iskcon bhakts make more sense to the Western audience. In the indian context, we must be wary of Iskcon literature and let them do their work in foreign countries

Thank you for making this enlightening video.

in the rigved samhita first translated by h.h wilson and then revised by ravi prakash arya and k.l joshi, they mention that the first meaning of devas in the ancient publications meant scholars. directly saying that devta meant scholars. what would you comment on it?

Make a video about the word "Shudra" it is most controversial word in Hinduism.

When they called Lord Shiva as a mere demigod, it put me off their Sampradaya.

Hello Sir, What is meaning of Name Neeva? Many say it is foundation, some say river narmada.

I like ISKON but their calling of lord Shiva as demigod as a Shiva bhakt has never convinced me!

Just call devās as celestial beings.

To those decrying ISKCON or it's translation... some in the comment section have even dared to go to an extent of saying no 1 takes ISKCON English translated Bhagwat Gita seriously... to them I would like to say you do not belong to any desciplic succession of any 1 of the 4 primary bonafide school of Vedanta because if you did you wouldn't say such nonsensical things. Now For the 1st time I have found Shri Nityananda Mishra ji's understanding and translation both incorrect. Infact the Rig Ved sukta you read substantiated ISKCON stand no matter how Indian translators may have translated it. For Devas can be best translated as Demi Gods in English and there are numerous reasons for doing so. The most essentially ingredient of translation 1 cannot forget or completely overlook is the fact there is no concept of English equivalent of the Dharmic understanding of Devas. The word God in English or in the Christian west means the Supreme. Only the Supreme is called God. If Devas is translated as God in English the purport of Shrimad Bhagwat Gita itself will be lost in English language and to the Western audience. Indra, Bramha and Shiva aren't or the rest of others besides ofcourse Bhagwan Krishna/ Vishnu / Narayana is the Supreme Absolute Truth and the Supreme Personality of Godhead as conveyed in Shrimad Bhagwat Gita so for right context and explanation of the Shrimad Bhagwat Gita, the others have to be called as Demi God in English for English context because the God in Shrimad Bhagwat Gita is only Bhagwan Krishna. Period! Just because you know the language, Sanskrit, Nityanand ji doesn't make you an expert on any Sanatan Vedic Grantha. It makes you no more an expert on the subject than an English professor is of Chemistry or Physics or Rocker Science even if the subjects maybe explained in the book in English yet an English professor would be completely out of his depth to be able to explain any of the concepts of Chemistry or physics or rocket science... why because the English professor completely lacks the required domain knowledge... just like you do. When you translate any Granth in a language you have to translate it in such a way that you are able to convey the purport of ( e.g. here) of Srimad Bhagwat Gita without any compromise but also in a way that makes perfect sense to the English western audience in their civilizational context. Not translating Devas as God is essential to proper translation and explanation of Shrimad Bhagwat Gita. Otherwise if there are so many Gods, which means everyone is Supreme... is a completely wrong interpretation of all and any Sanatan Vedic Grantha. This is why it is crucial to under go a proper disciplic succession from 1 of the 4 bonafide Sampradaya of Vedantic school of thought... English translation of the word Sampradaya. Your knowledge on the subject is clearly toe deep. Also those who translated Devas as God either don't know the meaning of God and what the Word represents in the English / Western Christian template or were simply lacking proper understanding of Shrimad Bhagwat Gita if you ask me the former would most likely be the case . I wish Nityanand ji you had read the commentary of Madhava or Ramanuja or Nimbarka, the 6 Goswami's of Vrindavan or Shri Baladevan Vidyabhushan transliteration work on Shrimad Bhagwat Gita before dashing out such unfounded and vile comments on ISKCON's Shrimad Bhagwat Gita. I am stunned to see such puerile comments coming from someone like you & I say this without any intent to patronize. To those who object to ISKCON... pls know this ISKCON totally belongs to Bramha Madhav Gaudiya Sampradaya 1 of the original 4 Vedantic School of thoughts and authorities on the subject of Sanatan Vedic Dharma as per shastras. So when you comment on it 1st gain the prerequisite domain knowledge of things. These 4 Sampradaya as per Shastras are the only bonafide authorities of Sanatan Vedic Dharma. You can challange A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada but 1st go gain some domain knowledge on the subjects. Ye original core understanding of Sanatan Vedic Grantha hai as conveyed by Maharishi Vyas. Baki kya kisne perd ker samjha or kya serial dekha cannot be called bonafide or authoritative. Tc

Thank you for bringing this up. First, Greek and Latin does not have the concept of one God. So, all its derivatives like English too cannot have an equivalent for one God. But we know that God is one. What then?? The only choice that a translator has is to assert a meaning or use the Sanskrit word as is. Coming to 'Demigod' word, it refers in English to partial entities to the 'Gods' who are actually not the one God but just living beings like Humans but who have Super human 'bodies'. The reference are the BG verses, 'ksheene punye martya lokam vishanti' meaning that when the credits are exhausted, the 'Gods' take birth with human bodies, Shocking!. What 'God' is this?. Also 'aabrahma bhuvanal lokah punaravartinah..'. meaning that this repeats on and on up and down. So Brahma is a normal living being and not the one God. So, in that sense, they are partial to the one God. That means, the 'Gods' themselves are partial to the one God and no better than humans, except Lord Shiva. Lord Shivas case is specially mentioned in another BBT publication the Brahma Samhita. Thus, in Latin and its derivatives, the so called 'Gods' are not the one God but partial to him. In other words, it is not an ISKCON mistranslation but the 'inadequacy' of the English language itself that has caused this dilemma. In order for the translator His Divine Grace Shri Abhaya Charanaravinda Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada to 'overlook' that limitation, which requires a mind that is not enslaved by a foreign culture or language, such an 'improvisation' was the only way out. After all, if the language is itself inadequate but the subject matter is of such urgency in Kali Yuga, a 'True' Master paves his own way!. All the other 'great' translators mentioned here are scarcely known in the world while Swami Prabhupada is very well known only because of this power! Hare Krishna! 🙏🙏

Thanks for these useful insights.

dhanyawaad aapka is video ko bnane ke liye mishra ji

How wrong are the translations of Bhaktivedanta Swami. 🤦‍♂️ finally everybody is understanding it.

हार्दिक धन्यावाद आपको 🙏

can you please make video on the word shudra... and also about the varna system which is misrepresented by many.

Mlechhasammohnaya certain words were used by Sirla Prabhupada during the translations. I don't think it is that big a deal for us.

iskCON is abrahamising Sanatana Dharma in missionary mode to make it palatable to their western converts. It would be much appreciated if Nityananda Mishra Ji were to do an exhaustive critique of their ideology, showcasing flaws in their understanding and particularly pointing out the interpolations, liberties taken in translation of sacred vedic texts (most important being Bhagwd Gita, Bhagwat Purana) in English. Sadly the English medium educatied youth often turns to their english publications and gets indoctrinated.

Wish the discussion had started off with both the current western definition of demigod as well as the sense in which Prabhupada understood (which the author got to around 5:00) it.

Videos of Mishraji are usually informative except few like this. He could not give any good eng word for devta. Hinduism is seen polytheistic religion because wrongly deva are considered as The God. Its like using official word for President to Peon. Logic of Upadevta, ardhadevta etc is like saying there are post of deputy officer, junior officer etc so Manager should be translated as CEO. Command of subject one doesn't get by getting book and dictionary. Mishraji is good in literature that doesn't mean he will become expert of all vedic subjects. Just like knowing English and getting a medicine book doesn't make one a doctor. I see translations are genius work of Prabhupada. Demigod is such a good word for devas. Just lesser God. Super. What more better word can anyone suggest for devtas?

Iskcon वाले नहीं सुधरेंगे. Lord का सही अनुवाद "मालिक‌" होता हैं. Demigod का अर्थ A half God or Inferior God होता है और एक बहुत ही गंदा अर्थ होता हैं Demigod का। ये एक Poison Pill 💀💀💀💀 है word "Demigod". "मालिक (Lord) " अब्राहमिक God को कहते हैं, हमारे भगवान्, हमारे देवता है, मालिक नहीं।

Well ,i think its may be just translation inaccuracies ...... As a non-isconite it do not feels like a deliberate attempt to create false narration !!!! Iskon walo ne dusre Bhagwan ke liye koi upshbd to nahi kahe h aj tak??? intention to galat nahi lagti but yes given the stature of the organisation ,steps for responsible tranlation must be taken ....after all it is the about our "sanatan dharma"❤

Can we use the word demi-god for 'Asuras'? I am asking this because English speaking Buddhists refer them as such.

I follow Yatarth Geeta. And they described demi-gods as attendants of Kuber. It is publicly available on internet.

Nityanand ji actually i am born ans brought up in Iskcon and i know that there are thousands of times that the word "demigod" is used but believe me thats not done with an intention of insulting any devtas. If you actually hear Srila Prabhupada's english lectures you will find that Srila Prabhupada is not so perfect in english. He is translating like that because thats what he is aware of. No bad intentions but. Even Iskcon devotees know that in sanskrit it would mean different and hence they take it generally not specifically. Actually if we see in Sanskrit there are terms like "ishwar"(controller), Bhagvan (one with 6 opulences) but english wont have such specific category so he although unintentionally generalized it and put devtas as demigods (inferior category) and bhagvan as Supreme Personality of Godhead. In English it would be just God even for ishwar and God even for Bhagvan. One also has to see the context why he did that. Thats why i say you will have to personally talk to iskcon devotees and not depend on what they say on RU-vid or write on emails or books. I also agree that it creates a confusion amongst people when speaking in public platform but we should know thay Srila Prabhupada's audience was majorly hippies and english people of 1970s who had zero idea of dharma. Srila Prabhupada created a good platform for them and he also told his disciples to learn Sanskrit and make things accurate where needed. Ofcourse we cant change what he has written but we can atleast make people understand his intentions. Also since you showed the meaning of demigods as offspring of God, from this perspective also there is no harm in calling all devtas as demigods because indeed they are offsprings of Narayan. In his Vishnu sahasra nam bhashya Sripad Adishankaracharya comments of the term "Keshava" from whom Lord Brahma, Lord Shiva and Lord Vishnu have come, thus hinting at Lord Krsna being the cause of their existence. The same meaning of Keshava is also there in Mahabharat. Didn't Lord Krsna say in Bhagvad Gita that He is the source of all and everything has emanated from Him- "aham sarvasya prabhavo"? I believe you could have atleast mentioned that his intentions were certainly not negative and it was primarily for his English audience. But you didn't acknowledge what he did for the whole world, on the contrary you just pointed out his technical mistakes which everyone agrees but atleast we all agree that what he did its nearly impossible for anyone to do at such a ripe age and in such a short span of time. Infact he was so dedicated to carry out his guru's orders that even in his last days he was hardly able to speak yet was seen translating the last two cantos of Srimad Bhagavatam. Hardly people know what he did. Everyone wants to simply correct the great acharyas and not see their vision. Hare Krishna

In Delhi Book fair few years back I picked up a small book on Shiva by ISCKON and to my surprise they called him evil. This belittling of others comes from a mindset to prove that Krishna is supreme. I hope new generation ISCKON people are not brought up with this hatred. They do great bhajans and monks are very nice and friendly.

Did Bhakti Vedanta swami say as Demi God or the followers mistranslated?

Very well tackled - I have also had bad experiences with Hare Krishnas, who while purport to be Vaishnavites, have a rather disdain view of other schools within the Indian religious ecosystem. They militantly and vehemently oppose anything Advaitic. I do not even think Hare Krishna, as it is now, is even part of Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Basically, I feel, Hare Krishna best mimics a very Abrahamic system (like they are intolerant of other deities). Let's also put it out there, most Hare Krishna types do not even call themselves Hindu, deep within their circle, they call others 'Hindu' but not themselves... they might patronize you, but in their circles, they are quite conditioned on Krishna... ONLY Krishna. Others below and subservient to Krishna, is fine - but God forbid, sharing a platform and suggesting parity is heresy for them. Some ideas tend to further denigrate other deities rather explicitly. Whatever the case, some of these guys happily equate Krishna with Jesus or Yahweh... but have difficulty doing this with Shiva or some Indic equivalent. I am quite perplexed at some of their ideas, given their mastery of Sanskrit is also rather weak. I began some reading of the Bhagwat Gita As It Is - and found that it was NOT the Gita as it was... rather, a interpretation that appeared to tinge some aspects of the central tenet that is the Bhagwat Gita. Clearly some ideas contain the tinge that scholars might not find appropriate. And also - Hare Rama and Hare Krishna - they are Balram and Krishna, not Valmiki's Rama - they are centrally focused on the divine Yadav brothers! I find it funny how their 'Maha Mantra' is commonly understood to be an exercise of equivocating, especially when it is Balram and Krishna they are chanting of. Might I be forgiven to make this suggestion - I feel Hare Krishna movement to be more of a cult than a unifying Indian movement of global reform (given it has foreign, non Indian heritage adherents). I also feel the elevation of Chaitanya (one of Ikscons saints) to an avatar of Vishnu is... somewhat unorthodox and may not be acceptable in a proper Vaishnav school. It's just... too 'Christian'. Doctrine-wise... Ikscon is somewhat... 'cultist'. There was this person who literally laughed at 'Gyan Yoga'... let us please also address this: Saint Chaitanya WAS NOT an avatar of Vishnu... since there is no doctrinal support for this elevation as the other potential avatars are mentioned in other religious texts. This has to be challenged too.

no iscon fanboy harmed in this video.....😁😁

I am so glad you took this up for discussion. The amount of damage ISKCON is doing in India in confusion people is sad to watch. Even swami Prabhupada did not intent this for India. I hope Indians wake up. Hare Krishna 🙏

Sir kindly tell me achyutam name meaning?is this good?

Only world's top 2 Bhagvat gita bhasy in world 1) shiv avtar bhagvan jagadguru adi Shankaracharya bhasy(not for beginners) 2) shri vishnudev dyan avtar( sant ke sant shresht shironami Yogiraj bhagwan Dnyaneshwari nath maharaj ( Dnyaneshwari granth /Bhavarth dipika) (beginners and experience sadhak) Bas or kahi bhatkne ki jarurat he 🙏🏻🚩har har Mahadev ram ram 🙏🏻🚩

Even Shiv Ji is shown as inferior to a devotee of Lord Hari What nonsense ISKCON is

This is underrated channel plese help him spread

It seems that some people are preoccupied with arguing about who is the supreme instead of focusing on their devotion to Lord Shiva or Krishna. True devotion should not be dependent on whether or not these figures are considered gods, but rather a genuine love and reverence for them. Let us strive to love them in a way that transcends such debates.

Thank God! Someone mustered up the courage to refute this. 🙏

Most awaited topic Nityanandji m very thankful and grateful🙏 to you for bringing this fraud of iskon, baps and their likes, younger generation are swayed by them as something hindu but these organisations are involved in soft evangelical activities

Thanks for clarification

Pranaam dhanyavaad.

Thanks

Jai Shri Ram. Brilliant mahodaya❤

Thank you exposing deliberate distortion

इशांत का क्या अर्थ होता है?

Excellent topic and knowledge share. Thank you for putting into perspective that a GOD like Krishna is GOD for certain Sampradaya but that doesn’t make Shiva any less hence using word like Demi God doesn’t make sense.

ISCON is hopeless

To those interested in the truth: No translation is perfect. Each author belonging to a sampradāya translates with the larger context or wordview (darśana) in mind. Though we can find flaws with the translations of any ācārya, we don't do it out of respect. Sometimes, a word like 'demigod' is employed to contrast with the primary deity of a tradition/sampradāya. Decontextualizing a term automatically sets itself up for ambiguity -- in short, text without context is meaning-less or worse, misleading. From a scholarly viewpoint: Saṁskṛta words (deva, dharma, śraddhā, etc.) are best used as they are without translating. To address the usage of the word 'demigod', we need some context. Gauḍīya-vaiṣṇavism, to which ISKCON belongs, holds Kṛṣṇa as the highest form of divinity & that devas appear from Him. The basis is the Bhagavad-Gītā. In 10.2, Kṛṣṇa mentions 'na me viduḥ suragaṇāḥ... aham ādir hi devānām': The suras/devas or great ṛṣis don't really know My origin, for I am their very origin in all respects. Further, Kṛṣṇa explicitly differentiates the devatas from Himself (7.23) by mentioning devān deva-yajo yānti mad-bhaktā yānti mām api. He clearly mentions of his unrivaled preeminence as the origin of everything: aham sarvasya prabhavo mattaḥ saravam pravartate (10.8). Thus, when Kṛṣṇa is viewed as the pre-eminent God, then His empowered representations like the devatas are contrasted as gods or demigods. Thus, deva-deva conveys the same sense of hierarchy when translated either as 'god of the gods' or 'the Lord of the demigods'. Nityānanda ji, before critiquing, one needs to be well-versed with the sampradāya, else the pūrva-pakṣa-jñana (knowledge of the opposition) remains incomplete, rendering arguments demi-scholarly or baseless at worst. There are references for other points on the definition of devas as those who are devoted to viṣṇu, etc. from sāmpradāyika texts like caitanya-caritāmṛta [viṣṇu-bhaktaḥ smṛto daivaḥ]. I hope and pray that we all progress toward the objective truth in our subjective ways.

Let's focus on devotion rather than arguing about who is supreme. True devotion is based on genuine love and reverence for Lord Shiva or Krishna, regardless of whether they are considered gods. Let's strive to love them beyond debates.

I wanted to know the origin of bramha, vishnuji and mahesh. How are the related to ब्रम्ह ans shiv and vishnu

Iskcon is trying to abrahamize sanatan Dharma which is misleading. Foreigners falls in that trap very easy but now a days Indians also fall for this. They always try to show lord Vishnu as superior which is not as per sashtra.

द्वौ भूत-सर्गौ लोके ऽस्मिन् दैव आसुर एव च विष्णु-भक्तः स्मृतो दैव आसुरस् तद्-विपर्ययः पाठान्तर द्विविधो भूतमार्गोयं दैव आसुर एव च | विष्णुभक्तिपरो दैवो विपरीतस्तथासुरः || ~ Caitanya Caritāmṛta Ādi 3.91 [अग्नि-पुराण ३८३.१२ ] So this theory is acceptable in the Gaudiya Sampradaya only under the constraint of calling the devas, demigod. I hope Śrīmān Nityānanda will look upon this. 5:26

Make a short on Sanskrit name for businesses. I am looking for a name for a khadi clothing brand

Prabhupāda: The demigods means they are highly advanced than these human beings. They are also living entities like us, but their duration of life, their standard of life, their civilization, spiritual knowledge, so advanced that they are called demigods. Almost God. They are so advanced. Demigods means almost God. They have got all godly qualities, and they are controller of the atmospheric affairs. Some of them are controlling rainy season; some of them controlling heat; some... The idea is krishna or vishnu is god , supreme above all and others are demigod. Devata are translated as demi-god which is not acurate , as we all know. cuz the idea of demigod is like compition to real god , but prabhupada didn't use word for so. For all vaishnav devatas are the servent of lord hari. Demi gods are respectable. द्वौ भूत-सर्गौ लोके 'स्मिन्, देवासुर एव च। विष्णु-भक्त: स्मृतो देव असुरस तद -विपर्यय :।। ( पद्म पुराण )

Iskcon personals deadly need this video 😊😊

bee and fly. bee will always sit on flower even in midst of dirt. fly will always sit on little dirt even in midst of a big beautiful garden. nityananda ji is acting like a house fly here.

Yes I am following iskcon, but it's hurted me many times when I listed lord Shiva,maa Parvati as demigods from preachers from Iskcon.. Hare Krishna hare Krishna Krishna Krishna hare hare hare Ram hare Ram Ram Ram Hare hare.🕉️💦🙏🏼🪷 ॐ नमः शिवाय ॐ 🕉️🙏🏼🪷🔱

I got into debate with a iskon people and he said we say shiva as demigod cuz there is no good English word for representing status of shiva

No ISKCON harmed in this video😂

सभी सनातन विद्यार्थीगण से प्रार्थना है कि अपने शास्त्रों को केवल हिंदी या किसी भी भारतीय भाषा जैसे मराठी, गुजराती, बंगला...में पढ़ें पर कभी भी,भूल कर भी इंग्लिश या यूरोपियन भाषाओं में नहीं पढ़ें।

A part of a Devta and human is regarded a demigod in English language which is a latin derivative, proper Hindi word for demigod would be Devansh, for instance Pandavs of Mahabharat could be regarded as demigods

The english words used in Iskcon books are to differentiate between anya devathas as demi gods and Vishnu, Krishna and Vishnu avataras as God. It need not be a true translation of sanskrit into English, but it is only to segregate so that reader (especially the western audience) doesnt get confused by word deva being used to refer to all gods. Yes, they could have transalated 'other devas or other devathas, as other gods'. it is emphasize the bhava. As per vaishnavism and as per many puranas Vishnu is supreme gods among all gods. Similarly you have Shaivas and some puranas calling Shiva and as supreme god. So, the usage of word demi god for devathas other than Vishnu or Krishna avataras by Iskcon though may not be exact true translation into english, but it is merely to show the differentiation.

nityananda ji is a brilliant example of how half knowledge is dangerous. neem hakeem khatara - e - jaan.

The worst spiritual guru on social media is that Amogh Lila das .His behaviour and style of commentary is that of a road side bully. He acts like a cheap stand up comedian .

Oh my God.. What kind of exercise are been offering. It's a disruptive kind.. We all respect all the humanly efforts given for the needful by the people presenting this knowledge.. But can todays young generation who are very practical and having scientific knowledge and evidence on science books.. Do they believe such explanations. Spread Love.. Hare Krishna Hare Krishna❤

Sir namaskar I am from Bangladesh. I am your follower. Just give me a favour. I need a book mahanirvan tantra. please sir

जिनको संस्कृत आती है, वो प्रभु पाद की गीता को पढ़ते ही आरंभ से ही पता चल जायेगा की इस्कॉन की गीता का ट्रांसलेट गलत है ।।

Views nhi as rahe : let’s make controversy with ISCKON

Even the bhagwatam says vishnu bhakto bhaved daivah. As there was ni english word for daivtas earlies in English dictionary, the demigod is been taken

we do not have to use word god or demi god let it be as it is (deva , asura ).