>If the reader has also received the benefit of the Vedas,

You don't, not definitively anyway.
Vedas were an oral tradition. Anything that survives since is bound to have a lot of stuff lost or tacked on because different scholars and sages before them added to them.
Being a westerner it would be worse because you would read a translation, not that sanskrit text that survives would be any better in the present day

t. Brahmin who was educated in line with his duties.

Read Dumezil's Mitra-Varuna.

>>9658566
Go for the Bhagavad-Gita but DON'T read the ISKON translation of it. The guy bends the text to the point of lying on everything that doesn't fit his fascist pov on certain forms of yoga.

If you can, find a critical edition and read several translations in parallel.

The ISKON guy, Prabhupad, is to be avoided at entry level. When you advance to texts like the Bhagavata Purana (Srimad Bhagavatam), he and his commentary is the most helpful guide however. Just avoid his Gita version. Can't stress this enough.

Also and just to say this as well - the Vedas are absolutely breathtaking. The dimensions of this treasure are not to be overstated. Seriously.
I've been interested in philosophy all my life and I can completely agree to the quote you give in the OP. It is a damn blessing to be able to access these texts.
Not memeing. I encourage everybody who has the chance to try read into them.

Also bump.

>>9660825
His BG version is the most eloquent and poetic I've read. All the other ones are bland, even compared to Oppenheimer's florid adaptation of the BG.

>>9658566
>Ok. How do I into the Vedas?
i don't know

>>9660860
Yet there are tons of snakes in the grass, friend. Tons. Which he put there. And his commentary is horrific.

Reread it.

>>9658566
You read up some on india's culture and history then you download the vedas on libgen.

>>9660860
He makes Siva a 'demi-god' in his translation. He calls some forms of yoga 'some forms of mysticism' and interchanges bhakti and yoga as he pleases and when it suits his tradition of bhakti which is centuries younger than the Gita is.

That alone should suffice as a warning for the careful reader, I believe.

File: hqdefault.jpg (11KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 480x360px

Sir Edwin Arnold translation of the Gita is my preferred translation, Prince.

>>9660916
How good is it?

Post extracts senpai.

>>9660997
Go look it up yourself, dipshit.

>>9661004
So not very good if it inspires this kind of low energy faggotry.

The BG is a good book, but it is not a Veda.

>>9661041
>low energy faggotry
That post was probably coming from a higher place of energy than you will ever attain, faggot; you just can't comprehend it, because you are so low.

>>9661048
He asked how to get into the Vedas though, reread the OP. And the Gita is widely considered to be the crown of the vedic knowledge.

>>9660997
Here's the scene made famous by Oppenheimer:

Thou seest Me as Time who kills,
Time who brings all to doom,
The Slayer Time, Ancient of Days, come hither to consume;
Excepting thee, of all these hosts of hostile chiefs arrayed,
There stands not one shall leave alive the battlefield! Dismayed
No longer be! Arise! obtain renown! destroy thy foes!
Fight for the kingdom waiting thee when thou hast vanquished those.
By Me they fall—not thee! the stroke of death is dealt them now,
Even as they show thus gallantly; My instrument art thou!
Strike, strong-armed Prince, at Drona! at Bhishma strike! deal death
On Karna, Jyadratha; stay all their warlike breath!
'Tis I who bid them perish! Thou wilt but slay the slain;
Fight! they must fall, and thou must live, victor upon this plain!

>>9661063
You're the Arnold anon? Thanks a lot f a m.

>>9661059
You read none of the above, evident by your lack of insight. Kill yourself.

>>9661048
The BG is not a book either.

>>9658566
>Ok. How do I into the Vedas?

You can start by reading the first word of the first page.

>>9661073
Oh I did, you clown.
Also
>Kill yourself.
Where's your display of energy now, faggot?
Enjoy your karma.

>>9661082
Oh I'm sure, especially by the way you're perfectly displaying vedic wisdom by being a futile windbag.

>>9661095
So apparently you don't know anything about the Vedas then, am I correct?

>>9661073
You're welcome, oh scourge of foes.

>>9661114
>So apparently you don't know anything about the Vedas either, having like me, never read it.

not even him but you're a raging faggot

>>9660825
>>9660898
>>9660912
He is not "the ISKCON guy". His translation is not "the ISKCON translation"

His translation and his beliefs are Gaudiya Vaisnava beliefs. Many people think Prabhupada just came up with his translations, his commentaries, and his views by himself. Everything he teaches, everything he writes was imparted to him by his spiritual masters through the line of disciplic succession.

Just because ISKCON has gained a degree of unpopularity should not discredit Prabhupada's views, which are not his but the views of Gaudiya Vaisnavism.

>>9658566
read the Christian vedas