What should I read after the Bhagavad Gita and Upanisads? Also, name the translation.

Don't read anything else, or your risk of demonic possession will rise even further. Read the Bible NOW.

>>24559217
Fuck you.

>>24559213 (OP)
You might be interested in this other thread
>>24558922 because it talks about texts of similar nature

>>24559213 (OP)

>>24559213 (OP)
It’s on my backlog but I was planning on reading the Bhagavad Gita from the Aurea Vidya publishing house.

Best Bhagavadgītā is the J.A.B. van Buitenen translation, but if you already read that and liked it, I'd recommend doing a little excursion into the samhitas/brahmanas. You can skip around the Rigveda-samhitā, unfortunately there aren't any great full-length translations; the śatapatha brāhmana (public domain trans. julius eggeling) is boring but it set like 500 years of religious practice in stone, the aitareya brāhmana (public domain trans. martin haug) is more interesting. But all three of them are super long so getting an idea of their contents is more important than finishing them cover to cover.
Next you'll probably want to read the Brahma-sūtras for an overview of Vedanta. If you have a keen eye the first twelve chapters of the Gītā will remind you much more of these than of the last six, which are more in line with the Sāmkhya school. t least one of the Śānkara-bhāshyas all the way through, just to get an understanding of the nitty gritty of what "advaita" actually means. Other than Patañjali's Yoga-sūtras (I liked Edwin Bryant's translation), I don't have anything that would be essential. The one thing I'll say is keep going back to the Upanishads; you'll find something new at every stage.

>>24559473
Oh also my recommended translations for Śānkara's commentary on the Brihadāranyaka-upanishad and for the Brahma-sūtras is Mādhavānanda's.

Has anyone actually read entire Mahabharata? All talk seems to be about its one tiny chapter - Brappat Gita. Is there nothing else of value there?
Same question regarding Ramayana and Persian Šāhnāme.

>>24559497
Yes the actual narrative is very good. The issue is that it's really repetitive. Incidentally I'm going to start shilling my abridgment once enough of it is done

>>24559473
what's wrong with brereton's translation?

>>24559497
yes, i have read it, i agree with >>24559549 that the narrative is good but repetitive (in pretty much exactly the same way that homer is repetitive, because they were once literally the same epic, but in the case of the mahabharata it's on a larger scale and harder to push through). an abridged translation (penguin) does already exist. honestly most of the intimidating length is stuff that is totally skippable, i read all the battle scenes because i didn't want to miss little variations of description but there are huge swaths that have nothing whatsoever to do with the actual story and have little purely literary value.