Here we have an extreme form of Fundmentalism. Obviously since the Bhagavad Gita was written about 2200 years ago, A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada did not write it. I assume he is claiming Prabhupada's translation and commentaries (or purports) are authoritative. This is similar to claims by some Chrisitans that the King James version of the Bible is the only authoritative one.Jaya Jagannath said 1st of all is this Bhagawad gita is written by the authority ( Srila Prabhupada ) ?? is that you have taken these verses from http://www.asitis.com ? answer is no these verses are from other source therefore we don't accept these verses because they are not authorative.
for example : Milk is very good food, everyone knows. But as soon as it is touched by the lips of a serpent, it is poison immediately. Therefore it is forbidden.
Claiming all other translations or commentaries are poisonous is a nice touch. It locks in a single perspective, forbidding all other considerations. But this raises serious concerns: what about the millions of people who studied the Bhagavad Gita prior to Prabhupada's version, were they deluded? Evidently after 2200 years, scholarship on the Bhagawad Gita ended when Srila Prabhupada died in 1977.
Obviously you mean painting, not photo. How does a painting become authoritative? What is he eating, ghee (clarified butter)? What is the deal with ghee, why is that so important?Jaya Jagannath said and here is the authorative photo of Lord Krishna.
Srila Prabhupada's translation on anger:
From anger, delusion arises, and from delusion bewilderment of memory. When memory is bewildered, intelligence is lost, and when intelligence is lost, one falls down again into the material pool.
Bhagavad Gita 2:63