This is a side-by-side comparison of Srila Prabhuapda’s original Macmillan Bhagavad-gita As It Is (on the left hand side) and ISKCON’s “Revised and Enlarged” edition [on the right hand side].

The Macmillan edition comes from the Bhaktivdanta Vedabase 2003 and does contain some scanning errors, occasionally there are words that have characters in them that are incorrect. ISKCON’s Revised and Enlarged edition comes from the Bhaktivedanta Vedabase 3.1.

Because of the way the diff program we used works in some cases we had to make the format of the Sanskrit verses the same in both books, otherwise the diff program would go crazy. Often in the original editon a Sanskrit verse would be quoted on four lines and in ISKCON’s “Revised and Enlarged” edition it is only quoted on two [longer] lines. So to get a clear comparison we have made the Sanskrit verses on the same number of lines in both books. Also sometimes we had to break a paragraph or join a paragraph in one of the books, again so the diff program would give the proper output.

We have only compared the translations and purports for Chapter 1-18. For clarity we have not compared the word-for-word synonyms, even though there are a lot of changes in the synonyms.

Apart from any scanning errors and the slight format adjustments we had to make you will very clearly see all the changes that have been made between the two versions of Srila Prabhuapda’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is in a way that was never possible before.

• Bg 1: Observing the Armies on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra
• Bg 2: Contents of the Gita Summarized
• Bg 3: Karma-yoga
• Bg 4: Transcendental Knowledge
• Bg 5: Karma-yoga-Action in Krsna Consciousness
• Bg 6: Sankhya-yoga
• Bg 7: Knowledge of the Absolute
• Bg 8: Attaining the Supreme
• Bg 9: The Most Confidential Knowledge
• Bg 10: The Opulence of the Absolute
• Bg 11: The Universal Form
• Bg 12: Devotional Service
• Bg 13: Nature, the Enjoyer, and Consciousness
• Bg 14: The Three Modes of Material Nature
• Bg 15: The Yoga of the Supreme Person
• Bg 16: The Divine and Demoniac Natures
• Bg 17: The Divisions of Faith
• Bg 18: Conclusion-The Perfection of Renunciation

This is the “original manuscript” referred to by Jayadvaita Swami which he uses to justify the BBT changes to Srila Prabhuapda’s Gita.

As I have noted elsewhere ISKCON’s New Gita Closer to the Manuscript? Not Really…
this manuscript is not the authority, the published book is the authority. However out of interest we have decided to publish the “original manuscript” also.

The manuscript is presented as .pdf files and can best be viewed with the Adobe PDF viewer which can be downloaded free of charge from www.Adobe.com

• Introduction
• Chapter 1: Observing the Armies on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra
• Chapter 2: Contents of the Gita Summarized
• Chapter 3: Karma-yoga
• Chapter 4: Transcendental Knowledge
• Chapter 5: Karma-yoga-Action in Krsna Consciousness
• Chapter 6: Sankhya-yoga
• Chapter 7: Knowledge of the Absolute
• Chapter 8: Attaining the Supreme
• Chapter 9: The Most Confidential Knowledge
• Chapter 10: The Opulence of the Absolute
• Chapter 11: The Universal Form
• Chapter 12: Devotional Service
• Chapter 13: Nature, the Enjoyer, and Consciousness
• Chapter 14: The Three Modes of Material Nature
• Chapter 15: The Yoga of the Supreme Person
• Chapter 16: The Divine and Demoniac Natures
• Chapter 17: The Divisions of Faith
• Chapter 18: Conclusion-The Perfection of Renunciation

Just imagine if I write a book and find an editor I trust and and give him the service of editing my manuscript for publication. I work with the editor, answering his questions and give him guidance on how to edit the book. Then I supervise all aspects of the production of the book and see and approve of the final blueprint.  When the book is printed, it is that book which is the authorized and authoritative version of my book. Not my first manuscript.

If later on someone finds my first manuscript and notes that there are some differences in the first manuscript to the printed book and he decides to “correct” my book back to my original manuscript he is doing me a great disservice.

The whole idea of having an editor and working with him to produce the final book is to produce something which will be somewhat different from the original manuscript. If Prabhupada wanted to publish his original manuscript, unedited, he could have done that. But, no, he appointed an editor and worked with that editor to produce the final result and he was very happy with the published book.

So the whole justification of the ISKCON book changes is completely wrong. The authoritative version of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is is the 1972 Macmillan Complete Edition. Not the so-called “original manuscript.” The 1972 Macmillan Complete Edition is the book used by Srila Prabhuapda personally on a daily basis for his reading and for giving all his Bhagavad-gita classes from. Srila Prabhuapda read his whole published Bhagavad-gita As It Is many times and he had his disciples read large sections of it out aloud which he would comment on during class. And these Bhagavad-gita readings with commentaries by Srila Prabhuapda were recored.

In the six years from 1972 to 1977 Srila Prabhuapda only mentioned two or three things he wanted corrected in his Bhagavad-gita As It Is, however at no point did he ever authorize anyone to “revise and enlarge” it. And this fact is openly admitted by the BBT.

Prabhuapda did not give anyone the authority to change his Bhagavad-gita As It Is. But the BBT changed it anyhow. This Prabhuapda referred to as the “American disease.” Change, change, change. This constant change is very destructive to spiritual life.

Understanding this point, that the manuscript is not the authority but the printed 1972 Macmillan “Complete Edition” is, still I was a little interested to see if it was actually true that Jayadvaita’s changes to Bhagavad-gita As It Is, make it closer to the original manuscript. Here are some of the changes I have mentioned in the past[these are the ones from the "108 Changes article"] along with what Jayadvaita Swami calls the “original manuscript.”

This short study clearly shows that although there are some cases where he has “made it closer to the manuscript” in the majority of cases Jayadvaita Swami’s changes are not connected with or supported by the original manuscript at all. And there are so many differences in the manuscript that he does not change. So the manuscript is obviously not the reason for his changes and this defense “I have simply made it closer to the manuscript” is a smokescreen only, an attempt to cover up why he really made these changes.

Bg 2.8 P ORIGINAL 72 GITA:

…they can achieve real happiness only if they consult Krsna, or the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam–which constitute the science of Krsna–or the bona fide representative of Krsna, the man in Krsna consciousness.

Bg 2.8 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

…they can achieve real happiness only if they consult Krsna, or the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam–which constitute the science of Krsna–through the bona fide representative of Krsna, the man in Krsna consciousness. This change has absolutely no justification in the manuscript. The original translation follows the original manuscript. Original manuscript says one can be happy if he consults Bhagavad Gita or Srimad Bhagavatam which constitute the science of Krishna from the bona fide representative of Krishna [which means you can achieve real happiness by consulting Bhagavad Gita or Srimad Bhagavatam if it is presented by the bona fide representative of Krishna, so the books are only good if presented by a bond fide representative of Krishna, like Prabhuapda's books are] OR the man in Krishna consciousness. The original translation puts it slightly differently but still comes up with the same conclusion, the same philosophy, howerver JAS is giving us a completely different conclusion. So as far as I can see that “-from the bona fide representative of Krishna” in the manuscript is saying that the books have to be from the bona fide representative of Krishna, and the second part is OR the man in Krishna consciousness. There is no question about the philosophy here. That is correct.The book Bhagavata and the person Bhagavata are the same and one can get the same benefit either from the book Bhagavata or the person Bhagavata. This idea is presented in Prabhupada’s original Gita, but not JAS’s edition. So according to JAS’s presentation you can not get real happiness from the Bhagavatam or Bhagavad-gita book, you can only get this “through the man in Krishna consciousness.” This is a very misleading and philosophically incorrect presentation. The book Bhagavata has to be presented, means written, by the bona fide representative of Krishna, so one can become completely Krishna conscious by reading this book Bhagavata which has been written by the bona fide representative of Krishna. JAS’s translation makes it appear that this is not possible. Therefore it is presenting incorrect philosophy, even though it may seem to be an attempt to make it closer to the original manuscript, he has made the philosophy incorrect.

Bg 2.18 P ORIGINAL:

…The body itself is unimportant. Arjuna was advised to fight and to sacrifice the material body for the cause of religion.

Bg 2.18 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

…The body itself is unimportant. Arjuna was advised to fight and not sacrifice the cause of religion for material, bodily considerations. This change has absolutely no justification in the manuscript. The original translation perfectly follows the manuscript. The original manuscript clearly says “Arjuna was advised to fight without consideration of the material body and sacrifice [it to] the cause of religiosity.” That is exactly what the original translation says with slightly better wording. However what JAS has put is completely meaningless gobbledygook. What on earth does it mean to “fight and not sacrifice the cause of religion for material, bodily considerations???” It is a completely meaningless and confusing statement. Here JAS is clearly tying to change something that appeared in the original manuscript. Original manuscript clearly says Krishna asked Arjuna to fight without consideration of the material body and to sacrifice it to the cause of religiosity. You can not find this anywhere in JAS’s Gita…

Bg 2.25 T ORIGINAL:

It is said that the soul is invisible, inconceivable, immutable and unchangeable. Knowing this, you should not grieve for the body.

Bg 2.25 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

It is said that the soul is invisible, inconceivable and immutable. Knowing this, you should not grieve for the body. This change has absolutely no justification in the manuscript. The word “unchangeable” is clearly there in the manuscript in both the translation and the word-for-word meanings. But JAS has simply deleted it.

Bg 2.30 T ORIGINAL:

O descendant of Bharata, he who dwells in the body is eternal and can never be slain. Therefore you need not grieve for any creature.

Bg 2.30 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

O descendant of Bharata, he who dwells in the body can never be slain. Therefore you need not grieve for any living being. This change has absolutely no justification in the manuscript. This is something of a mystery. You can see the manuscript really does not very closely resemble the original published edition, but more importantly it does not resemble JAS’s changed version either. We can only assume that there was some conversation with Srila Prabhuapda that resulted in this translation. In any case the original editors would have been justified in putting “eternal” into the translation on the basis that the word “nityam” appears in the verse and Srila Prabhuapda translates this to “eternally,” however Jayadvaita can not be justified in removing the word “eternal” from the translation as he says he changes Prabhupada’s translations to match the Sanskrit word-for-word. In this case he has changed the original translation and made it inconsistent with the word-for-word synonyms. There is absolute proof that Srila Prabhuapda accepted this verse, and the inclusion of “eternal” in the translation as it was presented in his original Bhagavad-gita As It Is, and you can read that below. So there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for JAS to remove the word “eternal” from the translation while otherwise keeping the version presented by the editors of the original edition that does not really appear to be very close to the original manuscript anyhow. This one verse is ample proof that JAS is not “making it closer to the original manuscript.” Here his translation is exactly like the Macmillan edition using the “he who dwells in the body can never be slain,” which does not appear in the manuscript, JAS has simply deleted the “is eternal” for reasons only known to him. The “eternal” is in the word-for-word, “nityam,” there is nothing wrong with the original editors putting it in the verse as is very clearly shown by Srila Prabhuapda himself below. It is only necessary to listen to Srila Prabhuapda’s classes to resolve all these points.

“O descendant of Bharata, he who dwells in the body is eternal and can never be slain. Therefore you need not grieve for any creature.”

Prabhupada: Dehi nityam avadhyo ‘yam dehe sarvasya bharata. Dehe, dehe means body, within the body. This topic began, dehino ’smin yatha dehe kaumaram yauvanam jara. Deha, dehi. Dehi means one who possesses the body. Just like guni. Asthate in prata. The grammatical. Guna, in, deha, in, in prata. Dehin sabda. So the nominative case of dehin sabda is dehi. Dehi nityam, eternal. In so many ways, Krsna has explained. Nityam, eternal. Indestructible, immutable. It does not take birth, it does not die, it is always, constantly the same. Na hanyate hanyamane sarire. In this way, again he says nityam, eternal. (730831BG.LON) So here Srila Prabhuapda clearly confirms that the word eternal (nityam) belongs in this verse. But for some completely unknown reason, not supported by the manuscript, and not supported by Prabhuapda personally, JAS has decided to delete the word eternal…

Bg 2.31 P ORIGINAL:

…Discharging one’s specific duty in any field of action in accordance with varnasrama-dharma serves to elevate one to a higher status of life.

Bg 2.31 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

…Discharging one’s specific duty in any field of action in accordance with the orders of higher authorities serves to elevate one to a higher status of life. I guess here it might be possible to argue that JAS has made it closer to the original manuscript. However my opinion on this is we should respect the original editors and it is not unreasonable to assume that the higher authority is the Varnasrama Dharma system since the whole purport is speaking of this Varnasrama system and the original editor may not have like to have it saying …higher authority… higher status of life. Such things that are philosophically and gramatically correct should not be changed to satisfy some pedantic editor. There is nothing wrong with the original at all.

Bg 2.40 P ORIGINAL:

If someone gives up self-gratificatory pursuits and works in Krsna consciousness and then falls down on account of not completing his work, what loss is there on his part?

Bg 2.40 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

If someone gives up his occupational duties and works in Krsna consciousness and then falls down on account of not completing his work, what loss is there on his part? Here you may be able to make a case that JAS has made it closer to the manuscript. Maybe you could even make a case that this is a valid correction. But you see this is the first one so far and I am being impartial here. I am not just picking out the quotes for this presentation. I am going through ALL the quotes I gave in this “108 Changes” article and I did not look at the manuscript before writing that article.

Bg 2.48 T ORIGINAL:

Be steadfast in yoga, O Arjuna. Perform your duty and abandon all attachment to success or failure. Such evenness of mind is called yoga.

Bg 2.48 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

Perform your duty equipoised, O Arjuna, abandoning all attachment to success or failure. Such equanimity is called yoga. The original translation to this verse has been very clearly approved by Srila Prabhupada personally and considering this to change it and delete points that Prabhuapda has stressed on so strongly is a great mistake and very offensive to Srila Prabhupada. Why the editors do not listen to Srila Prabhuapda’s classes before they butcher his books?

(7) When Tamala Krsna read the verse to Srila Prabhupada in 1968 (681216BG.LA) Prabhupada had this to say:

Tamala Krsna: “Be steadfast in your duty, O Arjuna, and abandon all attachment to success or failure. Such evenness of mind is called yoga.”

Prabhupada: This is the explanation of yoga, evenness of mind. Yoga-samatvam ucyate. If you work for Krsna, then there is no cause of lamentation or jubilation. Jubilation is there because you are working for Krsna, but there is no cause of lamentation. Yoga-sthah kuru karmani, yogah karmasu kausalam. That is the secret of activities, how you can very diligently work at the same time you are not entangled with the actions. That is the secret. Go on. So JAS has completely deleted this “evenneess of mind” from the verse, even though Prabhuapda clearly states that “this is the explanation of yoga, evenness of mind.”???

Bg 2.49 T ORIGINAL:

O Dhananjaya, rid yourself of all fruitive activities by devotional service, and surrender fully to that consciousness. Those who want to enjoy the fruits of their work are misers.

Bg 2.49 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

O Dhananjaya, keep all abominable activities far distant by devotional service, and in that consciousness surrender unto the Lord. Those who want to enjoy the fruits of their work are misers. Here JAS is making it closer to the manuscript and he is backed up by the word-for-word synomyms also. This is perhaps the best example so far but I must admit to having an uncomfortable feeling about this manuscript page that seems to have been typed with two different typewriters. And I do not know how that would be possible?

Bg 2.51 T ORIGINAL:

The wise, engaged in devotional service take refuge in the Lord and free themselves from the cycle of birth and death by renouncing the fruits of action in the material world. In this way they can attain that state beyond all miseries.

Bg 2.51 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

By thus engaging in devotional service to the Lord, great sages or devotees free themselves from the results of work in the material world. In this way they become free from the cycle of birth and death and attain the state beyond all miseries [by going back to Godhead]. Here I guess you could say JAS is making it closer to the manuscript, however Prabhuapda has clearly aproved of the original translation below so JAS’s jumbling of words is completely unnecessary.

Tamala Krsna: “The wise, engaged in devotional service, take refuge in the Lord and free themselves from the cycle of birth and death by renouncing the fruits of action in the material world.”

Prabhupada: Yes. There is purport?

Tamala Krsna: No. There’s a little more to that sloka.

Prabhupada: All right. Finish.

Tamala Krsna: “In this way they can attain that state beyond all miseries.”

Prabhupada: Read it again.

Tamala Krsna: “The wise, engaged in devotional service, take refuge in the Lord and free themselves from the cycle of birth and death by renouncing the fruits of action in the material world. In this way they can attain that state beyond all miseries.”

Prabhupada: How easy it is. You take to Krsna consciousness, you act in Krsna consciousness, you overcome the cycle of birth and death. And as soon as you overcome the cycle of birth and death, you overcome all miseries. Because birth and death means this material body. The living entity, spirit soul, has no birth and death. And anyone who possesses this material body has to undergo the threefold miseries of the material world. A similar passage is there in the Srimad-Bhagavatam. The other day, as I was speaking to you, nunam pramattah kurute vikarma. All these people, they are acting in a way which they ought not to have done. Nunam pramattah. But they are acting as madmen. Why? Yad indriya-pritaya, for satisfaction of the senses. Nunam pramattah kurute vikarma yad indriya-pritaya aprnoti na sadhu manye. This is not good. Because he does not know that he has achieved this material body by working in that way in his previous life. Again he is working in that way. So he’ll have to accept again this material body, therefore he’s miser. He’s not properly utilizing. Go on.

So it’s obvious Srila Prabhupada approved of, accepted and fully authorized the original translation! He had Tamala Krsna read it and agreed, “Yes, there is purport?” Then he had Tamala read it again, “How easy it is…” There is absolutely no hint Srila Prabhupada even considered anyone would dare to change the translation he personally heard twice here and completely agreed with and approved of…

Bg 2.57 T ORIGINAL:

He who is without attachment, who does not rejoice when he obtains good, nor lament when he obtains evil, is firmly fixed in perfect knowledge.

Bg 2.57 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

In the material world, one who is unaffected by whatever good or evil he may obtain, neither praising it nor despising it, is firmly fixed in perfect knowledge.

This is very interesting. Here JAS has made it closer to the manuscript, apparently. But in reality he has completely removed the principle of being without attachment is completely removed from Jayadvaita’s translation.

The manuscript’s “without affection for the good or the evil,” was rendered by the original editor as without attachment for good or evil, which correctly prevents the idea in the manuscript.

However Jayadvaita Swami has changed it to “unaffected by whatever good or evil he may obtain.” This is very different from Prabhuapda’s idea in the manuscript. Being unattached to good or evil or having no affection for good or evil is very different from not being affected by good or evil.

So here we have the strange situation where JAS has made it closer to the original manuscript, apparently, but by word juggelry he has screwed a completely different meaning out of the verse…

Bg 2.61 P ORIGINAL:

The Yoga-sutra also prescribes meditation on Visnu, and not meditation on the void. The so-called yogis who meditate on something which is not the Visnu form simply waste their time in a vain search after some phantasmagoria. We have to be Krsna conscious–devoted to the Personality of Godhead. This is the aim of the real yoga.

Bg 2.61 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

The Yoga-sutra also prescribes meditation on Visnu, and not meditation on the void. The so-called yogis who meditate on something which is not on the Visnu platform simply waste their time in a vain search after some phantasmagoria. We have to be Krsna conscious–devoted to the Personality of Godhead. This is the aim of the real yoga.

This change is completely contrary to the original manuscript. Prabhuapda very clearly twice states one has to meditate on the Visnu FORM in the manuscript and Jayadvaita changes it to the impersonal Visnu PLATFORM.

Just see how he works! He has not even deleted any words at all here! He has just added in “on” and “plat” and see the effect it has! The original says anyone who meditates on something other than the Visnu form is wasting his time, but Jayadvaita has to adjust this as what about the impersonalists? They meditate on the impersonal form, etc… Surely they’re not wasting their time?? So has to change Srila Prabhupada’s purport…

Bg 2.66 T ORIGINAL:

One who is not in transcendental consciousness can have neither a controlled mind nor a steady intelligence, without which there is no possibility of peace. And how can there be any happiness without peace?

Bg 2.66 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

One who is not connected with the Supreme [in Krsna consciousness] can have neither transcendental intelligence nor a steady mind, without which there is no possibility of peace. And how can there be any happiness without peace?

Here the original translation is clear and does not need to be “corrected.” And the “corrections” JAS has done do not come from the manuscript at all.

• He has added “connected with the Supreme” [not in manuscript].
• He has replaced “controlled mind” with “transcendental intelligence” which is in the manuscript but it has nothing to do with the “controlled mind” he replaces it for. He has removed the “controlled mind” altogether and we find “controlled mind” in the manuscript as “fixed mind” .
• Instead of the “controlled mind” or the “fixed mind” he has invented “steady mind” and put that into his new transaction. There is no “steady mind” in the manuscript…

So what is the result of all of Jayadavita’s word juggling here?  “A controlled mind…” In the original we can clearly see there’s no possibility of peace and happiness without a controlled mind, but in Jayadvaita’s translation the mind control has become a “steady mind?” He has also made it very confusing. The meaning is no where near as clear as the original. Who said Jayadvaita was making “better English?” He’s making bewildering English!

Tamala Krsna: 66: “One who is not in transcendental consciousness can have neither a controlled mind nor steady intelligence, without which there is no possibility of peace, and how can there be any happiness without peace?”

Prabhupada: Everyone in this material world, they are after peace, but they don’t want to control the senses. It is not possible. Just like you are diseased, and doctor says that “You take this medicine, you take this diet,” but you cannot control. You are taking anything you like, against the instruction of the physician. Then how you can be cured? Similarly, we want cure of the chaotic condition of this material world, we want peace and prosperity, but we are not ready to control the senses. We do not know how to control the senses. We do not know the real yogic principle of controlling the senses. So there is no possibility of peace. Kutah santir ayuktasya. The exact word is there in the Bhagavad-gita. If you are not engaged in Krsna consciousness, there is no possibility of peace. Artificially, you may try for it. It is not possible. Go on. (681219BG.LA)

Just see! Srila Prabhupada heard this verse personally and immediately he is preaching on the point of sense control! Where does he say “Get Jayadvaita Swami to delete mind control from the translation?” No. He does not say that. He preaches on sense control!

Bg 3.8 T ORIGINAL:

Perform your prescribed duty, for action is better than inaction. One cannot even maintain his physical body without work.

Bg 3.8 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

Perform your prescribed duty, for doing so is better than not working. One cannot even maintain one’s physical body without work.

Here is a case where the original edited translation is perfectly good and true to the manuscript and approved by Srila Prabhuapda himself [see below] and Jayadvaita has changed it to something else that some may say is “closer to the manuscript.” But this is completely unnecessary. The original translation is perfectly good.

This is interesting. Another little “correction.” But Srila Prabhupada heard the original verse many times and never requested that it be “corrected…”

“Perform your prescribed duty, for action is better than inaction. A man cannot even maintain his physical body without work.”

Prabhupada: Krsna never said that “You sit down, lazy.” You must work. And that is intelligence, how to engage a person in some work. That requires governing body. That is intelligence. They should be ready to work, and your intelligence will engage them. And there is sufficient. Why you are constructing so many centers? There is enough work to do. Just like here. All people are coming, and each one can be preached, each one can be convinced of the philosophy. (770121r2.bhu)

There is no indication anywhere that Srila Prabhupada was not satisfied with the original translation AS IT IS…

There are so many more examples. But any thoughtful person can see that:

• The source of many of the changes is not the original manuscript at all.
• Even if there is some difference from the original manuscript that does not mean the book should be changed back to the original manuscript. Prabhupada appointed the original editors and personally supervised and approved of their work.
• The real authorized version of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is is the published 1972 Macmillan “Complete Edition” NOT the so-called “original manuscript.

All glories to His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada who’se original books will illuminate this dark age of Kali for at least the next 10,000 years.

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!

Your servant

Madhudvisa dasa

The meeting was chared by Brahma Muhurta Prabhu and Jayadvaita Swami and all other important BBT trustees and members were present.

The presentation was well received and the only point that Jayadvaita Swami contested was:

Nobody, except the editor, [Jayadvaita Swami] was aware of the magnitude of the changes.

After a long discussion Jayadvaita Swami admitted that apart from himself there were only two other people in the world who were aware of extent of the changes to Bhagagavad Gita that he had made. Those other two people were Dravida who he showed the manuscript to and the typist who typed the final manuscript to be sent to the printers.

Please study the attached .pdf file.  Restoring Confidence in the BBT.pdf

Topics Covered in Presentation:

• BBT’s Responsibilities
• Current Problems BBT is Facing
• BBT Have No Authority to Make these Changes to Prabhuapda’s Books
• Srila Prabhupada Does Not Want His Books Changed
• Prabhupada Refereed to the Editors as “Rascals” in 1977
• In 1977 Prabhupada Ordered the “Next Printing Should Be The Original Way.”
• BBT Disobeyed This Order. Instead of Printing the Original Way, BBT Started Making Huge Changes to Prabhuapda’s Bhagavad Gita.
• BBT Released the “Revised and Enlarged Edition” of Bhagavad Gita in 1983.
• The Extent of Changes Were Not Revealed to Anyone, Not Even the BBT.
• Types of Changes Made to Bhagavad Gita
• Editor’s Justification of the Changes
• Changes Were Based on the False Premise that the Editor Can Change Anything He Feels Like Changing.
• The Most Famous Change [Bhagavad Gita 4.34]
• Prabhupada’s 1936 Translation of 4.34 Same As Macmillan Gita
• A Small Collection of Changes Clearly Not Approved by Srila Prabhupada
• The Way Forward for the BBT and Increasing Book Distribution

Conclusion:

• These unauthorized, undocumented and unnecessary changes destroy the authority of BBT books
• Such changed books will never be accepted by any thoughtful person as authorative.
• “The next printing should be the original way.”
• The Principle is nothing can be changed. If there is no error in the printed book it should not be changed
• Real typographical errors in the original books can be corrected. But only if there are footnotes notifying the readers of the correction.

Please study the attached .pdf file.  Restoring Confidence in the BBT.pdf

All changes are highlighted in the following pages. This comparison is based on the original & revised versions as they are presented in the Bhaktivedanta Archives Folio. We have not yet verified if the original and revised Cc’s in the folio are exactily the same as the printed books or not.

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Adi-lila

Adi 1: The Spiritual Masters
Adi 2: Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Is the Supreme Personality of Godhead
Adi 3: The External Reasons for Lord Caitanya’s Appearance
Adi 4: The Confidential Reasons for Lord Caitanya’s Appearance
Adi 5: The Glories of Lord Nityananda Balarama
Adi 6: The Glories of Sri Advaita Acarya
Adi 7: Lord Caitanya in Five Features
Adi 8: The Author Receives the Orders of Krsna and Guru
Adi 9: The Tree of Devotional Service
Adi 10: The Trunk, Branches and Subbranches of the Caitanya Tree
Adi 11: The Expansions of Lord Nityananda
Adi 12: The Expansions of Advaita Acarya and Gadadhara Pandita
Adi 13: The Advent of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
Adi 14: Lord Caitanya’s Childhood Pastimes
Adi 15: The Lord’s Pauganda-lila
Adi 16: The Pastimes of the Lord in His Childhood and Youth
Adi 17: The Pastimes of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu in His Youth

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Madhya-lila

Madhya 1: The Later Pastimes of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
Madhya 2: The Ecstatic Manifestations of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
Madhya 3: Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s Stay at the House of Advaita Acarya
Madhya 4: Sri Madhavendra Puri’s Devotional Service
Madhya 5: The Activities of Saksi-gopala
Madhya 6: The Liberation of Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya
Madhya 7: The Lord’s Tour of South India
Madhya 8: Talks Between Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Ramananda Raya
Madhya 9: Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s Travels to the Holy Places
Madhya 10: The Lord’s Return to Jagannatha Puri
Madhya 11: The Beda-kirtana Pastimes of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
Madhya 12: The Cleansing of the Gundica Temple
Madhya 13: The Ecstatic Dancing of the Lord at Ratha-yatra
Madhya 14: Performance of the Vrndavana Pastimes
Madhya 15: The Lord Accepts Prasada at the House of Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya
Madhya 16: The Lord’s Attempt to Go to Vrndavana
Madhya 17: The Lord Travels to Vrndavana
Madhya 18: Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s Visit to Sri Vrndavana
Madhya 19: Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Instructs Srila Rupa Gosvami
Madhya 20: Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Instructs Sanatana Gosvami in the Science
Madhya 21: The Opulence and Sweetness of Lord Sri Krsna
Madhya 22: The Process of Devotional Service
Madhya 23: Life’s Ultimate Goal–Love of Godhead
Madhya 24: The Sixty-One Explanations of the Atmarama Verse
Madhya 25: How All the Residents of Varanasi Became Vaisnavas

Sri Caitanya-caritamrta Antya-lila

Antya 1: Srila Rupa Gosvami’s Second Meeting With the Lord
Antya 2: The Chastisement of Junior Haridasa
Antya 3: The Glories of Srila Haridasa Thakura
Antya 4: Sanatana Gosvami Visits the Lord at Jagannatha Puri
Antya 5: How Pradyumna Misra Received Instructions from Ramananda Raya
Antya 6: The Meeting of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Raghunatha dasa Gosvami
Antya 7: The Meeting of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Vallabha Bhatta
Antya 8: Ramacandra Puri Criticizes the Lord
Antya 9: The Deliverance of Gopinatha Pattanayaka
Antya 10: Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Accepts Prasada from the Devotees
Antya 11: The Passing of Haridasa Thakura
Antya 12: The Loving Dealings Between Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Jagadananda
Antya 13: Pastimes with Jagadananda Pandita and Raghunatha Bhatta Gosvami
Antya 14: Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s Feelings of Separation from Krsna
Antya 15: The Transcendental Madness of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
Antya 16: Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu Tastes Nectar from the Lips of Lord Sri Krsna
Antya 17: The Bodily Transformations of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
Antya 18: Rescuing the Lord from the Sea
Antya 19: The Inconceivable Behavior of Lord Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu
Antya 20: The Siksastaka Prayers

“Consequently, Srila Vyasadeva is a guru. He does not misinterpret the words of Krsna, but transmits them exactly as they were spoken. If we send a telegram, the person who delivers the telegram does not have to correct it, edit it, or add to it. He simply presents it. That is the guru’s business.” (Science of Self Realization Chap. 2)

Regarding your proposed program of editing, the Bhagavatam First Canto is already edited, so when making final typing, you shall simply see it for proofreading. (Letter to Rayrama 15-May-69) This is NOT a comprehensive list!

• Sense Control, Regulative Principles, etc
  • Constant Practice
  • Controling the Mind and Senses
• Mode of Goodness
  • Acting in Goodness Leads to Knowledge?
  • Acting in Goodness Purifies One?
• Fruitive Activities
  • Give Up Fruitive Activities?
  • Renouncing Fruits of Action?
  • Devotees are Not Anxious for Fruitive Rewards?
• Mayavadis, Jnanis and Yogis…
  • Sat-Cakra-Yoga?
  • Reading Many Books?
  • Void Philosophy Causes Frustration?
  • Without Humility Understanding is Harmful?
  • Meditation On Other Than the Visnu Form?
• Spiritual Master
  • Many Spiritual Masters?
  • Not through the Independent Study of Books…
  • Spiritual Master Can Drive Away All Nescience?
• More palitable for the public?
  • Fighting for Krishna?
  • Material Existence is Suffering Only?
  • Sacrificing the Material Body For the Sake of Religion?
  • The Soft Line for Ksatriyas
  • Devotees are Liberated and Their Minds are Peaceful?
  • Brahmacaris Are Austere and Simple?
  • Devotees Should Live Simply?
  • “Faithfulness” is one of the Opulences of a Woman?
• Philosophy
  • The Changeless Soul?
  • Brahma is the “creator god”?
  • We Can’t Create Matter From Nothing? And “Krishna is the supreme creator of all individual souls? “
  • “OM” Eminates From Krishna?
• Various
  • Swans “Digging into” the Lotus Flower?
  • What Happened to the Purport?
  • Brahma has 4, 8, 16, 32, etc heads?

The original edition was more or less a transcript of the original conversation. It was edited, of course, to make the English clear and correct and to make it readable. But basically it remained a transcript of the original conversation.

The 1993 version changes all of this. The book is slashed from 99 pages to 77 pages! And the type is not even smaller! So much has been cut out. In one place four complete pages have been deleted!

All the text has been heavily edited and the whole mood of the book has been completely changed. We have not done anything below about the editing, we have just pointed out a few pieces of text (shown in bold) that have been completely deleted from the new edition.

“…the Sanskrit editors where by now accomplished scholars. And now they were able to see their way through perplexities in the manuscript by consulting the same Sanskrit commentaries Srila Prabhupada consulted when writing Bhagavad-gita As It Is.” (from A Note About the Second Edition, 1986 printing)

The BBT editors may think they are very great scholars, qualified to go back to the original scriptures and “correct” Srila Prabhupada’s translations… But Srila Prabhupada didn’t have so much faith in his “Sanskrit Scholar” disciples…

“…a little learning is dangerous, especially for the Westerners. I am practically seeing that as soon as they begin to learn a little Sanskrit immediately they feel that they have become more than their guru and then the policy is kill guru and be killed himself.” (from a letter to Dixit das on 18 Sep 1976)

There are some typographical errors in the 1972 printing, and if Jayadvaita had simply corrected the obvious typos no one would have been at all concerned.

The problem is Jayadvaita did not just correct the typographical errors. He has also changed so many things. There are thousands of changes which are completely unnecessary, change for the sake of change. Most of the changes make no significant improvement to the book. However these changes alter whole “feel” and style of the book and many devotees do not like the new “style.”

Among his more than 5,000 changes to Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is there are many major changes to the meaning of the text in the original book amid thousands of petty changes which apparently do not change the meaning…

There are hundreds of changes that completely alter the meaning of what Srila Prabhupada says in the original book, and which he confirmed while giving his classes and hearing the book read by devotees…

To give some idea of the changes we have collected 108 of them. This is by no means a complete list. There are hundreds more similar changes that COMPLETELY alter the meaning of the text in Srila Prabhupada’s book, but these 108 changes will give us a small insight as to how different Jayadvaita’s Bhagavad-gita is from Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

I guarantee if you take a little time to carefully go through this paper you will be surprised and shocked to see the GBC could allow such meddling with Srila Prabhupada’s books…

These 108 changes are just a few examples we have picked out to illustrate the point that Jayadvaita’s “New, Revised and Enlarged” Bhagavad-gita, in many, many cases, is completely different in the message it presents to Srila Prabhupada’s book. It’s NOT, NOT, NOT at all the same message one gets by reading Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is! It’s a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BOOK.

Srila Prabhupada completely approved of his original Bhagavad-gita As It Is , he read it himself daily and gave his classes from it. He certainly did not give ANYONE the AUTHORITY to “revise and enlarge” it.

Bg 2.8 P ORIGINAL:

…they can achieve real happiness only if they consult Krsna, or the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam–which constitute the science of Krsna–or the bona fide representative of Krsna, the man in Krsna consciousness.

Bg 2.8 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

…they can achieve real happiness only if they consult Krsna, or the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam–which constitute the science of Krsna–through the bona fide representative of Krsna, the man in Krsna consciousness.

(1) It’s only one word changed, but what a difference! In Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita we can understand Krsna by reading the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam, after all the books are not different from Krsna!! But Jayadvaita has adjusted everything for us…

Bg 2.18 P ORIGINAL:

…The body itself is unimportant. Arjuna was advised to fight and to sacrifice the material body for the cause of religion.

Bg 2.18 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

…The body itself is unimportant. Arjuna was advised to fight and not sacrifice the cause of religion for material, bodily considerations.

(2) Arjuna WAS advised by Krsna to “sacrifice the material body for the cause of religion…” But one would never know that by reading Jayadvaita’s version. This is typical of his word juggling. He uses the same words as in the original book but moves them around to get a completely different meaning…

Bg 2.25 T ORIGINAL:

It is said that the soul is invisible, inconceivable, immutable and unchangeable. Knowing this, you should not grieve for the body.

Bg 2.25 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

It is said that the soul is invisible, inconceivable and immutable. Knowing this, you should not grieve for the body.

(3) One would never know the soul is unchangeable by reading Jayadvaita’s book…

Bg 2.30 T ORIGINAL:

O descendant of Bharata, he who dwells in the body is eternal and can never be slain. Therefore you need not grieve for any creature.

Bg 2.30 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

O descendant of Bharata, he who dwells in the body can never be slain. Therefore you need not grieve for any living being.

(4) If one removes “is eternal” [perhaps by studying the original sanskrit to "correct" Srila Prabhupada's translation] it is NOT the same thing as the book Srila Prabhupada personally read from daily and gave all his classes from. Is it? Why didn’t Jayadvaita Swami listen to Srila Prabhupada’s classes?

“O descendant of Bharata, he who dwells in the body is eternal and can never be slain. Therefore you need not grieve for any creature.”

Prabhupada: Dehi nityam avadhyo ‘yam dehe sarvasya bharata. Dehe, dehe means body, within the body. This topic began, dehino ’smin yatha dehe kaumaram yauvanam jara. Deha, dehi. Dehi means one who possesses the body. Just like guni. Asthate in prata. The grammatical. Guna, in, deha, in, in prata. Dehin sabda. So the nominative case of dehin sabda is dehi. Dehi nityam, eternal. In so many ways, Krsna has explained. Nityam, eternal. Indestructible, immutable. It does not take birth, it does not die, it is always, constantly the same. Na hanyate hanyamane sarire. In this way, again he says nityam, eternal. (730831BG.LON)

But Jayadvaita has “intelligently” removed “eternal” form his translation of this verse!

Bg 2.31 P ORIGINAL:

…Discharging one’s specific duty in any field of action in accordance with varnasrama-dharma serves to elevate one to a higher status of life.

Bg 2.31 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

…Discharging one’s specific duty in any field of action in accordance with the orders of higher authorities serves to elevate one to a higher status of life.

(5) Why bother with varnasrama-dharma? How can one make spiritual advancement by following varnasrama-dharma? No. One has to surrender to the ISKCON authorities…

Bg 2.40 P ORIGINAL:

If someone gives up self-gratificatory pursuits and works in Krsna consciousness and then falls down on account of not completing his work, what loss is there on his part?

Bg 2.40 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

If someone gives up his occupational duties and works in Krsna consciousness and then falls down on account of not completing his work, what loss is there on his part?

(6) Is it really the same thing to give up “self-gratificartory pursuits” and to give up “occupational duties?”

Bg 2.48 T ORIGINAL:

Be steadfast in yoga, O Arjuna. Perform your duty and abandon all attachment to success or failure. Such evenness of mind is called yoga.

Bg 2.48 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

Perform your duty equipoised, O Arjuna, abandoning all attachment to success or failure. Such equanimity is called yoga.

(7) Just see! We get absolutely no hint at all from Jayadvaita Swami’s translation that a devotee is “steadfast in yoga” or a devotee has any “evenness of mind.” However, when Tamala Krsna read the verse to Srila Prabhupada in 1968 (681216BG.LA) Prabhupada had this to say:

Tamala Krsna: “Be steadfast in your duty, O Arjuna, and abandon all attachment to success or failure. Such evenness of mind is called yoga.”

Prabhupada: This is the explanation of yoga, evenness of mind. Yoga-samatvam ucyate. If you work for Krsna, then there is no cause of lamentation or jubilation. Jubilation is there because you are working for Krsna, but there is no cause of lamentation. Yoga-sthah kuru karmani, yogah karmasu kausalam. That is the secret of activities, how you can very diligently work at the same time you are not entangled with the actions. That is the secret. Go on.

Srila Prabhupada very clearly accepts the translation As It Is!!! He does not say “It’s wrong! Please get Jayadvaita Swami to change it…”

Not only does Srila Prabhupada accept the translation As It Is, he says “This is the explanation of yoga, evenness of mind.” And Jayadvaita Swami has completely deleted it!!!

Bg 2.49 T ORIGINAL:

O Dhananjaya, rid yourself of all fruitive activities by devotional service, and surrender fully to that consciousness. Those who want to enjoy the fruits of their work are misers.

Bg 2.49 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

O Dhananjaya, keep all abominable activities far distant by devotional service, and in that consciousness surrender unto the Lord. Those who want to enjoy the fruits of their work are misers.

(8) Here the emphasis has been taken off “freeing oneself from all fruitive activities.” Also the the meaning of surrender has been changed… Anyhow it’s different from the translation clearly accepted by Srila Prabhupada in his physical presence.

Bg 2.51 T ORIGINAL:

The wise, engaged in devotional service take refuge in the Lord and free themselves from the cycle of birth and death by renouncing the fruits of action in the material world. In this way they can attain that state beyond all miseries.

Bg 2.51 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

By thus engaging in devotional service to the Lord, great sages or devotees free themselves from the results of work in the material world. In this way they become free from the cycle of birth and death and attain the state beyond all miseries [by going back to Godhead].

(9) Krishna! It’s difficult to work out what Jayadvaita is trying to do here! The original translation is so perfectly clear and obvious. After reading it there’s no doubt what it says… “The wise, engaged in devotional service take refuge in the Lord and free themselves from the cycle of birth and death by renouncing the fruits of action in the material world. In this way they can attain that state beyond all miseries.” What’s wrong with that? It’s perfect! When we read Jayadvaita’s translation it’s not at all clear… And the meaning is completely different from the one personally approved by Srila Prabhupada!

Here Jayadvaita Swami has covered up the point that devotees renounce the fruits of action. He doesn’t seem to like this point and often obscures it, but it’s a basic cornerstone of Krsna Consciousness… Whatever fruits our actions produce are not ours! They’re Krsna’s and should be used in Krsna’s service. That’s renouncing the fruits of our actions, we don’t enjoy them ourselves, we use them for Krsna’s enjoyment…

So what did Srila Prabhupada think about the original translation? Did he ask Jayadvaita to change it?

Tamala Krsna: “The wise, engaged in devotional service, take refuge in the Lord and free themselves from the cycle of birth and death by renouncing the fruits of action in the material world.”

Prabhupada: Yes. There is purport?

Tamala Krsna: No. There’s a little more to that sloka.

Prabhupada: All right. Finish.

Tamala Krsna: “In this way they can attain that state beyond all miseries.”

Prabhupada: Read it again.

Tamala Krsna: “The wise, engaged in devotional service, take refuge in the Lord and free themselves from the cycle of birth and death by renouncing the fruits of action in the material world. In this way they can attain that state beyond all miseries.”

Prabhupada: How easy it is. You take to Krsna consciousness, you act in Krsna consciousness, you overcome the cycle of birth and death. And as soon as you overcome the cycle of birth and death, you overcome all miseries. Because birth and death means this material body. The living entity, spirit soul, has no birth and death. And anyone who possesses this material body has to undergo the threefold miseries of the material world. A similar passage is there in the Srimad-Bhagavatam. The other day, as I was speaking to you, nunam pramattah kurute vikarma. All these people, they are acting in a way which they ought not to have done. Nunam pramattah. But they are acting as madmen. Why? Yad indriya-pritaya, for satisfaction of the senses. Nunam pramattah kurute vikarma yad indriya-pritaya aprnoti na sadhu manye. This is not good. Because he does not know that he has achieved this material body by working in that way in his previous life. Again he is working in that way. So he’ll have to accept again this material body, therefore he’s miser. He’s not properly utilizing. Go on.

So it’s obvious Srila Prabhupada approved of, accepted and fully authorized the original translation! He had Tamala Krsna read it and agreed, “Yes, there is purport?” Then he had Tamala read it again, “How easy it is…” There is absolutely no hint Srila Prabhupada even considered anyone would dare to change the translation he personally heard twice here and completely agreed with and approved of…

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy! All glories to Srila Prabhupada and his original books!

Madhudvisa dasa

[99 more changes to come in Part 2 next week...]

All glories to Srila Prabhupada’s ORIGINAL books!

Jayadvaita Swami has started his own “newsgroup” where he aims to “explain” why he “revised and enlarged” Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is even though he openly admits Srila Prabhupada “never asked us to re-edit the book…”.

He has posted one “explanation” of a correction to an obvious typographical error… Actually he corrected many real typographical errors in the original book, perhaps a little more than one hundred, but he made more than five thousand changes!

Jayadvaita does not seem to realize no one is complaining about the correction of real typographical errors… Srila Prabhupada wanted the BBT editors to make sure the books were correct grammatically but he did not give anyone the authority to Revise and Enlarge his books or change his words or change the style! So Jayadvaita can go on and post a little more than one hundred articles to his “newsgroup” describing his one hundred or so bona fide corrections. But what about the other 4,900 changes?

The point he has never addressed in any of his “explanations” is why he has produced a “Bhagavad-gita” which contains hundreds of changes that COMPLETELY alter the meaning of the book when compared to the original version Srila Prabhupada personally read from daily, gave all his classes from and did not ask anyone to “revise and enlarge.” Jayadvaita’s book is completely different from Srila Prabhuapda’s. Where is the authority for all these changes?

Srila Prabhupada gave no authority for such changes… So we will continue looking at some of the changes.

Bg 2.57 T ORIGINAL:

He who is without attachment, who does not rejoice when he obtains good, nor lament when he obtains evil, is firmly fixed in perfect knowledge.

Bg 2.57 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

In the material world, one who is unaffected by whatever good or evil he may obtain, neither praising it nor despising it, is firmly fixed in perfect knowledge.

(10) Here the principle of being without attachment is completely removed from Jayadvaita’s translation. Of course he may say he has some secret manuscript he has got this information from or he may have studied the Sanskrit and by his great learning in the Sanskrit language decided there was no attachment in the original Sanskrit. But where did he get the authority from to retranslate this verse?

Bg 2.61 P ORIGINAL:

The Yoga-sutra also prescribes meditation on Visnu, and not meditation on the void. The so-called yogis who meditate on something which is not the Visnu form simply waste their time in a vain search after some phantasmagoria. We have to be Krsna conscious–devoted to the Personality of Godhead. This is the aim of the real yoga.

Bg 2.61 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

The Yoga-sutra also prescribes meditation on Visnu, and not meditation on the void. The so-called yogis who meditate on something which is not on the Visnu platform simply waste their time in a vain search after some phantasmagoria. We have to be Krsna conscious–devoted to the Personality of Godhead. This is the aim of the real yoga.

(11) Just see how he works! He has not even deleted any words at all here! He has just added in “on” and “plat” and see the effect it has! The original says anyone who meditates on something other than the Visnu form is wasting his time, but Jayadvaita has to adjust this as what about the impersonalists? They meditate on the impersonal form, etc… Surely they’re not wasting their time?? So has to change Srila Prabhupada’s purport…

Bg 2.66 T ORIGINAL:

One who is not in transcendental consciousness can have neither a controlled mind nor a steady intelligence, without which there is no possibility of peace. And how can there be any happiness without peace?

Bg 2.66 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

One who is not connected with the Supreme [in Krsna consciousness] can have neither transcendental intelligence nor a steady mind, without which there is no possibility of peace. And how can there be any happiness without peace?

(12) “A controlled mind…” In the original we can clearly see there’s no possibility of peace and happiness without a controlled mind, but in Jayadvaita’s translation the mind control has become a “steady mind?” He has also made it very confusing. The meaning is no where near as clear as the original. Who said Jayadvaita was making “better English?” He’s making bewildering English!

Tamala Krsna: 66: “One who is not in transcendental consciousness can have neither a controlled mind nor steady intelligence, without which there is no possibility of peace, and how can there be any happiness without peace?”

Prabhupada: Everyone in this material world, they are after peace, but they don’t want to control the senses. It is not possible. Just like you are diseased, and doctor says that “You take this medicine, you take this diet,” but you cannot control. You are taking anything you like, against the instruction of the physician. Then how you can be cured? Similarly, we want cure of the chaotic condition of this material world, we want peace and prosperity, but we are not ready to control the senses. We do not know how to control the senses. We do not know the real yogic principle of controlling the senses. So there is no possibility of peace. Kutah santir ayuktasya. The exact word is there in the Bhagavad-gita. If you are not engaged in Krsna consciousness, there is no possibility of peace. Artificially, you may try for it. It is not possible. Go on. (681219BG.LA)

Just see! Srila Prabhupada heard this verse personally and immediately he is preaching on the point of sense control! Where does he say “Get Jayadvaita Swami to delete mind control from the translation?” No. He does not say that. He preaches on sense control!

Bg 3.3 T ORIGINAL:

The Blessed Lord said: O sinless Arjuna, I have already explained that there are two classes of men who realize the self. Some are inclined to understand Him by empirical, philosophical speculation, and others are inclined to know Him by devotional work.

Bg 3.3 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: O sinless Arjuna, I have already explained that there are two classes of men who try to realize the self. Some are inclined to understand it by empirical, philosophical speculation, and others by devotional service.

(12) Just a few of Jayadvaita Swami’s little “corrections…”

Bg 3.6 T ORIGINAL:

One who restrains the senses and organs of action but whose mind dwells on sense objects certainly deludes himself and is called a pretender.

Bg 3.6 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

One who restrains the senses of action but whose mind dwells on sense objects certainly deludes himself and is called a pretender.

Bg 3.7 T ORIGINAL:

On the other hand, he who controls the senses by the mind and engages his active organs in works of devotion, without attachment, is by far superior.

Bg 3.7 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

On the other hand, if a sincere person tries to control the active senses by the mind and begins karma-yoga [in Krsna consciousness] without attachment, he is by far superior.

(13 & 14) This is one of the most amazing changes. Jayadvaita has removed or changed ALL the main points in the original verse! The original clearly says one who CONTROLS his senses by the mind and ENGAGES in works of devotion is by far superior… After reading all of Srila Prabhupada’s other books and hearing his classes one would expect to find this in Srila Prabhuapda’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

Jayadvaita’s version is a little different… He’s much more generous. According to him if a “sincere person” TRIES to control the senses and BEGINS karma-yoga [in Krsna consciousness] he is by far superior! One does not even have to control his senses, just “try to”, and he does not even have to be engaged in devotional service, he just has to “begin karma-yoga…” We can note [according to Jayadvaita] one does not even have to make any advancement in karma-yoga, if he just begins karma-yoga and TRIES to control his senses he is by far superior!!

So is there any hint Srila Prabhupada wanted Jayadvaita to make these changes to this verse? Is there any hint Srila Prabhupada was not satisfied with the original translation?

Sudama: Verse number seven: “On the other hand, he who controls the senses by the mind and engages his active organs in works of devotion without attachment is by far superior.”

Prabhupada: Yes. Instead of artificially trying to meditate and control the senses, just engage your senses in the activities of Krsna consciousness and gradually you will be happy. Your senses will be controlled. Go on. (681223BG.LA)

Srila Prabhupada clearly hears the original translation has no objections to it whatsoever! Rather Srila Prabhupada completely agrees with the original translation and EMPHASISES the very points Jayadvaita has DELETED in his translation!! Srila Prabhupada emphasises engaging the senses in Krishna consciousness and thus controlling them. But there’s no hint in Jayadvaita’s translation of engaging the senses in devotional service [just "beginning karma-yoga"??] and there’s no mention of controlling them either [just TRYING to control the senses...]

Bg 3.8 T ORIGINAL:

Perform your prescribed duty, for action is better than inaction. One cannot even maintain his physical body without work.

Bg 3.8 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

Perform your prescribed duty, for doing so is better than not working. One cannot even maintain one’s physical body without work.

(15) This is interesting. Another little “correction.” But Srila Prabhupada heard the original verse many times and never requested that it be “corrected…”

“Perform your prescribed duty, for action is better than inaction. A man cannot even maintain his physical body without work.”

Prabhupada: Krsna never said that “You sit down, lazy.” You must work. And that is intelligence, how to engage a person in some work. That requires governing body. That is intelligence. They should be ready to work, and your intelligence will engage them. And there is sufficient. Why you are constructing so many centers? There is enough work to do. Just like here. All people are coming, and each one can be preached, each one can be convinced of the philosophy. (770121r2.bhu)

There is no indication anywhere that Srila Prabhupada was not satisfied with the original translation AS IT IS…

Bg 3.9 T ORIGINAL:

Work done as a sacrifice for Visnu has to be performed, otherwise work binds one to this material world. Therefore, O son of Kunti, perform your prescribed duties for His satisfaction, and in that way you will always remain unattached and free from bondage.

Bg 3.9 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

Work done as a sacrifice for Visnu has to be performed, otherwise work causes bondage in this material world. Therefore, O son of Kunti, perform your prescribed duties for His satisfaction, and in that way you will always remain free from bondage.

(16) Why has Jayadvaita removed the fact one who always performs his prescribed duties for Krishna remains unattached?

Did Prabhuapda request this change? Was he unhappy with the original translation??

Sudama: Verse number nine: “Work done as a sacrifice for Visnu has to be performed, otherwise work binds one to this material world. Therefore, O son of Kunti, perform prescribed duties for His satisfaction and in that way you will always remain unattached and free from bondage.”

Prabhupada: Yes. Bondage means working for one’s own account. The same example. Just like a soldier is fighting for the country under the command of the commander in chief. The more he’s killing, he’s getting promotion, he’s getting medals. But the same man, when he comes back at home, if he kills one man, he’s hanged. Why? Because that killing and this killing is not the same thing. So one who cannot engage himself cent percent in Krsna consciousness, let him remain in his own position and try to sacrifice for Visnu or Krsna as far as possible. (681223BG.LA)

Once again, no hint anywhere that Srila Prabhupada was not happy with the original translation…

Bg 3.20 T ORIGINAL:

Even Kings like Janaka and others attained the perfectional stage by performance of prescribed duties. Therefore, just for the sake of educating the people in general, you should perform your work.

Bg 3.20 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

Kings such as Janaka attained perfection solely by performance of prescribed duties. Therefore, just for the sake of educating the people in general, you should perform your work.

(17) A few little edits…

Bg 3.20 P ORIGINAL:

…because he was the king of Mithila… he had to teach his subjects how to fight righteously in battle. He and his subjects fought to teach people in general that violence is also necessary in a situation where good arguments fail.

Bg 3.20 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

…because he was the king of Mithila… he had to teach his subjects how to perform prescribed duties. Lord Krsna and Arjuna, the Lord’s eternal friend, had no need to fight in the Battle of Kuruksetra, but they fought to teach people in general that violence is also necessary in a situation where good arguments fail.

(18) Interesting…

Bg 3.32 T ORIGINAL:

But those who, out of envy, disregard these teachings and do not practice them regularly, are to be considered bereft of all knowledge, befooled, and doomed to ignorance and bondage.

Bg 3.32 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

But those who, out of envy, disregard these teachings and do not follow them, are to be considered bereft of all knowledge, befooled, and ruined in their endeavors for perfection.

(19) So Jayadvaita has made it a little different. But did Prabhuapda ask for the change? NO! He PERSONALLY quoted the original verse AS IT IS!!

Tamala Krsna: Thirty-two: “But those who, out of envy, disregard these teachings and do not practice them regularly are to be considered bereft of all knowledge, befooled, and doomed to ignorance and bondage.”

Prabhupada: Yes. If somebody says, “Oh, why shall I serve God?” all right, then you shall have to serve dog. That’s all. Therefore he is befooled. He does not know that he has to serve somebody. His constitutional position is like that. He cannot escape. So therefore if he denies to serve God, Krsna, then he has to serve maya, illusion, in the hope that “I have become the master.”

Just like in your country the President Johnson was the master. Actually, he was not the master; he was the servant of the country. Now the country has dismissed him. He is no longer master. So our mastership in this material world is like that. Actually, we are servant, but we are thinking master. In a family, I am servant of my wife, I am servant of my children, I am servant of my servants, but I am thinking I am master. “I am master of this family. I am master of this country. I am master of this society.” Nobody is master.

The Caitanya-caritamrta says, therefore, “The master is only Krsna.” Ekale isvara krsna ara saba bhrtya: “Only Krsna, or God, is master, and everyone is servant.” Yare yaiche nacaya se taiche kare nrtya: “Each servant is dancing according to the order of the Supreme.” That’s all. Nobody is master. So this false conception of becoming master is called maya, illusion. Nobody is master. Therefore one who disagrees to become servant of God, he is befooled. It is said, “But those who, out of envy…” He is constitutionally servant, but he is envious: “Why shall I become God’s servant? I shall become God.” You see? Everyone is claiming, “Oh, everyone is God. Why? What is the use of becoming servant of God? I am God.” This is enviousness. So if one refuses to serve God and become envious, “disregard these teachings and do not practice them regularly are to be considered bereft of all knowledge.” Because he is servant, but he is thinking, “I am master. I am not serving anyone.” This is maya, bereft of all knowledge. Go on.

Where is the hint Srila Prabhupada wanted Jayadvaita to changed the translation he heard from Tamala Krsna and then even quotes himself in his explanation? There is no AUTHORITY from Srila Prabhupada to change this verse at all. Srila Prabhupada clearly accepts the original translation AS IT IS…

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy. More changes to come next week…

Your servant, Madhudvisa dasa.

“Therefore Krishna said, sa kaleneha mahata yogo nastah kaunteya: ‘And in due course of time, this yoga was lost. Therefore I am repeating the same thing, old philosophy to you.’ So it requires like that.” (750509rc.per Conversations)

The authority of the Bhagavad-gita As It Is (Revised and Enlarged Edition) which is currently printed by the BBT and distributed by ISKCON temples worldwide contains unauthorized changes to more than than 70% of the purports and translations. Many of these changes significantly alter the meaning of the text from the original book which was read daily by Srila Prabhupada without any complaints. This makes the Bhagavad Gita currently printed by the BBT and distributed by ISKCON temples quite different from Srila Prabhuapda’s Bhagavad Gita As It Is…

The original Bhagavad-gita As It Is is clearly approved and authorized by Srila Prabhupada. Prabhupada requested a couple of small changes be made including changing the incorrect reference to “cattle raising” to “cow protection” in the Eighteenth Chapter.

Some have complained about “the Blessed Lord said…” which is used in many places in Srila Prabhuapda’s Bhagavad Gita As It Is, suggesting that this should be changed to “The Supreme Lord said…,” however the  abridged edition of Bhagavad-gita As It Is was published in 1968 and it clearly says “The Blessed Lord said” in many places and Srila Prabhupada reads it himself many times on folio and on the audio recordings and he hears it read by devotees so many times, but he never says it should be changed.

If Srila Prabhupada wanted to change “the Blessed Lord said” to “the Supreme Personality of Godhead said” he had nine whole years to request the change. If he wanted it changed he could have easily asked the devotees to change it before 1972 when the unabridged edition was printed. But Srila Prabhupada did not request anyone to change it.

“Vrndavana dasa Thakura has previously elaborately described this. That which is clear need not be scrutinized for good qualities and faults.” (Adi 16.26)

The issue is not if a particular change is good or bad. The issue is AUTHORITY. Jayadvaita Swami, the person who “revised and enlarged” Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad Gita openly admits he has no AUTHORITY from Srila Prabhupada to make the changes:

“To my knowledge, SRILA PRABHUPADA NEVER ASKED US TO RE-EDIT THE BOOK.

“As you know, and as we kept in mind while doing the work, SRILA PRABHUPADA STAUNCHLY OPPOSED NEEDLESS CHANGES.” (Jayadvaita Swami’s Letter to Amogha Lila 1986)

Jayadvaita Swami has the audacity to say this after making more than one thousand [mostly completely needless] changes to the book!

“Comparing each verse in the book with the text of the manuscript, I made only those changes that TO ME SEEMED WORTHWHILE. I tried to be conservative and not make needless changes. At the same time, I kept in mind that whatever changes we are to make we should make now, so that the book will never need to be revised again.”

It’s very important to note that the more than one thousand changes made to Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is, the most important book in the world, are “Only those changes that seem worthwhile to Jayadvaita Swami…”

ISKCON, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness has put everything into the hands of Jayadvaita Swami? Whatever he wants to change in Srila Prabhupada’s books, that’s fine… And he has changed so much…

It’s not a question of arguing a particular change is good or bad. ANY unauthorized change destroys the AUTHORITY of the book.

As we have said over and over, if the BBT had simply corrected the real typos in the English and Sanskrit there would not have been a problem. We are not talking of the sort of typographical errors a proof-reader would find. The really serious changes are the ones where the philosophy is changed or watered-down in the Revised and Enlarged Edition of Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is. There are many such changes:

“On the other hand, he who controls the senses by the mind and engages his active organs in works of devotion, without attachment, is by far superior.” (Original Bg. 3.7)

“On the other hand, if a sincere person tries to control the active senses by the mind and begins karma yoga [in Krsna consciousness] without attachment, he is by far superior.” (Revised & Enlarged Bg. 3.7)

So one does not have to be a great scholar to notice “contoling the senses by the mind and engaging in works of devotion” is NOT NOT NOT the same as “TRYING to control the senses and beginning karma yoga??” Do we no longer have to control our senses and engage in works of devotion? Is is enough to just TRY to control our senses??

There are SO many changes like this. You can see the book changes web page for more. www.BookChanges.com

“I must admit my frailties in presenting Srimad-Bhagavatam, but still I am hopeful of its good reception by the thinkers and leaders of society on the strength of the following statement of Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.5.11):

“On the other hand, that literature which is full of descriptions of the pastimes of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, forms, pastimes, etc. of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation, full of transcendental words directed toward bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world’s misdirected civilization. Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.” (Srimad-Bhagavatam Introduction)

Srila Prabhupada: No. If one’s mind is perfect, he may give a meaning, but, according to our conviction, if one is perfect, why should he try to change the word of God? And if one is imperfect, what is the value of his change?

[note: in Bhagavad-gita 3.7 as mentioned above and in so many other cases Jayadvaita Swami has changed the translation of the words of God as accepted by Srila Prabhupada to one he considers "more correct..."]

Disciple: Aquinas doesn’t say “change.”

Srila Prabhupada: Interpretation means change. If man is imperfect, how can he change the words of God? If the words can be changed, they are not perfect. So there will be doubt whether the words are spoken by God or by an imperfect person.

Disciple: The many different Protestant faiths resulted from such individual interpretation. It’s surprising to find this viewpoint in Aquinas.

Srila Prabhupada: AS SOON AS YOU INTERPRET OR CHANGE THE SCRIPTURE, THE SCRIPTURE LOSES ITS AUTHORITY. Then another man will come and interpret things in his own way. Another will come and then another, and in this way the original purport of the scripture is lost.

Jayadvaita Swami is just the beginning. He will be gone and another chief editor of the BBT will change Srila Prabhupada’s “Bhagavad-gita As It Is” again, of course he will, like Jayadvaita, only make the changes that seem worthwhile to him… BUT THE ORIGINAL PURPORT OF THE SCRIPTURE IS LOST by such changes.

We have already seen this happen with “Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers.” Jayadvaita Swami edited it in 1978 and in 1993 the BBT had “Sita devi dasi?” re-edit it to remove the things ISKCON didn’t like about Srila Prabhupada’s preaching in PQPA…

www.BookChanges.com/pqpac.html

Jayadvaita Swami explains in regard to his Bhagavad-gita changes: “For this second edition, however, Srila Prabhupada’s disciples had the benefit of having worked with his books for the last fifteen years. The English editors were familiar with his philosophy and language, and the Sanskrit editors were by now accomplished scholars. AND NOW THEY WERE ABLE TO SEE THEIR WAY THROUGH PERPLEXITIES IN THE MANUSCRIPT BY CONSULTING THE SAME SANSKRIT COMMENTARIES SRILA PRABHUPADA CONSULTED WHEN WRITING BHAGAVAD-GITA AS IT IS… in places [Srila Prabhupada's] translations, ALTHOUGH ALREADY CORRECT, HAVE BEEN REVISED to come closer to the original Sanskrit… (Note About the Second Edition p. 866 of the “Revised and Enlarged Edition, 1983 printing. This note has been removed from subsequent printings!)

“I am also practically finding that if any of our students artificially try to become scholars by associating with unwanted persons they become victimized, for a little learning is dangerous, especially for the Westerners. I am practically seeing that as soon as they begin to learn a little Sanskrit immediately they feel that they have become more than their guru and then the policy is kill guru and be killed himself.” (76-09-18 Letter: Dixit)

Yasoda-nandana: In the Gurukula we were teaching Isopanisad class to the children. So we took… (break) …Prabhupada and the words which the recent edition of the Press is wrong. Many changes were brought. They were trying to make better English, but sometimes, to make better English, I think they were making philosophical mistakes also. There is not so much need of making so much better English. Your English is sufficient. It is very clear, very simple. We have caught over 125 changes. They’re changing so many things. We are wondering if this is necessary. I will show you today. I have kept the book.

Prabhupada: I know that these rascals are doing. What can be done? How they can be relied on?… And Ramesvara is indulging this. The great rascal is that Jagannatha? He’s there in Los Angeles… Jagannatha-suta… And the one rascal is gone.

Tamala Krsna: Nitai.

Prabhupada: It is starting. What can I do? These cannot… These rascals cannot be educated. Dangerous. Little learning, dangerous. So how to correct? The leader of these dangerous–Radha-vallabha. Hm. He’s a dangerous, who maintains these rascal with this work. He’ll always have questions and alteration. That is his business. That is American business.

They take that always. What can I do? Ultimate, it goes for editorial. They make changes, such changes…

Prabhupada: So how to check this? How to stop this?…

Prabhupada: BUT THEY ARE DOING WITHOUT ANY AUTHORITY…

Prabhupada: Very serious feature. It is not possible for me to check, and they are doing all nonsense, freedom. (pause)

Yasoda-nandana: Jaya Srila Prabhupada.

Prabhupada: What to do?

Prabhupada: …Now do the needful. OTHERWISE EVERYTHING WILL BE SPOILED.

These rascal editorial… That Easy Journey, original, this (indistinct) Hayagriva has changed so many things.

Tamala Krsna: He actually took out the whole part about their going to the moon being childish. He deleted the whole section.

Yasoda-nandana: Also in the Bhagavatam, where Prabhupada was talking about Lord Buddha… You mentioned that if the followers of Lord Buddha do not close the slaughterhouse, there is no meaning to such a caricature. That word was very nice. But in new book that word is not there any more. They have pulled the word. The meaning of the word is not… So many times.

Prabhupada: It is very serious situation. Ramesvara is in direct…

Yasoda-nandana: Sometimes they appeal that “We can make better English,” so they change like that, just like in the case of Isopanisad. There are over a hundred changes. So where is the need? Your words are sufficient. The potency is there. When they change, it is something else.

Svarupa Damodara: That’s actually a very dangerous mentality.

Yasoda-nandana: What is it going to be in five years? It’s going to be a different book.

Prabhupada: So you… What you are going… It is very serious situation.

You write one letter that “Why you have made so many changes?” And whom to write? Who will care? All rascals are there. Write to Satsvarupa that “This is the position. They are doing anything and everything at their whim.” THE NEXT PRINTING SHOULD BE AGAIN TO THE ORIGINAL WAY…

Prabhupada: So write them immediately that “THE RASCAL EDITORS, THEY ARE DOING HAVOC, and they are being maintained by Ramesvara and party…”

Prabhupada: So what to do?

Prabhupada: So you bring this to Satsvarupa. THEY CANNOT CHANGE ANYTHING!

Tamala Krsna: (indistinct)

Prabhupada: So on the whole, these dangerous things are going on. How to check it?

Prabhupada: So they are doing very freely and dangerously. And this rascal is always after change, Radha-vallabha. He’s a great rascal. (770622rc.vrn )

[For clarity I have removed quite a bit from the above conversation but you can read the whole thing at PrabhupadaBooks.com. All the way through this discussion Tamal Krishna is trying to get Srila Prabhupada to agree to Jayadvaita Swami going through and re-editing all the books, but Srila Prabhupada just says "Hm." and goes on to say "The next printing should be to the original way... They cannot change anything!"]

ISKCON’S current “Revised and Enlarged” Bhagavad-gita As It Is including the more than one thousand unauthorized changes that “seem worthwhile” to Jayadvaita Swami has absolutely no AUTHORITY and is completely useless. Let us read the book Srila Prabhupada himself read from daily and had no complaints with…

“Vrndavana dasa Thakura has previously elaborately described this. That which is clear need not be scrutinized for good qualities and faults.” (Adi 16.26)

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!

Your servant

Madhudvisa dasa

SB 4.20.17
One should accept the instructions of the Supreme Personality of Godhead by bowing down at the lotus feet of the Lord. This means that anything spoken by the Personality of Godhead should be taken as it is, with great care and attention and with great respect. It is not our business to amend the words of the Supreme Personality of Godhead or make additions or alterations, as it has become a custom for many so-called scholars and svamis who comment on the words of Bhagavad-gita. Here the practical example of how to accept the instruction of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is shown by Prthu Maharaja. This is the way to receive knowledge through the parampara system.

67-02-10 Letter: Kirtanananda
Regarding your editing, I would very much like it. I am sending my lecture copies to you. I think my other copies are lying on the left side of my seat in a cardboard box which please find out. Please be careful not to change the ideas.

68-01-22 Letter: Satsvarupa
Brahmananda & others cannot change the style. They want to see if there is any grammatical discrepancy.

70-02-15 Letter: Satsvarupa
I have sent a few tapes to Bhagavan das. He sends to you his edited copies and they may be made final. I want two editings only, just to see if there is any grammatical or spelling mistake. Your present program of two editions first by yourself and then by Jayadvaita is a nice arrangement.

70-04-28 Letter: Pradyumna Please accept my blessings. I have just received the blueprint copy of KRSNA, the Reservoir of Pleasure and I have begun to read it through. But I notice that there are some points you should correct before the final printing. I have already noted you the injunction that you should change the pretipadika artha to first case ending instead. Sannyasin should be printed Sannyasi, etc. So please correct these.

70-04-28 Letter: Pradyumna
Another point is that there are some errors in the English also. On page 2 it should read “. . . decided to kill his sister, Devaki.” but it has become sisters, plural. Then, what does it mean?: “The Lord’s compromise was that He had Vasudeva propose . . .” This does not seem to be very clear or at least it is very awkward expression. So please see that the editors make a very careful final proofreading before printing the final copies.

71-03-17 Letter: Jayadvaita
I have dictated the missing purports from Chapter IX and they are set enclosed herewith. So far changing the working of verse or purport of 12:12 discussed before, it may remain as it is.

74-10-24 Letter: Frederico:
Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letter dated October 3, 1974 and have noted the contents. I am very glad to learn that you are translating the Bhagavad-gita As It Is into Portuguese. Be careful not to change anything but present it exactly as it is. This is how we receive Bhagavad-gita through the disciplic succession as stated in the Fourth Chapter. By this translating work you will learn our philosophy very nicely. It is very important to broadcast Krishna consciousness all over the world. This is the great need of modern civilization.

74-10-31 Letter: Hrdayananda:
I am glad to note the publishing work you are doing, and I look forward to receiving the books printed. I am pleased that you are personally seeing to the translation how it is done. Actually these books are the foundation stone of our movement. Whatever we are is resting on these books, so far reading them and distributing them. This should be our only motto.

74-11-14 Letter: Hamsaduta
Regarding publishing the Life Comes From Life in English it should be grammatically correct because it is written book. Yes, it will be very good if you publish a book of lectures. Regarding going to New York, oh yes, certainly you can go. I have telegramed Bali Mardan to come here but not yet received any reply.

76-01-05 Letter: Radhavallabha
I will have to see personally what are the mistakes in the synonyms and also how you intend to correct them. I was not satisfied with the corrections that were made before. I saw some changes which I did no approve. Nitai may correct whatever mistakes are there, but the corrected material must be sent to me for final approval. So reprinting the volumes will have to wait until the mistakes are corrected and approved by me. In the meantime you can supply the standing orders whatever new volumes are published.

76-05-04 Letter: Radhavallabha
Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letter dated April 22, 1976, and I have noted the contents with care. Yes, there is no need for corrections for the first and second Cantos. Whatever is there is alright. Once Pradyumna comes to join me here from India, then there will be no need for Nitai das or Jagannatha das to edit the Srimad-Bhagavatam.

76-08-26 Letter: Radhavallabha
You may title this book, Teachings of Lord Kapila, but it must be subtitled, “The Son of Devahuti“. That will remain, do not try to change it. The Americans may like it or not like it, but we must make the distinction between devahuti putra kapila, and the atheistic Kapila. Do not try to change anything without my permission.

76-09-07 Letter: Radhavallabha
Titling of the Ninth Canto as Liberation is good, and the Tenth Canto should be called “The Summum Bonum”. As far as the 11th and 12th Cantos are concerned they shall be named when they are presented. The title which you have given to the Eighth Canto was a little hard to understand at first but if it refers to pralaya, then it is alright. You must consult with me on such matters. Do not manufacture anything.

76-09-28 Letter: Gopiparanadhana
Please accept my blessings. With reference to your letter to Harikesa dated 21st inst., regarding the purport, 2nd paragraph to Bhagavatam 2.2.38, it is clear. Do not try to change anything.

HDG A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

Dear BBT Trustees,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

“This movement is being supported just by literature. So in this
way we can flood the whole world with Krsna consciousness and then
there’ll be a change. If we want to see a change in the world,
then we have to distribute knowledge of Krsna in this way.” (Srila Prabhupada Room
Conversation 701213rc.ind)

I am writing this letter to request you to seriously consider the following question: “Should Srila Prabhupada’s books be changed or not?”

I’m not talking about correcting real typos and Sanskrit errors.

Should we make significant changes which alter the meaning of text in books which have already been edited by editors chosen by Srila Prabhupada and completely approved of and personally used by Srila Prabhupada on a daily basis for his personal reading and giving classes from?

Should such changes be made secretly by the BBT without informing the devotees that the books have even been changed, and perhaps without even informing the GBC and other leaders in ISKCON?

Should such changes be made completely at the discretion of the BBT editors without any requirement they justify the changes they have made, or even document them?

Many devotees are completely against changing even a word of the original published books of Srila Prabhupada, and that is fine by me and most other devotees also. I’m quite happy with all of Srila Prabhupada’s books as they were originally published and personally approved of by Srila Prabhupada.

I have read all of Srila Prabhupada’s original books many times and the effect they have had on my consciousness is very nice. They are certainly very potent as Srila Prabhupada approved of them.

If we continue to distribute Srila Prabhupada’s books as he personally approved of them they will continue to make new devotees and thus the Krishna consciousness movement will automatically expand. There is no doubt about that at all.

“This new BTG is done very nicely. The printing is very beautiful
and I thank you very much for doing such a nice job. I am very
glad to hear you have printed 100,000 copies of this magazine. Now
give them to everyone. Also I am very happy to hear the other
books will be coming out very soon. If you can finish
Bhagavad-gita As It Is in Spanish and show me at the Mayapur
festival that will be very sublime. Please print as many books as
possible, this is my real pleasure. By printing these books of our
Krsna Conscious philosophy in so many different languages we can
actually inject our movement into the masses of persons all over
the world, especially there in the western countries and we can
literally turn whole nations into Krsna Conscious nations. Thank
you for representing me there in LSS by stressing the importance
of attendance to the morning and evening programs and following
all of the spiritual practices. This is wanted. Without these
things there is no devotional life. And by your example many
others will also become strong.” (Srila Prabhupada’s letter to
Hridayananda Maharaja 74-12-21)

Many devotees, however, in principle, are not opposed to correcting real typographical and Sanskrit errors in the original books.

The thing which concerns me and most other devotees is not the actual correction of real typographical errors in the English and Sanskrit in the original printed books, but the “revision and enlargement” of the books.

More than 70% of the Bhagavad-gita translations and more than 70% of the purports have been changed. In many cases the meaning of the new text is substantially different from the meaning of the original text approved by Srila Prabhupada. We have made a small list of some of these changes at:

www.BookChanges.com

Even though Jayadvaita Swami has made literally thousands of changes to the Bhagavad-gita and most of them appear completely unnecessary, he says in his July 1986 letter to Amogha Lila Prabhu:

>First: To my knowledge, Srila Prabhupada never asked us to re-edit
>the book.
>
>As you know, and as we kept in mind while doing the work, Srila
>Prabhupada staunchly opposed needless changes.

There are so many substantial changes. It is no longer the same book as the one Srila Prabhupada personally approved of and used himself at all. Jayadvaita Swami himself calls it the “Revised and Enlarged” edition.

Of course we have written to Jayadvaita Swami and asked for his explanation, as you know, many devotees have done that over the years, but he always replies with the same letters [one to Amogha Lila and the other to "Senior ISKCON Devotees"] he wrote in 1986, which quite convincingly demonstrate there are a number of bona fide typos and Sanskrit errors in the original Bhagavad-gita which he has corrected, however there is no hint that he has made many changes and revisions which alter the meaning of the text in the book from the original approved by Srila Prabhupada.

In many places he has, perhaps unintentionally, subtlety changed the meaning of the text thus causing it to present a COMPLETELY different meaning from the original. That is the most disturbing aspect of the changes.

If he simply corrected the typos and Sanskrit without altering the meaning of the text and without trying to remove Hayagriva Prabhu’s editing who would have complained? After all Srila Prabhupada selected Hayagriva to edit the book and liked his editing.

There are so many examples of subtle changes of meaning in the book that look like small edits, but actually COMPLETELY change the meaning. I have not put many of them on the book changes page because it’s difficult for many to see how the meaning is changed and easy for Jayadvaita or Dravida to write something that “explains it” by referring to the “original manuscript” which they will not make available for anyone to look at…

Something to think about: (from bg 4.10)

Original: “…the conception of void that underlies the frustration of life…”

Jayadvaita: “…the conception of void that arises from frustration in life…”

So it is not difficult to see here that the editing has COMPLETELY changed the meaning and the original point has been COMPLETY lost. The original, approved by Srila Prabhupada, says void philosophy causes frustration whereas Jayadvaita’s says void philosophy “arises from frustration”. If this was an isolated incident that would be one thing, but there are hundreds of instances like this were the new version subtly imparts a completely different meaning to the original approved by Srila Prabhupada.

>My dear Hamsaduta,
> Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letter
>dated May 30, 1975 and have noted the contents. I don’t think that
>Hayagriva is at fault. He has not changed the meaning or the
>philosophy in any way…(Srila Prabhupada’s Letter: 75-06-08)

We have sometimes presented such things to Jayadvaita Swami, but he does not seem to be able to conceive such changes of meaning exist in the new edition. He just gets angry and calls us “self-righteous” and “abusive” and “refuses to correspond further”.

On such an important issue as the authorization and validity of changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books, a point which is fundamental to the credibility and authority of the entire ISKCON movement, this is not a very satisfactory reply.

>Date: 19.4.1997
>From: Jayadvaita Swami
>To: Madhudvisa dasa
>Subject: Vedabase editions & book revisions
>Ahmedabad
>18 April 97

>Dear Madhudvisa dasa,

>Hare Krsna. Since you’ve already decided what books you will accept
>as bona fide and what you will criticize as bogus, and since you are
>already sure enough of your convictions that you think it worthwhile
>to express them in a self-righteous and abusive manner, I have
>nothing to say to you except that I see no need for us to correspond
>further.

>Best wishes. Hare Krsna.

>Jayadvaita Swami

It would seem to us that the BBT have given absolute authority to Jayadvaita Swami to change anything he likes at all in Srila Prabhupada’s books without anyone even checking or approving of what he does. Of course that may not be that case, however that is what appears to be happening. So it is a very dangerous position for ISKCON as, really, everything in ISKCON depends on the authority of Srila Prabhupada’s books. Srila Prabhupada’s books are the real asset of ISKCON. They are the attractive principle.

“I was very glad to learn how our devotees are coming out
victorious in the preaching to the university professors and
students. Other groups have no philosophy nor do they have any
idea of spiritual life, what to speak of living it. Our movement
is authorized. Our books are based on the statements of the most
exalted devotees. And if we follow strictly the guidelines for
devotional service as they are given in the Nectar of Devotion and
Nectar of Instruction, then no one can touch us. Our position is
definitely due to our books, therefore I am always pressing on
this point. All the groups are declining including the Christians.
We are being harassed by the authorities and they are all
Christians. Because they are losing ground, and we are increasing,
they are trying to stop us. There is always this battle between
the demons and the devotees, but the devotees always win because
they are protected by Krishna.” (Letter: Bahudak 76-01-11)

If someone is making changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books, but is not prepared to justify them, and if the BBT refuse to make the source-material which authorizes such changes available, it does not look good.

I am also most distressed about Jayadvaita’s editing of Srila Prabhupada’s “Krsna Book”. That is completely heart-breaking. Srila Prabhupada’s original “Krsna Book” is so transcendentally wonderful. I can’t put it into words. It’s not possible to explain how wonderful that book is. Of course you know that well yourself. But Jayadvaita’s editing has COMPLETELY changed it…

Prabhupada liked, regularly read from, 100% approved of and relished reading his original “Krsna Book”. Satsvarupa Maharaja’s editing is very nice. I’m sure he has not changed the meaning from Srila Prabhupada’s dictation tapes. The English is very good. There are some Sanskrit errors and typos of course. If they were corrected who would complain? But Jayadvaita has practically re-written the book! He has completely changed the editing style, removed all the words he considers redundant, in places added in what appears to be his own preaching, and he has used Hridyananda Maharaja’s translation of the Tenth Canto to “correct” Srila Prabhupada’s Krsna Book… It is a disaster and heart-breaking to me… Who authorized him to “correct” Srila Prabhupada’s “Krsna Book”?

With all due respect, I don’t want to read Srila Prabhupada’s books “corrected by Jayadvaita Swami”. And I really don’t think anyone does. Even the scholars, university professors, etc. Srila Prabhupada’s books are literary classics. The scholars and university professors liked them as they were originally published! There are so many rave reviews. Everyone likes them. They are transcendental gems. They are priceless. Every word is spiritual. The whole thing is 100% transcendental. Even though there may appear to be some small discrepancies to our material eyes…

Who would be interested in any of the worlds great literary classics “corrected by Jayadvata Swami”? It is ridiculous. People want to read the original book!

And “Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers”… That has been “re-edited” by Sita devi dasi… Who is “Sita devi dasi” anyhow? What gives her the right to change Srila Prabhupada’s books? She has deleted so many things from “Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers”? What is the explanation? I don’t think the BBT even told anyone they changed the book!! Did the GBC approve of these changes?

We have the original transcript of the conversation and the text which has been deleted from the new edition is in the original transcript of the conversation. She has deleted Srila Prabhupada’s instruction that performing devotional service for some material benefit is business not devotion, she have deleted Bob asking Srila Prabhupada, “You mean by following these [regulative] principles,” and Srila Prabhupada replying “Yes.” She have deleted a whole discussion about miracles, “Miracles are for the ignorant”. She has deleted Srila Prabhupada saying “Our knowledge is perfect.” She has deleted Srila Prabhupada saying chanting Hare Krishna is a yogic process! Srila Prabhupada’s instruction that one who does not have perfect knowledge should not teach has been completely removed… And what to speak of Srila Prabhupada’s four page discourse on independence and the fact that we are always controlled either by maya or Krishna. It has been completely deleted from the new version along with so many other things. How can the BBT delete so much text from such a small book?? Who instructed Sita devi dasi to do this?

http://krishna.org/ISKCON/BookChanges/pqpac.html

No one in the BBT is prepared to explain WHY? And WHAT NEXT? Perhaps they will get Sita devi dasi to do the next edition of Bhagavad-gita? The “Women’s-Lib Edition” I see you have had some email correspondence about…

Some of the ISKCON Matajis may be a little pacified by all these changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books… But is that really the business of the BBT? And where has this idea of changing Srila Prabhupada’s books come from in ISKCON? Why are the Matajis demanding Srila Prabhupada’s books be changed? Do they no longer have any faith in Srila Prabhupada and his books? Who has taught them this??

Surely the BBT has a far greater responsibility, the responsibility to print and distribute Srila Prabhupada’s books as he approved of them? Without changing the message in the books? Perhaps with real typos and Sanskrit errors corrected. If that is all the editors do then who would complain?

“Too much editing is not required. If Satsvarupa has already edited it, there is no need of further editing.” (Letter to Rayarama 21-Dec-67)

Srila Prabhupada’s books are the only hope for this world (and the only hope for us!) so the BBT and ISKCON should be busy making plans to print them in unlimited quantities and distribute them widely to save the world… Not making plans how to change them and make them more “acceptable” to the public and the ISKCON Matajis…

“So Krsna is very popular in India. In every home, Krsna is
worshipped, and there are many millions of temples of Krsna in
India and followers also. Followers means almost all Hindus are
followers of Krsna. They read this Bhagavad-gita. So I have
recently published Bhagavad-gita As It Is. It is published by
Macmillan Company, and this book is very nicely being received. It
is being reviewed by several papers. I have got many others books.
They are being gradually introduced. Perhaps you have seen in our
counter. We have got books, magazines, calendar, and other
literatures. So it is a very scientific movement. It is not a
sentiment, bogus hoax. Anyone who wants to understand this
movement philosophically, scientifically, they will be very much
satisfied with this. The idea is that any religious movement
without philosophical basis, it is simply sentiment or fanaticism.
And philosophy without idea of God is simply mental speculation.
Therefore religious principles combined with philosophy, that is
perfect. So the younger section become attracted to this movement
because we are giving some religious principle based on
philosophy.” (Interview 680201iv.la)

How can we make Prabhupada’s books “acceptable” to people in maya? We have to make the people in maya Krishna conscious then they will not only accept, but they will relish Srila Prabhupada’s books. But if we water-down the books to make them “acceptable” to the public and the feminists then the potency will be lost and they will no longer be relishable by the devotees either. It is like sweet-rice with sand in it. It’s still sweet undoubtedly but how can you enjoy it mixed with sand?

I pray that you will consider what I have written and write back, not like Jayadvaita, calling me “self-righteous and abusive”. But an honest reply.

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!

Madhudvisa dasa

NOTE: This letter was written on March 8, 1998, almost 12 years ago, and still I have not received any reply from the BBT, and still the BBT is pushing on their agenda of changing Prabhupada’s books more and more and more…