It seemed that he couldn’t keep his hands off of Srila Prabhupada’s books! Earlier he had already pulled out his wallet once or twice and it appeared that he really, really wanted books, but something was stopping him. I went ahead doing other things at the table and let him examine the books, go back and forth with his wallet, and vacillating.

After a while he finally asked me, “I’m sorry if this is controversial, but don’t you worry about the fact that the books from this author have been edited after 1978, after his…?” I was surprised to hear this question and cut him off, assuring that he had no reason to worry because these are the original editions, pre-1978. He loosened up in relief and continued to express his concern about the matter – it didn’t make any sense to him why such editing and changing should happen, “posthumously”. He wanted the real thing. Now that his doubts were removed, he gladly gave a donation and took a full set of Bhagavad-gita, KRSNA book and Sri Isopanisad.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

If you would like some of Srila Prabhupada’s original, authorized (pre-1978) books to bring with you in your daily life to distribute, please goto: www.KrishnaStore.com

I asked him, “How did you know about the editing of these books”? He said, “A while ago there were some other people here passing out some books and I looked in the front and it said ‘REVISED’ in it and so I handed it back to them. I told them I don’t want an edited version, I want the original thing!” So he very happily gave a nice donation and took Srila Prabhupada’s original books.

I stopped one Indian man and presented him Srila Prabhupada’s books. He immediately smiled, stood very erect and said in a bit of a know-it-all way: “Oh, Prabhupada, he is a great scholar”. I got a serious expression on my face and firmly replied, “NO, he is much more than just a scholar. He is realized, he is a practitioner, he is a devotee, so his translations are not just scholarly or academic. They are realized, and will reveal to you realizations in your own heart, it’s all about experience.”

As I said this, his facial expressions went from jolly and a bit arrogant to serious and he said: “You know, I am physicist, and I have this book, and I know your Prabhupada”. Then he stopped talking for a moment and then he said in a whole other tone of voice, “I was just walking here one second ago before you stopped me and I was thinking about particles and atoms, and that it’s all useless knowledge unless you experience it. You have to experience it, realize it, and now you’re here telling me the same thing that I was just thinking about!”

He gave a nice donation and took all the books I had and asked if I had any other books by “Swami Prabhupada”, but unfortunately that day I only had three titles with me, so he only took those. Then he just started, on his own accord, glorifying Srila Prabhupada to me, saying he is such a great realized master and how wonderful Srila Prabhupada is, and he thanked me very much for distributing these books and being out there.

Being the last day of final exams, not too many students were around and the pickings were slim. So I approached the only person I saw. Judging by his clothing, demeanor, gait and haircut he looked as straight as a nail and like some type of a military kid. I presented the books to him. He, like many students who are away from home for the first time and burned out by the end of the year from too much partying and studying, was not too present or attentive when I was talking to him. So after I had explained what the books are about, the guy said, “So what is it about?” Obviously he was not listening to me at all the first time I explained it. So again I explained it to him, this time in slow motion. Now he looked up at me and said clearly and matter-of-factly, “Yeah, I have been looking for something like this, thank you so much! Is fifteen dollars ok?” Then, while looking me right in the eyes, he just kept on saying to me again and again, “Thank you so much, thank you so much, this is awesome!”

I was a little surprised at his level of appreciation and how he said he has been looking for something like this, so I asked him, “What is it about this that you’ve been looking for?” He replied that when he grew up he was religious, but he got out of it, came to college and got into partying and drinking. But the scene got old really quick. He wanted to quit drinking and get his life together and do something with himself because, in his words, he really just lost himself. So he found the books important and special and was grateful. He assured me he would read them. Thanking me a few more times, he walked away with the greatest gift one human being can give to another – Srila Prabhupada’s books.

If you would like some of Srila Prabhupada’s original, authorized (pre-1978) books to bring with you in your daily life to distribute, please goto www.KrishnaStore.com.

At this point, the so-called second edition might well provoke our curious investigator to browse the Internet a bit, as he is inclined to do, where he would find out that “revised” also means “omitted”. For example, the Forward, by a distinguished professor, as well as thirty color plates were omitted!

“Hm… apparently the second edition is not as complete as the first. That’s interesting… and look at this: there’s some articles here that demonstrate how the second edition has also been interpolated, reinterpreted. Hm… very interesting.” Etc.

This scenario is not far-fetched. There are a lot of intelligent people out there, especially those with some education, who approach their reading material in a discerning way. For example, in his article, “The Last Days of School“, Bhakta Philip, a champion book distributor, tells how, when he approached a student the student asked, “Are these the edited ones?”

The student explained, “A while ago there were some other people here passing out some books and I looked in the front and it said ‘REVISED’ in it and so I handed it back to them. I told them I don’t want an edited version, I want the original thing!” Bhakta Philip happily explained how all the titles he carried were original editions, and the student took one of each and made a nice donation.

Yes! All power to Sriman Bhakta Philip, as well as Mahajana das, Murti das, Brahmabhuta das, Raghava Caitanya das, Madhudvisa das and others around the world committed to distributing the real thing from Srila Prabhupada’s free press, Krishna Books, Inc.

Srila Prabhupada included the heading “Complete Edition” on the face page of his Gita. The so-called 2nd edition replaces that statement with the words, “2nd Edition, Revised and Enlarged.” “Complete Edition” certainly means definitive. Let the so-called second edition, which bears scant resemblance to the first, keep the self-incriminating phrase “revised and enlarged.” Very good! It helps to distinguish between the real thing and the other thing.

To know what that gold is, one has to first study Srila Prabhupada’s books and recordings (he called his books “recorded sound”). However, there is a popular propaganda that, in any case, one must hear from a “living (diksa) guru” for real spiritual benefits or advancement, or that listening to Srila Prabhupada’s recordings or studying his books without hearing from a “living guru” is insufficient. Or that reading his books is not the same as associating with Srila Prabhupada directly. In other words, since Srila Prabhupada is not still living, one must have a living guru. As one of his disciples used to say, “You cannot get to Srila Prabhupada except through me.”

These ideas started appearing in ISKCON just after Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance in 1977. The bonafide agenda for the GBC at that time was to lead the Movement, immersed in bereavement, from its dependence upon both Srila Prabhupada-vapu and vani to a singular dependence upon Srila Prabhupada-vani. This was a lesson Srila Prabhupada had been teaching for years: Prabhupada-vapu is temporary, destined to disappear, but Srila Prabhupada-vani would go on. Srila Prabhupada wrote in his dedication of the Srimad Bhagavatam about Srila Bhaktisiddhanta: “He lives forever by his divine instructions and the follower lives with him.” The same is true of our Srila Prabhupada.

Unfortunately, the eleven rtvik appointees (half the GBC at that time), claimed an exclusive right to be spiritual masters, and immediately began giving second initiation to their Godbrothers and sisters who hadn’t been able to receive it from Srila Prabhupada before he disappeared. So, instead of leading the natural transition from Srila Prabhupada-vapu to Srila Prabhupada-vani, the transition was to enthrone new “vapus“, or living gurus. The transition continues as an integral part of the general metamorphosis of the International Society for Krsna Consciousness.

An interesting interpolation in the purport of Bhagavad-gita 4.34, 1983 revised edition, illustrates how the “living guru” concept and minimizing the transcendental potency of Srila Prabhupada’s words go hand in hand. The original purport, 1st Edition reads:

“Therefore, mental speculation or dry arguments cannot help one progress in spiritual life. One has to approach a bonafide spiritual master to receive the knowledge.”

And the revised version purport reads:

“Therefore, mental speculation or dry arguments cannot help lead one to the right path. Nor by independent study of knowledge can one progress in spiritual life.”

Now even if, as they often claim, this additional wording was purloined by the editors from a previous draft of the manuscript submitted to Macmillan, it is not applicable to Srila Prabhupada’s books and was better edited out. In fact, the independent, serious study of Srila Prabhupada’s books of knowledge guarantee advancement in spiritual life! Because reading Srila Prabhupada’s purports is approaching the bonafide spiritual master. The whole point of distributing those books is to get people to read them and experience spiritual enlightenment. As Srila Prabhupada writes in his Preface to the Srimad Bhagavatam (1ast Ed.): “The reading matter is so arranged… that one is sure to become a God realized soul at the end of finishing the first nine cantos.” And in the Krsna Book Introduction (1st Ed.), he explains that when people who are after sex life in this material world read “…about Krsna’s pastimes with the gopis, they will relish transcendental pleasure, although it appears to be materialistic.” Actually, the potency or power of Srila Prabhupada-vani to revive Krsna consciousness, rasabhavamrita, is proving inconceivable.

The idea that one must have a living diksa guru to understand Krsna consciousness from Srila Prabhupada appears to be a scam. The fact is that reading or hearing from Srila Prabhupada is associating with the most bonafide spiritual master, the best spiritual master, at whose pada (lotus feet) all other prabhus pay obeisances. And reading his books is directly associating with him and equal in power to hearing in his physical presence.

In a lecture in Bombay on December 6, 1974, Srila Prabhupada said, referring to sastras, “Only highly qualified brahmins, they used to keep hand-written. And it was worshipped in the temple as Deity sastra. Not that it was available anywhere. Now press has made it very cheaper. But we should always understand that grantah or the scripture should be worshipped as God. That is sound incarnation of God. It should not be neglected. Don’t neglect Bhagwat, Bhagavad-gita as ordinary books. You must be very careful. So, as you take care of the Deities, so take care of the books also.”

The conclusion is that in the same way Lord Krsna is identical with His words in the Gita, even though He spoke them long ago, Srila Prabhupada is actually present in his purports, even though he is no longer physically present. And those purports are as much sastra as the verses they explain. Those books are as good as Deities in the temple. They are not the playthings of editors, but the literary incarnations of God and His most confidential servants. Therefore, they must be approached with all respect and reverence.

Srila Prabhupada’s books and recordings are a consistent and constant source of revelation for anyone who follows him. If one is able to follow Srila Prabhupada’s instructions to chant 16 rounds, follow the four regulative principles, systematically study his teachings and then help others do the same, that person will undoubtedly remember Lord Krsna at the time of death. Such a bhakta may be unable to discover a guru fully qualified to give diksa and specific name. Those who factually meet the standards required by Srila Prabhupada to become a genuine spiritual master may be few and far between. But by honestly and seriously accepting Srila Prabhupada as siksa guru, anyone can obtain freedom from the material conception of life, be inspired to action in Krsna consciousness, and learn to think of Srila Prabhupada and Lord Krsna always.

The editors of the 1983 revised Gita did not believe that they actually interpolated philosophy or style.* Their idea was to improve both translations and purports by transposing and clarifying portions of old manuscripts, etc. existing prior to the one finally submitted to Macmillan in 1972. Truly, many of the grammatical, spelling, format and historical inaccuracies corrected in the revision would have been approved by Srila Prabhupada himself had he been consulted.

Be that as it may, Srila Prabhupada never instructed anyone to use a procedure of re-visiting and researching old manuscripts or dictations to revise future printings of his first editions. On the other hand, recordings made from 1972 until 1977, six years, demonstrate how Srila Prabhupada often personally read excerpts from the Gita in classes, room conversations, engagements, etc. Many times he also instructed devotees present to read aloud as he listened. There is no evidence indicating that he ordered extensive revisions for the next printing. As the current chief editor wrote; “To my knowledge, Srila Prabhupada never asked us to re-edit the book.” ( letter to Amogha Lila, July, 1986 ) .

Interestingly enough, none of the scholars, educators, professors and other reviewers of the Gita called for it either. From 1972 until 1983 we don’t find requests from professionals for a revision to a higher standard. Nor do we hear any demand from devotees in general for such a thorough revision. In fact, the editors state in “A Note About the Second Edition” found in the BBT revised editions: “Yet their effort to publish Srila Prabhupada’s work was a success, and the Bhagavad-gita As It Is has become the standard edition for scholars and devotees around the world.” Still, after eleven years of documented success, the Gita was extensively re-worked. Why? What is the reason?

The editors continue their explanation: “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. The result is a work of even greater richness and authenticity… In places the translations, though already correct, have been revised to come closer to the original Sanskrit and Srila Prabhupada’s original dictations…”

The editors are claiming the benefit of 15 years work, which would mean 1968 until 1983, the year of the revision. However, the value of those benefits is uncertain, because in June, 1977 Srila Prabhupada severely chastised the editors for changes to his Isopanisad and Bhagavatam. He described the editors as rascals (a term he usually reserved for atheists, material scientists and politicians), and called them “dangerous” at least six times in ten minutes of discussion. Just five months before his disappearance, Srila Prabhupada made this a major issue for the Society.

The same basic issue came up in 1983 and has continued more or less for the last 25 years. But for us, now, who will decide who is right and who is wrong? One side says “responsible editing,” the other says “irresponsible, unauthorized, etc.” But who is right and who is wrong? Who will decide?

So now we must come to the point of reason. Is it reasonable to conclude that just five or six years after deserving that 1977 chastisement, editors could have emerged as “accomplished scholars” –by 1983? One editor escaped chastisement. Still, isn’t six years a short time for everyone to turn up as “accomplished scholars?” But even if all the editors had been studying Sanskrit for 30 years by 1983, is it plausible that such editors could be able to dive into the superexcellent depths of Sanskrit revelation, and come up with an understanding of it’s complexities—the same complexities—understood by previous acaryas? Was this the prerogative of such disciples, that they could be “able to see their way through perplexities in the manuscript by consulting the same Sanskrit commentaries Srila Prabhupada consulted when writing the Bhagavad-gita As It Is? Is it possible?

And further, “In places the translations, though already correct, have been revised to come closer to the original Sanskrit…” Here the implication is that the editors in 1983, whoever they were, thought they could interpret the original Sanskrit texts comparatively as well as Srila Prabhupada himself, or at least well enough to put their new realizations in his book under his name. And, that they could understand the same complexities understood by previous acaryas (presumably Sridhar Swami et. al.) simply by using the same Sanskrit commentaries Srila Prabhupada used. Is this credible? Is it reasonable to conclude that such editors were capable of producing “a work of even greater richness and authenticity?” Or that translations “already correct” could have been revised to even more correctness by them? Was all this perfection really possible by 1983?

May be, if they had received authorizations and blessings from Srila Prabhupada in 1977 before he disappeared, but that didn’t happen. It is known from that recorded conversation of June, 1977, that when Tamal Krsna suggested to Srila Prabhupada Jayadwaita check any changes before reprinting, Srila Prabhupada countered: “But they are doing without any authority!” In other words, no need for Jayadwaita to become an inspector of changes because nobody was authorized to make such changes in the first place! Tamal had already said to Srila Prabhupada: “Your original work that you’re doing now, that is edited by Jayadwaita. That’s the first editing.” Srila Prabhupada had answered, “He is good.”

So Srila Prabhupada, in the midst of all the turmoil, made it clear that he was satisfied with Jayadwaita’s work. Yet a “first editing” is entirely different from re-editing an already finished or printed work, which is what the others were doing. Srila Prabhupada never authorized anyone, including Jayawaita or Pradyumna to do that with the Bhagavad-gita then or in the future.

The extent of Srila Prabhupada’s disappointment in this matter can not be underestimated. He said, after being informed of the changes in the Isopanisad, “I know what these rascals are doing. What can be done? How they can be relied on?” And later, “It is starting. What can I do? These cannot…These rascals cannot be educated. Dangerous. Little learning, dangerous…What can I do? Ultimate it goes for editorial…”

In the 3^rd Canto (3.4.26), Srila Prabhupada writes, “Although one may be well versed in transcendental science, one should be careful about the offense of maryada-vyatikrama, or impertinently surpassing a greater personality. According to scriptural injunction one should be very careful of transgressing the law of maryada-vyatikrama because by so doing one loses his duration of life, his opulence, fame and piety and the blessings of all the world. To be well versed in the transcendental science necessitates awareness of the techniques of spiritual science.”

At this point the significant question emerges: Has maryada-vyatikrama, impertinently surpassing a greater personality, occurred in the process of editing and reprinting Srila Prabhupada’s books? It certainly had by 1977, according to the momentous June 22^nd, 1977 room conversation about changes to the Isopanisad and Srimad Bhadavatam. Six years later, considering the exaggerated claims in the “Note About the Second Edition” and the extreme content-editing of the text, it appears to have occurred again in the 1983 “Revised and Enlarged” version of the Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

Vaisnava etiquette demands that Srila Prabhupad’s disciples, grand-disciples, et. al. always think themselves fools in front of Srila Prabhupada. But, unfortunately, sometimes some of them forget that, and dare to rush in where angels fear to tread.

* “Our editing is to correct grammar and spelling errors only, without interpolation of style or philosophy.” ( Srila Prabhupada, 02/17/70 )

Hare Krsna—or should I write “hare krsna”? I just received your letter recommending more changes. You write:

“Strong reasons can be advanced, however, for leaving aside our present standard in favor of extending “down style’ to all pronouns.

The editors of Chicago “urge a spare, down style” in the field of religion, as in others. Specifically, they say that pronouns referring to God (or Christ) “are today preferably not capitalized.”

Does the use of lower case signify an impious lack of regard for the Deity? The King James Bible, that great work of awe and reverence, affords God a lower-case he. (For that matter, so does the Book of Mormon.)….”

1) First point you make in your letter above (which,in its entirety, follows this letter of mine) is your reference to some magazine called Chicago.

Seems nobody I know has ever heard of this one and besides that why are you getting “spiritual advice” from them instead of your own spiritual master???

What bona fide disciple of Srila Prabhupada cares if  the man on the moon uses caps or lower case letters to describe the Supreme Person Krsna ??

Have you lost your senses ? Our ONLY authority is Srila Prabhupada in case you have forgotten that most basic Krsna conscious fact. Disciple means to follow the discipline of the master-your master, who told you to use Caps when referring to God , Christ, Buddha, etc.

Furthermore these people you refer to, want to refer to the Lord in lower case as if they are in a position to dictate to GOD–Oh,Yes God, I have declared that You are no longer to be seen as the Primordial Person, the Supreme Controller, the Ultimate Refuge, but now we the editors of Chicago, along with Jayadvaita swami think the world is now ready for YOU as a lower case person.

And YES ,for your information,by the way, the lower case DOES signify  disrespect for a Deity of God. This shows you have Not much respect for God-because even a village idiot could understand this-but apparantly not you.

Furthermore, why are “strong reasons” as you say for this new change coming from  a magazine called Chicago, the Mormons and the King James bible folks?? Since when did bona fide vaisnavas care for village katha? Or the ramblings of mundane so called scholars?

None of the above people or groups even come close to following vaisnava dharma, know of its presence or if they do, care to follow it. They are all dull headed materialists and you are now taking THEIR advice?? Why are you NOT taking the advice of your God brothers who know the difference?  Again, what has happened to you brain??

2) Next you write……….

….” For example, Nanda Maharaja says to Krsna:

My boy, You must be tired from so much wandering in the forest. Go home with Your elder brother and take Your bath. I will look after the cows. Please don’t delay any longer or Your mother will be unhappy and scold me. Please cooperate and go right now.

Here the pronoun with which Nanda addresses Krsna bears an honorific capital though Nanda’s mood towards Krsna is decidedly ‘lower case.’

Again, These books are written for READERS–NOT Nanda Maharaj!!! The READERS should KNOW WHO it is they are reading about–GOD. Nandas relationship with Krsna is besides the point. The point is that God or His expansions should ALWAYS have Upper case letters-otherwise how will the readers know this is GOD?

By lowering the letter case,  you have made something which is clear to millions, now UNCLEAR!!!

All over the world everyone knows that when you refer to GOD in writing, He is ALWAYS  spelled with upper case letters……..-this is first grade stuff…………..Did you not pass first grade english??

3) And now another one…. from you…..

…..”Similarly, ,Sisupala hurls at Krsna scurrilous insults, with a piously reverent capital: “I think Krsna to be no better than a crow — how can He be fit to accept the first worship in this great sacrifice?”…”

So you think that the vedas were written by Srila Vyasadev for Sisupals benefit so that he would know that it was GOD  that was going to kill him? No, these vedas were written for us the readers so that WE would know that sisupala was to be killed by God.

It seems your point of reference in these cases is the demons side and not the pious souls who will read and get benefit.

4) you write more……

….”And yet again, sometimes the capital not only clashes with a speaker’s mood but even gives away the story line. For example, when an unknown boy rings milk, Madhavendra Puri asks:

Who are You? Where do You reside? And how did You know that I was fasting?

All such anomalies would be remedied by the consistent use of pronouns in lower case. This is the style that Dravida and I both favor….”

So, practically speaking,  the whole world accepts that the name of God should be written in the upper case, but you and Dravida alone, think otherwise. There is so much mystery, intrigue, deception,  etc, in the vedas, and it has been that way for billions of years.

But now you and Dravida think that people will not be able to perceive this mystery in a story line because the words depicting God will be giving away the story by showing Him in capital letters??

What has happened to your brains??

Devotees read and re read the Srimad Bhagavatam over and over again knowing fully well who Krsna is, yet that doesnt remove the mystery,suspense, and attraction they have for Him-even if His name was in lower case.

But by putting His name in lower case, YOU remove Him from THIS position from those who do not know who He is.

YOU are now doing what Prabhupada has warned us about- so called scholars who want to KILL Krsna by their demoniac changing of the words of sastra.

First kill the guru…….. then kill Krsna.

Now it has taken place….just see….

Hare Krsna — reply if you dare…

Damaghosa das

————————————————————

–H.H. JAYADVAITA SWAMI’S PROPOSAL TO THE BTG & BBT RE. A CHANGE IN POLICY TOWARDS THE USE OF “DIVINE PRONOUNS”

BBT Style: Regarding lower case for “divine pronouns”

Since the beginning, the BBT style for capitalizing pronouns has been this:

The pronoun He is capitalized for Krsnaa and His Visnu-tattva expansions,
and She for Srimate Radharani. For two or more of these together, They is
capitalized; but when anyone else is included, they becomes lower case.
Hence Balarama is He, but Subhadra is she; and Krsna and Arjuna, and the
Jagannatha deities, and the Panca-tattva are all they. We, Him, Her, She,
and possessives are treated in a similar fashion.

Strong reasons can be advanced, however, for leaving aside our present
standard in favor of extending “down style’ to all pronouns.

The editors of Chicago “urge a spare, down style” in the field of religion,
as in others. Specifically, they say that pronouns referring to God (or
Christ) “are today preferably not capitalized.”

Does the use of lower case signify an impious lack of regard for the Deity?
The King James Bible, that great work of awe and reverence, affords God a
lower-case he. (For that matter, so does the Book of Mormon.)

In BBT publications, the style of pronouns in the plural can be puzzling.
Why are the Jagannatha deities or the Panca-tattva they?

More disturbing still is the use of a capitalized pronoun that belies the
context in which it appears — as it often does. For example, Nanda Maharaja
says to Krsna:

My boy, You must be tired from so much wandering in the forest. Go home with
Your elder brother and take Your bath. I will look after the cows. Please
don’t delay any longer or Your mother will be unhappy and scold me. Please
cooperate and go right now.

Here the pronoun with which Nanda addresses Krsna bears an honorific capital
though Nanda’s mood towards Krsna is decidedly ‘lower case.’

Similarly, ,Sisupala hurls at Krsna scurrilous insults, with a piously
reverent capital: “I think Krsna to be no better than a crow — how can He
be fit to accept the first worship in this great sacrifice?”

And yet again, sometimes the capital not only clashes with a speaker’s mood
but even gives away the story line. For example, when an unknown boy brings
milk, Madhavendra Puri asks:

Who are You? Where do You reside? And how did You know that I was fasting?

All such anomalies would be remedied by the consistent use of pronouns in
lower case. This is the style that Dravida and I both favor.

Though scholars and general readers may find lower case entirely natural, we
need to take into account that many ISKCON devotees are likely to see it as
a shocking sign that the BBT (probably influenced by demonic scholars) has
slid into treating Krsna “like an ordinary human being.”

Some would no doubt point out that ,Srila Prabhupada, in his original
Bhagavatam, used upper-case pronouns. And in a talk with his editors on
December 4, 1969, he again endorsed upper-case pronouns.

Of course, in that original Bhagavatam ,Srila Prabhupada also sometimes used
upper-case Who. And in that 1969 conversation his general attitude was “the
fewer capitals the better.”

And so, although we naturally defer to Srila Prabhupada’s example in so many
areas, we need to ask ourselves whether typographic conventions should be
one of them. And since the 1969 exchange about pronouns was brief, we need
to ask ourselves whether to regard it as a definitive instruction or a
circumstantial comment.

In proposing lower case, one option open to us is to first try a lower-case
policy in BTG, where we can gauge feedback and revert to upper case should
we choose.

In any event, we propose the lower-case standard only for new books, not for
Srila Prabhupada’s already published titles.

Hare Krsna.

————————————————————

Conversation with Srila Prabhupada on Capitalisation

Satsvarupa: Prabhupada, in editing, there are two different policies about using capitals. One is to use as few capitals as possible or to use many capitals, in grammar capitalized, or to use few. So sometimes your Nectar of Devotion has got very few capitals. When Balarama is referred to as “he,” there is no capital. But the other policy is to always put… Krsna’s Hands, capital H, Krsna’s Feet, capital F, Krsna Who, capital W. Which is…

Prabhupada: No, no, no. Don’t follow that policy. That will not be very… Then…

Satsvarupa: The less capitals, the better?

Prabhupada: Yes. I think. What do you think?

Hayagriva: Well, I think, when referring to Krsna, we should always have a capital “H.” [His, Him, etc]

Prabhupada: Especially. Yes. Especially for Krsna, you can.

Hayagriva: And if we want to, for Radha, capital “S.” [She]

Prabhupada: But Balarama is not different from Krsna.

Satsvarupa: So He is capital “H.”

Hayagriva: So He is capital “H.” But then here we go. (laughter)

Prabhupada: No, no. You limit to these three. That will do.

Hayagriva: Limit to those three.

Prabhupada: Or Visnu. Yes. Visnu.

Hayagriva: What about avataras, in reference to Christ or Buddha?

Prabhupada: Buddha is capital used. Jesus Christ is capital used.

Satsvarupa: Yes. But he… Like “He.” He means Buddha, “Who.”

Hayagriva: No, “He.”

Prabhupada: No. That you can use…

Satsvarupa: Small.

Prabhupada: Yes.

Satsvarupa: Then words like Krsna’s “pastimes,” “entourage,” His “will.”

Prabhupada: No, small.

Satsvarupa: Small.

Prabhupada: Yes.

Hayagriva: The possessions of Krsna, small.

Prabhupada: Small.

Satsvarupa: His hands and feet, small.

Brahmananda: Lotus feet?

Prabhupada: Yes.

Satsvarupa: Lotus flower?

Prabhupada: Yes. All small. Simply name. Stick to name.

Hayagriva: The pronoun, Krsna, “who.” The pronoun “who,” that’s not…

Prabhupada: No, no. Use small.

Hayagriva: Thank you. There’s so many… That causes a headache for everyone.

Prabhupada: No. It is better to make everything sound but slow. We want to create this position of Back to Godhead as very authorized representation of the science of God. In future people may refer to it, so we should very cautiously and very nicely do it. It is very important thing, Back to Godhead. If our movement is going to be recognized as scientific, God consciousness movement, then this Back to Godhead will be referred as authorized scripture. So therefore we have to prepare in such a way, nothing non-conclusive can be introduced in this. That should be our policy. And actually it is the position of Back to Godhead.

[Conversation with Srila Prabhupada Dec. 24, 1969]

Misconceptions have been circulating about the authorship of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada (Srila Prabhupada).  For example, it is a mistake to think that his books were written by his editors.  The facts demonstrate that Srila Prabhupada translated, wrote, edited, and published his books while using his disciples as assistants.  In contrast, the so-called editing of his books without his knowledge and consent is really rewriting by hidden co-authors.

EXTRAORDINARY AUTHOR

Srila Prabhupada is an extraordinary author unsurpassed in history because he translated, wrote, edited, published, and distributed millions of books worldwide, translated in many languages.  He trained hundreds of disciples to assist him in this monumental work.  Srila Prabhupada created his own publishing house, the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust (BBT).  He created his own distribution system of temples, the Life Membership program, and book distributors who developed innovative methods to distribute books.  He engaged millions of people in producing, distributing and receiving his transcendental books, and thus engaged them in the pure devotional service of Lord Caitanya’s movement.

Srila Prabhupada was a published author before he reached America.  In India, without help, he translated, wrote, edited, published and distributed the three volumes of Srimad Bhagavatam, First Canto, the paperback Easy Journey to Other Planets, and many issues of Back to Godhead magazine.  He wrote a second manuscript for the Bhagavad-gita to replace his first one which had been stolen.

Of course, he recognized his difficulties in presenting transcendental knowledge in a foreign language.  In the Preface to each volume of Srimad Bhagavatam, he appealed to the readers:  “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): tad-vag visargo… ‘On the other hand, that literature which is full with descriptions of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, form and pastimes of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a transcendental creation meant to bring about a revolution in the impious life of a misdirected civilization.  Such transcendental literatures, even though irregularly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.’”

Once he arrived in America, he took opportunities to correct his “irregular composition.”  He gave a large stack of papers, his Bhagavad-gita manuscript, to his disciple, Hayagriva das, who had a Masters degree in English.  The two of them worked closely together to edit and prepare the manuscript for publication in the United States.

AMAZING SYSTEM TO WRITE AND PUBLISH

Srila Prabhupada’s published letters reveal an amazing system which he organized to accelerate his writing.  He controlled every aspect from beginning to end.  And he trained his disciples to assist him in various ways.  He dictated translations and purports which his disciples transcribed.  He corrected and edited those transcriptions which were then sent to other disciples for more editing.  He edited the Sanskrit synonyms or provided them himself.  He proofread manuscripts and final drafts.  He gave specific instructions regarding illustrations, number of pages, size, paper, binding, covers, printing and costs. He examined the printed books to see if they had been printed properly.  He noted his satisfaction and dissatisfaction.  If necessary, he ordered corrections for a subsequent printing.  Amazingly, he did all this work using personal meetings and regular postal mail while traveling around the world!

Srila Prabhupada wrote letters to convey his instructions and answer questions.  Excerpts demonstrate his direct involvement in training and correcting his disciples’ work.  He wrote his books by dictating the translations and purports which were transcribed.  “I have received the transcription of tape #16.  You are doing very nicely and improving your editorial capability.”  (Letter to Satsvarupa, July 29, 1969)  “Pradyumna and Shyamsundar will be sending you regularly completed transcriptions of my translation work by post … and because I am here, if they have questions, I can answer and make the final proofreading, and this will expedite everything.”  (Letter to Jayadvaita, May 15, 1971)

His disciples had difficulty producing quality translations and Sanskrit synonyms even in later years, thereby forcing Srila Prabhupada to do the work himself.  “The translations… I am not using.  There is some fault.  I am doing the translations… (Letter to Radhaballabha, Sept. 26, 1975)  “Yes, because no one else can do them, I shall do the Sanskrit synonyms.”  (Letter to Jayadvaita, Feb. 18, 1972)  “From yesterday night I have begun adding the synonyms as it doesn’t save very much time to have the synonyms.”  (Letter to Radhaballabha, Oct. 20, 1975) “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 not approve.  Nitai may correct whatever mistakes are there, but the corrected material must be sent to me for final approval.”  (Letter to Radhaballabha, Jan. 5, 1976)

Synonyms were missing for 25 chapters of the Srimad Bhagavatam, so he provided them.  “I have begun this work and the first tape of synonyms, tape no. 6, was sent to Pradyumna today.  This work will take at least one month to complete.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, Feb. 18, 1972)  Sometimes he provided the synonyms within the letter: “So far your question, the synonyms are as follows: sattvam – the mode of goodness; rajas – the mode of passion … (Letter to Jayadvaita, July 3, 1971)

Srila Prabhupada’s solution to the Sanskrit editing problems was to train his disciple, Pradyumna das.  “I am very much glad that Pradyumna is now with me for teaching him correctly this Sanskrit editing work.  After he has become well-trained that will be a great relief to me and it will benefit everyone by increasing the flow of our books and literatures.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, May 15, 1971)

Srila Prabhupada also trained his disciples in editing the English and preparing the manuscripts for publishers, including basic proofreading.  As always, he reviewed their work and made necessary corrections.  “Regarding your second point, all incarnations should be proper nouns and therefore capitalized.  It does not matter whether they are Visnu-tattva or jiva-tattva, saktavesh-avatar or plenary expansion.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, July 12, 1970)  “…you have got 31 only out of 33.  I think some of the brackets are not counted.  So if the parentheses are removed from ‘intoxication’ and ‘impotency’ and they are also counted, the total of symptoms will come to 33.  Simply add commas…” (Letter to Jayadvaita, Jan. 30, 1970)

Srila Prabhupada supervised his editors; he reviewed their work, including the final manuscript.  “Regarding the corrections you have sent, this kind of changes is admissible.  There is no harm.”  (Letter to Radhaballabha, Sept. 21, 1975)  “I have received your letter dated May 26, 1972, along with the blue-print copies of Bhagavad Gita As It Is from MacMillan Company.  It is very nice.  So I shall be looking forward to seeing the entire manuscript and book sometime around first July, 1972.”  (Letter to Jayadvaita, May 28, 1972)

Srila Prabhupada gave instructions and reviewed the art work to illustrate his books.  “The sketches are all alright as they are.  Please go ahead and make the paintings.”  (Letter to Jadurani, Jan. 5, 1976)  For Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta, he wrote, “The art paintings are very, very good.  Everyone likes them, and I know they have worked especially hard…. The photographs are also wonderful.  He has done nicely, the boy Bhargava.” (Letter to Radhaballabha, Sept. 26, 1975)

Other examples include the illustrations in the Seventh Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam (1st printing, 1976) which comply with his instructions.  “2. There should be no effulgence around Prahlad.  Hiranyakasipu should not be shown with a pipe.  He was a non-smoker.… 4. To illustrate Prahlad being protected when he is thrown off the cliff, there should be a semi-visible Krishna waiting below, as if to catch.”  (Letter to Radhaballabha, Feb. 3, 1976)

Srila Prabhupada determined the layout of his books and other publishing details.  He wanted high quality publications.  “Regarding 6th Canto, Nitai has just yesterday sent off Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8 and next week he expects to send off Chapters 9 through 13.  This will be sufficient for you to publish one volume.”  (Letter to Radhaballava, Sept. 21, 1975)  Regarding a decrease in the printing quality of Back to Godhead magazine, he wrote, “The color is not at all good.  It is not attractive, and not as good as Dai Nippon…. The standard quality of Dai Nippon must be maintained.  On what consideration is the printer being changed?… In my opinion, no one can print better than Dai Nippon.  Why is the plan changed without my consent?… We cannot change the quality of printing for the matter of a little change in the price.  This printing is not approved by me…. I am sending copies of this letter to all BBT Trustees for necessary action.”  (Letter to Radhaballava, Sept. 22, 1974)

Srila Prabhupada was a prolific writer – he translated and wrote faster than his disciples could edit and publish.  Although he was one person and they were many, they could not keep up with him.  For example, he pressured his disciples for years to publish the eighteen volumes of Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta.  The manuscripts were written, but the editing, illustrations, and publication progressed slowly.  The first published volume appeared in 1973.  A year later, another volume was published.  He overcame BBT’s lethargy in 1974 by forcing the Los Angeles temple into a marathon to prepare the books.  And he personally stayed there to assist the editors.  By his efforts, the entire Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta was finally published in 1975.

Other books took longer.  In 1972 he ordered the publication of a paperback based on recorded conversations.  “I think we are just now typing up the tapes of those conversations we held in Mayapur, and we shall be publishing them as a book.  It will be called Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers.”  (Letter from Srila Prabhupada to Bob Cohen, June 16, 1972, reprinted in the book)  Five years later, the small paperback was published and ready for distribution.

Srila Prabhupada’s system of book distribution relied on three integral parts – his temples, his book distributors, and the Life Membership program.  The temples were the regional centers for book distribution.  They organized the local distribution and provided all the needs for the book distributors and support persons (managers, pujaries, cooks, etc.) who lived in the temples.  The temple activities were organized so that the book distributors could devote all their energies to distributing Srila Prabhupada’s books and preaching.  “There is no doubt about it, to distribute books is our most important activity.  The temple is a place not for eating and sleeping, but as a base from which we send out our soldiers to fight with maya.  Fight with maya means to drop thousands and millions of books into the lap of the conditioned souls.  Just like during war time the Bombs are raining from the sky like anything.”  (Letter to Ramesvara, Aug. 3, 1973)

Srila Prabhupada devised the Life Membership Program as a scheme to publish and distribute books in India, and to expand it to America and other countries.  “Here in India our program is going on very nicely.  Especially we are making so many life members.  That program is so important that we are getting money, supporters and distributing our literature all at the same time.” (Letter to Damodara, March 5, 1971)  “…on this book distribution scheme of life membership.  50% is utilized for reprinting books and 50% is utilized for increasing the number of centers.  I think the same program may be vigorously introduced in your country and that will be a great success.” (Letter to Rupanuga, Feb. 19, 1971)

ERRONEOUS MISCONCEPTIONS

It is clear that Srila Prabhupada was the author of his books, and the editors were his assistants.  Also, he fully controlled the editing and publishing process. For his books, he determined the content, meaning, purpose, audience, style, illustrations, binding, paper, publication dates, etc.

So why do some, including some BBT editors, erroneously claim that Srila Prabhupada did not really write his books?  Why do they mistakenly refer to “Hayagriva’s Bhagavad-gita” instead of “Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita?”  The answer is that they confuse writing with editing.

Factually, editing is not writing because editing polishes something already written.  First the author writes, and then the editor edits.  First, Srila Prabhupada wrote the translations and purports for Bhagavad-gita, and then Hayagriva edited them.

Writing creates the content, meaning and purpose.  Editing polishes that work to make it more presentable to the readers, but editing does not change the author’s meaning and purpose.  Srila Prabhupada created the transcendental content of his books.  He conveyed the meaning of Krsna consciousness within the Vaisnava parampara (disciplic succession).  And he imbued his books with the purpose to spread Lord Caitanya’s mercy all over the world.  Srila Prabhupada’s books contain his potency to transform sincere readers into pure unalloyed devotees.  To assist him, Hayagriva polished the Bhagavad-gita manuscript by correcting the irregular composition without changing Srila Prabhupada’s meaning and purpose.

Editing differs from writing because the editor suggests changes and consults with the author for approval.  Hayagriva proofread the Bhagavad-gita manuscript.  Proofreading is the process of finding and correcting errors in spelling, conjugation, capitalization, grammar, syntax, italics, etc. as well as conformity to the publisher’s format (font size, margins, indentations, footnotes, etc.).

Hayagriva also suggested other changes to the manuscript.  Like a good editor, he discussed the changes and asked for Srila Prabhupada’s approval of them.  Other disciples acting as editors followed the same approval process with other books.  It is clear that Srila Prabhupada wrote his books and that Hayagriva and other disciples edited them.

Another misconception is that Srila Prabhupada’s books can be edited without his knowledge and consent.  This is erroneous because, as explained above, editing requires discussions and approval from the author.  And the author makes the final decisions about what is published.  Therefore, no editing can occur especially after Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance (in 1977) because he is no longer available for consultation.  The only exceptions would be found in his orders for specific changes to specific books.  Regarding the unfinished Srimad Bhagavatam, he personally trained and assigned only Pradyumna das to finish the translations and purports.

Still another misconception is that Srila Prabhupada gave orders to change his published books after his disappearance.  No evidence exists to support this claim.  In fact, he gave many orders not to change his books.  “Yes, there is no need for corrections for the first and second Cantos.  Whatever is there is alright.”  (Letter to Radhaballabha, May 4, 1976)  Regarding the Bhagavad-gita manuscript prepared for the 1972 MacMillan publication, he wrote, “So far changing the working of verse or purport of 12:12 discussed before, it may remain as it is.”  (Letter to Jayadvaita, March 17, 1971)  Apparently Srila Prabhupada rejected Jayadvaita’s suggestions in favor of leaving the manuscript “as it is.”  Yet three words in that purport were changed for the unauthorized 1983 revision.

Those familiar with Srila Prabhupada’s management understand that he would have given important orders to change his published books to the BBT Trustees, the GBC members, and Pradyumna, his highly qualified translator.  So why are there no orders from Srila Prabhupada to his important leaders?  Why would he grant permission to rewrite his Bhagavad-gita to devotees who were not important leaders before his disappearance?

HIDDEN CO-AUTHORS

What is so-called editing that is independent from Srila Prabhupada’s order?  Factually, it is not editing, it is rewriting of his books.  The so-called editors are acting like authors.  They are really co-authors because they are rewriting books written by another author, i.e., Srila Prabhupada.  And, they are really hidden co-authors because they rewrite his books while hiding behind the good name of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.  The hidden co-authors present their own translations and opinions hidden within Srila Prabhupada’s books.

In contrast, honest co-authors always publish their names, and sometimes they describe their individual contributions.  In any case, their readers understand that two or more authors wrote the book.  A famous example of co-authoring is a book about grammar and writing, The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White (Fourth edition, 2000, published by Longman Publishers).  In it, White explained his role as co-author and his changes to Strunk’s original book.  White also claimed credit for writing the section on style.

CHANGES TO THE BOOKS

The problem of hidden co-authors even occurred during Srila Prabhupada’s physical presence.  Some disciples deviated from the honest relationship between Srila Prabhupada as author and the disciples as editors.  Such persons changed his manuscripts and printed books without his permission and knowledge.  After discovering these unauthorized changes, Srila Prabhupada strongly chastised the persons involved and demanded the removal of the changes.  For example, during a Srimad Bhagavatam class, Nitai das read a manuscript translation which contained unauthorized changes.

Nitai: “At the time of death, Ajamila saw three awkward persons… His small child, Narayana, was playing a little distance off, and with tearful eyes and great anxiety, he called the name of his son very loudly three times, ‘Narayana, Narayana, Narayana!” (SB 6.1.28-29)

Srila Prabhupada: Is there “three times?”

Nitai: It said in the manuscript.  The manuscript said “three times.”

Srila Prabhupada: Who said in the manuscript?  There is no three times.  Not “Narayana” three times.  One time, “O Narayana,” that’s all.  So did I say “three times?” No, it is not said here.  You should correct it.  Once, “O Narayana,” that’s all.  There is no reason of calling three times.  There is no mention here.  Once is sufficient.  (laughter) …Uccair ajuhava, very loudly, “Narayana!” Like that.  That’s all. Uccair ajuhava akulendriyah.  So you edited it?  Not yet?

Nitai: No.

Srila Prabhupada: So you should keep at least what is there. (Transcription of recorded lecture for S.B. 6.1.28-29, Philadelphia, July 13, 1975)

Despite his continual efforts to rectify and train his editors, they continued to make unauthorized changes.  By June of 1977, Srila Prabhupada expressed his doubt that his leading editors would follow his order to remove over 100 changes to the Sri Isopanisad and publish it as the original (1969) printing.   He said, “It is a 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 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.”  (Conversation with with Srila Prabhupada and Yasoda-nandana, June 22, 1977)

After Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance, the hidden co-authors made major changes to Bhagavad-gita As It Is (1972 edition).  A major change is the language, the writing style, of the Bhagavad-gita translations.  For example, Srila Prabhupada originally published (1972 edition), Chapter 7, verse 24 as “Unintelligent men, who know Me not, think that I have assumed this form and personality.  Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature, which is changeless and supreme.”  In contrast, the hidden co-authors (1983 revision) rewrote the verse as “Unintelligent men, who do not know Me perfectly, think that I, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna, was impersonal before and have now assumed this personality.  Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature, which is imperishable and supreme.”

The stark contrast between the two versions clearly indicates that they were written by two different authors.  Srila Prabhupada wrote the original version, and the hidden co-authors wrote the later version.

Other Bhagavad-gita verses in the rewritten, 1983 edition display similar changes. The hidden co-authors substituted a lower level writing style not intended for college educated readers.  Therefore, the change in writing style indicates a change in audience, the intended readers.  Srila Prabhupada wrote for a college-educated, more intelligent audience; whereas, the hidden co-authors wrote for a less intelligent audience.

The co-authored Bhagavad-gita (1983 revision) is not suitable for college classrooms.  But Srila Prabhupada’s plan differed:  “…our propaganda should be going on for drawing attention of the educational institutions to accept our books at least in the religious courses.”  (Letter to Satsvarupa, Nov. 2, 1973)  “I am so glad to learn that you are having nice success in placing my books in the libraries and in schools and colleges…. I am sure that this will revolutionize the thinking of thoughtful men of your country as well as the students and the professors and the ultimate end will be to save the world from the clutches of material illusory activities which is now causing havoc everywhere.”  (Letter to Karandhar, Sept. 13, 1970)

Why do the hidden co-authors claim to be better translators and commentators (purport writers) than Srila Prabhupada?  What are the hidden co-authors doing when they change the philosophy and preaching plans in Srila Prabhupada’s books?  What is their purpose?

The hidden co-authors usurp Srila Prabhupada’ property, his books, by making changes not authorized by him.  They seize and hold his books by force without the spiritual right to do so.  The hidden co-authors force changes without any order to do so.  They blatantly disobey his direct order to maintain the books as originally published.  They use BBT money and diplomacy to defeat opposition to their usurpation.  The hidden co-authors behave like squatters who forcibly and unlawfully take over someone’s property and use it for their own purpose.

The hidden co-authors mislead the devotees and the innocent public by publishing their own opinions under Srila Prabhupada’s good name.  What is their purpose?  They are acting like hidden founder-acaryas because they rewrite sastra (Vedic scripture) intended for the next 9500 years.  Because they reject Srila Prabhupada’s order to maintain his books as published, they freely inject their own opinions.

The proper behavior of a disciple or follower is to follow the spiritual master’s order.  Srila Prabhupada explained: “Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura has stated that the order of the spiritual master is the life and soul of the disciples.  As a man cannot separate his life from his body, so a disciple cannot separate the order of the spiritual master from his life.  If a disciple follows the instruction of the spiritual master in that way, he is sure to become perfect.”  (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.24.13, 1974, 1st printing)

On the basis of this instruction, sincere devotees have the duty and the right to reject all co-authored changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books.  We must follow Srila Prabhupada, not the hidden co-authors because he can liberate anyone who follows him.

Srila Prabhupada wrote: “Not a single person in the West became Krsna conscious before the Krsna consciousness movement was founded.  But when the same Bhagavad-gita was presented as it is through the disciplic succession, the effect of spiritual realization was immediately manifested.”   (Srimad Bhagavatam, 4.22.19, 1978, 2nd printing)

By following Srila Prabhupada, we can make spiritual progress and preach Lord Caitanya’s movement all over the world.  And Srila Prabhupada, through his Prabhupada-vani – his books and teachings, can take anyone back home, back to Godhead.

His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada displayed all of the symptoms of an empowered jiva soul, working tirelessly to distribute the transcendental message of love of Godhead throughout the world. It is therefore the duty of his followers to preserve the legacy and protect the honor of such a great spiritual personality whose every moment was dedicated to the spreading of Krishna consciousness.

To guarantee that his teachings would not be forgotten in the oblivion of time, Srila Prabhupada created the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust and, assisted by his disciples, he astounded the academic community with his literary output.

What follows is a brief account of Srila Prabhupada’s struggle with the BBT staff to keep the final version of his books intact by resisting what he called the “American disease” of always wanting to change things. As will be seen from the letters and conversations cited in this article, Srila Prabhupada would finally insist on an “absolutely no change” policy based on the principle of “arsa prayoga”.

That unwanted changes were being made to his books came to his attention as early as 1975, and it quickly became a pressing matter. In a letter to the production manager of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, Srila Prabhupada expressed his alarm that changes he had not approved were appearing in print.

“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 not approve. Nitai may correct whatever mistakes are there, but the corrected material must be sent to me for final approval.” (Letter to Radha-vallabha dasa dated 1-5-76)

Srila Prabhupada never gave anyone carte blanche to make revisions in his books. This letter confirms that any changes to his books would require his personal approval before being printed.

A few months later, the issue of change was raised again by Radha-vallabha dasa regarding the text of several volumes of the Srimad-Bhagavatam which were soon to be reprinted. Srila Prabhupada advised him, “There is no need for corrections for the First and Second Cantos. Whatever is there is all right.” (Letter of 5-4-76) Seeing how persistent his BBT managers were to implement change in the text and presentation of his books, His Divine Grace wrote again to Radha-vallabha dasa in August, 1976, this time more firmly:

“Do not try to change anything without my permission.”

Srila Prabhupada consistently stated that he did not want anything to be changed unnecessarily. Any changes they thought would be an improvement in the text would require his written authorization.

The most serious violation of this instruction actually came years later, after Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance, when BBT personnel decided to print a new [revised & enlarged] version of the Bhagavad-gita. It is a well known fact that His Divine Grace never authorized anyone to re-edit the Bhagavad-gita As It Is. If Srila Prabhupada ever intended to make changes in the Gita, the ideal opportunity for him to say so came in a room conversation that took place on February 24, 1977 in Mayapur. On that occasion, Radha-vallabha dasa was describing how the upcoming printing of the Bhagavad-gita was going to require so much paper that it would take seventy-six train cars to transport it (1.5 million copies). Srila Prabhupada absolutely did not suggest making any corrections before this largest printing ever of the Bhagavad-gita As It Is. In fact, and to the contrary, in a discussion that took place three days later, he established a definitive “no change” policy that he wanted applied henceforward to all of his books. The tendency to want to make corrections was now a very serious problem, and Srila Prabhupada dealt with it.

The transcribed conversation of February 27, 1977 presented below clearly indicates that Srila Prabhupada would never have approved of anyone changing the final edited version of his writings, even after his disappearance. In this exchange, His Divine Grace states that for a disciple to see mistakes in his production-ready finished manuscripts was a bad habit that had to be given up. Even though the one correction his disciple Jagannatha dasa wanted to propose would not have changed the wording of the verse, Srila Prabhupada warned that to make any change whatsoever was “strictly forbidden.” As a servant of his spiritual master, Radha-vallabha dasa was obliged to accept Srila Prabhupada’s instruction that the text should be left exactly as is and that making corrections should never be contemplated.

To further enlighten his disciple, Srila Prabhupada explained the rule of “arsa prayoga“, that whatever the acharya has given, it should be accepted. The tendency to think oneself sufficiently qualified to correct one’s authority is not only a breach of vaisnava etiquette, but is an offense in the service of the spiritual master.

If one continues to see mistakes that he thinks need to be corrected, Srila Prabhupada says, “He is the mistake.” Due to his incomplete understanding, Radha-vallabha dasa reasoned, “So if we think there is some mistake, we should just forget about it.” Srila Prabhupada corrects him again, saying that one should not even think his authority has made a mistake. His opinion was that since Jagannatha dasa tended to see mistakes in the writings of the acharya, he was an irresponsible man who could not be relied upon. Srila Prabhupada then made his final point, that our true purpose is not served by becoming so-called scholars able to find errors in the books of the spiritual master, but by becoming advanced in devotion to Krishna. Radha-vallabha dasa finally got the point, that Srila Prabhupada was establishing the rule of “no corrections anywhere” once a book was submitted to his department for publication.

Room Conversation of 2-27-77, Mayapura

Radha-vallabha Das: Now Jagannatha had some questions on corrections in the book. In verse twenty-eight it says, “Then he worshiped Sri Krishna, the essence of all Vedas, with this hymn.”

Srila Prabhupada: Where it is? Brahma-samhita?

RVD: Yes.

SP: What is that?

RVD: So it says, “Then he worshiped Sri Krishna, the essence of all Vedas, with this hymn.”

SP: Where it is?

RVD: It’s verse twenty-eight, “Then he worshiped Sri Krishna.” So Jagannatha said it should be, “Then he worshiped…”

SP: No, no. Jagannatha cannot correct. That bad habit he must give up.

RVD: So we should just leave it exactly.

SP: Oh yes. You should not be more educated.

RVD: He wasn’t changing any of the words. He was just…

SP: Nothing of the…. This should be strictly forbidden.

RVD: So no corrections. That makes it simple.

SP: They can divide the synonyms. That’s all.

RVD: Synonyms. So even…

SP: That is his tendency, to correct. That’s very bad. He should not do that.

RVD: So I’ll just forget this, then.

SP: The system is: whatever authority has done, even there is mistake, it should be accepted.

RVD: Oh.

SP: Arsa prayoga. That is ha… He should not become more learned than the authority. That is very bad habit.

RVD: He was always wondering how he should think. So I’ll tell him that. He thinks, “If I think I see a mistake, what should I think?” I’ll tell him what you just said.

SP: He cannot see mistake. He is mistake (laughter). That is being done by this rascal. I don’t want. And the Hayagriva has…, the Easy Journey, he has changed so many things. That… He is now bad character. You should not maintain him.

Later, in the same conversation

SP: So Jagannatha should be strictly advised not to become very learned to correct authorities. No.

RVD: I think that the instruction you gave will help him very much about even if he thinks there is some mistake, just forget about it.

SP: He is mistake. He should not think his authority mistake.

RVD: He didn’t know what he should do. He didn’t know…

SP: So why he should be given this business. He’s such irresponsible man.

He should not be given any responsible work. Our first business should see how he is advanced in devotion. We don’t want so-called scholars.

RVD: Jagannatha was somewhat affected by Nitai, but he’s…

SP: I know that.

RVD: I think he understands what the problem was. I think he understands what his problem was, and that’s why he won’t do anything without asking you.

SP: Don’t allow him to do anything.

RVD: Well, now that this system of no corrections anywhere, that makes it very simple. Then he can’t do anything. I don’t think he wants to either. It makes it more simple for him. It makes him very uncomfortable.

SP: No corrections.

Six weeks later, Srila Prabhupada was listening to the notes and resolutions of a meeting held by the BBT trustees. He was generally pleased with the decisions that had been made, but at one point he interrupted the reading to make a recommendation of his own. He wanted them to include in their list the following admonition:

“And every time Radha-vallabha changes something, that should be stopped. He is very much inclined to change something. This practice should be stopped.”

Srila Prabhupada was assigning to the BBT trustees the duty of safeguarding his books from being changed in the slightest by anyone who had not been specifically ordered to do so.

The principle of “arsa prayoga” was again referred to on June 22, 1977 when Srila Prabhupada was in Vrndavana, India. In the middle of a reading of the Srimad Bhagavatam, Srila Prabhupada objected when he heard the synonym that was given for the word “sadhu”. The word-for-word translation said, “it is relevant,” but Srila Prabhupada said, “No. ‘Sadhu’ means ‘devotee’.” The editors had changed his translation, and he found this unacceptable. He spoke as though he had been betrayed by a dangerous element within his movement. His authority was being minimized by his own disciples to whom he had entrusted his most lasting contribution: his books. A number of devotees present voiced their objection to the production staff’s practice of deleting entire sections from certain books, and they mentioned discrepancies they had found in the Sanskrit to English translations. Literally hundreds of changes had already been made in the text of Srila Prabhupada’s books from one printing to the next and the devotees testified that the potency was not the same.

Srila Prabhupada asked for suggestions from his senior men to resolve this dilemma and they offered their advice. After hearing various proposals, Srila Prabhupada’s conclusion was that, “The next printing should be again to the original way.” He then ordered his secretary to contact the GBC man he wanted to entrust this matter to in Los Angeles where the press was located. “So you bring this to Satsvarupa. They cannot change anything.”

Drawing from these letters and conversations, we can gain some insight into Srila Prabhupada’s struggle to keep his books as they were. One should rightly conclude that he would never have approved of the wholesale changes that were made by the BBT editors after his disappearance. He would have expected the BBT trustees to resist on his behalf. The unnecessary and unauthorized changes in the Bhagavad-gita alone number more than seven hundred, so where is Srila Prabhupada’s signed approval for such changes to be made? And where are the rave reviews of the revised edition from scholars and professors praising the editors for having improved the original version of the Gita published by their spiritual master? We do not expect to see any testimonials from these mundane personalities glorifying the “revised and enlarged” edition of the Gita. After all, which scholar would approve of having his own writings altered after his physical demise?

The adulteration of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is was the first major milestone in the BBT’s refusal to follow the rule of arsa prayoga (the unholy practice of dishonoring the acharya), a program which reached its zenith when they declared in court that Srila Prabhupada was simply a writer hired by ISKCON to compile the Vedic classics. We do not know what kind of apology can be made by the BBT’s editors and trustees at this point, but it is our humble opinion that the best way to make amends for past transgressions would be to accept Srila Prabhupada’s instruction that “the next printing should be again to the original way.”

Lately, there have been a number of very good articles published on VNN, and other websites, concerning the ill advisability of changing Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books. For example:

1. July 2, 1999: “Make It Perfect – That Is Our Philosophy” (http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9907/ET02-4207.html)

2. July 3, 1999: “No Manuscript – No Problems!” (http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9907/ET03-4219.html)

3. July 5, 1999: “Footnoting Śrīla Prabhupāda’s ’Personal Ecstasies’” (http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9907/ET05-4231.html)

One point that they all seem to be missing is that changing Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books at this late date will create inconsistencies which may cause neophyte devotees and innocent people, to whom we are trying to preach, to lose faith.

Here are three examples of what I’m getting at:

1. Suppose someone listens to a tape of Śrīla Prabhupāda giving the Bhagavad-gītā class. Many of these tapes include the reading of the translations and purports from Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original “Bhagavad-gītā As It Is.” It’s perfectly obvious that Śrīla Prabhupāda approved of every word of the original versions of his books, since there are many tapes wherein the books are read aloud in his presence. Suppose this same someone then proceeds to follow along in one of the new “revised and expanded” versions of that book. Couldn’t it cause him to lose faith when he discovers that the original versions, which were obviously approved by Śrīla Prabhupāda, have been changed?

2. Suppose someone listens to an older tape of one of ISKCON’s new “gurus” giving Bhagavad-gītā class. These tapes are readily available in temple gift shops and by mail via dozens of “tape ministries.” Suppose he then proceeds to read along, while the translation and purport are being read, from one of the new “revised and expanded” versions of that book. Couldn’t it cause him to lose faith when he discovers that it’s been changed?

3. Suppose someone gets his hands on a “cracked” version of the “Vedabase.” Since a blank CD-ROM costs as little as one US dollar, and a CD-ROM writer can be purchased for as little as US$200, many people may be tempted to copy the “bootleg” version, rather than dish out US$500 for the heavily “copy protected” version from the Bhaktivedanta Archives. The bootleg version could actually end up being a lot more popular than the “legal” version! It just so happens that every cracked version of the Vedabase that I’ve seen contains the original versions of all of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books, not the revised editions. In any case, the transcriptions of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s recorded classes are also on the Vedabase. If someone wants to quote something from Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books or lectures, it’s obviously a lot easier to do a “copy/paste” from the Vedabase rather than to manually type it in, so obviously these differences are going to be noticed for a long time to come.

Therefore, for the sake of the neophytes, such as myself, and for the sake of the innocent, whom we are supposed to be preaching to, let’s leave Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books the way they were when Śrīla Prabhupāda was personally present, for consistency’s sake, if for no other reason.

Your servant,
Pratyatoṣa Dāsa

“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