(Srimad-Bhagavatam 7.5.23-24 — Vrndavana, March 31, 1976)

Prabhupada:This of should be strictly forbidden.

Radha-vallabha: So no corrections. That makes it simple.

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

Radha-vallabha: Synonyms. So even…

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

Radha-vallabha: So I’ll just forget this, then.

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

Radha-vallabha: Oh.

Prabhupada: Asa-praya(?) [NOTE: "Asa-praya(?)" should be transcribed as“Arsha-prayoga”] That is ha… He should not become more learned than the authority. That is very bad habit….

Prabhupada: Why finish it? Whatever is done is done. No more….

Radha-vallabha: 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.

Prabhupada: No corrections.

(February 28, 1977, Mayapura)

In the first quote above from Vrndavan, when listening to the audio one can hear that the transcription is clearly wrong. Prabhupada is transcribed as saying “asat-patha” but if you listen to the audio closely you will hear Srila Prabhupada clearly says “arsha-prayoga” not asat-patha. Also the words asat-patha make no sense in this context but the words  arsha-prayoga make perfect sense.

On the second above quote from Mayapur, I could not find the audio for this, but considering that (as per my knowledge) the words arsha-prayoga are not used by Srila Prabhupada on a daily basis, it goes to reason that the transcriber may not have been familiar with them. Not understanding those words the transcriber typed in “Asa-praya(?)” with a question mark afterwords to indicate his failure to understand what Srila Prabhupada said.

According to Satsvarupa Prabhu in his Prabhupada Lilamrita he also informs us that Srila Prabhupada said arsha-prayoga establishing a no change policy:

But one day while sitting in the garden with Tamala Krsna, Svarupa Damodara, and others, Srila Prabhupada became very disturbed when he detected a mistake in one of his already printed books. Tamala Krsna was reading aloud a verse from the First Canto which began, “Munayah sadhu prsto ‘ham.” Srila Prabhupada had him read the synonyms.

Tamala Krsna read: “munayah-O sages; sadhu-this is relevant; prstah-questioned… ”

“Sadhu?” asked Srila Prabhupada. Thus he uncovered a thoughtless mistake made by the Sanskrit editors. Sadhu means “devotee,” not “this is relevant.” Srila Prabhupada became very angry and denounced the “rascal Sanskrit scholars.” “A little learning,” he said “is dangerous. Immediately they think they have become big scholar, thinking, “I shall arrange!’ And then they write all nonsense.” He continued speaking about the mistake for half an hour. He was disturbed. He ordered Tamala Krsna to write at once to the BBT and stop these speculations by his disciples-changing his books in the name of editing The devotees were startled to see Prabhupada so angry; he was supposed to be peacefully relishing a Srimad-Bhagavatam reading here in his garden. Such a change was very serious, he said, because it changed the meaning. “Even if the authorized acaryas would make a mistake,” he said, “it would not be changed. This is arsa-prayoga. In this way the acaryas are honored.”

(Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita, chapter 52 “I Have Done My Part”)

I have just read this article about changes in the KRSNA Book. Although I am rarely surprised by anything anymore, still I was surprised by the article’s description about the volume of changes to the literature of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. I have heard all the many excuses over the years for making changes, which from the external perspective may seem logical, but these delusions cannot replace the desire of Srila Prabhupada in this connection.

With specific regards to the KRSNA book, during his physical presence, Srila Prabhupada would not even allow so much as a picture to be changed. Why then, when our mundane eyes can no longer perceive him, are so many changes going on?

For many years, I was in close contact with Radhaballabha dasa, who was the production manager for producing Srila Prabhupada’s books. A couple of years after Srila Prabhupada’s departure, around 1980, Radhaballabha Prabhu related to me an experience he had with Srila Prabhupada regarding book changes.

Soon after the intense marathon for completing the publication of Caitanya Caritamrita, Radhaballabha prabhu approached Srila Prabhupada and mentioned that the artists are now completing the paintings in preparation for the second printing. To this, Srila Prabhupada replied “No changes”. A further attempt was made to explain, stating that there were to be no actual changes, but that the same painting would simply be completed because there was insufficient time during the marathon, and that the paintings were actually published in an unfinished state. Srila Prabhupada replied to him again, “NO changes”.

Confused by Srila Prabhupada’s previous responses, Radhaballabha again tried to explain the situation. The short time frame of the publication marathon had prevented the paintings from being completed. They were now to be finished by the artists, re-photographed and in the next printing, the same picture, same size, everything the same except for the finishing touches, would be placed in the exact same spot in the book. Srila Prabhupada now appeared angered and replied again, but this time more forcefully, “NO CHANGES!!!”.

humbly,
Mithiladhisa dasa

These days many ISKCON devotees are publishing their own books, making their own translations and commentaries on Sanskrit or Bengali texts, or editing Prabhupada’s books

I have no problems with devotee’s translating books into English that were not done by Srila Prabhupada. What must be considered is: if we accept Srila Prabhupada as a guru or acharya then we must accept what he said about who is qualified and who is not to do this seva.

One effect of this flood of new books by various devotees is that if you go to an ISKCON event or temple and visit the book table often one finds that these books are more prominently displayed and distributed than Srila Prabhupada’s books. Also when you get a book that has Prabhupada’s name on it as the translator and author the words contained in it, are not approved of by Prabhupada due to content being changed by conditioned souls even after his clear instructions where given to not change it.

In this article we are going to discover directly from Srila Prabhupada what the qualifications are that one must have to write transcendental literature. On this same note when one edits a book rearranging or removing words that were approved by the acharya and uttama-adhikari devotee and replaces them with words that are of ones own choosing according to ones own mind and senses the same principals and rules apply.

Do Not Repeat What the Previous Acharyas Have Already Done:

This is a matter of etiquette. If a previous acarya has already written about something, there is no need to repeat it for personal sense gratification or to outdo the previous acarya. Unless there is some definite improvement, one should not repeat. (Cc. Madhya 12.151)

So Vyasadeva is the spiritual master. So the later acaryas, they did not think it proper that whatever the… Because their spiritual master has had already made a commentary on the Vedanta-sutra, “Oh, that is sufficient. Why should we do again?”These are some of the etiquette. (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 22.21-28 — New York, January 11, 1967)

One cannot defy the previous acaryas. The false pride that makes one think that he can write better than the previous acaryas will make one’s comments faulty. At the present moment it has become fashionable for everyone to write in his own way, but such writing is never accepted by serious devotees. (Cc. Antya 7.134)

Many devotees are writing their own (or editing Srila Prabhupada‘s) Bhagavad-Gita, I guess they have not read these verses from the Caitanya-caritamrta? Or maybe they feel that Srila Prabhupada is not competent in his translations. They obviously consider that there is something lacking in Srila Prabhuapda’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is and believe they can make a better translation and commentary on the Gita than Prabhupada. A mood such as this, where one intentionally or unintentionally may impertinently put forward presentations that overstep or out do the previous acharya simply show that they are not qualified to write transcendental literature.

In this regard one may refer to the Srimad Bhagavatam 3.4.26 where Srila Prabhupada warns his followers of the offense called maryada-vyatikrama “Although one may be well versed in the 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…. The rule is that in the presence of a higher personality one should not be very eager to impart instructions, even if one is competent and well versed.”

Not Possible Unless Authorized by Superior Authorities:

One cannot write on spiritual matters without being blessed by Krsna and the disciplic succession of gurus. The blessings of the authorities are one’s power of attorney. One should not try to write anything about Vaisnava behavior and activities without being authorized by superior authorities.This is confirmed in Bhagavad-gita: evam parampara-praptam imam rajarsayo viduh. (Cc. Madhya 24.345)

Without Your mercy such poetic expressions would be impossible for an ordinary living being to write. (Cc. Antya 1.196)

Not Possible Unless One is a Pure Unalloyed Devotee of Krishna:

Writing transcendental literature is not something an ordinary devotee can do. Only a pure unalloyed advanced devotee of Krishna has the power to write transcendental literature and anyone who has read Srila Prabhuapda’s books must know this for he stresses this point in many places:

The writing of Vaisnava literatures is not a function for ordinary men. Vaisnava literatures are not mental concoctions. They are all authorized literature meant to guide those who are going to be Vaisnavas. Under these circumstances, an ordinary man cannot give his own opinion. His opinion must always correspond with the conclusion of the Vedas. Unless one is fully qualified in Vaisnava behavior and authorized by superior authority (the Supreme Personality of Godhead), one cannot write Vaisnava literatures or purports and commentaries on Srimad-Bhagavatam and Bhagavad-gita. (Cc. Madhya 24.326)

“The words spoken by the Lord are different from words spoken by a person of the mundane world who is infected with four defects. A mundaner

1. is sure to commit mistakes,
2. is invariably illusioned,
3. has the tendency to cheat others and
4. is limited by imperfect senses.With these four imperfections, one cannot deliver perfect information of all-pervading knowledge. Vedic knowledge is not imparted by such defective living entities….One cannot say anything about the transcendental world without being free from materially contaminated consciousness.” (Introduction to Gitopanisad)

Unless one is a fully unalloyed devotee of the Lord, one should not try to describe the pastimes of Krsna in poetry, for it will be only mundane. There are many descriptions of Krsna’s Bhagavad-gita written by persons whose consciousness is mundane and who are not qualified by pure devotion. Although they attempted to write transcendental literature, they could not fully engage even a single devotee in Krsna’s service. Such literature is mundane, and therefore, as warned by Sri Sanatana Gosvami, one should not touch it. (Antya 1.212)

Here Srila Prabhupada stresses that only a pure unalloyed advanced devotee can write transcendental literature and if a devotee who is not a very highly advanced being free from materially contaminated consciousness tries to write such literature it will be mundane and Prabhupada warns us “one should not touch it”.

Transcendental literature that strictly follows the Vedic principles and the conclusion of the Puranas and Pancaratrika-vidhi can be written only by a pure devotee. It is not possible for a common man to write books on bhakti, for his writings will not be effective. He may be a very great scholar and may be expert in presenting literature in flowery language, but this is not at all helpful in understanding transcendental literature.Even if transcendental literature is written in faulty language, it is acceptableif it is written by a devotee, whereas so-called transcendental literature written by a mundane scholar, even if it is a very highly polished literary presentation, cannot be accepted. The secret in a devotee’s writing is that when he writes about the pastimes of the Lord, the Lord helps him; he does not write alone. As stated in the Bhagavad-gita (10.10), dadami buddhi-yogam tam yena mam upayanti te. Since a devotee writes in service to the Lord, the Lord from within gives him so much intelligence that he sits down near the Lord and goes on writing books.(Cc. Adi 8.39)

When a pure Vaisnava speaks, he speaks perfectly. How is this? His speech is managed by Krsna Himself from within the heart. (Cc. Madhya 8.200)

No one can learn Srimad-Bhagavatam who is associated with persons engaged in sex life. That is the secret of learning BhagavatamNor can one learn Bhagavatam from one who interprets the text by his mundane scholarship. One has to learn Bhagavatam from the representative of Sukadeva Gosvami, and no one else, if one at all wants to see Lord Sri Krsna in the pages. That is the process, and there is no alternative. (SB 1.3.44)

One cannot write such transcendental literature by mental speculation. One who writes about the Supreme Personality of Godhead must be especially favored by the Lord. Simply by academic qualifications it is not possible to write such literature. (Cc. Adi 14.1)

To describe Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu or Lord Sri Krsna, one needs supernatural power, which is the grace and mercy of the Lord. Without this grace and mercy, one cannot compose transcendental literature. By dint of the grace of the Lord, however, even one who is unfit for a literary career can describe wonderful transcendental topics. (Cc. Adi 13.1)

Prabhupada: Prepared by nondevotees. How you can expect? Bhaktya mam abhijanati [Bg. 18.55]. Without being devotee, who will understand Bhagavatam? It is not so easy. Big, big panditas, they cannot understand Bhagavatam even… No, no, that is rubbish. They do not know what is Bhagavata. How they will translate?Professional translation is not.Bhagavata-pado giya bhagavata sthane. “Whose life is Bhagavata, go there and read Bhagavata.” That is the recommendation. That is the order of Svarupa Damodara Gosvami. Ordinary men, what they will understand, Bhagavata? Bhagavata is not for ordinary men. Paramo nirmatsaranam satam vastavam vastu vedyam atra [SB 1.1.2]. In the beginning it is said unless one is paramahamsa, he cannot understand.Paramonirmatsaranam.(Room Conversation — April 2, 1977, Bombay)

Such transcendental narrations of the pastimes of the Lord can be described only by liberated souls like Vyasadeva and his bona fide representatives who are completely merged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. Only to such devotees do the pastimes of the Lord and their transcendental nature become automatically manifest by dint of devotional service. No one else can either know or describe the acts of the Lord, even if they speculate on the subject for many, many years. The descriptions of the Bhagavatam are so precise and accurate that whatever has been predicted in this great literature about five thousand years ago is now exactly happening. Therefore, the vision of the author comprehends past, present and future. Such liberated persons as Vyasadeva are perfect not only by the power of vision and wisdom, but also in aural reception, in thinking, feeling and all other sense activities.A liberated person possesses perfect senses, and with perfect senses only can one serve the sense-proprietor, Hrsikesa, Sri Krsna the Personality of Godhead. Srimad-Bhagavatam, therefore, is the perfect description of the all-perfect Personality of Godhead by the all-perfect personality Srila Vyasadeva, the compiler of the Vedas. (SB 1.5.13)

The secret of success is to receive the sound from the right source of a bona fide spiritual master. Mundane manufactured sound has no potency, and as such, seemingly transcendental sound received from an unauthorized person also has no potency.One should be qualified enough to discern such transcendental potency, and either by discriminating or by fortunate chance if one is able to receive the transcendental sound from the bona fide spiritual master, his path of liberation is guaranteed. (SB 2.9.8)

Among Prabhupada’s Disciples Not Many Can Translate Properly:

If somebody has translated properly, it can be published. But amongst our disciples, I don’t think there are many who can translate properly….A realized soul, must be. Otherwise, simply by imitating A-B-C-D will not help. My purports are liked by people because it is presented as practical experience….Our translation must be documents. They are not ordinary… One cannot become unless one is very realized. It is not A-B-C-D translation. (GBC Meets with Srila Prabhupada — May 28, 1977, Vrndavana)

Unqualified Authors are Condemned:

The brahmana poet from Bengal was an offender in the estimation of Svarupa Damodara Gosvami, for although the poet had no knowledge of the Absolute Truth, he had nevertheless tried to describe it. (Cc. Antya 5.120)

You will attain a hellish destination. You do not know how to describe the Absolute Truth, but nevertheless you have tried to do so. Therefore you must be condemned. (Antya 5.120)

Must Always Remain a Servant of the Acharya:

These so-called scholars and politicians, they have no acarya. Instead of being amanitvam, they’re mani… “I have become a leader, so whatever I shall say, it will be accepted.” This is going on. Very bad. It is clearly said, as soon as you give up the acarya system it is rotten.Sa kaleneha yogo nastah parantapa. So things which is rotten, what you’ll get benefit? That is going on. Therefore in spite of so many Gita commentators, big, big leaders, scholars, not a single person is converted into a devotee. Not a single person amongst their followers. It’s useless talking. Therefore it is forbidden.Avaisnava-mukhodgirnam putam… Because they are not Vaisnava, politicians and — reject them immediately. Immediately. That is the injunction. (Room Conversation — December 31, 1976, Bombay)

Not By Research Work:

At the end of every chapter, the author admits the value of the disciplic succession. He never claims to have written this transcendental literature by carrying out research work… This is the way of writing transcendental books, which are never meant for so-called scholars and research workers… In this way the message is transmitted in the bona fide spiritual disciplic succession from bona fide spiritual master to bona fide student… Thus he is able to set forth this transcendental scripture. (Cc. Madhya 8.312)

Must Not Consider the Opinions of Mundane Scholars or General Public:

The simplest thing for human beings is to follow their predecessors. Judgment according to mundane senses is not a very easy process. Whatever is awakened by attachment to one’s predecessor is the way of devotional service as indicated by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. The author says, however, that he cannot consider the opinions of those who become attracted or repelled by such things, because one cannot write impartially in that way. In other words, the author is stating that he did not inject personal opinion in the Caitanya-caritamrta. He has simply described his spontaneous understanding from superiors. If he had been carried away by someone’s likes and dislikes, he could not have written of such a sublime subject matter in such an easy way.The actual facts are understandable to real devotees. When these facts are recorded, they are very congenial to the devotees, but one who is not a devotee cannot understand. Such is the subject matter for realization. Mundane scholarship and its concomitant attachments and detachments cannot arouse spontaneous love of Godhead. Such love cannot be described by a mundane scholar.(Cc. Madhya 2.87)

One of the not very well thought through arguments that inexperienced devotees give for unlimitedly changing Prabhupada’s books is that they will be more acceptable by mundane scholars. This argument is not based on any facts whatsoever because scholars prefer Prabhupada’s original books and do not respect changes to great personalities literary works. Also if we look at the bulk of reviews of Prabhupada’s books we will find that those reviews are reviews of Srila Prabhupada’s original pre-1978 editions, not the edited editions. Considering this fact, it is bazar that the editors of the BBT/BBTI claim they are making Srila Prabhupada’s books more acceptable to the likes and dislikes of mundane scholars and their ever changing standards of grammar and rhetoric. Please read on to see What our Acharya Srila Prabhupada has to say about this practice of catering to the constantly changing likes and dislikes of academia and rules of grammar.

Srila Kaviraja Gosvami and one who follows in his footsteps do not have to cater to the public. Their business is simply to satisfy the previous acaryas and describe the pastimes of the Lord. One who is able to understand can relish this exalted transcendental literature, which is actually not meant for ordinary persons like scholars and literary men. Generally, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s pastimes recorded in Caitanya-caritamrta are studied in universities and scholastic circles from a literary and historical point of view, but actually Caitanya-caritamrta is not a subject matter forresearch workers or literary scholars. It is simply meant for those devotees who have dedicated their lives to the service of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. (Cc. Madhya 2.85)

So the conclusion is that only an advanced pure devotee of Krishna (such as Srila Prabhupada, Krishna das Kaviraj, or the the goswamis of Vrindavan etc) can write transcendental literature and unqualified authors, editors, or grammarians who attempt to write, comment or edit transcendental literature are condemned. Although these books may be intellectually stimulating, entertaining, thoughtful or contain extensive research, whatever literature they write is contaminated and devoid of any Spiritual potency as Prabhupada says “seemingly transcendental sound received from an unauthorized person also has no potency“(SB 2.9.8). Furthermore “Such literature is mundane, and therefore, as warned by Sri Sanatana Gosvami, one should not touch it.” (Antya 1.212)

“Originally I wrote Bhagavad-gita As It Is in the form in which it is presented now. When this book was first published, the original manuscript was, unfortunately, cut short to less than 400 pages, without illustrations and without explanations for most of the original verses of the Srimad Bhagavad-gita. In all of my other books-Srimad Bhagavatam, Sri Isopanisad, etc.-the system is that I give the original verse, its English transliteration, word-for-word Sanskrit-English equivalents, translations and purports. This makes the book very authentic and scholarly and makes the meaning self-evident. I was not very happy, therefore, when I had to minimize my original manuscript. But later on, when the demand for Bhagavad-gita As It Is considerably increased, I was requested by many scholars and devotees to present the book in its original form, and Messrs. Macmillan and Co. agreed to publish the complete edition. Thus the present attempt is to offer the original manuscript of this great book of knowledge with full parampara explanation in order to establish the Krsna consciousness movement more soundly and progressively.” (Bg-1972: Preface)

This is what happens when a conditioned soul meddles in the perfect transcendental writings of a nitya-siddha pure devotee of Lord Shri Krishna! Above Srila Prabhupada himself clearly says three times that his 1972 Macmillan published book is the manuscript. A previous draft is just that, a draft. To revert an author’s work posthumously without his blessings is simply a big gamble and definitely unauthorized! Srila Prabhupada clearly says that it is the “complete edition” in this above quoted paragraph.

Also in the very front of the book (next to the publishers page) under the title of the book, in all caps and boldface letters it is stated “COMPLETE EDITION“. Thus absolutely establishing this point and making it clear that the book is finished/complete! To change the book now would imply that it is actually not complete and that the person changing it must feel themselves to know better than the author.

Unfortunately the staff at the BBTI have completely removed the words “COMPLETE EDITION” and replaced it with “REVISED AND ENLARGED”.

Calling the draft a manuscript is simply word jugglery and disobeying and contradicting Srila Prabhupada’s words printed directly in the book itself.

This is a very sly move that directly opens the door for unlimited changing of the text of Srila Prabhupada’s perfect transcendental books! It creates a mentality that Prabhupada’s books are imperfect and thus not transcendental. Naturally the effect of this is that it creates the impression that if the books are not complete and perfect (they need a conditioned soul to constantly edit them to keep them relevant and/or remove all the “mistakes”) then they are also not to be followed with one’s life and soul. It also takes the validity away from Srila Prabhupada’s finalized and approved books thus further directly paving the way for more unlimited changes by the imperfect minds and senses of conditioned souls now and in the future.

Over just the last 20 or so years there has been over 5000 changes to Prabhupada’s Gita. Just imagine in the future maybe 30 or 100 years from now, at the rate we are going, our children or our grandchildren may pick up a book with Srila Prabhupada’s name on it and it will be a whole different book. A book full of words and changes from the mental speculations of a conditioned, imperfect soul full of anarthas. So naturally when one opens their heart and soul to those words, changes, mental speculations and anarthas that are now present within the pages of Srila Prabhupada’s once holy and pure transcendental book, what benefit will there be?

It seems simple to me. Jayadvaita Swami was not there when Hayagriva and Srila Prabhupada were creating his Bhagavad-Gita. Why would I want to read the version of a conditioned soul who wasn’t even there when Prabhupada was manifesting his book through the literary gifts of Hayagriva? Hayagriva was the conditioned soul that Prabhupada specifically chose, empowered and gave specific instructions to for that seva. These instructions may have never been recorded anywhere – if one wants to benefit from them one must simply read Prabhupada’s original books. So why second guess Srila Prabhupada, step over his head and read some other conditioned soul’s unauthorized, revised editions? It just makes no sense to me.

Srila Prabhupada never designated Jayadvaita Swami to revise the Gita after Srila Prabhupada’s departure, and Jayadvaita Swami admits it. So it seems to come down to this: who do you want to trust? The person Srila Prabhupada chose, designated and empowered to finish and complete the book, or someone else that unauthorizedly changes that finished complete edition, without his approval and after his departure?

The 1972 Macmillan edition was good enough for Srila Prabhupada, so it’s good enough for me.

Just because Srila Prabhupada at one point said someone was a good man, does that mean that they are one now? Srila Prabhupada liked many devotees at one point and at that point put them in positions of power and authority and praised them, but later on down the road he changed his opinion about them and/or they went astray or deviated to one degree or another. So although at one point Prabhupada approved of someone and complimented them, that does not mean that from that point on they are bona-fide no matter what they do. Here are a few examples to further examine this point.

One Prabhupada disciple did HUGE service for Prabhupada, pushing on the book distribution mission (probably) more than any other Prabhupada disciple in ISKCON’s history, and was pretty much running ISKCON at one point. But later he changed the basic rules of the four regulative principles to three. Does that mean because he had so many thousands of disciples, and at one point was so dear to Srila Prabhupada that Prabhupada even commented on how he was so intelligent and empowered, that now we should all only have three regulative principles instead of four and continue to follow this devotee?

There were so many big, big devotees that Srila Prabhupada personally gave sannyasa to but later on Srila Prabhupada became so fed up with their deviations that he said that they should give up those positions as sannyasi! Srila Prabhupada even said “This should be strictly outlawed, no more sannyasis….there will be no sannyasi anymore.”

(Room Conversation — January 7, 1977, Bombay)

Srila Prabhupada established the GBC as the ultimate managing authority for all ISKCON. But at one point Srila Prabhupada totally disbanded the whole of the GBC within ISKCON due to their deviations! So simply because at one point in time Srila Prabhupada appointed them to power and trusted them, does that give them permanent power? No! At any time anyone can lose their position and power and deviate or go astray and at that point one is no longer authorized and empowered.

I feel the most relevant example is from the concluding words of the Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, dated November 10, 1974

“Now, by the grace of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and his Divine Grace Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, it is finished. In this connection I have to thank my American disciples, especially Sriman Pradyumna dasa Adhikari, Sriman Nitai dasa Adhikari, Sriman Jayadvaita dasa Brahmacari and many other boys and girls who are sincerely helping me in writing, editing and publishing all these literatures.”

But then on February 27, 1977 in Mayapura India Srila Prabhupada says “Nitai, he’s a rascal.”

Unfortunately there are so many examples I could mention, but in order to not depress/and embarrass all of us unnecessarily in this article I will stop here.

I guess it just takes a bit of intelligence to figure all this out. But for those that look at the world through extremes and feel that a rubber-stamp carries more weight than common sense does, what can be said to persons like that?

Even great sages have fallen from their exalted positions. Even after getting blessings to be in positions. It’s nothing new, it’s in the Srimad-Bhagavatam many times.

This is why we conditioned souls have to be really careful in messing with Srila Prabhupada’s perfect transcendental books. On that same note, we should be even more careful of those devotees that feel they can mess with them.

Jayadvaita Swami agrees that Srila Prabhupada did not ask him or anyone else to “revise and enlarge” his Bhagavad-gita As It Is. So how did it happen? Where did the authority come from for ISKCON’s current “Revised and Enlarged” edition? It seems just after Srila Prabhupada left our material vision, Jayadvaita thought it was a good idea to revise and enlarge Prabhupada’s Gita, so he did it.

This was a confidential program. Although Jayadvaita did write a two-page letter to the “senior devotees” at the time, he never at any point in time revealed the extent of the changes he made to Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is. He personally challenged me on this point at a BBT Trustees meeting where I was invited to speak on the book changes. And when I asked him to let us all know who was actually aware of the extent of the changes he had made to Srila Prabhupada’s Gita before it was published (all the BBT trustees and others were present), his answer was, “three people.” And when I asked him who they were he told us himself, the typist and he also gave Dravida a quick look at the changes.

Apart from these three people no one else was aware of the extent of what he had done to Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is. No one in the BBT, no one in the GBC. The whole thing was done by Jayadvaita. He explained that he did the changes by writing them onto a Macmillan Gita and the only other person who saw that Gita with his changes written on it was Dravida, and of course the typist who typed up the manuscript of the current ISKCON “Revised and Enlarged” Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

So it was a great mistake on the part of the GBC and the BBT to print this book without being aware of the extent of the changes that had been made. Of course they made the decision based on a letter by Jayadvaita claiming that he had not made many changes:

“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.”
(Jayadvaita’s letter to senior devotees, October 25, 1982)

And what is his “authority” for this you may ask? As he said in the letter to senior devotees, “the text of the manuscript.” “I have made it closer to the original manuscript.”

And what is this so-called “original manuscript”? You can see it here.

As Bhakta Philip Prabhu has pointed out, this is not a manuscript at all. It is the first draft of the book. No author intends that the first draft of his book be published. He appoints an editor and together they work on the book to produce the manuscript which will ultimately be submitted to the publishers. In this case, Srila Prabhupada wrote the first draft and then worked with Hayagriva Prabhu and other editors to prepare the manuscript for his Bhagavad-gita As It Is, which was ultimately presented to MacMillan & Co. for printing.

Imagine that you write the first draft of a book and appoint an editor. You work with your editor on a daily basis for months until together you produce a manuscript you are happy with and your book is published. Your book becomes a worldwide best seller and you are very happy with it. It is a spiritual book and by reading it many of the readers have incredible life-changing experiences. They also become very attached to your book. Your book is praised by scholars worldwide with rave reviews. Then many years later, after you have left your body, somebody finds the first draft of your book and decides to “correct” your published book based on your first draft. Of course you were never intending to publish this first draft. That is why you spent so much time and energy working with your editor on that first draft to transform it into a manuscript you actually wanted to present to the publishers. How angry would you be with this fool who wants to undo your work and your editors’ work by going back to the first draft?

Jayadviata Swami, by going back to the first draft, is eliminating so many corrections and so much work that Srila Prabhupada personally did on his book with Hayagriva and his other editors. This is a great disservice to Srila Prabhupada.

Jayadviata Swami is insisting that his version of the history of the editing of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is is correct. And what is his version of the history? He has turned to “smoke and mirrors” to try and bewilder the devotees into believing a false history. In the “history according to Jayadvaita’s imagination”, Srila Prabhupada only typed and dictated the first draft of his Bhagavad-gita As It Is and handed it over to his editors and did not work with his editors on the book. In this way he claims the first draft that he has is authoritative and he is justified in changing the printed book if he can find something different in the first draft.

On his website he debunks “The myth that Srila Prabhupada and Hayagriva together carefully reviewed the completed text of Bhagavad-gita As It Is“. He does this by debunking a statement by Govinda dasi, who saw Srila Prabhupada and Hayagriva working together on editing Prabhupada’s books in 1968 in Los Angeles. Prabhupada and Hayagriva were actually working together on editing Srimad-Bhagavatam at that time. And according to Jayadvaita, that “proves” that Prabhupada and Hayagriva did not work together on editing the Gita. Strange logic, but we are expected to believe the Swami anyhow.

In a recent blog post [also appearing in today's edition of the Sun – "Book Changes: History Really Does Back the BBT"] Jayadvaita continues to try and distort and change the history:

“And so the image of Srila Prabhupada sitting with Hayagriva in December of 1968 carefully going over every verse of Bhagavad-gita As It Is, seeing to the finishing touches, is a persistent image of something that never took place. That’s the truth. Here’s the timeline. See for yourself.” (Jayadvaita Swami)

Then he goes on to present many quotes from Srila Prabhupada that are supposed to prove that Srila Prabhupada did not work with his editors on the Bhagavad-gita As It Is at all. However, Krishna slipped one quote into his article that completely blows his cover:

December 14, 1967: Srila Prabhupada writes Rayarama, “I have already sent you the purports of each and every sloka that you sent me for correction. . . . As soon as you finish the Gitopanisad business and the matter is handed over to the MacMillan Co. we begin on the Bhagavatam work without delay.”

Here Jayadvaita is letting us know that Rayarama, while he was editing Bhagavad-gita, was in constant contact with Srila Prabhupada and was asking many questions about the editing, which Srila Prabhupada was answering. “I have already sent you the purports of each and every sloka that you sent me for correction.” So even with Rayarama’s editing he was asking Prabhupada many questions and Prabhupada was sending him many corrections to his “first draft”. None of these corrections by Srila Prabhupada are present in what Jayadvaita refers to as “the original manuscript.” This alone completely blows away any justification for using this document as any sort of authority, as it does not include the many corrections that Srila Prabhupada made to it while Rayarama was working on editing his Bhagavad-gita.

The real world is quite different from Jayadviata’s imaginary world. Even though the Swami constantly says, “It’s not true!” Srila Prabhupada and Hayagriva did work together for almost three months in 1967 editing Bhagavad-gita As It Is, during this period Hayagriva Prabhu was consulting Srila Prabhupada daily on almost every verse in the Bhagavad-gita As It Is. It’s not a myth, it’s history, and this history completely destroys any justification at all for changing Prabhupada’s Gita based on Prabhupada’s first draft of the book (or the “original manuscript”, as the Swami calls it).

If you ask Jayadvaita about this he will lie and tell you: “It could not have happened. Prabhupada and Hayagriva were never living together. It’s an Internet myth…” All lies and deception, unfortunately. It is frightening to think that such a deceptive, dishonest character has been given full authority to change anything at all he wants to change in Prabhupada’s books without any system of checks and balances at all. He can change anything, print the changed books without even disclosing what he has changed. And he smiles and says, “You just have to accept it…”

The proof that Srila Prabhupada and Hayagriva worked together daily editing Bhagavad-gita for almost three months in 1967 can be found in Hayagriva Prabhu’s wonderful book, “The Hare Krishna Explosion”:

January 17, 1967: Prabhupada arrives in San Francisco from New York. Hayagriva Prabhu is there to meet him. Prabhupada is still translating Bhagavad-gita and Hayagriva is there with him:

“Swamiji continues translating Bhagavad-gita. He is so eager to print it that we begin negotiations with a local printer. Prices are very high. In New York, Brahmananda continues his pursuit of publishers.”

So Hayagriva is negotiating on Srila Prabhupada’s behalf with a local printer to print Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Finishing his translation of Bhagavad-gita As It Is, working with Hayagriva Prabhu to edit it and getting it printed are clearly the most important projects on Srila Prabhupada’s agenda at this time.

Hayagriva is still in San Francisco on January 29th, two weeks later, for the big concert featuring the Grateful Dead.

Hayagriva is still with Srila Prabhupada in San Francisco in February:

“The days of February are beautiful with perfect temperatures in the seventies, fog rolling off early, skies very blue and clear, sun falling bright and sharp on the lush foliage of Golden Gate Park. The park encloses the largest variety of plant and tree life to be found in any one spot on earth. We are at a loss to identify plants for Swamiji.”

Hayagriva has settled down in the ISKCON San Francisco temple (a storefront near Golden Gate Park) and he is working there:

“I rent an electric typewriter, set it up in the back temple room, and continue typing up stencils for Back To Godhead, writing and editing [Bhagavad-gita] while Harsharani sends people after food, and cooks noon prasadam.”

Hayagriva is the only devotee living in the San Francisco temple and is the “Temple Commander”:

“Being the only person living in the temple proper, and one of the senior devotees besides, I’m naturally looked to as the temple commander, a role I often find myself regretting.”

All this time Hayagriva is living with Srila Prabhupada and his main service is editing Bhagavad-gita:

“Apart from kirtans, I find myself spending many sunny hours in the park, walking past the tennis courts to large, quiet bowers surrounded with hybiscus and eucalyptus. And at times I sit in the shade beneath the white and pink rhododendrons and edit Bhagavad-gita. After editing, I sometimes visit the museum and stroll through the replica eighteenth century gardens, chanting my daily rounds while perusing the curlicues of rococo art.”

Hayagriva is still in San Francisco together with Srila Prabhupada on February 27th. This is now six weeks in the personal association of Srila Prabhupada, working with him editing his Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

He is still there with Srila Prabhupada in March:

“Golden Gate Park is redolent with March flowers. The morning fog disperses early, and the days are cloudless and blue. Thousands continue to flock to San Francisco from the midwest and east, and our Sunday kirtans attract big crowds… On Tuesday evenings, we go to the beach with Swamiji and hold unforgettable Pacific Ocean sunset kirtans. Sitting on the sand, we watch the tide roll in, or chant and wait for the sun to dip below the horizon. After chanting, we roast potatoes and smear them with melted butter. Swamiji eats with us, sitting on a big log. And after potatoes, we roast marshmallows, and red apples stuffed with raisins and brown sugar.”

All throughout this time (now over two months) Hayagriva is working editing Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is, consulting Srila Prabhupada on almost every verse:

“Although I write on the Lord Chaitanya play through the spring days, my primary service is helping Swamiji with Bhagavad-gita. He continues translating, hurrying to complete the manuscript but still annotating each verse thoroughly in his purports. Daily, I consult him to make certain that the translation of each verse precisely coincides with the meaning he wants to relate. “Edit for force and clarity,” he tells me. “By Krishna’s grace, you are a qualified English professor. You know how grammatical mistakes will discredit us with scholars. I want them to appreciate this Bhagavad-gita as the definitive edition. All the others try to take credit away from Krishna.”

“I am swamped with editing. Since much of the text is equivocal due to grammar, I find myself consulting Swamiji on nearly every verse. It seems that in Sanskrit, Hindi, and Bengali, phrase is tacked onto phrase until the original subject is lost.”

March 21: Hayagriva is still in San Francisco working daily with Srila Prabhupada on editing Bhagavad-gita As It Is… So far this is almost nine weeks constantly with Srila Prabhupada…

April 9:

“Swamiji leaves for the airport. Before entering the car, he stops, cane in hand, and gives a long look at the little storefront temple. It is a look that says a great deal. Gurudas snaps a photo at that very instant. ‘That’s a farewell look,’ I think to myself.”

So Srila Prabhupada and Hayagriva worked together on editing the Bhagavad-gita daily during the almost three months while Hayagriva Prabhu was living with him in the San Francisco temple, from Janurary 17, 1967 until April 9, 1967.

Jayadvaita Swami [desperately]: “IT JUST DID NOT HAPPEN!!!”

The history is the history. Srila Prabhupada worked on the first draft of Bhagavad-gita As It Is extensively with both Hayagriva Prabhu and Rayarama Prabhu. In the three months Hayagriva went through practically every verse with Srila Prabhupada and Prabhupada also sent many corrections to Rayarama Prabhu later on.

At that time Macmillan were only able to print 400 pages, so Rayarama abridged Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Prabhupada was not happy with this and wanted to publish the complete edition. Hayagriva was again called on by Srila Prabhupada for producing the manuscript, which was submitted to Macmillan for the publication of the complete 1,000 page edition in 1972. At this time there were at least exchanges of letters between Srila Prabhupada and Hayagriva and Prabhupada was still giving him many instructions related to the editing and answering the questions he had in regard to the editing.

So Jayadvaita’s “history” that Srila Prabhupada did not work with his disciples on editing Bhagavad-gita is nothing more than smoke and mirrors. It is a dishonest attempt to mislead the devotees and cover-up the real history.

The authoritative edition of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is is the final published 1972 “Complete Edition.” Not the first draft that Jayadvaita calls the “manuscript.” Srila Prabhupada spent considerable time, energy and effort working with his editors Hayagriva Prabhu and Rayarama Prabhu to take his first draft to the real manuscript — the manuscript which was submitted for publishing to MacMillan.

Changes to the final published book cannot be justified by referring to the first draft. This is a great mistake.

People are not so foolish. The truth is the truth. Eventually Jayadvaita’s smoke and mirrors will stop working and the blind followers will wake up and see the truth.

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!

Your servant,
Madhudvisa dasa

(1) Why is it in the revised edition of the Bhagavad-gita, you and company have completely removed the foreword by Professor Edward Dimock that was printed in the original Macmillan version of the Bhagavad-gita As It Is which Srila Prabhupada regularly read from?

Readers, please visit the website and see the video on YouTube of Srila Prabhupada lecturing on the Bhagavad-gita. There, in the very immediate beginning (very first few minutes) of this video, you will find Srila Prabhupada praising the foreword by Professor Edward Dimock. This particular video clip is taken from one of the 19 Double layer DVD’s produced by Nrsimhananda Prabhu and his associates at ITV. It is the particular DVD named Bhagavad Gita as It Is, with Krishna and Arjuna on the chariot, and sky background, and is in the very first part, called “Introduction”.

Srila Prabhupada is reading the foreword himself, praising it, mentioning Edward Dimock’s name, and praising Edward Dimock for a particular comment that he had made, as follows:

“Swami Bhaktivedanta comments upon the Gita from this point of view, and that is legitimate. More than that, in this translation the Western reader has the unique opportunity of seeing how a Krsna devotee interprets his own texts”

Srila Prabhupada in the video explains this particular statement by Edward Dimock, on how a Krsna devotee interprets his own texts, by explaining that just as a family member only is qualified to give the best knowledge to others about his own family, similarly, only a Krsna devotee can properly explain to others about Krsna. Srila Prabhupada appreciates this particular point made by Edward Dimock in the video.

Thus, not only has Srila Prabhupada authorized this particular foreword in the Macmillan Bhagavad-gita, but had himself read, it, and praised certain points made by the person who wrote this foreword. Yet you, Jayadvaita Swami, Dravida Prabhu & Company, have the audacity to remove this foreword completely in your revised version. The proof of how you have offended your Spiritual Master is on public video record, as those who watch will sadly but easily be able to understand this particular deviation of yourselves in either revising or omitting your Spiritual Master’s works and words by using your fertile imaginations.

(2) Why have you, Jayadvaita Swami, Dravida Prabhu & Company, omitted 47 out of 48 of the original color pictures inside of the original Macmillan Bhagavad-gita As It Is? Why have you omitted the pictures of the bona fide disciplic succession Gurus coming before Srila Prabhupada, namely Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur, Srila Gaur Kisore Das Babaji Maharaj, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur, with a brief description of their character and achievements? Srila Prabhupada wanted very much for every ISKCON member to understand their spiritual family roots, i.e., to understand the previous disciplic succession Gurus. That is why he arranged to put these pictures there.

Srila Prabhupada also wanted everyone, both devotees and karmi readers, to understand that he, as the author of this Macmillan version of Bhagavad-gita, was authorized and a student of these bona fide spiritual Masters, thus giving genuine authority to this book. Yet you, Jayadvaita Swami and company, have audaciously removed these most important disciplic Guru pictures. The other 43 pictures with their respective written descriptions below were also very useful for the reader to relate to what he was reading in the different chapters of the Bhagavad-gita. They were also painted with the guidance and authority of Srila Prabhupada, who blessed them with his constant glance whenever he used the book. Yet you have unfortunately removed all of them with the exception of one.

(3) Why have you, Jayadvaita Swami, Dravida Prabhu & Company, removed and replaced the original front cover of the Macmillan version of the Bhagavad-gita As It Is with your own version? In that original picture, Krsna is holding the conch shell, which is mentioned in the 1st chapter of the Bhagavad-gita, how when both Krsna and Arjuna blew their respective conch shells, it aroused fear and shattered the hearts of the enemies. Srila Prabhupada and all the thousands of devotees, including the karmis who bought this book, were delighted to see this spiritual picture, which is one of the chief attractions of the whole book. The horses in the Macmillan version look strong, stout, and healthy, as they should be, considering that they were gifted by the fire god Agni to Arjuna by the blessings of Krsna. This is mentioned in the Krsna book in the Chapter entitled, “Five Queens married by Krsna”.

Yet in your revised version picture, your horses look all so thin with very skinny legs, as if they have not had prasadam for a long time. They are half the size in bodily structure as opposed to the original Macmillan horses. They really do not look celestial and gifted by a celestial demigod. Readers, please compare for yourselves. Yet you Jayadvaita, Dravida & Company, have removed this wonderful picture and replaced it with yours. You have also replaced the original Krsna and Arjuna, with Krsna now holding a whip instead of a conch shell. What was the need for this change — just so that you all could show to everyone in the world that you could do something new and different than what your Spiritual Master has done?

(4) Why have you, Jayadvaita Swami, Dravida Prabhu & Company, on the back cover of your revised version of Bhagavad-gita, put a commentary by Mohandas K Gandhi, so-called praising the Bhagavad-gita, when you very well know how much Srila Prabhupada condemned Gandhi, especially in relation to the Bhagavad-gita? Srila Prabhupada comments that Gandhi was the greatest hypocrite, that on one hand while posing himself as a student of the Bhagavad-gita, he never even had any faith that Lord Krishna even existed. Srila Prabhupada describes Gandhi as having no spiritual consciousness whatsoever. Gandhi also did not even care to stop the millions of cows being slaughtered daily, when he had an excellent chance to do so, thus he was directly defying Lord Krishna’s instructions on cow protection described in the 18th Chapter of the Bhagavad-gita. Readers, please see the particular conversations mentioned below in the Folio about what Srila Prabhupada said abut Gandhi in relation to Bhagavad-gita and cow killing:

(A) Room Conversation March 2 1975 Atlanta:

Prabhupada: “No, no. No shortage. That is everything supply. You have got the Vedic knowledge. You don’t take care of that. You now manufacture your own knowledge. Now there is knowledge, this Bhagavad-gita is perfect knowledge, but even a political leader like Gandhi, he says that I don’t believe that there was anybody like Krsna living. This is your leader. All the acaryas, previous acaryas, big, big acaryas, Sankaracarya, big, big, stalwart, learned, they have accepted Krsna. Now Gandhi says, “I don’t believe.” Now you are guided by Gandhi, you are not guided by the acaryas. That is your misfortune. You are not guided by Krsna. You are guided by Dr. Radhakrishnan. That is the misfortune. Andha yathandhair upaneyamanau [SB 7.5.31], one blind man is being, is following another blind man. That is going on. That is going on all over the world, not only in India.

Guest (2): I think Mahatma Gandhi followed the Gita, all these…

Prabhupada: But he did not believe in Krsna and he followed Gita? Just see!

Guest (2): (indistinct)

Prabhupada: No, just try to understand the psychology. He (Gandhi) says plainly that I do not believe there was anybody Krsna, living ever. And he’s following Krsna’s instruction. Just see his position.

Guest (2): No, he must have also answered this question.

Prabhupada: No, no, there is no questioning. If you do not believe in somebody, how you are reading His book of knowledge?

Guest (2): That’s my point also.

Prabhupada: Yes, so therefore. This kind of leader we are following, contradictory. That is our misfortune.

(B) March 10th 1972, Vrndavana:

Prabhupada: “Useless speaking. In India also, so many fools, they are accepted as very perfect. Just like Gandhi, take Gandhi. Where was Gandhi? In spiritual consciousness, he is nothing. Nothing, no value. But if we say in the public, they will be angry, “Oh!” But actually there is no value, no spiritual value. He is known all over the world as a great spiritualist. He was a moralist, that’s all. That is not a qualification for understanding God”.

(C) March 5th 1975, New York:

Prabhupada: “Even Gandhi, such an exalted man, he says that “I have no belief. I do not believe that there was any person as Krsna ever living.” Just see. All the big, big acaryas of India who are practically controlling the destiny of the Hindu civilization or Vedic civilization, they all believe. Gandhi became more than them. Who made him, that is another thing. But he thinks like that, and because Gandhi thinks, just imagine how many millions of people have been misled”.

(D) January 23rd 1977, Bhuvanesvara:

Prabhupada: “Yes. No, anything, if you can understand very clearly, where is the question of interpretation? But it has become a fashion that “If I can interpret in my own way, I become a big scholar.” This is going on. If you have got your philosophy, you can speak. Everyone is free. Why you should take Bhagavad-gita and distort it? Krsna never meant that “In future Gandhi will come,” or “Dr. Radhakrishnan will come, and he will explain My ideas.” What is this nonsense? Krsna was a foolish person that he left it for Gandhi for distortion? He could not explain Himself that Kuruksetra means this body? Gandhi has to interpret? Do you think it is right?”

(E) Dec 16th 1975, Bombay:

Prabhupada: “Karl Marx maybe. Even your Gandhi-ism, that is also concoction. Gandhi invented nonviolence; it is also concoction. It is impossible. Everyone is doing this—something manufacturing. That is not sanatana dharma. Sanatana dharma is never manufactured. It is already there. You have to accept it, that’s all. Otherwise everyone is manufacturing some concoction. This is going on. Krsna is teaching, “Fight.” And Gandhi is teaching from Bhagavad-gita nonviolence. Just see! Is it possible?

(F) January 9th 1977, Bombay:

Prabhupada: “The people approached him that “Mahatmaji, you have got influence over the Muslims, why not stop cow-killing?” “I cannot touch on their religious principles.” Just see. Cow-killing is religious? Their religious principle. If I say my father-killing, mother-killing is my religion, so Gandhi will say, “Yes, you can do that. Nonviolent.” Kill nonviolent. This nonsense contradiction can be tolerated by the fools and rascals. That’s all. That is…”

(5) Why have you, Jayadvaita Swami, Dravida Prabhu & Company, removed the words below the picture of Srila Prabhupada in the original Macmillan Bhagavad-gita, namely, “greatest exponent of Krsna consciousness in the western world”? Is this also one of the many stupid mistakes made by some raw editors at the time, namely Hayagriva Prabhu, or some raw typist such as Bhakta Neal, and you have mercifully corrected it for all our spiritual welfare? Even a person with half a brain can understand that you have made the greatest offense to your spiritual master by enviously removing these words, “greatest exponent of Krsna Consciousness in the western world”.

Awaiting your reply. . .

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.

]]> http://bookchanges.com/the-last-days-of-school/feed/ 2 http://bookchanges.com/srila-prabhupada%e2%80%99s-free-press/ http://bookchanges.com/srila-prabhupada%e2%80%99s-free-press/#comments Thu, 27 May 2010 05:05:47 +0000 Rupanuga dasa http://bookchanges.com/?p=55 May 27, 2010 — JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, USA — An intelligent person who wants to learn what Srila Prabhupada has to say in his Bhagavad-gita As It Is will immediately note the sub-heading, “Enlarged and Revised”, which appears in the 1983 version. That phrase, “enlarged and revised”, usually rings a bell in the mind of a thoughtful inquirer: “Revised? What, exactly? When? Let’s see what the author himself has to say about his reasons for the revisions.” With a little luck, such an inquirer would discover in the section entitled “The Author” that actually, the author had passed away six years before the book was revised – posthumously – under his name, as if it were the author’s improvement upon his original work!

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.

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 )

x