The Principle is No Change:

“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 swamis 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.” (SB 4.20.17 P Lord Visnu’ s Appearance in the Sacrificial Arena of Maharaja Prthu)

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. (Letter to Kirtananda, Feb 10, 1967)

“Brahmananda & others cannot change the style. They want to see if there is any grammatical discrepancy.“( Letter to Satsvarupa, Jan 22, 1968)

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. (Mar 17, 1971)

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. (Letter to Frederico, Oct 24, 1974)

No, the printing of the Gitar-gan cover this fashion is not at all approved by me. You have done most nonsensically. Why change the cover? When people look to see the Bhagavad-gita they expect to see Krishna and Arjuna, not the picture of Krishna with cow. You have done a great mistake by changing the front picture and it will hamper the sale. In future you don’t do any changes without asking me first.

Simply because there is no stock of books, we can do anything whimsically??? Is this logic? Gita is not spoken in Vrindaban, it is spoken on the battlefield of Kuruksetra, but this is Vrindaban picture. That chariot driven by 4 horses, that is the real Kuruksetra picture. It is not that because there is no stock we can do whimsically as we like and lose the idea, that is rasa-bhasa. Because there is no bread, you take stone to eat? There is no stock of bread so you will take stone??? The front picture is most important thing and you have changed it. It must remain standard, and not change. Also, the lettering is not nice on the cover. You could have taken a color picture of Krishna and Arjuna and used it black and white (one color) on the front cover. Just as you did with the inside back cover of the Bhagavat darsana, the original picture of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu was in color but you have printed it in black and white. You could have done this on the front cover with Krishna and Arjuna on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra, but the cover must not be changed. (Letter: Bhargava, May 29, 1976)

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. (Letter to Radhavallabha, Aug 26, 1976)

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. (Letter to Radhavallabha, Oct 7, 1976)

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. (Letter to Gopiparanadhana, Sep 28, 1976)

Some Corrections are OK:

Regarding the corrections you have sent, this kind of changes is admissable. There is no harm. (Letter: Radhavallabha, Oct 21, 1975)

The review from “Choice” is very remarkable considering the importance of the journal, and I thank you very much for securing it. You have written: “We are all eager for the day when your books are recognized as the greatest masterpieces of all. We are all eager for the day when your books are the most demanded works in the library. We are sure that day is not far away.” Yes, Krsna will fulfill your desire. Actually it is so. But because they are fools and rascals it will take some time. Regarding the error which the critic has noted about the location of Tirupati, I did not say so. It should be corrected. (Letter to Ranadhira, Apr 18, 1977)

There Should Not be Very Much Editing:

There is a verse in Srimad-Bhagavatam that a book or poetry in which the Holy Name of Krishna is depicted, such language is revolutionary in the matter of purifying the material atmosphere. Even though such literature is presented in broken language or grammatical inconsistency or rhetorical irregularity, still, those who are saintly persons adore such literature. They hear such literature, and chant it and adore it, simply because the Supreme Lord is being glorified in this literature. In other words, we are not meant for presenting any literary masterpieces, but we have to inform people that there is a fire of maya which is burning the very vitality of all living entities, and they should guard against the indefatigable onslaught of material existence. That should be our motto. (Letter to: Krsna dasa  –  Los Angeles 13 Feb, 1969)

I also do not like too much editorial work. This too much editorial work on Geetopanishad has created some misunderstanding between the members of the editorial staff. Anyway, in the future one man should edit it, and that will be sufficient for our printing. And I do not want that Teachings of Lord Chaitanya should be edited again and typed again and time wasted in that way. I have also informed Rayrama of this, and you can also inform him like this. The book should be printed immediately, without any waste of time. That is my desire. (Letter to Satsvarupa, Dec 23, 1967)

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. Jayadvaita has good knowledge. (Letter to Satsvarupa, Feb 15, 1970)

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. (Letter to Radhavallabha, May 4, 1976)

English and Sanskrit in the Books Must Be Correct:

Prabhupada: Those who have got books, there should be one correction. It is written “how.” It should be “now,” n-o-w, not “how.” (Srimd-Bhagavatam Lecture, Oct 19, 1974)

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.

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. (Letter to Pradyumna, Apr 28, 1970)

Regarding publishing the Life 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. (Letter to Hamsaduta, Nov 14, 1974)

Concerning the Bhagavat darsana cover, this Hindi on the back is not good. Who is translating this? Also, the address on the back of our Vrindaban Temple is not correctly spelled. It has been spelled Chattakara Road; But it should be Chattikara Road. Who is proof-reading? (Letter: Bhargava, May 29, 1976)

Hayagriva Did Not Change the Meaning of the Philosophy:

I don’t think that Hayagriva is at fault. He has not changed the meaning or the philosophy in any way. But if you like to use the original manuscript, then if it is possible, you can use it. (Letter to Hamsaduta, Jun 8, 1975)

BBT Editors Were Making Unapproved Changes:

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. (Letter to Radhavallabha, Jan 5, 1976)

Prabhupada: The nonsense, they are… They are correcting my trans… Rascal. Who has done this? Munayah is addressing all these munis.
Tamala Krsna: It’s addressing the munis?
Prabhupada: Yes.
Tamala Krsna: Sadhus, great sages.
Prabhupada: Yes. Sadhu means they are very pure. What can be done if it goes there and these rascals becomes Sanskrit scholar and do everything nonsense? One Sanskrit scholar strayed, that rascal… He take… What is his…? Saci-suta? Saci-sandana?
Tamala Krsna: Jaya-sacinandana?
Prabhupada: And they are maintaining them. Different meaning.
Tamala Krsna: “Bhavadbhih – by all of you; loka – the world; mangalam – welfare; yat – because; krtah – made; krsna – the Personality of Godhead; samprasnah – relevant question; yena – by which; atma – self; suprasidati – completely pleased.” Translation: “O sages…”
Prabhupada: Now here is “O sages,” and the word meaning is “of the munis.” Just see. Such a rascal Sanskrit scholar. Here it is addressed, sambodhana, and they touch it — “munayah – of the munis.” It is very risky to give to them for editorial direction. Little learning is dangerous. However proper Sanskrit scholar, little learning, dangerous. Immediately they become very big scholars, high salaried, and write all nonsense. Who they are? (pause) Then?
Tamala Krsna: “O sages, I have been…”
Prabhupada: No, they cannot be reliable. They can do more harm. Just see here the fun(?).
(Conversation, “Rascal Editors” — June 22, 1977, Vrndavana)

Books Can Not Be “Simplified”:

Our literature is not sentimental stories. It is meant to be understood by the intelligent class of men. Children and those with child-like mentalities will do better to chant “Hare Krishna” and take prasadam. We cannot water down the philosophy to make it more palatable. Our books must remain as they are. Do not waste your time anymore with such attempts. We are not going to publish it. Whatever books we have got, let them try to understand, and if they cannot then let them chant “Hare Krishna” and take prasadam. (Letter to Lilavati, Mar 31, 1977)

Even if there are Some Discrepancies, They Are Accepted:

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 acceptable if 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. (Caitanya-caritamrta Adi-Lila 8.39)

So unless one is self-realized, there is practically no use writing about Krsna. This transcendental writing does not depend on material education. It depends on the spiritual realization. You’ll find, therefore, in the comments of Bhagavatam by different acaryas, even there are some discrepancies, they are accepted as asat-patha. It should remain as it is. (Srimad-Bhagavatam 7.5.23-24 — Vrndavana, Mar 31, 1976)

The Next Printing Should be the Original Way:

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 you bring this to Satsvarupa. They cannot change anything… So on the whole, these dangerous things are going on. How to check it? (Conversation, “Rascal Editors” — June 22, 1977, Vrndavana)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bg 2.8 P ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.8 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 2.18 P ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.18 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 2.25 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.25 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 2.30 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.30 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

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

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

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

Bg 2.31 P ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.31 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 2.40 P ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.40 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 2.48 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.48 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bg 2.49 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.49 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 2.51 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.51 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

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

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

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

Prabhupada: Yes. There is purport?

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

Prabhupada: All right. Finish.

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

Prabhupada: Read it again.

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

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

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

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

Madhudvisa dasa

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

All glories to Srila Prabhupada’s ORIGINAL books!

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

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

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

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

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

Bg 2.57 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.57 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 2.61 P ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.61 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 2.66 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 2.66 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

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

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

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

Bg 3.3 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 3.3 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

Bg 3.6 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 3.6 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

Bg 3.7 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 3.7 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bg 3.8 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 3.8 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

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

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

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

Bg 3.9 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 3.9 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bg 3.20 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 3.20 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

(17) A few little edits…

Bg 3.20 P ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 3.20 P REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

(18) Interesting…

Bg 3.32 T ORIGINAL:

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

Bg 3.32 T REVISED & ENLARGED:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Your servant, Madhudvisa dasa.