Guest guest Posted January 14, 1999 Report Share Posted January 14, 1999 > Nitai: Third-class: "Farming, cattle raising and business are the > qualities of work for the vaisyas,..." > Prabhupada: Not cattle raising, cow protection. > > *********************************** > > So I believe there are parts of Prabhupada's books which should be > revised. How did Hayagriva's mis-editing escape Prabhupada's attention in > the earlier edition? PAMHO AGTSP But in all the examples you cited, these were corrections Prabhupada personally made. How do you justify making corrections in his absence? Even if you think the grammar he used is not what is currently going on, we know anyway that so often Prabhupada uses "he" in a pan-gender manner. The karmis also understand this too. This is what E.B. White in *Strunk & White's Elements of Style* has to say about the use of the word "he": > *They* A common inaccuracy is the use of the plural pronoun when the > antecedent is a distributive expression such as each, each one, everybody, > every one, many a man, which, though implying more than one person, > requires the pronoun to be in the singular. Similar to this, but with even > less justification, is the use of the plural pronoun with the antecedent > anybody, any one, somebody, some one, the intention being either to avoid > the awkward "he or she," or to avoid committing oneself to either. Some > bashful speakers even say, "A friend of mine told me that they, etc." > Use he with all the above words, unless the antecedent is or must be > feminine. (http://www.seattleu.edu/~umphress/csse508/strunk/strunk3.html#20) This book is probably one of the most popular/ most used books on writing and style in American universtities today. ys KKdas Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 1999 Report Share Posted January 14, 1999 >On Wed, 13 Jan 1999, COM: Jatukarnya (das) HKS (Cintamani Intl, Oslo - N) >wrote: >> I did not follow the discussion on VAST and thus may have missed something, >> but to me it seems undefendable to change Srila Prabhupada's books, even if >> it appears as if he made some mistakes in them. They are his books, not >> ours, isn't it? If he wanted to write something in his books, who are we to >> change them after his departure? Unless of course it was a translation >> mistake, but that does not seem to be the case here. Hare Krsna dasi wrote: >Then again, there are parts of Prabhupada's writings which should be left >as is, but a footnote could inform the reader of how changing grammar >usage might obscure Srila Prabhupada's intent. For example, in the 1960s >and 1970s, according to proper and popularly accepted grammar, the pronoun >"he" could refer to either a man or a woman. Prabhupada's use of "he" in >certain places is not meant to imply an exclusion of women. It is in >keeping with the proper and popularly accepted use of grammar at the time. This is a sensitive subject indeed and I wish that all sincere devotees could have seen how carefully it was in fact dealt with on VAST. There was no flaming or shouting going on and everyone focused on the problem at hand and possible ways of solving it. Since VAST is a conference for devotees in academia, it is not surprising that some of its members feel a great frustration when they can't use Prabhupada's books in the classroom. Instead they have to teach from texts written by scholars for whom Krsna Consciousness may not be based on personal experience. One obstacle to using Prabhupada's books is that, the way they are written, it appears that they are both sexist and racist. Before moving on, please let me note that I don't think Prabhupada was either. This is simply how they appear to many outsiders whose only exposure to KC is the books (which is typically the case for university students). So, we were discussing both 1) what did Prabhupada really mean by some of his statements (e.g. re. women's intelligence) and 2) is there a way to make changes in the books so that the readers will not get that false impression? I don't think anyone ever suggested that we selectively strike out parts of Prabhupada's words to fit some modern feminist agenda (no, not even I suggested that :-)). However, as Hare Krsna Prabhu also suggested, footnotes was one of the options discussed. Those would be inserted (possibly only in editions meant for academe) to clarify statements that otherwise might be interpreted as sexist. Also, possibly changing the reference to "he" when meaning "he or she" was discussed, since Prabhupada himself had said that these statements referred to both genders. It's simply a matter of change in the useage of the English language. Several VAST devotees spoke of the professional standards in their own academic disciplines re. this matter. For example, the APA (American Psychological Association), has guidelines for non-sexist writing that have to be followed today. So we were discussing what was most important: Getting Prabhupada's books into the universities or keeping them outside by insisting on keeping what is now considered unacceptable language (such as "he" to refer to "he and she") in academia? I don't remember all the ins and outs of this discussion, but the topic was so complex and sensitive that no one really wanted to formally suggest or act on any of the proposals for change. What seems to be happening instead is that disciples and granddisciples are writing their own books on KC for academic settings, which confirms to the expected standards. That is of course wonderful, but it doesn't solve the original problem. Another partial solution has been for devotee professors to use carefully selected parts of Prabhupada's books only, and to use these together with texts by other non-devotee authors. That is what for example Advaita prabhu is doing at Harvard in his courses on the BG and SB (can you imagine how pleased Prabhupada must be to have a granddisciple teaching these topics at Harvard?) Hope that helps clarify things a little. It's unfortunate that this discussion began the way it did, but I greatly appreciate the friendly way in which Jatukarnya moved it forward and the intelligent and thoughtful input by Hare Krsna prabhu. You two are such role models of how to carry on level headed discussions about even sensitive subjects. What a relief from the hostile inquisition-style used in some of the previous texts. Ys, Madhusudani dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 1999 Report Share Posted January 14, 1999 On Thu, 14 Jan 1999, COM: Krishna Kirti (das) HDG (Baltimore, MD - USA) wrote: > [Text 2015056 from COM] > > > Nitai: Third-class: "Farming, cattle raising and business are the > > qualities of work for the vaisyas,..." > > Prabhupada: Not cattle raising, cow protection. > > > > *********************************** > > > > So I believe there are parts of Prabhupada's books which should be > > revised. How did Hayagriva's mis-editing escape Prabhupada's attention in > > the earlier edition? > > PAMHO AGTSP > > But in all the examples you cited, these were corrections Prabhupada > personally made. > > How do you justify making corrections in his absence? Even if you think the > grammar he used is not what is currently going on, we know anyway that so > often Prabhupada uses "he" in a pan-gender manner. The karmis also > understand this too. > > This is what E.B. White in *Strunk & White's Elements of Style* has to say > about the use of the word "he": > > > *They* A common inaccuracy is the use of the plural pronoun when the > > antecedent is a distributive expression such as each, each one, everybody, > > every one, many a man, which, though implying more than one person, > > requires the pronoun to be in the singular. Similar to this, but with even > > less justification, is the use of the plural pronoun with the antecedent > > anybody, any one, somebody, some one, the intention being either to avoid > > the awkward "he or she," or to avoid committing oneself to either. Some > > bashful speakers even say, "A friend of mine told me that they, etc." > > Use he with all the above words, unless the antecedent is or must be > > feminine. > > (http://www.seattleu.edu/~umphress/csse508/strunk/strunk3.html#20) > > This book is probably one of the most popular/ most used books on writing > and style in American universtities today. > > ys KKdas First of all, I work at a fairly reputable college, and Strunk and White have been replaced by an M.L.A. based sylebook as the standard in this and other school. Secondly, not every word of Bhagavad-gita is composed by Srila Prabhupada. As indicated above, much was edited by Hayagriva prabhu, an English professor. This is fine, and appropriate, but as we see, sometimes the end result was not what Prabhupada actually meant. So I propose: Give the reader all the facts, and let the reader decide. But back to Elements of Style, which is a loveable, slim volume, and still a great friend to any writer: *Elements of Style* revised edition, by William Strunk, Jr., and Edward A. Tenney, copyright 1935. I have in front of me the 1972 edition (updated from 1959) and I see your quote on page 54. I love old William Strunk, but the thing is, as *popularly understood* if you say "he" in the modern context, it is believed that you mean only a man. For example, consider the following quote from the earlier version of Bg 4.34: "Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has seen the truth." Most people in modern society will not take old Bill Strunk into account in reading this quote. They will think that means that a spiritual master has to be a man. It will not occur to them that the spiritual master could be a man or a woman, because they will not understand the usage that was common in 1972. So, instead of changing what Prabhupada said, we might want to add a footnote pointing out that Prabhupada indicated that women also could be spiritual master, and cited the example of Jahnavi Devi, Lord Nityananda's consort who initiated disciples herself. Or, if we do change it (which we have), why not add a note, citing the original text and explaining why it was changed? In essence: When things are not clear, why not relieve devotees' anxieties by explaining them? your servant, Hare Krsna dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 1999 Report Share Posted January 14, 1999 > In essence: When things are not clear, why not relieve devotees' > anxieties by explaining them? > > your servant, > > Hare Krsna dasi We never had these problems before, that is, lack of clarity when Prabhupada used the pronoun "he". If we start changing things, then we run the risk of changing the meaning of something, even if ever so slightly. Granted that whenever on of Srila Prabhupada's books is translated into another language, the meaning of the translation and the meaning of the English may slightly vary. However, if we start basing translations on modified versions, the difference in meaning will be heightened. Therefore, it is better to keep Prabhupada's books as they are--as a master copy--and that way we won't loose the understanding given to us. Personally, I think that tinkering with Srila Prabhupada's books is somthing like playing with fire: sa kaleneha mahata yoga nashta parantapa, "But in the course of time, the succession was broken, and therefore, the science, as it is, was lost." (Bg 4.2) Anyway, we can consider that so many devotees, both men and women, came from reading Prabhupada's books, which contained the pronoun "he" used in a pan-gender sense. And people, men and women, still become inspired to take up Krishna-consciousness with Prabhupada's books, as they are (As It Is). If we made further modifications to the Bhagavad-gita AS It Is, what would we call it? Bhagavad-gita As It Should Be, Bhagavad-gita For Modern Society, etc.? We really couldn't keep the title "As It Is". Older editions prior to new versions could read "Bhagavad-gita AS It Was", "As It Used To Be", etc. Better to leave it alone and just understand that "he" when used as a plural prononoun, where appropriate, refers to both genders. If it really is a problem, then we could just require that everyone in ISKCON learn Hindi (it would be great for preaching to life members), because a mixed plural pronoun, or verb case endings, take on a feminine construction. I've never heard that Hindi speaking men who read our Hindi translation of the Bhagavad-gita have a problem with gender specific words that some of us seem to be having. Whenever they read some passage where a plural pronoun for mixed genders are used (feminine construction), they don't get questions in their mind that, "Was Prabhupada only refering to women. . . ?" Better to leave the Bhagavad-gita As It Is as it is, or learn Hindi. Daso 'smi, Krishna-kirti das P.S. Check out the new, Spoken Samskritam conference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 14, 1999 Report Share Posted January 14, 1999 COM: Krishna Kirti (das) HDG (Baltimore, MD - USA) wrote: > [Text 2015310 from COM] > > > In essence: When things are not clear, why not relieve devotees' > > anxieties by explaining them? > > > > your servant, > > > > Hare Krsna dasi > > We never had these problems before, that is, lack of clarity when Prabhupada > used the pronoun "he". > > > ...Better to leave it alone and just understand that "he" when used as a > plural > prononoun, where appropriate, refers to both genders. > > If it really is a problem, then we could just require that everyone in > ISKCON learn Hindi (it would be great for preaching to life members), > because a mixed plural pronoun, or verb case endings, take on a feminine > construction. > > I've never heard that Hindi speaking men who read our Hindi translation of > the Bhagavad-gita have a problem with gender specific words that some of us > seem to be having. Whenever they read some passage where a plural pronoun > for mixed genders are used (feminine construction), they don't get questions > in their mind that, "Was Prabhupada only refering to women. . . ?" > > Better to leave the Bhagavad-gita As It Is as it is, or learn Hindi. > > Daso 'smi, Krishna-kirti das > > P.S. Check out the new, Spoken Samskritam conference. Hare Krsna dasi responds: I guess that is what I find so troubling about the perspective being presented here: I appears to be anti-preaching. Rather than making things accessible and easy to understand for potential devotees, who may not be coming from a Hindi background, we hear the suggestion that the people can learn Hindi if they can't understand Prabhupada's gender meaning. We should not change the original edition. (Does this mean you oppose all of Jayadvaita Maharaja's changes in the new Bhagavad-gita?) And we should not clarify the meaning of some words which have changed since Srila Prabhupada wrote his books. In essence: Here we are: Like it or lump it. If you don't like what Krsna consciousness sounds like, then you can just go on your way. Why not try to communicate? To clarify misunderstandings? To reach out and try to bring more people into Krsna consciousness. Why this mentality of shutting people out? your servant, Hare Krsna dasi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 1999 Report Share Posted January 18, 1999 > > > Hare Krsna dasi responds: > > I guess that is what I find so troubling about the perspective being > presented here: I appears to be anti-preaching. Rather than making > things accessible and easy to understand for potential devotees, who may > not be coming from a Hindi background, we hear the suggestion that the > people can learn Hindi if they can't understand Prabhupada's gender > meaning. We should not change the original edition. (Does this mean you > oppose all of Jayadvaita Maharaja's changes in the new Bhagavad-gita?) > And we should not clarify the meaning of some words which have changed > since Srila Prabhupada wrote his books. > > In essence: Here we are: Like it or lump it. If you don't like what > Krsna consciousness sounds like, then you can just go on your way. > > Why not try to communicate? To clarify misunderstandings? To reach out > and try to bring more people into Krsna consciousness. Why this mentality > of shutting people out? > > your servant, > > Hare Krsna dasi Advocating changing words in Srila Prabhupada's books to suit western society is a great cancer that could affect and damage the Krishna consciousness movement. The mission of Iskcon is not about pleasing a group of some academic circle in the USA, but a movement of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu for the whole world. The same books of Srila Prabhupada in the form we have today have produced countless numbers of devotees from academic circles that you are proposing the change to suit. One of the favorite verse in the Bhagavatama first canto recited by Srila Narada Muni started witn "tad vag visargo janataga viplavo....., that is that transcendental literature, though imperfectly composed, which is meant the redirect the current misdirected civilizations, are heard, chanted and sung by purifying men who are thourouly honest". We should make our life simple and try to follow the teachings and the examples of previous acaryas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 18, 1999 Report Share Posted January 18, 1999 > > > Advocating changing words in Srila Prabhupada's books to suit western > society is a great cancer that could affect and damage the Krishna > consciousness movement. The mission of Iskcon is not about pleasing a group > of some academic circle in the USA, but a movement of Lord Caitanya > Mahaprabhu for the whole world. The same books of Srila Prabhupada in the > form we have today have produced countless numbers of devotees from > academic circles that you are proposing the change to suit. One of the > favorite verse in the Bhagavatama first canto recited by Srila Narada Muni > started witn "tad vag visargo janataga viplavo....., that is that > transcendental literature, though imperfectly composed, which is meant the > redirect the current misdirected civilizations, are heard, chanted and sung > by purifying men who are thourouly honest". > > We should make our life simple and try to follow the teachings and the > examples of previous acaryas. There is form and there is content. You appear to be talking about content, and Hare Krsna dasi about form. Changing the form is a process that went on both before and after Srila Prabhupada left the planet. Have you ever read the !st Canto Bhagvatams that Srila Prabhupada brought with him to America? Then compare that to the editions that he authorised after Hayagriva edited them. The former are utterly charming for his disciples, but the latter are more effective for preaching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.