Guest guest Posted July 5, 2003 Report Share Posted July 5, 2003 It's well known among ISKCON devotees that the new "Revised and Enlarged" version of Srila Prabhupada's Bhagavad-gita As It Is is very different from Srila Prabhupada's original book. Jayadvaita Swami says in a note in the new revised & enlarged version (1983 printing): "...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...] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2005 Report Share Posted May 29, 2005 Strange, by verse 2.48 it seems Tamala Krishna is reciting yet another verse. For the rest it's really strange this editing. Luckely my parents both have an original copy, but I myself have got a revised one. You don't even know it when you're reading, but it seems you miss a lot of good information even in translations. It looks like the GBC consider themselves the ultimate authority. Better you leave someone else's books alone and wright your own's if you think they should be different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 29, 2005 Report Share Posted May 29, 2005 I still get angry over this everytime it's being brought up.I've said it before and I'll say it again: If someone thinks he knows S.P. better than S.P. Himself (yeah,I know that sounds ridiculous but some seem to think they do), who at the time of the first prints personally approved of those translations, if such a person thinks he has a better understanding of the gita or a better understanding of what Srila Prabhupada meant then that person should write his own commentary. He should write his own commentary and publish it under his own name,not under Srila Prabhupada's name with the "as it is" label. They should have never touched Prabhupada's Gita using His name. It's a serious offense and an insult to Srila Prabhupada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 On one hand you are saying that Srila Prabhupada accepted the few translations and on theother hand you are stating that the changes disgust you.IRM is a disgrace to the entire vaishnava community and these riviks have nothing better to do in life Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 Hare Krishna. I have seen some of the changes and they alter the meaning in a significant way. For example: chapter 2, verse 2 In the 1972 BG: "The supreme person [bhagavan] said:..." In the 1986 BG: "The supreme personality of godhead said:.." Notice the word "Bhagavan" is removed. If you remove the word 'Allah' from the Koran the Muslims would kill. If you remove the word "Jesus" from the Bible, the Christians would kill. Because the Hindus are very tolerant there is no action, but "Bhagavan" (Lord Krishna) is very angry. There are so many other changes like the one above. You can listen to the original 1972 BG at: www.gitamrta.org/bgita1972.m3u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 2, 2005 Report Share Posted August 2, 2005 Madhudvisa Prabhu is not a rtvik--at least the one i'm thinking of. this is a separate issue from guru-tattva. i'm the first say that politics should not be discussed openly, in front of impressionable devotees and public. but i have to point out that this is different from the rtvik issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 6, 2005 Report Share Posted August 6, 2005 Hare Krishna! I just checked my copy that I purchased from some devotees in downtown Vancouver, British Columbia. Unfortunately, I have the copy with the changes. It's still better than anything else I've ever read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 17, 2005 Report Share Posted August 17, 2005 Exactly bridget But people have nothing better to do in their lifes.Prabhupada himself ackowledged these changes but people will continue to stayon the mental platform rather than surrenderign themselves completely to Krishna 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.