Why now if not when He was here?

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna

 

Srila Prabhupada: "No Changes"

BY MITHILADHISA DASA

 

EDITORIAL, Dec 14 (VNN) — Dear Vaishnavas, please accept my humble respects.

 

I have just read the 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

 

i do not post this to start a huge argument here or something, but want to point out that Srila Prabhupada did not want changes to His books whatsoever. then why are his so-called disciples and such making changes to the books now? if the books are sold "AS THEY ARE" without changes to the original version of the books by Hid Divine Grace, then the books have the potential to make millions of devoees around the world.

 

i hope you agree with me; my point is that those that want to be 'true devotees' should read the original versions of the books by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada was a pure devotee of Lord Krishna, and there is no need to change that which is already perfect. yes, there may be minor errors in grammar, but i don't think that there are any that would lead the reader away from the meaning of the text.

 

why change that which is already perfect? if we accept these changes now, in a few years these will be completely new books with the same title, or maybe even that will be changed. so please support and buy the original versions of the books by His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada.

 

*i don't work for a book publishing company with the intention of more sells. to make that more clear, i do not work for any book selling corporation. i have bought the changed version of the Gita(i'm pretty sure that is the new version); that was quite a while ago when i had no clue that the original books had even been changed. now, i have decided to print the entire original book.*

 

note to admin:

Dear Admin,

 

Please do not delete this message. My intentions are not at all to start a 'war' amongst the visitors of this site.

-----------

Hare Krishna

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna

 

"Srila Vyasadeva revealed these statements after perfect realization and therefore they are perfect, for liberated sages like Vyasadeva never commit errors in their rhetorical arrangements. Unless one accepts this fact, there is no use in trying to obtain help from the revealed scriptures." -- CC Adi-Lila Chapter 2 text 86 purport.

 

"If you concoct, 'I am more intelligent than my Guru,' 'I can make additions and alterations,' then you are finished." -- Srila Prabhupada lecture July 12, 1975 Philadelphia Pa.

 

"We cannot water down the philosophy to make it more palatable. Our books must remain as they are." -- Srila Prabhupada letter to Lilavati devi dasi March 31, 1977.

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna

 

"Srila Vyasadeva revealed these statements after perfect realization and therefore they are perfect, for liberated sages like Vyasadeva never commit errors in their rhetorical arrangements. Unless one accepts this fact, there is no use in trying to obtain help from the revealed scriptures." -- CC Adi-Lila Chapter 2 text 86 purport.

 

"If you concoct, 'I am more intelligent than my Guru,' 'I can make additions and alterations,' then you are finished." -- Srila Prabhupada lecture July 12, 1975 Philadelphia Pa.

 

"We cannot water down the philosophy to make it more palatable. Our books must remain as they are." -- Srila Prabhupada letter to Lilavati devi dasi March 31, 1977.

 

Haribol

[gHari]

To keep our integrity here, let us remember how many times Srila Prabhupada said that "cattle raising" had to be changed to "cow protection".

[stonehearted]

And what's the deal with that "planet of trees"?

[Guest guest]

 

They are not changes they are 'corrections'.

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna

All glories to His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada

 

i respect your opinion in every way, but as you see, Srila Prabhupada did not want even an image changed in the book, what to say of the text. i've also heard that they have changed stuff like 'soul' to 'souls' etc. so what if there was a comma missing? there are about 800 changes currently on the Gita As It Is. eventually it won't even be "As It Is." in reality but only in name. if this movement of Srila Prabhupada is to advance in this Golden Age, then the original teachings will have to be restored; the disciplic succession is supposed to be: one being learns the absolute truth as it is from his guru; then he passes it as it is to his disciples. the teachings need to be restored. period. even in the introduction to the Gita As It Is, Srila Prabhupada says that He has presented the book As It Is. and no; it is better if they do not make the changes, because that will eventually change the meaning that Srila Prabhupada wanted to give us.

 

think about it. His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada was still in his physical body in this planet, would he agree that the text be changed if he did not want the paintings to be replaced with the completed works of paintings?

 

is He guru in name only to you? does His opinion about His own work not count? if you say no, why are you chanting Hare Krishna, why are you following the regulations, and/or why do you even read His book?(that is to say if you DO do all that).

 

i'm not saying that the devotional service you perform is bad; it probably is many, many more times greater than mine.

don't listen to me, but at least follow the directions of the pure devotee of Lord Krishna, of Lord Caitanya, Srila Prabhupada.

 

Jai Jai Guru Gauranga

[gHari]

That many of the 'changes' are actually returning the books back into Srila Prabhupada's original dictation. Places where the MacMillan editors have turned a phrase more poetic, or the ISKCON editors or typists have initially made changes or errors are being reset to Prabhupada's actual intention.

 

There are many pieces of real Prabhupada in the books now that have never been there since they were dictated by his divine lotus lips. Do we not want these treasures? Was he simply wasting his breath; was it maya? Was the Macmillan editor in maya or was it Prabhupada; which was the empowered saint who really knew Bhagavad-gita as it is?

 

The answers are not cut and dry. As you ignored earlier, Prabhupada was actually very upset to see an error in one book and on three occasions in the Vedabase he forcefully demands that IT MUST BE CHANGED. This must be weighed along with the "don't change the images" quote.

 

If the 'soul' into 'souls' is in the tattva-darshinah verse, then we should humbly understand that it is Krsna, Himself who says 'souls'. Certainly we cannot condone changing Lord Krsna's words, as well as Srila Prabhupada's. Before we get too forceful about either position we must educate ourselves about the issue.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna all dear Vaishnava prabhus and matajis. please accept my humble obeisances. all glories to Srila Prabhupada

Jai Jai Guru Gauranga

 

 

________________

Who Needs Authentic Books?

 

Devotees who are against allowing any editorial changes in Bhaktivedanta Swami's books often invoke what they call the "shastric principle of arsha-prayoga." Literally the word means "rishi usage." Early Puranic commentators would occasionally point out that a word used by Vyasadeva did not conform to the rules of grammar, or that a verse of his did not comply with the strictures of Sanskrit prosody. In such cases a commentator would say "iti arsha,It's Rishis' language." And nobody would ever dare to 'correct' Vyasa's writings. There is, however, no principle of arsha-prayoga that protects scribal errors. In other words, if a rishi was known to have said one thing, and a scribe or copyist wrote down another thing, that faulty version was fully subject to corrections.

 

There can be no doubt that A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami saw his own writings as divine revelations. In his experience God was the actual author of his work. And like the ancient rishis, whose poetry conveyed the thoughts of God, Bhaktivedanta Swami repeatedly stressed the divine origin of his writings: "Not my books, Krishna's books (760608mw.la).That is not my explanation, that is Krishna's explanation. I cannot explain now. That moment I could explain. That means Krishna's... [...] Although it is my writing, but I know it is not my writing. It is Krishna's writing (760904rc.vrn)." On another occasion Bhaktivedanta Swami seems to compare himself to the law giver Manu, when he tells his disciples that his books will be the law books for the next ten thousand years. The late Tamal Krishna Goswami writes: "Prabhupada's statement, 'My books will be the law books for human society for the next ten thousand years,' was made in my and Ramesvara prabhu's presence in 1975. I was seated in the back seat of a car with Prabhupada (Ramesvara in the front next to the driver) and we had just arrived back at the LA temple from a morning walk. I am not certain if the phrase 'for human society' was included. You may cite me as a source if you wish." (Personal communication, TKG to Ekkehard Lorenz, 02-NOV-00).

 

What if the authenticity of Bhaktivedanta Swami's books is being undermined by continuous ongoing posthumous editing since 1978? The concern is justified. What if the original message, that which was dictated by Krishna Himself, gets lost in the editing process? How much of Bhaktivedanta Swami's writing in the present printed BBT editions is still authentic? Is it really so that a text published in 1972 is more authentic, and therefore more 'spiritually potent' than a later version? Regarding Bhagavad-gita As It Is, it may be a good policy to revert to the 1972 edition. The argument that Bhaktivedanta Swami repeatedly lectured on practically each and every verse of that book, and that the 1972 recension should therefore be considered as fully approved by the author, is well-taken. But what about the other books? In the case of the Srimad-Bhagavatam, for example, "authorization through repeated lectures by the author" does not apply. Bhaktivedanta Swami lectured on less than 8% of the 8,923 Bhagavatam verses that he translated. Moreover, in most of his lectures he did not read the purports. More than 90% of his Srimad-Bhagavatam cannot be seen as authorized through lectures. The same holds for Caitanya-Caritamrita and Krishna Book.

 

The Krishna Book published during Bhaktivedanta Swami's presence contained a description of Mathura city encircled by cannons - an obvious anachronism! On the tape Bhaktivedanta Swami says Mathura was "encircled by canals." This reading is corroborated by the relevant Bhagavatam verse. But the author did not protest against "cannons" while he was present, nor did he authorize the post-1977 change to "canals." Was it right to change it, then?

 

Another passage in the pre-1978 Krishna Book tells about "the province of Kashi within the barricade of Varanasi." On the tape one can hear "...in the province of Kashi, in brackets 'Varanasi'..." In these two cases, the decision is easy. Unfortunately, tapes with original dictations are rare, and for the major part of the books only the so-called original transcripts (OTs) exist. For only 12% of the total content in all the books published by Bhaktivedanta Swami there exist authentic originals in the form of tapes or manuscripts produced by the author himself. For 4% there is no source material whatsoever: no manuscripts, no tapes, no transcripts. The remaining 84% are based on OTs. These OTs are undated and reflect various stages of editing. Some OTs aren't "original" at all; they have been retyped after the editors already made some changes. Many OTs show different levels of editing on the same sheet: various proposals in different handwritings, notes on the margins, strikethroughs etc. In many cases the transcribers could not understand what Bhaktivedanta Swami said on the tape. Thus the most exotic speculations found their way into the books, and may even be celebrated as divine revelations.

 

What it all boils down to is: for the major part of Bhaktivedanta Swami's books one cannot know with certainty whether they are factually his words. This may sound worse than it really is. In reality, the mood and the content of the purports match so well with his lectures and conversations, that there is no reason to suspect any terrible deviations from the original message.

 

There is little evidence that Bhaktivedanta Swami's pre-1978 books are more authentic (or closer to the version that Krishna revealed to him) than later editions based on tapes, manuscripts or transcripts. Experience suggests that Bhaktivedanta Swami would rarely ever point out mistakes in passages from which he lectured. He did not object when, during a lecture, Pradyumna read, "Lord Rishabhadeva's hands, feet and chest were very long." (Srimad-Bhagavatam 5.5.31--Vrindavan, November 18, 1976) This version is still found in the present printed BBT editions. In the OT version Lord Rishabha's chest is delicate and His arms are very long! Elsewhere the readers are told that humans evolved from vegetables and that Suta Gosvami was a descendant of Sukadeva Gosvami! None of this is supported by the original transcripts.

 

If there is an interest to preserve the authentic work of Bhaktivedanta Swami, one will not do the author any justice by declaring all editing endeavors to be unauthorized deviations. There clearly is a need for such editing. This said, it may turn out to be the safest thing, after all, to put a preliminary freeze on all so-called book changes. ISKCON, the BBT, and the Bhaktivedanta Archives will have to establish a credible and fully accountable procedure before any further editing can take place. Many devotees doubt whether there exist competent individuals who could be entrusted with such editing work. Devotees need to be informed about how exactly the books were made. What do the transcripts look like? How much editing has taken place between the original dictation and the so-called original book edition (like the 1972 Gita)? What information is there, in the BBT and in the Archives, and in the memories of those who are still present and who worked on the books? How much can be accomplished if a diligent effort is made to establish a canonical version of Bhaktivedanta Swami's work?

 

What is required is to first establish a catalogue of the original materials still existing. Next, the printed versions have to be compared against the original handwritten or typed manuscripts, tapes and transcripts. In those places where the transcripts are inconclusive (because the transcribers were unable to properly spell out what they heard on the tape), one needs to consult the original source texts that Bhaktivedanta Swami had used in his work.

 

Take for example the Bhaktivedanta Purport to Srimad-Bhagavatam 3.26.21. In the second paragraph of the present BBT version we read "...one can understand the Supreme Personality of Godhead, or the objective which is described in the Bhagavad-gita as adbhuta." The original transcript, however, is worded as follows: "...and the status in which one can understand the S of G or the objective which is described in the BG as Adibuta (?) that is also another feature of the Mahat Tatta." This is exactly and verbatim what the OT says. We do not know whether the author said exactly this, but it is at least what the transcriber heard; it is the version before conscious editing was applied.

 

If one looks at Sridhara's (14th century) commentary, it becomes easy to decide: the word used by him was 'adhibhuta.' It is clear that on the tape, following Sridhara's commentary, Bhaktivedanta Swami said 'adhibhuta.' The transcriber rendered it as 'Adibuta.' The editor, who did not know Sanskrit and did not read the commentaries, decided that it should be 'adbhuta,' an altogether different word.

 

Countless details will have to be examined before an edition can be presented that deserves to be called 'authentic.' In order to ascertain what exactly Bhaktivedanta Swami had said in a particular passage where manuscripts, tapes, or OTs remain inconclusive, it is not enough to carefully read and re-read that passage. One has to read the English, Hindi, and Bengali verse translations that he used when working with the text. (Bhaktivedanta Swami's translations in the Third Canto, for example, are based on the Gita Press English edition, and he copied many of its English verse translations verbatim). One has to consult the original Sanskrit and Bengali commentaries that Bhaktivedanta Swami used when he worked with the text. And one needs to study the original transcripts of the tapes from which the BBT edition was produced. Even lectures, letters, and conversations contain material that must be taken into consideration:

 

Tamala Krsna (reading): "Farming, cattle raising and business are the qualities..."

Prabhupada: They are not cattle raising, that was...

Tamala Krsna: Cow protection.

Prabhupada: Cow protection. It has to be corrected. It is go-raksya, go. They take it cattle-raising. I think Hayagriva has translated like this.

(Room Conversation with the Mayor of Evanston--July 4, 1975, Chicago)

 

The present BBT edition of the Bhagavad-gita As It Is reads "cow protection" (BG 18.44). The 1972 edition had "cattle raising." Back to '72?

--an article from http://www.adi-vani.org

 

Haribol! Hare Krishna

 

[moderators note: edited to keep page from going off screen]

[gHari]

was obviously a very serious and loving disciple of Srila Prabhupada. They have taken the time to reach a perfectly logical conclusion; one which Prabhupada himself would endorse. We are intelligent people. We can do this without screwing up; given enough time.

 

Quite frankly, after learning of so many clerical errors, when I find a tricky passage I wonder "what was really dictated here". That just shouldn't be, on this planet of the trees.

 

I am happy that sincere humble disciples like Jayadvaita Swami have taken so much time and care to perform this service for Prabhupada and the devotees. I know Prabhupada trusted him; I am certainly not about to place myself above His Divine Grace. I don't think anyone should.

 

[krsna]

Mar 31 2004

"Improving on the Perfect"

 

 

I consider the issue of the re-editing of Srila Prabhupada's books after his departure to be one of the most crucial issues facing the Vaisnava community today. I can only assume that the reader has been made aware of the justifications expounded by Jayadvaita Swami, the instigator of this action. The issue is again making headlines due to the publication of Madhudvisa dasa's recent report of the unfortunate experience he had with Jayadvaita Swami in Mayapur. The issue was already at the forefront due to the lawsuit that was filed against ISKCON, in which the challenging parties won the case and gained permission to print the original, unedited versions of Srila Prabhupada's books.

 

Personally, I stand firmly in favor of the position of not changing the books, and I'm certainly not alone in that position. I can't definitively say just how many people within the community support the 'no change' position, but I have a feeling it's a much larger group than Jayadvaita Swami and his supporters would like to believe – even within the institution of ISKCON.

 

Jayadvaita Swami only got the GBC's permission to do this editing by a single vote, and the GBC did not establish extensive guidelines in an effort to guide the process. Now that the editing work is considered to be complete or near complete, the truth is being revealed that there were extensive changes made to both the translations and the purports -- far more than Jayadvaita Swami had made people understand his original intention to be. Even in his justifications, he suggests that he was simply correcting some grammatical errors. In reality, there are many places where he significantly changed the meanings of what was originally printed.

 

In my mind, the essential question about this issue is one that is seemingly never asked: what is the mentality or vision of those who engaged in the editing, and those who voted for it and still support it? What is the vision of Srila Prabhupada that would allow them to go ahead with this type of activity?

 

I've made my position clear as to how I see Srila Prabhupada as the Sampradaya Acarya. If others were seeing him in that light, I don't see how they could possibly justify bringing about changes, or think that there could be any improvement upon such a personality's literatures. No one seems to ask this basic question in regards to the book changing issue, or any of the other issues that have confronted the followers of Srila Prabhupada after his departure.

 

The philosophy teaches us that there are not only philosophical roots to every situation, but there is the whole process of thinking, feeling and willing to be considered. If someone's doing something, one can assume they've thought about it to the point where they were motivated to act. So what were the original thoughts that brought about the kind of motivation that resulted in changes to the books, and other questionable activities? If one continues to justify their actions, then they must still be thinking the same thoughts they originally did, before they acted.

 

We can only conclude that Jayadvaita Swami is not seeing Srila Prabhupada as the Sampradaya Acarya. Similarly, Satsvarupa dasa Goswami, who wrote the Lilamrta, did not see or depict Srila Prabhupada as the Sampradaya Acarya. And the Zonal Acaryas, who introduced their whole program after Srila Prabhupada left, they weren't seeing Srila Prabhupada as the Sampradaya Acarya. And anyone who was originally a disciple of Srila Prabhupada, then takes shelter of some other guru, even for siksa... as far as I'm concerned, they're not seeing Srila Prabhupada as the Sampradaya Acarya. What to speak of those whole leave Krsna Consciousness altogether.

 

 

The changing of Srila Prabhupada's books is, in my mind, one of the most dangerous things an individual can do. Consider the reactions that those who supported, promoted and printed the edited books are in store for. We witness that those who venture into such dangerous territory have a tendency to go crazy as a result of their offenses. My suggestion is that anyone who is in any way sympathetic or supportive of these activities should do a re-think, because they'll get some sort of a reaction, proportionate to their approval or support. Srila Prabhupada once said that the problem with Westerners is that they're just not afraid of Maya. And changing the Sampradaya Acarya's books is the most serious influence of Maya that one can succumb to.

 

Rocana dasa