Changes to Prabhupada's Books

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

There are two types of changes that are occuring, the first is simple obvious errors made in the original transcription process - and these corrections are bringing it closer to how Prabhupada's original dictations were. But then there is another category of changes that Jayadvaita Swami doesn't like to discuss, and those are changes of context and meaning "I think Prabhupada really meant this..." Two such examples have recently been cited on www.harekrsna.com/sun. These types of changes are where they completely change what Prabhupada said to fit his words into their institutional agenda. To cover up these changes, they keep pushing forward the explanations for the first category of corrections - "look, we're giving you more Prabhupada."

 

Let's look at the two exampls given on the site I mentioned above:

"...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."

Original Bhagavad-gita As It Is 2.31

 

"...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.." - Revised & Enlarged Bhagavad-gita 2.31

 

The original told us to act in accordance with the scriptures (i.e. varnashrama dharma), whereas the new version tells us to to act under the guidance of our temple president, Guru and GBC.

 

And here is a second example:

 

Current Version: "Even if one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krishna Consciousness Society, still one should stick to the Society; if one thinks the Society's members are not purey devotees, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master." CC madhya 19.157

 

Original Version: "If one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master." CC madhya 19.157

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

Go to the Gita revisions explained site:

 

http://www.krishna.com/main.php?id=288

 

They offer you 30 or 40 examples that no one can argue against (the kind where they actually fixed an error in the transcription) and then make the claim "see we're giving you more prabhupada". But for every one of those that they highlight there are hundreds of lowlights that they don't even let you know exist. Till today they have not released a change log to the public documenting all of the changes that have been made. Only by the hard work of devotees scrutinizing both versions have some of the changes been noticed. Even most of ISKCON's leaders don't have access to the list of changes.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

I just spent around one minute on Jayadvaita Swami's gita revisions explained website, and in that short amount of time I already found quite an obvious mistake in the very first example I read.

 

Bhagavad Gita 2.1

 

In summary, Jayadvaita Swami assumes a sentence in this purport is an editing mistake and completely changes the meaning by inserting new words and deleting the old sentence. If he had just added a comma into the sentence, the context would have been self evident and he would realize there was no editing error. Prabhupada was speaking of yukta-vairagya (engaging everything in Krishna's service), whereas Jayadvaita Swami has changed the subject to nishkama-karma (renouncing attachment to fruitive results). These are two different subjects altogether.

 

Please see this example. (I have added a red coma for reference to show that the context flows perfectly when broken as "fruitive, being" instead of "fruitive being" (a single noun):

 

Original:

This realization is made possible by working with the fruitive, being situated in the fixed conception of the real self.

Jayadvaita Swami Edited Version:

This realization is possible when one works without attachment to fruitive results and is situated in the fixed conception of the real self.

Prabhupada's original transcription:

this realisation is possible by working with fruitive result being situ ated on fixed up conclusion of the real self.

Jayadvaita Swami's explanation:

Have you ever had to explain this sentence? It’s just an editorial mistake, and it doesn’t make a damn bit of sense.

 

What I assumed was intended: “This realization is possible by working without fruitive result, being situated on fixed-up conclusion of the real self.” A double-check with the commentary of Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana confirmed that my assumption was correct. So that’s what the second edition says, with proper English grammar.

Jayadvaita swami decides to assume it's an editing mistake (without any evidence of this) and then goes further to assume what Prabhupada really meant. What is in Prabhupada's original transcription is crystal clear, he is speaking about utilizing the fruits of one's actions in service to Krishna - yukta vairagya. There doesn't need to be any editing done to it at all, what to speak of assuming it's an editing error.

 

Prabhupada's original version is clear to all who are familiar with Prabhupada's teachings:

 

Working with fruitive results + fixed up conclusion of real self = karma yoga, offering the fruits of one's actions to Krishna.

 

Jayadvaita Swami's addition of the following words "This realization is possible by working without fruitive result" may not be wrong, but it isn't what Prabhupada said. We are now receiving a commentary of Jayadvaita Swami instead of Prabhupada's original purport.

 

Again, look at the original, (with the comma inserted to show the sentence context):

 

Original:

"This realization is made possible by working with the fruitive, being situated in the fixed conception of the real self."

In other words, "this realization is made possible by engaging in fruitive action while being fixed in conception of the real self", classic karma-yoga. There is no need to add the extra words and divert from Prabhupada's original statement. Prabhupada was speaking about working for Krishna, but what the new edition has is an extended purport on that topic given by Jayadvaita Swami. And why did he add it? By his own admission it was because he assumed it was an editing mistake.

 

If any change needed to be made at all, it would simply be inserting a coma into the sentence. Rather than changing Prabhupada's original words, and assuming they are editing mistakes we should leave them as is and let Prabhupada's words speak for themselves.

 

Actually what Jayadvaita Swami has done is completely change the meaning of the sentence. Prabhupada is speaking about utilizing fruitive results, whereas Jayadvaita Swami is speaking about developing nonattachment. They are two completely different subjects. "Working with the fruitive," (positively engaging results in Krishna's service) is yukta-vairagya, whereas Jayadvaita Swami is speaking about working without attachement which is nishkama-karma.

 

Jayadvaita Swami assumes it's an editing mistake, erases what Prabhupada said, and then replaces it with his own assumption of what Prabhupada meant. Someone who can't catch the subtle difference between yukta-vairagya and nishkama-karma shouldn't be making changes to Srila Prabhupada's books.

 

Please also note a second change that subtly alters the meaning:

Original:

This realization is made possible by working with the fruitive, being situated in the fixed conception of the real self.

Jayadvaita Swami Edited Version:

This realization is possible when one works without attachment to fruitive results and is situated in the fixed conception of the real self.

 

The words "by working" in the original indicate it is the very process by which the realization is achieved (abhideya). Whereas Jayadvaita Swami's version has changed it to "it is possible when one works without attachment" indicating that it is a possibility to occur (perhaps by some other activity). In other words, the edited version tells us "At that time it is possible to achieve this realization", but how it will be achieved is not necessarily stated. Thus the changing of a single word from "by" to "when" completely alters the meaning and stress of the sentence.

 

Again, I would like to point out that this was the very first example I read on his website which I just randomly chose. If the rest of his changes are as bad as this, then Prabhupada's original teachings may already have been completely altered. When dealing with transcendental literature, simply knowing English grammar is not enough. Every syllable in Prabhupada's writings contain vast philosophical import, and the slightest alteration can obscure these gems from our view.

[Pankaja_Dasa]

Least we have the Originals. Besides, there is a verse to the effect that even though imperfectly composed.. etc. I cannot remember. That whatever devotee do is perfect.

Current Version: still one should stick to the Society;

Original Version: one can keep direct company with the spiritual master,

=

Guru is omniscient, I also heard Iskcon doesn't accept Guru can be omniscient.

[Beggar]

When Ravana took Sita and imprisoned her, it wasn't the real Sita but rather Maya-Sita. If ISKCON is Srila Prabhupada's "body" then the ISKCON that doesn't accept Srila Prabhupada, an uttama adhikari guru, as omniscient is Maya-ISKCON.

[ng dasa]

It is interesting to read the above quotes to the changes that Jayadvaita Swami has made. I consider myself a beginner in this bhakti yoga process, but I am beginning to realise on an internal level, what a treasure Srila Prabhupada is. Understanding that his vani is nondifferent from him, I think it is sad, that due to such changes, I may infact not be able to relish deeply Prabhupada's "pure" vani.

Even as in the above case it is claimed that the changes were made due to editorial mistakes, I would prefer the original, and let the vani and Supersoul reveal the inner meaning to the verse. This is a simple joy of the process of self realisation.

If the changes are actually made due to institutional considerations, then possibly the institution is becoming an idol rather than the vehicle that spreads the message of a pure devotee such as Srila Prabhupada.

[ng dasa]

Yes, point taken. The original verse clearly points to the process of karma yoga. Therefore the question arises, was there necessity to edit this verse at all.

[gHari]

Per Ananda das at http://chakra.org/discussions/booksmovies.html

 

 

Original transcript (What Prabhupada dictated):

If one thinks in the Society there are many so-called devotees or there are so many nondevotees, still one should stick to the Society, and if one thinks the Society members are not pure devotees, he can directly keep company or in touch with the spiritual master. If there is any doubt he should consult the spiritual master.

[gHari]

 

Prabhupada's original transcription:

this realisation is possible by working with fruitive result being situated on fixed up conclusion of the real self.

I doubt that Srila Prabhupada actually dictated this. Either it is a typo here or by the original transcriber since 'working with fruitive result' surely isn't the way to Krsna.

[gHari]

.... but I read 'higher authorities' as guru, sadhu, sastra, Krsna:

 

 

"...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.." - Revised & Enlarged Bhagavad-gita 2.31

 

The original told us to act in accordance with the scriptures (i.e. varnashrama dharma), whereas the new version tells us to to act under the guidance of our temple president, Guru and GBC.

 

The current offering is:

On the bodily plane sva-dharma is called varṇāśrama-dharma, or man's steppingstone for spiritual understanding. Human civilization begins from the stage of varṇāśrama-dharma, or specific duties in terms of the specific modes of nature of the body obtained. 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.

[ng dasa]

Surely it is a huge responsibility that the editors have. And who am I to say if their decisions are right or wrong. Possibly in their editorial meetings they may have discussed similar things we are discussing now. Obiesances to them.

[ng dasa]

 

I doubt that Srila Prabhupada actually dictated this. Either it is a typo here or by the original transcriber since 'working with fruitive result' surely isn't the way to Krsna.

Quite possible gHari, but at the same time, can karma yoga be integrated with bhakti, even if this is not pure bhakti. Is it possible that Srila Prabhupada was referring to this in this instance?

[gHari]

Fruitive appears to have only been an adjective, not a noun. It is apparently obsolete and cannot be found in the American-Heritage dictionary, but older dictionaries offer these definitions:

From http://www.onelook.com/?loc=pub&w=fruitive

 

 

Webster Dictionary, 1913

<xpage ="600">Fru"i*tive <tt>(?)</tt>, <tt>a.</tt> <ety>[see Fruition.]</ety> <def>Enjoying; possessing.</def> <mark>[Obs.]</mark> Boyle.

</xpage>Webster's 1828 Dictionary

FRUITIVE, a. Enjoying.

<xpage ="600">

</xpage>

Random House Unabridged Dictionary, Copyright © 1997

fru•i•tive

 

Pronunciation: (frOO'i-tiv), [key]

—adj.

able to produce fruit or fruition; fruitful.

[ng dasa]

"Actually what Jayadvaita Swami has done is completely change the meaning of the sentence. Prabhupada is speaking about utilizing fruitive results, whereas Jayadvaita Swami is speaking about developing nonattachment. They are two completely different subjects. "Working with the fruitive," (positively engaging results in Krishna's service) is yukta-vairagya, whereas Jayadvaita Swami is speaking about working without attachement which is nishkama-karma." Quoted fron jn dasa's prevous post in this link.

 

I tend to agree with this understanding, and how subtle changes can change the whole context.

 

Also, after the word "fruitive" is, used the purport goes on to say ,"fruitive result being situated on fixed up conclusion of the real self."

 

So being fixed upon the real self there would not be possibility of the word fruitive referring to an enjoying/gratification context.

 

Anyway, I am getting way out of my league here, but at the same time am grateful for this learning oppurtunity.

[gHari]

 

Purport BG 8.28

 

One who is firm in yoga is constantly engaged in KRSNa consciousness in all his activities. SrI RUpa GosvAmI advises, anAsaktasya viSayAn yathArham upayuJjataH: one should be unattached in material affairs and do everything in KRSNa consciousness. By this system, which is called Yukta-vairAgya, one attains perfection. Therefore the devotee is not disturbed by these descriptions, because he knows that his passage to the supreme abode is guaranteed by devotional service.

 

Starting BG 9.26

 

If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I will accept it.

 

Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer or give away, and whatever austerities you perform--do that, O son of KuntI, as an offering to Me.

 

In this way you will be freed from bondage to work and its auspicious and inauspicious results. With your mind fixed on Me in this principle of renunciation, you will be liberated and come to Me.

 

PURPORT

One who acts in KRSNa consciousness under superior direction is called yukta. The technical term is yukta-vairagya. This is further explained by RUpa GosvAmI as follows:

 

anAsaktasya viSayAn

yathArham upayuJjataH

nirbandhaH kRSNa-sambandhe

yuktaM vairAgyam ucyate

(Bhakti-rasAmRta-sindhu 2.255)

 

RUpa GosvAmI says that as long as we are in this material world we have to act; we cannot cease acting. Therefore if actions are performed and the fruits are given to KRSNa, then that is called Yukta-vairAgya. Actually situated in renunciation, such activities clear the mirror of the mind, and as the actor gradually makes progress in spiritual realization he becomes completely surrendered to the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

 

Purport SB 4.29.55

 

The main fact is that one has to associate with a saintly person. In this age people are not going to search out a saint in the forest, so the saints and sages have to come to the big cities to make arrangements to receive the people in general, who are accustomed to the modern amenities of material life. Gradually such persons will learn that palatial buildings or comfortable apartments are not at all necessary. The real necessity is to become free from material bondage in whatever way possible. According to the orders of SrIla RUpa GosvAmI:

 

anAsaktasya viSayAn

yathArham upayuJjataH

nirbandhaH kRSNa-sambandhe

yuktaM vairAgyam ucyate

 

"When one is not attached to anything, but at the same time accepts everything in relation to KRSNa, one is rightly situated above possessiveness." (Bhakti-rasAmRta-sindhu 1.2.255)

One should not be attached to material opulence, but material opulence may be accepted in the KRSNa consciousness movement to facilitate the propagation of the movement. In other words, material opulence may be accepted as Yukta-vairAgya, that is, for renunciation.

 

SB 8.19.39p

 

Without the help of the body, one cannot follow a system of religion, nor can one speculate on philosophical perfection. Therefore, the flower and fruit (puSpa-phalam) have to be obtained as a result of the body. Without the help of the body, that fruit cannot be gained. The VaiSNava philosophy therefore recommends Yukta-vairAgya. It is not that all attention should be diverted for the maintenance of the body, but at the same time one's bodily maintenance should not be neglected. As long as the body exists one can thoroughly study the Vedic instructions, and thus at the end of life one can achieve perfection.

 

SB 9.4 Summary

 

From NAbhAga was born AmbarISa, the most powerful and celebrated devotee. MahArAja AmbarISa was the emperor of the entire world, but he considered his opulence temporary. Indeed, knowing that such material opulence is the cause of downfall into conditional life, he was unattached to this opulence. He engaged his senses and mind in the service of the Lord. This process is called Yukta-vairAgya, or feasible renunciation, which is quite suitable for worship of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Because MahArAja AmbarISa, as the emperor, was immensely opulent, he performed devotional service with great opulence, and therefore, despite his wealth, he had no attachment to his wife, children or kingdom. He constantly engaged his senses and mind in the service of the Lord. Therefore, to say nothing of enjoying material opulence, he never desired even liberation.

 

SB 9.9.47

 

Therefore I should now give up my attachment for things created by the external energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. I should engage in thought of the Lord and should thus surrender unto Him. This material creation, having been created by the external energy of the Lord, is like an imaginary town visualized on a hill or in a forest. Every conditioned soul has a natural attraction and attachment for material things, but one must simply give up this attachment and surrender unto the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

 

PURPORT

When passing through a mountainous region in an airplane, one may sometimes see a city in the sky with towers and palaces, or one may see similar things in a big forest. This is called a gandharva-pura, a phantasmagoria. This entire world resembles such a phantasmagoria, and every materially situated person has attachment for it. But KhaTvAGga MahArAja, because of his advanced KRSNa consciousness, was not interested in such things. Even though a devotee may engage in apparently materialistic activities, he knows his position very well. NirbandhaH kRSNa-sambandhe yuktaM vairAgyam ucyate. If one engages all material things in relation with the loving service of the Lord, one is situated in Yukta-vairAgya, proper renunciation. In this material world, nothing should be accepted for one's sense gratification: everything should be accepted for the service of the Lord. This is the mentality of the spiritual world.

 

CC Madhya 16.238p

 

Bhakti-rasAmRta-sindhu (1.2.108), it is said:

 

yAvatA syAt sva-nirvAhaH svI-kuryAt tAvad artha-vit

Adhikye nyUnatAyAM ca cyavate paramArthataH

 

"The bare necessities of life must be accepted, but one should not superfluously increase his necessities. Nor should they be unnecessarily decreased. One should simply accept what is necessary to help one advance spiritually."

 

In his Durgama-saGgamanI, SrI JIva GosvAmI comments that the word sva-nirvAhaH actually means sva-sva-bhakti-nirvAhaH. The experienced devotee will accept only those material things that will help him render service to the Lord. In the Bhakti-rasAmRta-sindhu (1.2.256), markaTa-vairAgya, or phalgu-vairAgya, is explained as follows:

 

prApaJcikatayA buddhyA hari-sambandhi-vastunaH

mumukSubhiH parityAgo vairAgyaM phalgu kathyate

 

"When persons eager to achieve liberation renounce things related to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, thinking them to be material, their renunciation is called incomplete." Whatever is favorable for the rendering of service to the Lord should be accepted and should not be rejected as a material thing. Yukta-vairAgya, or befitting renunciation, is thus explained:

 

anAsaktasya viSayAn yathArham upayuJjataH

nirbandhaH kRSNa-sambandhe yuktaM vairAgyam ucyate

 

"Things should be accepted for the Lord's service and not for one's personal sense gratification. If one accepts something without attachment and accepts it because it is related to KRSNa, one's renunciation is called Yukta-vairAgya." Since KRSNa is the Absolute Truth, whatever is accepted for His service is also the Absolute Truth.

 

 

KB 82

 

The family members of the Yadu dynasty and the cowherds of VRndAvana had their minds fixed on KRSNa. That is the symptom of all knowledge. And because their minds were always engaged in KRSNa, they were automatically freed from all material activities. This stage of life is called Yukta-vairAgya, as enunciated by SrIla RUpa GosvAmI. Knowledge and renunciation, therefore, do not mean dry speculation and renunciation of activities. Rather, one must start speaking and acting only in relationship with KRSNa.

 

Gitar Gan 3.19

 

ataev anAsakta haye kArya kara

yukta vairAgya sei tAte hao dRDha

anAsakta kArya kare parama padete

yogya hay krame krame se pada labhite

 

Text 19: Therefore, without being attached to the fruits of activities, one should act as a matter of duty, for by working without attachment one attains the Supreme.

 

5.12

 

karma-phal tyaji yukta vairAgya sAdhana

naiSThikI zAnti se, nahe saMsAra bandhana

phalgu vairAgya ye kAm kArI phal

phal-kArye nivandhana tAi se durval

 

Text 12: The steadily devoted soul attains unadulterated peace because he offers the result of all activities to Me; whereas a person who is not in union with the Divine, who is greedy for the fruits of his labour, becomes entangled.

 

 

Lectures an Conversations

 

The first-class yogi, who is? YoginAm api sarveSAM mad-gatenAntar-AtmanA: "Who is always thinking of Me, Hare KRSNa." Chant Hare KRSNa, and you always think if KRSNa. SmaraNam. SravaNaM kIrtanaM viSNoH smaraNam [sB 7.5.23]. This is bhakti-yoga, the simple practice, that if you chant Hare KRSNa, Hare KRSNa, KRSNa KRSNa, Hare Hare, tongue, your tongue is locked up and your hearing process is locked up. That is samAdhi, immediately, absorbed in the thought of KRSNa. SamAdhi.

Yoga practice means samAdhi, comes to the samAdhi point. This is samAdhi. Bhogaizvarya-prasaktAnAM tayApahRta-cetasAm, samAdhau na vidhIyate. But those who are too much materially attached, bhoga aizvarya, material opulence... Bhogaizvarya-prasaktAnAM tayApahRta-cetasAm. ApahRta, bewildered. They are thinking by this material enjoyment, by material opulence, they will be happy. Therefore it is called apahRta-cetasAm. They cannot. But if you practice this bhakti-yoga, vAsudeva... The whole KRSNa consciousness movement is vAsudeve bhagavati bhakti-yogaH prayojitaH [sB 1.2.7]. That's all. Why? Now, jJAnam and vairAgyam. JJAnam means we are misidentifying that "I am this body, and the bodily emanations, my sons, my daughters... I have got bodily relation with my wife. Therefore my wife, and the productions, the sons, then grandsons, then daughter-in-laws, then son-in-laws..." In this way, we are clustering round. So that should be not rejected at once, but it should be taken into KRSNa consciousness. Then even there is attachment, that is called Yukta-vairAgya, Yukta-vairAgya.

----

But RUpa GosvAmI says that "Dovetail with KRSNa consciousness." That is yukta vairAgya. Because in this human life we require to develop jJAna and vairAgya. So if we dovetail our activities for KRSNa's service, that is yukta vairAgya.

----

Where they have got this metal? This iron, wood, metal, everything, they have got from KRSNa. Therefore it has got relationship with KRSNa. Now, when it is manufactured, use it for KRSNa. That is Yukta-vairAgya. So we do not hate anything, material advancement. We can utilize everything for KRSNa's service. Our only preaching is that "Don't forget KRSNa." That is our business. And if you have got a special talent, utilize it for KRSNa.

----

Material life means we have accumulated some unwanted things. Just like this material body--this is also not wanted. But somehow or other, we have developed this, and as we have got this material body, we have got so many material necessities of life. So it is not that abruptly we have to give it up. But by Yukta-vairAgya, everything, the material activities, dovetailing with KRSNa consciousness, it becomes gradually purified, and we come to the final stage of understanding KRSNa. That is our success of life.

----

So we have to wind up from the material concept of life to the spiritual concept, or spiritual platform. That is called brahma-bhUtaH prasannAtmA na zocati na kAGkSati [bg. 18.54]. When... One who is on the spiritual platform, he has no more hankering, no more lamentation. Why he should be hankering? He knows that "I don't want anything material. Why shall I be hankering? Whatever is, I mean, barely required, I must be satisfied with that thing." So that is a, a very, not very nice proposal to the materially advanced world at this present moment. People will not accept it. Therefore this process, transcendental... Yukta-vairAgya. It is called Yukta-vairAgya. You just remain in your place. This is the facility of this Hare KRSNa movement, or KRSNa consciousness movement. You haven't got to change your place. You remain. You are student; you remain a student. You are businessman; you remain businessman. You are woman, man, or anyone, any, black, white, anyone--you remain in your position. Simply you try to hear.

SthAne sthitAH zruti-gatAM tanu-vAG-manobhiH. You just remain in your position. You simply hear. Kindly give your aural reception to this transcendental sound. Very simple process. No charges. We are not charging anything, that "You give us so many dollars, then I shall give you this mantra, Hare KRSNa." It is publicly distributed. You simply catch up and try it. You'll... Very quickly you'll come to the transcendental platform, and when you hear the chanting, that is transcendental meditation. This process is recommended in all scriptures of Vedic literature, and it is followed by Lord Caitanya and His disciplic succession for the last five hundred years, and people are achieving good result.

----

And in the BhAgavata, Sukadeva GosvAmI recommends that "Oh, this open field is your bed, this is your pillow, this is your pot, and the water in river is sufficient water, the tree is full of fruits, and in the cave, there is sufficient apartment. So why should you go, anyone, to ask for your shelter, for your food?" KasmAd bhajanti kavayor dhana-durmadandhAn: "Why should you approach the materialistic, puffed-up, monied men to give you some help?" So Sukadeva GosvAmI was strictly following this, strictly following, completely independent. That is not possible at the present day. (chuckles) If we imitate, that will be not good. We have to depose(?). Our GosvAmIs, they have prescribed Yukta-vairAgya: accept everything in relationship with KRSNa. Then it is Yukta-vairAgya. It is also vairAgya. SuSka-vairAgya and Yukta-vairAgya. SuSka-vairAgya means simply renunciation without assimilation. MAyAvAdI sect, SaGkara sect, they have got stringent laws for renunciation. But VaiSNavas, they have no stringent law. They accept everything as KRSNa-prasAdam, actually offering KRSNa, working for KRSNa, living for KRSNa. This is the best use. My Guru MahArAja used to say, "The best use of a bad bargain." Everything in KRSNa relationship. That is Yukta-vairAgya. NirbandhaH kRSNa-sambandhe Yukta-vairAgyam ucyate. Vairagya means detachment. So when we are attached to KRSNa, automatically we are detached to mAyA. Not artificially we want to be detached from mAyA. Just like theoretically I know that I am not this body, but the bodily necessities are there because I am encaged in the body. Therefore the bodily necessities--eating, sleeping, mating, defending--should be done in relationship with KRSNa. Then it is all right. Then my consciousness is always in KRSNa, and I am detached to my bodily demands. And those who are not KRSNa conscious, their bodily demands is on the materialistic platform.

----

No. If that steel, cement, and bricks are meant for preaching, then it is all right. But if there is difficulty, then sometimes we become absorbed in steel-cement. Steel-cement is not bad, provided it is meant for preaching. That is also spiritual. Nirbandhe kRSNa sambandhe Yukta-vairAgya. But because we are materialistic, sometimes steel and cement attracts us more than KRSNa. So this Bombay affair is giving me a little depression. Because so highly thought of, now these people they do not want to stay there. Just like this MahaMsa, DinanAtha, they do not wish to return. Something has to be done.

----

But we see everything has got KRSNa connection. Therefore we utilize it for KRSNa. Just like your talking about KRSNa, it is being recorded. So it is useful for KRSNa's service. Why shall I give it up? Because the airplane is there, therefore my preaching has been easier. In... Every year I am wandering all over the world, twice, thrice. Because it is aeroplane. So why shall I give it up? It is giving me facility to preach my KRSNa consciousness movement. Why shall I give it up? "It is mithyA." Just like the Jains, they do not ride on car. But if by going in a car, I can go and preach very swiftly and come back again, why shall I give up this car? So our philosophy not like that. NirbandhaH kRSNa-sambandhe yuktaM vairAgyam ucyate. It is Yukta-vairAgya. We have no attachment for all these things. We are sitting in this palatial building. That's all right. But we can talk these things underneath a tree. But if I sit down underneath a tree, nobody will come to me. (laughter) You see? So why shall I do that? This is our philosophy.

 

anAsaktasya viSayAn

yathArham upayuJjataH

nirbandhaH kRSNa-sambandhe

yuktaM vairAgyam ucyate

 

Yukta-vairAgya. After all, we have to practice vairAgya, non-attachment. But in connection with KRSNa, non-attachment is required. Otherwise, this non-attachment will not stay. Just like these... Now we are talking of mithyA, how do they consider mithyA. Because this artificial non-attachment will not stay. Therefore they say, "It is mithyA," but they're accepting it.

 

 

Glossary

 

Yukta-vairAgya -- befitting, real renunciation, in which one utilizes everything in the service of the Supreme Lord.

[gHari]

 

Madhya 23.105:

 

yukta-vairAgya-sthiti saba zikhAila

zuSka-vairAgya-jJAna saba niSedhila

 

yukta-vairAgya--of proper renunciation; sthiti--the situation; saba--all; zikhAila--instructed; zuSka-vairAgya--dry renunciation; jJAna--speculative knowledge; saba--all; niSedhila--forbade.

 

SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu then told SanAtana GosvAmI about proper renunciation according to a particular situation, and the Lord forbade dry renunciation and speculative knowledge in all respects.

 

PURPORT

This is the technique for understanding zuSka-vairAgya and yukta-vairAgya. In the Bhagavad-gItA (6.17) it is said:

 

yuktAhAra-vihArasya yukta-ceSTasya karmasu

yukta-svapnAvabodhasya yogo bhavati duHkha-hA

 

"He who is temperate in his habits of eating, sleeping, recreation and work can mitigate all material pains by practicing the yoga system." To broadcast the cult of KRSNa consciousness, one has to learn the possibility of renunciation in terms of country, time and candidate. A candidate for KRSNa consciousness in the Western countries should be taught about the renunciation of material existence, but one would teach candidates from a country like India in a different way. The teacher (AcArya) has to consider time, candidate and country. He must avoid the principle of niyamAgraha--that is, he should not try to perform the impossible. What is possible in one country may not be possible in another. The AcArya's duty is to accept the essence of devotional service. There may be a little change here and there as far as yukta-vairAgya (proper renunciation) is concerned. Dry renunciation is forbidden by SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu, and we have also learned this from our spiritual master, His Divine Grace BhaktisiddhAnta SarasvatI ThAkura GosvAmI MahArAja. The essence of devotional service must be taken into consideration, and not the outward paraphernalia.

 

SanAtana GosvAmI wrote his VaiSNava smRti, Hari-bhakti-vilAsa, which was specifically meant for India. In those days, India was more or less following the principle of smArta-vidhi. SrIla SanAtana GosvAmI had to keep pace with this, and his Hari-bhakti-vilAsa was compiled with this in mind. According to smArta-brAhmaNas, a person not born in a brAhmaNa family could not be elevated to the position of a brAhmaNa. SanAtana GosvAmI, however, says in the Hari-bhakti-vilAsa (2.12) that anyone can be elevated to the position of a brAhmaNa by the process of initiation.

 

yathA kAJcanatAM yAti kAMsyaM rasa-vidhAnataH

tathA dIkSA-vidhAnena dvijatvaM jAyate nRNAm

 

"As bell metal is turned to gold when mixed with mercury in an alchemical process, so one who is properly trained and initiated by a bona fide spiritual master immediately becomes a brAhmaNa."

 

There is a difference between the smArta process and the gosvAmI process. According to the smArta process, one cannot be accepted as a brAhmaNa unless he is born in a brAhmaNa family. According to the gosvAmI process, the Hari-bhakti-vilAsa and the NArada-paJcarAtra, anyone can be a brAhmaNa if he is properly initiated by a bona fide spiritual master. This is also the verdict of Sukadeva GosvAmI in SrImad-BhAgavatam (2.4.18):

 

kirAta-hUNAndhra-pulinda-pulkazA

AbhIra-zumbhA yavanAH khasAdayaH

ye 'nye ca pApA yad-apAzrayAzrayAH

zudhyanti tasmai prabhaviSNave namaH

 

"KirAtas, HUNas, Andhras, Pulindas, Pulkazas, AbhIras, Sumbhas, Yavanas and members of the Khasa races, and even others who are addicted to sinful acts, can be purified by taking shelter of the devotees of the Lord, due to His being the supreme power. I beg to offer my respectful obeisances unto Him."

 

A VaiSNava is immediately purified, provided he follows the rules and regulations of his bona fide spiritual master. It is not necessary that the rules and regulations followed in India be exactly the same as those in Europe, America and other Western countries. Simply imitating without effect is called niyamAgraha. Not following the regulative principles but instead living extravagantly is also called niyamAgraha. The word niyama means "regulative principles," and Agraha means "eagerness." The word agraha means "not to accept." We should not follow regulative principles without an effect, nor should we fail to accept the regulative principles. What is required is a special technique according to country, time and candidate. Without the sanction of the spiritual master, we should not try to imitate. This principle is recommended here: zuSka-vairAgya-jJAna saba niSedhila. This is SrI Caitanya MahAprabhu's liberal demonstration of the bhakti cult. We should not introduce anything whimsically, without the sanction of the bona fide spiritual master. In this connection, SrIla BhaktisiddhAnta SarasvatI ThAkura comments on these points by quoting two verses by SrI RUpa GosvAmI (Bhakti-rasAmRta-sindhu 1.2.255–256).

 

anAsaktasya viSayAn yathArham upayuJjataH

nirbandhaH kRSNa-sambandhe yuktaM vairAgyam ucyate

prApaJcikatayA buddhyA hari-sambandhi-vastunaH

mumukSubhiH parityAgo vairAgyaM phalgu kathyate

 

"When one is not attached to anything but at the same time accepts everything in relation to KRSNa, one is rightly situated above possessiveness. On the other hand, one who rejects everything without knowledge of its relationship to KRSNa is not as complete in his renunciation." To preach the bhakti cult, one should seriously consider these verses.

[Guest guest]

 

I doubt that Srila Prabhupada actually dictated this. Either it is a typo here or by the original transcriber since 'working with fruitive result' surely isn't the way to Krsna.

Thank you gHari. I have read the entire thread again and can see what you are saying here. Thanks for your patience.

[ng dasa]

 

Thank you gHari. I have read the entire thread again and can see what you are saying here. Thanks for your patience.

I posted this, forgot to log in, sorry.

[gHari]

From a collection of Srila Prabhupada's early Bengali essays now available in the book Renunciation Through Wisdom (Chapter 2 - The Science of Devotion):

 

 

The fruitive workers cannot be counted among the yogIs. The actual yogIs are the karma-yogIs, the jJAna-yogIs, the aSTAGga-yogIs, and the bhakti-yogIs. Factually they are the same, although named differently. The yogic process is like a ladder one ascends gradually toward the final goal of the Absolute Truth. NiSkAma-karma, or renunciation of the fruits of one's labor, is the first step on this ladder. When knowledge and austerity are added to it, it becomes jJAna-yoga, the second step in this ladder. And when meditation on the Supreme is added to jJAna-yoga, the third step is reached, namely aSTAGga-yoga. Finally, when loving devotional service to the Supreme Lord is practiced along with aSTAGga-yoga, it is transformed into bhakti-yoga. This entire successive process is yoga. For an exact and clear delineation of the subject of yoga, all four steps need to be explained separately. Those who desire the best for humanity take to the path of yoga. The process for progressing in yoga requires, first, determination and strict execution of discipline at each stage. When a person is firmly situated at one stage, he then has to relinquish attachment and adherence to the practices of that stage in order to elevate himself to the next higher stage. Those who cannot reach the top for some reason and get stuck at any one of the four stages acquire the designation of that particular stage. Thus there are karma-yogIs, jJAna-yogIs, aSTAGga-yogIs, and bhakta-yogIs. Lord KRSNa instructs Arjuna that one who renders loving devotional service to Him, the Supreme Lord, is the highest among all yogIs, and that Arjuna should thus strive to become such a bhakti-yogI.

 

The successive, step-by-step spiritual path is not the same as step-by-step progress in the material world. In the mundane process the rules of progress are strict and cannot be transgressed. If one wants to acquire a doctorate at a university, he has to begin from the elementary school level and gradually work upwards. It is impossible to go directly to the university without prior schooling. In spiritual life, however, although there are strict regulations, by the Supreme Lord's grace one can bypass many intermediary stages and reach the top, or "doctorate" level. One can attain this divine grace by intimate and constant association with the Supreme Lord. And such intimate association with the Lord comes about through confidential exchanges with a pure devotee of the Supreme Lord. Everyone of us is intimately and eternally related to the Supreme Lord, but due to the bad influence of mAyA we have forgotten our relationship with Him.

 

The living entities are like sons of the Lord, and as such they are rightful heirs to the great wealth of their rich father. But because of the reactions to sins committed in previous lives, they are roaming about without a home, suffering acute poverty. That the living entities are suffering is quite clear to all. But they do not know who their wealthy father is or where they can go to reclaim their valuable inheritance. Without proper knowledge, they are trying in vain to escape from their poverty while aimlessly roaming about like poor beggars. They meet many who promise to help them, but in the end such helpers turn out to be beggars themselves. A few among these strangers seem rich and prosperous, but the directions they give do not lead to the father's house, and so the living entities' poverty knows no end. The wealthy strangers suggest many paths, such as karma, jJAna, or dhyAna, but the problem of poverty remains unsolved. The living entities can escape their poverty only by learning and practicing the science of devotional service to the Supreme Lord. Caitanya MahAprabhu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the source of all incarnations, explained the science of devotional service to SrIla RUpa GosvAmI at PrayAga (Allahabad). These instructions are the crest jewel of teachings for all humanity. In SrI Caitanya-caritAmRta (Madhya 19.151), the Lord says,

 

According to their karma, all living entities are wandering throughout the entire universe. Some of them are being elevated to the upper planetary systems, and some are going down to the lower planetary systems. Out of many millions of wandering living entities, one who is very fortunate gets an opportunity to associate with a bona fide spiritual master by the grace of Lord KRSNa. By the mercy of both Lord KRSNa and the spiritual master, such a person receives the seed of the creeper of devotional service.

 

By the mercy of Lord KRSNa, this seed of devotion is available in the Bhagavad-gItA. Only one who is able to receive this devotional seed can understand the purport of the Bhagavad-gItA. Otherwise, simply repeatedly reading the Bhagavad-gItA and discussing its teachings will not produce any results.

 

In the Bhagavad-gItA, Lord KRSNa Himself reveals the truth about Himself. When an ordinary mortal writes an autobiography, he receives many accolades, but when the Supreme Lord writes about Himself, we unfortunately do not fully believe in His words. Furthermore, we overlook the cardinal issues in His writings and quibble over lesser subjects, trying to magnify them by giving them concocted connotations and meanings. This practice is stretched to such absurdity that the original meaning is lost and the lop-sided conclusions attract only ridicule from readers. In the Bhagavad-gItA Lord KRSNa unequivocally declares that He is the Supreme Absolute Truth and that it is the duty of everyone to render Him loving devotional service. The Bhagavad-gItA was revealed for the sole purpose of explaining these two principal points. One who understands them is eligible to begin spiritual life as a neophyte devotee. SraddhA, or faith, is the first prerequisite in spiritual life and is described as synonymous with neophyte devotion. Thus SrI Caitanya-caritAmRta (Madhya 22.62) says,

 

By rendering transcendental loving service to KRSNa, one automatically performs all subsidiary activities. This confident, firm faith, favorable to the discharge of devotional service, is called zraddhA.

 

----

 

Devotion's prime objective is the attainment of God. Therefore, one must offer the Lord everything in one's possession, including the results of karma-yoga, jJAna-yoga, mystic yoga, austerity, meditation, and so on. This perfect process of surrender will lead to the attainment of God. Thus Lord KRSNa openly proclaims in the Bhagavad-gItA (9.27),

 

yat karoSi yad aznAsi

yaj juhoSi dadAsi yat

yat tapasyasi kaunteya

tat kuruSva mad-arpaNam

 

Whatever you do, whatever you eat, whatever you offer or give away, and whatever austerity you perform--do that, O son of KuntI, as an offering to Me.

 

If a person follows this injunction and with love offers the Lord everything he has--wife, house, family, intelligence, learning, business, religiosity, labor, food, water, whatever is required to maintain the body, and even lust, greed, and anger--then the Lord accepts these offerings and completely satisfies the offerer. And at the time of death the Lord takes such a surrendered soul to His Supreme abode.

 

The demigods are empowered to accept only certain types of offerings, whereas Lord KRSNa can accept the karma-phala, or fruitive results, of everyone. The Supreme Lord alone is powerful enough to accept conflicting fruitive results and moods of worship. This indicates KRSNa's supreme lordship and absolute position. It is unlikely that all of humanity will be able to understand the science of pure devotional service, yet everyone always has the ability to attain the Lord's lotus feet, even in the face of striking odds. Therefore the best course is to offer everything to the Supreme Lord.

 

All the points we have discussed regarding niSkAma-karma are mentioned in detail in the scriptures. PaNDitas define niSkAma-karma as "activities free from the desire for fruitive gain or empirical knowledge." Only such transcendental activities can be offered to Lord KRSNa. But all activities--whether verbal, physical, or mental--are transcendental if offered to the Lord with love and devotion. And He duly receives these offerings by His causeless mercy.

 

----

 

Exerting oneself to satisfy one's own hunger is kAma-karma, fruitive activity, but to tirelessly toil to feed the Supreme Lord with delicacies is niSkAma-karma, transcendental work aimed at pleasing Him. Pleasing the Lord should be the sole purpose of commerce and trade, and also of research, science, charity, austerity, and all other activities. Such a practice will inspire one to hear and chant transcendental topics related to Lord KRSNa, and this hearing and chanting are the foremost of the ninefold devotional activities. In Vedic times, all human activities were strongly affiliated with devotional service to the Supreme Lord. Today the same eternal principle applies: everything must be utilized in the Lord's service.

[gHari]

In BG 2.1, I'd have to agree that 'by' indicates a definite causal relationship between "with/without fruitive (results) and in conception of real self" and self-realization. Whereas 'when' could mean that too or it could simply mean that only then (with/without fruitive and in conception of real self) do we realize the self.

 

Flying is possible by flapping my arms. Flying is possible when flapping my arms. Flying is possible when eating. Eating is possible when lying on my back. English is so inexact, if that's a word.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

I doubt that Srila Prabhupada actually dictated this. Either it is a typo here or by the original transcriber since 'working with fruitive result' surely isn't the way to Krsna.

I am also willing to accept that it is possible there was a word left out in the original transcript. There could have even been 10 words left out in the original transcript. The point is who is qualified to guess at what words were left out. If the present version can be logically explained and it remains consistant with gaudiya siddhanta, then why should someone start guessing at what might have been said and not written in the transcript.

 

 

Jayadvaita Swami asserted that the sentence "made no damn sense at all" and I showed that not only did it make sense, but it was in line with Gaudiya siddhanta. So what to do in such a situation? You can leave it as is, or you can start guessing and assuming as to what Prabhupada really meant, and guessing as to what words were left out of the original transcription. The guessing path is extremely dangerous and it offends so many devotees who hold Prabhupada's original words dear. As many have suggested, if any change needs to be pointed out, add a footnote below saying "the editors feel Prabhupada meant the following".

 

I believe if they would make available to the public 1) the original transcriptions of Prabhupada's Gita, and 2) a complete list of all changes made, then it would go half way to removing doubts because it would put their actions under the view of the worldwide devotee community.

 

I am sure there are a number of changes which are actually correcting genuine mistakes such as things in the original transcription that were cut out. But there are also a lot of suspect changes, and unless they make everything public there will be doubt in the minds of devotees.

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

Hari Bolo!

I humbly submit that I intend no offense in this posting as being critical isn't in the least the point here - this is just my humble observations on this matter.

We have the BBT Vedabase [from them] and we also have one we got from Krishna.org - the second one is supposed to be original - and it is in many places - but - it has some of the edits - like that noted in C.C. Madhya 19.157 - this is very unfortunate.

So when i quote Srila Prabhupada - I may still be quoting Jayadvaita - oh why doesn't he see what he's doing!

Of course it's exactly as Jndas has noted - the changes are [in part] to engender more authority for the leaders of ISKCON - in many cases - this may be a subtle thing - but - it is a valid point.

Also - I think that this may show that Jayadvaita is somewhat living within the past?

These materials have been widely published - for over 30 years - yes the devotees helped to edit these Books - in their original composition - one could say that these books are as much a part of those early devotees and that time - as they are a part of Srila Prabhupada and the represented Parampara.

Jayadvaita is thus trying to repose himself within the past in this manner?

In the real world one doesn't re-write books etc., - after they have been printed again and again - like Bhagavatam - it was in it's eighth printing in 1978 - so - by the 1990's - when it was being revised for it's continued printing - it was already circulating in so many other printings.

What if one were to take some other Books - by famous authors - books written long ago and - one were to do some of this type of editing - telling the world that these changes are closer to how it should be? Would the academic community accept these new books? No!

So here we have Jayadvaita trying to so-called appease the 'current' academic community in his changing the grammatic renderings of "He" to "he" - yet - Jayadvaita must be a kind of laughing stock [sorry to say!] among the academic community - for all these 'other' thousands of revisions - obvious revisions - not corrective edits.

So since Srila Prabhupada's original books are on the shelves of many of the Universities around the world and they are being used 'as is' now for decades - are they to be replaced? Which excuses shall they give these schools for such an exchange program?

So BBT should consider that the changes they are endorsing are in the end going to undermine the existing respect that is held for Srila Prabupada's Books - a respect gained without any post-publication edits.

My 'first book' was Bhagavad Gita 'As It Is' - 1972 version - the undiluted version - we also have the revised edition and - i just don't like the 'new' book - because that's what it is.

There must be pressure on BBT to reverse all these changes - they MUST publish Srila Prabhupada's books etc., as they are - not as they want them to be.

Here are some quotes which I'm sure they know [and i hope these too haven't been changed!]:

...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... [sSR ch. 2]

...Just like a bearer, peon. Somebody has written you letter, the peon has got the letter. It does not mean he has to correct it or edit it or addition or... No. He’ll present it. That is his duty. Then he is guru. He’s honest... [Lecture August 22, 1973]

...We have to edit in such a way, present our literature in such a way that it will be gospel truth.... [Conversation May 25, 1972]

That is certainly a past tense instruction - this was in 1972 - when Srila Prabhupada was present and playing a direct part of the 'edit' process - as evidenced by his use of the word "we" - the other part of my point here is that most of these changes seem to be to his 'purports' and not his verse translations...

So what we are now getting is Jayadvaita's purports to Srila Prabhupada's purports and - without any index of changes for us to look at - that's apparently what we've got now isn't it.

What shall be the end result of all this? What differences of opinion shall exist in the community of devotees due to these changes - depending on the 'versions' of the books which each of us have?

Jayadvaita and the BBT have thus seeded the community of devotees with so many possibilites for Vani schisms - wasn't that fact obvious to them when they decided to do all this revising? As if there wasn't enough 'divisions' in opinion within our community.

I often hear that senior devotees do not feel a sense of respect from the second and third generation of devotees - is this due in part to the particular 'version of' Srila Prabhupada's Teachings each respective generation has learned from? Does this make any sense?

Even in the proper academic world so-called post-publication editorial revisions are in general added as foot-notes within later printings - so what happened here? That method however - may have been acceptable in theory - but - with the number of and - the nature of these revisions - such foot-notes would appear quite akward all throughout the books etc., - wouldn't they...

So here in this exchange - there would appear to be some akward direction to them [in their minds] to edit the Teachings of Srila Prabhupada - I'm sure they've cited this point to critics:

...Pusta Krsna: Srila Prabhupada?

Prabhupada: Yes

Pusta Krsna: After your meeting this morning with Gopala Krsna, he brought up this point that maybe it would be necessary to edit the books, because...

Prabhupada: Hm?

Pusta Krsna: It might be necessary to edit the books because in these countries when they start reading about God and how we say this government is rascal, rascal, this and that, that...

Prabhupada: Yes.

Pusta Krsna: Do you think it is necessary?

Prabhupada: It will be necessary when there will be criticism.... [Morning Walk March 15, 1976]

So in that regard they may say they are very busy trying to add to and take away from his books - all to cover this point.

We can surmise though from this conversation that he wasn't advocating a replacement - only a time and circumstances revision.

With all the 'originals' in circulation it's too late for that - add to this the internet and the dissemination of the Books online - more people than ever can see the Books and - the changes. The websites dealing with these changes aren't all that hard to locate.

I would add - how many lectures has Jayadvaita given in the matter of context - in the matter of understanding the proper context of the various explications Srila Prabhupada has given the world on this point or that - for a simple example - in general - what Srila Prabhupada says within his written purports have more general application to 'one and all' - than the points presented within his letters. It's important that we ALL know this.

It's also important to understand Srila Prabhupada's application of time and circucumstance measures and not to confuse instructions that are past tense with those that are omni-tense.

So please BBT we pray thee - just deliver Prabhupada's message as a good peon...

BDM

[Bhakta Don Muntean]

"This realization is made possible by working with the fruitive being situated in the fixed conception of the real self.." [bG 2.1, purport]

For sake of discussion - here is the point made in that purport just previous to the noted quote:

This chapter instructs us in self-realization by an analytical study of the material body and the spirit soul

I've noticed that my krishna.org vedabase has no comma at all after the word "fruitive"...

Who cannot understand it anyway - the point is not about a 'fruitive being' - really - comma or no comma - neither is needed to see that.

It's 'by working with the fruitive' - and - 'being situated in' - that is quite obvious. Makes sense to me.

The point to understand this - might be reflected in BG 4.9:

One who knows the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities does not, upon leaving the body, take his birth again in this material world, but attains My eternal abode, O Arjuna.

So what is that?

the transcendental nature of My appearance and activities

Take that contrasted to:

realization is made possible by working with the fruitive being situated in the fixed conception of the real self

This contrast goes to the heart of understanding this point in BG 14.22:

knowing that the modes alone are active

This is further explained in BG 13.30:

One who can see that all activities are performed by the body, which is created of material nature, and sees that the self does nothing, actually sees.

So as we work with our fruitive activities and - while being fixed in the conception of the real self knowing that the modes alone are active - we can see the transcendental nature of our own appearance and activities - to at last - see that all activities are performed by the body, which is created of material nature, and to see that the self does nothing - at least not until the soul engages in transcendental activities.

BDM

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

Fruitive appears to have only been an adjective, not a noun.

In the original transcription it was an adjective of "result", i.e. "fruitive result". But in the first edition it became a noun "the fruitive" by leaving out the word result.

 

Original:

 

this realisation is possible by working with fruitive result being situ ated on fixed up conclusion of the real self.

Regardless, even if the word result was re-inserted, the meaning remains identical:

 

This realization is made possible by working with the fruitive result, being situated in the fixed conception of the real self.

 

Again the meaning remains crystal clear without the need to assume which words Prabhupada had intended to speak.

 

[vijay]

What do you think of this?

by Jayadvaita Swami

Posted March 11, 2006

 

Thank you to Vyapaka Prabhu (and internet news sites) for highlighting two excellent examples of how the older editions of Srila Prabhupada’s books differ from the newer, more carefully edited ones.

Here are those examples again (this time followed by the original text from which they came):

Bhagavad-gita As It Is

 

• 1972 Edition:

  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.

• 1983 Edition:

  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.

• Srila Prabhupada's original manuscript (Chapter Two was personally typed by His Divine Grace):

  To discharge one’s specific duty in any field of action and as ordered by higher authority is the opportunity for being elevated in higher status of life.

Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya 19.157:

 

• 1975 Edition:

  If one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master.

• 1996 Edition:

  Even if one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krishna Consciousness Society, still one should stick to the Society; if one thinks the Society's members are not pure devotees, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master.

• Original transcript:

  If one thinks in the Society there are many so-called devotees or there are so many nondevotees, still one should stick to the Society, and if one thinks the Society members are not pure devotees, he can directly keep company or in touch with the spiritual master. If there is any doubt he should consult the spiritual master.

As you can plainly see, in both cases the later edition sticks more closely to Srila Prabhupada’s originally recorded words.

 

There are two types of changes that are occuring, the first is simple obvious errors made in the original transcription process - and these corrections are bringing it closer to how Prabhupada's original dictations were. But then there is another category of changes that Jayadvaita Swami doesn't like to discuss, and those are changes of context and meaning "I think Prabhupada really meant this..." Two such examples have recently been cited on www.harekrsna.com/sun. These types of changes are where they completely change what Prabhupada said to fit his words into their institutional agenda. To cover up these changes, they keep pushing forward the explanations for the first category of corrections - "look, we're giving you more Prabhupada."

Let's look at the two exampls given on the site I mentioned above:

"...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."

Original Bhagavad-gita As It Is 2.31

"...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.." - Revised & Enlarged Bhagavad-gita 2.31

The original told us to act in accordance with the scriptures (i.e. varnashrama dharma), whereas the new version tells us to to act under the guidance of our temple president, Guru and GBC.

And here is a second example:

Current Version: "Even if one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krishna Consciousness Society, still one should stick to the Society; if one thinks the Society's members are not purey devotees, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master." CC madhya 19.157

Original Version: "If one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master." CC madhya 19.157