More book changes

http://www.harekrsna.org/gbc/themes/books2.htm

More Book Changes

Jayadvaita's Bhagavad-gita As It Isn't

- The Unauthorized Bootleg -

IRG - 28/3/99 (From com.)

The following is an exchange of comments from the Varnasrama development conference which I thought you may be interested in.

Hari!

Janesvara dasa

On 10 Mar 1999, Janesvara Dasa wrote:

Maybe I'm just a fanatic about VAD, but changes to Srila Prabhupada's books like the following give me little hope that ISKCON is really interested in moving toward fulfilling Srila Prabhupada's orders to implement varnasrama-dharma. Personally, I would be scared to death to make such changes without Srila Prabhupada's personal review and approval. Of course, I'm not a pure devotee like.....

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.

On 11 Mar 1999, Janesvara Dasa wrote:

On 11 Mar 1999, Tattvavit das wrote:

"I forwarded this to Jayadvaita Swami, who recently started a conference called Gita Revisions, on which he explains these things. Please join the conference."

I am afraid to "join" such a conference. To try to justify such changes can only be a very unnecessary entanglement in mental speculation. The books were fine as they were when Srila Prabhupada was present. IF there were additional changes that Srila Prabhupada MAY have approved before he left but Jayadvaita did not get a chance to get them approved by Srila Prabhupada personally, well that's tough luck. We have to accept Krsna's plan that He directed Srila Prabhupada to make the necessary changes to the books while he was present and after that we accept what he gave us as "perfect" enough for us and everyone else for the next 10,000 years. It can only be impertinence to think that they are making changes assuming Srila Prabhupada would have approved of them when they know he disapproved of many changes they previously thought were proper changes. Are they speaking to Srila Prabhupada secretly without our knowledge?

The only discussion should be an apology to Srila Prabhupada and stopping all changes and recalling all changed books. They are Srila Prabhupada's books - leave his things alone! If they don't like the way they were on the day Srila Prabhupada left the planet, too bad. I like them just fine as they are.

If they want to write their own Bhagavad-gita and other books that's fine. Leave it to the general public and devotees to choose which books they will read. But to change someone elses books without their personal permission and approval is downright rude and obnoxious. Jayadvaita should be knocked on the head with his own danda. Maybe he will wake up from this nightmare.

After these changes, the Bhagavad-gita "As It Is" by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami is no longer "As It Is". I am not saying that Jayadvaita and Dravida have nothing of value to say or that they are not learned in philosophy. They may be able to write very nice Krsna conscious books of their own. I've known them for 25 years and I always liked both of them very much. But if they want to make changes they HAVE to write their own books and put their name on them - not A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami's. This cannot be allowed. There is simply no honor in it.

On 11 Mar 1999, Janesvara Dasa wrote:

On 11 Mar 1999, Tattvavit das wrote:

"Janesvara Prabhu's reply (at the very bottom) is a long sermon, but he is unwilling to admit any ignorance."

I'll admit to all the ignorance you want me to. I am not very intelligent. I struggle to remember Krsna throughout the day. But I am trying! I could not make any edits or changes to Srila Prabhupada's books except maybe some spelling errors which I have seen in them over the years. I am not an English major or anything. Srila Prabhupada accepted Jayadvaita's service in editing the books which I fully accept and this is a nice service just like the pot washers in the temple or any other good bhakta service. It's all preaching.

I simply do not see what this has to do with the subject. Could you please answer me the one simple question:

If Srila Prabhupada disallowed certain changes that the editors proposed before he left the planet, and they were thinking that those changes were perfectly acceptable based on their level of knowledge, how can they make changes now which cannot be proposed to Srila Prabhupada for his approval?

And, how can they know that Srila Prabhupada would accept those changes??? It is clearly impossible!!

I have no problem with Jayadvaita writing his own Bhagavad-gita. Why is this not an agreeable alternative? He can include every change that he wants in his own version - Bhagavad-gita As It Is According to Jayadvaita Swami. It could be helpful to certain Scholars and others.

On 11 Mar 1999, Janesvara Dasa wrote:

On 11 Mar 1999, Madhusudani Radha wrote:

"I agree that the changes you just posted seem drastic and I'm really curious to hear what Jayadvaita Swami will say to explain why they were made. Until then, I reserve judgment."

Oh sure, be patient and nice and make me look like a putz!! ;-)

"However, there are other changes I've read about, which made perfect sense to me, e.g. when the original eidtion contained errors by the transcriptionist that were discovered. In those cases, Prabhupada's words were actually *restored*. So it's not a question of Jayadvaita Swami or Dravida Prabhu writing their own books in Prabhupada's name."

Maybe it's just my simpleton mind, but the whole thing just seems to deny the true and exact "picture" of how Krsna wanted Srila Prabhupada's books to be. Srila Prabhupada's transcendental "karma" or pastimes created the books in a certain way that have been read by thousands, millions?, of people with incredible results. I don't believe Harvard's Professor Cox ever mentioned that they are nice books but should be cleaned up a little. There are so many quotes from Srila Prabhupada about not changing a thing in HIS books UNLESS he approves of the changes. He simply cannot make those approvals now and that was Krsna's choice of taking him from here and leaving his books as they were - even full of little "errors". I think Krsna in His divine wisdom could have kept Srila Prabhupada here a little longer if He really felt it necessary to make additional changes to the books.

If Srila Prabhupada were present right now would the editors make changes to the books and publish them without Srila Prabhupada's approval?

"Can't we make a distinction between changes that are purely technical (e.g. due to mishearings of tapes, transcription errors ...) and changes that involved subjective judgments and actually changing Prabhupada's words? I'd like to know what proportion are of each variety. I have absolutely no problem with the former kind, but would be much more concerned about the latter one."

The problem is that those who have assumed this role of editing, post-Prabhupada's-right-to-approval, have made some of these "latter" kind of changes which, with all due respect, creates some suspicions as to their intentions or, maybe more accurately, their level of realization. It is not that they are not devotees/disciples but everyone must admit we are talking about very, very holy ground here - The Books!

"Prabhupada wanted his books to be the law books for humanity for a very long time. It seems like a nice service to make them as authentic and technically correct as possible."

When he left the planet did he say to finish/continue editing his books? No. The only thing he said was "unfinished" was his desire to implement varnasrama-dharma. Let's stop wasting time on anything else and try to spend the majority of our time trying to fulfill this advice. The books have certainly "worked" fine for thousands of disciples just As They Are.

" I don't think the fact that Prabhupada didn't complain about all the errors while he was here is a valid argument for keeping them. Thinking about the enormous volume of books he produced in a very short time (what to speak of all of the other things he did), some errors were bound to slip through. I don't see why that means they have to remain for all times though."

Fine. But let them write their OWN versions of Bhagavad-gita and the other books and they can tell everyone what changes they made and why. This is the only honorable thing to do when Srila Prabhupada cannot be here to defend himself from things that he had to stop previously. If you asked Srila Prabhupada if he is worried about what "people" will think of him and his movement with his books left the way they were before any unauthorized changes were made, what do you think he would say? Honestly.

On 12 Mar 1999, Janesvara Dasa wrote:

On 12 Mar 1999, Hare Krsna dasi wrote:

"This still sounds fanatical to me. I am certain that there are at least some corrections that Srila Prabhupada very much wanted made."

But he has the right to approve them personally. They are HIS books. What is wrong with his books exactly the way they are? Can someone NOT become Krsna conscious reading them due to some "imperfections" according to the English language (which leaves much to be desired as a language, especially for spiritual realization).

"On the other hand, that literature which is full of descriptions of the pastimes of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, forms, pastimes, etc. of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation, full of transcendental words directed toward bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world's misdirected civilization. Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest."

(Srimad-Bhagavatam Introduction)

"What is your objection to an annotated edition, which would give the editors a chance to reveal Srila Prabhupada's original intent? What is your objection to Stitha-dhi Muni's suggestion of parallel texts presented side by side? If everything is presented openly and it is left to the reader to decide the merit of each change, I cannot understand how you can still object."

I do not remember ever objecting to such a publication. But I will never agree that it can be published in A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami's name. Let them put it in their own name and explain it however they want. I have no objection to this.

"To object to all and any changes of Hayagriva's Bhagavad-gita As It Is still sounds fanatical to me."

Personally, I think Lord Krsna had a lot more to do with the way the Books turned out than Hayagriva. But then, I'm a fanatic.

On 27 Mar 1999, Jayadvaita Swami wrote:

Please feel free to post this message

2.31, purport (last sentence):

[NOTE: I have capitalized the relevant portions, to make them stand out.]

1ST 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.

2ND 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.

MANUSCRIPT: 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.

COMMENT: This revision seems to have become a topic in the "Varnasrama Development" conference on COM, under the subject heading "Editing varnasrama-dharma out of the books?" As you can see, the answer is

"No. Restoring what Srila Prabhupada said."

By the way, I could have further edited the sentence from the First Edition to bring it still closer to Srila Prabhupada's words. But my goal was to keep the sentence from the First Edition nearly intact and yet still restore Srila Prabhupada's point. I believe the revision does that.

Hare Krsna.

PS for members of the "Varnasrama Development" conference:

"MANUSCRIPT" refers to the original manuscript of "Bhagavad-gita As It Is," which for this chapter was apparently typed by Srila Prabhupada himself.

SUBSCRIPTION AND COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

This is an "information-only" conference, not a discussion conference. The only person who can post texts to it is me. (Queries and comments may be sent to me privately.)

The conference is public. If you are a member of COM, the BBT e-mail system, you can join or leave it on your own--no need to send a request to the Sysop or to me. E-mail users who are not on COM can join or leave the conference by sending me a request at <jayadvaita.swami@com.bbt.se.

The First and Second Editions of "Bhagavad-gita As It Is" are © 1972, 1983 by The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. Except where I have included quotations from other publishers, the rest of this message, and of the conference as a whole, is © 1999 by The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. All rights reserved.

Hare Krsna.

On 27 Mar 1999, Jayadvaita Swami wrote:

2ND 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.

MANUSCRIPT: 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.

COMMENT: This revision seems to have become a topic in the "Varnasrama Development" conference on COM, under the subject heading "Editing varnasrama-dharma out of the books?"

As you can see, the answer is "No. Restoring what Srila Prabhupada said."

Aside from a distinct feeling of implied condescension, there is also an underlying arrogance which is supposed to be accepted without question it seems.

It is NOT what Srila Prabhupada said. If it was, the revision would be exactly what was stated in the manuscript. Therefore Jayadwaita Prabhu has clearly interpreted what he thinks Srila Prabhupada "should" have said instead of what he actually said. (Personally, I think "serves to elevate one" in his 2^nd edition can be interpreted quite differently from the manuscript's "is the opportunity for".) That is besides the point.

The main point is SOMEONE changed the manuscript's words to read VARNASRAMA-DHARMA and Srila Prabhupada NEVER said to change it. For years and years the words had been read by Srila Prabhupada without question. The editors of the time substituted the words VARNASRAMA-DHARMA and presumably Srila Prabhupada approved those edits. Do we have evidence to the contrary? Solid evidence? Or are we just supposed to accept without question the "higher authorities" interpretation? Sorry, I did that with Bali Mardan and had to suffer the shame of Srila Prabhupada calling me a fool for doing so. Never again (I hope!).

You would think after all the "pure devotees" like Ramesvara, Kirtanananda, Bhagavan, Harikesha, etc., etc. ad nauseum, have come and gone, they would realize that things need to be dealt with on a more democratic platform amongst Godbrothers. We are all in this together. Don't we all have a say in such grave matters before some few individuals just go ahead and change things? Who gave them the authority? Is it in writing that Jayadvaita could make edits to the books AFTER Srila Prabhupada left the planet?

The HUGE thing that the editors back then had, which Jayadwaita Prabhu will NEVER have, was Srila Prabhupada's personal presence to approve of changes to HIS own books. The "gurus" are always stressing "personal bodily presence of the guru" for their own guru worship support but I guess it does not apply here when it comes to changing the words of the Guru Maharaja?

Jayadvaita Prabhu himself stated, after the Bhagavad-gita As It Is was published, that Srila Prabhupada never said that the book should be re-edited. Certainly no "unnecessary changes" should be made. Jayadvaita Prabhu has made more than 4000 changes since his statement. Are none of these "unnecessary"?

I heard Srila Prabhupada recite/read, directly, many of the exact same verses and purports from his Bhagavad-gita As It Is which have now been changed by Jayadvaita. Why didn't Srila Prabhupada make a note and tell the editors to change them after he read them and gave a lengthy perfect lecture about them?

It is another good example of bad leadership. Changes to the MOST important asset of this movement, the Books, without the benefit of Srila Prabhupada's approval of the same, should have FIRST been presented to the general population of devotee citizens for their consensus approval. If I was a leader of ISKCON, I would want to be completely in tune with "my" citizens. What are they thinking? What would they do? How do they feel about this or that? Our two (2) greatest examples of leaders, King Prithu and King Rama, always consulted with their public citizens about their legislative and governing issues. If the public was at odds the Kings would alter their decisions, even if they themselves disagreed with the public. Lord Rama KNEW that Sita devi was chaste and pure but because the general public was doubtful and critical of the relationship, He made other arrangements for Her in order to appease the citizens.

He set aside His unquestionable authority for the greater good of the citizens. That is leadership and courage and intelligence.

Thousands of Srila Prabhupada's disciples are at odds over this Book edit issue and yet no concerted effort has ever been made to ask FIRST before making the changes.

They should at least call their book by its rightful name (which even common publishing pirates use): Jayadvaita's Bhagavad-gita As It Isn't - The Unauthorized Bootleg. Get it now while its HOT!

P.S. The questions that they (the editors) have not answered yet still remain: If Srila Prabhupada were here (bodily), would they make edits/changes and publish them WITHOUT his approval? (The answer BETTER be NO. Otherwise we've got bigger problems.)

And if not, why wouldn't they publish them without his approval? (I know it's obvious to some of us but I'm still curious to hear the answer).

email: irg@zetnet.co.uk

homepage: http://www.irg.zetnet.co.uk

Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!

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