Arsa-Prayoga

Latest Articles

Debating “The Blessed Lord”
A Facebook post by Ajit Krishna Dasa discusses Śrīla Prabhupāda’s objection to the phrase “Blessed Lord said” during a 1970 lecture, arguing it was theologically inappropriate. However, he asserts that, while this objection is significant, it does not mean the phrase was inherently impersonal or unsuitable. Dasa presents evidence of Prabhupāda using the term both before and after the objection, emphasizing that the expression remained prevalent in his teachings. He contends that the post does not adequately consider Prabhupāda’s acceptance of “Blessed Lord” and argues for a balanced view, suggesting annotations instead of edits to preserve the original text alongside Prabhupāda’s preferences. The evidence therefore demands a broader and more careful reading rather than a conclusion based on one isolated statement.
Continue reading →: Debating “The Blessed Lord”

Hari-Sauri’s Defense of the Book Changes — and Why It Fails
The article critiques Hari-śauri Dāsa’s defense of posthumous editing of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s works, particularly in response to Rūpānuga Dāsa’s concerns about authority in altering these texts after Prabhupāda’s passing. Rūpānuga argues that no explicit instructions were provided by Prabhupāda allowing such revisions, emphasizing the need for clarity on editorial authority. Hari-śauri’s response focuses on specific changes he deems improvements without…

Why Jayadvaita Swami Changed “Phalanx” in Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita — and Why It Matters
The article discusses the implications of changing Srila Prabhupada’s term “military phalanx” to “military formation” in the Bhagavad-gita As It Is, arguing that such editorial changes can undermine the authority of the guru. It highlights Jayadvaita Swami’s rationale for the change, emphasizing his own retrospective acknowledgment of excessive pickiness. The author asserts that the decision reflects a broader editorial mentality…

“Taking Center of Krishna” Makes Perfect Sense
The posthumous edits to Bhagavad-gītā 9.32, substituting “taking center of Kṛṣṇa” with “taking shelter of Kṛṣṇa,” reflect an editorial simplification that may obscure deeper meanings. The original phrasing emphasizes Kṛṣṇa as a central point in life, enhancing understanding of spiritual orientation beyond mere refuge, showcasing the richness of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s philosophical expressions.

Hayagriva Prabhu versus Posthumous Editing: Eleven Problems with Jayadvaita Swami’s Method
Hayagriva Prabhu’s lifetime editorial service is compared with Jayadvaita Swami’s posthumous revisions, revealing eleven serious problems involving authority, method, consistency, and fidelity to Śrīla Prabhupāda’s published books.

How Can a Pure Devotee Make Mistakes and Still Never Be Wrong?
The article argues against the notion that “there are no mistakes” in the writings of pure devotees. While pure devotees do not commit material mistakes in spiritual understanding, their literary works may contain conventional errors. Recognizing these discrepancies does not undermine their transcendental status, illustrating the distinction between external faults and spiritual integrity.

Why The “Family Tree” Explanation Does Not Work
By Ajit Krishna Dasa Introduction Not everyone who is against the changes to Srila Prabhupada are in agreement about everything. Madhusudana Dasa has recently proposed an unusual defence of the phrase “planet of trees” in the purport to Bhagavad-gita 10.29. According to his explanation, “trees” should be understood as “family trees” or “genealogical trees,” and “planet of trees” would therefore…

Is Jayadvaita Swami Better Than Srila Prabhupada?
In that sense, the revised Bhagavad-gita does not merely arise from the “kill guru” mentality. It contaminates its readers with the same mentality by normalizing it and presenting it as service to Srila Prabhupada.

“You Can Never Change the Acharya’s Books—Never!”
Gunarnava das shares a vivid account of a powerful moment with Srila Prabhupada where he expressed intense anger over his Godbrother’s suggestion to change his books. Prabhupada emphasized that he acted as Krishna’s dictaphone, underscoring the sacredness of his writings. This encounter profoundly impacted Gunarnava, who now promotes the original texts.

Asta Sakhi Devi Dasi Remembers Srila Prabhupada: “From My Own Realizations of the Verse”
Asta Sakhi Devi Dasi recounts the launch of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita in London, emphasizing that Prabhupada intended translations reflecting his realizations, not strict transliterations. She criticizes Jayadvaita Swami for altering the text, claiming it diminishes Prabhupada’s integrity. The current GBC’s actions against original publications are seen as disrespectful to Prabhupada.

Open Letter to Bhakti Vikasa Swami: “Having Once Been” Does Not Mean “Having Been Created”
Ajit Krishna Dasa responds to Bhakti Vikasa Swami’s critique of the 1972 Bhagavad-gītā translation, defending Śrīla Prabhupāda’s wording. He argues that “having once been” does not imply the soul’s creation, clarifying that the full verse explicitly denies birth. Dasa emphasizes preserving the original text while allowing for clarified annotations.

How Can a Pure Devotee Make Mistakes and Still Never Be Wrong?

The article argues against the notion that “there are no mistakes” in the writings of pure devotees. While pure devotees do not commit material…
Earlier Drafts Are Not Final Authority

The argument posits that posthumous revisions to Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Bhagavad-gītā As It Is cannot supersede the author-approved editions. Manuscripts often reflect incomplete or error-laden…
The “Rascal Editors” Conversation – Then and Now

The post-samādhi editing of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books was a concern even during his lifetime, as he encountered unauthorized changes. He emphasized the necessity of…
About the Arsa-Prayoga Blog

By Ajit Krishna Dasa The term “Arsa-Prayoga” means we should not correct the transcendental mistakes sometimes made by the acaryas. We can only correct…