“As long as the BBTI do not make philosophical changes, then their changes are all okay!”
Dear Jaya Krsna Prabhu! Dandavat pranam! Jaya Srila Prabhupada!
Our previous chat was very messy and unstructured. It was not possible for either of us to present our arguments and points in an orderly way. Therefore let us now start a debate where we focus on some concrete points. I suggest we start with your above request:
Jaya Krsna Dasa (JKD):
“Whenever possible, please share any verse you found which is philosophically completely against what Srila Prabhupada taught because of this change. I mean only philosophical changes only, not any other type of changes”
Now, there are a few significant things about this request of yours. It has an implied premise, namely that:
“All changes that are not of a philosophical nature are okay.”
The truth of this implied premise can be disproved by quoting Jayadvaita Swami and the BBTI:
“As you know, and as we kept in mind while doing the work, Srila Prabhupada staunchly opposed needless changes.” (Jayadvaita Swami, Letter to Amogha Lila, 1986)
Now, as we see Prabhupada did not did not only disapprove of philosophical changes to his books. He also disapproved of “needless changes”. Therefore, if we can find any needless changes in his books, we know that Jayadvaita Swami and the BBTI have done something wrong. My contention is that Jayadvaita Swami and the BBTI have made many needless changes. Too many.
Here is one example:
“And the covers, if possible, should always be the same for each respective book regardless of what language it may be printed in.” (Letter to Jadurani, Bombay, January 3, 1975)
So why have the BBTI changed the covers of many of the books? This seems to be completely needless. Prabhupada loved the original cover. It was very special. It was popular. It made devotees. Why change it? We have asked the BBTI and Jayadvaita Swami why the cover was changed. But we have not received any reply.
Maybe you can answer this question, dear Jaya Krsna Dasa Prabhu?
Read more about the changes to the covers here:
So now I have:
1. Argued against your implied premise, and therefore against the validity of your question.
2. Presented positive evidence that the changes of the covers are against Srila Prabhupada’s instructions.
Now you have to:
1. Defend your implied premise, or admit that your question is invalid.
2. Argue against my points about the covers, or admit that you either cannot answer it, or that it is in fact against Srila Prabhupada’s instructions to change them.
3. Possibly present further points on the matter of the book changes.
Ajit Krishna Dasa