Category Archives: Arsa-prayoga

08.07.14
by

The “Book Changes” Conflict (Parasurama Dasa)

Parasurama_leading_kirtan_in_Oslo

BY: PARASURAM DAS (From Sampradaya Sun)

Aug 05, 2014 — UK (SUN) — We arrived in Scandanavia for the Rathayatra tour (7 Rathayatra festivals). The first words I heard from a local devotee were “thank you for defending Srila Prabhupada’s original books”. Then I noticed devotees wearing T-shirts promoting BBT printing. Yep, we have a conflict.

In this age of Kali there are few things we can agree on. At least we all agree on the Mahamantra being chanted, and we used to be able to agree on the purity of the books. It was an argument that set us above other “religions” who had watered down their books. But now we are in danger of disunity again over something that could have been avoided. Even the famous barking dog video revolved around the book changes.

All the deviations in our history had one thing in common: the concept that Srila Prabhupada was inaccessible or insufficient. Zonal Acharyas, Gopi Bhava Club, Narayana Maharaj, Hinduism, etc. Some groups still remaining within ISKCON still believe that Srila Prabhupada’s books are not Sabda Brahman. Not one word nor one full stop should be changed. Srila Prabhupada taught us this principle:

“So unless one is self-realized, there is practically no use writing about Krsna. This transcendental writing does not depend on material education. It depends on the spiritual realization. You’ll find, therefore, in the comments of Bhagavatam by different acaryas, even there are some discrepancies, they are accepted as asat-patha. It should remain as it is.” (Lecture, Vrindavana, March 31,1976)

It was Krishna’s arrangement that Jayadvaita Swami and Dravida prabhu made so many mistakes and unnecessary changes, as it has highlighted our offence of seeing Srila Prabhupada’s books in a relative way. Even though Srila Prabhupada said that discrepancies should remain unchanged the BBT ignore this, and even worse, make changes when there is no discrepancy. There are many cases where the manuscript and the original edition are in agreement, and with perfectly good grammar. One example is the many times that “owner of the body” has been changed to “knower of the body”. The BBT conveniently avoids talking about this.

07.02.14
by

Debate: Ter Kadamba Das versus Ajit Krishna Dasa

The following exchange between Ter Kadamba Das (disciple of Kadamba Kanana Swami, who is disciple of Jayadvaita Swami) and Ajit Krishna Dasa took place on facebook Tuesday 1st Juli 2014.

14324279_675617275936525_8383774334663058082_oTer Kadamba Das preaching: “Ask a Monk – Any Topic”. Well, when  asked about the book changes he deleted my questions and blocked me on facebook!

Ter Kadamba Das: For some odd reason there is still some confusion in ISKCON about book editing. I think this article should clear everything up: http://www.sivaramaswami.com/en/2010/01/02/“the-mystery-of-the-edited-books”/

And

Ter Kadamba Das: “Prabhupada has on some occasions found errors in text he personally wrote, and complained about the lack of editing.”

Ajit Krishna Dasa: Dear Ter Kadamba Prabhu! Dandavat pranam! Jaya Srila Prabhupada!

You wrote:

“Prabhupada has on some occasions found errors in text he personally wrote, and complained about the lack of editing.”

Prabhupada wanted his English edited, but to a limited degree only. Where does Prabhupada state that he wants his personally typewritten sanskrit translations edited? In the Rascal Editor conversation (1977) Prabhupada specifically became angry at changes to his sanskrit translations:

Prabhupada: The nonsense, they are… They are correcting my trans… Rascal.

In 1977 Srila Prabhupada also said they could only divide the synonyms – not change them:

Prabhupada: This of should be strictly forbidden.
Radha-vallabha: So no corrections. That makes it simple.
Prabhupada: They can divide the synonyms. That’s all.
Radha-vallabha: Synonyms. So even…
Prabhupada: That is his tendency, to correct. That’s very bad. He should not do that.
Radha-vallabha: So I’ll just forget this, then.
Prabhupada: The system is: whatever authority has done, even there is mistake, it should be accepted.
Radha-vallabha: Oh.
Prabhupada: Arsa-prayoga. That is ha… He should not become more learned than the authority. That is very bad habit….
Prabhupada: Why finish it? Whatever is done is done. No more….
Radha-vallabha: Well, now that this system of no corrections anywhere, that makes it very simple. Then he can’t do anything. I don’t think he wants to, either. It makes it more simple for him. It makes him very uncomfortable.
Prabhupada: No corrections.
(Room Conversation 27 february, 1977)

In chapter one of the 1983 edition of Bhagavad-gita there are around 130 changes to Srila Prabhupada’s own personally typewritten sanskrit translations. You can see the change here:

TAMPERING WITH PRABHUPADA’S PERSONALLY TYPEWRITTEN SANSKRIT TRANSLATIONS (BG, CHAPTER ONE):

https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/…/tampering-with…/

CHANGES TO PRABHUPADA’S PERSONALLY TYPEWRITTEN SANSKRIT TRANSLATIONS (STATISTICS FOR BG, CHAPTER ONE):

https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/…/changes-to…/

If any links are broken I shall gladly provide them.

65.92% of the changes to the sanskrit synonyms in chapter one are “Modifications not according to Srila Prabhupada’s draft while the original edition follows Srila Prabhupada’s draft.”

In light of the above statements from Srila Prabhupada, how is this justified?

Jayadvaita Swami has not only corrected mistakes. I have documented this in an e-book. Here in something from the introduction:

Many changes have been made to Srila Prabhupada’s books since his departure in 1977. As we all know this has caused a lot of controversy.

This e-book presents new evidence to the effect that the BBT International, and Jayadvaita Swami in particular, have overstepped their authority by making changes that Srila Prabhupada did not want.

The articles in this e­-book will show you that the changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books cannot be justified by arguments like

• We are changing Srila Prabhupada’s books back to what he actually said in his original manuscript.
• We are making the book “Closer to Prabhupada”.
• We are only correcting grammar, commas, capitalization etc.
• We are only correcting the mistakes of previous editors
• No unnecessary changes have been made

On the contrary, these articles will document that the BBT International have

• Deleted many of Prabhupada’s own chosen words and sentences (even those also found in his ”original manuscript”)
• Added their own words and sentences (which means these word and sentences are also not to be found in the ”original manuscript”)
• Changed Prabhupada’s own personally typewritten sanskrit translations.
• Made unnecessary change of syntax (sentence structure).

We humbly ask that you read this e‐book, and also visit the website http://www.arsaprayoga.com for much more information and many more examples of changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books.

Thank you!

The e-book can be found here.

Looking forward to your kind reply, prabhu!

Your servant,
Ajit Krishna Dasa

Ter Kadamba Das: Ajit krishna Prabhu. I deleted your comment because I find it offensive to the Vaisnavas. Jayadvaita Swami is my param guru, and I cannot allow you to use my timeline to blaspheme him. The gaudia vaisnava parampara is a siksa line, and that means we don’t just read Prabhupada’s books and then speculate on the meaning – we check with the senior devotees, the self realized souls, if we have understood correctly. You do not do that, and that makes your arguments invalid. Even worse is to take segments of letters or conversations (rather than the books themselves) in order to push our own issues. I posted an article by HH Sivarama Swami because that makes it authorized. Whatever I may come up with in my tiny brain is superfluous if I don’t check it with the self realized souls. The same goes for you. You have effectively sacrificed the association of the devotees in order to push your issue about the book editing, and I find that sad. I don’t mean to attack you, I am truly writing this in an attempt to help you, even though it may not seem so. For what it is worth, I consider you a devotee of the Lord, and I believe you are honestly trying to serve Prabhupada to the best of your ability. Hare Krishna my friend!

Ajit Krishna Dasa: Dear Ter Kadamba Prabhu! Dandavat pranam! Jaya Srila Prabhupada!

You say you find my comment offensive. If you hear blasphemy of devotees there are three things you can do. In the Nectar of Devotion it is stated:

“If someone is heard blaspheming by words, one should be so expert that he can defeat the opposing party by argument. If he is unable to defeat the opposing party, then the next step is that he should not just stand there meekly, but should give up his life. The third process is followed if he is unable to execute the above-mentioned two processes, and this is that one must leave the place and go away.” (NOD, Ch. 9, Blasphemy)

Instead of deleting my comment it would have been better service to your param guru if you had defeated my arguments.

You say I do not consult senior devotees to check my understanding. In fact I do. I have quite a network of senior devotees and friends whom I consult often, and who encourage me in my opposition against the changes to Srila Prabhupada books. I have simply chosen to listen to OTHER senior devotees than you listen to. You have used your discriminative powers and chosen your authorities, and I have used my discriminative powers and chosen mine (including my own Guru Maharaja who was against the changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books).

Our respective authorities simply contradict each other on certain points. If we want to find out who is correct regarding the book changes, and who is actually blaspheming who (am I blaspheming your param guru, or is your param guru blaspheming Srila Prabhupada?), then we have to see who’s points are backed by guru, sadhu and sastra, logic and observation.

If you had answered the points I raised in my comments, then we actually would have had a chance to settle the matter and see who of us is actually following bona fide authorities.

You claim I “take segments of letters or conversations (rather than the books themselves) in order to push our own issues.” But as I mentioned before, instead of simply deleting my comment and throwing unsubstantiated accusations it would be a better service to your param guru if you actually defended your own case with the help of guru, sadhu and satra, logic and observation.

In order to defend your case, and thus bring this exchange to a befitting level of intelligence, you need to show specifically what is wrong with the points I presented, including whatever quotes from Prabhupada I posted.

I hope you will do that, and I hope to hear from you soon.

Your humble servant,
Ajit Krishna Dasa

—

Ter Kadamba Das deleted both my above comments shortly after they were posted. Later he deleted the whole thread, including his own opening statement.

04.13.14
by

Deleting “whatever” (Bg. 6.26)

Bg. 6.26:

Srila Prabhupada’s draft (so-called original manuscript):

Screenshot 2014-04-13 12.00.37

Original and authorized 1972 Macmillan edition:

“From whatever and wherever the mind wanders due to its flickering and unsteady nature, one must certainly withdraw it and bring it back under the control of the Self.”

BBT International’s posthumously edited 1983 edition:

From wherever the mind wanders due to its flickering and unsteady nature, one must certainly withdraw it and bring it back under the control of the Self.

What did Srila Prabhupada think about the verse?

Visnujana: Verse twenty-six: “From whatever and wherever the mind wanders due to its flickering and unsteady nature, one must certainly withdraw it and bring it back under the control of the Self [Bg. 6.26].”

Prabhupada: This is the process. This is yoga system. Suppose you are trying to concentrate your mind on Krsna, and your mind is diverted, going somewhere, in some cinema house. So you should withdraw, “Not there, please, here.” This is practice of yoga. Not to allow the mind to go away from Krsna. (Lecture on Bhagavad-gita 6.25-29, Los Angeles, February 18, 1969)

The words translated as “whatever and wherever” is “yataḥ yataḥ”. In the 1972 Macmillan edition the word for word looked like this:

 yataḥ-whatever; yataḥ;-wherever

In BBT International’s 1983 edition this is changed to:

yataḥ yataḥ — wherever

Unfortunately these word for word synonyms are missing for 6.26 in the so-called original manuscript. But we do find something in Srimad-Bhagavatam:

yataḥ yataḥ — from whatever and wherever; (SB 7.15.32-33)

As a side note: This verse from Srimad-Bhagavatam in about the same subject as Bg. 6.26:

While continuously staring at the tip of the nose, a learned yogi practices the breathing exercises through the technical means known as puraka, kumbhaka and recaka — controlling inhalation and exhalation and then stopping them both. In this way the yogi restricts his mind from material attachments and gives up all mental desires. As soon as the mind, being defeated by lusty desires, drifts toward feelings of sense gratification, the yogi should immediately bring it back and arrest it within the core of his heart. (SB 7.15.32-33)

Again we left with the conclusion that Jayadvaita Swami and the BBT International are not bringing Srila Prabhupada’s books “closer to Prabhupada”. They are violating Srila Prabhupada’s, sastra’s and their own stated editing guidelines by making both needless and harmful changes in Srila Prabhupada’s books.

03.27.14
by

Jayadvaita Swami takes a step in the right direction

It seems that finally the BBT International has been listening to the arguments presented by many concerned devotees and is now taking a step in the right direction by putting Jayadvaita Swami’s name in the edited edition:

Andrew Whitlock wrote in a mail to Jayadvaita Swami:

“Firstly I noticed that Your name does not appear on the re edited version.”

Jayadvaita Swami replied:

“It will appear in the “Note about the Second Edition” in upcoming printings.”

To be completely honest, transparent and follow academic rules Jayadvaita Swami’s name ought to appear on the front cover of the book, so everyone – in advance – will know that this is a posthumously edited book.

An example of how it is supposed to be done is here:

1485908_574307139305587_32311085_o
Of course, eventually we need to have Jayadvaita Swami’s edited version of Bhagavad-gita As It Is (and all other posthumously edited versions of Srila Prabhupada’s books) completely eliminated. But as long as the BBTI insist on violating the sastric rule of arsa-prayoga, they at least should mention it on the books.

 

03.18.14
by

Jayadvaita Swami’s Reward (Bg 4.11)

Screenshot 2014-03-13 10.45.34Jayadvaita Swami

By Ajit Krishna Dasa

BG 4.11:

So called original manuscript (Srila Prabhupada’s draft):

Screenshot 2014-03-18 21.02.45Click to enlarge picture

Original and authorized 1972 Macmillan edition:

All of them—as they surrender unto Me—I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Pṛthā.

BBT International’s posthumously changed 1983 edition:

“As all surrender unto Me, I reward them accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Pṛthā.”

Hayagriva Prabhu was true to Srila Prabhupada’s words here. Jayadvaita Swami’s 1983 version is not! Why?

There is NO explanation of why this change was made on the BBTI’s website. I wonder why, since they write:

“Want to see the actual revisions made for Bhagavad-gita As It Is, Srimad-Bhagavatam, and Teachings of Lord Caitanya? You’ve come to the right place.” (BBT International’s website)

And on Jayadvaita Swami’s “annotated scans” which are categorized under “See the changes” on BBTI’s website there is no annotations made to verse 4.11.

Regarding these “annotated scans” BBT International’s website says:

“When Jayadvaita Swami made his revisions for the second edition of Bhagavad-gita As It Is, he did them directly on a copy of the book–that is, a copy of the first edition. After the second edition was published, for many years his first-edition copy was lost. But back in roughly 2006, Dravida Dasa found it in a trunk in San Diego. More recently, that copy has been scanned and digitized. And now the BBT is putting it here online.”

Apparently not all the changes made to Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is are to be found in this “annotated scan” that all of a sudden mysteriously re-appeared. Why do they not write that not all changes are mentioned in this “annotated scan”? Are they trying to hide some of the changes from the public?

How did Srila Prabhupada feel about verse  4.11 as it appeared in his 1972 Macmillan Bhagavad-gita As It Is:

Prabhupada: So the original verse says that “All of them as they surrender unto Me, I reward accordingly. Everyone follows my path in all respects.” This means that everyone is searching after that absolute truth. Some of them are satisfied with impersonal feature. The philosophers, jnanis, they, because they want to understand the absolute truth by dint of their imperfect knowledge.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Bhagavad-gita 4.11-18 — Los Angeles, January 8, 1969

Prabhupada: “All of them — as they surrender unto Me — I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.” God is everything, and we can associate with Him according to our choice.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Interview with the New York Times — September 2, 1972, New Vrindaban

Cyavana: Krsna says, “All of them, as they surrender, I reward accordingly.” So that means they are surrendering in different…
Prabhupada: Yes. He has not surrendered. He keeps himself separate from Krsna, and he is, artificially he shows surrender. Surrender does not mean that you reserve something for you. That is not surrender. Surrender means without reservation. That is surrender.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Morning Walk — November 1, 1975, Nairobi

Pradyumna (leads chanting): Translation: “All of them, as they surrender unto Me, I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.”

Prabhupada:

ye yatha mam prapadyante
tams tathaiva bhajamy aham
mama vartmanuvartante
manusyah partha sarvasah
[Bg. 4.11]

Everyone is seeking to find out Krsna. Directly or indirectly. Krsna means the all-attractive. All-attractive. Bhagavan means the all-attractive Supreme Personality of Godhead. So indirectly or directly, everyone is seeking Krsna, the all-attractive. Ananda-mayo ‘bhyasat. The Supreme Bliss.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Bhagavad-gita 4.11 — Bombay, March 31, 1974

Nitai: “All of them — as they surrender unto Me — I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.”

ye yatha mam prapadyante
tams tathaiva bhajamy aham
mama vartmanuvartante
manusyah partha sarvasah
[Bg. 4.11]

We are continuing from yesterday’s subject matter, how one can become purified and go back to home, back to Godhead.
Here the second line of this verse is very important. It is said, mama vartmanuvartante manusyah partha sarvasah: “All human being is searching after Me.”

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Bhagavad-gita 4.11 — Geneva, June 1, 1974

Prabhupada: This is page one-hundred-eighteen, yes.
Tamala Krsna: “All of them as they surrender unto Me, I reward accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.” Purport: “Everyone is searching after Krsna in the different aspects of His manifestation. Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is partially realized in His impersonal brahmajyoti or shining effulgence. Krsna is also partially realized as the all-pervading Supersoul dwelling within everything, even in the particles of atoms.”
Prabhupada: It [the microphone] is not fixed up right.
Tamala Krsna: “But Krsna is only fully realized by His pure devotees. Therefore, Krsna is the object of everyone’s realization, and as such anyone and everyone is satisfied according to one’s desire to have Him. One devotee may want Krsna as the supreme master, another as his personal friend, another as his son, and still another as his lover. Krsna rewards equally all the devotees in their different intensities of love for Him. In the material world the same reciprocations of feelings are there and they are equally exchanged by the Lord with the different types of worshipers. The pure devotees both here and in the transcendental abode associate with Him in person and are able to render personal service to the Lord and thus derive transcendental bliss in His loving service. As for those who are impersonalists and who want to commit spiritual suicide by annihilating the individual existence of the living entity, Krsna helps them also by absorbing them into His effulgence. Such impersonalists do not agree to accept the eternal, blissful Personality of Godhead, and consequently they cannot relish the bliss of transcendental personal service to the Lord…”
Prabhupada: Yes.
Tamala Krsna: “…and they extinguish their individuality.”
Prabhupada: God realization, there are three aspects: brahmeti paramatmeti bhagavan iti sabdyate [SB 1.2.11].

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Bhagavad-gita 4.11-18 — Los Angeles, January 8, 1969

Again we see that Jayadvaita Swami’s and BBT International’s claim to fame – namely that they are making the books “closer to Prabhupada” – is false propaganda. Many, many changes – hundreds (if not thousands) – are further away from the words that Srila Prabhupada originally wrote or dictated.

Their claim about not making needless changes is proved false by the changes to Bg. 4.11, since this change is not at all needed.

Does Jayadvaita Swami and the BBTI trustees ever ask themselves this question: If making all of these changes is our way of surrendering to Srila Prabhupada, then what will our reward be?

03.13.14
by

“Mendacious Tamohara” – The newbie GBC chairman

By Gopinath Dasa

Recently, the ambitious corporate climber, Tamohara dasa/GBC Chairman, posted on ISKCON cheerleading­­­ website a deceptive letter addressing the devotees and the temples, where they should purchase their books. He is attempting to self-righteously clamp down on distribution of the ORIGINAL Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita on the pretext that it is not authorized by Srila Prabhuapada’s created BBT.

TamoharaTamohara Dasa

The purpose of ‘his’ letter is based on their (GBC) need for continuation of intentional ‘dumbing down’ of naïve devotees that is unfortunately based on complete lie and deception that most of rank and file devotees are not aware of. GBC/BBTI wants to completely control and systematically undermine Srila Prabhupada created ISKCON, BBT and his real teachings which are based on pure devoti­­­­­onal principles.

Their lie and deception is twofold;

1) Firstly, after Srila Prabhupada’s departure they fraudulently and secretly incorporated their own private BBT called BBT INTERNATIONAL, that illegally replaced Srila Prabhupada’s BBT in their attempt to usurp total control and to put a stop to distribution of original Srila Prabhupada’s books. Replacing them with their own revised editions that was mentally contrived by Jayadvaita swami.

Within this fraudulent BBT INTERNATIONAL (as per FORM TX – For a Literary Work – United States Copyright Office Registration form) Srila Prabhupada is not even mentioned. In point 2 of the form the ‘NAME OF THE AUTHOR is given as – The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust. There is no mention of Śrīla Prabhupāda as the author of the Bhagavad Gītā As It Is. Why? “

This opens up a Pandora’s Box of questions…

  1. For example why is there any need for a “Corporation” to assist the BBT in its service?
  2. Who authorized the establishment of the BBTi  to “acts\” as an authorized agent”
  3. Why does this ‘authorized agent’ for Śrīla Prabhupāda’s BBT now have the ‘copyrights’ for Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books?
  4. What or who stopped the BBT from printing his Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books in their original unedited format as a natural process after Śrīla Prabhupāda entered into Samādhi?

Is there any authorization from Srila Prabhupada stipulating that his books should be edited after his entrance into Samādhi?

And if there is no authorization for editing or printing Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books, why are they doing it, especially after it is creating so much controversy amongst Śrīla Prabhupāda direct disciples? 

Following is what the BBT International say is the relationship between the BBT and BBTi.

BBT? BBTI? Who’s who?

The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust (BBT) is a California religious trust that owns the copyrights to the works published by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada during his lifetime.

The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International (BBTI) is a California corporation that has acted as an authorized agent of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust since 1988. The BBTI also owns the rights to some later works.

The BBT and BBTI work together to protect Srila Prabhupada’s rights and serve his will.

The important aspect of this subterfuge is that no one really knows what is going on… First they say that Śrīla Prabhupāda ‘owns’ the copyright of his book as per the BBT documentation but and it is a big but, what is this document where it shows the BBTi have the copyright of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Bhagavad Gītā As It Is???

What Bhagavad Gītā are they copyrighting? Is this their way of replacing Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Gītā with their own edited version so it can be edited ad infinitum all the while leaving Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Gītā gathering dust archived somewhere?

This also begs the question how many of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books have they done away with him as the author and placed the BBT as the author, leading the unsuspecting devotees to believe that they are reading and distributing Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books but in actual fact these are reading and distributing phony books.

I would not be surprised if in the future they openly say that these are not Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books at all, bearing in mind they ‘legally’ state that these books are ‘authored’ by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust.

The general devotees are so dumbed down to accept anything that the BBTi does or say as gospel truth or should we say ‘emet’ truth.

Consequently, once Śrīla Prabhupāda’s ‘as it is’ stance based on the ‘absolute truth” is undermined by the subjective truths of individuals such as Jaya Advaita Swami, then his books become ‘open game’ for any future BBT corporation/board and corporate members to edit according to their own interpretations of the truth that are fashionable at the particular time, place and circumstances.

Due to this ‘interpretive methodology’ of ‘these rascal editors’ which is based on so called academically contrived secular critical analytical study of texts, they can effortlessly indoctrinate devotees into the acceptance of hermeneutic (interpreting) views, that majority of ISKCON leaders are already habituated with, and are already steering our once glorious institution into the realm of mundane religion (cheating religion) a.i. Mayavadism, Sahajiyism, Hinduism, PC-ism, Corporatism, sentimental Veganism etc…

Devotees such as Ravindra Swarup, Tamala Kṛṣṇa Goswami, Kṛishna Kestra and Hridayananda etc, being heavily influenced and attached to secular academics have basically turned Śrīla Prabhupāda’s ‘as it is’ principles which are based on the understanding that truth is ‘absolute’, into truth being more in the realm of relativistic truth or truth that is malleable according to one’s personal cultural/psycho-physical background/realization/desire/preference.

Here is one but small example of such theorizing;

“The hermeneutical circle or interpretative horizon of scripture for modern readers has exploded out into the entire range of presently available texts drawn from an ever-increasing spectrum of religious and secular traditions. Canonical works no longer enjoy the seeming autonomy they once had, nor are they impervious to scrutiny from outside readers. The top-down, “vertical” process of receiving spiritual truth from infallible scripture is now, more than ever before, faced with the pervasive presence of a multiplicity of voices that challenge the privileged position of any one of them (Taken from – Constructive Theologizing for Reform and Renewal Thomas Herzig (Tamal Krishna Goswami) and Kenneth Valpey (Krishna Kshetra Das)”

2) Secondly, over the years they conjured a plethora of false rhetoric’s to justify and rationalize their big deceptive lie. However any individual, who takes the time to study the issue, will soon recognize that all their feeble excuses are based on bluffing and cheating and nothing else.

a) We are re-writing Srila Prabhupada’s books to appease Academia so we will be recipients of approval by them with a pat on the back whilst telling us “good ‘little’ boys”.

b) We are re-writing the books to make it “closer” to Srila Prabhupada`s drafted version.

Unfortunately, everything that they rationalized and justified up till now is one BIG FAT, and SMELLY LIE. I urge the readers, who are not sufficiently educated with this important matter to visit the https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/ to see and analyze the comprehensive evidence that completely exposes them and indentifies them for what they really are.

Since the latest groundswell of the devotees questioning and clearly exposing this BIG fraud, Jayadvaita swami is out of fear resorting to a wicked non-vaisnava behavior in order to bamboozle the naïve devotees and perhaps himself, into believing his deception.

Some time back he wrote an article “Book Changes: History Backs the BBT” lying thru his teeth in the attempt to bamboozle devotees that Hayagriva prabhu never worked together with Srila Prabhupada on Bhagavat-gita. Sadly, for him it back fired on Jayadvaita Swami, when his article was completely and chronologically refuted by Madhudvisa prabhu in article titled Jayadvaita’s Smoke and Mirrors which was a response to what appears to be a planned, conscious and intentional lie on the side of Jayadvaita swami in hope to completely erase Hayagriva pr, from the pages of ISKCON ‘real’ history, and replacing it with his own deconstructed history.

Due to the BBT’s standing on perpetual editing of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books it has forced devotees who want to see Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original books to be printed and distributed (which is after all the stated purpose of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s BBT) they have resorted to printing his books themselves – for example KBI and in particular Jitarati Prabhu’s printing of the ‘Pocket sized Bhagavad Gītā ’ which by the way was a huge success selling out nearly all 100,000 books that they printed!

You have to pause and think about this for one moment… One Hundred Thousand (100,000) of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original unedited books! Now this only goes to show that people want his unedited books!

Their success has so infuriated Jayadvaita swami that in his rage he began calling these books ‘rittvik’ books! Not only did he label them rittvik books he also began actively preaching to devotees not to purchase read or distribute these ‘rittvik’ books!

How pathetic is that? He is trying to say that Srila Prabhupada did not write the original books, but the evil RITTVIK`s DID IT!!!!!! ….HELP HELP HELP…save us from rittviks…and their evil “Original Srila Prabhupada” books. Come on Jayadyaita swami, how low can you go?

Naturally, when Jayadvaita swami was asked did Srila Prabhupada give him or anyone for that matter any instruction/consent to re-write his book “ad infinitum” after his departure, his answer is NO. Yet he disobediently continues with his offence to our glorious spiritual master.

WHICH MAKES ME WONDER WHO IS HE WORKING FOR, SINCE HIS ACTIONS CLEARLY AFFIRM THAT SRILA PRABHUPADA IS NOT HIS AUTHORITY AT ALL?

This is a very important point to consider especially when he would be loved rather than hated by many of his godbrothers if he spent his time and efforts to publish Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original books instead of putting our whole Vaiṣṇava society in such a hurtful and disheartening dilemma by spending not only countless hours scouring Śrīla Prabhupāda’s works to find what he perceives as an error or fault in the works of the uttama adhikāra devotee of Lord, editing those works and then publishing what he believes is the more superior/authoritive work.

While we are at it and going on the principle of establishing ‘shadow’ bodies to supersede the bodies that Śrīla Prabhupāda established, I would like to ask the GBC mouthpiece Tamohara dasa, why did they secretly and systematically privatize Srila Prabhupada’s created ISKCON, transferring the control into illegally created ‘shadow’, such as GBC of West Bengal, BBT International corporation etc, that have they own laws and by-laws and are diametrically opposed to the ones created by Srila Prabhupada. Huh, mister mouthpiece, please tell us???

However, I know that we will not hear from Tamohara nor any other GBC and BBTI corporate members (cronies), about this secret hijacking of Srila Prabhupada`s ISKCON, and its replacement with this Fraudulent ISKCON. CALLED FISKCON. We know that you want to keep this secret, because you know if the rank and file devotees wake up to how devious your agenda really is, they will have a revolution and unceremoniously kick you all out onto the curb.

Nevertheless, with time the devotees are waking up, just like is with the case of devious book changes of yours and are becoming more and more educated and enlightened with your secret plans, hence the time will come for you where you will not be able to bamboozle innocent no more and your ivory towers will come crumbling down like a deck of cards, with you in it.

Looking forward to seeing this day taking place

The main question devotees must be asking is – why are the BBT trustees relentlessly and ruthlessly pursuing this course of action? If all their efforts were placed on the printing of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original books and making sure the Temples were distributing his books we would not be involved in such terrible controversies for all these years, wasting so much time resources and money that the BBT could use to print more books.

Gopinath dasa

02.21.14
by

BBTI makes extreme changes to Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers (22 pages deleted)

12.25.13
by

Prabhupada on Brahma-Samhita: It should be left as is!

Help us by “liking” and “sharing” this post!

Sri_Brahma-Samhita-cover

In Brahma Samhita by Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, Introduction, page xvi (page 7 in the PDF):

“…As per Srila Prabhupada’s instructions regarding the publication of this volume, Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati’s somewhat technical and sometimes difficult prose has been left intact and virtually untouched. Fearing that any editorial (grammatical and stylistic) tampering with Bhaktisiddhanta’s text might result in inadvertant changes in meaning, Prabhupada asked that it be left as is, and the editors of this volume have complied with his wishes…”

Ramesvara Prabhu remembers regarding that same publication og Brahma Samhita:

“What about the incorrect grammar? “Prabhupada’s reply, “You cannot change one comma, not even a comma, not even a punctuation mark, that is the etiquette.” So that was just another one of those super heavy instructions that the etiquette in dealing with a great acarya’s books is that whatever he has done it’s eternal and it can never be changed. And I believe that all of this was part of Prabhupada’s training us . He wanted to train people who would be entrusted with his books.” (Ramesvara, Interview 1979)

The Brahma-Samhita was published with only very slight editing done:

  • Typographical errors was corrected.
  • Capitalization was standardized.
  • Sanskrit terms in devanagari script appearing within the English text was transliterated.
  • Already transliterated terms have been adjusted to international standards.
  • The original devanagari text was added for each verse. It was followed by roman transliteration, and then by a word-for-word translation into English (none of these appeared in the original edition).

This very limited editing of Brahma-Samhita were made under the instructions of our Sampradaya-Acarya, Srila Prabhupada, who is a pure unalloyed devotee of the Lord. No mistakes and no offenses would be made as long as he supervised and approved the work. In addition, the editors were honest and wrote in the introduction precisely what they did to the original work. The BBT International should also be honest by letting the readers know what they did to Prabhupada Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Something like this ought to be written:

Despite the fact that Srila Prabhupada educated us in the vedic principle of arsa-prayoga that state that the words of the acarya should not be corrected, we, the editor’s, have made extensive posthumous changes and corrections to Prabhupada’s personally typewritten sanskrit translations. We have also added completely new words, sentences and paragraphs and made re-arrangement of words and sentences. Original paintings and pictures have been removed and exchanged with new ones. We have also removed the foreword and changed the cover. All editing is done without the approval of the author. We can’t guarantee that our editing is free from mistakes, or that the author would be pleased with the editing.

12.09.13
by

Tampering with Prabhupada’s personally typewritten sanskrit translations (BG, Chapter One)

Please help us by “liking” and “sharing” this post!

Skærmbillede 2013-12-09 kl. 22.03.15

The text below was sent to the BBT International through their website (http://www.bbtedit.com/contact) and to Jayadvaita Swami and Dravida Prabhu’s personal e-mails (jswami@pamho.net, jayadvaita.swami@pamho.net, dravida108@gmail.com) the 7th Feb. 2014. We asked them to comment on the points raised.

So far we have not received any reply. 

By Ajit Krishna Dasa and Bhaktin Anna Nygaard

In regard to the posthumous editing of Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is, Jayadvaita Swami has expressed (emphasis added by Arsa-Prayoga staff):

1982:

“Comparing each verse in the book with the text of the manuscript, I made only those changes that to me seemed worthwhile. I tried to be conservative and not make needless changes.” (Jayadvaita Swami, letter to senior devotees, October 25, 1982)

1986:

“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)

1995:

“When Srila Prabhupada conveyed to us the conclusions of the previous acaryas, he did so perfectly, preserving and transmitting the philosophy exactly as it is, neither watering anything down, nor covering anything over, nor leaving anything out. He gave us the essence of everything.

We therefore don’t need to add anything, subtract anything, or change anything. We need only faithfully serve Srila Prabhupada’s orders, and everything will be revealed.” (Jayadvaita Swami, Sri Vyasa Puja book August 19,1995)

2009:

On BBT International’s website we find this video:

Transcription of the video:

“Arsa-Prayoga is a very important principle. The editor should never have the mentality that he’s better than the author, that he has something more to contribute than the author does, that the author really doesn’t know what he is doing, but he knows what he is doing. That’s offensive! And that is…ruins everything! It is an offense to the acarya. The idea, however, that this sort of sanctity that the author’s text has, or that the words of the author have, somehow extends to the mistakes of the editors…is weird! “It’s an offense to correct the mistakes of previous editors!” Are they acaryas? Are they paramahamsas? Are they infallible? They are wonderful devotees, they did wonderful service. But they made mistakes. Understandably.”

Summing up Jayadvaita Maharaja’s standpoints from the above:

In 2009 Jayadvaita Swami admits that the principle of arsa-prayoga is very important, and that it is an offense to violate it. He admits that Prabhupada’s text has sanctity, and that the editors of Prabhupada’s books should never think they are better than Prabhupada and has more to contribute than Prabhupada.

In 1995, twelve years after Prabhupada’s disappearance, Jayadvaita Swami said that we should not add, subtract or change anything in the teachings Prabhupada has given us. Earlier, in 1982 and 1986, Jayadvaita Swami claimed that they had in mind not to make needless changes in their editing of Bhagavad-gita As It is, because Prabhupada staunchly opposed such needless changes. They only changed what they felt was worthwhile changing. However, Jayadvaita Swami further states that the sanctity that Prabhupada’s texts have do not apply to the work done by Prabhupada’s editors (he seem not to appreciate the fact that this work was later approved by Prabhupada. Does Prabhupada’s approval not have sanctity?)

In this way Jayadvaita Swami makes it seem as if he did not add, subtract or change any of Prabhupada’s direct words (except for the grammatical errors, capitalisation and commas). However, during the last three decades, we and many other devotees have observed and documented numerous needless changes made by Jayadvaita Swami to Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is. And in spite of Jayadvaita Swami’s own seeming interest in not adding, subtracting or changing anything in Srila Prabhupada’s teachings, the posthumously edited books contain all of these three types of edits (adding, subtracting and changing).

We will now start a series of articles documenting the changes made to the sanskrit synonyms (word for word meanings) in the first six chapters of the Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Why only the first six chapters?

According to Jayadvaita Swami the first five or six chapters of the draft (often referred to as the ”original manuscript”) to the Bhagavad-gita As It Is was personally typewritten by Srila Prabhupada himself.

Jayadvaita Swami writes on his website:

”Some books Srila Prabhupada wrote out in longhand or typed himself. These include Easy Journey to Other Planets, Sri Isopanishad, the first and second cantos of Srimad-Bhagavatam, the first five or six chapters of Bhagavad-gita As It Is,…” (Jayadvaita Swami, Editing the Unchangeable Truth, How Were the Books Written?, Reprinted from ISKCON Communications Journal, Volume 11, 2005)

If anything has sanctity, apart from the finished manuscripts that Prabhupada sent to the press for printing, it must be the words that he himself wrote on his type-writer. We would most certainly not expect to see any changes made to these. Even if they contain mistakes, these mistakes should not be corrected according to the principle of arsa-prayoga.

However, we do see significant changes made to the sanskrit translations that Prabhupada personally wrote on his type-writer. By comparing the posthumously edited 1983 edition with both the 1972 MacMillan edition and the so called “original manuscript” we see that the 1972 MacMillan edition is much closer to and faithful to Prabhupada’s original words.

This is especially interesting because Prabhupada was very concerned with better knowing disciples that had become “learned” in sanskrit:

“…a little learning is dangerous, especially for the Westerners. I am practically seeing that as soon as they begin to learn a little Sanskrit immediately they feel that they have become more than their guru and then the policy is kill guru and be killed himself.” (from a letter to Dixit das on 18 Sep 1976)

We now publish for the first time a complete list over all the changes made to Prabhupada’s personally type-written sanskrit translations. Here is the complete list for Chapter One.

PDF: bg-comparing-OM-1972-1983-ch1  

Direct link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d9u09z5jxnwj50d/bg-comparing-OM-1972-1983-ch1.pdf

12.06.13
by

Question to Jayadvaita Swami: What would Prabhupada say to you?

Help us by “liking” and “sharing” this post!

This letter was sent to Jayadvaita Swami the 6th Dec. 2013:

Dear Jayadvaita Swami! Dandavat pranam! Jaya Srila Prabhupada!

Some weeks have passed since our last e-mail exchange. I hope  you are in the process of answering the questions I linked to in my first two e-mails to you? Otherwise they are here:

E-mail 1: https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/letter-to-jayadvaita-swami-23rd-oct-2013/

E-mail 2: https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/e-mail-exchange-between-jayadvaita-swami-and-ajit-krishna-dasa/

These are questions that thousands of devotee’s around the world would like to see answered as soon as possible.

While awaiting your promised answers, I am constantly researching the changes made to Prabhupada’s books. Recently I saw this video posted on BBT International’s website:

Direct link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlqbnzzL_28

In the video you say:

”I went back and re-edited especially the translations in the first canto. Especially the first perhaps three chapters where I thought their were a lot of short comings. And I typed up all the translations – after I finished all the work, I typed up all the translations in one manuscript and put them in an envelope, and Prabhupada was coming to New York where I was at the time. Prabhupada came, and I put all the translations in an envelope, and I wrote a cover letter explaning what I have done, and asking him whether it was okay. And then I brought it up to Prabhupada’s quarters at 55th Street in New York–the New York temple—with the idea that I would leave them with his secretary and come back later. But Prabhupada was right there, and so he…I offered obeisances, and he had me, you know: ”What do you do in here?” ”What have you come for?” Not in those words, but, you know, he inquired was I was doing. And I explained that I had come to deliver this. So Prabhupada had me start reading right in his presence. And I began, I read the first verse, the second verse, the third verse. I went through a few verses, and Prabhupada stopped me. Prabhupada was listening very carefully, he stopped me. ”So what you have done?” And I said: ”Well, Srila Prabhupada, I have edited to try to bring it closer to what you originally said.” Prabhupada said: ”What I have said?” I said: ”Yes, Srila Prabhupada!” Then Prabhupada: ”Then it is alright!”, and that was it. ”Then it is alright!” ”What I have said?”, ”Then it is alright!”

 A few points about this story:

1. Your story is merely anecdotal evidence which is considered a rather unreliable and dubious support of a  claim. No one is really able to investigate the truthvalue of your story. To use anecdotal evidence as the foundation for changing the books that are supposed to guide mankind the next ten thousands years will surely create doubt about the authority of the changed books.

As Srila Prabhupada said about such stories:

“Just like in our ISKCON there are so many false things: “Prabhupada said this, Prabhupada said that.””
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, 7/11/1972)

“They misunderstand me. Unless it is there from me in writing, there are so many things that “Prabhupada said.”” (Srila Prabhupada Letter, 2/9/1975)

And as you yourself say:

“If Srila Prabhupada didn’t clearly and definitely say it, and if it first came up after 1977 whatever it is, don’t trust it. Rule of Thumb.” (Diksa-Diksa, Where the Rtvik People are Wrong,  p. 85, Jayadvaita Swami)

You started circulating your story after the book changing controversy started, and there is no evidence to support that it is true. Therefore, “…don’t trust it. Rule of Thumb.”

Skærmbillede 2013-12-06 kl. 20.59.15

2. You seem to conclude that since Prabhupada approved the verses that you brought him, then he also approved that you could change all his books using the same method – even after his disappearance. But this is an unwarranted extrapolation, because you extrapolate far beyond the range of available data, namely from one single instance of editing to more or less all future instances of editing. But from your story no justification for such an extrapolation can be found. The only conclusion to be deduced (if your anecdote is at all true) is that what you did to the very specific verses you brought Prabhupada was okay.  No more, no less.

3. If your anecdote is true, then Prabhupada told you that if you had made the text closer to what Prabhupada originally said, then it was okay.

However, in my previous e-mails to you I have referred to articles where it is clearly documented that you have:

  • Deleted many of Prabhupada’s own chosen words and sentences (even those also found in his ”original manuscript”)
  • Added your own words and sentences (which means they are also not to be found in the ”original manuscript”)
  • Changed Prabhupada’s own personally typewritten sanskrit translations.

The article ”The Duty of the Finger” demonstrates all these types of changes made to Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is:

https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/10/24/enjoying-the-self-within-or-the-duty-of-the-finger-bg-4-38/

Now, I think most devotees around the world would like to know what you think Prabhupada would have said if you had told him:

”Well, Srila Prabhupada, in my editing I have deleted some of your own chosen words and sentences! And I have also invented some completely new words and sentences and put them in where I felt they would do a good job! And since we at the BBT are now ”accomplished sanskrit scholars” we have gone through some of your own typewritten sanskrit translations and changed them.”

What do you, honestly, think Prabhupada would have answered? Then try to extrapolate that answer to the changes you have made to Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

Your servant, Ajit Krishna Dasa