BBTI’s Gives Mutually Exclusive Justifications for the editing of Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers

Perfect_Questions_Perfect_Answers-cover

By Ajit Krishna Dasa

In 1993 BBT International published a new edition of Srila Prabhupada’s Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers. Madhudvisa Prabhu wrote about this:

“The original edition was more or less a transcript of the original conversation. It was edited, of course, to make the English clear and correct and to make it readable. But basically it remained a transcript of the original conversation.

The 1993 version changes all of this. The book is slashed from 99 pages to 77 pages! And the type is not even smaller! So much has been cut out. In one place four complete pages have been deleted!

All the text has been heavily edited and the whole mood of the book has been completely changed. We have not done anything below about the editing, we have just pointed out a few pieces of text (shown in bold) that have been completely deleted from the new edition.” (http://bookchanges.com/iskcon-perfect-questions-perfect-answers-book-changes/)

The BBT International has tried to justify the changes to Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers. But their attempted justifications are mutually exclusive.

BBTI’s Attempted Justification 1

“In the mid-1990s the BBT published a second edition of Perfect Questions, Perfect Answersedited by a less experienced BBT editor. Because readers of this edition pointed out numerous editorial discrepancies, the BBT directors resolved in 2002 that Dravida Dasa will review the book before its next printing. Either he will correct the discrepancies, or the BBT will revert to the first edition.” (ISKCON Communications Journal Vol. 11, Editing the Unchangeable Truth: An Overview of the Editorial History of the Books of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, 2005)

In 1996 the editing is of Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers was described by Jayadvaita Swami as follows:

Screen Shot 2015-08-03 at 13.13.04

(From Madhudvisa Dasa’s ISKCON’s Changes to Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is and Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers)

In this letter Jayadvaita Swami mentions the name of the “less experienced editor” (Sita Devi Dasi), and he claims that her editing made the new version read “more smoothly” and made it “closer to the original transcription”. But he later had to admit that this new and less experienced editor was allowed to change the books of Srila Prabhupada without proper supervision, and that her editing was not good enough.

So this is how Jayadvaita Swami’s explanations sounded in 1996 and 2005 respectively. But a few years ago one of his colleagues posted the following on the internet:

BBTI’s Attempted Justification 2

“A report from Ranjit das, BBTI:

No good deed goes uncriticized.

The story of Perfect Questions Perfect Answers reprint

Recently someone has tried to stir up a new criticism of the BBT by pointing to the re-print (in the 1990’s) of the book Perfect Questions Perfect Answers. Some 20 pages were taken out of the book. Why?

At that time PQPA had been out of print for a long time. The devotee in charge of operations really wanted to re-print the book because he liked it so much. However there was a problem. The book was around 120 pages long. The small books that the BBT were printing at the time had been formatted into 96-page books so that the printers would give a really good price. If PQPA were printed at the 120 plus pages then most of the distributors would not buy them and distribute them because such books as Perfection of Yoga, Beyond Birth and Death, etc were cheaper.

What to do?

Our devotee in charge of operations read the book and a good section consisted of a conversation between Srila Prabhupada and an Indian gentleman who was also present at the time. So our devotee figured that this part could go because it was not really part of the conversation between Bob Cohen (now Brahmatirtha Das) and Srila Prabhupada. But this was just not enough to bring it down to the 96-page format so a few more pages were cut.

Srila Prabhupada himself authorized the same thing with the abridged Gita. This devotee simply followed the precedent. But Srila Prabhupada wanted the word to go out and so did our intrepid BBT manager. And now this is being pointed to as some kind of conspiracy. So our BBT manager, instead of being lauded for the 96 pages that were printed and distributed is criticized for the 20 pages that he did not.” (https://www.facebook.com/bbtedit/posts/10152724990094126)

Like I said, these stories are mutually exclusive. Take a look:

Screen Shot 2015-08-03 at 10.28.07

In addition to this, Madhudvisa Prabhu has documented that in fact the second edition has not just had sections and pages cut out. Quite a few individual words and sentences have been randomly removed. Here is a link to Madhudvisa Prabhu’s comparisons. Please check it out yourself.

Our questions to BBT International: What is correct here? The first or second explanation? Or a combination? Or a third or fourth explanation?

Confidential E-mails From Ramesvara Leaked (Dec. 2014)

Just recently three confidential e-mails were leaked and posted on facebook. They reveal what Ramesvara Prabhu thinks about the changes made the Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita, the editing policies of the BBTI and they shed light on what happened when the GBC and BBT trustees “reviewed” the 83 Gita. ramesvara1 Below are some quotes that will rock the boat, but please visit the website at the end of this article to see all three e-mails in their entirety and thus get the full picture. Quotes From confidential email no. 1:

“The problem with the “Responsible Publishing” paper is that it is simply not the entire body of instruction, and it‘s critics point out that it is one-sided and obviously leaves out many of Prabhupada’s cautionary instructions against unnecessary change,”

[…]

“That analysis with Dravida Prabhu left me with my deepest concern: if the changes didn’t have substantial merit but were made anyway, then regardless of the justification of “making it better” the door, the “change disease” as Srila Prabhupada called it, had been dangerously opened for anything to happen in the future after we are all long gone.”

[…]

“The Lilamrita interviews I found tell of Srila Prabhupada’s direct instructions regarding the size of the books, the artwork to be kept in the books, etc. – things that have already been changed so many times in the past 20 years, without understanding of Prabhupada’s orders, that it makes the “official” opening of this “change” door more ominous for the future, in ways we can’t even imagine.”

[…]

“…an absolute position has to be reached so that before we die, we know that within the BBT and ISKCON there could never again be one single change, for any reason, ever made to Srila Prabhupada’s books.”

From confidential e-mail no. 2:

“The “Responsible Publishing” (RP) paper has either a significant misleading or a significant historical inaccuracy. There are sites which claim to list more than 5,000 changes. Certainly there were thousands of changes. The RP paper states that every change to the translations was reviewed and approved by the Trustees, leading ISKCON devotees, the CBC, etc. Later the RP cites or implies in its endorsements that all the changes were approved. Of course, NO ONE other than the editors ever saw back in 1981 or 1982 ALL the changes.”

[…]

“I have always admitted that my great failure as a trustee was not carefully reading every proposed change, and instead, relying on the endorsement of Hridayananda and Satsvarupa- along with Jayadvaita.”

[…]

“I know that in talking years ago with others on that committee, that they also admitted performing only a cursory review of the proposed changes,…”

[…]

“No one back then did their job or acted with full responsibility for what they were endorsing. l assure you that NO ONE on that Committee ever even asked to see all the changes, and we would have been astounded to have learned in 1981 or 1982 that there were thousands, maybe more than 5,000 changes. I lazily assumed that the work done on manuscripts as close to the original as possible was the only thing that mattered. I failed to consider all the other Prabhupada instructions, the ramifications for making changes if they didn’t ultimately change the meaning; the effect of changes that in some cases loses the flavor of the Gita we had been studying for 10 years, and most importantly, that breaks the etiquette of changing a Sampradaya Acaraya’s books after His disappearance and opens the “change door” for possible future other changes over the decades and centuries to come. The RP paper implies that the changes were carefully reviewed and approved throughout the leadership of the BBT, GBC and ISKCON. I am certain that by interviewing all the leaders of that time, we would find most guilty of the same mistake that i made. It is true to state that the leaders of ISKCON at the time endorsed the changes. However, it is overtly misleading to state or suggest that the leaders actually performed a careful review. And getting back to the fact that there are thousands of changes, no leader, including the BBT Trustees, was ever shown every single change. No one! That is the sad historical fact…”

From confidential e-mail no. 3:

“I find it embarrassing that on the site BBTEdit.com, in the section about editing posthumously, the only quote to support touching the works of a departed Acarya is that Srila Jiva Goswami was working posthumously on Bhakti Rasamrita Sindhu. Seriously – how can any living entity compare themselves to Sri Jiva Goswami, or think because he touched the work of Sri Rupa Gosvami, therefore an editor in the lower stages of bhakti, not yet fully situated in the perfected stages of bhava (what to Speak of prema) can touch and change the words of a departed Sampradaya Acarya. Not a good example in my lowly View – it begs the question of What our editors think of themselves and their level of Krsna Consciousness. Oh well…”

Please find all the three e-mails in their entirety here: http://jayasrikrishna.weebly.com (PDF and Word). You can also see and download the e-mails here as PDF and Word.

Rebuttal of Hridayananda Dasa Goswami’s Claims on the Book Changes

Danesh Dasa posted the following on the facebook group “Hridayananda Das Goswami – Friends and Disciples”:

“Hridayananda Maharaj on the revised 2nd edition of Bhagavad-gita As It Is:

“I Support This Edition”

“Jaya Advaita Swami and Dravida Prabhu sincerely worked to restore Prabhupada’s original text, and to clear up obvious mistakes by typists. Surely Prabhupada would appreciate this. Further, no one has ever shown that these corrections altered in any way Prabhupada’s philosophical teachings. Thus I support this edition of Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita.””

Here is a screenshot: Screen Shot 2014-12-11 at 10.55.31

Let us take a look at each of Maharaja’s statements:

Hridayananda Dasa Goswami:

“Jaya Advaita Swami and Dravida Prabhu sincerely worked…”

Hridayananda Dasa Goswami here commits the fallacy of “begging the question” and the fallacy of “Ipse dixit / bare assertion fallacy”:

“Begging the question means “assuming the conclusion (of an argument)”, a type of circular reasoning. This is an informal fallacy where the conclusion that one is attempting to prove is included in the initial premises of an argument, often in an indirect way that conceals this fact.” (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question)

Jayadvaita Swami and Dravida Prabhu did their job sincerely only if they pleased Srila Prabhupada, and we are disagreeing about precisely that. Therefore Maharaja is “begging the question”.

Hridayananda Dasa Goswami needs to give some evidence in support for his claim. But instead of giving evidence he just states it, and this is the fallacy of “Ipse dixit / bare assertion fallacy”:

“Ipse dixit, Latin for “He, himself, said it,” is a term used to identify and describe a sort of arbitrary dogmatic statement which the speaker expects the listener to accept as valid.” (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ipse_dixit)

Hridayananda Dasa Goswami:

“…to restore Prabhupada’s original text, and to clear up obvious mistakes by typists.”

Here Hridayananda Dasa Goswami commits the fallacy of “selective evidence / fallacy of incomplete evidence”:

“Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position.” (Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_picking_(fallacy))

It is correct that Jayadvaita Swami and BBTI in some cases have changed the books back to what Srila Prabhupada said in the so-called original manuscripts. But is this really a good idea? Normally your drafts end up in your trash bin. If someone took your drafts out of your trash bin and changed your essay back to what you wrote in your drafts without consulting you first, I think you would feel insulted. Here is an article that deals with this unusual idea of changing a text back to its draft:

https://arsaprayoga.com/2013/10/15/jayadvaita-undoes-prabhupadas-work-on-gita-manuscript/

What Hridayananda Dasa Goswami fails to communicate (and possibly comprehend) is the sad fact that in many cases Jayadvaita Swami and BBTI have brought Srila Prabhupada’s books further away from the so-called original texts. They have deleted Srila Prabhupada’s own chosen words and sentences and added their own. They even changed hundreds (if not thousands) of his personally typewritten sanskrit translations. And in most cases there was no reason to do it at all – other than the whimsical preferences of the editors. I have documented many instances of this sort of editing in my e-book “No Reply from BBTI” and on my website www.arsaprayoga.com (see links below).

Hridayananda Dasa Goswami:

“Surely Prabhupada would appreciate this.”

Here Hridayananda Dasa Goswami again commits the fallacy “Ipse dixit / bare assertion fallacy”.

Hridayananda Dasa Goswami:

“Further, no one has ever shown that these corrections altered in any way Prabhupada’s philosophical teachings.”

Since Hridayananda Dasa Goswami presents no evidence to back up his claim, he again commits the fallacy of “Ipse dixit / bare assertion fallacy”.

He claims that no one has been able to demonstrate that Jayadvaita Swami and BBTI have made changes to the philosophy. But by publishing the 1983 edition of the Gita it was openly declared that it is perfectly okay to violate the principle of arsa-prayoga. This is a serious philosophical deviation, and this offensive mentality is now woven into each and every page of Srila Prabhupada’s books, and everyone who reads them will be contaminated by this mentality.

Besides this, now there might only be very few philosophical mistakes made by Jayadvaita Swami and BBTI, but what about the future? If the door is not closed forever, then the changing business might go on forever, since one change justifies the next. Srila Prabhupada was afraid of this (see the famous “Rascal Editors” conversation).

We also know that Jayadvaita Swami has made his own mistakes. One example of this is his changing “Visnu Form” into the “Visnu platform” (Bg. 2.61). This seems to be a change that takes the Gita in the mayavada direction. And here is a link to an article that demonstrates how Jayadvaita Swami has changed a sentence in the Gita so it gets the opposite meaning of what Srila Prabhupada originally said:

https://arsaprayoga.com/2014/08/12/small-word-big-difference/

Do we want more of these kinds of changes?

Another significant point in this regard is that Hridayananda Dasa Goswami presents an hidden premise, namely that:

All changes that are not of a philosophical nature are okay.

This hidden 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 Srila Prabhupada 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 the 1983 edition of the Gita, we know that Jayadvaita Swami and the BBTI have displeased Srila Prabhupada. My contention is that Jayadvaita Swami and the BBTI have made many needless changes (thousands). I have presented some of them in my e-book “No Reply from BBTI”:

https://arsaprayoga.com/2014/05/08/e-book-no-reply-from-bbti/

This e-book shows how the attempted justifications used by the BBTI fails. BBTI usually argue that:

  • We are changing Srila Prabhupada’s books back to what he actually said in his original manuscript.
  • We are making the books “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.

But the articles in the e-book documents that the BBT International have needlessly:

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

Hridayananda Dasa Goswami:

“Thus I support this edition of Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita.”

If Hridayananda Dasa Goswami had studied this issue carefully he would not support the 1983 edition of the Bhagavad-gita.

Some might argue that Hridayananda Dasa Goswami’s statement is not supposed to be a thorough defense of his views. That is perfectly fine – as long as we recognize that his above statement is completely useless in any kind of debate on the topic.

The interesting question is:

Will Hridayananda Dasa Goswami ever post a thorough defense of his view on this controversial topic? Or does he expect his disciples and well-wishers to blindly accept his statements without any supporting evidence?

We are many who would love to see how he will attempt to justify the editing of Jayadvaita Swami and the BBTI.

Your servant, Ajit Krishna Dasa

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.

“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

VIDEO: The Duty of the Finger (Bg 4.38)

New questions to Jayadvaita Swami and Dravida Prabhu

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

Screenshot 2014-02-04 23.14.45

This article 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.

Dear Jayadvaita Swami and Dravida Prabhu! Dandavat pranam! Jaya Srila Prabhupada!

I have been studying more of your changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books, and I here give links​ to some articles I have written about these changes​. I have also given some links to older articles which I have not sent to you before.

 I have ​to give you links, since some or all of the articles include pictures and videos​ which I can’t post inside​ these mails, and if I attach them it will​ be confusing.

Please see the articles here:

TAMPERING WITH PRABHUPADA’S PERSONALLY TYPEWRITTEN SANSKRIT TRANSLATIONS (BG, CHAPTER ONE):
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/12/09/tampering-with-prabhupadas-personally-typewritten-sanskrit-translations/

CHANGES TO PRABHUPADA’S PERSONALLY TYPEWRITTEN SANSKRIT TRANSLATIONS (STATISTICS FOR BG, CHAPTER ONE):
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/changes-to-prabhupadas-personally-typewritten-sanskrit-translations-statistics-for-bg-chapter-one/

BBT(I) HAS DELETED THE COMPLETE FOREWORD OF PRABHUPADA’S BHAGAVAD-GITA AS IT IS:
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2014/01/13/bbti-has-deleted-the-complete-foreword-of-prabhupadas-bhagavad-gita-as-it-is/

FRIVOLOUS CHANGE OF CHAPTER-HEADING:
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2014/01/02/frivolous-change-of-chapter-heading/

T​O​ “​ENGAGE” or “​DESTROY”:
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2014/02/01/to-engage-or-destroy-bg-11-32/

COVERS SHOULD BE THE SAME REGARDLESS OF LANGUAGE:
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/09/01/covers-should-be-the-same-regardless-of-language/

PRABHUPADA’S INSTRUCTIONS ON FRONT COVERS NOT HONORED:
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/12/24/prabhupadas-instructions-on-front-covers-not-honered/

“PHALANX” IN BG. 1.2 AND BG. 1.11 (JAYADVAITA SWAMI’S DOUBLE STANDARD):
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/phalanx-in-bg-1-2-and-bg-1-11-jayadvaita-swamis-double-standard/

NOT BACK TO THE “ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPT” (BG. 1.2):
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/not-back-to-the-original-manuscript-bg-1-2/

REMOVING “ETERNAL” FROM BHAGAVAD-GITA, AS IT IS (2.30):
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/removing-eternal-from-bhagavad-gita-as-it-is-2-30/

LORD RAMACANDRA REMOVED FROM BHAGAVAD-GITA, AS IT IS (10.31 PURPORT):
https://arsaprayoga.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/lord-ramacandra-removed-from-bhagavad-gita-as-it-is-10-31

​I, and many thousands of devotees world wide, are anxiously waiting for explanations of the many changes I have asked Jayadvaita Swami about several months ago. They can be found here:

Responding to Dravida Prabhu’s “defense” of the book changes (Jan. 2014)

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

dravidaDravida Prabhu

By Ajit Krishna Dasa

This a a response to Dravida Prabhu’s article “The Book Changes – A Defense” (posted on the Sampradaya Sun (01.13.2014).

Basically Dravida Prabhu’s attempted defense boils down to two wellknown fallacious arguments often presented by the BBT International:

1. Prabhupada trusted Jayadvaita Swami pre Nov 14th 1977. Therefore the editing Jayadvaita Swami has done after Prabhupada’s disappearance (post Nov. 14th 1977) is also approved.

2. The books are made “closer to Prabhupada” by making them closer to the so called original manuscript (which is really only a draft).

Let us look at each of these fallacious arguments.

Continue reading

BBT(I) has deleted the complete foreword of Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is

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

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.

Excerpt from a letter called “Please Explain, Jayadvaita Swami, Dravida Prabhu & Company” originally posted on the Sampradaya Sun.

“BY: A GROUP OF SRILA PRABHUPADA DISCIPLES & FOLLOWERS

Dear Jayadvaita Swami, Dravida Prabhu & Company, please explain why you have done the following:

(1) Why is it in the revised edition of the Bhagavad-gita, you and company have completely removed the foreword by Professor Edward Dimock that was printed in the original Macmillan version of the Bhagavad-gita As It Is which Srila Prabhupada regularly read from?

Readers, please visit the website and see the video on YouTube of Srila Prabhupada lecturing on the Bhagavad-gita.

There, in the very immediate beginning (very first few minutes) of this video, you will find Srila Prabhupada praising the foreword by Professor Edward Dimock. This particular video clip is taken from one of the 19 Double layer DVD’s produced by Nrsimhananda Prabhu and his associates at ITV. It is the particular DVD named Bhagavad Gita as It Is, with Krishna and Arjuna on the chariot, and sky background, and is in the very first part, called “Introduction”.

Srila Prabhupada is reading the foreword himself, praising it, mentioning Edward Dimock’s name, and praising Edward Dimock for a particular comment that he had made, as follows:

“Swami Bhaktivedanta comments upon the Gita from this point of view, and that is legitimate. More than that, in this translation the Western reader has the unique opportunity of seeing how a Krsna devotee interprets his own texts”

Srila Prabhupada in the video explains this particular statement by Edward Dimock, on how a Krsna devotee interprets his own texts, by explaining that just as a family member only is qualified to give the best knowledge to others about his own family, similarly, only a Krsna devotee can properly explain to others about Krsna. Srila Prabhupada appreciates this particular point made by Edward Dimock in the video.

Thus, not only has Srila Prabhupada authorized this particular foreword in the Macmillan Bhagavad-gita, but had himself read, it, and praised certain points made by the person who wrote this foreword. Yet you, Jayadvaita Swami, Dravida Prabhu & Company, have the audacity to remove this foreword completely in your revised version. The proof of how you have offended your Spiritual Master is on public video record, as those who watch will sadly but easily be able to understand this particular deviation of yourselves in either revising or omitting your Spiritual Master’s works and words by using your fertile imaginations.”

[End of excerpt]

Below there are several instances where Prabhupada shows appreciation for the foreword by Edward Dimock. Please note that Prabhupada said that this foreword will “appeal to the scholarly class”. And we see here that Prabhupada in fact used the foreword to preach to professors, scholars, cardinals and journalists. As can be seen from the below quotes Prabhupada appreciated the foreword because it underscored some of his own points about this specific edition of the Bhagavad-gita, namely the As It Is version.

But the BBT International under the leadership of Jayadvaita Swami have now removed this foreword by Professor Dimock without ever explaining why. Certainly Prabhupada never asked for its removal.

Prabhupada: That’s all. So this Bhagavad-gita, at least, should be introduced in all colleges. And Professor Dimock has recommended. Just…
Professor: Well, it is quite widely read, the Bhagavad-gita.
Prabhupada: Eh?
Professor: The Bhagavad-gita is quite widely read.
Pradyumna: This is an introduction by Professor Dimock.
Professor: Yes, I’ve seen it. I read it. But it is quite widely read, you know. I mean the translations… (Room Conversation with Sanskrit Professor, Dr. Suneson — September 5, 1973, Stockholm)

Prabhupada: That has been written by Professor Dayal, Dimock, that “Sanskrit scholars should get good opportunity, and nobody, I think, will deny Swamiji’s scholarship.” He has said that. (Room Conversation — September 21, 1973, Bombay)

Bhagavan: There are many copies of Bhagavad-gita, but the unusual happening with this version is until this was presented, there was no devotee…
Prabhupada: Professor Dimock has said very nicely.
Monsignor Verrozano: Yes, we have also many translations. Yes.
Prabhupada: You have not brought by the fruit?
Nitai: Yes, Satsvarupa Maharaja did.
Monsignor Verrozano: We have here one translation of the commentary of Professor Zehner(?) from Oxford.
Prabhupada: Here is my foreword by Professor Dimock.
Yogesvara: This is a professor from Chicago University who wrote the foreword to this edition. He makes an interesting comment.
Prabhupada: You read, read it.
Dhananjaya: Yes.
Prabhupada: Professor Dimock’s.
Cardinal Pignedoli: It’s very strange and famous. That’s the gospel.
Prabhupada: Read it.
Dhananjaya: (reading) “Swami Bhaktivedanta comments upon the Gita from this point of view. And that is legitimate.”
Prabhupada: Yes. That is legitimate.
Dhananjaya: “More than that, in this translation the Western reader has the unique opportunity of seeing how a Krsna devotee interprets his own texts. It is a Vedic…”
Cardinal Pignedoli: Yes.
Prabhupada: A Krsna devotee interpreting on Krsna, and a nondevotee interpreting on Krsna. There is far difference. (Room Conversation with Catholic Cardinal and Secretary to the Pope — May 24, 1974, Rome)

The introduction by Mr. Dimock is nice and it will appeal to the scholarly class. (Letter to: Rupanuga — Sydney 4 April, 1972)

Krishna is the source of all human cultural contributions, and His book is the most widespread read all over the world. So if you can convince this education minister that this KC Movement is cultural. One big, big Professor Dimock has given in his introduction to my Bhagavad-gita As It Is that every college student should read this book. Syamasundara. can send you a copy of his statement if you require. So if in other colleges beyond India it is so recommended, why not in India. So the education minister must advise this books should be read. This will give us example for approaching central government. There are so many things to be done. (Letter to: Giriraja — Sydney 12 April, 1972)

Speculators cannot have definite knowledge. Therefore our Professor Dimmock has said, “Here is definite definition of Gita.” What is that? Just see. Then it is so. He has appreciated it. You cannot see, of the…
Devotee: They only put two lines of what he said in there. He says this…
Prabhupada: Yes. That is his word.
Devotee: Oh.
Prabhupada: Read it all.
Devotee: “Definitive English edition of Bhagavad-gita. By bringing us a new and living interpretation of the text already known to many, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada has increased our own understanding manyfold.”
Prabhupada: That is a definite, not vague, speculative. That is the difference between my translation and others. Therefore I have given the name “As It Is.” So we will be no spoke or speculation. As soon as you speculate, you are rejected. Therefore others are seeing some danger that “This Bhaktivedanta’s…, this Bhagavad-gita As It Is accepted, then where we are?” (George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel)

Prabhupada: “Dimmock. He has given very good appreciation. And gradually it will be printed in other languages. German, French, Spanish, Denmark, Holland…” (Conversation with Dai Nippon — April 22, 1972, Tokyo)

Prabhupada: “Somehow or other.” This is science. “Somehow or other,” “maybe,” “perhaps.” This is their science. [break] …speculation. The whole Western countries, their all knowledge simply speculation. Nothing definite. [break] …Professor Dimmock has “Definitive…” What is that translation, or something like?
Harikesa: Definitive.
Prabhupada: Definitive, then translation of Bhagavad-gita, like that. [break] (Morning Walk — June 30, 1975, Denver)

Prabhupada: Yes, yes, yes. You just read one big professor’s remark here. You see?
Faill: Yes.
Prabhupada: Professor Dimmock of Chicago University.
Faill: “A new and living interpretation.” This is you, is it?
Prabhupada: This is…? Yes.
Faill: That’s you.
Prabhupada: Yes. If you read these books and write regular articles on the basis of my talk with you, it will be actually great benefit to the public. (Room Conversation with Bill Faill (reporter) — October 8, 1975, Durban)

Pusta Krsna: In the United States… These are many letters we have, just some of them, from different professors who are actually using Prabhupada’s books, professors from respectable universities such as Harvard, Yale, Duke. Professor Dimmock, who is the leading scholar of southeastern languages at the University of Chicago, he very much appreciates Prabhupada’s books.

Prabhupada: He has written one foreword.
Pusta Krsna: So these books are being accepted as the authority, at least in America and England, so far as studies of Indian culture are concerned, philosophy, sociology. And you can see the beautiful presentation. Each Sanskrit is there, transliteration so that anyone can chant, word-for-word Sanskrit to English translation, translation in English, and then the purport, a commentary.
Prof. Olivier: That’s right. This is a good edition. Good edition.
Pusta Krsna: Professor Dimmock, he says that there are many, many translations of Bhagavad-gita, and he says that “By bringing us a new and living interpretation of a text already known to many, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada has increased our understanding manyfold.” So although it’s been prevalent in America… I know that when I was studying Humanities in college in the University of Florida, Bhagavad-gita was required. And we read one edition, but it was very much limited. Until we come in contact with Bhagavad-gita As It Is, the understanding is very much limited. But it’s not a sectarian approach. It’s purely scientific and realistic. There are many such reviews.
Prof. Olivier: Well, this is a good letter. (Room Conversation with Professor Olivier — October 10, 1975, Durban)

Prabhupada: Therefore rascal. (laughter) Therefore rascal. We definitely know Krsna, the origin of everything. That is definite, not “It may be.” We don’t say “Krsna may be.” No. Definitely. Krsnas tu bhagavan svayam [SB 1.3.28]. Here is Bhagavan. Here is God. That is definite. Therefore our professor…
Hamsaduta: Svarupa Damodara?
Prabhupada: No, no. Who has written foreword to my Bhagavad-gita?
Harikesa: Dimmock.
Prabhupada: Dimmock. “Here is definitive…”
Hamsaduta: Version.
Nitai: “Definitive edition.”
Prabhupada: “Definitive edition.” That is the credit. Not “may be.” No “maybe,” sir. That is rascaldom. (Morning Walk — November 26, 1975, New Delhi)

Prabhupada: Dimmock said that “Here is the commentation who has practiced devotion in his life.” (Morning Walk — December 17, 1975, Bombay)

Jayadvaita Swami admits there is no authorization

Vyapaka Dasa: “Do you have explicit instructions from Srila Prabhupada authorizing you to make post-samadhi changes to his books?”
Jayadvaita Swami: “No.” (Published e-mail correspondence between Jayadvaita Swami og Vyapaka Dasa)

Govinda Dasi: “…Jayadvaita Maharaja has said that Srila Prabhupada did not specifically give him the permission to…”
Jayadvaita Swami: “I never got an explicit word from Srila Prabhupada to do this work at an explicit time.” (Conversation between Govinda Dasi and Jayadvaita Swami about the posthumous changes to Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita, Honolulu on Jan 19, 2003)

“To my knowledge, Srila Prabhupada never asked us to re-edit the book.” (Jayadvaita Swami’s Letter to Amogha Lila 1986)

“Dear Yasodanandana Prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

In answer to your questions, I don’t have any original tape recording of any kind of Srila Prabhupada authorizing the editorial changes in the Gita. And despite scouring the GBC resolutions from 1979-83, I found no reference to the Bhagavad-gita whatsover. It seems the assignment of Jayadvaita Swami to perform that task was unpublished–at least I couldn’t find it in the GBC resolutions made widely available.

Hoping this meets you well, I remain

Your servant,
Dravida dasa [Editor for the BBT(I)]” (Letter from Dravida Dasa to Yasodanandana Dasa, Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 09:45:12 -0700)

So both Jayadvaita Swami and Dravida Dasa, who are the leading editors for the BBT International admits there is no instruction from Prabhupada to edit his Bhagavad-gita, As It Is (or any other of his books).