Tag Archives: authorization

03.20.25
by

From Dhyana to Sankhya: Prabhupada’s Vision for Chapter 6

By Ajit Krishna Dasa

Srila Prabhupada’s decision to title Chapter 6 of the Bhagavad Gita As It Is “Sankhya Yoga” stands as a distinctive and deliberate choice, diverging from the more common “Dhyana Yoga” favored by traditional acharyas, modern scholars, and Western translators. This title, unique in the history of widely recognized Gita commentaries, reflects his mission to present the text through the lens of Gaudiya Vaishnavism while reintroducing the theistic Sankhya philosophy of Kapila Muni, the divine son of Devahuti from the Srimad Bhagavatam. Far from a mere editorial quirk, Prabhupada’s naming can be seen as a strategic reclamation of the term “Sankhya,” serving as an implicit attack on the atheistic Sankhya school and aligning the chapter’s teachings with Krishna consciousness. This choice makes sense when viewed through the philosophical content of Chapter 6, its integration of Sankhya and Yoga, and Prabhupada’s broader purpose of countering materialistic philosophies.

Philosophical Foundations: Theistic Sankhya and Its Contrast with Atheism

Sankhya philosophy, one of the six classical schools of Indian thought, fundamentally distinguishes between purusha (the eternal, conscious soul) and prakriti (temporary, unconscious matter), aiming for liberation through analytical knowledge. However, two versions of Sankhya exist: the atheistic, classical Sankhya, often attributed to a sage Kapila, which denies a supreme God and posits multiple purushas liberated through intellectual discernment alone, and the theistic Sankhya of Kapila Muni, an incarnation of Vishnu, as detailed in Srimad Bhagavatam (Canto 3, Chapters 24–33). The latter integrates this dualistic framework with devotion to Krishna, the Supreme Purusha, as the source and controller of all existence.

Srila Prabhupada consistently champions the theistic Sankhya of the Bhagavatam’s Kapila, critiquing the atheistic version as incomplete. In his purport to Gita 2.39, he describes Sankhya as the analytical study of soul and matter but ties it to Krishna’s authority, while in Srimad Bhagavatam 1.2.30, he credits Kapila (the Vishnu avatar) with creating Sankhya to dispel material illusion, implying the atheistic school is a corruption. By titling Chapter 6 “Sankhya Yoga,” Prabhupada reclaims the term from its godless connotation, positioning it as a Krishna-centric science of self-realization. This choice serves as an attack on atheistic Sankhya by asserting that true Sankhya—unlike its materialistic distortion—culminates in devotion to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, not mere intellectual isolation.

Chapter 6’s Content: A Blend of Sankhya Philosophy and Yogic Practice

Chapter 6 of the Gita, while renowned for its meditative instructions (e.g., 6.11–14: sitting steadily, focusing on the self or Krishna), contains philosophical elements that resonate with Sankhya, justifying Prabhupada’s title. Verses like 6.5–6 (“One must deliver himself with the help of his mind… the mind is the friend or enemy”) echo Sankhya’s view of the mind as a product of prakriti that binds or liberates the purusha depending on its mastery. Similarly, 6.1–4 emphasize detachment from sense objects and fruitive results, mirroring Sankhya’s goal of disentangling the soul from material nature. The description of the yogi’s transcendent state in 6.20–23—realizing the self’s distinction from matter through “transcendental senses”—further aligns with Sankhya’s liberation through discriminative knowledge.

Prabhupada’s “Sankhya Yoga” title broadens the chapter’s scope beyond meditation (dhyana) to include this analytical foundation, reflecting the theistic Sankhya of Kapila, where understanding the soul’s eternality leads to Krishna (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.25.18). Unlike “Dhyana Yoga,” which narrows the focus to meditative practice, “Sankhya Yoga” encapsulates the integration of knowledge (Sankhya) and discipline (Yoga), culminating in devotion (6.47: “The highest yogi thinks of Me constantly”). By highlighting these Sankhya elements, Prabhupada challenges atheistic Sankhya’s endpoint—self-isolation without God—replacing it with a theistic synthesis that directs the practitioner to Krishna, thus undermining the atheistic school’s philosophical legitimacy.

Historical Context: Sankhya and Yoga’s Traditional Connection

The tendency in Indian tradition to connect Sankhya and Yoga as complementary systems supports Prabhupada’s titling. Historically, Sankhya provides the metaphysical blueprint (distinguishing purusha from prakriti), while Yoga, particularly Patanjali’s Ashtanga Yoga, offers the practical path, with dhyana (meditation, the seventh limb) as a key stage. The Gita itself reflects this synergy: Chapter 2 introduces Sankhya’s analytical wisdom (2.39), and Chapter 6 blends it with yogic practice. Prabhupada’s “Sankhya Yoga” title leverages this tradition, but adapts it to Vaishnavism by rooting it in Kapila’s theistic Sankhya, not the atheistic version that Patanjali’s Yoga partially accommodates (via Ishvara, Yoga Sutras 1.23).

This historical pairing bolsters Prabhupada’s attack on atheistic Sankhya. By invoking “Sankhya” in a yogic context, he reasserts its original spiritual purpose—lost in the godless classical school—and aligns it with the Gita’s theistic narrative, where Krishna is the ultimate goal (Gita 15.17–18). This reclamation serves as a polemic, subtly exposing atheistic Sankhya’s inadequacy compared to its devotional counterpart.

Prabhupada’s Strategic Intent: Attacking Atheistic Sankhya and Inspiring Exploration of the Bhagavatam

Prabhupada’s mission was to counter materialistic and impersonal philosophies, including atheistic Sankhya, which he saw as a distortion of Vedic truth. His critiques in purports—e.g., dismissing atheistic Sankhya as “dry speculation” (Gita 7.4, purport)—reveal his intent to restore its theistic essence. Naming Chapter 6 “Sankhya Yoga” is a deliberate strike against this distortion for several reasons:

  1. Reclamation of Terminology: By using “Sankhya,” a term familiar to scholars and practitioners, Prabhupada confronts its atheistic association head-on. He redefines it through Kapila’s lens, where analytical knowledge serves bhakti, not godless liberation, thus challenging the classical school’s authority.
  2. Philosophical Superiority: The chapter’s content—integrating self-realization with devotion—demonstrates that theistic Sankhya surpasses atheistic Sankhya. Verses like 6.29–30 (“He who sees Me everywhere”) elevate Sankhya’s dualism into a Krishna-centric unity, exposing the atheistic version’s limitation in stopping at individual purusha without recognizing the Supreme Purusha.
  3. Educational Polemic: Prabhupada’s global audience included Westerners and Indians influenced by secular interpretations of Sankhya. Titling Chapter 6 “Sankhya Yoga” educates them that true Sankhya aligns with Krishna consciousness, countering scholarly narratives equating Sankhya with atheism and reinforcing the Gita’s theistic intent “as it is.”
  4. Parampara’s Authority: By tying the title to Kapila of the Bhagavatam, Prabhupada roots it in disciplic succession, contrasting it with speculative atheistic Sankhya. This asserts the Vedic authenticity of his interpretation, undermining the classical school’s standalone credibility.
  5. Inspiring Engagement with the Srimad Bhagavatam: Beyond attacking atheistic Sankhya, Prabhupada’s use of “Sankhya Yoga” also aimed to inspire readers to explore the Srimad Bhagavatam, which he considered the “ripe fruit of the Vedic tree” (Srimad Bhagavatam 1.1.3, purport) and the ultimate scripture for Krishna consciousness. By linking Chapter 6 to Kapila’s theistic Sankhya—detailed in Bhagavatam Canto 3, Chapters 24–33—he creates a bridge to this text, where Kapila’s teachings expand on the Gita’s principles with a devotional focus (e.g., Bhagavatam 3.25.18). In purports like Gita 6.13–14, he references Kapila’s meditation on Vishnu (Bhagavatam 3.28.8–11), subtly encouraging readers to delve into the Bhagavatam for a deeper understanding of both Kapila’s Sankhya but also of the Srimad-Bhagavatam itself. For his audience—many unfamiliar with this scripture—the title “Sankhya Yoga” plants a seed of curiosity about Kapila’s full discourse, reinforcing the Bhagavatam’s role as the natural next step after the Gita and enhancing his mission to elevate global devotion through the parampara’s treasures.

Uniqueness and Justification

No major traditional acharya (e.g., Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya, Madhvacharya) or modern translator (e.g., Sivananda, Chinmayananda) titles Chapter 6 “Sankhya Yoga”—they typically use “Dhyana Yoga” or variants, reserving “Sankhya Yoga” for Chapter 2. Prabhupada’s divergence is a bold innovation, justified by Chapter 6’s Sankhya-like elements and his mission. While “Dhyana Yoga” fits the chapter’s meditative focus, “Sankhya Yoga” captures its broader philosophical depth, aligning with his view of Kapila’s system as both knowledge and practice directed toward Krishna.

Conclusion: A Sensible and Strategic Choice

Srila Prabhupada’s “Sankhya Yoga” title for Chapter 6 makes profound sense as a reflection of its content—merging Sankhya’s analytical insights with Yoga’s meditative discipline—and his intent to advance Gaudiya Vaishnavism. It serves as a strategic attack on atheistic Sankhya by reintroducing Kapila’s theistic version, challenging its godless conclusions, and redirecting its principles toward Krishna. This choice not only highlights the chapter’s philosophical richness but also fulfills Prabhupada’s mission to present the Gita as a devotional text, countering materialistic distortions and establishing Krishna consciousness as the ultimate synthesis of Vedic wisdom. In this light, “Sankhya Yoga” is not just a title—it’s a declaration of theistic triumph over atheism, rooted in scripture and tradition.

For a definitive proof that Srila Prabhupada wanted Chapter Six of his Bhagavad-gita As It Is to be named Sankhya-Yoga, please see this article.

03.27.24
by

PROBLEM OF THE BBT EDITING SUMMARIZED

“The problem of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust (BBT) editing can be summarized fairly well with four concise points:

(1) False Assumption of Authority: where Prabhupada only granted conservative, provisional authority, the BBT editors assumed unrestricted, open-ended authority.

(2) Editorial Overreach: where Prabhupāda requested only simple copyediting and correction of obvious mistakes, the BBT editors took great liberties in revising, omitting, and even attempting to correct the author’s content.

(3) Noncompliance with Scholarly Standards: where Prabhupada requested scholarly editorial standards, the BBT editors misapplied scholarly textual methods and employed arbitrary and inconsistent editing practices.

(4) Editorial Changes without Transparency: where devotional and scholarly editorial standards compelled full transparency, the extent of editorial changes by the BBT editors are undisclosed in the author’s works.”

Reference:

Posthumous Editing of A Great Master’s Work – Special Focus on the Writings of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Edited by Graham M. Schweig, 2024, Lexington Books, Introduction, p. 3-4)

04.13.17
by

JAYADVAITA SWAMI – SELF-APPOINTED GHOSTWRITER

By Ajit Krishna Dasa

Definition:

“ghostwriter
ˈɡəʊstrʌɪtə/
noun
a person whose job it is to write material for someone else who is the named author.

However, the difference between the usual ghostwriter and Jayadvaita Swami is that the latter is forcing his service upon the author (Srila Prabhupada), after the author’s demise.

We got rid of the eleven self-appointed zonal “gurus”. But we still have Jayadvaita Swami who, as the self-appointed ghostwriter, is forcing his editing on Srila Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada has no say in this regard. He is simply being forced to accept the ghostwritten material of Jayadvaita Swami.

And so is everyone else.

Hare Krishna!

Screen Shot 2017-04-13 at 21.27.05
11.13.15
by

Open Letter to Sivarama Swami

Screen Shot 2015-11-13 at 19.52.49

This below e-mail was sent to Sivarama Swami through the e-mail address (asksrs@gmail.com) provided on this website. I hope that the devotees in charge of receiving the e-mails will forward the e-mail to Maharaja. In the meantime I will look for another e-mail address of his.

—

Dear Sivarama Swami. Dandavat pranama. Jaya Srila Prabhupada.

I apologize if answering this letter becomes a burden on your many other responsibilities.

Recently I heard a podcast from your website where you respond to a few questions about the changes made to Srila Prabhupada’s books.

I have a few comments and points I find important in relation to your response, and I hope you will find the time to answer each of them.

This is an open letter, so it will also be posted online.

The letter is attached to this e-mail, but you can also find it here:

Open Letter to Sivarama Swami

Thank you very much.​
Your servant,
Ajit Krishna Dasa

—

10.30.15
by

Open Letter to Bir Krishna Goswami

Screen Shot 2015-10-30 at 22.32.34

I wanted to send the below e-mail to Bir Krishna Goswami personally. But the e-mail on his website is not working. I am now looking for another e-mail address, and any help in this regard is welcomed. But since the letter is an open letter I am posting it here on Arsa-Prayoga and hope that Maharaja will see it.

Here it is:

—-

Dear Bir Krishna Goswami. Dandavat pranama. Jaya Srila Prabhupada.

I would like to apologize if answering this letter becomes a burden on your many other responsibilities.

Recently I heard a Q&A session with you, and I have a few points that I would very much like to hear your opinion about. Instead of writing here I have attached my letter to you to this e-mail. Alternatively​ you can also see it here:

Open Letter to Bir Krishna Goswami

​Thank you very much.​
Your servant,
Ajit Krishna Dasa

08.10.15
by

E-Book: ISKCON’s Changes to Srila Prabhupada’s Bg. and PQPA

Click to download the book

Click to download the book

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

Perhaps the first book on the book changes. So old it was made with a typewriter. Definitely of both present day and historical value. It contains a lot of good evidence against the changes, good arguments and historical documentation (like mails).

Download the book here: ISKCON’s Changes to Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is and Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers (by Madhudvisa Dasa).

06.08.15
by

Ramesvara Prabhu Speaks About the Paintings in Srila Prabhupada’s Books

Ramesvara Prabhu here speaks about the amazing transcendental pastime of creating the many paintings in Srila Prabhupada’s books – especially the Krishna Book.

He explains how Srila Prabhupada often gave personal instructions to each artist regarding the specific paintings they made.

Unfortunately almost all these transcendental paintings have been removed from Srila Prabhupada’s books and replaced with other paintings that were not made under Srila Prabhupada’s supervision and authorization.

05.01.15
by

Example of a Bona Fide Change to Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita As It Is

krishna-cows

This is how evidence for bona fide changes looks like:

Room Conversation with the Mayor of Evanston — July 4, 1975, Chicago:

Tamala Krsna: “Farming, cattle raising and business are the qualities…”
Prabhupada: They are not cattle raising, that was…
Tamala Krsna: Cow protection.
Prabhupada: Cow protection. It has to be corrected. It is go-raksya, go. They take it cattle-raising. I think Hayagriva has translated like this.

This change is – contrary to all the post-1977 changes – Prabhupada-approved. It first appeared in a 1976 reprint of the 1968 abridged edition of Bhagavad-gita As It Is.

02.25.15
by

The Holy Name Will Destroy the Book Changers

caitanya-bhagavata

CAITANYA BHAGAVATA, ADI 11.105-110:

TEXT 105

prabhu bole, — “bhakta-vakya krsnera varnana
ihate ye dosa dekhe, se-i ‘papi’ jana

TRANSLATION

“The Lord replied, “Whoever finds fault in a devotee’s description of Lord Krsna is a sinful person.”

TEXT 106

bhaktera kavitva ye-te-mate kene naya
sarvatha krsnera priti tahate niscaya

TRANSLATION

“Krsna is certainly pleased with His devotee’s poetry, even though it is imperfectly composed.”

TEXT 107

murkha bole ‘visnaya’, ‘visnave’ bole dhira
dui vakya parigraha kare krsna vira

TRANSLATION

“An uneducated person may chant visnaya, while a sober person will chant the proper form, visnave, but the Supreme Lord Krsna will accept both forms when they are chanted with devotion.”

COMMENTARY

“To Lord Krishna, a pandita expert in correct language and someone ignorant of correct language are both equal. Of the two, Krishna bestows more mercy on the one who has more enthusiasm for the service of Krishna. Krishna, the omniscient Supersoul of every living entity, is not guilty of the fault of partiality. So-called learned persons who are devoid of devotion proudly consider themselves learned as they reveal their foolishness by pointing out faults in the transcendental language of the pure devotees. The Supreme Lord and master of Sarasvati confirms the foolishness of the so-called learned offenders who are envious of the devotees at every step. Thus their pride of learning is diminished. Due to the absence of realization in the Absolute Truth, Shri Krishna Chaitanya, they belch forth mundane knowledge of sense enjoyment. This is the cause of their disease and falldown.”

TEXT 108

murkho vadati visnaya dhiro vadati visnave
ubhayos tu samam punyam bhava-grahi janardanah

TRANSLATION

“At the time of offering obeisances to Lord Visnu, a foolish person chants visnaya namah (this is improper due to faulty grammar) and a learned person chants visnave namah (this is the correct form). But both achieve equal piety by their offering of obeisances, because Lord Sri Janardana sees the sentiment of the living being, in other words, He sees the degree of devotion, or in other words, He awards the result accordingly (He does not see one’s foolishness or intelligence).”

TEXT 109

ihate ye dosa dekhe, tahara se dosa
bhaktera varnana-matra krsnera santosa

TRANSLATION

“One who finds fault with a devotee is himself at fault, for a devotee’s descriptions are meant only for the pleasure of Krsna.”

TEXT 110

ataeva tomara se premera varnana
ihate dusibeka kon sahasika jana?”

TRANSLATION

“Therefore who will dare find fault with your devotional descriptions of Krsna’s pastimes?”

CAITANYA BHAGAVATA, MADHYA, 19.209:

ye amara dasera sakrt ninda kare
mora nama kalpa-taru samhare tahare

“My wish-fulfilling holy names destroy one who blasphemes My servant.”

FROM THE COMMENTARY:

“So if gross materialists engage with pride in activities like censuring, blaspheming, and abusing the devotees from the material point of view and through mundane considerations, then the Supreme Lord destroys them.”

Note the word “censuring”. When BBT International deletes Srila Prabhupada own chosen words and sentences, then they are in effect censuring Srila Prabhupada.

(The purports are by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura Maharaja, translated by Bhumipati Dasa)

02.13.15
by

Hidden Co-Authors

Screen Shot 2015-02-13 at 11.12.53

Krsna Krpa dasi (Mary E. Corens, M.A., M.Ed. )*

Part I – Hidden Co-Authors

Misconceptions have been circulating about the authorship of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada (Srila Prabhupada).  For example, it is a mistake to think that his books were written by his editors.  The facts demonstrate that Srila Prabhupada translated, wrote, edited, and published his books while using his disciples as assistants.  In contrast, the so-called editing of his books without his knowledge and consent is really rewriting by hidden co-authors.

EXTRAORDINARY AUTHOR

Srila Prabhupada is an extraordinary author unsurpassed in history because he translated, wrote, edited, published, and distributed millions of books worldwide, translated in many languages. He trained hundreds of disciples to assist him in this monumental work. Srila Prabhupada created his own publishing house, the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust (BBT). He created his own distribution system of temples, the Life Membership program, and book distributors who developed innovative methods to distribute books. He engaged millions of people in producing, distributing and receiving his transcendental books, and thus engaged them in the pure devotional service of Lord Caitanya’s movement.

Srila Prabhupada was a published author before he reached America. In India, without help, he translated, wrote, edited, published and distributed the three volumes of Srimad Bhagavatam, First Canto, the paperback Easy Journey to Other Planets, and many issues of Back to Godhead magazine. He wrote a second manuscript for the Bhagavad-gita to replace his first one which had been stolen.

Of course, he recognized his difficulties in presenting transcendental knowledge in a foreign language. In the Preface to each volume of Srimad Bhagavatam, he appealed to the readers: “I must admit my frailties in presenting Srimad Bhagavatam, but still I am hopeful of its good reception by the thinkers and leaders of society on the strength of the following statement of Srimad Bhagavatam (1.5.11): tad-vag visargo… ‘On the other hand, that literature which is full with descriptions of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, form and pastimes of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a transcendental creation meant to bring about a revolution in the impious life of a misdirected civilization. Such transcendental literatures, even though irregularly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.’”

Once he arrived in America, he took opportunities to correct his “irregular composition.” He gave a large stack of papers, his Bhagavad-gita manuscript, to his disciple, Hayagriva das, who had a Masters degree in English. The two of them worked closely together to edit and prepare the manuscript for publication in the United States.

AMAZING SYSTEM TO WRITE AND PUBLISH

Srila Prabhupada’s published letters reveal an amazing system which he organized to accelerate his writing. He controlled every aspect from beginning to end. And he trained his disciples to assist him in various ways. He dictated translations and purports which his disciples transcribed. He corrected and edited those transcriptions which were then sent to other disciples for more editing. He edited the Sanskrit synonyms or provided them himself. He proofread manuscripts and final drafts. He gave specific instructions regarding illustrations, number of pages, size, paper, binding, covers, printing and costs. He examined the printed books to see if they had been printed properly. He noted his satisfaction and dissatisfaction. If necessary, he ordered corrections for a subsequent printing. Amazingly, he did all this work using personal meetings and regular postal mail while traveling around the world!

Srila Prabhupada wrote letters to convey his instructions and answer questions. Excerpts demonstrate his direct involvement in training and correcting his disciples’ work. He wrote his books by dictating the translations and purports which were transcribed. “I have received the transcription of tape #16. You are doing very nicely and improving your editorial capability.” (Letter to Satsvarupa, July 29, 1969) “Pradyumna and Shyamsundar will be sending you regularly completed transcriptions of my translation work by post … and because I am here, if they have questions, I can answer and make the final proofreading, and this will expedite everything.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, May 15, 1971)

His disciples had difficulty producing quality translations and Sanskrit synonyms even in later years, thereby forcing Srila Prabhupada to do the work himself. “The translations… I am not using. There is some fault. I am doing the translations… (Letter to Radhaballabha, Sept. 26, 1975) “Yes, because no one else can do them, I shall do the Sanskrit synonyms.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, Feb. 18, 1972) “From yesterday night I have begun adding the synonyms as it doesn’t save very much time to have the synonyms.” (Letter to Radhaballabha, Oct. 20, 1975) “I will have to see personally what are the mistakes in the synonyms and also how you intend to correct them. I was not satisfied with the corrections that were made before. I saw some changes which I did not approve. Nitai may correct whatever mistakes are there, but the corrected material must be sent to me for final approval.” (Letter to Radhaballabha, Jan. 5, 1976)

Synonyms were missing for 25 chapters of the Srimad Bhagavatam, so he provided them. “I have begun this work and the first tape of synonyms, tape no. 6, was sent to Pradyumna today. This work will take at least one month to complete.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, Feb. 18, 1972) Sometimes he provided the synonyms within the letter: “So far your question, the synonyms are as follows: sattvam – the mode of goodness; rajas – the mode of passion … (Letter to Jayadvaita, July 3, 1971)

Srila Prabhupada’s solution to the Sanskrit editing problems was to train his disciple, Pradyumna das. “I am very much glad that Pradyumna is now with me for teaching him correctly this Sanskrit editing work. After he has become well-trained that will be a great relief to me and it will benefit everyone by increasing the flow of our books and literatures.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, May 15, 1971)

Srila Prabhupada also trained his disciples in editing the English and preparing the manuscripts for publishers, including basic proofreading. As always, he reviewed their work and made necessary corrections. “Regarding your second point, all incarnations should be proper nouns and therefore capitalized. It does not matter whether they are Visnu-tattva or jiva-tattva, saktavesh-avatar or plenary expansion.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, July 12, 1970) “…you have got 31 only out of 33. I think some of the brackets are not counted. So if the parentheses are removed from ‘intoxication’ and ‘impotency’ and they are also counted, the total of symptoms will come to 33. Simply add commas…” (Letter to Jayadvaita, Jan. 30, 1970)

Srila Prabhupada supervised his editors; he reviewed their work, including the final manuscript. “Regarding the corrections you have sent, this kind of changes is admissible. There is no harm.” (Letter to Radhaballabha, Sept. 21, 1975) “I have received your letter dated May 26, 1972, along with the blue-print copies of Bhagavad Gita As It Is from MacMillan Company. It is very nice. So I shall be looking forward to seeing the entire manuscript and book sometime around first July, 1972.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, May 28, 1972)

Srila Prabhupada gave instructions and reviewed the art work to illustrate his books. “The sketches are all alright as they are. Please go ahead and make the paintings.” (Letter to Jadurani, Jan. 5, 1976) For Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta, he wrote, “The art paintings are very, very good. Everyone likes them, and I know they have worked especially hard…. The photographs are also wonderful. He has done nicely, the boy Bhargava.” (Letter to Radhaballabha, Sept. 26, 1975)

Other examples include the illustrations in the Seventh Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam (1st printing, 1976) which comply with his instructions. “2. There should be no effulgence around Prahlad. Hiranyakasipu should not be shown with a pipe. He was a non-smoker.… 4. To illustrate Prahlad being protected when he is thrown off the cliff, there should be a semi-visible Krishna waiting below, as if to catch.” (Letter to Radhaballabha, Feb. 3, 1976)

Srila Prabhupada determined the layout of his books and other publishing details. He wanted high quality publications. “Regarding 6th Canto, Nitai has just yesterday sent off Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8 and next week he expects to send off Chapters 9 through 13. This will be sufficient for you to publish one volume.” (Letter to Radhaballava, Sept. 21, 1975) Regarding a decrease in the printing quality of Back to Godhead magazine, he wrote, “The color is not at all good. It is not attractive, and not as good as Dai Nippon…. The standard quality of Dai Nippon must be maintained. On what consideration is the printer being changed?… In my opinion, no one can print better than Dai Nippon. Why is the plan changed without my consent?… We cannot change the quality of printing for the matter of a little change in the price. This printing is not approved by me…. I am sending copies of this letter to all BBT Trustees for necessary action.” (Letter to Radhaballava, Sept. 22, 1974)

Srila Prabhupada was a prolific writer – he translated and wrote faster than his disciples could edit and publish. Although he was one person and they were many, they could not keep up with him. For example, he pressured his disciples for years to publish the eighteen volumes of Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta. The manuscripts were written, but the editing, illustrations, and publication progressed slowly. The first published volume appeared in 1973. A year later, another volume was published. He overcame BBT’s lethargy in 1974 by forcing the Los Angeles temple into a marathon to prepare the books. And he personally stayed there to assist the editors. By his efforts, the entire Sri Caitanya-Caritamrta was finally published in 1975.

Other books took longer. In 1972 he ordered the publication of a paperback based on recorded conversations. “I think we are just now typing up the tapes of those conversations we held in Mayapur, and we shall be publishing them as a book. It will be called Perfect Questions, Perfect Answers.” (Letter from Srila Prabhupada to Bob Cohen, June 16, 1972, reprinted in the book) Five years later, the small paperback was published and ready for distribution.

Srila Prabhupada’s system of book distribution relied on three integral parts – his temples, his book distributors, and the Life Membership program. The temples were the regional centers for book distribution. They organized the local distribution and provided all the needs for the book distributors and support persons (managers, pujaries, cooks, etc.) who lived in the temples. The temple activities were organized so that the book distributors could devote all their energies to distributing Srila Prabhupada’s books and preaching. “There is no doubt about it, to distribute books is our most important activity. The temple is a place not for eating and sleeping, but as a base from which we send out our soldiers to fight with maya. Fight with maya means to drop thousands and millions of books into the lap of the conditioned souls. Just like during war time the Bombs are raining from the sky like anything.” (Letter to Ramesvara, Aug. 3, 1973)

Srila Prabhupada devised the Life Membership Program as a scheme to publish and distribute books in India, and to expand it to America and other countries. “Here in India our program is going on very nicely. Especially we are making so many life members. That program is so important that we are getting money, supporters and distributing our literature all at the same time.” (Letter to Damodara, March 5, 1971) “…on this book distribution scheme of life membership. 50% is utilized for reprinting books and 50% is utilized for increasing the number of centers. I think the same program may be vigorously introduced in your country and that will be a great success.” (Letter to Rupanuga, Feb. 19, 1971)

ERRONEOUS MISCONCEPTIONS

It is clear that Srila Prabhupada was the author of his books, and the editors were his assistants. Also, he fully controlled the editing and publishing process. For his books, he determined the content, meaning, purpose, audience, style, illustrations, binding, paper, publication dates, etc.

So why do some, including some BBT editors, erroneously claim that Srila Prabhupada did not really write his books? Why do they mistakenly refer to “Hayagriva’s Bhagavad-gita” instead of “Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita?” The answer is that they confuse writing with editing.

Factually, editing is not writing because editing polishes something already written. First the author writes, and then the editor edits. First, Srila Prabhupada wrote the translations and purports for Bhagavad-gita, and then Hayagriva edited them.

Writing creates the content, meaning and purpose. Editing polishes that work to make it more presentable to the readers, but editing does not change the author’s meaning and purpose. Srila Prabhupada created the transcendental content of his books. He conveyed the meaning of Krsna consciousness within the Vaisnava parampara (disciplic succession). And he imbued his books with the purpose to spread Lord Caitanya’s mercy all over the world. Srila Prabhupada’s books contain his potency to transform sincere readers into pure unalloyed devotees. To assist him, Hayagriva polished the Bhagavad-gita manuscript by correcting the irregular composition without changing Srila Prabhupada’s meaning and purpose.

Editing differs from writing because the editor suggests changes and consults with the author for approval. Hayagriva proofread the Bhagavad-gita manuscript. Proofreading is the process of finding and correcting errors in spelling, conjugation, capitalization, grammar, syntax, italics, etc. as well as conformity to the publisher’s format (font size, margins, indentations, footnotes, etc.).

Hayagriva also suggested other changes to the manuscript. Like a good editor, he discussed the changes and asked for Srila Prabhupada’s approval of them. Other disciples acting as editors followed the same approval process with other books. It is clear that Srila Prabhupada wrote his books and that Hayagriva and other disciples edited them.

Another misconception is that Srila Prabhupada’s books can be edited without his knowledge and consent. This is erroneous because, as explained above, editing requires discussions and approval from the author. And the author makes the final decisions about what is published. Therefore, no editing can occur especially after Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance (in 1977) because he is no longer available for consultation. The only exceptions would be found in his orders for specific changes to specific books. Regarding the unfinished Srimad Bhagavatam, he personally trained and assigned only Pradyumna das to finish the translations and purports.

Still another misconception is that Srila Prabhupada gave orders to change his published books after his disappearance. No evidence exists to support this claim. In fact, he gave many orders not to change his books. “Yes, there is no need for corrections for the first and second Cantos. Whatever is there is alright.” (Letter to Radhaballabha, May 4, 1976) Regarding the Bhagavad-gita manuscript prepared for the 1972 MacMillan publication, he wrote, “So far changing the working of verse or purport of 12:12 discussed before, it may remain as it is.” (Letter to Jayadvaita, March 17, 1971) Apparently Srila Prabhupada rejected Jayadvaita’s suggestions in favor of leaving the manuscript “as it is.” Yet three words in that purport were changed for the unauthorized 1983 revision. **

Those familiar with Srila Prabhupada’s management understand that he would have given important orders to change his published books to the BBT Trustees, the GBC members, and Pradyumna, his highly qualified translator. So why are there no orders from Srila Prabhupada to his important leaders? Why would he grant permission to rewrite his Bhagavad-gita to devotees who were not important leaders before his disappearance?

HIDDEN CO-AUTHORS

What is so-called editing that is independent from Srila Prabhupada’s order? Factually, it is not editing, it is rewriting of his books. The so-called editors are acting like authors. They are really co-authors because they are rewriting books written by another author, i.e., Srila Prabhupada. And, they are really hidden co-authors because they rewrite his books while hiding behind the good name of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. The hidden co-authors present their own translations and opinions hidden within Srila Prabhupada’s books.

In contrast, honest co-authors always publish their names, and sometimes they describe their individual contributions. In any case, their readers understand that two or more authors wrote the book. A famous example of co-authoring is a book about grammar and writing, The Elements of Style by William Strunk Jr. and E.B. White (Fourth edition, 2000, published by Longman Publishers). In it, White explained his role as co-author and his changes to Strunk’s original book. White also claimed credit for writing the section on style.

CHANGES TO THE BOOKS

The problem of hidden co-authors even occurred during Srila Prabhupada’s physical presence. Some disciples deviated from the honest relationship between Srila Prabhupada as author and the disciples as editors. Such persons changed his manuscripts and printed books without his permission and knowledge. After discovering these unauthorized changes, Srila Prabhupada strongly chastised the persons involved and demanded the removal of the changes. For example, during a Srimad Bhagavatam class, Nitai das read a manuscript translation which contained unauthorized changes.

Nitai: “At the time of death, Ajamila saw three awkward persons… His small child, Narayana, was playing a little distance off, and with tearful eyes and great anxiety, he called the name of his son very loudly three times, ‘Narayana, Narayana, Narayana!” (SB 6.1.28-29)
Srila Prabhupada: Is there “three times?”
Nitai: It said in the manuscript. The manuscript said “three times.”
Srila Prabhupada: Who said in the manuscript? There is no three times. Not “Narayana” three times. One time, “O Narayana,” that’s all. So did I say “three times?” No, it is not said here. You should correct it. Once, “O Narayana,” that’s all. There is no reason of calling three times. There is no mention here. Once is sufficient. (laughter) …Uccair ajuhava, very loudly, “Narayana!” Like that. That’s all. Uccair ajuhava akulendriyah. So you edited it? Not yet?
Nitai: No
Srila Prabhupada: So you should keep at least what is there. (Transcription of recorded lecture for S.B. 6.1.28-29, Philadelphia, July 13, 1975)

Despite his continual efforts to rectify and train his editors, they continued to make unauthorized changes. By June of 1977, Srila Prabhupada expressed his doubt that his leading editors would follow his order to remove over 100 changes to the Sri Isopanisad and publish it as the original (1969) printing.   He said, “It is a very serious situation. You write one letter that ‘Why you have made so many changes?’ And whom to write? Who will care? All rascals are there! Write Satsvarupa that ‘This is the position. They are doing anything and everything at their whim. The next printing should be again to the original way.”  (Conversation with with Srila Prabhupada and Yasoda-nandana, June 22, 1977)

After Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance, the hidden co-authors made major changes to Bhagavad-gita As It Is (1972 edition). A major change is the language, the writing style, of the Bhagavad-gita translations. For example, Srila Prabhupada originally published (1972 edition), Chapter 7, verse 24 as “Unintelligent men, who know Me not, think that I have assumed this form and personality. Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature, which is changeless and supreme.” In contrast, the hidden co-authors (1983 revision) rewrote the verse as “Unintelligent men, who do not know Me perfectly, think that I, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna, was impersonal before and have now assumed this personality. Due to their small knowledge, they do not know My higher nature, which is imperishable and supreme.”

The stark contrast between the two versions clearly indicates that they were written by two different authors. Srila Prabhupada wrote the original version, and the hidden co-authors wrote the later version.

Other Bhagavad-gita verses in the rewritten, 1983 edition display similar changes. The hidden co-authors substituted a lower level writing style not intended for college educated readers. Therefore, the change in writing style indicates a change in audience, the intended readers. Srila Prabhupada wrote for a college-educated, more intelligent audience; whereas, the hidden co-authors wrote for a less intelligent audience.

The co-authored Bhagavad-gita (1983 revision) is not suitable for college classrooms. But Srila Prabhupada’s plan differed: “…our propaganda should be going on for drawing attention of the educational institutions to accept our books at least in the religious courses.” (Letter to Satsvarupa, Nov. 2, 1973) “I am so glad to learn that you are having nice success in placing my books in the libraries and in schools and colleges…. I am sure that this will revolutionize the thinking of thoughtful men of your country as well as the students and the professors and the ultimate end will be to save the world from the clutches of material illusory activities which is now causing havoc everywhere.” (Letter to Karandhar, Sept. 13, 1970)

Why do the hidden co-authors claim to be better translators and commentators (purport writers) than Srila Prabhupada? What are the hidden co-authors doing when they change the philosophy and preaching plans in Srila Prabhupada’s books? What is their purpose?

The hidden co-authors usurp Srila Prabhupada’ property, his books, by making changes not authorized by him. They seize and hold his books by force without the spiritual right to do so. The hidden co-authors force changes without any order to do so. They blatantly disobey his direct order to maintain the books as originally published. They use BBT money and diplomacy to defeat opposition to their usurpation. The hidden co-authors behave like squatters who forcibly and unlawfully take over someone’s property and use it for their own purpose.

The hidden co-authors mislead the devotees and the innocent public by publishing their own opinions under Srila Prabhupada’s good name. What is their purpose? They are acting like hidden founder-acaryas because they rewrite sastra (Vedic scripture) intended for the next 9500 years. Because they reject Srila Prabhupada’s order to maintain his books as published, they freely inject their own opinions.

The proper behavior of a disciple or follower is to follow the spiritual master’s order. Srila Prabhupada explained: “Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura has stated that the order of the spiritual master is the life and soul of the disciples. As a man cannot separate his life from his body, so a disciple cannot separate the order of the spiritual master from his life. If a disciple follows the instruction of the spiritual master in that way, he is sure to become perfect.” (Srimad Bhagavatam 3.24.13, 1974, 1st printing)

On the basis of this instruction, sincere devotees have the duty and the right to reject all co-authored changes to Srila Prabhupada’s books. We must follow Srila Prabhupada, not the hidden co-authors because he can liberate anyone who follows him.

Srila Prabhupada wrote: “Not a single person in the West became Krsna conscious before the Krsna consciousness movement was founded. But when the same Bhagavad-gita was presented as it is through the disciplic succession, the effect of spiritual realization was immediately manifested.”   (Srimad Bhagavatam, 4.22.19, 1978, 2nd printing)

By following Srila Prabhupada, we can make spiritual progress and preach Lord Caitanya’s movement all over the world. And Srila Prabhupada, through his Prabhupada-vani – his books and teachings, can take anyone back home, back to Godhead.

*The late wife of Rupanuga das, who wrote this essay anonymously in 2006 and posted it on Adi-vani

**This instruction was followed in 1972 edition. When challenged why the changes were made later in the 1983 edition, after Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance, the following reply was received.

“The story on 12:12:

I asked Srila Prabhupada whether the sequence of items mentioned in the verse (which to me seemed inconsistent with the Sanskrit) should be changed. He said no. Respecting his order, I left the verse as is.

Srila Prabhupada gave a very specific answer to a very specific question.

Someone now wants to extend Srila Prabhupada’s specific answer to make it a general order to the effect that not a word of the purport should be changed. And so the obviously erroneous “regulated principles” — a term that makes no sense — must be forever preserved, and not revised to the usual and sensible “regulative principles,” lest we stand in defiance of Srila Prabhupada’s sacred order.

This is a point of view with which I respectfully disagree.”
From Jayadvaita Swami August 25, 2011

Actually in 12:12 Srila Prabhupada is referring to the general practices or regulations of devotional service or Bhakti Yoga, not simply the “four regulative principles”.