Tag Archives: Jayadvaita

09.04.14
by

Not “Closer to Prabhupada” (Bg. 18.2)

Jayadvaita Swami and BBTI’s claim to fame:

Screen Shot 2014-09-04 at 21.27.05

Let us (again) take a look at this claim.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Text 18.2:

Original and authorized 1972 edition of Bhagavad-gita As It Is: 

“The Supreme Lord said, To give up the results of all activities is called renunciation [tyaga] by the wise. And that state is called the renounced order of life [sannyäsa] by great learned men.”

BBTI’s unauthorized 1983 edition of Bhagavad-gita As It Is:

“The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: The giving up of activities that are based on material desire is what great learned men call the renounced order of life [sannyasa]. And giving up the results of all activities is what the wise call renunciation [tyaga].”

“Original Manuscript”:

Screen Shot 2014-08-30 at 14.23.28 

This is NOT an example of Jayadvaita Swami bringing us “Closer to Prabhupada!” On the contrary, he has (again) taken the Bhagavad-gita As It Is further away from Srila Prabhupada. In other words, we are not reading Srila Prabhupada. We are reading what the hidden co-author, Jayadvaita Swami, wrote.

Their claim to fame is a falsehood.

08.07.14
by

The “Book Changes” Conflict (Parasurama Dasa)

Parasurama_leading_kirtan_in_Oslo

BY: PARASURAM DAS (From Sampradaya Sun)

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

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

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

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

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

07.26.14
by

Proof Positive: An Appeal to Jayadvaita Swami for Clarification (Part 1)

Screen Shot 2014-07-26 at 19.25.48

BY: THE ASSEMBLED DEVOTEES

Jul 22, 2014 — GLOBAL (SUN) — Let us first offer our obeisances to our Spiritual Master, His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.

om ajnana-timirandhasya jnananjana-salakaya
caksur unmilitam yena tasmai sri-gurave namahAlso, let us extend our respects to H.H. Jayadvaita Swami. We pray he will understand the concerns expressed in this essay and not construe our presentation as something other than a quest for truth.

In a conversation with Govinda dasi in 2003 (see Appendix A), H.H. Jayadvaita Swami repeatedly denied that Srila Prabhupada saw the galley proofs for his 1972 MacMillan edition of Bhagavad-Gita, indicating there were mistakes Prabhupada would not have allowed, implying this is why the book needed re-editing.

Jayadvaita Swami stated:

“He [Srila Prabhupada] never saw the proofs in 1972.”

“No he did not.”

“Prabhupada didn’t see the galley proofs of the 1972 edition.”

“But he didn’t see the galley proofs for the 1972 one…”

“there was no opportunity to like send Prabhupada back and forth, like sending him the second chapter and getting it back and asking questions; it just didn’t happen.”

“I could tell you that some of the verses that some of the BBT staff questioned, Prabhupada would never have approved. I can say with confidence, Prabhupada would never have approved.”

“And the unabridged edition he really didn’t see in its preparation for its, um, pre-publication stages”

The above statements appear to be in stark contradiction to the following letter from Srila Prabhupada to Jayadvaita found in the Bhaktivedanta Vedabase (Prabhupada regularly referred to galley proofs as “blue-prints” – see Appendix B).

SP Letter to Jayadvaita- Los Angeles, May 28, 1972:

“My Dear Jayadvaita, Please accept my blessings. I have received your letter dated May 26th, 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.”

After receiving the blue-print copies, Srila Prabhupada states “it is very nice”, gives no indication that he found any mistakes, and expresses anticipation to see the completed book. It would oppose reason to argue that the above letter does not indicate Srila Prabhupada’s approval of the blue-prints/galley proofs. In absence of evidence to the contrary, the May 28th letter proves that not only did Srila Prabhupada see and approve the blue-prints/galley proofs but that Jayadvaita himself sent them to His Divine Grace.

The printing of Bhagavd-gita As It Is in 1972 was to be the very first publication of Srila Prabhupada’s unabridged version of the book and it was about to be printed by a world-renowned publishing house. This was a very important event and a very significant milestone in Srila Prabhupada’s literary corpus—presumably something a disciple involved at responsible levels of the book production process would not take lightly or easily forget. Taking all these factors into consideration, is it unreasonable to wonder how Jayadvaita Swami not only forgot he had sent Prabhupada the blue-prints, but also forgot Prabhupada personally acknowledged receipt of them and had indeed approved them? In addition, it seems Jayadvaita Swami never came across the digital copy of the above letter in the Bhaktivedanta Vedabase during his otherwise scrupulous research regarding BBT editing.

As disciples of Srila Prabhupada, we feel duty bound to petition Jayadvaita Swami to explain these discrepancies to the Vaisnava community. At the same time we caution our readers notto rush to judgment without allowing Jayadvaita Swami a chance to respond. We concede that there may have been extenuating circumstances that we are yet unaware of. Perhaps Jayadvaita Swami has letters from Srila Prabhupada that never made it to the Bhaktivedanta Archives or other evidence that could shed light on this issue. If so, we hope he will share them with the assembled devotees and uproot our reasonable doubts. Under the circumstances, we trust he will understand why we would consider physical evidence much more compelling than personal recollection. When all the evidence is presented, if our assessments prove wrong, an apology on our part would certainly be warranted.

We conditioned souls have four defects. Our senses are imperfect, we fall prey to illusion, make mistakes and have a tendency to cheat. From the evidence available thus far, one would conclude that Jayadvaita Swami is also a victim of the four defects. Even if we assume the alleged error was an honest mistake, it is nonetheless, a grave mistake and it could cast doubt on his credibility as an impartial editor of the sanctified words of our Spiritual Master. It may even raise the greater question: Is it appropriate for any conditioned soul to edit the books of an empowered and fully realized nitya-siddha devotee after their departure andwithout their express approval or direct oversight?

Jayadvaita Swami Letter to Amogha Lila, quoted in Responsible Publishing:

“To my knowledge, Srila Prabhupada never asked us to re-edit the book” [1972 MacMillan edition of Bhagavad-gita As It Is]

Appendix A

Conversation between Govinda dasi and Jayadvaita Swami – Honolulu, Jan 19, 2003(emphasis is added):

Jayadvaita Maharaja: …It differs in uh, [inaudible] uh, in addition to that, of course, Prabhupada did see the galley proofs in 1968 of the abridged edition. He never saw the proofs in 1972. He wasn’t involved at any stage of the production, except, um, mainly for expressing impatience at how slow it was being turned out—a slowness for which I was partly responsible. Um, but he didn’t go over, didn’t go over the manuscript…

Govinda dasi: Srila Prabhupada didn’t see the galley proofs?

Jayadvaita Maharaja: No, he did not. [inaudible] Prabhupada didn’t see the galley proofs of the 1972 edition. But he did see the galley proofs, and we have galley proofs with Prabhupada’s handwriting and directions, just in very few places, for the original edition. But he didn’t see the galley proofs for the 1972 one…

Govinda dasi: There must be some preliminary, something that he went over, if he didn’t see the final galley proofs.

Jayadvaita Maharaja: Not that I remember.

Govinda dasi: Then he had to have… I mean, I…

Jayadvaita Maharaja: As far as I remember, he didn’t. He was just… the main thing that he was asking was, “Where is it? I’ve been hearing, ‘Just now coming, just now coming;’ I’ve been hearing that for some time now—where is the book?” The main thing that we were hearing from Prabhupada was, “Where is it?” And, um, Prabhupada at that time was already traveling extensively, um, around the world, and, uh, there was just none of this, there was no opportunity to like send Prabhupada back and forth, like sending him the second chapter and getting it back and asking questions; it just didn’t happen.

Govinda dasi: Hayagriva was living with Srila Prabhupada in ’68, and they were going over things, and that was after this book [the abridged edition] was printed. So that must have been for the ’72 one.

Jayadvaita Maharaja: He may have, for some brief time, spent some time with Prabhupada. It’s possible. Um, but the final product was certainly not, um, something that Prabhupada, um, you know, pored over the original, he just didn’t have, couldn’t possibly have the… I could tell you that some of the verses that some of the BBT staff questioned, Prabhupada would never have approved. I can say with confidence, Prabhupada would never have approved. Some of the very few verses that we had issues with, there’s no question in my mind that Prabhupada didn’t see them.

Later in the same conversation:

Jayadvaita Maharaja: Just all I really wanted to do is contribute to the history of the Gita and say that, um, what Prabhupada saw and signed off on, um, in 1968, was the abridged edition. And the unabridged edition he really didn’t see in its preparation for its, um, pre-publication stages, except perhaps there were some meetings at some point, you were there to…

SP Letter to Jayadvaita- Los Angeles, May 28, 1972:

“My Dear Jayadvaita, Please accept my blessings. I have received your letter dated May 26th, 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.”

Appendix B

The following letters show:

Srila Prabhupada regularly referred to galley proofs as blueprints
was consistent in his oversight of the editing
was meticulous in his scrutiny regarding errors

Letter to Pradyumna- Los Angeles, April 20, 1970:

“Please accept my blessings. I have just received the blueprint copy of KRSNA, the Reservoir of Pleasure and I have begun to read it through. But I notice that there are some points you should correct before the final printing.”

Letter to Brahmananda- Los Angeles, April 20, 1970:

“P.S. There are some editorial mistakes in the blueprint of The Topmost yoga.”

Letter to Brahmananda- Los Angeles, April 22, 1970:

“Please accept my blessings. Regarding the Topmost Yoga, in the blueprint there are many mistakes. I am pointing out some of them as follows:”

Letter to Brahmananda- Los Angeles, June 2, 1970:

“I have received the blueprint from Uddhava and I have already corrected 180 pages and sent it to Boston, and the balance will be sent tomorrow.”

Letter to Brahmananda- Los Angeles, June 19, 1970:

“Regarding Bhagavatam printing, I have received the blueprint copy of 1st chapter, 2nd Canto, and it is very nicely done. The style is to the standard of my previous books.”

Letter to Uddhava – Los Angeles, July 11, 1970:

“Please accept my blessings. I beg to thank you for your letter dated 6th July, 1970, along with the blueprint copy of the Lord in the Heart. Thank you very much. It is alright to go ahead with the printing of this second chapter. I have approved all the questionable points noted by Pradyumna, so it is alright.”

Letter to Uddhava- Los Angeles, July 14, 1970:

“Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 12th July, 1970, along with the blueprint for the third chapter of Srimad-Bhagavatam Second Canto, entitled “Pure Devotional Service: the Change in Heart.” I have looked over the blueprint and noted a few points to be corrected, so I am sending back the blueprint to you for seeing the necessary changes as they are in the text.”

Letter to Uddhava- Los Angeles, July 24, 1970:

“Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge your letter dated 20th July, 1970, along with the blueprint for chapter 4 Second Canto Srimad-Bhagavatam. I have gone through the blueprint and I am also sending the necessary Sanskrit corrections to Pradyumna. So when these corrections are made then you can print immediately.”

Based on the above letters, one might ask: If Srila Prabhupada had wanted any corrections made in the blue-prints of the ’72 Gita, would he not have stated so?

 

06.24.14
by

See the changes to Bg. 9.1

Screenshot 2014-06-21 23.45.09

 Click to enlarge the picture.

Download as PDF here:

change-to-bg-table-9.1.

 

04.13.14
by

Deleting “whatever” (Bg. 6.26)

Bg. 6.26:

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

Screenshot 2014-04-13 12.00.37

Original and authorized 1972 Macmillan edition:

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

BBT International’s posthumously edited 1983 edition:

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

What did Srila Prabhupada think about the verse?

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

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

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

 yataḥ-whatever; yataḥ;-wherever

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

yataḥ yataḥ — wherever

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

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

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

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

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

03.29.14
by

“Secret wisdom” deleted from Bhagavad-gita As It Is (Bg. 9.1)

By Ajit Krishna Dasa

Bg. 9.1:

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

Screenshot 2014-03-29 12.53.56

Original and authorized 1972 Macmillan edition:

“The Supreme Lord said: My dear Arjuna, because you are never envious of Me, I shall impart to you this most secret wisdom, knowing which you shall be relieved of the miseries of material existence.”

BBT International’s posthumously edited 1983 edition:

“The Supreme Personality of Godhead said: My dear Arjuna, because you are never envious of Me, I shall impart to you this most confidential knowledge and realization, knowing which you shall be relieved of the miseries of material existence.”

Here we, again, see that Jayadvaita Swami’s editing often takes us further away from Srila Prabhupada. We see again and again that the BBT International’s claim to fame, namely that they are making the books “closer to Prabhupada” is false. In fact they are deliberately changing Srila Prabhupada’s own chosen words. In other words, they are violating the principle of arsa-prayoga – again and again.

How long will this be allowed to go on?

03.27.14
by

Jayadvaita Swami takes a step in the right direction

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

Andrew Whitlock wrote in a mail to Jayadvaita Swami:

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

Jayadvaita Swami replied:

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

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

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

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

 

03.22.14
by

Jayadvaita Swami’s “Then it is alright” argument defeated

On BBT International’s website we find this video:

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

In the video Jayadvaita Swami says:

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

 A few points about this story:

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

As Srila Prabhupada said about such stories:

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

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

And as Jayadvaita Swami says:

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

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

Skærmbillede 2013-12-06 kl. 20.59.15

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

3. If Jayadvaita Swami’s anecdote is true, then Prabhupada told him that if he had made the text closer to what Prabhupada originally said, then it was okay.

However, in my previous articles to Jayadvaita Swami I have referred to articles where it is clearly documented that he has:

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

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

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

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

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

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

03.18.14
by

Jayadvaita Swami’s Reward (Bg 4.11)

Screenshot 2014-03-13 10.45.34Jayadvaita Swami

By Ajit Krishna Dasa

BG 4.11:

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

Screenshot 2014-03-18 21.02.45Click to enlarge picture

Original and authorized 1972 Macmillan edition:

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

BBT International’s posthumously changed 1983 edition:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Prabhupada:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

03.13.14
by

“Mendacious Tamohara” – The newbie GBC chairman

By Gopinath Dasa

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

TamoharaTamohara Dasa

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

Their lie and deception is twofold;

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

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

This opens up a Pandora’s Box of questions…

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

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

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

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

BBT? BBTI? Who’s who?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here is one but small example of such theorizing;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Looking forward to seeing this day taking place

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

Gopinath dasa