Response to Niscala Devi Dasi on the book changes

My response to an article by Niscala Devi Dasi posted on oneiskcon.com:

http://www.oneiskcon.com/the-actual-changes-to-srila-prabhupadas-books-and-his-standards/#comment-655

As Govinda Dasi Mataji says posthumous editing must be done according to a specific protocol. It needs to be stated on the book that is was posthumously edited, by whom, what was edited, and the date.

The problem with the new gita is that it not only lacks these informations, but it also has Prabhupada’s signature as if it was his original version, even though he never asked for this new edition nor approved it.

Editing something in Prabhupada’s books can only be done if the following is verified:

1. The change must not violate the principle of arsa-prayoga.

2. The change must be done

  • on the basis of a direct order, or
  • the change must be shown to be permitted, and/or
  • approved after it is done.

3. The change must not be needless (Prabhupada did not want needless changes)

4. We must be 100% sure (there must absolutely no doubt) that Prabhupada wanted this specific change (a principle of caution must be observed).

We know the proper protocol for posthumous editing never has been followed by BTT International. In addition to this: can anyone present just one change in Prabhupada’s books made posthumously that does not violate at least of the above points? Continue reading