Janmastami das, Mar 27 2009, West Virginia USA — One of ISKCON’s current and more prolific bloggers is Bhakta Eric, (http://www.littleblackstar.com/blog/) who recently posted this alleged “spiritual knowledge”. Clearly, if the ISKCON he purports to speak for felt that he was misrepresenting the facts, they would admonish him rather than making him a contributing editor at the Planet ISKCON. If, however, the points that the powers that be want made are as volatile and politically incorrect as some now being brought up, it would behoove them to have a surrogate speak “the philosophy” vicariously for them.
Aside from inane postulates such as “In the original Sanskrit, it is a list: those of lower birth, women, vaisyas, also sudras. But in Srila Prabhupada’s translation the list is describing “lower birth.” He describes “lower birth” as women, vaisyas and sudras.” While I don’t believe he was exposing a prejudice here, he certainly could have phrased it in a clearer way”. And, “In no other Gaudiya-Vaisnava translation and commentary that I’ve seen is it translated as such.”
We find accusations about the various errors he finds in Srila Prabhupada’s writings. One must be struck with wonder as to whom this bhakta aspires to seek initiation from. One who feels the need to issue his bhakta’s eye view of Srila Prabhupada’s mistakes, complete with his analysis and corrections, must surely find some of ISKCON’s “in good standing” gurus highly attractive.
The magnitude of the deviation is obvious when some overly pampered bhakta has the audacity to criticise Srila Prabhupada’s Bhaktivedanta purports because the idiots that he has been reciting Gita with for his entire time in association with ISKCON have no real understanding or appreciation of the mass of information they almost have at their disposal. These are the times we find ourselves immersed in. Can the massive correction be far off?
Eric’s Blog
Bhakta Eric, USA: “Though *who* may be of lower birth?
A little while ago, I wrote an entry entitled “Questioning Srila Prabhupada.” This is the first toe-dipping into that arena.
The quote in question is from Bhagavad-gita 9.32:
O son of Prtha, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth-women, vaisyas [merchants], as well as sudras [workers]-can approach the supreme destination.
What is actually being said is those that take shelter in Krishna can approach the supreme destination. That’s the whole intent of the verse.
Both Krishna (in the original Sanskrit) and Srila Prabhupada (in the translation) mention “women, vaisyas and sudras.”
In the original Sanskrit, it is a list: those of lower birth, women, vaisyas, also sudras. But in Srila Prabhupada’s translation the list is describing “lower birth.” He describes “lower birth” as women, vaisyas and sudras.
This, of course, is where the controversy is.
In no other Gaudiya-Vaisnava translation and commentary that I’ve seen is it translated as such. The verse is a great one. It is saying that love of God is available to anyone without discrimination. However, it also appears that Srila Prabhupada is discriminating against women, vaisyas and sudras, calling them “lower birth.”
To me, this term is not so much insulting as it is truthful. I have always taken it to mean “worse situation from birth.” Technically, the word “papa-yonayah” means “troubled womb.”
If someone is, for instance, born a black woman or in a working class family, it’s probably going to be a tougher life than someone born as a while male in a rich family. That’s just a fact. And technically, one would be a “higher birth” and the other a “lower birth.”
I don’t see this particular verse as Srila Prabhupada saying that “women are worse than men.” The real purport is that everyone is eligible, no matter your social status.
Like I said before, the original Sanskrit and every other translation avoids this confusion and does not claim that “women, vaisyas and sudras” are of a lower birth. But it does mention “papa-yonaya” – basically troubled families.
Why Srila Prabhupada chose to translate it this way is beyond me. While I don’t believe he was exposing a prejudice here, he certainly could have phrased it in a clearer way. After all, this is a very anti-prejudicial statement by Krishna.
Again, my take on it is that women, sudras, people from troubled families or pretty much anyone that’s going to get a crappy end of the stuck due to how they were born and where (black, gay, poor in a place that is prejudiced against them) is, by definition a “lower birth.” It’s not going to be an easy life because of the situation at birth.
“Lower birth” is a material designation, it has nothing to do with the spiritual (as this verse says). However, Srila Prabhupada’s choice to translate it like this could easily turn off women (right away) and workers/farmers when they figure out what “sudras” and “vaisyas” are. Someone could easily take this to mean that Srila Prabhupada is being prejudiced against them – and in his translation that appears to be so.
If he had translated it as it was in Sanskrit and as other acaryas and gurus in our line have translated it, it would be much clearer and wouldn’t require a long explanation.”
RAY LANTHIER, Mar 29, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA: Janmastami dasa in his article, “The View from Inside the Cracker Barrel”, brings to light the now long insidious practice of ‘correcting’ Srila Prabhupada’s extant writings. Many of these edits are trivial (and therefore unnecessary and meaningless). Some are worse, changing the purport of the text.
The erstwhile Bhakta Eric would rather commit an offense to a great devotee than overlook the absence of a comma. This is classic Vaisnava aparadha. Criticize the moon because it has spots and/or you imagine it has spots. But if it were only puppet bhaktas, things wouldn’t be so bad. The so-called BBTI editors are in the lead, buzzing like house flies to find some words to interpolate. What’s a brahmin to do?
I was privy to one these editorial fits during one of my visits to New Dwaraka, reciting the ten offenses against the Holy Name taken from the Nectar of Devotion.
Dravida dasa had decided that the line, “Every devotee who claims to be a Vaisnava must guard against these offenses in order to quickly achieve the desired success†to something like, “Anyone who is trying to be a Vaisnavaâ€, because in his opinion, a devotee who claims to be a Vaisnava is not…etc. Apparently Srila Prabhupada didn’t catch that subtlety of interpretation that the more insightful and intelligent disciple was able to discern.
What is significant is that nobody would have dared change a letter of this wonderful translation, which was partial to Srila Prabhupada, while he was physically present. And why didn’t the superior scholarship of a Dravida raise the question then? Because he knew that his change would have been rejected. So this editorial hubris is the cowardly vulture mentality of an envious disciple, attacking the corpus of the Spiritual Master’s work, when he is no longer physically present to defend it.
Why should this surprise us, when the sacred legacy of the ISKCON infrastructure, which is an extension of the Founder/Acarya’s body, the Spiritual Master’s property, has been ravaged? It is open season for materialist jackals and disciplic imposters to plunder the priceless treasures of the Spiritual Master’s legacy. This is the desecration that often happens when a great saint leaves the world. Pseudo-Christians and their looting and pillaging Crusades are a classic example. Hopefully this demonic celebration of carrying away the divine booty will not succeed in misdirecting sincere souls – who will refuse to patronize the sordid and defamatory flea market of editorial ‘corrections’.
If you see in Srila Prabhupada’s original purple edition of this verse it is given as “lower birth,” and now it is “lower birth-” The difference between the dash and the comma is the difference between 3 categories and 4 categories. Sridhara Swami, has commented as this verse meaning that those of papa yonayah, those who family traditions are inherently sinful can give those up and take shelter of Krishna and achieve the Supreme Destination. Women, can also achieve Krishna, despite their lack of scriptural knowledge, which might have been traditionally lacking. Vaishyas are simply engaged in business and agriculture, and sudras are also devoid of Vedic study, sanskrit grammar etc. but they can also achieve success.
One other point I would like to point out is that, Srila Prabhupada was dictating his translations and his disciples were typing them up. In the original manuscript you will find a comma instead of a dash.
Last point, read in the Bhagavatam 1.5.11 “Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.”
Yes i do support this artical.
Because, there is not only educated issue’s, but to much politic in the management. A person become a devotee to go back home to back to godhead. But many bramachari’s get kick out from the temple and become a roaming devotee or back to they’re karmi life.
As long as we in this material world(dukhalayam) we have to suffer.
But if the temple management not intrested in solving or to develop spiritual progress. Is that the devotees problem? Seen this bramachari wanted to develop the krishna consciousness it seems very difficult in and temple now adays. There are very much in making money and develop materialy or grouping.
Prabhupada has said” We have sufficent temple for preaching, now we have to boil the milk” . I don’t see anyone is intrested to develop spiritual upliftment. Many temple recomended to this process ” chant 16 round and make money and enjoy prashadam”.
A new bhakta should chant 16 rounds compolsary. But more then 6yrs devotee should chant more rounds rather then chant 16 round. If you only chant 16 round do you thing you can go back to godhead.
Haridas thakur chant 300.000 times and 6 goswami’s chant at lest 100,000 times a day. Where is our 16 rounds chants will leed too?
Let say the deovotees is not qualified.. Did the devotee should kick out from the temple? This has done.
In my question is….! Is the Iskcon GBC is responsible for this problem or how could this problem will be solve in the movement of ISKCON.
Prabhupada has build a house for the world to be take shelter but the members of the movement was killing the devotee’s.
Prabhupada made GBC to expand the movement to grow the devotee also not only in materialy.
THE INTRUCTION OF THE ACHARYA IS THAT “SERIOUS KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS IS THE ONLY WAY TO GO BACK TO GODHEAD”.
Pls do take some action on this matter. We want golaka dham not heavenly planet.