(by Madhudvisa dasa, 2014)
Hare Krishna
As you know our relationship with Srila Prabhupada is based on our associaton with him as we read his transcendental books. Srila Prabhupada is living in his transcendental books. The authority of Srila Prabhupada’s books is lost if they are changed. And unfortunatly the BBT are constantly changing Srila Prabhupada’s books. If you are unfamiliar with this problem please refer to www.BookChanges.com
Srila Prabhupada appointed Ramesvara Prabhu as the manager of his Bhaktivedanta Book Trust (BBT) so he was responsible for organizing the printing and distribution of Srila Prabhupada’s original books. Prabhupada gave more direct personal instructions to Ramesvara on book production and distribution than any other devotee.
Fortunately Ramesvara kept a detailed diary and used that diary in an interview for the Prabhupada Lilamrta in 1981. It is because of this diary and the Lilamrta interview that Ramesvara’s memories on Srila Prabhupada’s instructions regarding the publication of his books have been very accurately and authoritatively preserved over the years.
Recently some letters from Ramesvara Prabhu have surfaced on the internet which shed a great deal of light on the book changes issue. Here are a few quotes from these letters.
“The Lilamrita interviews I found tell of Srila Prabhupada’s direct instructions regarding the size of the books, the artwork to be kept in the books, etc. – things that have already been changed so many times in the past 20 years, without understanding of Prabhupada’s orders, that it makes the “official” opening of this “change” door more ominous for the future, in ways we can’t even imagine.”
“The analysis with Dravida Prabhu left me with my deepest concern: if the changes didn’t have substantial merit but were made anyway, then regardless of the justification of “making it better” the door, the “change disease” as Srila Prabhupada called it, had been dangerously opened for anything to happen in the future after we are all long gone.”
“…an absolute position has to be reached so that before we die, we know that within the BBT and ISKCON there could never again be one single change, for any reason, ever made to Srila Prabhupada’s books.”
Ramesvara Prabhu confirms that the devotees who were responsible for approving the printing of the “Revised and Enlarged” Bhagavad-gita As It Is were not aware of the extent of the changes and only the editor was aware of the full extent of the changes.
“I have always admitted that my great failure as a trustee was not carefully reading every proposed change, and instead, relying on the endorsement of Hridayananda and Satsvarupa–along with Jayadvaita.”
“I know that in talking years ago with others on that committee [which authorized the printing of the revised and enlarged Bhagavad-gita As It Is], that they also admitted performing only a cursory review of the proposed changes…”
He also exposes the official ISKCON explanation of the book changes, “Responsible Publishing” as being a one sided presentation that ignores Srila Prabhupada’s clear statements and desires as to how his books should be published:
“The problem with the “Responsible Publishing” paper is that it is simply not the entire body of instruction, and it’s critics point out that it is one-sided and obviously leaves out many of Prabhupada’s cautionary instructions against unnecessary change…
“The “Responsible Publishing” (RP) paper has either a significant misleading or a significant historical inaccuracy. There are sites which claim to list more than 5,000 changes. Certainly there were thousands of changes. The RP paper states that every change to the translations was reviewed and approved by the Trustees, leading ISKCON devotees, the GBC, etc. Later the RP cites or implies in its endorsements that all the changes were approved. Of course, NO ONE other than the editors ever saw back in 1981 or 1982 ALL the changes.”
“No one back then did their job or acted with full responsibility for what they were endorsing. l assure you that NO ONE on that Committee ever even asked to see all the changes, and we would have been astounded to have learned in 1981 or 1982 that there were thousands, maybe more than 5,000 changes. I lazily assumed that the work done on manuscripts as close to the original as possible was the only thing that mattered.”
“I failed to consider all the other Prabhupada instructions, the ramifications for making changes if they didn’t ultimately change the meaning; the effect of changes that in some cases loses the flavor of the Gita we had been studying for 10 years, and most importantly, that breaks the etiquette of changing a Sampradaya Acaraya’s books after His disappearance and opens the “change door” for possible future other changes over the decades and centuries to come. The RP paper implies that the changes were carefully reviewed and approved throughout the leadership of the BBT, GBC and ISKCON.
“I am certain that by interviewing all the leaders of that time, we would find most guilty of the same mistake that I made. It is true to state that the leaders of ISKCON at the time endorsed the changes. However, it is overtly misleading to state or suggest that the leaders actually performed a careful review. And getting back to the fact that there are thousands of changes, no leader, including the BBT Trustees, was ever shown every single change. No one! That is the sad historical fact…”
Ramesvara Prabhu does not accept the BBT’s justification for changing Srila Prabhupada’s books after his departure from the material world:
“I find it embarrassing that on the site BBTEdit.com, in the section about editing posthumously, the only quote to support touching the works of a departed Acarya is that Srila Jiva Goswami was working posthumously on Bhakti Rasamrita Sindhu. Seriously – how can any living entity compare themselves to Sri Jiva Goswami, or think because he touched the work of Sri Rupa Gosvami, therefore an editor in the lower stages of bhakti, not yet fully situated in the perfected stages of bhava (what to Speak of prema) can touch and change the words of a departed Sampradaya Acarya. Not a good example in my lowly View – it begs the question of What our editors think of themselves and their level of Krsna Consciousness. Oh well…”
Please read the letters for yourself:
Ramesvara Emails on Book Change (PDF)
If you have any comments please do not reply to this email but comment on the post at:
http://bookchanges.com/ramesvara-clears-up-the-book-changes-issue/
For more information: http://bookchanges.com/
comment by B. Radha-Govinda Swami on 28-12-14:
comment by Yasoda nandana dasa on 28-12-14:
Please accept my obeisances
All Glories to Srila Prabhupada
Kindly note that the advocates of book changing under the pretext of so-called editing are the same individuals, in collusion with the GBC, who filed in the case against Hamsadutta dasa, in a court of law in Los Angeles, California in the late 1990s, that Srila Prabhupada was just a “worker for hire” and “an employee” of ISKCON under the control of the GBC. .[see enclosed attachment]
Deluded by the modes, he thinks he is divinely inspired
Srila Prabhupada: “Therefore, it is a hazardous path of elevation that depends on personal characteristics within the jurisdiction of the three modes of nature. Without transcending these three material modes, a person will find himself securely in their clutches, and thus deluded, he will think that all his activities are divinely inspired. He will then broadcast this false concept, considering himself an advanced devotee and everyone else inferior. Impressed with his own knowledge, he will try to see God by dint of this knowledge instead acting in such a way that God will want to see him. Intoxicated by false ego, he will see his activities, which are motivated by passion, as divine. Those who are proud of their knowledge do not surrender to the Lord; instead, they try to attain the Supreme Lord’s mercy by the inductive method and thus exhibit an obnoxious mentality. One should constantly remember the Lord and pray to Him for mercy. The Lord, situated in the devotee’s heart, responds to such a prayer and illumines his heart with knowledge, which dissipates the darkness of ignorance.
Srila Prabhupada BTG 1960
“Influenced by an envious temperament and dissatisfied because of an attitude of sense gratification, mundaners criticize a real acarya. In fact, however, a bona fide acarya is non-different from the Personality of Godhead. And therefore to envy such an acarya is to envy the Personality of Godhead Himself. This will produce an effect subversive to transcendental realization.” Sri Caitanya-caritamrta – 1975 Unrevised Edition . The Spiritual Masters Adi-Lila 1.46
Yours in Srila Prabhupada’s service and in the service of His bona fide disciples.
With regards,
Yasoda nandana dasa
Bg 4.2
34
35 TEXT 2
36
37 TRANSLATION
38
39 This supreme science was thus received through the chain of
> disciplic succession, and the saintly kings understood it
> in that way. But in course of time the succession was
> broken, and therefore the science as it is appears to be
> lost.
40
41 PURPORT
42
43 It is clearly stated that the Gita was especially meant for
> the saintly kings because they were to execute its purpose
> in ruling over the citizens. Certainly Bhagavad-gita was
> never meant for the demonic persons, who would dissipate
> its value for no one’s benefit and would devise all types
> of interpretations according to personal whims. As soon as
> the original purpose was scattered by the motives of the
> unscrupulous commentators, there arose the need to
> reestablish the disciplic succession. Five thousand years
> ago it was detected by the Lord Himself that the disciplic
> succession was broken, and therefore He declared that the
> purpose of the Gita appeared to be lost. In the same way,
> at the present moment also there are so many editions of
> the Gita (especially in English), but almost all of them
> are not according to authorized disciplic succession. There
> are innumerable interpretations rendered by different
> mundane scholars, but almost all of them do not accept the
> Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna, although they make a
> good business on the words of Sri Krsna. This spirit is
> demonic, because demons do not believe in God but simply
> enjoy the property of the Supreme. Since there is a great
> need of an edition of the Gita in English, as it is
> received by the parampara (disciplic succession) system, an
> attempt is made herewith to fulfill this great want.
> Bhagavad-gita-accepted as it is-is a great boon to humanity;
> but if it is accepted as a treatise of philosophical
> speculations, it is simply a waste of time.
44