Did Prabhupada sanction the post-publishing editing of his books?
Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.
Hare Krishna, it's a long question by K. J. Devdas. I'll read the question and I will answer the question one by one. Between the first release of the Macmillan edition and the year 1977, in which La Prabhupada disappeared, there could have been many reprints of Bhagavad Gita as it is.
Why these changes were not incorporated those times? This question is basically a long comment to an earlier question about why are there differences between the unedited Gita and the Bhagavad Gita as it is which is being printed now. So, going over the timeline, first in 1968, the Collier edition was published, which is basically like a Macmillan subdivision. And then that was unabridged.
Sorry, that was abridged, it was condensed. In 1972, the unabridged edition was published. And then after that, ISKCON itself started publishing it through ISKCON Press, which later became BBT.
So now, the question is that when the unabridged Gita was published, why is after that, for five years when Shri Prabhupada was there, why were the changes not incorporated at that time? The changes are discovered gradually. Someone while reading might discover a spelling mistake. Somebody might discover something else.
And as the changes are discovered, that needs to be corrected. So, as they were discovered, they were corrected. Where is the documentary evidence that Shri Prabhupada wanted those changes made to his Bhagavad Gita as it is? The documentary evidence is there on bbtedit.com. And I'm quoting from there.
This is a lecture of Shri Prabhupada on January 1, 1974. So, Prabhupada is doing the word-to-word reading of during the class and he is saying, Purushadai by men. So, that is a word-to-word translation.
Purushadai, Purushadai means Rakshasa, the cannibals. So, there has been cannibals it should be. And now Pradyumna Prabhu was Prabhupada's assistant.
Prabhupada called him Panditji. And he was quite a scholarly person. Prabhupada said, you can have a notebook.
Whenever there is some discrepancy, you note in the next. That is for the next printing. Purushadai means by the cannibals, Rakshasas.
Word-to-word reading continues. So, Shri Prabhupada made no moratorium, no banning on editing. Once the book is published, it can never be edited at all afterwards.
So, Prabhupada told his editors that whenever you find any mistake, keep a record and correct it in the next printing. So, it is an ongoing process and that is what the editors are doing. Now, when Shri Prabhupada was there, there is another, Pradyumna Prabhu is telling in another lecture that Prabhupada said, if there is one mistake in the book, it kills the book.
So, make sure that there are no mistakes. And the devotees work painstakingly over the years to correct them. So, there is, first of all, there is very clear evidence that Shri Prabhupada did indeed want that if any mistakes are found, they be corrected.
Any editing that was needed to be done, that was done. So, there is documentary evidence for that quite clearly. So, why were they not incorporated? Because the discovery was gradual and at that time there was no email, there was no internet.
So, some devotee in some part of the world discovered and that devotee will send a mail and that will get incorporated and then it has to be sent to all the printing presses in different parts of the world and changing it to take time. So, it was happening gradually. Now, justifying the changes, this is the question continued.
Now, justifying the changes is like argument between lawyers where the most powerful in arguing wins no matter what the truth is. An argument like this is basically an argument to reject arguments without considering what the truth is. One is not coming to know the facts, one is simply deciding that there is no need to have an argument.
So, this is not a logical argument at all. Where is the basis for saying that the matter is being decided based on who is powerful and who is not powerful? The matter is being decided based on what is the evidence and whatever changes are being made, they are made entirely transparently as a whole website dedicated to explaining every single change. So, where does the issue of power come into the picture at all? Rather, there is, this is an argument to reject all argument and this is itself not indicative of very open-minded attitude.
The next part of the question is, we do not need sophisticated flowery language nor the best use of English language. For us, the words come out from a pure devotee is enough, that will do everything required spiritually. Please leave us with the original manuscript.
We do not want the book written in your best language. Yes, it does seem that BBT is meant to fulfil the desires of this anonymous we, the particular questioner and other people like him. But BBT was established by Shila Prabhupada and is meant to do what Shila Prabhupada wanted to be done.
And Shila Prabhupada told his editors to edit the books and he told them to continue editing those books so that all mistakes were removed over a period of time. So, expecting that BBT put aside Prabhupada's explicit instructions so as to do something which a small group of people want to do, that is entirely unreasonable and by doing this, BBT will be unfaithful to Shila Prabhupada. Now, are the words coming from a pure devotee enough? The question here is, are the words of the pure devotee enough for those critics? Prabhupada wanted his disciples to edit the books and are those words not enough for these devotees? So, we are not talking about spiritual potency over here.
Even the unedited words have spiritual potency. But the question is what did Shila Prabhupada want for his books? Shila Prabhupada wanted editing and there are extensive codes for this. If you again go to BBTedit.com, there are many, many codes what Prabhupada was saying that the books should be edited and Prabhupada expressing trust in his editors.
Jayadvait Maharaj was the main editor and Prabhupada said Jayadvait means parampara, whatever he is saying, you do it. So, Devamrith Maharaj was the chief editor, was the published production in charge over there in America and then the devotees found an extensive number of changes which needed to be done. There was Pitra Loka originally in the Gita and somebody had, that is there in the Gita in the 9th chapter and the devotees who originally had done it, they had made it Tree Loka.
So, the devotees listed it out and made changes. Now, when Prabhupada was given a huge lump of papers with all the changes which needed to be made, Prabhupada looked at it, just glanced to it and he approved it. He did not go through each of them and he said that whatever Jayadvait does, I trust it.
So, Prabhupada expressed this explicit trust in his editors. So, Prabhupada, of course, there is the spiritual potency that is there, but the point is what did Shila Prabhupada want? Did Shila Prabhupada wanted his words, which were not grammatically correct, which were not factually at times correct, to be presented as it is? He did not want that. So, we have to do what Shila Prabhupada wanted to do and his editors are working tirelessly to fulfill Prabhupada's will.
And going further, another point here is, again, the question here is the assumption that the language was made flowery. There is no question of making the language flowery. There is simply a question of making the language grammatically correct and that is what Shila Prabhupada wanted.
Making changes is not the issue. It should have been approved by the Acharya Shila Prabhupada. It has been very clearly approved.
Now, how does one know whether the changes are authorized? Shila Prabhupada gave a process for the editors to do the changes and he approved the person who is doing the changes. So, one does not need to stretch one's imagination further. It is clear that Shila Prabhupada authorized these changes.
Again, there is this link, if you go to BVT edit, all the answers will be there. Leaving the decision to the editors is not acceptable because we are not pure devotees. Yes, if we are not pure devotees, then surely we should have the humility to know that those who have been serving in Prabhupada's mission for many many more years than us will know what to do and they know better how to follow Shila Prabhupada's instructions than we do.
Assuming that one knows better than what many devotees who have been working tirelessly, unflinchingly, undeviatingly for many decades, this indicates attitude that is very contrary to the attitude of a Vaishnava. So, the decision is not left to the readers. The decision is done by the trustworthy disciples of Shila Prabhupada according to the instructions given by Shila Prabhupada.
And only because there is a group of very violent protesters, violent, there are some protesters who have gone to the extent of burning the pictures of the editors. There is a group of vocal, violent, intolerant critics who have said that, who have alleged that there are changes without understanding the extensive editorial process that has gone in. So, to respond to them, the BBT and the devotees are creating websites and answering questions.
So, the readers are not left to decide. The decision has been made by Shila Prabhupada and his followers, trustworthy followers, and the readers are given the opportunity to see what the decisions are. The book should have been left as it is, because even without this so-called correction, the potency of pure devotees, Prabhupada's word will never be diminished and there is no doubt that the reader's heart will be cleansed in spite of the absence of so-called corrections.
The point is, what did Shila Prabhupada want? The point is not of spiritual potency. It's very clear that Shila Prabhupada wanted the ongoing editing of his books and that has been done. By whipping up sentiments in the name of potency of pure devotee, one is actually doing a great disservice to the pure devotee by disobeying his words and by casting those who are obeying his words in an unfaithful light.
If at all the changes were made, it should not have been marketed in the original name used by Shila Prabhupada. Instead, it should have been sold with the Bhagavad Gita with the devotees who made the changes as the author. Yes, this can be done if the devotee suggesting it can transport himself to some other planet where he can make his own conventions of whose name should be there in a book and there that can be done.
When Shila Prabhupada wanted the books published in this world, he wanted the books to be published according to the conventions that are standard and according to standard publishing conventions, whenever editing of a book is done, the editor's name never replaces the name of the author. Even if the editing is done posthumous, the author's name remains the same. So, this sort of whipping up of sentiments in the name of faithfulness to Shila Prabhupada is very unfortunate and undesirable and it can even become… definitely it is offensive to those who have tirelessly dedicated their lives to Shila Prabhupada.
Jaya Dvait Maharaj told us that for every manuscript of the Bhagavatam that they printed, they had sackfuls of proofread material. Remember that they were doing this at a time when there was no computer available. So, editing was much, much more difficult using typewriter, using printouts and then changing everything.
So, it is extremely laborious and they have done an enormous task which they have done. And in many ways, the BBT edited books are of not just comparable, but superior standards as compared to the standards of even many eminent publishing houses. I had a close friend who was a critical proofreader and the joy of his life was that he would try to find out errors in famous author's books or popular books and then he would make a list of those errors and send them to the author or the publisher saying that I found those errors.
So, he was to get pleasure in that. When he got Prabhupada's BBT books, he practically could not find anything and that was what impressed him initially and that's how he became a devotee. So, there are people who may not appreciate the spiritual potency, but when they see material efficiency, that attracts them.
And if there is material sloppiness, we will lose so many people because of that who could have been otherwise attracted to Krishna's mission and to Prabhupada's message. So, by demanding, insisting that the books be left unedited, we are firstly insisting that we are defying Prabhupada's explicit instructions that the books be edited. We are doing a disservice to Prabhupada's mission by alienating people who could have been attracted otherwise and we are offending those devotees who have served Prabhupada for decades, working tirelessly to make his message, to ensure that his message is presented in a way that Krishna Prabhupada wanted and that is according to the best standards of publishing in today's world.
Thank you.