What is your understanding of the editing of Prabhupada books?

Understanding the Controversy Over Book Changes

Regarding the issue of book changes, somehow that topic has not caught my interest deeply, and I’ve often wondered why people are so fixated on it. Still, I’ll share my quick understanding, based on whatever I’ve studied.

The way Srila Prabhupada’s books have come into existence is quite an unusual process compared to how most books are written. While some spiritual teachers’ books may have evolved in similar ways, most authors usually sit down and write their books themselves—either by hand or by typing—and they carefully review any edits. Prabhupada, however, did not personally check all the edits. But when he noticed any edits that he felt were inappropriate or incorrect, he asked the devotees to correct them.

The Five Stages of Book Preparation

To understand the issue better, we can look at the stages involved in the creation of Prabhupada’s books. I propose a simple model of five stages:

• Stage 0 (0D) – Dictation: Prabhupada would dictate his content. In a few cases, he also typed himself, but he practically never handwrote his works.
• Stage 1 (1T) – Transcription: The dictated content (0D) was transcribed by devotees.
• Stage 2 (2P) – Initial Publication: The transcribed text was edited and then published. This editing involved basic grammar correction and sometimes minor interpretative changes.
• Stage 3 (3P) – Publication during Prabhupada’s lifetime: This included further edited versions that were approved or at least not objected to by Prabhupada during his physical presence.
• Stage 4 (4E) – Edited editions after Prabhupada’s departure: Editors attempted to revise based on listening to original audio recordings and comparing them with transcriptions and printed versions. This stage is where most of the controversy arises.

Types of Editorial Changes

Editing is essential because spoken words are not always suitable for direct publication. Based on my understanding, editorial changes generally fall into five categories:

1. Basic Grammar and Punctuation Fixes – These are universally accepted and necessary.
2. Incorrect Attribution of Words – For example, Prabhupada may refer to something inaccurately, such as confusing a reference point or mislabeling a term.
3. Incorrect Quotation of Verses – E.g., quoting a verse slightly wrong due to memory or dictation error.
4. Improper Wording or Ambiguity – An example is the phrase “O the King,” which can misleadingly suggest a person named “O.” The correct rendering should be “O King.”
5. Content Issues or Problematic Phrasing – For instance, in one lecture, Prabhupada said the blood from a fight reached the sun, to indicate that the sun is closer than the moon. Later, Harikesh Prabhu pointed out that the battle he referred to took place on another planet. When this was brought to Prabhupada’s attention, he admitted the point was more to discredit scientific claims and asked that the line be edited out.

Similarly, Prabhupada used certain analogies—like the one involving a Black man inside a grand car—to illustrate concepts. Today, these examples could be seen as racially insensitive. Such cases fall into the realm of problematic content.

Points of Agreement and Contention

Most devotees agree on the need for grammar corrections (Category 1) and even for addressing obvious misquotes or misattributions (Categories 2 and 3). The real debate arises around the fourth and fifth types of edits—especially when they involve interpretation or what might seem like modifying Prabhupada’s intent.

There have been instances where editors have gone too far, though such cases are a minority—perhaps two to five out of hundreds. Still, these become the basis for significant mistrust.

Some major changes have sparked agitation, but when carefully examined, they often don’t fall under malicious alteration but rather result from correcting earlier transcription errors. For instance, in the early days, devotees sometimes transcribed Prabhupada’s dictations inaccurately. Later publications were based on these faulty transcriptions, leading people to assume that the first published version was the “original.”

However, the real original is Prabhupada’s dictated word (0D), and not necessarily the first printed edition (2P or 3P). So recent changes in the edited editions (4E) are attempts to return to a more accurate rendering of Prabhupada’s spoken words.

Institutional Handling and Divergences

Because of the sensitivity of this issue, the BBT (Bhaktivedanta Book Trust) formed a committee to review and regulate editorial policies. After much deliberation, they finalized new editorial guidelines. These are now being used to systematically review each change, chapter by chapter, starting with the Bhagavad-gita—a process that may take years due to its meticulous nature.

This initiative was undertaken primarily by the North American BBT. However, it has not been accepted by all. For instance, the ritvik groups insist on publishing Prabhupada’s unedited words and claim that some original dictations were deliberately erased. They argue that editing is being used to distort Prabhupada’s teachings and weaken his position, particularly concerning the guru issue.

There is also a historical conflict between the Indian BBT and the North American BBT. The Indian BBT has not accepted the American committee’s guidelines. They prefer to publish what they see as Prabhupada’s “original” words. But the question remains—what exactly is the original? The audio? The transcript? The first publication?

This remains a matter of ongoing discussion and debate.