When Prabhupada did many things different from his spiritual master, how did he not change anything?

I read about Srila Bhaktisiddhantha Thakura and found that Prabhupada did many things differently from his spiritual master. Yet he said, “I haven’t changed anything.” How do we understand this?

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Hare Krishna question when Srila Prabhupada did so many things differently from the way his spiritual master Bhaktiswami Sri Thakur did how did he not change anything Srila Prabhupada often said that I did not add or delete anything, I simply gave the message as it is and yet when I read Bhakti Siddhanta Vaibhav, I found that there are many things which Prabhupada has done differently now he had Gaur Nata deities installed instead of Gaur Gadadhara as has been the standard at the time of Bhakti Siddhanta Sri Thakur he had the Guru Parampara normally it was from right to left now it has gone from left to right so there are several differences like this, I don’t want to go into the specifics, but I want to know what did Srila Prabhupada mean when he said that he did not change anything when clearly he changed many things answer when we say Srila Prabhupada presented the tradition as it is or Prabhupada says that we have to understand that the tradition has its immutability and its flexibility immutability means to not change at all and flexibility means changeability, adaptability so the tradition itself is a blend of both, immutability and changeability and flexibility in fact if you just look at the way Bhakti Siddhanta Sri Thakur presented and the way Bhakti Vinod Thakur presented there are significant differences there are practically very few places where Bhakti Vinod Thakur emphasizes the renounced order Bhakti Siddhanta Sri Thakur emphasizes the renounced order a lot or for that matter, compare Bhakti Vinod Thakur with the Goswamis, although he is called the seventh Goswami and he was very renounced but we see the Goswamis they had governmental posts and they renounced those posts and Bhakti Vinod Thakur held on to the governmental posts even when there was the independent struggle gaining momentum and many nationalistic people were against the British government, so Bhakti Vinod Thakur not only maintained the government job, he actively supported the British government so now in one sense both the Britishers and the Muslims, they are militias from the Vedic point of view, Bhakti Vinod Thakur did one thing, the Goswamis did another thing, so actually in the tradition, you know there is Sambandha, Abhidheya and Prayojan Sambandha is the philosophical knowledge of who we are and whom we are to connect with, that is we are souls, parts of Krishna and we are to connect with Krishna Abhidheya is the process by which we connect with Krishna and Prayojan is the goal, it’s ultimately love of God and the ecstasy that comes thereof so when we say that there is no change the Sambandha does not change and the Prayojan also does not change, the Sambandha gyan remains the same, but the Abhidheya is dynamic and in fact there is a clear license given by Rupa Goswami for the dynamism of Abhidheya when he says in Bhakti Vinod Thakur’s Sindhu yena kena prakarena mana krishna ni vesayet, yena kena prakarena, somehow or the other fix the mind in Krishna so every acharya will have time specific Abhidheya according to the nature of the people according to the way people are oriented or people are living, the Abhidheya has to change, that is but natural and essential so for Rupa Goswami at that time, renouncing the world was the best way he could serve he completely left his work at the Nawab Hussain Shah and then he just compiled a lot of literature and led an exemplary life of renunciation Bhakti Vinod Thakur led a life in which he stayed employed in the government and the Bhadraloka were very much respected at that time at least among those people who saw the Britishers as progressive and he attracted those Bhadraloka through his position, so that’s how he got people to fix the mind in Krishna now with Rupa Goswami’s time, those who were employed by the Mlecchas were looked down on very much and that’s why that was one of the reasons, there are other reasons also the point is that Abhidheya will change and Bhakti Vinod Thakur by the time Bhakti Vinod Thakur was preaching the Sanyas Ashram had gained respect in the eyes of Indians once again, it had always been respected but even among educated Indians because some Advaitic Sanyasis went to America and preached vigorously and even the even the Christians there are some Catholics also came in who had monks the Protestants did not have monks and Britishers were Anglicans so they did not have monks but gradually over a period of time the respectability of Sanyas Ashram was a lot was significant and Bhakti Vinod Thakur used that and he emphasized renounced order also quite a bit Bhakti Vinod Thakur was the first person to implement in a large way institutionalization so when we talk about tradition there is its immutability and its flexibility and being faithful to the tradition means being faithful to both its immutability and its flexibility sometimes we have a very simplistic idea of being faithful to the tradition as being faithful only to the immutability of the tradition but if we sometimes this can lead to an imbalance where in the name of being faithful to the immutability of the tradition we become faithless to the flexibility of the tradition and we do disservice to the tradition there are several places where Srila Prabhupada did bring about innovations for example he had women also doing outreach in quite significant ways he had various other things for example the temples which were built were not necessarily according to traditional regulations and Srila Prabhupada talks about this in his Bhagavatam purports, in the Chaitanya Charitamrit purports in the Bhishma’s prayers Desha Kaala Vibhagavit he says that how the Acharya knows how to apply the principles according to time, place and circumstance there is this flexibility also and even in the present the ISKCON leaders will have to have flexibility will have to adopt that flexibility, integrate that flexibility in order to continue their fidelity to the tradition so faithfulness to the tradition means not just faithfulness to its unchangeability but also to its flexibility and when Srila Prabhupada says that he did not change anything that primarily refers to Sambandha Gyan and Abhidhaya, Srila Prabhupada did a lot of things differently and that was what was essential that was what was required for effective outreach and that’s what he did now for example with the internet there today so much it’s important for ISKCON to have a good presence on the internet also and many people who would otherwise have never become connected with Krishna they are getting connected with Krishna through the internet now is hearing through the internet the same as hearing in a temple yes and no no in the sense that temple offers a cultural experience and devotional opulence because of the presence of the deity but when that is not available and people are not if people are not in the position to be able to go to temples then then something may have to be arranged through the internet and there are many people who are getting spiritually nourished by this so Srila Prabhupada used technology quite a lot he used dictaphone for dictating his purports no we can which Pratisanshra couldn’t do that so Abhidhaya the way devotional service is practiced and the way facilities are provided for practicing devotional service these are different for different people so the point is when we say Srila Prabhupada did I did not change anything you have to understand what it means he maintained the tradition by maintaining both its unchangeable core and its flexible periphery so the unchangeability maintains the connection with the past and the flexibility maintains the connection with the present so if we over emphasize the unchangeability then we may be connected with the past but we will become disconnected with the present will not be able to relate with people at all will become irrelevant such a tradition will become a fossil a museum archive it won’t no longer stay a living tradition on the other hand if somebody over emphasizes the flexibility and neglects the unchangeability then we won’t have a tradition we will simply have a deviation because the connection will be lost with the past will be lost so there has to be a balance and Srila Prabhupada executed this balance perfectly in one of my Vyasa Puja offerings to Srila Prabhupada I have written last year’s offering the expert tight robed dancer how Srila Prabhupada expertly managed this balance between fidelity to the tradition and flexibility to the contemporary environment so we have to understand Prabhupada statements in the light of what tradition means it is a living blend of unchangeability and flexibility and Prabhupada did not change that dynamic blend of unchangeability and flexibility thank you