Friday, 07th May 2021

home about authors news books sitemap privacy contact us

There are 9 users online

add to favorites
make home page

Book changes
Email correspondence
General Community News
Historical perspectives
Letters on topic
Personal recollections
Public statements
Scholastic views
Site Statistics
Srila Prabhupada vani
Voices! - Letters (active link)

Voices! - Letters

Our Newsletter

Srila Prabhupada said:

"Srila Vyasadeva revealed these statements after perfect realization and therefore they are perfect, for liberated sages like Vyasadeva never commit errors in their rhetorical arrangements. Unless one accepts this fact, there is no use in trying to obtain help from the revealed scriptures."  -- CC Adi-Lila Chapter 2 text 86 purport.

"If you concoct, 'I am more intelligent than my Guru,' 'I can make additions and alterations,' then you are finished." -- Srila Prabhupada lecture July 12, 1975 Philadelphia Pa.

"We cannot water down the philosophy to make it more palatable. Our books must remain as they are." -- Srila Prabhupada letter to Lilavati devi dasi March 31, 1977.


Notable Quotes:

Jasomatinandan prabhu:  " ... commonsense dictates that except for typographical mistakes such as "planet of the trees," no editions and subtractions should be done from 1972 edition."


In Defense Of Jayadvaita Swami
Author: Devala dasa
Added: 03/15/2003
Type: Review
Viewed: 8694 time(s)
Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10Average visitor rating of 7.7/10

How would you rate this article:    Bad Good   Go  

In Defense Of Jayadvaita Swami

Dear Devotees and Friends, please accept my humble obeisance. All glories to Srila Prabhupad and Mahaprabhu.

I have been reading the arguments against the need for the second edition of Bhagavad Gita. All the devotees who have written articles about it seem to be genuinely concerned about the need to preserve the words - and hence the shakti - of Prabhupad's books.

I commend Shrimati Govinda dasi statement, "To remain silent is to agree." In Iskcon, there is no need to fear anyone anymore. Yes, it was possible yesterday, but not today, not tomorrow, not ever.

As one shouldn't change Shri Krishna's words in Bhagavad Gita, so should one be careful not to change the words of the empowered and direct representative of Shri Krishna. I fully agree that by doing so one sets a dangerous precedent for future generations to want to take the liberty of editing Srila Prabhupad's books. The more one changes his books or allow himself to lose faith that the books are not suitable for American colleges -as is the case with some leaders-the more Prabhupad's Iskcon is being sent into a deeper abyss as a hodgepodge Hindu society. And then one wonders why people, especially those in white-bodies, are not being attracted to our society.

Reflecting on the articles, however, most of the devotees have "hammered" away at Jayadvaita Swami for the second edition. Is this fair? Who really should be blamed if the second edition is a deviation from Srila Prabhupad's desire? It certainly rang hollow with me that Jayadvaita Maharaj should be targetted.

In his article, the Maharaj stated that he did not whimsically edited Bhagavad Gita. Rather, he sought the permission of the GBC. They voted for it and hence he went ahead with the second edition. All the constructive criticisms, therefore, should have been levelled at the GBC. Though not an associate of Jayadvaita Swami (he doesn't know me), in my opinion, he is the wrong man to blame.

The onus is now on all the GBCs who served in 1983 and who are still physically and spiritually alive to come out from their "hiding" and say why they voted for the second edition for the benefit all followers of Srila Prabhupad. Let's hear from you!Without being diplomatic, maybe we can learn something from you.

Let's also hear the Maharaj's comment on why Srila Prabhupad said, "Jayadvaita Prabhu can make changes" (not the exact quote).

If Jayadvaita Swami has done bad in the second edition, then others have done worst in the translation of Prabhupad's books into other languages as they try to make it "as you like it" instead of "as it is". Besides, he has no problem if one only studies the first edition.

It is hard not to dismiss Jayadvaita Swami use of the slang "hoo-ha" and "let me not use a word" as a flaw. But the Maharaj fares well otherwise. His exemplary sannyas life in terms of his eating, dressing, spending and non-hankering for disciples serves well in Iskcon. Moreover, he is a fearless and open critic of the gross deviations of Iskcon's leadership-a quality you would hardly find in many others as they try to be all "yes" men.

Lest we become hijacked by the mentality that only book changes can and have caused Iskcon's meltdown and accused Jayadvaita Swami because he doesn't seem to be one of those high-profile fear-driving men, we need to look elsewhere. Some months ago, the GBC absolved Shridar Maharaj (Prabhupad's godbrother), though late, of the accusation of being responsible for the creation of the zonal acharya system in Iskcon.

Any man with some intelligence would therefore expect to know who then was responsible and when the GBC would make it known to everyone. After all, much greater than some editorial changes in the second edition, this single most monstruous deviation from Prabhupad's instructions has wreaked havoc in the heart of Iskcon and the intractable aftermath of it is still being felt today.

Those of us who have seriously inquired about the truth know the man responsible for the zonal acharya system. He "resides" in an unimaginable place.

Let us continue to study, practise and distribute the first edition as the Maharaj encourages and, hopefully, we can get a separate tika someday.

Jay Srila Prabhupad and his Bhagavad Gita as it is!

Your servant,
Devala das

[Ed. Note: Balavanta dasa, a GBC member in 1983, commented on the vote for what was supposed to be "minor corrections to more closely conform to the tapes and gramatical corrections ..."  Click here to read Balavanta's letter on VOICES!: ]

Article Pages:  1  

Support Material

There is no support material available for this article.

Related LinksForum Link

This article contains a link to a related forum thread.
Please click here to view the thread.

Related Books

There are no related books available for this article.

  Article Comments   Add Comment | View All (4)
Poster: harri
Added: -1/2-/2003

did you read the statement from the Lord Caitanja who spiks about insane man trying to change grammatical mistakes of pure Vaisnava????

after reading that book you would understand everything!!!

hare krishna

Poster: Prabhupada dasa
Added: -0/3-/2003

In Defense Of Sannyasis, Tree Pruners And Ignorant Motorists?

If a sectarian organization instructs a non-sectarian and "detached" sannyasa to become its employee and agent and he then performs sectarian actions for it, is that sannyasa still "detached" and non-sectarian?

Does he not become implicated in the sectarian deeds and reactions of his employer by intimate association, accessory after the fact? I killed a man but my employer told me to do it so I am not guilty.

Poster: Prabhupada dasa
Added: -0/3-/2003

Is it not true that employees and agents are dependent upon and duty bound to their employer-Master?

Since when does a Vaisnava sannyasa become the employee or agent of a sectarian organization, perform sectarian activities and then call them non-sectarian expressions of sentiment toward devotional service?

If a Vaisnava sannyasa is in fact "detached" and non-sectrian how can he become the employee and agent of a sectarian organization?

Poster: Prabhupada dasa
Added: -0/3-/2003

If a Vaisanva sannyasa earns his sustenance by pruning trees in the back yard of his sectarian employer rather than distributing their fruit or teaching about them to the ignorant masses, is he not more of a hired sudra than an independant Brahmana? Is he not an accomplice and co conspirator?

Is it not true that one who defends an ignorant man for killing a pedestrian while driving on the wrong side of the road is just as ignorant as the ignorant man?


Click to contact "Books are the basis."