There are many changes, big and smal, in Srila Prabhupada's books. The biggest problem is not what is happening now, but what is likely to happen in the future, if we don't stop the constant changing.
We are, however, often presented with the argument, that the editors only change mistakes and don't alter the meaning. Here are a few of the many examples proving the opposite
CC mad 19.157 original edition: "If one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master."
CC mad 19.157 edited edition: "Even if one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, still one should stick to the Society; if one thinks the Society’s members are not pure devotees, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master."
Original and authorized 1972-edition:
“As the rivers flow into the sea, so all these great warriors enter Your blazing mouths and perish.”
Changed version:
“As the many waves of the rivers flow into the ocean, so do all these great warriors enter blazing into Your mouths.”
So-called original manuscript:
There is no verse for 11.28 as the page is missing. But verse 30 mentions the words “blazing mouths”.
This is a very interesting change, because it is of a grammatical nature:
The context
Here we have the verses from Bg. 11.28-30 (original edition):
“As the rivers flow into the sea, so all these great warriors enter Your blazing mouths and perish.” (Bg. 11.28)
“I see all people rushing with full speed into Your mouths as moths dash into a blazing fire.” (Bg. 11.29)
“O Visnu, I see You devouring all people in Your flaming mouths and covering the universe with Your immeasurable rays. Scorching the worlds, You are manifest.” (Bg. 11.30)
We see that Srila Prabhupada describes the mouths of the universal form as “blazing” (Bg. 11.28) and “flaming” (Bg. 11.30), and compares them to a “blazing fire” (Bg. 11.29). There is no “original manuscript” available for Bg. 11.28-29, but the “original manuscript” for Bg. 11.30 also says “blazing mouths”, as mentioned above.
Plate 31 from the Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Just like all other paintings in the book it was approved by Srila Prabhupada. On the painting we clearly see that the warriors are entering into the blazing mouths of The Universal Form – just like we are told that they are in the Bg. 11.28, 1972 edition.
Srila Prabhupada’s desire
Based on the above, there is no doubt at all that Srila Prabhupada wanted to use the adjective “blazing” to describe the mouths of the universal form. He never meant to say that the great warriors were “blazing”.
What does the previous acaryas say about Bg. 11.28? (as translated on bhagavad-gita.org)
Sridhara Swami’s commentary:
“As unlimited currents of water helplessly flow in innumerable rivers and are propelled from multiple channels into the ocean, the mighty warriors of the Kaurava and Pandava armies are seen to be helplessly propelled into the flaming, gnashing mouths of the visvarupa or divine universal form of Lord Krishna.” ()
Kesava Kasmiri’s commentary:
“How helplessly do the mighty warriors of the Kaurava and Pandava armies enter into the flaming mouths of Lord Krishna’s visvarupa or divine universal form? As helplessly as unlimited currents of water from innumerable rivers are propelled into entering the ocean.”
In his translations of Visvanath Cakravarti Thakura and Baladeva Vidyabhusana’s Bhagavad-gita commentaries Bhanu Swami also translates Bg. 11.28 as follows:
“As many swift currents of rivers flow towards the sea, so these heroes of the world enter Your flaming mouths.”
The sanskrit
Gaura Krishna Dasa, a student of sanskrit, sent me the following analysis of the sanskrit grammar:
Regarding the change in the translation of Bhagavad gita 11.28.
The word “abhivijvalanti” is in the 1972 edition taken as what in grammar is called a verbal adjective or a participle. A participle is basically a derivative from a verb but belonging in the group of adjectives. This particular participle is a participle in present tense, active voice for parasmaipada verbs. It is in neuter gender, plural number and in the accusative case which clearly indicates that it relates to “vaktraani” which is also in neuter gender, plural number and accusative case.
Sridhara Swami, Visvanath Cakravati Thakur and Baladeva Vidyabhusana have the same grammatical conclusion of this word as a participle and therefore in relation to “vaktraani” attributively, “blazing mouths”.
The “anti” ending in “abhivijvalanti” could preliminarily appear as a finite verb 3rd person in the plural number and present tense related to “nara-loka-viira” (the kings of human society), but this conclusion is in the least very strange. It would, if accepted, be a distortion of historical facts and it must be concluded faulty because this sentense already has a finite verb namely “visanti” meaning entering. So if we for the sake of example maintain “abhivijvalanti” as a finite verb, as it is done in the 1983 edition it would translate “as the many waves of the rivers flow into the ocean, so all these great warriors enter and blaze your mouth”, since “abhivijvalanti” can also not be taken as an adverb describing “visanti” attributively.
Conclusion:
“abhivijvalanti” must be taken as a participle – as done by the previous acaryas and the original 1972 edition – and not a verb as done in the 1983 edition.
Conclusion
The evidence against Jayadvaita Swami’s change is overwhelming:
1. Srila Prabhupada is very clear in his original Gita and his manuscripts – the mouths are blazing. Not the warriors.
2. Srila Prabhupada follows the previous acaryas who says that the mouths are blazing (flaming, gnashing).
3 The painting depicting this event (Plate 31 in the Bhagavad-gita As It Is) shows that it is the mouths of The Universal Form that are blazing.
4. According to sanskrit grammer it is the “mouths” that are “blazing”. Not the “warriors”.
Even if both translations could be correct (which they cannot), there would still be no justification – based on the above analysis – to change Srila Prabhupada’s translation of the verse.
It would not be possible to do this without overriding his own editorial decisions and thus violating the arsa-prayoga principle.
Srila Prabhupada's purport to Madhya-lila 7.130 in the Sri Caitanya-caritamrta has been changed. The orginal purport states: "thinking, "I am a first-class devotee" Such thinking should be avoided. It is best not to accept any disciples."
Has been changed to: "thinking" I am a first-class devotee, so it is best not to accept any disciples. "Such thinking should be avoided."
Bg 2.31 P ORIGINAL EDITION: "…Discharging one’s specific duty in any field of action in accordance with varnasrama-dharma serves to elevate one to a higher status of life."
Bg 2.31 P EDITED EDITION "…Discharging one’s specific duty in any field of action in accordance with the orders of higher authorities serves to elevate one to a higher status of life."
Srila Prabhupada writes "varnasrama-dhama" and the editors have changed that to: "The orders of higher authorities"
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 10.34
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"I am all-devouring death, and I am the generator of all things yet to be. Among women I am fame, fortune, speech, memory, intelligence, faithfulness and patience."
Changed version
"I am all-devouring death, and I am the generating principle of all that is yet to be. Among women I am fame, fortune, fine speech, memory, intelligence, steadfastness and patience."
Manuscript:
"Among all kinds of devouring principles and death of all creatures manifestations I am called generating principle. Amongst the women I am Gitisri and boni and memory, intelligence, faithfulness and excuse all."
'Fine' speech is added. The manuscript's and the original's word-for-word says 'beautiful' speech. The original's text just says 'speech'.
'Faithfulness' is discarded although mentioned both in manuscript and original. It is
replaced with 'steadfastness' a word crossed out in the manuscript.
CORRECTION:
The last 6 words from this sentence should be deleted:
'Faithfulness' is discarded although mentioned both in manuscript and original. It is
replaced with `steadfastness [a word crossed out in the manuscript.]
So that the result is like this:
'Faithfulness' is discarded although mentioned both in the manuscript and original. It is replaced with 'steadfastness'. Actually the word crossed out in the manuscript is 'firmness'. Still the end result is the same.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 11.8
Original, authorized 1972-edition:
"But you cannot see Me with your present eyes. Therefore I give to you divine eyes by which you can behold My mystic opulence.
Manuscript:
"But you cannot see Me with your present eyes. Therefore do I give you divine eyes, so that you can behold my mystic opulence."
Changed version:
"But you cannot see Me with your present eyes. Therefore I give you divine eyes. Behold My mystic opulence!"
This is a whole new flamboyant twist to the meaning.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 9.11
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be."
Manuscript:
"The foolish mock at Me, at My descending like a human being. They do not know My transcendental Nature, and My Supreme Dominion over all that be."
Changed version:
"Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be."
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 4.28
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"There are others who, enlightened by sacrificing their material possessions in severe austerities, take strict vows and practice the yoga of eightfold mysticism, and others study the Vedas for the advancement of transcendental knowledge."
Manuscript:
"There are others who are taken into strict vows, enlightened in the matter of sacrificing their possessions, in severe austerities, in the practice of the yoga of eightfold mysticism, in the study of the Vedas and advancement of transcendental knowledge."
Changed version:
"Having accepted strict vows, some become enlightened by sacrificing their possessions, and others by performing severe austerities, by practicing the yoga of eightfold mysticism, or by studying the Vedas to advance in transcendental knowledge."
So the original and the manuscript says first they sacrifice and perform austerities, then they take vows etc.
The 'Jas It Is' version says first they take vows.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 9.30:
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"Even if one commits the most abominable actions, if he is engaged in devotional service, he is to be considered saintly because he is properly situated."
Manuscript:
"One who is engaged in devotional service, despite the most abominable action, is to be considered saintly because he is rightly situated."
Changed version:
"Even if one commits the most abominable action, if he is engaged in devotional service he is to be considered saintly because he is properly situated in his determination."
The words 'in his determination' is NOT found in either the original or the manuscript.
It is taken from the 'English equivalents'. 'Vyavasitah', meaning 'situated in determination'.
So is ALSO the word 'ananya-bhak', meaning 'without deviation'. This has not been used. Picking some words from the 'English equivalents' and not others seems to be rather whimsical. A common practice in the JAS It Is edition.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 7.12:
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"All states of being—be they of goodness, passion or ignorance—are manifested by My energy. I am, in one sense, everything—but I am independant. I am not under the modes of this material nature."
Changed version:
"Know that all states of being — be they of goodness, passion or ignorance — are
manifested by My energy. I am, in one sense, everything, but I am independent. I am not under the modes of material nature, for they, on the contrary, are within Me."
Manuscript:
Missing pages.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 6.47:
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"And of all yogis, he who always abides in Me with great faith, worshiping Me in
transcendental loving service, is most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all."
Manuscript:
"Of all practitioners, he who is always abiding by Me within himself, great in faith, and rendering transcendental loving service unto Me, he is the highest of all yogis."
Changed version:
"And of all yogīs, the one with great faith who always abides in Me, thinks of Me within himself, and renders transcendental loving service to Me — he is the most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all. That is My opinion."
There is no basis for this last added sentence, 'That is My opinion', either in the original or the manuscript.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 14.19:
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"When you see that there is nothing beyond these modes of nature in all activities and that the Supreme Lord is transcendental to all these modes, then you can know My spiritual nature."
Manuscript:
"When you see that there is nothing beyond these modes of Nature in all activities -- and that the Supreme Lord is transcendental to this, then you can know My spiritual Nature.
Changed version:
"When one properly sees that in all activities no other performer is at work than these modes of nature and he knows the Supreme Lord, who is transcendental to all these modes, he attains My spiritual nature."
The Original and the manuscript agrees TO THE LETTER. Both the manuscript and the original says `You can know My spiritual nature´, whereas `Jas It Is´ says `he attains to My spiritual nature. The word-for-word says, 'vetti'- know.
The phrase, 'no other performer' is not found in the original or the manuscript.
HOME
We are, however, often presented with the argument, that the editors only change mistakes and don't alter the meaning. Here are a few of the many examples proving the opposite
CC mad 19.157 original edition: "If one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master."
CC mad 19.157 edited edition: "Even if one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, still one should stick to the Society; if one thinks the Society’s members are not pure devotees, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master."
Original and authorized 1972-edition:
“As the rivers flow into the sea, so all these great warriors enter Your blazing mouths and perish.”
Changed version:
“As the many waves of the rivers flow into the ocean, so do all these great warriors enter blazing into Your mouths.”
So-called original manuscript:
There is no verse for 11.28 as the page is missing. But verse 30 mentions the words “blazing mouths”.
This is a very interesting change, because it is of a grammatical nature:
- In Srila Prabhupada’s original 1972 edition the adjective “blazing” describes the plural noun “mouths”.
- In BBT International’s 1983 edition the adjective “blazing” describes the plural noun “warriors”.
The context
Here we have the verses from Bg. 11.28-30 (original edition):
“As the rivers flow into the sea, so all these great warriors enter Your blazing mouths and perish.” (Bg. 11.28)
“I see all people rushing with full speed into Your mouths as moths dash into a blazing fire.” (Bg. 11.29)
“O Visnu, I see You devouring all people in Your flaming mouths and covering the universe with Your immeasurable rays. Scorching the worlds, You are manifest.” (Bg. 11.30)
We see that Srila Prabhupada describes the mouths of the universal form as “blazing” (Bg. 11.28) and “flaming” (Bg. 11.30), and compares them to a “blazing fire” (Bg. 11.29). There is no “original manuscript” available for Bg. 11.28-29, but the “original manuscript” for Bg. 11.30 also says “blazing mouths”, as mentioned above.
Plate 31 from the Bhagavad-gita As It Is. Just like all other paintings in the book it was approved by Srila Prabhupada. On the painting we clearly see that the warriors are entering into the blazing mouths of The Universal Form – just like we are told that they are in the Bg. 11.28, 1972 edition.
Srila Prabhupada’s desire
Based on the above, there is no doubt at all that Srila Prabhupada wanted to use the adjective “blazing” to describe the mouths of the universal form. He never meant to say that the great warriors were “blazing”.
What does the previous acaryas say about Bg. 11.28? (as translated on bhagavad-gita.org)
Sridhara Swami’s commentary:
“As unlimited currents of water helplessly flow in innumerable rivers and are propelled from multiple channels into the ocean, the mighty warriors of the Kaurava and Pandava armies are seen to be helplessly propelled into the flaming, gnashing mouths of the visvarupa or divine universal form of Lord Krishna.” ()
Kesava Kasmiri’s commentary:
“How helplessly do the mighty warriors of the Kaurava and Pandava armies enter into the flaming mouths of Lord Krishna’s visvarupa or divine universal form? As helplessly as unlimited currents of water from innumerable rivers are propelled into entering the ocean.”
In his translations of Visvanath Cakravarti Thakura and Baladeva Vidyabhusana’s Bhagavad-gita commentaries Bhanu Swami also translates Bg. 11.28 as follows:
“As many swift currents of rivers flow towards the sea, so these heroes of the world enter Your flaming mouths.”
The sanskrit
Gaura Krishna Dasa, a student of sanskrit, sent me the following analysis of the sanskrit grammar:
Regarding the change in the translation of Bhagavad gita 11.28.
The word “abhivijvalanti” is in the 1972 edition taken as what in grammar is called a verbal adjective or a participle. A participle is basically a derivative from a verb but belonging in the group of adjectives. This particular participle is a participle in present tense, active voice for parasmaipada verbs. It is in neuter gender, plural number and in the accusative case which clearly indicates that it relates to “vaktraani” which is also in neuter gender, plural number and accusative case.
Sridhara Swami, Visvanath Cakravati Thakur and Baladeva Vidyabhusana have the same grammatical conclusion of this word as a participle and therefore in relation to “vaktraani” attributively, “blazing mouths”.
The “anti” ending in “abhivijvalanti” could preliminarily appear as a finite verb 3rd person in the plural number and present tense related to “nara-loka-viira” (the kings of human society), but this conclusion is in the least very strange. It would, if accepted, be a distortion of historical facts and it must be concluded faulty because this sentense already has a finite verb namely “visanti” meaning entering. So if we for the sake of example maintain “abhivijvalanti” as a finite verb, as it is done in the 1983 edition it would translate “as the many waves of the rivers flow into the ocean, so all these great warriors enter and blaze your mouth”, since “abhivijvalanti” can also not be taken as an adverb describing “visanti” attributively.
Conclusion:
“abhivijvalanti” must be taken as a participle – as done by the previous acaryas and the original 1972 edition – and not a verb as done in the 1983 edition.
Conclusion
The evidence against Jayadvaita Swami’s change is overwhelming:
1. Srila Prabhupada is very clear in his original Gita and his manuscripts – the mouths are blazing. Not the warriors.
2. Srila Prabhupada follows the previous acaryas who says that the mouths are blazing (flaming, gnashing).
3 The painting depicting this event (Plate 31 in the Bhagavad-gita As It Is) shows that it is the mouths of The Universal Form that are blazing.
4. According to sanskrit grammer it is the “mouths” that are “blazing”. Not the “warriors”.
Even if both translations could be correct (which they cannot), there would still be no justification – based on the above analysis – to change Srila Prabhupada’s translation of the verse.
It would not be possible to do this without overriding his own editorial decisions and thus violating the arsa-prayoga principle.
Srila Prabhupada's purport to Madhya-lila 7.130 in the Sri Caitanya-caritamrta has been changed. The orginal purport states: "thinking, "I am a first-class devotee" Such thinking should be avoided. It is best not to accept any disciples."
Has been changed to: "thinking" I am a first-class devotee, so it is best not to accept any disciples. "Such thinking should be avoided."
Bg 2.31 P ORIGINAL EDITION: "…Discharging one’s specific duty in any field of action in accordance with varnasrama-dharma serves to elevate one to a higher status of life."
Bg 2.31 P EDITED EDITION "…Discharging one’s specific duty in any field of action in accordance with the orders of higher authorities serves to elevate one to a higher status of life."
Srila Prabhupada writes "varnasrama-dhama" and the editors have changed that to: "The orders of higher authorities"
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 10.34
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"I am all-devouring death, and I am the generator of all things yet to be. Among women I am fame, fortune, speech, memory, intelligence, faithfulness and patience."
Changed version
"I am all-devouring death, and I am the generating principle of all that is yet to be. Among women I am fame, fortune, fine speech, memory, intelligence, steadfastness and patience."
Manuscript:
"Among all kinds of devouring principles and death of all creatures manifestations I am called generating principle. Amongst the women I am Gitisri and boni and memory, intelligence, faithfulness and excuse all."
'Fine' speech is added. The manuscript's and the original's word-for-word says 'beautiful' speech. The original's text just says 'speech'.
'Faithfulness' is discarded although mentioned both in manuscript and original. It is
replaced with 'steadfastness' a word crossed out in the manuscript.
CORRECTION:
The last 6 words from this sentence should be deleted:
'Faithfulness' is discarded although mentioned both in manuscript and original. It is
replaced with `steadfastness [a word crossed out in the manuscript.]
So that the result is like this:
'Faithfulness' is discarded although mentioned both in the manuscript and original. It is replaced with 'steadfastness'. Actually the word crossed out in the manuscript is 'firmness'. Still the end result is the same.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 11.8
Original, authorized 1972-edition:
"But you cannot see Me with your present eyes. Therefore I give to you divine eyes by which you can behold My mystic opulence.
Manuscript:
"But you cannot see Me with your present eyes. Therefore do I give you divine eyes, so that you can behold my mystic opulence."
Changed version:
"But you cannot see Me with your present eyes. Therefore I give you divine eyes. Behold My mystic opulence!"
This is a whole new flamboyant twist to the meaning.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 9.11
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature and My supreme dominion over all that be."
Manuscript:
"The foolish mock at Me, at My descending like a human being. They do not know My transcendental Nature, and My Supreme Dominion over all that be."
Changed version:
"Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be."
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 4.28
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"There are others who, enlightened by sacrificing their material possessions in severe austerities, take strict vows and practice the yoga of eightfold mysticism, and others study the Vedas for the advancement of transcendental knowledge."
Manuscript:
"There are others who are taken into strict vows, enlightened in the matter of sacrificing their possessions, in severe austerities, in the practice of the yoga of eightfold mysticism, in the study of the Vedas and advancement of transcendental knowledge."
Changed version:
"Having accepted strict vows, some become enlightened by sacrificing their possessions, and others by performing severe austerities, by practicing the yoga of eightfold mysticism, or by studying the Vedas to advance in transcendental knowledge."
So the original and the manuscript says first they sacrifice and perform austerities, then they take vows etc.
The 'Jas It Is' version says first they take vows.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 9.30:
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"Even if one commits the most abominable actions, if he is engaged in devotional service, he is to be considered saintly because he is properly situated."
Manuscript:
"One who is engaged in devotional service, despite the most abominable action, is to be considered saintly because he is rightly situated."
Changed version:
"Even if one commits the most abominable action, if he is engaged in devotional service he is to be considered saintly because he is properly situated in his determination."
The words 'in his determination' is NOT found in either the original or the manuscript.
It is taken from the 'English equivalents'. 'Vyavasitah', meaning 'situated in determination'.
So is ALSO the word 'ananya-bhak', meaning 'without deviation'. This has not been used. Picking some words from the 'English equivalents' and not others seems to be rather whimsical. A common practice in the JAS It Is edition.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 7.12:
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"All states of being—be they of goodness, passion or ignorance—are manifested by My energy. I am, in one sense, everything—but I am independant. I am not under the modes of this material nature."
Changed version:
"Know that all states of being — be they of goodness, passion or ignorance — are
manifested by My energy. I am, in one sense, everything, but I am independent. I am not under the modes of material nature, for they, on the contrary, are within Me."
Manuscript:
Missing pages.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 6.47:
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"And of all yogis, he who always abides in Me with great faith, worshiping Me in
transcendental loving service, is most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all."
Manuscript:
"Of all practitioners, he who is always abiding by Me within himself, great in faith, and rendering transcendental loving service unto Me, he is the highest of all yogis."
Changed version:
"And of all yogīs, the one with great faith who always abides in Me, thinks of Me within himself, and renders transcendental loving service to Me — he is the most intimately united with Me in yoga and is the highest of all. That is My opinion."
There is no basis for this last added sentence, 'That is My opinion', either in the original or the manuscript.
Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 14.19:
Original, authorized 1972 edition:
"When you see that there is nothing beyond these modes of nature in all activities and that the Supreme Lord is transcendental to all these modes, then you can know My spiritual nature."
Manuscript:
"When you see that there is nothing beyond these modes of Nature in all activities -- and that the Supreme Lord is transcendental to this, then you can know My spiritual Nature.
Changed version:
"When one properly sees that in all activities no other performer is at work than these modes of nature and he knows the Supreme Lord, who is transcendental to all these modes, he attains My spiritual nature."
The Original and the manuscript agrees TO THE LETTER. Both the manuscript and the original says `You can know My spiritual nature´, whereas `Jas It Is´ says `he attains to My spiritual nature. The word-for-word says, 'vetti'- know.
The phrase, 'no other performer' is not found in the original or the manuscript.
HOME
