Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Jayadvaita's rotten changes to the Gita

http://prabhupadavision.com/2012/04/jayadvaita-changes/
=======================================



Rajesh says:
Complete Prabhupada Book Changes: History, Listings, Statistics & Scams
==========================================================================
Today I came across an article on SUN Sampradaya website which listed changes in BG as 77% overall.
(541 verses out of 700 changed)
Websites & Articles about Bookchanges:
===================================
http://www.adi-vani.org/topics.php?topicId=2
http://bookchanges.com/category/articles/
==================================
Listing of Book Changes:
Krsna Book Changes Analysis:
PQ-PA BOOK Changes:
MANU SCRIPTS, History & Manu Script Scams
======================================
ABOUT STATISTICS BG CHANGES:
=============================
Statistics source:
Listing of Changes details PDF file:
http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/04-10/changes.pdf
Chapter wise changes Statistics:
Bhagavad-gita As It Is Verses Changed in the BBT 1983 Revised Edition
Chapters 1 – 18: 541 verses out of 700 = 77% changed
Number of Verses Changed Per Chapter
Ch 1: 35 out of 46 = 76% changed;
Ch 2: 49 out of 72 = 68% changed;
Ch 3: 33 out of 43 = 77% changed;
Ch 4: 23 out of 42 = 55% changed;
Ch 5: 19 out of 29 = 66% changed;
Ch 6: 43 out of 47 = 91% changed;
Ch 7: 22 out of 30 = 73% changed;
Ch 8: 21 out of 28 = 75% changed;
Ch 9: 24 out of 34 = 71% changed;
Ch 10: 36 out of 42 = 86% changed;
Ch 11: 50 out of 55 = 91% changed;
Ch 12: 16 out of 20 = 80% changed;
Ch 13: 24 out of 35 = 69% changed;
Ch 14: 24 out of 27 = 89% changed;
Ch 15: 15 out of 20 = 75% changed;
Ch 16: 20 out of 24 = 83% changed;
Ch 17: 26 out of 28 = 93% changed;
Ch 18: 61 out of 78 = 78% changed
  • Giri-nayaka das says:
    Rajesh: Today I came across an article on SUN Sampradaya website which listed changes in BG as 77% overall
    =====
    Such presentation is misleading. It is not that 77% of BG is changed, but changes appear in 77% of verses.
    If you take one verse as unit, change rate is 77%. If you take one chapter as unit, change rate is 100%, because all chapters include changes. But this is misleading, because BG is not really changed 100%, nor 77%. But changes do appear in 77% of verses (translation and purport), as you stated.
    • Gopisvara dasa says:
      Like the percentages really matter.
      What really matters is that they have decided to change the very substance, on their own whim, against the instructions of the Author, and have thus lost all connection to spiritual grace.
      In Dravida Das’ own words, broadcast widely on the internet…
      “Some time back many devotees had noticed that the new 9 Volume edition of the Caitanya Caritamrta had made a deliberate change from Srila Prabhupada’s original version, not unlike the one made by Bhakti Caru Swami mentioned earlier. Srila Prabhupada’s Caitanya Caritamrta states the following:
      “Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura accepted Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji, who *initiated* Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who in turn initiated Srila Gaurakisora dasa Babaji”
      (C:C, Chapter 1)
      In the new BBT doctored 9-volume edition, the same passage reads:
      “Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura accepted Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji, the spiritual master of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who in turn accepted Srila Gaurakisora dasa Babaji”
      In other words it has been decided that contrary to what Srila Prabhupada states, Jagannatha Das Babaji did not really INITIATE Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura after all. Now the reason for the BBT changing Srila Prabhupada’s teaching here is very significant since the GBC maintain that the relationship between Jagannatha Das Babaji and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was based not on ‘formal initiation’ but rather only on the transmission of transcendental knowledge’. Once it is accepted that the transmission of divine transcendental knowledge ALONE constitutes INITIATION – then the objections made by the GBC to the Ritvik system of initiation crumble, since Srila Prabhupada could also *initiate* us with transcendental knowledge.
      Thus the BBT could not allow Srila Prabhupada to teach that Jagannatha Dasa Babaji actually *initiated* Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, for that would indirectly sanction Srila Prabhupada *initiating* for many generations to come simply via his transcendental knowledge, with the ‘formal initiation’ administered via the Ritvik system that he set up. In any case the teaching given by Srila Prabhupada above is totally consistent with what Srila Prabhupada has taught about Diksa and initiation in the Caitanya Caritamrta itself:
      “Diksa actually means *initiating* a disciple *with transcendental knowledge* by which he becomes freed from all material contamination.” (Madhya-lila, 4:112, Purport)
      Of course just the very fact that the BBT is deliberately changing the main legacy left by Srila Prabhupada – his teachings – is horrendous enough.
      However the fact that it was done specifically to keep the positions of the GBC within the crumbling Guru system intact, is totally shameful.
      But just when you though it could not get any worse, it does. For the BBT have now become so arrogant in their campaign against Srila Prabhuada’s teachings, that they have even tried to JUSTIFY this change. Dravida Das, the BBT editor, upon being asked by Dhira Govinda Prabhu to justify the change, first sums up the reason for NOT changing Srila Prabhupada’s teachings as follows:
      “On the side of not changing the “initiated” phrases we have the strong bias against changing the books unless absolutely necessary and the fact that Srila Prabhupada did indeed say that Jagannatha das Babaji initiated Bhaktivinode.”
      (BBT Editor, Dravida Das)
      Please note that Dravida clearly ADMITS that Srila Prabhupada “DID indeed say that Jagannatha das Babaji initiated Bhaktivinode”.
      To any sane person, this would be the ONLY reason required to NOT tamper with Srila Prabhupada’s teachings in any manner whatsoever. But hold on.
      Dravida Das has a reason that far outweighs a mere detail such as what Srila Prabhupada himself actually taught. Rather he states we must change Srila Prabhupada’s teachings to ensure they conform with what is currently understood within ISKCON in regards to initiation:
      “Leaving one or both “initiated”s will strongly imply that the use of the phrases “direct disciple” and even “accepted [as his disciple]” indicate formal initiation as we know it in ISKCON, which is far from the truth.” (BBT Editor, Dravida Das)
      Dravida then adds that this reason was paramount in justifying the change:
      This last was the weightiest argument, in my view, for changing the passage.
      (BBT Editor, Dravida Das)
      Thus to summarise, what Dravida is saying is this: That whenever Srila Prabhupada’s teachings differ from the way ‘we know it in ISKCON’, then they must be changed to conform with the way we DO ‘know it in ISKCON’. And of course the way ‘we know it in ISKCON’ is dictated by whatever ridiculous philosophy the GBC happens to be preaching at the time.”

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.