Wednesday, June 20, 2018

The "Rascal Editors" Conversation (Vidura Mahatma das)

[PADA Yes, the Purujit version is simply not going to be accepted by any more than a teeny cult, that's all it is. Never mind he has no BBT licence to produce his version, so it could not be mass distributed in any event. ys pd]

Vidura Mahatma Das, 

Dear prabhus,

I'm afraid Purujit and a few others have not properly read the Rascal Editors conversation. Perhaps Purujit already had an idea in his head that he wants to edit Srila Prabhupada's books for some personal recognition, and that is why he wasn't able to grasp the actual line of logic in the conversation. I'm not trying to be sarcastic, I think that's really what must have happened. 

When a person has no ulterior motive whatsoever, they will usually be able to interpret evidence as it is. Otherwise, there is a great risk of faulty conclusions, as is the case with Purujit, unfortunately. One gentleman has said in this thread of discussion that, in the Rascal Editors conversation, Srila Prabhupada says to "re-edit my books to the original way."

This is one example of how one comes to a faulty conclusion: by not reading properly. What Srila Prabhupada actually says in the conversation is:

"The next printing should be again to the original way." (June 22, 1977)

Maybe the gentleman simply heard from Purujit and didn't bother to read the text, as opposed to reading the text but lying to others about what was really said. That would be the benefit of the doubt.

Srila Prabhupada did not say to do any RE-EDITING. He didn't say anything about any MANUSCRIPT. He simply said that the NEXT PRINTING should be TO the original way. This means to the original way IN WHICH IT WAS PRINTED. A MANUSCRIPT isn't printed. How can the next printing be to the original way in which it WASN'T printed?

Remember, the entire conversation is about Srila Prabhupada's already printed editions of his books being edited more. Srila Prabhupada is NOT complaining about the first editions or earlier authorized editions of books, they are complaining about editions that had been printed AFTER those last authorized editions.

The 1972 printed edition of the Gita is what Srila Prabhupada authorized. He DID NOT EVER ask any editor to make revisions to that edition, save and except for maybe THREE commonly known errors he specifically requested to be corrected on record.

Can we at least get this conversation straight?

Your servant,

Vidura Mahatma das

SB: Thank you, Prabhu, for explaining this so clearly.

Vidura Mahatma Das: You're welcome prabhu!


Reply To Purujit And Bliss Re. Going Back To The Manuscript

CLD: What is this then, why he has to change this verse? He is totally un-authorised to change books or to take position as a leader. He self initiated himself without any ritvik representative. So he thinks he is qualified.

“Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized master will initiate you by knowledge because he has seen the truth.” (Purujit’s version of Bg verse 4.34

S Dasi: We are all familiar with that famous verse. WHY ADD THE WORD INITIATE??? Lets be Loving, kind, and distribute the ORIGINAL BOOKS AND NOT SPEND TIME CHERRY PICKING and Nitpicking. ALL GLORIES TO SRILA PRABHUPADA HARE KRSNA.

CLD: This change he made perfectly suits him, its rascaldom.

[PADA: The conversation is clear, we should use the original books that were already printed at that time.]

VKD: It is pretty clear what Purujit das's intention is. He is just trying to be another "Acarya" to gain some name and fame. It was very clearly revealed by his follower Miguel Ramos Zevallos yesterday. I am sure most of you must have read it too. But I don't seem to be able to find that in the thread now as it appears to have been deleted. He was making so many misquotes to justify Putujit dasa's acceptance of the position of a guru and he claims that it was being done on the order of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu and Srila Prabhupada.

CJ: I notice that Miguel Ramos Zevallos has gone mysteriously silent.

V Das. An upstart neophyte with little vedic knowledge mustering the audacity to presenting himself as de facto acarya is ludicrous, ridiculous,  presumptuous, offensive, unethical and WASTE OF TIME. He has fallen fallen into the grip of name and fame being completely overwhelmed with the fever of pratistha.
All these actions have been condemned by our acarya as nothing but different manifestations of pratistha---the dangerous upasakha or undesirable creeper of ambitions for cheap reputation, followers, fame and sense gratification. Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu has cautioned devotees against this treacherous weed.

[PADA: The consensus is, no one should alter the books approved and used by the acharya.]

1 comment:

  1. To Ramachandra dasa (Purujit's spokesman): Srila Prabhupada confirms this and that, and therefore, you can speculate that a word needs to be inserted where you want it to be here, and in many other places in "your edition"? Srila Prabhupada approved and used the 1972 book, and he used it extensively.

    If he had wanted us to insert another word here and there, he would have told us to do so. He didn't, he used that edition. In other words, you need to be authorized to make your own edits, and there is no indication you folks have that.

    Its the same as the GBC, they are "authorized" to be gurus. Authorized by whom? If Srila Prabhupada is the spiritual master, we need to use the books he uses and authorized. Of course Purujit knew he would not be accepted as the new editor, which is why he hid his book for three years and he sneak attacked us with it later on.

    He was hiding what he was doing, just like the GBC hides what they are discussing in their meetings, then they spring out their conclusions later on. Purujit does the same thing.

    Srila Prabhupada foolishly gives preference to the 1972? That is what you folks now concluded? And he is quoting from a rascal edited book? You are attacking Srila Prabhupada and the books he personally uses and authorizes, and you made your own concocted version which is what the GBC is doing, and that is why we had to address this. ys pd


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