Mother Yasoda Stopping Lord Siva
AI is going to save America and create hundreds of thousands of jobs!
PADA: Well not so fast. First of all AI is used to manage robotics, which replaces people's jobs -- including here-- the robotics taxis to get rid of our city taxi drivers jobs. Next problem, AI uses a lot of water and power of which the USA is in short supply. Next problem, China is already offering multiple FREE AI sites that don't charge any money, making it harder to make a profit from AI.
Next problem, investing in AI from Wall Street siphons money that could be used to make real manufacturing of real products. Next problem, AI is being used to monitor public cameras all over the place that are doing surveillance on people. It is looking like a 1984 Big Brother monitoring process.
Next problem, there are forest fires all over the planet from climate change and making electrical power for AI creates a lot of carbon output, which is not good for the climate, and so on! But the oligarchs want us to believe AI is going to save us, but -- it won't. OK it looks like it could be creating a lot of problems instead.
And some Bible thumping folks are saying -- AI is the mark of Satan and the Beast --- heh heh heh. But I think the public is starting to push back on these big AI projects, because it is starting to be seen as more of a menace than a help for humanity.
The good news? Some devotees said when they type in questions about ISKCON or ISKCON leaders -- then the AI often cites -- PADA's info! That must be giving the GBC guys a headache! ys pd
angel108b@yahoo.com
===
RONALD SINGH (Oroville)
PADA: Well sorry prabhu -- if PADA is making his Oroville program suffer. However since Ronald Singh's pal Naranaryan Visvakarma is saying "PADA is destroying the sacred golden body of ISKCON," that is making me a target for violence or even death. "Go get the offender to the golden body." That means his program is trying to harm my program, or even my life. The Vedic principle is -- we have a right to defend ourselves, or maybe even a duty to do so.
PADA's advice? We have to be completely untethered away from the pedophile messiah's project and its defenders, or we are implicated, that is my -- not so humble -- opinion. NNV says "the ritviks are slimy poison snakes." Does he want to make us ritviks targets -- or not? Need I say more? Of course then the HKC Jaipur people became disciples of "the ritviks are slimy poison snakes" program, because they are all on the same page. But yeah, they are not actual ritviks.
ys pd
======
IRAN IS A MESS
PADA: Yeah one patriot missile can only be built -- one time -- in a day, and we are using up to 250 a day in Iran, so we are creating a huge shortage of our own supplies. Thad anti-aircraft missiles supplies are even worse, a few made per month. So yeah, our plan to totally deplete our military is working out good, for our opponents.
Iran is using $15,00 drones to make us use multi-million counter anti-drones, so they are basically draining our resources down, and it is working good for them. The Russians are also supplying Iran with weapons, so their weapons are getting better.
Dick Cheney said this Iran problem can only be fixed with 500,000 soldiers on the ground, but better is 1,000,000 boots. Iran is 1 and 1/2 the size of California, lots of boots would be needed. I don't think we have sent in 2 boots in so far? In any case we are a long way from getting 1M boots there, so it is more or less a stalemate unless we get our act together.
The commander in charge of all this said -- we are going to bomb the effing sh*t out of the Iranians. Great plan, then they bomb the effing sh*t out of the entire gulf area and then millions of people will have no power, water and no desalinized plants. And the oil production will be destroyed. There will be a giant humanitarian crisis of people dying of no water. That is the plan? That is what I thought was the plan!
ys pd
Nimāi Nitāi Dāsa
July 25
Are Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Edited Books Really “Poison”?
A Philosophical Examination
The discussion surrounding Śrīla Prabhupāda’s edited books has become increasingly polarized. Many devotees rightly desire to preserve the original editions. However, some have gone further and concluded that the edited books are spiritually “poison,” incapable of producing genuine devotees.
Below is a message sent to one devotee who sees post '77 books as poison:
Hare Kṛṣṇa Prabhu. Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Śrīla Prabhupāda!
I am replying on behalf of the ISKM management and His Grace Sundar Gopāla Prabhu. Our understanding of this issue is based on guru, śāstra and sādhu.
We shall answer for the benefit of those who may have doubts.
The issue is not “accept every edit” or “reject every edited book.” One may reject unauthorized edits while still accepting that the remaining unchanged teachings retain their transcendental potency.
The essence of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original books is the original siddhānta. The wording serves to convey that siddhānta, but it is the siddhānta that must never be changed.
You stated that “anything after 1977 is not authorised.” That is not entirely accurate. The changes themselves were not authorized, but the vast majority of those changes consist of synonyms, grammar, punctuation and stylistic alterations.
You quoted one dangerous change yesterday:
“Even if one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Kṛṣṇa Consciousness Society, still one should stick to the Society.”
The last part of that sentence was indeed added. There are a few other changes of that nature which suggest a particular agenda. We ourselves pointed out one in our video concerning the ṛtvik system, found in the introduction to the Caitanya-caritāmṛta.
Such changes cannot spoil all of the remaining nectar found throughout Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books, for knowledge about Kṛṣṇa is nondifferent from Him.
“By our material calculation we see a difference between the name and the substance, but in the spiritual world the Absolute is always absolute: the name, form, qualities and pastimes of the Absolute are all as good as the Absolute Himself.”
— Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi-līlā 8.16, Purport
I copied the above quotation from an edited edition of the Caitanya-caritāmṛta. Has it now become poison simply because of the edition from which it was copied?
To maintain such a conclusion requires an additional unsupported assumption. In logic this is called an ad hoc hypothesis.
For example:
Claim: “All swans are white.”
Counterexample: “Here is a black swan.”
Ad hoc response: “Black swans don’t count because they are spiritually white.”
Likewise, your position requires another unsupported assumption: devotees who came to Kṛṣṇa consciousness through the edited books must somehow be less sincere.
Where does Śrīla Prabhupāda teach that Kṛṣṇa measures sincerity by which edition of a book someone happens to receive?
You asked:
“What kind of devotees are they making?”
You first have to prove that sincere devotees cannot come through the edited books. Otherwise, saying that they must be inferior devotees is simply an unsupported assumption.
Our position requires no additional theories; The books contain unauthorized edits. Many of those edits should be corrected. The philosophy remains substantially intact. Kṛṣṇa reciprocates with sincerity.
Your position also requires another unsupported assumption—that Kṛṣṇa deliberately withholds the original books from sincere souls.
Where did Śrīla Prabhupāda teach that?
The existence of unauthorized edits does not logically entail that the books are spiritually poisonous.
Śrīla Prabhupāda writes:
“The transcendental subject matter of Vedic literature is still spiritually potent despite the crudest translation; still, because we have the facility to make it perfect, that is our philosophy.”
— Letter to Haṁsadūta, Jaipur, 20 January 1972
Notice what Śrīla Prabhupāda says. He says we should strive for perfection, correct mistakes and avoid printing errors. He does not say that such mistakes render transcendental literature spiritually useless.
On the contrary, he says the subject matter remains spiritually potent.
If the crudest translation remains spiritually potent, how can a translation containing mostly synonym and grammatical changes become spiritually poisonous?
Likewise, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 1.5.11 states:
“Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.”
In the purport, Śrīla Prabhupāda writes:
“After all, it is a technical science of spiritual values, and thus we are concerned with the techniques and not with the language. If the techniques of this great literature are understood by the people of the world, there will be success.”
This shows that the faithful application of the philosophy is what must be preserved. Language is the vehicle; siddhānta is the destination.
Suppose someone changes “must” to “should.” That is an editorial change.
Suppose someone changes “Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead” into “the impersonal Brahman is supreme.” That is a change of siddhānta.
These two are not remotely equivalent.
Likewise, suppose one edition says, “Always remember Kṛṣṇa,” and another says, “Constantly remember Kṛṣṇa.” The wording differs, but the siddhānta remains unchanged.
The essence of “As It Is” is not every English synonym.
The essence of “As It Is” is the faithful transmission of siddhānta.
You repeatedly state that there are thousands of changes. Whether there are ten changes or ten thousand changes is not the issue. The real question is whether those changes have altered the fundamental siddhānta of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism. Quantity alone is not proof.
Please distinguish between changes in English wording and changes in siddhānta. Can you demonstrate that the latter exist on a scale sufficient to justify calling the books “poison”?
Śrīla Prabhupāda himself made this distinction:
“So the verses of Bhagavad-gītā are so simple that there is no question of interpretation. Unfortunately, I have seen that in Bhagavad-gītā commented by a great scholar like Dr. Radhakrishnan, the verse is translated very nicely, and that is done by an Englishman, but he interprets in a different way.”
— Interview, Los Angeles, February 12, 1969
Śrīla Prabhupāda used Dr. Radhakrishnan’s translation while preaching in the beginning of the movement. In fact, some of the translations found in the 1972 Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, such as Bhagavad-gītā 3.43, are taken from that translation. His objection was not to the English wording but to the philosophical interpretation.
Likewise, Śrīla Prabhupāda wrote:
“English translation of Caitanya-caritāmṛta by Nogen Roy have been seen by me. There is no commentary and therefore it can be read. Anyway there is no harm reading simply the translation.”
— Letter to Rayarama (Satsvarūpa), San Francisco, March 30, 1967
From this we can understand that simply reading a translation is not the issue. The real danger lies in philosophical deviation, not in every difference of wording.
You state that “the philosophy has changed considerably.”
The burden of proof therefore rests upon you. Please demonstrate changes in the fundamental siddhānta of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism, rather than merely differences in wording.
You also state that by reading an edited book, using an app, or visiting a website maintained by those who have acted improperly, one “will certainly take on unwanted karma.”
I respectfully ask: where does Śrīla Prabhupāda teach this?
This conclusion overlooks one of the most fundamental principles of bhakti—that Kṛṣṇa is a person who actively reciprocates with the sincerity of His devotees, bhāva-grāhī janārdana.
We are not dealing with an impersonal machine where the result is produced merely by the external wording on a page. We are dealing with Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who resides within everyone’s heart as Paramātmā and reveals Himself to sincere souls.
Kṛṣṇa says:
teṣāṁ satata-yuktānāṁ bhajatāṁ prīti-pūrvakam
dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ taṁ yena mām upayānti te
To those who are constantly devoted to serving Me with love, I give the understanding by which they can come to Me.
mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca
I am seated in everyone's heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness.
Even if some tinge of fault were present, why should we believe that Kṛṣṇa would be unkind, uncondescending, or partial in bestowing His mercy upon a sincere soul who genuinely desires to serve Him?
Characteristically, the Supreme Personality of Godhead does not take seriously an offense committed by a pure devotee. The Lord accepts whatever small service a devotee renders as being such a great service that He is prepared to give even Himself, not to speak of other benedictions.
-CC Antya.1.107
If the Lord overlooks even offenses committed by His sincere devotees, why should we conclude that He would refuse to reveal Himself to a sincere soul simply because that person happened to receive an edition containing unauthorized edits? Such a conclusion places greater emphasis on external circumstances than on Kṛṣṇa’s personal mercy and reciprocation.
You mention “what is the qualification of these men you are defending, homosexuals, murderers…”
as though defending the transcendental potency of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books means defending those individuals.
These are two entirely different issues.
A person’s misconduct does not logically determine whether every sentence in an edited book has lost its spiritual potency.
Yet Śrīla Prabhupāda never taught such a principle.
On the contrary, he approved reading books written by devotees with whom he had serious disagreements. Regarding his Godbrother Rāghava Caitanya dāsa, who had deviated from the order of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, Śrīla Prabhupāda was asked whether his book The Divine Name could be read.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: “It’s called The Divine Name. It is by one of your Godbrothers.”
Prabhupāda: “Oh yes.”
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: “Is it all right to read it?”
Prabhupāda: “Oh yes. There are some discrepancies, but, on the whole, it is nice… Yes, Rāghava Caitanya. Yes, he was my Godbrother… Oh. That’s good. That’s nice.”
-Lord Caitanya Play Told to Tamāla Kṛṣṇa—August 4, 1969, Los Angeles
Likewise, if a devotee falls from devotional service, it does not follow that every book he edited has become spiritually poisonous.
We judge each edit on its own merits.
You also imply that we are turning a blind eye to this issue. That is simply not true.
ISKM Montreal has already printed 3,000 copies of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original French books. We have attempted to obtain original English editions through Krishna Store, but they are no longer printing them. We are also having discussions regarding printing originals in China. We are also developing an application containing the original editions.
Most importantly, we continue preaching.
The priority should be to train sincere devotees who understand this issue properly. As ISKM expands, so will the opportunity to restore and print the original editions on a larger scale.
Until then, preaching cannot stop simply because original English books are not readily available.
Our duty is to continue giving Kṛṣṇa consciousness while simultaneously working toward preserving Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original editions.
We are not choosing between preserving Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books and preaching. We are doing both according to our present capacity.
I sincerely hope you can see where your philosophical conclusion differs from Śrīla Prabhupāda's teachings, as demonstrated above. I also pray that you may kindly take the association of the devotees in ISKM, rather than relying primarily on articles and opinions scattered across the internet.
By Kṛṣṇa's mercy, His Grace Sundar Gopāla Prabhu has trained hundreds of devotees who are actively pushing forward Śrīla Prabhupāda's movement As It Is, despite having very limited resources, having no financial scale like ISKCON, and often facing strong opposition.
I say this from personal experience. Before taking the association of His Grace Sundar Gopāla Prabhu, I also misunderstood this issue. Through his guidance, my understanding gradually changed. Therefore, my sincere prayer is that no one develops the same fault-finding mentality that I once had, but instead learns to appreciate the sincerity of devotees while simultaneously working to preserve Śrīla Prabhupāda's legacy in the proper spirit.
Hare Kṛṣṇa!
All Glories to Śrīla Prabhupāda!
Your servant,
Nimāi Nitāi dāsa
JP: We can examine the core arguments through the lens of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava siddhānta, śāstra, and the specific instructions of Śrīla Prabhupāda. The Distinction Between Awakening Faith and Achieving Perfection (Śraddhā vs. Dīkṣā)
The changed books can spark a genuine seeker's interest and awaken initial faith (śraddhā), but spiritual perfection requires taking shelter of a bona fide guru who initiates or binds himself to delivering the seeker and the seeker into a path which will deliver the seeker at a ceremony with vows.
In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.5.11), it is noted that even imperfectly composed transcendental literatures are heard and accepted by purified men because they speak of the Supreme Lord. However, the Bhāgavatam (11.3.21) explicitly mandates—
tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam "Anyone who is seriously desirous of real happiness must seek out a bona fide spiritual master and take shelter of him by initiation."
The changed books act as the initial medium to awaken the dormant soul, but Kṛṣṇa consciousness is a science of paramparā (disciplic succession). A book alone—especially one with unauthorized alterations—cannot substitute for the living guidance of a bona fide spiritual master who properly represents the siddhānta.
The Vāṇī (sound vibration/instructions) of the pure devotee is more prominent than vapuḥ (physical association), and that original, uncompromised books offer the Vāṇī "as-it-is, the Guru living in sound vibration. Śrīla Prabhupāda always stressed and established the principle of Vāṇī over Vapuḥ during his final days, emphasizing that his presence would always be felt through his instructions in his books and lectures.
When unauthorized editors alter the text to fit institutional or personal agendas, they risk substituting the pure Vāṇī ( the sound acharya) of the ācārya with human speculation, the acharya is lost but the siddhantas ethics etc remain to guide even they become adulterated. While a sincere soul can still extract devotional sentiment (bhāva) from the remnants of truth, the unadulterated Vāṇī provides the exact, undiluted medicinal potency required to cut through material illusion and situate himself perfectly and in purity of the Vani guru.
The Danger of Unauthorized Authority and Guru-Imposture or individuals posing as gurus—stealing the śikṣā of the bona fide guru and usurping the position of dīkṣā—directly addresses a major historical deviation within the post-1977 movement (premature guru systems).
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (6.1.40) and various Vaiṣṇava texts warn against accepting unqualified or unauthorized spiritual guides who deviate from the authorized disciplic stream.
Impostors who exploit a spiritual movement or misappropriate the legacy of the pure ācārya for personal prestige place themselves and their followers in a perilous spiritual position. True shelter must be taken in a bona fide representative of Kṛṣṇa, not someone who merely leverages an edited platform or institutional title without authentic spiritual realization.
I don’t dismiss sincere devotees who came through edited books, and acknowledge that Kṛṣṇa reciprocates with the sincere seeker's heart (bhāva-grāhī janārdana). But I insist that medium matters, because the ultimate goal is complete surrender to Kṛṣṇa under the guidance of a bona fide guru through unadulterated knowledge given specifically by the bona fide guru which makes him responsible for delivering the soul.
Why does Krishna need to come again and again in the material realm? ( BG 4:7-8 ) When people forget the path of righteousness or the path become compromised and corrupted — He appears in every millennium to REESTABLISH the path. So how the paths get compromised corrupted or lost ?. It happens by whimsical misrepresentation interpretation of Krishna and his pure devotee, the Acharya’s word who endeavor to keep the DHARMA INTACT.
In the last paragraph, a sane person can see why the changed books, even a changed comma is not favored because this sets the precedence of corruption of DHARMA. Now ask yourselves what is right and wrong…, even utilizing these changed books is sin and becoming a party with corrupters of the Acharya’s words. Corrupting the Srila Prabhupada’s books is same as corrupting Krishna’s Bhagvata Gita.
SD: Haribol well said prabhu! All glories to Srila Prabhupada
JT: Srila Prabhupada's books were his life and soul. He gave so many warnings not to change anything. This offence of changing his books is the most grievous. It is even worse than poisoning him. Now after killing his vapu, then outlawing taking diksha from him, now they are trying to erase his vani form.
The discussion surrounding Śrīla Prabhupāda’s edited books has become increasingly polarized. Many devotees rightly desire to preserve the original editions. However, some have gone further and concluded that the edited books are spiritually “poison,” incapable of producing genuine devotees.
Below is a message sent to one devotee who sees post '77 books as poison:
Hare Kṛṣṇa Prabhu. Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Śrīla Prabhupāda!
I am replying on behalf of the ISKM management and His Grace Sundar Gopāla Prabhu. Our understanding of this issue is based on guru, śāstra and sādhu.
We shall answer for the benefit of those who may have doubts.
The issue is not “accept every edit” or “reject every edited book.” One may reject unauthorized edits while still accepting that the remaining unchanged teachings retain their transcendental potency.
The essence of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original books is the original siddhānta. The wording serves to convey that siddhānta, but it is the siddhānta that must never be changed.
You stated that “anything after 1977 is not authorised.” That is not entirely accurate. The changes themselves were not authorized, but the vast majority of those changes consist of synonyms, grammar, punctuation and stylistic alterations.
You quoted one dangerous change yesterday:
“Even if one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or nondevotees in the Kṛṣṇa Consciousness Society, still one should stick to the Society.”
The last part of that sentence was indeed added. There are a few other changes of that nature which suggest a particular agenda. We ourselves pointed out one in our video concerning the ṛtvik system, found in the introduction to the Caitanya-caritāmṛta.
Such changes cannot spoil all of the remaining nectar found throughout Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books, for knowledge about Kṛṣṇa is nondifferent from Him.
“By our material calculation we see a difference between the name and the substance, but in the spiritual world the Absolute is always absolute: the name, form, qualities and pastimes of the Absolute are all as good as the Absolute Himself.”
— Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi-līlā 8.16, Purport
I copied the above quotation from an edited edition of the Caitanya-caritāmṛta. Has it now become poison simply because of the edition from which it was copied?
To maintain such a conclusion requires an additional unsupported assumption. In logic this is called an ad hoc hypothesis.
For example:
Claim: “All swans are white.”
Counterexample: “Here is a black swan.”
Ad hoc response: “Black swans don’t count because they are spiritually white.”
Likewise, your position requires another unsupported assumption: devotees who came to Kṛṣṇa consciousness through the edited books must somehow be less sincere.
Where does Śrīla Prabhupāda teach that Kṛṣṇa measures sincerity by which edition of a book someone happens to receive?
You asked:
“What kind of devotees are they making?”
You first have to prove that sincere devotees cannot come through the edited books. Otherwise, saying that they must be inferior devotees is simply an unsupported assumption.
Our position requires no additional theories; The books contain unauthorized edits. Many of those edits should be corrected. The philosophy remains substantially intact. Kṛṣṇa reciprocates with sincerity.
Your position also requires another unsupported assumption—that Kṛṣṇa deliberately withholds the original books from sincere souls.
Where did Śrīla Prabhupāda teach that?
The existence of unauthorized edits does not logically entail that the books are spiritually poisonous.
Śrīla Prabhupāda writes:
“The transcendental subject matter of Vedic literature is still spiritually potent despite the crudest translation; still, because we have the facility to make it perfect, that is our philosophy.”
— Letter to Haṁsadūta, Jaipur, 20 January 1972
Notice what Śrīla Prabhupāda says. He says we should strive for perfection, correct mistakes and avoid printing errors. He does not say that such mistakes render transcendental literature spiritually useless.
On the contrary, he says the subject matter remains spiritually potent.
If the crudest translation remains spiritually potent, how can a translation containing mostly synonym and grammatical changes become spiritually poisonous?
Likewise, Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 1.5.11 states:
“Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.”
In the purport, Śrīla Prabhupāda writes:
“After all, it is a technical science of spiritual values, and thus we are concerned with the techniques and not with the language. If the techniques of this great literature are understood by the people of the world, there will be success.”
This shows that the faithful application of the philosophy is what must be preserved. Language is the vehicle; siddhānta is the destination.
Suppose someone changes “must” to “should.” That is an editorial change.
Suppose someone changes “Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of Godhead” into “the impersonal Brahman is supreme.” That is a change of siddhānta.
These two are not remotely equivalent.
Likewise, suppose one edition says, “Always remember Kṛṣṇa,” and another says, “Constantly remember Kṛṣṇa.” The wording differs, but the siddhānta remains unchanged.
The essence of “As It Is” is not every English synonym.
The essence of “As It Is” is the faithful transmission of siddhānta.
You repeatedly state that there are thousands of changes. Whether there are ten changes or ten thousand changes is not the issue. The real question is whether those changes have altered the fundamental siddhānta of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism. Quantity alone is not proof.
Please distinguish between changes in English wording and changes in siddhānta. Can you demonstrate that the latter exist on a scale sufficient to justify calling the books “poison”?
Śrīla Prabhupāda himself made this distinction:
“So the verses of Bhagavad-gītā are so simple that there is no question of interpretation. Unfortunately, I have seen that in Bhagavad-gītā commented by a great scholar like Dr. Radhakrishnan, the verse is translated very nicely, and that is done by an Englishman, but he interprets in a different way.”
— Interview, Los Angeles, February 12, 1969
Śrīla Prabhupāda used Dr. Radhakrishnan’s translation while preaching in the beginning of the movement. In fact, some of the translations found in the 1972 Bhagavad-gītā As It Is, such as Bhagavad-gītā 3.43, are taken from that translation. His objection was not to the English wording but to the philosophical interpretation.
Likewise, Śrīla Prabhupāda wrote:
“English translation of Caitanya-caritāmṛta by Nogen Roy have been seen by me. There is no commentary and therefore it can be read. Anyway there is no harm reading simply the translation.”
— Letter to Rayarama (Satsvarūpa), San Francisco, March 30, 1967
From this we can understand that simply reading a translation is not the issue. The real danger lies in philosophical deviation, not in every difference of wording.
You state that “the philosophy has changed considerably.”
The burden of proof therefore rests upon you. Please demonstrate changes in the fundamental siddhānta of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism, rather than merely differences in wording.
You also state that by reading an edited book, using an app, or visiting a website maintained by those who have acted improperly, one “will certainly take on unwanted karma.”
I respectfully ask: where does Śrīla Prabhupāda teach this?
This conclusion overlooks one of the most fundamental principles of bhakti—that Kṛṣṇa is a person who actively reciprocates with the sincerity of His devotees, bhāva-grāhī janārdana.
We are not dealing with an impersonal machine where the result is produced merely by the external wording on a page. We are dealing with Śrī Kṛṣṇa, who resides within everyone’s heart as Paramātmā and reveals Himself to sincere souls.
Kṛṣṇa says:
teṣāṁ satata-yuktānāṁ bhajatāṁ prīti-pūrvakam
dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ taṁ yena mām upayānti te
To those who are constantly devoted to serving Me with love, I give the understanding by which they can come to Me.
mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanaṁ ca
I am seated in everyone's heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness.
Even if some tinge of fault were present, why should we believe that Kṛṣṇa would be unkind, uncondescending, or partial in bestowing His mercy upon a sincere soul who genuinely desires to serve Him?
Characteristically, the Supreme Personality of Godhead does not take seriously an offense committed by a pure devotee. The Lord accepts whatever small service a devotee renders as being such a great service that He is prepared to give even Himself, not to speak of other benedictions.
-CC Antya.1.107
If the Lord overlooks even offenses committed by His sincere devotees, why should we conclude that He would refuse to reveal Himself to a sincere soul simply because that person happened to receive an edition containing unauthorized edits? Such a conclusion places greater emphasis on external circumstances than on Kṛṣṇa’s personal mercy and reciprocation.
You mention “what is the qualification of these men you are defending, homosexuals, murderers…”
as though defending the transcendental potency of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books means defending those individuals.
These are two entirely different issues.
A person’s misconduct does not logically determine whether every sentence in an edited book has lost its spiritual potency.
Yet Śrīla Prabhupāda never taught such a principle.
On the contrary, he approved reading books written by devotees with whom he had serious disagreements. Regarding his Godbrother Rāghava Caitanya dāsa, who had deviated from the order of Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura, Śrīla Prabhupāda was asked whether his book The Divine Name could be read.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: “It’s called The Divine Name. It is by one of your Godbrothers.”
Prabhupāda: “Oh yes.”
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: “Is it all right to read it?”
Prabhupāda: “Oh yes. There are some discrepancies, but, on the whole, it is nice… Yes, Rāghava Caitanya. Yes, he was my Godbrother… Oh. That’s good. That’s nice.”
-Lord Caitanya Play Told to Tamāla Kṛṣṇa—August 4, 1969, Los Angeles
Likewise, if a devotee falls from devotional service, it does not follow that every book he edited has become spiritually poisonous.
We judge each edit on its own merits.
You also imply that we are turning a blind eye to this issue. That is simply not true.
ISKM Montreal has already printed 3,000 copies of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original French books. We have attempted to obtain original English editions through Krishna Store, but they are no longer printing them. We are also having discussions regarding printing originals in China. We are also developing an application containing the original editions.
Most importantly, we continue preaching.
The priority should be to train sincere devotees who understand this issue properly. As ISKM expands, so will the opportunity to restore and print the original editions on a larger scale.
Until then, preaching cannot stop simply because original English books are not readily available.
Our duty is to continue giving Kṛṣṇa consciousness while simultaneously working toward preserving Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original editions.
We are not choosing between preserving Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books and preaching. We are doing both according to our present capacity.
I sincerely hope you can see where your philosophical conclusion differs from Śrīla Prabhupāda's teachings, as demonstrated above. I also pray that you may kindly take the association of the devotees in ISKM, rather than relying primarily on articles and opinions scattered across the internet.
By Kṛṣṇa's mercy, His Grace Sundar Gopāla Prabhu has trained hundreds of devotees who are actively pushing forward Śrīla Prabhupāda's movement As It Is, despite having very limited resources, having no financial scale like ISKCON, and often facing strong opposition.
I say this from personal experience. Before taking the association of His Grace Sundar Gopāla Prabhu, I also misunderstood this issue. Through his guidance, my understanding gradually changed. Therefore, my sincere prayer is that no one develops the same fault-finding mentality that I once had, but instead learns to appreciate the sincerity of devotees while simultaneously working to preserve Śrīla Prabhupāda's legacy in the proper spirit.
Hare Kṛṣṇa!
All Glories to Śrīla Prabhupāda!
Your servant,
Nimāi Nitāi dāsa
JP: We can examine the core arguments through the lens of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava siddhānta, śāstra, and the specific instructions of Śrīla Prabhupāda. The Distinction Between Awakening Faith and Achieving Perfection (Śraddhā vs. Dīkṣā)
The changed books can spark a genuine seeker's interest and awaken initial faith (śraddhā), but spiritual perfection requires taking shelter of a bona fide guru who initiates or binds himself to delivering the seeker and the seeker into a path which will deliver the seeker at a ceremony with vows.
In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (1.5.11), it is noted that even imperfectly composed transcendental literatures are heard and accepted by purified men because they speak of the Supreme Lord. However, the Bhāgavatam (11.3.21) explicitly mandates—
tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam "Anyone who is seriously desirous of real happiness must seek out a bona fide spiritual master and take shelter of him by initiation."
The changed books act as the initial medium to awaken the dormant soul, but Kṛṣṇa consciousness is a science of paramparā (disciplic succession). A book alone—especially one with unauthorized alterations—cannot substitute for the living guidance of a bona fide spiritual master who properly represents the siddhānta.
The Vāṇī (sound vibration/instructions) of the pure devotee is more prominent than vapuḥ (physical association), and that original, uncompromised books offer the Vāṇī "as-it-is, the Guru living in sound vibration. Śrīla Prabhupāda always stressed and established the principle of Vāṇī over Vapuḥ during his final days, emphasizing that his presence would always be felt through his instructions in his books and lectures.
When unauthorized editors alter the text to fit institutional or personal agendas, they risk substituting the pure Vāṇī ( the sound acharya) of the ācārya with human speculation, the acharya is lost but the siddhantas ethics etc remain to guide even they become adulterated. While a sincere soul can still extract devotional sentiment (bhāva) from the remnants of truth, the unadulterated Vāṇī provides the exact, undiluted medicinal potency required to cut through material illusion and situate himself perfectly and in purity of the Vani guru.
The Danger of Unauthorized Authority and Guru-Imposture or individuals posing as gurus—stealing the śikṣā of the bona fide guru and usurping the position of dīkṣā—directly addresses a major historical deviation within the post-1977 movement (premature guru systems).
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam (6.1.40) and various Vaiṣṇava texts warn against accepting unqualified or unauthorized spiritual guides who deviate from the authorized disciplic stream.
Impostors who exploit a spiritual movement or misappropriate the legacy of the pure ācārya for personal prestige place themselves and their followers in a perilous spiritual position. True shelter must be taken in a bona fide representative of Kṛṣṇa, not someone who merely leverages an edited platform or institutional title without authentic spiritual realization.
I don’t dismiss sincere devotees who came through edited books, and acknowledge that Kṛṣṇa reciprocates with the sincere seeker's heart (bhāva-grāhī janārdana). But I insist that medium matters, because the ultimate goal is complete surrender to Kṛṣṇa under the guidance of a bona fide guru through unadulterated knowledge given specifically by the bona fide guru which makes him responsible for delivering the soul.
Why does Krishna need to come again and again in the material realm? ( BG 4:7-8 ) When people forget the path of righteousness or the path become compromised and corrupted — He appears in every millennium to REESTABLISH the path. So how the paths get compromised corrupted or lost ?. It happens by whimsical misrepresentation interpretation of Krishna and his pure devotee, the Acharya’s word who endeavor to keep the DHARMA INTACT.
In the last paragraph, a sane person can see why the changed books, even a changed comma is not favored because this sets the precedence of corruption of DHARMA. Now ask yourselves what is right and wrong…, even utilizing these changed books is sin and becoming a party with corrupters of the Acharya’s words. Corrupting the Srila Prabhupada’s books is same as corrupting Krishna’s Bhagvata Gita.
SD: Haribol well said prabhu! All glories to Srila Prabhupada
JT: Srila Prabhupada's books were his life and soul. He gave so many warnings not to change anything. This offence of changing his books is the most grievous. It is even worse than poisoning him. Now after killing his vapu, then outlawing taking diksha from him, now they are trying to erase his vani form.
The book change issue is the most important as these changes will continue and once they are gone they are gone and the parampara is lost. Stand up and defend Prabhupada's books. There is a court case taking place right now after the asuras tried to have websites with digitalized original books taken down. Changing the Acharya's books which he so painstakingly came to give us, is the most wicked offence. It is even more wicked than the abuse taking place. It's that serious.
KS: very well said prabhu. JAYA JAYA SRILA PRABHUPADA 🙏❤️🙏
JT: On the principle that we don't hear the Mahamantra being chanted by an offensive person, because milk touched by the lips of a serpent has poisonous effects, so also have the pages of Srila Prabhupada's books now been tainted with Jayadvaita's poison.
As just one example of this, we can look at BG 6.31.
ORIGINAL:
"The yogī who knows that I and the Supersoul within all creatures are one worships Me and remains always in Me in all circumstances."
CHANGED:
"Such a yogī, who engages in the worshipful service of the Supersoul, knowing that I and the Supersoul are one, remains always in Me in all circumstances."
That's a massive change, and one that takes the reader away from personal worship of Bhagavan Sri Krishna, and directs them toward worship of Paramatma instead.
So while there may still be some potency in the unchanged parts of the books, there are also poison and misconceptions that are delivered in the same spoonful.
KS: HDG SRILA PRABHUPADA,S WORDS ARE DIVINE.They can’t be mixed with material words . HARI BOL🙏
Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.5.11, Purport): Prabhupada noted that transcendental literature presented even with broken language or grammatical flaws is still adored by saintly persons because it glorifies the Supreme Lord, cautioning against artificial amendments by external mental speculators
KS: very well said prabhu. JAYA JAYA SRILA PRABHUPADA 🙏❤️🙏
JT: On the principle that we don't hear the Mahamantra being chanted by an offensive person, because milk touched by the lips of a serpent has poisonous effects, so also have the pages of Srila Prabhupada's books now been tainted with Jayadvaita's poison.
As just one example of this, we can look at BG 6.31.
ORIGINAL:
"The yogī who knows that I and the Supersoul within all creatures are one worships Me and remains always in Me in all circumstances."
CHANGED:
"Such a yogī, who engages in the worshipful service of the Supersoul, knowing that I and the Supersoul are one, remains always in Me in all circumstances."
That's a massive change, and one that takes the reader away from personal worship of Bhagavan Sri Krishna, and directs them toward worship of Paramatma instead.
So while there may still be some potency in the unchanged parts of the books, there are also poison and misconceptions that are delivered in the same spoonful.
KS: HDG SRILA PRABHUPADA,S WORDS ARE DIVINE.They can’t be mixed with material words . HARI BOL🙏
Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.5.11, Purport): Prabhupada noted that transcendental literature presented even with broken language or grammatical flaws is still adored by saintly persons because it glorifies the Supreme Lord, cautioning against artificial amendments by external mental speculators
