Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

I think it is a good idea. Annotations are common in many scientific or scholarly publications. Some statements (like the ones above) in Prabhupadas books definitely could use additional explanation. I translated his books for the BBT for several years.

Historically, this is not a new thing. There are many commentaries by disciples on commentaries by their gurus or other previous acaryas.

Related to this, imho textcritical editions of our main books should be made by BBT before its done by someone else (which will happen in any case in future).

I am very concerned that the annotations will spin a different view than Srila Prabhupada intended and further upset many devotees.

"In his Vedanta-sutra Srila Vyasadeva has described that everything is but a transformation of the energy of the Lord. Sankaracarya, however, has misled the world by commenting that Vyasadeva was mistaken. Thus he has raised great opposition to theism throughout the entire world." - Sri Caitanya Caritamrita Adi-lila 7.121

There is nothing wrong with anything Srila Prabhupada wrote. His writing is perfect as it is.

[quote][cite] Pandu das:[/cite]
There is nothing wrong with anything Srila Prabhupada wrote. His writing is perfect as it is.[/quote]

Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape. (SB 4.25.41, p.)

When a husbandless woman is attacked by an aggressive man, she takes his action to be mercy. (SB 4.25.42, p.)

Generally, when a woman is attacked by a man--whether her husband or some other man--she enjoys the attack, being too lusty. (SB 4.26.26, p.)

I have met scores of people deeply upset or even offended by these statements and all proclaimed them to be completely false. Was that Prabhupadas intention? How many rape victims told anyone that they enjoyed being raped? Were their tears, cries, and struggles a sign of joy to anyone? Are you sure there is no need for any explanation here?

there is this article by Jayadvaita Swami that explains the issue:
http://www.jswami.info/rape

the comment at the bottom is useful too.

I think that its a duty of every disciple direct or not of Prabhupada to give his annotations during Bhagavatam class - and its a duty for us to hear such annotations - daily. In some schismatic temples they ONLY listen to Prabhupadas taped lectures - but that is not what he wanted and is clearly reflected by opinions that state that no comments should be made by anyone on his purports.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite] - but that is not what he wanted and is clearly reflected by opinions that state that no comments should be made by anyone on his purports.[/quote]
could you please provide exact quote for that? Any direct reference by Srila Prabhupada about not changing his purports?

[quote][cite] mishra:[/cite][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite] - but that is not what he wanted and is clearly reflected by opinions that state that no comments should be made by anyone on his purports.[/quote]
could you please provide exact quote for that? Any direct reference by Srila Prabhupada about not changing his purports?[/quote]
The meaning of the above is that at no point Prabhupada disallowed his own disciples explaining his Bhakivedanta purport. He instituted the daily Bhagavatam Class in 1972 in a revolutionary move that ensured his succession and success of his movement. His purports are to have many generations of purports by disciples, grand disciples etc.,

Dear Kula Pavana prabhu,

Hare Krishna. Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I have but a couple of minutes right now, but Ill try to address your concern. First of all, consider what Srila Prabhupada said himself:

From Srila Prabhupada'92s conversations, Morning Walk, May 11, 1975, Perth:
"Rape means without consent, sex. Otherwise there is no rape. There was a rape case in Calcutta, and the lawyer was very intelligent. He some way or other made the woman admit, "Yes, I felt happiness." So he was released. "Here is consent." And thats a fact. Because after all, sex, rape or no rape, they will feel some pleasure. So the lawyer by hook and crook made the woman agree, "Yes, I felt some pleasure." "Now, there is consent." So he was released. After all, it is an itching sensation. So either by force or by willingly, if there is itching, everyone feels relieved itching it. Thats a psychology. It is not that the woman do not like rape. They like sometimes. They willingly. That is the psychology. Outwardly they show some displeasure, but inwardly they do not. This is the psychology."

So here we have a choice, to accept Srila Prabhupadas view or to concoct our own ideas based on our imperfect senses.

Although Srila Prabhupadas words seem clear enough, IMHO, Ill risk describing some of my own thoughts and observations. Feel free to disagree if youre so inclined. I would argue that a one of the traumatic effects of rape is due to the fact that there is some degree of physical pleasure, and this can create substantial internal conflict for a woman. Srila Prabhupada describes the general mentality of women in many places, but what we seem to be seeing in modern society appears something like a blending or blurring of the sexes. Men are becoming effeminate and women are becoming masculine.

It is even hard today to talk of men and women, there is so much gender confusion. A few months ago I saw an article by one "transgender" person, explaining that there are more than twenty(!) kinds of genders today. For example, in addition to normal men and women, there are gays and lesbians, hermaphrodites, genderless persons, men who take female hormones, women who take male hormones, those who surgically change sexes, and various degrees of these transgender changes. Recently I saw in the news what they said was a man who got pregnant, although actually it was a person born as a woman who got most of a sex change but without removing her female organs. I refuse to call her a pregnant man, but she looked a lot like a guy with a big beer-belly, and there is (was?) indeed a baby inside.

So a person in the body of a woman may have some of the mentality of a man, and consequently she wants to be in a dominant position. That desire is grossly violated by rape, and indeed modern academics say that rape is more about power than sex. Although the sex gives some bodily pleasure for the rape victim, as Srila Prabhupada has said, the resultant feeling is a violation of violation of ones sense of independence, a theft of personal power, plus shame and confusion due to the pleasure. Trying to assert her power, fighting against a more powerful rapist, can cause the woman to be injured by the act, increasing her misery. If we can accept these points as true, then it also makes sense that more traditional women, who are accustomed to not having independence, would tend not to be as harmed by rape, either physically or emotionally.

Of course, if some rascal takes these facts as permission to commit rape, ignoring the many, many prohibitions against illicit sex stated in Srila Prabhupadas books, then he is sure to go to hell. Our duty in relation to women is to give them protection for their own good and for the good of society, although they often dont want it. So they go out alone and sometimes get raped. Considering that they consciously put themselves at risk of rape, this can also be a reason for saying they want to get raped, in the same sense that a father sees his son run across a busy street and angrily accuses him of wanting to get hit by a car. Of course the boy doesnt actually want to get hit by a car, but still he takes the risk, which can be said to be a desire for the consequences.

A sense of relief may also be felt due to the expenditure of sinful reactions, "I have committed a terrible sin in the past, and now finally I am being punished." As Krishna says in Bhagavad-gita 10.38, "Among all means of suppressing lawlessness I am punishment...," so one may expect that there is some pleasure even in punishment.

I hope that helps, but nobody should put any of it in Srila Prabhupadas books unless he said it himself. Hare Krishna.

Sincerely, your servant,
Pandu das

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite][quote][cite] mishra:[/cite][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite] - but that is not what he wanted and is clearly reflected by opinions that state that no comments should be made by anyone on his purports.[/quote]
could you please provide exact quote for that? Any direct reference by Srila Prabhupada about not changing his purports?[/quote]
The meaning of the above is that at no point Prabhupada disallowed his own disciples explaining his Bhakivedanta purport. He instituted the daily Bhagavatam Class in 1972 in a revolutionary move that ensured his succession and success of his movement. His purports are to have many generations of purports by disciples, grand disciples etc.,[/quote]

I understand the possibility and need to explain and expand on SP purports in classes etc, but the thing that worries me is to make actual notes in the books. If he wanted us to do so, surely he would be saying, my question now is if there exist some direct quotes from SP that state the opposite, do not change my books or annotate? My impression is that he did not even imagine we would do such a thing.

I agree with you on this Mishra....if someone can provide a quote or reference where Srila Prabhupada authorised any future additions (endnotes or otherwise) to his books, then it could be considered....otherwise it seems totaly unneccessary and I feel undermining and offensive to the Founder Acarya of ISKCON.

It would be interesting to find out the source of such a recommendation to the GBC for these changes.

yes, would be interesting to know what is the source... from who the idea sprang.
Note that the GBC tacitly agree that those statements are not beneficial when saying "notwithstanding the many other beneficial statements in them". A-m-a-z-i-n-g.

One a number of occasions Prabhupada would correct the person reading a purport, and say it was wrong or it was a mistake. There are volumes of corrections worked out and books are already annotated (at least in folio format) and nobody every said anything. Is there a quote from him saying that his books can not be annotated or indexed or translated - which all amounts to the same thing. What I am sure is that there should be many editions of his books, some original and some edited to suite the language. Did you know that translated books of Prabhupada by far more popular then his original English works, at least in the quantity terms/ and Prabhupada wanted books translated did he not? As long as you keep the original there is a lot you can do. Cutting out statements from books is NOT beneficial and they can be and often are misused by both devotees and nondevotees.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]One a number of occasions Prabhupada would correct the person reading a purport, and say it was wrong or it was a mistake. There are volumes of corrections worked out and books are already annotated (at least in folio format) and nobody every said anything. Is there a quote from him saying that his books can not be annotated or indexed or translated - which all amounts to the same thing.[/quote]
CCD are you saying that we should just add endnotes and undermine the authority of Srila Prabhupada? Do you think Srila Prabhupada would not have done this himself if he felt it neccessary? We are talking of a pure devotee here, not some writer or mundane philosopher. Lets just start the process of watering down Srila Prabhupadas books and maybe they will end up like the bible CCD, do you think that is a good proposition?

I suggest the opposite: one can just add endnotes to emphasis the authority of Srila Prabhupada.

"Do you think Srila Prabhupada would not have done this himself if he felt it neccessary?"

I do not think its necessary. But it has been done already in the Folio and in other places. Good footnotes or end notes or indexing adds value to the books not take away from it. (btw Folio footnotes are not that good) After all nobody ever objected to Academics reviews published at the end of his books.

I do not think that notes or any commentaries should be done to form an apologetic statements or justifications or even qualifications of what he has said. There are better ways to do it.

For example a good footnote would explain the use of the same word in another place in Prabhupadas books or provide a quote from another purport or in other way provide more information for the books. That is a good thing just as the index is.

I do not expect you to accept it, mainly because you have already formed you opinion and I do not think you have the flexibility to consider the obviousness of this situation, as footnotes, indexes and reviews already exist.

Prabhupada wanted his books to be as scholarly as possible thus providing extra information or indexing is not harming the message. Apologetic notes are a different matter altogether.

ys

Prabhu, your points on academic annotations are valid. An annotated version of the Gita showing the changes between the pre and post-78 editions would be *awesome* and a great value add in so many ways.

However, while academic annotations are one thing, Resolution 311 is not about academia. Witness the lack of academic papers justifying, clarifying, or defending it. Resolution 311 is about using apologetic notes strategically to deal with internal cultural issues, including disengagement of the membership, and external issues, including declining recruitment and loss of prestige and influence of the organization in the host culture.

The point of these proposed annotations seems to me to be to contradict or minimize what Srila Prabhupada wrote in his books to avoid embarrassment and other difficulties. Thats my impression. Before they start "explaining" things in Srila Prabhupadas books, it would help a lot if they did more to explain what they intend to do, why, how, etc.

If they said they were only adding endnotes consisting of relevant quotes by Srila Prabhupada on those subjects, then I think I could accept that since Im practically a nobody in this organization and can only give myself trouble by arguing, though I doubt such annotations would be helpful. If, as I fear, they are going to depute someone to explain that Srila Prabhupada was wrong about those subjects and "we now know better" thanks to so much psychological research, then itll be hard not to freak out.

I resent that that they would drop this on us without telling us more about what theyre thinking. Dont they know how much trouble its causing?

I can not see that "Resolution 311 is about using apologetic notes" from the resolution itself. What is your factual basis for assumption that it will "strategically deal with internal cultural issues, including disengagement of the membership, and external issues, including declining recruitment and loss of prestige and influence of the organization in the host culture". For example "disengagement of the membership" is hardly the case in the most of current ISKCON world (maybe only old ISKCON world).

I spoke with couple of GBCs and they were categorical that its not even a resolution and will not form part of the Law book, its a recommendation or a way to initiate a discussion. And certainly nobody is going to change the Purports. The whole notion is that if you annotate, you do not need to change. Of course some "footnotes" are already written and are used by the translators who translate Prabhupadas book to other languages. Unlike reading, when you translate and edit translation, lots of questions come up, and clarity is most welcome.

I agree that comparative edition between a) Indian print b)First western editions c)Latest edition could be a nice way to go and that will diffuse all the confusion, devotees would love it and it can be printed in small runs, everyone will buy it.

I think we can agree that to have a few editions of Prabhupadas books would be the most welcome development.

[quote][cite] sitapati:[/cite]Prabhu, your points on academic annotations are valid. An annotated version of the Gita showing the changes between the pre and post-78 editions would be *awesome* and a great value add in so many ways.[/quote]

I totally agree. I am not strictly against editing or annotating but upon reading the resolution, it struck me as strange that the GBC have sanctioned annotating/end-noting Prabhupadas commentaries, but they have not found it necessary to annotate/end-note any of the numerous major and minor editing changes to the very same commentaries.

It would be interesting if there was some breakdown of how many of the GBC body actually supported, opposed or chose not to vote for this proposal.

Remember though, at this stage the resolution only "recommends to the BBT trustees" that it be done. It appears the final decision rests with the BBT trustees.

[quote][cite] sitapati:[/cite] However, while academic annotations are one thing, Resolution 311 is not about academia. Witness the lack of academic papers justifying, clarifying, or defending it. Resolution 311 is about using apologetic notes strategically to deal with internal cultural issues, including disengagement of the membership, and external issues, including declining recruitment and loss of prestige and influence of the organization in the host culture.[/quote]

Sitapati, what are the internal cultural issues you refer to?

The GBC has to address strategic issues. Thats part of its function. When they are meeting in Mayapura they are looking across the society as a whole and considering macroscopic issues.

One of the big ones is ISKCONs declining influence in Western countries. Book distribution is down, recruitment is down.

This is considered to be partly due to external cultural changes which make our presentation dated (such as "Chant and Be Happy" with the Beatles in it), and statements in our books which people would consider old-fashioned, culturally, like "women are less intelligent". It is also considered to be due partly to the internal problems which have alienated many people from the movement.

We have a real image problem in these countries due to our troubled internal history. We have a rap as chauvinistic, even criminal organization that oppresses and exploits women.

To deal with this they have proposed this resolution. People think we are chauvinistic because they read the books and they encounter these statements that say things like "woman is less intelligent" etc.

At the same time, internally, these kind of statements have been recited as mantras and philosophical justification by people who have done things like abuse women and children (for an example of this social dynamic see "No One Stopped My Rape", an article from a 2001 issue of Glamour Magazine - http://www.rickross.com/reference/krishna/krishna41.html).

As a result of this there is a big disconnect between many of the women and the second generation of devotees on one hand, and the movement itself, meaning the formal organization.

The justification for the resolution is not the thrust of Mukunda Goswami and Madhava Ghoshs advocacy for annotations. Its not an academic approach. If it were, then the first annotation would indeed be the pre- and post-78 editions.

The resolution is a strategic measure by a managerial body. Not a principled one by a brahmincial body.

The resolution seeks to increase the influence on ISKCON in the outside world, recruiting more people to its ranks, and to change the internal culture by not allowing people to "misinterpret the words of Srila Prabhupada", and use them as justification for deviant acts.

I would, myself, say that the failure to punish transgressors such as rapists and child abusers is the actual cause of internal problems. A woman may like to be raped, but nevertheless a rapist must be punished by the state.

[quote][cite] sitapati:[/cite]
The resolution is a strategic measure by a managerial body. Not a principled one by a brahmincial body.
[/quote]

I am not sure about that. What brahminical solution would you propose? The punishment solution is a managerial measure. Adding explanations in footnotes is a brahminical measure. Manu Samhita advises punishing rapists with severe corporal punishment, up to and including death.

You say: "We have a real image problem in these countries due to our troubled internal history. We have a rap as chauvinistic, even criminal organization that oppresses and exploits women. To deal with this they have proposed this resolution. People think we are chauvinistic because they read the books and they encounter these statements that say things like "woman is less intelligent" etc."

This image problem is our own fault, for several reasons. We did all these bad things, and for decades we pretended that we do not need to address the criticisms of society in general "because we are right, and they are wrong". Whenever a critical article about us would appear, we were only happy for the "exposure" it gave us, and we only counted the number of times the word "Krishna" appeared in the article. Was that a brahminical solution?

Now even a mere mention of adding footnotes to the more controversial passages in Prabhupadas books incites intense emotions among devotees. Best solution is to do nothing? We even have big time child abusers like Danurdhar as "gurus" in our society, and "gurus" like Bhakti Vikasa, who persistently denigrate women using quotes from Prabhupadas writings. Our bad image is our fault.

It would appear to me that the statements in SPs book are not chauvinistic but our past immature interpretation and resulting attitudes of the statements are faulty (not just about women)....SPs statement about women being less intelligent refers to woman as a class and should be explained by the brahmnically inclined devotees to the preachers so that in the field they can clear any public misunderstanding.....SP wrote his books so that they would be the lawbooks and therefore relevant for the next 10,000 years, I feel we need to tread carefully about adding to the material presented by the pure devotee and thus avoid offenses.

Kula-pavana prabhu: Yes, the punishment solution is a managerial one. The problem is managerial.

If the footnoting proposed by Resolution 311 were brahminical in its nature, it would have philosophical justification around it. Instead, it has only a resolution (executive order), which has consequential justifications.

As for your rhetorical questions, I think Im in agreement with your underlying position.

My point is that there should be more consideration and discussion of the problem and the possible solutions, rather than what appears to be a knee-jerk reaction: "Oh, we have these problems. Lets footnote the books!"

As you point out, there are several missing steps and some self-reflection that we need to do as an organization to see where we have gone wrong, and what we need to do to address that.

Our steps should be taken carefully, and with deep deliberation.

Otherwise we run the risk of yet more managerial missteps, only this time involving Srila Prabhupadas books.

[quote][cite] sitapati:[/cite]
If the footnoting proposed by Resolution 311 were brahminical in its nature, it would have philosophical justification around it. Instead, it has only a resolution (executive order), which has consequential justifications.
[/quote]

It will depend on what kind of footnotes are added. IMO Resolution 311 is the best they could do under the circumstances. Nobody in GBC has the guts to address the real issue - explaining that the statements Srila Prabhupada makes in these controversial parts are relative and to a large extent flowing from a particular cultural background.

[quote][cite] It will depend on what kind of footnotes are added. IMO Resolution 311 is the best they could do under the circumstances. Nobody in GBC has the guts to address the real issue - explaining that the statements Srila Prabhupada makes in these controversial parts are relative and to a large extent flowing from a particular cultural background.[/quote]
Cultural background yes, but we are talking of a spiritual culture based on vedic life that can be applied to any future situation (considering SP said his books would be law for the next 10,000 years)...the modern mind may reject these teachings but the facts presented in SPs books still remains.

So now its come to this --- that there is some "need" to apologize for, water down, annotate, render more palatable --- the written words of Srila Prabhupada? Why? Because some people are upset about some things? We are catering to those who will feel offended or upset by some things Prabhupada said or wrote? Those people will find some other reason to be disturbed or upset. Either one renders submissive aural reception and has a spiritual awakening or they dont. Since when was Prabhupadas mission to please the mainstream?

Prabhupada never compromised. He was advised by many to present his message in a way that would be more acceptable to and popular with Westerners but he refused. He didnt cater to some current political correctness. He presented the absolute truth as it is, as it always has been and as it always will be eternally.

Its a disgrace! Its a travesty. Its a sham and an outrage. Its two shams, three travesties and a half dozen outrages. I for one am disgusted with the whole thing. Just thinking about it makes me physically ill.

Swarup Das: Well said....totally agree and feel the same way about the whole concept....look what happened to the bible!

The bible has many commentaries, annotations, concordances, study guides, etc. Im not aware of any Christian group stating that their founders commentary should be the last one.

Afaik, the annotation proposal refers only to explaining a cultural context, not to diluting the siddhanta.

devotees should be there to explain the concepts that escape beginners, another thing is to alter the originals.

In BG, it is said that the book should be read in the company of devotees, like that.

It is not that SP was wrong and now we have to comment and annotate to save the day...

SP books and compassionate devotees guiding in the day to day understanding is the recipe that worked to make 1000s of devotees. If things are not OK it is precisely because devotees are not preaching in that personal way. If we change the books on the plea that they are not sufficient or even negative for people, that will bring effective and powerful preaching even lesser.

This idea of annotation is all the way wrong... think if SP would like the idea of his books annotated by the same ones that implemented such things as the Zonal Acarya, etc, and have been watering down his movement the last 30 years.

Can`t you even leave the books alone as they are?

Afaik, annotation is not changing originals but notes under line or at the end of a chapter. They are a sort of commentary. Just as a language changes and new translations are needed every generation, cultural context also changes and needs to be explained. This has been going on in Vedic and other traditions.

> if SP would like the idea of his books annotated by the same ones that implemented such things as the Zonal Acarya, etc, and have been watering down his movement the last 30 years.

Then new annotations/commentary is needed refuting/overruling/expanding on the previous one. This is how the many bhasyas emerged: as annotations to the unchanged eternal sastra.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Then new annotations/commentary is needed refuting/overruling/expanding on the previous one. This is how the many bhasyas emerged: as annotations to the unchanged eternal sastra.[/quote]
This is nonsense....over-intelligence can be a disqualification in spiritual life, the books dont need any additions full stop, end of story.

Its not just about making devotees, its about creating a healthy cultural dynamic inside the society. I dont think that annotations is the way to do that either, but Im just pointing out that resolution 311 seeks to address two problems: external public perception and internal cultural issues.

(And resolution 311 implies that both of these are Srila Prabhupadas fault...)

Why not consult Srila Prabhupada on this, since theyre his books?

Prabhupada: Oh, yes. You have no right. Suppose I have written one book. So I have got some intention. So why should you interpret my intention with your intention? What right you have got? You have no right. If you want to speak something of yours, then you write another book. Why you are taking advantage of my book and misleading others? I want to speak to the public something, I have expressed my opinion in that way. But because it is popular, you are taking advantage of my book and expressing your views. How much cheating, how much cheater you are! Therefore he is suffering, Dr. Radhakrishnan. He has lost his brain.
>>> Ref. VedaBase => Room Conversation -- April 2, 1972, Sydney

rasa108: I dont speak about an overintelligence in a sense of trying to insidiously distort previous explanations (Radhakrishnans case).

From our GV history its obvious that writing of new and new tikas and subtikas was going on all the time. Jiva G. wrote commentaries on writings of Rupa and Sanatana Gosvamis. Visvanatha Cakravarti wrote simplified commentaries on Gosvami works. Narottama dasa Thakura explained the GV siddhanta in his bhajans for illiterate Bengalis. Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati made the same siddhanta palatable for Indians influenced by English education and Srila Prabhupada made it accessible to Western audience of 20th century. Desa kala patra, nothing else.

Were living a mere one generation after SP. If nothing else is done by his disciples, their disciples, etc., then after 100, 1000, what to speak of thousands of years SP books will be as hard to understand as old Bible commentaries.

"Were living a mere one generation after SP. If nothing else is done by his disciples, their disciples, etc., then after 100, 1000, what to speak of thousands of years SP books will be as hard to understand as old Bible commentaries."

If I thought the way you do
At night Id take a worn out shoe
Id beat my mind a hundred times
And the next morning with a broom
Id do it, too

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Were living a mere one generation after SP. If nothing else is done by his disciples, their disciples, etc., then after 100, 1000, what to speak of thousands of years SP books will be as hard to understand as old Bible commentaries.[/quote]

Will be as hard to understand as old Bible commentaries? This is your assumption and speculation Veda....considering SP spoke of his books as being the lawbooks for the next 10,000 years (and if he thought it would be neccessary to add annotations or any other additions of commentary etc.) then dont you think he would have instructed his disciples to do this? Unless someone can produce evidence of such instructions given by SP, then there is no justification for annotations or any additions or changes....none.

I can not understand much of law books - I need barristers to tell me what some words means... Its natural and there is no contradiction. BTW the commentary on the commentary is called Tippani.

ccd:
are the law books annotated so that lay man can understand them better?
of course you go to a barrister, and people goes to devotees

I actually would want to note that tika is not exactly what Prabhupada wrote. He summarized many tikas and add his own and its called Bhaktivedanta Purports. So commenting on them will be both tippani and not, since he has already crossed over the traditional boundaries and used English for commentaries (something not done before him). It is certainly not bhashya since he did not use bhashya structure which is quite standard.

[quote][cite] mishra:[/cite]ccd:
are the law books annotated so that lay man can understand them better?
of course you go to a barrister, and people goes to devotees[/quote]

That is a good point, law books are not annotated:-) but exactly because some barristers are so smart as not to want it.

I have to say, and I do not want to say it, but I have heard so many weird explanations of the books of Prabhupada, I wish we had less barristers like that in ISKCON. There is an unbelievable amount of misinterpretations of his words. So academic style footnotes in some editions will be a great help.

ccd:
there are some awful interpretations of SP books in the classes sometimes, but would not be worse to have them in print?
at least the air carries the spoken words and they are more easily forgotten or fixed.
with our record on interpreting instructions, wouldn`t be better to leave the books as they are, just to be safe :)
I am starting a question about interpretation heard in classes.. that could be fun.

I do not think that any sane person can suggest instilling stupid remarks or interpretations in print. That seems to be what you are all talking about.

I would suggest that people who can do it should have at least a degree or two and better refer to a properly reviewed work by iskcon academics. Better if iskcon academics do it. I nominate our oxford phd radhika ramana... what do you think? I have to agree with you if any footnotes will be of any lower then that standard it will devalue the works.

"I have to agree with you if any footnotes will be of any lower then that standard it will devalue the works. "

danger danger... and all this trouble to satisfy who?

I [quote][cite] mishra:[/cite]"I have to agree with you if any footnotes will be of any lower then that standard it will devalue the works. "

danger danger... and all this trouble to satisfy who?[/quote]

I guess objective is to satisfy Prabhupada and all generations of his disciples-grand and great-grand-disciples to come. I gave up on satisfaction of his direct disciples, honestly, they are too sensitive:-)

> considering SP spoke of his books as being the lawbooks for the next 10,000 years (and if he thought it would be neccessary to add annotations or any other additions of commentary etc.) then dont you think he would have instructed his disciples to do this?

rasa108: Speculations? Well, then try it out yourself. Get writings of Church Fathers and see how much you can understand after 2000 years. I presume you have no background in Christian history, language and theology, as most people.

As I said, language and cultural context changes. No book can remain eternally understandable at face value. Explanation will be always needed.

If we do only what SP instructed and nothing else, then we should e.g. stop using internet. It didnt exist (for public use) in 70, he never instructed us to use it and therefore we shouldnt.
The same goes for cell phones, etc. etc.

Imagine what such great innovator acaryas, masters of yukta vairagya, like SP, BSST or BVT would say to that.

Differences between tape transcripts and books (I know this is a somewhat different problem, but stay with me here)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kindly compare

http://www.prabhupadavani.org/Conversations/Text/222.html

to:

http://www.harekrsna.com/philosophy/gss/sadhu/religions/killing.htm

this is the conversation between Prabhupada and Cardinal Danielou. I was surprised how different that conversation really was compared to the version circulated in the movement (Science of Self-Realization, Chapter 4 )

my point is that anybody can write a book or booklet which annotates, explains, etc. That remains as a commentary, addition, explanation, but still is a separate item and preserves the original.
but to annotate the book, I see it as a child scribbling in his fathers notebook. Hopeless.

[quote][cite]VEDA: As I said, language and cultural context changes. No book can remain eternally understandable at face value. Explanation will be always needed.
If we do only what SP instructed and nothing else, then we should e.g. stop using internet. It didnt exist (for public use) in 70, he never instructed us to use it and therefore we shouldnt.The same goes for cell phones, etc. etc. Imagine what such great innovator acaryas, masters of yukta vairagya, like SP, BSST or BVT would say to that.[/quote]
Yukta Vairagya is one thing, adding a commentary or annotation is a completely different thing - this is a weak argument and I get the feeling you somehow enjoy playing the devils advocate Veda but you are running out of justification for this proposal.
"No book can remain eternally understandable at face value"...more nonsense....the knowledge contained in SPs is totally transcendental and pertains to the spiritual energy and not the material energy - the explanation is already there in the purports - devotees also give explanations based on SPs teachings in our temples/namahatta centres etc. and on the street where preaching is active.
I do agree that there may need to be updates in the the language used....to remain contemporary for the time (considering the time frame is 10,000 years), but this has to preserve all the original words and meanings and there should be no changes....the devotees who update the language have to be free of any material motivation (such as misrepresenting SPs words for political reasons such as comments about women etc.).

---VEDA: As I said, language and cultural context changes. No book can remain eternally understandable at face value. Explanation will be always needed. If we do only what SP instructed and nothing else, then we should e.g. stop using internet. It didnt exist (for public use) in 70, he never instructed us to use it and therefore we shouldnt.---

He DID say do not change my books.

'85just like in our ISKCON there are so many false things: '93Prabhupuc0u257 da said this, Prabhupu257 da said that.'94
(Letter to: Krsna du257 sa'97Vrndu257 vana 7 November, 1972)

Prabhupu257 da: Yes, preaching, preaching, you will become perfect preacher. Preach only what you have heard from Krsna and guru, that'92s all. Don'92t add and subtract. Then you are secure. And if you add some concoction just like somebody says that '93I may do whatever I like independently. If I chant, then everything is all right,'94 this is nonsense addition. It is not the fact. That is the danger. Some inexperienced man, he introduces some concoction. Sometimes they say, '93Prabhupu257 da said it.'94 More misleading. Yes.

(Morning Walk'97February 3, 1975, Hawaii)

Prabhupu257 da: So, when you change, then the authority is lost. Just like in our society, sometimes they do something nonsense and they say, '93Prabhupu257 da said.'94 (laughter) They are doing that. We know that. It is deteriorated like that. Therefore Krsna said, sa kaleneha mahata yogo nastah kaunteya: '93And in due course of time, this yoga was lost. Therefore I am repeating the same thing, old philosophy to you.'94 So it requires like that.

(Room Conversation with Carol Cameron'97May 9, 1975, Perth)

'93Unless it is there from me in writing, there are so many things that '91Prabhupu257 da said.'92'94
(Letter to: Oku257 ra'97Vndu257 vana 2 September, 1975)

rasa108: I used the yukta vairagya just to counter your idea of following only what SP instructed. It was in a separated paragraph. Let everyone decide if it was a weak argument or not.

Youre talking from 1970-2008 perspective. I talking from the perspective of later generations.

Spiritual knowledge is transcendent but the material world changes. SPs books were innovative in a sense of making this sp. knowledge accessible to people of 20th century (even though his English is often 19th century Indian style as we can see from the rape issue). He used a lot of time/place/circumstances based examples. Theyll be increasingly less understandable as time passes. The question if the annotations should be included in the books or in separate volumes is another thing.

We simply have different experiences. I dont just read the books, I have to render them into another language. I dont know if you ever tried translating and editing any book several hundred years old.

> devotees also give explanations based on SPs teachings in our temples/namahatta centres etc. and on the street where preaching is active.

So thats a natural thing. But SP also stressed that his disciples should write - articles to BTG, comments in newspapers, and their own books. He was following BSSTs order:

"It is certainly not good to write literature for money or reputation, but to write books and publish them for the enlightenment of the general populace is real service to the Lord. That was Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati'92s opinion, and he specifically told his disciples to write books." (CC 2.19.132 p.)

> but this has to preserve all the original words and meanings and there should be no changes

No one ever suggested that. Originals will be always preserved. Only new commentaries on them will emerge as time goes by, both spoken and written.

mishra: The unauthorized changing was unfortunately done by Hayagriva and possibly others.
This we discussed earlier.

>VEDA: Youre talking from 1970-2008 perspective. I talking from the perspective of later generations.

Read again Veda, I talked about language changes in the next 10,000 years.

>VEDA: Spiritual knowledge is transcendent but the material world changes. SPs books were innovative in a sense of making this sp. knowledge accessible to people of 20th century (even though his English is often 19th century Indian style as we can see from the rape issue). He used a lot of time/place/circumstances based examples. Theyll be increasingly less understandable as time passes. The question if the annotations should be included in the books or in separate volumes is another thing.

Increasingly less understandable? Are you serious Veda? SP never compromised in his presentation of the philosophy....we should not compromise the words and presentation of Srila Prabhupada regardless of what is going on in the material world.

I have to agree with Veda. ANY book by anyone will be increasingly less understandable because language is a living thing and especially such a dynamic language as English. One has to be a fanatic not to understand it.

Veda, I quite like your suggestion of including annotations in different volumes. Best would be to include them in well respected journals and then publish as a separate volumes at a later stage. In this way Prabhupadas books with references to academic sources discussing the statements in the footnotes will not lose and at the same time will become more valuable. A simple note: for use of word rape see Journal vol X. will add great value to books and will make them easier to sell in Libraries, something Prabhupada definitely wanted.

Im imagining a morning walk with Srila Prabhupada and at some point one of us says to him, "Prabhupada -- English is a living language and it will surely change as time goes on -- and already some of the things you write in your books are being misunderstood by academics as well as general readers. We think it might be a good idea to either put annotations in your books or perhaps even publish a separate volume explaining further some points that tend to be misconstrued like the very controversial issue around what you said concerning rape and women. We think that if we do this your books will sell better in libraries, recruitment in our temples will increase and it might offset or defuse some of your critics.

Yes, I can just hear Prabhupada saying, "Oh, this is a wonderful and practical idea. Yes, go ahead with my blessings."

NO - I DONT THINK SO, folks!!!

If it aint broken, dont fix it. If you are seeing it as broken and needing "fixing" then its your vision and mentality that needs the adjustment and not Prabhupadas writings.

Its inconceivable to even imagine this conversation or debate going on when Prabhupada was present. Once again we see how all sorts of chaos and nonsense infiltrates the mission after the Acarya departs.

One more point Id like to make. When I joined ISKCON in the late 60s we were finding it very difficult to preach the message of Bhagavad-gita wherein Lord Krishna instructs Arjuna to fight and kill. The war in Vietnam was raging and those to whom we were preaching were all pacifists and active in the anti-war movement (as were most of us who were becoming devotees). There was just no way around it --- either one understood the difference between Vietnam and Kurukshetra, between Richard Nixon and Lord Sri Krishna -- or one did not. It was as simple as that.

I think many devotees are ignorant of some facts. And fact number one is that Prabhupada actually on a number of occasions consulted with his disciples on use of a word in English. He would approach his disciples and ask what word would they use, he trusted his disciples, just as we do not trust imaginary stories about Prabhupadas walks.

rasa108: > Increasingly less understandable? Are you serious Veda? SP never compromised in his presentation of the philosophy...

Dead serious. Since I speak about time/place/circumstances based examples, not about philosophy.

"I think many devotees are ignorant of some facts. And fact number one is that Prabhupada actually on a number of occasions consulted with his disciples on use of a word in English."

Whats your point? What does that have to do with anything? Speaking of ignorance -- where the hell do you come off being an expert on Prabhupada? Who are you? What are your credentials? I typeset the entire KRISHNA Book trilogy, half the Bhagavad-gita unabridged edition, the Nectar of Devotion and numerous other books from 69 to 71 in a freezing little room in Boston -- all night long, every night. I transcribed Prabhupadas tapes as they arrived. I was there -- while it was all going on -- and I can tell you that without a doubt -- once a book was printed and published -- that was it -- no changes -- no additions and no subtractions. I with I had a dime for every time Prabhupada told us NEVER to make any changes to his books once they were published -- unless he authorized it.

My imaginary walk with Prabhupada was to stress a point you moron. Who am I dealing with here? Do I know you? What does CCD stand for? What is your background? How is it that you are an expert on Prabhupada and his books?

I refuse to discuss it in anything less then a rational way. Is it not a clear case when a person who did typeset the Krishna, was clearly not trained and without a previous experience trying to prove that what ever he misspelled or misheard on the tape should be the eternal truth to the next 10000 years?

Prabhupada always relied on professional advice and he did not get much of it from uneducated but fortunate souls. The fact that you did a great service is not an excuse to look at the same service you did and improve on it. Nobody is talking here about changing the books. Are you aware that the typesetting mistakes you or other typists did causing a great deal of pain to the present generation, what to speak of the numbers of mistakes that resulted from it in translations in over some 50 languages?

With your services in ISKCON press, did you ever discuss with Prabhupada a need of the annotations or end notes?

[quote][cite] Swarup Das:[/cite]I typeset the entire KRISHNA Book trilogy, half the Bhagavad-gita unabridged edition, the Nectar of Devotion and numerous other books from 69 to 71 in a freezing little room in Boston -- all night long, every night. I transcribed Prabhupadas tapes as they arrived. I was there -- while it was all going on -- and I can tell you that without a doubt -- once a book was printed and published -- that was it -- no changes -- no additions and no subtractions. I with I had a dime for every time Prabhupada told us NEVER to make any changes to his books once they were published -- unless he authorized it.
[/quote]

Even if you are who you claim you are, many other devotees are quite familiar with the way books were produced during Prabhupadas times and in most cases he did not perform a full pre-print book review himself. Based on the historical records at the Bhaktivedanta Archives, the only book fully reviewed by Prabhupada was the purple Bhagavad-gita. That early edition was later changed by Hayagriva and this is what now passes as the original Prabhupadas Gita.

"Your fear that the entire society will be in danger by Raymonds editing of the Gita is not very suitable remark...."

January 15, 1968 Letter to Hayagriva:

"Regarding the manuscript: It is very difficult for me to see it again, but I inquired from Brahmananda whether the manuscript is already delivered to MacMillan Company or not. If it is not delivered then I shall try to see it again. Your fear that the entire society will be in danger by Raymonds editing of the Gita is not very suitable remark. Rayarama may not be as qualified as you are, but his one qualification that he is fully surrendered to Krishna and his Spiritual Master is the first class recommendation for his editing any one of our literatures, because editing of Vedic literatures does not depend on academic education.

It is clearly stated in the Upanisads that one who has implicit faith in God as well as in the Spiritual Master, to him only the import of Vedic literature is revealed. I think Rayarama is doing work in that spirit and his recent publication of several booklets and Back to Godhead and a calendar are all first class proof of his sincerity of service.

Anyway, when I started Back to Godhead, it was my intention that your academic career and Rayaramas sincere service would be a good combination; unfortunately, I do not know why, you do not agree with one another. To me, English language is undoubtedly a foreign language, and I thought your combination of editorship will help me a great deal. Anyway, whatever is done is done. "
-------------------------

Actually, that manuscript has not yet been delivered to MacMillan and Srila Prabhupada was able to review it. He actually liked what Rayarama did with the original manuscript (RR even added his own sentences in some places to make the meaning of the text more clear), and fully approved it. The Archives still have a copy of this manuscript, with Prabhupadas check marks and notes. According to them this is the only case where Prabhupada actually reviewed the book prior to printing.

Too bad Hayagriva had to change that text in the subsequent printings, ostensibly to bring it closer to the
Prabhupadas original work. Actually it was all just his own false ego...

"Nobody is talking here about changing the books. "

Actually I think they are talking about changing the books. The proposed annotations are in response contemporary ideas that conflict with what Srila Prabhupada wrote in some of his Srimad Bhagavatam purports, with an open door for annotations on other subjects where Srila Prabhupada seems to have been "out of touch" to some people.

Although the GBC hasnt revealed exactly what they want to say, the implication I find is that they want to make changes in hope of pleasing the feminists and then other special interest groups. Most of Srila Prabhupadas disciples are still alive today, and I find it hard to believe that they had a different idea of the definition of the word "rape" then compared to now. Srila Prabhupada knew it meant forcing sex upon an unwilling person, as did his disciples. Recently plugged the word into the Vedabase and it was clear that he considered it an activity of demoniac persons, and that it required punishment. Still he said that it gives some physical pleasure to the victim. Ive had debates on my blog with devotees supporting the annotations who argued that Srila Prabhupada was wrong. They dont want these annotations to support Srila Prabhupadas view; they want to replace it with modern politically correct ideas.

Please sign Petition to Rescind GBC Resolution 311

See here:

http://www.petitiononline.com/GBCre311/petition.html

Please pass this on, and dont forget to sign.

Your servant,
Caitanya dasa

[quote][cite] Caitanya das:[/cite]Please sign Petition to Rescind GBC Resolution 311

See here:

http://www.petitiononline.com/GBCre311/petition.html

Please pass this on, and dont forget to sign.

Your servant,
Caitanya dasa[/quote]
You should at least provide an option to agree or not. Otherwise you are not comparing like with like (BTW the letter incorrectly states that the resolution is formally requesting the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust to do it, it does not it suggests a discussion).

If you are opposed to this GBC resolution, there is now a petition to rescind it.
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/GBCre311/

In my opinion it all comes back to this....show us evidence of SP giving instruction or direction (written or spoken) to his disciples in regards to additions, annotations or extra commentary in his books (or a separate book)....produce a reliable quote and I am sure there will be consent amongst the devotees....the fact is there is no such quote, instruction or direction.

There is one joke about your comment Rasa.

In different places there are different ways to look at half empty/half full glass or instruction/no instruction.

On one side Prabhupada vested all powers into his BBT and on the other side have commented on both not changing and editing of the books.

He never commented on any footnotes or endnotes... full stop.

So the joke is:

In Germany, everything that is not allowed is forbidden. In England everything that is not forbidden is allowed. In France even some things that are forbidden are allowed but in Russia even some things that are allowed are forbidden.

Dont get hung up on the names as its a joke but do figure in which country you live.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]On one side Prabhupada vested all powers into his BBT and on the other side have commented on both not changing and editing of the books.[/quote]
No solid argument for this CCD....Srila Prabhupada would have definitely given instruction on this matter as His books were his life and an extremely important service that he performed under instruction from his Spiritual Master....with such an important issue as this, SP would have given at least one written or oral instruction....there is not one instruction or directive given to his disciples....mmmm interesting that isnt it?

[quote][cite] rasa108:[/cite][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]On one side Prabhupada vested all powers into his BBT and on the other side have commented on both not changing and editing of the books.[/quote]
No solid argument for this CCD....Srila Prabhupada would have definitely given instruction on this matter [/quote]
Of course there is no instruction written or verbal about footnotes or endnotes. If there was there would be no discussion. So both sides will have to use some interpretation, which will separate those who think that even some things that are allowed are forbidden, and those who think that not forbidden is allowed. That is precisely the point. One side say - in order not to change the books we put footnotes, other side will say, that books should be exactly as they are and its sinful to consider even considering explaining the meaning of the word infinitesimal.

Dear Caitanya Candrodaya prabhu,

Hare Krishna. Please accept my respectful obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

Dont you think the following quote is especially relevant?

Prabhupada: Oh, yes. You have no right. Suppose I have written one book. So I have got some intention. So why should you interpret my intention with your intention? What right you have got? You have no right. If you want to speak something of yours, then you write another book. Why you are taking advantage of my book and misleading others? I want to speak to the public something, I have expressed my opinion in that way. But because it is popular, you are taking advantage of my book and expressing your views. How much cheating, how much cheater you are! Therefore he is suffering, Dr. Radhakrishnan. He has lost his brain.
>>> Ref. VedaBase => Room Conversation -- April 2, 1972, Sydney

He was speaking about Dr. Radhakrishnan commenting on Krishnas words in Bhagavad-gita, changing the apparent meaning with his own ideas and interpretation. To explain, Srila Prabhupada gave the example of his objection to someone changing his own books by way of commentary that does not hold true to his intention. In my view this is exactly the current situation, and it seems almost prophetic in the way Srila Prabhupada spoke of it, even in the absence of the words, "footnotes," "endnotes," or "annotations." What do you think? How specific would he have had to have been for devotees to accept this statement by Srila Prabhupada as relevant or conclusive?

Hare Krishna.

Panduji, Hare Krishna

<Dont you think the following quote is especially relevant?>

It is entirely different case. One was a book where meaning was changed. It has nothing to do with annotations or footnotes. I am sure its obvious. Nobody is taking advantage of Prabhupadas books to promote themselves here.

You have to agree that this has nothing to do with endnotes or an index or glossary (it already exists in hard copies and footnotes already exist in Bhagavatam and in Vedabase for years, nobody said anything!!! Amazing!)

Just open first canto and look at page 29. There is footnote that is obviously not written by Prabhupada and was added much later then his own publication. Here is a proof that its acceptable. I just guess that devotees who never open the books and only use Vedabase search or their memory of reading books 30 years back may need this little element of proof - index, glossary and footnotes already exist, please open the book and read it for yourself.

Yes, Prabhupada was critical of Dr Radhakrishnan for many reasons, that was just one of them and it does not speak about any of footnotes or endnotes.

BTW there are stronger instructions record from Prabhupada about not changing the actual text of his books, but that does not mean that illustrations, index or footnotes can not be added to the books, it was done and it will be done with or without Basu Ghosh Prabhu.. that is almost as to suggest that you can not translate the book because.. "you are taking advantage of my book and expressing your views" ... of course you can translate and annotate books as your service. Now how to do it to add value and make devotees and non devotees read the books. Lets be honest many devotees, possibly even Swarup above do not read books much..

How to do it to make it a real service and at the same time to satisfy all somewhat conservative devotees? I suggest two different editions, one academic edition with footnotes and academic format citations, and a second is the edition for conservative devotees with annotations comparing existing and different original editions of Prabhupadas books. I would love to read myself for example his pre-1966 published books in the footnotes of the current Bhagavatam or Isopanishad as well as a comparative edition of the versions of his Bhagavad Gita (which was incidentally based a lot on Radhakrishnans translations of the verses, and interestingly Radhakrishnan himself accepted a formal initiation from Prabhupadas godbrother, Tirtha Maharaja, something that did not stop Prabhupada from criticising his pre-vaishnava publications and using them at the same time for his lectures, before BGAII came out, - we need a similar flexibility).

Did I answer your question?

Hare Krishna, Caitanya Candrodaya prabhu. I see your point. However, my objection is not to annotations, footnotes, or endnotes, in priciple. I am considering this resolution in the context of the persistent push by some for "equal rights," which many GBC seem to support despite Srila Prabhupadas rejection of the notion as an unnatural adjustment and harmful to society. I have no objection to commentary in support of Srila Prabhupadas view, only to that which is likely to contradict his view or undermine his authority.

Its not fair to suggest that I dont read Srila Prabhupadas books. I read them and listen to his audio recordings practically every day, but my reading and hearing are linear -- I cannot cover everything at once, so I have to rely on memory and the Vedabase much of the time when specific topics arise. Also, I dont consider myself conservative by devotee standards, since my views in this matter were _formed_ by reading Srila Prabhupadas books and hearing him speak. Before hearing from Srila Prabhupada, I was very liberal, but he defeated my mundane ideals with his superior arguments. I am very much thankful to him for that, and afraid that the same "ideals" I worked hard to shed are going to be inserted into his books.

It would have helped a lot if the GBC released notes from their discussions so that we can have a clear idea of what is their intention with this. They should have known that many devotees would be alarmed by this and done more to prevent unnecessary speculation and conflict.

The problem is to annotate or comment "explaining" a different meaning than Srila Prabhupada intended, to satisfy scholars and new ageists, whatever is the current trend.

There is a point on being conservative in regards to Srila Prabhupada'b4s books. What normally occurs is that the same people that are being conservative in things that need to be re-addressed, like social problems in ISKCON etc, are being so liberal when it comes to dangerously changing the meaning of SP books, covertly by "notes" or directly by changing the actual words.
These are the same people and we have to stop both nonsense.

[quote][cite] Pandu das:[/cite]Hare Krishna, Caitanya Candrodaya prabhu. I see your point. However, my objection is not to annotations, footnotes, or endnotes, in priciple. I am considering this resolution in the context of the persistent push by some for "equal rights," which many GBC seem to support despite Srila Prabhupadas rejection of the notion as an unnatural adjustment and harmful to society. I have no objection to commentary in support of Srila Prabhupadas view, only to that which is likely to contradict his view or undermine his authority.

Its not fair to suggest that I dont read Srila Prabhupadas books. I read them and listen to his audio recordings practically every day, but my reading and hearing are linear -- I cannot cover everything at once, so I have to rely on memory and the Vedabase much of the time when specific topics arise. Also, I dont consider myself conservative by devotee standards, since my views in this matter were _formed_ by reading Srila Prabhupadas books and hearing him speak. Before hearing from Srila Prabhupada, I was very liberal, but he defeated my mundane ideals with his superior arguments. I am very much thankful to him for that, and afraid that the same "ideals" I worked hard to shed are going to be inserted into his books.

It would have helped a lot if the GBC released notes from their discussions so that we can have a clear idea of what is their intention with this. They should have known that many devotees would be alarmed by this and done more to prevent unnecessary speculation and conflict.[/quote]

I actually think that GBC has made a mistake or two in the way they worded the minutes and by not making it clear that it is not a resolution but a suggestive minuted note. Its not a part of ISKCON law you know... I apologise for coming across that you do not read books. Sorry Prabhu. I do not mean to say that, it was just a point that there is a scope to make Prabhupadas books more interesting for readers using footnotes. And I agree that one should not bow to the critics or a few ladies who work in BBT for some time with a sole subconscious motive to edit out or annotate the quotes that were used by their ex-husbands to treat them as dirt. I think that GBC resolution with all the faults is good, because it makes it a public debate, where any footnote (that would have been unnoticed by the likes of devotees who do not read) is a center of attention, so if anything will be done, it will be done without a bias and preferably with Prabhupadas own words quoted form another source, or with reference to academic publications.
[quote][/quote]
Mishra, would you accept footnotes with Prabhupadas own words or quotes from his lectures on the verse? Do you accept existing footnotes and Index added by BBT as quoted above?
[quote][/quote]
I do not want to go into details, but what footnotes whould you accept?

ccd:
In this era of "indirect", "easy" preaching, annotations seem the way to go to solve the problem, but it entrails far more dangers once in the hands of conditioned souls like us, mistakes that would endure for posterity.

We did not have substantial problems with those conflictive parts till now. And if we have problems with sectors of society, is that not normal? Do we have to please a minority that are not ready to become devotees anyway at the cost of risking SP'b4s legacy?

My take is to leave the books as they are and have expert preachers to take care of the rest. That is how thousands of devotees were made and continue to be made.

In the Bhagavad gita SP explains that the book should be read WITH devotees.

In my experience is quite normal new devotees or pious people will have problems with many things in our philosophy and lifestyle, but association, friendship and example will make them understand.
And if that is not possible at the moment, at least we will leave the door open with the unchanged books for better times.

Sure its possible in these times. What are you talking about? USA?

Footnotes added by BBT already exist. Adding more footnotes should be done with certain sensibilities and its exactly so that young devotees would not interpret the words of Prabhupada in any weird way. I have already heard at least 4 absolutely perverted explanations of the rape quote, I do not want to hear it again.

I meant if not possible to have preachers that explain the books. Its a deaf dialogue, ours. But interesting nonetheless. I never doubt of your good intentions, but sometimes I am scared of them. :)

So do I scared to note that such a huge number of devotees are scared or can not trust BBT with their job...:-)

better to be scared than to happily rush into another (this time of enormous consequences) mayhem. Do not ask devotees to trust BBT or GBC on that one. Too many gross mistakes made already,
Specially when BBT has become corporation style enterprise with payroll against SP direct orders, can we expect and happily venture that they will make it right this time?
I for one would copy the originals and put them in a vault, safe from "intelligent" Prabhus.

If the GBC thinks we need to have these quotes explained to us, it seems to me that they should just explain them now and consider later whether or not to write explanations into the books.

Does GBC need to explain existing footnotes to Bhagavatam?

Do they have any authority over what goes into Prabhupadas books?

No. They can only instigate a discussion, and that what they did. How well it goes that is a another point.

Do you seriously think that they care about what is being said here or in other forums? If they did, they would present the matter for consideration, instead they did pass the resolution to give BBT carte blanche to implement changes, not to instigate discussion.
Are you talking about GBC having moral and spiritual authority? No.
Managerial authority? Yes. They shouldn'b4t, but they can and they did with resolution 311.

I received this email today :-)

"I signed this petition and I recommend all Srila Prabhupadas
disciples to do so. I dont know if the GBC will hear it, but at least we
should make the effort. So far I see only 19 signatures so please log on the
following petition site and sign up to stop the inclusion of annotations in
Srila Prabhupadas books.

Your humble servant,
Hari-sauri dasa

See here:

http://www.petitiononline.com/GBCre311/petition.html"

---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Text PAMHO:15657344 (66 lines)
From: Hari Sauri (das) ACBSP
Date: 12-Jun-08 02:17 (22:17 -0400)
To: Prabhupada Disciples [8438]
Reference: Text PAMHO:15653512 by Malati (dd) ACBSP (GBC) (New
Vrindavan/Columbus - USA)
Subject: Re: Please DONT sign Petition to Rescind GBC Resolution 311
------------------------------------------------------------
> Hare Krishna:
>
> One reason only 19 signatures are represented is because a whole lot of
> folks feel a whole lot differently about this and they are not deviant
> monsters.

Sorry but thats just pure speculation. How do you know this is the
reason why there are not many signatures? Have you done a survey? I only
signed it this morning because that was the first I saw of it.

And nobody is calling anyone a deviant monster, at least not that I
have seen. But there are strong feelings among some very senior members of
our society that something drastically unhealthy, and seriously
ill-considered is happening with the GBC approving the inclusion of
annotations within Srila Prabhupadas books. At least one GBC Nrsimhananda
prabhu recently spoke to said the GBC didnt seriously discuss it, and the
resolution was passed without much deep discussion and thought.

> They are folks who deeply care about Srila Prabhupada, his reputation and
> his movement (see below). They understand that there are not going to be
> changes to his words....but that there will be foot notes available to
> guard against incorrect understanding and misinterpretations. Which, in
> the not so recent past and even the present, promoted detrimental
> consequences.

I am not against the idea of annotations in certain specific cases
where serious misunderstandings about the use of language may occur--and
these are very rare by the way. I am completely against the inclusion of
such annotations being put into Srila Prabhupadas books, which are his
property and not ours. People now and in the future must be able to get his
books as he originally gave them, not mixed in with some comments from
someone that never met him, and who may or may not have their own agendas.

The problem is that although the intention may be honest now, in
trying to ensure that what Srila Prabhupada wrote is understood in the way
he meant it, it sets a precedent which paves the way for others in the
future to make comments, within the books, which we cannot gaurantee will be
in the same mood and spirit Srila Prabhupada intended. In a hundred years
time can you guarantee the same fidelity once you have given permission for
anyone to come along and decide that their interpretation should be printed
in the same book?

If you start to include annotations in the same book, they become
part of it. The reader consciously or unconsciously gives the same weight to
the annoation as the original work; it becomes indistinguishable. In several
hundred years, those books will be loaded with annotations which readers
will think are equal to the original comments. You dont have to think very
much to see where this is leading.

If you want annotations, fine, print them in a separate volume, so
that it is clear to the reader that it is someone elses voice. Do not mix
them with Srila Prabhupadas voice. Thats my point.

I therefore repeat what I said in my previous email: I signed this
petition and I recommend all Srila Prabhupadas disciples to do so. I dont
know if the GBC will hear it, but at least we should make the effort. So
far I see only 19 signatures so please log on the following petition site
and sign up to stop the inclusion of annotations in Srila Prabhupadas
books:

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/GBCre311/

Your humble servant,
Hari-sauri dasa

"A little learning," he said "is dangerous. Immediately they think they have become big scholar, thinking, "I shall arrange! And then they write all nonsense." He continued speaking about the mistake for half an hour. He was disturbed. He ordered Tamala Krsna to write at once to the BBT and stop these speculations by his disciples-changing his books in the name of editing The devotees were startled to see Prabhupada so angry; he was supposed to be peacefully relishing a Srimad-Bhagavatam reading here in his garden. Such a change was very serious, he said, because it changed the meaning. "Even if the authorized Acaryas would make a mistake," he said, "it would not be changed....."

From Srila Prabhupada Lilamrta Vol 6

Madhava Gosh das wrote:

The latest topic amongst those in ISKCON addicted to debating is the annotation of Prabhupada'92s books. For those of you not familiar with the specifics, I will not provide links because a.) I am too lazy to find and include them and b.) why disturb your mind about it when you were having a perfectly fine day without worrying about it already.

I stipulate I haven'92t read the GBC resolution and don'92t know their specific reasons for deciding to annotate Prabhupada'92s books. I am speaking only from my own perspective on the topic and neither approve nor disapprove of their method of arriving at their decision.

My first impression on reading some of the feedback is that I think that half the opposing commentators or more don'92t know what annotation is, ergo I include this definition:

Main Entry: an'b7no'b7ta'b7tion
Function:noun
Date:15th century

1 a note added by way of comment or explanation 2: the act of annotating.

One example would be like Srimad Bhagvatam class where after reading the verse and purport, the person giving class gives a critical analysis of what has been read. An oral annotation in other words.

My premise is that the only way that Srila Prabhupada'92s books can be retained in their original version is through the use of annotations. Think of Shakespeare.

He wrote hundreds of years ago and since then the English language, being very fluid, has shifted. In order to understand not only what the now archaic words meant but the cultural context and nuance of how those words were used, one would need to do an extensive study of the culture of that time.

Fortunately, qualified scholars have already done this for us so when we get stuck we can read the annotations and continue to enjoy Shakespeare as he originally wrote it.

Annotations don'92t change books, they clarify points in them. Shakespeare comes in both annotated and unannotated versions. Just because an annotated version of a book exists, doesn'92t mean an unannotated version can'92t also exist, so there is no need to worry an annotated version of SP'92s books will replace the current ones.

As language morphs, the need to annotate will become greater if the desire is there to retain Prabhupada'92s books in original versions. That may seem academic now, but will be a greater need as decades slip by.

Consider the word '93gay'94 and how its meaning has drastically changed:

Main Entry:1gay
Function:adjective
Date:14th century

1 a: happily excited : merry b: keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits 2 a: bright, lively b: brilliant in color3: given to social pleasures; also : licentious4 a: homosexual b: of, relating to, or used by homosexuals

Most would agree that the 4th meaning should now be put as the first, at least in America. If it were, the old Christmas carol '93Deck the Halls Boughs of Holly'94 would need to be annotated in scholarly quarters so it was clear that the refrain '93don we now our gay apparel'94 wasn'92t understood to be an exhortation to dress in drag.

Consider this quote from Srila Prabhupada'92s original Bhagvatam:

'93The Lord was then married with great pomp and gay and began to preach the Congregational chanting of the Holy Name of the Lord at Nabadwipa.'94

SB 1-1962: Introduction

Do we think that SP was saying Lord Chaitanya was a homosexual? Of course not, but an annotation would be in order to clarify it.

So I personally have no problems with the concept of annotating SP'92s books IF it is done by devotees who have an understanding of the principles of Vaisnava philosophy.

A statement I found quoted on Krishna Kirti prabhus blog (http://www.siddhanta.com/ -- have a look at his excellent writing on this subject) which exemplifies the mood that I believe is the motivation for the proposed annotations:

"Srila Prabhupad came in a material body and had flaws that come with a material body. Although very compassionate to women in his personal relationships, he was bound by his time, place and circumstance and revealed himself to be a bigoted man who preached a misogynist attitude to women publicly. This was not the attitude of all men of his time in India - I have known many vaisnavas (and other) men of Srila Praphupad'92s generation in India who were extremely respectful of women, always spoke of women and viewed women with utter respect, and even elevated women as naturally superior to men in intelligence, in managerial ability and as mother and '91griha-laxmi'92.
"I am ever grateful that Srila Phabhupad brought me to Krishna, and I respect and love him for his immense compassion in bringing the BG, SG, Nectar of Devtion, Sri Isopanisad to the world outside India. To take as absolute truth Srila Prabhupad'92s views on science or women is extremely foolish and ignorant-minded. Lord Sri Krishna is not limited by either Srila Prabhupad'92s views nor by ISKCON'92S dictates. I am a devotee of little merit and no importance, but unless ISKCON GBC comes forward dynamically to reject and negate the misogyny that is floating in ISKCON society, I for one, am outta here!"

(Siromani dd, "Comment", 12 Jun. 2008, Hare Krishna Women, 13 Jun 2008 <http://harekrishnawomen.wordpress.com/2008/06/09/prabhupada/>)

Personally Im not the least bit alarmed upon hearing a threat of leaving by someone who considers Srila Prabhupada a "bigoted man" and a "misogynist." On the other hand, if ISKCON adopts such an attitude, I dont see much room for persons such as myself who worship him as Krishnas pure devotee.

Hare Krishna.

[quote][cite] Pandu das:[/cite]"Srila Prabhupad came in a material body and had flaws that come with a material body. Although very compassionate to women in his personal relationships, he was bound by his time, place and circumstance and revealed himself to be a bigoted man who preached a misogynist attitude to women publicly"[/quote]
Wow, I hope this misunderstanding about Srila Prabhupada and his exalted position isnt widespread within our female devotee community....maybe this attitude has motivated the annotations?

Understanding guru-tattva is the need of the times. Srila Gour Govinda Swami spoke about it endlessly. Im still trying to understand.

Again at the time Goura Govinda Maharaja was under serious fire and when his follower Vedanta Krit presented a paper to GBC with the Gurutattva issues addressed - he got a very cold reception.

I actually think that ISKCON will never have a complete issue of gurutattva resolved, because it does not land itself to institutionalization on the scale of ISKCON.

His name is Jayantakrd.

Anyhow, Krishna can do and undo things, make the impossible possible. There is no saying that a tattva-darsi guru cannot rise up from within Iskcon and everyone will support him. we have to wait for such a time, when the light will return. It is a dark period now, but it doesnt have to remain so.

At the BBTI June 2008 annual meeting, the BBTI trustees have rejected the recommendation of resolution 311. A statement was published on Jayadvaita Swamis website.

http://www.jswami.info/bbt/editing/no_notes

"In conclusion: We do not intend to add anything to Srila Prabhupada'92s books, or subtract anything, or change anything Srila Prabhupada says, to make his controversial or potentially controversial statements more acceptable to readers or less vulnerable to misuse by ISKCON devotees. We believe that this would be unwise, contrary to our prescribed duties, and potentially disastrous. We also strongly urge whoever our successors may be to preserve Srila Prabhupada'92s books intact and reject all proposals, however well intentioned, for softening the impact of his words."

All glories to this decision :-)