Krishna is present within the sound vibration of the holy name

by Isana dasa

BG 2.72 purport excerpt:  

One can attain Kṛṣṇa consciousness or divine life at once, within a second-or one may not attain such a state of life even after millions of births. It is only a matter of understanding and accepting the fact. Khaṭvāṅga Mahārāja attained this state of life just a few minutes before his death, by surrendering unto Kṛṣṇa.  

So, let us consider this statement.  I think we can safely say that all of Srila Prbhupada’s initiated disciples understand our Krishna conscious philosophy.  And if we ask them if they accept our Krishna conscious understanding of the Absolute Truth they would readily assert that they do. 

 However, my thought is that When Srila Prabhupada uses the word accept, he means more than mental acceptance. Rather he means a heartfelt embrace of our Krishn conscious understanding.  And these two categories of acceptance can be millions of births apart. 

BOOK CHANGES ARTICLES DRIVE
Hare Krsna. We are pleased to release the articles on the book changes. This drive contains over 200 articles on book changes organized into various parts.
Please find the link for the drive below:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1cyEy4E4WFpjcdEGJ67TaymZjaNeam3NG?usp=sharing
The devotees are requested to go through these articles, as they contain many Srila Prabhupada’s direct instructions regarding the book changes, also prove that the new books have unnecessary changes that have changed the philosophy as a whole. 
The drive will help the devotees to realise the importance of Srila Prabhupada’s original books for they are the ultimate authority of instructions.
“Dr. Vajpeye’s review we are going to print and widely distribute, especially in Bombay and Madras, where there is so much propaganda from these bogus gurus and yogis. He has got practical experience of how they are cheating the innocent people in foreign countries and he has written; “The authorized edition of Bhagavad-gita will help to stop the terrible cheating of ‘gurus’ and ‘yogis’ who are false and unauthorized.”[Letter to: Svarupa, Ranadhira, Mayapur-3 February, 1976 Los Angeles]

Please find a very important conversation where Jayadvaita Swami states that establishment of Bhagavad Gita as it is [1972 edition] is done by Srila Prabhupada.
Srila Prabhupāda: So this is the position. The whole Vṛndāvana is full of Māyāvādīs. We have to be very, very cautious and careful. I was there. That Brahmānanda protested against that Aurobindo. And then “Don’t speak of Gītā.”

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Yes, that’s what they told him.Jayādvaita: They shouldn’t speak of Gītā. They should speak of whatever other thing they want.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Then why call it Gītā-pratiṣṭhāna?
Jayādvaita: That’s Prabhupāda’s promise. He’s establishing Bhagavad-gītā.
Srila Prabhupāda: Eh?
Jayādvaita: The actual establishment of Bhagavad-gītā is being done by Your Divine Grace. They should admit that, “We have our philosophy, but as far as Bhagavad-gītā goes, Śrīla Prabhupāda is establishing it all over the world. We have something else, our own idea.” They can say that.
Srila Prabhupāda: Now find out the way how to stop this class of men speaking in our halls.[Room Conversation 1-VRNDAVAN – November 03, 1977 ]
This shows that the Bhagavad Gita as it is  1972  edition] was and is already potent enough and its establishment is already done, so there is no need for its editing.
This is a solid proof that shows the editors themselves knew that 72 edition was the only bona fide original established edition.

Hare Krishna

Ys Ynd

Srila Prabhupada Receives the First Big 1972 Original Bhagavad Gita As It Is
by Nanda Kumar Das

One day, when I was first with His Divine Grace in L.A., Brahmananda Prabhu came from New York and they were talking about the printing of a Bhagavad Gita with Sanskrit included. Evidently, there was a question as to whether the western people could pronounce the transliteration with diacritic marks.

Srila Prabhupad rang his bell, and I came into his room. Brahmananda was there. Srila Prabhupad handed me a paper with Sanskrit transliteration and said “Read this!” I have been able to read since I was three, so evidently, I made the pronunciations close enough. Srila Prabhupad said to Brahmananda, with great enthusiasm, “See! I told you they could do it!” He was very happy.

So the printing went on, and in New York, when His Divine Grace was there, Brahmananda brought in the first edition of the big Gita with all the Sanskrit in it. Remembering the LA experience, he very kindly gave the Gita to me, and said “Here, you can give this to Srila Prabhupad.” I was overjoyed, and went to His room to offer it to Him, followed by a photographer. I gave it to Him and said “Here is the first copy of Your new Bhagavad Gita, Srila Prabhupad.”

In His amazing way of innocence and childlike excitement, He took it and held it to His head, saying “Jai! Jai!” It was awesome to be present for such an important and empowering moment. Srila Prabhupad was so kind to me. Even though I was/am a deeply entrenched rascal, He has engaged me so many times in wonderful service. All Glories to Srila Prabhupad!

Nanda Kumar Das

CC ML 10.136 FULL PURPORT

Both Kāśīśvara and Govinda were personal servants of Īśvara Purī. After Īśvara Purī’s demise, Kāśīśvara went to visit all the holy places of India. Following the orders of his spiritual master, Govinda immediately went to Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu for shelter. Govinda came from a śūdra family, but because he was initiated by Īśvara Purī, he was certainly a brāhmaṇa. Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya here asked Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu why Īśvara Purī accepted a disciple from a śūdra family. According to the smṛti-śāstra, which gives directions for the management of the varṇāśrama institution, a brāhmaṇa cannot accept a disciple from the lower castes. In other words, a kṣatriya, vaiśya or śūdra cannot be accepted as a servant. If a spiritual master accepts such a person, he is contaminated. Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya therefore asked why Īśvara Purī accepted a servant or disciple born of a śūdra family.

In answer to this question, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu replied that His spiritual master, Īśvara Purī, was so empowered that he was as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As such, Īśvara Purī was the spiritual master of the whole world. He was not a servant of any mundane rule or regulation. An empowered spiritual master like Īśvara Purī can bestow his mercy upon anyone, irrespective of caste or creed. The conclusion is that a spiritual master who is authorized and empowered by Kṛṣṇa and his own guru should be considered as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. That is the verdict of Viśvanātha Cakravartī: sākṣād-dharitvenaśā. An authorized spiritual master is as good as Hari, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As Hari is free to act as He likes, the empowered spiritual master is also free. As Hari is not subject to mundane rules and regulations, the spiritual master empowered by Him is also not subject. According to the Caitanya-caritāmṛta (Antya-līlā 7.11), kṛṣṇa-śakti vinā nahe tāra pravartana. An authorized spiritual master empowered by Kṛṣṇa can spread the glories of the holy name of the Lord, for he has power of attorney from the Supreme Personality of Godhead. In the mundane world, anyone possessing his master’s power of attorney can act on behalf of his master. Similarly, a spiritual master empowered by Kṛṣṇa through his own bona fide spiritual master should be considered as good as the Supreme Personality of Godhead Himself. That is the meaning of sākṣād-dharitvena. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu therefore describes the activities of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and the bona fide spiritual master as follows.

137-146

137  Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu said, “Both the Supreme Personality of Godhead and My spiritual master, Īśvara Purī, are completely independent. Therefore, neither the mercy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead nor that of Īśvara Purī is subject to any Vedic rules or regulations.

138  The mercy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is not restricted to the jurisdiction of caste and creed. Vidura was a śūdra, yet Kṛṣṇa accepted lunch at his home.

139  Lord Kṛṣṇa’s mercy is dependent only on affection. Being obliged only by affection, Lord Kṛṣṇa acts very independently.

PURPORT

Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is merciful, but His mercy does not depend on mundane rules and regulations. He is dependent only on affection and nothing else. Service to Lord Kṛṣṇa can be rendered in two ways. One can serve the Lord in affection or in veneration. When service is rendered in affection, it is the Lord’s special mercy. When service is rendered in veneration, it is doubtful whether Kṛṣṇa’s mercy is actually involved. If Kṛṣṇa’s mercy is there, it is not dependent on any prescribed caste or creed. Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu wanted to inform Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya that Lord Kṛṣṇa is the spiritual master of everyone, and He does not care for mundane caste or creed. Therefore, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu cited the example of Lord Kṛṣṇa’s accepting food at the house of Vidura, who was a śūdra by birth. By the same token, Īśvara Purī, an empowered spiritual master, could show mercy to anyone. As such, he accepted Govinda, although the boy was born in a śūdra family. When Govinda was initiated, he became a brāhmaṇa and was accepted as Īśvara Purī’s personal servant. In the Hari-bhakti-vilāsa, Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī states that one who is initiated by a bona fide spiritual master immediately becomes a brāhmaṇa. A pseudo spiritual master cannot transform a person into a brāhmaṇa, but an authorized spiritual master can do so. This is the verdict of śāstra, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and all the Gosvāmīs.

140  In conclusion, dealings in affection with the Supreme Personality of Godhead bring happiness many millions of times greater than dealings with Him in awe and veneration. Simply by hearing the holy name of the Lord, the devotee is merged in transcendental bliss.”

141  After saying this, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu embraced Govinda, and Govinda in turn offered his respectful obeisances unto Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s lotus feet.

142  Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu then continued speaking to Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya: “Consider this point. The servant of the spiritual master is always respectable for Me.

143  As such, it is not befitting that the guru’s servant should engage in My personal service. Yet My spiritual master has given this order. What shall I do?

PURPORT

A guru’s servants or disciples are all Godbrothers to one another, and as such they should all respect one another as prabhu, or master. No one should disrespect his Godbrother or try to engage him as a servant. For this reason, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu asked Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya what to do about Govinda. Govinda was the personal servant of Īśvara Purī, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s spiritual master, and now Īśvara Purī had ordered Govinda to become Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu’s personal servant. So, what was to be done? This was the inquiry Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu placed before Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya, an experienced friend.

144  Sārvabhauma Bhaṭṭācārya said, “The order of the spiritual master is very strong and cannot be disobeyed. That is the injunction of the śāstras, the revealed scriptures.

145  Being ordered by his father, Paraśurāma killed his mother, Reṇukā, just as if she were an enemy. When Lakṣmaṇa, the younger brother of Lord Rāmacandra, heard of this, He immediately engaged Himself in the service of His elder brother and accepted His orders. The order of the spiritual master must be obeyed without consideration.

………………………..

as to be a living guru.  But these texts indicate that both the Lord and the bonafide empowered spiritual master are above the dictates of shastra, and that their directives must be followed without considOne point of consideration in the above, is that the Iskcon reasoning is that shastra says the diksha guru heration, any consideration.

One of the main arguments of Iskcon in connection with the appointment of gurus is that it is the instruction of shastra that the diksha guru must be a living personality.  The above section from CC discusses this subject of shastric authority versus the authority of the pure devotee.  The conclusion is that the bonafide guru is as independent of shastric gudelines as the Supreme Personality of Goadhead.

The discussion centers around the fact that Lord Caitanya and Govinda were godbrothers and disciples of Isvara Puri and that one godbrother cannot become the servant of another.  However, Isvara Puri instructed Govinda to become the servant of Lord Caitanya.  Lord Caitanya is saying that according to shastra, He knows that this is incorrect, and yet, he feels that the order of His spiritual master takes precedence over the dictates of shastra. 

In other words, regardless of what shastra dictates, according to Lord Caitanya, Srila Prabhupada’s order to act as Ritvik for the next !0,000 years is as good as the order of the Supreme Personalty of Goadhead.

Therefore, in consideration in the above, the Iskcon reasoning that shastra says the diksha guru has to be a living guru, must be accepted as subordinate to Srila Prabhupada’s instruction to implement the Ritvik program of initiation, and this must be followed without consideration, up to and including shastrc injunction. 

The same applies to all of the other accusations and criticisms of Srila Prabhupada’s godbrothers with respect to the changes in protocol that Srila Prabhupada has implemented in order to push the movement forward.

……………………………………

Srila Prabhupāda: Yes. That is ordinary duty. If you encroach upon my freedom, I have the right to kill you. That is recommended. That is clearly stated in the śāstras. If anyone sets fire in another’s house, if anyone kidnaps his wife, if anyone takes his money—so many list—he is to be killed. There is no question. He can be killed immediately. That action-reaction is going on in the material world, that is a different thing. That is karma-bandha. But in devotion, there is no karma-bandha. As Kṛṣṇa is free from all reaction, similarly Kṛṣṇa’s devotee who wants to satisfy Kṛṣṇa only, he is also free from all reaction. Therefore, Kṛṣṇa says, ācāryaṁ māṁ vijānīyān nāva-manyeta karhicit [SB 11.17.27]. “The ācārya is as good as I am,” Kṛṣṇa says. Nāva-manyeta karhicit, “Never neglect him.” Na martya-buddhyāsūyeta, “Never be envious of the ācārya, thinking him as anything of this material world.” Ācāryaṁ māṁ vijānīyān [SB 11.17.27]. Therefore, ācārya’s position is as good as Kṛṣṇa. Sākṣād-dharitvena samasta-śāstrair **. Ācārya is always cautious that he may not be subject to criticism. But who criticizes ācārya, he becomes immediately offender. Because he is playing the part of ācārya, he plays as far as possible. But sometimes for preaching work, he might have to do something which is not consistent. But if he is criticized, then that man who criticizes, he becomes… Of course, he must be ācārya, not a bogus. Ordinary man cannot transgress the laws, but Kṛṣṇa and His representative, ācārya, might be sometimes seen that he has transgressed. Therefore, Kṛṣṇa says, ācāryaṁ māṁ vijānīyān [SB 11.17.27]. Vaiṣṇavera kriyā, mudrā vijñeha nā bujhaya. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Vaiṣṇava ācārya, his activities is not understood even by the wisest man. Vaiṣṇavera kriyā, mudrā vijñeha nā bujhaya. Brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. Ācārya, guru, he is completely surrendered to Kṛṣṇa. He has taken the shelter of Kṛṣṇa, being completely freed from all material affection. Brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. Everything… Everyone has got some material desire to fulfill, but a guru or ācārya has no such business. That is the symptom of ācārya. He has no more any material business. Brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. He has finished all business of material satisfaction. That is the symptom of ācārya. And śābde pare ca niṣṇātam. And he has taken full bath in the ocean of transcendental (indistinct). Śābde pare ca niṣṇātaṁ brahmaṇy upaśamāśrayam. Tasmād guruṁ prapadyeta [SB 11.3.21], one should surrender to such spiritual master. Jijñāsuḥ śreya uttamam, when he is actually serious about inquiring the transcendental subject matter. Otherwise there is no need of accepting guru or ācārya. He has no business. If one is not interested in the transcendental subject matter… Just like so many people come, they have no interest. Unnecessarily they talk and waste time. As soon as I asked that man that “If I say something, whether you will accept?” He said, “If I like it, then I shall accept.” Then why come to waste my time to inquire from me? Therefore Bhagavad-gītā says, tad viddhi praṇipātena [Bg. 4.34]. When you go to inquire something from a person, you must fully surrender there, or you must find out a person where you can fully surrender. Otherwise, don’t put any questions. Your waste of time, his waste of time. Because he will not accept. Suppose if you go to a physician, you are diseased, and the physician says, “All right, I shall give you medicine.” And if you say, “Yes, I shall accept the medicine if I like it,” then why do you go to that physician? What is the meaning? The physician, one physician doctor friend, long…, forty years ago, he prescribed one of my patent medicines. And the patient little protested because it is Indian-made. He was Eurasian. So as soon as he questioned, “What is this medicine, Indian-made?” “Yes, it is Indian-made. If you have no such faith, don’t come to me.” He flatly said, “Don’t come to me.” That should be the position of the physician or ācārya. If you go there, you should accept whatever he says. If you are in doubt, then don’t go there. That is the position. It is freedom. It is not that you have to accept some ācārya particular by canvassing. No, you should be inspired that “Yes, here I can surrender, here I can gain something.” Then surrender. In the spiritual science, there is no bluffing. Everything must be very clear-cut. Otherwise it will be not very satisfactory. [break] Hear this sound, ca-caw caw. (laughter) Because nobody takes this rooster. Prabhupāda: Oh, that is not harmful. (break—end) Conversations : 1972 Conversations : March, 1972 : Room Conversation with John Griesser (later initiated as Yadubara Dasa) — March 10, 1972, Vrndavana

Adi 6.42–Śrī Advaita Ācārya, however, considers Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu His master, and He thinks of Himself as a servant of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

Similarly, a pure devotee wishes to be blessed like Mahārāja Prahlāda by being thus endowed with devotional service. Devotees also offer their respects to Hanumān, who always remained a servant of Lord Rāma. The great devotee Hanumān prayed:”I do not wish to take liberation or to merge in the Brahman effulgence, where the conception of being a servant of the Lord is completely lost.” Similarly, in the Nārada-pañcarātra it is stated: I do not want any one of the four desirable stations. I simply want to engage as a servant of the lotus feet of the Lord.”

PURPORTThe Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu of Rūpa Gosvāmī explains the superexcellent quality of devotional service as follows: brahmānando bhaved eṣa cet parārdha-guṇī-kṛtaḥ naiti bhakti-sukhāmbhodheḥ paramāṇu-tulām api“If multiplied billions of times, the transcendental pleasure derived from impersonal Brahman realization still could not compare to even an atomic portion of the ocean of bhakti, or transcendental service.” (Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.1.38) Similarly, the Bhāvārtha-dīpikā states: tvat-kathāmṛta-pāthodhau viharanto mahā-mudaḥ kurvanti kṛtinaḥ kecic catur-vargaṁ tṛṇopamam“For those who take pleasure in the transcendental topics of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the four progressive realizations of religiosity, economic development, sense gratification and liberation, all combined together, cannot compare, any more than a straw, to the happiness derived from hearing about the transcendental activities of the Lord.” Those who engage in the transcendental service of the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa, being relieved of all material enjoyment, have no attraction to topics of impersonal monism. In the Padma Purāṇa, in connection with the glorification of the month of Kārttika, it is stated that devotees pray:“Dear Lord, always remembering Your childhood pastimes at Vṛndāvana is better for us than aspiring to merge into the impersonal Brahman. During Your childhood pastimes You liberated the two sons of Kuvera and made them great devotees of Your Lordship. Similarly, I wish that instead of giving me liberation You may award me such devotion unto You.” In the Hayaśīrṣīya-śrī-nārāyaṇa-vyūha-stava, in the chapter called Nārāyaṇa-stotra, it is stated: na dharmaṁ kāmam arthaṁ vā mokṣaṁ vā vara-deśvara prārthaye tava pādābje dāsyam evābhikāmaye“My dear Lord, I do not wish to become a man of religion or a master of economic development or sense gratification, nor do I wish for liberation. Although I can have all these from You, the supreme bestower of benedictions, I do not pray for all these. I simply pray that I may always be engaged as a servant of Your lotus feet.” Nṛsiṁhadeva offered Prahlāda Mahārāja all kinds of benedictions, but Prahlāda Mahārāja did not accept any of them, for he simply wanted to engage in the service of the lotus feet of the Lord. 

Continue reading →

Some proofs from Srila Prabhupada that the  Macmillan 1972 edition is the “only original” edition
“Therefore we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is. We do not change. We have no power to change. Then where is the authority of Bhagavad-gītā? I am a third-class man, and if I change the statements in the Bhagavad-gītā, then where is the authority of Bhagavad-gītā? That is going on. Therefore it is practically . . . you have got experience that there are hundreds of Bhagavad-gītā edition in the Western countries, but because we are presenting Bhagavad-gītā as it is, our sale is better than all others.

There is the report from the trade manager of Macmillan Company. He says: “While other editions are dwindling, going down, this edition is coming up.” They published our this present enlarged edition of Bhagavad-gītā, fifty thousand in the month of August. They are going to print again, second edition, August, September, October. So the reason is that if we present things as they are, it will be accepted. Without any adulteration.

Sometimes, you know, people say that I have done miracles. They say everywhere. But I do not know anything miracles or magic. If there is any miracle, that miracle is that we present things as they are, that’s all, without any adulteration. So that should be the principle. Present as it is: it will be accepted.  [Lecture SB 01.02.11 – Vrndavana,October 22, 1972]

Letter to: Svarupa, RanadhiraMayapur-3 February, 1976Los AngelesMy dear Svarupa and Ranadhira,Please accept my blessings. I beg to thank you for your letter dated January 30th, 1976 with the important enclosures.The membership pamphlet is very nicely done. That you have got $20,000 in 1975 from the members is certainly very noteworthy. Develop the program more if the results are so good. Also, along with the pamphlet and The K.C. Movement Is Authorized you can send our book catalog. Then the philanthropists will be able to purchase our books.The reviews have very much encouraged me. Especially those of Prof. Bhatt and Prof. Vajpeye. I have personally written a letter of thanks to Dr. Bhatt, that he has so much encouraged me. Dr. Vajpeye’s review we are going to print and widely distribute, especially in Bombay and Madras, where there is so much propaganda from these bogus gurus and yogis. He has got practical experience of how they are cheating the innocent people in foreign countries and he has written; “The authorized edition of Bhagavad-gita will help to stop the terrible cheating of ‘gurus’ and ‘yogis’ who are false and unauthorized.”I hope this meets you well.Your ever well-wisher,A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami———————————————Hare Krsna-This is a particular well written letter by Srila Prabhupada who repeats what some Indian scholar has written about  Prabhupada’s Bhagavad-gita -as it is So we can see from this how iskcon has ruined the movement for so many years and here in this one letter it is summed up , for one reason, why this has taken place. The bogus gurus and swamis of which there are many worldwide in this age of kali,have taken it upon themselves to change the words of the Acarya Srila Prabhupada just to suit their whims for  name fame and prestige.

MAY 9 1975 PerthGaṇeśa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, if the knowledge was handed down by the saintly kings, evaṁ paramparā-prāptam [Bg. 4.2], how is it that the knowledge was lost?
Prabhupāda: When it was not handed down. Simply understood by speculation. Or if it is not handed down as it is. They might have made some changes. Or they did not hand it down. Suppose I handed it down to you, but if you do not do that, then it is lost. Now the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is going on in my presence. Now after my deparature, if you do not do this, then it is lost. If you go on as you are doing now, then it will go on. But if you stop… (end)
Morning Walk — September 2, 1976, New Delhi
 Lokanātha: …five thousand years back, until now, there’s only thirty ācāryas…Prabhupāda: Chain is broken when there are false spiritual masters. Otherwise it is not broken. Chain is broken if a so-called spiritual master speaks something manufactured. Then the chain is broken. Otherwise chain is not broken.
Below is an article by a devotee who explains how the Caitanya Caritamrta was changed to “fit the iskcon situation” as we know it today
“Leaving one or both “initiated”s will strongly imply that the use of the phrases “direct disciple” and even “accepted [as his disciple]” indicate formal initiation as we know it in ISKCON, which is far from the truth.” (BBT Editor, Dravida Das)
Some Conclusions–Because iskcon has made so many offenses to Srila Prabhupada beginning with his books and his disciples, iskcon today is in a total meltdown of spiritual potency.Hare Krsnadamaghosa das—————————-The BBT could not allow Srila Prabhupada to teach that Jagannatha Dasa Babaji actually *initiated* Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, for that would indirectly sanction Srila Prabhupada *initiating* for many generations to come simply via his transcendental knowledge, with the ‘formal initiation’ administered via the Ritvik system that he set up.
We highlighted previously in newsletter No. 20, how Bhakti Caru Swami’s Bengali translation of the Srimad Bhagavatam had omitted a very key verse from Srila Prabhupada’s original version. The omitted verse in question would itself have destroyed the GBC’s position that they were duly authorised to be Diksa Gurus in ISKCON. This of course was shocking, since it showed that Srila Prabhupada’s books were being ‘edited’ not to bring them closer to the originals as claimed, but rather doctored to prop up the GBC’s bogus Guru philosophy.Though we had also been aware of many other controversial changes made to Srila Prabhupada’s books, the BBT had always claimed that they were made to actually correct ‘errors’ made by Srila Prabhupada’s ‘hippie’ editors. Thus they were not actually changing Srila Prabhupada’s books, but Hayagriva’s ‘incorrect version’ of the books, and thereby actually RESTORING the books BACK to how Srila Prabhupada actually wanted them. However, thanks to the diligent efforts of His Grace Dhira Govinda Prabhu, the Chairman of the ISKCON Office of Child Protection, we now have evidence that the current BBT, which is controlled by GBC supporters, are making changes motivated slowly by the desire to doctor Srila Prabhupada’s books so that they fit in with whatever happens to be the prevailing view instituted in ISKCON by the GBC.Some time back many devotees had noticed that the new 9 Volume edition of the Caitanya Caritamrta had made a deliberate change from Srila Prabhupada’s original version, not unlike the one made by Bhakti Caru Swami mentioned earlier. Srila Prabhupada’s Caitanya Caritamrta states the following:“Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura accepted Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji, who *initiated* Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who in turn initiated Srila Gaurakisora dasa Babaji”(C:C, Chapter 1)In the new BBT doctored 9-volume edition, the same passage reads:“Srila Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura accepted Srila Jagannatha dasa Babaji, the spiritual master of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, who in turn accepted Srila Gaurakisora dasa Babaji”In other words it has been decided that contrary to what Srila Prabhupada states, Jagannatha Das Babaji did not really INITIATE Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura after all. Now the reason for the BBT changing Srila Prabhupada’s teaching here is very significant since the GBC maintain that the relationship between Jagannatha Das Babaji and Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was based not on ‘formal initiation’ but rather only on the transmission of transcendental knowledge’. Once it is accepted that the transmission of divine transcendental knowledge ALONE constitutes INITIATION – then the objections made by the GBC to the Ritvik system of initiation crumble, since Srila Prabhupada could also *initiate* us with transcendental knowledge.Thus the BBT could not allow Srila Prabhupada to teach that Jagannatha Dasa Babaji actually *initiated* Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, for that would indirectly sanction Srila Prabhupada *initiating* for many generations to come simply via his transcendental knowledge, with the ‘formal initiation’ administered via the Ritvik system that he set up. In any case the teaching given by Srila Prabhupada above is totally consistent with what Srila Prabhupada has taught about Diksa and initiation in the Caitanya Caritamrta itself:“Diksa actually means *initiating* a disciple *with transcendental knowledge* by which he becomes freed from all material contamination.” (Madhya-lila, 4:112, Purport)Of course just the very fact that the BBT is deliberately changing the main legacy left by Srila Prabhupada – his teachings – is horrendous enough.However the fact that it was done specifically to keep the positions of the GBC within the crumbling Guru system intact, is totally shameful.But just when you though it could not get any worse, it does. For the BBT have now become so arrogant in their campaign against Srila Prabhuada’s teachings, that they have even tried to JUSTIFY this change. Dravida Das, the BBT editor, upon being asked by Dhira Govinda Prabhu to justify the change, first sums up the reason for NOT changing Srila Prabhupada’s teachings as follows:“On the side of not changing the “initiated” phrases we have the strong bias against changing the books unless absolutely necessary and the fact that Srila Prabhupada did indeed say that Jagannatha das Babaji initiated Bhaktivinode.”(BBT Editor, Dravida Das)Please note that Dravida clearly ADMITS that Srila Prabhupada “DID indeed say that Jagannatha das Babaji initiated Bhaktivinode”.To any sane person, this would be the ONLY reason required to NOT tamper with Srila Prabhupada’s teachings in any manner whatsoever. But hold on.Dravida Das has a reason that far outweighs a mere detail such as what Srila Prabhupada himself actually taught. Rather he states we must change Srila Prabhupada’s teachings to ensure they conform with what is currently understood within ISKCON in regards to initiation:“Leaving one or both “initiated”s will strongly imply that the use of the phrases “direct disciple” and even “accepted [as his disciple]” indicate formal initiation as we know it in ISKCON, which is far from the truth.” (BBT Editor, Dravida Das)Dravida then adds that this reason was paramount in justifying the change:This last was the weightiest argument, in my view, for changing the passage.(BBT Editor, Dravida Das)Thus to summarise, what Dravida is saying is this: That whenever Srila Prabhupada’s teachings differ from the way ‘we know it in ISKCON’, then they must be changed to conform with the way we DO ‘know it in ISKCON’. And of course the way ‘we know it in ISKCON’ is dictated by whatever ridiculous philosophy the GBC happens to be preaching at the time.So the fact that we have had a bogus Guru system imposed on us in ISKCON by the GBC means that even though we may find that Srila Prabhupada teaches something else, we must modify Srila Prabhupada’s teachings to agree with the way things are understood in ISKCON. Instead of changing the practices and understanding of ISKCON to conform with Srila Prabhupada’s teachings – which of course is what a spiritual society based on following Srila Prabhupada would do. Not only is it bad enough that ISKCON is NOT run according to Srila Prabhupada’s teachings, but now Srila Prabhupada’s teachings must also be changed to fit in with the way we happen to be doing things in ISKCON.What makes this shocking state of affairs even more ludicrous is that the way things are ‘known in ISKCON’ are themselves constantly changing anyway.1) Thus from 1978-onwards, in ISKCON we ‘knew’ one thing in regards to the process of initiation – that you could ONLY take it from 11 people, and then ONLY whichever of the 11 people ‘owned’ your geographical area.2) Then from 1986 we ‘knew’ something else about initiation – that you could take it from many others providing they had received the necessary number of votes.3) Now we ‘know’ something else – that whoever you get initiated from, do not forget that you must not worship him too much and that Srila Prabhupada is also doing some important things, and indeed maybe even more important than the person who does initiate us.4) And what’s the betting that this ‘understanding’ will also change in the next year or so?5) And just because we happen to ‘know’ at the moment that initiation must mean the ‘formal ceremony’, therefore any teaching in Srila Prabhupada’s books that imply otherwise must be doctored.And this is a very sinister development for yet another reason. For this justification is laying the ground for making ANY further change to Srila Prabhupada’s teachings that the GBC deems fit. Thus in the future if it is ‘known in ISKCON’ that ‘women are as intelligent as men’ say, then we will be able to alter all of Srila Prabhupada’s statements where he says that women are less intelligent, since then it would not conform with the way things are ‘known in ISKCON’. Or if in the future we begin to ‘know in ISKCON’ that Lord Siva is just as worshipable as Krishna say, then whenever we encounter the word ‘Demi-God’ in Srila Prabhupada’s books, then all those instances must be changed. And so on.Of course someone may argue that the philosophy as ‘we know it in ISKCON’ will never change and will always be faithful to Srila Prabhupada’s teachings, and the above fear is unfounded. (Of course Pigs May Also Fly).If the last 23 years is anything to go by, the only thing we can say with certainty is that the GBC will ALWAYS be deviating from Srila Prabhupada’s teachings, and the ONLY SAFEGUARD WE HAVE IS SRILA PRABHUPADA’S TEACHINGS.And once we change Srila Prabhupada’s teachings to fit in with whatever nonsense we happen to believe, then all will be lost – as seems to be happening now.How much longer must we put up this with this madness that is leading to the destruction of Srila Prabhupada’s movement. No wonder devotees, life members and members of the public, are turning to support the IRM in their droves.From: Adridharana Dasa, Temple President ISKCON Calcutta