Social: What do you think about GBC Resolution 311 - to annotate and "explain" SP`s books?

…just like in our ISKCON there are so many false things: “Prabhupāda said this, Prabhupāda said that.”
(Letter to: Krsna dāsa—Vrndāvana 7 November, 1972)

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

(Morning Walk—February 3, 1975, Hawaii)

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

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

“Unless it is there from me in writing, there are so many things that ‘Prabhupāda said.’”
(Letter to: Okāra—Vndāvana 2 September, 1975)

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

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.

I'm 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 DON'T THINK SO, folks!!!

If it ain't broken, don't fix it. If you are seeing it as broken and needing "fixing" then it's your vision and mentality that needs the adjustment and not Prabhupada's writings.

It's 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 I'd like to make. When I joined ISKCON in the late 60's 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.

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 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?

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

"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 hasn't 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 Prabhupada's 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. I've had debates on my blog with devotees supporting the annotations who argued that Srila Prabhupada was wrong. They don't want these annotations to support Srila Prabhupada's view; they want to replace it with modern politically correct ideas.

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.

ccd: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.

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?

Dear Caitanya Candrodaya prabhu,

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

Don't 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 Krishna's 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.

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 Prabhupada's rejection of the notion as an unnatural adjustment and harmful to society. I have no objection to commentary in support of Srila Prabhupada's view, only to that which is likely to contradict his view or undermine his authority.

It's not fair to suggest that I don't read Srila Prabhupada's 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 don't consider myself conservative by devotee standards, since my views in this matter were _formed_ by reading Srila Prabhupada's 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.

Pandu das: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 Prabhupada's rejection of the notion as an unnatural adjustment and harmful to society. I have no objection to commentary in support of Srila Prabhupada's view, only to that which is likely to contradict his view or undermine his authority. It's not fair to suggest that I don't read Srila Prabhupada's 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 don't consider myself conservative by devotee standards, since my views in this matter were _formed_ by reading Srila Prabhupada's 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.

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.

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?

I do not want to go into details, but what footnotes whould you 'accept'?

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.

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

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.

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´t, but they can and they did with resolution 311.

---------- 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 DON'T 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 that's 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 Prabhupada's books. At least one GBC Nrsimhananda
prabhu recently spoke to said the GBC didn't 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 Prabhupada's 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 don't 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 else's voice. Do not mix
them with Srila Prabhupada's voice. That's my point.

I therefore repeat what I said in my previous email: I signed this
petition and I recommend all Srila Prabhupada's disciples to do so. I don't
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 Prabhupada's
books:

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


Your humble servant,
Hari-sauri dasa

Madhava Gosh das wrote:

The latest topic amongst those in ISKCON addicted to debating is the annotation of Prabhupada’s 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’t read the GBC resolution and don’t know their specific reasons for deciding to annotate Prabhupada’s 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’t know what annotation is, ergo I include this definition:

Main Entry: an·no·ta·tion
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’s 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’t 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’t mean an unannotated version can’t also exist, so there is no need to worry an annotated version of SP’s books will replace the current ones.

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

Consider the word “gay” 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 “Deck the Halls Boughs of Holly” would need to be annotated in scholarly quarters so it was clear that the refrain “don we now our gay apparel” wasn’t understood to be an exhortation to dress in drag.

Consider this quote from Srila Prabhupada’s original Bhagvatam:

“The 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.”

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’s books IF it is done by devotees who have an understanding of the principles of Vaisnava philosophy.

Pandu das:"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"

Wow, I hope this misunderstanding about Srila Prabhupada and his exalted position isn't widespread within our female devotee community....maybe this attitude has motivated the annotations?

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.

At the BBTI June 2008 annual meeting, the BBTI trustees have rejected the recommendation of resolution 311. A statement was published on Jayadvaita Swami's website. http://www.jswami.info/bbt/editing/no_notes