Hansadutta's poll

[theist 1]

Response To Akruranath's Challenge

 

BY HANSADUTTA DAS

 

EDITORIAL, Jun 1 (VNN) — Dear VNN readers, obeisances, all glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Even in the material world, if you tamper with the works of an author, musician, artist or kitchen chef you will find yourself the target of intense verbal, physical or legal reaction. How anyone could think himself qualified, or entitiled to tamper with the works of Srila Prabhupada is incomprehesible to me. Therefore let the world wide Vaishnava community give their opinion, and supporting Vedic evidences in this highly contraversial issue. Simply respond with a yes in favor of editing Srila Prabhupada's books, or a No, opposed to editing Srila Prabhupada's books, PREFERABLY backed with reference to vedic authority. No opinions, or speculations, everything based on quotations from shastras.

 

From my side I have already referred to what Srila prabhupada said to me when I, As a BBT trustee, suggested that we revert back to his original Indian publication of Srimad Bhagavatam " No, whatever Hayagriva has done is perfect, I have full faith in him as the editor of my books " This is all I need to Know, who is a greater authority than Srila Prabhupada, about the books of Srila Prabhupoada? Jayadvaita?, Akruranath?, or anyone else?

 

Instead of an insignificant like myself taking up the challenge of Akruranath, I will defer to the Vaishnava community for a interactive world wide decision.

 

Your humble servant,

Hansadutta das

 

P.S. Those with pertinent vedic knowlege more than myself are invited to comment in detail for the illumination of the world wide vaishnava community.

 

 

 

[theist 1]

I see the need for a third option. Here is my situation. I believe it possible that errors were found and corrections warranted in some cases. I also believe the editors have added their own conclusions to Prabhupada's word's.

 

I have no idea how much of each may have taken place or where. We are told all is well. We are told to "just believe". Well ___k blind faith.

 

The third option as put forth by Rupa Vilas das and others before him is to print the books as Prabhupada had written them and with the corrections and alterations duely noted at the bottom of the page. I'm sure there is a well established procedure for these things in academia, the details I am not in knowledge off.

 

I cast my vote for this third option.

 

Come loose with ALL the changes BBT. Doling out some of them only makes the others more suspect.

[Krsnanatha 0]

I recall when the BBT was gearing up to correct the Krsna books (I believe in '85) I was told by a person connected to the project that they were only going to be fixing errors made by transcriptionists. He gave the example of something like a passage that was to have read "Rukmini was Krsna's queen" was misheard and committed to type as something like "Rukmini had eyes of green". Or vice-versa I don't specifically recall but the point made (which seemed harmless and logical) was these were errors made in the course of processing words from Srila Prabhupada, to tape, to type, to proof, to published. It would seem these mistakes could be fixed without harm as the corrections only replace error with Prabhupada's actual intended words.

Beyond that I am convinced that to alter anything else, on the plea of having a more qualified editor on hand now is to engage a tar baby of potentially epic proportions. I suppose it's quite possible I am just not smart enough to grasp the need to change beyond simple error, but a "better really safe than really sorry" approach seems most sensible to my simple mind.

[gHari 0]

I see some partiality in the selecting and weighing of facts related to the story. That always causes me to ask why; why the cheating. I fear we may be trying to simply justify doing something Srila Prabhupada had never intended to happen when he installed the BBT legal entity apart from ISKCON; namely that someone would leave or become excommunicated, and then try to take Srila Prabhupada's books away from ISKCON. I smell smoke-screen, especially when the keenest complainers are the ghostly trustees themselves.

 

Only a lawyer could see Hansdutta as a real trustee of the BBT; certainly no Prabhupada man did. He's a nice enough fellow for sure, but I just don't get it.

 

Bring on the abuse, Guest; prove me right again.

 

gHari

[Krsnanatha 0]

I was at a temple once when an older Prabhupada disciple, a former sannyasi/GBC dropped in and began offering a veritable flood of unsolicted advice to the Temple President. When he was told moreless, "Thanks for the advice and when you do more around here than occasionally drop by to find fault we may take some of what you say seriously", this fellow took the opportunity to inform all who were there that he was our real GBC, that Prabhupada had appointed him for life. He then drove away leaving us to struggle without his direction.

I always thought this statement to be the rantings of person who was still suffering from the skewer of the "Once honored/dishonor worse than death syndrome". Then, what I had dismissed as a delusion of some sort came up in this matter as a the back bone of a litigation strategy.

I can't imagine one of Srila Prabhupada's students honestly asserting that Srila Prabhupada would be unconcerned if someone or something completely independent of the BBT was trying to gain control of the interests of His literature . The theory that someone could leave a post and the day to day responsibilties of that post (no intention to criticize but merely stating simple fact) and then at a time of their arbitrary choosing, many years later, come back and expect to take over where they last left off is ludicrous. Any assertion that this is a system of management Srila Prabhupada would endorse missed the history of how carefully he attended to detail.

Having said this it seems to this small guy that the big guys at the BBT whose service it is to manage issues of this nature, require accountablity to the community of devotees they serve. Otherwise the crediblity required to do that service will elude them, and things will be hard for everyone involved. (For further clarification refer to definition of "tar baby".)

From my experience both in material society and the society of devotees, as soon as I detect even a subtle hint of a "slight of hand" game, lights and alarms go off.

[theist 1]

I see no use in trying to straighten out the deatils of the past. That will never happen.

 

I am hoping we can all agree on the solution, which I see in Rupa Vilas' letter.

 

Let Supersoul sort all the rest out. Easy for Him, impossible for us.

[gHari 0]

Yes, from what I've heard here his idea sounds good. I would, however, recommend that the simple obvious changes be included in the mainstream text, with footnotes referring to the original typos. I suggest this for the new readers who won't know the history and will probably read the main text without the footnotes. Hopefully they'll read; we are so fortunate to know how great reading is.

[theist 1]

No problem with that. As long as everything is open and out front.