archives

As a precursor to these thoughts: I read a powerful realization that Jauvana prabhu shared this morning:

That's the essence of politics. I cloak myself in any manner of holy garb: as an ayatollah, guru, monk, priest or president. But whatever my dress, politics means that I have the answer and that the problem is somehow out there, threatening, foreign, to be attacked

Jauvana said:

...devotees are no different than any other conditioned soul, until they develop real humility and tolerance as taught by Mahaprabhu (trnad api sunicena)

I thought about that as I went about my daily tasks.

False ego drives us to say: "I have the answer! I am right!". We want to "be like Krishna" and tell the world the absolute truth "as it is" just like He does.

Only Krishna doesn't even do that Himself.

Krishna is so humble that even while instructing Arjuna in Bhagavad-gita he frequently says: "That is my opinon". [Bg 6.36, Bg. 6.47, Bg. 13.3, Bg 18.6]

Krishna is the supreme person. I am one tiny person with limited experience and a limited perspective. This is my opinion.

I think it's important to separate the circumstances from the principle in this case:

• I agree with the idea of explaining what Srila Prabhupada intended to communicate with his statements.
• I agree with the idea of clarifying misunderstandings and misinterpretations of Srila Prabhupada's statements.
• I agree with the idea of demonstrating the relevance and the specific application of Srila Prabhupada's statements and teachings.
• I agree with the idea of distributing Srila Prabhupada's books widely and encouraging people to seriously study them.

However:

• I do not agree with the idea of modifying his books.

Therefore:

• I do not agree with the idea of modifying his books to achieve these aims.

When I think about the proposed notes - clarifying some of Srila Prabhupada's statements using the word "rape", I think that it's not a bad idea. However, when I think about modifying the books to do that, I get a strong gut reaction.

Those two things should be kept separate. Why? Because if I agree that Srila Prabhupada's books can be modified to achieve some aim, with which I agree, then I open the situation up for the books to be potentially modified in the future for other aims or in ways with which I do not agree. At that point what recourse to protest do I have?

Apart from this, I do not think it appropriate to modify the books. Personally, to me, it does not feel right. I can agree with the stated aims of these modifications, but I am uncomfortable with them on principle. I think the principle of keeping the books sacrosanct and inviolable should be held higher than any utilitarian argument about the intended effects of those modifications.

In reponse to a particular temporary time, place, and circumstance we are about to abandon an eternal principle of leaving the books as Srila Prabhupada left them (some will argue for the pre-78 books on that basis). Where will it end?

The real issue here for me is not whether these particular annotations are appropriate, but whether "annotations at all" is appropriate.

As a similar situation, sometimes people say to us: "Why are you forcing your son to be vegetarian, why not wait until he's old enough to choose?"

In fact, we are waiting until he's old enough to choose, and giving him the choice. If we stuffed a hot dog in his mouth when he's three years old, we kind of took his choice away from him, didn't we?

That's something that you can't go back on. It's like losing your virginity - once you do it, you can't go back.

Similarly, once you admit the strategy of annotating Srila Prabhupada's books, you can't go back.

It's also like trademarking "Hare Krishna". Oh yeah, great idea, as long as you are the one holding the trademark. Kinda sucks when someone else gets control of it later on and sues your devotional organization out of existence.

It's better to leave children not eating meat, Hare Krishna untrademarked, and Srila Prabhupada's books as they are.

Srila Prabhupada's books, like his rooms in various temples around the world, should be left the way he left them. Disciples and grand-disciples can further elucidate and illuminate them with their own writing.