The unseen destruction of Srila Prabhupada’s first edition Srimad Bhagavatam (4th canto)

Yasoda nandana dasa
 
 
 
 
Inline image
 
 
The unseen destruction of Srila Prabhupada’s
first edition Srimad Bhagavatam (4th canto)
 
Hare Krsna.
All glories to His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. 
 
This article is presented to highlight how the editors have massacred the contents of Srila Prabhupada’s Bhagavatam, especially the 4th canto. This was done after 1977, and no website features the first edition of Srimad Bhagavatam, including the so-called original books websites.The 10 volume set that is being advertised as original was also checked for the same changes, and unfortunately it has followed suit.  
It is a sincere request to all those who are going through this article to introspect these changes carefully and analyze the situation. Will Srila Prabhupada be pleased to see his books being played by some self-motivated mischievous rascals who do anything without his approval?
 
Why can’t the books simply be printed and distributed as they were being done while Srila Prabhupada was present? He gave all lectures from the first editions of Srimad Bhagavatam only. Yet, there are some who defend these unethical changes to gain monetary benefits.
 
The following is just a list of a few changes to keep the article brief. The links below have a list of all changes and one can find so much of adulteration in these. 
For all tables: Left side contains the first print books. Right side has revised editions.
 
To all those who are still distributing the 10 volume set, please answer whether Srila Prabhupada will be satisfied with such kind of distribution where the changed books are sold as original ones which contain so many deletions.
 
There is sufficient proof to show that these changes are found in the 10 volume set too. Just open the verse from that set or compare it with the content found in 30 volume set to see the massive destruction.
 
CANTO 4 DELETIONS: (The lines highlighted in red have been removed in the new sets.)
4.13.11 T
 
image.png
 
4.27.3 P
 
image.png
 
4.27.5 P
 
image.png
 
4.27.9 P (One entire verse removed)
image.png
 
4.27.10 P
image.png
 
4.28.20 P (Content consisting of almost a page cut off)
image.png
image.png
4.28.25 P
image.png
 
image.png
 
4.29.78 P
image.png
 
4.31.14 P
 
image.png
 
Ramesvara Das explains Srila Prabhupada’s statement over Srimad Bhagavatam changes
 
 
 
Proof showing no more changes in Srimad Bhagavatam after Mayapur 1976 meetings: (Changes in first four cantos were made after that without authorization from 1976-78)
 
And also at that Mayapur meeting of 1976 we had had meetings with Prabhupada about the Bhagavatam. We prepared for that Mayapur festival a color board which showed all the volumes of the Bhagavatam drawn in for each Canto what the color would be. And Srila Prabhupada approved the color scheme for the Srimad-Bhagavatam for all the reprints. But he warned us emphatically that this must be the very very last change that is ever to be made in the Srimad-Bhagavatam. [Page 173]
 
“Yes, there is no need for corrections for the first and second Cantos. Whatever is there is alright. Once Pradyumna comes to join me here from India, then there will be no need for Nitai das or Jagannatha das to edit the Srimad-Bhagavatam. “
[Letter to Radhavallabha, May 4, 1976]
 
Instruction from Srila Prabhupada regarding cover change:
 
“No, the printing of the Gitar-gan cover this fashion is not at all approved by me. You have done most nonsensically. Why change the cover? When people look to see the Bhagavad-gita they expect to see Krishna and Arjuna, not the picture of Krishna with cow. You have done a great mistake by changing the front picture and it will hamper the sale. In future you don’t do any changes without asking me first.Simply because there is no stock of books, we can do anything whimsically??? Is this logic? Gita is not spoken in Vrindaban, it is spoken on the battlefield of Kuruksetra, but this is Vrindaban picture. That chariot driven by 4 horses, that is the real Kuruksetra picture. It is not that because there is no stock we can do whimsically as we like and lose the idea, that is rasa-bhasa. Because there is no bread, you take stone to eat? There is no stock of bread so you will take stone??? The front picture is most important thing and you have changed it. It must remain standard, and not change. Also, the lettering is not nice on the cover. You could have taken a color picture of Krishna and Arjuna and used it black and white (one color) on the front cover. Just as you did with the inside back cover of the Bhagavat darsana, the original picture of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu was in color but you have printed it in black and white. You could have done this on the front cover with Krishna and Arjuna on the Battlefield of Kuruksetra, but the cover must not be changed.[Letter: Bhargava, May 29, 1976]
 
Canto 1: (Over 6000 changes) 
 
 
Canto 3: (Over 4000 changes)
 
 
This 10 Volume set cannot be called the original set as it has the same changes that are found in the links below(it is not the 1972 print). Also Srila Prabhupada had never instructed to take out the front covers of the books and merge them as 10 cantos. 
 

Google drive with Srila Prabhupada’s first edition unrevised, non adulterated, original books.https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1nHm72gVwAeei95WDkSLf2aw5x-jRXDoF?usp=sharing

Another folder for Srimad Bhagavatam 1972 on-wards first edition original books:https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1am9rKGII3wMrmkyxHp85hfjMjgnWGzT9?export?format=pdf

IDENTIFY THE ORIGINAL SET:
 
image.png
Some questions that must be discussed:
 
1. If only the first 2 chapters of the first canto were revised during 1976, why are thousands of changes in all the first 4 cantos found? Why are the same changes in these 4 cantos present in the 10 volume set as shown above?
 
2. Even if we accept the claim made by the editors who say they got approval from Srila Prabhupada for revising only for the first 2 chapters of the first canto, where is the approval for 21000+ changes to be made in all four cantos?
 
In the 7th September 1976 letter, we only see Srila Prabhupada approving corrections only for the first 2 chapters (“Concerning the editing of Jayadvaita Prabhu, whatever he does is approved by me. I have confidence in him.Your changes which I have seen of the sanskrit synonyms is also approved by me”.).
If they got an approval, it is only for the first 2 chapters of the first canto and not for all 4 cantos as per that letter. Also the letter dated August 31,1976 by Radhavallabha Prabhu asks for approval only for the first 2 chapters.
There is no such letter which shows Srila Prabhupada’s approval for changing these 4 cantos.
Where is the approval for cutting off so many lines,verses and paragraphs in 2nd and 4th cantos?
 
Where is the recorded room conversation with Srila Prabhupada and Jayadvaita Swami [as he has claimed] allegedly authorizing all these changes?
 
3. Why does the 10 volume set have the same changes in all 4 cantos if they claim it as “original”?
 
4. Who exactly made so many revisions in these 4 cantos?
 
5. Why does the BBT Edit Review website show the changes made only in the first 2 chapters of the first canto and not all the changes in 4 cantos?
 
6. Did Srila Prabhupada ever want to remove front covers and merge them into 10 volumes? He did make such a statement in 1968 but that was the time when there was only 1st canto available. 
After this, we only find Srila Prabhupada’s desire to complete the entire Srimad Bhagavatam in 60 volumes and he used to say the same till 1977. There are so many instructions with respect to this found in the vedabase. But he could only dictate till the first few chapters of the 10th Canto. Therefore, what we have as an original set is the 30 volume Bhagavatam. 
 
7. If the 10 volume set is really original, then why are its supporters unwilling to look at so many deletions in these books(esp 2nd and 4th cantos)?
 
8. Is the 10 volume set really “pre-1978”? If it is so, then why is it that the changes that were made in the first 4 cantos during 1978 replicated in this set? 
 
At first, it was thought by all that only some parts of the first two cantos are second editions printed prior to 1978. But after checking the publication years for every volume, it was noticed that some volumes are printed after 1977. The proof for this is shown below. The second edition printing years after 1977 are set to bold.
 
There is another question that comes about the first canto of this 10 volume set being the 1976 edition. We know that the mistake in the verse 1.2.5 was emphasized by Srila Prabhupada in June 1977. They have just partially corrected this verse keep the meaning of Sadhu as “this is relevant” despite Srila Prabhupada mentioning the meaning of Sadhu meaning noble,pious,etc in the lectures given on this verse. From the table below, the 3rd edition which supposedly contains that partial correction of 1.2.5 is said to be printed in 1978. How is it that the mistake that was brought up in 1977 corrected in 1976? Now some people may say that it was already corrected in 1976. To refute that, there is another proof to this. This so called BBTedit.com website in this link http://bbtedit.com/Bhagavatam_revisions_examined explains the revisions made by the editors in 1976 which excludes 1.2.5. They have also deceived the devotees by presenting the approval for revisions done in 1976 only for first 2 cantos as an approval for making 21000+ changes in first 4 cantos. Rest of the changes in the remaining 6 cantos will be dealt separately. The total number of changes in the entire Srimad Bhagavatam is something that will make anyone astonished.
 
We ask those who are promoting this so called original set that why haven’t they cross-checked these revisions in so many cantos before publishing these sets? Why do the 10 volumes in the new set have the same 21000+ changes?
 
BBT Books Edition Year
       
1 SRIMAD BHAGAVATAM 1:1 1st 1972
2 1:01 6th 1976
3 1:01 8th 1978
4 1:02 1st 1972
5 1:02 4th 1976
6 1:03 1st 1972
7 1:03 3rd 1976
8 1:03 3rd 1976
9 1:03 4th 1978
10 2:01 1st 1972
11 2:01 7th 1977
12 2:01 7th 1977
13 2:01 8th 1978
14 2:02 1st 1972
15 2:02 3rd 1976
16 3:01 1st 1972
17 3:01 3rd 1977
18 3:02 1st 1974
19 3:02 2nd 1977
20 3:02 2nd 1977
21 3:03 1st 1974
22 3:03 2nd 1978
23 3:04 1st 1974
24 3:04 2nd 1978
25 4:01 1st 1972
26 4:01 2nd 1977
27 4:02 1st 1974
28 4:02 2nd 1978
29 4:03 2nd 1978
30 4:03 1st 1974
31 4:03 2nd 1978
32 4:04 1st 1974
33 4:04 2nd 1978
 
9. Why is “the original way” taken as a second edition by some devotees who make their own conclusions? Before he mentioned the “original way”, changes in both “Isopanisad and Srimad Bhagavatam” were discussed.
 
Here Srila Prabhupada boldly says “I know that these rascals are doing. What can be done? How they can be relied on? “, which expresses his denial of the 1974 revised Isopanisad edition.
 
Why are these 10 volume distributors making their own conclusions wrt the original printing?
From this anyone can easily conclude that the first printing itself is the original way.
 
There is no such statement where Srila Prabhupada approves changes 4 cantos in the Srimad Bhagavatam. 
 
Regarding Sri Isopanisad changes: (Srila Prabhupada disapproves the changes)Yaśodā-nandana: In the Gurukula we were teaching Īśopaniṣad class to the children. So we took… [break] …Prabhupāda and the words which the recent edition of the Press is wrong. Many changes were brought. They were trying to make better English, but sometimes, to make better English, I think they were making philosophical mistakes also. There is no so much need of making so much better English. Your English is sufficient. It is very clear, very simple. We have caught over 125 changes. They’re changing so many things. We are wondering if this is necessary. I will show you today. I have kept the book.Srila Prabhupāda: I know that these rascals are doing. What can be done? How they can be relied on? [……..]
 
Yaśodā-nandana: Sometimes they appeal that “We can make better English,” so they change like that, just like in the case of Īśopaniṣad. There are over a hundred changes. So where is the need? Your words are sufficient. The potency is there. When they change, it is something else.Svarūpa Dāmodara: That’s actually a very dangerous mentality.Yaśodā-nandana: What is it going to be in five years? It’s going to be a different book.
Prabhupāda: So you… What you are going… It is very serious situation. You write one letter that “Why you have made so many changes?” And whom to write? Who will care? All rascals are there. Write to Satsvarūpa that “This is the position. They are doing anything and everything at their whim.” The next printing should be again to the original way.[Rascal editors conversation, June 22,1977, Vrindavan]