Talk:A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada/Archive 2

Vegetarianism
Vegetarianism was such a huge part of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's philosophy, mission and content in his books that I think there should be a section on it in this article.

thanks

New external link?

 * Srila Prabhupad's translation in Bhagavad Gita As It Is in English poetry form

--59.97.224.9 (talk) 11:01, 20 November 2007 (UTC)Servant of servant of Vaishnavas

Who gave Prabhupada the name "Prabhupada"?
"His later name of Prabhupada, literally meaning "he who has taken the position of the Lord" [7] (i.e one who is representing Krishna) was given later on by Prabhupada's disciples in America after he had been promoting Krishna Consciousness there for some time."

Dear Vaishnavas,

I claim that this statement is incorrect and misleading. I believe Prabhupada himself requested his disciples to address him by the name "Prabhupada." My argument follows:

Prabhupada was known to his American disciples as "Swamiji" from 1965 until he returned from India to America on December 16, 1967, when his disciples first began calling him "Prabhupada." Where did his disciples get this name "Prabhupada?"

None had been to India except for Kirtanananda Swami who stayed with Prabhupada in India about a month, then returned to the U.S. and got in big trouble by misleading the New York devotees. He was banned from the temple and was living with Hayagriva in Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania, during December 1967. No one would have listened to him at this time.

The only other disciples who had been to India with Prabhupada were Achyutananda and Ramanuja (see letters from Prabhupada to Satswarupa 6th October, 1967, and to Brahmananda 7th December, 1967) and both of them remained in India when Prabhupada returned to America (see letter from Prabhupada to Brahmananda 12th December, 1967).

So Prabhupada's disciples in America just suddenly one day decided to call him "Prabhupada?" Where did they learn this new form of address? From the Gaudiya Math? But only those disciples in India (Achyutananda and Ramanuja) would have had any contact with the Gaudiya Math, and they did not return to America until much later.

So Prabhupada must have taught his disciples to address him by the name "Prabhupada."

This is confirmed by Hayagriva in "Hare Krishna Explosion" pp. 228-229:

Quote:

Brahmananda phones me from New York. "Swamiji's leaving India," he tells me jubilantly. "He's flying to Japan. Then Los Angeles." . ..

We all write Swamiji, telling him how much he is needed. . . . We cry out for Swamiji.

And he appears in a wholly different and wonderful way. As the year wanes and Americans brace for another Christmas holiday, he arrives in San Francisco via Tokyo, December 16 [1967]. He doesn't arrive as the ailing Swamiji, but returns in full strength as "Prabhupada."

"Prabhupada means one who is always found at Krishna's lotus feet," he says. "Rupa Goswami was called Prabhupada because he was always worshipping the lotus feet of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. All the six major Goswamis were called Prabhupada. A spiritual master is usually addressed as Vishnupada, or Gurudeva, or Prabhupada. These signify reversance and respect."

"Oh, you mean Srila Prabhupada!" Brahmananda corrects me on the phone when I enquire about "Swamiji." "Yes, Srila Prabhupada is doing fine."

Unquote

Perhaps Brahmananda can be contacted to confirm this. His remembrance of would be helpful. Hamsadutta may remember also, as may Satsvarupa and Jadurany.

Any comments?

Sincerely Your Servant,

Hrishikesh dasa Henrydoktorski (talk) 03:37, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I think the answer to this is on the first of the "Following Srila Prabhupada" DVD's. One devotee retells the story, that goes something along the lines of the devotees finding out that the appendix 'ji' is third class. They ask Prabhupada what a first class name for the Spiritual Master is. He gives 3 answers - Gurumaharaja, Gurudeva, and Prabhupada. The devotee picked Prabhupada and it hence forth remained fixed.


 * Ys
 * Nitai-nam das Chopper Dave (talk) 03:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)


 * That sounds correct to how I have heard it before also. Somewhere Prabhupada makes the point that he actually signs his letters simply as "Bhaktivedanta Swami", and it was his disciples who affectionately decided to use the term. Thus within ISKCON it became Prabhupada's recognised name. Gouranga(UK) (talk) 14:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

-


 * Many thanks dear friends for your thoughtful insight. I have heard this story before, but did not know it had been documented.


 * I just watched the "Following Srila Prabhupada: A Chronological Series" DVD 1 (Nov. 1965-July 1970). During the Boston 1968 section Govinda dasi speaks how Swamiji became Prabhupada.


 * In so many words (and my words are not exactly what she said, but I will try to get the gist), she explained that she was speaking with Prabhupada; she said definitely it was MAY 1968; and mentioned how Gaurasundara wanted to address her as "Govindaji." Prabhupada said "ji" was a second class form of address and he should simply call her Govinda dasi.


 * Then Govinda dasi piped in "But we call you 'ji!' We call you 'Swamiji!' What should we call you?"


 * Prabhupada didn't want to say anything, but Govinda dasi pressed him: "What should we call you?"


 * Prabhupada finally said, "You could call me 'Gurudeva, Gurumaharaja or Prabhupada."


 * Govinda dasi said, "That's three names. Which is the best?"


 * Prabhupada replied, "Prabhupada." From then on Govinda dasi made sure everyone called him Prabhupada instead of Swamiji.


 * Very nice story; well spoken.


 * However, the date is five months later than Hayagriva's account, which puts it at December 1967. I know Hayagriva kept a diary, which lends credence to his account. Does anyone have an explanation for this?


 * In any case, I think the above-mentioned text from the article should be revised to make it more neutral, something like:


 * At first his disciples called him "Swamiji," but later--probably late in 1968 or early in 1968--they began using the more respectful form of address: "Prabhupada" (literally meaning "he who has taken the position of the Lord," [7] i.e one who is representing Krishna).


 * Any more thoughts?


 * Sincerely Your Servant,


 * Hrishikesh dasa
 * Henrydoktorski (talk) 21:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

-

Thankyou for clarifying the details on this one. I've amended the article text in-line with your suggestion above, but just swapped it around to fit in with the paragraph. Does this read okay from your view? It's definitely more accurate than it was before. Best wishes, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 10:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC) :-) -

Yes, I agree the change is better. A small detail, but more accurate. I am grateful for this discussion and your input. Thank you, prabhu. Hrishikesh Henrydoktorski (talk) 14:11, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

-

Check this out, prabhus! Just watched more from "Following Srila Prabhupada: A Chronological Series" DVD 1 (Nov. 1965-July 1970). During the section titled "April 1969, New York City, Temple at 61 2nd Ave," TWO devotees interviewed referred to Prabhupada as "Swamiji." This suggests that the transfer from the name "Swamiji" to "Prabhupada" was not immediate as implied by Hayagriva and Govinda dasi.

Hrishikesh Henrydoktorski (talk) 21:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

As with any name of the acarya Prabhupada is the name his followers address him. The relevant passage in the commentaries of the first canto was there indicating that this is the correct name to address the guru. As in many cases he had no interest in being call anything special and was accepting the name Swamiji. This name is a common name and is used throughout the beggining of his carrier in USA as depicted in Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita. It is however the name most academics[http://books.google.com/books?id=F-EuD3M2QYoC&pg=PA74&dq=Swami+Prabhupada&sig=JjQlZ-pT8ND0Gog0_PDJqFWVJy4 Krishna Consciousness in the West - Page 74 by David G. Bromley, Larry D. Shinn - Religion - 1989] would use [http://books.google.ie/books?id=l4cE-nzXLx8C&pg=PA275&dq=Swami+Prabhupada&sig=fNyEbFFjArTEAsIcDzt5Mu-AqUE The Hare Krishna Movement: Forty Years of Chant and Change - Page 275 by Graham Dwyer, Richard J. Cole - Religion - 2007] to refer to A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada and he himself insisted that this full name to used on all his book covers. The Bhagavat comments passage reads Bhag. 1.115: "The pure devotees whose only business is serving are honored by the names PrabhupAda and ViNUupAda, which indicate such devotees to be representatives of the lotus feet of the Lord." Its earlier then any topics discussed is verifiable evidence as far as wiki is concerned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikidas (talk • contribs) 18:33, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Update to this topic: Respected prabhus, It appears that some disciples began addressing A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami as "Prabhupada" as early as December 1967, as explained by Hayagriva in "Hare Krishna Explosion," but the practice was not universally adopted throughout ISKCON until April 1969.

When Swamiji returned from India on December 14, 1967, some of his disciples began calling him “Prabhupada.” Hayagriva explained: “We cry out for Swamiji. And he appears in a wholly different and wonderful way. As the year wanes and Americans brace for another Christmas holiday, he arrives in San Francisco via Tokyo, December 16. He doesn’t arrive as the ailing Swamiji, but returns in full strength as “Prabhupada.”

Prabhupada indicated why his disciples should use the new form of address: “Prabhupada means one who is always found at Krishna’s lotus feet. Rupa Goswami was called Prabhupada because he was always worshipping the lotus feet of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. All the six major Goswamis were called Prabhupada. A spiritual master is usually addressed as Vishnupada, or Gurudev, or Prabhupada. These signify reverence and respect.”

In Srimad-Bhagavatam Prabhupada explained: “The pure devotees whose only business is serving are honored by the names Prabhupada and Vishnupada, which indicate such devotees to be representatives of the lotus feet of the Lord.”

“Sometimes the spiritual master is addressed as Prabhupada. Prabhu means ‘the Supreme Personality of Godhead,’ and pada means ‘post.’ According to Vaishnava philosophy, the spiritual master occupies the post of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, or in other words he is the bona fide representative of the Supreme Lord.”

Hayagriva described how Brahmananda once reminded him to use the new form of address: “‘Oh, you mean Srila Prabhupada!’ Brahmananda corrects me on the phone when I enquire about ‘Swamiji.’ ‘Yes, Srila Prabhupada is doing fine. I hear he looks very well and is already shouting at the impersonalists. He arrived in San Francisco [from India] this morning.’”

Swamiji becomes widely known as Prabhupada.

Although some devotees, such as Brahmananda, addressed their spiritual master—beginning in December 1967—by the respectful name of “Prabhupada,” the practice had not widely caught on. Most disciples, including Hayagriva, still referred to him as “Swamiji” or “Bhaktivedanta Swami,” as attested by his articles in the New Vrindaban Newsletter and Back to Godhead.

Govinda Devi Dasi explained how Swamiji’s disciples received a great impetus to begin addressing their guru as “Prabhupada” when he explained: “‘Ji’ is a third-class form of address.” 

All along everyone knows him as “Swamiji.” This is up until May 1968. And so [my husband] Gaurasundar decided he wanted to call me “Govindaji,” and he asked Prabhupada [about it] and Prabhupada said: “No. Actually ‘ji’ is a third-class form of address. It’s better not to call her ‘Govindaji.’”

So I piped up—I was sitting right in front of him—I said, “Well, if it is a third-class form of address, why are we calling you ‘ji?’ Why are we calling you ‘Swamiji?’” And he said, “Eh, it’s not very important.” And I said, “Oh, no. It’s very important. If it’s a third-class form of address, then we don’t want to call you that. We want to call you the most first-class form of address. So tell us what would be a good name for us to call you by.”

And he was very humble, very reluctant. But I pressed him, “I… like… you’ve gotta change this.” And he [finally] said, “You can call me ‘Gurudev,’ ‘Gurumaharaj,’ or ‘Prabhupada.’” So I said, “Well, that’s three. We need one.” And so I said, “Well, which one is the best?” and he answered: “Srila Prabhupada is nice. That is the best.”

So I said, “From today, you will be called ‘Srila Prabhupada!’” and so we told all the devotees. . . . We gradually started calling him ‘Srila Prabhupada’ from that time.

The April 18, 1969 issue of Back to Godhead announced the news of Swamiji’s new form of address with a feature article titled: “Prabhupada.” 

The word Prabhupada is a term of the utmost reverence in Vedic religious circles, and it signifies a great saint even among saints. The word actually has two meanings: first, one at whose feet (Pada) there are many Prabhus (a term meaning “master,” which the disciples of a Guru use in addressing each other). The second meaning is one who is always found at the Lotus Feet of Krishna (the Supreme Master). 

In the line of disciplic succession through which Krishna Consciousness is conveyed to mankind, there have been a number of figures of such spiritual importance as to be called Prabhupada:

Srila Rupa Goswami Prabhupada executed the will of his Master, Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, and therefore he and his associate Goswamis are called Prabhupada. Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Goswami Thakur executed the will of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur, and therefore he is also addressed as Prabhupada. Our Spiritual Master, Om Vishnupad 108 Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaj has, in the same way, executed the will of Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Goswami Prabhupada in carrying the message of love of Krishna to the Western world, and therefore we American and European humble servants of His Divine Grace, from all the different centers of the Sankirtan Movement, have followed in the footsteps of Srila Rupa Goswami Prabhupada, and prefer to address His Grace our Spiritual Master as Prabhupada, and he has kindly said “Yes.” 

Henrydoktorski (talk) 21:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

---


 * After a long endeavour, including my reasoning made to some biased ISKCON Wikipedia editors and relevant administrators of this article, finally, Wikipedia seems to accept the correct meaning of the word "Prabhupāda". "Since Medieval Bengali Literature period Prabhupāda means lotus feet of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu". - A title of honour used before or after the name of Vaishnava Religious Teachers.


 * After so long time finally, Wikipedia realises that this article may rely excessively on sources too closely associated with the subject, preventing the article from being verifiable and neutral. And this article appears to be written like an advertisement!


 * I find it good that now editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.


 * Snthakur ( সৌমেন্দ্র নাথ ঠাকুর ) (talk) 22:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Citation
In the following statement from the article :

A number of memorial samadhis or shrines to Prabhupada were constructed by members of ISKCON in his remembrance.

I really don't see the benefit in adding this second statement with a citation to the Prabhupada Lilamrita:

which is also reflected in ISKCON writers biographies of Prabhupada.

If a citation is required I think it would be much more useful to find one which describes something directly in relevance to the memorials constructed for Prabhupada. The Lilamrita, for example (which was cited) details the events within Prabhupada's lifetime from a devotional perspective, and doesn't really go into details concerning where samadhi's and shrines have been set up in the years following 1977. I don't see it as being an appropriate source of information in this regard. Thus I have removed the comment and reference. Regards, Gouranga(UK) (talk) 20:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

The article
Its is stabilised. I think with a bit of effort it can move towards GA, I will work on the references. Wikidās-ॐ 08:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Since the article stabilised and I have added proper references and provided a NPOVs references, I suggest final edits by the editors who were contributing to the article. Following the general proofing and copyedit, I would suggest nominating it towards GA (Good Article). Wikidās-ॐ 14:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Redtiger, big thanks for bringing the article to its current state and removing all duplicate wikilinks. As it stands it has been listed in the nominated section of GA process. Wikidās-ॐ 10:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's too far away from passing GA status. -- Shruti14 t c s 18:25, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
 * With all references working and neutral views included in the lead the article should really pass. I brought citations to the standard and many more illustrations give article the value. It is on the list of nominations for GA, so any editor who did not take part in editing it can promote it to GA or give a GA review. Wikidās ॐ 19:09, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Appearance/Disappearance
Vaisnava Hindus tend to use the word "appearance" as a synonym for "birthday," and "dissappearance" as a synonym for "death."

The reason I mention this is because I've seen this article modified from time to time in a way that makes it look like the "disappearance" of Srila Prabhupada was a mystery, as if he just wandered off into the jungle and never came back.

I'm sure this is just confusion over vernacular. 172.167.228.92 (talk) 14:36, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Websites of Disciples of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

 * "famous writer and poet"


 * "famous for walking across Canada"


 * "Yale-educated monk famous for his books"


 * "famous for traveling around the world"

C'mon, fellas! Who are we trying to fool here? At least Sankarshan and Swami B.V. Tripurari's Wikipedia editors appear to have a better grasp on reality and show their self-discipline by refusing to use the word. Famous, my foot! Famous to whom? a handful of ISKCON advocates & disciples? I haven't even heard of some of these guys, and I was in ISKCON for a good many years. Make anyone famous by adding the adjective "famous" before their name! Wishful thinking, I think. :) Henrydoktorski (talk) 01:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
 * You have been out since... more then 20 years ago... you are famous! ;-) Wikidās ॐ 02:49, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your light-hearted spirit, Wikidās ॐ !!! P.S. Yes, it was 20 years ago NV officially left ISKCON. Henrydoktorski (talk) 17:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Grammar Editing for GA
I have made a couple small edits already in Views on Other Religions. I place a comma and added "the" to read as follows..."In the view of some, the Gaudiya-Vaishnava philosophy he followed", and I have inserted "this is know as" to suffix Achintya Bheda Abheda. In the next sentence I also added a comma between path and Gaudiya Vaishnavism. That is all. I hope these edits will be helpful. I would also propose to consolidate the opening sentence as follows... "Abhay Charanaravinda Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada (Sanskrit: अभयचरणारविन्द भक्तिवेदान्त स्वामीप्रभुपाद, phonetical: abhaya-caraṇāravinda bhakti-vedānta svāmī prabhupāda, Bangla: অভয়চরনাবিন্দ ভক্তিবেদান্ত স্বামীপ্রভুপাদ) (September 1, 1896–November 14, 1977) was the founder-acharya of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness[1], commonly known as the "Hare Krishna" movement[3]. His mission is to propagate Gaudiya Vaishnavism throughout the world.[2]" Prahlad 108 (talk) 17:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Good idea, except phonetical should be IAST and the last sentence needs to read more neutral. Wikidās ॐ 18:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * How about this:

His mission is to propagate the Gaudiya Vaishnavism of his Guru, Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura, throughout the world .[2]

Also I agree with the phonetical part. Could you help with that or steer me in a direction so I would be able to do it myself? ThanksPrahlad 108 (talk) 21:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

TALK PAGE TO DISCUSS IMPROVEMENTS TO ARTICLE
There have been quite a bit of additions to this article in the past couple months. The person of interest in this article is very deserving for Wikipedia's designations of what a good article is. There isn't a visible attempt to ensure the article's additions are meshing with the body of the article!!! If you are going to post an addition, ethically, you'd want to offer your suggestion here first.

Here are a few examples of what I mean:

The section titled renunciation is arguable. The opening sentence is an exclusive, which is untrue. There isn't an attempt at including Radha Damodar Mandir as one of the places where he lived after taking sannyas. Since his stay at Radha Damodar Mandir was already mentioned, maybe whoever posted could try to include Kesavji Gaudiya Math in that section instead of creating a whole new section which contradicts his stay at Radha Damodar Mandir.

Do we really want links to a definition of what September 1 means???

Please post your intended additions here first and get some feedback. Wait a week and if no one has responded then go ahead and add it to the body of the article. But please try to stick with the format and do your best, make it work with the rest.

Lets Do This. Thanks Prahlad 108 (talk) 05:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * One has to be careful as not to remove valid references and statements supported by WP:RS. For example


 * After his death in 1977 his ISKCON, an authentic form of Hindu Krishnaism based on the Bhagavata Purana, continues to grow and is respected in India, though there have been many squabbles about leadership among his followers. from:
 * This is a statement that needs to be retained if you want to have it neutral, ie it should be objective. Just as one has to be objective and admit hostility towards Neo-vedantists such as Vivekandanda etc., Wikidās ॐ 09:29, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, Wikidas. I don't disagree with the necessary objectivity for the article. The part you discussed just doesn't read properly. It can be totally rephrased meaning basically the same thing albeit, more objective. The use of the word hostile can be rephrased to be "in contrast". Essentially the meaning is there with regards to disagreeing on concepts but hostility indicates a more martial attitude. Here what I'm thinking...(Here is the original presentation)

'''After his death in 1977 his ISKCON, an authentic form of Hindu Krishnaism based on the Bhagavata Purana, continues to grow and is respected in India, though there have been many squabbles about leadership among his followers.[17][18] Prabhupada is sometimes criticised by Neo-Vedantic relativistic philosophers, mainly due to uncompromising and 'unkind remarks' against non-Vaishnava systems, particularly 'the mayavadis'.[19] This may be taken in the perspective of general underlying hostility of Neo-Vedantists towards fundamental truth of bhakti, devotion, and orthodox Vedanta system presented by Prabhupada being in conflict with heterodox views of mayavadis.[20] '''

First of all, the first sentence has more to do with the incorporated institution, ISKCON, than it has to do with Prabhupada. It is out of place in the subject body of the article and doesn't really belong even if there are references to it. What does the reference to members of ISKCON disagreeing on leadership after the death of Prabhupada have to do with Prabhupada himself??? If it is needed (which I believe it is not) then it could read as follow:

'''ISKCON (the institution founded by Prabhupada to propagate an authentic form of Hindu Krishnaism based on the Bhagavata Purana) continues to grow, even though there are disagreements among the members regarding leadership. '''

Second...The next 2 sentences also appear to be disjointed from the opening subject paragraph of the article. While we want to maintain an objective view we also need to keep focus on its relevance to the article. Perhaps we can re-write in this way..

'''Prabhupada's preaching stance has been noted as being uncompromising toward certain non-Vaishnava philosophical systems, particularly the Neo-Vedantist mayavada system. While he has been criticized by the Neo-Vedantists because of this, his stance may be understood in the context that there is a general non-acceptance by the Neo-Vedantists with regards to the notion of bhakti (devotion) to Bhagavan Shree Krishna. The Vaishnava system presented by Prabhupada fundamentally contrasts the Neo-Vedantist mayavada system. ''' Prahlad 108 (talk) 04:10, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think I understand now where you are coming from. Disagreements bit is fine. I would suggest:

'''Prabhupada's preaching stance has been noted as being uncompromising toward certain philosophical systems, particularly the Neo-Vedantist mayavada system. While he has been criticized by the Neo-Vedantists because of this and his stance may be understood in the context. There is a general non-acceptance by the Neo-Vedantists with regards to the notion of bhakti (devotion) to Krishna and this Vaishnava system presented by Prabhupada fundamentally contrasts the Neo-Vedantist mayavada system.'''

In general it is better edit parts rather then remove referenced material, unless agreed. Thank you prahlad. Wikidās ॐ 08:01, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks Wikidas. . I appreciate your involvement. I certainly don't want to change the article unnecessarily, and yet I see possibilities for improvement. Are you saying you'd be fine with the removal of the "squabbles/disagreements" part? I won't change the article till we are in agreement. I also want to adjust the other parts of the paragraph further to read as follows (Let me know if this is acceptable to you)


 * He has been described as a charismatic leader, in the sense used by the sociologist Max Weber, as he was successful in acquiring followers in the United States, Europe, India and elsewhere. Prabhupada's preaching stance has been noted as being uncompromising toward certain philosophical systems, particularly the Neo-Vedantist Mayavada system. He has been criticized by the Neo-Vedantists because of this. His stance may be understood in the following context. There is a general non-acceptance, by the Neo-Vedantist, of the Vaishnava notion of bhakti (devotion) to Krishna, and this Vaishnava system, presented by Prabhupada, fundamentally contrasts the Neo-Vedantist mayavada system . As such his Hare Krishna movement is accepted by the academics as "the most genuinely Hindu of all the many Indian movements in the West".

If not that then how about this?


 * He has been described as a charismatic leader, in the sense used by the sociologist Max Weber, as he was successful in acquiring followers in the United States, Europe, India and elsewhere. ISKCON (the institution founded by Prabhupada to propagate an authentic form of Hindu Krishnaism based on the Bhagavata Purana) continues to grow to this day, even though there are disagreements among the members regarding leadership. Prabhupada's preaching stance has been noted as being uncompromising toward certain philosophical systems, particularly the Neo-Vedantist Mayavada system. He has been criticized by the Neo-Vedantists because of this. His stance may be understood in the following context. There is a general non-acceptance, by the Neo-Vedantist, of the Vaishnava notion of bhakti (devotion) to Krishna, and this Vaishnava system, presented by Prabhupada, fundamentally contrasts the Neo-Vedantist mayavada system . As such his Hare Krishna movement is accepted by the academics as "the most genuinely Hindu of all the many Indian movements in the West".

Prahlad 108 (talk) 04:24, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Last one sounds good to me. I would include one more 'transitional' sentence just before the last one. I think if you do not remove references and sources, you can safely edit the article itself. It sounds good. A number of edits suggested by Good Article reviewer above are also to be considered, but they are too extensive but all to be considered. Wikidās ॐ 20:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:George Harrison - Radha Krsna Temple promo sheet.jpg
The image Image:George Harrison - Radha Krsna Temple promo sheet.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --00:55, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It is to be expanded with non-free use rationale note. Wikidās ॐ 08:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC) ✅ Wikidās ॐ 21:19, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Inconsistencies regarding "The Disciplic Line of Succession" in Bhagavad-Gita As It Is
Recently, I was in a used book store and began comparing the older versions of the Bhagavad-Gītā As It Is with the newer version. On the last page of the introduction, one can find a list entitled "The Disciplic Line of Succession". Well, there were clearly 33 names listed under The Disciplic Line of Succession in the older version, but there are only 32 in the newer (current) version. So, I went down each list and found the one that had been changed (and/or combined) from the two different versions. As I recall, the inconsistency occurs around number 28. "(Baladeva) Jagannatha". This is where it's confusing for me. Is this a combination of Baladeva Vidyabhushana and Jagannatha dasa Babaji ? They were clearly two different people, and one was not initiated by the other. Baladeva studied under Visvanatha Chakravarti, who is listed as number 27 on The Disciplic Line of Succession, but Jagannatha accepted initiation (diksha) from Jagadananda Goswami, and later accepted Babaji initiation from Madhusudana dasa Babaji (and neither Jagadananda Goswami nor Madhusudana dasa Babaji are listed in The Disciplic Line of Succession). So, I found this inconsistency to be quite interesting.

I haven't had much luck finding more information about this online, or a direct lineage comparison and discussion regarding the two different lists, but I did find this: Muralidhar das, of The Sampradaya Sun, wrote the following in this article:  "The Parampara list given by Srila A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada in the introduction to Bhagavad Gita As It Is is the same list Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saraswati Thakur gave in his commentary to Chaitanya Charitamrita. Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Maharaj Prabhupada listed the spiritual masters in his Guru Parampara as follows: '26) Narottama, 27) Visvanatha, 28) (Baladeva) Jagannatha'. It is to be noted that Narottama lived some two generations before Visvanatha and that Visvanatha lived two generations before Jagannatha das Babaji. Baladeva was a contemporary of Visvanatha. This list, therefore, is not a list of initiating Gurus and their direct disciples. Rather, it is a list of the most significant spiritual masters in the school of thought of Sri Chaitanya." Geneisner (talk) 22:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Shrilla Prabhuphada Poisoned by his fake disciples
I was wondering why there is no mention about How Shrilla Prabhuphada was poisoned and killed by his false disciples. This is now a well Known fact and there are many videos to prove this that can be easily accessed by anyone. Many Professionals and Forensic Experts have analyzed these tapes and videos and have concluded that Shrilla Prabhuphda was indeed poisoned. If this was not enough proof Shrilla Prabhuphada has said many times himself that someone was poisoning him. He said this right before his death that he was being poisoned and Forensic experts have claimed this to be true. On top of this we have the tapes to prove this as whispers can be heard about the plotting to Kill Shrilla Prabhuphda. So first we have Shrilla Prabhuphda who was completely knowledgeable, true, and perfect proclaiming many times that he had been killed, we have many Forensic experts claiming this to be true, we have many Krishna Conscious sites such as HareKrishna.org, Hare Krishna.com, Prabhuphda.com, Krisha.org etc claiming this to be true. We have the videos that can easily be accessed on youtube where we can hear the disciples whispering about killing Shrilla Prabhuphda. On top of this Prabhuphda said that they would kill and torture him, and mentions how they killed Jesus. He also says that “the most sinister movement was taking place in our movement (ISKCON)” This can also be proven true because of all the cases of child abuse and molestation that occurred after Shrilla Prabhuphda was poisoned and killed. These evil fake disciples wanted to destroy Shrilla Prabhuphda’s movement so they posed as disciples to get close to Prabhuphda and killed him. Once Shrilla Prabhuphda was out of the picture, they would do the most evil, mishevious acts by beating, sexually abusing, molesting, and torturing young girls and boys. Many of these fake disciples were using drugs, were practicing homosexuality and were very violent and they were sqandering all the money of ISKCON to use for themselves. They wanted to commit these evil acts of Child abuse so that they could blame it on Shrilla Prabhuphda. In this way they could destroy ISKCON, SHrilla Prabhuphda’s mission. The sad this is that this is working because ISKCON now has a negative image as a child-abusing cult. Anyone who has experienced this child-abuse or is close to someone who has now has an extremely negative view of ISKCON and Shrilla Prabhuphda. This the goal of the fake disciples to destroy ISKCON by doing atrocious acts and blaming it on Shrilla Prabhuphda and his teachings and philosophy. All of these atrocious activities are destroying ISKCON and Shrilla Prabhuphda’s message, because people are now becoming Adverse to ISKCON and its philosophy because they view it as a child abusing cult. This is exactly what the false disciples wanted and this is how they are destroying ISKCON and Shrilla Prabhuphda’s mission by commiting the most atrocious activities in the name of Shrilla Prabhuphda in order to blame him and his teachings, and the general public are now believeing that Shrilla Prabhuphda and his teachings are evil, cultish, and abusive. What more proof do we need? http://www.prabhupada.org.uk/sp_poisoned/sp_poisoned.htm http://www.harekrsna.org/gurupoison/support/nityananda.htm http://www.anet.net/users/yasoda/web/ http://krishna.org/srila-prabhupadas-untimely-disappearance-update/ http://www.vnn.org/world/971102-1159/index.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqAnBnrtGrw http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZTqCsMkj7g&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3SBe8Jf6To http://www.harekrsna.org/pada/2003/history-draft.htm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRGKc9wvubA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3ZyGV35PEw&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzyT98NLIUk&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueA4JOqNB-s&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bptXnEM1T-M&feature=related http://harekrishnadiary.blogspot.com/2009/07/srila-prabhupada-was-poisoned-by-his.html http://www.srilaprabhupada.us/ http://www.prabhupada.org.uk/sanat/false_guru.htm http://www.angelfire.com/ego2/prabhupada/sp_poisoned/whispers.htm http://gurupoison.tripod.com/support/nnv.htm http://www.harekrsna.org/gurupoison/support/pishima.htm http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_0K1uB61c0 http://prabhupada.krishna.org/Articles/2004/12/disap.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzyT98NLIUk&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ueA4JOqNB-s&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bptXnEM1T-M&NR=1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdCoqschYLw&NR=1 http://www.prabhupada.org.uk/sp_expose/sp_poisoned/sp_poisoned.htm http://tribes.tribe.net/srilaprabhupadapoisoning/thread/3fb01846-7ab9-4ca6-a956-b22826c39e29 http://www.bollywoodsargam.com/video_todayfeaturedvideo.php?blockbustermovieclip=OzyT98NLIUk---latest-PRABHUPADA_POISONED!_HEAR_SINISTER_ILLUMINATI_WHISPERS._featured_hollywood_blockbuster_video.html http://harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/12-06/editorials1062.htm http://harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/12-06/editorials1062.htm http://www.harekrsna.org/gurupoison/support/poisontranscript.htm http://www.prabhupada.org.uk/poison1.htm http://www.prabhupada.org.uk/sp_poisoned/evidence.htm http://hearfromsrilaprabhupada.info/ http://www.iskconirm.com/docs/webpages/mukunda_further_arguments.html http://www.angelfire.com/ego2/prabhupada/sp_poisoned/sp_poisoned.htm Eronel189 (talk) 09:55, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

When you can spell 'Shrila' properly, people might start to listen to your conspiracy theories. 81.111.37.96 (talk) 13:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Eronel189, first you think about yourself, and see how much we have been poisoned by staying in this dastardly material world, and how much we are helplessly and hopelessly suffering, and then you start thinking whether Shrila Prabhupada was poisoned or not. As far as I know, Prabhupada is not an ordinary soul who can be "poisoned" by "fake" disciples. -59.95.7.139 (talk) 18:37, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Poor referencing in section "Views on other religious traditions"
The following passage appears in the section "Views on other religious traditions"

/While ISKCON theology of personal god is close to Christian theology, both personal and monotheistic, being a preacher of bhakti and a missionary he sometimes would add, that "already many Christians have tasted the nectar of divine love of the holy name and are dancing with karatalas (hand-cymbals) and mridangas (drums)."[64] Prabhupada's approach to modern knowledge is also seen in sectarian Orthodox Judaism, where the skills and technical knowledge of modernity are encouraged, but the values rejected. For example, while higher education in engineering or accounting is permitted, the liberal and fine arts are dismissed as "useless" and "immoral".[36]/

But the reference [36] has no mention of these things. Isn't the writer imputing his personal opinion? Merely taking recourse to a phrase like "is seen as" is a poor way of masking POV, which this section reeks of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.194.198.0 (talk) 05:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Mention of Paedofillia
One thing that article fails to mention is that Swami Prabhupada had sex with minors. This seems to be a significant omission. He hismelf said and it was published by a reliable source: "So I was also married very early age. My wife was only eleven years old." and "I was married, my wife was eleven years. I was 22 years. She did not know what is sex, eleven years' girl. Because Indian girls, they have no such opportunity of mixing with others. But after the first menstruation, the husband is ready. This is the system, Indian system." "Formerly, when I was married, my wife was eleven years old. So (laughing) an eleven years old girl and I was at the same time twenty-one, twenty-two. One day I captured her hand. She began to cry. A little girl, you see? So gradually, gradually. I know..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by MBest-son (talk • contribs) 11:29, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * You must be kidding. Early arranged marriages have always been a part of Indian culture.--Gaura79 (talk) 11:38, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * That also can be mentioned, obviously. If Pedophilia was socially acceptable part of the culture, it is a valid clarification. -- (User) Mb (Talk) 11:50, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * As far as I know early arranged marriages are not related to pedophilia. Mainly because one stays married for a long time to the same person. Are there any reliable sources to the claim, except for a few quotes? Wikid as&#169; 14:39, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

-

Personally, I consider sex with minors abhorrent. But as someone else here has said, early arranged marriages are common in India. This was especially so in the early 20th century, when Prabhubada was married. It's still common in rural India today, but much less prevalent in urban areas. The age of 18 for consensual sex is not part of a universal moral code that dropped out of the sky for all humankind. Consensual ages are fixed by the legislation of various countries; according to their cultures. In traditional Indian society, when a female begins to menstruate, and is thus of childbearing age, it was considered normal for her husband to have sex with her. It was also common for the man to be ten years or more older than the wife, for the practical reason that he would be more established financially; thus able to support a wife and start a family. In addition, such marriages were arranged by parents when their children were quite young. When Prabhubada was a young man (when he was just Mr. De), his parents told him when the wedding date would be, according to an astrologer. He had no choice in the matter. You obey your parents or get shunned and shamed. This is the traditional Bengali marriage scenario. Now, if Prabhubada had waited six years or so until his wife was 18 to consummate the marriage, then her mother-in-law and other relatives would have given her hell, assuming she was a barren woman; and they might have done away with her and arranged a new marriage for her son. Sons (even though legal adults) are very much under the control of their parents and extended families in this culture. He got married and tried to start a family whether he wanted to or not, simply because that's how the system works here. Therefore, the charge of pedophilia (which the person who started this discussion misspelled) does not apply. (I have not sourced these comments because they're common knowledge. Any Indian sociology text would say the exact

thing. I'm sure there's a lot on the internet as well regarding Indian arranged marriages.) Mahamaya1 (talk) 05:27, 27 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you Mahamaya. It is however a fact, be it due to the customs of the time or under social pressure or any other pressure. I assume you are american, thus you can not even recognize an English spelling of the word. Is it true that members of Iskcon are banned from the places of congregation, if they were engaged in consensual sex with underage partners, but you find the same 'sin' acceptable due to social conditions. As you rightly indicated, he consummated the marriage at the same time, but why do you think it was to make life of his wife rather easy?

The term paedo, paedophilia, paedophile and related terms comes from the Greek for ‘child’, used as the root for many conventional terms, it is only lately been been associated in the public imagination with the worst of its uses (User) Mb (Talk) 20:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

-

Thanks MB for the correction (yes, I'm American and thus didn't know the British spelling). Also, thanks for making the change for me in the intro. I've never been a member of ISKCON, but my favorite activity is the study of various Hinduisms. My wife is Bengali (same race and culture, and from the same city, as Prabhubada), and I've lived in Calcutta nine years now. It's all part of my local world: Tollygunge, where Prabhupada was born, is now a bustling part of south Calcutta, though when he was born it would have been more like a village. Scottish Church College is just 5 Km west of our house. In addition to this, I grew up near San Francisco in the 1960s, and was introduced to ISKCON from age seven. That's my background in this subject.

The point I was trying to make is that in current parlance, the word "pedophilia" most often brings to mind a genuine sex-offender (like Keith Ham, a.ka. Swami Kirtanananda); a pedophile preys upon vulnerable kids, and if arrested, goes to prison and then becomes a Registered Sex Offender the rest of his/her life. But such ideas don't fit the setting of of Indian arranged marriages. As you said, the word comes from the Greek for "child," but in Indian culture (especially in the 1920s when Prabhubada was married) a menstruating female is no longer considered a child, but a woman. And since bearing children (especially male children) is so important in traditional Indian society, if a woman appears to be barren--well this really sucks, but she's likely die in an "accidental" kitchen fire or something similar. At the very least, she'll be replaced with a fertile wife and spend the rest of her days a shamed outcaste, who in many cases will resort to prostitution just to survive. So there's just no way that Prabhupada (or any young Bengali man in his situation) would wait until the Western historically-later-to-come and arbitrary (why 18? Why not 17, 19 or 23?) legal age to consummate the marriage.

Since I'm not a True Believer, I think of Prabhupada as a regular Bengali man, pretty much like the rest of my Hindu-Bengali friends and neighbors (except that he was quite mystically gifted, extremely studious, and had a charismatic personality). He came to America as an old man, totally steeped in his own culture. Thus he hit the streets of New York in a state of severe culture-shock; and even after several years made statements that were totally normal according to his culture, but were culturally unacceptable in the USA and UK. His statement about his young wife was one of these cross-cultural blunders. He just should never have said it in the first place, but didn't know better.

I'm not an apologist for ISKCON, nor do I hold any guru of any sect in awe. I just believe it would be academically unsound, unfair and inflammatory to use the word in Prabhupada's case. (But in the cases of Keith Ham and other sexual predators, whether they be religious or not, yes, "pedophilia" (or its British spelling) is definitely the right word to use).

Finally, I just looked over an old book I have, which, unlike most Indian sociology texts, is probably available in the West. You can get a full picture of the child marriage issue and everything else from the following: Bumiller, Elizabeth, May You Be The Mother of A Hundred Sons: A Journey Among The Women Of India (New York: Random House, 1990; and Delhi: Penguin Books, 1990). Mahamaya1 (talk) 17:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

How to edit the intro?
In the biography section I made a minor correction in the college's name (it's "Church" not "Churches"). But the same error is also in the top introductory section, and I can't find an "edit" button for it. Does anyone know how to edit this section? Mahamaya1 (talk) 05:11, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I can do it for you. (User) Mb (Talk) 20:43, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Goswami

 * Merge Not notable alone. Thanks Ism schism (talk) 20:31, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Notable enough to have an article on wiki. Merging makes no sense.--Gaura79 (talk) 22:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Article itself is not notable. The only notability is an association with Bhaktivedanta Swami. As such, merge here. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 22:27, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * "The only notability is an association with Bhaktivedanta Swami" - strongly disagree.--Gaura79 (talk) 23:27, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * After two Afds, no other notability has been shown. As such, relevant information should be merged here. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 23:33, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There're reliable academic sources that make him notable enough for standalone article. Plus there're ISKCON sources (most notably Satsvarupa Dasa Goswami) which describe his relationship with Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.--Gaura79 (talk) 23:39, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The only remarks about him are related to his relationship with Bhaktivedanta Swami; nothing says that he is notable aside from his relationship with him. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 00:46, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose Merging only part as the option that keep the original article (eg WP:SS). It will be undue to dedicate so much in this article to Bhakti Prajnana Kesava Goswami. You can mention him, but not all the material and if you want to delete other article (no sources) go again for AfD. If there is no sources for him no material can be salvaged, and thus no material can be added to this article too. Merging as an option in the AfD was discussed already, if not you can mention it in the future AfDs. Wikid as&#169; 07:25, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Bias Much?
The 'Early Life' section makes him sound godly right off the bat. This is not WP-grade objectivity in the slightest.134.174.21.5 (talk) 14:42, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Move over redirect
We have no other page entitled Bhaktivedanta, just a redirect to this one. That is backwards. Honorifics, titles, and such should only be used in page names when necessary to disambiguate articles on other, similarly named, individuals. This page should be moved over that redirect. (An admin will have to do that).LeadSongDog come howl!  18:48, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The current name of the article is based on the consensus and the policy to use most common names as in Sanskrit names for clergy. There are tons of Bhaktivedanta people out there, even if they are NN. Wikid as&#169; 22:59, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you saying there's a special policy for Sanskrit names? Can you link to it? LeadSongDog come howl!  03:27, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * MoS is quite clear on this. But your recent proposal is interesting but it contradict Manual_of_Style_%28India-related_articles%29, which is based on a previously reached consensus. Let us see if you can build a consensus, but that would have to include omitting titles of Pope from the likes of Pope John Paul II. File RFC and see how it goes.  Wikid as&#169; 05:11, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Did you notice that Manual of Style (India-related_articles) is only historical, not in effect? My edit at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Indic) wasn't exactly my proposal, if you read the preceding comments, you'll note mine was more of an overdue close. LeadSongDog come howl!  06:08, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You are right that that MoS is a historical record. Policy became less restricted and more based on the common sense then. I know of about 50 Bhaktivedantas at present. Let us continue the discussion on the other talk page to reach a consensus. Thanks for you input Wikid as&#169; 06:32, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.krishnamedia.org/e-books/Narada_Bhakti_Sutra.pdf
 * In Haridasa Thakur on 2011-03-22 21:31:02, 404 Not Found
 * In A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada on 2011-06-19 22:10:21, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 22:10, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

WP:Honorifics
Does this article need renaming A. C. Bhaktivedanta without Swami Prabhupada added? In ictu oculi (talk) 00:45, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The question needs to be asked whether Naming_conventions_(Indic) is consistent with other religions. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Sri Radha Vallabha (talk) 20:29, 18 May 2012 (UTC) Initially "Bhaktivedanta" was an honorific title awarded to Abhay Caranaravinda. However, when he accepted the renounced order of life (sannyasa) he was given the name "Bhaktivedanta Swami". Whether the sannyasa-name or any names other than the birthgiven names are to be considered honorific could be debated; in that case, the person in this Wikipedia article should/could be referred to as "Abhay Caran De". Nevertheless, "Prabhupada" really is an honorific title used by disciples to address their spiritual master. Hence it would be more appropriate and objective not to use it on a Wikipedia page (though it may be mentioned in the article that his disciples and followers address Bhaktivedanta Swami as "Prabhupada").

"Birth" and "death"
Note: It is considered an offense to treat the great Vaishnava gurus or acharyas as ordinary mortals, and thus assign processes like birth and death to them, as is done to ordinary humans. They are considered to be the messengers and confidential associates of the Supreme Lord (Vishnu or Krishna), and hence they are not considered to be under the control of nature like ordinary human beings, although their "birth" and "death" may be apparently ordinary to the eyes of ordinary mortals. Hence the words "appearance" for birth, and "disappearance" for death are most appropriate. This is supported by all current serious followers of Vaishnavism. -59.95.7.139 (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah. That's not going to happen. WP is not a devotional soapbox. We'll just have to accept that "birth" and "death" have different meanings to different people.LeadSongDog come howl!  17:24, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Please have the general discussion in a more appropriate venue, such as Naming conventions (Indic). This page is for discussions specific to this one biography.LeadSongDog come howl!  18:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)


 * An offense? Would a messenger and confidential associate of the Supreme Lord be offended by anything at all, much less the ascription of mortal qualities by the ignorant? Think on this, Son. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.232.191.16 (talk) 19:53, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Criticisms
The 'Criticisms' section is WP:OR. --220.253.153.108 (talk) 11:39, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Prabhupāda
Prabhupāda (eng) প্রভুপাদ  (ben) is a Bengali word originated from the language Sanskrit meaning, a title used before the name of Vaishnava religious teachers or, an honourary title. In Sanskrit "prabhu-pāda" means lotus feet of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.

Prabhupāda is a joined word by the words 'prabhu' and 'pāda', where the word prabhu literally means, master or, lord, God, saint, person with high spiritual esteem, leader and the word pāda literally means, feet or, leg, root.

Therefore, Prabhupāda needs to be redirected properly.


 * প্রভু (Prabhu)+ পাদ (pāda) = প্রভুপাদ  (Prabhupāda) = বৈষ্ণবদের ধর্মগুরুর নামের আগে ব্যবহৃত উপাধিবিশেষ (title used before the name of Vaishnava Religious Teachers), সম্মানসূচক উপাধিবিশেষ (honourary title);

External Links
 * Samsada Bangala Abhidhana - The Digital South Asia Library, Biswas, Sailendra. Samsada Bangala abhidhana. 7th ed. Calcutta, Sahitya Samsad, 2004.
 * Bhaktivedanta VedaBase: Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Antya 19.68

Snthakur ( সৌমেন্দ্র নাথ ঠাকুর ) (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Controversial footnote reference to "Chandraswami" to be deleted
This is hearsay and gossip "Chandraswami Chandraswami is also suspected by some to be involved in poisoning of A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, ISKCON founder. Chandraswami is said to supply false "medicine" Makhardhvaja for Prabhupada around 1977. Chandraswami, who was in and around Vrindavana at the time, and who had supplied Srila Prabhupada the Makaradvaj medicine (coincidentally having found some which had "just" been made and graciously donated) has since become an shady and infamous figure who is known to have been involved in Rajiv Gandhi's assassination, and is also known to have CIA connections. How far does this tangled web of deceit go? Who else may have wanted Srila Prabhupada dead and gone?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.225.220.128 (talk) 21:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Wiki biography changes
Taylor DiBart 03:58, 1 October 2014 (UTC)Taylor DiBart 03:59, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Deleted section
I just deleted this section until a reliable source can be provided. It was apparently being used to manufacture the controversy it claimed to describe. LeadSongDog come howl!  04:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Thousands of followers are against the many changes made toBhagavad-Gītā As It Is (as well as the entire collection of books by the author). These books have been changed (by the publishers, "The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust"), many times since the passing away of the author in 1977, fueling a significant controversy among his original disciples. While the book-edits can be argued to be of accuracy in line with some of the Sanskrit to English corrections, as well as clear English grammatical errors which should be corrected as a matter of course in any second edition, inhere seems to be no need to remove nuances which collectively form the unique writing style of the author. Arguments giving clear and irrefutable evidence of unnecessary changes can be found at Arsa Prayoga .com

The controversy over the book-changes and the argued philosophical digressions by "The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust" fueled a splintering of the original group of followers into various groups. In 2014, four decades after the "As It Is" controversy began, the "Bhaktivedanta Book Trust" continues to defend its claim to editorial rights on the Internet with apparent transparency and accountability for each of their editorial changes and nuances in strict, grammatical detail, at http://bbtedit.com/changes. Many of the original and contemporary followers of Swami Bhaktivedanta still continue to insist that their "teacher's poetic presentation and unique vernacular cannot be subject to strict rules of grammar, either English or Sanskrit, without diluting the writer's intended artistic expression—as with any other written work."

Another major concern is that the "revised" books are not accepted at Universities. This is due to the fact that standard publishing protocol has not been followed and the editors names do not appear in the revised books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poppy007 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Websites used in Controversy section are not RS
The websites (aside from the International Business Times article) used in this section are not from reliable sources. Just because a website states something on this subject does not make it reliable or worthy of inclusion. Contentious material especially requires reliable sources. I am not against the subject matter, but reliable sources must be used. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:50, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * How would you propose to discuss a dispute without discussing the POV positions of the factions? That is the essence of wp:YESPOV. Your username would suggest an understanding that schisms happen, and pretending they don't is a more-or-less standard institutional response in organizations which seek to project an image of internal harmony. LeadSongDog come howl!  12:56, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I would propose that RS be used as there are many which address controversy and schism in this sect. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 13:12, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * So what is it about these websites that makes you think they are not representative of their own positions? What alternative sources would you propose? Just saying that they are not RS without explanation is not very helpful. LeadSongDog  come howl!  14:28, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * We need to use WP:RS per Wikipedia policy. One example is Larry Shinn . This is a RS, a religion scholar with a notable published work. Experts like this make for encyclopedic articles. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 14:52, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Of course we need to use RS, but why do you say that those sources are not RS? Shinn looks useful too for a more neutral source POV.LeadSongDog come howl!  16:10, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * These websites claim to post about Pranhupads's writings. I am not sure about their reliability or verify them, WP:Verify. If you want to use them - I suggest you check them out at WP:reliable sources noticeboard. They pose as a depository of primary sources. When editors use sources like these (if they are verifiable), and offer analysis, then they have crossed over to WP:OR. It is best to use reliable sources and let them speak for themselves. Thanks. Ism schism (talk) 21:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)