Many of the editorial revisions significantly change the meaning of the text.

Many of the revisions go beyond spelling and grammar and significantly alter the meaning of the text. They actually change the philosophy. This is clearly unacceptable.

Yes, many of the revisions do change the meaning—back to what Śrīla Prabhupāda originally said. The BBT believes this to be entirely acceptable.

For example, consider this line from the purport to 2.8:

“. . . they can achieve real happiness only if they consult Krsna, or the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam—which constitute the science of Krsna—or the bona fide representative of Krsna, the man in Krsna consciousness.”

The second edition changes that or to through, significantly changing the meaning.

As one critic writes, “It's only one word changed, but what a difference! In Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Bhagavad-gita we can understand Krsna by reading the Bhagavad-gita and Srimad-Bhagavatam, after all the books are not different from Krsna!! But Jayadvaita has adjusted everything for us...”

The critic is right: That one word does make a difference.

In Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original manuscript, the word Śrīla Prabhupāda used was from. One is advised to consult Krsna or the scriptures from Krsna’s representative—that is, through him, or with his help. As Śrīla Prabhupāda writes in the purport to Chapter One, text 1, “One should read Bhagavad-gita very scrutinizingly with the help of a person who is a devotee of Sri Krsna. . .” In the first edition one is advised instead to consult Krsna and the scriptures or Krsna’s representative—an either/or proposition.

We leave it to you decide which advice better matches Śrīla Prabhupāda’s original manuscript and better gets across his intended meaning.