BÁBÁ
Re: Story—Maniiśánanda’s
expulsion: clash on pure AM books
The following letter from Ac. Mantracetanánanda Avt, posted courtesy of WhatsApp, was written in response to the recent posting on this network "Story—Maniiśánanda’s expulsion: clash on pure AM books" (18 October), found here below Mantracetananda Dada's letter. Dada ji's letter is translated here below into English by TR Sukulji; below that is the original Hindi, highlighted in yellow.
Namaskar,
The material which has been circulated in the letter
"Story—Maniiśánanda’s expulsion..." is correct. There cannot be two
opinions about this. You tell me, whatever
Dada Maniiśánanda ji was doing, was he right or wrong? Maximum
persons would say, he was right.
If he was right, why did he not get the favor of other wts?
What was the reason? If he was right but adopted the wrong
procedure, was there any other way to do so? Dada Maniiśánanda
was the first person to oppose the wrongs in the organization,
is it wrong?
We are also committing the same mistake now. I too have done
the same mistake. others are also doing the same mistake
today.
In general, we appreciate and morally support those who come
forward to oppose the wrongs but do not dare to come openly to
support them. This drawback is found in nearly all
the wts and grhii margis.
We generally remark about the opposers of wrongdoers that the
person opposing today,
has themselves supported and accompanied the wrongdoers in the
past.
But they do not realize that before 1990 to 2000 wrongs done
by Bengalis have been supported by non-Bengali powerful
persons. And later on, from 2003 to 2007 the powerful persons
of unity group didn't establish Dada Rudránanda
and Dada Nigmánanda. I too did the
mistake to not oppose the atrocities on unity group that time
but supported Dada Rudránanda
and Nigmánanda. This mistake
was done by me, whether it was done knowingly or unknowingly,
but it is done by me which I accept.
But this thing was not with Maniiśánanda
ji as he always exposed the wrongdoers and never did anything
wrong. Since we didn't support Maniiśánanda
the wrongdoers were encouraged to continue wrongs and the
proverb "might is right" went true.
If we really want to celebrate Dashahra then we should try to
destroy the drawbacks existing inside Ravan in our personal
character; then and only then we could say that we have won
over the internal and external Ravana.
Killing the internal Ravana will benefit only to self but
killing outer Ravana will benefit the whole society.
If we want that the circumstances of the organization be
solved in our own life itself then the Ravanas of the
organization would have to be finished. Otherwise, our
Dashahra celebration would be a formality only and we will not
be deceiving others but to self only.
(these are my own views and do not aim to hurt sentiments of
anybody)
-------------------
The following letter from Ac. Mantracetanánanda Avt, posted courtesy of WhatsApp, was written in response to the recent posting on this network "Story—Maniiśánanda’s expulsion: clash on pure AM books" (18 October), found here below Mantracetananda Dada's letter.
(Below in yellow is the original letter in Hindi from Mantracetanananda Dada)
नमस्कार।
जिन्होंने
भी दादा मनीषानन्द जी के बारे में लिखा है,
वह सही है। इसमें दो राय नहीं
हो सकती।
आप यह
बताये,
कि दादा मनीषानन्द
जी जो कर रहे थे ।
वह गलत
थे या सही?
अधिकतर
लोग कहेंगे,
कि वह सही थे।
यदि वो
सही थे। तो उनको WT
वर्कर्स (workers)
का साथ
क्यों नहीं मिला। उसका क्या कारण था?
यदि
उनका कारण सही था। और तरीक़ा गलत था,
तो उस तरीके के अतिरिक्त कोई
दूसरा भीतरीक़ा था?
संस्था में गलत के प्रति आवाज़
उठाने की हिम्मत तो प्रथम दादा मनीषानन्द
ने ही दिखाई। यह तो सत्य है।
उसी तरीके से आज भी हम लोग वही गलती
कर रहे हैं। वह गलती मैंने भी की है। और आज दूसरे लोग भी कर
रहे हैं।
असल
में हम लोग लगभग गलत का विरोध करनेवालों को एप्रिशिएट (appreciate)
और
मोरल सपोर्ट (moral
support) तो कर सकते हैं। लेकिन उनका ओपन
(open) रूप से
सामने आकर सपोर्ट (support)
करने
का साहस नहीं कर पाते।यह कमी अधिकतर सन्न्यासियों और गृही
मार्गियों,
दोनों में भी है।
गलत का
विरोध करनेवालों को हम लोग आसानी से रिमार्क
(remark) देते
हैं। कि:-
आज यह
गलत का विरोध कर रहा है। लेकिन कल तक तो इसीने,
गलत का साथ दिया था।
लेकिन
कभी उन्होंने ऐसा रिमार्क (remark)
देने
से यह नहीं देखा कि पहले
1990 से 2000 तक सभी
नन (non) बंगाली
वर्कर्स (workers) ने
बंगाल में होनेवाली बंगालियों की गलती का साथ हमारे ही नन
(non) बंगाली
के महारथियों ने दिया था। और बाद में 2003 से 2007 तक,
यूनिटी ग्रुप (unity
group) के महारथियों ने,
दादा रुद्रानन्द
जी, एवं
दादा निगमानन्द
जी को एस्टबलिश (establish)
नहीं
किया। तब मुझसे भी गलती हुई,
कि मैंने भी यूनिटी ग्रुप (unity
group) के ऊपर होनेवाले अत्याचार का
साथ न देते हुए,
दादा रुद्रानन्द
जी एवं दादा निगमानन्द
जी का साथ दिया था। चाहे वह जाने या अनजाने में ही मुझसे
गलती क्यों न हुई हो। पर गलती मुझसे अवश्य हुई। मैं अपनी
गलती को स्वीकार करता हूँ।
लेकिन
यह बात दादा मनीषानन्द
जी के साथ नहीं थी,
क्योंकि उन्होंने तो कभी किसी
भी गलत का साथ साथ नहीं दिया था,
उन्होंने तो हमेशा गलत
करनेवालों को एक्सपोज (expose)
ही
किया था। तो दादा मनीषानन्द
जी को हम लोगों ने जो सपोर्ट (support)
नहीं
किया। आज वही कारण है कि संस्था में गलत करनेवालों को साहस
मिलता गया। और "जिसकी
लाठी उसी की भैंस"
वाली कहावत सही हुई।
आज यदि
हम वास्तव में दशहरा मनाना चाहते हैं। तो रावण के अन्दर जो
भी कमी थी,
उन सभी कमियों को हम अपने
व्यक्तिगत चरित्र से समाप्त करने की कोशिश करें। तभी हम कह
सकते हैं, कि
हमने अपने अन्दर के रावण,
और बाहर के रावण पर विजय
प्राप्त की हैं।
अन्दर
के रावण को मारने से,
हमारा व्यक्तिगत लाभ होगा।
लेकिन जब तक बाहर के रावण पर विजय प्राप्त नहीं करेंगे,
तब तक बाहर के समाज का भला नहीं
होगा।
यदि हम लोग चाहते हैं। कि हम लोग ज़िंदा होने
तक संस्था की परिस्थितियों में सुधार आ जाय तो संस्था के
रावणों पर विजय प्राप्त करनी ही होगी।
अन्यथा यह दशहरा मनाना सिर्फ़
फॉर्मिलटी (formality) होगी। और इस तरीके से हम लोग दूसरे
को धोखा नहीं बल्कि अपने आप को धोखा दे रहे हैं।
(यह मेरे पर्सनल (personal)
विचार
है। मेरा मक़सद अपने विचारों से किसी को दुःख पहुँचाना
नहीं है।)
The above letter from Ac. Mantracetanánanda Avt, posted courtesy of WhatsApp, was written in response to the recent posting on this network "Story—Maniiśánanda’s expulsion: clash on pure AM books" (18 October). That posting is found here below.
On 10/18/18 7:54 PM, Ananda Marga
Discourses wrote:
BÁBÁ
Story—Maniiśánanda’s
expulsion: clash on pure AM books
Namaskar,
From the very beginning of WT life in 1970, Dádá Maniiśánanda
had deep interest in Bábá's discourses. Since the time when Dádá
Maniiśánanda first acquired an audio recorder and discourse
audio files from Shrii Kirit Dave, in his day to day life—while
traveling, doing asanas, engaged in nitya karma, and whenever
possible—Dádá ji would listen to Guru’s discourses over and over
again. Whenever he had the opportunity to attend Guru’s
darshana, Dádá would record Bábá's discourses to listen to.
After recording a few bits and pieces of discourses during
General Darshans and listening to them exhaustively, Dádá began
to share his recordings with various Márgiis and Wts, and, in
turn, other disciples shared their audio recordings with him.
Only Bengali books match original Bábá audio
Ultimately, Maniiśánanda Dádá ji felt the need to organize his
collection by discourse name, place, and date etc. To that end,
he started reviewing the printed books of Ánanda Márga
philosophy to (a) find out what discourse was printed in which
book, and (b) take note of the discourse name and further
identifying information. In this process, one day in December
1990 while listening to a Bengali discourse and following along
with the printed version in the Bengali book, Dádá was
pleasantly surprised and pleased to find that a high percentage
of the recorded Bengali discourse neatly matched the printed
version of that Bengali discourse.
English & Hindi Books do not match
original Bábá audio
Later on that same day, while listening to a Hindi discourse and
simultaneously following the printed version in the Hindi book,
to his surprise Dádá discovered that the recorded discourse and
printed version did not match. Although it was the same
discourse, the printed version had been rewritten entirely and
did not reflect Baba’s original words. That was the moment he
realised that the printed Hindi books of Ánanda Márga philosophy
were not simply a transcription of the original audio recording.
The next day while listening to an English discourse and
following along with the printed version in the English book,
Dádá found that the recorded English discourse and English
printed text did not match either. The printed English edition
had been completely rewritten.
Dádá was deeply concerned that the Hindi and English printed
versions of a given discourse were not accurate renderings of
what Bábá spoke. Mahásambhúti Bábá was orally delivering His
discourses and Wts in the Tiljala Publications Department were
printing them in an entirely different manner. The subject was
basically the same, and the discourse date and place were the
same, but the actual sentences were drastically different, both
in terms of word choice and sequence. And sometimes that made
for a different meaning as well.
Centre’s bogus justification: Bangalisation
On this basis, Dádáji began discussing with Márgiis and other
WTs, and all were in basic agreement that this was a concerning
issue. Ultimately, Dádá Maniiśánanda raised the matter with
higher posted avadhútas and purodhas with the authority and
responsibility for printing Bábá’s books. Sadly, mostly those
Tiljala Publications in-charges and authority figures downplayed
the matter and responded with their own logic and reasoning. Far
and away however, the key justification Dádá Maniiśánanda heard
again and again from those in-charges was that the Hindi and
English audio discourses could not be transcribed and printed
“as-is” because they first had to be translated into Bengali.
Essentially what those in-charges were claiming was that:
(a) The audio recordings of Bábá’s original Hindi discourses
first had to be translated into Bengali; and then that
translated Bengali version would be treated as the master file;
then that Bengali version would be retranslated back into Hindi
in order to print the Hindi edition of the book.
(b) The audio recordings of Bábá’s original English discourses
first had to be translated into Bengali; and then that
translated Bengali version would be treated as the master file;
then that Bengali version would be retranslated back into
English in order to print the English edition of the book.
The above processes have come to be known as Bengalization /
Bangalisation.
Dádá Maniiśánanda never found their approach or explanations
satisfactory. It defied all logic and reasoning to treat audio
files of Bábá’s original English and Hindi discourses as being
inferior, inadequate, or useless, whereby they had to be first
translated into Bengali and then keep that Bengali as the master
version.
Why they expelled Dádá M
This fundamental difference in approach became the basis of a
long-standing disagreement between Dada Maniiśánanda and certain
Tiljala Publications in-charges. Over the years, many
conversations ensued. But all along, Dádá Sarvátmánanda held
firm to their point and insisted that the audio files of Bábá’s
original English and Hindi discourses were inferior in language
and expression. To eradicate this issue permanently, the then
General Secretary Sarvátmánanda, with the support of all Bengali
and Hindi group leaders, expelled Maniiśánanda. The first
attempt to expel him in January of 1994 was eventually
overturned but Sarvátmánanda gathered the necessary support to
permanently expel him on 30th November 1995, just before the
arms drop in Ánanda Nagar late 1995.
There was a concerted effort to permanently derail and halt the
movement for "as-is" discourses. To that nefarious end,
Sarvátmánandanda victimized and ultimately expelled Dádá
Maniiśánanda. They also went to the extent of justifying in
their audio remembrances, by their saḿsmarańa recordings, that
Bábá "wanted" all the discourses kept as "original Bengali".
This is just their bogus propaganda. Sadguru Bábá has never said
anywhere that such a narrow-minded plan like Bangalisation
should be implemented. How could Bábá have ordered to discard
all His English and Hindi GD and DMC discourse recordings.
In Him,
Debashish Ghosh
Mantreshwaranand, Mantreshvarananda, Mantreshvaranand, Mantreshvaránanda, Sarvátmánandand, Sarvatmanandanda, Sarvatmanandand, Sarvátmánandanda, Acyutananda, Acyutanand, Acyutánanda, Hariishanand, Hariishánanda, Rudrananda, Rudranand, Rudránanda
== Links ==
Previous postings:
