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:
Reply to: anandamargadiscourses@sunlink.net
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:
