Outrageous Agenda of Calcutta Group: Lame Excuse for Deletion

From: "K.Singh" <ksingh203@shoretrust-.....>
To: ananda-marga-discourses@googlegroups.com
Subject: Outrageous Agenda of Calcutta Group: Lame Excuse for Deletion
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2013 20:49:06

BABA

Outrageous Agenda of Calcutta Group

Lame Excuse for Deletion

Namaskar

I would like to address a matter brought up by the Kolkata Group Representative in his point number five:

"5. In order for you to understand the difficulties in the translation work, try to translate one of Baba's articles entirely by yourself. Then pass it on to other qualified people and see what they tell you about the mistakes in your translation.  This will tell you real problem faced in the work. It is not some kind of conspiracy and ill intent on our part. The real problems are many varied. To name a few: the material is intuitional in nature, the English language has its limitations in expressing the concepts... And you have valid point about the sanctity of the books .. who can disagree on that and errors must be corrected. All you need to do is to point out the error..."

Subtle Issues in Translation to Be Appreciated

The matters you raise are present to be sure. There are many subtle nuances in translation work, and being able to portray the meaning as well as the feeling (bha'va) conveyed in a discourse needs real skill.

Leaving out Sections of Discourse: Not part of Subtleties of Translation

But the issues being raised here are not of that sort of subtle nature. In the case of the discourse "The Lord's Feet", Baba raised a critical point that the blind ego expressed by Gayasura when he went against his Lord Visnu, was the same as the blind ego expressed by Central dadas of 1971 who went against Baba. And Baba's point was just plain left out by the translators. Here we are not at issue with the style of translation; we are expressing outrage that the three sentences were not translated at all: they were LEFT OUT.

Distinction Between Subtleties & Gross Negligence

I hope the distinction I am making is clear. When particular sentences are translated, then there may be discussion as to the way some phrases were worded in translation. In such cases we should have tolerance and appreciation for the efforts put forth in translation. Because such issues are subtle and require in depth evaluation and skill. But there is a night and day difference between subtle issues as this, and gross negligence in leaving out entire sections of discourses. It is the Publishers duty to include everything Baba said, and if sections and paragraphs are left out, then that constitutes failure to comply with the basic duties of publishing Guru's work.

To put it simply: One cannot justify leaving out sections of a discourse on the excuse that translation is hard work. If a section is left out, it means translation was not even done: you just left out the section. This amounts to basic negligence of duty.

Pointing Out Errors: Only Useful when Action is Taken

You state no one disagrees that errors should be corrected, and "all Margiis need to do is point out the error". That sort of thing can be said when response is being given and action taken in a timely way. But literally hundreds of errors have been pointed out in the last thirteen years, and not a single one has been repaired. Egregious errors of leaving out entire paragraphs, mixing up one half of a discourse with another and printing it as one, translating discourses given in English and Hindi into Bangla and then re-translating into English and Hindi for printing-- rather than printing Baba's original words. So many errors have been brought to Kolkata publishers so many times...and nothing done. How long will we go on hearing this tale that "all you need to do is point out the errors". After the passing of years with no indication of any action, then one loses faith in the sincerity of such invitations to "point out errors". 

At His feet,
Kailash Singh