== "ART" OF SARVATMANANDJI ==
Namaskar,
Recently, Ananda Vacanamrtam Part 11-12 (2008) was published by the
Tiljala faction's Publications Department. They went to great lengths to
talk about what a noble job they did and how meticulous they are in
their work.
In their Publisher's Note in the beginning of AV 11-12 (2008), the
Tiljala captains use words and phrases like: (a) "carefully re-checked
against that tape-recorded voice of the author, and re-transcribed where
necessary"; (b) "we have identified all such corrections"; (c) "the
editors do not alter pronouns"; (d) "meticulous efforts were made to
authenticate"; "(e) etc, etc.
By reading the above, one would assume that each and every discourse
printed in AV 11-12 is in tip-top shape, with few or no errors.
Unfortunately, the opposite is the case. Every discourse of AV-12 (2008)
is literally filled with piles and piles of errors. Every discourse-- no
exceptions, period.
All errors made and committed by the Tiljala Publications team led by
Sarvatmananda.
As a case example, attached is a word document of the entire discourse,
'The Real Value of Human Entity'. In red with cross-outs are all the
wrong things that the Tiljala camp inserted into the printed version of
the discourse; in green are words Baba actually spoke that were not
included in the printed discourse.
That is why many joke that the recent publication of AV-12 (2008) is not
so much a transcription of Baba's discourse, but rather a display of
Sarvatmananda's artwork, as he had the esteemed duty of doing the "final
transcription" of the discourse. This has been clearly written in the
'Publisher's Note': Sarvatmananda did the "checked and rechecked" the
transcription (p. xxviii). Yet when Sarvatmananda's "transcription"
strays so very far from Baba's actual words, then people humorously
refer to that type of transcription as Sarvatmananda's artwork, not
Baba's discourse.
MORE ABOUT THIS LETTER
By viewing the attachment, it is quite evident that throughout the
entire discourse, there are many, many mistakes. Too many to count and
describe in this letter. So, only those grave mistakes which represent
the most critical errors with philosophical blunders have been
elaborated upon in this email. All other small errors can be seen by
opening the attachment.
Finally, all the below errors are quite apparent so I am not explaining
at length; the errors are very obvious blunders; any margii or learned
person can understand if one wishes.
BIG BLUNDER #1: 'WHO AM I'
In paragraph #5 of the attached discourse, the question is posed, "Who
am I?'
In response, the Tiljala team wrongly transcribed, "His; thou comest",
as if to say that 'You, Parama Purusa come from Parama Purusa, i.e. the
I-feeling of Parama Purusa comes from Parama Purusa.
But this it is a totally wrong transcription and misleading rendition of
Baba's discourse.
Baba actually says, "his; he cometh", meaning that in meditation the
sadhaka got the answer that 'he', i.e. the sadhaka's I-feeling, comes
from Parama Purusa.
This is the proper transcription and meaning of Baba's discourse. Proof
being that throughout Baba's many discourses, Baba poses this similar
question and the answer is, 'I (the jiivatma or unit being) come from
Parama Purusa'.
So this is the only way to transcribe and interpret Baba's discourse.
Hence, what Baba actually has spoken holds deep meaning. The way the
Tiljala team printed it has no sense at all.
Even then the Tiljala camp may have their own justification for their
so-called great work. But their justification will be meaningless.
Because:
(1) If anyone listens to the sound file, Baba clearly says "his, he
cometh", not the fake transcription which Tiljala printed.
(2) The way Baba originally spoke holds deep meaning and value, whereas
the way Tiljala printed the discourse is nonsensical. It is useless and
inaccurate as that is not what Baba spoke.
So that is the first major blunder and philosophical misnomer from
Tiljala's printed version of this discourse in AV-12 (2008).
BIG BLUNDER #2: PHYSICAL STRUCTURE NOT MENTAL STRUCTURE
In paragraph #6, the Tiljala transcription team wrongly transcribes and
totally misconstrues Baba's discourse.
The Tiljala team writes as if Baba is only talking about the limitation
of the physical or material structure of the human being. They
transcribed paragraph #6 in this type of wrong way.
When in fact, Baba is talking about the mental structure and about how
the jiivatma loses his mental or unit identity.
And indeed in so many discourses Baba presents this same idea.
Baba says, "What is the Supreme Entity? How should human beings try to
understand Him? When a doll made of salt wants to fathom the depths of
the ocean, the doll itself becomes lost in the ocean. Likewise, how far
can human beings move with their limited intellect? At a particular
stage the human intellect loses itself, the mind loses its identity it
stops functioning. The intellect can at most go to that particular point
and try to depict objects in its own limited way." (AMIWL-10)
Hence, Baba is talking about the mind becoming lost in the ocean of
Cosmic Consciousness; He is not talking about the limitation of the
physical stratum.
But once again, the Tiljala Publications team led by Sarvatmananda
totally drops the ball on this and leads the reader into the dark.
Once again, Tiljala may have their own justification, but that will not
be worthwhile.
Because:
(1) What Baba spoke they did not write
(2) What Tiljala wrote is totally wrong and confusing.
BIG BLUNDER #3: "5600 YEARS AGO"
In one very significant part of the discourse, paragraph #13, Baba is
discussing the use of language and He clearly says that those Vaedika
Aryans learned to write about 5000 years ago.
But even this simple number, the Tiljala team distorted. They printed,
"5600 years ago". But that is wrong. Baba did not say that.
Baba spoke, "5000 years ago".
And Baba is detailing that the Aryans did not have any written script
before then, only the non-Aryans had script earlier. So the Aryans
learned how to write later than or after the non-Aryans. That is Baba's
point, and being omniscient Baba surely knows exactly when those Aryans
learned how to write, which was "5000 years ago".
But those in the Tiljala Publications office wrongly wrote 5600 years
ago" because it seems they thought they knew better than Baba, but
their miscalculation is based on when the non-Aryans learned how to
write, not when the Aryans learned how.
So that is yet another clear-cut blunder by Sarvatmananda & Co. It is
shocking how they feel the need to "correct" Baba's discourses when in
reality Baba Himself is omniscient and His knowledge is perfect. In that
case, what is the need for Sarvatmananda to continually change Baba's
words.
Let us not forget that this discourse was spoken by Baba in English; all
that was needed was to write down those words-- period. But with their
little brain, they began changing Baba's original words. That is the
problem, otherwise what can be the explanation.
BIG BLUNDER #4: "SERPENTINE NOOSE"
In paragraph #18, the Tiljala team makes such a gross error, one can
only wonder how they made such a ridiculous mistake.
After all, Tiljala Publications proudly states again and again how they
have first editors, second editors, final editors, and teams of
transcribers etc, everyone checking and re-checking the discourse. Yet
in the end they commit such a blunder like this one, it only makes one
wonder what their team is thinking about when they do their work.
The Tiljala team wrongly wrote, "'serpentine noose', a noose which
catches a snake like this".
Baba actually spoke, "'serpentine noose', a noose of snake, snake
catches like this".
So, the Tiljala team is wrongly saying that a serpentine noose is that
type of noose which catches a snake.
When in fact Baba is saying that a serpentine noose is how a snake
catches something.
In their faulty version, the snake is caught; in Baba's original version
the snake catches something.
That is the dramatic mistake. So two thing happened. (1) They wrongly
transcribed the discourse and (2) with their tiny intellect they got a
totally flip-flopped understanding of what Baba was telling. And the
things is this is not an obscure point. In dozens and dozens of
discourses, Baba repeatedly uses the term 'serpentine noose', but even
then this basic point Tiljala wrongly wrote and misrepresented.
BIG BLUNDER #5: "COMMON GENDER WORDS"
In the Publisher's Note on page xix, Tiljala boasts how "in the case of
discourses originally given in English, the editors do not alter
pronouns and other terms which the author in his lifetime considered
'common-gender' words."
So this is the promise that Sarvatmananda has given.
Yet see here what they did in paragraphs #18 & #19. They betrayed their
own rule so many times in just these two paragraphs:
(1) Changed 'him' to 'you';
(2) Changed 'him' to 'them';
(3) Changed 'he' to 'a person';
(4) Changed 'man' to 'person';
(5) Changed 'him" to 'a person';
(6) Changed 'man' to person';
(7) Changed 'him' to 'you'.
And the above errors happened in just two paragraphs.
ALL THE DISCOURSES ARE LIKE THIS
Tragically, this discourse, 'The Real Value of the Human Entity', is not
an anomaly. All the discourses which Tiljala transcribes are full of
hundreds and hundreds of errors. All are bad and done in a sloppy,
distorted manner. This is especially the case with the English and Hindi
discourses.
Again, here we are not talking about the subtle nuances of translation,
but rather gross and deliberate errors in transcription. There is no
fine line of interpretation involved.
The basic and fundamental problem is that Baba what spoke they did not
write. Yet with big pomp and show, they praise themselves up to the sky
that they have checked everything perfectly and their discourse is
highly accurate. As if they worked so hard to make it perfect. When in
fact they took what should be an easy job and created thousands of errors.
Tiljala has the original tape and they have computers and they have
typists. That is all that is needed to properly transcribe a discourse.
But this they cannot do, reasons best known to them.
And on the top, they absolutely refuse to share the cassette as they
wish to keep not only margiis but their own helpers in the dark. Now we
can understand why: Because what team Tiljala has done is utter
nonsense. There is no other way to put it. And that is why they do not
want to share the cassette. Because then it will blatantly expose their
hypocritical and deceitful ways.
HELPERS SHOULD ABANDON SHIP
Tiljala team has recruited many helpers to "support" them in their
translation and transcription work. These well-intentioned margiis who
help team Tiljala are: Gayatrii Ghista (USA), Taraka Ghista (USA),
Dharma Curl, Suvrata Sarkar, Devashiisha (Puerto Rico), Madhava Basak,
Kirit Dave (USA) etc.
All these simple and innocent margiis piously thought they were doing
justice to Baba's discourses when in fact they unfortunately got duped
and roped into collaborating in sin by wrongly printing the Lord's
discourses. They got sucked into being accomplices in Sarvatmananda's
gang. That is the travesty. Good people getting tricked into wrongful
dealings.
The best advice for such persons is to jump ship and give up their work
of "helping" Tiljala Publications, i.e. Sarvatmananda's gang. That is
the best way to save Baba's discourses at the present moment. Creating
more and more distorted books only multiplies the harm.
BABA'S BLESSING
It is a tragedy to see how team Tiljala has utterly mangled Baba's holy
discourses. Their book AV-12 (2008) is full of countless errors. Let us
never forget Baba's divine guideline.
Baba says, "The scriptures containing spiritual injunctions must be
totally flawless." (NSS)
Namaskar,
Gagan
Note: OTHER POSTINGS DETAILING ERRORS IN AV-12 (2008)
Here are some of the other postings detailing the gross errors in Ananda
Vacanamrtam Part 12 (2008):
http://am-global-01.blogspot.com/2008/10/re-proof-of-distortion-in-new-book-av.html
http://am-global-01.blogspot.com/2008/08/proof-of-distortion-in-new-book-av-11.html
http://am-global-01.blogspot.com/2008/09/proof-of-hypocrisy.html
*********************************************
UNKNOWN FACT ABOUT WEALTH
Parama Purusa BABA says, "In the subtle economic sense, the value of
wealth is the real wealth. Wealth, if not properly defined, may mean
only riches. But the value of wealth is to be measured in terms of its
capacity to purchase commodities. That is, the purchasing capacity of
wealth is its real value. This real value of wealth has not yet been
properly understood in numerical terms by economists." (Proutist
Economics, p. 269)
*********************************************
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comment here