Talk:Path Ke Pradeep (पथ के प्रदीप): Difference between revisions

From The Sannyas Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 43: Line 43:
Let's ask Neeten what edition he has.
Let's ask Neeten what edition he has.


I moved old edition to this page added small note about its relation with 100 ch edition without evidence because of bureaucracy: too much time are needed for collecting evidence, descriring and making conclusions. I often jump from observations to conclusions. IF you guys are needed some details you are always welcome to ask about them.<br>Ok, here, on images at the right, are two letters from two editions.--DhyanAntar 06:14, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
I moved old edition to this page added small note about its relation with 100 ch edition without evidence because of bureaucracy: too much time are needed for collecting evidence, describing and making conclusions. I often jump from observations to conclusions. IF you guys are needed some details you are always welcome to ask about them.<br>Ok, here, on images at the right, are two letters from two editions.--DhyanAntar 06:14, 23 November 2020 (UTC)


<div class="tright" style="clear:none">[[image:Path Ke Pradeep, 1965 ed, letter 9.jpg|thumb|right|400px|letter #9 (1965 ed)]]</div>
<div class="tright" style="clear:none">[[image:Path Ke Pradeep, 1965 ed, letter 9.jpg|thumb|right|400px|letter #9 (1965 ed)]]</div>
Line 52: Line 52:
  |<div class="tright" style="clear:none">[[image:Path Ke Pradeep, 1966 ed, letter 84.jpg|thumb|right|400px|letter #84 (1966 ed)]]</div>
  |<div class="tright" style="clear:none">[[image:Path Ke Pradeep, 1966 ed, letter 84.jpg|thumb|right|400px|letter #84 (1966 ed)]]</div>
|}
|}
----
Neeten likely doesn't actually have an edition, he has just taken a pic long ago of it in India and been told it was from 1960-1963.
Thanks for your thoroughness here. That should take care of the matter. Such detail, as you have noted, is not always needed, but when there is conflicting info from another source, then yes. And you've done very well! Thanks! -- doofus-9 08:58, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:58, 23 November 2020

It is not precisely known when the camp in Matheran was, closer than "fall 1964" (and hence also unknown when the letters were written) but there is some justification for placing it around mid-Sep. It is nowhere near solid but the language and story-line in Gyan Bhed's book suggests it may have been only a few days to a week after a talk in Mumbai on Sep 10. And this will make the letters, at a presumed or plausible rate of one a day, mostly done by Dec 31, with possibly just a few written in Jan 1965. -- updated doofus-9 17:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)


Subtitle added on the basis of info received from Shailendra. There is a subtitle visible in the cover image but it is clearly too low-res to make out until now. -- doofus-9 23:55, 17 November 2017 (UTC)


The 20 letters to Sohan that were published in Flowers of Love have dates between 1964.10.26 and 1965.10.25. --Sugit (talk) 08:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


Source for this page is Neeten's Osho Source Book.

About the other book of the same title, it has been transliterated differently (Pradeep) so no need for fiddling with titles.


I don't agree with the title. In my opinion, where there are two books with the same Devanagari title (i.e. the only real title), the last one published should have a (2). --Sugit (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2018 (UTC)


I see you have already moved the other one to (2), so may as well just do it, although a case might be made for assigning the (2) not to the more recently published but to the one with the more recently created wiki page -- as is done with two people with the same names -- ie make THIS one (2). doofus-9 16:44, 4 August 2018 (UTC)


With people indeed I think there are no rules for who gets a (2). But for books I have always tried to give (2) to the later one. --Sugit (talk) 08:19, 18 December 2018 (UTC)


I have removed the reference to 11 early letters to Ma Yoga Sohan. This page belongs to a very old and small book(let) described by Neeten, long before we ever heard of letters to Sohan. If in fact there IS such a booklet of letters to Sohan and it is called Path Ke Pradeep (पथ के प्रदीप), it will be a third book with this title, not THIS one which belongs to the ancient talk in Jabalpur and published by a Digambara publishing group. -- doofus-9 04:36, 22 July 2019 (UTC)


That book has letters to Sohan, not ancient talk. They were identified and noted on main pages. So at first 11 letters were published then 100. Old page remove and the current get ridden of "(letters)" portion as not needed.--DhyanAntar 04:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


So you have verified that the earliest edition is eleven letters, particular numbered letters that are in all the later editions? The images from that earliest edition don't look like letter images. And Neeten has the booklet Path Ke Pradeep published earlier, in 1960-1963, before Osho started writing the hundred letters to Sohan. Neeten can be wrong, but it would be good to see a couple of specific letters compared to establish this, ie the same letter (#x) in the two "editions". You're sweeping away some long-established "info" without a demonstrated record of why your new view is the correct one. Thanks, doofus-9 23:26, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


The current booklet is edition of 11 letters, which description is:
"On the auspicious occasion of Sant Taaran Taran Jayanti, by courtesy of Seth Bhagwandas Shobhalal Jain, Sagar, we are offering you eleven nectar letters written by Most respectable Acharya Shri Rajneesh to Mrs. Sohan Bafna, Poona (Maharashtra). Thinking, contemplating, and living according to them can illuminate your life."

I have this edition and checked each letter. It was discovery of Shailendra about relation 11 ch. and 100 ch. editions. He also adds useful info on it:

These letters to Sohan were not written and posted in the usual way. Osho used to keep writing, and from time to time he used to post a bunch of letters to her. She was told to preserve these for future publication.
In a letter to Sohan dated 25 Feb. 1965 he wrote -- I am sending few letters, when 365 will be collected, then we will publish them as a book.
This is proof that PATH KE PRADEEP was not published before 1965. (Editor: this is answer on my question about year of publishing of earliest edition, 11 ch.)
This information may be useful (printed in first edition of Path Ke Pradeep, 1966, written by editor - Maanav, on page 14-15)- This is the fourth book by acharya rajneesh ji, first is SADHANA PATH, second is KRANTI BEEJ, and third is SINHNAAD.
1 Sadhana Path was published in DEC. 1964
2 Krantibeej was published in JAN. 1965
3 Sinhanad was published in AUG. 1965
4 PATH KE PRADEEP must be after AUG. 1965

Last statement of Shailendra related with 1966 edition as it was named by his editor.

In Letter written on 8 Sep 1966 Osho tells about receiving just published compilation of letters to Sohan with current title. It seems meant 1966 ed. of Vindhyachala Prakasan, Chhatarpur (MP) - edition of 100 letters. So 11 letters edition should be published much before.

Let's ask Neeten what edition he has.

I moved old edition to this page added small note about its relation with 100 ch edition without evidence because of bureaucracy: too much time are needed for collecting evidence, describing and making conclusions. I often jump from observations to conclusions. IF you guys are needed some details you are always welcome to ask about them.
Ok, here, on images at the right, are two letters from two editions.--DhyanAntar 06:14, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

letter #9 (1965 ed)
letter #82 (1966 ed)
letter #3 (1965 ed)
letter #84 (1966 ed)

Neeten likely doesn't actually have an edition, he has just taken a pic long ago of it in India and been told it was from 1960-1963.

Thanks for your thoroughness here. That should take care of the matter. Such detail, as you have noted, is not always needed, but when there is conflicting info from another source, then yes. And you've done very well! Thanks! -- doofus-9 08:58, 23 November 2020 (UTC)