Talk:Undated Letter written to Anandmayee 005

From The Sannyas Wiki
Revision as of 02:09, 9 April 2020 by Sarlo (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Observations...

  • In the 3rd para of letter dated 8 Mar 61 the 1st line reads “मैं महावीर जयंती के लिए बंबई के आमंत्रण को स्वीकार कर लिया हूँ। - I have accepted invitation for Mahavir Jyanti from Bombay.” As per the Jain Festivals 1961 listed in the [Calendar 1961] : 2559th Birth Anniversary of Mahavir Swami Mahavir Jayanti falls on Thursday, March 30, 1961.
In the end of current letter Osho says: “I will be going to Bombay on 28th March and returning back on 1 or 2 April.”
PS of current letter cannot be part of letter on 8 Mar as: Osho mentioned in that letter (8 Mar) receiving of letters from Phadke Guruji and Ch. Padam and he says that will answer on them soon. Previous known letter from 1 Mar has already additional sheet with PS with answers to these two persons.
  • In 1st line of letter dated 16 Mar 61 Osho writes: “प्रणाम। पत्र मिले : खूब खुशी हुई। - Pranam. Received the letters - pleased lot.” (It can be inferred that the other letters might be from Shree Parakh Ji and Padam also.) Further in the 2nd para Osho writes: “श्री भीखमचंद जी देशलहरा के निमंत्रण पर मैं अपनी असमर्थता के लिए क्षमा मांग लिया था। आज उनका दूसरा पत्र आया है कि मैं आपको पहुँचने के लिए लिख दूँ। महावीर जयंती पर आप बुलडाना चली जायें तो अच्छा हो। - I had asked forgiveness for my inability to accept invitation of Shree Bhikhamchand Deshalhara. Received second letter from him today that, I suggest you to reach. So it would be good if you visit Buldhana on Mahavir Jayanti.”
In the same letter (16 Mar) in 4th para Osho says: “महावीर जयंती के बहुत से आमंत्रणों में एक जयपुर का आमंत्रण भी है। अब तो बंबई के बंध गया हूँ। - One of the many invitations of Mahavir Jayanti is the invitation of Jaipur. I am now tied to Bombay.”
  • From this manuscript transcribed and translated on main page we can see this Osho is addressing to Shree Parakh Ji, Chi. Padam and Ma in response to their letters each. Response to Ma is congruent with letters of 3 and 16 Mar as noted above. So it is very much possible that this PS is for the letter written on 16 Mar 61.

Above from Dilip with some additions from me. He is for 16 Mar. However i have other view: a) letter on 16 Mar has two sheets, then PS sheet should be 3rd sheet, unlikely? b) Style of writing in Letter 16 Mar (very plain lines, small right field) differs from style used in current PS (lines move down, big right field), to which (PS) suits well next letter from Letter written on 26 Mar 1961 pm; c) letter 26 Mar published in Bhavna on p 87 and this PS on next page.--DhyanAntar 09:17, 7 April 2020 (UTC)


Okay. As we have a disagreement between Antar and Dilip here, we have to proceed with some care and thoroughness. First, it will be good to be clear about our terms here. Let's look at the two letters being touted as the main page to which to attach this orphaned PS.

As i look at these two letters, 16 and 26 Mar, it looks like with "right field", you mean right margin. Is that correct? Then your observation about the writing styles makes sense and begins to help 005 connect with 26 Mar.

Similarly, "lines move down" vs "plain lines": that refers to the slant or levelness of the written lines, yes? And "lines move down" means as they go from left to right they become lower on the page, yes? That writing style observation also seems to work, ie it aligns 005 with 26 Mar more than with 16 Mar. And the page numbers in Bhavna also work to support that.

The file numbers work against that, though. 005's image file # is 810, 8 Mar's number 811, 16 Mar has two sheets, 812 and 813, and 26 Mar's number is far away at 814. Still, we can look more closely at all these sheets and discover something interesting that i missed the first time around:

For most of these sheets, there are comments about hand-written pale blue undecipherable marks. With the experience of looking at many of Anandmayee's later letters, we can get some help from these pale blue marks. What they are are numbers written on the back sides of letters by the compilers (Vikal Gautam, Anandmayee, etc), and when they show through the sheets' front sides, they become pale and mirror-image. And when we look at them reversed and turned 90º, lo! -- they make sense, they make a pattern:

file # letter date marks
810 undated 005 22 crossed out (changed to) 23
811 Mar 8 20 crossed out (changed to) 21
812 Mar 16 1st page no marks
813 Mar 16 2nd page 21 crossed out (changed to) 22
814 Mar 26 22 crossed out (changed to) 23

These numbers are believed to be a kind of system used by the compilers to organize the letters, probably for publication. That 810/005's and 814/Mar 26's numbers are the same looks to be the final clue needed to put them together.

About Dilip's text analysis, it is good but insufficient to establish a connection between 005 and Mar 16. "'Received the letters - pleased lot.' (It can be inferred that the other letters might be from Shree Parakh Ji and Padam also.)" Yes, it can be inferred that "letters" plural includes those from Parakh ji and Padam, but maybe it doesn't. Yes, he replies to them in this 005 letter which is all PS, but that reply was not necessarily on Mar 16, which already has two pages; OR his "received letters" might have referred to different letters. This inference does not look solid enough to build a case for Mar 16 when Mar 26 has so much going for it. -- doofus-9 02:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)