| Contents: |
|---|
On Thursday 5th January 2006, Christophorus received the letter of a certain man, named Gerasim Galitonov, who expressed peculiar concerns pertaining to the translation of one of the lectures on this site, namely The Grain of Wheat. Christophorus decided to answer in an artistic form, reminiscent of a Platonic dialogue, inspired by the ancient Greek plays of Aeschylus and Menander, and resembling a 13th century disputa - a polemic. This artistic form was employed in order to ennoble and make more engaging the subject matter, and also in the hope that all readers - including the author of the letter - may be edified as much as can be possible. In this way an important objective is inventively achieved: the answering of a number of questions that people may, and have posed, or will pose in the future. Christophorus thanks Gerasim for sending his letter, and having given Christophorus the opportunity to write this work - it gave Christophorus great pleasure to be able to transform the rough material into something artistic that may enrich all people. In this way, something not intrinsically aesthetic - an answer to a rough, indecorous reproach - turns into an aesthetic dialogue or polemic, between two opposing views.
The reply containing the answered questions raised by the man Gerasim is included in Chapter 1. As new objections or queries emerge, they may graciously appear in more chapters to be answered in various artistic forms, and to be elucidated for the benefit of all readers. For "every one who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does what is true comes to the light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God". (Jn 3:20-21).
Christophorus was generously told by the man that the translation offered on this site is somehow imprecise, "not perfect", even erroneous - "wrong" (but simultaneously "better than the other"). Certainly, the predicate "perfect" only applies to the Divine, to God, but as for imprecise and "wrong" - one really needs to prove this quite rigourosly; and it is quite ridiculous when the claims for inaccuracy are themselves inaccurate! It is also very unfortunate, that the man rebuking the translation on this site has himself made a great number of mistakes in his English speech - this is not said with the purpose of being derogatory to the man, but simply highlights the inadequacy of such rebukes.
Incidentally, the same man happens to be (or at some point was) heavily involved in the translation efforts for the website that was referred in the man's letter. This web-site will not be disclosed, since Christophorus neither wishes to ridicule the site, nor to promote it.
Nevertheless, Christophorus thanks Gerasim for sending his letter, for it only aids to highlight the necessity, integrity and superiority of the translations made on this site. Let the reader excuse the seeming pomposity - this is merely a fact.
The concerns expressed by the man Gerasim are addressed completely and most fully by Christophorus below, so that no one will be left to speculate, and lest falsehoods such as those present in the letter begin to proliferate. It must also be noted that the address below is not a castigation of the man Gerasim, for every man has human dignity, which Christophorus respects and writes accordingly. It thus should not be taken as a personal letter of reply - for that it is certainly not - nor is it recalcitrant - for a significant effort has been made to make the exposition objective, and every effort has been made to make it objectively true.
Gerasim: a man writing a letter to Christophorus
Christophorus: an author and translator
Scene I: Comparison. How close to the Bulgarian originals are the translations made by Christophorus?
Gerasim's proposition:
Hi,
I compare translation of the 'Grain of wheat' from your site with the one from [a website]
and I came to the next conclusions:
1. Both translations are slightly different. Sometimes translation from your website is better and
closer to the original, sometimes not.
To this Christophorus replies:
The man Gerasim gratuitously sent Christophorus a Word Document comparing (automatically)
the translation made by Christophorus on this website, with the translation made on the website
mentioned by the man in his letter.
This wonderful document, shows - if there were any need to do so - that the translation made
by Christophorus is the exact equivalent of the Bulgarian text, so much so, that if one was
to translate back into Bulgarian, almost invariably, one would obtain the original Bulgarian
text unmodified - quite an achievement indeed, one that if the man Gerasim knew Bulgarian
as he claims he does, would notice immediately.
Scene II: Is there a need for a "real professional editor"? Are there mistakes in translations on this site?
Gerasim's proposition: 2. In both of translations, there are mistakes. Both of them need real professional editor.
To this Christophorus replies:
They do? But as far as the website mentioned by this man claims, the translation they have is
already edited by a "professional editor". And whoever knows Bulgarian, is free to check
that there are no mistakes in the translation made by Christophorus, although there are many in the
other. Again, this is not to say that the people who have spent time, energy and effort to translate
the Word of the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno) are to be reprimanded - for this in particular - but
that the claim made by the man Gerasim is simply a falsehood. And unfortunately for the man, this can
be freely checked by anyone who knows Bulgarian.
[Christophorus] Soliloquy:
It is interesting how one might believe that an editor, who does not know the original - nor can he understand it - can correct a manuscript. Surely, the English will flow and be correct, but - inevitably - there will be an introduction of mistakes from ignorance of the original Bulgarian. And hence there is a triple layer of modification: original, editor, and finally "professional editor". Certainly not a good idea!
[Christophorus] Soliloquy:
It is interesting how the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno) uses grammar, too. He does not always observe the rules of linguistic grammar - a challenge for the translator, to be sure. In fact, the Master does so on purpose, and explains this phenomenon in one of the lectures - the Word that the Master gives is no mere literature, and it is constructed in special ways. Therefore, if the English sounds strange on this site at times, it is not due to the lack of expertise of Christophorus, but it is an honest wish to keep the original Bulgarian grammar intact, as much as is possible. But there are no mistakes in the translations.
Scene III: Can these translations be perfect, or definitive?
Gerasim's proposition: 3. I thing translated lecture from your website is better, but not perfect.
To this Christophorus replies:
It is unusual that in point 1. the man refers to the translation on this web-site as sometimes
"better and closer to the original, sometimes not", and now, suddenly, he admits unequivocally that
the "translated lecture from your website is better".
It is beyond any and every doubt that ``the predicate "perfect" only applies to
the Divine''; and no translation is "perfect" in the sense of being the original - a translation
by definition is not the original itself - this would be confusing concepts. But the translation of
the The Grain of Wheat on this web-site is as close
as possible to being "definitive". Again, this is not an empty claim and it can be verified by
everyone who knows Bulgarian and deems precision of paramount importance.
Scene I: Does translation introduce mistakes? Admittance by Gerasim of editing used by others. What is the importance of "pure, authentic, unedited" translations?
Gerasim's proposition: 4. Differences between these translations are huge compared to any editorial changes in original Bulgarian texts, made by some publishing houses. So what's the point about saying on the main page of your website that there are 'deformed' lectures in Bulgarian language. It's clear to me that translation process is introducing much bigger differences and real deformations of the original meaning.
To this Christophorus replies:
There are two very important points to note, which the man Gerasim has unknowingly contributed.
Firstly, the man admits - quite plainly - that there are "editorial changes in original Bulgarian texts,
made by some publishing houses", and thus justifies completely the necessity of a new translation -
because the publishing house he refers to is the web-site that he also refers to in the beginning of his
letter. Secondly, the statement that "translation process is introducing much bigger differences and
real deformations of the original meaning" and others like it, presumes that the readers of this text
do not know a word of Bulgarian - but if they do, as often happens to be the case - they will find for
themselves (by simply comparing "The Grain of Wheat" here,
to "Jitnoto Zarno"
in Bulgarian) that not only is there no "deformation", but that the translation made by Christophorus on
this web-site is - as far as the languages permit - the exact equivalent, in English, of the text in
Bulgarian.
[Christophorus] Soliloquy:
Now, why is purity and authenticity so vital, so absolutely necessary?
The disciple of the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno) should "eat well, work well, live well". However,
to eat well one must have pure food. To live well, one must have eaten pure food and drunk pure water.
Is it right to offer one's brothers and sisters poisoned food and contaminated water? Certainly, it
is not, and this belief is what lies at the foundation of this site.
And it is written: "Truth is the Head of Your Word". How sad it is to see those, who by editing, attempt to
correct and perfect the Living God of all Perfection. Does one think that by removing a paragraph, a
sentence, even a word, that one is stating the Truth better than the source of Truth Itself? Indeed, many
believe this, and do likewise. And it is strange that people desire their own works to be intact, yet feel
bold and courageous to edit the words of another, even of God. It is unworthy to judge this, although "I
have much to say about you, and much to judge"; "but He who sent me is true" (Jn 8:26). Therefore, this site
aims to remedy the situation, by giving the ability to all people unable to read Bulgarian, an opportunity
to find the living bread of life in the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno)'s Word, in its pure,
authentic state.
Scene II: Repose
Gerasim's proposition: I'm sending you track-changes of my work (attached as word file), so you can take a look of what I'm talking about. Perhaps you should ask for help some good professional editor.
To this Christophorus replies:
Does the man Gerasim suggest himself here? Christophorus would never hire him.
Scene III: Does one have to be Bulgarian to translate? Are you Bulgarian?
Gerasim's proposition: I have no idea are you Bulgarian, but if translation is made by not-bulgarian, it is wrong.
To this Christophorus replies:
Automatically? Even if they know Bulgarian better than Bulgarians? That is strange, is it not?
The man Gerasim proposes the following: "if 'not Bulgarian', then 'wrong'". But, "if Bulgarian", then
this does not imply "right". So, it seems that only Bulgarians of a special class can produce
"right" translations. Quite an interesting argument from the logical point of view, but, unfortunately,
incorrect.
Scene IV: Do we understand the Teaching of the Master? Is it only for Bulgarians?
Gerasim's proposition: Original texts are difficult for understanding sometimes even to Bulgarians (I'm one of them).
To this Christophorus replies:
To believe that one understands the Word of the Master is delusion,
to profess so to others is arrogance. The Master says about this in one of the Morning Talks:
"I understand you, you do not understand me".
And there is nothing embarrassing, or boastful, about being Bulgarian, and as noted carefully above,
the argument that only Bulgarians can understand the Word seems, to say the least, offensive.
The teaching of the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno) is for every human being - for Bulgarians and
non-Bulgarians alike, and can be understood, or misunderstood, equally by everyone.
Scene V: Is Christophorus able to translate? By what methods?
Gerasim's proposition: A lot of the words used in these lectures are obsolete and not used in today's language. I have some experience with multi-language translations, and trust me, these translations should be made by Bulgarian translators.
To this Christophorus replies:
Christophorus, too, has "some experience with multi-language translations"; and it is difficult to
trust someone who has exhibited (1) logical flaws, (2) falsehoods, (3) incorrect grammar
and (4) an incorrect conception of translation - but even more difficult when one has already
quite significant experience in the area, as can be witnessed by every single person - including
the man Gerasim - on this web-site at the very least in the translation of
The Grain of Wheat.
Gerasim's proposition: Later they should be improved by people knowing very well English grammar and using this language in their natural environment.
To this Christophorus replies:
So, first one cannot translate well unless being (a rather special) Bulgarian, and now suddenly,
one can only translate well if being non-Bulgarian, because the results would be grammatically flawed
otherwise.
But, what happens if the translation needs no improvement? And what occurs if the original
person knows "very well English grammar" or "using this language in their natural environment"?
This, for sure, is the personal approach to translation of the man Gerasim, and therefore of the site
he mentions. But this does not necessitate that it must become anyone else's approach, especially when
it is not required.
[Christophorus] Soliloquy:
At this point, it should be mentioned that to translate the Word of God for money is - like editing - "disapproved by Christophorus". This approach, taken by the above mentioned web-site, cannot lead to good results.
Scene VI: Does Christophorus do original translations?
Gerasim's proposition: Don't you think is better to start translating some lectures, which are not translated up to this moment. Otherwise is not clear, are you copying/editing some other existing translations, or you are doing original translations.
To this Christophorus replies:
All translations made by Christophorus are original, made from absolute zero - from scratch.
They do not refer to other translations, do not use them, and do not consider them to even exist.
This is done out of principle.
As for translating untranslated works - other than the fact that for Christophorus nothing is translated unless it is translated from the original sources - this is already done. Such lectures will be released through time. And why start with "Behold the Man!" and "The Grain of Wheat"? Because they are the first two public lectures by the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno). Naturally, everyone begins with these lectures, but they have never been translated originally from the un-edited sources.
Scene VII: Why does Christophorus translate lectures that have already been translated?
Gerasim's proposition: There are 4000 lectures, and I still cannot understand why every translator is starting from the same point - the same, existing lectures. Have you idea that some of the lectures are translated already 3-4 times independently? Are you going to be next one? Thing about it.
To this Christophorus replies:
After doing a lot of "thinging", as Gerasim expresses it, one can only come to the conclusion that
new translations of the same work are made for the reason of improving over previous attempts.
And the translation of The Grain of Wheat on this site
is such an improvement. Furthermore, the man Gerasim seems to show total unwillingness in accepting the
statements he himself has verified - that lectures available from the web-site he mentions are edited,
not pure and not authentic. Therefore, new translations are required to give non-Bulgarian speaking people
the opportunity to experience the true Word of the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno).
Scene VIII: Does Christophorus know about other existing efforts of translation?
Gerasim's proposition: At the moment I'm trying to point-out which of the documents are already translated. Take a look at: [a website]
To this Christophorus replies:
Christophorus is very well aware of all the currently translated lectures, and of all the ongoing efforts
of translation. As was stated in the main page, "of those lectures currently
available in English, many are edited and modified yet again!" - joyfully verified by Gerasim - on top of
the original modifications already present in the extant Bulgarian originals used.
Scene I: Can these translations be improved? What requirements are necessary to make a good translation?
Gerasim's proposition:
However, I like your work. I hope you will continue with translation of the lectures,
because people from the entire world are waiting for them. I believe you will really improve quality of
the current document (and next documents as well). I wish you success with these translations.
I can tell you, some day you job will give a good fruit.
OM
Gerasim
To this Christophorus replies:
The man Gerasim is entirely correct, for the first time, in saying that "people from the entire world
are waiting for them" - but they are waiting for the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno)'s lectures,
as the Master himself gave them, not as another person has modified them.
And they require translations incredibly precise, totally accurate and scholarly,
from the original, pure, undefiled Word of God - like translations on this site!
Furthermore, by publishing The Grain of Wheat -
a translation that can hardly be improved in any way - this site has already given "good fruit",
because one lecture translated to these standards, un-edited and authentic, is worth more than the
4000 lectures translated imprecisely, edited, modified and defiled.
[Christophorus] Soliloquy:
Christophorus wishes that Gerasim, and his team, may take example from the work on this site, and may do likewise - not as now - and make the necessary efforts required for disseminating the true, pure, authentic Word of the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno), so that they, along with all those who accept the Word, may abide in the Love of God.
---===[][][]===---
Christophorus has become aware - shamefully not from the original authors - that certain vilifications are being proliferated about this web page (``The English Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno) Home Page''). Christophorus is extremely glad that this web page has become so very contentious and so highly controversial - it bespeaks well of it, for it represents the lamp of the Truth, and "no one after lighting a lamp puts it in a cellar or under a bushel, but on a stand, that those who enter may see the light" (Lk 11:33).
For the benefit of the readers, the debate will be reproduced here in full (see below), where no one can edit and change the evidence.
In the opening note made on Wikipedia on the 26 Jan 2006 (incidentally, just after the placement of the new lecture The Appearance of the Spirit) the "Brotherly Council" of the organization "Obshtestvo Bqlo Bratstvo" complains against someone who has placed a link to these web pages on Wikipedia. A later note reproaches (yet again) this web page, this time, however, spreading various aspersions in an attempt to defame the page, in the meanwhile having no fear to say many falsehoods - "no fear", but "in the Endless Love" they say, (mis)using a sacred formula by the Master, in the attempt to reconcile Love and falsehood. The notes are most interesting, to be sure, but most ignoble, to be certain.
The notes further state that this web page contains "incorrect and incorrect information".
Incorrect information it does not contain, but "incorrect and incorrect" information - even less!
On the contrary, this web page contains "correct and very correct" information that perhaps may distinguish
other sites as "incorrect and rather incorrect", but this contradistinction is something that is being
exploited for no noble cause.
Yet again the notes state that this web page has also "destroyed and demolished the Word of Master Beinsa
Douno". But, can it be demolished? Can the Word of God ever be abolished? It may be, however, that certain
organizations are anxious that their deeds may be revealed, and that thereby their reputation may be
denigrated and demolished and abolished, or with lesser strength: denigrated or demolished or abolished.
And in the latest note, the English capabilities of Christophorus are attacked (for want of anything
better): apparently they are "not good" - yet their capabilities quite obviously are: "THERE IS NO any
English Master Peter Deunov". Oh dear! What impeccable grammar, what amazing vernacular - perhaps they
should revisit their primary school English teacher. But, let the reader better versed in English judge
for themselves what is quite plain to see - that these people look ridiculous.
Come to Christophorus to raise your questions and discuss your problems, do not hide in cowardice behind other places such as Wikipedia and the like. But you do not come, lest your deeds be exposed, for your deeds are wrought in darkness, (Jn 3:20), lying that you have contacted Christophorus, but have not.
But who are you, about whom Christophorus has until now written so subtly, wishing to reprimand no-one, to apply the principle of brotherhood, which you only profess but do not apply in the least part?
For those to whom subtlety means naught, Christophorus will elucidate more clearly - you are those who consider yourselves as the leaders of the Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria, who have nothing to do with the White Brotherhood, and who lie and cheat while promoting your edited lectures of the Master, calling them "original" for pretence and sedulously striving to suppress this web page, which at once exposes your deeds - thus being mightily dangerous for you - and simultaneously offers better translations which you steal for use. And of these organizations which you now build, it is written: "there shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." (Mt 24:2). The Master says, "If you build a church for me, I will come and destroy it". Behold, the Master comes to destroy it, and it destroys itself, by perverting the Word of God and spreading it with lies. Christophorus will not judge this, there is One who will judge. But the true, pure Word of Christ stands firm on these pages, and of those who work against it is written: "he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God". (Jn 3:18)
---======---
Below is an internal link reproducing the debate from Wikipedia, taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Peter_Deunov, verbatim, omitting the Wikipedia administrators and all links given; the text is covered by the GFDL license.
{ Wikipedia debate }
---===[][][]===---
On 29 Jan 2006 at 20:31 UTC, an officious posting was made to Wikipedia, with great officiality.
Filip Filipov - the official coordinator for translations of the Society White Brotherhood,
Bulgaria - joyfully left the statement (signed with the name "galactic radiance") unanswered in silent
accordance, whereby it can only be concluded - beyond any doubt - that this is the official view taken
by the official site of the Society White Brotherhood, Bulgaria - and their official publishing house
"Byalo Bratstvo".
Incidentally, Christophorus can conjecture with prodigious certainty who the author of the posting is.
It states, amongst its many interesting tenets, that there is no such thing as the Pure Word, saying further that all those who believe in this are "purists". Most excellent - Christophorus is infinitely pleased to be called a "purist" and "pure", whereby all those who edit and modify can safely be termed "dirty". And so there are two sects which follow the Teaching of the Master, "pure" and "dirty". The reader can now make an informed decision about whose translations to read.
But, as it turns out, no-one is sure what the original lectures are like, and even deciphering the original stenographic documents (taken by 3 people independently) is erroneous. Can this be true? Is there then any valid reason to publish lectures by the Master at all then, and, in this case, are not edited lectures also full of grave, grave errors? Do the leaders of the Society and the Brotherly Council desire to undermine their own efforts, also? Let us consider an elementary logical statement: If the pure Word does not exist, then they wish to undermine their efforts. They do not wish to undermine their efforts; therefore, the pure Word exists (modus tollens). Dialectic is wonderful, is it not?
But the most outstanding achievement of the announcement is that it admits, or rather posits, that editing and modification is not only essential to their translations and "original" preservation of the Master Peter Deunov's lectures, but that the Word of God is also (in the words of the announcement) "very poor" and rather "illetarate" which "should be edited" to a higher, "intelligent" "level". Well, well - let the readers verify for themselves whether this is so, from the translations published by Christophorus - they are wonderfully precise and true to the authentic sources. But by saying this the author of the announcement offends the Spirit of the Word, and they "dishonor Me" (Jn 8:49); for this it is written: "whoever says a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come" (Mt 12:32). So, why then do these people seek to infuse such deceitful doubts in the hearts of men regarding the authenticity of the Word? Why do they astutely seek to suppress this web page which contains the true Word of the Master? They well know where stands the true Word, they have been told already. But "if I tell you the truth, why do you not believe me? He who is of God hears the words of God; the reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God" (Jn 8:46-47) Therefore, you do all this because "you cannot bear to hear My Word" (Jn 8:43). It is amazing, but not suprising, that someone has already noticed and has already seen, as Christophorus has, that "you betray your Master with a kiss" (Lk 22:48).
(The official announcement is reproduced in full here, so that no one may edit and change the evidence; the text is covered by the GFDL license)
O, irrational people that fight against the Word of Christ, hear and see these words, "hear and hear but do not understand, see and see but do not perceive" (Is 6:9), lest you see with your eyes, and hear with your ears, and understand with your hearts, and turn to Him and be healed (Is 6:10).
"Woe to the rebellious children," says the Lord, "who carry out a plan, but not Mine; and who make a league, but not in My Spirit, that they may add sin to sin" (Is 30:1), for "well did the prophet Isaiah prophecy of you hypocrites: `this people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men'" (Mk 7:6-7)
"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!" (Is 5:20), for you know what you do.
"Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees, and the writers who keep writing oppression, to turn aside the needy from justice and rob the poor of My people of their right" (Is 10:1-2), for their right is to hear the pure and living Word of God.
"Woe to you, destroyer, who yourself have not been destroyed; you treacherous one, with whom none has dealt treacherously! When you have ceased to destroy, you will be destroyed; and when you have made an end of dealing treacherously, you will be dealt with treacherously." (Is 33:1)
Therefore thus says the Holy One of Israel: "Because you despise this Word, and trust in oppression and perverseness, and rely on them; therefore this iniquity shall be to you like a break in a high wall, bulging out, and about to collapse, whose crash comes suddenly, in an instant; and its breaking is like that of a potter's vessel which is smashed so ruthlessly that amongst its fragments not a sherd is found" (Is 30:12-14).
This is the last reply by Christophorus to your attacks and your complaints, for you "have become
a burden to me" (Is 1:14) and have diminished your dignity to nothing; "Behold your house is forsaken.
And I tell you, you shall not see me until you say, `Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!'"
(Lk 13:35). "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand" (Mt 3:2), and behold, it is "suddenly upon you"
and you do not know it.
Christophorus will not build the Temple of God with you, Christophorus will build it alone (1 Esdr 5:70)
as the Lord, the Holy One of Israel has commanded.
---===[[]][[]][[]]===---
The text on this web site is Copyright (c) Christophorus 2006-2015 and the translations are Copyright (c) their respective authors (all rights reserved) - all for the sake of them not being edited; No translation on this web site of the Word of the Master Peter Deunov (Beinsa Douno) is based upon copyrighted material.