Re: Sri Aurobindo and the Future of Humanity
by Rich on Sat 18 Oct 2008 11:25 AM PDT Profile Permanent Link ... one comes to believe in an Avatar, there is no Avataric epistemology rather it is an article of faith.
Additionally what one calls sincere spiritual sadhana is a subjective judgment. For one to make a judgment about another's spiritual practice is wrought with danger. Who can fairly make an objective judgment as to whether another person's subjective sadhana is "sincere or spiritual? The only judgments that can be made would be to use the norms of some moral, ethical, interpretative laws of a community claiming to be the faithful.
In fact however, Sri Aurobindo had a distrust of collectives and groups. His yoga places responsibility solely on the individual. In speaking about the Gnostic Community , he makes it clear that he is speaking about a collective of Gnostic individuals. To condemn someone's individual sadhana because it does not conform to the standards judged to be proper by a collective or group that claims for itself the sole authority and arbiter of truth in the matter seems to me to be a gross distortion of Sri Aurobindo's work. rc Reply
In response to comments I have seen from those leading the charge to ex-communicate PH, namely, that any former editor of this forum was removed from SCIY for posting against the Lives of Sri Aurobindo, let me clarify what actually happened.
That editor (RYD) had posted for weeks both his and those of others vitriolic attacks on the character of the author of the book. In short someone described these post as character assassination. Unlike the forum used by those engaged in the hysteria against this book, we take a more civil tone here.
In fact our guidelines start out as follows: Posts may not contain content that is: Vulgar or offensive; Inflammatory; Excessively outside of the scope of the current topic; Directed at specific individuals in an inappropriate manner; Commercial in nature; and/or Incomprehensible or extremely lengthly. SCIY Administrators are the sole arbiters and enforcers of these guidelines.
The former editor took his post down himself after it was brought to his attention that his post violated these principles. Moreover, it came to the fore that both he and the other ringleaders of the movement against the book had taken large copyrighted portions from the book and selectively omitted them quoting them entirely out of context to fuel the fires of hatred.
That is why we have posted the corrected excerpts with permission here. So if anyone wants to post passages from the book that come under "fair use" provisions of copyright law and make their comments in a manner that respects the guidelines of this forum you are welcome to do so. But I do request that if you want to post on this book to first read it entirely, before you post Reply Reply