Thursday, October 21, 2010

It looks like as if Sri Aurobindo has corrected his own works

From Sunil sunilauro@gmail.com to tusarnmohapatra@gmail.com date 21 October 2010 00:16 subject For posting

The key person involved in the tampering is Peter along with Richard and Bob and god knows who else, with a background of supporters who talk how Sri Aurobindo does not know his English and how they have to rectify the works to go along with the times. These conversations I was witness to when I was in Lodi centre in California. I had raised objections and that is recorded in Peter’s talk in 1998.

The thing is that they have worked very well, a very thorough job, a fool proof plan, that is why they challenge with authority that Peter has done no editing and we are all clean. Yes they are clean in covering their tracks, but their tracks cannot cover the consciousness which betrays out the fact of what is divine and undivine.  Their foolproof plan goes somewhat like this:

1. That they did not do any editing it was authorised by Nirodbaran and Amal Kiran. So they get a letter signed from them. Amal Kiran and Nirodbaran whom the Mother calls morons have no authority. But they have been peddling strongly that they do have the authority as they need that to protect themselves.

2. They have with them as proof that all their editing is being done by Sri Aurobindo himself. It looks like it is Sri Aurobindo who himself has corrected his own works, in this situation the question of any editing does not come into play. When I had insisted in not believing that it is Sri Aurobindo who has changed the meaning they had asked me to come back after some days to see the proof and I was shown on an old printed paper the corrections made, and it was in Sri Aurobindo’s hand writing.  They have everything in Sri Aurobindo’s hand writing, “Look this is not Peter it is Sri Aurobindo correcting himself”. We can only wonder why after 50 years. 

3. They entered the Sri Aurobindo Ashram as inmates. We are no outsiders, we are and represent Sri Aurobindo Ashram so it is authentic. We are the Archives department we have developed Archives Research and Development. So who are you going to catch as we are Sri Aurobindo! They had to create this Research and Development not for the growth of consciousness and its upward journey but to come out with their own versions successfully of what is Sri Aurobindo’s life and his works which were already printed approved and sealed. Sunil S R

14 comments:

  1. To Sunil:

    Someone on this blogsite has earnestly praised you and even called you the "Divine's bulldog" for "bravely" fighting against the Evil Ashram Authorities and for “protecting” Sri Aurobindo’s work from tampering, that you allege has taken place so darn well, that even you can’t find any evidence to substantiate your allegations!!!

    Now that you believe that you are basking in the limelight of the SEOF and to your credit have even succeeded in acquiring a following that coincidentally consists of all the dimwits that are around, I would like to encourage you to pursue your fight against your Battle against Tampering and urge you to take it to another level, a more realistic one.

    Because you see, IN REALITY, if at all there has been some “tampering” in the Ashram, it has unequivocally happened in no other place than the P.E.D. Ever since Pranob Da laid his hands on the Mother’s and Sri Aurobindo’s photographic material, he claimed exclusive right to that material, interestingly in the very same manner in which his alter-ego Satprem took exclusive right on the Mother’s tape recordings for his Agenda.

    Pranob Da’s department, the P.E.D. has since then been systematically, deliberately and in a very ORGANIZED manner been tampering many of the Mother’s and Sri Aurbindo’s photos right under Pranob Da’s guidance. Several photographs all of which are invaluable historical documents and records, have been thoughtlessly tampered with and very probably done so without any proper documentation. And now in a digital age where Photoshop rules, and with the precedents that Pranob Da has established, who knows how many more halos, shades and special effects are being added to those photographs in order to satisfy the insatiable appetites of hungry miracle-mongers! And if you go by the saying that “a picture is worth a thousand words”, you can imagine how many thousand of “words”, entire volumes maybe, have been tampered by Pranob Da and his department.

    While I am not in judgment if that “tampering” was Good or Bad, Divine or Evil, in the manner in which your ilk – Pranob Da inclusive - have accused the Ashram’s archivists of wrong-doing, “Divine bulldogs” such as yourself will surely have an esteemed opinion and judgment on such happenings. Moreover, you are even likely to perhaps open another battle front in your War against Tampering.

    Lastly, my dear “Divine bulldog”, I hope that you would not get offended if I aptly told you that actually, it appears that after all, you have been barking up the wrong tree!!!

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  2. A.A.D on L.S.D: You'll have to do better than to scream bloody murder about tampering of photos. It is not as if the photos are the original WORKS of Mother Sri Aurobindo. Like paintings and other figures they are created to a great extent by the photographers and developers themselves. For example someone might take the same photo in color and another might take it in b/w. Now for which one are you going to scream that "Holy Smokes! That's been tampered with! AAARGGGH". Also the photographer and developer is essential to the process of getting a photo. You can't call them tamperers. The editor is only a help, at most. Finally, with the photos there is a fundamental fact that everyone accepts that photos can come in various shapes, sizes, formats, decorations, appearances, shades, colors, forms, resolutions etc. etc. etc. So the analogy is really quite illogical. NEXT....

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous at 2.19 AM, October 22, 2010 said:

    “[Bla, bla, bla…and similar rubbish… AND finally something somewhat sensible]…Also the photographer and developer is essential to the process of getting a photo.”

    Great! At least it would appear that our dear flustered friend still has some neurons functioning. Now let’s see if some of those neurons are still capable of making what our friend would surely consider to be a quantum leap in reasoning, analysis AND understanding.

    Because a book such as that of Sri Aurobindo’s poem the Savitri also requires a few essential persons before it can be VIEWED and read by people. And such persons have been and would be (as is the case for most books): a scribe, typists, proof-readers, archivists, editor(s), typesetters, printers, etc., etc.

    Da!!!! Too hard to understand for someone like Pranob “Da” and his followers???!!! Or do you expect the only original collection of manuscripts (with all the possible revisions, scribbling and bits of paper made by Sri Aurobindo himself) to be passed on from reader to reader??? Da..Da..!!!? Rings a bell?

    And finally with books there is a fundamental fact that everyone accepts that books can come in various shapes, sizes, formats, decorations, appearances, shades, colors, forms, editions, etc. etc. etc. Do the neurons see any analogy?

    And please spare yourself your "NEXT" public humiliation....

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  4. A.A.D on L.S.D: 1) Wow. You completely ignore my first point to dance your victory dance.

    As I stated before the editors etc. can at most help. I reject the contention that any of the people performing any of the roles you have mentioned has any mandate to CHANGE anything of the text. Unlike photographers they have no CREATIVE input in the OUTCOME.

    Let me give you a MORE appropriate analogy. Consider a sketch done by the Mother Herself. What if someone went in and rubbed a little bit out somewhere and put in a little bit somewhere else. The photos are not something created by the Mother Herself. I hope that this makes the distinction clearer.

    2) About publishing original collection of manuscripts - You are talking as if Sri Aurobindo never published anything before the great editors came on the scene. You forget that Sri Aurobindo also edits the work that he creates. My point was that unlike the various roles required to produce a photo, the editors role is minimal. This is particularly true in case of Sri Aurobindo who could come up single-handedly with issue after issue of the content for the Arya.

    3) Finally the point about variety... Have you never marked the difference between even two photographs of the Mother? How many ALTERNATE version of Savitri has Sri Aurobindo produced? No doubt Savitri has evolved over time. But the final product is one. That is what even the great editors assume no? Otherwise why present the last version and the final, authoritative version.

    You are evidently confusing copies of the same WORK in different formats with entirely different photos of the same person at different times.

    It is because of these fundamental distinctions that photos are different from literary works.

    But on the whole I am happy to see your agitation over the supposed tampering with the photos. You just have to be consistent in your thinking (admittedly something hard for you to do) and see the far greater damage that self-appointed editors can do to the original Works of Sri Aurobindo

    ReplyDelete
  5. So, the errors which crept into his writings after he could not properly see his own writing due to severe deterioration of eyesight ought to be reproduced and not corrected?
    What sort of an impression would the reader then have of Aurobindo's command of English?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "reader then have of Aurobindo's command of English? "

    Raghu has gone anonymous!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Which "anonymous" is "Raghu" and which one is R Y Deshpande, or Govind, or Anurag Banerjee, or Alok Pandey, or Sraddhalu Ranade, or Peter Heehs, or "Govind", or Ananda Reddy?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Is "Dr Ryder" an alias of RYD or Alok Pandey?

    ReplyDelete
  9. "So, the errors which crept into his writings after he could not properly see his own writing due to severe deterioration of eyesight ought to be reproduced and not corrected?"

    And who is to decide what is correct and incorrect? Did Sri Aurobindo always have bad eyesight?

    Furthermore, even assuming that there is some error, there is always the possibility that in correcting you are actually introducing many more errors. Using an analogy from software development, when the system is changed to fix one defect or software bug, often many more defects are introduced as a result.

    Finally who is going to trust someone else to CORRECT Sri Aurobindo's work? I am not going to trust anyone including an Amal or a Nirod. That is why the baseline and authoritative version of works should have been the SABCL which was produced explicitly as per the WILL of the Mother and then released when She was still in Her Physical Body.

    That vast library of Light is enough for anyone who wants to take up Yoga. That, at least, is not debatable.

    "What sort of an impression would the reader then have of Aurobindo's command of English?"

    If a reader is so casual that he lets things that strike him as mistakes or deficiencies deter him from the Infinity of Beauty staring him in the face... well, such a person would have turned back and away from an version of the work because Sri Aurobindo's Works and Words do not conform to human standards and expectations anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous at 11:08 PM, October 22, 2010 (who certainly has some bad memories about L.S.D) …

    … is going in circles trying to justify the mess that Pranob Da has created with the photographs of Sri Aurobindo and Mother that were under his custody and is trying to exonerate him with meaningless analogies.

    Moreover, his LSD-phobic neurons are of course incapable of understanding, let alone appreciating that “the last version and the final, authoritative version” of the Savitri is the result of decades of meticulous archival research and documentation that was till that time never undertaken before publishing the earlier versions of this poem.

    He is of course also incapable of understanding that this archival work of tireless, meticulous, dedicated research and documentation has in fact eliminated hundreds if not thousands of human errors that had inadvertently (and without any malicious intent on behalf of the scribe, typists, proof-readers, typesetters, etc., etc.,) crept into the publication of the earlier editions of the Savitri and that “the last version and the final, authoritative version” of the Savitri is the most authentic version of the poem that exists to date.

    He is also evidently incapable of understanding that during the restoration of such a monumental and complex hand-written work there are bound to be doubts and questions which need to be resolved. And this is exactly where the editorial team has to intervene and make their most educated decisions. And if he thinks that Nirodbaran and Amal Kiran and the many others who involved were not qualified, capable, sincere, devoted enough in their work, it only shows that he belongs to that exclusive club of self-opinionated people who will inevitably find fault with everybody else but themselves.

    And as falsely stated by the same neurotic case, there never was any attempt or a mandate to “improve” or “change” Sri Aurobindo’s text. These are absolutely false accusations and if he has the required documentary evidence and credentials to prove his allegations, let him demonstrate them here.

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  11. From "A.A.D on L.S.D''s words it is clear that these obnoxious egos are claiming credit for actually producing the Savitri. It is precisely such elitist snobs and arrogant egos who are bound to TAMPER with the Savitri and all of Sri Aurobindo's Works in order to satisfy their OWN human notions of correctness and perfection. Why don't you useless appendages find jobs elsewhere where your "tireless, meticulous, dedicated research and documentation" will be duly recognized and adequately compensated? We are here to read Sri Aurobindo's Truth and not your egoistic stupidity... which you yourself admit HAS NEVER DONE BEFORE. If it has never been done before in the 100+ years that Mother Sri Aurobindo have Personally presided over the publications of His Works, then we don't want it. You can keep your valueless and pretentious revisions and meticulous research and pickle them. We don't want it, and you and your Ashram Bosses certainly CANNOT FORCE US TO ACCEPT IT.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous said:

    "You can keep your valueless and pretentious revisions and meticulous research and pickle them."

    Who is stopping you from reading ONLY the editions published prior to 1973? Are the "Ashram Bosses" ransacking your houses and confiscating these editions so that you read ONLY the new editions?

    If you say that you "are here to read Sri Aurobindo's Truth", please READ and spare us your rabid crap about tampering.

    Probably you just can't rest in peace and are in a permanent state of frustration, because each time you read Sri Aurobindo, you realize how your petty self stands in stark contrasts to what Sri Aurobindo would expect you to become.

    Hard luck, try another Guru. May I suggest you try your luck with Bal Thackeray? That'll surely suit your character.

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  13. To A.A.D on L.S.D: You seem to be quite irreparably logic-challenged. Being able to read the SABCL editions has nothing to do with the issue at hand, which is your ASHRAM BOSSES and the insufferable archives snobs blessing and producing the new TAMPERED & ADULTERATED as the OFFICIAL / TRUEST version of Sri Aurobindo's Works. It is really quite sad that these basics have to be decomposed, digested and spoon-fed to you. Furthermore, your statement just boils down to asking me to go away and not speak up, to fall in line and to defer to the authorities. This has been your tactic against your opponents from the first time you made an appearance here. Your idea of debating seems to be to brow-beat, to defame and to intimidate. Forget about me picking another Guru. You already seem to have the Ashram Bal Thackeray's for your Gurus.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The Anonymous obsessed with L.S.D. said:

    "Being able to read the SABCL editions has nothing to do with the issue at hand."

    You said it right. Because by your behavior you have surely established that you certainly don't care about what the SABCL contains as reading the SABCL is peripheral to what matters in life. You're of course more concerned about the "ASHRAM BOSSES". Keep it up if you like it. Who's stopping you? Who's asking you to leave? Please, please, stay on and keep rubbing salt into your own wounds.

    And if you've cornered yourself and feel insecure about it, deal with it yourself. Why do you need to grimace and bark like a cornered animal at the innocent passersby??? And just because the barking of your allegations about tampering gets LOUDER and LOUDER, it doesn't make it one bit truer. Try barking at the PED as Sunil has bravely admitted.

    Lastly, as you wish to cling on to my Gurus, I think that you would do Them a favour and show Them some respect if you would make sure that you're not an embarrassment to Them. Could that much be expected of you???

    Looking forward to my next fix of L.S.D. that you so generously and punctually provide.

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete