Saturday, November 13, 2010

Even the Dalai Lama referred to Sri Aurobindo and the Mother as husband and wife

From Jitendra Sharma to "Tusar N. Mohapatra" date 13 November 2010 07:52 subject The Present Situation
The present situation is precarious and ludicrous at the same time. Very  dirty linen is being washed in this Public Forum of SEOF. Each fellow, with swollen spiritual ego, is infected with a holier-than-thou attitude and is trying his/her best to insult another person. What’s wrong with you, guys?! Have you lost all sense of shame? As Sri Aurobindo has observed, the first thing that most Sadhaks surrender is their common sense. All those who are against Peter Heehs have assimilated and interiorised into the depths of their consciousness every word of the book ‘The Lives of Sri Aurobindo’. For them, the utmost important task is to continue these threadbare arguments and generate more heat and controversy.

     Why can we not focus on so many other excellent books on Sri Aurobindo? Should we continue to waste our precious time and energy in this way? I had read this book long back and had benefited by its excellent portions. I have never bothered about all bullshit and dirty things that this book contains. A normal, educated and sexually-matured Sadhak should be able to appreciate and benefit from an article on the Integral Yoga even in a pornographic magazine, in a very cool manner.  -    Dr. Jitendra Sharma

From Paulette to "Tusar N. Mohapatra" date 13 November 2010 07:01 subject can you post the attachment?
can you post the attachment? Originally, this was a confutation of Sraddhalu's statements, written after the shock of discovering that he is listed as petitioner n.5 in the court case against the Ashram trustees. But as I don't have the habit to involve someone who, being sub judicio, cannot reply, while I am such a fool, in all this horror, as to still abide by a code of honor, I have removed Sraddhalu's allegations. I will add afterwards the part on Sri Ramakrishna and J. Kripal. Thanks Paulette


It is distressing, for example, to see all that has been projected on Peter Heehs apropos Sri Aurobindo’s marriage with Mrinalini Devi and his relationship to the Mother. I am horrified by certain statements by Jeffrey Kripal regarding Sri Ramakrishna Paramhansa, as much as I am by others referring to Sri Aurobindo in the book which Michael Murphy asked Kripal to write to celebrate the Esalen institute. But nothing of this appears in Heehs’ own book, and it has to be stated loudly. As proof of this I have taken the trouble to scan the texts directly from Peter Heehs’s biography. Let’s start with a most beautiful description of love – equal only to the Mother’s description of marriage (in Auroville well-known because the Mother sent it again to an Aurovilian couple). Quoting from “The Lives of Sri Aurobindo”, pp.55-6: […]
While reporting about the premature death of Mrinalini (Sri Aurobindo’s wife for seventeen years), Heehs writes, pp. 318-9: […]
This is how Peter Heehs presents love, sexual life and marriage between young Arabindo and his wife Mrinalini. One may question the need for entering into such detail, but we all know that there are people, in Pondicherry as well as in Auroville and elsewhere, who do ask such questions. What is one to expect when even the Dalai Lama, in his official talk on the occasion of his third visit to Auroville, last year, referred to Sri Aurobindo and the Mother as husband and wife? Peter Heehs made the effort to clarify the matter to an external audience, both academics and lay people, and one would expect that they are not more enlightened than the Dalai Lama.

Then, what about certain astounding allegation that Heehs alleged the practice of “tantric sexuality” to Sri Aurobindo in his biography? In the light of all that Peter Heehs writes in “The Lives of Sri Aurobindo”, these accusations are totally unfounded. As for the Mother, already with Paul Richard there had never been any question of marriage with physical consummation. At p. 254 of the said biography Heehs indeed writes, apropos the marriage between Mirra Alfassa and Paul Richard: […]
Commenting about Sri Aurobindo’s personal sadhana in his “Record of Yoga”, Heehs explains – clarifying at the same time the issue of Tantra vis-à-vis Integral Yoga, p. 239: […]
The following is taken from “Sri Aurobindo’s Ashram”, an article published in the Hindu, Madras, in May 1927, and reproduced in Heehs’s biography. The additions into square brackets appear in an email that Peter Heehs had circulated, in the fall 2008, to re-insert essential passages from his book, and which Raman Reddy (petitioner no.1, in the affidavit filed against the Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust and trustees) had cut off from his own selection. Thousands have read Reddy’s mutilated version, which ignited the controversy, and did vehemently react because of it – instead of taking the trouble to read the book, or at least Heehs’ detailed email. Below is the complete excerpt as it appears in the biography, p. 359; the omitted passages appear into square brackets: […]
In fact, in concluding the paragraph on Shakti and Tantric (sexual) practices, p.329, Peter Heehs makes his viewpoint unmistakably transparent: […]
As far as “tantric sexuality” goes, this is the factual evidence as presented in Heehs’ biography. No ‘Tantric’ reviser of Integral Yoga, alleged or real, can find support in Peter’s book, where it is explicitly stated that brahmacharya was the only rule. Whatever J. Kripal and M. Murphy may (or may not) write, believe and do is their own subjective take on reality, not to be mixed up with Heehs’s biography. Commenting upon the freedom that Sri Aurobindo left to his surrounding disciples during the early years after the Mother had joined, Heehs clearly writes, p. 332: […]
Furthermore, at p.341 he writes: […]
We must look for other deeper causes behind a controversy that threatens to destroy the Sri Aurobindo Ashram and all that it represents, whose final outcome may be the Government of India’s takeover. Maybe part of the answer lies with what Sraddhalu writes, PH has recently been appointed Visiting Professor for Sri Aurobindo Studies at Cambridge University with this perverse biography as textbook and source material for Cambridge students. It is only a question of time before other colleges and universities follow suit.” But there is more…Paulette 

1 comment:

  1. Tusar,

    I have understood that you don’t allow Sri Aurobindo’s and the Mother’s quotes. With the proper references, these can be traced back in their books. Moreover there are people who misuse and abuse quoting from their texts to prove what they want. But in all other cases how are people to know, when the documentation is not available? Moreover, in the case of Heehs’ biography, a simple request to read it means to be rubber-stamped as a devil?

    It is precisely because people have not read, and/or don’t even have the possibility to read the book that a certain fringe feels free to dump whatever suits them on Peter Heehs, writing thousands of (useless) pages of insults and calumnies that nowhere else would be accepted without court cases for defamation and calumny, intervention of the Human Rights Commission and so on. I refuse to pay back with the same strategy, praising instead of vilifying Peter – an operation that would be no less shameful and degrading than systematic slander and character assassination. I have been trained to do historic research at Milano university and I expect to live in a civil society where the facts, impartially examined, are assessed dispassionately on the basis of evidences – not of wild, lurid vital obsessions that tell a lot about those entertaining such fantasies.