Pages

Sunday, October 17, 2010

Biography is based on lies upon lies

From Sunil sunilauro@gmail.com to tusarnmohapatra@gmail.com date 17 October 2010 22:24 subject For posting

It is interesting to see at what length they go and in creating a certain picture from their lower the waist thinking and putting it forward as the truth without having any concept of what is in front of him. Even if you asked a blind man he would come up with some truth about the world as the subtle worlds are open to him. But Peter has no vision at all. If he had any opening what so ever he could at least see what is there. He describes what he would be doing if he was in that description, he has no understanding of their workings as how somebody who lives in Silence has all these higher worlds active in him and is master over the universal forces would act and interact with another that is equally vast and active. So all his biography is based on lies upon lies, are the public so dumb and has no experiences in the yoga to be led by a totally blind man writing about a subject as though he is the master of it. No doubt he will find other blind men to agree with him and even support him. That is because they enjoy that blindness they are not about Sri Aurobindo’s yoga or the truth if anybody is they would immediately spit Peter’s biography out as they have the taste of the yoga and the road that leads in the the earth’s evolution.
Peter himself told a certain audience in Lodi California where his talk was recorded. I was among the audience where Johnrobert asked him about the Sri Aurobindo’s biography to which Peter replied.
Peter:  ... “Ah, but I learned a little bit about writing and about the form that biography gives, that you got to select and you got ah, sort of create, ah. Aaa, that is another in sort of technical thing, but, but you ah, the materials are far, far, far, ah, greater than anyone could ever make a sort of complete, dealing with. So you got to select and in the selection always would be, ah, ah, personal, in a way, interpreted, and you got to discipline yourself so that your interpretation is going to be good representative.”…
He can create that is fine but to call your creation the truth and then have a bunch of suckers fighting for you as why it should not be the truth. That is unacceptable. Sunil S R

7 comments:

  1. Peter has stated elsewhere in an interview with Auroville Today that "if I had shovelled every new bit of information I had ever found into the book, it would have become almost unreadable". So he has left out many things that he could have filled into his book. Peter has 1) chosen to select very specifically these controversy-generating ambiguous reports out of all the vast mountain of written and spoken data 2) presented these pieces of questionable hearsay as facts without bothering to corroborate them using multiple sources, e.g. the interchange between Sri Aurobindo and Paul Richard regarding possible marital relationship with the Mother 3) chain them all together to create the impression in the mind of the reader that growing "emotional intimacy" between Mother and Sri Aurobindo led a frustrated and jilted Paul Richard to leave 4) left out key information from Paul Richard himself which gives a very different reason for his departure. All of this would be enough to convict Peter of the intent to distort and disfigure the truth. However, the hostile and dishonest folks who want to use Peter's book to grind their own axes against Sri Aurobindo, for e.g. the ignoramus Mr.R who wants to show that there is nothing like Yogic Force, based on the one claim that Peter's book proves Sri Aurobindo finally succumbed to renal failure or some such thing, cannot stand that opponents of Peter will deprive them of this dark God-killer of a book. There is no point in trying to talk reason to insincere and disputatious folks. The only effort should be to expose their own unreason for all to see. The worse offenders are the Heehsians "within" the Aurobindonian community straight from "top management" down to their loyal and obedient foot-soldiers, and the cornucopia of the various friends and mates of the great Peter. Whether they know it or not they are all now accessories after the fact. But that is between them and the Divine.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What a paranoia-laden diatribe! And yet you delude yourself that you are on the side of the "divine" and your opponents are "instruments of hostile forces"?
    "Mr. R" is in good company in asking for conclusive evidence for "yogic force". Just do a survey among the scientists and physicians of the world to find out how many of them lend credence to "yogic force" or "spiritual force"!
    If the existence of this force is so obvious, why don't the textbooks of medicine mention it?
    If it is so easy to prove the existence of this "yogic force", why don't you try? Perhaps, you can get the next Nobel prize for discovering such a force in nature or the human mind!
    There is really no difference between the members of a religious cult and the followers of Aurobindo if the latter react to alternative approaches, critical questions, or criticisms in EXACTLY THE SAME WAY the members of a religious cult or fanatical religious believers do in the face of those things!

    ReplyDelete
  3. > "alternative approaches, critical questions, or criticisms"

    You agree, then, that these might be present in the said book, and that you find support in the book for your belief that there are no occult forces.

    ReplyDelete
  4. for e.g. the ignoramus Mr.R who wants to show that there is nothing like Yogic Force, based on the one claim that Peter's book proves Sri Aurobindo finally succumbed to renal failure or some such thing"
    That he had kidney problems, prostate enlargement, partial blindness, etc., was well-documented prior to Peter's book.

    "cannot stand that opponents of Peter will deprive them of this dark God-killer of a book."

    How does a book manage to turn into a
    "God-killer"? Which God are you talking about?

    It is asinine to speak of killing the Divine, much less of a book doing so. There is no such thing even in your universe populated by "asuras" and such!

    If by "God" you mean "Aurobindo", then you should know that the "Aurobindo" you pathetically cling to is an external form created and projected on by your own insecurities. The TRUE CONSCIOUSNESS which is Aurobindo cannot be killed, maimed, or distorted!

    And yet you have the temerity to call others ignorant! What a pathetically deluded condition!

    ReplyDelete
  5. You seem unable to conceive of an INQUIRY, instead of slothful belief or disbelief, into "occult forces"! Ultimately, it is EVIDENCE and not the claims of any book or individual which will resolve the issue of whether there are any "occult forces".

    ReplyDelete
  6. You, your ilk, and "the said book"! Can you focus for a moment on the issues instead of "the said book" and its author?

    ReplyDelete
  7. -- That he had kidney problems, prostate enlargement, partial blindness, etc., was well-documented prior to Peter's book.

    But it has to be looked at in the context of a vast storehouse of other documented usages of His Yogic Force, testified by Himself as well as many other disciples. If you selectively choose certain "facts" only to promote your own pet theories while ignoring all the rest, then that is nothing but distortion.

    -- How does a book manage to turn into a
    "God-killer"? Which God are you talking about?

    Iconoclasm is as old as the human race. No more explanation is necessary I hope

    -- It is asinine to speak of killing the Divine, much less of a book doing so. There is no such thing even in your universe populated by "asuras" and such!

    Wrong again. If that were the case what was the need for Sri Aurobindo to concern Himself with "protecting" the Mother during WWII. How could He have been attacked Himself and suffered injury. Read His poem "A God's Labor". You need to discard your infantile and childish notions of the Divine that derive from some sort of backward religious / superstitious conditioning.

    -- If by "God" you mean "Aurobindo", then you should know that the "Aurobindo" you pathetically cling to is an external form created and projected on by your own insecurities. The TRUE CONSCIOUSNESS which is Aurobindo cannot be killed, maimed, or distorted!

    But as I have told you above the hostiles did try to kill, did succeed in maiming and are continuously trying to distort. This is what you think WE are doing. Sri Aurobindo has described his life as a battle from the beginning to the end. He has described his Yoga as a battle. You are also here writing and typing for some reason. Eat your own cooking before forcing others to swallow it. If you have such a rock-solid belief in the inviolability of the "True Consciousness" then go home and take a nap in your complacent confidence. Why are you wasting your time and ours over here... unless you believed differently that harm, damage, obstruction and destruction can interfere with the Divine Manifestation.

    -- And yet you have the temerity to call others ignorant! What a pathetically deluded condition!

    You are sounding like Mrs.R (the better half). Don't worry. I am calling him an ignoramus only because he chooses to confine himself to an infinitesimally thin slice of the reality and presents it as the absolute Truth. He may be a very good man to you and I understand your taking offense at my dragging his ignorance out into the public for all to stare at. But, trust me, it's for your his and your own good.

    ReplyDelete