Friday, October 15, 2010

They had mastered the forces of desire

Dear Mr Tusar

Could you kindly post my reply to Dr Ryder on the Savitri Era Forum

Thanking you 
Ranjit Das

It’s highly doubtful that Dr Ryder is a practicing professor of psychology. No serious academician would attempt to assess or question the motive of an author by analyzing one single paragraph in a 500 page book.

Referring to the much quoted hand holding incident the self acclaimed doctor concludes

“It is glaringly obvious that the insinuation is either romantic, sexual, emotional because in the subsequent paragraphs there is talk of marriage etc.

If Dr Ryder’s intentions were honest he would have turned the page and continued with the narration. This is what the author of TLoSA has to say about the relation between Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Note the sentence in bold.

“ One thing is clear, however: the arrival of Mirra Richard had an enormous impact on his practice. With her help, he told Barin, he completed ten years of sadhana in one. Her assistance was especially important in turning his sadhana outward. If he had been concerned only with his own transformation or with transmitting his yoga to a limited number of people, he could have done it on his own. But for his work to have a lasting effect in the world, he needed a shakti, a female counterpart.”

 “Shakti, as Aurobindo explained in The Synthesis of Yoga, is the conscious power of the divine. “By this power the spirit creates all things in itself, hides and discovers all itself in the form and behind the veil of its manifestation.”58 Systems of yoga that aim at liberation regard shakti as, at best, a force that can help the individual obtain release from the limitations of mind, life and body. But systems aiming for perfection, such as tantric yoga or the way of the siddhas, see shakti as the power needed to transform oneself and the world. Tantrics and siddhas worship shakti in the form of goddesses such as Kali; some also worship women as embodiments of the divine force. This is the rationale behind the esoteric sexuality of certain forms of tantrism. The consecrated union of a human male and female is seen as a reenactment of the cosmic act of creation. Some schools of tantric yoga put so much stress on this relationship that they require male practitioners to have female sexual partners. Aurobindo made it clear that this was not the case in his yoga. “How can the sexual act be made to help in spiritual life?” he asked a disciple who posed the question. It was necessary, in the work he was doing, for the masculine and feminine principles to come together, but the union had nothing to do with sex; in fact it was possible in his and Mirra’s case precisely because they had mastered the forces of desire.” 59 
(pp. 328-329) 

Reveal your true identity Dr Ryder.

Ranjit Das


  1. But this is simply an extension of Dr.R's false argument that by making an explicit statement to the contrary Peter is somehow free to suggested the controversial in a different part of the passage. All that this statement of "nothing to do with sex", like the other "nothing furtive" fig leaf, does is give Peter deniability. How does it in any way change the presentation of the previous passage? What was the need to make it SEEM controversial in the first place... the impression of other people noticing, the hand-holding and bowing in private but hurried withdrawal when discovered etc. the forced insertion of the alleged discussion with Richard about marriage with the Mother etc... You would have to be blind to ignore all that. This is in fact the standard operating procedure of all gossip-mongers, to suggest the scandalous and then, in order to cover ones own tracks and not SEEM to be scandalizing the other person's good name, to quickly deny that anything fishy was going on. However, the deed is done and the suggestion is planted in the minds of the target. Whether intentional or not, this is exactly what is happening here. Sorry, but this statement does nothing to dispel the bad taste that Peter's dark and ignorant presentation of the interactions between Mother and Sri Aurobindo, and Sri Aurobindo and Richard. All that it seems to have done is give Peter the license to suggest whatever he wants to as long as he can cover his own tracks, so that in the court of public opinion his vociferous fanatics club can wave these little disclaimers to get him completely off the hook while leaving Mother Sri Aurobindo in the lurch.

  2. Underlying all of your "anonymous" repetitions ad nauseam is the asinine assumption that Aurobindo and Mirra were superhuman "divinities" devoid of human emotions and foibles and that every biographical account of them must also subscribe to this asinine assumption and must ceaselessly and thoughtlessly sing their praises and pay homage to their status as "avatars" or "divinities" on every page and refrain from mentioning anything which would even remotely suggest that they were human beings with ordinary emotions and responses.
    This asinine and false assumption is responsible for the pathological intolerance you consistently exhibit for any view, including Peter's, which portrays them accurately as human beings who shared ordinary human emotions, foibles, and imperfections, e.g., anger, affection, sadness, vulnerability to physical pain, illness, and infirmity, etc.
    You need a serious, year-long session of "deprogramming" to cure yourself of the hold of the false and irrational assumption that Aurobindo and Mirra were "divinities" and the syndromes of "Avatarhood" pathology which prevents you from understanding them in terms of their obvious humanity.

  3. Are you trying to mimic the burning bush? You sound like a prophet who speaks with the voice of the all-knowing omniscient divine. What else can explain this absolute certitude that enables you to characterize my facts as mere assumptions and to promote your assumptions as absolute facts? You sound like a religious preacher who can't see beyond the confines of his limited holy book. "Outside of this there is no truth, only false beliefs (assumptions)". There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your infinitesimal pseudo-philosophy.

  4. Yes, no doubt you will be receiving a Nobel Prize and a Knighthood for your amazing discovery and/or proof of "absolute facts" such as the divinity of Aurobindo and Mirra, hostile forces, Asuras, and such!
    I am sure the distinguished members of the "Haloperidol Club" will be nominating you for a Nobel soon, assuming they don't succumb to an overdose earlier.

  5. The Divinity of Mother Sri Aurobindo is a fact to me because I have experienced it and continue to experience it first hand. And I am far from being the only one. I understand that it may not be a fact to you. But the rational thing would be to find out for yourself instead of limiting yourself to premature conclusions which see only the outer human expression but miss the Divine Consciousness behind it. If you do choose not to verify for yourself then that is your choice, but I am not beholden to deny my experience and painfully squeeze myself into your tiny little nutshell.

  6. "Reveal your true identity Dr Ryder"

    Reveal YOURS! Anyone can call himself Ranjit Das! Even Peter Heehs, Rich Carlson, and their latest proxy - DRRaghu!

    Dr Ryder contributed somthing original and spelled out how and why Heehs writing creates doubt and confusion despite his disclaimers.

    What did you contribute except quote from Heehs book..again!!?


  7. AA(R)DVARK,
    Oh how astute you are! But your forgot to mention in the same breath that even Sraddhalu Ranade and Jayant Bhattacharya, Kittu Reddy, Raman Reddy, Alok Pandey, RYD, Ranganath, etc., etc., can sign in any name that they want.

    Moreover, given the abhorrent quality of the repetitive criticism and the pathetic level of intellectual discourse on this blog that is being entertained by your ilk, it is very likely that they are actively doing so.

    And if you call the fraudulent Dr. Ryder's write-up "original" you must be, as your name suggests, from the same planet inhabited by Dr. Ryder, probably the planet Moronus in the constellation of Stupidis.

    Because the so-called Dr. Ryder's write-up is nothing else but a rehash of the same old issues that are so stale that even your ilk find it hard to digest and to regurgitate in a new form.

    So just eat and swallow the bitter pill of reality that whether you like it or not, not everybody is like you and many others like and appreciate Peter's Book.

    So you may return to your planet and spread the news to your fellow aliens that the new world order that you were trying to establish is doomed forever.

    Ranjit Rao's unknown friend.

  8. Ranjit Rao's unknown friend/AKA "Dr"Raghu/AKA Carlson/AKA Heehs/AKA Hartz or is it Hertz?,

    You fool no one. There are not many Heehs pals around but they are all equally insufferable! The same boring unconvincing arguments, the same abuse of others, the same idiocy, the same belligerance, the same uncouth language, the same lack of intellect.... And when someone like Dr Ryder come up with good points, they question his identity instead of debating the points.

    Mark my words, this book's worth is finished in the long-term and its supporters will be ignored or tossed aside in everyone's minds. They may have to start a Heehs ashram in California to retain some dignity, self-worth, and pursue making trouble over something else.