Pages

Saturday, October 16, 2010

This is Sri Aurobindo’s Ashram not yours and not Peter’s

From what I recall anybody who became my friend was threatened by certain Ashram characters. Were you one of them too?  I could answer your judgement and do know you jealous group have such low views? I used the word foreigners because they happened to be so at that time in the Archives nothing more nothing less.  They did the perverted editing as they had all the works in the digital form and they were playing God on it. But we want Sri Aurobindo as he wrote it not what Peter writes and gives it to us and calls it Sri Aurobindo, because he has managed to edit and back track his works and prepare a false picture for the world that all this is hallucination and not true. What joy you can get in supporting falsehood or ass licking Peter regardless of what nationality he is. This is Sri Aurobindo’s Ashram not yours and not Peter’s. If you are here or are associated with it then your first and the most aim should be to see that is not destroyed. And what is more harmful than twisting his very words and his life.
I am giving a small example of two paragraphs from synthesis of Yoga the first one is what Sri Aurobindo wrote and was available in all older versions, the second one is  which you and I and everybody will read and is only available.
First One:
“It is evident that by dwelling in this cosmic consciousness our whole experience and valuation of everything in the universe will be radically changed. As individual egos we dwell in the Ignorance and judge everything by a broken, partial and personal standard of knowledge; we experience everything according to the capacity of a limited consciousness and force and are therefore unable to give a divine response or set the true value upon any part of cosmic experience. We experience limitation, weakness, incapacity, grief, pain, struggle and its contradictory emotions or the opposite of these things as opposites in an eternal duality and not in the eternity of an absolute good and happiness. We live by fragments of experience and judge by our fragmentary values each thing and the whole. When we try to arrive at absolute values we only promote some partial view of things to do duty for a totality in the divine workings; we make-believe that our fractions are integers and thrust our one-sided viewpoints into the catholicity of the all-vision of the Divine.
By entering into the cosmic consciousness we participate in that all-vision and see everything in the values of the Infinite and the One. Limitation itself, ignorance itself change their meaning for us. Ignorance changes into a particular action of divine knowledge, strength and weakness and incapacity into a free putting forth and holding back various measures of divine Force, joy and grief, pleasure and pain into a mastering and a suffering of divine delight; struggle into a balancing of forces and values in the divine harmony. We do not suffer by the limitations of our mind, life and body; for we no longer live in these but in the infinity of the Spirit, and these we view in their right value and place and purpose in the manifestation, as degrees of the supreme being, conscious-force and delight of Sachchidananda veiling and manifesting Himself in the cosmos. We cease to judge men and things by their outward appearances and are delivered from hostile and contradictory ideas and emotions; for it is the soul that we see, the Divine that we seek and find in every thing and creature, and the rest has only a secondary value to us in a scheme of relations which exist now for us only as self-expressions of the Divine and not as having any absolute value in themselves. So too no event can disturb us, since the distinction of happy and unhappy, beneficent and maleficent happenings loses its force, and all is seen in its divine value and its divine purpose. Thus we arrive at a perfect liberation and an infinite equality. It is this consummation of which the Upanishad speaks when it says "He in whom the self has become all existences, how shall he have delusion, whence shall he have grief who knows entirely (Footnote: Vijãnatah. Vijnana is the knowledge of the One and the Many, by which the Many are seen in the terms of the One, in the infinite unifying Truth, Right, Vast of the divine existence.) and sees in all things oneness.”
Second: After Peter’s editing...
So much for the essential relation; but we have to see also the practical results of this internal transformation. It is evident that by dwelling in this cosmic consciousness our whole experience and valuation of everything in the universe will be radically changed. As individual egos we dwell in the Ignorance and judge everything by a broken, partial and personal standard of knowledge; we experience everything according to the capacity of a limited consciousness and force and are therefore unable to give a divine response or set the true value upon any part of cosmic experience. We experience limitation, weakness, incapacity, grief, pain, struggle and its contradictory emotions and we accept these things and their opposites as opposites in an eternal duality and cannot reconcile them in the eternity of an absolute good and happiness. We live by fragments of experience and judge by our fragmentary values each thing and the whole. When we try to arrive at absolute values we only promote some partial view of things to do duty for a totality in the divine workings; we then make believe that our fractions are integers and try to thrust our one-sided view-points into the catholicity of the all-vision of the Divine.

But by entering into the cosmic consciousness we begin to participate in that all-vision and see everything in the values of the Infinite and the One. Limitation itself, ignorance itself change their meaning for us. Ignorance changes into a particularising action of divine knowledge;strength and weakness and incapacity change into a free putting forth and holding back various measures of divine Force; joy and grief, pleasure and pain change into a mastering and a suffering of divine delight; struggle, losing its discords, becomes a balancing of forces and values in the divine harmony. We do not then suffer by the limitations of our mind, life and body; for we no longer live in these, even when we record and accept them, but in the infinity of the Spirit, and these we view in their right value and place and purpose in the manifestation, as degrees of the supreme being, conscious-force and delight of Sachchidananda veiling and manifesting Himself in the cosmos. We cease also to judge other men and things by their outward appearances and are delivered from hostile and contradictory ideas and emotions; for it is the soul that we see, the Divine that we seek and find in every thing and creature, and the rest has only a secondary value to us in a scheme of relations which exist now for us only as self-expressions of the Divine and not as having any absolute value in themselves. So too no event can disturb us, since the distinction of happy and unhappy, beneficent and maleficent happenings loses its force, and all is seen in its divine value and its divine purpose. Thus we arrive at a perfect liberation and an infinite equality. It is this consummation of which the Upanishad speaks when it says “He in whom the self has become all existences, how shall he have delusion, whence shall he have grief who knows entirely (Footnote: Vijãnatah. Vijnana is the knowledge of the One and the Many, by which the Many are seen in the terms of the One, in the infinite unifying Truth, Right, Vast of the divine existence.) and sees in all things oneness.”
Divine Ananda is not personal it belongs and comes from the Divine or am I talking gobelty goo for you..
Sunil S R

23 comments:

  1. GREAT JOB! You have spoken the Truth with Great FORCE

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sunil says:
    "This is Sri Aurobindo’s Ashram not yours and not Peter’s."

    So who the hell are YOU to interfere with the business of the Ashram??? Do you by any chance think that Sri Aurobindo is synonymous with Sri Sunil??? You certainly appear to be another of those who thinks that he is smarter than everybody else.

    I'm sure that in the perfect world of your hallucinations you would have made Pranob Da in charge of the editing of Sri Aurobindo's works and Kishore Gandhi ji in charge of the PED!!! LOL!!!

    Thank God nobody takes you seriously!!!

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Men do not abandon a cause,because they have seen it all or forsee its failure;and they are spiritually right in their stubborn perseverance.

    The Divine takes men as they are and uses men as His instruments even if they are not flawless in virtue,angelic,holy and pure.If they are of good will,if,to use the Biblical phrase,they are on the Lord's side,that is enough for the work to be done.

    That is Sunil.

    The upheavels and cataclysms are often an indication that a new descent or manifestation is near at hand.Those who have had occult knowledge have said so with one voice down the ages.

    All this is a temporary phenomenon for which those who know anything about the workings of the world-energy and the Spirit were prepared.

    It was forseen that this worst would come,the darkness of night before the dawn;therefore the instruments of the Divine are not discouraged.

    He knows what is preparing behind the darkness and can see and feel the first signs of its coming.

    Those who seek for the Divine have to stand firm and persist in their seeking,after a time the darkness will disappear and the Light will come.

    Beyond the blackest darkness there lies for one who is a divine instrument the light of God's victory.


    Selections from Letters to Dilip Kumar Roy

    ReplyDelete
  4. To A.A.D.: I don't get the point. What is there to laugh about Pranab-da being in charge of the Archives? Jayantilal Parekh, who was in charge of the dept. when Peter joined for eg., was a painter. There is nothing to suggest that Pranob-da would have failed at that job. He would have done quite as well in the Archives dept as anywhere else. Does your derision for Pranab-da have something to do with the incident mentioned by Sunil in which Pranab-da had asked Kittu Reddy to throw out the "perverted foreigners"? Care to elaborate?

    ReplyDelete
  5. If I may paraphrase what Shelley said on Oct. 16, 2010, Sunil is the Divine's instrument and is on the Lord's side.

    Sure! Why not? And who ever denied that, Shelley? If all in this world is the manifestation of the Divine’s Will and we are all part of this Divine “eco-system” and we all have our equal part to play, then surely so does Sunil. But that shouldn’t prevent people such as myself from calling one who enjoys dabbling with and feeding on filth a scavenger or detritivore!!! If he enjoys that, so be it.

    Additionally, if according to some Sunil is a blue-eyed boy of the Divine, what makes him or his friends believe that he is better or superior or wiser or purer or truer or more sincere or more capable or more devoted, etc., etc, than the very people he criticizes?!!!

    I do not seek any answers to these questions of course. It will suffice if Sunil acts a little more intelligently... that is to say if he is capable of it. Otherwise, let him keep making a fool of himself, because that always serves the purpose of his critics!!!

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous at 7:26 AM, October 18, 2010 said:
    “What is there to laugh about Pranab-da being in charge of the Archives?... Care to elaborate?”

    Elementary my friend, elementary. Someone who proclaims that books (even one book) should be destroyed, is certainly unfit to deal with literary material in an objective manner. The logic that flows from there onwards is even more than obvious.

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  7. To A.A.D.: I still don't get it. So what you are saying is that in your opinion Pranab-da was incapable of "dealing with literary material in an objective manner" and therefore unfit to be in charge of the archives? Are you alleging Pranab-da would DESTROY even Sri Aurobindo's original works and could not be trusted? What exactly are you saying ABOUT Pranab-da here? In what words would you choose to describe the specific quality that would have made him unfit management of the archives?

    Another question for you. As per your reasoning since Mother herself has burned books that makes Her incapable of "dealing with literary material in an objective manner". Your logic seems to flow a bit too indiscriminately in directions unforeseen by your incisive investigative acumen. Books are books after all and destroying one with the intent that the information contained therein not get out to the world at large, is the same as destroying another with the very same intent. What is your response?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous at 4:57 PM, October 18, 2010 said:

    “What exactly are you saying ABOUT Pranab-da here? In what words would you choose to describe the specific quality that would have made him unfit management of the archives?”

    If you think that you are provoking me and are expecting me to insult Pranab-da publicly, you’ll be disappointed. Moreover, I will surely not please you by worshiping and treating him like a demi-God, just because you appear to think that he is one.

    We have all seen his limitations, particularly when it comes to dealing with literary and intellectual material. And we can now be rest assured that he never was and shall never be in charge of the Archives, whether you like it or not. And there’s no point talking about it anymore.

    With regards to your statement “Mother herself has burned books” could you please provide a specific instance or reference to such an incident? Please don’t tell me “that so and so told so” or “that I heard”, etc., specific references please!!!

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  9. To A.A.D: I am confident that like your admired ideal Heehs you have at least the basic ability to keep your true opinions under wraps while saying enough to give the recipient hints of what you are really thinking.

    The fact that you have refused to answer my point-blank question is enough. I had asked you clearly if you believe that Pranab-da would have DESTROYED the original works of Sri Aurobindo. IF you had any doubts then either you would refuse to answer, which is what you have done, or you would, provided of course you wanted to be that honest, come out and accept it as a possibility.

    But your opinion about his inability to run the archives and his "limitations" is enough. Insulting Pranab-da further was not the issue. Understand, if you can, that the SAME dedication and devotion which leads Pranab-da to oppose Heehs is the thing that virtually guarantees his FAITHFUL preservation of historical documents of and related to Sri Aurobindo. You are confusing faithful execution of assigned work (in this case with the preservation of literary material) with objectivity, and are also confusing objectivity with the urge to put everything out into the public.

    Some basic instruction for you and others like you who seem to have little understanding of the fundamentals of Ashram life: people don't join the Ashram to be "objective" or to make a name for themselves, or a career or to publicly expose everything or make negative allusions and remarks about Sri Aurobindo or the Mother.. all these motives are not only unrelated, but they are CONTRARY to the ideals and the purpose of life at the Ashram. They come there to faithfully serve the Divine.

    That one requirement is enough. Anyone who has that can serve anywhere. The toilet cleaner, if he has that, can do a wonderful job as the Archivist or a Trustee. The Archivist or the Trustee who does not have that will not be able to do even the job of a toilet cleaner properly.

    You can continue to hold your arrogant and mistaken belief in the permanent "limitations" of others like Pranab-da (Weren't you the same person who was just yelling at someone else for thinking himself "SMARTER" than others??) But in Yoga all limitations are transcended through the Mother's Grace, which only requires faith, sincerity and surrender to work its magic and make one a fit instrument in any field.

    Coming finally to your tactic of asking for "references"... You are really a remarkable specimen of the species. On this forum you have yourself made extreme and not so extreme statements. Have you provided references for all of these? Then on what basis are you asking for references from others? Have you provided a specific reference for your sleazy and unprovoked attack against Sunil about his alleged eve-teasing or womanizing or victimizing the women of the Ashram or was it just based on "that so and so told so" or "that I heard". I have yet to come across anyone in this whole controversy who has stopped to such a disgustingly low level with such breathtaking rapidity as you have. The man had just started to post on this site and you thought it fit to thrust the spear straight into his guts with as much force as you could muster. And yet you have no problem holding the whole rest of the world to a higher standard!

    I will not provide any references to you and you may joyfully use that to avoid answering the question. Of course if you want to answer you may do so by all means. You do not need to wait for references. I can rephrase the question for you so that the references no longer stand in the way: If Mother herself has destroyed books in the past in order to prevent the information in them from reaching the public and being misused and misread then is the Mother also not, as per your own reasoning, "un-objective", therefore cannot be trusted with Sri Aurobindo's works and, finally, incapable of managing the archives dept.?

    ReplyDelete
  10. toilet cleaner as an ashramite is good because he serves the divine.
    but anyone outside who does menial jobs is inferior. is not everyone serving the divine inside or outside or any side.
    it is several times mentioned , peter heehs as a taxi driver, which is supposed to be as an inferior human and low job.
    what is wrong in that.
    indians do not believe in dignity of labour. see the dalits being asked to do scavenging, can they ever be asked to work as archivists in ashram. even if they do, and commit a mistake everyone will point out the person as a dalit.
    the ashram always had a halo of everyone coming from royal or zamindar families and how they have sacrificed everything at the altar of the mother. what is there to sacrifice, you trade one type of life for another, each has its own pluses and minuses.
    mother has written very interesting things on this sacrifice and how at its least it inflates the ego.
    whatever faults of the west, peter etc. there is lot of dignity of labour in the west.
    india is still in many ways feudal.
    this talk of chotto log, jee, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  11. There is certainly truth in what you are saying. Indians today do have a long way to go in improving the lives of other Indians. However, in many places in the west too there is no greater crime than being poor. If you don't have money or are a menial laborer life is as much a hell as anywhere. We cannot therefore take general problems of human nature and blame them exclusively on Indians. Yes, things have been improving in the west, but the whole history of the west, straight from the great and noble Greeks down to present-day South Africa and the wars of liberation launched by the American Empire, is filled to overflowing with brutality, discrimination, savagery and barbarism towards their fellow-men. Indias are at least taught, through her teachers, to find the Divine in all things and beings. It is this and not some extremem discrimination that makes India unique among peoples and nations. This is a fundamental truth that even Sri Aurobindo repeats throughout Hiw Works. If we have fallen from that state and strayed from that teaching then it is because of some fundamental weakness and error for which Sri Aurobindo provides the necessary corrective. If you feel that there is still a sense of discrimination and persecution in the Ashram then that is absolutely one of the first things that have to go, even as a preliminary to entering the spiritual life, which fundamentally rests on seeing and loving the One Divine Truth in all things and beings.

    ReplyDelete
  12. "the ashram always had a halo of everyone coming from royal or zamindar families and how they have sacrificed everything at the altar of the mother. what is there to sacrifice, you trade one type of life for another, each has its own pluses and minuses. mother has written very interesting things on this sacrifice and how at its least it inflates the ego."

    btw, as a follow-up to my earlier comment would like to say that this is indeed a capital point and something that I see in many and even in myself. The vital ego it seems needs to feel compensated in some way. One way perhaps to correct is to try and remember the one truth that is common to both the way of knowledge and bhakti: who are you and what is yours that you think YOU are the one who is sacrificing something that belongs to YOU.

    Would love to read any quotes from the Mother on the subject if you can provide them here.

    ReplyDelete
  13. the mother's quotes are always difficult to find when required.
    still can try, no assurances.

    this long justification of west and poverty, is typical of indians.always justify the west too is bad. nobody denies it exists in the west, but it is worse here and that is the issue. no country has solved this poverty, class, etc. issues. even the scandinavian countries, which are the best in these and every social/economical parameters.

    this peter being a taxi driver (so he was dirt) has even gone to courts etc.; it is an insult to taxi drivers, that their job is so low that only mindless and fraud are fit to do it and one can never rise in life after that.

    if peter was a professor, could anyone have written about professors in such a derogatory manner. professors/intellectuals can be equally big frauds.

    ashramites are deeply conscious of their "chosen ones", superior air.
    they talk about being equal amongst themselves but it is in theory.the bengalis consider themselves superior, due to art, culture, intellect. the business class gujarati/marwari is inferior, the working class oriyas are treated worse in the ashram as brainless, poor etc.
    sunil s.r who has written here, in his school days was friendly with a bengali girl. her elder brother, got another bengali strong boy to physically roughen him up on the road opposite flower room, warning him, as he was not up to their class. by chance was there and saw it personally.

    gave some books on dalits to the ashram school/library and the response was uncomfortable, as if the problem does not exist or is not their agenda. okay agree on it.
    just a few kms. outside pondy near villupuram and other areas, dalit discrimination is in full force. such as 2 tumbler system in tea shops. etc.
    on ecr road before pondy university, after tsunami, the upper castes did not allow dalit bodies to go through certain areas.
    okay ashramites/devotees are not supposed to solve these problems, but to talk about equality and toilet cleaner as archivist etc, is not fair. these issues and work of archives is not easy, takes years to learn, and the archives always, had to take help of experts, as many owrking there were not trained, so this talk of anyone doing it is not fair.

    another issue, of alternate archivist:
    pranab da was a genius according to his disciples, he could do no wrong and used to comment on anything and everything, could have been everywhere. typical of using force to take over what he felt was wrong. same man would he have allowed someone to take over his dept., or comment on his mistakes. he was violent on these issues. could interfere everywhere, but no one could question him. has all the power and veto capacity without responsibility, as the trust/trustees had to take the flak.
    for saice students, even if the selection committee by a majority has chosen a student, he could veto it. what is the use of the committee, he could have done the job alone and saved time and energy.
    this is partly fault of the trust and dept. heads who grew up under him, they were in awe and fear of him, in childhood.when they grew up they could not shed this and had to pay the price, when they were up against him, did not know what to do.
    so they have just waited, including trustees for him to pass away, to solve their headache.
    manoj da, prime example, writes to him as big brother (when everyone in ashram is equal and guru bhai, but as in animal farm, some are more equal than others)
    this will be justified, as his being a senior sadhak, mother's favourite etc. etc.,

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous at 6:22 PM, October 19, 2010 said:

    “I had asked you clearly if you believe that Pranab-da would have DESTROYED the original works of Sri Aurobindo.”

    Well, my anonymous friend, I appreciate your stubborn insistence, but why do you want me to speculate? It goes against my grain and I have already clearly stated my reservations about Pranab-da’s limitations with regards to literary and intellectual material and the fact that there is now no way that Pranab-da can head the archives as he is no more. So why speculate uselessly?

    But it now comes to my mind that actually, if at all there has been some “tampering” in the Ashram, it has unequivocally happened in no other place than the P.E.D. itself which always claimed exclusive right on the photographs of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Mother’s and Sri Aurobindo’s photos have been systematically, deliberately and in an organized manner tampered by the P.E.D. right under Pranab-da’s nose and guidance.

    While I am not in judgment if that “tampering” was Good or Bad, Divine or Evil, in the manner in which your ilk - Pranab-da inclusive - have accused the Ashram’s archivists of wrong-doing, the fact remains that Pranab-da has repeatedly and consistently demonstrated a lack of objectivity (and I don’t think that there is a Western or Eastern brand of objectivity in case you too have xenophobic tendencies) in several of the decisions that he has taken. The fact of the matter is that such a person is certainly not suitable material for editing literary works. Plain and simple.

    Regarding my request for specific references about your claims that the Mother destroyed books, you certainly appear rather confused and certainly illogical. For, how can you compare my accusations against Sunil with your claims about the Mother’s actions? How absurd and ridiculous!!!

    Because, I am not using my accusations against Sunil to set a benchmark or a standard of behavior based on which certain actions are being justified. My accusations are not justifications. If you wish to challenge them, please do so. And if I cannot provide documentary evidence, I grant you the brownie point.

    But instead you are clearly suggesting that IF the Mother had destroyed books, then that is a benchmark or a standard that Pranab-da is justified to emulate. If, based on your reasoning, Pranab-da is justified to call for the destruction of a book, because he is - according to you - emulating the Mother, the onus is clearly and certainly on you to first and foremost establish that the Mother had destroyed a book or had encouraged such actions.

    But the fact that you try to weave a web of illogic in order to try and escape from your false and hypothetical claims, clearly demonstrates that you have put your foot right into your mouth. And if your only defense or argument is a pathetic “IF”, well then I can also arm myself with “IFs” and we can argue aimlessly ad infinitum.

    In conclusion, if you cannot provide a specific reference to your claims that Mother destroyed books, you can consider this exchange terminated and of course your credibility on the SEOF, although anonymous, severely eroded.

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "this long justification of west and poverty, is typical of indians.always justify the west too is bad. nobody denies it exists in the west, but it is worse here and that is the issue. no country has solved this poverty, class, etc. issues. even the scandinavian countries, which are the best in these and every social/economical parameters."

    I agree that the situation is worse in India. However, if we see the situation in India in isolation from the rest of the world and divorced from times past we will come up with a distorted view. For e.g.Where were the Scandinavians a few centuries ago? Go farther back and you will meet some of the most bloodthirsty and feared people in the world. Things change for the better and for the worse. For India the historical trajectory in the same time period has been in the opposite direction. Even the nation with the highest standard of living and the most egalitarian social system is bound to decay, degenerate and even disintegrate at some point. As Sri Aurobindo has pointed out there is no solution except for the transformation of human nature into something else, something higher, because that is only way to eliminate the root cause. And whatever one may say for India, it is India that holds the key to that transformation and through Sri Aurobindo is even now in the process of implementing it in itself as well as giving it to the whole world wherever there is an opening.

    "this peter being a taxi driver (so he was dirt) has even gone to courts etc.; it is an insult to taxi drivers, that their job is so low that only mindless and fraud are fit to do it and one can never rise in life after that.

    if peter was a professor, could anyone have written about professors in such a derogatory manner. professors/intellectuals can be equally big frauds."

    You are absolutely right. However, the urge behind it might have been to give Peter some of his own treatment. He has sought to trivialize Sri Aurobindo with even less justification in his book. The motive might have been to shed some of the same kind of distorting and disfiguring "light" on some of the lives of Peter Heehs. I cannot say what it was, nor have I have ever used the taxi driver thing against him. But for those who give an overblown false estimate of the man based on superhuman claims of infallibility and absolute scholarly authenticity this is certainly one way to bring them a little bit more down to earth because it is these very same people who think no end of the scholar and the professor and the academician and the intellectual. In general I have seen that Heehsians look upon themselves, Ashram Management as well as the foreigners in the Archives dept, and their cultural brethren in the West, as a kind of elite. So this may be a way to talk to these elitist snobs in their own language and to show them that "Behold, he is now what you think he is and does not necessarily fit the description of what you value."

    I fully support and sympathize with your efforts to enlighten the ignorant and the insensitive about the plight of the downtrodden and the oppressed. Please understand that when I say that I admire your idealism and activism it is without the least shred of sarcasm whatsoever. That effort has to go on. Only, from what I have understood and seen for myself, as I have learned from Sri Aurobindo, the ultimate change, one that will abide, will only come if we follow Their lead and bring it about from within outwards.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Also, about the deferential kow-towing to Pranab-da. I have observed and experienced that the victim in such situatins, the moment he/she has the opportunity, often turns around and looks for others to give him/her the same deference and respect and awe-filled genuflections. They feel that they have paid their dues to Pranab-da and so now others in the same "junior" position to themselves as they were vis-a-vis Pranab-da need to compensate them in the same manner. After all, why should others get away and enjoy equality and freedom when they themselves could not? That would be patently unfair according to them. Since they have paid their dues and played by the rules of the game, others cannot go scott free without paying the necessary toll. From what I have seen MDG etc. are following this human psychological pattern to the T. So I hope you will understand me if I take the claims of the dawn of the golden age of guru-bhai-hood and equality post-Pranab with a massive helping of salt.

    ReplyDelete
  17. RESPONSE TO A.A.D PART I

    A.A.D: "Well, my anonymous friend, I appreciate your stubborn insistence,"

    -- I doubt if repeating a question or rephrasing it is any kind of stubborn insistence. In fact I had given you choice of not responding as well. So forget about stubborn, there was not even any insistence. But certainly your repeated refusal to give a straight response does seem like persistent evasiveness on your part.

    A.A.D: "but why do you want me to speculate?"

    -- I had not asked you to speculate but to clarify. A simple yes or no would have done. But since that level of straightforwardness seems too much to ask of you...

    A.A.D: "It goes against my grain"

    -- Nothing to do with your grain. It was just an ordinary question from one ordinary human to another. We are all ONE grain. Let's not let our high personal opinions get in the way of a simple, straightforward answer.

    A.A.D: "and I have already clearly stated my reservations about Pranab-da’s limitations with regards to literary and intellectual material and the fact that there is now no way that Pranab-da can head the archives as he is no more. So why speculate uselessly?

    But it now comes to my mind that actually, if at all there has been some “tampering” in the Ashram, it has unequivocally happened in no other place than the P.E.D. itself which always claimed exclusive right on the photographs of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Mother’s and Sri Aurobindo’s photos have been systematically, deliberately and in an organized manner tampered by the P.E.D. right under Pranab-da’s nose and guidance.

    While I am not in judgment if that “tampering” was Good or Bad, Divine or Evil, in the manner in which your ilk - Pranab-da inclusive -"

    -- This has to be a compliment. At least I am taking it as one. Pranab-da in MY ILK. And your reference to Pranab as belonging to some "ILK" is also not lost, but duly noted.

    A.A.D: "have accused the Ashram’s archivists of wrong-doing, the fact remains that Pranab-da has repeatedly and consistently demonstrated a lack of objectivity (and I don’t think that there is a Western or Eastern brand of objectivity in case you too have xenophobic tendencies) in several of the decisions that he has taken. The fact of the matter is that such a person is certainly not suitable material for editing literary works. Plain and simple."

    -- I have already responded to your red herring of "xenophobia" previously.

    ReplyDelete
  18. RESPONSE TO A.A.D PART II

    A.A.D: "Regarding my request for specific references about your claims that the Mother destroyed books, you certainly appear rather confused and certainly illogical. For, how can you compare my accusations against Sunil with your claims about the Mother’s actions? How absurd and ridiculous!!!

    Because, I am not using my accusations against Sunil to set a benchmark or a standard of behavior based on which certain actions are being justified. My accusations are not justifications. If you wish to challenge them, please do so."

    -- You certainly have a great ability to come up with tons of B.S. to avoid giving straightforward answers. First and foremost I was not comparing your "accusations"... the right description is all-out assaults b.t.w... against Sunil with anything. I don't know how you generally read but at least in this instance you have spectacularly misread. The issue is this: You have this theory that something that YOU refer to as "objectivity" is necessary for being in the Archives. Furthermore, your second premise was that in asking for the Heehs' books to be destroyed Pranab-da had somehow demonstrated that he lacked what YOU refer to as "objectivity" and your final conclusion was that Pranab-da was incapable of running the archives dept. I had disputed your first assumption on the ground that "objectivity" was not required to do any Ashram work. What was required was the attitude of the servant discharging the commitment to the Divine with absolute faithfulness, which I assume Pranab-da had. You may dispute whether Pranab-da was faithful. That is certainly something you can do. But you are dead wrong about this objectivity red herring. Secondly as far as the question of Mother's burning the books was concerned, since you balked at answering my straightforward question using the "references" excuse I went the extra mile and rephrased the question as something hypothetical so that you did not any longer need references. Specifically this was to help you clarify to yourself that destroying books, whether or not it demonstrated lack of some vague notion of "objectivity" you are carrying around in your head, did not necessarily mean inability to run the archives department of the Ashram. If that is your contention, and IF Mother Herself has destroyed books with the intent that the information contained in them should not be made public, then you would have to disqualify even the Mother from running the archives department. Once again I restate that you are confusing faithfulness, which is the real requirement, with objectivity, and objectivity with taking private things public. What you are describing is really an inversion of values. Rather than being faithful to what the Mother has enjoined you operate by your own self-will, impose your own ideas, and then give it the label of "objectivity". Then you compound your error by arrogantly passing judgment on those, like Pranab-da, who are really concerned only with being faithful to the Mother. Is it any wonder that others like me find you and these self-appointed experts in the Archives to be insufferable snobs?

    ReplyDelete
  19. RESPONSE TO A.A.D PART III

    A.A.D.: "And if I cannot provide documentary evidence, I grant you the brownie point."

    -- Oh it is not so harmless as that my dear. You tried to skewer poor Sunil in public based on rumor and hearsay. It gave me a taste of the kinds of methods that Ashram authorities and the long arm of their henchmen (I am doing you the honor of including you in that category FOR NOW) use to keep troublesome dissidents like Sunil in line.

    Also, before you go and mock at others like Sunil for their basic slips ups in the English language (another characteristic of insufferable snobs) you might be interested to know that "brownie points" have nothing to do with points in a debate, but rather favors that you accrue from authority figures by ingratiating yourself to them, something that, if I may speculate, perhaps you have a lot of experience collecting with the trustees for e.g.

    A.A.D.: "But instead you are clearly suggesting that IF the Mother had destroyed books, then that is a benchmark or a standard that Pranab-da is justified to emulate."

    -- You seem to be deliberately misreading again to avoid answering a simple question. Standard of what? Benchmark for which behavior? I never said that Pranab-da was emulating the Mother nor have I said that the Mother established the standard for anything in this matter. It is in fact YOU who have established the standard of some fuzzy notion of OBJECTIVITY as the requirement for running the archives dept. What you clearly said was that Pranab-da's lack of adherence to this standard disqualified him from running the archives dept. What I have been trying to get you to understand is that Mother Herself does not adhere to your arbitrary standard. The only thing required was faithfulness which is open to toilet-cleaners, taxi drivers, professors alike. IF YOU HAVE THAT THE MOTHER WILL DO THE REST THROUGH YOU. If do not have that then, objectivity or no objectivity, you are bound to make a mess of things.

    A.A.D: "If, based on your reasoning, Pranab-da is justified to call for the destruction of a book, because he is - according to you - emulating the Mother, the onus is clearly and certainly on you to first and foremost establish that the Mother had destroyed a book or had encouraged such actions."

    -- Following your own "logic" and list of demands, since it is you who are apparently setting up the arbitrary standards, benchmarks and pre-requisites the onus is on you to understand the ground reality of the Ashram, which is that the sadhaks are there to function as the faithful servitors of the Divine. They cannot come up with their own standards and then go about on their merry way to do as they please, claiming "objectivity" or some other self-concocted nonsense.

    ReplyDelete
  20. RESPONSE TO A.A.D PART IV

    A.A.D: "But the fact that you try to weave a web of illogic in order to try and escape from your false and hypothetical claims, clearly demonstrates that you have put your foot right into your mouth."

    -- Given the way you have tried like a thug to disrobe Sunil in public just for opening HIS mouth, I'm glad that this discussion has given me the opportunity to put my foot into your big mouth. If you will oblige me further I will gladly put my other foot somewhere as well.

    A.A.D: "And if your only defense or argument is a pathetic “IF”, well then I can also arm myself with “IFs” and we can argue aimlessly ad infinitum."

    -- A.A.D, you are probably on L.S.D. Only so can I explain you hallucinating that the "IF" was a defense. The IF was a restatement for your benefit. If it looked like defense at the time then you were also probably seeing pink elephants. BTW the "IF" in the preceding sentence is not meant in defense, just in case you are still high.

    A.A.D: “In conclusion, if you cannot provide a specific reference to your claims that Mother destroyed books, you can consider this exchange terminated and of course your credibility on the SEOF, although anonymous, severely eroded.”

    -- OK I was using the L.S.D crack to make a point. But in all seriousness you seem to be a completely ego-intoxicated individual. It is up to you to believe me or not but it is totally presumptuous of you to speak for everyone else who visits this site. Despite your pompous pretensions I have no illusions about my credibility with you and do not care to change it one jot or one tittle. But adopting the passive voice and speaking like the owner of SEOF shows that you have some kind of a megalomaniac streak which likes to issue pronouncements and proclamations on behalf of the whole world. Well... I hereby take thy leave, your majesty and wish you a good day in your ROYAL BUBBLE.

    ReplyDelete
  21. To the Anonymous who has responded to me in 4 parts:

    You have given a perfect demonstration of the law of physics that hot air always expands and that the hotter the air is, the larger the expansion will be. Because you reply in 4 parts has nothing else but plenty of hot expanded air which contains absolutely nothing substantial, as usual!

    YOU, by the way, made the claim that the Mother had destroyed books. And when I asked you for a specific reference of such an instance, you conveniently side-step the issue and come back empty handed except for a lot of hot air.

    The readers of the SEOF, particularly the many silent ones, are more astute than that and they have surely looked through your ploy of attempting to distract the readers and avoiding the question.

    Thus, under these circumstances, I have made it amply clear that there is absolutely no point arguing infinitely with someone who is incapable of substantiating his claims, especially when it concern the use of the Mother’s words or actions.

    Moreover, apart from the clear demonstration of a total lack of credibility, till you demonstrate to the readers of the SEOF that you have substantiated your claims, I will also consider that you have actually indulged in the distortion of the Mother’s image and denigrated her by publicly showing the Mother in very bad light.

    How ironic it is that characters like you allege that Peter has indulged in the denigration of Sri Aurobindo…

    A.A.D.

    P.S.
    In the meantime you are of course free to try to put your big feet wherever you wish, but please wash them after you have extricated them from your frothing mouth.

    ReplyDelete
  22. A.A.D: "YOU, by the way, made the claim that the Mother had destroyed books. And when I asked you for a specific reference of such an instance, you conveniently side-step the issue and come back empty handed except for a lot of hot air."

    Silence your inner child if you can. I had asked you the same question hypothetically and you prevaricated and dissimulated using a plethora of specious excuses. You, my little friend, can continue to dance around the issue and point fingers excitedly in my direction as much as you want. But remember that childish impetuosity is no substitute for mature honesty.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "I had asked you the same question hypothetically..."

    Ok. Ok. stop whining. I'll give you your hypothesis in exchange of the specific reference to the Mother's destruction of books. Deal!

    Now, IF the Mother has destroyed a book, in all likelihood you would have been born as Peter Heehs... Everything is possible in a hypothesis!!!

    Your turn now with your specific reference please.

    Let's see your "mature honesty".

    A.A.D.

    ReplyDelete