Manoj Das Gupta Stops Dr. Radhikaranjan’s Classes — Sridharan
from Critique of The Lives by General Editor
The latest victim of Manoj Das Gupta is Dr.
Radhikaranjan Das, who teaches Sanskrit and Biology in the Sri Aurobindo
Ashram School ,
Pondicherry . He
is also a full-fledged Homeopathic doctor and has been successfully treating
both Ashram and outside patients from the last twenty years…What the Sri Aurobindo Ashram needs now is basic
justice, basic morality and minimum freedom of speech, which is unfortunately
lacking despite all the inspiring words of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother the
authorities keep quoting in order to defend their unjust actions.
Now, a generation later, a new group of people
accuse the Trustees of the Ashram of being the traitors, and once again the aim
is to turn Sri Aurobindo’s teachings into a religion, a thing of the past. Putting
themselves forward as the priests of this religion, this group wants to control
the thoughts and feelings of those who turn to Sri Aurobindo and the Mother for
guidance, in order to gain power, position, and influence. Lately they have
seized on a nationally and internationally acclaimed biography of Sri
Aurobindo, conveniently (for them) written by a firangi Ashramite.
By selectively misquoting, misattributing, misrepresenting, decontextualising,
and distorting passages from the book, by filing court cases based on
trumped-up charges and feeding misinformation to Government officials and the
press, they forced the Trustees of the Ashram to come to the author’s defence.
This enabled them to attack the Trustees for being complicit in an attempt to
“denigrate” Sri Aurobindo and, by annexing
Sri Aurobindo to the Indian religious traditions of the past, to frame them
as co-conspirators in a universal plot by “Western supremacists” against “the
age-old glorious culture and tradition of our Motherland”.
Comment on Amal Kiran and Prithwi Singh Nahar’s Interviews with
the Mother about the Return of Sri Aurobindo. by s.subramanian from Comments for Overman Foundation by s. subramanian
in the present condition of the world there is no
possibility of peace and harmony amongst the nations and also within each
nation. every religion has become almost extremist. to solve this you need a
world government overuling individual nations to have world government is not
possible witout a supramental beeing in our midst. let us pray for such an event
as early as possible so that the world turns into a divine life as evisaged by
him
The Freedom of the Gnostic Being from Sri Aurobindo Studies May 21, 2012
Human nature, based in the Ignorance, has to address
numerous conflicting impulses, each attempting to carry itself out in action despite
opposition from some other part of the being. In order to try to rein in these
impulses, moral standards, ethical rules, legal frameworks are set up. These
systems of laws and social expectations are then used to more or less harmonise
the individual’s action with the larger society’s needs. The call of the ego
for freedom is illusory in that freedom is not to be found in setting one’s
individuality in opposition to everyone or everything else. The gnostic being,
acting from the knowledge and will of Divine Knowledge and Force, would
automatically harmonise its action with the higher intention, and thus, there
is no question of opposition, conflict or need for a moral, ethical or mental
law or framework…
Spiritual freedom does not mean a prerogative or
license for the expression or enjoyment on the part of the individual ego. It
does not arrogate to itself the right to trample down all limits for the
aggrandisement of the personality. Rather it is a higher law, not a lower law,
and thus, the transcendence of ethical, moral or social standards of law is
based on alignment and adherence to the higher law of Oneness and universal
harmony in the expression of the Divine Intention.
Intellectual Conservatism by Nikunj February 28, 2011 | 11 Comments
The conservative mind must open again for Hindu
Nationalism itself is an inheritor a reformist intellectual tradition, the 19th
century Hindu reformist movement of Bengal . At
the core of that tradition was a emphasis on social reform to create a basis
for national re-generation. This national re-generation of India as a
civilization has to be the sole focus of the Right. Religion has its place in
this framework, yet it cannot be the cornerstone of it.
On innovation through conservatism from Love of All Wisdom by Amod Lele
Alasdair MacIntyre, whom I have already contrasted
to Wilber on a related subject, is one example. For MacIntyre, modernity is a
story of slow decline, one which makes the idea of ethical action increasingly
meaningless. He is not a naïve Romantic; he knows we can’t go back. But he
nevertheless rejects the modern secular liberal world and most of its
presuppositions, and hopes to build a world more like the ones that preceded
it. He works from a long background of studying post/modern figures like Marx
and Nietzsche, who are strong influences in his own analysis... MacIntyre is scarcely alone in this. Writers at Front Porch Republic,
like Patrick Deneen and James Matthew Wilson, have a sharply articulate grasp
of the Western philosophical tradition from ancient times to the present, often
holding PhDs in it (and their grasp of it usually strikes me as deeper than
Wilber’s). But they express a Romantic rejection of much of the modern
worldview, seeking to return us to a world of conservative traditional
communities. Their anti-modernism and anti-postmodernism (the two are of a
piece) is not naïve but sophisticated. What MacIntyre and the Front Porchers are
doing is described very well by Randall Collins in The Sociology of Philosophies: it is innovation through conservatism.
Their approach has a venerable pedigree in philosophy throughout the world, and
it is one that I don’t think Wilber adequately recognizes.
Deicide: This Time No Screw-Ups! from One Cʘsmos by Gagdad
Bob
In his parable of the madman, Nietzsche implies that
one must be both a little crazy and ahead of one's time to recognize that God
is dead -- like a wild-eyed prophet, really, bearing the stark news that men
are not yet prepared to accept: […] Again, Nietzsche is refreshingly candid,
not to mention poetic, about the implications of deicide. I'll take a deicidal
literary genius any day over an atheistic mediocrity, because at least the
former points up in spite of himself.
The problem with our contemporary atheists is that
they are shaped by an altogether different culture than was Nietzsche,
essentially the cramped world of scientism instead of the wider world of art,
letters, and literature. You might say that the styleless style of atheism that
flows from vulgar scientism is just too facile to be true. With a little
education, anyone can believe it, which our trolls prove.
Being a consistent atheist poses as much -- if not
more -- of a challenge than being a consistent theist. After all, a theist has
the aid of heaven, whereas the atheist must accomplish his promethean -- not to
say sisyphean -- task on his own. (Interesting that no matter where man goes,
myth has been there first, from stealing light to rolling stones. Myth always
comprehends man more than man comprehends myth, unlike, say, science, where
this relation is reversed.) … If it is true that myth shapes man -- that there
exist preconceptual categories through which thought courses -- then each man
is heir to the ontological inclinations of all men, irrespective of whether one
calls it theism or atheism.
Thoughts on Immortality: From a Skeptical Philosopher Who
Doesn’t Want to Be Decieved, But Sees Potential in Ibn Arabi, and Spacetime
Smearing from Networkologies by chris
Anyone who’s studied basic neuroscience knows that
human brains are “pattern completion” machines. When something is missing, we
guess. When there are parts, we try to devise a whole. When there’s a tendency,
we extrapolate.
God is the largest pattern of which our brains can
conceive. God generally has all the perfections we can imagine, all combined,
no matter the contradictions, on one notion. And with pattern completing
brains, it’s natural to see this in the world, as it’s necessary
complement, because that’s the way our brains are made. Evolution, of
course, made the brain this way, and this would lead us to believe that completing
patterns, and perhaps even a belief in something like God, was somehow good for
the survival and flourishing of our species. And perhaps still is. Certainly
people seem happier when they believe in something like a God, for whatever
that’s worth.
And yet, the very same brains now generally see
something like God as irrational. We see no evidence for it, and the hankering
for evidence produced the science which produced so much change in our physical
worlds. Yet there is a sort of psychological efficacy to God. It impacts how
people act, think, and feel. Certainly that is real, as real as a psychosomatic
illness! But does that mean we should all just delude ourselves in believing in
something we can’t see?
The same goes with notions of immortality, at least
of the personal sort. No-one who believes in science can find any reason to
support any notion of personal immortality… Ibn Arabi speaks of ecstasy as well
as sadness in his erotic poetry, which is Sufism is frequently a way of
discussing mystical experience. And it is, as Sells argues, precisely the
ambiguity of reference, the fact that what is being discussed could be erotic
love for a beloved, or for God, that gives the poetry its power. For in fact,
it is the ambiguity that makes it creative, possible of more meanings. Bringing
these meanings into the physical world is the only way to anchor them, just as
reimagining the physical world is the only way to liberate it. This dialectic
cuts both ways.
And so eternity is always present, even as every
moment vanishes forever. Nirvana is samsara, and we need to learn to give up
everything to gain it completely, and vice-versa. Dreaming can liberate matter,
just as matter can anchor dreaming. And while dreaming is closer to eternity,
and matter closer to passing away, humans always live between these. The more
intensely we bring the dream into reality, the more we eternalize and
materialize our dreams, and the more we dream about matter, the more we
liberate it, eternalize it.
And this is why everything in the world is potentially
holy, sacred, a site for the appearance of eternity, and it is our recreation,
our dreaming, that can make it so. But we need to learn to give up our dreams
to create new ones, to transform with them, or we become prisoners of them, we
lose the link to eternity in the present, that which breaks our tie to craving
and binding. This is why the eternity of the present comes at the cost of
perpetual dying and rebirth.
Two
towers of Europe and America David Brooks New
York Times: Mon May 21 2012 Structures
created to keep the worst of human nature in check are no longer working
Though the forms were different, the democracies in
Europe and the US
were based on a similar carefully balanced view of human nature: People are naturally
selfish and need watching. But democratic self-government is possible because
we’re smart enough to design structures to police that selfishness.
But, over the years, this balanced wisdom was lost.
Leaders today do not believe their job is to restrain popular will. Their job
is to flatter and satisfy it. A gigantic polling apparatus has developed to
help leaders anticipate and respond to popular whims. Democratic politicians
adopt the mindset of marketing executives…
Western democratic systems were based on a balance
between self-doubt and self-confidence. They worked because there were
structures that protected the voters from themselves and the rulers from
themselves. Once people lost a sense of their own weakness, the self-doubt went
away and the chastening structures were overwhelmed. This is one of the reasons
why Europe and the US
are facing debt crises and political dysfunction at the same time. People used
to believe that human depravity was self-evident and democratic self-government
was fragile. Now they think depravity is nonexistent and they take
self-government for granted. Neither the US nor the European model will work
again until we rediscover and acknowledge our own natural weaknesses and learn
to police rather than lionise our impulses.
No comments:
Post a Comment