Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Sri Aurobindo's disagreements with Mahatma Gandhi and Rabindranath Tagore

Tweets 1h - Savitri Era Party @SavitriEraParty [failures in fathoming the depths of Aurobindo’s thought are related to more general infirmities... Sugata Bose]
1h - @krishnarjun108 His socio-political analysis penetrates into the future, encompasses the whole planet and abhors narrow Hindu ghettoisation  View conversation - 1h - @krishnarjun108 Honest and open debate with Sri Aurobindo as the point of departure will go a long way in sensitizing the present generation  View conversation
1h [Bankim took Auguste Comte’s prescription that the ‘human deity’ be worshipped, but did not take Comte’s reasons. -Ray]
3h [Bhaskar Chatterjee @BhaskarChat Today is birthday of #Bankim Chandra Chatterjee, prophet of Indian Nationalism #VandeMataram. A speech by Sri Aurobindo Retweeted by Savitri Era Party
2h [Sri Aurobindo's disagreements with his contemporaries like Mahatma Gandhi & Rabindranath Tagore]
15h [Nirmal Verma’s novel Raat ka Reporter, set in Delhi during the Emergency, was published in 1989.] #Emergency75 -  View location
16h Savitri Era Party @SavitriEraParty MUKTIKAMI July10, 1975 distributed in Gopabandhu Hostel in Bhubaneswar, Odisha. [TNM55] #Emergency75 -  View photo

[The Week | Up close and personal By Ajish P. Joy BOOK REVIEW: Monday, June 25, 2012 14:29 hrs IST Heehs, though in respectful tones, questions the divinity of Aurobindo and the claim that he possessed supernatural powers. The book records Aurobindo's famous disagreements with his contemporaries like Mahatma Gandhi and Rabindranath Tagore. The book attempts a critical evaluation of Aurobindo. It is comprehensive, empirical, historically accurate and a formidable piece of scholarship. Though his followers may disagree, the book manages to humanise Aurobindo for the common man.]


  1. Mr. Joy should, first of all, understand that Sri Aurobindo is not a common man like him and others, but a great and uncommon yogi and spiritual leader, who did intense sadhana for long years to bring down a new Power for the evolutionary needs of the mankind: an Avataric work. Such a person does not need the type of crude investigation tried in Peter’s book. Moreover, Sri Aurobindo himself had categorically advised against trying to write his biography, since the essential elements of it are not on the surface to see. The mischievous mind of Peter Heehs, under influence of his US conspirators, have naturally tried to work like gutter inspectors, and in the process, distorted every event towards his own dirty conclusions, (in the name of humanising him!). Hence, this book is highly detestable and despicable from end to end, whatever the so-called pseudo-intellectuals like Mr, Joy, or others, have to say about it.

  2. The Mother says Sri Aurobindo belongs to the future. Similarly one by going through the works of Sri Aurobindo cannot but oblige to say how the future also belongs to Sri Aurobindo! This‘s a natural realization of any person who reads Sri Aurobindo in-depth.

    PH is no exception to this. He has at least well grasped who Sri Aurobindo really is – his undeniable and irrevocable legacy and authority. Then he, by writing a purported book, started a game to attack Sri Aurobindo for the sake of his and his friends’ vested interests, religious conditioning, narrow-mindedness, ethnic jealousy, sadistic pleasure, intellectual slavery, money, sex, power, name and fame. Thus grossly biased himself he wants to bias everybody, the whole world! But this sort of his futile conspiracy won’t work – rather this’ll very soon turn to be a bloody boomerang for him.

    Then why should we protest him? It’s because PH, well aware of Sri Aurobindo’s all-pervading prophecy of life and the world, his unquestionable future legacy, tried through his vested interest book to inject and infect the minds of future with poison against Sri Aurobindo. Who are these minds of future? They are the world’s energetic young generation! The first impression of a young reader about Sri Aurobindo, after going through his purported book, would be negative and they’ll hardly be inquisitive to read Sri Aurobindo anymore. Besides exceptions this’ll be the major case because PH claims to have authored the book by forty years’ research in SAAA. Thus he has very shrewdly tried to wipe out and eliminate both the future-Sri Aurobindo and the Sri Aurobindo-future from the minds of future generation! Here comes the indispensable necessity of a relentless and full-fledged counter criticism and counter attack of the book TLOSA.

    We know truth will prevail at last and PH’s book cannot soil Sri Aurobindo for good. But saying this we cannot flee from our very basic responsibility and rest content. Because, as we also know, the book and our inaction about it can lead towards delaying the process of Sri Aurobindo’s vision! Can this go well with us? No. Hostile forces are always awake to damage the divine plan at the slightest opportunity. When the call is inevitable how can we ‘talk and sleep’ at all?

    Finally, when one being well aware of who Sri Aurobindo is writes such a purported book like TOLSA doesn’t know Sri Aurobindo in true sense of the term.

    -- Someone

  3. It’s a basic truth that the creator is reflected in his/her creation and vice versa. So it’s not only PH reflects TLOSA but also TLOSA reflects PH! In a book we not only read the story or plot consisting of the hero among other characters but we also knowingly or unknowingly read the author by what, why, how, when and where the story he/she presents before us! And obviously we the readers are eager to know who and how the author is! However the author tries to hide himself behind the book it would be only futile. Author and author’s book cannot be separated from each other. Thus TLOSA tells us more about PH than Sri Aurobindo!

    The book TLOSA written by PH has become controversial. It seems the author is very much in favour of making his book controversial. So the stamp of controversy will continue for all time to come. Why did the book become controversial after all? Is the author himself a controversial person? As we know, it’s almost like that. Whether the ban is lifted or not the stamp of controversy on the book can never be lifted any more until and unless the author himself admits his fault and submits for a thorough amendment of the book on the basis of true truth. Otherwise he would only prove himself as a split person who is not yet free from his oral and genital stages. He split Sri Aurobindo’s life and teaching into many parts saying they are all one in the end but he precariously fails to reflect this in his book’s title where he emphasized ‘lives’ instead of ‘life’.

    If PH is, as a historian as he claims, really honest, sincere and concerned about his book TLOSA and its controversy then he should publicly disclose, reveal and share his personal diaries, correspondence letters he sent to and received from his friends, beloved/s and relatives during 40 years of stay in Ashram. For, this will prove to a great extent his authenticity in writing TLOSA and innocence for extending the visa! And now-a-days it would be simply hard to imagine a historian without maintaining personal diaries and without making correspondences! Instead of defending himself desperately he should always be ready to put forth all the data and references he used in the book as and when required. He may argue about the writer’s right in his unique way but that, he may accept or reject, won’t work in case of a controversial book like TLOSA. Here especially in case of Sri Aurobindo’s life and teaching one should have that minimum courtesy of humility, simplicity and openness. Lacking those values mean nurturing vested interests.

    As for the Trust it should appeal and should be appealed frequently and constantly for mutual and common discussions and consultations about TLOSA and the use of Archives by PH. Avoiding this means we are not on the sides of The Mother and Sri Aurobindo but on the sides of our egos and vested interests. TLOSA is not a simple controversy but a great challenge calling for churning out what is real Truth and how we respond to that.

    -- Someone

  4. I would like to add that it is not advisable and more viable to compare between the greatest man India had produced with ordinary men like Gandhi and Tagore.It is but obvious prim-a-facie that Maharshi will disagree with the latters especially with "Mahatma" in all because of basic difference of levels between them. Sri Arvind was transformed from ordinary to super whilst the others were not.