Angiras: Thank you very much for all of these clarifications, and for the dispassionate way in which you have presented them. Much appreciated.

This note was in fact circulated widely, as was Ranade’s letter of 25 September 2008 marked “Most confidential. Strictly not for circulation.”

Someone has also posted it on the Internet, or at least a portion of it.

Dear Ned,
I am Surendra to whom the above letter was addressed.
I would like to know where has this been posted on the internet. Would be thankful...
L&R,
Surendra

Dear Surendra,

A lot of the original letters were posted on this site:
http://www.sriaurobindoaba.com/index.php?option=com_links&Itemid=72

Best regards,
ned.

Dear Ned,
Looked all over, could not find the letter or even a partial portion of it... ??? may be not this letter? Pl. check out and do send the precise-place link, if you can... Sorry for the inconvenience.
L&R,
Surendra

Dear Surendra,

Sorry, there's a confusion here I think. The letter that was posted online is the one Angiras is referring to here:

"Ranade’s letter of 25 September 2008 marked “Most confidential. Strictly not for circulation.” "

This letter is posted here:
http://www.sriaurobindoaba.com/index.php?option=com_links&task=linkdetail&cname=17&Itemid=72

So this is not the letter addressed to you.

Thats that then! QED...
Thanks for having taken the trouble, Ned.
Surendra

Dear Angiras,
I am Surendra. I see that you have taken upon yourself to address the points Sraddhalu has conveyed to me in response to my letter to him. Since it is SR himself who has chosen to circulate this letter, yes, there seems to be no violation of confidentiality he had initially stipulated. Freedom of expression is not a rare right reserved only for some; as for him, so for you..., and may we say, so for PH....!?

I am curious to know what prompts you to bring this particular letter, (not in its entirety though), at THIS time here on SCIY? Am equally curious about your non-curiosity to inquire into the basis of SR's reply - i.e. my letter to him; for it would have only made the picture more perfect. More on hearing from you...

Love,
Surendra

"I am curious to know what prompts you to bring this particular letter, (not in its entirety though), at THIS time here on SCIY?"

Is there any reason why these things should not be made public on SCIY at this particular time?

NONE, Ned.
In so far as it is typical of Mind to question the very opposite of what is inquired, I do understand; hope I have opined satisfactorily. I had expressed my curiosity to know and not be questioned about why I want to know... however, I have absolutely no issues if the Mind has issues! If Angiras has posted SR's Jan.13th reply on March 15th, why should I not be curious? If I authentically want to know from Angiras his reasons to write, how would you know? I may be able to grasp better his feelings and objectives rather than resort to assumptions and thus do better justice to the matter at hand. Does it not say that its more a matter of basic trust in our fellow beings, or the lack of it?
I am as open and accommodating of any sincere inquiry as yourself or anyone you may come by... :-)
L&R,
Surendra

I think Angiras just wants to set the record straight.

Why has he posted it now? Probably because it takes time to read The Lives of Sri Aurobindo, read the allegations against it, re-read the book and check the allegations against the book carefully and with scholarly integrity, and then do a write-up assessing how well the allegations stand up in the light of the book's actual content.

I think Angiras's postings on SCIY have shown pretty clearly that whatever genuine flaws the Heehs biography might have, most of the allegations of malicious slander and defamation that have been leveled against it are flimsy at best, and absurd at worst.

What you say may well be the line of Angira's thinking or it may not be... let's hear from him directly instead of speculating on his reasons. Besides, the timing of the post in itself is not such a big thing except that it may throw some interesting and additional light on the buildup of things. I might as well wait to hear from him before adding my views.

PHb controversy is still to show its true colours ... :-)))
Let's see...
Surendra

PHb controversy is still to show its true colours ... :-)))

I would hope the controversy would lead to more introspection, more self-critique, and more dialogue, rather than all the ridiculous overreaction that has been on display thus far.

Dear Surendra,

All of Ned's inferences are correct and I thank her for answering so perceptively on my behalf. Sorry about the delay in replying myself, but my access to the internet is limited.

Perhaps you are not aware that the circulation of Sraddhalu's letter long ago escaped from anyone's control. When so many copies have been emailed from one person to another or passed around in a printed form, there is no point in pretending that it is confidential. Since it is impossible to trace all the people who have read it, the only way to reply is in a public forum. SR seems to be claiming that he has the right to do as much damage to PH as he likes and no one has the right to answer him. I hope you do not accept that claim. I liked your letter of 10 January which has been circulated along with SR's, but I didn't mention it because I wanted to focus mainly on the criticisms of the book. I thought my posting was long enough as it is.

I have commented on SR's letter written in January for the same reason that I have recently commented on some letters written in September. These letters are part of the history of a controversy that raises important questions which have not been resolved. Many people still seem to be confused. I hope my commentary sheds some light on the issues.

Angiras

Dear Angiras,

A thousand apologies for this inordinate delay - I am transiting and am unable to get access to an internet connection sometimes; do pardon me.

Even now, much as I would have liked to respond to you at some length, I will have to excuse myself until I can come back with a loaded reply :-) . For the time being, pl. permit me to post this short acknowledgement.

Your points, needless to say, are very valid in their own sphere and scope. Contrary to the current trend of countering, I would aspire to add to your thoughts for your consciousness's consumption, reflection and interaction hoping to ‘connect’ with you and bask a while in the radiance of your unique inner world...

Many thanks for your 'engagement', encouragement and love. May I revert soon as I can?

Love and regards to all,
Surendra
(ps: this must be my 30th attempt to post a reply here - some problem in my laptop, i guess!!)

Angiras,

You've done excellent work here. Reading the most startling of Mr. Ranade's supposed “conclusions of PH”, it appears highly likely he had not read the book and was campaigning against a different book that existed only in his mind. It's easy to raise criticisms about some of the tone and content of the real book without proposing absurdly false claims or conspiracy theories.

I do think I noticed a hint of contradiction emerging between two ideas you referenced:

1) It's very important for “scholars in the Sri Aurobindo Ashram” to engage on the academic playing field to counter those academics (e.g. Ashis Nandy) who have written in a manner hostile to Sri Aurobindo or at least failed to properly value his importance and achievements. Dr. Nadkarni is quoted in apparent support of this view.

2) It's not very important what scholars in academia write about Sri Aurobindo. “Ideas accepted by intellectuals“ and “how Sri Aurobindo is represented in academia” pose no particular threat and could certainly not “repel spiritual seekers and shatter the foundations of the Ashram”.

So it would appear that at most one, but not both of these characterizations could be correct. If 1) is correct, then Mr. Heehs has made a perhaps flawed but noble attempt to influence the vitally important academic perception of Sri Aurobindo, and any collateral negative impact on his fellow ashramites or other devotees pales in importance.

If 2) is correct, the impetus behind the book seems murkier. I can't say I'm aware of Sri Aurobindo or Mother ever having suggested that if academic intellectuals could be somehow persuaded to consider yogic realizations as not necessarily pathological delusions, then the work of establishing a divine life on earth would be significantly aided.

Regards,
Kepler

Kepler: perceptive observations. I always appreciate your comments here.

Until reading your words here, I thought it was obvious that the project of establishing a divine life on earth needed a general openness in the human population to the possibility. Such an opening does not exist at present due to a widespread "faith" in philosophical materialism as the basis of reality and reason as the basis of knowledge. Such a general faith in the human mass is a characteristic of modernity and is largely kept in place by the "knowledge industry" in its various ramifications, but with academia as its authority. In European history (the foundation of modern world history), this "faith" makes its appearance in the 17th/18th c. and displaces the "faith" in an inscrutable God whose wishes could only be known through his priestly agents.

Of course, the priestly agents have not gone away (as we can see clearly here) but exist in "preserves" in the modern world, from which they hold sway over the spectral obscurities of the irrational. But they have little power over the faith of the age. Just as 17th c. Europe displaced the faith of the previous age ("epsiteme" to use Foucault's language and "yuga-dharma" to use Indian terminology) and established the "new church" of reason as the western academy, if "yoga is to be revealed to mankind because it is the next stage in evolution," (Sri Aurobindo) this needs necessarily an addressing of the distortion that "yogic realizations [are] necessarily pathological delusions" (J. Kepler) in the heart of the maintenance of the episteme of modernity.

Of course, this is not what all who come to the integral yoga are called upon to do. Scholars in academia perpetuating the expected view that yogic realizations are delusions can hardly "shatter the foundations of the ashram" but they can certainly continue to maintain a stranglehold on the general understanding of the times, unless challenged in their domain by those who can answer their charges and open up new disciplines of understanding. One may say Sri Aurobindo himself took pains to do this in his time, but the academic discourse has changed somewhat since he left his body and people like Mangesh Nadkarni, for this reason, made an appeal for this dimension of "the work to be done" (kartavyam karma) to be recognized and undertaken by those who had the ability to do so. And in this area, he applauded the work of Peter Heehs.

Debashish,

I understand your perspective, but I think an equally rational view can find the mid-set holding sway in academia to be much less cosmically important and specifically much less of a critical success factor in the type of spiritual progress Sri Aurobindo describes as being most necessary for the next big evolutionary steps ahead. My read would put much more emphasis on the development of a new consciousness in a relatively small number of aspirants ready for that development, and think of their progress then leading to changes in the general human mental atmosphere, more so than the other way around.

I don't mean to disparage academic work and intellectual awakening to the possibility of spiritual evolution as a factor in preparing the total human field for change (as you point out), but to me a book on Sri Aurobindo that helped light a spark of aspiration and consecration in those ready for Integral Yoga would be more efficacious than an academic tome arguing against some egregious misconceptions within academia, especially a tome that has proved unable to accomplish its task without rattling devotees unnecessarily. But perhaps we've discussed this already :-)

Kepler

The question of whether the development of a new consciousness in a relatively few or the creation of a wider receptivity in the academic world is more necessary for the next evolutionary step can be debated without issue (unless one claims, as too many do today, some occult privilege in knowing such things). It is worth noting however, that the unfathomable yogic work of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother and the early disciples has not made much of a dent in the general mind so far; and also that explicitly, to a question raised by Nirodbaran, regarding whether the disciples at the ashram would bring about the supramental change in humanity, Sri Auorbindo replied that a few hundred disciples at the ashram would not be effective for that, thousands in the world testing it out in a variety of life circumstances would be required for that. One might "believe" that those thousands would turn to the yoga automatically by "grace" or due to changes in the mental atmosphere but this may or may not be the case. Perhaps the random law of grace is replaced by more predictable laws with the persistence and growth of a power of consciousness due to external acitvities as well.

The need to make a change in the academic world may not seem important to some, I see it as a major need in the long run. At the least, no one has the right to stand in its way under the assumption that this is an unworthy attempt.

As to the statement that the "tome" in question "has proved unable to accomplish its task without rattling devotees unnecessarily," the "rattled devotees" are evidently not doing much to vindicate the power of Sri Aurobindo's yoga, rather the opposite. In the eyes of many followers of yoga, they are being perceived as laughing stocks. The "tome," on the other hand, if one is to belive the reviews and the reception in academia so far, has gone much further towards accomplishing its task.

DB

K: I think an equally rational view can find the mid-set holding sway in academia to be much less cosmically important and specifically much less of a critical success factor in the type of spiritual progress Sri Aurobindo describes as being most necessary for the next big evolutionary steps ahead.<


TC: Although for many reasons I have serious doubts about the utility of equating spiritual progress with the biological phenomena that is evolution, - and I will prefix my statement by admitting that the Academy is not without its share of problems - but, whatever the cosmic importance or not of academics in general the academic standards that have been set to assess and demonstrate the validity of truth claims that can be asserted by someone have no doubt proven themselves to be, by in large, far superior than the standards set to judge the truth claims of those proclaiming themselves experts on metaphysical traditions or occult realizations.

This above all is instanced in this controversey
in which puffed up spiritualist have taken it upon themselves to persecute someone (in a very material sense) because they have granted themselves the authority to represent the occult and spiritual truth of Sri Aurobindo.

I agree, Tony, that occult and spiritual claims are a very, very tricky thing. Unless someone has stabilized extremely powerful spiritual realizations, has been testing them day in and day out, for years, literally, it is best to maintain a certain kind of high-minded "spiritual skepticism" or "spiritual positivism" (to use Sri Aurobindo's own phrase). I have had by now quite a few spiritual experiences, some that have been very powerful and indeed have had physical effects on me, and I could even claim to have had experiences that could be considered "adeshes", but I dare not make any public or authoritative statement as far as these experiences go.

These spiritual capacities have not yet stabilized in general humanity the way mental capacities have, so it is best to fall back on reason, I feel, when in doubt or when one feels that one is not sufficiently pure to arrive at the best interpretation of an experience.

Besides we all know how ridiculously easy it is to fall from an experience. Great rishis have fallen from their realizations. Before one claims to have spiritual insight, a good amount of humility and self-conquest is needed, or one will most definitely end up making a fool out of themselves.

Besides we all know how ridiculously easy it is to fall from an experience.

I am tempted to quip: we all know how easy it is to fall for an experience (that is, get attached to it, get stuck there, blow it up out of proportion to its actual significance).

These spiritual capacities have not yet stabilized in general humanity the way mental capacities have, so it is best to fall back on reason...

I wish reason had stabilized in general humanity!

lol, yeah you're right, Koantum. I guess I would say that mental capacities / reason have stabilized at least in a sizeable quantity of humanity, if not the majority.

About what you said about getting attached to experiences and blowing them out of proportion: yeah, I think spiritual egoism is the worst and leads to the greatest self-deception, because you are partly conscious and partly unconscious. The higher we climb on the ladder of consciousness, the harder we will fall when we slip up. That's just how the game is played and we shouldn't take it personally if and when it happens.

I didn't really think of spiritual egoism — just our natural lack of perspective, owing to which we fail to see that behind every peak climbed there is a larger peak to be climbed.

...the coming of a spiritual age must be preceded by the appearance of an increasing number of individuals who are no longer satisfied with the normal intellectual, vital and physical existence of man, but perceive that a greater evolution is the real goal of humanity and attempt to effect it in themselves, to lead others to it and to make it the recognised goal of the race. In proportion as they succeed and to the degree to which they carry this evolution, the yet unrealised potentiality which they represent will become an actual possibility of the future. (Sri Aurobindo, The Human Cycle..., p. 263)

The words emphasized in this passage are often overlooked. Since academia's doctrines strongly influence, via the mass media, the great unwashed, opening up academia (by means acceptable to them) to Sri Aurobindo's influence is of utmost importance.

Koantum,

To quote from my reply above to Debashish: “I don't mean to disparage academic work and intellectual awakening to the possibility of spiritual evolution as a factor in preparing the total human field for change”. My point was about the relative importance of academic opinion concerning Sri Aurobindo and Integral Yoga, as that importance is regularly cited as the urgent rationale for Mr. Heeh’s recent book.

You write “opening up academia (by means acceptable to them) to Sri Aurobindo's influence is of utmost importance.” I’ll assume you know the meaning of “utmost” :-), and that by “means acceptable” you mean rational debate, attempting to convince philosophical materialists that their positions are illogical, etc.

I don’t deny that can be useful and interesting work (and you are among the best at it), but do you really mean to say that intellectuals convincing academics to think differently is, within the context of Integral Yoga, as or more important than people with yogic capacity opening to the psychic being, or to the descent of the higher consciousness? Considering the mass of Sri Aurobindo’s writings on yoga (Synthesis, Letters, etc.), I haven’t noticed any emphasis on the utmost importance of this effort to convince academics of the theoretical validity of his yoga. I rather seem to find him emphasizing the yogic silencing of the thinking intellect so that a consciousness with a more direct access to truth may find room to work in the human mind.

Perhaps this is not the most receptive website on which to question the cosmic importance of academic thinking; no offense intended! I’m certainly not suggesting no one has the right to feel influencing academia is important or to pursue that effort. I’m just trying to gauge your thinking on the importance of that in the grand scheme of things.

Kepler

Dear Kepler,

(This is slightly off-topic for the post and the general thrust of the thread.)

I think I'm very sympathetic toward what you're saying here, but just to give a practical example from my own yoga practice.

I came to this yoga through a spontaneous psychospiritual awakening that involved a descent of Ananda, light, power, peace. At the time I was a materialist and as you can imagine the experience completely shattered my ontological foundations.

Yet despite that, as the months went by, and I resumed my studies, I found doubts entering my mind again. I never quite lost faith per se, but I was plagued with doubts again and again.

I later found out that Mother and Sri Aurobindo were hardly naive about these things. They knew that the physical mind can be stubborn, and that even as far as the thinking mind goes, there can often be a rush of materialistic thoughts from the environment that drags down one's consciousness and causes one to doubt one's experiences even if they had been very intense or powerful (and mine certainly were).

My point is, there is a need to create a passionate counter-discourse to the prevailing materialistic discourse so that we who are serious spiritual aspirants do not have to be fighting off the materialistic thoughts that are everywhere all the time. I can't tell you how good it was for my yoga to find out about people like Ken Wilber (although I don't like him much, I still think some of his earlier works like "Eye to Eye" are quite good), and forums like SCIY or Ulrich's own "Anti-Matters" journal.

(Now whether the Heehs biography challenges materialism or not is a separate issue. Personally I actually thought this was where the Heehs biography didn't come up to the mark, i.e. it doesn't challenge materialism as much as I would have liked it to. But Peter had his reasons, his intended audience, etc. etc., and so I'm not going to stay stuck on that.)

Ned,

Your comments are good, I don't disagree. Clearly there's a value to influencing the intellectual climate. I think it's possible to over-value that field of effort, and in some cases that can lead to wrong attitudes and results, but clearly in your case it is the healthy attitude towards the role of the intellect in yoga.

Kepler

Kepler: I’ll assume you know the meaning of “utmost” :-), and that by “means acceptable” you mean rational debate, attempting to convince philosophical materialists that their positions are illogical, etc.

TC: I wont answer for Koan but IMO its a bit more complex than your question makes it. Its not simply about convincing academics about the validity of yoga is part of a whole trend that is shifting acceptable ways of knowing on the Academy. As such, although I dont like the term, you could call it an evolution of consciousness

In fact part of the project of postmodern/post-colonialist scholarship has been to discount the privileging of euro-centric discourse and the reductionist epistemology of logical-positivism on the Academy.

Many academics and scientist now view cross-cultural ways of knowing (such as yoga) as equally valid narratives of explaining the world as those of science and logic.

If this book just manages to help establish the validity of one of these other ways of knowing it would have facilitated an important goal

Kepler,

I liked Ned's response to your post and I don't want to steal Koantum's atomic thunder (saurya agni) but I did wish to correct the notion you seem to be repeating about "intellectuals convincing academics to think differently." The idea is as little one of "convincing Ashis Nandy" (which you have brought up eleswhere, wondering if the Lives has managed this) as the bringing down of the Supermind is one of convincing the Avidya to change. In both cases (analogical, not comparative) it is to establish an alternate principle in a certain domain (in one case, the intellectual mind, buddhi, of the world, in the other case, the subtle physical world consciousness) so as to open the general consciousness to that possibility.

The Ashis Nandys and their ilk control a certain materialized portion of the knowledge domain; their readers and the readers' readers are largely responsible for maintaining a stranglehold on this domain and the percolations of this domain maintain the materialist and rational faith of our times. To introduce a convincing alternate interpretation here sets up a new general possibility. This is not to challenge the need for yogic work; it should be clear that the two are not oppositional. The change of faith I spoke about earlier from an age of religion to an age of reason could very well be interpreted as an occult event, but it isn't difficult to show that a well-orchestrated external movement in fact materialized it. Of course, to those who don't see the need for all this, no one ought to bother themselves about it and everyone needs only to grow into a divine consciousness internally for the world to be transformed. But in the Integral Yoga, the process and even the eventuality of growing into a divine consciousness includes the instrumentalizing of the shakti and this in turn includes external action. For those who are conscious of the need for a change of faith in the age, this karma could reveal itself as one of establishing an opening in the terrestrial knowledge domain now controlled by academics. The importance of this work may go unnoticed, but that hardly matters. What is more relevant is the prevention of interference and opposition based on ignorance. And of course, what has happened in the case of the Lives is far worse than this.

DB

Dear All,
The points I would have raised in response to Kepler's comments here and with regard to my review of his review of The Book have indeed mostly been made by now. The gist is of course that we no longer live in the times of either-or. As the Mother once exclaimed in the course of a conversation, it's not this OR that but this AND that AND that... No individual effort counts for much, but all together and the Force that secretly concerts them do. I would like to draw your attention to the article "Transformations and Transformers: Spirituality and the Academic Study of Mysticism" by G. William Barnard in the last issue of AntiMatters (http://anti-matters.org/07). Those with little time should at least read the passages marked by sidebars.

Koan:The gist is of course that we no longer live in the times of either-or.


TC: You hit the nail on the head,

Kepler in the clear delineation you seem to draw between yogis and intellectuals you seem to suggest that academic scholarship and the practice of yoga are mutually exclusive.

Perhaps it might just be my interpretation but mutual exclusivity would seem antithetical to a practice calling itself integral.

Tony,

I have not been trying to argue for exclusivity between academic scholarship and practice of yoga, just initiating a "critical exploration" :) of their relationship.

Perhaps you would agree that if someone actually held the extreme view that Integral Yoga equals academic scholarship, and the evolution of scholarly views in the academy is itself the evolution of consciousness envisaged by Sri Aurobindo, then they would be mistaken.

I'm happy with Debashish's formula below: "And let it also be allowed that this [scholarly work] can be a legitimate part of yoga sadhana in the Integral Yoga. That and no more (but also no less) is necessary for integrality of effort."

Kepler

K:Perhaps you would agree that if someone actually held the extreme view that Integral Yoga equals academic scholarship, and the evolution of scholarly views in the academy is itself the evolution of consciousness envisaged by Sri Aurobindo, then they would be mistaken.


TC:well, I am not sure, because IY is so complex a phenomena I'd hate to define it absolutely one way or the other however, in the former instance regards academic scholarship although it would certainly not comprise the entire practice it could be part of ones jnana yoga.

And although it would have to be qualified in the latter instance yes, I do think that some developments of scholarly view can be identical to what Sri Aurobindo calls the evolution of consciousness. In much the same way that he envisions the evolution of poetry as representative of the evolution of consciousness


Moreover, in Aurobindian terms -people who dont practice yoga at all - even scientist also experience the descent of higher, illumined, intuitive mind or whatever name one chooses to give it, the discovery of the structure of the benzene molecule is one such instance by Kekulé. IMO the importance of such intuition is implicit in Einsteins statement imagination is more important than knowledge.

Finally, yogic theories can barrow from scientist.
And anytime one speaks of the evolution of consciousness
in yogic terms one is doing just that as Sri Aurobindo's formulation of the evolution of consciousness itself builds on Darwin.

It seems in very concrete ways that, while on the one hand there are differences that must be appreciated that
at the end of day, everything is hopelessly interconnected,

Tony,

I can see it is quite difficult to propose a definition of Integral Yoga extreme enough for you to reject.

Let's say there is a person, and choosing an arbitrary name completely at random, let's say his name is Debashish. This Debashish, unlike the well known scholar by the same name, insists Integral Yoga (IY) is identical to a single practice: the translation of Beatles lyrics into Aramaic. Note carefully that Debashish is not saying that this particular academic work can be made a part of, included in, related to, or representative of IY, but that it is uniquely identical to and entirely determines IY. No other practice of any kind can be considered in any way related to IY.

1) For all x, if x is a practice in any way related to IY, then x = the translation of Beatles lyrics into Aramaic.

2) X is a practice related in some manner to IY, if and only if X = the translation of Beatles lyrics into Aramaic.

Now, perhaps you would agree that this Debashish is mistaken in his conception of Integral Yoga?

(I'm assuming your tolerance for humor is high :)

Kepler

Humor is appreciated, but seriously, any definition of IY in terms of external activities – whether inclusive or exclusive – is false. It all depends on the consciousness in and with which you do whatever you happen to be doing. I remember meeting a character (forgot his name) who was also interviewed in... – was it Collaboration? – and whose gist was that he was a thief and that the practice of IY had made him a better thief. He was charming, by the way.

Well, I think that's sort of where I started, with an objection to a seeming lack of emphasis on the inner development of consciousness as the key dimension of yoga.

I quoted the passage

...the coming of a spiritual age must be preceded by the appearance of an increasing number of individuals who... perceive that a greater evolution is the real goal of humanity and attempt to [i] effect it in themselves, to [ii] lead others to it and to [iii] make it the recognised goal of the race.

I emphasized [iii] because it's probably the most neglected part, but of course one shouldn't swing to the other extreme and overemphasize [i]. No doubt, the inner development is the key dimension of yoga, but (Words of the Mother II, p. 318):

The more I grow, the more I know that it is in work that Sri Aurobindo’s integral yoga is best done.

And if you didn't have the fortune of having the Mother tell you directly your kartavyam karma, you need to know this from within. And if a real or imaginary Debashish feels from within that such and such is his kartavyam karma, who are we to challenge him on that?

well there are two more pieces of information I would have to know first before I could answer this:

1) Is his work consecrated to the Divine?

2) Does he believe that Clapton is God?

t.

Maybe Rich Carlson knows.

I dont think so, I think that guy is still trying to find God by playing Revolution Number 9 backwards,)


tc..

that guy is still trying to find God by playing Revolution Number 9 backwards

Infinitely mysterious are the ways by which God tries to find h-self.

I wonder how you knew? I'm sure this is a sign of overmental realization and that a variety of patrons are taking note to sponsor Europe and America tours for the reincarnated Kepler (Ramas take note), while a variety of spectral Debashishs roam the streets in search of an author to write them into reality - sorry, in search of the translation of Beatles lyrics into Indus Valley ideograms. This, the ultimate philological project to solve the root of Indo-European language drift and the split into phonetic and visual languages, the many Debashishs have jointly determined (after a prolonged conference in a Derridean multilogue) as being the ultimate miracle of tongues, direct access to the Word from which all languages sprang in the beginningless past and towards which the Future Poetry flows. Thus, as one of the shadowy Keplers has so presciently (almost) announced, the secret name of the Integral Yoga for the multiple Debashishs is to achieve that translation in sleeping and waking, breathing and eating, listening and uttering. All life is, to turn the phrase made famous by Sri Aurobindo, the translation of Beatles lyrics to Indus valley ideographic speech. And, as a penultimate project (which is why the said Kepler cannot be presumed to be yet in the Supermind), the translation of the same into Aramaic, for reasons which the multiple Debashishs are still debating.

You've inspired me:

From the mouths of many murmuring Debashishs
Indus Valley ideograms descend en masse
Inspiring verses that sweep out their orbits
In Aramaic ellipses, from beginningless time.

Debashish,

You make some good points, as usual. Introducing a “convincing alternate interpretation” in the intellectual mind, still sounds in practice like convincing someone (we'll leave Mr. Nandy aside) to think differently than they currently do, and as far as I can tell the vehicle for this is rational argumentation. As I stated before, I'm not at all starting from a premise that this work is without value, although I suspect its value looms larger to you then to me.

Kepler

Relative valuation in works is inevitable unless one has attained a consciousness high and integral enough. A shoemaker cannot be expected to understand the true value of a painter and vice versa. That said, perhaps both of us are aiming at some eventual sense of the true place of these things in building the future. In the meantime, let it suffice in the minimum allowance of some usefullness of the scholarly work, whether it looms larger for one or not. And let it also be allowed that this can be a legitimate part of yoga sahana in the Integral Yoga. That and no more (but also no less) is necessary for integrality of effort.

b

Whether firing up the aspiration, or working in the mental field upon the mind of academia, is more important, is not for us to decide. Perhaps both are very important, but their importances resonate differently among us. What seems important to me is this: Thoughts are things. Sri Aurobindo and Mother did a lot of conscious work in various fields, including the field of ideas, thoughts, perceptions; the mental field, the mass mind. Rishabhchand discusses how Sri Aurobindo so changed the substance of the subliminal that our psychic beings now may find it easier to pass unclouded or less clouded into a more integral approach; to fulfill the natural aspiration of the soul to divinize life. He also opened up the way beyond the thought mind to regions that are more spiritual though still mental regions. Before Sri Aurobindo, as Rishabhchand points out, when the soul or psychic being was realized, the general tendency was almost exclusively devotional—to live in the divine presence, but rather statically, and not so much to engage with life or transform the mind, vital, and body; more quietistic. Sri Aurobindo and the Mother actively engaged with many other fields of the forces in which we live and that act upon us, clearing away a great deal of subliminal and subconscient debris—also, they linked subplane to subplane, building bridges with the aim eventually of a connected whole spanning all.

It seems to me that these fields are of great importance in conditioning our responses, our thoughts, even our inner inspirations. And none of the fields are completely shut up in themselves. Academics deal not only with other academics and the need to publish and pursue an academic career—rather, they affect all the students who pass their way. Let’s remember the great effect of Frederic Spiegelberg at Stanford; many took his courses and came out with a whole new approach, aspirations they didn’t know they had, changed life-courses; minds and hearts freed up to seek beyond the reductive.

I see SCIY as an active part of this effort. I don’t see, either, a tremendous dichotomy, between bhakti and jnana, as they complement and nourish each other. I see some connection between SCIY and the some of the open-ended work of Nolini who engaged with the world-mind, the world of science and academics and books modern to his time; but who also was a great devotee, whose devotion grew greatly the longer he lived.

I am personally interested in the problem: How do we build a bridge between a more open, less reductive viewpoint, and the materialist view with its exclusive faith in reason—and that being mostly the reason of the physical mind. There seems to be some gap, some lack of linkage, that we haven’t got to, some bridges we need to build or, at least, add to a portion of the spans that already exist. It’s not a matter of proselytizing towards some religion, but of opening a way so that the human mind, really the whole human being, can link up, and more effectively connect, with a more conscious way of knowing and experiencing. Dr. Nadkarni worked in this field and we need to continue to do so. AntiMatters journal, the SCIY website, and the publication of works attempting to engage with the academic mind, for example, are a step in that direction. So many blocks stand in the way; to remove those blocks is an authentic need.