Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Sri Aurobindo’s text cry out today

I don’t spend any time speculating on such lofty questions regarding the supramental, mahapralaya, etc. Knowledge in the spiritual path is given on a need-to-know basis. When you are inwardly ready for something, the knowledge will be automatically disclosed to you in a vision.
Until then, one has to focus on bread-and-butter issues. One has to learn to live better by regulating food consumption and speech, sleeping well, extending the duration of mental silence, etc. When you reach a certain stable point in the spiritual path, your intuition awakens and automatically provides you with the answers to the questions as required. The following article is relevant in this context]
[Auromira Yoga: OBSESSIVE COMPULSIVE SPIRITUALITY By Dr. Ramesh Bijlani The misplaced curiosity trap
Drifting into spirituality with the relatively simple aims of pursuing something of lasting value, something useful to others, or something better than joining the rat race, some young people get distracted by the futile search for answers to irrelevant questions. They want to know more and more about life after death, rebirth, past life regression, or forecasting the future. They start resolving the apparent discrepancies in the karma theory.]
[Comment on Romanticism and the New Deleuze by David Baulch by rc via Comments for Posthuman Destinies by rc on 4/10/11 RC: Regards this passage above: “At the transition from the 19th to the 20th century, several thinkers tried to reestablish the unity between human experience and original unity. It was an extraordinarily creative philosophical period.”
Along with Nietzsche, Bergson and Whitehead -who all influenced Deleuze- one can also list Sri Aurobindo as someone who at this period was trying to reestablish a creative link between human experience and original unity. What he calls the supramental manifestation, I believe can said to be on the side of “difference” neither one nor many. Supermind was also an attempt by Sri Aurobindo to destablize the traditional representations of metaphysics. Unfortunately, Aurobindo’s commentators have not followed up on this nor evolved a language to renew his insights to make them relevant for a post-metaphysical age but instead have chosen to stabilize his text by affixing traditional mythological representations of South Asian spirituality to it.
(a post-metaphysical age to me suggest not that one has to eliminate metaphysics but to destabilize its identity reified in “the same”)
How would give such treatment to Sri Aurobindo?
I think that a study of Deleuze treatment of Bergson provides some insights. Before Deleuze took up Bergson, he had become the exponent of a backward psychologism that was widely viewed as bourgeois ideology. The leading edge of philosophy in the 1940s and 50s had made him irrelevant.
Deleuze took him up in the 1960s and breath new life into him. While stripping the stabilizing metaphysics of consciousness away, he focused on Bergsons insights into Intuition as a method, that he called “one of the best developed methods of philosophy”
Sri Aurobindo’s text cry out today for a skillful commentator who can resurrect them within a contemporary intellectual milieu.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF SRI AUROBINDO holds colossal potential and promise for the future of philosophy as well as politics. For this, shunning the candle-holding habit is essential. [TNM]

No comments:

Post a Comment