Saturday, March 31, 2012

Inmate of an Ashram can’t claim unbridled freedom

Having presented Sri Aurobindo's experiences at length, I pause, on page 245, to anticipate "a question that may have occurred to some readers", namely what is the relationship of spiritual experience to madness… This form of argument is, I believe, similar to the purvapaksha-uttarapaksha form of argument of Sanskrit rhetoric.]

[Cardinal Slur Comment on Ignore all rubbish: Dr Ryder Savitri Era Open Forum October 06, 2010
The author himself admits that the technique he has employed is, in his words, “anticipating and refuting objections”… So clearly the author is well aware of the objection of “furtiveness” between Mirra and Aurobindo being raised in the minds of the readers upon reading his description, and in anticipation of it, the author attempts to dispel it. In fact it is glaringly obvious that the insinuation is either romantic, sexual, emotional because in the subsequent paragraphs there is talk of marriage etc.]

Gautam Chikermane is confused about certain things which we shall attempt to clarify. Peter Heehs has written a hostile book on Sri Aurobindo and the flaws can be identified only by those who are well-read in the subject. (Odia proverbs like “Khajuri gachhara ki guna gaibi mularu pahacha pahacha” or “Kambala jaka ta bala” are apt descriptions of how the whole book is replete with mischief.) Being an inmate of the Ashram, Heehs can’t claim such unbridled freedom, and hence, must live outside. Savitri Era Party, however, doesn't support banning of books in general. [TNM55] 

1 comment:

  1. banning a book is a fashion only.it can never solve the basic problem.it can not root out the controversy.total banning of a book only bring out blasphemy and black marketing in total.
    the readers should compell the author to revise the book and compell the publishers to publish only the revised book in future from where ever the book may be published.

    ReplyDelete