Originally posted on sciy.org by Debashish Banerji on Mon 16 Mar 2009 07:44 AM PDT
In response to [SAICE members'] suggestions, frankly speaking, I think that Peter and his book are not the REAL issue, so I don’t see how “involving†him will help resolve this “complex imbroglio†as finally admitted here and (deliberately? ) initiated and kept alive by some. Please let me explain (but unfortunately this can’t be done with just a few words).
Since Peter’s book got published we have heard voices from both sides. We are of course all too familiar with what the loud and vociferous critics of the book have had to say. But we have also heard people who have liked the book, drawn inspiration from it, got closer to Sri Aurobindo, etc.; in other words appreciated and benefited from it. And many others, the VAST majority, have just not bothered about it and have kept quiet.
Even the website www.thelivesofsriaurobindo.com, so strongly recommended by Peter’s critics could not prevent the following poll information (screenshot image of the result is also attached here) from appearing on its website some time last month:.
The Poll indicated: I find the book “The Lives of Sri Aurobindo†by Peter Heehs to be: .
Offensive – 19 votes - 13% .
Deceptive – 18 votes - 13%
Boring – 10 votes - 7%
Representative – 63 votes - 45%
Useful – 113 votes - 82%
Don’t ask me how this adds up, but what it appears to show is that many who polled on that website found the book useful and representative.
By the way, out of curiosity and in order to update these figures I went to check what the latest poll results indicate, and the polling information seems to have disappeared (or should I say censored?), I suppose for obvious “objective, respectful and honest†reasons! What good are polls if they don’t show the “required†and “objective†results, right?
But polls aside, because their real significance can always be questioned, what is clear is that we have some who don’t like the book and others who do.
So for how long should one group try to convince the other that it is more right than the other?
The group that has liked the book consists of individuals who have in all likelihood read the book. They really have nothing to ask to Peter as they have read and enjoyed the book.
The vociferous critics however, consist of only a small minority who have read the book whereas the majority among them have at best read some selective excerpts, and probably because of this want to interrogate Peter. So is there any real logic or due process in the reasoning behind wanting to “involve†and interrogate Peter?
We can go to war over the book, judge, incriminate, banish, hang or crucify PH, and we will still not resolve this issue. And whether some like it or not, the book is a reality and even if it is banned in India , it cannot be banned in the rest of the world. So the existence and purpose of Peter’s book is a non-issue.
Therefore I really think that IF we really want to resolve this issue we need to stop beating around the bush and instead roll our sleeves and look and deal with the REAL ISSUES!
I get the impression that those who want to try to corner and interrogate Peter or question his book are only pretending to be looking for a “solutionâ€. Like ostrich, their heads are buried deep into Peter’s book and deliberately ignore the larger issues and picture, because probably it doesn’t suit them!
For example, if I want to make a controversy and pick on and vilify our dear Srikantbhai and the people he is usually associated with, I can dig through his e-mails and find statements like:
“…Mother reluctantly agreed…†(e-mail to SYG dated 15th May 2009) implying that The Mother did not have a mind and will of her own.
And,
“Now obviously Mother failed to understand, what the problem was†(e-mail to SYG dated 15th May 2009) implying that The Mother was “obviously†incapable of understanding the problems of those that came to her.
I could use these examples to demonstrate the complete disrespect that Srikantbhai has towards The Mother, but I choose not to. Why? Because I do not wish to start controversies and because I am in no position to judge the feeling, respect, devotion, etc. that Srikantbhai may have towards The Mother. And so I mind my own business and let him and his language be.
So now, the REAL ISSUES are (what I have always and since the very beginning been addressing!) related to HOW WE as an “Aurobindonian†collectivity deal with differing and diverging views, opinions and beliefs. And this is where I believe that the crux of the matter lies.
Let us not ignore the existing and aspiring self-proclaimed power centers in the Ashram that survive and thrive on controversies, as their only objective is to impose themselves and therefore attack and interfere with the real and only legitimate care-takers of the Ashram. Differing views, opinions and beliefs are their best weapons to stir up controversies.
Until recently, it was the Savitri and other tampering controversies, now it is Peter’s book. What will it be tomorrow, East vs. West? Devotionalism vs. Rationalism? X vs Y? Where does this end??? Those who want to create controversies and unrest will always find enough fuel to ignite their fires.
If you really look closely, you will find that the most disturbing issue in this whole affair is the controversy in itself. The controversy is what has thrown up all the muck and that unanimously and across both camps disturbs and upsets each and every member of the “Aurobindonian†collectivity. The book doesn’t do that at all and upsets only a small minority. So in order to REALLY solve this issue shouldn’t we be looking at the origins and persistent continuation of this controversy instead of directing all our attention on the book and Peter?
The only people who benefit from the controversy are those whose personal agendas get fulfilled through such controversies.
War-mongerers have always had personal agendas up their sleeves. Because otherwise why would they not choose peace which serves the overall good of a collectivity?
And so let’s not be naive about the controversy of Peter’s book and get carried away by some logic that sounds reasonable (like “let’s involve Peterâ€) but that is based completely on the wrong premises.
The book or Peter are not the issue! The controversy IS the real issue and is the real premise of any discussion. And unless we deal with that there will be no end to this and other controversies, my friend.
So let’s ask ourselves:
Whose purpose does it serve to fabricate, fuel and keep this controversy alive?
Why is Peter or his book targeted when the REAL target is the ashram management?
In conclusion therefore I suggest that we focus our attention on the origin and continuation of this controversy. We can deal with Peter and his book later if need be.
But to start with and in order to put this issue to rest I think that we will need to ask some tough questions to those like Sraddhalu and others concerned, as to why they chose to fabricate and persist with such a controversy instead of dealing with Peter, his book and the Ashram management in a more civilized, educated, decent, harmonious and constructive way.
I therefore don’t see Peter as being central to this issue at all, but if he wishes to be part of this process, so be it.
Best Wishes,
Filio.
Attachment:
Attachments:- Peter's+book-poll.jpg (8KB)
