I have read your note written with so much love and devotion for your Master. Your devotion towards your Master is fully understandable and admirable.
As to the comparisons with Sri Aurobindo, I am afraid they are very much off the mark. It is understandable. It is not the first time nor the first spiritual movement that has been compared with Sri Aurobindo. It is natural given the tendency in human beings to believe that they are the best and their Master is the highest. Personally I have left all this way far behind. I am conscious of my aspiration and none of the paths known so far answer it except Sri Aurobindo. Having said that I do not engage in verbal exchanges to prove or disprove anyone. Faith is something precious and if one has faith in someone and if that Master answers one’s highest aspiration it is perfectly fine. To each his own goal and the path as all who believe in Sanatan Dharma would say.
Yes I don’t appreciate when people try to compare Sri Aurobindo with other Masters, – a futile and unnecessary exercise as each must find what works for them. But I prefer to be silent even when I differ unless someone tries to belittle Sri Aurobindo. To each his own world view and God-vision. The Vedas, the Upanishads, the Gita are all wonderful Works and so are the works of the great Masters. But the greatest of all is He who shines beyond and dwells in every form and exceeds the word of every Scripture. If one has found Him by whatever means, he or she is blessed. All the rest is theory and intellectual discussion. It has its own little place in the total scheme of things but nothing more.
I understand and appreciate this work of Synthesis. I have myself given time to this kind of effort at one point. I wish that the Synthesis includes the tantras and the material Science and its findings as well so that it can be complete. I am aware of number of persons doing it. It is a good sign provided we do not make a khichadi of sort in the process where the unique distinctions are lost while bringing together the common elements.
Affectionately,
Alok Da
orch for me to follow my Guru.
Otherwise I would have lost elsewhere.
As you said, By the Grace of the Master, I should be fortunate to discover my soul in this life, if not wait till the time comes and He opens the door.
ANS
Thank for the understanding. Yes, I fully understand what it means to be faithful to one’s Master. This faithfulness however is best practiced by living the teachings rather than trying to convince and convert others. In fact if one is sincerely trying to live a teaching then one automatically draws others, that is to say those who are ready, to his influence.
Comparisons do not help much. There are always common elements in every teaching. Most also have a common goal as well. The differences are mainly in the details of the practice though the fundamentals remain largely the same.
In any case it is never good to compare Masters. It is a modern tendency due to the need to convert others and expand the number of disciples. Or sometimes simply a movement of the ego that feels itself superior because the Guru is great. This tendency taken to its extreme breeds fanaticism and is inimical to progress. What matters in the end is not who the Guru is but what we have realised by His Grace. And indeed to be a living example of the teachings is the best tribute one can pay to one’s Master. It is also the true sign of the greatness of the Guru.
Of course these are not pertaining to you but to the quite common tendency I have seen in different Ashrams. You are a genuine seeker who has love for her Master which is a thing always admirable.
