I know Sri Aurobindo does not approve of propagating his teachings – but there are people who are actively misrepresenting him and closing young inquisitive minds. They certainly are not holding back with their propaganda.
Many youngsters today believe that traditions and philosophies of pre-colonial India that are maintained through the disciplic successions, especially of monastic orders are pure and authentic sources of Santana Dharma and independent thinking is not worth considering (unless the thinking 400+ years old). They are not willing to acknowledge that we could do with a few reforms.
One of so called intellectuals called Sri Aurobindo a ‘facile’ writer among many other things. I did give him a rebuttal but it is not enough.
Another youngster, with whom I have interacted in the past said most abominable things (which I shall not repeat here). He considers it blasphemous (Veda- Ninda) that Sri Aurobindo said that Supermind being the intermediary between unmanifest brahman and that the inner symbolic meaning of the Veda as the true and most consistent interpretation. Many ‘traditionalist-intellectuals’ like him hold this to be an ‘apologist anti ritualist interpretation’ influenced by colonial/English education.
All this is very wrong sir. I don’t have the scholarship to counter them. But they and their bosses must be countered.
What upsets me the most, that even those who have had respect in the past for Sri Aurobindo are swayed by these arguments and resort to defending traditionalism
I fully understand your feelings and if you feel deeply moved and inspired you can surely give a suitable rebuttal. I am sure the Mother will guide as well as inspire you. I am not on twitter and generally don’t go to social media. But if you consolidate and send me the arguments I will be happy to reply. The only problem is that the netizens on social media are often a mask used by vested interests. These people are not interested in Sanatana Dharma or in serious discussions. Their motive is to disrupt, hit and run. Not that one cannot reply to them or give back in their own terms, it is just that they are heavily opinionated and hence closed to any deeper understanding of things.
If you wish you can point out that ‘facile is taking things literally, on the face value. Sri Aurobindo’s interpretations are based on both his own profound spiritual experiences but a deep and careful study of the Sanskrit language where he has analysed and revealed the roots of every single sound comparing it with Latin and Tamil roots. To say that someone who was a master of several Indian and foreign languages, someone who wrote a 99 verse poem in Sanskrit, translated several pieces from the Ramayana, Mahabharata, Kalidasa, whose linguistic and poetic (leave aside intellectual and spiritual) genius has been recognised by several great minds in India and the West, such as Tagore, Romain Rolland, even by spiritual masters of his time as facile shows the shallowness of the critic. It is basically the hard-core Mayavadins who try to denounce Sri Aurobindo which is more like a pig pushing against the mountain. But the world knows and is increasingly recognising the greatness of Sri Aurobindo. The sheer work he has left for us is itself a sign that here is the Vyasa of our own age. Whether one has the intellectual calibre to appreciate Sri Aurobindo or not, the least we could do as an Indian is to admire and feel proud about another son of Mother India who shook the foundations of the British empire. But to denounce him simply shows a rogue mentality that being Indian one is busy ridiculing another Indian who did so much for his motherland.’
Affectionately,
Alok Da
Follow up question:
Thank you so much sir, for your reply. You always have so much patience to give detailed replies to trolls whose motive, as you say, is to hit and run. Twitter is not really a place for rational discourse. I doubt whether anyone would read it seriously. I’m now having second thoughts on whether I should really engage with them. I must learn how to respond in the right manner at the right time.
Yes. Twitter is not a place for discussion. However, In general people tend to be simply opinionated just because they have heard or read a few things from here and there. When confronted with facts and reason, they tend to shy away because the ground of personal likes and opinions is pulled away from the feet.
Affectionately,
Alok Da
