[Dr. Radhikararanjan Das is not the first case of expulsion connected with the issue of Peter Heehs. In October 2010 Prof R.Y. Deshpande was expelled from the Higher Course of the Sri Aurobindo Ashram Centre of Education. Prof. Deshpande, who was teaching Physics from the last thirty years and Savitri from the last ten years, was summarily shown the door by Manoj Das Gupta for his “rash” and “thoughtless action” of having put on the Internet his correspondence with Jhumur Bhattacharya (Higher Course in charge), who had accused him of having discussed in his class Peter Heehs’s book Lives of Sri Aurobindo. What an accusation, as if discussing the book was a crime! And what a severe punishment for it, as if humanity was saved from imminent disaster by not letting Prof Deshpande discuss it in his class! In any case, the professor had spoken about the book when the students themselves raised the issue and not because he wanted to distract them from the subject he was supposed to teach. It is evident from the exchange of letters published below between Prof Deshpande and the authorities of the School that they were only waiting for an opportunity to throw him out of the School. According to Prof Deshpande, they even manipulated the event with the help of a student who used to come to his class "once in a blue moon". The reason for this revengeful action is obvious. Prof Deshpande was the first person to expose the distortions in Peter Heehs’s book, and his postings on the blog Mirror of Tomorrow (available now at http://archives.mirroroftomorrow.org/blog) had deeply embarrassed Manoj Das Gupta’s deceitful position with regard to the book.]
Manoj Das Gupta Demands Apology
From RY Deshpande
by RY Deshpande on Mon 01 Nov 2010 03:30 AM IST | Permanent Link | Cosmos
A hundred years ago CR Das was fighting in the Alipore Case more for the Doctrine of Nationalism than defending an accused; the beauty is, for preaching such a Doctrine none can be held guilty. Should that not hold true when it is the matter of psychic and spiritual reverence to the Mother and the Master who attempted all and did all for us? We have to be at least grateful for all that we receive from them. Let me tell you that what I am fighting for are these basic spiritual verities. This is what the Ashram as an Institution should uphold. If it fails in it, then it has no reason to exist.
A Memo from Jhumur
25 August 2010
Deshpande ji
Certain students have complained about the way you conduct the classes, that you use those periods to discuss matters that do not pertain to the subject studied. Naturally, you are entitled to your own opinions regarding the controversies that are raging in the Ashram now, but classes are not the place to air these views. Please restrict yourself to the subjects being studied. They are not light ones and should take up all your time.
Jhumur/Knowledge
Deshpande writes:
27 August 2010
Knowledge-in-Charge
I checked with my regular and serious students and they tell me of having never made such a complaint. But if there is anywhere dissatisfaction about the study proper they can just walk away. As you have preferred to write this note to me, let me tell you that you are absolutely free to take whatever action you might wish to take against me, action with or without any basis. By the way, I do not understand your phrase “controversies that are raging in the Ashram now”. I believe a stand taken on truth does not lead to contentious situations; perhaps you would like to reflect upon this.
Copy:
The Registrar/SAICE
I checked with my regular and serious students and they tell me of having never made such a complaint. But if there is anywhere dissatisfaction about the study proper they can just walk away. As you have preferred to write this note to me, let me tell you that you are absolutely free to take whatever action you might wish to take against me, action with or without any basis. By the way, I do not understand your phrase “controversies that are raging in the Ashram now”. I believe a stand taken on truth does not lead to contentious situations; perhaps you would like to reflect upon this.
Copy:
The Registrar/SAICE
When students complain about Deshpande you take action against Deshpande.
When Ashramites complain about Peter Heehs you take action against Ashramites.
When Ashramites complain about Peter Heehs you take action against Ashramites.
30 August 2010
Knowledge-in-Charge
You say that certain students have complained about the way I conduct the classes. Please inform them that they will not be attending my classes henceforth.
You say that certain students have complained about the way I conduct the classes. Please inform them that they will not be attending my classes henceforth.
4 September 2010
Knowledge-in-Charge
My note dated 30 August 2010. Please let me know the names of the students who will be leaving my classes.
My note dated 30 August 2010. Please let me know the names of the students who will be leaving my classes.
6 September 2010
X will not attend your classes henceforth. (unsigned)
6 September 2010
Knowledge-in-Charge
I have not been informed yet about the names of all the students who will be leaving my classes. I take you as a responsible person and expect an answer in writing from you. Please let me have it with your signature.
I have not been informed yet about the names of all the students who will be leaving my classes. I take you as a responsible person and expect an answer in writing from you. Please let me have it with your signature.
7 September 2010
Deshpande ji
I have already sent my answer on Saturday—I hope you have got it. The name is X.
Jhumur
7/9
NB: The note was brought by S during the class I was conducting. Read it in his presence. He started looking at me, if I had something to tell back to J. He seems to have realized the incompleteness of the answer. I told him J is talking of one student who has left my class. But her first note mentions “certain students”. He said, you mean “plural”. Also he asked me if this had to be conveyed to J. I told him, “yes.”
After one hour comes the following note.
After one hour comes the following note.
7 September 2010
Deshpande ji
I don’t think there is any point in continuing these exchanges.
The purpose of my first letter was that the class periods should be used for the study of the subjects that you are teaching. They are not easy subjects and should take up all your time. I still hold the same opinion. Students who have opted to work with you should study. That is all.
Jhumur
(“Knowledge-in-Charge” has a name)
8 September 2010
Knowledge-in-Charge
Do you realize what a preposterous note you had sent to me yesterday morning in the 3rd period? But let me first begin with the student who has now left my class. With a sigh of relief I will only say “good riddance”. But your first letter clearly speaks of more than one student; it says, “Certain students have complained….” Surely, one student does not make “certain students”. When this inconsistency is pointed out to you, you flare up and refuse to engage yourself in further exchanges. Yet I must ask you a plain question: does it mean that in your first letter you were just dreaming up things, or bluffing? It seems to me that you were rather lying. How repugnant, a thing not expected from a responsible person. It was equally irresponsible of you to have gone by what one student had told you, without checking it with others who are in the same class; they tell me that they have no complaint against me. In fact, they eagerly look forward for the Savitri-class they take from me.
Do you realize what a preposterous note you had sent to me yesterday morning in the 3rd period? But let me first begin with the student who has now left my class. With a sigh of relief I will only say “good riddance”. But your first letter clearly speaks of more than one student; it says, “Certain students have complained….” Surely, one student does not make “certain students”. When this inconsistency is pointed out to you, you flare up and refuse to engage yourself in further exchanges. Yet I must ask you a plain question: does it mean that in your first letter you were just dreaming up things, or bluffing? It seems to me that you were rather lying. How repugnant, a thing not expected from a responsible person. It was equally irresponsible of you to have gone by what one student had told you, without checking it with others who are in the same class; they tell me that they have no complaint against me. In fact, they eagerly look forward for the Savitri-class they take from me.
Now about this student X who has complained to you, let me bring to your attention that X used to come to the class only once in a blue moon. Last month that blue moon happened to be on 20 August. It was also the birthday of Y. I had started the Savitri-class in the normal manner but they wanted me to tell them a story, on the occasion of the birthday. I told them that I am not a story-teller; instead, they could ask me whatever questions they might wish to ask me. In the course of such a session some of them mentioned what Kittu had told them about the notorious Lives of Sri Aurobindo and the unsavoury happenings in the Ashram, his meetings and correspondence with the Managing Trustee. In my class the discussion was restricted only to the book, a book according to the author meant for objective academic studies. I consider such intense valid discussions also form a part of good and wholesome and decent study. In any case, this was just one period,—and not what you say “periods”—and the occasion for that period was a birthday. It is a usual practice in our Centre of Education that, birthdays in the class are celebrated in another way; I suppose this is another good caring way of interaction between the students and the teacher, and one does not take it as waste of time. But thoughtlessly you are generalizing one birthday period to periods in my classes. This is bluntly atrocious. By making one period as “periods” you seem to be telling me another blatant lie, that I use my class periods for things apart from the study of the subjects. Isn’t that weird? giving me a lecture which you should follow yourself? Please do some introspection also.
Now that the topic of the disgraceful-outrageous biography has come up, let me ask you a question or two. This book crudely if not vulgarly relishes tasteless descriptions, and it has the impudence of luridly speaking about Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. It sees their relationship as a romantic relationship, a most perverse and perfidious outlook towards things spiritual. Will you approve such descriptions in the book? say that these are perfectly in order? will you commend it? a book written by a member of the Ashram? and our Ashram authorities supporting it, and an absconder? If you have any genuine sense of spiritual propriety you will unhesitatingly condemn it, I suppose, and condemn it without a moment’s delay—notwithstanding what stand the authorities take. Let me tell you that if an occasion should arise in a class I will never flinch from criticizing the biography, in the least. I believe there is nothing objectionable in a birthday period if I explain to the students the luminous occult that is there behind their relationship which is never vulgar in any sense, including the physical sense. About their relationship the Mother herself has said: “Without him I exist not; without me he is unmanifest.” But if you think this is a crime, then you are absolutely free to take whatever action you might wish to take against me, action with or without any basis. But what do you think, personally, about such a depiction of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother? Do you approve it? Is it not falsification of the entire vision-and-work of theirs? Let me quote what Huta had written to Manoj DG sometime ago: “I request you to stop Peter’s publications and ask him to leave the Ashram before he does more harm to the Ashram and its reputation. … All he does is not in tune with the Mother’s Consciousness.” I see real truth in what she is saying and suggesting, truth to follow.
Another point which I will briefly mention here is apropos of the Savitri-editions. In the course of the discussions in the classes we often notice the differences between the Centenary and the Revised Editions. And I must tell you that, without any prompting, most of the students start questioning the wisdom behind the changes present in the Revised Edition. But the most damaging statement about Savitri is present in The Lives of Sri Aurobindo which says that Savitri is a “fictional creation”. But without going into details I leave the matter at this stage. However, again, if you consider it a crime to criticize the biography on these grounds you are absolutely free to take whatever action you might wish to take against me, action with or without any basis.
RY Deshpande
PS: Some of the aspects of The Lives of Sri Aurobindo have been communicated in an Open Letter to Manoj Das Gupta, and I am attaching a copy of it for your benefit.
Copy to the Registrar /SAICE
5 October 2010
Dear Deshpandeji
I was deeply shocked to read your most indecent comments on Jhumurdi which you have put up on the Internet. It is absolutely not permissible for any member of the SAICE to make adverse comments against another member in any public forum.
I have therefore no other options but to ask you to either:
1. apologise for your rash and thoughtless action and promise never to repeat it;
or
2. sever all connections with the SAICE from the next session.
I feel extremely sad that I have, at all, to write such a letter to you.
Sincerely,
Manoj
(Sd/)
Manoj Das Gupta
Registrar
Sri Aurobindo International Centre of Education
Sri Aurobindo Ashram
Pondicherry 605-002
(Seal)
12 October 2010
To
The Registrar
Sri Aurobindo International Centre of Education
Sri Aurobindo Ashram
Pondicherry 605-002
Dear Mr Manoj Das Gupta
I am in receipt of your letter dated 5 October 2010, asking me to apologise for my “rash and thoughtless” statement vis-à-vis Ms Jhumur Bhattacharya and “promise never to repeat it”; you further state that in the event of my failing to do so I will no more be associated with the Centre of Education.
In the present case, I need not really reply to your ill-conceived letter. You may like to read again my letter dated 8 September 2010 addressed to the Knowledge-in-Charge, a copy of which I had given to you. It is this letter which is posted as a comment on the Internet.
Let me quote what she had written to me on 25 August 2010: “Certain students have complained about the way you conduct the classes, that you use those periods to discuss matters that do not pertain to the subject studied. Naturally, you are entitled to your own opinions regarding the controversies that are raging in the Ashram now, but classes are not the place to air these views. Please restrict yourself to the subjects being studied. They are not light ones and should take up all your time.” She wrote without checking and counterchecking the facts. Who are the students she is speaking of? and which were the periods? She is unable to tell. Also perhaps she is writing this, being unaware of my thirty years of teaching here! Never was such a note sent to me nor was I ever told orally anything to this effect.
And yet, you are writing this letter to me without conducting detailed internal inquiry. If you have already done such an internal inquiry I should have been first given a copy of your findings. Procedurally this was absolutely essential, something expected of any competent administrator; but you have not done this. It gives more the impression to me that you are going by your whims and fancies.
Instead of you demanding an apology from me, it is I who should rather be asking it from Ms Bhattacharya, and now from you also. In my said letter of 8 September 2010 I had exposed fully her lies and my expectation was that you would check all the facts before shooting out this outrageous letter of yours, dated 5 October 2010.
I can only say that both of you are wasting time and consciousness. I have not come here to do that. I have come here to make the values I cherish purer and brighter, kindle them in the fire of the Mother’s consciousness.
You will recollect that every cordial attempt was made during the last two years to warn you the disastrous path of falsehood you had been adopting in the context of the infamous Lives of Sri Aurobindo. You did not heed Pranab; you disregarded what Huta had written to you,—just to give two examples of those who were intimately connected with the Mother. Any number of letters from within the Ashram and outside has been written to you; but all along you have been adopting “dignified silence”. Instead of making effusive and emotional proclamations which more expose the falsehood they contain than conceal, you ought to have taken the entire community into confidence and come out with facts and logically consistent statements. Yet alert souls of the Ashram cannot be dumb witnesses to such things.
About this appalling biography, a French scholar and historian of repute tells in a private conversation the following: “Academically, Heehs is not known in the West at all. I tried to publish this book’s review in an international journal and the editor asked me who this Peter Heehs was! When I requested the Ashram’s Mother India to publish it, it went unheeded.” My articles also have met the same fate, articles on the present biography and the flawed editing of Savitri.
Such are the dubious ways in which things move here, under your cover; but these cannot remain covered up. One of the natural means of meeting such a situation is to go public. That is also the accepted mechanism of any open-ended and democratic system. Public institutions are bound by it. You must realise that a distinction has to be made between the Ashram—a spiritual centre—and a Public Institution which must follow the Law of the Land. In this respect, I don’t see any reason to regret what I did, or what I will be doing whenever an occasion should arise. I am simply following the democratic principle. Regarding matters spiritual, it is the question only between my soul and the Mother, and there nobody else has any place.
So let us talk about the Institutional issues. Ashram as an Institution is bound by the Law of the Land, as I just mentioned. There are checks and counterchecks for its functioning. There is answerability and none can simply claim that he is “providentially appointed”; it will be preposterous if one should go by this proposition of being appointed providentially. The Institution comes under the category of Public Charitable Trusts, and is bound to legal stipulations. It is not anybody’s inherited fief of the feudal era, not a Private Ltd firm at all. Most importantly it is my democratic right to speak out openly if something should be going wrong with such a public institution. No one can snatch that right away from me, and nobody is going to prevent me from using it.
About the said Internet post, let me inform you that there are already more than three thousand hits on it, with its readership spread all over the world; there are at least 130 comments. Be also informed that its intellectual-academic-professional audience will not tolerate impropriety if it should be there anywhere. This audience is not such a dim lot to get carried away by my innuendos. In fact, had my arguments been flawed in any way I would have been torn to pieces by now.
But why should you be afraid if things become public? If you are managing a public institution by just means you have nothing to worry about; if you are clean, if you are well above the board, the question of distress would not be present. Besides, you can always build your own communication channels in the cyber world; through them you can make the institutional position known to the world, an aspect of sound public relations. But, sadly, you do not have any such mechanism. Instead you believe that you can get away by planting seeds of confusion in the minds of people.
Let us look at the questions to be answered: why should there be a number of court cases against the Institution? why should the Hon Lt Governor summon you and demand certain explanations from you? what occasioned the Parliament to ask for details regarding The Lives of Sri Aurobindo? You threaten the inmates that in the event of internal conflicts, the government might take over the Ashram management. You should realize also that, in the process, you are squandering the Mother’s precious money away. Your acts are proving ruinous to the Institution. But the solution is simple, and it lies in your own hand—if you have the concern for the Ashram as an Institution. The solution is, you step down from your official positions.
If I mention something openly about Ms Bhattacharya’s wrong action, you get angry with me and wish to shoot me down. But you go all the way out to support a book which on every page denigrates the Mother and the Master. The loyalty of both of you seems to be more towards that author, of The Lives of Sri Aurobindo, than towards them who have taken us under their spiritual wings.
A hundred years ago CR Das was fighting in the Alipore Case more for the Doctrine of Nationalism than defending an accused; the beauty is, for preaching such a Doctrine none can be held guilty. Should that not hold true when it is the matter of psychic and spiritual reverence to the Mother and the Master who attempted all and did all for us? We have to be at least grateful for all that we receive from them. Let me tell you that what I am fighting for are these basic spiritual verities. This is what the Ashram as an Institution should uphold. If it fails in it, then it has no reason to exist.
I cannot keep quiet seeing the Mother and the Master being trampled under the dirty feet which you both seem to support and enjoy. Sorry, this cannot remain unexposed and if I have to go to the world-wide Internet for that purpose, I shall go to the world-wide Internet which none can prevent.
However, before I close let me quote Sri Aurobindo: “The children should be helped to grow up into straightforward, frank, upright and honourable human beings ready to develop into divine nature.”
Sincerely
(Sd/)
RY Deshpande
It appears that Ashramites practice a spurious spirituality and the Ashram has become a community of cowards to permit such vindictive actions to persist.
ReplyDelete