Dear Friends,
Your above letter
was placed before the Board of trustees.
Essentially the letter dated 28.05.2010 focuses on the following broad issues:
a. Sri Aurobindo
Ashram Trust and the responsibilities of its trustees
b. The book entitled
"The Lives of Sri Aurobindo".
c. Whether the author
of "The Lives of Sri Aurobindo" continues to remain an inmate of the
Ashram, and if so how and why
d. Whether the
finances of the Ashram are misused and
e. Disciplinary
proceedings regarding some persons who were inmates of the Ashram.
Here are the
answers for your satisfaction.
a. As
you are aware, it was The Mother who in Her infinite compassion had taken the
responsibility of running the Ashram. It was in the year 1955 that She settled
the Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust by a Deed in which She has Herself described in
detail about the formation of the Trust Board, and the methods to be followed
for future additions to it, in the case of her physical absence for any reason
whatsoever. The Trust Deed is a sacred document which takes care to define the
responsibilities of the trustees, which we are humbly discharging in letter and
spirit. The Mother has unambiguously given the responsibility to the Trust to
manage all the properties and other assets of the Trust. Amongst other acts for
the fulfilment of its objects, the Trust does its best to ensure that at least
the minimum facilities which are conducive for Sadhana are made available to
the inmates of the Ashram. In the
carrying out of this obligation, the Trust has to undergo many ordeals due to
external forces that continuously try to disturb the Ashram's harmony and
stability. Though this in itself is a formidable task, it is the Grace that
sustains it and the same Grace will never deny the inmates, the peace and the
sense of assurance while they are pursuing their sadhana. We sincerely believe
that nothing has happened "that could be a disturbing trend which can be
disastrous for the Ashram and for the spiritual life of its inmates".
Your
statement that "today many Ashramites are confused between loyalty to the
The Mother and Sri Aurobindo on one side and the Ashram Trust on the
other" besides being factually incorrect,-- for never had the Trust tried
to create an impression that it was an alternative to The Mother and the Master
-- only begs the question as to whether the Trust or any of its trustees ever
stood in the way of anyone fulfiling his or her spiritual aspirations! The
answer for this is an emphatic NO. It has always been a tradition of the Ashram
-- a tradition that is consistent with the highest spiritual truths -- to leave
every individual as free as possible in order that the sadhak may pursue his
spiritual aspiration in a manner that he or she feels is best suited for his or
her growth and according to the requirements of his or her own nature,
unhindered by any dogma or creed, or bound by any catechism. It is therefore
natural that the external rules of conduct for all the inmates are very few --
basically only such rules that were in place during the physical lifetime of
The Mother -- and each one be left free to devise his own pattern of inner and
outer discipline consistent with the requirements of his own nature, and
according to his sincerity for spiritual progress. We can assure you that the
Trust has not tried in any way to expand those rules of conduct in any
unnatural way, so as to act as a barrier for any inmate's spiritual quest.
Hence there is no question of any sincere sadhak having to make a choice
between loyalty to The Mother or loyalty to the Trust.
The
Mother while entrusting the responsibility to the Trust to manage the assets of
the Sri Aurobindo Ashram, thought fit in Her wisdom, not to include any clause
or direction to even remotely suggest that all beneficiaries, be they devotees
or inmates, should necessarily be consulted at any stage in the management of
things or in the decision making process - if at all it be even logically
possible to consult everyone belonging to such an open ended and amorphous body
consisting of all the inmates of the Ashram and disciples of Sri Aurobindo.
Notwithstanding what is stated above, we would like to point out that the
trustees do regularly consult and informally seek advice and suggestions from
various persons, who have an inherent interest in the Trust, be they inmates or
devotees, some of them well-known in their field of expertise, whenever the
benefit of their expertise could be made best use of. However after seeking
suggestions from several persons and considering and assembling all the advices
given by them, which are very likely to be of various hues, it is finally the
trustees themselves who are responsible for taking the ultimate decision.
Anything other than this would be an abdication of their responsibility.
Constructive suggestions from inmates as well as well-wishers genuinely
interested in the Ashram are naturally welcome, and the Trust has always
received them and given them careful consideration before any important
decision is taken.
We
have no doubt, as much as you have none, that everyone including the SAAT are
bound by the laws of the land and the consequences arising thereof. The SAA T
is alive to its duties and obligations as a public charitable trust and the
question of the Trust or its office-bearers trying to avoid or by-pass the laws
of the land does not arise.
b. As
regards the book "The Lives of Sri Aurobindo", the issue as to
whether the content of the book is offensive, warranting a ban on the book, is
the subject matter of adjudication by the High Court of Orissa, in a litigation
initiated in their wisdom by some devotees there. It is therefore inappropriate
for the Trust, whatever be the perceptions of the trustees, to pronounce itself
on an issue seized of by the Court from as early as October 2008 or so. We are
informed that the Writ Petition lists out and quotes a very large number of
specific citations from the book "The Lives of Sri Aurobindo" with a
prayer to issue a Writ of Mandamus to ban the printing, publication and
distribution of the impugned book. In June 2009 or so, a newspaper report from
Orissa claimed that a group of persons have filed a contempt application in
that particular Writ Petition in the High Court of Orissa against the trustees
of Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust for interfering with the orders of the Court. It
is besides the point that the claim was apparently false. However the news
report serves as a reminder that we should be prudent not to make any
pronouncement on an issue being adjudicated upon by the High Court. Hence our
comments on this topic can necessarily be only very general, not in any way
impinging into the prohibited domain.
A
number of persons, both inmates and devotees outside, have either written or
spoken to us expressing their displeasure with the content and style of the
book entitled "The Lives of Sri Aurobindo". If we are enclosing only
one sample of such a communication (Annexure 1), it is because this
sample is one of the most elaborate and complete, as also because you are
surely aware of similar communications. However, communications expressing
diagonally opposite views have quite possibly never come to your notice.
The
reactions to the book "The Lives of Sri Aurobindo" have been very
varied, reflecting different types of temperaments, and quite a few of them of
course, claiming to draw their inspiration exclusively from Sri Aurobindo
Himself. As explained above, I am enclosing for your benefit a copy of a
communication (Annexure 1) from someone who has intensely disliked the
book, as also a copy of a letter (Annexure 2) from an ex-student of the
Sri Aurobindo International Centre of Education who found nothing worth
agitating about regarding this book, as also of two other persons who have
expressed their appreciation for the book (Annexures 3 and 4).
In
this context let me also enclose a lengthy analysis of this book (Annexure 5)
by one long time resident here, who is also on the faculty of Sri Aurobindo
Center for Advanced Research (SACAR), an Institution where one of you regularly
goes for lecturing on various aspects of Sri Aurobindo's thought. As per this
analysis, its author comes to the conclusion that though the tone of the book
is sometimes provocative, as such the criticisms generally levelled against it,
when properly analyzed, are actually unfounded. Similarly a Retired Judge of
the High Court at Madras, who is a long time resident of Pondicherry, has gone
public in an article published recently (Annexure 6) wherein he wonders
why people are disturbed by this book which he calls a model of a biography and
goes so far as to recommend this book to the members of the larger public.
The
above instances have been cited to show varied shades of opinion the Trust has
been receiving, and not for the purpose of taking any side. No one has an
exclusive privilege as regards the capacity to know the Truth.
We
would also like to point out that even amongst those who have not liked the
book, the solutions that they have proposed have not always come through as
coherent or cogent. It became even more bewildering when the same person put
forth variant views, one for public dissemination and another for the trustees
in his private communication. Kindly consider the views expressed in a letter
dated 14.10.2008 (a copy of which I am attaching as Annexure 7) written
by the same person who has unequivocally and militantly condemned the book in
public in his other note (copy attached earlier as Annexure 1). In this
private communication to the trustees dated 14.10.2008 (Annexure 7),
this person says: "...removal of Peter from the Ashram would be a most
unfortunate extreme, and might even lead to more harm than his continuance.
Ideally he should be able to continue in the Ashram, and perhaps even keep
contact with the Archives and related work, but with his access….curtailed...
There are no set standards for action or inaction. All rests in the
consciousness in which we choose to act..." etc. You will notice thus that
the author of this note is also the same person who has publicly distributed
his notes and views (including what has been attached as Annexure 1) in
which the tone and the conclusions drawn are very different.
It
is also pertinent to note that the Managing Trustee had received a letter dated
13.10.2008 in which one of the instant signatories was also a co-signatory.
That letter, inter alia, stated “we do not have the necessary documents to
verify the most serious allegations and distortions since these documents are
part of the Ashram's Archives records which till now Peter alone had been
allowed access to so far…Allow us access to the same and related documents that
Peter has freely had access to in preparation of his book, so that we can
verify them and either confirm or refute his allegations about Sri Aurobindo.
Since the work is large, we have formed a small team of academically minded
devotees who can work simultaneously on different sections/themes of the book...."
There
was never any question of denying access to the Archival material to them, or
to any other serious student of Sri Aurobindo, since the very purpose of
preservation of archival material is that it may be consulted. Apart from the
misrepresentation that Peter alone had access to the documents, more than one
and half years have passed since they have written the above mentioned letter,
but these scholar-devotees have so far not got back to the Trust after having
examined those documents which they wrongly claimed had not been available to
them earlier.
It
has sometimes been alleged that the author of "The Lives of Sri
Aurobindo" has violated laws relating to copyright. From the initial
discussion on this issue with our lawyers, it was felt that prima facie it
would be difficult for the Trust to sustain that a law relating to copyright
has been violated. At one point in the month of September 2009 or so, Pranab-da
offered to get the opinion of some lawyer on this issue. Thereafter he sent an
unsigned note on a plain paper regarding the points relating to alleged
violation of copyright. He was requested to get that note authenticated by the
lawyer who had drafted it so that the regular lawyers of the Ashram could at
least engage him in dialogue in order to arrive at a possible consensus. That
particular note was never returned to Trust under the signature or on the
letter-head of the lawyer who had drafted it. Our enquiries however revealed
that the unsigned note was drafted by a lawyer who since 1999 has been
unsuccessfully litigating or helping in the litigation against the Ashram by
advancing the argument that the Ashram Trust cannot claim to have the copyright
even over Sri Aurobindo's works! Similarly if according to that lawyer, Ashram
does not have the copyright over the Works of Sri Aurobindo because of the lack
of any written assignment by Sri Aurobindo himself in favour of the Trust, it
would be an anomaly if now the Trust were to claim copyright over an
unpublished diary of a sadhak in the absence of any such written assignment.
However, you may rest assured that the Ashram can very safely claim to have the
copyright over the works of Sri Aurobindo at least, on very solid legal
grounds. There is an intermediary state in our holding of copyright over Sri
Aurobindo's works which that lawyer has deliberately chosen to ignore. As for
the diaries of Purani-ji, they continue to remain in the safe custody of the
Ashram as a valuable source material, even though Ashram will find it hard to
claim a copyright over them. We also stand by the fact that "no theft has
been committed" as the diaries of Purani-ji are still safe in our custody
as a valuable reference material. But whether we can claim copyright over them
is a different matter altogether.
In
any event once the matter has been admitted by a Court of Law, it would be
impudent for us to pronounce ourselves on these issues until the final verdict
has been delivered. We will take a decision on the issue after the final
outcome of the Court proceedings.
c. Regarding
the question as to who could or should be allowed to become or remain an inmate
of the Ashram, it is a very complex matter. All of us would surely not dispute
that Sri Aurobindo Ashram is primarily a spiritual institution. That is a
self-evident truth. In this context it would be pertinent to quote from the Human Cycle as to how Sri Aurobindo
described the character of a spiritual society:
“The
spiritual aim will recognise that man as he grows in his being must have as
much free space as possible for all his members to grow in their own strength,
to find out themselves and their potentialities….. Thus true spirituality will
not lay a yoke upon science and philosophy or compel them to square their
conclusions with any statement of dogmatic religious or even of assured spiritual truth (emphasis added), as some of the
old religions attempted, vainly, ignorantly, with an unspiritual obstinacy and arrogance…..
But meanwhile they (Science and philosophy) must be left free even to deny God
and Good and Beauty if they will, if their sincere observation of things so
points them…Often we find atheism both in the individual and society a
necessary passage to deeper religious and spiritual truth; one has to sometimes
deny God in order to find him”
(The Human Cycle -
pages 214 / 215, SABCL)
We
are sure you will agree that this passage from Sri Aurobindo apart from laying
down the very raison d’etre of the Ashram, is an answer to all the various
propositions put forth by you.
After
this you will agree that as to who should be permitted to remain an inmate of
the Ashram and who should not is not so simple a matter as it appears to be at
first sight. The trustees, took all the factors into consideration, including
the fact that the author of "The Lives of Sri Aurobindo" had been
taken to The Mother in the year 1971 by Jayantilal-da who was the moving force
behind the setting up and the work of the Archives.
There
are many inmates who write books on their own initiative and Ashram gets
nowhere into the picture, unless Ashram itself be the publisher of those books,
or unless the Ashram would have specifically assigned to that inmate the
writing of that book as a work-responsibility. Only then can the Ashram take
the responsibility of whatever may be the content of the book. Otherwise it is
the author alone who is solely responsible for what is said.
Given
the unfortunate controversy, the Trust may consider refining the process and
insist that in future, no inmate of the Ashram who would like to write any book
should describe himself as an inmate or a resident of the Ashram, foreclosing
the apprehension of any possible misunderstanding by the public at large that
the view of the author are either views of the Ashram or in any way endorsed by
the Ashram. This rule could be applied in future across the spectrum to prevent
any possible mix-up or misapprehension.
As
regards the financial guarantee, be it noted that such a guarantee was given in
the year 1971 or so. For every extension of Residence Permit, the guarantor has
only to confirm that the guarantee which had been given by him earlier is still
there. Whether a foreign national may reside in India or not is a decision
taken by the Govt. of India. In case the Govt. of India does not renew the
residence permit and in spite of such a denial if the foreign national refuses
to leave, the Govt. reserves the right to invoke the guarantee for defraying
the cost of his journey and other incidental expenses. No guarantor is ever
asked to give any certificate of good conduct or to step into the shoes of the
regulatory authority.
As
regards the offering of Rs 90000/- by Peter Heehs to the Ashram, it was a
voluntary contribution to The Mother of his own money with no tag attached, and
as such it is not proper for the Trust to refuse a contribution to The Mother
from anyone who wishes to offer of his own free-will.
d. As
regards Raghavan House and other similar matters, this is how rumors are born
and nurtured till a point when they seem to acquire an independent existence on
their own. Much of the so-called information that you are communicating about
Raghavan House originates from a so-called Section 161 statement given to the
police alongwith other fabricated material by a disgruntled and mischievous
element who, for ulterior reasons began working against the interests of the
Trust. He also perversely tried to lend credibility to that statement by
describing himself as an ex-lawyer of the Ashram. A complaint to the Bar
Council against this lawyer PP Raghavachary abated on his untimely demise and
could not be pursued to nail the lie. The complaint to the Bar Council having
abated, we are much more at liberty to talk about the matters stated therein in
order to give a lie to the rumors that he had spawned and which a few others
have blindly accepted as a fact. This is a good example of how a misinformation
disguising itself as so-called information is disseminated:
To
begin with, the so-called statement to the police is a perfect example of
manufacturing something that looks to be an important official document to a
layman, but to anyone who is knowledgeable about the format of Section 161
statements that are recorded by the police, it is clear that the copy of the
signed statement circulated by this lawyer is not a true 161 statement. This
same lawyer had in the year 2002 written to us that he knew nothing about
Raghavan House, while suddenly in the year 2004 he claimed to have gone to the police
in order to describe in detail what he alleged were privileged communications
to which he was privy to. It would be pointless to specify here as to why and
what prompted him to act in such a manner. Be that as it may, once the process
of Law has been set in motion, it has to follow a rigorously laid down
procedure. It is in this context, as a logical consequence of this mischief,
that an anticipatory bail had to be taken which is precisely a part of the
process that needs to be followed in the circumstances. It is significant that
after full investigation, the police did not find any material to prosecute the
Managing Trustee. There is no "miracle" in this, unless facts are
construed as miracles.
Furthermore,
we would like to add something which relates precisely to the process of how
rumors are created and how they get embellished at each successive stage of
transmission: kindly refer to your letter wherein you state that a sum of Rs.
50000/- was paid as anticipatory bail by a devotee. In a bail, be it
anticipatory or regular, it is a normal condition that someone has to execute a
bond as a security. In this case it was stipulated that the bond be for Rs
5000/-. A simple legal procedure has been deliberately twisted and distorted to
spice up negative imagination by adding a simple zero and using the word
"paid".
Raghavan House was
purchased only after a proper due diligence on the marketability of the
property. The inter se dispute now between the father and the son - each
asserting his ownership to the title - regarding the validity of the document
does not involve the Trust which is effectively defending itself as a bonafide
purchaser. The Court is seized of the matter and the Trust will necessarily
have to await the outcome. It is prudent that at this point of time we do not
comment on an issue that is subjudice, or put the documents that justify our
stand in public space.
The
irresponsible statement that we bribe our way through is once again not just a
leaf, but perhaps a chapter out of PP Raghavachary's fiction. When he had found
that the false complaints that he had filed against the trustees and many other
inmates of the Ashram were making no headway and he was being confronted in the
box with documents that were proving to be embarrassing for him, he conjured up
this tale in order to manufacture a ground for attempting to shift the trial of
his complaint out of Pondicherry. Well, he tried and did file suits in the High
Court of Madras in order to wriggle out of the situation, but after examining his
pleading, the High Court found it fit to dismiss his case. PP Raghavachary
tried to take this further and filed a petition in the Supreme Court, which
also dismissed the same. Ultimately after full trial the complaint filed by PP
Raghavachary was also dismissed.
e. Coming
to the disciplinary matters and other related issues, we can go into the
details of one of the disciplinary proceedings since it has already reached
finality in the courts. As you are aware, one Kamal Dora had challenged in a
Court of Law the necessary disciplinary action taken against him. The entire
hierarchy of Courts have declined to give any relief to him. In fact he has
gone up not once but twice to the Supreme Court with his grievances, but all
the courts have rejected his claim. Notwithstanding this, as we have always
maintained, should he be genuinely repentant and willing to reform himself, we
could take a very liberal and compassionate view even in this matter to help
Kamal Dora in whatever way, so that he may reform himself. Of course, as we do
not claim to have the spiritual insight and wisdom of The Mother, we cannot
throw practical and worldly wisdom entirely to the winds, and we would have to
take our necessary precautions to prevent any potential mischief on his part, or
any possible insincerity in his purpose. Disciplinary actions are very rare and
adopted only as a last resort when all other reasonable and persuasive methods
have failed. Although most of the other disciplinary cases that you have
mentioned are still being adjudicated, in the same spirit of goodwill as stated
above regarding Kamal Dora, anyone of them may approach the Trust in order to
find a solution subject to the Trust being satisfied that the person is sincere
in his/her approach and is truly regretting his/her act of indiscipline.
Generally speaking this is the consistent position of the Trust. However, it
would not be proper to discuss someone else's personal case and grievance with
anyone else. Should any of these persons mentioned by you give you a clear
mandate to discuss each one's case, we shall consider that possibility also.
Regarding
Abala, we would like to mention to you that notwithstanding the fact that she
had become a regular nuisance for a very long time to others at the Samadhi and
in the Dining Room, nothing has been done which would cause her any real
hardship. She has only been asked not to report for work as long as she chooses
to behave in a disturbing manner. Nothing more was done in this case taking
into consideration the inherent limitations of her personality because of which
she is herself hardly in a position to realize that she is being used as a tool
which she is herself hardly in a position to realize that she is being used as
a tool by some others.
As
you are aware, every department including New Guest House is also audited by
the internal auditors and any deficiency or discrepancy is attended to
promptly.
It
is a little ironical that you have complained that funds from the Ashram were
utilized to defend criminal cases against the trustees. Ironical, since one of
the signatories of your letter was himself an accused in Alipore (in the same
court in which Sri Aurobindo himself stood as an accused about a century ago)
along with the trustees and some other inmates, with the only cause of action
against him being that he was looking after the Press as part of the work
responsibility assigned to him by the Ashram. Obviously, the Trust took care to
provide him with an adequate legal defense and bore all the consequential costs.
Do you think it would have been fair to simply leave him in the lurch? His only
fault appears to have been that he was discharging the work responsibility of
an Ashram inmate. Incidentally, all those false complaints have been dismissed
since long, and the trustees have taken care to defend the position of the
Trust, and to protect the inmates of the Ashram.
We believe we have
answered you satisfactorily.
For The Board of
Trustees
Signed: Dilip
Datta
No comments:
Post a Comment