19 Jul 2012

Two Comments by an Inmate on “Misconceptions About the Sri Aurobindo Ashram Trust Deed”


A most essential truth regarding the management of Ashram properties was put in writing by the Mother on 10 February 1933, long before it became one of the key reasons for rushing through the Trust Deed, the way it had to be done:

The Ashram with all its real estate and moveable property belongs to Sri Aurobindo… and if my name sometimes appears…, it is…, a matter of convenience for the papers, since it is I who “manage” everything, but not because I really own them.” [CWM 16:8]

It is most significant that thus informed, Mother’s son André, who could have legally claimed all Ashram estates & properties, remained – in thought, word, & deed, – perfectly obedient to his mother’s gentle warning. Was every Trustee or his/her representative or Dept. Head who had the responsibility to “manage” any, even the most ‘insignificant’ Ashram estate or property, as fully conscious as Mother & as perfectly obedient as André – in thought, word, & deed – that he/she was ‘managing” Sri Aurobindo personal estates & properties & not his own? Whatever the answer(s) may be, those who sincerely believe that both Sri Aurobindo & Mother are as actively present as ever, can rest assured that They know even more fully than any Trustee or representative ever did or do, not only the answer(s) but everything that flowed from it, for ‘good’ or ‘bad’.


Here are a few quotes in support of the comment on Clause 7 of the Trust Deed, namely, “she did not think anybody spiritually fit to replace her in this matter!”

All souls who aspire are always under my direct care. [CWM 13:68]

There is no formal initiation, acceptance is sufficient, but I do not usually accept unless I have seen, or the Mother has seen the person or unless there is a clear sign that he is meant for this Yoga. [SABCL 23:849]

With those whom I have accepted as disciples, to whom I have said Yes, there is more than a tie, there is an emanation of me. [CWM 13:76]

Each path of sadhana has its own way and procedure which may be quite different from other paths. For this path the Mother and I can alone determine what is necessary, what is admissible or not admissible. [CWSA 35:727]

In order that PH’s & RH’s admission & adulation by SAAT now making headlines, headaches, & head-balances, hastens an in-depth exposé of SAAT’s usurpation of this authority, we need to begin with this historical fact: Even before Mother’s so-called ‘demise’ friends, advisors, brokers, et al, slipped into the confidence of the Trustees adding to the yogic immaturity & spiritual unfitness of their decisions on admission, expulsion, punishment, etc. of ‘inmates’. The results of this association become obvious with even a cursory study of the quality & quantity of the inmates admitted by them, – the worst, in the opinion of one of Mother’s secretaries, being parasitical retirees who have made SAAT’s Ashram their “haven of splendid soft repose”.

It is worth notng that most of those who were ‘seen’ by Sri Aurobindo &/or received Mother’s “Yes”, or possess the right faith, sincerity and surrender oppose SAAT’s antics on l’affaire PH & its upshot because they are moved by deeper insights into the truth & purpose of Mother’s Ashram.

Note too that most of those who support these antics were never ‘seen’ &/or received that “Yes”, or have been ‘seen’ &/or received that “Yes” but prefer to be blinded by their prejudices, ambitions, positions & self-interests which coincide with those of SAAT & PH & co., and those without the right faith, sincerity and surrender that imparts the power to see & think for oneself.

An Inmate

No comments:

Post a Comment