Is This History or Speculation? -- by Krish Patwardhan

But where are the solid facts and well-documented evidence? All that we come across is speculation after speculation, and one speculation pitted against another speculation in order to create problems! And if there are a few hard facts, Heehs is more keen on artificially creating problems than solving them. There is as it were a deliberate “problematising” of Sri Aurobindo’s life and a deliberate denial of the right perspective to create the impression of a so-called “balanced” view which caters more to the materialistic point of view than the spiritual, so that Sri Aurobindo is often presented as a bundle of opposites!
  ...full text...

"Sexual union dignifed by marriage" - page 318

On page 318, Peter Heehs falsely alleges that Sri Aurobindo engaged in “sexual union dignified by marriage”.   

The remark is as follows:

After Aurobindo entered what he called "the sexual union dignified by the name of marriage," he seems to have found the state bothersome and uninteresting.

We are told to accept these sort of remarks because Sri Aurobindo is being "humanized".   Has anyone bothered to inquire into the source of this conclusion?  It is derived from the previous page (page 316) where Sri Aurobindo asks his disciple Nolini whether he wishes to engage in "sexual union dignified by the name of marriage".   That passage is as follows:

  ...full text...

Distortions of Quotations

In this text, Peter attempts to distort and misrepresent the relationship of guru and disciple as a romantic personal interest. He distorts simple normal gestures to turn them into “surprising” ones. He adds fertile speculation with comments without basis, such as “people noticed a surprising development” and “nothing furtive”. Nobody was surprised as the gestures were normal of a disciple to the guru, and Mirra’s primary interest in meeting Sri Aurobindo was spiritual. (Extract followed by full article)   ...full text...

Sri Aurobindo's Avatarhood -- by Vishwas Patel

The occasion for a rebuttal came up when Peter Heehs attempted to ridicule the private beliefs of the disciples of Sri Aurobindo and argued that he was not an Avatar because he had “never made any such claim on his own behalf”. It would have been absolutely fine, I repeat, had Peter Heehs said that he did not believe in the Avatarhood of Sri Aurobindo, because there was never any question of forcing upon others such a sacred and personal conviction. It is only when he had a nasty dig at the faith of the concerned disciples in what he claimed to be the “first objective biography on Sri Aurobindo” (while still pretending to be a disciple of the same Guru), that a reply became necessary. It is this duplicity that had to be exposed in public. For it is understood that as far as institutional propriety is concerned you are either outside an institution or inside it. You cannot be both in and out, that is, enjoy the privileges of an insider and at the same time have the unrestricted freedom to criticise the founder of the institution that an outsider generally has. (Extract)

  ...full text...

The Trial and the Verdict -- by Alok Pandey

We have in this book TLOSA what may be called the Second Trial of Sri Aurobindo to see where He stands in our assessment. Unfortunately the trial is being ordered not by the British Municipal Magistrate but by an inmate of his own ashram. It is being done in crass violation of all ethical and spiritual norms. Ethically it is not in good taste to pass comments upon someone who is no more there to defend himself and set things in their right perspective. Spiritually, it is an anathema to doubt and criticize the Master, an act regarded in all spiritual schools as the straight road to perdition. [Extract, read full article below]

  ...full text...

Sri Aurobindo's Image in the Words of Peter Heehs -- by Michel Beven

SRI AUROBINDO--LAZY LIAR, INSANE TERRORIST

HIS YOGA--NO GUIDELINES

HIS APHORISMS--ONLY IMITATIONS OF A FOREIGNER

SAVITRI--ONLY A STORY

KRISHNA--IS HE DIVINE?

HIS VISION OF KRISHNA--ONLY IMAGINATION

HIS POLITICAL FAME--DUE TO PROPAGANDA

SEX-SMOKING-ALCOHOL--BETTER NOT TO KNOW
  ...full text...

On Sri Aurobindo’s Childhood, Anger and Riding Test—by Krish Patwardhan

Another unpardonable case of bad taste! I wonder whether those who support the book have at all understood this sentence: “Well, if you take the clothes away there remains little to distinguish one human radish from another.” It is a reference to the male sexual organ! And if this is passable, then I wonder what is not passable, and you might as well start writing for a porn magazine. [extract]

  ...full text...

One-Sided Reporting by Peter Heehs -- by Alok Pandey

Let me now give an example of one-sided reporting from the chapter entitled “Son”. Our biographer goes at great length to describe the madness of Sri Aurobindo’s mother and keeps referring to it time and again well past the half-way mark of his book. He mentions the unfaithfulness of Sri Aurobindo’s father to his wife and dubs him as “Darwinian Mr Ghose” because he was “proud to have brought children of a better breed into the world” (p 9). What does the author convey through the presentation of this data? He is forcefully drawing our attention to the poor heredity of Sri Aurobindo, more specifically the inheritance of madness from his mother, and the unhappy environment of his childhood days, both of which may have caused the spiritual “hallucinations” he saw in the latter part of his life! This view we of course discredit, but even from the angle of the psychologist seriously interested in engaging with someone who does not believe in spiritual things, there are three important factors Peter deliberately ignores.

  ...full text...

Clever Denigration of Sri Aurobindo by Peter Heehs -- by Alok Pandey

Peter Heehs uses in his book certain subtle psychological techniques to create a negative opinion of Sri Aurobindo. One such device is never passing an outright negative judgment without making some qualifications to it. Generally he flip-flops between positive and negative statements, swings to the left and right, and in a most unsuspecting way nullifies his positive statements on Sri Aurobindo. For committing this ‘murder in cold print’, he begins with some sweet talk lulling the reader into a false sense of sympathy, and then delivers a blow to Sri Aurobindo in someone else’s name, adding his own opinion quietly in the presentation of a multitude of documents. He does this so cleverly that at times it is hard to distinguish his personal opinion from the quoted documents. For example, while summarizing Sri Aurobindo’s life at Baroda, the author makes the following statement:   ...full text...

Sri Aurobindo’s Horse Riding Test—by Krish Patwardhan

Where is the evidence of “the series of lies” Sri Aurobindo told when he was called to the office of the Civil Service Commission? Deliberately missing appointments or going late to them, not receiving letters and not promptly replying to them is more evasive tactics than telling lies (see Appendix 1), which any lawyer would be familiar with. [extract]

  ...full text...

Distortion of the episode involving Vivekananda's guidance to Sri Aurobindo in Alipore jail (page 178)

On page 178 of the biography, Heehs surreptitiously debunks the well-known fact that Sri Aurobindo received guidance from Swami Vivekananda in Alipore jail.  It is astonishing that so many people have read the biography but not one seems to have noticed this glaring inaccuracy.  Perhaps it is because while reading, people tend to gloss over the incidents in Sri Aurobindo’s life that they are already familiar with, or they trust that the author is telling the truth, or they have not bothered to investigate and determine what the primary sources actually contain.    

Anyway, here is the passage from the biography:

  ...full text...

Preface of TLOSA -- by Alok Pandey

The fact is that PH has more often quoted the enemies and critics of Sri Aurobindo and shied away from those who have made positive statements on him. He does not give credence to even Sri Aurobindo’s statements on the events of his own life, though he is quick in highlighting Sri Aurobindo’s negative statements on himself in a highly decontextualised manner. Why this biased choice on implicitly accepting “negative statements” and rejecting outright “positive statements” of Sri Aurobindo or his admirers? His criterion of selection is not based on whether a document is authentic or not, but on whether it is critical or not of Sri Aurobindo. If it is critical, he is too eager to accept it; if it is appreciative he is too willing to reject it or doubt its authenticity! [extract]   ...full text...