090 bm. Way to change others not in IY, is by our example & integrity, not by theoretical bashing" by ronjon on Sun 24 Jul 2005 04:21 PM PDT Permanent Link From: "Bindu Mohanty" (firstname.lastname@example.org) Date: July 24, 2005 4:20:51 PM PDT To: email@example.com Subject: RE: well,..why (how) even talk about it?!!! Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
Dear Richard and others, I confess, I have hardly read any of the postings on this Post-AUM. I am somehow still stuck in a relentless treadmill of work and study. Anyway today, I chanced to open this e-mail and my interest was immediately caught by certain keywords—Habermas, intersubjectivity and not to mention my own name. In addition to the wonderful arguments that you make here about introducing Sri Aurobindo to a wider context, I'd like to make a few comments.
As an Aurobindonian group, we can perhaps agree that this whole contemporary interest in integral and evolutionary studies is part of the supramental change that the world is going through. Sri Aurobindo elaborates that the inﬂuence of the Supermind is almost always distorted when it descends to the human mentality. This is perhaps why the message of Allan Combs and Ken Wilber is distorted. And yet, I agree with you that we should continue to try and reach out to the wider world, and the AUM presents itself is a very good forum to bring together Aurobindonians and other people interested/engaged, in whatever way, in an evolutionary spiritual practice.
What I would like to see however in future AUMs is that a clear distinction be voiced between practitioners of Integral Yoga and other people who have important, contemporary theories to share about integral education or evolution but do not subscribe to the spiritual path of Integral Yoga. If this distinction is made from the outset, then those Aurobindonians who are not interested in contemporary discoveries and efforts, need not attend those talks.
Neeltje's (and Ameeta Mehra's) effort at integral education is very different from Joe Subbiondo's efforts at integral education. Just because the term used by both are same, there is no need to say that they both mean the same thing. And at the same time, there is no point in trashing Joe's efforts, for CIIS, whatever its weaknesses, is quite a radical alternative to mainstream college education in USA or India. And the only way to change others, who are not on the Integral Yoga path, is by our own example and integrity and not by theoretical bashing. Anyway, this is my practically oriented two-pence contribution to this very rich discussion. I leave USA in about a week's time, and hopefully in August, I'll have more time to participate in this discussion.
Posted to: Main Page