Thursday, August 17, 2006

The Life Divine is written for people like you

Tusar N. Mohapatra Says: August 16th, 2006 at 12:15 am But, it seems that Berge would not touch Sri Aurobindo even with a barge pole.
Tusar N. Mohapatra Says: August 16th, 2006 at 1:03 am THE LIFE DIVINE Sri Aurobindo 2.1.13: Exclusive Concentration of Consciousness-Force and the Ignorance
In this chapter, Sri Aurobindo attempts to resolve an age-old metaphysical question in absolute speculative fashion with remarkable success. It is interesting to note that this piece of philosophical wizardry has resonance in Heidegger’s Unconcealment. Exclusive Concentration and Unconcealment
Edward Berge Says: August 16th, 2006 at 6:18 am You’re right Tusar, I’m not interested in Aurobindo or other “metaphysical” systems as Wilber defines them. And it’s not that I’m unfamiliar with them. Although I’m unfamiliar with Aurobindo I studied a hermetic and qabalistic tradition for about 10 years before being initiated into an Order. I was an initiate of this Order for another 5 years and attained a fairly high degree of initiation. So I’m aware of kabbalistic (or as we used it, qabalistic) levels of ontology. I just no longer accept that worldview as my own.
Tusar N. Mohapatra Says: August 16th, 2006 at 8:04 am So, better rename the blog as Closed Integral, if you are so hostile to Sri Aurobindo and that too without studying anything about him. Even Wilber won’t like to take such a rigid stand. If you are so enamoured of Postmodernism, may I add that The Mother and Sri Aurobindo are the first Post-modernists.
Edward Berge Says: August 16th, 2006 at 9:40 am Just because I don’t have an interest in studying Aurobindo doesn’t mean I’m closed to his ideas or his relevant and valuable insights. Nor does it mean this forum is closed to them. It’s just not my interest to accept his view in toto or to study him in depth. Your and Aurobindo’s views are welcome here but expect them to be questioned. And by all means continue to question mine.
Edward Berge Says: August 16th, 2006 at 12:14 pm Tusar, I started to read the referenced chapter in The Life Divine but I don’t understand it. In your blog you noted that it related to Heidegger’s unconcealment, so perhaps you can explain this to me. Thanks.
Tusar N. Mohapatra Says: August 16th, 2006 at 1:11 pm [Edward Berge Says: August 15th, 2006 at 1:02 pm I’m confused then Marko, for it there are ontologoical “layers” of being then how are they not relative to each other and hence not absolute being per se as you describe it? ]
Oh Great! Finally, your resistance melted. In the cited Chapter, Sri Aurobindo has answered to your aforesaid confusion with all philosophical rigorousness. And may I say it in all sincerity that this has not been done in any other philosophy, theology, or theosophy. You are an earnest seeker of Truth and endowed with abundant intelligence. The Life Divine is written for people like you. There is no better joy than to discover its treasures by reading it at a slow pace. Bon voyage!

No comments:

Post a Comment