Sri Aurobindo: A Contemporary Reader —

Sri Aurobindo: A Contemporary Reader

Sri Aurobindo: A Contemporary Reader — Ed: Sachidananda Mohanty- ISBN: 978-0-415-46093-4 Publisher: Routledge, New Delhi

The editor has selected from five of Sri Aurobindo’s books, viz The Ideal of Human Unity, The Human Cycle, War and Self-Determination, The Foundations of Indian Culture, and Autobiographical Notes and Other Writings of Historical Interest with a view to presenting certain aspects of Sri Aurobindo’s vision for the future of humanity in the context of the “crisis of contemporary culture”.

The editor initially talks of the four areas – (a) the tyranny of the State idea, (b) religion versus secular modernity, (c) the problem of self-determination, and (d) identity politics in a multicultural society.
Then, the editor gives an overview of the work as against the contemporary context and goes on to focus on how Sri Aurobindo applied his yogic understanding to the arena of contemporary society and politics and goes to show how many of the comments made in early twentieth century are still valid and relevant.

The editor includes an example to show Sri Aurobindo’s insight in 1950 on the Korean conflict foretold the possibility and consequences of China’s aggression against India in 1962. On June 28, 1950, Sri Aurobindo wrote a letter to K.D. Sethna, editor of Mother India, in reply to his question on the conflict in Korea, describing the situation there as “the first move in the Communist plan of campaign to dominate and take possession first of these northern parts and then of South East Asia as a preliminary to their manoeuvres with regard to the rest of the continent—in passing, Tibet as a gate opening to India.” Some months later, in the wake of China’s invasion of Tibet in October 1950, Sethna wrote an editorial “The Truth About Tibet” which elaborated on the views expressed in Sri Aurobindo’s earlier letter to him.


Years later, in 1962, the Chinese aggression against India created international concern. In March 1963, Sudhir Ghosh, an Indian emissary of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, had a meeting with President Kennedy in Washington D.C. and shared with him a letter from Nehru dated January 5, 1963, “on the problem posed by the military power of Communist China”. He also showed the president the following excerpt from that Mother India editorial dated November 11, 1950, referring to it as “the last testament of Sri Aurobindo”. Though this was not written by Sri Aurobindo himself, it is clear from the full content of his letter to K.D. Sethna on the Korean War that the editorial represented his general views on the subject.

The basic significance of Mao's Tibetan adventure is to advance China's frontiers right down to India and stand poised there to strike at the right moment and with the right strategy—unless India precipitately declares herself on the side of the Russian bloc. But to go over to Mao and Stalin in order to avert their wrath is not in any sense a saving gesture. It is a gesture spelling the utmost ruin to all our ideals and aspirations. Really the gesture that can save is to take a firm line with China, denounce openly her nefarious intentions, stand without reservation by the U.S.A. and make every possible arrangement consonant with our own self-respect to facilitate an American intervention in our favour and, what is of still greater moment, an American prevention of Mao's evil designs on India. Militarily, China is almost ten times as strong as we are, but India as the spearhead of an American defence of democracy can easily halt Mao's mechanised millions. And the hour is upon us of constituting ourselves such a spearhead and saving not only our own dear country but also all South East Asia whose bulwark we are. We must burn it into our minds that the primary motive of Mao's attack on Tibet is to threaten India as soon as possible.

To quote from Sudhir Ghosh’s own account: The President read the words of Sri Aurobindo's last testament several times over and said: "Surely there is a typing mistake here. The date must have been 1960, not 1950. You mean to say that a man devoted to meditation and contemplation, sitting in one corner of India, said this about the intentions of Communist China as early as 1950?”