(by Arinaya Khalsa)
Having been a member of the Auroconf email list for a good part of the last six years, I have both witnessed and been party to a number of attempts to raise the subject of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet, her yoga, her knowledge about the Matrimandir, etc. on that forum. At first, I was somewhat shocked by the vehement rejection and judgement of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet and her
work, however, recently I have been given the opportunity to see more clearly the force that lies behind this whole "controversy". Lori's brief tenure on Auroconf provided the conditions for this force to be brought to light for all to see.
Prem Sobel is one of the individuals who has helped the most in bringing this hostile and undermining force to light, because, while many are content to merely express their opinions, speculations or subjective impressions, he has chosen to take a very definite stance in regards to Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's work and speaks with an air of absolute authority and certainty. At the same time, he has chosen to leave many unanswered questions, unresolved contradictions and unsubstantiated accusations lingering in his account of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet and her contribution to the Supramental Descent, which calls to question the validity of his statements as well as his motivations for making them.
In writing this letter I am publicly calling Prem Sobel's accusations to light and holding him accountable for the specific claims that he has made.
Firstly, Prem Sobel stated in an email on April 20, 2006, that he has "spent hours describing [Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's] delusions on [Auroconf] years ago." In the interest of discovering the truth regarding the lineage of the Supramental Descent, it is more than reasonable to ask Prem Sobel to furnish:
A. His descriptions of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's "delusions" which he published to Auroconf.
B. Medical proof that Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet is "delusional". (Ms. Norelli-Bachelet has expressed her consent to any necessary psychiatric examinations to disprove this slanderous and unjustified 'diagnosis' that has been made by Prem Sobel and others whose authority is threatened by her yoga.)
Secondly, when questioned by Lori about his classification of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet as "delusional", Prem Sobel replied with an email, dated April 21, 2006, in which he made a number of very strong accusations, which, after repeated questionings, he has been unable to substantiate or clarify in any way. If these accusations represent anything other than a deliberate and malicious attempt to discredit Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet and damage her reputation, then I sincerely ask that Prem Sobel demonstrate this by providing the Integral Yoga community with substantial evidence or examples of his very specific and strongly voiced accusations, made on a public forum, which I will list here:
1. Prem Sobel has written that good deal of what PNB says is "not hers". He later claimed that Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet incorporated certain ideas of his into her work without acknowledging his contributions. However, he has yet to substantiate this claim with details or examples. Can Prem Sobel provide us with any specific examples of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's work that has been plagiarized or appropriated from another source without providing due credit?
2. Prem Sobel has written that a good deal of what PNB says is "not verifiable". Can Prem Sobel provide us with any specific examples of unverifiable statements in the published works of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet?
3. Prem Sobel has also stated that a good deal of what PNB says is "just plain wrong". Prem Sobel implies here that Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's errors are glaringly obvious, as plain as day, staring us in the face. Yet after repeated requests, he has not been able to provide us with a single example of this. Is Prem Sobel able to furnish any examples of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's work that is "just plain wrong"?
4. And most amazingly, Prem Sobel claimed that "[Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet] told me [...] that [the] Mother asked her not to publish her claims (about Matrimandir, about her family, about ...) until She gave permission. [Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet] disobeyed." As it stands, this statement is more or less incapable of being true, due to the fact that the Mother passed from the physical in 1973, while Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's knowledge of the Matrimandir, the identity of the Fourth, etc. only began to take form in 1974 and later. I would like to give Prem Sobel the opportunity to either publicly retract this statement, or indicate how it can possibly be true, especially given the fact that Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet does not recall having this conversation, which he claims took place in 1971 or 1972 (when her son would have been 8). Is Prem Sobel able to flesh out his story or prove in any way that the above represents anything other than the intentional defamation [1] of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet?
Taken together, along with his persistent refusal to provide any examples or details to substantiate these serious accusations, it would appear that Prem Sobel's statements are intentionally defamatory [1], and that they are part of a deliberate campaign to suppress and discredit Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet, her work and her contribution to the Supramental Descent. If this assessment is untrue, I invite Prem Sobel to take this opportunity to set the record straight once and for all.
Sincerely, Arinaya Khalsa
[1] Defamation is used here in its specific legal sense. For example, the following definition, taken from the Law.com website (http://dictionary.law.com):
Defamation: n. the act of making untrue statements about another which damages his/her reputation. If the defamatory statement is printed or broadcast over the media it is libel and, if only oral, it is slander.Public figures, including office holders and candidates, have to show that the defamation was made with malicious intent and was not just fair comment. Damages for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malice. Some statements such as an accusation of having committed a crime, having a feared disease or being unable to perform one's occupation are called libel per se or slander per se and can more easily lead to large money awards in court and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Most states provide for a demand for a printed retraction of defamation and only allow a lawsuit if there is no such admission of error.
Saturday, June 24, 2006
Letter to the Moderators of Auroconf # 2
(by Robert Wilkinson)
Dear David, Will, Kenny and Larry,
I have followed recent developments on Auroconf and I am appalled at the behavior which passes for enlightened discussion of the sublime teachings of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Your stewardship of this group has sunk to a new low. This cannot continue.
One of the false assumptions that you have maintained over the years is that one could not be a devotee of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother and also a proponent of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's teachings. The two in your mind have always been mutually exclusive which allowed you to feel righteous in condemning her work as heresy and ridiculing her students as misguided followers of a delusional pretender. As Moderators you have maintained this condescending posture from the inception of Auroconf up to the present day denying hundreds of sincere seekers the opportunity of learning the truth about the Mother's extraordinary accomplishments in her Temple plan not to mention Sri Aurobindo's return.
It now appears that part of your justification for this outrageous behavior is the testimony of Paul Sobel who has proven himself a liar out of his own mouth. Do not forget that Sobel has implicated you in his malicious campaign to discredit Patrizia and thereby assure that her books were excluded from the list of authors who have written about Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Sobel writes:
"…All of us who worked on the web site and know of her or have had contact with her made this decison, in fact to tell the truth it was not for one moment under consideration to mention P.N.'s books. The basis is very simple Robert, we do not feel that what Patrezzia has writen is truth. At best it is a partial insight from a limited viewpoint that has has been eggzagerated, at best!"
In addition to making a liar out of you David for telling me that her books were under consideration Sobel has placed himself and you in an untenable position. Since you have willingly followed his lead, I insist that you, and the others Sobel has referenced, tell me exactly how Patrizia's books are "partial" and compared to what standard are they "limited"? And make no mistake that your answers will be examined by our attorneys as cause of action against you and Sobel.
As devotees of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother we will no longer tolerate this disgraceful behavior. You have encouraged and allowed lies and slander against the good name of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet to be published on Auroconf even to the extent of calling her a "delusional schizophrenic". You have taken it upon yourselves to interfere with the circulation of her books, denying others the benefit of her knowledge based only on your ignorant opinions and obvious lack of realization. And in so doing you have disqualified yourselves as worthy of leading anyone in the path of this yoga.
We are writing the Trustees of the Ashram to inform them that you have willingly conspired to use the Mother's name to add credence to malicious and untrue statements against Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet. That you have done so to enhance your reputations as the highest authorities on the teachings of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother and the final arbiter of what is and is not the Supramental Truth. As a consequence of your irresponsible stewardship, we will be demanding the following:
1.) An immediate and heartfelt apology to Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet for allowing and encouraging the publication of libel against her good name.
2.) An immediate listing of her books and articles on the Miraura site.
3.) An open letter of apology to the entire community of devotees for using the Mother's name to lend credence to the publication of your self-serving lies about Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet. This is to be published in the AVI Newsletter for international circulation.
4.) The immediate expulsion of Paul Sobel from the Auroconf list.
5.) An apology to Lori Tompkins for your disgraceful treatment of her during her brief tenure on Auroconf.
6.) And finally, your resignations as Moderators of Auroconf and the election of more suitable persons who do not seek to impose their limited beliefs on its members by maliciously censoring material relevant to their understanding of the Yoga.
It would be best if you undertook these remedies out of a sincere turn of heart after reflecting on the gravity of what you and your colleagues have done and said in the Mother's name. If you do not, we will seek legal means to insure that you comply.
In the service of Truth, Robert Wilkinson
Dear David, Will, Kenny and Larry,
I have followed recent developments on Auroconf and I am appalled at the behavior which passes for enlightened discussion of the sublime teachings of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Your stewardship of this group has sunk to a new low. This cannot continue.
One of the false assumptions that you have maintained over the years is that one could not be a devotee of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother and also a proponent of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet's teachings. The two in your mind have always been mutually exclusive which allowed you to feel righteous in condemning her work as heresy and ridiculing her students as misguided followers of a delusional pretender. As Moderators you have maintained this condescending posture from the inception of Auroconf up to the present day denying hundreds of sincere seekers the opportunity of learning the truth about the Mother's extraordinary accomplishments in her Temple plan not to mention Sri Aurobindo's return.
It now appears that part of your justification for this outrageous behavior is the testimony of Paul Sobel who has proven himself a liar out of his own mouth. Do not forget that Sobel has implicated you in his malicious campaign to discredit Patrizia and thereby assure that her books were excluded from the list of authors who have written about Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Sobel writes:
"…All of us who worked on the web site and know of her or have had contact with her made this decison, in fact to tell the truth it was not for one moment under consideration to mention P.N.'s books. The basis is very simple Robert, we do not feel that what Patrezzia has writen is truth. At best it is a partial insight from a limited viewpoint that has has been eggzagerated, at best!"
In addition to making a liar out of you David for telling me that her books were under consideration Sobel has placed himself and you in an untenable position. Since you have willingly followed his lead, I insist that you, and the others Sobel has referenced, tell me exactly how Patrizia's books are "partial" and compared to what standard are they "limited"? And make no mistake that your answers will be examined by our attorneys as cause of action against you and Sobel.
As devotees of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother we will no longer tolerate this disgraceful behavior. You have encouraged and allowed lies and slander against the good name of Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet to be published on Auroconf even to the extent of calling her a "delusional schizophrenic". You have taken it upon yourselves to interfere with the circulation of her books, denying others the benefit of her knowledge based only on your ignorant opinions and obvious lack of realization. And in so doing you have disqualified yourselves as worthy of leading anyone in the path of this yoga.
We are writing the Trustees of the Ashram to inform them that you have willingly conspired to use the Mother's name to add credence to malicious and untrue statements against Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet. That you have done so to enhance your reputations as the highest authorities on the teachings of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother and the final arbiter of what is and is not the Supramental Truth. As a consequence of your irresponsible stewardship, we will be demanding the following:
1.) An immediate and heartfelt apology to Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet for allowing and encouraging the publication of libel against her good name.
2.) An immediate listing of her books and articles on the Miraura site.
3.) An open letter of apology to the entire community of devotees for using the Mother's name to lend credence to the publication of your self-serving lies about Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet. This is to be published in the AVI Newsletter for international circulation.
4.) The immediate expulsion of Paul Sobel from the Auroconf list.
5.) An apology to Lori Tompkins for your disgraceful treatment of her during her brief tenure on Auroconf.
6.) And finally, your resignations as Moderators of Auroconf and the election of more suitable persons who do not seek to impose their limited beliefs on its members by maliciously censoring material relevant to their understanding of the Yoga.
It would be best if you undertook these remedies out of a sincere turn of heart after reflecting on the gravity of what you and your colleagues have done and said in the Mother's name. If you do not, we will seek legal means to insure that you comply.
In the service of Truth, Robert Wilkinson
Friday, June 16, 2006
A Letter to the Auroconf Moderating Group
Auroconf Moderating Group:
I understand that this moderating group, and it seems the Auroconf group as a whole has made up its mind about Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet. I entered the group, suspecting this was the case, wanting to know why.
Given that I was born in 1969 and have never had direct access to the events that unfolded in the 1970's regarding the Matrimandir, Ms. Norelli-Bachelet's arrival in Pondicherry, and the way things unfolded after the Mother's departure, I necessarily depend on the accounts of others to understand what happened in those days. My references for the past six years regarding that time period have been largely The Mother's Agenda, and various works by PNB such as The Tenth Day of Victory.
I entered into your group and found out first hand that the majority of this group believes that PNB's accounts of her own significance and her accounts of the Matrimandir's construction are delusional. I found out that there are people in your group with first hand experience of events surrounding Ms. Norelli-Bachelet and the construction of the Matrimandir.
I found out that one of those people, Prem Sobel, accused PNB of disregarding direct orders from the Mother in the early 1970's ... and that no one in Auroconf is the least bit concerned that the issues that Sobel cites as PNB's defiance of the Mother, didn't even exist while the Mother was alive. I also found out that Prem accuses PNB of usurping knowledge from him.
I believe Prem's accusations and Auroconf's apparent collusion in supporting them by allowing them to go unquestioned warrants a serious public investigation. I wanted to know the details of Prem's accusations and no one in the group would stand for that. I did share emails with PNB because I wanted her side of the story. You considered this to be nefarious and bannable activity, and were even more horrified that I would present her side of the story to the group. According to you, PNB's defense of herself and her reprimand of your behavior had no place in your forum. Your clung to your rules and felt totally justified in kicking me out as a deviant and hostile participant.
Your response was unanimous: For god's sake you crazed angry spammer, nobody wants to hear her side of the story. No one cared whether or not Prem was lying. It just didn't matter.
It is understandable that as a collective you just want your side of the story to continue to reign unquestioned, unchallenged regardless of how unsubstantiated your side of the story regarding PNB's history and the ‘faultless' construction of the Matrimandir happens to be, regardless of facts that speak to the faults of your side of the story.
These are not matters of individual concern and opinion, these are matters of character defamation and a hoard of people who collude in the process ... the same goes for the mis-execution of the Matrimandir ... claims are made in the name of the Mother, regarding the Matrimandir and regarding Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet, that mislead those interested in following the yoga of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, whom Auroville and Auroconf claim to be serving.
Well you are not serving anyone but yourselves and your own positions of ‘authority' on these matters. If you were interested in serving the followers of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, you would encourage Prem to fully disclose and substantiate his accusations against Ms. Norelli-Bachelet. I am a follower of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, and your unquestioning acceptance of his accusations, and your disregard of the Mother's original blue prints for the Matrimandir and your disregard for PNB in no way serves me. In fact you are obstructing a process of exploration and discovery into these serious matters, preferring your own insights over those that threaten your well-established structure. All those who question your behavior are disregarded as angry disciples of a deluded woman.
At present, you all seem to be accountable to no one. You put forth your ‘authority' on these matters, as if you represent the greater truth, without question that your authority or your experience of the truth of these matters might be seriously warped by your personal concerns. This needs to change.
I am requesting accountability and transparency of your organization. I request that you clearly indicate in your mission statement that your group believes Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet to be delusional and that discussions regarding the validity of her work are not tolerated by the group. You can pretend this is otherwise, but the fact remains ... your group is unanimous in it's rejection of PNB's yoga, her claims about her son, and her work regarding the mis-execution of the Matrimandir. Why not be transparent about that defining-characteristic in your literature? That way you could avoid any further disturbance of your group.
I will publicly request such accountability and transparency from your organization and from Prem regarding his unsubstantiated accusations against PNB via the web and via what ever other channels I can find.
It seems you feel yogis should not engage in such struggles. But I feel that you all are committing epic injustices in the name of the Mother and Sri Aurobindo and that you should be held publically and personally accountable for these injustices. From my point of view your group operates under the false pretense of being an open forum and a service to the followers of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Yet you are not an open forum. You have no interest in sharing your collectivity's private defamations of PNB with the larger public, you do not want to be held accountable for these defamations and you think that neither Prem nor anyone in your group has an obligation to the greater public to substantiate and make known your accusations, character assassinations and objections made against PNB.
I disagree. I feel you have a clear and pressing obligation to followers of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother to make your bias's known publically, rather than closing yourselves off in your ‘open' group and treating anyone that questions your collective treatment of PNB's work like a angry fanatic. I feel that the public should be able to investigate these matters openly without being subject to the rejection and ridicule of your moderating committee and members.
Lori Tompkins
I understand that this moderating group, and it seems the Auroconf group as a whole has made up its mind about Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet. I entered the group, suspecting this was the case, wanting to know why.
Given that I was born in 1969 and have never had direct access to the events that unfolded in the 1970's regarding the Matrimandir, Ms. Norelli-Bachelet's arrival in Pondicherry, and the way things unfolded after the Mother's departure, I necessarily depend on the accounts of others to understand what happened in those days. My references for the past six years regarding that time period have been largely The Mother's Agenda, and various works by PNB such as The Tenth Day of Victory.
I entered into your group and found out first hand that the majority of this group believes that PNB's accounts of her own significance and her accounts of the Matrimandir's construction are delusional. I found out that there are people in your group with first hand experience of events surrounding Ms. Norelli-Bachelet and the construction of the Matrimandir.
I found out that one of those people, Prem Sobel, accused PNB of disregarding direct orders from the Mother in the early 1970's ... and that no one in Auroconf is the least bit concerned that the issues that Sobel cites as PNB's defiance of the Mother, didn't even exist while the Mother was alive. I also found out that Prem accuses PNB of usurping knowledge from him.
I believe Prem's accusations and Auroconf's apparent collusion in supporting them by allowing them to go unquestioned warrants a serious public investigation. I wanted to know the details of Prem's accusations and no one in the group would stand for that. I did share emails with PNB because I wanted her side of the story. You considered this to be nefarious and bannable activity, and were even more horrified that I would present her side of the story to the group. According to you, PNB's defense of herself and her reprimand of your behavior had no place in your forum. Your clung to your rules and felt totally justified in kicking me out as a deviant and hostile participant.
Your response was unanimous: For god's sake you crazed angry spammer, nobody wants to hear her side of the story. No one cared whether or not Prem was lying. It just didn't matter.
It is understandable that as a collective you just want your side of the story to continue to reign unquestioned, unchallenged regardless of how unsubstantiated your side of the story regarding PNB's history and the ‘faultless' construction of the Matrimandir happens to be, regardless of facts that speak to the faults of your side of the story.
These are not matters of individual concern and opinion, these are matters of character defamation and a hoard of people who collude in the process ... the same goes for the mis-execution of the Matrimandir ... claims are made in the name of the Mother, regarding the Matrimandir and regarding Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet, that mislead those interested in following the yoga of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, whom Auroville and Auroconf claim to be serving.
Well you are not serving anyone but yourselves and your own positions of ‘authority' on these matters. If you were interested in serving the followers of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, you would encourage Prem to fully disclose and substantiate his accusations against Ms. Norelli-Bachelet. I am a follower of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, and your unquestioning acceptance of his accusations, and your disregard of the Mother's original blue prints for the Matrimandir and your disregard for PNB in no way serves me. In fact you are obstructing a process of exploration and discovery into these serious matters, preferring your own insights over those that threaten your well-established structure. All those who question your behavior are disregarded as angry disciples of a deluded woman.
At present, you all seem to be accountable to no one. You put forth your ‘authority' on these matters, as if you represent the greater truth, without question that your authority or your experience of the truth of these matters might be seriously warped by your personal concerns. This needs to change.
I am requesting accountability and transparency of your organization. I request that you clearly indicate in your mission statement that your group believes Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet to be delusional and that discussions regarding the validity of her work are not tolerated by the group. You can pretend this is otherwise, but the fact remains ... your group is unanimous in it's rejection of PNB's yoga, her claims about her son, and her work regarding the mis-execution of the Matrimandir. Why not be transparent about that defining-characteristic in your literature? That way you could avoid any further disturbance of your group.
I will publicly request such accountability and transparency from your organization and from Prem regarding his unsubstantiated accusations against PNB via the web and via what ever other channels I can find.
It seems you feel yogis should not engage in such struggles. But I feel that you all are committing epic injustices in the name of the Mother and Sri Aurobindo and that you should be held publically and personally accountable for these injustices. From my point of view your group operates under the false pretense of being an open forum and a service to the followers of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Yet you are not an open forum. You have no interest in sharing your collectivity's private defamations of PNB with the larger public, you do not want to be held accountable for these defamations and you think that neither Prem nor anyone in your group has an obligation to the greater public to substantiate and make known your accusations, character assassinations and objections made against PNB.
I disagree. I feel you have a clear and pressing obligation to followers of Sri Aurobindo and the Mother to make your bias's known publically, rather than closing yourselves off in your ‘open' group and treating anyone that questions your collective treatment of PNB's work like a angry fanatic. I feel that the public should be able to investigate these matters openly without being subject to the rejection and ridicule of your moderating committee and members.
Lori Tompkins
Wednesday, June 14, 2006
Determinations of ‘the Oracle' regarding the Matrimandir and PNB (circa 1975)
During my 44 day adventure in the Auroconf forum during the spring of 2006, a person named Constance [1] instantly questioned the four Auroconf moderators why they would facilitate my interest in discussing the ‘schism' that exists between their group and those who consider Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet a valid successor of the Supramental Descent.
I shared much of what happened while I was in Auroconf with Ms. Norelli-Bachelet and other students of her work; and questions regarding Constance arose that led to an important discussion about the events surrounding Auroville, the Mother and Ms. Norelli Bachelet in the mid 1970's.
For those of us who weren't there to see for ourselves what happened in those crucial years after the Mother left, these accounts are precious.
Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet: ‘If I recall, it was Constance who went to the Bhrigu Astrologer in Bangalore in 1975 or 1976 to ask about the Inner Chamber. The astrologer replied, from ancient papyrus leaves, that the 24 metres HAD TO BE INNER MEASUREMENT, and he gave him the references from the Scriptures to uphold the Mother's insistence. Of course this was never taken seriously, by Constance as well. I am almost certain that it was Constance. But I may be wrong. What is certain is that Constance lived in Auroville at the time the Matrimandir dispute came up and that he was not in favour of the Mother's original plan being implemented. Therefore any experience he remembers of me from those days can only be negative. But this was all after the Mother left, not before.'
I asked PNB who Davoud was and who sent him to the astrologer and more of the story unfolded.
Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet: ‘It was Davoud who made trips to the astrologer on his own initiative. He was an ashramite in the early 1960s, left around 1965 and returned about the time when I arrived. He never lived or had anything to do with Auroville. (Bear in mind that the two places are 20 kms apart and miles apart in the level of commitment and consciousness.) ...
‘His trips to the astrologer were entirely his thing. He used to ask all sorts of questions, some of the answers he would pass on to me when we met from time to time. The custom was to write 9, 6, or 3 questions, and place them in a sealed envelope before the astrologer. He would ask you to pick a card. I remember Davoud asking who Jesus was, and many times about Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Things like that.
'When Davoud put the question about the Mother's temple, the astrologer's reply from the old papyrus leaf was that "the Mother is grateful to Udar Pinto [name given in full!] and only to Udar Pinto for his help."
'Udar was the Ashram engineer she asked to draw up her plan originally. That is the plan that Piero brought to me and I worked with. He continued:
' "The diameter 24 mts must be INNER measurement," or to this effect. Again, the exact wording is on my files.
'With this reply, then Auroville agents stepped in and rushed to the same astrologer, believing, I suppose, that Davoud had fabricated his answer. Instead, this 'Constance' (or whoever) came away with the same command: INNER ONLY; but this time the astrologer even added the references in the Scriptures to support the inner measurement. But even with this, they defiantly chose to leave the measurement outer, and thus the crosswise axial balance was lost forever.
'When word spread about the Bhrigu reading, the main financial support of the temple, Madanlal Hematsinka, got HIS astrologer to CONFIRM that all was well just as it was being built, OUTER measurement and all. This was outrageous and a total sham. But that just goes to show you how shabbily they treated the Mother's knowledge. ANYTHING GOES!'
Ms. Norelli-Bachelet later noted that Madanlal's visit to his own astrologer, supposedly confirming that the OUTER measurement of 24 meters was correct, is possibly included in a history of Auroville that Gilles Guigan is compiling with various letters and similar anecdotes (We will try to confirm this.) She noted, however, that Gilles is not likely to make any mention of the Bhrigu astrologer's prior reading to Davoud and then to Constance, or whoever it was that paid him a visit after Davoud, for obvious reasons.
I encourage any readers concerned with these issues, who were around in those years, to add to this unfolding story by sending me their accounts of the events discussed above – in support or in opposition of the accounts given by Ms. Norelli-Bachelet. Soon there will be a time when those of you who have direct experience of the events as they unfolded, will no longer be around to share your contributions to the historical record of these important matters. Accounts can be posted to pnb-controversies.blogspot.com or sent to me at lotus@saber.net.
Lori Tompkins
13 June 2006
endnote:
[1] In the article ‘AuroExpose', Robert Wilkinson identifies Constance's original name as David E. Walker.
I shared much of what happened while I was in Auroconf with Ms. Norelli-Bachelet and other students of her work; and questions regarding Constance arose that led to an important discussion about the events surrounding Auroville, the Mother and Ms. Norelli Bachelet in the mid 1970's.
For those of us who weren't there to see for ourselves what happened in those crucial years after the Mother left, these accounts are precious.
Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet: ‘If I recall, it was Constance who went to the Bhrigu Astrologer in Bangalore in 1975 or 1976 to ask about the Inner Chamber. The astrologer replied, from ancient papyrus leaves, that the 24 metres HAD TO BE INNER MEASUREMENT, and he gave him the references from the Scriptures to uphold the Mother's insistence. Of course this was never taken seriously, by Constance as well. I am almost certain that it was Constance. But I may be wrong. What is certain is that Constance lived in Auroville at the time the Matrimandir dispute came up and that he was not in favour of the Mother's original plan being implemented. Therefore any experience he remembers of me from those days can only be negative. But this was all after the Mother left, not before.'
I asked PNB who Davoud was and who sent him to the astrologer and more of the story unfolded.
Patrizia Norelli-Bachelet: ‘It was Davoud who made trips to the astrologer on his own initiative. He was an ashramite in the early 1960s, left around 1965 and returned about the time when I arrived. He never lived or had anything to do with Auroville. (Bear in mind that the two places are 20 kms apart and miles apart in the level of commitment and consciousness.) ...
‘His trips to the astrologer were entirely his thing. He used to ask all sorts of questions, some of the answers he would pass on to me when we met from time to time. The custom was to write 9, 6, or 3 questions, and place them in a sealed envelope before the astrologer. He would ask you to pick a card. I remember Davoud asking who Jesus was, and many times about Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Things like that.
'When Davoud put the question about the Mother's temple, the astrologer's reply from the old papyrus leaf was that "the Mother is grateful to Udar Pinto [name given in full!] and only to Udar Pinto for his help."
'Udar was the Ashram engineer she asked to draw up her plan originally. That is the plan that Piero brought to me and I worked with. He continued:
' "The diameter 24 mts must be INNER measurement," or to this effect. Again, the exact wording is on my files.
'With this reply, then Auroville agents stepped in and rushed to the same astrologer, believing, I suppose, that Davoud had fabricated his answer. Instead, this 'Constance' (or whoever) came away with the same command: INNER ONLY; but this time the astrologer even added the references in the Scriptures to support the inner measurement. But even with this, they defiantly chose to leave the measurement outer, and thus the crosswise axial balance was lost forever.
'When word spread about the Bhrigu reading, the main financial support of the temple, Madanlal Hematsinka, got HIS astrologer to CONFIRM that all was well just as it was being built, OUTER measurement and all. This was outrageous and a total sham. But that just goes to show you how shabbily they treated the Mother's knowledge. ANYTHING GOES!'
Ms. Norelli-Bachelet later noted that Madanlal's visit to his own astrologer, supposedly confirming that the OUTER measurement of 24 meters was correct, is possibly included in a history of Auroville that Gilles Guigan is compiling with various letters and similar anecdotes (We will try to confirm this.) She noted, however, that Gilles is not likely to make any mention of the Bhrigu astrologer's prior reading to Davoud and then to Constance, or whoever it was that paid him a visit after Davoud, for obvious reasons.
I encourage any readers concerned with these issues, who were around in those years, to add to this unfolding story by sending me their accounts of the events discussed above – in support or in opposition of the accounts given by Ms. Norelli-Bachelet. Soon there will be a time when those of you who have direct experience of the events as they unfolded, will no longer be around to share your contributions to the historical record of these important matters. Accounts can be posted to pnb-controversies.blogspot.com or sent to me at lotus@saber.net.
Lori Tompkins
13 June 2006
endnote:
[1] In the article ‘AuroExpose', Robert Wilkinson identifies Constance's original name as David E. Walker.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)