Two more texts on and for Auroville

for life; such condition would naturally bar the way to Government officers wishing to interfere in or even to seize control of the affairs of Auroville. This is not a matter of qualities, aptitudes or behaviours, but one of the deepest sort of commitment and self-giving. One may debate rationally the pros and cons of some working compromise so that a degree of willing collaboration may be achieved between those who have chosen to give their lives to Auroville and those who represent the Central Government at this critical moment of transition, but there must be a deeper understanding of the profound difference in the nature of the choices made for any compromise to have a chance of progress and fulfilment. Auroville has much to offer to the nation and its people and for this sharing and diffusion to happen harmoniously, mutual respect and caring awareness must be established. In terms of dharma, one can cite positions and actions on the part of the Government that do not meet the demands of either the Auroville‟s dharma or its own. The Central Government has no “right” to nominate or designate any Government body, such as the Auroville Foundation, as the owner and proprietor of Auroville (its lands and assets), since the Parliament Act‟ original intention was for the Central Government to protect Auroville precisely from such claims of ownership and provide it with a legal status which would allow it to develop according to its goals as stated in its Charter. Therefore it is “adharmic” for the Central Government today to claim complete control over the land and assets of Auroville, which belong to “nobody in particular, but to humanity as a whole”. The many individuals who offered – to the Mother - all the plots of land which now technically belong to the Auroville Foundation, to be managed and cared for on behalf of humanity as a whole at the service of the Divine Consciousness, never intended for these donations to be used by the Government for its own ends and this arbitrary imposition of Governmental control constitutes a breach of trust.

15