journal d'une transition

1380

Auroville, does all this still have any relevance? The ‘might have done’ replaces what is, the unreal the real, and the accusation produces retroactively its own justification: many people in Auroville are now convinced that the Caveat was put because the four Aurovilians pointed at really meant to put a stay order: the Caveat proves the stay order. The unreal has become a believed-in imaginary reality, against which no defence is possible, as Socrates pointed out long ago in his own case. A more prudent use could have been made of the Chairman’s position. The passage from the field of knowledge where his contribution has been so inspiring, to the field of influence, then of legal control, is a very delicate one, which touches very centrally at all the mechanisms of power at work in any society and the commerce they have with spiritual truths to reinforce themselves. I understand his wish to make Auroville move ahead, and certainly his action will make it move in some ways, by churning it deeply I hope, but his action falls within our field of research and you can understand that it becomes then an object of direct questioning and scrutiny. When the false becomes official truth and object of collective belief, when the unreal becomes recognised reality, when the meaning men give to their action is not listened to anymore, doesn’t count anymore, we are already drifting away from Auroville’s ideals, from any possible ideal. As a son of Europe, I would summarise my point in a nutshell by saying that we have to choose between the faithful constant questioning of Socrates, who knows he doesn’t know, and Plato’s geometrical order of certitudes, where philosophers dream of becoming kings. Socrates had a bad destiny in Europe; does he have a chance in India? I invite you to consider seriously the above mentioned points, for they touch at what is fundamental to Auroville and at our fidelity to Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, far beyond the reach of any court of law. Note: All arguments seeking to establish the legitimacy of the Chairman’s actions were derived from his initial choice to install the “Chief Architect” as the supreme authority over all matters at Matrimandir; therefore, what was not approved by him now was to be deemed ‘illegal’, and thus our spending funds on works not wanted by him now constituted dereliction of duty; in the same fashion, our negative protest and rebellion against this new dispensation pointed inevitably to the possible danger of wreckage for this new established hierarchical structure. We went on with our daily work. The Workers Team continued to meet regularly, once or twice a week. The atmosphere on site was often very taut with tensions, as a number of determined supporters of “the architect” were positioning themselves, seeking to influence the workers, and generally making it clear to me particularly – as I was the most exposed on site – that every day was counted. But somehow, it was not overwhelming, and there was calm and peace in me. I did not try to convince anyone, I did not like to argue for or against; I stayed on because it was my place, the place of my heart, and because I didn’t want to let Arjun down, and because I was too bound to the workers, and because I still had faith that this could With my best regards, Jean Yves”