journal d'une transition

1383

for the timely destruction of the Outer Gardens/Park of Matrimandir was collapsing. But it did not really matter any longer. The deed was virtually done. The future destiny of the area between the Oval Island and the city could wait as a no man’s land. What mattered to the “Architect” was then, and is now, that his authority was established and no obstruction would be left between his concept of the city and physical reality. I was certain that the Aurovilians themselves, whether they were temporarily members of this or that group, would never have the shakti to carry out these orders on their own; until that day, not one Aurovilian had ever been able to come straight out and tell me any of this; only a couple of newcomers had ventured to let me know what they had gathered was the general trend or mood. Unless and until the same Aurovilians would be armed with some actual legal, official order, they would not find it in themselves to come and tell us physically to move out of Matrimandir. I was right, too! But I felt, those days just after receiving their letter of “thanks”, that I wanted at least this time to let them know what I thought! So I wrote another, unpopular, letter! This too was posted and circulated.

*Open Communication – 21-9-2003 – from Divakar:

“To those who have put their names to the shameful act of ordering two of their brothers to quit from their life-service to the Mother.

You are in deep trouble, not Arjun, not me. I choose to trust that this ‘community’ of which you have become the voice is NOT

Auroville, for it is not worthy of Auroville. Its methods and processes are a-dharmic.

And all those who wit pretty and wrinkle their nose in distaste at the ‘conflict of egos’ over Matrimandir would do well to think more deeply. For, what is this ‘community’ (180 in the last count?) on behalf of which you speak and act?

A temporary coalition of vested interests. And what has it nurtured and supported?

Vicious slander, hysterical build-up of the most negative formations, groupisme and division, manipulation of opinion, corrupting influences – and, more seriously, the misuse of the provisions of the Auroville Foundation Act for the sake of personal ambition, revenge and spite. Thus what was meant as a protection for the adventure of Auroville has now been turned, with your servile and self-serving support, into a tool of arbitrary rule, exposing Auroville to hostility. You have deemed it acceptable to spearhead this vendetta of sorts against two of us while assuming a posture of righteousness. But, pray, what exactly are you accusing us of? What principle, what law of Auroville have we, according to you, betrayed? Which written or unwritten agreement have we, according to you, broken?

The truth of the matter is that you have no grounds, no ethical grounds, on which you may justifiably ‘request us to voluntarily resign’.