Is the past really past?

I sometimes think that Aurovilians feel, when they join Auroville, they have sloughed off the past like a dead skin, to emerge as new-born citizens of the world, unshackled from the influence of birth and nationality. 

This is not necessarily true. In fact, in some cases people’s national characteristics even seem to become exaggerated here, partly, perhaps, as a reaction to being surrounded by so many cultures different from their own.  

Generally, however, cultural influences may be there in less obvious ways, for example in tacit assumptions that our perspective upon the world is the only one available. 

Take individualism. It is easy for many western-born people to assume that individualism, defined by Merriam-Webster as “a doctrine that the interests of the individual are or ought to be ethically paramount,” is a universal good that everybody in the world is striving, or should strive, to attain. This, however, may be yet another example of western cultural arrogance. In the Far East, for example, where Confucian values are still influential, or in many Aboriginal cultures, the cult of the individual seems less important than being part of and being defined by a larger social order. The Xhosa term ubuntu, “I am because you are”, is the classic expression of this. 

Or take the notion of freedom, liberty. Different cultures have understood this in very different ways. For many in the West, the classic text is John Stuart Mill’s essay ‘On Liberty’, published in 1859, where he argues that free speech should be tolerated, even when it offends, except when it would cause actual harm (“the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others”). This is a ‘negative’ conception of freedom – of being free from outer restraint, something much loved by libertarians – whereas Eastern religions and philosophies have tended to emphasize a more ‘positive’, inner conception of freedom, most obviously in the sense of the liberation from ignorance of the true nature of reality or the Self. 

Or take the concept of progress itself. The idea that we are relentlessly arrowing into a better future is very much a western concept, and a relatively recent one at that. Traditional societies usually have a cyclical view of history. Eastern cultures as a whole also tend to be more respectful of the wisdom of elders and ancestors than western future-oriented ones. 

All these, of course, are generalizations. They don’t take into account that we are individuals and respond in different ways to our cultural upbringing, that almost all variations of attitude and behaviour occur, to a certain extent, in almost all cultures (making the distinction between ‘East’ and ‘West’ a radical oversimplification) , or that there are challenges even within cultures to previously accepted norms and conceptions (for example, the West’s belief in unending material progress is now being challenged by many western as well as non-western thinkers).  Moreover, there are also clear differences between even similar cultures. For example, the Dutch penchant for wide windows and refusal to draw curtains is not shared by the more private, curtain-drawing British, a difference which may also be reflected in the Dutch reputation for being far more outspoken.  

Also, the world is changing; certain attitudes, like individualism and materialism, are becoming more prevalent, while old cultural norms are breaking down. When it comes to Auroville, it may be fair to assume that individuals drawn to this international project are less marked by their cultural upbringing than many of their compatriots back home.  And even if they arrive here with well defined cultural identities, the sharp edges may be worn away by constant contact with the different cultures cohabiting in this place. (Although, some Aurovilians say they only began to appreciate their birth culture when they came here because they missed certain aspects of it.) 

Auroville also breaks cultural norms by allowing Aurovilians to take up work, like sorting waste or preparing bodies for burial or cremation at the Farewell Centre, which might be considered unacceptable work for them in their birth cultures.  

Some may say that any attempt to define cultural differences runs the risk of being simplistic, even patronizing.  Bearing in mind this caveat, I think we may still see different cultural influences at work in Auroville, even if they are in the form of tendencies rather than clearly-defined cultural fault lines (although it is interesting to speculate, for example, why so many Anglo-Saxons are drawn to work in the Greenbelt).  This is a sensitive area, so it needs to be emphasized that this is not about judging one culture better than another. It’s simply identifying possible cultural differences, tendencies, in ways of comprehending and acting in the world.

So here are some tentative speculations. One concerns communication. It may be that an eastern tendency for indirect messaging, or even holding back views altogether,  in order not to discomfort the receiver, to maintain harmony or for self-protection,  sometimes clashes in Auroville with the western tendency to value the speaking of ‘truth’ in a forthright manner. And the western tendency to assume that rational verbalization is the prime tool of communication may not be shared by cultures which value more intuitive, personalized and heart-centred approaches. Or, indeed, cultures where what is not said can be as expressive as what is said.

Then again, the emphasis upon individualism may be reflected in the western assumption that during our election/selection events each individual will make up his or her own mind, whereas for some Indians loyalty to the family or kinship group may sometimes be a very powerful factor in how they choose to align themselves on certain topics, or whom they choose to support. 

The western belief in equality, egalitarianism (in theory, if not always in practice), may also differ from a higher respect for formal hierarchies and status in the east.  In westerners, egalitarianism can degenerate into rudeness, disrespect, lack of sensitivity; in asians, respect may sometimes degenerate into excessive deference to convention or to those perceived to be of higher status.  

Cultural influences may also be reflected in different responses to nationalism. In India and the east in general, people tend to display more pride, and have more respect for, their nation and birthright culture than would normally be expressed by many westerners.  It many western democracies it is taken for granted that the government or existing authorities can be criticized, even lampooned, in a way that would be considered unacceptable in many countries of the east. 

These are meta-trends. At a more granular level, people in cross-cultural relationships may also notice cultural influences in the subtly different ways in which each partner behaves or relates to certain issues, in what can or cannot be expressed or even in what is considered humorous. For example, an Indian Aurovilian pointed out that in her culture they avoid talking about death, disaster, or accidents because it is believed that whatever you say gets the possibility to be manifested.  Her western partner has no such qualms, and this can sometimes lead to tensions. 

What are the lessons we can draw from all this? One is that the source of our misunderstandings, disagreements, in Auroville may sometimes be the result of different cultural conditioning, of different ways of looking at the world, rather than personal differences or disputes about ideology. 

Secondly, it is important to consider how we respond to cultural differences. Ex-Governing Board member, Doudou Diène, pointed out that what he termed the inevitable ‘tension’ existing between cultures can lead to quite different outcomes. If we fear the differences and draw back for protection into our own cultural group, it can result in us discriminating against ‘outsiders’. At its worst, this can degenerate into xenophobia and racism. But if we can accept, even celebrate, the differences, each cultural perspective has the potential to add something new to our understanding, for we learn that there is more than one way of understanding the world and constructing norms of conduct. Hopefully, this will make us pause the next time we assume that our particular cultural values are ‘universal’ ones that should be shared by or, worse, imposed upon others. 

Thirdly, however, in the context of the Integral Yoga it points to the urgency of what Mother was expressing in To Be a True Aurovilian. For if we really seek ‘Truth’ with a capital ‘T’, ultimately we need to find a way to transcend these cultural influences. 

The first necessity is the inner discovery in order to know what one truly is behind social, moral, cultural, racial and hereditary appearances.

t the centre there is a being free, vast and knowing, who awaits our discovery and who ought to become the active centre of our being and our life in Auroville.

The first step in this journey, however, is to recognise that many of us are not yet autonomous, fully-independent beings, but are still strongly influenced by many factors. And these include our cultural upbringing…