A legitimate New Religious Movement (NRM)

[To determine the legitimacy of the Savitri Era Religion, it is crucial to analyze it from different perspectives. Legitimacy, in this context, is not a simple question of "yes" or "no," but depends on the framework being used for evaluation: sociological, legal, and theological. While it may have internal legitimacy for its followers, external validity is contested, especially considering that Sri Aurobindo himself did not intend to found a new religion. 

Foundational context

The Savitri Era Religion was established in 2006 by followers of Sri Aurobindo and The Mother. Its core tenet is faith in Sri Aurobindo's philosophy of Integral Yoga, which aims for a spiritual evolution of humanity. The group reportedly rejects Hindu mythology and rituals in favor of this philosophical and spiritual approach. The name is derived from Sri Aurobindo's epic poem, Savitri: A Legend and a Symbol, which is considered a central text for the movement. 

Factors supporting legitimacy

From a sociological perspective, the Savitri Era Religion can be considered a legitimate New Religious Movement (NRM) due to the following reasons:

A distinct belief system and community: The group possesses a unique set of beliefs and practices centered on the teachings of Sri Aurobindo and The Mother. The formation of the group in 2006 was in response to a perceived need among devotees for their "own independent shelter".

Internal logic and purpose: For its members, the religion offers a coherent narrative for spiritual development, freeing them from what they see as the "irrationality and superstitions" of traditional religion.

Adaptation to modern needs: The movement's rejection of traditional rituals and its focus on a rational, modern spiritual path may appeal to a contemporary audience.

Freedom of religion: In a country like India, which protects the freedom of conscience and the right to practice and propagate religion, any group with a system of beliefs and organization can legally function as a religious denomination. 

Arguments against legitimacy

From other perspectives, particularly theological and academic ones, the legitimacy is highly questionable:

Sri Aurobindo's intent: Sri Aurobindo explicitly stated that he did not come to found a religion. His aim was an inner, spiritual self-development that would transcend traditional religions. The Mother also clarified that Sri Aurobindo's teaching was an "action from the supreme" that should not be converted into a fixed religion. The very act of creating a formalized religion from his teachings goes against the core spirit of his work.

Deification vs. philosophical practice: The movement's focus on "worshipping" Sri Aurobindo conflicts with the principles of Integral Yoga, which emphasizes self-discovery and the evolution of consciousness, rather than the worship of a figurehead. Deifying Sri Aurobindo transforms his philosophy into a conventional religion, potentially limiting the very spiritual freedom he espoused.

Legal precedent: A Supreme Court of India ruling in the 1983 S.P. Mittal case found that the Sri Aurobindo Society was not a "religious denomination." The court determined that Aurobindo's teachings were a philosophy, not a religion, and that neither the society nor Auroville qualified for the legal status of a religious organization under Article 26 of the constitution. While this specific ruling addressed the Aurobindo Society and not the Savitri Era Religion, it established a legal precedent about the non-religious nature of Aurobindo's philosophy.

Contradiction in approach: Followers of Sri Aurobindo's Integral Yoga often see themselves as following a spiritual discipline, or sadhana, that is distinct from conventional religion. The formation of a new religion, with its structured dogma, could be seen as an unnecessary and potentially regressive step for those seeking a more personal, direct connection to the divine. 

Conclusion: A matter of perspective

The legitimacy of the Savitri Era Religion worshipping Sri Aurobindo is not an absolute judgment but depends on the criteria being used.

From an internal, sociological perspective, it functions as a legitimate new religious movement for its followers, providing a distinct identity, community, and spiritual path.

From a theological and academic standpoint, its legitimacy is highly debated, as its existence appears to contradict Sri Aurobindo's original intentions. By transforming his philosophy into a formalized religion, it risks undermining the very principles of inner spiritual development that he advocated.

Ultimately, while the religion may be legitimate for those who believe in it, its practice of worshipping Sri Aurobindo stands in tension with his own teachings and with the broader understanding of his spiritual philosophy.] - GoogleAI