|
General Remarks on the Sadhana of the 1930s
"A Far Greater Truth"
In a letter dated November 1928, you speak of "a far greater Truth than any yet realised on the earth". Does this mean that the realisation of the Divine which this world is witnessing at present in the person of Sri Aurobindo eclipses the Light of all the previous Divine Descents of which humanity is aware? Or, is it to be construed as meaning that Sri Aurobindo does not call himself the Avatar but the Divine, having realised the Divine on earth?
"A far greater Truth" has nothing to do with Avatarhood or anything of the kind. I meant by it the descent of the supramental Consciousness upon earth; all truths below the supramental (even that of the highest spiritual on the mental plane, which is the highest that has yet manifested) are either partial or relative or otherwise deficient and unable to transform the earthly life, they can only at most modify and influence it. The supermind is the last Truth-consciousness of which the ancient seers spoke; there have been glimpses of it till now, sometimes an indirect influence or pressure, but it has not been brought down into the consciousness of the earth and fixed there. To bring it down is the aim of our Yoga. 25 April 1930
*
In spite of his very deep respect for Sri Aurobindo, X holds the view that the earth did previously attain to the Supramental Consciousness. We reject any such suggestion.
Write to them that it is better not to enter into sterile intellectual discussions. The intellectual mind cannot even realise what the supermind is; what use, then, can there be in allowing it to discuss what it does not know? It is not by reasoning, but by constant experience, growth of consciousness and widening into
Page – 277
the Light that one can reach those higher levels of consciousness above the intellect from which one can begin to look up to the Divine Gnosis. These levels are not yet the supermind, but they can receive something of its knowledge. As to X's statement I do not catch what he means by previously, unless he means that the Vedic Rishis attained to the supermind for the Earth. But that is precisely what they failed to do or perhaps did not even attempt. They tried to rise individually to the supramental plane, but they did not bring it down and make it a permanent part of the earth consciousness. Even there are verses of the Upanishad in which it is hinted that it is impossible to pass through the gates of the Sun (the symbol of Supermind) and yet retain an earthly body. It was because of this failure that the spiritual effort of India culminated in Mayavada. Our Yoga is a double movement of ascent and descent; one rises to higher and higher levels of consciousness, but at the same time one brings down their power not only into mind and life, but in the end even into the body. And the highest of these levels, the one at which it aims is the supermind. Only when that can be brought down is a divine transformation possible in the earth consciousness. 5 May 1930
Sadhana for the Earth Consciousness
Does not the "earth consciousness" include all humanity? And also animals, the vegetable and mineral kingdoms, etc.? Will the higher consciousness be established only in a few people?
Yes, all that is the earth consciousness — mineral = matter, vegetable = the vital-physical creation, animal = the vital creation, man = the mental creation. Into the earth consciousness so limited to mind, vital, matter has to come the supramental creation. Necessarily at first it cannot be in a great number — but even if it is only in a few at first, that does not mean that it will have no effect on the rest or will not change the whole balance of the earth-nature. 3 May 1933
*
Page – 278
What is the earth consciousness? Is it Cosmic Matter? Or only this globe?
The consciousness of this Earth alone. There is a separate global consciousness of the earth (as of other worlds) which evolves with the evolution of life on the planet. 29 July 1933
*
Is the establishment of the supramental activity in the earth consciousness a separate process from its establishment in individuals?
It is first through the individual that it becomes part of the earth consciousness and afterwards it spreads from the first centres and takes up more and more of the global consciousness till it becomes an established force there. 29 July 1933
*
The spiritual work of Krishna, Ramakrishna, Vivekananda and others achieved nothing permanent.
Whose work? So far as bringing in spiritual forces goes, I suppose their work was fairly successful. I am not aware that Ramakrishna or any other of those you speak of wanted to change the earth consciousness — they were concerned to raise people out of it, not to bring down anything into it, except spiritual force for personal salvation.
Are we to expect the same results for us — unsteadiness, fall and fiasco?
It does not matter very much what you expect. It depends on whether the greater consciousness can be brought down and fixed here (as mind fixed itself in the vital life of earth) or not. 4 January 1934
*
It seems to me that the purpose of the supramental yoga is to dissipate ignorance from the entire cosmos and remove the
Page – 279
darkness of earthly nature, in order to make the divine life possible.
Not from the entire cosmos — from the earth consciousness, — because the earth is the place of evolution.
Through the descent and manifestation of the supermind, a new race will be born — a new creation. But what exactly will this new creation be?
The supramental being on earth, as man is the mental being, the animal the vital etc. 8 May 1934
*
When I hear people talking about the supramental descent it makes me somewhat sceptical. They expect that when the descent happens everything will soon be spiritualised and even in the most outward political life all that is now wrong will immediately be set right. Such expectations create a great curiosity and flutter.
All that is absurd. The descent of the supramental means only that the Power will be there in the earth consciousness as a living force just as the thinking mental and the higher mental are already there. But an animal cannot take advantage of the presence of the thinking mental Power or an undeveloped man of the presence of the higher mental Power — so too everybody will not be able to take advantage of the presence of the supramental Power. I have also often enough said that it will be at first for the few, not for the whole earth, — only there will be a growing influence of it on the earth life. 15 December 1934
*
Do you seriously want me to swallow this mountainous absurdity that any man can be made a Krishna or a Sri Aurobindo, any woman a Mother, any X a Tyagaraj, any Y a Tansen, any Z a Shakespeare, any A a Raphael, any B a Vyasa or a Valmiki? . . .
I have never said any or all of these things. These egoistic terms
Page – 280
are not those in which I think any more than these egoistic ambitions are those in which my vital moves. It is a higher Truth I seek, whether it makes men greater or not is not the question but whether it will give them truth and peace and light to live in and make life something better than a struggle with ignorance and falsehood and pain and strife. Then even if they are less great than the men of the past, my object will have been achieved. For me mental conceptions cannot be the end of all things. I know that the supermind is a truth.
You really want me to swallow this even if I suffocate? Your logical proposition is "Everything is possible", but this makes all human experience look so hopeless, so childish and so frightening. It is difficult to believe that any amount of the divine force will turn a C into a Sri Aurobindo or a D into a Sri Mira. I am not joking. I mean it.
You do not seem to have followed the sense of my reasoning very well — perhaps because I clothe my arguments with E in a tone of humour.1 You have taken my humorous comment about Muthu with a portentous seriousness — if you really are not joking: but I suppose you are in spite of your disclaimer. It is not for personal greatness that I am seeking to bring down the supermind. I care nothing for greatness or littleness in the human sense. I am seeking to bring some principle of inner Truth, Light, Harmony, Peace into the earth consciousness — I see it above and know what it is — I feel it overgleaming my consciousness from above and I am seeking to make it possible for it to take up the whole being into its own native power, instead of the nature of man continuing to remain in half-light, half-darkness. I believe the descent of this Truth opening the way to a development of divine consciousness here to be the final sense of the earth-evolution. If greater men than myself have not had this vision and this ideal before them, that is no reason why I should not follow my Truth-sense and Truth-vision. If human
1 See the letters of 9 and 10 February 1935 on pages 402 10. — Ed.
Page – 281 reason regards me as a fool for trying to do what Krishna did not try, I do not in the least care. There is no question of C or D or anybody else in that. It is a question between the Divine and myself — whether it is the Divine Will or not, whether I am sent to bring that down or open the way for its descent or at least make it more possible or not. Let all men jeer at me if they will or all Hell fall upon me if it will for my presumption, — I go on till I conquer or perish. This is the spirit in which I seek the supermind, no hunting for greatness for myself or others. (This is not to be circulated.) 10 February 1935
*
Your "superman" reminds me of an interesting debate we had. Some people ridicule us for our aspiration after super manhood. They say it is not a sober aspiration. We don't even have the divine realisation, and we want the supramental! I replied that it is Sri Aurobindo who wants the supermind for us.
By divine realisation is meant the spiritual realisation — the realisation of Self, Bhagavan or Brahman on the mental-spiritual or else the overmental plane. That is a thing (at any rate the mental-spiritual) which thousands have done. So it is obviously easier to do than the supramental. Also nobody can have the supramental realisation who has not had the spiritual. So far your opponent is right.
They say that one must see what one is aspiring for. When our movements and consciousness are as externalised as they are, what is the point of aspiring for the Supermind? But I don't see why I shouldn't aspire for the highest, in spite of my weaknesses. We rely on the Divine Grace. It is the central sincerity that is needed.
It is true that neither can be got in any effective way unless the whole being is turned towards it — unless there is a real and very serious spirit and dynamic reality of sadhana. So far you are right and the opponent also is right. It is true that I want the supramental not for myself but for
Page – 282 the earth and souls born on the earth, and certainly therefore I cannot object if anybody wants the supramental. But there are the conditions. He must want the Divine Will first and the soul's surrender and the spiritual realisation (through works, bhakti, knowledge, self-perfection) on the way. So there everybody is right.
Any flaws in my argument?
The central sincerity is the first thing and sufficient for an aspiration to be entertained, — a total sincerity is needed for the aspiration to be fulfilled. Amen! 15 April 1935
*
If it is reasonable for those who follow other gurus to expect divine realisation — that is, union with the spiritual conscious ness — is it not reasonable for us here to expect something beyond that — assuming you intend to give it and we truly follow your lead? The answer to this depends, I believe, on whether it is your intention to give the supramental for others after achieving it yourself.
I have no intention of achieving the supramental for myself only — I am not doing anything for myself, as I have no personal need of anything, neither of salvation (Moksha) nor supramentalisation. If I am seeking after supramentalisation, it is because it is a thing that has to be done for the earth consciousness and if it is not done in myself, it cannot be done in others. My supramentalisation is only a key for opening the gates of the supramental to the earth consciousness; done for its own sake, it would be perfectly futile. But it does not follow either that if or when I become supramental, everybody will become supramental. Others can so become who are ready for it, when they are ready for it — though of course the achievement in myself will be to them a great help towards it. It is therefore quite legitimate to have the aspiration for it — provided (1) one does not make too personal or egoistic an affair of it turning it into a Nietzschean or other ambition to be a superman, (2) one is ready to undergo
Page – 283
the conditions and stages needed for the achievement, (3) one is sincere and regards it as part of the seeking for the Divine and a consequent culmination of the divine Will in one and insists on no more than the fulfilment of that Will whatever it may be, psychisation, spiritualisation or supramentalisation. It should be regarded as the fulfilment of God's working in the world, not as a personal chance or achievement. 20 April 1935
*
I have been pondering over your letter [pp. 346 47]. I trust I have grown wiser, not less so as a result of the irony in your letter in regard to us mental beings. But you have expressed yourself, willy-nilly, in the language which the mental has invented after all. So you are in no less of a fix than I.
Why should I be in a fix for that? I use the language of the mind because there is no other which human beings can understand, — even though most of them understand it badly. If I were to use a supramental language like Joyce, you would not even have the illusion of understanding it; so, not being an Irishman, I don't make the attempt. But of course anyone who wants to change earth-nature must first accept it in order to change it. To quote from an unpublished poem of my own:
He who would bring the heavens here Must descend himself into clay And the burden of earthly nature bear And tread the dolorous way.2 23 August 1935
*
Would you say something in brief about how the Supermind works on the earth consciousness in order to transform it?
No. I have never written on that except in Arya and do not propose to start now. It would be mere words to the mind which would be likely to make its own wrong constructions about it.
2 Lines from "A God's Labour", in Collected Poems, volume 2 of THE COMPLETE WORKS OF SRI AUROBINDO, p. 534. — Ed.
Page – 284 The sadhak should first get the higher consciousness down and know something by experience of the higher planes before trying to know what is the Supermind. 10 January 1936
*
Somewhere you said that it would be sufficient for most sadhaks to become psychicised. This would mean that only a very few will be able to reach the Intuition and fewer still the Overmind. If this is so, who will be able to reach the Supermind and how will it be established in the earth consciousness?
Well, what I meant is that taking in view their present nature the psychisation would be a big change that is quite enough for them to concentrate on. To aim at the Intuition plane or Overmind now would be useless. But the result of psychisation of the whole nature is not small; it can bring about or embrace most of what have been celebrated as the great spiritual realisations. Only these are got by a sort of reflection in the human consciousness (mind, life, body), not by a permanent ascension of the consciousness to the highest planes or a permanent descent from above. There are upgoings and downflowings from there only. If that much is gained one may think of the rest afterwards. On the other hand there are others in whom there is the clear possibility of rising above after a sufficient psychisation (when completed) of the being and then these two things go on together — psychisation and spiritualisation of the being, the latter process opening up the highest planes entirely. 29 September 1936
*
If the preparatory work for the supramental descent into the earth consciousness goes on so slowly, will it not be years before the earth consciousness is wholly transformed?
There is no proposal to transform the whole earth consciousness — it is simply to introduce the supramental principle there which will transform those who can receive and embody it. 16 December 1936
Page – 285
Descent and the Supramental Yoga
Was there not anything like descents of peace in Ramakrishna or Chaitanya? It seems like they had intense realisations and visions and depths of Samadhi, but we do not read of their having descents of peace. Perhaps their realisations brought with them the peace and Light during Samadhi or intense emotional moments, so that it was not particularly noted — and for supporting and stabilising all that, there must have been a basis of calm and peace.
It happens that people may get the descent without noticing that it is a descent because they feel the result only. The ordinary Yoga does not go beyond the spiritual mind — people feel at the top of the head the joining with the Brahman, but they are not aware of a consciousness above the head. In the same way in the ordinary Yoga one feels the ascent of the awakened inner consciousness (Kundalini) to the brahmarandhra where the Prakriti joins the Brahman-consciousness, but they do not feel the descent. Some may have had these things, but I don't know that they understood their nature, principle or place in a complete sadhana. At least I never heard of these things from others before I found them out in my own experience. The reason is that the old Yogins when they went above the spiritual mind passed into samadhi, which means that they did not attempt to be conscious in these higher planes — their aim being to pass away into the Superconscient and not to bring the Superconscient into the waking consciousness, which is that of my Yoga. 26 July 1935
*
We do not find the process of descent elsewhere — not in Patanjali or Sankhya or Hathayoga, not even in the Upanishads that I have read. In the Tantras there is the rising of the Kundalini but not the descent of peace or force. Why then do people not recognise the newness of your Yoga?
They will perhaps say that there are "equivalents" in the old things or if the descent is not spoken of as descent it still happens
Page – 286 in the old Yogas. 21 March 1936
*
In other Yogas does the silence descend or is it rather the mind that goes into the silence? It does not seem that there is anything like a process of descent in Rajayoga or Vedantic Jnanayoga. Moreover, in Rajayoga there is nowhere any mention of silence in the waking consciousness — always it is a question of going into Samadhi. In Jnanayoga, however, it does seem as though the waking state becomes illumined and full of peace and brahmānanda.
I never heard of silence descending in other Yogas — the mind goes into silence. Since however I have been writing of ascent and descent, I have been told from several quarters that there is nothing new in this Yoga — so I am wondering whether people were not getting ascents and descents without knowing it! or at least without noticing the process. It is like the rising above the head and taking the station there — which I and others have experienced in this Yoga. When I spoke of it first, people stared and thought I was talking nonsense. Wideness must have been felt in the old Yogas because otherwise one could not feel the universe in oneself or be free from the body consciousness or unite with the Anantam Brahman. But generally as in Tantrik Yoga one spoke of the consciousness rising to the Brahmarandhra, top of the head, as the summit. Rajayoga of course lays stress on Samadhi as the means of the highest experience. But obviously if one has not the Brahmi sthiti in the waking state, there is no completeness in the realisation. The Gita distinctly speaks of being samāhita (which is equivalent to being in samadhi) and the Brahmi sthiti as a waking state in which one lives and does all actions. 9 June 1936
*
Such a concrete process of ascent and descent could not have escaped notice if other Yogis had it. They do mention a rising of Kundalini to the Brahmarandhra. Why then do they not mention a coming down of, say, a current of brahmānanda
Page – 287
or of light from the Brahmarandhra into the Kundalini to the Muladhara? If we suppose they did not mention it because it was a secret, then how could they mention the rising up of the Kundalini? If there is nothing new in this Yoga, those who believe so should quote something which is similar to descent — either in Patanjali or the Hathayoga Pradipika or in the Panchadashi and other Vedantic books wherein experiences are mentioned.
So I have always thought. I explain this absence of the descent experiences myself by the old Yogas having been mainly confined to the psycho-spiritual-occult range of experience — in which the higher experiences come into the still mind or the concentrated heart by a sort of filtration or reflection — the field of this experience being from the Brahmarandhra downward. People went above this only in samadhi or in a condition of static mukti without any dynamic descent. All that was dynamic took place in the region of the spiritualised mental and vital-physical consciousness. In this Yoga the consciousness (after the lower field has been prepared by a certain amount of psycho-spiritual-occult experience) is drawn upwards above the Brahmarandhra to ranges above belonging to the spiritual consciousness proper and instead of merely receiving from there has to live there and from there change the lower consciousness altogether. For there is a dynamism proper to the spiritual consciousness whose nature is Light, Power, Ananda, Peace, Knowledge, infinite Wideness and that must be possessed and descend into the whole being. Otherwise one can get mukti but not perfection or transformation (except a relative psycho-spiritual change). But if I say that, there will be a general howl against the unpardonable presumption of claiming to have a knowledge not possessed by the ancient saints and sages and pretending to transcend them. In that connection I may say that in the Upanishads (notably the Taittiriya) there are some indications of these higher planes and their nature and the possibility of gathering up the whole consciousness and rising into them. But this was forgotten afterwards and people spoke only of the buddhi as the highest thing with the Purusha or Self just above, but there was no clear idea of these higher planes.
Page – 288 Ergo, ascent possibly to unknown and ineffable heavenly regions in samadhi, but no descent possible — therefore no resource, no possibility of transformation here, only escape from life and mukti in Goloka, Brahmaloka, Shivaloka or the Absolute.
11 June 1936
*
What good is the dynamic descent if it needs years and years merely to touch the heart centre? What exactly is this descent?
It is a thing which is new and has to be worked out by this Yoga. 12 June 1936
The Supramental Yoga and Humanity
I can say little about the method he [Krishnaprem] speaks of for getting rid of dead concepts. Each mind has its own way of moving. My own has been a sort of readjustment or rectification of positions and I should rather call it discrimination accompanied by a rearrangement of intuitions. At one time I had given much too big a place to "humanity" in my scheme of things with a number of ideas attached to that exaggeration which needed to be put right. But the change did not come by doubt about what I had conceived before, but by a new light on things in which "humanity" automatically stepped down and got into its right place and all the rest rearranged itself in consequence. But all that is probably because I am constitutionally lazy (in spite of my present feats of correspondence) and prefer the easiest and most automatic method possible. I have a suspicion however that Krishnaprem's method is essentially the same as mine, only he does it in a more diligent and conscientious spirit. For his remark about the concepts as flags and not the means of advance seems to indicate that. 26 October 1934
*
I certainly hope to bring down an effective power of the Truth which will replace eventually the Falsehood that has governed the minds and hearts of men for so long. The liberation of a few
Page – 289 individuals is a thing that is always possible and has always been done — but, to my seeing, it cannot be the sole aim of existence. Whatever the struggles and sufferings and blunders of humanity, there is still in it an urge towards the Light, an impulse towards a greater Truth not only of the soul but the life. If it has not been done yet, it is surely because those who reached the Light and the greater Truth, rested there and saw in it more a means of escape for the soul than a means of transformation for the life. The liberation of the spirit is necessary, nothing can be done without it — but the transformation is also possible. 26 January 1935
*
I am disgusted with the world and would have preferred to go away from it to some subtler existence had it not been for your programme of changing the world and bringing some better things into it. But does the world want to change and buy your wares at the heavy cost of giving up all it is and has and does?
It wants and it does not want something that it has not got. All that the supramental could give, the inner mind of the world would like to have, but its outer mind, its vital and physical do not like to pay the price. But after all I am not trying to change the world all at once but only to bring down centrally something into it it has not yet, a new consciousness and power. 31 July 1935
*
It seems that wherever one turns one sees the same humanity — with all its ignorance and incapacity.
Of course. That's what I have been telling you all along. It is not without reason that I am eager to see something better in this well-meaning but woe-begone planet. 3 August 1935
*
But you are surely mistaken in thinking that I said that we work spiritually for the relief of the poor. I have never done that. My work is not to intervene in social matters within the frame of the
Page – 290 present humanity but to bring down a higher spiritual light and power of a higher character which will make a radical change in the earth consciousness. 22 December 1936
Physical Transformation
You have written that particular creations each have a beginning and an end. Will there be an end to this creation even after you manifest the Divine in the physical?
That is not a question of any importance, since the earth has millions of years of life before it and, if the Divine creation begins, it will develop at that time and itself decide the question.
Will anyone leave his body even after manifesting the Divine in his physical body?
It will depend upon the person whether he wants to leave it or not. 19 November 1933
*
You have said that the Overmind is not sufficient to deal with the physical.3 Does this mean that the physical is not liberated or spiritualised even by the Overmind?
There is an inner liberation and a strong spiritualisation of the mind and vital and a partial effect on the physical especially the physical mind, but mostly subjective. A mixture of the Ignorance, or at the very least a limitation of the active Knowledge, power, Ananda etc. remains always. At the same time if one withdraws from the outward physical consciousness, one can feel always the wide spiritual liberation, peace, living in the silent Divine. 29 November 1933
*
Some say that Sri Aurobindo brought down the Supermind
3 See the letter of 20 November 1933 on pages 145 46. — Ed.
Page – 291
even into his physical cells and is only preparing others to manifest it in them. Some say it is not yet manifested in his physical cells but he is bringing it down and only after he gets it fully will he give it to others. Some say that since 1927 he has been describing how his body has been changing after the Supramental Light began to come down, and so we have to think that the Supermind is not yet manifested fully in his body. Some say Sri Aurobindo normally lives in the Overmind and whenever he wants he will go into the Supermind. . . .
These are questions and statements which people idly make as a matter of talk. They do not even know what it means or what is the difference between Supermind and Overmind. It is better therefore to leave all such questionings alone at present. circa 1935
*
Have you written anywhere what would be the nature of the physical transformation?
I have not, I carefully avoided that ticklish subject.
What would it be like? Change of pigment? Mongolian features into Aryo-Grecian? Bald head into luxuriant growth? Old men into gods of eternal youth?
Why not seven tails with an eighth on the head — everybody different colours, blue, magenta, indigo, green, scarlet, etc.; hair luxuriant but vermilion and flying erect skywards; other details to match? Amen. 15 September 1935
*
I have been thinking about the physiological chemistry of transformation. It seems to me that there are two possibilities. (1) The chemical composition of the body would remain the same, but the chemicals would become more Peace-active, Light-active, Force-active (radio-active, as they say). (2) The
Page – 292
chemical composition of the blood, glands, secretions, nervous materials would undergo a radical change, leading to a complete, if gradual, transformation into a supramental body.
It has been the idea of many who have speculated on the subject that the body of the future race will be a luminous body (corps glorieux) and that might mean radio-active. But also it has to be considered (1) that a supramental body must necessarily be one in which the consciousness determines even the physical action and reaction to the most material and these therefore are not wholly dependent on material conditions or laws as now known, (2) that the subtle process will be more powerful than the gross, so that a subtle action of Agni will be able to do the action which would now need a physical change such as increased temperature. 18 November 1935
*
I agree that the action would not be "wholly dependent on material conditions or laws as now known", but that it will necessarily change material conditions or laws. If this necessity was not there, it could act under present conditions and laws — but it doesn't.
But how is it going to change material conditions and laws without acting on the body as it is?
Will the "subtle action of Agni" take place in our present bodies?
The subtle action of Agni is part of the workings of the Yoga shakti even now; only its action is at present for perfecting and transformatory.
Certainly it is understood that "the subtle process will be more powerful than the gross", but will not the subtle process change the present character of the gross process?
If the consciousness cannot determine the physical action and reaction in the present body, if it needs a different basis, then that
Page – 293 means this different basis must be prepared by different means. By what means? Physical? The old Yogis tried to do it by physical tapasya; others by seeking the elixir of life etc. According to this Yoga, the action of the higher Force and consciousness which includes the subtle action of Agni has to open and prepare the body and make it more responsive to Consciousness-Force instead of being rigid in its present habits (called laws). But a different basis can only be created by the supramental action itself. What else but the supermind can determine its own basis? 20 November 1935
*
Either I have not been clear or you have missed my point. What I meant is this: how is it possible for the Supramental to act in the body with its present chemical and physiological processes? A new composition and a new activity of various organs will be the proper basis for a Supramental action — if at all there is to be one.
What I did not understand is why the Supramental Force should not act at all on the present basis of the body. That it cannot act fully without changing many things is obvious.
You are evading the question of the physiological and chemical side of the thing when you say, "What else but the supermind can determine its own basis?" The real question is whether this "own basis" will have a different character, chemical composition, physiochemical activity, etc. Do you mean to say that the Supermind can work in ordinary bodies of ordinary people?
I did not intend to evade anything, except that in so far as I do not yet know what will be the chemical constitution of the changed body, I could not answer anything to that. That was why I said it needed investigation. I was simply putting my idea on the matter which has always been that it is the supramental which will create its own physical basis. If you mean that the supramental cannot fulfil itself in the present body with its present processes that is true. The processes will obviously have to be altered. How far the constitution
Page – 294 of the body will be changed and in what direction is another question. As I said it may become as you suggest radio-active: Theon (Mother's teacher in occultism) spoke of it as luminous, le corps glorieux. But all that does not make it impossible for the supramental to act in the present body for change. It is what I am looking forward to at present. Of course a certain preliminary transformation is necessary, just as the psychic and spiritual transformation precedes the supramental. But this is a change of the physical consciousness down to the submerged consciousness of the cells so that they may respond to higher forces and admit them and to a certain extent a change or at least a greater plasticity in the processes. The rules of food etc. are meant to help that by minimising obstacles. How far this involves a change of the chemical constitution of the body I cannot say. It seems to me still that whatever preparatory changes there may be, it is only the action of the supramental Force that can confirm and complete them. 21 November 1935
The Conquest of Death
In one of your talks in the early days you seem to have acclaimed yourself as immortal except under three conditions — accident, poison or icchā mrtyu.
It must have been a joke taken as a self-acclamation. Or perhaps what I said was that I have the power to overcome illness, but accident and poison and the I.M. still remain as possible means of death. Of course, the Mother and myself have hundreds of times thrown back the forces of illness and death by a slight concentration of force or even a use of will merely.
Another conviction which all of us share is that you could never have any illness; but your eye problem, due to whatever cause, has shattered it.
It is long since I have had anything but slight fragments of illness — (e.g. sneezes, occasional twitches of rheumatism or neuralgia:
Page – 295 but the last is mostly now outside the body and does not penetrate) — with the exception of the eye and the throat (only one kind of cough though, the others can't come) which are still vulnerable points. Ah yes, there is also prickly-heat; but that has diminished to almost nothing these last years. There is sometimes an attempt at headache, but it remains above the head, tries to get in and then recedes. Giddiness also the same. I don't just now remember anything else. Those are the facts about "having no illness". As for the conclusion, well, you can make a medical one or a Yogic one according to your state of knowledge. 26 March 1935
*
From whatever you have said in joke or in earnest, it logically follows that you are immortal. Because if you say that the Supramental can alone conquer death, one who has become that is evidently and consequently immortal. So if one is immortal or has conquered death, no poison or accident can affect him.
Your syllogism is:
"One who becomes supramental, can conquer death. Sri Aurobindo has become supramental. Sri Aurobindo has conquered death."
1st premiss right; second premiss premature; conclusion at least premature and in any case excessive, for "can conquer" is turned into "has conquered" = is immortal. It is not easy, my dear doctor, to be a logician; the human reasoning animal is always making slight inaccuracies like that in his syllogisms which vitiate the whole reasoning. This might be correct:
"One who becomes wholly supramental conquers death. Sri Aurobindo is becoming supramental. Sri Aurobindo is conquering death."
But between "is conquering" and "has conquered" is a big difference. It is all the difference between present and future, logical possibility and logical certitude.
Page – 296 I hope I haven't made a rigid mental conclusion.
The premiss is false. I have never said that I am supramental — I have always said that I have achieved the overmind and am bringing down the supramental. That is a process and until the process is complete it cannot be said that "I am supramental". Of course when I say "I" — I mean the instrument — not the Consciousness above or the Person behind which contain all things in them. 27 March 1935
*
My logic again: Sri Aurobindo is bound to become wholly supramental and is being supramentalised in parts. If that is true — and it is — well, he can't die till he is supramental — and once he is so, he is immortal.
It looks very much like a non sequitur. The first part and the last are all right — but the link is fragile. How do you know I won't take a fancy to die in between as a joke? 30 March 1935
*
By the way, none of those perverse "fancies" please. If at all you think of going, let us know beforehand, so that we may disappear before you!
Where would be the fun if I told you beforehand? However, I have no bad intentions for the moment. 31 March 1935
Page – 297 |