Sadhana in the Ashram Contd... I for my part am not prepared to bear any part of the burden of transformation of the hostile forces.
So much the better. I am not asking anybody to transform the Asuras — I am only asking them to reject them.
I spoke of having seen and heard someone who showed me how he had organised, in the being of every sadhak here, a "dark being" veiling his "divine being".
I do not know what you mean by this someone. The existence of a double being is a preexistent fact, it has not been organised by anyone here.
I am not aware that the condition of anyone in the Asrama was or is as difficult as mine since I have come to this house.
That is your ignorance. There were many others.
By my observation I have found it was not so.
Your observation is incorrect.
And it is my conviction that the sort of attack I have under gone cannot last when a man is with others and is busy with collective work.
I do not accept your idea of the origin of the attacks on you as correct.
I am neither for delay nor for incurring more danger for the sake of the dogma that we have to accept everything that is in the creation . . .
It is a practical fact, not a dogma — we have to proceed from what it is, not from what we would like it to have been.
and in the way chalked out by another.
Who is this other?
Page – 647
My greatest urge is to go up and see the truth in its own home.
There is no objection to that, but it is not so easily done — at least to my experience. Those who have tried it in a rush have not had very good results.
This I can best do by your grace, and by your answering my questions.
I don't see how my answers can do that — since you stick to your own view of the matter.
You once said that the ascension to the supermind and individual transformation must precede the manifestation of the Sangha. But why did you allow the Sangha to manifest before this condition was fulfilled?
Which Sangha? I have never called this Asram the Sangha. The Asram is a field of growth, not a manifestation of perfection.
Is there no possibility of an individual rising up to the Supramental separately, and then turning down towards manifestation with a fuller light, knowledge, power and joy, individually?
There is no possibility of shooting up suddenly to the Supermind — one has to go step by step — though it may be done more or less quickly — but not with any railway-train speed. Nor is it possible for the supramental to descend without a preparation of the lower parts.
Have you still the idea of transforming the hostile forces? If so, how?
I do not know what you mean by the transformation of the hostile forces. It is the lower nature that has to be transformed into the higher nature. The object of the Yoga is the transformation of terrestrial beings, not of the Asuras.
Page – 648 Is it not possible again to begin the sadhana of ascension to the higher mind and supermind and work out the transformation below just as you did for yourself, keeping this outward and inward Sangha formation, if possible, though curtailing the outward work to a minimum or for the greater need and purpose of the Truth giving it up temporarily?
That is an ignorant and incorrect statement of our sadhana.
Since the Chandernagore [i.e. the Prabartak Sangha] experience, it has always seemed to me that the best way of sadhana would be to rise to the vijñāna individually, to transform oneself personally, and then, when all was perfect to create or allow the Sangha to descend.
I do not know what you mean by a Sangha descending — it is the Supermind that has to descend. This transformation cannot be done individually in a solitary way only — if it were possible we would not have undertaken the burden of maintaining this Asram. It appears from all you have written that you do not accept my knowledge but have ideas and principles of sadhana of your own. My knowledge and action are based on the actual facts of the universe and the relation of the higher Truth with these as I have found them. If you have a knowledge superior to mine and a greater way of action, there is no necessity for these questions. 4 January 1934
*
The forces compelled Adam — who does not seem to have possessed a great knowledge about the wiles of the hostile forces — to fall.
It means that he was ignorant and not merely innocent.
From your statement it is obvious that at a certain stage of the manifestation the hostile forces interfered but that up to that stage the manifestation was perfect.
Not at all. If it had been perfect, there would have been no need of evolution.
Page – 649
This supports the idea that a perfect manifestation was intended from the very beginning.
An unperverted manifestation is not necessarily a perfect manifestation — it may be unperverted but still imperfect.
You have not taken exception to my statement that the exclusive Avidya is not present in the inner vital and mental.
It depends on what you mean by Avidya. They are not inconscient like Matter, but until the higher knowledge comes, they are in the Ignorance.
I do not understand what you mean by "It has nothing to do with Darwin."
The evolution I speak of is not the evolution of the Darwinian theory.
I understand that the interference of the Avidya or the hostile forces were the causes of man's degeneration and delay in his evolution and that they were not helping forces as such, even indirectly.
They did not intend to be helping forces, but they have been obliged to help in certain ways.
Psychic innocence is a great perfection by itself.
What is psychic innocence after all?
You have not taken exception to my statement about Vidya and Avidya.
These are terms which one can use in different senses. There is no Avidya in the highest planes, if by Avidya you mean Ignorance.
You have not taken exception to my statement about the great pain created in the universe by the interference of the hostile forces in the life of man.
Page – 650 I have not accepted it. Once pain is in the world and a main part of its working it cannot be got rid of arbitrarily by ignoring it or by a simple surgical operation of cutting out its source. It is the mind with its summary conclusions that thinks the complex knot of things can be dealt with by a simple cut — in fact it is not so.
The Mother has spoken many times of hostile forces that came here after the descent for transformation. In fact, she had transformed one hostile being who was present in the Asrama.
A transformed hostile being or one who wants to be transformed is no longer hostile. It is simply a power of the vital world which places itself at the service of the Divine. Hostility consists in opposing the Divine Light and fighting against the transformation of the earth consciousness. But in any case the Mother never spoke of such transformation as the object of the sadhana or the Asrama.
You have not said anything about several of my questions and statements.
There are many things you have written about which I have not said anything but which I do not endorse. It is impossible for me with my limited time to answer such a long series of questions in detail.
After the descent, the Mother spoke of the Asrama as the spiritual cell (the word is mine) and Sangha.
The Mother was not in the habit of using the word sangha, I think. 9 January 1934
*
A natural unfolding of the consciousness in manifestation from an involved state is quite a beautiful phenomenon.
Page – 651 No doubt — but when the evolution had to express the possibilities of an emergence from the Inconscience, it was not easy to materialise a flawless unfolding — since out of Inconscience came Ignorance and Ignorance is easily a field of deviation and error.
Probably you spoke of a psychological evolution whereas Darwin spoke of the evolution of the physical species.
Quite so. Many centuries before Darwin Puranic and Tantric writers spoke very explicitly of an evolution of the soul's birth through the vegetable and animal to man.
Psychic innocence is psychic existence in the eight planes of consciousness, manifestly.
Innocence has two meanings — sinlessness and ignorance. The psychic innocence is not an ignorant condition.
An ordinary vital being or a hostile vital being driven into the Asrama atmosphere by some presence from above or other wise may at any time open to its own world and source in its darker aspects and then become the cause of much disturbance in the sadhana.
That does not apply to a converted Asura. The others are not driven — wherever sadhana is going on, they come to disturb it — a fact known to the Yogis and Rishis from early times.
Forced opening by a vital or a hostile force means a forced opening and entering of the same force in our mental, vital, physical body.
If you mean an invasion of the consciousness by a hostile force, that happens — but it cannot succeed unless something in the sadhaka either welcomes the invasion or is somehow attracted or won over or somehow responds. As for the ordinary attack not amounting to an opening, that nobody escapes.
Page – 652 In your reply of 4 January, you wrote: "That is an ignorant and incorrect statement of our sadhana" [p. 649] Could you please clarify this?
I said that was an incorrect statement of my sadhana. I did not start by ascension to the supermind — I fought out the difficulties of the mind and vital first in such a way as to make it possible for not only the higher mind but the intuition and overmind to descend. The supermind comes last of all. 16 January 1934
*
Inconscience is the involved state of the Sachchidananda. It is all-knowing, only the knowledge is involved. In Inconscience there need not be an exclusive avidyā, neither is it necessary for involving the Supraconsciousness.
In that case there is no exclusive Avidya anywhere — for wherever there is Ignorance, there is also the all-knowledge involved in it.
The condition of innocence realised by Christian saints and mystics was a psychic state of perfect self-surrender to and oneness with God on every plane of consciousness. But that perfection is not a state of Ignorance. Achieved in its fullness, it is as good as a state of supramental perfection — the difference being only in the basis, movement and aiśvarya.
Not at all. If it were then there would be no use of seeking for the descent of the supermind. A condition which one cannot retain by the inherent light and power of the Knowledge Will in it is not the supermind as I know it.
Sri Krishna when asked by Arjuna after the destruction of the Yadavas to repeat the sacred lore of the Gita, replied that the teaching of the Gita came into him once but that it was no more and he could not repeat it. Can one who has attained to the supermind fall?
Srikrishna did not say that he was in the supermind when he spoke the Gita to Arjuna — he was in Yoga, but one can be in
Page – 653 Yoga without being in the Supermind. So this is not a point in instance.
The only way to avoid the "fall" is to preserve oneself by a supreme knowledge and strength that refuses submission even to God if some part of His being should draw one down the path of darkness; and to correct this world-movement at its very source.
I am not aware of any state of supreme knowledge in which the separative ego or the individual becomes greater in knowledge and will than the Divine or can by his own separate power overcome the Divine Will and correct the world movement. In the supermind there is not this division of one part of the being of God willing something and some other part fighting against it. There all is viewed from an integral vision and founded on a harmony in the being — how this works out cannot be fixed by the mind, which lives and acts in division. If there is no such integral supermind, then I have nothing to do here and will leave it to greater Minds to solve the problem in their own way.
When did the hostile forces begin their work of perversion — at the time of mental, vital or physical manifestation?
As soon as Life was to appear, they intervened in it.
A converted Asura, i.e. one who has consented to be God's ally and undergo transformation, may easily change colour and become hostile. In fact, the Mother writes in her Prayers of some Asuras who promised to be God's servants, but did not keep their promise as they wanted to lord it over others.2
The Mother was not speaking of any Asuras called into the As ram and imposed on some human being there who was to bear the burden of his transformation. She was speaking of certain
2 The Mother, Prayers and Meditations (Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 2003), p. 223.
Page – 654 Lords of the Vital who had taken birth in earthly bodies and tried to prepare the Divine Descent, but each imagining that he alone was the chosen instrument of the Force, spoiled the work they could have done. It was outside the Asram that this originally happened — only the Mother found the same mentality still persisting and interfering with the manifestation of the Force. But it had no reference to the converted Asura who tried to come here in his subtle Form of whom I spoke — that was many years afterwards — and he did not change colour or become hostile. Any other case of Asuric intervention was due to an affinity in the sadhak himself or a call from him — as in the case of X who was always calling Asuras into himself to convert them and although discouraged by us persisted thinking that he had himself a truer knowledge than we of what was wanted for the work. But again I have not known of any Asura who had accepted submission to the Divine becoming hostile. It is men who are under the influence of truly hostile beings who become like that.
The hostile beings generally attack, then make some way in, lay siege and create conditions for invasion and ultimately lead or compel the human being to fall.
I am quite aware of the way in which the unconverted hostile beings, who have a hostile intention, get inside — there have been plenty of cases like that, and their method besides has been known by occultists and Yogins all through the ages. As for attacks, they can attack anybody. Christ and Buddha too had to bear the assaults of the Asura. But invasion in a man is only possible if there is something in him that gives a response and opens the gate.
What I would like to know is whether all this can be done individually.
I do not seize the significance of the question. It has to be done in each individual — otherwise it cannot be done in the collective at all. But there can be a general descent of the Force by which
Page – 655 each can profit to have it done in him if he is ready or when he is ready. 25 January 1934
*
Summing up, I understand you to say: (1) That the hostile forces were permitted by God to pervert this creation at the time of the evolution of the human type.
No, I said "when life began to appear", that is before the human evolution.
(2) That when the supermind comes down and manifests itself in the transformed earth consciousness they will go away or be driven out as there would be no need of their presence in this creation or Asrama,
No possibility either, if the supermind is once dominant.
(3) for here they serve some purpose (which I have not quite understood).
The purpose they serve in the world is to give a full chance to the possibilities of the Inconscience and Ignorance — for this world was meant to be a working out of these possibilities with the supramental harmonisation as its eventual outcome. The life, the work developing here in the Asram has to deal with the world problem and had therefore to meet, it could not avoid, the conflict with the working of the hostile Powers in the human being.
(4) That you did not allow any hostile being in the Asrama, except one converted Asura, and that no Asura owing allegiance to you had turned hostile.
We did not call any. The converted one too came but did not remain, so he too does not count.
(5) Outside the Asrama some Lords of the vital world took birth on this earth, saying that they would serve God, but in
Page – 656 fact lorded it over others. But these were not Asuric forces though they were so called in the book.3
I said nothing about their not being Asuras. I said those to whom the Mother referred were not Asuras who had manifested in the Asram, but outside the Asram and before it was formed — as human beings who wanted to help and prepare the Divine Advent but spoiled their work, not by hostility, but by egoism — just as human beings with an Asuric temperament often do.
(6) The transformation of hostile beings is no part of the Yogin's work — though Mother transformed one. No such thing had been done in the Asrama or will be done.
The Mother's transforming one Asura was an incident, not an object of the Yoga. I have not said either that it will not be done. If the Divine demands it, it will be done; if not, it won't be; but in any case it is not an object of the Yoga.
(7) That the Supermind can be attained individually though a force may descend by which men can profit according to the self-preparation — though you once said that it could not be done individually.
You have missed altogether the qualifying words which I put with great care and prominent emphasis — if you don't read carefully, you will necessarily misunderstand what I write. I said "This transformation cannot be done individually in a solitary way only" [p. 649]. No individual solitary transformation apart from the work for the earth (which means more than any individual transformation) would be either possible or useful. (Also no individual human being can by his own power alone work out the transformation, nor is it the object of the Yoga to create an individual superman here and there.) The object of the Yoga is to bring down the supramental consciousness
3 The "book" referred to here is apparently the Mother's Prayers and Meditations. See footnote 2 on page 654. — Ed.
Page – 657 on earth, to fix it there, to create a new race with the principle of the supramental consciousness governing the inner and outer individual and collective life. Therefore the existence of the Asram, whatever difficulties it created for ourselves or for the individual, was inevitable. The method was the preparation of the earth consciousness in the human being as represented by the members of the Asram and others (with also a certain working in the general earth consciousness) so as to make the descent of the supramental Force possible. That Force accepted by individual after individual according to their preparation would establish the supramental consciousness in the physical world and so create a nucleus for its own expansion.
(8) This world was originally intended to be an evolution out of ignorance in matter to knowledge through struggle and duality. Thus there was no original divine creation in the image of Heaven, or an original Satya Yuga.
It is quite possible that there have been periods of harmony on different levels, not supramental, which were afterwards disturbed — but those could only be a stage or resting place in a world of spiritual evolution out of the Ignorance.
(9) That a perfect manifestation is quite possible without need of evolution. But you have not said anything about whether an unfolding of the Inconscience (involved Sat-Chit-Ananda) without ignorance is possible.
I don't see how there can be, given the starting point of the Inconscience. An unfolding of anything involved must necessarily be an evolution.
(10) As for Krishna, he was God, who is everything consciously not excluding the Vijñāna (the Supermind).
I have said nothing about that. 31 January 1934
*
Page – 658 In a letter of November 1933 [p. 639], you wrote that the intervention of the hostile forces was no longer necessary. But it seems that they have come full force this year and driven several people away. That suggests that the hostile forces will remain for ever — or at least until the final transformation.
When I said "no more necessary", I did not mean that their action could not go on — I think I expressly said that if the sadhaks persisted in opening themselves to it, it would continue. There is a difference between the action of the hostile powers and the ordinary action of the lower nature. The latter of course goes on until it is changed but there is no necessity for it to take the form of hostile attacks and upsettings; it can be treated as a machinery that has to be set right and with the aid of the higher Light and Power can be set right. There are several who were once taken by hostile attacks who have now reached the point where they can follow this method, others are approaching it — some of course have always followed and never were attacked, at least in their mind and vital. But there are still many who are very far from it and so the action of the Hostiles continues. 14 October 1935
*
There can be no question that it is a most desirable thing that the hostile forces should be destroyed or ejected from the Asram atmosphere and from all hold on the lower vital and physical of the sadhaks — the sooner the better. For the moment they are still able to resist and to keep up the disharmony in this part of Nature. It is only when they do so no more that the capital difficulty in the general sadhana will be over. 9 May 1936
Retirement and Progress in Yoga
Would not rejection of the problems of the lower vital be better done in retirement?
It is very doubtful. Our experience is that, generally, it does not succeed very well. Sometimes there is a great improvement so long as the person remains sequestered but it does not stand the test of again coming out into contact with others. Sometimes it
Page – 659 has led to an exalted inner activity, occasionally sound but often too unsound, the sadhak in retirement losing in the latter case the power of discrimination between subjective formations and valid truths of fact (X and others). In other cases the result has been a complete failure (Y, Z). As a general rule we consider it safer at the very least to combine some activity of outer life with retirement if any is made. 2 December 1933
*
Mother does not at all approve of the idea of complete retirement. It does not bring the control, only an illusion of a control because the untoward causes are removed for a time. It is a control established while in contact with the outward things that is alone genuine. You must establish that from within by a fixed resolution and practice. Too much mixing and too much talk should be avoided, but a complete retirement is not the thing. It has not had the required result with anyone so far. 27 November 1936
Lack of Intensity in Sadhana
I have been thinking again about the general sadhana in the Ashram, how the intenser attitude of sincerity in all would bring an earlier victory. Does such thinking about others bring any difficulty in one's sadhana? Is it better to stick to one's own sadhana?
No — it is very good — there are few who have that in any intensity — if there were more, it might hasten things. 27 June 1933
*
How is it that there is so little intensity of devotion here? Is it because there is more insistence on controlling emotions or because of constant Sadhana and the integral movement?
It is true that devotion here is very insufficient — but these can not be the reasons, for psychic emotion is not discouraged by us and the integral Sadhana is not integral without bhakti. And yet it is a fact that those who come here full of bhakti lose much of
Page – 660 it after a time — with a few exceptions. I think it is because of the prevalence of a too positive mind and the habit of criticising everything from a quite external point of view which is rife in the atmosphere. 5 August 1933
*
We have very little devotion and obedience compared to the disciples of Shankara and Buddha or the followers of old yogic disciplines, even though a greater discipline is needed because our aim is higher. This is perhaps due to the fact that you do not impose any discipline. Or perhaps there is a fundamental defect in our aspiration because of the western education many have had. I wonder if Shankara or Buddha or Mahavir would have allowed many of the things we do here.
They would not. All the causes you mention operate — perhaps the westernised atmosphere (even more than the education) of the present times is the strongest, but also the nature of the work to be done. 3 April 1934
*
I feel that many have become "soft" after they come here. Is there something in the Yoga itself that makes them soft?
Nothing in the sadhana. It is because their desires had only been limited by poverty and, as soon as the poverty is removed, the desires come surging up. As for the self-imposed renunciation of desire which is of primary importance in this Yoga, only a few ever think of it. 13 June 1934
*
If the Force cannot bring definite and lasting fruit without our individual endeavour, don't you think at least half the sadhaks here will remain in the mud for long if not for ever? Half of them don't seem to want to make any steady personal effort. They depend on the action of your Force alone.
That is why the Asram is what it is. Only those who are taking the Yoga seriously are making any progress. 17 November 1936
*
Page – 661
How is it that people here become more soft than in ordinary life and a little hardship or discomfort becomes unbearable? Is it because they live a life of ease here doing no physical work?
What you have noticed is quite correct. It comes from a wrong movement which takes the rejection of asceticism as if it were a sanction for the indulgence of the body in whatever comfort it can get. The right principle is that one should be free from attachment and be able to do without things but also able to have them and use them without being bound or affected. Very few have taken it in that way — the vital has chosen to turn a deaf ear to anything said in that direction and to take as a right the comforts and conveniences given. What you have noted is one of the consequences. December 1936
Egoism among Sadhaks
I have heard that some people here have gigantic egos, like X and Y, while some have fat egos, like Z. What sort of ego do I have?
Your ego is small and not gigantic — not tall and vehement and aggressive like Y's, but squat and inertly obstinate — not fat, completely, nor thin, but short and roundish and grey in colour. 3 November 1935
*
I looked up "squat" in the dictionary but could not guess which definition applied to my ego.
Squat = short in stature but broad and substantial, so difficult to get rid of.
You write: "not fat, completely, nor thin, but short and roundish and grey in colour." What do all these symbols stand for?
Not tall and preeminent or flourishingly settled in self-fullness — roundish = plenty of it all the same Grey = tamasic in tendency, therefore not aggressive, but
Page – 662 obstinate in persistence. But these are not symbols, they are the temperamental figure of the ego. 5 November 1935
*
Nowadays I find ego in every little act or feeling. Formerly I saw it only when I acted with desire or pride.
Perhaps because then you were looking for ego only in the form which people specially call egoism, i.e. pride, vanity, selfishness, insistence on vital satisfactions. But ego is of all kinds — and you are only just now finding it out.
Half my being is trying hard to reject the sense of ego, while the ego itself colours all my actions. This contradiction creates an inner pain. Will the ego never be dissolved completely?
There is nothing to be troubled about. You ought rather to congratulate yourself that you have become conscious. Very few people in this Asram are. They are all ego-centric and they do not realise their ego-centricity. Even in their sadhana the I is always there, — my sadhana, my progress, my everything. The remedy is to think constantly of the Divine, not of oneself, to work, act, do sadhana for the Divine, — not to consider how this or that affects me personally, not claim anything, but to refer all to the Divine. It will take time to do that sincerely and thoroughly, but it is the proper way. 31 March 1936
*
Many here seem to be proud of their surrender — even though they know that surrender and ego do not go together.
But who has got rid of ego in this Asram? To get rid of ego is as difficult as to make a complete surrender. 10 August 1936
Conversion, Realisation and Transformation
Today the Mother spoke to me of "conversion of conscious ness" as distinct from "transformation of physical nature".
Page – 663
Pointing to me she said, as for "the conversion of consciousness, it is there". Did she mean, by implication, that all those who have gathered round Sri Aurobindo and the Mother have this "conversion of consciousness" — perhaps in varying degrees?
No. Those who come here have an aspiration and a possibility; something in their psychic being pushes and if they follow it, they will arrive; but that is not conversion. Conversion is a definite turning of the being away from lower things towards the Divine.
Can it be further explained in terms of the psychic being and its relation to the instrumental (nature) being?
It is certainly the psychic being turning the nature definitively Godwards, but the transformation has still to be worked out in the nature.
Or can it be said that whoever has some aspiration for the Light or Truth or God vaguely, has some sort of conversion of consciousness, for the reason that he has come to the Ashram and lives here?
No. Aspiration can lead hereafter to conversion; but aspiration is not conversion. Mother spoke of three different things: conversion, the turning of the soul decisively towards the Divine, — inner realisation of the Divine, — transformation of the nature. The first two can happen swiftly and suddenly and once for all, the third always takes time and cannot be done at one stroke, in a moment. One may become aware of a rapid change in this or that detail of the transformation, but even this is a rapid result of a long working. 3 September 1937
Ashram Sadhaks and the Supramental Realisation
One day, while I was thinking that I would have to fulfil certain conditions before I could be saved from Ignorance, a strong feeling came to me from you that I need not fulfil any
Page – 664 condition, but that you would save me by a special Grace. Was there any truth to what I felt?
I certainly gave you no such message or promise as you describe. You may have picked up something that was in my atmosphere, but, once again, your mental transcription of it was wrong — and turned it into something quite different from the truth. It may or may not be, although no promise of the kind can be made at the present moment, that you or other sadhakas here or all will be brought through in the end by the divine grace in spite of the very serious difficulties created by your and their external being and the obstinate obscurities and resistance in its crooked human nature. But in any case, to say that "you need not fulfil any condition" is a flagrant error. It is the old mischievous suggestion of an inert passivity to all influences as the true surrender and, if accepted, would legitimate every wrong movement of the nature. First, certain conditions have to be fulfilled; afterwards, there will be room for the divine grace to act. 18 October 1928
*
I have heard that sadhaks here will have perfect control over decay and death. I have some doubts about this. Could you say something about it?
It depends on the Supramental and on the Divine's will in the sadhak. All that can be said is that to conquer disease and death is part of the total physical perfection. But as to other matters nothing can be said as yet. 13 September 1933
*
You wrote to X, "It is the first step and perhaps for some it may be sufficient, for we are not asking everybody to become supramental." Do you mean everybody in this Asram?
Yes. Only it does not mean that anybody here is debarred from the supramental consciousness or the physical transformation — if he wants it. It is not a question of possibility, but of the need and aspiration in the nature. 21 September 1934
Page – 665 Realisations by Sadhaks
I have all but made up my mind to give up the sadhana. I find it very humiliating to be reminded every month that I am far from the cosmic consciousness. In the midst of all my troubles, I have lost faith. Do you think it is of any use to keep me here? When you have got out of this attack, you will yourself recognise the emptiness of such a question. You have the Yogic capacity in you as your experiences show and it is not by going away from here that you will develop it. I do not understand why it should be insulting to speak al ways of the cosmic consciousness and the necessity of its settling down. I mean by it the living in the sense of the cosmic Self and the experience of the cosmic forces. A certain number here have contact with that, very few have it as a constant realisation, none have it perfected and fixed in all their being. As for going above it there are grades in the cosmic consciousness and one can go above the cosmic mental and rise as far as the overmind. But that also is still the cosmic consciousness. 15 September 1934
*
I sometimes wonder whether anyone here is attaining anything at all? Has anyone realised the Divine? Please don't ask me what I mean by the Divine.
Why shouldn't I ask? If you mean the Vedantic realisation, several have had it. Bhakti realisation also. If I were to publish the letters on sadhana experiences that have come to me, people would marvel and think that the Asram was packed full of great Yogis! Those who know something about Yoga would not mind about the dark periods, eclipses, hostile attacks, despairings, falls, for they know that these things happen to Yogis. Even the failures would have become Gurus, if I had allowed it, with circles of Shishyas! X did become one. Y of course. But all that does not count here, because what is a full realisation outside, is here only a faint beginning of siddhi. Here the test is transformation of the nature, psychic, spiritual, finally supramental. That and
Page – 666 nothing else is what makes it so difficult. 20 May 1936
*
Is it only for physical transformation that staying here is necessary? Otherwise sincere sadhana can be done elsewhere as well as here.
I don't suppose the later stages of the transformation including the physical would be possible elsewhere. In fact in those outside none of the three transformations seems to have begun. They are all preparing. Here there are at least a few who have started one or two of them. Only that does not show outside. The physical or external alone shows outside. 11 April 1937
*
People here — the Toms, Dicks and Harrys, who would be nowhere beside X in the outside world and who would simply have rotted in the gutter if they hadn't found shelter here — even such people criticise him.
The quality of the sadhaks is so low? I should say there is a considerable amount of ability and capacity in the Asram. Only the standard demanded is higher than outside even in spiritual matters. There are half a dozen people here perhaps who live in the Brahman consciousness — outside they would make a big noise and be considered as great Yogis — here their condition is not known and in the Yoga it is regarded not as siddhi but only as a beginning. 12 July 1937
*
What the deuce is "Brahman consciousness"? The same as cosmic consciousness? Does one come to that after your psychic and spiritual transformation? Is it something like seeing Brahman in everybody and everywhere or what? It is not spiritual realisation, I suppose, I mean realisation of Self? You see I am a nincompoop in this business. Please perorate a little.
Eternal Jehovah! you don't even know what Brahman is! You
Page – 667 will next be asking me what Yoga is or what life is or what body is or what mind is or what sadhana is! No, sir, I am not proposing to teach an infant class the A-B-C of the elementary conceptions which are the basis of Yoga. There is X too who doesn't know what consciousness is, even! Brahman, sir, is the name given by Indian philosophy since the beginning of time to the one Reality eternal and infinite which is the Self, the Divine, the All, the more than All, which would remain even if you and everybody and everything else in existence or imagining itself to be in existence vanished into blazes — even if this whole universe disappeared, Brahman would be safely there and nothing whatever lost. In fact, sir, you are Brahman and you are only pretending to be Y; when Z is translating X's poetry into Bengali, it is really Brahman translating Brahman's Brahman into Brahman. When X asks me what consciousness is, it is really Brahman asking Brahman what Brahman is! There, sir, I hope you are satisfied now. To be less drastic and refrain from making your head reel till it goes off your shoulders, I may say that a realisation of the Self is the beginning of Brahman realisation; — the Brahman consciousness — the Self in all and all in the Self etc. It is the basis of the spiritual realisation and therefore of the spiritual transformation; but one has to see it in all sorts of aspects and applications first and that I refuse to go into. If you want to know you have to read the Arya.
Is living in that consciousness an ideal condition for receiving the supramental descent?
It is a necessary condition.
I ask because I heard that no one here was prepared for this supramental descent.
Of course not, this realisation of the Self as all and the Divine as all is only the first step.
Page – 668 Is that the height of realisation achieved here so far among sadhaks? What is the next step?
The next step is to get into contact with the higher planes above spiritual mind — for as soon as one gets into the spiritual Mind or Higher Mind, this realisation is possible.
Now the big question is: Is the realisation of the Self a state of perpetual peace, joy and bliss?
If it is thoroughly established, it is one of internal peace, freedom, wideness, in the inner being.
Is it a state surpassing all struggles, dualities and depressions?
All these things you mention become incidents in the external being, on the surface — but the inner being remains untouched by them.
Are all troubles of the lower nature conquered finally — especially sex?
No, sir. But the inner being is not touched.
Or is it that sex-desire rises up in the Yogis, but leaves them untouched, unscathed? No attraction for them? It must be so, otherwise how can they be called siddhas? No danger of a fall from the spiritual state?
It may be covered up in a way — so long as it is not established in all parts of the being. The old Yogis did not consider that necessary, because they wanted to walk off, not to change the being.
Why do you call it a beginning only? What more do you want to do except perhaps physical transformation?
I want to effect the transformation of the whole nature (not only of the physical) — that's why.
Page – 669
And lastly can you whisper to me the names of those lucky fellows, those "half a dozen people" [p. 667], so that I can have a practical knowledge of what that blessed thing — "the Brahman consciousness" — is like?
NO, SIR. How can you have a practical knowledge of it by knowing who has it? You might just as well expect to have a practical knowledge of high mathematics by knowing that Einstein is a great mathematician. Queer ideas you have!
Are they A? B? C? D? E? F? — but he can't be for he is a Brahma himself, so keeps himself secluded like Him, no?
??????? 18 July 1937
"Advanced Sadhaks"
X is an advanced sadhak? This word "advanced" has no sense, it merely feeds the egoism of those who apply it to themselves.
*
The Mother never speaks of advanced sadhaks — it is the sadhaks themselves who have invented the phrase. Whenever they used it in their letters to me, I have thrown ridicule on the phrase and said I have no knowledge of there being two classes in the Asram, one of advanced sadhaks and the other of non-advanced sadhaks. So the question about X does not arise. If a sadhak, whoever he may be, speaks or acts out of anger, rajasic violence or any other unYogic impulse, his speech or action is contrary to the spirit of the sadhana.
*
Yes, you should learn not to be perturbed by talk of this kind from whomsoever it proceeds; I think I have already tried to put you on your guard against listening to "advanced sadhaks" or taking these pronouncements of theirs as authoritative statements of the aims and conditions of the Yoga. Why this claim
Page – 670 to be an advanced sadhak and what is the sense of it? it resolves itself into an egoistic assertion of superiority over others which is not justified so long as there is the egoism and the need of assertion — accompanied, as it always is, by a weakness and turbid imperfection which belie the claim of living in a superior consciousness to the "unadvanced" sadhaks. It is time these crudities disappeared from the Asram atmosphere. 3 February 1932
*
Wouldn't it be best if people did not think of themselves as being more advanced than others? It is enough to know that we are on the right path.
Yes, the talk about advanced sadhaks is a thing I have always discouraged — but people go on because that appeals to the vital ego. 13 May 1935
*
I understand your protesting against "great" or "big" sadhaks, but why against "advanced" sadhaks? Is it not a fact that some are more advanced than others? If we speak of X as an advanced sadhak, we don't mean anything else.
Advanced indeed! Pshaw! Because one is 3 inches ahead of another, you must make classes of advanced and non-advanced? Advanced has the same puffing egoistic resonance as "great" or "big". It leads to all sorts of stupidities — rajasic self-appreciating egoism in some, tamasic self-depreciating egoism in others, round-eyed wonderings why X, an advanced sadhak, one 3 inches ahead of Y, should stumble, tumble or fumble while Y, 3 inches behind X, still plods heavily and steadily on, etc. etc. Why, sir, the very idea in X that he is an advanced sadhak (like the Pharisee, "I thank thee, O Lord, that I am not as other unadvanced disciples",) would be enough to make him fumble, stumble and tumble. So no more of that, sir, no more of that. 25 September 1935
Page – 671 |