|
Rules in the Life of the Ashram
No Fixed Rules
The Asram, not being a public institution, has no prospectus or fixed set of rules. It is directed by the Mother according to what she sees to be necessary for each individual and for the work as a whole. 19 March 1930
*
I request you to furnish me with the rules and regulations necessary for becoming a member of the Ashram.
Tell him that there are no public rules and regulations for the Asram, as it is not a public institution.1 Only some of Sri Aurobindo's disciples who are considered ready or called to the Asram life are admitted. At present however no admissions are being made, as the accommodation capacity of the Asram is exhausted and there is no possibility just now of expanding it. 25 December 1934
*
What seems to me of more importance is to try to explain how things are worked out here. Indeed very few are the people who understand it and still fewer those who realise it. There has never been, at any time, a mental plan, a fixed programme or an organisation decided beforehand. The whole thing has taken birth, grown and developed as a living being by a movement of consciousness (Chit-tapas) constantly maintained, increased and fortified. As the Conscious Force descends in matter and radiates, it seeks for fit instruments to express and manifest it. It goes without saying that the more the instrument
1 Written by Sri Aurobindo to his secretary, who replied to the correspondent.
— Ed.
Page – 676 is open, receptive and plastic, the better are the results. The two obstacles that stand in the way of a smooth and harmonious working in and through the sadhaks are: (1) the preconceived ideas and mental constructions which block the way to the influence and the working of the conscious force; (2) the preferences and impulses of the vital which distort and falsify the expression. Both these things are the natural output of the ego. Without the interference of these two elements my physical intervention would not be necessary. You are quite right when you do not believe in "Mother likes", "Mother dislikes": it is quite a childish interpretation. There is a clear precise perception of the Force and the Consciousness at work, and whenever this Force gets distorted or the Consciousness is obscured in its action, I have to interfere and rectify the movement. In most cases things are mixed up and there again I have to intervene to separate the distorted transcription from the pure one. Otherwise a great freedom of action is left to all, because the Conscious Force can express itself in innumerable ways and for the perfection and integrality of the manifestation no ways are to be a priori excluded; a trial is very often given before the selection is made. 22 August 1939
The Ashram's Rules and Regulations
I would like to know precisely which people I should ask to read the Rules and Regulations of the Asram2 and sign for them?
The members of the Asram. For the others you can submit the names — long resident visitors in the Asram itself would usually have to see the rules e.g. X. 12 April 1933
2 The reference is to a typed set of "Rules and Regulations of the Asram", issued in 1933 but incorporating several rules written earlier. — Ed.
Page – 677 General Rules and Individual Natures
It is a little difficult from the wider spiritual outlook to answer your question in the way you want and every mental being wants, with a trenchant "Thou shalt" or "Thou shalt not", especially when the "thou" is meant to cover "all". For while there is an identity of essential aim, while there are general broad lines of endeavour, yet there is not in detail one common set of rules in inner things that can apply to all seekers. You ask "Is such and such a thing harmful?" But what is harmful to one may be helpful to another, — what is helpful at a certain stage may cease to be helpful at another, — what is harmful under certain conditions is helpful under other conditions, — what is done in a certain spirit may be disastrous, the same thing done in a quite different spirit would be innocuous or even beneficial. I asked the Mother indeed what she would say to your question about pleasures and social expansiveness (put as a general question) and she answered, "Impossible to say like that; it depends on the spirit in which it is done." So there are so many things: the spirit, the circumstances, the person, the need and cast of the nature, the stage. That is why it is said so often that the Guru must deal with each disciple according to his separate nature and accordingly guide his sadhana; even if it is the same line of sadhana for all, yet at every point for each it differs. That also is the reason why we say the Divine's way cannot be understood by the mind, — because the mind acts according to hard and fast rules and standards, while the spirit sees the truth of all and the truth of each and acts variously according to its own comprehensive and complex vision. That also is why we say that no one can understand by his personal mental judgment the Mother's actions and reasons for action; it can only be understood by entering into the larger consciousness from which she sees things and acts upon them. That is baffling to the mind because it loses its small measures, but it is the truth of the matter. To come down to hard facts and it may make the dictum a little more comprehensible. You speak of retirement and you say that if it is good why not impose it — you couple together X, Y,
Page – 678 Z, A, B, C ! Well, take that last name, C, and add to it D for he also "retired" and went headlong for an intense and solitary sadhana. X and Y profited by their seclusion, what happened to C and D? We forbade D to retire, — he was always wanting to give up work, withdraw from all intercourse and spend all his time in meditation; but he did it as much as he could — result, collapse. C never asked permission and I cannot say what his retirement was like, but I hear he boasted that by his intense sadhana he had conquered sex not only for himself but all the sadhaks! He had to leave the Asram owing to his unconquerable attachment to his wife and child and he is there living the family life and has produced another child — what a success for retirement. Where the retirement is helpful and fits the mind or the nature, we approve it, but in the face of these results how can you expect us to follow what the mind calls a consistent course and impose it as the right thing on everybody? You have spoken of your singing. You know well that we approve of it and I have constantly stressed its necessity for you as well as that of your poetry. But the Mother absolutely forbade E's singing? To music for some again she is indifferent or discourages it, for others she approves as for F, G and others. For some time she encouraged the concerts, afterwards she stopped them. You drew from the prohibition to E and the stopping of the concerts that Mother did not like music or did not like Indian music or considered music bad for sadhana and all sorts of strange mental reasons like that. Mother prohibited E because while music was good for you, it was spiritually poison to E — the moment he began to think of it and of audiences, all the vulgarity and unspirituality in his nature rose to the surface. You can see what he is doing with it now! So again with the concerts — though in a different way — she stopped them because she had seen that wrong forces were coming into their atmosphere which had nothing to do with the music in itself; her motives were not mental. It was for similar reasons that she drew back from big public displays like Udayshankar's. On the other hand she favoured and herself planned the exhibition of paintings at the Town Hall. She was not eager for you to have your big audiences for your singing because she found
Page – 679 the atmosphere full of mixed forces and found too you had afterwards usually a depression; but she has always approved of your music in itself done privately or before a small audience. If you consider then, you will see that here there is no mental rule, but in each case the guidance is determined by spiritual reasons which are of a flexible character and look only at what in each case are the spiritual conditions, results, possibilities. There is no other consideration, no rule. Music, painting, poetry and many other activities which are of the mind and vital can be used as part of spiritual development or of the work and for a spiritual purpose — "it depends on the spirit in which they are done." That being established, that these things depend on the spirit, the nature of the person, its needs, the conditions and circumstances, I will come to your special question about plea sure and especially the pleasure in society of an expansive vital nature. P.S. Of course there is a category of things that have to be eschewed altogether and of things that have to be followed by all, but I am speaking of the large number that do not fall into the two categories. 24 October 1936
*
No, there is no obligation of gloom, harshness, austerity or lonely grandeur in this Yoga. If I am living in my room, it is not out of a passion for solitude, and it would be ridiculous to put forward this purely external circumstance — or X's withdrawn ness which is a personal necessity of his sadhana — as if it were the obligatory sign of a high advance in the Yoga or solitude the aim; these are simply incidents which none is called on to imitate. So you need not be anxious; solitude is not demanded of you, for an ascetic dryness of isolated loneliness cannot be your spiritual destiny since it is not consonant with your swabhava which is made for joy, largeness, expansion, a comprehensive movement of the life-force. And, as for stern gravity and the majesty of a speechless and smileless face, your transformation into that would be terrifying to think of! I may remind you that the Mother and myself always recommended to you a sunlit and
Page – 680 cheerful progress as the best; if we were inclined to complain of anything in you — which we are not, knowing that one does not choose one's difficulties, — it would not be that you have too much gaiety but that you are not always as gay and cheerful as we would like you to be! The storm, cloud, difficulty, suffering come, but they are no part of the Yogic idea; they belong to the Nature that is now, not to the divine Nature that is to be.
Disregarding the Rules of the Ashram
Is it a fact that some sadhaks enjoy the special privilege of having obtained either your or the Mother's sanction for eating meat or fish whenever they like?
No such sanction or privilege has been obtained by anybody from the Mother.
If so, can they cook these things in their residential quarters?
Certainly not, that is strictly forbidden.
Or does the permission apply only to their going out in town to eat these things?
When they do it outside in the town, they are taking a liberty — no liberty has been granted to them.
If no such sanction has ever been given, then how far are the principles of the Asram violated if a local well-wisher or a visitor to the Asram invites us to such feasts? Do they do the right thing by inviting us?
No, they don't do the right thing — if they know of the rule of the Asram.
Those sadhaks who wilfully indulge this vital desire, how do they stand in your estimation? Are they to be classed as especially progressed souls for whom no such bondage to rules and regulations apply?
Page – 681 Not in the least — any such claim is obvious bunkum.
When such sadhaks lead others to believe that they are above the Asram rules, does it not do harm to their own Buddhahood? Then what is the right attitude to take up?
That raises the general question of disregard of the rules of the Asram or of the standards of action in Yoga. As such disregard is widespread and common among the sadhaks, if dealt with radically, it could entail a Pride's purge or Communist purification which would leave in the Asram only a greatly reduced number of inmates. Certain things cannot be tolerated especially if done in the Asram. Apart from that we have been waiting for something to develop inwardly in individual sadhaks which will bring about a change. If it doesn't — well, I suppose a time will come or is coming when everybody will have to choose. I am not aware that there are any Buddhas in the Asram. The right attitude is to keep strictly oneself to the truth and to affirm it quietly whenever it is necessary to do so.
Would turning down such invitations amount to a breach of etiquette or hurting the feelings of the person inviting?
That too is rubbish. Etiquette cannot take precedence over a rule of life proper to the Asram or the Yoga. 10 November 1938
No Politics in the Ashram
It is supposed that all who come here come for the spiritual life and aspire to realise the Divine Truth, leaving all else behind them. If you have come here for the spiritual life, you have nothing to do with what others may be doing in the political field which you have left behind you. It is no part of your dharma.
*
The rule for permanent residents of the Asram is that they must abstain from political activities altogether. Although this rule is not rigidly imposed on disciples at a distance, yet it is expected
Page – 682 that they should not do anything which would compromise the Asram, and, as a matter of fact, no disciple of Sri Aurobindo is at present participating in political agitation. It is also the rule for permanent members of the Asram that they should put their property at the disposal of the Mother, and they do not spend anything of it for other purposes except with the sanction previously given by her. But as you are not a permanent member, this rule does not apply to you, and the Mother cannot undertake to direct you as to the persons and the purposes to which you should give or refuse financial assistance. As a rule we never interfere in the personal lives or affairs of others than whole-time sadhaks who have given up everything else for the spiritual life. I would suggest that the difficulty about giving shelter to Congressmen arises only when there is an arrival of a batch of Salt Law Satyagrahis sent to break the Law. If such a batch arrives at your place and you give them shelter, then, as the law is now being administered, you run the risk of going to jail. It seems to me that, not being yourself a Satyagrahi, you are not bound to give this help or run this risk. Nothing prevents you from receiving a friend who is a Congressman under other circumstances. The questions you put about financial help to Khaddar and Prohibition and to the National school, must be decided by yourself, I think. I will only ask you to note what I have written in the first paragraph of the letter. 24 May 1930
*
Is there no likelihood of any political work being done by us?
Not any! What is called politics is too rajasic, mixed and muddied with all sorts of egoistic motives. Our way is the pressure of the spirit upon the earth consciousness to change. 25 July 1933
*
What will be the use of a transformed vital in a new manifestation if there is nothing active like politics?
Page – 683 But surely politics is not the only activity possible for the vital — there are hundreds of others. Whenever there is something to be produced, created, organised, achieved, conquered, it is the vital that is indispensable. 26 July 1933
*
Is politics necessary for some people here? We would seem to have sufficient difficulties in sadhana without adding that. Why do people take mental interest in something not likely to help the divine manifestation unless it is given as a work to some?
No, it is not given as a work to anybody. People go on with that because it is a mental interest or habit they do not like giving up, it is like the vital habit of tea-drinking or anything else of the kind. Politics is not only not given as a work but the discussion of politics is discouraged as much as possible. 30 November 1933
*
A member of the Asram cannot belong to a political body or do political work. He is also not supposed to do any social propaganda. Educational work like the Gurukula is different; it can be done with the Mother's permission. circa September 1938
*
I don't understand how X and others who are there are continuing to make proposals like these when I have clearly forbidden any publicity of the kind. You must make it perfectly and finally clear to them that the Asram is a non-political institution as well as non-sectarian and that therefore there can be no public commitment by its members and they cannot take any official position in institutions like this nor can their names be signed to any document involving a breach of this principle. Their proposals therefore cannot be accepted by Sri Aurobindo and the Mother. Whatever sympathy, support and guidance they receive from you or from anybody here must be personal and given
Page – 684 behind the scenes. Sri Aurobindo has sometimes made public utterances or taken publicly a political position, but that was on his own personal account and his action did not involve the Asram. His name also must not be published in this connection. They must be satisfied with the knowledge that his sympathy is entirely with your objects and that his spiritual force will be behind your work, but this must not be made public. 14 April 1947
Avoidance of Speech and Writing about Ashram Life
I do not know why you said all you did to Miss Maitland about the British police. We do not care in the least about the matter, and we have no intention of making any move to get rid of them. Farther, you must try to remember that this Asram is not concerned with politics and the members are expected not to talk politics with people from outside like Miss Maitland. She came here from an interest in Yoga and is not in the least interested in politics. If you begin to talk to her about the freedom of India and the misdeeds of the British Government, she will inevitably think in the end that the Consul was right and the Asram is full of revolutionaries under the garb of Yoga. It is surprising that the members of this Asram seem always unable to use discretion in their speech or measure its consequences or understand how easily false impressions are created. Finally, those who see Miss Maitland are expected not to quarrel or dispute with her about her views or mental impressions about India. She is returning soon to England and they can surely have patience for this short time and maintain harmony and good feeling in their relations with her. 1929
*
I am sending herewith a letter from a friend. Can I let him know some details about the Ashram?
It is an express rule of the Asram not to give inner information of the Asram life to people outside. If the correspondent is a seeker after Yoga (which does not seem to be the case here) he can be
Page – 685 told general things about the Yoga (not anything personal to the sadhaks or to Sri Aurobindo or the Mother). 19 November 1931
*
It is not very advisable to discuss either myself or the Asram or spiritual things with hostile minds or unbelievers. These discussions usually bring on the sadhak a stress of the opposing atmosphere and cannot be helpful to his progress. Reserve is the best attitude; one need not be concerned to dispel their bad will or their ignorance. 13 September 1932
*
Your mistake was to say something which implied a reflection on a fellow-sadhak to a visitor. That should not be done when it is unnecessary, especially if the Mother's name is brought in. If some sadhak of the Asram says things to a visitor against us or the Asram or the Yoga, for instance, and the visitor comes to you with a report of it, it is necessary to set right the wrong impression made or any perplexity he may feel, or other reasons may arise. But here there was no necessity. Your explanation of X's goings out from the Asram was in fact not correct, for he had wired refusal to go and had no wish to go and it was not out of a desire to attend a relative's marriage that he went; but even if it had been correct, the statement should not have been made. The internal affairs of the Asram and the sadhaks should not be spoken of — unless it cannot be avoided — to visitors or persons from outside. There is no reason why you should stop receiving visits; you have the Mother's approval and it is helpful. But we would wish you to avoid anything which might be interpreted as reflections or personal judgments on other sadhaks or anything which can be interpreted as that; you see for yourself what reactions and bad currents any indiscretion of that kind can create. Page – 686 Guidelines for Writing about the Ashram
It is not necessary to answer everything that appears in the newspapers. Nor is it advisable to take the outside public into confidence as to what is or is not going on in the Asram. It is only in exceptional cases that an answer is called for.
*
Here is an article by X (with some necessary corrections).
I have glanced over your monster. He will have to be beheaded and his tail cut off. Beheaded because Mother has put a prohibition on publication of her name and what she has written. The Conversations are for private circulation, the Prayers only for disciples and those who are actively interested in spiritual experience. This rule has been hammered into Y and others; you also must fix it in your cerebellum for the future. The tail will have to be docked for a reason regarding myself. Your reason for including it shows a harrowing incomprehension of the purpose of these things. The object of such special issues3 is not to exhibit me to the public and show them all sides of me, i.e. to make me go through all my possible performances on a public stage. The object is to make the reading public better acquainted with the nature of this Yoga and the principle of what is being done in the Asram. The private matters of the Asram itself are not for the public — at most only so much as the public can see. A fortiori anything personal and private about me is also taboo. I come in only so far as it is necessary for the public to know my thought and what I stand for. You will notice that my life itself is so written as to give only the grey precise surface facts, nothing more. All propensity to make me figure in the big Barnum circus of journalistic "features" along with or in competition with Joe Louis the prize-fighter, Douglas Fairbanks, H. G. Wells, King George and Queen Mary, Haile Selassie, Hobbs, Hitler, Jack the Ripper (or any modern substitute of his) and Mussolini should
3 Special issues of daily or weekly periodicals dealing with Sri Aurobindo and his work. — Ed.
Page – 687 be strictly banished from the mentality for evermore and the day after. 24 September 1935
*
I cannot understand how some people here think that a few articles in magazines help the Mother's work. Do such articles help to remove the hostile impressions in people's minds which hamper the work or do they create interest among rich people and induce them to offer some money to help?
Up to now it has not. It has only brought useless letters and people wanting to "join" the Asram to "study" here. There is no specific utility in the publications, but only a sort of counteraction to false ideas and rumours about the Asram and a vague general effect on the public mind. I allow it not because it has any central value for the work, but there is in the play of forces a tendency towards pressure for a more favourable attitude towards the Asram in Pondicherry and elsewhere and some measure of respect in Europe also and this is helpful to a certain extent. Especially it relieves me from the necessity of putting out forces constantly to combat the possibility of hostile attacks from outside threatening the security of the work. The result is therefore rather defensive up till now than something positive — but I cannot say it is of no use at all. 8 October 1935
*
I shall see your article and decide. I fear the first part of it is not admissible. The Mother always insists on great reserve in writing publicly about the Asram, especially if it is done by inmates or sadhaks. 25 November 1935
*
Asked by the Indian Review, I sent them an article entitled "Socialism and the Indian Ideal". They are asking for permission to print it in their review as well as in booklet form. Can the permission be given?
I think I had better make it clear once for all that I do not
Page – 689 approve of the publication of articles on controversial political subjects by members of the Asram. It involves the Asram and can prejudice the work of the Mother by raising quite uselessly unnecessary opposition and prejudice of which there is already more than enough. From a deeper point of view it pulls down the work to a lower region of mental and vital forces and the methods current on that lower plane. The work we have to do does not belong to that plane and cannot be done by current methods. It can only be done by rising to a higher spiritual plane and working silently from there on the forces in action so as to prepare a favourable field for the growth of the true consciousness and the true life-action. So long as that is not done, to engage in any activity which means opposition and struggle on the lower plane or to resort to its methods can only put it at a disadvantage and imperil its future. It is from the higher levels that things have to be worked out before the lower can be ready. Your article is not at all conclusive except to people who are already disposed to be of the same way of thinking. It has besides the appearance of preaching a sort of spiritualised individualism and capitalism, but that is no more the object of our work than the "spiritual communism" which Motilal put into it. To allow that to pass as the economic gospel of this Yoga would not do at all. In the Gita I only explain the spiritual sense of the cāturvarnya; I do not put that forward as my own economic or social teaching. Our aim is to rise to a higher spiritual consciousness and to create from there — to drag in mental forms from the present or past society could only spoil or hamper the purity and freedom of the future spiritual working. 29 September 1938
*
It is because I thought I might serve you through such an article — a personal article I mean, the only type I feel free in — that I accepted the invitation to contribute something to Asia.
Well, what I am considering is just this, whether it would
Page – 689 not be wiser, as far as concerns England or America, to start impersonally with the philosophical side and the side of the Yoga, and leave the person a little behind the scene for the present, until people there are ready as individuals for the personal touch; that is the course we have been following up to now. In India it is different, for here there is another kind of general mentality and there is the tradition of the Guru and the Shishya. May 1943
No Propaganda or Proselytism
It is a rule of the Asram that resident sadhaks shall not engage in any kind of public or propagandist activity political, social or religious; it is only our special permission which could dispense any member of the Asram from conformity to this rule. The Asram exists solely for Yoga and for a purely spiritual purpose; it is not a political or social or religious institution and it abstains from all these activities, this abstention is necessary for its existence. If any member engages in them, it involves the Asram itself and gives it the appearance of entering into activities which are not proper to it, and if any such impression of that kind is created, it may have serious consequences. It appears that you have been engaging without our permission or authorisation in public activities of various kinds for some time past. This must cease. If you intend to carry them on any farther, you must leave the Asram and go outside; you cannot be allowed to continue them from the Asram and as a member.
*
You must not write to all these people encouraging them in the idea of coming here. It is only selected people who can come here. If anybody is encouraged, there would before long be 10,000 instead of 120 — and it would no longer be an Asram. 14 April 1933
*
There is no necessity for a society for the translation of the
Page – 690 books. I have given my books outside always so that the Asram should not be entangled in these things and there should be no appearance of a propaganda inspired by me. 14 May 1933
*
How far does the arrival of well-known people justify the flutter it causes? Is it a sign that the Truth is spreading?
No, not at all. Well-known or unknown has absolutely no importance from the spiritual point of view. It is simply the propagandist spirit; they think and say "O if Kalelkar comes, the whole of Gujarat will be ours" — as if we were a party or a church or religion seeking adherents or proselytes. One man who earnestly pursues the Yoga is of more value than a thousand well-known men. 16 January 1934
*
I think there is nothing solid about all these magazine articles — a temporary value.
There is no value at all in these things — people read and forget. As for propaganda I have seen that it is perfectly useless for us — if there is any effect, it is a very trifling and paltry effect not worth the trouble. If the Truth has to spread itself, it will do it of its own motion; these things are unnecessary. 5 September 1934
*
It may be said generally that to be overanxious to pull people, especially very young people, into the sadhana is not wise. The sadhak who comes to this Yoga must have a real call, and even with the real call the way is often difficult enough. But when one pulls people in in a spirit of enthusiastic propagandism, the danger is of lighting an imitative and unreal fire, not the true Agni, or else a short-lived fire which cannot last and is submerged by the uprush of the vital waves. This is especially so with young people who are plastic and easily caught hold of by ideas and communicated feelings not their own — afterwards
Page – 691 the vital rises with its unsatisfied demands and they are swung between two contrary forces or rapidly yield to the strong pull of the ordinary life and action and satisfaction of desire which is the natural bent of adolescence. Or else the unfit adhara tends to suffer under the stress of a call for which it was not ready, or at least not yet ready. When one has the real thing in oneself, one goes through and finally takes the full way of sadhana, but it is only a minority that does so. It is better to receive only people who come of themselves and of these only those in whom the call is genuinely their own and persistent. 6 May 1935
*
It is true that there is in most people here this running after those who come from outside especially if they are well-known or distinguished. It is a common weakness of human nature and, like other weaknesses of human nature, the sadhaks seem not inclined to get rid of it. It is because they do not live sufficiently within, so the vital gets excited or attracted when something important or somebody important (or considered so) comes in from outside. 29 November 1935
*
No, X should not write to his friends to come here. That would not only be propaganda which we must avoid but done like that it would create a conflict and turmoil — and conflict and turmoil are the wrong atmosphere for the Truth to grow in. It has been the great mistake of schools and religions to fight for the possession of men's minds — that we must not do. We can protect ourselves by spiritual means from attacks from outside, but not enter into mental or outward conflict with others. If his friends are meant to come here, it must happen otherwise. 30 March 1936
*
What Tagore or others think or say does not matter very much after all as we do not depend on them for our work but on the Divine Will only. So many have said and thought all sorts
Page – 692 of things (people outside) about and against us, that has never affected either us or our work in the least; it is of a very minor importance. 7 March 1937
*
I am sure you have read the eulogies showered upon Durai swami on his retirement and enjoyed them immensely, at the same time feeling proud of him and saying, "Ha, ha, here is the fruit of my Force!" It is indeed a great pleasure to see the prestige of the Asram elevated by at least one man, though I suppose you don't give a damn about prestige.
Queer idea all you fellows seem to have of the "prestige" of the Asram. The prestige of an institution claiming to be a centre of spirituality lies in its spirituality, not in newspaper columns or famous people. Is it because of this mundane view of life and of the Asram held by the sadhaks that this Asram is not yet the centre of spirituality it set out to be?
I want to see how far Duraiswami's character has been changed and moulded by the Force.
Lord, man, it's not for changing or moulding character that this Asram exists. It is for moulding spirituality and transforming the consciousness. You may say it doesn't seem to be successful enough on that line, but that is its object.
I suspect, however, that you are closing in your Supramental net and bringing in all the outside fish!
Good Lord, no! I should be very much embarrassed if all the outside fish insisted on coming inside.
What about X? When do you propose to catch him? . . . It would be a great enrichment of your Fishery. We are all watching with interest and eagerness that big operation of yours. But I don't think you will succeed till your Supramental comes to the field in full-fledged colours, what?
What big operation? There is no operation; I am not trying to
Page – 693 hale in X as a big fish. I am not trying to catch him or bring him in. If he comes into the true spiritual life it will be a big thing for him, no doubt, but to the work it means only a ripple more or less in the atmosphere. Kindly consider how many people big in their own eyes have come and gone (Y, Z, A to speak of no others) and has the work stopped by their departure or the Asram ceased to grow? Do you really think that the success or failure of the work we have undertaken depends on the presence or absence of X? or on my hauling him in or letting him go? It is of importance only for the soul of X — nothing else. Your image of the Fishery is quite out of place; I fish for no one; people are not hauled or called here, they come of themselves by the psychic instinct. Especially, I don't fish for big and famous and successful men. Such fellows may be mentally or vitally big, but they are usually quite contented with that kind of bigness and do not want spiritual things, or, if they do, their bigness stands in their way rather than helps them. The fishing for them is X's idea — he wanted to catch hold of Subhas Bose, Sarat Chatterji, now Lila Desai etc. etc., but they would have been exceedingly troublesome sadhaks, if they ever really dreamed of anything of the kind. All these are ordinary ignorant ideas; the Spirit cares not a damn for fame, success or bigness in those who come to it. People have a strange idea that Mother and myself are eager to get people as disciples and if anyone goes away, especially a "big" balloon with all its gas in it, it is a great blow, — a terrible defeat, — a dreadful catastrophe and cataclysm for us. Many even think that their being here is a great favour done to us for which we are not sufficiently grateful. All that is rubbish. 30 June 1938
*
Is it not natural for us to feel proud of the praises bestowed on Duraiswami or feel a little "embarrassed" when things are said against X?
If the praise and blame of ignorant people is to be our standard, then we may say good-bye to the spiritual consciousness. If the
Page – 694 Mother and I had cared for praise or blame, we would have been crushed long ago. It is only recently that the Asram has got "prestige" — before it was the target for an almost universal criticism, not to speak of the filthiest attacks. 2 July 1938
Page – 695 |