{"id":1064,"date":"2013-07-13T01:32:20","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:32:20","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=1064"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:32:20","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:32:20","slug":"13-facts-and-opinions-17-7-1909-vol-02-karmayogin-volume-02","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/01-sabcl\/02-karmayogin-volume-02\/13-facts-and-opinions-17-7-1909-vol-02-karmayogin-volume-02","title":{"rendered":"-13_Facts and Opinions 17-7-1909.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n
\n
\n


\n\tFacts and Opinions<\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

Volume I – July
\n\t17,1909 – Number 4<\/span><\/p>\n

An
\n\tUnequal Fight<\/b><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 
\n\t            <\/font>
\n\tO<\/font>ur controversy with the Bengalee<\/i>
\n\tis like a conflict between denizens of two different elements. Not only has
\n\tour contemporary the advantage of prompt reply, but he has such a giant’s
\n\tgulp for formulas, such a magnificent and victorious method of dealing with
\n\tgreat fundamental questions in a few sentences, such a generous faculty for
\n\tclouding a definite point with sounding generalisations that he leaves us
\n\tweak and gasping for breath. However in our own feeble way we shall try to
\n\tdeal with the several points he has raised. Their importance must be our
\n\texcuse for the length of our reply. One great difficulty in our way is that
\n\tour contemporary for the convenience of his argument chooses to attribute to
\n\tus the most ridiculous opinions born out of his own prolific brain and
\n\tgenerous facility in reading whatever he chooses into other people’s minds.
\n\tHe thinks, for instance, that by seeing a special manifestation of Divine
\n\tPower and Grace in a particular movement we mean to shut God out from all
\n\tothers. This is a fair sample of the "inconsistencies" which the
\n\tBengalee<\/i> is always finding in his own brain and projecting into ours. If
\n\twe have to guard ourselves at every point against such gratuitous
\n\tmisconceptions, argument becomes impossible. Neither space nor patience will
\n\tallow of it.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t
\n God
\n and His Universe<\/a><\/span><\/b><\/font><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\tThe Bengalee<\/i> takes as its
\n\tfundamental position that God is Absolute, Eternal and Universal in all
\n\tmovements and not limited to any particular. Very true, but a vague
\n\tstatement of abstract truth like this leads nowhere beyond itself. What are
\n\tthe concrete implications in this generalisation ? God is not only the
\n\tAbsolute, Eternal and Universal in his own essence, but He manifests in<\/font><\/span><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

Page \u2013 67<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

the
\nrelative, transient and particular. The Absolute is an aspect of Him necessary
\nfor philosophical completeness; but if He were only Absolute, then this
\nphenomenal world would be only Maya, God akartā<\/i> and all action purely
\nillusory. If He were only Eternal we might regard this world as something not
\nfull of Him, but a separate creation which may or may not be subject to His
\nimmediate action. It is because He is the Universal that the clarified vision
\nsees Him in every being and every activity. As the Absolute He stands behind
\nevery relative, as the Eternal He supports every transient and assures the
\npermanence of the sum of phenomena; as the Universal He manifests Himself in
\nevery particular.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n


\n The
\n Scientific Position<\/a><\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Still,
\nthere is the question, how does He manifest Himself ? There is a school which
\nholds that He has once for all manifested Himself in certain eternal and
\nuniversal laws and has no other connection with the universe. This was the
\nattitude definitely taken by the Indian Social Reformer<\/i> when it ridiculed
\nSj. Aurobindo Ghose’s Uttarpara speech. God does not speak to men through their
\ninner selves in Yoga or otherwise, there is no way of communion between Him and
\nhumanity, there is no special action of His power or grace anywhere. He speaks
\nto men only through His laws; in other words, He does not speak to them at all.
\nHe does not act personally. He acts through His laws; in other words, He does
\nnot act at all, His laws act. This is an intelligible position and it contains
\nthe whole real quarrel between Science and Religion. Science does not as yet
\nrecognise God. Taking its stand on material senses and logical argument from
\nexternal phenomena it demands proof before it will admit His existence. It has
\nplenty of proof of Shakti, of Prakriti, of Nature; it sees none of the Purusha
\nor any room for His existence. If He exists at all, it must be an Impersonal
\nBeing immanent in but different from Force and Energy and Himself inactive;
\nbut even of this there is no proof. Religion holds that God is not only
\nimpersonal but personal, not only Purusha but<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Page \u2013 68<\/font><\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n
\n

Prakriti,
\nnot only Being but Shakti; He is all. For the proof of its position Religion
\nappeals to something higher than logic or the senses, to spiritual experience
\nand the direct knowledge drawn from the secret discipline it has developed in
\nmost parts of the world.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n


\n
\n Force
\n Universal or Individual<\/a><\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

It is not
\nclear whether our contemporary recognises any personality in its Universal God
\nor only recognises Him in all movements as natural Law. We hold that He
\nmanifests Himself in particulars not as Law, which is only a generalisation of
\nthe methods by which He acts, but as Shakti working for the Purusha. He puts
\nHimself as force, energy, motive-power into every particular. It is perfectly
\ntrue that every particular contains Him, but there are differences in the force
\nof His manifestation. This is obvious in individuals. The strength of every
\nparticular individual is the strength of God and not his own, because every
\nparticular strength is merely a part of the Universal force and it is really the
\nUniversal force and not the individual strength that is acting. But in living
\nbeings, when consciousness has become separate, the individual is allowed to
\nsuppose himself to be strong in his own strength. He is not really so. God gave
\nthe strength and He can take it away. He gave it power to act and He can baffle
\nits action of the fruits the individual sought and turn it to quite other
\nresults. This is so common an experience that we do not see how any man with the
\npower of introspection can deny it. Only at ordinary times, when things seem to
\nbe moving according to our calculations, we forget it, but on certain occasions
\nHe manifests Himself with such force either in events or in our own actions that
\nunless we are blinded by egoism or by infatuation we are compelled to perceive
\nthe universality of the force that is acting and the insignificance of the
\nindividual. So also there are particular movements in particular epochs in which
\nthe Divine Force manifests itself with supreme power shattering all human
\ncalculations, making a mock of the prudence of the careful statesman and the
\nscheming politician, falsifying the prognostications of the scientific analyser
\nand advancing with a vehemence and<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Page \u2013 69<\/font><\/p>\n

\n<\/div>\n
\n

velocity
\nwhich is obviously the manifestation of a higher than human force. The
\nintellectual man afterwards tries to trace the reasons for the movement and lay
\nbare the forces that made it possible, but at the time he is utterly at fault,
\nhis wisdom is falsified at every step and his science serves him not. These are
\nthe times when we say God is in the movement. He is its leader and it must fulfil itself however impossible it may be for man to see the means by which it
\nwill succeed.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n


\n Faith
\n and Deliberation<\/a><\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

The next
\npoint is the question of mature deliberation. The Bengalee<\/i> here tries to
\navoid confession of its error by altering the meaning of language. The mature
\ndeliberation of which it spoke applies only to particular acts and, even then,
\nit was not one man or a dozen but the whole self-conscious part of the country
\nwhich took part in these mature deliberations. The facts do not square with this
\nmodified assertion. The majority even of the particular steps taken in
\npursuance of the ideas which swept over the country were not taken in pursuance
\nof mature deliberation but were the result in some men of a faith which defied
\ndeliberation and in others of a yielding to the necessity of the movement. The
\nNational Council of Education came into existence because Sj. Subodh Chandra
\nMullik planked down a lakh of rupees and was followed by the zamindar of
\nGauripur, an act of faith, because the Rangpur schoolboys and their guardians
\nrefused to go back on their action in leaving the Government school and
\nestablished a school of their own, also an act of faith, and because some
\nleading men of the country recognised that something must be done on the spot
\nto prevent the honour of the nation being tarnished by abandonment of this
\nheroic forlorn hope while others thought it a good opportunity to materialise
\ntheir educational crotchets. Was this mature deliberation or a compound of
\nfaith, idealism and risky experiment ? The Boycott came into existence because of
\nthe wrath of the people against the Partition and the vehement advocacy of a
\nCalcutta paper which, supported by this general wrath, bore down the hesitations
\nof the thinkers, the politicians and the economists. Almost every<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

Page \u2013 70<\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\n

step
\ntowards Swadeshi, every National school established was an act of faith in the
\npermanence of the movement, a faith not justified by previous experience. These
\nwere acts of boldness, often of rashness, not of mature deliberation. Mature
\ndeliberation implies that having consulted the lessons of past experience and
\nweighed the probabilities of the future and the possibilities of the present, we
\ntake the step which seems most prudent and likely to bring about sure results.
\nThe Bombay millowners deliberated maturely when they said, "This movement born
\nof a moment’s indignation will pass like the rest; go to, let us raise our
\nprices and make hay while the sun shines." The leaders deliberated maturely when
\nthey said, "The rush towards National Education will not last and if encouraged
\nit will mean the destruction of private institutions and the payment of a double
\ntax for education." So they stopped the students’ strike, withheld their moral
\nsupport and by this mature deliberation put, like the Bombay millowners, almost
\ninsuperable obstacles in the way of the movement. It was the unconsciously
\nprepared forces in the country that made their way in spite of and not because
\nof the mature deliberation. It was a minority convinced of the principles of
\nself-help and passive resistance, full of faith, careless of obstacles,
\nbelieving in the force of ideas, and not the whole self-conscious portion of the
\ncountry, which mainly contributed, by its eloquence, logic, consistency,
\nself-sacrifice and the impact of its energy on the maturely-deliberating
\nmajority, to the permanence of the movement. These are the facts. As for the
\nconclusion from them we never made the absurd statement evolved out of the
\nBengalee<\/i>‘s imagination that God is everywhere except in the conscious and
\ndeliberate activities of men. What we say and hold to is that the Divine Force
\nmanifests itself specially when it effects mighty and irresistible movements
\nwhich even the ignorance and egoism of man is obliged to recognise as exceeding
\nand baffling his limited wisdom and his limited strength.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n


\n Our
\n "Inconsistencies"<\/a><\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nA third point is the proposition that out of evil
\ncometh good and<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Page \u2013 71<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

that
\neverything that happens or can happen is for the best. Here our contemporary
\nfinds an inconsistency, for did we not say that just now<\/i> everything works
\nfor the upraising of India because there is an upward trend which all forces
\nassist. "Curiously enough," he says, "the writer thinks the two propositions
\nidentical." Curiously enough, we do. We say that just now India is being raised
\nup and everything tends to God’s purpose in raising her up, even calamity, even
\nevil, even error. He uses them for His purpose and out of evil bringeth good. We
\nsaid "just now", because it is not true that God has always raised up India and
\nalways there has been an upward trend; sometimes He has cast her down, sometimes
\nthere has been a downward trend. Even that was for the good of India and the
\nworld as we shall take occasion to show. Where then is the limitation or the
\ninconsistency ? The limitation in the phrase "just now" applies to the upward
\ntrend, to the particular instance and not to the principle that out of evil
\ncometh good, which is universal and absolute.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n


\n\t
\n Good
\n out of Evil<\/a><\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

It is
\nstrange to find a philosopher like our contemporary parading in this twentieth
\ncentury the ancient and hollow platitude that such a doctrine, however true,
\nought not to be applied to individual conduct because it will abrogate morality
\nand personal responsibility. This is a strange answer, too, to an argument which
\nsimply sought to confirm the faith and endurance of our people in calamity by
\nthe belief that our confidence in our future was not mistaken and that these
\ncalamities were necessary for God’s high purpose. The evil we spoke of was not
\nmoral evil, but misfortune and calamity. But we do not shrink from the doctrine
\nthat sin also is turned to His purposes and, so far as that goes, we do not see
\nhow such a doctrine abrogates morality. The wisdom and love of God in turning
\nour evil into His good does not absolve us of our moral responsibility. Our
\ncontemporary shows this want of connection between the two positions himself
\nwhen he asks whether one should not in that case play the traitor in order to
\nassist the progress of the tendency. The gibe shows up the absurdity not of our
\nfaith but of his argument.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

Page \u2013 72<\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\n

Our
\nselfish or sinful acts, our persistence in ignorance or perversity are for the
\nbest in this obvious sense that God makes out of them excellent material for the
\nwork He is about, which always tends to the good of humanity. The persecution of
\nChristianity by the powers of the ancient world was utterly evil, but it was for
\nthe best; without it there could not have been that noble reaction of sublime
\nand exalted suffering which finally permeated the human mind with the impulse
\nof sacrifice for high ideals, and by introducing a mental soil fit for the
\ngrowth of altruism sowed the seeds of love, sweetness and humanity in that hard
\nselfish lust-ridden European world. The Bengalee<\/i> no doubt would have
\ncounselled the Christian martyrs not to be so rash and unreasoning but to demand
\nfrom God a balance of profit and loss for each individual sacrifice and only
\nafter mature deliberation decide whether to obey the voice of God in their
\nconscience or offer flowers to Venus and divine homage to Nero.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n


\n Loss
\n of Courage<\/a><\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 \n<\/p>\n

But the
\nquestion of self-sacrifice needs separate handling and we have not the space to
\ndeal with it in this issue as its importance deserves. The Bengalee<\/i>
\ncounters our suggestion about the superfluity of prudence and the instinct of
\nself-preservation at the present moment by the assertion that there is an excess
\nof unreasoning rashness. That is a question of standpoint and vocabulary. But
\nwhen the Bengalee<\/i> goes on to say that when evil results ensue from their
\nimprudence the rash and unreasoning lose heart and become unbelievers, we have a
\nright to ask to whom the allusion is directed. In the young, the forward, the
\nmen stigmatised by the Bengalee<\/i> as rash and unreasoning we find no loss
\nof courage or faith but only a hesitation on what lines to proceed now that the
\nold means have been broken by repressive laws. Among the older men we do indeed
\nfind a spirit of depression for which we blame those who in the face of the
\nrepressions drew in their horns out of mature deliberation and allowed silence
\nand inactivity to fall on the country. But these were never men of faith. We who
\nbelieve in God’s dispensations have not lost heart, we have not become
\nunbelievers. Our cry is<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

Page \u2013 73<\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\n

as loud as before for Swaraj and Swadeshi; our hearts
\nbeat as high.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n


\n Intuitive
\n Reason<\/a><\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

However
\nthere is hope for our contemporary. He has admitted in his idea of rationality
\nthe place of the intuitive reason, and it is precisely the intuitive reason,
\nspeaking oftenest in the present stage of human development through the
\ninspiration that wells up from the heart, which is the basis of faith and
\nexceeds the limits of the logical intellect. For this is the highest form of
\nfaith when the intuitive reason speaks to the heart, captures the emotions and
\nis supported by reflection. This is the faith that moves mountains and there is
\nnothing higher and more powerful except the yet deeper inner knowledge.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

Page \u2013 74<\/font><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Facts and Opinions Volume I – July 17,1909 – Number 4 An Unequal Fight                   Our controversy with the Bengalee is like…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1064","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-02-karmayogin-volume-02","wpcat-23-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1064","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1064"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1064\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1064"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1064"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1064"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}