{"id":137,"date":"2013-07-13T01:26:09","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:26:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=137"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:26:09","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:26:09","slug":"11-rebirth-vol-16-the-supramental-manifestation-volume-16","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/01-sabcl\/16-the-supramental-manifestation-volume-16\/11-rebirth-vol-16-the-supramental-manifestation-volume-16","title":{"rendered":"-11_Rebirth.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n


\n
\nRebirth<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n            T<\/span><\/b>HE
\ntheory of rebirth is almost as ancient as thought itself and its origin is
\nunknown. We<\/p>\n

may
\naccording to our repossessions accept it as the fruit of ancient psychological
\nexperience always renewable and verifiable and therefore true or dismiss it as a
\nphilosophical dogma and ingenious speculation; but in either case the doctrine,
\neven as it is in all appearance well-nigh as old as human thought itself, is
\nlikely also to endure as long as human beings continue to think.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

         
\nIn
\nformer times the doctrine used to pass in Europe under the grotesque name of
\ntransmigration which brought with it to the Western mind the humorous image of
\nthe soul of Pythagoras migrating, a haphazard bird of passage, from the human
\nform divine into the body of a guinea-pig or an ass. The philosophical
\nappreciation of the theory expressed itself in the admirable but rather
\nunmanageable Greek word, metempsychosis, which means the insouling of a new body
\nby the same psychic individual. The Greek tongue is always happy in its marriage
\nof thought and word and a better expression could not be found; but forced into
\nEnglish speech the word becomes merely long and pedantic without any memory of
\nits subtle Greek sense and has to be abandoned. Reincarnation is the now popular
\nterm, but the idea in the word leans to the gross or external view of the fact
\nand begs many questions. I prefer "rebirth", for it renders the sense
\nof the wide, colourless, but sufficient Sanskrit term, punarjanma, <\/i>."again-birth",
\nand commits us to nothing but the fundamental idea which is the essence and life
\nof the doctrine.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

 
\n Rebirth
\nis for the modern mind no more than a speculation and a theory; it has never
\nbeen proved by the methods of modern science or to the satisfaction of the new
\ncritical mind formed by a scientific culture. Neither has it been disproved; for
\nmodern science knows nothing about a before-life or an after-life for the human
\nsoul, knows nothing indeed about a soul at all, nor can know; its province stops
\nwith the flesh and brain and nerve,<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage-79<\/font>
\n<\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

 the
\nembryo and its formation and development. Neither has modern criticism any
\napparatus by which the truth or untruth of rebirth can be established. In fact,
\nmodem criticism, with all its pretensions to searching investigation and
\nscrupulous certainty, is no very efficient truth-finder. Outside the sphere of
\nthe immediate physical it is almost helpless. It is good at discovering data,
\nbut except where the data themselves bear on the surface their own conclusion,
\nit has no means of being rightly sure of the generalisations it announces from
\nthem so confidently in one generation and destroys in the next. It has no means
\nof finding out with surety the truth or untruth of a doubtful historical
\nassertion; after a century of dispute it has not even been able to tell us yes
\nor no, whether Jesus Christ ever existed. How then shall it deal with such a
\nmatter as this of rebirth which is stuff of psychology and must be settled
\nrather by psychological than physical evidence?<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

         
\nThe
\narguments which are usually put forward by supporters and opponents, are often
\nsufficiently futile and at their best certainly insufficient either to prove or
\nto disprove anything in the world. One argument, for instance, often put forward
\ntriumphantly in disproof is this that we have no memory of our past lives and
\ntherefore there were no past lives! One smiles to see such reasoning seriously
\nused by those who imagine that they are something more than intellectual
\nchildren. The argument proceeds on psychological grounds and yet it ignores the
\nvery nature of our ordinary or physical memory which is all that the normal man
\ncan employ. How much do we remember of our actual lives which we are undoubtedly
\nliving at the present moment? Our memory is normally good for what is near,
\nbecomes vaguer or less comprehensive as its objects recede into the distance,
\nfarther off seizes only some salient points and, finally, for the beginning of
\nour lives falls into a mere blankness. Do we remember even the mere fact, the
\nsimple state of being an infant on the mother’s breast? and yet that state of
\ninfancy was, on any but a Buddhist theory, part of the same life and belonged to
\nthe same individual, \u2013 the very one who cannot remember it just as he cannot
\nremember his past life. Yet we demand that this physical memory, this memory of
\nthe brute brain of man which can-<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage
\n\u2013 80<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

not
\nremember our infancy and has lost so much of our later years, shall yet recall
\nthat which was before infancy, before birth, before itself was formed. And if it
\ncannot, we are to cry, "Disproved your reincarnation theory!" The
\nsapient insipiency of our ordinary human reasoning could go no farther than in
\nthis sort of ratiocination. Obviously, if our past lives are to be remembered
\nwhether as fact and state or in their events and images, it can only be by a
\npsychical memory awaking which will overcome the limits of the physical and
\nresuscitate impressions other than those stamped on the physical being by
\nphysical cerebration.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

         
\nI
\ndoubt whether, even if we could have evidence of the physical memory of past
\nlives or of such a psychical awakening, the theory would be considered any
\nbetter proved than before. We now hear of many such instances confidently
\nalleged though without that apparatus of verified evidence responsibly examined
\nwhich gives weight to the results of psychical research. The sceptic can always
\nchallenge them as mere fiction and imagination unless and until they are placed
\non a firm basis of evidence. Even if the alleged are verified, he has the
\nresource of affirming are not really memories but were known to the person
\nalleging them by ordinary physical means or were suggested to him by others and
\nhave been converted into reincarnate memory either by conscious deception or by
\na process of self-deception and self-hallucination. And even supposing the
\nevidence were too strong and unexceptionable to be got rid of by these familiar
\ndevices, they might yet not be accepted as proof of rebirth; the mind can
\ndiscover a hundred theoretical explanations for a single group of facts. Modem
\nspeculation and research have brought in this doubt to overhang all psychical
\ntheory and generalisation.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n


\n <\/span>          
\n<\/span>We know, for instance, that in the phenomena, say, of automatic writing
\nor of communication from the dead, it is disputed whether the phenomena proceed
\nfrom outside, from disembodied minds, or from within, from the subliminal
\nconsciousness, or whether the communication is actual and immediate from the
\nreleased personality or is the uprising to the surface of a telepathic
\nimpression which came from the mind of the then living man but has remained
\nsubmerged in our subliminal.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage
\n\u2013 81<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

mentality.
\nThe same kind of doubts might be opposed to the evidences of reincarnate memory.
\nIt might be maintained that they prove the power of a certain mysterious faculty
\nin us, a consciousness that can have some inexplicable knowledge of past events,
\nbut that these events belong to other personalities than ours and that out
\nattribution of them to our own personality in past lives is an imagination, a
\nhallucination, or else an instance of that self-appropriation of things and
\nexperiences perceived but not our own which is one out of the undoubted
\nphenomena of mental error. Much would be proved by an accumulation of such
\nevidences but not, to the sceptic at least, rebirth. Certainly, if they were
\nsufficiently ample, exact, profuse, intimate, they would create an atmosphere
\nwhich would lead in the end to a general acceptance of the theory by the human
\nrace as a moral certitude. But proof is a different matter.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

         
\nAfter
\nall, most of the things that we accept as truths are really no more than moral
\ncertitudes. We have all the profoundest unshakable faith that the earth revolves
\non its own axis, but as has been pointed out by a great French mathematician,
\nthe fact has never been proved; it is only a theory which accounts well for
\ncertain observable facts, no more. Who knows whether it may not be replaced in
\nthis or another century by a better – or a worse? All observed astronomical
\nphenomena were admirably accounted for by theories of spheres and I know not I
\nwhat else, before Galileo came in with his "And yet it moves,"
\ndisturbing the infallibility of Popes and Bibles and the science and logic of
\nthe learned. One feels certain that admirable theories could be invented to
\naccount for the facts of gravitation if our intellects were not prejudiced and
\nprepossessed by the anterior demonstrations of Newton. (This
\nwas written before the theory of Einstein came to be known)
\nThis is the ever-perplexing and inherent plague of our reason; for it starts by
\nknowing nothing and has to deal with infinite possibilities, and the possible
\nexplanations of any given set of facts until we actually know what is behind
\nthem, are endless. In the end, we really know only what we observe and even that
\nsubject to a haunting question, for instance, that green is green and white is
\nwhite, although it appears that colour is not colour but something else that
\ncreates<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage
\n\u2013 82<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

the
\nappearance of colour. Beyond observable fact we must be content with reasonable
\nlogical satisfaction, dominating probability and moral certitude, – at least
\nuntil we have the sense to observe that there are faculties in us higher than
\nthe sense dependent reason and awaiting development by which we can arrive at
\ngreater certainties.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n


\n <\/span>          
\n<\/span>We cannot really assert as against the sceptic any such dominant
\nprobability or any such certitude on behalf of the theory of rebirth. The
\nexternal evidence yet available is in the last degree rudimentary. Pythagoras
\nwas one of the greatest of sages, but his assertion that he fought at Troy <\/i>under
\nthe name of the Antenorid and was slain by the younger son of Atreus is an
\nassertion only and his identification of the Trojan shield will convince no one
\nwho is not already convinced; the modern evidence is not as yet any more
\nconvincing than the proof of Pythagoras. In absence of external proof which to
\nour matter-governed sensational intellects is alone conclusive, we have the
\nargument of the reincarnationists that their theory accounts for all the facts
\nbetter than any other yet advanced. The claim is just, but it does not create
\nany kind of certitude. The theory of rebirth coupled with that of Karma gives us
\na simple, symmetrical, beautiful explanation of things; but so too the theory of
\nthe spheres gave us once a simple, symmetrical, beautiful explanation of the
\nheavenly movements. Yet we have now got quite another explanation, much more
\ncomplex, much more Gothic and shaky in its symmetry, an inexplicable order
\nevolved out of chaotic infinities, which we accept as the truth of the matter.
\nAnd yet, if we will only think, we shall perhaps see that even this is not the
\nwhole truth; there is much more behind we have not yet discovered. Therefore the
\nsimplicity, symmetry, beauty, satisfactoriness of the reincarnation theory is no
\nwarrant of its certitude.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

         
\nWhen
\nwe go into details, the uncertainty increases. Rebirth accounts, for example,
\nfor the phenomenon of genius, inborn faculty and so many other psychological
\nmysteries. But then Science comes in with its all-sufficient explanation by
\nheredity, – though, like that of rebirth, all-sufficient only to those who
\nalready believe in it. Without doubt, the claims of heredity have<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nP<\/font><\/span>age
\n83<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

been
\nabsurdly exaggerated. It has succeeded in accounting for much, not all, in our
\nphysical make-up, our temperament, our vital peculiarities. Its attempt to
\naccount for genius, inborn faculty and other psychological phenomena of a higher
\nkind is a pretentious failure. But this may be because Science knows nothing at
\nall that is fundamental about our psychology, – no more than primitive
\nastronomers knew of the constitution and law of the stars whose movements they
\nyet observed with a sufficient accuracy. I do not think that even when Science
\nknows more and better, it will be able to explain these things by heredity; but
\nthe scientist may well argue that he is only at the beginning of his researches,
\nthat the generalisation which has explained so much may well explain all, and
\nthat, at any rate, his hypothesis has had a better start in its equipment of
\nprovable facts than the theory of reincarnation.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n


\n <\/span>          
\n<\/span>Nevertheless, the argument of the reincarnationist is so far a good
\nargument and respect-worthy, though not conclusive. But there is another more
\nclamorously advanced which seems to me to be on a par with the hostile reasoning
\nfrom absence of memory, at least in the form in which it is usually advanced to
\nattract unripe minds. This is the ethical argument by which it is sought to
\njustify God’s ways with the world or the world’s ways with itself. There must,
\nit is thought, be a moral governance for the world; or at least some sanction of
\nreward in the cosmos for virtue, some sanction of punishment for sin. But upon
\nour perplexed and chaotic earth no such sanction appears. We see the good man
\nthrust down into the press of miseries and the wicked flourishing like a green
\nbay-tree and not <\/i>cut down miserably in his end. Now this is intolerable.
\nIt is a cruel anomaly, it is a reflection on God’s wisdom and justice, almost a
\nproof that God is not; we must remedy that. Or if God is not, we must have some
\nother sanction for righteousness.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

         
\nHow
\ncomforting it would be if we could tell a good man and even the amount of his
\ngoodness, – for should not the Supreme be a strict and honourable accountant? –
\nby the amount of ghee that he is allowed to put into his stomach and the number
\nof rupees he can jingle into his bank and the various kinds of good luck that
\naccrue to him. Yes, and how comforting<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage
\n\u2013 84<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

too
\nif we could point our finger at the wicked stripped of all concealment and cry
\nat him, "0 thou wicked one! for if thou wert not evil, wouldst thou in a
\nworld governed by God or at least by good, be thus ragged, hungry, unfortunate,
\npursued by griefs, void of honour among men? Yes, thou art proved wicked,
\nbecause thou art ragged. God’s justice is established." The Supreme
\nIntelligence being fortunately wiser and nobler than man’s childishness, this is
\nimpossible. But let us take comfort! It appears that if the good man has not
\nenough good luck and ghee and rupees, it is because he is really a scoundrel
\nsuffering for his crimes, – but a scoundrel in his past life who has suddenly
\nturned a new leaf in his mother’s womb; and if yonder wicked man flourishes and
\ntramples gloriously on the world, it is because of his goodness, – in a past
\nlife, the saint that was then having since been converted, – was it by his
\nexperience of the temporal vanity of virtue? – to the cult of sin. All is
\nexplained, all is justified. We suffer for our sins in another body; we shall be
\nrewarded in another body for our virtues in this; and so it will go on ad<\/i>
\ninfinitum. <\/i>No wonder, the philosophers found this a bad business and
\nproposed as a remedy to get rid of both sin and virtue and even as our highest
\ngood to scramble anyhow out of a world so amazingly governed.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

         
\nObviously,
\nthis scheme of things is only a variation of the old spiritual-material bribe
\nand menace, the bribe of a Heaven of fat joys for the good and the threat of a
\nhell of eternal fire or bestial tortures for the wicked. The idea of the Law of
\nthe world as primarily a dispenser of rewards and punishments is cognate to the
\nidea of the Supreme Being as a judge, "father" and school-master who
\nis continually rewarding with lollipops his good boys and continually caning his
\nnaughty urchins. It is cognate also to the barbarous and iniquitous system of
\nsavage and degrading punishment for social offences on which human society is
\nstill founded. Man insists continually on making God in his own image instead of
\nseeking to make himself more and more in the image of God, and all these ideas
\nare the reflection of the child and the savage and the animal in us which we
\nhave still failed to transform or outgrow. We should be inclined to wonder how
\nthese fancies of children found their way. into such profound<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nP<\/font><\/span>age
\n\u2013 85<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

philosophical
\nreligions as Buddhism and Hinduism, if it were not so patent that men will not
\ndeny themselves the luxury of tacking on the rubbish from their past to the
\ndeeper thoughts of their sages.
\nNo doubt, since these ideas were so prominent, they must have had their use in
\ntraining humanity. Perhaps even it is true that the Supreme deals with the child
\nsoul according to its childishness and allows it to continue its sensational
\nimaginations of heaven and hell for a time beyond the death of the physical
\nbody. Perhaps both these ideas of after-life and of rebirth as fields of
\npunishment and reward were needed because suited to our half-mentalised
\nanimality. But after a certain stage the system ceases to be really effective.
\nMen believe in Heaven and Hell but go on sinning merrily, quit at last by a
\nPapal indulgence or the final priestly absolution or a death-bed repentance or a
\nbath in the Ganges or a sanctified death at Benares, – such are the childish
\ndevices by which we escape from our childishness! And in the end the mind grows
\nadult and puts the whole nursery nonsense away with contempt. The reward and
\npunishment theory of rebirth, if a little more elevated or at least less crudely
\nsensational, comes to be as ineffective. And it is good that it should be so.
\nFor it is intolerable that man with his divine capacity should continue to be
\nvirtuous for a reward and shun sin out of terror. Better a strong sinner than a
\nselfish coward or a petty huckster with God; there is more divinity in him, more
\ncapacity of elevation. Truly the Gita has said well, krpanah phalahetavah. <\/i>And
\nit is inconceivable that the system of this vast and majestic world should have
\nbeen founded on these petty and paltry motives. There is reason in these
\ntheories? Then reason of the nursery, puerile. Ethics? Then ethics of the mud,
\nmuddy.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

 
\n  <\/span>          
\n<\/span>The true foundation of the theory of rebirth is the evolution of the
\nsoul, or rather its efflorescence out of the veil of Matter and and its gradual
\nself-finding. Buddhism contained this truth involved in its theory of Karma and
\nemergence out of Karma but failed to bring it to light; Hinduism knew it of old,
\nbut afterwards missed the right balance of its expression. Now we are again able
\nto restate the ancient truth in a new language and this<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage
\n\u2013 86<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

is
\nalready being done by certain schools of thought, though still the old
\nincrustations tend to tack themselves on to the deeper wisdom. And if this
\ngradual efflorescence be true, then the theory of rebirth is an intellectual
\nnecessity, a logically unavoidable corollary. But what is the aim of that
\nevolution? Not conventional or interested virtue and the faultless counting out
\nof the small coin of good in the hope of an apportioned material reward, but the
\ncontinual growth of a divine knowledge, strength, love and purity. These things
\nalone are real virtue and this virtue is its own reward. The one true reward of
\nthe works of love is to grow ever in capacity and delight of love up to the
\necstasy of the spirit’s all-seizing embrace and universal passion; the one
\nreword of the works of right Knowledge is to grow perpetually into the infinite
\nLight; the one reward of the works of right Power is to harbour more and more of
\nthe Force Divine, and of the works of purity to be freed more and more from
\negoism into that immaculate wideness where all things are transformed and
\nreconciled into the divine equality. To seek other reward is to bind oneself to
\na foolishness and a childish ignorance; and to regard even this things as a
\nreward is an unripeness and an imperfection.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

 
\n  <\/span>          
\n<\/span>And what of suffering and happiness, misfortune and prosperity ? These
\nare experiences of the soul in its training, helps, props, means, disciplines,
\ntests, ordeals, – and prosperity often a worse ordeal than suffering. Indeed,
\nadversity, suffering may often be regarded rather as a reward to virtue than as a
\npunishment for sin, since it turns out to be the greatest help and purifier of
\nthe soul struggling to unfold itself. To regard it merely as the stern award of
\na Judge, the anger of an irritated Ruler or even the machanical recoil of result
\nof evil upon cause of evil is to take the most superficial view possible of
\nGod’s dealings with the soul and the law of its evolution. And what of worldly
\nprosperity, wealth, progency, the outward enjoyment of art, beauty, power? Good,
\nif they be achieved without loss to the soul and enjoyed only as the outflowing
\nof the divine Joy and Grace upon our material existence. But let us seek them
\nfirst for others or rather for all, and for ourselves only as a part of the
\nuniversal condition or as one means of bringing perfection nearer<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage
\n\u2013 87<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/div>\n

 <\/span>          
\n<\/span>The soul needs no proof of its rebirth any more than it needs proof of
\nits immortality. For there comes a time when it is consciously immortal, aware
\nof itself in its eternal and immutable essence. Once that realisation is
\naccomplished, all intellectual questionings for and against the immortality of
\nthe soul fall away like a vain c1amour of ignorance around the self-evident and
\never-present truth. Tato na vicikitsate. <\/i>That is the true dynamic belief
\nin immortality when it becomes to us not an intellectual dogma but a fact as
\nevident as the physical fact of our breathing and as little in need of proof or
\nargument. So also there, comes a time when the soul becomes aware of itself in
\nits eternal and mutable movement; it is then aware of the ages behind that
\nconstituted the present organisation of the movement, sees how this was prepared
\nin an uninterrupted past, remembers the by-gone soul-states, environments,
\nparticular forms of activity which built up its present constituents and knows
\nto what it is moving by development in an uninterrupted future. This is the true
\ndynamic belief in rebirth, and there too the play of the questioning intellect
\nceases; the soul’s vision and the soul’s memory are all. Certainly, there
\nremains the question of the mechanism of the development and of the laws of
\nrebirth where the intellect and its inquiries and generalisations can still have
\nsome play. And here the more one thinks and experiences, the more the ordinary,
\nsimple, cut and dried account of reincarnation seems to be of doubtful validity.
\nThere is surely here a greater complexity, a law evolved with a more difficult
\nmovement and a more intricate harmony out of the possibilities of the Infinite.
\nBut this is a question which demands long and ample consideration; for subtle is
\nthe law of it. <\/span>Anur
\nhyesa dharmah.<\/p>\n

<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage
\n\u2013 88<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Rebirth               THE theory of rebirth is almost as ancient as thought itself and its origin is unknown. We may according to our repossessions…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-137","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-16-the-supramental-manifestation-volume-16","wpcat-5-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/137","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=137"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/137\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=137"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=137"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=137"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}