{"id":1653,"date":"2013-07-13T01:36:17","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:36:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=1653"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:36:17","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:36:17","slug":"12-on-his-published-prose-writings-vol-35-letters-on-himself-and-the-ashram","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/03-cwsa\/35-letters-on-himself-and-the-ashram\/12-on-his-published-prose-writings-vol-35-letters-on-himself-and-the-ashram","title":{"rendered":"-12_On His Published Prose Writings.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n
\n

\nOn His Published Prose Writings<\/font><\/b>
\n <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPublication Plans, 1927<\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThere is no intention of withdrawing support. The small book The Mother <\/i>was given to Rameshwar because it was necessary
\nto bring it out without delay and the A.P.H. [Arya Publishing<\/i> House<\/i>] was already occupied with the
\nEssays on the Gita <\/i>which
\nit had not been able to bring to completion.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nIt was hoped that Rameshwar’s joining the A.P.H. would
\nunite all interests, but since you have not been able to agree together, it will be necessary to give him something from time
\nto time as the long-standing connection with him cannot be broken \u2014  there being no reason for giving him up any more
\nthan for giving up A.P.H. This will not stand in the way of my giving my principal books to A.P.H.
\n\u2014  provided always that the
\nA.P.H. can keep its side of the arrangement by publishing them properly and without inordinate delay.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nI can understand that there have been financial and other difficulties in putting A.P.H. on a sound footing and I have not
\ninsisted either on publication or money or anything else. At the same time I am bound to say that the methods of work seem
\nto be loose and haphazard, e.g. the enormous time taken to publish the Second Series [of
\n<\/i>Essays on the Gita], the endless
\ndelay in sending me my copies of the First Series, the absence of all information regarding the condition of the concern or of
\nany regular accounts of my dues from the House etc. I hope that things will be better in the future.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nIt is not necessary or possible to publish all my books together; hardly any of them can go out without revision and as I
\nhave very little time for this kind of work revision will take time.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\nFor Sri Aurobindo’s remarks on his poetic works, see <\/font>
\n<\/i>Letters on Poetry and Art<\/font>, volume<\/font><\/i>
\n27 of <\/font> <\/i>T<\/font>HE <\/font>C<\/font>OMPLETE<\/font> W<\/font>ORKS OF<\/font> S<\/font>RI<\/font>
\nA<\/font>UROBINDO<\/font>, pp. 219 \u00ad 363. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 74<\/font><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

\nThe Ideal of Human Unity<\/span><\/i>. I was revising, but as there seemed to be no progress with the
\nGita <\/i>and I had other work to
\ndo, I dropped it. I will now complete the revision and I expect it will not take more than another two months.
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\nThe Defence of Indian Culture<\/span><\/i>. Not finished. I will look through it and revise and add two or three chapters to finish.
\nThe time taken will depend on the amount of revision necessary \u2014  probably not very extensive alterations are needed.
\nThe Katha Upanishad<\/i>. This also needs revision before it can be published; but it is not likely to take very long.
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\nThe Kena Upanishad<\/span><\/i>. My present intention is not to publish it as it stands. This must be postponed for the present.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

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

 <\/p>\n

\nIt would be no use coming to see me, as I am seeing nobody, not even those who are living here. Nor is there any necessity
\nfor the journey, as I have not any present intention of altering the existing arrangement.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n30 November 1927 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

 <\/p>\n

\nI am an Indian student working for the Ph.D. degree at Harvard University. For my thesis subject I have selected “Contemporary Political Thought in India”. You of course will be one of the authors I will be considering. Unfortunately your
\nbooks are not available here. Please send me a list of books related to my subject, and the address of your publisher.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nRefer him to A.P.H. Tell him that my political writings appeared in the daily
\nBande Mataram <\/i>and the weekly Karmayogin<\/i>
\nand have for the most part not been separately published. You can mention however
\nThe Ideal of the Karmayogin<\/i>, The<\/i>
\nRenaissance in India<\/i>, The Ideal of Human Unity<\/i>, War and<\/i>
\nSelf-Determination <\/i>as books that may be useful for his subject,
\nas the two former are partly concerned with or touch upon Indian politics, and the two latter are written upon international
\nquestions. I do not remember any others; if there are any, they may be included in the list. Ask A.P.H. to send him a complete
\nlist of my published works. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n11 April 1928
\n  
\n76<\/i> <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>75<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

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

 <\/p>\n

\nNow that they have written, I remember that in fact the Speeches<\/i>
\nwere transferred from the Prabartak to A.P.H. But then how is it that Rameshwar asked for it? I gave permission under the
\nimpression that it must be in his share of the already published books. You had better write to him about it. After receiving his
\nanswer I will decide. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n6 May 1929
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nI find it impossible to decide about the Speeches<\/i>; the whole
\nmatter has got twisted up in a very undesirable way. It would be better if they settle it themselves amicably; otherwise I shall
\nhave to promise it to whoever can bring it out soonest or in the best style or put it up to auction or toss heads or tails. This
\nwhole matter of the publications being split up between half a dozen Arya Aurobindo houses is reaching the point of a
\nreductio<\/i>
\nad absurdum <\/i>if not ad impossible<\/i>. But nothing however absurd seems impossible here.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n10 July 1931 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nRegarding Speeches of Sri Aurobindo <\/i>\u2014  there has been a great demand for it in the market. If you kindly allow us to omit
\nthose speeches which may come under the Press Act, we could print the book. Please let us know your decision.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nBut who will decide what may come under the Press Act? It is a legal point and the law of sedition is exceedingly elastic.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nSeptember 1935 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nThe Ideal of the Karmayogin<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nHave you seen my review of The Ideal of the Karmayogin<\/i>?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYes, I have seen it, but I don’t think it can be published in its
\npresent form as it prolongs the political Aurobindo of that time into the Sri Aurobindo of the present time. You even assert that
\nI have “thoroughly” revised the book and these articles are an  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>76<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nindex of my latest views on the burning problems of the day and there has been no change in my views in 27 years (which would
\nsurely be proof of a rather unprogressive mind). How do you get all that? My spiritual consciousness and knowledge at that
\ntime was as nothing to what it is now \u2014  how would the change leave my view of politics and life unmodified altogether? There
\nhas been no such thorough revision; I have left the book as it was, because it would be useless to modify what was written so
\nlong ago \u2014  the same as with Yoga and Its Objects<\/i>. Anyway the review would almost amount to a proclamation of my present
\npolitical views \u2014  while on the contrary I have been careful to pronounce nothing
\n\u2014  no views whatever on political questions
\nfor the last I don’t know how many years. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n21 April 1937
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nIn the new edition of The Ideal of the Karmayogin <\/i>there is this
\nannouncement: \u2014
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nFourth Edition \u2014  January, 1937
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n(Thoroughly Revised by the Author) <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nRadhakanta is repeating the above formula in all your old
\nbooks which are really reprints. May I ask him not to do it?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nEvidently it is an untrue statement and cannot be allowed to
\ncontinue as it creates a false impression. But I think it will be necessary for me to write myself
\n\u2014  otherwise he may not listen.
\nOr you may write that I have asked you to inform him that I want this to be discontinued in future editions as it creates a
\nwrong impression \u2014  since in fact these are reprints and I have not revised or rewritten any part of them.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n23 April 1937 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nA System of National Education<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI readily give the permission you request to embody my System<\/i> of National Education
\n<\/i>as a chapter in the book projected by
\nyour Institute.1<\/font><\/sup> I have no time to go again through it, but I am
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

\n1 <\/span> <\/font> This letter was drafted by one of Sri Aurobindo’s secretaries and extensively revised<\/font><\/i>
\nby Sri Aurobindo. He wrote the last sentence in his own hand. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>77<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nasking my publishers, the Arya Publishing House of Calcutta, to send you a copy of the corrected and authorised edition. The
\nMadras edition is unauthorised and full of gross errors. The book is only a series of preliminary essays never worked out or
\ncompleted, but I shall be glad if, even as it is, you think it can be of some use.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nYogic Sadhan<\/i> <\/b>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nThe Yogi from the North (Uttara Yogi)2<\/font><\/sup> was my own name given
\nto me because of a prediction made long ago by a famous Tamil Yogi, that thirty years later (agreeing with the time of my arrival)
\na Yogi from the North would come as a fugitive to the South and practise there an integral Yoga (Poorna Yoga), and this would
\nbe one sign of the approaching liberty of India. He gave three utterances as the mark by which this Yogi could be recognised
\nand all these were found in the letters to my wife.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAs for Yogic Sadhan <\/i>it was not I exactly who wrote it,
\nthough it is true that I am not a Mayavadin. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\nYour name was not printed on the first two editions of Yogic<\/i> Sadhan<\/i>. But the third edition (brought out by A.P.H.) has your
\nname on it.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nNo need of name. The publication of the name in the third
\nedition of Yogic Sadhan <\/i>was unauthorised and is in fact a falsehood.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n6 June 1931 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\nAs to Yogic Sadhan<\/i>, it is not my <\/i>composition nor its contents the essence of my Yoga, whatever the publishers may persist in
\nsaying in their lying blurb in spite of my protests.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n4 May 1934 <\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\nThe Yogic Sadhan <\/i>has its use, but it is not one of the main or
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\n2 On the title page of the book <\/i>Yogic Sadhan (first published in 1911) the editor is<\/i>
\ngiven as “The Uttara Yogi”. \u2014  Ed.<\/i>
\n  
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>78<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nmost important books published among mine, nor is it my own writing.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n6 December 1935 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPassages from Yogic Sadhan<\/i><\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt is said in Yogic Sadhan<\/i>: “The Will when it begins to act, will be hampered by the Swabhava; therefore until you are able to
\nact on the Swabhava, you will not, should not bring your Will to bear upon life.”3<\/font><\/sup> I don’t understand what this means.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI don’t remember the passage. Possibly it means that till you can act on the real nature in you and use the true will and
\nconsciousness, you should go on trying for that, and not try to shape life with an imperfect will and imperfect instrument.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n18 September 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nIn Yogic Sadhan<\/i>, Sri Aurobindo has said: “You have so many milestones to pass; but you may pass them walking, in a carriage, in a railway train, but pass them you must” [p. 1378<\/i>]. What are the main milestones on the Shakti
\nmarga<\/i>?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nAnswer as under.4<\/font><\/sup><\/span><\/p>\n

\nThe Yogic Sadhan <\/i>is not Sri Aurobindo’s writing \u2014  only
\ncommunicated to him. The statement of the publishers that it contains the essence of Sri Aurobindo’s Yoga is an error propagated by them against his own protest. He cannot therefore say what particular milestones were meant. It is true as a general
\nrule, but can be partly cancelled by a concentrated movement.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI suppose there are different milestones on different paths?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nNecessarily.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nAgain, while discussing the law of resistance, Sri Aurobindo
\nsays: “They [old rules, habits or tendencies<\/i>] are supported by
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

\n3 Yogic Sadhan, in
\n<\/i>Record of Yoga, volume 11 of <\/i>T<\/span><\/font>HE<\/font>
\nC<\/font>OMPLETE<\/font> W<\/font>ORKS
\nOF<\/font> S<\/font>RI<\/font>
\nA<\/font>UROBINDO<\/font>, p. 1375.<\/font><\/i>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\n4 <\/span> <\/font> Written by Sri Aurobindo to his secretary, who replied to the correspondent.
\n\u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>79<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nan army of forces or spiritual beings who surround you and live upon your experiences and enjoyments” [p. 1377<\/i>]. What
\nare these “spiritual beings”?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThey are powers, forces or beings of the mental, vital or subtle
\nphysical worlds. There are some that simply want to utilise, there are others that want to possess, oppose or destroy and are
\nknown by us as “the hostile forces”. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n14 April 1936
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nWhat does the author of Yogic Sadhan <\/i>mean by saying “when
\nthe man himself becomes God” [p. 1378<\/i>]?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nHe means “when he becomes identified with the Divine”, or
\n“when he feels himself to be only a portion of the Divine and thinks and acts as such.”
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n24 September 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\n“It [the Manas<\/i>] catches thoughts on their way from the Buddhi to the Chitta, but in catching them it turns them into the stuff
\nof sensations . . .” [p. 1383<\/i>]. Has Manas any right to catch these thoughts? If so, what is the way to stop it so that it does
\nnot turn them into stuff of sensations?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe terms Manas etc. belong to the ordinary psychology applied
\nto the surface consciousness. In our Yoga we adopt a different classification based on the Yoga experience. What answers to
\nthis movement of the Manas there would be two separate things \u2014  a part of the physical mind communicating with the physical
\nvital. It receives from the physical senses and transmits to the Buddhi \u2014  i.e. to some part or other of the Thought-Mind; it
\nreceives back from the Buddhi and transmits idea and will to the organs of sensation and action. All that is indispensable in
\nthe ordinary action of the consciousness. But in the ordinary consciousness everything gets mixed up together and there is
\nno clear order or rule. In the Yoga one becomes aware of the different parts and their proper action, and puts each in its
\nplace and to its proper action under the control of the higher consciousness or else under the control of the Divine Power.
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n

\nAfterwards all gets surcharged with the spiritual consciousness and there is an automatic right perception and right action of the
\ndifferent parts because they are controlled entirely from above and do not falsify or resist or confuse its dictates.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n13 September 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nWhat is “the conceptual activity of the Manas” [p. 1385<\/i>] and how can one still it?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe real conceptual activity belongs rather to the Buddhi \u2014 that of the Manas is simply a rendering of perceptions and impressions into thought-forms. There is no necessity of specially stilling this function
\n\u2014  it comes best with a general stillness of
\nthe mind. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n12 September 1933
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nIt is written in Yogic Sadhan<\/i>: “Adharma is often necessary as
\na passage or preparation for passing from an undeveloped to a developed, a lower to a higher Dharma” [p. 1387<\/i>]. How is
\nthis?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI don’t remember the context; but I suppose he means that when
\none has to escape from the lower Dharma, one has often to break it so as to arrive at a larger one. E.g. social duties, paying
\ndebts, looking after family, helping to serve your country, etc. etc. The man who turns to the spiritual life, has to leave all that
\nbehind him often and he is reproached by lots of people for his Adharma. But if he does not do this Adharma, he is bound for
\never to the lower life \u2014  for there is always some duty there to be done
\n\u2014  and cannot take up the spiritual dharma or can do it
\nonly when he is old and his faculties impaired. That is a point in instance.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n14 September 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\n“I come next to Prana, the nervous or vital element in man which is centralised below the Manas and Chitta in the subtle body and connected with the navel in the Sthula Deha” [p. 1388<\/i>]. What is that subtle body? Also, I don’t understand
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n

\n

\nthe phrase “connected with the navel in the Sthula Deha”.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nHow is it you do not know these elementary things? Man has not a gross (sthūla<\/i>) visible body only, but a subtle body (sūksma<\/i>
\ndeha<\/i>) in which he goes out of the sthūla deha <\/i>at his death.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe navel is the vital center in the physical body
\n\u2014  but the
\nnative seat of the vital is in the vital sheath of the subtle body, which sheath it pervades, but for action through the gross body
\nits action is centred at the navel and below it. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n16 September 1933
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nThe Yoga and Its Objects, Yogic Sadhan<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nand The Synthesis of Yoga<\/i><\/span><\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nSri Aurobindo is the author of Yoga and Its Object<\/i>.5<\/font><\/sup> It must be by an error of the printers that his name has been omitted.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nBut the book represents an early stage of Sri Aurobindo’s sadhana and only a part of it is applicable to the Yoga as it has
\nat present taken form after a lapse of more than twenty years.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nThe Yogic Sadhan
\n<\/i>is not Sri Aurobindo’s own writing, but
\nwas published with a note by him, \u2014  that is all. The statement made to the contrary by the publishers was an error which they
\nhave been asked to correct. There is no necessity of following the methods suggested in that book unless one finds them suggestive
\nor helpful as a preliminary orientation of the consciousness \u2014 e.g. in the upbuilding of an inner Will etc.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nA book giving some hints about the Yoga compiled from letters to the sadhaks is about to be published,6<\/font><\/sup> but it cannot be
\nsaid to be complete. There is no complete book on the subject; for even The Synthesis of Yoga<\/i>, published in the
\nArya <\/i>but not
\nyet republished in book form, gives only the theory of different components of the Yoga (Knowledge, Works, Devotion) and
\nremains besides unfinished; it does not cover the more recent developments of the Yoga.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n28 October 1934 <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n5 When first published in 1921, <\/i>The Yoga and Its Objects
\nwas entitled <\/i>The Yoga and<\/span><\/font>
\nIts Object<\/font>. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\n6 The reference is to <\/i>Lights on Yoga<\/span><\/font>, first published in February 1935.
\n\u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n

<\/p>\n

\nThe Yoga and Its Objects<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nA friend says there are no books in Gujarati that he can give
\nto people who want to know about Sri Aurobindo’s yoga. So he suggested I translate
\nThe Yoga and Its Object<\/i>.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

\nThe Yoga and Its Object <\/span> <\/i>is not at all suitable for the purpose as it was written very long ago and expresses things that belong to
\nthe early stages of my sadhana, not the fullness of the integral and supramental sadhana.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n16 August 1934 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nPassages from The Yoga and Its Objects<\/i><\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“To those who demand from him, God gives what they demand. . . .”7<\/font><\/sup> Is this true?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt is not meant that He gives always whatever anyone demands \u2014  but that what they demand is all He gives
\n\u2014  they cannot get
\nanything else. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n9 January 1934
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\n“For behind the Sad Atman is the silence of the Asat which
\n the Buddhist Nihilists realised as the sunyam <\/i>and beyond that
\n silence is the Paratpara Purusha (puruso varenya ādityavarnas<\/i>
\n tamasah parastāt<\/i>)” [p. 76<\/i>].
\n <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe passage in Yoga and Its Objects <\/i>is written from the point of
\nview of the spiritualised Mind approaching the supreme Truth directly, without passing through the Supermind or disappearing
\ninto it. The Mind spiritualises itself by shedding all its own activities and formations and reducing everything to a pure Existence,
\nSad Atman, from which all things and activities proceed and which supports everything. When it wants to go still beyond, it
\nnegates yet farther and arrives at an Asat, which is the negation of all this existence and yet Something inconceivable to mind,
\nspeech or defining experience. It is the silent Unknowable, the Turiya or featureless and relationless Absolute of the monistic
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

\n7 Sri Aurobindo, <\/i>The Yoga and Its Objects, in <\/i>Essays in Philosophy and Yoga<\/span><\/font>, volume<\/font><\/i>
\n13 of <\/font> <\/i>T<\/font>HE<\/font> C<\/font>OMPLETE<\/font> W<\/font>ORKS OF<\/font> S<\/font>RI<\/font>
\nA<\/font>UROBINDO<\/font>, p. 74.<\/font><\/i>
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>83<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nVedantins, the Sunyam of the nihilistic Buddhists, the Tao or omnipresent and transcendent Nihil of the Chinese, the indefinable and ineffable Permanent of the Mahayana. Many Christian mystics also speak of the necessity of a complete ignorance in
\norder to get the supreme experience and speak too of the Divine Darkness \u2014  they mean the shedding of all mental knowledge,
\nmaking a blank of the mind and engulfing it in the Unmanifest, \u2014  the param avyaktam<\/i>. All this is the mind’s way of approaching the Supreme \u2014  for beyond the avyakta<\/i>,
\ntamasah parastāt<\/i>, is the Supreme, the Purushottama of the Gita, the Para Purusha of the Upanishads. It is
\nāditya-varna <\/i>in contrast to the darkness of
\n the Unmanifest; it is a metaphor, but not a mere metaphor, for
\n it is a symbol also, a symbol visually seen by the sūksma drsti<\/i>,
\n the subtle vision, and not merely a symbol, but, as one might
\nsay, a fact of spiritual experience. The sun in the Yoga is the symbol of the supermind and the supermind is the first power of
\nthe Supreme which one meets across the border where the experience of spiritualised mind ceases and the unmodified divine
\n Consciousness begins the domain of the supreme nature, parā<\/i>
\nprakrti<\/i>. It is that Light of which the Vedic mystics got a glimpse and it is the opposite of the intervening darkness of the Christian
\n mystics \u2014  for the supermind is all light and no darkness. To the
\n mind the Supreme is avyaktāt param avyaktam<\/i>, but if we follow
\nthe line leading to the supermind, it is an increasing affirmation rather than an increasing negation through which we move.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nLight is always seen in Yoga with the inner eye and even with the outer eye, but there are many lights; all are not and all
\n do not come from the param jyotih<\/i>.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n18 August 1932
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\n“Matter itself, you will one day realise, is not material, it is
\nnot substance but form of consciousness, guna<\/i>, the result of quality of being perceived by sense-knowledge” [p. 77<\/i>].
\n <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThere is no need to put “the” before “quality”
\n\u2014  in English that
\nwould alter the sense. Matter is not regarded in this passage as a quality of being perceived by sense; I don’t think that would
\nhave any meaning. It is regarded as a result of a certain power  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n

\nand action of consciousness which presents forms of itself to sense perception and it is this quality of sense-perceivedness,
\nso to speak, that gives them the appearance of Matter, i.e. of a certain kind of substantiality inherent in themselves
\n\u2014  but in
\nfact they are not self-existent substantial objects but forms of consciousness. The point is that there is no such thing as the
\nself-existent Matter posited by nineteenth-century Science.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“chitta” and “chetas”
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nChitta is ordinarily used for the mental consciousness in general, thought, feeling, etc. taken together with a stress now on one
\n side or another, sometimes on the feelings as in citta-pramāthī<\/i>,
\nsometimes on the thought-mind \u2014  that is why I translated it [on<\/i> p. 75<\/i>] “heart and mind” in its wider sense. Chetas can be used
\nin the same way, but it has a different shade of sense, properly speaking, and can include also the movements of the soul, covering the whole consciousness even; [on p. 82<\/i>] I take it in its most general sense. The translation is not meant to be literal but to render the thought in the line in its fullness.
\nAdhyātmacetasā<\/i> practically amounts to what in English we would describe as a
\nspiritual consciousness. <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“throw our arms around” [p. 78<\/i>]
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt is a figure meaning to comprehend in our consciousness with love and Ananda.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n“the nature” [p. 81, lines 29, 31, 33<\/i>] <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nNature here means the parts of Prakriti in the human being: as
\nit is the condition of the Prakriti that changes with shifting of the gunas and it is this condition of the Prakriti that will become
\nillumined by the transformation of sattva <\/i>into jyotih<\/i>.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“lokasangrahārthāya<\/i>” [p. 85<\/i>] \u2014  Does this mean the present
\n order?
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>85<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nNo. It is in a more general sense the maintenance of the world order which may be a developing, not necessarily a stationary
\none, an order spiritual, moral etc. and not merely a social order. <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“Maya means nothing more than the freedom of Brahman
\nfrom the circumstances through which he expresses himself” [p. 89<\/i>].
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe sentence is rather loose in expression. It does not mean that Maya is Brahman’s freedom, but “the doctrine of Maya
\nsimply comes to this that Brahman is free from the circumstances through which he expresses himself.” This limited play is not He,
\nfor He is illimitable; it is only a conditioned (partial) manifestation, but He is not bound by the conditions (circumstances) as
\nthe play is bound. The world is a figure of something of Himself which he has put forth into it, but He is more than that figure.
\nThe world is not unreal or illusory, but our present seeing or consciousness of it is ignorant, and therefore the world
\nas seen<\/i>
\nby us <\/i>can be described as an illusion. So far the Maya idea is true. But if we see the world as it really is, a partial and developing
\nmanifestation of Brahman, then it can no longer be described as an illusion, but rather as a Lila. He is still more than his Lila, but
\nHe is in it and it is in Him; it is not an illusion. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n16 October 1931
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nThe Arya<\/i><\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe Arya<\/i>8<\/font><\/sup> is a work of spiritual philosophy founded on personal realisation; it is obviously not meant for minds that do not think out spiritual things in all their aspects.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\nFor understanding Arya <\/i>one must have a sufficiently trained
\nand developed intellect or else a basis of experience along with a capacity of mentalising experience.
\nX <\/i>as yet has neither. It is
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

\n8 The monthly journal (1914 \u00ad 1921) in which <\/i>The Life Divine, <\/i>The Synthesis of Yoga<\/span><\/font>
\nand many other works by Sri Aurobindo first appeared. Before these works were<\/font><\/i>
\npublished as separate books, they were referred to collectively as “the Arya”.
\n\u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n

\nsufficient if he can get accustomed to forming general ideas and
\nthinking coherently about them. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n22 September 1933
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nWhat is meant by: 1. the psychic nature, 2. spiritual nature, 3.
\nsupramental nature, 4. divine nature?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nTo answer these questions it would be necessary to write a volume. I have written some letters about the psychic being and the self \u2014  you can get hold of those and read them.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nSupramental nature can only be understood if one understands what supermind is and that is not altogether possible for
\nmind so long as it does not open into the higher planes. So far as a mental account can be given, I have done it in the
\nArya<\/i>.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nDivine Nature is the nature of the divine Consciousness, Truth, Peace, Light, Purity, Knowledge, Power, Ananda on
\nwhichever plane it manifests. Supermind is one plane of the Divine Nature. The Divine is Sachchidananda.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n18 October 1938 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tI do not find it easy to answer the few brief and casual sentences in Angus’ letter,
\n\u2014  precisely because they are so brief and
\ncasual.9<\/font><\/sup> Not knowing him or the turns of his mind, I do not exactly seize what is behind this passage in his letter. It would
\nbe easier to reply if I had some notion of the kind of thought or experience on which he takes his stand when he dismisses
\nso cavalierly the statement of spiritual truth put forward in the Arya<\/i>. As it is, I am obliged to answer to what
\nmay <\/i>be behind
\nhis sentences and, as there is much that possibly stands behind them, the reply becomes long and elaborate and is in danger
\nof seeming long and discursive. I could of course answer easily myself by a few brief and trenchant sentences of the same calibre,
\nbut in that kind of discussion there is no profit.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n9 <\/font>
\n\t\t\tThe paragraphs that follow are from a letter-draft that was not revised or sent in this<\/font><\/i>
\nform to the correspondent. \u2014  Ed.<\/i>   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

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

\n

\n

\n

\nLet me say that he makes an initial mistake \u2014  quite natural for him, since he has not read the
\nArya<\/i>, \u2014  when he describes
\nthe extract sent to him as a “theological fragment”. I must insist that there is no theology in the
\nArya<\/i>. Nothing there is written
\nto support or to develop any kind of religious belief or dogma or to confirm or enunciate the credo of any old or new religion.
\nNo less does he miss the mark when he describes as a scholastic distinction the substance of the passage. The teaching there is not
\ntaken from books, nor, although put in philosophic language, is it based upon abstract thought or any formal logic. It expresses a
\nfundamental spiritual experience, dynamic for the growth of the being, confirmed and enlarged and filled with detail by almost
\nthirty years of continuous sadhana, and, as such, it cannot be seriously challenged or invalidated by mere intellectual question
\nor reasoning, but, if at all, then only by a greater and wider spiritual experience. Moreover, it coincides (not in expression,
\nit may be, but in substance) with the experience of hundreds of spiritual seekers in many paths and in all parts of the world since
\nthe days of the Upanishads \u2014  and of Plotinus and the Gnostics and Sufis
\n\u2014  to the present time. It is hardly admissible then to
\nput it aside as the thought of a tyro or beginner in spiritual knowledge making his first clumsy potshots at a solution of the
\ncrossword enigma of the universe. That description seems to show that he has missed the point of the passage altogether and
\nthat also makes it difficult to reply; for where there is no meeting point of minds, discussion is likely to be sterile.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nI was a little surprised at first by this entire lack of understanding, shown still more in his cavil at the two Divines
\n\u2014  for I
\nhad somehow got the impression that Angus was a Christian and the recognition of “two Divines”
\n\u2014  the Divine Transcendent
\nand the Divine Immanent \u2014  is, I have read, perfectly familiar to Christian ideas and to Christian experience. The words themselves in fact \u2014  transcendent and cosmic \u2014  are taken from the West. I do not know that there is anything exactly corresponding
\nto them in the language of Indian spiritual thinking, although the experiences on which the distinction rests are quite familiar. On
\nanother side, Christianity insists not only on a double but a triple  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>88<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tDivine. It even strikes me that this triple Godhead or Trinity is not very far off at bottom from my trinity of the individual, cosmic and transcendent Divine \u2014  as far at least as one can judge who has not himself followed the Christian discipline. Christ
\nwhether as the human Incarnation or the Christos in men or the Godhead proceeding from the Father, seems to me to be quite
\nmy individual Divine. The Father has very much the appearance of the One who overstands and is immanent in the cosmos. And
\nalthough this is more obscure, yet if one can be guided by the indications in the Scripture, the Holy Ghost looks very much
\nlike a rather mysterious and inexpressible Transcendence and its descent very much like what I would call the descent of Light,
\nPurity, Peace \u2014  that passeth all understanding \u2014  or Power of the supramental Spirit. In any case these Christian and Western
\nideas show surely that my affirmation of a double or a triple Divine is not anything new and ought not to be found startling
\nor upsetting and I do not see why it should be treated as (in itself) obscure and unintelligible.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAgain, are these or similar distinctions very positively made in the Christian, Sufi or other teachings mere theoretical abstractions, scholastic distinctions, theological cobwebs, or metaphysical puzzles? I had always supposed that they corresponded
\nto very living, very dynamic, almost \u2014  for the paths to which they relate
\n\u2014  indispensable experiences. No doubt, for those
\nwho follow other ways or no way at all or for those who have not yet had the illuminating and vivifying experience, they may
\nseem at first a little difficult or unseizable. But that is true of most spiritual truth
\n\u2014  and not of spiritual truth alone. There are many
\nvery highly intelligent and cultured people to whom a scientific explanation of even so patent and common a fact as electricity
\nand electric light (this is a reminiscence of an article by Y. Y. in the New Statesman and Nation<\/i>) seems equally difficult to seize
\nby the mind or to fix either in the memory or the intelligence. And yet the distinction between positive and negative electricity, both necessary for the existence of the light, \u2014  like that of the passive and active Brahman (another scholastic distinction?)
\nboth necessary for the existence of the universe, \u2014  cannot be  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>89<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\ndismissed for that reason as something academic or scholastic, but is a very pertinent statement of things quite dynamic and
\nreal. No doubt the unscientific man does not and perhaps need not trouble about these things and can be content to enjoy the
\nelectric light (when he is allowed to do so by the grace of the Pondicherry Municipality), without enquiring into the play of
\nthe forces behind it: but for the seeker after scientific truth or for the practical electrician it is a different matter. Now these
\ndistinctions in the spiritual field are a parallel case; they seem theoretical or abstract only so long as experience has not made
\nthem concrete, but once experienced they become living stuff of the consciousness and, after a certain stage, even the basis of
\naction and growth in the spiritual life.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nHere I am driven to a rather lengthy digression from the
\nmain theme \u2014  for I am met by Angus’ rather baffling appeal to Whitham’s History of Science. What has Whitham or Science
\nto do with spiritual truth or spiritual experience? I can only suppose that he condemns all intrusion of anything like metaphysical thought into the spiritual field \u2014  a position excessive but not altogether untenable
\n\u2014  and even perhaps proposes to
\nbring the scientific method and the scientific mentality into spiritual experience as the sole true way of arriving at or judging
\nthe truth of things. I should like to make my view clear as to that point, because here much confusion has been created about
\nit, and more is possible. And the first thing I would say is that if metaphysics has no right to intervene in spiritual experience,
\nneither has Science. There are here three different domains of knowledge and experience each with its own instrumentation,
\nits own way of approach and seeing, suited for its own task, but not to be imposed or substituted in these other fields of
\nknowledge, \u2014  at least unless and until they meet by some kind of supreme reconciling transmutation in something that is at the
\nsource of all knowledge. For knowledge may be essentially one, but like the one Divine, it manifests differently in different fields
\nof its play and to abolish their distinctions is not the way to arrive at true understanding of experience.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nScience deals effectively with phenomenon and process and  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>90<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tthe apparent play of forces which determine the process. It cannot deal even intellectually in any adequate way with ultimate
\ntruths, that is the province of the higher, less external mind \u2014 represented up till now by metaphysics, though metaphysics is
\nnot its only possible power. If Science tries to fix metaphysical truth by forcing on this domain its own generalisations in the
\nphysical field, as people have been doing for almost the last century, it makes a mess of thought by illegitimately extended
\nconclusions and has in the end to retire from this usurpation as it is now beginning to retire. Its discoveries may be used by
\nphilosophy, but on the grounds proper to philosophy and not on the grounds proper to Science. The philosopher must judge the
\nscientific conceptions of relativity or discontinuity or space-time, for instance, by his own processes and standards of evidence. So
\ntoo, Science has no instrumentation or process of knowledge which can enable it to discover spiritual truth or to judge or
\ndetermine the results of spiritual experience. There is a field of knowledge of process in the spiritual and the occult domain, in
\nthe discovery of a world of inner forces and their way of action and even of their objective dynamisation in the mind and life and
\nthe functioning of the body. But the mathematical exactitudes and rigid formulas of physical Science do not apply here and the
\nmentality created by them would hamper spiritual experience. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nThe Life Divine<\/b><\/span><\/i> <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThere is possible a realistic as well as an illusionist Adwaita. The philosophy of
\nThe Life Divine <\/i>is such a realistic Adwaita.
\nThe world is a manifestation of the Real and therefore is itself real. The reality is the infinite and eternal Divine, infinite and
\neternal Being, Consciousness-Force and Bliss. This Divine by his power has created the world or rather manifested it in his own
\ninfinite Being. But here in the material world or at its basis he has hidden himself in what seem to be his opposites, Non-Being,
\nInconscience and Insentience. This is what we nowadays call the Inconscient which seems to have created the material universe
\nby its inconscient Energy; but this is only an appearance, for we   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>91<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nfind in the end that all the dispositions of the world can only have been arranged by the working of a supreme secret intelligence.
\nThe Being which is hidden in what seems to be an inconscient void emerges in the world first in Matter, then in Life, then
\nin Mind and finally as the Spirit. The apparently inconscient Energy which creates is in fact the Consciousness-Force of the
\nDivine and its aspect of consciousness, secret in Matter, begins to emerge in Life, finds something more of itself in Mind and
\nfinds its true self in a spiritual consciousness and finally a supramental consciousness through which we become aware of the
\nReality, enter into it and unite ourselves with it. This is what we call evolution which is an evolution of consciousness and an
\nevolution of the Spirit in things and only outwardly an evolution of species. Thus also, the delight of existence emerges from the
\noriginal insentience first in the contrary forms of pleasure and pain and then has to find itself in the bliss of the Spirit or as it is
\ncalled in the Upanishads, the bliss of the Brahman. That is the central idea in the explanation of the universe put forward in
\nThe Life Divine<\/i>. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nA Passage from The Life Divine<\/i><\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“This opens the way for other explanations which make Consciousness the creator of this world out of an apparent original
\nInconscience. . . . All these things we see around us are then the thoughts of an extra-cosmic Divinity, a Being with an
\nomnipotent and omniscient Mind and Will. . . .”10<\/font><\/sup>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe phrase “extra-cosmic Divinity” is used here in
\nThe Life<\/i>
\nDivine <\/i>because in that stage of the reasoning nothing more emerged as positively established. In fact Sri Aurobindo regards
\nthe Divinity, the Reality behind and in the universe as at once supracosmic or transcendent of cosmos and immanent in it, and
\nall, constituting the universe by its being, consciousness and force and by that too bringing out from the Inconscient the evolution and developing its stages inevitably according to a truth
\n\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n10 Sri Aurobindo,
\n<\/i>The Life Divine, volume 21 of <\/i>T<\/span><\/font>HE <\/font>
\n\t\t\tC<\/font>OMPLETE <\/font>
\n\t\t\tW<\/font>ORKS OF <\/font>S<\/font>RI
\n\t\t\t<\/font>A<\/font>UROBINDO<\/font>, p. 316.<\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>92<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tin things which is its element of Necessity and the possibilities of the Consciousness and Force (seen by the human mind as
\nChance) through which the truth works itself out. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nThe Synthesis of Yoga<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\nThe Synthesis of Yoga <\/i>is being revised and largely rewritten for publication; so I don’t think it is possible to send out copies of
\nit like this. For the time the revision has been stopped, because I have not a moment free, but I hope to resume it shortly; the
\npublishers are in fact pressing for the book. It was why I wrote to X <\/i>that it could not be sent outside.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nDecember 1932 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n 
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\nX <\/span> <\/i>would like to see the six revised chapters of The Synthesis<\/i>
\nof Yoga<\/i>, as he has translated the unrevised ones. May I send
\nhim a copy?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThese six chapters cannot be translated and published separately
\nor along with the other unrevised chapters. It can only be done when the revision of the whole book is complete.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n3 September 1936 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tWhat about the publication of the Synthesis<\/i>? They are all asking me about it. So many are eager that it should see the
\nlight, fed up as we all are with the analysis of the universe through science of mind and ignorance of life, what?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI hope you are not referring to the whole colossal mass of the Synthesis<\/i>,
\n\u2014  though that too
\nmay <\/i>be ready for publication before the next world war (?) or after the beginning of the Satya Yuga (new World Order?). If you mean the Yoga of Works, I
\nam writing or trying to write four or five additional chapters for it. I hope they will be ready in a reasonable time,
\n\u2014  but my
\ndaily time is short and chapters are long. In the absence of exact prophetic power, that is all I can say.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n2 March 1944  
\n94<\/i> <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>93<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tPassages from The Synthesis of Yoga<\/i><\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“Often, we see this desire of personal salvation overcome by
\nanother attraction which also belongs to the higher turn of our nature and which indicates the essential character of the action
\nthe liberated soul must pursue. . . . It is that which inspires a remarkable passage in a letter of Swami Vivekananda. `I have
\nlost all wish for my salvation,’ wrote the great Vedantin, `may I be born again and again and suffer thousands of miseries
\nso that I may worship the only God that exists, the only God I believe in, the sum-total of all souls,
\n\u2014  and above all, my
\nGod the wicked, my God the miserable, my God the poor of all races, of all species is the special object of my worship.
\nHe who is the high and low, the saint and the sinner, the god and the worm, Him worship, the visible, the knowable, the
\nreal, the omnipresent; break all other idols. In whom there is neither past life nor future birth, nor death nor going nor
\ncoming, in whom we always have been and always will be one, Him worship; break all other idols.’
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t“The last two sentences contain indeed the whole gist of the matter. . . .”11<\/font><\/sup>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nAs to the extract about Vivekananda, the point I make there does not seem to me humanitarian. You will see that I emphasise there
\nthe last sentences of the passage quoted from Vivekananda, not the words about God the poor and sinner and criminal. The
\n\t\t\t point is about the Divine in the World, the All, sarva-bhūtāni<\/i>
\nof the Gita. That is not merely humanity, still less only the poor or the wicked; surely even the rich or the good are part of the
\nAll and those also who are neither good nor bad nor rich nor poor. Nor is there any question (I mean in my own remarks) of
\n\t\t\t philanthropic service; so neither daridra <\/i>nor sevā <\/i>is the point.
\nI had formerly not the humanitarian but the humanity view \u2014 and something of it may have stuck to my expressions in the
\nArya. <\/i>But I had already altered my viewpoint from the “Our Yoga for the sake of humanity” to “Our Yoga for the sake of
\nthe Divine”. The Divine includes not only the supracosmic but
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

\n11 Sri Aurobindo,
\n<\/i>The Synthesis of Yoga, volume 23 of <\/i>T<\/span><\/font>HE <\/font>
\n\t\t\tC<\/font>OMPLETE <\/font>W<\/font>ORKS OF
\n\t\t\t<\/font>S<\/font>RI <\/font>
\n\t\t\tA<\/font>UROBINDO<\/font>, pp. 269 \u00ad 70.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>94<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tthe cosmic and the individual \u2014  not only Nirvana or the Beyond but Life and the All. It is that I stress everywhere. But I shall keep
\nthe extracts for a day or two and see what there is, if anything, that smacks too much of a too narrow humanistic standpoint. I
\nstop here for today. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n29 December 1934
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n“This concentration proceeds by the Idea . . . ; for it is through
\nthe Idea that the mental being rises beyond all expression to that which is expressed, to that of which the Idea itself is only
\nthe instrument. By concentration upon the Idea the mental existence which at present we are breaks open the barrier of
\nour mentality and arrives at the state of consciousness, the state of being, the state of power of conscious-being and bliss
\nof conscious-being to which the Idea corresponds and of which it is the symbol, movement and rhythm” [p. 321<\/i>].
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI have not the original chapter before me just now; but from the sentences quoted it seems to be the essential mental Idea. As for
\ninstance in the method of Vedantic knowledge one concentrates on the idea of Brahman omnipresent
\n\u2014  one looks at a tree or
\nother surrounding objects with the idea that Brahman is there and the tree or object is only a form. After a time if the concentration is of the right kind, one begins to become aware of a presence, an existence, the physical tree form becomes a shell
\nand that presence or existence is felt to be the only reality. The idea then drops, it is a direct vision of the thing that takes its
\nplace \u2014  there is no longer any necessity of concentrating on the . It should be
\nidea, one sees with a deeper consciousness, स पश्यति noted that this concentration on the idea is not mere thinking,
\nमननम्\u2014  it is an inner dwelling on the essence of the Idea.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n27 August 1933
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n” . . . we must not only cut asunder the snare of the mind and
\nthe senses, but flee also beyond the snare of the thinker, the snare of the theologian and the church-builder, the meshes of
\nthe Word and the bondage of the Idea” [p. 330<\/i>]. Would you explain this to me?
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>95<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nIt would take too long. You can get it explained to you by someone, it is not difficult. The central idea is that the Divine
\nTruth is greater than any religion or creed or scripture or idea or philosophy
\n\u2014  so you must not tie yourself to any of these
\nthings. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n18 September 1933
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n“Therefore the psychic life-energy presents itself to our experience as a sort of desire-mind, which we have to conquer if we mean to get back to the true self” [p. 350<\/i>].
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt means the life-energy which comes from within and is in consonance with the psychic being
\n\u2014  it is the energy of the true
\nvital being, but in the ordinary ignorant vital it is deformed into desire. You have to quiet and purify the vital and let the true
\nvital emerge. Or you have to bring the psychic in front, and the psychic will purify and psychicise the vital and then you will
\nhave the true vital energy. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n11 September 1933
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nThe Synthesis of Yoga, The Mother<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\nand Lights on Yoga<\/i><\/span><\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nDoes the method of sadhana as given in The Synthesis of Yoga<\/i> apply now in our practice? What one finds when one reads
\nthe Synthesis <\/i>seems to differ a great deal from what one finds in The Mother
\n<\/i>and Lights on Yoga<\/i>.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

\nThe Synthesis of Yoga <\/span> <\/i>was not meant to give a method for all to follow. Each side of the Yoga was dealt with separately with all
\nits possibilities, and an indication as to how they meet so that one starting from knowledge could realise karma and bhakti also
\nand so with each path. It was intended when the Self-Perfection12<\/font><\/sup> was finished, to suggest a way in which all could be combined,
\nbut this was never written. The Mother <\/i>and the Lights <\/i>were not intended to be a systematic treatment of the sadhana as a whole;
\nthey only touch on various elements in it. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n18 May 1936
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n12 “The Yoga of Self-Perfection”, Part IV of <\/i>The Synthesis of Yoga<\/span><\/font>. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>96<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nA Passage from “Rebirth and Karma”<\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIn “Rebirth and Karma”,13<\/font><\/sup> I find the following: “We have in
\nfact an immutable Self, a real Person, lord of this ever-changing personality which, again, assumes ever-changing bodies, but
\nthe real Self knows itself always as above the mutation, watches and enjoys it, but is not involved in it. Through what
\ndoes it enjoy the changes and feel them to be its own, even while knowing itself to be unaffected by them? . . . This more
\nessential form is or seems to be in man the mental being or mental person which the Upanishads speak of as the mental
\nleader of the life and body, manomayah pran<\/font>a-śarīra-netā<\/i>.”14<\/font><\/sup> Would not the mental being be part of the human personality
\n\u2014  the mental, nervous and physical composite?
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe mental being spoken of by the Upanishad is not part of
\nthe mental nervous physical composite \u2014  it is the manomayah<\/i>
\npurus<\/font>ah<\/font> prana-śarīra-netā<\/i>, the mental being leader of the life
\nand body. It could not be so described if it were part of the composite. Nor can the composite or part of it be the Purusha,
\n\u2014 for the composite is composed of Prakriti. It is described as manomaya
\n<\/i>by the Upanishad because the psychic being is
\nbehind the veil and man being the mental being in the life and body lives in his mind and not in his psychic, so to him the
\nmanomaya purusa <\/i>is the leader of the life and body, \u2014  of the psychic behind supporting the whole he is not aware or dimly
\n\t\t\t aware in his best moments. The psychic is represented in man
\nby the Prime Minister, the manomaya<\/i>, itself being a mild constitutional king; it is the
\nmanomaya <\/i>to whom Prakriti refers for
\nassent to her actions. But still the statement of the Upanishad gives only the apparent truth of the matter, valid for man and
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\n13 The sixteen essays published since 1952 as <\/i>The Problem of Rebirth
\n\t\t\t<\/font> originally appeared in the monthly review <\/font><\/i>Arya
\n<\/font> between 1915 and 1921. The first twelve, which<\/font><\/i>
\nwere published in 1915 and 1919, were sometimes referred to as “Rebirth and Karma”.<\/font><\/i>
\nThis informal title was used later as the subtitle of Section I of
\n<\/font> <\/i>The Problem of Rebirth<\/font>.<\/font><\/i>
\n(In the United States, it also was used as the title of the entire book.)
\n\t\t\t<\/font> <\/i>The Problem of<\/font> Rebirth
\nis reproduced in <\/i>Essays in Philosophy and Yoga, volume 13 of <\/i>T<\/font>HE
\n\t\t\t<\/font>C<\/font>OMPLETE <\/font>
\n\t\t\tW<\/font>ORKS OF <\/font>S<\/font>RI
\n\t\t\t<\/font>A<\/font>UROBINDO<\/font>, pp. 255 \u00ad 434. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n14 Sri Aurobindo, <\/i>Essays in Philosophy and Yoga<\/span><\/font>, p. 275.<\/font><\/i>
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>97<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nthe human stage only \u2014  for in the animal it would be rather the
\nprānamaya purusa <\/i>that is the netā<\/i>, leader of mind and body.
\n\t\t\t It is one reason why I have not yet allowed the publication of
\n“Rebirth and Karma” because this had to be corrected and the deeper truth put in its place. I had intended to do it later on, but
\nhad not time to finish the remaining articles. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n24 December 1935
\n\t\t\t<\/font>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n“The Lines of Karma”<\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nRegarding “The Lines of Karma”,15<\/font><\/sup> we beg to draw your attention to the matter and ask what should be done to publish it. If you kindly manage to write the first part of the book,
\nthen we can bring it out.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe book is unfinished \u2014  that is the main obstacle to its publication. However I will look at the copy Nolini has sent up and see.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n5 September 1935 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nThe Ideal of Human Unity<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nWith regard to The Ideal of Human Unity<\/i>, the book has to be revised before it is ready for reprinting. Sri Aurobindo will take
\nup the work when he is able to make some time for it.16<\/font><\/sup>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n19 April 1949
\n\t\t\t<\/font>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nTranslations of Vedic Hymns<\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nLast year I got from X <\/i>some translations of the Rig-Vedic
\nhymns done by the Master after his retirement. I have just retyped them for myself and
\nY <\/i>wanted my old copy.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThese translations are provisional, not final \u2014  so I should not like them to be freely copied and seen by all; but I have no
\nobjection to your keeping a copy. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n3 December 1936
\n\t\t\t<\/font>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n15 A group of four essays that originally appeared in the <\/i>Arya
\n\t\t\t<\/font> in 1920 and 1921. They<\/font><\/i>
\nnow comprise Section II of <\/font> <\/i>The Problem of Rebirth<\/font>. Here the reference may be to a<\/font><\/i>
\nproposed book including all of Sri Aurobindo’s essays on rebirth and karma, which<\/font><\/i>
\neventually came out as <\/font> <\/i>The Problem of Rebirth<\/font>. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n16 <\/span> <\/font> Written by Sri Aurobindo to his secretary, who replied to the enquirer. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>98<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\tGlossary of Vedic Words<\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI see that this is a glossary of Vedic words with their current
\nmeanings. I have no objection to that. But I do not want any publication of Vedic interpretations or significances founded upon
\nmy translations, so long as my work on the Veda is incomplete and has not taken its final form.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n5 March 1929 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nEssays on the Gita<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nMy brother is thinking of starting a bookselling and publishing business and has asked for one or two books of Sri Aurobindo
\nfor publication. May I prepare for him an edition of the Gita with only the text and Sri Aurobindo’s translation compiled
\nfrom the Essays on the Gita<\/i>?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe casual renderings in the Essays <\/i>cannot be published as my
\ntranslation, \u2014  they were not intended for the purpose. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n20 January 1932
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nBefore coming here, I found some justification for my anger
\nfrom your Essays on the Gita <\/i>\u2014  though I must say that the tendency to violence was already there. Will there be any place
\nfor some sort of violence in the new creation?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe Essays on the Gita <\/i>explain the ordinary karmayoga as developed in the Gita, in which the work done is the ordinary work of human life with only an inward change. There too
\nthe violence to be used is not a personal violence done from egoistic motives, but part of the ordered system of social life.
\nNothing can spiritually justify individual violence done in anger or passion or from any vital motive. In our yoga our object is to
\nrise higher than the ordinary life of man and in it violence has to be left aside altogether.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n12 August 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tI have compiled a translation of most of the slokas of the Gita, using your interpretation of them in the
\nEssays on the Gita<\/i>.
\nI request you to give me permission to publish the book as it   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>99<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\twill help the public to understand the Gita from your point of view.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe permission cannot be given \u2014  the translations in the Essays<\/i> are more explanatory than textually precise or cast in a literary
\nstyle \u2014  I do not want that to go out as my translation of the Gita.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n1 August 1934 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tI read your Essays on the Gita <\/i>twice or thrice before. But when I started reading it again, I found that there were many ideas
\nin it which I had missed before. I think if I read it over and over again I would find newer and newer ideas each time.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThat is a common experience \u2014  most books with any profundity of knowledge in them have that effect. Almost all spiritual
\nproblems have been briefly but deeply dealt with in the Gita and I have tried to bring out all that fully in the
\nEssays<\/i>.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n1 November 1936 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tThe Essays on the Gita <\/i>is the most important of the published books.17<\/font><\/sup> If it is to be translated in Telugu it should be assured
\nthat it is an accurate translation in good style. A translation from a translation does not usually secure that object.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nPassages from Essays on the Gita<\/i><\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“But the Gita insists that the nature of the action does matter. . . .”18<\/font><\/sup> This perplexes me. Sri Aurobindo wrote to me in reply to my question about office work: “The nature of the
\nwork does not matter.”
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThat is quite a different question from the choice referred to in
\nthe passage of the Essays<\/i>.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n17 At the time this letter was written,
\n<\/i>Essays on the Gita <\/span> <\/font> was the only full-length work<\/font><\/i>
\nby Sri Aurobindo that was available in the form of a book. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n18 Sri Aurobindo,
\n<\/i>Essays on the Gita, volume 19 of <\/i>T<\/span><\/font>HE <\/font>
\n\t\t\tC<\/font>OMPLETE <\/font>
\n\t\t\tW<\/font>ORKS OF <\/font>S<\/font>RI<\/font>
\n\t\t\tA<\/font>UROBINDO<\/font>, p. 131.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>100<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nWhat is written must be read and interpreted according to the context. In the Gita, the question is between two kinds of
\naction \u2014  the quietistic life of the Sannyasin with the minimum of action and the dynamic life offered in all its actions whatever
\nthey be as a sacrifice to the Divine. It might be said that Arjuna might do either, it does not matter
\n\u2014  but the Gita thinks it does
\nmatter: that Arjuna being called to a life of dynamic action must follow that and not the quietistic life.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n3 December 1934 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tIn Essays on the Gita <\/i>Sri Aurobindo renders the term “Kshara Purusha” as “the universal Soul” [p. 436<\/i>]. How can the
\n“Kshara” be the universal Soul, if the one is mutable and the other immutable?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThis is not my interpretation, it is what the Gita itself plainly says. It explains Kshara as “all existences” and since Purusha
\nis the being which observes and experiences all the movements of Nature, (which is what is meant here by soul) it cannot be
\nanything else than the universal Soul identifying itself with all existences in Nature.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nKindly indicate the relation of the universal Soul to the Divine.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe word
\nक्षर [ksara<\/i>] means really mobile as opposed to the immobile immutable Akshara. The Kshara Purusha is that which
\n\t\t\t follows the movement of the universe and seems to move and
\nchange, because it identifies itself while the Akshara is not identified and stands apart. The Upanishad makes the same distinction
\nof the two Souls and Prakriti.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI used to take ksetra <\/i>and ksara purusa
\n<\/i>to mean the lower nature.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nNature is Prakriti \u2014  Purusha cannot be Prakriti. Neither can Purusha be
\nksetra<\/i>, the field, because Purusha by its very definition is that which is behind Prakriti and its field and observes it
\n\u2014  it is the Being not the nature. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n28 November 1934
\n  <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>101<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

\nThe Future Poetry<\/b><\/span><\/i> <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI will write later about the University idea. But it is not possible,
\nI think, to give The Future Poetry <\/i>as a whole. If it is to be published, it should be in England and the time is not ready for
\nthat. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n26 January 1932
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nThere is a review of the Oxford Book of Seventeenth Century<\/i>
\nVerse <\/i>in the New Statesman<\/i>. It might be noted as worth getting when you have the money
\n\u2014  unless you have already something
\nof the kind. Have you Donne and Blake in the Library? \u2014  not that I want them just now, but I shall some day when I revise
\nThe Future Poetry<\/i>. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nJanuary 1934
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nThe Mother<\/b><\/span><\/i> <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI sent you a review of The Mother <\/i>a few days ago. Have you
\nseen it?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYes. I think it will give the reader the impression that The Mother<\/i>
\nis a philosophical or practical exposition of Yoga \u2014  while its atmosphere is really not that at all.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n1 March 1937 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nThe Mother <\/b> <\/span> <\/i>as a Mantra<\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nSome mornings I recite The Mother <\/i>silently with an aspiration to know what it contains. But sometimes it seems to me that
\nthis is intellectual and so not part of our discipline. Should I continue with this recitation?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYes, if you find that it helps you.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI also recite the Gita with the view to understanding it but
\nalong the lines of Essays on the Gita<\/i>. Is this a good idea?<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYes. It does not matter whether it is mental, if it helps you. These
\nthings often help the mind to get into the psychic attitude. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n25 June 1933
\n  
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>102<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nA Note on the Terminology of The Mother<\/i><\/b> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n(1) Falsehood and Ignorance<\/span><\/i><\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIgnorance means Avidya, the separative consciousness and the egoistic mind and life that flows from it and all that is natural to the separative consciousness and the egoistic mind and life. This Ignorance is the result of a movement by which the
\ncosmic Intelligence separated itself from the light of Supermind (the divine Gnosis) and lost the Truth,
\n\u2014  truth of being, truth
\nof divine consciousness, truth of force and action, truth of Ananda. As a result instead of a world of integral truth and
\ndivine harmony created in the light of the divine Gnosis, we have a world founded on the part truths of an inferior cosmic Intelligence in which all is half truth, half error. It is this that some of the ancient thinkers like Shankara, not perceiving the greater Truth-Force behind, stigmatised as Maya and thought to be the highest creative power of the Divine. All
\nin the consciousness of this creation is either limited or else perverted by separation from the integral Light; even the Truth
\nit perceives is only a half knowledge. Therefore it is called the Ignorance.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nFalsehood, on the other hand, is not this Avidya, but an extreme result of it. It is created by an Asuric power which
\nintervenes in this creation and is not only separated from the Truth and therefore limited in knowledge and open to error,
\nbut in revolt against the Truth or in the habit of seizing the Truth only to pervert it. This Power, the dark Asuric Shakti or
\nRakshasic Maya, puts forward its own perverted consciousness as true knowledge and its wilful distortions or reversals of the
\nTruth as the verity of things. It is the powers and personalities of this perverted and perverting consciousness that we call hostile
\nbeings, hostile forces. Whenever these perversions created by them out of the stuff of the Ignorance are put forward as the
\n\t\t\t truth of things, that is the Falsehood, in the Yogic sense,
\nmithyā<\/i>,
\nmoha<\/i>.   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>103<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

\n(2) Powers and Appearances<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThese are the forces and beings that are interested in maintaining
\nthe falsehoods they have created in the world of the Ignorance and in putting them forward as the Truth which men must
\nfollow. In India they are termed Asuras, Rakshasas, Pisachas (beings respectively of the mentalised vital, middle vital and
\nlower vital planes) who are in opposition to the Gods, the Powers of Light. These too are Powers, for they too have their cosmic
\nfield in which they exercise their function and authority and some of them were once divine Powers (the former gods,
\npūrve<\/i>
\ndevāh<\/i>, as they are called somewhere in the Mahabharata) who have fallen towards the Darkness by revolt against the divine
\nWill behind the cosmos. The word “Appearances” refers to the forms they take in order to rule the world, forms often false and
\nalways incarnating falsehood, sometimes pseudo-divine. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n(3) Powers and Personalities<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe use of the word Power has already been explained \u2014  it can be applied to whatever or whoever exercises a conscious power
\nin the cosmic field and has authority over the world movement or some part of it or some movement in it. But the Four of whom
\nyou speak are also Shaktis, manifestations of different powers of the supreme Consciousness and Force, the Divine Mother,
\nby which she rules or acts in the universe. And they are at the same time divine Personalities; for each is a being who manifests different qualities and personal consciousness-forms of her Godhead. All the greater Gods are in this way personalities of
\nthe Divine \u2014  one Consciousness playing in many personalities, ekam sat
\nbahudhā<\/i>. Even in the human being there are many
\npersonalities and not only one, as used formerly to be imagined; for all consciousness can be at once one and multiple. “Powers and Personalities” simply describe different aspects of the same being; a Power is not necessarily impersonal and certainly
\nit is not avyaktam<\/i>, as you suggest, \u2014  on the contrary it is a manifestation acting in the worlds of the divine manifestation.
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>104<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

\n(4) Emanations<\/b><\/span><\/i> <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nEmanations correspond to your description of the Matrikas of
\nwhom you speak in your letter. An emanation of the Mother is something of her consciousness and power put forth from her,
\nwhich so long as it is in play is held in close connection with her and, when its play is no longer required, is withdrawn back
\ninto its source, but can always be put out and brought into play once more. But also the detaining thread of connection can be
\nsevered or loosened and that which came forth as an emanation can proceed on its way as an independent divine being with
\nits own play in the world. All the Gods can put forth such emanations from their being, identical with them in essence of
\nconsciousness and power though not commensurate. In a certain sense the universe itself can be said to be an emanation from the
\nSupreme. In the consciousness of the sadhaka an emanation of the Mother will ordinarily wear the appearance, form and
\ncharacteristics with which he is familiar.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nIn a sense the four Powers of the Mother may be called,
\nbecause of their origin, her Emanations, just as the Gods may be called Emanations of the Divine, but they have a more permanent and fixed character; they are at once independent beings allowed their play by the Adya Shakti and yet portions of the
\n\t\t\t Mother, the Mahashakti, and she can always either manifest
\nthrough them as separate beings or draw them together as her own various Personalities and hold them in herself, sometimes
\ndrawn back, sometimes at play, according to her will. In the supramental plane they are always in her and do not act independently but as intimate portions of the original Mahashakti and in close union and harmony with each other.
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n(5) Gods<\/b><\/span><\/i> <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThese four Powers are the Mother’s cosmic godheads, permanent in the world-play; they stand among the greater cosmic Godheads to whom allusion is made when it is said the Mother
\nas the Mahashakti of this triple world “stands there (in the   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>105<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nOvermind plane) above the Gods”.19<\/font><\/sup> The Gods, as has been already said, are in origin and essence permanent Emanations
\nof the Divine put forth from the Supreme by the Transcendent Mother, the Adya Shakti; in their cosmic action they are Powers
\n\t\t\t and Personalities of the Divine each with his independent cosmic
\nstanding, function and work in the universe. They are not impersonal entities but cosmic Personalities, although they can and do
\nordinarily veil themselves behind the movement of impersonal forces. But while in the Overmind and the triple world they
\nappear as independent beings, they return in the Supermind into the One and stand there united in a single harmonious
\naction as multiple personalities of the one Person, the divine Purushottama.
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n(6) Presence<\/b><\/span><\/i> <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt is intended by the word Presence to indicate the sense and
\nperception of the Divine as a Being, felt as present in one’s existence and consciousness or in relation with it, without the
\nnecessity of any farther qualification or description. Thus of the “ineffable Presence”20<\/font><\/sup> it can only be said that it is there and
\nnothing more can or need be said about it, although at the same time one knows that all is there, personality and impersonality, Power and Light and Ananda and everything else, and that all these flow from that indescribable Presence. The word may
\nbe used sometimes in a less absolute sense, but that is always the fundamental significance,
\n\u2014  the essential perception of the
\nessential presence supporting everything else. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n(7) The Transcendent Mother<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThis is what is termed the Adya Shakti; she is the supreme
\n\t\t\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n19 <\/span> <\/font> “Determining all that shall be in this universe and in the terrestrial evolution by what<\/font><\/i>
\nshe sees and feels and pours from her, she stands there above the Gods and all her Powers<\/font><\/i>
\nand Personalities are put out in front of her for the action. . . .” \u2014  Sri Aurobindo,
\n\t\t\t<\/font>
\n<\/i>The<\/font> Mother <\/font> (Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1999), p. 34.<\/font><\/i>
\n\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n20 <\/span> <\/font> “Alone, she harbours the absolute Power and the ineffable Presence. . . .”
\n\u2014  Sri<\/font><\/i>
\nAurobindo, <\/font> <\/i>The Mother<\/font>, p. 29.<\/font><\/i>
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>106<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tConsciousness and Power above the universe and it is by her that all the Gods are manifested, and even the supramental Ishwara comes into manifestation through her \u2014  the supramental Purushottama of whom the Gods are Powers and Personalities.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nPassages from The Mother<\/i><\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nWhat I want to know is \u2014  when does God take full charge of
\nour sadhana?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe sadhana described in the Arya <\/i>in the beginning was
\nbased on the conviction that God was the sadhak. In subsequent years, individual effort was permitted in
\nArya<\/i>, something like cooperation between the individual and God.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThis is an error. There is no such variation in the beginning of
\nthe Arya <\/i>and in subsequent years.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIn the message of February,21<\/font><\/sup> the operator is God and the
\nindividual becomes the operated. The individual effort consists in fasting etc. before and during the operation.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nWhat is all this about operations and fasting? Certainly, I cannot have written anything of the kind.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nWhat are the signs of the coming of the Divine Grace? Does the Divine Grace take full charge of the sadhana as soon as the
\nsadhak gives the charge? If not, when will it take full charge?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIf he gives full charge truly and really, with an absolute sincerity
\nof total surrender and does not come in the way of the divine Grace. How many can do that? It cannot be done by a word or
\nby taking up a mental posture.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nCalling on God to do everything and save one all the trouble
\nand struggle is a self-deception and does not lead to freedom and perfection.22<\/font><\/sup>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n30 May 1927 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n
\n21 Chapter One of <\/i>The Mother <\/font>
\n\t\t\twas first issued as a “message” on 21 February 1927.<\/font><\/i>
\n\u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n22 Sri Aurobindo incorporated this sentence into Chapter Two of <\/i>The Mother<\/span><\/font>, which<\/font><\/i>
\nhe wrote on the back of this letter. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>107<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tDoes our spiritual destiny mean the fulfilment of “the aim of our endeavour”, which you mentioned at the beginning of
\nThe<\/i>
\nMother<\/i>?23<\/font><\/sup>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYes. It means to find your true self, the Divine, and become
\nin the Nature a conscious and illumined part of the Divine in manifestation.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n14 November 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t” . . . it is only the very highest supramental Force descending from above and opening from below that can victoriously
\nhandle the physical Nature and annihilate its difficulties . . .” [p. 2<\/i>].
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“Opening from below” means this \u2014  that the supramental force descending awakes a response from below in the earth consciousness so that it is possible for a supramental activity to be formed in the material itself. All is involved as potentiality in
\nthe earth consciousness \u2014  life, mind, supermind \u2014  but it is only when Life Force descended from the life plane into the material
\nthat active and conscious organised life was possible \u2014  so it was only when mind descended that the latent mind in Matter awoke
\nand could be organised. The supramental descent must create the same kind of opening from below so that a supramental
\nconsciousness can be organised in the material. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n20 April 1933
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n” . . . it is only the very highest supramental Force . . . that
\ncan victoriously handle the physical Nature . . .” [p. 2<\/i>]. Is this idea to be found anywhere in the Upanishads or Vedas? What
\nis there in this Force which can deal with Matter, and why cannot other forces do it
\n\u2014  for example the occult vital forces
\n <\/i> that are used to produce kāya siddhi <\/i>in Hathayoga?
\nThe physical Nature does not mean the body alone but the phrase includes the transformation of the whole physical mind,
\nvital, material nature \u2014  not by imposing siddhis on them, but by<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n23 Sri Aurobindo,
\n<\/i>The Mother<\/font>, p. 1.<\/font><\/i>
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>108<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tcreating a new physical nature which is to be the habitation of the supramental being in a new evolution. I am not aware that
\nthis has been done by any Hathayogic or other process. Mental or vital occult power can only bring siddhis of the higher plane
\ninto the individual life \u2014  like the Sannyasi who could take any poison without harm, but he died of a poison after all when he
\nforgot to observe the conditions of the siddhi. The working of the supramental power envisaged is not an influence on the physical
\ngiving it abnormal faculties, but an entrance and permeation changing it wholly into a supramentalised physical. I did not
\nlearn the idea from Veda or Upanishad, and I do not know if there is anything of the kind there. What I received about
\nthe Supermind was a direct, not a derived knowledge given to me; it was only afterwards that I found certain confirmatory
\nrevelations in the Upanishad and Veda. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n11 September 1936
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n“Detect first what is false or obscure in you . . . then alone can
\nyou rightly call for the divine Power to transform you” [pp.<\/i> 4 \u00ad 5<\/i>]. Does “rightly” mean “it is the right way of calling” or
\ndoes it mean “then only you have the `right’ to call”?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt means “in the right way”.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“If behind your devotion and surrender you make a cover for your desires, egoistic demands . . .” [p. 3<\/i>]. Does this mean
\n“you use devotion and surrender as a means <\/i>of fulfilling your desires and demands”?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYes, practically it means that. I put it in that way so as to avoid suggesting that the devotion is altogether insincere and meant
\nonly <\/i>as a cover. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n12 December 1934
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nNo sadhak can rely entirely on the Divine in the beginning. He
\ngoes by his own effort. Even as he makes his own effort, many subtle beings, the power of the Divine, etc. must be helping
\nthe sadhak. Is not this kind of tapasya and self-dependence a form of the Divine Power’s help?
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>109<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nIt has been clearly stated in The Mother <\/i>that personal effort is necessary so long as the transference to the Divine Power cannot
\nbe complete [p. 8<\/i>]. It is the fact that all power is the Divine’s and therefore self-effort is also a use of the Divine Power conceded
\nby the Divine, but there is a great practical difference between the delegated use and the direct Divine Action.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nIn the book The Mother <\/i>Sri Aurobindo says, “The personal
\neffort required is a triple labour of aspiration, rejection and surrender.” And “rejection of the movements of the lower
\nnature \u2014  rejection of the mind’s ideas, opinions, preferences, habits, constructions, so that the true knowledge may find
\nfree room in a silent mind, \u2014  rejection of the vital nature’s desires . . .”, etc. [p. 9<\/i>]. How can I apply this in my working
\nlife?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThis has to be done in life itself \u2014  whether the life is in an
\nAsram or outside, the rule and method is the same. It is an internal change for which one must become conscious of the
\nlower nature as well as of the psychic and spiritual workings. Meditation is usually necessary for that but so also is life, for it is
\nonly life that tests the genuineness of the change. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n7 April 1938
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n” . . . surrender of oneself and all one is and has and every
\nplane of the consciousness and every movement to the Divine and the Shakti” [p. 10<\/i>]. Can I take this to mean surrender
\nof the outward life to the Universal Nature through reason and will (i.e. a rational adaptation of the material life to the
\nways of Nature) and surrender of the inward life to the Divine through faith?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nNo. Universal Nature is a mass of forces, mental, vital and physical. The Divine is above with its supreme Shakti
\n\u2014  and
\nwithin behind Nature. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n25 December 1934
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nIn The Mother<\/i>, you have said: “Ask for nothing but the divine,
\nspiritual and supramental Truth” [p. 13<\/i>]. Should one have  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>110<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tsuch a high aspiration? The general impression in the Ashram is that it would be laughable to try.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThere is nothing laughable in aspiring for the supramental Truth so long as one understands that it is not possible to have it at
\nonce and one must go through a long preparation and development. What is laughable is to think you have it when you are
\nfloundering about it in mental and vital half-truths or delusions \u2014  that is what some have done and it is probably these bad
\nexamples that have created the impression of which you speak. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n2 June 1933
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nIn The Mother <\/i>you write that the Mother is the consciousness
\nand force of the Ishwara [p. 28<\/i>]. But my experience here is that Ishwara is the consciousness and force of the Supreme
\nMother. Could you please make it clear to me?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe Mother is the consciousness and force of the Divine
\n\u2014  or,
\nit may be said, she is the Divine in its consciousness-force. The Ishwara as Lord of the Cosmos does come out of the Mother
\nwho takes her place beside him as the cosmic Shakti \u2014  the cosmic Ishwara is one aspect of the Divine. The experience therefore
\nis correct so far as it goes. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n16 November 1934
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nIn The Mother <\/i>you write: “There are three ways of being of
\nthe Mother of which you can become aware when you enter into touch of oneness with the Conscious Force that upholds
\nus and the universe” [p. 28<\/i>]. Is it the Cosmic Spirit that is meant or the Overmind?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt is the Divine Shakti \u2014  who acts on all the planes and has all the aspects.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n16 June 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tI am or was under the impression that Mother is the Cosmic and Supracosmic Mahashakti.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI don’t quite understand the question. I have explained it in The<\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>111<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n
\nMother <\/i>[pp. 28 \u00ad 29<\/i>] that there are three aspects, transcendent, universal and individual of the Mother.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n31 May 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“At the summit of this manifestation of which we are a part there are worlds of infinite existence, consciousness, force and
\nbliss over which the Mother stands as the unveiled eternal Power” [p. 32<\/i>]. Are we to understand that the Transcendent
\nMother stands above the Ananda plane? There would then be four steps of the Divine Shakti:
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t(1) The Transcendent Mahashakti who stands above the Ananda plane and who bears the supreme Divine in her eternal
\nconsciousness.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t(2) The Mahashakti immanent in the worlds of Sat-Chit-Ananda, where all beings move in an ineffable completeness.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t(3) The Supramental Mahashakti immanent in the worlds
\nof Supermind.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t(4) The Cosmic Mahashakti immanent in the lower hemisphere.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYes; that is all right. One speaks often however of all above the
\nlower hemisphere as part of the transcendence. This is because the Supermind and Ananda are not manifested in
\nour <\/i>universe
\nat present, but are planes above it. For us the higher hemisphere
\nपर
\n[parā<\/i>], the Supreme Transcendence is  परात्पर [parātpara<\/i>].
\nis The Sanskrit terms are here clearer than the English.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n27 January 1932 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tIn The Mother <\/i>you write that the Mother as the Cosmic Mahashakti “stands there above the Gods and all her Powers
\nand Personalities are put out in front of her for the action and she sends down emanations of them into these lower worlds
\nto intervene, to govern, to battle and conquer, to lead and turn their cycles, to direct the total and the individual lines of their
\nforces” [pp. 34 \u00ad 35<\/i>]. Does this imply that the World War or the Bolshevik Revolution or the Satyagraha movement were
\nin some manner arranged by the Mother?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThey are incidents in the cosmic plan and so arranged by the
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>112<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tcosmic Mahashakti and worked out by men under the impulse of the forces of Nature.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n1 June 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tYou write in The Mother <\/i>that there are Vibhutis of the powers and personalities of the Ishwara and Vibhutis of the Mother,
\nbut that in both cases it is the action of the Grace of the Mother that alone can effect a transformation of the Vibhuti
\n[p. 35<\/i>]. I would like to know the difference. Take for example, Christ, Chaitanya, Ramakrishna, Confucius, Zarathustra, Buddha, Shankara, Mohammed, Alexander, Napoleon \u2014 among these well-known figures which are Vibhutis of the
\nMother and which are Vibhutis of the Ishwara? And what about the Mother’s action in Avataras like Rama and Krishna?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nThe Mother’s Vibhutis would normally be feminine personalities most of whom would be dominated by one of the four
\npersonalities of the Mother. The others you mention would be personalities and powers of the Ishwara, but in them also, as
\nin all, the Mother’s force would act. I do not quite catch the question about the transformation of the Vibhutis. All creation
\nand transformation is the work of the Mother. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n29 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\nSince all creation is her work, can it be taken that it is the
\npersonalities of the Mother who, behind the veil, prepare the conditions for the descent of the Avatar or Vibhutis?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIf you mean the divine personalities of the Mother \u2014  the answer is yes. It may even be said that each Vibhuti draws his energies
\nfrom the Four, from one of them predominantly in most cases, as Napoleon from Mahakali, Rama from Mahalakshmi, Augustus
\nCaesar from Mahasaraswati. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n31 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n“Four great Aspects of the Mother, four of her leading Powers
\nand Personalities have stood in front in her guidance of this Universe and in her dealings with the terrestrial play” [p. 37<\/i>].
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>113<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tWhat are you speaking of here?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nOf the Mother in her universal workings.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n13 July 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“Wisdom, Strength, Harmony, Perfection are their several attributes and it is these powers that they bring with them into
\nthe world, manifest in a human disguise in their Vibhutis and shall found in the divine degree of their ascension in those who
\ncan open their earthly nature to the direct and living influence of the Mother” [pp. 38 \u00ad 39<\/i>].
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI am afraid it [a translation of the above passage<\/i>] is still wrong. Let me try to explain otherwise. It means “they bring the powers
\ninto the world (in their ordinary and in man their human degree), manifest them (in a half-divine degree but) in a human disguise
\nin their Vibhutis and shall (hereafter), in those who can open to the direct influence of the Mother, raise them (the powers) to
\ntheir highest divine degree and establish them in that degree.” Please don’t translate my explanation, for that will make it very
\nawkward; I only want the true sense of the sentence expressed in the translation as briefly and elegantly as possible. You might
\nsend me up what you propose to put for approval and only after approval put in the proof so that there may not be too many
\nerasures. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tWhat is meant by “height” in the phrase “not wideness but height” [p. 42<\/i>]?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt is very much as we speak of high ideas, high feelings, high aspirations. In that sense Mahakali’s movement is a high, swift
\naction, very effective at the point touched, but not wide, patient, comprehensive like Maheshwari’s.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n11 August 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tThis morning, when I said that I thought that the Mother was putting pressure on me, you wrote that the word “pressure” was “entirely wrong”. If that is so, what is the sense  
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>114<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tof the word “pressure” in this passage from The Mother<\/i>: “[Maheshwari] puts on them the required pressure” [p. 41<\/i>]?
\nYou wrote also, in regard to Mahakali, of “the vehemence of her pressure” [p. 44<\/i>].
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nI was speaking of your case only \u2014  it was not my intention to say that the Mother never uses pressure. But pressure also can
\nbe of various kinds. There is the pressure of the Force when it is entering the mind or vital or body
\n\u2014  a pressure to go faster, a
\npressure to build or form, a pressure to break and many more. In your case if there is any pressure it is that of help or support
\nor removal of an attack, but it does not seem to me that that can properly be called pressure.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIn the same book you say of Mahakali, “her hands are outstretched to strike and to succour” [p. 44<\/i>]. What do you mean
\nhere by “strike”?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt expresses her general action in the world. She strikes at the
\nAsuras, she strikes also at everything that has to be got rid of or destroyed, at the obstacles to the sadhana etc. I may say that
\nthe Mother never uses the Mahakali power in your case nor the Mahakali pressure.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n5 June 1936 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tAbout the Mother’s Mahakali aspect it is said in The Mother<\/i>: “When she is allowed to intervene in her strength, then in
\none moment are broken like things without consistence the obstacles that immobilise or the enemies that assail the seeker”
\n[p. 44<\/i>]. How is this intervention of the Mahakali force felt?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIt is felt as if something swift, sudden, decisive and imperative.
\nWhen it intervenes, it has a kind of divine or supramental sanction behind it and is like a fiat against which there is no appeal.
\nWhat is done cannot be reversed or undone. The adverse forces may try, may even touch or invade, but they retire baffled and it is
\nseen as soon as they withdraw that the past ground has remained intact \u2014  it is felt even in the attack. Also the difficulties that
\nwere strong before touched by this fiat lose their power, their   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>115<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nverisimilitude destroyed or are weak shadows that come only to flicker and fade away. I say “allowed”, because this supreme
\naction of Mahakali is comparatively rare, the action of the other Powers or a partial action of Mahakali is more common.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n24 August 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tIn the book The Mother <\/i>what is the sense of “false adaptation” [p. 53<\/i>]
\n\u2014  is it something like a mason doing a coolie’s work?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nWell, yes \u2014  it means misapplication of any kind and fitting things in where they do not really fit
\n\u2014  whether with regard to
\nideas, activities, or anything else.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n“Only when the Four have founded their harmony and freedom of movement in the transformed mind and life and body . . .” [p. 56<\/i>]. Here does “transformed” mean the full
\ntransformation?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nAt any rate a sufficient foundation <\/i>of the harmony in a sufficiently transformed Nature for still greater things to come in without perturbation of the Nature.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n29 March 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“There are among them Presences indispensable for the supramental realisation,
\n\u2014  most of all one who is her Personality of
\nthat mysterious and powerful ecstasy and Ananda which flows from a supreme divine Love, the Ananda that alone can heal
\nthe gulf between the highest heights of the supramental spirit and the lowest abysses of Matter, the Ananda that holds the
\nkey of a wonderful divinest Life and even now supports from its secrecies the work of all the other Powers of the universe”
\n[pp. 55 \u00ad 56<\/i>]. Is not the Personality referred to in this passage the Radha-Power, which is spoken of as Premamayi Radha,
\nMahaprana Shakti and Hladini Shakti?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYes \u2014  but the images of the Radha-Krishna līlā <\/i>are taken from the vital world and therefore it is only a minor manifestation of
\nthe Radha Shakti that is there depicted. That is why she is called Mahaprana Shakti and Hladini Shakti. What is referred to is
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>116<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tnot this minor form, but the full Power of Love and Ananda above.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n7 February 1934 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\nThe Riddle of This World<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nIn reference to what Prof. Sorley has written on The Riddle<\/i> of This World<\/i>, the book of course was not meant as a full or
\ndirect statement of my thought and, as it was written to sadhaks mostly, many things were taken for granted there. Most of the
\nmajor ideas \u2014  e.g. Overmind \u2014  were left without elucidation. To make the ideas implied clear to the intellect, they must be put
\nwith precision in an intellectual form \u2014  so far as that is possible with supra-intellectual things. What is written in the book can
\nbe clear to those who have gone far enough in experience, but for most it can only be suggestive.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n10 April 1934 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

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

\n  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tAll that was bowed and rapt lifting clasped hands out of pain and night,
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tHow hast thou filled with murmuring ecstasy, made proud and bright!
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThou hast chosen the grateful earth for thy own in her hour of anguish and strife,
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tSurprised by thy rapid feet of joy, O Beloved of the Master of Life.24<\/font><\/sup>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\nYour answer is not only fine poetry but it is a true explanation of the descent of the soul into the Ignorance. It is the adventure
\ninto the Night (the introduction of the Light, Joy, Immortality) to see whether they cannot be established there
\n\u2014  so that there
\nmay be a new experience of the Divine and joy of the Divine through separation and union (or reunion) on a new basis. It is
\nwhat I have hinted at in The Riddle of This World<\/i>.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n24
\n\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t<\/font> From “Lakshmi”, a Bengali poem by Dilip Kumar Roy, as translated by Sri Aurobindo. See <\/font><\/i>Translations, volume 5 of <\/i>T<\/font>HE
\n\t\t\t<\/font>C<\/font>OMPLETE <\/font>
\n\t\t\tW<\/font>ORKS OF <\/font>S<\/font>RI
\n\t\t\t<\/font>A<\/font>UROBINDO<\/font>,<\/font><\/i>
\np. 561. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>117<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\tPassages from The Riddle of This World<\/i><\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIn the Riddle <\/i>you speak of a conversion inwards and a series
\nof conversions upwards.25<\/font><\/sup> Does the upward conversion begin only after the inward conversion, i.e. the psychicisation of the
\nlower nature, is complete? <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tNot necessarily.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tOr do both kinds of work go on simultaneously?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIt differs with different people, but the upward conversions cannot go very far or cannot be secure if the lower nature is not psychicised \u2014  for there is then always the possibility of a big or
\neven a decisive fall if there is something seriously unpsychic in the lower nature.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n29 March 1935 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tWhat precisely is meant by the “intermediate zone” [pp. 35 \u00ad<\/i> 45<\/i>]? Has everyone to pass through it to reach the truth?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe intermediate zone means simply a confused condition or passage in which one is getting out of the personal consciousness
\nand opening into the cosmic (cosmic Mind, cosmic vital, cosmic physical, something perhaps of the cosmic higher Mind) without
\nhaving yet transcended the human mind levels. One is not in possession of or direct contact with the divine Truth
\non its own<\/i>
\nlevels<\/i>, but one can receive something from them, even from the Overmind, indirectly. Only, as one is still immersed in the cosmic
\nIgnorance, all that comes from above can be mixed, perverted, taken hold of for their purposes by lower, even by hostile Powers.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nIt is not necessary for everyone to struggle through the intermediate zone. If one has purified oneself, if there is no abnormal
\nvanity, egoism, ambition or other strong misleading element, or if one is vigilant and on one’s guard, or if the psychic is in front,
\none can either pass rapidly and directly or with a minimum of <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n25 Sri Aurobindo,
\n<\/i>The Riddle of This World <\/span> <\/font> (Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram,<\/font><\/i>
\n1973), p. 5.<\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>118<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\ttrouble into the higher zones of consciousness where one is in direct contact with the Divine Truth.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nOn the other hand the passage through the higher zones \u2014  higher Mind, illumined Mind, Intuition, Overmind, is obligatory \u2014  they are the true Intermediaries between the present consciousness and the Supermind.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n28 December 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tAbout the intermediate zone, you wrote [in the preceding letter<\/i>]: “One is not in possession of or direct contact with the
\ndivine Truth on its own levels<\/i>.” Are the planes of Higher Mind or Intuition in direct contact with the truth?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tYes \u2014  because it is there that one opens to the cosmic Truth (as opposed to the cosmic Ignorance)
\n\u2014  the cosmic Divine etc.
\nIt is not the full power of the Truth \u2014  that one reaches only in the Supermind where one is in direct communion with the
\nTranscendent Reality; but it is still manifested Truth and not manifested Ignorance. This, of course, is when one can rise to
\nthose levels and stay there for a time at least or when the mind etc. are already so much changed that they can receive without
\nperverting or distorting or misusing and diminishing too much. It is not so difficult once that is done to receive the Truth in
\nconsciousness \u2014  what is more difficult is to make it dynamic in its purity for life.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n29 December 1933 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tYou write in The Riddle of This World<\/i>: “Very readily they come to think that they are in the full cosmic consciousness
\nwhen it is only some front or small part of it or some larger Mind, Life-Power or subtle physical ranges with which they
\nhave entered into dynamic connection” [p. 37<\/i>]. What is meant here by “larger Mind”?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIt means simply larger than the limited personal mind. It is a play of some combination of cosmic Mind-Forces but not the
\nfull cosmic Consciousness, not even the Cosmic Mind. It belongs usually to the Ignorance.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n30 March 1934 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>119<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nAbout polytheism, I certainly accept the truth of the many forms and personalities of the One which since the Vedic times has been
\nthe spiritual essence of Indian polytheism \u2014  a secondary aspect in the seeking for the one and only Divine. But the passage
\nreferred to by Professor Sorley (page 56 [of the first edition<\/i>])26<\/font><\/sup> is concerned with something else
\n\u2014  the little godlings and Titans
\nspoken of there are supraphysical beings of other planes. It is not meant to be suggested that they are real Godheads and entitled
\nto worship \u2014  on the contrary it is indicated that to accept their influence is to move towards error and confusion or a deviation
\nfrom the true spiritual way. No doubt they have some power to create, they are makers of forms in their own way and in their
\nlimited domain, but so are men too creators of outward and inward things in their own domain and limits
\n\u2014  and even man’s
\ncreative powers can have a repercussion on the supraphysical levels. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n10 April 1934 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tI have always believed that there was an existence after death akin to our existence in this world minus the physical body.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe soul goes out in a subtle body.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tOn the strength of certain phenomena that did not appear to
\nme to be capable of being summarily dismissed, I further believed that after a period of confusion immediately following
\ndeath, the recollections of the life just preceding returned, and persisted till rebirth.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tOnly for a time, not till rebirth \u2014  otherwise the stamp could be so strong that remembrance of past births even after taking a
\nnew body would be the rule rather than the exception. <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tI was also disposed to believe that in cases of pure and unalloyed attachment the relationships of one birth persisted in successive births, the number depending on the strength of
\nattachment.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n26 ” . . . for these intermediate planes are full of little Gods or strong Daityas. . . .”
\n<\/i>The<\/span><\/font>
\n\t\t\tRiddle of This World <\/font> (1973), p. 38.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>120<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tThis is possible, but not a law \u2014  as a rule the same relationship would not be constantly repeated
\n\u2014  the same people often meet
\nagain and again on earth in different lives, but the relations are different. The purpose of rebirth would not be served if the
\nsame personality with the same relations and experiences were incessantly repeated.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tAll these beliefs were shattered to pieces when someone drew my attention to certain statements of yours in the book
\nThe<\/i>
\nRiddle of This World <\/i>[pp. 53 \u00ad 54, 58 \u00ad 60<\/i>], in which I understood you to say that in the case of forms of life lower than
\nman there is a complete annihilation of the ego on death. <\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThat is not the case.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tI further understood you to say that in the case of man, the ego persisted in a static condition of complete rest and carried
\nwith it (except in a very few exceptional cases) only the essence of the experiences and the inclinations gathered and acquired
\nin the life just preceding.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThis is said not of the ego, but of the psychic being after it has
\nshed its vital and other sheaths and is resting in the psychic world. Before that it passes through vital and other worlds on
\nits way to the psychic plane.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tI would like to know whether it is possible to come into direct
\ntouch with those who have departed from this world.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tYes, so long as they are near enough to the earth (it is usually
\nsupposed by those who have occult experience that it is for three years only) or if they are earth-bound or if they are of those who
\ndo not proceed to the psychic plane but linger near the earth and are soon reborn.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nUniversal statements cannot be easily made about these things \u2014  there is a general line, but individual cases vary to an
\nalmost indefinite extent.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t[Note by Sri Aurobindo to his secretary:<\/i>] You will tell him that
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>121<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nI do not carry on correspondence usually with people outside, but as his questions were from the book, I have asked you to
\ngive him my answers to his questions. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n28 February 1938
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“It is not to be denied, no spiritual experience will deny that
\nthis is an unideal and unsatisfactory world, strongly marked with the stamp of inadequacy, suffering, evil” [p. 61<\/i>].
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThat is when you look at what the world ought to be and lay stress on what it should be. The idealist’s question is why should
\nthere be pain at all, even if it is outweighed by the fundamental pleasure of existence. The real crux is why should inadequacy,
\nlimit and suffering come across this natural pleasure of life. It does not mean that life is essentially miserable in its very nature.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n23 July 1935 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tWeber writes of Spinoza’s conception of God: “God is not the cause of the world in the proper and usual sense of the
\nterm, a cause acting from without and creating it once for all, but the permanent substratum of things, the innermost
\nsubstance of the universe.”27<\/font><\/sup> Does this not find a parallel in the following lines from
\nThe Riddle of This World<\/i>: “For
\nit is not . . . a supracosmic, arbitrary, personal Deity himself altogether uninvolved in the fall who has imposed evil and
\nsuffering on creatures made capriciously by his fiat” [pp. 65 \u00ad<\/i> 66<\/i>]. I wonder why Spinoza did not arrive at a convincing
\nexplanation of the problem of evil and misery.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe European type of monism is usually pantheistic and weaves
\nthe universe and the Divine so intimately together that they can hardly be separated. But what explanation of the evil and
\nmisery can there be there? The Indian view is that the Divine is the inmost substance of the Universe, but he is also outside it,
\ntranscendent; good and evil, happiness and misery are only phenomena of cosmic experience due to a division and diminution
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n
\n27 Alfred Weber, <\/i>History of Philosophy <\/font>
\n\t\t\t(London: Longmans, Green, 1904), pp. 328 \u00ad 29.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>122<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tof consciousness in the manifestation, but are not part of the essence or of the undivided whole-consciousness either of the
\nDivine or of our own spiritual being. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n6 October 1935
\n\t\t\t<\/font>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tPassages from Lights on Yoga<\/i><\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tYou write in a letter: “One must not enter on this path, far
\nvaster and more arduous than most ways of Yoga, unless one is sure of the psychic call and of one’s readiness to go through
\nto the end.”28<\/font><\/sup>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIt is simply an indication to those who wish to enter on to this
\nPath that they must have a call (not take it up as they would take any way for spiritual experience) and must be prepared for
\ngreat difficulties to surmount.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tCan it be said that you have seen in all those who are permanent members of the Asram this readiness to go through to the end?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe readiness to go through to the end is a thing dependent on the will of the sadhak. That will may be there in the beginning
\nand flag afterwards. All who are here did not come as permanent members and some were never told that they were made permanent but they have stuck on and Mother has not sent them away.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tWhat is the exact significance of “to the end”?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tUntil the siddhi \u2014  but it means essentially here to go through in spite of the difficulties.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n20 October 1934 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“The difference or contrast between the Personal and Impersonal is a truth of the Overmind
\n\u2014  there is no separate truth
\n\t\t\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n28 Sri Aurobindo, <\/i>Lights on Yoga <\/span> <\/font>
\n
\n\t\t\t(Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1981), pp. 2 \u00ad 3.<\/font><\/i>
\n\t\t\tLights on Yoga
\n<\/font>
\nis made up of letters by Sri Aurobindo, who revised the letters for<\/font><\/i>
\npublication in the book, which was brought out in 1935. The writer of this question of<\/font><\/i>
\nOctober 1934 cited the original version of the letter, which Sri Aurobindo wrote on 6<\/font><\/i>
\nApril 1928 (see page 540 of the present volume). \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>123<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tof them in the Supermind, they are inseparably one” [p. 5<\/i>]. If this refers to the Personal and Impersonal Divine, the question
\nof the difference can hardly arise, because the Personal Divine (i.e. the Avatar) is not always there. It is only very rarely that
\nthe Divine becomes the Avatar to come on earth.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tI do not understand. The Personal Divine does not mean the
\nAvatar. What I said was that the scission between the two aspects of the Divine is a creation of the Overmind which takes various
\naspects of the Divine and separates them into separate entities. Thus it divides Sat, Chit and Ananda, so that they become three
\nseparate aspects different from each other. In fact in the Reality there is no separateness, the three aspects are so fused into
\neach other, so inseparably one that they are a single undivided reality. It is the same with the Personal and Impersonal, the
\nSaguna and Nirguna, the Silent and the Active Brahman. In the Reality they are not contrasted and incompatible aspects; what
\nwe call Personality and what we call Impersonality are inseparably fused together in a single Truth. In fact “fused together”
\neven is a wrong phrase, because there they were never separated so that they have to be fused. All the quarrels about either the
\nImpersonal being the only true truth or the Personal being the only highest truth are mind-created quarrels derivative from
\nthis dividing aspect of the Overmind. The Overmind does not deny any of the aspects as the Mind does, it admits them all as
\naspects of the One Truth, but by separating them it originates the quarrel in the more ignorant and more limited and divided
\nMind, because the Mind cannot see how two opposite things can exist together in one Truth, how the Divine can be
\nnirguno<\/i>
\ngunī<\/i>; \u2014  having no experience of what is behind the two words it takes each in an absolute sense. The Impersonal is Existence,
\nConsciousness, Bliss, not a Person, but a state. The Person is the Existent, the Conscious, the Blissful; consciousness, existence,
\nbliss taken as separate things are only states of his being. But in fact the two (personal being and eternal state) are inseparable
\nand are one reality. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n13 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>124<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tYou write in Lights on Yoga<\/i>: “It is a mistake to dwell on the lower nature and its obstacles, which is the negative side of the
\nSadhana. . . . The positive side of experience of the descent is the more important thing” [cf. p. 5<\/i>]. But there may be obstacles
\nthat themselves prevent the experience of descent. If that is the case, I suppose one would have to deal with them in order to
\nclear the road.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe statement is a general one and like all general statements
\nsubject to qualification according to circumstances. What I meant was to discourage what some do which is to be always
\ndwelling on their difficulties and shortcomings only, for that makes them turn for ever like squirrels in a cage always in the
\nsame circle of difficulties without the least breaking of light through the clouds. The sentence would be more accurate or
\ngenerally applicable if it were written “dwell too much” or “dwell solely”.29<\/font><\/sup> Naturally, without rejection nothing can be
\ndone. And in hard periods or moments concentration on the difficulties is inevitable. Also in the early stages one has often
\nto do a great amount of clearance work so that the road can be followed at all.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n29 April 1935 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“The taking away of the Force of destruction implies a creation that will not be destroyed but last and develop always” [pp.<\/i>
\n7 \u00ad 8<\/i>]. Does this mean that in the Truth-Creation the force of destruction will be taken away and only the forces of creation
\nand preservation remain? Does it mean that nobody will die \u2014  not even plants and animals?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThat might be true if the whole world were to be supramentalised and that supramentalisation meant inability to change or
\nput off a form, but it is not so. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n16 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tYou write in Lights on Yoga <\/i>that the subconscient “receives
\nobscurely the impressions of all things and stores them up in
\n\t\t\t<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n29 Sri Aurobindo in fact wrote “dwell too much” in the passage in
\n<\/i>Lights on Yoga<\/span><\/font>. The<\/font><\/i>
\ncorrespondent omitted “too much” when he transcribed the passage. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>125<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\titself” [p. 11<\/i>]. Where then are stored all the words, images and thoughts that we say come out of memory? What is the
\ndifference between storing in memory and this subconscient storing?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe clear memory of words, images and thoughts is an action of the conscious mind, not the unconscious. Of course the memory
\ngoes behind, so to speak, in the back part of the mind, but it can be brought out. Also the memory can be lost or defaced,
\nso that one remembers wrongly or forgets altogether, but that is still an imperfect action of the conscious mind, not an action
\nof the subconscious. What the subconscious keeps is a mass of impressions, not of clear or exact images and these can come
\nup as in dreams in an incoherent jumble distorted altogether or else in the waking state as a mechanical recurrence or repetition of the same suggestions, impulses (subconscient vital) or sensations. There is a recognisable difference between the two
\nfunctionings. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n26 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“The true vital being . . . is wide, vast, calm, strong, without
\nlimitations, firm and immovable, capable of all power, all knowledge, all Ananda” [p. 13<\/i>]. Does this imply that the true
\nvital belongs to the cosmic or supracosmic consciousness? If not, how can it have such qualities?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe true being mental, vital or subtle physical has always the greater qualities of its plane
\n\u2014  it is the Purusha and like the
\npsychic, though in another way, the projection of the Divine, therefore in connection with the Higher Consciousness and reflects something of it, though it is not altogether that \u2014  it is also in tune with the cosmic Truth.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIn the change of the vital nature, is the external surface vital to be entirely effaced and replaced by the true vital or is it to
\nbe kept and changed into the nature of the true vital? In either case, what is the need of an external vital at all if the true vital
\nis already there?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe true vital is in the inner consciousness, the external is that
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>126<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\twhich is instrumental for the present play of Prakriti in the surface personality. When the change comes, the true vital rejects
\nwhat is out of tune with its own truth from the external and makes it a true instrument for its expression, a means of expression of its inner will, not a thing of responses to the suggestions of the lower Nature. The strong distinction between the two
\npractically disappears. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n19 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tIf the true vital is “capable of all power, all knowledge, all
\nAnanda” [p. 13<\/i>], it would seem to be the equal of the supramental vital itself or the vital of the Ishwara. How is it possible
\nfor an individual to have such a vital?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIt is capable of receiving the movements of the higher consciousness, and afterwards it can be capable of receiving the still greater supramental power and Ananda. If it is not, then the
\ndescent of the higher consciousness would be impossible and supramentalisation would be impossible. It is not meant that it
\npossesses these things itself in its own right and that as soon as one is aware of the true vital, one gets all these things as inherent
\nin the true vital. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n20 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“This central being has two forms \u2014  above, it is Jivatman, . . .
\nbelow, it is the psychic being . . .” [p. 15<\/i>]. Is it meant that the Jivatman and the psychic being are different
\nforms <\/i>of the
\ncentral being? If they are forms <\/i>of the central being, how can they be
\nbeings<\/i>?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t“Forms” is not used in a physical sense here. The central being is the being in its original self, the psychic being is the same in
\nthe becoming.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tAgain, when one rises from the psychic being below to the
\nJivatman above, does the psychic being cease to be? And when one rises above the Jivatman does the central being become
\nformless?   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>127<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nThe evolution or becoming continues, so the psychic also continues, just as the rest of the nature continues, only spiritualised and
\nfelt as one being in all planes. It is not a question of formed or formless. As I have said “forms” is not used here in its outward
\nbut its inward or metaphysical sense. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n11 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“The Jivatman . . . knows itself as one centre of the multiple
\nDivine, not as the Parameshwara. It is important to remember the distinction; for, otherwise, if there is the least vital egoism,
\none may begin to think of oneself as an Avatar or lose balance like Hridaya with Ramakrishna” [pp. 15 \u00ad 16<\/i>]. Can the
\nJivatman status be realised before vital egoism is abolished?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tOne can get the knowledge or perception in the higher mind “I
\nam That” while the vital is still untransformed, \u2014  then the vital ego can take it up and give it a wrong application.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tHow can one go so far as to think of oneself as an Avatar? Is it because, if there is union with the Divine, the sense of
\nall-powerfulness that it brings is reflected on the vital ego as something grandiose?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tYes. It is when one feels that one is the Divine, So aham <\/i>but not in the impersonal way to which all is the one Brahman, the One
\nSelf, but in the personal way “I am God, the Parameshwara”. It is as in the Puranic story in which the knowledge was given both to
\nIndra and Virochana and the God understood but the Asura concluded that he the ego was the Divine and therefore went about
\ntrying to impose his ego on the universe. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n26 November 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“The ego . . . does not cease with the body” [pp. 16 \u00ad 17<\/i>].
\nDoes this mean that it is carried by the psychic as a separate principle after death, just as the psychic sometimes carries with
\nit a highly developed mental or vital being, or does it mean ˙   <\/i>
\n that it is taken up in the psychic as a seed-samskara <\/i>or that it exists side by side with the psychic in the after-death state?
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>128<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tIt is only meant that the separative ego is not a creation of birth in the physical body; the mental and the vital have it also. So
\nlong as the mental and vital are subject to ignorance, the ego will last also. When the psychic being goes into rest it naturally
\ntakes it with the essence of its past experience and in coming back it takes up a mental, vital and physical existence which has
\nthe mark of the ego and the ignorance. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n29 October 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“Moreover, the multiple Divine is an eternal reality antecedent
\nto the creation here” [p. 17<\/i>]. Does this mean that souls existed eternally separate from the Brahman? In other words are Jiva
\nand Brahman eternally separate?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe Brahman is not a mathematical One with the Many as
\nan illusion \u2014  he is an infinite One with an infinite multiplicity implied in the Oneness. This is not Dwaitavada
\n\u2014  for in Dwaitavada the many are quite different from the One. In the Sankhya Prakriti is one but the Purushas are many, so it is not Sankhya,
\nnor I suppose Jainism, unless Jainism is quite different from what it is usually represented to be.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tDoes “antecedent to the creation” mean creation as it took place from Supermind downward or does it simply mean the
\nmaterial creation?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThe material creation or the creation of the universe generally.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIf the multiple Divine is to be taken as an eternal reality, does this not come down to something like Jainism and Sankhya, in
\nwhich several Purushas exist eternally? This would be a pure Dwaitavada.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIt is on the contrary a complete Adwaitavada, more complete than Shankara’s who splits Brahman into two incompatible
\nprinciples \u2014  the Brahman and a universe of Maya which is not Brahman and yet somehow exists. In this view which is that of
\nthe Gita and some other Vedantic schools the Para Shakti and the Many are also Brahman. Unity and Multiplicity are aspects of
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>129<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nthe Brahman, just as are Personality and Impersonality, Nirguna and Saguna.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n18 March 1936 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t” . . . if the mental is strongly developed, then the mental being can remain [when the body is dissolved]; so also can the
\nvital, provided they are organised by and centred around the true psychic being; they share the immortality of the psychic”
\n[p. 18<\/i>]. Does this mean that the vital of strong persons like Napoleon is carried forward in the future lives? But how can it
\nbe said that their vital was centred around the psychic being? It is only about the Bhaktas and the Jnanis that we can say
\nthat their vital was centred around the psychic.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIf one has had a strong spiritual development, that makes it
\neasier to retain the developed mental or vital after death. But it is not absolutely necessary that the person should have been
\na Bhakta or a Jnani. One like Shelley or like Plato for instance could be said to have a developed mental being centred round
\nthe psychic \u2014  of the vital the same can hardly be said. Napoleon had a strong vital but not one organised round the psychic being.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n12 October 1935 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“It is really for the vital part of the being that Shraddha and rites are done
\n\u2014  to help the being to get rid of the vital
\nvibrations which still attach it to the earth or to the vital worlds, so that it may pass quickly to its rest in the psychic
\npeace” [p. 18<\/i>]. Does this mean that the Shraddha ceremony performed at present by the Brahmins is correct? Does feeding
\nthe caste and the Brahmins fulfil the purpose?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tI only said what was originally
\nmeant <\/i>by the ceremonies \u2014  the
\nrites. I was not referring to the feeding of the caste or the Brahmins which is not a rite or ceremony. Whether the Shraddha
\nas performed is actually effective is another matter \u2014  for those who perform it have not either the knowledge or the occult
\npower. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n11 April 1935
\n  
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>130<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n


\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tBases of Yoga<\/span><\/i><\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tI have been reading your Bases of Yoga <\/i>\u2014  a most staggering
\nbook: the Himalayan conditions for success you impose \u2014 well, shall the likes of us ever fulfil a hundredth part of such
\ncountless conditions?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tConditions for success? But these are not conditions for doing
\nthe sadhana, but the basic conditions for the integral siddhi \u2014 they are, as it might be said, basic siddhis, realised foundations
\non which the total and permanent siddhi can be created \u2014  or one may say they are the constituents of the Yogic as opposed
\nto the ordinary consciousness. When one has arrived fully at this Yogic consciousness, one can be called a Yogi, till then one
\nis a sadhak. So much as all that is not demanded immediately from a sadhak. From the sadhak all that is asked is “a sincerity
\nin the aspiration and a patient will to arrive . . . in spite of all obstacles, then the opening in one form or another is sure to
\ncome.”30<\/font><\/sup> “All sincere aspiration has its effect; if you are sincere you will grow into the divine life” [p. 26<\/i>]. Again “One cannot
\nbecome altogether this at once, but if one aspires at all times and calls in the aid of the Divine Shakti with a true heart and
\na straightforward will, one grows more and more into the true consciousness” [cf. p. 27<\/i>]. It is of course said that the success
\nwill come sooner or later, \u2014  it is for that reason that patience is indispensable. But these are not Himalayan conditions
\n\u2014  it
\nis not putting an impossible price on what is asked for. As for the difficulty, as it has also been said in the book, when one
\nonce enters into the true (Yogic) consciousness, “then you see that everything can be done, even if at present only a slight
\nbeginning has been made; but a beginning is enough, once the Force, the Power are there” [pp. 33 \u00ad 34<\/i>]. It is not really on the
\ncapacity of the outer nature that success depends, (for the outer nature all self-exceeding seems impossibly difficult), but on the
\ninner being and to the inner being all is possible. One has only to get into contact with the inner being and change the outer
\n\t\t\t<\/span>
\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n30 Sri Aurobindo, <\/i>Bases of Yoga <\/span> <\/font>
\n
\n\t\t\t(Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram, 1981), p. 24.<\/font><\/i>  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>131<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nview and consciousness from the inner \u2014  that is the work of the sadhana and it is sure to come with sincerity, aspiration, and
\npatience. All that is not excessively stern or exacting.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nAs a description of the constituents of the Yogic consciousness, the bases of realisation, I don’t think the book can be called staggering or its suggestions Himalayan
\n\u2014  for in fact they have
\nalready been stated by the Gita and other books on Yoga and, after all, thousands of people have realised them in part at least
\nor in the inner being \u2014  though not so well in the outer. But to realise the inner being is quite enough for a foundation
\n\u2014  for
\nmany it is quite enough even as a last state, for those who do not seek the transformation of the outer nature. Here too, even
\nif one puts the whole ideal, it is not alleged that it must be all done at once or as a first condition for the greater endeavour.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n26 June 1936 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tYou feel depressed on reading the Bases of Yoga<\/i>, because your mind becomes active at the wrong end; from the point of view
\nof your obsession about inability, hopelessness, past failure enforcing future failure. The right way to read these things is not
\nto be mentally active, but receive with a quiet mind leaving the knowledge given to go in and bear its fruit hereafter at the proper
\ntime, not ask how one can practise it now or try to apply it to immediate circumstances in which it may not fit. I have told you
\nalready that these things are the basic siddhis which constitute the Yogic consciousness
\n\u2014  they are things towards which one
\nhas to move but cannot be established now and offhand. What has to be done now is for each the thing necessary for him at
\npresent. I have indicated what is necessary at present for you, the growth of the psychic being which had begun and the power
\nof contact and communication which it will bring with the inner consciousness and through it with the Divine Power or Presence.
\nBut for that to grow the mind must keep more quiet, not insisting, not desponding at every moment, but steadily aspiring and
\nletting the things of which these were indications grow from within.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n28 June 1936  
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>132<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tPassages from Bases of Yoga<\/i><\/b>
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tI do not remember the context of the sentence quoted,31 without
\nwhich it is not possible to say what was meant by its not being the first aim of the Yoga. That may mean it is not the one to be
\npursued at the beginning, for first there should be the union in the heart of the personal being with the Divine. Or it may mean
\nthat it does not take priority or importance over all others. For both personality and impersonality have their claims and join
\ntogether in the final realisation of what transcends and unites them both in one.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nWhat has to disappear is the personal separative ego \u2014  the dualities of course also. The quickest though not the final way
\nto extinguish ego is to make it disappear in impersonality. When all is one, universal or infinite then there is no place for the sense
\nof ego \u2014  the dualities also begin to disappear. But the difficulty is that usually this realisation is confined to the mind or the
\nabove-mind while in the vital the stamp of ego remains and is felt in the life and its actions and reactions. Even if full impersonality comes in the vital and physical also, there remains the impossibility, all being impersonal, of having any relation with
\nthe Divine. What has therefore to be done is to lose the small personality in impersonality, but also by that loss to discover the
\ntrue personality which is a portion of the Divine. This person is not separative and limited but is a universal individual, has the
\nsense of uniting with all, but also the power of love and worship for the Divine. That is why I say that to merge the personal
\nconsciousness is not the first (or the whole) aim of the Yoga. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nNovember 1935
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tIn Bases of Yoga <\/i>one reads, “It is with the Mother who is
\nalways with you and in you that you converse” [p. 56<\/i>]. Could you kindly explain to me how one converses with the Mother?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t<\/p>\n

\n31 “Also to merge the personal consciousness is not the first aim of the Yoga. . . .”
\n<\/i>Bases<\/span><\/font> of Yoga<\/font>, p. 1.<\/font><\/i>
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>133<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nOne hears the voice or the thought speaking inwardly and one answers inwardly. Only it is not always safe for the sadhak if
\nthere is any insincerity of ego, desire, vanity, ambition in him \u2014  for then he may construct a voice or thought in his mind
\nand ascribe it to the Mother and it will say to him pleasing and flattering things which mislead him. Or he may mistake some
\nother Voice for the Mother’s. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n2 July 1936
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tYou write in Bases of Yoga<\/i>, “All the ordinary vital movements . . . are waves from the general Nature, Prakriti,” and “The desires come from outside . . .” [p. 61<\/i>]. If desires are only
\nwaves from outside (Prakriti), what then is the vital itself? Is not desire its main constituent?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThere can be a vital without desire. When desire disappears from the being, the vital does not disappear with it.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIs not the vital itself part of the same Prakriti?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tBy Prakriti is meant universal Prakriti. Universal Prakriti entering into the vital being creates desires which appear by its habitual response as an individual nature; but if the habitual
\ndesires she throws in are rejected and exiled, the being remains but the old individual prakriti of vital desire is no longer there
\n\u2014  a new nature is formed responding to the Truth above and not to the lower Nature.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tWhat determines the first <\/i>response to these waves? One may suppose that the habit of response is carried over from life to
\nlife. But what determined the response when we were animals in some distant past?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tUniversal Prakriti determined it and the soul or Purusha accepted it. In the acceptance lies the responsibility. The Purusha is that
\nwhich sanctions or refuses. The vital being responds to the ordinary life waves in the animal; man responds to them but has the
\npower of mental control. He has also, as the mental Purusha is awake in him, the power to choose whether he shall have desire
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>134<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tor train his being to surmount it. Finally, there is the possibility of bringing down a higher nature which will not be subject to
\ndesire but act on another vital principle. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nDecember 1936
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tYou write in Bases of Yoga<\/i>, “The whole principle of this
\nYoga is to give oneself entirely to the Divine alone . . . and to bring down into ourselves . . . all the transcendent light . . .
\nand Ananda of the supramental Divine. . . .” And then, “It is only after becoming one with the supramental Divine . . .” and
\nalso, “It is only the bringing down of the supramental Light, Power and Bliss . . .” [pp. 70 \u00ad 72<\/i>]. These passages indicate
\nthat it is possible for the Jiva to rise up into and bring down the supramental consciousness. But in the
\nArya <\/i>you define the
\nsupermind as the truth-will of Sachchidananda. How could any human being except one who has come for the divine
\nmanifestation reach or bring down the supermind? This is something for the Divine alone.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tIt is the very principle of this Yoga that only by the supramentalisation of the consciousness which means rising above mind to
\nsupermind and the descent of the supermind into the nature can the final transformation be made. So if nobody can rise above
\nmind to supermind or obtain the descent of the supermind, then logically this Yoga becomes impossible. Every being is in essence
\none with the Divine and in his individual being a portion of the Divine, so there is no insuperable bar to his becoming supramental. It is no doubt impossible for the human nature being mental in its basis to overcome the Ignorance and rise to or obtain
\nthe descent of the Supermind by its own unaided effort, but by surrender to the Divine it can be done. One brings it down into
\nthe earth Nature through his own consciousness and so opens the way for the others, but the change has to be repeated in each
\nconsciousness to become individually effective. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n29 July 1936
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\t“In this Yoga . . . there can be no place for vital relations or
\ninterchanges with others. . . . Still worse would it be if this interchange took the form of a sexual relation . . .” [p. 70<\/i>].
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>135<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tThe first of these sentences seems to refer to relations between men and men or women and women. But didn’t you
\nonce say that ordinary interchanges between people are almost unavoidable? Moreover, almost everyone here [in the<\/i>
\nAshram<\/i>] has friends. Do friendships fall in the category of “vital relations”?
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tI suppose I must have been referring to the interchanges which are the result of vital relations. The involuntary vital or other
\ninvoluntary interchange which takes place by the mere fact of meeting, talking or being together are those which are practically
\nunavoidable. That is to say, they are avoidable only when one has become entirely conscious and is able to put a wall of Force
\naround oneself which nothing can penetrate except the things which one wills to accept. But the reference in the passage cannot
\nbe to these, but to the interchange due to vital attachments, passions, vital love or hate etc.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nFriendships can be vital relations if there is strong attachment or desire but the friendship which is the nature of comradeship or mental affinity or of a psychic character need not be a vital relation.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n4 January 1937 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t  <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t\tIn Bases of Yoga<\/i>, it is said about the sex-movements that they “throw into the atmosphere forces that would block the supramental descent, bringing instead the descent of adverse vital powers” [p. 71<\/i>]. Is it meant that any kind of sex-movement in
\nthe Ashram atmosphere would block the supramental descent? If it were so, the descent would hardly be possible because new
\nsadhaks or temporary visitors may indulge in sex-movements and throw these forces in the atmosphere.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\tThat is not what is said in that passage. What is spoken of is the taking of sex indulgence as a part of the aim and method of
\nthe sadhana. It is said that if that were done, the sadhana would bring down vital Forces of a type adverse to the supramental
\nchange which would serve to block (stand in the way of) the supramental descent.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n1 August 1936 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t*<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>136<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\tYou write in Bases of Yoga<\/i>, in regard to “the waves that
\nrecur from the general Nature”, that “they return on him [the individual], often with an increased force . . . when they
\nfind their influence rejected. But they cannot last long once the environmental consciousness is cleared
\n\u2014  unless the `Hostiles’
\ntake a hand” [p. 90<\/i>]. Two questions arise: (1) Whether the Hostiles are something quite different from the waves of
\nNature? (2) Whether, during the process you describe (the “return” of the forces and so forth), it was not the Hostiles
\nattacking all the time. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t 
\n <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\tThere are some who are never touched by the hostile forces.
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe normal resistance of the lower Nature in human beings and the action of the Hostiles are two quite different things.
\nThe former is natural and occurs in everybody; the latter is an intervention from the non-human world. But this intervention
\ncan come in two forms. (1) They use and press on the lower Nature forces making them resist where they would otherwise
\nbe quiescent, making the resistance strong or violent where it would be otherwise slight or moderate, exaggerating its violence
\nwhen it is violent. There is besides a malignant cleverness, a conscious plan and combination when the Hostiles act on these
\nforces which is not evident in the normal resistance of the forces. (2) They sometimes invade with their own forces. When this
\nhappens there is often a temporary possession or at least an irresistible influence which makes the thoughts, feelings, actions of
\nthe person abnormal \u2014  a black clouding of the brain, a whirl in the vital, all acts as if the person could not help himself and were
\ndriven by an overmastering force. On the other hand instead of a possession there may be only a strong Influence; there the
\nsymptoms are less marked, but it is easy for anyone acquainted with the ways of these forces to see what has happened. Finally
\nit may be only an attack, not possession or influence; the person then is separate, is not overcome, resists.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n24 August 1936 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t 
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe Supramental Manifestation upon Earth<\/b><\/span><\/i>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n 
\n <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\tBefore coming to the main point I may as well clear out one  
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>137<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nmatter not unconnected with it, my articles or messages, as they have been called, in the
\nBulletin<\/i>;32<\/font><\/sup> for their appearance there and
\ntheir contents seem to have caused some trouble, perplexity or misunderstanding in your mind and especially my speculations
\nabout the divine body. I wrote the first of these articles to explain about how or why sport came to be included in the programme
\nof the Ashram activities and I think I made it clear, as I went on, that sport was not sadhana, that it belonged to what I called
\nthe lower end of things, but that it might be used not merely for amusement or recreation or the maintenance of health, but
\nfor a greater efficiency of the body and for the development of certain qualities and capacities, not of the body only but of
\nmorale and discipline and the stimulation of mental energies: but I pointed out also that these could be and were developed
\nby other means and that there were limitations to this utility. In fact, it is only by sadhana that one could go beyond the
\nlimits natural to the lower-end means. I think there was little room for misunderstanding here but the Mother had asked me
\nto write on other subjects not connected in any way with sport and had suggested some subjects such as the possibilities of the
\nevolution of a divine body; so I wrote on that subject and went on to speak of the Supermind and Truth-Consciousness which
\nhad obviously not even the remotest connection with sport. The object was to bring in something higher and more interesting
\nthan a mere record of gymnasium events but which might appeal to some of the readers or even to wider circles. In speaking of the
\ndivine body I entered into some far-off speculations about what might become possible in the future evolution of it by means
\nof a spiritual force, but obviously the possibilities could not be anything near or immediate and I said clearly enough that we
\nshall have to begin at the beginning and not attempt anything out of the way. Perhaps I should have insisted more on present
\nlimitations but that I should now make clear. For the immediate object of my endeavours is to establish spiritual life on earth and
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n32 The eight essays making up <\/i>The Supramental Manifestation upon Earth
\n<\/font> were first<\/font><\/i>
\npublished in the <\/font> <\/i>Bulletin of Physical Education
\n<\/font> in 1949 and 1950. \u2014  Ed.<\/font><\/i>
\n  
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>138<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tfor that the first necessity must always be to realise the Divine; only then can life be spiritualised or what I have called the Life
\nDivine be made possible. The creation of something that could be called a divine body could be only an ulterior aim undertaken
\nas part of this transformation; as obviously the development of such a divine body as was envisioned in these speculations could
\nonly come into view as the result of a distant evolution and need not alarm or distract anyone. It might even be regarded as a
\nphantasy of some remotely possible future which might one day happen to come true.
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t7 December 1949 <\/font> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t\t 
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nPublication Plans, 1949<\/b>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n 
\n <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n\tThere can be no objection to the immediate or early publication [in the United States<\/i>] of (1)
\nThe Life Divine <\/i>(2) the Essays on the<\/i>
\nGita <\/i>(3) The Synthesis of Yoga <\/i>(Yoga of Works) (4) Superman<\/i> (and other essays) (5)
\nThe Hero and the Nymph <\/i>(with essay on
\nKalidasa). As regards the Collected Poems <\/i>numerous corrections have to be made in
\nPerseus <\/i>and the essay on classical metres,
\nbut as these are mainly misprints there is no objection to their being made on the proofs when these are sent to us.
\n\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nAs to The Ideal of Human Unity <\/i>and The Psychology of<\/i> Social Development
\n<\/i>they have to be altered by the introduction of new chapters and rewriting of passages and in the Ideal<\/i> changes have to be made all through the book in order to bring
\nit up to date, so it is quite impossible to make these alterations on the proofs. I propose however to revise these two books as
\nsoon as possible; they will receive my first attention. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe Defence of Indian Culture
\n<\/span>
\n<\/i>is an unfinished book and
\nalso I had intended to alter much of it and to omit all but brief references to William Archer’s criticisms. That was why its
\npublication has been so long delayed. Even if it is reprinted as it is, considerable alterations will have to be made and there must
\nbe some completion and an end to the book which does not at present exist.
\n<\/span>
\n<\/p>\n

\nThe Future Poetry <\/span> <\/i>also cannot be published as it is, for there must be a considerable rearrangement of its matter since
\n   <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>139<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n

\npublication from month to month left its plan straggling and
\nill-arranged and also one or two chapters will have to be omitted
\nor replaced by other new ones. I do not wish it to be published in its present imperfect form.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe publication of The Secret of the Veda <\/i>as it is does not enter into my intention. It was published in a great hurry and at
\na time when I had not studied the Rig Veda as a whole as well as I have since done. Whole chapters will have to be rewritten
\nor written otherwise and a considerable labour gone through; moreover, it was never finished and considerable additions in
\norder to make it complete are indispensable. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n30 June 1949
\n  
\n<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n 
\n\t\t\t<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nPage \u2013 <\/font>140<\/font><\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

On His Published Prose Writings   Publication Plans, 1927   There is no intention of withdrawing support. The small book The Mother was given to…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[37],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1653","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-35-letters-on-himself-and-the-ashram","wpcat-37-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1653","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=1653"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1653\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1653"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1653"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1653"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}