{"id":3776,"date":"2013-07-13T01:51:09","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:51:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=3776"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:51:09","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:51:09","slug":"04-sources-of-poetic-inspiration-and-vision-vol-03-third-series-1949","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/02-other-editions\/letters-of-sri-aurobindo\/03-third-series-1949\/04-sources-of-poetic-inspiration-and-vision-vol-03-third-series-1949","title":{"rendered":"-04_Sources of Poetic Inspiration and Vision.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n
\n

\n
\nSECTION TWO <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\n
\nSOURCES OF POETIC INSPIRATION AND <\/font><\/b><\/p>\n

\nVISION\u2014 MYSTIC AND SPIRITUAL POETRY <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/font>
\n
\nSources of Poetic Inspiration<\/a><\/i><\/font><\/b><\/p>\n

\n


\n <\/font><\/b><\/p>\n

\nA<\/font>LL<\/b> poetry is mental
\nor vital or both; sometimes with a psychic tinge; the power from above mind
\ncomes in only in rare lines and passages lifting up the mental and vital
\ninspiration. towards its own light and power. To work freely from that hidden
\ninspiration is a thing that has not been done though certain tendencies of
\nmodern poetry seem to be an unconscious attempt to prepare for that. But in the
\nmind and vital there ? are many provinces and kingdoms and what you have been
\nwriting recently is by no means from. the ordinary mind or vital; its
\ninspiration comes. from a higher or deeper occult or inner source. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n17-5-1937 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nVital Poetry<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\nWHAT I mean by vital poetry is that in which appeal to sense or sensation, to the vital thrill, is so dominant that the mental content of the poetry <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 59<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ntakes quite a secondary place. Either word and sound tend to predominate over sense or else the nerves and blood are thrilled (e.g. in war poetry) but the mind and soul do not find an equal satisfaction. This does not mean that there is to be no vital element in poetry\u2014without the vital nothing living can be done. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe World of Word-Music<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\nN<\/b> SEEMS to have put himself into contact with an inexhaustible source of flowing words and rhythm\u2014 with the world of word-music, which is one province of the World of Beauty. It is part of the .vital world no doubt and the joy that comes of contact with that beauty is vital but it is a subtle vital which is not merely sensuous. It is one of the powers by which the substance of the consciousness can be refined and prepared for sensibility to a still higher beauty and Ananda. Also it can be made a vehicle for the expression of the highest things. The Veda, the "Upanishad, the Mantra, everywhere owe half their power to the rhythmic sound that embodies their inner meanings. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/font><\/p>\n

\n2-3-1936 <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 60<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\n
\nEarth-Memory\u2014Subtle-Vital World of
\n<\/a> <\/i> <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\nCreative Art\u2014Dream Inspiration<\/i> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nTHERE is an earth-memory from which one gets <\/b>or can get things of the past more or less accurately according to the quality of the mind that receives them. But this experience is not explicable on that basis\u2014for the Gopis here are evidently not earthly beings and the place R saw was not a terrestrial locality. If she had got it from the earth-mind at all, it could only be from the world of images created by Vaishnava tradition with perhaps a personal transcription of her own. But this also does not agree with all the details. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIt is quite usual for poets and musicians and artists to receive things\u2014they can even be received complete and direct, though oftenest with some working of the individual mind and consequent alteration\u2014from a plane above the physical mind, a vital world of creative art and beauty in which these things are prepared and come down through the fit channel. The musician, poet or artist, if he is conscious, may be quite aware and sensitive of this transmission, even feel or see something of the plane from which it comes. Usually, however, this is in the waking state and the contact
\nis not so vivid as that felt by R. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 61<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nThere are such things as dream inspirations\u2014it is rare, however, that these are of any value. For the dreams of most people are recorded by the subconscient. Either the whole thing is a creation of the subconscient and turns out, if recorded, to be incoherent and lacking in any sense, or, if there is a real communication from a higher plane, marked by a sense of elevation and wonder, it gets transcribed by the subconscient and what that forms is either flat or ludicrous. Moreover, this was seen between sleep and waking\u2014and things so seen are not dreams, but experiences from other planes either mental or vital or subtle physical or more rarely psychic or higher plane experiences. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIn this case it is very possible that she got into some kind of connection with the actual world of Krishna and the Gopis through the vital. This seems to be indicated first by the sense of extreme rapture and light and beauty and secondly, by the contact with the "Blue Radiance" that was Krishna \u2014that phrase and the expressions she uses have a strong touch of something that was authentic. I say through the vital, because of course it was presented to her in forms and words that her human mind could seize and understand; the original forms of that world would be something that could hardly be seizable by the human sense. The Hindi words <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 62<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ncourse belong to the transcribing agency. That
\nwould not mean that it was a creation other personal mind, but only a transcription given to her, just
\nwithin the bounds of what it could seize, even though unfamiliar to her waking consciousness.
\nOnce the receptivity of the mind awakened, the rest came to her freely through the channel created by the vision. That her mind did not create the song is confirmed by the fact that it came in Hindi with so much perfection of language and technique. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nTo anyone familiar with occult phenomena and their analysis these things will seem perfectly normal and intelligible. The vision-mind in us is part of the inner being, and the inner mind, vital, physical are not bound by the dull and narrow limitations of our outer
\nphysical personality and the small scope of the world it lives in. Its scope is vast, extraordinary, full of inexhaustible interest and, as one goes higher, of glory and sweetness and beauty. The difficulty is to get it through the outer human instruments which are so narrow and crippled and unwilling to receive them. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n9-6-1935 <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 63<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nPoetry of the Inner Mind and Dynamic Vision<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nTHE inner Mind can get the reflection of the higher experience or, of course, by descent in yoga the higher realisation can come down into the lower planes\u2014that is indeed the object of this Yoga. But what I meant was that the Higher Mind is itself a spiritual plane and that one who lives in it has naturally the realisation of the Self, the One everywhere. The inner Mind has not that naturally,, but it can open to it; all the same, between the reflected realisation in the mind and the automatic realisation in the spiritual mental planes there is a difference. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe plane of dynamic vision is a part of the inner Mind and perhaps should be called a province rather than a plane. There are many kinds of vision in the inner Mind and not dynamic vision only. So, to fix invariable characteristics for the poetry of the inner Mind is not easy or even possible. It is a thing to be felt rather than mentally definable. A certain spontaneous intensity of vision is usually there, but not of that large or rich sweep or power which belongs to the Illumined Mind; moreover, it is more subtle and fine and has not the wideness which is the characteristic of the planes that rise towards the Overmind. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 64<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\n
\nPoetic Intelligence and Higher Mind<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nTHE Higher Mind is the first plane where one becomes aware of the Self, the One everywhere and knows and sees things through an elevated thought- power and comprehensive mental sight\u2014not illumined by any of the intense or upper lights but as in a large strong and clear daylight. The poetic intelligence is quite different; it is the mind and its vision moving on the wings of imagination akin <\/b>to <\/b>the intellect proper but lifted above it. The Higher Mind is a spiritual plane, this is not. But the larger philosophic and the larger poetic intelligence are nearer to it than the ordinary intellect and may receive its influence. When Milton starts
\nhis poem <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nOf man’s first disobedience and the fruit <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOf that forbidden tree\u2014 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nhe is evidently writing from the poetic intelligence.
\nThere is nothing of the Higher Mind knowledge or vision either in the substance or style. But there
\nis a largeness of rhythm and sweep of the language which has a certain kinship to the manner natural to what is above. Naturally, something from the higher planes can come into the poetry whose
\n<\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 65<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nmedium is the poetic intelligence and uplift it. That happens in such lines as <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThose thoughts that wander through eternity. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThis applies to most of the classical poets\u2014classical poetry is fundamentally a poetry of the poetic intelligence. But it may be suffused and modified by Other influences\u2014generally through some infiltration from the inner Mind which communicates some tinge of a higher afflatus to the poetic intelligence, sometimes through a direct uplifting. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOf course you must understand that the greatness Of the poetry as poetry does not necessarily depend on the level from which it is written. Shelley has more access to the inner Mind and through it to greater things than Milton, but he is not the greater poet. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\nTrue Inspiration and Poetic Rhetoric<\/i>
\n<\/a><\/font><\/b><\/p>\n

\nMANMOHAN’S poem* has a considerable elevation of .thought, diction and rhythm. It is certainly a fine<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/font><\/p>\n

\n*Augustest! dearest! whom no thought can trace, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nName murmuring out of birth’s infinity, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nMother! like heaven’s great face is thy sweet face, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 66<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nproduction and, if all had been equal to the first three lines which are pure and perfect in inspiration, the sonnet might have stood among the finest things in the English language. But somehow it fails as
\na whole. The reason is that the intellectual mind took up the work of transcription and a Miltonic rhetorical note comes in; all begins to be thought rather than seen or felt; the poet seems to be writing what he thinks he ought to write on such a subject and doing it very well\u2014one admires, the mind is moved and the vital stirred, but the deeper satisfying spiritual thrill which the first lines set out to give is no longer there. Already in the fourth line there is the touch of poetic rhetoric. The original afflatus continues to persist behind, but can no longer speak itself out in its native language; <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\n______________________________________________________         <\/font><\/p>\n

\nStupendous with the mystery of me. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nEyes elder than the light; cheek that no flower <\/font><\/p>\n

\nRemembers; brow at which my infant care <\/font><\/p>\n

\nGazed weeping up and saw the skies enshower <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWith tender rain of vast mysterious hair! <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThou, at whose breast the sunbeams sucked, whose <\/b>
\narm <\/font><\/p>\n

\nCradled the lisping ocean, art thou she, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nGoddess! at whose dim heart the world’s deep charm, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nTears, terrors, throbbing things were yet to be? <\/font><\/p>\n

\nShe, from whose tearing pangs in glory first <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI and the infinite wide heavens burst? <\/font><\/p>\n

\n(Manmohan Ghose) <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 67<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nthere is a mental translation. It tries indeed to get back\u2014 <\/font><\/p>\n

\nEyes elder than the light\u2014cheek that no flower Remembers\u2014 <\/font><\/p>\n

\nthen loses almost altogether\u2014what follows is purely mental. Another effort brings the eighth line which is undoubtedly very fine and has sight behind it. Then there is a compromise; the spiritual seeing mind seems to say to the thinking poetic intellect,, "All right, have it your own way\u2014I will try at least to keep you up at your best", and we have the three lines that follow those two others that are forcible and vivid poetic (very poetic) rhetoric \u2014finally a close that goes back to the level of the "stupendous mystery". No, it is not a "splendid confusion"\u2014the poem is well-constructed from the point of view of arrangement of the thought, so there can be no confusion. It is the work of a poet who got into touch with some high level of spiritual. sight, a living vision of some spirit truth, but, that not being his native domain, could not keep its, perfect voice throughout and mixed his inspiration \u2014that seems to me the true estimate. A very fine poem, all the same. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 68<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nA Personal Appreciation<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nIT is not a relapse, but an oscillation which one finds in almost every poet. Each has a general level, a highest level and a lower range in which some defects of his poetical faculty come out. You have three manners: (1) a sort of decorative romantic manner that survives from your early days\u2014this at a lower pitch turns to too much dressiness of an ornamental kind, at a higher to post-Victorian, Edwardian or Georgian rhetoric with a frequent saving touch of Yeats; (2) a level at which all is fused into a fine intuitive authenticity and beauty, there is seldom anything to change; (3) a higher level of grander movement and language in which you pull down or reach the influences of the Higher Mind, Illumined Mind, Overmind Intuition. The last you have not yet fully mastered so as to write with an absolute certainty and faultlessness except by lines and stanzas or else as a whole in rare moments of total inspiration, but you are moving towards mastery in it. Sometimes these inspirations get mixed up together. It is this straining towards greater height that creates the difficulty, yet it is indispensable for the evolution of your genius. It is not surprising, therefore, that inspiration comes with difficulty often, or that there are dormant <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 69<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nperiods or returns of the decorative inspiration. All that is part of the day’s work and dejection is quite out of place. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n20-4-1937<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\nPoetry of the Intuitive Mind<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\nWHAT you are writing now is ‘overhead’ poetry\u2014 I mean poetry inspired from those planes; before you used to write poems very often from the intuitive mind\u2014these had a beauty and perfection of their own. What I mean by absoluteness here is a full intensely inevitable expression of what comes from above. These lines are original, convincing, have vision, they are not to be rejected, but they are not the highest flight except in single lines. Such variations are to be expected and will be more prominent if you were writing longer poems, for then to keep always or even usually to that highest level would be an extraordinary feat\u2014no poet has "managed as yet to write always at his highest flight and here in that kind of poetry it would be still more difficult. The important point is not to fall below a certain level. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 70<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nThe intuitive mind, strictly speaking, stretches from the Intuition proper down to the intuitivised inner mind\u2014it is therefore at once an overhead power and a mental intelligence power. All depends on the amount, intensity, quality of the intuition and how far it is mixed with mind or pure. The inner mind is not necessarily intuitive, though it can easily become so. The mystic mind is turned towards the occult and spiritual, but the inner mind can act without direct reference to the occult and spiritual, it can act in the same field and in the same material as the ordinary mind, only with a larger and deeper power, range and light and in greater unison with the Universal Mind; it can open also more easily to what is within and what is above. Intuitive intelligence, mystic mind, inner mind intelligence are all part of the inner mind operations. In today’s poem, for instance\u2014A Poet\u2019s Stammer \u2014<\/i>it is certainly the inner mind that has transformed the idea of stammering into a symbol of inner phenomena and into that operation a certain strain of mystic mind enters, but what is prominent is the intuitive inspiration throughout. It blends with the intuitive poetic intelligence in the first stanza, gets touched by the overhead intuition in the second, gets full
\nof it in the third and again rises rapidly to that in the two last lines of the fourth stanza. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 71<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nThis is what <\/b> I call poetry of the intuitive Mind. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n13-5-1937 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\nPoetry of Spiritual Vision<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nTHE spiritual vision must never be intellectual, philosophical or abstract, it must always give the sense of something vivid, living and concrete, a thing of vibrant beauty or a thing of power. An abstract spiritual poetry is possible but that is not A’s manner. The poetry of spiritual vision as distinct from that of spiritual thought abounds in images, unavoidably because that is the straight way to avoid abstractness; but these images must be felt as very real and concrete things, otherwise they become like the images used by the philosophic poets, decorative to the thought rather than realities of the inner vision and experience. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n28-5-1937 <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 72<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nMystic and Spiritual Poetry<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nI USED the word mystic in the sense of a certain kind of inner seeing and feeling of things, a way which to the intellect would seem occult and visionary\u2014for this is something different from imagination and its work with which the intellect is familiar. It was in this sense that I said D had not the mystic mind and vision. One can go far in the spiritual way, have plenty of spiritual experiences, spiritual knowledge, spiritual feelings, significant visions and dreams even without having this mystic mind and way of seeing things. So too one may write poetry from different planes or sources of inspiration and expressing spiritual feelings, knowledge, experiences and yet use the poetic intelligence as the thought medium which gives them shape in speech; such poems are not of the mystic type. One may be mystic in this sense without being spiritual\u2014one may also be spiritual without being mystic; or one may be both spiritual and mystic in one. Poems ditto. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nMystic Poetry of Higher and Lower Planes<\/b><\/i>
\n<\/b> <\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

\nMYSTIC poetry can be written from any plane, provided the writer gets an inspiration from the <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 73<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ninner consciousness whether mind, vital or subtle physical. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nNaturally, the lower planes cannot express the Spirit with its full and native voice as the higher planes do unless something comes down into them from the higher planes. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nSunlight and Moonlight Mystic Poetry\u2014
\n<\/a> <\/i> <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\nInspiration and Revelation<\/i> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nI FIND no difficulty in the last stanza of J’s poem nor any in connecting it with the two former stanzas. It is a single feeling and subjective idea or vision expressing itself in three facets. In the full night of the spirit there is a luminosity from above in the very heart of the darkness\u2014imaged by the moon and stars in the bosom of the Night. (The night sky with the moon (spiritual light) and the stars is a well known symbol and it is seen frequently by sadhaks even when they do not know its meaning). In that night of the spirit is the Dream to which or through which a path is found that in the ordinary light of waking day one forgets or misses. In the night of the spirit are shadowy avenues of pain, but even in that shadow the Power of Beauty and <\/font><\/p>\n

\n.<\/font>Page – 74<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nBeatitude sings secretly and unseen the strains of Paradise. But in the light of day the mystic heart of moonlight sorrowfully weeps, suppressed, for even though the nectar of it is there behind, it falters away from this garish light because it is itself a subtle thing of dream, not of conscious waking mind-nature. That is how I understand or rather try mentally to express it. But it is putting a very abstract sense into what should be kept vague in outline but vivid in feeling\u2014by mentalising one puts at once too much and too little in it. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI do not remember the context of the passage you quote from "The Future Poetry", but I suppose I meant to contrast the veiled utterance of what
\nis usually called mystic poetry with the luminous. and assured clarity of the fully expressed spiritual experience. I did not mean to contrast it with the mental clarity which is aimed at usually by poetry in which the intelligence or thinking mind is consulted at each step. The concreteness of intellectual imaged description is one thing and spiritual concreteness is another. "Two birds, companions, seated on one tree, but one eats the fruit, the other eats not but watches his fellow"*\u2014that has an illumining spiritual clarity and concreteness to one<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/font><\/p>\n

\n *Mundaka Upanishad <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 75<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nwho has had the experience, <\/b> but mentally <\/b>and <\/b>intellectually it might mean anything or nothing. Poetry uttered with the spiritual clarity may be compared to sunlight, poetry uttered with the mystic veil to moonlight. But it was not my intention to deny beauty, power or value to the moonlight. Note that I have distinguished between two
\nkinds of mysticism, one in which the realisation or experience is vague, though inspiringly vague, the other in which the experience is revelatory and intimate, but the utterance it finds is veiled by the image, not thoroughly revealed by it. I do not know to which Tagore’s recent poetry belongs, I have not read it. But the latter kind of poetry (where there is the intimate experience) can be of great power and value\u2014witness Blake. Revelation is greater than inspiration\u2014it brings the direct knowledge and seeing; inspiration gives the expression, but the two are not always equal. There is even an inspiration without revelation, when one gets the word but the thing remains behind the veil; the transcribing consciousness expresses ‘something with power, like a medium, of which it has not itself the direct sight or the living possession. It is better to get the sight of the thing itself than merely express it by an inspiration which comes from behind the veil, but this kind of poetry too <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 76<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nhas often a great light and power in it. The highest inspiration brings the intrinsic word, the spiritual mantra; but even where the inspiration is less than that, has a certain vagueness or fluidity of outline, you cannot say of such mystic poetry that it has no inspiration, not the inspired word at all. Where there is no inspiration there can be no poetry. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n10-6-1936 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\nSymbolic and Mystic Poetry<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nI SUPPOSE the poem you sent me might be described as the poetic rendering of a symbolic vision\u2014 it is not a mystic poem. A poem no doubt can be symbolic and mystic at the same time. For instance N’s English poem of the vision of the Lion-flame and the Deer-flame, beauty and power, was symbolic and mystic at once. It is when the thing seen is spiritually lived and has an independent vivid reality
\nof its own which exceeds any conceptual significance it may have on the surface that it is mystic. Symbols
\nmay be of various kinds; there are those that are concealing images capable of intellectual interpretation but still different from either symbolic or <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 77<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nallegorical figures\u2014and there are those that have a more intimate life of their own and are not conceptual so much as occultly vital in their significance; there are still others that need a psychic or spiritual or at least an inner and intuitive sight to identify oneself fully with their meaning. In a poem which uses conceptual symbols the mind is more active and the reader wants to know what it means to the mind; but as minds diner, the poet may attach one meaning to it and the reader may find another, if the image used is at all an enigmatic one, not mentally clear and precise. In the more deeply symbolist \u2014still more in the mystic\u2014poem the mind is submerged in the vividness of the reality and any mental explanation falls far short of what is felt and lived in the deeper vital or psychic response. This is what Housman in his book tries to explain with regard to Blake’s poetry, though he seems to me to miss altogether the real nature of the response. It is not the mere sensation to which what he calls pure poetry appeals but to a deeper inner life or life-soul within us which has profounder depths than the thinking mind and responds with a certain kind of soul-excitement or ecstasy\u2014the physical vibrations on which he lays stress are merely a very outward result of this sudden stir within the occult folds of the being. Mystic poetry can <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 78<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nstrike still deeper\u2014it can stir the inmost and
\nsubtlest recesses of the life-soul and the secret inner mind at the same time;
\nit can even, if it is of the right kind, go beyond these also to the pure inmost
\npsychic.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nA Comparison between Arjava\u2019s "Totalitarian\u201d *
\n<\/a> <\/i> <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\nand Walter De La Mare’s "Listeners\u201d<\/i> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nDE la Mare’s poem has a delicate beauty throughout and a sort of daintily fanciful suggestion of the occult world. I do not know if there is anything more. The weakness of it is that it reads like a thing imagined\u2014the images and details arc those that might be written of a haunted house on earth which has got possessed by some occult presences. Arjava must no doubt have taken his starting-point from a reminiscence of this poem, but there is nothing else in common with De la Mare\u2014his poem is an extra- ordinarily energetic and powerful vision of an occult world and every phrase is intimately evocative of the beyond as a thing vividly seen and strongly lived\u2014it is not on earth, this courtyard and this crescent moon, we are at once in an unearthly world and in a place somewhere in the soul of man<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/font><\/p>\n

\n* Vide <\/b> Poems,<\/i> p. 215 by Arjava <\/b> (J. A.
\nChadwick ) <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 79<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nand all the details, sparing, with a powerful economy of phrase and image and brevity of movement but revelatory in each touch as opposed to the dim moonlight suggestions supported by a profusion of detail and long elaborating development in De la Mare\u2014of course that has its value also\u2014make us entirely feel ourselves there. I therefore maintain. my description ‘original’ not only for the latter part of the poem but for the opening also. It is not an; <\/font><\/p>\n

\necho, it is an independent creation. Indeed the difference of the two poems comes out most strongly in these very (first eight) lines. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nThe faint moonbeams on the dark stair <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThat goes down to the empty hall <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe dark turf ‘neath the starred and leafy sky <\/font><\/p>\n

\nare a description of things on earth made occult only by the presence of the phantom listeners. But <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n…. the empty eerie courtyard With no name <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor <\/font><\/p>\n

\n…. a crescent moon swung wanly, White as curd  <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 80<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nare not earthly, they belong to a terrible elsewhere, while the latter part of the poem carries the elsewhere into a province of the soul. This is the distinction <\/b>and <\/b>makes the perfect successfulness of Arjava’s poem. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n15-10-1936 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nA Comparison between A\u2019s "Pharphar\u201d and
\n<\/a> <\/i> <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\nWalter De La Mare’s "Arabia\u201d<\/i> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nIT is indeed charming\u2014De la Mare seems to have an unfailing beauty of language and rhythm and an inspired loveliness of fancy that is captivating. But still it is fancy, the mind playing with its delicate imaginations. A hint of something deeper tries to get through sometimes, but it does not go beyond a hint. That is the difference between his poem and the one it inspired from you. There is some kinship though no sameness in the rhythm and the tone of delicate remoteness it brings with it. But in your poem that something deeper is not hinted, it is caught\u2014throughout\u2014in all the expressions, but especially in such lines as <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWhen the magic ethers of evening <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWash one the various day <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 81<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nor <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe beautiful body of Pharphar <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOr its soul of secret sound <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThis river of infinite distance, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPharphar. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nThese expressions give a sort of body to the occult without taking from it its strangeness and do not leave it in mist or in shadowy image or luminous silhouette. That is what a fully successful spiritual or occult poetry has to do, to make the occult and the spiritual real to the vision of the consciousness, the feeling. The occult is most often materialised as by Scott and Shakespeare or else pictured in mists, the spiritual mentalised, as in many attempts at spiritual poetry\u2014a reflection in the mind is not enough. For success in the former, Arjava’s "Totalitarian" with the stark occult reality of its vision is a good example; for the latter there are lines both in his poems and yours that I could instance, but I cannot recall them accurately just now\u2014but have you not somewhere a line <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe mute unshadowed spaces of her mind? <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 82<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nThat would be <\/b> an instance of the concrete convincing reality of which I am speaking\u2014a spiritual state not hinted at or abstractly put as the metaphysical poets most often do it but presented with a tangible accuracy which one who has lived in the silent wideness of his spiritualised mind can at once recognise as the embodiment in word of his experience. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI do not mean for a moment to deny the value of the exquisite texture of dream in De la Mare’s representation, but still this completer embodiment achieves more. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n16-10-1936 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\nTruth behind Poetic Images<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\nTHERE are truths and there are transcriptions of truths; the transcriptions may be accurate or may be free and imaginative. The truth behind a poetic creation is there on some plane or other\u2014supraphysical generally\u2014and from there the suggestion of the image too originally comes; even the whole transcription itself can be contributed from there, but ordinarily it is the mind’s faculty of imagination which gives it form and body. Poetic imagination is very usually satisfied with beauty of idea and <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 83<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nimage only and the aesthetic pleasure of it, but there is something behind it which supplies the Truth in its images, and to get the transcription also direct from that something or somewhere behind should be the aim of mystic or spiritual poetry. When Shelley made the spirits of Nature speak, he was using his imagination, but there was something behind in him which felt and knew and believed in the truth of the thing he was expressing\u2014he felt that there were forms more real than living man behind the veil. But his method of presentation was intellectual and imaginative, so one misses the full life in these impalpable figures. To get a more intimate and spiritually concrete presentation should be the aim of the mystic poet. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nSymbolic poems always come from a mystic region; the allegorical may come from the intellect, but often the allegory itself rests on a concealed symbol and then there is a mystic element. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nNov. <\/b> 1933 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nMystic Symbols<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/b><\/p>\n

\nIF you expect matter of fact verisimilitude from X or a scientific ornathologically accurate swan, you are <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 84<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nknocking at the wrong door. But I don’t see exactly the point of your objection. The lake in this poem is not a lake but a symbol; the swan is not a swan but a symbol. You can’t expect the lake merely to ripple and do no hing else. It is as much a symbol as the Bird of Fire or the Bird of the Vedic poet who faced the guardians of the Soma and brought the Soma to Indra (or was it to a Rishi? I have forgotten)\u2014perhaps
\ncarrying a pot or several pots in his claws and beak!! for I don’t know how else
\nhe could have done it. How is he to use the symbol if you don’t make allowances for a miraculous Swan? If the Swan does nothing but what an ordinary swan does, it ceases to be a symbol and becomes only a
\nmetaphor. The animals of these symbols belong not<\/i> to earth but to Wonderland.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\nSymbolism and Allegory<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/b><\/p>\n

\n
\n(I)<\/font>
\n<\/font><\/p>\n

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

\n <\/p>\n

\nTHERE is a considerable difference between symbolism and allegory; they are not at all the same thing. Allegory comes in when a quality or other abstract thing is personalised and the allegory proper should <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 85<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nbe something carefully stylised and deliberately sterilised of the full aspect of embodied life so that the essential meaning or idea may come out with sufficient precision and force of clarity. One can find this method in the old mystery plays and it is a kind of art that has its value. Allegory is an intellectual
\nform; one is not expected to believe in the personalisation of the abstract quality, it is only an artistic device. When in an allegory as in Spenser’s Faerie Queene<\/i> the personalisation, the embodiment takes first place and absorbs the major part of the mind’s interest, the true style and principle of this art have been abandoned. The allegorical purpose here becomes a submerged strain and is really of secondary importance, our search for it a by play of the mind; we read for the beauty and interest of the figures and movements presented to us, not for this submerged significance. An allegory must be intellectually precise and clear in its representative figures as well as in their basis, however much adorned with imagery and personal expression; otherwise it misses its purpose. A symbol expresses on the contrary not the play of abstract things or ideas put into imaged form, but a living truth or inward vision or experience of things, so inward, so subtle, so little belonging to the domain of intellectual abstraction and precision that it cannot be brought <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 86<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nout except through symbolic images\u2014the more these images have a living truth .of their own which corresponds intimately to the living truth they symbolise, suggests the very vibration of the experience itself, the greater becomes the art of the symbolic expression. When the symbol is a representative sign or figure and nothing more, then the symbolic approaches nearer to an intellectual method, though even then it is not the same thing as allegory. In mystic poetry the symbol ought to be as much as possible the natural body of the inner truth or vision, itself an intimate part of the experience. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\nSymbolism and Allegory<\/font><\/a><\/b><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n (2) <\/font><\/p>\n

<\/a><\/b><\/p>\n

\nLord, what an incorrigible mentaliser and allegorist you are! If the bird were either consciousness or
\nthe psychic or light, it would be an allegory and all the mystic beauty would be
\ngone. A living symbol and a mental allegorical symbol are not the same thing.
\nYou can’t put a label on the Bird of Marvel any more than on the Bird of Fire or
\nany other of the fauna or flora or population of the mystic kingdoms. They can be described, but to label them destroys their life and makes them only stuffed <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 87<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nspecimens in an allegorical museum. Mystic symbols are living things, not abstractions. Why insist on killing them? J has described the Bird and told you all that is necessary about it, the rest you have to feel and live inside, not dissect and put the fragments into neatly arranged drawers. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n8-8-1936 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\nPsychic and Esoteric Poetry<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nTHESE poems are quite new in manner\u2014simple and precise and penetrating. What you describe is the psychic fire, Agni pavaka,<\/i> which burns in the deeper heart and from there is lighted in the mind, the vital and the physical body. In the mind Agni creates a light of intuitive perception and discrimination which sees at once what is the true vision or idea and the wrong vision or idea, the true feeling and the wrong feeling, the true movement and the wrong movement. In the vital it is kindled as a fire of right emotion and a kind of intuitive feeling, a sort of tact which makes for the right impulse, the right action, the right sense of things and reaction to things. In the body it initiates a <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 88<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nsimilar but still more automatic correct response to the things of physical life, sensation, body experience. "Usually it is the psychic light in the mind that is first lit of the three, but not always\u2014for sometimes it is the psycho-vital flame that takes precedence. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIn ordinary life also there is no doubt an action of the psychic\u2014without it man would be only a thinking and planning animal. But its action there is very much veiled, needing always the mental or vital to express it, usually mixed and not dominant, not unerring therefore; it does often the right thing in the wrong way, is moved by the right feeling but errs as to the application, person, place, circumstance. The psychic, except in a few extraordinary natures, does not get its full chance in the outer consciousness; it needs some kind of Yoga or sadhana
\nto come by its own and it is as it emerges more and more in front that it gets
\nclear of the mixture. That is to say, its presence becomes directly felt, not
\nonly behind and supporting, but filling the frontal consciousness and no longer dependent or dominated by its instruments \u2014mind, vital and body, but dominating them and moulding them into luminosity and teaching them their true action. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIt is not easy to say whether the poems are esoteric; for these words "esoteric" and "exoteric" are rather <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 89<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nill-defined in their significance. One understands the distinction between exoteric and esoteric religion \u2014that is to say, on one side, creed, dogma, mental faith, religious worship and ceremony, religious and moral practice and discipline, on the other an inner seeking piercing beyond the creed and dogma and ceremony or finding their hidden meaning, living deeply within in spiritual and mystic experience. But how shall we define esoteric poetry? Perhaps what deals in an occult way with the occult may be called esoteric\u2014e.g., the "Bird of Fire", "Trance", etc. "The Two Moons" is, it is obvious, desperately esoteric. But I don’t know whether an intimate spiritual experience simply and limpidly told without veil or recondite image can be called esoteric\u2014for the word usually brings the sense of something kept back from the ordinary eye, hidden, occult. Is "Nirvana" for instance an esoteric poem? There is no veil or symbol there \u2014it tries to state the experience as precisely and overtly as possible. The experience of the psychic fire and psychic discrimination is an intimate spiritual experience, but it is direct and simple like all psychic things. The poem which expresses it may easily be something deeply inward, esoteric in that sense, but simple, unveiled and clear, not esoteric in the more usual sense. I rather think, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 90<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nhowever, the term "esoteric poem" is a misnomer and some other phraseology would be more accurate. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n30-4-1935 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\nPsychic and Overhead Inspiration<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nTHE psychic has two aspects\u2014the soul principle itself which contains all soul possibilities and the psychic being which develops from life to life. The psychic being usually expresses itself through its instruments,\u2014mental, vital, physical,\u2014putting
\nas much of its own stamp on them as possible. But it can seldom put on them the
\nfull psychic stamp\u2014 until it comes out and takes over the direct government of the nature. It can then receive and express. all the spiritual realisations. But the turn of the psychic is different from that of the above-head planes; it has less of greatness, power, wideness, more of sweetness, delicate beauty, beauty of emotion also, fine subtlety of true perception, an intimate language,. etc.\u2014Arnold’s expression "sweetness and light" can very well be applied to the psychic as the kernel of its nature. The spiritual planes, when they take up these, give them a wider utterance, powerful audacity, strength and space. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 91<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nOverhead Poetry<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nWHAT super-excellence? as poetry? When I say that a line comes from a higher or overhead plane or has the Overmind touch I do not mean that it is superior in pure poetic excellence to others from lower planes \u2014that A’s lines outshine Shakespeare or Homer for instance. I simply mean that it has some vision, light, etc. from up there and the character of its expression .and rhythm are from there. You do not appreciate probably because you catch only the surface mental meaning. The line is very fine from the technical point of view, the distribution of consonantal and vowel sounds being perfect. That, however, is possible on any level of inspiration. These are, technical elements, the Overmind touch does not consist in that but in the undertones or overtones of the rhythmic cry and a language which carries in it a great depth or height or width of spiritual vision, feeling or experience. But all that has to be felt, it is not analysable. If I say that the second line\u00b9 is a magnificent expression of an inner reality most intimate and powerful and the first line\u00b2, with its conception of the fire once ‘flickering’ with the ‘cry’ of clay but now no longer, is admirably revelatory\u2014you would <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n1 The distance-haunted fire of mystic mind <\/font><\/p>\n

\n2 Flickering no longer with the cry of clay <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 92<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nprobably reply that it does not convey anything of the kind to you. That is why I do not usually speak of these things in themselves or in their relation to poetry\u2014only with A who is trying to get his inspiration into touch with these planes. Either one must have the experience\u2014e.g., here one must have lived in or glimpsed the mystic mind, felt its fire, been aware of the distances that haunt it, heard the cry of clay mixing with it and the consequent unsteady nickering of its flames and the release into the straight upward burning and so known that this is not mere romantic rhetoric, not mere images or metaphors expressing something imaginative but unreal (that is how many would take it perhaps) but facts and realities of the self, actual and concrete, or else there must be a conspiracy between the solar plexus and the thousand-petalled
\nlotus which makes one feel, if not know, the suggestion of these things through
\nthe words and rhythm. As for technique, there is a technique of this higher poetry but it is not analysable and teachable. If, for instance, A had written ‘No longer flickering with the cry of clay’, it would no longer have been the same thing though the exact mental meaning would be just as before\u2014for the overtone, the rhythm would have been lost in the ordinary staccato clipped movement and with the overtone the rhythmic significance. It would not <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 93<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nhave given the suggestion of space and wideness full with the cry and the flicker, the intense impact <\/b>of <\/b>that cry and the agitation of the fire which is heard through the line as it is. But to realise that, one must have the inner sight and inner ear for these things; one must be able to hear the sound-meaning, feel the sound-spaces with their vibrations. Again, if he had written ‘Quivering no longer with the touch on clay’, it would have been a good line, but meant much less and something quite different to the inner experience, though to the mind it would have been only the same thing expressed in a different image\u2014not so to the solar plexus and the thousand-petalled lotus. . In this technique it must be the right word and no other, in the right place and in no other, the right sounds and no others, in a design of sound that cannot be changed even a little. You may say that it must be so in all poetry; but in ordinary poetry the mind can play about, chop and change, use one image or another, put this word here or that word there\u2014if the sense is much the same and has a poetical value, the mind does not feel that all is lost unless it is very sensitive and much influenced by the solar plexus. In the overhead poetry these things are quite imperative, it is all or nothing\u2014or at least all or a fall. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 94<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nOvermind Rhythm and Inspiration<\/a><\/i><\/font><\/b><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nIN the lines you quote from Wordsworth\u2014 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nThe cataracts blow their trumpets from the steep; <\/font><\/p>\n

\nNo more shall grief of mine the season wrong; <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI hear the echoes through the mountains throng,<\/font><\/p>\n

\n The winds come to me from the fields of sleep <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n\u2014it is precisely the Overmind movement that is
\nwanting; in the last line there is something of the Overmind substance expressed
\nnot directly but through the highest intuitive consciousness (the plane between
\nthe illumined mind and Overmind), and, because it is not direct, the Overmind
\nrhythm is absent. If I have given high praise to a passage, it does not follow
\nthat it is from the Overmind; the poetic (aesthetic) value or perfection of a
\nline, passage or poem does not depend on the plane from which it comes, but on
\nthe purity and authenticity and power with which it transcribes an intense
\nvision and inspiration from whatever source. Shakespeare is a poet of the vital
\ninspiration, Homer of the subtle physical; but there are no greater poets in any literature. No doubt, if we can get a continuous inspiration from the Overmind, that would mean a greater, sustained height of perfection and spiritual <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 95<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nquality in poetry than has yet been achieved; but we are discussing here short passages and lines. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAs for the Overmind rhythm and inspiration,. we get nearer to it in another line of Wordsworth, but I do not remember it exactly and I may misquote,\u2014 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nAnd marble face, the index of a mind <\/font><\/p>\n

\nVoyaging through strange seas of thought, alone <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor a line like Milton’s <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThose thoughts that wander through eternity. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOne has the sense here of a rhythm which does not begin or end with the line, but has for ever been sounding in the eternal planes and began even in Time ages ago and which returns into the infinite to go sounding on for ages after. In fact, the
\nword- rhythm is only part of what we hear, a support for the rhythm we listen to behind in "the Ear of the ear," shrotrasya shrotram.<\/i> To a certain extent, that is what all great poetry tries to have, but it is only the Overmind rhythm to which it is natural and easy as breathing and in which it is not only behind the word-rhythm but gets into the word-movement <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 96<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nitself and finds a kind of fully supporting body there. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nP.S. Lines from the highest intuitive mind-consciousness, as well as those from the Overmind, <\/b>can have a mantric<\/i> character\u2014the rhythm too may have a certain kinship with mantric<\/i> rhythm, but it may not be the thing itself, only the nearest step towards it. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\nThe Mantra<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nTHE mantra<\/i> (not necessarily in the Upanishads alone) as I have tried to describe it in "The Future Poetry" is what comes from the Overmind inspiration. Its characteristics are a language that says infinitely more than the mere sense of the words seems <\/b>to <\/b>indicate, a rhythm that means even more than the language and is born out of the Infinite and disappears into the Infinite and the power to convey not merely some mental, vital or physical contents or indications or values of the thing it speaks of, but its value and figure in some fundamental and original consciousness which is behind them all. The passages you mention (from the Upanishad and the Gita) have certainly the Overmind accent. But ordinarily, as I have said, the Overmind inspiration does not come out pure in human poetry. It has to <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 97<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nlift it by a seizure and surprise from above into the Overmind largeness; but in doing so there is usually a mixture of the two elements, the uplifting influence and the lower stuff of mind. You must remember that the Overmind is a superhuman consciousness and to be able to write always or purely from an Overmind inspiration
\nwould mean the elevation of at least a part of the nature beyond the human level. But to write of these things would need a greater length of exposition than I can give you at present. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nBut how do you expect a Supramental inspiration to come down here when the Overmind itself is so rarely within human reach? That is always the error of the impatient aspirant, to think he can get the Supermind without going through the intervening stages or to imagine that he has got it when in fact he has only got something from the illumined or intuitive or at the highest some kind of mixed Overmind consciousness.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nOvermind and Aesthetics\u2014<\/a><\/b><\/i><\/font><\/p>\n

\n Critical Intellect and Mystical Poetry<\/b><\/i>
\n<\/b> <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOBVIOUSLY, the Overmind and aesthetics cannot be equated together. Aesthetics is concerned mainly <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 98<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nwith beauty, but more generally with rasa,<\/i> the response of the mind, the vital feeling and the sense to a certain "taste" in things which often may be but is not necessarily a spiritual feeling. Aesthetics belongs to the mental range and all that depends upon it; it may degenerate into aestheticism or may exaggerate or narrow itself into some version of the theory of "Art for Art’s sake". The Overmind is essentially a spiritual power. Mind in it surpasses its ordinary self and rises and takes its stand on a Spiritual foundation. It embraces beauty and sublimates it; it has an essential aesthesis which is not limited by rules and canons; it sees a universal and an eternal beauty while it takes up and transforms all that is limited and particular. It is besides concerned with things other than beauty or aesthetics. It is concerned especially with truth and knowledge or rather with a wisdom that exceeds what we call knowledge; its truth goes beyond truth of fact and truth of thought, even the higher thought which is the first spiritual range of, the thinker. It has the truth of spiritual thought, spiritual feeling, spiritual sense and at its highest the truth that comes by the most intimate spiritual touch or by identity. Ultimately, truth and beauty come together and coincide, but in between there is a difference. Overmind in all its dealings puts <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 99<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ntruth first; it brings out the essential truth (and truths) in things and also its infinite possibilities; it brings out even the truth that lies behind falsehood and error; it brings out the truth of the Inconscient and the truth of the Superconscient and all that lies in between. When it speaks through poetry, this remains its first essential quality; a limited aesthetical artistic aim is not its purpose. It can take up and uplift any or every style or at least put some stamp of itself upon it. More or less all that we have called Overhead poetry has something of this character whether it be from the Overmind or simply intuitive,. illumined or strong with the strength of the higher revealing Thought; even when it is not intrinsically Overhead poetry, still some touch can come in. Even Overhead poetry itself does not always deal
\nin what is new or striking or strange; it can take up the obvious, the common, the bare and even the baldy the old, even that which without it would seem stale and hackneyed and raise it to greatness. Take the lines: <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nI spoke as one who ne’er would speak again <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd as a dying man to dying men. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nThe writer is not a poet, not even a conspicuously talented versifier. The statement of the thought
\nis <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 100<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nbare and direct and the rhetorical device used is of the simplest, but the Overhead touch somehow got in through a passionate emotion and sincerity and is unmistakable. In all poetry a poetical aesthesis of some kind there must be in the writer and the recipient; but aesthesis is of many kinds and the ordinary kind is not sufficient for appreciating the Overhead element in poetry. A fundamental and universal aesthesis is needed, something also more intense that listens, sees and feels from deep within and answers to what is far behind the surface. A greater, wider and deeper aesthesis then which can answer even to the transcendent and feel too whatever of the transcendent or spiritual enters into the things of life, mind and sense. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe business of the critical intellect is to appreciate and judge and here too it must judge; but it can judge and appreciate rightly here only if it first learns to see and sense inwardly and interpret. But it is dangerous for it to lay down its own laws or even laws and rules which it thinks it can deduce from some observed practice of the Overhead inspiration and use that to wall in the inspiration; for it runs the risk of seeing the Overhead inspiration step across its wall and pass on leaving it bewildered and at a loss. The mere critical intellect not touched by a rarer sight can do little here. We can take an <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 101<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nextreme case, for in extreme cases certain incompatibilities come out more clearly. What might be called the Johnsonian critical method has obviously little or no place in this field,\u2014the method which expects a precise logical order in thoughts and language and pecks at all that departs from a
\nmatter of-fact or a strict and rational ideative coherence or a sober and restrained classical taste. Johnson himself is plainly out of his element when he deals crudely with one of Gray’s delicate trifles and tramples and flounders about in the poet’s basin of goldfish breaking it with his heavy and vicious kicks. But also this method is useless in dealing with any kind of romantic poetry. What would the Johnsonian critic say to Shakespeare’s famous lines <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nOr take up arms against a sea of troubles <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd by opposing end them ? <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nHe would say, "What a mixture of metaphors and jumble of ideas! Only a lunatic could take up arms against a sea! A sea of troubles is a too fanciful metaphor and, in any case, one can’t end the sea by opposing it, it is more likely to end you." Shakespeare knew very well what he was doing; he saw the mixture as well as any critic could and he accepted it because it brought home, with an inspired <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 102<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nforce which a neater language could not have had, the exact feeling and idea that he wanted to bring out. Still more scared would the Johnsonian be by .any occult or mystic poetry. The Veda, for instance, uses with what seems like a deliberate recklessness the mixture, at least the association of disparate images, of things not associated together in the material world which in Shakespeare is only an occasional departure. What would the Johnsonian make of this Rik<\/i> in the Veda: "That splendour of thee,
\nO Fire, which is in heaven and in the earth and in the plants and in the waters and by which thou hast spread out the wide mid-air, is a vivid ocean of light which sees with a divine seeing"? He would say, "What is this nonsense? How can there be a splendour of light in plants and in water and how can an ocean of light see divinely or otherwise? Anyhow, what meaning can there be in all this, it is a senseless mystical jargon." But, apart from these extremes, the mere critical intellect is likely to feel a distaste or an incomprehension with regard to mystical poetry even if that poetry is quite coherent in its ideas and well-appointed in its language. It is bound to stumble over all sorts of things that are contrary to its reason and offensive to its taste: association of contraries, excess or abruptness or crowding of images, disregard of intellectual limitations<\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 103<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nin the thought, concretisation of abstractions, the treating of things and forces as if there were a consciousness and a personality in them and a hundred other aberrations from the straight intellectual line. It is not likely either to tolerate departures in technique which disregard the canons of an established order. Fortunately here the modernists with all their errors have broken old bounds and the mystic poet may be more free to invent his own technique. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n26-4-1946 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n
\n
\nUse of "High Light\u201d Words in Spiritual Poetry<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nAE’s remarks about "immensity", etc. are very interesting to me; for these are the very words, with others like them, that are constantly recurring at short intervals in my poetry when I express not spiritual
\nthought but spiritual experience. I knew perfectly well that this recurrence would be objected to as bad technique or an inadmissible technique; but this seems to me a reasoning from the conventions of a past order which cannot apply to a new poetry dealing with spiritual things. A new art <\/b> of <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 104<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nwords written from a new consciousness demands a new technique. AE himself admits that this rule makes a great difficulty because these "high light" words are few in the English language. His solution may do well enough where the realisations which they represent are mental realisations or intuitions occurring on the summits of the consciousness, rare "high lights" over the low tones of the ordinary natural or occult experience (ordinary, of course, to the poet, not to the average man); there his solution would not violate the truth of the vision, would not misrepresent the balance or harmony of its actual tones. But what of one who lives in an atmosphere full of these high lights\u2014in a consciousness in which the finite, not only the occult but even the earthly finite, is bathed in the sense of the eternal, the illimitable infinite, the immensities or intimacies of the timeless? To follow AE’s rule might well mean to falsify this atmosphere, to substitute a merely aesthetic fabrication for "a, true seeing and experience. Truth first\u2014a technique expressive of the truth in the forms of beauty has to be found, if it does not exist. It is no use arguing from the spiritual inadequacy of the English language; the inadequacy does not exist and, even if it did, the language will have to be made adequate. It has been plastic enough in the <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 105<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\npast to succeed in expressing all that it was asked to express, however new; it must now be urged to a farther new progress. In fact, the power is there and has only to be brought out more fully to serve the full occult, mystic, spiritual purpose. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\nUse of Undignified Words in Poetry<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nI DISPUTE the legitimacy of the comment. It is based on a conventional objection to undignified and therefore presumably unpoetic words and images\u2014an objection which has value only when the effect is uncouth or trivial, but .cannot be accepted otherwise as a valid rule. Obviously, it might be difficult to bring in "bobbing" in an epic or other "high" style, although I suppose Milton could have managed it and one remembers the famous controversy about Hugo’s "mouchoir". But in poetry of a mystic (occult or spiritual) kind this does not count. The aim is to bring up a vivid suggestion of the thing seen and some significance of the form, movement, etc. through which one can get at the life behind and its meaning; a familiar adjective here can serve its purpose very well as a touch in the picture and there are occasions when no other <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 106<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ncould be as true and living or give so well the precise movement needed. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIt is the same with the metre\u2014an identical
\nprinciple applies, a natural kinship between the subject or substance of the
\npoem and its soul-movement. For instance, a certain lightness, a suggestion of faery dance or faery motion may be needed as. one element and this would be lost by the choice of a heavier, more dignified rhythm. After all, subject to a proper handling, that is the first important desideratum, an essential harmony
\nbetween the metrical rhythm and the thing it has to express. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\nOverhead Inspiration and Overmind Aesthesis<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font>
\n<\/b><\/p>\n

\nSOMETHING more might need to be said in regard to the overhead note in poetry and the overmind aesthesis; but these are exactly the subjects on which it is difficult to write with any precision or satisfy the intellect’s demand for clear and positive statement. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI do not know that it is possible for me to say why I regard one line or passage as having the overhead  touch or the overhead note while another misses it. When I said that in the lines about the dying man <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 107<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe touch came in through some intense passion and sincerity in the writer, I was simply mentioning the psychological door through which the thing came. I did not mean to suggest that such passion and sincerity could of itself bring in the touch or that they constituted the overhead note in the lines. I am afraid I have to say what Arnold said about the grand style; it has to be felt and cannot be explained or accounted for. One has an intuitive feeling, a recognition of something familiar to one’s experience or one’s deeper perception in the substance and the rhythm or in one or the other which rings out and cannot be gainsaid. One might put forward a theory or a description of what the overhead character of the line consists in, but it is doubtful whether any such mentally constructed definition could be always applicable. You speak, for instance, of the sense of the Infinite and the One which is pervasive in the Overhead planes; that need not be explicitly there in the overhead poetic expression or in the substance of any given line: it can be expressed indeed by overhead poetry as no other can express it, but this poetry can deal with quite other things. I would certainly say that Shakespeare’s lines <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAbsent thee from felicity awhile, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 108<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nhave the overhead touch in the substance, the rhythm and the feeling; but Shakespeare is not giving us here the sense of the One and the Infinite. He is as in the other lines of his which have this note, dealing as he always does with life, with vital emotions and reactions
\nor the thoughts that spring out in the life-mind under the pressure of life. It
\nis not any strict adhesion to a transcendental view of things that constitutes
\nthis kind of poetry, but something behind not belonging to the mind or the vital
\nand physical consciousness and with that a certain quality or power in the language and the rhythm which helps to bring out that deeper something. If I had to select the line in European poetry which most suggests an almost direct descent from the overmind consciousness there might come first Virgil’s line about "the touch of tears in mortal things": <\/font><\/p>\n

\nSunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalia tangunt. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnother might be Shakespeare’s <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIn the dark backward and abysm of Time <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor again Milton’s <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThose thoughts that wander through eternity. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 109<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nWe might also add Wordsworth’s line <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe winds come to me from the fields of sleep. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThere are others less ideative and more emotional or simply descriptive which might be added, such as Marlowe’s <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIs this the face that launched a thousand ships <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd burnt the topless towers
\nof Ilion? <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIf we could extract and describe the quality and the subtle something that mark the language and rhythm and feeling of these lines and underlie their substance we might attain hazardously to some mental understanding of the nature of overhead poetry. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe Overmind is not strictly a transcendental consciousness\u2014that epithet would more accurately apply to the Supramental and to the Sachchidananda consciousness\u2014though it looks up to the transcendental and may receive something from it and though it does transcend the ordinary human mind and in its full and native self-power, when it does not lean down and become part of mind, is superconscient to us. It is more properly a cosmic consciousness, even the very base of the cosmic as we perceive, understand or feel it. It stands behind every particular<\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 110<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nin the cosmos and is the source of all our mental, vital or physical actualities and possibilities which are diminished and degraded derivations and variations
\nfrom it and have not, except in certain formations and activities of genius and some intense self- exceeding, anything of the native overmind quality and power. Nevertheless, because it stands behind as if covered by a veil, something of it can break through or shine through or even only dimly glimmer through and that brings the overmind touch or note. We cannot get this touch frequently unless we have torn the veil, made a gap in it or rent it largely away and seen the very face of what is beyond, lived in the light of it or established some kind of constant intercourse. Or we can draw upon it from time to time without ever ascending into it if we have established a line of communication between the higher and the ordinary consciousness. What comes down may be very much diminished but it has something of that. The ordinary reader of poetry who has not that experience will usually not be able to distinguish but would at the most feel that here is something extraordinarily fine, profound, sublime or unusual,\u2014or he might turn away from it as something too high-pitched and excessive; he might even speak depreciatingly of "purple passages", rhetoric, exaggeration or excess. One who had the line of <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 111<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ncommunication open, could on the other hand feel what is there and distinguish even if he could not adequately characterise or describe it. The essential character is perhaps that there is something behind of which I have already spoken and which comes not primarily from the mind or the vital emotion or the physical seeing but from the cosmic self and
\nits <\/i>consciousness standing behind them all and things then tend to be seen not as the mind or heart or body sees them but as this greater consciousness feels or sees or answers to them. In the direct overmind transmission this something behind is usually forced to the front or close to the front by a combination of words which carries the suggestion of a deeper meaning or by the force of an image or, most of all, by an intonation and a rhythm which carry up the depths in their wide wash or long march or mounting surge. Sometimes it is left lurking behind and only suggested so that a subtle feeling of what is not actually expressed is needed if the reader is not to miss it. This is oftenest the case when there is just a touch or note pressed upon something that would be otherwise only of a mental, vital or physical poetic value and nothing of the body of the overhead power shows itself through the veil, but at most a tremor and vibration, a gleam or a glimpse. In the lines I have chosen there is always an unusual <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 112<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nquality in the rhythm, as prominently in Virgil’s line, often in the very building and constantly in the intonation and the association of the sounds which meet in the line and find themselves linked together by a sort of inevitable felicity. There is also an inspired selection or an unusual bringing together of words which has the power to force a deeper sense on the mind as in Virgil’s<\/font><\/p>\n

\n Sunt lacrimae rerum. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOne can note that this line if translated straight into English would sound awkward and clumsy as would many of the finest lines in Rig Veda; that is precisely because they are new and felicitous turns in the original language, discoveries of an unexpected and absolute phrase; they defy translation. If you note the combination of words and sounds in Shakespeare’s line <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd in this harsh world draw thy breath in pain <\/font><\/p>\n

\nso arranged as to force on the mind and still more on the subtle nerves and sense the utter absoluteness of the difficulty and pain of living for the soul that has awakened to the misery of the world, you can <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 113<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nsee how this technique works. Here and elsewhere
\nthe very body and soul of the thing seen or felt come out into the open. The
\nsame dominant characteristic can be found in other lines which I have not cited,\u2014in Leopardi’s <\/font><\/p>\n

\nInsano indegno mistero delle cose <\/font><\/p>\n

\n(The insane and ignoble mystery of things) <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor in Wordsworth’s <\/font><\/p>\n

\nVoyaging through strange seas of thought, alone. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nMilton’s line lives by its choice of the word "wander" to collocate with "through eternity"; if he had chosen any other word, it would no longer have been an overhead line, even if the surface sense had been exactly the same. On the other hand, take Shelley’s stanza\u2014 <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWe look before and after, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd pine for what is not: <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOur sincerest laughter <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWith some pain is fraught; <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOur sweetest songs are those that tell of <\/font><\/p>\n

\nsaddest thought. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 114<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nThis is perfect poetry with the most exquisite melody and beauty of wording and an unsurpassable poignancy of pathos, but there is no touch or note of the overhead inspiration: it is the mind and the heart, the vital emotion, working at their highest pitch under the stress of a psychic inspiration. The rhythm is of the same character, a direct, straight- forward, lucid and lucent movement welling <\/b>out <\/b>limpidly straight from the psychic source. The same characteristics are found in another short lyric <\/b>of <\/b>Shelley’s which is perhaps the purest example <\/b> of the psychic inspiration in English poetry: <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI can give not what men call <\/b> love; <\/font><\/p>\n

\nBut wilt thou accept not <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe worship the heart lifts above <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd the Heavens reject not,\u2014<\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe desire of the moth for the star, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOf the night for the morrow, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe devotion to something afar <\/font><\/p>\n

\nFrom the sphere of our sorrow? <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWe have again extreme poetic beauty there, but nothing of the overhead note. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIn the other lines I have cited it is really the overmind language and rhythm that have been to <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 115<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nsome extent transmitted; but of course all overhead poetry is not from the Overmind, more often it comes from the higher thought, the
\nillumined mind or the pure intuition. This last is different from the mental intuition which is frequent enough in poetry that does not transcend the mental
\nlevel The language and rhythm from these other over- head levels can be very different from that which is proper to the Overmind; for the Overmind thinks in a mass; its thought, feeling, vision is high or deep or wide or all these things together: to use the Vedic expression about fire, the divine messenger, it goes vast on its way to bring the divine riches, and it has a corresponding language and rhythm. The higher thought has a strong tread often with bare unsandaled feet and moves in a clear-cut light: a divine power, measure, dignity is its most frequent character. The outflow of the illumined mind comes in a flood brilliant with revealing words or a light of crowding images, sometimes surcharged with its burden of revelations, sometimes with a luminous sweep. The intuition is usually a lightning flash showing up a single spot or plot of ground or scene with an entire and miraculous completeness of vision to the surprised ecstasy of the inner eye; its rhythm has a decisive inevitable sound which leaves nothing essential unheard, but very commonly <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 116<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nis embodied in a single stroke. These however are only general or dominant characters; any number of variations is possible. There are besides mingled inspirations, several levels meeting and combining or modifying each other’s notes, and an overmind transmission can contain or bring with it all the rest, but how much of this description will be to the ordinary reader of poetry at all intelligible or clearly identifiable? <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThere are besides in mental poetry derivations or substitutes for all these styles. Milton’s "grand style" is such a substitute for the manner of the Higher Thought. Take it anywhere at its ordinary level of in its higher elevation, there is always or almost always that echo there: <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nOf man’s first disobedience and the fruit <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOf that forbidden tree <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor <\/font><\/p>\n

\nOn evil days though fall’n, and evil tongues <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor <\/font><\/p>\n

\nBlind Thamyris and blind Maeonides <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd Tiresias and Phineus, prophets old. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 117<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nShakespeare’s poetry coruscates with a play of the hues of imagination which we may regard as a mental substitute for the inspiration of the illumined mind and sometimes by aiming at an exalted note he links on to the illumined overhead inspiration itself as in the lines I have more than once quoted: <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWilt thou upon the high and giddy mast <\/font><\/p>\n

\nSeal up the shipboy’s eyes and rock his brains <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIn cradle of the rude imperious surge? <\/font><\/p>\n

\nBut the rest of that passage falls away in spite of its high-pitched language and resonant rhythm far below the overhead strain. So it is easy for the mind to mistake and take the higher for the lower inspiration or vice versa.<\/i> Thus Milton’s lines might at first sight be taken because of a certain depth of emotion in their large lingering rhythm as having the overhead complexion, but this rhythm loses something of its sovereign right because there are no depths of sense behind it. It conveys nothing but the noble and dignified pathos of the blindness and old age of a great personality fallen into evil days. Milton’s architecture of thought and verse is high and powerful and massive, but there are usually no subtle echoes there, no deep chambers: <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 118<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe occult things <\/b> in man’s being are foreign to his intelligence,\u2014for it is in the light of the poetic intelligence that he works. He does not stray into "the mystic cavern of the heart", does not follow the inner fire entering like a thief with the Cow of Light into the secrecy of secrecies. Shakespeare does sometimes get in as if by a splendid psychic accident in spite of his preoccupation, with the colours and shows of life. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI do not know therefore whether I can speak with
\nany certainty about the lines you quote; I would perhaps have to read them in
\ntheir context first, but it seems to me that there is just a touch, as in the
\nlines about the dying man. The thing that is described there may have happened
\noften enough in times like those of the recent wars and. upheavals and in times of violent strife and persecution and catastrophe, but the greatness of the experience does not come out or not wholly, because men feel with the mind and heart and not with the soul; but here there is by some accident of wording and rhythm a suggestion of something behind, of the greatness of the soul’s experience and its courageous acceptance of the tragic, the final, the fatal \u2014and its resistance; it is only just a suggestion, but it is enough: the Overhead has touched and passed back to its heights. There is something very different <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 119<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nbut of the same essential calibre in the line you quote: <\/font><\/p>\n

\nSad eyes watch for feet that never come. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIt is still more difficult to say anything very tangible about the Overmind aesthesis. When I wrote about it I was thinking of the static aesthesis that perceives and receives rather than of the dynamic aesthesis which creates; I was not thinking at all of superior or inferior grades of poetic greatness or beauty. If the complete Overmind power or even that of the lower Overhead plane could come down into the mind and entirely transform its action, then no doubt there might be greater poetry written than any that man has yet achieved, just as a greater superhuman life might be created if the supermind could come down wholly into-life and lift life wholly into itself and transform it. But what happens at present is that something comes down and accepts to work under the law of the mind and with a mixture of the mind and it must be judged by the laws and standards of the mind. It brings in new tones, new colours, new elements, but it does not change radically as yet the stuff of the consciousness with which we labour. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWhether it produces great poetry or not <\/b> depends <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 120<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\non the extent to which it manifests its power and overrides rather than serves the mentality which it is helping. At present it does not do that sufficiently to raise the work to the full greatness of the worker. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd then what do you mean exactly by greatness in poetry? One can say that Virgil is greater than Catullus and that many of Virgil’s lines are greater than anything Catullus ever achieved. But poetical perfection is not the same thing as poetical greatness. Virgil is perfect at his best, but Catullus too is perfect at his best: even, each has a certain exquisiteness of perfection, each in his own kind. Virgil’s kind is large and deep, that of Catullus
\nsweet and intense. Virgil’s art reached or had from its beginning a greater and more constant ripeness than that of Catullus. We can say then that Virgil was a greater poet and artist of word and rhythm but we cannot say that his poetry, at his best, was more perfect poetry and that of Catullus
\nless perfect. That renders futile many of the attempts at comparison like Arnold’s comparison of Wordsworth’s Skylark<\/i> with Shelley’s. You may say that Milton was a greater poet than Blake, but there can always be people, not aesthetically insensitive, who would prefer Blake’s lyrical work to Milton’s grander achievement, and there are certainly things in <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 121<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nBlake which touch deeper chords than the massive hand of Milton could ever reach. So all poetic superiority is not summed up in the word greatness. Each kind has its own best which escapes from comparison and stands apart in its own value. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nLet us then leave for the present the question of poetic greatness or superiority aside and come back to the Overmind aesthesis. By aesthesis is meant a reaction of the consciousness, mental and vital and even bodily, which receives a certain element in things, something that can be called their taste, Rasa, which passing through the mind or sense or both, awakes a vital enjoyment of the taste, Bhoga, and this can again awaken us, awaken even the soul in us to something yet deeper and more fundamental than mere pleasure and enjoyment, to some form of the spirit’s delight of existence, Ananda. Poetry, like all art, serves the seeking for these things, this aesthesis, this Rasa, Bhoga, Ananda; it brings us a Rasa of word and sound but also of the idea and, through the idea, of the things expressed by the word and sound and thought, a mental or vital or sometimes the spiritual image of their form, quality, impact upon us or even, if the poet is strong enough, of their world-essence, their cosmic reality, the very soul of them, the spirit that resides in them as it resides in all things. Poetry <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 122<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nmay do more than this, but this at least it must do to however small an extent or it is not poetry. Aesthesis therefore is of the very essence of poetry, as it is of all art. But it is not the sole element and aesthesis too is not confined to a reception of poetry and art; it extends to everything in the world: there is nothing we can sense, think or in any way experience to which there cannot be an aesthetic reaction of our conscious being. Ordinarily, we suppose that aesthesis is concerned with beauty, and that indeed is its most prominent concern: but it is concerned with many other things also. It is the universal Ananda that is the parent of aesthesis and the universal Ananda takes three major and original forms, beauty, love and delight, the delight of all existence, the delight in things, in all things. Universal Ananda is the artist and creator of the universe witnessing, experiencing and taking joy in its creation. In the lower consciousness it creates its opposites, the sense of ugliness as well as the sense of beauty, hate and repulsion and dislike as well as love and attraction and liking, grief and pain as well as joy and delight; and between these dualities or as a grey tint in the back- ground there is a general tone of neutrality and indifference born from the universal insensibility into which the Ananda sinks in its dark negation in. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 123<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe Inconscient. All this is the sphere of aesthesis, its dullest reaction is indifference, its highest is ecstasy. Ecstasy is a sign of a return towards the original or supreme Ananda: that art or poetry is supreme which can bring us something of the supreme tone of ecstasy. For as the consciousness sinks from the supreme levels through various degrees towards the Inconscience the general sign of this descent is an always diminishing power of its
\nintensity, intensity of being, intensity of consciousness, intensity of force, intensity of the delight in things and the delight of existence. So too as we ascend towards the supreme level these intensities increase. As we climb beyond Mind, higher and wider values replace the values of our limited mind, life and bodily consciousness. Aesthesis shares in this intensification of capacity. The capacity for pleasure and pain, for liking and disliking is comparatively poor on the level of our mind and life; our capacity for ecstasy is brief and limited; these tones arise from a general ground of neutrality which is always dragging them back towards itself. As it enters the overhead planes the ordinary aesthesis turns into a pure delight and becomes capable of a high, a large or a deep abiding ecstasy. The ground is no longer a general neutrality, but a pure spiritual ease and happiness upon which the special tones of <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 124<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe aesthetic consciousness come out or from which they arise. This is the first fundamental change.<\/font><\/p>\n

\n Another change in this transition is a turn towards universality in place of the isolations, the conflicting generalities, the mutually opposing dualities of the lower consciousness. In the Overmind we have a first firm foundation of the experience of a universal beauty, a universal love, a universal delight. These things can come on the mental and vital plane even before those planes are directly touched or influenced by the spiritual consciousness; but they are there
\na, temporary experience and not permanent or they are limited in their field and
\ndo not touch the whole being. They are a glimpse and not a change of vision or a
\nchange of nature. The artist for instance can look at things only plain or
\nshabby or ugly or even repulsive to the ordinary sense and see in them and bring
\nout of them beauty and the delight that goes with beauty. But this is a sort of
\nspecial grace for the artistic consciousness and is limited within the field of
\nhis art. In the Overhead consciousness, especially in the Overmind, these things
\nbecome more and more the law of the vision and the law of the nature. Wherever the overmind spiritual man turns he sees. a universal beauty touching and uplifting all things, expressing itself through
\nthem, moulding them into <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 125<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\na field or objects of its divine aesthesis; a universal love goes out from him to all beings; he feels the Bliss which has created the worlds and upholds them and all that is expresses to him the universal delight, is made of it, is a manifestation of it and moulded into its image. This universal aesthesis of beauty and delight does not ignore or fail to understand the differences and oppositions, the gradations, the harmony and disharmony obvious to the ordinary consciousness: but, first of all, it draws a rasa from them and with that comes the enjoyment, bhoga, and the touch or the mass of the Ananda. It sees that all things have their meaning, their value, their deeper or total significance which the mind does not see, for the mind is only concerned with a surface vision, surface contacts and its own surface reactions. When something expresses perfectly what it was meant to express, the completeness brings with it a sense of harmony, a sense of artistic perfection; it gives even to what is discordant a place in a system of cosmic concordances and the discords become part of a vast harmony, and wherever there is harmony, there is a sense of beauty. Even in form itself, apart from the significance, the Overmind consciousness sees the object with a totality which changes its effect on the percipient even while it remains the same thing. It sees lines and masses <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 126<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nand an underlying design which the physical eye does not see and which escapes even the keenest mental vision. Every form becomes beautiful to it in a deeper and larger sense of beauty than that commonly known to us. The Overmind looks also straight at and into the soul of each thing and not only at its form or its significance to the mind or to the life; this brings to it not only the true truth of the thing but the delight of it. It sees also the one spirit in all, the face of the Divine everywhere and there can be no greater Ananda than that; it feels oneness with all, sympathy, love, the bliss of the Brahman. In a highest, a most integral experience it sees all things as if made of existence, consciousness, power, bliss, every atom of them charged with and constituted of Sachchidananda. In all this the overmind aesthesis takes its share and gives its response; for these things come not merely as an idea in the mind or a truth-seeing but as an experience of the whole being and a total response is not only possible but above a certain level imperative. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI have said that aesthesis responds not only to what we call beauty and beautiful things but to all things. <\/b> We make a distinction between truth and beauty; but there can be an aesthetic response to truth also, a joy in its beauty, a love created by its charm, a rapture in the finding, a passion in the embrace, an <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 127<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\naesthetic joy <\/b> in its expression, a satisfaction of love in the giving of it to others. Truth is not merely a dry statement of facts or ideas to or by the intellect; it can be a splendid discovery, a rapturous revelation,. a thing of beauty that is a joy for ever. The poet also can be a seeker and lover of truth as well as a seeker and lover of beauty. He can feel a poetic and aesthetic joy in the expression of the true as well as in the expression of the beautiful. He does not make a mere intellectual or philosophical statement of the truth; it is his vision of its beauty, its power, his thrilled reception of it, his joy in it that he tries to convey by an utmost perfection in word and rhythm. If he has the passion, then even a philosophical statement of it he can surcharge with this. sense of power, force, light, beauty. On certain levels of the Overmind, where the mind element predominates over the element of gnosis, the distinction between truth and beauty is still valid. It is indeed one of the chief functions of the Overmind to separate the main powers of the consciousness and give to each its full separate development and satisfaction, bring out its utmost
\npotency and meaning, its own soul and significant body and take it on its own
\nway as far as it can go. It can take up each power of man .and give it its full
\npotentiality, its highest characteristic development. It can give to intellect its austerest <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 128<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nintellectuality and to logic its most sheer unsparing logicality. It can give to beauty its most splendid passion of luminous form and the consciousness that receives it a supreme height and depth of ecstasy. It can create a sheer and pure poetry impossible for the intellect to sound to its depths or wholly grasp, much less to mentalise and analyse. It is the function of Overmind to give to every possibility its full potential, its own separate kingdom. But also there is another action of Overmind which sees and thinks and creates in masses, which reunites separated things, which reconciles opposites. On that level truth and beauty not only become constant companions but become one, involved in each other, inseparable: on that level the true is always beautiful and the beautiful is always true. Their highest fusion perhaps only takes place in the Supermind; but Overmind on its summits draws enough of the supramental light to see what the Supermind sees and do what the Supermind does though in a lower key and with a less absolute truth and power. On an inferior level Overmind may use the language of the intellect to convey as far as that language can do it its own greater meaning and message but on its summits Overmind uses its own native language and gives to its truths their own supreme utterance, and no intellectual speech, no mentalised poetry can equal <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 129<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nor even come near to that power and beauty. Here
\nyour intellectual dictum that poetry lives by its aesthetic quality alone and has no need of truth or
\n<\/i>that <\/i>truth must depend upon aesthetics to become poetic at all, has no longer any meaning. For there truth itself is highest poetry and has only to appear
\nto be utterly beautiful to the vision, the hearing, the
\nsensibility of the soul. There dwells and from there things the mystery of the inevitable word, the supreme immortal rhythm, the absolute significance
\nand the absolute utterance. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI hope you do not feel crushed under this avalanche of metaphysical psychology; you have called
\nit upon yourself by your questioning about the Overmind’s greater, larger and deeper aesthesis.
\nWhat I have written is indeed very scanty and sketchy, only some of the few essential things that have to be said; but without it I could not try to give you any glimpse of the meaning of my phrase.
\nThis greater aesthesis is inseparable from the greater truth, it is deeper because of the depth of that truth, larger by all its immense largeness. I do not expect
\nthe reader of poetry to come anywhere near to all that, he could not without being a Yogi or at least
\na sadhak: but just as the overhead poetry brings some touch of a deeper power of vision and creation
\ninto the mind without belonging itself wholly <\/b> to <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 130<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe higher reaches, so also the full appreciation of all its burden needs at least some touch of a deeper response of the mind and some touch of a deeper aesthesis. Until that becomes general the Overhead or at least the Overmind is not going to do more than to touch here and there as it did in the past, a few lines, a few passages, or perhaps as things advance, a little more, nor is it likely to pour into our utterance its own complete power and absolute value. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI have said that overhead poetry is not necessarily greater or more perfect than any other kind of poetry. But perhaps a subtle qualification may be made to this statement. It is true that each kind of poetical writing can reach a highest or perfect perfection in its own line and in its own quality and what can be more perfect than a perfect perfection or can we say that one kind of absolute perfection is "greater" than another kind? What can be more absolute than the absolute? But then what do we mean by the perfection of poetry? There is the perfection of the language and there is the perfection of the word-music and the rhythm, beauty of speech and beauty of sound, but there is also the quality of the thing said which counts for something. If we consider only word and sound and what in themselves they evoke, we arrive at the application <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 131<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nof the theory of art for art’s sake to poetry. On that ground we might say that a lyric of Anacreon is as good poetry and as perfect poetry as anything in Aeschylus or Sophocles or Homer. The question of the elevation or depth or intrinsic beauty of the thing said cannot then enter into our consideration of poetry; and yet it does enter, with most of us at any rate, and is part of the aesthetic reaction even in the most "aesthetic" of critics and readers. From this point of view the elevation from which the inspiration comes may after all matter, provided the one who receives it is a fit and powerful instrument; for a great poet will do more with a lower level of the origin of inspiration than a smaller poet can do even when helped from the highest sources. In a certain sense all genius comes from Overhead; for genius is the entry or inrush of a greater consciousness into the mind or a possession of the mind by a greater power. Every operation of genius has at its back or infused within it an intuition, a revelation, an inspiration, an illumination or at the least a. hint or touch or influx from some greater power or level of conscious being than those which men ordinarily possess or use. But this power has two ways of acting: in one it touches the ordinary modes of mind and deepens, heightens, intensifies or exquisitely refines their, action but without changing its <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 132<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nmodes or transforming its normal character; in the other it brings down into these normal modes something of itself, something supernormal, something which one at once feels to be extraordinary and suggestive of a superhuman level. These two ways of action when working in poetry may produce things equally exquisite and beautiful, but the word "greater" may perhaps be applied, with the necessary qualifications, to the second way and its too rare poetic creation. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe greater bulk of the highest poetry belongs to the first of these two orders. In the second order there are again two or perhaps three levels; sometimes a felicitous turn or an unusual force of language or a deeper note of feeling brings in the overhead touch. More often it is the power of the rhythm that lifts up language that is simple and common or a feeling or idea that has often been expressed and awakes something which is not ordinarily there. If one listens with the mind only or from the vital centre only, one may have a wondering admiration for the skill and beauty of woven word and sound or be struck by the happy way or the power with which the feeling or idea is expressed. But there is something more in it than that; it is this that a deeper, more inward strand of the consciousness has seen and is speaking, and if we listen more <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 133<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nprofoundly we can get something more than the admiration and delight of the mind or Housman’s thrill of the solar plexus. We can feel perhaps the Spirit of the universe lending its own depth to our mortal speech or listening from behind <\/b> to some expression of itself, listening perhaps to its memories of <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nOld unhappy far-off things <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnd battles long ago <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor feeling and hearing, it may be said, the vast oceanic stillness and the cry of the cuckoo <\/font><\/p>\n

\nBreaking the silence of the seas <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAmong the farthest Hebrides <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor it may enter again into Vyasa’s <\/font><\/p>\n

\n"A void and dreadful forest ringing with <\/font><\/p>\n

\nthe crickets’ cry" <\/font><\/p>\n

\nVanam pratibhayam śūnyam jhillikāgananināditam <\/i> <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor remember its call to the soul of man <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnityam asukham lokam imam prāpya bhajasva mām <\/i> <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 134<\/font> <\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n"Thou who hast come to this transient and unhappy world, love and worship Me." <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThere is a second level on which the poetry draws into itself a fuller language of intuitive inspiration, illumination or the higher thinking and feeling. A very rich or great poetry may then emerge and many of the most powerful passages in Shakespeare, Virgil or Lucretius or the Mahabharata and Ramayana, not to speak of the Gita, the Upanishads or the Rig Veda have this inspiration. It is a poetry "thick" inlaid with patines of bright gold" or welling up in a stream of passion, beauty and force. But sometimes there comes down a supreme voice, the overmind voice and the overmind
\nmusic and it is to be observed that the lines and passages where that happens rank among the greatest and most admired in all poetic literature. It would be therefore too much to say that the overhead inspiration cannot bring in a greatness into poetry which could surpass the other levels of inspiration, greater even from the purely aesthetic point of view and certainly greater in the power of its substance. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nA conscious attempt to write overhead poetry with a mind aware of the planes from which this inspiration comes and seeking always to ascend to those levels or bring down something from them, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 135<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nwould probably result in a partial success; at its
\nlowest it might attain to what I have called the first order, ordinarily it
\nwould achieve the two lower levels of the second order and in its supreme
\nmoments it might in lines and in sustained passages achieve the supreme level,
\nsomething of the highest summit of its potency. But its greatest work will be to
\nexpress adequately and constantly what is now only occasionally and inadequately
\nsome kind of utterance of the things above, the things beyond, the things behind
\nthe apparent world and its external or superficial happenings and phenomena. It
\nwould not only bring in the occult in its larger and deeper ranges but the
\ntruths of the spiritual heights, the spiritual depths, the spiritual intimacies
\nand vastnesses as also the truths of the inner mind, the inner life, an inner or
\nsubtle physical beauty and reality. It would bring in the concreteness, the
\nauthentic image, the inmost soul of identity and the heart of meaning of these
\nthings, so that it could never lack in beauty. If this could be achieved by one
\npossessed, if not of a supreme, still of a sufficiently high and wide poetic
\ngenius, something new could be added to the domain of poetry and there would be
\nno danger of the power of poetry beginning to fade, to fall into decadence, to
\nfail us. It might even enter into the domain of the infinite and inexhaustible,<\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 136<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ncatch some word of the Ineffable, show us revealing images which bring us near to the Reality that is secret in us and in all of which the Upanishad speaks, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAnejad ekam manaso javīyo nainad devā <\/i> <\/font><\/p>\n

\nā<\/font><\/i>pnuvan pūrvam arshat.<\/i>… <\/font><\/p>\n

\nTad ejati tan naijati tad dūre tad u antike.<\/i>  
\n  <\/i> <\/font><\/p>\n

\n"The One unmoving is swifter than thought, the gods cannot overtake It, for It travels ever in front; It moves and It moves not, It is far away from us and It is very close". <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThe gods of the Overhead planes can do much to bridge that distance and to bring out that closeness, even if they cannot altogether overtake the Reality that exceeds and transcends them. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n29-7-1946 <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nGreatness and Beauty in Poetry<\/i>
\n<\/a> <\/font><\/p>\n

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

\nAs to the doubt you have expressed, I think there is some confusion still about the use of the word ‘great’ as distinct from the beautiful. In poetry greatness <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 137<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nmust, no doubt, be beautiful in the wider and deeper sense of beauty to be poetry, but the beautiful is not always great. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI do not think I have ever said that all overhead poetry is superior to all that comes from other sources. I am speaking of greatness and said that greatness of substance does count and gives a general superiority; I was referring to work in the mass and not to separate lines and passages. I said, practically, that art in the sense of perfect mastery of technique, perfect expression in word and sound was not everything and greatness and beauty of the substance of the poetry entered into the reckoning. It might be said of Shakespeare that he was not predominantly an artist but rather a great creator, even, though he has an art of his own, especially an art of dramatic architecture and copious ornament; but his work is far from being always perfect. In Racine, on the other hand, there is an unfailing perfection; Racine is the complete poetic artist. But if comparisons are to be made, Shakespeare’s must surely be pronounced to be the greater poetry, greater in the vastness of its range, in its abundant creativeness, in its dramatic height and power, in the richness of his inspiration, in his world-view, in the peaks to which he rises and the depths which he plumbs\u2014even though he sinks to flatnesses which Racine would have abhorred <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 138<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n\u2014and generally a glory of God’s making which is marvellous and unique. Racine has his heights and depths and widenesses, but nothing like this; he has not in him the poetic superman, he does not touch the superhuman level of creation. But all this is. mainly a matter of substance and also of height and greatness in language, not of impeccable beauty and perfection of diction and rhythm which ought to rank higher on the principle of art for art’s sake. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThis is one thing and for the sake of clarity it must be seen by itself in separation from the other points I put forward. The comparison of passages. each perfectly beautiful in itself but different in their kind and source of inspiration is a different matter. Here it is a question of the perfection of the poetry,. not of its greatness. In the valuation of whole poems. Shelley’s Skylark<\/i> may be described as a greater
\npoem than his brief and exquisite lyric\u2014’I can give not what men call love’\u2014because of its greater range and power and constant flow of unsurpassable music, but it is not more perfect; if we take separate lines and passages, the stanza ‘We look before and after’ is. not superior in perfection or absoluteness to that in the other poem ‘The desire of the moth for the star’, even though it strikes a deeper note and may be said to have a richer substance. The absolute is the <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 139<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nabsolute and the perfect perfect, whatever difference there may be in the origin of the inspiration; but from the point of view of greatness one perfection may be said to be greater, though not more perfect than another. I would myself say that Wordsworth’s line about Newton is greater, though not more perfect than many of those which you have put side by side "with it. And this I say on the same principle as the comparison between Shakespeare and Racine; according to the principle of art for art’s sake Racine ought to be pronounced a poet superior to Shakespeare because of his consistent and impeccable
\n^lawlessness of word and rhythm, but on the contrary Shakespeare is universally
\nconsidered greater, standing among the few who are supreme. Theocritus is always perfect in what he writes, but he cannot be ranked with Aeschylus and Sophocles. Why not, if art is the only thing? Obviously, because what the others write has an ampler range, a much more considerable height, breadth, depth, largeness. There are some who say that great and long poems lave no true value and are mainly composed of padding and baggage and all that matters are the few perfect lines and passages which shine like jewels among a mass of inferior half-worked ore. In that case, the ‘great’ poets ought to be debunked and the world’s poetic production valued only for a few <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 140<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nlyrics, rare superb passages and scattered lines .that we can rescue from the laborious mass production of the artifices of word, sound and language. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nI come now to the question of the Overmind and whether there is anything in it superior or more perfectly perfect, more absolutely absolute than in the lower planes. If it is true that one can get the same absolute fully on any plane and from any kind of inspiration, whether in poetry or other expressions of the One, then it would seem to be quite useless. and superfluous for any human being to labour to rise above mind to Overmind or Supermind and try to bring them down upon earth; the idea of the transformation would become absurd since it would be possible to have the ‘form’ perfect and absolute anywhere and by a purely earthly means, a purely earthly force. I am reminded of X’s logical objection to my idea of the descent of the Divine into us or into the world on the ground, as he put it, that "the Divine is here, from where is He to descend?" My answer is that obviously the Divine is here, although very much concealed; but He is here in essence and He has not chosen to manifest all His powers or His full power in Matter, in Life, in Mind; He has not even made them fit by themselves for some future manifestation of all that, whereas on higher planes there is already that manifestation and by a descent <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 141<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nfrom them the full manifestation can be brought here. All the planes have their own power, beauty, some kind of perfection realised even among their imperfections; God is everywhere in some power of Himself though not everywhere in His full power, and even if His face does not appear, the rays and glories from it do fall upon things and beings through the veil and bring something of what we call perfect and absolute. And yet perhaps there may be a more perfect perfection, not in the same kind but in a greater kind, a more utter revelation of the absolute. Ancient thought speaks of something that is highest beyond the highest, paratparam :<\/i> there is a supreme beyond what is for us or seems to us supreme. As Life brings in something that is greater than Matter, as Mind brings in something that is greater than Life, so Overmind brings in something that is greater than Mind, and Supermind something that
\nis" greater than Overmind\u2014greater, superior not only in the essential character of the planes, but in all respects, in all parts and details, and consequently in all its creation. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nBut you may say each plane and its creations are "beautiful in themselves and have their own perfection and there is no superiority of one to the other. What can be more perfect, greater or more beautiful than the glories and beauties of Matter, the golden <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 142<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nsplendour of the sun, the perpetual charm of the moon, the beauty and fragrance of the rose or the beauty of the lotus, the yellow mane of the Ganges or the blue waters of the Jamuna, forests and mountains, and the leap of the waterfall, the shimmering silence of the lake, the sapphire hue and mighty roll of the ocean and all the wonder and marvel that there is on the earth and in the vastness of the material universe? These things are perfect and absolute and there can be nothing more perfect <\/font><\/p>\n

\nor more greatly absolute. Life and mind cannot surpass them; they are enough in themselves and to themselves; Brindavan would have been perfect even if Krishna had never trod there. It is the same with Life: the lion in its majesty and strength, the tiger in its splendid and formidable energy, the antelope in its grace and swiftness, the bird of paradise, the peacock with its plumes, the birds with their calls and their voices of song have the perfection that Life can create and thinking man cannot better that; he is inferior to the animals in their own qualities, superior only in his mind, his thought, his power of reflection and creation: but his thought does not make him stronger than the lion and the tiger or swifter than the antelope, more splendid to the sight than the bird of paradise or the human beauty of the most beautiful man and woman <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 143<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nsuperior to the beauty of the animal in its own kind and perfect form. Here too there is a perfection and absoluteness which cannot be surpassed by any superior greatness of nature. Mind also has its own types of perfection and its own absolutes. What intrusion of Overmind or Supermind
\ncould produce philosophies more perfect in themselves than the systems of Shankara or Plato or Plotinus or Spinoza or Hegel, poetry superior to Homer’s, Shakespeare’s, Dante’s or Valmiki’s, music more superb than the music of Beethoven or Bach, sculpture greater than the statues of Phidias and Michael Angelo, architecture more utterly beautiful than the Taj Mahal, the Parthenon or Boro Budoor or St. Peter’s or the great gothic cathedrals? The same may be said of the crafts of ancient Greece and Japan and the Middle Ages or structural feats like the pyramids or engineering feats like Dnieper Dam or inventions and manufactures like the great modern steamships and the motor car.
\nThe mind of man may not be equally satisfied with life in general or with its own dealings with life, it may find all that very imperfect, and here perhaps it may be conceded that the intrusion of a higher principle from above might have a chance of doing something better: but here too there are sectional perfections, each complete and sufficient for its <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 144<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\npurpose, each perfectly and absolutely organised <\/b>in its own type, the termite society for instance, the satisfying structure of ant societies or the organised life of the bee-hive. The higher animals have been less remarkably successful than these insects, though perhaps a crows’ parliament might pass a resolution that the life of the rookery was one of the most admirable things in the universe. Greek societies like the Spartan evidently considered themselves perfect and absolute in their own type and the Japanese structure of society and the rounding off of its culture and institutions were remarkable in their pattern of perfect organisation. There can be always variations in kind, new types, a progress in variation, but a progress in itself towards a greater perfection or towards some absolute is an idea which has been long indulged in but has recently been strongly denied and at least beyond a certain point seems to have been denied by fact and event. Evolution there may be, but it only creates new forms, brings in new principles of consciousness, new ingenuities of creation but not a more perfect perfection. In the old Hebrew scriptures it is declared that God created everything from the first, each thing in its own type, and looked on his own creation and saw that it was good. If we conclude that Overmind or Supermind <\/b> do not <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 145<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nexist or, existing, cannot descend into mind, life and body or act upon them or, descending and acting, cannot bring in a greater or more absolute perfection into anything man has done, we should, with the modification that God has taken many ages and not six days to do his work, be reduced to something like this notion, at any rate in principle. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nIt is evident that there is something wrong and unsatisfying in such a conclusion. Evolution has not been merely something material, only a creation of new forms of Matter, new species of inanimate objects or animate creatures as physical science has at first seen it: it has been an evolution of consciousness, a manifestation of it out of its involution and in that a constant progress towards something greater, higher, fuller, more complete, ever increasing in its range and capacity, therefore to a greater and greater perfection and perhaps finally to an absolute
\nof consciousness which has yet to come, an absolute pf its truth, an absolute of its dynamic power. The mental consciousness of man is greater in its perfection,
\nmore progressive towards the absolute than the consciousness of the animal, and
\nthe consciousness of the overman, if I may so call him, must very evidently be still more perfect., while the consciousness of the superman may be absolute. No doubt, the instinct of the animal is superior to <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 146<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nthat of man and we may say that it is perfect and absolute within its limited range and in its own type. Man’s consciousness has an infinitely
\ngreater range and is more capable in the large, though less automatically perfect, in the details of its work, more laborious in its creation of perfection. The Overmind when it comes will decrease whatever deficiencies there are in human intelligence and the Supermind will remove them altogether; they will replace the perfection of instinct by the more perfect
\nperfection of intuition and what is higher than intuition and thus replace the
\nautomatism of the animal by the conscious and self-possessed automatic action of
\na more luminous gnosis and finally, of an integral truth-consciousness. It is,
\nafter all, the greater consciousness that comes in with mind that enables us to
\ndevelop the idea of values and this idea of the quality of certain values which
\nseem to us perfect and absolute is a view-point which has its validity but must
\nbe completed by others if our perception of things is to be entire. No single
\nand separate idea of the mind can be entirely true by itself, it has to complete itself by others which seem to differ from it, even others which seem logically to contradict it, but in reality only enlarge its view-points and put its idea in its proper place. It is quite true that the beauty of material things is perfect in itself and you may say <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 147<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nthe descent of Overmind cannot add to the glory of the sun or the beauty of the rose. But, in the first place, I must point out that the rose as it is is something: evolved from the dog-rose or the wild rose and is largely a creation of man whose mind is still
\ncreating further developments of this type of beauty. Moreover, it is to the mind of man that these things are beautiful, to his consciousness as evolution has. developed it, in the values that mind has given to them, to his perceptive and sometimes his creative aesthesis: Overmind, I have pointed out, has
\na greater aesthesis and, when it sees objects, sees in them what the mind cannot see, so that the value it gives to them can be greater than any value that the mind can give. That is true of its perception, it may be true also of its creation, its creation
\nof beauty> its creation of perfection, its expression of the power of the absolute. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThis is in principle the answer to the objection you made, but pragmatically the objection may still be valid; for what has been done by any overhead intervention may not amount for the present to anything more than the occasional irruption of a line or a
\npassage or at most of a new still imperfectly developed kind or manner of poetry which may have larger contents and a higher or richer suggestion but is not intrinsically superior in the essential elements of <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 148<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\npoetry, word and rhythm and cannot be confidently said to bring in a more perfect perfection or a more
\nutter absolute. Perhaps it does sometimes, but not so amply or with such a complete and forcible power as to<\/i> make it recognisable by all. But that may be because it is only an intervention in mind that it has made, a touch, a partial influence, at most a slight. infiltration; there has been no general or massive descent or, if there has been any such descent in one or two minds, it has been fundamental but not yet completely organised or applied in every direction; there has been no absolute transformation of the whole being, whole consciousness and whole nature. You say that if the Overmind has a superior consciousness and a greater aesthesis it must also bring’ in a greater form. That would be true on the Overmind level itself: if there were an overmind language created by the Overmind itself and used by Overmind beings not subject to the limitations of the mental principle or the turbidities of the life principle or the opposition of the inertia of Matter, the half light of ignorance and the dark environing wall of the Inconscient, then indeed all things might be transmuted and among the rest there might be a more perfect and absolute poetry, perfect and absolute not only in snatches and within boundaries but always and in numberless kinds and in the whole: <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 149<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n

<\/p>\n

for that is the nature of Overmind, it is a cosmic consciousness with a global perception and action. tending to carry everything to its extreme possibility; the only thing lacking in its creation might be a complete harmonisation of all possibles,
\nfor which the intervention of the highest Truth-Consciousness, the Supermind, would be indispensable. But at present the intervention of Overmind has to take mind, life and Matter as its medium and field, work under their dominant condition, accept their fundamental law and method; its own can enter in only initially or partially and under the obstacle of a prevailing mental and vital mixture. Intuition entering into the human mind undergoes a change; it becomes what we may call the mental intuition or the vital intuition or the intuition working inconsciently in physical things: sometimes it may work with a certain perfection and absoluteness, but ordinarily it is at once coated in mind or life with the mental or vital substance into which it is received and gets limited, deflected or misinterpreted by the <\/i>mind or the life; it becomes a half intuition or a false intuition and its light and power gives indeed a greater force to human knowledge and will but also to human error. Life and mind intervening in Matter have been able only to vitalise or mentalise small sections of it, to produce and develop living<\/p>\n

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

\nPage – 150<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nbodies or thinking lives and bodies but they have not been able to make a complete or general transformation of the ignorance of life, of the inertia and inconscience of Matter and large parts of the minds, lives and forms they occupy remain subconscient or inconscient or are still ignorant, like the human mind itself or driven by subconscient forces. Overmind will certainly, if it descends, go further in that direction, effect a greater transformation of life and bodily function as well as mind but the integral transformation is not likely to be in its power; for it is not in itself the supreme consciousness and does not carry in it the supreme force: although different from mind in the principle and methods of its action, it is only a highest kind of mind with the pure intuition, illumination and higher thought as its subordinates and intermediaries; it is an instrument of cosmic possibilities and not the master. It is not the supreme Truth-Consciousness; it is only an intermediary light and power. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nAs regards poetry, the Overmind has to use a language which has been made by mind, not by itself, and therefore fully capable or receiving and expressing its greater light and greater truth, its extraordinary powers, its forms of greatness, perfection and beauty. It can only strain and intensify this medium as much as possible for its own uses, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 151<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nbut not change its fundamental or characteristically mental law and method; it has to observe them and do what it can to heighten, deepen and enlarge. Perhaps what Mallarm\u00e9 and other poets were or are trying to do was some fundamental transformation
\nof that kind, but that incurs the danger of being profoundly and even
\nunfathomably obscure or beautifully and splendidly unintelligible. There is here
\nanother point of view which it may be useful to elaborate. Poets are men of
\ngenius whose consciousness has in some way or another attained to a higher dynamis of conception and expression than ordinary men can hope to have\u2014though ordinary men often have a good try for it, with the result that they sometimes show a talent for verse and an effective language which imposes itself for a time but is not durable. I have said that genius is the result of an intervention or influence from a higher consciousness than the ordinary human mental, a greater light, a greater force; even an ordinary man can have strokes of genius resulting from such an intervention but it is only in a few that the rare phenomenon occurs of a part of the consciousness being moulded into a habitual medium of expression of its greater light and force. But the intervention
\nof this higher consciousness may take different forms. It may bring in, not the higher consciousness <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 152<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nitself but a substitute for it, an uplifted movement of mind which gives a reflection of the character and qualities of the overhead movement. There is a substitute for the expression of the Higher Thought, the Illumination, the pure Intuition giving great or brilliant results, but these cannot be classed as the very body of the higher consciousness. So also there can be a mixed movement, a movement of mind in its full force with flashes from the overhead or even a light sustained for some time. Finally, there can be the thing itself in rare descents, but usually these are not sustained for a long time though they may influence all around and produce long stretches of a high utterance. All this we can see in poetry but it is not easy for the ordinary mind to make these distinctions or even to feel the thing and more difficult still to understand it with an exact intelligence. One must have oneself lived in the light or have had flashes of it in oneself in order to recognise it when it manifests outside us. It is easy to make mistakes of appreciation: it is quite common to miss altogether the tinge of the superior light even while one sees it or to think and say only, "Ah, yes, this is very great poetry." <\/font><\/p>\n

\nThere are other questions that can arise, objections that can be raised against our admission of a complete equality between the best of all kinds <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 153<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nin poetry. First of all, is it a fact that all kinds of poetry actually stand on an equal level or are potentially capable by intensity in their own kind, of such a divine equality? Satirical poetry, for instance, has often been considered as inferior in essential quality to the epic or other higher kinds of creation. Can the best lines of Juvenal, for instance, the line about the graeculus esuriens<\/i> be the equal of Virgil’s
\nO passi graviora,<\/i> or his sunt lacrimae rerum?<\/i> Can Pope’s attack on Addison, impeccable in expression and unsurpassable in its poignancy . of satiric point and force and its still more poignant conclusion <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWho would not love if such a man there be? <\/font><\/p>\n

\nWho would not weep if Atticus were he? <\/font><\/p>\n

\nbe put on a same poetical level with the great lines of Shakespeare which I have admitted as having the overmind inspiration? The question is complicated by the fact that some lines or passages of what is classed as satirical verse are not strictly satirical but have the tone of a more elevated kind of poetry and rise to a very high level of poetic beauty,\u2014for instance, Dryden’s descriptions of Absalom and Achitophel as opposed to his brilliant assault on the second duke of Buckingham. Or can we say that <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 154<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\napart from this question of satire we can equal together the best from poetry of a lighter kind with that which has a high seriousness or intention, for instance, the mock epic with the epic? There are critics now who are in ecstasies over Pope’s Rape of the Lock<\/i> and put it on the very highest level, but we could hardly reconcile ourselves to classing any lines from it with a supreme line from Homer or Milton. <\/b> Or can the perfect force of Lucan’s line, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nVictrix causa deis placuit sed victa Catoni, <\/font><\/p>\n

\nwhich has made it immortal induce us to rank it on a level of equality with the greater lines of Virgil? We may escape from this difficulty of our own logic by pointing out that when we speak of perfection we mean perfection of something essential for poetic beauty and not only perfection of speech and verse however excellent and consummate in its own inferior kind. Or we may say that we are speaking not only of perfection but of a kind of perfection that has something of the absolute. But then we may be taxed with throwing overboard our own first principle and ranking poetry according to the greatness or beauty of its substance, its intention and its elevation and not solely on its artistic completeness of language and rhythm in its own kind. <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 155<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nWe have then to abandon any thorough-going acceptance of the art for art’s sake standpoint and admit that our proposition of the equality of absolute perfection of different kinds, different inspirations of poetry applies only to all that has some quintessence of highest poetry in it. An absolutely accomplished speech and metrical movement, a sovereign technique, are not enough; we are thinking of a certain pitch of flight and not only of its faultless agility and grace. Overmind or overhead poetry must always have in its very nature that essential quality, although owing to the conditions and circumstances of its intervention, the limitation of its action, it can only sometimes have it in any supreme fullness or absoluteness. It can open poetry to the expression of new ranges of vision, experience and feeling, especially the spiritual and the higher mystic, with all their inexhaustible possibilities, which a more mental inspiration could not so full) and powerfully see and express except in moments when something of the overhead power came to its succour; it can bring in new rhythms and a new intensity of language: but so long as it is merely an intervention in mind, we cannot confidently claim more for it. At the same time if we look carefully and subtly at things we may see that the greatest lines or passages in the <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 156<\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nworld’s literature have the Overmind touch or power
\nand that they bring with them an atmosphere, a profound or an extraordinary
\nlight, an amplitude of wing which, if the Overmind would not only intervene but
\ndescend, seize wholly and transform, would be the first glimpse of a poetry,
\nhigher, larger, deeper and more consistently absolute than any which the human
\npast has been able to give us. An evolutionary ascent of all the activities of
\nmind and life is not impossible. <\/font><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n20-11-1946 <\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 157<\/font><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

SECTION TWO SOURCES OF POETIC INSPIRATION AND VISION\u2014 MYSTIC AND SPIRITUAL POETRY   Sources of Poetic Inspiration   ALL poetry is mental or vital or…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[100],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3776","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-03-third-series-1949","wpcat-100-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3776","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=3776"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3776\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3776"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3776"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3776"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}