{"id":3964,"date":"2013-07-13T01:52:32","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:52:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=3964"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:52:32","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:52:32","slug":"41-30-december-1950-vol-15-words-of-the-mother-volume-15","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/02-works-of-the-mother\/01-cwmce\/15-words-of-the-mother-volume-15\/41-30-december-1950-vol-15-words-of-the-mother-volume-15","title":{"rendered":"-41_30 December 1950.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n
\n


\n
\nPART TWO<\/span><\/font><\/b><\/p>\n


\n <\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n


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

\n


\n30
\nDecember 1950<\/font><\/span><\/i><\/b> <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nThis talk is based upon the Mother\u2019s essay
\nentitled <\/span><\/font> <\/p>\n

\n
\n\u201cForesight\u201d (On Education, Cent. Vol. 12,
\npp. 77-79).<\/span><\/font> <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

To
\nforesee destiny ! How many have attempted it, how many systems have been elaborated,
\nhow many sciences of divination have been created and developed only to perish
\nunder the charge of charlatanism or superstition. And why is destiny always so
\nunforeseeable? Since it has been proved that everything is ineluctably
\ndetermined, how is it that one cannot succeed in knowing this determinism with
\nany certainty ?\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Foresight means seeing beforehand; but can you tell me
\nwhat is going to happen tomorrow? I don\u2019t think you can. Of course you can say,
\nwe shall sleep, eat, etc. − general things. But you can\u2019t say whether
\nsomething unexpected is going to happen. Why? Someone has said, \u201cFor this a
\nspecial eye is needed.\u201d It is possible to foresee without receiving images:
\nthere is a mental knowledge without images. Seers are usually able to foresee −
\nnot always, but often. I don\u2019t suppose you were thinking of an extra eye in the
\nmiddle of the forehead like the Cyclops! No, you mean an inner eye belonging to
\nanother world. One doesn\u2019t normally see material things with this eye, or if
\none does, it is from a very special angle. There are people who can see at a
\ndistance what is going on in another country or in a place that is far away
\nfrom them. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Are
\nthese things seen by the psychic vision? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

No, the psychic vision doesn\u2019t usually deal with
\nmaterial things.  <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 307<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

Isn\u2019t
\nit mental vision? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

It could be, but then what you receive is the thoughts
\nof the people in the place you see, because these people are focusing their thoughts <\/i>on what is going on there. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Usually, \u201cdeterminism\u201d
\nis taken to mean a logical chain of cause and effect; if you do one thing, a
\ncertain result will follow. For instance, if you eat a certain kind of food you
\nwill fall ill, if you swallow some poison you will die, and so on. But it often
\nhappens that the effects of certain determinisms cancel out the effects of
\nother determinisms. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Here
\nagain the solution is to be found in Yoga. And by yogic discipline one can not
\nonly foresee destiny but modify it and change it almost totally. First of all,
\nYoga teaches us that we are not a single being, a simple entity which
\nnecessarily has a single destiny that is simple and logical. Rather we have to
\nacknowledge that the destiny of most men is complex, often to the point of
\nincoherence. Is it not this very complexity which gives us the impression of
\nunexpectedness, of indeterminacy and consequently of unpredictability?\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There are people whose destiny is very complex, giving
\nthe impression that the things which happen to them are quite unexpected and
\nunforeseeable, unless one can \u201csee\u201d by some means other than the ordinary. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

To
\nsolve the problem one must know that, to begin with, all living creatures, and
\nmore especially human beings, are made up of a combination of several entities
\nthat come together, interpenetrate, sometimes organising<\/span>
\nthemselves and completing each other, sometimes opposing and contradicting one
\nanother.\u201d <\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 308<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

An \u201centity\u201d is a personality or an individuality.
\nThere are many such \u201cpersonalities\u201d in each one of us. If these personalities
\nagree and are complementary with one another, they make up a human being, a
\nrich and complex \u201cperson\u201d. But that is not what usually happens. These
\npersonalities do not agree with one another. For example, one of them might
\nwish to make some progress, to become more and more perfect, to get a deeper
\nknowledge of things, to realise<\/span> more and more, to
\nproceed towards the perfection of the being, while another one may simply want
\nto have fun and enjoy itself as much as it can; one day it will do this, the
\nnext day something else, etc. If the personalities do not agree, this person\u2019s
\nlife will be incoherent, and that is not unusual: in fact, these cases are very
\ncommon. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Each
\none of these beings or states of being belongs to a world of its own and carries
\nwithin it its own destiny, its own determinism. And it is the combination of
\nall these determinisms, which is sometimes very heterogeneous, that results in
\nthe destiny of the individual.\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

A person may have a great many personalities within
\nhim − ten or twenty, for example − and each one has its own
\ndestiny. In the physical world, an individuality means a human body; so, in a
\nhuman body there are many individualities, each one with its own destiny. What
\nhappens then? Conflicts, friction, inner disorder created by these
\nindividualities which are unable to get on with one another. The strongest one
\ngets the upper hand; it is not only dominant over the others but curbs them to
\nstop them from rebelling. So, in the end, the unlucky ones, the repressed ones,
\ngo to sleep. They bide their time, and when that time comes, they suddenly jump
\nup and turn everything upside down. If that happens very often, that person\u2019s
\nlife will be a very disorderly one. He will take up one thing today and go on
\nwith another tomorrow and so on.  <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 309<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

I don\u2019t think it is true to say that a
\nperson is \u201charmonious\u201d if he has no inner complexity. People who have this kind
\nof illusory harmony are usually deeply immersed in material life, so that the slightest
\nunpleasantness upsets them completely, because they have nothing else. No, a
\ntruly harmonious personality implies a conscious arrangement of the inner
\nindividualities. This arrangement may be effected spontaneously before birth,
\nbut that is rare. The arrangement is achieved later, by means of a discipline,
\na proper education. But to succeed in this one must consciously take the
\npsychic being as the centre and arrange, harmonise<\/span>
\nthe various individualities around it. True harmony, inner organisation<\/span>
\nis the result of such a persistent effort. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

But
\nas the organisation<\/span> and relationship of all these
\nentities can be altered by personal discipline and effort of will, as these
\nvarious determinisms act on each other in different ways according to the concentration
\nof the consciousness, their combination is nearly always variable and therefore
\nunforeseeable.\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

In mathematics, one sometimes takes a great many
\nnumbers to try and find all the possible combinations of them. At once one
\nfinds that it becomes impossible, for there are many numbers that are beyond
\nexpression. Similarly, if you have a great many destinies that come together in
\nyou and occur in various combinations, depending on the part of the being that
\npredominates at the time, if you try to foresee what is going to happen, it is
\nextremely difficult. It is the same thing with states of consciousness. A
\ndestiny represents an individual; they all react on one another and the number
\nof things that may happen is frightening! So how will you foresee that? The
\n\u201claws\u201d of the universe always work independently, and that is the \u201csecret\u201d of
\nthe composition of the universe. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

The art of living would then consist in maintaining <\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 310<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

oneself
\nin one\u2019s highest state of consciousness and thus allowing one\u2019s highest destiny
\nto dominate the others in life and action. So one can say without any fear of
\nmaking a mistake: be always at the summit of your consciousness and the best
\nwill always happen to you. But that is a maximum which is not easy to reach. If
\nthis ideal condition turns out to be unrealisable<\/span>,
\nthe individual can at least, when he is confronted by a danger or a critical
\nsituation, call upon his highest destiny by aspiration, prayer and trustful
\nsurrender to the divine will. Then, in proportion to the sincerity of his call,
\nthis higher destiny intervenes favourably<\/span> in the
\nnormal destiny of the being and changes the course of events insofar as they
\nconcern him personally. It is events of this kind that appear to the outer
\nconsciousness as miracles, as divine interventions.\u201d<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

I shall give you an example of how consciousness, a
\nhigher consciousness, intervenes. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>A man steps
\nout of his house to go to his office. He goes a certain way. Suddenly he
\nremembers that he has left something behind. He steps back to go and get it and
\njust then, in the place where he would have been if he had stepped forward, a
\nlead pipe falls. Something in this man\u2019s consciousness, by telling him to go
\nback, has saved his life. That is what we mean when we say that an intervention
\nof consciousness can change destiny. In this man there were two destinies −
\namong others, probably, − one which wanted him to die and one which
\nwanted him to live. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>Can\u2019t this be called \u201cchance\u201d? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

No, because chance is something quite incoherent, something
\nthat occurs for no reason, and if you believe that life is something incoherent,
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 311<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

\nyou still have much to learn. On the
\ncontrary, it is quite coherent, each little thing is exactly determined and if
\nsomething makes you feel that it is \u201cchance\u201d it is because you know nothing
\nabout the determinisms. They are completely beyond you, because there are
\ninnumerable interweaving laws and you know nothing about them. So if something
\nhappens according to these laws you say it is a \u201cmiracle\u201d or \u201cchance\u201d! <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Pavitra<\/span> has said: \u201cIn mathematics it has been shown that if
\nthe number of intervening factors is very high, and if they act independently,
\nthe result appears to be what is called chance\u2019.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>I have just
\nexplained that this is only an \u201cappearance\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>People who
\nmake an effort to progress and grow in consciousness, realise<\/span>
\nthat what at one time in their lives they took to be a disaster or a calamity
\nmay appear fifteen years later like a blessing, an effect of Grace, some
\nhighest good. From a higher standpoint, it is quite obvious that if you bring
\nyour highest consciousness down into your ordinary life, it will bring the
\ngreatest good into your life. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>People who
\nhave made some progress always have this experience. They see clearly that the
\nso-called \u201cdisaster\u201d was in fact the starting-point of their ascension, an
\nascension which could not have taken place without it. If someone has the inner
\nvision and is able to enter his higher consciousness at will, he will see that
\nit is the greatest good that happens to him when he is in contact with his
\nhighest consciousness. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>But, to be
\nable to understand this, there are two conditions. You must make an effort for
\nprogress and be utterly sincere, for if you are not sincere, you will never
\nhave any insight into your own life. You must be able to look at yourself and
\nsay, \u201cHow tiny I am.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

If
\nsomething is ineluctably determined, how can it be changed? <\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 312<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

I shall give you a simple example − but it may
\noccur in any state of consciousness. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>A stone falls.
\nIf it fulfils its destiny, it will fall to the ground, won\u2019t it? But you are
\nthere and you have a vital or a mental will − one or the other −
\nand you catch the stone in your hand. You have changed the destiny of the
\nstone. A leaf falls − onto the ground if it follows its normal destiny.
\nYou have a vital will, take the leaf in your hand. You have changed the destiny
\nof the leaf. This happens millions of times in the universe and nobody notices
\nit because it is so common. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>But imagine
\nthat you have a very high range of consciousness. If into the determinism down
\nhere you can bring, by aspiration, an urge, a prayer, a higher consciousness,
\nif you can get hold of your higher consciousness, so to say, and bring it into
\nthe material destiny, everything would immediately be changed. But because you
\ndo not see or do not understand what is happening, you say that it is chance or
\na miracle. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Not every
\ndestiny is active in a material destiny, and if you want to change this
\nmaterial destiny, you must be able to bring down another one from above. In
\nthis way, something new will enter into it − these \u201cdescents\u201d of the
\nhigher consciousness take place all the time, but because we do not understand
\nthem, this \u201csomething new\u201d that comes is turned by ordinary people into a
\n\u201cmiracle\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>This is
\nprecisely what we want to do by bringing down into the physical and material
\nworld the supramental<\/span> force and consciousness. At
\nfirst it works by diffusion, not directly. Its working is more or less veiled,
\nmore veiled and distorted as it descends into the physical world, until it
\nbecomes almost imperceptible. If it could work here directly, without this
\ndistortion and this veiling, it would change everything in an absolutely
\nunexpected way. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>I hope you will
\nget this concrete example one day !  <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 313<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

\n


\n6 January 1951<\/font><\/a><\/span><\/i><\/b> <\/font> <\/span><\/a><\/i><\/b>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nThis talk is based upon the Mother\u2019s
\nessays <\/span><\/font> <\/p>\n

\n
\n\u201cTransformation\u201d and \u201cWhat a Child Should <\/span>
\n<\/font> <\/p>\n

\n
\nAlways Remember\u201d (On Education, Cent. Vol. <\/span>
\n<\/font>\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n12, pp. 80-81, 150) .<\/span><\/font> <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

We
\nwant an integral transformation, the transformation of the body and all its
\nactivities. But there is an absolutely indispensable first step that must be
\naccomplished before anything else can be undertaken: the transformation of the
\nconsciousness…However, this is only a beginning; for the outer consciousness,
\nthe various planes and parts of the outer active being are transformed only
\nslowly and gradually as a result of the inner transformation.\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Why do I make a distinction between the integral
\ntransformation and the transformation of consciousness which I mentioned
\nearlier? What is the connection between consciousness and the other parts of
\nthe being? What are these other parts? <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>This
\ntransformation of consciousness is something that comes to all who have practised<\/span> a yogic discipline and become aware of the divine
\nPresence or the Truth of their being. I don\u2019t say that \u201cmany\u201d people have realised<\/span> this, but at least quite a few. What is the
\ndifference between this experience and the integral transformation? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

In
\nthe integral transformation both the outer nature and the inner consciousness
\nare transformed . The character, the habits, etc. are completely changed, as
\nwell as the thoughts and the mental outlook on things. <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, but there is something which remains unchanged
\nunless you take care and persist in your effort. What is it? The body
\nconsciousness.
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 314<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

\nWhat is the body consciousness? The
\nvital consciousness, of course − the physical consciousness as a whole. But
\nthen, in this physical consciousness as a whole, there is the physical mind −
\na mind that is occupied with all the ordinary things and responds to everything
\naround you. There is also the vital consciousness, which is the awareness of
\nsensations, impulses, enthusiasms and desires. Finally, there is the physical
\nconsciousness itself, the material consciousness, the body consciousness, and
\nthat is the one which has so far never been entirely transformed. The global,
\noverall consciousness of the body has been transformed, that is, one can throw
\noff the bondage of thought, of habits that one no longer considers inevitable.
\nThat can change, it has been changed. But what remains to be changed is the
\nconsciousness of the cells. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>There is a
\nconsciousness in the cells: it is what we call the \u201cbody consciousness\u201d and it
\nis wholly bound up with the body. This consciousness has much difficulty in
\nchanging, because it is under the influence of the collective suggestion which
\nis absolutely opposed to the transformation. So one has to struggle with this
\ncollective suggestion, not only with the collective suggestion of the present,
\nbut with the collective suggestion which belongs to the earth-consciousness as
\na whole, the terrestrial human consciousness which goes back to the earliest
\nformation of man. That has to be overcome before the cells can be spontaneously
\naware of the Truth, of the Eternity of matter. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Of course,
\nuntil now, those who have achieved this conscious transformation, who are aware
\nof the eternal and infinite life within themselves, in the depths of their
\nbeing, must, in order to preserve this consciousness, constantly refer back to
\ntheir inner experience, return to their inner contemplation, live in a sort of
\nmore or less constant meditation. And when they come out of meditation, their
\nouter nature is pretty much what it was before, and their way of thinking and reacting
\nis not very different − unless they give up action altogether. But in
\nthat case the inner realisation<\/span>, this transformation
\nof the consciousness,  <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 315<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

is helpful<\/span> only for the
\nperson who has achieved it, but it doesn\u2019t change the condition of matter or
\nearthly life in the least.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>For this
\ntransformation to succeed, all human beings − even all living beings as
\nwell as their material environment − must be transformed. Otherwise
\nthings will remain as they are: an individual experience cannot change
\nterrestrial life. This is the essential difference between the old idea of
\ntransformation − that is, the becoming conscious with the psychic being
\nand the inner life − and transformation as we conceive it and speak of
\nit. Not only an individual or a group of individuals or even all individuals,
\nbut life, the overall consciousness of this more or less developed material
\nlife, have to be transformed. Without such a transformation we shall have the
\nsame misery, the same calamities and the same atrocities in the world. A few
\nindividuals will escape from it by their psychic development, but the general
\nmass will remain in the same state of misery. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

If
\nonly the inner consciousness is changed, won\u2019t some impurities still remain in
\nthe outer being? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, of course. That is the essential difference
\nbetween our yoga and the old yogic disciplines which dealt only with the inner
\nconsciousness. The old beliefs used to say − and some people interpret
\nthe Bhagavat<\/span> Gita<\/span> in this
\nway − that there is no fire without smoke, no life without ignorance in
\nlife. That is the common experience, but it is not our idea, is it? <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>We know by
\nexperience that if we go down into the subconscient<\/span>,
\nlower than the physical consciousness, into the subconscient<\/span>
\nand even lower still into the inconscient<\/span>, we can
\nfind in ourselves the origin of atavism, of what comes from our early education
\nand the environment in which we lived. And this gives a kind of special
\ncharacteristic to the individual, to his outer nature, and it is generally
\nbelieved that we are born like that and we will stay like that. But by going
\ndown into the subconscient<\/span>, into the inconscient<\/span>, one can trace the origin of this formation  <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 316<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

and undo what has been done, change the movements and
\nreactions of the ordinary nature by a conscious and deliberate action and thus
\nreally transform one\u2019s character. This is not a common achievement, but it has
\nbeen done. So one may assert not only that it can be done, but that it has been
\ndone. It is the first step towards the integral transformation, but after that,
\nthere remains the transformation of the cells which I mentioned earlier. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>There is an
\narticle by Sri Aurobindo<\/span> in one of the\u00a0 <\/span>Bulletins which describes the various stages
\nthrough which the entire physical being can be changed. And this is what so far
\nhas never been done. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Does the inconscient<\/span> in oneself belong to the individual being or to
\nthe earth? <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>The inconscient<\/span> is not individualised<\/span>
\nand when you go down into the inconscient<\/span> in
\nyourself, it is the inconscient<\/span> of matter. One can\u2019t
\nsay that each individual has his own inconscient<\/span>, for
\nthat would already be a beginning of individualisation<\/span>,
\nand when you go down into the inconscient<\/span>, it is
\nperhaps not the universal but at least the terrestrial inconscient<\/span>.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>The light,
\nthe consciousness that comes down into this inconscient<\/span>
\nin order to transform it must necessarily be a consciousness that is close
\nenough to be able to touch it. It is not possible to conceive of a light −
\nthe supramental<\/span> light, for example − that would
\nhave the power to individualise<\/span> the inconscient<\/span>. But, through a conscious, individualised<\/span>
\nbeing, this light can be brought down into the inconscient<\/span>
\nand gradually make it conscious. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>First of
\nall, it is the subconscient<\/span> that has to become
\nconscious, and indeed the main difficulty of the integral transformation is
\nthat things are constantly rising up from the subconscient<\/span>.
\nYou think you have got a certain movement under control − anger, for
\nexample. You try very hard to control your anger and succeed to some extent,
\nthen suddenly it rises up again for some reason unknown to you, as if you hadn\u2019t
\ndone anything at all, and you have to start all over again.
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 317<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

\nIf it were the
\ntransformed part of the being going back to its old ways, it would be most
\ndepressing, but it is not like that. It is the material part, the material life
\nwhich is sustained, supported, so to say, by a subconscient<\/span>
\nlife. And this subconscient<\/span> is beginning to get individualised<\/span> around some people; it has certain
\naffinities with a kind of subconscient<\/span> somewhat like
\nour own, and that is where the things you have repressed or thrown out of your
\nnature go to − and one fine day they rise up again. But if you are able
\nto bring the light into the subconscient<\/span> and make it
\nconscious, this will no longer happen. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

One
\noften has the experience of struggling more or less successfully with a defect
\nor a wrong movement, but just when one gives up expecting a total victory, the
\nthing is removed as if from outside. Why is that? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There are two main reasons for this. In such a case,
\nyou may suddenly become receptive, and in this state of receptivity you receive
\nthe help that is needed to remove the defect and the help becomes effective.
\nThe other reason is that, while trying with patience and perseverance, you have
\n− perhaps unknowingly − hit upon the origin of the difficulty in
\nthe subconscient<\/span>. And once that is done, it is easy
\nto transform whatever you wanted to transform in yourself. But this
\ntransformation may seem to you to come \u201cfrom outside\u201d, because you were not
\naware of what was going on. It does not come from outside, it is outside your
\nactive consciousness, and you are aware only of the \u201cresult\u201d of your action. It
\nmay be one of these two things or both together. <\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 318<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

\n"<\/b><\/span>W<\/span>HAT A<\/font><\/span> C<\/span>HILD <\/font> <\/span>S<\/span>HOULD <\/font> <\/span>A<\/span>LWAYS <\/font> <\/span>R<\/span>EMEMBER"<\/font><\/span> <\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe necessity of an absolute sincerity. <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\u201cThe certitude of Truth\u2019s final victory. <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\u201cThe possibility of constant progress with the will to achieve.\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Why do I insist on absolute sincerity? Perhaps the
\nyounger children don\u2019t understand what sincerity is, but the older ones surely
\nought to know ! You have all passed through childhood and you probably remember
\nwhat you were taught, what you were told when you were young. Parents nearly
\nalways tell their children, \u201cYou must not lie, it is very bad to tell a lie.\u201d
\nBut the unfortunate thing is that they lie in your presence and then you wonder
\nwhy they want you to do something which they don\u2019t do themselves. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>But, apart
\nfrom that, why do I insist on the fact that children should be told from a very
\nearly age that it is absolutely necessary to be sincere? I am not addressing
\nthose who were brought up here, but those who were brought up in an ordinary
\nfamily, with ordinary ideas. Children are very often taught how to outsmart
\nothers, how to dissimulate so as to appear good in others\u2019 eyes. Some parents
\ntry to control children through fear, and that is the worst possible method of
\neducation, for it is an incentive to lying, deceit, hypocrisy and all the rest.
\nBut if you repeatedly explain to children something of this kind: If you are
\nnot absolutely sincere, not only with others but also with yourself, if at any
\ntime you try to cover up your imperfections and failings, you will never make
\nany progress, you will always remain what you are throughout all your life,
\nwithout ever making any progress. So, even if you only want to grow out of this
\nprimitive unconscious state into a progressive consciousness, the most
\nimportant thing, the one absolutely important thing is sincerity. If you have
\ndone something which you ought not to have done, you must admit it to yourself;
\nif a less-than-admirable  <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 319<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

movement has occurred in yourself, you must look it in
\nthe face and tell yourself, \u201cIt was not good,\u201d or \u201cIt was disgusting,\u201d or even
\n\u201cIt was wicked.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>And don\u2019t
\nthink that there are people to whom this rule does not apply, for you cannot
\nlive in the physical world without having a share in the physical nature, and
\nphysical nature is essentially a mixture. You will see, when you become
\nabsolutely sincere, that there is nothing in yourself that is absolutely
\nunmixed. But it is only when you look yourself in the face, in the light of
\nyour highest consciousness, that whatever you want to eliminate from your
\nnature will disappear. Without this striving for absolute sincerity, the
\ndefect, the little shadow, will stay in a corner biding its time to come out. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>I am not
\nspeaking of the vital, which is hypocritical, I am merely speaking of the mind.
\nIf you have a small, disagreeable sensation, a slight uneasiness, see how
\nquickly the mind gives you a favourable<\/span> explanation!
\nIt lays the blame on someone else or on the circumstances, it says that what
\nyou did was right and that you are not responsible, and so on. If you look
\ncarefully into yourself, you will see that it is like that and you will find it
\nmost amusing too! If a child starts examining himself carefully very early,
\nobserving himself honestly so as not to deceive himself or deceive others, it
\nwill become a habit and spare him much struggling later on. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Now I am
\naddressing parents and teachers, for it is very important to teach children
\nthat it is absolutely useless to \u201clook\u201d as if they were good, to \u201clook\u201d as if
\nthey were obedient, to \u201clook\u201d as if they were studying well, etc. Very often,
\nthe course parents and teachers adopt with their children is to encourage them
\nto \u201clook as if\u201d. It often happens that if a child spontaneously confesses his
\nmistake, he is given a scolding. This is one of the greatest mistakes of
\nparents. You must have sufficient control over yourself never to scold a child,
\neven if he has broken a very valuable and cherished object. You should simply
\nask him, \u201cHow did you do that?\u201d \u201cWhat happened?\u201d For the child ought to see why
\nit happened, so that he can be more careful next time. 
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 320<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

\nBut that is all. In this way you will get the child to
\nbe sincere with you instead of trying to deceive you. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>The
\ngreatest obstacle to the transformation of one\u2019s own character is hypocrisy. If
\nyou always keep this in mind when dealing with a child, you can do him a lot of
\ngood. Of course, you must not sermonise<\/span> or lecture
\nhim, etc. You should simply make him understand that there is a nobility in the
\nbeing, a great purity, a great love of beauty, which is so powerful that even
\nthe most wicked and criminal people are forced to acknowledge a truly beautiful
\nor heroic or selfless act. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>For, in human
\nbeings, there is a presence, the most marvellous<\/span>
\nPresence on earth, and except in a few very rare cases which I need not mention
\nhere, this presence lies asleep in the heart − not the physical heart but
\nthe psychic center − of all beings. And when this Splendour<\/span>
\nis manifested with enough purity, it will awaken in all beings the echo of this
\nPresence. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Why
\ndoes insincerity get such a sanction from society? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Because society is obsessed with success. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Is
\nthere a difference between sincerity and loyalty? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There is always a difference between two different
\nthings. Of course, it is very difficult, I suppose, to be loyal without being
\nsincere, and vice versa. But I have known people who were loyal and yet lacked
\na certain kind of sincerity. The opposite is not unusual. The one doesn\u2019t
\nautomatically follow from the other, but it is obvious that honesty,
\nstraightforwardness, loyalty and sincerity are closely related. I think that it
\nis extremely difficult for someone to be perfectly sincere without being loyal
\nand honest, but of course this demands the utmost. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Isn\u2019t
\nloyalty limited by a feeling for something or <\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/i>someone?
\nIsn\u2019t sincerity something wider?<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 321<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

<\/span><\/div>\n

Yes, it is. Loyalty implies some kind of hierarchical
\nrelationship, so to say, with someone or something. There is a sort of
\ninterdependence. The usual idea is that loyalty means keeping one\u2019s word, doing
\none\u2019s duty scrupulously, etc. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>Someone who
\nlives all alone in a forest can practise<\/span> total sincerity,
\nbut you can only practise<\/span> loyalty in social life, in
\nrelation to other people. A person who is entirely consecrated in an act of
\ninner devotion to the divine Presence, can be loyal to this Presence. This
\nimplies a relationship with something in front of you, or a relationship with
\nthe universal. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

The
\nGerman generals were loyal to Hitler, but they weren\u2019t sincere with themselves.
\n<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

This is a very complex problem. They might have been
\nsincere in relation to their own ideal. You do not know. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>I have
\nknown beings who were the most active instruments against the divine life,
\nagainst the divine realisation<\/span>. Well, to some extent,
\nthey were loyal to their own ideal and very sincere in their…\u00b9 These beings
\nare called Asuras<\/span>, but as I have just said, they were
\nsincere in relation to their own ideal. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

So
\nsincerity is not enough? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

I didn\u2019t say they had an absolute sincerity. I simply
\nsaid that they were very sincere. Perhaps, in some part of their being, there was
\nsomething that did not try to know any more than it knew. It is quite probable.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Some
\npeople think they have achieved absolute sincerity. <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

If you are sure <\/i>you
\nhave achieved absolute sincerity, you can be sure that you are immersed in
\nfalsehood! <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n\u00b9Words missing in
\nthe transcription.<\/font><\/span> <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nPage – 322<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

PART TWO   CONVERSATIONS 30 December 1950    This talk is based upon the Mother\u2019s essay entitled \u201cForesight\u201d (On Education, Cent. Vol. 12, pp. 77-79). …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[114],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3964","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-15-words-of-the-mother-volume-15","wpcat-114-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3964","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=3964"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3964\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3964"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3964"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3964"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}