{"id":4032,"date":"2013-07-13T01:52:58","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:52:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=4032"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:52:58","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:52:58","slug":"14-28-july-1929-vol-03-questions-and-answers-volume-03","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/02-works-of-the-mother\/01-cwmce\/03-questions-and-answers-volume-03\/14-28-july-1929-vol-03-questions-and-answers-volume-03","title":{"rendered":"-14_28 July 1929.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n
\n


\n28 July
\n 1929<\/font><\/span><\/i><\/b>
\n<\/font>
\n<\/i>
\n<\/b><\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Is it
\npossible for a Yogi to become an artist or can an artist be a Yogi? What is the
\nrelation of Art to Yoga? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

The two are not so antagonistic as you seem to think. There is
\nnothing to prevent a Yogi from being an artist or an artist from being a Yogi.
\nBut when you are in Yoga, there is a profound change in the values of things,
\nof Art as of everything else; you begin to look at Art from a very different
\nstandpoint. It is no longer the one supreme all-engrossing thing for you, no
\nlonger an end in itself. Art is a means, not an end; it is a means of
\nexpression. And the artist then ceases too to believe that the whole world
\nturns round what he is doing or that his work is the most important thing that
\nhas ever been done. His personality counts no longer; he is an agent, a
\nchannel, his art a means of expressing his relations with the Divine. He uses
\nit for that purpose as he might have used any other means that were part of the
\npowers of his nature. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

But
\ndoes an artist feel at all any impulse to create once he takes up Yoga? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Why should he not have the impulse? He can express his relation
\nwith the Divine in the way of his art, exactly as he would in any other. If you
\nwant art to be the true and highest art, it must be the expression of a divine
\nworld brought down into this material world. All true artists have some feeling
\nof this kind, some sense that they are intermediaries between a higher world
\nand this physical existence. If you consider it in this light, Art is not very
\ndifferent from Yoga. But most often the artist has only an indefinite feeling,
\nhe has not the knowledge. Still, I knew some who had it; they worked
\nconsciously at their art with the
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

knowledge. In their creation they did not put forward their
\npersonality as the most important factor; they considered their work as an
\noffering to the Divine, they tried to express by it their relation with the
\nDivine. <\/span><\/p>\n

This was the avowed function of Art in the
\nMiddle Ages. The \u201cprimitive\u201d painters, the builders of cathedrals in Mediaeval
\nEurope had no other conception of art. In <\/span>India<\/span> all her architecture, her sculpture, her
\npainting have proceeded from this source and were inspired by this ideal. The
\nsongs of Mirabai and the music of Thyagaraja, the poetic literature built up by
\nher devotees, saints and Rishis rank among the world’s greatest artistic
\npossessions. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

But
\ndoes the work of an artist improve if he does Yoga? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

The discipline of Art has at its centre the same principle as the
\ndiscipline of Yoga. In both the aim is to become more and more conscious; in
\nboth you have to learn to see and feel something that is beyond the ordinary
\nvision and feeling, to go within and bring out from there deeper things.
\nPainters have to follow a discipline for the growth of the consciousness of
\ntheir eyes, which in itself is almost a Yoga. If they are true artists and try
\nto see beyond and use their art for the expression of the inner world, they
\ngrow in consciousness by this concentration, which is not other than the
\nconsciousness given by Yoga. Why then should not Yogic consciousness be a help
\nto artistic creation? I have known some who had very little training and skill
\nand yet through Yoga acquired a fine capacity in writing and painting. Two
\nexamples I can cite to you. One was a girl who had no education whatever; she
\nwas a dancer and danced tolerably well. After she took up Yoga, she danced only
\nfor friends; but her dancing attained a depth of expression and beauty which
\nwas not there before. And although she was not educated, she began to write
\nwonderful things; for she had visions and expressed
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

them in the most beautiful language. But there were ups and downs
\nin her Yoga, and when she was in a good condition, she wrote beautifully, but
\notherwise was quite dull and stupid and uncreative. The second case is that of
\na boy who had studied art, but only just a little. The son of a diplomat, he
\nhad been trained for the diplomatic career; but he lived in luxury and his
\nstudies did not go far. Yet as soon as he took up Yoga, he began to produce
\ninspired drawings which carried the expression of an inner knowledge and were
\nsymbolic in character; in the end he became a great artist. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Why
\nare artists generally irregular in their conduct and loose in character? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

When they are so, it is because they live usually in the vital
\nplane, and the vital part in them is extremely sensitive to the forces of that
\nworld and receives from it all kinds of impressions and impulsions over which
\nthey have no controlling power. And often too they are very free in their minds
\nand do not believe in the petty social conventions and moralities that govern
\nthe life of ordinary people. They do not feel bound by the customary rules of
\nconduct and have not yet found an inner law that would replace them. As there
\nis nothing to check the movements of their desire-being, they lead easily a
\nlife of liberty or license. But this does not happen with all. I lived ten
\nyears among artists and found many of them to be bourgeois to the core; they
\nwere married and settled, good fathers, good husbands, and lived up to the most
\nstrict moral ideas of what should and what should not be done. <\/span><\/p>\n

There is one way in which Yoga may stop
\nthe artist’s productive impulse. If the origin of his art is in the vital
\nworld, once he becomes a Yogi he will lose his inspiration or, rather, the
\nsource from which his inspiration used to come will inspire him no more, for
\nthen the vital world appears in its true light; it puts on its true value, and
\nthat value is very relative. Most <\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

of those who call themselves artists draw their inspiration from
\nthe vital world only; and it carries in it no high or great significance. But
\nwhen a true artist, one who looks for his creative source to a higher world,
\nturns to Yoga, he will find that his inspiration becomes more direct and
\npowerful and his expression clearer and deeper. Of those who possess a true
\nvalue the power of Yoga will increase the value, but from one who has only some
\nfalse appearance of art even that appearance will vanish or else lose its
\nappeal. To one earnest in Yoga, the first simple truth that strikes his opening
\nvision is that what he does is a very relative thing in comparison with the
\nuniversal manifestation, the universal movement. But an artist is usually vain
\nand looks on himself as a highly important personage, a kind of demigod in the
\nhuman world. Many artists say that if they did not believe what they do to be
\nof a supreme importance, they would not be able to do it. But I have known some
\nwhose inspiration was from a higher world and yet they did not believe that
\nwhat they did was of so immense an importance. That is nearer the spirit of
\ntrue art. If a man is truly led to express himself in art, it is the way the
\nDivine has chosen to manifest in him, and then by Yoga his art will gain and
\nnot lose. But there is all the question: is the artist appointed by the Divine
\nor self-appointed?<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

But
\nif one does Yoga can he rise to such heights as Shakespeare or Shelley? There
\nhas been no such instance. <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>Why not? The Mahabharata
\nand Ramayana are certainly not inferior to anything created by Shakespeare or
\nany other poet, and they are said to have been the work of men who were Rishis
\nand had done Yogic\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>tapasy\u00e3 .. The Gita
\nwhich, like the Upanishads, ranks at once among the greatest literary and the
\ngreatest spiritual works, was not written by one who had no experience of Yoga.
\nAnd where is the inferiority to your Milton and Shelley in the famous poems
\nwritten whether in <\/span>India<\/span> or <\/span>Persia<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

or elsewhere by men known to be saints, Sufis, devotees? And,
\nthen, do you know all the Yogis and their work? Among the poets and creators
\ncan you say who were or who were not in conscious touch with the Divine? There
\nare some who are not officially Yogis, they are not\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>gurus\u00a0\u00a0
\n<\/span>and have no disciples; the world does not know what they do; they are
\nnot anxious for fame and do not attract to themselves the attention of men; but
\nthey have the higher consciousness, are in touch with a Divine Power, and when
\nthey create they create from there. The best paintings in <\/span>India<\/span> and much of the best statuary and
\narchitecture were done by Buddhist monks who passed their lives in spiritual
\ncontemplation and practice; they did supreme artistic work, but did not care to
\nleave their names to posterity. The chief reason why Yogis are not usually
\nknown by their art is that they do not consider their art-expression as the
\nmost important part of their life and do not put so much time and energy into
\nit as a mere artist. And what they do does not always reach the public. How
\nmany there are who have done great things and not published them to the world! <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Have
\nYogis done greater dramas than Shakespeare? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Drama is not the highest of the arts. Someone has said that drama
\nis greater than any other art and art is greater than life. But it is not quite
\nlike that. The mistake of the artist is to believe that artistic production is
\nsomething that stands by itself and for itself, independent of the rest of the
\nworld. Art as understood by these artists is like a mushroom on the wide soil
\nof life, something casual and external, not something intimate to life; it does
\nnot reach and touch the deep and abiding realities, it does not become an
\nintrinsic and inseparable part of existence. True art is intended to express
\nthe beautiful, but in close intimacy with the universal movement. The greatest
\nnations and the most cultured races have always considered art as a part of
\nlife and made it subservient to life. Art was like that in <\/span>Japan<\/span> <\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

in its best moments; it was like that in all the best moments in
\nthe history of art. But most artists are like parasites growing on the margin
\nof life; they do not seem to know that art should be the expression of the
\nDivine in life and through life. In everything, everywhere, in all relations
\ntruth must be brought out in its all-embracing rhythm and every movement of
\nlife should be an expression of beauty and harmony. Skill is not art, talent is
\nnot art. Art is a living harmony and beauty that must be expressed in all the movements
\nof existence. This manifestation of beauty and harmony is part of the Divine
\nrealisation upon earth, perhaps even its greatest part. <\/span><\/p>\n

For, from the supramental point of view
\nbeauty and harmony are as important as any other expression of the Divine. But
\nthey should not be isolated, set up apart from all other relations, taken out
\nfrom the ensemble; they should be one with the expression of life as a whole.
\nPeople have the habit of saying, \u201cOh, it is an artist!\u201d as if an artist should
\nnot be a man among other men but must be an extraordinary being belonging to a
\nclass by itself, and his art too something extraordinary and apart, not to be
\nconfused with the other ordinary things of the world. The maxim, \u201cArt for art’s
\nsake\u201d, tries to impress and emphasise as a truth the same error. It is the same
\nmistake as when men place in the middle of their drawing-rooms a framed picture
\nthat has nothing to do either with the furniture or the walls, but is put there
\nonly because it is an \u201cobject of art\u201d. <\/span><\/p>\n

True art is a whole and an ensemble; it is
\none and of one piece with life. You see something of this intimate wholeness in
\nancient <\/span>Greece<\/span> and ancient <\/span>Egypt<\/span>; for there pictures and statues and all
\nobjects of art were made and arranged as part of the architectural plan of a
\nbuilding, each detail a portion of the whole. It is like that in <\/span>Japan<\/span>, or at least it was so till the other day
\nbefore the invasion of a utilitarian and practical modernism. A Japanese house
\nis a wonderful artistic whole; always the right thing is there in the right
\nplace, nothing wrongly set, nothing too much, nothing too little. Everything is
\njust as it
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

needed to be, and the house itself blends marvellously with the
\nsurrounding nature. In <\/span>India<\/span>, too, painting and sculpture and architecture
\nwere one integral beauty, one single movement of adoration of the Divine. <\/span><\/p>\n

There has been in this sense a great
\ndegeneration since then in the world. From the time of <\/span>Victoria<\/span> and in <\/span>France<\/span> from the <\/span>Second Empire<\/span> we have entered into a period of decadence.
\nThe habit has grown of hanging up in rooms pictures that have no meaning for
\nthe surrounding objects; any picture, any artistic object could now be put
\nanywhere and it would make small difference. Art now is meant to show skill and
\ncleverness and talent, not to embody some integral expression of harmony and
\nbeauty in a home. <\/span><\/p>\n

But latterly there has come about a revolt
\nagainst this lapse into bourgeois taste. The reaction was so violent that it
\nlooked like a complete aberration and art seemed about to sink down into the
\nabsurd. Slowly, however, out of the chaos something has emerged, something more
\nrational, more logical, more coherent to which can once more be given the name
\nof art, an art renovated and perhaps, or let us hope so, regenerated. <\/span><\/p>\n

Art is nothing less in its fundamental
\ntruth than the aspect of beauty of the Divine manifestation. Perhaps, looking
\nfrom this standpoint, there will be found very few true artists; but still
\nthere are some and these can very well be considered as Yogis. For like a Yogi
\nan artist goes into deep contemplation to await and receive his inspiration. To
\ncreate something truly beautiful, he has first to see it within, to realise it
\nas a whole in his inner consciousness; only when so found, seen, held within,
\ncan he execute it outwardly; he creates according to this greater inner vision.
\nThis too is a kind of yogic discipline, for by it he enters into intimate
\ncommunion with the inner worlds. A man like Leonardo da Vinci was a Yogi and
\nnothing else. And he was, if not the greatest, at least one of the greatest
\npainters, \u2013 although his art did not stop at painting alone. <\/span><\/p>\n

Music too is an essentially spiritual art
\nand has always been <\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

associated with religious feeling and an inner life. But, here
\ntoo, we have turned it into something independent and self-sufficient, a
\nmushroom art, such as is operatic music. Most of the artistic productions we
\ncome across are of this kind and at best interesting from the point of view of
\ntechnique. I do not say that even operatic music cannot be used as a medium of
\na higher art expression; for whatever the form, it can be made to serve a
\ndeeper purpose. All depends on the thing itself, on how it is used, on what is
\nbehind it. There is nothing that cannot be used for the Divine purpose \u2013 just
\nas anything can pretend to be the Divine and yet be of the mushroom species. <\/span><\/p>\n

Among the great modern musicians
\nthere have been several whose consciousness, when they created, came into touch
\nwith a higher consciousness. C<\/span>\u00e9sar Franck played on the organ as one inspired; he had an opening
\ninto the psychic life and he was conscious of it and to a great extent
\nexpressed it. Beethoven, when he composed the Ninth Symphony, had the vision of
\nan opening into a higher world and of the descent of a higher world into this
\nearthly plane. Wagner had strong and powerful intimations of the occult world;
\nhe had the instinct of occultism and the sense of the occult and through it he
\nreceived his greatest inspirations. But he worked mainly on the vital level and
\nhis mind came in constantly to interfere and mechanised his inspiration. His
\nwork for the greater part is too mixed, too often obscure and heavy, although
\npowerful. But when he could cross the vital and the mental levels and reach a
\nhigher world, some of the glimpses he had were of an exceptional beauty, as in
\nParsifal, in some parts of Tristan and Iseult and most in its last great Act. <\/span><\/p>\n

Look again at what the moderns have made
\nof the dance; compare it with what the dance once was. The dance was once one
\nof the highest expressions of the inner life; it was associated with religion
\nand it was an important limb in sacred ceremony, in the celebration of
\nfestivals, in the adoration of the Divine. In some countries it reached a very
\nhigh degree of <\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

beauty and an extraordinary perfection. In <\/span>Japan<\/span> they kept up the tradition of the dance
\nas a part of the religious life and, because the strict sense of beauty and art
\nis a natural possession of the Japanese, they did not allow it to degenerate into
\nsomething of lesser significance and smaller purpose. It was the same in <\/span>India<\/span>. It is true that in our days there have
\nbeen attempts to resuscitate the ancient Greek and other dances; but the
\nreligious sense is missing in all such resurrections and they look more like
\nrhythmic gymnastics than dance. <\/span><\/p>\n

Today Russian dances are famous, but they
\nare expressions of the vital world and there is even something terribly vital
\nin them. Like all that comes to us from that world, they may be very attractive
\nor very repulsive, but always they stand for themselves and not for the
\nexpression of the higher life. The very mysticism of the Russians is of a vital
\norder. As technicians of the dance they are marvellous; but technique is only
\nan instrument. If your instrument is good, so much the better, but so long as
\nit is not surrendered to the Divine, however fine it may be, it is empty of the
\nhighest and cannot serve a divine purpose. The difficulty is that most of those
\nwho become artists believe that they stand on their own legs and have no need
\nto turn to the Divine. It is a great pity; for in the divine manifestation
\nskill is as useful an element as anything else. Skill is one part of the divine
\nfabric, only it must know how to subordinate itself to greater things. <\/span><\/p>\n

There is a domain far above the mind which
\nwe could call the world of Harmony and, if you can reach there, you will find
\nthe root of all harmony that has been manifested in whatever form upon earth.
\nFor instance, there is a certain line of music, consisting of a few supreme
\nnotes, that was behind the productions of two artists who came one after
\nanother \u2013 one a concerto of Bach, another a concerto of Beethoven. The two are
\nnot alike on paper and differ to the outward ear, but in their essence they are
\nthe same. One and the same vibration of consciousness, one wave of significant
\nharmony touched both these <\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

artists. Beethoven caught a larger part, but in him it was more
\nmixed with the inventions and interpolations of his mind; Bach received less,
\nbut what he seized of it was purer. The vibration was that of the victorious
\nemergence of consciousness, consciousness tearing itself out of the womb of
\nunconsciousness in a triumphant uprising and birth. <\/span><\/p>\n

If by Yoga you are capable of reaching
\nthis source of all art, then you are master, if you will, of all the arts.
\nThose that may have gone there before, found it perhaps happier, more pleasant
\nor full of a rapturous ease to remain and enjoy the Beauty and the Delight that
\nare there, not manifesting it, not embodying it upon earth. But this abstention
\nis not all the truth nor the true truth of Yoga; it is rather a deformation, a
\ndiminution of the dynamic freedom of Yoga by the more negative spirit of
\nSannyasa. The will of the Divine is to manifest, not to remain altogether
\nwithdrawn in inactivity and an absolute silence; if the Divine Consciousness
\nwere really an inaction of unmanifesting bliss, there would never have been any
\ncreation.\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span><\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

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

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

28 July 1929     Is it possible for a Yogi to become an artist or can an artist be a Yogi? What is the…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[115],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4032","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-03-questions-and-answers-volume-03","wpcat-115-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4032","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=4032"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4032\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4032"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4032"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4032"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}