{"id":4312,"date":"2013-07-13T01:55:06","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:55:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=4312"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:55:06","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:55:06","slug":"07-jnana-60-61-61-vol-10-on-thoughts-and-aphorisms-volume-10","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/02-works-of-the-mother\/01-cwmce\/10-on-thoughts-and-aphorisms-volume-10\/07-jnana-60-61-61-vol-10-on-thoughts-and-aphorisms-volume-10","title":{"rendered":"-07_jnana-60-61_61.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n
\n

\n61 \u2013 There is nothing finite. It is only the Infinite who can create for
\nHimself limits. The finite can have no beginning nor end, for the very act of
\nconceiving its beginning and end declares its infinity. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

How can we have the experience of the Infinite?<\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

The only way is to come out of the
\nconsciousness of the finite. <\/span><\/p>\n

 It is in the hope of achieving this
\nthat all yogic disciplines have been developed and undertaken from time
\nimmemorial until now. Much has been written on the subject, but little has been
\ndone. Only a very small number of individuals have so far succeeded in escaping
\nfrom the finite to plunge into the Infinite. <\/span><\/p>\n

And yet, as Sri Aurobindo has written, the
\nInfinite alone exists; only the falsehood of our superficial perception makes
\nus believe in the existence of the finite. <\/span><\/p>\n

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

20 May 1961 <\/font> <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\n62<\/a> \u2013 I heard a fool discoursing utter folly and wondered what God meant
\nby it; then I considered and saw a distorted mask of truth and wisdom. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

How can folly be a distorted mask of truth? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

It is the very definition of folly that
\nSri Aurobindo gives here. A mask is something that conceals, that makes
\ninvisible what it covers. And if the mask is distorted, it not only renders
\ninvisible what it conceals but also totally changes its nature. So, according
\nto this definition, folly is something that veils and distorts beyond all
\nrecognition the Truth which is at the origin of all things.  <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n\u00a0<\/font><\/span>23 June 1961<\/i> <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 98<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

Does Sri Aurobindo mean that there is no absolute falsehood, no absolute
\nuntruth?<\/span><\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There can be no absolute untruth. In
\nactual fact it is not possible, because the Divine is behind all things. <\/span><\/p>\n

It is like people who ask whether certain elements
\nwill disappear from the universe. What could the destruction of a universe
\nmean? If we come out of our folly, what can we call destruction? Only the form,
\nthe appearance is destroyed \u2013 and indeed, all appearances are destroyed, one
\nafter another. It is also said \u2013 it is written everywhere, so many things are
\nsaid \u2013 that the adverse forces will either be converted, that is to say, they
\nwill become conscious of the Divinity within them and become divine, or they
\nwill be destroyed. But what does destroyed mean? Their form? Their form of
\nconsciousness can be dissolved, but that something which makes them exist,
\nwhich makes all things exist \u2013 how could that be destroyed? The universe is an
\nobjectivisation, an objective self-discovery of That which is from all
\neternity. So? How can the All cease to be? The infinite and eternal All, that
\nis to say, That which has no limits of any kind \u2013 what can go outside That?
\nThere is no place to go! Go where? There is nothing but That.<\/span><\/p>\n

Furthermore, when we say There is only
\nThat, we are locating it somewhere, which is absolutely stupid. So, what can be
\ntaken away from there? <\/span><\/p>\n

One can conceive of a universe being
\nprojected outside the present manifestation. One can conceive of universes
\nhaving succeeded each other and that which was in the earlier ones would no
\nlonger be in the later ones \u2013 that is even obvious. One can conceive that a
\nwhole mass of falsehood and untruth \u2013 things which are falsehood and untruth
\nfor us now \u2013 will no longer belong to the world as it will be in its unfolding;
\nall this one can understand \u2013 but \u201cdestroy\u201d? Where can it go to be destroyed?
\nWhen we speak of destroying, we think only of <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 99<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

the destruction of a form \u2013 it may be a
\nform of consciousness or a material form, but it is always a form. But how
\ncould what is without form be destroyed?<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>So
\nto speak of an absolute falsehood that will disappear would simply mean that a
\nwhole set of things will live eternally in the past but will not belong to
\nfuture manifestations, that is all. <\/span><\/p>\n

One cannot go outside That! <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

But they will remain in the past? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

We are told that there is a state of
\nconsciousness, when we rise above, when we are able to go beyond both the
\naspect of Nothingness or Nirvana and the aspect of Existence \u2013 there is the
\nNirvana aspect and the Existence aspect, the two simultaneous and complementary
\naspects of the Supreme \u2013 where all things exist eternally and simultaneously;
\nso one can conceive God knows! This may well be another stupidity \u2013 one can
\nconceive of a certain number of things passing into Non-Being, and that to our
\nconsciousness would be a disappearance or a destruction. <\/span><\/p>\n

Is that possible? I do not know. You would
\nhave to ask the Lord, but usually He does not answer such questions. He smiles!
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

There comes a time when really one can no
\nlonger say anything: one has the feeling that whatever one says, even if it
\nisn’t absolutely inane, is not far short of it, and that it would actually be
\nbetter to keep quiet. That is the difficulty. In some of these Aphorisms you
\nfeel that he has suddenly caught hold of something above and beyond everything
\nthat can be thought \u2013 so what can one say?  <\/span><\/p>\n

(Silence<\/i>) <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>Naturally, when one comes down here again, one
\ncan \u2013 <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 100<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

oh, one can say many things! <\/span><\/p>\n

As a joke \u2013 one can always joke, but one
\nhesitates to do so because people take your jokes so seriously \u2013 one could very
\nwell say, without being completely wrong, that one sometimes learns much more
\nby listening to a madman or a fool than by listening to a reasonable man. I am
\nquite sure of it. There is nothing that withers you more than reasonable
\npeople. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

27 June 1961 <\/font><\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/p>\n

\n63<\/a> \u2013 God is great, says the Mahomedan. Yes, He is so great that He can
\nafford to be weak, whenever that too is necessary.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\n64 \u2013 God often fails in His workings; it is the sign of His illimitable
\ngodhead.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

\n65 \u2013 Because God is invincibly great, He can afford to be weak; because
\nHe is immutably pure, He can indulge with impunity in sin; He knows eternally
\nall delight, therefore He tastes also the delight of pain; He is inalienably
\nwise, therefore He has not debarred Himself from folly. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

Why does God need to be weak? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Sri Aurobindo does not say that God has
\nany need of weakness. He says that in any particular whole, for the perfection
\nof the play of forces, a moment of weakness may be just as necessary as a
\ndisplay of strength. And he adds, somewhat ironically, that since God is
\nalmighty force, He can at the same time afford to be weak, if necessary. <\/span><\/p>\n

This is to widen the outlook of certain
\nmoralists who attribute definite qualities to God and will not permit Him to be
\notherwise.
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 101<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

Strength as we see it and weakness as we
\nsee it are both an equally distorted expression of the Divine Truth which is
\nsecretly present behind all physical manifestations.
\n\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

30 June 1961 <\/font> <\/span><\/i>
\n
\n <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

Does God ever really fail? Is God ever really weak? Or is it simply a
\ngame?\u00b9<\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/p>\n

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

It is not like that! That is precisely the
\ndistortion in the Western attitude as opposed to the attitude of the Gita. It is
\nextremely difficult for the Western mind to understand in a living and concrete
\nmanner that everything is the Divine.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>People are so deeply imbued with the Christian
\nidea of \u201cGod the Creator\u201d \u2013 the creation on one side and God on the other. When
\nyou think about it you reject it, but it has penetrated into the sensations and
\nfeelings; so, spontaneously, instinctively, almost subconsciously, you
\nattribute to God everything you consider to be best and most beautiful and,
\nabove all, everything you want to attain, to realise. Naturally, each one
\nchanges the content of his God according to his own consciousness, but it is
\nalways what he considers to be best. And that is also why instinctively and
\nspontaneously, subconsciously, you are shocked by the idea that God can be
\nthings that you do not like, that you do not approve of or do not think best. <\/span><\/p>\n

I put that rather childishly, on purpose,
\nso that you can understand it properly. But it is like that \u2013 I am sure,
\nbecause I observed it in myself for a very long time, because of the
\nsubconscious formation of childhood, environment, education, etc. You must be
\nable to press into this body the consciousness of Oneness, the absolute
\nexclusive Oneness of the Divine \u2013 exclusive in the sense that nothing exists
\nexcept in this Oneness, even the things we find most repulsive. <\/span><\/p>\n

And this is what Sri Aurobindo is
\nfighting, for he too had <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\n\u00b9 <\/font> <\/span>The Mother replied orally to this
\nquestion.<\/font><\/span> <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 102<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

this Christian education, he too had to
\nstruggle; and these Aphorisms are the result \u2013 the flowering, as it were \u2013 of
\nthis necessity of fighting a subconscious formation. For that is what makes you
\nask such questions: \u201cHow can God be weak? How can God be foolish? How\u2026?\u201d But
\nthere is nothing other than God, only He exists, there is nothing outside Him.
\nAnd if something seems ugly to us, it is simply because He no longer wants it
\nto exist. He is preparing the world so that this thing may no longer be
\nmanifested, so that the manifestation can move from that state to something
\nelse. So naturally, within us, we violently repulse everything that is about to
\ngo out of the active manifestation \u2013 there is a movement of rejection. <\/span><\/p>\n

But it is Him. There is nothing but Him.
\nThis is what we should repeat to ourselves from morning to evening and from evening
\nto morning, because we forget it at each moment. <\/span><\/p>\n

There is only Him. There is nothing but
\nHim \u2013 He alone exists, there is no existence without Him, there is only Him! <\/span><\/p>\n

So, to ask a question like this is still
\nto react like those who make a distinction between what is and what is not
\nDivine or rather between what is and what is not God. \u201cHow can He be weak?\u201d It
\nis a question I cannot ask. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

I understand, but they speak of the Lila, the divine play; so He is
\nstanding back, as it were. He is not really entirely involved, not really
\nabsolutely in the play. <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, yes, He is! He is totally in it. He
\nhimself is the Play. <\/span><\/p>\n

We speak of God, but we should remember
\nthat there are all these gradations of consciousness; and when we speak of God
\nand His Play, we mean God in His transcendent state, beyond all the levels of
\nmatter, and when we speak of the Play we speak of God in his material state. So
\nwe say: Transcendent God is watching and playing \u2013 in Himself, by Himself, with
\nHimself \u2013 His material game. <\/span><\/p>\n

But all language is a language of
\nignorance. Our entire way
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 103<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

of expressing ourselves, everything we say
\nand the way in which we say it, is necessarily ignorance. And that is why it is
\nso difficult to express something which is concretely true; this would require
\nexplanations which would themselves be full of falsehood, of course, or else
\nextremely long. This is why Sri Aurobindo’s sentences are sometimes very long,
\nprecisely because he strives to escape from this ignorant language. <\/span><\/p>\n

Our very way of thinking is wrong. The
\nbelievers, the faithful, all of them \u2013 particularly in the West \u2013 when they
\nspeak of God, think of Him as \u201csomething else,\u201d they think that He cannot be
\nweak, ugly or imperfect \u2013 they think wrongly, they divide, they separate. It is
\nsubconscious, unreflecting thought; they are in the habit of thinking like this
\ninstinctively; they do not watch themselves thinking. For example, when they
\nspeak of perfection in a general way, they see or feel or postulate precisely
\nthe sum-total of everything they consider to be virtuous, divine, beautiful,
\nadmirable \u2013 but it is not that at all! Perfection is something which lacks
\nnothing. The divine perfection is the Divine in His entirety, which lacks
\nnothing. The divine perfection is the Divine as a whole, from whom nothing has
\nbeen taken away \u2013 so it is just the opposite! For the moralists divine
\nperfection means all the virtues that they represent.<\/span><\/p>\n

From the true point of view, perfection is
\nthe whole (Mother makes a global gesture<\/i>),
\nand it is precisely the fact that there can be nothing outside the whole. It is
\nimpossible that anything should be missing, because it is impossible for
\nanything not to form part of the whole. There can be nothing which is not in
\nthe whole. Let me explain. A given universe may not contain everything, for a
\nuniverse is a mode of manifestation; but there is every possible kind of
\nuniverse. So I always come back to the same thing: there can be nothing which
\ndoes not form part of the whole. <\/span><\/p>\n

Therefore one can say that each thing is
\nin its place, exactly as it should be, and that relations between things are
\nexactly as they should be. <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 104<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

But perfection is only one special way of
\napproaching the Divine; it is one side, and in the same way there are
\ninnumerable sides, angles or aspects, innumerable ways of approaching the
\nDivine, for example: will, truth, purity, perfection, unity, immortality,
\neternity, infinity, silence, peace, existence, consciousness, etc. The number
\nof approaches is almost unlimited. With each one you approach or draw near or
\nenter into contact with the Divine through one aspect and if you really do it,
\nyou find that the difference is merely in the most external form, but the
\ncontact is identical. It is as if you were turning around a centre, a globe,
\nand seeing it from many different angles as in a kaleidoscope; but once the
\ncontact is made, it is the same thing. <\/span><\/p>\n

Perfection is therefore a global way of
\napproaching the Divine: everything is there and everything is as it should be \u2013
\n\u201cshould be\u201d, that is to say, a perfect expression of the Divine; one cannot
\neven say of His Will, for if you say His Will it is still something outside
\nHim. <\/span><\/p>\n

One can also say \u2013 but this is far, far
\nbelow it \u2013 <\/sub>that He is what He is and exactly as He wants to be \u2013
\nwith this \u201cexactly as He wants to be\u201d, one has come down by a considerable
\nnumber of steps! But this is to give you the point of view of perfection. <\/span><\/p>\n

Besides, divine perfection implies
\ninfinity and eternity; that is to say, everything coexists outside time and
\nspace. <\/span><\/p>\n

It is like the word purity; one could hold
\nforth interminably on the difference between divine purity and what people call
\npurity. The divine purity, at the lowest, allows no influence other than the
\ndivine influence \u2013 at the lowest. But that is already very much distorted; the
\ndivine purity means that there is only the Divine, nothing else \u2013 it is
\nperfectly pure, there is only the Divine, there is nothing other than Him. <\/span><\/p>\n

And so on. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

7 July 1961<\/font><\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\nPage – 105<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

\n66<\/a> \u2013 Sin is that which was once in its place, persisting now it is out
\nof place; there is no other sinfulness.<\/span><\/p>\n

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

Has cruelty, for example, ever been in its
\nplace<\/span><\/i>? \u00b9<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

This very question of yours came to my
\nvision, since I receive in my consciousness all the questions people ask. <\/span><\/p>\n

To kill out of cruelty? To make others
\nsuffer out of cruelty? And yet it is an expression of the Divine \u2013 we always
\ncome back to the same thing \u2013 but an expression which is distorted in its appearance.
\nCan you tell me what lies behind it? <\/span><\/p>\n

Cruelty was one of the things that was
\nmost repugnant to Sri Aurobindo, but he always said that it was the distortion
\nof an intensity, one could almost say the distortion of an intensity of love,
\nsomething which is not satisfied with a middle course, which wants extremes \u2013
\nand that is justifiable. <\/span><\/p>\n

I had always known that cruelty, like
\nsadism, is a need for violent, extremely strong sensation, to penetrate a thick
\nlayer of tamas that feels nothing \u2013 tamas needs something extreme in order to
\nbe able to feel. The explanation may lie in this direction. <\/span><\/p>\n

But at the origin there is still the
\nproblem that has never been solved: Why has it become like this? Why this
\ndistortion? Why has it all been perverted? Behind, there are beautiful things,
\nvery intense, infinitely more powerful than what we can even bear, wonderful
\nthings, but why has all that become so frightful here? This is what came to me
\nimmediately when I read this Aphorism. <\/span><\/p>\n

The concept of sin is something that I do
\nnot understand and have never understood; original sin seems to me one of the
\nmost monstrous ideas that man could ever have \u2013 sin and I don’t go together! So
\nnaturally, I fully agree with Sri Aurobindo that there is no sin, this is
\nunderstood, but\u2026 <\/span><\/p>\n

Certain things, like cruelty, could be
\ncalled sin, but I can only see this explanation, that it is a distortion of the
\ntaste or<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\n\u00b9 <\/font> <\/span>Oral Question and answer.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 106<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

need for an extremely strong sensation. I
\nhave observed in cruel people that they feel Ananda at that moment; they find
\nan intense joy in it. So that is its justification, only it is in such a state
\nof distortion that it is repugnant. <\/span><\/p>\n

As for the idea that things are not in
\ntheir place, I understood it even when I was a child. It was only later that I
\nwas given the explanation by the person who taught me occultism, for, in his
\ncosmogonic system, he explained the successive pralayas<\/i>\u00b9 of the various universes by saying that with each
\nuniverse an aspect of the Supreme would manifest itself, that each universe was
\nbuilt on one aspect of the Supreme and that one after another they had all
\nreturned into the Supreme. He enumerated all the aspects that were manifested
\nsuccessively and with what logic! It was extraordinary \u2013 I have kept it somewhere,
\nI forget where. And he said that this time, it was \u2013 I do not remember exactly
\nwhat number in the series \u2013 but it would be the universe which would not be
\nwithdrawn again, which would follow a progressive course of becoming that would
\nbe, so to say, indefinite. And this universe represented equilibrium, not
\nstatic but progressive equilibrium that is to say, each thing in its place,
\nexactly, each vibration, each movement in its place. The further down one goes,
\nthe more each form, each activity, each thing is exactly in its place in
\nrelation to the whole.<\/span><\/p>\n

I was extremely interested, because later
\nSri Aurobindo said the same thing, that nothing is bad, it is just that things
\nare not in their place \u2013 their place not only in space but also in time; their
\nplace in the universe, beginning with the worlds, the stars, etc. \u2013 each thing
\nexactly in its place. And so, when each thing is exactly in its place, from the
\nmost stupendous to the most microscopic, the whole will express the Supreme
\nprogressively, without any need of being withdrawn to be emanated again. On
\nthis Sri Aurobindo based the fact that in this creation, in this universe, the
\nperfection of a divine world \u2013 what Sri Aurobindo calls the Supermind \u2013 will be
\nable to manifest. Equilibrium is<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\n\u00b9 <\/font> <\/span>Pralaya: the end or destruction of a
\nuniverse.<\/font><\/span> <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 107<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

the essential law of this creation and
\nthis is why perfection can be realised in the manifestation. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

In this connection what are the very first things that the Supramental
\nForce intends to drive out, or is trying to drive out, so that everything may
\nbe in its place, individually and cosmically? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Drive out? But will it \u201cdrive out\u201d
\nanything? If we accept Sri Aurobindo’s idea, it will put each thing in its
\nplace, that’s all. <\/span><\/p>\n

One thing must necessarily cease, and that
\nis the distortion, that is to say, the veil of falsehood upon Truth, because
\nthat is what is responsible for everything we see here. If this is removed,
\nthings will be completely different, completely. They will be what we feel them
\nto be when we come out of this consciousness. When one comes out of this
\nconsciousness and enters into the Truth-consciousness; the difference is such
\nthat one wonders how there can be anything like suffering and misery and death
\nand all that. There is a kind of astonishment in the sense that one does not
\nunderstand how it can happen \u2013 when one has really tipped over to the other
\nside. But this experience is usually associated with the experience of the
\nunreality of the world as we know it, whereas Sri Aurobindo says that this
\nperception of the unreality of the world is not necessary to live in the
\nsupramental consciousness \u2013 it is only the unreality of Falsehood, not the
\nunreality of the world. That is to say, the world has a reality of its own,
\nindependent of Falsehood. <\/span><\/p>\n

I suppose that is the first effect of the
\nSupermind \u2013 the first effect in the individual, because it will begin with the
\nindividual. \u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

18 July 1961<\/font><\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n


\n67<\/a> \u2013 There is no sin in man, but a great deal of disease, ignorance and
\nmisapplication. <\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\nPage – 108<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

\n68 \u2013 The sense of sin was necessary in order that man might become
\ndisgusted with his own imperfections. It was God’s corrective for egoism. But
\nman’s egoism meets God’s device by being very dully alive to its own sins and
\nvery keenly alive to the sins of others. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

At what phase of his development will man be able to rid himself of
\negoism?<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

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

When egoism will no longer be necessary to
\nmake man a conscious individuality.  <\/span><\/p>\n


\n\u00a0<\/font><\/span>27
\nJuly 1961 <\/font> <\/span><\/i>
\n
\n <\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\nPage – 109<\/span><\/p>\n

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

61 \u2013 There is nothing finite. It is only the Infinite who can create for Himself limits. The finite can have no beginning nor end,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[122],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4312","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-10-on-thoughts-and-aphorisms-volume-10","wpcat-122-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4312","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=4312"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4312\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4312"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4312"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4312"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}