{"id":4487,"date":"2013-07-13T01:56:21","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:56:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=4487"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:56:21","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:56:21","slug":"12-27-may-1953-vol-05-questions-and-answers-volume-05","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/02-works-of-the-mother\/01-cwmce\/05-questions-and-answers-volume-05\/12-27-may-1953-vol-05-questions-and-answers-volume-05","title":{"rendered":"-12_27 May 1953.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n
\n

\n27 May 1953<\/b> <\/font> <\/span>\n<\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThere is a state of consciousness in
\nunion with the Divine in which you can enjoy all you read, as you can all you
\nobserve, even the most indifferent books or the most uninteresting things. You
\ncan hear poor music, even music from which one would like to run away, and yet
\nyou can, not for its outward self but because of what is behind, enjoy it. You
\ndo not lose the distinction between good music and bad music, but you pass
\nthrough either into that which it expresses. For there is nothing in the<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span>world which has not its ultimate truth and
\nsupport in the Divine.\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Questions and Answers 1929 (28 April)<\/font><\/span><\/i> <\/span><\/p>\n

What is there \u201cbehind\u201d the external form
\nof music?<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Music is a
\nmeans of expressing certain thoughts, feelings, emotions, aspirations. There is
\neven a region where all these movements exist and from there, as they are
\nbrought down, they take a musical form. One who is a very good composer, with
\nsome inspiration, will produce very beautiful music, for he is a good musician.
\nA bad musician may also have a very high inspiration; he may receive something
\nwhich is good, but as he possesses no musical capacity, what he produces is
\nterribly commonplace, ordinary, uninteresting. But if you go beyond, if you
\nreach just the place where there is this origin of music \u2013 of the idea and
\nemotion and inspiration \u2013 if you reach there, you can taste these things
\nwithout being in the least troubled by the forms; the commonplace musical form
\ncan be linked up again with that, because that was the inspiration of the
\nwriter of the music. Naturally, there are cases where there is no inspiration,
\nwhere the origin is merely a kind of mechanical music. It is not always
\ninteresting in every case. But what I mean is that there is an inner condition<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span>Page \u2013 69<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 in which
\nthe external form is not the most important thing; it is the origin of the
\nmusic, the inspiration from beyond, which is important; it is not purely the
\nsounds, it is what the sounds express.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

So the expression cannot be better than
\nthe inspiration? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There are
\nmusical pieces which have no inspiration, they are like mechanical works. There
\nare musicians who possess a great virtuosity, that is, who have thoroughly
\nmastered the technique and who, for example, can execute without making a
\nmistake the fastest and most difficult things. They can play music but it
\nexpresses nothing: it is like a machine. It means nothing, except that they
\nhave great skill. For what is most important is the inspiration, in everything
\nthat one does; in all human creations the most important thing is inspiration.
\nNaturally, the execution must be on the same level as the inspiration; to be
\nable to express truly well the highest things one must have a very good
\ntechnique. I do not say that technique is not necessary; it is even
\nindispensable, but it is not the only indispensable thing, it is less important
\nthan inspiration. <\/span><\/p>\n

The
\nessential quality of music depends upon where the music comes from, upon its
\norigin. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

What does \u201cits origin\u201d mean? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Its
\nstarting point. Just as the spring is the source of the river. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Are there many sources for everything? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

All
\nphysical life has the vital and mental life as its origin. The mental and the
\nvital reality have themselves another origin, and so on. Nothing can be
\nmanifested physically upon earth that has not a higher truth at its origin,
\notherwise the world would not<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span>Page \u2013 70<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 exist. If
\nit were a flat thing having its origin in itself, it would very soon cease to
\nexist. It is because there is a force which pushes, an energy which pushes
\ntowards manifestation, that life continues to exist. Otherwise it would exhaust
\nitself very soon.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

If everything that is manifested in the
\nphysical world has its origin in the higher Truth, what is it that makes it
\nugly when it expresses itself? Why are there ugly things at all? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Because
\nthere are forces that intervene between the origin and the manifestation. <\/span><\/p>\n

If
\nI ask you, \u201cDo you know the truth of your being?\u201d What will you say?.. Do you
\nknow it? Well, the same holds for everything. And yet you are already a
\nsufficiently evolved thinking being who has passed through all kinds of
\nrefinements. You are no longer quite like, let us say, a lizard that runs on
\nthe wall; and yet you would not be able to say what the truth of your being is.
\nThat is just the secret of all deformations in the world. It is because there
\nis all the inconscience created by the fact of separation from the Origin. It
\nis due to this inconscience that the Origin, though always there, is not able
\nto manifest itself. It is there, that is why the world exists. But in its
\nexpression it is deformed because it manifests itself through the inconscience,
\nignorance and obscurity. <\/span><\/p>\n

It
\nis something I shall try to explain in the next issue of the Bulletin<\/i>.<\/span>\u00b9<\/span> But still, very briefly summed up, it is
\nthis: <\/span><\/p>\n

In
\ncreating the universe as it was, the Will was an individual projection –
\nindividual, you understand, a scattering: instead of being a unity containing
\nall, it was a unity made of innumerable small unities which are
\nindividualisations, that is, things that feel themselves separated. And the
\nvery fact of being separated from all others is what gives you the feeling that
\nyou are an individual. Otherwise you would have the feeling that <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n


\n\u00b9<\/font><\/span>See On Education, MCW Vol. 12, pp. the
\ntapasy of love).<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span>Page \u2013 71<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 you were a
\nfluid mass. For example, instead of being conscious of your external form and
\nof everything in your being which makes of you a separate individuality, if you
\nwere conscious of the vital forces which move everywhere or of the inconscient
\nthat is at the base of all, you would have the feeling of a mass moving with
\nall kinds of contradictory movements but which could not be separated from each
\nother; you would not have the feeling of being an individual at all: you would
\nhave the feeling of something like a vibration in the midst of a whole. Well,
\nthe original Will was to form individual beings capable of becoming conscious
\nonce again of their divine origin. Because of the process of individualisation
\none must feel separate if one is to be an individual. The moment you are
\nseparated, you are cut off from the original consciousness, at least
\napparently, and you fall into the inconscient. For the only thing which is the
\nLife of life is the Origin, if you cut yourself off from that, consciousness
\nnaturally is changed into unconsciousness. And then it is due to this very
\nunconsciousness that you are no longer aware of the truth of your being It is a
\nprocess. You cannot argue whether it is inevitable or evitable; the fact is it
\nis like that. This process of formation and creation is the reason why purity
\nno longer manifests in its essence and in its purity but through the
\ndeformation of unconsciousness and ignorance If you had answered immediately:
\n\u201cYes, of course, I know the truth of my being!\u201d it would have finished there,
\nthere wouldn\u2019t have been any problem. <\/span><\/p>\n

That
\nis why there is all this ugliness, there is death; that is why there is
\nillness; that is why there is wickedness; that is why there is suffering. There
\nis no remedy, there is only one way for all these things. All this is there in
\ndifferent domains and with different vibrations, but the cause of all is the
\nsame. It is inconscience produced because of the necessity of individual
\nformation. Once again I do not say that it was indispensable. That is another
\nproblem which perhaps later on we shall be ready to solve; but for the moment
\nwe are obliged to state that that\u2019s how it is.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span>Page \u2013 72<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 And
\nso, the remedy? Since such is the cause, the only way of putting everything
\nright is to become conscious once again. And this is very simple, very simple. <\/span><\/p>\n

Suppose
\nthat there are in the universe two opposing and contradictory forces, as some
\nreligions have preached: there was good and evil, and there always will be good
\nand evil, there will be a conflict, a battle, a struggle. The one that is
\nstronger, whether it be the good or the evil, will win; if there is more of the
\ngood, the good will win and if there is more of the evil, the evil will win;
\nbut the two will always exist. If it were like that, it would be hopeless; one wouldn\u2019t
\nhave to say then that it is either difficult or easy, it would be impossible.
\nOne would not be able to get out of it. But actually that is not so. <\/span><\/p>\n

Actually
\nthere is but one Origin and this origin is the perfection of Truth, for that is
\nthe only thing which truly exists; and by exteriorising, projecting, scattering
\nitself, it brings forth what we see, and a crowd of tiny brains, very gentle,
\nvery brilliant, in search of something they have not yet seized but which they
\ncan seize, because what they are in search of is within them. That is a
\ncertainty. It may take more or less time, but it is sure to come. The remedy is
\nat the very core of the evil. Voila<\/i>. <\/span><\/p>\n

It
\nhas been called by various names, each one has presented it in his own way.
\nAccording to the angle of seeing, one\u2019s experience differs. All those who have
\nfound the Divine within themselves have found Him in a certain way, following a
\ncertain experience and from a certain angle, and this angle was self-evident to
\nthem. But then, if they are not well on their guard, they begin to say: \u201cTo
\nfind the Divine, one must do this and do that. And it is like that and it is
\nthat path one should follow\u201d, because for them that was the path of success.
\nWhen one goes a little further, has a little more experience, one becomes aware
\nthat it is not necessarily like that, it can be done through millions of ways..
\nThere is only one thing that is certain, it is that what is found is always the
\nsame. And that\u2019s remarkable, that whatever the path followed, whatever the form
\ngiven to it,<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span>Page \u2013 73<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 the result
\nis always the same. Their experience and everyone\u2019s is the same. When they have
\ntouched the Thing, it is for all the same thing. And this is just the proof
\nthat they have touched That, because it is the same thing for all. If it is not
\nthe same thing, it means that they have not yet touched That. When they have
\ntouched That, it is the same thing. And to That, you may give all the names you
\nlike, it makes no difference. <\/span><\/p>\n

Words
\nare words. After all, they mean nothing, unless there is something behind. Have
\nyou never noticed that when you speak to certain people, you may express
\nyourself quite clearly and yet they understand nothing; and to others you say
\njust two words and they understand immediately? You have not had this
\nexperience? No? I have had it often. Therefore, it does not depend upon the
\nexternal form, the words one speaks, but on the force of the thought one puts
\ninto them; and the greater, stronger, more precise and clear the thought-force,
\nthe more the chance of what you say being understood by people who are able to
\nreceive that force. But if one speaks without thinking, usually it is
\nimpossible to understand what he says. It makes a kind of noise, that is all.
\nFor example, when you have the habit of speaking with someone, exchanging ideas
\nwith him, when between the two of you there is a certain mental adjustment,
\nthat is, when you have taken the precaution of saying, \u201cWhen I use this word, I
\nmean this\u201d, and the other person has said, \u201cWhen I use that word, I mean that\u201d,
\nand so on; when you are used to an interchange, when you have established a
\nkind of contact between brain and brain \u2013 even if it be only that \u2013 you
\nunderstand each other quite easily. But with people who come altogether from
\nelsewhere, with whom you have never spoken, you need a little time to adjust
\nand adapt yourself to understand what they mean by the words they use What is
\nit that makes you understand? It is just the kind of mental sense that is
\nbehind the words. When the thought is strongly thought out, there is a powerful
\nvibration and it is that which is sensed; the word is only an intermediary
\nmeans. You can develop this sense to the point of having<\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 a direct
\nmental contact with a minimum of words or even without any words at all; but
\nthen you must have a very great force of thought-concentration. And for
\neverything one does, it is like that. When there is a developed consciousness
\nbehind, when one has the power to concentrate it, one can do anything at all \u2013
\nthis consciousness will act.<\/span>\u00b9<\/span>
\nCertainly it is not the bodily mechanism that makes you act; the mechanism is
\nsimply an instrument, nothing more. The day you catch that (it is invisible,
\nbut you can catch it), and when you catch it and put it into your movement,
\nthis movement becomes conscious and you do well whatever you do. The day you do
\nnot catch it, it slips from you like water through your fingers; and then you
\nare clumsy, you do not understand, you do not know what to do. Hence, it is not
\nthe physical mechanism that counts, it is what is behind. <\/span><\/p>\n

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

From what plane does music generally come?
\n<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There are
\ndifferent levels. There is a whole category of music that comes from the higher
\nvital, which is very catching, somewhat (not to put it exactly) vulgar, it is
\nsomething that twists your nerves. This music is not necessarily unpleasant,
\nbut generally it seizes you there in the nervous centres. So there is one type
\nof music which has a vital origin. There is music which has a psychic origin \u2013
\nit is altogether different. And then there is music which has a spiritual
\norigin: it is very bright and it carries you away, captures you entirely. But
\nif you want to execute this music correctly you must be able to make it come
\nthrough the vital passage. Your music coming from above may become externally
\nquite flat if you do not possess that intensity of vital vibration which gives
\nit its splendour and strength. I knew people who had truly a very high
\ninspiration and it became quite flat,<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00b9<\/font><\/span>At the time of the first publication of this talk, in 1968, Mother added
\nthe following commentary: \u201cWhat is important is to keep the consciousness of
\nthe Presence, that is, the Presence must be concrete, and then all that one
\ndoes and all that one says \u2013 whatever one may do and whatever one may say \u2013 It
\nis this Presence that expresses itself.\u201d<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 because the
\nvital did not stir. I must admit that by their spiritual practices they had put
\nto sleep their vital completely it was literally asleep, it did not act at all
\n\u2013 and the music came straight into the physical, and if one were connected with
\nthe origin of that music, one could see that it was something wonderful, but
\nexternally it had no force, it was a little melody, very poor, very thin; there
\nwas none of the strength of harmony. When you can bring the vital into play,
\nthen all the strength of vibration is there. If you draw into it this higher
\norigin, it becomes the music of a genius.<\/span><\/p>\n

For
\nmusic it is very special; it is difficult, it needs an intermediary. And it is
\nlike that for all other things, for literature also, for poetry, for painting,
\nfor everything one does. The true value of one\u2019s creation depends on the origin
\nof one\u2019s inspiration, on the level, the height where one finds it. But the
\nvalue of the execution depends on the vital strength which expresses it. To
\ncomplete the genius both must be there. This is very rare. Generally it is the
\none or the other, more often the vital. And then there are those other kinds of
\nmusic we have \u2013 the music of the caf\u00e9<\/i>–concert<\/i>, of the cinema \u2013 it has an
\nextraordinary skill, and at the same time an exceptional platitude, an
\nextraordinary vulgarity. But as it has an extraordinary skill, it seizes you in
\nthe solar plexus and it is this music that you remember; it grasps you at once
\nand holds you and it is very difficult to free yourself from it, for it is
\nwell-made music, music very well made. It is made vitally with vital
\nvibrations, but what is behind is frightful. <\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 <\/span>But imagine this same vital power of
\nexpression, with the inspiration coming from far above \u2013 the highest
\ninspiration possible, when all the heavens open before us \u2013 then that becomes
\nwonderful. There are certain passages of Cesar Franck, certain passages of
\nBeethoven, certain passages of Bach, there are pieces by others also which have
\nthis inspiration and power. But it is only a moment, it comes as a moment, it
\ndoes not last. You cannot take the entire work of an artist as being on that
\nlevel.<\/span><\/p>\n


\nPage – 76<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n Inspiration comes like a flash; sometimes it lasts sufficiently long,
\nwhen the work is sustained; and when that is there, the same effect is
\nproduced, that is, if you are attentive and concentrated, suddenly that lifts
\nyou up, lifts up all your energies, it is as though someone opened out your
\nhead and you were flung into the air to tremendous heights and magnificent
\nlights. It produces in a few seconds results that are obtained with so much
\ndifficulty through so many years of yoga. Only, in general, one may fall down
\nafterwards, because the consciousness is not there as the basis; one has the
\nexperience and afterwards does not even know what has happened. But if you are
\nprepared, if you have indeed prepared your consciousness by yoga and then the
\nthing happens, it is almost definitive.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

What is the cause of the great difference
\nbetween European and Indian music? Is it the origin or the expression?<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

It is both
\nbut in an inverse sense.<\/span><\/p>\n

This
\nvery high inspiration comes only rarely in European music; rare also is a
\npsychic origin, very rare. Either it comes from high above or it is vital. The
\nexpression is almost always, except in a few rare cases, a vital expression \u2013
\ninteresting, powerful. Most often, the origin is purely vital. Sometimes it
\ncomes from the very heights, then it is wonderful. Sometimes it is psychic,
\nparticularly in what has been religious music, but this is not very frequent. <\/span><\/p>\n

Indian
\nmusic, when there are good musicians, has almost always a psychic origin; for
\nexample, the ragas have a psychic origin, they come from the psychic. The
\ninspiration does not often come from above. But Indian music is very rarely
\nembodied in a strong vital. It has rather an inner and intimate origin. I have
\nheard a great deal of Indian music, a great deal; I have rarely heard Indian
\nmusic having vital strength, very rarely; perhaps not more than four or five
\ntimes. But very often I have heard<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span>Page \u2013 7<\/font><\/span>7<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 Indian
\nmusic having a psychic origin, it translates itself almost directly into the
\nphysical. And truly one must then concentrate, and as it is \u2013 how to put it? \u2013
\nvery tenuous, very subtle, as there are none of those intense vital vibrations,
\none can easily glide within it and climb back to the psychic origin of the
\nmusic. It has that effect upon you, it is a kind of ecstatic trance, as from an
\nintoxication. It makes you enter a little into trance. Then if you listen well
\nand let yourself go, you move on and glide, glide into a psychic consciousness.
\nBut if you remain only in the external consciousness, the music is so tenuous
\nthat there is no response from the vital, it leaves you altogether flat.
\nSometimes, there was a vital force, then it became quite good\u2026 I myself like
\nthis music very much, this kind of theme developing into a play. The theme is
\nessentially very musical: and then it is developed with variations, innumerable
\nvariations, and it is always the same theme which is developed in one way or
\nanother. In Europe there were musicians who were truly musicians and they too
\nhad the thing: Bach had it, he used to do the same sort of thing, Mozart had
\nit, his music was purely musical, he had no intention of expressing any other
\nthing, it was music for music\u2019s sake. But this manner of taking a certain
\nnumber of notes in a certain relation (they are like almost infinite
\nvariations), personally I find it wonderful to put you in repose, and you enter
\ndeep within yourself. And then, if you are ready, it gives you the psychic
\nconsciousness: something that makes you withdraw from the external
\nconsciousness, which makes you enter elsewhere, enter within.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

In what form does music come to the great
\ncomposers? That is, is it only the melody that comes or is it what we hear?<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

But that
\ndepends upon the musician. This is just what I was saying. For example, here in
\nIndia, the science of harmony does not exist much, so the thing is translated
\nby melody. As soon<\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

as the
\nvital intervenes, there comes a kind of harmonic complexity in the music. That
\ngives it a richness, a plenitude which it did not have.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

But is it the melody that comes? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

No, it is the
\nmusic, and music is not necessarily melody. It is a relation of sounds which is
\nnot necessarily melodic. Melody is a part of this relation of sounds. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWhen the resolution has been taken, when
\nyou have decided that the whole of your life shall be given to the Divine, you
\nhave still at every moment to remember it and carry it out in all the details
\nof your existence. You must feel at every step that you belong to the Divine;
\nyou must have the constant experience that, in whatever you think or do, it is always
\nthe Divine Consciousness that is acting through you.\u201d <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Questions and Answers 1929 (28 April)<\/font><\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

When one is conscious does one perceive
\nthe Divine in His form in everything? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Oh! that
\nis, you expect to see a divine form in everything!.. I do not know, that may
\nhappen. But I have the feeling that a great deal of imagination enters into it,
\nfor it is not like that. You change consciousness, you change the state of
\nconsciousness and change the states of perception. <\/span><\/p>\n

If
\nI understand well what you mean, you expect to see a form, like the form of
\nKrishna for example, or the form of Christ, of Buddha, in every person? That
\nseems to me childishness. But still I do not say that it cannot happen; I think
\nit may happen. But there is in it much human consciousness added to the
\nperception, for that would no longer be exactly what I have just told you: for
\nthose who have the consciousness of the Divine,<\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 when they
\nare in contact with the Divine, whoever they may be, whatever age, whatever
\ncountry they may belong to, the experience is the same. Whereas if it were as
\nyou say, then Indians would see one of their divinities, Europeans one of
\ntheirs, the Japanese one of their own, and so on. Then it would no longer be a
\npure perception, there would already be an addition of their own mental
\nformation. It is no longer the Thing in its essence and purity, which is beyond
\nall form.<\/span><\/p>\n

But
\none may have a perception, and a very concrete perception of the Divine
\nPresence, yes. One may have a very personal contact with the Divine, yes. But
\nnot in this way. And it is inexpressible, except for those who have had the
\nexperience. If you do not have an experience, I could speak to you for hours
\nabout it, you would understand nothing; it escapes all explanation. It is only
\nwhen one has the experience that one can understand. And what do you expect?
\nWhen you speak or write about things, there is necessarily a mental addition,
\notherwise you would not be able to speak, you would not be able to write. Well,
\nit is this mental addition that has made people try to give an explanation of
\ntheir experience, and then they have said or written things like this: \u201cI see
\nimages of God.\u201d These are ways of speaking. It is possible that the thing you
\nare speaking about may happen: to be suddenly in a particular state and see a
\nDivine Presence and this Presence taking a form that\u2019s familiar to you \u2013 one is
\naccustomed to associate certain forms with the Divine, due to one\u2019s education,
\ntradition, and that takes an external form. But it is not the supreme essence
\nof the experience, it is the form, and this gives a sort of limitation to the
\nexperience, it must take away from it its universality and a great deal of its
\npower.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cObviously, what has happened had to happen;
\nit would not have happened, if it had not been intended. Even the mistakes that
\nwe have committed and the adversities that fell upon us had to be, because
\nthere was<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i>Page \u2013 80<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 some necessity in them, some utility for our
\nlives. But in truth these things cannot be explained mentally and should not
\nbe. For all that happened was necessary, not for any mental reason, but to lead
\nus to something beyond what the mind imagines. But is there any need to explain
\nafter all? The whole universe explains everything at every moment and a
\nparticular thing happens because the whole universe is what it is.\u201d<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Ibid.<\/font><\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

How does the universe explain at every
\nmoment the universe? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

That is not
\nwhat I have said. If you want an explanation of something, it is the universe
\nthat explains this something. And each thing is explained by everything; and
\nyou can explain nothing except by the whole universe and the entire universe is
\nexplained by everything Just see: if you read all the explanations given in all
\nthe sciences, all the branches of human knowledge, always one thing is
\nexplained by another, and if you want to explain this other you explain it by
\nyet another and if you want to explain this other one too, you explain it by
\nyet another. So you continue in this way and go round the universe in order to
\nexplain one thing. Only, usually people get tired after a time, they accept the
\nlast explanation and stick to it. Otherwise, if they continued to find an
\nexplanation, they would have to make the full round of all things and would
\ncome back always to the same point. Things are so because they are so, because
\nthey had to be so, otherwise they would not be. Things are so, because they are
\nas they are. There\u2019s no doubt about it. And that indeed is supreme wisdom. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Is there not a physical law that is able
\nto explain everything in the universe?<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i>Page \u2013 81<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 Find it
\nout, I shall be very glad. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Can it be found by science? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, if it
\nmoves in a very definite direction, if it progresses sufficiently, if it does
\nnot stop on the way, scientists will find the same thing the mystics have
\nfound, and all religious people, everybody, because there is only one thing to
\nfind, there are not two. There is only one. So one can go a long way, one can
\nturn round and round and round, and if one turns and turns long enough without
\nstopping, one is bound to come to the same spot. Once there, one feels as
\nthough there is nothing at all to find. As I have just told you, there is
\nnothing to find. It is That, the Power.<\/span>\u00b9<\/span> It is That, that is all. It is so. Still
\nanother question?<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Can the Divine withdraw from us? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

That is an
\nimpossibility. Because if the Divine withdrew from a thing, immediately it
\nwould collapse, for it would not exist. To put it more clearly: The Divine is the
\nonly existence.<\/span>\u00b2<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\n\u00b9<\/font><\/span>Later on, a disciple asked Mother what she
\nmeant by, \u201cIt is That, the Power.\u201d Mother answered, \u201cYes, they will find the
\nsame thing the mystics have found and religious people have found, as everybody
\nhas found it is That, the Power. What one finds is the Power. And to That,
\nessentially, you can give neither a name nor a definition That is now the big
\nquarrel about Auroville: in the \u2018Charter\u2019 I put the \u2018Divine Consciousness\u2019 (to
\nlive in Auroville one must be a \u2018willing servitor of the Divine Consciousness\u2019,
\nso they say: it makes you think of God. I said (laughing), as for me, it does
\nnot make me think of God! So some translate it as \u2018the highest consciousness\u2019,
\nothers put other things. I agreed with the Russians to put \u2018Perfect Consciousness\u2019,
\nbut that is an approximation And it is That which you can neither name nor
\ndefine which is the supreme Power. It is Power that one finds. And the supreme
\nPower is only an aspect: the aspect concerning the creation.\u201d<\/font><\/span> <\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\nVide \u201cNotes on the Way\u201d (13 and 16 March
\n1968), Bulletin of Sri Aurobindo International Centre of Education, April 1968.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n\u00b2<\/font><\/span>At the time of the publication of this
\ntalk, Mother added: \u201cNow I would have answered: it is as if you asked whether
\nthe Divine would withdraw from Himself! (Mother laughs.) Well, that is the
\ntrouble: when you say \u2018Divine\u2019, they understand \u2018God\u2019 There is only That, That
\nalone exists. That, what is it? That alone exists.\u201d <\/font> <\/span><\/p>\n

\nVide \u201cNotes on the Way\u201d (13 March 1968),
\nBulletin, April 1968.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

\n <\/font><\/span>If
\nthe Divine withdrew, it would mean that He would withdraw from the universe;
\nthere would no longer be any universe (this is an image to make you understand
\nthe thing, I speak of an impossibility). Human beings may withdraw from the
\nDivine and they do it very often. But the Divine withdrawing from human beings,
\nthat\u2019s an impossibility. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

By following the way of music or art or
\nany other thing, why can\u2019t one arrive at the divine realisation and the
\ntransformation? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Who has
\ntold you that? Do you know all that is happening in you? Don\u2019t you think that
\nthere are many people who have realised the Divine, who have never said
\nanything about it, known nothing about it?<\/span>\u00b9<\/span> There are people who have spoken about it
\n\u2013 philosophers, whose very profession necessarily is to express what happened
\nto them. But there are people who have had experiences but never said anything.
\nAnd I know there are artists who purely by their art attained the divine
\nrealisation. <\/span><\/p>\n

As
\nfor transformation, I would be glad if you could show me an instance; I would be
\nglad to see it. One example. Whatever the way one follows, whether it be the
\nreligious way, the philosophical way, the yogic ways, the mystic way, no one
\nhas realised transformation. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Since art does not arrive at
\ntransformation, it is not of much value! <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

———-<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\u00b9<\/font><\/span>A disciple asked the Mother how one could
\nrealise the Divine and know nothing about it? The Mother answered: \u201cIt is once
\nmore the same thing. One might add: \u2018and know nothing about it mentally.\u2019 They
\ndid not say: \u2018I have realised the Divine\u2019, because that did not correspond to
\nany mental conception.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 But who has
\never reached there till now, will you tell me? Neither philosophy nor religion,
\nnor yoga. If you put the value in realisation and in the transformation of the world,
\nfor example one single individual transformation, admitting that it is
\npossible, and I do not believe it, then nothing has any value, because nothing
\nhas ever reached there till today. Don\u2019t you understand?<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, I understand that.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Then why do
\nyou suddenly say that art has no value? Nothing has any value, because nothing
\nhas led to that? But everything helps. The whole universe is helping the
\ntransformation. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

But it may happen that the artist after
\nhaving reached a certain height where he is master of his art, has to stop his
\nwork to proceed towards the transformation of his life. <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Why? For
\nthe transformation of his life? Who has told you that? If you were doing manual
\nwork, there are any number of artisans who have had a wonderful conversion.
\nThere is the example of a shoe-maker who became one of the greatest Yogis of
\nthe world. It does not depend on what one does, happily! You have to sit in
\nmeditation, like that, with an orange robe on, under a tree, to be able to
\nrealise the Divine? <\/span><\/p>\n

So
\nI do not understand anything of what you say. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There may come a time when one must change
\none\u2019s activity? <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

But by any
\npath whatever, if you follow it sincerely enough and fairly constantly you
\narrive, by any path whatsoever \u2013 I tell you, you may make shoes and find the
\nDivine. There are illuminating examples that are indisputable. It matters
\nlittle what one does. There are numerous examples of people who were<\/span><\/p>\n

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

<\/p>\n
\n

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

 doing
\ngardening, or cultivating, and who found the Divine even while they were
\nworking physically; they had no need to stop their work to do this. You do not
\nunderstand? You believe one must have what? \u2013 a philosophical knowledge?<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

No, it is not that, but I do not know how
\nto express myself <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

No, I understand
\nvery well what you mean to say, but, excuse me, it is something foolish<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span>Page \u2013 85<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

27 May 1953   \u201cThere is a state of consciousness in union with the Divine in which you can enjoy all you read, as you…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[126],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4487","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-05-questions-and-answers-volume-05","wpcat-126-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4487","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=4487"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4487\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4487"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4487"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4487"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}