{"id":4519,"date":"2013-07-13T01:56:34","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:56:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=4519"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:56:34","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:56:34","slug":"21-23-may-1956-vol-08-questions-and-answers-volume-08","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/02-works-of-the-mother\/01-cwmce\/08-questions-and-answers-volume-08\/21-23-may-1956-vol-08-questions-and-answers-volume-08","title":{"rendered":"-21_23 May 1956.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n
\n


\n23 May 1956<\/font>\u00a0<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Sweet Mother, what is the
\ndifference between yoga and religion? <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Ah! my child\u2026 it is as though you were asking me the difference
\nbetween a dog and a cat! <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

(Long silence)<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Imagine someone who, in some way or other, has heard of
\nsomething like the Divine or has a personal feeling that something of the kind
\nexists, and begins to make all sorts of efforts: efforts of will, of
\ndiscipline, efforts of concentration, all sorts of efforts to find this Divine,
\nto discover what He is, to become acquainted with Him and unite with Him. Then
\nthis person is doing yoga. <\/span><\/p>\n

 Now, if this person has
\nnoted down all the processes he has used and constructs a fixed system, and
\nsets up all that he has discovered as absolute laws <\/span>―<\/span> for example, he says: the
\nDivine is like this, to find the Divine you must do this, make this particular
\ngesture, take this attitude, perform this ceremony, and you must admit that
\nthis is the truth, you must say, \u201cI accept that this is the Truth and I fully
\nadhere to it; and your method is the only right one, the only one which exists\u201d<\/span>―<\/span> if all that is written down,
\norganised, arranged into fixed laws and ceremonies, it bees a religion. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Can one realise the Divine by
\nthis method [of religion]? <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

Those who carry within themselves a spiritual destiny and are
\nborn to realise the Divine, to become conscious in Him and live Him, will
\narrive, no matter what path, what way they follow.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 147<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

That is to say, even in religion there are people who have had
\nthe spiritual experience and found the Divine <\/span>―<\/span> not because of the religion,
\nusually in spite of it, notwithstanding it <\/span>―<\/span> because they had the inner
\nurge and this urge led them there despite all obstacles and through them.
\nEverything served their purpose. <\/span><\/p>\n

 But if these very people
\nwant to express their experience, they naturally use the terms of the religion
\nin which they were brought up, so they restrict their experience and inevitably
\nlimit it very much, they make it sectarian, so to say. But they themselves may
\nvery well have gone beyond all the forms and all the limitations and all the
\nconventions and may have had the true experience in its pure simplicity. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

\nSweet Mother, in the world today most people follow some sort of
\nreligion. Are they helped? <\/span><\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

Not much. <\/span><\/p>\n

 Perhaps they are taking
\nit up again now, but for a very long time, towards the beginning of this
\ncentury, they had repudiated religion as something opposed to knowledge <\/span>―<\/span> at least all intellectual people
\nhad. And it is only recently that a movement of return to something other than
\na thorough-going positivism has begun. <\/span><\/p>\n

 People follow religion by
\nsocial habit, in order not to get into the bad books of others. For instance,
\nin a village it is difficult not to go to religious ceremonies, for all your
\nneighbours will point at you. But that has absolutely nothing to do with
\nspiritual life, nothing at all. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

(Silence)<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

The first time I came to India I came on a Japanese boat. And on
\nthis Japanese boat there were two clergymen, that is, Protestant priests, of
\ndifferent sects. I don\u2019t remember exactly which sects, but they were both
\nEnglish; I think one was an <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 148<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

Anglican and the other a Presbyterian.<\/span><\/p>\n

 Now, Sunday came. There
\nhad to be a religious ceremony on the boat, or else we would have looked like
\nheathens, like the Japanese! There had to be a ceremony, but who should perform
\nit? Should it be the Anglican or should it be the Presbyterian? They just
\nmissed quarrelling. Finally, one of them withdrew with dignity <\/span>―<\/span> I don\u2019t remember now which
\none, I think it was the Anglican <\/span>―<\/span> and the Presbyterian performed his ceremony. <\/span><\/p>\n

 It took place in the
\nlounge of the ship. We had to go down a few steps to this lounge. And that day,
\nall the men had put on their jacket <\/span>― <\/span>it was hot, I think we were in the Red Sea <\/span>―<\/span> they put on their jackets,
\nstiff collars, leather shoes; neckties well set, hats on their heads, and they
\nwent with a book under their arm, almost in a procession from the deck to the
\nlounge. The ladies wore their hats, some carried even a parasol, and they too
\nhad their book under the arm, a prayer-book. <\/span><\/p>\n

 And so they all crowded
\ndown into the lounge, and the Presbyterian made a speech, that is to say,
\npreached his sermon, and everybody listened very religiously. And then, when it
\nwas over, they all came up again with the satisfied air of someone who has done
\nhis duty. And, of course, five minutes later they were in the bar drinking and
\nplaying cards, and their religious ceremony was forgotten. They had done their
\nduty, it was over, there was nothing more to be said about it. <\/span><\/p>\n

 And the clergyman came
\nand asked me, more or less politely, why I had not attended. I told him, \u201cSir,
\nI am sorry, but I don\u2019t believe in religion.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 \u201cOh! oh! you are a materialist?\u201d
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

 \u201cNo, not at all.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 \u201cAh! then why?\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 \u201cOh!\u201d I said, \u201cif I were
\nto tell you, you would be quite displeased, perhaps it is better for me not to
\nsay anything.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 But he insisted so much
\nthat at last I said, \u201cJust try to see, I don\u2019t feel that you are sincere,
\nneither you nor your flock.\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 149<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

You all went there to fulfil a social duty and a social custom,
\nbut not at all because you really wanted to enter into communion with God.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 \u201cEnter into communion with
\nGod! But we can\u2019t do that! All that we can do is to say some good words, but we
\nhave no capacity to enter into communion with God.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 Then I said, \u201cBut it was
\njust because of that I didn\u2019t go, for it doesn\u2019t interest me.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 After that he asked me
\nmany questions and admitted to me that he was going to China to convert the
\n\u201cheathens\u201d. At that I became serious and told him, \u201cListen, even before your
\nreligion was born <\/span>―<\/span> not even two thousand years ago <\/span>―<\/span> the Chinese had a very high
\nphilosophy and knew a path leading them to the Divine; and when they think of
\nWesterners, they think of them as barbarians. And so you are going there to
\nconvert those who know more about it than you? What are you going to teach
\nthem? To be insincere, to perform hollow ceremonies instead of following a
\nprofound philosophy and a detachment from life which lead them to a more
\nspiritual consciousness? I don\u2019t think it\u2019s a very good thing you are going to
\ndo.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

 Then he felt so
\nsuffocated, the poor man; he said to me, \u201cEh, I fear I can\u2019t be convinced by
\nyour words!\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

 \u201cOh!\u201d I said, \u201cI am not
\ntrying to convince you, I only described the situation to you, and how I don\u2019t
\nquite see why barbarians should want to go and teach civilised people what they
\nhave known long before you. That\u2019s all.\u201d <\/span><\/p>\n

And there, that was the end of it. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Mother, in the Buddhist
\ntraditions it is said\u2026<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Oh! Oh! you are becoming a Buddhist. It\u2019s the fashion. <\/span><\/p>\n

 Yes? <\/span>
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

It is said that two thousand
\nfive hundred years after his birth\u2026<\/span><\/i><\/b> <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

\nPage – 150<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

Yes, he will return to earth to preach a new Buddhism, is that
\nit? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

It seems his teaching will come
\nto an end, and will be replaced by something new. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, it is that gentleman, what is his name\u2026 X, who told you
\nthat? <\/span><\/p>\n

 But that is his theory.
\nHe told me also that he thought that it was Sri Aurobindo who had realised the
\nteachings of the Buddha. Is that it? You didn\u2019t go to his lecture?… No, then
\nwhat did you want to ask? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Because it is now <\/span>―<\/span> tomorrow is the day the two
\nthousand five hundred years will be over <\/span><\/i><\/b>― <\/span><\/i><\/b>does this correspond to the new
\nthing? <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

What new thing? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

The new Supramental
\nManifestation. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Oh! Listen, this seems to me just the kind of discovery one
\nmakes when one wants something sensational. <\/span><\/p>\n

 There are always many ways
\nof interpreting texts, and one does it according to what one likes them to say.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

(Silence)<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

That reminds me of something: (turning
\nto a teacher)<\/i><\/b> have they found the sounds with which hieroglyphs are to
\nbe read? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Egyptian? <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, hieroglyphs are Egyptian!<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

I think so.<\/span><\/i><\/b> <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

\nPage – 151<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

That means they have found the spoken language of five thousand
\nyears ago? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

I think so. And there are
\nhieroglyphs which are also phonetic. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Phonetic! Where can we get this information from? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

In the library, Mother, there
\nis something. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Oh!… Because I was wondering how they had restored the names
\nof the pharaohs and gods. Naturally, more recent peoples have spoken about
\nthem, the Greeks mention them, the Phoenicians speak of them;\u00a0 <\/span>they had phonetic writing. But earlier than
\nthat? The first pharaohs and all those names of the gods, who discovered these?
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

According to tradition it is
\nChampollion, with the Rosetta Stone; they found a stone with inscriptions in
\nEgyptian, Greek and Coptic, which enabled them to solve the problem.<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

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

He was sure it was the same thing written in Egyptian and in
\nGreek? How was he sure of that? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There was a vague idea, there
\nwere some points of reference and cross-checking. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

But that was for the meaning, not for the sounds. <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes. <\/span><\/i><\/b>
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

What language was spoken in the Schools of Initiation? How did
\nthey express themselves, those people?
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 152<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

I know that sounds are given
\nfor the words. Now, whether they know the exact pronunciation or not is another
\nmatter. They don\u2019t even know the pronunciation of ancient Greek<\/span><\/i><\/b>. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Greek? They don\u2019t know the pronunciation? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

They don\u2019t know how it used to
\nbe pronounced. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Is the language of ancient Egypt contemporaneous with the earliest
\nSanskrit, or is it earlier still? And then, something else: was the cuneiform
\nscript of Assyria phonetic or hieroglyphic? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

 I believe that there too it is
\npossible to read the sounds, for quite a number of names given in the Bible
\nhave been set right and it has been found that there were deformations:
\nNabuchodonsor, for example. <\/i><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes. Oh! that has been changed. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Now, whether they are
\nabsolutely sure of having found the sounds\u2026<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Yes, that seems strange to me. For a book came to my hands in
\nwhich the names had been restored, and had become a little queer! But still,
\nthere must have been a certain way of pronouncing them. I mean, does any other
\nhuman language go back further than the earliest Sanskrit? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

I don\u2019t know the dates of the
\nearliest language. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

And one last thing: is this hieroglyphic Egyptian language
\nrelated to the Chaldean line or to the Aryan? There are Sanskrit roots in all
\nthe languages. That was precisely what I wanted to ask. <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 153<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

I read somewhere that the
\npriests of Egypt used to give initiation with mantras. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

Sanskrit mantras? But that must be in a novel, surely! <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

A few Sanskrit words. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

There are Sanskrit roots <\/span>―<\/span> with some distortions <\/span>―<\/span> in all languages. And there is
\na very old tradition claiming to be older than the two bifurcating lines, Aryan
\nand Chaldean. But Greek, for instance, which is relatively recent, is it a
\nlanguage of Aryan or Chaldean origin? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Greek is entirely Aryan. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Entirely Aryan. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Egyptian is of Chaldean origin.
\n<\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Chaldean, yes. But everywhere there was an intermixture of
\nEgyptian and Greek. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

The Phoenician language was
\nolder. From the point of view of the written language, it was earlier than
\nGreek. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

But Phoenician is phonetic, it is a phonetic language. <\/span><\/p>\n

 And hieroglyphs were
\nwritten from top to bottom and from right to left, or was it from left to
\nright? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

From right to left. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

From right to left. Chaldean languages are written like that.
\nChinese and Japanese also. Only Aryan languages are written from left to right.<\/span><\/p>\n

(Meditation)<\/span><\/i><\/b> <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

\nPage – 154<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

\nMuch later, when this talk was
\nfirst published,<\/span><\/p>\n

\n\u00a0<\/span>a disciple asked Mother what gave rise to
\nthese <\/span><\/p>\n

\nquestions on hieroglyphs. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

It used to interest me very much
\nonce, to know about them. I tried to recall the memory of the elements which
\nexisted at that time, but I could not get any answer. There was a complete
\nblank. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Did you hear any sounds? <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

(After a silence) Look, I\u2019ll give you an instance. About two years
\nago, I had a vision about Z\u2019s son\u2026. She had brought him to me, he was not quite
\none year old, and I had just seen him there, in the room where I receive
\npeople. He gave me the impression of someone I knew very well, but I didn\u2019t
\nknow who. And then, in the afternoon of the same day, I had a vision. A vision
\nof ancient Egypt, that is to say, I was someone there, the great priestess or
\nsomebody <\/span>―<\/span> I don\u2019t know who, for one doesn\u2019t tell oneself \u201cI am so and
\nso\u201d: the identification is complete, there is no objectifying, so I don\u2019t know.
\nI was in a wonderful building, immense! so high! but quite bare, there was
\nnothing, except a place where there were magnificent paintings. So there I
\nrecognised the paintings of ancient Egypt. And I was coming out of my apartments
\nand was entering a kind of large hall. There was a sort of gutter running all
\nround the base of the walls, for collecting water. And then I saw the child,
\nwho was half naked, playing in it. And I was quite shocked, I said, \u201cWhat! this
\nis disgusting!\u201d <\/span>―<\/span> but the feelings, ideas, all that was translated into French in
\nmy consciousness. There was the tutor who came, I had him called. I scolded
\nhim. I heard sounds. Well, I don\u2019t know what I said, I don\u2019t remember the
\nsounds at all now. I heard the sounds I was articulating, I knew what they
\nmeant, but the translation was in French, and the sounds I could not remember.
\nI spoke to him, told him, \u201cHow can you let the child play in there?\u201d And he
\nanswered me <\/span>― <\/span>and I woke<\/span> <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 155<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

\u00a0<\/span>up with his reply <\/span>― <\/span>saying <\/span>―<\/span> I did not hear the first
\nwords, but in my thought it was <\/span>―<\/span>\u201d Amenhotep likes it.\u201d I heard Amenhotep, I remembered. Then I
\nknew the child was Amenhotp. <\/span><\/p>\n

 So I know that I spoke: I
\nspoke a language but I don\u2019t remember it now. I remembered \u201cAmenhotep\u201d because
\nI know it in my waking consciousness: \u201cAmenhotep.\u201d But otherwise, the other
\nsounds did not remain. I have no memory for sounds. <\/span><\/p>\n

 And I know I was his
\nmother; at that moment I knew who I was, for I know Amenhotep is the son of
\nso-and-so <\/span>―<\/span> besides, I looked up the history. Otherwise there is no
\nconnection: a blank. <\/span><\/p>\n

 I always admire those
\nmediums <\/span>― <\/span>usually very simple people <\/span>―<\/span> who have the exact memory of
\nthe sound, who can tell you, \u201cLook, I said this and this.\u201d In that way one
\nwould have the phonetic notation. If I could remember the sounds I pronounced,
\nwe would have the notation, but I don\u2019t. <\/span><\/p>\n

 I remember this
\nconversation; suddenly I said to myself, \u201cIt would be so interesting if one
\ncould hear that language\u201d, and then, from curiosity, \u201cHow did they discover the
\npronunciation? How?\u201d Besides, all the names we were taught as children, in
\nancient history, have been changed today. They say they have discovered the
\nsounds, or at least they claim to have discovered them. But I don\u2019t know. <\/span><\/p>\n

 It is the same thing for
\nancient Babylon: I have extremely precise memories, completely objective, but
\nwhen I speak I don\u2019t remember the sounds I utter, there is only the mental
\ntranslation. <\/span><\/p>\n

 I have no memory for
\nsounds. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

I was wondering what had
\nprompted all your questions. <\/span><\/i><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s just that, it is that I am aware I have no memory for
\nsounds. There are people who have a memory for sounds, I don\u2019t have that
\nmemory. So I would be interested to know that. Otherwise I have always been
\nable <\/span>―<\/span> <\/span>when
\nthere was something of the <\/span>
\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage – 156<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n
\n

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

past which was doubtful for me, or interesting or incomplete <\/span>― <\/span>I have always found the means
\nof making it come back to my consciousness. But sounds don\u2019t come. It comes as
\na state of consciousness which is translated mentally, and so it is translated
\nmentally into words which I know. So it is not at all interesting.<\/span><\/p>\n

 Even now, while I was
\nplaying music, the memory of the sounds was vague and in complete. I had the
\nmemory of the sounds I heard in the \u201csource of music\u201d (with an upward gesture<\/i><\/span>),
\nand then, when the material music reproduced something of these sounds, I recognised them; but there is not that precision, that exactness which would
\nmake it possible for me to reproduce with the voice or with an instrument the
\nexact sound. That is not there, that is missing. While the memory of the eyes
\nwas it was stupefying. A thing I had seen just once <\/span>―<\/span> it was fixed, never forgotten.<\/span><\/p>\n

 Several times in this
\nway, in visions <\/span>―<\/span> \u201cvisions\u201d, actually memories: memories relived <\/span>―<\/span> I have spoken the language of
\nthat time, spoken it, heard myself speaking, but the sound has not remained.
\nThe sense of what I said has remained but the sound hasn\u2019t. <\/span><\/p>\n

 It is a pity. <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage –
\n157<\/font><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

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

23 May 1956\u00a0   Sweet Mother, what is the difference between yoga and religion?   Ah! my child\u2026 it is as though you were asking…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[127],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4519","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-08-questions-and-answers-volume-08","wpcat-127-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4519","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=4519"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4519\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4519"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4519"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4519"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}