{"id":5492,"date":"2013-07-13T02:02:33","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T02:02:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=5492"},"modified":"2013-07-13T02:02:33","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T02:02:33","slug":"24-questions-and-answers-23-vol-07-questions-and-answers-november-1956-november1962","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/02-works-of-the-mother\/02other-editions\/07-questions-and-answers-november-1956-november1962\/24-questions-and-answers-23-vol-07-questions-and-answers-november-1956-november1962","title":{"rendered":"-24_questions and answers 23.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n

\n<\/p>\n

\n

THE MOTHER <\/b><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n
\nQuestions and Answers<\/font><\/i> <\/font><\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nSri Aurobindo Ashram <\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\nPondicherry <\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\nApril, 1962
\n
<\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n
\nQuestions and Answers<\/font><\/i> <\/font><\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\nI<\/b><\/p>\n

\n\tSri Aurobindo writes, "The Supreme has laid his luminous hand upon a
\n\tchosen human vessel of his miraculous Light and Power and Ananda" ("The
\n\tSynthesis of Yoga", p.
\n\t<\/i>100)\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\nIT is as you like. One does not know who has begun ! But the two happen
\ngenerally at the same time.\n<\/p>\n

\n     If you want an order of priority, it is evident that
\nthe Divine exists before the individual, then it is the Divine who must have
\nchosen the first time. But it is a choice made before the terrestrial fife. In
\nthe order of the ordinary human consciousness it can be either the one or the
\nother or both at the same time. In fact it is probable that it is the Divine who
\nperceives at first that this one or that one is ready. But one who is ready
\ngenerally begins by not knowing it, so he has the impression that it is he who
\nchooses and decides. But that must be an impression rather than a reality.\n<\/p>\n

\n     But once you are chosen, it is irresistible, you cannot
\nescape, even if you try.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tThe being who is chosen by the Divine, can he understand it ‘ from his
\n\tvery birth ?<\/i>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n      Even before his birth.\n<\/p>\n

\n      Perhaps his very birth is the result of this
\nchoice. It is like that generally. But it may happen at any time of one’s life.
\nFor those\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-1<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nwho are predestined, it is before the birth; generally they have come upon earth
\nwith a purpose, for a fixed goal.\n<\/p>\n

\n     You would like very much to know if it so happened in
\nyour case, isn’t it ? (laughter) <\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n     Does the Divine choose only one individual to
\nmanifest Himself or can he choose several?<\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n     He chooses several.\n<\/p>\n

\n     But here also there is a hierarchy. You can understand
\nnothing of the spiritual life if you do not understand true hierarchy.\n<\/p>\n

\n     Now, it is not the fashion. In human thinking it is a
\nthing which does not find favour at all. But from the spiritual point of view it
\nis something automatic, spontaneous, undisputable. So, if the hierarchy is true,
\nthere is a place for everybody; and for each individual, at the place where he
\nis, his individual truth is absolute. That is to say, each element that is truly
\nin its place has a total and perfect relation with the Divine, in its place. And
\nyet taken as a whole there is a hierarchy which is also quite absolute. But to
\nunderstand the spiritual life you must understand that first and it is not very
\neasy.\n<\/p>\n

\n      Everyone can be a perfect expression of the
\nDivine in himself, on condition that he knows his place and keeps to it.\n<\/p>\n

\n     And if they don’t know the hierarchy?<\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n    But they need not know that they form a hierarchy, it is not
\nnecessary to know it. It is only when you want to organise physically a
\nspiritual society that you have to materialise the hierarchy. But generally in
\nthe world as it is, there are so many gaps in this hierarchy that it looks like
\na confusion,.\n<\/p>\n

\n    The perfect hierarchy is an all-inclusive hierarchy and it
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-2<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\ncares neither for time nor for space. But when you want to realise it
\nphysically, it becomes very difficult. It is like a piece of cloth to be woven
\nwith good many holes everywhere; the holes upset the general harmony. Always
\npeople are missing, levels are missing, pawns are missing on the
\nchess-board\u2014things are missing. So it looks like a confusion. But if the whole
\nthing were expressed and each thing were in its place, then it would be a
\nperfect harmony and a perfect hierarchy.\n<\/p>\n

\n      There is somewhere\u2014not in the material universe,
\nbut in the manifested universe\u2014this perfect hierarchy, it exists. But it is not
\nyet manifested upon earth.\n<\/p>\n

\n     Perhaps that will be one of the results of the
\nsupramental transformation : the world will be ready for a perfect, spontaneous,
\nessentially true hierarchical manifestation\u2014and without coercion of any kind\u2014in
\nwhich everyone will have the consciousness of his own perfection.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tWhat exactly is the spiritual hierarchy? Because when one speaks of
\n\thierarchy, it implies an order with higher and lower elements?<\/i>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n         Yes\u2014but it is quite wrong. That
\nis to say, materially it is like that. But that is not what I call a hierarchy.\n<\/p>\n

\n         What then is a hierarchy?<\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n         It is the organisation of
\nfunctions and the manifestation in action of every one’s own nature.\n<\/p>\n

\n         Sometimes comparisons were
\nattempted, but they are worth nothing, because none of the things we know
\nphysically can answer to that condition. There is always as you say the sense of
\nsuperiority and inferiority.\n<\/p>\n

\n         Hierarchy has been compared to
\nthe various functions of the body, for example. But that always gives the
\nimpression that the head is above and the feet below\u2014that is embarrassing !
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-3<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tEach element is the whole Divine at the same time, then how can one speak
\n\tof hierarchy?<\/i>\n\t<\/p>\n

\n\tEach element has a direct and perfect relation with the Divine.\n\t<\/p>\n

\n\tBut can’t they become the whole Divine?<\/i> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n         Yes, all become the Divine, but
\nnot the whole Divine\u2014 because the Divine is the All. You cannot take a bit of
\nthe Divine and say, "this is the Divine". And yet every one in his spiritual
\nconsciousness has a perfect relation with the Divine, that is to say. everyone
\nis the Divine as perfectly as he can be. But to rebuild the Divine, the whole
\nDivine is necessary. And that is exactly what constitutes the very essence of
\nhierarchy; but as everyone is perfect in himself, there can be no feeling of
\ninferiority or superiority.\n<\/p>\n

\n         I do not think human mentality
\ncan understand that. I think one must live it and once you have lived it, it is
\nvery simple, it appears luminously simple. But to understand that with the mind
\nis not possible, it seems impossible. Especially because the mind in order to
\nunderstand any thing has to divide everything, put everything in opposition,
\notherwise it does not understand, it is in a confusion. Because of its very
\nfunction it makes itself incapable of understanding.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tHow can one say that a thing is "already done", when it is not yet
\n\tmanifested, for example, that the Divine has chosen an instrument, when
\n\tnothing is as yet apparent?<\/i>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n         Yes, within, in the world that
\nis not yet manifested, there is the decision, it is done there, only it must
\ncome out on the surface.\n<\/p>\n

\n         It is exactly the individual
\nequivalent of what I have told you several times, in connection with the freedom
\nof India. When I had gone to a certain plane, I told Sri Aurobindo, "India is
\nfree", I did not tell him, "India will be free", I told him, "India
\nis free”.<\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-4<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nWell, between that moment when it was an accomplished fact and the moment when
\nit was translated in the material world upon earth, how many years were needed ?
\nIt was in 1915 and the liberation came in 1947, that is to say, 32 years. That
\nis the exact image of the resistance.\n<\/p>\n

\n     For the individual it is the same thing. It takes
\nsometimes the same length of time, sometimes it goes quicker.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tYou say that you saw India free… <\/i><\/p>\n

\n\tNo, I did not see, I knew.\n\t<\/p>\n

\n\tWhen you said to Sri Aurobindo, "India is free", was India wholly free?<\/i>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n          I had meant what happened
\nin 1947, that is to say, the foreign domination was withdrawn. That is all,
\nnothing else than that, not her moral or spiritual freedom, I did not speak of
\nthat at all. I said simply that she was liberated from foreign domination. And
\neven I answered to a question put by Sri Aurobindo, "There will be no violence,
\nit will be done without a revolution, it is the British people who of themselves
\nwill decide to go away, for the place will become untenable for them because of
\ncertain circumstances upon the earth". So that was the whole matter, there was
\nno spiritual question here.\n<\/p>\n

\n         The things happened that way. I
\ntold Sri Aurobindo in 1915 exacdy. It was all there, it was there, I guessed
\nnothing, prophesied nothing\u2014it was a fact.\n<\/p>\n

\n        This then gives you an image of the
\ntime that is needed between the established fact and the outer realisation. For
\nthe individual also it is the same thing. He is chosen, he has chosen. He has
\nchosen the Divine and he is chosen. It is a thing decided and it will be
\nrealise^! infallibly. One cannot escape even if one wanted. Only it may take a
\nlong time.
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-5<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tMother, you said that India was free in <\/i>1915, but was she free as now
\n\t? because Indian is not free as a whole, she has been divided.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n         Oh, that’s what you wanted to
\nknow !\n<\/p>\n

\n        But the details were not there. Yet
\nthere must have been a possibility that it might be otherwise; for, when Sri
\nAurobindo sent them his message1<\/sup> he knew very well that one could
\navoid what happened in the end. If they had listened to him at that tune, there
\nwould have been no division. Therefore the division was not decreed. It is a
\nhuman deformation; uncontestably it was a human deformation.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tBut then how can one say that the decision of the Supreme is unescapable,
\n\tif He had chosen that India must be free ?<\/i>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n      No, no, it is not like that, my child.\n<\/p>\n

\n      It is a fact, that’s all. It is the Divine that
\nis India, it is the Divine that is freedom, it is the Divine that is subjection,
\nit is the Divine that is all\u2014then how could he have chosen ?\n<\/p>\n

\n      I advise you to go up there, then you will
\nunderstand. Until you have climbed the ladder up to there, it will be difficult
\nto understand.\n<\/p>\n

\n*<\/p>\n

\n*  *\n<\/p>\n

\n     <\/b>  1<\/font><\/sup>
\nLet us recall that in 1942, at the time when Sir Stafford Crips proposed his
\n"reforms" (reforms that did not yet contemplate India’s independence but would
\nlead to it), Sri Aurobindo took the trouble of sending a special messenger to
\nDelhi to convince the responsible persons that the reforms should be accepted.
\nThey did not understand him. Had the reforms been accepted India would probably
\nhave avoic?e6 the Pakistan partition and the atrocities that went with it.
\n(Editor’s note)<\/i> <\/font>
\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-6<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nII<\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t"At best we have only the poor relative freedom
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\twhich by us is ignorantly called free will. But that
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tis at bottom illusory, since it is the modes of
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tNature that express themselves through our personal
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\twill; it is force of Nature, grasping us, ungrasped
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tby us that determines what we shall will and how we
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tshall will it. Nature, not an independent ego,
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tchooses what object we shall seek, whether by
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\treasoned will or unreflecting impulse, at any moment
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tof our existence." ("The Synthesis of Yoga", p.
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/i>108) <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n      I have explained it to you I do not know how many
\ntimes.\n<\/p>\n

\n     You believe that it is you who decide, it is the
\nimpulses coming from outside that decide. You believe you are conscious of your
\nwill, it is a consciousness not yours. You are wholly built up by the forces of
\nNature that express a higher Will of which you are unconscious.\n<\/p>\n

\n     But you understand that only when you are able to come
\nout of your ego, even though for one moment; for the ego is convinced\u2014and it is
\nthis which gives it its strength\u2014that it is itself that decides. But if you look
\nclosely you will perceive that it is moved by all kinds of things that are not
\nitself.\n<\/p>\n

\n    But what then is mental and vital will?<\/i><\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\n    It is an expression of something that is not personal. If you
\nanalyse with care, you will perceive, for example, that all that you think has
\nbeen thought by others; these are things that circulate and pass through you,
\nbut you are not at the origin of your thoughts. All your reactions arise out of
\natavism from those who gave you birth and the environment in which you have
\nlived, out of the impressions that hav.e\u00ab gathered in you and built up something
\nwhich appears to you as yourself, but it is not created by you, it is
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-7<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nsimply felt and experienced. You become aware of it on your way, but it is not
\nyou who created it, not you who gave it birth.\n<\/p>\n

\n     One might say that they are like sounds (words or music
\nor anything) recorded by an instrument and reproduced by another instrument,
\nwhich repeats like the gramophone, for example. You won’t say that it is the
\ngramophone that has created the sound which you hear, you would never think that
\nway, isn’t it ? But as you have the illusion of a separate personality, these
\nthoughts that pass through your head and express themselves, these feelings that
\npass through your vital and express themselves you think them coming out of you,
\nbut there is nothing that comes out of you. Where is the "you" that can create
\nall that ?\n<\/p>\n

\n     You must go in deep, deep, must reach and find the
\neternal essence of your being to have that creative reality within you. And once
\nyou have found that, you realise that it is the same thing in others and then
\nwhere is your separate personality ? Nothing remains.\n<\/p>\n

\n    Yes, they are instruments for recording and reproducing and
\nthere are always various deformations\u2014deformations for the better, as well as
\ndeformations for the worse, there may be sufficiently big changes. The inner
\ncombinations are such that things are not reproduced exactly when they pass from
\none to another, for the instrument is very complex. But it is one and the same
\nthing which is moved by one single conscious Will, and this Will is altogether
\nindependent of personal wills.\n<\/p>\n

\n    When the Buddha wanted his disciples to understand this, he
\ntold them: each time you send out a vibration, a desire, for example, the desire
\nfor a particular thing, your desire begins circulating from one to another, from
\none to another through the universe, and will turn all around and come back to
\nyou. And as it is not only one thing and as you are not the only transmitting
\ncentre\u2014all individual beings are transmitting centres\u2014it makes such a complex
\naffair that you do not recognize yourself. But these vibrations move about in
\nthe same identical field; but it is only the complication and interception of {h,e
\nvibrations that gives you the impression that a thing is separated or
\nindependent.
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-8<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nBut there is nothing separate or independent, it is only one substance, one
\nsingle Force, one single Consciousness, one single Will that moves in coundess
\nways.\n<\/p>\n

\nAnd it is so complicated that one cannot make anything out of it. But if you
\ntake one step back and follow the movement, any line of the movement, no matter
\nwhat, you discover very well that the vibrations are continued gradually on and
\non, and, in fact, there is only one single unity\u2014unity of Substance, unity of
\nConsciousness, unity of Will. And that is the only reality. Outwardly, it is a
\nkind of illusion\u2014the illusion of separation and the illusion of distinction.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tThe desires also?<\/i> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n      It is not personal, not at all. And it is very
\neasy to find it out: of all things it is the easiest to find out, oecause ninety
\ntimes out of a hundred, they come from another person, from a certain
\ncircumstance or from a set of circumstances, or from a vibration coming from
\nanother person or several other persons. You can recognize it easily. It is a
\nvibration that suddenly awakens something similar in you. Something produces a
\nshock in you and this shock brings forth a response, just as when you touch a
\nnote. Well, this vibration of desire comes and touches you in a certain way and
\nyou respond.\n<\/p>\n

\n      Even when you are a child, if you are attentive
\nyou can be aware of it. You five constantly in the midst of constant collective
\nsuggestions. I do not know if you have attended funerals, for example, or if you
\nhave been in a house where there is a death\u2014naturally you must observe yourself
\na little, otherwise you are aware of nothing\u2014if however you observe yourself a
\nlittle, you have no particular reason to be full of grief or sorrow for the
\npassing of the person in question, it is a person like many others, the thing
\nhappened and by a conjunction of social circumstances, you have been brought
\ninto -the house. There all on a sudden without knowing why and how, you feel a
\ngreat emotion, a great grief, a
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-9<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\ngreat sorrow and you ask yourself, "Why am I so unhappy ?" Simply the vibrations
\nhave entered into you, nothing else.\n<\/p>\n

\n      I tell you it is easy to observe, because I
\nmyself had this experience when I was quite a child (and at that time I was not
\ndoing any conscious yoga, not yet; perhaps I was doing yoga, but not
\nconsciously) and I observed it very, very clearly; I told myself, "certainly, it
\nis their grief that I feel, for I have no reason to be especially touched by the
\ndeath of the person"; but all on a sudden tears came to my eyes, I felt my
\nthroat choked and inclined to weep, as if I had a great grief\u2014I was quite a
\nchild\u2014I understood immediately, "But it is their grief that entered into me".\n<\/p>\n

\n     It is the same thing with regard to anger. It is very
\nclear that people get it all of a sudden, not even from any body, but from the
\natmosphere; it is there, and all of a sudden it enters. It takes you usually by
\nyour lower part and then it rises and pushes you and you go. A minute before you
\nwere not angry, you were quite master of yourself, you had no intention to be in
\nanger. And the thing seizes you so strongly that you are unable to resist\u2014
\nbecause you are not sufficiently conscious, you allow it to enter into you and
\nit makes use of you\u2014you, what you call "you", that is to say, your body; because
\napparently (I say indeed apparently) it is separate from the body of your
\nneighbour. But it is only an illusion of your eyes, because in fact there are
\nconstantiy what may be qalled particles, even physical particles, like a kind of
\nradiation coming out of the body and mixing with others. And when one is very
\nsensitive one can feel at a distance because of that.\n<\/p>\n

\n     It is said, for example, that blind people acquire such
\na sensitiveness, such a delicate perception of sensations that when they
\napproach an object they feel the impact at a distance. But you can make an
\nexperiment of it quite easily. For example, you approach some one without making
\na noise, put your hand quite near\u2014 sensitive people feel it immediately. You
\nhave exercised no will in order to make them feel, you have not caused any
\npsychological element to intervene, you have only made the experiment, the
\npurely physical experiment, of approaching’ without noise so that you may not be
\nheard\u2014someone sensitive will feel it immediately.
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-10<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n     That is to say, the body seems to end here, but it is
\nonly the way in which our eyes are built. If we had a little more subtle vision,
\nhaving a wider scale, we would see that something comes out\u2014as there is
\nsomething that comes out of other bodies\u2014 and all that gets mixed and they react
\nupon one another.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tWhat does Sri Aurobindo mean by "the unity of dynamic force"?<\/i> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n     That’s what I was telling you. There is a dynamic force
\nthat moves all things and when you become conscious of it, you see that it is
\none single Force that moves all things; you can even follow its movement and see
\nhow it works through people and things.\n<\/p>\n

\n     As soon as you become conscious of the unity\u2014unity of
\nForce, unity of Consciousness and unity of Will\u2014you have no longer the
\nperception due to which you seem quite separate from the others, you do not know
\nwhat is happening in them and they are strangers to you,’ you are shut up as it
\nwere in your skin and you have no contact with others except in an altogether
\nexternal and superficial manner. But it is precisely because you have not
\nrealised in you the perception of the unity of Consciousness, the unity of
\nForce, the unity of Will\u2014even the unity of material vibration.\n<\/p>\n

\n     It is the complexity that makes the perception
\ndifficult; because our faculties of perception are too linear and too simple. In
\ncase we want to understand we are immediately assailed by an innumerable
\nquantity of things which are almost contradictory to one another and are mixed
\nup in such a complex way that you are unable to discover the lines and follow
\nthe things, you enter suddenly into a whirl.\n<\/p>\n

\n     But it is because the majority of people think one idea
\nafter another, even as they are obliged to utter one word after another \u2014they
\ncannot utter many words at the same time, otherwise they stammer. So, the
\nmajority of people think like that, they think one thought after another, their
\nwhole consciousness moves lineally. But you begin to cognize things only when
\nyou cognize spherically,
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-11<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nglobally\u2014think spherically, that is to say, an innumerable quantity of thoughts
\nand perceptions that are simultaneous.\n<\/p>\n

\n     Naturally, up till now, if you want to describe things,
\nyou are obliged to describe them one after another, because you cannot say ten
\nwords at the same time. And that is why all that one says is practically
\nincapable of expressing the truth, altogether incapable, because we are obliged
\nto say one thing after another. And as soon as we say things one after another
\nthey are no longer true. One must say all at the same time, even as one can come
\nto cognize them at the same time and each in its place.\n<\/p>\n

\n     When you begin to see like that\u2014to see, to perceive, to
\nfeel, to think, to will like that\u2014then you are approaching the truth. But as
\nlong as one sees as one speaks\u2014oh, it is lamentable poverty.\n<\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\tSri Aurobindo writes: "As long as we live in the ignorant seeming, we
\n\t\tare the ego and are subject to the modes of . Nature. Etislaved to
\n\t\tappearances, bound to the dualities, tossed between good and evil, sin
\n\t\tand virtue, grief and joy, pain and pleasure, good fortune and ill
\n\t\tfortune, success and failure, we follow helplessly the iron or gilt and
\n\t\tiron round of the wheel of Maya."<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t(The Synthesis of Yoga, p. 108)<\/i> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n     Yes, there are people who have a happy and comfortable
\nlife and there are others that have a miserable life. It depends upon individual
\ndestiny, it depends perhaps on what they have to do upon earth, upon the stage
\nwhere they are; it depends upon many things. It is quite evident that it is not
\nthey themselves who choose. Because the majority of people would choose always
\nthe same thing. If they were asked what they wanted, there would be differences
\nbut not very great. It would be quite monotonous.\n<\/p>\n

\n    The majority of people would like to be what they call
\n"quiet", what they call "peaceful", have a small organisation suited to their
\ndimension\u2014which is generally microscopic\u2014which consists in living a regular
\nroutine, activities almost always identical, within
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-12<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nan almost identical frame, in an almost identical surrounding and that repeats
\nwithout too great a difference, with a sufficient variety so that it does not
\nbecome irksome, but nothing that would upset the regular circle which makes what
\nis called a peaceful life. For the immense majority of people that is the ideal.\n<\/p>\n

\n     And then the realisation of the details of this ideal
\ndepends exclusively on the country in which one is born, the society in which
\none is born, the customs of one’s environment. They have their ideal fashioned
\nby the habits of the country or society in which they live.\n<\/p>\n

\n     Evidently there are exceptions, but they only prove the
\nrule. In a general way, the widest ideal is to be born in a sufficiently
\ncomfortable surrounding in order not to have too many difficulties in life, to
\nmarry a person who would not give you too much trouble, to have children who are
\nhealthy and grow normally (also in order not to have trouble) and then a quiet
\nand happy old age and also not to’ fall ill too much in order not to have
\ntrouble. And then to depart when one is tired of life, also again because one
\nwould not like to have trouble.\n<\/p>\n

\n     At bottom, it is the most widely spread ideal.
\nNaturally there are exceptions, you find even the very contrary. Otherwise, the
\nlife as men conceive it would be sufficiently monotonous. The differences would
\ncome in the details, because in one country one prefers one thing and in another
\nanother thing; and then in the society in which one is born, you have certain
\nhabits, an ideal of happiness and in another society you have other habits and
\nanother ideal of happiness\u2014that’s all.\n<\/p>\n

\n    If one speaks to the Europeans, for example, they tell you
\nthat there is nothing more beautiful than Europe. I knew Frenchmen\u2014not one, but
\nhundreds\u2014who said there were nowhere in the world more beautiful women than
\nFrench women ! I knew a Negro who had all his education in France and who, when
\nasked where were the most beautiful women, answered, "None more beautiful than a
\nNegro woman". It was quite natural, isn’t it ? Well, it is like that No house is
\nmore beautiful than the one in which one has been accustomed to five\u2014the houses
\nof the country
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-13<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nwhere you live, where you are born\u2014and the landscape, it is the same, the food,
\nit is the same, the habits, it is the same. Provided it all passes in a
\nsufficiently harmonious way, without any violent blows, you are perfectly
\nsatisfied.\n<\/p>\n

\n     That is the general mentality. You turn round, you turn
\nround \u2014and sometimes it is an iron circle, sometimes it is a circle of gold \u2014but
\nyou turn round and round and round and your children also will turn round and
\nround and your grand children will also turn round and round\u2014and that will
\ncontinue. There you are.\n<\/p>\n

\n*<\/p>\n

\n*  * <\/p>\n

\nIII<\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t"Nature as Prakriti is an inertly active Force\u2014for she works out a
\n\t\tmovement imposed upon her; bid within her is One that knows (the
\n\t\tPurushottama)…. The individual soul or the conscious being in a form
\n\t\tmay identify itself with this experiencing Purusha or with the active
\n\t\tPrakriti. If it identifies itself with Prakriti, it is not master,
\n\t\tenjoyer and knower…"<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\t\t(The Synthesis of Yoga p.112.)<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\t\tIf Nature does what is imposed on her, how is it that there are all
\n\t\tthese deformations?<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\t\tIt is the theory of the Gita, it is not the whole truth. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n        I heard it when I was in France.
\nThese are people who ex plain the Gita, saying that there is no fire without
\nsmoke\u2014which is not true. Starting from that they say, "life is like that and you
\nwill not change it. All that you can do is to pass over to the side of the
\nPurusha and become the ruling force instead of the ruled force". But as Sri
\nAurobindo says, it is the theory of the Gita, it is not the whole truth. It is
\nonly a partial way of seeing things\u2014useful, practical, convenient, but not
\nwholly true.
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-14<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tIn that case, how is it that disciples of Sri Aurobindo preach the
\n\tmessage of the Gita for the salvation of the world ?<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tIt is their business. If it pleases them, I do not mind. <\/p>\n

\n\tThat has nothing to do then with the Yoga of Sri Aurobindo ?<\/i> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n         You can’t say it has nothing to
\ndo. But it is narrowness, that’s all. They have caught one corner and made it
\nthe whole. But that happens to everybody. Who can grasp the whole, I would like
\nto know ? Everybody catches a corner and makes it the whole.\n<\/p>\n

\n        But Sri Aurobindo has explained…<\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n       Oh ! but you are a propagandist! Why do you
\nwant to convince them ? If they are satisfied that way, leave them with their
\nsatisfaction. If they come and tell you, ‘This is Sri Aurobindo’s theory, then
\nyou have the right to tell them, "No, you are mistaken, it is the traditional
\ntheory, it is not Sri Aurobindo’s theory".’ That’s all. But you can’t tell them,
\n"you must change". If it pleases them let them keep it.\n<\/p>\n

\n         It is a very convenient theory.
\nI saw it in France, at Paris, before coming to India, I saw to what extent it
\nwas practical. First of all, it makes you grasp a very profound and extremely
\nuseful truth and then it keeps you away from all necessity of changing your
\nexternal nature.\n<\/p>\n

\n        It is so convenient, isn’t it ? You
\nsay, "I am like that, how can I help it ? I separate myself from Nature, I leave
\nit to do as it likes, I am not this Nature, I am the Purusha; let it go its own
\nway, after all, I can’t change it". There are people who accept this even after
\nhaving read and studied Sri Aurobindo. They hold on to it, they stick to it,
\nbecause it is comfortable, you have not got to make any effort to change
\nymav <\/i><\/b>nature\u2014it is unchangeable. Only you look at it from your ivory
\ntower and allow it to do whatever it likes,
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-15<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nand say, "It is not I, I am not that". This is extremely convenient. That is why
\npeople take it up, because they imagine they are in the Purusha, but at the
\nslightest scratch, they fall plump, back into Prakriti and they get furious, or
\nare in despair or fall ill.\n<\/p>\n

\n     I heard also of someone who had however realised this
\nidentification with the Purusha and who spread a very remarkable atmosphere; but
\nhe considered as dangerous revolutionaries people who sought to change anything
\nin earthly Nature, all those who wanted that things upon earth should change; as
\nfor example, suffering should be abolished or that one should in the end annul
\nthe necessity of death, or that there might be an evolution, a luminous progress
\nthat needs no destruction. Yes, people who think like that are dangerous
\nrevolutionaries. If need be, they must be put in prison!\n<\/p>\n

\n    If you want to be a wise man, without there being any
\nquestion of becoming a great Yogi, you must be able to look at such things with
\na smile, not to be touched. You have your own experience, try to make it as true
\nand as complete as possible, but leave each one to his own experience.\n<\/p>\n

\n    Unless, of course, they come to you and take you as a Guru
\nand ask you "Now, lead me to the Light and the Truth", then there begins your
\nresponsibility \u2014 not before.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tShould not one try to show the new truth to others and convince them?<\/i>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n     If you reach this conception that the world is the
\nexpression of the Divine in all its complexity, then the necessity of the
\ncomplexity and diversity has to be accepted and it becomes impossible for you to
\ntry to convince others and make them think and feel like you.\n<\/p>\n

\n     Everybody has his own way of thinking, feeling and
\nreacting. Why should you want others to do like you and to be like you ? Even if
\nit is admitted that you have a greater truth than theirs (although this word
\nsignifies nothing, because from a certain
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-16<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\npoint of view all truths are true\u2014they are all partial, but they are true as
\nthey are truths), but the moment you seek your truth to be greater than that of
\nyour neighbour you begin to stray from the truth.\n<\/p>\n

\n      This habit of wanting to compel others to think
\nas you think always seemed to me arbitrary, it is what I call "the spirit of
\npropagandists" and that takes you very far. You can take one step further and
\nwant people to do as you do, to feel as you feel and it becomes a terrible
\nuniformity.\n<\/p>\n

\n      In any case, I may assure you that there is a
\ntime when one does not feel at all, at all, the necessity of convincing others
\nof the truth of what one thinks.\n<\/p>\n

\nIV<\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\n\tHow to enter into the occult worlds?<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tDo you know how to exteriorise yourself ? <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n          Do you know at all what
\nit is to exteriorise oneself ? Not philosophically or psychologically, I mean in
\nthe occult way ? Are you conscious when you exteriorise yourself, do you do it
\nat your will ? Do you know how to leave the body and live in a subtier body,
\nthen to leave that body too and live in another still subtler body\u2014and so on ?
\nCan you do all that ? Have you done it ? No \u2014then we shall talk about it another
\nday.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tIt happens in dream.<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tIn dream ? Do you <\/i><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-17<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n\tA little.<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tA little ? It is getting interesting. Where do you go in your dreams ? <\/p>\n

\n\tOften in the vital worlds.<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tOh ! Oh ! You go into the vital world\u2014and nothing unpleasant happens ? <\/p>\n

\n\tMost often.<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tAh ! and how do you get out of it ? <\/p>\n

\n\tRun back into the body.<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tThat is where ends your knowledge ? <\/p>\n

\n\tNo, sometimes I call for the Light and then I find there is no need to
\n\trun away. But that does not last long.<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tYou enter and come out at will ? Not at will.<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tCan you return to a place where you have already been before ? <\/p>\n

\n\tNo, Mother.<\/i> <\/p>\n

\n\tYou do not find back again the same spot several times ? <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-18<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n       Not at my will.<\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n      But there are children who know how to do that,
\nthey continue their dreams. Every night when they go to bed, they return to the
\nsame spot and continue their dream.\n<\/p>\n

\n      When I was a child, Mother, I used to do that. <\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n      <\/i>You are no more a child, it’s a pity.\n<\/p>\n

\n      Because I was not preoccupied at that time.<\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n       Well, become a child again and you will
\nknow how to do it again. There is nothing more interesting. It is quite a
\npleasant occupation for the-nights : you begin a story, and when it is time to
\nget up, you put a fullstop at the last word and get back into your body. The
\nfollowing night you start again, you open the page once more and begin your
\nstory and continue all the while you are outside; then you put the things in
\norder\u2014it must be well arranged, quite beautiful. And when the time comes to
\nreturn, you put a full stop once more and tell the things, "keep quiet till I
\ncome back!" Then you get back into your body. You continue that every evening
\nand you write a book of wonderful fairy tales\u2014provided of course you remember
\nthem when you wake up.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tBut that depends on the quietness in which one has passed the day ?<\/i>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n      No, that depends on the candidness of a child,
\nupon its trust in things that come to him, upon the absence of the mind’s
\ncritical sense, upon heart’s simplicity, upon a young and active energy\u2014 it
\ndepends upon all that\u2014upon a kind of vital generosity within. And one must not
\nbe too egoistic, too greedy and one must not be too practical, too
\nutilitarian\u2014yes, there are all kinds of things that one must not be, as children
\nare not. And then one must have
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-19<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\na power of living imagination, because (I seem to tell you foolish things, but
\nit is absolutely true) there is a world where you are a supreme maker of forms,
\nit is your own world of the vital. You are a supreme maker of forms and you can
\nmake a marvel of your world. If you know how to make use of it, if you have the
\nconsciousness of an artist, of a poet, if you love harmony and beauty, you will
\nbuild there a wonderful thing that will tend to come into the material
\nmanifestation.\n<\/p>\n

\n      When I was a child, that was what I used to call
\ntelling stories to myself. It is not at all telling stories through words, but
\nin the head: it means going to a spot yet virgin and build there a wonder story.
\nAnd when you know how to tell a story like that and it is truly beautiful and
\nharmonious, truly strong and coordinated, it will realise itself in your
\nlife\u2014perhaps not exactly in the form you created, but as a physical expression,
\nmore or less deformed of what you might have done.\n<\/p>\n

\n     That perhaps will take years, but your story will tend
\nto organise your life.\n<\/p>\n

\n      But there are very few people who know how to
\ntell a beautiful story and then they mix up always horrors which they regret
\nafterwards.\n<\/p>\n

\n      If one could create a fine story with no horrors
\nin it, nothing but beauty, that would have a considerable <\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n     If one could utilise this power, this creative power in
\nthe world of vital forms, if one knew to utilise that when yet a child, a little
\nchild ! because it is then that one builds up one’s material destiny. But
\ngenerally the people who are around you, sometimes even your little comrades,
\nbut especially the parents and teachers meddle there and spoil everything, to
\nsuch an extent that there are very few cases where it succeeds wholly.\n<\/p>\n

\n     Otherwise, if it were done like that, with the
\nspontaneous candour of a child, you could organise for you a wonderful life. I
\nam speaking to you of the physical world.\n<\/p>\n

\n      Dreams of childhood are realities of ripe age.\n<\/p>\n

\n*<\/p>\n

\n*  *
\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-20<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nV<\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\n\tHow can one understand the Divine ?<\/i> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n          By becoming Him, my
\nchild. That is the only way, by identity.\n<\/p>\n

\n        "If one did not carry Him in
\noneself", Sri Aurobindo says, "one would never be able to understand Him". It is
\nbecause He is the very essence of our being that we are able to become Him and
\ntherefore understand Him, otherwise it would be quite impossible.\n<\/p>\n

\n\tHow can we find the Divine within ourselves? <\/i><\/p>\n

\n\tIt is just what I said. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n         First of all, you must set
\nabout looking for Him, as it is the most important thing in your life, then the
\nwill must be constant, the aspiration constant, the preoccupation constant and
\nthis must be the only thing that you want, then you will find Him.\n<\/p>\n

\n        Naturally, if you think of it only
\nfive minutes in your life and be busy with other things for three quarters of an
\nhour, there is hardly any chance of success. In any case, many lives will be
\nneeded. It must not be a pastime, it must be the exclusive occupation of your
\nbeing, the very reason of your existence.\n<\/p>\n

\n*<\/p>\n

\n*  *
\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-21<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\nVI<\/b>\n<\/p>\n

\n

\n\t\t"All the Timeless presses towards the play in Time; all in Time turns
\n\t\tupon and around the timeless Spirit". {"The Synthesis of Yoga, p. <\/i>
\n\t\t137) <\/p>\n

\n\t\tWhy?<\/i> <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\n       Because, it is like that, my child. All
\nthat is not manifested wants to be manifested and all that is manifested tries
\nto return to its Origin.\n<\/p>\n

\n      It is as if you asked me, "Why is the earth
\nround, why are there the sun and the planets ?" It is like that, the Law of the
\nUniverse is like that.\n<\/p>\n

\n      Most of these things are simply statements of
\nfacts; but there are no explanations, because you cannot give a mental
\nexplanation; you can give it, but each thing that you want to explain is
\nexplained by another which must again be explained by another, which in its turn
\nmust be explained by yet another\u2014and so on indefinitely. You can go round the
\nuniverse, each thing explaining another thing, but that explains nothing. The
\nonly thing that one can do is to say, it is like that.\n<\/p>\n

\n     That is why it is said that the mind can know nothing.
\nIt can know nothing, because it has need of explanations. And an explanation has
\na value only to the extent it gives you the power to act upon the thing which is
\nexplained. Otherwise, what is the use of it ? If by explaining a thing you do
\nnot have the power to change it, it is absolutely useless. Because, as I have
\nsaid, the explanation that you give necessitates another explanation and so on.
\nBut if by an explanation you get a power over the thing, to make it different
\nfrom what it is, then that is worth the trouble. But this is not the case. Here
\nwe turn round and round upon the surface, instead of leaping into the air
\ntowards a new height.
\n\n<\/p>\n

\nPage-22<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n       How can one increase one’s
\nunderstanding?<\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n      Understanding ? Well, it is by increasing the
\nconsciousness, by going beyond the mind, by widening one’s consciousness, by
\ndeepening one’s consciousness, by coming in contact with regions above the mind.\n<\/p>\n

\n      Later on, at the time of the publication of this
\ntalk, Mother added the following commentary.\n<\/p>\n

\n      I would add now one thing : it is experience.
\nChange the knowledge into experience. And experience leads you automatically to
\nanother experience.\n<\/p>\n

\n      But by "experience" I mean quite a different
\nthing from what it is usually taken to mean. It is not experiencing the thing
\nthat one knows\u2014that is, of course, understood\u2014but instead of knowing and
\nunderstanding (even a knowledge much higher than the mental knowledge, even a
\nmost integral knowledge), to become the power that causes it to be. <\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n      People always say that at the beginning of the
\nManifestation there is saccidananda <\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\n     When you are there, you have the sense of such a
\ntremendous power\u2014the universal power ! You have the sense of total mastery of
\nthe universe.\n<\/p>\n

\n<\/p>\n

\n

\nPage-23<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nReprinted from The Bulletin of S. A. I. C. of Education <\/i>\n<\/p>\n

\nApril, 1962\n<\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

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

THE MOTHER Questions and Answers           Sri Aurobindo Ashram Pondicherry April, 1962 Questions and Answers I Sri Aurobindo writes, "The Supreme…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[137],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5492","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-07-questions-and-answers-november-1956-november1962","wpcat-137-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5492","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=5492"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5492\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5492"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5492"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5492"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}