Mother, in her body, emerges into a 'third position' - resembling the quantum world - a 'third cellular position' in which you become incapable of dying because death no longer has any reality.
The course of the year 1962.... the year of the Kennedy-Khrushchev confrontation over Cuba and the first Sino-Indian conflict: "Could it be the first sign of something really.... momentous? It seems to have profoundly disrupted something central." The entire earth is disrupted. It is the year when Mother, in her body, emerges into a "third position", neither life nor death as we know them, but another side of the "web" where the laws of our physics no longer hold, and which strangely resembles the quantum world of Black Holes: time changes, space changes, death changes. Could this be the material place, in the body, where the laws of the world - which exist only in our heads - become inverted and where evolution opens out into an unthinkable body freedom, a third position, that of the next species on earth?.... "The body is beginning to obey another law. The sense of time disappears into a moving immobility.... A mass of infinite force, like pure superelectricity..... An undulating movement of corporeal waves, as vast as the earth.... All the organs have changed, they belong to another rhythm. Such a formidable power, so free! It's something else.... something else! I don't know if I am living or dead.... The nature of my nights is changing, the nature of my days is changing.... The physical vibration is becoming porous.... No more axis - it's gone, vanished! It can go forward, backwards, anywhere at all.... Ubiquity, or something of the sort." And then this cry: "Death is an illusion, illness is an illusion! Life and death are one and the same thing. It's merely a shifting of consciousness. Why, it's fantastic!" And then this simple discovery in the flesh: "The closer you draw to the cell, the more the cell says, 'Ah, but I am immortal!' "A third cellular position in which you become incapable of dying because death no longer has any reality." Has Mother, at the age of 84, discovered another material reality? "There, behind, it's like a fairy tale....Something very beautiful is in preparation, ineffably beautiful - a lovely story that Sri Aurobindo was trying to bring onto earth, and it is sure to come!"
What have you brought? Your book? Do you have your book?
A bit of it, yes.
All right, begin with that.
It's getting to be heavy going, you know....
Oh!
I'm under a lot of pressure... I'm thinking of the "Bulletin," of everything that remains to be done.
No.
But I have to!
Just let it come naturally, like that.
Don't think ahead. Just put a piece of paper in front of you and let it come.
Page 467
Otherwise you give yourself a headache.
All right, I am listening; read what you've brought.
It's not perfect yet.
No problem.
I am perfecting it—all I have to do is hear it.
!?
You don't believe it, do you? But I can assure you!
Actually, words serve only to put people in contact with something else, a knowledge, a light, a force or an action, or... whatever. So as long as you manage to put one into the other,1 that's all that's necessary.
If you knew.... You can't imagine how stupid people are! They put exactly what they want into what they read or hear, whatever they have in their heads. Only when you have the power to break that can something get in—and that can happen through any word at all, it doesn't matter.
That's what I try to bring in when I listen to your book.
So go ahead now, I am listening.
(After the reading:)
There's just one thing... I don't know... it's when you say Sri Aurobindo "succumbed" on December 5, 1950. He didn't "succumb." It's not that he couldn't have done otherwise. It's not the difficulty of the work that made him leave; it's something else. You can't mention this in your book, of course, it's impossible to talk about for the moment, but I would like you to use another word. What was your sentence again?
I said: "Sri Aurobindo succumbed to this work on December 5, 1950."
He didn't succumb.
We have to use another word, not "succumb." It was truly his CHOICE—he chose to do the work in another way, a way he felt
Page 468
would bring much more rapid results. But this explanation is nobody's business, for the moment. So we can't say that he succumbed. "Succumbed" gives the idea that it was against his will, that it just happened, that it was an accident—it CANNOT be "succumbed."
Yes, I understand.
You could simply say that he did the work up to that moment... that's all, giving no reason.
We could simply say: "Sri Aurobindo left this life on December 5, 1950."
Read the beginning of the passage again.
"The seeker of transformation must thus face all the difficulties, even death, not to vanquish but to change them—one cannot change things without taking them upon oneself. 'Thou shalt bear all things,' says Savitri, 'that all things may change.' Sri Aurobindo succumbed to this work..."
Can't you just put "that's why," without giving any explanation?... That's why Sri Aurobindo left his body. That's much more powerful. You said "even death," so just put: "That's why Sri Aurobindo left his body."
Page 469
Home
The Mother
Books
Agenda
Share your feedback. Help us improve. Or ask a question.