This is the fourth and final volume in the correspondence between Sri Aurobindo and Dilip. Sri Aurobindo keeps up his correspondence with his 'favourite' son throughout the difficult war years. Mother’s letters to Dilip are included in this volume.
Sri Aurobindo : corresp.
THEME/S
February 1, 1943
I find my mind is very tough. It simply will not surrender its right of private judgment. I have been trying for a long time to get some light which will give me the clue to truer judgments. But till I get it I don’t see how I will make myself accept what seems to be impossible of acceptance. Such being the case what shall I do? Shall I leave Yoga (as impossible for such people as I whose mind is so formed) for some other walk of life or shall I stick to this? This continuous self-tussling has become very painful. I don’t know what I shall do for it seems to me that the conditions necessary to success in Yoga can never be fulfilled by some and that I am one of these.
I am unable to see why you should give up Yoga, because you cannot believe in the action of occult laws and forces or in siddhis. The object of Yoga is realisation of the Divine; these other things are side matters which need be no part of spiritual experience, nor is belief in them necessary for realisation. Everyone has the right of private judgment in these matters; so you need not worry.
*
February 4, 1943
(Dilipda’s account of “An hour with Sri Aurobindo on 4.2.43 between 2.30 p.m and 3.30 p.m.”)
What I blurted out was a strange point blank question, apropos of nothing as it were “When are you going to come out?”
He smiled. “I don’t know,” He said.
“How do you mean ? Surely you must be knowing.”
Page 53
“Not in the way you know” He said, “for I stand no longer on the mental plane. I do not decide from the mind.”
“But still,” I said emboldened, “you can’t really mean to say that a radiant personality like you will be cooped up in this small room always?”
“I told you things are not predetermined with me. Suffice it to say for the present that I can’t do what I have to do if I go on seeing people, etc.”
“For instance,” he added voluntarily, “things that have happened lately in Russia, I can tell you I have had to put my force there daily and concretely enough in all conscience.”
“It is most cheering,” I said brightening, “specially the great Russian victory at Stalingrad.”
“Yes,” he smiled, “but the Mother and I had to put our force there constantly. It took time, being a different operation. But it is beginning to work. The Asuric forces were very strong you see. Yet another reason why I have to concentrate so much....”
I remembered when a few months ago I had written to him that his stopping of all correspondence was a decision we all deeply mourned and his reply [see Sri Aurobindo’s letter dated 29 May 1942].2
_________________
2(Dilipda’s note:) Sri Aurobindo’s closing note went: “I have made a few alterations. As for publication, that too is one of the things that wait for the Supramental Descent. En attendant, even, it should not be shown to many people.”
Page 54
February 6, 1943
Please forgive me that I have to write to you so soon asking a few questions again. Had it not been absolutely necessary, I would not have written. I realised in a way I never did before the great work you and Mother have been doing, and believe me that I meant it when I told Mother day before yesterday that I wanted to be worthy of the grace she and you have all along showered on me. I have numerous faults of which I am fully conscious but insincerity, I trust, is not one of them? So when I told you and her that I wanted to dedicate to your cause not only all / have but all I am, I did mean it with all it meant and implied. So I have decided to take no more of your time than I can help, wanting only to make a return (however poor) with my entire being rather than words. This I have expressed in my poem I wrote day before yesterday, the poem I sent up to you yesterday. I will only add that I have written another at 4 a.m. yesterday morning which I will send up to you when you will have read the one I gave Nirod yesterday. I want you to read this too only because it will supplement what I wrote in the first about the nature of the inspiration and fire I have received at your hands, not because I know / have never written better poems in my life. I ask you also to note that this metre is Madhusudan’s with the rich paurush [manliness] which characterised his diction and which Tagore could not follow up because he, with all his greatness, did not have this element in his composition as my father, who had it, often used to say regretting. But I am taking your time. To resume.
The reason, I repeat, why I write to you this letter is that I want to ask you a few questions. I will leave some space below either so that you may write your answer: this, only to save time. I hope it will not take more than a few minutes at most? (Except in the last question for which I am trying to feel contrite.)
I am hard at work recording (please forgive my journalistic failing, but I can’t leave this unrecorded, nigrahah kim karisyati, don’t you know?) I put down all I could remember then and there, but my memory for which I used to congratulate myself so manfully is failing me – getting old, you see! So I have to write you as I find certain rather important things (for us, I mean) I cannot recall.
Page 55
Do please help me, as I cannot capture it through your letters written to me which I have been rereading to stimulate my memory with. Please note I have taken the liberty to supplement your remarks here and there with certain relevant explanations supplied through your letters. I must, however, apologise for my inability to capture your style, though I have, indeed, tried hard to transcribe as much of your way of speaking which I hope you will allow me to retain. What I mean by this you will understand better when you see my report as to your laughter which (forgive me again) inspired me even more than your talk. Krishnaprem has written in his Katha (God bless him), “Laughter was given by the Gods to man and it was one of their choicest gifts. No animal can laugh, nor does it need to since it lives in the harmony of the purely instinctive life. It is only Man whose possession of an ego introduces stresses and strains which cannot be avoided and for the healing of which, therefore, the Gods gave him this supreme gift. Time and again it will save us when otherwise all would be lost.” I shall be very grateful if you will tell me if you find this correct. Suhrawardy told me once years ago in Berlin commenting on the dense seriousness of the German people (he loved the French and Russians) that people who couldn’t laugh were generally cruel by nature. Is this true also, substantially? I leave a little space below.
Such general statements are seldom altogether true. There are many grave and serious people who are, on the contrary, tender-hearted or compassionate. Krishnaprem’s statement has its truth, though I don’t think that is the only origin or cause of laughter. I am not sure either, that some animals don’t laugh inwardly though they can’t do the outward thing, having no machinery for it! Some certainly have a sense of humour.
Forgive me once more. But such things will not be repeated, I assure you, though my assurance reminds [me] of a villager who wrote to my grandfather on being dunned, “1 solemnly promise to repay you in a month, only, if I can’t, what can I do?”
Page 56
The debtor knew what humour was, didn’t he? as my grandfather asked me with rollicking laughter. You see I have lived all my life with humorous people and don’t really remember having loved anybody who could not laugh heartily. But Yoga is long and time is fleeting. So to try again to come to the point.
I remember that you said in answer to my question whether the force you “put on me” (as you put it) was concrete.
Concrete? What do you mean by concrete? It has its own concreteness; it can take a form (like a stream for instance) of which one is aware and can send it quite concretely in whatever direction or on whatever object one chooses. (The words in brackets I add now as an illustration; I did not use it at the time.)
I forget something very important you said here. So I was trying to find if your letters could tell me and here is something you wrote (7.12.35): “A Yoga-consciousness or spiritual consciousness which has no power or force in it, may not be dead or unreal but it is, evidently, something inert and without effect or consequence... If Yoga is a reality, if spirituality is anything better than a delusion, there must be such a thing as Yoga force or spiritual force.3
That is a statement of fact about the power inherent in spiritual consciousness. But there is also such a thing as willed use of any subtle force – it may be spiritual or mental or vital – to secure a particular result at some point in the world. Just as there are waves of unseen physical forces (cosmic waves, etc.) or currents of electricity, so there are mind-waves, thought-currents, waves of emotion, for example, anger, sorrow, etc. which go out and affect others without their knowing whence they come or that they come at all, they only feel the result. One who has the occult or inner senses awake can feel them coming and invading him. Influences
__________________
3 Sri Aurobindo’s comment here: “This does not come in well here; it refers to a much more general question.”
Page 57
good or bad can propagate themselves in that way; that can happen without intention and naturally, but also a deliberate use can be made of them. There can also be a purposeful generation of force, spiritual or other. There can be too the use of the effective will or idea acting directly without the aid of any outward action, speech or other instrumentation which is not concrete in that sense, but is all the same effective.
Can you tell me or rather write me something to this question I put to you? You said something about the force – your force – working concretely enough in all conscience even where the recipient was unconscious of receiving as was obviously the case with me. You wrote also once (I am hunting for it) that times out of number you put a concrete force on me when I was in despair and that made me regain my balance, remember? So could you supplement it in a few words?\
About the occult phenomenon of the house and stone, etc. What was it? The details I have clean forgotten. It was in the beginning, you see, before I had quite regained my balance after the agreeable shock of seeing you talking thus like a friend. So hope to be forgiven for inattention as well as for asking you to take the trouble of writing out what you told me, specially about the disagreeable happenings stopping because Mother put her force to counteract them. You told me about her moving into the house, was it?
I gave this as one instance of actual occult experience and action in accordance with occult law and practice, showing that these things are not imaginations or delusions or humbug, but can be true phenomena.
The stone-throwing began unobtrusively with a few stones thrown at the guest-house kitchen – apparently from the terrace opposite, but there was no one there. The phenomenon began before the fall of dusk and continued at first for half an hour, but daily it increased in frequency, violence and the size of the stones and the duration of the attack till it lasted for several hours until towards the end it became in the hour or half-hour before midnight
Page 58
a regular bombardment. It was no longer at the kitchen only, but thrown too in other places, for example the outer verandah. At first we took it for a human-made affair and sent for the police, but the investigation lasted only for a very short time, when one of the constables in the verandah got a stone whizzing unaccountably between his legs, the police abandoned the case in a panic. We made our own investigations, but the places whence the stones seemed to be or might be coming were void of human stone-throwers. Finally, as if to put us kindly out of doubt, the stones began falling in closed rooms; one huge one (I saw it immediately after it fell) reposed flat and comfortable on a cane table as if that was its proper place. Finally they became murderous. The stones had hitherto been harmless in result except for a daily battering of Bejoy’s door (in the last days) which I watched for half-an-hour the night before the end. They appeared in mid-air a few feet above the ground, not coming from a distance but suddenly manifesting, and from the direction from which they flew, should have been thrown close in from the compound of the guest-house or the verandah itself, but the whole place was in a clear light and I saw that there was no human being there and could not have been. At last the semi-idiot boy-servant who seemed to be the centre of the attack and was sheltered in Bejoy’s room under Bejoy’s protection, began to be severely hit and was bleeding from a wound by the stones thrown from inside the closed room. I went in at Bejoy’s call and saw the last stone fall on the boy; Bejoy and he were sitting side by side and the stone was thrown at them from in front, but there was no one visible to throw it – the two were alone in the room. So unless it was Wells’ invisible man – ! We had been only watching or sometimes scouting around till then, but this was a little too much, it was becoming dangerous and something had to be done. The Mother from her knowledge of the process of these things decided that the process here must depend on a nexus between the boy-servant and the house and if the nexus were broken, the servant and the house separated, the stone-throwing would cease. We sent him away to Hrishikesh’s place and immediately the whole phenomenon ceased; not a single stone was thrown after that; peace reigned. That shows that these occult phenomena are real, have a law or process as definite as that of any scientific operation and a knowledge of the processes can not only bring them about but put an end to or annul or dissolve them.
Page 59
Then for my last (though by no means the least) question: I read out to you the first part of my last question and you said many things about mental richness, etc. But I am afraid I can’t reproduce it without making a mess of it all. So I will type out the question here and ask you to write out your answer – O please! This I put last as it is I feel extremely interesting as well as intriguing, shall we say? Now for the question: “I recognise that one has to transcend the mental questioning moods of doubt, etc. which entail a lot of avoidable pain and suffering. Yet does not this pain often engender a feeling of richness too? I remember a poem of A.E. who wrote in his poem “Man to the Angel”,
“They are but the slaves of light
Who have never known the gloom
And between the dark and bright
Willed in freedom their own doom.”
You also wrote to me that you had passed through doubts such as none had passed before. Were they not necessary then? What I mean is that deep sufferings through mental questions and doubts give one often a sense of gain which I think was what A.E. meant too. Is this sense of gain illusory, after all, – a mere ruse of Prakriti to maintain the hold other movements as against the enlightened movements of the soul? You wrote also of pain in the Life Divine, “Without experience of pain we would not get all the infinite value of the divine delight of which pain is in travail.” One can’t help feeling that such utterances are somehow deep and profound and that chiefly because through deep pain (even physical) one feels a strange sense of fulfilment a fulfilment one might not attain without the deeper light I mean, that comes in the wake of pain and suffering.” There was more but I mustn’t take more of your time. You will understand my drift all right from this much I am sure.
Page 60
I would only remind you that you said something like this that the mental was the natural leader of the being (or was it man in place of being ?) as also re. enrichment through pain, etc. “It is partly true.” But then you butted it I remember, but how I fail to recall. Will you not help ? I will expect your reply today or tomorrow morning. Please don’t shelve it; I promise once more (not like the debtor though) to trouble you no more with such questions. I enclose an extra sheet since the margin below seems to me insufficient.
I don’t remember saying anything on this subject, except that disappointed vital desire must bring about suffering. Pain and suffering are necessary results of the Ignorance in which we live; men grow by all kinds of experience, pain and suffering as well as their opposites, joy and happiness and ecstasy. One can get strength from them if one meets them in the right way. Many take a joy in pain and suffering when associated with struggle or endeavour or adventure, but that is more because of the exhilaration and excitement of struggle than because of suffering for its own sake. There is, however, something in the vital which takes joy in the whole of life, its dark as well as its bright sides. There is also something perverse in the vital which takes a kind of dramatic pleasure in its own misery and tragedy, even in degradation or in illness. I don’t think mere doubts can bring any gain; mental questioning can bring gains if it is in pursuit of truth, but questioning just for the sake of sceptical questioning or in a pure spirit of contradiction can only bring, when it is directed against the truths of the spirit, either error or a lasting incertitude. If I am always questioning the Light when it comes and refusing its offer of truth, the Light cannot stay in me, cannot settle; eventually, finding no welcome and no foundation in the [mind] it will retire. One has to push forward into the Light, not always falling back into the darkness and hugging the darkness in the delusion that that is the real light. Whatever fulfilment one may feel in pain or in doubt belongs to the Ignorance; the real fulfilment is in the divine joy and the divine Truth and its certitude and it is that for which the Yogin strives. In the struggle he may have to pass through doubt, not by his own choice or will, but because there is still imperfection in his knowledge.
Page 61
February 25, 1943
Mother,
Please excuse me if this letter becomes somewhat long. I know how busy you are – I’ll try to be brief. Please show this to Sri Aurobindo and send me your answer, if possible tonight so that I may write to Madras and Delhi.
1) The Gramophone people want me to record a few songs. Can’t go to Calcutta. Madras recording is not so good but que faire? Calcutta is a far cry. I could offer you Rs. 315 a month or two ago. So the records (mine and Hashi’s) are selling not badly for wartime. So they are pressing me again and again, you see. I have written I can only go to Madras not to Calcutta. So may I go for a week to Madras with your blessings?
Yes.
If you permit I will leave on the second proximo after Prosperity. The Radio people also were asking, Jadu told me. That way I may offer at least Rs. 60 at your feet.
2) I intend to stay in some dry place for say a fortnight or three weeks. I am invited by Jnanranjan Sen, Public Prosecutor, Nagpur. I may stay there a week on my way to Delhi where Dr. Indra Sen and Nishikanto Sen – Registrar in the University – are there. The latter loves me and my music. I would prefer to stay with him a week. Dr. Indra Sen was suggesting to me to lecture at the Amphitheatre on “Sri Aurobindo and what he stands for” as I did at Trivandrum with music of course. I may do so if you give me your blessings – not otherwise.
Page 62
J told him so. In Delhi I have many other friends also and I will try to see if I can be of some service to you in getting some money contributions. It may happen as was the case with Birla year before last at Calcutta. But for this too your full blessings are necessary.
All right.
For I am not so vain now-a-days as I used to be and can’t really believe I can get money, etc. for you. If you will make me a servant of yours then only I can act, I really feel this – some progress anyhow, isn’t it? I suggest this as my vitality makes me often restless and if I can serve you in this way once or twice a year, why not? I hope you will believe me when I say it is not fame that draws me. I feel very tired outside and that quickly. My vairagya is persistent, as I told Sri Aurobindo on the 4th. If you give me some force only then I may (perhaps) shed this vairagya. Otherwise I often feel days are passing, etc. etc. I won’t repeat the doleful song. I am a little tired of my vairagya, really. Why cannot I with my abounding vitality serve you better?
3) In Delhi the India Gramophone may, I think, like to make some records. That way I can fetch some money too – but this is not likely to be much. But the Radio may offer me Rs. 150 (they do often). I will try.
4) From Delhi I want to go for a week or two to Almora to Krishnaprem’s Ashram as he presses me to come once. On the way I will stop a few days with Udayshankar. If he helps I can get some money with his help for the Ashram. 7 will try. That may be [consideration] Rs. 1000 at least.
So I will come back about 22nd of April for darshan.
Qu’en dites-vous?But do give me all your force. If I am overtaken with vairagya there as I was at Trivandrum I will return post-haste from Nagpur maybe – outside the Ashram I feel a great nostalgia for the Ashram after the first week or two at the most. In that case I feel very weak and can’t do strenuous work. I want to do some strenuous kind of work if I am to get rid of this inveterate vairagya as Sri Aurobindo told me again he does not like it.
Page 63
5) In Delhi I am likely to meet Birla who admires me greatly. But he is too deep a Gandhist now-a-days. So I don’t hope much from him this time. But I will certainly try.
You know of course that I have a good life outside. My only weakness is for fish now-a-days. I often dream of fish. Que faire? But there’s nothing fishy about my activities outside believe me.
P.S. In Madras I am going to teach two or three Mir a songs to Subbulakshmi.11 That will fetch some money. Your blessings are necessary. She and her husband are nice people and she is very religious – her husband says. So – I think her songs in the Gramophone will be a success. They are inviting me as you may remember.
Yes to the whole programme (with reservations about the vairagya, though!) with the Mother’s blessings and mine.
February 26, 1943
J could not quite understand – though partly I did – what you meant by
“Yes to the whole programme (with reservations about the vairagya, though!) with the Mother’s blessings and mine.”
If possible throw a few lines of radiant light hereanent below. I know vairagya is a protection and in my case a strong armour – being rather prone to attachments and fame, etc. but it causes a loss or waste of energy. Though I can’t very well complain I have felt the lack of it here however much I may have felt the lack of peace. I have written already a library of poems and songs and music, what?
Page 64
It was a reference, more humorous than anything else, to the possible item in your programme of vairagya overtaking you in the middle and disabling you from carrying it out.
For the rest, I quite acknowledge the utility of a temporary state of vairagya as an antidote to the too strong pull of the vital. But vairagya always tends to a turning away from life and a tamasic element in vairagya, despair, depression, etc. often dilapidates the fire of the being and may even lead in some cases to falling between two stools so that one loses earth and misses heaven. I therefore prefer to replace vairagya by a firm and quiet rejection of what has to be rejected, sex, vanity, ego-centrism, attachment, etc. etc.; but that does not include rejection of the activities and powers that can be made instruments of the sadhana and the divine work, such as art, music, poetry, etc. Yoga can be done without the rejection of life, without killing or impairing the life-joy and the vital force.
I will be praying all the time to you and Mother for the tireless grace you have both shed on me and I really want (believe me) to make some return by personal service. I know I am vain (though I am less now I feel) and full of faults and flaws but if your grace is there I can make some headway as you know too. For instance (this I mention deliberately to help Cohayne), Cohayne’s letter to Mother two days ago imploring her to take him in hand. Here is a man of real intelligence, I have exchanged heaps of letters with him and he was a tireless critic and yet the Mother’s grace and yours has worked through me. My only desire of course was that he should serve you – with all others too I love. That is why I trouble you so about them. Please give Cohayne your force and protection – he is a fine fellow you will find. Can I answer him in the affirmative – you must know he is sincere – but now humble truly.
Well, at present it is better not to write anything too positive. Nowadays, especially, the Mother takes people in such circumstances on probation, she does not give them large immediate assurances, but waits to see how they open. If he justifies his aspiration, all will be well.
Page 65
I have one last request to make to you before I leave. Read the poem in blank verse a la Madhusudan. This ends the series. I know you have not found time to read the second poem – (it was too long?) – I sentcopied by Rani, but this is about the psychic being – a difficult thing to write about – and your Yoga essentially I feel.
I read it, but kept to read again; I return it with this.
So I think you will like it. These three blank verse poems are, I repeat, three of my very best (if not the best) and so I would love you to read this last one. Qu’en dites-vous?
Yes, I shall return it before you leave.
March 11, 1943
I am hard at work (filling up the gap and annotating, etc.) with your talk. I find one gap which if you will please fill up, I will be grateful. You told me (remember?), ‘Thaven’t had the experience of levitation itself but the experience I had could not have been true if there was no levitation.” (I distinctly remembered this as I put it down on paper at 4 p.m. on the 4th.) Could you kindly tell me what the experience was if, that is, it is tellable. I remember Purani once told me that it was at Alipur you found your being in equilibrium from a tilted angle. Is that it?
There were other things but not at present tellable! You can put it like this, “I take levitation as an acceptable idea, because I have had myself experience of the natural energies which if developed would bring it about and also physical experiences which would not have been possible if the principle of levitation were untrue.”
Page 66
April 26, 1943
I enclose a letter from Krishnaprem.
About therapy, etc. I am not genuinely interested. But I confess I am rather intrigued about Surya Deva. Inever thought of worshipping him as a Deva. How about it? Does Krishnaprem mean that Surya is a conscient god?
Yes, obviously.
If it is meant god in the sense that sarvam khalvidam brahma [All this is the Brahman. Chhandogyopanishad, 3.14.1] – the point is lost for why then pick out Surya Deva as a God – the little stream flowing there is surely as much a flowing God?
No, every being and thing is not a god. Well, because he is supposed to be one of the great cosmic Powers – the little stream is not.
I have heard of sun-worshippers (I don’t know if there are moon-worshippers) but I could never take them seriously.
There were both. Even now the Sun and Fire [get] reverence, I believe, from the Parsis. The Gayatri, which is a very potent mantra, centres round Surya.
I don’t like to be in “a parlous state” – but que faire? The sun has never inspired me as a Godhead in the way that a Krishna or a Kali has. How ought I to look on the sun anyhow? I would like not to look at him irreverently, but how can there be positive reverence for one who, for all we know, doesn’t seem to be conscious in the same sense as for instance an Avatar is conscious?
Page 67
Well, if not reverently at least amiably, as a nice and friendly being who removes the darkness.
That is just what Krishnaprem is jocosely damning, your parlous state of ignorance about the occult world and what lies behind things here.
If Krishnaprem were asking you to concentrate on Surya instead of Krishna, you could very obviously retort on him with the sloka from the Gita,
devandevayajo yanti madbhakta yanti mamapi. [To the gods go the worshippers of the gods, but my devotees come to Me.
Bhagavad Gita VII. 23]
But he is not asking that, he only suggests that you should believe in higher worlds and higher beings, divine beings also who are here behind material phenomena, not in the reality of the outer material world alone, after the Aristotelian fashion – though I am under the impression that Aristotle also worshipped the gods, including the Sun (Apollo). I think that is all he is after. But you needn’t bother your head much about Surya at present; if he manifests himself to you in vision or otherwise, then you can begin to take a more active interest in his deity.
April 28, 1943
I have typed what you wrote just now but the last three lines please revise. “I think you need not be eager,” is what you wrote.
I will try to persuade them then to pay more say Rs. 50 for the radio. They will consent I think. I will then write also to the Gramo, as they expected me about the middle of this month. A week out in Madras about the middle of July then ?
I will try the scenario then. Please grant it to me that I may try it as a real spirit of offering. Who knows it may bring what to the Ashram ? I will also write another article for Aria.
Page 68
But please bear with me if I hasten to ask you a question or two. Krishnaprem made me promise I was not to blurt it out to anyone. But as you don’t fall under the category of “anyone” – I must tell you everything – so I have no qualms in asking you.
The sloka I quoted was from the book [Dharmo Pras-angy] of Swami Brahmananda. He says then,
uttamo brahmasadbhavo madhyama dhyanadharana stutirjapodhamo bhavo bahyapujadhamadhama
[The highest is to dwell rightly in the Brahman, meditation and concentration come next. Lowest is prayer and Japa; lower than the lowest is external worship.]
Krishnaprem smiled and said that he could not accept it as true in all cases, as through bahyapuja he has had remarkable objective experiences.
What is meant by bahyapuja? If it is purely external, then of course it is the lowest form; but if done with the true consciousness inside, it can bring the greatest completeness of the adoration by allowing the body and the most external consciousness share in the spirit and act of worship.
The experience which struck me most (and which I would have found it difficult to believe if it came from
some other man) was this that time and again when he offered bhoga to Krishna in the temple, Krishna actually ate it – sometimes whole of it, sometimes a part of it. The bhoga is left for a little while when the curtain is drawn and nobody then is about: it is upstairs and no servant is allowed there inside the temple. So one is forced to accept it. He told me that once such a big part of the bhoga disappeared that the servants who had expected part of it were very much disappointed as the amount was considerable. They deliberated which of the sadhaks ate up such a huge amount. Is this possible? Where does the bhoga go? Does Krishna then eat it up sometimes? If it had been only Krishnaprem’s testimony I would have understood but Motirani (his guru’s daughter, who is very truthful) and his guru both have seen the dwindling of the bhoga often enough! Qu’en dites-vous? Hallucination or day-dreaming can’t account for the disappearance of the anna [food], can it?
Page 69
And three persons saw it repeatedly. So how can this testimony be invalid unless they are solemnly lying. And Krishnaprem does not lie, that everybody knows, and he himself is the pujari – none else does the puja now!
The “scientific” explanation would be that somebody, a servant perhaps, disregarding prohibitions got secretly in and polished off the food of offering when there was nobody to see! That however assumes that occult manifestations are impossible, which is not the case; it is besides only a probable inference or theory. Occultists, or some of them hold that the taking of food offered to unseen beings is, sometimes (but, by not any means always), taken in its subtle elements, leaving the outward body of the food as it was. The natural taking of the food, physically, is rare, but instances are believed to have happened where the bhakti was very strong.
Lastly I would like to ask you about this darshan of Krishna. I have heard many people saw Him. But are there darshans and darshans? You know what I mean? I mean, does Krishna give different kinds of fulfilment to different people according to their need or karma or adhar? Krishnaprem’s guru evidently sees Him with deep devotion and this darshan to her means milan which changes her life completely – necessarily. But say Puranmal, I find his repeated visions of Krishna have not changed much. I give the two instances as I have thought on these lines. In conclusion I would like to know if milan is synonymous with darshan? In our bhaktimarga [path ofbhakti] darshan has been looked upon, very often, as the last grace of the Divine – I mean for the sakar worshippers.
Seeing is of many kinds. There is a superficial seeing which only erects or receives momentarily or for some time an image of the Being seen; that brings no change, unless the inner bhakti makes it a means for change.
Page 70
There is also the reception of the living image of the Divine in one of his forms into oneself – say, in the heart; that can have an immediate effect or initiate a period of spiritual growth. There is also the seeing outside oneself in a more or less objective and subtle-physical or physical way.
As for milan, the abiding union is within and that can be there at all times; the outer milan or contact is not usually abiding. There are some who often or almost invariably have the contact whenever they worship, the deity may become living to them in the picture or other image they worship, may move and act through it; others may feel him always present, outwardly, subtle-physically, abiding with them where they live or in the very room; but sometimes this is only for a period. Or they may feel the Presence with them, see it frequently in a body (but not materially except sometimes), feel its touch or embrace, converse with it constantly – that is also a kind of milan. The greatest milan is one in which one is constantly aware of the Deity constantly abiding in oneself, in everything in the world, holding all the world in him, identical with existence and yet supremely beyond the world – but in the world too one sees, hears, feels nothing but him, so that the very senses bear witness to him alone – and this does not exclude such specific personal manifestations as those vouchsafed to Krishnaprem and his guru. The more ways there are of the union, the better.
P.S. Please forgive me if I ask you to explain what was the darshan of Krishnaprem’s guru when she saw Krishna with open eyes first in her room and then in the temple. Krishnaprem did not see Him but “I have felt Him,” he said with tears in his eyes. So there was evidently some concrete manifestation which the guru visualised and the other felt.
One can receive the manifestation by any of the senses or by a feeling in the consciousness – in the complete objective manifestation there can be sight, hearing, touch, everything.
Page 71
(,..) through service to you – 7 have had enough personal fame and ego-play and all that sort of thing – these change nothing and I feel I can change only through serving you. But how best to do it – ah, that is the question. Here in the concrete what would you have me do? I want to do what you wish me-to do. Please tell me, I ask you very simply and in all sincerity, as you can believe through my tone. I have a feeling of repose and security in me – a new feeling that the inner surrender must be achieved counting no cost as Krishnaprem said and I don’t want to lose it, as it comes of deepening bhakti in me for you and Mother. Please forgive my prolixity. But I need to feel sure of my footsteps. They should not land me in pitfalls. No more ego-play-sanctioning if you please. I leave a little space below.
If you combine records and the radio affair it is perhaps worth doing. I don’t suppose a week out would do any harm. As for the feeling from within, it depends on being able to go inside. Sometimes it comes of itself with the deepening of the consciousness by bhakti or otherwise; sometimes it comes by practice – a sort of referring the matter and listening for the answer – listening is of course a metaphor, but it is difficult to express it otherwise – it doesn’t mean that the answer comes necessarily in the shape of words; spoken or unspoken, though it does sometimes or for some; it can take any shape. The main difficulty for many is to be sure of the right answer. For that it is necessary to be able to contact the consciousness of the Guru inwardly – that comes best by bhakti. Otherwise it may become a delicate and ticklish job. Obstacles; (1) normal habit of relying on outward means for everything; (2) ego, substituting its suggestions for the right answer; (3) mental activity; (4) intruder nuisances. I think you need not be eager for this, but rely on the growth of the inner consciousness. The above is only by way of general explanation.
May 10, 1943
I am writing an article on you for “Aria”. They offered at Almora, as you may remember. They pay handsomely too. I have very nearly finished. I will send it to you tomorrow or the next day in all probability.
Page 72
In the meanwhile I have a question for you as I consider it as important and people seem to cherish very wrong notions hereanent. I will be very grateful if you will throw a little light.
Last night Anilkumar asserted that you said that no matter what guru one has accepted the disciple may realise and then what he realises, under even a humbug guru will be the same thing as what another realises under an Avatar. I find this a little incomprehensible. From what I have gathered from your writings I have an idea that avatars are in a special category and what they achieve can not be achieved through any other intermediary. I don’t know if I am clear but I hope you will understand what my difficulty is. To make it a little more clear: I have felt that though I may have profited by Krishnaprem’s contact I do not need it. I can get all I want from you and what I can get from you he cannot get from his guru – assuming of course that you are what we believe to be. I mean if you were an ordinary guru, Krishnaprem and we would be on a level ground. But since you are not, we are better off spiritually. Is this notion mistaken? I don’t see how it can be. For if I am will not the logical conclusion be that though one can say that there are shishyas and shishyas, one can’t say that there are gurus and gurus? Do you get me? What the blessed use of an avatar is there for a disciple ?
Well, according to this striking and overwhelming theory, the Avatar may have a use for external world changes, but none for internal or spiritual realisation; for, on this principle you can catch anybody in the street or your cook or a butler in the house opposite and make him your guru and go splash into the supreme Brahman – of course leaving behind you the said cook or butler, as his utility is over. I leave to Anilkumar the full responsibility of this invention: I refuse either to patent it or to share in the credit of its discovery. All what I meant was that one can have a guru inferior in spiritual capacity (to oneself or to other gurus) carrying in him many human imperfections, and yet, if you have the faith, the bhakti, the right spiritual stuff, contact the Divine through him, attain to spiritual experiences, to spiritual realisation, even before the Guru himself.
Page 73
Mark the “if – for that proviso is necessary; it is not every disciple who can do that with every guru. From a humbug you can acquire nothing but humbuggery. The guru must have something in him which makes the contact with the Divine possible, something which works even if he is not himself in his outer mind quite conscious of its action. If there is nothing at all spiritual in him, he is not a guru – only a pseudo. Undoubtedly, there can be considerable differences of spiritual realisation between one guru and the other; but much depends on the inner relation between guru and shishya. One can go to a very great spiritual man and get nothing or only a little from him; one can go to a man of less spiritual capacity and get all he has to give – and more. The causes of this disparity are various and subtle; I need not expand on them here. It differs with each man. I believe the guru is always ready to give what can be given, if the disciple can receive, or it may be when he is ready to receive. If he refuses to receive or behaves inwardly or outwardly in such a way as to make reception impossible or if he is not sincere or takes up the wrong attitude, then things become difficult. But if one is sincere and faithful and has the right attitude and if the guru is a true guru, then, after whatever time, it will come.
May 1943
Don’t trouble about the article if it needs too much considering. Consign it to the waste paper basket. I don’t want to take much of your time. I can ask Nolini to write an article on you for Aria. He is the man who can write a proper article. I knew I was not fit for such a task. It is because I thought I might serve you through such an article – a personal article I mean, the only type I feel free in – that I accepted their invitation. If you approve I can ask Nolini to send them an article on yourself. Perhaps it is worthwhile? If not well, let us forget about it.
Page 74
Well, what I am considering is just this, whether it would not be wiser, as far as concerns England or America, to start impersonally with the philosophical side and the side of the Yoga, and leave the person a little behind the scene for the present, until people there are ready as individuals for the personal touch; that is the course we have been following up to now. In India it is different, for here there is another kind of general mentality and there is the tradition of the Guru and the Shishya.
I don’t know about Nolini writing for the Aria. I suppose Mrs Gertrude Sen wanted an article from you personally, a personal article and not a general article on the subject.
May 31, 1943
J send you Bharati’s post card. Her book The Well of the People have you read it?
She writes very good English I thought but I wrote to her declining to say more as I was not a modern. Qu’en dites-vous?(I mean about her book, not about my ancientness)
Very good; her language is excellent. I don’t want to say anything, because when I cannot positively encourage a young and new writer, I prefer to remain mum. It is the symbolic structure of the poem that seems to me rather loose and formless, the poetry lacks grip and bite. But I suppose she will get over these defects in time. Each writer must be left to develop in his own way.
By the way, my drama is getting on fine, really fine, you know! Would you believe it – I believe it is really going
o make a hit – unless I am very much mistaken! Did you send force, I mean, consciously? Not that I wish you didn’t so that I could call it my own handiwork.
Certainly.
Page 75
June 3, 1943
Night before last I sang to a few three songs. The first song was my own ekelar pathe bajao tomar banshi [you are playing your flute on my lonely path], the second on Mother, the third on Krishna: Chandidasa’s famous band-hu ki ar baliba ami, marane jibane janame janame, prananath hoyo tumi.4
J felt a very deep sorrow as I sang it (with tears flowing). It seemed to me life was quite impossible without Krishna (I wish this feeling lasted all the time till His relief came!) as I sang the last couplet,
ankhira nimishe jadi nahi dekhi tabe je parane mari. chandidas kahe? – parasha ratan galay bandhiya pari?5
The sorrow I felt was a qualified sorrow: it was full of sweetness of appeal to Krishna to accept me though with the knowledge (there was the sorrow) that I was not yet acceptable to Him. How to make myself so – that was the cry?
And then Pratibha (la cousine des trois soeurs [the three sisters’ cousin]) saw a beautiful vision with open eyes. Just about one cubit from me – behind me – Kishore Krishna was standing with a “wicked expression “she says, eyeing me in a posture of dance with flute, anklets, etc. – “silvery blue “ his colour and a face of unsurpassable beauty. “I was bewitched by this sheer beauty,” she says, “for you know, Dilip, I have never loved Krishna or sakar bhagavan
_______________________
4 Sri Aurobindo’s translation: “O love, what more shall I, shall Radha speak, Since mortal words are weak? In life, in death, in being and in breath, no other lord but thee can Radha seek.”
5 Sri Aurobindo’s translation: “If one brief moment steal thee from mine eyes, my heart within me dies.”
Page 76
[God with form], being a Brahmo. “ Then yesterday in the evening she saw this same face on Mother’s head – [twining] her neck with His both hands. Pratibha was then moved and came, almost embraced me on the staircase as I was going to pranam Mother in great sorrow that Krishna never gave his darshan to me, but only to others, since such phenomena have happened on several occasions in the past – Sisir, Puranmal and Narayanprasad having been those among the fortunate ones who have seen Krishna as I sang of Him.
I write to you as I feel a great sorrow since – though I feel a deep bhakti too – no despair a proprement parler [strictly speaking] – only very deep sorrow mingled with sweetness. Sorrow also because I cannot, try ever so hard as I would, get a foothold in sadhana proper. But I won’t enlarge on that. I ask you what was the meaning of this manifestation again? Did Krishna want only to make me more sorrowful or was it an unreal subjective vision ? But how to dub it subjective either – when Pratibha asserts that she never cared for Krishna or the gods? I could understand it happening before Yashoda Ma. But why did Krishna show Himself to one who didn’t care for Him at all and never to me who misses His touch so much and feels life and karma almost like a mockery without Him?
Subjective visions can be as real as objective sight – the only difference is that one is of real things in material space, while the others are of real things belonging to other planes down to the subtle physical; even symbolic visions are real in so far as they are symbols of realities. Even dreams can have a reality in the subtle domain. Visions are unreal only when these are merely imaginative mental formations not representing anything that is true or was true or is going to be true.
In this case the thing seen can be taken as true since it has been seen by many and always in the same relation and still more because it has been confirmed by what was seen by Yashodabai and Krishnaprem. It means obviously that your singing by the power of the bhakti it expresses can and does bring the presence of Krishna there.
Page 77
It is not that Krishna “shows himself, “ but simply that he is there and some who have the power of vision catch sight of him and others who have not the power fail to do so. This power of vision is sometimes inborn and habitual even without any effort of development, sometimes it wakes up of itself and becomes abundant or needs only a little practice to develop; it is not necessarily a sign of spiritual attainment, but usually when by practice of Yoga one begins to go inside or live within, the power of subtle vision awakes to a greater or less extent; but this does not always happen easily, especially if one has been habituated to live much in the intellect or in an outward vital consciousness. The question you put does not, then, arise.
I suppose what you are thinking of is “darshan “, the self-revelation of the Deity to the devotee; but that is different, it is an unveiling of his presence, temporary or permanent, and may come as a vision or may come as a close feeling of his presence which is more intimate than sight and a frequent or constant communication with him; that happens by deepening of the being into its inner self and growth of consciousness or by growth of the intensity of bhakti. When the crust of the external consciousness is sufficiently broken by the pressure of increasing and engrossing bhakti, the contact comes. It is already something (and not usual) that the bhakti in the song is sufficient to bring even the unfelt Presence.
June 5, 1943
Prayopavesan [fasting unto death] would be quite the wrong movement, it would be a sort of Satyagraha against the Divine. In essence it is an attempt to force the divine to do what one wants instead of trusting to him to do what is best according to his own divine will and wisdom; it is a culminating act of vital impatience and disappointed desire, while the true movement is a pure aspiration and an ardent surrender.
After all, one has not a right to call on the Divine to manifest himself; it can come only as a response to a spiritual or psychic state of consciousness or to a long course of sadhana rightly done; or, if it comes before that or without any apparent reason, it is a grace; but one cannot demand or compel grace; grace is something spontaneous which wells out from the Divine Consciousness as a free flower of its being.
Page 78
The bhakta looks for it, but he is ready to wait in perfect reliance – even if need be, all his life – knowing that it will come, never varying in his love and surrender because it does not come now or soon. That is the spirit of so many songs of devotees which you have sung yourself; I heard one such song from you in a record sometime ago and very beautiful it was and beautifully sung – “Even if I have not won Thee, O Lord, still I adore. “
What prevents you from having that is the restless element of vital impatience and ever-recurring and persisting disappointment at not having what you want from the Divine. It is the idea, “I wish so much for it, surely I ought to have it, why is it withheld from me? “ But wanting, however strongly, is not a passport to getting; there is something more to it than that. Our experience is that too much vital eagerness and insistence often blocks the way, it makes a sort of obstructing mass or a whirl of restlessness and disturbance which leaves no quiet space for the Divine to get in or for the thing asked for to come. Often it does come, but when the impatience has been definitely renounced and one waits, quietly open, for whatever may be (or, for the time, not be) given. But so often when you are preparing the way for a greater progress in the true devotion, the habit of this vital element starts up and takes hold and interrupts the progress made.
The joylessness also comes from the vital. It is partly due to the disappointment but not solely; for it is a very common phenomenon that when there is a pressure from the mind and soul on the vital, it often gets a rajasic or tamasic vairagya instead of the sattwic kind, refuses to take joy in anything, becomes dry, listless or unhappy, or it says, “Well, why don’t I get the realisation you promised me? I can’t wait. “ To get rid of that, it is best, even while observing it, not to identify oneself with it; if the mind or some part of the mind sanctions or justifies, it will persist or recur. If sorrow there must be, the other kind you described in the previous letter is preferable: the sadness that has a sweetness in it – no despair, only the psychic longing for the true thing to come.
That must come by the increase of the pure and true Bhakti. You have been constantly told so by us and lately by Krishnaprem and his Guru; remember that she told you that the presence of Krishna
Page 79
during your singing was a sure sign that it would come – not necessarily today or tomorrow or the day after, but that it would surely come. We can’t be all of us wrong and your vital impatience only in the right. For heaven’s sake, get rid of it and settle down to quiet aspiration and an ever-growing devotion and surrender, leaving it to Krishna to do what he is sure to do, in his own right way and time.
June 6, 1943
I am very grateful to you for your patient way of showing me the right way. I quite realise that I have somehow got into the wrong habit of over-eagerness. I should rather, as you say, trust in the Divine and accept gratefully whatever He concedes. I remember a prayer of Mother’s:
«J’aurais tort de me plaindre des circonstances de mon existence, ne sont-elles point conformes a ce que je suis?»6 (15.10.1917)
I don’t think I would have continued the prayopavesan. The idea came from a remark ofVivekananda who said to Sri Ma (Sri Ramakrishna Kathamrital “bhagahaner janye prayopabesan korte, teman ichchhe hochchhe koi? (Korbo Master Mahashay ?) Kintu jodi rakhte na pari? “ [Shall I start the fast unto death ? (Shall I start Master Mahashay?) Suppose I fail to keep it up ?]
I had an idea that prayopavesan would succeed if taken up with a sincere conviction that life was meaningless without the Divine. I see now I was wrong: you have convinced me of that – though here perhaps my cowardly fear of an eventual failure in prayopavesan may have somewhat paved the way beforehand that led [??] life so that I accept your arguments a wee bit too readily! (The ingrained reluctance complex too!)
Anyhow – I must sigh like a good child and accept the joylessness since there is no other way of traversing the rest of the Way – and since no other Way I can possibly choose on earth now or ever.
_____________________
6 (Dilipda’s translation:) I have no right to complain of the circumstances of my existence, for are they not in consonance with what I am?
Page 80
Good Heavens, no! I would never recommend to anyone to accept joylessness. On the contrary, I explained that a certain vital movement was the origin of the joylessness, its cause, and what I wanted was the removal of its cause which would necessarily bring about the removal of the effect.
I resolve so often to be a good boy (a little too grownup boy though) and get along with the proper attitude of surrender and trust. But of late the joylessness has been so unrelieved that it has become very difficult. The only reasoning of yours I don’t quite follow is about my vital wanting, choosing complete rajasic or tamasic vairagya! I do so long for joy! Why should I then choose painful vairagya – and of the tamasic kind at that? I have worked hard enough in all conscience. Now, however, I don’t feel any joy at all in any work – not even music which brings only sorrow for which reason I have been seriously thinking of giving up music! Is that because I want to give up music? I don’t know how this conclusion follows. But I won’t argue or question. I accept your judgment as final. If joylessness comes to stay, let it. I will pray for strength to bear it, trusting to Divine Grace to intervene when it will.
No, I didn’t say that you chose the rajasic or tamasic vairagya. I only explained how it came, of itself, as a result of a movement of the vital in place of the sattwic vairagya which is supposed to precede and cause or accompany or result from a turning away from the world to seek the Divine. The tamasic vairagya comes from the recoil of the vital when it feels that it has to give up the joy of life and becomes listless and joyless; the rajasic comes when the vital begins to lose the joy of life but complains that it is getting nothing in its place. Nobody chooses such movements; they come independently of the mind as habitual reactions of the human nature. To refuse these things by detachment, an increasing quiet aspiration, a pure bhakti, an ardent surrender to the Divine, was what I suggested as the true forward movement.
.
Page 81
June 18, 1943
I naturally do not accept your usual solution of going away – I am glad to see, however, that there is a change for the better, since you do not talk of giving up spiritual effort as impossible for you, but, instead, speak of still continuing to pray to Krishna and seek help from him. There is, however, no reason for so much discouragement. You have had a tumble, all the more distressing for you as you thought you had gained fixed mastery – always a dangerous thing to do prematurely as it invites the lower forces to try to prove the opposite. But you have tumbled before and got up and gone farther on the Way. That is what you must do always. Don’t attach so decisive an importance to this passing failure. Of course you must try not to yield even a little, if or when the thing comes up again. But to give up is not admissible.
I thought I had already told you that your turn towards Krishna was not an obstacle. In any case I affirm that positively in answer to your question. If we consider the large and indeed fundamental part he played in my own sadhana, it would be strange if the part he has in your sadhana could be considered objectionable. Sectarianism is a matter of dogma, ritual, etc., not of spiritual experience; the concentration on Krishna is a self-offering to the ishta-deva. If you reach Krishna you reach the Divine; if you can give yourself to him, you give yourself to me. Your inability to identify may be because you are laying too much stress on the physical aspects, consciously or unconsciously. In any case it does not very much matter; we have accepted your loyalty and the devotion of your offering of work and service. All else that is needed can come of itself afterward. There is nothing wrong with your self-offering in works and in service; it is quite what it should be; you have no reason to feel worried about it.
Don’t be too diffident and don’t be too easily discouraged. More resilience in difficulties and more faith in your spiritual destiny!
Page 82
June 24, 1943
(Written on a letter received by Dilipda from a friend who says, “(...) If I am not yet ready to enter the Ashram, may I not be allowed to live nearby, somewhere in peace and solitude?”)
Why does he want to come to Pondicherry for solitude and peace? The Ashram itself is not a place of solitude and peace, much less the town. In any case, one has to get peace in oneself much more than from one’s surroundings.
And, “Alas, Dilip, last night I fell... Perhaps I was too sex-conscious during the day or afraid to be so. Perhaps it would be best for me to forget about sex altogether. Is it not one of those vices that die by neglect but grow by attention ? “
Quite right; but one must be able to neglect it.
June 27, 1943
I am grateful for your answer. I will only ask you one more question, please forgive me, as I feel Krishnaprem is not altogether right about it. I mean about “vivisection. “ Is it unjustifiable? Take Pasteur’s anti-hydrophobic serum which effects a cent per cent cure. It has undoubtedly saved the lives of thousands. Can we seriously say such a serum is an evil and has to be “paid for” as Krishnaprem puts it? If not then vivisection is justified. If not please let me know. It seems to me Krishnaprem has erred here. You only know the full truth so to whom shall I appeal when I certainly don’t know? I leave a little space here.
Page 83
I feel inclined to back out of the arena or take refuge in the usual saving formula, ‘There is much to be said on both sides. “ Your view is no doubt correct from the commonsense or what might be called the “human “ point of view. Krishnaprem takes the standpoint that we must not only consider the temporary good to humanity, but certain inner laws. He thinks the harm, violence or cruelty to other beings is not compensated and cannot be justified by some physical good to a section of humanity or even to humanity as a whole; such methods awake, in his opinion, a sort of Karmic reaction apart from the moral harm to the men who do these things. He is also of the opinion that the cause of disease is psychic, that is to say, subjective and the direction should be towards curing the inner causes much more than patching up by physical means. These are ideas that have their truth also. I fully recognize the psychic law and methods and their prefer-ability, but the ordinary run of humanity is not ready for that rule and, while it is so, doctors and their physical methods will be there. I have also supported justifiable violence on justifiable occasions, e.g., Kurukshetra and the war against Hitler and all he means. The question then, from this middle point of view, about the immediate question is whether this violence is justifiable and the occasion justifiable. I back out.
I enclose Cohayne’s letter, which you will find interesting, I think. I am very glad he is turning in your direction. But tell me has Mother been really sending him force? I ask because I have heard that many indulge fancies, I trust he is not one of them. I found him a very brilliant and honest fellow though he used to be very vain, as he acknowledges now. Do you not think he is changing for the better? If so I would like to convey it to him. I am very contrite about conveying your remarks to Bharati. In future such mistakes will not be repeated. I will first get your permission before I communicate your remarks. One last question: Cohayne alters one line (he suggests, that is) of my war-song. My final version I send today, please tell me which you prefer.
I don’t know whether Mother is sending force in the accepted sense; I haven’t asked her. In any case anyone can receive the force who has faith and sincerity, whose psychic being has begun to wake and who opens himself – whether he knows or not that he is receiving. If Cohayne even imagines that he is receiving, that may open the way to a real reception – if he feels it, why question his feeling. He is certainly trying hard to change and that is the first necessity; if one tries it can always be done, in more or in less time.
Page 84
I have worked very hard of late and wrote a beautiful novel (spiritual) of 200 pages in the last ten days. For sometime now I will compose music as my Gramophone and radio is coming (Madras 22nd, 23rd Gramophone and 25th radio).
Bhisma sang beautifully last night. (...) [Incomplete]
June 29, 1943
I told so to Nirod – yesterday. People so often imagine – so why should not Cohayne imagine? But he doubted my doubts. Now I know that my doubts are more valid than his.
But it is not to write about this that I take up my pen. Last night I was feeling once more at loose ends after my very hard spell of work for the past two months. I was wondering if whenever! tried a little concentration on the Divine this sort of reaction must come. But I won’t plague you with this recurrent trouble of mine which I find it so hard to shake off.
It so happened that this morning I received a letter from Krishnaprem again. It is his certitude I envy – since I am so full of doubts and questionings. Shall I try his remedy – singing to nobody else?
Well, I don’t know. These methods succeed wonderfully sometimes, but not always. It depends on many things and cannot be automatic.
Page 85
N.B. I see from Krishnaprem’s letter that he meant something else. He seems to say, you can sing before others, but sing to Krishna only. That is quite all right.
I am prepared to cancel Madras programme if you so wish. Now-a-days I find no joy in any activity really and won’t in the least mind cancelling Madras.
No; you are doing the Mother’s work there. Besides if you sing of the Divine, what more splendid means can there be of spreading devotion in the hearts of others; that too is a work for the Divine.
Lastly Prithwi Singh told Umichand categorically (in spite of his telling P. that it was not true) that Mother didn’t like singing in the Ashram premises and consented because otherwise Dilip made trouble. He argued and Umichand retorted, etc. I won’t repeat all that. I have no grudge against Prithwi Singh or qui que ce soit. I only want to assure you and Mother very humbly and sincerely that it is not for any ostentation of my musical gifts that I take so much pains in training twenty or thirty sadhaks and sadhikas – it is only under the impression that it may please Mother. But Prithwi Singh receives many letters from Mother (private ones, he tells people) and his tone of certitude gives rise to misgivings.
“One or two perhaps of very private nature – otherwise only ‘love and blessings’ “ or letters written about herself. In any case it is on the Mother’s own word that you must rely and not on what anybody may think that she thinks, etc. The singing is quite all right; the Mother likes it and she has made no objection to the music or singing. Each time she was very well pleased with it.
So please be a little frank with me and ask Mother to be so. If she tolerates it for the reason Prithwi Singh asserts – if, that is, the music gives her no pleasure and disturbs the peace of the ashram, I will be the last person to insist or feel hurt if Mother would rather that I cancelled the chorus I train for her pleasure. I have been very egoistic in the past and no doubt am so even now. But I don’t think that I have ever been so selfish as to inflict something on Mother for my self-love, least of all disturb the Ashram atmosphere like a spoilt child taking advantage of Mother’s kindness to me which certainly I can’t claim I have ever deserved.
Page 86
July 19, 1943
J am leaving tomorrow for Madras. I can honestly say that I have led a very hard working and pure life and tried all the time to equip myself in my work (in music – the compositions have been astonishingly beautiful) for your service. All I want is that I may do it with self-oblivious bhakti. I run on danger. My compositions have of late been so amazingly beautiful that I often catch myself congratulating my genius. I know it is nothing and all gifts are yours, still the weakness of blind egoism you see. I pray genuinely that I may feel it is all yours as it is and I do feel in my stronger moments of insight. But in my egoistic moments I find (I am very sorry for it) I am felicitating myself (as many are doing today) as India’s greatest composer-musician, etc. I am so ashamed of it, Mother. But I know that since I am conscious of it all you will cure me in due course of all this.
Well, that is an almost universal human weakness, especially with artists, poets, musicians and the whole splendid tribe – I have known even great Yogis suffer from just a touch of it! If one can see mentally the humour of it, it will fall off in the end.
For the rest tell me, am I indeed growing through all this towards bhakti for you?
Yes, surely. [Underlined by Sri Aurobindo]
For genius, etc. are all chimeras and phantoms – that I know. All I want to be assured is that I be accepted as your devoted servant.
Page 87
Yes. [Underlined]
I leave tomorrow noon.
You go with our love and blessings. [Underlined by Sri Aurobindo]
July 31, 1943
(Regarding poems written by Dilipda’s friend Bharati.
Re. Bharati’s poem “Left Out “)
This is a fine poem by virtue of its original thought and expression and strongly carved images, and it might have been a great one if there had been the greater poetic cadences. The rhythm here, as in most free verse, though very good in its own kind, is not memorable or inevitable. (Re. the word “furious “ in the poem – 12th line). I would suggest that the omission of this epithet would make the line more restrained and powerful.
(Re. Bharati’s poem “Raiments of the Rainbow “)
This is original – the French word fits best: joli. I agree that she has the stuff of a fine poet in her and these two poems have style.
(Re. Bharati’s poem “Clarity “)
This poem has not much poetical force, though the ideas carry some appeal. It is written in the more obvious modernist style and in the half-conversational free verse language which so many modernists affect and that is seldom successful; even Elliot does not always carry it off. In metre the “conversational-poetic “ style comes off more easily as the rhythmic mould brings in a cadence that gives it poetic value.
Page 88
August 2, 1943
(...) me since she was a girl of twelve in frocks and secondly because she is not only a very gifted person but gave me the impression that she was somehow dissatisfied with life and was tending to become “questful “ as I put it. She told me very candidly her ambitions etc., but asked my advice. I asked her to get into the habit of prayer. She agreed at once as she sorely misses her loved brother who died in a state of spiritual ecstasy saying to their mother, “I have realised, mother, that the meaning of life is in vSb – and I don’t regret to have to leave this life. “ He had become a sort of mystic after his marriage and left business and lived in seclusion. He cast a deep influence on Bharati whose seeking dates from her dear gifted brother’s conversion. She does want to visit Pondicherry next November and I offered to ask her to be my guest in my flat as I have always looked upon her as a little sister of mine.
Please let me know if I can confirm this invitation when she writes as she will soon. For most likely she will come next November or February at the latest – for she is very eager to imbibe your influence.
Well, that is not legally, you know, only psychic. Mother is doubtful about the advisability from the public point of view. If a room is available at the time, Mother will give it, but this is not certain. Permission for darshan is, of course, given.
I can talk well on faith – perhaps you would never have guessed it if I hadn’t told you, what? – and she was much impressed. She is very serious-minded and had depth and firmness of character always – and the whole family has lived a pure abstemious moral life.
Page 89
But they have stopped at ethicality so far – till the death referred to of an idol of the family. So I want you to guide Bharati a little not only with your silent force but with your directions, etc. – a few lines will do as you wrote about her two poems I sent from Madras. You know I have always wanted to bring people I have genuinely loved or liked to your feet – and that with not a shred of egoistic motives. I simply want because I feel they should want also.
But I won’t write more today as I have to write my serial for the Press for which I have offered the royalty to Mother a month or two ago.
Consulting with Rajani I have written to Arup Singh my Sikh friend to contribute for the purse on your 72nd birthday. I hope something will come out of it. Rahim has promised Rs. 100 and R. contributes Rs. 100. So....
I am not surprised that you could not follow the poem all through – probably nobody could really do that except the poet. Somebody once said of modernist poetry that it could be understood only by the writer himself and appreciated by a few friends who pretended to understand it. That is because the ideas, images, symbols don’t follow the line of the intellect, its logic or its intuitive connections, but are pushed out on the mind from some obscure subliminal depth or mist-hung shallow; they have connections of their own which are not those of the surface intelligence. One has to read them not with the intellect but with the solar plexus, try not to understand but feel the meaning. The surrealist poetry is the extreme in this kind – you remember our surrealist Baron’s question, “Why do you want poetry to have a meaning? “ Of course, you can put an intellectual explanation on the thing, but then you destroy its poetical appeal. Very great poetry can be written in that way from the subliminal depths, e.g. Mallarme, but it needs a supreme power of expression, like Blake’s or Mallarme’s, to make it truly powerful, convincing, and there must be sincerity of experience and significant rhythm. In this poem the rhythm is not there throughout and sometimes the writing becomes too mental and falls from the deeper inspiration towards the obvious; some images are rather forced; but these defects are inevitable in a technique like this, for it is the most difficult to maintain if the poem is of some length. I have marked the passages that struck me most, those that reach a certain kind of perfection; there are others that come near it.
Page 90
August 8, 1943
I didn’t really want to trouble you now – knowing how very busy you are, but a question of Bharati I find myself somewhat incompetent to answer and I can’t think of any letter of yours hereanent. [ “Can you tell me where I can find an explanation between ‘vital and nervous emotion’ and ‘purified emotion’? “] I send you her letter as you will find she is growing in her seeking. Also she calls upon me to renew contact with her father who used to love me much years ago. It maybe that she, and through her, her father who dotes on her, may turn, that is why I invite your attention – not for any selfish purpose.
By “vital emotion “ is meant emotion generated and supported for the nonce by the vital – is it? But vital does include nervous too, does it not? I talked to her of the necessity through Yoga of purifying the emotions as she is emotional though not of the nervous type. But I told her vital emotions were not helpful if one wanted to touch spiritual depths though spiritual experience needed vital power to find full poetic expression. I hope I didn’t err here. But I am not quite clear about the nervous as I have not lived on the nerves except in rare moments of sudden outbursts of anger. So I ask you to explain. But first read her letter, please.
The nervous part of the being is a portion of the vital – it is the vital-physical, the life-force closely enmeshed in the reactions, desires, needs, sensations of the body. The vital proper is the life-force acting in its own nature, impulses, emotions, feelings, desires, ambitions, etc.,
Page 91
having as their highest centre what we may call the outer heart of emotion, while there is an inner heart where are the higher or psychic feelings and sensibilities, the emotions and intuitive yearnings and impulses of the soul. The vital part of us is, of course, necessary to our completeness, but it is a true instrument only when its feelings and tendencies have been purified by the psychic touch and taken up and governed by the spiritual light and power.
August 9, 1943
Your answer “no “ to Cohayne’s offer to transfer legally his possessions prompts me to ask you again a question or two as I have to reply to him. What shall I write? Have you really accepted him? I ask this as I have to proceed on that basis. Or if you want to see him once shall I ask him to come for few days in this darshan or November so that you may form a judgment of his capacities? Or shall I write to him to send say some monthly contributions (as much as he can conveniently spare) as a spiritual concentrating on Mother and yourself so that things will progress till he can come here profitably for a darshan. I am a little in the dark as to whether you regard him as a would-be disciple – for he, evidently, considers himself a disciple of yours already. Qu’en dites-vous? Sorry to trouble you but you seel am a little bit in a difficulty – can’f assure him of your support, etc. without your express consent.
Up to now he has not been either accepted or rejected; he is being given his chance. Of course Mother doesn’t want to accept his offer of his property; that could happen, if at all, only much later on, that is, if he stood the test and became a real disciple and progressed very much in his Yoga. Also, there is something morbid in his vital (his letters about himself give that impression). Mother did not want him to be here at present, but that does not mean that he is rejected. All this however should not be told to him, as it might interfere with his chance. For instance the will to give his property or by feeling that internally he has offered it, may help his progress, even though externally it cannot be accepted now.
Page 92
August 10, 1943
The Mother was quite as usual and your inference is quite wrong – that she was displeased at your coming to pranam. She is under the impression that she blessed you as usual and, if by accident it was otherwise, it was quite unintentional. You must get a stronger faith in her love and affection and not yield to these ideas. When this cloud comes upon you, it always makes you see things wrongly. Why on earth should you suppose that you are not helping and cannot be of service? It is not in the least true. I hope you will dispel les nuages [the clouds] at once and come quite clear of them to the Darshan with the taste for life recovered and ready to go forward on the path towards the divine Love and Ananda.
September 3, 1943
(Krishnaprem’s letter to Dilipda dated 25 August 1943)
Thanks for your booklet of poems...
As regards my remark that violence never pays and the question of “justifiable violence on justifiable occasions “ – the point is a subtle one (as indeed are most points if pursued to the end! In fact they are apt to have the Euclidean character of position without magnitude!).
Certainly I agree that the “ordinary run “ of humanity is not ready for subtle therapies. But I was not talking of or to the “ordinary run “ but to you as a Sadhaka. The ordinary man must and will have his appendix operated on under certain conditions, and even for the sadhaka whether he uses medical violence on certain occasions will have to depend on the degree of his inner attainment. I was putting forward a guiding principle rather than a mere practical rule. ‘Violence never pays’ meant that in some form or other it has to be paid for though on some occasions such paying of the price may be the lesser of the two evils.
Page 93
To pass from the merely medical to the wider question: Yes, I certainly think Kurukshetra was ‘historical’ as well as adhyamatic (all the acts of a Mahapurusha have that twofold quality and, for that matter so have the acts of all men in a more limited degree – limited because of their inner disharmony). I don’t know just when Kurukshetra occurred but I am quite sure the narrative has a substantial historical basis. I certainly hold that the instructions to Arjuna (in the Gita) have their outer as well as inner application. Does Krishna then support violence on occasions? Undoubtedly and on many occasions. For instance, apart from making use of violence in men. He supports violence by the Gods, e.g. in earthquakes, etc. (I hope you are not so ‘modern’ as to be scandalised by a reference to the Gods who are just as factual as you or I but in a different mode). Even if I were to say that violence is not for the Brahmin I shall still be confronted with Drona and Parashurama. Clearly I could not support the point. Violence is part of the manifestation but perhaps it would be correct to say that it is the last resort and always has to be paid for. Its results are not permanent (because not harmonious). Notice that Krishna makes no attempt to deny Arjuna’s gloomy prognostications about the evil results of the war and that in fact they did take place though of course they were not the only results. Moreover, even if on Kurukshetra’s field Krishna was weaponless, on other occasions he was by no means so.
What can I say in the end but as Brahma said to Krishna in Brindaban, “Let those who know, know: what can I say save that your powers are beyond the range of my body, mind and speech.
Page 94
“ All I know is that there is truth in the principle I enunciated and an important truth for you and me. How much truth and what are the limitations (limitations are invariably and inevitably present in all mental formations) I do not know. Hitler as Duryodhana? Again I do not know. He may be or again he may be much less than that. It is too fatally easy to see Krishna’s enemies or even Arjuna’s enemies in those who one may feel to be enemies of one’s own connection. I detest nearly all that I have heard of Hitler (which, incidentally, is not true of Duryodhana) but are the statements that have come my way all true, are they all a decently complete selection of the facts? I do not know. I know that the would-be Fuehrer in myself is evil but is the man Hitler essentially or only accidentally (in the philosophic sense of the term) a manifestation of that inner archetype of the would-be dictator? I do not know. If I felt called to take part in the outer conflict I would certainly fight against him with all my heart. But an outer Arjuna has not yet come within the range of my vision and that makes me suspicious. One there is who is certainly present even to my weak eyes and He is, as ever, in the midst of it, but if I take them off Him even for a little and look around for anyone else, the fog of ego-blindness comes down and blots out everything. ‘Yatra Yogeswara Krishna’ (where Krishna is, there will be victory, prosperity, etc.). Yes, but He is always everywhere. What about Partha-dhanurdhara ? Is the roaring noise of the Anglo-American aeroplanes the pratyancha of the great Gandiva bow? Again I do not know, so I must be silent and watch only the One whom I can see. If I could see Him more clearly I should be able to recognise others too; but at present I cannot and therefore I remained silent when you talked of Hitler. But that certainly does not mean that I have any sort of sympathy for him. If all that we have heard is an adequate selection of the facts about him then he seems to be one who has given himself to the service of evil forces and who is fated to be torn to pieces by the powers he serves.
Page 95
Perhaps you feel that it is our duty to take a side even if only in thought. Well, if you feel so by all means do so, but, for myself, I feel that if one can keep one’s gaze fixed on Krishna, however feeble our powers, we shall be doing something, however little, towards removing the fog of illusion, the Rakshasi maya, that envelopes the whole field and so will be doing what little we can towards helping others to see more clearly. And that is all I can say about that.
You say that sectarianism sometimes makes you doubt whether even a spiritual sadhana can always help to enlarge the mind and heart. In time, yes, but not always, at once – and we are too impatient. Moreover it must be a truly spiritual sadhana, that is, one performed for the sake of the Spirit alone. Only too often the sadhaka, while invoking the name of the Spirit, is contentedly serving ego-interests and then of course little, if any, true widening takes place. One trouble is that many of the sadhanas that appeal particularly to the modern educated mind are what may be called ‘manipulative’ – that is, they recoil from sheer self-giving to Krishna and seek to attain the goal by self-directed manipulation of the psyche. Many, perhaps most, versions of ashtanga yoga, come under this head, and at least some versions of advaita vedanta. It is doubtless possible but I think very difficult for the modern man to go through to the true goal by such manipulative methods. The curious thing is that it is just these methods that are apt to appeal most to the modern mind. There is a terrible danger of being side-tracked into serving the interests of a merely glorified ego. Another trouble even where self-giving is attempted, is that we sometimes identify Krishna’s lila with our own hopes and desires and then proceed to serve the latter under the name of the former! But why worry about all this? The world is full of illusions and will-o’-the-wisps. The only true light is that which streams out from Krishna’s feet, the akasha-ganga which streams through all the worlds. “See where Christ’s blood flows through the firmament “ as Faust cried out, too late and in despair. Forget your problems (they are endless) and your doubts, as your Guru says, settle down to aspiration and devotion, “leaving it to Krishna to do what He is sure to do in His own right way and time. “
Page 96
Your visit was a joy to us all. Have no doubts of what is quite certain and you will surely find Him at the right time. In our blindness we are naturally impatient but it is on a dark night that He is born.
P.S. I had finished this and was reading the Bhagavat this morning and came across this which is perhaps appropriate after my remarks about manipulative methods:
yamadibhiryogapathaih kamalobhahato muhuh
mukundasevaya yadvattatlratmaddha na samyati
‘The mind, attached constantly by desire and greed does not so certainly attain calm by the practice of ashtanga yoga as by the service of (devotion to) Mukunda.’
September 4, 1943
I just received (2.9.43) a letter from Krishnaprem in which he has qualified his objection to violence as his letter enclosed will explain. I have no doubt hereanent specially after your approval of violence against Hitler who has become such a menace to civilisation. Only one point sometimes gives rise to misgivings in me. This I told Nolini when he read out to us his masterly analysis on the values at stake in this War and the real issue: it is his comparing this war to Kurukshetra implying (when he identified Hitler’s cause with the Asura’s) that the Allies were here the Pandavas which is exactly what troubles Krishnaprem. You know I had never, from the very beginning, doubted the wisdom of having all our efforts (the entire humanity’s) directed and all our available forces organised against Hitler; but is it not unwise to compare him with Duryodhana (though I myself have done it), for then do not the Allied Powers become the Pandavas, by a kind of inference as it were? I have received of late from correspondents and friends objections to this our dubbing the Allies as ‘modern Pandavas’.
Page 97
Those were protagonists of virtue (dharma) and unselfishness which can hardly be said of the Allies who are all exploiters of weaker races and imperialistic. Krishnaprem too has felt doubtful about the Allies being as exemplary as the Pandavas. Could you kindly throw some light on this question? It is, I think, somewhat important, that is why I ask.
What I have said is not that the Allies have never done wrong things, but that they stand on the side of the evolutionary forces. I have not said that at random, but on what to me are clear grounds of fact. What you speak of is the dark side. All nations and governments have shown that side in their dealings with each other – at least all who had the strength and got the chance. I hope you are not expecting me to believe that there are or have been virtuous governments and unselfish and sinless peoples? It is only individuals and not too many of them who can be described in that style. But there is the other side also. Your correspondents are condemning the Allies on grounds that people in the past would have stared at, on the basis of modern ideals of international conduct; but looked at like that, all big nations and many small ones have black records. But who created these ideals or did most to create them (liberty, democracy, equality, international justice and the rest)? Well, America, France, England – the present Allied nations. They have all been imperialistic and still bear the burden of their past, but they have also deliberately spread these ideals and introduced self-governing bodies and parliamentary institutions, where they did not exist; and whatever the relative worth of these things, they have been a stage, even if a still imperfect stage, in a forward evolution. (What about the others? What about the Axis’ new order? Hitler, for example, says it is a crime to educate the coloured peoples, they must be kept as serfs and labourers.) England has helped certain nations to be free without seeking any personal gain; she has conceded independence to Egypt and Eire after a struggle, to Irak without a struggle. On the whole, she has been for some time moving away steadily from imperialism towards a principle of free association and co-operation; the British commonwealth of England and the Dominions is something unique and unprecedented, a beginning of new things in that direction.
Page 98
She is turning in spirit in the direction of a world-union of some kind after the war; her new generation no longer believes in an “imperial mission “; she has offered India Dominion independence, or even if she prefers it she can choose or press on to isolated independence after the war, on the base of an agreed free constitution to be chosen by Indians themselves; and though, it has been feared, this leaves a loophole for reactionary delay, it is in itself extremely reasonable and it is the Indians themselves with their inveterate habit of disunion who will be responsible if they are imbecile enough to reject the opportunity. All that is what I call evolution in the right direction – however slow and imperfect and hesitating. As for America she has forsworn her past imperialistic policies in regard to Central and South America, in Cuba, the Philippines – everywhere apart from some islands in the Pacific which would go plop into other hands if she withdrew from them. It is perhaps possible, some suggest, that she may be tempted towards a sort of financial imperialism, the rule of the Almighty American dollar, by her new sense of international power, or led into other mistakes, but if so she may find [succour] from her other strong tendencies that she will soon withdraw from it. The greater danger is that she may retire again into a selfish isolationism after the war and so destroy or delay the chance of a possible beginning that they may [lead eventually] to [some] beginning of a free world-union. But still there again is the evolutionary force. Is there a similar trend on the part of the Axis? The answer is plain enough both from their own declarations and their behaviour. Avowedly and open, Nazi Germany today stands for the reversal of this evolutionary tendency, for the destruction of the new international outlook, the new Dharma, for a reversion not only to the past, but to a far back primitive and barbaric ideal. She fully intended to impose it on the whole earth, but would have done so if she had had, as for a time she seemed to have, the strength to conquer. There can be no doubt or hesitation here, if we are for the evolutionary future of mankind, we must recognize that it is only the victory of the Allies that can save it. At the very least, they are at the moment the instruments of the evolutionary forces to save mankind’s failure, and the declaration of their [aims] show that they are conscious of it. Other elements and notions there are, but the main issue is here. One has to look at things on all sides, to see them steadily and whole. Once more, it is the forces working behind that I have to look at, I don’t want to go blind among surface details. The future has first to be safeguarded; only then can present troubles and contradictions have a chance to be solved and eliminated.
Page 99
For us the question put by you does not arise. The Mother made it plain in a letter which has been made public that we did not consider the war as a fight between nations and governments (still less between good people and bad people) but between two forces, the Divine and the Asuric. What we have to see is on which side men and nations put themselves; if they put themselves on the right side, they at once make themselves instruments of the Divine purpose in spite of all defects, errors, wrong movements and actions (past or present or possible backsliding in the future) which are common to human nature and to all human collectivities. The victory of one side (the Allies) would keep the path open for the evolutionary forces; the victory of the other side would drag back humanity, degrade it horribly and might lead even, at the worst, to its failure as a race, as others in the past evolution failed and perished. That is the whole question and all other considerations are either irrelevant or of a minor importance. The Allies at least stood for human values, though they may often have acted against their own best ideals (human beings always do that); Hitler stands for diabolical values or for human values exaggerated in the wrong way until they become diabolical (e.g. the “virtues “ of the Herrenvolk, the master race). That does not make the English or Americans nations of spotless angels nor the Germans a wicked and sinful race, but as an indicator it has a decisive importance.
Nolini, I suppose, gave the Kurukshetra example not as an exact parallel but as a traditional instance of a war between two world-forces in which the side favoured by the Divine triumphed, because its leaders made themselves his instruments. I don’t suppose he envisaged it as a battle between virtue and wickedness or between good and evil men or intended to equate the British with the Pandavas, nations with individuals or even individuals with individuals, or shall we say, Stafford Cripps with Yudhishtir, Churchill with Bhima and General Montgomery with Arjuna? After all, were even the Pandavas virtuous without defect, calm and holy and quite unselfish and without passions? There are many incidents in the Mahabharata which seem to show the contrary, that they had their defects and failings.
Page 100
And in the Pandava army and its leaders there must have been many who were not paragons of virtue, while there were plenty of good men and true on Duryodhana’s side. Unselfishness? but were not the Pandavas fighting to establish their own claims and interests – just and right, no doubt, but still personal claims and self-interest? Theirs was a righteous battle, dhaima-yuddha, but it was for right and justice in their own case. The Allies have as good or even a better case and reason to call theirs a righteous quarrel, for they are fighting not only for themselves, for their freedom and very existence, but for the existence, freedom, maintenance of natural rights of other nations, Poles, Czechs, Norwegians, Belgians, Dutch, French, Greece, Yugoslavia and a vast number of others not yet directly threatened; they too claim to be fighting for a Dharma, for civilized values, for the preservation of ideals and in view of what Hitler represents and openly professes and what he wishes to destroy, their claim has strong foundations. And if imperialism is under all circumstances a wickedness, then the Pandavas are tinted with that brush, for they used their victory to establish their empire continued after them by Parikshit and Janamejaya. Could not modern humanism and pacifism make it a reproach against the Pandavas that these virtuous men (including Krishna) brought about a huge slaughter (alas for Ahimsa!) that they might establish their sole imperial rule over all the numerous free and independent peoples of India? Such a criticism would be grotesquely out of place, but it would be a natural result of weighing ancient happenings in the scales of modern ideals. As a matter of fact such an empire was a step in the right direction then, just as a world-union of free peoples would be a step in the right direction now – and in both cases the right consequences of a terrific slaughter.7 I don’t see why Hitler should
_______________
7Who are the people who have such a tenderness for Hitler and object to his being compared to Duryodhana? I hope they are not among those (spiritual people among them, I am told) who believe – or perhaps once believed? – Hitler to be the new Avatar and his religion (God help us!) to be the true religion which we must help to establish throughout the wide world? Or among those who regard Hitler as a great and good man, a saint, an ascetic and all that is noble and god-like?
Page 101
not be compared to Duryodhana, except that Duryodhana, if alive, might complain indignantly that the comparison was a monstrous and scandalous injustice to him and that he never did anything like what Hitler has done. By the way, what about Krishna’s “jahi satmm, bhunjasva rajyaiii sainrddham”? [Overcome the enemy, enjoy the rich kingdom.] An unholy and unethical bribe? Or what on earth did he mean by it? But battle and conquest and imperial rule were then a Dharma and consecrated by a special form of sacrifice. We should remember that conquest and rule over subject peoples were not regarded as wrong either in ancient or mediaeval times and even quite recently but as something great and glorious; men did not see any special wickedness in conquerors or conquering nations. Just government of subject peoples was envisaged, but nothing more – exploitation was not excluded. No doubt, many nations in the past were jealous of their own independence and some like the Greeks and later the English had the ideal of freedom [?] of individual liberty. But the [passion] for individual liberty went along in ancient times with the [institution] of slavery which no Greek democrat ever thought to be wrong; no Greek state [or peoples] thought it an injustice to take away the freedom of other [peoples], still less of foreign peoples, or decried it when found to rule over subject races. The same inconsistency has held sway over ideas [until recent] times and still holds sway over [international] [practice] even now. The modern ideas on the subject, the right of all to liberty, both individuals and nations, the immorality of conquest and empire, or, short of such absolutist compromises as the British idea of training subject races for democratic freedom, are new values, an evolutionary movement, a new Dharma which has only begun slowly and initially to influence practice – an infant Dharma that would be throttled for good if Hitler succeeded in his “Avataric “ mission and established his new “religion “ over all the earth. Subject nations naturally accept the new Dharma and severely criticise the old imperialisms; it is to be hoped that they will practise what they now preach when they themselves become strong and rich and powerful. But the best will be if a new world-order evolves which will make the old things
Page 102
impossible – a difficult task, but not, with God’s grace, absolutely impracticable.
The Divine takes men as they are and uses them as His instruments even if they are not flawless in character, without stain or sin or fault, exemplary [?], or angelic, holy and pure. If they are of good will, if, to use the Biblical phrase, they are on the Lord’s side, that is enough for the work to be done. Even if I knew that the Allies (I am speaking of the “big “ nations, America, Britain, China) would misuse their victory or bungle the peace or partially at least spoil the opportunities open to the human world by that victory, I would still put my force behind them. At any rate things could not be one-hundredth part as bad as they would be under Hitler. The ways of the Lord would still be open – to keep them open is what matters. Let us stick to the real issue and leave for a later time all side-issues and minor issues or hypothetical problems that would cloud the one all-important and tragic issue before us.
P.S. This is in answer to what is implied in your letter and, I suppose, in those of your correspondents, not to anything in Krishnaprem’s letter. His observations are all right, but circumstances alter cases. Ours is a Sadhana which involves not only devotion or union with the Divine or a perception of Him in all things and beings but also action as workers and instruments and a work to be done in the world, a spiritual force to be brought on the world, under difficult conditions; then one has to see one’s way and do what is commanded and support what has to be supported, even if it means war and strife carried on whether through chariots and bows and arrows or tanks and cars and American bombs and planes, in either case a ghoram karma [a dreadful work]: the means and times and persons differ, but it does not seem to me that Nolini is wrong in seeing in it the same problem as in Kurukshetra. As for wars, violence etc. the use of force to maintain freedom for the world, for the highest values of human civilisation, the salvation of humanity from a terrible fate, etc. the old command rings out once again after many ages for those who must fight or support that battle for the right: mayaivaite nihatahpun’ameva nimittamatram bhava savyasacin. [By Me and none other already even are they slain, do thou become the occasion only, O Savyasachin. Gita, 11.33]
Page 103
October 1, 1943
Anilbaran has written an article in Anandabazar (26.9.43) entitled “Anaharey Mrityu “. Hiren came and showed it to me this morning. Anilbaran has offered a solution which to us – we are many – seems impracticable. Besides it sounds unrealistic. Monihas said that he can write a stinging reply to this absurd article but he doesn’t dare to as you would be displeased.
No, sir. There is enough fighting between sadhaks in the Ashram; a public pugilistic encounter would be superfluous and undesirable.
I felt inclined also to write a protest but desist as I learn from Hiren that Anilbaran has told him that not to accept all that he has said in this article means that one refuses to accept your authority – the premiss being that you have sanctioned the article. I understand about a dozen people are quite amused by Anilbaran’s solution. It is not my intention to probe the rationality of the article. All I want to ascertain (though I know Anilbaran is wrong or mistaken if you will in thinking that an article sanctioned by you for publication ought to be accepted by all...
That is obviously nonsense.
...on pain of being dubbed disloyal otherwise) is this:
1) Am I not free to judge any article by any sadhak on its merits and give my opinion on its worth?
2) The fact that you have sanctioned an article for publication only means (if anything) that you don’t think it is harmful to your cause. That is all. More is not binding on me to accept. Am I not right?
Yes; it does not mean that I agree with all or anything written in the article. There are only two subjects on which I am often rigid, Yoga and politics. And of course anything that may happen to be undesirable to publish, I reserve the right to ban.
Page 104
3) Anilbaran categorically says to Hiren, “You should leave the Ashram if you don’t agree with my views in the article. “ Upon which Hiren retorted, “Who are you to order me to leave? I won’t. “ “Then you will go mad/’said Anilbaran. Hiren is (forgive the humour) a little scared at the prospect and asked me, “Shall I go mad? “ “Not more than you are, “ I say laughing.
What’s all that rubbish? If Anilbaran really said such things (Hiren’s versions of what people have said, are not always extremely accurate, they tend to take a dramatic turn), he must have been in a singularly Hitleric mood – unless he was ragging Hiren. That is, if he said these things at all, which I shall believe only when I get better evidence.
But jokes apart, is it not something like madness to menace an opponent with madness on a relatively unimportant issue – I mean unimportant to us here in the Ashram?
Please forgive me Guru, and don’t think I encouraged Hiren to sow disharmony. I didn’t even tell him that I would write to you. I only accepted his letter written to you to forward it – not because I regard him (or anybody else) as my protege (1 mix very little with him or others now-a-days – either write or read or do japa of Mother’s name and don’t thank god, suffer from my egoistic impulses as of yore). I only ask this to be sure of what I told him very calmly – to dismiss all Anilbaran said and that there is no chance of his going mad if he disagreed with Anilbaran.
Well, anybody can go mad, I suppose, in this already very mad world where lunatics can be Fuehrers and start world wars, but it won’t be because they disagree with Anilbaran, or anybody else. That would be a new aetiology of madness and not at all valid. But surely Hiren must be romancing or, at the least, “curulating “?
Page 105
I told him at the same time, mind, that if it were an article on war and Hitler, etc. I would not say it didn’t matter. But that it being a social question one was free. The question remains (I confess I am still a little puzzled) why should Anilbaran make such a foolish assertion. I have never thought him to be a very intelligent man (like Moni e.g., to say nothing of Nolini) but that one could threaten like this of madness, etc. seems to me to be so utterly childish! Please....
His writing has certain qualities, very valuable in my judgment, but of a kind quite different from Nolini’s or Moni’s.
P.S. I won’t write poems for a day or two as I have to write the next serial for a spiritual novel for which they have offered me Rs. 50. (I gave Mother) and will give Rs. 75 more. So.
Also since I have written so much why not put another question? Yesterday Annada Sankar Roy12 (I.C.S. whom you know who has now turned spiritual and has described my Bengali poems in his P.E.N, book on Bengali literature as “poems of a flame-like purity “, etc.) wrote to me not to write English verses. His argument is the old one: you can’t create first-class stuff in a learned language. And then where Tagore too has failed, etc. You know all that.
What was the failure? Tagore’s Gitanjali had an immense success.
I am not troubled as I write in English because 1)1 like to,
2) it puts me in a right attitude. But I often think of this problem. I now-a-days feel if I stick on I may produce in English too some first-class poems. Am I really only deluding myself? It is on this point I want your opinion. Please give it freely I won’t be hurt even if you say as poems my English poems are not worth much. For I know I don’t write from egoistic motives and that I feel very humble when I write (in English or Bengali).
Page 106
Yet it would be interesting – even if somewhat discouraging – to know your frank opinion about my poems having promise and potentiality or not. You see, lately I have often been something like impelled to write – if not possessed. I am conscious of my defects yet I do feel the inspiration wherever it may come from. Am I wrong here?
No.
It is not true in all cases that one can’t write first-class things in a learned language. Both in French and English people to whom the language was not native have done remarkable work, although that is rare; What about Jawaharlal’s autobiography? Many English critics think it first-class in its own kind; of course he was educated at an English public school, but I suppose he was not born to the language. Some of Toru Dutt’s13 poems, Sarojini’s,14 Harin’s have been highly praised by good English critics, and I don’t think we need be more queasy than Englishmen themselves. Of course there were special circumstances, but in your case also there are special circumstances; I don’t find that you handle the English language like a foreigner. If first-class excludes everything inferior to Shakespeare and Milton, that is another matter. I think as time goes on, people will become more and more polyglot and these mental barriers will begin to disappear.
My view of your poetry is different from Annada’s. Some of your poems have seemed to be of a high order and others very good, and if you go on improving your height and power of expression as you have recently done, I don’t see why you should not write first-class things – if you have not done some already. But on that I don’t want to pronounce definitively, as usually I have read your poems and returned them at once, so there was only a first impression and that does not always last; I shall have to keep the best of them by me for some time and let them stand the test of frequent reading. But I have found them increasingly good and some of them, especially recent ones really fine and distinctive in thought and style – I don’t think I could have felt that if they were without true value. In spite of Annada, I would regard it as a sort of psychic calamity, if you stopped in the good way at anybody’s suggestion. If for nothing else they would be worth doing as an expression of bhakti (the Indian kind) which in English poetry has had till now no place.
Page 107
October 4, 1943
I had to wound a fellow-sadhak to the quick with blunt and offensive words. You know it is against my nature to be cruel to people or hurt them with harsh words, (e.g. I told him that I could not believe him even if he protested innocence till he was blue.) But I can’t admit that I was wrong in flaring up as I did when he was lying and insinuating against the fairness of our Guru. I know in the heat of the moment one tells things one really doesn’t really mean. But I have always noticed his deep dissatisfaction against your war-views (he hates the British like poison) and suffers. I pity him for that but I can do no more as I can’t sympathise with his blind hatred of the nation whom you support against Hitler. Please correct me Guru if I need correction. I will accept it all with genuine and willing humility.
I wrote yesterday three hundred and twenty-six lines (blank verse) in English on Pralhad. I think it was inspired by you. But I need your inspiration again as it is all broken and I am in a most unpoetic mood now. I will sit and meditate and take Mother’s name now.
You did nothing wrong certainly, in giving a piece of your mind to Hiren. He needed it badly and it would be good if it made an impression on him, but usually people are too self-satisfied to profit. Rubbish about “advanced sadhaks “ – the old old meaningless phrase; there is no such class of sadhaks in the Ashram. Anyhow advanced sadhak or non-advanced or no sadhak, I am not going to believe such incredible statements against anyone or Hiren’s scintillating reports. I note however that in his letter to me he tells a different and more credible story – that Anilbaran was speaking about settled disbelief in the Guru, which is a different affair altogether. The matter may drop, since all is now clear.
Page 108
October 10, 1943
(This letter is addressed to Sri Aurobindo and Mother)
Maya has just written a letter which I enclose. She asks me to preside over Esha’s marriage on the 29th of November, asking my forgiveness.
I have had no occasion to change my view of Maya’s conduct. You may remember my reply to her last overtures for reconciliation. I told her very clearly (in my letter to Esha a couple of years back) that there could be no question of reconciliation between me and Maya unless and until she repented of her conduct in 1938 and that ours was not a Yoga which could accept any compromise on this point. She has insulted my guru and so unless there was a genuine repentance I could not offer my hand of “forgiveness “. I have, personally, never nursed anger against her: it is not with me a question of anger or retaliation. I pray for Maya still that she may repent and turn to you. But I can’t do anything which brings any distance between you and me. It has always been unthinkable for me and today it is impossible, absolutely, when I feel I must belong to you only and to none other. How else can I make you any return for what I owe to you? Your trust in me and confidence in my loyalty is my greatest reward for what little I can offer you, my life. I have little to give. The more reason why I should want to turn towards you so that what I can give might be more worth giving than it is today even though it can never be worthy enough as an offering to your feet. I have been writing a long poem in English on Prahlad and ahaituki bhakti, and the bhakti I speak of is my bhakti to you. (You will see that poem in a day or two – I am typing it.) But I must not only talk of bhakti but live it And to live it I must do only what you wish me to do and approve of in my sadhana. Maya writes she has written to you for your blessing. May I ask you frankly (and you have been frank with me always – another great grace) what she has written? Also if you are satisfied (in case she has asked your forgiveness too as she has asked mine) of her sincerity? If not there is an end of the matter. I will write then to Esha (as tenderly as I can to Esha alonej that I cannot possibly preside. Will you please let me have your views on the matter? I can safely assure you that I have no personal wish in the matter and will do what you wish me to do. You have only to command me and it will be obeyed not only willingly but gladly.
Page 109
Well, I don’t know that there is much repentance in the affair. She is sorry she had to do what she did; she never had any desire to insult us or any bad motive against us; she asks for forgiveness for all her aparadhas against us. Evidently now that Esha is being married, she wants to make up with you and with us – that much, I suppose, is quite genuine. On our side, though she did much harm, our work cannot really suffer from the acts of any individual, it goes on without being affected by what people think or do against it, so we can very well overlook the past – that does not mean any effusive reconciliation. Mother suggests that you might write to Esha and ask her whether this marriage proceeds from her own will or has her free and full consent or she is marrying under pressure from her mother; if the former, for her sake you will attend the marriage and do the sampradan.
October 20, 1943
(Re: Bengal famine)
I have been feeling very sad of late reading newspapers and talking to friends from Calcutta. The misery there is rampant. At such a time should I go to take part in a marriage festivity where Maya and the Rajas family will spend thousands? Is this attitude a mere sentimental attitude? I can only ask you who know? If it were Your work I would go of course. But it is not your work, is it? Out of pity for Esha ? Is that a reason that ought to weigh ? Please tell me and send me a little force to drive away this sentimental sadness. Is it klaibyam ma sma gamah partha [O Partha!
Yield not to unmanliness. Gita 2.3] Please tell me.
Page 110
The Mother suggests that you can make it a condition for going that a certain percentage, say ten per cent of the amount of the marriage expenses should be given to a canteen or other organisation for feeding the hungry and starving. You could write to Esha expressing your feelings and saying that you could bring nothing but your sadness to the marriage festivities and overshadowing with it her marriage. Only if the marriage brings this help to the starving could you attend it with a free conscience.
1943?
Now please tell me frankly I leave it entirely to you – very simply and I have told you why I should go if you favour [and don’t] mind.
Yes, we think it is better if you go. You will have our blessings with you.
October 21, 1943
The Mother has never objected to people who “cannot pay “ residing or visiting the Ashram without paying; she expects payment only from visitors who can pay. She did object strongly to the action of some rich visitors (on one occasion) who came here, spent money lavishly on purchases, etc. and went off without giving anything to the Ashram or even the smallest offering to the Mother, that is all.
Certainly, Sachin can come and stay for the month as you propose.
Page 111
The situation is becoming very difficult: more things are being rationed and the authorities have informed us that they will give us rations only for three hundred people, though there are three hundred and fifty here and the number is increasing; we are no longer able to get the full amount of milk from the milkmen; we are threatened with a scarcity of fuel; prices of ordinary things are becoming fantastic. In short, Pondicherry is no longer a land of plenty in the general scarcity and the Ashram may soon cease to be a place of comfort and security. If things continue to get worse, there can be a series of restrictions and deficiencies. In that case, if people don’t get what they want or feel that they need, they must not think that it is bad will on our part; they must understand the situation. This is general and does not apply to Sachin’s stay. Only there is a child and you say they are not in good health. But that is for them to consider. We will always do the best we can.
October 22, 1943
I am so grateful for your grace and Mother’s deep consideration. The fact is I owe to Sachin a great lot. When all turned against me re. Esha – my uncles, aunts and even Sachin’s elder brother who came this time believed Maya – Sachin was one of the few who stuck to you and believed me against Maya. Also he has more than once collected money for the Ashram Rs. 300 once from the film and sends his pranam offerings whenever he can spare. And he never asked my monetary help. Now you see he lost his little saving Rs. 500 as the bank failed and then he is in debt. Also they all want to come for darshan very eagerly. That is why I made an exception for him only.
All others who came here have paid, I think. I can’t place the rich man you speak of. I remember only one rich man staying with me who forgot to pay, that was K.N. Mitra. But he sent a cheque from the Cape within a fortnight apologising. Perhaps this cheque which I gave to Mother was not reckoned as part payment? Could you tell me who this rich man was? Only other rich man I remember was Abani Chatterji, I.C.S. but he did pay. Who then can it be – this defaulting rich absconder?
Page 112
Mother doesn’t remember the name; it was long ago; nothing recent; since then things have been all right in that respect. My own impression is that it was a zamindar, perhaps from Assam side, but I may be mistaken.
J am very grateful for your kind letter. If the rationing, etc. becomes too stringent I will put Sachin off. W. Dutt (and his wife) has written. They sent Rs. 16 for [hotel]. But I will put them off now. I hope you will agree?
But what about the poem on Prahlad, Guru ? I am eager to see your corrections. I am working at music now and reading your masterly Psychology of Social Development. Also doing meditation, japa, etc. of Mother’s name. May the inner surrender grow.
I have read the poem once but I am now going through it line by line slowly and carefully – it can’t be done quickly. I have finished about twelve pages. The corrections are only of details of language and rhythm, but such details are very important in a poem of this kind.
October 28, 1943
Venkataram yesterday asked me if I could help him in this: he concentrates often on Life Divine, translating, etc. Doesn’t go out much said, “1 am really trying Dilip and I think with some success. But Sisir paces up and down just before my room and that disturbs me. Can you speak to him about it? “ I asked him why he didn’t appeal to you. But he feels some qualms about it, he said – it looks like a personal complaint. I did sympathise with him and felt like speaking to Sisir about it. But on second thoughts I decided it would be best to let you know as this might hurt Sisir – though I hope he won’t mind if you tell him to walk elsewhere. It is true, I thought, when one concentrates, it is a little difficult this up and down pacing with a regular thud, before one’s door and that for one whole hour. I tell you this thing simply and briefly. The rest is for you to decide.
Page 113
Mother does not feel inclined to intervene. Why can’t the sadhaks settle these things amicably between themselves? They ought not to have such porcupine natures as to bristle over small things like these.
October 29, 1943
I have wired to Esha, “Can’t refuse you, coming positively. “ Mother graciously gave her a flower which I sent with Sotuda.15 So I am going to Calcutta for a month or so. I will be glad if you will give me some force which will enable me to be of some service to you. Dakshina was telling me of one Soshibhushan: he has told Mother about it. He will invite him to a musical party there. Some force from you, what? Soshibhushan is a very rich man.
Captain S.N. Chaudhuri (the brother of the barrister who was my guest this week) has invited me to stay with him a few days atTambaram on the way to Madras. My barrister friend assured me it is a lovely house with a swimming pool and what not and his brother a big Railway Official – all comforts, etc. So I wonder if I may go and spend a week with him early next month say from the 2nd till 8th. Tambaram is a very healthy place and dry and open, etc. I have been of late feeling a little out of sorts as you know – bad appetite, bad sleep and a general feeling of weakness and lethargy without any cause (yesterday, I felt particularly weak, today I am better).
Page 114
Am reading five to six hours your Psychology of Social Development and Chandi, etc. (religious books only) but can’t sit down to music or poetry. I don’t know why. For quite a long time I have been working fairly hard and steadily. If I have to go to Calcutta I must improve my health and energy. So what do you think of the invitation of Chaudhuri? Why not try a little swimming for a week and dry air? They have been very eager to have me there it seems. Captain Chaudhuri has written twice to me. Shall I go then for a week – just for a change, let us say?
Yes, certainly. I hope it will make you O.K.
November 17, 1943
(Answered by Sri Aurobindo)
Mother, I know I should not go daily to pranam you now as the number of visitors is increasing daily.
That is all right. There is no reason why you should not come daily.
But as I leave on the 25th of this month, I want to have as much of your blessing for my trying times in Calcutta – also because I want to see if I can get a few thousand rupees for the Synthesis of Yoga (Sisir told me the sum often thousand rupees is needed for it) and for this your force is necessary as by myself I can’t do much. Since I have to go to Calcutta I should try to be of some service to you. I will try but your blessing is specially necessary, you see.
I suppose he means for the whole of the Synthesis of Yoga; but that is still immensely far from being ready. It is only the Yoga of Works that is nearly ready for publication.
Page 115
Dr. Sisir Maitra is changing, I think. Shower on him your special force, Mother, as he is a really good man though a little limited because of his intellectual dogmatism. I don’t argue with him as that rubs him the wrong way. But you know all about him. He is very fond of me and I want to help him to move towards you if I can.
About my last interview with Sri Aurobindo I have not yet received his final answer. Can he (omitting the portions he doesn’t like to sanction for publication) permit me to translate into Bengali for the second edition of my book Tirthankar which has sold very well – though Tara-pada16 has not sent me a farthing to be offered to your feet. My other books are selling and I have offered the sale proceeds to you but Tarapada is a very strange fellow. I sent him three hundred rupees for two other books (the cost) yet he sends me nothing to be offered to you. Shall I speak to Nolini about it?
You can speak to Nolini.
As for the interview, I am afraid I may mention the answer sent through Nirod. Most of it is unpublishable at the present time and for a fairly long time to come; very little would escape from the [damner’s] pencil. There are many subjects on which I have carefully avoided publicity up to now and the taboo continues; when it is lifted it will mean that the supramental is beginning to wave its tail very vigorously over the earth’s surface.
November 22, 1943
(...) should be still ten years. Fifty six! Good god! However, perhaps before that age I will have some authentic spiritual experience that will make the spiritual voyage more heartening.
Rather latish, but if it is the goal you reach and if it is “sure “! Obviously many things ought to happen before you reach the final goal.
Page 116
But no – I am tending to be gripped by my arch-enemy – the melancholic vairagya. I will end on a cheerful note. I wrote such a lovely song night before last and taught it to Minnie17 and Millie.18 They are singing extremely well and Minnie may, in future, fill the void of Hashi in my region of deep regret. She hasn’t got Hashi’s depth yet nor her sense of rhythm but her voice is marvellously sweet and she is almost as quick to grasp. If she works hard she may sing for the Gramophone and fetch a considerable sum to the Ashram, I am sure. But there is time for that.
Biren told me this morning in Calcutta the orthodox musicians are now willing to give me a real reception in the stately way. I feel a vengeful gladness, forgive me, for they have always decried me and now they are bound to admit that I am somebody (forgive this uncontrollable spirit of glad revengefulness for once, Guru!).
But to be more serious, grant that such eulogy, etc. may not feed my gross ego. May I always be conscious that whatever success I achieve in any field is due to your grace and for your work – not for my petty self-satisfaction.
Today happens to be 22nd November the day I came here fifteen years ago in 1928.1 have gained so much at your feet and through Mother’s unspeakable sweetness. May I grow more and more conscious of her divinity and yours!
Page 117
Home
Disciples
Dilip Kumar Roy
Books
Share your feedback. Help us improve. Or ask a question.