Sri Aurobindo : corresp.
THEME/S
PART IV
THE VITAL DIFFICULTY
After stopping tea my mind seems to become dull. I cannot take interest in anything. It has become difficult to attend my classes.
All that is evidently due to the vital-physical becoming tamasic because you refuse it its small desires. You should throw it away altogether and call down into the vital-physical the Mothers Force.
So long as something in the being clings to the desire of indulgence, no Force can get rid of these things by violence. Even if the Force threw it out, that in the being would call it back.
The tamas could rise so completely because some part of my vital was upset yesterday.
That is the difficulty which is standing in the way - the power of this part to upset the consciousness.
I wonder why I do not have any psychic experiences at present, even during the periods when my vital is calm.
Only calm in the vital is hardly sufficient. There must be something throwing out the ego from the vital.
My vital has become extremely unstable. When its views are even slightly contradicted, it invariably sinks into despair. I often try to stop it but it always returns to its nature.
It is because the vital was very much under the grip of its desires and so, now that it is separately active, not controlled by mental will, it kicks and cries whenever its desires are not satisfied. That is an ordinary movement of the human vital when not dominated and kept in its place by the mental will.
What a curious nature I have - to be upset because somebody spoke this or that! I take it as a great weakness.
Page 79
That also is the usual movement of the vital when acting in its own nature.
The vitality in my outer being has decreased much. What I could do in one day now needs three days! Is this due to a transition period for establishing a higher life in the outer nature?
It depends on how you take it. If you allow the inertia to depress you it becomes an interruption and not a transition.
Could you kindly explain how it becomes a period of transition simply by not allowing the depression?
It becomes a state of transition in which something that has to be dealt with is worked out. But if there is depression etc. it becomes instead a struggle between the lower consciousness and the impulsion towards higher things.
Dullness, unhappiness and indifference in regard to every earthly thing are felt by some parts of my nature. That, I think, is not depression.
Then what is it? That is usually called depression.
At times, parts of my being do not feel happy, yet neither do they feel depression or despair.
If dullness and unhappiness are not depression, I do not know what depression means. Despair is another matter.
To be desireless does not need a long tapasya. There are people in the world who keep themselves detached from desires. It is an initial step of any Yoga.
Of Yoga, yes. But people in the world are not desireless - only they control their desires, choose between them, accept some, reject others.
Desire is a psychological movement and it can attach itself to a "true need" as well as to things that are not true needs. One
Page 80
must approach even true needs without desire. If one does not get them, one must feel nothing.
In what way am I keeping myself open to "Ego, Demand and Desire"?
The fact that your vital "goes out of the poise" and accepts them means that you keep yourself open to them. The sign that these things are no longer admitted is when the inner vital rejects them so that they become suggestions only and nothing else. There may be even a seige of suggestions or waves from the general nature, but they cannot get admission. It is only then that a wall can be kept in which one is untouched by the general atmosphere.
I feel some sort of voidness just after my English class. It is not a spiritual emptiness, but a kind of exhaustion of my life-energy.
Voidness may be of different kinds - a certain kind of spiritual voidness or the emptiness that is a preparation for new experiences. But an exhaustion of life energy is a very different thing. It may arise from fatigue, from somebody or something drawing away the vital force or from an invasion of tamas. But I don't know why it should be connected with the English study and happen only then.
I just read that if our vital lays its hold on the physical the transformation of the body can be done very quickly. Why then does my vital not try it?
Laziness. The vital can be all right when things are going on swimmingly, but when difficulties become strong, it sinks and lies supine. Also if some bait is held out to the vital ego, then it can become enthusiastic and active.
The vital struggle comes from a wrong attitude in the vital itself and in the physical mind, an absence of quietude resulting.
In this Yoga, desires are not to be suppressed but conquered.
Page 81
But to dissolve them is not easy - when no longer in the mind, they are found lurking in the vital or the physical or the subconscient.
I do not know what you mean by dissolution. The principle of the Yoga is rejection - throwing out of the being. It is true that rejected from the mind it often goes to the vital, rejected by the vital, to the physical, rejected by the physical to the subconscient. Rejected from the subconscient also, it can still linger in the environmental consciousness - but there it has no longer any possession of the being and can be thrown away altogether.
Why did the vital feel that the Mother was displeased with me?
Causeless vital habit, constructing things in order to have an excuse for being dissatisfied. It is the nature of the vital, there is no other why.
It seems something has happened in my vital being. The displeasure, depression and despair it now feels really have nothing to do with physical occurrences; they are only excuses it projects for its justification. For while these outer circumstances have remained the same, it is only now that such absurd dissatisfaction has risen up. What has happened? Is there a real cause?
There is no cause. It is the nature of the vital. The ordinary vital movement is to go through pleasure and pain, joy and grief, exaltation and despondency, all the dualities. Therefore the vital seizes on any cause it can find to get these things. If there is no real cause, it will invent one. If it is not allowed to invent, it will bring up a causeless grief or despondency or discontent rather than have none at all. This is especially the case when peace or quietude is trying to establish itself - the vital nature does not like that and tries all it can to bring despondency, grief, revolt, any kind of disturbance. When one is free from these things, that is the sign that the consciousness has become liberated and the higher consciousness is there.
It is the vital joy or pleasure I spoke of as the thing desired by the vital along with variations of grief and depression. The
Page 82
deeper joy and delight comes only with the touch of the higher consciousness.
"The ordinary vital movement is to go through pleasure and pain, joy and grief, exaltation and despondency, all the dualities." Then why did I not have periods of pleasure, joy or exaltation before this present lapse into depression?
Because you had brought down the peace which is free from the dualities. What came to oppose it and cover it was the inertia, and the inertia is not easily capable of joy or exaltation, but it easily admits despondency etc., so the vital not finding any rajasic pleasure takes refuge in despondency.
I was told that despondency comes only when the vital stirs. What makes it stir only at certain times and not at other times?
You might just as well ask why sometimes the wind blows and at other times there is no breeze since the air is always there. The vital cannot be expected to be always in action to bring despondency - it does when it feels inclined so to act.
The vital seems to be unable to reject depression and despair.
That is because your mind often participates and gets despondent - also because the will to dissociate and push it out is not steady and calm enough. To a calm and steady will the vital would be obliged to respond after a time.
But why does the depression increase in spite of my efforts to reject it?
It is the resistance of the vital to change. Formerly it probably took more the form of an undiscovered and therefore unresisted activity of ego etc., and, when dissatisfied, of discontent and soreness rather than depression. Now that it is definitely and finally asked to change, its reaction takes the form of refusal and depression.
What is the inner reason for the vitals dissatisfaction?
Page 83
It is dissatisfied by its claims not being recognised, by the pressure on it to change, by the attempt to stabilise a consciousness in which its ego cannot have a place.
A wise vital is a rare phenomenon. It has to be enlightened from above, otherwise it is always imprudent.
For some days I have been trying to recover my past attitude of surrender: "Give everything and ask for nothing." But I don't know why I meet there with a total failure.
I suppose because you are giving too big a place to your vital -that is to say the part of the vital which insists on itself as the one important thing and says, "If I am not satisfied there can be no sadhana; if I am going wrong, then all this sadhana must be false like X's."
Things in sadhana cannot be done in a "short time". The vital despondency comes largely from an impatience and the unwillingness to spend a calm, steady labour on the things to be done. No great work was ever done without the patient overcoming of difficulties.
When the vital is dissatisfied, the being does not care much for the sadhana. For it feels that if the Divine is displeased with me what is the use of all this tapasya, experience, progress?
What being feels like that? If it is the whole being that shares whatever the vital chooses to raise, dissatisfaction, causeless despair etc., how do you propose to get rid of the vital opposition in a short time? It is not possible to get rid "directly" of a thing to which the whole being consents.
It is mostly when the sadhana condition is interrupted that the vital becomes agitated or impatient and restless. Instead of remaining quiet and waiting or calling down the real push from above, it begins to get vexed and restless and begins to ask questions "Why this? Why that?" Also the old vital mental
Page 84
egoism rises up and if the answers do not please it, it becomes challenging, disputatious, insistent on its own point of view. These are old defects which are part of the external nature and therefore difficult to root out. You must learn to recognise them and get rid of them by a quiet rejection and disuse.
What is the "sadhana condition"?
When the sadhana is strong and intense or sufficiently active, that is the sadhana condition. When it is interrupted, then the vital becomes impatient and restless.
Why does the sadhana condition get interrupted?
Always the same question! Everybody's sadhana gets interrupted because it is the nature of the consciousness to have these oscillations, until the whole nature is sufficiently changed to have the constant realisation in all parts. I do not know how often I have explained that.
Even before our whole nature is changed, I think that if the higher action is persistent, we can at least throw off our human imperfections for a long time.
If it were so easy as that, there would be no need of sadhana. The higher action would only have to rush in and stay and everything would be done in no time.
A mere peaceful state makes my vital impatient. For it thinks: "If there is no restlessness or turmoil, why shouldn't the higher things descend at once?"
It is this impatience of the vital that is, as I told you, one of the chief obstacles. If the vital were quiet (not either inert or restless) one would feel peace itself as a great realisation as all great Yogis do, and into it would come the sense of the free silent Self unperturbed for ever and tranquil and in that condition the Force also could descend. A vital attached and demanding results and refusing to go on with the sadhana without them is a great hindrance.
Page 85
Since yesterday there has been a strong revolt in the vital. It is accompanied with anti-divine suggestions. Is not all this surging up as a resistance to a new opening?
It may be. But more probably because of the pressure on it to change, give up its attachments etc.
When the vital does not express its dissatisfaction it takes refuge usually in a form of passive surrender: "If you don't satisfy my desires, it is all right. I don't want anything, don't want to do sadhana. I fall back to my old position." This, I suppose, is as bad as the vital's insistence on its desires!
All the same that is the first step towards freeing the vital. So long as it insists on its desires, it cannot be freed. One has to make it give up its insistence first and give up its passive resistance afterwards.
What is the difference between the voidness caused by a drawing of the life energy and that produced by a spiritual emptiness?
The drawing of the life energy leaves the body lifeless, helpless, empty and impotent, but it is attended by no experience except a great suffering and unease sometimes.
Is it good to have a vital sensitive to others, exposed to others?
It is neither good nor bad. It comes like that in the course of the development. Some are incapable of consciously or visibly opening to others because they are insensitive. On the other hand to be too open is troublesome.
Has everybody to pass through the stage of vital sensitiveness?
The Mother and myself have passed through it. It comes inevitably in the full opening of the being to the universal.
Isn't insensitiveness better than the constant trouble which comes from remaining open to others?
There can be no transformation of the being in an insensitive consciousness.
Page 86
The depression is not the only cause of suspension of experiences. There are others such as inertia etc. If one can have experiences continuously in spite of these things, that means that a part of the consciousness has definitely separated from the rest and is able to go on in spite of the outer resistance.
Since yesterday there has been no gloom or despondency in spite of enough outer reasons for it. Is it then a fact that my being does not respond to the outer reasons, or does the mind simply think like that?
The outer reasons are created by the mind and it is the mind that responds or does not respond to them. Nothing outward can affect unless the mind (vital mind usually) represents them to itself in a particular way and makes its own response.
If the mind does not respond to any suggested reasons for despondency, that is indeed a great liberation.
Does the vital by itself never get depressed? It is only when the mind creates outer reasons that vital depression is possible?
The vital mind is part of the vital. If the mind (mental mind, vital mind, physical mind, subconscient mind) does not respond to outer things, depression is impossible. The self at one end, the stone at the other never get into depression. In between, the true mind, true vital, true physical consciousness never get depression because they do not give the responses to things that create depression.
I have raised this question again because X tells me that when he is depressed there are never any external causes. Well, that may prove that depression is possible in the absence of any outward reasons.
You seem to rely very much on X and his experiences and ideas about them. X's experience proves nothing because he is quite ignorant. His depression comes from outside and has its causes, only his vital mind does not record or understand the
Page 87
causes, but there is a response to them all the same. Because the vital mind has in the past always associated depression with these causes and that impression remains in the vital stuff, so it responds to their touch with the usual reaction taught to it by the vital mind. An ignorant and untrained mind like X's cannot be expected to realise the secret machinery of the movements of his own consciousness.
If the vital responds [to the depression] so intensely and easily, it shows that there is not a complete liberation in the vital. You have been stressing so much on the violence and intensity of this vital activity or response, that it is difficult to suppose it is in the environmental only. For then, how is it that you do not feel, are not conscious that it comes from outside and is not a thing having its origin within you?
When the vital truly turns with passion towards the Divine, then can there be any real difficulty in changing one's nature?
There will be changes that have to be made, but they will not present themselves as almost insuperable difficulties.
The lower vital does not like egolessness - it wants always its own personal satisfaction.
What is the inner reason that the vital gets depressed?
The original nature of the vital - selfish, demanding, dissatisfied with anything that does not respond to its desires. It is the only reason why it rejects the peace and gets depressed or revolted. Even if there is no active cause, this essential and fundamental cause is sufficient.
My vital gets restless by its own restlessness.
Of course, because it is the habit of its nature to be restless.
Have you started any higher action directly on the lower vital to remove the particular difficulty there?
Page 88
The only action has been for bringing down the Force of the Higher Consciousness into the lower being.
The higher Force is not likely to come down into the vital independently of the rest of the system.
You wrote once that the outer being cannot be changed without bringing down the higher consciousness first into the inner. Shall I have to wait then for the inner being to get the higher consciousness before this depression can go?
Yes, unless you free the vital from subjection to ego and demand. But that needs a will which will master the instinctive movements of the lower vital.
If the middle vital accepts the right attitude, will there still be depression?
If the middle vital accepts it, the depression ought to diminish. If the lower vital accepts it, then there will be no depression.
Could medical treatment cure the vital depression?
Doctors think that they can, as it is due to physico-psychological causes, which are in their province.
Why does my vital feel a strong attraction towards a particular person?
There is no why to the attractions of the vital. The vital is not governed by reasons.
You wrote, "Liking and disliking always means interchange of influences." If I have a special liking for P, will not the interchange between us be only of good influences?
Whether good or bad is not the question, there is an interchange in the vital.
Will there be any interchange of influences with a person whom we like or dislike but have no physical contact?
Page 89
There can be and usually is, but not so much as by physical contact.
Does a good vital interchange, due to our liking a person, interfere with the sadhana?
It can interfere, if it is strong and brings an attachment.
The physical vital has made some progress. Though it does not feel satisfied with the higher things, strangely enough it is troubled when it cannot have them or when mud from the general Nature enters into it.
The physical vital is always full of inconsistencies. The contradiction you describe is quite normal and usual in the intermediate stage before the complete conversion of the vital.
When the vital feels dull and unhappy because of the constant emptiness, the light of the higher knowledge brings it to the right attitude. But this lasts only for a few days, after which the vital reverts to its old habit. Why so?
Because of the obstinacy of the subconscient vital in error - it sends up the same thing always. If the conscious vital refuses to receive it, then it will stop or at any rate be ineffective.
It seems to me that the part of my being that gets despondent is not my own vital. It becomes mine only when I take it as mine. I say this because I feel the gloom more in the form of suggestions from outside than as feelings from within, and the sadhana goes on in spite of it. The depression must be due to a push of the genera! lower nature and the vital's inability to reject it.
Yes. The depression comes from without, not from within. But some part of the vital is too habituated to respond or at least passively accept or reflect and to take it as its own. If it were not for this, there would be little or no difficulty in throwing off the depression when it tries to come.
Why do I find no interest, no joy, no satisfaction even in my higher experiences?
Page 90
It is strange that there should be no interest or satisfaction of any kind. Perhaps it is the vital interest, joy or satisfaction that you are expecting? But that comes only if the vital takes part in the experience.
Really I do not know what kind of joy you want. All experiences are not accompanied by joy. Interest is another matter.
You know that my mind and inner being at least are quite earnest to rid the being of the vital ego and vital demands. Can you not then cut them off by a direct higher action? It is said that the Divine comes to one's aid if one aspires sincerely for it.
These things cannot be done in that way. For transformation to be genuine, the difficulty has to be rejected by all the parts of the being. The Force can only help or enable them to do that, but it cannot replace this necessary action by a summary process. Your mind and inner being must impart their will to the whole.
I have always said that it is not P and his vital which upset my sadhana but my own self and nature.
Certainly, it is the vital ego that is the cause and there is no need of bringing in P's vital. You have to get rid of it altogether. It is this kind of thing that must be preventing the dynamic Force from coming down - for if it came into this part of the vital, this kind of reaction getting strength in the vital might assume enormous proportions.
What is meant by your last four words?
Might become exceedingly strong and violent.
The vital is too selfish to have any gratitude. The more it gets the more it demands and it takes everything as its right and every denial of what it wants as an injustice and an offence.
The whole significance of your sentences was that you had
Page 91
made all the necessary resolutions, but you could not carry them out because the Force refused to support you. That is the usual trick of the vital mind when it wants to rid itself of the blame for difficulties or want of progress in the sadhana. "I am doing all 1 can, but the Force is not supporting me."
I am not "pressing" any Force. The Force is there to help if the help is acceptable. The vital is depressed and dissatisfied because ego and desire have to be given up and it does not want to give up anything. And as for you, well, you will say "If the vital does not want, what can I do?"
Your vital responds to it [depression] and reproduces its suggestions of despondency etc. If your vital stopped doing that, you would feel it is a suggestion from outside and simply answer with you mind "Nonsense" and dismiss it. Even if you could live separate in your inner being, the response of your vital would be felt as something superficial, negligible, not effective.
Perhaps the vital cooperated before because it hoped to get something for the ego out of the sadhana and refuses to cooperate now as its demands are not honoured - also because there is now a pressure for the giving up of desire and selfishness and it is not prepared to do it. In the absence of the vital cooperation the mind cannot get up steam to do anything steadily in the sadhana line.
Purification of the vital is usually considered to be a condition for a successful sadhana. One may have some experiences without it, but at least a complete detachment from the vital movements is necessary for a substantial realisation.
The cause of depression does not lie in there being Pranam or no Pranam but in the nature itself- in a certain kind of rajasic and tamasic vital egoism which seizes on any excuse for indulging its propensities.
Page 92
The reason is that there is in the vital a desire or an interest and in the mind a habit of bringing itself all the satisfaction of the desire or chewing the cud of interest and the mechanical mind goes on doing these things even when it ought to be free from all such things and concentrated on the sadhana. That is why the roots of all desires have to be loosened so that one can do things without desire or attachment and be able also not to do them; so with interests they must be held loosely cm the surface of the mind so that they can be dismissed or taken up at will and not allowed to fasten on the mind and occupy it against its will.
Page 93
TALKING AND VITAL INTERCHANGE
Yesterday I was talking with A before I went to bed. This morning when I got up, I found my vital unusually restless. But there had been no conflict or opposition in our talk. Why then such a strong turmoil in the vital?
It is not only talk that creates a turmoil - disturbing forces can come in by contact also. There may be restlessness or confusion of consciousness in the person who talks with you to which he does not give expression or is not even aware that he is like that, or he may bring forces from others. Again it may be that you met or contacted in your sleep the vital of others or some vital forces in the atmosphere. Turmoil may come in many ways.
How does one " bring forces from others" and then pass them on while talking?
There is no how to it; it so happens. Whenever one mixes with others, things are passing from one to the other. If I talk with a number of people, I bring away with me in my atmosphere many forces that were around them; they may affect me or not, but they remain for a time at least. If in that time I speak with another man, he may receive them from me. It is like a man carrying germs with him from a person he has visited; he may not fall ill himself (or he may), but, even if he does not, he can pass them on to another man he visits afterwards - who falls ill. It is the same thing here in the supraphysical parts.
If one has much inertia, will someone with whom he is talking feel void?
He may; if he is sensitive to other people's atmospheres.
I was under the impression that it is the excess of selfishness or ego that influences others with voidness.
No. That happens when one draws on the vital of others or when the other is sensitive and one pulls him down to a lower
Page 94
consciousness so that he no longer feels the energy which usually supports him. 3
After talking with X I often feel empty or uneasy or a kind of disturbing restlessness.
The disturbing restlessness may come from him for he has always been restless; the uneasiness may come from the contact with his obscure atmosphere; but the emptiness can only come from the reasons aforesaid.
The last three days I talked so much that all my inner energy was exhausted.
Talking has a very exhausting effect for the inner energies -unless the inner itself controls the talk.
Everyone who lives much inside tends to feel too much talking a fatiguing thing and quite shallow and unnecessary unless it is talk that comes from within. Of course if you make a practice of talking much, that will bring you outside, externalise you and then you will no longer find it fatiguing even if you talk for 18 hours out of the 24.
It is my perpetual experience that the less I speak, the better my inner being feels. If I talk more than usual, it brings a headache! Is this not a sign of disability?
It is not a sign of disability. It is a characteristic of the inward consciousness in sadhana not to throw itself out too much in speech, as that tends towards externalisation and dispersion. The headache is a sign that this is being too much done.
Why does even a slight casual talk create a disturbance in my work?
It is because by talking one passes into another consciousness. That is so long as the inner being has not attained a constant and even calm poise.
Page 95
It is no use giving up talking altogether - the proper course is to speak usefully to people but not to talk for the sake of talking.
Can one maintain peace within, even while talking and mixing with others?
Possible only if the inner being can separate itself in the peace and remain unaffected by the outer movements and contacts.
One has to go inside into the inner being and one can minimise contacts, if necessary, not as an absolute rule - provided there is a real living in the inner being and sufficient contact with outside things not to lose one's hold of practical realities. But if there is an isolation which brings depression, inertia, unhappiness, gloom or else morbidity of any kind, then it is evident that the retirement is not wholesome.
If one tries to deal with the outer world without that poise of peace and silence, is he not likely to be entangled by the vital forces?
Yes, but in retirement from the outside things also vital forces can get hold of you.
At present, I aspire to separate my inner being from the outer and to keep it always in direct contact with the Mother.
That is the thing to be done if there is to be peace stabilised under all circumstances.
Have not the sadhaks to exchange their sympathy, kindness, etc. when they talk or mix with each other? Otherwise there will be only dryness.
What if they exchange other things also along with the sympathy and kindness? In a psychic feeling there is no question of anything so commercial as an excuse.
Dr R has asked me to talk freely. Will it help my sadhana?
R asks you from the medical point of view. He thinks not talking makes you morose, moody, depressed, without vital
Page 96
force. If so and talking will mend that, you must talk.
To talk and take pleasure in talking is a natural vital impulse.
I can now talk freely without fatigue. But is such talking necessary for a sadhak? Is it our highest aim?
No. But it is offered you as a means not an end - a means of getting back vital force and liveliness.
The mixing and talking are not prescribed as good for the sadhana, but as good for the health and spirits.
The Doctor advises me to talk more. Will talking remove the inertia and depression or bring in the vital force necessary to remove them?
I don't know whether it will. The Doctor goes upon ordinary psychological grounds, viz. that talking and mixing with others helps to keep the vital active and cheerful, whereas solitude and repression of the social instincts makes one shut up in oneself and can lead to moroseness and melancholy. One can forgo the ordinary freedom of vital interchange only if one has something to support one within, peace or joy or the satisfaction of the inner life. When this inner peace, sukha, or satisfaction (atma-rati) is there, then the need of social talk etc. disappears and it becomes even disturbing or lowering to the consciousness - only talk from the source within or with a true meaning must be felt as tolerable.
Page 97
THE ACTION OF THE EGO
Everybody is an instrument of the Cosmic Force through his ego.
The Divine is there in all men, so the Divine and the ego do live together. But the Divine is veiled by the ego and manifests in proportion as the ego first submits itself, then recedes and disappears. There can be no complete possession by the Divine without disappearance of the ego. Any man can be an instrument of the Divine, e.g. X, Kemal Pasha - the thing is to be a perfectly conscious instrument.
My English teacher told me that the ego and the soul are like two sides of a rubber ball. The outer side is the ego, the inner is the soul. So if you pull out what is within, you have the soul, the psychic being.
The ego has nothing to do with the soul. It is a formation of Nature in the mind, vital or physical.
I read somewhere that the ego is to be dissolved, while in another place I read that it is to be transformed.
The form of ego has to be dissolved, it has not to be replaced by a bigger ego or another kind of ego. It has to be replaced by the true being which feels itself, even though individual, yet one with all and one with the Divine.
Is it a fact that R's ego has risen up more than before?
It is not more than it was. One cannot expect him to divest himself of his ego at this early stage of his sadhana.
You have described certain kinds of egoisms - pride, vanity, etc. Are there other kinds?
Any number of kinds, sattwic, rajasic and tamasic.
Page 98
In most there are one or two defects which are exceptionally obstinate and return even after a long rejection. Cannot the Mother's Force intervene directly and quickly wash them out?
If there is the consent from the part affected, it can be done.
The ego can be made to give its consent. If it were not so, the transformation would not be possible.
In the beginning many sadhaks were proud of their surrender -but how could surrender and ego go together?
But who has got rid of ego in this Ashram? To get rid of ego is as difficult as to make a complete surrender.
So long as the ego remains below and acts behind the veil, one can't see its manoeuvres in full light; therefore it will be difficult to tackle it and transform it.
Yes - it is true.
It is said that with the presence of ego one cannot have love, joy, happiness etc. in Yoga. But I had these experiences in the past. What then about my ego?
It had been subdued, by a knowledge from above and a will in the mind. It was still there, but its movements and their power were too small and the movement above too large for that to interfere except by bringing in small movements of error and desire.
Error and desire are not the same thing. Error is of the mind, desire is of the vital.
What still comes in the way of Mother taking me on her sunlit path?
If the ego is gone and the full surrender is there, then there should be no obstacle. If however the rajas of the vital is only
Page 99
quiescent, then its quiescence may bring up the tamas in its place, and that would be the obstacle.
Some suggestions say, "You are studying by a push of ambition. " Is it really so?
That is for you to see. You have to become sufficiently conscious of yourself to see where ego mixes and where it does not.
You say that the difficulty in the descent of the Mother's Force is due to something in the vital which is not ready. What is this "something"?
I suppose not yet sufficiently surrendered or free from ego. The Force can come down in spite of that, but then it is in danger of being misused by the exaggerated ego for its desires.
Instead of thus being misused, cannot the descent be rather used for lessening or destroying the ego and its desires?
That is its proper working, but if the ego is not rejected, then the wrong use may take place.
Could you kindly tell me why I have become so dry?
It is a natural result of the rising up of the vital and the ego with inertia - whenever that dominates you get into the dryness and when you can overcome it, you get into a good condition.
Does the present coming up of the vital and the ego coincide with the need of my sadhana, i.e. for their transformation?
The ego and the vital movements do not come up for the sake of the sadhana, but because they are there and wish to remain there. Whenever the consciousness relaxes and gives them room, they rise up.
Don't you think I have rejected whatever is to be rejected?
Obviously you have not, otherwise the ego and the vital would not have risen so strongly.
Page 100
The vital sensitiveness is becoming excessive - I can't stand any disagreement, refusal or clash with others.
That all comes from the ego and it is precisely the thing you have to get rid of.
If one is more sensitive, does it follow that he has more ego in him?
It depends on the nature of the ego. Some egoists are hard-skinned and not sensitive at all; others are hypersensitive.
Most sensitiveness is the result or sign of ego.
So many pretensions and excuses are there for self-indulgence. Sometimes they are very subtle and therefore more difficult to deal with even than hostile forces. Should we not deal with them with a concentrated mind?
Yes, certainly. The mind must become conscious of these things and on its guard - without this consciousness it is not possible to get rid of these vital things - they will go on lurking under all sorts of disguises.
Can the ego be thoroughly rejected?
If it is not ever indulged in thought, speech or action, it will not return. That is the full rejection.
I find that even the descents cannot change or purify the ego and desire.
It is not descents that can do [it]. It is either psychic rejection or the settling of the higher consciousness in the lower nature or both together that can do it.
The ego comes out in most of my thoughts, feelings and actions, even in trifling and stupid movements where there is nothing to be proud of. Please explain why it is so.
Page 101
But that is the case with all human beings. All the action is shot through with ego: acts, feelings, thoughts, everything, big or small, good or bad. Even humility and what is called altruism is with most people only a form of ego. It does not depend on having something to be proud of.
But why only now do I feel the presence of ego in such little acts? Formerly it was detected only in things done with desire or pride.
Perhaps because then you were looking for ego only in the form which people specially call egoism, i.e. pride, vanity, selfishness, insistence on vital satisfactions. But ego is of all kinds - and you are only just now finding it out.
As most of my activities are "shot through with ego" my life has become a source of trouble, not of delight as a sadhak's should be. For there is a division in the being. The inner being is very strict that there should be no sense of ego in whatever is done. But the ego never forgets to colour everything.
There is nothing to be troubled about. You ought rather to congratulate yourself that you have become conscious. Very few people in this Ashram are. They are all ego-centric and they do not realise their ego-centricity. Even in their sadhana the I is always there, - my sadhana, my progress, my everything. The remedy is to think constantly of the Divine, not of oneself, to work, act, do sadhana for the Divine; not to consider how this or that affects me personally, not to claim anything, but to refer all to the Divine. It will take time to do that sincerely and thoroughly but it is the proper way.
It is better to be conscious of the egoism than to think that one is free when one is not.
Off and on, time breaks into my eternity when the small ego turns up and says. Hello! What are you doing leaving me alone?"
Obviously, unless the object is Nirvana, the small ego has to
Page 102
be attended to, - not indulged, but transformed out of existence.
Can the ego disappear totally in the self-realisation?
The sense of ego can disappear into that of the Self or the Purusha but that of itself does not bring about the disappearance of the old ego reactions in the Prakriti. The Purusha has to get rid of these by a process of constant rejection and remoulding. The remoulding consists in turning everything into a consecration to the Mother and doing all for her without regard to oneself, one's desires, opinions, vital reactions, as if they were the things to be fulfilled. This is most easily done if the psychic being becomes quite awake.
I go on rejecting the ego-movements but they go on assuming new forms. My rejection seems to have a negative result. I am afraid there will be no final change unless some positive thing intervenes from above.
Without persistent rejection it cannot be done. Going up into the Self liberates the higher parts, but the ego remains in the lower parts. The most effective force for this liberation is the psychic control along with steady rejection.
It is rather a wider than a higher consciousness that is necessary for the liberation from the ego. Going high is necessary of course, but by itself it is not sufficient.
I was under the impression that the psychic can be liberated by love and devotion and till then the ego cannot disappear.
Without the liberation of the psychic and the realisation of the true Self the ego cannot go, both are necessary. If there is no consciousness of the Self how can the ego disappear? The psychic can be liberated by love and devotion, but I was speaking of a case in which it is not so liberated, and the realisation of the Self seems more easy - a case like yours.
The ego wanted to utilise my present experiences and trances for its own aggrandisement! Something like what X did. It picked out
Page 103
particularly that samadhi experience of "trance within trance" as something unique!!
Good Heavens!!
What is the attitude in action of the unegoistic and the ego-centric man?
The ego-centric man feels and values things as they affect him. "Does this please me or displease, give me gladness or pain, flatter my pride, vanity, ambition or hurt it, satisfy my desires or thwart them," etc. The unegoistic man does not look at things like that. He looks to see what things are in themselves and would be if he were not there, what is their meaning, how they fit into the scheme of things - or else he feels calm and equal, refers everything to the Divine, or if he is a man of action how they will serve the work that has to be done or the life of the world or the cause he serves, etc. etc. - there can be many points of view which are not ego-centric.
You wrote, "If it was an impersonal experience how does the ego come in? Self (Atman) is one thing, the ego another." Certainly the ego did not come with the experience. It was only when the experience was over that the foolishness of my mind brought it in as an idea. Why? Because I had heard that X's ego became aggrandised after his experiences of the Self.
The ego cannot come into the experience as an experience. What the ego can do however is to get proud of having the experience and think "What a great one am I." Or it may think "I am the Self, the Divine, so let me go and do what I will, for it is the Divine who wills in me." It is only if the experience of Self imposes silence on the other parts and frees the psychic, that the ego disappears. Even then not ego itself, but numerous fragments and survivals of ego-habit can remain and have to be eliminated.
I cannot say my ego is gone. Only it is controlled by the mental will.
Page 104
It is not possible to get rid of the ego-movements all at once. They have to be worked out of the nature by a constant consciousness and rejection. Even when the central ego has gone, the habitual movements stick for a long time.
For so long J have been trying to get rid of the ego! But something of it always remains!
The element of the egoism in the thoughts, feelings, actions has to be got rid of, but that cannot be done in a day.
If I work for the Mother alone, the interference of the ego would mean that it comes from outside. For the Mother's work and the ego can't go together.
Of course it is a way. But one has still to be careful about the ego. Even people who sincerely think they are doing only the Mother's will are yet actuated by ego without knowing it.
You said above that people "are yet attached1 by ego without knowing it." In which way are they attached to it?
I don't know what you mean by "in which". Ego attaches them means that it gets into their thought, feeling or action. It gets in in whatever way it can - there is no rule that it can get in only in certain things and not in any others.
One cannot dissolve the ego in the early stages of the sadhana. But one can keep it separate from oneself and at a distance, can't one?
In the inner being, yes - the difficulty is to exclude it from the action (thought, feeling, motive, etc.) of the outer part of the consciousness.
Because of my increased withdrawal from social contacts like mixing, talking etc., people around me say that I am becoming more and more egoistic.
1 This word was misread; Sri Aurobindo wrote "actuated", not "attached".
Page 105
Obviously one must not get egoistic about it, but withdrawal from the outer or lower consciousness into the inner is not in itself an egoistic movement. If it were so, all sadhana would be egoism and to be always social and on the surface would be the only thing!
I feel no love, devotion or joy even when there is no ego or inertia.
The quiescence of ego or inertia does not automatically bring love, joy or bhakti.
Now I feel that to have desires, attachments, ego, is something strange to my true consciousness!
Yes, these things are foreign to the true being.
During one of the meditations, I found that the ego was disturbing my life and sadhana. So I separated myself from it and kicked it out. Is there any validity to such a feeling?
It has a validity of experience - if the action repeats itself consciously and applies itself to all the movements of the ego, then by an accumulative effect it can get rid of the ego.
Page 106
YOGA AND THE PHYSICAL
When the working is in the physical consciousness, it is the tamas which is the main physical force that comes in whenever it can.
You said that R cured A's inertia. The question is whether it is cured by medicines or by some other means of which R himself may not be conscious.
R does not profess to cure by medicines alone - he knows that it is only when supported by Force that his medicines are infallibly effective. But A's inertia resisted the Force for years, because he was shut up to the Force. When R took him up, he got confidence and the medicines were able to act both in their own power and as instruments of the Force.
Many sadhaks were not fit for any Yoga, much less for the Integral Yoga. It was sheerly by the Mother's Grace that we were accepted. And yet the only return we have offered to her is to tire her out by our ego and vital demands.
It is so - if the sadhaks had been different in their reaction to the Mother's grace, the work in the physical would have been much easier and less perilously subject to hostile attacks, perhaps it would have been done by now.
I distinguish the inertia in me as of two types. First there is the type which is always there in the outer being whether my consciousness goes above or below.
Only removable by being transformed into shama, i.e. divine peace, quietude, stillness.
The second type is a special surge which comes to obstruct me from diving within or ascending above. This type comes usually after a luminous period.
Correct. That is what usually happens.
Page 107
This evening the inertia took a different turn. It put on the mind the impression that study was impossible. This impression was accepted for a long time.
The acceptance of such impressions must necessarily stand in the way of getting rid of the inertia. If the inertia finds its suggestions seriously accepted, it will go on merrily bringing them in.
When I speak of inertia, I mean usually mental inertia.
Mental inertia would not come to you to that extent if there were not the physical tamas.
The feeling "I can't aspire etc. What can I do?" is suggested by the physical inertia, but it must not be accepted as a truth.
The rush of inertia would not have mattered so much had it not been for a complete inert passivity of my mind and vital.
If it did not bring ego, sex, tamas, despondency etc. it would not matter. Inert passivity can be turned into a state of spiritual quietude.
Inertia by itself is simply dull or else quiet, it is only if the vital stirs that despondency comes in.
Though my vital is not dissatisfied, it does not live in a satisfied condition either!
Well, if it is not dissatisfied that is something. If inertia there is to be, it is better to have a quiet rather than a restless inertia.
Today I tried to take a walk. It was so tiring that my right leg ached! I had to suspend my normal painting work! All this in spite of my having used will-power.
In the body there is a strong resistance of obscure inertia and this inertia is always accompanied by an openness to contrary forces. So as soon as you put your will on it the contrary reaction is suggested by the lower forces and through habit prevails. I
Page 108
don't see anything to do but press on with the progress of the inner and higher consciousness till the body is obliged to open to it.
Will the dynamic descent stop the inertia from interfering with the sadhana?
By the descent the inertia changes its character. It ceases to be a resistance of the physical and becomes only a physical condition to be transformed into the true basic immobility and rest.
After each two days of the higher state, the inertia comes back again, turning the whole consciousness dark. Can we not prevent this regular rush of inertia?
The peace and silence have to come into the physical and replace the inertia.
This morning I tried for some time to bring down the higher Force. Its effect was immediately felt in the body. I could not continue the effort for long with the same intensity. What came in the way?
It is impossible to say anything precise about these things. It is always some aprakash and apravritti in the lower consciousness that comes in the way.
The higher things I felt this morning were not felt in the evening, even during the meditation. What happened to them?
To have the higher things all the time would mean that the whole physical consciousness had been changed - that has not yet happened.
At present the spiritual experiences etc. are felt either above or in the body. The mind and vital seem to have been put aside.
That is because it is in the physical that they have to be established.
The higher working remains until 4 a.m. The evening brings a straight descent into inertia!
Page 109
Because the inertia is there in the physical consciousness and has made itself habitual - so the consciousness falls back to it. It is by the higher working getting hold of the physical that that can cease - unless of course you succeed in throwing off the inertia by your own will.
Cannot the enlightened parts of the body exert their pressure on the tamasic parts of the body to turn them towards the same light?
No. It is a local working which has to be extended to the whole by the Force, but the parts of the body can do nothing towards it.
I experience a greater and greater passivity. What is the need of this?
I suppose it is in order to liberate the consciousness more completely and prepare the turning of tamas into shama, inertia into absolute repose and peace.
Up to 1 a.m. my consciousness deepened more and more into higher consciousness. Afterwards, there came such a strong pressure for sleep that my eyes became blurred. I went to bed but got no sleep. I struggled in vain for two hours though the pressure for sleep continued all the time.
But why struggle? That usually increases the difficulty. The difficulty itself must come from some resistance in the physical.
The dynamic descent seems to have stopped at the throat centre (the physical mind centre).
If it has stopped there, it must be because there is not sufficient plasticity and surrender in the physical mental to let it through.
The descent will come when it is possible for it to come down. Meanwhile, more quietness and fortitude in the physical mind and consciousness would perhaps be helpful.
The latest higher descent is now penetrating into my physical
Page 110
and material consciousness - so inertia, dullness etc. are natural. Is this not true?
It may be - as a reaction of the lower nature resisting change.
Just after the general evening meditation there is a great uprush of inertia. Its power prevents me from doing any sadhana. What is the cause of this?
There can be many reasons. Either something still not quite right in the attitude of reception or else the force pressing and the inertia rushing up to resist or else a fatigue-resistance of the physical.
Release from the inertia comes only when a strong and powerful Force presses on the head. As soon as it withdraws, the inertia again surges up. How long will this go on?
These things last so long as they can last. When the consciousness as a whole is ready, they disappear.
The resistance of inertia is not a new phenomenon, but formerly it was only occasional. Now there is not a single day when it does not overpower the sadhana!
The hold of inertia always increases when the working comes down into the physical and subconscient. Before that the inertia is overpowered though not eradicated by the action in mind and vital - afterwards it comes up in its natural force and has to be met in its own field.
Why don't the inertia, ego and desire decrease in spite of our sustained effort to change them?
It needs time, persistent will and effort and increasing equality and quietude to do it.
It is probably the refusal of the vital to give up its desires that gives the inertia so much strength to impede the sadhana.
I have said it is evidently the vital resistance to change that is
Page 111
holding up your sadhana, bringing the inertia and preventing the action of the higher consciousness.
I have discovered that there is always something in the vital and physical mind that tries to oppose what you desire me to do -especially when a physical thing is concerned.
Well, that is all right. You have to discover like that all these ignorant desire movements in you - for it is partly these or rather the mind's acquiescence in them and support of them that keeps the physical consciousness unable to receive the full Peace and the Force.
How do the vital desires supported by the mind prevent the physical from receiving the Peace and the Force?
If the mind and the vital impose their obstacles how can the physical get the Peace or Force? You seem to think that mind, vital and physical are three quite independent things which have no connection with each other and no influence or effect upon each other. That is not so. They powerfully affect each other. Moreover in mind there is a vital mental, a physical mental - in vital there is a mental vital, a physical vital - in physical there is a mental physical, a vital physical. How do you imagine then that vital can have no effect on the physical?
Inertia is mental, vital, physical, subconscient. Physical inertia can produce mental inertia, mental inertia can produce physical inertia, vital inertia almost always makes the physical lifeless and lustreless and dull, and that is inertia. Vital inertia can also infect the mind, unless the mind is very strong and clear. I have always said that the physical consciousness is the main seat and source of inertia. Your ideas about these things seem to be very fanciful and elementary.
Page 112
EXPERIENCES IN THE SUBTLE AND
GROSS PHYSICAL
When H wrote in his poem that he felt peace in his body, some people commented that it was impossible to experience peace or anything spiritual in the body itself at such an early stage of the sadhana. According to them, a strong peace descending into the inner or subtle physical gives only an illusion of reaching the outer gross physical. What is the truth of the matter?
All experiences that penetrate the centres are recorded in the body and seem to be the body's experiences, but one has to distinguish between the reflection of the experiences there and the experiences that belong to the physical body consciousness itself. It is a matter of consciousness and fine discernment. There is no absolute law about the time.
If one feels a fountain of Force rushing into the body, can it be a mere reflection of the inner being's experience?
It can be a rushing of Force into the subtle body which the physical records and feels the effect. When Force descends into the head it means that it has come down into the mind, when it is felt in the heart it means it has entered into the emotional vital, when it is in the Muladhara and below it means it is acting on the physical consciousness. The centres are all in the subtle body although there are corresponding parts in the gross physical.
I understand from your answers that all experiences felt in the physical body are reflections of experiences of the subtle physical. What progress is needed to bring the experiences directly into the outer physical?
I spoke only of the fact that what one feels recorded in the physical body may be actually taking [place] only in the subtle body. Whether in a particular case it is that or a direct experience in the physical body also, is a matter to be seen in each case. One must distinguish for oneself which it is.
Page 113
I would say this: the static Peace and the Force are sometimes felt in the outer body directly, and not merely as reflections from the subtle physical. Now it is for you to correct me.
Have you a clear feeling of the subtle body as separate from the outer body or of the mental and vital and subtle physical sheaths which comprise the subtle body? If not how can you say which is of the subtle body and which is of the physical?
The influence and action of the Mother's Force is felt so tangibly in the outer physical; there can hardly be any doubt about it.
Any reflection or outflowing from the subtle body into the physical would also be felt as tangible.
For instance, when the Force is in the outer physical it is sometimes felt as a great mountain entering my external body.
But the same thing would be felt if it was acting massively in the subtle body.
When the Force and Peace descend into my body, I experience the power, swiftness and palpability as of a waterfall. Could such concrete sensations be a mere record of the experiences of the inner physical?
Why "mere" record? If you think the experiences in the subtle body are feeble vague things, you are mistaken - they can be quite as intense, swift, palpable, massive as those of the body.
How to distinguish a mere reflection of a subtle physical experience from a pure and direct experience of the outer body?
You cannot distinguish except either by intuition or by experience and established direct knowledge of the different sheaths.
Is the whole of the inner being made up of sheaths only?
Yes. Sheaths is simply a term for bodies, because each is superimposed on the other and acts as a covering and can be cast
Page 114
off. Thus the physical body itself is called the food sheath and its throwing off is what is called death.
Sometimes I feel the Force acting in the nerves, and also the nerves passing through different states of consciousness. Are there really nerves in the subtle physical sheaths?
Yes, there are nerves in the subtle body.
Yesterday not only my consciousness but the body also felt horizontally wide and vertically huge. And then I experienced that 1 was the Self. When the physical began to widen out still more, I was afraid of a possibility of ego aggrandisement, though the whole experience was taking place in an impersonal aspect.1 So I called at once for the Personal and put my widened self on the Mother's lap.2 Was my fear a true one?
The feeling of the body enlarging and widening itself is of course an indication of widening out of the physical (body) consciousness and is a subtle material rendering in the body of the self-realisation. One has not to be afraid of it, but to keep the idea of the ego out of it, for it is not the personality that is in question but the realisation of the self, one in all.
There was a dynamic action of the Mother's Force in my left arm. But why did the arm become especially red?
There is no reason why the arm should become physically red merely because there was Force in it. If the redness was a subtle physical phenomenon, that is different.
Today I felt for a long time a powerful action of the Mother's Force in my feet. It was an experience in various phases. In order to describe it concretely, let us imagine the feet as a pebble. At times the pebble expanded to the size of a rock, at other times it was still a pebble but seemed as heavy as if filled with lead, and at
1 If it was an impersonal experience, how does the ego come in? Self (Atman) is one thing, ego is another. (Sri Aurobindo's comment in margin)
2 That is all right. (Sri Aurobindo)
Page 115
other times it contained a tremendous energy and strength! During this condition, the mind, vital and higher parts of the being remained almost blank.
Action in the feet means action on the most physical consciousness.
Page 116
Home
Disciples
Nagin Doshi
Books
Share your feedback. Help us improve. Or ask a question.