|
March 1937 You find "funny" things in my poems? Then, Sir, you have only to ask me to stop writing. But why do you object to fun? Modern opinion is that a poet ought to be funny (humorous) and that the objection to funniness in poetry is a romantic superstition. How is it then that you give remarks "very fine" etc.? Page-842 Well, it can be funnily fine or finely funny—can't it? If they are really funny, why should I spoil my valuable time writing them when I could sleep comfortably for two hours? For the joy of the world, of course. Funny however is used in the sense of "extraordinary". You can't deny that these things are extraordinary? Is that the reason why you don't give any explanations either? Very well, Sir! Why should I explain when you can understand and explain yourself? As Christ came to save sinners, not the righteous, so am I here to explain the inexplicable to the non-understanding, not to the understanding. [There were a few friends who, inspired by my surrealistic poetry, were writing poems in the same vein, and I was sending them to Sri Aurobindo asking him to explain some of the difficult ones. After explaining once or twice he said that if it continued he would go on "strike".] But I don't see the logic of your threat of "strike". If people begin writing these surrealistic poems by your inspiration, am I to blame and suffer? The strike is supposed to be against the 4, 5, 6 ad infinitum, not against the two. My inspiration? When they catch it from you! By the way, for whom have you to write explanations from set to dawn ? One is my precious self? Yes. And the other is J?
Yes. I have to explain for her also. But she is not a surrealist! Page-843 Surrealist or symbolist, it comes to the same so far as need for explanation goes. March 1,1937 . .. In spite of your decrying my poems, Sir, there are plenty of beautiful conceptions, you must admit! Who decries it? Some are funny—I beg pardon, extraordinary— but the beauty is all there. March 2, 1937 I suppose you have seen that letter of S's. I left it to the wisdom of the Mother to do what my wisdom failed to decide. .. What a letter, my God! Why get upset over such an entirely unimportant thing? S's letters are like that and nobody attaches the least value to them. I have thrown his letter into the W.P.B. which is the only place that suits it. March 3, 1937 A has pain in the liver region and near the umbilicus. She was given acid Hydrachlor mix with Nux vomica for a long time. Now we have changed it to mix. Sod. and other salts. A writes that B told her to take curds when she had diarrhoea (?), and she has been doing so with the results that she is being washed out completely by thick leucorrhea, sometimes also intense shooting pains in stomach lower and upper—spine and loins paining day and night. Asks if she is to continue curds. Asks me to tell you. By the way what was your objection to Kola for Arjava? I have forgotten. He complains of being very rundown in energy — Mother thought that ten days of Kola repeated whenever necessary (not continued for longer periods) might help to keep it up —and as we have fresh supply of Kola — well! March 4, 1937 My objection was that Kola contains caffein which is a stimulant, so it can't be continued for a long period. But Page-844 surely it can be taken for 2 or 3 weeks — it will be a good tonic after this weakness. In that case you can give? If it is not with you, take from Pavitra. March 5,1937 [P suffering from a carbuncle.] He said that if it was going to be serious, he would as well start for home! If he wants to go, don't stop him—let him do so. He was allowed to come here for a month's experiment to see whether the place suited him and he suited the place. The carbuncle seems to be a negative answer. What's your opinion, Sir, on today's poem?
Quite successful. March 6, 1937 "Quite successful" only? When will this be followed by a little more warmth and exhilaration, can you predict? Well, I can write, if you want: "Superlative! Extraordinary! Unimaginable! Surprising! Inexpressible! Ineffable!" That ought to be warm and exhilarating— I told you that I have written two poems in an hour. Should I have written one instead and revised it to make it a better egg if possible? No such rule necessary. But when this stuff itself is not very remarkable, can further labour improve it much? Only detail corrections needed. Wouldn't it be a waste of time?
Yes.
Page-845 I could write instead another poem if it pours in? Yes. Of course one can go on altering and altering till an altogether new poem is created. That is what you do, I understand. That is for "big" poetry. Short poems I usually revise only once and alterations are not many. March 7, 1937 10. p.m. I heard just now that X is again troubled because of some "peacelessness", and intends to go to Calcutta. May I go to see him? I hope there is no harm in doing so? I know I won't be able to help him. . . He cheered me up in my last depression. I suppose it is useless to discuss, or to persuade either. What will be the best thing to do ? I pray that he may give up this mad project. . . You must keep him, Sir! There is no harm in your going to see him, but it should be to cheer him and be helpful, not to dispute or lecture. To make him change his mind or cancel his going is difficult now because he has telegraphed to everybody—would be of little use. For something in him is strongly seized with this idea of Calcutta and Almora which has been long ripening and repeating itself, and it has been coming back and back every ten days or so. It would come back again and with greater vehemence. It is better to let him have his relief. He wrote a quite reasonable letter except for his usual silly nonsense about the "grimness" of the morning Meditation — and in answer I subscribed to his going for a few months, and staying at Calcutta and Almora. He was making his preparations quite cheerfully when suddenly he got the idea of taking Y with him (so it is reported) and went to her. She gave him a scolding and lecture. Result — he came gloomy to the Mother, found her "stern" (which she was not) and broke into a tragic despair, praying for death and saying that he would never come back or write again etc. If he is to go, it is surely better that he should go gladly and cheerfully and not in this spirit. Page-846 As to the madness of the project it is certainly not the best thing he could have done. But he has got into such a formation of ideas and feelings against the Yoga as it is practised here (he had that always almost) and is so unable to get rid of it that he is unable to have any outward progress until it is broken and no progress (a quiet inward psychic growth he does not want) throws him into fits of despair after every calm period of a few days. He wants to escape or get relief from it by going out. Well, let him try it, by a miracle it might succeed. In any case to hold back always when he says he is in turmoil here is not possible. March 9, 1937 L has a burning sensation in the mouth and throat. What cause? She says from mouth to throat is carpeted with pepper and covered with thin pomegranate grains and she suspects an eruption there. Also you have medicated her throat but under the tongue there is fire. Surrealist Poetry is not your monopoly — even your patients write it. S informed me the other day that her spine had already begun breaking of itself into two. March 10, 1937 Guru, I was badly hit by X's going away. .. The first question is: why has he gone? The marvel is that he did not go before. You and Mother have poured and poured all heaven, as it were, on him—affection, sympathy, love, consideration, etc., and yet he complains of dryness of heart here! By dryness of heart, he means that the vital is not given free play. You have very admirably explained in NK's poem Jackal, how the lower nature rushes towards the subconscient, and as soon as I read it I could not resist drawing the conclusion that this is X's present picture, word for word. Do you agree ? Yes, it is that. A certain part of him which belongs to the lower Page-847 vital was always rushing and has dragged away the rest. . . . Why has this lower nature become so vehement this time? But it has been rising again and again vehemently for a long time. Many times he wanted to go but you stopped him; why have you failed this time? This time I didn't try. It was becoming like a dog pulling at his leash and moaning miserably. Can't go on with that sort of thing for ever. So I had promised his outing, Bangalore and Cape Co-morin. He changed it to Baroda and Almora after Bangalore. I said, All right. He gave up Almora and perhaps Baroda. I said, All right. Finally no Bangalore, but Calcutta, Almora and anywhere else and several months at least. I said, All right — Then for some reason the old drama (for up till now all was fairly reasonable except the "grim Meditation" affair and the intolerableness of Mother's withdrawal and loss of the Pranam which had made his sufferings just tolerable), of Mother's sternness, desire of death, never never shall I come back here — finally joy of going accompanied with sentimental effusions. That's the whole story. Will he come back with his lower fires run down and, thus a changed man, jump into the spiritual sea? For a time perhaps, but will not the hydra-headed monster rise up again ? Yes, if there is no radical change. But only Mahakali can bring that about. Up to now we have given her no chance. Isn't it true that in Yoga desires enjoyed are more harmful than rejected or repressed? At any rate in this Yoga. Some say he hasn't gained anything substantial. Why, his psychic has surely developed in these 8 years. . . Rather say — it was beginning to develop by fits and starts interrupted by periods of vital violent reaction. Of course if he had Page-848 stayed and gone through it, the psychic should have prevailed in the end. But — Did he not realise that there is nothing, after all, in lower enjoyments? He said so always. After this realisation can there be a fresh necessity for further enjoyment? If there is no radical change, there can. Is it possible that he won't return at all, or will come back after many years? With X everything is possible. "Won't return" seems impossible for have you not said that his success is sure and that you will carry him yourself to his goal? I put a proviso, "If you are faithful to your seeking for the Divine". How is it that in spite of tremendous cost of Force and Energy, you could not change his views about your Yoga ? His mind changed somewhat, but his vital clung to the feeling of frustration by the Yoga and therefore abused the Yoga. It wanted either satisfaction of its play or brilliant experiences to replace them or both together. Not getting its way, it damned the Yoga as grim, horrible etc. All the time it refused to go on steadily with the thing that would be effective. Quarrels with J, grimness of A, estrangement with N, etc., etc., are they reasons for deserting this Yoga? For a man with X's vital they seem governing reasons. He has read so many of your books, has had so many letters Page-849 from you, yet he doesn 't give any importance to inner things — calm, silent, steady progress ? What have you done then, Sir? You are speaking as if it was his thinking mind that refused. His thinking mind was changing its attitude. It was the vital mind that refused inwardness, silence etc. Unfortunately he seemed to think that Mother is harder than you: she is grim and doesn't love etc., etc. That is because Mother's pressure for a change is always strong— even when she doesn't put it as force it is there by the very nature of the Divine Energy in her. But it was just this change his vital did not want — hence the feeling. He will suffer terribly, I fear, outside. Is it then his soul's necessity for further experience? Has the soul any such need? If the soul had not, it would not be here in this world of Ignorance. It is for the experience of Ignorance that it is here. It baffles me to think that a man who had so much self-confidence regarding poetry, music, and achieved success with sheer industry, could do nothing in Yoga with so much of your Force. . . What a delusion! All the industry in the world could not have made him a poet, a novelist, a prosodist, an effective writer on serious questions. .. None of you realise that X had talent but no genius before he came here — Tagore is right there, except in music — and even there many criticised him as shallow, limited, superficial; merely pretty, lacking in depth, power, greatness. I saw a letter of an admirer the other day who told X that formerly his music had been full of show and ostentation, but now there was an immense change, it had become true and genuine. .. But he had a strong vital and Mother and I saw that there was stuff here which could be made into something. And we made it. . . Page-850 He has supported himself in many things, saying that he had your sanction. You gave him absolute freedom. . . It was no use interfering—he would have done it all the same. And these things — talks, food, sociality were not the crucial things in his case. To press in his case on these points would only have prevented all chance of his giving an opportunity to the sadhana. It is not necessary in all cases to put this kind of pressure, — it depends on the case and the nature. Another thing that hurt me was K's revolt. How could he say such things against you when he broke with X Over you and Ramakrishna? My dear Sir, these fits are periodical with K—it is only the remarks against myself that were new. Ever since he came here, he has been announcing from time to time his departure. He came here, I understand, on this earth, only for you! Eh, what? What has been achieved if after 13 or 14 years of sadhana, there is a lack of faith in the Guru? Considering what K was, much has been achieved. But in a way nothing is really achieved until all is. Is that not enough to show that real faith is not yet there? Faith is there in parts of the being, absent in others. Now, if K behaves in this way and X can leave the Asram after 8 years, two opposites—what about us? Opposites, but for the same reasons—a physical mind clinging like a leech to its own wrong ideas of traditional sadhana and a vital that does not want to surrender, to lose independence and its own way of satisfaction. Page-851 What have you kept in store for us, Sir? Not sandesh and rasagolla! Will the sadhaks tumble one by one in this way as your Supramental comes nearer and nearer? Then with whom will you enjoy your Supramental? Night and day you are soaring and soaring. Romantic one! I am not soaring and soaring—I am digging and digging, "Go to the ant, thou sluggard" sort of affair. You don't even look to see what fires your wings are throwing on our mortal frames! My wings are throwing no fire. If anything happens to your mortal frames, it is your own kerosene stoves that are responsible. Why don't you give us any word of hope? When will your Gentleman come down, if he will? Bother your words of hope. I am concerned with getting things done, (if people will kindly allow it and not be making a row all the time)—not with words. I am shaken to the roots, for I fear I may share no better fate in your hands. Nevertheless all your promises will be fulfilled one day, for the Divine is eternal and so is the soul. Well, that ought to be enough. . . . How is it that a person professing a deep love for you is strongly attached to another one, and asks you to have trust in him or her? Isn't it a duplicity? I can't tolerate such conduct, and get rather disturbed. . . You speak like a Daniel come to judgment. If you could only be calm like Daniel in the den of lions when these things happen, it would be all right. . .. Seeing all this I have made up my mind to cut off all vital human relations. . . Page-852 I say that all that is magnificent, if you can do it. But can't you see that it is the inward change that is wanted — the inward plunge? These dramatic outward breaks lead only to new joinings. Neither you nor she can keep to it. If there comes a strong ingoing movement, then it is another matter. That of itself would make it possible to readjust the relations or to withdraw if necessary. But splashings about on the surface —will it lead to anything? It does not look like it. If I have shown X's other side, it is needless to tell you that I have seen his finer side too, and have profited much by it. Affection can be there even when one criticises somebody, can't there? Yes, of course. Outward breakings away and rejoinings, what's the use of that? The remedy lies inside you. Try to go inward, find the Mother there, find your true self, your psychic being. Afterwards J won't matter—you may be her friend or her literary collaborator or neither and it won't make a jot of difference — I have spoken. You may congratulate yourself, Sir, on this invasion of surrealism [10.3.37]! But L is better. What have you done with S's spine? I saw her still going strong; result of your operation ? The spine was surrealistic — her going it strong is realistic. Krishnayya says that you have asked him to stop Hadensa as it is of no use now. Nonsense — it is he who wanted to stop, saying no improvement, very costly — So I said, he could stop. P's carbuncle is much better—says bandage is now bondage! Seems much struck by Mother's force as per cure carbuncle — no gratitude to the doctor. Such is life! March 11, 1937 Page-853 All interest in life has disappeared, Sir! Poems are a bore; what prescription? Shift to a centre within. Our chief centre has gone! I suppose he will find plenty of radii in his new-old circumference. Poor fellow speaks about my affection in his letter. What an illusion! Illusion? This is poetry, sir. Yes, Sir, such is life! But in P's case I must give more credit to Mother, for his quick cure. Good he believes in her Force, for you will have a disciple of the Warrior-Ian-! [Punjab] of which you have none. Have several (not here, but there) but they are almost all neurasthenics! Only, he is a little too old and too much chaperoned by V!
Great heavens! V has got hold of him —Poor fellow!
We have to get Hadensa tubes for B; shall we ? Yes. Nishikanta has congestion of throat.
Result of Customs? or of custom? March 12, 1937 What about my book, Sir? Haven't decided where you will begin and where you will end? or keeping it for Sunday? My dear Sir, if you write a Mahabharat, you can't expect the answer however scrappy to be finished in one or two nights among Page-854 a mass of other work? Nous progressâmes1 — that's the state of things. Still feeling bad—not for the loss of the centre, but don't know exactly.
No? you don't feel
Under P, you wrote: "They are almost all nervous thieves"? Gracious! I didn't. I wrote "neurasthenics"—neurasthenic Warriors, sir! And about Nishikanta—"Result of—or of custom?" Customs (British). Reference to their outing with Dilip. March 13, 1937 How did you hear of this remark anāth? Any number of vivid reports of the great event—this detail among others. I find that as a result of your Force, A has had only one vomit today! Evidently my Force is growing just as my handwriting is improving! Doraiswamy better; pain. Is it that he has a better pain? or that the fact that he has a pain shows that he is better; or that he is better but still has pain? An aphoristic style lends itself to many joyfully various interpertations. March 14, 1937 1We have made some progress (i.e. "I have made a start on your letter"). 2anāth: orphan. Page-855 Obviously, evidently, undoubtedly, Sir, your Force is growing! By the number of deportees, one can see that!
They are not departees — yet. X gone on a spree — says he will one day come back. V sent as a missionary by the Mother— don't expect his mission will be very fruitful though. R went for her property—property and herself held up by family, as we told her it would be etc. So no sufficient proof of Force here. If they had all gone saying
March 15, 1931 About the "departees", they may come back all right, but why did they go? Because some pressure acted on the old knots and they had to give up the Yoga, at least temporarily. Once one takes up this Yoga, what is family, property or anything else? But R didn't give up Yoga — she was going on very well. Only the idea of her property shut up in others' hands and ready to disappear, obsessed her. She wanted to bring it and give it to Mother. It was a mistake, for it was not worth the risk and trouble and interruption to Sadhana. But there was a vital push and attachment that made her recur always to the idea. You have forgotten D.S. who went mad after 8 or 9 years of Yoga? What Yoga? This idea of D.S. being a great Yogi is a queer thing. Have you read the letter and poems by X? Anything to communicate regarding the letter? Nothing special. The poems seem extremely fine, don't they? Yes, I said so. 1 Never again shall I come back. Page-856 You can't call them sentimental this time, Sir, because they are addressed to the Divine! Well, one can be sentimental with the Divine, if one particularly wants to! X is having plenty of garlands, meetings, feastings etc. Spree indeed!... Good enough for a change, what? Change, certainly. Are you writing a Mahabharat in reply to my "Maha-bharat", I wonder! I was. Guru, I hope you won't "ash"1 me for spoiling your afternoon "spree", by this letter, will you? Where is the spree in the afternoon? Neither afternoon, evening, night, nor morning. Spree, indeed!
Laugh with the sonnets and cry with the letter [X's], if you can. Very touching! If the
You recommend me a fit of hysteria? No, sir. The sonnets are as usual, quite admirable. So, I dare say, was the
[Regarding a poem of J's: ] The confusions of muddy eddies of life are at an end? Wish they were! Jehovah! How far down is your plume ? Do you see the great Tail yet ? 1 Reduce to ashes. 2 komal vyavahar: kind behaviour. Page-857 Tail is there—but no use without the head. March 16, 1937 Why did you say "I was"? Have you stopped writing the Mahabharat, then? Because I can make no time-Night after night have to write letters, letters, letters, not to speak of other things. Everything seems to be queer in this world, Sir, especially in this yogic world! When a fellow [D.S.] works hard at French, medicine, trying to improve the Dispensary and himself, and thereby serve the Divine better, it is bad. Too much concentration and meditation is worse. [Sri Aurobindo underlined "and himself".] There is where you miss the truth and he missed it also — he did not try to "improve himself", at any rate in any Yogic way—he might try to aggrandise himself but that is another matter. Self-aggrandisement does not save from collapse. When one follows the rule "eat, drink and be merry" it is the worst. Well, I never heard that 'to eat, drink and be merry' was one of the paths of Yoga - unless Charvak's way is one of Yoga. I am coming to X's view that your Yoga will always remain yours. Nobody will ever catch its head or tail, except a few perhaps. Let us pin our faith on the "Head" now. The tail has noosed many! It is not my Yoga that is difficult to get the head or tail of—it is your and X's and others' views about Yoga that are weird and wonderful. If a fellow is brilliant in French and Sanskrit, you think he is a wonderful Yogi, but then it is the people who are first in the Calcutta B.A. who must be the greatest Yogis. If one objects to spending all the energy in tea and talk, you say "What queer gurus these are and what queer ideas", as if sociability were the base of the Brahman—or on the contrary you think everybody Page-858 must shut himself up in a dark room, see nobody, go mad with want of food and sleep—and when we object to that, you say "Who can understand this Yoga?" Have you never heard of Buddha's maxim "No excess in any direction"—or of Krishna's injunction "Don't eat too much or abstain from eating, don't drop sleep or sleep too much; don't torture the soul with violent tapasya—practise Yoga steadily, without despondency. Don't abstain from works and be inactive, but don't think either that mere work will save you. Dedicate your works to the Divine, do it as a sacrifice, reach the point at which you feel that the works are not yours but done for you etc., etc. Through meditation, through dedicated works, through bhakti—all these together, arrive at the divine consciousness and live in it." Buddha and Krishna are not considered to be unintelligible big Absurdities, yet when we lay [stress] on the same things, you all stare and say "What's this new unheard-of stuff?" It is the result I suppose of having modern-minded disciples who know all about everything and can judge better than any Guru, but to whom the very elements of Yoga are something queer and cold and strange. Kismet! Have you heard that Y is also tottering, or has tottered already? Couldn't get over the shock of D.S.'s madness? Y has written to us already. He wants to make a marriage and farewell to the world trip, somewhat like X's. . . But he has been tottering, as you call it, ever since he was here, so that is nothing new. . . Guru, Chand wants to know what will be the true spirit of surrender for him and how he ought to receive Mother's flower "Surrender" which he has been getting often. Why for him? Surrender is the same for everybody. Any illumination? None. There is some law point here and reference to A.P. House1
1 Arya Publishing House, Calcutta. Page-859 also. God knows who this B.K. is, who requires your permission to go into all this business. Well? B.K. is a "disciple" and has been Manager of A.P.H. but is now to be relieved of his duties. He was at the head of some institution in Khulna — forgotten which. Don't know what status he has for the purpose. Probably he is or was a lawyer—but not sure. Permission be hanged! March 17, 1937 [Morning] You perhaps had a hope that at least you would have some respite with no more of X's voluminous correspondence. Much mistaken, Sir! Much mistaken! So long as I have not to write voluminous answers. I am sure next August will be a great victorious occasion with swarms of elites of Calcutta at your feet. Happy at the prospect? Horrifying idea! Luckily the elites are not in the habit of swarming.
[Afternoon] All these orations, successes, etc. of X, raise another question—whether the Divine also wanted that His name should be spread now. The Divine is quite indifferent about it. Or rather more privacy would be better for the work. [Evening] What? X also has a "message"? But all I heard was that he had become restless. I said that his [Y's] outing was somewhat like X's—i.e. a social round. What, Y has gone out to deliver a "message"? What message, Sir? Page-860 There is nothing about message. Marriage, marriage—two marriages, in fact. Not that he is going to marry 2 wives, but he is going to see the misfortune of two others consummated and gloat over it. But why exactly did D.S. tumble?—if not private. Self-aggrandisement only? Can't be! Why not? Never heard of megalomania? I heard he was touchy regarding his wife and wife touchy about him—My God, grazes the skin, almost, Sir! Touchy means what? And how does touchiness graze the skin? Now about X's tea and butter!. . . It isn't butter—it's "tea and talk". All these were, it seems, generously granted by you to X. No bar, no restriction—full freedom, carte blanche . . . They were granted by me as a concession to his nature, because by self-deprivation he would land himself in the seas of despair — not as a method of reaching the Brahman. He was trying to do what his nature would not allow. It was only if he got intense spiritual experience that he could give up tea and talk without wallowing in misery—Is it so difficult to understand a simple thing like that? I should have thought it would be self-evident even to the dullest intelligence. You remember your reply to his "ascetic" letter about giving up cooking, shaving his head, etc., etc.? Well, what is this now? Sociability not the base of Brahman, surely? That's what we all thought, but your sanction and support that each has a different path etc., took our support away. Because I allowed him to talk, and objected to his making an ostentatious ascetic ass of himself, does it follow that the talk and Page-861 tea were given as part of his Yoga? If the Mother allowed butter or eggs to Y for his physical growth, does it follow that butter and eggs are the bases of the Brahman? If somebody has a stomachache and I send him to the dispensary, does it follow that a stomachache, the dispensary, Nirod and allopathic drugs are the perfect way to spiritualisation? Don't be an a—, I mean a Gandhilike logician! My poems are now getting less surrealistic and losing all charm of incomprehensibility . . . Necessary transition, I suppose. Also the power of bold expressions, images, etc. are disappearing. . . Why? Get them in another way, bold and original but not surrealistic, so that people instead of crying "Very fine but what the devil does he mean?", will shout "Ah ha! Wah! wah!" in a chorus of approbation for your genius and personality much as X is getting in Calcutta. How do you like the prospect? March 18, 1937 Nishikanta and Jyoti say, about my recent poems, that there is much improvement. They're more cogent, harmonious and still retain my originality and surrealism too. They are more cogent and harmonious; there is also plenty of individuality, fine images, lines and phrases. But the surrealistic audacity of phrase and image is in abeyance. My suggestion is that it has to come back without the surrealism and with this greater clarity and harmony and more perfect building. That's why I said "transition". I say, there's a fellow in this world who says that besides occasional emissions of normal and orthodox kind with dreams, he gets almost daily slight discharges without dream in light sleep (day sleep or morning sleep renewed after waking) and there are "internal" discharges which don't come out until there is (after some days, I believe) a proper discharge. This he supposes due to a liquification of the semen due to former bad habits. When there Page-862 are these internal discharges his head becomes empty and giddy, and he expects if it goes on there will be no head left—or at least nothing inside it. Now i have heard of internal haemorrhage but not of internal discharges which seems self-contradictory in itself as a phrase. i can understand habitual loss of semen or weakness in retention due to past misuse, but what is this? Does your medical science shed any light? have you had any experience in treatment of such things so as to give me a direction for this distressed traveller towards headlessness? What? March 19, 1937 I am afraid I can't throw much light on these "internal discharges", unless it means that instead of coming out they flow back to the bladder due to some obstacle in the urethra. Hardly a possibility. They can be stopped halfway by will in an emission—but he does not mean that. If there is constant excitement there might be a constant dribbling also. . . But it is only in these two sleeps and without dream. He says waking time is all right. Or there might be a gleety discharge which may be mistaken far semen. Hasn't spoken of that. But would it come only in special sleeps like this? What does R say on this matter? Haven't asked him. Afraid of a resonant explanation which would leave me gobbrified and flabbergasted but no wiser than before. But is he really sure that they are seminal discharges? Can't make out. He distinguishes them from emission, speaks of slight discharges and internal discharges—same thing apparently. Page-863 Lastly, if his testes have undergone some degeneration, the internal secretion may be deficient. How could that be described as internal discharges in two special kinds of sleep? Is my surmise enough to understand the matter? No. J is very much fascinated by the variety in chhanda in Dilip's and NK's work, and doesn't want to rest content only with the old forms. You say both forms can be beautiful. Why not try then this modern form, since we are your "modern disciples"? No objection to trying. But is the form of Dilip and Nishikanta general in modern Bengali poetry? I thought it was Dilip's departure and much criticised by many? I don't think a rule or school can be made of these things. Let each follow his own genius.
I don't follow the
Lord, sir! If you want to be intelligible and read by people, why do you write symbolic and sometimes almost surrealist poetry? In your comment on my poetry, why did you underline "audacity"? French sense? If I had intended the French sense, I would have written "audace". The word means boldness, daring. Does it suggest anything more? I don't like these "suggestions". One has ego enough 1 yugadharma; spirit of the age, Time-spirit. Page-864 and to spare. So please don't write: you have done this, you have done that! Don't understand all this. I thought you would like to get the "audacious" originality back again in full in better form, so I suggested that the transition could very well be moving towards that. What the hell has all that got to do with egoism or with personal effort either? Why bloat the ego still further when you know that suggestions and that sort of thing are no use? In Yoga, you say surrender, and in poetry—this personal effort business? No, Sir, no! Wait a minute—Where have I said that there is to be no personal effort in Yoga? Kindly read the passages in The Mother about tamasic surrender and the place of personal effort in the sadhana. March 20, 1937 I think my expressions were rather surrealistic, so you helled them. What expressions? Well, what I meant by "suggestions" was that I shall be led to think it was I, my great personal effort, that brought in the boldness of images, audacity, etc. Won't that be egoism and personal effort business? Do you mean that you don't want your poetry to improve because that would make you egoistic? Very queer, sir. What about the book, Sir? What book? [After I gave a brief interpretation of a poem of J's, Sri Aurobindo gave a further explanation.] Page-865 . . . Very complicated operation. Kindly explain or translate or do something to remove my bewilderment. I am afraid your prose is becoming as surrealistic as your poetry—full of ellipses and suppressed concepts. Today it has bewildered me thrice (see your poetry book,) where I have had to ask "what expressions?" "what book?" If these internal discharges can be stopped halfway by will, what happens to them? Do they go back to the vesicles or come out in the urine? Don't know — they don't give any sign afterwards. . . . But is it not usual to have losses without dreams in sleep ? Yes, but that is quite another matter. I hear it is common in people who have misused their parts, and the fact of their getting them after sleep may be due to lack of voluntary nervous control. In sleep. Or if the prostates are enlarged, they may press on the vesicles more directly in the lying position, and thus cause the discharge. Yes, constipation also produces discharge. I can't think of any other possibility. Does he unconsciously do involuntary movements in sleep, I wonder! Not likely. March 21, 1937 Another letter from Chand—family matters and something about his Bank trouble! What a fine thing to be an Avatar, what? Page-866 Why? You think an Avatar has to take in the Bank troubles of his Chands? No fear! How the devil could I mean that I don't want my poetry to improve? I certainly want it to improve to its zenith, but it must not bring in the egoistic idea that I have done it by my own power, as your expressions "you have to do this", "you have to bring this etc., etc." is very likely to feed the egoism. That's all, Sir! Not clear? Well, sir, if I can't say you, must I write "that body" or "the phenomenon of an apparent Doctor-poet"? Or there must be an impersonal commotion in the apparently personal part which might be pragmatically called "doing this" or "bringing this". That would discourage egoism; but it might discourage my writing also as well as stifle your poetic inspiration while you stared at the roundabouts. "What book?" you ask after 2 or 3 weeks? My "Maha-bharat", Sir, or Ramayana, if you like! Good heavens! who would have thought of that? Yes, I tried reading The Mother, but the first chapters gave me a fright and made my blood freeze— "no use, no use" resounds everywhere, resulting in the idea of giving up even the ghost of Yoga! I suggested to you to read the passages referring to the necessity of effort so long as the Force does not take up the whole business. About "internal discharge", I had a talk with Rajangam. Could you please wait till tomorrow? Yes, certainly. March 22, 1937 . . . I am now waiting only for the Mahabharat, and in the meantime sharpening my sword! Page-867 Well, don't brandish the sword in the void—that's all. [A long report on "internal discharge".]
Any remedy? March 23, 1937 Y asked me if I had written to you anything about X, she would like to see your answers. Will you take the trouble, Sir, to cross the portions of your letters that I can show her? [Sri Aurobindo twice underlined "cross" and "can".] Good Lord, sir, I can't do that. You forget that I will have to try to read my own hieroglyphs. I have no time for such an exercise — I leave it to others. Today I have written 3 poems, Sir, from 2.30-4.45 p.m. Remarkable, isn't it? Colossal! N had fever in the evening again.. . Couldn't find anything in the lungs. Still something incipient may be going on as he had already pleurisy. Anyway, we can give him some medicine—Ayurvedic or allopathic? That's the doctors' business. Whatever has been good for him. I took Sanganswami to the oculist. He will scratch the conjunctiva a little suspecting something there. About the remedy I am afraid! [I suddenly took up N's report.] Afraid of what? Will make things worse? But, I suppose, some nerve tonics, sedatives and gland products will have an effect. . . I read with amazement—thought it was all about Sanganswami's eye. Page-868 J says she makes no mental effort; tries to keep quiet, yet nothing comes down. Difficulty of shunting the train. March 24, 1937 Guru, here is a history, a prayer and a task! I hope you will note the dates of X's performances.1 Noted, but he is sometimes late in his information. That doesn't matter though. He has given me some work—shall I ask Anilbaran and Nolini? But for Anilbaran your sanction is necessary. Sanction for what? The suggestion is rather vague. Shall I send him Arjava's poems? If Arjava consents. You will note, Sir, he writes that he does not doubt that his material success and fame and glory are by your Force, but all doubts are about his yogic success. Can't understand his contradiction. Does he mean he has capacities in some lines which the Divine can push, but yogic capacity nil, so the Divine can't pull? That's his latest idea—though not so late, for it was growing for some time. Anyhow. . . There is going to be plenty of money, Sir, of which Mother has great need! No objection if it comes. Please explain your "shunting". How can the difficulty be solved? 1 X's musical recitals on the radio. Page-869 When one has run always on one line with great success, it is difficult to shunt to another. Time, aspiration, inner working. Sorry if I am indefinite, but— ... Despair doesn't seem to help. It doesn't. On the other hand, it hinders, doesn't it? Yes. A quiet aspiration with faith works best.
Quite so. Preaching?
Very correct preach. I told J confidently that poetry is bound to develop. Of course it will. Today J named me an "angel of hope", Sir. From a "devil of despair" to an "angel of hope"? Your Yoga has worked, Sir! You can congratulate me a little. Mille felicitations! March 25. 1937 "Mille felicitations"? Thank you, Sir! But just note that it was with regard to poetry only. Yoga has to come. Without that no felicitations are any good, at least for me. Well, well—all in due time—mille félicités as well as felicitations. A funny thing happened last night. It began this way: since 6.30 p.m. I had been feeling the Mother's Presence, and more vividly yours, until I went to bed. Page-870 In the evening when I went to the pier, for a while your entire face appeared vividly before my eyes. I was so happy that I forgot the moon above and was drinking in your Presence. Then gradually it dissolved, leaving only the outline. At times it seemed to be before me, at others as if the whole sky was pervaded by your Presence. I returned home, but went again to the pier at 9 p.m. with J. While she was talking, I was perceiving the outline of your Presence, and no other thought came in or went out. J's talk had no effect on it. Within I was automatically uttering your name and the Mother's. At 10.30 p.m. I went to bed, after a short concentration. I was in a sort of semi-slumberous state wherein a great pressure was being exerted on the head. The whole body became hot and was perspiring. The pressure increased so much that I said I must come out of it or burst. It was such a possession. I relaxed myself and rolled into sleep. I hope you will pick the grain out of the chaff. What sort of an affair is this, Sir? Trying to cut my throat or burst my head? Very good indeed — that is something like a beginning. Well, sir, the Presence not finding an entrance into your waking mind easy, tried to take advantage of half sleep to do it. (Half sleep is always a favourable condition for these things). But your body consciousness, not being familiar with such spiritual penetrations, got into a stew—and as a stew is accompanied by heat and steam,—so your body got hot and perspired. Naturally, when it found so much resistance, it increased to meet the resistance. Obviously, to burst is undesirable. Throat not in the picture—Tried to steal a march into your head. Did I do anything wrong by trying to relax? It is better to relax than to burst. . . . Sometimes I have felt inclined to doubt the Presence, but I think I should not, what? Page-871 Certainly not — doubt under such circumstances is perfectly imbecile. Still a small snake of doubt says (not regarding yesterday's feeling, though), "It is all imagination—" Rubbish! It goes on "If not. . . why have you to concentrate and call the Presence? By its very nature the Presence should at once make you see that it is there as if it were an object before you, without making you imagine things." Sir, is the Presence of a physical nature or a spiritual fact? And is the physical sense accustomed or able to see or feel spiritual things—a spiritual Presence, a non-material Form? To see the Brahman everywhere is not possible unless you develop the inner vision — to do that you have to concentrate. To see non-material forms is indeed possible for a few, because they have the gift by nature, but most can't do it without developing the subtle sight. It is absurd to expect the Divine to manifest his Presence without your taking any trouble to see it,—you have to concentrate. Just now, as I am writing to you, I feel as if the Mother were looking at me and you too, but from your invulnerable fortress. It simply means you have a subjective sense of our Presence. But must a subjective sense of things be necessarily a vain imagination? If so, no Yoga is possible. One has to take it as an axiom that subjective things can be as real as objective things. No doubt there may be and are such things as mental formations—but, to begin with, mental formations are or can be very powerful things, producing concrete results; secondly whether what one sees or hears is a mental formation or a real subjective object can only be determined when one has sufficient experience in these inward things. What should I do to develop this experience further? It is the very Thing, you see, isn't it ? Page-872 Yes, of course. What you have to do is to grow and let the experience grow. Is this what you call going inward? [Sri Aurobindo drew a line from the word "inward" leading to his reply.] No, not quite—but it is evidently the result of some opening from within—for without that opening one cannot become aware of Presences or Forms that are super-physical in their nature. This experience, I feel, is the means of escape from worldly pleasures, isn't it? Yes. I feel now some strength; nothing can disturb me in my relation with people. Good? Exceedingly good. Please give me some necessary instructions, not depending on my notes, as to what should be done. If I have seen the tail it must lead me to the head! There is nothing to do but to go on concentrating and calling the Presence within and without you, the opening, the power to receive and let it come. The more the mind falls quiet during or as the result of concentration, the better (no other thought in or out). But no need to struggle for that, must come of itself by the concentration. March 26, 1937 C is involved in a cheating case; by some compromises he can get out of it. . . What does he mean by compromises? Lies? If he goes on with this sort of thing, how the devil is he ever to come out of his messes? . . . Z attributes her trouble to R's insufficient or even negligent treatment. Strange! I saw that R took much Page-873 care and he cured her of that terrible attack of hiccough. Such is life, Sir! What? Z is a liar and says anything she wants to—she is also semi-hysteric and believes anything she wants to. Such is life and such are humans. Shall we try Fandorine? Her back-ache also is due to retroversion of the uterus, probably. If it is retroverted uterus, Fandorine will have no effect. If it is bad circulation etc., then it is the best. Anyway you may try it. S.B. has intense itching—the whole body is swollen and red. But what nature of eruption? She has sent a howl—can't sleep, etc. B complains of more pain! Yes, he has also sent an epistolary howl. Suggesting enema from tomorrow. Lead and opium lotion for injection. This lotion, as you see, is sedative and astringent. I suppose it can do no harm? Is not B too sedentary for a man with piles? March 29, 1937 The trouble is that people expect their ailments to disappear by a miracle! Doctors are not Gods and Gods are not always miraculous, are they? Miracles can be done, but there is no reason why they should be all instantaneous, whether from Gods or doctors. Suddenly at 5 p.m. B's pain vanished. So I justify his epistle, Sir! His thundering scowl burst your ear! Page-874 It wasn't a scowl, even a thundering surrealist one—it was a tympanum-piercing howl—so one had to do something. K gave her baby 2 spoons of milk of magnesia. Result — copious motions with blood and mucus discharge; no sleep, restlessness, crying, etc. . . Looks like irritation due to heavy dose of magnesia! Must K's babies have something every time she comes here? Well, if she gives them 2 spoons of milk of magnesia, they are bound to. That was the way D's last baby got killed here, though M began it before she came. But the result was a dysentery which nothing can cure. But does your Science approve of purging babies of that age? In France, Mother says, the doctors (those who specialise for children at any rate) forbid purgatives being given on any excuse to children under twelve months. Some Force from you is wanted, for the baby can't aspire and surrender, Sir! Exactly! that's why milk of magnesia should not be given. Any baby treated in that way will need much aspiration and surrender to counteract the results. [About the patient with the "internal discharge":] He says that only after slight sleep or rest he feels giddy, weak and the condition lasts for 2 or 3 days. From this he gathers that there has been the discharge. It is only gathered then! I was insisting that it was not possible, but the fellow ne voulait pas demordre.1 But do you know that he is awfully, terribly and damnably constipated? I knew he was constipative, but not so adverbially. By the way, I want to know, just as a piece of information,
1 The fellow stuck to what he said; the fellow wouldn't give up his point. Page-875 what Mother is going to do about the awful smell around Belle Vue. Smell was that of Godard's prawns. The Municipality has just thundered at him and given notice to the prawns to quit. I am told that there is a sensible odorous amelioration since the last two days. March 30, 1937 2 p.m. I asked Mother through Nolini, whether I should give an emetine injection to K's baby, she said—No medicines to babies under 1 year. Emetine injection to a child of that age is not approved. What Mother says is that this is not an illness, but an accident caused by the purgative given. The tissues have been hurt and have to recover. What would be best is to give not a medicine properly speaking but something which would protect the injured tissues while they reformed. Mother does not know whether what is given to adults for that purpose can be administered to children. They say that the pains seem to have decreased, as the child slept well. As regards diet, he is given freely barley water, whey and glucose water. Shall we give milk? Milk might be too heavy. The diet seems all right. Now I am wondering if Nolini heard it right. Did Mother disapprove only of emetine or all medicines? Mother had said to me about the purgatives, not about medicines. Emetine for a child like that she would of course never sanction. [Between 2 p.m. and 8.30 p.m.] Nirod In view of the nature of the illness of K's child and its development, I think we cannot take any longer the responsibility—if Page-876 you think best, we can call in Dr. Valle who, I hear, has a child of his own and ought to have some experience with the maladies of children. You might see him at once, if possible. Sri Aurobindo [Evening] ...Now emetine being out of the question, we can give what we gave yesterday: 1) Bismuth 2) Soda Bicarb 3) Kaolin... Kaolin was the kind of thing Mother was thinking of as utilisable. I asked Nolini, he said—no medicines, no medicines. But your evening answer [to the note written at 2 p.m.] doesn't say that. It says — no emetine, no purgative, but "something which would protect the injured tissues..." Again at the end you say "Mother had said to me about the purgatives, not about medicines." It is all very puzzling and I am in a fix. . . Well, since medicines have been used, and the atmosphere is not the right one for No-medicine, you can go on,—but nothing violent like emetine. The Mother offered to call Valle and in that case of course the responsibility would be with him, but K has refused. What do you say, Sir, about this poem? Somewhat forced and artificial, no rhythm? I am afraid so. Rather drum-drum-drummy-brang-clangy. I have marked in two places, please see if they jar your ears. I am afraid they do. March 31, 1937 Page-877 |
as X threatened once, the proof would be conclusive.
of the people there had not been so good, it would have been splendid methinks.
must be satisfied. You can't pooh-pooh it, when you want things to be intelligible to people. Otherwise they will damn it.