Loretta reads Mother's Questions and Answers:1955-11-16 part 1

From Auroville Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
AurovilleRadio-logo-pop.png Mother's Questions and Answers: November 16, 1955 (part 1 of 2)
by Loretta, 2016 (56:34)


Loretta reads Mother's Questions and Answers
November 16, 1955 (part 1 of 2)
Loretta Q&A single icon.png

Gray arrow left.png     Gray arrow right.png



In this class, Mother speaks about the significance of the number 18, and then she explains the different combinations that can add up to 18. She tells the students that the numbers 6 plus 12, which of course add up to 18, are something really good. She explains that the number 12 is the number of perfection in conception and creation, and the number 6 is the number of the new creation. She says that if you put 12 and 6 together, you have something absolutely remarkable.

Most people are familiar with Mother's symbol; and we know it is designed with 12 outside sections or petals. Mother said her symbol is a fully-opened lotus flower. And when she named the flowers, she called the white lotus 'Aditi' which means the divine Mother.


Mothers symbol.jpg       White lotus.jpg


Mother said that 12 is the figure of the Mahashakti, the full great power of the supreme, which contains everything as the divine Mother.

The Matrimandir has 12 pillars, and 12 surrounding meditation chambers, called 'petals'. And it is designed as though it is Mother's symbol, lying on the earth.

Sri Aurobindo said the 12 sections of the Mother's symbol represent the 12 vibrations necessary for the complete manifestation of the supramental force here.

The name 'Sri Aurobindo' has 12 letters; Mother's given name, 'Mirra Alfassa', has 12 letters; 'Mother' is 6 letters. And Mother said that we really have 12 senses, not the 6 senses that we're always taught we have.

What's really interesting is that the important dates in the lives of both Mother and Sri Aurobindo come in 6-year cycles. The most important ones come in 6 + 2, or 12-year cycles. And Mother said that the succession of 12 years...12 years, marks the most momentous spiritual events in Sri Aurobindo's life.

Auroville Archives has a list of the 6- and 12-year cycles in the lives of Mother and Sri Aurobindo. It's really absolutely fascinating:

1872 Sri Aurobindo's birth year
1878 Sri Aurobindo is 6 years old; Mother is born
1884 Sri Aurobindo is 12; Mother is at age 6; and she said this is a significant year for the progression of her being's consciousness here.
1890 At age 18, Sri Aurobindo entered Cambridge University.
1896 Sri Aurobindo is 24; Mother is 18. She says this year marked the beginning of her artistic and vital development. She had married Morisset, the Impressionist painter, in 1887, and she went forward for a long time as a part of the Impressionist movement in France.
1902 Sri Aurobindo is 30; Mother is 24; Sri Aurobindo began his active part in the working for India's freedom. And this is the year when Mother first came into contact with the teaching of Max Théon, who was her teacher in occultism.
1908 Sri Aurobindo is 36; and he is arrested and jailed for one year. And as he said, he was forced by the Divine to slow down and leave political work. During that year in jail, he realized the Divine. In that year, 1908, Mother separated from her husband, André Morisset; and she started spending time with Paul Richard, starting a 12-year period of concentration on the mental development. And this is something that Mother said; the mental development concentration started at that time.
1914 Sri Aurobindo is 42; Mother is 36; they meet for the first time on the physical plane. Mother comes to Pondicherry and they start their work together; and Sri Aurobindo starts writing the Arya. And the Arya was a major work that had a very strong effect on the whole country of India.
1920 Mother is 42; and she returns to Pondy for the rest of her life.
1926 Sri Aurobindo is 54; and he has the major realization of the Overmind consciousness, which comes in him and makes a stable base which allows him to bring down the supramental forces. At this time, he retires to his room for good.
1932 Mother is 54; and she goes through a period of illness where she's extremely sick for one month, and it marks a major change in all her activity in the Ashram and with her disciples.
1938 Sri Aurobindo is 66; and this is the year he breaks his leg, and he's confined to bed. Which he basically doesn't really leave for the rest of his life.
1944 Sri Aurobindo is 72, and that's the same number as the year of his birth (1872). Mother has succeeded in establishing the Ashram school. The official starting date was a little bit before – on December 2nd, 1943.
1950 Sri Aurobindo is 78, the year of Mother's birth. Mother is 72, the year of Sri Aurobindo's birth. And this is the time that Sri Aurobindo voluntarily chooses to leave his body.
1956 Mother is 78, Sri Aurobindo's birth year a hundred years before. And there comes the very first manifestation of the supramental consciousness on earth.
1962 Mother retires permanently to her room, to concentrate on her inner work. And we can notice that 62 is the reverse of 26 – when Sri Aurobindo retired, in 1926.
1968 Mother is 90; and she starts Auroville.
1974 Mother has already left her body; she left about a month and a half before the new year of 1974, and about three-and-a-half months before her 96th birthday.

So this last date of Mother's action in her physical body, on the physical plane, is not exactly on the mark of the 6- and 12-year cycles. But the 6-year cycles do continue and they can be traced after that; and most likely they will continue.

Mother calls the pomegranate flower, 'Divine Love'. And in this class she tells the children that she always distributes the petals of the Divine Love flower on the day of Kali Puja. Kali Puja is the ceremony for the Indian goddess Kali; and Mother gives out Divine Love flowers because her love is the most active love, and the most powerful love.

Mother is well-known for naming flower essences, for showing us how they correspond to different universal movements that are also in us. And there are also many stories about how Mother used flowers to give forces to ashramites and to people who came to see her.

Mother first learned that flowers could receive and transmit forces while she was still living in Paris, around the turn of the twentieth century. And we have seen in the list of the years that in 1902, she first came into contact with Max Théon. She learned through some action of Théon's wife that she could put forces into flowers. And the flowers that she learned with are the flowers of the Divine Love.

Mrs. Théon, whose name was Alma – Alma sent Mother the petals of Divine Love, and told her that they were carrying her protection and force. So Mother tells a whole story about this, and here's the story:

“All the flowers to which I have given a significance receive exactly the force I put into them and transmit it. People don’t always receive it because most of the time they are less receptive than the flower, and they waste the force that has been put in it through their unconsciousness and lack of receptivity. But the force is there, and the flower receives it wonderfully.
I knew this a very long time ago. Fifty years ago.... There was that occultist who later gave me lessons in occultism for two years. His wife [Alma] was a wonderful clairvoyant and had an absolutely remarkable capacity — precisely — of transmitting forces. They lived in Tlemcen. I was in Paris. I used to correspond with them. I had not yet met them at all. And then, one day, she sent me in a letter petals of the pomegranate flower, “Divine’s Love”. At that time I had not given the meaning to the flower. She sent me petals of pomegranate flowers telling me that these petals were bringing me her protection and force.
Now, at that time I used to wear my watch on a chain. Wristwatches were not known then or there were very few. And there was also a small eighteenth century magnifying-glass... it was quite small, as large as this (gesture).... And it had two lenses, you see, like all reading-glasses; there were two lenses mounted on a small golden frame, and it was hanging from my chain. Now, between the two glasses I put these petals and I used to carry this about with me always because I wanted to keep it with me; you see, I trusted this lady and knew she had power. I wanted to keep this with me, and I always felt a kind of energy, warmth, confidence, force which came from that thing.... I did not think about it, you see, but I felt it like that.
And then, one day, suddenly I felt quite depleted, as though a support that was there had gone. Something very unpleasant. I said, “It is strange; what has happened? Nothing really unpleasant has happened to me. Why do I feel like this, so empty, emptied of energy?” And in the evening, when I took off my watch and chain, I noticed that one of the small glasses had come off and all the petals were gone. There was not one petal left. Then I really knew that they carried a considerable charge of power, for I had felt the difference without even knowing the reason. I didn’t know the reason and yet it had made a considerable difference. So it was after this that I saw how one could use flowers by charging them with forces. They are extremely receptive.[1]

Mother wrote a story about why the flowers of the pomegranate bush express and contain the Divine's Love. She called it “An Old Chaldean Legend”. The story is printed as an appendix to the text of this class, because a child asks her about it, and she speaks something about it. So here's the story:

An Old Chaldean Legend

“Long, long ago, in the dry land which is now Arabia, a divine being incarnated upon earth to awaken in it the supreme love. As expected it was persecuted by men, misunderstood, suspected, pursued. Mortally wounded by its assailants, it wanted to die quietly in solitude in order to be able to accomplish its work, and being pursued, it ran away. Suddenly, in the vast desert land there appeared a small pomegranate bush. The saviour crept in under the low branches, to leave its body in peace; and immediately the bush spread out miraculously, it grew higher, larger, became deep and thick, so that when the pursuers passed by, they did not even suspect that the One whom they were chasing was hidden there, and they went their way.

While drop by drop the sacred blood fell, fertilising the soil, the bush was covered with marvellous flowers, scarlet, large, crowded with petals... innumerable drops of blood.

These are the flowers which express and contain for us the Divine’s Love.”[2]

This week again we have the tape-recording of Mother's class; it will play automatically after the English reading is finished.

So we're in the Playground, Mother's Friday class...


16 November 1955[3]



(Mother reads from The Synthesis of Yoga, Part I, Chapter I:
“The Four Aids”.)

Ch.1 The Four Aids.jpg
PDF (16 pages)


(To a child) Have you prepared a question for your Birthday?

What is the significance of 18?

Of the number 18?

It depends on how it is read.

It can be read as 10+8; it can be read as 9+9; it can be read as 12+6. And each of these readings has a different meaning.

If we take 10+8, it can indicate something quite immobile: because 10 indicates a static perfection, something which has reached its perfection and stops there; and 8 is a double enclosure, that is, something which is framed in, surrounded, demarcated, and which naturally stops there. So if we put 10 and 8 together it truly makes something which can be an accomplishment but one that is terminated.

On the other hand, if we take 9+9: 9 is the process of creation — not the creation itself but its process — and 9+9 is a process of creation which continues and follows another process of creation, that is, a creation which is dual and implies the idea that it continues indefinitely. This gives us two meanings which are almost contradictory.

And if we take 12 and 6, then it becomes something very good. 12, you know what it is, don’t you? It is the number of perfection in conception and creation; and 6 is the number of the new creation. So if you put 12 and 6 together, you truly have something absolutely remarkable.

Now we can have other combinations. But it becomes a little more complicated.


[Page missing from audio:]

18 itself — as 18 — was the number of the consciousness in its effort for material realisation: the consciousness trying to realise itself materially, express itself materially.

So now you have something...

From the social point of view it is the first number for attaining majority, the first majority; that is, from eighteen onwards one has one’s own will, one has the right to have one’s own will, from the social point of view. It is clearly a very interesting starting-point.

There, then.

Sweet Mother, has each person’s number a different significance for each one?

If one wants to give it, yes.

If one doesn’t think about it, it doesn’t signify anything at all. It’s the importance one gives it which counts.

Numbers are a way of speaking. It is a language, as all the sciences, all the arts, everything that man produces; it is always a way of speaking, it is a language. If one adopts this language it becomes living, expressive, useful. As we need words to make ourselves understood usually—unfortunately it is liable to all kinds of confusions, but still we haven’t yet reached the state where we can communicate in silence, which, obviously, would be a very much higher state — well, if you want to give numbers a meaning in your life, they can reveal to you quite a lot of things. But it’s like that. It is like astrology: if one wants to study the relation between his life and the movement of the stars, one can also find all kinds of useful information.

Fundamentally it is a way of knowing, nothing else — a process. True knowledge is beyond words, beyond systems, beyond languages; it is in a silent identity. It is in fact the only one which does not err.

What else?


[Audio continues:]

In the prayer you gave us this time for Kali Puja, you have written something in Sanskrit.

It is Sri Aurobindo who has written a mantra.

[And the mantra that he's written is: “OM anandamayi chaitanyamayi satyamayi parame”. 'OM', Mother said was the sound of the creation; and then so it goes: '(the sound of the creation), bliss-filled, consciousness-filled, truth-filled, supreme being'.]
Then why has he written like this?

Why has he written this?

[And then, in a very quiet, matter-of-fact voice – and we remember that Sri Aurobindo left five years before, and that Mother always said that he didn't go anywhere, and so Mother simply says:]

Why don’t you ask him? Perhaps he will tell you.

It is an evocation. You know what it means? Did you find someone to explain it to you? No? Ah, that’s the first thing you should have done, ask what the meaning of these four words is.

The transcription underneath: there are only two of them. He had begun transcribing and then his paper... it was on a tiny little scrap of paper, and there wasn’t any more space to write everything; so he stopped. [And then you hear the children's laughter on the tape.]

Have you read it? You don’t know how to read Sanskrit? So now you must find someone to show you how to read it; and then to give you the significance. And after that you will ask me why he wrote it. Not now!

Sweet Mother, has that Chaldean legend which you have written any relation with Kali Puja?

Yes, my child, because on Kali Puja day I always distribute the flowers of “Divine’s Love”; for Kali is the most loving of all the aspects of the Mahashakti; hers is the most active and most powerful Love. And that is why every year I distribute the petals of “Divine’s Love” on Kali’s Day. And so naturally this explanation of why these flowers were chosen to express the Divine’s Love — it is a sufficient explanation.

Mother, who was this man you have spoken about?

Who told you that it was a man?

I haven’t said whether it was a man or a woman. I took care to put only “a divine being”.

Who?

It is a prehistoric story, so you cannot find any information about it. It isn’t written anywhere. There are no written documents.

Haven’t you any questions to ask on what we read today?

Sweet Mother, is personal effort always egoistic?

There we are, you see. French is not as rich a language as we could hope for. In English there are two words: “selfish” and “egoistic”. And they don’t mean the same thing. You know the difference in English, don’t you? Well, in this case, the French word “égoïsme” is in the sense of egoism in English, not in the sense of “selfishness”.

There may be an effort which is not at all selfish and is yet egoistic, because the moment it becomes personal it is egoistic — that means, it is based on the ego. But this does not mean that it is not generous, compassionate, unselfish nor that it is for narrow personal ends. It is not like that. It may be for a very unselfish work. But so long as an ego is there it is egoistic. And so long as the sense of one’s own personality is there, it is naturally something egoistic; it is founded on the presence of the ego.

And this must last for a fairly long time, because it must last until the individuality is completely formed, until it has reached a certain state of individual perfection; then the presence of the ego is no longer necessary — but not before one has attained the maximum individual development.

It is not just a tiny little job. It asks for much time and much effort. And when one has attained the perfection of his own development, when one is an individual being who is truly personal, that is, who has all the characteristics of something different from all others — for in principle there are no two individualities exactly alike in the world — then, when one has succeeded in expressing the individuality one is, is exclusively, represents exclusively in the universal creation, then one is ready for the ego to disappear—but not before.

It asks for a certain length of time, not a little effort, a fairly complete education. But one may be quite unselfish long before being ready not to have the ego any longer. That is something else.

For years, all the time I have been translating from English into French — that is, for a very long time, something like thirty years of this work, perhaps thirty-five — I have tried to find two words to say that, to make a difference. I haven’t found them yet, because in French one can’t fabricate words, it is not allowed; that’s the misfortune! In English you can make as many words as you like and if they are fine and well made they are accepted. In French, unless it is recognised by the French Academy in its dictionary, you will be told, “This is not correct.” So I haven’t yet found them.

(Looking at a child) He is up to some mischief! (Laughter).

Sweet Mother, a rich man is never satisfied, he wants to have more riches; a scholar wants to have more knowledge. Does this show that they are seeking the Divine?

He is in search of an absolute in life, that’s obvious. Perhaps it is analogous, I don’t know.

It is this: “To enjoy him in all experience of passivity and activity, of peace and of power, of unity and of difference, is the happiness which the jiva, the individual soul manifested in the world, is obscurely seeking.”

Yes. But you are not told anything about the love of riches or the love of power or the love of knowledge. You are told about the divine Love; it is not altogether the same thing. Nothing is said about enjoying ambition or desire or even aspiration; what is spoken of is the enjoying of the divine Presence. That’s completely different; there is no similarity.

I admit that I don’t quite catch the meaning of your question. I think you are mixing up the Divine with growth and increase and development, no? perhaps at best with progress. But it is not the same thing. Progress is perhaps the base upon which the present world was constructed, one can take it like that; but it is not the Divine.

What were you trying to say?

For each being there is a thirst for something.

That the thirst for something is the Divine? No, my child. It can be quite simply a desire. How can the thirst for something be the Divine?

I see clearly what you are trying to say, but truly you do not say it: that is, this inner flame of aspiration is what you call the Divine; this inner flame of aspiration which never dies out, which always burns, burns more and more; what in India is called Agni, you know, the will to progress, the power of aspiration; this is what you call the Divine. It is an aspect of the Divine, that’s true, but it is not the Divine. It is only one aspect, that is, a divine way of being.

...


Le 16 novembre 1955[4]


(À un enfant) Tu as préparé une question pour ta fête ?

Quelle est la signification de 18 ?

Du chiffre 18 ? Ça dépend comment on le lit. On peut le lire 10 plus 8 ; on peut le lire 9 plus 9 ; on peut le lire 12 plus 6. Et chacune de ces lectures a un sens différent.

Si nous prenons 10 plus 8, cela veut dire quelque chose d’assez immobile. Parce que 10 est une perfection statique, quelque chose qui est arrivé à sa perfection et qui s’arrête là ; et 8 est une double clôture, c’est-à-dire quelque chose qui est encadré, entouré, délimité, et qui naturellement s’arrête là. Alors, si nous mettons 10 et 8 ensemble, ça fait vraiment quelque chose qui peut être un accomplissement, mais qui est terminé.

Au contraire si nous prenons 9 plus 9, 9 est le procédé de la création — pas la création elle-même mais son procédé — et 9 plus 9, c’est un procédé de création qui continue et suit un autre procédé de création, c’est-à-dire une création qui est duelle, et qui implique l’idée qu’elle continue indéfiniment. Ce qui fait que les deux sens sont presque contradictoires.

Et si on prend 12 et 6, alors cela devient quelque chose de très bien. 12, vous savez ce que c’est, n’est‑ce pas : c’est le nombre de la perfection dans la conception et la création ; et 6 c’est le nombre de la création nouvelle. Alors, si vous mettez 12 et 6 à la fois, vous avez vraiment quelque chose de tout à fait remarquable.

Maintenant, on peut en avoir d’autres. Mais ça devient un peu plus compliqué.

18 lui-même, en tant que 18, c’était le chiffre de la conscience dans son effort de réalisation matérielle : la conscience essayant de se réaliser matériellement, de s’exprimer matériellement.

Alors, maintenant tu es pourvue !

Au point de vue social, c’est le premier chiffre de la majorité, la première majorité ; c’est-à-dire qu’à partir de dix-huit ans, on a une volonté propre, on a le droit d’avoir une volonté propre au point de vue social. C’est évidemment un point de départ très intéressant.

Douce Mère, le chiffre de chacun, est‑ce que ça a une signification différente pour chacun ?

Si on veut la donner, oui. Si on n’y pense pas, ça ne signifie rien du tout. C’est l’importance qu’on lui donne qui compte.

Les chiffres sont une façon de parler. C’est un langage, comme toutes les sciences, tous les arts, tout ce que l’homme produit, c’est toujours une façon de parler, c’est un langage. Si on adopte ce langage, ça devient vivant, expressif, utile. Comme nous avons besoin de mots pour nous faire comprendre généralement — malheureusement c’est sujet à toutes sortes de confusions, mais enfin, nous ne sommes pas arrivés encore à l’état où on peut communiquer dans le silence, ce qui serait évidemment un état très supérieur — eh bien, si on veut donner aux chiffres un sens dans sa vie, ils peuvent vous révéler un nombre considérable de choses. Mais c’est comme ça ; c’est comme l’astrologie, si on veut étudier la relation entre son existence et le mouvement des astres, on peut aussi trouver toutes sortes de renseignements utiles.

Au fond, c’est une façon de connaître, pas autre chose — un procédé. La connaissance vraie est au-delà des mots, au-delà des systèmes, au-delà des langages ; elle est dans une identité silencieuse. C’est au fond la seule qui ne se trompe pas.

Quoi d’autre ?

Dans la prière que tu nous as donnée cette fois pour la Kâlî Pûjâ, tu as écrit quelque chose en sanskrit.

C’est Sri Aurobindo qui a écrit un mantra.

Alors pourquoi est‑ce qu’il a écrit ça ?

Pourquoi il a écrit ça ? Pourquoi est‑ce que tu ne le lui demandes pas ? Peut-être qu’il te le dirait !

C’est une évocation. Tu sais ce que ça veut dire ? Tu as trouvé quelqu’un pour te l’expliquer ? Non ? Ah, c’est la première chose que tu aurais dû faire, demander quel était le sens de ces quatre mots.

La transcription en dessous : il n’y en a que deux. Il avait commencé à transcrire et puis son papier... c’était sur un petit bout de chiffon de papier, et il n’y avait plus de place pour mettre tout ; alors il s’est arrêté.

Tu as lu ? Tu ne sais pas lire le sanskrit ? Alors maintenant il faut que tu trouves quelqu’un pour te montrer comment le lire, et puis pour te donner la signification. Et puis après tu me demanderas pourquoi il l’a écrit. Pas maintenant.

Douce Mère, cette légende chaldéenne que tu as écrite , est‑ce qu’elle a un rapport avec la Kâlî Pûjâ ?

Oui, mon enfant, parce qu’à la Kâlî Pûjâ je distribue toujours les fleurs de l’« Amour Divin » ; parce que Kâlî est la plus aimante de tous les aspects de la Mahâshakti : c’est l’Amour le plus actif et le plus puissant. Et c’est pour ça que chaque année je distribue ces pétales de l’Amour Divin le jour de Kâlî. Et alors naturellement, cette explication, de pourquoi ces fleurs ont été choisies pour exprimer l’Amour Divin, c’est une explication suffisante.

Mère, qui était cet homme dont tu as parlé ?

Qui te dit que c’est un homme ? Je n’ai dit ni que c’était un homme ni que c’était une femme. J’ai eu le soin de mettre seulement : un être divin.

Qui ?

C’est une histoire préhistorique, alors tu ne peux pas trouver de renseignements là-dessus. Ce n’est écrit nulle part. Il n’y a pas de documents écrits.

Tu n’as pas de questions à poser sur ce que nous avons lu aujourd’hui ?

Douce Mère, est‑ce que l’effort personnel est toujours égoïste ?

N’est‑ce pas, voilà : le français n’est pas une langue aussi riche qu’on pourrait l’espérer. En anglais il y a deux mots : il y a selfish, et egoist. Et ça n’a pas le même sens. Vous savez la différence en anglais, n’est‑ce pas ; eh bien, dans ce cas-là, c’est l’égoïsme dans le sens de egoism en anglais, ce n’est pas dans le sens de selfish.

On peut avoir un effort qui ne soit pas du tout selfish, et qui est pourtant égoïste, parce que du moment que c’est personnel, c’est égoïste — ça veut dire que c’est basé sur l’ego. Mais ça ne veut pas dire que ce n’est ni généreux, ni compatissant, ni désintéressé, ni que c’est pour des fins personnelles étroites. Ce n’est pas comme cela. Ça peut être pour une oeuvre très désintéressée. Mais tant qu’il y a un ego là, c’est égoïste. Et tant qu’il y a le sens de sa personnalité à soi, c’est naturellement une chose égoïste ; c’est basé sur la présence de l’ego.

Et ça, ça doit durer assez longtemps, parce que ça doit durer jusqu’à ce que l’individualité soit complètement formée, qu’elle ait atteint un certain état de perfection individuelle ; alors la présence de l’ego n’est plus nécessaire. Mais pas avant qu’on soit arrivé au maximum du développement individuel.

Ce n’est pas une toute petite besogne. Cela demande beaucoup de temps et beaucoup d’efforts. Et quand on est arrivé à la perfection de son développement, qu’on est un être individuel qui est vraiment personnel, c’est-à-dire qui a toutes les caractéristiques de quelque chose qui se distingue de tous les autres — parce qu’en principe il n’y a pas deux individualités semblables dans le monde —, alors, quand on est arrivé à exprimer ce que l’individualité que l’on est, est exclusivement, représente exclusivement dans la création universelle, là on est prêt pour que l’ego disparaisse — mais pas avant.

Cela demande un certain temps, pas mal d’efforts, une éducation un peu complète. Mais on peut être très unselfish longtemps avant d’être prêt à ne plus avoir d’ego. Ça, c’est une autre chose.

Depuis des années, depuis que je traduis de l’anglais en français — c’est-à-dire il y a très longtemps, il y a quelque chose comme trente ans de ça, peut-être trente-cinq —, j’ai toujours essayé de trouver deux mots pour dire cela, pour faire une différence. Je n’ai pas trouvé encore, parce qu’en français, on ne peut pas fabriquer des mots, ce n’est pas permis, c’est ça qui est malheureux. En anglais vous faites autant de mots que vous voulez, et s’ils sont jolis et bien faits ils sont acceptés. En français, à moins que ce ne soit reconnu par l’Académie française, dans son dictionnaire, on vous dira : « Ça, ce n’est pas correct. » Alors je n’ai pas encore trouvé.

(Regardant un enfant) Il a de la malice dans l’esprit ! (rires)

Douce Mère, un homme riche, il n’est jamais satisfait, il veut avoir plus de richesses ; un savant veut avoir plus de connaissance. Est‑ce que cela montre qu’ils cherchent le Divin ?

Il est à la recherche d’un absolu dans la vie, c’est évident. Peutêtre est‑ce contigu, je ne sais pas.

C’est : « Goûter sa présence dans toutes les expériences, passives et actives, dans la paix et dans le pouvoir, dans l’unité et dans la différence, tel est le bonheur que le jîva, l’âme individuelle manifestée dans le monde, cherche obscurément. »

Oui. Mais on ne te parle pas de l’amour des richesses, ou de l’amour du pouvoir, ou de l’amour de la connaissance. On te parle de l’Amour divin ; ce n’est pas tout à fait la même chose. On ne parle pas de goûter une ambition, ou un désir, ou une aspiration, même ; on te parle de goûter la Présence divine. C’est tout à fait différent ; il n’y a aucune analogie.

J’avoue que je ne saisis pas très bien le sens de ta question. Je crois que tu confonds le Divin avec la croissance, et l’augmentation, l’accroissement — non ? —, peut-être au mieux le progrès. Mais ce n’est pas la même chose. Le progrès est peutêtre la base sur laquelle le monde actuel a été construit, on peut le prendre comme ça ; mais ce n’est pas le Divin.

Qu’est‑ce que tu essayais de dire ?

Dans chaque être il y a une soif pour quelque chose.

Que la soif pour quelque chose, c’est le Divin ? Non, mon petit. Ça peut être tout simplement un désir. Comment est‑ce que la soif pour quelque chose peut être le Divin ?

Je vois bien ce que tu essayes de dire obscurément, mais vraiment tu ne le dis pas : c’est-à-dire que cette flamme d’aspiration intérieure, c’est ça que tu appelles le Divin ; cette flamme d’aspiration intérieure qui ne s’éteint jamais, qui brûle toujours, qui brûle de plus en plus ; ce que dans l’Inde on appelle Agni, n’est‑ce pas, la volonté de progrès, le pouvoir d’aspiration, c’est ça que tu appelles le Divin. C’est un aspect du Divin, ça c’est vrai, mais ce n’est pas le Divin. C’est seulement un aspect, c’està-dire une manière d’être divine.

...




  1. Questions and Answers 1954, p.230
  2. Questions and Answers 1955, p.373
  3. Ibid., p.363
  4. Entretiens 1955, p.401