Loretta reads Mother's Questions and Answers:1956-10-03 part 2

Transcript of:

Mother's Questions and Answers: October 3, 1956 (part 2 of 2)

by Loretta, 2018 (51:23)

Listen on Auroville Radio →

Mother's Questions and Answers

In the second half of Mother's class, she gives us a feeling of the future. She gives us some idea of what things will be like with the addition of all the elements that emerge into the universe with the new supramental force that's coming. In order to describe our universe to us, the first half of the class (which was last time), she described something she had seen; and she said she was using concepts of mathematics, but not the language of mathematics. She said that all of the elements of our universe – and she spoke of the physical elements, like molecules and atoms, and the subtle elements, which she called ‘psychological’ ones but which include the vital (all the vital life-energies), and the mental (all our thoughts) – all these elements are combined by the supreme Will, always in ever-new combinations. One after the other they come, and they produce our universe.

And there are so many, many, many elements, that even though there is a finite number of them, for us it is an infinity of ever-changing combinations. Ever-changing combinations of all these elements of all kinds. She said this explains how our universe is new at every second. And the words that are used are very beautiful: she said, “the universe is new at each moment of eternity”. And it's almost like a mantra – it brings us a kind of consciousness about our universe. The universe is new at each moment of eternity.

Then Mother went on, and she explained that the new supramental consciousness, with its adding of more elements, makes the numbers and kinds of combinations greatly increased. And that in the book, afterwards, we found that they put a further explanation, after the class – when they finally printed the book, some years later, Mother added this. And she said that the so-called ‘new’ elements, which are coming more and more, are new only in the manifestation. They are new only in what they are doing now – in all the gross and subtle levels and planes of consciousness, they were already there. They were not available to be used to create, because they were involved. But now they are evolving in the manifestation.

‘Involution’ is a technical term that Sri Aurobindo and Mother use. They explain that all of our universe, all of our cosmos, started by spirit involving itself in the universe. Spirit is involved in matter. Present, but not in any form other than pure spirit. Possibly we could see them as seeds of pure spirit, which do not open, do not grow, do not evolve, until their time of evolving comes.

The evolving of our spirit out of its involution is our evolution – and the evolution of all the subtle and gross parts of the universe and the cosmos. And last time, when Mother had explained about the elements and how the new-coming elements would combine to produce totally new things in the universe, she added something more. Mother spoke about the order of the combinations – the order in which all the elements are chosen to do what they do. And she spoke of the order not proceeding in a way that we might think of. The supreme Will who chooses the combinations does not take the elements one after the other, by the logic of taking the one which is closest to the one which has just been used. She said if the universe is new at every instant, then we have to acknowledge that since it is new at every instant, nothing is impossible. Everything is possible. And not only that: we have to acknowledge that the logic – or, at this point Mother says, one could almost say the ‘fantasy’ of the supreme Will in creating us and everything – is unlimited. Therefore, if the Supreme chooses much more freely from all the elements, to create our universe, then all our logic – our logical view about external things, our view about how things are supposed to happen (how internal things must happen, and how external things must happen; how thoughts should follow, feelings should follow, events should follow) – all these logical constructions that we've been holding on to will all break down. And they're going to break down once we accept the fact that the creation is not logical in the way that we have imposed our logic on the creation.

And then she went on to point out that modern scientific perception of our universe – which has progressed a great deal, but still, which has been based on what was before the coming of the new consciousness – is now going to be completely turned upside-down. It's going to be overpassed, and exceeded, and broken.

All this is a kind of preparation for what Mother is going to say now in the class. She's going to speak about the very laws of nature not even being all-powerful for us any more. She calls them the ‘so-called’ laws of nature. And says that even before – even before this new consciousness – they really had no absolute truth. Even though we believe they did, because of the way our minds do things.

And now she says that with the introduction of the new supramental element, into the existing combination, all these so-called ‘necessary’, never-changing laws become absurdities. She uses the word ‘ineluctable’: “necessary and ineluctable laws”. It means never-changing laws of the universe (as we believe they are). She says that now, all miracles are more and more possible. And the only thing that stops us from experiencing them is our attitude. (And of course, since she is conscious of how everything works, she calls them ‘so-called miracles’. And she says that for people who know how they work, they are not miracles.)

And here on the tape, you can hear the tone of her voice: she is urging us to be open to her words. She is urging us to be open to these concepts. She is working to expand our consciousness; she wants us to receive the free action of the divine Grace. She's trying to get us not to put barriers in the way of the possibilities that are coming – and also the possibilities that are already here – which our attitudes, our belief in the so-called ‘necessary and ineluctable’ laws of nature, have kept us bound by.

This is Mother's class of October 3rd, 1956. This part of the class today is shorter than the first part. But there are several pages in the book, under the date of this class, which are actually from another one of Mother's classes. So, in our class today, Mother has mentioned that more child prodigies will be born now; but she doesn't have any examples, and so she doesn't say any more. In the other class which is printed in the book (but not recorded), she speaks more about child prodigies. Again she says more and more will be coming, and she has an example.

And by now, it's 60 years later – most people have seen that newborn children are much more developed. People talk about kinds of children like ‘Indigo Children’ – they have special qualities. There are reports of a lot of children who have special powers. Many countries, Russia in particular, have had a lot of reports about this. And so in this other class, Mother brings a book of poetry written by an 8-year-old French girl named Minou Drouet. She reads a few of the things that she says are absolutely extraordinary – the things that make this girl a prodigy. And then she tells us how it was done. And we find that how it is done is not something new that comes with the supramental. How it is done is actually done for everyone – although not necessarily receiving what this girl received.

And again, we are learning from Mother about how all of us are receiving and transmitting instruments. Mother and Sri Aurobindo spoke a lot, and wrote a lot, about how since we are receiving-transmitting instruments, that negative vital energies and negative mental thoughts of others enter into us from outside. And Mother has spoken of it in the context of protecting ourselves from these impulses coming in from outside. However, recently she spoke about it in a positive way, and she told the class about making positive formations with a will behind them. Someone asked about doing good to others with our thoughts; and she explains how it can be done.

And in all of our teachings that we receive from them, they also speak about how the good things in us can go into others, and affect others – just as the good and bad things in everybody go into everybody, and we are all affected. It's a whole yogic practice, to have some more consciousness of this. And I think the more we develop our consciousness the more that becomes part of the world that we live in. Sometimes people complain about it – it's easy to complain about when somebody has affected you in a very negative way! But here we are – we have to deal with it. This is what people are.

Here Mother takes us into a whole different level of this. She's going to speak of well-developed artistic and musical formations – well-developed, organized ones – ones which have not dissolved when the musician or artist has died. Mother and Sri Aurobindo teach that part of the process of Topic::death is something more than just the physical. When our body can no longer support the life-forces, for whatever reason (sickness, sudden breakdown of some part of the body, physical damage and accident and injury, etc. – so many reasons one could die) – we do what is called ‘die’. Without the life-forces, the body decomposes down into its physical earth elements, and these earth elements are naturally returned to the earth, to be used for new bodies. Our vital being does the same thing. Our feelings, our energies, our impulses break apart from the way they were organized in our being, and all the vital elements return to the universal vital plane for further use in the future.

It is the same for the mental being. The mental entity that we are, that we developed in life – all our thoughts, our ideas, our mental impulses, our mental organizations and beliefs – they all break apart, and they go back into universal mental plane. There they are readily available for the future; and they are taken up by the supreme Creator, the supreme Will, and used in the future.

And there are also subtle physical formations remaining. Subtle physical formations remaining from people with particular, organized physical development in some area. Therefore, in these subtle physical, and vital, and mental planes of the creation, where everything is, there are organized formations – groups of these subtle physical or vital or mental elements, that are integrally functioning in their own right. And Mother speaks about this in this other class that they've printed in the book.

It's an absolutely fascinating subject. And perhaps someone who reads this or learns about it might find an explanation for something that's happened to them.

Here, Mother speaks about the thoughts of a great writer, Maeterlinck, still existing as organized expressions. And she explains how they can be written by this 8-year-old girl, Minou Drouet. Then she speaks of certain famous musicians, and their organized mental and vital and subtle physical formations – ones which remain after their death. And she gives her own experiences and her personal observations of musicians who were used by these formations for the formations to express themselves.

This is a totally new subject for most of us. And it could be looked at with a kind of fear, just as one might be afraid of being possessed by someone else's negative impulse coming inside. And someone in the class voices some fears about this (although he doesn't say that). But he asks Mother whether these higher organized artistic or musical formations harm a person when they enter into them. And Mother explains: not at all. It's a good thing all-around.

The original French tape-recording of this part of the October 3rd class is going to play after the English translation. But unfortunately, we don't have any recording of Mother's other class. So all we have is what they've printed in the book.

It's October 3rd, 1956. We're sitting in the Playground; Mother's been speaking about how the universe is created new at every instant of eternity. And then she says...

---

…

From an altogether restricted, external and limited point of view, I shall now speak to you of certain things which don’t belong to my own experience but which I have heard about; for instance, that there is a greater number of what are called “child prodigies”. I haven’t met any, so I can’t tell you what is truly prodigious about these children, but still, according to the stories that are related, there are obviously some kind of new types which seem astonishing to the ordinary human consciousness. It is examples of this kind, I believe, that we would like to know in order to understand what is happening.... But it is possible, in fact, that things are happening now which we are not used to watching. But it is a question of interpretation. The only thing I am sure of is what I have just told you, that the quality, the number and the nature of the possible combinations in the universe are suddenly going to change so considerably that it will probably be quite bewildering for all those who do research.

Now, we shall see.

(Silence)

I could perhaps add a practical word to what I have just told you; it is only an illustration of a detail, but it will be an indirect answer to other questions which were asked some time ago about the so-called laws of Nature, causes and effects, “inevitable” consequences in the material field, and more particularly from the point of view of health; for example, that if one doesn’t take certain precautions, if one doesn’t eat as one should, doesn’t follow certain rules, necessarily there are consequences.

It is true. But if this is seen in the light of what I have just said, that no two universal combinations are alike, how can laws be established and what is the absolute truth of these laws?... It does not exist.

For, if you are logical, of course with a little higher logic, since no two things, two combinations, two universal manifestations are ever the same, how can anything repeat itself? It can only be an appearance but is not a fact. And to fix rigid laws in this way — not that you cut yourself off from the apparent surface laws, for the mind makes many laws, and the surface very obligingly seems to comply with these laws, but it is only an appearance—but anyway this cuts you off from the creative Power of the Spirit, it cuts you off from the true Power of the Grace, for you can understand that if by your aspiration or your attitude you introduce a higher element, a new element — what we may now call a supramental element — into the existing combinations, you can suddenly change their nature, and all these so-called necessary and ineluctable laws become absurdities. That is to say that you yourself, with your conception, with your attitude and your acceptance of certain alleged principles, you yourself close the door upon the possibility of the miracle — they are not miracles when one knows how they happen, but obviously for the outer consciousness they seem miraculous. And it is you yourself, saying to yourself with a logic that seems quite reasonable, “Well, if I do this, that will necessarily happen, or if I don’t do that, necessarily this other thing will happen”, it is you yourself who close the door — it is as though you were putting an iron curtain between yourself and the free action of the Grace.

How nice it would be to imagine that the Supreme Consciousness, essentially free, presiding at the universal Manifestation, could be full of fantasy in its choice and make things follow one another not according to a logic accessible to human thought but in accordance with another kind of logic, that of the unforeseen!

Then there would no longer be any limits to the possibilities, to the unexpected, the marvellous; and one could hope for the most splendid, the most delightful things from this sovereignly free Will, playing eternally with all the elements and creating unceasingly a new world which logically would have absolutely nothing to do with the preceding one.

Don’t you think it would be charming? We have had enough of the world as it is! Why not let it become at least what we think it ought to be?

And I am telling you all this in order that each one of you may put as few barriers as you can in the way of the possibilities to come. That’s my conclusion.

I don’t know if I have made myself understood, but indeed a day will come, I suppose, when you will know what I meant. That’s all, then.

Some time later, during a “Friday Class”, Mother spoke once again on the subject of child prodigies.

Recently, in one of the Wednesday classes, we talked about child prodigies. Some say that the number of child prodigies is increasing considerably, and some — even among Americans — say it is the influence and work of Sri Aurobindo, and others say it is a result of atom bombs! But the fact is that there is a fairly large number of child prodigies. I did not want to speak about it in much detail, for I did not have any proofs in hand, that is, I did not have any good examples to give. It happens that since then someone has brought me a French book written by a child of eight. Naturally there are people who dispute the possibility, but I shall explain to you later how such a thing is possible.

The book is remarkable for a child of eight. This does not mean that if the age of the child were not known the book would be considered wonderful; but there are, here and there, some sentences in it which are quite astonishing. I have noted down these sentences and am going to read them out to you. (Mother skims through her book.)

A little phrase like this: “If we truly love one another, we can hide nothing from each other”.... Obviously this is fine.

And then something else written to a boy with freckles — you know what freckles are, don’t you? She writes to him: “You are beautiful, yes indeed, your freckles are so pretty; one would say that an angel had sown grains of wheat all over your face so as to attract the birds of the sky there.” Surely this is very poetic.

And finally, something really fine which opens the door to the explanation I am going to give you: “I am only an ear, a mouth; the ear hears a storm of words which I cannot explain to you, which an immense voice hurls within me, and my mouth repeats them and nothing of what I say can compare with the streaming of light which is within me.”

Obviously this is very beautiful.

It seems that here and there in her poems — she has written many — one can find reminiscences of Maeterlinck, for instance; so people have concluded that it was not she who had written them, for at the age of eight one doesn’t read Maeterlinck, that it must have been someone else. But in fact there is no need at all to suppose a hoax, and the publisher indeed declares that he is sure of what he is about, that he knows the child very intimately — in fact he was in a way her adoptive father, for her father was dead — and can guarantee that there is no deception. But it is not at all necessary to suppose a deception in order to explain this phenomenon.

Authors, writers, who were inspired and serious in their creative work, that is to say, who were concentrated in a kind of consecration of their being to their literary work, form within themselves a sort of mental entity extremely well-constituted and coordinated, having its own life, independent of the body, so that when they die, when the body returns to the earth, this mental formation continues to exist altogether autonomously and independently, and as it has been fashioned for expression it always seeks a means of expression somewhere. And if there happens to be a child who has been formed in particularly favourable circumstances — for instance, the mother of this little girl is herself a poetess and a writer; perhaps the mother herself had an aspiration, a wish that her child would be a remarkable, exceptional being — anyway, if the child who is conceived is formed in particularly favourable circumstances, an entity of this kind may enter into the child at the time of birth and try to use him to express itself; and in that case, this gives a maturity to the child’s mind, which is quite extraordinary, exceptional and which enables him to do things of the kind we have just read.

We could say, without fear of sounding quite absurd, that if what she has written surprisingly resembles certain things in Maeterlinck or has the characteristics of his writings, even with certain almost identical turns of phrase, we could very well imagine that a mental formation of Maeterlinck has incarnated in this child and is using this young instrument to express itself.

There are similar examples, for instance, among musicians. There are pianists who have individualised their hands and made them so wonderfully conscious that these hands are not decomposed — not the physical hands: the hands of the subtle physical and vital — they are not decomposed, do not dissolve at the time of death. They remain as instruments to play the piano and always try to incarnate in the hands of someone playing the piano. I have known some cases of people who, as they were about to play, felt as though other hands entered into theirs and started playing really marvellously, in a way they could not have done themselves.

These things are not as exceptional as one might believe, they happen quite often.

I saw the same thing in someone who used to play the violin and another who played the cello — two different cases — and who were not very wonderful performers themselves. One of them was just beginning his studies and the other was a good performer, but nothing marvellous. But all of a sudden, the moment they played the compositions of certain musicians, something of that musician entered into their hands and made their performance absolutely wonderful.

There was even a person — a woman — who used to play the cello, and the moment she played Beethoven, the expression of her face completely changed into Beethoven’s and what she played was sublime, which she could not have played unless something of Beethoven’s mind had entered into her.

Mother, isn’t this exceptional faculty harmful for the persons who play?

Why do you suppose it would do them harm? It does them good! It is always good to make a progress or to exceed oneself.

But for the child?

I don’t understand. For the child?

Yes. She is already fully mature at the age of eight.

But it is something wonderful to be at the age of eight the expression of something which surpasses the intelligence! In what way do you suppose it could harm her? I don’t quite understand your question.

When one grows up, one becomes less plastic.

No. You mean that what often happens is that a child prodigy is no longer a prodigy at all when he grows up. But, precisely, those who have studied these cases say that what is exceptional about the things happening now is that child prodigies become, as they put it, prodigious men, that is, the exceptional faculty remains in them and becomes more firmly established as they grow up.

But I don’t see how it can be bad, it can only be good. In what way can it be bad? It is as if you said, “If one has a beautiful soul, that is bad!”

When something of a higher nature enters into you, it is a grace, isn’t it?

---

...

D’un point de vue tout à fait réduit, extérieur et limité, je vous parlerai maintenant de certaines choses qui ne sont pas de mon expérience, mais que j’ai entendu dire ; par exemple, que l’on compte un plus grand nombre de ce que l’on appelle les « enfants prodiges ». Je n’en ai pas rencontré, alors je ne peux pas vous dire quel est vraiment le prodige de ces enfants, mais enfin, d’après les histoires que l’on raconte, il y a évidemment des sortes de types nouveaux qui paraissent étonnants à la conscience humaine ordinaire. Ce sont des exemples de ce genre-là, je crois, que l’on voudrait connaître pour comprendre ce qui se passe... Mais il est possible, en effet, qu’il se passe à présent des choses auxquelles on n’a pas l’habitude d’assister. Mais c’est une question d’interprétation. Le seul fait dont je sois sûre, c’est ce que je viens de vous dire, que la qualité, la quantité et la nature des combinaisons universelles possibles vont tout d’un coup changer d’une façon si considérable que ce sera probablement ahurissant pour tous ceux qui font des recherches dans la vie.

Maintenant, nous allons voir.

(silence)

Je pourrais peut-être ajouter un petit mot pratique à ce que je viens de vous dire ; ce n’est qu’une illustration de détail, mais qui sera une réponse indirecte à d’autres questions que l’on m’a posées il y a quelque temps à propos des soi-disant lois de la Nature, des causes et effets, conséquences « inévitables » dans le domaine matériel, et plus particulièrement au point de vue de la santé ; par exemple que, si l’on ne prend pas certaines précautions, si l’on ne mange pas comme il faut, si l’on ne suit pas certaines règles, il y a nécessairement des conséquences.

C’est vrai. Mais si l’on voit cela à la lumière de ce que je viens de vous dire, qu’il n’y a pas deux combinaisons universelles semblables, comment est‑ce que l’on peut établir des lois et quelle est la vérité absolue de ces lois ?... Elle n’existe pas.

Parce que si vous êtes logiques, enfin d’une logique un peu supérieure, puisque deux choses, deux combinaisons, deux manifestations universelles ne sont jamais les mêmes, comment quelque chose peut-il se répéter ? Ce ne peut être qu’une apparence, mais ce n’est pas un fait. Et de fixer des lois rigides de la sorte, non pas que vous vous coupiez des lois apparentes de la surface (parce que le mental fait beaucoup de lois, et la surface, d’une façon très obligeante, a l’air de satisfaire à ces lois, mais c’est seulement une apparence), mais en tout cas cela vous coupe de la Puissance créatrice de l’Esprit, cela vous coupe du Pouvoir véritable de la Grâce, parce que vous pouvez comprendre que si, par votre aspiration ou par votre attitude, vous introduisez un élément supérieur, un élément nouveau — ce que nous pouvons appeler maintenant un élément supramental — dans les combinaisons existantes, vous pouvez soudainement en changer la nature, et toutes ces prétendues lois nécessaires et inéluctables deviennent des absurdités. C’est-à-dire que vous-même, avec votre conception, avec votre attitude et l’acceptation que vous donnez à certains prétendus principes, vous fermez la porte à la possibilité du miracle (ce ne sont pas des miracles quand on sait comment ils se produisent, mais évidemment, pour la conscience extérieure, cela a l’air miraculeux). Et c’est vous-même, en vous disant avec une logique qui paraît tout à fait raisonnable: « Eh bien, si je fais ça, nécessairement ceci va arriver, ou si je ne fais pas ça, nécessairement telle autre chose va arriver », c’est vous-même qui fermez la porte — c’est comme si vous mettiez un rideau de fer entre vous et la libre action de la Grâce.

Comme il serait bon d’imaginer que la Conscience suprême, essentiellement libre, qui préside à la Manifestation universelle, puisse être fantaisiste dans son choix et faire succéder les choses, non pas selon une logique accessible à la pensée humaine, mais selon un autre genre de logique, celle de l’imprévu.

Alors, il n’y aurait plus de limites aux possibilités, à l’inattendu, au merveilleux; et l’on pourrait espérer les choses les plus splendides, les plus réjouissantes, de cette Volonté souverainement libre, jouant éternellement avec tous les éléments et produisant sans cesse un monde nouveau, qui pourrait n’avoir absolument rien à faire logiquement avec le monde précédent.

Vous ne croyez pas que ce serait charmant? Nous en avons assez du monde tel qu’il est! Pourquoi ne pas le laisser devenir au moins ce que nous concevons qu’il devrait être ?

Et tout ce que je vous en dis, c’est pour que chacun mette aussi peu de barrières qu’il peut devant les possibilités à venir. C’est ma conclusion.

Je ne sais pas si je me suis fait comprendre, mais enfin un jour viendra, je suppose, où vous saurez ce que j’ai voulu dire. Voilà.

Quelque temps après, au cours d’une «classe du vendredi», Mère a repris la question des enfants prodiges.

Il a été question récemment, dans une des classes du mercredi, des enfants prodiges. Certains disent que le nombre des enfants prodiges est en train d’augmenter considérablement; et les uns (même parmi les Américains) disent que c’est l’influence et le travail de Sri Aurobindo, et d’autres disent que c’est le résultat des bombes atomiques! Mais le fait est qu’il y a un nombre assez considérable d’enfants prodiges. Je ne voulais pas en parler en détail parce que je n’avais pas de preuves dans les mains, c’est-à-dire que je n’avais pas de bons exemples à donner. Il se trouve que depuis lors on m’a apporté un livre français qui a été écrit par une enfant de huit ans. Naturellement, il y a des gens qui en contestent la possibilité, mais je vous expliquerai après comment une chose pareille est possible.

Le livre est remarquable pour une enfant de huit ans. Cela ne veut pas dire que si l’on ne savait pas l’âge de l’enfant on trouverait le livre merveilleux; mais il y a là-dedans, de temps en temps, des phrases qui sont tout à fait étonnantes. Ces phraseslà, je les ai notées et je vais vous les lire. (Mère feuillette le livre)

Un petit mot comme cela : «Si vraiment on s’aime bien, on ne peut rien se cacher»... Évidemment, c’est joli.

Et puis une autre chose écrite à un garçon qui a des taches de rousseur... Vous savez ce que c’est que des taches de rousseur? Elle lui écrit: «Tu es beau, mais oui, tes taches de rousseur c’est si joli ; on dirait qu’un ange t’a semé sur tout le visage des grains de blé pour y attirer les oiseaux du ciel.» Évidemment, c’est très poétique.

Et puis enfin, la chose qui est vraiment bien et qui ouvre la porte à l’explication que je vais vous donner: «Je ne suis qu’une oreille, qu’une bouche ; l’oreille entend la tempête de mots que je ne peux pas t’expliquer, qu’une voix immense lui lance au-dedans de moi et ma bouche les redit et rien de ce que je dis n’est pareil au ruissellement de lumière qui est en moi.»

Évidemment c’est très beau.

Il paraît que de temps en temps, dans sa poésie (elle a écrit beaucoup de poésies), on retrouve comme des réminiscences de Maeterlinck, par exemple; alors on en a conclu que ce n’était pas elle qui avait écrit, parce que, à huit ans, on ne lit pas Maeterlinck, que cela devait être quelqu’un d’autre. Mais en fait, il n’est pas du tout besoin d’imaginer une supercherie, et l’éditeur, lui, déclare qu’il est sûr de son affaire, qu’il connaît la petite très intimement (en fait, il a été pour elle comme un père adoptif, parce que son père était mort) et qu’il peut garantir qu’il n’y a pas de supercherie. Mais il n’est pas du tout nécessaire d’imaginer une supercherie pour expliquer ce phénomène.

Les auteurs, les écrivains qui ont été inspirés et sérieux dans leur création, c’est-à-dire qui se sont concentrés dans une sorte de consécration de leur être à leur littérature, forment au-dedans d’eux une sorte d’entité mentale extrêmement bien constituée et coordonnée, qui a sa vie propre, indépendante du corps, de sorte que lorsqu’ils meurent, que le corps retourne à la terre, cette formation mentale continue d’exister d’une façon tout à fait autonome et indépendante, et comme elle a été créée pour l’expression, elle cherche toujours un moyen d’expression quelque part. Et s’il se trouve qu’il y a un enfant qui est formé dans des circonstances particulièrement favorables (comme par exemple, la mère de cette petite fille, qui était elle-même poétesse et écrivain ; peut-être cette mère avait-elle une aspiration, un désir que son enfant soit un être remarquable, exceptionnel), enfin si l’enfant qui est conçu est formé dans des conditions particulièrement favorables, une entité comme celle-là peut entrer dans l’enfant au moment de la naissance et tâcher de se servir de lui pour s’exprimer; et dans ce cas-là, cela donne une maturité à la mentalité de l’enfant, qui est tout à fait extraordinaire, exceptionnelle, et qui lui permet de faire des choses comme celles que nous venons de lire.

Nous pourrions dire, sans craindre d’être tout à fait absurde, que si ce qu’elle écrit ressemble étonnamment à certaines choses, ou a la caractéristique des écrits de Maeterlinck, avec même certaines tournures de phrase presque identiques, on pourrait très bien concevoir qu’une formation mentale de Maeterlinck se soit incarnée dans cette enfant et se serve de ce jeune instrument pour s’exprimer.

Il y a des exemples analogues, par exemple chez les musiciens. Il y a des pianistes qui ont individualisé leurs mains et les ont rendues si merveilleusement conscientes que ces mains ne se décomposent pas (pas les mains physiques), les mains du physique subtil et du vital ne se décomposent pas, ne se dissolvent pas au moment de la mort. Elles restent comme des instruments pour jouer du piano et elles essayent toujours de s’incarner dans les mains de quelqu’un qui joue du piano. J’ai eu des exemples de gens qui, au moment de jouer, sentaient comme une autre main qui entrait dans la leur et qui se mettait à jouer d’une façon tout à fait merveilleuse, dont ils étaient incapables eux-mêmes.

Ces choses-là ne sont pas aussi exceptionnelles qu’on pourrait le croire, elles se produisent assez souvent.

J’ai vu la même chose aussi pour quelqu’un qui jouait du violon et quelqu’un qui jouait du violoncelle — deux cas différents —, et qui n’étaient pas des exécutants merveilleux eux-mêmes. Il y en avait un qui était au début de ses études et l’autre qui était un bon exécutant, mais rien de merveilleux. Mais tout d’un coup, au moment où ils jouaient la musique de certains musiciens, quelque chose de ce musicien entrait dans leurs mains et leur faisait exécuter d’une façon absolument merveilleuse.

Il y avait même une personne (c’était une femme), elle jouait du violoncelle, et au moment où elle jouait du Beethoven, son masque se transformait absolument en le masque de Beethoven, et ce qu’elle jouait était sublime, comme elle n’aurait pas pu jouer si quelque chose de la mentalité de Beethoven n’était pas entré en elle. Voilà.

Mère, est‑ce que cette faculté exceptionnelle n’est pas mauvaise pour la personne qui joue ?

Pourquoi veux-tu que cela leur fasse du mal? Cela leur fait du bien !

C’est toujours bon de faire un progrès ou d’être supérieur à soi-même.

Mais pour l’enfant?

Je ne comprends pas. Pour l’enfant?

Oui. Elle est déjà en pleine maturité à l’âge de huit ans.

Mais c’est une chose merveilleuse de pouvoir être à huit ans l’expression de quelque chose qui dépasse votre intelligence! En quoi veux-tu que cela puisse lui faire du mal? Je ne comprends pas bien ta question.

Quand on grandit, alors on devient moins plastique.

Non. Tu veux dire que ce qui se passe souvent, c’est qu’un enfant prodige n’est plus du tout prodige quand il est grand. Mais justement, ceux qui ont fait des études là-dessus disent que ce qui se passe maintenant d’exceptionnel, c’est que les enfants prodiges deviennent, comme ils disent, des hommes prodigieux, c’est-à-dire que la faculté exceptionnelle reste en eux et s’installe de plus en plus à mesure qu’ils grandissent.

Mais je ne vois pas comment cela peut être mauvais, cela ne peut être que bon. En quoi est‑ce que cela peut être mauvais? C’est comme si tu disais: si on a une belle âme, c’est mauvais!

Quand il entre en vous quelque chose d’un caractère supérieur, c’est une grâce, non?

---