|
Painting, Music, Dance and Yoga
Yoga and the Arts
In the new creation would there not be great musicians, painters, poets, athletes etc. created from the Ashram?
All kinds that are needed for the work or the manifestation would, I suppose, come. 24 May 1933
Painting and Sadhana
Painting also is sadhana; so it is perfectly possible to make them one. It is a matter of dedicating the painting and feeling the force that makes you paint as the Mother’s force. 4 September 1935
*
Of course everybody is here for Yoga and not for painting. Painting or any other activity has to be made here a part of Yoga and cannot be pursued for its own sake. If it stands insuperably in the way, then it has to be given up; but there is no reason why it should if it be pursued in the proper spirit, as a field or aid for spiritual growth, or as a work done for the Mother. 18 January 1936
*
You have painting and music in you and if you apply yourself they will develop in you. Only it is best to do it as an instrument of the Mother and as an offering to her, and not allow any personal desire for fame or appreciation by others or any personal pride to be the motives ―for it is that that gives trouble. All work done as an offering is a great help and does not give trouble.
*
Page-733
Is it really possible to get anything simply by faith and surrender? I heard Mother said to Sanjiban that if one wants to be an artist one must work hard. What is true of art, is true of everything, isn’t it?
For heaven’s sake, don’t be so universal in your rules. Art means a technique (especially painting, sculpture, etc., music also, poetry less), and technique has to be developed. But that does not mean that there is nothing that can come by simply faith and surrender. 6 April 1935
*
Let Thy grace abide with me so that I may keep the right attitude towards Thee at the time of painting. Often I feel a vital atmosphere around me and a sort of vital excitement in me.
What do you mean by vital excitement? There is an intensity and enthusiasm of the vital without which it would be difficult to do any poem, picture or music of a creative kind. That intensity is not harmful. 7 October 1933
*
The Mother finds the pictures of Tagore hideous and monstrous, she would not dignify them with the name of art. But it is not because they depart from tradition. The Mother does not believe in tradition ―she considers that Art should always develop new forms ―but still these must be according to a truth of Beauty which is universal and eternal ―something of the Divine. 8 December 1933
Music and Sadhana
I quite understood your main point to which I shall answer, but there were many side-issues which obscure the main one in your letter and I took the occasion to try to get rid of one of them at once. For the moment I am answering only to your question about the music. Let me say at once that all of you seem to have too great an aptitude for making drastic conclusions on the
Page-734 strength of very minor facts. It is always perilous to take two or three small facts, put them together and build upon them a big inference. It becomes still more dangerous when you emphasise minor facts and set aside or belittle the meaning of the main ones. In this case the main facts are (1) that the Mother has loved music all her life and found it a key to spiritual experience, (2) that she has given all encouragement to your music in special and to the music of others also. She has also made clear the relation of Art and Beauty with Yoga. It is therefore rather extraordinary that anyone should think she only tolerates music here and considers it inconsistent with Yoga. It is perfectly true that Music or Art are not either the first or the only thing in life for her, ―any more than Poetry or Literature are with me, ―the Divine, the divine consciousness, the discovery of the conditions for a divine life are and must be our one concern, with Art, Poetry or Music as parts or means only of the divine life or expression of the Divine Truth and the Divine Beauty. That does not mean that they are only “tolerated”, but that they are put in their right place. Then the minor facts and their significance. The Mother limited the concerts to one hour because that was the utmost she could give to them in the afternoons for which they are fixed and that meant checking a very natural tendency to spread over a greater length of time. On this occasion she first wanted it to be a half an hour affair because the more important occasion was to be reserved for November. But it was found that certain very undesirable psychological movements were tending to appear which would turn the occasion not into a part of the preparation for true expression or a part of the Yoga, but an occasion for the exhibition of a very mundane, almost professional egoism, vanity, rivalry, anger and spite at one’s talent being “neglected” etc. It was decided that this anti-Yogic stuff should not be allowed to mix with the atmosphere of the 24th November and therefore the Sunday concert could be lengthened out and the November one dropped ―and this was what was written to Venkataraman. It is not an objection to music that the decision represented, but an objection to bringing into music here these very undivine and unyogic and, if human, yet not very reputable human elements
Page-735 and movements. The Mother said nothing to you about it because these things did not directly concern you and she did not besides care to make the causes of the change public. Let us have music by all means; but also more rhythm and harmony in the atmosphere! 29 October 1932
*
I don’t think I can say anything about your non-appreciation of [X's] singing or rather your failure to feel it, for this is a matter of personality and its responses. [X] has put me the question as coming from you and I have made some kind of answer. His idea is that you have no appreciation of his music from the aesthetic point of view because it is new in its lines and you cling conservatively to the traditional music. If that is so, it is obviously a mental and aesthetic limitation. But what you say is that you admit his genius and the qualities of his singing ―only you don’t feel what you seek in his music. That is a different matter. Your interpretation may then be the right one. In any case what is important for you is to develop your inner realisation till it can take up all the feeling and outer action ― whether for your own singing or for a new appreciation of music in general that is the one line opened to you and the one thing needful. 8 September 1937
*
I meant exactly the same thing as when I wrote to you that the “famous singer” must disappear and the “inner singer” take her place. “The old psychological lines” means the mental and vital aesthetic source of the singing, the desire of fame or success, singing for an audience ―the singing must come from the soul within and it must be for the Divine. What I wrote about the conservative clinging to traditional music was in answer to Dilip’s supposition about the source of your non-appreciation. I said if it were that it would be a mental limitation. I had written before that I gathered from what you had written that it was not that but a temperamental difference
Page-736 or a seeking for another vibration than what his music could give. As to the newness of Dilip’s music and how far he has been successful, I am not a musical expert and cannot pronounce. It was the Mother who gave him the advice and impulse to create something new. If Tagore’s most recent verdict is sincere, he has succeeded in doing it, since Tagore speaks of him as a creator in music. A new creation need not be on one line only, each creator follows his own line, otherwise he would be more of an imitator than a creator. There are many who receive inspiration from me in poetry but they do not all write on the same line. Nishikanta’s poetry is different from Dilip’s, Nirod’s from Amal’s. As for your singing, I was not speaking of any new creation from the aesthetic point of view, but of the spiritual change ― what form it takes must depend on what you find within you when the deeper basis is there. I do not see any necessity for giving up singing altogether. I only meant, ―it is the logical conclusion from what I have written to you not now only but before, ―that the inner change must be the first consideration and the rest must arise out of that. If singing to an audience pulls you out of the inner condition, then you could postpone that and sing for yourself and the Divine until you are able, even in facing an audience, to forget the audience. If you are troubled by failure or exalted by success, that also you must overcome. 10 September 1935
*
If Sahana gives up music, ―I presume it is only a temporary step ―I suppose it must be for a reason personal to her sadhana. There is no incompatibility in principle between music and sadhana. 28 June 1931
*
You can learn the song and sing ―do it as Mother’s work with out desire, such as even the wish to sing before her ―but simply as something to be done for her service. Only you must not allow it to interfere with your painting
Page-737 which is your main work ―that in which you are making much progress. That you must go on doing every day. 7 December 1933 *
Can I take up the esraj when my hands get tired from practising the sitar?
One instrument is enough. If you feel tired so soon, it may be that the physical takes no pleasure in it, and then you should not trouble to learn. 10 October 1932
When I first took up the sitar, I could practise only for ten minutes without exhaustion, then went on to half-an-hour. But Dilip says if I can’t do it for at least three or four hours a day, I should give it up.
What Dilip says is not untrue. It is hard work if you want really to learn and otherwise it is not much use.
It is only for myself when I am alone and tired of other things that I want music. I really want to learn one instrument. I hope you will not forbid my asking Nirod or someone else for help.
I don’t think it will be very helpful to your sadhana; but if you want to ask, you can do so. 28 January 1933
*
Yesterday suddenly I felt a great desire or impulse to sing. The music seemed to come or rather pushed out from inside me by an automatic force. Something was felt ―very tangibly so ―to be doing it as if I was a mere instrument in its hold. Since then I had tried again to do it, but it won’t come.
It is no use trying ―it comes or it does not come. One must be open for its coming, that is all. 9 April 1933
*
It is absurd to say that you have narrowed or deteriorated be cause one no longer sings erotic songs. One is not narrowed if
Page-738 one loses taste for jazz and can hear with real pleasure only the great masters or music of a high or exquisite quality. It is not deterioration when one rises from a lower to a higher plane of thinking, feeling or artistic self-expression. Can one say of the man who has grown out of childishness and no longer plays with nursery toys that he has narrowed and deteriorated by the change? 26 August 1933 *
I often catch myself acting as the great composer, musician, ´ litterateur and all that sort of rot.
Well, that is an almost universal human weakness, especially with artists, poets, musicians and the whole splendid tribe ―I have known even great Yogis suffer from just a touch of it! If one can see mentally the humour of it, it will fall off in the end. 19 July 1943
Dance and Sadhana
Dance alone with rhythm and significance can express something of the occult or of the Divine as much as writing or poetry or art ―why should it not and why should there be anything in it condemnable? 17 July 1933
*
To feel the vibration and develop from it the rhythm of the dance is the right way to create something true; the other way, to understand with the mind and work out with the mind only or mainly, is the mental way; it is laborious and difficult and has not the same spontaneous inspiration. 28 April 1932
*
After seeing Udayshankar dance, I asked him for instructions and he showed me some exercises. May I know whether it is desirable for me to continue?
Dancing is a private thing ―we can’t deal with it as part of the
Page-739 Yoga. So it depends on your choice.
Can dancing not become part of the yoga, like poetry, music and painting?
If it is done in the right spirit, it can. But we answered like that because Udayshankar’s coming brought only the vital side with it and dancing in its vital side is a personal affair and cannot be part of Yoga. It would only raise the vital turn in the consciousness. 15 October 1934
*
I know nothing about Udayshankar or his qualities; but if he was calm himself, his coming certainly did not create calm in the Ashram but much unnecessary excitement. I do not quite see how Udayshankar is to be useful to the Ashram. The visits of celebrities are not the means by which the work of the Ashram can be helped. These are ideas that belong to the ordinary external consciousness in which the coming of famous So and So creates an exultation and a flutter. 5 October 1934
Page-740 |