ISBN 2-902776-33-0
(By some quirk of the tape recorder (?) the following conversation, which is so important, was almost inaudible, as if veiled, and Satprem was unable to save the recording, though he was able to save his notes. It should be said that his tape recorder was quite patched up - Mother never wanted him to borrow the Ashram's machines, except for "official recordings.")
I wanted to point out to you an article in the "Reader's Digest" on the structure of the cell according to the latest scientific discoveries. [[Reader's Digest, August 1964: "Inner Space of Living Cells," by Rutherford Platt. ]] I thought it might throw light on certain aspects of your experiences. They speak in particular of the cells' consciousness; they have discovered rather mysterious things.... You would see the correspondence with your own experiences.
The question I am asking myself is whether the cells have an autonomous existence or whether they must remain aggregated in the way they are, obeying a collective consciousness. [[The transcription of this first sentence is quite uncertain. ]] I do not mean the body consciousness, which is an entity; I mean: does the cell, as an individuality, have the will to remain in its present collectivity? Just as an individual willingly collaborates with a society, with an aggregate, does the individual cell have the will to remain in its aggregate, or is it only the central consciousness that has that will?
They speak of the consciousness of EACH cell, which has its own "life code," and communicates with the other cells for a particular work by sending out messages.
What I meant was: if you take a cell, does that cell have a will to remain in its present collectivity, that is to say, the body?
They conducted an experiment and took a piece from the heart membrane. The cells they took from the body started to come together, and ... "Then they start to move towards one another, after several hours clusters are formed and the cells in each
Page 173
cluster are pulsing in unison," as though they were trying to form a heart again.
Yes, but I also wanted to know whether, for instance, all the cells that make up the body have the will to preserve that aggregate or if ... Are they conscious only of themselves?
Not at all, they are conscious of a collective work to be done. And they communicate among themselves to organize that collective work.
Yes, I understand that very well; in other words, the heart cells tend to form a heart again, the liver cells to form a liver again, and so on. But I am up against this problem: here is an aggregate of cells making up this body; do they have a will for this body to continue, or ...? But when a body decomposes, the cells do not remain cells: the end is dust.
It's only through the parents' seed that the cell is formed again. After death, the body is reduced to dust.
Yes, so then it's over.
Which means that ultimately ... You see, it is said that the work you do to make your cells progress is useful for the whole - but I don't see how? It reverts to dust.
Obviously the transitional being, the being who does the Work, would have to be able to build a new body, or to give his cells a new possibility of action.
Yes, but those cells revert to dust.
Yes.... A new body must be created.
Well, yes! But dust is dust!
During your lifetime, during the lifetime of the one who works, you would have to create a body, you would have to emanate a body whose properties would be different from those of the purely animal body.
Yes, but that's before death.
Yes, before death.
Page 174
It's before death.
You see, for our consolation we are told in every possible way that the work done isn't lost and that all this action on the cells to make them conscious of the higher life isn't lost - that's not true, it's absolutely lost! Suppose I leave my body tomorrow; this body (not immediately, but after a time) reverts to dust; then all that I've done for these cells is perfectly useless! Except that the consciousness will come out of the cells - but it always does! ...
It's really during the Worker's lifetime that the thing must be done.
Yes, of course!
There's no doubt about it.
It's before. Something has to ENTER here.
Yes, it's in your body, through your body, that a new form must be worked out. But the moment the cells are conscious, there's no reason why that consciousness shouldn't want to follow a different course and make a body different from an animal body.
Yes, but that's not my question.
But after death, it's finished.
It's finished.
It's finished, for sure!
Consequently, it's a waste. We are consoled by being told, "No, death isn't a waste, because everything goes into the general work" - it's not true! It's not true, it's a pure waste.
It's true on the mental or vital level, but on the physical level it's not true.
On the physical level, it's a pure waste. The mind and vital are another affair, that's not interesting: we have known for a very long time that their life doesn't depend on the body - it depends on the body only in order to manifest. That's another affair. I am
Page 175
speaking of the body, that's what interests me: the body's cells. Well, death is a waste and that's that.
Yes. Yes, the transformation must be done in one lifetime.
Yes.
It isn't for next life, it's one life, one lifetime. The progress of your cells won't be passed on to another body - unless you create another body.
That is to say, before this body dissolves, a new creation should be there.
Yes, either your own body should be transformed, or else you should create another body in some other way. But during your lifetime.
I am perfectly convinced of that.
What is said is all very well for the mind and vital, because the mind and vital are immortal - they can be, at any rate; they have the possibility of being immortal. Whereas for the physical, that possibility is what is needed: a certain quality of cells should be able to allow the form to become different (the form can change, it changes all the time, it's never the same), but with the conscious interrelationships of the cells persisting.
[[The transcription of this last sentence is uncertain. ]]
But that's not impossible.
It's more than possible, but we have to learn how to do it!
Well, yes! But there's no point in consoling oneself by saying, "Next life" the next life, everything must be done all over again.
Everything must be done all over again, all over again. That's terrible!
There's no doubt, the Transformer must carry out the transformation in his lifetime.
So I don't mean to be pessimistic, but if it ends in a death, I will have wasted all my work.
Page 176
Not for the consciousness, naturally - all that is conscious remains conscious, eternally conscious - but for the cells of the body, the work has to be done all over again.
At the most, there might be a greater new ability.
How?
When you are born again, your mind is more developed, your vital is more developed; well, the physical consciousness will be more capable of doing the work again.
Provided dust retains consciousness - and it doesn't retain consciousness.
No, there's no doubt, the work must be done in one lifetime.
Of course! Well, Sri Aurobindo said that for the work to be done, the minimum is 300 years. We're still far from it!
One has a feeling that it doesn't depend so much on that as on the fact that the world or circumstances aren't ready, and that when circumstances are ready, maybe it won't be a "long-drawn-out work," maybe it's something that will be done in a flash - maybe it's waiting for the moment.
(long silence)
Well. We'll see. Would it be in the direction of a materializing power?... But those materializations aren't permanent, they have no permanence.
Yet Sri Aurobindo doesn't speak of "materialization," he speaks of transformation.
(silence)
Well. We will see.
Anyway, everything depends on you.
Thank you! (laughing) Thank you for the responsibility.
(silence)
Page 177
But the cells are an already very developed thing, in the sense that they are a form of LIFE in Matter; they are a form of life, they're not purely material, inert Matter....
You see, as long as all those things are on the psychological plane, it's very comfortable; very comfortable in the sense that you have the key, not only the key to the understanding, but the key to the action - as long as you remain on that plane. But as soon as it becomes very material, you feel you know ABSOLUTELY nothing, that with all that they know, nothing has been found yet - have they found the way of creating life out of inert matter? ... I haven't heard of it.
Some claim to have done so.
Bah!
(silence)
So then, that would be the difference between the subtle physical and the physical - immortality in the subtle physical is even perfectly obvious: it's not only easy to imagine, it's a fact; but the PASSAGE? ... The passage, which for most people is like passing from the waking consciousness to the sleep consciousness and from the sleep consciousness to the waking consciousness.... The most concrete experience I have had was like taking a step here and then taking a step there - there is still a step; there is still this-that (gesture of reversal).
But this subtle physical is very, very concrete, in the sense that you find things again in the same place and in the same way: YEARS LATER, I found again some places where I had been, with certain little "inner" differences, if I may say so, but the thing, for instance a house or a landscape, remains the same, with little differences in the arrangement - as there are in life. Anyway it has a continuity, a sort of permanence.
(silence)
But when you want to be absolutely sincere and not to kid yourself, in other words, not to be satisfied with explanations of appearances, you realize that you know nothing. All the experiences I have with people leaving their bodies, the more I have, the more ... puzzling it is. For instance, not very long ago, I had an experience with L. The night before she officially died, she came to me in an absolutely concrete manner: she had settled down and didn't want to leave me - wherever I went she followed me. She
Page 178
seemed to be clinging to me, talking to me, asking me questions - officially she was still alive. And there was a sort of tall being (those beings are connected to Death; I don't know their exact name, in the traditions they have been given all kinds of names - those are things I don't know at all theoretically). This time, a being of that sort was there, and it was as if he had given her permission to be there for a certain time, as if he were in charge of her and of taking her away once the time was up (all this without words, but "understood"). Then she told me (after literally "sticking" to me: I couldn't do anything anymore, she was taking up all my time), she told me, "I wanted to leave my body on ..." (I don't remember exactly, it was a Darshan day, November 24 or August 15, but if it was August 15, then she came to see me on the 14th). So I answered her, "Listen, today isn't the 15th yet; if you want to leave on the 15th, you should go back now." (That was to get rid of her! It was so concrete, you know, like when you have someone in your room and can't get rid of him.) Finally, I looked at that tall individual who was standing there perfectly peacefully and as if indifferent (he was there as an active permission), and I ... I didn't tell him, but "communicated" to him that perhaps it was time to take her away. And prrt! she left instantly - he was awaiting my order. None of this corresponds to any active knowledge on my part: that's just how it happened. And when she came back into her body in the morning, she told those waiting around her, "I spent the night with Mother, I was with her, I didn't leave her. She sent me back, but now I am going back to her." I was told this in the morning. A few hours later, she died. So the agreement is excellent, everything tallies. But her intention was not to leave me after her death (she came in the night with the idea that she was dead and that she was leaving me). Well, after she really died, I didn't get a SINGLE sign of her! ...
So I sat there wondering, "Is there really a difference of consciousness between the time when there is life in the body and the time when one leaves?..." It was a problem for me for days.
Things of this sort, you understand!
And the more I go into the details, the more I ... The more you feel YOU-KNOW-NOTHING. What people call "knowing" is wanting to define, regulate and organize things - that doesn't correspond to ANYTHING.
(silence)
Every passing year brings me closer to a certainty that we know nothing; and yet, the consciousness keeps growing and growing and
Page 179
growing.... Everything is becoming a LIVING consciousness, each thing emanates its own consciousness and EXISTS because of it. For instance, as I have already told you, knowing in one's consciousness just a second or a minute beforehand: The clock is going to strike, someone is going to enter, someone is going to move...." And those things aren't mental, they are part of the mechanism of things, yet they are all phenomena of consciousness. The things themselves LIVE (I say "live," but that's not it), they let you know where they are, where you'll find them; other things suddenly go OUT of the consciousness and disappear. It's a whole world - a world of tiny, microscopic phenomena that are another way of living, a world that seems to be the result of consciousness WITHOUT the intervention of what we call "knowledge": it's something that has nothing to do with knowledge or thought.
There are ups and downs, moments when it's more present and moments where it's less so; to be exact: moments when it's active and moments when it isn't. And whenever there is a period during which it isn't active, when it starts again it does so on a higher rung, that is, more intensely and clearly. The whole thing is obviously following a process of development. It's a sort of ... the word awareness might be the nearest; it isn't a perception, which still belongs to the mind, it's a sort of phenomenon of vision. And it has an absolute character. For instance, from time to time, when I hear people speak of something or other and say, "It will be like this and like that," instantly there comes a sort of "tactile" vision ... how can I explain this?... It resembles touch and sight (yet it's neither touch nor sight, but both together): it's the thing as it is, that's IT; and they may say what they like, that's IT and it is irrefutable. And so far, there has never been any contradiction.
It's a consciousness in which the mental element is absent. It comes just on its own, and it's so clear! It's like an immediate contact with the thing as it is.
It is another way of living.
And I am aware that when I am in that state, I look very absent - I must have the appearance of an automaton; yet, on the contrary, the consciousness is so acute, it's the exact opposite of absence! The consciousness is so awake, so awake - awake - but not mentalized, without mental interference.
(silence)
But all this is the psychological plane, it's very comfortable; as soon as you come down to Matter ... you feel the work is endless! You feel
Page 180
you're not moving forward and you don't even know what you should do to move forward. And when it becomes very acute, very tense like that, I invariably have an experience. But at the same time with the sensation that He is laughing, that He's making fun of me: "You're still a child, you still need some playthings!" So I am a good girl.
It is clearly a transitional period - it's interminable! If I start thinking and remembering what Sri Aurobindo said - he said it would take 300 years.... We have some time to wait, we needn't hurry.
The only thing is, you have neither a sense of power nor a sense of knowledge, nor even a sense of a relaxation - you're forever keeping hold of the body so that nothing happens to it. As soon as it has an experience, as it did the other day, [[When the center of the body consciousness moved. ]] it's quite shaken.
We know nothing, we know nothing, nothing. All the rules ... Naturally, the inner experience and the inside are very fine, there's no question. But that sort of tension every minute in your every movement ... You know, to do EXACTLY what should be done, to say exactly what should be said - the exact thing in every movement ... You must pay attention to everything, be tensed for everything: it's a constant, constant tension. Or if you take the other attitude, trust the divine Grace and let the Lord take care of everything, isn't there a risk that it will end in the body's disintegration? Rationally I know, but it's the body that should know!
When there is someone who has made the experiment and naturally has Wisdom, it's so simple! Before, whenever there was the slightest difficulty, I didn't even need to say anything to Sri Aurobindo, everything would sort itself out. Now, I am the one who is doing the work, I have no one to turn to, no one has done it! So this, too, makes for a sort of tension.
One cannot imagine - one cannot imagine what a grace it is to have someone in whose hands you can place yourself entirely! By whom you can let yourself be guided without having the need to seek. I had that, I was very, very conscious of it as long as Sri Aurobindo was there. And when he left his body, it was a dreadful collapse.... One cannot imagine. Someone you can refer to with the certainty that what he says will be the truth.
There's no path, the path has to be blazed out!
Page 181