MOTHER'S AGENDA

Vol. 6

Contents

 

 

January 6, 1965
January 9, 1965
January 12, 1965
January 16, 1965
January 24, 1965
January 31, 1965
February 4, 1965
February 19, 1965
February 24, 1965
February 27, 1965


March 3, 1965
March 6, 1965
March 10, 1965
March 20, 1965
March 24, 1965

March 27, 1965


April 7, 1965
April 10, 1965
April 17, 1965
April 21, 1965
April 23, 1965
April 28, 1965
April 30, 1965


May 5, 1965
May 8, 1965
May 11, 1965
May 15, 1965
May 19, 1965
May 29, 1965

 

June 2, 1965

 

June 5, 1965
June 9, 1965

June 12, 1965
June 14, 1965

June 18, 1965
June 23, 1965
June 26, 1965
June 30, 1965

 

July 3, 1965
July 7, 1965
July 10, 1965
July 14, 1965
July 17, 1965
July 21, 1965
July 24, 1965
July 28, 1965
July 31, 1965


August 4, 1965
August 7, 1965
August 14, 1965
August 15, 1965
August 18, 1965
August 21, 1965
August 25, 1965
August 28, 1965
August 31, 1965

 

September 4, 1965
September 8, 1965
September 11, 1965
September 15, 1965
September 15, 1965

 

September 16, 1965

September 18, 1965
September 22, 1965
September 25, 1965

September 29, 1965

 

October 10, 1965
October 13, 1965
October 16, 1965
October 20, 1965
October 27, 1965
October 30, 1965


November 3, 1965
November 6, 1965
November 10, 1965
November 13, 1965
November 15, 1965
November 20, 1965
November 23, 1965
November 27, 1965
November 30, 1965


December 1, 1965
December 4, 1965
December 7, 1965
December 10, 1965
December 15, 1965
December 18, 1965
December 22, 1965
December 25, 1965
December 28, 1965
December 30, 1965
December 31, 1965


HOME

 

ISBN 2-902776-33-0

October 16, 1965

I have just thrown a fit of indignation! Because almost without exception, all the people around me, who profess to want nothing but what I want, are apparently completely obedient, but their instinct is just the opposite. When I see someone, for instance, I see how he is, what he is capable of, etc., and when I see it's a man we can't count on, THEIR instinct is: "Oh, what a wonderful man!" And it's their INSTINCT, in other words, the spontaneous movement of their being is in constant contradiction with my knowledge.

Page 273


So that means ... I can't say it's hypocrisy, but it's a purely mental attitude that doesn't correspond to the consciousness of the being. Because for me there is a very sure indication: when I don't say anything to someone (that is, I don't use the intermediary of the mind) but see that his sensation, his feeling, his state of consciousness are in harmony with mine, I know it's going well. And when that person tells me, "Yes, I want what you want," it's true. But when it's simply a purely mental, superficial attitude and when because I say, "It's like that," outwardly they repeat, "It's like that," but inwardly everything seethes because they feel differently ...

For instance, for precise problems, a decision to be made, the problem is put to me; I don't answer materially right away, I send the answer like this (gesture of inner communication), then I wait. Well, it has happened (rather rarely, but anyway it has happened) that the person wrote to me, "I have received the answer, it's this and that." Then I say, "That's good." But when I write words and because I write words, they say the same thing, it doesn't prove anything. It's an artificial obedience.

And I am not talking about those who immediately feel, "Oh, Mother is wrong," I am not even talking about those; I am talking about those who truly have goodwill, but who are up to here (gesture to the mouth), even up to here (gesture to the forehead) fully in Ignorance and Falsehood, and who cover that with the cloak of a knowledge they have learned but don't even feel....

How will the world change? It's not possible.

No, I am not speaking of the enormous mass of those who imagine I am wrong all the time, but still who say, "Oh, the poor old lady, we shouldn't cross her," I am not even speaking of those. I am speaking of those who mentally have goodwill - they have put on a mask of goodwill. But the inner vibrations still belong to the world of Falsehood.

***

(Soon afterwards, about a new disciple in France who asks for a photograph of Sri Aurobindo.)

We are going to send him a good photo of Sri Aurobindo.

Which photo of Sri Aurobindo?

 If he was brought up in a Christian way, it's the photo where he is young which is good, they instantly see in it the face of Christ I ... All of them.... The day before yesterday again, an American painter, who is here and has read Sri Aurobindo's books, wanted

Page 274


to do a portrait of Sri Aurobindo (he never saw him) from photos - it's just as it was with the bust in Sri Aurobindo's room! [[That bust was made by a German woman (Else Fraenkel) and installed in Sri Aurobindo's room in 1958 at the disciples' instance. (One wonders why a bust, with golden illumination, was needed in this room.) ]] They all make a mystic Sri Aurobindo with narrow temples, like that (gesture tapering upward), a long mystic face, because they can't get out of their Christianity! For them, of course, the Power, anything that expresses the Power, oh! ... (gesture of repulsion)

I wanted to say that to this American.... For them, spiritual life is sacrifice, it's the God who sacrifices himself: he renounces the joys of the earth and sacrifices his existence to save mankind. And they can't get out of it!

So to those, it's the photo of the young Sri Aurobindo that should be sent, like the one in the reception room. Because he had just come out of his ascetic period here, and he still had a long face.

The photo in the armchair ... it's a bit too late; he was already beginning to feel that ... the world wasn't ready to go to the end. There is already the expression of suffering on his face.

But the other photo is good. That's how I knew Sri Aurobindo: he had just come out of the photo in profile, in which he is very thin. As for Cartier-Bresson's photos, they were taken in 1950.

It's a pity nothing was taken before.

Oh, he would never have let himself be photographed!

But when I saw the photo [of Cartier-Bresson, taken in 1950], when I saw he had that expression ... Because, with me, he never had it; he never showed it. But I wasn't in the room when the photo was taken, and suddenly he ... (he was sitting there, of course), he slackened. When I saw the photo (because they came long after, we had to write and ask them to send them), I was dumbfounded.... He had that expression.

I always saw him with a perfectly peaceful and smiling face, and above all, the dominant expression was compassion. That was what predominated in his appearance. An expression of compassion so ... so peaceful, so tranquil, oh, magnificent.

Page 275