EWS #132: On Power and Wealth – II

October 8, 2022

Alina (0:00:26):
Namaste. Good evening everyone.

Namaste Sraddhalu.

Sraddhalu (0:00:31):
Namaste. Happy to be with all of you.

Alina (0:00:34):
We are happy to continue our part 132 on the same topic like last time, on the power of, and wealth. So we will be taking some questions that we received from our viewers on this subject of strength and wealth and other powers. As usual you might feel free to ask questions in our chat box or send questions beforehand at our email integralstudies.in[at]gmail.com.

I will start today with an extensive question from SriValli. Shall I read the whole question?

Sraddhalu (0:01:21):
I think before that I will give a general summary of this thing and then we'll go to the question.

Alina (0:01:25):
Okay.

Sraddhalu (0:01:26):
Okay. So last time we took a pretty extensive view of what was a relatively simple question: how to build up the kind of strength and spiritual power that we see in the example of Vasishtha Ganapati Muni which was the result of his spiritual tapas and it was so powerful that the Mother said that when he walked into the room all the hostile forces ran away.

We covered quite a wide ground, and I want to give a context to why I tend to do that.

First is that often a question is a starting point, we could answer simply the content of the question, it would lead to another question, which would lead to another, in reality knowledge is one. And every question only represents an aspect of knowledge sometimes with a pinpoint focus, but still it's the whole ocean leaning to a pinpoint. And if you only solve the pinpoint or explore that, there is always more eventually. So my tendency is to try to give the bigger picture which often goes beyond the immediate scope of the question, and yet it answers all those things which come in that direction.

Second important distinction that I make is, always to place what we are studying in reference to the highest ideal. We could stop short with a superficial practical solution or discussion, but if you don't look at where it has to go, it's easy to get lost in this. Also, it would become false because there will be something greater that is missed. You stop with that, there is something greater that is missed, which even falsifies sometimes, the lesser truth. And therefore, I try always to place in alignment to the highest ideal and from there, the steps of growth or at least the direction of growth always widening also to encompass other associated elements as for example in the discussion on power, the aspect of knowledge and of love, which are the three so to say legs of Dharma.

And although we won't elaborate on the knowledge and love but just sufficient that the aspect of power is not left in isolation as well as limitations of the power use and the dangers, all those things broadly we have touched, and it was reasonably comprehensive.

What may happen though is as a result the picture is too big, and what the question may have question may have sought was only a very practical starting point, but giving a big picture makes it seem too complex, it may be too much to take in or it may be too confusing, and one tends to want to reduce some part to what is accessible to us and so on.

But keeping this broad picture has two advantages.

One is, it covers the full scope, and the question will not have too many follow-ups thereafter because it will have covered pretty much all the implications. But also that 20 years from now when someone sees the same thing, it will be as useful 20 years from now or at least significantly of value.

There's another aspect which is specific to the fact that we are following in the direction and the framework that Sri Aurobindo offers us, because in Sri Aurobindo's vision everything in the universe is useful, everything has value. Well, that is the divine vision, isn't it? And so one of the characteristics of his writings is that he takes up every viewpoint, every position, every claim or aspect or power or experience of reality, each thing is justified in its specific context or place but put in relation with the larger truth, and so when it goes out of sync with the larger truth, it becomes false, brought back in sync, it becomes true. And then you can understand why every position, every viewpoint, every philosophy, every experience, every method, every technique, every religion, every philosophy, everything has a value and a justification whatever may be the context, either small, limited or even large context but still an aspect to the whole.

So what we need to do in our understanding, I'm taking this question but it will apply to all the questions that we raise for discussion here especially when we seek a specific outcome, is recognising that everything has value, we first ask ourselves: Does this practice or does this path or does this application does it give you the result you seek? If it does not then perhaps it's not what you need to do now.

Second question would be from there: is the result commensurate to the effort?

I can spend an entire lifetime pounding away with a hammer on a nail and get some result, but I could get the same thing in a much more rapid way. So given the effort you make is the result commensurate. And one of the characteristics of the Integral Yoga having set a goal which is perhaps the most difficult transformation of human nature into divine nature, the effort you make and in relation the result you get makes it the easiest path.

(0:07:44):

And for us this should always be a reference that we don't shrink from making effort, but I would say it is pointless to make a huge effort for small result, isn't it?

So I'm putting all this in question of what we discussed but also earlier we discussed about rituals, mantras and so on various practices.

So is second question you ask: Is the result commensurate to the effort?

The third question we would ask is: Is there a more direct means with superior results?

And this is one of the great gifts of Sri Aurobindo that while justifying every position he goes straight to the heart of the matter and also in terms of application and practice straight to the most direct means.

For some people the direct means may involve too much let's say prior preparation because some of these direct means were too advanced at a certain stage of human development but we still have in humanity various stages as well as within our individual lives we go through stages.

At a certain stage of childhood perhaps certain direct means accessible in your adulthood would not be accessible now and so you may use secondary or indirect means at that point and the same applies for our spiritual journey.

So it is not to say that certain methods are unnecessary or that the rituals are not needed and specifically in context to rituals there were some responses. I'm not saying they're not good or they're not needed or they're useless. They're all useful but you have to see in this context: Is there a more direct means?

And finally, the fourth question to ask every time: Having got superior results even is not enough, is it assisting or leading to your higher spiritual evolution?

You could spend a lot of time to acquire certain powers by means which are indirect, by means which are more direct, by means which are extremely rapid. But having got to that, did it assist or lead to a higher spiritual evolution? If not, then you need to question: Should this take all your priority?

So keep these four questions in mind:

Does it give you the results that you seek?

Is the result commensurate to the effort?

Is there a more direct means with superior results?

Is it assisting or leading to your higher spiritual evolution?

Apply this to the rituals, to the mantras, to various practices, to prioritising knowledge, power, love, surrender, skills, capacities, whatever it is that you, for you now is on the priority and as means.

In our discussion on rituals particularly, and this is a lot of it is so to say putting that in context I had mentioned that I would speak of thread ceremony. It slipped my mind later, time was short. But I spoke of various rituals, particularly after someone has passed on, saying that in many cases they are unnecessary. In some cases they could be helpful, if not to that person, to someone else, creating a current to assist and so on.

But there are certain rituals which are of great value, not necessarily in the form in which they are traditionally made but in the psychological truth they represent.

And I wanted to point to certain rituals which represent stages of our development, one in particular in India is the, what is called the ‘thread ceremony’ at a certain age, sometimes 8, sometimes 10, sometimes 12. When it is felt that the child is ready to enter into some degree of responsibilities, there is a kind of an initiation done, and in the initiation a thread is put and then you are said, now you are born a second time.

The idea behind this is, the first physical birth is often in a state of helplessness, inertia, loss of memory, with it loss of purpose at least, obviously, externally, but also we are incapable of guiding ourselves, even though we don't remember the direction we want to go, even if we could remember, we are incapable, we are dependent.

But there comes a stage in life where we become reasonably capable of taking charge of our own lives. And so this ceremony is like a ceremony of coming of age where you are so to say handing over responsibility for your own life's journey to the child and saying, from this point on you will be responsible, these are the references, these are the values, these are the priorities, and these are the efforts you have to make. Something of that kind.

(0:12:55):

In various traditions, various cultures, religions, they may have variations to the idea or the form. But the principle of this ceremony is extremely valuable. Again, it need not be done with a thread.

In my case, for example, because we are in the Ashram, there was no such formality of a thread ceremony, and yet the need for a kind of a formal step of handover of responsibility being there my Mother spoke about this and then my teacher M.P. Pandit gave me a kind of a so to say handover of responsibility by teaching me Sri Aurobindo's Gayatri mantra, making me repeat three times, and it was in a sense also kind of a transmission of energy of consciousness in that, I already knew it, but when he taught it, it was giving it a force. And then he said, every morning after you finish your shower, you wear your clothes, you will stand here in front of the prayer space and in concentration repeat the Gayatri mantra three times, and he said, once for the mind, once for the lifeforce, once for the physical body, explained the meaning of what it means, opening the whole being to receive the light of truth and so on. And so from that point it became a ritual. As a child, of course, you are doing sometimes mechanically, but the explanation given, the purpose taught, that always stays. Even if you're in a hurry, your mind is distracted, somewhere at the back of the mind, the intention and the purpose is there, and there is a result.

Less or more is not important. It is helpful.

A second thing it does for a child growing especially is, to give you a reference point that you can cling to for those values. Again it's not the form of the ritual which is important but the fact of the reference.

And so every time you are, I would go to do that invocation, at the back of the mind was this idea, oh there is a greater light to which I open my mind, my heart, my body. Just that as an idea, even if fleeting when you start because there's a meaning you have understood the meaning so you can't ignore it there is a result and then in addition being told that it is there also as a mantra for protection it can override or overcome every danger, you also call upon it when you need to and so on.

So what I'm pointing to is certain ceremonies had a value which can be immense when correctly used, but the complex long process of the ritual is perhaps not as relevant unless you're conscious of the meaning and purpose and actually do it with some sense of that. It can be condensed to something very practical with the result that you get, ask the four questions, and you will see how you need to design it for the spiritual life, of course for other purposes any ritual would have a value but we are always in the context of the spiritual growth.

So this is to set a context and to close the discussion of rituals and mantras also. We're also setting context for what we are at now.

Last time we took up the question from Maya of power. And so we looked upon, we touched upon these three things which need to go together: knowledge must lead power and both must be suffused with the love. And the first foundation required to be able to contain power is the necessity to build up your instrumentation to handle that kind of intensity of spiritual power but with it all power even material power and authority.

So the base of peace, of calm is essential. The capacity to receive the power, to hold the power and not be overwhelmed, not lose your balance and so on, and then the need to widen what you can receive and then build to receive and intensify, that would be the primary stages of development of the spiritual power.

At the same time, I also said, you need to exercise the skill. It's not enough to receive. You may have the ocean with you, but when you try to pour it, the instruments through which you have to pour break down. So the instruments themselves have to be raised.

You will recall all this discussion is, has been covered earlier when we spoke of the seven steps of the Integral Yoga. Isn’t it? The instruments which needed to be amplified and then the Shakti which needed to be poured in. It's all there as part of the overall framework. But now we're limiting it to this aspect of power.

And therefore you start exercising the power that you have within whatever limited capacities, skills, domains in which you have to exercise it. And in exercising you build the skill. And there are aspects to the skill which relate to the knowledge and the love which as they grow will make more effective even with less power a specific outcome.

We have this wrong idea that in order to overcome a difficulty you need a power much greater. Not necessarily. And this is something which comes with the knowledge aspect. You may not have too much power. The thing which is opposing is opposing with tremendous power. It has already the power you need. If you can step in and bring knowledge, bring light, bring realignment within that thing, its own power now can be turned and utilised for the specific outcome. Very interesting idea.

(0:19:13):

You don't need the power to overwhelm a greater power. You may be able to do it with knowledge, with skill or with love. And so, even as you may build the aspect of power, build these two which will allow you to wield effective power without needing yourself to possess so much power. With whatever you have, you may consider a little more doesn't matter, you can do so much more because the thing opposing you already has the power that you need and you can use that to you, to bring an outcome which is intended.

So work on the skill aspect and learning to wield the power without getting swept away by the force that you're wielding.

All of this will later relate to wealth also, because the two are so closely connected.

If furthermore your intention to utilise the power is for the higher spiritual evolutionary purpose, then you have to be right from the beginning as far as possible as selfless in your purpose and as transparent an instrument as possible. So that right from the beginning, it's not that I will build power then I will turn, it will never happen, you start with the alignment and then let the power and the skill grow and so at each stage as your capacity grows and as the power contained grow, it is constantly in alignment. And every time it tends to deflect, it tends to lose balance, you will bring it back in alignment.

Remember this is because you want to utilise it for a higher purpose and by a higher means and drawing the highest source. If that was not the case, you could just as what happens in most cases, people just use the power and that's it, mostly seized by their own ego-sense.

But in this case since our goal is the spiritual not only power but spiritual evolution in the consequence.

So from the beginning work on this thinning of the instrument.

I've seen many people who have apparently a very humble, selfless, thinned out ego, the moment they come into position of power, suddenly the whole thing swings.

And a case comes to mind in the Ashram, such a wonderful person and so caring, loving and helpful to everybody with capacity of knowledge, and then Monday he was suddenly given a very high position of power in the Ashram and he wept with a joy and said now I am so great, and his whole personality warped, and all that innocence and clarity filled with some kind of dark mixture and that was it. It was remarkable to see how rapidly it switched from this to that. And it's a warning.

So, but because there was no preparation for power. He had not worked upon it. He was self-satisfied with whatever the capacity and temperament, swabhava, was. And so, especially because Maya has put this question, it shows a certain inclination in the nature towards this possibility or perhaps even a sense of purpose of the soul's aspiration. Knowing that, prepare yourself for it. From the divine perspective, there are insufficient number of developed and capable instruments to receive the power.

I avoid speaking of things which could have political ramifications because often it's associated with very sharp contrary views but I have to give one example here because it is one of the most remarkable cases in modern times and that is the example of our current Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi who from his early stages of life had this strong spiritual leaning. And at a certain stage, because that was all available, three times he tried to become a monk. And it was with Ramakrishna mission that he went twice for receiving the initiation and twice he was refused. He went and lived in the Himalayas for a couple of years, trying to live the life of a monk. Something happened there which he does not speak of openly, he was sent back to serve the country.

So he has lived a pretty monastic life all through his political career, owning nothing, possessing nothing. When he moved from Chief Minister to Prime Minister, whatever he had earned as Chief Minister he gave away for the education of the children of the government drivers. And the same continues.

This is an unusual example because we do not see anywhere in the world a position of that kind of power of leadership as president or prime minister of an entire country, nation, who lives actually the values of, I have to use the word ‘ascetic’ but that's not the right word anymore, but the true sense of the ascetic, that is the dispossession of ego and desire and owning everything, living in the kingdom with full power, wielding it with no personal interest but always for an ideal.

(0:25:11):

It's an example worth studying and I'm pointing it out for that purpose. And it will be worth it not to believe too much the media propaganda which has its own interests and vested, I would say, agendas. But this will set a precedent. In fact, it represents the fact that he could come to that position of power, represents an enormous precedent for the future of the world also.

So I'm giving these examples as useful for us. No personal interest mixing in. From the beginning you have to train yourself. And then when you begin the actual, let's say, tapas for building of this capacity, not all of us will need to begin with the power aspect.

Each one begins with the aspect natural to their temperament, swabhava. You begin with that direction in which your whole nature leans naturally. Not all will lean to power. In my case, the primary leaning is to knowledge. There was even a shrinking from power for a very long time. And at some point I had to consciously dissolve that shrinking and say, okay, deal with it as it comes, as it goes. Whether it comes or goes it doesn't matter but accept it as legitimate and as required to wield. So there was a passage of transition for this. But the natural starting point is still knowledge. The moment the need for exercise of power goes, I would tend to withdraw and shift to the knowledge aspect.

Others, and I've seen I have friends who are like that, temperamentally lean to power, knowledge is secondary. Or if it is there, it serves only the interests of amplification and utilisation of power. Even there, between different types of nature, some would apply it to achieving specific outcomes in materialising an ideal vision or some possibility. Others, it would be power exercised over circumstances, over people. For others, it would be power exercised over wealth. There are differences in temperament.

So always begin with the natural turn of your temperament and then widen as your instruments become more plastic and then as the soul powers, the fourfold soul powers, come forward and get amplified, not only there are four facets but they blend into each other in a way that is, that can even become seamless. And this is characteristic in the Integral Yoga. Allow that. And at some point the power aspect also would come forward. That would be more natural for most of us. And those of us who already have a natural inclination to the power aspect, well, that's their natural starting point. But then increase gradually. Do not rush to amplify.

The same thing happens with knowledge, whatever we have discussed. As you grow in knowledge, as you open to a higher perception or more complete, wider knowledge, also work on the articulation. Not all of us are naturally turning to articulation, but to whatever extent possible, write, speak, put into practice, in whatever way to make the external expression as aligned to the inflow and your nature as transparent as possible, and so it would be for all the other aspects of the soul powers or love.

In the case of the power aspect particularly, the recalling the steps, build the foundation of peace, open above, receive light and force, widen, deepen, etc., then you build up the intensity. And I come to the point of the tapas, which was the point of the question.

Build up the intensity as if there's a kind of a pressure that is building within your container. Of course, your container will be large, but into that building of intensity. It's similar to what you will feel sometimes, some days when you're full of energy or you may see somebody else who's full of energy, it feels as if he's bursting with energy or you feel as if you're bursting with energy, in other words, you have so much that it feels like you can't contain, its overflowing beyond your boundaries. It's something of that kind of pressure which is built up and gradually, consciously begin to build that. That is tapas, that concentrated intensification is the tapas. And that was the specific feature of Ganapati Muni, which was the example that we started with.

(0:30:18):

So, and eventually of course, as you open to the higher, it is an infinity of energy, an infinity of power that begins to pour through. But well before that, even as we are at a very preliminary stage of what we have described as the whole trajectory, as I said before, you will find you can begin to exercise power with great effectivity even without needing to have that kind of intensity just utilising the knowledge, the skill and love that dissolves the opposition and heals conflicts. And that itself is a great power also, isn't it? So, work on all these at the same time.

I, going back to Maya's question, I do not know what is your temperament. You can introspect, see what works for you. But begin in this way. If you have a strong aspiration to develop something, and the example of Ganapati Muni, calls to you, know that this is a direction but start where you are and build with the steps already within your reach.

Moving a step further from the question itself, there is an aspect to the utilisation of power, especially spiritual power as opposed to physical power that I want to bring. It is extremely important because from the ascetic influence of the past there are two distortions which have come. There are many which we have spoken of but two in this context. First that non-violence and therefore by it non-power was associated with spirituality. But second which is an allied distortion much more subtle is that somehow you will use spiritual force and not use material force because that is inferior.

Unfortunately Sri Aurobindo, Sri Aurobindo's example from the point of 1926 where he withdrew for the purpose of the supramental consciousness to be brought down into the physical, that is seen by people as an example of allied to something ascetic. It was not.

Even when Rabindranath Tagore met him, Sri Aurobindo told him, oh in a few years I will be coming out. Later to somebody else, he even said 1928 was when he expected to come out with the work done and now ready to bring into the world his whole, not only the Yoga, but the whole program of regeneration of the nation and of the world. It was literally just two years away and as you know we have spoken about this, some of the things which changed things, but it is to say that he was very much a man of action and the example of course is when he had to place the Mother in front because he had to go to this particular work you have the example of the Mother who was literally working 24 hours, everything, everywhere everyone, and with full power, all the love and knowledge and everything available and all four of the soul forces fully playing out.

So, we have spoken before of non-violence, but this aspect of spiritual power should be exercised at a distance, at a subtle level, and not through a physical action is still there somehow in people's minds:

Why are you getting involved with the court case? Why are you going and lifting the sword? Why are you standing there and shouting before whatever it is the government or something? You should sit at home and with your spiritual force counter it.

That's at least the advice given. This also comes very strongly from the ascetic twist which came in the example of Mahatma Gandhi who spoke like this who actually said, he wrote to the, when the Second World War started, he wrote to the King of England, I think, or the Prime Minister of England, he said that you will not fight with violence, you will fight with soul force, and if necessary let Hitler come and seize your country and kill your children and rape your women, and, but you will stand without violence and with soul force.

Now of course it is ridiculous but because he had fixated himself on a certain idea which came from his Tolstoy in Christianity he was stuck on it.

Sri Aurobindo speaks very firmly about this. And I want to read, a dimension which is not well understood, not well known, but which actually tells you that utilising soul force and real soul force, not Gandhi's moral force, but utilising soul force actually can be more damaging than physical violence and even more violent in outcome, so, I am going to read from two passages, one from the Mother and one from Sri Aurobindo.

(0:35:42):

And first, the Mother's discussion is from the Agenda, 1973 February, this is a year, less than a year before she left. This is from a meeting with the School teachers. Someone complains that the first signs of violence are showing up in children.

Mother's comment which is recorded:

“Violence is necessary as long as men are ruled by their ego and its desires. But violence must be used only as a means of defence when you are attacked. The ideal towards which humanity is moving and which we want to realise is a state of luminous understanding in which each person’s needs as well as the harmony of the whole are taken into account.”

“The future will have no need of violence because it will be governed by the Divine Consciousness, in which all things are harmonised and complement each other.”

“For the moment, we are still in a stage where weapons are necessary. But it should be understood that this is a transitory stage, not a permanent one, and we must strive for the other one.”

She's now speaking in a very large context especially of even wars and conflicts.

“Peace... peace and harmony will be a natural outcome of the change of consciousness.”

“You see, in India there reigns the Gandhian concept of nonviolence which has replaced physical violence with moral violence, but it’s far worse!”

“But if you dare speak against Gandhi, everyone will immediately... oh!”

“You don’t need to mention his name, you can explain to the children that replacing physical violence with moral violence is no better. Lying down in front of a train to stop it running is a moral violence that can ultimately cause more disorder than physical violence.”

How? How?

Think about it.

Why will “moral violence ... ultimately cause more disorder than physical violence”?

Think about it.

We'll come to that later when Sri Aurobindo explains, but this is something very important for each one of us to ponder. It's not obvious, the link from how moral violence leads to greater disorder.

But we'll come to.

“There would be a lot to say.... It depends on each case. I myself very much encouraged the practice of fencing because it gives you skill, control over your movements and discipline in violence – I very much encouraged fencing at one time.”

Imagine “discipline in violence”.

So there are situations in the world where you have to act with a certain intensity of force which may even involve violence of various kinds. Verbal violence, even physical violence depends what the form is. But still in that can you hold your discipline?

Most of us when required to put out intensity we lose our balance, we lose our, in French there is a word, ‘sang-froid’, means cold blood. This capacity to remain completely calm, even in the midst of the most disturbing and disrupting situations, without losing your head, without losing your clarity. But this is strained by this discipline and violence.

So this was actually done in the Ashram School for many years, and then they just stopped like many things which Mother initiated over the last few decades have been gradually shut down, wound up, stopped.

Even now people going to Sri Aurobindo's Room on their birthdays has been stopped.

And we have to recognise, this is a perverse tendency and whenever possible it will have to be set right and these things brought back for the value that they have for the spiritual purpose, and this is one of those things we will have to bring back.

“I very much encouraged fencing at one time.” And then Mother says, “I learned how to shoot; I used to shoot with a rifle, because it gives you steadiness and skill and a very good eye; and it forces you to remain calm in the midst of danger.”

(0:40:21):

Think about it. Imagine the Mother saying, well if you had to generalise it, all children should learn fencing and shooting. And you will say, oh-no, but violence, guns are bad.

Well, they have their right place in the right context, but as a training, and this is all about consciousness training.

“All these things are....”-she pauses-“I don’t see why one should be hopelessly nonviolent, it only makes a spineless character.”

Think about this again.

To build a character which has strength, which is able to stand firm, you need to go through a discipline that requires you to face aggressions of some kind to build the capacity to stay firm in the midst of aggression. Isn't it? What would that be?

So one of the forms in which it has still stayed in the Ashram at least partially, now even that has been reduced, we used to have boxing, wrestling, and judo. I think, the judo has stopped completely; and the boxing, wrestling, I don't know what they do.

But all these combatives are the base for training this.

“I don’t see why one should be hopelessly nonviolent, it only makes a spineless character.”

“Turn it into an art! An art for cultivating calm, skill and self control. There’s no need to cry out indignantly as Gandhi would. It’s useless, useless, absolutely useless – I am not at all in favor of it! One should master the means of self-defence, and one should cultivate them in order to do so.”

So, “calm”, “skill”, “self-control” and mastering “the means of self-defence”.

“Above all, make them understand that moral violence is just as bad as physical violence. It can even be worse, that is, at least physical violence forces you to become strong and control yourself, whereas moral violence is....”-she pauses-“You may be like this [apparently quiet] and harbour the worst moral violence in yourself.”

Now think about what happens in a person who does not have the strength or the self-control, incapable of physical violence and now holds a kind of a moral violence and externally apparently quiet, internally the worst moral violence.

What happens now?

They are radiating this force of violence. Themselves may not physically produce an action which is violent but would surround themselves, would influence their environment with the most extreme kind of hatred or violence or disrupting energy which will seize upon others, and because they have no outlet for their moral violence it builds and builds and builds. Consider what happens to them. Eventually, perhaps they fall sick. But what happens to others around and the sustained damage it could cause? Here you get a first hint.

But now when this is extended to soul force and a spiritual, let's say, restraint against violence, it can be far more damaging.

And now we'll read from Sri Aurobindo. This is from his article on, which is titled, from The Essays on the Gita, the chapter titled “Kurukshetra”, and there he is taking up this whole question of violence and as part of action, so he says for those who argue:

“We will use only soul-force and never destroy by war or any even defensive employment of physical violence?”

You remember that was Gandhi, he said, do not defend even yourself.

“only soul-force and never destroy by war or any even defensive employment of physical violence?”

Sri Aurobindo now answers the question.

“Good, though until soul-force is effective, the Asuric force in men and nations tramples down, breaks, slaughters, burns, pollutes, as we see it doing today, but then at its ease and unhindered, and you have perhaps caused as much destruction of life by your abstinence as others by resort to violence;”

So “your abstinence” has caused as much destruction as their violence because you gave them free play for all that they were doing.

So this is the first sign, the first form in which your restraint physically is causing the destruction, unhindered.

"still you have set up an ideal which may some day and at any rate ought to lead up to better things.”

And meanwhile as your soul-force develops the capacity to overcome, all this is being destroyed, perhaps there's nothing left and maybe even you don't get your chance to develop soul-force, well, that's what the Second World War was heading for, that's why Sri Aurobindo had to intervene.

(0:46:08):

But then, he continues:

“But even soul-force, when it is effective, destroys.”

So what you would do with soul-force finally is also involving a destruction of something, if nothing else, the evil and the instruments of evil and the forces of evil.

Now he comes to something very profound:

“Only those who have used it with eyes open,”-soul-force-“those who have used it with eyes open, know how much more terrible and destructive it is than the sword and the cannon; and only those who do not limit their view to the act and its immediate results, can see how tremendous are its after-effects, how much is eventually destroyed and with that much all the life that depended on it and fed upon it.”

So in the long run the consequence of utilising that force goes well beyond immediate results, sometimes it can last for centuries and destroying all that.

So, it destroyed not only the evil, but also everything that depended on the set order now, which was created by the negative things.

Then he says:

“Evil cannot perish without the destruction of much that lives by the evil, and it is no less destruction even if we personally are saved the pain of a sensational act of violence.”

So you may say, ah at least I didn't have to act with violence, but the destruction is not less.

So if you really want to overcome the evil and defeat it, there has to be the destruction of all “that lives by the evil” also, isn't it?

Still, now he elaborates on this:

“Moreover, every time we use soul-force we raise a great force of Karma against our adversary, the after-movements of which we have no power to control.”

This is the deep point, and it is a point of first spiritual, I would say, principle or implication: “every time we use soul-force we raise a great force of Karma against our adversary”.

You would have gone and destroyed whatever violence would have ended it. You raise soul-force with physical restraint and the result is a huge wave of karma that comes far greater than this because of the suffering that is being caused and the spiritual force which is activated as a result. And then the destruction which comes is not only on this but a whole chain of associated forces, events, people, circumstances and down through time through the centuries, sometimes on an entire people.

So he gives an example of this: “Vasishtha”-one of the great Rishis of the Vedic age-“Vasishtha uses soul-force against the military violence of Vishwamitra”, he was a king who became a sage but who fought Vasishtha first, Vasishtha used soul-force, neutralised every action of the “military violence” either by the spiritual power or allowed even his 100 children to be butchered by Vishwamitra and did not act, did not react, and so, this becomes a very powerful example for the non-violence.

Eventually, he subdues Vishwamitra because of his love, but.

Meanwhile what has happened?

So, “Vasishtha uses soul-force against the military violence of Vishwamitra, and armies of Huns and Shakas and Pallavas hurl themselves on the aggressor.”

(0:50:31):

All through the centuries you see this happening as a consequence of that one act ten thousand, five thousand years ago.

“The very quiescence and passivity of the spiritual man under violence and aggression awakens the tremendous forces of the world to a retributive action; and it may even be more merciful to stay in their path, though by force, those who represent evil than to allow them to trample on until they call down on themselves a worse destruction than we would ever think of inflicting.”

Think about it.

This is an extraordinary statement, the full import of which we can appreciate only when we have that kind of a vision to see the chain of consequences of the karmic forces unleashed across centuries where there is no direct external cause and effect.

“Huns”, “Shakas”, “Pallavas”, you see this in history, they were known for their violent revolt, battle, response, and so on, their aggression and violence hurling against the aggressors, and destruction, and destruction, and destruction, all as a consequence of Vasishtha's use of soul-force against military violence of Vishwamitra, many millennia before.

So it is sometimes “more merciful to stay in their path” of “those who represent evil than to allow them to trample” on until “a worse destruction” is called upon and especially his point that “The very quiescence and passivity of the spiritual man under violence and aggression awakens the tremendous forces of the world to a retributive action”.

So he continues:

“It is not enough that our own hands should remain clean and our souls unstained for the law of strife and destruction to die out of the world; that which is its root must first disappear out of humanity. Much less will mere immobility and inertia unwilling to use or incapable of using any kind of resistance to evil, abrogate the law; inertia, tamas, indeed, injures much more than can the rajasic principle of strife which at least creates more than it destroys.”

Think about it.

Very interesting.

And all this will now link to the next question which we have also.

You could say: Ha-well, what can I do? Country is run by some bad people. This is happening wrong. What can I do?

If you fought back with Rajesh, at least you'll create more than you'll destroy. Even though there will be the clash and so on.

So I would leave it for you to read the whole chapter because there are other implications, but this idea is extremely important.

In fact at the culmination of that whole thing when Vasishtha uses soul-force and again and again Vishwamitra's army is destroyed, and then he goes and he says, I will become as great as Vasishtha, and he starts building his tapas and fighting him with the force of tapas and so on. At the end when he loses and he finds himself ineffective, he declares and it is in Sanskrit a very famous verse, it goes, Dhig balam kshatriya balam, brahma-tejo-balam balam, that is, translated loosely, the strength of the Kshatriya or the power of the Kshatriya is worthless, the intensity, the power of Brahman is the true strength.

So again it has been quoted to justify non-action by the physical force of violence or the Kshatriya action because that is greater.

No, we will make this correction.

And I'll come back to our discussion: And that's why this was very important to put it in context that we have to develop the Kshatriya strength also while the spiritual power may be of far greater effectivity, its utilisation and the preparation and capacity to utilise it may follow its own path during which time develop this external means of your instruments and where necessary the capacity to exercise in situations of stress and conflict the force that is appropriately necessary. You could take the general reference of the Mother's guidelines that it should be done in self-defence, but in self-defence there will be a violent response or action also.

So this, remember, is not about non-violence. It is not about use of pure spiritual force shorn of material action or vital action. Those things are needed, backed by spiritual force where necessary or where possible.

But those things are sometimes better than the other.

So we can now take the question of the next question in our list.

Alina (0:56:11):
Shall I proceed with both parts in the question?

Sraddhalu (0:56:17):
Yes. Yes please. I think so, I think we'll read both.

Alina (0:56:19):
SriValli is writing: We most often see wealth concentrated with people in powerful positions, be it business people or politicians. They are the ones with the least attitude for the manifestation of Mahahalakshmi, and yet that is the order of the present state of affairs. Can you please throw some light on how is it that case, as well known from Mother's readings, the conditions for Mahalakshmi to manifest, and what we see is exactly the opposite, in places of wealth and power concentration?

And the second part of the question: Most strong, vital-natured people tend to dominate and suppress the voice of those who are more demure in their way of being. In such cases, the choice of the people with softer nature is to either fall in agreement with the stronger voice or submit himself to the other's view, though not agreeing internally, or he might have to leave the space. None of these seem good choices, as you cannot always agree with people when you do not feel it internally right, and if one submits oneself, it feels as cheating one's inner self, and leaving the space would mean running away from the circumstance. How would one manage such situations either at home or at work spaces for harmony and yet not be submissive to the general harmony's sake?

Sraddhalu (0:58:19):
Yes, I think, I'll take the second question first.

So the first question is about: Why is it that we see wealth concentrated with people in powerful positions, sometimes business people, politicians, others, and they seem to have the least attitude for manifestation of Mahalakshmi?

The second question is more close to us: Most people with a strong vital nature dominate, suppress those who are soft-voiced, sensitive, demure, and so what do you do? Either you fall in agreement against your wishes or you submit to them or you leave the place but in any case they have won and you have lost, isn't it? And this happens at home as well as in workspace.

And what is interesting is, in the articulation of the question, SriValli says: How would one manage such situation either at home or at workspace for harmony and yet not be submissive for general harmony's sake?

So here's the catch. The weak point is the attempt to cling to harmony which now becomes your responsibility alone, whereas the other person doesn't care for the harmony. They know that by trampling upon you strong enough, long enough, you will cave-in in the name of harmony, isn't it? It's very simple. Knowing that, they will wait, they will keep insisting until you back off because now it's your responsibility alone to create harmony, right?

First recognise that it is equally their responsibility. Your responsibility is not primarily harmony, but the protection of Dharma. I am deliberately using this word instead of truth because the word is more appropriate. The moment you say truth, there are ways in which we can distort this very easily.

Let's say somebody made a mistake inadvertently, perhaps intentionally, whatever the reason. You can say: to expose him is truth, therefore I am going to spend the rest of my life exposing him and destroying him until nobody can trust him again.

Truth, right? But it's not Dharma.

You see, the problem with the English word ‘truth’ is, you can pick a piece and say this is truth.

Dharma automatically puts it in context of the overall evolutionary sense.

And then you have to say: Is that the right Dharma for you in relation to that person, to yourself, to society?

Obviously not, in none of these three.

Perhaps you need to expose but not in that way necessarily, and so you will find the appropriate via media.

But my point is harmony is not your first priority. And by putting harmony on the higher priority, you have allowed the suppression of Dharma or even truth. A greater truth is one way we could articulate the word ‘Dharma’ which includes all. That would be one way to define the Dharma which includes the well-being and growth of all.

If that you try to bring forward, then sometimes opposing and sometimes firmly opposing something which is wrong is necessary.

Sri Aurobindo explains that there is no way to avoid violence in the physical world because the law of physical matter is form colliding with form and therefore violence is inevitable.

Non-violence is a law of the psychological domain. In your mind, in your heart, you will be non-violent.

In physical action, even to eat, well, you have to chew the food, isn't it? You have to cut the vegetables. That's violence. So, violence is a law of the physical world. You cannot live in the physical world by pursuing non-violence, you will tend to withdraw or be kicked out of the physical world by those who exercise their freedom, isn't it?

So in your mind and heart, as far as possible, you can't always do it, but as far as possible you will bring a greater equality, and I won't yet use the word ‘love’, you don't love the enemy, you don't love the Asura, you do not love the pan who has caused you great suffering, but you love a greater truth for which then you are able to stand and if needed with force or where necessary suffer, but not helplessly, with the necessary pushback that is required appropriately, knowing it may fail because you alone are not strong enough. Isn't it? And yet you have to do that so when you start looking at this question from a deeper perspective, from a spiritual perspective, and from an affirmative spirituality, not an ascetic spirituality, we have to make this distinction, because the ascetic will say, it's all illusion get out. But we say, no, this is a domain where truth has to manifest, against that truth are great powers which are organised, you have to stand firm. If you do nothing, they will suffocate the truth and destroy it.

So you have to fight. And sometimes the fight may be more psychological, sometimes it may be a fight of ideas, sometimes fight of wills, sometimes fight of emotions, energies, sometimes fight in action, again various kinds of action, but for what?

It has to be to protect a greater truth, a truth that is greater than yourself and the other.

That's one way you will ensure, you will not make a mistake. If you hold a truth that is yours but not theirs, you are already biassed. Well, at least it's better than nothing.

But a truth that is greater than you, where your survival or not is irrelevant even, because that is greater. For example, the survival of the nation, which is a greater truth than my individual, is what makes possible for a soldier to sacrifice their life on the battlefield.

But a truth which includes the other as yourself equally would be the greater truth, and that would be Dharma.

(1:05:15):

Even in the case of battle, of war, where some one side has to lose and it doesn't matter even which side will lose finally, you will have to do what is right to protect this greater truth, and then even if the wrong side loses or the right side loses, the outcome will be in the direction of the Dharma, of the greater truth, not necessarily in your lifetime.

And this is one of those things historically that we have had to go through these passages if you go back into history and all of us have been part of those periods sometimes battling, struggling, surviving, where the defeat was inevitable, but by fighting, by opposing, by resisting, a greater truth eventually would be victorious. Although at that moment, the apparent truth is defeated.

So keep this in mind: Dharma, which includes the other equally. And in that situation, sometimes it is necessary to completely extinguish the evil, with force where necessary, through war where necessary, where possible through a defensive means, where necessary through offensive means.

So all this is to put in context this much simpler domain of home and workspace.

So what is happening here is, somebody with a strong vital nature is dominating and suppressing the voice of the more demure, the demure can feel overwhelmed the first time, the second time, but the third time if the demure does not make the effort to speak up, then that is a greater falsehood than the assertion of the strong vital nature. They're living by their nature. They have a strong vitality, they will dominate you if they get a chance. Isn't it? It's not a play of morality. You can't say, oh, you should restrain your vitality because I am weak.

We have in Indian cinema, during that moral phase, just post-Gandhi, you see that even now sometimes, the hero is fighting the bad guy. The hero has a gun or a knife. The bad guy now has just lost his tool of his weapon. And then he throws away his gun and goes for a fistfight. It's ridiculous, right? You could just say, okay, enough, we end it right there. But there has to be this moral one-upmanship. And of course, inevitably in the cinema, the bad guy will pull out a hidden knife and turn it against the hero, which is the nature of evil, isn't it?

So, you have to understand that your inaction is a greater falsehood than his nature dominating because that's his nature, that's actually his truth in a sense superficially, and for you then to speak up is a necessary thing. If you did not make the effort, then you have chosen that inertia what Sri Aurobindo referred to earlier which in fact ends up creating more harm even to yourself.

So you will have to train yourself to speak up.

Before you speak up, plan with clarity what is it you need to say, and if possible prepare yourself with exactly what you will say. If you feel you're unable to say it the right way without getting emotional, write it down first. Minimise it, simplify it. It won't be two pages. It will be reduced to one paragraph, maybe reduced to two lines. When you have got to the essence, removing all personal elements, yours and theirs, it's not a personal attack, you are standing for something which is greater than both of you. You have articulated it. Now at that point, when you feel overwhelmed, you will say, wait, I have something to say, and you read out. If you have the capacity, you will speak up without needing to read it. But always clinging to that thing which is not personal to him or to you.

So I would have liked that if SriValli had given an actual example, but we see many such examples. So I'll just pick up one which recently came my way.

So here is a woman married into a family where the parents of the husband eat fish and she cannot stand fish. They're just about to move in or the parents want to come and move in with them, as long as they were visiting it was fine, but now they are going to come and live permanently. How will I manage? How will I suffer? It will be hell for me. That's the thinking. And I said to her simply, just tell them that I am allergic to the fish smell, and it is impossible for us to live together because of this difference unless you stop the fish or I move out. But you need to say this. If you don't say it and keep suppressing and keep wallowing in your suffering, nothing is ever going to change and you will be the most miserable person. They will not gain in any case. Once you've articulated this, you can have a discussion of how to find the via media. But you need to articulate, you need to speak up. When you see a wrong being done to another, again taking in the office work, office space, a wrong being done to you or to someone else, you speak up. If there are consequences, well, you have to choose how you will say it. There are ways to articulate without necessarily insulting or without seeming to break a trust.

(1:11:05):

So, these are aspects of the skill. I don't need to go too much into detail. But the moment you say, for the sake of harmony, I will keep quiet, you have fooled yourself by placing yourself on a higher moral pedestal saying, see for harmony I suffered. No, you have actually chosen a line which is falsehood. Harmony is secondary or is a dual responsibility. Ok?

So set aside this word for a while. You aim towards harmony, but not by compromise of a falsehood, and take small steps, start speaking up. The moment you say, for harmony I will keep quiet, the fellow will take one more step and create disharmony where you are, push you one more step behind for harmony, then he takes one more step, kicks you out, one more step and kicks you out. Eventually, there is no harmony anyway or is the harmony of their victory with nothing of you left, isn't it?

The character of Asura is that it needs to, Asuric nature or Asuric energy, is that it needs to own or possess the space, if it cannot own or possess, then it needs to control or dominate, if it cannot control or dominate, then it needs to oppress or destroy.

All these are falsehood.

To allow it in the name of harmony is falsehood.

So if you feel, as a deeper part of you, not as a personal response, I have to stay general unfortunately, that something is wrong, you have to act to set it right. Even if you think you will lose, take small steps, start by speaking, start by taking small steps of action and persist.

Where you are entirely overwhelmed, you may take a strategic position where you will express disagreement, but not take an active position where you might be wiped out and then build the necessary steps to bring about the change in that environment, but you have to push by whatever means.

Vital nature will tend to dominate, it is their dharma, they have done nothing wrong as such. If it is barbaric vital nature, well, it exercises barbarism. And inevitably in history we see that the more civilised because more refined fade out. They get overwhelmed by the barbarians because they weakened themselves in their civilisational evolution and therefore the necessity for strength which is an aspect of the divine also. Can we have a civilisation which at the same time has the higher knowledge, has a power to defend itself, has the love to understand every viewpoint and learn to harmonise where possible, where the other accepts the principle of a greater truth, and actively work for the expansion of a greater ideal, greater than yourself?

Yes, it is possible.

And that's what we are here for, and we are all capable of it.

This aspect of power has not been sufficiently trained, has in fact been thrown away and weakened over time, and therefore we are in this condition, and there is now a pushback that has to happen.

We see for example in India, it has come in a very interesting way recently with Indian cinema, where it was very common for the cinema which was often controlled by the mafia centred in the Middle East to deliberately pervert Hindu icons, deities, values, sacred phrases. They would make movies with titles that represented something very sacred but with a complete perversion of it, and they would gloat over it, they would celebrate how they had fooled people, and the masses would rush to watch a movie where they had no choice, giving them money to continue to do their mischief.

(1:15:25):

And recently, in the last two years particularly, we see, very interesting, people just boycott the movie. And very big budget movies which were intended to denigrate have just failed, and it's forcing now the box office industry to review what they have been doing. And there's a collective pushback. It was not possible earlier because there was not enough of this internal conviction of your own values that you need to protect. And there was the compromise, oh, but I want to be entertained even if it is insulting to me. That's changed now, because, in part, because through online means we have a much wider choice of things to watch, but still.

It is also a formation of the sense of individuality of the culture and civilisational values, which had been battered through nearly 1000 years of colonisation and invasions and destruction. So there's a recovery. It's kind of slow, but when it happens, it's quite remarkable to see.

But the same thing has to happen now in our individual lives in our personal spaces, and so this, I think, covers the second question.

The first question of SriValli is about wealth being concentrated in people in power, business, politicians, who don't obviously live by the values associated with the conditions for Mahalakshmi to manifest.

And you read from The Mother, the little booklet of Sri Aurobindo, where he describes what are the conditions in which Mahalakshmi will manifest, and obviously you don't see that in many of them, but that's the point which we have to recognise.

When the power of wealth was discarded by the spiritual and the spiritually minded, literally you handed it over to anybody who chose to grab it. Once they grabbed it, they've ensured, it has stayed in their possession, in their control. They will not give it to you.

At a very practical level what happens with businesses is they form what are called ‘interest groups’, ‘cartels’, to protect the wealth that stays within them. They will not make transactions with someone else where the wealth goes out of their domain. If you want to be a part of the cartel, then they submit you to certain means by which you are under their control, various forms through blackmail or other means. Once they can control you, then they will share with you and you are part of their system. And that's how it has worked. It has protected itself.

So now is the challenge. Can you rebuild the wealth system on a different basis which is not replicating the cartel model but where the wealth also you have to protect but where it is applied for growth instead of for destruction or domination or oppression? It's happening. It's been happening particularly we see, at least in India we see this much more in the last I will say about 20 years ever since some kind of a practical liberalisation took place in the systems of business. Before that the Asuric control ensured that if you did not feed the machinery of corruption you were not even allowed to survive. Once that was withdrawn to some extent it has given a chance.

In the West, at least in the United States where things were much more liberal, it's gone the other way. We find the control systems creeping in then, the cartels grabbing ownership and an exaggerated centralised control of the power structure and others being pushed into impoverishment. And so you have to push back, create your own spaces and so on.

The principle of the cartel you will have to recognise and protect the wealth and not have it go right back.

I give an example, this was, and this will actually bring us to the larger discussion of wealth which we will keep for next time, where I had gone to a conference, where some people from the Native American population were discussing: Why the Native American population stays poor? And they explained how the government dole comes, so money has come into your pocket, obviously the first thing you do is you spend it on your basic necessities and then your comforts and luxuries whatever form it is. And everywhere that you spend, the money goes right out of the sanctuary, right out of their reservation. So the money came from outside, given to you, and it goes straight out. The moment you've spent your month's money, what's left in the reservation? Again zero. Where's the wealth? You cannot have wealth in this situation unless you create within the reservation the means by which you will pay and the money stays within in circulation in the reservation. Isn't it? If it goes right back into the cartel, you have nothing.

(1:20:58):
So something similar will have to happen for those who stand for a higher value, further utilisation of wealth, and profit is not a wrong value, it is a necessary value in a business.

What you do the business for?

What is the impact it has on society, even as your business grows, that is what will be the determining factor?

But having done that, ensure that the wealth do not go to the Asuric cartels, but build, I would say, even a cartel of the good. Protect the wealth. And in, that's how bit by bit you will take it back. And something of this has started happening in the Bollywood film industry in some way in the last eight years perhaps. And so I'm giving this as a practical example, but we'll have more to discuss about this next time.

But recognise: Why is it that greater wealth is concentrated in powerful positions of business and politicians?

Because, well, they are powerful. They can decide where the wealth will flow, and they ensure it flows only into their controlled space. It doesn't have to be that.

Where is the other side which says I will grab the wealth and ensure it flows in a different direction?

So there is this possession of the wealth although the wealth is in its origin a spiritual power in its exercise in the material world it is primarily a vital energy with physical representations which are seizable by the Asuric forces, and it is the reversal of this which needs to be done.

The balance has tilted, much more has to happen still. But we'll take up a few examples next time and take this question in greater detail.

I think, for today, just look at the chat box, so there are many interesting questions in the chat box and I will list them for next, another time. I would suggest for those who have put questions, leave them on, don't delete them. I copy this later and then rearrange the questions so that they come in clusters of similar topics.

But I think this is a good enough point for us to stop at.

Reviewing: We have looked at the necessary preparation for building power, both spiritual power as well as its mental, vital and physical equivalents, and the requirements to be able to wield it.

And this training is an integral part of the Integral Yoga. It is in fact the second and the third aspects of the Integral Yoga, so elements, second and third elements of the Integral Yoga, starting with equality as the foundation.

We have also looked at the distinction between non-violence and the necessity of violence, but also the play of soul-force as causing in fact greater violence when it is exercised exclusively without the necessary physical block, action, resistance, which must be exercised where necessary.

And then we have looked at this question of vital nature as well as powerful position, people and what we need to do each one of us. It may take time, it took me a few years to shift from this mode of harmony-passivity, sweet-soft nature, sensitivity to something where I could not compromise the sensitivity and yet assert myself, I had to find my way according to my temperament, the right channels of exercise of expression, but I had to do it only when the situation demand it. If it had not, then I would have avoided developing that aspect. I can't say, it's developed, but at least it's more developed than before. But the situation demanded it, and so I will put it to you in this way: In your life, if you neglect this aspect of exercise of power and wealth long enough, eventually life will come knocking at your door to wake you up, to learn to exercise this skill. And if you still ignore, then life will bang at your door. And if you still ignore, life will break down your door and drag you out of your inertia and force you to deal with it. Because both power and wealth are aspects of the divine which need to be reconquered and brought back into the ambit of the spiritual evolution.

Each one of us has a different role to play, perhaps even in a different degree in this exercise, but the underlying basis on which we will wield power and wealth is the same with which we will wield all our activities of life, because wealth and power are interwoven into life itself which brings us back to the basic principles of the practice of the Integral Yoga itself.

So as practitioners of the Integral Yoga if you find yourself challenged by these, know that you have neglected them and now is the time for you to wake up and take it now that you will be helped if you ask for the help to develop these capacities but you have to ask and you have to accept that you are going to now develop this capacity.

(1:26:53):
We can hold at least within us a collective aspiration that the wealth of the world must come back to the service of the Divine, freed from the stranglehold of the Asuric energies, as well as power in the world, all these must come back for the participation of the evolutionary fulfilment.

Namaste.

Alina (1:28:03):
Namaste.