When I speak of the inner being I mean the inner consciousness and inner existence.
Through which centre does the inner being manifest itself?
Do you not know that the inner being means the inner mind, inner vital, inner physical with the psychic behind as the inmost? How can there be one centre for all that?
Is it true that the point between the eyebrows is the centre of the will as well as of the inner vision?
It is the centre of the inner mind — therefore also of the inner mental will and inner mental vision.
I sometimes feel as if my inner being is located above and lives on the higher planes.
The inner being cannot be “located” above, it can only join with the above, penetrate it and be penetrated by it. If it were located above, then there would be no inner being.
There is a central consciousness, I suppose? When the consciousness is centred above, it can be said to be located above. That does not mean that there is no consciousness left in the lower parts.
Obviously, the outer life must be a transcript of the inner, not a mere empty mould or form. But if the outer life is unyogic, that means that the inner is still unchanged in some, even in a great, perhaps the greater part of itself.
I conceive that there are two inner beings. One is just behind the outer, but wider and finer. Artists and thinkers often create from it. However, it can be as impure and restless as the outer. The other inner being is centred not around the ego but around the psychic being. It is peaceful and pure and open to the Divine and not only to the universal forces. It helps in preparing the outer nature for the spiritual life. Though it can act directly, it usually acts through the inner being that is just behind the outer. Is there any substance in my statement?
It is correct as a distinction between the true mental, vital, physical beings and the outer layers of the inner mind, vital and physical.
The inner parts in everybody remain vulgar or become high according as they are turned to the outward forces of the Ignorance or towards the higher forces from above and the inner impulsion of the psychic. All forces can play there. It is the outer being that is fixed in a certain character, certain tendencies, certain movements.
At present, when I meditate, in one part there is a high concentration while in another part ordinary thoughts, images etc., move about. Thus there is no full concentration of the whole nature. Formerly I used to have long periods of sheer inner or higher concentration in which the lower nature was forced to remain quiescent. Where is my inner being now?
Even now you speak of periods when all is still in the whole being below as well as above. If there were no inner being, that would not be possible.
There is a contradiction between what you write here and what you write later on. You probably get the impression that there is no inner being felt, only an upper and a lower, because you are trying to bring down the Force and as yet the Force has not come down from above, reaching the inner mind only; so the inner being is empty of force, though not, as you admit later on, of peace.
During meditation I observed that there are two quite separate parts of my being — one is above the head, completely separate from mind, life and body. The other is of the lower being. The one is high, wide, receptive; the other is inert and full of the ordinary stuff.
The consciousness above is naturally a separate consciousness — it has nothing to do with the lower consciousness. It is only by descending and occupying the inner being (which is again a separate consciousness) that it can proceed to act on the ordinary lower being.
In my meditations I try to bring down a force from above which will change the lower being.
You cannot change the lower (external) nature directly — it can only be changed from above through the within.
A going up and up higher, though a part of the total necessary movement, does not by itself have any effect on the outer being. It only divides the consciousness into two and its only logical outcome is Nirvana. I have always written that the descent is necessary to change the nature; ascent is useful to open the higher planes and exalt the level of the consciousness, but it does not change the lower being except superficially by opening to it certain possibilities it had not before. But the descent must first take place in the inner being. When the higher consciousness is settled in the inner being, then it can change the outer. But necessarily the descent must be dynamic, not merely that of a static peace; the inner peace must itself become dynamic.
The descent whether of peace or force or light or knowledge or Ananda must occupy the whole inner being down to the inner physical. Without that how is the outer to be transformed at all? It is an amazing idea to suppose that the outer can be changed while the inner is left to itself. What you had in the inner being was a static stillness which did not even entirely occupy the inner physical except at times — that was why the dynamic descent was necessary, but in the inner being or if possible the whole being, the inner outflowing into the outer, not in the outer being to the exclusion of the inner.
My inner being lives mostly in the deeper experiences, my outer being in the ordinary consciousness. Are not 3 or 4 years of sadhana enough to fuse them into one?
3 or 4 years is not such a very long time in the sadhana.
After each state of samadhi — trance — I feel a change in my waking state for a long time, a change not usually brought about even by the deeper and higher experiences, a change more deeply penetrating than any other and more prolonged and tangible even than experiences in the waking state. But it is said that samadhi does not bring any change in the waking consciousness.
It depends on how far the inner being imposes the result of its experience on the outer.
After the samadhi is over, many parts of my being continue to remain indrawn. The physical and mental activities are handed over to the Mother’s force. Then I feel myself positively living and moving in quite another region, and the actions are felt as if carried out by some other person, as if it was somebody else elsewhere.
That is very good. It is the condition at which the sadhak arrives in his progress, when the inner being goes on with its experience and something in the outer is carried automatically through its action outside.
You wrote, “something in the outer is carried automatically through its action outside”. I am not able to understand this.
It means simply that some part of the outer being does its action as a thing outside (you said as if it was somebody else elsewhere) under the push of the Force that carries it through without its having to call the whole consciousness to aid in the action.
Gradually the inner and outer beings become like statues of peace and silence. My inner being feels as if there is no end to peace, silence or ascent.
If there is an established peace, then only is the inner being safe.
If the inner being is safe, then there is no longer any struggle or overpowering by inertia or depression or other fundamental difficulty. The rest can be done progressively and quietly, including the bringing down of the Force. The outer being becomes merely a machinery or an instrumentation to be set right. It is not so easy to be entirely mukta [liberated] in the inner being.
I have just come out from a deep trance-like state. It was a sudden invasion by an intoxicating Peace. If such powerful states come twice a day, the mastery over the human nature will not be so difficult. But it depends on how far the higher consciousness can act without even a call from below and in spite of the pervading inertia.
If the inner being once becomes separate, then inertia need not interfere at all with such states. The outer consciousness is up to now stronger than the inner in you, more normal still, so it happens like that, inertia interfering and stopping these states.
When the inner being once thoroughly establishes its separateness, even oceans of inertia cannot prevent it keeping it. It is the first thing to be done in order to have a secure basis in the Yoga, to establish thoroughly this separateness. It is most usually when the peace is thoroughly fixed in all inner parts that the separateness also becomes fixed and permanent.
The outer being does not care for the sadhana unless it gets something by it which is to it pleasant or gratifying or satisfying — depression therefore comes easy to it.
It is true that my outer being is always stronger than the inner. It was why the inner separation could not be dynamic and effective. Also I think it was due to the nature of the descents, which were mostly of peace and silence rather than of Force.
That cannot be so; for if the peace is there with the separation, then the inner being is free and not subject to the outer nor is one identified with the outer. Passive peace is sufficient for that, provided it is complete in all parts of the being.
The descent will come down when it is possible for it to come down. Meanwhile more quietness and fortitude in the physical mind and consciousness would perhaps be helpful.
You spoke of the restlessness, impatience etc. Were they only in the outer being or also in the inner being?
I have already said that if they did not touch the inner then there would be the sense of complete separation and no disturbance except in a superficial part which could then be more easily dealt with.
Do you agree with me that the peace and silence have remained above and have never come down?
If you have felt them below, they must have come below. But it is evident that they are not perfectly established in the inner physical being — otherwise there would be the complete separateness there.
Is it not true that inertia is still so strong because there is no peace in the inner physical?
If there were full peace in the inner physical, it would be always calm and separate and not disturbed or affected by any superficial disturbances.
If the inner physical has peace, the tamas of the outer is bound to decrease and slowly fade away.
That does not follow. Tamas might come, but there would be no active disturbances.
If the separateness depends on the dynamic peace filling up the empty or passive peace, if it is not felt in the empty or passive peace itself, it cannot be depended upon. It must always be there even in the utmost passivity.
How is it that the peace that comes down is always passive and not solid or dynamic?
Because your inner being is not sufficiently solid in an established passive peace to be able to bring down the dynamic at will.
As soon as I get back to the higher poise, I must put forth all my efforts to stabilise myself in the inner being.
It is of the greatest importance that that should be done.
If the enlightened parts of the inner being have more and more of Mother’s love, joy and peace, it becomes easier to turn the physical to purity and light.
All that may be very well in theory, but practically it is found that the physical impurity is strong enough to bar the inner progress and limit rigidly the inner experience to some passive peace.
I have often seen that when the inner being or the mind feels love, happiness, joy, etc., the other parts of my being also feel a tendency towards them.
That is all right if the inner being had separated itself firmly from the outer and was free from the pressure of its desire and inertia, manifesting at all moments the true consciousness — but it is not so yet.
I want to attempt a full stabilising of my central consciousness in the higher nature, so that there will be a complete separation between the lower and the higher nature.
This is only possible if the inner being becomes quite awake, open to the Higher and able to feel itself separate from the outer nature.
I did not say that you should not remain in the higher consciousness. I only said that without the separateness of the inner from the outer, the complete separateness of the higher and full stabilisation in it was not likely.
You spoke of a complete separation between the lower nature and the higher, a full stabilising of the central consciousness in the higher nature. That would mean staying above and leaving the lower nature including the inner consciousness to themselves until this had been done. I questioned whether this was possible so long as the inertia was so strong. Usually the full stabilising can only come if the inner being is separate from the outer consciousness, otherwise the outer consciousness is sure to pull the central down.
I aspire also for the inner being to bring down the Mother’s Force not merely to guide the actions of the outer being but to take the actions into itself and be their doer.
That is more possible, provided the inner being separates itself from the outer.
If instead of going in for the higher development, I had gone in for the inner development first it would have been much better. For I could have lived more easily in my inner being — separate from the outer — even during work.
Yes. But also the psychic development would have been easier, and the conquest of ego — likewise the widening of the consciousness.
If the inner being is filled with the Mother’s dynamic Power, I do not think the outer being will still be able to remain separate from the inner.
It is much better to have it separate and not identify oneself with it — so long as the consciousness is not ready for the unification in the Infinite.
There was something like an inner quietude which the mind misinterpreted as separation.
There can surely be no mistake about the sense of separation. One feels it or one does not. One feels a being within always calm and separate and another part outside or on the surface which may be touched by things, but that does not affect the inner being.
During certain moments the inner being calls me within. When I accept it the outer being tries its best to keep me on the surface. Then a tug-of-war takes place!
That is because you are accustomed to submit to your outer consciousness and not live within in your inner consciousness. If one lives within, then it is the inner consciousness that one depends on, not the outer. The inner consciousness can then always go on independent of the outer state to which it gives attention only when it chooses.
The Mother’s inner or subtle touch had not the same effect as her physical touch during the Pranam. The former came and disappeared within a few seconds, leaving practically no effect, whilst the latter left its impress for a long time in spite of depression and resistance.
It is because you have lived in your outer and not in your inner being that it is like that. But unless you open to the inner touch, the inner being cannot develop. I mean by the inner being, the inner mind, the inner vital, the inner physical, the psychic.
What exactly is the inner touch?
The inner touch is the Mother’s influence felt in the inner being.
When I had experiences and realisations, why did I not feel the inner touch, since it is said that none can have experiences (which are the fruits of the inner being’s development) without it?
You did not feel it because the inner being was not awake to it — it felt only the results — and these results were not experiences in the inner being itself but in the self above.