Question Answers session with children, Jaipuria School - Lucknow (30 September 2004) - Audio

Aim of Life and Parent’s Will

*Q: Should our aim of life be totally dependent on our parents' will or on ours and ours alone?

I’ll tell you my own story. My father had five sons. I am the fourth one in the family and my father had decided that each one of his five sons will have a different kind of profession. That my first brother should be an agriculturalist. My second brother should be a lawyer. My third brother should be a commerce manager. Fourth one was myself and he did not know what to do about this boy and the fifth boy he wanted him to be a doctor. He had decided. I was only thorn because I could not fit in anything. I was a misfit actually, you might say right from the beginning, so there was a big question mark against me, but sometimes my father said: let him become a lawyer. That is true in a way. Then what happened was that my father decided ultimately that all right, let him also become a lawyer.

At the age of 13, I lost my voice. It so happened, I mean it's an accident of life, in the morning when I got up my voice was gone. It was my traumatic experience of life. For five years I could not shout in my life. So imagine a boy designed to become a lawyer, he could not shout and I loved my father so much that I wanted to please him very much, so I lived with him for five years without letting him know that I had no voice, so you can imagine my traumatic experience of life. My father did not know that I had no capacity to shout. For five years I lived in his house, but our advantage was that there were five brothers, so I could escape his notice at the right moment. So he could never make out that I was utterly unfit to become a lawyer. By the time that he became aware of my advancing state of learning, he was convinced that I should become a lawyer. By that time, my voice had returned. So he had no problem. He thought I’ll become a lawyer.

By that time this question of aim of life had become very prominent in my life. I was looking looking looking: what am I here for, what should I do in this life? And the one thing that was very attractive to me was the concept of truth. One must be true, one must be truthful. What you do you should do sincerely, truly, not for the sake of earning bread. You should do truly because it must be yours, the truth of your being. So I was asking this question: what is the truth of my being? It is that which led me to read this book, that book, meet this one, meet that one. I became a pilgrim, one who goes from place to place in search.

Between the age of 15 and 18, I knocked the doors of many great minds of the world and I tell you whom I had knocked. First, I knocked on the door of Dayananda Saraswati. I don't know if you heard his name, who established Arya Samaj. I knocked his door. Then I knocked the door of Rabindranath Tagore. Then I knocked the door of Vivekananda. Then I knocked the door of Gandhi. Then I knocked the door of Socrates, then of Plato, then of Aristotle, then of Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza. Spinoza I read a lot at one time. Then slightly some of the western philosophers, then Emmanuel Kant, then Bradley, then Russell.

These are the doors I knocked. Then I turned to Bhagavad-Gita. Then I turned to Nayaya, Nayayikas, Sankhya philosophers, Shankaracharya, Rmanujacharya, Vallabhacharya, Chaitanya. All these doors I knocked by the age of 18. I had knocked these doors and it was Sophocles, Sophocles came in my way much later in my life. So anyway, I mean I’m only telling you what happened to me. I tried my best to know as much as possible, to knock as many doors as possible. None of them answered my question: what am I here on this earth for? And I came to the conclusion that I have one thing to declare. This is the only work I have to do in my life and out there tell all the children not to be mesmerised by anybody, because nobody has an answer.

At the age of 18. I had become a rebellion because, after having knocked all the doors which I could knock, I found that nobody had a real answer to give. So I said that is one task which I can do for others. Also I can tell them look I have really read all these people, please don't be mesmerised by any one of them. They don't have an answer to your questions, but that was not the end of my life.

Then one day a friend of mine, who was my roommate actually, came to my room and said: read this book. My uncle has asked me to read this book, but I am engaged in a romance and I have no time to read this book. So you read out the book and tell me what it contains. I will tell my uncle what the book contains, so I told him, I said: look I have read so much, now I’m completely tired, but still I condescendingly said tell me what is the book's name? The title of the books he said is The Life Divine. By that time the word divine had become quite obnoxious to me because I had read Shankaracharya, I had read Vallabhacharya, read so many, all speaking of divine divine divine divine, but whenever I ask a question to all these saints, why this world at all, nobody had an answer. If the divine is so good, why this world, which is full of evil and pain? Why? Why is this? And nobody had an answer to this question? In the meantime, I have knocked the door of Christianity, knocked the door of Islam, Judaism. I have not yet read Taoism and Shintoism, but they are three religions I knocked the doors in the meantime, even they had the same idea, same problem, divine divine divine. But what am I, why I am here? What is the problem? Nobody had an answer.

So I told my friend that look all of them regard this world to be an illusion, and I have nothing to do with illusion, because this world is so pressing here, I can't say this is an illusion at all. This is quite concrete, quite real to me. If some people say it is illusion, let them have their own views, but for me this world is very real, so I don't want to read this book because it will be saying same thing. There he'll again say: oh the world is an illusion and I don't want to read such books. All right, the book remained on my table for eight days. After eight days, my friend came and said: please, my uncle is pressing me very much. Please read the book, not for God's sake, but for my sake. So only for the sake of my friend I said all right I’ll read the book.

That was the moment of my life. I opened the book and the first chapter, you know there are many chapters in the contents. My eyes fell upon one of them. The title of it was The Double Soul in Man. Now this was very surprising to me. Everybody spoke of one soul in man, but here was a title which said The Double Soul in Man. I said this philosopher, I did not know about Sri Aurobindo at that time, I said this philosopher seems to be quite new. He speaks of The Double Soul in Man and I must find out what is The Double Soul in Man. This is what attracted me to Sri Aurobindo’s book. I opened the book thereafter. I remember that moment: 8:30 pm on that day. I read late at night till the next morning. I did nothing else, but reading that book that day, I read 22 hours that book. Next day, again the same thing. In four days I completed the first volume of this book and during the next three days I read once again the whole volume.

So you might say in seven days I read the whole first volume twice and I was so thoroughly satisfied, so thoroughly, as if heaven had come on my earth, I had been knocking, knocking, knocking and I found the answer. I had now realised that the only philosopher in the world who has tackled the problems of the world squarely uncompromisingly, it is Sri Aurobindo. And I came to three conclusions after reading that book. In seven days I was convinced, without a shadow of doubt and that conviction has remained to me from the age of 18 to 73 now. For not a single day these three convictions have been shaken. So you can see what a tremendous impact this one week of study had and I was settled.

The three conclusions I arrived at were: first that God exists. I was intellectually convinced that God exists. Second conclusion of which I was convinced was that this world is a gradual manifestation of God. It is not a manifestation of God, but a gradual manifestation of God. So if there is pain, evil, it is because of gradual evolution, it's not a complete manifestation. Third, I am myself a part of that gradual manifestation. And my work as the work of anybody else is to take this gradual evolution to the next step of evolution.

Today man is mental, man is bound to become supramental. Therefore the function and role of each individual at present is to be engaged in this task: how to go beyond mind to supermind. These three tasks, I was absolutely convinced. Now I came to my own aim of life by my own study and thereafter I decided I have only one thing to do in my life, just to be in this evolutionary movement of the world. That’s why I’m always with people, because all people are in evolution. Even now I’m with you, because you're all evolving, I am also evolving and we are evolving in the upward movement. We are all in the mud of the mind. We are to come out of the mud, but all together, not as someone leaving everybody and going upward. No, we are all marching together. That’s why I like children very much, always to be with children, because they're all marching, they're fresh. So if you march with them, you also march nicely and truly and you grow, so I decided this is my work. This is my aim of life.

So my answer to your question is: should we follow our parents or should we arrive at our own aim? I tried to follow my father as much as possible. As I told you, I had even concealed from him the fact that I had no voice just to fall into line with my father, so that he is not disturbed. So my answer to your question is that if your father has any idea, your parents have any idea, please respect them, explore them, they may be right, they will be not right. Who knows? Explore them respectfully. We must have love and respect our parents. You must have. We must remember that they have made tremendous sacrifices for us. We should be always respectful to them. Therefore, if they say something try to explore, but ask yourself also that's why I like the method of exploration.

Even these three days, I’ve done only exploration with you. I advocate exploration, knock and knock and knock, a day will come. You know I said to many people that Sri Aurobindo came to me. I did not look for, ultimately Sri Aurobindo came to me and waited for eight days on my table and then I read. It was as if your lover was standing at the gate and he came and embraced you. Such a joy of life, isn't it so. This is what has happened to me and since then I live in that love, so my life is full of love. I receive the love from my master, even unasked, and I think this is the truth of every soul.

To my mind, everyone should know this fact. Your master is waiting for you. He is your lover. By your knocking, one day you'll find that he's there and he was actually knocking, not you. Actually, he was knocking. So this is my message in answer to your question.

Why New Religions Get Started

Q: Who sees the supreme God is said to have attained divinity, he wants to spread his knowledge among people. Why does he start a new religion to make people follow a path which leads to God? Why they don't spread the knowledge in the existing religion, for example, prophet Muhammad started Islam, Guru Nanak Sikhism, etc.

I think it's a very good question. Who has supported this question? It's a very good question. His question is you discover God, you discover your master and then you turn to the world and you say: look I have discovered, I have discovered, I have discovered. And the other people ask you: please tell us how you have discovered, then you say this is how I discovered then very often the people who hear the voice of the discoverer, he says we shall also do the same. I told you just now my story. Now I don't tell you that you should discover God in this way, but you may hear me and then you say all right. We shall also do the same thing, but if I’m a good teacher, I will tell you look, you must discover in your own way, but sometimes this is not done. Sometimes I myself tell people that, just as I did you also do the same way. This is where the mistake lies. That is how religion starts. Buddha found out a permanent status of nirvana and he was called Tathagata. Tathagata means one who went in that way, gatah means one who has gone and tatha means in that way, one who has gone that way. Now he told his disciples, I went this way. So those who heard his voice, they say also we also going that way. Mahavir went another way, his path was different, so his people said: all right, we also go your way. Muhammad said I went that way. So that became another path. Christ said he said I am the way, not only that, even that he says I am the way, so his followers went in that way.

This is how different religions have started in the world. Now I don't blame anybody in the world. We have to understand this is what has happened. I can only say now you learn from this, when you discover something, no harm in telling the way in which you have discovered, but don't tell them: this is the way, or this is the only way of doing it. You can say this is the way I followed. You may also like to follow that way if you like, but find out your own way, I found it in this way. There are many ways of finding it.

This is what Ramakrishna did. That was the greatness of Ramakrishna, he found out that there are many ways. It's not that there is one way, there are many ways. Sri Aurobindo also did not establish any religion, he actually opposed religion. He said that everyone should have his own religion, or he should have his own way. That is his real path. He says the path itself is multiple paths. There is not THE way, not THE path. There are multiple paths and for you, the path is unique to you, so that everyone should have your own yogic system. He does not even speak of the religion. He speaks of yoga. Yoga is far different from religion. Religion is only a path of believing in something. Yoga says that belief is a very low level, you should begin by experiencing. Yoga’s starting point is experience, not belief, and everyone should start on his line of experience.

So Sri Aurobindo says his yoga is called Integral Yoga in which all paths ultimately coalesce and meet together, but each one moves in his own way, so there are multiple, hundreds of paths, millions of paths. For each one the path of his discovery will be different. Now this message will cure the religions. Religions are conflicting, quarrelling and if you want the cure of religions, you declare that there is not one single path, everyone has to find out. If I speak to Chitwan, I don't say: look you do this. She has to discover her own way. If I speak to her, I don't say that now you should follow your daughter's path or the daughter should follow the mother's path. No, each one has to make an experiment. Each one has to find out what is his unique method, because every individual is individual, because he's unique. This uniqueness is very important. It will apply only to you, but therefore you should be careful. The path that you follow, don't say you must follow now the same way. Don’t do that. That’s a mistake, you should say look, there are many, many things which can be done. You can go this way. You can go that way. You can go this way. You can go this way.

In the Bhagavad-Gita Krishna said every way is my way. It’s not like Christ saying: I am the way. He said: every way is my way, so he also spoke in such an integral manner. That is why Bhagavad Gita’s teaching is integral, every way he says is my way. Find out your own way. That is how religions can be cured, conflicts can be cured.

But this is how it has happened. There is a mistake, a mistake from our present point of view. At that time mankind was of such a nature, such a level that they needed this kind of scaffolding. Now mankind has become more enlightened. Therefore, in the modern world we should not follow the old methods. We are now more free. We have learned many many things which were not known to our forefathers at that time. It was not known that there are many many religions. Now we know there are many religions, not only many systems of yoga

So we should be wiser now, both teachers and pupils. Teachers should not impose any methods, and students should not expect that only one method will be given, and I must follow that method. He has also to find out his own method of development, and this is what Sri Aurobindo has said, and I loved that very much.

That’s why there should be no propaganda. I am very much opposed to propaganda. You can talk to people, you can reason with them. Explore with them, but don't dong, dong, dong. I have found the truth now you come along and follow it. This is what I don't want. Everyone should be given a chance of finding out his own means of his highest that he can discover. We are all friends together. We can hold each other's hands, we can share each other's way. We can participate and work together, but each one has his own place, his own way, his own paths. All right. Is it all right?

Next one this is by Kireet Mishra. There are six different questions here. Let’s start with the first. In the story of Swami Vivekananda in the aim of life, I came across an incident which said that Ramakrishna felt an agonising desire to see his pupil Vivekananda. He said, oh my darling, come to me. I cannot live without seeing you. Sir, my question is: where can I find a great teacher who can teach me and is probably longing to see me the way I am waiting for them?

I have already answered this question. Now remember he's knocking your door already. You knock and you'll find.

Chance or Destiny? Autobiographical Illustration

Second one: It is said that inventions and discoveries happen by chance, but it is also believed that the supra physical power has pre-planned everything that has to happen. So if something is a coincidence, how can it be pre-planned?

This idea of pre-planning is both true and false. In a sense, nothing is pre-planned, in a sense many things are pre-planned, not everything, but many things are pre-planned. The best attitude you should take is that nothing is planned in this world. You are always free. When you have freedom, there can't be pre-planning. If I say today, you are free, the school timetable is pre-planned, and I know that after this class is over, what you do next is pre-planned and you're bound to do it. In that sense, you might say it is pre-planned, but should I tell you it's not pre-planned. If you so decide, you will open the gate and your beloved is standing there and it will take you away. The timetable will be left aside. It is possible at every moment. It depends upon your choice. If you decide you are free, it's a question whether you really feel free or not. Very often, you don't feel free. Most people don't feel free at all. When your exam is announced - and you say I am free - I will not take the exam now. Today I don't feel like taking this. You won't do it. Even if you are told you are free, my dearest child, you are free, you say I don't want that freedom. My exam, I must attend, I don't know what will happen next year if I don't take the exam I must take the exam. So pre-planning is true, pre-Planning is false.

Everything in the world in a sense is pre-planned, pre-planned because there are so many people in the world, each one is planning and you are a part of that whole network. You can't help it. The whole network, it is not upon you. The principal is here, he wants to run the school. Your parents want you to be educated. You can't help it. You are pell-mell here, you do not know why you are here, but school is given to you. There are rules, regulations, courses, syllabi, and the whole network of life is pre-planned. Only you who stands in this pre-planned movement, now it depends on you. We are free to follow the pre-plan. We are free not to follow the pre-plan, but normally we do not know that we are free either. So what do we do? We fall into the pre-plan, there's a normal tendency to fall into the pre-plan, which is good in a way, nothing wrong about it.

Until you really come to a point when you realise you are free and when you realise you are free, that's a day of marvel. In fact somebody asked me: what is the message you want to give to students of the country and the world. So once I said I want to say only one word to the children: my dear friends realise you are free, but this is a word to be given. A day must come when you really realise you are free.

At one time in my life.. I was telling my story of my father and myself. A time came when I had to tell my father: I do not want to be a lawyer. I will not be able to speak lies in court anytime in my life. Therefore, do not ask me to be a lawyer. This is what I told my father very clearly. He was getting disappointed in this boy. Then he said what do you want to do? He said, alright, join politics. My father was a political leader of Gujarat, our family, my mother was chairman of the municipality for 20 years at that time, a very powerful woman, a very famous woman, my father, was a very famous man and as their son I was also famous in my own town. So my father said you finish your whatever education you want to do. You are already BA now, do MA, then PHD LLB, whatever you want to do, then you stand for election. An election is for you a cakewalk. Nobody will contest against you because our family was so popular that nobody would contest even. So, we had no need to do any canvassing, it will be uncontested, I’ll be elected. That was a possibility for me in my life, and he said the moment you are elected, you will become education minister of all state, and you just enter the assembly and as soon as you enter into the assembly, you will become education minister. They saw my prospect at the age of 24, so I told my father. The plan is so good, but I don't want to be a politician. He's full of intrigue, full of elbowing others. I don't want to elbow anybody in this world. I want to walk with everybody in love, in joy, in harmony, but to compete with somebody and to throw out somebody to play a game against another person. This is not me. I do not want it. My father was greatly disappointed. How unpractical this boy was, he said. Anyway, he was a very kind man, so he did not press me further.

Then one day he came and said: all right, you don't want to be a lawyer, you don't want to be politician, fine. What about IAS? So I said: yes, IAS is quite a good thing, because you have to serve people, you have to go to villages, you have to see that wells are constructed, bridges are made and you'll be able to be with the farmers, with the labourers, very nice. I like it. So nice, then you pass the IAS examination. So I took the IAS examination. I passed it. I was appointed assistant collector of Surat. All was pre-planned. My whole career was now before me. Now I wanted to walk through the life.

Then I realised, but I was free. I am not bound to this and what I discovered earlier that life is to go beyond mind to supermind, it's a gradual development, so I said I’ve got to learn how to go beyond mind. So I had to go to my teacher, so I went to my teacher. I resigned from the IAS, and still I remain at the feet of my teacher. This is because I decided I am free. My father was utterly disappointed in this boy, but this is how it has happened in my life.

So I can only tell everybody: look, the whole life is before you and remember: you are free. Now you take your own decision, but never be rash, never be egoistic, never be arrogant, be very humble, modest in life and do what you feel to be the truest truth of your being. If you are not strong, don't pretend you are strong, because some strong men have done something, don't say. I would also do the same thing. Follow your own paths, your own way, be always modest, extremely humble in life, because only humility can take you on the right path. So I feel like embracing all the children of the world and tell them: look you are all free, but be extremely humble, don't be arrogant. All right.

Science, Philosophy, Religion and Yoga

Third question is: Sir, how are science and religion connected? Or in other words, what is it that separates science and religion?

I think you have got very good questions. What is it that distinguishes science from religion? There are four things, not two things, but four things to be distinguished from each other. There is science, there is philosophy, there's religion, there is yoga—four things, four inquiries in the whole world. There are only four inquiries basically—science, philosophy, religion and yoga. All the four are in search of the highest, so you might say that none of them is different from each other. All of them want the highest, so no distinction, but what is the real distinction? When does it differ?

The methods are different and what each achieves is different from each other. They all want the highest, but each one prescribes a method to achieve that highest. And what happens is that if you follow this method, it reaches up to here, but not here because of the methods, the other one perhaps reaches here in some direction, one here and the other in another direction, but not there. Let us now discuss this question. What are the methods?

Science follows the method of observation and experience, in science we are required to observe, then experiment, then arrive at a conclusion which you must see yourself, experience it. In philosophy you criticise and say that merely by observation, merely by experimentation, merely by experiencing, you don't get the highest, it criticises science, you don't get the highest. If you really want the highest, you must follow other methods. What is that method?

You ask two questions and try to find the answers to two questions. Can I know the truth without experience? Science says you must gain knowledge by experience. Philosophy says: can you get knowledge without experience and, secondly, can you get full knowledge without experience, knowledge and full knowledge? Two questions: can you know knowledge without experience and can you get full knowledge without experience and philosophy says, I have got that method. It's a claim of philosophy. What is that method? Whatever you gain by observation, you put them on your slates. You will find that you neither have knowledge nor you have full knowledge. You will only have tid-bits of information. Now from these tidbits of observation, you apply a kind of an engine, put these tidbits into that engine. What is this engine? These tidbits you try to combine them together. You can't combine normally easily, so philosophy says I give a method of combining.

Now what is the method of combining? This is an important word I am giving you this is a secret of philosophy. Whatever tidbits are there, you ask a question: what do they imply? This word imply is very important. What do these words imply? You are smiling. What does it imply? This is philosophy. My only observation is that you are only smiling here. What does it imply? Right, good, it's not written on your face. This is philosophy. What do facts imply? You put all the tidbits together and ask a question: what do they imply.

Now, if you think on this, think of implication and many replies will come, maybe you told me truthfully that you are happy, but maybe that you are joking at me. It’s also possible. No, it's quite possible that you're laughing at me. What is this man talking here? It’s quite possible. So how to know whether this implication is right or that implication is right?

So I must answer to be sure that you are really happy, I have to find out other facts. If you are joking at me, there are some other signs also, you will never be so attentive as you are, you see, your eyes are full of attention. Every word that I am speaking is being grasped by your eyes. I can see that and the method of implication, but mere implication is not enough. Compare implications. This implies this. This impress that. This also gives me.. implies that also.. compare until you can say: I have tried my utmost to see comprehensive implication. The criterion of implication and criterion of comprehensive implication, combine the two together and philosophy says, then you will find out the highest. This is the difference between science and philosophy. All right.

Now, religion comes forward and says that neither science takes you to the highest, nor philosophy takes you to the highest. Science gives you tid-bits, philosophy claims that from highest implication you'll go to the highest, at the highest what do you get? only an idea, but I give you fulfilment not really an idea, I give fulfilment. I give you a promise. The highest is not only an idea, in philosophy it is only the idea. I think your highest is a being, and I promise you that if you hold out your hand and have trust and faith, you will see that somebody will hold your hand. I promise you, he said I promise you. The highest himself will come to you and would hold your hand and in your whole life you'll pass in great safety. You’ll reach the highest. No need to observe, no need to experiment, no tidbits, no indications, just trust, put yourself forward and be sure the highest will come, take your hands and your life will be secure. This is religion.

Now yoga comes. It says: follow science, go to the utmost; follow philosophy, go to the utmost; follow religion, go to the utmost, do your very best. If you are satisfied with any one of them, fine, I don't need to come to you. I have no other claims, but if you still feel a problem, come to me. I will not say trust, the highest will come. I have a method by which you will experience the highest. You will see the highest face to face. You will see God face to face. You will not even need to have faith in him. You need to have faith when you don't see somebody face to face. In religion you have to believe, to have trust. Yoga says trust, I don't mind if it satisfies you, go ahead. I have no quarrel with anybody, but if you are not satisfied with it, then I give you methods and if you follow that method, you will meet God and you will really experience God putting his hand in your hand, no faith, no trust! You will experience God, as you experience this glass. You will have no doubt whatsoever, no need even to have trust or faith. Your faith will be transformed into direct experience, direct realisation. The highest will be known.

Science aims at the highest, but gives you tidbits, philosophy promises the highest but gives you only the idea of the highest, religion promises, have faith in the highest, that you have faith, God is always with you. Yoga says you will see God face to face and yogi tells you now you choose, he doesn't want to propagate, he's not a propagandist. He has no quarrel with any one of them. If you are satisfied with science, fine. If you are satisfied with philosophy, fine. If you are satisfied with religion, fine. But if you are not satisfied with any one of them, yoga says I have methods by which you can be utterly fulfilled in your own experience, but all of them are seeking for the highest. Utter fulfilment will come only through yoga and yoga never makes any propaganda.

Therefore, yogis are always free. It is a religionist who said, please believe, please believe. Yogi says if you are dissatisfied then come to me and my methods are very simple. Come with all your presuppositions blanked out, as Vivekananda says yoga demands no preconditions. Yoga is, according to me, the highest inquiry because it requires no preconditions at all. It says you make your own mind so blank, the starting point of yoga is to make your mind blank. So no question of belief or no belief. When your mind is absolutely quiet, then you are ready for real experience and when you experience, there's no doubt. The highest proof comes from experience. You should see God face to face, then there's no doubt at all. So this is the difference between science, philosophy, religion and yoga. All right.

Zero, Existence, Infinity

Fourth question: what does shunya, zero, mean? How is it related to philosophy?

First, let us see what is zero. You will find that in your thought process, you take any thought, it refers to something beyond thought. This is a specialty of thought. Take any thought I think of this microphone. It’s a thought in my mind. It corresponds to something here outside me. You take any thought at the bottom you go on and on and on and on and you'll find it corresponds to something outside, excepting one thing, and that is zero. Zero is only a concept corresponding to which there is nothing. If you look at anything in the world by its very nature, zero means zero, which it does not does not have anything corresponding to it.

Now this concept of zero, therefore, is something to which nothing corresponds. Therefore, you ask a question: does nothing exist? It’s a self-contradiction. A discussion of this question is philosophical. This is the simplest definition of philosophy. Does zero correspond to anything? When you discuss this question, you are centrally into the field of philosophy. In mathematics. Zero is assumed, we don't raise a question: does it refer to anything, you have to assume in mathematics. You have to assume you don't question. In philosophy you question: does zero correspond to anything? When you begin to reflect on this question you become a philosopher.

Philosophy has only one question to answer: what is existence? Only one question to answer: what is existence? In physics you assume that matter exists, and then you study matter, what is matter. In biology you assume life exists and you examine life. In psychology you assume that mind exists and you examine mind. But what is existence? None of these discusses this question. Science assumes matter exists, life exists, mind exists, but what is existence itself? That is philosophy. Philosophy starts with this question. What is existence? What does it really mean? Not that this glass exists, or this exists, not that but what is existence itself? What is existence itself? What does it mean “exists”? This inquiry is philosophy. All right.

In physics, people are told there is something like a vacuum, people are told. Philosophy raises this question: is physics right in saying there is anything like a vacuum? In physics it is assumed that there is a vacuum. Philosophy says I do not know whether we are right or wrong. That’s philosophy. All that you say, I believe you can question in philosophy. Philosophy is a question of questions.

Q: What does infinity mean?

What is infinity is a central question of philosophy. Mathematics assumes infinity, philosophy questions it. It examines what is infinity really. The discussion of infinity is philosophy. Mathematics assumes infinity, does not discuss, there’s no question. In philosophy you question: what is infinite? Is there anything like infinity at all? If you think about infinity, whether it really can exist at all, can infinity exist? Can any time infinity exist? Mathematics assumes that it is infinity because you can go on in infinite series. Nobody has finished the series. You are told going on and on and on and then you are told now you keep quiet. It goes on and on and that's the end of mathematics. In philosophy you ask a question. I go on and on and on and on, then then then, then? That is philosophy. In mathematics you are taught to go on, assume it is there. In philosophy, no, you question it. This is one of the central questions to think of infinity, to think of eternity is philosophy, to question infinity, to question eternity. In mathematics we are told infinity, go on and on and on and on and on, in philosophy you say yes, I go on on, I am with you, go on on on, then what happens? What happens? You are on a flight, philosophy is a flight. Methameric only shows you a flight, but then says, now come down, settle down and deal with finites. Now that flight is on, but you now come down to this: one plus one plus one, at the most zero and minus zero, you go down and down and down, you assume there is infinity, but don't discuss whether there is infinity or not. Philosophy asks a question: does infinity exist? Mathematics assumes, that's all. It doesn't question. Philosophy is a question of questions to think of infinity, to think of eternity, that is philosophy, to think of zero, to think of shunya, to think of infinity, to think of all, to think of some. What are all these terms that we are using all the time, do they correspond to reality or not and to find out the reality, this effort, this attempt is philosophy. All right.

The Ultimate Reality

Next question: what is the ultimate reality?

Oh no, what is the question?! I don't understand the question! What is the ultimate reality? Fine. I want to understand the question.

Yesterday I said in one of your expositions: a teacher should be a dramatist, so I’m now doing a drama with you, because the question which gives us a drama I must say I don't understand the question. What is your question?

In your book the Aim of Life while reading the book I had this question about what was in the in the book, so they were talking about being and non-being.

Good! I’m so happy. Now you see by asking the question again and again, you get some clue to understand the question: does non-being exist? This is the question. Try to answer this question: does non-being exist?

First of all, non-being by definition is that which does not exist. What is non-being? that it does not exist. So my question is: does non-being exist? You say no, it’s a self-contradiction. Ultimate reality is that in which there is no self-contradiction. This is the answer. Ultimate reality is that in which there is no self-contradiction. Everything in the world you find is self-contradictory. This also has to be seen because we don't see that everything is self-contradictory. Take only a small example: is small big or small?

Right, correct. You answered the question: small is both small and big, it depends. As long as you are in the field where you can see both, it is not ultimate, ultimate is that which is, there is no question of both, partly this, partly that. That is not the ultimate. Ultimate is that which is without any contradiction, without any kind of this or this. As long as it is this this this, it's not philosophy, it's not ultimate reality. Ultimate reality is defined as complete affirmation, complete affirmation without qualification, unqualified affirmation is ultimate reality. There are no buts, there are no ifs, no partly this, no partly that. It IS. That's why, in India, it is called sat, it is the ultimate reality. It is called sat. That IS, not partly this, partly that. You might say ultimate reality IS, even the word “is” is not appropriate because even that is partly yes and no. Therefore, the greatest philosophers have said: ultimate reality is x, don't even define x. It is x, it is even said ineffable x, ineffable means you can't even speak about ultimate reality. It is ineffable x. All right.

Sir, that means even God is not ultimate reality. Even God does not ultimate reality because there's contradictions even about the existence of God. So if God is not the ultimate reality, then nothing is ultimately reality?

It’s a very good question, but if I say God is equal to “IS”,then what will be your answer? God is equal to “IS”. If I said God is equal to “IS”, then? It is only when you define God saying that he has got four hands or eight hands.. This is a question, but if I say according to me, God is “IS”. That’s only one thing which you can never doubt, you can doubt whether God has five heads or six heads, but if I say God is simply he is. That is why in India we found out the trick, we simply say sat. God is what? sat, sat means “IS”. That’s all. The moment you start defining, there is a question whether he has five hands, whether he exists in heaven or hell. In India we are told, God is simply “IS”, or Tat Sat.

You said that there is some uncertainty about “IS”also, so if there is uncertainty about “IS”also, then how is God certain?

It's a good question actually. Did I say there is uncertainty about “IS”? I might have said, I must have said, because you are saying, so I am accepting. There's only one thing that cannot be doubted and that is God, everything else you can doubt but not “IS”. Why? Because according to me, God is equal to “IS”, you can doubt only in a state of being, doubt exists therefore it is, if doubt exists, doubt can exist only if there is “IS”, therefore one thing cannot be doubted. That is “IS”. This is regarded as an ontological argument of the existence of God. I give you only a simple idea, but she wrote a very good article on this subject, ontological argument. She got the highest marks on that subject in London University on this subject. It’s called ontological proof of the existence of God, which only says that the only one thing you cannot doubt — and that is God provided by God you mean “IS”.

If you say by God I mean that who is sitting in the heaven upstairs, that could be doubted, but if you say by God I mean “IS”. That is something which you cannot doubt because in the very act of doubt it must be. You cannot doubt if there is no “IS”, to doubt there must be “IS”. So there is one thing about which you cannot doubt that is God, provided by God, you mean “IS”. Right. It's called the ontological argument of the existence of God. You can doubt everything in the world. excepting God, provided by God you mean “IS”. If you say by God, I’m in Shiva, Krishna, Rama, all this can be questioned. Therefore, in India we have only one definition of God: Tat Sat. That’s all. Tat Sat, that which exists.

Sir, then what is Asat?

Asat is only possible in the context of Sat. You cannot think of asat if there was no sat at all. Asat is a contradiction of sat. Asat is that which contradicts sat, but in order to affirm it, you have to affirm sat. asato gamya, sat that is to say from asat, I live in doubt, that therefore I’m not sure, but then, if you really inquire, you move from asat to sat, you affirm sat. All right.

Ethical guidance from literature, philosophy and Yoga

What is meant by right or wrong. How do you demarcate the difference between the two, because Shakespeare has said, that “nothing is good or bad, thinking makes it so”. Something that is right according to me, might be wrong according to someone, nothing in this world is absolute according to the theory of relativity proposed by Einstein.

One of the profoundest questions, very very good question. I think all of you are very bright students, and I must congratulate all the students. Really, the quality of the questions is very great, very very good. I would like to embrace all of you very heartily, because you are so good, very fine.

You know literature is a very good means of experience when you study literature like Shakespeare, Wordsworth, Shelley, Keats. Great literature, literary people, when you listen to them their own wisdom comes, but there's a difference between literature and philosophy. Literature is an expression of experiences. But literature can be fully correct only if it expresses full experience. Literature is an expression of experiences, but the experiences have to be multiplied on and on and on and on until you can experience all, then only truth can be seen. Therefore, if you are looking for the total truth in literature, very rarely you will get it.

Literature can give you in depth experience of anything or of many things. Very rarely there is one literary piece somewhere which can give you the whole of the truths. There are very few pieces in the world of literature when you really get the truth, the whole of the truth. That’s why, when you study literature, always keep this in mind that whatever great expressions come, do not take them to be wholly true, they are partially true. Therefore, if you want to follow the path of the truth, study literature, but don't follow it unless you are sure that the person who has written has seen the whole of the truth. This is the one difficulty with literature. Literature is very good when you want to experience something deeply, anything you want to experience deeply, go to literature, see a drama, Othello strangulating Desdemona, because he has doubt, just see the drama. It’s a deep experience, what jealousy can do, deep experience of jealousy. There is a fire of jealousy, but Othello does not give the true full truth of life, only the partial truth of life. Afterwards he himself realises and kills himself. Most of the literature in the world gives you partial truths. So if Shakespeare has said something is very good, very nice and joyous, but don't say now, it is true. Right.

Very rarely literature as such very rarely gives you the truths as a whole. It gives you glimpses. Suppose you are walking in a desert, very cold, overhead there is only sky, dark night, walking, walking, walking and if you're a poet you write: all this darkness, nothing nothing in the world, but the sand, no hope of ever crossing. There is no terminus. You say all these words. All are true, true to their experience. If you are walking in Rajasthan at night and he says all is dark, it's true, but if he had to be at the same time aware of the whole globe, see America, it is a bright day at that time. All right, so it's not true to say that all is dark. It is true of that experience at that time. All is dark, you don't see any light anywhere at all. So if Shakespeare says there is nothing good or bad in the world, only thinking makes it so. It is true, but in a sense it's not entirely true.

If you want guidance in life, don't really remain in literature. That is where philosophy comes. In philosophy they say, don't be poetic. That’s one of the difficulties with poets and philosophers. Philosophers say, don't be poetic. I don't want poetry, don’t be poesy, no poetry. I want hard hard reality and the full reality, the whole of reality. But when you go to philosophy it's so dry, there is no experience. Literature gives you experience, vividity, life, your mood, in your heart, in your emotions, in your imagination. In philosophy, everything is so dry abstract and this hardness, so philosophy makes you comprehensive, but dry, devoid of experience. Therefore, neither literature is the answer. Nor philosophy is the answer. Yoga is the answer.

In yoga, you have experience and experience of the totality of the whole. Therefore, neither literature nor philosophy is the answer to our query. Yoga is the method by which you can know, experience. It gives the experience of literature and the vastness of philosophy combined together. That is yoga.

Now, if you look at it from yogic point of view and this is the important point and I’ll give you an example now. Is it really true that there is nothing like good or nothing like that? Really literally, yes, I agree. Shakespeare said there are experiences in which said: oh no, you may say good or bad depending upon your mood, but really it is so? Philosophy also asks: is it really so? Even philosophy cannot answer this question. But yoga, yes.

Arjuna went to the battlefield. It’s a concrete example. Arjuna went to the battlefield and he became doubtful. Is it good to be in the battlefield? Is it bad to be in the battlefields? Is it right? Is it wrong? If Shakespeare were near him, he would have said, look neither is right nor wrong. It is your mind which makes it so. That would have been the answer of Shakespeare. Literature sometimes gives you the full truth. Sometimes, I don't say no at all, sometimes, but don't normally knock the door of literature if you want truth, but nothing but the truth and all of the truth. Literature is not the answer. That’s why our education is so incomplete. Very often we give children lots of literature and then our mind is filled with this idea, that idea, we don't know where we are going, or we teach philosophy and everything becomes dry abstract, hardly anything experienced.

For true education is yogic education. Today we are having a session of yoga. We are. This is called yogic education. What I am doing with you is a lesson in yoga in which we are knocking the doors, all the doors. Without assumptions we are striving to see truth, truth as a whole, experience the whole truth, so I’m giving this example. The Gita is called the book of yoga. Now, if you read the Gita, if you read, every chapter is a chapter on yoga, so you should go to yoga to get the real truths.

Now I ask this question: Arjuna was in the battlefield and he was in doubt. Is it right? Is it wrong? Then he said: I am definitely wrong. It’s his conclusion. This is the very first chapter he says to Krishna: I am wrong. This is not my place here. He became absolutely quiet, he threw away gandiva and became quiet. He did not even ask the question. He was sure, this is wrong. Again. Shakespeare was not with him. He'd have said, it may be right. It may be wrong. It’s only your thinking that makes, but no Arjuna simply said. I am wrong here. I will not be here. I am going away. Did Krishna say that look it is your mind that makes you so? Krishna was better than Shakespeare surely, he did not say to Arjuna: look, my dear child it is only your mind which makes you like that, you think it in one way it is wrong, it is wrong; in one way it is right, is right, now do what you like, what you think according to your mind. He didn't say that.

He said: you are a coward. That was his answer. You are a coward, you are not seeing the reality and you can see the reality. I can make you see the reality. There is yoga. It doesn't depend upon your mind whether to think right or wrong, not at all. Truth is not subjective. Then Arjuna has many many questions as a whole of the Gita, then at a given stage that is the whole power of yoga. Just now see, yoga is seen. There’s a greatness of yoga, experiencing, but no literature, see, and he shows and that's the greatest part of the Bhagavad-Gita is what is called vishwaroopa darshan. The whole vision of reality manifests out and he says: look. What he sees is that the lord himself is killing the Kauravas, lord himself, not he, he's a small little puppet here. The Lord himself is killing the Kauravas. Is God wrong? He says, is he right? Only your mind thinks it, here is objective reality. God himself is killing not you or I. It's not even a dream here. What is going on in this battle is a real battle. It’s not what you're thinking makes it. So it's a real battle going on and whether you kill or not, they are being killed, whether you should kill or not, it's up to you, go away if you like, I’m sure you'll come back here, even if you don't come back, so what? Do you think that Kauravas will be saved? They have to be killed. That is right that they are killed. It's not that thinking makes it so, it is really wrong. Their rule is wrong. They are evil doers, they should be massacred. In any case, I am massacring. It doesn't depend upon you whether you are here or not. You are only given a privilege, if you want a privilege to come up and to kill them, they are already killed. That is the power of yogic vision.

So right or wrong is not what you think it to be right or wrong. There should be a vision of the highest. Now the answer of the question is the following: anything that takes you to that vision is right, anything that prevents you from that vision is wrong. What Arjuna was doing was wrong because he was preventing himself from seeing that highest vision. There is a vision in the light of which truly something is right, something is wrong. I am now talking to you for example, is it right for me to talk to you? wrong for me to talk to you? My thinking makes it so? Right now, it is right. Shakespeare will say your thinking makes it so. No, it is right because I see beautiful faces of God around me. I am sitting with you. I have the privilege of being at your feet. I am washing your feet. What a great delight I have got.

What is right, I am absolutely right, it's not my thinking. So it is not true to say that it is only thinking that makes right or wrong? no, but to answer the question you must be seated in yoga. You cannot truly answer a question right or wrong unless you sit in that philosopher yogi. One who sees and sees the whole, totality, seated in that consciousness, he sees the totality beyond thought. Yoga is something that's beyond thought. It's not thinking which makes right or wrong. So now conclusion: anything that takes you to the yogi is right. Anything that takes you away from a yogi is wrong. Even in your own lives if you are in search of a true teacher, you are right. The true teacher is a yogi. If you are not in that search, I see you're wrong.

The whole world today is wrong because today teachers and students are all told, don't bother. One message in the world is to be amused all the time. This is one big message which is being given in the whole world. You open the television, you want to be amused. You go to your classroom, you want to be amused, you go to football, you want to be amused. Who tells you to go to God? The only good school in the world is who tells you please, there is a yoga. There is a knowledge, you can be, you are candidates of yoga. You have not come into this world only to be amused. In any case, even if you want amusement, you can't be amused. Nobody can keep you perpetually amused even if you want to, even television you can't run for all the time.

So don't seek amusement, as Mother said, do not seek pleasure, but take pleasure in all that you seek, do not seek pleasure, but take pleasure in all that you seek and take pleasure in all that you ought to seek. This is a great message. We are at the present only trying to be amused. Everybody is amusing everybody else, they're all on the wrong paths All right. Next question.

So you gave an example of a poet who is walking through the darkness of the desert, and you said that he believes that there is darkness all around. There might be another poet who says that just now, it's darkness but after some hours it will be sun. And there will be hope and hope. We believe that God has equally bestowed us with the same soul and he takes care of us equally throughout our life. Then what causes the difference in perception?

There are poets and poets. That is why I said, every poet you should not take. There are some poems, there is some literature. There is a literature which is not like that. You have to see literature as many grades. There are poets of the physical, poets of the vital worlds, of the mind, poets of the spirits, and poets of the supreme vision. Even Gita is a literature, it's a big poem, but it's a poem of the highest vision. So you should see when you go to literature. You should ask this question: is it physical poetry, physical literature? Is it vital literature? Is it mental literature? Is it spiritual literature? Is it supramental literature? grades and grades and grades of literature, all right. So I don't say that you should not go to literature at all, not at all. I am myself a great lover of literature personally, but we must know what we are knocking when you open literature. Look only for depth of experience, don't expect much more than that. If you want the highest experience through literature, then make a selection, go to Upanishads I tell you personally. If you want the highest truth expressed in any literature in the world, it is Upanishads, therefore go to Upanishads if you want both poetry and truths. There is a literature available. There are many Upanishads — Isha Upanishad, Katho Upanishad, Prashno Upanishad, Mandukya Upanishad, Mandukiya Upanishad. At least twelve Upaishads are very famous and my advice to you is that if you really want literature and truth at the same time, read the Upanishads, you'll get both: deepest experience beautifully expressed, and yet the highest that was expressed. All right.

Or you take Savitri which Sri Aurobindo has written. The longest poem in English literature is written by an Indian, Sri Aurobindo. It has 24,000 lines, it is the highest literature and the highest truths. If you anytime have any question in your mind, you open Savitri at random. You will get the answer to your question. This is a trick that I am giving you, if your question, if you want an answer, you take Savitri then open any page. It is like a magic. Take the book, take a feather and just cross the whole book, whichever page opens you'll find your answer. I have done it many many times in my life and it's true. Yes, you kindly do it if you're in doubt, take Upanishads also and it is the same thing. There are great poems in the world which have this quality. As I told you, your beloved is always at your door. Your beloved is at your door, only we do not know, and this is one of the ways of opening the door. All right. Savitri is a book which you must at least see. Next.

Why am I here? If God has pre-designs for me, then how am I to know them, and when will I know them?

My greatest duty on the earth is to be a seeker to be in service and not to pretend. If I don't know, I must say I do not know, if I know I should not say, I don't know, it's also wrong. It’s called false modesty. If I know I must say yes, I know. What is wrong in it? What is boasting about it? If I know I know, but if you do not know say, I don't know. Therefore, at any given stage what you should be doing is to be in search. Now, while you are searching, you have compulsions, because search is always a time taking business search means you have to make a lot of quests knocking here, knocking there, knocking here, etc, it takes time, and this world does not allow you time. This is one very important thing. The world is like an engine, rushing rushing rushing all the time. You are, as it were, on the rods of the rail and when you look here, you find train is coming this side. If you look at this side, a train is coming this side. You are not allowed to stay there. The trains are running all the time all around. In fact, this is the great vision of the world because you are searching. The world is not waiting for your search to end. In the meantime, there's a big big big engine running and not one engine, so many engines are running around. They don't allow you to stand even for one minute. You want to stand and to stare. You are not allowed in this world. This is our condition in the world, what can we do? This is where we are. Everyone is demanding on you and every time, even when you think that I have got complete leisure now, nothing else to do, next moment you are knocked out. The world is constantly on you, constantly there is a demand on you, but the first thing is to say even then to say: I am looking for, I am searching. I will not pretend, therefore, while you are searching since there are demands on you, what should you do?

He said himself: shall I follow my parents and try to please them? The answer is yes, if you also say, shall I not follow my parents? I will say yes. If you were to say, shall I run away, I'll say yes, anything at that moment. You think there is no final answer until you ask the question: should I ask God? I will say yes absolutely. When you do not know, be in search and say I want to search by knocking the gate of God, like Arjuna knocked the door, and he found the answer from Sri Krishna, from God himself. Similarly, your standpoint should be: I am searching in the meantime with our compulsions even, when you do this or you do that, you tell God inwardly because he listens to you every time, he's there all the time, be sure of that, this is one thing which is certain. Even now, God is listening to all of us. He's very kind. Now God is always very, very kind, absolutely kind. You tell him, I am in your hands. Take me in your hands. I may believe in you. I may not believe in you, doesn't matter. He doesn't affect him, you are there, I am told at least you are there. I am told, and since you are there, take care of me, I really want to do what exactly is the right thing to do. I don't know what is right, what is wrong but be with me, I’ll be with you until you tell me definitively. I'll go knocking in the meantime. Whatever you do is right, provided this you're done, not otherwise. If you have not done this exercise and you say whatever I do is right, no, if you have done this, then whatever you do is right, running away is right, being there is right, not obeying your parents is right, obeying your parents is right. Everything on the condition that this already has a dialogue between you and God. You do this dialogue sincerely truly, not merely for the sake of dialogue, truly in this state of consciousness. Whatever you feel like doing, you do, in due course you will be doing the right thing in your work. Be sure of that.

Just as I know now, I am doing the right thing in being with you. In the whole universe I should be with you at this moment. I shall be talking to you exactly as I am talking to you. I am quite sure God wants it. God wants that I should embrace you all with all my heart. This is a fact and God is very pleased. This is the right thing that is happening now, so if you move in the world with this consciousness, be always trustful, God will not let you down. The world will let you down, doesn't matter, there's one reality which will never never let you down. That is certain, our most beloved God. This is a fact.

This is Himanshu Dubey, he has three questions. The first one is yesterday Sraddhaluji said that health is an inherent property of the human body. My question is that can we overcome death and decay process? If, yes, then, will it not be against the law of nature?

It’s a very good question because it raises what is the law of nature. There are two laws of nature: the law of nature and the law of supernature. There are two laws, always in the world. You remember this thing. We think there's only one law. Like Sri Aurobindo, said double soul in man, similarly we should say we have double law in the world, there is a law of nature and there is a law of supernature. Both are nature. The only difference is whether it's lower or higher. At present, we are living in the lower world. Therefore, there is a lower law. The law of birth and death is the law of our lower world, but it's not the law of supernature of higher nature. Now the lord nature is always ambiguous. Lower is never entered over lower is like twilight neither day nor night. That is the nature of lower nature. It’s not entirely lower. Lower is like twilight, neither day nor night, that is the nature of lower nature. It is not entirely lower, it is always somewhat higher is always present in it.

My movement towards health in a body is a part of the higher nature. My inclination to fall sick is the law of my lower nature. Therefore, in this lower nature, you might say that my body tends to be sick, my body tends to be healthy. So when Sraddhalu said that it is a nature's nature to be healthy, he's right, but not entirely right. My body has also the tendency to fall sick. It’s also part of my nature. In the higher nature, only one law: to be healthy, to be healthy is the law of the higher nature.

Now we are here to experience the lower nature. First, all that we are doing in life at present is to examine the world as it is, which is lower and higher both combine together, mixture. This is the world of yes and no, na na karte haan ho jata hai. This is the present. This is the world, it is yes and no world. Therefore, don't decide what is the higher only by seeing this world, we won't get correct answers. It requires a great deal to find out the real answer. Therefore, if you say to be absolutely devoid of death, am I not transcending the law? I said yes, you are transcending if you are here, if you are a candidate of this world, yes, you are transcending, but why are you here? Is it to be here that we are here? This is the question you are here to prepare a ladder.

You are like an architect. Each one of us is an architect here and each one is asked to build a ladder from here to there, from here to eternity. That is our whole task. We are all architects here or masons or carpenters, you might say, or all together. Each one of us is given a task. Wherever you stand, our body is our standing point. You can't come out of the body, so it's a continuous standing point in your body. Now in this body, this is the task given to all of us. Prepare a ladder, build a ladder and you will find as you rise higher and higher, you will begin to see from twilight, you'll come to real daylight and then you'll come to the noon of daylight from where the things you look completely different, that's why the teacher said to the students stand up on the table. You should stand up on the table, when you stand up on the table you see things completely differently.

So not only do you rise, then there is another task to be done. Having risen you bring down what you've seen high and fix it here. This is the work given to every one of us. We are all given the task to build a ladder, go to the top and having reached there, you gradually bring down here and fix it here. The law of immortality is the law of the higher world. First, you rise from death, move forward towards immortality and bring down immortality here and live immortal. That is why Upanishads say: mrityor ma amritam gamaya. Mrityu means death, ma means my, amritam gamaya means lead me towards immortality. Lead me from death to immortality. This is the Upanishad. It’s a poetry, literature, but here you get the highest truths, mrityor ma amritam gamaya. Your whole task of life is this: you are not breaking the law of life if you seek immortality, which is the law of the higher life of the higher world, higher nature, then you bring that down and then what is higher becomes lower and both become one. Then there is no difference between higher and lower because it is all higher nature ultimately, one super nature which is natural. This is what you get.

So if you seek immortality, if you can establish immortality here, it is, of course not according to the law of life as it is here now, but it is the law of the higher world and it is that which is to be brought down here. This is the whole task of life. When you say why I am here, the answer is only this: I am here to make a ladder to rise upwards, to reach the higher world and to bring down the higher world on this earth. You see all great pioneers of the world have done this, a little bit they have gone up and brought down here. All revolutions have come for what? They have seen something higher and tried to bring down on the earth. That is how civilization has moved forward. All education is nothing but this to tell you this: all children are budding architects. They are supposed to make a ladder, rise up and having risen up, having viewed all that is beautiful there, to bring down the beauty here on the earth. All right.

Second question: today we live a materialistic life with materialistic aims of our lives. How should we maintain a balance between our approach to the materialistic and ultimate aim of life? Our society and social relations do not allow us to pursue the aim of life to discover life to its fullest. What should we do?

There is not one answer to this question, which one should have a separate answer. What should I do? I told you I’m not a religionist, I'm not a propagandist. Each one has his own way of answering this question. My general answer I have given you: O my dear friends, remember you are free. This is my basic answer to everyone. When you say what parents want to do this, we shall do this. Shall we do this? My basic answer is, but all of you are so wonderful. Remember you are free, but be modest, don't be arrogant. Freedom implies that you have to be extremely humble, extremely humble, the true humility and freedom go together. The free man is an extremely humble man. You should be more tender than a flower. That is what you are supposed to do. So my answer is: let the world be what it is, let the world make demands on you, you be tender like a flower, respond truly. If you are obliged to do, do it, don't complain. It is through these compulsions, through pressures, the only thing you should say is to have a dialogue with God, as I told you truly sincerely: O my beloved, I invite you to be with me. I do not know who you are. I am told that you are to be with me. Walk with me. Make me do what is the best thing for me to do, till that time I am pulled, I am pushed, I accept, but I want to be like you, you are my beloved. Make me in your image. This is your responsibility now, if you move in this way constantly, this is called yoga. Yoga is exactly this: to invite God in your life. It is very easy actually, although you don't need to go to the Himalayas to invite God into your life. When Christ said be like the child as a child, you really say: O God, just be with me  and he'll be with you, you don't require many acrobatics, no tapasya, you just say to God: you are my beloved. You are truly beloved, the beloved doesn’t leave you, you are my true beloved, be with me, take my hand always, even if I don't recognize, even if I revolt against you, you be with me, I may fight with you, but you don't fight with me. Please. That’s the only contract you make with me. I’ll denounce you, I will hate you, I will fight with you, but you, you are my beloved. You can't fight with me. You be with me. If you do this all the time, all the time, all the time, be sure you will always be in the garden of joy.

This is the question from yesterday's presentation. We were exposed to various ideas and hypotheses of some of the great men in the present history of humanity on the aim of life, but that is how they perceive the aim of life, but being a part of the most intelligent species on earth, I myself would like to perceive my aim of life. When I ask this question to myself, I feel that I am at a loss because, according to me before this question, there is another question which has to be answered before dealing with this question. Suppose one doesn't know what a telephone is and he is given a telephone. He might use it as a weapon to throw on someone, as he doesn't know the purpose of that device. Hence to know the true aim of the telephone, he will have to go to Graham Bell and ask him why did he invent this device, and this is the very question which comes to me before thinking about the aim of life? That is what is the origin of human life, who originated it, for only he can tell us the aim of this human life. I feel this is the most important question in front of humanity. Yet in the hundred thousand years of human history, this question has been neglected. Biologists call it a mere scientific coincidence that an intelligent life has developed on earth, but this probability of this coincidence is very less. Yet this miracle took place and I think that there is more to it than coincidence. So I would like to ask what is our origin, and am I right to think that origin of life and aim of life are interconnected?

The secret of secrets. This is a question which I asked God myself. I met the Mother. I told you once you please give me time when I should talk about Sri Aurobindo and the Mother, truly, not today, I’ll come one day to talk to you about it. I only today tell you that I have met God. I met the Mother. I am absolutely certain that she is God, supreme God, supreme reality. I met her. This is a great privilege of my life. This is what I like to tell all my brothers and sisters in the world. Look. I have met the supreme and I have asked this question and I asked this question not on my only behalf. I asked for the whole world. I told her, what should I tell the children of the world and she gave me the answer which I gave you yesterday. There is a divine Will which wants to manifest itself in physical life. Our aim is to discover that will and to work for its manifestation in physical life. Of this answer, I have no doubt at all in my mind, so I can share with you.

I’ve gone exactly to the telephone maker in the story. I know that God has made me here. God has made all of us here. I know this very well, I have no doubt at all about it. The divine Mother has made all of us, whether you regard her as your mother or not doesn't matter. She knows you are all her children and she wants to give you this answer because she gave it to me for all of you. I had asked this question on behalf of everybody. In fact, Mother once told me when I asked her what is my work, so she said your ultimate work, I have many works with you, she told me many works to do, but she said your ultimate work is to look after the children. Therefore, when I am with the children, I feel I am doing exactly what Mother has told me to do, to be with children, and she said, look after the child, not only to be with them, to look after the children. That means I have to be responsible. When I talk to you, I should not talk to you, like literally people like Shakespeare. I should talk to you like Upanishads, something responsible, something that is really according to me, which is really true. I should not give any fiction. My answer should be really true answer and she told me to tell you all, which I am now telling you again, that there is a divine will which wants to manifest itself in physical life, and your work here is to discover that Will, and to make you capable of manifesting that will in physical life.

So my first proposition to you is: please do not live your physical life. There are people in the world today who are going to commit suicide. No, there are many children in the world who say there is nothing in the world at all, why are we here? So the first message I want to give you is, please please be where you are. Your physical life is very important, be where you are. First of all, do not run away. You are in a very sacred place in your body. This physical life is not an illusion. You are in your physical life, be there, being there discover the divine will, there is a divine Will, the beloved wants you to do something. He is your beloved. He wants you to do something, but he's a very clever, very mischievous beloved. That’s why we seek Krishna as a mischievous boy, but he's like that. So what can we do if the beloved is like that. We are also like that. We are also mischievous, so we are equal, so he is a mischievous friend and he says discover me first of all, hide and seek. I am there with you, but you discover me, so I’m answering Taposh. This is the real task that you have to perform. You have to discover the divine not only divine but divine will, there's a difference between finding divine and divine will. I may find you, but I don't know what is your will, it requires further probing; merely meeting the divine is not enough. Many people have said to discover God and that is the end, but no that is not the end. It’s only the first step, to discover God is the first thing, then you ask him: what is your real will?

In the battlefield Arjuna had found Sri Krishna was with him, but that was not enough. This problem was not answered merely because Sri Krishna was seated by his side. Not at all. We have to ask questions.

pariprashnena pari sevyah

You have to ask many many questions, so go to the divine, then ask questions as we are asking questions now, which is very good. Then Sri Krishna said what is his will by asking asking, he found out the divine's will. That is what you have to do and then having discovered his will, that’s not end either. We discover his will, then be prepared to do according to that will. This is also not an easy thing. Supposing you say that God’s will says you should be president of the world, not president of India, not of the United States. Supposing, I want you to ask me the hypothetical question, we say you have to be president of the world. This is what I will do. Now such a position, first of all, does not exist in the world today. World’s presidentship does not exist, but if God wants you to do that, what will you do? You have to create a condition in the world where the president's position is first created. Then you work out by which you'll be elected, to be president of the world and then you'll be able to do what he wants you to do as president of the world.

Now I gave a hypothetical example, but actually his will is like that, he's a fantastic master and friend. What he wants from you is not here at all available. He wants from you something tremendously great. You are his very beloved child, beloved friend, beloved spouse. He wants you very very best for you. That is certain, for which you don't have your own imagination here. Therefore, you ask him, prepare yourself, you have to prepare tremendously for it, gymnastics is nothing, athletics is nothing, studies of MA, PHD is nothing, more and more tremendous sadhana, tremendous preparations are necessary, your body is made for that. In simple terms, this body is to glow with light.

Yesterday Sraddhalu said that with the glow of light some of the fishes transmit their messages. God wants you to be like that, glowing with light and by mere glowing you tell every word. The whole world should be able to get to get your message. The highest will of God at present is to make you transform. You should be angelic, great, vast, tender, more tender than a flower, more rocky than the rocks at the same time, this is what is the divine's will. This is the result of my search. I don't say you should have the same search in the same way, I am only sharing with you my search. My only request is make a search. I had the privilege of meeting God and I got this message from God for all of us, so I’m just giving it to you, make use of it. There is a divine will which wants to manifest his self in the physical life, make your life in such a way that it manifests God's will. More than this, I’ll answer if you asked, but not today, there's a lot to say about it. Much can be said about it, but if you ask me, I’ll come here again and I’ll answer the questions. I am under your command. You are my God here.