Sri Aurobindo
Letters of Sri Aurobindo
Volume 1
Letter ID: 280
Sri Aurobindo — Roy, Dilip Kumar
October 18, 1932
□ Hide link-numbers of differed places
I am sending you back the letters, etc. The long letter is absolutely unfit for publication, as I see on a final reading, except the first page – the rest won’t do at all. To the others (even the door and head letter) I will not object, if you want them. As to Subhash, I would not advise you to send him this morning’s letter as it would evoke your writing to him about your experience, which it is not good to do from the point of view of your sadhana; the other letter (about Shiva, Krishna, etc.) could be sent, but would it mean anything to him – I don’t know.
I have not yet found a moment’s time to go through Russell’s book; as soon as I can do so I will let you know if I have anything to say about him. I have already said that I have no objection to anybody admiring Russell or Lowes Dickinson or any other altruist. Genius or fine qualities are always admirable in whomever they are found; all that has nothing to do with the turn of a man’s opinions or the truth or untruth of atheism or of spiritual experience. Neither for that matter is the fact that there are people who believe out of fear or desire a valid argument against the existence of the Divine. I will read the book as soon as I can, but I do not expect to find anything very novel in it, as I
am perfectly familiar with European atheism and it is for the most part a shallow and rather childish reaction against a shallow and childish religionism – that of orthodox exoteric Christianity as it was believed and practised in Europe. Not much food on either side of the controversy either for the intellect or the spirit!
1 In SABCL, volume 22 and Letters of Sri Aurobindo. 2 Ser. the last part of this sentence was highly corrupted and inserted into antother letter to Dilip (September 22, 1932) as this sentence:
It is against this conception that the atheistic objection is aimed,– for atheism in Europe has been a shallow and rather childish reaction against a shallow and childish exoteric religionism and its popular inadequate and crudely dogmatic notions.