Sri Aurobindo
Letters of Sri Aurobindo
Letters
To Motilal Roy [22]1
[end 1919]
Dear M.
About your scheme of a weekly paper – as for the name
it is not difficult to find; it could be called the “Standard-bearer”. But are
you quite sure you will be able to live up to the name and carry the thing on in
the requisite manner? Nalini and Suresh are not likely to be able to write; one
does not write at all in English, the other can do it if he likes, but is even
more মন্হরগতি [manharagati
] than in Bengali. To write for an English weekly would be beyond his present
energies. As for myself, I am at present unable to write or do anything
substantial, because of the extreme pressure of my Yoga, which has entirely
occupied my time,– except for what I am obliged to give to the “Arya” and even
that I have cut short as much as possible,– for the last few months. This state
of things is likely to go on for the rest of the (English) year; whether it will
be changed in the beginning of the next is more than I can tell with any
certainty. The whole work might fall on your two Chandernagore writers. An
English weekly cannot be conducted like a Bengali monthly or fortnightly. And it
is not going to be a political paper of the ordinary kind which can be filled up
anyhow. It will have to maintain a high reputation to be at all successful.
These things however are for you to consider; you know your own strength and how
far the field in Bengal is ready. As to the symbol, none has come to me. I 
am not altogether favourably inclined to the Uttara Yogi idea, nor anyone else
here. It sounds too like the old style of spiritual pretension, and, when it is
put in a current English production, suggests bujruki. Plain colours and
as few symbols as may be are what we want at the beginning. Indian spirituality
has lost itself in a jungle of symbols and shlokas and we have to get out of
them on to the plain and straight ways and the open heights, where we can see
the “much work that has still to be done”. Why any editor? Let the Shakti
herself be the editor.
As to articles for the Prabartak, Nalini used to be
your mainstay and he is now in another atmosphere,– mainly hitherto of marriage
and football, and complains of an inability to write. As for the other he has
produced nothing since he left here, except a drama for the “Bijoli” and the
answer to [? ] even his Prabasi article was written and sent before he left for
Bengal. Moni’s inspiration flows in channels hardly suitable for the Prabartak.
As for myself, it was only as a result of a solitary inspiration and with much
trouble of rewriting that I got one thing done for you. Since then I have been
too much occupied by my Yoga and not at all visited by any
preranā or at least none which lasted long enough to produce more than a
few lines. In this matter I am entirely dependent on the যহা নিযুক্তেঽস্ম
[yahā niyukte’sma], as I have no natural control of
the language and I have no time at present for increasing it by constant
practice. It seems to me that Prabartak is getting on well enough as it is,
though, if Nalini could write, it would produce an element of greater variety.
You should be able to develop more writers with the necessary spiritual
experience, grasp of the thought and literary ability,– these things the inner
Shakti can bring to the surface if it is called upon for them,– so that
Prabartak will not have to depend on three or four people only for its
sustenance.
There is nothing more, I think, to add immediately,– if
there is I will keep it for later answering, so that this letter may not be
farther delayed. By the way, with regard to your design for the paper, the only
thing that now suggests itself to me is the Hansa in the Sun, ie the free Soul
lodged in the vijñāna, and the legend “In this sign
thou shalt conquer,” which is appropriate, 
but has the disadvantage of being borrowed from Christianity and Constantine. It
would perhaps be better if you could find a Sanscrit equivalent or substitute.
K.