Nirodbaran
Talks with Sri Aurobindo
Volume 1
10 December 1938 – 14 January 1941
18 December 1940
This evening Sri Aurobindo broached the subject of rebirth by addressing Dr. Manilal.
Sri Aurobindo: Your story about the parrot being reborn as magistrate may not be true.
Dr. Manilal: Not as a magistrate but as his grandson. (Laughter)
Sri Aurobindo: Oh, I see, but that doesn’t matter. In one case the parrot will read law, in the other it will read ordinary books.
Mulshankar: Why not true, Sir? You mean that a parrot can’t be born as a human?
Sri Aurobindo: Because there is no evidence by which to verify it. It may be the simple imagination of the boy, whereas in other cases ample proof is given.
Dr. Manilal: Can’t a parrot or and animal be reborn as a human? You don’t believe in the evolution of life, Sir?
Sri Aurobindo: Yes, I do.
Dr. Manilal: In a Jain story it is said that the mother of our first Tirthankara was born as a banana tree. By the side of that tree there was another tree full of thorns. Those thorns used to prick the banana tree so much …
Nirodbaran: Good Lord! Do you believe in these stories?
Dr. Manilal: – but in spite of the pain and suffering the tree used to remain calm.
Purani: As a reward it was reborn as a Tirthankara’s mother.
Sri Aurobindo: You are asked whether you believe in these stories.
Dr. Manilal (Looking at Nirodbaran): Why not? When there is no proof to the contrary.
Nirodbaran: But there is no proof in their favour either.
Dr. Manilal: Why? This story has been told by the Tirthankara himself who is a Sarvajna, that is, one who knows the past, present and future.
Sri Aurobindo: How do you know it was told by a Tirthankara?
Dr. Manilal: Why? It is in the Shastra. (Laughter)
Purani: Everything in the Shastra is true?
Dr. Manilal: Otherwise why should it be stated?
Sri Aurobindo: For the sake of pleasure. Besides, what proof is there that it was told by a Sarvajna or that what the Sarvajna said was true?
Dr. Manilal: Why not? A Sarvajna is supposed to know everything. You don’t think Sarvajnas exist?
Sri Aurobindo: I don’t know, I have never met one.
Dr. Manilal: If these stories can’t be believed, then Buddha’s recounting of all his past lives is also not true, not correct.
Sri Aurobindo: How to know whether they were correct or not?
Purani: Besides, who reports those stories? Is it Buddha himself?
Dr. Manilal: Then all that is said about Krishna and Arjuna and the Gita can’t be believed.
Purani: It is not necessary to believe everything. The point is whether or not the principle laid down there is true.
Sri Aurobindo: Quite so. The important question is whether the truth or principle laid down in the Gita is valid, can be verified. The rest is unessential, legendary, unimportant.
Dr. Manilal: Buddha says …
Nirodbaran: Where?
Dr. Manilal: In the book. (Laughter)
Sri Aurobindo: You remind me of a British worker who said, “It must be true because I saw it in print.” (Laughter)
Dr. Manilal: In that case all Buddhism and Jainism are false.
Nirodbaran: Not Buddhism!
Purani: Why false? There are records by which it could be proved that Buddha did exist whereas there is no proof of his previous births, of the existence of other Bodhisattvas. Only after Gautama Buddha appeared did we come to know that he was the thirty-second Bodhisattva, while Dipankar was the first. But all that depends on who has said it and whether there is any proof of it.
Dr. Manilal (to Sri Aurobindo): Do you disbelieve it?
Sri Aurobindo: Disbelief is easy. Belief is difficult. But it does not matter at all whether Buddha and other Bodhisattvas existed. The thing is whether what has been said as regards Buddhism can be verified by experience. That is the important thing.
Purani: They usually regard four things as possible proof of a fact – Shruti, Anumana, Anubhava, Aptavakya.
Dr. Manilal: Aptavakya alone is enough. What do you say, Sir?
Sri Aurobindo (beginning to shake his head): What is meant by Aptavakya?
Dr. Manilal: Words of a realised soul.
Sri Aurobindo: How to know if someone is realised and from whom the words come – from him or from somebody who reports them? Annie Besant, for instance, calls herself a saviour and knows all about her past, present and future …
Dr. Manilal: I think even the Theosophists don’t believe in that.
Nirodbaran: Why? Some may and some may not, just as some Jains may not believe in the Tirthankara stories. (Laughter)
Dr. Manilal: Oh no, every Jain believes in them.
Sri Aurobindo: It was said that Mohammed was born some three or four thousand years prior to what is now presumed to be his date of birth. Only after sorting through all the documents and spurious evidence, has the date been cut down so many years now. So which is the Aptavakya and how to believe in it unless there is some proof to substantiate it?
Dr. Manilal: But if Purani reports something you have said, can’t it be taken as true?
Sri Aurobindo: It depends. It may or may not be true. Depends on the reporter. The report is not only from Purani, but from Purani to somebody else, and then from somebody to somebody again and so on! In that case the miracles that have been added to my life by Motilal Mehta may be considered true.
Dr. Manilal: Yes, Sir, as he was your disciple and came in direct contact with you. But miracles are associated with the life of realised souls. Alice told me once of a miracle in Hyderabad. She said that for a long time there was no rain in Hyderabad. Then she said to people, “You will see, in twenty-four hours there will be rain.” (As Dr. Manilal was narrating the story Sri Aurobindo was saying all the time, “Yes, yes.’’) Then she began to pray to the Mother, pray, and pray very intensely, and then came a heavy downpour. Was it not a miracle by the Mother?
Sri Aurobindo: Well! It was a response to Alice’s prayer, but any and every prayer doesn’t get such a response – it must be an intense prayer. One may go on praying and praying without any result. But it was not a miracle.
Dr. Manilal: It was not done by the intervention of the Mother?
Sri Aurobindo: Maybe, but it was not a miracle, it was the result of a contact with some forces that brought down the rain. It was a play of forces. Any number of people have done that sort of thing. There is the story of some European who prayed to save the ship he was on in the midst of a heavy storm, and it was saved. Then the well-known story of a Christian minister who began to pray for rain. There was such a downpour that it wouldn’t stop for days. Then the minister cried out, “Oh, God, this is just ridiculous.” (Sri Aurobindo said this with great amusement.)
Nirodbaran: What happened as a result of his outcry?
Sri Aurobindo: That is not reported. The healing by Christ is not a miracle for that matter. Many people have done that.
Champaklal: What is a miracle then?
Sri Aurobindo: Something that happens contrary to any laws of nature.
Dr. Manilal: If on the new moon day, the moon can be seen?
Sri Aurobindo: That is not miraculous – may be hypnotic! (Laughter)
Dr. Manilal: If not hypnotic?
Sri Aurobindo: Then it could be a miracle.
Dr. Manilal: The raising of the table cloth from the table and suspending it in the air as narrated in the Mother’s conversation?
Sri Aurobindo: That is not a miracle either. It is simply done by putting out some force. Where there is a method, a process, it can’t be called a miracle. Otherwise levitation is also a miracle.