Sri Aurobindo

Letters on Himself and the Ashram

The Complete Works of Sri Aurobindo. Volume 35

Human Relations and the Ashram

Sexual Relations and the Ashram [9]

Why is it that in the past so much stress was laid on food, external cleanliness, asceticism, etc. and so little on brahmacharya or conservation of energies or inner development? And why all the prejudice of caste in the matter of food? Is there any truth in the popular belief that a man is not considered spiritual unless he is a vegetarian, cooks his own food, etc.?

The value of brahmacharya was fully understood in past times for Yogis; carefulness about food and cleanliness is also necessary as a minor matter for the body. The rest appertains to the social system (e.g. caste etc.) and does not concern spiritual living. The Sannyasi is not supposed to be bound by caste. Some may be unable to shake off these things — the grihastha Yogi may continue them because they are part of the social life in which he is.

I suppose the idea of inner detachment with regard to food and other vital enjoyments is not much understood in other beliefs.

The idea of inner detachment is perfectly well known to the Yogis as the Janaka ideal — but it is considered too difficult to practise for most men and therefore likely to be practised only in profession, not in fact.

And what is the reason for the popular opposition to materialism?

Materialism is of course incompatible with the spiritual aim. The spiritual control of matter is a different thing, it has nothing to do with materialism.

I would like to know if in the higher spiritual or Divine Life the sexual or vital play is to be altogether banned.

If you expect to indulge it in the Divine Life, you will never get rid of it — it will remain clinging under that excuse.

If there is to be no sex in the Divine Life, how is the human race to continue?

Why concern yourself with the continuity of the race? There will be plenty of people to continue it. If the supermind has to intervene in the continuity, it will surely do it in its own way, but what that way will be will be found out if and when there is a necessity.

What did Sri Ramakrishna mean by banning kāminī and kāñcan for a spiritual man?

He stressed the danger of sex and greed of money for the spiritual life and insisted on a total abstinence, at any rate in the whole period of sadhana and I suppose he considered that impossible without keeping aloof from the things that most aroused these passions. Some of his disciples say however that he said [kām kāñcan], not [kāminī kāñcan]. Anyhow he probably imposed it for the raw period of the sadhana — once siddha, when the contact with women could no longer rouse the sex-impulse, he would not have considered it so imperative for all. But he himself could not touch money.

What are the correct ideas with regard to gārhasthya life?

Gārhasthya life, meaning marriage and rearing of a family, is a social institution based on ego. It can only be a stage in the evolution of a spiritual man.

13 November 1934