It was certainly not the immediate previous birth where She mentioned about Leonardo and Mona Lisa. Her immediate birth in all likelihood, was Queen Catherine of Russia.
Mona Lisa was a passing remark that She made, not as something confirmed. Da Vinci was an inference that was largely a reasonable speculation. When Sri Aurobindo was asked about it, he neither confirmed nor denied it. He simply said that he didn’t know anything about it. This is what The Mother is confirming here, that Sri Aurobindo didn’t tell anything about being Da Vinci to her. However, Sri Aurobindo does confirm in a letter that Da Vinci was a minor incarnation of Vishnu.
As to Mona Lisa, the Mother’s earlier remark is interesting. It is about the painting of Mona Lisa in regard to which She passingly mentions that it was her. If we look back at history, the existence of Mona Lisa is as doubtful as in the Radha Krishna stories. Perhaps there was a historical Mona Lisa or perhaps the painting represents the conception of the Divine Mother in the mind of Leonardo da Vinci, possibly the latter. Her statement might well indicate that while She as the Divine Mother is whom Da Vinci conceived and painted (he would never want to sell that painting) but it is doubtful if there was any historical Mona Lisa. She had no memory or any identification with her.
The Mother, though one carries in Her multitudes of personalities, generally fragments of Her that manifested through the various personalities, past and present. It does not necessarily mean that it was Her central being that took birth. She explains how, at one point She had manifested through four different personalities at the same time. Therefore, one has to be extremely careful in drawing conclusions about The Mother’s past lives, in fact about the lives of all the great human beings.
Affectionately,
Alok Da
