AT THE FEET OF THE MOTHER
Ask Alok da

In Agenda volume 13, April 7, 1973 it looks like Pranab da treated both the Mother and Satprem badly. Why did he restrict Satprem from meeting the Mother? It is said that Nolini da and Champaklal, all were scared of Pranab da. Why is that🤔?

This is of course Satprem’s version. He could have sent a letter to the Mother asking for Her audience or simply waited to see if the Mother noticing his absence would ask those taking care of Her to call in Satprem! Neither of this happened which itself tells its own story. 

As per Pranab da, Satprem would make her talk while She was having difficulties speaking. It is quite likely true. If one reads the Agenda carefully one would see that after a point, especially towards the end of 1972, once She had the revelation of Her New Body and Sri Aurobindo’s centenary was over, She seems less and less inclined to speak. Satprem does seem to be more interested in documentation (which of course gave him lot of importance) than in Her comfort.  In one of his interviews Pranab da answered this. 

Of course Satprem does engage a lot in self projection. as is evident in mention of his name alongside the Mother in the beginning of each volume. The Agenda became for him the road to fame. Pranab da saw in him the tendency to dramatise and the arrogance of the Western intellect whereas Satprem saw in Pranab da someone who didn’t understand the physical transformation (though the Mother herself says that Pranab has been Her chosen instrument for the physical transformation) and coming in the way of his growing closeness with the Mother. Whatever it be there does seem to be in the Agenda a tendency in Satprem to denounce the disciples as if they meant nothing and he was the sole guardian who inherited the Mother’s Yoga of physical transformation. 

Without going into more details, if one had to trust in Satprem’s account vis a vis the accounts of Pranab da, Champaklal ji, Nolini da, Andre da, I would rather distrust Satprem with regard to his judgments and insinuations. This is not to belittle him but to put him in his rightful place with respect to the other close disciples. Like every disciple he has his own important place in the Mother’s Work but to build a larger than like image, abrogate to him a sort of guruhood whose every statement and judgment should be accepted as truth is what one should be careful about. 

Affectionately,

Alok Da

Share this…

Related Posts

I have been taking antipsychotics for the last 15.5 years (olanzapine 15 mg every night). The issue is – I feel a bad mood and irritation for 4-6 hours after getting up from sleep every day. Is it happening because of my psychosis condition, dear Alok da? 🔮😫😥🦋✨

Yes, it is due to an instability in nature. Psychosis itself is the result of this instability that arises because the consciousness has got centered around the little ego and perceives everything from that point of view. Learn to step back and do not accept every thought and suggestion or flow with every feeling as if it is true.

Read More >

Reading all the writings, all the answers to my seekings, there remains a gap, a feeling of being unanswered. My inner call says that I can’t know anything fully while staying in the same dimension; there is a higher level or dimension than my present one, or maybe many of them, and only when I reach there, my quest will end. 🤔🌷🌄✨

Yes, of course, reading and writing prepare the ground, they are not a replacement or substitute for direct experience which comes through the meeting of Aspiration and the Grace. 

Read More >

Jai Maa. Today I was reading the Two Natures chapter from Essays on the Gita and there Sri Aurobindo explains that the desire in consonance with dharma does not lead to any bondage, while there he also mentions that desire born of Rajogun leads to bondage and misery. 📖✒️😊🙏🏻🌻[…]

He has already answered this as you have correctly indicated, through the svabhava. Svabhava is the Divine Impulsion in creation that generates karma. It is the swabhava of the…

Read More >