Second, whether any deeper significance connects Sri Rama’s boat crossing during exile and Sri Aurobindo’s voyage to Pondicherry; and third, how a sadhak can maintain inner equanimity and conscious witness-attitude amidst biologically driven emotional shifts, such as menstrual hormonal fluctuations, without falling into suppression.
These are very good observations and the questions that arise naturally to any seeker.
Fidelity to the Path is indeed expected of every disciple in all the paths that I know of. Of course, some turn it into a rigid sectarian approach that starts looking down upon other paths and seekers. Sectarianism is, of course, something rigid and narrow and often, just a step away from fanaticism that is indeed counterproductive.
But fidelity to the Path is different and has a practical reason for it.
We can look at it through a couple of examples. Say, you have to travel from one city to another. You can go by road, or boat or air. Again, you can take different vehicles depending upon your preference and ability. Even there could be different routes to the same city. As long as you have not actually started the journey and the mind is still exploring the different paths, it is natural and even good that one studies and understands the different paths, through books, talks and even picking up a practice or two. But once you enter the journey and have advanced a little, then it becomes increasingly difficult and a waste of time to keep changing the road and the vehicle.
This would still be okay if one were to go to the same city. But the Divine though One is, at the same time Infinite. It is somewhat like climbing the Himalayas. Though the Mountain is one, it has different peaks, each with its own view, terrain, etc. Each path has its own special requirements, even though they may converge at the highest summit. It is one thing to read about the Himalayas from a book, but the first-hand experience requires treading a distinct road, at least to begin with. These roads join after a certain point, but one can’t walk on all the roads at the same time. Hence the requirement to stick to one path once the journey has begun. It is a very sound and practical advice. Intellectual exploration is of course a different thing and the mind must be wide enough to understand the different approaches rather than shutting the Infinite in a single formula.
The other aspect is the influence of the Guru. Each Guru, each aspect or God, each manifestation brings its own unique forces into the play. Shiva and Vishnu are no doubt one in essence, but they are also different in their approaches. To mix their influences can only end up creating inner confusion. Respect for every Master, learning something useful from each one is one thing, but treating all as the same with regard to the core practices is a different thing. Vishnu leads us through the world, Shiva away from it. So too the influence of different Gurus, though they are all from the same Source, works in very different, often even seemingly opposite ways. Hence the need to stick to one Master.
As to the similarities between Sri Rama’s journey and Sri Aurobindo’s, well there are no doubt certain similarities between the two. But the similarities between Sri Krishna and Sri Aurobindo are far too striking. I have actually given a talk on this subject on AuroMaa. All three worked towards securing Bharat as a nation, even fighting against adverse forces. All three spoke about Dharma and upheld the truths of the Sanatana Dharma. All three were at once worldly as well as otherworldly. All three led the life of a householder and advocated inner tyaga rather than sannyasa. And all three brought something new in the world relevant to their times. Of course, there are differences which are natural, especially as the Time-Spirit moves forward. All three were not present when their father died. In fact, each one’s father died with the name of his son on their lips. It is a long subject. Time permitting, I will share more on this someday.
Affectionately,
Alok da
