Sri Aurobindo: The right remedy is, not to belittle still farther the agelong ideal of India, but to return to its old amplitude and give it a still wider scope, to make in very truth all the life of the nation a religion in this high spiritual sense. This is the direction in which the philosophy, poetry, art of the West is, still more or less obscurely, but with an increasing light, beginning to turn, and even some faint glints of the truth are beginning now to fall across political and sociological ideals. India has the key to the knowledge and conscious application of the ideal; what was dark to her before in its application, she can now, with a new light, illumine; what was wrong and wry in her old methods she can now rectify; the fences which she created to protect the outer growth of the spiritual ideal and which afterwards became barriers to its expansion and farther application, she can now break down and give her spirit a freer ﬁeld and an ampler ﬂight:  she can, if she will, give a new and decisive turn to the problems over which all mankind is labouring and stumbling , for the clue to their solutions is there in her ancient knowledge. Whether she will rise or not to the height of her opportunity in the renaissance which is coming upon her, is the question of her destiny.


Sri Aurobindo: N CONSIDERING Indian civilisation and its renascence, I suggested that a powerful new creation in all ﬁelds was our great need, the meaning of the renascence and the one way of preserving the civilisation. Confronted with the huge rush of modern life and thought, invaded by another dominant civilisation almost her opposite or inspired at least with a very different spirit to her own, India can only survive by confronting this raw, new, aggressive, powerful world with fresh diviner creations of her own spirit, cast in the mould of her own spiritual ideals.    She must meet it by solving its greater problems, — which she cannot avoid, even if such avoidance could be thought desirable, — in her own way, through solutions arising out of her own being and from her own deepest and largest knowledge.


Sri Aurobindo: In that connection I spoke of the acceptance and assimilation from the West of whatever in its knowledge, ideas, powers was assimilable, compatible with her spirit, reconcilable with her ideals, valuable for a new statement of life. This question of external inﬂuence and new creation from within is of very considerable importance; it calls for more than a passing mention.  Especially it is necessary to form some more precise idea of what we mean by acceptance and of the actual effect of assimilation; for this is a problem of pressing incidence in which we have to get our ideas clear and ﬁx ﬁrmly and seeingly on our line of solution.   But it is possible to hold that while new creation — and not a motionless sticking to old forms — is our one way of life and salvation, no acceptance of anything Western is called for, we can ﬁnd in ourselves all that we need; no considerable acceptance is possible without creating a breach which will bring pouring in the rest of the occidental deluge.


Sri Aurobindo: That, if I have not misread it, is the sense of a comment on these articles in a Bengali literary periodical which holds up the ideal of a new creation to arise from within entirely on national lines and in the national spirit. The writer takes his stand on a position which is common ground, that humanity is one, but different peoples are variant soul-forms of the common humanity. When we ﬁnd the oneness, the principle of variation is not destroyed but ﬁnds rather its justiﬁcation; it is not by abolishing ourselves, our own special temperament and power, that we can get at the living oneness, but by following it out and raising it to its highest possibilities of freedom and action. That is a truth which I have myself insisted on repeatedly, with regard to the modern idea and attempt at some kind of political uniﬁcation of humanity, as a very important part of the psychological sense of social development, and again in this question of a particular people’s life and culture in all its parts and manifestations.


Sri Aurobindo: I have insisted that uniformity is not a real but a dead unity: uniformity kills life while real unity, if well founded, becomes vigorous and fruitful by a rich energy of variation.  But the writer adds that the idea of taking over what is best in occidental civilisation, is a false notion without a living meaning; to leave the bad and take the good sounds very well, but this bad and this good are not separable in that way: they are the inextricably mingled growth of one being, not separate blocks of a child’s toy house set side by side and easily detachable, — and what is meant then by cutting out and taking one element and leaving the rest? If we take over a Western ideal, we take it over from a living form which strikes us; we imitate that form, are subjugated by its spirit and natural tendencies, and the good and bad intertwined in the living growth come in upon us together and take united possession. In fact, we have been for a long time so imitating the West, trying to become like it or partly like it and have fortunately failed, for that would have meant creating a bastard or twy-natured culture; but twy-natured, as Tennyson makes his Lucretius say, is no-natured and a bastard culture is no sound, truth-living culture. An entire return upon ourselves is our only way of salvation.


Sri Aurobindo: There is much to be said here, it seems to me, both in the way of conﬁrmation and of modiﬁcation.  But let us be clear about the meaning of our terms. That the attempt in the last century which still in some directions continues, — to imitate European civilisation and to make ourselves a sort of brown Englishmen, to throw our ancient culture into the dust-bin and put on the livery or uniform of the West was a mistaken and illegitimate endeavour, I heartily agree. At the same time a certain amount of imitation, a great amount even, was, one might almost say, a biological necessity, at any rate a psychological necessity of the situation.


Sri Aurobindo: Not only when a lesser meets a greater culture, but when a culture which has fallen into a state of comparative inactivity, sleep, contraction, is faced with, still more when it receives the direct shock of a waking, active, tremendously creative civilisation, ﬁnds thrown upon it novel and successful powers and functionings, sees an immense succession and development of new ideas and formations, it is impelled by the very instinct of life to take over these ideas and forms, to annex, to enrich itself, even to imitate and reproduce, and in one way or in another take large account and advantage of these new forces and opportunities. That is a phenomenon which has happened repeatedly in history, in a greater or a lesser degree, in part or in totality.  But if there is only a mechanical imitation, if there is a subordination and servitude, the inactive or weaker culture perishes, it is swallowed up by the invading leviathan. And even short of that, in proportion as there is a leaning towards these undesirable things, it languishes, is unsuccessful in its attempt at annexation, loses besides the power of its own spirit. To recover its own centre, ﬁnd its own base and do whatever it has to do in its own strength and genius is certainly the one way of salvation.


Sri Aurobindo: But even then a certain amount of acceptance, of forms too, — some imitation, if all taking over of forms must be called imitation, — is inevitable. We have, for instance, taken over in literature the form of the novel, the short story, the critical essay among a number of other adoptions, in science not only the discoveries and inventions, but the method and instrumentation of inductive research, in politics the press, the platform, the forms and habits of agitation, the public association.  I do not suppose that anyone seriously thinks of renouncing or exiling these modern additions to our life, — though they are not all of them by any means unmixed blessings, — on the ground that they are foreign importations. But the question is what we do with them and whether we can bring them to be instruments and by some characteristic modiﬁcation moulds of our own spirit.  If so, there has been an acceptance and an assimilation; if not there has been merely a helpless imitation.


Sri Aurobindo: But the taking over of forms is not the heart of the question.   When I speak of acceptance and assimilation, I am thinking of certain inﬂuences, ideas, energies brought forward with a great living force by Europe, which can awaken and enrich our own cultural activities and cultural being if we succeed in dealing with them with a victorious power and originality, if we can bring them into our characteristic way of being and transform them by its shaping action.  That was in fact what our own ancestors did, never losing their originality, never effacing their uniqueness, because always vigorously creating from within, with whatever knowledge or artistic suggestion from outside they thought worthy of acceptance or capable of an Indian treatment. But I would certainly repel the formula of taking the good and leaving the bad as a crudity, one of those facile formulas which catch the superﬁcial mind but are unsound in conception.


Sri Aurobindo: Obviously, if we “take over” anything, the good and the bad in it will come in together pell-mell. If we take over for instance that terrible, monstrous and compelling thing, that giant Asuric creation, European industrialism, — unfortunately we are being forced by circumstances to do it, — whether we take it in its form or its principle, we may under more favourable conditions develop by it our wealth and economic resources, but assuredly we shall get too its social discords and moral plagues and cruel problems, and I do not see how we shall avoid becoming the slaves of the economic aim in life and losing the spiritual principle of our culture.  But, besides, these terms good and bad in this connection mean nothing deﬁnite, give us no help.  If I must use them, where they can have only a relative signiﬁcance, in a matter not of ethics, but of an interchange between life and life, I must ﬁrst give them this general signiﬁcance that whatever helps me to ﬁnd myself more intimately, nobly, with a greater and sounder possibility of self-expressive creation, is good; whatever carries me out of my orientation, whatever weakens and belittles my power, richness, breadth and height of self-being, is bad for me.


Sri Aurobindo: If the distinction is so understood, it will be evident, I think, to any serious and critical mind which tries to fathom things, that the real point is not the taking over of this or that formal detail, which has only a sign value, for example, widow remarriage, but a dealing with great effective ideas, such as are the ideas, in the external ﬁeld of life, of social and political liberty, equality, democracy. If I accept any of these ideas it is not because they are modern or European, which is in itself no recommendation, but because they are human, because they present fruitful view-points to the spirit, because they are things of the greatest importance in the future development of the life of man. What I mean by acceptance of the effective idea of democracy, — the thing itself, never fully worked out, was present as an element in ancient Indian as in ancient European polity and society, — is that I ﬁnd its inclusion in our future way of living, in some shape, to be a necessity of our growth. What I mean by assimilation, is that we must not take it crudely in the European forms, but must go back to whatever corresponds to it, illumines its sense, justiﬁes its highest purport in our own spiritual conception of life and existence, and in that light work out its extent, degree, form, relation to other ideas, application.  To everything I would apply the same principle, to each in its own kind, after its proper dharma, in its right measure of importance, its spiritual, intellectual, ethical, aesthetic, dynamic utility.


Sri Aurobindo: I take it as a self-evident law of individual being applicable to group-individuality, that it is neither desirable nor possible to exclude everything that comes in to us from outside. I take it as an equally self-evident law that a living organism, which grows not by accretion, but by self-development and assimilation, must recast the things it takes in to suit the law and form and characteristic action of its biological or psychological body, reject what would be deleterious or poisonous to it, — and what is that but the non-assimilable? — take only what can be turned into useful stuff of self-expression. It is, to use an apt Sanskritic phrase employed in the Bengali tongue, , an assimilative appropriation, a making the thing settle into oneself and turn into characteristic form of our self-being.


Sri Aurobindo: The impossibility of entire rejection arises from the very fact of our being a term of diversity in a unity, not really separate from all other existence, but in relation with all that surrounds us, because in life this relation expresses itself very largely by a process of interchange.  The undesirability of total rejection, even if it were entirely possible, arises from the fact that interchange with the environment is necessary to a healthy persistence and growth; the living organism which rejects all such interchange, would speedily languish and die of lethargy and inanition.   Mentally, vitally and physically I do not grow by a pure self-development from within in a virgin isolation; I am not a separate self-existent being proceeding from a past to a new becoming in a world of its own where no one is but itself, nothing works but its own inner powers and musings. There is in every individualised existence a double action, a self-development from within which is its greatest intimate power of being and by which it is itself, and a reception of impacts from outside which it has to accommodate to its own individuality and make into material of self-growth and self-power.


Sri Aurobindo: The two operations are not mutually exclusive, nor is the second harmful to the ﬁrst except when the inner genius is too weak to deal victoriously with its environmental world; on the contrary the reception of impacts stimulates in a vigorous and healthy being its force for selfdevelopment and is an aid to a greater and more pronouncedly characteristic self-determination. As we rise in the scale we ﬁnd that the power of original development from within, of conscious self-determination increases more and more, while in those who live most powerfully in themselves it reaches striking, sometimes almost divine proportions.  But at the same time we see that the allied power of seizing upon the impacts and suggestions of the outside world grows in proportion; those who live most powerfully in themselves, can also most largely use the world and all its material for the Self, — and, it must be added, most successfully help the world and enrich it out of their own being. The man who most ﬁnds and lives from the inner self, can most embrace the universal and become one with it; the Swarat, independent, self-possessed and self-ruler, can most be the Samrat, possessor and shaper of the world in which he lives, can most too grow one with all in the Atman. That is the truth this developing existence teaches us, and it is one of the greatest secrets of the old Indian spiritual knowledge.


Sri Aurobindo: Therefore to live in one’s self, determining one’s selfexpression from one’s own centre of being in accordance with one’s own law of being, swadharma, is the ﬁrst necessity. Not to be able to do that means disintegration of the life; not to do it sufﬁciently means languor, weakness, inefﬁciency, the danger of being oppressed by the environing forces and overborne; not to be able to do it wisely, intuitively, with a strong use of one’s inner material and inner powers, means confusion, disorder and ﬁnally decline and loss of vitality.  But also not to be able to use the material that the life around offers us, not to lay hold on it with an intuitive selection and a strong mastering assimilation is a serious deﬁciency and a danger to the existence. To a healthy individuality the external impact or entering energy, idea, inﬂuence may act as an irritant awakening the inner being to a sense of discord, incompatibility or peril, and then there is a struggle, an impulse and process of rejection; but even in this struggle, in this process of rejection there is some resultant of change and growth, some increment of the power and material of life ; the energies of the being are stimulated and helped by the attack. It may act as a stimulus, awakening a new action of the self-consciousness and a sense of fresh possibility, — by comparison, by suggestion, by knocking at locked doors and arousing slumbering energies.


Sri Aurobindo: It may come in as a possible material which has then to be reshaped to a form of the inner energy, harmonised with the inner being, reinterpreted in the light of its own characteristic self-consciousness.  In a great change of environment or a close meeting with a mass of invading inﬂuences all these processes work together and there is possibly much temporary perplexity and difﬁculty, many doubtful and perilous movements, but also the opportunity of a great self-developing transformation or an immense and vigorous renascence.  The group-soul differs from the individual only in being more self-sufﬁcient by reason of its being an assemblage of many individual selves and capable within of many group variations.  There is a constant inner interchange which may for a long time sufﬁce to maintain the vitality, growth, power of developing activity, even when there is a restricted interchange with the rest of humanity. Greek civilisation, — after growing under the inﬂuence of Egyptian, Phoenician and other oriental inﬂuences, — separated itself sharply from the non-Hellenic “barbarian” cultures and was able for some centuries to live within itself by a rich variation and internal interchange.


Sri Aurobindo: There was the same phenomenon in ancient India of a culture living intensely from within in a profound differentiation from all surrounding cultures, its vitality rendered possible by an even greater richness of internal interchange and variation.  Chinese civilisation offers a third instance. But at no time did Indian culture exclude altogether external inﬂuences; on the contrary a very great power of selective assimilation, subordination and transformation of external elements was a characteristic of its processes; it protected itself from any considerable or overwhelming invasion, but laid hands on and included whatever struck or impressed it and in the act of inclusion subjected it to a characteristic change which harmonised the new element with the spirit of its own culture. But nowadays any such strong separative aloofness as distinguished the ancient civilisations, is no longer possible; the races of mankind have come too close to each other, are being thrown together in a certain unavoidable life unity. We are confronted with the more difﬁcult problem of living in the full stress of this greater interaction and imposing on its impacts the law of our being.


Sri Aurobindo: Any attempt to remain exactly what we were before the European invasion or to ignore in future the claims of a modern environment and necessity is foredoomed to an obvious failure.    However much we may deplore some of the characteristics of that intervening period in which we were dominated by the Western standpoint or move away from the standpoint back to our own characteristic way of seeing existence, we cannot get rid of a certain element of inevitable change it has produced upon us, any more than a man can go back in life to what he was some years ago and recover entire and unaffected a past mentality. Time and its inﬂuences have not only passed over him, but carried him forward in their stream. We cannot go backward to a past form of our being, but we can go forward to a large repossession of ourselves in which we shall make a better, more living, more real, more self-possessed use of the intervening experience.


Sri Aurobindo: We can still think in the essential sense of the great spirit and ideals of our past, but the form of our thinking, our speaking, our development of them has changed by the very fact of new thought and experience; we see them not only in the old, but in new lights, we support them by the added strength of new view-points, even the old words we use acquire for us a modiﬁed, more extended and richer signiﬁcance. Again, we cannot be “ourselves alone” in any narrow formal sense, because we must necessarily take account of the modern world around us and get full knowledge of it, otherwise we cannot live.  But all such taking account of things, all added knowledge modiﬁes our subjective being. My mind, with all that depends on it, is modiﬁed by what it observes and works upon, modiﬁed when it takes in from it fresh materials of thought, modiﬁed when it is wakened by its stimulus to new activities, modiﬁed even when it denies and rejects; for even an old thought or truth which I afﬁrm against an opposing idea, becomes a new thought to me in the effort of afﬁrmation and rejection, clothes itself with new aspects and issues. My life is modiﬁed in the same way by the life inﬂuences it has to encounter and confront.


Sri Aurobindo: Finally, we cannot avoid dealing with the great governing ideas and problems of the modern world. The modern world is still mainly European, a world dominated by the European mind and Western civilisation.  We claim to set right this undue preponderance, to reassert the Asiatic and, for ourselves, the Indian mind and to preserve and develop the great values of Asiatic and of Indian civilisation. But the Asiatic or the Indian mind can only assert itself successfully by meeting these problems and by giving them a solution which will justify its own ideals and spirit.  The principle I have afﬁrmed results both from the necessity of our nature and the necessity of things, of life, — ﬁdelity to our own spirit, nature, ideals, the creation of our own characteristic forms in the new age and the new environment, but also a strong and masterful dealing with external inﬂuences which need not be and in the nature of the situation cannot be a total rejection; therefore there must be an element of successful assimilation.


Sri Aurobindo: There remains the very difﬁcult question of the application of the principle, — the degree, the way, the guiding perceptions. To think that out we must look at each province of culture and, keeping always ﬁrm hold on a perception of what the Indian spirit is and the Indian ideal is, see how they can work upon the present situation and possibilities in each of these provinces and lead to a new victorious creation.  In such thinking it will not do to be too dogmatic. Each capable Indian mind must think it out or, better, work it out in its own light and power, — as the Bengal artists are working it out in their own sphere, — and contribute some illumination or effectuation. The spirit of the Indian renascence will take care of the rest, that power of the universal Time-Spirit which has begun to move in our midst for the creation of a new and greater India.


Sri Aurobindo: BOOK under this rather startling title was published some years ago by Sir John Woodroffe, the well-known scholar and writer on Tantric philosophy, in answer to an extravagant by Mr. William Archer. That wellknown dramatic critic leaving his safe natural sphere for ﬁelds in which his chief claim to speak was a sublime and conﬁdent ignorance, assailed the whole life and culture of India and even lumped together all her greatest achievements, philosophy, religion, poetry, painting, sculpture, Upanishads, Mahabharata, Ramayana in one wholesale condemnation as a repulsive mass of unspeakable barbarism.  It was argued by many at the time that to reply to a critic of this kind was to break a butterﬂy, or it might be in this instance a bumble-bee upon the wheel. But Sir John Woodroffe insisted that even an attack of this ignorant kind ought not to be neglected; he took it as a particularly useful type in the general kind, ﬁrst, because it raised the question from the rationalistic and not from the Christian and missionary standpoint and, again, because it betrayed the grosser underlying motives of all such attacks. But his book was important, not so much as an answer to a particular critic, but because it raised with great point and power the whole question of the survival of Indian civilisation and the inevitability of a war of cultures.


Sri Aurobindo: The question whether there has been or is a civilisation in India is not any longer debatable; for everyone whose opinion counts recognises the presence of a distinct and a great civilisation unique in its character. Sir John Woodroffe’s purpose was to disclose the conﬂict of European and Asiatic culture and, in greater prominence, the distinct meaning and value of Indian civilisation, the peril it now runs and the calamity its destruction would be to the world.  The author held its preservation to be of an immense importance to mankind and he believed it to be in great danger. In the stupendous rush of change which is coming on the human world as a result of the present tornado of upheaval, ancient India’s culture, attacked by European modernism, overpowered in the material ﬁeld, betrayed by the indifference of her children, may perish for ever along with the soul of the nation that holds it in its keeping. The book was an urgent invitation to us to appreciate better this sacred trust and the near peril which besets it and to stand ﬁrm and faithful in the hour of the ordeal.


Sri Aurobindo: It will be useful to state brieﬂy its gist as an introduction to this all-important issue.   A true happiness in this world is the right terrestrial aim of man, and true happiness lies in the ﬁnding and maintenance of a natural harmony of spirit, mind and body.   A culture is to be valued to the extent to which it has discovered the right key of this harmony and organised its expressive motives and movements.


Sri Aurobindo: And a civilisation must be judged by the manner in which all its principles, ideas, forms, ways of living work to bring that harmony out, manage its rhythmic play and secure its continuance or the development of its motives. A civilisation in pursuit of this aim may be predominantly material like modern European culture, predominantly mental and intellectual like the old Graeco-Roman or predominantly spiritual like the still persistent culture of India. India’s central conception is that of the Eternal, the Spirit here incased in matter, involved and immanent in it and evolving on the material plane by rebirth of the individual up the scale of being till in mental man it enters the world of ideas and realm of conscious morality,. This achievement, this victory over unconscious matter develops its lines, enlarges its scope, elevates its levels until the increasing manifestation of the sattwic or spiritual portion of the vehicle of mind enables the individual mental being in man to identify himself with the pure spiritual consciousness beyond Mind.  India’s social system is built upon this conception; her philosophy formulates it; her religion is an aspiration to the spiritual consciousness and its fruits; her art and literature have the same upward look; her whole dharma or law of being is founded upon it.


Sri Aurobindo: Progress she admits, but this spiritual progress, not the externally self-unfolding process of an always more and more prosperous and efﬁcient material civilisation. It is her founding of life upon this exalted conception and her urge towards the spiritual and the eternal that constitute the distinct value of her civilisation. And it is her ﬁdelity, with whatever human shortcomings, to this highest ideal that has made her people a nation apart in the human world.   But there are other cultures led by a different conception and even an opposite motive.


Sri Aurobindo: And by the law of struggle which is the ﬁrst law of existence in the material universe, varying cultures are bound to come into conﬂict. A deep-seated urge in Nature compels them to attempt to extend themselves and to destroy, assimilate and replace all disparates or opposites.   Conﬂict is not indeed the last and ideal stage; for that comes when various cultures develop freely, without hatred, misunderstanding or aggression and even with an underlying sense of unity, their separate special motives. But so long as the principle of struggle prevails, one must face the lesser law; it is fatal to disarm in the midmost of the battle.


Sri Aurobindo: The culture which gives up its living separateness, the civilisation which neglects an active self-defence will be swallowed up and the nation which lived by it will lose its soul and perish.  Each nation is a Shakti or power of the evolving spirit in humanity and lives by the principle which it embodies. India is the Bharata Shakti, the living energy of a great spiritual conception, and ﬁdelity to it is the very principle of her existence. For by its virtue alone she has been one of the immortal nations; this alone has been the secret of her amazing persistence and perpetual force of survival and revival.


Sri Aurobindo: The principle of struggle has assumed the large historical aspect of an agelong clash and pressure of conﬂict between Asia and Europe. This clash, this mutual pressure has had its material side, but has borne also its cultural and spiritual aspect.  Both materially and spiritually Europe has thrown herself repeatedly upon Asia, Asia too upon Europe, to conquer, assimilate and dominate. There has been a constant alternation, a ﬂowing backward and forward of these two seas of power. All Asia has always had the spiritual tendency in more or less intensity, with more or less clearness; but in this essential matter India is the quintessence of the Asiatic way of being.


Sri Aurobindo: Europe too in mediaeval times had a culture in which by the dominance of the Christian idea — but Christianity was of Asiatic origin — the spiritual motive took the lead; then there was an essential similarity as well as a certain difference. Still the differentiation of cultural temperament has on the whole been constant.  Since some centuries Europe has become material, predatory, aggressive, and has lost the harmony of the inner and outer man which is the true meaning of civilisation and the efﬁcient condition of a true progress. Material comfort, material progress, material efﬁciency have become the gods of her worship. The modern European civilisation which has invaded Asia and which all violent attacks on Indian ideals represent, is the effective form of this materialistic culture.


Sri Aurobindo: India, true to her spiritual motive, has never shared in the physical attacks of Asia upon Europe; her method has always been an inﬁltration of the world with her ideas, such as we today see again in progress. But she has now been physically occupied by Europe and this physical conquest must necessarily be associated with an attempt at cultural conquest; that invasion too has also made some progress.  On the other hand English rule has enabled India still to retain her identity and social type; it has awakened her to herself and has meanwhile, until she became conscious of her strength, guarded her against the ﬂood which would otherwise have submerged and broken her civilisation. It is for her now to recover herself, defend her cultural existence against the alien penetration, preserve her distinct spirit, essential principle and characteristic forms for her own salvation and the total welfare of the human race.  But many questions may arise, — and principally whether such a spirit of defence and attack is the right spirit, whether union, harmony, interchange are not our proper temperament for the coming human advance.


Sri Aurobindo: Is not a uniﬁed world-culture the large way of the future? Can either an exaggeratedly spiritual or an excessively temporal civilisation be the sound condition of human progress or human perfection?  A happy or just reconciliation would seem to be a better key to a harmony of Spirit, Mind and Body. And there is the question too whether the forms of Indian culture must be preserved intact as well as the spirit.  To these queries the reply of the author is to be found in his law of graduality of the spiritual advance of humanity, its need of advancing through three successive stages.


Sri Aurobindo: The ﬁrst stage is the period of conﬂict and competition which has been ever dominant in the past and still overshadows the present of mankind. For even when the crudest forms of material conﬂict are mitigated, the conﬂict itself still survives and the cultural struggle comes into greater prominence.  The second step brings the stage of concert. The third and last is marked by the spirit of sacriﬁce in which, because all is known as the one Self, each gives himself for the good of others.


Sri Aurobindo: The second stage has hardly at all commenced for most; the third belongs to the indeterminate future. Individuals have reached the highest stage; the perfected Sannyasin, the liberated man, the soul that has become one with the Spirit, knows all being as himself and for him all self-defence and attack are needless. For strife does not belong to the law of his seeing; sacriﬁce and selfgiving are the whole principle of his action.  But no people has reached that level, and to follow a law or principle involuntarily or ignorantly or contrary to the truth of one’s consciousness is a falsehood and a self-destruction. To allow oneself to be killed, like the lamb attacked by the wolf, brings no growth, farthers no development, assures no spiritual merit.


Sri Aurobindo: Concert or unity may come in good time, but it must be an underlying unity with a free differentiation, not a swallowing up of one by another or an incongruous and inharmonious mixture. Nor can it come before the world is ready for these greater things. To lay down one’s arms in a state of war is to invite destruction and it can serve no compensating spiritual purpose.   Spiritual and temporal have indeed to be perfectly harmonised, for the spirit works through mind and body. But the purely intellectual or heavily material culture of the kind that Europe now favours, bears in its heart the seed of death; for the living aim of culture is the realisation on earth of the kingdom of heaven.


Sri Aurobindo: India, though its urge is towards the Eternal, since that is always the highest, the entirely real, still contains in her own culture and her own philosophy a supreme reconciliation of the eternal and the temporal and she need not seek it from outside. On the same principle the form of the interdependence of mind, body and spirit in a harmonious culture is important as well as the pure spirit; for the form is the rhythm of the spirit.   It follows that to break up the form is to injure the spirit’s selfexpression or at least to put it into grave peril.  Change of forms there may and will be, but the novel formation must be a new self-expression or self-creation developed from within; it must be characteristic of the spirit and not servilely borrowed from the embodiments of an alien nature.


Sri Aurobindo: Where then does India actually stand in this critical hour of her necessity and how far can she be said to be still ﬁrmly seated on her eternal foundations? Already she has been largely affected by European culture and the peril is far from over ; on the contrary it will be greater, more insistent, more imperatively violent in the immediate future. Asia is rearising; but that very fact will intensify and is already intensifying the attempt, natural and legitimate according to the law of competition, of European civilisation to assimilate Asia.  For if she is culturally transformed and conquered, then when she again counts in the material order of the world, it will not be with any menace of the invasion of Europe by the Asiatic ideal.


Sri Aurobindo: It is a cultural quarrel complicated with a political question. Asia must become culturally a province of Europe and form politically one part of a Europeanised if not a European concert; otherwise Europe may become culturally a province of Asia, Asiaticised by the dominant inﬂuence of wealthy, enormous, powerful Asiatic peoples in the new worldsystem. The motive of Mr. Archer’s attack is frankly a political motive. This is the burden of all his song that the reconstruction of the world must take place in the forms and follow the canons of a rationalistic and materialistic European civilisation.


Sri Aurobindo: On his reasoning, India if she adheres to her own civilisation, if she cherishes its spiritual motive, if she clings to its spiritual principle of formation, will stand out as a living denial, a hideous “blot” upon this fair, luminous, rationalistic world.  Either she must Europeanise, rationalise, materialise her whole being and deserve liberty by the change or else she must be kept in subjection and administered by her cultural superiors: her people of three hundred million religious savages must be held down ﬁrmly, taught and civilised by her noble and enlightened Christian-atheistic European warders and tutors. A grotesque statement in form, but in substance it has in it the root of the matter. As against the attack — not universal, for understanding and appreciation of Indian culture are now more common than before, — India is indeed awaking and defending herself, but not sufﬁciently and not with the whole-heartedness, the clear sight and the ﬁrm resolution which can alone save her from the peril.


Sri Aurobindo: Today it is close; let her choose, — for the choice is imperatively before her, to live or to perish.     The warning cannot be neglected; recent utterances of European publicists and statesmen, recent books and writings against India and the joyful and enthusiastic welcome they have received from the public of occidental countries, point to the reality of the danger. It arises indeed as a necessity from the present political situation and cultural trend of humanity at this moment of enormous decisive change. It is not necessary to follow the writer in all the viewpoints expressed in his book.


Sri Aurobindo: I cannot myself accept in full his eulogy of the mediaeval civilisation of Europe.  Its interest, the beauty of its artistic motives, its deep and sincere spiritual urgings are marred for me by its large strain of ignorance and obscurantism, its cruel intolerance, its revolting early-Teutonic hardness, brutality, ferocity and coarseness. He seems to me to hit a little too hard at the later European culture.  This predominantly economic type of civilisation has been ugly enough in its strain of utilitarian materialism, which we shall err grossly if we imitate; still it has been uplifted by some nobler ideals that have done much for the race. But even these are crude and imperfect in their form and need to be spiritualised in their meaning before they can be wholly admitted by the mind of India.


Sri Aurobindo: I think too that the author has a little underrated the force of the Indian revival.  I do not mean its outward realised strength, for that is very deﬁcient, but the inevitability of its drive, its spiritual and potential force. And he has made a little too much of the servile type of Indian who is capable of mouthing the portentously obsequious imagination that “European institutions are the standard by which the aspirations of India are set.” That, except for the rapidly dwindling class to which this spokesman belongs, has its truth now only in a single ﬁeld, the political, — a very important exception, I admit, and one which opens the door to a peril of stupendous proportions. But even there a deep change of spirit is foreshadowed although it has not yet taken deﬁnite form and has now to meet a fresh invasion of furious Europeanism inspired by the militant crudeness of proletarian Russia.


Sri Aurobindo: Again he does not attach a sufﬁcient importance to the increasing inﬁltration of India’s spiritual thought into Europe and America, which is her characteristic retort to the European invasion.  It is from this point of view that the whole question takes on a different aspect.  Sir John Woodroffe invites us to a vigorous self-defence.  But defence by itself in the modern struggle can only end in defeat, and, if battle there must be, the only sound strategy is a vigorous aggression based on a strong, living and mobile defence; for by that aggressive force alone can the defence itself be effective. Why are a certain class of Indians still hypnotised in all ﬁelds by European culture and why are we all still hypnotised by it in the ﬁeld of politics?


Sri Aurobindo: Because they constantly saw all the power, creation, activity on the side of Europe, all the immobility or weakness of a static inefﬁcient defence on the side of India.  But wherever the Indian spirit has been able to react, to attack with energy and to create with ´eclat, the European glamour has begun immediately to lose its hypnotic power. No one now feels the weight of the religious assault from Europe which was very powerful at the outset, because the creative activities of the Hindu revival have made Indian religion a living and evolving, a secure, triumphant and self-assertive power. But the seal was put to this work by two events, the Theosophical movement and the appearance of Swami Vivekananda at Chicago. For these two things showed the spiritual ideas for which India stands no longer on their defence but aggressive and invading the materialised mentality of the Occident.


Sri Aurobindo: All India had been vulgarised and anglicised in its aesthetic notions by English education and inﬂuence, until the brilliant and sudden dawn of the Bengal school of art cast its rays so far as to be seen in Tokio, London and Paris.  That signiﬁcant cultural event has already effected an aesthetic revolution in the country, not yet by any means complete, but irresistible and sure of the future. The same phenomenon extends to other ﬁelds. Even in the province of politics that was the internal sense of the policy of the socalled extremist party in the Swadeshi movement; for it was a movement which attempted to override the previous apparent impossibility of political creation by the Indian spirit upon other than imitative European lines. If it failed for the time being, not by any falsity in its inspiration, but by the strength of a hostile pressure and the weakness still left by a past decadence, if its incipient creations were broken or left languishing and deprived of their original signiﬁcance, yet it will remain as a ﬁnger-post on the roads.


Sri Aurobindo: The attempt is bound to be renewed as soon as a wider gate is opened under more favourable conditions.  Till that attempt comes and succeeds, a serious danger besets the soul of India; for a political Europeanisation would be followed by a social turn of the same kind and bring a cultural and spiritual death in its train. Aggression must be successful and creative if the defence is to be effective.   This great question must be given its larger world-wide import if we are to see it in its true lines.


Sri Aurobindo: The principle of struggle, conﬂict and competition still governs and for some time will still govern international relations; for even if war is abolished in the near future by some as yet improbable good fortune of the race, conﬂict will take other forms. At the same time a certain growing mutual closeness of the life of humanity is the most prominent phenomenon of the day.  The War has brought it into violent relief; but the after-war is bringing out all its implications as well as the mass of its difﬁculties. This is as yet no real concert, still less the beginning of a true unity, but only a compelling physical oneness forced on us by scientiﬁc inventions and modern circumstances. But this physical oneness must necessarily bring its mental, cultural and psychological results.


Sri Aurobindo: At ﬁrst it will probably accentuate rather than diminish conﬂict in many directions, enhance political and economic struggles of many kinds and hasten too a cultural struggle. There it may bring about in the end a swallowing uniﬁcation and a destruction of all other civilisations by one aggressive European type: whether that type will be bourgeois economical or labour materialistic or a rationalistic intellectualism cannot easily be foreseen, but at present in one form or another this is the actuality that is most in the front.  On the other hand it may lead to a free concert with some underlying oneness. But the ideal of the entire separateness of the peoples each developing its sharply separatist culture with an alien exclusion law for other leading ideas and cultural forms, although it has been for some time abroad and was growing in vigour, is not likely to prevail. For that to happen the whole aim of uniﬁcation preparing in Nature must fall to pieces, an improbable but not quite impossible catastrophe.


Sri Aurobindo: Europe dominates the world and it is natural to forecast a Westernised world with such petty differences as might be permissible in a European unity given up to the rigorous scientiﬁc pursuit of the development and organisation of material life. Across this possibility falls the shadow of India.   Sir John Woodroffe quotes the dictum of Professor Lowes Dickinson that the opposition is not so much between Asia and Europe as between India and the rest of the world. There is a truth behind that dictum; but the cultural opposition of Europe and Asia remains an unabolished factor. Spirituality is not the monopoly of India; however it may hide submerged in intellectualism or hid in other concealing veils, it is a necessary part of human nature.


Sri Aurobindo: But the difference is between spirituality made the leading motive and the determining power of both the inner and the outer life and spirituality suppressed, allowed only under disguises or brought in as a minor power, its reign denied or put off in favour of the intellect or of a dominant materialistic vitalism. The former way was the type of the ancient wisdom at one time universal in all civilised countries — literally, from China to Peru.  But all other nations have fallen away from it and diminished its large pervasiveness or fallen away from it altogether as in Europe. Or they are now, as in Asia, in danger of abandoning it for the invading economic, commercial, industrial, intellectually utilitarian modern type. India alone, with whatever fall or decline of light and vigour, has remained faithful to the heart of the spiritual motive.


Sri Aurobindo: India alone is still obstinately recalcitrant; for Turkey and China and Japan, say her critics, have outgrown that foolishness, by which it is meant that they have grown rationalistic and materialistic. India alone as a nation, whatever individuals or a small class may have done, has till now refused to give up her worshipped Godhead or bow her knee to the strong reigning idols of rationalism, commercialism and economism, the successful iron gods of the West.  Affected she has been, but not yet overcome. Her surface mind rather than her deeper intelligence has been obliged to admit many Western ideas, liberty, equality, democracy and others, and to reconcile them with her Vedantic Truth; but she has not been altogether at ease with them in the Western form and she seeks about already in her thought to give to them an Indian which cannot fail to be a spiritualised turn. The ﬁrst passion to imitate English ideas and culture has passed; but another more dangerous has recently taken its place, the passion to imitate continental European culture at large and in particular the crude and vehement turn of revolutionary Russia.


Sri Aurobindo: On the other hand one sees a growing revival of this ancient Hindu religion and the immense sweep of a spiritual awakening and its signiﬁcant movements. And out of this ambiguous situation there can be only one out of two issues.  Either India will be rationalised and industrialised out of all recognition and she will be no longer India or else she will be the leader in a new world-phase, aid by her example and cultural inﬁltration the new tendencies of the West and spiritualise the human race. That is the one radical and poignant question at issue. Will the spiritual motive which India represents prevail on Europe and create there new forms congenial to the West, or will European rationalism and commercialism put an end for ever to the Indian type of culture?


Sri Aurobindo: Not, then, whether India is civilised is the query that should be put, but whether the motive which has shaped her civilisation or the old-European intellectual or the new-European materialistic motive is to lead human culture. Is the harmony of the spirit, mind and body to found itself on the gross law of our physical nature, rationalised only or touched at the most by an ineffective spiritual glimmer, or is the dominant power of spirit to take the lead and force the lesser powers of the intellect, mind and body to a more exalted effort after a highest harmony, a victorious everdeveloping equipoise?  India must defend herself by reshaping her cultural forms to express more powerfully, intimately and perfectly her ancient ideal. Her aggression must lead the waves of the light thus liberated in triumphant self-expanding rounds all over the world which it once possessed or at least enlightened in far-off ages. An appearance of conﬂict must be admitted for a time, for as long as the attack of an opposite culture continues.


Sri Aurobindo: But since it will be in effect an assistance to all the best that is emerging from the advanced thought of the Occident, it will culminate in the beginning of concert on a higher plane and a preparation of oneness.   HIS QUESTION of Indian civilisation, once it has raised this greater issue, shifts from its narrow meaning and disappears into a much larger problem.  Does the future of humanity lie in a culture founded solely upon reason and science? Is the progress of human life the effort of a mind, a continuous collective mind constituted by an ever changing sum of transient individuals, that has emerged from the darkness of the inconscient material universe and is stumbling about in it in search of some clear light and some sure support amid its difﬁculties and problems?


Sri Aurobindo: And does civilisation consist in man’s endeavour to ﬁnd that light and support in a rationalised knowledge and a rationalised way of life? An ordered knowledge of the powers, forces, possibilities of physical Nature and of the psychology of man as a mental and physical being is then the only true science. An ordered use of that knowledge for a progressive social efﬁciency and well-being, which will make his brief existence more efﬁcient, more tolerable, more comfortable, happier, better appointed, more luxuriously enriched with the pleasures of the mind, life and body, is the only true art of life.  All our philosophy, all our religion, — supposing religion has not been outgrown and rejected, — all our science, thought, art, social structure, law and institution must found itself upon this idea of existence and must serve this one aim and endeavour.


Sri Aurobindo: This is the formula which European civilisation has accepted and is still labouring to bring into some kind of realisation. It is the formula of an intelligently mechanised civilisation supporting a rational and utilitarian culture.  Or is not the truth of our being rather that of a Soul embodied in Nature which is seeking to know itself, to ﬁnd itself, to enlarge its consciousness, to arrive at a greater way of existence, to progress in the spirit and grow into the full light of selfknowledge and some divine inner perfection? Are not religion, philosophy, science, thought, art, society, all life even means only of this growth, instruments of the spirit to be used for its service and with this spiritual aim as their dominant or at least their ultimate preoccupation?  That is the idea of life and being, — the knowledge of it, as she claims, — for which India stood till yesterday and still strives to stand with all that is most persistent and powerful in her nature.


Sri Aurobindo: It is the formula of a spiritualised civilisation striving through the perfection but also through an exceeding of mind, life and body towards a high soul-culture.  Whether the future hope of the race lies in a rational and an intelligently mechanised or in a spiritual, intuitive and religious civilisation and culture, — that, then, is the important issue. When the rationalist critic denies that India is or ever has been civilised, when he declares the Upanishads, the Vedanta, Buddhism, Hinduism, ancient Indian art and poetry a mass of barbarism, the vain production of a persistently barbaric mind, what he means is simply that civilisation is synonymous and identical with the cult and practice of the materialistic reason and that anything which falls below or goes above that standard does not deserve the name. A too metaphysical philosophy, a too religious religion, — if not indeed all philosophy and all religion, — any too idealistic and all mystic thought and art and every kind of occult knowledge, all that reﬁnes and probes beyond the limited purview of the reason dealing with the physical universe and seems therefore to it bizarre, over-subtle, excessive, unintelligible, all that responds to the sense of the Inﬁnite, all that is obsessed with the idea of the eternal, and a society which is too much governed by ideas born of these things and not solely by intellectual clarity and the pursuit of a material development and efﬁciency, are not the products of civilisation, but the offspring of a crudely subtle barbarism.  But this thesis obviously proves too much; most of the great past of humanity would fall under its condemnation.


Sri Aurobindo: Even ancient Greek culture would not escape it; much of the thought and art of modern European civilisation itself would in that case have to be damned as at least semi-barbarous. Evidently, we cannot without falling into exaggeration and absurdity narrow the sense of the word and impoverish the signiﬁcance of the past strivings of the race.  Indian civilisation in the past has been and must be recognised as the fruit of a great culture, quite as much as the Graeco-Roman, the Christian, the Islamic or the later Renaissance civilisation of Europe.   But the essential question remains open; the dispute is only narrowed to its central issue.


Sri Aurobindo: A more moderate and perspicacious rationalistic critic would admit the past value of India’s achievements. He would not condemn Buddhism and Vedanta and all Indian art and philosophy and social ideas as barbarous, but he would still contend that not there lies any future good for the human race. The true line of advance lies through European modernism, the mighty works of Science and the great modern adventure of humanity, its effort well founded not upon speculation and imagination but on ascertained and tangible scientiﬁc truth, its laboriously increased riches of sure and ﬁrmly tested scientiﬁc organisation. An Indian mind faithful to its ideals would contend on the contrary that while reason and science and all other auxiliaries have their place in the human effort, the real truth goes beyond them. The secret of our ultimate perfection is to be discovered deeper within us and things and Nature; it is to be sought centrally in spiritual self-knowledge and selfperfection and in the founding of life on that self-knowledge.


Sri Aurobindo: When the issue is so stated, we can at once see that the gulf between East and West, India and Europe is much less profound and unbridgeable now than it was thirty or forty years ago. The basic difference still remains; the life of the West is still chieﬂy governed by the rationalistic idea and a materialistic preoccupation. But at the summits of thought and steadily penetrating more and more downward through art and poetry and music and general literature an immense change is in progress. A reaching towards deeper things, an increasing return of seekings which had been banished, an urge towards higher experience yet unrealised, an admission of ideas long foreign to the Western mentality can be seen everywhere.


Sri Aurobindo: Aiding this process and aided by it there has been a certain inﬁltration of Indian and Eastern thought and inﬂuence; even here and there we ﬁnd some growing recognition of the high value or the superior greatness of the ancient spiritual ideal.  This inﬁltration began at a very early stage of the near contact between the farther Orient and Europe of which the English occupation of India was the most direct occasion. But at ﬁrst it was a slight and superﬁcial touch, at most an intellectual inﬂuence on a few superior minds. An academic interest or an attracted turn of scholars and thinkers towards Vedanta, Sankhya, Buddhism, admiration for the subtlety and largeness of Indian philosophic idealism, the stamp left by the Upanishads and the Gita on great intellects like Schopenhauer and Emerson and on a few lesser thinkers, this was the ﬁrst narrow inlet of the ﬂoods. The impression did not go very far at the best and the little effect it might have produced was counteracted and even effaced for a time by the great ﬂood of scientiﬁc materialism which submerged the whole life-view of later nineteenth-century Europe.


Sri Aurobindo: But now other movements have arisen and laid hold on thought and life with a triumphant success.  Philosophy and thought have taken a sharp curve away from rationalistic materialism and its conﬁdent absolutisms. On the one hand, as a ﬁrst consequence of the seeking for a larger thought and vision of the universe, Indian Monism has taken a subtle but powerful hold on many minds, though often in strange disguises. On the other hand new philosophies have been born, not indeed directly spiritual, vitalistic rather and pragmatic, but yet by their greater subjectivity already nearer to Indian ways of thinking. The old limits of scientiﬁc interest have begun to break down; various forms of psychical research and novel departures in psychology and even an interest in psychism and occultism, have come into increasing vogue and fasten more and more their hold in spite of the anathemas of orthodox religion and orthodox science.


Sri Aurobindo: Theosophy with its comprehensive combinations of old and new beliefs and its appeal to ancient spiritual and psychic systems, has everywhere exercised an inﬂuence far beyond the circle of its professed adherents.  Opposed for a long time with obloquy and ridicule, it has done much to spread the belief in Karma, reincarnation, other planes of existence, the evolution of the embodied soul through intellect and psyche to spirit, ideas which once accepted must change the whole attitude towards life. Even Science itself is constantly arriving at conclusions which only repeat upon the physical plane and in its language truths which ancient India had already afﬁrmed from the standpoint of spiritual knowledge in the tongue of the Veda and Vedanta. Every one of these advances leads directly or in its intrinsic meaning towards a nearer approach between the mind of East and West and to that extent to a likelihood of a better understanding of Indian thought and ideals.


Sri Aurobindo: In some directions the change of attitude has gone remarkably far and seems to be constantly increasing.   A Christian missionary quoted by Sir John Woodroffe is “amazed to ﬁnd the extent to which Hindu Pantheism has begun to permeate the religious conceptions of Germany, of America, even of England” and he considers its cumulative effect an imminent “danger” to the next generation. Another writer cited by him goes so far as to attribute all the highest philosophical thought of Europe to the previous thinking of the Brahmins and afﬁrms even that all modern solutions of intellectual problems will be found anticipated in the East.


Sri Aurobindo: A distinguished French psychologist recently told an Indian visitor that India had already laid down all the large lines and main truths, the broad schema, of a genuine psychology and all that Europe can now do is to ﬁll them in with exact details and scientiﬁc veriﬁcations. These utterances are the extreme indications of a growing change of which the drift is unmistakable.   Nor is it only in philosophy and the higher thinking that this turn is visible.  European art has moved in certain directions far away from its old moorings; it is developing a new eye and opening in its own manner to motives which until now were held in honour only in the East.


Sri Aurobindo: Eastern art and decoration have begun to be widely appreciated and have exercised a strong if subtle inﬂuence. Poetry has for some time commenced to speak uncertainly a new language, — note that the world-wide fame of Tagore would have been unthinkable thirty years ago, — and   one often ﬁnds the verse even of ordinary writers teeming with thoughts and expressions which could formerly have found few parallels outside Indian, Buddhistic and Suﬁ poems. And there are some ﬁrst preliminary signs of a similar phenomenon in general literature.


Sri Aurobindo: More and more the seekers of new truth are ﬁnding their spiritual home in India or owe to her much of their inspiration or at least acknowledge her light and undergo her inﬂuence. If this turn continues to accentuate its drive, and there is little chance of a reversion, the spiritual and intellectual gulf between East and West if not ﬁlled up, will at least be bridged and the defence of Indian culture and ideals will stand in a stronger position.  But then, it may be said, if there is this certainty of an approximative understanding, what is the need of an aggressive defence of Indian culture or of any defence at all? Indeed, what is the need for the continuance of any distinctive Indian civilisation in the future? East and West will meet from two opposite sides and merge in each other and found in the life of a uniﬁed humanity a common world-culture.


Sri Aurobindo: All previous or existing forms, systems, variations will fuse in this new amalgam and ﬁnd their fulﬁlment. But the problem is not so easy, not so harmoniously simple. For, even if we could assume that in a united worldculture there would be no spiritual need and no vital utility for strong distinctive variations, we are still very far from any such oneness. The subjective and spiritual turn of the more advanced modern thought is still conﬁned to a minority and has only very superﬁcially coloured the general intelligence of Europe. Moreover, it is a movement of the thought only; the great life-motives of European civilisation stand as yet where they were.


Sri Aurobindo: There is a greater pressure of certain idealistic elements in the proposed reshaping of human relations, but they have not shaken off or even loosened the yoke of the immediate materialistic past. It is precisely at this critical moment and in these conditions that the whole human world, India included, is about to be forced into the stress and travail of a swift transformation. The danger is that the pressure of dominant European ideas and motives, the temptations of the political needs of the hour, the velocity of rapid inevitable change will leave no time for the growth of sound thought and spiritual reﬂection and may strain to bursting-point the old Indian cultural and social system, and shatter this ancient civilisation before India has had time to readjust her mental stand and outlook or to reject, remould or replace the forms that can no longer meet her environmental national necessities, create new characteristic powers and ﬁgures and ﬁnd a ﬁrm basis for a swift evolution in the sense of her own spirit and ideals. In that event a rationalised and Westernised India, a brown ape of Europe, might emerge from the chaos, keeping some elements only of her ancient thought to modify, but no longer to shape and govern her total existence. Like other countries she would have passed into the mould of occidental modernism; ancient India would have perished.


Sri Aurobindo: Certain minds would see in this contingency no disaster, but rather a most desirable turn and a happy event. It would mean, in their view, that India had given up her spiritual separation and undergone the much needed intellectual and moral change that would at last entitle her to enter into the comity of modern peoples. And since in the new world-comity there would enter an increasing spiritual and subjective element and much perhaps of India’s own religious and philosophical thought would be appropriated by its culture, the disappearance of her antique spirit and personal self-expression need be no absolute loss. Ancient India would have passed like ancient Greece, leaving its contribution to a new and more largely progressive life of the race.


Sri Aurobindo: But the absorption of the Graeco-Roman culture by the later European world, even though many of its elements still survive in a larger and more complex civilisation, was yet attended with serious diminutions.  There was a deplorable loss of its high and clear intellectual order, a still more calamitous perdition of the ancient cult of beauty, and even now after so many centuries there has been no true recovery of the lost spirit. A much greater diminution of the world’s riches would result from the disappearance of a distinctive Indian civilisation, because the difference between its standpoint and that of European modernism is deeper, its spirit unique and the rich mass and diversity of its thousand lines of inner experience a heritage that still India alone can preserve in its intricate truth and dynamic order.   The tendency of the normal Western mind is to live from below upward and from out inward. A strong foundation is taken in the vital and material nature and higher powers are invoked and admitted only to modify and partially uplift the natural terrestrial life.


Sri Aurobindo: The inner existence is formed and governed by the external powers.  India’s constant aim has been on the contrary to ﬁnd a basis of living in the higher spiritual truth and to live from the inner spirit outwards, to exceed the present way of mind, life and body, to command and dictate to external Nature. As the old Vedic seers put it, “Their divine foundation was above even while they stood below; let its rays be settled deep within us,”, . Now that difference is no unimportant subtlety, but of a great and penetrating practical consequence.


Sri Aurobindo: And we can see how Europe would deal with any spiritual inﬂuence by her treatment of Christianity and its inner rule which she never really accepted as the law of her life. It was admitted but only as an ideal and emotional inﬂuence and used only to chasten and give some spiritual colouring to the vital vigour of the Teuton and the intellectual clarity and sensuous reﬁnement of the Latins.  Any new spiritual development she might accept would be taken in the same way and used to a like limited and superﬁcial purpose, if an insistent living culture were not there in the world to challenge this lesser ideal and insist on the true life of the spirit.  It may well be that both tendencies, the mental and the vital and physical stress of Europe and the spiritual and psychic impulse of India, are needed for the completeness of the human movement. But if the spiritual ideal points the ﬁnal way to a triumphant harmony of manifested life, then it is all-important for India not to lose hold of the truth, not to give up the highest she knows and barter it away for a perhaps more readily practicable but still lower ideal alien to her true and constant nature.


Sri Aurobindo: It is important too for humanity that a great collective effort to realise this highest ideal — however imperfect it may have been, into whatever confusion and degeneration it may temporarily have fallen, — should not cease, but continue. Always it can recover its force and enlarge its expression; for the spirit is not bound to temporal forms but ever-new, immortal and inﬁnite.  A new creation of the old Indian, not a transmutation to some law of the Western nature, is our best way to serve and increase the sum of human progress.  There arises the necessity of a defence and a strong, even an aggressive defence; for only an aggressive defence can be effective in the conditions of the modern struggle. But here we ﬁnd ourselves brought up against an opposite turn of mind and its stark obstructive temper.


Sri Aurobindo: For there are plenty of Indians now who are for a stubbornly static defence, and whatever aggressiveness they put into it consists in a rather vulgar and unthinking cultural Chauvinism which holds that whatever we have is good for us because it is Indian or even that whatever is in India is best, because it is the creation of the Rishis. As if all the later clumsy and chaotic developments were laid down by those much misused, much misapplied and often very much forged founders of our culture.  But the question is whether a static defence is of any effective value. I hold that it is of no value, because it is inconsistent with the truth of things and doomed to failure. It amounts to an attempt to sit stubbornly still while the Shakti of the world is rapidly moving on her way, and not only the Shakti of the world but the Shakti in India also.


Sri Aurobindo: It is a determination to live only on our past cultural capital, to eke it out, small as it has grown in our wasteful and incompetent hands, to the last anna: but to live on our capital without using it for fresh gains is to end in bankruptcy and pauperism. The past has to be used and spent as mobile and current capital for some larger proﬁt, acquisition and development of the future: but to gain we must release, we must part with something in order to grow and live more richly, — that is the universal law of existence.  Otherwise the life within us will stagnate and perish in its immobile torpor. Thus to shrink from enlargement and change is too a false confession of impotence.


Sri Aurobindo: It is to hold that India’s creative capacity in religion and in philosophy came to an end with Shankara, Ramanuja, Madhwa and Chaitanya and in social construction with Raghunandan and Vidyaranya. It is to rest in art and poetry either in a blank and uncreative void or in a vain and lifeless repetition of beautiful but spent forms and motives. It is to cling to social forms that are crumbling and will continue to crumble in spite of our efforts and risk to be crushed in their collapse.    The objection to any large change — for a large and bold change is needed and no peddling will serve our purpose — can be given a plausible turn only if we rest it on the contention that the forms of a culture are the right rhythm of its spirit and in breaking the rhythm we may expel the spirit and dissipate the harmony for ever.


Sri Aurobindo: Yes, but though the Spirit is eternal in its essence and in the fundamental principles of its harmony immutable, the actual rhythm of its self-expression in form is ever mutable. Immutable in its being and in the powers of its being but richly mutable in life, that is the very nature of the spirit’s manifested existence. And we have to see too whether the actual rhythm of the moment is still a harmony or whether it has not become in the hands of an inferior and ignorant orchestra a discord and no longer expresses rightly or sufﬁciently the ancient spirit.   To recognise defect in the form is not to deny the inherent spirit; it is rather the condition for moving onward to a greater future amplitude, a more perfect realisation, a happier outﬂow of the Truth we harbour.  Whether we shall actually ﬁnd a greater expression than the past gave us, depends on our own selves, on our capacity of response to the eternal Power and Wisdom and the illumination of the Shakti within us and on our skill in works, the skill that comes by unity with the eternal spirit we are in the measure of our light labouring to express;.


Sri Aurobindo: This from the standpoint of Indian culture, and that must be always for us the ﬁrst consideration and the intrinsic standpoint.   But there is also the standpoint of the pressure of the Time Spirit upon us. For this too is the action of the universal Shakti and cannot be ignored, held at arm’s length or forbidden entrance.


Sri Aurobindo: Here too the policy of new creation imposes itself as the true and only effective way. Even if to stand still and stiff within our well-defended gates were desirable, it is no longer possible. We can no longer take our single station apart in humanity, isolated like a solitary island in the desert ocean, neither going forth nor allowing to enter in, — if indeed we ever did it. For good or for ill the world is with us; the ﬂood of modern ideas and forces are pouring in and will take no denial. There are two ways of meeting them, either to offer a forlorn and hopeless resistance or to seize and subjugate them.


Sri Aurobindo: If we offer only an inert or stubborn passive resistance, they will still come in on us, break down our defences where they are weakest, sap them where they are stiffer, and where they can do neither, steal in unknown or ill-apprehended by underground mine and tunnel.  Entering unassimilated they will act as disruptive forces, and it will be only partly by outward attack, but much more by an inward explosion that this ancient Indian civilisation will be shattered to pieces. Ominous sparks are already beginning to run about which nobody knows how to extinguish, and if we could extinguish them, we should be no better off, for we should yet have to deal with the source from which they are starting.    Even the most rigid defenders of the present in the name of the past show in their every word how strongly they have been affected by new ways of thinking.


Sri Aurobindo: Many if not most are calling passionately, calling inevitably for innovations in certain ﬁelds, changes European in spirit and method which, once admitted without some radical assimilation and Indianisation, will end by breaking up the whole social structure they think they are defending. That arises from confusion of thought and an incapacity of power. Because we are unable to think and create in certain ﬁelds, we are obliged to borrow without assimilation or with only an illusory pretence of assimilation. Because we cannot see the whole sense of what we are doing from a high inner and commanding point of vision, we are busy bringing together disparates without any saving reconciliation. A slow combustion and swift explosion are likely to be the end of our efforts.


Sri Aurobindo: Aggressive defence implies a new creation from this inner and commanding vision and while it demands a bringing of what we have to a more expressive force of form, it must allow also an effective assimilation of whatever is useful to our new life and can be made harmonious with our spirit. Battle, shock and struggle themselves are no vain destruction; they are a violent cover for Time’s great interchanges. Even the most successful victor receives much from the vanquished and if sometimes he appropriates it, as often it takes him prisoner. The Western attack is not conﬁned to a breaking down of the forms of Eastern culture; there is at the same time a large, subtle and silent appropriation of much that is valuable in the East for the enrichment of occidental culture.


Sri Aurobindo: Therefore to bring forward the glories of our past and scatter on Europe and America as much of its treasures as they will receive, will not save us.  That liberality will enrich and strengthen our cultural assailants, but for us it will only serve to give a self-conﬁdence which will be useless and even misleading if it is not made a force of will for a greater creation. What we have to do is to front the attack with new and more powerful formations which will not only throw it back, but even, where that is possible and helpful to the race, carry the war into the assailant’s country. At the same time we must take by a strong creative assimilation whatever answers to our own needs and responds to the Indian spirit. In certain directions, as yet all too few, we have begun both these movements.


Sri Aurobindo: In others we have simply created an unintelligent mixture or else have taken and are still taking over rash, crude and undigested borrowings.  Imitation, a rough and haphazard borrowing of the assailant’s engines and methods may be temporarily useful, but by itself it is only another way of submitting to conquest.   A stark appropriation is not sufﬁcient; successful assimilation to the Indian spirit is the needed movement. The problem is one of immense difﬁculty and stupendous in its proportions and we have not yet approached it with wisdom and insight.


Sri Aurobindo: All the more pressing is the need to awaken to the situation and meet it with original thinking and a conscious action wise and powerful in insight and sure in process. A mastering and helpful assimilation of new stuff into an eternal body has always been in the past a peculiar power of the genius of India.   UT THERE is yet another point of view from which the challenge put in front of us ceases to be an issue crudely and provokingly phrased in a conﬂict of cultures. Instead it presents itself as a problem with a deep signiﬁcance; it becomes a thought-provoking suggestion that affects not only ours but all civilisations still in existence.


Sri Aurobindo: We can reply on the cultural issue from the view-point of the past and the valuation of different cultures as acquired contributions to the growth of the human race, that Indian civilisation has been the form and expression of a culture as great as any of the historic civilisations of mankind, great in religion, great in philosophy, great in science, great in thought of many kinds, great in literature, art and poetry, great in the organisation of society and politics, great in craft and trade and commerce. There have been dark spots, positive imperfections, heavy shortcomings; what civilisation has been perfect, which has not had its deep stains and cruel abysses? There have been considerable lacunae, many blind alleys, much uncultured or ill-cultured ground: what civilisation has been without its unﬁlled parts, its negative aspects?  But our ancient civilisation can survive the severest comparisons of either ancient or mediaeval times. More high-reaching, subtle, many-sided, curious and profound than the Greek, more noble and humane than the Roman, more large and spiritual than the old Egyptian, more vast and original than any other Asiatic civilisation, more intellectual than the European prior to the eighteenth century, possessing all that these had and more, it was the most powerful, selfpossessed, stimulating and wide in inﬂuence of all past human cultures.


Sri Aurobindo: And if we look from the view-point of the present and the fruitful workings of the progressive Time-Spirit, we can say that even here in spite of our downfall all is not on the debit side.  Many of the forms of our civilisation have become inapt and effete and others stand in need of radical change and renovation.   But that can be said equally well of European culture; for all its recently acquired progressiveness and habit of more rapid selfadaptation, large parts of it are already rotten and out of date.    In spite of all drawbacks and in spite of downfall the spirit of Indian culture, its central ideas, its best ideals have still their message for humanity and not for India alone.


Sri Aurobindo: And we in India hold that they are capable of developing out of themselves by contact with new need and idea as good and better solutions of the problems before us than those which are offered to us secondhand from Western sources. But besides the comparisons of the past and the needs of the present there is too a view-point of the ideal future. There are the farther goals towards which humanity is moving, — and the present is only a crude aspiration towards them and the immediate future we now see in hope and strive to bring about in form, only its crude preparatory stage.    There is an unrealised standard of the ideas which to the mind of the moment are ﬁgments of Utopia, but may become to a more developed humanity the commonplaces of their daily environment, the familiar things of the present which they have to overpass.


Sri Aurobindo: How stands Indian civilisation with regard to this yet unrealised future of the race? Are its master ideas and dominant powers guiding lights or helping forces towards it or do they end in themselves with no vistas on the evolutionary potentialities of the earth’s coming ages?   The very idea of progress is an illusion to some minds; for they imagine that the race moves constantly in a circle. Or even their view is that greatness more often than not is to be found in the past and that the line of our movement is a curve of deterioration, a downward lapse.


Sri Aurobindo: But that is an illusion created when we look too much upon the highlights of the past and forget its shadows or concentrate too much on the dark spaces of the present and ignore its powers of light and its aspects of happier promise. It is created too by a mistaken deduction from the phenomenon of an uneven progress. For Nature effects her evolution through a rhythm of advance and relapse, day and night, waking and sleep; there is a temporary pushing of certain results at the expense of others not less desirable for perfection and to a superﬁcial eye there may seem to be a relapse even in our advance. Progress admittedly does not march on securely in a straight line like a man sure of his familiar way or an army covering an unimpeded terrain or well-mapped unoccupied spaces.


Sri Aurobindo: Human progress is very much an adventure through the unknown, an unknown full of surprises and bafﬂing obstacles; it stumbles often, it misses its way at many points, it cedes here in order to gain there, it retraces its steps frequently in order to get more widely forward.  The present does not always compare favourably with the past; even when it is more advanced in the mass, it may still be inferior in certain directions important to our inner or our outer welfare. But earth does move forward after all,. Even in failure there is a preparation for success: our nights carry in them the secret of a greater dawn.


Sri Aurobindo: This is a frequent experience in our individual progress, but the human collectivity also moves in much the same manner. The question is whither are we marching or what are the true routes and harbours of our voyage.   Western civilisation is proud of its successful modernism.   But there is much that it has lost in the eagerness of its gains and much which men of old strove towards that it has not even attempted to accomplish.


Sri Aurobindo: There is much too that it has wilfully ﬂung aside in impatience or scorn to its own great loss, to the injury of its life, to the imperfection of its culture. An ancient Greek of the time of Pericles or the philosophers suddenly transported in time to this century would be astonished by the immense gains of the intellect and the expansion of the mind, the modern many-sidedness of the reason and inexhaustible habit of inquiry, the power of endless generalisation and precise detail.   He would admire without reserve the miraculous growth of science and its giant discoveries, the abundant power, richness and minuteness of its instrumentation, the wonder-working force of its inventive genius.  He would be overcome and stupeﬁed rather than surprised and charmed by the enormous stir and pulsation of modern life.


Sri Aurobindo: But at the same time he would draw back repelled from its unashamed mass of ugliness and vulgarity, its unchastened external utilitarianism, its vitalistic riot and the morbid exaggeration and unsoundness of many of its growths.  He would see in it much ill-disguised evidence of the uneliminated survival of the triumphant barbarian. If he recognised its intellectuality and the scrupulous application of thought and scientiﬁc reason to the machinery of life, he would miss in it his own later attempt at the clear and noble application of the ideal reason to the inner life of the mind and the soul. He would ﬁnd that in this civilisation beauty had become an exotic and the shining ideal mind in some ﬁelds a debased and exploited slave and in others a neglected stranger.  As for the great spiritual seekers of the past, they would experience in all this huge activity of the intellect and the life the sense of an aching void.


Sri Aurobindo: A feeling of its illusion and unreality because that which is greatest in man and raises him beyond himself had been neglected, would oppress them at every step. The discovery of the laws of physical Nature would not compensate in their eyes for the comparative decline — for a long time it was the almost absolute cessation — of a greater seeking and ﬁnding, the discovery of the freedom of the spirit.  But an unbiassed view will prefer to regard this age of civilisation as an evolutionary stage, an imperfect but important turn of the human advance. It is then possible to see that great gains have been made which are of the utmost value to an ultimate perfection, even if they have been made at a great price.  There is not only a greater generalisation of knowledge and more thorough use of intellectual power and activity in multiple ﬁelds.


Sri Aurobindo: There is not only the advance of Science and its application to the conquest of our environment, an immense apparatus of means, vast utilisations, endless minute conveniences, an irresistible machinery, a tireless exploitation of forces. There is too a certain development of powerful if not high-pitched ideals and there is an attempt, however external and therefore imperfect, to bring them to bear upon the working of human society as a whole. Much has been diminished or lost, but it can be recovered, eventually, if not with ease. Once restored to its true movement, the inner life of man will ﬁnd that it has gained in materials, in power of plasticity, in a new kind of depth and wideness.  And we shall have acquired a salutary habit of many-sided thoroughness and a sincere endeavour to shape the outer collective life into an adequate image of our highest ideals.


Sri Aurobindo: Temporary diminutions will not count before the greater inner expansion that is likely to succeed this age of external turmoil and outward-looking endeavour.   If on the other hand an ancient Indian of the time of the Upanishads, the Buddhist period or the later classical age were to be set down in modern India and note that larger part of its life which belongs to the age of decline, he would experience a much more depressing sensation, the sense of a national, a cultural debacle, a fall from the highest summits to discouragingly low levels. He might well ask himself what this degenerate posterity had done with the mighty civilisation of the past. He would wonder how with so much to inspire, to elevate, to spur them to yet greater accomplishment and self-exceeding, they could have lapsed into this impotent and inert confusion and, instead of developing the high motives of Indian culture to yet deeper and wider issues, allowed them to overload themselves with ugly accretions, to rust, to rot, almost to perish.


Sri Aurobindo: He would see his race clinging to forms and shells and rags of the past and missing nine-tenths of its nobler values. He would compare the spiritual light and energy of the heroic ages of the Upanishads and the philosophies with the later inertia or small and broken fragmentarily derivative activity of our philosophic thought. After the intellectual curiosity, the scientiﬁc development, the creative literary and artistic greatness, the noble fecundity of the classical age he would be amazed by the extent of a later degeneracy, its mental poverty, immobility, static repetition, the comparative feebleness of the creative intuition, the long sterility of art, the cessation of science. He would deplore a prone descent to ignorance, a failing of the old powerful will and tapasya, almost a volitional impotence. In place of the simpler and more spiritually rational order of old times he would ﬁnd a bewildering chaotic disorganised organisation of things without centre and without any large harmonising idea.


Sri Aurobindo: He would ﬁnd not a true social order but a half arrested, half hastening putrescence. In place of the great adaptable civilisation which assimilated with power and was able to return tenfold for what it received, he would meet a helplessness that bore passively or only with a few ineffectual galvanic reactions the forces of the outside world and the stress of adverse circumstance. At one time he would see that there had been even a loss of faith and self-conﬁdence so considerable as to tempt the intellectuals of the nation to scrap the ancient spirit and ideals for an alien and imported culture. He would note indeed the beginning of a change, but might perhaps doubt how deep it had gone or whether it was powerful enough to save, forceful enough to upheave the whole nation from its cherished torpor and weakness, enlightened enough to guide a new and robust creative activity towards the building of new signiﬁcant forms for the ancient spirit.


Sri Aurobindo: Here too a better understanding points to hope rather than to the ﬂat despondency suggested by a too hasty surface glance.   This last age of Indian history is an example of the constant local succession of night even to the most long and brilliant day in the evolution of the race. But it was a night ﬁlled at ﬁrst with many and brilliant constellations and even at its thickest and worst it was the darkness of Kalidasa’s , “night preparing for dawn, with a few just decipherable stars.” Even in the decline all was not loss; there were needed developments, there were spiritual and other gains of the greatest importance for the future. If the high spiritualised mind and stupendous force of spiritual will,, that characterised ancient India were less in evidence, there were new gains of spiritual emotion and sensitiveness to spiritual impulse on the lower planes of consciousness, that had been lacking before.


Sri Aurobindo: Architecture, literature, painting, sculpture lost the grandeur, power, nobility of old, but evoked other powers and motives full of delicacy, vividness and grace.  There was a descent from the heights to the lower levels, but a descent that gathered riches on its way and was needed for the fullness of spiritual discovery and experience. And in the worst period of decline and failure the spirit was not dead in India, but only torpid, concealed and shackled; now emerging in answer to a pressure of constant awakening shocks for a strong self-liberation it ﬁnds that its sleep was a preparation of new potentialities behind the veil of that slumber. The decline of our past culture may even be regarded as a needed waning and dying of old forms to make way not only for a new, but, if we will that it should be so, a greater and more perfect creation.


Sri Aurobindo: For after all it is the will in the being that gives to circumstances their value, and often an unexpected value; the hue of apparent actuality is a misleading indicator. If the will in a race or civilisation is towards death, if it clings to the lassitude of decay and the laissez-faire of the moribund or even in strength insists blindly upon the propensities that lead to destruction or if it cherishes only the powers of dead Time and puts away from it the powers of the future, if it prefers life that was to life that will be, nothing, not even abundant strength and resources and intelligence, not even many calls to live and constantly offered opportunities will save it from an inevitable disintegration or collapse.   But if there comes to it a strong faith in itself and a robust will to live, if it is open to the things that shall come, willing to seize on the future and what it offers and strong to compel it where it seems adverse, it can draw from adversity and defeat a force of invincible victory and rise from apparent helplessness and decay in a mighty ﬂame of renovation to the light of a more splendid life. This is what Indian civilisation is now rearising to do as it has always done in the eternal strength of its spirit.


Sri Aurobindo: The greatness of the ideals of the past is a promise of greater ideals for the future. A continual expansion of what stood behind past endeavour and capacity is the one abiding justiﬁcation of a living culture. But it follows that civilisation and barbarism are words of a quite relative signiﬁcance.  For from the view of the evolutionary future European and Indian civilisation at their best have only been half achievements, infant dawns pointing to the mature sunlight that is to come.


Sri Aurobindo: Neither Europe nor India nor any race, country or continent of mankind has ever been fully civilised from this point of view ; none has grasped the whole secret of a true and perfect human living, none has applied with an entire insight or a perfectly vigilant sincerity even the little they were able to achieve. If we deﬁne civilisation as a harmony of spirit, mind and body, where has that harmony been entire or altogether real? Where have there not been glaring deﬁciencies and painful discords?  Where has the whole secret of the harmony been altogether grasped in all its parts or the complete music of life evolved into the triumphant ease of a satisfying, durable and steadily mounting concord?


Sri Aurobindo: Not only are there everywhere positive, ugly, even “hideous” blots on the life of man, but much that we now accept with equanimity, much in which we take pride, may well be regarded by a future humanity as barbarism or at least as semi-barbarous and immature. The achievements that we regard as ideal, will be condemned as a self-satisﬁed imperfection blind to its own errors; the ideas that we vaunt as enlightenment will appear as a demi-light or a darkness. Not only will many forms of our life that claim to be ancient or even eternal, as if that could be said of any form of things, fail and disappear; the subjective shapes given to our best principles and ideals will perhaps claim from the future at best an understanding indulgence. There is little that will not have to undergo expansion and mutation, change perhaps beyond recognition or accept to be modiﬁed in a new synthesis.  In the end the coming ages may look on Europe and Asia of today much as we look on savage tribes or primitive peoples.


Sri Aurobindo: And this view from the future, if we can get it, is undoubtedly the most illuminating and dynamic standpoint from which we can judge our present; but it does not invalidate our comparative appreciation of past and extant cultures.  For this past and present are creating the greater steps of that future and much of it will survive even in that which supplants it. There is behind our imperfect cultural ﬁgures a permanent spirit to which we must cling and which will remain permanent even hereafter; there are certain fundamental motives or essential idea-forces which cannot be thrown aside, because they are part of the vital principle of our being and of the aim of Nature in us, our. But these motives, these idea-forces are, whether for nation or for humanity as a whole, few and simple in their essence and capable of an application always varying and progressive.  The rest belongs to the less internal layers of our being and must undergo the changing pressure and satisfy the forward-moving demands of the Time-Spirit.


Sri Aurobindo: There is this permanent spirit in things and there is this persistent swadharma or law of our nature; but there is too a less binding system of laws of successive formulation, — rhythms of the spirit, forms, turns, habits of the nature, and these endure the mutations of the ages,. The race must obey this double principle of persistence and mutation or bear the penalty of a decay and deterioration that may attaint even its living centre.   Certainly we must repel with vigour every disintegrating or injurious attack; but it is much more important to form our own true and independent view of our own past achievement, present position and future possibilities, — what we were, what we are and what we may be.  In our past we must distinguish all that was great, essential, elevating, vitalising, illuminating, victorious, effective.


Sri Aurobindo: And in that again we must distinguish what was close to the permanent, essential spirit and the persistent law of our cultural being and separate from it what was temporary and transiently formulative. For all that was great in the past cannot be preserved as it was or repeated for ever; there are new needs, there are other vistas before us. But we have to distinguish too what was deﬁcient, ill-grasped, imperfectly formulated or only suited to the limiting needs of the age or unfavourable circumstances. For it is quite idle to pretend that all in the past, even at its greatest, was entirely admirable and in its kind the highest consummate achievement of the human mind and spirit.


Sri Aurobindo: Afterwards we have to make a comparison of this past with our present and to understand the causes of our decline and seek the remedy of our shortcomings and ailments. Our sense of the greatness of our past must not be made a fatally hypnotising lure to inertia; it should be rather an inspiration to renewed and greater achievement. But in our criticism of the present we must not be one-sided or condemn with a foolish impartiality all that we are or have done. Neither ﬂattering or glossing over our downfall nor fouling our nest to win the applause of the stranger, we have to note our actual weakness and its roots, but to ﬁx too our eyes with a still ﬁrmer attention on our elements of strength, our abiding potentialities, our dynamic impulses of self-renewal.   A second comparison has to be made between the West and India.