Analysis. a Talk by Eugene Halliday
Transcript Alan Roberts 24 July 2013
Eugene talks about the method of analysing our ideas and the frustrating but very valuable effect this has reducing the vibrations in the mind and returning complex and intense mental forms to simple and plainer motions of the original omniscience and how this allows field awareness and gives conscious response ability in all types of situations.
Transcript . [all comments by the transcriber are in square brackets. All the diagrams are the surmising of the transcriber- they were not recorded at the time of the talk. The recording of the talk begins mid-sentence.]
[ . . . ] the word 'analysis'. And one or two questions have been raised about the utility of it, and how far it should be taken, and some have been finding frustration when carrying analysis to an extreme. As if this frustration should not occur; Whereas, in actual fact, this frustration is an essential part of the work. because if you don't get frustrated, you haven’t really completed the analysis.
Let's draw a circle, and this circle represents the bound of conceptual activity. That is intellectual activity. Beyond this circle is the abyssal no-form, which if you remember is the same thing as the absolute will. When the spirit comes in, and rotates, it produces a sphere of being, and this sphere in its largest sense is the cosmic soul - the soul of the world. In the act of coming in, spirit which is free prior to its rotation becomes bound. And the binding does two things: it binds itself in objective existence, and at the same time it loses the free motion that it had prior to rotating. So it has a positive aspect which we'll represent by the sign of the positive, the cross - George Cross. It has the negative aspect, namely it has lost the free motion of the absolute in the process of objectifying itself. It is gaining objectivity, it is losing absolute motion. The absolute pure motion is the motion, as we have said before, of translation. It just keeps moving and it never turns back upon itself and meets itself.
The pure motion of translation we can demonstrate in a tank, only subject to remembering the tank has sides and the motion is impeded by being reflected from the sides. But if we imagine an infinite ocean, an ocean with no shores, and ripples going through this ocean in all directions simultaneously, so that there is an infinite passing of motions through this infinite continuum, and none of it rotates; yet a very peculiar thing happens, that the appearance of rotation arises at the intersection points of the translating motion. If I draw a line to represent a wave front that is travelling from the left of the paper to the right, if I draw another one at right angles to it travelling from the top down, and this one advances from left to right, and this one from top to below, we get an apparent movement of the intersection point.
Now the intersection point of two forces is always the generation of a rotation or vortex. So when we have two translating waves intersecting, at the intersecting points we have an apparent creation of a sphere of rotation. In the very tiniest sphere, we could say we have the prime particle of the material world.
But it has no validity from itself; its validity is only that of a product of something beyond itself. The free motion translating at right angles to another motion, produces the intersection point which travels, apparently although this travelling of the intersection point is not, in fact a truth, it is an appearance. Reality is the translating motion. The appearance is the travelling of the intersection which bisects the angle between the two waves. In which sense, we could say that the material world is at right angles to the spiritual world. In a sense the material world is bisecting motion in the spirit pure motion. And at the intersection points of the translating motions there arises the appearance of zones of spin or spheres of being - prime particles, and then complex little beings moving up into atoms, molecules and so on till we have complex beings like the human being. [5min 21]
Now if we look at this motion of translation here, which I have kept very simple by using only two motions, one at right angles to the other, we see that the translating motion presents us with the appearance of a grid. And if we become identified with the wave crests, with our travelling, we will see this grid very clearly. If we get a square bowl - one of the plastic bowls that you can buy does quite well for this - and strike it with a stick down one side, the hit being parallel with the side so that you give the impact along the whole length a straight wave will be pass across the water, hit the other side and be reflected back. If while it is travelling, if you hit the other side at right angles to it you will see a grid of waves crossing each other. There's an old Indian saying that says 'when the surface of the sea is rough, one can not see the bottom, and the mind is exactly like this'.
If you get a boat with a glass bottom in it - let's draw one. Here's the boat, there is the surface of the water. There may be waves beyond the boat, and around the boat but the bottom of boat has no waves because the bottom of the boast is flat, like a pressing point so that it kills the motion so they cannot arise. Now the light is shining on the waves and bouncing into the observer’s eye so that he cannot see below the surface. And if he looks inside the boat, through the glass bottom of the boat, because there are no waves, the light cannot bounce into his eye and he can see straight through the bottom of the boat to the ground at the bottom of the sea. In fact it is surprising how deeply you can see in a glass bottomed boat, such as certain pearl fishers use.
The analogy in the mind is simple. If, instead of looking at the outside world and being dazzled by the phenomenal reflection from the object, if we look inside ourselves, treat the body as the ark, look inside and flatten the set of the mind, as if you had a glass bottom - looking through the mind - you'll see the ground of being. If we look at our translating motions at right angles to each other, they draw for us a grid. And if we look at the wave crests of the travelling waves you cannot see through the water. If we look at the intersection points of the waves, that are travelling at right angles to each other we can see phenomenally zones of spin - little vortices of activity on the inspection [talk jumps here 8min 54] the angle. And these points travelling constitute the phenomenal world and the analogy of the world as material things. Material things are modes of activity, bisecting the angles between spiritual forces.
Now let's draw a grid inside our circle for a moment, and consider what it does for us. It acts like a screen when we identify with the wave crests, Which tend to catch our attention because when a wave is made the forces in the crest, building it up, are forces in opposition. The masses of water are built up because forces are opposing each other. [9 min 51]
Consequently there is an intention at the wave crest, which the trough does not have. We can if we like write positive on the wave crest; and negative in the wave trough. Now ‘crest’ is from kra – create, plus the ‘S’ for spirit and ‘T’ for cross, when the forces are crossing each other spirit creates, or locks itself up. Now in the act of focusing on a crest, or that which is created, the attention – the tension of ones self, is focused in such a way as to be pinned, to be bound by the form presented in the mind. This causes the formulation of an idea.
There’s the wave, every crest is made up of opposing forces and these forces produce tension; intention when viewed as centripetal, extension viewed as centrifugal, and attention when viewed psychologically as a focal point of consciousness. When we look at the crests, we are ‘finited’ and our consciousness is full of discrete elements. These discrete elements cut the mind into little bits. The mind cannot have unity while we are thinking. And the clearer the idea, the more clearly formulated it is, the less unity there is involved. Now why then do we wish to analyse if our formulation progressively obscures ultimate reality? And the answer is ‘because half-way is no good’. Most people do not analyse but they suffer from presented forms that they have not yet broken down. And they accept these forms as valid.
Thus a person born at a certain social level will tend to the ‘left-wing’, and one at another level will tend to be ‘right-wing’. He does not analyse the concepts formed in his mind and therefore he is being conditioned by them. Now then, when we analyse the concepts, we don’t do it because we think that this concept will confer power upon us – it is for the exact opposite reason. We analyse, or loosen this thing, because we know that power is locked up in it. The analysis is merely going to return us to the state we had prior to the intellective activity that generated this form. So that when we analyse a word we begin to take out the subsidiary crests in the word which have been crushed together, apparently in a simple concept; a simple concept like democracy.
Let us let this crest represent democracy, and let’s start cutting it. And we have on the one side the demos and on the other side the cracy . One means ‘people’ and the other means ‘governed’. So we split this wave up into two waves. Now, the demos – the ‘people’, meaning – knee benders, and the cracy part meaning ‘government’, are contradictory ideas. We have taken the energy involved into ‘democracy’ and cut it into two crests and divided the energy between them. If we now attack the word demos and see why it means people – we are going to take the single crest representing demos and split it into ‘de’ and ‘mos’. Now de means analysis. So we’ll take the energy of this one and split it, and the mos means - substantial issue. So the whole word means ‘that which is dividing the substance, and causing it to leak – if you like the word means ‘incontinence’ – losing power.[14min 40]
So we can cut this again into two and then we will take the de and the mos and separate them. And then write d and e, and see that ‘d’ is a forcing [sound of E.H. hitting a board for emphasis] of a way through the location of a door, in ‘e’ – a field. That letter ‘e’ is the fifth letter, equivalent to the Hebrew ‘heh’ and means the field of life. And the ‘d’ is the door. So we have as it where, put a hand on the field and separated it. Again we’ve split these things.
As we’re doing this, this once high crest is lowering and the energy in it is returning to the field. We can see then we are beginning to pull down the energy in the original concept. And return it to the field. This is the real reason for intellectual analysis. We say ‘break the thing down, not break it up’ when we analyse it. And we break the thing down and we each break the original continuous energy and we have reduced it from a state of high tension - of wave crests - to a state of equable tension throughout the field. Which is the equivalent to having a glass bottom to our ‘body boat’; you can now [loud cough – suggest ‘see into’] . . the substance of the field.. And this substance of the field that we had glimpsed before is no more than the original sentient power of the absolute. [16min 31]
And when that power is travelling along, without interruption, it cannot build up a wave crest and therefore cannot make a depression – a trough. It cannot be elated. It cannot be depressed. If therefore we look through it, what we see in it is nothing, that is: no thing, no tension, no attention no extension. And in so doing we have regained the free motion of the original essence. But this free motion is not static because static is a concept derived from forces in opposition pressing against each other.
This pure continuous motion of the absolute is not static, it is free and it is initiative. It can do anything whatever by free initiative. It can pile up, because it has no inertia, it can pile up immediately and locally a crest – if it so wills. And it has no inertia so it can ruffle it up again. Whereas, in the case of the water that is full of waves, the intention on the crest and the extension – or distension in the trough - is so much ‘energy bound in’, that is ‘inertia’, that it takes a considerable amount of energy to cancel it and reduce it to the flat. So if there had been a storm at sea, and you go to it with a very large sheet of Perspex, that you purchased for this purpose, and you bang it on the centre of the sea to stop the motion, you’ll find there is an awful lot of motion in the sea.
And if having pressed it quite flat you pick up your sheet of Perspex again. Which we’ll assume to be as big as our attention, and as you lift it up all the way, they’ll start off again, because the motion you pressed down has not stopped. It has merely been pressed into the water as a substance. So if you don’t give it time to die down, that is to equilibrate and reach maximum entropy, it will start up again. This is the thing that Jesus was talking about when he talks about a man who swept his house clean after casting a devil out, and having got the house clean he went away. And when he came back that devil had returned with seven others worse than himself. [19 min 11]
This is what happens to a man who thinks, ‘I will meditate and clear my mind of rubbish. And because I believe it is possible to do it, I will do it with great effort now.’ And he sits down and with super effort he calms his mind. It becomes perfectly clear and then he says, ‘Good my mind is now clear, I have the mind of a yogi. I can see right into the depths of being so now I will take a girl to the pictures’. And he then gets up and goes out. And immediately, all the things he flattened jump up again, because he has gone out. And because he did not use time to let maximum entropy set in inside his substance.
He had time to do a job, immediately and now and with super effort he has used up all his finite power to do it. He has attained this clarity. Many men who do this get an immediate apprehension of reality which stops them and convinces them that there is a sort of thing as ‘ultimate reality’ and that it is worth having. And the shock of seeing it is so great – they stop doing it. And then when they try to do it again they find they haven’t got enough energy to do it. And then a kind of rationalising process comes in to them, and takes over for a long period of time and they may, in fact, not see that experience again for years. But they will always remember it was a valid experience of transcendence, at that moment.
If you remember Humphrey Davy and the Laughing Gas experiment, where he inhaled some Nitrous Oxide and then instead of seeing students sitting in their seats he saw little vortices spinning. He never again believed that there were such things as students. He just saw everybody as a vortex spinning in a field of energy. But he did not develop the power deliberately and freely to see them again in that same way. He’d had this experience that profoundly conditioned his view of reality. But he did not develop the power to see it this way at will. [21 min 38]
Therefore when we take any given terms, the more abstract the term is the more subject that term is to analysis, and the greater the amount of power in it. If we take the term ‘Nelly Dean’ and break it down, you will find there is less in it than there is in the word ‘accident’; if you confine it to the original meaning of ‘Nelly Dean’. If you break ‘Nelly’ down and ‘Dean’ down, you find it starts resolving back into the absolute. If you take any so-called ‘abstract’ term, and we can look at the word abstract in two different ways. You know the ‘tract’ part means ‘drawing’. Tragere is a drawing. And the ‘ab’ means father, and this ‘s’ is an issue – spiritual issue – from the father - energy coming forth and drawing things and fastening on the cross.
An abstract idea is very near God the father. So that if you take an abstract idea about ‘philosophy’ and break it down into the ‘philo and ‘sophy’ part, you discover that one means ‘love’ and the other means ‘wisdom’. So you take your central precipitating crest, and you take the energy involved in it and you break it into two crests. It is no longer as high as it was, and it is now wider than it was. And then you take the philo part of it and cut that. And you see basically that the ‘phi’ and the ‘la’ there – or a pi law – and you put ‘p’ on one side and ‘L’ on the other. And you split this and it becomes wider still.
You do the same thing with the ‘so’ and the ‘phi’ on the other side. Then you discover that the love ‘philo’ referred to is no more than the positing of a leak; a means whereby a connection is seen.
Every time we split a term - if I was to take the letter ‘ph’ and take that and split that into consonant of ‘p’ and vowel ‘huh’ , and I again cut down the height of the wave, I’m gradually returning the energy that was in the word ‘philosophy’ back into the field. In the process I’m discovering that philosophy really is no more than a fundamental motion of a sphere of being, with motions traversing it, backwards and forwards and crossing each other. So that any given wave may be considered as positive to the others, and acting in the role of male – or analytical force, and the other is acting as the female – or receptive force.
So that we can say that every existential term, every word we can utter, in so far as it exists, and stimulates the ear has in it involved a definite amount of energy. And we can gain this energy by cutting this word into its constituent parts. Now we cut into a zone, fairly low down, where we begin to wonder how the devil we are going to cut two [too ?] . This is the realm of frustration. Now frustration [fr / us / tra / t / ion ] itself tells you, by the word, that there is: a ‘fire’ in it, there is a use in it, there is a law in it and a crucifixion in it, and there is a zone of motion.
[25 min 28]
When you feel this frustration, you are not getting any further with your analysis. You are getting over heated. The heat you experience is exactly the same thing, when gathered together as willpower and initiative. So that, if you don’t work to the point of frustration, you will not discover the energy in the concept. If you do work to the point of frustration, and you do have the control concept in your mind that the heat of this frustration is no more than the heat of energy willing something, you can switch over from the concept, through the frustration to pure will.
So people are never frustrated have just never worked. And people who are frustrated, and think they shouldn’t be, and give it up are being fooled by the grid that is being placed over the sphere of their being. Now in a church you have a screen, and this screen separates the church. Beyond the part where the people are there is a mysterious part where strange things go on. The purpose of the screen, profanely, is there to divide things holy from things not holy; the people from God. But this screen represents no more than the surface light kept in the ripple on your being and diverting it from seeing into the depths – the reality of being. [27 min 21]
So the chancel screen, as the word tells you is for screening things, it’s a method of diverting, a Lorelei causing the sailors to go on the rocks. When you see that screen, you should say, ’That screen means – we must dazzle the people, so they cannot see the basic propositions behind reality’. Now what are there, when you come to examine it? There is no pontiff, or monarch or scientist that will not confess that on the one side there is force, and on the other side form/ matter, and that this force is acting upon this matter. And there is nothing else. If we are to take our triangle, we can write inside our triangle – sentient power – ‘S’ and ’P’, subject and predicate. There isn’t anything else.
When you are asked to bend the knee to something, you are asked to do so by some subject, who understands that you are a member of the people, hence you bend the knee. He makes a formal statement, if the power form of the statement catches your gaze so you can’t see through to his deep intent - that’s your business and you will bend the knee. If you see through the phenomenal sparkle to the intent in the will below you will not bend the knee. But then you won’t be a ‘P’ you will be an ‘S’. Every person is essentially a subject, that is a spiritual being.
Now there are two forms of ‘S’, here, the open ‘S’ which you can teminalise in the Greek, [29 min 24] and the initial and median ‘S’ which is a closed one. The initial and median one begins a word, and the other one, the open one, ends the word. Why is that so? Because when you begin you bounce, it’s also a median ‘S’ a continuing ‘S’ and therefore you represent it with the bound ‘serpent-with-tail-in-mouth’. In the end of the word, it takes it’s tail out of its mouth and frees itself from the formulation it had started. In the beginning there is binding, in the middle there is binding and at the end there is loosing.
If we know this we can see that only the free serpent is truly itself and un-duped by the formal behaviour that arises by closing or biting ones own tail. Michelangelo’s mason’s mark is simply three circles, laced together. If you get a pair of compasses and try this yourself, you discover you can repeat this to infinity – if you have got that much time and paper and patience. This simple interlacing of circles can give rise to the whole phenomenal world in all its relations. Without stopping we can run around, from one circle to another to infinity. This closed circle, this ‘serpent with tail in mouth’ is the most economic way of saying one element in the chain mesh – the armour of God – the one thing that keeps you out from pure will. The ruse whereby free spirit objectifies itself is by closure, rotation. And this rotation is a bound, it’s a filter and a screen and stops you seeing that you are concerned entirely with free will positing objects which are bound.
Now in the Hebrew there is a funny letter, a little letter, that’s shaped like a triangle. In the Tarot his name is Forca -’the fork’, and it is equated with ‘The Fool’. This letter is made of three other letters and the letters they are made of is simply the same letter repeated three times. It is the sixth letter of the alphabet. So if you put down this number six, three times, in the English notation it’s six, six ,six. It is ‘the number of the man and the number of the beast’ in revelations. Whether it’s the number of the man or the beast depends on how you look at it. If you want to humanise yourself, you can see it as the number of ‘man the evaluator’. If you see it as the beast, you see it as a closed system of energies no longer aware of the fact that they are self precipitated. The beast is the energy involved, become inert – it can’t get out of its package. The man aspect of it is evaluator. In the Hebrew letter you can put a dot either over the sinister tooth of the trident, or over the dexter tooth. And if you put it on the sinister side it is pronounced ‘shin’ . And if you put it on the dexter side it is pronounced ‘sin’. ‘shin’ means the eternal spirit and ‘sin’ means the temporal spirit, or matter. [33 min 42]
There is a joke about this, namely that always in the universe is ‘justice’ – ‘forca’ – this trident, and the ‘sin’ is only the ‘shin’ precipitated. The shin is the absolute fire of God, this letter too means ‘fire’. The Hebrew word for a man is ‘yod shin‘ – ‘ish’, means fire, its the noise that fire makes under the free conditions to go ‘phwish’ [non word sound of wind or rushing air]. And man is a fire, or man is a spirit. And if you point him on the absolute consciousness side, then he is just spread out, he’s just ‘shuhhh’ [non word - sound of gentle breeze], it takes out the crests of the conceptualised energies and breaks it down to just flats. The sound made by the tongue, held flat in that way is shuhhh.
But if you allow the crests to go up, put the tip of your tongue against the palette and hold it tight, with a small area in contact, it says sssuh [non word sound] - sharp edge. So if we like to represent the passage from spirit to matter we can do so by drawing an arrow through that one letter. The arrow says we are going from shin to sin; from shine to sign, with the ‘G’ in it ‘sig’. When you are doing this, your intelligence, your illumination, your shine is becoming ‘signatured’ or objectified. But there is no objectification other than the self objectification of the shin by actualisation by self opposition; pressure against oneself objectified. So when the field motions press against themselves in opposition, this produces a zone of ‘sig’ of relative ignorance – spirit ‘ig’. [36 min 04]
It is only by condensation of oneself, pressing against oneself, as a sentient power that any object comes to be. In this sense, every ‘sig’ that exists, that is every spiritual, individuated earth being is: self precipitated and the cause of its own objectification; its own destiny, it own reward and its own punishment. ‘I am mine own executioner,’ says the poet, mystic, and he [indistinct word drowned by cough, suggest – means] ‘my spirit has precipitated my sign’. We are all self condemned. And nothing condemns us except the mode of our own self-conception, conceptualising.
If we take the same joke out of Indian philosophy, we get Shiva is Shava. This is nearly the same word but not quite, there is a vowel issue. Shiva is the great god with the power of concentration and Shava is a corpse. So Shiva is like shin and Shava is like sin. In so far as you have a corporeal form – mass inertia – you are self objectified, self rewarded, self punished. Now the curious thing is that if you don’t objectify at all you feel yourself as a potential of objectification, which is not self realised. So you feel a bit satisfied and this tends to make you move into objectification. [38 min 08] But if you do move into objectification, beyond a certain threshold level, you lose awareness that you are precipitating it, and you become imposed on by your own self-objectification and you begin to conceive that the form of your being is something that you cannot get rid of; something that is essentially you and therefore something you are stuck with.
Now in Christian theology it is the duty of the Devil to convict you of sin. Now convict means – convince mightily. Any stimulus that acts upon you to convict you, that is convince you, that the form you have is essential to you and cannot be got rid of, is a devil to you. Factually there is no form inside you whatever that you have not yourself precipitated. True that you’ve precipitated it in response to a stimulus, but you have precipitated it. The stimulus cannot do it without your help.
Imagine yourself as a closed system, you have nothing in you. A stimulus comes and hits you and the ripple passes through you but what you do with the ripple once it comes in, is your business. If you were transparent to the stimulus it would go straight through you and be as if it had never been. But if you have started to conceptualise yourself as a finite being, when the stimulus hits you go to meet it. In the ‘I - Ching’, it is one of the trigrams called ‘going to meet’ , when you go to meet it you are trying to hold it. Maybe you are trying to hold it out because you believe it is evil, or hold it in because you believe it’s desirable, but you are trying to hold it. And in the act of holding the energy of the stimulus the thing spins – you have now generated a ‘sub–ent’ - a subsidiary zone characterised, formally, by the motion stimulus, plus the motion of your reaction. |You are now what you call a character.[40 min 30]
This character is very closely related to your concept of the kind of deity you have. It’s the chariot, ‘the char’ in the character, and the ‘char – iot’ are intimately related – they are both hchha [non word sounded ] or power differentiations. When you have these reactions inside yourself you are in very grave danger, because if you are not careful, you will start substanting them because you believe they are essential parts of your equilibrium. So if your friend comes along and gives you a stimulus, saying, ‘You know the reaction you made to that stimulus number one, I think it was a very bad reaction’. Instead of confessing, ‘Yea, it was a bad reaction,’ the tendency is to substantiate it and to try to justify this reaction, and therefore to add more to it to try to build it up. You take the energy of the accusation and try to use it to bolster up the already faulty reaction you have shown. You are now building yourself a ‘bad’ character. ‘Bad’ means – your house is being divided.
So that whenever you respond in self defence in the presence of an accusation you are actually conditioning your body to respond in a progressively more finite, more limited way.
The saying in the Tao Te King that we should be transparent to the world’s situation means just this, if we can stop the ‘bounce’ inside us when a stimulus comes the energy of the stimulus will go straight through us. We’ll be aware of what has gone through but we will not formulate from it and establish in our being an inert form that can condition our behaviour. We continuously get rid of the stimulus information. We continuously therefore restate our Pralaya our primary entropy. We get rid of all our characterising agents. We continuously restate our absolute essential foolishness. We don’t know what it is we’ve been subjected to and every time the stimulus comes to us, instead of building up around the stimulus, we just plain out again. We go through life flattening ourselves instead of building ourselves. And instead of finishing up a series of wonderful collection of mountain ranges we are still flat.
And certain there’s a peculiar thing about the nature of this flatness. This flatness is the original motion of the absolute. And this motion of the absolute, being absolute, is motion in all directions and contains therefore within its ‘all directionalness’, within sections of this absolute motion all conceivable forms that may be super-stressed in an elective situation. So one unique thing about flatness, you are not ignorant you are merely innocent. You can see the form of the situation presented to you and you see the context in which it belongs. That is you see the absolute field, charged with form – it is the ‘Sophic Sphere’ – the wisdom sphere, and as the stimulus hits it you see where this stimulus belongs. You see the tendency within the sphere to hold on to it and react, and you open it out again but you are aware of the zones responding. So that you continuously restate omniscience when you flatten yourself out. [44 min 39]
[the tape/talk jumps here a little] …you do not become ‘ig-norant’. That is you allow yourself the response of the stimulus by building up a resistance to it of by trying to hold it, to possess it. You super-stress the Sophic Sphere and if all the forms within the grid are free, and the stimulus comes, and perhaps stimulates one of them, if you try to hold the formal stimulus you have super stressed part of the grid. Now if you stress that very, very much, that part of the grid will begin to dominate the field of consciousness. That means you are now finite, you are now ignorant, and you will respond finitely and therefore erroneously.
We see then that the purpose of analysis is loosening, the ‘lys’ in analysis means loosening. The ‘ana’ part of it is the same thing as motion. We want to get rid of that which binds the motion. The pure motion of the absolute is omniscience itself. But the ‘interfered with’, super-stressed motion is the zone of relative ignorance. We have to get rid of these by simply refusing to react to the stimulus, although we are very alert as the stimulus is presented and goes through us we do not allow the reaction.
We are not asleep, we are not ignoring the stimulus, we are alert – ‘all work’ – to the stimulus, and the work is to let it through. And you see it as it goes through and in the process you are learning all the time about the nature of your own being – without becoming super-stressed in the process. [46 min 40]
Analysis therefore is merely a method of attaining frustration, so that when you are fully frustrated you can say, ’This is frustration.’ You can actually see the limit of frustration and say, ‘Now if I cut it again, I do not need further form, I get nothing – only my own will. And this is precisely what you want, liberation from the conceptualised energies that were built up into wave crests, and the restatement of the original optimal entropy of your own being. Which is the same as free initiative.
Then if you particularly could focus on this one . . .
[Question from the audience] – Is it true that the Russians, as a nation, the Russian soul [unclear phrase suggest – . . . aggression, are able to change?]
We should get to know about all the different types of civilisation because they are really manifestations of subsidiary entities in any given individual. Understanding the human race in all its various aspects is the study of one man under various impulses. And therefore Ethnology has a function for the individual self development, the same as any other department of human knowledge.
[Same questioner again] - Isn’t there a sort of plan of frustration? Isn’t there a sort of period of suffering, to which a nations human needs are as it were limited or devoting themselves ? Aren’t they hanging on to their resistance pattern for a period ? [50 min 02]
[Another Questioner] - Why is there in a section a refusal to define, from the parts of the majority of people ? They can get into positions, quite elevated positions even in the teaching and educational world, and be not even clear of the value of definition.
[The second speaker again] - There is no doubt that if you can define and then the feeling which arises is a feeling of, of power, isn’t it . The moment that a form is presented which is now not a form to you the moment . . .
And if you can be tricked into valuing any given concept so that you think it’s a necessity of your existence you are powering your emotion into that form. And therefore something that is really infinite, your emotion, your potential in the field is effectively finited into the situation formally, and therefore it is put in bondage. And then other beings, who know the ropes, can deal with you as a mechanically formulated entity instead of as a free will.
[The second speaker again] – They’d obviously be terrified of definition in that case in case it breaks through the school, wouldn’t they.
It will actually divert you, so that when you say, ‘This concept is untrue and I must throw it away’ and if you throw it away it will run away, it will change its form and come back and say, ‘Yes, you got me with that one. Here’s another one better.’ But it’s really the same one disguised. And it act like a subsidiary entity within you. And it must be so because absolutely there is nothing other than sentient power, and the sentient power is self objectified as the form. So an idea, in so far as it is circumscribed, is a definite amount of sentient power. And when sentient power circumscribes, it constitutes an entity. So this idea with the energy involved in an emotional charge will actually fight for its own existence against other ideas. This is basic, [54 min 37 unclear words suggest - heard in the annals] of educational psychology, where ideas actually fight like soldiers, perhaps it was because he was a German and he saw it. But the ideas are fighting, like soldiers fir a threshold in consciousness.
They are not just empty forms, they are forms of energy and this energy is fundamentally sentient, so it feels itself to be alive, it witnesses itself as alive, it makes case for its existence against other forms that want to contradict it. So a man with many concepts is a battlefield, literally, between energies that are inconsistent with each other and struggle to dominate the field.
There is nothing inside a man that is not outside, and there is nothing outside that is not inside. Which means you’ve got inside you Laurence of Arabia and Allenby saying, he’s glad he has no responsibility, and things. They’re all there and if you can see it outside, and if you go and look inside and you find the thing you have condemned outside is inside. Only, just as the one outside, if you condemn it openly will retaliate, so will the one on the inside if you condemn it openly will retaliate. And therefore ‘softly, softly, catchee monkey’. When you discover an idea is erroneous inside you, your best method of getting at it is obliquely, that is creep up on it.
Find another idea that is presupposed in it and basic to it, but not quite so strong, and descend on this decoy. Move away from the strong one and find one related to it that is feeding it and destroy it. As you would with a garrison, a garrison town, manned and armed , outposts round it, you wouldn’t try to attack the strongest point first. You’d find a few weak points and you’d destroy those and this would weaken the central position. So if you take subsidiary concepts of your pet ideas, the full implications of which you have not seen but you know that they are somehow connected with your central idea and essential to it, they are not sufficiently aware of the connections to defend themselves adequately. So you can tear them to bits, analyse them and destroy them. And then the central idea is weakened. You have to conduct your internal individual development, in the same way as a Joshua conducted his campaign. In fact that’s what the book of Joshua’s about, the internal process of fighting the battle of ‘sub-ents’.
[a third questioner asks] - And in the centre you have a great gain presumably? . . . which is the garden . . .
[ third questioner] - yes circled, and he is in the dark presumably, you see.
[end of recording 58 min 27]