HIERARCHY IN BODY CENTRES
Talk given at Ishval by Eugene Halliday, Ishval Audio 140
I am going to continue where we left off last time we met. The reason I am going to do that is because several people said to me that they would like an expansion of what was then said, and I like expanding that particular thing backwards, in a sort of contractive manner to concentrate what was there already fused.
So I am going to start with this question of centres in the human being related to certain organic structures in the body but I am not going to deal with it anatomically in the occidental sense, but logically in terms of evolution in the individual and human collective and in the cosmic. One of the main difficulties with philosophy is the failure to define terms adequately in each generation. Each philosopher seems to like to start from scratch, which is, as you know, a name of the Devil, and is determined if possible, to ignore the contributions of all other men of the past, except in so far as he believes he can refute them. So we don’t actually have a history of philosophy in which the valid contribution of a philosopher is clarified and added to the next philosopher. What we tend to have is one philosopher denying the conclusions of his predecessors in order to establish a new truth. Well, we want to cut across all this by considering, from certain dialectical principles, what is possible for human thought, in considering universal manifestation and the individual within that.
To do this, we can start off with our old friend S, where S is the subject, the observer, sentience itself. Sentience means feeling, which is the basis of all knowledge. A plant feels dimly, and animal feels a little more acutely, a human being has a magnifying glass on his sufferings so that he can actually make them bigger than they are by a process of feedback. But, in all cases, sentience is at the basis of what is happening. So when we write S we shall mean the perceiving subject of phenomena, we shall mean the consciousness internal to which all objects appear. We shall mean an infinite field of sentience; we shall mean that it is infinite because we cannot actually define the limits of anything other than an object. To define, by the meaning of the term, and the fin in define; which means end, to define is to indicate the limits of extension of any given being, .so we can only define that which has limits. Anything whatever that can be defined with limits, that we can refer to as an object, or as phenomena, or we can say of it that it is a content of sentience itself. When sentience analyses itself and verbalises its analytical process, sentience is then called consciousness. When sentience is on guard against a very wide field of possibilities we call it awareness. These are words from different languages simply because different peoples have developed sentience in different ways. Remember that the SCI in conscious comes from a root meaning to cut, to shear, as you see in scissors. So consciousness itself means an analytical process. You cut total reality into bits in order to become conscious. If you don’t cut it into bits and analyse it, although you are sentient, that is you can feel, although you may be aware of a widely diffused threat to your existence, you are not conscious until you analyse and verbalise the content of your sentience. Sentience therefore includes all modes of knowing within itself that it is the Infinite Field internal to which some of its processes are analytic, and those analytic processes are the means whereby we become clearer and clearer about what is happening. When we define any situation whatever we become, by that act of definition more in charge of a situation than we would otherwise do.
I went to a football match once in 1926, and the man who took me took me, because I did not want to go and he thought it was very wrong of me to say that it was a waste of my time to go to a football match and therefore I ought to go, for my education’s sake, so I went, because I love education and when I got there I could not tell spud from Murphy. Those of you who are not old enough to understand that, means that was the hero of the day. But I could not be bothered with the geometry of the football field, I did not define, the shirts were rather similar of the two teams, and the result was I did not know who won or lost and I did not want to know. All I knew was that the weather was very cold, it was foggy and there was a fellow walking about, obviously very sick, nigh unto death, trying to persuade other people to buy what he said were cough cure tablets, and he was coughing throughout this fog. Now, because I could not understand the rules and did not want to understand those rules, although I am very interested in geometry, I didn’t like to waste my time deciding why a sudden roar went up, it can be said that I was not conscious of what was going on. I was aware that there was movement. Peripherally I was aware that men were rushing about and that some people shouted for some reason or other, every now and then, very loud and began to thump each other. But I had sentience but I had no consciousness of what was going on, and, being a stickler for precise significances, I did not pretend to be conscious, and when this man said, “Well, did you understand it?” and I said, “I was totally unconscious of what was going on,” and he accused me of abstractive processes, introversion, lack of communication and a variety of other things. I have not been since and I have not bothered to commit to memory the geometry of the football field. But I know, from occasional accidental viewing on the TV, that there is sometimes sufficient difference of shirts to say why one man is hitting another. The important thing is that when we define and analyse, only when we do so are we conscious, and where we do not define, we cannot act as referee. It would be no good at all giving the whistle to me on a football field and say referee this, because I would not know when to blow the whistle except if I happened to feel, from the rhythmical pattern of movement that a whistle here or there would help.
So we have to be very careful that we are thoroughly conscious, that is we verbally define what we mean with every term we use, and we are talking about sentience, we are saying sentience comes from a word meaning to feel, that feeling is the means whereby, basically, every living form is aware of itself and its environment. But, within the field of sentience, we can define objects without in any sense, defining sentience. No philosopher has ever defined sentience, awareness, consciousness, adequately so that any other being with no awareness, no consciousness and no sentience has been able to understand him. It is only possible to talk about sentience to sentient beings. To talk at all to anybody requires them to have a sufficient vocabulary to be conscious, that is to be analytic, at least about the sounds you are using to represent certain ideas. So, when we try to examine sentience we must recognise that nothing whatever can be said about sentience other than this, it is that in which phenomena occur, in which objects are presented. And we say we are beings of five senses; we smell, - not stink in that pejorative sense, we smell, taste, touch, hear and there is one missing. Seeing is the tyrant, because seeing gives you the defined edge whereby you are led to separate, from sentience, its content. With the play of light on the retina, you are led, by differences of tone value and colour, to assume contours where you see changes, which are then assumed to belong to what we call an object. An object is something most clearly defined by the eye, so that the eye has become in ancient literatures and certainly in all initiatory rites of the great religions, the supreme tyrant and supreme agent of the intellect. By means of adequate vision and definition of forms as perceived by the eye, it is possible to learn to think geometrically and when we do this we can discover that although we can never consider sentience as such, we can actually consider the objects within sentience and then it does not matter whether sentience has any significance at all, because instead of looking for significance in sentience where it has no existence, we look for significance in the object.
Now I am going to say that within sentience there are certain perceptive possibilities. I am going to write a P there for perception, for phenomena, for predication. Now the field of sentience must be undefined, or if we like, we can define it negatively by saying it is infinite. Infinite means not finite and it does not mean anything else. The field of sentience is not finite and is therefore non-defined, but the field of sentience is that internal to which, all the objects we know about, present themselves. Philosophically it is very often useful to call them phenomena. Phenomena means names separated from other names. A noumenon is a name standing in its own right as a mode of absolute definition. The prefix before it, using a letter phi, which means analysis, means that we can take the noumenon and turn it into a phenomenon by deliberately segregating it from the totality of other phenomena within the field of sentience. So we can say that any sentient being can be represented by S, and the content of any sentient being can be represented by P. That which is pre-cipitated, that which is phenomenal, analysable, that which is posited within sentience is represented by P. So that in a simple two-fold analysis of ultimate reality, we do not actually need more symbols than S and P. It is rather like binary. You know is you want to write a number in binary as opposed to a denary system, you are only allowed to use one and 0. So if I said 1 and 0 like that, in binary that does not mean ten, because I am only allowed to use these two numbers so I cannot fill the space in between here with the others from two to nine and so it is very, very useful to be able to write yes, no, something, nothing and deal with everything in the Universe in that way. It makes computers possible. In the same way, in philosophy we could use S and P. We could say we are either referring to sentience or to what is posited within sentience. If we refer to sentience we have nothing to say other than this, that it is that in which P is posited. But nevertheless we could analyse every conceivable phenomenal structure, object or event in P-terms. All we have to say is P is the pattern, which appears within sentience and we can then compare patterns and ignore the sentience and be concerned with the pattern because it is only the pattern that determines what we mean by efficiency. A man who designs a motor car engine or a jet plane engine or an engine for an ocean liner is concerned with different patterns, is concerned with the way we arrange P. A primary particle pluralised, like a lot of little ball bearings and then arranged in patterns constitutes the analysable universe. Sentience is beyond analysis forever because it is that, internal to which, the analytical process must take place. What takes place, what is posited within sentience, that we can deal with. So in the very simple analysis we can say ultimate reality is polarised as sentience and power and we must now ignore the sentience and concentrate on the power positing the phenomena particularised within it.
When we do this we will say, well it is going to be very complicated. You see, to programme a computer you have to train somebody in this binary system, and you have to get that person to reduce every thing that he knows to a yes-no. In philosophy we have to say reduce everything you know to P. That is, the play of patterns, posited, phenomenon within sentience. Well, you could do it, but, like the binary, you would have to train for it and that was one of the main objects of the Buddhist religion, which set out to say only sentience is non-conditioned. All phenomena are conditioned.
Now, do you wish to be conditioned or non-conditioned? Nobody knew what he was talking about so they all said, “Please we would like to be non-conditioned,” because he put an emotive tone in the one and not in the other. Would you prefer to be free or in jail? Everybody shouts, “Free.” They don’t bother to analyse that “jail” actually is an old name of God, tying Himself up and that there is no jail whatever other than that posited by sentience within itself. Jail is form; jail is any form whatever, anywhere. Prison is form, P for prison. There are no prisons other than forms posited within sentience. Buddha said only sentience is unconditioned, you condition lot and they said, “Oh we are terribly sorry, How do we get to that?” and he said, “Well, give it all up. Stop positing, stop thirsting, stop being hungry and just be sentience.” Now, anybody who listened to him, immediately got out of the way of all the businessmen, as you can imagine, who were very busy positing, and if everybody had taken Buddha seriously and gone on with their sentience and abandoned their positing, there would have been a lot more space in India for further positors to push around in. And most of them did not understand what he was talking about, and as soon as he was dead and even before, they were busy positing again and they have not stopped yet until they S for pig, pill.
Now we can see that handling philosophy in this polarised way does not make it terribly easy unless we train ourselves all the time. You meet Mr Smith, Trevor, and instead of saying that is Mr Smith, you say, “Oh that is P to the 2354 to the tenth.” It is very confusing. It is more convenient to say, “There is Trevor of the S.” And this way is economic to deal with each other rather than a simple binary philosophy, so it sometimes helps to add another term. If we see that sentience is that internal to which phenomena appear, that internal to which is posited the particular particle the patterning of which constitutes the world, we can say let it be imagined that between these two something is happening, a process is occurring of circumscription. Now we can write an O in here to symbolise circumscription. I will now change this diagram because that is the original sop that the solid globe would be made into, if we were to pursue the philosophy thoroughly, and we are going to say we are now going to write the circle there and put the P inside it and the S outside it, and this circle is to remind us that what we mean by phenomena, what we mean by particularised, particular patterning is circumscription. The fact that SOP is t he ancient word for wisdom, Sophia, derives from this observation. Everything that can be circumscribed is now within P, or P is the circumscribed, P and O are contingent on each other and they are congruent absolutely. S is the observing subject, internal to which, it is all there round here, internal to which phenomena are posited. So we now have a three-fold system. Now when we have this system we observe factually, that we become more efficient in handling phenomena, which is the only thing to be handled anyway, the more accurately we can circumscribe a situation. If you go to Her Majesty’s Stationery Offices you can find a little guidebook called Careers. In that book you will find that you can be a teacher or a dentist or an atomic scientist and all sorts of funny things. This is a basic book that tells you what P you are if you read the book and are influenced by it. Once you are posited on the book and the book acts on you, you are, possibly conditionable by the terminology of the book. It has a very high sale, that book, actually.
So we see here that in order to decide what to do, you must circumscribe the infinity of possibilities and select from infinite possibility that that you think you are most likely to be profitably employed in. Now we find here, change the diagram again, we are going to put sentience at the top, we are going to put P at the bottom. That is P for perhaps. Between these two we are going to put the zone O and we are going to remember that this P really belongs in that O. But we are going to say a funny thing about it. That if we cover this whole thing like this, we have drawn a diagram of a being, separated out in a linear manner rather like a human being. A human being has five senses in the head and he has a positor down below and he has a zone between into which S is infiltrating and P is infiltrating. Now, we have a threefold division here and we can say there is sense information coming in through the five senses in the head, there is a positing energy at the other end of the body, tending to posit regardless, and there is a zone of interrelation where the senses fabricate from their own activities what they are pleased to define as rules, which they then try to impose on the positing tendencies, and the positing tendencies, being serpentine are very subtle and they try to avoid whatever impositions there are, whatever inhibitions there are upon their activities. So, there arises between them a zone of interference of S and P, a zone that is tremendously important because that zone psychologically, is the zone of the affect. That is the zone of emotional play, the zone where you suffer emotionally from the necessity of choice. Now, if we send a force down to something that we have posited, that force will bounce back again to the source, so that the energy thrown onto a centre from the periphery, bounces back to the periphery. Once a periphery has come to be as when we do the S outside the circumscribed zone, once the periphery has come to be, anything pressing upon it can in fact, be bounced from the periphery back to the initiating source. So there arises another zone, a zone between S and O and another zone between O and P. If we say that this middle zone here is the zone in which emotive responses occur to the impositions of controls upon basic impulses, then we can say that in the battle of the zone the S which is free, is more able to work upon the emotive zone from above and to see it objectively, but the P, which is below, produces a zone of interaction here, so that when it sees the desire or the emotive charge to be already tainted by orders from above, a conflict will appear in which the P tries to avoid the tainting of the pure impulse by the intellectively imposed taboo. We have now got a five-fold system.
Now, let us apply this, as we did before, to the human being and we will say the human being has these three parts and we will observe the nexus, here, between them. The head is lifted away from the rest of the body in order that the head may be able consider, consciously, that is, analytically, whatever messages come to it from below. The essential thing about that head is that it must be able to shelter itself sufficiently to be able consider what would be the best formal response to any phenomenal stimulus. So, at the top end there we have the function of reason, at the other end the function of pure impulse, the unconsidered impulse, which always feels exactly right unless it is actually punished, which means, negated in its power by some action of a restraining force.
Between the reason and the spontaneous impulse arises the zone of conflict, “Shall I, shall I not?” let us say “Yes” a Y down there and “No” up there. A “No” in the head and a “Yes” in the lower tummy and then let us say that the head comes down and writes “No” and the tummy rises up and writes “Yes.” So that in the chest region there is a conflict between yes and no. Yes comes from below, “I affirm life,” no comes from above, “You know what happens when you affirm life, you get into trouble.” The one below rising up says, “Nevertheless, I affirm, because if I accept your ‘No’ I die.” The one above says, “Either you accept my ‘No’ all we all die.”And therefore in this chest zone there is this tremendous zone of conflict. Annoy (aNNoY) of course has just a couple of these with the N and the Y in a different order. The whole object is to annoy the whole being so that the whole being becomes aware to what he shall say “Yes” and to what “No.”
Now, as we have seen in the other diagram, when the No-sayer or law, the control, says “No” and the one below says “Yes” and produces a conflict zone, the existing conflict zone now produces between it here, an analytical device, because now, the law, the no-sayer, the nous, he who knows, examines the conflict and by verbal trickery, proceeds to sort out the nature of the conflict. Whereas, down below there is a zone here coming into being where the positive spontaneous impulse of life says to itself “I suspect that this no-stuff is going on up there, I will have to defend myself with all subtlety.” If we allowed the free, spontaneous, natural impulse is the good then we would have to abandon all control and civilisation would probably disappear. If we say that we will curb this “Yes” but by pure imposition from above without waiting for understanding we will produce a profoundly negative state with ultimate impotence and the disappearance of the human race through impotence. What is required is that there shall be a balancing of these processes. This fivefold division has arisen because we have sentience and positing within it, these interact and produce a zone of conflict, and then with the sentience imposing “Noes” here, there has arisen a mediating zone which is your larynx and between this chest zone and this impulse zone there has arisen the solar plexus there which tells you that you have to become very, very subtle to defeat the verbalising impositions of the law. Now, all of these processes are essential for human evolution there is no possibility of saying that one of these is good and the rest is bad. It has been historically convenient for the ones in the head zone who say, “No” to say to the spontaneous responders, “You are wrong,” because in the days of spontaneous response, civilisation was impossible. Let us therefore take this and see how we divide it.
We used the sixfold division last time and we can do exactly the same thing now, simply positing inside here sub-division, Now, if we take it like this and we now start at the bottom and we say the sexual centre down there and that circle is centred on the navel, so you have a sexual impulse, a navel which guarantees you had parents and therefore makes you a family man, a herd animal, a solar plexus brain there which is instinctive and perfectly matched to the environment so that the solar intelligence in the solar plexus is invariably right within the environment that gave birth to its knowledge but it is not invariably right in another environment. If we take a polar bear, with its instincts, in the Arctic Circle and put it in an equatorial jungle it will become confused, its instincts will not have the appropriate stimuli. So, remember that your solar plexus is infallible in its conclusions providing you are in the environment in which that solar plexus got its information. Now, from the solar plexus here to the heart we have a slightly different process going on. This heart centre came into existence as a result of the interplay between sentience and phenomena or the law of consciousness analysis and the spontaneous impulse. The heart itself is the centre of the whole being and is the supreme evaluating centre of sentience, but, between the chest and the head comes the larynx, and that is your verbalising centre and in the head, between the eyebrows, you have a centre called the command centre, individual, and at the top of the head there, where babies have a little hole, you have a universal.
When we look at this analysis we see what we did before, the universal there, contains the potentialities of all that are at the other end of the being. Whatever occurs in the sexual drive, the attempt to posit children, that is, new phenomena, new forms of being is a potentiality in the universal, there. So these two are in opposition, not as enemies, but opposition, spatially because one of them is the universal, cosmic; the other one is a particularising individuated co-creator. The space between your eyebrows, just slightly above them, your individual command centre is opposed to your herd instinct. The thing that makes you a member of a family, whether it is a little family, the one that generated you, or the nation, or the total terrestrial community, this is in opposition with your individual being, but they are not enemies but they frequently function as if they were. But when they do, they do so in order to be friends because only good fences make good neighbours, and if you wish to stay on good terms with members of your own family, the best thing to do is to remove to the antipodes. There is a certain natural law about that and misinformation about that holds people together in continuous enmity that would be far happier friends far apart, to do with the dispersal of characteristics through the infinite continuum.
Now, in the same way that this opposition exists, so there is opposition between verbalisation, which is serial, moment-by-moment you say a word, a word, a word; and the solar plexus, which is simultaneous knowledge from a given environment. Your verbal centre analyses what your solar plexus simultaneously comprehends. And the heart is the pivotal centre for all these processes. There are three down here, three above and one in the middle. Further sub-division of the chest will show that we have certain processes going on on the diaphragm and certain in the upper chest where there is a funny little gland that has certain relations, there. And, of course, when we did that we get a nine- fold division and we can go on doing all kinds of funny things by sub-dividing our initial concept. What we have to remember is that our sub-divisions are for our increased efficiency and not for anything else, and that there is no entity status of self existence within anything we define other than that we choose arbitrarily to use as an entity. The only reality is whole reality and anything abstracted from it by the intellect for its own purposes, wrenched out of its holistic content is thereby rendered that much less relational, that much less powerful, that much less efficient. Now, we can see here the meaning of power differentiation because if we look at this diagram we can see that it represents a process of evolution and involution. If we start with the cosmos up here and posit progressively downwards we will find that cosmic energies first posit individuated centres of sentience; those individuated centres of sentience verbalise, that is to say, they vibrate sonically; they, observing their own vibratory state feel; the verbalisations through the feeling are gathered together into a unity and generate this solar intelligence of the animal; this solar intelligence posits a family as a means of development because only groups provide each other with sufficient stimulus to develop the individuals within the group; this group posits the individual. That is the process of involution. That the cosmic posits its primordial monads, the unities of sentience; that they vibrate and verbalise their own content; that feeling their own verbalisations they unify them and make a solar intelligence, which is instinctive; that makes the group or family; and that posits an individual.
Now the process of evolution, this way is that every individual has to belong, in order to evolve, to a family; has to be subjected to the collective instinctive knowledge of the group to which he belongs; and then he has to climb up, to evaluate in feeling, the evolution of the instinct of compassion rising out of the solar plexus,;and when he has felt this unity of all beings instead of simply of his own group; then to verbalise his relation with forces of the source of the origin; and then in the process of verbalisation to integrate himself as an individual. When he is a self-conscious evolved individual able to articulate his inner content then he is in a state where he can assert his cosmic origin and his cosmic intent to co-operate with all other beings who are cosmically determinant. So involution is a process from the cosmic downwards to the particular individual, evolution upwards from the individual to the cosmic.
Now, in terms of efficiency, the more you know formally about a situation, the better equipped you are to deal with it. The freer you are from emotional contagion the better you are to deal with it. And, the more free energy you have the better you are to deal with it.
If we take this word, (Hieros) the old Egyptian word for a priest we see here the same kind of division in which power and sentience here is breathing a relation between it. H has always been the glyph of power. It means control, it means hedging it means ditching, it means ladders of high design. Power in the Universe differentiates that is the R. The differentiation of those powers result in expressions. Every time you differentiate a power, there is a stimulus from the differentiation and the whole thing feeds back. The vowels here (ie) mean God and the vowel here (o) means the world. So, within this word we have a series of glyphs which imply that there is more efficiency in the differentiated mind, in free power and freedom from emotional contagion. This is obviously a very, very high aim for a person involved in an emotive situation. A person involved in an emotive situation does not want to know what are the formal facts. A man may fall in love with a woman with bowlegs. We can find a tribe that think they are beautiful and send him there, and then everybody will be happy. It is true that we can find forms that will please anybody in the universe and it is equally true that we usually find people not in the places where those forms are. Because, if they were in the places where those forms are, because if they were exactly where they would be satisfied, the universe would be static. And therefore there has been a big mixing process. Creation and the word ‘crater’ are fundamentally the same word and the crater, the creator, is a mixing bowl. The fundamental idea of creation is to get everybody who is thoroughly satisfied as far away from the being that can satisfy them as possible, and then say, “Right, find it.” And, viewed from a helicopter it makes very interesting patternings which people of Germanic extraction like doing in slow motion on TV.
The important thing about it is to deny that differentiation of power is the way to efficiency is simply to regress to an earlier level. We remember that when we take a monocell, some living protoplasm, with no divisions within it, if we give a stimulus, that is an energy input, in to that protoplasm, the energy goes inside it, bangs against the walls, reverberates in there and there is no discrimination within that being. It is simply moved by the energy input and the energy which constitutes its own being. If we put two stimuli into that being and mark one B and the other A, the one called A will cover the whole sphere with A and the one called B will cover it with B and there will be no possibility in that being, of discrimination. If we were to fire all the letters of the alphabet simultaneously at an amoeba it would vibrate alphabetically, simultaneously, comprehensively but it would not comprehend Shakespeare’s serial order of presentation. This method of mashing up the whole thing is called protopathic response and it depends on a monocell having no internal subdivisions. This kind of being goes about and it evacuates anywhere, from any point whatever. It ingests food by throwing out prolongations, pseudopodia and then it retracts them, and it piles up rubbish in itself and it goes pbut anywhere really and no possibility of saying, “Would you mind that away,” do you see? Whereas a little thing called paramecium has more consideration. It has actually drilled a little hole in itself, and it is always in the same place. So, if you approach a paramecium from the front you do not get insulted, whereas with this protopathic geezer you can actually be insulted very easily, If you have friends who suddenly opened a very large pore and blew out of it what they did not want and you never knew where the pore was going to open, you would say, “Well, I must defend myself somehow. Either I have got to accelerate my own pore openings in all directions or retire from this place.” The process of evolution is retiring from this place, namely the pond. Climb out and start being a unidirectional being with a front end and a back end with a notice on both. Remember all your features are notices for other beings to interpret.
Now, protopathic response is no good and it is the biggest single enemy of the next step in human evolution. Human evolution is a movement of cosmic intelligence to produce within itself, pluralisations, the S produces the P. Each one of these posited beings has a destiny to fulfil and the end of its destiny is that each posited being within the field of sentience, shall be able to function consciously and deliberately and by act of will freely from within itself. It shall be absolutely self-determinant and absolutely reflexive, and when this has occurred, so that all the energy inside cosmos is actually energy of absolute self-determination then that is the end of evolution. The human race is not there yet, altogether. There have been indicators in the past of the possibilities. We have seen in Europe, certain kinds of psychological movements, generally subsumed under mysticism, we have seen the same in India, in Yoga and so on. All these processes are simply attempts on the part of an evolving cosmic being precipitating itself into individuation states, to get hold of itself and make a plurality of conscious created beings. The only way to this is by heightened awareness of the processes whereby one becomes what one is.
Now, if we take the being below, the belly being, which reproduces and belongs to a family and has an instinctive intelligence, and examine that being we find that such a being cannot get away from its herd. All its instinctive intelligence binds it within the herd and simply posits within the herd another form like itself so that that being cannot evolve to become a reflexive being, self-determinant, consciously creating like the original Cosmic Creator. So we have to say, we have to lift this being up somehow, out of the herd. You notice that Christ said that he had come to destroy certain facts in the world. And notably amongst these facts was the fact of family. When he was required to go back to his Mamma and his brothers and so on, he said, “Who is my mother and father and sisters and brothers? Those who do the will of my Father.” He denied terrestrial relationships of the physical order to be valid. He was anti-family, anti-biological group and pro-logos, pro-cosmic thinking. Buddha did the same thing because he did a very naughty unethical thing, he deserted his wife and child in the middle of the night and went away without telling her, that is very unethical and yet he became a saviour for millions. Other saviours in the past have had to break the herd instinct and the tie that stops individuated self-determination. Every point must become self-determinant because, logically that which is not self-determinant is going to be determined by something outside itself. The man who will not study what is happening in Vietnam or Biaffra and who yet presumes to vote upon it is a fool. If he is going to speak about it he should know about it. But unless he individuates himself and integrates himself then, that man is not qualified to speak, and he knows it. And, because he knows it, he joins the herd. So, that as soon as you say, “But you have no knowledge,” he invokes all his friends to come and beat you, because he knows that if he does not beat you he will have to change and he is at the level of belonging to the herd and living instinctively. But, evolution is going to wipe out every being that is not self-determinate, because the aim of evolution is the creation of self-determinate, self-conscious, reflexive beings. You have had a couple of wars, we are going to have another one. In this third one there will be such a stimulus presented to people that they will have to decide whether or not they are going to passively allow governments to slaughter them for purposes they know nothing about. Every person after the third world war will have to take a hand in his own government. He cannot put a mark on a piece of paper and say now I do not have to think any more. Men are sitting in a big house doing something so mysterious for my welfare that they will not let me take a TV camera in to watch them. The third world war will give us a bang to the human race for every individual to decide that he must know what he is doing and when all the beings in the world know what he is doing, so that no one of them can be duped by the others, then the evolutionary process is completed and the process called New Heaven, New Earth appears in its fullness.
Now let us consider another aspect, it must be getting near the end, (Collapse of drawing roll)
Now let us consider certain terms in relation to a five-fold division and see what the work is one has to do in order to integrate. We will say we have a physical body, we will call it a phiz bod because that is what it does, and this phiz bod is made of minerals from the earth. Every physical body of every living being we know is made of minerals from the earth by a certain agency. If you take a man and put him in the crematorium and go through the proceedings and get a little pile of somebody else’s ashes back, you will certainly get a mineral content not organic being after it has been through the fiery furnace. Jews do not like it because of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. Now, it is a fact that the minerals of the earth that lie inertly on the ground are picked up by plants, trees and so on, and that to do this they need light form the sun and a substance called chlorophyll and with the aid of this substance and the light they are able to take out of the atmosphere some carbon, they are able to mix with water, minerals from the earth, and they are able to take the so-called inanimate, inorganic mineral world and organise it in the form of a plant. And therefore we have to say there is a process above the level of the mineral. Anybody can go around and kick a rock when he is in a bad temper and the rock has no redress other than Newton’s Law of action-reaction and it cannot even determine that. Above the level of that physical body which chemical, there is a force, which vitalises and organises. Now this is a fact, this is the one we call the biofield, because there is a field of force which organises the mineral world and patterns it in ways quite beyond the power of minerality itself. The mineral world cannot grow by ingesting other minerals, changing their forms and moving about. It lies statically, and in the case of so-called crystal growth it is by accretion from outside, but this vital organising force, which is intimately connected with solar radiation, is able to pick up these minerals from the earth and in the air and to make an organised vital body. So that we have to say that the collectivity of vital organising forces, which takes these minerals of the world, must be considered to be, in its own sense, at its own level, a kind of being. Now, if we use the word ‘body’, we do not have to mean by the word ‘body’ gross heavy coarse material, mineral, by body we can mean anything whatever that we circumscribe, because the letter B originally was a circle and meant circumscribe and analyse, we put a D in it to divide it. A body is any energy system whatever that is circumscribed. So we can talk about a body of opinion, we could talk about a body of radio energies issuing from a certain radio station, we can talk about bodies of influence, bodies of emotion, bodies of spirit and so on. Body does not necessarily mean gross material of the heavy mineral sort, body is any zone that we can circumscribe and thereby divide from any other zone. So we can talk about a vital organising body and we can talk about a physical, mineral body and we can say that the collectivity of minerals elements in a body, if the vital organising body removes, begins to disintegrate, but the vital forces depart from an organised mineral body, the mineral bodies start returning to the places they came from.
Now we have not only a vital organising complex of energies, but we have also another one which mobilises us, because we do not only grow fatter and fatter day by day we also get up and run about and reduce it a bit. So we have to say we have another body up here and we will call it the mobilising or activating principle, here, and psychologically we experience it as desire but we will call it here an active, mobilising function. We run about as well as living. We live when we are asleep and relaxed in bed. A new principle is operative when we run about and we observe that we are climbing up from a purely passive mineral state in which another being who is vital can come along, grind us to bits and swallow us and convert us to its cause, like a plant does. There is a definite climb, because the plant has got one over the mineral world, it can do something with it that the mineral world cannot do itself. The plant takes a certain amount of mineral elements from the earth, and fix them up in the act of growth, and defies gravity the mineral is entirely gravity dominated, the plant is not. Now just as that plant can defy the horizontal of gravity, so there is another principle here that can defy gravity and the confinement to the vertical movement and move about horizontally. So that we find that we have a desire nature and we have an active, mobilising body and this active, mobilising body can run about, and rip trees up by the roots and throw them on fires and break rocks up, in other words, that active, mobilising body has got superiority over the merely organising vital body or the physical body.
Now, above this active running about mind this process of deciding to rush here and there, to evaluate this is this and this is that, in terms of action, we have another kind of body, which we will call the mental body, and this body is able to calculate where to run to without actually running. And this, the totality of the energies that calculate in the mind, the totality of those energies, is the mental body. Now the person who can evaluate his desires, his organic processes, his physical, mineral body, that person can decide, “Oh, I am vitamin C deficient today, I think I will swallow a couple,” and he can balance himself up in this way, he is superior to a being who cannot do this but must rush about. And as that being is superior to one that simply grows and organises, as that is superior to one that lies about on the ground. So there is a definite climb in power and efficiency to the level of the mind.
Now, the mentation process there represented is empirical and it merely counts what it has got through having a physical body, a vital organising complex of energies, an activating mobilising complex of energies and all these have acted in such a way there has been an evaluation, empirical, that is all the data supplied from below. But above this empirical mind there is another mind. Above that empirical mind there is one subtle one for which the term ‘buddhi’ is used, we will put boddhi down there, buddha is the intellect, this is that process which does not need an external stimulus to determine it. And that particular body there is able, without any external data, without reference to the mineral world, without reference to vital organisation, without reference to active mobilisation, without reference to empirical data, to determine from within itself the pure logic of possibility. Gautama Buddha represented pure intellection that could sit down under a Bo tree or a banyan tree or a banana tree or any other tree you like and from within himself, he could produce an intellectual analysis of a situation that did not yet exist. From that realm of cosmic intellect, sitting down inside himself, he was able to determine and to influence, one man, millions of people at the other level. He knew kings who were at the mental level, he knew other fellows at the active level, some who were lounging about, just being organisms, and some that were walked upon, like minerals. But he knew something else that he did not need to run about. He had a dialectical principle inside him of cosmic intellection, and it consisted in the discovery that every process downwards was developed deliberately by a process of internal self-positing, that this original cosmic intellection preceded the mentation of the empirical order, the active mobilisation of the animal body, the vital organising of your vegetative system and the minerality of your physical body. So that he completed a process to a certain level, the cosmic level. Now, there is only one level beyond that and that level is itself, the Infinite, the undefinable. Boddhi covers everything that is definable and beyond that there is only the undefinable which is the Absolute source of the whole process. And when there is a certain little formula in Yoga of being- consciousness- bliss, this top level is being referred to. You know that bliss is the uninterrupted motion of the will, you know that form interrupts, so this bliss level must be above the limitations. And we see in atma, spirit, buddhi, manas, the higher trinity. There is Free Spirit, Cosmic Intellection, Individual Mentation, that is the top triad and those are beyond all the determinations from below. And, if we take these four processes here we can refer to them as lower individual personality. So the man of the empirical mind who knows because he has studied empirically is clever in proportion to his studies and his degree of mobility and his vital organising drive and a physical body to start from, that man is what we call a personality. There is a very, very important rule and that is until you integrate your personality you cannot become spiritually illuminated. Until you can make your physical body obey you, and your vital organism obey you, and your active mobilising impulses obey you so that you only run about if you decide to, until you can integrate those processes, you are not yet ready for the higher triad. Number seven, in the Ancient World, a holy number, was so formed because it refers to this fact that we have a physical body with vital impulses, mobilising tendencies and mentation. These have to be integrated and when they are integrated you have a personality, a very clever shiny fellow. But that personality man is empirical, he is an encyclopaedic salesman on the door, he has studied externally and if he has studied very hard he is very, very clever, empirically. And when he has made that personality in that way then his next step is to offer to cosmic service all his cleverness. If he decides to keep his cleverness for his own defined, finite circle he cannot move up. But if he defines that having integrated himself so that he is so clever that he could really take advantage of millions if he so wished because of a sufficient millions of people not clever, if he decides to dupe, he remains on a lower level, a clever personality, a Hitler, a Mussolini or whatever you like, a Napoleon. But if he decides that he will dedicate himself to Absolute Service then the whole of this process is changed in a very mysterious way. The Transfiguration in Christianity refers to this that at the moment a very clever integrated man decides that he will not use his cleverness for furthering his own private, individual aims, at that moment the whole of his being has all the divisions that were taken into it for evolutionary purposes, washed out. He becomes a unity. You can see that this cannot happen unless that person dedicates to the service of the Absolute, because if he decides to keep for his private ends, his cleverness, he is keeping the divisions in himself that brought him into being and if he keeps those divisions in himself, he is on guard. If he is on guard he is inhibited, he is walled in. If he is inhibited in this private way then the spiritual triad above him cannot subserve his purpose because it is not their purpose, and therefore, although they are present all the way through him, his own fear of the defeat of his private purpose will keep him partitioned and hide from him aspects of his own being which will keep him at the level that he will always be inefficient in relation to those higher beings. And, just as the vital organising self is cleverer than the physical and the actual mobilising self is cleverer than the vital and the physical and the mentation is cleverer than the three of them so the spiritual triad beings above the private clever fellow, utilise his private cleverness to further their cosmic purpose.
So, we see that the whole process involves a departure from the Absolute and a return to the Absolute, a precipitation from omniscience into nescience, from knowing all to knowing nothing except the darkness of minerality and then the gradual climb out, until that being is so saturated with this world’s cleverness that he comes to a level where he knows as a fact that he could dupe millions of people to subserve his end, because until he reaches that level he cannot dedicate himself wholly. It is no good a person who is not integrated, who is not truly a person, a being using the right of running about stage, who may rush about and give you a pamphlet about a new religion or something, it is no good him dedicating himself to cosmos because he has nothing yet to offer. He is a tool to another being. The only being that can be of any real service to the spiritual triad that controls cosmos is the being who has integrated his four levels, so that being is a true personality with all his parts obeying that centre of mentation in him so that he constitutes a valid unific offering. At that point, and at no other, he can say right, I remove the necessary private binding lines of my evolutionary process and I now slip into the sea of the Infinite determined that I will not exist any more as other than an instrument. And then, he is the Prodigal Son that Christ talks about. He has done everything, he has integrated everything and he has given it up. Whatever he had done had enriched his sentience and this richness he offers to the Absolute. And in the very act of being able to offer it he rubs out the final, separating concept, the concept of private purpose, and rubbing that out there is no difference whatever between his will and the Absolute, in which case, whatever he says is absolute, and all the beings below him will not be able to comprehend what he is doing because they will comprehend at their own particular level; but he will become that mysterious pearl that the whole field was bought for, referred to in the parable. Remember the pearl is grown out of irritation. The irritation of phenomena within sentience has caused the precipitation of beings who ultimately will become absolutely self-determinant. To recognise the efficiency/inefficiency of the levels of being, to recognise that all things have authority on what is below them and subservience to what is above them except the top and the bottom. The Absolute has nothing above it and is self-determinant; the bottom has nothing below it and is totally enslaved, and in between these two there is a hierarchy of. developing, evolving beings.
HIERARCHY IN BODY CENTRES