VOCABULARY by Eugene Halliday
Transcription by Bob Hardy
[Recorded at ISHVAL meeting – date unknown]
We are talking about the use of terms, without bothering about the implications of them.
Most of the vocabulary that we have is a vocabulary - acquired as children - without definition.
There is an index, as when you point out something to a child and say, “That is a pot, that is a plate, that is a cup.”
You indicate but don’t define, and particularly, not the implications. So children are told to be naughty, or not naughty, according to the mood of the person. No definition is given adequately to cover the implications of the term.
We’ll use this particular word ‘unique’ to indicate what we mean.
Now the important thing to note is this, human beings are unique in the world of living beings because of vocabulary superiority. They have more sounds, more articulately manipulated, than any other living being on earth. But these sounds are learned - in social situations - with emotive tones. So that when you hear a particular word, you don’t merely get a pure phonetic unit of sound presented to the hearing apparatus, but it is accompanied by references to other things (and therefore is relational) and to emotional tones accompanying the words offered to you.
Now Greta offered this particular word. So I can ask Greta what she would mean if she said something was unique… First, I ask her where she acquired the word… Did you go into the dictionary Greta?
Did you hear it when you were a child?
Greta: Did I hear it when a child? Yes.
Yes, yes. And did it have a particular auric association of feeling about it?
And did it seem to you that it was a good thing to be or a bad thing to be?
Greta: A good thing
A good thing. Did anybody tell you to be unique is good in those words?
Greta: Not in those words. No…. To be oneself
To be oneself. .. And if one were one’s self…
Greta: In fact, no. I would not say that. I think it stemmed from schooldays… To be better than the others.
To be better than the others… So there is an implication that if you are unique, emotively, you are more important than other people.
Greta: Yes, yes.
So that a man like Jack the Ripper, who was unique in his way, [Yes] must have been better than other people…[Yes] .. In his own field.
Greta: Yes….. ….
Now this is true - that we do acquire terms, as babies,, without adequate definition and with emotional overtones, which condition the way we react to the word.
So, if we draw our famous three-part man: the think part; the feel part; the will or action part, in that way. And we put a spinal coordinator down the middle. You hear a word, which goes through your little place there, and is recorded in the brain… So that’s in the think department; the sound has a form.
The sound of the vowel ‘ee’ and the vowel ‘ah’ and ‘oo’ are different sounds and they have different emotional connotations.
They go into the ear, they record themselves in the brain; and then they have feeling associations, because the voice that speaks the word gets its air from the lungs. … If that looks a bit like an archaic symbol it is quite correct. It is a phallic power. We will see what we mean by that in a moment.
The voice itself is phallic. .. Yes?
Let’s see why. … Because that letter - the ph, or phi, in the Greek – (5.00) means ‘a situation penetrated’.
A situation, substantially made of energy is penetrated by another energy. And in the way that it is penetrated, there is a wrap round the penetrating energy, and that is represented by the ‘L’. So the function of phi-losophy and phallus-ophy are very intimately related.
The superiority of the human being over the animal world depended upon the human being’s capacity for mimicry. You know that human hunters copy the sounds of birds, and of animals, that they are pursuing. And they can dupe an animal into thinking an animal is there, when really it is a human being voicing an animal sound.
So the human superiority to the animal consists in a mysterious way - as the ancients in all the major religions said, - somehow man is total animality. He is not just a snake in the grass, he is a kangaroo, and an elephant, and anything whatever that any animal can do, man can impersonate effectively enough to dupe the animal.
It does not matter that today we use electronic instruments to dupe animals and we can do this very easily. We can actually draw on the edge of a film a geometrical configuration, which when played back through the instrument will give the sound of a cuckoo enough to deceive a cuckoo. Because we can analyze the sound made by the cuckoo and we can record it, put it on an oscilloscope, photograph it, draw it on a piece of paper, modulate it, draw it on the edge of a film, play it through the film and fool the cuckoo.
Now the other animals don’t do this so efficiently. Many animals mimic and deceive each other: protective coloring, and the coloring of predators like the spots on the leopard or the stripes on the tiger. They are methods of deceiving by misinforming. They inform you amiss. The strips of the tiger in the bamboo, the spots of the speckled light of the forest with the leopard, are deceiving tricks.
Now we want to examine this very carefully because the ‘phi lambda’ there - those two fundamental letters in phi-losophy and pha-llus, are set in opposition with another word lu - I will put the ‘S’ at the bottom. – ‘Phi-lambda’ means ‘reason’ because the circle is that whereby we circumscribe any situation whatever. We make a Venn diagram in this way, we analyze it with logic, we cut the circle in various ways. The symbol of the cutter is the rod, so that the letter ‘O’ symbolizes the situation in its passivity - the feminine aspect - and the rod symbolizes the interfering force - masculine aspect. And because the rod laid across that circle will divide the circle in a certain way, it gave rise to the concept that we call ‘pi-ratio’, ‘phi-ratio’.
If you remember that the letter ‘L‘ and the letter ‘R’ are the same letter, produced in the same part of the mouth, but in the case of the ‘L’, you just wipe it once, in the case of the trilled ‘R’ you repeatedly wipe the tongue there, and this trills that in the same place as the ‘L’. So the difference in the R and the L is that the R is rapidly differentiating while the L is binding together. So, when we look at this pair of letters, the ‘phi’ and the ‘Lambda’ - the ‘F’ sound and the ‘L’ - together they give the method of logical analysis. A situation cut with some device, penetrating it and dividing it into right and left, and thus giving rise to the concept of ratio and relation. 10.00)
Now the word relation means ‘to lay a thing back on another thing’. If we take the circle and put the rod on it, we see immediately that the two halves of the circle are symmetrical, and we can fold one half onto the other half and that is to re-late it - to lay back one half on the other half ; and the figure, being symmetrical, the two halves are congruent and equivalent to each other.
Now the use of that little concept by the Greeks and the Egyptians, and the Babylonians, and the Hindus, was that they were creating a device for analyzing any situation whatever that could be circumscribed.
Now when the process of rationalization – that’s ‘phi-law’ - was completed - the function of the analysis having been made obvious - you did not need to be bound by your logical analysis. You could disobey it if you wished. And therefore, the word ‘loose’ was used in opposition to it.
First you made your ‘phi-law’ rational analysis, and then you let yourself ‘loose’ from it. Those that are called - in religious terms, - two keys; one of binding, one of loosing. The binder is ‘Pha- la.’ The ‘looser’ means ‘to play’. You know the word ‘loo,’ apart from the place where people go to meditate, is also the same base as in the word ‘Ludo’, a game, ‘ludere’ ‘to play’ and so on.
To let oneself loosen the logical implications of one’s analysis, having performed the analysis you then have two conditions; a thoroughly rationalized situation ‘pha-la’ and a liberation from the analysis,’ lus’ Both together constitute the basic weapons of the science of the last six thousand years. Phal-lus, that means make your analysis complete, down to the every minutest detail, and then, having made it, cut loose. Plotinus put it in the way, “First perfect your reason, then take the flight of the alone to the alone,” - loose yourself from your definition.
Now why should we when we have made a perfect rational analysis of a situation, bother to cut loose from it?
If our analysis is perfect, had we not better keep it? Well, let us keep it. But are we to subordinate ourselves to it?
Once upon a time there was a thing called Euclidian Geometry and it was supposed to be absolutely self evident, self-consistent, beyond argument – triangles have three sides, and the number of degrees in the three angles equals added up to a certain number, which some of you might remember, if you are young enough. And that was invariable. And if you actually drew a triangle on a surface that was flat, you could demonstrate that and measure it. But supposing, using the same motions with the same compass, you drew that same form on the surface of the sphere. Now the lines would then be curved and the number of degrees in the angles would not be the same. So then we have another kind of geometry. Instead of having a two-dimensional flat geometry we have a spherical geometry. And in fact we can make an infinity of geometries by drawing the same primordial shape on different shapes of surfaces.
So, those people who, for a couple of thousand years, were intimidated by the Euclidian definitions, found it very hard to accept that there were other kinds of geometry possible. Geometry was established and perfect and beyond argument. But we can draw geometries in spaces which are electro-magnetically fluctuating at any given moment at a given periodicity, that would break all of the Euclidian rules. Therefore we can say this, - when we have made a complete analysis in a given situation and we can say, “Phala, phala, phala, we have done it.” You know that occurs in a lot of songs - folk songs - doesn’t it, the fala, falo, etcetera, which means I have really got control of the situation. That would be fine if the Universe were static. (15.00) But the Universe is not static. The Universe is nothing but energy in a perpetual state of flux moving from an earlier condition, through time, to an open-ended undefinable. And on the way towards that undefinable it is going through myriads of changes that make it necessary for us to throw our ‘phala’ away and be ‘lus’. Therefore loose means not only ‘not tied’, it also means light, it is directly related to play and the ‘lux’ in the Latin ‘light’ and the ‘lume’ as in luminosity, all come from the same base. So that we have, in fact, a strong warning in one word, phal-lus. Phal- lus means ‘define it but do not be intimidated by your own definition’.
Now it is obvious, that the first beings to discover this process; the very careful, formal analysis of a situation could give you control of the situation, providing no other beings had made the same analysis and providing the situation remains sufficiently slow-changing for your analysis to be applicable. Now it happens, and I think you will find this through personal self-examination, that the beings who discovered this process, were rational beings. They were men, who discovered it. Males discovered it, and now we are going to see why.
It was a function of vocabulary, and the shape that we drew inside here is a phallic shape because it was through shouting and mimicry of the animal world that certain beings discovered that they could influence, flow into, a situation with words, sounds, very economically.
That is to say, a big muscle man might want to thump a small man into obedience, but when there are lots of small men about it often became inconvenient. And, if you had a tribe of a few thousand, you might not have time to get round and thump them all. And then, one day, a man thought, “If only I can invent the word ‘thump’ and then ask the whole tribe in a formal gathering, would you like to be thumped?” And demonstrate what thump means in public, then the tribe can decide whether they liked it or not. You know that the result of this brilliant idea was a gathering together of the peoples, an announcement made to them by an articulating being. And he defined the situation, and he had large muscle men with him, and a few captives to demonstrate on. So that you can get a man; you can have him thumped in public and say, “Listen to this sound”. (Thumping sound) Now we will say that is a thump, it will do, if I had a bigger chest it would be a bigger thump. When this sound is made, say, “When you hear me say this word ‘thump’ I want you to visualize this big strong man hitting this little weak man.” And then, having demonstrated it, “Now who else in the audience would like a thump? Now who would like to demonstrate this? Have we got a small, not too strong person and a large, strong person in the audience who will be prepared to demonstrate this for us? Or would you say that your imagination is enough?” …………..
Imagination is enough! The only reason that imagination is enough is because you have ancestors for thousands of years who have been seriously thumped, very hard, in public, and their protoplasm has been modified, and the continuity of this protoplasm from generation to generation makes you not need a demonstration. So that means that you are fundamentally nervous about a word because of its emotive associations based on some form of physical activity in the original demonstration.
So we will examine this ‘unique’ word. Obviously the first part, the ‘uni’ has a meaning. You hear it in other words, ‘unify’, ‘unit’, and so on. (20.00)
Now let us analyze it in its primary phonetics and see why it means what it means. The ‘oo,’ you form that ‘oo’ sound - in English you say ‘eyoo’ because the English are very good at distorting everything, but in most sensible languages on the Continent, that same letter is ‘oo’ not ‘eyoo’.
The English use diphthongs where decent people don’t.
The ‘oo’ means ‘drive’, it means ‘push’, it means ‘force moving’. Such that when you see that ’oo’ if I draw you ‘oo’ in ancient Egyptian. I’ll draw it for you,… I hope it is big enough. …And if I draw it in Hebrew it’s like that, That is a ‘wow’ in Sephardic, and ‘vov … vav’, Germanic, and quite simply it was a drawing of the male organ, pushing.
It is our letter ‘F’, so all we have done is take that rude-imentary drawing there and say we have heightened it, for decent geometry, and we will call it the letter ‘F’. The ‘F’ is simply a drawing of the male organ, which is why one of them is longer than the other there, one bar, this one is the left one usually, statistically, the other is the right one. That one is a pendant organ; it is an ‘F’-ing letter. It is the first letter of the word ‘force’.
Now, these mysteries come out of a structure of thought called Cabala. Now Cabala’ is based on the letter ‘Q’. When we look at this primordial drive, we see that really we are talking about a relationship, in which a situation is driven into by a penetrating force. Now don’t confine this down to the merely physical aspects of sexual relation in the animal or human world. Think of it cosmically. Any force whatever in the whole universe, that pushes into any situation - which is another force, but relatively passive - that is a sexual relation in the highest sense of the word. So we are not to confine that word ‘sexuality’ merely to the behavior of animals and humans at the physical level. We are to remind ourselves that we are talking about cosmic energies where one of them travels through the other.
We take our letter ‘U’, here, and we will put the penetrating force there. Now that is a very simple, primitive diagram of a force penetrating a situation, and bending the situation that it enters into. So the word vulva, (ua), you know in Latin you say ‘oo’ not ‘ver,’ don’t you? You’re supposed to say, “wedi, wici,” in the best classical mode, not, “vedi, vici” and so on, right? ‘Vedere’ means ‘to know’, ‘videre’ means ‘to see’, and fundamentally it is a drawing which occurs in its most primitive form as a simple scratch on a piece of stone to remind a governor of his function.
Something has got to give; it doesn’t have to be me, right?
So hold one hand up, grip your fingers together, your four upright fingers as hard as you can so that nothing can get through them, then put the thumb of the other hand in the space between two of those fingers and push and see if you can stop, with your fingers, your thumb, from pushing through….. Are your fingers strong enough?
No! Because they haven’t had enough practice closing as the thumb has in pushing.
Observe that the practice of the pushing in the presence of unpracticed receivers of pushes means that somebody gives in. The one that is giving in (25.00) is called ‘vulnerable’, and it’s exactly the meaning of this diagram. There is always a force operating on a situation, and if the situation is relatively passive, or does not gather itself together strong enough, it will be bent.
Take a bit of your paper and push your finger into the paper and the paper will give way and the finger will represent that letter ‘I’ and the paper will represent the letter ‘U’ wrapped round it.
Now, when we come to consider this we can say therefore, this closed situation, the letter ‘O’ penetrated by a force, the letter ‘I’ can be represented after the penetration by a ‘U’ for the ‘O’ and the penetrating force going into it in that manner, so the same letter could mean either ‘O’ or ‘U’ according to whether you were considering the situation to have been penetrated or not.
So the very same letter, this Hebrew letter here which is a Spanish, ‘wow’, that letter can be used in Hebrew for either ‘O’ or ‘U’, the very same letter. Because it could be a closed situation not yet attacked and penetrated or it could be a situation that has been penetrated. And it would be the same letter, but you would pronounce it slightly differently, an ‘or’. You would mimic - remember it begins with mimicry - you would mimic it by making a round mouth, ‘or’ – pure. Not an ‘O-U’ as in English ‘own’, a pure Yorkshire ‘aw’.
Now you will feel that the mouth is like a sphere when you do that, and then, when you have done that, push your lips forward and repeat it. You see how the ‘or’ becomes ‘oo.’ You cannot push your lips out while you are voicing that without changing ‘or’ to ‘oo’. Also you cannot make that ’oo’ sound without protruding your lips a bit.
So many designs of vases were made by doing copying the lips pushing forward, and we find very, very, great satisfaction with certain shapes because they remind us a fundamental of appetite. The ‘awe’ - the situation - when it is about to be penetrated, can open its mouth and push its lips forward and embrace the invader. Thus giving rise to that wonderful weapon used by ladies for defense against men, called ‘Uterus’. Oo-teroos is the final defense of the relatively more passive. Namely, allow the invader in … and then dine on him.
Now that was a very primitive analysis, and very effective, and, funnily enough, it still works.
Now, when we look at the letter ‘N’ you pronounce this letter ‘N’ by making the shape of an ‘N’ in your mouth. … I don’t want to remove those, I will ask you to think about it.
The floor of your mouth, the roof of your mouth - there is the floor, there is the roof - you put your tongue from the back of your throat, up towards your teeth and palette behind the teeth so you have a shape like that. Now just turn it round and it is the letter ‘N’. You pronounce that ‘N’ by going ‘nnnnnn’. Now you will notice that when you do it, you have closed your mouth but somehow, air is coming up the pharynx and down the nose, so the word nose, actually, is nothing but an extension of the issuance of that primordial ‘nnnnnnn’. Make a nice long ‘nnnnnnnnnnnnnnn’.
Now, isn’t that a nice warm sound? But funnily enough, it means ‘to negate’ in the very moment of apparently opening. I open my mouth to say, “Yes,” and I put my tongue in the position to say, “No,” and what I say is, “Nnnnn-yes,” which means no-yes.
The ‘N’ means negation but, because you can continue to make that ‘N’ sound, it is a continuance, hence it’s use in the continuous forms of verbs (30.00), whether in English or French or German or Italian. Whatever it is you find, singing, the ‘N’ in the termination ‘ing’, or the termination ‘ant’, or the termination ‘end’, the ‘N’ is the constant and means continuity. So that ‘N’ has a double function. It means to continue and to, together.
So if we now take the drive concept of the ‘oo’ and add to it the ‘N,’ and say, ‘oonn’, we are symbolizing and vocalizing a primitive sound which means moving continuously, driving continuously - the continuity of drive.
So ‘oonnn’ - as long as you keep that ‘N going it means you are continuing the action symbolized by the letter preceding it. So ‘ooo,’, ‘to drive’; ‘nnn,’ ‘oonnn’ means ‘drive continuously’. Remember that, because the word ‘noose’ - ‘nowse’ - ‘intelligence’ - means the ability to detect what is of no use and throw it away. N-O-U-S nous, nowse, intelligence, is the ability to detect what is of no use and throw it away, or sell it to somebody who does not know it is no use. That is the mark of intelligence in humanity.
Now the letter ‘I’ - again it needs to fool you by making a diphthong, say ‘I-E’ -‘ah ee’ - and if you wrote it with a letter ‘A’ - pronounced ‘ah’, and a letter ‘I’ pronounced ‘ee’ and say it both together ‘ah-ee’, ‘ai’. But the reality is that that little letter should be pronounced and is, in respectable languages, ‘ee,’ not ‘ai.’ The second element in the English diphthong ‘ahee,’ ‘ee,’ is correct. It is made by a dot. ‘e,’ the primordial sound for a dot, and that dot is pushed through space like that and continues. And the travelling dot, or punkt, or point, or yud, or jot, means ‘the line generator’. So that when we take this word, ‘uni’ we are saying, push continues to push on a line. Then we have ‘unity of intention’, ‘unity of purpose’, and a guarantee apart from earthquakes, of success in arriving.
Now we will go on to the next part of the word. This means drive continuously on to the point thus generating a line. The ‘Q’ part here, the ‘uni-Q’ - the first letter, the ‘Q,’ thrown out by the Greeks because it was too rude for their delicate souls, they retained ‘Kappa’ and threw out ‘Coppa’. Hebrew has retained both, the ‘kaffa’, ‘kaf’, our letter ‘K’ and the ‘Q’. But the Q was pronounced down the well of the throat with a sort of hard coughing action, and correctly pronounced it is quite simply a cough like this ((cough) that is the way to pronounce ‘Q’,, and you are to think of the ‘alloa’, the tone column, as they call it in bell canto, coming up from the larynx and the air is pushing through the larynx like that, and into the pharyngeal space. Driving through it, it is making exactly that same thing we defined before as the sexual relation. The pharyngeal situation is penetrated by an air column and the sound is ‘k,’” and when you made a strong effort to do something you did that, (harsh coughing sound), and primitives would pronounce it that way, even today.
If you were to travel to where there were primitive peoples, say in Australia, or New Guinea, or parts of Africa, you will find that in their dance motives, when they are singing there is lots of ‘uuhh’ to go with the rhythm, and it means, ‘make super efforts if you wish to penetrate that situation’.
Then we have a repetition of the drive, and then we have the letter ‘E’, and the letter ‘E’ is the fifth letter of the alphabet which is a ‘hey’ in the Hebrew, and means life itself. (35.00) A life made by a drive continuing to posit a point and push it through a resistant situation but overcoming it, continuing to drive, and this makes life unique.
Now supposing as a child, Greta, you were told this is what unique meant…Mmm? …. That you couldn’t be it, unless you gathered yourself together, with all your power. Drove, very hard. Continued to do so, in the presence of all opposition, on a defined point going towards a goal. And that to do this you would have to overcome resistances in the environment, and you must actually overcome them, and continue to drive. And if you keep on doing this, really do this, you will really be alive. And if you do that you are unique, and if you do not you are not.
Now when you were taught that word ‘unique’ in that passive way did you think it meant all that recommendation to total self-dedication of the absolute wholeness of your energy? No?
Supposing you had been what kind of a girl would you be now?
Greta; Something inside me said I would not be the woman and I resent that.
No of course you wouldn’t. You would have got a ‘tash’ like Lord Kitchener from World War One, and you would be going like that saying, “You country wants you,” wouldn’t you? Well do you prefer your present condition?
Greta Do I prefer it?
Greta: I want my own uniqueness.
Your own uniqueness? But there is only one kind of uniqueness isn’t there? That which is attained by this dedicated drive. Now if you wished to define yourself as ‘The Queen of All Passivity’, and you drove all your energies toward passivity, you could be a unique woman.
Greta: That seems like a contradiction in terms.
Greta: Yes, drive into passivity.
Yes but it must be a possibility mustn’t it?
Greta : Yes it is.
Because passivity means the energy is accepting what is coming to it.
Greta : Yes.
Now if you can accept absolutely what the universe is doing, you do what William Blake said about reality, “This world is a fiction made of contradictions.” You contradict yourself. You know, ordinarily you do not like to be passive unless it is pleasant. But it is actually possible to be deliberately passive when it is not pleasant and that really fools everybody. Yes? So it could be possible to say I will be what people think they mean by being feminine, but I will be it deliberately so I will be secret man behaving like a woman, and I will conquer by my submission. When you do that technically, you are a Muslim.
Greta: Unless that is what I would see except a man changed to be a woman would he remain a male?
Greta: The same drive as …..
That particular man of a sex change remained a man and he deliberately behaved as if he were a woman and had anatomical alterations to make him able to behave like a woman, but he was still a man. So he could do it. Likewise any woman could do it if she could control herself and stop trying to seize the initiative. What she usually does is make herself passive when it is pleasant, and then very actively, aggressively resistant when it is not. And thus she does neither efficiently.
Now the big rule for all primordial magic success. You must take the whole of yourself, you must aim that at a defined point and without deviation, and without any other consideration, use the totality of your energy to get there, and then you must become it, even if it were self-contradictory. Mmmm? Because all is energy, and energy can contradict itself. Because in fact, this ‘I’ and ‘O’ show you because both of them are energies and one has elected to stand still and the other to push into it because it stands still, but both of them are modalities of an Infinite Field of Sentient Power.
So that Infinite Field of Sentient Power has itself chosen to be actively passive (40.00) and passively active. That is the whole meaning of the cream of Hindu philosophy - the Bhagavad Gita. That Lord’s song is about nothing except the art of acting without regard to the fruits of action, but with due regard to what is and is not the reality. That every situation is passive-active/active-passive, and you can chose a role of active-passive or passive–active if you are conscious of both your possibilities. And then whichever you do you are active, whether you are actively-active or actively passive you are still active, and therefore, by definition, male. Yes?
Now, the word ‘unique’ then, has tremendous associations, implications in the word. But, most of the words that people use are not analyzed in that way; and children do not acquire them in that way, and therefore they are bound by an unanalyzed passive element of vocabulary - very strong emotional charges which place them at the mercy of the sound when it comes. They are conditioned in an emotive socio-politic economic situation to respond to a word.
Let us take the word, ‘work’, and the word ‘play.’ Is it not true that they do not have the same emotive association? … Why not? … Well because they have totally different meanings. Play is ‘pee-lay’. You place yourself in a laying position, you make yourself passive to an impulse, to an energy, and you let that energy dictate to you what you will do, and you deliberately give in to it, and it is called play. But the moment you ‘organize’ yourself - that’s the ‘O-R’ in work - where you have a defined place and you would differentiate and discriminate its content very clearly. And you fixate, lock it up, so the definition can’t escape, and then you drive - that is the ‘W’ at the beginning - and you drive (‘W’), because the moment you move, you create a back motive power that opposes you to the degree that you move. So the ‘W’ in the word ‘work’ is to remind you that when you push, you generate opposition. And that if you are going to get on with your work, you will have to overcome the opposition; push into the situation: discriminate the contents of the situation, and tie up the situation hard, so that it can’t escape. Now that is work. So the word work is the opposite to the word play, isn’t it?
Now, you are taught, and certainly since the building of the pyramids, you are taught that organized applications of forces, of energies, of power, change situations in an orderly manner which is predetermined by some intelligent being, the work-master. He organizes the labor force, and he makes it work. And very, very often, in the Ancient World, there were literally millions of people engaged on a magnificent project of architecture, required to cut out ten-ton blocks of limestone, and carry them, and put them in position. They did not know what they were for, they were told to do it and there were men there to make them do it, and they did it, and this was associated with the word ‘work.’
So, the word ‘work’ to us is ‘irksome’, ‘work-some’, whereas when the work was done and the thing was up, everybody admired it, you could lie down for a bit until the next pyramid was ordered. And when you were laying down you were taking it easy and the sun was shining on you and you felt fine. And because of the emotive associations of thousands of years of being compelled to engage in an organization action of energy, the word ‘work’ has got this association of difficulty and drive and organization, and to many minds all things horrible that we would rather do without.
Whereas the word ‘play’ means exactly, ‘to lie in the sun when you have done all the work’ and you are allowed off in, I think, fifty-two weeks in the year, and you are allowed a couple off, once, or possibly twice, a year by kindness (45.00) of the government, to get you fit to go back to work. Because they know if they work you all the time without the rest on the seventh day and your two weeks holiday and the gap in your two weeks holiday, you will undoubtedly run berserk and start screaming the place down and muck up the job. Because running berserk was very, very common when the taskmasters were too tough and too heavy with the whip.
Somebody told me a Jewish joke a week ago, about somebody who was rowing down the Nile, as a slave, rowing Pharaoh’s boat. And the taskmaster was lashing them away like mad and suddenly one of the Jewish rower slaves turned to his friend and said, “Leichman. How much do you tip the whipper?”
Now there is a very deep psychology in that because in every situation in the Jewish mind, which is based on this symbol, pronounced ‘Yahweh’, or ‘Hi Hu’, or ‘Jehovah’ in its corrupt form, meant, ‘in every situation there is something you can get out of it already’.
So you are a slave rowing and your muscles are getting better. Maybe they will get so strong you can beat the bosses a bit. So keep quiet a bit, and if he has got a nice wife when the rowing is good, smile, maybe she likes smiling rowers.
Now Joseph got promoted like that, and like Joseph, know when to refuse an offer. Remember he refused an offer and got thrown in jail. And in jail - that’s the ’oo,’ because he had refused the offer - he became a great dream interpreter and became Pharaoh’s right hand man. So it says there is no situation where you cannot capitalize on it if you are intelligent. Don’t sit down and mope in jail. Get to know the warders and the other prisoners and see if they need a cigarette. See if they need something that you have not got but you know somebody who has. That makes you a ‘middleman’.
So, here we are with a very simple proposition. We have imposed on us, as children, words without definitions, but with very strong emotional charges upon them, and they are re-enforced over thousands of years by continuous representation as facts. You would not ordinarily think that we, are daily and nightly presented with threats, would you? Unless you watched the TV and see what happens to heroes? Does not every situation show you men being shot and beaten up? Aren’t you really just as presented with the threat and the offer of a thump only disguised in the forms of plays and films and jests and so on?
Now the function of the play in the Ancient World was called ‘cathartic.’ Now quite simply, that word means ‘enough to give you diarrhea.’ That’s what it means catharsis. Think about it, mmm? It means you present a drama in which some young fellow with great intelligence objects to being a slave, either of humanity or of the gods, it does not matter which. All the way through that play he is going to do very well, up to the last act. In the last act, do you know what they used to do in the Ancient World? They used to take their best actors who played the part, and he would take a bow and go off, they then brought a slave in, dressed like him, and murdered him on stage. And that was cathartic. That meant ‘do not want to be a hero’. You have been identifying with him all the way through the play up to the time his head came off, and then you would breathe a sigh of relief and applaud.
What are you applauding? You are applauding that it isn’t you. Now, there is no other ground of applause, when you go to the theatre. Mmm? Think of all the people that applaud at a Beethoven concert. What are they applauding about? I’ll tell you what they are applauding about. It is marvelous violin playing, but the audience did not have to do the practice.
Now anybody who has worked very hard at any skill knows that is true. To be any good at anything is murder - of you. You are really a scapegoat to show what good performance means. It is absolutely exhausting. Now the audience knows it, they see the perspiration rolling in great lumps down the toil-struck brow, and say, “My God, he is working.” (50.00) And they applaud and say, “Oh let’s go quick to play and have a little chat about it, and drink.” … And he is trying to recover. He will have a coronary in no time if he does not watch it, through his dedication to the work And we will always remember him. He died in harness entertaining us who don’t work.
So the fundamental idea of all dramatic presentations in the Ancient World was to impress the audience with the inadvisability of revolution … and it is still used for the same purpose.
Now, let us apply this principle to another word. We had, didn’t we, something about what is the difference between conscience and consciousness? Is there a French speaker in the house, lurking about somewhere, disguised? What does the word mean in French, that we use for conscience in English? … Has Hannukah slipped out?
Is she lurking somewhere like a midget?
Hannukah: It is the same word.
It is the same word. Would you mind pronouncing it down your nose like a true French girl please?
Hannukah: Which word?
The one that we say ‘conscience’, in English.
Hannukah: Conscience (spoken with French accent)
Yes ‘conscience’, nnnnn. … Well actually ‘con-science’, yes? ‘Con-science’ – ‘with-together-knowledge’. Now science means, ‘S-C-I’, which means ‘to cut’. The same root as in ‘scissors’ and ‘scythe’ – ‘to cut’. And the ‘ence’ at the end of it means ‘be’ - the essence of the thing.
‘Science’ therefore, means you take being and cut it in little bits and find out what the bits are and when you know what the bits of the thing are, in relation to that thing, you are a scientist. Now, therefore, a rationalist people like the French say this ‘conscience, is consciousness, because by means of cutting it to pieces you become conscious of the parts as well as the whole.
Now it has an emotive association engrafted upon the word in English, and it is something that makes you feel awful. Isn’t it? Conscience. Think of that double ‘N’ in it. Say the word, “conscience,” and let the ‘Ns’ last a bit. Connnsciennnnce. It feels horrible, “connnsciennnce,” it is very, very impeding.
Your totality of knowledge is your conscience, and that is why conscience is not a valid ground to justify or condemn any activity. Because your conscience, your con- science - your knowledge – changes. As you develop and grow up and learn, your knowledge extends, and consequently your conscience extends. So your conscience is really very flexible, and will not do for an absolute statement of a truth. Your ‘con-science’, acquired through cutting your sense organs later, up, that ‘con-science’ is changing every day and is not a valid ground for making a pronouncement about anything other than the particular things it has cut to pieces.
Audience: Why does consciousness make cowards of us all?
Well, every time you think about what you know about a thing. And when you think about what you would really like to do if you didn’t know about it… mm? For instance, there is a lady sitting next to you, isn’t there? She is the wife of a man next to her, mm? Now when you remember that, your knowledge inhibits you. Right? So conscience doth make a coward of you. The word ‘coward’ means ‘Q-guarder’, ‘Q-warder’, ‘Q-guarder,’ guard your genital organ.
You know what they used to do - and they would re-introduce in certain parts of Islam today - if you are naughty, they will cut it off. Now, when you remember that fact, if you think it is worth keeping, you become a coward. That is a ‘Q-guard’. (55.00) because you have remembered that society does not let you do it. ‘Thus conscience doth make cowards of us all’. But then, the other part goes with it, ‘And thus the native hue of resolution is sickled o’er with the pale cast of thought’.
Now how many times do people find that their will is one thing, and their conscience, their total intellectual furniture, is another? The will would do this, and the con-science says, “Yes, but somebody is looking.”
There are cameras in Liverpool in certain positions and they are trained on the roads. And, if they like to play back the records of those they can see one fellow breaking the rules and get his number from that record, and he can be found and charged because he has been watched and this is happening more and more and more. Any time there is a public demonstration, the ringleaders are photographed by TV cameras, the whole film is examined to see who has got the initiative, and then the ones with the initiative can be picked up and removed and everything goes quiet. There are only five percent of people with any initiative so it doesn’t need much to sort people out really.
So here we are, with primary sounds which we have learned as babies without adequate definition but with emotional charges that actually control our lives. Now what are we going to do about it, if anything? Think, “How very interesting”, and then forget all about it.
Now this depends entirely on the temperament of the person. If the person who hears that wishes to develop full, total, efficiency of life function in himself or herself, then the obvious thing to do is get to know more and more about these primordial roots of words, and how their emotive associations were accreted to those words. Because once you understand how they got there … then you can begin to release yourself from them.
Let’s take a word like the word ‘man’. Now man is made of a base ‘ma,’ which means ‘mother.’ It does not matter whether you go to darkest Lancashire or highest alti-Himalaya.’ Go to Tibet and say, “What is the name of the feminine ruling power of the Universe?” and they say, “Ma.” So it does not matter whether you go in a Chinese take-away in Chorlton, or whether you go to Tibet, ‘ma’ is ‘ma’ everywhere. Why? Because ‘mmm, mem’, closed mouth, ‘mmmmm’, is the primary sound that woman makes to herself when she is contented.
Now it is the same sound that baby makes when he is being breast-fed. There is a little term called ‘yumming’. You know the word ‘yumming’ in ‘yum, yum, yum’, that is copied from babies, nursing. And they have got the mouth full and therefore closed but when they are satisfied and they feel like a little gurgle and go ‘mumumumum’ and so probably their first words will be, unless you hit them hard suddenly, ‘Ma’, not ‘Pa’. They go ‘mumumum’, so that word, that primary root ‘ma’ the mother principle, was actually the base of the word ‘man.’ Now will somebody offer, from what we have already said, how did it get the ‘N’ on the end of it? …What turned ‘ma’ into ‘man’? … Negation.
Negation. Now how can you become a man if you don’t finally break from your Ma? You have to able to say, “No,” to Ma. You know very often a full-breasted woman with a child, she has got more than the child needs, and at some point, the child turns away, ‘nnnnn’. And this goes ‘ma’ and it goes ‘nnnn’. Now if it does it effectively it is called ‘mann’. The woman is then very proud you see, and says, “Oh you little thing. I must keep hold of him, must chase away all other women because when his father dies he will lovely to have about the house. Because he can say “Mannn”. And you will notice this peculiar sound in naughty boys, they love it. Have you noticed it, that little boys when you push them (60.00) they go “Nnnnnnn,” you see? ‘Ma’ - primordial substantial appetite. ‘M-A-nnnaa’ the negative activity turned ‘ma’ into ‘man’, and this negation is another word for self-control.
Negation, and control, and discipline and every word of any value whatever in relation to efficiency is based on negative controls. That is, you take your ‘Absolute Infinite Primordial Appetite’, and you get hold of it and tie it up. And, when you can tie up your own energy, deliberately from within yourself, you have turned from ‘ma’ to ‘na’. And that same devil, ‘Mana’ in Polynesia is called magical power. There is a whole theory among anthropologists about this mysterious power of ‘Mana’. It is really very simple. The fellow, who can control his own appetite and conceal it, is much better off than the fellow who goes about, as they say in primitive language, “Gawping”. How would you like to go walk about like that all day? ….
They would think you were a member of Mau Mau wouldn’t they, yes?
Now, when you are able to negate that and shut your mouth so that somebody does not know that you want a grape. And imagine a small boy standing in front of a bowl of grapes, and he is only a visitor in the house and he … what does the owner of the grapes think? I have actually seen this happen. I remember as a child myself when I ate a grape, and some ladies in the house I went to, do you know what they used to do? Quietly remove the grapes.
While, if you kept your mouth shut and looked through the window like this they thought what a tinsy-winsy, little appetite that child has got, and walked out of the room. And then, of course the grapes went (whistle) like that. So that the ability to hush your mouth was very, very, very important. And the only difference between a king, a priest, and a commoner, was the ability, primarily, to keep the mouth shut, not gawp about the place, to negate one’s own appetival tendencies, and thereby to become ‘man’.
Now, supposing, when you were at school and you were doing a bit of elementary anthropology and the teacher said to you, “You are a member of mankind, and that means you are a rational being.” What would you say to that? What is he trying to do to you if he says you are a member of mankind?
Audience: Tie you up.
Tie you up. Well, first of all you have got to be a ‘man’ that is negate your appetite, then you won’t be such a pest in society, and then you have got to be kind as well, and ‘kind’ just means remember your kin, your kith and your kin, your family and divide your family, that is the letter ‘D’ at the end, from all other families, and then you are kind. So, if you are born a Bavarian, you are kind to Bavarians in principle, and if you meet an Italian you are not kind, and you don’t have to be kind to an Italian because you are not of that kind.
So the wars in Scotland that allowed the English to conquer the Scots were wars where a clan in this little valley, and a clan in this valley were distinct, they were not kin, there was no kinship there and no necessity for kindness because they were not of kin. And the people who wished to control their tribes always tied them up with a definition of difference.
Now the most extreme form of this definition of difference was invented by the Jewish thinkers who brought forth the concept of ‘The Chosen People of God’. They said that God has a unilateral pact into make one peculiar people into the people that would eventually benefit the whole of mankind. To Abraham a promise, “In him shall all the nations of the world be blessed” And coming out of that line, (55.00) through David the King … And the scepter shall not pass from there until Shiloh comes. Till he whose it is by right arrives, the authority remains in that line.
Now Christianity was built by a Jew who revolted against the idea that only one people was elect of the human race and said, “No, this dispensation was made for all linear descendants of Adam.”
Now that was a great revolt against the idea that a particular people, who today we call the Israelis, were the only elect people, elected by God. And this Jewish fellow, Jesus of Nazareth, said, “No, it isn’t true. It is from Adam where the election is. God made man, as opposed to sub-man, as opposed to apes, He made man there to rule on Earth, and he is the elect of all living beings. The human race is elect.” So he said that.
Now after that came Mohammed amongst an Arabian people who were largely polytheistic and he realized they needed reformation. But what had been said of the one God by the Jewish prophets, there is one God and His name is One, His power is One, and there is no other God. But that was kept to a select people and it had it be spread. And Jesus had said he came to fulfill that law by reminding them that the human race was included, and not merely a little section of them. Mohammed came, said the same thing and therefore, he said, you must recognize that the people of the Book, that is the Jews and the Christians of his day, were telling you about the One God as opposed to the many gods. And there is only One God and that God is Absolute Power, Absolute Intelligence, Infinite Comprehension, and that no finite individual human being in a body can usurp the position of the Invisible All-Intelligent Power. But we have to co-operate with the Jews because they were the inventors of the monotheistic concept there is only One supreme God.
In India you have got literally thousands and thousands of gods and they are all more or less on the same level and worth worshipping. Although they have a concept of a super god in India, how far that concept borrowed from the Judaic concept through trade relations, the scholars differ.
And then we have this Muslim statement which carries on the dispensation of Christianity and of Judaism, “There is only one God.” And all human beings, all in the line Adamic, as it says in the Koran, all of the Adamic line are the elect. As opposed to the animal world and the vegetable world and the mineral world, it is the human world.
Now if that is so, and if you care to read in the Koran you will see there that the Jews who are true Jews and the Christians who are true Christians, are accepted by Muslims who are true Muslims and the rule is very simple in the Koran. “If you do not give to another person that which you would like for yourself, you are not a Muslim, you are not a Christian, and you are not a Jew.” Only if you are prepared to give to other people what you value for yourself, and share it with them, are you a true Muslim.
That means to say that Iraq and Iran, fighting for the sole possession of a port in the Gulf are not Muslims, though both sides say that they are. They are not truly Muslim, because each side wants the control, but by Muslim law, he should want the control for the other side as well as for himself.
Now how many Muslims are true Muslims, how many Christians are true Christian, how many Jews are true Jews? To be any one of those three religions you have to say, “All human beings are identical genetic protoplasm, they are really extensions of the same Being, and in principle can co-operate. And all they have to do, in fact, is do what they can do in principle.”
Now that is all hidden in terminology, taught to people and not defined adequately (70.00) but emotive tones are built up. So there are people who were born in a certain civilization and brought up as Muslims in Iran, in Iraq, in Turkey, and elsewhere, as others are brought up Christian and others are brought up Jew. And there they are, and today they are fighting each other and many of them - by the hundreds of thousands - are giving up that religious belief in favor say, of communism, to fight against that religious teaching, when what they should be fighting against is the corruption of it, not the teaching. The teaching of the unity of the human race is absolutely true. The teaching of the necessity for intelligent co-operation is absolutely true. The abuse of that teaching by any given section is no disproof of the truth of the teaching.
So, when we get all these differences, apparently, of sectarian religions, it is terminology that has created that difference, terminology undefined. Because you get a simple thing, Muslim is related to certain people who believe in the Prophet Mohammed. But the same word exists in Hebrew and means exactly the same thing - it means ‘submission.’ So ‘masleem’ and ‘Muslim’ both have the same meaning, and one is Arabic and the other is Hebrew; and they both mean ‘submission to the will of God’, and Abraham, therefore, was a Muslim.
So we see, an undefined term with an emotive association can be very dangerous. So, unless we get to the bottom of this terminological difference, and release ourselves from the emotive overtones of it, we will remain continuously at war with each other - either openly or covertly. And when the next war is fought, as a big convention of scientists recently said, and the system breaks down, there is a high probability that the condition will be like primitive man before there was a system to help them to relate, and they’ll rove in bands, like wolves, destroying each other if they meet. There will be total chaos. That is the prediction by some scientists, today, of what is likely to happen.
Now as long as people have erroneous ideas derived from undefined vocabulary, charged with emotive associations the high probability of that happening is with us.
So, it is for each individual to decide how much energy is available to investigate fundamental concepts.
Let us take the word ‘love’ again. The word ‘love’ – we’ve dealt with it before - you can’t deal with it too often. People learn this context in a situation where as babies, “I love you,” is accompanied with a gesture, arms round, and you feel comfortable and relatively warm; and “I hate you,“ it has a different facial expression and a pushing away with it, so the word ‘love’ tends to mean, ‘emotively, arms round and comfy’. That is not its meaning. The word means ‘laboring for the development of the potentialities of being’. So, you don’t love anybody unless you work for their development. That is the only valid meaning of that combination of primary phonetic elements. You have an ‘L’ there which means the work factor, the lamed, the lamda, an ox-goad, drive yourself; bind yourself to the situation; the ‘O’, before ‘V’, the development of ‘E’, the life. It is to drive oneself in every situation to develop the life potential of that situation is love; anything less than that is not love.
It does not matter what we call it, it may have nothing to do with arms round and cuddliness, it may have to do with the opposite. It might have to do with telling somebody very clearly, but not dogmatically, but clearly, that certain factors are better taken into consideration than not, and then that person having been told, is not to be compelled to do it, because the highest respect (75.00) has to be given to the free will of every individual being, as a zone of activity of that Infinite Universal Power, which itself posits us and of which we are modalities.
So we see that this unique word has tremendous significance, hasn’t it? And in conscience, and we had another one, didn’t we? What was the other one?
Audience: Principles before practice.
Principles before practice.
Audience: Fact before fiction, no fact before fallacy was the other statement for the human being.
Fact before fallacy, principle before practice.
Audience: Principle before practice, yes
You didn’t mention the fallacy line have you?
Audience: No I didn’t …. …
Fact before fallacy
Audience: Fact before fallacy. Yes.
Before fantasy or fallacy?
Fantasy. Did you say fallacy a moment ago?
No did you?.
Audience: No, I didn’t say that.
No but did you?
Did anybody hear you say fallacy?
Well I , and I think I have got some agreers. Now it could be that fallacy and fantasy are all mixed up, and it could be they are both mixed up with sexuality.
Because all fantasy, you know the word ‘fanny’ is a euphemism for the lady’s genital department isn’t it? ….
And it means vanity, which means that which vanishes, and that means the opposition that collapses under attack and that was attributed to the female that gave in when pressed hard. And the fallacy was to believe that it wouldn’t, and therefore never to try.
Think how much nervousness there is in men who are only ‘ma’ and very often not quite ‘na’ yet, because the maturation of man is the ability to negate the ma in himself, think how many of these ‘maa-’ beings have not attained full self-negation power over their own appetite and in consequence, are terrified of their own female aspect inside themselves. They are afraid of running amok because of their own feelings of unformedness within. And because that unformed-ness possibly over-riding their logic they are frightened also of external women.
Do you know that lots of men are intimidated by the feminine? They really are. It is understandable because when they were about so big and Momma was nursing them, occasionally, playfully, she choked them and then said, “I could choke you,” or, “I could eat you.” And the child,… It has happened before, I mean it has happened. Not only rabbits eat their young, barmaids do. You have never seen a barmaid with a baby have you? You can’t say they are celibate.
So, we have this strange fact that the man afraid of the feminine in his own being, because of its irrationality, tends also to be afraid of the feminine outside him in the woman and therefore, to be ruled by women through unconscious fears of their non-rational capacities. Because they can behave in such a way that all your masculine negation power which we call intellect is crowded out of existence by a sudden irrational tantrum. So that fallacies and phantasies arise where the phallus is not sure of itself. Is not sure that when presented with an opposition that it has the capacity together itself together and drive through it.
Audience: Is that why highly academic people can sometimes appear very insecure?
Mmm, and the more intellectual you prefer to be the more evidence there is that you are afraid of the non-rational. Why bother to stabilize yourself in intellect unless you think something can over-ride you? In our thought, intellect is only a tool to give you a technique of attaining your volitional ends?
So you get a lot of highly intellectual-like men who are quite feminine in their own self, (80.00) very much either mother dominated, or afraid of women, and particularly afraid of their own irrationality. And therefore, they throw themselves into self-intellectualization to make themselves secure…..
Now ‘principles before practice’. Imagine a situation where protoplasm - and that is all we are, organized in more or less complex ways - protoplasm, originally, was quite simply a kind of colloidal shaking mass in a primitive ocean. Only later did it fall onto centers and make mono-cells. So its first sentient experience of itself is one of a diffused, not adequately defined, tremulous anxiety. It’s not yet made itself into a being. It has not yet got a center. And then, somehow mysteriously, some scientists think it is caused by lightning striking into this chemical mess, caused a falling onto centers of the chemistry of that primal ocean, and there appeared little dark spots in little masses of protoplasm, and that little spot is the letter ‘I’, the dot of the ‘I’, the Yud of the Cabala. It is the principle of individuation, the prince-ipal, a pi-ra in that place, a principle. Because from the moment that that centralization has occurred then the Infinite Universal Power pressing into that center, pushes through that center and the center is a little transformer, and it pushes out to the periphery of that primitive cell, and pushes the cell out. And begins to move about in search of food.
The principle therefore is that pi-rational behavior that arises from the first positing of a central nucleus in the protoplasm. Then the pira-actice having got this principle, this pi-ractional center, then you begin to activate through the center. Because, before the center, the whole mass with no little dark dots in it was a blubbering, shaking, tremulous, vaguely sentient, anxious non-being, with no demarcation. But from the moment of that center, the energy can go through the center to its periphery, push it out, make pseudopodia, make false legs, extend them, deposit calcium in them, make bones, produce the vertebrates and so on, finally, up to man himself. And he does it by ‘pi-ra–activation’ – ‘practice’.
,Instead of waiting for the stimulus to hit him from outside, he feels inside, when the stimulus comes whether the stimulus is worthy of his attention. If it is worthy of his attention - his tension - he tenses on it, he holds it and he activates himself on his evaluation of the worth-whileness of the stimulus. Not the stimulus determines him, but his evaluation made by his nuclear will determines what he will do.
Now when that is done from center, the ‘pi-ra’, the rational function in the nucleus of that egg, gives the orders from in the nucleus by its own self-evaluation of the importance of the stimulus, and it pushes out ,and it shapes itself in accordance with its judgment, and that shaping is called worth-shape which later was contracted to the word worship.
So that all true worship starts in the center of being and defines the kind of being that it wills to become. It sits down and writes its definition so it doesn’t forget it.
And then, having defined it, it activates itself on the basis of its own definition and therefore makes itself into a shape (85.00) which is worthwhile to it because it conforms to its own definition of that shape which is most efficient for the pursuit and attainment of a goal defined from within the center of being. And that is Absolute Self-determination.
When a being does that adequately it means that the Infinite Power of the Absolute Sentience has posited that protoplasm, entered it, set up a little reference point within it, that ‘yud’ point, that jot, and then pushing through that little jot has organized that protoplasm in a very individuated unique way.
And that is the total fulfillment of the will of the Absolute for that being. That being is then unique, has a conscience, that is, a totality of knowledge to date, and a practice of a principle, and a method of overthrowing fantasies and escaping fallacies. So that all of these things come together. And we arrived at all of this by starting with a simple little word.
Can we say that the definition when we look at that word now, is quite the same as it was when we were babies? No. Can we say that, “Why bother with it, it is useless?” Or can we say, “That is very useful.”
That means I have a principle inside my own being which is absolutely central, which is absolutely valid, which in religious terminology is God posited, as stated in the Book of Genesis, “God breathed the spirit of life into man.” And he became a living soul, a solo, a being on its own, there, within, on its own, because it owes to the Absolute this positing, within a universe with infinities of other such centers, all posited by the same Absolute. And therefore to whom we have a peculiar kind of cosmic relation such as if we behave in a relational, intelligent, purposive, mutually loving - equals developmental way - we are doing two things simultaneously, the Will of God and the certain development of our own talents.