« October 2012 | Main | December 2012 »

JFK assassination / Vincent Salandria's lunch with Arlen Specter on January 4, 2012

Teknosis needs your help. * Ways to help Teknosis

___

 

Post main:

RM relays:
Vincent Salandria, a Philadelphia lawyer, says that it is obvious that US military intelligence murdered JFK for Cold War reasons. I agree. (I would hasten to add that it is equally obvious that Lyndon Johnson, based on what we know now, was at the epicenter of the JFK assassination. The Kennedys were within days of politically executing the despised and malevolent LBJ.)
 
Salandria, a common man who is really not that bright - as he will readily tell you - figured this out very early on. So the real issue is the psychological ability of the American people to accept an ugly reality - that John Kennedy was murdered in a high level domestic coup d'etat by the national security state. Multiply that times 100 in the case of the American elites as far as their level of acceptance vs. what it should be if they were honest with themselves.
 

Notes on Lunch with Arlen Specter on January 4, 2012 by Vincent Salandria

November 8, 2012
By

This thoughtful and provocative piece comes from an early and brilliant Warren Commission critic and lawyer Vincent Salandria, author of False Mystery. He has taken the position for years that the visible facts in the case were transparent from the start, without ever being officially confirmed. In his view, we already know who killed President Kennedy and why, but to admit that to ourselves would lead to an imperative for action with unknown consequences. He continues these themes in this recent piece sent to us for public consumption. Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania passed away recently after a long battle with cancer and never recanted his conclusions about the single bullet theory he propounded for the Warren Commission to explain multiple wounds in President Kennedy and John Connally on November 22, 1963.

Notes on Lunch with Arlen Specter on January 4, 2012

On January 4, 2012 at 11:25 a.m. I arrived at the Oyster House restaurant in Philadelphia for a meeting with former U.S. Senator Arlen Specter. He had called me a week or so earlier and suggested we have lunch.

We met, shook hands, and seated ourselves at a table. I thanked him for suggesting having lunch with me.

I told him that I viewed his work on the Kennedy assassination as very likely having saved my life. I also wanted him to know that if I had been given his Warren Commission assignment, and if I knew then what I know now about power and politics in our society, I would have done what he did. Of course, as a pacifist peace activist with socialist leanings, such as I was and am, I would never have been selected for Specter’s job with the Warren Commission. Arlen Specter was neither a pacifist nor a peace activist. He was a lawyer. I believe that Specter did not know that after the assassination of President Kennedy he was no longer a citizen of a republic but rather was a subject of the globally most powerful banana republic.

But if I had been chosen for his assignment, i.e. to frame Lee Harvey Oswald as Kennedy’s killer, I would have done what Specter did. As a lawyer I would have had been obligated to serve the best interests of my client, the U.S. government. My assignment would have been to cover up the state crime, the coup. I said that not to do that work and not to steer the society away from the ostensible pilot to kill President Kennedy, which plot had as its central theme a pro-Castro and pro-Soviet origin, would have resulted in terrible political consequences.

I told Specter that the American people could never have accepted my view of the assassination as a covert military-intelligence activity supported by the U.S. establishment – not then, and not now. They would have readily accepted as truth the leftist-plot script that the assassins employed. Even now, most Kennedy assassination critics will not accept my view of a U.S. national security state military-industrial killing. I explained that my very bright and rational wife could and would not completely accept my version of the meaning of the Kennedy assassination.

The U.S. national security state’s killing of Kennedy was cloaked in the Oswald myth. That myth included a supposed U.S. defector to the Soviet Union who headed up a Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and who before the assassination allegedly sought a Cuban passport. Therefore, the myth pointed an accusing finger at Fidel Castro and the Soviets.

If the U.S. public had been convinced that Castro and the Soviets were behind the killing of Kennedy, then the military would have considered the killing an act of war, and a military dictatorship in the U.S. would have probably resulted.

Oswald, a U.S. intelligence agent whose past had been molded by the C.I.A., could have been cast into whatever his intelligence masters chose. If the Oswald myth had completely unraveled and had exposed the joint chiefs to the U.S. public as the criminals behind the coup, they, the joint chiefs, would never have quietly surrendered their newly acquired power. I believe that instead, they would have sought to preserve and exploit their newly acquired status of possessing ultimate power over the U.S. arms budget and foreign policy. I believe that they would have proclaimed a national security emergency and imposed martial law. They would have declared a state of emergency, to a state of war, and would have designated the replacement for President Kennedy as a unitary president. We now have been made to understand that the unitary president is unhampered by constitutional separation of powers and the restraints of the bill of rights. In short, the unitary president is a euphemism for the correct political designation of a dictator.

Specter asked me what I thought was the reason for the assassination. In reply I asked whether he had read the correspondence between President Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev. He had not. I explained that my reading of the correspondence convinced me that Kennedy and Khrushchev had grown very fond of one another. I saw them as seeking to end the Cold War in the area of military confrontation. They were in my judgment seeking to change the Cold War into a peaceful competition on an economic rather than military basis, testing the relative merits of a free market and command economy. I saw the U.S. military intelligence and its civilian allies as being opposed to ending the Cold War.

I told him that I concluded that there was also a conflict between Kennedy and our military on the issue of escalation in Vietnam. In order to deter the efforts of Kennedy and Khrushchev to accomplish a winding down of the Cold War, the C.I.A, with the approval of the U.S. military, killed Kennedy.

I said that I believed the assassination was committed at the behest of the highest levels of U.S. power. I said that I did not use sophisticated thinking to arrive at my very early conclusion of a U.S. national-security state assassination. I told him that I think like the Italian peasant stock from which I came. We use intuition.

I explained that the day after the Kennedy assassination I met with my then brother-in-law, Harold Feldman. We decided that if Oswald was the killer, and if the U.S. government were innocent of any complicity in the assassination, Oswald would live through the weekend. But if he was killed, then we would know that the assassination was a consequence of a high level U.S. government plot.

Harold Feldman and I also concluded that if Oswald was killed by a Jew, it would indicate a high level WASP plot. We further decided that the killing of Oswald would signal that no government investigation could upturn the truth. In that event we as private citizens would have to investigate the assassination to arrive at the historical truth.

Specter uniformly maintained a courteous, serious and respectful demeanor, as did I. He asked me whether I had talked to Mark Lane frequently. I told him that I had spoken to him, and that I had spoken to essentially every assassination critic then active. I described meeting Mark Lane at a dinner in Philadelphia at a lawyer’s home. The dinner was in 1964. I could not recall the name of the lawyer host. I related that Spencer Coxe, the Executive leader of the Philadelphia branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, was also present.

At that dinner I informed Lane that I was interested in Oswald as a likely U.S. intelligence agent provocateur. Lane was not interested in the concept of Oswald as a possible U.S. intelligence asset. Specter asked me what Lane believed regarding the assassination. I said that at that time he believed there was a plot, but he did not name who the plotters were and did not discuss what he thought the reason was for the killing. I did say that later, Lane got a jury to decide for Lane’s client who had said that E. Howard Hunt was in Dallas on the date of the Kennedy assassination. Lane’s client had been sued for libel. He described the case in his 1991 book Plausible Denial.

In 1964, after his work with the Warren Commission was completed, Specter had been honored for this association at a meeting of the Philadelphia Bar Association. He asked me what I remembered about that event. I told him that I attended with my copy of the Warren Report and directed some questions at him regarding the shots, trajectories and wounds in the Kennedy assassination. After the meeting some of my colleagues at the bar asked me to write an article. That night I did so. I sent the article to Theodore Vorhees, the Chancellor of the Philadelphia Bar Association, and asked him to have it published. He sent it back and asked me to tone it down. I did so. He got it published in The Legal Intelligencer.

Specter recalled that in our confrontation I had accused him of corruption. He said that he had asked me at that time whether I would change the charge to incompetency. I had refused. I told him that I could not change it to incompetency because I knew then from his public record, as I know now, that he was not incompetent. My charge was reiterated in the Legal Intelligencer article, which described the Warren Commission’s work as speculation conforming to none of the evidence. I said the Warren Report did not have the slightest credibility, committing errors of logic and being contrary to the laws of physics and geometry.

Specter, during our 2012 lunch, asked me whether I thought that the Warren Commission was a set up. I answered that probably not all of the Commissioners knew it was a set up, but that Dulles and Warren knew. I also told him that I thought that McGeorge Bundy was privy to the plot. Specter did not respond to this.

I explained that I did not discuss with friends my view of the assassination and my conception of how controlled our society is. I said that I did not discuss with my friends matters such as we were discussing because people are just not ready to accept my view of the assassination and the tight control over our society. I said that I had nothing to offer to people in terms of solutions to the mess we are in. I related how last year, when I had a blood condition and thought I was going to die, my big regret was the mess of a society we were bequeathing to our children.

Specter commented: “Washington is in chaos.” I told him that I was deeply concerned about whether we are going to bomb Iran. Specter said, “We are not going to bomb Iran.”

I offered an example of how out of control the society is. I pointed out that he had been against escalation in Afghanistan. While Obama was supposed to be meditating over whether or not to escalate the U.S. forces there, Generals McChrystal and Petraeus were speaking to the press telling the world that we were going to escalate. These statements by the generals were made while Vice President Biden was speaking publicly against escalation. I said that I thought McChrystal and Petraeus should have been court martialed for violating the chain of command. I then said that I don’t think Obama any longer has power over the military, despite the ostensible constitutional chain of command.

I told Specter that I knew there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy notwithstanding his single-bullet theory because the holes in the custom-made shirt and suit jacket of Kennedy could not have ridden up in such a fashion to explain how a shot from the southeast corner of the sixth floor of the Texas Book Depository Building, hitting Kennedy at a downward angle of roughly 17 degrees, and hitting no bone, could have exited from his necktie knot. I told him that Commission Exhibit 399 was a plant.

I admitted that I had coached Gaeton Fonzi before his interview with him on the questions that he should ask Specter. Specter asked me where Fonzi is. I told him that he lives in Florida, and that he is sick with Hodgkin’s disease. Specter said he was a good reporter. I told Specter that Fonzi was a great investigative reporter.

I told Specter that my very smart wife does not accept my political thinking regarding the nature of the power in control of the country and the world. Specter asked me about my wife. I told him that she is Jewish. She is a graduate of Swarthmore College. She studied at the University of Chicago and accomplished all but the dissertation in Russian Literature there. She owns and manages 41 apartments around Rittenhouse Square. Her father was a fellow traveler. He was subpoenaed before the House Un-American Activities Committee. He retained Abe Fortas as his lawyer. The hearing was cancelled. He was a philanthropist who financed the Youth Ruth Wing of the Jerusalem Museum and a college and high school in Israel.

I suggested to Specter that he was selected to perform the hardest assignment of the Warren Commission because he was a Jew. The government could have selected a right WASP lawyer for the job. I said that I had received less criticism for my work on the assassination than he had received for his work on the Commission and as Senator. He related how in Bucks County in a speaking engagement a man had risen and shouted at him that he should resign because he was too Jewish. I told him that I thought that he was a good Senator. He replied that being a Senator was a good and interesting job.

So how is it that Arlen Specter’s work on the Warren Commission saved my life? If I had been successful in arousing public opposition to the National Security State, whom I viewed at the President’s true killers, then the National Security State, possessing supreme power after its successful coup, would have liquidated any effective dissent. In 1966, after a public forum on the Warren Commission’s evidence, I was advised by Brandeis Professor Jacob Cohen that I would have to be killed. I viewed Professor Cohen as speaking for the assassins.

The Warren Report quieted the public. And as it developed, I was completely ineffective. There was no need to dispose of me. So, I consider my life was saved by the effectiveness of Arlen Specter’s work and the ineffectiveness of my own.

As we were leaving the Oyster House I gave Specter a copy of James W. Douglass’s book, JFK and the Unspeakable. I said it was the best book on the assassination, and that it was dedicated to a friend of mine and me.

Specter was smiling broadly as we left. I told him that he had a great smile, but that he did not sport it often in public. I asked him whether he was in good health. He said he was, and seemed optimistic about his well-being. I don’t know whether he was then aware of his illness. In dealing with his protracted struggle against very serious afflictions he displayed remarkable fight and courage.

Knowing what I know now, and being then, as now, committed to historical truth, I would have not changed my earliest statement that the Kennedy assassination was a crime of the U.S. warfare state. But I would not have endeavored to rally people to confront as I did the assassins. I know now that the U.S. public never did want to accept the U.S. warfare state as the criminal institutional structure that it is. I know now, that even if the U.S. public ever was ready to accept the true historical meaning of the Kennedy assassination, that there are and have been no institutional structures open to them with which they could hope to countervail successfully the Kennedy killers, the enormous power of the U.S. empire and its warfare state.

I know that my efforts to convince people to oppose Kennedy’s assassins were feckless. But was the effort of a small community of people to establish the historical truth of the Kennedy assassination valueless? I think not. I feel that historical truth is the polestar which guides humankind when we grope for an accurate diagnosis of a crisis. Without historical truth, an accurate diagnosis of the nature and cause of crisis, we would have no direction on how to move to solve societal disease.

Knowing what I know now, would I change my harsh criticisms of Arlen Specter? Yes, I would. Specter was a superior lawyer who enlisted his services to the U.S. government. The Warren Commission Report, through its lies, served to calm the U.S. public in a period of great crisis. If any serious domestic or foreign effort had been made to counter the coup, the weaponry commanded by the state criminals would have resulted in catastrophic loss of life. Therefore, in my judgment of Arlen Specter I defer to the wisdom of Sophocles, who said: “Truly, to tell lies is not honorable; but where truth entails tremendous ruin, to speak dishonorably is pardonable.”

November 22, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Robert Morrow's Take on the Kennedy Assassination and How Oswald-Did-It Researchers Complicate the Case

Teknosis needs your help. * Ways to help Teknosis

___

Post main:

 

JFK Assassination Here is ROBERT MORROW Essay

 

Here is ROBERT MORROW'S essay on the 1963 Coup d'Etat which (updated as OF 11/1/11). IT CONTAINS A GOOD OVERVIEW OF THOSE INVOLVED IN KENNEDY'S MURDER AND THE ONGOING COVER-UP THAT CONTINUES TO THIS DAY.

The LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK

Fifty years after the assassination of John Kennedy, research is pointing the finger at Lyndon Johnson and the CIA as having engineered a coup d'etat. It is likely that Lyndon Johnson made a dirty deal with CIA Republicans to murder John Kennedy in the 1963 Coup d’Etat. (People like Clint Murchison Sr., H.L. Hunt, D.H. Byrd, Nelson Rockefeller, David Rockefeller, top Nelson Rockefeller aide Henry Kissinger, McGeorge Bundy, George Herbert Walker Bush, Gen. Edward Lansdale (CIA) and Gen. Charles Willoughby all are excellent candidates for elite sponsorship.) Lyndon Johnson and Allen Dulles may very well have been co-CEOs of the JFK assassination; with the CIA in charge of the killing of JFK, and Lyndon Johnson and (his close friend and neighbor of 19 years in Washington, DC) FBI director J. Edgar Hoover in charge of the cover up. 

Texas oil men and key LBJ supporters Clint Murchison, Sr. ands H.L. Hunt are thought to be key players in the JFK assassination because of their close ties to the inner core of US intelligence (Allen Dulles, Nelson Rockefeller, John J. McCloy), close ties to Lyndon Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover of the FBI, bankers Rockefellers; Murchison was even friends with key Kennedy-hater mafia godfather Carlos Marcellos of New Orleans. Not only that, Murchison, Sr. was a patient and partner of Dr. Alton Oschner, the former president of the American Cancer Society and who ran covert cancer research for the CIA. Oschner, likewise was a Kennedy-hater. John Simkin: “One of Ochsner's friends described him as being ‘like a fundamentalist preacher in the sense that the fight against communism was the only subject that he would talk about, or even allow you to talk about, in his presence.”
When JFK was slaughtered, Russia’s Khrushchev was literally crying, fearing nuclear war. Cuba’s Castro worried and feared an US invasion and gave an impressive speech the next day deconstructing the CIA’s deception provocation for war. Meanwhile at Clint Murchison’s home(NOTE, SHE WAS A SEAMSTRESS AND MAID AT , their family maid May Newman describes the scene: “The mood in the Murchison family home was very joyous and happy. For a whole week after like champagne and caviar flowed, every day of the week. But I was the only one in that household at that time that felt any grief for his assassination." 


AT THIS POINT,I WOULD LIKE TO INTERJECT INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONTROVERSY REVOLVING AROUND THE "MURCHISON PARTY" AND THE EVENT DESCRIBED ABOVE,USING AN OSWALD-DID-IT CRITIC'S WRITINGS,WHICH MIX FACT AND FICTION CONVINCINGLY. THE WRITER IS DAVE PERRY, WHO HAS WRITTEN THAT IF I AM TELLING THE TRUTH,I SHOULD BE ARRESTED.  HIS REFERENCES INCLUDE GARY MACK, CALLED 'THE TRAITOR OF THE 6TH FLOOR MUSEUM' FOR ONCE PRETENDING TO CRITICIZE THE WARREN COMMISSION,BUT FOR WHOM A BIG SALARY TO SUPPORT THE 6TH FLOOR MUSEUM'S CAMPAIGN THAT OSWALD KILLED KENNEDY HAS BEEN TOO MUCH OF AN ENTICEMENT FOR HIM TO REFUSE. I WILL INTRODUCE COMMENTS INTO HJIS CRITIQUE,WHICH HAS MANY PROBLEMS. i WILL ALSO PLACE IN RED THOSE WORDS THAT EXHIBIT PREJUDICE. II WILL UNDERLINE KEY PROBLEMS WITH THE WRITING AND ADD COMMENTS IN PARENTHESES.
Dave Perry writes:
"May Newman is identified as a Seamstress and Companion to Virginia MurchisonThe Guilty Men's narrator intones "She lived and worked in another Murchison house in Dallas for Virginia, Clint Sr.s' second wife. She speaks here for the first time."
Newman reports:
"I started working for Virginia Murchison in 1962 until her death in 1997, approximately 36 years."
As Newman speaks a single story brick ranch style house with a circular drive and the street number 9785 is shown in the background. The actual address is 9785 Audubon Place located within Dallas' Sunnybrook Estates.
Newman makes a puzzling statement. She maintains:
"I remember well the night before the assassination. I worked with a man called Jule Feifer (phonetic), black man, which was Virginia Murchison's chauffeur. He got a call from her stepson John at the big house. They were having a big party for a very special guest that was coming from Washington to go to the party, by the name of Bulldog, which I found out later was J. Edgar Hoover. And he said he was very excited about doing this going on this trip to the airport to take this very special guest to a very special party, big party. And I asked him when he came back if he got a good tip. And he said no and he was very, very upset. He had to go back that night to take J. Edgar Hoover to the airport to go back to Washington and he still didn't get a tip."
Newman also claims she had a conversation with Buella May Holeman (phonetic) who she identifies as John and Lupe Murchison's cook. 
(LATER,PERRY WILL TELL PEOPLE THAT JOHN AND LUPE HAVE NO INTEREST IN THE WELL-DOCUMENTED VENDETTA AGAINST KENNEDY BY CLINT MURCHISON SR'S --AND JR'S--VENDETTA AGAINST KENNEDY. BUT JOHN MURCHISON NEEDED TO KEEP IN FAVOR WITH HIS DISABLED FATHER. CLINT,JR, WHO I WAS TOLD BY MARY FERRELL HAD A COCAINE HABIT AND OTHER PROBLEMS,COULD NOT BE COUNTED ON FOR SECRECY.] 
Holeman indicates they are expecting a very important guest by the name of J. Edgar Hoover. Newman should come over and help prepare the principal meal of quail so she could meet him. Newman refused saying she might have gone if he was a movie star but at the time she didn't know who he was.
Newman also contends she was the only person in the Virginia Murchison household who felt remorse over Kennedy's death.
"The mood in the Murchison family home was very joyous and happy. For a whole week after like champagne and caviar flowed, every day of the week. But I was the only one in that household at that time that uh felt any grief for his assassination."
With all the claims and counterclaims concerning this party, let me explain.
Madeleine Brown, the only person professing attendance, indicated the party was held at Clint Sr.'s home 
[THE HOME ONCE BELONGED TO MURCHISON SR. THOUGH IT WAS NOW OCCUPIED BY HIS SON JOHN, AND JOHN'S WIFE,LUPE MURCHISON, THEY WERE FREQUENTLY ABSENT,LIVING ELSEWHERE ON A RANCH,AS LUPE DIDN'T LIKE THE HOUSE.]
"as a tribute honoring his life long friend, J. Edgar Hoover."
[IF MURCHISON,SR. HAD HIS OWN HOME ELSEWHERE, WHICH WAS THE CASE,WHY WOULD HE USE OF HIS SON'S HOUSE FOR THE TRIBUTE,WHICH WAS MORE REMOTE AND HARDER TO REACH UNOBSERVED, RATHER THAN HIS OWN FORMER MANSION, ON SOME 25 ACRES OF LAND SO CLOSE TO THE HEART OF DALLAS? CONSIDER, TOO,THAT IF A SECRET MEETING WAS TO BE HELD THERE, JUST IN CASE OF LEAKS, A COVER 'PARTY' IN MURCHISON SR'S OWN HOME WOULD BE TOO OBVIOUS. THESE ARE CONSIDERATIONS PERRY IGNORES.] 
"It was a rather large affair as the guest list included John McCloy, Richard Nixon, George Brown, R.L. Thornton and H.L. Hunt. This scenario is impossible because Clint Sr. had retreated to his Glad Oaks Ranch in 1959 after suffering a stroke in 1958."
 
[PERRY WANTS US TO BELIEVE THAT MURCHISON,SR. WOULD NOT HAVE ARRANGED FOR HIS FORMER HOME TO BE USED FOR THE PARTY,WITHOUT OFFERING EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY.NOBODY EVER QUESTIONED JOHN AND LUPE ABOUT THIS PARTY,THOUGH THE STORY FIRST WAS OUTED BY PENN JONES. PERRY THUS CANNOT QUOTE JOHN AND LUPE.]
 
In McClellan's book the party was held at Clint Jr.s' home. One can surmise where this revelation came from.
 
[ But the question is, would John Murchison prohibit a meeting about eradicating Kennedy,which occurred at the party 'honoring Hoover'? This is a question Perry ignores. .]
 
By the late-1980's Madeleine Brown had learned, through the research efforts of Gary Mack, of the inconsistencies in her original story. She made an appearance on the television show A Current Affair and described the party as being at Clint Jr.'s home. This also is impossible, as Clint Jr. was not an occupant of Newman's referenced "big house", and would have no reason, as I explained above, to have "a tribute honoring his life long friend, J. Edgar Hoover."
[Here Perry ignores the high intelligence factor of Clint Murchison,Jr. who would not be about to reveal anything incriminating, and the fact that Clint Murchison Sr. did not die until June 20, 1969.]
 
"Newman correctly attests that the occupant of the "big house" was John Murchison." 
[Note that Perry says 'occupants,' avoiding saying that John Murchison OWNED the house. A November 7, 2008 Dallas News article says, "After he suffered a stroke around 1960, Clint traded houses with his son John Murchison and John's wife, Lupe.
The big house then became the backdrop for Lupe and John's stunning collection of art by Mark Rothko, Roy Lichtenstein, Helen Frankenthaler and others. Then Perry uses Newman,who he says elsewhere is in error, to go on to discredit the "Clint Murchison Jr" connection. Yet he will attack other elements in the maid's story.] 
Once John took custody of the home his wife, Lupe, turned the 22,000 square foot house into what has been described as "a showcase for the eye-popping contemporary art" collected by the couple.
Next Newman introduces another home, that of Virginia who is Clint Sr.s' second wife. She, as well as, Virginia's chauffeur are asked to assist with a party now being held at the Murchison mansion occupied by John and Lupe! 
[Pewrry wants us to think this is impossible.  Yet,
John has absolutely no relationship with J. Edgar Hoover and therefore no interest in any party. There are lots of the claims and counterclaims but since the whole scenario is fabricated there can be no corroboration. The entire story of the party is a fraud created by one person only - Madeleine Brown.
Martin Shackelford made a valid point on April 8, 2004 when he mentioned in the alt.assassination.jfk newsgroup that:
"Oddly, Dave attributes the Murchison party as simply an invention of Madeleine Brown, despite the fact that another source (reportedly a chauffeur who had driven someone to the party) had reported the party to Penn Jones Jr. many years before Madeleine went public with her account."
AT THE END OF HIS ESSAY,  HE WRITES:

 
Martin Shackelford is correct. Years before Madeleine told her story Penn Jones did mention a party but the story involving an unnamed chauffeur [here Perry conveniently forgets to mention that Jones said the chauffeur was black,--just as the maid had said!---we get that information from Perry's close friend, Gary Mack, which is a portent of Mack's later activities generally supporting the 6th Floor Museum's agenda that Lee Oswald killed Kennedy. Here we will underline and bold face points where Mack is interesting:

Gary Mack's account of Madeleine Brown's LBJ party story on 14th May, 1997. 

Madeleine has claimed over the years that she attended a party at Clint Murchison’s house the night before the assassination and LBJ, Hoover and Nixon were there. The party story, without LBJ, first came from Penn Jones in Forgive My Grief. In that version, the un-credited source was a black chauffeur whom Jones didn’t identify, and the explanation Jones gave was that it was the last chance to decide whether or not to kill JFK. Of course, Hoover used only top FBI agents for transportation and in the FBI of 1963, none were black.
 [NOTE THAT THIS EARLY VERSION DISMISSES A BLACK CHAUFFEUR. GARY MACK DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BLACK CHAUFFEUR NEWMAN SAID WORKED AT THE MURCHISON MANSION]
Actually, there is no confirmation for a party at Murchison’s. I asked Peter O’Donnell because Madeleine claimed he was there, too. Peter said there was no party. Madeleine even said there was a story about it in the Dallas Times Herald some months later (which makes no sense), but she had not been able to find it. Val Imm (Society Editor of the Dallas Times Herald) told Bob Porter (of the Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza staff) recently she had no memory of such an event and even looked through her notes - in vain. 
WHO IS PETER O'DONNELL? AN EXTREME CONSERVATIVE,A FOUNDING MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION IN NOV,1964. Ref: http://www.seekgod.ca/cnp.c.htm 
RESEARCHER JAMES FETZER in his book ASSASSINATION SCIENCE relates that he interviewed Madelein,who said O'Donnell drove Richard Nixon to the meeting. If this is true,O'Donnell would NEVER admit to the meeting. If the interview with O'Donnell had been conducted with somebody else, would they have been so certain that O'Donnell was telling the truth?

Could LBJ have been at a Murchison party? No. LBJ was seen and photographed in the Houston Coliseum with JFK at a dinner and speech. They flew out around 10pm and arrived at Carswell (Air Force Base in northwest Fort Worth) at 11:07 Thursday night. Their motorcade to the Hotel Texas arrived about 11:50 and LBJ was again photographed. He stayed in the Will Rogers suite on the 13th floor and Manchester (William Manchester - author of The Death of a President) says he was up late. 
[GARY MACK DOES NOT TELL US THE SOURCES OF THE INFORMATION ABOVE. IT TURNS OUT THAT SOME OF THE ALIBI,IF SUCH WAS THE CASE,CAME FROM LBJ'S AIDE BILL MOYER,WEHO WOULD HAVE SAID ANYTHING TO PROTECT HIS BOSS. MANCHESTER'S STATEMENT MEANS LITTLE,SINCE LBJ MIGHT HAVE BEEN OBSERVED UPON HIS RETURN. MADELEINE BROWN SAYS LYNDON ARRIVED VERY LATE AND THAT THE MEETING DID NOT LAST VERY LONG.]
Could Nixon have been at Murchison’s party? No. Tony Zoppi (Entertainment Editor of The Dallas Morning News) and Don Safran (Entertainment Editor of the Dallas Times Herald) saw Nixon at the Empire Room at the Statler-Hilton. He walked in with Joan Crawford (Movie actress). Robert Clary (of Hogan’s Heroes fame) stopped his show to point them out, saying “. . . either you like him or you don’t.” Zoppi thought that was in poor taste, but Safran said Nixon laughed. Zoppi’s deadline was 11pm, so he stayed until 10:30 or 10:45 and Nixon was still there. 
[BUT MADELEINE BROWN DOES NOT TELL US WHEN NIXON ARRIVED. SHE SAYS O'DONNELL DRIVE HIM THERE. FURTHER, MACK'S STATEMENT THAT "ZOPPI'S DEADLINE WAS 11 PM,SO HE STAYED UNTIL 10:30 OR 10;45 AND NIXON WAS STILL THERE" DEFIES ALL LOGIC. I WAS A NEWS REPORTER MYSELF: THERE IS TRANSPORTATION TO THE NEWS OFFICE,WHICH WOULD TAKE SOME TIME, PARKING, ENTERING BIG BUILDING, GETTING INTO OFFICE,THEN WRITING UP THE EVENT ON A NEWS TYPEWRITER,WHICH ITSELF TAKES TIME. NIXON COULD HAVE LEFT AT 1-0:00 PM,FOR ALL WE KNOW.]



 is more allusion than reality. Jones' brief version of the event appears in Forgive My Grief (pp. 84-86). Jones first discussed a party that did take place on or about October 18, 1969 at "Number One Main Place Plaza" in Dallas. You haven't misread the date of 1969. Jones references a party that took place almost six years after the assassination. Then in a classic case of historical fraud 

[PENN JONES WAS A RESPECTED RESEARCHER. DAVE PERRY'S
 ACCUSATION IS SPECIOUS. IN THE NEXT SENTENCE, YOU LEARN THAT
AN EARLIER PARTY IS REFERENCED THEN BY PENN JONES...]

he comments:
"An earlier unreported Murchison party was much more important than those of recent years. This party was held on the night of November 21, 1963 at the Murchison home (notice he doesn't mention which home), and we think, was the cover for an important conference of the assassination staff." (Emphasis mine)
Jones originally thought the party took place in Sikes, Lousiana but for reasons known only to him changed it to the Murchison home. Jones then divines that two of the guests at his unreported party were Richard Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover. He actually gives Hoover the appellation "Task Force Commander." Lyndon Johnson's name appears nowhere in the article.


[BUT LYNDON JOHNSON'S TEXAS CRONIES HAD GREAT POWER IN TEXAS
AT THIS TIME, AND PENN JONES KNEW THIS VERY WELL,HAVING 
HAD TO DEAL WITH TRYING TO HELP FORMER DALLAS WITNESS
ROGER CRAIG.]


At the end of his "report" he states, "Admittedly our information about Hoover's presence was learned second hand, but it is reliable. We will never tell how we got the information."
Can you imagine the outcry if the government used the same deceitful techniques Jones uses to support his questionable claim?
I tried to find the source of the allegation that "a chauffeur had driven someone to the party" but was never able to find it in print, and as shown above Jones was reticent about revealing his source. I believe he operated in this fashion so serious researchers would find it difficult to discover the true depth of the deception he used in his "investigations."
It turned out that the chauffeur story originated with Roger Craig. Here is what Jones omitted from Craig's recounting 1 - the chauffeur was black and 2 - the chauffeur was in the employ of Clint Murchison, SR.

[EVEN AS PERRY ATTACKS PENN JONES FOR NOT PROVIDING A CITATION FOR HIS INFORMATION (WHICH SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN MADELEIN BROWN) HE THEN TELLS US THAT  ROGER CRAIG PROVIDED THIS INFORMATION--WHILE HE,TOO, FAILS TO CITE A SOURCE,EITHER.]


With that history I merely had to determine who the chauffeur was. It turned out to be Warren Tilley, husband of Eula Tilley who I interviewed for the first time on August 21, 2002. Warren has throat cancer and is unable to speak but Eula did. Sometime between 1959 - 1960 Clint Murchison, Sr. moved to his Glad Oaks Ranch near Palestine, Texas after suffering a stroke. That is at least THREE YEARS before the assassination. On the day of and at the time of the assassination he was having lunch with his neighbor Woffard Cain. Earlier in the morning Warren had given him a ride in the car. Murchison and the Tilly's were nowhere near Dallas for months prior to or well after the assassination.Interested parties may want to pull out a map to see just where Palestine is located with respect to Dallas.

[BUT THIS IS A CHAUFFEUR FOR THE MURCHISON,SR. AT HIS NEW HOME AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DALLAS LOCATION. PERRY KNOWS THIS BUT PROFFERS THIS INFORMATION ANYWAY.]
Roger Craig
Since Jones never mentioned what Murchison home was involved it was Madeleine and Madeleine alone that invented the FINAL SCENARIO of the "lavish party" at Clint Murchison, Sr's home. As her story unraveled she was forced to embellish and lie. She pleaded with Val Imm (Society Editor of The Dallas Times Herald) to find her story about the party because Madeleine had spent hours in an unsuccessful search at the public library. Imm couldn't because there was no party to write about. Back in 1969 Jones had already asserted the party was unreported.

[THIS IS A TWISTING OF PENN JONES' STATEMENT. THE PARTY WAS NOT REPORTED BY THE WARREN COMMISSION, FBI, ETC. AS WELL AS BY
MADELEINE BROWN, TO ANY AUTHORITY AT THE TIME. TO INCLUDE NEWSPAPER STORIES,JONES MIGHT HAVE USED THE TERM 'UNPUBLISHED' BUT DID NOT.]

Madeleine not only had problems with Val Imm but the actual time of the party itself. She kept moving the start time up. She had to. To her chagrin she found out that, shortly after his arrival at Carswell Air Force Base northwest of Fort Worth, Lyndon Johnson was photographed at 11:07 PM Thursday night. Then she discovered Richard Nixon was with movie actress Joan Crawford at the Empire Room of the Statler Hilton in Dallas as late as 10:45 PM. Both Tony Zoppi(Entertainment Editor of The Dallas Morning News) and Don Safran (Entertainment Editor of The Dallas Times Herald) saw the two of them there at Robert Cleary's show. Cleary is known for his role as Corporal Louis Lebeau in the 1960s to 1970s television series Hogan's Heroes.
Dave Perry April 9, 2004"

NOW WE WILL RETURN TO ROBERT MORROW'S STORY:



The Warren Commission should have really been called the “Allen Dulles Commission” because he controlled it and made it the farce that it was. Dulles was probably an elite sponsor (i.e. murderer), as well as certainly Lyndon Johnson. The 3 hardcore cover up artists on the Warren Commission were the 3 Council on Foreign Relations members: Allen Dulles (president CFR 1946-50), John J. McCloy (then chairman of the CFR 1953-1970) and Gerald Ford (CFR member, later president). John J. McCloy was a Rockefeller man, former head of Chase Manhattan bank, and very deep US intelligence since the OSS days. John J. McCloy’s nickname was “Chairman of the American Establishment,” and he mixed at the highest levels of business, intelligence and he was close to the Kennedy-hating Texas business elite. Cover up artist Gerald Ford was secretly reporting to Hoover and the FBI what the Warren Commission was doing. In 1970, Newsweek called Gerald Ford the “CIA’s best friend in Congress.” The CFR especially 40 years ago, was heavily Rockefeller influenced and it top players were deep CIA.

The CIA has been called the military wing of the CFR; and actually that is not too far from the truth. The CFR was in its heyday from 1950-1990.

Here is an absolutely spectacular article why the National Security State murdered John Kennedy: http://www.lewrockwe...rshall10.1.html John Kennedy was despised by and did not control his CIA nor his Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Lyndon Johnson’s reasons to murder were out of his deep desperation and fear of what would become of him after his imminent expulsion from the 1964 Democratic ticket and his fears of going to jail over the exploding Bobby Baker scandal. LIFE magazine, being fed extremely damaging info by Robert Kennedy, was set to run an expose on Lyndon Johnson’s corruption that would blow him out of the water once and for all (Dec. 6th issue, but due to be printed and mailed on 11/29/63: source James Wagenvoord who worked at LIFE then). Bobby Baker was the protégé of a wildly corrupt LBJ in the Senate; Lyndon Johnson was like both a dad and a big brother to Bobby Baker (who named two of his children after LBJ: Lynda and Lyndon). Both Lyndon Johnson and Bobby Baker were receiving tremendous amounts of under-the-table money while Johnson was running the Senate. The Kennedys and LIFE Magazine were literally days away from politically executing Lyndon Johnson with the rope of the unraveling Bobby Baker scandal. After vaporizing the despised Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy was going to replace LBJ most likely with Terry Sanford of North Carolina or possibly his good friend George Smathers of Florida as VP on the 1964 Democratic ticket.

The Kennedys and Lyndon Johnson were having a sub rosa fight: Jack and Robert Kennedy brought knives to the battle and Lyndon Johnson brought guns and it was settled on 11/22/63 at 12:30 PM in Dallas. 

Lately, I have been studying the role of McGeorge Bundy, the National Security Advisor for JFK and Henry Cabot Lodge, JFK’s insubordinate ambassador to Vietnam who Kennedy was planning to fire on Monday, 11/25/63. It is probable that both McGeorge Bundy and Henry Cabot Lodge were involved some way with the JFK assassination. McGeorge Bundy, astonishingly, was already drafting sharp escalations to JFK’s Vietnam policy NSAM 273 (which JFK would not have approved) on 11/21/63, the night before the 1963 Coup d’Etat! McGeorge Bundy was also assuring others very quickly on 11/22/63 that there was no conspiracy to kill JFK, at a time when it was impossible for him (or anyone) to credibly be saying that. Bundy later ran the Ford Foundation from 1966-1979.

JFK’s Secretary of State, Dean Rusk, who ran the Rockefeller Foundation from 1952-1961, and was also a hawk on Vietnam, is another one who merits close scrutiny in the Coup of 1963. Kennedy had appointed Rusk because it was unlikely that the Senate would confirm JFK’s first choice J. William Fulbright, who later became a prominent opponent of the Vietnam War. After the 1963 Coup d’Etat, Rusk lasted through all the blood and guts of Vietnam and all the way through Jan., 1969, as Johnson’s Secretary of State. Walt Rostow (CFR), another Vietnam hawk, replaced McGeorge Bundy (CFR) as National Security Advisor in 1966. The CFR and the Rockefellers, not John Kennedy, lusted for the Vietnam War.

The midlevel murderers (field operations) of JFK would include CIA guys like Richard Helms, David Atlee Phillips, James Angleton, David Morales, William King Harvey, E. Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, and perhaps Cord Meyer. Cord Meyer who ran Operation Mockingbird (media manipulation) certainly was heavily involved in the cover up of the JFK assassination. 

Deputy Harry Weatherford is a good candidate to have been on the Records Building as a sniper. Influential mobster Johnny Roselli was especially close friends with the CIA’s William King Harvey, a rabid Kennedy hater. The most likely mafia godfathers involved would be Carlos Marcello and Santo Trafficante, particularly in the Jack Ruby murder of Oswald and perhaps in the JFK Assassination as well and other murders in the post assassination cover up.

We now know Lyndon Johnson was far worse than he is presented in current biographies. Far beyond ballot stuffing, bribery, massive under-the-table kickbacks, and being a consummate and pathological liar, Lyndon Johnson was murdering a lot of people in Texas to cover up his eye popping corruption. A prime example is the murder of US agricultural official Henry Marshall in June, 1961, and who then Vice President Lyndon Johnson arranged to have murdered. In the 1980’s, Billie Sol Estes, a close and corrupt partner of LBJ, began confessing to the murders that he, Lyndon Johnson, Cliff Carter and LBJ’s personal hit man Malcolm Wallace committed. Lyndon Johnson, a manic depressive – and at times a barely functioning psychopath - murdered perhaps 10-20 people to avoid exposure before he got his knife wet with John Kennedy’s blood.

Lyndon Johnson and Sam Rayburn, taking advantage of Hoover’s dossier on JFK, used sexual blackmail and other threats on John Kennedy on the night of July 13th at the 1960 Democratic convention in Los Angeles in order to force Kennedy to put LBJ on the ticket. Johnson was not on JFK’s short list for VP; he was not on the long list. LBJ was not on the VP list – period. Johnson made a hostile take over of the vice presidential slot. 

John Kennedy told his close friend Hy Raskin: “You know we had never considered Lyndon, but I was left with no choice. He and Sam Rayburn made it damn clear to me that Lyndon had to be the candidate. Those bastards were trying to frame me. They threatened me with problems and I don’t need more problems. I’m going to have enough problems with Nixon.” Evelyn Lincoln, JFK’s secretary for 11+ years, also confirms that Lyndon Johnson used sexual blackmail combined with other threats to force JFK to put LBJ on the 1960 Democratic ticket.

On Inauguration Day 1961, Johnson's close confidant Bobby Baker predicted to his friend Don Reynolds that John Kennedy would not finish out his term and that he (JFK) would die a violent death. I think that Bobby Baker was intimating that LBJ was planning to murder JFK. For the rest of JFK's life, he and LBJ would be engaging in a sub rosa war.

My current thinking on US intelligence agent Lee Harvey Oswald is that he was indeed involved in the JFK assassination, but he was a patsy who shot NO ONE that day, neither John Kennedy nor Officer J.D. Tippit. Both murders were complete frame jobs. Oswald was a fake defector to Russia and his behavior in New Orleans 1963 was all about Oswald’s sheep dipping as he passed out pro-Castro flyers and pretended to be a “pro-Castro Marxist.” Meanwhile Oswald was working in concert in New Orleans with folks like David Ferrie and Guy Bannister whose politics were the equivalent of a 1960’s Strom Thurmond or Jesse Helms. Oswald’s fake public persona as a “pro-Casto Marxist” meant that he was an ideal pick as a patsy and his likely knowledge of and/or participation in the JFK Assassination meant that he had to be murdered quickly. The folks who killed Oswald wanted a “dead Red” not a “talking head.” The JFK assassination was a deception provocation intended to facilitate a US military invasion of Cuba. It was that bad and ugly. A US invasion of Cuba might have provoked a broader war with Russia and from the point of view of some like Air Force General Curtis LeMay that was fine because, astoundingly, he wanted to wage and “win” a nuclear WWIII. Curtis LeMay hated Kennedy so much that a child could have recruited him into a plot to kill Kennedy. LeMay told Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis that he was an appeaser equivalent to Neville Chamberlain for not bombing Cuba.

That was the pool of sharks John Kennedy was swimming in: a desperate and psychopathic serial killer Vice-President Lyndon Johnson who was literally murdering a string of people down in Texas and who was waging a sub rosa war with the Kennedys, an out-of-control CIA hell bent on a coup; an FBI director Hoover who detested JFK and who was close friends and neighbors with LBJ, and a JCS military brass who wanted to invade Cuba, wage the war in Vietnam, and Curtis LeMay who, according to Robert McNamara, wanted to wage full scale nuclear war with Russia, giving them the “Sunday punch” while the USA still had first strike capability. Add to that the white hot mafia hatred that Robert Kennedy was engendering with his prosecutions. This same mafia had been working hand in glove with their friends the CIA to take out Castro in Cuba. Think of these enemies of JFK as fasces: “a bundle of wooden sticks with an axe blade emerging from the center, which is an image that traditionally symbolizes summary power and jurisdiction, and/or strength through unity.”

The elite domestic murderers of JFK did it for many reasons, both personal and ideological. At the core it was Lyndon Johnson, the CIA, and the shadow government of Texas oil barons and the Rockefellers. It was not either/or the Western “Cowboys” or the Eastern “Yankees” who murdered John Kennedy: it was the elites of both.

Most folks don’t know just how close Lyndon Johnson and J. Edgar Hoover were both personally and physically. For 19 years LBJ and Hoover lived literally 3 houses down and across the street, about 57 yards, in Washington, D.C. They often had Sunday brunch together at the Johnsons with other power brokers such as Sen. Richard Russell and House Speaker Sam Rayburn, both LBJ mentors. LBJ and Hoover were also extremely close to the Texas oil barons such as Clint Murchison, Sr. and H.L. Hunt who have been implicated in the JFK assassination.

I always want to learn and I am always willing to change my mind. Two excellent books to read on the JFK assassination are 1) LBJ: Mastermind of JFK’s Assassination (2010) by Phillip Nelsonhttp://www.lbj-themastermind.com/ and 2) JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why it Matters (2008) by James Douglass. Review: http://www.ctka.net/...nspeakable.html I also highly recommend 3) Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years by David Talbot 4) The Dark Side of Camelot by Seymour Hersh 5) Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty by Russ Baker.

Richard Nixon knew the dirty truth about the JFK assassination, but I do not think he was directly involved. In fact, when Nixon was under intense Watergate pressure, his firewall strategy as recorded on the “smoking gun tape” (recorded 6/23/72) was to ominously say don’t investigate me because it you do “the President believes that this is going to open up the whole Bay of Pigs thing again” – an obvious reference to the JFK assassination. Nixon’s aide Dean Burch said that when George Herbert Walker Bush heard that “He broke out in assholes and ____ himself to death.” GHW Bush was probably an elite planner of the JFK assassination.

Howard Baker once asked Nixon, “What do you know about the Kennedy assassination?” Nixon replied “You don’t want to know.” (Source: Don Hewett, Kennedy Library Oral History.)

Lyndon Johnson himself told Madeleine Duncan Brown on the night of 12/31/63 that it was Texas oil barons and “renegade intelligence bastards” who murdered John Kennedy. LBJ and Madeleine had a son Steven Mark in 1950. (Source: Madeleine Brown.)

Edgar Hoover who along with LBJ was the primary architect of the cover up, told Billy Byars, Jr.: "If I told you what I really know, it would be very dangerous to the country. Our whole political system could be disrupted." Hoover was responding to a question of whether Oswald really shot JFK. (Source: Billy Byars, Jr.)

Without a doubt, top honors for being biggest source for disinformation on the Coup of 1963 has been the NY Times whose reporting on the JFK assassination has been the equivalent of 1950’s Soviet style propaganda, i.e. completely fraudulent and parroting the 1960’s fantastic whoppers of LBJ, FBI, CIA and the Warren Commission. CBS News, ABC News, the Washington Post and the former LIFE magazine and CIA assets in other major media have been equally bad. LIFE Magazine actually bought the rights to the Zapruder film early on and never showed it once to the American people in video form., which would have revealed the incriminating “back and to the left” head snap of John Kennedy, all but proving a kill shot from the Grassy Knoll (grassy knoll shooting area being an extremely close 33 yards away from JFK). Finally, when American hero Robert Groden showed the Zapruder film on Geraldo on ABC in 1975, millions of Americans knew without a doubt what a sham the Warren Commission was.

After he murdered John Kennedy and assumed the presidency, Lyndon Johnson gave over his Administration to the Council on Foreign Relations, both in regards to domestic and foreign policy. NSA chief McGeorge Bundy in particular immediately assumed a lot of power over LBJ. The CFR, the CIA, the Rockefellers, the JCS, and the military contractors wanted the Vietnam War. It is extremely significant that in spring, 1968, after LBJ had withdrawn from the presidential race, Democrat Lyndon Johnson secretly supported Republican Nelson Rockefeller for president. LBJ wanted someone who could stop Robert Kennedy, and more importantly, who would continue the cover up of the 1963 Coup d’Etat. Nelson Rockefeller personified the CFR, CIA and Eastern Establishment and I think he was a sponsor of the JFK assassination. Note: Rockefeller did not support fellow Republican Barry Goldwater in his 1964 race against Johnson.

A special word about the Council on Relations role in the 1963 Coup d’Etat and cover up: no other organization has been more responsible for the murder and cover up of John Kennedy than the CFR. Elite CFR members such as Allen Dulles, Nelson Rockefeller, George Herbert Walker Bush and McGeorge Bundy were probably sponsors of the JFK assassination. Certainly leadership CFR members such as Allen Dulles, John J. McCloy, and Gerald Ford played the most critical roles in the Warren Commission farce. Add in cover up roles played by McGeorge Bundy (CFR/CIA), Nelson Rockefeller (CFR/CIA), Henry Kissinger (CFR/CIA), Richard Helms (CFR/CIA), William Colby (CFR/CIA), Nicholas Katzenbach (CFR), Jack Valenti (CFR), Bill Moyers (CFR), Henry Luce (CFR), Clair Boothe Luce (CFR), William Coleman (CFR) James Reston NY Times (CFR), Anthony Lewis NY Times (CFR), William F. Buckley (CFR/CIA), Walter Cronkite CBS (CFR), Dan Rather CBS (CFR), Bob Schieffer CBS (CFR), Peter Jennings ABC (CFR), Daniel Schorr (CFR), Arthur Ochs Sulzberger NY Times (CFR), Michael Eisner Disney (CFR), Harrison Salisbury NY Times (CFR), Kenneth Gilmore Readers’ Digest (CFR), Tom Braden (CFR/CIA), Stephen Rosenfeld Washington Post (CFR), Bobbie Ray Inman (CFR/CIA), Arnold de Borchgrave (CFR), Donald Rumsfeld (CFR), Rupert Murdoch FOX (CFR), John McCain (CFR), Robert Gates CIA (CFR)… the list is almost endless. Note two things: 1) they are the key establishment players of BOTH major political parties spanning decades 2) their power and influence is directly proportional to the fantastic whoppers they tell about in the 1963 Coup d’Etat. For the older CFR members it is a case of PARTICIPATION and COVER UP in the JFK assassination. For the younger ones such as Bill Clinton (CFR), Douglas G. Brinkley (CFR), George Will (CFR/ABC), Charles Krauthammer (CFR/FOX), Bill Kristol (CFR/FOX), David Gergen (CFR), John Segenthaler (CFR), Frank Sesno (CFR), Evan Thomas (CFR), Michael Beschloss (CFR), Stephen M. Walt (CFR), George Stephanopolous (CFR/ABC), Jonathan Alter (CFR), Evan Thomas (CFR), Brian Williams (CFR/NBC), Daniel Pipes (CFR), Michael Gerson (CFR) it is a case of WILLFUL IGNORANCE as they still push the Big Lie. Note: Chris Matthews of Hardball, another willfully ignorant man, is close friends with Richard Haass, current president of CFR. I have never seen highly acclaimed political guru Michael Barone, a Bilderberger attendee, ever say anything credible on the JFK assassination.

Question: do we really expect the CFR to admit that some of its elite members slaughtered John Kennedy and many more played integral roles in the cover up? No, but it is important to highlight that the Council on Foreign Relations has stunk up the place with tremendous amounts of radioactive horse manure relating to the 1963 Coup d’Etat. 

The key thing to understand about the Council on Foreign Relations is that it has been joined at the hip with the CIA and that US intelligence has long used the CFR to manipulate the media. Covering up the JFK assassination has been a Holy Grail of the CFR/CIA.

The 1963 Coup d’Etat was very similar to the 1992 election between George Herbert Walker Bush, Ross Perot and Bill Clinton. In 1963, there was a Texas Vice President, a desperate and dangerous Lyndon Johnson - supported by the CFR, the intelligence agencies, military contractors and the oil industry - who feared exposure of his criminality and was on the verge of political and personal annihilation. So Lyndon Johnson used the CIA to murder his political rival John Kennedy.

In the 1992, there was a Texas President, a desperate and dangerous George Herbert Walker Bush, supported by the CFR, the intelligence agencies, military contractors and the oil industry - who feared exposure of his criminality and was on the verge of political and personal annihilation. Ross Perot was well aware of the gargantuan Bush/Clinton/CIA drug smuggling of the 1980’s. So George Herbert Walker Bush used elite CIA “Pegasus” assassins to threaten to murder Ross Perot. GHW Bush feared what Perot, a self-funded (and therefore uncontrollable) billionaire might do in office. Bush, like LBJ 29 years before, faced both political and potentially personal annihilation if an untainted Ross Perot were elected.

Ross Perot was leading in a Time/CNN poll in June, 1992, with 37% to 24% Clinton, 24% Bush. On July 16, 1992, Ross Perot, a billionaire who could self-fund and was leading in the polls significantly, QUIT the presidential race because he feared that a desperate George Herbert Walker Bush might literally assassinate him. Google “Chip Tatum Pegasus” and read about the elite CIA assassin who quit rather than follow the orders of George Herbert Walker Bush and neutralize Ross Perot: 
http://whatreallyhap...ATUM/tatum.html An incensed Perot later got back in the race only to ensure the election of Bill Clinton.

I think that George Herbert Walker Bush (CIA/CFR) became a made man with the JFK assassination in 1963. Read the book Family of Secrets by Russ Baker to learn more about the possible role of GHW Bush. Also read this link: http://www.jfkmurder...ed.com/bush.htm 

One of the first things the Bill Clinton (CIA/CFR) did after he got elected in 1992 was to ask Webb Hubbell at Justice to find out who really killed John Kennedy. Bill Clinton is a coward; he is good friends with GHW Bush today and Clinton today says he thinks a lone nut killed Kennedy - something he surely does not believe.

The Discovery Channel has put out some incredibly bogus, poorly done disinfo presentations such as Inside the Target Car. Any MSM site that features Vincent Bugliosi, Gerald Posner, especially Hugh Aynesworth, Edward Jay Epstein, Gus Russo, Michael Shermer, Dale Meyers, Max Holland, Dave Perry or Gary Mack prominently and positively is giving you counterfeit money. Edward Epstein and Gerald Posner in particular are thought by many credible JFK researchers to be CIA propagandists. If you google “JFK assassination” the first 2 links that come up are lone nutter controlled disinfo sites: 1) Wikipedia 2) John McAdam’s site. John McAdams is a very lowly regarded man who basically controls JFK related content on Wikipedia as well as his own site. Both Wikipedia and the NY Times are both tremendously dishonest sources for information relating to the 1963 Coup d’Etat. Finally, another major source of disinformation on the Coup of 1963 is the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas, which blithely recycles the shredded vapors of the Warren Commission, as if it had an ounce of truth in it. Gary Mack, the curator of the Sixth Floor Museum, simply does not have credibility on the JFK assassination.

A special note on Wikipedia: any entry related to the JFK assassination or US intelligence agent Lee Harvey Oswald is locked down to prevent editing by the public. Wiki founder Jimmy Wales has a fondness for governmental fairy tales and JFK experts are prevented from editing entries on the site.

In the near future there are going to be efforts by both Tom Hanks (HBO series) and Leonardo DiCaprio (a movie Legacy of Secrecy) to take on the JFK assassination. Sadly, these are both going to be disinformation efforts; the ONLY legitimate take on the JFK assassination is that it was a full blown domestic coup d’etat. Tom Hanks is a clueless lone nutter.

Legacy of Secrecy, produced by Warner Brothers, is a deeply flawed attempt to blame the JFK assassination on “the mob only,” leaving out Lyndon Johnson, the National Security State and the shadow government of Texas oil barons and Rockefellers. Courtenay Lynda Valenti, an executive vice president of production at Warner Brothers,
is very likely (short of a DNA test) the biological daughter (born in 1963) of Lyndon Johnson and Mary Margaret Valenti. Mary Margaret Valenti, a Texas beauty, had been a secretary/mistress of Lyndon Johnson and it is believed that Jack Valenti was letting his “wife” sleep with Lyndon Johnson. Back in the 1960’s Courtenay Lynda Valenti was known as the “baby in Lyndon Johnson’s White House” and was often referred to by LBJ as “Lynda” and “his little heartbeat.” As an adult, Courtenay Lynda Valenti is now producing some major disinformation on the 1963 Coup d’Etat: Legacy of Secrecy. Her brother John “Lyndon” Valenti (namesake only of LBJ) also works at Warner Brothers. Jack Valenti, her “dad,” issued a 7-page statement in 1992 denouncing Oliver Stone’s JFK as “a propaganda masterpiece and equally a hoax.”

Similar to Jack Valenti, another sycophant of Lyndon Johnson is biographer Doris Kearns Goodwin who met Johnson in 1967 at age 23 (LBJ, age 58). Sally Quinn, in a revealing article in the Wash Post (8/24/75), entitled “A Tale of Hearts and Minds,” wrote that Doris said LBJ “pressed me very hard sexually the first year,” that he courted her aggressively, then he asked her to marry him, that he was jealous of other men in her life.” Doris, after spending much face time with LBJ, ghost wrote LBJ’s presidential autobiography Vantage Point and later a biography on him which, no surprise, did not include any references to Johnson’s pivotal role in the JFK assassination. Doris has all but admitted that she was having sex with Lyndon Johnson. 

The best discussion boards on the internet for good info are 1) Education Forum 2) Deep Politics Forum 3) www.assassinationresearch.com 3) JFKmurdersolved.com and 4) Mary Ferrell Foundation – www.maryferrell.org 5) JFK Lancer. On Facebook, the premier spots are JFK-The Grassy Knoll Witnesses (run by Rusty Yardum) http://www.facebook....115305938487641 and JFK Assassination http://www.facebook....133383230054271 run by Al Tavers. Black Op radio’s web site www.blackopradio.com (Len Osanic) is an excellent place to listen to high quality interviews with folks such as JFK expert Jim DiEugenio. Deep Politics Quarterly (Walt Brown) http://www.manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/ and www.ctka.net (Jim DiEugenio) are 2 other quality spots on the internet.

As for videos, I highly recommend going to You Tube and watching the extremely important The Men Who Killed Kennedy - (episodes 7, 8, and 9). Much of these episodes focus on the role of Lyndon Johnson in the 1963 Coup d’Etat and they were BANNED from the History Channel because they were so accurate. LBJ aide Jack Valenti (CFR) organized a suppression campaign on the videos along with Lady Bird Johnson, Warren Commission con man Gerald Ford (CFR), Jimmy Carter (CFR) and Bill Moyers (CFR). Also, on You Tube watch the spectacular “Evidence of Revision” and Jesse Ventura’s 2010 Conspiracy Theory show on the JFK assassination (You Tube   ). In addition, I recommend JFK the movie by Oliver Stone, director’s cut. Oliver Stone, despite immense criticism in the MSM by CIA assets, pretty much nailed the JFK assassination. It was a full blown Coup d’Etat by Lyndon Johnson, the CIA and key elements of the U.S. military.

Robert Morrow is a political researcher with over 200+ books on the 1963 Coup d’Etat, aka JFK assassination. His email is Morrow321@aol.com and he accepts phone calls at  512-306-1510.

If you want to get quickly “up to speed” on the JFK assassination, here is what to read:

1) LBJ: Mastermind of JFK’s Assassination by Phillip Nelson 
2) JFK and the Unspeakable:Why He Died and Why it Matters by James Douglass
3) Brothers: the Hidden History of the Kennedy Years by David Talbot 
4) The Dark Side of Camelot by Seymour Hersh 
5) Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty by Russ Baker. 
6) Google the essay “LBJ-CIA Assassination of JFK” by Robert Morrow.
7) Google “National Security State and the Assassination of JFK by Andrew Gavin Marshall.” 
8) Google “Chip Tatum Pegasus.” 
9) Google “Vincent Salandria False Mystery Speech.” Read everything that Vincent Salandria ever wrote.
10) Google “Murray Rothbard the JFK Flap”
11) Google “Preserving the Legacy by Mat Wilson”
11) Google “Bertrand Russell 16 Questions on the Assassination”
12) Watch on You Tube the extremely important videos The Men Who Killed Kennedy, episodes 7, 8, and 9 which focus on the role of Lyndon Johnson. 
13) Watch on You Tube Jesse Ventura’s show on the JFK assassination. 
14) Watch the movie JFK director’s cut by Oliver Stone. 
15) Watch on You Tube “Evidence of Revision.” – 8 hours of fantastic and rare footage relating to the JFK assassination.

Another key point: Lee Harvey Oswald was U.S. intelligence and he shot NO ONE on 11/2263. Re: Oswald's intelligence connections read 1) "Oswald and the CIA" by John Newman 2) "Spy Saga: Lee Harvey Oswald and US Intelligence" by Philip Melanson 3) "History Will Not Absolve Us" by Martin Schotz (Chapter V Oswald and U.S. Intelligence by Christopher Sharrett) 4) "Me and Lee" by Judyth Vary Baker (Oswald's mistress in New Orleans, summer 1963) 5) Google “Lee Harvey Oswald’s reading habits summer 1963” 
Posted by Judyth Vary Baker at 12:54 AM 

REF: http://oswald-not-guilty.blogspot.com/2011/12/here-is-robert-morrows-essay-on-1963.html

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              

November 20, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Barry Goldwater (1973) was convinced that Lyndon Johnson murdered John Kennedy

Teknosis needs your help. * Ways to help Teknosis

___

 

Post main:

 

Sen. Barry Goldwater (1973) was convinced that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK assassination

 

Goldwater told Jeffrey Hoff that in October, 1973

 

   At the 2012 Dallas JFK Lancer conference I ran into JFK researcher Jeffrey Hoff of Arizona. Jeffrey Hoff was a leadership position in the local Cochise County Democratic Club from 1980-1983. He used to be a member of SDS in the 1960's. Now he installs "off the grid" solar systems. I briefly interviewed Hoff on Saturday, November 17, 2012 in Dallas, TX, at the JFK Lancer conference.

        Jeffrey Hoff told me that in October, 1973 he met Barry Goldwater at a Republican political picnic in Wilcox in Cochise County, AR. I asked him how he ended up at a Republican picnic and he told me his friend Louise Parker, a friend and "real estate lady" from an Arizona "pioneer" family, had invited him. She said do you want to meet Barry Goldwater? Hoff said yes.

      When Hoff met Sen. Barry Goldwater, Hoff, who had a keen interest in the JFK assassination brought up that topic. Sen. Barry Goldwater told Hoff in October, 1973, that he (Goldwater) was convinced that Lyndon Johnson was behind the JFK assassination and that the Warren Commission was a complete cover up. Hoff got the impression that Goldwater had told others privately the same thing. I asked Hoff how confident was Goldwater when he was making these statements. Answer: Goldwater was very confident.

        Jeffrey Hoff currently (2012) lives about 35 miles from Pierce, AZ. Lyndon Johnson died in January, 1973. J. Edgar Hoover had died in May, 1972. Allen Dulles died in January, 1969.
 
 
From Robert Morrow   512-306-1510

Barry Goldwater also read and complimented Fred Newcomb's book Murder From Within(1974) on the JFK assassination. Newcomb pointed the finger at Lyndon Johnson.

 

Barry Goldwater: "... the book ... seems to be very concise, detailed and documented" which he told Fred Newcomb in a letter complimenting his book. (Sen. Jesse Helms and Russell Long also read this book according to Tyler Newcomb, the son of Fred Newcomb.)

 

The book has been re-released (2011) and retitled as "Murder From Within: Lyndon Johnson's Plot Against President Kennedy."

November 20, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

JFK assassination / Dallas Sheriff JFK witness shot in chest by rifle... ruled suicide

JFK Assassination Robert Craig

 
ASH writes:

as we crawl up into the last yr of the fifty yr anniversary... as we are
in the 49th
yr...let us look at the evidence

The man in the filmed interview below was an ordinary honest laid back
cop who witnessed certain things after JKF's assassination, and spoke
about what he saw. He was eventually murdered by a rifle bullet to the
chest. He only owned hand guns. The coroner pronounced it was a suicide.
The land of the free and the brave - in imagination only!
There were dozens of eye witnesses to the Kennedy assassination
including trained ones like police. They
were ordered to keep their mouths shut about what they saw - and most
did. Those who did not were
warned, harassed, and if they were persistent and their testimony
dangerous enough, they were eliminated.
One too-seldom discussed example is in this filmed interview some time
in the late 1960s:

Expert Witness to the Kennedy assassination - Killed.mpg
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/21019.html

Article: 529 of sgi.talk.ratical 
From: (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe) 
Subject: When They Kill A President by Roger Craig 
Keywords: Unpublished manuscript written by a man who didn't change his story 
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc. 
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 1992 15:21:34 GMT 



Roger Craig was a Deputy Sheriff in Dallas at the time of the assassination of President Kennedy. He was a member of a group of men from Dallas County Sheriff James Eric "Bill" Decker's office that was directed to stand out in front of the Sheriff's office on Main Street (at the corner of Houston) and "take no part whatsoever in the security of that motorcade." Once he heard the first shot, Roger Craig immediately bolted towards Houston Street. His participation in the formative hours of the investigation during the rest of that day and into the evening included observations and experiences that would have singlehandedly destroyed the entire Warren Commission fairy tale before a grand jury or a Congressional investigation.

Roger Craig was named the Dallas Sheriff's Department "Officer of the Year" in 1960 by the Dallas Traffic Commission. He received four promotions while he was Deputy Sheriff. Among the most important events he witnessed:

 

  • At approximately 12:40 p.m., Deputy Craig was standing on the south side of Elm Street when he heard a shrill whistle coming from the north side of Elm and turned to see a man -- wearing faded blue trousers and a long sleeved work shirt made of some type of grainy material -- come running down the grassy knoll from the direction of the The School Book Depository (TSBD). He saw a light green Rambler station wagon coming slowly west on Elm Street, pull over to the north curb and pick up the man coming down the hill. By this time the traffic was too heavy for him to be able to reach them before the car drove away going west on Elm.

     

  • After witnessing the above scene, Deputy Craig ran to the command post at Elm and Houston to report the incident to the authorities. When he got there and asked who was involved in the investigation, a man turned to him and said "I'm with the Secret Service." Craig recounted what he had just seen. This "Secret Service" man showed little interest in Craig's description of the people leaving, but seemed extremely interested in the description of the Rambler to the degree this was the only part of the recounting that he wrote down. (On 12/22/67, Roger Craig learned from Jim Garrison that this man's name was Edgar Eugene Bradley, a right wing preacher from North Hollywood, California and part-time assistant to Carl McIntire, the fundamentalist minister who had founded the American Counsel of Christian Churches. Then-governor Ronald Reagan refused to grant the extradition request from Garrison for the indictment of Bradley during the New Orleans Probe.)

     

  • Immediately after this Craig was told by Sheriff Decker to help the police search the TSBD. Deputy Craig was one of the two people to find the three rifle cartridges on the floor beneath the window on the southeast corner of the sixth floor. All three were no more than an inch apart and all were lined up in the same direction. One of the three shells was crimped on the end which would have held the slug. It had not been stepped on but merely crimped over on one small portion of the rim. The rest of that end was perfectly round.

     

  • He was present at when the rifle was found, and, along with Deputy Eugene Boone who had first spotted the weapon, was immediately joined by police Lt. Day, Homicide Capt. Fritz, and deputy constable Seymour Weitzman, an expert on weapons who had been in the sporting goods business for many years and was familiar with all domestic and foreign makes. Lt. Day briefly inspected the rifle and handed it to Capt. Fritz who asked if anyone knew what kind of rifle it was. After a close examination, Weitzman declared it to be a 7.65 German Mauser. Capt. Fritz agreed with him.

     

  • At the moment when Capt. Fritz concurred with Weitzman's identification of the rifle, an unknown Dallas police officer came running up the stairs and advised Capt. Fritz that a Dallas policeman had been shot in the Oak Cliff area. Craig instinctively looked at his watch. The time was 1:06 p.m. (The Warren Commission attempted to move this time back beyond 1:15 to plausibly claim Oswald had reached the Tippit murder scene in a more humanly possible time-frame than would be the case if Tippit had the encounter with his murderer any earlier.)

     

  • Later in the afternoon Craig received word of Oswald's arrest and that he was suspected of being involved in Kennedy's murder. He immediately thought of the man running down the grassy knoll and made a telephone call to Capt. Will Fritz to give him the description of the man he had seen. Fritz said Craig's description sounded like the man they had and asked him to come take a look. When he saw Oswald in Fritz's personal office Deputy Craig confirmed that this was indeed the man, dressed in the same way, that he had seen running down the knoll and into the Rambler. They went into the office together and Fritz told Oswald,

     

    "This man (pointing to me) saw you leave." At which time the suspect replied, "I told you people I did." Fritz, apparently trying to console Oswald, said, "Take it easy, son -- we're just trying to find out what happened." Fritz then said, "What about the car?" Oswald replied, leaning forward on Fritz' desk, "That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine -- don't try to drag her into this." Sitting back in his chair, Oswald said very disgustedly and very low, "Everybody will know who I am now."

    The fact that Fritz said car and this elicited Oswald's outburst about a station wagon -- that no one else had mentioned -- confirms the veracity of Roger Craig's story.

     

  • Junior counsel for the Warren Commission Dave Belin, was the man who interviewed Roger Craig in April of 1964. After being questioned in what Craig recounts as a very manipulative and selective way, Belin asked "Do you want to follow or waive your signature or sign now?" Craig noted, "Since there was nothing but a tape recording and a stenographer's notebook, there was obviously nothing to sign. All other testimony which I have read (a considerable amount) included an explanation that the person could waive his signature then or his statement would be typed and he would be notified when it was ready for signature. Belin did not say this to me." After Craig first saw the transcript in January of 1968 he discoverd that the testimony he gave had been changed in fourteen different places.

Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig never changed his account of what he witnessed and experienced on Friday, November 22, 1963. (The passage where he describes the methodology employed by David Belin in selectively recording his testimony is highly illuminating and provides us with a glimpse of how the "W.C." interviewed witnesses in a very controlled way.) He remained convinced, for the rest of this life, that the man entering the Rambler station wagon was Lee Harvey Oswald. He was fired from the Sheriff's office on July 4, 1967, and from that day forward he never again could find steady work. Multiple attempts were made on his life, his wife finally left him, and in the end, he was alleged to have shot himself to death on May 15, 1975.

--ratitor




the following is an unpublished manuscript 
written by the late Roger Craig:










WHEN THEY KILL A PRESIDENT 

 By 

 Roger Craig -- © 1971 






This book is dedicated to my wife Molly, 
who meant it when she said "for better or worse."







Our president John Kennedy went down to Dallas town 
Where the hired assassins waited and there they shot him down, 
Because he dreamed of peace and plenty and he talked it 'round 
His dream goes marching on.









I



The Dallas County Court House at 505 Main Street was indeed a unique place to come to hear what was WRONG with John F. Kennedy and his policies as President of these United States.

This building housed the elite troops of the Dallas County Sheriff's Department (of which I was one), who, with blind obedience, followed the orders of their Great White Father: Bill Decker, Sheriff of Dallas County.

From these elite troops came the most bitter verbal attacks on President Kennedy. They spoke very strongly against his policies concerning the Bay of Pigs incident and the Cuban Missile crisis. They seemed to resent very much the fact that President Kennedy was a Catholic. I do not know why this was such a critical issue with many of the deputies but they did seem to hold this against President Kennedy.

The concession stand in the lobby of the court house was the best place to get into a discussion concerning the President. The old man who ran the stand evidenced a particular hatred for President Kennedy. He seemed to go out of his way to drag anyone who came by his stand into a discussion about the President. His name is J. C. Kiser.

He was a little man with a short mustache and glasses that he wore right on the end of his nose. He was a particularly good friend of Sheriff Decker, and he held the concession in the lobby for many years. Like Decker, he was unopposed when his lease came up for renewal. It was common knowledge that Bill Decker made it possible for him to remain there as long as he wished. This sick little man not only had a deep hatred for John F. Kennedy, he also hated the black people, even those who spent their money at his stand. He would often curse them as they walked away after making a purchase from him. He flatly refused to make telephone change for them even though he would be simultaneously making change for a white person.

This little man was a typical example of the atmosphere that lingered in this building that housed law and order in Dallas County.

Many of the deputies had a dislike for the President -- some more so than others. However, there were those who would not degrade themselves by taking verbal punches at our President. One of these was Hiram Ingram. Although devoted to Bill Decker, he was also a good friend of mine. We often discussed the political debates that took place in the lobby. Hiram had a great dislike for this sick little man who seemed to lead the attack on the President. He also had little respect for the deputies, attorneys and court house employees who tolerated or even agreed with this philosophy of attacking John F. Kennedy.

Hiram Ingram was a small man -- in stature. He was always ready with a friendly smile and greeting. He began his association with the County during the Bonnie and Clyde era -- when he was an ambulance driver and inside employee at a local funeral home. In fact, Hiram prepared Bonnie and Clyde for burial after they were brought back to Dallas from the ambush in Louisiana.

Hiram and I were very close -- one of those friendships which develops when some people first meet. I had known Hiram for about four years at the time of the assassination. He was working in the Civil Division and shortly after November 22, 1963 he had a heart attack. When he returned to work Decker put him on the Bond Desk, where I would later be and work closely with Hiram. I worked the day shift one month and the evening shift the following month. Hiram worked only evenings. So every other month we worked together. This gave us time to talk and discuss the events in Dallas and even the Sheriff's Office itself. The Department was not well organized.

To clear some of the bonds and bondsmen we would have to call Decker at home -- no matter what time of the day or night -- for his approval or any decision. This applied only to certain bondsmen. Decker had his chosen few who were not questioned. Hiram was a very dependable employee and should not have had to clear the minor decisions with our Great White Father, Bill Decker.

As the months passed and Hiram and I worked together we built a mutual respect for each other. When Decker fired me on July 4, 1967 Hiram was infuriated but, like any employee of Decker's, he couldn't say anything in my defense for fear of having his employment cut short or his reputation ruined. One of Decker's favorite past times was ruining reputations.

Our friendship did not end with my termination. We continued to talk from time to time and Hiram was very helpful when Penn Jones wanted information concerning records at the Sheriff's office. However, in March of 1968 Hiram explained to me that information was getting more difficult to get for some reason. Fortunately by this time I had already supplied Penn Jones and Bill Boxley (investigator for Jim Garrison) with much information from Hiram.

About two weeks later, near the end of March 1968, I heard that Hiram had fallen at home and broken his hip and was in the hospital. I went to see my good buddy to cheer him up and received the shock of my life. Hiram was under oxygen and could not have any visitors. Three days later he was dead -- of cancer. He had been working just prior to the fall. I think that we owe a debt of gratitude to this great man who, in his own quiet way, helped us all so much.

Thus . . . we have the atmosphere that was to greet the President of the United States upon his arrival in Dallas. However, things were to get even worse before he arrived.

The battle ground had been picked and the UNwelcome mat was out for President Kennedy. Unknown to most of us, the rest of the plan was being completed. The patsy had been chosen and placed in the building across from the court house -- where he could not deny his presence after it was all over. This was done with the apparent approval and certainly with the knowledge of our co-workers, the F.B.I., since they later admitted that they knew Lee Harvey Oswald was employed at the School Book Depository Building located on the corner of Elm Street and Houston Street across from the Sheriff's Office.

The security had been arranged by the Secret Service and the Dallas Police -- our boys in blue. The final touch was put on by Sheriff James Eric (Bill) Decker. On the morning of November 22, 1963 the patrolmen in the districts which make up the Dallas County Sheriff's Patrol Division were left in the field, ignorant of what was going on in the downtown area, which was just as well. Decker was not going to LET them do anything anyway.

About 10:30 a.m. November 22, 1963, Bill Decker called into his office what I will refer to as his street people -- plain-clothes men, detectives and warrant men, myself included -- and told us that President Kennedy was coming to Dallas and that the motorcade would come down Main Street. He then advised us that we were to stand out in front of the building, 505 Main Street and represent the Sheriff's Office. We were to take no part whatsoever in the security of that motorcade. (Why, James Eric?) So . . . the stage had been set, all the pawns were in place, the security had been withdrawn from that one vulnerable location. Come John F. Kennedy, come to Elm and Houston Streets in Dallas, Texas and take your place in history!

The time was 12:15 p.m. I was standing in front of the court house at 505 Main Street. Deputy Sheriff Jim Ramsey was standing behind me. We were waiting for the President of the United States. I had a feeling of pride that I was going to be not more than four feet from the President but deep inside something kept gnawing at me. I said to Jim Ramsey, "He's late." Jim's reply stunned me. He said, "Maybe somebody will shoot the son of a bitch." Then I realized the crowd was hostile. The men about me felt that they were forced to acknowledge his presence. Although he was the President, they were making statements like, "Why does he have to come to Dallas?"

Something else was bothering me . . . being a trained officer, I always looked for anything which might be amiss about any situation with which I was confronted. Suddenly I knew what was wrong. There were no officers guarding the intersections or controlling the crowd. My mind flashed back to the meeting in Decker's office that morning, then back to the lack of security in this area.

Suddenly the motorcade approached and President Kennedy was smiling and waving and for a moment I relaxed and fell into the happy mood the President was displaying. The car turned the corner onto Houston Street. I was still looking at the rest of the people in the party. I was soon to be shocked back into reality. The President had passed and was turning west on Elm Street . . . as if there were no people, no cars, the only thing in my world at that moment was a rifle shot! I bolted toward Houston Street. I was fifteen steps from the corner -- before I reached it two more shots had been fired. Telling myself that it wasn't true and at the same time knowing that it was, I continued to run. I ran across Houston Street and beside the pond, which is on the west side of Houston. I pushed a man out of my way and he fell into the pond. I ran down the grass between Main and Elm. People were lying all over the ground. I thought, "My God, they've killed a woman and child," who were lying beside the gutter on the South side of Elm Street. I checked them and they were alright. I saw a Dallas Police Officer run up the grassy knoll and go behind the picket fence near the railroad yards. I followed and behind the fence was complete confusion and hysteria.

I began to question people when I noticed a woman in her early thirties attempting to drive out of the parking lot. She was in a brown 1962 or 1963 Chevrolet. I stopped her, identified myself and placed her under arrest. She told me that she had to leave and I said, "Lady, you're not going anywhere." I turned her over to Deputy Sheriff C. I. (Lummy) Lewis and told him the circumstances of the arrest. Officer Lewis told me that he would take her to Sheriff Decker and take care of her car.

The parking lot behind the picket fence was of little importance to most of the investigators at the scene except that the shots were thought to have come from there.

Let us examine this parking lot. It was leased by Deputy Sheriff B. D. Gossett. He in turn rented parking space by the month to the deputies who worked in the court house, except for official vehicles. I rented one of these spaces from Gossett when I was a dispatcher working days or evenings. I paid Gossett $3.00 per month and was given a key to the lot. An interesting point is that the lot had an iron bar across the only entrance and exit (which were the same). The bar had a chain and lock on it. The only people having access to it were deputies with keys. Point: how did the woman gain access and, what is more important, who was she and why did she have to leave?

This was to be the beginning of the never-ending cover up. Had I known then what I know now, I would have personally questioned the woman and impounded and searched her car. I had no way of knowing that an officer, with whom I had worked for four years, was capable of losing a thirty year old woman and a three thousand pound automobile. To this day Officer Lewis does not know who she was, where she came from or what happened to her. Strange!

Meanwhile, back at the parking lot, I continued to help the Dallas Officers restore order. When things were somewhat calmer I began to question the people who were standing at the top of the grassy knoll, asking if anyone had seen anything strange or unusual before or during the President's fatal turn onto Elm Street.

Several people indicated to me that they thought the shots came from the area of the grassy knoll or behind the picket fence. My next reliable witness came forward in the form of Mr. Arnold Rowland. Mr. Rowland and his wife were standing at the top of the grassy knoll on the north side of Elm Street. Arnold Rowland began telling me his account of what he saw before the assassination. He said approximately fifteen minutes before President Kennedy arrived he was looking around and something caught his eye. It was a white man standing by the 6th floor window of the Texas School Book Depository Building in the southeast corner, holding a rifle equipped with a telescopic sight and in the southwest corner of the sixth floor was a colored male pacing back and forth. Needless to say, I was astounded by his statement. I asked Mr. Rowland why he had not reported this incident before and he told me that he thought they were secret service agents -- an obvious conclusion for a layman. Rowland continued. He told me that he looked back at the sixth floor a few minutes later and the man with the rifle was gone so he dismissed it from his mind.

I was writing all this down in my notebook and when I finished I advised Mr. and Mrs. Rowland that I would have to detain them for a statement. I had started toward the Sheriff's Office with them when lo and behold I was approached by Officer C. L. (Lummy) Lewis, who asked me "What ya got" -- a favorite expression of most investigators with Bill Decker. I explained the situation to him and told him of Rowland's account. Being the Good Samaritan he was, Officer Lewis offered to take the Rowlands off my hands and get their statements. This worked out a little better than my first arrest. The Warren Commission decided not to accept Arnold Rowland's story but at least they did not lose them. Hang in there, Lummy!

The time was approximately 12:40 p.m. I had just turned the Rowlands over to Lummy Lewis when I met E. R. (Buddy) Walthers, a small man with a very arrogant manner. He was, without a doubt, Decker's favorite pupil. He wore dark-rimmed glasses and a small-brimmed hat because effecting them meant that he would resemble Bill Decker. Walthers had worked for the Yellow Cab Company of Dallas before coming to the Sheriff's Office, about a year before I began working there. His termination from the cab company was the result of several shortages of money. He came to the Sheriff's Department as a patrolman but because of his close connection with Justice of the Peace Bill Richburg -- one of Decker's closest allies -- Buddy soon was promoted to detective. He had absolutely no ability as a law enforcement officer. However, he was fast climbing the ladder of success by lying to Decker and squealing on his fellow officers.

Walthers' ambition was to become Sheriff of Dallas County and he would do anything or anybody to reach that goal. It was very clear Buddy enjoyed more job security with Decker than anyone else did. Decker carried him for years by breaking a case for him or taking a case which had been broken by another officer and putting Walthers' name on the arrest sheet. Soon after he was promoted to detective he became intimate with such people as W. 0. Bankston, the flamboyant Oldsmobile dealer in Dallas who furnished Decker with a new Fire Engine Red Olds every year and who was arrested several times for Driving while Intoxicated but never served any jail time.

Buddy's acquaintances also included several independent oil operators throughout Texas, several anti-Castro Cubans and many underworld characters -- especially women! He was frequently crashing parties which were given by wealthy friends of Decker's -- of course while he was on duty. He often became drunk and belligerent at these parties and at one point, when asked to leave, he threatened to pull his gun on the host. This information can be verified by Billy Courson, who was Buddy's partner at that time.

Walthers hit the big time when, in 1961, two Federal Narcotics Agents came to Decker's office with charges that Buddy was growing marijuana in the back yard of his home at 2527 Boyd Street in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas. This could be considered conduct unbecoming to a police officer -- but not for Buddy! After a secret meeting between the Federal Agents, Decker and Buddy, the matter was dropped and -- needless to say -- covered up, thus enabling Buddy to continue his career as Decker's Representative of Law and Order in Dallas County.

However, the Dallas Police began receiving complaints that Buddy was shaking down underworld characters for loot taken in several burglaries and selling the stuff himself. After several reports the Dallas Police began to investigate and, finally, obtained a search warrant for Buddy's home. Their BIG mistake was securing the warrant from Judge Richburg -- which was bad enough -- but Buddy's wife also worked for Richburg and this made matters worse. Strangely enough, they did not find anything. However, a few weeks later they were a little more careful and made a surprise visit to Buddy's home, where they, indeed, recovered such things as toasters, clothing and various items -- just as their informers had said. It would seem they had himthis time, wouldn't it? But not so. Buddy explained that he had recovered the merchandise from where it had been hidden and had not had time to make a report on them and turn them in to the Property Room! The Dallas Police didn't buy this story but the pressure was again brought to bear by our Protector, Bill Decker, and the Dallas Police were left out in the cold -- no charges filed! They were certainly furious but what could they do? If WE as citizens cannot fight the Establishment, how can the Establishment fight the Establishment?

It was clear in my mind, and if the people with whom I worked could talk, I am sure they would agree that Buddy had a powerful hold on Decker. I base this on the fact that Buddy's popularity with Decker greatly increased after the assassination. Buddy was a chronic liar -- he was always telling Decker things he thought were happening in the County which he was checking on. Things which he was not doing. He also told Decker that he was in the theater when Oswald was captured and that he, in fact, helped the Dallas Police. This was completely untrue. Buddy never entered the Texas Theater -- his partner, Bill Courson, did.

Buddy also told Decker about a family of anti-Castro Cubans living in the Oak Cliff area and said that he was watching them. This part may have been true because we received the same information from the Dallas Police Intelligence Division. But one day Buddy made a visit to the house in Oak Cliff and when the Police and Sheriff's Deputies went to question them a few days later, they were gone. Did Buddy warn them? After all, he was very, very close to Jack Ruby. In fact, every time Buddy was in trouble with one of Jack Ruby's employees -- especially Nancy Perrin Rich -- Decker would send Buddy to straighten things out and put Nancy in her place -- with the help of Judge Richburg. Touching Jack Ruby was a no-no!

There were many other things which made Buddy suspect as a not-so-law abiding lawman, such as the swimming pool he built in his back yard (on his salary?). The concrete was furnished by a local contractor free of charge. Buddy used many pills he carried in the trunk of his unmarked squad car for trading with certain underworld characters -- pills for information. I learned from what I consider a reliable source that these pills had been confiscated (although no reports were made nor the pills turned in). Most of those involved in this exchange were women. It would seem that Buddy Walthers could not be terminated from the Sheriff's Department, no matter what.

One incident in 1966 which would have resulted in the firing of any other deputy occurred when Buddy was sent to Nevada to transfer a suspect wanted in Dallas. It seemed Buddy was given a certain amount of travel money which he lost at the gambling table in Las Vegas. Broke and in trouble, Buddy called none other than W. O. Bankston, who wired him enough money to bring his prisoner back to Dallas. Many times I wondered who was REALLY Sheriff but Buddy was about to reach the end of his rope.

In late 1968, when the Clay Shaw trial was being prepared, there was talk of bringing Buddy to New Orleans to testify. Well, that was a blow to the power which ruled Dallas. They could not have this half-wit on the witness stand. When the word reached Dallas, Decker was working on a double-murder which occurred in his county and had a lead on the suspect in January of 1969. The Shaw trial was scheduled for February and Decker sent Buddy and his partner, Alvin Maddox (who was about as efficient as a nutty professor), to a motel on Samuell Boulevard in Dallas to question a Walter Cherry about the killings. Cherry was an escaped convict and a suspect in the double-murder. Decker sent them to talk to Cherry without a warrant. When they entered the room at the motel Buddy was shot dead and Maddox wounded in the FOOT. Coincidence? Maybe! At any rate Buddy had been silenced. One more point for Dallas!

Back to November 22, 1963. As I have earlier stated, the time was approximately 12:40 p.m. when I ran into Buddy Walthers. The traffic was very heavy as Patrolman Baker (assigned to Elm and Houston Streets) had left his post, allowing the traffic to travel west on Elm Street. As we were scanning the curb I heard a shrill whistle coming from the north side of Elm Street. I turned and saw a white male in his twenties running down the grassy knoll from the direction of the Texas School Book Depository Building. A light green Rambler station wagon was coming slowly west on Elm Street. The driver of the station wagon was a husky looking Latin, with dark wavy hair, wearing a tan wind breaker type jacket. He was looking up at the man running toward him. He pulled over to the north curb and picked up the man coming down the hill. I tried to cross Elm Street to stop them and find out who they were. The traffic was too heavy and I was unable to reach them. They drove away going west on Elm Street.

In addition to noting that these two men were in an obvious hurry, I realized they were the only ones not running TO the scene. Everyone else was running to see whatever might be seen. The suspect, as I will refer to him, who ran down the grassy knoll was wearing faded blue trousers and a long sleeved work shirt made of some type of grainy material. This will become very important to me later on and very embarrassing to the authorities (F.B.I., Dallas Police and Warren Commission). I thought the incident concerning the two men and the Rambler Station Wagon important enough to bring it to the attention of the authorities at the command post at Elm and Houston.

I ran to the front of the Texas School Book Depository where I asked for anyone involved in the investigation. There was a man standing on the steps of the Book Depository Building and he turned to me and said, "I'm with the Secret Service." This man was about 40 years old, sandy-haired with a distinct cleft in his chin. He was well-dressed in a gray business suit. I was naive enough at the time to believe that the only people there were actually officers -- after all, this was the command post. I gave him the information. He showed little interest in the persons leaving. However, he seemed extremely interested in the description of the Rambler. This was the only part of my statement which he wrote down in his little pad he was holding. Point: Mrs. Ruth Paine, the woman Marina Oswald lived with in Irving, Texas, owned a Rambler station wagon, at that time, of this same color. 







II



From the book depository and of course that grassy knoll 
And the Dal Tex building's shooter fulfilled his deadly role 
The noon day sun was witness as they took their awful toll 
His dream goes marching on.




I learned nothing of this "Secret Service Agent's" identity until December 22, 1967 while we were living in New Orleans. The television was on as I came home from work one night and there on the screen was a picture of this man. I did not know what it was all about until my wife told me that Jim Garrison had charged him with being a part of the assassination plot. I called Jim Garrison then and told him that this was the man I had seen in Dallas on November 22, 1963. Jim then sent one of his investigators to see me with a better picture which I identified. I then learned that this man's name was Edgar Eugene Bradley. It was a relief to me to know his name for I had been bothered by the fact that I had failed to get his name when he had told me he was a Secret Service Agent and I had given him my information. On the night of the assassination when I had come home and discussed the day with my wife I had, of course, told her of this encounter and my failure to get his name.

As I finished talking with the Agent I was confronted by the High Priest of Dallas County Politics, Field Marshal Bill Decker. Decker had, apparently, been standing directly behind me and had overheard what I was saying. He called me aside and informed me that the suspect had already left the scene. (How did you know, James Eric? You had just arrived.) Decker then told me to help them (the police) search the Book Depository Building. Decker turned toward his office across the street, then suddenly stopped, looked at me and said "Somebody better take charge of this investigation." Then he continued walking slowly toward his office, indicating that it was not going to be him.

When I entered the Book Depository Building I was joined by Deputy Sheriffs Eugene Boone and Luke Mooney. We went up the stairs directly to the sixth floor. The room was very dark and a thick layer of dust seemed to cover everything. We went to the south side of the building, since this was the street side and seemed the most logical place to start.

Luke Mooney and I reached the southeast corner at the same time. We immediately found three rifle cartridges laying in such a way that they looked as though they had been carefully and deliberately placed there -- in plain sight on the floor to the right of the southeast corner window. Mooney and I examined the cartridges very carefully and remarked how close together they were. The three of them were no more than one inch apart and all were facing in the same direction, a feat very difficult to achieve with a bolt action rifle -- or any rifle for that matter. One cartridge drew our particular attention. It was crimped on the end which would have held the slug. It had not been stepped on but merely crimped over on one small portion of the rim. The rest of that end was perfectly round.

Laying on the floor to the left of the same window was a small brown paper lunch bag containing some well cleaned chicken bones. I called across the room and summoned the Dallas Police I.D. man, Lt. Day. When he arrived with his camera Mooney and I left the window and started our search of the rest of the sixth floor.

We were told by Dallas Police to look for a rifle -- something I had already concluded might be there since the cartridges found were, apparently, from a rifle. I was nearing the northwest corner of the sixth floor when Deputy Eugene Boone called out, "here it is." I was about eight feet from Boone, who was standing next to a stack of cardboard boxes. The boxes were stacked so that there was no opening between them except at the top. Looking over the top and down the opening I saw a rifle with a telescopic sight laying on the floor with the bolt facing upward. At this time Boone and I were joined by Lt. Day of the Dallas Police Department and Dallas Homicide Captain, Will Fritz. The rifle was retrieved by Lt. Day, who activated the bolt, ejecting one live round of ammunition which fell to the floor.

Lt. Day inspected the rifle briefly, then handed it to Capt. Fritz who had a puzzled look on his face. Seymour Weitzman, a deputy constable, was standing beside me at the time. Weitzman was an expert on weapons. He had been in the sporting goods business for many years and was familiar with all domestic and foreign weapons. Capt. Fritz asked if anyone knew what kind of rifle it was. Weitzman asked to see it. After a close examination (much longer than Fritz or Day's examination) Weitzman declared that it was a 7.65 German Mauser. Fritz agreed with him. Apparently, someone at the Dallas Police Department also loses things but, at least, they are more conscientious. They did replace it -- even if the replacement was made in a different country. (See Warren Report for Italian Mannlicher-Carcano 6.5 Caliber).

At that exact moment an unknown Dallas police officer came running up the stairs and advised Capt. Fritz that a Dallas policeman had been shot in the Oak Cliff area. I instinctively looked at my watch. The time was 1:06 p.m. A token force of uniformed officers was left to keep the sixth floor secure and Fritz, Day, Boone, Mooney, Weitzman and I left the building.

On my way back to the Sheriff's Office I was nearly run down several times by Dallas Police cars racing to the scene of the shooting of a fellow officer. There were more police units at the J. D. Tippit shooting than there were at President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Tippit had been instructed to patrol the Oak Cliff area along with Dallas Police Unit #87 at 12:45 p.m. by the dispatcher. Unit #87 immediately left Oak Cliff and went to the triple underpass, leaving Tippit alone. Why? At 12:54 p.m., J. D. Tippit, Dallas Police Unit #78, gave his location as Lancaster Blvd., and Eighth St., some ten blocks from the place where he was to be killed. The Dallas dispatcher called Tippit at 1:04 p.m. and received no answer. He continued to call three times and there was still no reply. Comparing this time with the time I received news of the shooting of the police officer at 1:06 p.m., it is fair to assume Tippit was dead or being killed between 1:04 and 1:06 p.m. This is also corroborated by the eye witnesses at the Tippit killing, who said he was shot between 1:05 and 1:08 p.m.

According to Officer Baker, Dallas Police, he talked to Oswald at 12:35 p.m. in the lunch room of the Texas School Book Depository. This would give Oswald 30 minutes or less to finish his coke, leave the building, walk four blocks east on Elm Street, catch a bus and ride it back west in heavy traffic for two blocks, get off the bus and walk two more blocks west and turn south on Lamar Street, walk four blocks and have a conversation with a cab driver and a woman over the use of Whaley's (the cab driver) cab, get into the cab and ride to 500 North Beckley Street, get out and walk to 1026 North Beckley where his (Oswald's) room was located, pick up something (?); and if that is not enough, Earlene Roberts, the housekeeper where Oswald lived, testified that at 1:05 p.m. Oswald was waiting for a bus in front of his rooming house and finally, to make him the fastest man on Earth, he walked to East Tenth Street and Patton Street, several blocks away and killed J. D. Tippit between 1:05 and 1:08 p.m. If he had not been arrested when he was, it is my belief that Earl Warren and his Commission would have had Lee Harvey Oswald eating dinner in Havana!

I was convinced on November 22, 1963, and I am still sure, that the man entering the Rambler station wagon was Lee Harvey Oswald. After entering the Rambler, Oswald and his companion would only have had to drive six blocks west on Elm Street and they would have been on Beckley Avenue and a straight shot to Oswald's rooming house. The Warren Commission could not accept this even though it might have given Oswald time to kill Tippit for having two men involved would have made it a conspiracy!

As to Lee Harvey Oswald shooting J. D. Tippit, let us examine the evidence: Dallas Police Unit #221 (Summers-refer-police radio log) stated on the police radio that he had an "eye ball" witness to the shooting. The suspect was a white male about twenty-seven, five feet, eleven inches, black wavy hair, fair complexioned, (not Oswald) wearing an Eisenhower-type jacket of light color, dark trousers, and a white shirt, apparently armed with a .32 caliber, dark-finish automatic pistol which he had in his right hand. (The jacket strongly resembles that worn by the driver of the station wagon).

Dallas Police Unit #550 Car 2 was driven to the scene of the Tippit murder by Sgt. Gerald Hill. He was accompanied by Bud Owens, Dallas Police Department, and William F. Alexander, Assistant D.A. for Dallas. Unit #550 Car 2 reported over the police radio that the shells at the scene indicated that the suspect was armed with a 38 caliber automatic. 38 automatic shells and 38 revolver shells are distinctly different. (Oswald allegedly had a 38 revolver in his possession when arrested?)

After much confusion in the Oak Cliff area the Dallas Police were finally directed to the Texas Theater where the suspect was reported to be. Several squads arrived at the theater and quickly surrounded it. At the back door was none other than William F. Alexander, Assistant D.A., and several Dallas Police officers with guns drawn. While Dallas Police Officer McDonald and others entered the theater and turned on the lights and the suspect was pointed out to them, they started searching people several rows in front of Oswald, giving him a chance to run if he wanted to -- right into the blazing guns of waiting officers!

This man had to be stopped. He was the most dangerous criminal in the history of the world. Here was a man who was able to go from one location to another with the swiftness of Superman, to change his physical characteristics at will and who pumped four automatic slugs into a police officer with a revolver -- indeed a master criminal!

Well, back to the facts? Oswald was captured by Officer McDonald, who was out cold from one blow from the suspect and woke up to find he had arrested the suspect! (Nice going, Mac).

Later that afternoon I received word of the suspect's arrest and the fact that he was suspected of being involved in the President's death. I immediately thought of the man running down the grassy knoll. I made a telephone call to Capt. Will Fritz and gave him the description of the man I had seen and Fritz said, "that sounds like the suspect we have. Can you come up and take a look at him?"

I arrived at Capt. Fritz office shortly after 4:30 p.m. I was met by Agent Bookhout from the F.B.I., who took my name and place of employment. The door to Capt. Fritz' personal office was open and the blinds on the windows were closed, so that one had to look through the doorway in order to see into the room. I looked through the open door at the request of Capt. Fritz and identified the man who I saw running down the grassy knoll and enter the Rambler station wagon -- and it WAS Lee Harvey Oswald.

Fritz and I entered his private office together. He told Oswald, "This man (pointing to me) saw you leave." At which time the suspect replied, "I told you people I did." Fritz, apparently trying to console Oswald, said, "Take it easy, son -- we're just trying to find out what happened." Fritz then said, "What about the car?" Oswald replied, leaning forward on Fritz' desk, "That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine -- don't try to drag her into this." Sitting back in his chair, Oswald said very disgustedly and very low, "Everybody will know who I am now."

At this time Capt. Fritz ushered me from his office, thanking me. I walked away saddened but relieved that it was the end of the day and I could go home, where I could try -- at least for a little while -- to put the tragedy and the day's events out of my mind. I was soon to find out that my troubles had only begun -- for I had seen and heard too much that fateful day.

Saturday, November 23, 1963, I spent the day at home talking to my wife, Molly, about Friday's events and playing with Deanna and Terry, not knowing that the very next day would bring another tragic event which would affect not only my job but my entire future.

Like many other Americans, I was watching television on Sunday morning, November 24, 1963 when Jack Ruby shot Lee Harvey Oswald. I would like to clear up one thing at this point concerning Ruby's access to the basement of the city jail. The Warren Commission concluded that Dallas Police Officer R. E. Vaughn, through negligence, let Jack Ruby into the basement. What they did not say is that Officer Vaughn was questioned extensively after the shooting and even submitted to a polygraph test, which he passed, showing that he did not let Jack Ruby go down the Main Street Ramp of the city jail. I have known Officer Vaughn for many years and feel that he is honest, conscientious and one of the finest people I have ever known. I feel that he was unjustly accused. However, bombing Vaughn was the easiest way out for Earl Warren's Commission. 







III



The industrial and military complex can't survive 
Without their little horror wars they artfully contrive. 
If they push us to the big one then we won't come out alive 
His dream goes marching on.




Things were fairly normal for me for the next few months, with the exception of curious persons who popped into the Sheriff's Office from time to time to ask me questions about the assassination.

On the first anniversary of the assassination a team of newsmen from NBC New York came to Dallas. They wanted to do a documentary on the assassination and they contacted Jim Kerr of the Dallas Times Herald who told them of me.

Jim approached me and said that the NBC people were interested in what I had to say and would I talk to them? Jim Kerr indicated to me that he had it all set up. However, because I knew how Bill Decker felt about anyone in his Department talking about this particular event, I told him I would have to get Decker's permission. NBC had been calling me since October 1964 asking to talk to me but I would not commit myself.

When they arrived during the week of November 22, I went to Decker to ask permission to do the story. Decker promptly sat me down in the private office, closed the door and sat there looking at me for several minutes. It was difficult to tell if Decker was looking at you -- with that glass eye of his -- but at the same time you had the uneasy feeling that he was looking straight through you. Decker began to talk with that even, never-rising voice which commanded attention and gave you the feeling that it was dangerous to interrupt or even question him.

Decker told me to tell these people (Jim Kerr and NBC) that I was a Deputy Sheriff -- not an actor -- and for me to keep my mouth shut. He then went on to say, "Tell them you didn't see or hear anything." He then went back to the papers on his desk and I knew he was through -- and so was I. I relayed the message to Jim Kerr, who was very disappointed -- and even mad, but he, like me, knew that he must not challenge Decker's law.

From that day forward Bill Decker began to watch my every move. People in the office who, before this, very seldom spoke to me, began to hang around watching my every move and listening to everything I said. Among these were Rosemary Allen, E. R. (Buddy) Walthers, Allen Sweatt and Bob Morgan -- Decker's four top stoolies.

Combine the foregoing with the run-in I had with Dave Belin, junior counsel for the Warren Commission, who questioned me in April of 1964, and who changed my testimony fourteen times when he sent it to Washington, and you will have some idea of the pressures brought to bear.

David Belin told me who he was as I entered the interrogation room (April 1964). He had me sit at the head of a long table. To my left was a female with a pencil and pen. Belin sat to my right. Between the girl and Belin was a tape recorder, which was turned off. Belin instructed the girl not to take notes until he (Belin) said to do so. He then told me that the investigation was being conducted to determine the truth as the evidence indicates. Well, I could take that several ways but I said nothing. Then Belin said, "For instance, I will ask you where you were at a certain time. This will establish your physical location." It was at this point that I began to feel that I was being led into something but still I said nothing. Then Belin said, "I will ask you about what you thought you heard or saw in regard." Well, this was too much. I interrupted him and said, "Counselor, just ask me the questions and if I can answer them, I will." This seemed to irritate Belin and he told the girl to start taking notes with the next question.

At this point Belin turned the recorder on. The first questions were typical. Where were you born? Where did you go to school? When Belin would get to certain questions he would turn off the recorder and stop the girl from writing. Then he would ask me, for example, "Did you see anything unusual when you were behind the picket fence?" I said, "Yes" and he said, "Fine, just a minute." He would then tell the girl to start writing with the next question and would again start the recorder. What was the next question? "Mr. Craig, did you go into the Texas School Book Depository?" It was clear to me that he wanted only to record part of the interrogation, as this happened many times.

I finally managed to get in at least most of what I had seen and heard by ignoring his advanced questions and giving a step-by-step picture, which further seemed to irritate him.

At the end of our session Belin dismissed me but when I started to leave the room, he called me back. At this time I identified the clothing wore by the suspect (the 26 volumes refer to a box of clothing -- not boxes. There were two boxes.)

After I identified the clothing Belin went over the complete testimony again. He then asked, "Do you want to follow or waive your signature or sign now?" Since there was nothing but a tape recording and a stenographer's note book, there was obviously nothing to sign. All other testimony which I have read (a considerable amount) included an explanation that the person could waive his signature then or his statement would be typed and he would be notified when it was ready for signature. Belin did not say this to me.

He said an odd thing when I left. It is the only time that he said it, and I have never read anything similar in any testimony. "Be SURE, when you get back to the office, to thank Sheriff Decker for his cooperation." I know of no one else he questioned who he asked to thank a supervisor, chief, etc.

I first saw my testimony in January of 1968 when I looked at the 26 volumes which belonged to Penn Jones. My alleged statement was included. The following are some of the changes in my testimony:

 

  • Arnold Rowland told me that he saw two men on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository 15 minutes before the President arrived: one was a Negro, who was pacing back and forth by the southwest window. The other was a white man in the southeast corner, with a rifle equipped with a scope, and that a few minutes later he looked back and only the white man was there. In the Warren Commission: Both were white, both were pacing in front of the southwest corner and when Rowland looked back, both were gone;

     

  • I said the Rambler station wagon was light green. The Warren Commission: Changed to a white station wagon;

     

  • I said the driver of the Station Wagon had on a tan jacket. The Warren Commission: A white jacket;

     

  • I said the license plates on the Rambler were not the same color as Texas plates. The Warren Commission: Omitted the not -- omitted but one word, an important one, so that it appeared that the license plates were the same color as Texas plates;

     

  • I said that I got a good look at the driver of the Rambler. The Warren Commission: I did not get a good look at the Rambler. (In Captain Fritz's office) I had said that Fritz had said to Oswald, "This man saw you leave" (indicating me). Oswald said, "I told you people I did." Fritz then said, "Now take it easy, son, we're just trying to find out what happened", and then (to Oswald), "What about the car?" to which Oswald replied, "That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine. Don't try to drag her into this." Fritz said car -- station wagon was not mentioned by anyone but Oswald. (I had told Fritz over the telephone that I saw a man get into a station wagon, before I went to the Dallas Police Department and I had also described the man. This is when Fritz asked me to come there.) Oswald then said, "Everybody will know who I am now;" the Warren Commission: Stated that the last statement by Oswald was made in a dramatic tone. This was not so. The Warren Commission also printed, "NOW everybody will know who I am", transposing the now. Oswald's tone and attitude was one of disappointment. If someone were attempting to conceal his identity as Deputy and he was found out, exposed -- his cover blown, his reaction would be dismay and disappointment. This was Oswald's tone and attitude -- disappointment at being exposed!

Shortly after the Kerr and Belin incidents, the Sheriff took me out of the field and assigned me to the Bond Desk. This meant that I was sitting directly in line with Decker's office door, where he could watch me. It made me feel a little like a goldfish in a bowl!

While I was on the Bond Desk I noticed Eva Grant (Jack Ruby's sister) was making daily visits to Decker's office. During this time Eva and I came to be on good terms. It was convenient for her to speak to me when she came in because of the position of my desk -- close to the door leading into the Sheriff's Department. As time went on Eva Grant would stop me in the hall every time I went for a cup of coffee or took a break. Decker became very concerned over this and it was not long before I realized that ever time Eva and I talked we were joined by someone. In addition to this, Buddy Walthers would be standing close by and listening. (This is another example of his talents as a peace officer -- that he would make himself so conspicuous.) First he would stand and listen, and then head into Decker's office.

After a few days of this and armed with information from this so-called detective -- who couldn't track an elephant through the snow with a nose bleed -- Decker called me into his office and pointed to a chair without saying a word. Well, knowing he wasn't giving me the chair or asking me to look it over, I sat down. After a long silence he finally said, "What about it?" This was Decker's way of telling you he knew it (whatever it was) and he wanted you to "confess." I felt sure Eva Grant was going to be the subject of conversation but I was determined to make him start the interrogation -- after all he wanted the answers and, apparently, Buddy had not heard as much as he thought he had.

Finally he gave in and said, "You've been talking to Eva Grant." I said, "Yes sir." Decker then said, "What about?" I replied, "She is concerned about Jack's depressed state of mind and worried about the fact that he looks ill." Decker said, "That's none of your business." I replied with the only thing that Decker would accept -- I said, "No sir." Apparently sure that he had convinced me once again that there was no law except Decker's law, he pointed to the door and I left. He was a man of few words!

The next day Eva and I had another talk. She was getting more and more concerned about Jack's health. She had been to see Decker several times trying to secure medical help for her brother. By this time the rumor was all through the Sheriff's office that Jack was, indeed, ill. Most of this information came from the deputies assigned to guard him. The deputies were Walter Neighbors, James R. Keene, Jess Stevenson, Jr., and others. Finally Decker permitted a doctor to see Jack, a psychiatrist, who said Jack Ruby had a cold!

A few weeks passed, during which time I received same telephone calls concerning the assassination and my testimony. These calls came from various people from different parts of the country who were, apparently, just interested. These calls somehow were reported to Bill Decker. Not having a reason to fire me, he did the next best thing, he had a monitoring unit connected to the telephone system so that he could periodically check any telephone calls.

I will not go into the events leading to Jack Ruby's death. Much has already been written about this but I would like to say that Jack Ruby made several statements to guards, jail supervisors and assistant D.A.'s in which he said "they are going to kill me." These statements became a private joke among these people and they discussed them freely in the hall of the court house. When the Sheriff from Wichita Falls, Texas came to observe the prisoner he was about to take charge of, due to Ruby's change of venue, he refused to accept the prisoner on the grounds that Ruby was very ill. Then, and only then, did Decker send Ruby to Parkland Hospital where he died a few short days later (some cold!).

I was not too concerned about the minor attention I was receiving from Decker regarding the assassination and its aftermath until August 7, 1966. At 2:30 a.m, I was approached by Hardy M. Parkerson, an attorney from New Orleans, La. Mr. Parkerson was interested in the assassination and the Jack Ruby trial. I was working late nights on the Bond Desk when he came to the Sheriff's office. He asked me several questions relating to these tragic events and I answered him as honestly as I could and he thanked me and left.

However, on October 1, 1966 Mr. Parkerson wrote to me advising me that I was receiving more publicity than I might be aware of. He mentioned in his letter that he had picked up a book on a New Orleans newsstand. The book was entitled, The Second Oswald by Richard H. Popkin and my report had been mentioned in the book. This disturbed me as I knew my popularity with Decker was fading anyway.

On October 18 I received another letter from Mr. Parkerson. It seemed that he had come across another book on a New Orleans newsstand which mentioned my name. This one was Inquest by Edward J. Epstein. Then I began to worry a bit. Of course other names were mentioned also in these books but I was concerned because of my employer's attitude and the fact that I was in definite conflict with the Warren Commission in my testimony.

In February of 1967 the lid blew off. District Attorney Jim Garrison announced publicly his probe into the John F. Kennedy Assassination. It wasn't long -- in fact, a matter of hours -- until Decker walked up to me and asked, "Have you been talking to Jim Garrison?" I told him that I had not, which was the truth. Decker then said, "Somebody sure as hell has." That was the beginning of the end of my career as a law officer and my future in Dallas County.

As more and more books critical of the Warren Commission began to hit the newsstands throughout the country and I received calls and visitors asking questions my future with the Sheriff's Office became very shaky. Finally, on July 4, 1967 Bill Decker called me into his office and told me to check out. Knowing there was no grievance board and that Decker was the supreme ruler of his domain, I left the Sheriff's Office for good.

I was saddened by the loss of eight years in a job that I had given my ALL to. But I was soon to find out that this was only the down payment on the price that I was to pay for the truth! I immediately began looking for work and found that the Commerce Bail Bond Company was just opening an office and needed someone to help in the office as Les Hancock, the owner, was just starting out.

Mr. Hancock and I had a long talk and he agreed that I would be an asset to the business because he knew nothing about it and I was familiar with bonds and most of the people at the Sheriff's Office as well as those wishing to make bond. Les and I seemed to get along very well. I posted most of the bonds and kept track of our clients. Posting the first few bonds with the county went slowly -- although the money was in escrow, Decker wanted to personally approve all bonds posted by me. I did not mind this delaying tactic because all it involved was a little extra time for me. The bonding business was going very well -- within two months we were making money.

I kept up as much as possible on Jim Garrison's probe and decided to write him and tell him what I knew -- if it would help him. Jim Garrison answered my letter and asked me to call him, at which time he made arrangements for my trip to New Orleans.

Les Hancock tried to persuade me not to go, saying I shouldn't get involved (a little late). I arrived in New Orleans in late October and was picked up at the airport by Bill Boxley, one of Jim's investigators, and four men who didn't work for Jim. Boxley took me to a motel where I was to meet Jim and the other four men followed -- apparently, they were not invited. Most of my talks with Jim were at his office while my "tails" (apparently government agents) searched my room. I must apologize to them for not bringing what they could "use."

I had several meetings with Jim Garrison. He showed me numerous pictures taken in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. Among them was a picture of a Latin male. I recognized him as being the same man I had seen driving the Rambler station wagon in which I had seen Oswald leave the Book Depository area. I was surprised and I asked Jim who the man was. Jim did not know but he did say this man was arrested in Dealey Plaza immediately after the assassination but was released by Dallas Police because he could not speak English! This was, to me, highly unusual. In my experience as a police officer I had never known of a person (or prisoner) being released because of a language barrier. Interpreters were, of course, always available.

We also discussed the 45 caliber slug found on the south side of Elm Street, in the grass, by E. R. (Buddy) Walthers. Buddy had indeed found such a slug. He and I discussed it the evening of November 22, 1963. Buddy also gave a statement to the Dallas Press confirming this find (found among bits of brain matter). However, he later denied finding it -- after Decker had a long talk with him and subsequent to newsmen questioning the Sheriff about the evidence.

Jim Garrison also had a picture of an unidentified man picking up this 45 slug and Buddy is also in that photograph. I asked Buddy about this many times -- after his denial -- but he never made any comment.

Jim also asked me about the arrests made in Dealey Plaza that day. I told him I knew of twelve arrests, one in particular made by R. E. Vaughn of the Dallas Police Department. The man Vaughn arrested was coming from the Dal-Tex Building across from the Texas School Book Depository. The only thing which Vaughn knew about him was that he was an independent oil operator from Houston, Texas. The prisoner was taken from Vaughn by Dallas Police detectives and that was the last that he saw or heard of the suspect.

Incidentally, there are no records of any arrests, either by the Dallas Police Department or the Sheriff's Office, made in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. Very strange! Any and all arrests made during my eight years as an officer were recorded. It may not have been entered as a record with the Identification Bureau but a report was always typed and a permanent record kept -- if only in our case files. A report on any questioning shows a reason for your action and protects you against false arrest. I am saying that there is absolutely no record in the case files or any place else.

Upon returning to Dallas from my first contact with Jim Garrison, I was picked up by another "tail." I was followed constantly after that. My wife could not even go to the grocery store without being followed. Sometimes they would go so far as to pull up next to her and make sure she saw them talking on their two-way radios. They would also park across from my house and sit for hours making sure I knew they were there.

On the morning of November 1, 1967 I received a call from a friend of mine. He owned a night club at Carroll and Columbia Streets in Dallas. Bill said that he wanted to see me and would I meet him in front of the club. Bill had called me many times when I was a deputy as he was frequently in financial trouble and I would have the citation issued for him held up until he was in a position to accept them. Some people in Dallas did receive Special Treatment in the matter of citations. Bill was not one of these but I did this for him because I knew that by holding it up a day or so I could save his credit rating -- and the creditor would be paid without having a Judgment entered. We were friends and it was a natural -- and practical thing to do.

When Bill called me on November 1 he said he wanted to talk to me about money he owed the Bonding Company where I worked -- for getting one of his employees out of jail on traffic tickets. He had asked that I meet him at 9:00 a.m. At about 8:30 a.m. "me and my shadows" started for the club, arriving at approximately 9:00 a.m.

When I parked in front of Bill's club "my shadows" began one of the sweetest set-ups I had ever seen. One car, a tan Pontiac, parked one block in front of my car, racing me, and the other, a white Chevrolet with a small antenna protruding from the roof, kept circling the block again and again, never stopping. There were two men in the Chevrolet. I couldn't get a good look at the driver but the other man was in his early thirties. He had dark hair, was nice looking and wore a black-and-white checked sport coat.

Bill had never been late before for an appointment with me but he was this time. When it was nearing 10:15 I began to worry that those poor bastards would get dizzy from driving around and around -- and might hit someone.

Finally, at 10:15 a.m. Bill arrived and we went to the Waffle House across the street for coffee. There, as big as life, sitting on a stool was the man in the sport jacket -- from the white Chevrolet. Well . . . we sat down and had coffee. We talked about how each of us was doing -- just shot the bull -- and Bill never did bring up the subject which he had said he wanted to discuss with me!

When we finished we started to leave and the man in the sport coat jumped up and beat us out of the door. We paid our checks and walked out the door and my shadow was nowhere in sight -- believe me, I looked. We crossed the parking lot and stopped at the traffic light, as it was red against us. For some reason I stepped down off the curb before the light changed. As I did, Bill fell flat on the sidewalk. I was about to find out why. At that very instant a shot rang out behind me and the hair just above my left ear parted. I felt a pressure and sharp pain on the left side of my head. I bolted for my car leaving Bill lying on the ground. I heard him say, "You son of a bitch" and I jumped into my car and drove home as fast as possible. When I arrived home I told my wife what this good friend had done for me. I pondered the idea of moving my family to some safe place.

A curious note: my friend (?) Bill was deeply in debt and about to lose his business at the time of the shooting. However, about a month later he was completely out of debt, his business was doing great and he had invested in two other businesses which were doing very well. (Payment was, apparently, not withheld just because the trigger man missed.) I decided to get in touch with Jim Garrison. I tried all day and finally reached him around ten that evening. After I told him what had happened he said someone would be at my home within the hour.

At approximately 11 p.m. someone knocked on the door and I opened it with my left hand, holding my 45 automatic in my right hand. Standing there was a small but well-built man in his late forties or early fifties. He said, "My name is Penn Jones. Jim Garrison called me." My hand tightened on the 45 when my wife, Molly, took hold of me and said, "I've seen him on T.V. He isPenn Jones." With that I relaxed and he remained Penn Jones!

Penn Jones listened to my story and then began making telephone calls to newsmen and wire services that he had contact with, explaining to me that the best protection for me was open coverage on the incident. After a long talk with Penn Jones I found that I had a great deal of respect and admiration for this man. Although small in stature, I felt he would fight the devil himself to find the truth about the assassination.

The next day, November 2, 1967, when I went to work at Commerce Bail Bonds I was approached by two reporters and a photographer from Channel 8 in Dallas. They had picked the story up on the news wire and wanted a personal interview. After the interview my boss, Les Hancock, called me into his office and told me he didn't think that I should have done the interview (giving no specific reason).

The next few days Les' attitude was very cold and he would barely speak to me. Then, on the 7th of November he called me into his office once again. This time he told me the business wasn't doing well and he would have to let me go because he was closing the office. Of course, I knew better than this -- after all I had access to all the records and I knew the business was making money. A few days later I found out Les merely moved to another location and his business continued as usual.

However, this knowledge did not help me for I was back pounding the pavement looking for work. In the meantime I had been in contact with Jim Garrison. He informed me that there was an opening at Volkswagon International in New Orleans and that I might try there. By this time my health had begun to be affected. I had undergone a serious stomach operation in August of 1963 and I suffer from chronic bronchitis and emphysema (not to mention Dallas County Battle Fatigue).

My family and I made the trip to New Orleans, where I was interviewed by Willard Robertson, the owner of the company. Mr. Robertson told me he was looking for a Personnel Manager and because of my background of dealing with the public he hired me. After a long trip back to Dallas where we gathered up our meager belongings we moved to New Orleans and I felt good -- I was working again!

We had been there but a few days when all of our neighbors and half the people where I was working knew who I was. This was due to the newspaper and television coverage of Jim Garrison's probe into the assassination. Again came the never-ending questions, which I did not mind because outside of Dallas people were sincerely interested and I certainly did not mind doing what I could to clear up any doubts they had. The people at the office treated me very well.

Unfortunately, after about a month I realized that I was not doing anything but going in to the office and coming home -- nothing in between. Although I appreciated Jim Garrison recommending me for the job, I knew by this time that he had done this because he was concerned about my safety and wanted me out of Dallas. Because this company did not really need a Personnel Manager and I couldn't take the money for a job I was not doing, I submitted my resignation to Mr. Robertson and my family and I returned to Dallas.

We arrived back in Dallas on a cold and snowy seventh of January, 1968, and moved in with Molly's parents as we had very little money and nowhere to stay. The next few days I spent looking for work. I tried every ad and every lead I could find. The people who interviewed me always seemed interested but like all companies, they wanted to check out my references. When I failed to receive any results from my efforts, I called some of the places where I had placed applications to see what was wrong. I always received the same answer, "the position had been filled." Finally, I decided something was wrong and I suspected one employment reference, Bill Decker. I had a friend write Decker asking for an employment reference -- he never received an answer!

My next move was to have someone call Decker and ask for a reference and this took some doing. Writing him was one thing but talking to him on the telephone was another. He would bait you on the telephone and, before you knew it, he knew who you were and whether you were legitimate or not.

Many people in Dallas liked Decker for the favors he could do for them but those who did not like him were afraid of the tremendous power he possessed in Dallas County. They were afraid to oppose him in any issue for fear that this man could, indeed, affect their professional careers. A good example is the charge, "Hold for Decker." This meant that when Decker wanted to talk to you or some friend of his disagreed with an arrest (without warrant), you were detained in the county jail until Decker wished to talk or release you. No attorney in Dallas County would dare apply for a writ of habeas corpus to secure your release.

Well, to get back to my "minor" problem, I finally found someone to call Decker for a reference and when he did Decker informed him that, "Mr. Craig had worked for me and I would not re-hire him and that is all I've got to say about Mr. Craig." So . . . I had worked for the Sheriff for eight years and yet, without a reference, it was as though those years had never existed. How do you explain this kind of situation to a prospective employer?

After many more exhaustive interviews, I found a company, on February 1, 1968, which had just opened a branch office in Dallas and was in BAD need of security guards to work in department stores where they had new contracts. When I applied for the job I told them of my background in law enforcement, leaving out the details of my separation with the Sheriff's Office. I only showed them the watch I was wearing, which is inscribed: Roger D. Craig, First Place, Sheriff's Department 1960. (The award was for Officer of the Year). They were impressed and with a sigh of relief I was hired without the customary background check.

My first assignment was a department store in East Dallas, where I held the very important position of keeping the shopping baskets out of the aisles. (Don't knock it -- I was working 12 hours a day and making a whopping $1.60 per hour).

By this time my creditors were knocking on my door day and night. All of the furniture we had, which was not much, we lost and then "along came Jones."

I had contacted Penn when I arrived back in Dallas and after I lost the car he let me use his 1955 Ford, which he wasn't driving, and I was back in business!

Because of the crowded quarters at Molly's parents, we began to search for an apartment. We found many and were turned down every time. Some people said they did not want to rent to families with children. Others would accept us and then when we were ready to move in, they would say it was already rented and they had "forgotten." Finally, in mid-February we found a couple on Tremont Street, who were not afraid to rent to us. Oh, they knew who I was but they said it did not matter -- they had kept up on the assassination.

Our only outlet for our tensions were the Sunday trips we made to the Penn Jones home in Midlothian, Texas. During these visits I would try to bring Penn up to date on the latest from the Dallas Police Department and Sheriff's Office. I was able to give him some help from time to time because I could keep in touch with these offices through officers there who were still friendly toward me. It was fun and relaxing to get together with Penn and his wife L.A., who is a delightful person with a great sense of humor. The two of them made you feel as though the whole world was right there.

On one of these visits Penn told me he was going to appear on the Joe Pyne show in Los Angeles and asked if I would go with him. Needless to say, I owed Penn Jones much over the previous months and if I would be an asset, I was certainly prepared to go, I told him. I got a leave of absence from my employer, Penn made the arrangements and we were off to Los Angeles.

The Los Angeles trip was a success as far as I was concerned, especially when we spoke to the young people at U.C.L.A. They were very concerned about the assassination and were kind to Penn and me. The only disappointment came in the form of Otto Preminger, who was sitting in for Joe Pyne that night. I think his statement to the audience speaks for itself. He said that he believed whole-heartedly in the Warren Report and when I asked him if he had read the Warren Report, he said "no"! After a week of appearances on television and radio my lungs were beginning to give me trouble and I returned to Dallas with Mrs. Jones, while Penn went on to San Francisco.

After a few weeks back on my important job of keeping the shopping carts in line I found that at a dollar and sixty cents an hour I had too much month left at the end of the money. We were behind on our rent and, oh well, back to the want ads.

We found a couple who were looking for someone to live in and care for their elderly mother, rent free. After all this time there was something free? Getting settled did not take very long -- with just a few clothes. This worked out fairly well. I worked twelve hours a day and Molly did all of the washing, ironing, cooking and cleaning -- in addition to caring for Terry, Deanna and Roger Jr. (Who had been staying previously with his grandmother). Did I say free?

In the meantime Penn had returned from San Francisco and during a visit to our house he told me he could get me a job in Midlothian working at an oil refinery and that the pay was $500.00 per month. I hated to give up the prestige of my present position but money was money. I gave my employer notice and on April 15, 1968 I started work at the refinery. This was not crude oil but used motor oil -- we re-re-processed it. The work was new to me and I had never re-refined used motor oil before. I found that I was a little soft. I had to dump three thousand pounds (50 fifty-pound bags) of clay into hot oil every morning and pump it back into the still which cooked it. This whipped me into shape quite rapidly. I was not concerned with the physical work involved for I knew that I had a chance to support my family and that was what counted.

The work went smoothly until the second Thursday of May, 1968 when, while trying to start an engine at the plant, I slipped and broke my arm -- "good ole lady luck." I had my arm set and missed one day of work. On Monday morning I returned to work, knowing I could not live on workmen's compensation, which was about $40.00 per week. I painfully continued to work with the arm in a cast for the next six weeks.

During this six week period my boss had offered to let me move into a house he owned in Midlothian so that I would be closer to work. I took him up on the offer because I was driving sixty miles each day to work and back and Molly was worried about me driving and working with the broken arm and -- again I was being followed.

During this time a Dallas Sheriff's car stopped me and asked where I was going. I had known this deputy for several years and there was no reason for his behavior. Molly's health was getting worse. She had serious stomach disorders and the strain of past events had not helped -- so we moved. Now we were in Midlothian and I was driving four miles to work and back.

During the time I was still driving back and forth from Dallas to Midlothian -- or the job -- I noticed that I was being followed by a blue and white pick-up, occupied by a white male. One day, after being followed by this truck for several days, as the truck was approaching the driver stuck a revolver out the window and was about to fire, when another car pulled up behind me and he withdrew the pistol. My hours were never the same two days in a row but this man seemed to know the precise hour I would leave work. Penn Jones and I tried to set a trap for this man but, he, apparently knew it and got away. I never saw him after that.

It was six weeks since I had broken my arm and this was the day I was to have the cast taken off. I felt good as it had been quite a burden. On that morning I reported for work and started preparing the pumps and tanks for cooking the oil when lady luck smiled down on me once again. I started to light the furnace and it blew up, burning my face and a good deal of hair and my arms. This was around the first of July, 1968. After the doctor treated me, he advised me that I would have to wear the cast another two weeks because he was afraid that I would get an infection in the burned area if the cast were removed. I do not want to leave the impression that my conflict with the Dallas establishment was the direct cause of these accidents. However, had the door not been closed to me in Dallas, I would not have had to turn to work with which I was not familiar.

In August of 1968 (while living in Midlothian) I received a visit in the middle of the night from a man in his fifties who said he was out of gas. I was already in bed and Molly was catching up on some of my court records when this man came to the door. Molly told him I was in bed with a sprained ankle and would not be able to help him. She directed him to the neighbors down the road. He went straight to his car, which was parked beside our house, got in, started it right up and drove off! Apparently, he was not out of gas but wanted us to know we could be found. This was about the time Penn was printing some pretty hot editorials in his paper with information I had supplied. I guess someone didn't like it.

I made some friends in Midlothian and was getting along fairly well. I had a job, a place to live and was able to purchase a used car.

The City Council was taking applications for a city judge. After talking it over with Penn Jones and some of my other friends, I went before the council for an interview, and, I must say, it was somewhat of a surprise when they appointed me. The future was beginning to show some promise. I continued the work at the refinery and pursued my new duties at city hall.

On August 5, 1968, Bill Seward, the only other employee at the refinery, was discussing a better way to process the oil with Dale Foshee, the owner. They were going to try something new in an attempt to obtain a better quality of oil. Dale purchased a new type of clay which would absorb more waste from the used oil as it cooked. Neither of these men told me that this new clay contained a substantial amount of some sort of acid. This meant that when I dumped it (the clay) into the hot oil tank, as I did every morning, and did not wear any sort of breathing devise, I inhaled a great deal of the dust from this new product.

Shortly after I started cooking the oil I noticed I was having trouble breathing. I did not pay much attention to it and finished the day's work. That night the acid really got to me and I found myself passing out. I tried lying my head right in the window to get enough air -- but still could not. Penn Jones came to the house and he and Molly rushed me to the hospital in Mansfield, Texas, about ten miles from Midlothian. I stayed under an oxygen tent for two days. On the fourth day I felt much better and was released from the hospital.

I had learned, about a week before going to the hospital, that the Justice of the Peace in Midlothian was resigning and I was persuaded by friends to seek that position. I had talked with the county commissioners before I went to the hospital and they made their final decision on the day I came home from the hospital. I was sworn in as Justice of the Peace on August 8, 1968. I would be an appointee until the November election. Now I was working at the refinery, holding the position of City Judge and also Justice of the Peace. The city paid me $50.00 a month and the Justice of the Peace position brought in about $50.00 a month. I was not getting rich but look at it this way, I was the entire establishment in Midlothian!

The business for the city was very routine and went rather smoothly. However, the Justice Court was another matter. I was having to correspond with the surrounding counties and they were all cooperative, with one exception (you guessed it), Dallas County. Some warrants, citations and subpoenas were sent to the Dallas County Sheriff for service. Needless to say, they were returned "unable to locate"!

So the door was still closed to me in Dallas -- even in matters of the law which these officials were sworn to uphold. Now, also Decker knew where I was and it was not long before my creditors, with whom I had been trying to make arrangements to pay a little to each month, had obtained judgments against me in the Dallas courts and I had been served with the papers. Now there was no hope of clearing my credit without paying everyone in full, which was impossible (I'll bet his glass was really shining). The next few weeks I managed to avoid my contact with the Good People of Dallas, hoping that they would forget about me -- a fat chance!

In October 1968, my oldest son (Roger, Jr.) wasn't doing well in school and he decided to run away from home. I was, of course, very concerned about him -- he was only fourteen years old. I contacted the Dallas Morning News to see if they would print his picture. I might have just as well invaded Russia. My name was immediately connected with Jim Garrison and before I could say stop the press, my name and connection with Jim was all over the newspaper, UPI, radio and television. I was getting calls from all over the country.

A couple of days later we received a call from the sheriff in Texarkana, Arkansas. He had Roger Jr.. We went to Arkansas and retrieved him as quietly as possible. He had been working for one day on a ranch.

On October the seventh I reported to work at the refinery at which time my boss handed me a check marked, FINAL. He told me he was cutting down on production due to a slowdown in business and he wouldn't need me anymore. Now where have I heard that before?

Being Justice of the Peace, I wasn't without influence in Midlothian. I soon secured a job at a gas station changing truck tires. Not much prestige but a lot of hours and I quickly commanded the respect of every tire tool in the place.

A few days later, my former employer came to me and said that I would have to move out of his house because he wanted to use if for a week retreat to get away from Dallas.

By this time I was beginning to suspect the periodic publicity I had been receiving through the years, might have had something to do with my trouble finding jobs and housing. I guess I am a little slow -- especially when this former employer hired someone to take my place at the refinery. He let him move into the house where I lived -- as I found out sometime later. So now I had to work 12 hours a day and try to find a place to move my family. The election was coming up. This would not have been important except for the fact that being Justice of the Peace served as a deterrent from harassment by certain people, whose names I need not mention.

It was November and I still had been unable to find a house to rent. Midlothian was a very small town and there were just no houses to rent. Anyway, the election was over and I had won by twenty votes. No doubt, twenty people who did not read the paper or watch television. I continued working at the gas station and living in my former employer's house. The election had done at least one thing for me. Dale still wanted me to move but was not pressing as hard. The days which followed were hard -- we had rain and some sleet and working in this was beginning to affect my health. Molly was ill and Deanna, who had suffered from chronic bronchitis since birth, was not doing any better than we were. December was on us before I knew it and Mr. Roberts, the owner, decided to retire from the gas station. This meant, of course, that I was back on the street. 







IV



Our President is lying up there cold beneath his flame 
He is calling out for vengeance and to do so in his name. 
To keep the peace forever and erase our nation's shame 
His dream goes marching on.



This time there were no jobs to be found. However, business in the Justice Court was somewhat improved due to the opening of a sub station in Midlothian by the Highway Patrol. I could not pay the rent or meet the bills but the increase was enough to buy groceries. I had resigned as City Judge so that there would be no conflict of interest between the two positions (City and County Court).

It was at this time that I was notified by District Attorney, Jim Garrison, that he would need me in the upcoming Clay Shaw trial -- another wrench in the machinery. The night after I was notified of this I received a telephone call and the voice asked if I was going to go to New Orleans. When I answered, "yes," he just said, "get a one-way ticket" and then hung up. I brushed this off as just another crank. I'd had those calls before. However, the next day I received another call. This time it was a different voice. This one asked if I were going to New Orleans and when I said, "yes," all he said was, "Remember you have a family" and hung up.

I must admit this worried me. After that I would get up during the night and check the family and house -- not a very pleasant way to live.

During this turmoil I at last had a prospect of getting back into that illusive pastime called "employment" -- it was again Penn Jones to the rescue -- and I say this with the greatest respect and admiration! Penn had been corresponding with a friend of his in Boulder, Colorado, regarding helping me find employment out of Texas, which seemed the only thing left. The friend suggested to Penn that I make a trip to Boulder to check into some leads so the Jones family made the arrangements and I was off to Boulder. This was in January 1969.

I arrived in Boulder and was met by members of the Students for a Democratic Society, whose names I will not mention. (J. Edgar Hoover should not have his work made so easy). They took me from the airport and arranged for my lodging. The next three days I filled out applications at various places, including the Boulder Police Department and Sheriff's Office because those were the positions I was most qualified for and I believed I could be a cop and still have compassion for my fellow men. If they would not accept me that way, I could always quit -- after all, I was an expert at being out of work.

After I had exhausted all possibilities, I thanked the people who had been so kind to me and returned to Midlothian, Texas to wait. I had been home about one week when I received word from the Boulder Sheriff's Department that there would be an opening soon and if I wanted the job, it was mine. Satisfied that the out of Texas bit was going to pay off, the Penn Jones, bless them, financed the trip back to Boulder. This time the family went with me. We drove straight through from Midlothian to Boulder. The second day in Boulder we found an apartment or two we might be able to afford until I started getting regular pay checks. I felt good about having a chance at a new start as I went to see Under Sheriff Cunningham.

When I arrived at the Sheriff's Department, Cunningham took me to his office, asked me to sit down and closed the door. It was then that I began to get that feeling I'd had so many times before when I was about to get the purple shaft. Sure enough, I had managed to lose a job before I even started. Mr. Cunningham began to ask me about my background with the Dallas Sheriff's Department (which he already knew from my previous visit) and the reason for my termination. Then he brought out his big gun, "What about Jim Garrison?" Well, knowing I'd been had, I told him I was going to have to testify in the Shaw trial (which I'm sure he already knew).

I'd heard about every excuse there was for not hiring me but he should have handed me this one in a gift-wrapped "surprise" package. "Mr. Craig," he said, (I had been Roger until then) "we've had a little situation here" and he went on -- it seemed that one of their jailers had seduced a sixteen-year old girl while she was in their custody -- WOW -- and with that and my connection with the Garrison probe, the heat would be more than they wanted to handle. He was sorry. So was I -- all the way back to Texas.

When we arrived back in Midlothian we were all exhausted and very disappointed. Molly had the flu, Deanna a bad cold and the strain of the past few weeks had taken its toll on me. I was having trouble with my stomach and lungs and was down to 138 pounds. It was February 1, 1969. We had just enough money left from the trip to perhaps rent a house and buy a few groceries. Dale Foshee was pressing me again to move and I had nowhere to go and no prospects of a job. Like a wounded animal, I could only think of returning to familiar surroundings -- the place that I had spent most of my adult life.

We drove to Dallas and by some streak of luck sneaked by a property owner and managed to rent a house. Before this poor, misguided soul could change his mind, we gathered up our belongings in Midlothian and moved back to Dallas, where I again applied my trade of looking for work.

I spent the following days filling out many applications and some of the interviews were even promising. I was very careful not to mention any part of my involvement in the assassination.

However, on February 13, 1969 I was summoned to New Orleans to testify in the Clay Shaw trial. On the 14th when I finally took the stand the defense tried very hard to discredit me by saying that I worked in New Orleans and was, in fact, still working in that city under an assumed name. Failing to discredit me, they accomplished the next best thing, the distorted version appeared in newspapers and wire services throughout the country.

When I returned to Dallas on February 16, 1969 I was to realize the full impact of this distorted news story for when I contacted the job possibilities I had before I testified I found all doors closed. On March 4 -- after several days of no openings, or being told that I was not qualified, or that they would call me, which they never did -- I found a job with Industrial Towel and Uniform Company of Dallas. This was a rental company and they needed men so that all I had to do was pass a polygraph test to prove I was not a thief, which I passed!

Now I was a Route Salesman. Ponder that awhile -- a Judge reduced to picking up dirty laundry. Oh, well, work is work! Still weak and underweight from being sick during January and February, I was determined to make it on my new job.

I left home at 5:45 a.m. and arrived at the plant a little after 6:00 a.m., put my route slips in order, loaded my truck and started my deliveries. I got back to the plant about 4:30 p.m., unloaded the dirty linens, turned in my money and charge slips and got back home around 6:30 p.m. This was the season for cold, rainy weather -- wouldn't you know? I had been to a doctor who gave me some medication for the chest infection I had developed and the medicine kept me going until March 14 -- when I, literally, ran out of gas.

On March 18, Molly called Penn and told him that I was not any better. Penn began to make arrangements for me to be admitted to the Veterans Hospital, where he was to meet me. By this time I was out of it and Molly called an ambulance. I had completely passed out by the time it had arrived. I knew that I was going to the V.A. Hospital but when I woke up a short time later I knew I was not at the V.A. Hospital. Those dirty bastards had taken me to Parkland Hospital, which has a reputation for saving people comparable to my employment record for the past two years. I gathered what strength I had, got off the stretcher and staggered down the hall.

Molly had reached Penn, who was waiting at the V.A. Hospital, and he was madder than hell as he hated Parkland Hospital even more than I did. So, I finally wound up at the V.A. Hospital via Penn's car, where I spent the next ten days. I was released from the hospital on March 28, 1969 with instructions not to work out in the weather until my lungs had improved. This, of course, eliminated my job as a route salesman.

I knew an inside job was going to be hard to find from my experience during the past two years. First of all, I knew that when my references were checked Decker would not give me a favorable recommendation -- if he even gave one at all. Second, my unstable employment record during the past two years had resulted in a disastrous credit rating. Eight years of experience in various responsible duties at the Sheriff's Office were gone. They had, indeed, done their work well!

After many weeks of search I still had no job and was again behind on the rent. At this point we took two cameras, one 8 millimeter movie and one Minor still, our projector and screen and sold them for enough to rent a cheaper house. We moved into a three room house on Gurley Street which wasn't much but it kept out the rain!

One day I got a wild idea. I would go down to the Federal Building and apply for a government job -- those people will hire anybody -- well, almost anybody. I passed the civil service test and was told they had a job coming up in the office and I was qualified for it. I was to go back in two days to begin work. Things were certainly looking up. I went over to my father-in-law's and drank all of his beer to celebrate.

The two days passed and I headed for my government job, which was to be handling correspondence from other government agencies -- they do a lot of writing to each other. Well, when I arrived I was ushered into one of those cubby hole offices AGAIN, where I was told that they had received a memo telling them the budget was being cut and my job was being eliminated (I hadn't even started). Oh, well, at least I was losing "more important" jobs now.

On June 1 I answered an ad for an Assistant Manager's job at a liquor store, where the only qualification was that I pass another polygraph test, which I did, proving that I had not yet turned to stealing. The next day I reported for work to find that I was a delivery boy again. My job was restocking private clubs throughout Dallas who bought merchandise from the store. I soon made friends with all the club owners and every time I would make a delivery, they would insist on buying me a drink. I was making $1.87 an hour. I wasn't the highest paid delivery boy in town but after a few stops I was probably the happiest!

In the meantime being out of work from March until June 1, I was again behind on the rent as well as the car payment on my used 1965 Buick. The landlord had asked us to move. I tried to explain my situation and the fact that I was now working and would try to catch up on the rent but he didn't care -- I had to go. It was two weeks before I received a pay check. I don't know how we made it but we did. Molly then found a house for us to rent and I paid the first month's rent. I didn't worry about the car payment any longer for two days after I started to work the bank repossessed the car. We then again went back to driving one of Penn's cars.

During the slow periods of the weeks which followed I was always searching the paper and talking to people -- trying to find a better paying job with a little security. I was working eleven hours a day, six days a week so it took me some time to locate one and I also had to be careful not to let people know too much about me because the general attitude in Dallas was not to get involved in the assassination. (A little late for Dallas).

On September 18, 1969 I applied at Peakload, Inc., a temporary employment service, who was looking for a dispatcher. The job consisted of taking orders from companies which needed temporary help for a few days, selecting the men from the hall who were best suited to the customer's needs, then seeing that they were delivered by our driver and picked up promptly after work. Al Nagel, the office manager, was from Minnesota and knew little of the events in Dallas and nothing of the people involved in the assassination so I slipped by and was hired. Now I was doing something which I enjoyed and the pay was $500.00 a month with time and one-half for over 48 hours. The next few weeks went by swiftly. I was working six days a week and making enough money to pay the rent, buy groceries and clothes for the kids.

On November 10, 1969 I was taken to the V.A. Hospital again. This time with neuritis, which the doctors said was caused by a vitamin deficiency over a long period of time, and bronchial pneumonia. This time I was not too concerned because Al Nagel liked my work and I was sure that I had a future with Peakload regardless of this temporary set back.

Well, after twenty-four days of what seemed like endless injections of vitamins, penicillin and streptomycin (one hundred and twenty-eight in all) I was sent home on December 4, 1969. The next day I called Al Nagel to tell him that I would return to work in a couple of days -- when I got my strength back. Al informed me that I no longer had the job -- that I had been replaced.

My final check from Peakload paid the rent for a month and bought a few groceries but Christmas was coming and I had managed somehow not to let the kids down -- up until now. While I was in the hospital Penn Jones brought a letter he had received from Madeline Goddard. She had, apparently, read much on the assassination and sent her best wishes and support to us. Also in the letter was the answer to this Christmas. Madeline had enclosed a check for $100.00.

She did not realize it, I'm sure, but that kept us from throwing my hands up in the air and giving up. The next few weeks were a repetition of earlier days -- no jobs, no money, no prospects (there must be a song in there somewhere). Our only means of eating those days was Madeline Goddard's generosity; God bless Madeline and her generous heart.

Penn Jones had a few acres of land in Boyce, Texas, a short distance from Midlothian and he had persuaded us to move into the smaller of two houses on this land. We decided to go so that I could recuperate and regroup my thoughts. By this time, January 24, 1970, I was very depressed and ready to throw in the towel.

Penn and his son, Penn III, moved our belongings into the small three-room house and I must say that the fresh air and freedom from Dallas and its citizens was a welcome change. After a few days I felt better and began exploring our new surroundings. Penn had seventy-eight head of cattle on the place and I was feeding twenty bales of hay to them every morning. As my strength came back I also tackled various small, clean up jobs around the farm. It was the least I could do -- the rent was free and Penn paid the light and water bills. We bought what butane we had to buy for heat and cooking. How about this -- in 1948 I ran away from home at age 12 and spent the next four years working on farms and ranches in the west and northwest -- now twenty-two years later I was back on the farm! There were days, however, when the rain and sleet would keep me inside, only venturing out when I had to (mostly to feed the cows).

The highlight of each day was when the mail man came as we were now corresponding with Madeline Goddard regularly and always looked forward to her letters. I do not know what we would have done if it hadn't been for this wonderful person. If I live to be a hundred, I couldn't repay her!

Roger, Jr., was sixteen now and living with his grandparents in Dallas. Terry and Deanna were going to school in Waxahachie, seven miles away. They had to walk about three quarters of a mile to the school bus stop so in bad weather we would drive them to school. This was no easy job in the 1955 Ford of Penn's, which had seen better days. I certainly do not mean to sound ungrateful -- Penn Jones and his wife were wonderful to us -- we will always hold them close.

It was April when the larger house on the land in Boyce became vacant and Penn said that we could move into it. We needed the room and I would be closer to the stock and the feed for them was also in the barn near that house. Living in the bigger house was much easier and it was about this time that Penn decided to try to raise Holstein calves. There were no jobs in this small county and maybe we could make some money on this venture.

Molly, Terry, Deanna and I drove Penn's Travelall truck to Cleburne, where we picked up the calf Penn had bought on a pilot project. At three days old, the calf was a big baby at 80 pounds or more. Every morning at 7:00 a.m. Molly fixed the calf's bottle and we took turns feeding him until he decided that Molly was his mother. Cute -- but something she wasn't ready for!

We continued taking care of the cattle for several weeks and during this time two calves were born. We named one, a little bull calf, "Jones" and the other a heifer calf, Deanna named "Susie." They became her only playmates. However, I wasn't making one red cent and the only help we received was from Madeline who, God knows, was carrying the burden of feeding my family.

On May 15 a decision had to be made. It was apparent that the calf project wasn't going to materialize and Penn was talking of selling some of the land and cattle. It looked as though Penn was having financial problems and I did not want to add to them. So, Molly and I talked and decided the best thing for us was to drive to Dallas and make arrangements to stay with someone and for me to try one more time (there's that song title). We talked to my mother, who said we could move in with her until I found a job and a place to live.

As we drove back to Boyce we spoke of our apprehension about moving but when we drove into the yard we knew it was the thing to do. The front door of the house was standing wide open. I knew what was gone even before I got out of the car. I was right. The 30-40 Krag rifle (the only one I had managed to hang onto), Terry's 30.30 Winchester, which he had received as a gift, his 410 shotgun, and the 12 gauge automatic shotgun Penn had loaned me were all missing. These were our only means of protection in this place so far in the country with no telephone or close neighbors. Now we had been stripped of that. Coincidence? Maybe. I was very uneasy and the sooner we got out of there, I felt, the better.

It took two days and two sleepless nights to arrange the move but we did it and were back in Dallas and staying with my mother. By this time my physical health was somewhat improved and my mental attitude was back to normal. This was due to the words of encouragement I had received from Madeline and others who had written to us over the past months to let me know that there were people in this country who cared. I was ready for any opposition from the Political Monster which ruled Dallas and even the very lives of those so-called Business and Civic leaders who did not have the guts to stand on their own two feet! As I thought over the past years, I was even amused that I, a man of limited education and no social position in this City of Purity, had struck fear into the hearts of its great leaders by just speaking to them on the street!

Although I had not worked steadily since my termination from the Dallas County Sheriff's Department, I did not forget my obligation as an American. Thus, when asked by certain critics of the Warren Report to help, I did what I could. Imagine the turmoil it will cause when and if the Dallas Police read this and find out I have copied and turned over to a certain editor several names, addresses and telephone numbers of people connected with the assassination of John F. Kennedy which were locked in the files of the Dallas Police Intelligence Division. Not to mention the files which were photostated and smuggled out of the Dallas County Mail under Bill Decker's nose (all after I left the Sheriff's Department). Even though I have not made any money in the past few years, I hope I was able to help those who have spent so much time investigating the assassination, who certainly haven't made any money either!

The last week of May, 1970 I got lucky. The ad in the newspaper read, "Wanted Dispatcher for temporary labor company". The Company was Peakload. I quickly made a call to the chief dispatcher, with whom I had worked previously, and found he was working sixteen hours every day. He was so happy to hear from me, because of his workload, that he offered to come and get me so that I could go to work that day. The company had a new office manager, Jim Morris. I went in immediately to apply -- at the urging of the chief dispatcher, Bill Funderburke -- and for an interview with Jim Morris, the manager. He was from Ft. Worth and knew more about the assassination and me than I would have preferred (from the questions he asked me concerning Bill Decker, Jim Garrison and others who had made the news). However, the office was in trouble as they had not been able to keep an evening dispatcher for more than three or four weeks at a time since I worked there in 1969.

With a word of caution as to my activities, Jim put me to work. This made Bill very happy as the pressure was now off him. I knew the work, the customers and most of the men I would be dealing with so Peakload did not have to worry about breaking in a new man. The rest of May and early June passed uneventfully but around the middle of June Molly went into Baylor Hospital, through the clinic as we could not afford a private doctor or the high rate of regular hospital services (I had only worked a short time and we still had a balance owing on Molly's surgery in August 1969). On June 26 Molly underwent major surgery. She had been under a tremendous strain the past years and was physically and mentally exhausted.

During this period I had managed to gather enough money to buy a 1962 Ford from a friend. It was not the best car in the world but it was only a hundred and fifty dollars and it did run. I paid $50.00 down and was to pay him the rest in a month or so. I also rented a small apartment and it seemed good to once again be by ourselves in our own home. But our new found Wealth was short lived.

Shortly after this, a self-professed private detective in Dallas, by the name of Al Chapman, had written a story about new evidence in the assassination which he had sold to the National Enquirer. In this article he quoted me as saying that I had given certain information to him and had personally identified a picture of a man and car saying it was Lee Harvey Oswald and his accomplice.

The entire story, with reference to me, was completely false. I had never been interviewed by this man and had at no time seen the picture to which he referred. Al Chapman, prior to the assassination, was a custodian for a church in Oak Cliff. There is a good deal of mystery about him for he will not reveal his business or residential address. Nor is the name of the church available. Although he is a part-time private investigator, he has no license.

The story was all over the office and Jim was concerned as he had been keeping up on anything written involving these events. Before long the F.B.I. and the Dallas Police were making regular visits to the office on the pretext of looking for "Jim Jones" or "Tom Smith" or any excuse they could use to let me know they could also read! The heat was on. Jim was constantly there -- everytime I looked up -- which was unusual. This leech, this skid row bum, and I am referring to Al Chapman, in his lust for money, not caring whom he hurt, had not only sold his story but my future with Peakload as well.

On July 17, 1970, I reported for work to find another man doing my job. I was told by this "replacement" that Jim wanted to see me. As I sat in Jim's office I knew what was coming. Jim said, "Roger, you've done a good job but it is time for a change." I asked him for an explanation but all he would say was that it was time for a change and he was sorry!

Bill Decker died in August. The County Commissioners appointed his executive assistant, Clarence Jones, to fill the job until November, when he had to run for election (with the backing of the Democratic Party). For the first time since Decker's reign, the Republicans nominated someone to oppose a Democrat for the office. The man was Jack Revel, former Chief of the Dallas Police Intelligence Division. This meant that the voters had the choice between two evils. Well, Clarence Jones was elected -- his campaign signs and posters read, "Elect Clarence Jones -- In the Tradition of Bill Decker"! It would be nice if Jack Revel would be upset enough over his loss of the election to make public some information -- but this is very wishful thinking indeed.

Meanwhile, I am still out of a job (but still looking). I would like to think that the people of Dallas will change and rise up against the dishonest and irresponsible tyrants who govern in their name -- but I do not see it happening in the near future. Dallas is my home but I will always feel like an outsider because I simply will not adjust to the idea that for Dallas, for Texas, for America this must serve as democracy







A Few Odd and Interesting Facts



Allen Sweatt, Decker's Chief criminal investigator, let me know that he was aware of my friendship with Hiram Ingram and that he did not like it one bit.

Before I departed the Sheriff's Office for good Allen Sweatt and I talked a couple of times and he revealed to me that he knew Lee Harvey Oswald. He also told me that Oswald worked for the F.B.I. as an informer, that he was paid $200.00 a month and his code number was S 172. 


ROBERT PERRIN AND NANCY PERRIN RICH 

When Penn Jones wanted the records of Robert Perrin, the ex-husband of Nancy Perrin Rich, I had to find a new source of information. (I won't release this name for obvious reasons.) It seems that Nancy Perrin was connected with Jack Ruby, Clay Shaw and Lee Oswald at about the time of President Kennedy's death.

Robert Perrin was reported to have committed suicide in New Orleans, La. The autopsy showed no visible scars, marks or tattoos and Penn knew that Perrin had been arrested in Dallas and wanted me to get the records of the arrest along with his description. After some doing I finally obtained the record. It showed that Perrin had several tattoos and part of his right index finger was missing. None of this information showed up on the autopsy report. It would be interesting to know who WAS buried in Robert Perrin's place and where Robert Perrin is now, wouldn't it? 







ADDENDUM



      The favorite pastime in Dallas 

      Is a game they call murder with malice. 

      They don't ask your leave. 

      But not to deceive. . . . 

    To tell you would be -- well, too callous.




CAR ACCIDENT 

On Wednesday, October 27, 1970 I went to downtown Dallas to Jack Revel's campaign headquarters to pick up some campaign signs. The headquarters were not open and I decided to visit a friend who works at a restaurant across the street. While talking with my friend the conversation turned, as it so often does, to the assassination. He and I had discussed this in the past.

During the course of our conversation a man who I had not met before entered into the conversation. He, of course, did not know me (not to my knowledge). I told him that I was from out of town and that I was interested in facts that hadn't been printed and in persons that had known Jack Ruby and Lee Oswald. This man said, "I knew Oswald and Ruby. I can tell you anything you want to know about them."

At this point I became very interested and I told him again that I'd sure like to know first hand what they were like. He said, "I knew Ruby well -- I had seen Oswald a couple of times in Ruby's place." I then said, "Well, in Ruby's business -- the night club -- I imagine a lot of people were seen there." He sort of chuckled and said "Huh -- Jack Ruby's business was spelled Mafia." He then said, "I can show you a used car lot where Ruby collected a lot of gambling money over on Ross Avenue" (it was the 4600 block of Ross Avenue). So I offered to drive him over there and he said, "No -- do you have your car here?" I did. He said I should follow him, which I did. I parked my car on the same side of the street as the car lot, a short distance down and walked back to his car. I opened the door of his car on the passenger side and he pointed to the car lot and said, "That's where a lot of the money comes in from the gambling operation and Jack picked it up here."

He said, "If you really want to know what's going on in Dallas you have to talk to someone who's been around -- and I've been around in those circles." Then he said, "Just leave your car parked there and come with me -- I'll show you something that's REALLY interesting." He drove me to 300 1/2 South Ewing in the Oak Cliff area to an apartment that had been a family dwelling and was converted into apartment units. I should mention here that Jack Ruby's address at the time of the assassination was 323 South Ewing.

The apartment at 300 1/2 South Ewing is upstairs and when we walked into the apartment there was a distinct feeling of an unlived-in atmosphere. The furnishings were bare. There was a couch, chair and coffee table -- no lamps, no ash trays, nothing on the walls. The man had been smoking so it was odd that there were no ash trays. He said, "How about a cup of coffee?" We went into the kitchen, he opened the cabinet and said, "Oh well, I guess I'm out of coffee." He was also out of everything else as there was nothing in the cabinet.

The arrangement of the apartment was unusual as you had to go through the bedroom to the kitchen, which was very small. The closet door was open in the bedroom. However, there were no clothes in it. At that time I became slightly nervous about the situation.

We went back into the bedroom from the kitchen. While in the bedroom he said, "I want to show you something." He opened the top drawer of the dresser and pulled out a shoulder holster -- there was a 32 revolver with a three inch barrel in the shoulder holster. He pulled the 32 out of the holster and said, "what do you think about that?" I remarked that you don't see many 32's with a barrel like that. He put the 32 back in the drawer and went around to the side of the closet which was not visible when you went into the kitchen. At that time he produced two rifles -- one was a bolt action which looked like a 30.06, the other was a high power automatic which appeared to be a 257 caliber.

I remarked that they were nice rifles and I would like to have a good deer hunting rifle. He then laid those two on the bed and he said, "You haven't seen anything yet." He then got down on the floor and he pulled 5 more rifles from under the bed. Each of these were equipped with scopes. He then pulled a cardboard box about 13 inches long and 10 inches deep also from under the bed. The box was closed and on the side was printed "Ammunition -- Handle With Care." He then slid the rifles and ammunition back under the bed. I said jokingly, "What are you gonna do -- start a war?" He said, "Could be."

At that time he looked at his watch and said "excuse me just a minute, I have to go down to the landlady's apartment and make a phone call -- I promised some people I would call them" (there was no telephone in the apartment). He was gone for about ten minutes. During this time I made a mental inventory of the apartment. After he returned he asked me if I was ready to go back to my car. There was a pay phone on the corner from the apartment and I asked him to pull over so that I could call the people who owned the car (I had told him that it was borrowed while I was in Dallas), that I wanted to let them know that the car was okay. From the pay phone I called my wife and gave her the man's name and address and told her of the situation. His name -- as he gave me is A.E. Allen, 300 1/2 South Ewing, Dallas, Texas.

Before we went to his apartment, or the apartment, I told him being from out of town that I didn't know much, but that I had heard that Ruby was in the gun running business. He said that Ruby wasn't actually buying and selling weapons. That people in higher positions made the arrangements for the buying and selling of weapons. That Ruby was mainly the go-between for delivering the money and making arrangements for the storage of the weapons until they were shipped out.

During the course of the evening he made the statement several times that, "if you want to stay healthy, don't say anything to anybody in Dallas about the assassination unless you're damn sure you know who you're talking to."

He then said that there were a lot of people in Dallas who were out to "get" him because he knows too much. ?

One of the strangest things that he did was to drive on East Jefferson to a used car lot and stop. There were two men inside the office and he went in and talked to them. I stayed in the car and could see them through a window of the office. He was in there only a few minutes. His car was a light blue Oldsmobile 66 model. When he came out of the office he got into a gray Olds sitting on the lot and he drove it onto the drive stopping just before he entered the street -- he motioned to me -- I was watching him. I got out of the blue Olds and he took me back to my car in the gray Olds. ?

On the way to my car across town, he kept repeating there's a lot more to this (the assassination) than they'll ever know. In taking me to my car he cut across to Ft. Worth Avenue. While driving slowly along he pointed out certain private clubs -- saying that he wasn't allowed in one or the other. My first thought was that he was trying to give me the impression that he was knowledgeable about the workings of the Dallas underworld. However, it really seems that he was using a delaying measure -- since it took from 10:00 p.m. until 11:15 p.m. to drive me to my car -- an ordinary 15 minute drive at that time.

When I got out of his car at mine he said, "I'll call you tomorrow." Earlier in the evening he had implied he was going to give me more information. I had given him a number to reach me by. Needless to say I did not hear from him after the incident that followed!

I had locked my car when I parked it. When I got into it I turned the key over to start the engine. At this point there was a muffled type explosion and then smoke came out the sides of the hood. The hood had a double latch and didn't blow. Fire was coming through the air vents under the dash and a pillow was burning inside the car.

I jumped out of the car and raised the hood. The engine, hoses, firewall and even under the bell housing was all ablaze. Several persons came up and someone called the fire department. A man named Bill Booken was walking by at about the time it happened. The fire department used 2 cans of chemical to extinguish the fire. This was one of the hottest fires I had ever seen. There was no smell of gasoline before or after, there was no back fire as the car had not started and afterwards the gas lines were checked and there were no leaks. There was an air breather on the car and in fact, there was no mechanical reason for the explosion.

This happened at 4625 Ross Avenue. Mr. Booken took me to Anderson's Restaurant at 4909 Ross Avenue where I called my wife and she arranged for my brother Duane to come after me. I didn't know that I had been injured until I felt the warm blood running down my shirt after my brother picked me up. I had lost quite a lot of blood by the time I went to the emergency room. I was there for three hours. A police report was made. I had received 5 puncture type wounds in the chest area. One vein had been severed and had to be tied and stitches taken in the wounds. X-rays were also made. I went to our family physician the following day and had the stitches removed the following Monday. It was never completely determined what hit me. Another close call! The doctor at the emergency room said I was lucky the wounds had not been lower and our family physician said I was lucky the wounds were not in the neck. So . . . I suppose I'm just lucky all the way round!

 ___

Related:

JFK Murder Truth telling
http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2013/11/jfk-murder-truth-telling-heading-to-the-grassy-knoll-on-november-22nd-50th-anniversary.html

November 19, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Congressman Ron Paul's Farewell Speech to Congress

Teknosis needs your help. * Ways to help Teknosis

___

 

Post main:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q03cWio-zjk

Full Speech Transcript:

By Ron Paul | Delivered on the House Floor, November 14, 2012

Farewell to Congress


This may well be the last time I speak on the House Floor. At the end of the year I’ll leave Congress after 23 years in office over a 36 year period. My goals in 1976 were the same as they are today: promote peace and prosperity by a strict adherence to the principles of individual liberty.


It was my opinion, that the course the U.S. embarked on in the latter part of the 20th Century would bring us a major financial crisis and engulf us in a foreign policy that would overextend us and undermine our national security.


To achieve the goals I sought, government would have had to shrink in size and scope, reduce spending, change the monetary system, and reject the unsustainable costs of policing the world and expanding the American Empire.
The problems seemed to be overwhelming and impossible to solve, yet from my view point, just following the constraints placed on the federal government by the Constitution would have been a good place to start.

How Much Did I Accomplish?


In many ways, according to conventional wisdom, my off-and-on career in Congress, from 1976 to 2012, accomplished very little. No named legislation, no named federal buildings or highways—thank goodness. In spite of my efforts, the government has grown exponentially, taxes remain excessive, and the prolific increase of incomprehensible regulations continues. Wars are constant and pursued without Congressional declaration, deficits rise to the sky, poverty is rampant and dependency on the federal government is now worse than any time in our history.

All this with minimal concerns for the deficits and unfunded liabilities that common sense tells us cannot go on much longer. A grand, but never mentioned, bipartisan agreement allows for the well-kept secret that keeps the spending going. One side doesn’t give up one penny on military spending, the other side doesn’t give up one penny on welfare spending, while both sides support the bailouts and subsidies for the banking and corporate elite. And the spending continues as the economy weakens and the downward spiral continues. As the government continues fiddling around, our liberties and our wealth burn in the flames of a foreign policy that makes us less safe.


The major stumbling block to real change in Washington is the total resistance to admitting that the country is broke. This has made compromising, just to agree to increase spending, inevitable since neither side has any intention of cutting spending.

The country and the Congress will remain divisive since there’s no “loot left to divvy up.” 

Without this recognition the spenders in Washington will continue the march toward a fiscal cliff much bigger than the one anticipated this coming January.
I have thought a lot about why those of us who believe in liberty, as a solution, have done so poorly in convincing others of its benefits. If liberty is what we claim it is- the principle that protects all personal, social and economic decisions necessary for maximum prosperity and the best chance for peace- it should be an easy sell. Yet, history has shown that the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which are rarely if ever fulfilled.

Authoritarianism vs. Liberty


If authoritarianism leads to poverty and war and less freedom for all individuals and is controlled by rich special interests, the people should be begging for liberty. There certainly was a strong enough sentiment for more freedom at the time of our founding that motivated those who were willing to fight in the revolution against the powerful British government.


During my time in Congress the appetite for liberty has been quite weak; the understanding of its significance negligible. Yet the good news is that compared to 1976 when I first came to Congress, the desire for more freedom and less government in 2012 is much greater and growing, especially in grassroots America. Tens of thousands of teenagers and college age students are, with great enthusiasm, welcoming the message of liberty. 


I have a few thoughts as to why the people of a country like ours, once the freest and most prosperous, allowed the conditions to deteriorate to the degree that they have.

Freedom, private property, and enforceable voluntary contracts, generate wealth. In our early history we were very much aware of this. But in the early part of the 20th century our politicians promoted the notion that the tax and monetary systems had to change if we were to involve ourselves in excessive domestic and military spending. That is why Congress gave us the Federal Reserve and the income tax. The majority of Americans and many government officials agreed that sacrificing some liberty was necessary to carry out what some claimed to be “progressive” ideas. Pure democracy became acceptable.


They failed to recognized that what they were doing was exactly opposite of what the colonists were seeking when they broke away from the British.
Some complain that my arguments makes no sense, since great wealth and the standard of living improved for many Americans over the last 100 years, even with these new policies.


But the damage to the market economy, and the currency, has been insidious and steady. It took a long time to consume our wealth, destroy the currency and undermine productivity and get our financial obligations to a point of no return. Confidence sometimes lasts longer than deserved. Most of our wealth today depends on debt.

The wealth that we enjoyed and seemed to be endless, allowed concern for the principle of a free society to be neglected. As long as most people believed the material abundance would last forever, worrying about protecting a competitive productive economy and individual liberty seemed unnecessary.

The Age of Redistribution


This neglect ushered in an age of redistribution of wealth by government kowtowing to any and all special interests, except for those who just wanted to left alone. That is why today money in politics far surpasses money currently going into research and development and productive entrepreneurial efforts.
The material benefits became more important than the understanding and promoting the principles of liberty and a free market. It is good that material abundance is a result of liberty but if materialism is all that we care about, problems are guaranteed.

The crisis arrived because the illusion that wealth and prosperity would last forever has ended. Since it was based on debt and a pretense that debt can be papered over by an out-of-control fiat monetary system, it was doomed to fail. We have ended up with a system that doesn’t produce enough even to finance the debt and no fundamental understanding of why a free society is crucial to reversing these trends.

If this is not recognized, the recovery will linger for a long time. Bigger government, more spending, more debt, more poverty for the middle class, and a more intense scramble by the elite special interests will continue.

We Need an Intellectual Awakening


Without an intellectual awakening, the turning point will be driven by economic law. A dollar crisis will bring the current out-of-control system to its knees.
If it’s not accepted that big government, fiat money, ignoring liberty, central economic planning, welfarism, and warfarism caused our crisis we can expect a continuous and dangerous march toward corporatism and even fascism with even more loss of our liberties. Prosperity for a large middle class though will become an abstract dream.

This continuous move is no different than what we have seen in how our financial crisis of 2008 was handled. Congress first directed, with bipartisan support, bailouts for the wealthy. Then it was the Federal Reserve with its endless quantitative easing. If at first it doesn’t succeed try again; QE1, QE2, and QE3 and with no results we try QE indefinitely—that is until it too fails. There’s a cost to all of this and let me assure you delaying the payment is no longer an option. The rules of the market will extract its pound of flesh and it won’t be pretty.


The current crisis elicits a lot of pessimism. And the pessimism adds to less confidence in the future. The two feed on themselves, making our situation worse.

If the underlying cause of the crisis is not understood we cannot solve our problems. The issues of warfare, welfare, deficits, inflationism, corporatism, bailouts and authoritarianism cannot be ignored. By only expanding these policies we cannot expect good results.

Everyone claims support for freedom. But too often it’s for one’s own freedom and not for others. Too many believe that there must be limits on freedom. They argue that freedom must be directed and managed to achieve fairness and equality thus making it acceptable to curtail, through force, certain liberties.
Some decide what and whose freedoms are to be limited. These are the politicians whose goal in life is power. Their success depends on gaining support from special interests.

No More ‘isms’


The great news is the answer is not to be found in more “isms.” The answers are to be found in more liberty which cost so much less. Under these circumstances spending goes down, wealth production goes up, and the quality of life improves.


Just this recognition—especially if we move in this direction—increases optimism which in itself is beneficial. The follow through with sound policies are required which must be understood and supported by the people.

But there is good evidence that the generation coming of age at the present time is supportive of moving in the direction of more liberty and self-reliance. The more this change in direction and the solutions become known, the quicker will be the return of optimism.

Our job, for those of us who believe that a different system than the one that we have had for the last 100 years, has driven us to this unsustainable crisis, is to be more convincing that there is a wonderful, uncomplicated, and moral system that provides the answers. We had a taste of it in our early history. We need not give up on the notion of advancing this cause.

It worked, but we allowed our leaders to concentrate on the material abundance that freedom generates, while ignoring freedom itself. Now we have neither, but the door is open, out of necessity, for an answer. The answer available is based on the Constitution, individual liberty and prohibiting the use of government force to provide privileges and benefits to all special interests.

After over 100 years we face a society quite different from the one that was intended by the Founders. In many ways their efforts to protect future generations with the Constitution from this danger has failed. Skeptics, at the time the Constitution was written in 1787, warned us of today’s possible outcome. The insidious nature of the erosion of our liberties and the reassurance our great abundance gave us, allowed the process to evolve into the dangerous period in which we now live.

Dependency on Government Largesse


Today we face a dependency on government largesse for almost every need. Our liberties are restricted and government operates outside the rule of law, protecting and rewarding those who buy or coerce government into satisfying their demands. Here are a few examples:


Undeclared wars are commonplace. 
Welfare for the rich and poor is considered an entitlement. 
The economy is overregulated, overtaxed and grossly distorted by a deeply flawed monetary system. 
Debt is growing exponentially. 
The Patriot Act and FISA legislation passed without much debate have resulted in a steady erosion of our 4th Amendment rights. 
Tragically our government engages in preemptive war, otherwise known as aggression, with no complaints from the American people. 
The drone warfare we are pursuing worldwide is destined to end badly for us as the hatred builds for innocent lives lost and the international laws flaunted. Once we are financially weakened and militarily challenged, there will be a lot resentment thrown our way. 
It’s now the law of the land that the military can arrest American citizens, hold them indefinitely, without charges or a trial. 
Rampant hostility toward free trade is supported by a large number in Washington. 
Supporters of sanctions, currency manipulation and WTO trade retaliation, call the true free traders “isolationists.” 
Sanctions are used to punish countries that don’t follow our orders. 
Bailouts and guarantees for all kinds of misbehavior are routine. 
Central economic planning through monetary policy, regulations and legislative mandates has been an acceptable policy.
Questions
Excessive government has created such a mess it prompts many questions:
Why are sick people who use medical marijuana put in prison? 
Why does the federal government restrict the drinking of raw milk? 
Why can’t Americans manufacturer rope and other products from hemp? 
Why are Americans not allowed to use gold and silver as legal tender as mandated by the Constitution? 
Why is Germany concerned enough to consider repatriating their gold held by the FED for her in New York? Is it that the trust in the U.S. and dollar supremacy beginning to wane? 
Why do our political leaders believe it’s unnecessary to thoroughly audit our own gold? 
Why can’t Americans decide which type of light bulbs they can buy? 
Why is the TSA permitted to abuse the rights of any American traveling by air? 
Why should there be mandatory sentences—even up to life for crimes without victims—as our drug laws require? 
Why have we allowed the federal government to regulate commodes in our homes? 
Why is it political suicide for anyone to criticize AIPAC ? 
Why haven’t we given up on the drug war since it’s an obvious failure and violates the people’s rights? Has nobody noticed that the authorities can’t even keep drugs out of the prisons? How can making our entire society a prison solve the problem? 
Why do we sacrifice so much getting needlessly involved in border disputes and civil strife around the world and ignore the root cause of the most deadly border in the world-the one between Mexico and the US? 
Why does Congress willingly give up its prerogatives to the Executive Branch? 
Why does changing the party in power never change policy? Could it be that the views of both parties are essentially the same? 
Why did the big banks, the large corporations, and foreign banks and foreign central banks get bailed out in 2008 and the middle class lost their jobs and their homes? 
Why do so many in the government and the federal officials believe that creating money out of thin air creates wealth? 
Why do so many accept the deeply flawed principle that government bureaucrats and politicians can protect us from ourselves without totally destroying the principle of liberty? 
Why can’t people understand that war always destroys wealth and liberty? 
Why is there so little concern for the Executive Order that gives the President authority to establish a “kill list,” including American citizens, of those targeted for assassination? 
Why is patriotism thought to be blind loyalty to the government and the politicians who run it, rather than loyalty to the principles of liberty and support for the people? Real patriotism is a willingness to challenge the government when it’s wrong. 
Why is it is claimed that if people won’t or can’t take care of their own needs, that people in government can do it for them? 
Why did we ever give the government a safe haven for initiating violence against the people? 
Why do some members defend free markets, but not civil liberties? 
Why do some members defend civil liberties but not free markets? Aren’t they the same? 
Why don’t more defend both economic liberty and personal liberty? 
Why are there not more individuals who seek to intellectually influence others to bring about positive changes than those who seek power to force others to obey their commands? 
Why does the use of religion to support a social gospel and preemptive wars, both of which requires authoritarians to use violence, or the threat of violence, go unchallenged? Aggression and forced redistribution of wealth has nothing to do with the teachings of the world great religions. 
Why do we allow the government and the Federal Reserve to disseminate false information dealing with both economic and foreign policy? 
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? 
Why should anyone be surprised that Congress has no credibility, since there’s such a disconnect between what politicians say and what they do? 
Is there any explanation for all the deception, the unhappiness, the fear of the future, the loss of confidence in our leaders, the distrust, the anger and frustration? Yes there is, and there’s a way to reverse these attitudes. The negative perceptions are logical and a consequence of bad policies bringing about our problems. Identification of the problems and recognizing the cause allow the proper changes to come easy.
Trust Yourself, Not the Government
Too many people have for too long placed too much confidence and trust in government and not enough in themselves. Fortunately, many are now becoming aware of the seriousness of the gross mistakes of the past several decades. The blame is shared by both political parties. Many Americans now are demanding to hear the plain truth of things and want the demagoguing to stop. Without this first step, solutions are impossible.
Seeking the truth and finding the answers in liberty and self-reliance promotes the optimism necessary for restoring prosperity. The task is not that difficult if politics doesn’t get in the way.

We have allowed ourselves to get into such a mess for various reasons.
Politicians deceive themselves as to how wealth is produced. Excessive confidence is placed in the judgment of politicians and bureaucrats. This replaces the confidence in a free society. Too many in high places of authority became convinced that only they, armed with arbitrary government power, can bring about fairness, while facilitating wealth production. This always proves to be a utopian dream and destroys wealth and liberty. It impoverishes the people and rewards the special interests who end up controlling both political parties.
It’s no surprise then that much of what goes on in Washington is driven by aggressive partisanship and power seeking, with philosophic differences being minor.

Economic Ignorance


Economic ignorance is commonplace. Keynesianism continues to thrive, although today it is facing healthy and enthusiastic rebuttals. Believers in military Keynesianism and domestic Keynesianism continue to desperately promote their failed policies, as the economy languishes in a deep slumber.
Supporters of all government edicts use humanitarian arguments to justify them.
Humanitarian arguments are always used to justify government mandates related to the economy, monetary policy, foreign policy, and personal liberty. This is on purpose to make it more difficult to challenge. But, initiating violence for humanitarian reasons is still violence. Good intentions are no excuse and are just as harmful as when people use force with bad intentions. The results are always negative.

The immoral use of force is the source of man’s political problems. Sadly, many religious groups, secular organizations, and psychopathic authoritarians endorse government initiated force to change the world. Even when the desired goals are well-intentioned—or especially when well-intentioned—the results are dismal. The good results sought never materialize. The new problems created require even more government force as a solution. The net result is institutionalizing government initiated violence and morally justifying it on humanitarian grounds.


This is the same fundamental reason our government uses force for invading other countries at will, central economic planning at home, and the regulation of personal liberty and habits of our citizens.

It is rather strange, that unless one has a criminal mind and no respect for other people and their property, no one claims it’s permissible to go into one’s neighbor’s house and tell them how to behave, what they can eat, smoke and drink or how to spend their money.

Yet, rarely is it asked why it is morally acceptable that a stranger with a badge and a gun can do the same thing in the name of law and order. Any resistance is met with brute force, fines, taxes, arrests, and even imprisonment. This is done more frequently every day without a proper search warrant.

No Government Monopoly over Initiating Violence


Restraining aggressive behavior is one thing, but legalizing a government monopoly for initiating aggression can only lead to exhausting liberty associated with chaos, anger and the breakdown of civil society. Permitting such authority and expecting saintly behavior from the bureaucrats and the politicians is a pipe dream. We now have a standing army of armed bureaucrats in the TSA, CIA, FBI, Fish and Wildlife, FEMA, IRS, Corp of Engineers, etc. numbering over 100,000. Citizens are guilty until proven innocent in the unconstitutional administrative courts. 


Government in a free society should have no authority to meddle in social activities or the economic transactions of individuals. Nor should government meddle in the affairs of other nations. All things peaceful, even when controversial, should be permitted.

We must reject the notion of prior restraint in economic activity just we do in the area of free speech and religious liberty. But even in these areas government is starting to use a backdoor approach of political correctness to regulate speech-a dangerous trend. Since 9/11 monitoring speech on the internet is now a problem since warrants are no longer required.

The Proliferation of Federal Crimes


The Constitution established four federal crimes. Today the experts can’t even agree on how many federal crimes are now on the books—they number into the thousands. No one person can comprehend the enormity of the legal system—especially the tax code. Due to the ill-advised drug war and the endless federal expansion of the criminal code we have over 6 million people under correctional suspension, more than the Soviets ever had, and more than any other nation today, including China. I don’t understand the complacency of the Congress and the willingness to continue their obsession with passing more Federal laws. Mandatory sentencing laws associated with drug laws have compounded our prison problems.

The federal register is now 75,000 pages long and the tax code has 72,000 pages, and expands every year. When will the people start shouting, “enough is enough,” and demand Congress cease and desist.

Achieving Liberty


Liberty can only be achieved when government is denied the aggressive use of force. If one seeks liberty, a precise type of government is needed. To achieve it, more than lip service is required.

Two choices are available.
1. A government designed to protect liberty—a natural right—as its sole objective. The people are expected to care for themselves and reject the use of any force for interfering with another person’s liberty. Government is given a strictly limited authority to enforce contracts, property ownership, settle disputes, and defend against foreign aggression.

2. A government that pretends to protect liberty but is granted power to arbitrarily use force over the people and foreign nations. Though the grant of power many times is meant to be small and limited, it inevitably metastasizes into an omnipotent political cancer. This is the problem for which the world has suffered throughout the ages. Though meant to be limited it nevertheless is a 100% sacrifice of a principle that would-be-tyrants find irresistible. It is used vigorously—though incrementally and insidiously. Granting power to government officials always proves the adage that: “power corrupts.”

Once government gets a limited concession for the use of force to mold people habits and plan the economy, it causes a steady move toward tyrannical government. Only a revolutionary spirit can reverse the process and deny to the government this arbitrary use of aggression. There’s no in-between. Sacrificing a little liberty for imaginary safety always ends badly.


Today’s mess is a result of Americans accepting option #2, even though the Founders attempted to give us Option #1.


The results are not good. As our liberties have been eroded our wealth has been consumed. The wealth we see today is based on debt and a foolish willingness on the part of foreigners to take our dollars for goods and services. They then loan them back to us to perpetuate our debt system. It’s amazing that it has worked for this long but the impasse in Washington, in solving our problems indicate that many are starting to understand the seriousness of the world -wide debt crisis and the dangers we face. The longer this process continues the harsher the outcome will be.

The Financial Crisis Is a Moral Crisis


Many are now acknowledging that a financial crisis looms but few understand it’s, in reality, a moral crisis. It’s the moral crisis that has allowed our liberties to be undermined and permits the exponential growth of illegal government power. Without a clear understanding of the nature of the crisis it will be difficult to prevent a steady march toward tyranny and the poverty that will accompany it.
Ultimately, the people have to decide which form of government they want; option #1 or option #2. There is no other choice. Claiming there is a choice of a “little” tyranny is like describing pregnancy as a “touch of pregnancy.” It is a myth to believe that a mixture of free markets and government central economic planning is a worthy compromise. What we see today is a result of that type of thinking. And the results speak for themselves.

A Culture of Violence 


American now suffers from a culture of violence. It’s easy to reject the initiation of violence against one’s neighbor but it’s ironic that the people arbitrarily and freely anoint government officials with monopoly power to initiate violence against the American people—practically at will.

Because it’s the government that initiates force, most people accept it as being legitimate. Those who exert the force have no sense of guilt. It is believed by too many that governments are morally justified in initiating force supposedly to “do good.” They incorrectly believe that this authority has come from the “consent of the people.” The minority, or victims of government violence never consented to suffer the abuse of government mandates, even when dictated by the majority. Victims of TSA excesses never consented to this abuse.

This attitude has given us a policy of initiating war to “do good,” as well. It is claimed that war, to prevent war for noble purposes, is justified. This is similar to what we were once told that: “destroying a village to save a village” was justified. It was said by a US Secretary of State that the loss of 500,000 Iraqis, mostly children, in the 1990s, as a result of American bombs and sanctions, was “worth it” to achieve the “good” we brought to the Iraqi people. And look at the mess that Iraq is in today.

Government use of force to mold social and economic behavior at home and abroad has justified individuals using force on their own terms. The fact that violence by government is seen as morally justified, is the reason why violence will increase when the big financial crisis hits and becomes a political crisis as well. 

First, we recognize that individuals shouldn’t initiate violence, then we give the authority to government. Eventually, the immoral use of government violence, when things goes badly, will be used to justify an individual’s “right” to do the same thing. Neither the government nor individuals have the moral right to initiate violence against another yet we are moving toward the day when both will claim this authority. If this cycle is not reversed society will break down.
When needs are pressing, conditions deteriorate and rights become relative to the demands and the whims of the majority. It’s then not a great leap for individuals to take it upon themselves to use violence to get what they claim is theirs. As the economy deteriorates and the wealth discrepancies increase—as are already occurring— violence increases as those in need take it in their own hands to get what they believe is theirs. They will not wait for a government rescue program.


When government officials wield power over others to bail out the special interests, even with disastrous results to the average citizen, they feel no guilt for the harm they do. Those who take us into undeclared wars with many casualties resulting, never lose sleep over the death and destruction their bad decisions caused. They are convinced that what they do is morally justified, and the fact that many suffer just can’t be helped.

When the street criminals do the same thing, they too have no remorse, believing they are only taking what is rightfully theirs. All moral standards become relative. Whether it’s bailouts, privileges, government subsidies or benefits for some from inflating a currency, it’s all part of a process justified by a philosophy of forced redistribution of wealth. Violence, or a threat of such, is the instrument required and unfortunately is of little concern of most members of Congress.

Some argue it’s only a matter of “fairness” that those in need are cared for. There are two problems with this. First, the principle is used to provide a greater amount of benefits to the rich than the poor. Second, no one seems to be concerned about whether or not it’s fair to those who end up paying for the benefits. The costs are usually placed on the backs of the middle class and are hidden from the public eye. Too many people believe government handouts are free; like printing money out of thin air, and there is no cost. That deception is coming to an end. The bills are coming due and that’s what the economic slowdown is all about.

Sadly, we have become accustomed to living with the illegitimate use of force by government. It is the tool for telling the people how to live, what to eat and drink, what to read and how to spend their money.

To develop a truly free society, the issue of initiating force must be understood and rejected. Granting to government even a small amount of force is a dangerous concession.

Limiting Government Excesses vs. a Virtuous Moral People


Our Constitution, which was intended to limit government power and abuse, has failed. The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people. The current crisis reflects that their concerns were justified.

Most politicians and pundits are aware of the problems we face but spend all their time in trying to reform government. The sad part is that the suggested reforms almost always lead to less freedom and the importance of a virtuous and moral people is either ignored, or not understood. The new reforms serve only to further undermine liberty. The compounding effect has given us this steady erosion of liberty and the massive expansion of debt. The real question is: if it is liberty we seek, should most of the emphasis be placed on government reform or trying to understand what “a virtuous and moral people” means and how to promote it. The Constitution has not prevented the people from demanding handouts for both rich and poor in their efforts to reform the government, while ignoring the principles of a free society. All branches of our government today are controlled by individuals who use their power to undermine liberty and enhance the welfare/warfare state-and frequently their own wealth and power.
If the people are unhappy with the government performance it must be recognized that government is merely a reflection of an immoral society that rejected a moral government of constitutional limitations of power and love of freedom.

If this is the problem all the tinkering with thousands of pages of new laws and regulations will do nothing to solve the problem.


It is self-evident that our freedoms have been severely limited and the apparent prosperity we still have, is nothing more than leftover wealth from a previous time. This fictitious wealth based on debt and benefits from a false trust in our currency and credit, will play havoc with our society when the bills come due. This means that the full consequence of our lost liberties is yet to be felt.
But that illusion is now ending. Reversing a downward spiral depends on accepting a new approach.

Expect the rapidly expanding home-schooling movement to play a significant role in the revolutionary reforms needed to build a free society with Constitutional protections. We cannot expect a Federal government controlled school system to provide the intellectual ammunition to combat the dangerous growth of government that threatens our liberties.

The internet will provide the alternative to the government/media complex that controls the news and most political propaganda. This is why it’s essential that the internet remains free of government regulation.

Many of our religious institutions and secular organizations support greater dependency on the state by supporting war, welfare and corporatism and ignore the need for a virtuous people.

I never believed that the world or our country could be made more free by politicians, if the people had no desire for freedom.

Under the current circumstances the most we can hope to achieve in the political process is to use it as a podium to reach the people to alert them of the nature of the crisis and the importance of their need to assume responsibility for themselves, if it is liberty that they truly seek. Without this, a constitutionally protected free society is impossible.


If this is true, our individual goal in life ought to be for us to seek virtue and excellence and recognize that self-esteem and happiness only comes from using one’s natural ability, in the most productive manner possible, according to one’s own talents.

Productivity and creativity are the true source of personal satisfaction. Freedom, and not dependency, provides the environment needed to achieve these goals. Government cannot do this for us; it only gets in the way. When the government gets involved, the goal becomes a bailout or a subsidy and these cannot provide a sense of personal achievement. 

Achieving legislative power and political influence should not be our goal. Most of the change, if it is to come, will not come from the politicians, but rather from individuals, family, friends, intellectual leaders and our religious institutions. The solution can only come from rejecting the use of coercion, compulsion, government commands, and aggressive force, to mold social and economic behavior. Without accepting these restraints, inevitably the consensus will be to allow the government to mandate economic equality and obedience to the politicians who gain power and promote an environment that smothers the freedoms of everyone. It is then that the responsible individuals who seek excellence and self-esteem by being self-reliance and productive, become the true victims.

Conclusion 


What are the greatest dangers that the American people face today and impede the goal of a free society? There are five. 
1. The continuous attack on our civil liberties which threatens
the rule of law and our ability to resist the onrush of tyranny. 
2. Violent anti-Americanism that has engulfed the world. Because the phenomenon of “blow-back” is not understood or denied, our foreign policy is destined to keep us involved in many wars that we have no business being in. National bankruptcy and a greater threat to our national security will result. 
3. The ease in which we go to war, without a declaration by Congress, but accepting international authority from the UN or NATO even for preemptive wars, otherwise known as aggression. 
4. A financial political crisis as a consequence of excessive debt, unfunded liabilities, spending, bailouts, and gross discrepancy in wealth distribution going from the middle class to the rich. The danger of central economic planning, by the Federal Reserve must be understood. 
5. World government taking over local and US sovereignty by getting involved in the issues of war, welfare, trade, banking, a world currency, taxes, property ownership, and private ownership of guns. 
Happily, there is an answer for these very dangerous trends. 

What a wonderful world it would be if everyone accepted the simple moral premise of rejecting all acts of aggression. The retort to such a suggestion is always: it’s too simplistic, too idealistic, impractical, naïve, utopian, dangerous, and unrealistic to strive for such an ideal. 

The answer to that is that for thousands of years the acceptance of government force, to rule over the people, at the sacrifice of liberty, was considered moral and the only available option for achieving peace and prosperity. 

What could be more utopian than that myth—considering the results especially looking at the state sponsored killing, by nearly every government during the 20th Century, estimated to be in the hundreds of millions. It’s time to reconsider this grant of authority to the state.

No good has ever come from granting monopoly power to the state to use aggression against the people to arbitrarily mold human behavior. Such power, when left unchecked, becomes the seed of an ugly tyranny. This method of governance has been adequately tested, and the results are in: reality dictates we try liberty.

The idealism of non-aggression and rejecting all offensive use of force should be tried. The idealism of government-sanctioned violence has been abused throughout history and is the primary source of poverty and war. The theory of a society being based on individual freedom has been around for a long time. It’s time to take a bold step and actually permit it by advancing this cause, rather than taking a step backwards as some would like us to do.

Today the principle of habeas corpus, established when King John signed the Magna Carta in 1215, is under attack. There’s every reason to believe that a renewed effort with the use of the internet that we can instead advance the cause of liberty by spreading an uncensored message that will serve to rein in government authority and challenge the obsession with war and welfare. 
What I’m talking about is a system of government guided by the moral principles of peace and tolerance. 

The Founders were convinced that a free society could not exist without a moral people. Just writing rules won’t work if the people choose to ignore them. Today the rule of law written in the Constitution has little meaning for most Americans, especially those who work in Washington DC.

Benjamin Franklin claimed “only a virtuous people are capable of freedom.” John Adams concurred: “Our Constitution was made for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

A moral people must reject all violence in an effort to mold people’s beliefs or habits.


A society that boos or ridicules the Golden Rule is not a moral society. All great religions endorse the Golden Rule. The same moral standards that individuals are required to follow should apply to all government officials. They cannot be exempt.

The ultimate solution is not in the hands of the government.
The solution falls on each and every individual, with guidance from family, friends and community.

The #1 responsibility for each of us is to change ourselves with hope that others will follow. This is of greater importance than working on changing the government; that is secondary to promoting a virtuous society. If we can achieve this, then the government will change.

It doesn’t mean that political action or holding office has no value. At times it does nudge policy in the right direction. But what is true is that when seeking office is done for personal aggrandizement, money or power, it becomes useless if not harmful. When political action is taken for the right reasons it’s easy to understand why compromise should be avoided. It also becomes clear why progress is best achieved by working with coalitions, which bring people together, without anyone sacrificing his principles. 

Political action, to be truly beneficial, must be directed toward changing the hearts and minds of the people, recognizing that it’s the virtue and morality of the people that allow liberty to flourish.

The Constitution or more laws per se, have no value if the people’s attitudes aren’t changed. 

To achieve liberty and peace, two powerful human emotions have to be overcome. Number one is “envy” which leads to hate and class warfare. Number two is “intolerance” which leads to bigoted and judgemental policies. These emotions must be replaced with a much better understanding of love, compassion, tolerance and free market economics. Freedom, when understood, brings people together. When tried, freedom is popular. 

The problem we have faced over the years has been that economic interventionists are swayed by envy, whereas social interventionists are swayed by intolerance of habits and lifestyles. The misunderstanding that tolerance is an endorsement of certain activities, motivates many to legislate moral standards which should only be set by individuals making their own choices. Both sides use force to deal with these misplaced emotions. Both are authoritarians. Neither endorses voluntarism. Both views ought to be rejected.

I have come to one firm conviction after these many years of trying to figure out “the plain truth of things.” The best chance for achieving peace and prosperity, for the maximum number of people world-wide, is to pursue the cause of LIBERTY.


If you find this to be a worthwhile message, spread it throughout the land.

 

November 19, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Death Ray: Conspiracy Theory w/ Jesse Ventura, more., + interviewed on Alex Jones Show

Teknosis needs your help. * Ways to help Teknosis

___

 

Post main:

 

Death Ray: Conspiracy Theory

with Jesse Ventura

 

 

http://youtu.be/6AiFL9FSz-E

Ref: http://www.forbiddenknowledgetv.com/videos/dr-judy-wood/death-ray-conspiracy-theorywith--jesse-ventura.html

 

Directed Energy Weapons:

Is This What Became of Star Wars?

Published by zeemonkey10

November 15, 2012 

 

A lethal weapon that can vaporize targets and whole cities from miles away seems like the stuff of sci-fi movies, but Jesse and his team find that this technology could be all

too real. Jesse Ventura's Conspiracy Theory interviews the real heavy-hitters of this story: Dr. Judy Woods and John Hutchison.

 

Ventura says he doesn't know how the WTC towers were brought down but the use of this technology makes the most sense.

 

A much-watch presentation!

 

"Venus shooter"'Where Did the Towers Go?'10-12 murders of 9/11 contractors22 murders of SDI scientists9/11Brian O'LearyDeath RayDEWDirected Energy WeaponsDr Judy Woodsdustificationdustifiedfast-moving cancerFred Bellion cannonsIraqJohn HutchisonOliver StoneTesla,toasted carsTom BeardenTruTVWilliam LyneWTC

 

___

 

Also:

 

Richard.D.Hall interviews Dr Judy Wood on 9/11 truth. (two interviews on same show, first interview begins around 37:40, then after watching to the end go to the beginning of video to see the 2nd interview)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udDkMP4MF6A&feature=plcp

 

___

 

Directed Energy Technology

 

Of notable mention: Watch the "spire" turn to dust.

 

http://youtu.be/bmmQ6OWMHTI

 

  • Everyone is allowed their opinions.But the trolling continues.Funny how no one mentions the video of the experiment on the piece of iron.Faked?Funny how no one in the responses mentions the video of the car handles that appear to be smoking and are blocks away from ground zero.Faked? Can anyone here show ''they'' have a Masters or PhD degree(s) in her field?Thought not.Paranoid? I have my eyes wide open.My ear to the ground.Whack job?I'm sure some considered Einstein a whack job too.Wake up ppl.
    stoker187 1 day ago 
     Reply
  • exposethebunk.... is a.... SHILL.... attempting to muddy the waters ..he knows the truth but gets paid to disseminate lies and confusion. A vehicle cannot burn in the interior and produce enough heat to buckle the doors and not melt the plastic lights on top. Also the fuel lines running from back to front would ignite the fuel tank...
    savydude1 3 weeks ago 

 

___

 

9/11, The Hutchison Effect, & Directed Energy Weapons (7 parts)

 

http://youtu.be/OpFCQfr2fDk

 

http://youtu.be/YjtJrdGWNcQ

 

http://youtu.be/KzhbV84TTCU

 

http://youtu.be/fqiM1qtTxgU

 

http://youtu.be/xJfH9NYURew

 

http://youtu.be/Hrqby6iknNU

 

http://youtu.be/a2dptor24i0

 

___

 

Jesse Ventura: Secrets of Tesla's "Death Ray" Revealed (interviewed on Alex Jones Show)

 

http://youtu.be/Va6mVyZPwJo

November 17, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Free David R Hinkson, political prisoner of the United States of America

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/447/928/342/free-david-r-hinkson-political-prisoner-of-the-united-states-of-america/

__

Related:

Blowing Whistles At Hurricanes - The Coming Storm

http://tekgnosis.typepad.com/tekgnosis/2014/05/blowing-whistles-at-hurricanes-from-44202086-modeleski-mitchell-paul-unit-set-d-c-given-name-also-a-.html

November 16, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Re: Private Attorney General writes to John Pilger re: Dr. Rafil Dhafir, political prisoner and "The End of Justice in America," by John Pilger (11/7/2012) / BY UPPER-CASING HYPER-LINKS, YOUR SOFTWARE CORRUPTS OUR LINKS (????)

Teknosis needs your help. * Ways to help Teknosis

___

 

Post main:

 

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/united.states.notice.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/opm/letter.2012-08-06/

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/registered.agent.2007-02-12.gif
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp/registered.agent.2007-02-12.gif

cute!  REAL CUTE!!
 

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Supreme Law Firm <paulandrewmitchell2004@yahoo.com>
To: "joe@freedomabovefortune.com" <joe@freedomabovefortune.com>
Cc: "supremelaw@googlegroups.com" <supremelaw@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 7:57 PM
Subject: Re: Private Attorney General writes to John Pilger re: Dr. Rafil Dhafir, political prisoner and "The End of Justice in America," by John Pilger (11/7/2012)

 

Greetings Michael Babige:
Evidently, Joe has not yet shared with you any evidence
of the help I provided to him, behind the scenes, back in 2003 e.g.:
(CO ordered that "star chamber" moved OFF Coast Guard Island)
Also, I exposed William B. Shubb for failing to exhibit
a valid license to practice law in California, along
with 200,000+ other "members" of The State Bar of California:
(48 UNlicensed ATTORNeys fell totally silent)
Also, Bernhoft's associate, Daniel James Treuden, SBN #269351
is another UNlicensed California ATTORNey:
And, I am the author of "The Federal Zone" -- first published in 1992
(in case Joe did not tell you):
http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/  (free, in 3 different formats)
p.s.  You cannot understand IRC 861 without understanding IRC 862:
26 USC § 861 - Income from sources within the United States
26 USC § 862 - Income from sources without the United States
The key phrases "within the United States" and "without the United States"
are explained and verified here:
http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm#Q16


This is a WINNING BRIEF, by the late John Knox,
based in part on the latter understanding:

http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/append-a.htm


This is also a WINNING BRIEF, which I wrote on my own behalf:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/jetruman/oppososc.htm
(names were changed to protect family privacy)

That case was quietly dismissed by Vaughn R. Walker,
without any further litigation.


But, as usual, Vaughn R. Walker was also named here
for also failing to produce a valid license to practice law:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/aol2/criminal.complaint.4.htm

http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/walker.vaughn/


It always helps to know your audience  :)


Thank you and best regards to Joe.



All Rights Reserved without Prejudice



From: "joe@freedomabovefortune.com" <joe@freedomabovefortune.com>
To: Supreme Law Firm <paulandrewmitchell2004@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2012 7:22 PM
Subject: Re: Private Attorney General writes to John Pilger re: Dr. Rafil Dhafir, political prisoner and "The End of Justice in America," by John Pilger (11/7/2012)


To whom it may concern,

I am Joe Banister's assistant and wish to share this information with you to help in any way I can.  The only thing that wrong/evil needs to flourish is for good people to say or do nothing.  So please pass this information on to others so they too can see the uncontroversial truth that the American people are being duped and stolen from with a tax they don’t owe.

Since you're a student of the truth & if you haven’t seen this please watch Aaron Russo's documentary America Freedom to Fascism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNNeVu8wUak

Next please take a look at Larken Rose's Theft by Deception:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vg1nYbch4TQ&feature=gv  This is one you can take to your accountant and ask for an explanation on how they have been preparing your taxes?

Lastly take a look at the 861 Evidence that further shows the deception: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4415453765598154441

Thank you, again, for your interest.  Please pass all this information to your friends and others to allow them to see and hear the truth.

Michael Babige




On 2012-11-12 19:19, Supreme Law Firm wrote:
> ----- Forwarded Message -----
>  FROM: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
>  SENT: Monday, November 12, 2012 4:47 PM
>  SUBJECT: Private Attorney General writes to John Pilger
> re: Dr. Rafil Dhafir, political prisoner and
> "The End of Justice in America," by John Pilger (11/7/2012)
>
>
> http://www.newstatesman.com/world-affairs/world-affairs/2012/11/end-justice-america
>
> http://www.dhafirtrial.net/about-this-site/contact/
>
> Greetings John Pilger, Katherine Hughes and Dr. Dhafir Support Committee:
>
> I have briefly reviewed some of the links found above, and for now
> I presume that Norman A. Mordue was assigned to Dr. Dhafir's case.
>
> Please be fully advised that my office recently mailed DEFAULT notices
> to each recipient identified by "NAD" (Notice and Demand) links
> at each of the four (4) divisions of the U.S. District Court for the
>  District of New York State -- Northern, Southern, Eastern and Western:
>
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#NDNY
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#SDNY
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#EDNY
http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/evidence.folders.2004-03-16.htm#WDNY
>
> You will please find our evidence folder for Norman A. Mordue here:
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/mordue.norman/
>
> NOW HEAR THIS: After receiving and responding to our proper Request
>  submitted under the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA"), the United States
> Department of Justice ("DOJ") effectively admitted that Mr. Mordue is missing
> 2 required credentials -- APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS and OATH OF OFFICE:
>
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions/mordue.norman/nad.missing.credentials.htm
> (IN DEFAULT)
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/oaths/foia.request.usdc.dny.htm (IN DEFAULT)
>
>  The implications of such missing and/or defective credentials
> are matters that have already been decided by several American Courts,
> and by an official Opinion issued by the office of the U.S. Attorney General:
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/commissions.htm
>
> Here is one of the clearest holdings on this point:
>
>  Without taking the oath prescribed by law [1],
>
> one cannot become a judge either de jure or de facto, and
>
> such an individual is without authority to act and
>
> _HIS ACTS AS SUCH ARE VOID UNTIL HE HAS TAKEN THE PRESCRIBED OATH [1]._
> [FRENCH V. STATE, 572 S.W.2D 934]
> [BROWN V. STATE, 238 S.W.2D 787]
>
> Moreover, the U.S. Attorney General Opinion makes it very clear
> that no one is entitled to any judicial compensation until and
> unless the requisite Oaths of Office have been duly executed:
>
> _Oath was prerequisite to compensation of judges._
>  
> [7 OP ATTY GEN 303]
>
> _Oath was prerequisite to official duties and salary._
>  
> [19 OP ATTY GEN 219]
>
> Moreover, even if an Office of Personnel Management ("OPM")
>
> STANDARD FORM 61 HAS BEEN SIGNED BY SUCH A COURT EMPLOYEE,
> MOST OF THE RECENTLY SIGNED SF-61 APPOINTMENT AFFIDAVITS
> CLEARLY VIOLATE THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT BECAUSE THEY DO NOT
> DISPLAY A VALID OMB CONTROL NUMBER, THERE IS NO PARAGRAPH AT THE
> BOTTOM CITING TO 5 U.S.C. 2903, AND OMB HAS NEVER NEVER REVIEWED
> NOR APPROVED OPM'S USE OF AN ELECTRONIC SF-61 IN LIEU OF A PAPER FORM:
>
HTTP://WWW.SUPREMELAW.ORG/CC/HEDGES/
> HTTP://WWW.SUPREMELAW.ORG/CC/HEDGES/UNITED.STATES.NOTICE.HTM
> HTTP://WWW.SUPREMELAW.ORG/CC/HEDGES/OPM/LETTER.2012-08-06/
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/hedges/omb/letter.2012-08-23/
>
> I legally represent the United States _ex rel. _in the latter NOTICE,
>
> CHIEFLY BECAUSE THE "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" IS NOW SHOWN
> TO BE AN IMPROPER (READ BOGUS) PARTY WITH NO LEGAL STANDING TO APPEAR
> in any Federal Courts -- particularly anywhere inside New York State:
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/sos/ny/ (see all Certificates ! )
>
> HTTP://WWW.SUPREMELAW.ORG/CC/USA.INC/REGISTERED.AGENT.2007-02-12.GIF
>
> HTTP://WWW.SUPREMELAW.ORG/CC/USA.CORP/REGISTERED.AGENT.2007-02-12.GIF
>
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc/THE.UNITED.STATES.OF.AMERICA.LIMITED.JPG
> (Scotland ??)
>
> http://www.supremelaw.org/letters/us-v-usa.htm (see U.S. v. Cooper
> Corporation, in chief)
>
> IF MY OFFICE CAN BE OF ANY FURTHER ASSISTANCE IN THIS MATTER,
> please contact us in confidence here, via email:
>
> <SUPREMELAWFIRM@GMAIL.COM>
>
> THANK YOU, JOHN PILGER _ET AL._, AND DO KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
>
> --
> Sincerely yours,
> /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
> Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
> http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm [2]
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm [3]
> http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm [4] (Home Page)
> http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm [5] (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm [6] (Client Guidelines)
> http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm [7] (Policy + Guidelines)
>
> All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
>
>
>
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://www.supremelaw.org/rsrc/oaths/federal.judges.htm
> [2] http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
> [3] http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
> [4] http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
> [5] http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
> [6] http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm
> [7] http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm

November 13, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Re: Interview request (will send the finalized topics over the weekend)

Teknosis needs your help. * Ways to help Teknosis

___

 

Post main:

----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell 
Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2012 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: REMINDER Re: Interview request (will send the finalized topics over the weekend)

 

>  One word topic: "CITIZENS".  I know it's simple, but voluminous.


Many thanks, Randy, and EXCELLENT CHOICE!

Then, some of our most recent work on that subject is here,
written in a style to imitate that excellent series of books "For Dummies":

http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/mitchell/citizenship.for.dummies.htm
(with lots of links to additional reading, at the end)


Here's THE KEY -- which even luminaries like Abraham Lincoln either missed,
or chose to ignore:

When the U.S. Supreme Court held that a proper constitutional amendment
would be needed to eliminate the apartheid which prevented Dred Scott from
being a Citizen of Missouri, Congress should have honored that holding 
and proposed "The Correct Amendment":

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/dredscot/excerpt1.htm
If any of  its provisions are deemed unjust [apartheid]
there is a mode prescribed in the instrument itself
[Article V]
by which it may be amended; but while it remains unaltered,
it must be construed now as it was understood
at the time of its adoption
[when apartheid was the supreme Law].

However, a horrible Civil War ensued, and the very next year 
after it ended (1865), Congress attempted to "fix" Dred Scott's problem
by enacting the 1866 Civil Rights Act -- INSTEAD OF PROPOSING
THE CORRECT CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.


As we summarized in "Citizenship for Dummies":

Congress could not remove the obstacles identified in that decision 
solely by means of Federal legislation enacted by that Body.


And, that pivotal error still remains with us today --
with all of its many and far-reaching ramifications.


Happily, 20/20 hindsight now helps us to frame The Correct Amendment
as follows:

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/correct.amendment.htm

Section 1.  The status of Citizen of one of the United States of America shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State of the Union on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.
 
Section 2. The fourteenth article of amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America is hereby repealed with prejudice.
 
Section 3.  Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.



-- 
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

All Rights Reserved without Prejudice

On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Randy Maugans <randy.maugans@gmail.com> wrote:

One word topic: "CITIZENS".
I know it's simple, but voluminous.
The storms here in the east have interrupted my work capacity (I had only my phone for email for a few days), so I still need to sharpen, which means going back over your work a few more times. Will follow up as soon as I can.
Randy Maugans - OffPlanet Radio


On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 11:15 PM, Randy Maugans <randy.maugans@gmail.com> wrote:
Duly noted. Will reply soon.


On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Paul Andrew Mitchell <supremelawfirm@gmail.com> wrote:
Courtesy Reminder (see below:)

On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:54 AM, Randy Maugans <randy.maugans@gmail.com> wrote:

I will send the finalized topics over the weekend. 
Thanks, Paul 

November 13, 2012 in Current Affairs | Permalink

Teacher's Guide by Vitvan

Teachers Guide by Vitvan

 

Teacher’s Guide

by Vitvan

* Electronically typed and edited by Juan Schoch for educational, research purposes and in acknowledgement and appreciation of Vitvan, his lifework and those who made this possible.

 

February 10, 1950

 

SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER — OUTLINE OF THE INSTRUCTION

 

This morning I am giving you an outline of the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order. I am going to ask you to develop the outline, fill it in, sound it out, write it.

Our morning class will be discontinued until you have finished that work. I will make inquiry around how you are getting on. I think the reason for this is obvious; you must get more thalamic impression of the work than cortical. The work must not degenerate into entertainment; you must exert yourselves against me and develop your own individuality. Subtly and unobtrusively, you might be leaning and eventually that would be disastrous, because in the natural cyclic process, Vitvan will not always be here to carry you and support you, and you will ultimately be thrown back on yourself and you have to stand on your own feet — that, among other reasons for this outline and your work, your effort.

I suggest that you get up in the morning like you were going to class and put in that hour on working on this outline. Of course, I would prefer that you type it, but that is not necessary, because when your papers are all done, I want you to give them to me; I want to see what I will see. Then from your papers I am going to take lots of cues, and probably will mention no names, but I might jump on certain points and romp around on them in subsequent lessons. How am I going to know what points to jump on if I continue without some form of knowing how much this work is being understood? etc., etc.

This is enough; you get my general drift and idea. There is one more point that I might mention. I want to know how trustworthy you are to represent this work, or mis-represent it. I could talk about that at length, but we will take up our outline.


 

PREFATORY

 

          The characteristics which differentiate ‘man’ from ‘animal’.

(a) objective-self-consciousness.

(b) value-giving.

(c) symbolical representation for the sake of communication.

 

Objective self-consciousness equals identity with ‘body’.

                    (a) the manifold of values developed upon the basis of that identity.

                   (b) man, the creator of the values which affect him.

                   (c) non-identity of symbol (word) with ‘thing’.

                   (d) transvaluation of values.

 

          The immediate objective relative to the man state is to achieve the next level or state in the natural order process. As man is differentiated from the animal, so the creative urge in man is to become differentiated from the man state.

                    (a) the aristotelian state, contrasted with the non-aristotelian state.

                    (b) the non-aristotelian state as indicative of beyond-man state.

                    (c) peace, security, harmony are only possible when the urge to achieve

               the next state is fulfilled.

 

          Psychological functions.

                   (a) the thwarting of the urge develops compensatory and substituted

     forms of expression.

                   (b) the inevitability of the natural order process.

                   (c) shortcomings and failures of modern psychiatry based on the

aristotelian attitude, approach, etc.

 

THE INSTRUCTION OF THE SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER

 

          In recognition that the consciousness of each beginner is identified with the objective appearance of ‘things’, the first effort is focused on explaining the illusiveness or non-reality of ‘things’.

          (a) describe the structure of a given individual.

          (b) describe how the psychic nature is developed.

          (c) describe the motivating force in the creating process.

          (d) explain how an image is formed in the psychic nature and appears

     substantive.

          (e) explain and correlate with scientific facts why we call ‘this world’ an

     energy world, or dynamic process.

 

General Semantics:

          (a) the abstracting process

          (b) non-identity of word with ‘thing’.

          (c) reifications, hypostatizations respecting words, etc.

          (d) describe the autonomous field; the pattern characterizing each field;

     configurating energy.

          (e) describe the two ways of expressing the structure of a given individual:

     first, in scientific terminology; second, in terms descriptive of state of

     consciousness. (The description of foci goes in with the description of the

     individual.)


 

METHODOLOGY RESPECTING THE INDIVIDUALIZING PROCESS

 

          1. A description of the lunar cycle.

          2. A description of the sacral-conarial axis.

          3. Relative to the man state, the goal, the objective, is to develop the noetic

    mind; describe same, and the method whereby it is accomplished.

          4. A description of the Noetic level.

 

          General remarks: we will continue with our work from the Noetic level, until we feel that enough has been given to again have an opportunity for filling in thalamic impressions and study, because we can describe the functions of the Sun-God on his own level and his goals and objectives at some subsequent times; this is all in the nature of preliminary to the real work and the real world.

          Note this: in the outline as given that it is in the nature of exoteric work; there is nothing esoteric in that outline. When you get through with the outline, you can mark it “exoteric.” This is the work we give to the ‘people’, or beginners, or the first grade in our School. When they have accomplished these preliminary or first grades in the instructions, then they are prepared to enter upon the esoteric phase of the work and the description of the Sun-God and his functioning on his own level, which is never off the noetic mind and level. The description of expansion of his consciousness into the wideness, into the vastness of Reality constitutes the esoteric work of the School of the Natural Order.

          But to any beginner, exoteric student, that work should not be touched upon; that work should not be mentioned at all; because if instruction can be given thoroughly enough, often enough and sustained long enough to effect an orientation from the aristotelian state to the non-aristotelian state — that is, from identity in the objective appearance with the creative force by which ‘things’ are created as representations, then you see the basis will have been gained, the foundation will have been established to study the esoteric work. So, it is extremely important that this change in orientation be effected; then one is capable of not only understanding, but in measurable degrees, of functioning in energy forces in creativity in mind substance whereby he utilizes the faculties of the mind level, the frequencies falling within that octave that we mention as mind level, and particularly the ideas formulated on that level as the Reality, and therefore his work lies in the realm of the faculties relative to the mind and the ideas developed, but those faculties and those ideas become comparable to ‘things’ and ‘objects’ in the objective identity state; then to consciously function with ideas in mind substance and to the consciousness as Real (and I believe much more substantially real; that is, you experience them as more substantial than the one in objective identity experiences ‘things’ and ‘objects’ as substance).

          In the latter case… his values are unsubstantial, but even with his consciousness in objective identity — and he values the substantiality of ‘things’ and ‘objects’ — his consciousness has not been developed to the range, depth and power that the consciousness on the mind level has attained; therefore, with greater range, depth and power, the one on the mind level views the ideas and deals with them far more realistically and substantially than the one in objective identity can possibly deal with his images appearing substantive. So, the idea, even from the basis of experience, or from the basis of actuality, is infinitely more substantial than the image appearing substantive, even though the image is identified with the configuration; one deals with Reality on the mind level, and the other is dealing with illusory and very deceptive appearances — so the great objective of man is to surpass man, that is why that analogy was used in the prefatory remarks. As man is characterized by certain functions of his consciousness, which differentiates him from the animal, so the non-aristotelian state is definitely characterized and differentiated from the man state, and again that is all the exoteric work — to show that goal, to show that objective, to strive for that point.

So, the natural order process must be described relative to the state of those for whom it is described, and it is a serious error in judgment to begin to describe states non-relative to the one for whom the description is given. The acme of psychology is to constantly reiterate those points in the instruction in the School of the Natural Order which are germane to the individual’s state, because the teaching itself could be distorted by attempting descriptions non-relative to the state of the one to whom the description is given. You may have to wait a long time for a few to whom you can give the esoteric work. Better wait than to distort it and create misunderstandings.

          Rudolph Steiner in an autobiographical sketch said that he was twelve years of age in his physical embodiment when he found his teacher and the teacher impressed him with one principal method of procedure: to destroy the “dragon”; his teacher said to him, “To destroy the dragon, one must enter its hide.” The dragon in this case is the manifold of values based upon objective identity. How is that manifold of values to be destroyed? Become more perfect, not only in the understanding of it, but in understanding all of the accumulated information about it — that those in objective identity value. And then having accomplished all of the understanding that those in objective identity think they have about ‘things’ and ‘objects’ in the universe, then show them the fallacy of their understanding, its limitations and its failures, and then carry them a step beyond their own level, and you have effectively destroyed the dragon, because there wouldn’t be anything left of that objective manifold. Then they are ready, because they are adrift — they have no anchor.

          Get one to actually see that what he calls a ‘thing’ or an ‘object’ is 999,999/1,000,000 nothing; just get them to see it is nothing, then he will begin to cast about for what is Real. You have destroyed the dragon; you have destroyed the whole basis of the manifold of values — then he is ready.

          But if he is canalized and crystallized and completely under the illusory belief that the ‘thing’ and ‘object’ are real and therefore his values are on a ‘solid’ basis, and in that state you describe the energy world as a dynamic process and the differentiation of fields in energy substance, you just leave him cold and vague. He thinks you are a damn fool. So, “enter his hide” and destroy it utterly and completely until he hasn’t a raveling to hang onto within his manifold — the aristotelian manifold. That constitutes preparing him for real instruction which will lead to the undifferentiated Light.

          We are getting to the point where we must deal with Indra and the other personifications of the Light World forces, so this is an admirable point to pause and review to see whether we are ready or not; among other things, this is in the nature of an opportunity for each of you to check on yourselves. I am not going to check on you. I am just going to see wherein I have been remiss in description. I want your papers, because you don’t know what that means to me in future work and effort. I will get so much. You will become my teacher; you will teach me how to teach, and how I have failed in the teaching.

 


 

February 21, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 1

 

          We will begin with the Prefatory description of the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order.

          The reason for giving the prefatory work is in the nature of a generalized summary of information current in the Occidental race consciousness; it is prefatory as well for the attitude taken respecting the exoteric work, because the exoteric work is not to further information based upon the aristotelian orientation — in other words, it is not a furtherance of the aristotelian attitude and outlook. The prefatory or preparatory work is to lay the ground for the introduction of a complete change in orientation. That change in orientation from the aristotelian to the non-aristotelian basis is absolutely essential for any progress in what we call the path of development, or in understanding the basic or fundamental factors constituting the cosmic process.

          There is nothing new in this change-over from the aristotelian to the non-aristotelian orientation; it is very ancient; its essentiality remains not only pertinent, but prerequisite to entrance upon the real study as sanctioned or endorsed by the Illuminati or the Initiates of the Wisdom, because every initiate of the wisdom is so fully conscious that until that change has been effected, there is no possibility of instruction being understood or the instruction given being received. They are fully conscious that it is prerequisite to everything else, because you can shout wordy description of the clear understanding in all the languages living and dead to one whose orientation remains as formerly in objective identity, and he will never understand a word of the instruction. He will think he understands the instruction because he translates it into his oriented state of objective identity. So, the preparation for this change-over is what we call this prefatory work. We are trying to get the students or a given neophyte ready to understand the instruction.

          You will see how this point is increasingly emphasized in these prefatory suggestions in the outline as we go on and expand it. I want you to get first the generalized picture, the reason for the prefatory or introductory phase of the teaching. I said a moment ago that there is nothing new about this problem of changing orientation, and I will give you a quotation from the Christian Bible to indicate how ancient it is: (to make a liberal quotation) “Not by conscious effort, but by the renewing of the mind the kingdom is found.” The whole point is the “renewing of the mind”. I think I am as partial to that form of expression as to using the form “change in orientation”. “Renewing the mind” and “change in orientation” represent the same meaning. This becomes startlingly clear — I think almost shocking — when we make the discovery that that which we seek, the whole creative urge of our being, is focused in finding the Truth, the Reality and it is here all the time. That means to say, you can take a little piece of the earth that you scrape off your shoes when you come in the house, and the whole Reality is right there, if you could change your way of seeing it — if you could renew your mind, if you changed your orientation. Take a little flower — the whole understanding is right before you. What is startling to us is that which we stumble over, is that which we are seeking, and we find it is not higher levels and occult and mysterious hocus-pocus; it is changing our orientation, changing the way of seeing, it is the renewing of the mind.

          We describe the characteristics which differentiate the man from the animal from two levels: first, as it is understood and perceived from the basis of the wisdom teaching; and second, as that basic change in structure and function as seen, perceived, and thoroughly understood from the standpoint of the wisdom teaching, as having its representations in appearance. So, we describe secondarily, the representations in appearance, in the maya.

          First, the description of these characteristics from the standpoint and basis of the wisdom teaching. We begin by describing one undifferentiated sphere or field of Light in process of differentiation. At this preliminary phase of the instruction we do not describe this differentiating process in terms of rays, the gunas; that is always reserved for much later, as a rule. The undifferentiated sphere or field of Light is described as becoming differentiated into other fields, spheres, within the sphere which is undifferentiated. Many illustrations can be used. I used to use the illustration of a tick, because we were in the Rocky Mountains and at certain times of the year when it sucks the blood of the host, the one tick becomes a multiplicity of little ones. The spider spins a particular little sphere and in it there is a whole mass of little spiders which will emerge — the one differentiates itself and becomes many differentiations. Analogy is the creative artfulness side of the teaching and the more fertile one is with analogies and illustrations, the better; and the illustrations are on the level of consciousness of the student and therefore he gets a great deal that he could not in description without analogy.

          Each differentiation in this process becomes differentiated, like a sphere becoming broken up into a multiplicity of little spheres, each relatively smaller sphere integrated in the larger sphere. I have often used the illustration of the structure of a cell of the physiological organism, showing the multiplicity of spheres of which it is composed, then take those spheres — the molecules — and show that each molecule is composed of a multiplicity of other spheres called atoms, and even the atom is composed of units of energy called photons, protons, etc. But, in this differentiating process from the one to the many, there is a point finally reached where no more does it differentiate — the last differentiation is reached. That last differentiation becomes a turning point, and that process of the one to the many is reversed, the process is repeated inversely; the one expands through the same gradations, reversely until the one again.

          Many illustrations are available to describe this, but that final sphere or field which represents the turning point characterizes the difference between the animal and man. We show that last emergence to the final differentiated field by describing how the animal functions under a group force, a group influence which is labeled instinctive response, which characterizes the nature of any animal.

          The final, the last, differentiated field or sphere is the individual Self, which doesn’t become any more. That is the end of the descending arc of the cosmic process — it can’t descend anymore. What cannot descend? It is not man or animal; the differentiating process of the Light cannot descend anymore; it has reached its ultimate point of what we label descent. In some teachings it is labeled the out-breathing of Brahma. It cannot breathe out any further; it has to stop and breathe ‘in’, pull in the breath (just illustration). There are other illustrations: the descent of the gods into the animal body. There is nothing literal about that; it is just a way of describing it to those in objective identity. It has also been described as the involving of something labeled spirit into something labeled matter, and when it gets over-involved in that labeled matter, it has to struggle and work to get out of matter. That is just a way of trying to describe structure and a functional process.

          When the differentiation reaches its ultimate point in the individualized field and the turn is made, there is one of the most beautiful parables to describe this process that you will ever find anywhere. It is the story of the Prodigal Son — how he wanted to take his portion that belonged to him and take a journey out into a far country and “fained he filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat” until he “came to himself” — he individualized, the last individualization and then he turned. He said, “Why even the servants in my Father’s house had better than this.” When one turns, nothing will stop him; he cannot go against all the Cosmic power, force, energy, which is behind that turning. He is not an individual yet; his individual power decides; he doesn’t decide anything at any time, he only thinks he does. This is a cosmic process — that turning back level by level, sphere by sphere; oneness, unity is made, groups are formed that function not instinctively under one force, but fully conscious of individualization. Individuality is not surrendered at any time but there is a blending and a conscious unity with others and you even assume responsibility to take on others to help them along. So, now it is a process of expanding the consciousness from the single, separate sense or state to increasing unity, oneness; sometimes this can only be made with one, the twain becomes one; sometimes it is made with two or three; but in due time it will be made with everyone and everything. That is what we call brotherhood. When you are inducted into the brotherhood of the initiates, you will find that is the way they are; they are not personal about themselves. And so, the return is made.

          That final differentiated field is autonomous not only respecting the configurations, but autonomous respecting other differentiated fields, and this differentiates the man from the animal.

          Now there are ‘outer’ representations of this process, which we take up tomorrow. (We have given the ‘inner’ side briefly this morning.)

 


 

February 22, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 2

 

          Ages before we had the labels autonomous fields, differentiated spheres, etc. the final eventuation in the process of Light differentiating into energy areas, the ultimate differentiated sphere or field was labeled the Ovum. If you ever take up the study of old mystical writings, you will come across the label — the primordial ovum. The labels used in all mystical writings were abstracted from that which was obvious in nature, and nature’s representations were used most frequently as descriptive, explanatory of the more intricate and difficult processes which only the Seers understood. This developed an allegorical language, and the basis of allegorical language was the natural things of the environment, and particularly, as has just been said, that with which they worked in the production of food, clothing and housing (for the house they used the same material as for their clothes — the raw material was the wool and hides of their animals); the planting of the seed in the soil, the tilling of the soil, the raising of their flocks, the observation of the natural processes around them — these were used as the basis of allegorical language which the Seers used to describe and explain the fundamentals which their awakened and higher developed faculties enabled them to perceive.

          The egg served an admirable purpose to describe the differentiating process respecting the World-Mother, and long after the original purpose of the allegorical symbol was lost, we still celebrate with the use of many of these allegorical symbols, like the egg used at Easter and the little rabbits and chicks; the little chick is of course the symbol of that which develops within the egg, and the allegorical symbol is very apt on the grounds that the differentiated or individualized field serves the purpose that the egg serves — it encases, encloses the embryo, and as the embryo develops within the ovum, it reaches a point where it has the strength to pip its own shell and shatter the periphery of it and emerge. That pipping of the shell and emergence is the birth of the Christos. So between the differentiation respecting the autonomous field — ovum — from the most generalized animal field to the birth of the Christos we have the label, the man state.

          While man is differentiated from the animal, he is embryonic relative to his next great advent, the pipping of his shell and his emergence. As soon as this differentiated force or energy has been born (don’t confuse this word birth with the birth of the Christos) out of the animal field, there are representations immediately that characterize that birth, and the most outstanding one which we emphasize (and more than any other) is — objective identity.

          We will understand this much clearer and better if we will remember that man cannot do anything of himself — that is, in that consciousness developed in or out of objective identity, man can do nothing of himself; only as the field changes will the representation thereof change — that is, man can change. It is futile to even speculate that man can do anything else except depend upon the change of the field. In teaching the exotericists respecting this point, we use many illustrations. My favorite illustration for years was the projection picture machine: the light, the film, the projected image; then the identity with the shadow on the screen and where the consciousness is circumscribed within the manifold of values developed in identity or out of that identity with the shadow, man could do nothing to stir or change the shadow or effect any improvement; he would have to resort to the film — which means the pattern — and that which governs the pattern, the Light, together with the ensemble; there is where we bring in the gestalt, the whole ensemble — meaning the whole structure of the field in which the Light is present and becomes the predominant factor. Hold that in mind as you read the various scriptures, particularly the Old Testament of the Christian Bible, where the helplessness is emphasized, the nothingness is emphasized, and the man’s whole dependence is upon God, upon the Lord, etc., etc., ad infinitum. You can translate that into the absolute dependence upon the field as fundamental. The joy and pleasure on the mental level of reading the Scriptures with the clarified understanding is not to be disparaged; there is so much value in it as well as clear wonderful enjoyment.

          Other illustrations might have been used, and they have been, but I have been partial to the light, the film and the projected image to illustrate this ovum, differentiated Light, the force, the power-to-be-conscious; the power part of it, the energy part of it, the force part of it is where the Light has been converted into energy; that is the energy aspect of Light. So, the ovum, or we say today, autonomous field, the Light and then the Arche, the pattern, the lines of force, the emergent energy as representation. There we have the three fundamentals which allow of an infinite variation in descriptions, illustrations for the sake of communication.

          I started out to say that we can better and more clearly understand this objective state of identity if we remember that the periphery of the field has not been ruptured, that the embryo is developing within an unbroken periphery. Connect that point with the statement that man can do nothing of himself; he is wholly dependent upon the change of the field and its pattern for any change in the representation — that is, in himself as man and his objective level, manifold; no change can possibly take place otherwise.

          We have two points to keep in mind: one, the unbroken field, ovum; the other, man cannot effect any change by conscious effort — “Who by taking thought can add one cubit (one fraction) unto his stature?” It can’t be done. But he is conscious; power, light has become energy, power-to-be-conscious. The ovum is unbroken. So, he cannot function in what he calls feelings, in what he calls desires, in what he calls thinking outside of himself. Why? Because that periphery has not been ruptured. He is wholly egocentralized, and must be in order to finish the development of the embryonic phase between animal and the birth of the Christos. So, if consciously or unconsciously thought, feeling, desire, etc., are functioning, his psychological processes are wholly concerned with himself. Now it is only posing or pretense or falsity of some kind to appear otherwise. I am thinking of a person that I have known who gave away everything that he had, even lost his home, out of fear that he would be considered selfish; he falsified his state.

          Now in respect to this clarity of understanding, sometimes one who might happen to be at the moment in association with me will begin to snort about some selfish act on the part of someone else, and when the psychological opportunity permits, I will horn in and say, if he were not wholly selfish something is wrong with him; he would be posing and pretending and living a lie. I have observed many cases where one is posing and pretending, magnanimous, unselfishness, altruism, etc., and I look at him and see that the periphery of the ovum is pretty solid, no pipping yet, I can’t detect any hole. I know all that is posing and hypocrisy and pretense. He should be selfish. If one of those became a patient I would bring him first to see he must live a wholly selfish life, and this goody good-for-nothing altruism is not yet his to practice. He is attempting to live on a level he is not ready to live on, because mother Nature has designed it so, or we can say it is the structure and function of the cosmic process, or any other way you want to phrase it; he is enclosed, hidden within the egg for a purpose, and the more selfish, the more egocentralized, the quicker he is going to develop the embryo. As soon as that is developed he can pip his own shell, then he can think and feel and desire more expansively. It is the motivating force which really changes. Then not to love another one for the sake of the other — not for what you are going to get out of it — is just as natural than as to camouflage your desire and call it love.

 

---

 

          There is nothing false about needs and urges, and when the force is in the heart center it is sometimes a desperate need, it is a powerful need.

          If one reaches the heart center before he has shattered the periphery of his field, the predominating and motivating force in his consciousness is the need of loving, and it may appear to others that is unselfish. If the mother showers the force of love upon her children and makes all sorts of sacrifices for them, that is her need for expression. We even observe many sacrifices, even sacrifice of teeth and bones from the mother’s physiological organism for her children or of the laying down of a ‘life’ for another — but I say it is wholly a need, and selfish if he has not pipped his shell.

          Relative to my premise, and my premise was that until the periphery of the field has been shattered, man is helpless to do anything of himself; he is wholly dependent on the field — relative to my premise, man’s feelings, his desires, his thinkings, his loving even to the point of sacrificing his physiological organism, is wholly egocentralized.

          This is a very beautiful illustration of identity of two levels. I am giving this from the perceptive standpoint of the field and how it functions. What has been said was identified with the objective manifold of values.

          Relative to the structure of the field and the force of the field that we call energy, there can be in the consciousness of the embryo no altruistic feelings outside of self-regard, egocentralized motivations, no matter how much he camouflages; relative to his basic field structure and function, he must of necessity figure, work, desire, feel, love and think for himself.

          (Discussion arose over the use of the words hypocrisy, pose and pretense.)

 


 

February 23, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 3

 

          Simultaneously with the differentiation of the field, consciousness when embodied becomes identified therewith.

          Now, this objective focus of consciousness characterizes the representation as well as the difference between the animal and the man states in the cosmic process. The uttered word or sound becomes an instinctive means or method of communication. Of course, a critical observer would say that the animal communicates by sound. They do; but to the creatures, sound is not accompanied by the ‘object’ to be communicated, or the meaning to be communicated, or the concept to be communicated. In all communication by sound below the level of the man state, there is no consciousness of the meaning, concept, purpose, object, to be communicated, and it is that particular objectiveness in the consciousness respecting the sound which is the characteristic of the man state; therefore we have the basis of speech and of language.

          The creation and the giving of values is another differentiating characteristic. The animal consciousness quickly learns to instinctively avoid that which hurts, as it quickly learns to go to and is attracted by that which gives pleasure; by the avoidance of pain instinct rises to objective consciousness in the man state, and it develops taboos, so that certain values are given to ‘things’, ‘objects’, places and persons — and tribal, group, taboos are created out of these values. This value-giving, value-creating has the most far reaching consequences in the further development in the man state having its negative as well as its positive aspects.

          Now, in addition to the consciousness of the meaning to be communicated in the uttered sound and the value-creating and value-giving propensity, there are other symbolical representations which characterize the man state and differentiate him from the animal. Outstanding among these symbolical representations becomes sign language or signal reaction — that means signs designed to serve as signals for the purpose of communication.

Before language, as we know it, had been developed to the point where it could be written language — and the written language constitutes the development of the sign or signal method of communication — there were ages wherein the ideograph served the same purpose: that is, signs developed as symbolical representations for meanings and for the sake of communication. This is deeply rooted in the unconscious of the psyche of even the higher developed man, because he still reacts to signals, and for the most part reacts unconsciously. These characteristics which differentiate the man from the animal are the first characteristics which fall into abeyance in the process called the second crossing.

          The next observation in our outline — objective self-consciousness equals identity with the ‘body’, and the manifold of values developed upon that identity: this is a colossal semantic “chamber of horrors”. Remember when individuals, preachers and reformers are genuinely agonizing and in distress over genocide, wholesale slaughter of innocent individuals that we call war, that all such destruction and wholesale extermination represents the end product of this manifold of values. Try to dispute that. It is the resultant end product of the creation of this manifold of values, so in respect to consciousness and in respect to one who has become freed from that manifold of values and stands in another level of consciousness and understands how it was developed, he has only one label for it — maya (meaning darkness, dense ignorance). I have labeled it relative to consciousness ‘above’ that level “the chamber of horrors”. The end product of the objective manifold of values is always war — that means wholesale destruction, wholesale murder. Now, between that end product and the identity of consciousness with the ‘body’ watch the fill-in: how did the consciousness in its identity with its objective ‘body’, appearance, gradually grow and develop until it reached the holocaust of wholesale destruction labeled war? Do you think we can fill that gap? It takes keen and penetrating reading of history to trace every movement labeled our foreign policy, whether English, French, Chinese, Tibetan, American, etc., and all the factors involved; if we can trace it right back we will find — with no exception — it rests upon consciousness identified with the ‘body’, how to feed, clothe and keep it from being wrapped in rags. Our foreign policy is going to be based upon the preservation of the physical ‘body’ in some form or other, or the betterment in some form or other, or the feeding or protection of it, etc., until — what? England is taking our trade and we are going to go hungry, — bang, bang! Germany is taking our markets, world trade is becoming cornered and we are going to be deprived, we are going to be reduced to rags, or something — bang, bang! Or England and America have, and we are the have-nots; we want our share of the ‘grass and the pasture’ — trade and barter — this ‘body’ secured and better fed, etc. We are going to show them — bang, bang!

          It takes a careful build-up and reading of the history of people and their migrations and search for ‘grass and pasture’ (barter and trade and commerce). What is it all for? Objective self-consciousness.

          Let us imagine one who is out of that realm of values and really sees what they are trying to preserve as shadows; they have forgot the real which they are seeking which will preserve them. What sort of value is he going to give to the whole works? “Chamber of horrors.” And does he want to reincarnate any more in this manifold of values based upon objective identity? “What shall it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses sight of himself?”

 


 

February 24, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 4

 

          This section in the outline respecting the manifold of values developed out of identity of consciousness with the physical ‘body’, man the creator of the values, and transvaluation of values, is given at the very beginning and as prefatory to entering the path of development in order that the individual may clearly understand the constituent factors respecting his state and the integration of his consciousness with the state of consciousness of the race to which he belongs. The emphasis is upon understanding his state, because then it becomes increasingly clear what there is to surmount; he cannot remain in that state and at the same time expand his consciousness beyond that state. All of the essential and/or permanent qualities, gunas developed or acquired while in that state will be preserved, but all of the nonessential qualities respecting that state will be utterly and forever lost, expurgated from the psychic nature.

          In addition to the emphasis upon understanding of that state and its constituent factors, it is extremely essential for the individual to gain control over these preliminary or preparatory methods of functioning respecting his own forces of consciousness, because as he develops even in his general reading and mental exercises, mental studies, through such reading and studies, associating with a higher level from which that which he reads or studies has been given, he is going to gain force; he is going to release power — not precipitously by any manner of means (and fortunately so), but it is impossible for him to be serious and genuine in his quest, which we assume motivates his reading and study, without gaining force or power, without releasing latent or potential force or power. Before the release of potential force or power has gained a sufficient momentum to be more effective, he must control his values — that is, his reactions.

          Now, the student will find that this is not an easy matter, even after mentally learning how the objective manifold of values has been created, even after intellectually seeing and seeing fairly clearly, as far as the conceptual mental level can see clearly, he will discover that emotionally, psychologically he reacts to values, things, instances, events, persons, etc., and this reaction will teach him that he has not yet surmounted the value-giving. Then is when he discovers that it is not easy; it is very difficult. The difficulty does not lie so much within himself, as an isolated individual, as it lies within his reflection of the race psyche. That word “reflection” as used in this connection means that beneath the level of his clear intellectual understanding he is still integrated, synchronized, en rapport, to a greater or lesser degree, with the race out of which he is seeking emancipation. The admonition “come ye therefore out from among them and be ye therefore separate” is operative upon him as prerequisite to the entrance upon the path of development. The student will find that he will have to be infinitely patient with himself because after studying and reading and participating in the work, he still discovers the remnants of tendencies, if not the functional forces, of reaction. He has not as yet finished the preparatory work and that notwithstanding his mental development, his mental perception and understanding.

          The criterion by which each measures himself in respect to development, is what he does under different combinations of circumstances. When he feels sufficiently strong, he deliberately places himself in a situation in which he used to react to find out or discover whether or not he has really made the grade in this preliminary work. When he can place himself in all sorts of situations and he finds “the Prince of this world cometh unto him and findeth nothing in him” then he knows — free at last from value-giving, and he is confident then that he can enter the real work; he can place his foot on the first rung of the ladder of genuine development. There is nothing facetious about this. This is the way it is in the natural order process, and I always interject the word “fortunately” because there is another part of the teaching that is given in the esoteric work on what happens when one gains admission to the Arcanum levels without having freed himself from the value-creating, the value-giving; that teaching concerns the angels that were cast out of Heaven and the war that obtains in Heaven when they are cast out. That “casting out” is terrible, on the grounds that one knows the felicity, the beauty, the freedom and then loses it. The others struggling to gain it, don’t know what they are missing, because they don’t know it yet. But for the one who knows, it is always harder the second or even the third time to make the grade than it was the first time, as hard as that was; because, there is increasing force, increasing power that creates more monumental difficulties — that is, traumas that have to be repaired. The one short of force and power cannot create in himself the severity of injury in his function and structure, therefore it is easier for him to make the grade the first time, even though it is a struggle; but the second time it is harder and the third time it is much harder to surmount the injury of his reactions. Because we know this, we used the term “fortunately”.

          We have here in this group respecting the manifold of values, the creator of the values, the transvaluation of values, non-identity, etc., we have not only the key for the insurance and preservation of peace and serenity while yet in the world of value-giving, but we have the pivotal point of what is called emancipation, deliverance, in the Sanskrit, Mukta. So, one has to emancipate, liberate himself, to qualify for the work.

          You students as representatives of the teaching of the School of the Natural Order, or any other genuine representation of the Wisdom teaching, must constantly reiterate the non-value giving, that nothing affects the individual, a given person; positively nothing can affect him except — and there is only one exception — the value that he gives; the recognition and the quality that he puts in the recognition that alone affects him. When this has penetrated into its functional and structural levels, we make one of the greatest discoveries — that the power with which one is conscious, the power with which he gives values is the only power there is; there is no other power. That is the wonderful part of even this preliminary work — that discovery; because at first he cannot and does not make that discovery, for the reason he is struggling in the fog of his self-created values, and is so befogged with the fog to get out of the reaction to his values that he is not clear enough to see the fundamental function and structure respecting his value-giving. But by and by as the fog begins to clear, he will make that discovery and he will have made one of the greatest points of all philosophical research, or all philosophers: the I Am of me is God; there is no other. That is some point to stand in, and how the creator creates — not only the reaction to the quality component of the value given, but the representations — that is that which eventuates, the “reaping” part of it. He will understand by his power to create value and the quality contributed in the creating, the sowing part of it, but if he is not clear in understanding of that process, he is going to rebel against the reaping part of it, that is, he will still give value respecting the reaping. Why has this come upon me? What have I done? Why does so and so? Why did God inflict this upon me? He rebels against his own sowing.

          The one who stands clear, never rebels; he says, “If I ever get out of this, I will try not to create this again.” That statement indicates transvaluation of values. “Trans” is a prefix meaning, over across, beyond, on the other side of valuing. To transvalue doesn’t mean to abandon all values. When it is idly said, “Oh, it is just a matter of values”; that is just a noise; you haven’t said anything. There is not anything that is not a matter of values. Every word uttered is a matter of value and there can’t be anything that can be dismissed by saying — it is only a matter of values; because something must be added there to make it stand up as a true representation of meaning. It is only a matter of a certain individual’s values, a certain group, racial or accepted value; or it is a matter of another level or higher order manifold of value. When one says, it is only a matter of so-and-so value, we can agree right away. It is like saying, “To me, it seems so and so”; we can at once agree with him. We are agreeing with his manifold of values that so and so looks so and so. One can give recognition to another manifold of values and might himself have a different manifold of values to which he would like to have recognition. That is the acme of preservation and respect for the integrity of the individual; it is the recognition of the integrity of each for each.

          When it is said: to me, it is the way I see it, etc., etc., that is the grounds for agreement at once; the agreement is in the recognition of the manifold of values, and it is the highest compliment that can be paid. When assertion is made, so-and-so is so-and-so, the manifold of values is left out, and you never can agree; it is like a slap in the face — the recognition of the manifold of values and that he is going to hold to it, and bless him, you are going to let him hold to it until he can create another manifold in the other way.

          If you want to understand one who has emancipated himself, reached liberation from the generally accepted racial manifold of values which we label “this world” (the world of sense, of racial values), always try to get his manifold of values and he is easy to understand. After having gained a manifold of values in transvaluation of values, he cannot abandon it and assume a lesser manifold, a more imperfect manifold, a manifold let us say, based on the phenomenal appearance of images. There are other manifolds of values relative to other levels in the expanding process of consciousness.

          You students, as representatives of the work, cannot over-emphasize the description of how man is the creator of values which affect him and through and in your association with others, you will have to reiterate that point about twice a year for the first 45 years, before they can stand in the acid test of discovery that they have lost the ability to give value.

I am going to close this morning with the emphasis upon the transvaluation of values. It is by assumption — remember I am working on the point that I discovered which makes for development; never assume too far beyond the present state, but catch the next step in development and focus upon it. If you don’t cover too much territory that system works; it helps greatly in accomplishing results and in surmounting the results of value-giving (that is, the sowing); therefore, to avoid the reaping, begin to transvalue right at first. There are many simple psychological devices whereby we begin to transvalue. We generally say, “Well, he simply doesn’t know any better; unconsciously he is motivated by his basic manifold of values.” The idea of hypocrisy comes in there, because you will meet those who are not apparently reacting and you know they ought to be, by reason of their basic state. So, a word which should be employed instead of hypocrisy is, self-censorship. An individual will consciously or unconsciously censor himself to prevent basic reaction from coming to the surface in appearance or in the presence of others.

          Inevitably, when the cortex wanes, because the cortex wanes with the waning of the physiological organism, there is no conscious guard, then what is there comes out. That is why we say some individuals grow old so sweetly and graciously and lovely, because inherently they are sweet and lovely; while of others we cannot say so much. It is dangerous not to react when that is the basic point; but while saying that, the student should endeavor to surmount reaction; that is, surmount his manifold of values, surmount his world, and he should do it not by repression and keeping a surface appearance of sweetness, which we label sweet hypocrisy; he should struggle to do it by assuming another, unique manifold of values, like a manifold of values based upon the understanding of the natural order process. That will create a wonderful manifold of values, because it will give the relative age of different individuals, so that he can say, “That is his level; he doesn’t know any better.” That is one psychological device to prevent reaction about what another does or does not do.

          Here is another one: When I was struggling to surmount that quick and unconscious reaction to so-called insult, I imagined I was in another country. I selected Germany (I do not know why); I would say, “This is going on here at this particular longitude and latitude but I am in Germany and I do not know it; therefore, that which I don’t know doesn’t affect me.” I immediately transported myself to another part of the universe.

          I have another one (in my bag of tricks). I was born and raised in a cattle country, and I had an older brother that “rode after cattle” and worked for big cattlemen. Being a young kid, I loved to hang around the corrals and listen to the talk and songs, etc. Later in life in imagination I used to put my arms on the corral fence and look over the fence. That is another one of my psychological tricks. I keep on the other side of that corral; I am going to assume another manifold. This is transvaluing values — until you come to the point where there is only one factor upon which you will react. I haven’t overcome that one yet — denying or compromising the Light. I won’t compromise the Light. I imagine if I get high enough in a yet higher manifold of values, that I can deny the Light; but at present I can’t do it. I will let everything else go — money, lands, family ties. I let go very easily, even though I worked hard for them. I hold very lightly until I am backed into a corner. I have an intimation that could deny the Light for its preservation, but that is beyond the category of values that I have as yet reached.


 

February 25, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 5

 

          Our lesson this morning will be on the next topic of the outline: the aristotelian (A) state contrasted with the non-aristotelian (Ā) state. (Lessons 5 to 8 inc.) In respect to these terms, A and Ā, I am clinging to them merely out of desire to correlate with our modern developments in science, because I do consider semantics a further step in the development of the study of psychology toward a scientific basis. It will become a recognized science when the study of psychology will have been correlated with the natural order process. General semantics was a most signal advancement of Freudian psychology toward science. Information will become general respecting semantics, and the doctrine of general semantics has put over the psychology of teaching. I have endeavored to keep the principles of the Wisdom as given in the School of the Natural Order in step with that which will and is becoming generally accepted. Frankly I do not fully accept that attitude, although I employ it. I do not fully believe that the effort to correlate the Wisdom teaching with modern science and scientific developments has much merit; in certain quarters it may be more readily accepted; in other quarters it doesn’t make any difference whether you are on familiar ground or not. There is an instinctive fear of it in the consciousness of those who do not understand the wisdom teachings; it is the age-old instinctive fear of the unknown; it is an instinctive fear of that which they sense will become inimical to their present foundation, irrespective of how erroneous the foundation might be. It is a foundation in their consciousness upon which they confidently rest until shattering experience jars them loose from it. But until they are disillusioned or have gone through shattering experiences which will destroy their foundation, they cling to it, and there is an instinctive fear of anything which might threaten it or some a priori developed or achieved foundation.

          I have endeavored to present the wisdom teaching in a way which would cause those to feel that they are still on firm ground, by the use of words that are still accepted and familiar; and gradually in the exoteric phase of the presentation, lead them into the perception of another foundation and eliminate the foundation upon which they have erroneously, yet confidently, been resting, by substituting little ‘bits’ or ‘chunks’ until the old foundation is gradually eliminated by substituting, and enough of that process had been effected so that a transition from an old foundation to a new could be made unobtrusively and gradually and confidence established in the new foundation. That was the design, the map. I do not know whether the map fits the territory or not; in the present moment of speaking as to date, they are on the brink of the most cataclysmic and therefore shattering experience which is not at all charitable in easing them out of one foundation into another, with a world catastrophe and upheaval and the most brutal shattering of their foundations.

          Friedrich Nietzsche likened those of whom we are speaking on the old A or objective identity foundation, to pretty little butterflies flitting and fluttering around the rim of a crater on the verge of a titanic eruption. Pretty little ‘butterflies’ have no more consciousness of potential power about to be released than actual butterflies.

          What is predicated at one date becomes obsolete at another, particularly at a transition period where old lamps are being traded for new ones so rapidly everywhere. Nevertheless we will continue to use these terms although they begin to look silly to me.

          The prefatory remarks lead up to contrasting the A with the Ā state. The immediate objective relative to the man state is to achieve the next level, etc. That next level is labeled the Ā orientation.

          The first point that strikes the consciousness of one who has studied these two levels, orientations, manifolds of values, etc., is that the A one (meaning state, level, orientation, manifold of value, etc.) is characterized by identity with the image appearing substantive, the other is characterized by non-identity with substantive images. But in the contrast of the two states I intended for the student filling in the outline to go further and describe non-identity. The contrast is, of course, the description first of identity with the images appearing substantive, because only upon the basis of that description could the contrast have emphasis. So, briefly let us describe identity of images appearing substantive. I say, briefly, because we are on such familiar ground that we don’t have to labor it.

          Essentially any given “this” is a configuration of units of energy. Is it perceived and evaluated as such? No. Why? If that is the essential, intrinsic nature of any given this, this world, etc., then why is it not perceived and evaluated as such? Because of the limitations of the sense faculties upon which a given perceiver depends.

          Then comes the enumeration of the sense faculties, the way they function, etc. Then how the individual is incarcerated, imprisoned, cabined and confined by them until they appear as small apertures through which a prisoner peeks out, and he is helpless so long as he is confined, incarcerated; he has no other access to this world except what he can sense, register, etc., through his sense faculties. If those apertures have windows through which he is peeking with variegated colors of glass, then the modalities — that means the qualities, gunas, etc., of the medium through which he must look, through which he must function (even though the consciousness itself is representative of the individual incarcerated) remains unconscious of the modalities, gunas, qualities, etc., of the medium through which he must perceive this world. The more unconscious the prisoner remains of the modalities, qualities, etc., of the medium through which he must look or function in various methods of perception, the greater becomes his deception, therefore, limitations respecting this world. And further, when he so completely conditioned, canalized, and completely identified with that conditioning and canalization of the modalities, qualities, gunas, etc., of the medium through which he must sense and perceive, the greater becomes his inability to register any other basis, foundation, orientation, etc. Crystallization in the maya, in the ignorance eventuates. Why?

          If this world is essentially, intrinsically an energy system, a dynamic process, why isn’t it seen or evaluated as such? Like Lot’s wife, it has turned to crystals until the state of consciousness is described as hard-set and fixed, like mid-winter with everything frozen over solid; that means completely dogmatic. Spring must come and the warmth of the sun must thaw the hard-set state. This hard-set state is labeled A. Why bring in this adjective based upon a historical character or abstracted from him? Poor Aristotle; I often feel sorry for him that we have used him as an adjective! Because he was that character in history that focused attention upon the objective world as it appears to sensuous receptivity — that is another way of saying image appearing substantive as real. I have always had a sneaking feeling that while he studied with his great teacher twenty years, he was jealous of his teacher; I  have had the sneaking feeling that jealousy of a chela for his real Master, Guru, changed the history of the world — so terrifically powerful are thoughts, even erroneous thoughts. However or whatever the reason, he contravened the essential points in the teachings of his teacher and was sufficiently powerful to focus attention upon them. He would not have been that powerful if it had not been for Alexander the Great (Alexander, the Great monkey, if there ever was one). When he got over into Persia, the women made a monkey of him, and we still say; Alexander the Great; it should be Alexander (the Great). However, I do think it is superfluous to put this in here; you all know history intimately enough. We say there are accidents, a sort of accidental combination that causes these things to happen. Old King Philip of Macedonia couldn’t handle an obstreperous youth and said, send someone up here to teach this brat. Word was sent to Plato and he went to Aristotle and said, “Go up there and teach that boy.” He did, but he couldn’t get the boy to settle down, but he tried mightily and gave up. But that harum-scarum was Alexander, and he organized an innovation comparable to the atom bomb or gunpowder — the phalanx. That was like a steamroller and so he took Athens. That was a great turning point in history. Alexander was just a kid at this time; what did he do? He said, “I am going to conquer the world, and I want Aristotle, my teacher, to take care of Athens while I am gone.” Aristotle agreed but asked that a mission be sent to every part of the world and bring back marine specimens, flora specimens, etc. That was the beginning of science; believe it or not, science was born. That gave Aristotle a great deal of power. An accident of history focused attention upon the objective world as it appears to the senses as real.

          So, the man today that never heard of Aristotle and wouldn’t know what you were talking about if you mentioned him, is wholly canalized; as Count Alfred says, “His head is full of Aristotle,” because of the manifold of values that has been built and erected upon that belief and identity, and no one suspected and few today even suspect the erroneous factors in the premise in their manifold of values. So, the objective world as it appears to the senses seems real, and a terrific, a gigantic, stupendous edifice of values has been built upon that belief.

          This is a very brief summary of the A manifold of values or state of consciousness, against which we can contrast a new manifold of values, a different manifold of values, a different conditionality, because we do become conditioned, but we never become crystallized, reason of the fact that it is a dynamic process upon which the conditionality rests which never allows crystallization; instead extensionality characterizes the conditionality.

          Existentialism is a doctrine that is trying to be born out of in France, and it is spreading.

          Extensionality means that you are constantly on extensional grounds, so we can contrast it with crystallization.


 

February 27, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 6

 

          This contrast of the A state with the Ā state is very important to the student aspiring for the new and higher orientations. While we admit that it is in the nature of a mental construct, etc., it is one of those points wherein the mental construct serves as a most important aid, help, etc., to achieving the new orientation. The clearer the mental construct, the easier it will be to practice that assumption of the new state. Those who do not aspire to the new orientation as advancing levels or rungs of the ladder toward a greater goal or objective — namely, the identity with Atman — may strive for proper evaluation in order to effect maximum predictability. Of course, with this other group that I have in mind, the general semanticists who obviously eschew a higher goal, I believe are guided unknowingly to that higher goal; but their obvious objective is the achievement of the non-identity evaluation basis for more accurate evaluation and the object of their goal would be maximum predictability. That simply means that they are aware of the fact that evaluations based upon objective identity is deceptive and wholly unreliable. That is no mean point to be reached and must not be disparaged. In their understanding of the unreliability of evaluation based upon objective identity, they cast about for some frame of reference which will lend greater stability, confidence, assurance, etc., to their evaluation, and the other, greater foundation for assurance, they feel that they will escape the perpetual deception, demoralization, confusion and idiocy which the former evaluation inevitably eventuated in. That is a valuable step, but to us in the School of the Natural Order, it doesn’t go far enough, because the permanency upon which they are predicating maximum predictability, as seen by the “eye of vision”, while relatively more permanent than the phenomenal appearance, is not stable and fluctuates and changes with the changing pattern or state of the field. While the configuration becomes a representation of the pattern or the state respecting the field, it is much more stable and therefore enduring than the phenomenal appearance; yet that configuration can only be described as representation and therefore is unstable and will not ultimately lend itself to maximum predictability, but in contrast to the phenomenal or/and to the manifold of values based upon phenomenal appearance, it is very stable — that is, relatively stable and not going far enough with their understanding respecting it and assuming that its relative stability means permanency, they conclude upon that assumption that it will be enduring. This is one of the many points of departure and difference between the teachings as set forth in the School of the Natural Order and general semantics. There is a qualifying term in their formula with which we can agree and that qualifying term must not be overlooked; it is the term maximum, because the evaluation based upon the phenomenal appearance is so evanescent, chimerical, etc., that evaluation based upon the configuration does lend apparent maximum predictability — again I repeat, relative to the manifold based upon phenomena, but maximum does not mean invariant.

          Years ago before we had modern science and general semantics we used to describe this relative permanency between the evaluation based upon appearances, the phenomena and evaluation based upon the basic state of individual self-consciousness; we described the evaluation based upon phenomena as an appearance of an appearance which is wholly deceptive and illusory and we defined and described the basis of its illusory nature; then we turned to the basic state in which a given individual is conscious and showed that the basic state undergoes very little change throughout an entire incarnation. We have oil paintings of the causal field and the representation of the pattern of the field showing that from the individualization from the animal group through all of the developmental phases of the psychic nature, there is almost imperceptible change in the basic state, in the field, on the grounds that it requires universal, wholly impersonal, wholly non-identified, wholly unselfish, impulses, urges, desires, feelings, emotions, thoughts to effect any change in the causal field, therefore it remains relatively invariant or stable.

          But since we have the understanding of general semantics and the understanding of the autonomous field, the understanding of its pattern as described by the scientists and general semanticists, we have readily adopted their nomenclature because it adds immeasurably to understanding that which we had from pure perceptive insight without scientific correlation or substantiations.

          But that state in the autonomous field respecting a given individual will change and it changes very rapidly after the second crossing in the individualizing process (that means after the baptism by water) — after the psychic nature has been conquered, surmounted, risen above, passed, etc. Then when the focus of consciousness is seated, automatically we can say, or so to speak without conscious effort to sustain it in impersonality, in universality, non-relatedly to the individual, per se; to entertain ideas as ideas non-relatedly to any ‘thing’ or person except related to the cosmic process as the manifold as the basis of evaluation is non-involvement in the psychic nature; then after that non-involvement in the psychic nature where universalities, unselfishness, impersonal functions are natural, and become established, as it were, then the change in the pattern of the field and the corresponding changes in the representations thereof; the configuration becomes extremely fast, rapid, etc.

          There is another way in which we used to express it; we used to express it as the embryo, that is, the individual in the embryonic state cannot function outside of his embryonic state by reason of the fact that the periphery of the ovum of that embryo has not been burst or shattered; that prevents any frequency from penetrating to the consciousness of the embryo and consequently no response. The field in which the embryo functions is a psychic field, like a higher level animal group field; mob psychology is rather an exaggerated analogy we use, because we would generally associate disruptive moil and turmoil and destructive qualities to the term mob influence. We only use this as illustrative of the psychic field, which we generalize by the label race consciousness; and that is only the psychic level. But every group organization, cultural, political, educational, etc., develops its own psychic group.

          In the embryonic state the individual functions in rapports more or less ‘subjectively’, which means psychically identified, and any attempt of a given individual to depart from his group will create solicitude (and that is an understatement) on the part of other members of the group, and this is very significant of what in the Christian Bible is called the “bands”, “gangs” — Hail, hail, the gangs all here! — so to speak. And in the psychic world, these bands, meaning psychic groups, become very strong and it requires an inordinate individual effort to separate from one of them; this is the organization of the psychic world; if you will watch it carefully — that is why the crowd, the group always pulls ‘down’ to its own level, it will never push ‘up’; it always pulls ‘down’ to its own level until it wants to uniform the whole nation to the point of regulating its thinking and what it is going to read or hear, etc. This is in a way off the beam, but yet it is illustrative of this contrast of the A and Ā states. What I am trying to do is to show how difficult the process becomes to separate one’s self and “be ye therefore separate”, to reach a high enough degree of individualization that you can begin to think for yourself, instead of unconsciously and automatically repeating the “party line” of racial groups, and thinking that the repetition of the propaganda of the “party line” (I don’t care what you label the democrats, republicans, communists, etc.) is original thinking; yet that is the province in which the embryo functions; so, not until the periphery of that ovum has been shattered, through intensification of forces, that is, through building up the strain, the internal pressure of forces within the field (it is only as the tension mounts in the field through, not repression, but conservation of expenditure of energy in other directions [your emotional splurges or mental orgasms exhaust energy]and it is only through the conservation and building up of tension in the field) that tension by and by mounts to the point that — bang!, and you can actually and literally experience the explosion; that is one of the indications on the way, until by and by no matter what “party line” — which means psychic for psychic frequency — you can easily understand and are not persuaded by it at all; and out, beyond and around it you think clearly in evaluating it.

          We can readily see how the general semanticists assumed that the configuration was far more stable and permanent than the phenomenal appearance, and therefore a system of evaluation based upon the configuration would lend maximum predictability. But that maximum is only relative to the manifold of values based upon the phenomenal representations of images based in the psychic nature, which are not permanent. So the peg has to be moved back further to the individual field, and yet the individualized field must be recognized as a differentiation of the undifferentiated Light and consequently is not permanent; but a greater maximum of predictability could be developed upon the manifold of values based upon the differentiated field, Atman, than a manifold of values based upon the creation; as the manifold of values based upon the configuration is relatively more stable and permanent than the manifold of values based upon phenomena. Always when I use the word phenomena I mean the image in the psychic nature appearing substantive.

          So here we have a series of manifolds of values. To come back to the contrast between the manifold of values based upon phenomena and the manifold of values based on the configuration, which is the contrast between the A and Ā states — what strikes us first (before we go into more recondite phases of contrast); what first appears as contrast? The phenomena is evaluated as permanent, objective, real — so much so that they used to say (but they don’t anymore) that any departure from the confident belief in its permanency was a “flight from reality”. That is what they used to say; so, every physicist today has taken a “flight from reality”. Prior to the advent of our modern physicists and their reluctant denying, their agonizing surrender, that phrase had validity. It became a cliché intended to utterly annihilate a religionist, metaphysician or mystic not in the “party line” mob, race psyche, or whatever label. “Ha! that is just a flight from reality!” That was enough; his “goose was cooked” — in their estimation, we hasten to say. Now “the rug has been jerked out from under them” and desuetude characterizes the cliché.

          What hits us first as contrast? That which we thought was permanent and real, now is labeled an event, an event that is not static, but highly dynamic, so that wherever ‘thing’ or ‘object’ is evaluated as such in the manifold of values labeled A, now that same ‘thing’ or ‘object’ is labeled a dynamic event in the Ā manifold. In the objective manifold, the objective appearance — not labeled in that manifold ‘appearance’, but labeled ‘objective reality’ — became determinative respecting all other considerations. I rather advisedly said, “all other considerations”, even their conceptions respecting creator. In the absence of what is called creation, no concept can be formed respecting creator. So, in that manifold of values ‘objective reality’ became determinative of all considerations from the individual security to individual economic systems to individual educational progress, all the way through to religious institutions and the concept of creator. At first you will not accept that broad comprehensiveness. Think and study and reflect much before you contradict it, and you will find it is the “lie and the father of all other lies”; it father’s all other lies.

          But in the manifold of values based upon dynamic process, this world as an energy world, and events occurring in rapid sequence and nothing permanent except change (isn’t that wonderful) — nothing permanent except change, I repeat — the illusory nature of the evaluation based upon the phenomena becomes so apparent, that it seems like idiocy and leads to idiocy; therefore, a real one on this particular level which we are speaking wrote the book “Science and Sanity”; because the only show for sanity is to achieve the next manifold of values based upon the dynamic nature of this world.

          These first factors which we perceive in the contrasting phase are so revolutionary, they are so weighted with such far-reaching significance, they are so vast in their comprehensiveness that it requires a long time to re-canalize the psychic nature to begin to comprehend the vastness of the revolutionary change which will eventuate when the new manifold of values has infiltrated into the consciousness of a sufficient number to become effective in the race psyche. I am of the opinion that all exoteric work should be confined to that level and that the other manifold of values based upon the field — Atman, based upon Aditi as represented by Brahma — should be held in reserve for the esoteric work, because it is a monumental job to effect that transference of evaluation from objective identity, the A state, to non-identity, the Ā state.

          This contrast should go further; we have only touched the fringe of it.

 


 

February 28, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 7

 

          The Ā state as indicative of — beyond-man. This term “beyond-man” is put in our description to indicate progressive development and at the same time to avoid the use of the word, masters. In the School of the Natural Order we reserve the term, masters, for the Atmic level — Atman — on the grounds that not until one is completely in control of the physiological organism can he be designated a master. There is that level, even though it seems far and remote from our state as we are now manifesting it, where complete control of the physiological organism means just that; there are none of its so-called functions but that are under the conscious control of the individual. We hear or read occasionally of an oriental who has developed the ability to suspend animation. Not over three days ago one was featured in the news. A Swami had developed suspended animation and was buried for 72 hours or more in a concrete sepulcher, and to demonstrate that he had complete suspended animation he was immersed in water in addition. An individual based in the objective mental state would not have lived over three minutes, but the Swami was left for 72 hours before they took him out and he returned to full conscious functioning, and yet that is not mastership, because he has not as yet reached the ability to arrest the cyclic process of the physiological organism. That means his physiological organism will grow what we call “old” and will begin to fall apart; he will lose his teeth and his hair or his hearing will become impaired, etc., and finally he will have to surrender his ‘body’. The master does not surrender the physiological organism; he constantly renews it; he continually maintains it at a given state, approximately what would be thirty years of age, relative to the birth-death process of the physiological organism. The master eats very little, sleeps little; some sleep almost not at all. My teacher told me that he was with his teacher in the Himalaya mountains for 16 years, and that his teacher came in contact with real masters, and his teacher said that on one occasion he was visiting a real master, and because he didn’t know any better at that time, he asked the Master, “How often do you sleep?” The reply was, “I think I have had 15 minutes in the last three years,” and this was said rather apologetically, that he had to lapse to the level of sleep for 15 minutes.

          When one reaches that state he does not reincarnate as we do. They may or may not come through the process of birth natural to the objective manifold, but once the physiological organism has been assumed (they consciously assume it) they will maintain it until their mission for assuming it has been fulfilled, and they will control it in all of its intricate departments and functions. Out of deference to that, his level or state, we avoid the glib use of the word master in our School of the Natural Order, and reserve it for the state just described — complete control of the physiological organism. Of course, there are degrees of this level; there are those who are just born on that level but who have not grown up on it. We must recognize that that level has its birth, which we label the birth of the Christos, and the process of development of the physiological organism to maturity. So, mastership means maturity on an exceedingly high level, and not just born and still an infant on that level. There are many degrees of the developing process after the birth respecting that level, and as we would say, of the little baby born of the physical mother. In the race consciousness there is recognition of various phases of manhood. All these factors should be kept in mind.

          But there is a preliminary phase to the birth we are labeling “beyond-man” because the orientation has changed; the manifold of values has changed respecting the preliminary phase in the process toward the birth or in preparation for the birth. This is the immediate objective of the man state.

          Now we have another sharp differentiation. Everyone that walks upright is not yet man; he might be more animal than man; he may have slipped atavistically and assumed characteristics of the animal state which may predominate, or dominate his psychic nature and he is controlled by those animal forces and has lost his estate as man. That is more prevalent than generally believed, and subsequent cycles in the palingenetic process will substantiate and represent his fallen state because he will come back in an animal form. That is contrary to some teachings in which it is alleged that the animal world has been lost and man can no longer revert to the animal form. But that is not accepted in the School of the Natural Order instruction; that state is never lost on the grounds that that which predominates in the consciousness of a given individual will inevitably have its own representation and that is a ‘rule’ that is invariant. “As ye sow so shall ye reap” and if one allows the animal propensities and proclivities to predominate his psyche then that individual will manifest the representation thereof; there is no such thing as a door in that process of representation (as we see it, and we will allow anyone else to see it otherwise). So, “man” has many connotations, but that is not the purpose or province of this lesson, which is on the beyond-man state.

          What has become recognized as common decencies, the common amenities, and I will go further and say, nobilities, we label “man”, until we have a cliché, “Well, be a man,” “be manly,” etc. That is incorporated in the race consciousness and is sufficiently descriptive of what we mean by the word “man”.

          However all that may or may not be, the beyond-man state is preparatory for the great advent, the birth of the Christos, which simply means the awakening of consciousness on the noetic mind level, as distinct, separate, unique, from the control of forces in the psychic nature; it means the passing beyond the function relative to the psychic nature. This has been labeled in general semantics, the Ā state because of the manifold of values. It is in order to describe somewhat that Ā or beyond-man state, the idea that it is indicative of a higher level of development; I cannot exhaust that description, I will give it sufficiently so that what is left out (which might be comparable to what is given) might be fulfilled each for himself.

          First, it is a complete reversal of roles; it is one of those anomalies or paradoxes we find repeatedly in the study of the cosmic process, and those paradoxes must be reconciled as we find them, and they are only reconciled by recognizing the change in respect to the reference frame — that is, the manifold of values. Once we can understand that there are many manifolds (that means frames of reference) then the anomalies and paradoxes are not difficult to handle; they are easily reconciled. But it has been impossible to reconcile these paradoxes or anomalies by clinging to one given manifold of values. So, first, we recognize a complete reversal of roles.

For illustration: If one is in the Ā state and in association with others in that state and the question is asked, “How old are you?” As he reflected he might say, “I am only 2,857,000 years old.” Then the reply, “Is that all?” Of course, that could not be said to anyone in the A orientation, the objective manifold of values, because when that question is asked he would think of the date that he was born this time, not the date he came in. That thinking of the date he came in is indicative of the Ā state because the one in the A state never thinks of the date he came in, because he is identified with his physical ‘body’ and thinks of the date he was born and not the date he came in. There is the anomaly. One who is reaching the habit of thinking in the Ā frame of reference always has to translate in the presence of one limited to the A state, and he has to use language understandable to that state, but he may translate mentally, within himself.

          I was in conversation with my teacher one day and in mentioning two individuals, he casually said that there are 250,000 years between them. I want you to get the contrast; both walking on their hind legs; neither one in consciousness dominated by the animal level forces; to all objective appearance belonging to the same race, society, culture, yet 250,000 years separated them.

          The one in the Ā state thinks, acts and reacts differently from those in the A state; not only in respect to what we can age (that we have just touched on), but in so many other respects. For instance, one in the Ā state looks upon that interval between coming in and departing hence, or thence, as opportunity for acquiring experience; therefore, his categories of good and bad and degrees between readily change. Contrasted again with the one in the A state or manifold of values, good and bad are that which makes or doesn’t make for physical comfort, convenience, security, etc. But the other one doesn’t register that at all; his ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are that which aids or thwarts creative expression in experience; that which thwarts creative expression in experience is his ‘bad’; that which supplies, makes, aids, creative experience and endeavor he considers ‘good’. It is not either/or; because the one in the Ā manifold is conscious of the excluded middle, the degrees of opportunity for creative expression in experience. Here opens a field of observation upon which I could spend weeks with a lesson a day, to fully comprehend it. But I will give you only one or two instances, and you follow through with what will fit.

          The individual in the Ā orientation does not believe in inheritance — in leaving anything to one through rapport or karma who has been attached to him, like children. He will not leave anything to them because he is apprehensive that it will defeat the purpose of their coming, of their gaining experience through creative endeavor. Anything which will deprive another of opportunity for individual creative effort will thwart the purpose of his coming. If one were left a hundred thousand dollars, it might prove a temptation to slack off effort, which effort will expand his consciousness; expansion of consciousness is only achieved through individual creative effort. So, among other things, if one has accumulated the ‘things’ valued in the objective manifold he will see to it that not one of his children are left anything because he doesn’t want to throw that obstacle in their way of being free to find their own creative force in experience. Compare the parable to the same line of thought, of belief that the educational system in the objective manifold of values is all cock-eyed because of thinking that everyone should be educated to further the individualizing process, to develop that consciousness of self-confidence which comes from egotistic satisfaction in achievement. To educate a child to be successful poses a monumental problem; what is the criterion of success? Here we see the reversal of roles again. Utter and complete failure relative to the A manifold of values may be the highest success relative to the Ā manifold of values — it may go so far as to be a complete sell-out and prostitution of inherent intrinsic worth.

          So, the Ā state is not just simply non-identity of word with ‘thing’, non-reification of symbols, etc.; the Ā state is not simply evaluation based upon the dynamic process which characterizes ‘things’, ‘objects’, individuals, etc.; it is not just thinking in terms of autonomous fields, lines of force, emergent energy, etc., etc.; the Ā state is a functional realm of consciousness in which these articulations of living in an energy world as a dynamic process and evaluations are based upon that simple fact. These factors relative to the Ā state are comparable to parsing the parts of speech relative to adequate use of language in which the technique or structure of the language used has receded into the unconscious and been forgotten.

          So, the technique or structure of the Ā state must be learned as the child learns a b c, c a t, d o g, in the A state, and learns to identify the picture of the word with the picture of that which the word symbolizes; when he has gained facility in identification of one picture with another picture he is supposed to have the technique of language, until the original ‘thing’, ‘object’, which is supposed to be symbolized has long since been forgotten and lost. That was demonstrated in the New York public schools about a year ago. They had to bring a cow around to show the children where milk came from. The picture of the characters — m i l k — identified with the picture of a can, had to be literally off-set by showing a real cow and the milk.

          The artificial educational institutions based upon what is called success in the objective manifold sense, has led the entire culture astray from that which is considered to be the purpose of the palingenetic cycle, as seen from the Ā manifold of values; and in the Ā manifold of values the technique respecting that manifold has been gained and it is functional in the consciousness of the individual oriented in some degree to that level.

          Do you see the comprehensiveness which opens and how this lends itself to almost endless treatment in description?

 


 

March 1, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 8

 

Our lesson this morning is a continuation of the three preceding lessons; factors not touched upon in those lesson talks will be developed — a continuation beyond the technique of the non-aristotelian orientation into the functional properties of the state. We will take up heredity and environment and again contrast the aristotelian interpretations with the non-aristotelian method of evaluation, among other things.

          Heredity. The attitude from the aristotelian manifold of values is that the individual identified with its physical ‘body’, born of its physical mother, has potentialities responsive to influences like plastic clay in the hands of a molder, but that its potentialities are limited by that which has been a priori established by the parents and the genealogical line of the parents, etc. This all focuses down to the combinations of the chromosomes and the characteristics inherent in the chromosomes called the genes and whatever that combination might be respecting the arrangement of the chromosomes, 48 in all; 24 contributed by the mother and 24 contributed by the father; that that becomes fixed, whatever the arrangement of these chromosomes, then potentialities respecting capabilities, abilities, etc., are therefore fixed and that potential and individual, identified as the body, is plastic and can be molded. Therefore, the great stress upon proper opportunity, environment, opportunity present in environment, the home environment, the church influence, educational environment, cultural, racial; ideas as environments, etc. Within this category of values it has been alleged by some — give me the child from birth to seven years and you can take him from then on; that the potentiality within the limitations of heredity will be set and fixed, etc., etc.

          Now everyone is familiar with these factors running back into the Lamarckian theory of evolution and Darwinian survival of the species, what is generally called the classical factors of evolution. Those classical factors rest upon and were developed out of the aristotelian attitude, manifold, etc. There is no use to stress these classical factors, everyone is so well informed respecting them, and just to touch upon them is sufficient for this purpose.

          Now turn from the classical factors of evolution as explanatory of heredity and the potentiality within the limitations thereof, and consider the baby born as the body only and as plastic and that it can be molded according to environmental influences, etc., — we turn to the non-aristotelian attitude respecting the same event.

          First, some of the background of the non-aristotelian attitude under which and out of which evaluation is based or develops. Every individual essentially can be described as an autonomous field of consciousness-light-energy. We are not sufficiently conversant with the Sanskrit to mentally picture a referent; we have not thought long enough, racially speaking, respecting the fundamental intrinsic factors, the essential nature of this world, and of individualization, etc. So, in lieu of our lack of complete grasp of referent for the Sanskrit terms and symbols, we will confine ourselves to our English. For instance, instead of saying Jiva we say consciousness-light-energy as a field or as a differentiated sphere. In English we have to use lots of words where in the Sanskrit they use one. However, every field, autonomous or not, differentiated or not, is thought of as positive-negative, the two poles; therefore, the constant use of the analogy of the magnetic field, as can be generated, until channels are created in thinking, so that whenever the terms field, sphere, differentiated substance, are used, automatically we think of positive-negative energy of the field having two poles — one positive and one negative — and the union of the positive and negative represents the fundamental structure of a given field; if one is absent, whether the positive or negative pole — no field. We have often used the illustration that all the electrons in the universe will not make an atom; but one electron and one proton in polarity and that relationship, that attractive force, represents the field that we label atom; so, throughout all so-called levels of the universe, with no exceptions.

          This is the non-aristotelian attitude toward the new-born babe. We are thinking about that individual for which the physical ‘body’ is prepared for its occupancy; that individual has an aeonian past, and that aeonian past can be described as the descending arc through successive differentiations until the final, ultimate, autonomous field has become differentiated; so, there is synthesized in that field the aeonian past.

          One more factor, or I should have said, another factor to be put in here. In respect to these final and ultimate differentiations of individualized or autonomous fields, there are different harmonic time intervals or stages by which the ultimate or final differentiation is effected. We can, if we are careful with our thoughts, show that will be the age of the soul. We are justified in using the term because it is spoken of in the Scriptures: the elder and younger. We cannot refer to sidereal time factor because that is so arbitrary; it is so temporal and recent; so, we have to refer to harmonic time by which the cosmic process can be evaluated, and in like manner the epitomization of the cosmic process in the individualizing process can be evaluated in terms of harmonic time. We studied that in our lessons where we described the dimensions of space and the dimensions of time, so we will not do other than refer to it here. It is a factor which must be put in because we will see how it operates respecting heredity.

          Now we turn our attention to the chromosomes and the genes. In the functional process of the configurations, we find a cyclic process in every representation of the state or the pattern of a given field or of any field. The analogy which brings it into sharp focus is the plant — from seed to seed represents the cycle. We plant the seed; it germinates, grows, develops and culminates in the seed; so, also with the chromosomes, the cycle is similar to the plant. The physiological organism is developed out of the seed, and the physiological organism terminates in the seed. Hold all these factors in mind, as it is quite complicated, and I have to put in two or three more to make the picture complete.

          The gunas. As light eventuates in energy it manifests as energy force, pressure, in the plant and animal or in the human as well, which simply means energy in action, in contrast to potential or inertial energy. We can divide the gunas broadly into three divisions: the tamasic or inertial quality; the tempestuous, virulent qualities; and the quiet, the peaceful, the beautiful, the quality of felicity. Energy in action is characterized by the qualities and the blendings of those qualities which make seven, and the wide divisions of each of the seven, like dividing the primary colors into their infinite shadings. Qualities habitually held or cultivated in the psychic nature eventually become represented in the configuration as representation thereof (of the psychic nature).

          The chromosomes are not ‘things’ like regulators, determinators of temperament, capacity, ability, functional characteristics or structure qualities — by structure qualities, we mean color of eyes, texture of hair (flat, round, coarse, etc.), texture of skin, etc.; these are representations of the gunas, and these qualities or gunas held in the psychic nature become representations in the configuration, and the configuration eventuates in the seed, the chromosome; so the chromosome becomes the electromagnetic field of the guna — not a ‘thing’, not an ‘object’; and the genes represent qualities, the gunas as representations. Do not think that one can hold rajasic qualities for a few years and establish those qualities in the psychic nature; but if you will hold a rajasic quality for a few generations, then the fourth or fifth generation will have those qualities in the form of genes and chromosomes and become transmitted. Transmitted to what? To the physiological organism, that is, it goes into the seed.

Now comes the individual himself. We will not go into why that individual comes to a certain genealogical line and not another. Again it is magnetic affinity. We have to think wholly in terms of affinity, the state of development, which means the age of the individual, the accumulated qualities inhering in the consciousness, affinities which have been developed therein, and these all become governing factors to the race, the genealogical line within the race, the parentage in the genealogical field of the race, and environmental situation in which it can further its own development; that furthering means expiation of karma as furthering its own development. All those factors are involved in why an individual is born into a certain circumstance and not another, why born in one race and not another, why in one genealogical line and not another; there is a side range of variation upon that theme or factor. The higher developed the individual, the more that individual can consciously govern all these attractive and repulsive affinities, and the less developed the individual the more he is subjected to generalized affinities, circumstances.

          But, focusing our attention upon heredity and not going too far afield from the thought, we have the individual, due to its inherent attractive forces drawn to certain parents (to narrow it down and oversimplify) and it becomes attached to the physiological organism prepared, the configuration developed through the process of mating and the arrangement of the chromosomes.

          Now, those qualities of the physiological organism will have a profound influence upon the consciousness providing (this is a mighty provision) there is affinity in the consciousness of the individual for similar qualities inhering in the chromosomes as seed, inhering in the seed representative of the parents and the parent’s parents, etc.; if there is very little affinity for the qualities in the chromosomes, and do not confuse this affinity with the affinity which attracts the individual to a certain line or parents, because karmic factors might have entered, opportunity for development might have entered, or in the higher levels of individualization, deliberate choice might have been made, so the affinity for the gunas of the physiological organism as established by the chromosomes must not be confused with that other affinity which attracts a given individual to a given genealogical line, or to certain parents; there are two different levels respecting affinity.

          But to deal with heredity we must concentrate upon the influence of the gunas of the physiological organism as determined by the chromosomes relative to the individual and his affinity or lack of affinity for those qualities or gunas. We can state it broadly that the lesser developed in the scale or ladder of the individualizing process of the individual, the more negative he will be to those qualities, or if he has affinity he will assume the qualities very easily and manifest them. In 50% or more of the cases he will have no affinity for those hereditary qualities, but will be motivated by them to a greater or less degree. Watch the degrees here, because it plays tremendous importance in the personality pattern of the individual. In some there is no affinity and easily he can conquer and surmount the qualities of the physiological organism determined by the qualities in the genes and chromosomes; in others it is a desperate fight. He feels these influences, and the individual doesn’t like them and is constantly at war with them. Sometimes the qualities of the physiological organism, more or less, gain control of the individual and dominates him. The warfare in some individuals, not in all, has been characterized as evil flesh, devil, warring against Christ and the Spirit, etc., etc.; that may be one way to characterize it, but it is a warfare between qualities; one inhering in the physiological organism as established by genes and chromosomes, and the other inherent, essential qualities of the individual himself, and the degree of affinity he will have or not have for them will set the degree of warfare between them, until there will be more or less easy victory over them, or succumbing to them, etc.

          We could say, to the average state of development respecting the field, the individual, the Jiva, that as his own inherent and potential forces are motivated, so we can look upon the qualities, the gunas of the physiological organism as motivators, striving to strike a balance, an average between a considerable range, either side of average or balance.

          If we go to the more animalized, the aborigine, the tribal man, we find no effort to counteract the guna ensemble of the physiological organism; we find a complete instinctive submergence, with no consciousness of submergence. But as we come to the higher or cultural level we find wide discrepancies between the inherent qualities of the individual’s field and the qualities of its physiological organism, and there we will find another range of many degrees of handling it easily or being motivated or persuaded, etc., etc.

          Now, there are so many exceptions to the whole rule as given this morning — exceptions come in where we find a higher developed individual electing a certain genealogical line, consciously electing parentage, and therefore consciously establishing a relationship with mother or father or both prior to conception, and if that relationship is established prior to conception (which is not the rule; it is usually about three weeks after conception), if that attachment has been made prior to conception, like the individual in the field of the mother or in the field from a rapport with the father, or both, — if they are sufficiently harmonized (if they are not sufficiently harmonized for that affinity to operate in the law of polarity, then it will be one or the other, not both), if that attachment has been made prior to conception, then out of the range possible in the chromosomes, the field for their combinations can be established, and the qualities desired in the physiological organism determined. But that is such a rare and great exception that there is hardly need for mentioning it; yet those eventuations do take place.

          What has been said about heredity can in some measure be applied to environment, but not as the aristotelians believe, that the individual is identified with the ‘body’ which is born and it can be molded. For every individual that an aristotelian can point out wherein the whole environment influenced the individual I will point out one where the individual completely transformed and revolutionized the environment of the home before its physiological organism was out of the cradle, its influence was so great — father changed, mother changed, they began to change their consciousness because of a superior influence in the home — I will show you more where the incarnating one influenced the home than you can show me the home influenced the individual.

          If you have had experience and memory, think of a home before a greater one came, one greater than the parents. The non-aristotelians think always of the field relationship. Many a home has been revolutionized and transformed before the physiological organism got out of the cradle, but it was because of the presence of a higher developed individual. So, the idea that the individual can be molded by environment is preposterous, unless we say the individual coming in is negative to the environment; the environment will impress him psychically not educationally (unless you call psychic impression education, which you could in a way). To educate is to draw out; being negative is the reverse. One takes on the guna qualities of the environment. It is according to the wave length and frequency, energy in action and its qualities, the field, whether the individual is negative or not. Many individuals grow up in a field in which they have no affinity and they get out as soon as they can; or they transform it, or succumb to it. But always in terms of field qualities, the guna frequencies, etc., never in terms that the individual is a plastic so-and-so that is going to be molded; he might be a molder instead of being molded.

          The non-aristotelian attitude is always in terms of fields, in terms of qualities, gunas of the field respecting both heredity and environment, so that it puts a different value upon a given situation which never lends itself to generalization; it is one, one, one. You must use all the factors touched upon in our non-aristotelian attitude respecting heredity and environment with one individual; they will not work if they are applied simultaneously to two individuals. You will find it will work with no exception, and you will learn the relationship of the individual field qualities to hereditary guna qualities of the physiological organism, or/and the field which is called environment. If you read biography widely enough and long enough you will find that more great ones, great creators, great contributors come out of squalor and environmental influences that have no redeeming features — that is, that you would think would mold. It is just the opposite to those born in the slums and line-house districts. I can think of many, from Florence Nightingale to Abraham Lincoln; and I always think of Blanche Walsh, born in the gutter of the slums in Chicago, and what a magnificent example to all womanhood. If you will watch, you will see that the non-aristotelian attitude works in heredity and also in environment.

          I should put in also as illustration and proof of the working of affinity respecting the guna qualities both in heredity and environment, the great number who are born with a so-called “silver spoon in their mouth”; with all the opportunities that could be supplied on this earth, and of all the cussedness, etc., as a result.

 


 

March 2, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 9

 

          Peace, security, harmony, etc., are not possible until the urge to achieve the next state is fulfilled. Primarily this refers to a given individual; secondarily, to group affiliations, family relations, organized society, etc. This is part of the instruction of the School of the Natural Order for several reasons: first, to counteract the aristotelian method of evaluation respecting modern psychology, both in the Freudian school and in the psychiatric fraternities which grew out of the Freudian basis of evaluation respecting psychological functions. Those who understand the psychic nature, how it is developed and the way it functions are of the opinion that the Freudian school of psychology and all who have developed psychological studies out of that basis are in grievous error.

          It is understandable how this error came to be. First, is the background of aristotelian canalization, the phenomenal representation, images appearing substantive, this world appearing as real, as static ‘thing’; the age-long habit of thing-i-fying every configuration, the inability of the sensuous receptors to register this world as discontinuous respecting the units of energy, energy systems, etc.; and further, that when the creative force of the psychic nature is galvanized into activity, or when it first awakens, it awakens in the genital center and there is a characteristic of this force irrespective of the center in which it becomes active or resident: all latency in the form of non-fulfillments, suppressions, repressions, etc., are precipitated, thrown into a high degree of activity. When the psychic nature is understood and the place that it occupies, the part that it plays in the individualizing process, then there is no confusion respecting the galvanization of the centers into action, and the precipitous bringing to the periphery of the psychic substance of the psychic nature, latent potentialities, particularly suppressions, repressions, etc.; that is part of the process. But reflect a moment: this galvanizing into activity of the centers which govern creative force, creative forms of expression, creativity itself in the various levels or departments of the individual’s nature — that means to say, that it is the creative force which motivates every form of expression in the individual’s nature — with the thought focused upon the creative force as the motivating ‘source’ or ‘principle’, and as the motivating principle or source of any or all expressions, the structure of the psychic nature is envisioned; that means that each of the major foci of force respecting the structure govern the various levels or govern a certain level. Reflect upon that and hold it in consciousness, then think of one who knows nothing — that the source of all creativity, the urge to expression is described as this motivating source; he knows nothing of the structure of the individual ensemble and in that ignorance of these factors; consciousness is identified with the physical body as real; therefore all of this is attributed to the ‘physical’ body as the brain and its neurons and convolutions and degrees of gray matter infilled between convolutions of the brain, etc., etc. The whole thing is ‘physical’ identity of the consciousness, and consciousness itself is attributed to the ‘physical’ as the sum total of its parts plus its organization. There is the foundation of this grievous error perpetrated upon stupidity and ignorance by the stupid and the ignorant. One  has to be in the position of a professional man, particularly in medicine or a psychological consultant over a period of years to fully realize the widespread result of this error initiated by Sigmund Freud; and then the greater error was introduced which seriously confounded the first error, and the rebellion that is going to sweep the constituted church people, which is going to throw the pendulum the other way and off the rhythm. So, the aristotelians in all departments swing from one extreme to the other extreme — both extremes in non-conformity to the natural order process. These are the factors envisioned when this was introduced — that peace, security, harmony, etc., are not possible until the urge to achieve the next state is fulfilled. “I come not to destroy the law (that means the function); I come to fulfill,” says the Christos. So, we have the basis for psychological studies in the School of the Natural Order by understanding the motivating force in feeling-thinking, psychological processes.

          It is the thwarting of the urge to fulfilling, to completing the man state which becomes the basis of all psychological conflicts; the thwarting of the urge develops compensatory and substituted forms of expression to complete, to accomplish, to fulfill the man state. Now, this is such an enormous problem at the present state of racial development, and ramifications extend into so many different divisions and departments of organized society. For instance: the compensatory form of expression which has been developed in the pursuit of wealth. Men and women who do not understand the urge and have so much creative force, drive, that they elect, among other things, the pursuit of wealth, the acquisition of money — not because they want money or wealth, but because it becomes a game that they play as a substituted outlet, and it is a gigantic game that enlists their creative force; doing that calls upon all the creative force that they can put into it; but no happiness, no peace, no security, no harmony eventuates, even in the successful playing of the game, when the game becomes established as the criterion of wealth in the race consciousness, becomes respectable and respected and is made the racial goal, god to worship; then the entire harmonic organization of society becomes thrown out of balance and opens the door wide to organized crime, with all of the subsidiary adjuncts thereto. So, the increase in crime parallels the increase in accentuation of the game, and the game is a compensatory or substituted form of outlet or expression, contrary to the natural order process of development. See what enormous problems for solution are created? And I cited only one factor.

          Let us cite the mental breakdowns and the increasing number in our institutions which is becoming a prodigious problem, because statistically speaking, and I am quoting, “If the rate continues as it has for the past ten years, by 1980 50% of the inhabitants of the U.S. will be in our insane asylums; 25% will be superannuated, and the other 25% will be working for the rest” — and that will be a gigantic problem unless something happens. 98% of neuroses in England disappeared magically after the first blitz raid; they were violently jarred out of self-indulgence; they had to think of others, and had to do something fast. That was their salvation; and unless 50% of the inhabitants of the U.S. are prevented from going into insane asylums by 1980 something has to happen that will cure 98% overnight.

          I am citing the enormity of the problem of what? Blind leaders of the blind, ignorance, stupidity, impossible erroneous evaluation upon ignorance and stupidity, until confusion is becoming confounded in pyramidal problems.

          There is another reason for introducing this in the prefatory work and that reason is described as the necessity of becoming psychologically balanced, psychologically oriented, psychologically straightened out before entrance to the path of development is attempted. There has to be harmony, rhythm, balance achieved in the psychic nature as preparatory to the real study and real development; in other words, one cannot start from a false basis to fulfill, to accomplish, to achieve the man state, because back of all that we are saying, or that could be said on this subject, there is fundamental ‘law’, which means that is the way it functions, and it doesn’t function in any other way. Only as one fulfills the state in which he is now conscious can he achieve or accomplish entrance to the next state. So, the beyond-man state is not possible until the man state has been fulfilled, completed, rounded out. That ties into the “wheel of necessity”; over and over and over again the efforts must be made in successive reincarnations until it is accomplished. There are no skips, jumps in nature. Imagine a plant skipping and jumping and the flowers and fruit appearing with no limbs or trunks! Many individuals are trying to do that. They want the ‘flowers’ and the ‘fruits’ by some magical process, by ignoring growth. The German people used to have an old folk expression “Some want the roast pigeon to fly into their mouths.” You will find many in so-called truth studies and circles that have this attitude. “Serene I fold my hands and wait”; that makes one who understands the natural order process just shiver; when the whole emphasis must be upon growth — natural growth. The natural order process must be fulfilled. That balance and harmony in the psychic nature must be accomplished because one cannot start from a substituted or compensatory position or basis to go ‘up the ladder of development’; he has to go back to his unfulfilled point, and there is no escape; it is the inevitability of the natural order process. If it were not that way, it would have no value; we would have nothing to rest upon confidently. It is forever unfailing. We learn the natural order and cooperate with it, then we are on solid grounds — the “rock of Ages” is it so solid. But to depart from it is foolish; you are right back where you started with all the loss of effort, and others going on ahead, because the publicans and harlots will go into the Kingdom before the out-on-the-limbers, because they have to go back in order to fulfill.

          Now, I have to confess that we are only playing around on the surface of the vast problems, but we are setting the basic foundation for the therapeutics for the new age, the new cycle. All therapeutic efforts will be based upon this doctrine of fulfillment and the dynamism of the creative urge at each step and each stage, and the false creations in the frequencies and representations thereof — viruses, bugs, germs and what have you — until its waves and clouds of murky destructive substances exuding, like a plague from a pit, will have ceased forever.

          So, the basis of all therapeutics is the understanding of the structure of the individual, the understanding of the individualizing process, the understanding that that is only a phase of the gigantic, dynamic creative power of the universe, and the cooperation with and fulfillment of that within one’s self is peace, harmony, health, security and increasing felicity until the joy song will just sing and sing in the members of a given individual, and in society-as-a-whole. So, we are right at the very roots and foundation of remedial efforts for the individual and for the world.

          We will go on with contrasting the shortcomings and failures of modern psychiatry.

 


 

March 3, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 10

 

          Shortcomings and failures of psychiatric practice due to the aristotelian approach, etc. Relative to healing work in the School of the Natural Order, as well as relative to healing work in those circles studying the Gnosis, this analysis of Freudian psychology and psychiatric practice which has and is evolving out of Freudian psychology is very important. It is important on the grounds that only by knowing the true causative factors regarding maladjustments in the emotional and mental levels of a given individual can the remedy be found and the conditions adjusted.

          Freudian psychology remained more academic, not that it was adopted by our higher institutions of learning, but that it became more of an intellectual pastime among those who took up the study. But when it was put into practice by practicing psychiatrists, then its failures began to loom up, until recent reports (and we should date this) like Gallup polls taken in which the question was asked, “What proportion of your cases are you successful in straightening out, effecting a cure?” etc. The largest percentage given was 10%, the smallest 2%. So, we have an average of 6% of the cases which they receive that they admit they can help. This is well authenticated, because it so happens that I have been keeping up with it.

          The widespread recognition in the medical profession of this practical failure of practicing psychiatrists has developed three factions. There is no use here to go into the grounds upon which they have divided. The factions are now becoming crystallized, dogmatized and are virulently opposing each other. Here is obvious failure of a methodology which gave great promise — the final recognition of psychology and I should say Freudian psychology, by the medical profession and by our academic or higher institutions of learning was quite an achievement; it became acceptable. Then after its acceptance, after it was put to the severe test of practice and taken away from the verbalistic level or mental toying with phrases and new terms until a jargon was developed that only the initiated could understand, and was put to the test of practice, as conscientious M.D.’s would do, then its failure showed up and became monumental and resulted in the dichotomies we now witness.

          So, it is very appropriate to take up the subject of the failures of modern psychiatric practice and see whether or not with the understanding of the whole gestalt, structure of the individual, we can place our finger on the reason; this was generalized when I mentioned that the failure of psychiatric practice was due to the aristotelian attitude, approach, etc. But that is too generalized; that generalization was sufficient for the outline, but when that outline was supposed to be filled in, specific points were to be developed. In filling in the outline I have eight specific points to develop:

1. No recognition of the existence of individual being before birth of the given physiological organism. This failure is glaring in Freudian writings, as the strained effort is present to account for maladjustments in the emotional and mental life of the individual, in the absence of any experience in the present life; but so dogmatic is the attitude that there is no other life to consider that Francis Mott ran down these cases in which no experience could be found to account for them, to the intra-uterine state. And using elaborate verbalistic involvement, causative factors were developed affecting the fetus in the intra-uterine state, because they had to get something, some experience prior to the conscious experience after the birth of the ‘body’ to account for these factors. Subsequently, in Freud’s declining years and with his advanced students these eventuations alleged to have taken place in the intra-uterine conditions or state, were developed into a fundamental causative factor which affected the lives of those not classified in the lack of experience. The intra-uterine conditions and effects were generalized as a strong tendency to retreat from life, and unconscious motivating forces operating within the lives of numerous individuals to get back to the cryptic conditions of the womb where complete protection could be enjoyed and experienced. (Francis Mott specialized on that point and attracted international attention by his elaborate and verbalistic descriptions for the reason for this retreat.) This and many other factors that we can call to mind or that we will touch upon, are due to the non-recognition of the being prior to the present or a given birth.

          In giving recognition to a previous existence and adding thereto the state or stage of development of the individual, comprehending therewith attractive forces in the consciousness of the individual due to karmic creations, etc., the difficult problems are easily reconciled without resorting to the intra-uterine state of the fetus. For illustration: one coming out of a relative higher level into birth subjects the individual to the environmental forces and frequencies of a much lower level; that individual has great difficulty in making his adjustment to the most excruciating effects of the lower frequencies — colic in babies as a case in point; the effort to withdraw, retreat from that which produces pain and suffering, not to the intra-uterine state, but to the Light world from which it has newly arrived. The peace and beauty and felicity and harmony, etc. in which that individual had its existence prior to birth, and being compelled to associate with its physiological organism and occupy it and thereby subjecting it to frequencies which are cruel and merciless, and particularly before adequate resistance has been built up against said frequencies, naturally there would be an effort to withdraw or retreat to the Light and the felicity and not to the intra-uterine state.

          This is a profound difference in evaluation between the aristotelian attitude, approach, etc., and the non-aristotelian. Many other illustrations could be cited to account for this effort to withdraw or retreat. The hyper-sensitive individual, the one further along in the individualizing process experiences this suffering more than the lesser developed individual who comes in with his consciousness filled with eagerness for the experiences of the sense level. We will have occasion to refer back to this very illustration — the recognition of the existence of individual being before birth of its ‘physical body’ — as we touch upon other factors in which failure is very pronounced in psychiatric practice.

          2. That the etiology of emotional function inheres in the neural structure constitutes one of the fatal causes for failure in psychiatric practice or Freudian psychology. The basis of psychological functions, whether emotional or mental reside in the psyche, not the structure of the neural system. There may be some physical trauma which could cause aberrations; there may be psychoma in some form or other, tumors of the brain or nervous system that would cause mental and emotional aberration, and we would classify these as physical traumas, although in the case of tumor in the brain exerting undue pressure upon neural functions, throwing them out of adjustment or causing compensations in other areas, could be traced to the true psychological basis; but being generous and comprehending these diseases as traumas, then with all the liberal allowances due to physical traumas we have vast ranges of conditions and numerous cases where the maladjustment is in the psyche and not in the physiological neural system. So, in the absence of physical trauma, or recognizing the physiological organism as a representation of the whole psychic nature (or the psychic nature as-a-whole as its representation in the physiological organism), then the etiology of emotional disturbances reside in the psyche not in the nervous system.

          3. That the Oedipus complex stems from the sex attraction to the mother is a fantastic reason given for this undue rapport between the child and the mother. And yet the vast amount of literature that has been developed upon this, to us, false basis, beggars description. Yet there are certain authors like Eugene O’Neill who became very wealthy and also famous in literary circles for his outpouring of literature based upon the Oedipus complex as residing in the sex attraction of the infant for its mother. And yet this basis of the Oedipus complex has become almost classical in literary circles and in Freudian psychology and psychiatric practice. It would require literally weeks of effort to minutely describe the intricacies, involvements, etc., which have gone into the description of the Oedipus complex as based upon sex attraction to the mother.

          But it doesn’t require very much time or effort to point up the true basis, the true reason for the Oedipus complex. The strongest power, that is, the most persuasive determinative, etc., respecting the psychic nature, is that force or power which we label love, but which more accurately should be labeled a strong and powerful rapport. Where that obtains we are in the presence of a force that is comparable to Sir Isaac Newton’s concept of gravitation. That seems like an exaggerated form of expression, but it isn’t, because I would place the greater power, binding force, in that which we label love, stronger than what we call gravitation; where that obtains between two individuals in a given life (so long as the psychic nature holds itself together, isn’t disintegrated by the superior power which will ultimately destroy it, and this force is replaced by a yet greater force) and so long as that psychic nature holds together, that becomes the most persuasive determinative force in the lives of a given individual. If you want to bind yourself for the duration of the psychic nature, have no reservation respecting your love, and if you do not want to bind yourself to places, to conditions, to persons, avoid that powerful rapport called love and avoid its negative aspect; when this is recognized — the powerful and persuasive force of love — you have the basis for the Oedipus complex and not sex attraction of an infant in the arms of its mother, you have something infinitely superior in strength and power which brings them together over and over for the duration of the psychic nature. It seems that in the light of true understanding of Reality and of the natural order process respective thereof, that some of these elaborate and involved reasons given for these manifested conditions are utterly fantastic, and yet in great decorum and seriousness among pedantic professors they are accepted and they try to analyze individuals. It is a wonder to me that the psychiatrists, etc., have 2% success in their patients.

          4. The most serious error in all sincerity perpetrated by Sigmund Freud was the over-emphasis upon the sex urge and therefore its repressions, suppressions, compensatory and substituted outlets (because one has to be on the other side, beyond the scenes to witness the result of this failure; more tragedies result from trying to find expression, trying to get over the repression, etc.); the idea of which brought a train of accumulated entities in the psychic nature until the last state of that man was far worse than the first. However, the most signal and outstanding failure to psychiatric practice was due to emphasis upon the sex urge with its complete misunderstanding of it, and therefore total and complete false evaluation of it.

          In saying this and pointing it out as the most signal and outstanding failure of Freudian psychology and modern psychiatric practice, we do not mean to eliminate the recognition of the sex force; it isn’t a case of censorship where full and complete recognition of the force and its power is mitigated; we have the fullest and most complete recognition of it, but at that point we depart from Freudian psychology and modern psychiatric practice. Instead of assuming that the force when once engendered pertains to the physiological organism and that all who are occupying a physiological organism therefore have that force or must deal with that force, and that force is limited in its motivating forms of expression to the sex relationship, and like a syllogism consequently the repression of that force is the cause of 98% of maladjustments, etc., is just as wrong a conclusion as any syllogism. In the recognition of the sex force there has been given all the weight, value, attributes, power, etc., the recognition that that is the pivotal point. The stone that the builders reject becomes the chief keystone of the edifice or the foundation stone of the temple, and the power and force generated, that is, developed in generation, is, by the natural order process, to be used in creative effort in respect to a given birth, to one’s Son of Godhood and all of the intermediate phases and stages of creative effort between generation and the highest creative effort.

          Freudian psychologists and modern psychiatrists limit it to just one level, although they talk about sublimation, whatever — they mean substitution in other forms of creative outlet, particularly on the mental level. I am of the opinion (note the qualification) that the over-emphasis upon the sex force as pertaining to the ‘physical’ individual, has developed vastly more difficulties and maladjustments than it has ever straightened out, cured or adjusted and I can point to 40 years of consultation and innumerable cases where under the persuasion of Freudian psychology effort has been made in expression to get rid of repression and developed a vast train of hidden consequences, entities in the psychic nature which were far more difficult to surmount than the original blockage to the direction of force to higher levels.

 


 

March 4, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 11

 

          30 years ago, more or less, I finished my study and my interest in the study of psychoanalysis. I cast my plumb line into its depths and found it wholly inadequate and dismissed it; I have had no interest in it since. Its limitations became so apparent and also its failures to solve psychological problems. As said in the previous lesson, the only point in reviewing it as prefatory to the study of the School of the Natural Order instruction is because of its interest generally; it is now accepted; it has been taken up in the curriculums of the higher institutions of learning; it is being incorporated into the medical profession specializing now in psychiatric practice; it has been incorporated in the armed services in its various branches, etc. Therefore students preparing themselves for the advanced study of the Gnosis should have some acquaintance with the subject, if not deeper understanding, then they will in turn dismiss it and lose interest because of its failures, its inadequacies, etc.

          You will have observed by your previous acquaintance with the teachings of Sigmund Freud, Brill, Jung, and others, that three fundamental factors are entirely absent in their premises and in their analyses and conclusions: one factor — that whatever eventuates called ‘thing’, ‘object’, phenomenon, or what the aristotelians label subjective feeling, thinking, maladjustments and involvements in the realm of feeling and thinking respecting a given individual, that the positive-negative forces, the functions of polarity are absent. This is a key to the solution of so many of these psychological problems. There is a perfectly natural order synchronization of positive and negative forces, not only in the individual, but between individuals, between individuals and group affiliation, and by group affiliation I comprehend business organization groups and society and communal interests of all kinds and descriptions. Adler emphasized communal adjustment over and above all other factors, and the lack of communal adjustment as basic cause for many maladjustments, complexes, etc. But while the synchronization between the positive and negative forces in these categories mentioned, or within the individual himself, have normalcy, they can easily become disturbed, erroneously interpreted, and within the functional process of the relationship between positive and negative poles of forces, deflections from the norm become prevalent and lead to a series of disastrous consequences. This becomes striking when the problem of homosexuality is approached by the psychoanalysts and psychiatrists. In the presence of this situation they are utterly helpless in seeking or finding any solution whatever.

          5. First, they are up against a monumental semantic blockage in the race consciousness, particularly of the West, England and America (more in the United States than in England, wherein the racial consciousness is still floundering under the unconscious or conscious influences of the Victorian era, the Puritanical taboos and Christian moralists). This has created a monumental semantic blockage to an intelligent approach to the problem of homosexuality; the taboo has extended so far that the laity (meaning those outside of professional circles) do not believe it is a problem, and if they are confronted with its existence, which they are nearly every day in the newspapers, they quickly dismiss it and don’t want to consider it, because it is a taboo of the worst type; consequently the censorship due to the Victorian and Puritanical racial taboos is such a strong force that it constitutes a censorship to the problem. Whether the laity knows it or not it is widespread; it is extremely common, and during the transition period between the cycles where all congealed, hidden and repressed forces are released, it becomes more and more manifest, and on the surface in a greater and greater number of individuals. There are some countries, even before World War I, which were on the eve of legalizing it, and in the last week in the Saturday Review of Literature and other literary magazines, a book was reviewed that was just off the press, written by an outstanding French literary writer, in which the practice of homosexuality is lauded, endorsed, eulogized and brought to the level of an apotheosis of the practice. So, it is with us today. For many years prior to World War I and since, particularly among the writing fraternity of Europe, there was no concealment of the practice; it was openly avowed that it was no longer fashionable for a woman to have a man lover, women must have women lovers, and men must have men lovers, so that those who considered it the most dreadful form of sin, vice, etc., felt that the whole world had lost balance and normal values, like “vice seems too oft familiar with its face, see it first condemned and then embrace” or something to that effect.

          But it is a false approach to label it vice, to label it sin, etc., we should label it maladjustment in polarity, and then approach it with understanding. The only point in bringing it up here is because of its great prevalence and the great confusion which accompanies its solution and I point it out as the most signal failure of the psychiatric practice. Of course the further study and the solution should be given, but that carries it beyond the purpose of our outline. Why is it that upon the basis of the aristotelian approach and attitude there is such signal failure? If you want me to depart from the filling in of the outline and give the answer to that question, I will put it in; if not we will go on.

          I mentioned that there were three factors absent in the attitude of the psychoanalysts and psychiatrists in their premise, and out of the three I have mentioned one: no knowledge of normal natural order functions of polarity between the positive and negative forces between one individual and another individual, between or in groups, society, organizations, etc., and going into communal adjustments, etc. The absence of the understanding of polarity was one factor — the fact that every individual functions as and in the psychic nature, and not in a ‘physical body’. The ‘physical body’, per se, doesn’t exist at all, except as an image, a picture in the psychic nature, so even those who think that they function in a ‘physical body’ are functioning in the  psychic nature with the fixation on the picture in the psychic nature which they label “functioning in their ‘physical body’”. So, in all other respects feelings, desires, thinkings, etc., those are wholly functions of the psychic nature. So completely is the consciousness focused in the psychic nature that there is no exception anywhere, because even in the most canalized objective state, it is merely the domination of the psychic nature by categories or bundles of sensations in which the individual functions — that is, functions under the complete domination of these bundles of sensations in the psychic nature received through the sense faculties. It is sense domination of the psychic nature that is called physical.

          But my point at this moment is that so completely does a given individual function within his psychic nature, and yet that factor is completely left out of consideration in the psychoanalytical and psychiatric evaluations. If there is any reference to the psyche or the psychic nature it is considered to be a development from physical experiences — that is, the outgrowth of some definite ‘thing’ called ‘physical body’ and its functions — and just the reverse represents the facts: the physical body, so-called, is a representation of the total ensemble of sensational effects, experiences of the sense faculties in the psychic nature, and that is easily established; stating it further, even the most concrete ‘thing’ is completely unknown except the bundles of sensations by which it is known; other than that there is no such thing as a concrete ‘thing’. That is the simple fact, saying nothing of going on into the other realms, departments of the psychic nature. One realm or department of the psychic nature is the epitomization of the whole past, called the unconscious or the subconscious, which is only the whole aeonian past rolled up as a scroll in the present. The creative forces, called id, libido, urges, x, umph, and other labels, are merely the creative forces of the psychic nature but are wholly ignored as creative forces pertaining to the psyche, the very constitution of the psychic nature, the energy substance composing it, the building of energy substance according to the guna or quality respecting that substance, then the structure of the psychic nature, the foci, centers and channels in which creative force functions; these are the other factors that are left out or are not comprehended or are ignored by psychoanalysts and psychiatrists, and these are the factors which would render accurate solutions of the psychological problems.

          Then turn your attention again to homosexuality and comprehend these factors that we have just mentioned, and we find first, that the psychic nature, whether it sustains or is sustained, is by synchronization of forces, rapports, etc., and this invariantly, until union is made with the source of the energy of any given psychic nature — that means to say, until the individual has reached conscious identity with the field, the Atman, through the instrumentality of the noetic level. Until that point is reached, rapport synchronization of forces is prerequisite. The younger the individualized state or stage — that is, the less developed — the more necessity exists in the consciousness of the psychic nature for rapport; the relatively higher phases or stages of development, the less dependence upon support derived from rapport synchronization, affiliation, etc., until no support is required by the nature of the individual. As above so below; the younger the infant the more dependent it is upon its mother, the older, and as it grows in degrees, the less dependent, until it can cut the “apron strings” and function independently. So, with the psychic nature — the younger, the more dependent upon the sustaining force, and if it cannot find it one place it will in another, out of necessity. If it cannot be found in husband or wife, it has to go out and find it. That necessity of sustenance drawn from rapport synchronization, affiliation, is erroneously labeled sex by the psychoanalysts and psychiatrists; the aristotelian approach comes in and utterly blocks off understanding. They should understand the polarity of all and every differentiated field. The simple study of chemistry or the structure of the molecule should have given them the key long ago but they dissociate themselves from the understanding of chemical affinity and the electromagnetic force of attraction and repulsion, below the molecular level.

          But in the aristotelian state — in that identity with bundles of sensations, images and pictures — there seems to be an eclipse, a semantic aphasia respecting the function of forces in the psychic nature, the need for communal affiliations, rapports, etc.

          Now, to go a step further: when the normal creative force seeks polarity, that is, seeks the positive or negative for mutual support and sustenance, that sustenance is as vital as food ingested. When that individual — normal to the natural order process, normal to his state — seeks mutual support and sustenance through synchronization of forces respecting the psychic nature and is thwarted, doesn’t complete the function, the rapport, the affiliations, etc. (that is, the completion of the function is thwarted), the force turns back on itself and when it reverses, the polarity changes; the positive becomes negative; the negative becomes positive. Any reversal of force changes its polarity.

          When you read articles about ‘visitors’ to our solar system that approached so close, did you note that the polarity of the earth reversed? I only bring that in as a case exemplifying the reversal.

          In the reversal, the psychic nature seeks its opposite, just like it did before; it sought its opposite in the charge, the ionization; in other words, in the polarity. What we would call a man in the aristotelian language would seek the polarity, but was thwarted; there are many reasons for this thwarting, and we can enumerate them — a mother can form such a strong rapport with a son that the polarity in the son can reverse and he becomes a homosexual, for the same reason as the visitor coming into this solar system; the same ‘law’, same way of functioning. The polarity in the psychic nature of the negative one reverses.

          Now, we have a negatively charged psychic nature in a male ‘body’. He can never form a rapport with a woman; he has to find a man — but we should not say it that way, because at once we introduce all the racial taboos. We should keep our language more accurate and say: the negatively charged psyche is seeking a positively charged psychic nature, and if we would keep that clear (and we do keep that clear in the non-aristotelian manifold of values when we no longer function in the aristotelian manifold; if we function wholly in the non-aristotelian manifold of values we do not mix the two language structures; we keep them separate) we observe that is the most common cause for homosexuality. That is the answer to why.

          But there is another cause that is due to the fact that a positive or negative charged psyche incarnated in a physiological organism of the opposite polarity. Let us say a negatively charged psyche, through many forms of attraction, and again we could enumerate them: chemical attraction, developed rapports, which is karma also, where the father or mother through a strong rapport in prior existence pulls the other in, and the pull is stronger than the natural or normal function of forces in the psychic nature; that is, normally or naturally the negatively charged psychic nature would wait until the female ‘body’ is prepared, until that combination of chromosomes and genes, etc., would develop an organism that fits its lines of force and the polarity of its own field. But that can be upset by a stronger force that pulled it in, and then the negatively charged psyche gets caught in a male ‘body’.

          To the aristotelian a baby boy grows up, but as the baby boy grows up it has no interest for girls (because it is a negatively charged psyche in a male ‘body’), can’t stand them, fights them off, but is interested in boys, loves them. Then the baby boy becomes a man (aristotelianly speaking), and that individual finds himself in terrific conflict; he learns the customs and usages and conventions, mentally or intellectually he learns all that, and he knows that he should be interested in women, but he isn’t, and he can’t make himself. And when he slips and finds he is interested in a man, he feels good, and mentally he tells himself he should feel terrible because of his racial taboos. When he violates the taboo he feels all right, but just blot all that out and focus the consciousness in the psychic nature. Here is a negatively charged psyche that can only form a rapport with the positive. There is a need, and need must be emphasized. If you want Scripture, I can give it to you, “Man is his brother’s keeper.” Don’t think that One on the Heights would write that meaning to feed him and give him clothes and physical comforts, because he would function in the aristotelian manifold of values. That means, in power and force and rapport until he grows up, etc. The non-aristotelian manifold is a different world, a different way of thinking, a different way of evaluating, and it stands on its head the valuations from the objective level. “The last becomes first, and the first becomes last.”

          We have the understanding of the psychic level and the conscious orientation in the energy world, and when one functions in the energy world according to its laws, its positive and negative force, and its frequencies and gunas, etc., etc., then all evaluations are based upon the way the energy world functions, and not according to racial or tribal taboos.

          Here in the case of homosexuality we have a perfectly natural ‘law’ relative to the energy world, and this is why I say that the problem cannot be solved from the aristotelian manifold of values and attitude of approach.


 

March 6, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 12

 

          6. Illustrative of the failure of psychoanalytical and psychiatric practice, I am reading you a book review out of the last “Time” magazine. This illustrates the fantastic lengths to which they will go to account for psychological involvements and confusions as causative factors in the present physical life of the individual. We brought that out by the Oedipus complex, but it is more strikingly brought out here.

 

          “The Writer and Psychoanalysis” by Edmund Bergler.

 

          “In this formidable treatise, Analyst Bergler wrestles with the problem of the writer who has copy paper, a late-model portable, an old farm in Connecticut, a nice wife, the right agent, and no ideas. The fellow need not worry, since Analyst Bergler finds that he can cure nearly 100% of such cases, and says so in a brash passage recalling the palmy days of the old sure-cure Indian remedies.

          “Every writer’s urge, he holds, is sprung by some jolt at weaning time; the adult writer’s flow of words is a psychological substitute for the flow of milk he wanted and did not get, plus a recompense for all the guilt he has subconsciously felt since his diaper days. Once the analyst has worked the anxious writer back to the point where he can endorse mother’s product without fear, shame or remorse, it’s simply a matter of putting a fresh sheet of paper into the machine and hitting the keys.

          “At such a happy times, says Writer Bergler, there is little need for thought, either, since ideas don’t come that way; they just originate in the hurricane cellar of the unconscious, and the writer traps them as they break for the open. According to Bergler, the writer’s function is like that of a man erecting a prefabricated house; in writing, he merely assembles slabs of his inner conflicts and his repressed desires in story form.

          “Analyst Bergler has developed his ideas about writing and writer from the case histories of 36 writers who felt wretched enough to go to him for treatment. What Bergler may not clearly see is that in developing his interesting argument, he is performing a party trick rather like pulling a rug out from under his own feet. By the book’s end, the reader has been taught to wonder what compulsion makes a man set out to explain most of the world’s literature as just an infant’s whimper for a bountiful teat.”

 

          This is what I mean by the utter and complete failure of these ‘birds’ accepted in the army, navy and universally, and their status raised to the eminence of dignity. We cite it as infantile, if not fantastic, stretched to the point of incredulity.

          However, the main failure in the psychoanalytical and psychiatric practice stems from their refusal or inability to give recognition to the independent functions of the psychic nature, and we might add, the understanding of the structure of the psychic nature. Until the force and power of the psychic nature has been transcended — that is, until the orientation has been established with the noetic mind level — every urge, compulsion, drive, etc., inheres in and stems from the psychic nature in any and all, without exception. The character — that means, the guna or quality predominant in the urge or drive — is determined by the area (meaning the center in the psychic nature from which the urge originates). Therefore sharp differentiation should be made between what is labeled the sex urge and the acquisitive urge, the love-force urges, and the intellectual urges; and once these various gunas or types of urge — the drive-force — have been differentiated and sharply so, then the substituted or compensatory forms of expression which the urge takes by reason of obstructions, repressions, suppressions, etc., can be determined by the fixation factors in the psyche. These fixation factors in the psyche represent those unfinished compulsions of past incarnations. All these unfinished experiences in past incarnations constitute the weaker points, like the weak link of a chain, and once tension is placed upon the chain it will be the weakest link that will give way first, and second the next weakest link, etc., or like we would put high pressure steam in a boiler, and if it had a weak spot or a weak seam, those will give way first. So, with the developing process in the natural order there are points on the time-line that might not be strong — that is, well rounded and forgotten, left behind, and the experience gained synthesized in succeeding states, efforts, points, etc.

          We have an analogy in a well-organized educational system: let an individual skip many years, let us say in learning grammar, the parts of speech, etc. and in his older years he tries to make it up, he will find great difficulty in incorporating it into his consciousness and there will always be that lack, error or weakness. One has to catch it as he goes along, at the proper age or times, etc. I do not say it cannot be made up, but it takes an extraordinary effort to make it up and incorporate the missing gaps into the consciousness.

          So, on the time-line in the palingenetic cyclic process, there are points that are not completely expressed, fulfilled at the proper stage in the developing or expanding process. Later on, when there is accretion of force, tension is put on or is developed in the psychic nature, these become fixation points — that is, they are not eliminated out of the psyche, they are fixed there and become points of weakness that will afford opportunity for the substituted or compensatory outlets when creative force at a relatively higher level is aborted, repressed. What is perfectly natural and normal at one state of development of the psychic nature, is, relative to the high state and in a higher organized culture: criminal, destructive, subversive, or in some way or other discriminated against in subsequent ages and conventions.

          To illustrate this point — we find that with the jazz age the opportunity is afforded in this world as an energy world, for the incarnation of aborigine, tribal, pre-aristotelian levels of development, infantilism, and let us say that out of that state developed there are attracted to that state (environmentally speaking, in the energy world or non-aristotelian evaluation process) submental or aborigine types. One comes in and organizes his psychic nature according to the state and guna of the state of his individual point of development, and before he is out of his teen age, he is a wild one, a criminal, and he kills without compunction. Perhaps in one prior incarnation if he killed one who did not belong to his own tribe he was applauded and praised, like we have the remnants of such laudations and praise in wartime today; medals are pinned on for killing the enemy. We are not far removed from the tribal state.

          But if one does that in this day, or the present incarnation, he is a murderer. When these youths are examined by the authorities, they find no remorse, because that conscience, remorse, belongs to a higher level in the development of a psyche, and these belong to a tribal state. He is called a criminal and he doesn’t feel like he is a criminal.

          Who is to blame? Where does the blame lay? Suppose one makes drunkenness or “getting high” a habit; he lends himself to elementalistic and primitive feelings, thoughts, forces, sexual intercourse out of pure animal desire for pleasure. What type of incarnating individual is going to come? Masters of the Wisdom?

          There should be a long and careful (and prayerful) preparation for motherhood and fatherhood, and conscious effort to lift the forces knowing that you are going to attract one and you want to attract the best in your power or ability; parenthood should be planned on that basis — energy world qualities, non-aristotelian evaluations — and if that attitude were inculcated from infancy until one grows up to the point of maturity, marriage, building of a home, etc., within a few generations with such educational regimes or systems, what a race could be developed!

          But we are not, as a race-as-a-whole, far enough along yet to recognize this. All of this, along with the failure to recognize the independent functions of the psyche is the basis for the fantastic conclusions that psychoanalysts and psychiatrists draw to account for maladjustments in psychological processes.

          7. Now, we come to neuroses complexes. The neurosis complex has a basis in fact and in truth, in reality, with a long identification. There is much justification for the neurosis complex if we use the word God as a synonym for the “true self” the “master self”, but by these terms we mean the differentiated field constituting the true individuality. And if we use the word God as a synonym whether we say God incarnate, or God as a word to label the Power-with-which-one-is-conscious (or otherwise) then we have a true admonition “Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy power, with all thy strength, etc. This is self-love, the love of self; the love of Self should fill the consciousness to that point of allness, leaving no room for anything else. Now we have a powerful force which, through a multiplicity of experiences, avenues, is seeking that Self. Let me explain that thought another way. The most powerful force in a given individual essentially, intrinsically is the love of self, but that force will express itself according to the identities which the consciousness contrives at its various states in the expanding process. Where the identity is upon ‘things’ and ‘objects’ that love — inherently and intrinsically — for the God Self will be directed to ‘things’ and ‘objects’ if the consciousness has identified itself therewith. While the urge to love another is primarily the urge to the God Self, the form the urge will take is due to the identity which the consciousness has determined; so we find a multiplicity, a vast range of substitutions for the Self, until experience has been exhausted — that there is no fulfillment, no ultimate enduring satisfaction, until gropingly the way is found to the Self, then ‘thing’, ‘object’, etc., can be loved fully and completely as representation of the Self, not in blind ignorance and unconsciousness of Self.

          The urge to love, the state of the consciousness in identity, these two factors are determinative respecting the neurosis complex, and where there is an overweening focus of consciousness upon and in identity with the physiological organism, then we have what is labeled the Narcissus complex — self-love in the most objective sense.

          The psychoanalyst and psychiatric interpretation or description of the Narcissus complex is always focused upon neglect in childhood; that if the child could not have the love of its guardian, father, mother or brothers and sisters, it loves itself to compensate for the lack of love. But watch the weak link in the skein which causes that. In the psyche there has not been a sufficient emancipation from objective identity. If the love that the infant has and would naturally have directed to mother and father or older brothers and sisters is repressed, no response, then by reason of this overweening or stronger state of identity in the psyche with the physiological organism, with objectivity in general, then the child will love itself.

          But the psychoanalysts and psychiatrists blame the parents and say it is neglect; however, they have other cases that they blame the parents: over-codling, over-pampering, over-spoiling the infant until the infant grows into a canalized state of expecting it, and as it grows older it expects it from everyone until it is focused upon self-love with no consideration whatever for anything or anyone — wholly involved in self-love. No parent or combination of circumstances can force such a state upon an infant where there is no weakness in the psyche, in that particular sense; because the same neglect, over-attention, pampering and spoiling even accentuated in both respects, or either, cannot be given to one who has developed the consciousness of independence in its psychic structure. One will see no effect whatever, in fact, you will see a very early repudiation of either or both. So, it is the weak link in the psyche, not the environmental factors of the home.

 


 

March 7, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 13

 

In the March, 1950, Scientific American magazine I have an article on “Experimental Neuroses” by Jules H. Masserman, which I think will round out our outline on the failure of psychoanalytical and psychiatric practice and methodology.

          The key of this article is set by the work of Auguste Comte, one of the real Illuminati. He was born in France about 1798 and during the entire first part of the nineteenth century he was the highest developed and most recognized philosopher in Europe. The English culture, both in England and America, is greatly indebted to him, because J. S. Mill (John Stuart) was a disciple of Comte, and the contribution of J. S. Mill to the basic philosophy of democracy, wherever it may be, is comparable to Locke. But the sources of democratic principles are familiar to everyone, and you know it stems from August Comte.

          This article is set by what he express as the three stages of any science, and particularly psychiatry.

          I want you to observe that these experimentations (as outlined by Jules H. Masserman) are all based in what in the human level of development we would label the objective manifold; that is, the experiments are all within the objective manifold of values; they are ‘physical’ experiments for different objective purposes. While that biodynamic phase of their experiments respecting neuroses will lead eventually through and to the psychical manifold of values, there is left out all of those conflicts of the consciousness of the individual which are psychical in both the urge and the objective where the experiment is performed with the ‘thing’ or ‘object’ manifestly in the objective manifold and not specifying what level the urge is on, then we find the pattern both in the animal and the human are comparable or parallel; there will be a parallel pattern. But once the ‘object’ is removed from “thing-i-fying” — as the definite ‘thing’ or ‘object’, not something psychically gained — then all these experimentations will become futile, because there is nothing objective in evidence to gain.

          So, the psychic nature can be divided into three categories respecting objectives. First (No. 1), the urge for creature comforts — food, protection, security, mating, etc. Second (No. 2), there comes another set of urges and no objective means of fulfillment — egotistic satisfactions, not in adjustments to a ‘thing’ or ‘object’, but in self-satisfaction. And third (No. 3), the urge to fulfill the basic state of development, the urge to become identified with the primal source of power, the urge to higher development where no egotistic satisfactions appear or are to be fulfilled. These are definite propulsions, compulsions of forces of the psyche in all three categories, and any one of the three have some objective. Here we refer back to our original premise respecting the failure of psychiatry. So long as they confine themselves to that category of urges which has objective results, they will be completely deceived in practice when the methodology developed for one category is applied to the other two, because it will not work at all, and this is the aristotelian approach still adhered to.

          In our point #8, our last factor to be developed (as the fill-in of the failure of modern psychoanalytical and psychiatric practice) is the inferiority complex. There is no doubt in the category No. 1 just cited, where the urge has some definite objective in fulfillment, that success in accomplishment will be developed to a limited degree; but on the human level there are two other categories which operate which do not operate on the animal level. For instance, the man who through acquisitiveness fulfills the urge to acquire, and is successful. Within that category and among those oriented to that category, he will feel egotistic satisfactions, full of confidence. But let that man meet an artist or associate in another group of artists where the objective which represents success is not a ‘thing’, money, power, possessions, acquisitiveness, then it will not be long before he will feel inferior, that he is in the presence of some ‘thing’ that he doesn’t have, because there is nothing objective that he can demonstrate as a criterion of success. There are esthetic factors brought into play and he is devoid of them. So, in category No. 2 he may feel inferior and may develop an inferiority complex if forced to associate with those in that category; he will beat a retreat back to his own level where he can feel secure in things and possessions and then he will restore his confidence.

          So, we have those of category No. 1 and No. 2 coming into contact with category No. 3 — let us say a group of Illuminati. Now, both the artist and the acquisitive one, if forced to associate with that group all the time will begin to feel inferior, but if they can beat a retreat to their own level, where they feel secure and confident, if there is a compulsion to achieve on that level, in that category, etc., which is greater, then there will develop a conflict whether to retreat to feel secure, or whether to persevere. That will depend upon the time-line, the point of development of the individual.

          Let us again cite the relationship between the members respecting category No. 1 and category No. 2; they will feel insecure in category No. 3; to achieve they have to abandon category No. 1 and category No. 2. I am citing these categories for only one purpose. The inferiority complex is so relative. If an inferior man associates with an animal that would look up to him as a god, he feels superior. So, the inferiority complex is a relative state, and is based upon that consciousness of self-confidence, and right here at this point I would like to put in those lessons I gave some weeks ago on self-confidence — those lessons showed the various levels upon which creative urge is developed and manifest, in which self-confidence is established. It is the lack of establishing self-confidence on the various levels that is the basic reason for the inferiority complex.

 


 

March 8, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 14

 

          With this lesson we begin the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order according to our outline.

          It is very appropriate for students in the school who represent the teachings to others to carefully explain that there is no originality whatever in this instruction. The instruction is a continuance of the Gnosis which means the supreme Knowledge or Reality or the Wisdom Teachings. Explain that there have always been those who understood the Truth, the fundamental Reality; explain further that there has always been a brotherhood of those who know the Truth, and that while entire cultures, or what we call civilizations, might rise and fall without any incorporation of the fundamental Wisdom in their respective institutions of learning, nevertheless there are those who hold the Light of that Truth and represent it and await the times and opportunity to give it; that those representatives of the Light and the Truth are eager to impart it to those who they can find ready for it. This has always been and will always be; therefore there is no originality irrespective of the labels given to different forms of teaching or instruction.

          I consider this an important point that should be emphasized, because any departure from it displays great ignorance; and then the very fact that there is a Brotherhood of representatives of the Light is the most heartening idea to communicate to others — that there is always a provision whereby each and every one can find the way or the path to that great fraternity and become identified with them. To me that is the greatest incentive and challenge, having an effect upon me infinitely beyond the idea that some ‘good man’ shed his blood and died that I might have something. That idea outrages all my sensibilities, and it throws me back upon myself — “Have you got it in you?”

          However, those are the ideas that must be incorporated in the consciousness of each and every individual. Explain to them that no teacher anywhere, no representative of the Light anywhere can do the work for them (or any given individual), any more than he can eat the food which nourishes the ‘physical body’.

          Our first point in the outline covering the instruction is to describe the structure of a given individual. Before this description is given, great emphasis should be placed upon the fact and the point that structure deals with the stages or states of consciousness, and everything rests upon consciousness. There are various ways whereby this can be done by the artful employment of analogy. Show in many simple ways that without consciousness there is nothing to describe; without consciousness there is nothing to consider; that what a given person observes primarily depends upon the consciousness with which he is perceiving, and without that consciousness — nothing to perceive, discuss or describe.

          The aristotelians without exception ignore that point; they go into the description or the discussion of the ‘thing’ or of the ‘object’ observed, just like there wasn’t any consciousness observing, like those ‘ things’ whether a given atom, the solar system or the sidereal universe — exist independently of the perceiving consciousness. That attitude must be not only checked and counteracted, but must be oriented or reoriented from the ‘thing’ discussed or observed to the consciousness perceiving, observing, etc. That there is one who is conscious is only a matter of one’s own consciousness, because without his consciousness there is not another who is conscious to him.

          So, to discuss the structure of a given individual and ignore that consciousness by which we know there is a given individual, becomes in its final analysis, puerile and vitiating in respect to any final determination.

          Explain at length that that which a given individual experiences — sees, tastes, hears, smells, and touches — is the representation of the state of his own consciousness, to which there is no exception. In this respect one can paraphrase Carlyle who said, “That which thou seest (i.e. hear, smell, taste, touch), that is what you are conscious of being.” So, in various ways focus the thought upon the perceiving consciousness before attempting to describe structure.

          Students in the School of the Natural Order, or those who aspire to become students, must deal with these considerations respecting consciousness until their own consciousness has become completely oriented or reoriented to that as the basis of the entire study, from its primary phases through the exoteric grades of the instruction, to the advanced or esoteric understanding. If that orientation or reorientation is not effected, there will be a continuous failure to grasp the full import of the instruction, because the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order rests upon and stems from the structure and the function of consciousness in its various states and in the multiplicity of its differentiations. The more complete that orientation to the basis of all description, the relatively easier it will be for the student to expand understanding into the meaning and significance of the presentation.

          In describing the structure of a given individual we begin, after this preparation, with a simple statement: the individual intrinsically represents a differentiated sphere or field of the undifferentiated consciousness-light-energy; the light and energy representing modes of consciousness and constituting the higher triplicity; so, we are beginning with a differentiated field. There are various ways whereby this differentiated field, which a given individual represents, may be described, and some of these ways are quite involved and complicated.

          In the School of the Natural Order we endeavor to evade complication, and so we describe the structure of that differentiated field of consciousness which a given individual represents in its simplest manner. We will use a chart or a blackboard and on the blackboard, let us say, we will draw a square and over the square we will place a triangle. We will label the square as diagrammatic of the four somatic divisions of the individual. We will label the triangle above the square as diagrammatic of three fundamental states of the individual; one can place in that triangle a single eye symbolizing the undifferentiated consciousness of knowing, of seeing, of which the individual is a differentiation. Then the next in the description of the structure of a given individual will be the four sides of the square, the four somatic states in which the consciousness of the individual has, does, or will function. We will number these four sides of the square 1, 2, 3, 4. Let us say that the lower line of the square is number 1, and going counterclockwise the right side will be number 2, the top number 3 and the left side will be number 4. Then we will take up the descriptions in order.

          #1 side of the square (it doesn’t make any difference where you start) we will label “consciousness in identity with image appearing substantive” which in the aristotelian language is labeled “physical”, and which in the non-aristotelian language is labeled, “identity with phenomena.”

          You may have occasion to describe the word, phenomena, as an appearance, like the shadow on the screen at the cinema, like the mirage that appears to the weary traveler on the desert — and in various ways. But to a well-read or educated person you must not make those descriptions, just use the term phenomena; they understand what you mean by the word — an illusory image having no reality.

          In describing this side of the square, you are laying the foundation for subsequent instruction — how the image appears substantive, etc., why it is only appearance, maya, why faith and confidence and belief and information respecting it becomes a snare and a delusion, and is therefore labeled, ignorance, Avidya, etc. In describing this first side of the square you will lay the foundation for all of the subsequent instruction and particularly the point that it is the individual’s consciousness that has become focused and identified with the phenomena or the phenomenal aspect of himself, or the phenomenal aspect of the universe or the world.

          Knowing that the description of the structure of the individual is the foundation upon which much of the instruction is going to rest and out of which it will be developed, great carefulness must be used in accuracy respecting this description of the structure of a given individual. That is why it was placed at the very beginning of the outline of the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order.

          As we proceed with the filling-in of the outline, you will note how we go back repeatedly to the description of the structure until it is thoroughly tied into it and logically developed out of it, with no missing gaps, guesswork, inferences or assumptions. The description of a given individual therefore becomes like a foundation of a house, the house representing the more detailed and developed instruction or teaching that will be given; it rests surely, solidly upon this foundation or upon the foundation.

          Further in the description of this first side of the square — consciousness of a given individual in identity with the phenomenal appearance — opportunity presents itself for description of the manifold of values which evolves through the generations out of it.

          Now, I direct your attention to #2, or the second side of the square. The second side of the square represents in our diagram the emotional nature of the individual. In describing this second side of the square we are laying the foundation for the explanation as well as the understanding of the lower psychic nature. In describing the emotions as a phase in which the consciousness functions respecting a given individual, always begin with sensations as pertaining to and belonging to emotions. This linking of sensation with the emotional division of the structure of a given individual is to counteract the aristotelian errors, ideas, that the sensation belongs to the neural system of the physiological organism. Through the years, I have used many illustrations to disprove the idea that it is only the function of the nervous system which creates the consciousness of sensation — illustrations such as trance, in creptoid states, in hypnotism, in projection or dissociation of the consciousness from the physiological organism, the nerves are all there, cellular structure is all there in each of these cases, but no sensation. I have used the illustration of the Fiji Islanders who walk upon red hot coals or rocks with no burns. How did they do it? I have cited cases of stigmata, in the absence of any ‘physical’ experience to show how sensations are created in the consciousness and appear as representations in the ‘body’, etc.

          In filling-in this outline it is not our province to go into the whole teaching; we are merely filling-in the outline. When it is established that sensation belongs to the emotional structure of consciousness in a given individual, then by easy stages it can be described how consciousness evolves out of these sensations, the categories respecting desires or the desirabilities; that those sensations creating pain are avoided and become labeled all the way from the ‘devil’ to ‘evil forces’ and ‘malevolent entities’, etc. And those sensations which produce pleasure are sought after and are labeled ‘beneficent’, and some are labeled ‘heavenly’, ‘enjoyable’, etc.

          Out of the developing process of consciousness and the effort to avoid that which produces pain or discomfort, and the effort to secure that which gives pleasure and comfort, we find the basis for the categories of values in the objective manifold, and out of which moralities are evolved in that objective manifold, and we could include ethics as evolving out of pleasure-pain compulsions.

          Then we have the basis for feeling and the desiring and emotional reactions respecting these various categories, and we have laid the foundation for the functions of consciousness in the lower psychic nature.

          This description of a given individual must never contain disparagement or a critical attitude, or a holier-than-thou-attitude. This is an impersonal, impartial description of the structure of a given individual, phases that every differentiated field has gone through or will go through, with no exception. It is also a description of the natural order process respecting the growing consciousness in individualization.

          We will take up the third side of our square in the next lesson.


 

March 9, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 15

 

          The third side of our square will represent the higher psychic nature which is labeled the mental; it is characterized by conceptional thinking, the development of concepts, the accumulation of information about images appearing substantive, etc. As a rule the lower psychic nature and the higher psychic nature are linked together in what is labeled the psychological functions, processes, etc. This linking of the lower psychic nature with the higher psychic nature is by reason of the fact that both pertain to the psychic nature as a medium of expression, as a vehicle in which consciousness operates, but in describing the four somatic divisions of man, or of a given individual, they are separated because they constitute two separate and distinct departments of the somatic area.

          The fourth side of our square which symbolizes the four somatic divisions, can be labeled variously; in fact, to pin any specific label upon it is difficult. I have labeled it, for the purpose of our outline “the ego”, and by the word ego I mean to represent the personality pattern which now has become formed. In the development of the four somatic divisions in the natural order process and after the consciousness has long since been focused in identity with the phenomena, and the emotional and mental faculties have been evolved, the ego-sense is next in order of development; or after the development of the three preceding phases, the personality pattern has become set, established or fixed, then that ego sense, that sense of distinctness from others or from the universe or from any ‘thing’ is quite pronounced; that I-Am-I-ness, that distinct feel of separateness, is the state of consciousness we label the ego or the ego-sense.

          During the formative phases of the developing consciousness through the first three somatic divisions, there is no such sense of distinctness of separateness, or uniqueness, it is more of a submental force of belonging to a given group, tribe, race, etc., because that distinct and unique sense of I-Am-I-ness has not been sufficiently developed to have the freedom, the psychological freedom of independence, not willy-nilly upon any one but dependent upon a particular family, group or race. Prior to the development of this uniqueness of the ego-sense, it is difficult to associate apart from or to separate from the familiar and supporting (and unconsciously so) provincial group, race, family, organization, etc.

          After this ego-sense has been established, one separates himself in his consciousness — that means to say, that consciousness can separate itself from the remnants, the holdovers from the psychological pressure of the group or of the animal field. It seems like there is a provision in the natural order process of development whereby the differentiated field must become conscious of its differentiation, of its extreme separation; so, while long before this is a functional state in the consciousness, it has been an actual state of the field, of the being — as the being or the field, it has been differentiated, but it has required quite a period, a period that has incorporated many rounds, many cycles in the palingenetic process to develop.

          Between the differentiation of the field from the animal group and the ability of consciousness to function as differentiated or as separate, perhaps thousands of what we call incarnations have intervened until that ego-sense is so strong, so well established, that it is not dependent upon any group or race anywhere; and that is the way it should be. One must become independent in his consciousness, he must become individualized in his consciousness before he can begin to return to the Father’s house, before he can unite as an independent and conscious individual with other independent and conscious individuals; in other words, as man, adultship has now been reached — he is grown up as man.

          Every individual that walks on his hind legs may not have completed his development as man; he may still be in process of developing his ego-sense. When one understands these four somatic divisions as pertaining to a natural order process, one can observe the four stages of development very early in the babies. As there are babies born that are very dependent in every way, so there are babies born that are so independent they want to assert themselves. One can read those states of the four divisions very early because the consciousness portrays it.

          This independence, this ego-sense, relatively speaking, is quite a point to achieve — that is, to complete and fulfill that state as man. Somewhere Aurobindo Ghose has said that “the ego is the helper” because to develop this completeness of I-Am-I-ness was essential or pertains to the natural order process and is a prelude to further development. So, in due time, what has been the greatest helper becomes the greatest “bar” (“ego is the bar”). When it comes time for the three higher states or levels in the development of a given individual, that ego-sense which has been the greatest help now has to be dethroned, overthrown, destroyed, etc., or surmounted and surrendered, and that requires more incarnation. If we appreciate that it has required thousands of cycles — births and deaths and deaths and births — to develop the ego-sense, against that background of the process, when it is said that it requires approximately seven incarnations to renounce it and acquire the consciousness of the higher levels of the individualizing process, it doesn’t mean very much. It shows how relative everything is. Only as conscious effort is sustained can the transition be accomplished in seven incarnations. To one whose consciousness is identified with the sidereal time factor, it looks formidable, an enormous task. But against the background of thousands of incarnations required to develop the ego-sense, it is a very brief period; it is a wonder that it can be done in so brief a period — and consciousness becomes focused upon the noetic level. However, that is the way it is, as we see, understand and perceive it. So, like all processes in the natural order, we haven’t anything to do about it except learn it, function with it and conform to it. Out of necessity we must learn, because the combined efforts of all men on this planet cannot alter or change the process by a shade. Each one can only create interferences with himself on his emotional and mental levels. The development of the personality, the ego-sense, rounds out and completes the four somatic divisions of man.

          Before we turn our attention to the higher triad, I would like to point out that these stages or states in the expanding consciousness do not function sequentially, so much as they function parallel or lap over. One does not complete one phase or state and then begin another stage, etc. After one has been fairly well initiated, the other begins, until the four are overlapping. But in description we have to describe the process sequentially, as if it were one after another. We could say the initial stages are one after the other, but the developing process is a sort of gestalt, a synthesis.

          Another factor I wish to point out before we move on to the description of the higher triad: no force center is involved in the development of the four somatic divisions. The force centers as functional foci of the power of consciousness are dormant, latent or moribund. It is like the latent life force in the seed or the bud. The buds of the force centers will be developing, as in the child the buds of his permanent teeth are developing when he has his milk teeth. So, similarly, the ‘buds’ are developing in the centers. When one reaches that point in the ego-sense where he feels he must surrender to a higher something, the buds are beginning to swell, as the buds of the plant or tree begin to swell during the springtime. But as functional centers of power and force of consciousness they are absent.

          Before we move on to the description of the higher triad, there is another point I wish to bring out. After the aeonian struggle to complete the four phases of the man state, the ego likes to exercise itself; like the kids say “it throws its weight around.” The young ego “struts its stuff”; the consciousness is sort of celebrating the process of getting itself organized. When you are familiar with the process you can recognize it at once. It is obvious when one has just arrived and he is exercising himself, that excessive exercising of the ego-sense, that independence, that I-Am-I-ness and I-want-you-to-know-it-ness is wonderful. The onlooker, the witness observes the various stages in developing independence and it is wonderful to see them arrive at that ego-sense; you know the consciousness is just celebrating, it has worked so long and hard to get it. After a few incarnations, it begins to get its “ears knocked down” and it doesn’t strut so much. By and by the ego has to be surmounted — “every head shall bow and every knee bend”. There comes that time where through renunciation it lays down and gladly dies — “he that giveth up his life for my sake shall find it, and all these things shall be added an hundred fold” (just a little boot thrown in) — and you don’t want it any more. The older ego doesn’t want it; he is in that stage of getting rid of interferences, and not accumulating interferences. So, he finally gets rid of even what he is conscious of being as life, the ego-sense; he dies and is born again.

          No blanket rule can be applied; some may have to be stimulated to develop the ego-sense, and others may have to be stimulated to surrender it; always remember, one brick, one brick, one brick and pretty soon the house is completed — Smith1, Smith2, Smithn, etc. Don’t forget that, or you will be in higher levels of abstraction, etc. That is why we don’t get hot and bothered over politics; it doesn’t make any difference whether it is called democratism, republicanism, communism, it is just the same, with different labels. When the individuals, Smith1, 2, n, have developed, we have a change, not before. When we hear, “he does so and so” we must remember — “what is that to thee”; it doesn’t concern you; you are “off the beam” with such thoughts and feelings — there is no basis for them in the natural order process. So, learn the natural order process and concern yourself with yourself, at the stage or state in which you are conscious, and that is the quickest way to expand the consciousness into a higher state.

          Now you will readily see how a new manifold of values is being developed, one other than the aristotelian; that is, the manifold of values based upon identity with the objective appearance. These factors as described, and the individual learning, experiencing respecting the natural order process, establishes the coordinates of a new manifold of values. We must add a new coordinate to the four points of reference. When we add the time-line coordinate to the three coordinates of space, we have a different manifold of values; we have a growth line, the palingenetic cyclic line, which we label the time-line. The more we learn about the natural order process, the more complete becomes the fourth coordinate in a new frame of reference having a new manifold of values. As consciousness expands the student must function mentally in these four coordinates; that sharply separates individuals because the states or stages of different individuals may not be anywhere near on the time-line. In the new manifold of values there is great deference, respect, recognition of the integrity of individuality. We respect each where he is, at his point on the time-line. If you are ‘below’ another, gladly serve him; if you are ‘above’ a given point, teach him, support him, counsel him, advise him; that is respect for the integrity of each individual; that necessity is imposed by the fourth coordinate that we are establishing — the growth cycle that we label the time-line which is the fourth coordinate of the higher manifold of values — the non-aristotelian manifold.

 


 

March 10, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 16

 

          In developing the purely mental construct respecting the structure of the individual, and for that matter in filling in this outline of the teachings as given in the School of the Natural Order, there is no specific or particular reason for elaborating upon these points respecting the structure, but I am of the opinion that it is helpful to understanding of the structure to go beyond the mere formulation of the mental construct. For instance, we have now finished the description of the four divisions in the structure of a given man state wherein the consciousness has been focused in objective identity and out of that formulation of consciousness in objective identity the four divisions in the structure of man have been developed and fulfilled. During this period the higher nature which we have labeled the higher triad, respecting the structure of a given individual, has remained unknown, obscure. In the man state there may have been exceptions where he has heard or read about the higher Self, the higher nature, the real Self, etc., but he has been limited to just a concept respecting it; there has been no experience whatever, and could not have been during the fulfillment of the first four levels in the structure of the man state.

          The point that illustrates going outside of mere description of structure from the mental level is — why and how does the turn come about? Because after this ego-sense is developed and has had its day, there is a turning point that will ultimately be reached; he will turn away from all of the creations based upon the ego and he will even turn away from the ego in a sort of repudiation of it or a dissatisfaction with it, if not an outright renunciation of it. The interesting point is, how does this turning away come about? What causes it?

          The description of that transition phase from the man state, which means a transition from functioning in the objective manifold to the development of another manifold, or to the focus of consciousness upon another state which lies outside of the four divisions of the man state — that is the transition phase, a transition period between two fundamental bases of operation, of functioning.

          In forming a construct of the description of a given individual one does not necessarily have to describe this transition or what brings it about or what causes it — that is, what causes the transition, the turning; and yet, it is an extremely interesting subject, not only from a psychological standpoint, but from a historical standpoint and a philosophical standpoint, leaving the religious standpoint out. Yet, the whole burden of thought and purpose of religions find their meaning and significance on this turning or transition. So, let us touch upon it briefly.

          There are many descriptions or explanations for the turning. I believe they are all valid. One can say that in the essential nature of the individual there are the creative forces which at the proper season, the proper point on the time-line, urge, motivate the consciousness to expand, go on growing, creating, producing, etc. It is analogous to a tree that has reached its maturity, it is fully developed and yet is not producing fruit, and the nature of the tree is to go on and produce fruit and seed and complete its cycle, complete itself. So, I dare say that all other explanations or descriptions of why the turn or change (as some label it, or conversion, which means a turning around) could be described on the basis of the essential urge to completion, to fulfillment of the cycle, and we could let it go at that. But as a rule the mind wants some objective reason or explanation; so to satisfy that run-around of the mental functions we supply some reasons because we know it is going to dig up reasons anyway; that is its province. So, for this turning-around or transition, reasons have to be dug up, and to anticipate this state of consciousness on the mental level we will find some reasons. Generally there is dissatisfaction out of creative effort or endeavor in the objective manifold. I have labeled this disgust (when a given individual becomes disgusted with everything, even the so-called best), he is dissatisfied with ‘things’ and ‘objects’ and reaches a point of utter disgust — he is seeking something else. Another reason — that satisfaction in mental inquiry is impermanent. Everything in the ego-sense is impermanent, transitory, ephemeral; there is a longing for securing something which lends itself to security that will not change.

          There is a cliché that describes a great deal: “Man’s extremity is God’s opportunity.” One (to fully understand) has to have the experience of a group of men and women finding themselves utterly and completely helpless with all of their individual efforts in the face of a great catastrophe. I once stood in the presence of a hundred or more men when surrounded by fire, men who in their well-fed and comfortable state used blasphemous oaths every other word uttered, and one would think them the furthest from turning to some superior power; big huskies throwing their weight around and cursing everything. I saw those same men crying like babies, down on the ground, groveling and praying, “God save me.” I had to literally kick them and say, “Listen to me, I will save you,” and I did save all who obeyed my orders. In some great catastrophe, flood, earthquake, storm, holocaust, you will see something that will be an eye-opener. Talk to the boys that have been in the thick of fighting and got out and back home; they will tell you the same; they whimper and cry to God — there is the turning to something else. There are many experiences in ordinary events where there is a turning away from everything. However these mental reasons and justifications may or may not be, sooner or later there is a turning to a ‘higher something’; one feels the instinct, the sense; or we can go back to the original cause — the urge — and in response to it the development proceeds, the flowing and fruiting, because it has been said that every tree that doth not bear fruit shall be cut down and cast away. The flowing and fruiting of the individual cycle is the development of the higher triad.

          Here comes the philosophical interest. How is the development of that higher triad brought about? What is the modus operandi? Is there just one method, or are there several or many? I am of the opinion that there are as many methods as there are individuals. Then, is there more merit in one method than another? I do not know; that is a tremendous confession; I honestly do not know. Whatever method is described or given, the individual improvises upon it and develops out of it that which works for him. That is why I say I believe there are as many methods as there are individuals. But to dogmatize that one method has preference over another, I am not in any position to make such a statement. I have to say to me there is a certain method that works better than another, and I am willing to describe that in case you can abstract from it something that might help you, but whether it will work or not, I do not know.

          After studying all these methods, we find they are synthesized into about five, because there is a body of men who have been making this their business and the great objective of their existence for several thousand years. I have reference to the East Indians, the Aryans. After thousands of years of concentration upon processes, methods, they have synthesized them into about five specific methods and they have labeled them: Gnana, Raja, Hatha, Karma, Shakti Yoga. These are categories respecting methods of effecting the transition in orientation from the objective manifold to the non-objective manifold (what we are pleased to label, from the aristotelian to the non-aristotelian).

          I say, employ the method which works for you, and never mind the label; let somebody else label it, because there is danger in fixing the consciousness upon one method as having preference to another; it might constitute a semantic blockage. “The object of the journey is to arrive” — another cliché I have heard somewhere. Whether you take an ox cart, an automobile, an airplane or something else — the whole object should be the arrival and not the methodology.

          There are those who have made a complete transition in orientation from the man state, the objective manifold, to the beyond-man state, the higher man state, without knowing anything about centers and channels connecting them, and forces and gunas respecting the forces in the centers, etc. They knew nothing about all that and knew no labels and made the transition. To illustrate this, I will read a passage from “The Cloud of the Unknowing” (published by Harper & Brothers), a version in modern English of a Fourteenth century classic. It is hardly fair to read a little excerpt, but this writer is one who made the transition without knowing of force centers, channels, frequencies and guna qualities, etc., etc. It may be that some individuals are better off not knowing anything about all that, because one might get some involvement in his values as to this center or this force or some other quality or guna, etc., etc., until by and by he spins around in a tangled skein until he doesn’t know where he is. Here is one who made the complete grade without any knowledge whatever.

          “If ever you are to come to this Cloud and abide in it and work in it, as I have urged you to do, you must, since this Cloud of Unknowing” …

          This is the transition, and you are turning to something that seems like a cloud of nothing; you are turning away from all that you have known in the objective manifold, so it is a “Cloud of Unknowing.”

          “… is above you, between you and your God, place a Cloud of Forgetting beneath you, between yourself and all creatures that have ever been made.”

          Forget all of the objective manifold, all of the values and every ‘thing’ and ‘object’ in it, all of that information; wipe it out and forget it.

“Perhaps you think you are very far from God because of this Cloud of Unknowing that is between you and your God, but if you consider it alright you will see that you are much further from Him when you have no Cloud of Forgetting between you and all the creatures that have ever been made, and all their works and conditions. All things, I tell you, are to be hidden under the Cloud of Forgetting in this work. When the eye of the soul is fixed on its mark, as the eye of the shooter is upon the target, that upon which it gazes is beheld in a celestial light. So whatever it is upon which you center your loving desire, that creature or thing will stand between you and your God. Then you are further from Him than when your mind is empty of all else save Him for whom you long.

“It is for this reason that I say all should be hidden under the Cloud of Forgetting. Although it be good to think upon the kindness of God, and to love Him and praise Him for it; yet it is far better to gaze upon the pure essence of Him and to love Him and praise Him for Himself.

“And now you ask, ‘How shall I think of Him? What is he?’

“To this I have no answer except to say, ‘I do not know.’

“For with this question you have brought me to that same darkness which I wish that you were yourself. Man through grace can have full knowledge of all other creatures and their works, and even of the works of God Himself; and can reason about them aright, but of God can no man think. Therefore I would leave all the things about which I can think and choose to love that about which I cannot, because He may be fully loved who cannot be defined at all. By the affection He may be secured and kept, but by the thought never. Therefore, while it may be good to think about the kindness and goodness of God on certain occasions, for in these thoughts there are both enlightenment and nurture for the soul yet when the soul is stirred to a one-pointed desire for God, these meditations should be given up and covered over with a Cloud of Forgetting. Step above them firmly and stalwartly and with a devoted and determined directing of your will to God, set yourself to pierce that darkness above you. Strike upon that thick Cloud of Unknowing with a sharp dart of longing love — and do not leave it no matter what happens.

“If any thought arise and persist between you and this darkness and ask you, “What are you looking for, what do you want?’ say, ‘It is God I covet, Him I desire, Him I seek, and nothing but Him’.

“If he ask you, ‘What is that God?’ you say, ‘It is the God who created me, whose love claimed me and whose grace called me to this state and in it you have no skill — go down!’ Then tread him down vigorously with a prayer of love, even though he seems to you to be very pure and able to help you in your seeking. It is true that he perhaps will bring to your mind many consoling and wonderful memories of the kindnesses of God, saying — He is altogether lovely and loving, altogether gracious and merciful. If  you will listen to him — and he desires nothing better — he will continue to chatter more and more, until he has brought you lower and lower to the place where he wishes you to be.

“This is the manner of his workings — first, he will let you look on the wonderful kindnesses of God — then he will bring you to look on your wretched life, and perhaps in seeing and thinking of it, he will bring your mind to some place where you have lived before. Then at last, even before you are aware of it, you are scattered you know not where. The cause of this scattering is — that at first you willfully listened to your thoughts, then you answered them, then you received them and then you let them have their way with you — giving yourself over fully to revery.

“Nevertheless the things that he said at first were good and holy, so holy that any man or woman who thinks he can come to contemplation without many such profitable meditations beforehand on his own wretchedness apart from God, on the suffering and worthiness of God, surely he shall err and fail in his purpose.

“The meditations of those who are called by grace to this work come suddenly without any previous meditation. It is in this manner that the words of their prayers arise… if they are words, as they seldom are, then they are very few words; and the fewer the better. If it be a little work of one syllable, I think it is better than a word of two syllables, and more in harmony with the work of the spirit. The truth of this may be seen in the cry of human need. A man or a woman, frightened by a sudden danger of fire, or of death, or whatever else that comes is driven in haste to the height of his spirit and needs to cry or pray for help. How does he cry? Surely not in many words, nor yet in one word of two syllables. What is that? Surely it is because longer words take too long a time to make plain the urgency of his need and the desperateness of his spirit.

“He bursts out with fright in the depths of his spirit and cries out one little word of one syllable: such a word as this word fire, or this word out. Just as this little word fire stirs and pierces more quickly the ears of his hearers, so does this little word of one syllable pierce the darkness when it is not only cried and thought, but secretly meant in the depth of the spirit, which is the height of the spirit. For in the spiritual language all is one, height and depth, length and breadth. It pierces the ears of the Almighty God, quicker than any long psalter unmindfully mumbled in the teeth. Therefore it is written that the short prayer pierces heaven.

“Why does it pierce heaven, this little short prayer of one syllable? Surely because he who prays it cries in the urgency of his spirit, in its depths in its height, in its length and in its breadth. The cry is in the height of the spirit, for it is with all the power of the spirit; it is in the depth for in this little syllable is all the wisdom for the spirit; it is in the length for it is felt forever as it is felt now and so it would cry forever; it is in its breadth for it wills this same prayer for all that it wills for itself.”

          Against this Cloud of Unknowing he focused his will and said God, God, night and day; wouldn’t eat or sleep or do anything. In about seven days he broke through the Cloud of Unknowing.

          This is one method. He knew nothing about centers and directing of the forces and the control of forces and gunas and frequencies, and yet he attained supreme illumination. We do not care what method is employed; you must get there.

          This has been one of the great problems, and will be a greater problem — what methodology, what system, what modus operandi will achieve the results more immediately and directly than any other? Who is high enough to say? Again I confess I cannot.

          But for myself (and I do not know what it is worth to anyone else), I have to get a clear mental construct, but I don’t have any confusion about a map; the better the map the easier the journey. But I must first have a map. Second, after I discover that every feeling, every desire, every thought, every function of awareness in knowing, etc., is motivated by a force, a power, which resides in and constitutes the essential differentiated Self or field, then to lay hold of that power which motivates everything else, to control that power, to direct that power to the motivation of that which is independent of desire, feeling or thought seemed to work better for me than anything else. So, instead of working with that which is motivated — feeling, desire, thought, etc. — work with the power that motivates, identify the consciousness with that, direct that, or work with it in its motivating process. That method seems better — to me, remember? I pass it on as the best method I have discovered; with this method I passed through the transition to the higher triad.

 


 

March 11, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 17

 

          In the description of the structure of a given individual, before we take up the three levels or states constituting the higher triad, symbolized by the triangle with the apex pointing up (placed above the square), a description of the foci or the force centers — in the Sanskrit the chakras — must be given. It must be given because it is only by the focus of consciousness upon the force by which these centers are energized and the direction of that force from center to center, until the centers which create and motivate the three levels of the higher triad have been developed or energized by the force. This is invariant. As said in yesterday morning’s lesson, it is not necessary for one to know that process, but it is impossible to develop the consciousness in the higher centers unless it is done, so that it is accomplished whether there is any knowledge of it or not.

          I am of the opinion that the description should be given so that one intelligently cooperates or works with the natural order structure and the way the functional process in the natural order structure operates. That is only opinion, but the opinion is based upon a great deal of experience in innumerable cases where the force has been awakened, and the individual in whom it was awakened having no knowledge of it became alarmed and thought something had gone wrong; the consciousness still in objective identity and the mental function trying to find causes and reasons, the individual thought there was some organic disturbance or disease and resorted to all sorts of efforts to restore the former state of placidity, normalcy or the feeling that had obtained for so long. Innumerable operations have been performed by doctors to cure some alleged disturbance. There has been much distress and alarm, grave concern created over the energization of centers where there was no knowledge of them, and it isn’t only for this reason but because I believe that the developing process can be continued or that great transition can be effected — from the objective manifold to the higher manifold or the new fourth-dimensional manifold, or a manifold having the four coordinates — safely, easily and with less disturbance or questioning or concern through and by reason of having the understanding of the structure of the individual. So, for these and other reasons at this point in the description of the structure of a given individual, the centers must be brought in.

          There is another reason — the more that the description of the centers is given, in many cases effort will be put forth to direct the force or to awaken the centers. For those who are ready, ripe for that awakening, just the study of the centers, the way they function and the levels which they control, etc., will be sufficient to energize one or more of those centers; or some who hear or study the description of the centers and their function will attempt to essay or begin to practice the awakening of them and the direction of the force.

          This signalizes a great turning point in the development of the individual; it signalizes a change from studying the map or making a map and taking the journey. Note that some will begin to take the journey at this point; others will not, they will go on and put the description of the centers, the way they function and the levels which they govern and control into the map and continue to mentally work on the construct — that is, the map, and will not attempt the journey.

          No matter how thorough the description of the structure of a given individual might be, how minutely described the component phases and factors of the structure might be, it is still the map and not the journey; so, sharp differentiation is in order between the taking of the journey and the building or the study of the map.

          At this point it can be in either case or both; we cannot make a blanket rule because there may be many individuals who will study the structure of a given individual and make a map after the journey is taken, and others will study beyond this point in the journey, make the map and not take the journey. But in the majority of cases, you will find that there will be some who attempt the journey for the first time without a description of the centers and forces which motivate them. They depart at this point from purely intellectual consideration of the map and take the journey. Of course, we also have to put in that they take the map with them and continue to develop it and the understanding of it.

          In the description of the centers, the first thing and of most importance, is to thoroughly describe that the force or power which motivates the given center has nothing whatever to do with the form of expression pertaining to the level or state motivated. More confusion results from the failure to make this sharp differentiation than any other point; the confusion is one of simple and elementary semantics: the identification of word with ‘thing’, the identification of force with quality, a simple aristotelian unconscious habit, but nevertheless habit, which we call canalization. So, teachers who attempt to represent the presentation as given in the School of the Natural Order must remember that those to whom this work is presented, particularly for the first time, are canalized to greater or less degree in the aristotelian methodology, methods of functioning, habits of thinking, etc. That aristotelian habit is characterized by the identity of word with ‘thing’, of the quality of the function with the force. The aristotelian, as such, is incapable of separating the forces energizing and motivating a given center from the forms of expression motivated. I say, incapable, because he has to learn non-identity to such a point that he can easily think of the function separate and apart from any form of expression, quality, guna, state or level. When the individual can entertain force, as such — as force irrespective of the level or guna, quality, kind of expression or function, etc. — then he will have no difficulty and no confusion. One must resort to all sorts of artifices, devices to put over the differentiation between the force and the function, the quality of function and level, etc.

          Let us turn on the electric light. No one has any difficulty in understanding that. Let the light represent the center, and if you use this illustration to differentiate the force from the function or the level, etc., you can say the Book of Revelation, the Apocalypse uses that analogy of the lampstands. There is another beautiful allegorical story in the New Testament about the five wise virgins with oil in their lamps. So we have the word, lamp, many times as symbolical representation of the centers. Imagine we have various lamps, each with a different color bulb or glass, and then turn the current on. The current is not the lamp, the current is not the color of the light. It would seem silly to use such an elementary illustration, but you will be surprised, after you have gone to all sorts of limits and exhaustive forms of explanation, pulled your hair and shouted like a penitential preacher to make this differentiation, they will turn right around and identify the function and the quality of the force with the ‘lamp’, the center, or the color of the glass, and like the psychiatrists and psychoanalysts and followers of Sigmund Freud, say it is all sex force, by reason of the fact that in one center and only one center the force is labeled sex. It is as wrong to identify the word ‘sex’ with the force in that one center as in all the other centers.

          If you teach this you will be accused, blasphemed and libeled. We are just infants groping our way and we get into all sorts of jams. Long before one becomes a Master, he is driven out. Why? ‘People’ can’t understand there is a current and they can’t think that that current is separate from the color of the light in the room; that simple little thing cannot be grasped; it is beyond them, and you will suffer grievously because it cannot be understood. You can’t get it through the consciousness that there is a current that motivates the light, that creates the light, and yet we must keep at it, over and over; it is going to take many hundreds of thousands of years of study and work to get that over, until this whole world becomes an energy world. Think of it, work in it, consider it in complete non-identity with any phenomena or quality of guna. The effort must be made to make this description of the differentiation between the force and the center, between the force and the functions, between the force and the quality of the force, between the force and the level, between the force and the state, between the force and the consciousness. This is all preparation for the higher work, to understand Agni and why the great emphasis is placed upon Agni, why that force labeled Agni is considered the Supreme, the highest of all the Gods. This simple differentiation is the early preparation for that more advanced work and teaching — differentiation of the current, the force from the form of expression motivated by the force.

          That is the beginning of real understanding, an understanding beyond phenomenal representations (I mean of thoughts, ideas) and reference and incorporations of any phenomenal representation will have been dropped out, lost out of the consciousness completely until one lives and deals and functions wholly in the energy world, the Reality which is the essential foundation of everything else, of differentiations, of configurations and therefore of phenomenal appearances.

          Now, in approaching the description of these force centers as part of the structure of a given individual, I have been very fond of citing the Scriptural references to them, particularly in the Apocalypse. In Gnostic teachings of the pre-Christian era, the lesser mysteries and schools were preparatory for the greater mysteries and in the lesser schools there were no references ever given to the centers, and their structure and function.

          If you have ever joined fraternal organizations where charity has been taught — kindness to children, orphans and widows, etc. — you will get the ethics which represented the teachings in the lesser mysteries of the pre-Christian era. In the higher culture or civilization what is known as the common everyday politeness or amenities used to have to be taught and practiced, and an oath was taken to do it. These fraternal organizations today where love, kindness, decency, adoration and praise singing to the high ideals, no matter how labeled, God, Jesus, Christ, Krishna, Rama and others, all this glorification and ethics and higher morals represented the lesser mysteries, which was a preparation for the acceptance into the schools of the greater mysteries. But in all these lesser schools or groups no reference was ever given to the centers. It was a taboo subject, and it used to be very severe if one taking the teachings of the greater mysteries gave this work or even mentioned it. We find there is a racial and unconscious taboo down to this day about the study and understanding of the force centers; it is considered dangerous. But the natural order process has proceeded to the point where it is dangerous not to understand the centers and their functions.

          These force centers have been described allegorically in a variety of ways. I have mentioned two — the lampstands and the five wise virgins; they have also been portrayed as cities in Asia and it was like a journey being taken from one city to another, and in allegorical language the state, the forms of functions are described in the Book of Revelations. The description of the opening and development of these centers constitutes the esoteric and basic teachings of all advanced mystery schools and does so down to this day.

          Let us turn from this generalization about the centers to a more minute description. There are 49 major centers. There are innumerable other centers; I do not know if anyone has ever been able to count them — they run into the billions; they are spoken of as one, the thousand-petalled lotus, which is an allegorical form of expression, and it could well be called a billion petalled lotus.

          But there are 49 major centers; the description of these 49 major centers is given in groups in the order in which the groups are energized. The first group constitutes five; we call them the five centers of the lunar phase of development. When those five centers are energized and functioning they are so constituted that they represent one; that is they are synthesized in their functioning as one, although they are separate in the early stages of energization. After these five are energized it is very difficult to experience any functions as localized, because they become so blended and synthesized.

          Then the next group that is described constitutes seven; the seven are treated separately also. The first five are incorporated in the seven, but with a different quality in respect to the function. When the seven are described, the two poles — the sacral-conarial axis — are emphasized. These centers function as a unit and it is exceedingly difficult to localize them; one loses the consciousness of separation.

          From the seven we go to the twelve; that is, there are twelve major centers which constitute the structure of the noetic mind level. In the description of the twelve is contained the description of various ramifications respecting the functions on the noetic mind level. It is wide in its versatility and the wideness of its functions exceeds anything that has preceded it in the four somatic divisions of man, or in the energization of the five or seven centers.

          When these twelve centers which represent the structure of the noetic mind level have been completely developed they function as a unit until the force seems wholly diffused, not localized; localization becomes lost, as in the two preceding groups in the developing process.

          Then there is a fourth group. After the energization of the twelve, a group of 25 centers is brought into life, awakened from the “dead” to use the analogy of the Book of Revelations, and that analogy can be used respecting each center. They are all awakened from the “dead” and become alive, that is, functional.

          With the description of the 25 and their energizations we have the 49 major centers. All subsidiary, secondary centers are merely adjuncts, appendages to the other centers; that is why they are not enumerated or given as the predominant centers are given.

          You will find this: that too much description of the relatively higher groups should not be given; it is useless to put them in the map, for no intellectualization about any of the centers will awaken them. The description of groups of higher centers would serve no purpose in taking the journey, therefore would have no reason to be incorporated in the map, the mental construct.

          So far as the journey is concerned, and therefore the purpose of a map, description would be restricted to the group of five and the group of seven centers; description of the other two groups — the 12 and 25 — should not be given as part of the map. The map should be according to a given objective; after the objective has been arrived at, the description would be superfluous. It would be analogous to having a road map describing the way from one point to another point, but there would be no purpose in putting in the description of a town. When he has arrived at the town, he will discover everything about it himself, and a description of it would serve no purpose.

March 13, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 18

 

          We come now to the description of that part of the structure of a given individual which we label the higher triad. It is relatively important to describe the chasm which separates the lower quaternary from the higher triad. In effecting the crossing of this chasm, it is very pronounced; I mean by that, that it is distinct to the intelligence. One in effecting this crossing of the chasm is extremely conscious of it; it seems to be especially vivid to the consciousness. I do not know that I can explain why it is so; perhaps that is the way it is in the structure. It has much significance because much is made of it, and it goes back to the Egyptian teachings.

          I believe that the significance of this chasm or cleft rests upon the separateness of the two states — the man state and the beyond-man state; the complete separateness of the ‘earth’ from ‘heaven’ (as described in our lesson yesterday morning).

          In approaching the presentation of this chasm or cleft, I have resorted to the story of Lazarus and Dives, because the pivotal point of the story is to highlight the extreme separateness of the two levels, the two manifolds of values or the two states. The story culminates with the point where Lazarus had died (death, always remember, never means passing out of the physiological organism in the psychic world); to the Illuminati the word has no such meaning. The use of the word, death, in that sense belongs wholly to the aristotelian manifold of values. When the Illumined one writes or speaks of death in the objective manifold of values he means the entrance into the consciousness of the man state, the lower quaternary, the psychic world, etc.  So, death means passing beyond, dying to and being born again. (While we are on the subject, there are always two deaths spoken of in all illumined writings, writings given from the higher level or manifold. The first death is withdrawal of consciousness from objective identity, functioning in the psychic nature. The second death is the withdrawal from the psychic nature and functioning in the higher triad.)

          To return to our story, after Lazarus had died and had gone to ‘heaven’ he saw Dives in hell suffering agonies and he pleaded with the Lord to allow him to help Dives and the Lord said, “No, it cannot be, between thee and Dives is a gulf fixed; you cannot dip your finger in the water and give him one drop; you cannot reach across that gulf with one drop of water for Dives.” The story illustrates this gulf and how fixed it is, how impossible it is to cross over from the higher triad to the lower quaternary.

          Naturally the question comes, why? Why is it so rigidly fixed, so impossible to render help? That is a hard question for one in the objective manifold, but if we turn to the consciousness of the other manifold, the manifold based upon the higher triad, wherein we have the fourth coordinate, the time-line, at once we see the reason for the impossibility of rendering help. The reason for the impossibility — if there were in the structure a provision whereby the crossing back could be effected, it would utterly destroy and annihilate the integrity of the individual Self; the individualizing process would be destroyed; and this is preserved to that extreme point as described in the allegorical story of Lazarus and Dives — not by one drop of water from the tip of the finger.

          That has also been said in other analogies and in various ways “each must tread the wine press alone”, each must press out the wine, the creative force in the psychic nature, which alone goes ahead and prepares the way and opens the ‘gate’ or the ‘door’ and also effects the crossing of the chasm.

          Many questions arise that should be answered, probably a multiplicity of them; but we would deal with them endlessly. Any help would undermine the individualizing process, the expiation of one’s own karma, for instance. It may be thought that after suffering the effects of his karma or creation up to a certain point he could be relieved of further suffering. He must relieve himself of the suffering, of the result of his own creation; that is always there as a possibility. Another one cannot do it without undermining or injuring the individual initiative or will, etc. Those who have reached a higher level of development and are appointed as instructors or teachers or are self-appointed, should study this chasm and its significance long, deep and seriously. If the significance of the gulf or chasm is grasped, understood, then any tendency which still belongs to the ego-sense of coercion, domination or controlling another in any way will be wiped out of his consciousness. In contemporary world events wherein totalitarianism in any form is brought out, whether ecclesiastical, theoretical, purely political or economic, etc., this chasm and gulf and the significance of it always comes to my mind — how terrible must be the consequences of dominating by brute force the integrity of another individual, even though that other individual is a babe and easily controlled or dominated. One does not have to know the actual sequence of events; he can prognosticate the end, the ultimate, without knowing any sequence of events, psychically or otherwise, intuitively or otherwise. One knows that where that natural order ‘law’ has been violated, the consequences are inevitable, and are going to be devastating to the perpetrators thereof.

          There is another point that is borne into the consciousness respecting the significance of the gulf and the chasm which separates the quaternary from the triad, and that pertains to another line of evolution, rather than the human line; that is the Deva line. As one begins to awaken from the limitations of sense and becomes conscious in the psychic world, he learns of the Deva line of evolution. The Deva is easily controlled and the most powerful influence which can be developed for an individual. These two factors represent a strong temptation to some individuals. First, because they are so easily controlled; and second, the controlling of them renders such tremendous force and power in egotistic accomplishments, ‘objects’, ‘aims’, ‘ends’, etc. Many fall into the trap, the error of controlling the Devas. The reason why they are so easily controlled is because there is nothing in their world which represents resistance; their world is complete harmony, music, peace; for ages and ages nothing but harmony and peace and music; nothing to resist; therefore, they do not build up any resistance. They don’t have anything to counteract an influence which would control them.

          Another factor is that the Devas must attach themselves to a higher developed one, whether from the human line or another line of evolution. They can function in frequency just as the fish can function in water, and it is as needful (I say that rather carefully); a fish will not live without water and a Deva will not live without the radiance, the frequency of love and harmony; that is tangible to the Deva; it is more important to them than food to the objective conscious man; they draw support and sustenance and energy and life from the aura, the field of a higher developed one and they grow by reason of that. That is the reason they are so easy to control. Temporal results can be accomplished inordinately, beyond the average process or imagination, because their influence is so subtle and yet so powerful.

          Unless the significance of that gulf is well understood, and one in his ongoing begins to get on to the Deva world and how easily controlled and used, etc., he will slip and then will retard his development; he will throw himself back and create grievous karma that he has to work out of to regain his position in the individualizing process in order to go on; he has to expiate the results of his error. After he does this a few times, he gets the significance of that gulf; he must not cross it under any circumstances.

          One might say, if an individual has crossed the gulf, why does he teach? Is that helpful? Teaching is helpful, but it is helping others to help themselves; it is showing the way and leaving them alone. Upon occasions he has to cast them off, throw them back on themselves in order to learn; he is constantly mindful of this chasm and the significance of it. He cannot allow one to lean, yet teach, describe, explain over and over and over until he finds enough who can avail themselves of the instruction and utilize it. That is a wonderful help, but notice there is no reaching across the chasm and doing it for them. It cannot be done. Who wants to control others? You want to help them, you yearn and long, but leave them alone too.

          We call that chasm in ordinary conversation and in the aristotelian fraternity, respect for the integrity of the individual, but we don’t attempt to describe the chasm, the gulf; we just say the integrity, the inviolability of each must be respected, and that is the way of putting it into a language that is understandable, the significance of the chasm, of the gulf fixed in the structure of the natural order process.

          The significance of this chasm or gulf has been tremendously important to me in studying history; it has been a background against which I have read and studied history; it is the basis of what is called Democracy (that means the preservation of the freedom to grow, to learn, to develop). If I were writing the “four freedoms” I would add a fifth freedom, the freedom of each to expand and grow into understanding of ultimate Reality. That is an important freedom that is not even observed by many who verbalize about the “four freedoms”.

          If you read history with the consciousness of the significance of this chasm, you will see how the high point of development respecting culture or civilization is always reached where that freedom is preserved. And further, where we read of the struggles to achieve emancipation and freedom from tyranny, the Magna Carta, Declaration of Independence, etc., the powerful motivating forces that will cause men to leave their homes, women and children and go out and die in order to achieve it — there is some force there that is terrific that causes men to go forth and sacrifice all that they are conscious of as life even.

          That is the significance of the chasm — they will not control or dominate by tyranny in any form and will not be controlled. If you will read history with this in the background of your mind, you will see that this longing for freedom has deep roots in the structure of the natural order process and becomes such a powerful motivating force that it causes men to walk out of everything, even the consciousness of their life to preserve it or to win it. Enough for the chasm.

          After the transition in consciousness from the man state, the ego-sense, the objective identity, etc. — across the chasm, the gulf — the “Cloud of Unknowing” becomes burst by the force of determination and will (creative force experienced as will), then the vastness begins to open. We label this vastness the noetic mind, the illumined mind, the will, or Atma. These are labels only; the only significance these labels represent rests upon experience, not upon description. If a description of the three phases or aspects of the highest triad is attempted, of necessity it must be done by analogy; it cannot be done otherwise. The more versatile one is in using analogy, the better preparation for those who are striving to gain some mental understanding, to make a mental construct or map of the three higher levels.

          The analogy I have resorted to more than any other through many years has been the simple magnetic field. For over thirty years I have used that analogy; that is something that can be grasped on the mental level; they can at least grasp the picture of the positive and negative poles of a common magnet, and then the lines of force flowing continuously between the two poles, and the power exhibited in the magnetic field. After setting up the magnetic field I have used the lines of force as descriptive of the noetic mind level; that it is a level characterized only by the wave and frequency of energy, that one on that level can arrest — that is, register the frequency and know the quality, the guna, the meaning, the significance, etc., of the frequency culminating in the concept. This is the level of clear immediacy of knowing. Immediacy means that if the significance is not immediately registered from the frequency, then it continues on into the concretion in the mental level; the concretion, the objectification of the frequency on the mental level is idea, concept. So, when that frequency registers and does not continue on to concretion of concept, but is known and facility is gained in that registry and interpretation of the frequency, then one gradually, little by little, learns to function in knowing, not in thinking.

          Then I try to describe that world of knowing and label it the noetic mind or the mind level. But the range of it is vast, unimaginably vast and requires much development, growing-up on that level to comprehend its vastness. I have used the analogy of the baby born of the physical mother into the world and how vast that world is to its consciousness. Little by little it adjusts itself to its immediate surroundings, its crib, its room, the house, the street, the town, and so on; after it lives in the world and travels around and crosses the seas and fraternizes with other parts of the world, it doesn’t seem so large. Then today when we sit by the radio and listen to broadcasts from London, Calcutta, Guam, etc. the vastness has almost disappeared.

          There is no other way whereby the structure can be described except by parables, stories and allegorical representations. That is why all Scriptures are written that way. It is an advantage in one respect; if an individual never had the sense of taste we could not use analogy to describe the experience of sweetness; if we start to say, it is like — we are stopped; we don’t have an analogy. That feeling of helplessness comes over one who has experienced any of the higher triad and tries to describe it. In Scriptures like the Koran where the sensuous, erotic, exotic force is so strong in the consciousness of the Levantines, “heaven”, meaning the higher triad, is described as a thousand naked women. That is analogy with which they try to describe something wonderful. Read “The Song of Songs” if you want some luscious analogy. They are trying to describe something most extraordinary to the sensuous, or those on the level of the senses. Why do they resort to the sensuous language? Only on the grounds that the sensuous state lives and deals in that sort of thinking and they use that language as analogy. The Pentecostal Days are described where they reel around like drunken men and yet they had nothing to drink; they touched the ecstasy. So, they resort to wine and drunkenness to describe felicity, joy, happiness, that fairly obsesses or possesses one who touches the illumined mind beyond the man state; hence, the exuberance, the exaggerated forms of expression, the ambrosia, the nectar of the gods, etc., used in trying to describe that state.

          “The rod of iron” is the analogy used for the Will; also the “thunderbolt of Zeus,” etc. That is just the force, consciousness, identified with the creative force of the field, and we tamely and limply say Atman, Will, and we have no conception of the terrific lightning bolt that the power really represents, and that power is in you and in me and everyone.

          The power that can be released on the lower quaternary, on the higher level of the higher triad is Atman, the Will. There is where we will leave the description. That is as far as it is in the power of my understanding or ability to go in trying to describe it.

          As one in the quaternary level, I am very humble in the presence of that Power; I lay down quickly; I will never hold out against it in any way. I will humble myself quickly and easily whenever it is necessary in the presence of the higher triad. It is the only thing that I respect and I mean wholly respect. I respect it so far that I can understand the Puritans when they describe the wrath and destruction of that power and call themselves God-fearing; I belong to that category.

 


 

(No class March 14)                                                                           March 15, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 19

 

          We take up this morning the description of how the psychic nature is developed. The purpose of placing this in our outline and as the second item, is in order to prepare the student of the School of the Natural Order for the first crossing in his own individualizing process, and in addition to that, generally to lay the foundation for the new cycle basis in therapeutics.

          Racially speaking, we are standing at the threshold of vast and new discoveries in the art of science of healing, in the understanding of the constitution of the objective world, and in freedom and emancipation from self-created forms of destruction, etc. It would be impossible to over-exaggerate the change, the results, etc., in the racial consciousness by the understanding of how the psychic nature is developed. The race stands upon that threshold now (1950) and we may confidently expect revolutionary changes in the old methodologies, orientations, etc. I am of the opinion that the world unrest everywhere manifest is due to the change in frequencies on a planetary scale, a change which is indicative of a new orientation from the objective manifold of values to the beginning of understanding of the psychic nature. That means to say, that the humanity on this planet irrespective of respective educational advantages, is being prepared for this first crossing. In effecting this first crossing in the individualizing process, submental types, those who have not had educational opportunities, will be the first to make it, and the scribes and Pharisees will trail along in the rear — such are the peculiar anomalies of the natural order process relative to the objective manifold of values. In fact, submental types have an advantage over the mental types in making this grade of effecting the first crossing. With these remarks prefatory to a description of how the psychic nature is developed, I am trying to convey the idea of the enormous significance of the understanding of this point — how the psychic nature is developed; and I am straying further to convey the idea of its relative importance — relative to the old cycle, relative to the objective manifold of values, relative to the developing process of the planet, etc. This is of great moment, of enormous importance.

          I said awhile ago that we could not overemphasize it; our descriptive adjectives are inadequate to describe the enormity of the change which will be effected in the race psyche and in cultural mores of the races on the planet. No one oriented in the objective manifold has imagination sufficiently developed to overstress or overemphasize the importance of this point in our teaching.

          When we come to the individual student striving to understand the teaching as given in the School of the Natural Order, he is dealing with a pivotal point which if embraced ardently would enable that student to achieve startling results, especially respecting his healing powers.

          There seems no way to arouse a student oriented in the objective manifold of values, as he is, to the possibilities, potentialities which lie in this phase or stage of his education in this School. It is simply indicative of the tenacity, embedded conditionality, etc. which the objective or aristotelian manifold of values exerts in the consciousness of the student; so much so is this true that the significance of the description of how the psychic nature is developed, is treated wholly, and there is no aroused endeavor to put it into practice. The consciousness seems to be closed off from grasping the significance, the ramifications, the genuine and true meaning, the import, etc. of how the psychic nature is developed. Nothing we can do about it; that is the way it seems to be.

          Now let us take up the description of how the psychic nature is developed. In a given man’s essential nature, he can be described as a differentiated field in the world Mother substance; he can be described as an autonomous field of energy, which exhibits the characteristics of consciousness, of sentientness — a sentient differentiated field or sphere. There is no psychic nature pertaining to or existing in that field. On its own level, in its own essentiality, so as to speak, there is no psychic nature; that represents the true individual, the true I Am that I Am respecting any individual. So, when an individual as such (and he cannot be otherwise than as such) is born into the world, he has no psychic nature. When he is originally born into the world he finds he is differentiated from the animal field, which heretofore has controlled all of the instinctive functions by which he was motivated. But now he is not born from the animal field; as an individual field he is born into the world. That indicates his origin, his essential birth as an individual. That is his first birth; that point — that original birth — is repeated over and over and over again on the time-line, that fourth coordinate of the higher manifold, or what can be described as a palingenetic process or a cyclic process on that time-line or in the palingenetic process. That essential birth is repeated each time he is born into the world, each time he comes in without any psychic nature, so that, originally and each time, the psychic nature has to be developed.

          How? is the pivot of our question. How is it developed? By the qualities of the substance which he elects to work with. This becomes the first factor in the description of how the psychic nature is developed. The moment that the quality of ‘matter’ is mentioned, we have reference to the gunas respecting energy; this factor of the qualities respecting energy allows of a wide play; if one is attempting to give the instruction to others, it is an interesting play — mind over ‘matter’, the conversion of ‘matter’ into energy problems and discussions, etc., then, accurate description of what constitutes ‘matter’, with much play upon the constitution of ‘matter’, etc. But to skip over all of the ‘doors’ that open for play upon the term, and leaving its variations alone (which is necessary in a brief description of how the psychic nature is developed), we can say that energy, like color shadings (because we have to resort to some analogy) or the tone of the musical scale (the color shadings lend themselves to the analogy because we can say that color can be reduced to three primary shades and we do not have to quarrel about which three primary colors), that energy is characterized by gunas or qualities, and we have three primary gunas or qualities; again, it doesn’t make any difference what labels we use, just so we convey the idea that there are three qualities; these qualities represent the kinds, the characteristic types of ‘matter’ with which the psychic nature is built. The most important factor is the selection of material. In the vast majority of cases, this selecting which is done, while unconscious to the cortical intellect, is not unconscious to the essential nature. Sometimes the selection is eager, avid, and sometimes more or less indifferent. But in either case or the excluded middle, there is unconscious selection of material by the individual. It is only when we pitch the thought upon the mental level that the factor of conscious or unconscious respecting this selection has any validity. To the individual, it is always conscious. This is easy to grasp when we go back to the original statement that when he is born he has no psychic nature; he has to build one; and he can’t have any intellectual or cortical functions until after he has built his psychic nature, because the intellect and cortex belong to the last stages in the building of the psychic nature. What we call the cortical functions of intellect pertains to the psychic nature and not to the consciousness in the field as selecting material, because he has no cortex yet with which to think; so, whether conscious or unconscious has no validity; he is conscious; he is sentient; that was carefully said; therefore he is conscious not unconscious. We cannot endow that autonomous field with consciousness and then introduce the possibility of unconsciousness. If he is conscious, he is conscious in his field, and if he is unconscious, there is no field or no individual; so, consciousness or unconsciousness is relative to the intellect, not relative to the field, therefore, it is always a conscious selection of qualities of material or ‘matter’.

          Now, to describe this on a lower level; on the mental level it must be described in terms of values given to the objective world in whole and in minute part, because there may be some infinitesimal factors involved, or the world-as-a-whole may be involved in the value giving. We describe it in terms of value giving; according to the quality of value given which determines the kind of ‘matter’ selected in the building of the psychic nature. That energy, irrespective of the quality selected, is built into the field; it is built into the consciousness (two ways of saying the same thing). It is built right upon the basic structure of the individual field, and that basic structure of the individual field is like unto the steel framework of a modern building, and we use the word steel there advisedly because it is more powerful than steel. The lines of force of a given field constitute the framework upon which any structure, respecting the individual, is built. So, it is upon the lines of force, which are more invariant than the steel framework of a building, more enduring than the steel framework (we must employ these analogies, otherwise it would become so recondite that the beginner could not grasp what we would want to convey); it is upon the pattern which we label the Arche or the architect.

          I believe this leads off the description of how the psychic nature is built; we have sort of organized our material with which to describe it; we must carry this description on to its finality.

 


 

March 16, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 20

 

          The description of how the psychic nature is developed constitutes the most important subject for those who have not developed beyond the psychic nature — that means, of beginners in the study of truth. Attention must be focused upon the psychic nature and the way it functions, in order that those coming out from the aristotelian manifold of values might lay hold of the causes for so much that is obscure and impossible of understanding in that objective state. The enormous importance of this is learned first gradually and when completely learned, it can be said that there is no problem, condition — psychological or what is called functional or organic — but what the causes thereof can be located in the psychic nature. That statement does not apply to the aristotelian, because it will be categorically rejected. It is only comparatively recently that we have been startled by the conclusions being arrived at by the psychiatrists respecting the etiology of many of the organic and structural defects of the physical body as having their causes — the etiology thereof — in the psychic nature. Some of those discoveries are heralded as marvelous, revolutionary, etc., and yet these facts have been known for countless ages by the members of the fraternity that we label the Illuminati. These discoveries now being made by the psychiatrists herald the dawning understanding, because they correlate it as yet (as per date, 1950) with the aristotelian manifold of values, inasmuch as they relate it to the unconscious, instead of to the psychic nature (and the word unconscious is used as relative to the objective self-conscious state, that is, consciousness in identity with the objective appearance, the objective world, etc., as it appears to the senses).

          But to the beginner in the study of truth and to the teachers who attempt to represent the higher wisdom to beginners, the importance of the understanding of the psychic nature, how it is developed and how it functions, etc., is because the majority of individuals function more on that level of the psychic nature than any other. So, it is more germane to their state and the instruction pertaining thereto, particularly when we begin to uncover the causes for physical distresses and disturbances, and go further and ferret out the causes for psychological maladjustments, complexes, emotional and mental ailments, diseases, etc.

          To the more advanced student, it is of equal importance, on the grounds that it gives him very great understanding of the difficulties through which others are passing (and this understanding is called compassion and patience on the part of the more advanced individual) because to him there is no cause for turmoil and disturbances outside of the psychic nature. The old aristotelian habit of thinking is so strong that it unconsciously operates, even with the higher developed students; it is a holdover, because when there is some psychological conflicts within a given individual, and the individual has the tendency to mentally manufacture reasons and causes respecting others, situations, environmental contexts, economic and political conditions of the world — that is, these various combinations are used as the reasons for disturbances, that is just a holdover of the aristotelian manifold of values. There is a conflict in the psychic nature of the individual, which conflict is not understood or recognized, and transference of the individual’s conflict is made to another, or to this or that, ad infinitum — because, you can’t beat the cortex in manufacturing reasons. Remember the individual is in conflict and that gives you great patience, compassion and understanding. You don’t react to the objective appearance of things, you have compassion, it is like one having the measles or the flu, and you have the same attitude; you don’t jump on one for having the flu, he needs your help, radiance, understanding, etc.

          We cannot expect that of the aristotelian, because he doesn’t know that the individual is in conflict with his psychic members.

          The conflict between the psychic nature and the developing noetic level states becomes quite severe, so severe that in Egyptian times it was symbolized by dividing the country into two halves — the south half and the north half — the south half representing the psychic nature and the north half representing the noetic level. After that period, all of Egypt was used as symbolical representation of the psychic nature and the term the “flesh pots of Egypt” holds over in the race psyche to this day, although the original symbolical representation of the term has been lost. We have the terms “journey of the children of light out of Egyptian bondage,” etc., and in other countries the conflict between the forces of darkness and the forces of light have been stressed to no end, and we have the holdover in modern religions of the conflict between the devil and those who are saved; this is just a modern remnant of the ancient symbolism of the conflict between the forces of evil and the forces of light.

          The aristotelians have to manufacture images and pictures or make some identity of this or that race or group with which they might be commercially or economically in conflict. It is easy to say they are representatives of darkness or of the forces of light, and it is always “we” who are representatives of the forces of light. This is transference of the conflict between the psychic nature and the developing noetic level — without exception. It is the habit of the aristotelian mind to make these objective identities. This is easily understood when one goes far enough in the study of the truth about reality to have passed through the purificatory period in the individualizing process. As soon as one has succeeded in expurgating all destructive forces — that is, destructive to the developing noetic level — then the noetic level and the psychic level are reconciled and united in one consciousness, and what we called forces of darkness, or the south half of Egypt, and the north half, the higher nature, the children of light, etc., now are seen as the same individual — two levels of the same individual’s consciousness all the time. That is why the Janus symbol has been used; the individual faces in two directions. He cries with Paul — “That which I would not do, that I do; that which I would do, I do not; O, when will the Lord deliver me from this conflict”. Or like Nietzsche, “O, that I were wise, wise from the very heart!”

          On the higher level there is a complete reconciliation of the so-called two natures — the psychic nature and the noetic level, the mind, the true nature, and they are so completely united that they are one, and the individual can look back from that state and see where they were twin souls all the time.

          So, you see for one who wants to represent this work, how important it is to understand the psychic nature, because in his understanding he never can react to the obstreperousness of another; he just has compassion for the conflict and waits until that individual gets well or is relieved of his sickness.

          Even to the more advanced student the importance of understanding how the psychic nature is developed becomes apparent; upon this understanding rests that which is erroneously called compassion and patience; it is merely understanding of the conflict. We must add to this, that it is the province of the cortical mind to find reasons, alibis and excuses, and if it didn’t do this, something would be wrong somewhere (it only stops perking when the higher level of functioning is reached where frequencies are registered directly); add those two factors together — the conflict going on within the psychic nature of a given individual, and the cortical mind busy finding reasons and justifications and interferences, etc.

          Do you see where one’s own peace — not the peace of anyone else — one’s own peace of heart and mind and consciousness rests upon that understanding? If you want peace and serenity, which you have to have in order to work constructively — if you want peace and harmony — to work harmoniously, you must have understanding of the psychic nature and of the conflict between the psychic nature and the higher levels, then one has great serenity and an enormous advantage; as Schopenhauer said, “Nothing is comparable to standing on the vantage ground of truth.”

          So much for trying to encourage you to learn how the psychic nature is developed; let us now proceed to the description of how it is developed.

          We have the Artificer, the Architect, the Arche, the Power with which I create my world; the I AM which is my true Self is the Power with which I create my psychic nature — that is my world, because I have to live in it.

          Now we have the Artificer and we have also his material, energy and the variety of his materials, the gunas. That is the drama, that is the thesis. An individual does not have a psychic nature when he is born (and each time he is born, he is born without a psychic nature). That is why those who come without a psychic nature are so sweet; they even smell sweet. Sometimes we want to keep them that way; that is, we don’t want them to build a psychic nature. We are all sweet when divested of the psychic nature; we are lovable and loving and pure when we don’t have a psychic nature; just like babies.

          But the quality of material — little by little — is selected. To tell all the minute particulars of how this psychic nature is built does not lend itself to this description. Why does the Artificer select this quality instead of the other quality? It runs back into the karma of the past, to the point on the time-line where there is a weak note. At each re-birth he runs over the seven notes of his octave, and if he finds a note not rounded and full and pearly, that will be the note selected and not another. We can say generally, according to the constituent factors of the state of a given individual that this will determine why the selection of one quality of material and not another. The constituents of that state are quite comprehensive, but in the description of the building of the psychic nature, we are only concerned with the fact that it selects one quality of energy rather than another. The quality of energy selected operates in the attitude, value, way the objective world appears to it. There is a vast range; it doesn’t appear the same to each and all; it appears differently to different individuals and appears differently to the same individual at different times. There are those who never can see it as real; it always remains like a dream picture to them and they never get serious about it; they can’t get over the fact that it looks like a dream picture to them. I have known those who from birth to passing out treat their life like a visitor to a foreign country; they say I am just a visitor here and I am just looking around to see how the inhabitants of this country conduct themselves, etc. They always feel like a visitor in the house and never criticize anything or anyone.

          Look at the difference in values, material selected. But the vast majority become identified with the objective, substantive images, and the basis of their evaluation is determined by that identity. It always begins with identity with the physical body; that is, the image appearing substantive, which is labeled the physical body.

          For the sake of those who will represent this work (and each of you who speak will represent it) there is an incident that you can use to illustrate the identity with the physical body. The baby repeats all of its past from conception to birth; the aeonian past is condensed in a nine-month period and repeated in detail; then from birth to twenty-eight years the four stages of the state reached on the time-line are repeated. In the first seven years the state of objective identity is developed; the second seven years, the psychic nature is developed; the third period of seven years the higher psychic nature is developed; the fourth period of seven years there is a rapid repetition of past experiences, an orientation for the initiation of new experiences. In the first period of seven years the time comes when the baby begins to see its little hands and feet for the first time. Prior to this incident the little baby uses its hands and feet but is not conscious of them. That illustrates the animal state, that it has a body but does not know that it has a body. Then that moment comes when the baby sees its hands and feet (usually has to bite them) and identifies them with himself — this is me. From this identity it spreads out and identifies with other ‘things’. That is the dawning of the objective identity state. After that state is formed, value is given: likes and dislikes, attraction and aversion, love and hate (and don’t forget the excluded middle of all these either/or degrees); there is quite a range of love or hate, of attraction and aversion. It is those values in the consciousness of identity, each having its guna, its quality, which build within the consciousness the energy corresponding thereto.

          If you happen to be in scientific circles or if you want to express this point in more scientific language, eliminate the word consciousness and say: the energy is built upon the lines of force of the individual field, the differentiated field, characterized by definite lines of force. To illustrate those lines of force, we use the analogy of the steel framework of a modern building. Upon this is placed the various building materials. We can say that energy is built upon the lines of force of the field; or we can say that the energy having its specific quality is built into the consciousness. Both are true; just different modes of expression. There is nothing except energy with which the Artificer has to work, but he determines the quality according to his own intrinsic needs and requirements; he builds the energy into his field and forms the psychic nature. As soon as the psychic nature is formed, the consciousness can enter and function in it, then what we label the personality pattern has been set for his incarnation. The only thing he can do, after the building of the psychic nature for the incarnation — that is, after the personality pattern has been set — is to eliminate some material and substitute another material so that he can transform the whole psychic nature by eliminating here and there and substituting other material, until he gradually replaces it bit by bit, piece by piece. It is very unusual to shatter the psychic ‘body’ completely and escape from it, although the possibility exists; but it is so rare where one is changed in the “twinkling of an eye.” The change is generally very gradual; bit by bit the guna quality respecting the energy that has been used, may be eliminated and other qualities substituted. The ‘rule’ is that the psychic nature is very gradually changed.

          The completion of the change — not of the building — is with the great change, the turning-around, the facing in the other direction, where there is no longer orientation to the objective world, images appearing substantive. Like the needle of the compass, it undergoes a complete 180º swing and is oriented to the master Self, the individual, the Atman, the differentiated field; it is light, mind and will; it is power. When that takes place, that complete reversal, the whole orientation is to the light, to the power, to the mind. The value given purifies the psychic nature; that is, eliminates, expurgates all energy substance with its guna quality that has been built through the opposite orientation. When it is completely rebuilt we call it the utter destruction of the old man and the putting on of the new man.

          When the consciousness is re-oriented, then the psychic nature and the mind Self are completely united; the gods are no longer in conflict. He stands above them; he is the reconciler of the gods of darkness and the gods of light; he effects the reconciliation between the two and they become one.


 

March 17, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 21

 

The next point in our outline: describe the motivating forces in the creating process.

The highest level possible for us to entertain (oriented as we are in the objective manifold) is that level described as the Logos, the creating Word. In the description of that level it is stated that consciousness perceived the idea, the idea gathers the Mother substance and appears as representation. That is also described as the autonomous field, characterized by its pattern, lines of force forming a pattern; that the emergent energy on these lines of force, like whirls or knots, configurated, and the configuration of these units of energy or the configuration of these whirls or knots on or of the lines of force, become the representation of the pattern of the field. In both cases it is the sentient field, the sentient differentiated sphere, the consciousness; but the motivating force is a power by which and with which consciousness functions. That could be described as the charge of the field; it is personified in the Vedas as the highest god, Agni, the power-to-be-conscious.

Obviously, this motivating force in the creating process and the description of it relative to the level of the Logos, whereby that creating frequency, the creating Word, becomes manifest, does not and cannot pertain to a student learning to walk in the Light, and yet that is the ultimate objective, the ultimate point toward which he is developing and which will at one point on his time-line be reached and fully and consciously developed. So, all of that creating process relative to the level of the Logos, does not directly or immediately concern him, and yet he should begin to practice, from the very earliest efforts in understanding the ultimate Reality, creating. He should not give up in despair and say the fundamental process of creating is so far beyond that there is no use for him to even attempt it; that is true, but there are two levels of reflection of the same process and one can begin with that second reflection; in fact, he does it all the time; he reflects the creating process.

The first reflection is upon the Noetic level, wherein mind substance, the fundamental creating process of consciousness is reflected, and we will describe that creating process as we go along with this phase of our outline.

But the creating process is again reflected in the psychic nature, and here is where it falls within the province, the ability, of every individual, even the beginners, to practice creating, so that he will shortcut the ultimate attainment of becoming a high level conscious creator. There are no grounds for despair, that it is beyond one’s ability, etc., because here is where he is doing it all of the time. Here is one of the most subtle secrets in the esoteric work — the power with which consciousness works on the higher levels is reflected in the psychic nature and is labeled desire.

          I want to call your attention to the fact that conceptual thinking is not involved in the creating process, whether in its reflection on the Noetic level, or in its reflection in the psychic nature in desire. As one is coming up from the animal state to the Logoic state — becoming a conscious Logos — conceptual thinking plays a very minor part in the process, because the motivating force of thinking on the ascending side of the arc is labeled desire.

          In the expanding process from the animal instinctive perceptions to the thinking conceptions, the force which motivates that process, the force which motivates the thinking is labeled desire. Focus your mind on the psychic nature and see how often in your own experience or in the experience of anyone else that you can observe closely enough, desire always precedes the effort to think — with no exception. Observe the functions of the psychic nature of a child after it has repeated the development of its psychic nature (that means after 14 years of age on the average); the child generally knows what it wants to do — I want to be a doctor, I want to be an engineer, I want to be this or that.

          Now to promote the want, desire, lots of study, lots of thinking has to be done. Find one where you cannot stimulate the want, or the want is not stimulated in him, and you will never get a thinker; in no way will that individual learn to think. When the want is strong enough you have no trouble about getting him to learn his lessons, to study his books; he is avid about his studies; he wants to know and wants to learn for a particular reason — to justify his desires, his want.

          Take the student in and of the Light, the Truth, and if he wants it, you have no trouble with him about the desperateness with which he will study. I am only emphasizing that the motivating force is labeled desire, and desire in the psychic nature is that which becomes the force in the creating process. If beginners would accept that simple statement (which they won’t, you may rest assured), then there would be no need to stress it at all; we could just make the statement: that which motivates desire in the psychic nature — that force is the reflection of the creating power, of the creating process. The alert student will seize it, lay hold of it and begin consciously creating what he elects to bring into manifestation.

          The first step in learning to consciously create is to be extremely careful about what you elect; and the next step is to become extremely obdurate about giving up what you select. If you have been careful in choosing what you want to create, and I am not specifying what — whether a profession, a method of life, a man, a woman, a house, a car, etc. — I am showing the method to accomplish it, because you will learn by doing, not to create that which is burdensome. The only way to learn that is to get burdened to the last straw. Nietzsche gives three metamorphoses: first, he becomes a camel, takes on all the burdens too much, and then he is metamorphosed into a lion that roars for its freedom, like it roars for something to eat; then he gets his freedom from burdens; finally he is metamorphosed into a little child — “Except ye become,” etc.

          No use to say you don’t want to load yourself up with possessions that are burdensome, because that may be your point and you have to learn, and the only way you can learn is to load yourself up and become so burdened that you get to the last burden. Literally, as well as figuratively, he breaks his back, then he begins to roar for freedom.

          We are not going to specify what a given individual is going to create; he is going to create according to his point on the time-line; it is like selecting the material for the building of the psychic nature — he selects what he needs. So, he will create according to his need, and those needs will vary with the developing individual.

          I want to add something here — there is a peculiarity about this creating process; the creating power of your higher Self is like a mother — in fact it is labeled the Mother — and it operates like a mother. The mother knows that the child should not have this or that, but if it nags long enough, the mother will say, “Here, take it.” The creating process operates that way even when it is not good for you; if you desire long and hard enough and nag Mother enough you will get it. So, it doesn’t make any difference what you want, you can create it if you will arouse yourself to the significance of desire. You will not create by thinking. I have been careful to show that thinking follows desire and doesn’t motivate or create desire. Never try to reverse it. I have looked in upon these so-called cults of Truth which always stress “holding the right thought,” “visualize the thought, mentally picture,” etc. To me, the way I see the creating process, they are way off the beam, and the more they practice that mental visualization, mental thought, etc., the poorer and poorer they get. It is not done on that level at all; it is done by the force of desire on the psychic level. One who can hold the strong force of desire until that desire to do a certain thing becomes so entrenched in his consciousness that it is a reflection of will — that is the driving force. You must lay hold of the creating force in any creating process and in respect to the psychic nature it is labeled desire — leave thinking alone.

          How is one going to carefully select what he wants? By just canvassing his feeling and thinking. If there is paucity, don’t want anything — don’t create. But if there is a category out of which selection could be made — poise, peace, security, money (which is the easiest thing in the world to create); higher understanding? Do you want to function on a higher level? Wait until you want something; that wanting is desire.

          There are two steps: be very careful about what you select, and then be very obdurate. You will undermine what we call concentration if you desire something and then surrender it, and desire something else and surrender that; by and by you will have to work against the habit of vacillation. That is why you should be very careful about your selection, and be very obdurate.

          The third step — do not try to defend your selection by words; if you tell about what you desire, you will dissipate energy that should be going into the creation of it. The more secret you hold your desire, the more force you can muster and hold, the more creative energy will go into it.

          The fourth step in the motivating process of creativity — stimulate great enthusiasm, eager anticipation; just burst with eagerness but keep it repressed; screw down the safety valve of the boiler; get the steam up high, yet with eager anticipation of desire; then when you repress it, you force the energy into the creative channels of the field. Your desire is a reflection of the idea. Your aura, your field is formed, just like the Logos projects the idea which forms the differentiated fields on the higher level; you do that on the psychic level by stimulating desire, by heightened enthusiasm and keeping it all repressed; you force it into the frequency world on the psychic level, and build a field. Just keep pouring your enthusiasm, your force, your energy into desire and expectation and consciously build and work. You are going to do a lot of thinking about it, but thought is part of the creation, not the creating power motivating the creation.

          Here comes the most pleasurable experience. How you are led, or one comes, or this or that happens. You wonder how it happened until you remember that all creative effort is fourth-dimensional and there are no spatial barriers; configuration begins to take place and you can stand and witness it as you create; configuration, representation of your desire takes place.

          This is a key and this is one of the great secrets — the conscious utilization of power called desire. There are those who have labeled it “the divinity of desire”.

          Learning to create on the psychic level enables one easily to progress to the mind level; learning to do the same thing in mind substance on the mind level enables one to pass into the consciousness itself, focusing upon the Word as the creative matrix, and the Word as the creative matrix determining the configuration.

March 18, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 22

 

          Explain how an image is formed in the psychic nature and appears substantive.

          Always begin this description with reference to the structure of the atom, for it makes it extremely easy and simple. You can refer to the atomic weight. The number of positive units of energy are perfectly balanced by a corresponding number of negatively charged units of energy; the hydrogen atom presents one of each, and the uranium atom, 92 of each. This calls attention to the units of energy which are not ‘things.’

          There is a description which illustrates the minuteness relative to size which generally obtains in the consciousness of the individual. Picture a room 200 feet in length, 60 feet in width and 40 feet in height, and if you would place in that room the printer’s “full stop” (what the laity label the period in printing), the room would represent the field; the period points represent the units of energy circulating in that field— they have lots of room.

          Now, it is incredible to the objective mind and requires a long time to become conditioned to thinking that every so-called ‘thing’ or ‘object’ including one’s own physical ‘body’ is composed of nothing except these units of energy, and each atom having the relative space as the room described. As soon as it begins to dawn upon the thinking principle, one begins to feel rather queer, that he is more nothing than actual substance, until he can change his consciousness from identity with that nothing, to the conscious power with which those units of energy are maintained in configurating form. It is that queer feeling of being nothing which is only due to his state in objective identity, but that makes no impression for a long time; the idea is too vast; it requires a great deal of conditionality, of living, dwelling, with the identity, until very, very gradually it dawns upon the thinking principle. The vacuity which results is intolerable because one doesn’t want to think of himself as so much nothing; he wants to think of himself as far more substantial, real, than that, so it is an aid in effecting the transference of identity, of thinking what a mighty power I am to configurate those entities, those units of energy and hold them relatively invariant in a configurated form; and what a mighty power I must be in order to manufacture an image out of the peripheral outlines described by those units of energy; and what a mighty power I must be to seemingly project that image, which is called the objective world; then what a mighty power I must be to create this objective world — then, by the great horn-spoon, I am the creator or I am identified therewith: “Be still and know that I Am God”, — not created, but one with the creator; I create and sustain this vast and objective world out of nothing, just an image.

          Hence, the great theological argument for ages: how can God create this world out of nothing, because something must come from something; something cannot come from nothing, etc., etc., etc. Do you see the error in the theological argument? It has raged for centuries — attributing the qualities of the substance to the image that only appears substantive; there is the basic error in the theological argument. Then when we see how the image is created by the creator, we see how ‘this world’ as objective appearance is created out of nothing; it is created out of the peripheral outlines which appear to sense faculties, and the I AM which is my true Self is the creator of Its own world.

          We can get down to more minute description of how the image is created and then appears substantive. There are several devices which must be used to illustrate the process. One can use the simple device of the electric fan; let the blades of the fan be at rest; then turn the current into the motor, and the blades whirl. What were simple blades with space between appear as a ‘solid’ disc. One can take a bicycle wheel and put it on a shaft, and if that wheel is turned rapidly enough you could not jab a knitting needle through the spokes; it would appear and operate as ‘solid’ to the knitting needle.

          Years before I had these references, which are now so simple that it seems like waste of time to use them (but it is not waste of time until the thinking principle has finally received the idea); you can reiterate these illustrations over and over until the thinking principle receives them and gets into that state of vacuity respecting the objective state of identity; from then on there is no need to use them.

          The mental comprehension is valuable as the vestibule to the consciousness. Not until the thinking principle in the consciousness registers or accepts an idea does it become functional respecting the consciousness. Of course, we are assuming a great deal in using these illustrations. We are assuming that one wants to make the transference, and of course, this is given only for those who are desirous of making the transference; so it has a purpose for them (but no purpose at all for those who are not striving to make the transference from identity with the image appearing substantive to the creator of the substantive images). To those who are striving to make that transference there is no waste of time; it is full of significance.

          Years before we had the constitution of what we call matter, the structure of the atom so well known, we used to use the illustration of a brilliant point of light on the point of a stick in a dark room. The neon signs represent it — charged molecules of gas oscillating through the glass tubes. They are like one point of light on the stick; they oscillate and make outlines.

          When the question is asked, “Why is this ‘floor’, ‘table’, ‘chair’ so ‘solid’? We use these tables and chairs, etc. How does it come about? Beginners are always bringing that up. The word ‘solid’ is identified with the image, not identified with the configuration; that is the error in the question. Be patient. Remember how long the canalization has obtained of thinking of the image as ‘solid.’ The image is in the consciousness. It is like the illustration of waking from a dream. One knows that the picture in the dream state is not external to his mind — that is, to his consciousness, but in the dream state, how realistically the picture appeared; in the dream state the picture was ‘out there’; but on awakening, one knows those pictures that he saw when in the dream state were never any place except in the mind. But if one could enter the dream state and say that; the one in the dream would say, “Don’t talk to me; they are not there! Here it is!” Think of the ages of canalization! Be infinitely patient, until the ideas constituting the instruction are accepted by the thinking principle in the consciousness. That will be just like awakening from the dream. Those ideas will be accepted when conditionality respecting them has displaced and offset the conditionality of the ideas which have been lived in for so long.

          To return to the illustration respecting the sense of touch — let us use the cog-wheel. I borrowed that from Count Alfred, because it gave variation from the sight of the peripheral outlines of the units of energy, to the touch phase, and it fortifies the stab with the knitting needle in the bicycle wheel. That illustration was figured out mathematically, because Count Alfred was an advanced mathematician. If the cog-wheel revolves so that there are less than 1550 strokes per minute hitting the hand, the structure of the neural system and the energy forces by which the function can make the complete reflex arc respecting the strokes (the afferent wave can go to the brain cells and the efferent can return), each stroke on the hand can be registered separately; but if the wheel revolves with sufficient acceleration so that more than 1550 strokes per minute hit the hand, the closeness of them does not permit the reflex arc to be completed; so the neural system throws itself and the energy with which it functions — and the consciousness governing both — into another method of functioning (into high gear, I like to say); it groups the impulses instead of registering each separately. It is the grouping, the continuous instead of discontinuous registry which is the key to how the image appears substantive. When separate or discontinuous impulses can be registered by consciousness (plus its instrumentality — brain cells, neural system, sense faculty, etc.) and can account therefore, that is, can register the impulses as distinct and separate, no image can be formed respecting the configuration; it is only when the rapidity becomes accelerated beyond the rhythm, the rate of registry of the impulses separately, that the consciousness registers as-a-whole, it groups the impulses. Gestalt is the psychological word for the wholeness, the synthetical registry, and that plays an important part in the study of psychology where it is carried beyond neural impulses. Any acceleration beyond the rate of registry goes from the discontinuous to the continuous impression, and the impressions are registered as continuous, as wholes, not as parts.

          If the cog-wheel is accelerated so that there are more than 1550 impressions per minute on the sense faculty of touch, then consciousness throws over into “high gear”; it registers the impression as a group, as-a-whole, and then we have the attribute created in the consciousness labeled ‘smoothness’; that modality, that attribute is transferred to the image appearing substantive; it is identified, like the consciousness is identified, with the image appearing substantive. Then we say the glass is smooth or ‘solid.’ The degrees of these attributes from softest to the hardest substance can be described by the number of impressions per units of time; the less number of impressions per unit of time (still in the gestalt method of evaluation, the continuous, the grouping of the impressions), the softer / the greater number of impressions per unit of time, the harder.

          That cog-wheel is very important, because if you have advanced students, you can use that illustration and step right up to a higher level. While it served one purpose — the continuous registry in contradistinction to the discontinuous registry of impressions, how all change is beyond these attributes, these modalities, these qualities, etc. — the illustration can be stepped up to a higher level and become an admirable illustration of how we register separateness respecting the universe, distinctness respecting so-called things and objects and persons (angels, gods, etc.); how we register them separately and how we can register them as one; the whole illustration of the one and the many; the many and the one; the whole illustration of how the one becomes the multiplicity and how the multiplicity becomes the one. We can go right back to the cog-wheel and the sense impression of touch and it holds up as an analogy admirably.

          The use of the illustration of the cog-wheel and touch, the one becoming multiplicity and the multiplicity becoming the one, the whole doctrine of maya, Avidya, opens up like a book; you read it like a primer.

          How valuable these simple analogies are when they lead into such insight, penetrating depths that seem so mystifying and confusing to one in the objective manifold of values.

          Now, the summation of how the image appears substantive: the inability to register the units of energy in a given configuration as separate, and in that inability, they are registered continuously, instead of separately; out of that continuous registry the image, the picture, is formed in the psychic nature. We have already described the psychic nature and how it is built and after it becomes a functional instrument in the consciousness. Not knowing that in reality a given configuration represents the constituents, the basis from which the abstraction (the image) is made; not knowing that the configuration constitutes the basis from which the image is abstracted, the image is identified with the configuration. If the configuration is known as the basis from which the image has been abstracted, then the tendency of identification will have been interfered with, and ultimately will be broken. But it is in the complete unknowing that the configuration constitutes the basis from which the image has been abstracted, and that configuration constitutes the Reality, the image is identified with Reality.

          Why is this ‘chair’ hard? Why can we sit on it? Because it is the only Reality there is; there is no other Reality; this is the Real world; that is why it is so dependable; we even have an instinct toward it — when we use the term “real estate” — and we can go further and say that instinct to the land, to the soil, to have your own place, that sense of security in the objective sense, stems from a deep sense of substantiality respecting Reality. There are reasons for that, even in the instinctive consciousness of the race. And when ‘this world’, this configurated world of energy — this energy world — is labeled illusion, maya! the basic Reality is thereby denied. The individual who does that is cutting himself off and if it were not for the basic factors which govern every feeling, desire and thought, he would ultimately be lost. But the basic factors bring him back to the Reality that he denies and sometimes with a rather shattering bang when he has to repudiate his denials and hawkshaw around like Nicodemus at night to learn the Truth he denies.

          The whole burden of your effort in describing how the image appears substantive is going to be to get the individual to separate the image from the Reality; to live in the Reality without denying it and learning to place the values he has given to the image in one category of maya, Avidya, etc., and sharply differentiate the values given to the Reality, here and now in the real world; and learn those categories as separate from the values given to the image as substantive and identified with the Reality. That is the “winter of our discontent” to get that sharp line of differentiation over; to separate the two categories of values; one is light and the other is darkness; one is wisdom, and the other is ignorance; one is understanding, the other is a snare and a delusion of maya. All that is required is to develop that differentiation between the image in the consciousness and the configuration of units of energy, from which the image has been abstracted.

          It is so simple to one who has been in it for years, that it is difficult to understand how it constitutes such a stumbling block to the inquirer respecting the teaching.

 


 

March 20, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 23

 

          Constantly remember that we go to knowing through feeling; impress yourself deeply with that. We use the mind to make the road map, and then throw it aside; when you step out onto the journey, the map doesn’t assist, accelerate you in the actual function of the journey, but feeling does. Start with feeling when you take the journey.

          When you chant the word OM, feel your way into the frequency effect, feel your way into the rising forces, and feel your way into the force in the noetic level centers; that is very definitely effective. Where the mind throws the focus of attention upon the sound, the external technique, etc. — to the negation of feeling your way into it — you are missing the purpose and you will miss the result. To you older students that is very important; to beginners you cannot emphasize that — they have to find their way into it.

 

**

 

          Our lesson continues — explain how an image is formed in the psychic nature and appears substantive. So much has been given respecting this point in our instruction, and it is a point which has to be reiterated so often in our public work that I am not going to utilize this opportunity in restating it.

          For the family or for advanced students, this subject lends itself to the application of the process of why an image is formed in the psychic nature in various ways, in expanding degrees and on various levels, etc.

          Let us imagine you have a group of beginners and you want to make the application of how the image is formed to the state of consciousness characterizing a beginner in understanding. Of course, we will go through the description of the inability of the sense registry to separate, differentiate, respecting the frequency registered, or respecting the units of energy of a given configuration, and in that inability of the sense faculties to separate frequency from frequency, units of energy from units of energy, the continuous sense registry is substituted for that inability, and we have the peripheral outline which is photographed in a gestalt and the image is formed. Of course, we have to add to the seeing faculty the reports from the other sense faculties, because they are incorporated in the process.

          Here is something more important than just the intellectual understanding of that process — the focus of attention upon the psychic process, instead of upon the neural process or the sense faculties. The beginner must condition himself as rapidly as possible to orient all of his thinking, and therefore his evaluations, upon the psychic nature.

          The reason for this and the application of the process — no one can register perception of Reality from a false basis. No one can go from Avidya to Vidya by using Avidya as the basis of evaluation. Let me say that in plain and simple English: one cannot consciously or unconsciously remain oriented to the maya, to the objective manifold of values and upon that basis, upon that orientation, expand consciousness into understanding, into perception of fundamental Reality. It is only by the complete separation, dichotomy, from that basis and the incorporation into the consciousness of the true basis upon which he actually functions, that he can proceed to expand into perception of Reality.

          Here is another way of saying it: each and everyone, whether he knows it or not, functions in and from and upon the psychic nature; that is the way he actually functions; note the antecedent of the word, “he”. It doesn’t mean the person identified with his ‘body’. It means that which has become identified. He is the functional one and he is functioning in the psychic nature and from it.

          Now in order to proceed in fulfillment of his destiny — that means in order to accomplish the successive stages in the orderly process of development — he has to first find his true basis from which he functions; he cannot begin from a false basis, because nothing will work. So, he first has to orient himself to the way he now actually functions and start from that true basis, then his progress is very rapid by reason of the fact that the hidden error which will constitute a semantic blockage will not intrude because it is already taken care of by the orientation to his true basis, not a hypothetical true basis, not some ultimate essentially true basis, but the basis from which he actually, now, functions, irrespective of his state, of his point on the time line; he has to clarify himself respecting actuality — now, in any given now. Then he will obviate the unconscious obscuration and every one of those unconscious obscurations to progress will be found in false meaning, false evaluation; therefore we label them semantic and they become semantic blockages to further progress. One has to get back to taw; you can’t start shooting your marbles from a false point, which the rules of the game prohibit — that means, the natural order process. (The word, taw, comes from the Egyptian label from Brahma, or the power with which one is conscious; that is a play upon the word, is the reason I like to use it; taw was the supreme creating power).

          Now the application: at the very beginning, one has to change the focus of consciousness from identity with the image appearing substantive to the basis upon which one actually functions. How do you actually function? In the psychic nature. Of course, subsequently or later on for the beginner, we will describe and explain the structure of that individual in his psychic state. This reorientation to the actual life facts culminates in distinct and conscious experiences of not being the image. We use the analogy of the green walnut compared to the ripe nut. As the walnuts are growing, take one partly mature and cut it in half, and look at the cross section. You cannot distinguish hull from shell and hull and shell from the nut; you can’t find a line anywhere between meat, shell and hull; they look ‘solid’ to the eye. When the nut is ripe, the hull drops off of its own accord; the shell is quite distinct from the meat and when the shell is broken the meat drops out. Nature provides the whole teaching continuously before us; we are stumbling over it and can’t see it. Only the Epopte sees all that, all the time, everywhere; in matter of fact, he can’t see anything else by and by; he lives in that way of seeing everything.

          Let the hull represent this image which appears substantive. It will drop away of its own accord; it will drop out of your consciousness and you will even forget it; and the shell would represent the psychic nature, and then we have the meat; the real Self will separate itself from even its shell and its shell will be discarded.

          Go back in your mind to the instruction as given to a beginner; the beginner must think of his psychic nature as his taw line, his base, until he actually experiences the separation, the looseness from his physiological organism. While it is not very semantically correct (and I do not think in the instruction given to beginners we should overstress semantic correctness), the beginner can be told this: think of yourself as a tenant of your house; consider how freely you can move around in the rooms of your house; at no time do you think you are the house in which you are moving around. Begin to think of this physical organism as a house and you are the occupant, the dweller in the house. The house has certain apertures, called senses, and you can go to any one of those apertures and peek out, because that is the only access you have to what is called the outside world. You have to go around and peek out the windows and each window has different-colored glass. You are only the tenant of that house and you can’t change those windows, and so long as you occupy that house, you are incarcerated, as it were; there is no way you can gain experience of the so-called universe, or world, except by peeking out through the windows of the house. If the windows have colored glass, you don’t know what the world is, the actual qualities, because you are getting it in colors. You must constantly think, meditate upon, concentrate on, dwell with — with what? The idea that I am only a tenant, I am only occupying this house, I am not the house, I am only occupying it. If you will do that, it won’t take long until you begin to experience the looseness of the ‘hull’, the ‘hull’ begins to loosen and the shell and meat can rattle around in the ‘hull’. You get the distinct experience, the feel; then it is not long thereafter that the ‘hull’ drops away.

          When the ‘hull’ drops away in our analogy, it means that all tendency to evaluate from the objective state of identity is gone, even the tendency is gone; you lose the ability; you forget it. If there were any validity in that state of objective identity, you could not forget it so quickly. It is on the grounds that it was illusory, on a false basis of evaluation that causes it to drop away so quickly. That is where the beginner must start. He must get to taw; the natural order won’t allow him to play, to grow in the fulfillment of its process until he gets to the true basis from which he actually functions; he can’t start falsely; he must start truly. If you don’t mind my quoting some Scripture: “And if a man also strive for masteries, yet is he not crowned except he strive lawfully.” It is only by the lawful procedure that one can gain the true end; that is, one cannot start with falsehood and reach truth; he has to start on facts; he has to abandon falsehood — the identity of consciousness with an image is so false that it has been said: “It is the lie and the father of all other lies.” Living on that basis is living in falsehood and lies. If you don’t believe it, watch the world and see how it is overtaken. Get on the true basis and you will never be overtaken. That is simple; that is for the beginner.

          Let us carry the same to the higher developed student and we will find the same application — the application of the description of how the image appears substantive. The very advanced (you fill in all the degrees between) student reaches the point where he is so loosened up in his ‘house’ that he wants to go outside; he is tired getting colored reports and wants to go out. There is a provision for him in the natural order process; he can go out of his ‘house’ and he can crosscheck in various ways so that he is not psychologizing himself or dreaming, but is actually out and those checks are startling. We have to prepare the one who is ready to go out. He has to have that distinct feel of being loosened up and the consciousness of rattling. There are many ways in which this condition is obvious to your consciousness. (I have to pull my consciousness from where it has been working and put it in the hull and make it work; it is a deliberate transference of energy; those lines are sharp.)

          The advanced student who goes out must have help and preparation for the experience. For one to see his own ‘house’ is like seeing a corpse, and it is quite a shock and the individual must be prepared for this. If the shock is too great you will throw the whole consciousness out of kilter and will have to go back and wait until you can fortify yourself against such shock.

          There is another point that is difficult to get over, and some become afraid, which is an interference. One way to get over the possibility of a shock is by familiarizing himself with being the occupant of the ‘house’, and that he is not the ‘hull’. Then there is a possibility of becoming a “walker of the skies” and some fulfill that form of service instead of keeping the ‘house’.

          We can step the same analogy up to a yet higher level, because the same process is repeated on the noetic level. The Noetic level is the meat of the nut and the meat loosens itself up inside its shell (the psychic nature). Little by little — the association of the consciousness with the ‘meat’ as the essential nature, the power with which you are conscious, with Agni — that identity is formed. It only requires steadfastness of attention to effect identity with that upon which attention is focused and held. There is so little requirement to accomplish these objectives. So, when the focus of consciousness is placed upon the mind level, the power with which one is conscious, and held there, by and by identity is made and as identity is made in consciousness, the ‘meat’ begins to loosen up from the ‘shell’ until it becomes quite distinct from the ‘shell’. Such energy is generated on that level that even though it has been a “walker of the skies”, it feels confined, in limitation, and it bursts that shell asunder; it bursts the periphery of its own field.

          Now he is the resurrected one; we will celebrate it at Easter; he is the truly liberated one, because he is losing the consciousness of his individualization; he is universalizing his consciousness.

          This is the application of that one point in our outline — to clearly understand how the image is formed in the psychic nature; that is the modus operandi of breaking identity. The more clear your understanding of how that image is formed in the psychic nature and appears substantive, the stronger the grounds for the breaking of identity with the illusory image. The more clearly you can see that the substantive image is not really ‘out there’, the easier it is to break the identity with it. Without that clear seeing, you have an enormous semantic blockage to handle because of the old canalization in that identity. So, this is an extremely important point in our outline. Note that intellectually we can understand how we abstract from the stimuli received and form images, but it is the application of it that gives significance and value.

          The first application is to get back to taw, and then see the further applications of it later on. In your consciousness you can separate yourself from these false identities and reach ultimate liberation.

March 21, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 24

 

          Explain and correlate with scientific facts why we call this world an energy world, or a dynamic process. Let us take up first the “why”; that is the pivot of the subject. There are many reasons why we call this world an energy world or a dynamic process, and outstanding among these reasons we have three:

          A student approaching the study of the wisdom teaching and in preparation for understanding the presentation of the Gnosis as given in the School of the Natural Order, should endeavor to break the old canalization habit tracks of thinking about this world, and about himself as static. It is the static habits of thought, the static state of his consciousness respecting this world that must be broken; once that habit of thought can be changed, a series of consequences immediately follow — for instance, a dogmatic attitude is changed into an extensional attitude. The habit of dogmatizing, of accepting statements having a dogmatic basis, of making statements of a dogmatic nature, becomes impossible when one’s way of thinking respecting this world has become changed from the static to the dynamic. Any thought respecting a circumstance or event is subject to change and allowance must be made for that change in the statement or in the moment of thinking. This cannot be done except through a forced concentration upon a concept; that is, mentally it can be forced, but as soon as one relaxes from mental attention, his psychological processes will at once revert to the static basis of orientation — that means he will dogmatize or will accept dogmatic statements. But just as soon as his orientation is changed from the static attitude toward this world to the dynamic attitude, at once he will unconsciously, as well as consciously correct his habits of thinking and speaking because there will be an automatic check upon his words and upon even the structure of his thoughts.

          When in the aristotelian age everyone, generally speaking, tacitly, psychologically and unconsciously accepted this world as it appears to sensuous receptivity, as permanent, as there, always was and always will be, etc., illustrated by such terms as the everlasting hills, how real and permanent, and everyone thought they always will be as they appear; then naturally it follows almost logically and instinctively, that the statements will carry that significance. It involves the “is” of identity — that is the way it is, always has been, always will be. That attitude is a great menace and a danger, because we have the dogmatic statements that lead to world catastrophes — there always have been wars, and there will be new wars, and every military man is so canalized in that attitude that he cannot think that war is not necessary.

          It seems at first glance far-fetched to show that those international conflicts rest upon dogmatism, or upon dogmatic statements, from the attitude respecting this world as static, but it is not far-fetched at all.

          See how difficult it is for the religionists, thinking of this world as it appears to the senses, as static and real, always was and always will be, and then man as part of this world created by an extraneous creator, and he thinks and strives to expand his consciousness to a higher level. The only way that he can attempt to expand his consciousness is to try to bring everything into his static and dynamic attitude and fit it some way or other; try to bring light into darkness, truth into error. It can’t be done. So, the tremendous and far-reaching consequences of the changed attitude can be shown in a variety of ways; this whole static attitude must be given up for the new attitude toward the dynamic process. That is the first reason, and we could go on and on with that reason and show the ramifications of changing from the static attitude toward the dynamic attitude. But for the student approaching wisdom or the presentation of the wisdom as given in this School, he must change that attitude as rapidly as possible or he will not get very far in understanding.

          The second reason for this “why”: it is a preparation for an understanding of general semantics; and the understanding of general semantics is the vestibule, not only to cutting asunder erroneous habits of thought (which we shall treat of at length later), not only in preparation for advanced understanding respecting the fundamentals of Reality, but it is a vestibule to a complete transference of consciousness from identity in the objective sense to identity, not with the dynamic process, but with the power which governs the dynamic process.

          See how that works like it did in the first reason? So long as there is an unconscious habit of thought toward this world as static, what possibility exists to reorient to the power with which one is conscious, to the power which is the creator, not only of the static, but of the dynamic process? No possibility exists. There must be utter and complete surrender of that attitude toward this world as static, as fixed, as real, so it appears phenomenally.

          This second step is the vestibule to the main “Hall of Learning”, as the “Hall of Learning” is the antechamber to the “Hall of Wisdom”. The second reason is to at least enter the vestibule of progress in understanding, which is utter and complete surrender of one’s old system of thought based upon a static universe.

          Now, the third reason — whenever there is a significant change in cultural thinking, the Ageless wisdom must be restated in terms corresponding thereto. This reason could be termed pure psychology, that we are striving constantly to inculcate the basic principles of the wisdom teaching in the consciousness of the individual, and therefore of the race, because one doesn’t acquire the understanding of the wisdom for himself alone. He may think so when he is studying that he is hungry for knowledge and higher understanding, etc. Irrespective of his temporary belief that he is acquiring wisdom for his own satisfaction, he is acquiring it for the whole in which he is integrated, and after he has acquired a degree of understanding, he will experience the urge to share it, and that urge flows from a ‘deeper’ or ‘higher’ stratum of his own essential nature. So, irrespective of belief in that matter, one never acquires understanding of fundamental Reality for himself alone; he acquires understanding for the whole and for the growth and expansion and development of the whole.

          If the scientific and philosophical developments change the structure of a given culture or the structure of a given cultural thinking, then the wisdom teaching must be recast and restarted to become accepted; otherwise it will be relegated to the outgrown past. This point is quite significant for those who study the history of the Gnosis. Down the ages it has been stated in terms which are now obsolete and discarded, for instance, the alchemists. While the wisdom teaching was at one time presented in alchemical terms and language, to do so today would subject one to ridicule, and yet there was a period when that was the only way in which it could be stated to be accepted. While we now look back upon the alchemists, and the outstanding master of them, Paracelsus, as founders of the science of chemistry, they were far more than that; they were presenting the ageless teachings in a language which to the time was symbolical representation; the transformation of one metal into another, which meant to them the metamorphosis of one metal into another. It was by the transformation of one state into another which constituted the real alchemical process of development. But to use their terminology today in the changed methods of thinking would subject one to ridicule.

          There was another period and another culture in which the wisdom teaching had to be stated astrologically, until that became a symbolical language to the initiates, and those who were so crystallized in the static attitude, the objective identity state, could accept the wisdom in no other way than as planetary influences, because the idea of introducing an influence was a change in attitude which caused them to look outside of themselves — that is, outside of their present and limited state — for light, for support, for help, etc. But, no longer can the wisdom teaching be described in astrological terms to the advanced intellectuals of the new age, of the new cycle. We only incorporate the astrological language in our teaching of the occult to show how to read the Scriptures, particularly the Christian Bible, which is based upon astrological terminology. If it were not for the deference and value in racial consciousness given to the Christian Scriptures in the Occident, it would be much easier to disregard the Scriptures entirely, instead of laboriously trying to describe its symbolical language. It would be far easier to restate, to describe the structure and function of fundamental Reality independently and outside of allegorical languages of the past.

          Again it is a psychological factor which causes us to reinterpret the Scriptures, because of the position that it holds in the ‘cultural mind’ in the race psyche. Therefore, we try to correlate at all times in all ages the wisdom teaching with the limitations in development, the limitations in understanding of the period, of the times, of the culture, etc.

          Today it is a more significant change which has taken place in respect to the consciousness of the educated or the well-read man or woman. That significant change has been labeled einsteinian. We have entered a new period of thinking, a new attitude. I am of the opinion that after the dramatic effects and considerations of the atomic bomb have passed away, the label einsteinian will be given to this most significant change in cultural thinking, and it will be known as the einsteinian age. When we are more familiar with atomic power in commerce and trade, in the motive power of our facilities, the light and heating of the homes, the power which propels engines on land and sea will have become atomic power, then the idea of just the destructive effect of the bomb will have passed out of consciousness, and then the label einsteinian age will be given to it, as we treat the old objective orientation as aristotelian for the same reason.

          It is in preparation for this new and greater advent in cultural development that we in the School of the Natural Order are restating or recasting the wisdom teaching in terminology suitable for acceptance. But this time, the greater scientists have, with their findings, verified and developed confirmations as never before in any cultural period of the past, the basic principles of the wisdom teaching. So much for the three reasons “why”.

          I do not believe that it is necessary to restate what has been given so thoroughly and so much respecting the presentation as it is to correlate with the present developing scientific understanding. Those of you here are so well versed in it that it seems superfluous for me to reiterate it, and in respect to our record of these talks, we have that well accomplished in our literature. Therefore, we are most ready to move on to the next subject in our outline where we will take up general semantics.

          But before we pass to it, I want to point your attention to one of the most significant changes in the past thinking relative to the present thinking — the change in respect to time. For the first time in the history of racial development on the planet, a new coordinate has been introduced or added to the preceding coordinates respecting space. We now have the new coordinate of time; and in the new frame of measurement, the three coordinates of space and the coordinate of time, new evaluations have come into the consciousness of the race, because there is no event which can be properly evaluated by ignoring the new coordinate of time.

          When we approach our subject under general semantics, we will apply that by dating even opinions or inferences or descriptions of an event; it all must be dated by reason of the new coordinate, the time factor, against and in which the dynamic process is understandable.

          Another point that we might mention in passing (just touching a few highlights in the change from the old orientation to the new), the word “matter”. Two things have happened to it, and we could mention three, the third would be the abolition of the term; it has no validity any longer, if you think how that word, matter, used to be the basis of any thought or expression. But the two ‘things’ I had in mind that have happened about the word (other than having lost its standing entirely because there is no more referent for it — the scientists have changed the referent — “matter” no longer represents something) is that it now is a symbol for phenomena. I do not think that it is necessary for me to emphasize the fact that the word phenomena represents any appearance, mirage, shadow, image, or picture, or some ‘thing’ that transpires in appearance only. The shadow of the motion picture screen can be appropriately labeled phenomena without the connotation of any reality. So the word “matter” now symbolizes phenomena to many, particularly in the schools of wisdom; they will use the word matter and the word phenomena as synonymous. So it is quite interesting to see what has happened to the word matter.

 


 

March 22, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 25

 

          The first item under our general semantic heading is the abstracting process.

          After nearly a full life devoted one pointedly to the search for understanding of the ultimate Reality, and in that search studying many systems, I have never found such a great help toward the accomplishment of that understanding as the abstracting process, as set forth by Count Alfred Korzybski in general semantics. In fact, it was only after some measurable degree of understanding having been attained which enabled me to see the help which the abstracting rendered; there was no doubt but that if one had not had that background he would not be able to grasp the significance of the abstracting process relative to the shortcut in reaching clear perception, understanding, etc., respecting the fundamental Reality.

          There is an ‘outer’ and an ‘inner’ aspect to every event, so-called ‘thing’ or ‘object’, representation, presentation, etc., and while the general semanticists, including Korzybski, do not pursue or apply the abstracting process beyond what we call the ‘outer’, we in the School of the Natural Order apply it on several levels, both ‘inner’ and ‘outer’, and in presenting the abstracting process as part of this school work, one must not infer that this is the way that the abstracting process is taught in the schools of general semantics or in general semantic courses. Their application does not extend beyond structure respecting linguistic systems. The way we present the abstracting process in our School of the Natural Order does not in any way detract from or distort the application to linguistic structures, nor does it mitigate in the least the application to psychological processes. These applications of the abstracting process are comprehended, while we go beyond those two levels — the verbalistic level and the psychic level — and apply it to the basic structure of the frequency world from which all abstractions both psychic and ‘objective’ are made.

          Now, among the applications which can be and are made respecting the abstracting process, there is outstanding, training of the thinking-principle in differentiating between levels of the frequency world. Obviously, as to the general semanticists, the training is only in the orders of abstraction on the verbalistic level, and the psychologists carry it to functional behavioristic patterns on the psychic level. That, of course, has a measure of validity, but in the application of the abstracting process respecting labels for orders of abstractions in language structure and functional behaviorism, it doesn’t include conscious abstracting respecting levels of consciousness. It is this training of the thinking-principle in conscious abstracting on the lower levels which renders it relatively easy to consciously abstract respecting consciousness or as consciousness functions on different levels or in different states. It is the conscious differentiation between these states or levels of consciousness which is the main objective of studying the abstracting process in our School of the Natural Order. This is exceedingly important for definite, clear, precise, orientation to the synthesis of various levels of consciousness and respecting a given level of a given moment for a given purpose.

          Our School is in the incipient phases of its formation, and we have no way whereby we can exact a discipline respecting the studies in our School; the freedom from necessity makes for a slackening off of effort at the present date, but I trust the time will come when the courses as given must be acquired — thoroughly studied that means — and mastered before proceeding to the study of other levels of consciousness.

          So, with this abstracting process — it should be thoroughly learned in the beginning phases of the work in the School of the Natural Order, then subsequent confusion will be avoided at all times by sharp differentiation between the levels of consciousness. When this abstracting process is learned, it is easy to detect and instantly recognize the levels of consciousness so that within one sentence or one paragraph of the written word, the various levels of consciousness can be separated one from another with no confusion.

          To generalize what I am trying to say: confusion results when relatively higher levels of consciousness become identified with relatively lower levels of consciousness. A student, if properly disciplined (but we don’t do it in our School), should be sent back to the grade upon which the abstracting process is given and kept there until he can come out therefrom with the abstracting process thoroughly learned; then he has matriculated and deserves the right to receive higher instruction. But if one starts on the higher instruction without that ability to quickly and readily abstract respecting levels, that higher instruction will more than likely be more injurious to him than beneficial. So, it is with the various grades in the presentation of our School of the Natural Order teaching. The lesser grades should be thoroughly learned before admittance is allowed to higher grades; that system has not been inaugurated in our work and perhaps will not be inaugurated for some forty or fifty years yet, but it will be in due time.

          So much for the prefatory remarks.

          With the help of the Structural Differential we learn the abstracting process more quickly. We are always glad and happy to make acknowledgement to Count Alfred Korzybski for this work, and I wish to go on record that Count Alfred gave me, personally, the right to use the Structural Differential in our School of the Natural Order work.

          (A series of public lectures had been scheduled for me in Boston, Mass., prior to my going to Chicago to take the work in the Institute of General Semantics, and while there the circulars that they mailed out from Boston were sent to me. In one of my private interviews with Count Alfred, I laid one on the table and he read it; everything was all right except one word — the word was: sacred. He fairly scringed over that word, and when he got through scringing around, I talked at length about it, (and I dropped the word thereafter because I saw more than I ever had seen before respecting it) and then said to him, “I have told you of my work and with this notice you will see the general character of it. I am applying all I am learning in your Institute in our School and I don’t want to sail under any false colors. I am here to get what I can apply in our School.” That delighted him and he was for it. I said, “I would like to have permission to use the Structural Differential in our work.” And he granted that permission. Of course, I did not insult him by asking him to put that in writing, which probably should have been done because of copyright involvements.)

          In my work I had the Structural Differential and had been using it years and years before, but not in the same form as Count Alfred. I had used it as a camera since 1910 when I first developed the diagram of the light, the film and the projected image. So in principle, I had the Structural Differential thirty years before the date upon which the interview took place.

          The Structural Differential is to be used as a relief diagram. Always explain the words structural and differential. The word structure is very apparent: it represents a synthetical whole having co-ordinate parts; and the word differential: that which differentiates respecting levels in the abstracting order or in the order of abstracting. There is a natural order which the Structural Differential diagrams, even though one never heard of a Structural Differential or a diagram respecting the orders of abstraction. Everyone, without exception, follows a natural order process in his unconscious abstractions. I have found it necessary to describe the word abstraction because of the inferences which have been developed in the race mind that abstraction means something other than or different from or opposed to, ‘objective’, ‘concrete’, etc. (and I don’t mean cement). Because of this general idea of the word abstract as something other than ‘concrete’ I have had to explain the word as the process of drawing from. You can draw water in a bucket from the well (to use a crude analogy), and you are abstracting water. To draw from is to abstract. Wherever there is an inference, a conclusion reached; wherever there is judgment formed; wherever there appears an assumption or an opinion, etc., those are examples of abstracting. In each and every case there has been a certain combination of modalities, attributes, inferences, respecting qualities in the assumption, the opinion, the judgment, etc. The opinion, judgment, inference, assumption, etc., represents the result of having abstracted. So, to abstract mean to draw from and form other qualities, attributes, modalities, appearances, etc.

          The parabolic figure in the Structural Differential symbolizes, diagrammatically, the energy world. Now, the semanticists will not use that statement; I doubt whether many of them would even recognize the statement. In the Institute of General Semantics they would make the statement something like this: the parabolic figure in the Structural Differential symbolizes the sub-microscopic world, with no further explanation about what constitutes that sub-microscopic world. The only description given is that it is a dynamic process. I watched very carefully to see if they would go further with it; that is their beginning in teaching the abstracting process. The reason why they would not go further in that which they label the sub-microscopic world is that they would have to depart from acceptance in the aristotelian pedantic circles. Those in pedantic and academic — and particularly aristotelian — circles would have thought they were going metaphysical if the description were pursued beyond the generalization that there is a sub-microscopic world. At the Institute I was most keen and questioned further description of the constitution of the sub-microscopic world, but was brushed off like I had treaded upon sacred ground; and for years I had been trained in pursuing both by thought and experience beyond what is labeled the sub-microscopic world. I detected at once why they dare not open that door. They had to keep that door tightly closed and turn the other way and show the sequence of events called the abstracting process resulting from that from which the abstractions are made. I wanted to turn my back on those results and open the door and pursue the sub-microscopic world and its levels into energy, and through energy into light. But they keep that door tightly closed, and I approve of their method respecting their purpose. They were trying to introduce general semantics into the universities ‘inside’ the “Trojan Horse”, and old wise Count Alfred knew that once he could smuggle that “Wooden Horse” into the “walls of Troy” it would do the rest. So, the application he adhered to was the “Wooden Horse”, and it is now inside the universities, and it is inevitable what it is going to do. I not only heartily approve of the method; but I am of the opinion that it is about the only method that could have been employed to have smuggled it into the universities. This will become obvious as we pursue the orders in the abstracting process.


 

March 23, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 26

 

          It is advisable to begin teaching the abstracting process to beginners with the five physical senses before you direct attention to the parabolic figure on the Structural Differential. Show that the five physical senses are only the instrumentality whereby frequencies are registered. We use the word frequency to comprehend both the wave and the number of waves per unit of time and group the two as the referent for the word frequency. Of the five senses, the sense of sight is the easiest to understand. How does one see that which he calls object?

          At this point it is well to show the cause of the error in the aristotelian orientation which is described as identity with the effect, with the cause, and by ignoring the intermediate process. An image is formed in the consciousness functioning in its psychic nature, immediately the image thus formed is identified with a configuration of units of energy from which the frequency registered was derived, that is, the canalization in that identity of image with the configuration develops to the point that there is a complete unconsciousness or ignoring of the intermediate process which eventuates, and it is by calling the attention to the intermediate process that recanalization is effected or can be developed respecting this world as an energy world, instead of it being considered erroneously as an ‘objective’ world, as a static world.

          To return to the sense of sight and the focusing of attention upon the intermediate process which intervenes between the cause and the effect, the cause being a given configuration of units of energy — that is, the energy world — the effect being an image formed in the psychic nature. How does one see so-called objects or things or individuals? Do not be afraid of reiterating this too much, because you must be mindful that the habit has become entrenched respecting the identity of image with cause and the habit automatically asserts itself over and over. You must also remember that it will require a constant reiteration for the first fifteen years of the novitiate’s introduction to the new way of thinking, before the old habits, the old canalizations are broken up. (If you will remember that, you will not be embarrassed all the time, as I have been, by constant reiteration.) You will observe they lapse right back after having the clearest mental understanding, because of the deep psychological habits. When they have been broken, the student will unconsciously react; it is not a problem of getting it over on the mental level, because that is comparatively simple; it is a matter of getting it over until it is established in the consciousness as a process.

          Let us return again to the question, how does one see? In one of two ways: either by reflected light from the peripheral surface of a given configuration, or if the given configuration is self-luminous, which it is when it is seen as a configuration of units of energy and one no longer functions by reflected light (that is why we call it the lunar cycle — so long as one is under the necessity of functioning by reflected light; when one can function by direct light — not reflected light — he has crossed over to the solar cycle where every configuration is luminous and one does not register it by reflected light). There are many ‘things’ that have direct light; like we turn on the electric light, then you register it directly; like the firefly; phosphorescence in rotting material or in sea water, and many other phenomena of nature where the reflected light is eliminated. In either case it is the wave and frequency of energy which impinges upon the delicate and most marvelous structure of the eye, and the impingement of these frequencies set up frequencies which are communicated to the neurons, some in the brain, some in the autonomic system, some in the sympathetic system. So, wherever the neurons are located, the frequencies are transmitted to them.

          Without consciousness those frequencies cannot be utilized; it requires consciousness in some degree of self-awareness to formulate, out of those frequencies received, the image, the picture, the effects; and then we say we see the ‘thing’, the ‘object’.

          The whole focus of attention must be upon that intermittent process between the event in the energy world and the end product — the formulation of the frequency received into significance, into symbolical representations. You can introduce that term symbolical representations deliberately because it is preparation for some higher work whereby you show that until Reality is portrayed and perceived directly, there is nothing — nothing except symbolical representation; but the description of this phase comes later on where you refer back to the simple process of how one sees, and you will then be in a position, after laying this foundation, to teach the mythos; that there is nothing outside of the perception of Reality — wave length and frequency, etc…. One actually lives in a mythological state, thinking that it is Reality, and that state which is thought real, is the basis for the understanding of the maya.

          In giving this outline to you of the beginning work, I like to make these references to the advanced work because you have the ability to read further into the teaching and its understanding. But keep reiterating over and over — it is by the registry, the reception of stimuli in the form of wave and frequency that we see.

          Then go to hearing. (Confine yourself first to the five physical senses.) I am not dealing with this as much as it should be dealt with because this is only an outline developing an idea that seems simple, but you must deal with it more fully because you are breaking up old canalization that takes a long time to accomplish.

          Show that when one is speaking, there is no sound in the room or coming out of the speaker’s mouth, except in the consciousness of the one registering the frequencies — the number of waves per unit of time; again, if one lacks the instrumentality intact and perfect and has some semantic blockage, he doesn’t hear anything. Sound is in the consciousness and doesn’t exist anywhere else. If a tree fell in a primeval forest, and no creature is there within the range of the frequency disturbances set up — is there any sound? There is none. But to someone there, it is a mighty crash. Sound is in the consciousness, the end product of registry of frequency.

          Take up smell; it leads more directly and immediately into the knowledge of the psychic world than the other senses. In the absence of any apparent phenomena, one can smell odors, when there is really no phenomena with which it can be identified. There are certain races, the members of which, no matter how much they bathe, still have a characteristic odor, because it is the psychic frequency; this is the reason why the sense of smell will lead to the fact that all odor is psychic. So are the other senses — seeing, hearing, etc. But we generally have some phenomena that will justify the mental as a creation. But in many other respects we cannot find anything with which to identify in respect to odor. Again I say the sensitive glands and buds, the delicate area of the cellular structure or our instrument of smell is such that it can register the frequency; but in each and every case, it is the frequency that is set up on the nerves that is carried to the neurons, and consciousness abstracts from the frequency received, draws from, and formulates significances, meanings, in which it functions and to which it gives values (but you don’t introduce the value phase yet, because that comes on another level). We, in the objective level and man state, have the sense of smell in common with all creatures.

          Describe taste and touch similarly. Touch could be described first because it was the first sense faculty developed, and the other four sense faculties are merely modifications of the original sense of touch. It seems to me, through many years of training, to show that the sense of touch is only the registry of frequency, is more difficult, than to start with the sense of sight. That is why I leave it to the last, instead of bringing it out first.

          Again stress the intermediate process, because to the consciousness of a given individual so canalized in the belief that the objective world, as it appears to his senses, is so substantial and real that when his attention is directed to the actual contact with it, he doesn’t see any possibility of an intermediate play of frequency registry, or waves of frequencies of light or energy; therefore it is more difficult for him to see that the sense of touch is merely the contact with frequency. So, you can either pass it over or slight it, until he gains a clear registry of the sense of sight, the process of seeing, or hearing, particularly, and then he can apply it to the sense of touch, or you can go into more description of it and show what is touched… the peripheral outlines of energy that he called the object.

          Then show the next step, that the impulse that is set up on the nerves by the contact called touch is nothing except frequency, electrical impulses in the form of frequencies; these are similar to the impingement of light on the optic nerve that sets up the frequency. In a similar way it was the frequency that was communicated to the neurons and then to the consciousness which creates the sensation of touch.

          So, by beginning with the sense faculties, we establish the fact that it is only through registry of stimuli — stimuli caused by the wave and frequency, and that there is no other way whereby any individual or any creature can function in what we call the objective world; there is no other way except through registry of frequency, and if there is impairment, trauma in the psychic or neural instrumentalities of registry, then the senses are closed to registry. That does not mean that consciousness cannot function on other levels in its self-awareness where there has been no injury or interference with its instrumentality of registry respecting the other levels.

          After we have exhausted the “why” respecting seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching, I believe it is advisable to go to communication before we turn to the parabolic figure on our Structural Differential — the radio, television, telephone, etc. Remember that many of us thought and knew these things before there was any radio, or telephone. How excited we were when Marconi demonstrated that we could communicate without wires — “That is what we have been trying to say all these years!” How quickly one becomes canalized to the belief that it always was. It was as exciting to us when we had Marconi’s demonstrations to refer to, as the flying saucers are today. But now we have the telephone, the radio and images on the screen without any phenomena; just all energy — and the pictures appearing and the sound being heard. The wire does not carry the frequency (in the case of the telephone), it only directs and channels it. Why? We are not electrical engineers, but one end of the wire is negative and the other positive, or there will be no flow. One pole is the receiving set and the other the sending, and we have both in our telephone; you place one end to the ear and on the other is the sender, and it is merely positive and negative poles which enable the wire to direct the energy from pole to pole. With these wonderful analogies today we can show that only through wave length and frequency of energy is there any communication — in the absence of it, just nothing. By emphasizing these simple things that we have in such abundance we can move to the radioactive structure of the elements of the atomic table which is a marvelous part of the instruction. All this is merely recanalization because the student must be recanalized before he can begin to consciously function in frequency.

What we call taking the journey is not all this description, it is not even the description, it is not even the description of the functions. Expansion of consciousness, growth, accomplishes the ‘objective’ of the teaching. All this description is the merest rudimentary preparation for the actual effort to function in frequency and with frequency — that means to consciously function in frequency. One functions all the time now in the frequency world when he sees and hears and smells, etc., but that is not the point. The point is that the function must be raised to the level of consciousness and one must consciously function in the energy world. The animal has a ‘body’ and is wholly unconscious of having a body; man has all this marvelous ability and power and is wholly unconscious of it. Man is still in the mythos and still clings to his symbolical representations, yet he has all the power to function in Reality and won’t do it. Why? Because he is unconscious of that power. Keep reiterating it, and after about fifteen years you may get him started on his way.

          Let us go to the structure of the atomic table and deal with it. Have your students read books on the subject, familiarize themselves with the atomic structure, the constitution of atoms until they think in positive and negative units of energy, and it becomes as familiar as so-called mythological phenomena are or have been, and they will gradually begin to graduate from myth to Reality — that which the myths are trying to portray are representations.

          Again, before turning to the Structural Differential, introduce the electromagnetic field. I have taken some simple book of physics and passed the pictures around of the electromagnetic field and called attention to the three factors — a positive pole, a negative pole, and the lines of force between the poles. That is the basic structure of the universe, and there is nothing you can think of which cannot be described in terms of those three factors. Pause for a moment and think of the comprehensiveness of that statement. There is nothing that can be mentioned or thought of but what can be described in terms of those three factors. This is the trinity. We are laying the foundation for the higher level of physics, or philosophy, or functional, perceptive understanding of ultimate Reality, which is the highest of all. This calling attention to the simple electromagnetic field is the beginning and foundation upon which the individual will climb to the perception of the ultimate Trinity, the constitution of Reality. So, I always lay a great deal of stress on the electromagnetic field and its three factors.

          Going back to the teaching of the structure of the atom — the positive nucleus and the negative electrons surrounding the nucleus are that which we label atom; in the absence of either there is no atom. These three factors — the positive, the negative, the lines of force — are reiterated over and over again, irrespective of the level upon which one can or will function; he will never depart from those three factors; in fact, when he finds himself he will find he is constituent of those three… When we introduce the configuration, it is always on the basis of these lines of force; the energy is merely knots or whirls — not on the lines of force — but of the lines of force; the lines of force themselves eddy, and these eddies are what we label photons, electrons, protons, etc. We must set up this electromagnetic field as our referent and the basis for the description of a given configuration, and later on in the teaching as the basis and the referent for the labels that we will use for the Architect, the Arche, the Demiurge, the Logos, etc. To attempt to introduce these labels is worse than useless; it makes a sort of jargon having no meaning; but if one is careful in his instruction not to introduce those labels until after complete canalization to this world as an energy world, respecting the constitution and structure of atoms, respecting the understanding of the electromagnetic field, then it becomes easy to understand when the labels are used. But they never should be introduced until there is some degree of recanalization respecting the intermediate process between the myth and that from which the myth was abstracted.

 


 

March 24, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 27

 

          There is one more factor to which it is advisable to direct attention before turning to the parabolic figure of the Structural Differential, and that is in respect to the feelings, emotions and thoughts. It should be comparatively easy after going through the description of how the physical senses register stimuli in the form of light and energy frequencies, how one functions through the instrumentality of the sense faculties; then bring out the point that the character (when the word, character is mentioned, you can bring in the quality of the guna phase of the instruction, because that word character is another label for the guna or quality) of one’s feelings, desires, emotions, and thoughts is determined by the level of wave length and frequency registered. We now have a very wonderful referent which we did not have heretofore — it is scientifically established that thoughts do not occur, let alone originate, in the cranium, that they are registered outside of the head. The gadgets with which they register the charge and frequency of the field have located the point or points in the surround of the head, the nimbus, or the aura as it used to be called, now called the field, where the frequency is registered, and the registry is outside of the head.

          We could go further with advanced students and show how the gunas inhere in the frequency world, in the energy world, but I will not stress that point until later on in the instruction. If the student can get hold of the fact that he can function through his physical senses by the registry of frequency, then step it up one level, to the psychic level, where feelings, desires and thoughts are functions pertaining to the registry of frequencies in the psychic nature and are not through the instrumentality of the physical senses.

          There are psychic faculties which we have as the instrumentality for the registry of feelings, desires and thoughts, etc., but so often the feeling impulse and the thought becomes identified with the value given to the image appearing substantive, that is, with abstractions from the objective appearance or the objective world, whereby many psychologists conclude that the emotions, feelings, or thoughts are stimulated by the value given to the sense object. That is erroneous. If we had time we could set it up, but you can bring it out casually in your instruction that there are no two observers that react exactly alike to the same ‘thing’ observed. It will vary widely with individuals and it will also vary with the same individual at different times. You can mention a non-objective point of interest — fear, horror, sweet, sour, love, etc., etc. — where no objective phenomena becomes involved even though with the mention of sweet or sour you might think there is an objective phenomena involved. If there is any confusion over the words sweet or sour, you can confine yourself to the words fear, love, pleasure, etc., where no objective phenomena is in evidence. We see how the feelings, emotions and thoughts develop — not from any value given to image appearing substantive, and these thoughts are powerful. Medical groups have proved that a complete chemicalization of the physiological organism can result from the effect of these abstract qualities, such as fear, horror, etc. It is due to registry of frequency in the psychic nature similar to the registry of frequency through sense faculties. With these illustrations, descriptions, analogies, etc., the student becomes conditioned to consider the frequency world (instead of the habit constantly dominating the consciousness of identifying every psychological effect or experience with the objective world). If he can become sufficiently conditioned to think in registry of frequency respecting the psychological processes, then he has gained a stage in his development whereby he can understand that the most objective functions — functions in the objective manifold — are also psychic and not so-called physical, not only in respect to the value given and the semantic reaction resulting from the image appearing substantive (that is included in the fact that the objective world also is psychic phenomena, and nothing ‘objective’ or ‘physical’ at all).

          While the value given and the reaction therefrom is most obviously psychic, I am speaking of the ‘thing’ (so-called), the ‘object’, etc. of the objective world as psychic, that is, it rests upon the psychic nature.

          If you folks have followed the successive steps, even before the attention is brought to the parabolic figure of the Structural Differential, you will see that the whole process of functioning in the objective world is a psychic functioning even in respect to the image, the ‘object’. With these illustrations, descriptions and helps, the parabolic figure of the Structural Differential will have more significance as it is described (far more significance than if the descriptions were started abruptly). Your description has the whole canalization in objective identity upon which to play or beat, and as hard as you can beat, you cannot beat it down immediately. But with all of this build-up, it will be easier to introduce the significance which is symbolized by the parabolic figure of the Structural Differential.

          Let us turn our attention to the parabolic figure (this is outline only). The little holes in the parabolic figure represent the multiplicity of waves and frequencies characterizing the energy world. I have found that for analogy there is nothing comparable to color; first, for the reason that color is something that is registered; second, that color can be described in terms of its wave and frequency, more definitely than other phenomena; and third, that color lends itself to such a wide range of shadings. (All of the shades of color can be reduced to primaries, whether you use seven or three, and irrespective of what you label the primaries, because that is beside the point. The point is that through the great range of shadings [running through thousands of shadings] for each primary, it is a very apt analogy to understand the range of octaves respecting the gunas or qualities of wave lengths and frequencies characterizing the energy world.) Now, somewhere along to this point in the instruction even though it is a separate lesson given upon the point, I will bring out the electronic spectrum, and show the known range to these wave lengths and frequencies of energy, calling attention to the very narrow band which can be registered through the sense faculties. This highlights one of the most important points in the entire instruction. It isn’t “lo here and lo there”; it isn’t in the caves of the Himalaya mountains, in the desert, etc., because that is what the Scriptural interpretation would require. And then I love to bring in Paul, “It is by the renewing of the mind”, or we can say it is by the opening of the slit, that little narrow band through which we are peeking. The consciousness of the vastness of heights and depths and powers and the all-inclusiveness of all the worlds of light above and below this little narrow band, depends upon the individual developing the faculty to register the frequency; that is a highpoint in the whole instruction; it is self-refinement, self-improvement, a self-creating faculty, a self-creating process, the pivot upon which the consciousness of this or that level (or world or heights or depths, etc.) depends. How startling it would be if one could suddenly be endowed with the faculty of just two or three octaves above the range that is registered through the sense faculties; then there would be other worlds which would appear as definitely as this world appears and by the same process. All we have to do is go back to the question, how does this world appear? How do we see it? It is the same way.

          You students follow through mentally, the consequences, the sweeping and far-reaching and revolutionary change in semantic evaluation respecting that simple point. For instance, how can anyone give you anything; he cannot create a faculty for you; if you don’t create it, it isn’t created. If a man is color blind, what are you going to do about it? You can’t give it to him; there is no way you can verbalize that color; all the intellectualizing in the world would not make him see a color, that wave length and frequency; some way or other he has to find out how to repair the inability to register, then he can see the color. So, with the other worlds; they are right here when we bring out of the bud stage faculties which will register on all so-called levels (the heights and depths, the comprehensiveness of the frequency world), the possibility inheres in the consciousness of each and every individual, like the whole tree inheres in the life germ of the seed. When you understand this, as a teacher, a representative of the work, you will never have any impatience when one doesn’t see, because if you understand that it is due to the registry of frequency which enables one to see, to perceive, to see on other levels, etc., there is nothing to be impatient about, nothing to react about. In due time we will all see, but now we “see through a glass darkly”, but later we will see clearly, “face to face”; so, it is self-development, learning how to develop the faculty. But let us get back to the Structural Differential and these holes in our parabolic figure. Out of the multiplicity of holes in the parabolic figure, each hole represents an octave of wave lengths and frequencies. A given individual only registers a few, like the narrow slit in the electronic spectrum.

          Then we point attention to the strings. We have hanging strings as well as those tied; the hanging strings also represent frequencies registered but not utilized in the formation of the image. We might say the hanging strings would represent secondary frequencies, and the consciousness synthesizes the most prominent or pronounced frequencies and disregards others in the formulation of the image. So, the hanging strings are a constant reminder that there are many frequencies registered which are not used. I dare say the difference between an accomplished artist and an ordinary individual looking at a sunset is that the artist utilizes these frequencies registered, and the other has become conditioned in disregarding them — therefore the artist sees color, beauty, contrasting shades, etc. that the untrained artist has not been trained to value and bring forth into his consciousness.

          Out of the range or number of wave lengths and frequencies registered, some are utilized in the formulation of the image, some are not, and the holes where there are no strings are frequencies which the individual at a given time cannot or does not register at all.

          Before we go on to the formulation of the image in the psychic nature from frequencies registered and utilized, let us develop a coordinate which plays a very important part in the non-aristotelian manifold of values, or the manifold which is developed on the noetic level. That coordinate, one of four, which serves as a point of reference for evaluation on the non-aristotelian level or state, is better described by analogy, and I have been fond of using the analogy of someone who is recognized as very highly developed, like the Christ. What is the difference between the Christ and a Hottentot, or a Pygmy of Africa, or the Digger Indian of Australia? In recent years I have used Einstein and the Pygmy. How can we describe the difference between Einstein and the Pygmy? Both are registering wave lengths and frequencies in common, in a certain very limited octave. The one can leave that octave and register frequencies in octaves in an ascending scale, and the other cannot; that is the only difference. The Einstein can function on the level upon which the Pygmy functions, and to which he is limited, but the Einstein can leave that level in a flash and function on other levels. That is the only difference. This range of registry which we describe in terms of octaves or in terms of states of consciousness, and ability respecting these ranges, octaves, levels, relative to Smith1 to Smithn, constitutes a coordinate in the non-aristotelian manifold of values. The moment that you pick up the level upon which a given individual functions, you are most kind and considerate, most tolerant and patient, you don’t laugh and ridicule, you get down on his level and play with him, and you don’t belittle him by constantly telling him he doesn’t understand. There is lots of difference in your semantic reactions (s.r.’s) when you have this coordinate. I have some sort of frequency connection with Paul because I have to bring him in all the time: “I am all things unto all men”, that is, I will function on different levels with them, and there is no vice or virtue, etc., to it. I think that coordinate is most wonderful as a point of reference because it gives you so much peace and understanding.

There will be more to this coordinate than we are bringing out at this present moment respecting our Structural Differential but this all comes through the consideration of these holes which symbolically represent the octaves of wave lengths and frequencies. I always call attention to the wavy line at the top which is an engineer’s sign in blueprinting, which means infinite extension — the infinite extension of octaves of wave lengths and frequencies component of this world as an energy world. When we get through with the parabolic figure we say it represents the real world from which all abstractions are made; there is nothing else from which to abstract. As we abstract from it, what significance or validity the abstractions have rests upon the Reality from which the abstractions were made. Without that from which all abstractions, or any abstraction, are made, there is no dependability, and there is no confidence and no surety even respecting the abstraction because that ‘underlies’ anything and everything upon which there is dependence; in the absence of it — that is, where abstractions are made not from the Reality, but from hypostatization — there is no dependence, as we will see later on when we get to that point in our semantic discussions.

 


 

March 27, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 28

 

          After one has exhausted his resources, his understanding and his analogies respecting the registry of frequency in the form of stimuli from which abstractions are made, he is then ready to move on to the next step in the abstracting process — characteristics exhibited by the substantive images from which again abstractions are made in the formulation of the name, word, label, sign, symbol, etc. for the sake of communication. “For the sake of communication” is important, because if individuals at this phase or state on their respective time-lines had any other means of communication, there would be no purpose in the second step in the abstracting process. It is solely and only for the sake of communication. When other means are developed for the sake of communication, the ‘outer’ word, sign, gesture or symbol will be abandoned and the other method employed. But it so happens that in the natural order process that phase must be passed through of verbalistic communication; therefore, relative to that phase on the time-line, that state of consciousness, we describe the second step in the abstracting process, which is drawing from characteristics exhibited by the substantive image or images.

          In order to describe these characteristics from which abstractions are made, it is important that we introduce the subject of the gunas to lay the basis for characteristics. There is a far-reaching and extensional purpose in introducing the description of the gunas; that far-reaching understanding which is infinitely extensional, is through the division, the breaking up of the one quality into its many qualities. I can conceive of no better approach to the understanding of how the one becomes many, and yet remains one, than through this description of the gunas.

          In describing the gunas, I find that it is very desirable to resort to the color analogy again. It is simple to demonstrate even to children with a prism how the pure white light is refracted into its prismatic bands. I hope that somewhere along the way in our School work, particularly when we begin to take the children under instruction, that we will devise a simple gadget whereby the primary frequencies of violet, green and red can be blended, making the pure white light. That will be a very graphic demonstration to the children of the three primaries respecting frequencies; respecting light.

          However, the use of the analogy of color very aptly describes the qualities — that is, the gunas — and as with the prism, we can refract the sunlight into its seven bands, separate the various frequencies one from another and group them together, so one can say each individual, each “thing-in-itself” (to use Kant’s term), every individual field, irrespective of its level, refracts the one pure white light according to the structure of the field.

          Various devices must be employed to describe the result of this refraction besides color. Tone lends itself to the analogy, because we commonly speak of tone quality of sounds, of voice, particularly in singing; and when one’s ear is attuned to the gunas in the voice, he can determine the state of the consciousness of the individual, although he may not see him — like listening to the radio; one can most accurately place the consciousness of the speaker by listening keenly, like the trained musician listens to the accuracy of pitch, he can immediately pick up the guna in the voice and know by that, the state on the time-line of the individual speaking. It could be said that some voices rasp on your nerves, and some do not; you can listen to another for hours. Why? Because of the gunas in the tone which he enunciates.

          Again, it is in order to introduce the tone as an illustration of the quality of guna for the reason that later on in the further description of the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order, you can refer back to the guna in the tone as a preparation for the understanding of the creative sound which sharply differentiates the word from communication, or from creation or the creative force, creative power. But that is another state where the tone, the word is used as the creative force, the creative power, the Logos Itself. The idea of following through with the guna in tone (that is, mentioning it at this point) is to show that in each one of these apparent descriptions there is an esoteric side underlying it, which you do not mention, but you are making preparation for the ‘inner’ phase of the instruction.

          But let us return now to the exoteric, the obvious purpose or ostensible purpose of describing the gunas. As the pure white light can be refracted, and is refracted every time we see a rainbow (by the multiplicity of droplets or moisture in the air), so the undifferentiated light, Aditi, becomes refracted through the multiplicity of states characterizing each autonomous field. Therefore, we have a double play upon the thought — the guna constitutes the image; it is component thereof; and yet the guna is non-existent when a given individual field, a given individual becomes oriented to the undifferentiated light. There are many levels of consciousness beyond the guna, in the absence of all gunas, Nirguna Brahman; so, also there are many many states functioning within the gunas; therefore a dual play of qualities is the light refracted through a given individual field. None of these factors can be left out; to do so would limit the description of the guna to the field.

          Let us resort again to the prism: it requires both the prism and the light to produce the color bands. So we must include the two in one act of consciousness to get the third. In describing the gunas keep in mind how difficult it would be for one who had the ear for perfect pitch to describe that to one who had no ear for any pitch and you will readily see that if you depart from analogy in trying to describe the gunas, you are utterly lost and helpless, because the experience of guna in frequency remains forever on the unspeakable level and therefore on the non-mental level.

          Only by analogy can you approach the subject of description of the gunas. Any departure from analogy will leave you dumb; it cannot be told, and it cannot be thought, but it can be experienced; one can actually live in evaluation, interpretation and communication, etc., with guna alone. (If you ever have occasion to study the Deva world and how they communicate, you must thoroughly integrate your consciousness in the gunas because that is the only means or method of communication in a variety of ways, both in color and tone and other methods.)

          When one has as nearly as he can (it is a very difficult subject, I will admit) described the gunas, then he can turn to the next step in the abstracting process — the ‘thing’ or ‘object’ or substantive image. If the ones with whom you are communicating are conditioned to the language of the School, you can use the term substantive image as a label; otherwise, you will have to resort to the aristotelian language by using the word ‘thing’ or the word ‘object’.

          As we said in the beginning of this entire outline course, we must bear in mind that when we describe the teachings to beginners, they are oriented in the aristotelian manifold, state, attitude and outlook; therefore, use that language, but you can mentally single-quote the words in order to keep the levels in the abstracting process sharply differentiated. If you neglect to mentally single-quote the words as you use them, you will easily slip back into the conditionality of objective identity. So it is to constantly practice the development of the new orientation, the non-aristotelian manifold of values, that we always mentally single-quote the words which need single-quotes, so that in conversation your mental process does not appear obvious at all to the listener. With this understanding of the purpose that we single-quote the words used, we will say the ‘thing’, a given ‘object’, exhibits certain characteristics; we can label a few of them to indicate what we mean: softness and hardness and the degrees which are always taken for granted (whether mentioned or not, that is another mental process), opaqueness, transparency, etc., color, smooth, glistening, dull, sweet, sour (we have gone from sight to taste faculty), these labels represent characteristics by which a ‘thing’ is known. In the absence of characteristics — that means to say, in the absence of sensation in the psychic nature which the characteristics excite — nothing is known; there is no way of knowing it. It is by reason of the sensation, the characteristic or the gunas, these three steps, that we know a ‘thing’ or ‘object’. Start with the sensation, go to the characteristic, then to the guna — that is, the frequency world and its gunas. The ordinary person always uses one of that trinity; he says, the flower is pink, the leaf is green; that is only one of the trinity, because he doesn’t become conscious of sensation; he is not conscious of the guna in the frequency world; therefore, he takes the characteristic. The frequency itself represents the guna; the lines of force of a given field represents the guna. The aristotelian excludes both ends of the trinity and abstracts from the sensation created in his psychic nature the modalities, attributes or character, and immediately identifies it with the ‘thing’ or with the ‘object’. So long has he done this, so completely is he canalized in it, it is never questioned — “There it is. The leaf is green, the flower is pink. Can you deny it?” That is canalization in identity — the identification of sensation with the ‘thing’ or with the ‘object’.

          One bright young man, a senior in Yale University, said, “What of it, everybody knows what you mean, the purpose is served, so why fuss with any other description?” My answer was: “If one does not have any urge to move off that level and wishes to endlessly stay on that level of functioning, there would be no purpose; but some of us have the urge to move to other levels, and these mental constructs we give in description are merely road maps and justifications for moving to other levels of perception and function.” If everyone could and wanted to remain on just the objective manifold (whether from another level it is treated as maya, illusion or not) then there is no purpose in describing gunas, fields, the lines of force or the creating process, etc.; just stay there in the shadow world, dealing only with shadows, the myths, the substantive images which are mythology.

          If one is perfectly happy and contented, please leave him alone. Do not disturb him, he will be disturbed sooner or later, just step around very gently.

          But this description is in the School of the Natural Order for those who are seeking understanding, not to make proselytes of individuals generally or try to awaken them, that is the last thing we try to do — to awaken the sleepers. This work is for those who are awakening and beating against the bars of their prison houses, and those only do we try to help; the others could not be helped. In this type and kind of work, instruction is not for the many and never was intended for the many, it is for those in process of awakening.

          Observe the vast number of sleep-walkers, dreaming while they walk — that is believe their substantive images are real; we have no message for them, we have no work to do for them specifically. Of course, in the higher levels anyone that comes out and becomes separate affects the process of expansion of the whole, that is understood. But this instruction is for those who are awakening and are in need of mental constructs. (It is our youth in the Occident which blinds us to the Oriental method; I still want the road map exhaustively described. Why? Because I am young and because I am an Occidental.)

          After the gunas are as thoroughly described as your ability and understanding permit — because the description is infinite and out of its infinite extensionality we have only a few factors — when you have exhausted a few factors in describing them, then turn to the disc on the Structural Differential. Again we have strings attached and not-attached, and again we have a multiplicity of holes, like when we abstracted from the vastness of the frequency world. The holes where there are no strings represent characteristic gunas respecting the ‘thing’ or ‘object’ or component thereof. In the constitution of any given ‘thing’ or ‘object’ there will be found a multiplicity of characteristics that we never register or cannot register until we are much further developed and have psychic sight, and beyond psychic sight clear perception of the ultimate structure and constitution. So at a given point, particularly in the abstracting process, there is a vast range of characteristics and gunas, etc., that we never register. Out of those few that we do perceive, that we do become conscious of (we do not use them ‘all’), we abstract the label we are going to attach to that ‘thing’ or that ‘object’. There are only a few of the characteristics that we formulate into the name by which, in our particular circle, it will be known. “Our particular circle” — because every circle will develop different labels for the sake of communication. There are a few characteristics that we gather together and formulate the label to symbolize it, and by which it is known; we therefore have the name, the word, the second order of abstraction, the second level in the abstracting process.

 


 

March 28, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 29

 

          Among other factors, the non-aristotelian orientation is characterized by the absence of dogmatism, dogmatic statements, self-opinionations, etc. This absence of dogmatic statements, etc. is based and is due largely to the fact that this world is a dynamic process and therefore non-static; consequently any statement made dogmatically would be erroneous on the grounds that before the statement could be completed, changes have eventuated respecting that which was spoken of or about.

          But there is another factor that enters into the inability to make a dogmatic statement or the exclusion of dogmatic attitudes: that basis is found in the first and second orders of abstraction. In the first order of abstraction there is recognition that there exists an infinite range of frequencies not registered at a given state.

          In respect to our teaching in the School of the Natural Order, one would have to reach complete identity in consciousness with “pure-being” (Sat) in order to comprehend in consciousness the totality of frequencies — any state or stage short of that would find itself outside the limitations of “all-ness”. So, when one is just beginning to awaken to the consciousness of this world as a dynamic process — a vast incomprehensible energy system — and in that state of awakening he stands, as it were, in the presence of its illimitable, infinite vastness respecting the range of wave lengths and frequencies both of energy and light, he is vividly aware of the multiplicity of wave lengths and frequencies of energy that he does not register at any given moment and respecting any given event.

          Then when one becomes fully conscious of how he abstracts from frequencies received, and that out of the small range which he does or can register, all of those frequencies registered are not utilized in the formulation of the image in the psychic nature; therefore, one never comprehends ‘all’ in any given opinion or attitude or statement; so the consciousness is impressed more with non-allness in the non-aristotelian orientation than with ‘allness’.

          The same applies when the abstractions are made from the substantive image; the image exhibits a vast range of characteristics which are not comprehended in those few characteristics which can be perceived. For instance, let us take any given ‘thing’ and see how it is only the surface and superficial factors, and only a few of those, that are valued as characteristics, whether those characteristics are attributed to the ‘thing’ observed or to the observer. Then let us imagine the microscopic world, and then the submicroscopic world, for both or either are not included in the characteristics by which the label is given. We could make some exceptions from the general ‘rule’ — the laboratory worker, where the grouping, the arrangement of the molecules are known, and from the knowledge of the arrangement of the molecules, as characteristics of certain phenomena, a label might be given and often is, because sometimes out of an abbreviation of chemical terms or labels a trade word or label is given, like nylon. But with those few exceptions the microscopic world characteristics are not included; generally the submicroscopic world characteristics (and we might add the energy world characteristics which would be classified as submicroscopic world) are excluded or not registered, so that there are very few characteristics that are grouped in the consciousness which suggest the word, the label; therefore the hanging strings on the symbol of the substantive image on the Structural Differential.

          The further one grows in the understanding both of the characteristics in the second order of abstraction and in respect to wave length and frequency in the first order of abstraction, the less inclined he is to say ‘all’ about anything; in fact of the matter he becomes overwhelmed with chagrin if he slips occasionally and says, “I know all about so and so.” He feels like the cockroach when the light is turned on, scurrying to find a crack to crawl into.

          So, we stand in the presence of a vastness of which we know relatively nothing, just plain nothing. Show the door of your consciousness to that little entity ‘allness’, it will depart, and your opinions, your ideas, your assumptions, your inferences will never take a dogmatic guna quality. This is quite important for the growing and developing student, it not only introduces him to what is called extensionality, it also introduces him to what is called charity, because one becomes very charitable toward himself and toward others. That leads into a high level characteristic called compassion. There is no criticism anymore in the consciousness; those factors cannot dwell in the consciousness that realizes non-allness, because if you will follow through with the thought closely, that criticism, the tendency to react, is based upon your self-opinionations, and the basis of that is dogmatic, which develops out of the old static orientation. So, you see there are far-reaching effects upon the consciousness of an individual that just begins with a simple fact that he can never contact, comprehend ‘all’ the facts and never comprehend ‘all’ of a given configuration or substantive image. Therefore he becomes very extensional, which is the referent for non-dogmatic, non-opinionated, non-critical attitude, charitableness and compassionateness. You will get a different referent for the word compassion, because it is generally considered to be based upon love, forgiveness, and there is no love or forgiveness in it. To say that one loves so much that he doesn’t hold anything against another is nonsense. Compassion is breadth and depth and height of understanding and it doesn’t have any forgiveness or love either in it. The greater ones are filled with compassion because of breadth, depth and height of understanding that a given situation, a given person in a given statement, in a given reaction, in a given action, etc., etc., doesn’t comprehend ‘all’.

          In your teaching of this phase of general semantics as incorporated in our School of the Natural Order, lay great stress upon the non-allness doctrine. As students of the School, think of it a great deal, study it a great deal; you will not grasp ‘all’ the implications in your study because it leads into ever widening spheres of understanding. You can start with the simplest little factors in the form of an opinion. Start with the recognition that there are many factors you do not know, or that you cannot make this judgment or could not react in a certain way if you knew more of the factors. That is elementary and simple, but start that way and see how the extensional consciousness widens and widens to that level of infinite compassion and even beyond that.

          While we briefly touch upon it and mention a few factors, it doesn’t mean that we have comprehended the ‘allness’ of the subject or doctrine of non-allness. A great One said (it is attributed to Solomon), “With all your getting, get understanding,” and that is the loadstar which has drawn me more than any other factor; I crave understanding because I find that with understanding all of these other states and conditions and factors, etc., follow. All charitableness and compassion and non-reaction and non-dogmatism and non-self-opinionation follow from understanding — understanding the infinitude of frequencies, of characteristics, of factors, that we do not have and do not possess and make allowances therefor and that making allowances means to say one cannot make a positive, dogmatic statement about anything. Now we understand why Count Alfred said, “When a statement is made that a ‘thing’ is, it isn’t.” That statement is valid on the grounds that understanding reveals how much is left out of the factors from which the abstraction — that is, the statement — was made. So, before we leave this subject of non-allness, allow me to impress you with its importance and to think of it often and ruminate upon it, because it is vast in its extensionality.

          As we proceed with the description of the abstracting process, I would like to call your attention to how the integrating point on the time-line in respect to a given individual, group, culture, etc. has been found to be one of the most significant indexes as representation of the basic state of development of a given individual (his point on the time-line). As you learn the deeper significance of the abstracting process, the more clearly this image stands forth in your consciousness as a student.

          There was a man by the name of Buell who devoted his life to the study of aborigine tribes. He would live for years with one tribe and then for years with another tribe, learning their language, the symbolical representations and the limitations thereof. He went from that study to the study of the sounds of animals, housing himself for months in cages in the jungles of Africa and listening to the sounds uttered by chimpanzees. It was through that study that he learned some tribes could abstract only to the second level; some could abstract to the third level, but he found no aborigine tribe that could abstract to the fourth level. It was indicative of their state.

          From my study of little babies as they exhibit the base of their time-line and condense it (the first periods are condensed in each round of the palingenetic cycle), I discovered that there was a period in the aeonian past when one did not abstract beyond the first level. That is stepping the peg back further than Dr. Buell discovered. This is indicated if you will watch a baby reach for a moonbeam or a shaft of sunlight. It has no discrimination between that beam of light and a ‘thing’ or ‘object’; that means that everything is one: rock, tree, dog, cat, animal, man, etc., are just ‘objects’, moonbeam or ray of sunshine are ‘objects’; where everything is one, and the label for that ‘thing’ is ‘object’, that indicated the inability to abstract beyond the first level — symbolized by the disc on the Structural Differential.

          But the child will pass beyond that phase and will repeat the order of abstraction and will learn a word for a given ‘object’, and then can go on from there by learning words to symbolize or represent other familiar ‘objects’; that is abstracting to the second level. So it is, with the growing of each individual out of the unconscious into consciousness. There may be ages in which the consciousness could not abstract above a given or certain level.

          We find that ‘rule’ applies also in respect to teaching philosophy, mathematics, the study of psychology, etc. because we find certain individuals who can abstract way out beyond the many of the race in which that individual was born and to which he apparently objectively belongs. We also find that this applies to developing cultures. The East Indian can abstract easily three to four levels beyond the Occidental. The Occidental reaches a certain point in his abstracting and stops; it is the inability of his state and neural structure, which are representative of his state, of course; he cannot abstract beyond his state. But there are always the exceptions; we cannot judge all members of a given race by even the first million or second million or five million or forty million examined, because we will find yet an exception. So, when a given tribe or culture is mentioned, the average mean is that to which reference is made.

          I have one more point on this abstracting process, and it is significant. As there are orders in the abstracting process, so there are orders respecting groupings in the energy worlds and light worlds. To illustrate, it could be conceived that there is a group meeting in which one hundred individuals are in attendance. To one limited to the objective manifold level — that is, a good aristotelian — he would group them all on one level. But a non-aristotelian, and I must admit a highly developed perceiver in the non-aristotelian orientation, could group them on one hundred levels. That does not mean to say that every group of one hundred individuals born represents one hundred levels; I said it could be conceived. There may be one hundred individuals in one room on one level, or at least a few. Let us conceive of one hundred individuals in one room and that each represents a different level and a different society, meaning a different band, a different group respecting the submicroscopic world (if we were in the presence of nothing but aristotelians), but understanding the psychic world as we do, and understanding the noetic mind level as we do, and having some indication of the light spheres beyond, we could say there are orders respecting each state or each level and that each individual, whether manifest in his physiological organism or not, is a member of one or other of these groups on these various levels.

          Now I go back to the statement which to me has great and far-reaching significance: there are as many orders of beings as there are orders in the abstracting process, with gradations and shades respecting each order. So these would be generalized orders with quite a range of shadings respecting each. As the esoteric student learns these orders and learns how progression is designed to fit a structure which we have to label cosmic structure respecting the states of consciousness, respecting Aditi, and that progression is from one order to another order, one graduates from one order and identifies himself with another until all orders are fulfilled in a great unity, and that great unity ends where the abstracting process began. Everything is one; it ends there. And the cycle of the abstracting process is complete.

 


 

March 29, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 30

 

          We will take up two items under general semantics this morning in our lesson — non-identity of word with ‘thing’ and reification, hypostatization, respecting words, etc.

          In approaching these two factors in general semantics and as described in our teaching, we approach the most difficult points to adequately get across to those canalized in identity. I have witnessed Count Alfred Korzybski struggle with professors in our universities. Some of them in the groups were Ph.D.’s, and after struggling to get the points over to them, he quit in manifest despair. I am of the opinion that Count Alfred passed on with the sense that he had utterly failed to establish this point, because in an interview with a Time Magazine representative he expressed utter disgust and disillusionment with those who verbally subscribed to his work and his teaching, and in this interview Count Alfred was quoted as saying, “The great wonder to me is that the authorities have not had them all incarcerated.” But he went on to explain — because of the utter failure to grasp his basic structure, and in that failure misrepresented and distorted his work. This is particularly obvious of those who have written about general semantics, as their published books portray their utter lack of understanding.

          Need we despair because of this evidence of inability to grasp the most fundamental points in that science which has been accepted as semantics? No, not by any manner of means, because a time factor is involved and not a sufficient duration has been allowed; evaluation in these respects is not possible until we have had two to three generations growing up from infancy in the instruction respecting the new canalization.

          Like the old cliché of our grandparents, “You cannot teach an old dog new tricks” — all of this difficulty of presenting a difference in attitude, outlook, orientation, etc. lies in the pattern of the psychic nature; when the pattern of the psychic nature becomes established it is exceedingly difficult to alter or change it. It can be done, but it is exceedingly difficult. And when we grasp the fact that characteristics, qualities, etc. of thinking are determined by the psychic pattern (and not reversely), clarity respecting understanding is then relatively easy and impatience becomes obviated.

          I present these difficulties, as encountered by Count Alfred, as a little preparation for this visit on these two points, so that you may not be impatient with yourselves in not being able to function unconsciously (as well as consciously) in the new and changed methodology respecting outlook, attitude, semantic reactions, etc. The way for a given individual to change the pattern in the psychic nature is to deal with a point such a long, long time, ruminating on it, thinking of it, studying it, that as “the piece of iron placed in the fire will partake of the quality of the fire”, so the psychic nature, through impression, and particularly suggestion, because thinking upon the subject operates on the personality pattern of the psychic nature as suggestion until it will begin to react to the suggestion and the new pattern will become incorporated, and the former pattern changed. So, it is only a matter of impressing it, and that, of course, is suggestion. Then gradually, not precipitously, you will find your reaction changing — that is, your functioning — in this or any other respect where the same approach is incorporated, changes will take place.

          Before taking up the identity of word with thing, I wish to go back to the first order of abstraction and where the first order of abstraction has been developed unconsciously, without exception. That process of abstracting from frequency received through sense faculty is unconscious and I believe it is part of the natural order process that it is done unconsciously. However, the fact is quite evident that when the first order of abstraction is accomplished, there is also an unconscious identity of image abstracted with the configuration or configurations from which the frequencies were derived, whether by refraction of light or by direct impression.

          Referring back and in respect to sight, to the self-luminous ‘thing’ or ‘object’, like the glowworm, the firefly, phosphorescence in rotting matter, etc., and then the sense faculties always operate by direct impression of frequency, like the smelling and tasting, hearing, except by echo; there is a reflection comparable to sight where light is refracted, that is echo in the sight, like the hearing of an echo and not direct frequency from the ‘object’ or ‘thing’.

          The point is that when the image is formed in the psychic nature, it is unconscious identification with that from which the frequency is received. This unconscious identity of ‘thing’ or ‘object’ or substantive image with the energy world, or a given configuration thereof, forms the basis for the identity of the second order of abstraction with the first. If the first order of abstraction, in some way or other unknown to us, could have been non-identified, then the very basis for the identity of the second order of abstraction with the first order would have been obviated. But that is wholly established in the consciousness of a given individual. That identity of the substantive image or ‘thing’ or ‘object’ with that from which frequency is received is already established in the consciousness, and it forms the basis of the identity of the second order, the word with the first order, the ‘thing’.

          We cannot go back and do anything about it; there is no way of preventing it; it is only now a matter of raising to a higher level in which the old, false habits, erroneous methods are corrected, from or on the basis of higher level perception.

          Now, all that is said about the habit being formed unconsciously would at some future date (and we would have to put that date several thousand years ahead of where we are) have to be dated, because we can conceive of a frequency environment of a culture wherein the consciousness of the energy world is full and clear and no abstractions made from it. It is indicative of a period on the time-line that the abstractions are made and the identity with that from which the abstraction is derived, and the unconsciousness of that identity becomes symbolical representations of a state or stage on the time-line in the natural order process.

          Here is the point — without laying the foundation of how easily, unconsciously and apparently naturally each drifts into it — the particular point, the identity of the word with the ‘thing’; the identity of the label, sign, symbol, word, with the ‘thing’ or ‘object’ (that is, with the first order of abstraction) transfers meaning from the ‘thing’ or ‘object’ and that from which it is abstracted to the word. There is the most difficult point in general semantics — to understand that transference.

          Jump ahead in the developing process of a given individual to where he is so canalized in that transference that it never dawns on him to question the statement, “What does the word mean? What meaning does the word have? Let us go to the dictionary to find the meaning of the word.” Lexicographers define terms, define words — just semantic blockage; stop right there. Listen to the aristotelians, particularly in intellectual groups, “Let us find the meaning of that word. Let us look up the meaning. How do you define it?” As Voltaire said, “If you discuss with me, define your terms.” Tell me the meaning you have respecting the words you are using. When all that is said to the aristotelians, they don’t see anything wrong. It is right. Isn’t that the way it is? etc.

          Please let me put a little advice in this talk to you. When you encounter that reaction on the part of anyone, do not press the argument that the word has no meaning, that it is only a sign, only a symbol for a meaning. Do not press the point, get around it some way and leave it. Why do I offer that suggestion? Because of the utter futility in a few discussions or in one that would go on unvarying lengths from day to day or month to month, etc., the inability to change the pattern of the psychic nature. You are not trying to put something over to the intellect by establishing this point. You are trying to change the pattern of the psychic nature. It is exceedingly difficult and cannot be done by discussion and argument. You must begin to use the other faculty of sharp differentiation between levels, and when you recognize an individual is on a certain level, the part of wisdom is to discuss with him in a way, or manner suitable to his level and keep your own knowledge respecting other levels upon which he doesn’t and cannot function from intruding in any way. See how clever you can be in “being all things to all men” and confine yourselves to his level while in association or discussion with him. That is a very valuable suggestion, because anything else is egotism; you are trying to “throw your weight around” or “strut your stuff” or convince him with arguments.

          Go back to changing the pattern of the psychic nature; he has to do that over a long period of time; he will have to do it if it is done; another one cannot do it for him.

          Here is another suggestion. If you occupy the position of teacher then you do not side-step these points, you may not press them unduly, you ease along with the student, because you know that you have to until the change of his psychic pattern, and that will not come about through your mental constructs or verbalization and discussion (and you will never argue). It will come about with the synchronization of his consciousness in his psychic nature with the frequencies of your consciousness. That will bring about the change more immediately than anything else. If it were not for that factor, there would be no purpose whatever in the teacher-student, guru-chela relationship. It is like one candle lighting another candle without becoming impoverished; the candle is still as strong as ever with its light, and that lighting another candle is the consciousness response to consciousness through the instrumentality of frequency synchronization and relationship. That is the only contact consciousness has with consciousness — frequency synchronization and relationship. That changes the psychic pattern.

          With that exception, if one is in relationship to you as student, then you do not side-step as readily the issue of the point now before us — the identity of word with ‘thing’.

          But let us go back and show the far-reaching consequences respecting this transference of meaning from (allow me to use a label) the world of true significance, instead of saying from the Truth, because that is always a vague term to me; I try to say the Truth about Reality, to make it less vague. There is no referent anywhere for “Truth”. Using the term transfers meaning from the world of true significance to the word, sign and symbol. This switching of meaning from the world of true significance to the symbol, in this case, the word, would not be so serious in the long run if it were not for the habit that is formed in the psychic nature; it becomes conditioned, a pattern becomes established and set, sometimes hard set, like Lot’s wife.

          What habit becomes set or established? The habit of thinking that word has meaning, because now the switch, the transference has been effected from the world of true significance to the symbol. I say that transference would not be so serious in the ultimate analysis if it were not for the habit that is formed in the psychic nature, because when the habit is formed, later on words having no background referent in the world of true significance are evaluated as having meaning; and now we come to the reification and hypostatization of words.

          You must follow through there carefully with your thought directed to the psychic nature. Now it becomes serious instead of inconsequential because the next step is to live in verbalism as reality, and when you live in verbalism as reality (go back to the transference of meaning from the world of true significance to the word), you have the end product of mayaistic orientation, living in maya, living in Avidya — living in Avidya with such vehemence, so firmly convinced of validity, of factuality that they become utterly blind to the world of true significance, and they become intellectual orators with vast appeal and they persuade hundreds and thousands of other blind ones, until cyclic catastrophe results and overtakes them; then these blind followers of the blind leaders do not understand what takes place and how it takes place, and they have only one way of showing their reaction — they strike blindly and try to destroy that which they heretofore looked up to and followed, their intellectual leaders and ecclesiastical authorities, and we have then the swing to the extreme that we call revolutions. They have the true instinct with no understanding; their true instinct knows they have been misled and they strike blindly against those leaders. Have you lived long enough to see the crowd, hands up, “Il Duce!” throngs? Did you see the picture of him hanging like a hog in the market by his feet? Hitler was wise; he wouldn’t let them get hold of him and hang him up, which they certainly would have done.

          What has that to do with what we are talking about? Everything, because we are dealing with the causation of all that verbalization, wordy stuff leads to. Meaning is given to the word, the utter and complete blindness to the world of true significance, which words are supposed to symbolize. That is why in our teaching every once in awhile we will say without pressing it: all words have one meaning, all words have the same meaning — they are symbols; they are supposed (because of the vast number of words that have no referent in the world of true significance) to represent meanings. But thousands of them represent no meaning; therefore, they are noises, bla bla about tra tra. There is no referent anywhere in the world of true significance.

          It is my opinion that to escape from maya, Avidya, darkness, ignorance, etc. is to understand this process of abstracting; consequently I lay great stress upon learning the abstracting process, because I am of the opinion that it clarifies understanding and more immediately will orient the inquiring one to the world of true significance.

          This will become more apparent as we proceed with the orders of abstraction, until we get to the higher levels in the orders of the abstracting process, where we depart from the world of true significance and have nothing left except verbalism and live in that delusional world of meaning attributed to words, to symbols. No matter how intellectual one may be in attributing meaning to words, and his ability to define words (because that is given great value in certain circles), he is no different from numerologists that take another sign or symbol and develop an elaborate (maybe not so elaborate) definition respecting the symbols, digits and numbers, and then tries to read meaning into the numbers — that is the symbols only. There is no difference in my estimation from the one who has become developed eruditionally in defining words, to the one who reads great meaning into symbols, astrological, uranographical, numerical symbols. All are apparently developing great erudition and it is only the attributing of meaning to symbols, and it is by reason of that fact that we in the School of the Natural Order do not and cannot accept astrology in any way; we cannot accept it on the basis and on the grounds that it is attributing meaning to symbols. So, we cannot accept numerology, where the basis is attributing meaning to symbols — the same basis obtains in each and every case, because in the consciousness of those who become identified in reification and hypostatization, they operate as forces, as powers — that is, they can conjure with words, conjure with symbols for numbers and the starry heavens. So, it is a conjuring, mumbo-jumbo, drum-drum business from one end to the other. Medicine men are still with us, and by their conjuring hold high and responsible positions where the lives of millions and the orderly continuance of cultures rest in their shaking hands. They wouldn’t have a raveling to hang anything on if the mayaistic veil could be pierced and they could be seen, and it wouldn’t be a very pleasant sight, because “they are filled with pollution and dead men’s bones and of unseemly things”.

          Do you think for a moment that we are not dealing with tremendous and far-reaching consequences? We are at the heart of the causation of world troubles. How did it begin? By switching, transferring meaning from the world of true significance to the symbol and the unconscious habit formed of looking to the symbol. That is why we say they are living in myths; it is mythology. That is the Avidya; that is the first veil that must be pierced to effect the first crossing. Even with the consciousness oriented to the psychic nature that process is easily seen — the process of unconscious identity of substantive images with that from which the abstraction was made, the unconscious identity of the second order of abstraction, the word, with the first order of abstraction, the substantive image. Once the substantive image can be perceived — not conceived — as what it is in its essential nature — a picture, an image, a mirage — no longer can there be any deception respecting it, no longer can any value be given to it. That is true emancipation, that is true liberation from the semantic reaction from the value given to the symbol. And that one is preparing himself to stand in the world of true significance, which will never deceive him; it is light and joy and happiness without alloy, the world of the Wondrous.

 


 

March 30, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 31

 

          The third order in the abstracting process represents a change in the developing consciousness, it also represents faculty to differentiate respecting classifications not only in respect to the first order, but in labeling the classifications; therefore, it is classification of the second order in the abstracting process. At first it seems that it is only the classification respecting the first order of abstraction, but it involves a classification respecting the second order as well. When this third order in the abstracting process is developed, or I should have said, when it is beginning to be developed there is no differentiation between the second order in the abstracting process and the first order in the abstracting process; to the consciousness, to the perceiver the word is never separate from the ‘thing’; there is such a blending of word with ‘thing’ that it is merely a classification of word with ‘thing’ which is considered a classification of ‘thing’.

          As one works his consciousness, his understanding into the third order in the abstracting process, he begins to realize how young he is, how young the race is. As we begin to realize our position in relation to the abstracting process we must not turn toward self-depreciation, rather we should utilize the ability to abstract to the third order and place the state in development in its proper relation to the point of the past and the future on the time-line — that is, as we begin to understand the third order in the abstracting process, it is extremely deflationary to the ego-sense, because the brevity of our understanding relative to what there is to understand becomes more and more voluminous, becomes more apparent.

          For instance, there are many native tribes which cannot abstract to the third order at all, and sometimes in pointing out that fact with little reference to our respective selves who are studying the abstracting process, we feel quite proud of ourselves because some native does not abstract to the third order. He emphasizes our poverty in the same respect and how we have not scratched the surface respecting ability to abstract to the third order.

          So, we are going to locate ourselves with the help of the Structural Differential, that we are just emerging into the third order in the abstracting process and haven’t gone much beyond it; we recognize our kin with the primitive, and it also points up our own respective infantilism. For instance, how many can classify very far respecting any given subject or ‘object’. Let us take these ‘things’ with which we are more familiar and see how far we can abstract respecting them. Take the plant life. How far can we go in abstracting? Can you recognize 10, 50, 100 species, genera, etc? L. H. Bailey, who has devoted his life to classification respecting plant life has abstracted fifty thousand genera. Take the best of those who work with plants and even though they could go to the second or third hundred, see how little they have learned respecting one subject. The abstracting process begins with grouping separate specimens, ‘things’, by similarities. It hasn’t been very long ago (referring again to the plant life) that plants were classified erroneously, because certain specimens exhibited in appearance only similar characteristics, they were classified as belonging to one group, and after the Mendelian ‘law’ was discovered, then lost and rediscovered. Several hundred years later they had to revise the textbooks of that day and classify genera according to number of chromosomes in sperm and ovum, because that formed a more fundamental basis for classification, instead of just the phenomenal appearance alone in the unconsciousness of structural basis upon which classification should be made. Our highest and best scientists of our period are just now learning the structural basis for proper classification of the elements of the periodic table, because that structural basis was unknown and now is just beginning to be known, and the knowledge is just dawning of how to determine, to measure, the constitution of various atoms, until now an entire new science is being developed respecting classification.

          But take the average individual that doesn’t specialize in study and development respecting one subject, how many can classify respecting the most common ‘things’? For instance, what is more common to a given individual than his physiological organism? How many can classify into groups the cells of the body? Very few. It is a specialized study; one has to devote some little time to the structure and function of the cells in order to classify them. Mention the most common thing with which we are in association; no classification in academic class of human species has as yet been made respecting the organs of the body. I do not mean to say that the anatomist or physiologist cannot distinguish between liver and spleen or heart and lung, but they have not classified the organs of the body respecting the differentiated fields which each configuration that we label the organization of the body represents. But let us come back to the laity and not think of the specialists in these fields of effort, study and labor. How many can classify respecting the rocks or minerals? It is the exceptional one. Take the study of crystallography; how many of the laity can classify in that field?

          Let us take another example. I am just pointing up the order in the abstracting process where we are. Most commonly we see men and women peregrinating on their hind feet and we say man or woman (or we say man in general); there is a vast range in the orders which each individual represents, and very little classification is even known about those orders which each represents.

          Take the word evolution which is a high order of abstraction. We haven’t reached that order in the abstracting process, yet we apply the term, evolution, to plant, or human life levels generally.

          How many know there are nine separate lines of evolution on the planet and can classify those nine lines of evolution? Sometimes in the study of the wisdom teaching we learn to classify in respect to two of those nine — the human and the Deva lines of evolution. But even those who have mentally learned the labels for two of those nine lines of evolution, cannot differentiate one group from the other in actual contact and association therewith. So, no ability to classify is yet in evidence. We have not as a group emerged into the third order in the abstracting process; we respectively are on the periphery of this third order in the abstracting process.

          In giving this to beginners, treat this inability to classify very lightly and throw the subject onto the mental level, and mentally and verbalistically describe the abstracting process, and leave the functional part of it obscure; don’t bring it out too pointedly. You should do that only with the more advanced students. But with the beginners, just verbalize and mentalize about the abstracting process, but don’t try to abstract because you will find yourself embarrassed if you have any egotism left, and your students will think you are belittling them. Even though one says to another who is not thoroughly acquainted with him, “I do not know very much,” the other one thinks he is foreflushing or that he is modest or humble. But he is none of those qualities which those labels symbolize. As one begins to realize how utterly insignificant his knowledge is, he just states a fact — he doesn’t know anything yet, and is frank to say so; there is nothing humble or modest about it and you are not foreflushing. Just take this third order in the abstracting process and realize how little you can abstract, particularly respecting fundamental structure as a basis for abstracting. Well, you just heave and sigh and say, “I don’t know a thing.” We can verbalize a little about it but can’t abstract to the third order respecting most ‘things’. So, we have a wonderful camouflage, we have a wonderful mask that we can play hide and seek behind; we can mentalize and verbalize and it passes, and we get by with it. We peek out around the edges of our mental and verbalistic masks that hide (not our poverty) our state. That is legitimate as psychology where others would injure you, but it has no purpose where there is no threat of injury. It is too bad that we have to defend ourselves against each other, but that is our level (racially speaking) of development.

          Let us turn to mentalizing and verbalizing about the abstracting process, instead of laying the emphasis upon functional ability in the abstracting process. The third label on the Structural Differential diagrammatically represents classification, the grouping of species, genera, according to similarity of characteristic or similarity in basic structure. In respect to the use of the total similarity in the abstracting process, we should avoid the word which we are prone to use — sameness. In the study of semantic differences we discover there are no two ‘things’ which are identical. While superficially they may exhibit similar characteristics, and that similarity is so closely allied that one cannot be distinguished from the other, even under closer inspection, like microscopic examination, like going into the guna quality of the field respecting each, even in respect to its molecular structure, etc., there still will be wide differences. So, we will again have to remember the factors left out, or the factors of frequency non-registry and avoid the use of the terms, same, identical, etc. To maintain the extensional attitude, to keep always on the extensional side and avoid the dogmatic nuances in respect to the words —  “it is the same; it is identical” — we shy away from dogmatic statements and keep extensional, remembering factors left out, not known, etc., we say similar structure, similar characteristics; so, classifications are based upon similarities, not identity, not sameness, similarity of structure — thinking of genes and chromosomes, thinking of molecular arrangements of cellular structures, thinking of atomic groups in the molecular structures, thinking of electronic energy world, wave length and frequency configurated, etc., etc., we say the characteristics appear similar and therefore our classifications are based upon similarity.

          This ability to differentiate respecting ‘things’ and ‘objects’, this ability to classify, represents the third level in the abstracting process.

          Now mentally and verbalistically we can move to the fourth level in the abstracting process, where we recognize in our secret knowing that we cannot function on that level; it is beyond us. We are learning to function on the third level; we are just on the periphery in our racial point on the time-line, and respectively we are on the periphery in the third order in the abstracting process and haven’t entered it yet. Naturally, if we haven’t entered the third order, we cannot abstract on the fourth level; we can verbalize about it, because it is mental wherever the word is used; it is not functional. When we function we do not mentalize about a ‘thing’ specifically or generally; we are beginning to learn not to verbalize.

          Six hundred and forty years B.C. Lao-Tze said, “He who knows, does not teach.” Anyone who teaches doesn’t know anything yet, because he hasn’t learned enough not to verbalize. Today I would like to paraphrase Lao-Tze: “He who knows, never verbalizes; he who doesn’t know, and the less he knows, bursts into speech and verbalizes.” I am of the opinion (and I am not kidding you or myself either) that verbalization is a camouflage of our profound, fathomless ignorance. Don’t impute any modesty to me respecting that state; at least give me the credit for elementary honesty. I realize how infantile I am and all infants are lusty; they like to make noises. We are infants and like to make lots of noises. When we grow up a little, to paraphrase Lao-Tze, “We know; we will no longer verbalize; that is, we will no longer teach.” But we are still infants and love to make noises; we even love to hear it. One of the most incredible things to an Englishman is how crowds will sit for hours on uncomfortable seats listening to somebody verbalize. If we can’t make the noise ourselves, we enjoy it vicariously. We can talk long and loud “about” that which we do not know; if we did know we wouldn’t make so much noise.

          So, we are verbalizing “about” the orders of abstraction and have reached the fourth level — the ability to distinguish one of a class. Here is where the knowledge of fundamental structure comes in. It looks easy, but it is extremely difficult to take a minute particle of a given ‘thing’, to isolate it and classify it. That is the ability to distinguish one of a given classification. A few can do it with the aid of a microscope and other devices (electronic devices today; its lines that it will portray on the spectrum) and other methods can be employed to classify. To classify is an ability that few possess and hardly any can do it functionally. With the aid of spectroanalysis, measurements of wave lengths and frequencies, cellular, molecular, atomic structural classifications can be made, but keep that on one side and keep on the other the ability to register the frequency and sharply differentiate respecting the gunas. Now, you have what I mean when I say that we cannot as yet function to the fourth level, because to function to the fourth order in the abstracting process would mean to consciously register the frequencies and at the same instant consciously differentiate respecting its level (that means its wave length and number of frequencies per unit of time), and to consciously know the gunas.

          To a limited extent, those who have made the first crossing can do it. They can know that the frequency is tamasic, they can know that the frequency is rajasic, or they can know that the frequency is sattvic, and that is classification. But it is very limited. In each of these tamasic, rajasic, sattvic levels there is a vast range respecting the gunas, the qualities. When the individual, by his own developed faculty, can perform all of the functions of spectroanalysis and structural measurements of wave lengths and frequencies in addition to the conscious knowledge of the gunas, then we have the equipment with which to distinguish one of a class.

          Superficially, we cannot distinguish one of a class, if we do not reduce it to particles. I started with a particle of given ‘thing’. If we do not start with a particle and can start with a larger aggregation of ‘things’ or piece of a given ‘thing’, we can to a limited extent determine one of a class, like if we take a leaf of a tree; we can tell whether it is an oak or a maple. Some can tell the difference between marigold plants and tomatoes, and others can’t. This merely highlights how some of us cannot differentiate one of a class, not even when we have the whole specimen!

          Our infantilism dawns in the study of the third and fourth levels in the abstracting process.

 


 

March 31, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 32

 

          In the previous lesson we considered the third and the fourth orders in the abstracting process from two levels. This morning I wish to treat of the third and fourth orders in the abstracting process from three levels, incidentally showing how our Structural Differential is diagrammatic and therefore symbolical representation of three distinct and separate levels.

          I am going to label these three levels: 1) unconscious functioning, 2) conscious functioning, 3) the mental-verbalistic level. I will present a brief description of these three levels.

          Keep in mind that the fundamental structure of the consciousness of a given differentiated field is of course the basis, the factual Reality which constitutes what we label an individual. That consciousness — the I AM which is my true Self — functions on the Mind level when faculty is sufficiently developed to enable it to do so; it functions on the psychic level when faculty respecting the psychic nature is sufficiently developed to enable it to do so; and it functions also in the ‘physical body’ when the sense faculties are sufficiently developed to enable it to do so. When the consciousness is focused in the objective manifold in identity — that is, with the representations of that manifold which we label images appearing substantive — any function of that same consciousness in its psychic nature, or in its true nature, mind, we label unconscious. I know that reiteration respecting salient points is always in order, and what I have just said is simply this: when consciousness is in identity with the objective world, any function in its psychic nature or in its mind level is labeled unconscious, so, the word, unconscious, is only relative to the state in identity with the objective. This is our first level, the unconscious.

          Now, our second level upon which we are going to treat anent the third and fourth orders in the abstracting process is labeled, conscious. This is where functioning in the objective manifold becomes conscious. We have to watch carefully here, because we are in the habit of considering the mental — that is, the conceptual-verbalistic functioning as conscious. I am drawing a sharp line of demarcation between those two — that is, between being conscious of the way, the manner, the method of functioning, and functioning, mentally and verbalistically, unconsciously. So, that mental-verbalistic level of functioning is not considered conscious, and it is not considered unconscious, it is a sort of transition period between the unconscious and the conscious.

          Allow me to illustrate a little further. If one thinks about images appearing substantive — that is, thinks and speaks about the psychic world and psychic nature, about mind level, energy world, light spheres, etc., and talks freely, loquaciously about those things, he may not be conscious of what he is talking about, or he may be conscious of what he is talking about. Let one speak quite learnedly about a given ‘thing’ or ‘object’ — does he know that ‘thing’ or ‘object’ or has he amassed and accumulated lots of information, concepts, about it? If he speaks from his accumulated information about it, I set that off as the mental-verbalistic level. But if he knows through what we call rapport, the “thing-in-itself”, if he can consciously function respecting the field, lines of force, wave lengths and frequencies, configurations, respecting that given ‘thing’ or ‘object’, then he is conscious, and his mental-verbalizing is descriptive of that which he perceives and is not about it.

          So, between being the ‘thing’ described and speaking out of accumulated information about it, there is the line of differentiation between the two levels.

          To be conscious respecting the objective manifold, to be conscious of the function and structure of the psychic nature, or further to be conscious of the functional experiences on the mind level, is what I am labeling the conscious.

          I have already described the third level — the mental-verbalistic level. Instead of jumping from one level to the other level in my treatment of the third and fourth orders in the abstracting process, I shall be careful to mention the level as I switch from one to the other. Treating the third and fourth orders in the abstracting process from the first level as described, the unconscious, it is very obvious that one begins to unconsciously function upon the third level in the abstracting process long before he does so consciously — and, by the way, do not make extremes respecting each of these levels, the rudimentary beginning and the highly developed ability respecting each, there is a vast range of degrees between; so, do not make it either-or. Remember that if we mention functioning unconsciously or consciously or neither, there is a vast range of degrees respecting each.

          For illustration of how one begins to unconsciously function in the third order in the abstracting process, when the differentiation from the animal level eventuates in the field, in the true I AM, he begins to function on the fourth level in the orders of abstraction, the third level would represent the animal group. The animal field consciousness is quite functionally distinct from, let us say, the plant world, or the mineral world, and we can mention many other differentiations of plant world and mineral world. We could mention other differentiations in the animal world, because the group classification — meaning third order in the abstracting process — that we on the mental level label the dog, canine, functionally, will not affiliate with the feline group. We find that in the field there is a distinct differentiation, classification; the field has already classified itself, or we can say, differentiated itself, and it will function in that differentiation even though it doesn’t verbalistically label itself as classified.

          This points up the world of true significance that I mentioned so frequently in the previous lesson. By referring back we can now say, in the world of true significance the consciousness of a given group of the animal doesn’t function, synchronize, etc. with the consciousness of other groups. So, in like manner in the world of true significance, when a given individual field has differentiated itself in its own consciousness from a given animal field or animal group, functionally it has progressed to the fourth order in the abstracting process — that is, one of a group, the consciousness of oneness, one of a given class, of a given group, etc. Now you can see where for some time this is functional, but it is also unconscious. Relative to the world of true significance it is conscious functioning, relative to the objective world and the objective manifold of values (which means mental) it is unconscious. So, here we have a peculiar dual play upon a word, unconscious — it is conscious on one level, unconscious on the other. The fact that it functions even in some degree separate from the group influence — here and the varying degrees up to absolute consciousness — is self-determinative now, without influence from the group. Then we have the higher level of functioning respecting the fourth order in the abstracting process. So, somewhere between the beginning to function in the world of true significance and the higher consciousness of such functioning, there is a gradual dawning, a growing awareness of that uniqueness, of that distinctness — it is the growing, developing ego, the ego-sense.

          While it is not germane to our treatment of the third and fourth levels in the abstracting process, I think it should be put in here that we consider it very essential to develop the ego-sense consciousness. I am of the opinion that no one can make the next grade, the fifth order in the abstracting process, until he has perfected, completed the consciousness of the ego, the consciousness that I-AM-I, distinct and separate from everyone and everything else, and can function independently of all group influences, racial group influences, psychic influences, etc. I am of the opinion that that ego must be developed completely, but the great danger to everyone who does so is that he will over-accentuate it and protract his surrender of it in the process of expansion of consciousness, functionally, to the next level, the fifth in the order of the abstracting process — that is, he will not make the group grade of becoming a member of the fifth root race, that he will become isolated, isolate himself. This obviously does not belong to this lesson, it belongs to another consideration that has great significance and meaning and we will properly treat of it another time, if we treat the orders as representations of the abstracting process.

          Let us focus here upon our work this morning again. In the dawning of the field or psychic level functioning in sense of separation — the ego development — the functioning becomes conscious and we enter our second level of the treatment of the third and fourth orders in the abstracting process, that dawning culminating in consciousness signalizes that which we label the first crossing. I am of the opinion that it gives the nearest description of what we call the first crossing, and that is why I use the words “signalizes the first crossing”. When the dawning of the unconscious functioning on the fourth level of the abstracting process, culminates in the consciousness of functioning whether one consciously projects, dissociates from the physiological organism or not, there takes place changes in the focus of consciousness from the objective manifold of values to the consciousness of functioning independently of the objective manifold. As a rule this is through dissociation, and as soon as one is consciously out of his physiological organism, he then clearly sees, hears, tastes, smells and touches with full consciousness that he doesn’t have a physical body with which to do so, by many crosschecks in a variety of ways that it is not self-psychologization or from delusional conditions that he has gotten into, some aberration, etc. There is acute and sharp functioning of consciousness. That enables him to perceive the images appearing substantive, it also enables him to understanding the feel of relationships, because he sees the field relationships as well as feeling them. To see the relationship between two individualized fields gives him a very sharp consciousness on the fourth level in the abstracting process.

          Let me illustrate a little further. If two of us live in the same habitation and we grow closer and closer in harmony, en rapport, until words are not necessary (that is, not much description), maybe a little gesture of head or hand, a little glance or just a grunt is all that is necessary, it speaks all that you could say and it is understood — two growing en rapport, growing out of the need to speak, believe it or not. They talk very little, just to indicate all that might take a half hour to describe is all there and more clearly understood than if described verbally. I want you to hold that in your thought a moment, and dissociate in the psychic nature. That relationship between those individualized fields is seen in addition to being felt. You can call it the blending of auras, the blending of vibrations, the blending and synchronization of frequencies — that is going to the mental level to describe it, that is seen as well as felt.

          I will give you another illustration that is a little harder to understand: we know in many ways what the word faith symbolizes — the sense of trust, the sense of security, the sense of support — faith, confidence, great confidence, etc. We are verbalizing it on the mental level. Let us imagine that we dissociate in the psychic level — faith is a substance seen. According to its degree, its strength on the feeling side will be its substantiality on the other, until it is like unto a concrete pavement that you can walk right out on and it holds you up, you can stamp on solid substance, believe it or not.

          Now, there is a substance that is stronger than that, we would have to use the analogy of steel to describe it, and that is the power and substantiality of love, it is substance seen, touched, and it will support you. Be careful of the one you love, you are tied irrevocably, no escape, you might as well try in the objective manifold side to break steel beams with your hands, as to try to break love if bound by it.

          Let us leave the illustration alone and come back. The idea was in the dawning process from the unconscious, relative to the mental level, in the dawning process where the functioning of the feel has developed to faculty whereby it knows, that is, becomes conscious of its uniqueness, of its being one of a group, one of a class. We have then effected a transition from our unconscious level to the conscious in the abstracting process, and specifically from the third to the fourth order in the abstracting process.

          Let us leave both those levels and move to the third step as described — the mental-verbalistic level. Now, we have license, there is no freedom, we have license. We can now depart from all rules and regulations, because we can now mentalize about the abstracting process on its third level, we can mentally manufacture labels, that is, words, signs, symbols for groups, classifications. Our classification on the mental level has nothing to do with unconscious functioning and has nothing whatever to do with conscious functioning, so we just hop on it and classify, and if we can find some fundamental basis for our classification all the better, but if we don’t, we classify anyway, because our license allows us to. If we have knowledge and information about the chromosomes, about different species, we have a permanent basis on which to classify.

          Then when it comes to differentiating one of a class on the mental level, that is simple as can be. It has nothing to do with conscious or unconscious functioning. We can go ahead on the mental level and abstract way beyond to the fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth levels (that consciously or unconsciously we are nowhere near in ability to function). So there are two phases, now, to the abstracting process: one is esoteric, which is the finding of one’s way functionally and consciously from level to level in the abstracting process, and the other is mental, where mentally we can abstract and label the orders in the abstracting process.

          As was developed yesterday morning, we, as members of our racial level of development, are just beginning to consciously function, although unconsciously we have been functioning for some time on the fourth level in the abstracting process. We have yet a long way to go before we have completed the development of a faculty with which we will function on the fourth level in the abstracting process. So, our subsequent lessons of necessity will deal only with and by relation to the mental level and we will not refer anymore to the unconscious or conscious functioning respecting the abstracting process, everything said respecting the fifth and subsequent orders in the abstracting process will be predicated.

 


 

April 3, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 33

 

          The link between the fourth and the fifth orders in the abstracting process represents the turning point from the descending arc to the ascending arc. On the Structural Differential therefore there should always be portrayed a turning back at this point between the fourth and the fifth orders in the abstracting process. The fifth order in the abstracting process represents the beginning of the expansion of consciousness into fundamental oneness. There has been a ‘going out’ up to this point and it signalizes a ‘return’ (because it is only action of consciousness and nothing else). To the frame of values which we label the objective manifold, it looks like it is literally a ‘going out’ and a ‘returning’. Now, if we have sharply differentiated between the functional level and the mental level in the description of the first four orders in the abstracting process, we can readily see on the functional level that the line between the fourth and the fifth orders in the abstracting process represents the ‘return’ or the turning point. For instance, if you will remember the image appearing substantive — that is the objective world, just objects, just appearances, no differentiation respecting appearances, everything one, then came the name, the label.

          In the allegorical story of the Hebrew and Christian Scriptures, this is portrayed as the Lord bringing before Adam each separate phenomenon, and that which Adam named each was the name thereof; that is a very beautiful allegory, but it stretches credulity to a fantastic breaking point to take it literally. In the Gnosis, Adam is the name for the first-born which the Hindus labeled Brahma. Brahma or Adam therefore represents the informing intelligent force respecting each and all differentiations which he fathers. There comes in the Father principle; he is the Father, the progenitor, the creator of all subsequent differentiations of His or Its differentiated fields. The subsequent differentiation of that first and original first-born, which is one relationship to the positive-negative, is representation of the Son, and in the other relationship to all subsequent relations represents Father, progenitor.

          When we relate this to a given individual, our respective selves, for instance, it is perfectly obvious that we cannot feel, think or act without the power to think, feel and act. With what power do we think, feel and act? With what power is one conscious? The Power; the power of the first-born, Adam; the power of the Father or any other label which one wishes to give and there are as many labels as there are languages. So, in the ultimate, fundamental intrinsic nature of a given individual, it is that force labeled Adam, the infilling intelligence by which one is conscious, before whom the phenomenal aspect of differentiated fields and their configuration is brought, and from which he abstracts the character and names, labels, symbolizes. So, while the given individual in his consciousness of identity with the phenomenal appearance of himself and other ‘things’ may believe that he is doing the abstracting, that he is doing the labeling, which is merely an error in identity, and while that may go on in his consciousness in sense of separation, the intrinsic nature is not disturbed and it is the intrinsic nature which is motivating the action in feeling, thinking, acting, labeling. “Naught of myself I do, the Father worketh hitherto and I work.” If I make a mistake and think it is I that am working, that is just my mistake, it doesn’t interfere the slightest with the intrinsic nature. One might interfere with himself, but he cannot interfere with the intrinsic nature, it is not that precarious. One may eclipse himself from his understanding and unity and oneness and functional function, but he never interferes with the intrinsic nature, and cannot.

          We see that fundamentally speaking, functionally speaking, or mentalizing and verbalizing about the intrinsic nature or the basic process in these orders of abstracting, we observe that it is ‘descending’ from unconscious and undifferentiated oneness through a series of steps which we label the abstracting process — then the return through a series of steps which we label the higher orders in the abstracting process. So, when the terminology is used, the lower orders of abstraction, reference is made to that which we label the descending arc. When reference is made to the higher orders in the abstracting process, the referent therefore belongs in that category which we label the ascending arc. It is a process of grasping oneness, consciously, through a series of gradations in synthesis. The consciousness of unity or oneness respecting the essential nature, Adam or Brahma, represents a prodigious expansion of consciousness, and that vastness respecting extensionality cannot be immediately consummated, grasped, it has to be taken in steps, but each step taken is a process representative of the whole; that means to say that one degree of expansion of consciousness in a synthetical action represents a certain degree of the overall synthesis which we label oneness. So, in respect to a given individual, when he reaches the fourth level in the abstracting process, he is completely conscious of uniqueness, separateness, one-of-a-class. We call it development of the ego, the ego-sense.

          It also happens that every action on the functional level — that means in the intrinsic nature — which we very often designate the consciousness of the Self in its own field, sends out, as it were, heralds, indications of the change in action, like the old cliché of “straws in the wind” indicating which way it is going to blow. These ‘straws’, these heralds preceding the functional action and indicative of changes beginning to take place within the intrinsic functional nature or level, are representations in feelings, emotions and thinkings.

          Now, reverse the process; one begins to entertain thoughts of synthesis; there is an emotional response to unity; actions respecting such emotional responses and ideas become evidenced. These actions, this emotional response and these ideas, these thinkings are the ‘straws’ or the heralds of forces in the intrinsic nature. So, we can use two illustrations contemporary with this description: much talk, thought and emotional response and some action is in evidence respecting one world, one economic system for the planet, one political form of government for the planet. These indicate changes in the intrinsic nature. And another illustration: the recognition — the ‘straw in the wind’ — is given that the next step in the expansion of consciousness, which is called evolution, development, ongoing, etc., is to the effect that functioning in group effort, group activity, motivated by the conscious urge to unity, not from a gregarious level, but from a conscious level repeating the gregarious instinctive function of the descending arc; that thinking about it, emotional response to it, action taken, merely represents the ‘straws’, heralds of intrinsic changes in the fundamental nature, in the consciousness of the first-born. So, while we understand this process sufficiently to differentiate between mentalizing on the mental level and functioning in the intrinsic nature, yet too sharp a line of demarcation must not be drawn so that the thinking, the emotional response, the action are entirely separated from the intrinsic functional nature, because it is the change in the intrinsic or functional nature of each that motivates the thought, the emotional response and the action; therefore, we might say that the mental label and the mental constructs respecting fundamental synthesis, functional synthesis, are a degree of such synthesis, a heralding of its dawning.

          So, we have a period which in the Vedas is labeled, the dawn, before the full brilliant light of the rising sun falls upon us, which we must prepare for; literally, actually, we must prepare for that brilliant light or we cannot withstand it. So, the dawn precedes the full light, and it is in the dawn that we begin to think synthetically respecting the turning point that we are treating in this lesson between the fourth and the fifth orders in the abstracting process. It is in the dawn that we feel the urge to unity — it is in the dawn that we begin to initiate action towards synthesis of the complete synthesis! We have to synthesize gradually, we cannot make the leap from the fourth to the fifth order in the abstracting process that we are turning away from, that intense ego-sense of separateness; turning away means renouncing by little degrees, dying, in a way, in one aspect, as we are being born, or expanding consciousness in another aspect that we label the synthesis. So, here is the turning point from extreme egotism, ego-sense, making the first step into synthesis even though that is only heralded by thinking about it, and having some emotional response respecting it, that is, devotional response to a cause, to a group, to an initiated effort, even on the economic basis of what is labeled cooperative; never mind the label, whether it starts with just the idea that it is only service, sharing, not of profits, that is the economic basis; it is emotional response, and then to take the action, to begin to do it, irrespective of how imperfectly it is done. The perfect resides in the intrinsic nature of the fundamental level, which we call functional.

          It is better to begin thinking about it than not thinking about it at all, because not to entertain the idea in any way is simply indicative that the ego is not yet developed. He has the ego to develop, instead of having developed it. How can one surrender an ego-sense before he has it developed? He has to develop that ego-sense before he can begin to renounce it. This idea of renunciation of the ego-sense before it is developed, or the consciousness is developed, throws the statement, attitude or effort into the psychological level; that is, it must be examined on the psychic level; it is a psychological process, substituted form of expression, in other words. As soon as those who initiate effort to function in cooperative effort, in group functions, in synthesis prior to developing the ego-sense, it is only a matter of opportunity and they will revert to the ego level, not only to their respective selves. It was only a substituted form of expression and not a herald of intrinsic change in the consciousness — which is all right; these are just statements of the process.

          In respect to group functioning, many will come obviously with all good intentions of group effort and are genuine and sincere respecting it, but as soon as opportunity permits they revert to the ego-sense, and should revert to the ego-sense — that is, to get for themselves all they can get out of what is called the group effort. Remember they should, because they are truer when they do. How did they make the mistake? Because they could not understand how the thwarted urge to ego-sense development had substituted, they were censored off until opportunity presented, and then they realized: I was only for myself, and not for the group, all the time.

          So you see, to understand the doctrine, the teaching of the abstracting process in its essential level which we call functional — we must differentiate between the actual, essential development of the ego-sense and the substitution for the urge to ego-sense being thwarted, and the obvious group effort initiated, etc.

          We find as we read contemporary history, the same problem: there are those who will advocate unity; for instance, the League of Nations after World War 1; but as soon as opportunity presented itself, the nations were not functionally operating in that synthesis; they had used the League as the substituted form of expression for nationalism — that is ego-sense, because all nationality rests upon the ego-sense or sense of ego. So, the worldwide disappointment; they should have reverted until they had reached in the intrinsic nature the expansion of consciousness into synthesis; therefore, the disappointment is due to lack of understanding of how the psychological processes work in the psychic nature and not in the intrinsic nature, because the substituted outlets, substituted forms of expression whether in the individual or in a nation, operate only in the psychic nature, never in the intrinsic, the functional nature of the Reality, the Being, the Brahma.

          If this is properly presented it eliminates all criticism of those who initiate effort and revert to the ego-sense, because it is the endorsement that they do, not a criticism for so doing; then it is only a problem on the psychological level of why was the apparent effort to cooperate, and can’t cooperate? Because the ego has not yet been sufficiently developed and the next step, the renunciation of ego-sense, that point on the time-line of the essential nature, has not yet been reached. This is all germane in the abstracting process from the fourth level to the fifth level. We students of the natural order process must treat these subjects impersonally, as descriptive of the process, non-related to any specific individual, because it is related to all individuals as they come along through the natural order process and consciously or unconsciously abstract according to the changes in the essential nature. I think that is all the time we have this morning to treat this subject.

 


 

April 4, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 34

 

          In the fourth order in the abstracting process there is a complete absence of the faculty which in its functioning is labeled synthesis — one wholly functioning in that state firmly believes that in order to understand a given thing it must become divided up as a fragmentation process and then by the analysis of the most minute fragments, particles, the essential nature of the thing can be understood. That, of course, refers to investigators, laboratory workers, research workers. In the epistemological methodology, thought takes the same turn: isolate, separate, then refine and re-refine to isolate, separate, searching for the ultimate purity of the element or specimen, etc.; this is the process of analysis, fragmentation.

When a given individual has functionally passed through that period and has become oriented to the fifth order in the abstracting process, he then reverses all former opinions; assertions are made by him that nothing can be understood separately, isolated fragmentation leads to misunderstanding, not to understanding. To understand a single fragment (particle) even though that particle may be microscopic, one must understand the organism-as-a-whole; one must understand the relationship which a given particle or fragment has or bears to the whole, and the influence of the whole on the particle, etc.; in other words, to approach understanding it must be approached from the whole.

          So, synthesis characterizes the methodology in the search for knowledge. I have only mentioned two states: one wholly in the fourth order in the abstracting process, and the other in the fifth order, and you can well supply the infinite range of degrees wherein analogy plays a very important part in the process of the search for knowledge and the theory of knowledge, blended with, in varying degree, the synthetical. So, it is not a case of either/or respecting the transition between the fourth order in the abstracting process and the fifth. This transition between the fourth level and the fifth plays a very important part in philosophy, psychology, theology, in methods of development and also of course in the basis of religions past and present with us today. This is exemplified by the Egyptian wisdom teaching. The label used, as we use the label Logos, was Osiris, and irrespective of the label for that differentiated field in the Mother substance, the field represents the Source, causative respecting all other differentiations, therefore, it constitutes the Reason for the creative process irrespective of the level. So, we could label it the Light source, identifying the word Light with the word consciousness — the Light source of creativity.

          That Light source is difficult to understand and I might say, impossible to understand in the objective manifold of values having only three coordinates — that is, space factors. It becomes apparent that one must add the time factors to the space factors for its complete comprehensiveness, because that Light source is the creator of the concept of space and concept of time and remains independent of both the three dimensions of space and the three dimensions of time. So, the Light source, being the creator of space and the creator of time, is superior to its own creation, so that any description embodying the factors of space and/or time becomes relative to a point on the time-line of a given individual out of the consciousness of the Light source. Any manifold of values, such as our objective manifold of values, which is predicated upon space factors (no time factors at all), would be wholly inadequate to grasp, understand or describe the Light source.

          However, this Light source was labeled Osiris. In respect to a given individual’s conscious identity with Osiris, there was a great enemy which had to be overthrown, cast down, slain, etc. The label given to that enemy was Typhon. Typhon was the personification of the unexpurgated forces in the psychic nature. The Egyptians portrayed Typhon (the personification of unexpurgated factors in the psychic nature) as having fourteen characters, and they drew a picture of him — hairy satyr, with hoofs, a tail with a spike on the end of it, pointed ears and horns on his head. These were some of the fourteen symbols of fourteen categories of forces in the psychic nature. Typhon was the ruler and controller of darkness, of the nether regions of the dead (that means of the ignorance).

          But in spite of Typhon, Isis gave birth to a Son, Horus — that birth that we represent by the label Christos. No sooner than Horus reached his maturity, the first commission to which he was assigned by his Mother, Isis, was to search for Osiris, his Father. But Typhon had destroyed him and chopped him up into pieces and buried him, each piece in widely separated areas, and then the only way Osiris could be found was to dig up each of the fourteen fragments into which he had been divided by Typhon. Of course, this was the way the story was told, and the rest of the story is the search for these fragments (which is true Masonry), with Typhon fighting the search each inch of the way; each inch of the search is bitterly contested until many valiant battles have to be fought with Typhon.

          Typhon personifies the force governing in what we are describing as the fourth level in the abstracting process. The whole tendency is fragmentation, breaking up any effort toward unity, any effort toward synthesis, any effort toward the formation of a functional group. Typhon can govern by dividing and ruling, and those who divide in order to rule are under the government of Typhon, because Typhon knows that as soon as there is synthesis, a unification of the force of the fragments of the creating Source, his reign is done. So, he has to prevent the finding of the fragments of the Light source, Osiris.

          Now, remember Osiris is never divided up into fragments. It is like a light source refracted through a prism. It is according to which side of the prism on which one stands; if he never stood ‘behind’ the prism, facing the light source he is justified in saying, “That light is certainly refracted; it is broken up.” But if he ever can understand the operation of refraction and once can get perceptive faculties whereby he can see ‘behind’ the other side of the prism — that is, reach the fifth level in the abstracting process — at once he sees the light source was never refracted, it was due to the prism that the refraction appeared.

          Take these factors, unexpurgated factors in the psychic nature, whether you divide them up into fourteen categories as the Egyptians did, or not, just take the unexpurgated factors in the psychic nature and relate them to the prism. The Light source remains constant, invariant on its own level, but when observed through the fragmentation, the refraction as the basis, through the unexpurgated force of the psychic nature, it is all broken up. But the creativity, the substantiality of each fragment, whether atom, molecule, cell or groups of cells, etc., the substantiality respecting each fragment rests upon the Light source, the creative force, the creative power that gives the fragment significance, meaning, and that source is what misleads those in the fourth order in the abstracting process because they demonstrate empirically the substantiality that they would label inheres in the fragment — the power in the atom for instance, the function of the molecule, etc., ad infinitum — because the creativity of the Source ‘resides’ in each fragment; so, with the unexpurgated factors, forces and elements of the psychic nature, the individualism of the instincts, each instinct having tenacity, force, power; therefore the power of Typhon is very great — the personification of the totality of unexpurgated factors of the psychic nature.

          Now, it is not the province of this talk respecting the transition between the fourth and the fifth orders in the abstracting process to go into the discussion of problems of theology, but this is an ancient problem in theology: If God is all in all, the sole and only creator, who created the devil (Typhon)? How could God create the devil and the devil work against God? How could God be all in all, the only creator if he did not create the devil? If you do not think this problem has raged, you do not know history.

          If you will follow through, the whole problem is solved if you understand the unexpurgated forces of the psychic nature and how the Light source, Osiris, is really the creator. Without the light source, how is there going to be these bands of color as the light source is refracted through the prism? So, it takes the prism and the Light source to produce — shall we say a Typhon? It takes the individualized field with the accumulation of the effects of values given to images appearing substantive (how the psychic nature is created lesson) to break up in fragments — that is, refract — the Light source, the Logos with the creative force and power evident, manifest in each fragment, no matter whether it is microscopic or macroscopic. Now, the search of Horus, the new born, individualized Self, for synthesis, for Osiris, and that long, seemingly interminable battle with Typhon; it is seemingly interminable because after the battle is over and Typhon doesn’t bother you anymore, he bothers you so little that you can flit him with your finger — as it were, like a fly — you have so much control over him; then it doesn’t seem like it was much. But before that state, level, order is reached — where Typhon buzzes like a fly annoying — it seems interminable, this hunting of the fragments. This resurrection of Osiris, the uniting of Osiris with the Spouse, Isis, and the uniter, constitutes the third part of the great Trinity, the Son in his Sonship, the Sun-God seated with Osiris resurrected and Isis the marvelous cooperator in all endeavor.

          But let us come back to this battle with Typhon because it represents our point on the Structural Differential, the transition between analysis and synthesis, between fragmentation efforts and the efforts toward synthesis because this is the transition of consciousness of a given individual from the fourth to the fifth order, level, in the abstracting process. How monumental, how dark, how discouraging this battle with Typhon appears to be when it is first initiated — darkness, Avidya, ignorance, stupidity, blindness seem to be met with at every turn; everywhere you look, something to slap you down, to destroy your synthetical efforts. It looks formidable at first, but allow me to assure you, later on it appears like a bugy-boo, like somebody said boo around the corner and scared you to death. If you want to play make-believe, you say boo right back and that is all the power Typhon has — later on. But one by one, hidden ‘behind’ the unexpurgated factors of the psychic nature, the parts, the fragments, the gleanings of understanding of the Light source, the finding of the parts of Osiris — it takes digging here and there and these fragments of wisdom come to light and we begin to synthesize these fragments of wisdom in our research work, and like the jigsaw puzzle, we put it together piece by piece and pretty soon the Light bursts upon us; Osiris is put together and becomes alive in the consciousness again. This is the synthetical process, it begins with what we label the fifth order in the abstracting process, it continues with each expanding force and power in synthesis until the oneness, the completeness, the undifferentiatedness has identified with the Light source as the Whole.

          So, our further studies in the abstracting process are merely the search for Osiris, behind the fragments, factors, in the psychic nature. It is as simple as that.

 


 

April 5, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 35

 

          We have emphasized at great length the turning point from the descending process respecting consciousness to the ascending, as represented by our Structural Differential and at the turning point between the fourth and the fifth orders in the abstracting process the consciousness of the many or one in sense of separation, one of a class, to the synthesis, the unification, the oneness, which the fifth level or order in the abstracting process represents, which is called the ascending arc of the cycle.

          In emphasizing or describing this turning point, the illustration was used in a previous lesson of the refraction of the Light source through the divisions in the psychic nature which is truly representative of the farthest swing outward from the unconscious or instinctive oneness; and the fact that in each of these fragments, divisions, the reality inheres, the Light source is present, which gives validity or significance to the particle, to the fragment. In mentioning this analogy of refraction we can account for the multiplicity on the mental level, insofar as the psychic nature is involved or concerned, but it does not account for the multiplicity beyond the psychic nature — that which is described as the differentiated fields and their respective configurations.

          (The description of the conscious functional perception of the sixth level in the abstracting process obviously is forever on the unspeakable level, to speak of it is to distort it dreadfully. I will try it a little, but I will not continue if it does not work.)

          Let us refresh our respective minds, clearly and carefully respecting the fragmentation relative to the fourth level in the abstracting process — the one in isolation. By reason of the fact that the psychic nature in each is developed from formulation received through sense faculties, the consciousness in the psychic nature cannot function ‘beyond’ the level of phenomena, whether images appearing substantive or phenomena where there are no images appearing substantive. In this classification of images having no substantive referent, we include all of the reifications, hypostitizations of words, because the concept, inference, assumption, opinion, etc., on the mental level abstracted from the value given to a sign, the word, or symbol, etc., constitutes phenomena on the mental level. Relative to the consciousness on the mental level, a concept becomes comparable to an image appearing substantive on the emotional level, because in the final analysis the image appearing substantive is also a concept, a formulation, a picture, an image. So, as picture, as image, there is very little variation from concept, opinion, inference or assumption.

          Now by reason of the fact that they are so classified, inferences, assumptions, etc. are considered as phenomena, then whether the image appears substantive or not we are still in the realm of phenomena, that is, consciousness is still functioning in the psychic nature, which reflects the Light source and creates a multiplicity of fragments.

          Now upon that basis, we can account for the multiplicity or how the one becomes many, but as we move ‘forward’, ‘upward’ on the ascending arc through the process of unification, or synthesis, we rise ‘beyond’, ‘behind’, etc., the psychic nature in which a higher synthesis not only can be perceived, but in which the individual functions, and this consciousness of oneness ‘beyond’ phenomena (whether concepts, opinions, etc. of the mental level or images appearing substantive, etc.) becomes a higher synthesis, a conscious participation and a conscious functioning in a higher synthesis — in the abstracting process represented by the sixth level, the sixth order, the sixth root race (if we use the terminology of root race as indicative of a state of consciousness on the time-line of a given individual, and because these terms have been used for thousands of years in the teachings of the Orient, it is just as well for us to correlate these terms with the abstracting process which we use today — instead of these undefined, undescribed terms, it puts a foundation under the terms). So, the fourth root race state of development, is represented on our Structural Differential as the fourth level or order in the abstracting process; the fifth root race and its divisions, the beginning of synthesis, the beginning of the return to consciousness of oneness, is represented by the fifth order or level in the abstracting process; and now with this lesson we are moving on to the sixth level which on our Structural Differential represents membership in the sixth root race, or represents conscious functioning beyond the psychic nature.

          Now, on that level how does the synthesis appear to the consciousness? Having now no sense faculties to operate on that level, consequently no phenomena — because all phenomena becomes relative to consciousness in the psychic nature which has been developed out of sense faculty — has been abstracted from sense faculty reports. How can one having no faculty ‘beyond’ the psychic nature or limited to reports through the sense faculties, grasp a synthesis respecting that level? Only by analogy could description be made. Let us try.

          In a given electromagnetic field many waves and frequencies can operate without interference one with another, and the field could be described as an inertial system. The term inertial used here, means that irrespective of the multiplicity of movements within the field, the field is not moved thereby. Electrical engineers have employed this ‘law’ by sending many messages over the same wire without one interfering with another, because of the ‘space’, sending each message on the same frequency simultaneously on the same wire, and one message does not interfere with the other. It is only when synchronizing the same wave length in the same field that they will clash and break up each other. That is one analogy.

          Here is another analogy that is purely an imaginative word picture, it has no existence anywhere that is known. Let us give this word picture, remembering that it is wholly imaginative as referent, as analogy, and if you can refer it to the Reality, it will hold true, even though in the objective manifold it is purely imaginative. Let us imagine a transparent man, and when we look ‘at’ him, we look ‘through’ him simultaneously, and we not only look ‘at’ him and ‘through’ him simultaneously, we look ‘in’ him. So, we look ‘at’, we look ‘through’ and look ‘in’ — all simultaneously. Now, as we look ‘at’ — he is an individual with separate individualized powers, functions, duties, commissions, abilities, that pertain to him; but as we see those individual powers that pertain to him, we are looking ‘through’ him, and as we look ‘through’ him, we see series upon series of differentiations embodied in him, represented in him. He appears separate as we look ‘at’. As we look ‘through’, he seems to be the focalization of an infinite range of differentiated fields and Beings. As we look ‘at’ and ‘through’, we then focus and look ‘in’, and we see that he is component of many Beings, differentiations, ‘below’ what we look at, and ‘beyond’ what we look at, and we see the many differentiated fields in the one we are looking at. We stand in utter and complete awe at the synthesis, the oneness and the many-ness; now, on this level becoming two levels for the one ‘thing’, because it doesn’t make any difference as we look ‘at’, as we look ‘through’, and look ‘in’, whether we say one or whether we say many. It means the same to our perception, to our function and to his functioning. So, we don’t know what to say, and we invent a term: one-many, or reverse it, many-one — one-many/ many-one — right there to our perceptive insight and to our functional consciousness, and we have a grand synthesis, sixth order in the abstracting process, because we haven’t abstracted the one from the many, and we haven’t abstracted many from one. Synthesis respecting that form of abstracting belongs to the fifth order in the abstracting process. Now, we have crossed over and synthesized many and one, or one and many, not verbalistically, mentally, but functionally, perceptually, there is it. We can look through and see the vast ranges of differentiations focused there in him, and we look in, and see that he is component of quite a range of differentiations ‘below’ and ‘above’ what we look at, and we have a synthesis in mind substance, sans sense faculty and psychic nature, and no phenomena — actual, real, not an appearance.

          So, we have moved on to a description of the sixth level in the abstracting process.

April 6, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 36

 

          You may have noticed that in giving the abstracting process under the heading of general semantics respecting our outline, I confined myself to the esoteric use of the Structural Differential. The application of the Structural Differential to linguistic structures would represent the exoteric application. That has been given in our literature and in our lessons which were prepared for general circulation for the general student. The careful student of the presentation as given in the School of the Natural Order will, of course, familiarize himself with that exoteric use of the Structural Differential and correlate it with these lessons representing the esoteric phase in description of the same Structural Differential.

          Now, there are many points still remaining which should be amplified; they were suggested here and there in course of describing various other aspects, for instance, the phenomenon of space, the phenomenon of time. But I felt that these phases which needed amplification had been given and the brief references made to those phases would be sufficient to link them up. For instance, again, as on the fourth level in the abstracting process, space is always separated from time and time is always separated from space, and treated separately; whereas on the fifth level in the abstracting process, time and space are united, or space is united with time by adding another coordinate to the three coordinates defining space; so, as transition is made from one order in the abstracting process to another order in the abstracting process, wherein space becomes united with time, in the transition from the fifth order in the abstracting process to the sixth, the many and the one are similarly united and no longer appear separately, because in the fifth level in the abstracting process they are treated on the conceptual level as separate; the one in some way or other undefined and undescribed is the creator of the multiplicity, whether the referent for the word multiplicity means ‘thing’ and ‘object’, configuration of units of energy or differentiated fields, the multiplicity is always separated in thought, that means on the thought level. That is to say, to reiterate, the many is always considered separately from the one or the one is considered separately from the many, but on the sixth level they are united and we have one-many or many-one, because with perceptive insight on the mind level they are seen as one and never separate.

          Incidentally in that seeing, the unity of the many and the one in one act of consciousness, the entire mystery of Avidya, of maya, of the ignorance, etc., is clearly understood; there is no more mystery how the one becomes many, how in any ‘given’ of the many, the one in its totality, inheres as the essential nature of that ‘given’.

          Much of this requires amplification, but this is an outline and in all of these respects I was under the necessity to confine myself to the barest outline.

          Now, again the briefest mention was made of the seventh level in the abstracting process. The reason for this brevity or casual reference was due to the difficulty in adequately representing that level in or with the spoken or written word, and yet that has been described in previous lessons as the Plenum, the ‘solidity of time’. The Greeks had a word for it, which is translated into the English language as solid, and as we say ‘time’, we have reference to the three coordinates respecting time and when these are united with the three coordinates by which space is known or described, we have a point of ultimate or absolute rest.

          Allegorically, the seventh level in the abstracting process represents the end of the cycle of creation expressed: “And God saw the six days of creation and that it was good and upon the seventh day he rested.” So, the seventh level in the abstracting process is absolute rest, which means, no motion; that means no time, and space has long since disappeared in time, and time, meaning motion, has ceased and a period of rest, the seventh day. See how recondite the subject, how difficult to adequately portray on the mental level (which means the written or spoken word)? So, it is better to treat it casually, knowing that in due process the mind level will be reached by each, knowing that it is inevitable, because the natural order characterized by its own rhythms, expands the consciousness to the point of complete and absolute rest, and upon that inevitability we can confidently rest. And so with the reference to the seventh order in the abstracting process we rest from our description of the abstracting process.

          Now, in our outline we move on and take up the description of the autonomous field, the pattern and the configuration. This item was placed under the general item of general semantics in the outline; it was so placed because until the mind level is reached where alone — that is only upon that level — it can be perceived, it must remain in the category of meanings abstracted, that is, it belongs to general semantics insofar as it pertains to meanings to which value is given; on the mind level it doesn’t pertain to meaning and to which no value is given; on the mind level there is complete reversal of roles, it is that which creates meaning and the master thereof and doesn’t abstract from significance, meanings, etc. But so long as the consciousness of a given individual functions in the process of abstraction, it belongs to general semantics, therefore I put it under that heading.

          Out of instruction, lessons, reading of the wisdom teachings, descriptions of the one and the many, etc., meaning is created, that meaning abstracted from your teachings, lessons, readings, research work, etc., the study of the wisdom teachings, the Gnosis, etc., the gleanings in the Quest, an abstraction is made respecting the autonomous field or the labels which are given — Atma, Atman. If we could say, I AM represents a label — I AM THAT that I AM and this is my name throughout all generations, the word name there means label. So, I dare say, we could put I AM, like in our mantra — the I AM which is my true Self is the power (the “is” of identity used twice, and should be used) — as a label along with the label autonomous field.

          How are we going to describe that which we label the autonomous field? Only by analogy; there is no other way, and perhaps I should qualify that remark — insofar as my limitations extend I can conceive of no other way to describe it except by analogy. One should emphasize that it will not always rest respecting description, verification, etc., upon the use of analogy; the use of analogy is in the nature of concession to those who haven’t as yet developed the faculty of immediate and direct experience, functional consciousness or perception, because the perception precedes the experience and functional consciousness in identity with the autonomous field, therefore, it will not always rest upon the use of analogy for verification. But in description, so far as I can see, it must rest upon analogy.

          Now, it has been implied that anyone, everyone, can know it, experience it, become consciously identified with it, which is true; and it is true and verifiably so, by those who have experienced it; it is true for everyone by reason of the fact that the very sense faculties with which he now functions and the faculties or faculty of the psychic nature with which he abstracts, creates opinions, concepts, draws conclusions from the functions of the sense faculties which he now has and uses, both these — the sense faculties and the faculties of the psychic nature — with which he abstracts from functional operations, reports, or sense faculties, are merely adumbrations, incipient evidences, reflections, etc., of a prototype respecting each. The prototype of these sense faculties and psychic faculties which are employed in the abstracting process respecting sense faculty reports, constitutes the structure of the autonomous field.

          When the mind level is reached the prototype is relabeled Archetype, the Arche; the reason for that is obvious; only when consciousness is consciously or unconsciously identified with the sense faculty and/or the psychic nature faculty which operates upon the function of the sense faculties, abstracts therefrom, makes inferences, conclusions, like action/reaction, ad infinitum, so long as the consciousness is identified with that whole ensemble, that process, the creative origin of those faculties is referred to as prototype. But once what heretofore has been called the prototype represents the consciousness, that means to say, the consciousness becomes identified with the prototype, then the sense faculty and the reaction faculty both recede and ultimately disappear, and the archetype of all potentiality is the label which is given to these faculties on the mind level.

          The awakening of the prototype of the sense faculties, the awakening of the prototypes of the psychic faculties or reaction to sense faculties, represents expansion of consciousness on the mind level or in the autonomous field; so the description of the autonomous field is by analogy; the analogy was sense faculty and reaction. That is more immediate to each individual, gives him something to lay hold of. “I see.” What did he see? Take the allegorical story of the man that was born blind and the Master restored his sight and the aristotelians (I mean the Pharisees) were striving to “get” something on the Master, because of threatening their control of the blind, and so these aristotelians questioned the man whose sight was restored. He said, “I don’t know. The only thing I do know, wherefore I was blind, now I see.” That is a wonderful allegorical story, because it has the meaning of the prototype, and that is why the story was told, because one never knows how utterly blind he is until he “sees”; then he is appalled at his stupidity, ignorance and blindness, and he thought he saw all the time. All he can say when that great faculty is awakened, “Heretofore I was blind, now I see.”

          Now it is by these analogies that we must describe the autonomous field.

 

Question: For autonomous field, could we say: a specific differentiation of fundamental sentient power?

 

Answer: Provided we set up a referent. Without the referent for sentient, in struggling to set up a referent, you are going to use analogy.

 


 

April 7, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 37

 

          In creating a mental construct of the autonomous field or differentiated field which we label the higher Self, the true Self, the Christ consciousness, Atma or Atman, etc., we must resort to analogy and I have found through years of struggling with this creating of a mental concept, a mental construct, that the use of an electromagnetic field serves the purpose admirably — at least better than anything I have been able to get on to.

          If I do not draw a diagram of the positive and negative poles of an electromagnetic field on a chart or blackboard, showing lines of force flowing, as it were, from positive to negative, and from negative to positive, I will get a good cut of it in some book on electricity or physics and will pass it around and have each of the class look at the cut or diagram of the electromagnetic field.

          Where possible I will resort to demonstration with magnets, where the strength of the field can be observed on the objective level. By taking the magnets in the hands, one can experience the pull, the force, the power of the magnet.

          After these demonstrations, etc., I will say: you cannot see it with your physical eyes; you cannot hear it with your physical ears; you cannot bite it, and you cannot feel it with your sense of touch; yet IT IS, beyond peradventure of doubt.

          When you have sufficiently stressed the pull of the magnets, just say: magnify the power of that pull which is experienced between the earth and the moon. It has been scientifically and carefully worked out mathematically that the power of this pull between the earth and moon is so great that it would simultaneously break every steel cable, eleven inches in diameter, attached to each square foot of one hemisphere of the earth. The imagination of man cannot conceive the power between those two poles. What must be the power between the sun of our solar system and the earth? What must be the power between the whole solar system, one pole, and the galaxy, the other pole? The power is incomprehensible. Give all the labels you want to; what difference does it make about the labels; call it Atman, Brahma, Theos, God. What do we care about the labels. It is the power.

          We must not dissociate ourselves from that power. We go right back to the individual; the sacral-conarial axis represents the two poles of the individual field in this power house, our field. So, we have fields within fields. Everything today in scientific studies can be and is described in terms of these fields. The one who, in scientific circles, attempts any other description would be at once relegated to the dodos, he is not a modern scientist or physicist.

          Now the scientist has oriented thought to these fields, spheres and fields or spheres within ever receding infinite fields and spheres.

          But when we direct attention to the individual, the sacral-conarial axis as fundamental to the structure of the individual as an individual — that means, autonomous, the moment we use the word, individual, we can substitute as a synonym, autonomous. That individual or autonomous field is relative only to the psychic nature and the objective manifold; he is autonomous relative to the objective manifold; he is autonomous relative to the psychic nature; he is not autonomous relative to the differentiated fields ‘beyond’ him, he is integrated in them. We drop the word autonomous and we use the word integrated.

          In the ascending scale or expansion of consciousness of Self, of one’s own individual field, he soon loses any point of referent respecting himself as individual; it is just absorption of interest, not absorption of being.

          Now we resort to analogy. One may read an exciting book — the beautiful heroine is caught by bad men and is about to be lost, then comes the hero almost too late — and the pot on the stove burns dry and you don’t know it and the stew is burned up. That is absorption of interest. It is the same; you were not absorbed, but your interest was absorbed. Remember that. This is one of the ancient problems — whether the ocean drinks the drop, or the drop drinks the ocean. You must go back to consciousness — what is it absorbed in? So, consciousness becomes absorbed, and we call that expansion from the individualized state to the universalized state — or if you want the Sanskrit word, Ishvara. That means that absorption where you forgot the stew on the stove — you forgot yourself. See how simple it is? One can meditate and function in it and see and hear it like angels singing all the time. You can hear it and you can taste it, believe it or not. You can touch it; it seems more solid than a concrete thing.

          These are the prototypal faculties, the Archetypal faculties, the Arche that has developed. How? By directing the force to the mind level, to the field. Those faculties develop and you don’t have anything to do with it except keep the force directed. It is like planting here on this place; we plant the seed in the womb, the mother, or we set a little plant in the mother; we water and nourish and have nothing else to do. How? By the nature; “by my nature, O Arjuna, by my nature” it does it.

          Give the force, and the nature does the rest and you don’t have to do anything else. The more you can stay out of its way, the better; It knows what IT is doing and you don’t. Stay out of ITs way, and by ITs nature IT will do it.

          Who took care of you through the aeons when you didn’t have a mind with which to think? During this little period when you have a mind with which to think, you just mess things up. But It goes on and on.

          If you cannot get understanding, then fortify yourself with faith and confidence. Of course, above all other things, understanding is preferable. Look back to those illustrations of the feeling and thinking of that mighty power. So mighty is that power that this objective universe, solar systems, and island universes can be held in the “hollow of ITs hand”. That is trying to show how much greater that power is than all these planets and solar systems, and the individual on the pond, like submicroscopic amoeba in the slime of the pond, and these little amoeba in the slime on the pond raise their little heads and try to think! And all these island universes could be held in the “palm of the hand”, and hardly notice it, so great is that power. And yet everyone and everything is integrated in that (don’t make a mental construct ‘out there’); even the little amoeba has reached the molecular level, because it functions as a single cell. So, its structure is the mighty atom, and it has mighty power locked up in its atomic structure.

          The thing to do is to learn to think in terms of fields, like the modern physicists, until you lose ability to think with or in any other terms — that is, you lose the ability to become emotional in the psychic nature, and to abstract from images appearing substantive, you forget to do that. Why? Because you are orienting your thoughts to thinking in terms of differentiated fields in this mighty power; then you think of yourself as a field having two poles relative to your field; then when sight and hearing and the other archetypal faculties begin to function, which they will, you become so absorbed in what you feel and hear, and the sense of taste and touch, that from then on no one will have to persuade you; the interest becomes so fascinating you are just drawn like the power magnets draw to each other.

          But to get over that hump, to break this identity in the objective manifold — that is, you surrender renounce, you give up, you become disintegrated, you become nothing in nothing in order to become all in all. You die to be born. “Except a man give up his life” — that is, the objective manifold orientation — “he has no part in me.”

          We are supposed to build a mental construct of the autonomous field, the individual or differentiated field which represents the true Self, the true individual (and if I make my connection for the record’s sake at least), after one has demonstrated, illustrated, diagrammed, etc., an electromagnetic field showing the two poles and the lines of force making a sphere (always), then turn the attention to the sacral-conarial axis, as those two poles of a given individual field and the lines of force between those two poles constitute the field of the individual.

          Now, we can resort again to modern science, even a little understanding of quantum mechanics. We can refer everything to a little understanding of the quantum theory which is now passed the stage of theory, due to Albert Einstein’s work which has been proved sufficiently on empirical grounds and has been accepted as a fact.

          What does even a little study of quantum description reveal to us? That these lines of force in any given field eddy; the lines of force eddy. Each eddy of each line represents a quantum energy; they call that emergent energy. The number of eddies on a given line of force of a given field is called quanta and all of the eddies of each of the lines of force of a given field, while called quanta, are also called configurations. These are labels. So, a configuration merely represents quanta of eddies of the lines of force of a given field. So far we are on ‘solid’ empirical, scientific grounds.

          Now the question is asked by the scientists (it can be proposed by anyone) — what determines the position on the lines of force in a given field where the eddies occur? Scientists up to this date, are silent, but in their silence about the answer, they will say, entropy, a factor of probability.

          Now the scientists have also established that there is a rhythm. They do not employ the word, teleos, which is a Greek term meaning the fundamental, dominant, perfect rhythm. Teleos means perfect, basic, fundamental.

          The scientists have established that those eddies occur on a given line of force in a given field in a perfect rhythm. Again the question can be asked — whose rhythm? What rhythm?

          Now we have to leave science in the mental construct of the autonomous field, in the undifferentiated power. Remember it is a mental construct only. Now we go right to the wisdom teaching, the ancient teachings. We frankly confess that we are going to employ the terms of the ancient wisdom about the answer. To begin this answer and fit it into the mental construct that we are creating about the autonomous field, we preface whatever we say with the statement that every individualized field, every autonomous field exhibits sentience (in the wisdom teachings, the Gnosis, Light and consciousness are synonymous). At this point where you introduce the sentient concept into your mental construct, resort to modern embryology.

          Gustaf Stromberg shows how the autonomous field exhibits consciousness in the cellular structural organization of a given embryo, and how all the cells are the same, and that they enter a very narrow aperture in the embryonic process. As each cell enters, it is changed from the sameness, undifferentiatedness to specialized work, specialized labor, and it is as though the cell has been given orders and goes to its position. It is changed from undefined, undifferentiated sameness into specialized work in the histological structure of the embryonic development. That is resorting, in your mental construct to a substantiation of your introduction of the term consciousness, sentient. The field is consciousness, it is sentient. Or to eliminate the “is” of identity — that which is called the field is also called consciousness, etc. Light, which we have already established as the basis of energy in the quantum studies, now is used synonymously with the word consciousness, or sentient nature of the field.

          There are various other ways whereby you can establish this fact that the field is sentient, that it is consciousness or exhibits consciousness. Generally at this point I bring in the power-to-be-conscious. With what power do you feel, with what power do you act? There evidently is a power, or you would not think, feel or act.

          I bring that in to establish only one point — that that autonomous field labeled the true Self, the higher Self, of any given individual in its essential nature is sentient; it can be labeled consciousness. Then we correlate that with the quantum theory in science, how light is converted into energy, and the quanta of energy representing the configuration in the lines of force of the field. I am trying to tie these two together, and they do tie without strain; they coalesce beautifully. Then we have on empirical, scientific grounds the basis for our mental construct of the autonomous field.

          On the grounds of the wisdom teaching we introduce the label by which the field has been called from time immemorial — the Atman. At this point I am going to read you an article that was sent to me. One has to be illustrious in the racial manifold of values before the newspapers will publish what he has to say.

          “Einstein’s new field theory may make possible a better understanding of the spiritual

          “‘I wouldn’t be surprised if Einstein is on the track of a logical method to unite science and religion,’ said Gerald Eldridge Stedman, a holiday visitor to the Santa Barbara Biltmore, veteran writer on scientific and industrial subjects.

          “‘Heretofore we have regarded science as a purely material concept,’ he said. ‘This new theory takes it out of the material and into the realm of the infinite.’

          “Stedman is a field editor of 23 national industrial and scientific publications and a contributor to 43.

“He is here with his wife, Margaret Stedman, fictionist, associate editor of ‘Highway Traveler’ and photographer of note who illustrates her husband’s articles.

          “The now famous theory, Stedman said, ‘tends to unite electro-magnetism and gravity and in the realms of theoretic physics has tended to remove chance which was one of the weaknesses of the quantum theory.

          “‘If Einstein is right, it is safe to assume that there is no such thing as matter; that, after all, matter is energy.’

          “Stedman commented on a news dispatch from Tucson in which a prominent scientist gave further credence to the ‘life on Mars’ theory.

          “‘It’s a mark of extreme conceit on the part of the human being to think that he and the earth are the only things in the universe,’ he said.

          “In Stedman’s opinion, Einstein’s new field theory substantiates the view of ‘Universal life’ as humans think of life; that ‘there is an infinity of life on an infinity of planets because there’s an infinity of energy which can make an infinity of anything.

          “‘If you remove the sense of matter you base your reasoning on the sense of energy which has no dimensions,’…

          There is where he slipped badly — we know the dimension in which the differentiated field may be described.

          “He believes that Einstein’s theory is ‘probably the most amazing deduction, perhaps of all time,’ particularly because of its philosophic connotations.

          “In other words, it is almost possible to say that there is no reality; we only think there is. It almost removes all sense of physical being.

          “‘From a philosophical standpoint it’s an endless sort of thing. We can justify the reality of the infinite. The great philosophers can say that there was an infinity of time in the past as there will be in the future.’

          “And what of the more practical aspects of the theory? ‘It’s an entirely new concept,’ he says. ‘It changes considerably the constants of mathematics of theoretical physics.’

          “He believes that if we had had the theory five or ten years ago it would probably have eliminated the fears that aircraft engineers had of piercing the sonic wall. ‘It would have saved a good deal of mathematical conjecture and time in design.’”

          I wanted to read this for only one point: in the ordinary public press, they are giving recognition on that level to the fact that there isn’t anything, really nothing, except the energy world and its differentiating fields. This is a wholesome sign, when it gets down to the level of the newspapers giving recognition that there isn’t anything else except the energy world and its differentiating fields. That is significant; straws in the wind, as referred to in a previous lesson.

 


 

April 10, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 38

 

          We come now to the second division of the description of the autonomous field — the pattern characterizing each field.

          This description, of necessity, must be given from the conceptual level, but that which is described is far removed from the conceptual level, and that dichotomy imposes a great difficulty; the difficulty is so great that it seems presumptuous, if not foolish, to attempt a reduction of the pattern of a given field to the conceptual level. There is another difficulty; there is nothing on the conceptual level which lends itself as a referent, even when we resort to analogy, which we have to use in order to adequately frame a mental construct. There is very little that is useable as analogy, so when we face the vast discrepancy between the two levels and appraise the difficulties, there is only one resort which justifies the effort, and that can be expressed as talking around and around about the point — the pattern in this case — and trust to the hearer or reader to pick up the frequency of that which we are talking about, intuitively apprehend it, and in that apprehension disregard the words. If it were not for that resort, personally speaking, I would feel helpless to try to adequately describe the pattern of any autonomous field.

          The level that we are talking about is labeled the Logos, and to use Plato’s description of the Logos, it is the Ideational World, or the world of Pure Idea. Here is a case in point of the difficulty — the moment the Idea is mentioned we think of concepts. Between the world of Pure Idea and the concept — meaning the concept level — there obtains a dual reflection, so that the concept becomes a reflection of a reflection, which reflection represents the Idea. In words that means nothing — bla, bla about tra, tra — I confess it.

          The first reflection of the Idea is the psychic nature; the second reflection is the representation of the content of the psychic nature. And the highest level of that second reflection is the mental level; the lowest of that second reflection is the image appearing substantive from which the ideas, concepts are abstracted, and further, outside of which, conceptual function cannot operate. We have the concepts which are labeled variously — opinions, information, assumptions and substantive images, which means the objective world; the conceptual thinking cannot function outside of such bases, premises, whether ‘below’ or ‘above’; ‘below’ in the sense of feelings, instincts, psychic then vanishes — submental rapports, submental readings, submental awareness and which for the most part the submental attribute to something higher, because it is out of the ken of the objective referent, and these psychics, submentals, whether they label it subconscious or unconscious or spirit world contacts, etc. always delude themselves that it belongs to the ‘spiritual’ simply because there is no objective referent. They think it lies back of or hidden or other-than, etc. Above the conceptual level we enter the world of frequency registration outside of, beyond the psychic nature. So, that leaves the conceptual concept method of functioning isolated and relative to the basis from which abstractions are made, and out of which concepts are born, and we can label that basis, premise — images appearing substantive or the objective world. If you are talking to an aristotelian use the term objective world; if you are talking to a non-aristotelian use the term or label, image appearing substantive, the phenomena.

          The danger of confusion of describing the pattern, the Logos, the Ideational world, Plato’s world of Pure Idea, on the conceptual level and by means of the conceptual level, causes the vast majority of those who perceive and understand it to remain silent. The point is the danger; it causes them to remain silent; that is why so little clarity is given anywhere respecting the Logos; it remains one of those undefined, undescribed factors of conception. They remain silent for another reason: anyone who has the perception and therefore the understanding of the pattern — the Logos, the Demiurge, the Grand Architect or the Arche, etc. — knows that in due time the individual will arrive at the perception and will know without thinking, without concepts, and so he is content to wait until the individual himself has arrived — arrived means developed the faculties with which the clear perception is gained. Notwithstanding, all these difficulties, dangers, fools will rush in, so here is a fool going to rush in and will talk about it.

          Brahama, the Pure Being is completely isolated in his world, in his consciousness until something is developed by which contact can be effected. The Orientals from remote antiquity have said he was lonesome and wanted to play, but he didn’t have anything to play against, like the analogy of the handball court. If one throws the ball and there isn’t anything the ball can strike, there is no game, there is no play. So, the wall had to be erected, something to hurl the ball against. So, Brahma was lonesome and wanted to play, and then the ancients went on to describe the lila, the dance of life, that everything is the play of Brahma, which means action. But there was a danger. One under blitz and maybe under atomic bombs, says, “Is this the play of Brahma, this war and tragedy?” Yet, we know that is only the maya. But what comfort does that give in the war, destruction, death and tragedy? You begin to see why they remain silent.

          The wonderful perceiving Greeks talked about the Gods on Mount Olympus and that they play ball; it was the medicine ball back and forth; that is their play, and the poor mortals down there under the cloud banks of maya can’t see any play in their war with the gods up on top of Mount Olympus playing ball.

          But they did say he was lonesome and wanted to play, so the wall was erected; the Idea was born. Out of what? Out of nothing? No — out of the consciousness or in the consciousness of Brahma, because without some ‘thing’ other than Pure Being, without a second, there was no consciousness. See the contradiction there? In the consciousness of Pure Being, there was no consciousness, because there is no second of which Pure Being can be conscious. So that unconsciousness is the sleep of Adam, and while he was asleep, a rib was pulled out of him and out of that rib the ‘other’ was fashioned. Idea was born as the negative to that positive. So, he had someone to play with and it has kept him busy ever since.

          He was called Adam-Eve and the original word for Adam was Jod, and Eve was, Hove — Jod-Hove — which has been twisted around down the ages and means Jehovah; Jod-Hove. Jehovah is a term representing the Pure Being and its Idea, not the Pure Being. So, we have the twain, which is the Logos, the reason for every ‘thing’ else which eventuates in the Light world and in the energy world, and is reflected in the phenomenal world, because it took the play between the positive and the negative. Without that play Pure Being — which means Adam — is asleep in Pralaya.

          Now, the play is what we call the pattern of a given field; the play between the creating Self and its Idea — its not-self. In every subsequent differentiation this becomes repeated until in our mental concept, our mental construct, we can visualize a series of differentiated fields. Each field represents a conversion of Light, which means consciousness into energy; energy here is a term for the play, for the activity by reason of the fact that in the undifferentiated Light there is no activity; it is a constant, no motion; therefore, no time and no space, no activity. The simple formula becomes endlessly repeated so that it can be said of any given differentiated field (which means autonomous) — the union of the positive-negative gave birth to the son, the configuration; so that in any given field we have a trinity, which is a replica (not a reflection, a replica), a duplication of the original imagination out of Pure Being. That Pure Being is the Son — the only Begotten — there is no other; all subsequent differentiations meaning “all power is given unto the Son.”

          Down on our conceptual level and in our mental construct, we could visualize a vast differentiated field of Light and we could visualize subsequent differentiations of spheres or fields, until we could step it down and say one differentiated field represents the totality of the galaxy; then we could step it down to where we could say, one differentiated field would represent the totality of galaxy and island universes. We could step it on down in a mental construct, and could point to one differentiated field in that first differentiation, Brahma, Pure Being, until we could point to that one and say a given galaxy; and then we could imagine subsequent spheres within spheres and fields within fields and we could point to another one and say this represents a given solar system, and imagine all of these as a spiraling process, each rung of spirals representing a differentiation from the preceding rung of the spiral; then in respect to that particular rung of the spiral that we could point to in a mental construct and say this one represents a solar system. Keep on spiraling within that spiral and get down and say this represents a planet; and as we keep on spiraling, we could say this one represents the atomic world, nothing but atoms, relative to that particular level. Then we could go on with the spiral and point and say this is the molecular world, and then the unicellular, and keep on spiraling and you might get it down to a given individual and say, it is the I AM that I AM, the individual field linked, integrated in the whole process that we call cosmic. And by the way, that word cosmic, has changed in its connotation; originally it only meant order. They say chaos means disorder, and cosmos means order; that is the original referent for the term cosmos.

          Now, we are applying the word to the vastness of manifestation, phenomena. The vastness of phenomena we say cosmos, and originally it meant order. Here is the order, the cosmos described.

          As we take the journey into the understanding, functional awareness, or awareness of the function of this process that we label cosmic, we must of necessity begin with that which is accessible; namely, one’s own differentiated field; that means one’s real Self. Here we are dealing with the basic, the fundamental. One’s own real field, one’s own real Self is accessible; there isn’t anything else that is accessible by and through direct experience. There are many barriers existing between a given individual and any ‘thing’ else, meaning phenomena. There are also many barriers between a given individual and any other field — that means any other individual. Those barriers are the mediums by which he appraises, knows there is another — like the sense faculties in the phenomenal level; those sense faculties are the mediums upon which everyone depends to have access to phenomena. So, there is a barrier between, and that barrier is between every one and every ‘thing’ — it is between every field and every other field.

          Out of the whole range of both phenomena and differentiated fields — that means individual Beings — there is only one that is accessible to experience, that is one’s own field, one’s own Self. At the very beginning of the developing consciousness of the Reality which we call taking the journey, is the transfer of consciousness from identity with all the phenomenal aspects thereof, that is of his consciousness; transfer the identity from all phenomenal aspects of his consciousness to the consciousness with which he thinks, feels, desires, acts; that is, become identified with the power with which he is conscious, become identified with his own field.

          In that identity that we are talking about, there is the possibility of expanding to that rung of the spiraling of which his field is a differentiation. You quickly and readily appreciate that you could not go to that next rung of the spiraling process as described except in and through and by reason of complete identity with your own field. Then having attained that expansion of consciousness into that field of which your field is a differentiation, you can readily see the next step and the next step and so on, ad infinitum, until the greatest of the great speaking to the greatest of the great that we can contact through the greatest of their great disciples, say no one as yet knows the end; it is too illimitable, but that we are in the process of expanding yet.

          Now, this gives us the pattern of the cosmic process. This is as well or as clearly as your present speaker can make a mental construct of that cosmic pattern. We have narrowed the description of the pattern down to the basis upon which specific fields and their patterns can be described, and in our tomorrow morning’s lesson we will come out of the mental construct of the cosmic process and its pattern to the description of the pattern of a given field and how it operates.

 


 

April 11, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 39

 

          As was stated in the previous lesson, we have now focused the Archetypal pattern down to the individualized field, and in this lesson we will continue by describing the archetypal pattern relative to a given individual field; and we will take up along with it, the description of the configurating energy; they will be treated together.

          To understand the archetypal pattern of a given individual field, we must resort first to the time-line. That has been described as a movement motivated by Idea-awareness or the Logos which is described as the action of Brahma. The time-line constitutes the fourth coordinate by which consciousness eventuates in what is called growth, development, progress, etc. That fourth coordinate represents the expansion of consciousness from space identity — that is, identity with space. Now, in the higher philosophical realm of thought or knowledge, the identity of consciousness with space is a way of expressing the basis of maya; it is a philosophical way of describing identity with the image appearing substantive without the use of the aristotelian terms, objective, subjective, etc. When we say consciousness in objective identity, there remains a residue in the thought that the objective is some ‘thing’ with which identity is made; but in the world or on the level of pure, clear perception, to say identity with space leaves no residuum in the thought that the objective world is really some ‘thing’ with which consciousness has identified itself. That point was amply clarified in the previous lesson, where on analysis of a given ‘thing’ or ‘object’ we find space has disappeared; it disappears upon analysis and nothing except space is left — left where? An image in the consciousness. Once that is grasped, the entire basis upon which Avidya, maya, is developed is immediately seen, and then we can refer it to the Christian Scriptures, and to the statement wherein: “It is the lie and the Father of it”; once that difficulty has been surmounted — the difficulty in grasping it — then all of the ground has been cut out from under the feet of the novitiate and he must not from then on resort to any referent except to his consciousness. Until that is grasped, he will unconsciously resort to the image appearing substantive — that is, to space — for referent for any given point of evaluation. So, this constitutes an extremely valuable turning point in his orientation process. He begins to evaluate any ‘thing’, trivial or so-called serious or important, etc., from the basis of consciousness of the given individual. There is where individuals will vary, and no blanket evaluation, meaning rule, can be applied to any two individuals, and it cannot be applied to any given individual at different times; therefore, the dating of any statement, of any opinion, of any assumption, or any attitude has ‘solid’ grounds, validity, because the evaluation will change with the same individual at different times. So, what is predicated or stated about a given individual in 1920 cannot be stated about that individual in 1940, etc.

          The moment that resort is made for referent to the consciousness of a given individual at a given date, at once we are confronted with the point on his time-line. There is vague reference to this point on the time-line when the “elder son” and the “younger son” is spoken of in the parable of the Prodigal Son. Vague reference is again made when mention is made to the older ‘soul’ and the younger ‘soul’, because recognition is given to the varying points on the time-line.

          This same consideration becomes the basis for the conception of the brotherhood of man, and destroys all the false conception of equality respecting the brotherhood of man. The term brotherhood in the light of this understanding comprehends a wide range from babies to adults, with the adults spoken of as Adepts having the consciousness of responsibility for the babies in the brotherhood of humanity. No objective reference can be given to such a conception of a brotherhood.

          Many other vast and far-reaching programs, like educational systems, economic systems, leadership principles, who should be the leaders, etc., are vastly affected by this understanding. And the caricature, almost the vitiation, of those principles can be so readily observed when this is not understood; even the problem of political institutions is involved and the merits of democracy, constitutional monarchies, etc. So, for proper evaluation in respect to all of these, clarity of perception respecting the archetypal level becomes not only practical but absolutely essential.

          But when we resort to the consciousness and how it has identified itself with space and ‘things’ in terms of consciousness, and its states, special or otherwise, we have to again focus upon the point on the time-line; as in respect to a given individual at a given time, or to different individuals at the same time, proper evaluation becomes impossible without accurately placing the point on the time-line.

          Now, it is not the province of this lesson to review those lessons describing the time-line; the mention of them is sufficient for a student to resort to those lessons respecting the description of the time-line if the understanding wavers respecting its position in this lesson. (So, refresh your memory on those lessons given about the time-line. They were exhaustive and adequate.)

          In order to describe the individual archetypal pattern, we have to begin with the time-line and then the point on the time-line, because we will then focus the thought in the consciousness and its basic state. When the time factor is understood and grasped as-a-whole; that is, as a coordinate and added to the three coordinates of space, and in that grasping of the time coordinate and its addition to the three coordinates of space, all evaluation that was based upon the three coordinates of space become nullified. It would be comparable to a child adding a certain sum together, but in arranging his figures he unconsciously left one out and he added up the figures; the teacher says, “No, that is wrong; let us see what you did. You left one figure out; put that in.” All that he had added up previously was nullified by the introduction of another figure. So, it is when this time-line is grasped as a coordinate; it has been left out previously in all evaluations based upon space identifications; the moment it is put in, then all of the evaluations based upon the three coordinates of space are nullified; they were wrong — that is, they were “the lie and the father of it”.

          But with the addition of the fourth coordinate, we not only have the basis for proper evaluation, we have also the basis upon which the pattern of a given field can be described, because it is manifestly impossible to describe the pattern of a given individual field by leaving out the fourth coordinate, the time-line.

          I do not think it is necessary to direct your attention to the fact that there was a conception of time abstracted from the three coordinates of space. And obviously when we speak of the fourth coordinate as the time-line of consciousness of a given individual, there is no way it could be fitted into the time abstracted from the three previous spatial coordinates. We speak therefore of that time as arbitrary time, as sidereal time (space); that time doesn’t exist outside of the consciousness in spatial identity. With the perception of the time-line or the fourth coordinate, the arbitrary time, sidereal time or spatial time ceases. And as the consciousness grows into identity with itself on its time-line, for that individual it becomes increasingly difficult to orient, even to remember, eventuations respecting the former sidereal time, because he has a different time evaluation.

          The best way to describe this fourth coordinate, the time-line respecting a given individual upon which the movement called progress, expansion, growth, development, etc., proceeds is to use the words harmony, harmonic time. I have resorted to all sorts of over-simplified devices to present it; such as, when one is bored to the point that he is getting the teesy-weesies or something, it seems like the eventuation will never come to an end and it may be only ten to fifteen minutes in arbitrary time. But in sidereal time, it seems endless. When an event is interesting, an hour or more seems like no time at all, and we get the idea of harmonic time. Left in a situation in which there is nothing but inharmony, and it seems an age; left in a situation in which everything is beautiful and harmonious, and it seems like it is always “now”; no time connected with it.

          With these simple devices I have tried to present the idea of a different kind of time, to lead the thought into the consideration of the fourth coordinate, the time-line in which the movement of consciousness proceeds.

          Sufficient references to previous descriptions in the teachings have been given for us to now consider the archetypal pattern which is determined by the point on the time-line. Here we have the individual microcosmic field, a duplication — not a reflection — of the Idea-awareness as described in the Cosmic field. It was mentioned that after that description of the Idea-awareness was given that it was endlessly repeated, even to the ultimate differentiated field, which is the individual field. And now in the microcosmic Self we find it again, only this time instead of calling it the Idea-awareness, we call it the state; it is the state in which the differentiated or individualized field becomes aware of itself, which is determinative respecting the lines of forces of its field. This is so fundamental to the pattern respecting any given field that many gross misunderstandings and misinterpretations have been given to it. But even so, no matter how gross the misinterpretation or description or misunderstanding may be, the fundamental factor carries force even into the misinterpretation, and I will give you an illustration.

          There has been developed a quasi-system of thought, founded upon the basic statement that “man is the idea in the infinite mind; that nothing is real except the infinite mind and its idea,” etc. This is a gross misunderstanding, but so fundamental is the basis which is misunderstood, that there is force and power even in the misinterpretation of it. Follow me carefully and you can see vast difference between the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order and any system of thought based upon a statement, whether that statement is labeled a scientific statement or being, or any other label that might be given to it. That is, you will see the vast difference between the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order and any teaching resting upon and abstracted from the statement that “man is an idea in the infinite mind” or/and that there is “nothing except the infinite mind and its idea,” etc. When the statement is made that man, the real man, the real Self, the ‘spiritual’ man, etc., is an idea in the infinite mind or it is stated that nothing is real except the infinite mind and its idea, there is a complete elimination of the cosmic process. All of those factors, based upon a series of differentiations culminating in a given individualized differentiated field, are ignored. That eliminates a cosmic process.

          Now pragmatically speaking (that means, practically) it resorts to this: if what I am in my essential nature is an infinite mind, although the term infinite mind is merely a reified, hypostatized label (because there is no referent given for it), then whatever that label infinite mind represents or symbolizes, must think me over again. What can I do about it? All of that doctrine dovetails perfectly with Mohammedism — “It is the will of Allah; what it was to be; what will be is to be,” etc. No one can do anything; it is the will of Allah. Do you think that is exaggerated? Listen: man is the idea in the infinite mind — what can the idea do to change itself? because it is the infinite mind’s idea, not the man’s idea. So, if there is going to be any movement on a time-line it is the infinite mind that must change its idea — the will of Allah. The same doctrine, just different words; the same doctrine, philosophically speaking, because the whole cosmic process is ignored. There is no descending arc and no ascending arc; it is only infinite mind and its idea, and if the idea changes, the mind, whose idea it is, must effect some change. Then if that which is so-called infinite can change, the source, point in time of beginning (for any point in time of beginning presupposes an ending), the infinite mind could not exist at all, because of the factor of change. The doctrine becomes self-nullified.

          I could go on and on and elaborate that, but it is enough for you to relate it.

          Now, to the differentiated field that we call the individual, that is no idea in any reified infinite mind label; that is integrated, fundamental, basic, and as the individual differentiated field of light, of consciousness, of power, etc. it is the determinator of its state and its movement on its time-line. If you don’t think there is a vast difference, you have another thing coming, or you can’t understand philosophical language in philosophical levels. We are mortised and tendoned in the power, and when identity of consciousness is made with its own power, it determines the idea and therefore its patterns and configurations become representations of that pattern, the lines of force of which everyone says of himself, I AM the power, I AM the determinator, Surya is my name, the Ordainer. He, I AM; not an idea.

 


 

April 12, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 40

 

          We are describing the differentiated or autonomous field at length, but not exhaustively, by reason of the fact that the clear understanding of it and the position which it occupies in our mental construct gives significance to the work which will follow; namely, the individualizing process, because that entire individualizing process is merely the transference of consciousness from the phenomenal appearance to the psychic nature, from the psychic nature to the field. Then when consciousness is focused upon the field and grows into identity therewith, the individualizing process has become completed, we call that the entrance to the Real world, we call that the Door, the Gate, by reason of the fact that any given individual field is an epitomization of all the ascending spheres, fields, powers, beings, to the only Begotten, Brahma.

          Now it is that epitomization which a given individual field represents that constitutes that given field as the door, as the gate to all the realms in the energy world and in the light world. There is no way whereby the realms, the worlds which stand as representation of the pattern of the state, can be gained except through that which in its essential structure is the epitomization thereof. That is why it is said that only through the consciousness of the individual field can access be gained to those levels, powers, beings, worlds, etc. No man “cometh unto the Father (Brahma, who is the Begotten Son, but the Father of all differentiated fields), save by me”, the I AM which is my true Self. “He who attempts to go up some other way is a thief and a robber.” I do not know why that latter clause was put in that statement, because there is no other way known by virtue and by reason of the structure respecting states of consciousness. There should have been a qualifying word put in — attempts to be a thief and a robber. Because one cannot get out of the natural order or structure of that which we call Nature or Reality.

          That is not the whole or all the significance of understanding the position of the field in the mental construct. We cannot understand the psychic nature and its representation, the physiological organism, unless we understand the field and its pattern, because the field and its pattern is that upon which the psychic nature is built, as well as the determinative force, the Ordainer, the Ruler respecting the functions of consciousness in the psychic nature as well as in its building. So, we see two reasons for the understanding of the individual field and its pattern, because no adequate understanding can be gained respecting the psychic nature without the understanding of the field and its pattern. And no access can be had to the Devachanic level in the energy worlds and light world, except through the epitomization thereof. Therefore, the whole burden of effort, short of conscious identity with the field, focuses upon gaining that conscious identity and nothing else. It narrows down to the one factor that all effort, whether unconscious or conscious, tends toward and culminates in the consciousness of the individual field, the power with which one is conscious, with which he thinks, feels and acts. After that identity, the burden of effort changes into functional participation in the creative world. Changes in the pattern of the field are represented by what is called progress on the time-line, no matter how slight the change might be in the lines of force in the pattern; three dimensionally described it could be indicated as advancement in time which series of advancements would represent the line, a spiraling line that we call the time-line. And the spiraling process is that which is labeled the palingenetic cycle; it is relative only to the field and not to consciousness in objective identity; it is a misnomer and misunderstanding of the palingenetic cycle that a given individual as he is known to himself and to others ever returns. He never returns; he disappears forever, on the grounds that he never existed. That is where we read the shadows and attribute extensionality to the shadows; it is a false attribution. So, there is no such thing as reincarnation as such — that John Doe as he is known will return.

          But the field, whose pattern finds representation through the psychic nature, endures and in its cyclic process again will focus its consciousness with what changes that might be effected — progress and the result thereof — will again bring out its representation — that is, bring out the psychic nature and in turn the psychic nature will bring out its representation; a double reflection. But that is a process relative to the individual field and we could call that the rhythm of the field, the pulse beat of the field (birth-death; death-birth); it pulsates, rhythmically, and those pulse beats of the field — outbreathing and inbreathing, to use the analogy — represent its cyclic process on its time-line and have nothing to do with the building of the psychic nature as the reflection of the pattern, and have nothing to do with the physiological organism as a representation or a reflection of the psychic nature — and yet it has everything to do with it. Here is one of those paradoxes, because it is the Determinator, the Ruler, the Ordainer, the Controller, the Power by which it is done and we can reconcile the paradox by using the motion picture projection machine (which I have used for 40 years to try to get the point over); the light is really the cause of the shadow on the screen, and yet interposed between the light and the screen is the film and the image on the film. The light didn’t create the image, and yet it did project that image. In the light and relative to the light — that is, entering the light and limiting values only to the light — which is the same as saying, entering the field and its pattern and limiting values to that level only, it has nothing to do with any image or the projection of that image; it remains constant as light; and its process on the time-line can be described by terms of intensification of the light. And yet it is that without which there would be no psychic nature image, and without which there would be no projection of image, the physiological organism.

          In the Wisdom teachings, another great change is described, prior to the identity of consciousness with its Self; that is, with its differentiated field; there is no possibility of changing the gunas, qualities in the structure of the chromosomes, but after conscious identity with the field, those qualities, called genes, are self-determinative.

          Let us see this point, because it is the root and heart of genetics. We know the label chromosome: think of it as a cell; we know the label, genes: think of the genes as molecules of which a cell is constructed. So, the constitution of the cell is the molecule. If we think of the chromosome as a cell, and it is a unicellular structure — structure of what? Molecules. Now, relate the molecule to the guna quality and we have the determinative source of characteristics respecting the physiological organism and the psychic nature, which means temperamental, emotional, mental potentialities, possibilities, capacities in varying degrees.

          Let your thought revert back to the level of the autonomous field — that is, the power with which you think, feel and act, which is the autonomous field level — the I AM which is my real Self level. If that individual field with its pattern has not progressed on its time-line to the point where it has individualized itself from the group in which it is integrated and you can go back in your mind to the animal, ethnological or genealogical groups, because the genealogical represents a group structure. Irrespective of the group you think of, and don’t generalize the word, group, when it is mentioned; it means a specific, a common control of a multiplicity of individual fields in the formative process. They are not consciously individualized yet, but in a formative process of individualization.

          We can see in that situation where a given individual field has not become sufficiently emancipated in its I-AM-I-Ness, or I-AM-I-consciousness, it is not operating separately from the group influence; therefore, the group influences will become determinative in the qualities of its field and in the development of the configuration, and the subsequent development of its psychic nature, and the representation, the physiological organism. We will see where those qualities become determinative in the structure of the cells; specifically the gunas become representations in the chromosomes, and become representations in the genes, and become representations in the cells, and then the physiological organism will carry through the characteristics of its racial, group, genealogical type — type, meaning the ensemble of the gunas, because the field is integrated in and not independent of a group, the group force, the group lines of force, the group structure, the group qualities. That is the basis of genetics of the Mendelian Law.

          It is also the basis of much that is now being lost in what we call democracy; the sense of honor belonging to a different genealogical line.

          Again direct your thought to the level of the individual field, the autonomous field and its pattern. When that consciousness of a given field has sufficiently emancipated itself from influences (guna structures) of any other field, genealogical, or way back to the animal group, then it can initiate its own qualities, and as the configuration is developed, it supports the psychic nature which is subsequently developed, and the psychic nature supports the representation which we label the physiological organism; then throughout those successive structures, those qualities will be impressed therein and no relationship will be exhibited to a genealogical line or ethnological or racial group, because the guna structure of the chromosomes will have been changed.

          That is why Surya is labeled the Ordainer, the Controller, because Surya is a label for and symbolizes or represents the power of the individual field, the determinative force of an individual field — that determinative force for which we have the Sanskrit word, Surya. Surya, therefore, would represent the higher degree of individualization. So, we have added another factor to the importance of understanding the position of the individual field in our mental construct — the factor of genetics — to our other two factors previously given. But these three factors do not exhaust the description of the field and its pattern.

          When a given field comes into existence, it is described as a colorless sphere like a soap bubble having no iridescent patterns or color. But through experience in its cycling process, experience which can be described as between birth and death, and the assimilation of such experience between death and birth (here is where we mix two levels), because to that individual field, it is merely its rhythm, and not birth and death, because when we introduce those terms we have stepped over into the objective manifold level to help us describe a process that doesn’t pertain to that level at all, but it helps us explain a process that belongs to the rhythm, the pulsation, or the growing light of the individual field. But relative to that field, there is no birth and death or death and birth; none at all, per se, as in the manifold of values given to images appearing substantive. (The moment we say that that field represents an epitomization, a condensation, a synthesis of all worlds or realms, powers or Beings, let your thought go back to the lesson on the many-one, and one-many [that means, the epitomization] to catch the implication of consciousness I am describing when I mention epitomization respecting a given field.) There is no such ‘thing’ as birth-death, death-birth, but we cross over to the objective manifold to help explain the rhythm relative to the field; and so, with this explanation of crossing over, let me continue the thought.

          It is the result of experience between what is called birth and death; the result of that experience is abstracted between what is called death and birth, because one ‘thing’ we must remember is that between what is called death and birth memory is extremely keen, because memory in this sense belongs to the mind which again means the lines of force of a given field that we label mind, in distinction to the refraction through the qualities of the psychic nature, which breaks it all up into the variegated colors, or its spectrum; because, the psychic nature is like the prism, through which the wave lengths and frequencies in mind substance, in Chit become refracted. But outside or relatively ‘above’ the psychic nature there is no refraction; it is the pure Light and that pure Light represents memory; it is extremely keen, to the degree in which it is developed on a point on the time-line of an individual field (all that has to be put in because it cannot be verbalized). Due to the fact that it is the pure light relative to the field, relative to the time-line, memory is keen, therefore the result of experience can be abstracted and incorporated. If the experience has only been automatic repetition of the taboos, the mores, the customs and usages of the tribe, very little experience is gained. It is like chickens picking up corn — peck, peck, peck — automatically; so that, automatically the psychic nature repeats the tribal usages. It all eventuates into mere suggestion on the psychic nature, and where the psychic nature reflects these suggestions, no original experience, or very little; but there comes variations upon it; that is, a member of a given tribe will question, and if he questions any taboo too closely, a dichotomy will develop in the group, the cell will divide, and the questioner will pick up his supporters and withdraw, if he can get away with it, and form another tribe; and we have cellular division on the group level of a tribe. The question is that which will effect the field. In memory he will build that quality into his pattern and it will show forth a little change; a little iridescent color will begin to form in his soap bubble.

          We have to have a vivid imagination to see as the pulsation of the field continues, little by little, there is not just an unquestioned acceptance of everything; there is thought, analysis — no synthesis, perhaps, but analysis, question, little by little the qualities are built into the field as the result of experience. And when these qualities built into the field become sufficiently organized, developed, the individual is approaching the responsiveness to Surya. He is switching from suggestive responsiveness to the group, to responsiveness to Surya — the determinative power of his own field; he is becoming more individualized.

          Now, these factors respecting the field and its pattern are extremely valuable and must be placed in our mental construct in the proper situation, because then we can see what the individualizing process is about and what it is for. And we can also follow the determinative factors respecting the individualizing process.

          The configuration of a given field is the representation of its pattern. That constitution is likened to the steel structure of a modern building; it is that upon which the façade is laid; and that which supports that ‘façade’ is the psychic nature and the reflection thereof — the image appearing substantive that we label the physiological organism.

 


 

April 13, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 41

 

          We now come to our next item in the outline — describe two ways of expressing the structure of a given individual; first, in scientific terminology; second, in terms descriptive of states of consciousness. (The description of the foci goes in with the description of the individual.)

          The purpose of placing this in the outline is so that the students in the School of the Natural Order may be able to meet those who have no scientific background respecting the recent discoveries of the autonomous field and configurating energy, and at the same time, he can also meet those who understand the scientific developments; and then in his own consciousness he could correlate the two and in that correlation discover a great deal of freedom in respect to labels — that it doesn’t make one bit of difference what labels are given to any aspect of the structure. The essential factor will assume importance over labeling, verbalizing, mentalizing, etc. and that essential factor is clear perception, clear knowing, and in that he can learn the different terminology in different languages and in different times in the same language, and in different groups or philosophies, or the fundamental thought structure underlying different religions, etc. With that clear perception or knowing he can pick up any work of any age and quickly adjust the different terminology to the basic structure — because the terminology will change, and does change, from philosophical group to philosophical group, from language to language, etc. but the basic structure never changes, it remains invariant. So much for the purpose of putting this in; I wanted to accomplish that freedom from linguistic methods, means of description.

          Let us go through the two descriptions — first, in scientific terminology. It was Faraday who was given credit for first discovering the electronic field. Faraday was not an academic man; he had no academic training; he was a laboratory assistant and was wholly self-educated. Any encyclopedia or biographical sketch of him will describe all the interesting and really fascinating details of his struggles, of his experiments. He was the original discoverer of the electromagnetic field, and he left one hint which eventually was taken up. The hint was — is it not possible to treat the electromagnetic field as independent of matter, or words to that effect. It was this hint that was dropped by Faraday that inspired Albert Einstein. It is comparable to another hint that was dropped by Thomas Edison which enabled Marconi to develop the wireless and telegraph, etc., and subsequently the radio was developed. It takes something to pick up these hints, and there are those who come along who have that ability, and Marconi was one of them. I am giving this, because to me it is valuable, it shows the far-reaching consequences resulting from just a hint to those who are highly enough developed, have faculty awakened sufficiently to grasp the hint and follow through.

          Thomas Edison was experimenting with filaments which gave off light, in other words, he was trying to develop the electric light. He had developed his research down to carbonized bamboo, and had noticed that the glass of the lamp would become smoked, clouded, and he knew that was the effect of electrons carbonizing on the inside of the glass bulb; in doing so, directly opposite each leg of the filament there was a tiny streak on the glass that did not smoke up, that did not color. There was just a little white streak left showing where the electronic bombardment was arrested by the filament and did not pass through and strike the glass. Thomas Edison dropped this hint:— evidently the filament absorbs the radiation; that is all; that was the origin of wireless, telegraphy, now radar, etc. Marconi picked that up. If a filament absorbs the radiations of electrons, cannot that absorption be converted into energy? And he did it.

          So, in a similar way Faraday dropped a hint which he discovered in his laboratory and demonstrated to the satisfaction of scientists (and he read a revolutionary paper on his discovery before the scientific society in London) — cannot the electromagnetic field be treated and considered as independent of matter? He never followed through, and no one else followed through until Einstein. That was the hint that opened the electronic world. Einstein is extremely modest and gives liberal credit to all his source material — to Max Planck’s quantum mechanics, to Niels Bohr in the study of the structure of the atom, where they tried to account for the jump of the electron from one orbit to another. It was this discovery of Niels Bohr that was the basis of the quantum theory; and it was also fixed by Max Planck. When an electron jumped from a larger orbit to a smaller one within the electron field, there was a quantum of energy emitted from the field; when the electron suddenly and unaccountably jumped from a smaller orbit to a greater one, there was a quantum of energy absorbed by the field. That was the basis of the quantum theory which Einstein used in his development of the special and general theories of relativity.

          I do not wish to go on in the description of the development of the autonomous field; that is accessible in numerous articles, and we have one in the April issue of Scientific American, which is extremely valuable and quite historical, because it is the turning point in the evolution of thought affecting the planet. I advise each of you to read and reread and study that article by Einstein, even though you do not understand it; you unconsciously register more than you can consciously register through the cortex. It would serve no purpose in our work to develop mental constructs, if it were not for that fact — that there is a realm of our respective natures which picks up the frequency, which in due time develops faculty outside of the province of the cortex, with which to register, etc.

          Through electronic devices, hook-ups, scientific tubes, gadgets, etc., the charge of the field is now ascertained, and Professor Burr of Yale University has carried that line of investigation further than any other individual; with his best developed seniors they have conducted much experimentation respecting the charge of the electromagnetic field on the autonomous field, until now they have developed their work to the point where the field of a given plant, animal or man can be charted, a graph can be made of the charge of the field. In these scientific descriptions which have developed out of these various investigations, we can now confidently describe the structure of a given individual in scientific terms. It would be interesting to go through it all in the sequence in which it was developed, but we assume that those who are interested in describing the structure of a given individual in scientific terms, would have had some background, because otherwise he would not use the scientific method of description.

          Assuming that the hearer or reader has the rudiments of scientific background, we also assume he understands the language, and we can say this: every individual in his essential nature (or we can use the word, fundamental or the word, basic) — in his essential, fundamental or basic nature, constitutes, represents a differentiated and independent (which means autonomous) field, sphere of sentient energy. Do not think that by introducing the word, sentient, that it is not scientific. I point your attention to the book by Gustaf Stromberg, “The Searchers”, wherein this science has been amply and empirically established, that the autonomous field is a direct source of all subsequent organization respecting a given individual; therefore, it is sentient; that is, it is characterized by that quality that we call consciousness or sentience. So, this has been scientifically established. I am tempted to go back to Niels Bohr to show the hint for the cause of the jump of the electrons from one orbit to another, when he demonstrated that it was the power of the perceiver and not the perceived. So, therefore, we have the basis for subsequent developments, that the autonomous field is characterized by sentience, meaning consciousness. A given autonomous sphere or field can only be described in terms of its lines of force on the grounds that the lines of force are that upon which the abstraction is based — the abstraction labeled sphere or field; that concept is an abstraction whether we label it sphere or label it field. In the absence of the lines of force — no sphere, no field exists. Lines of force eventuate where we have a negative and positive pole, so that any given autonomous field must be described in terms of its negative and positive poles, and the lines of force between those poles by which and from which the sphere or field is known; or the concept abstracted constitutes the pattern, the structure of the field.

          Now we come to the most difficult point in description, in scientific terms, respecting the structure of a given individual. We can describe what takes place, what eventuates, but we cannot describe why it takes place, why it eventuates. What takes place within this field is that the lines of force eddy. (We can visualize a whirlpool, like in water an eddy always has a spiral structure [leave aside whether the spiral is clockwise or counterclockwise]; we merely want to establish the fact that there are eddies, like whirls, comparable to the little whirlpools on the edge of a current in running water.) These eddies have eventuated on the lines of force in a given field, exhibiting energy; each eddy represents a quantum of energy. They are both positive and negative. If the lines of force in the field are flowing from positive to the negative pole, the spiraling whirls or eddies will be labeled proton; if the whirls eventuating on the lines of force flow from negative to positive pole, that whirl will be emergent energy labeled electron, etc. (The etc. here represents other eventuations within the field.) When these quanta of emergent energy, or when the whirls are considered in a gestalt, as-a-whole, then we have the label — “configuration of units of energy”; that is, configuration forming fields within the given individual autonomous field, like that endless repetition of the process from one to the many. Here in the individual field we find a comparable microcosmic epitomization of the cosmic process, because the individual autonomous field can be considered the one Creator, Ordainer, Controller, Atman, and the whole cosmic process becomes duplicated, repeated (notice the avoidance of the word, reflection; it is not a reflection; it is a repetition, microcosmically of the macrocosmic process), because out of one field now comes, after the emergent energy on the lines of force, field formations within the field. We can now say the individual autonomous field is differentiated into a multiplicity of fields which the original autonomous field of the given individual motivates, governs, sustains, creates and recreates (the recreating is called destruction).

          So, out of this emergent energy, the atomic field is formed. Out of the atomic field, the molecular field is formed. Hold the mind steady in terms of energy, not in terms of phenomena; keep in the background of your mind that phenomena is only the abstract from this energy structure and has no existence except in the consciousness of the abstracter. This is energy differentiating within the autonomous field. That which is labeled molecular field forms larger fields — colloidal, crystalloid, cellular, etc. — labels given to the phenomenal aspect of the configurating process. Keep your levels straight when you label, and that which you label. Do not identify word with ‘thing’ or ‘thing’ with configuration because you will get hopelessly balled up if you do not keep these levels sharply differentiated.

          We can visualize what is labeled the cellular, colloidal, crystalloidal levels in the configurating process as forming organisms — that is, energy structures we label organisms. And now we can visualize the power of the individual or autonomous field as organizing the energy configurations that we label organisms into functional organism-as-a-whole, which we label the physical body or the physiological organism, etc.

          This is the process, and each single step suggested, as well as mentioned, can be scientifically substantiated, and we have the structure of a given individual in scientific terminology.

          From this we turn to non-scientific terminology and describe the same individual. We have lots of freedom now, and this is going to take us from Swedenborg to Kapila, Sankara, to Patanjali, down to Plato. So, not to be restricted by the time factor, we will carry on and open that description of the individual tomorrow morning.

 


 

April 14, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 42

 

          We turn now to the description of the structure of a given individual in terms descriptive of states of consciousness.

          As has so often been said in this review or outline of the instruction as given in the School of the Natural Order, constantly keep in mind in presenting the instruction that the beginner presents an orientation in the objective manifold, is canalized therein, and constantly his evaluations, understandings, appreciations, etc., are limited to the objective manifold. When we approach the description of the structure of the individual in terms of consciousness, the emphasis must be laid upon the fact that Reality, fundamental truth, the essential nature, etc., respecting a given individual or respecting any other existence or being, can be summed up in one word — consciousness. In other words, the consciousness (the term, the label) represents the totality, the summum bonum of the essential nature of any given ‘thing’, as well as any given individual. Attention must be focused upon the fact, even when the individual intellectually recognizes it and says, yes, yes, let us talk about something else; psychologically, he will not function as if it were a fact, and the only fact respecting existence.

          The student of the School of the Natural Order should learn the means of methods of meditation from his teacher, which will focus attention upon that essential fact, or he should devise means, ways, etc. of concentrating attention and meditate upon that essential fact. In other words, a genuine student should focus attention steadily in and upon all levels upon which he functions respecting that essential fact — there is nothing except That which we label consciousness; naught else exists.

          To direct attention of the beginner in a convincing manner, a variety of mental constructs can be devised and description thereof given: without consciousness, what is there to think about, to talk about, to consider? Nothing; blank — without consciousness to know there is any ‘thing’. It is a misstatement to say nothing, which means no ‘thing’ and it takes consciousness to be aware that there is no ‘thing’; rather, we should confine ourselves to the statement that without consciousness nothing exists. But the intellect will step in and say, “Oh, nothing exists to me if it were not for my consciousness.” That there is no one (no ‘thing’) to whom something exists is only a matter of your consciousness; so without your consciousness nothing exists, not even another.

          The great debate that is becoming classical, because I am running across references to it in current literature, book reviews, etc., — the great debate between Albert Einstein and Tagore, as reported (because Tagore slipped on one point and failed to put it over); when Tagore visited Albert Einstein in Germany, they were sitting in his sitting room, and in their discussions the point came up — there is nothing except consciousness and that consciousness constitutes the only reality. Einstein said to Tagore, “Do you mean to say that if you and I and no one was here, that this table would not exist?” Tagore replied that that was what he meant to say, “If there were no consciousness present, the table would not exist.” Einstein laughed heartily and said, “It was reported that you were a religionist, but I am more of a religionist than you are. I believe in a God that supports the table, not any individual consciousness present or absent.” And it appears that Einstein got away with the argument, but he really didn’t because Tagore slipped on a very essential point: that any individualization (which means differentiated consciousness) is merely the higher dimensional epitomization of all consciousness — like when we say respecting the individual field (the differentiated field that is autonomous) that the one-many/ many-one become comprehended — otherwise the differentiated or individual consciousness would be nonexistent.

          I refer you back now to the illustration of that allegorical transparent man, where the one and the many are simultaneously present, comprehended, etc., in that which we designate the one. The consciousness in the objective manifold cannot grasp that point. It takes liberation from the objective manifold. But that would not have been necessary for Einstein, if Tagore had made that point, and the only concession that can be made respecting that point is to the objective manifold of values, wherein it could be said, “the table has no existence, except in the consciousness of the perceiver, but that perceiver represents the universal consciousness, so without the cosmic or universal or all-comprehensive consciousness, the table would not exist; it exists in the consciousness.” Stating it that way is a concession to the objective manifold, by introducing the label for a higher order of abstraction — the label, universal.

          When we get beyond the abstracting process to the level of the abstractor, then both the terms individual and universal are invalid and disappear, and there is only consciousness remaining.

          In reading this classical account of this discussion between Einstein and Tagore, I have always felt sorry for Tagore that he got confused, because he knew, but stuttered in adequately verbalizing what he knew, because fundamentally he was right; the table has no existence in the absence of consciousness; whether you label it individual or universal is only relative to linguistic representation on and in the objective manifold — that is, it merely represents two levels in the abstracting process.

          Among metafizzlers, there is getting to be a cliché, which has no meaning — “Well, in three dimensions we see the table, but it is in a fourth dimension or fifth or sixth dimension of consciousness that it must be seen; that it has no existence in the absence of consciousness, “bla, bla about tra, tra”.

          These considerations have no particular bearing upon the presentation of the instruction, as given in the School of the Natural Order, to a beginner; one who is representing the School and its teaching is only concerned with bringing the attention of the student to the consideration of consciousness — a term representing that which alone exists. I used to say years and years ago (it seems like many incarnations ago) over and over to the beginner — your best friend may be sitting right behind you, one you have longed to see, but if you are not conscious that he is there, he is non-existent, as being here to you. Everything of which you conceive or which you perceive, and to which you give value is only a matter of your consciousness of it. Then I used to give a little resume of the Vision of Sir Launfal: how the pompous knight rode forth to find the Holy Grail, and he flipped a coin to the beggar at the gate as he rode forth. He searched and searched for the Holy Grail and was ready to do battle, but he returned a broken old man, and he sat down and shared his last crust with the beggar at his gate — Lo and behold! It was He all the time! The beggar at one’s gate begs for recognition, not alms. That which is begging right at your gate is the power with which you are conscious; no, no, you ride forth; you are going to find it! A wonderful vision. Not until the humility after search and research, do you come right back to where you started, and it is still there at your gate, begging recognition, and the moment recognition is given, there the Luminous Self, the Light of Light’s, the Holy Grail.

          That of which one is not conscious does not exist; that of which one becomes conscious, exists, so long as he is conscious of it; but when the act of being conscious is focused and identified with the power with which one is conscious, the present, indestructible, permanent, Reality has been found.

          But we cannot, nor can any individual, make that jump out of the identity of his consciousness in objective evaluation to that identity with the power with which he is conscious of his objective world or any world; he has to meditate, focus, concentrate long and ardently and steadily upon the fact that nothing is, except consciousness.

          When I took up this point in my own development, I was a ranger for Uncle Sam and was much alone in the mountains, and heavy timber, mountainous country — north Idaho. Whenever opportunity afforded in camping, riding, the dismissal of my duties as ranger, I would look at a big tree and mentally repeat over and over (sometimes I would sit for hours), “The tree is conscious. I am conscious of the tree. If the tree in its essential nature is consciousness, the tree must be conscious of me.” I would repeat that over and over mentally until I would get it down to a sort of shorthand — the tree is conscious; I am conscious; the tree and I are one in consciousness. I would work until a certain experience came; that became a fact, not a mental repetition; it became an experience. I knew and didn’t have to think or mentalize; I knew.

          I have practiced this with many ‘things’ for hours and hours until I would break through or into the experience of it — of the awareness of the consciousness of that so-called ‘thing’ and myself as one consciousness. I practiced that simple little thing (that looks silly) for so many years that I would have automatic experiences resulting from it. One of these — I was returning from a hike and I looked into what we call space and wondered about it. Suddenly, space became consciousness, not space, and from that experience I knew — this that we call the universe exists only in consciousness; consciousness is all there is, and all that appears, phenomenally or otherwise (otherwise means energy systems, differentiated fields, etc.) exists only in consciousness, and that consciousness, and the consciousness with which I am conscious of it are one consciousness; consciousness alone is real. That can be gained as an actual experience, where the knowing level is reached.

          But coming back to the individual beginning this study, where his consciousness is oriented to his evaluations respecting the phenomenal appearance of the world: whatever the devices which might be employed each one of those devices must be designed to focus the attention upon the essential Truth — there is nothing except consciousness. When this point is sufficiently established, attention has been drawn to it, then one can take up the second point in the description of the structure of the individual in terms of consciousness: do not depend upon relationships and comparisons. In the absence of relationships and comparisons, which involve your coordinates or reference points, there is no knowledge; the only qualification that must be introduced, is the term epistemological, respecting the word, knowledge.

          Again I refer you back to two lessons on pure knowledge in contradistinction to epistemological knowledge. If your memory is keen enough, you can fit it in (go back and read those lessons and you will see my point of qualification). Without relationship and comparison, concepts cannot be formed about phenomenal images or any abstraction made therefrom. That is, there is no accumulation of information which is called ‘knowledge’.

          Again, go further in reviewing those lessons that were given on the subject, because my point now is that the moment one knows, he has given recognition to the state, the manner, the quality, guna, etc. respecting consciousness. (I know that didn’t go over, and I want to register that point on you and in you.)

          To be conscious of a given person, ‘thing’, concept, etc., implies there is a way, a manner or state in which you are conscious of that person, ‘thing’, concept, etc. Unless there are differentiated processes based upon relationship comparisons, one would not know one ‘thing’ from another; there may be consciousness, but it would be in the absence of state. The moment that one says, “I AM I, I am not you (another),” he is differentiating. But when we go back into the intricate processes respecting how he came to get that way, how he came to differentiate, we find it resolves itself to the state in which he was conscious of I AM as different from the state in which he is conscious of another, and it was only the relationship and comparison between two states of his own consciousness. So, therefore, what we call planes, levels, orders, etc., essentially means varying states in which a given individual is conscious, and his planes, levels, orders and differentiations, etc. are merely terms representing the range, the octave respecting his own states of consciousness.

          So, instead of using the terms planes, levels, orders, etc., one could more properly use the terms respecting his states in which he is conscious. So, by these devices, mentalizations and mental constructs we represent what we call the differentiating process respecting the spheres, orders, etc.; then unification respecting the vast multiplicity is therefore found in the consciousness as that which is equally present respecting its various states and we have a complete solution of the problem of the one and the many, and the many and the one; it is when we stop abstracting at the level of differentiated states and ignore the beggar at the gate, the consciousness which supports each and all, analytically or synthetically… so Brahma is the one and only Begotten; everything else merely represents the multiplicity of the states in which he is conscious.

          The highest meditation of all, that carries one into the ultimate samadhi —

He, I AM — He, I AM;

the One without a second,

in whom the multiplicity exists as my states of Self-awareness.


April 17, 1950

 

OUTLINE — SCHOOL OF THE NATURAL ORDER TEACHINGS — 43

 

          The description of a given individual is not complete until we have added to the previous description of the foci, the centers of force through which and by means of which the creative process on all levels and in every respect is brought about; that means to say — as focalizations of the force of the field, the functional process respecting representations, manifestations, creative effort in all departments becomes affected; this description is given in our literature, and in this outline course, as I have so repeatedly said, it is not the purpose to exhaustively describe it; we confine ourselves to the outline; but in giving this outline course of a review of much work that has preceded it, I am endeavoring to add points of interest not contained in the lesson courses.

          To my knowledge, we have nowhere adequate diagrams of the structure of the individual and particularly of the force centers as part of that structure. It will require an artist with very subtle divination and feeling for the sense of it to adequately portray it, symbolically, in a drawing or painting. I believe it would be helpful if we had adequate drawings and paintings; our oil paintings are wholly inadequate to show the structure, but in lieu of adequate paintings, I am going to try to draw a word picture. Give your imagination latitude and see if out of this word picture you can abstract a construct which might be helpful in the description.

          Never describe the somatic divisions symbolized by the circles on our chart (the Four Somatic Divisions of ‘Man’), or the centers of the somatic divisions without portraying first the individual sphere, the individual field. In three dimensional space the field will vary greatly respecting its circumference relative to the three dimensions. When the field is first formed out of the animal group field, it is approximately seven feet in diameter, midway from top to bottom, at right angles to the perpendicular, and the perpendicular line would be approximately nine feet, if it could be seen — and it can be seen when the center we label Ajna is opened. It is like a luminous ovum, egg-shaped, opalescent, iridescent in its luminosity; that is, as it is developing.

          At first in its differentiation from the animal field, it is more like a soap bubble with very little iridescence, yet luminous. There is no need to describe the structure of the field except in general terms. The same field of an Adept, adult in the light-energy world. (You can say Adept of the wisdom or adult; using the word adult is analogous of the birth of a child on the physical level to a full grown man or woman; there is a birth in the field and a development in the field, comparable to the adult, on the mind level. The field of the adult on the mind level will extend from one to three miles in diameter.) I am relating this to the three coordinates of space as a matter of word description, but there is no periphery, the periphery of the field has long since been shattered by the intensification of the force in the field, which means in mind substance of the individual, and that energy can be focused by the adult on that level, like a radio beam which can be effective when focused, throughout the solar field, because it goes now over into a higher dimension in which the concept of space in three dimensional terms or coordinates becomes lost.

          But to try to describe the field in terms of three dimensions of space, there is no periphery; there is just a gradual dimensional fading out without any sharp line of demarcation which could be called periphery.

          Now, between these two — the individual field when first differentiated from the animal group, and the adult, the Adept — you can fill in by gradual gradations all of the stages between. That is why (if you will catch that excluded middle, with an infinite range of degrees of developments of the field) each relatively higher degree of development, is more luminous, brighter, more intense in color — that means, the energy, the gunas. I started to say that is why no specific description can be given; it is an individual proposition, because the field respecting Smith1 will be vastly different from the field of Smith2 on to Smithn. So, to describe the field, we must first have a specific individual, and then that one’s field can be described; but we can’t make a general description like I am attempting this morning, from the first individualization of the field to the highly developed field with forces and powers highly organized with great intensity and radiation. So, such a field is a powerful influence on that level, and any mineral, plant, animal and man which can live in such a field, and particularly when responsive to its influence, can be developed…

          While this is not germane to the description to comment respecting the effect of a highly developing field, the temptation is great to add some comments. The true process of development is to live in a highly developed field until you can respond to its influence, and that over and above any other methodology, particularly mentalizing, verbalizing, etc. I believe that the mentalizing and verbalizing in addition to the maintenance of the higher level force or influence is extremely valuable or I would not indulge it. But to mentalize about the higher levels of development, the light-energy world, this world as an energy system, the noetic mind level functioning, etc., in the absence of the ability to maintain the field influence is worse than useless; it is spurious and a sort of caricature of real development.

          In like manner, as we shall see as we proceed, to fall into the snares of the psychic world and repeat such as ‘spiritual’, as high, as light, etc., it is a profanation, a prostitution of the Real. So much for comment.

          Let us go back to the description of the structure. After we have this field sufficiently described, visualized or understood, then and then only, introduce that there is a conscious controller, a consciousness of all eventuations respecting creativity flowing from that field. We can give a label for the controller of the field; we do not care what label, just so we agree upon the label after establishing a referent for such label. Here in the Occident we are not old enough in understanding to have devised English labels — that is, labels in the English language — so we borrow labels from older cultures: from the Greeks, Aryans and Egyptians, but mostly the Greeks and Aryans — the older cultures where they had developed understanding respecting the higher departments or levels in the structure of the individual. When we borrow from the Greeks we use the word — Logos — for this power which controls and directs and organizes the field. When we borrow from the Sanskrit (the Aryan language) we use the word — Atman — as the label for the force or power which controls the field and all creativity respecting that field — the Atman. The nearest that we have in the English language is: the Higher Self, the Real Self, the Master Self, etc., which you will readily understand is rather a multi-ordinal term of which there are many interpretations or meanings.

          In this description of the field, we must comprehend with one act of consciousness in the lines of force, the Arche and the configuration of units of energy as representations of the Arche, the pattern. It is like in any consideration, the trinity must be grasped as a unity and in respect to the field, pattern and configuration respecting the other two sides of the triangle, the triplicity or trinity, which of course, in the submicroscopic or individual field is merely an epitomization or representation of any field to the cosmic level. To understand one is to understand ‘all’, etc. We should add a word there: to understand one in the essential nature is to understand ‘all’; so we could apply that to the atom — to understand the atom in its essential structure or nature is to understand all. To understand the individual in his essential nature is to understand all, because it never varies — it is an infinite repetition in structure and in nature and in function.

          A third point must be introduced: there is no field, individual or otherwise, no differentiated sphere in the undifferentiated Mother, without the basic unity being represented. That basic unity we label the positive and negative poles of any electromagnetic field, the poles to the foci, the energy centers by which and through which creativity is effected, by which and through which creative force operates. The two poles of any individual field (I will use the English, you can supply the Greek and Sanskrit from the lesson course, if you wish) we label the sacral and conarial. Notice on the chart that there is a line connecting these two poles, which is only diagrammatic of the axis of the field upon which the lines of force of the field depend. Or we could express it this way: without the axis, which is the invisible attractive force between the positive and negative poles of the field (and it is extremely powerful), the field would not be supported. The lines of force of the field spiral continuously around the axis, flowing from the negative to the positive pole of the field and flowing from the positive to the negative pole of the field. That which we label the sacral pole of the field is the negative; that which we label the conarial is the positive pole of the field. This is important, because we find in nature (not birds and flowers, etc. I mean the Mother as energy world or as light world differentiated or not) that all or any of her differentiation must first flow from the negative to the positive before the return force is possible, and from the positive to the negative. When we get to the description of the process of individualization we will see how this operates and it will be carried out in more minute detail.

          But it is a nice idea to carry this as basic, not only to the individual and the process that we call expansion of consciousness, etc., but for the understanding of the creating process in any respect and every respect, even though you enter a school of higher development; for instance, mathematical physics, you will still find this fundamental. I use the analogy to illustrate this point of the common phenomenon of what we call lightning. There proceeds the bolt of lightning, from the highly charged positive cloud or area, a magnetic force that leaps from the negative to the positive; it generates the pathway for the positive bolt. This used to be a mystery until modern science learned how to measure the magnetic field, and now it is well known that the magnetic force of the earth rolls in waves under a positively charged cloud until this magnetic wave of the force of the earth can find a line of least resistance to discharge itself to the positive cloud, and when it finds that line of least resistance it discharges itself; the wave suddenly becomes a concentrated stream, beam, line, etc., and leaps to the positive, and immediately the positive discharges itself on the same pathway to the earth. There is no way in which that positive can be released in the positively charged cloud until the negative forms the pathway. I use that as an analogy because it has such deep and far-reaching significance in the individual in his effort to achieve the higher level of development, the noetic level and beyond. One who understands this fundamental fact of nature, the Mother, then knows that there is no escape, there is no other way out except discharging of his force to the positive pole of his field, before that positive can respond. If one will once accept the fundamental fact, then he will never delude himself; he will never fall under the error of thinking that any psychic development, no matter how pronounced it might be, represents the completion of his offering, the sacrifice, or the discharge of negative energy to the positive pole. So, if one developed the power of projection on the psychic level, power of levitation, power of forming a mental image of himself — the Arupa body — and functioned independent in his mental thought form of himself, separate from his physical state, and though he developed a great deal of force on the various levels of his psychic nature, still he has not completed the basic order respecting the structure and function which governs the process. He must completely discharge his negative energy to the positive pole, instead of diverting it on the way to anything else.

          Now to bring all that down to factuality and more simple terms (I hope), one who enlists in the real and genuine process of what we call development, must make up his mind that he is going to direct his force to the noetic level. Remember I linked the noetic level with the field substance; so, he is directing his force to his individual field or sphere as described. And to do so, it means that all the other functions of the psychic nature which motivate sense functioning, must be abandoned; they fall into atrophy, and in due time pass away.

          Let me take one case among many. I could use the function of the heart center, the throat, the pituitary, etc. but let us take the one that dominates the race mind more than any other — that is why it is symbolized as Sagittarius, the hunter, the slayer of Taurus — that is labeled the sex force. If your force is directed according to the essential or basic structure, urges, id, libido, etc., will soon pass away, pass clear out of your consciousness and the sex organs will atrophy, because creativity then can operate from the field; it becomes set, we call it, in the field, meaning the noetic level and whatever we do we do from that level. More about that as we go along with the individualizing process.

          You can readily understand that this type of teaching is not for everyone, because if his consciousness, the controller, the director of his field has focused yet in generation, he is not yet ready and cannot, no matter how much he would want to, apply those directions of the force from the negative center of his field to the positive center of his field. He has to wait until his time arrives; that is, the psychological point on his time-line will arrive when it is relatively easy and not such a struggle and fight, etc. That is why, in our work, we take it so easy; no struggle and fight; just take it naturally and easily until it begins to operate within us, and that is why we realize that it takes from 18 to 21 years if one sustains effort (I do not mean fighting and struggling; just sustaining effort); that is very short compared to the aeons in which he has existed.

          But let us go back to the description of the force structure and I will take up the point that I have introduced, the poles of the field which we label the sacral-conarial axis, and the English symbolism is extremely significant of Saturn in Capricornus, which has been described in our lesson course; and the symbol of the Sun in Leo, at the height of his exultation when the Sun enters Leo in the precession of the equinoxes. When the symbol was first devised, the height of the sun’s journey through the zodiacal wheel used to be reached in Leo. So the very height of power is reached when the force reaches this center (the conarium), and then comes the descent of the positive power. It is the descent of that positive power that switches the orientation of the individual from the Mother, the negative, to the positive, the Father principle. No one can switch himself from the negative, th