Wednesday, February 4th, 1981

CLASS at Wisdom's Goldenrod, Hector, NY

with Anthony Damiani (AD)

February 4a, 1981

METAPHYSICAL CHART; IDEA OF MAN

TOPIC: Metaphysical Chart

SUBJECT: Idea of Man

SUBSUBJECTS: Mandalas of the Idea of Man in Being, Idea of Man in Soul

CONTENTS:

Laying out the three I.M. (Idea of Man) levels to show 5th Idea as special form of the 12

Human soul's peculiar vision of the I.M

Seeing three levels of the I.M. in natal chart

I.M. in Nous necessarily contains subjective I.M. and objective

Mental being, emotional being, material being

Man made in image of God

1st Idea, Unity of I.M.

2nd Idea: Essences, Infinite Potentiality

3rd Idea: Bound or Limit, restricts, defines how different from other Ideas

Meaning of special and unique form of the whole

I.M. Infinite

Unity, Infinite, Bound: ontological vs. metaphysical

3rd Idea in chart of Being, differentiation of homogeneity

Essences (2nd house) of I.M. at three levels: superessential, essential, dissipated

Houses 1, 2, 3 in each third of I.M. in Being

4th Idea: Tetradic Being of I.M

On 3rd (Adam Kadmon) & 4th Idea (Tetradic) of I.M. in Being

Three zodiacs

3rd Idea: Limit (& 3rd zodiac as Universal Grand Man example)

Doing 1, 2, 3, 4 as quadrants (Unity, Essences, Limit/Soul, Body)

5th house of 5th house: Unit Soul

First two quadrants of I.M. in Soul as 5th and 6th Ideas of Metaphysical Chart

6th Idea, root of subjective, objective

7th as 3rd quadrant of I.M. in Soul, 24 Tattvas inserted into Life

8th: Subjective Conception, Feltness

Third triad, I.M. in cosmos

Three I.M. zodiacs like a 3-layer cake and they are in your chart

3rd house of I.M. in Soul mandala

Saturn in Leo (3rd house of I.M. in Soul), limitation of I.M., the Unit Soul

Saturn: sensitive point in chart, personal Atma, Overself

I.M. in Soul, Being, & as principle

Eternal generation of I.M. in Soul

Second third [I.M. in Soul] vs. I.M. in Being, knowledge of Nous

Problem-solving in metaphysical chart

8th house as grades of life, feltness, analogies with Jung's anima levels & levels of 24 tattvas

Cancer, 4folds & 3folds (student discussion)

BOOKS READ FROM OR REFERENCED:

• Plotinus, The Enneads (MacKenna translation, 4th ed.)

• Plato, Republic

PLOTINUS QUOTES READ OR REFERENCED: III.8.8, IV.3.5, VI.7.5-6

DIAGRAMS appended to this transcript:

• FIGURE IMG 2202-Posterboard Metaphysical Chart.

• FIGURE 1981 0204a-2. Twelvefold Mandalas for Each Level of the Idea of Man.

• FIGURE 1981 0204a-3. Fifth Idea as a Constituent of the Intellectual-Principle.

• FIGURE 1981 0204a-4. Fifth Idea as a Unique Form of the Whole.

• FIGURE 1981 0204a-5-JF. Idea of Man Mandalas.

• FIGURE 1981 0204a-6-JF. 12-fold Idea of Man.

• FIGURE AD_A027. Metaphysical Chart with Orders of Gods.

NOTES:

• TWO DIFFERENT EVENTS WITH AUDIO FILES OF THIS DATE. The transcript below (a) is of the class actually held on this date. The audiotape continued after the end of this class into an older class that had been partially taped over. This earlier, undated class fragment (but probably in this same general time period), on the Intruder and the Primal Man, is included in the Idea of Man transcript series as WG Class 1981 0204b.

• This early 1981 class series on the Idea of Man was held on Wednesdays.

• In these classes Anthony Damiani speaks about, among other things, the relation of Soul to Nous and Being, and to the Cosmos; perception; and "teaching the Soul." A large portion of these classes is devoted to Anthony Damiani's laying-out of the components of the three Idea of Man mandalas; herein we can see some of his metaphysical chart methodology. In these classes, one should remember that Anthony Damiani is working out his speculations in the metaphysical chart; therefore his symbolization of astrological and metaphysical chart concepts may not exactly match that in Anthony's later thinking or in Astronoesis.

• For further reading on the Idea of Man in general, refer to Astronoesis pp. 147-165, the Editors' Extension on the Fifth Idea. Astronoesis pp. 114-117 is about "Each Idea is a Unique Form of the Whole." Astronoesis pp. 132-133 includes two Twelvefold Idea figures, to which the reader may also want to refer.

• Previously printed, distributed 2003 as part of a set on the Idea of Man.

TRANSCRIBED by jf 2003 from Audio Cassette tapes; reformatted by jf 2018. In 2024, IT updates prefatory matter and footer, replaces tape markers with audio file markers, alters Topic to make more accurate, completes Book List, adds Plotinus quotes section, corrects typos and some listening errors, adds new notes and alters some existing notes within transcript, adds five diagrams and references within transcript to these diagrams, replaces FIGURE 1981 0204a-6-JF with corrected version, reformats to accord with new conventions. Readable edited transcript – V11r.

AUDIO FILES: 1981 0204a, 1981 0204b (formerly 1981 0204c). [Note 1: "Tape" refers to original audio cassette tapes that were later digitized into .MP3 Audio Files. Note 2: In 2025, REP Studio cuts dead air from file a, separates off Intruder and Primal Man class fragment from file b.]

1981 02/04a at Wisdom's Goldenrod

Metaphysical Chart; Idea of Man

[Plotinus VI.7.5-6 below: basis for AD's three Idea of Man levels or mandalas.]

Plotinus VI.7.5-6: The Man of the realm of birth has sense-perception: the higher soul enters to bestow a brighter life, or rather does not so much enter as simply impart itself; for soul does not leave the Intellectual but maintaining that contact holds the lower life as pendant from it, blending with it by the natural link of Reason-Principle to Reason-Principle: and man, the dimmer, brightens under that illumination.

6. But how can that higher soul have sense-perception?

It is the perception of what falls under perception There, sensation in the mode of that realm: it is the source of the lower soul's perception of the correspondences in the sense-realm. Man as sense-percipient becomes aware of these correspondences and accommodates the sense-realm to the lowest extremity of its counterpart There, proceeding from the fire here to the fire Intellectual which was perceptible to the higher soul in a manner corresponding to its own nature as Intellectual fire. If material things existed There, the soul would perceive them; Man in the Intellectual, Man as Intellectual soul, would be aware of the terrestrial. This is how the secondary Man, copy of Man in the Intellectual, contains the Reason-Principles in copy; and Man in the Intellectual-Principle contained the Man that existed before any man. The diviner shines out upon the secondary and the secondary upon the tertiary; and even the latest possesses them all--not in the sense of identifying itself with them all but as standing in under-parallel to them.

[Audio File 1981 0204a Begins]

[Note: See FIGURES 1981 0204a-2, 5 for the following.]

AS: Now the last couple of classes, or at least last week, we spoke about this cosmic circuit being imposed, this objective cosmic circuit, the objective embodiment of the Ideas, being superimposed on the Soul as its base or the subjective embodiment of the Idea of Man. Or the Ideas in the human soul.

But, some of these quotes bring in this notion of the "Man that exist[s] before any (man)," [Note: See Plotinus, VI.7.6, second para.] before you speak about any human soul's vision. In other words, the Idea of Man in itself, or the Being of the Idea of Man, (drawing on blackboard) Man in the Intellectual-Principle. Now, this suggests that the chart itself, that if we take the threefold division of the chart that we've done, there's some suggestion there of the threefold division that we spoke about in terms of the Idea of Man. Namely if you consider, for example, all of the signs from Aries to Gemini [he means Cancer], these are 'Being' -- you have Being, Being, Being, Being [Being rulerships for first four signs]. And this is a suggestion of the universal principle of Man, or the Idea of Man in Being, or in the Divine Mind, or in Nous. Before you even speak about a Unit Soul, okay, the Idea of Man is prior to that in some way. Although it may implicitly contain the possibility of any Soul's vision of it. Certainly we have to conceive that the Idea of Man per se, as one of the Divine Ideas, is prior to either a human Soul's vision or to its objective manifestation in the cosmos. And so -- you read some of these quotes-- and sometimes it seems that there is a notion of the Idea of Man which is above even the Soul's vision. But okay, suppose we say-- we have the suggestions from the chart of the threefold, that the first four signs represent the Being of the Idea of Man.

AD: Avery, if I may interrupt-- Now why not reverse it-- Put the metaphysical chart on that board, on your left board. [Note: See FIGURE IMG 2202-Posterboard Metaphysical Chart.] Just run a circle with 12 houses, (AS: Yes--) paint the 5th house Idea alright, the same way that we did with the 10th house or the 4th house. You took the 10th house idea, and you said I'm going to understand it according to these 12 different ways. (AS: Right.) And we did that with the 4th house idea. This time you're doing it with the 5th house Idea, the Idea of Man [FIGURES 1981 0204a-3, 4].

AS: In other words this whole thing here -- four, four, and four -- gives you the whole 12fold interpretation of the 5th house Idea of Man. (AD: Yes.) In other words, this view is from the point of view of the Idea of Man, namely of the 5th house Idea of the metaphysical chart. And so, (drawing) in other words, if we interpreted the first four houses of the metaphysical chart in terms of the Idea of Man, that would be this circle here as it were, where he's speaking of the Being of the Idea of Man. The way it is above its ensoulment, even. The second four, which also have these rulerships -- Life, Life, Life, Life -- would be represented in terms of the Idea of Man; they will be show-- they will be subsumed under the Idea of Man in the way that the human Soul has its vision of that Idea of Man. And the last four. the Demiurgic Intellect will be subsumed here in the way that the Idea of Man is being fabricated or embodied or manifested in the cosmos.

Okay, I could say a little more about that. So in other words, like we did with the other ideas, we took one of these ideas, like we did the 10th house, and we showed how all the 12 applied to the notion of formless Matter. And we interpreted all of these: Unity, Essence, the principle of Bound, and so on, in terms of the 10th house Idea. So in a sense what we're trying to do here is to interpret the 5th house Idea, the Idea of Man in terms of all 12. Or to show how this 5th house Idea, the Idea of Man, is special form of the whole 12 Ideas, the metaphysical ideas.

Now it seems peculiar-- and it is-- I mean each Idea has a peculiar form to it. This one seems peculiarly to give us this 3fold arrangement. I mean it may be partly because the 5th house does, is first place where you talk about the rulership as Life. It's also from the 5th house point of view that you do have the 3fold division of the chart to begin with. And so it does seem appropriate. And also another thing, from the point of view of the 5th, the first four have, as it were, a kind of a different status than the other eight. There seems to be a division that way also from the point of view of the 5th. So the interpretation of the Idea of Man in terms of the first four houses here is going to be in terms of the universal Idea of Man, or the Idea of Man in Being, the Being of the Idea of Man. And the next four-- maybe we should do some details of that-- in some way also I think, both of these, this in some way represents the unification of these two also. I think even on a much lower analogy, it's like when he had the Idea in the object, the Idea in the mind, and then the Idea which is above both of those, the universal-- well, maybe it's better not use that analogy. Or use the psychological analogy of an archetype, which gives rise to both a subjective conception and an objective, an apparently objective manifestation of it. And in any case it seems clear that the Idea of Man itself in the Nous-- and then if you fit in all these quotes which say that the Idea of Man contains from the beginning everything which will come from it, well if you say this is the Idea of Man, what's going to come from it: individual souls' visions of it, and also the objective manifestation of it, that's what's going to come from it.

TS: It's almost like saying that the first four (inaudible) have to do with the peculiar constitution of the Sun in Leo, and then next four would be the exaltations, and the last four would be detriments and (falls).

AS: That was a suggestion except um-- somebody didn't like it (student laughter). The first one sounds like-- Supposing this whole thing is an interpretation of the 5th idea, the Idea of Man, and it does make sense in some way to say that the Sun, the rulership here, corresponds to the Being -- well, actually it's in Life, but okay. Before it's embodied subjectively. But it's not clear why the objective manifestation in terms of the Demiurgic Intellect refers to the detriment, Saturn [in Leo]. See this one seems to refer to the Saturn, the subjective, the way it is in the human soul.

TS: What you just said about it, that this peculiar vision of the individual Soul of the Idea of Man, that's what we've spoken of.

AS: But it's the peculiar vision wedded to the Human Soul. It's the Idea of Man as-- in a soul, in a Unit Soul.

TS: Yes.

AS: If anything -- maybe it's -- maybe I can say it's a relation, in some way. But it's not clear why there's anything in here that indicates um-- (knocking on blackboard) the objective manifestation. Unless you already say that souls have a nature tending to division. It just seems if it's going to be anywhere we'd have to go to the 6th house to find that.

PD: I don't see how you've connected the sensation with the Intellectual Perception.

AD: You can't do that yet, Paul, that's why I asked him--

PD: I thought that's what you were attempting to do--

AD: That's what I'm aiming at, that's the goal-- But the whole idea is, if you take a look at an astrological chart, I want in the chart, I want the material entity, I want the Soul behind that material entity, and I want the Nous operating through that Soul understanding what the material entity is about. But we first have to dissect, take apart, every factor in the chart. So that means I'm looking at the blank paper, alright, then there's a dot that appears in the blank paper, then there's directions of force or lines of force going in all directions, and superimposed on that the 12-house structure, and superimposed upon that is the cosmic circuit with all the planets going around. Then we'll talk about perception. Okay? So we have to leave perception alone because this is a peculiar way of seeing what perception means. It will include the sensory process, the dianoia, and the intellect. In other words the whole of the Divided Line is in your chart.

AS: We once said that to understand "I see a tree" requires you to go all the way, through all the levels, I mean all the way up to the Nous.

AD: From psychology to the Nous.

AS: And in a sense-- one of these basic things that this basic diagram shows-- is that this relation can't be understood (knocking on blackboard) unless by going back to the prior, to both of them. It's the Idea of Man that contains the priors here, not the human Soul. Maybe that's the point, if you try and look just to the subjective to explain the objective, that's not really right. You won't be able to explain just in terms of the human Soul about the cosmic manifestation here. But you will be able to explain it in terms of the Idea of Man per se or the Nous. That will include both of these, whereas in some ways this doesn't strictly include what's going on here. But that this includes both of these (knocks at blackboard throughout this paragraph-- I don't know--

AD: So to understand the Idea of Man, you really have to tear apart your astrological chart, right down the blankness of the paper. No symbol can be excluded, every symbol is very, very specific. In a similar way, we could make it easy to understand by saying, well, think of the first third as the Mental Being, the second third as the Emotional Being, and the third as Material Being. Okay. So the Mental Being would include the Emotional Being, and the externally perceived external being. But those three are just for analogy; actually, the Mental Being, the Emotional Being, and the Materiel Being is all in the third third. And not scattered like that. So we have to go step by step, and no giant steps either, no one can wear seven-league boots in this process.

AS: Say this-- this changes a little bit also, a couple of the quotes we read before, I mean it does in my mind--

AD: Go on with the analysis first, go on with the analysis. (AS: Okay I just don't know--) Go on with the quotes.

AS: I'm just not sure-- Do you want to try and --

AD: Yes, because this is all still very abstract. So you have to give an idea, take the 5th house Idea of Man, and go around the metaphysical circle, and show how the Idea of Man is in Being, how the Idea of Man is in Life, how the Idea of Man is in the so-called material. Whether they like it or not they sooner or later have to understand what we're doing.

AS: Okay, well here we go--

AD: I'm supposed (to be correcting Paul)--

AS: Well, here-- So, in other words, in this particular case, I don't know whether this is true with any other Idea, but here we have the notion that the Idea of Man as a unique form of the Intellectual-Principle, is a unique form in Being, a unique form in Life, and a unique form in Intellect. (knocking on blackboard) Or a unique form in the Divine Mind, as it is in the Soul, and as it is manifested in the cosmos. So each of these is going to have a 12 fold. I mean, in a sense it would be the basis of the three zodiacs that they talk about in astrology. So I mean that's a conjecture-- So we have to understand what each of the 12 Ideas mean in terms of ---

AD: Erase the left-hand board-- and stop-- This is an exercise in metaphysics. (sounds of drawing on the blackboard)

S: Would it make any difference to say that each of those are a 12fold form of each, that each section, each quadrant is a threefold?

AS: It amounts to the same thing.

S: Would it amounts to the same thing?

AS: See, let me-- (S is trying to interrupt)

AD: Don't let them deter you! (student laughter) They're about as archetypal as they can get. (more drawing-on-blackboard sounds)

[Note: See FIGURES 1981 0204a-4, 6 for the following.]

AD: So on the left-hand side put the (12-house analysis) (hard to hear), the 12fold Intellectual-Principle. It says it in the Bible too, Man is made in the Image of God, so you might as well try to understand it instead of quoting it.

AS: Just for example what we're saying, is that there's going to be a principle of Unity in each one of these three realms. The Unity of the Being of the Idea of Man, and then you're going to have the Unity of Man as in Life or in the Soul, and then the Unity as objective.

AD: All the way down to the level of Horsehood and Manhood-- and the Self-nature that they want to deny.

AS: In other words, if you have a material-- you know, like the Buddhists say well you have a horse, even that material horse has a certain unity to it, which you cannot deny, otherwise-- even though in some way the atoms are being replaced, you always recognize the horse from day to day. If that principle of unity were not there, as it were, in the material thing you couldn't recognize the materially manifested horse from day to day, it wouldn't be horse all the time. This one would be like the Unity of a Unit Soul which would be here (knocking on blackboard), he says "each soul is permanently a unity" [cf. IV.3.5].

AD: Let's start with the 1st house, Avery. That's not the metaphysical chart, alright, that's the ontological chart, that's not four, that's a triad. The metaphysical chart is an entirely different framework. Then you have to bring in the One. We're not bringing in the One, we're just bringing in the Intellectual-Principle, and that's our premises, we're starting from the Intellectual-Principle, alright. The 1st house idea is what? -- The One. Apply it.

AS: So we have the Unity of the Idea of Man.

AD: In Being.

AS: Now--

AD: That's-- Now go to the other one and show them what you're doing. (student snickers)

AS: Let me leave the out the "in Being" and say, you have the Unity of the Idea of Man; here it's in Being. (S inaudible) Here's the Unity of that Idea as in the Soul, okay, if we've made that qualification--

AD: Go around the circle, don't listen to them. Go around the circle.

AS: Hold on--

AD: We've had enough on this, go around the metaphysical-- go around the ontological chart.

AS: Okay. We're going to stick to this one, do this one first. Because otherwise, (AD inaudible) otherwise we (inaudible; student laughter). Okay so the next-- I think we have to use the paradigm -- um-- I think we're going to have to do it in terms of the Aries, Taurus, Gemini, and Cancer also.

AD: (inaudible) It would be better to do it (inaudible), just to work with the first four houses. (AS: That's what I meant.) Work with the first four houses, and do the first triad in that chart. The way we've been doing it, that the 2nd house was superessential essences.

AS: Oh, oh, I see what you're doing-- I'm sorry-- Let me change the framework just a little bit. Okay. Let me change the framework a little bit. The Unity of the Idea of Man in Being, put it there and say that's this-- I just changed the framework a little bit. See this whole big 12fold here is this 12fold here (knocks on blackboard). There's two to three levels of 12fold. It doesn't really, it doesn't really matter, you'll see it'll work out (student snickers) any way we go, it has to work out. So the Unity of the Idea of Man now, it's in Being or in the Nous or in the Divine Mind. Okay. And the 2nd [house] then would be the essences but as superessential.

AD: That is, they're above Life, they're not embodied in Life.

AS: Essences in the Idea of Man, or the Infinite Potentialities that are in any Idea, in the Idea of Man in this case. Okay, better not say superessential, in a sense that's going to be the paradigm for this quadrant here. Now, the third one, Adam Kadmon or the notion of Bound or Limit, somehow has to represent the (inaudible)--

AD interrupts: (That makes it) different from other ideas--

AS: It has to represent the characterization of these; in other words, the Unity and the Essences combined together will give you the Definition of this-- Um-- well, as it were analogously, if this represents the Unity of the Idea of Man in Being, and this its Essences, then this in a way represents the superessential principle of Soul, I mean if you do it by quadrant. This represents the Unity of these two, I don't know how else you could say its definition?

AD: You could also point out that it's different from other Ideas. Because if you worked with a different idea, it would mean something else. In other words, Limit which is being imposed on a combination of Man and Essences, it's a different combination if you were to take let's say the 10th house Idea. So Limit here would be a Limit to the Idea.

RC: Could you say too that (with this) point, that you could say each Idea is a special form of the whole Intellectual-Principle (AD assents), that in that 3rd house here it's where that Power within the Idea of Man would structure the whole of the Intellectual-Principle according to it in a particular form.

AD: That's what I just (did). (S: What?) The 3rd house always restricts an idea and makes it to be itself and not the other Ideas. So if you were to put, for instance, in the 1st house like you did [in 10th house example] the Unity of Formless Matter, in the 2nd house would be the Receptivity of that Formless Matter to take on any form and combine them, it [3rd house] would be restricting that Idea to Formless Matter, and prevent it from being any other Idea. It's very possible (inaudible) that way.

RG: Well, but how does that apply particularly then here?

AD: Well, you're combining the Idea of Man with its Infinite Power. Now if you combine the Idea of Formless Matter with its Infinite Receptivity, you must get, the 3rd house must be different, a different Idea than the prior, what I have just mentioned. It would distinguish one Idea, which is unique and special version of the Infinite All, from other ideas which are also special and unique Ideas of the All.

RG: Yes.

AD: That's what Limit means.

RG: Okay. That's what Plato says.

AD: Plato says One, Infinity, Bound. That Bound limits that Idea.

RG: That seems to be the metaphysical meaning of the 3rd house. But now we have to apply it ontically. (AD assents) So now what does it mean in particular, being that we've already limited, this already is a limitation to the 5th house chart, it already is a limitation within the Intellectual-Principle, of the chart of one Idea.

AD: But not until you get to the 3rd.

RG: What do you mean? But we already started with the Idea--

AD: We already started with the Idea of Man. How will you show that it doesn't include all the other Ideas?

RG: But it does include all the other Ideas.

AD: It does NOT include all the other ideas, it's a special and unique version of all the other Ideas.

RG: But -- in that sense--

AD: That's the whole-- that's the point.

RG: But you've already started with that premise by calling it the Idea of Man.

AD: Again, Richard, again. If I put something in the 1st house, I call it a Unity, a one, okay, (RG: Yes.) and I attach to it or associate it with certain essences. Alright. How am I to say that this is not the Infinite, how could I show that this is not the Infinite?

RG: Metaphysically, only by putting Limit on it.

AD: Yes.

RG: But ontologically, you've already done it. You're already within the concept of Limit to get to ontology.

AD: Where's the concept of Limit? (Is it prior to) the Idea of Man? (RG: Prior to-- already in a sense--) How?

RG: How?

AD: How-- Do you know any other world?

RG: It's already been limited.

AD: Do you know any other world besides the human world?

RG: No. It's already been limited.

TS: Aren't you saying that the first two Ideas, Richard, aren't you saying that the first two applications are metaphysical and it's the third that makes it ontological?

AD: No. What we're starting out with is the chart of Being. So we are in ontology. And the point I'm trying to make is that the divisions and distinctions which arise within ontology, you come upon in the 3rd house. They do not arise at the level of the One. Because as the One, the only characteristic of it (AS: is Unity) is its aseity.

RG: But not in Being though! Not as a One in Being!

AD: You forgot everything that we did about the Unities.

RG: The One in the 2nd hypothesis.

AD: No, the Unities! You could never say anything about the Unities, you can't characterize them.

RG: I don't-- Okay. My problem is--

AD: And if you can't characterize the 1st house, in any way whatsoever, how have you limited it?

RG: Isn't it-- Okay, here's my question-- Isn't it in--

AD: I understand your question, Richard.

RG: Well, maybe I don't. I obviously don't understand my question or I--

AD: Yes I know--

RG: Or maybe I won't understand your answer.

AD: You'd like to imply before that you knew more than the human.

RG: No I didn't.

AD: Yes, you did. You said, That's a limit! You said 'human' is a Limit. (RG: Yes, I did.) And I wanted to know if you know of another world! For you, humankind represents Infinity.

RG: Okay.

AD: Well, just think about it for a minute. (silence) The Idea of a Human, or the Being of the Idea of Man, is an Infinite Idea, any Idea is Infinite. Now how do we separate one Infinity from another? It has to be a division within Being.

RG: Right. But the Being that we now-- but the Being that we've put on the ontological chart, doesn't that already imply that we've made that distinction? (inaudible)

AD: We didn't make any distinction, we just put up a chart of Being.

RG: But isn't that already a Limit on--

AD: A limit on what?

RG: From the metaphysical chart--

AD: But it's absolutely asymmetrical.

RG: Yes.

AD: Alright. So tell me now, where is this limit? (RG inaudible) You're saying that we're making a distinction between Being and the One. Okay, that's what you're saying, you've made a distinction, between Being and the One, so our chart is an ontological chart. (RG: Right.) Fine, okay.

RG: Alright. And we've chosen one Idea now to put up around the chart. (AD assents) Now in that choosing haven't we already invoked the Idea of Bound, we've already chosen this one idea as our model.

AD: No, no we have chosen, (inaudible) again, you're refusing to see that the Idea of Man is infinite; you're saying it's bound. (RG keeps interrupting throughout AD's comment.)

SD (hard to hear, several people trying to talk at once): But it has a Bound aspect to it but there's also an infinite aspect-- and in 3rd house (inaudible)--

RG: I don't deny that the Idea of Man has an Infinite Power, prior to the 3rd house of this ontological chart. And if we use 'Infinite' in that way, I can understand it. But in-- (inaudible short RG/AD interchange)

AD: Take each one of the ideas, go around the circle, and take the 1st and the 2nd house, and the 3rd house will show the particular (Infinite) of the Infinite Idea that you're dealing with. Because until you combine that infinite Idea with certain Essences, alright, you can't speak about it (as) there's a division in Being. There's no division in Being yet.

RG: I really don't understand that-- Then I don't understand.

AD: Alright, let me try this way. The plurality of the Intellectual in the Intellect-- (RG/AD inaudible) Alright, how do you establish that?

RG: How do you establish it?

AS: Richard, I think this is analogous to -- from the point of view of these first two houses of any idea, there's part of the Nous as a whole or the Divine Mind as a whole. Let's not say the One, let's not say they're Absolute Unities. But let's say from the point of view of this, the Unity of any Idea in Being, and its infinite Power, we're still talking about them-- Almost on the model of when we had them all part of the Nous as a unity, when we say that each one is a unique form of that, and has its own, has its own (?) distinguishable from all the others, that's where you'd bring in the 3rd. So it's not that you're not talking about the Idea of Man, it's just that the Idea of Man from the point of view of the 1st house or its Infinite Power is indistinguishable from the Nous, from the Nous as a whole.

RG: Well then, I don't see why you call the 1st house then in that case the Unity of the Idea of Man and not the Unity of the Intellectual-Principle. (RG/AD/S try all to talk at once)

SD: You're making (inaudible) like with the sign and the rulership and the exaltation, with the exaltation is the particularizing (AS: Yes), and you still call that particular sign, you still have a particular rulership, they had a name that was different from the Nous as a whole, and yet they have to be conceived of as identified with the Nous as a whole. And it was only when you got to the exaltation that you could really say well, here's where the particularity aspect comes in.

AS: It's almost like--

TS: Are you saying when you're speaking about an Idea metaphysically, you can't speak about all Ideas or the Unities as indistinguishable or inseparable. But when you speak about *an* Idea, the Unity of the Idea, you're going to speak about its Real Unity, you're still speaking about it as in some way undifferentiable; it's only within the Limitation or by the application of the Idea of Limit or Bound that its specificity arises. But in its Unity as a real Unity, it's not specific. If it was, then it wouldn't be entirely capable of being a metaphysical Idea.

AS: Well, I was trying to limit this even to ontology.

TS: No, I'm saying-- Maybe this is not what you're saying, but what I'm trying to say is when you speak of an ontological view of an idea, that same idea which we're speaking of ontologically has, as it were, a metaphysical Unity, its unity is not exclusively ontological. You're looking at it from the point of view-- Insofar as you're speaking about just have one Idea in its whole, in a totality, you're speaking of it ontologically, but its Unity is not solely limited to its ontological character. And in that way just its Unity is the Unity which, were you to speak metaphysically, you would speak of it in a different way.

AS: Right. I'd even go-- Maybe this is wrong but suppose you said -- Not considered in terms of the Absolute but in terms of the Nous, the Unity of the Being of any Idea, is the Nous. And from that point of view-- here we're not speaking about these Unities as rooted in the One, but the Ideas as rooted in the Divine Mind, in the Intellectual-Principle. Now even as part of the Intellectual-Principle we said there's really two aspects. In one sense, all of the Ideas constitute the Intellectual-Principle. Insofar as they do they participate in that Intellectual-Principle or Nous and in its Infinite Power.

TS: Right.

AS: And in those two respects they are indistinguishable from each other, insofar as they are indistinguishable from the Nous. And that requires like the third thing, I think Severin's example is -- (people talking at once) Here, it's only like this is its own intellection of itself, whereas here this is almost like the Nous knows it.

TS: If it wasn't for those two, you wouldn't really speak about it as an Idea in the Nous, because in some ways to be an Idea in the Nous it has to have that identify with it as well. You know what you're saying.

AS: Yes. (Then several people talking at once) In other words the unity here is the Unity in the Nous.

TS: Then you wouldn't be speaking of it as an ontological idea.

AS: You wouldn't be speaking of it at all as it were. But if you speak of it as its distinct Idea within the Nous you'd have to bring in the 3rd, as just these two [1st, 2nd ideas in this chart] you're just referring to Nous as a whole. (inaudible TS/AS)

TS: Or its unity with the Nous?

AS: Its unity with the Nous or the way that it constitutes the Unity of Being.

TS: The way it's constituted by (inaudible).

AS: Yes. And the Infinite Power derives from that. Whereas in this one it's its own peculiar unique-- it has its own unique character. I don't know if that makes sense, I'm trying to--

AD: What you're doing is differentiating the homogeneity of Being from one of its participants.

AS: Yes. And that's distinguishing it from the homogeneity has to be the 3rd house Idea. Insofar as it's a Unity in Being it's indistinguishable from the homogeneity of Being. And insofar as it has Infinite Power it's also indistinguishable from the homogeneity of Being.

AD: (You'll find that) all the way down at the lowest level. (inaudible student comments) You're learning something of a little bit about the analysis of Being -- which is the most complicated and complex study that you can undertake. Instead of just reciting the words.

PD: Avery, are the essences in the 2nd house (inaudible), the essences of the Idea of Man, are they exclusively essences pertaining to the Idea of Man?

AS: Well I think you would have to say that you can't say one way or another, until you bring in the 3rd. I mean, that's--

AD: We could say, those are sensible essences, the essences unembodied in life because they're above there, they're above existence. We could say that all the essences necessary right down to the eyeball that you need in order to be a man, is included in those essences. But there they would be of a superessential type. At the next third they will be of an essential type. And at the last third they will be of a dissipated type. [referring to "essences" 2nd house idea in each of three Idea of Man wheels]

AS: That's what we're going to do, go right down through those.

AD: Go right down-- But, let Avery continue.

LCG: Avery I have a question, what does it mean to talk about these without the dignities, without-- (AS inaudible)

AD: We don't want to bring them in now, Lauren, we want to make it simple, one little step at a time. I used to assume that you could follow me, from now on I don't. We'll bring in the dignities later, (we won't) rush things, just the ideas, one thing at a time.

AS: The Mars Sun business.

LCG: Yes. I don't understand--

AS: The original-- oh no we did this prior to doing any of that--

LCG: (inaudible) Never mind.

AS: We're interpreting the 12, just as we did the 10th idea, we're trying to do the same thing with the 5th house idea, the Idea of Man.

LCG: Right.

AS: Okay. So we'll bring it down over here into these later but right now we're just trying to do it in principle.

LCG: Okay.

AS: So let me try and go over that again and see if it makes sense. This is that Unity of that Idea of Man in Being, or its Unity with the whole of Being. And here it's Infinite Power or Infinite Potentialities. From the point of view of these first two, it's part of the homogeneity of Being or the Divine Mind. Okay. But the way it takes itself to be a *unique form* distinguishable from all the others is in terms of these. Not that its essences and not that its Unity is not included in the Nous -- obviously those are included there-- but it's only here that you have the actual distinction of that Idea from the others.

LCG: (inaudible) in general this idea could be related to either of those three rings.

AS: Well, those first four, we're going to say that these first four refer to this ring here, the way that we're doing it.

LCG: Okay. (another inaudible student question)

AS: Because -- these first four houses here are going to refer to the first third of the Idea of Man, the Idea of Man in Being, okay. Its unity in Being, the Essences which are in Being which are above Life, okay. A certain limit, the combining of those two as a definite Idea distinguishable from all others will be here -- just as here [different wheel] your vasanas are going to distinguish you from all others-- the unity of these two Bound is going to Limit, Delimit, or define this idea as distinguishable from all others as a unique one. And then finally, okay, the fourth part of this first one here, would be this notion of fourfold Being as applied--

PD: So it's not like a limit, if I may-- it's not like the Limit takes it out of the Nous, but it just separates the interpenetration.

AS: Within-- it distinguishes it within the Nous, this is *all* within Being, within the Nous. I think we're talking about this ontologically. Okay, so then the 4th one in the first sector, which in the metaphysical is the Tetradic Notion of Being, or Fourfold Being, would have to represent the four different levels on which this Idea of Man could have Being. Okay, the Fourfold Substance, (knocks on blackboard) I guess you could say, of the Idea of Man. Here, once we have its Unity and its Infinite Power combined as a Particular Idea here, we have to talk about its Fourfold Substance, the Fourfold Underlie of that Idea. In other words, ultimately every-- also contained here would be every soul that's going to manifest-- every human soul, as a principle of every human soul.

AD: Let me try this way, Tim, the 3rd house is -- we refer to that as Adam Kadmon. Now that means that Adam Kadmon, there is within Man the Unity of all the Ideas necessary to manifest the 2nd and 3rd triad, and also Power, or the necessary powers, we call them the Intelligibles. So Adam Kadmon includes both of these. So we could say something like this in shorthand: it is pre-ideational, pre-existential. And that you find in the 3rd house, alright. That's Adam Kadmon. Now -- the 4th house would have to be the Intelligible Fire, the Intelligible Earth, the Intelligible Air, Water, all the four different levels that you become acquainted with. Like four different levels of consciousness, four different levels of sound, they all have to be there too. And then when you take Adam Kadmon and combine it with the 4th house, you'll see that the world will have to have this Tetradic division. You'll have to end up with a Unity, Spirit, Soul, and Body at this lowest level. Now that's just the first third--

AS: That's still in terms of Being, the fourfold there is still in terms of Being.

AD: Yes. It's all in terms of Being. And that's going to be the first zodiac. Because when you look at some of the (Ptolemaic) diagrams did by some of the ancient sages, they show you three zodiacs. Remember (inaudible) had 3 zodiacs, I don't know if they understood it, but that's the first zodiac. So from Aries to Cancer we're going to spread out the first zodiac, and do the same likewise with others.

AS: Now I don't know if you want to bring this in now, but it seems logically that you could say the next step in order is to say that now within the metaphysical, you do have to also assign a meaning to the three levels of dignities within each of these. And that'll give you your 12fold. In other words-- the unity itself--

AD: Avery, I follow you (hard to hear).

AS: I don't know if that comes next or-- Like just the division you made for example in Limit, within the Limit of the Idea of Adam Kadmon, if you say that the Mercury is Adam Kadmon, then you said the Unity of the Ideas is the Head, and then the Infinite Power to manifest those Ideas, or the Power to manifest them is the Demiurgic Soul. So right there we have that division within there. [needs to be sorted out]

AD: I didn't want to go into that-- just work with the Ideas for awhile.

RG: What is this Limit in the 3rd house? What name (inaudible)?

AS: Well, in a sense, it's the Limit of the Idea of Man, it's the Limits, it's the Limits of the Idea of Man encompasses --

RG: That would be true-- you could apply the term Limit to any of the 12 ideas, in the 3rd house of any of the 12-Idea chart--

AS: Yes but--

RG: So don't we need a particular meaning for the Idea of Man 3rd house? (inaudible)

AD: Try again, Richard--

RG: Well, to call the 3rd house Limit, *any* 3rd house of any chart is Limit in a sense, so we don't yet have a particular 3rd house meaning for the Idea of Man chart. I mean, any of the 12 Idea charts would have the 3rd house as Limit. But what-- what does the Limit particularly mean in the Idea of Man chart?

AD: In the Idea of Man chart-- I'll try to explain it-- Limit here [third zodiac], you would have to think first of the Idea of the Universe per se, in itself-- and the existence of the universe. You have to think in the 3d house *prior to* its manifestation, whether in Idea or in existence, is the meaning of Limit of the Idea of Man here. So then the Limit of the Idea of Man, would be for instance, you could think of the whole 4th quadrant as the Grand Man, that would be the Limit of the Idea there. And the Limit could also, so to speak -- if you think of the 10 Powers that are operative there, the Limits of their operation are in the construction of what we just called the Grand Man or the Universe. That's the Limit. Now another Idea is going to give you an entirely different picture, an entirely different version of what the Limit is, it won't be that kind of a Limit. The first quadrant is the hardest all the time, because you can only speak analogously of things which are beyond any sort of existence, any sort of mentation, beyond any Idea, and you know (inaudible) in a sense. Here you're always speaking about a principle of manifestation whether you're thinking of the universe as a manifestation or the other possibilities of manifestations which we can't even conceive of. Don't limit the possibilities of manifestation to just the way we understand them, the Universal or Grand Man, there are other possibilities of manifestation beyond us. We're simply getting acquainted with some of the manipulations that have to go on with the concept of ontology.

RC: So (inaudible) Limit used in this context not as limitation necessarily so much as like a defining--

AD: A defining, yes, a defining. (RC inaudible) Yes. That was one of the points Santayana made. He says there are possible worlds that we can't even conceive of, remember?

[Audio File 1981 0204a Ends]

[Audio File 1981 0204b (formerly 1981 0204c) Begins (seems to be a continuation of above, nothing really missing)]

AD: No, I can't buy that, no. (RC inaudible) You can think them out the way you thought. (a few student giggles)

RC: Like I wasn't thinking of it so much in terms of limiting the number of possibilities or possible objects or possible universes or possible definitions, but it's more like a qualitative identity with (some of all of them), it would always be limited--

AD: To that Idea, yes. (RC: Yes.) The two thirds would always be limited to that.

RC: Regardless of what type of universe.

AD: I'd like to do the 4th house as an Idea and I think we would get an entirely different picture, it would have to divide itself into fours (inaudible). But what I'm simply trying to put you through here is something you won't come across even if you go study philosophy at a college. They'll speak about Being until you're deaf, dumb, and blind, you'll never know what they're talking about. And we're going to bring this here all the way down into your natal chart. Alright Avery, please continue.

JL: Avery, I have a question. That you could make a correlation between these two [black]boards here--

AS: Yes.

JL: Well let me ask my question-- you said in this chart over here, you're breaking up that triad in terms of the four quadrants, Aries, sort of covering the first quadrant, Taurus the second quadrant and so on. Could you say, in respect to which those are broken up in terms of those quadrants that they determine the extent to which that idea is exemplified let's say in this other chart?

AS: Is exemplified in-- which other chart? (JL: This chart.) Well I was kind of correlating or identifying these four, this first third of the interpretation of the Idea of Man with this whole 12fold chart here.

JL: And let's say the third in this chart, the Limit, means precisely the soul quadrant?

AS: Yes--

JL: The Limit of Man is Soul. And let's say the 4th, (in) the other one has something to do with, let's say, with the 4th quadrant in this one, that is cosmos.

AS: Oh yes okay, in a sense, in a sense you're saying-- this is the Unity, these are the Essences, this the Soul definition, and this in a sense the way that they're going to be embodied as prefigured here [doing each chart by quadrants]. So you have the fourfold again, sure. I would agree. And this 12 is, as it were, a further differentiation of this fourfold, (knocking on blackboard) this four of the Idea of Man in Being. In other words the Unity of the Idea of Man in Being is going to involve these three. The Essences, the superessential Essences in the Idea of Man is going to be seen to involve houses 4, 5, and 6 here. The Limit is going to be seen to involve houses 7, 8, and 9. And the Fourfold embodiment as it were of the Superessentials, of the superessentials' embodiment, is going to be seen to involve 10, 11, and 12. Or this prefigures four levels of manifestation. Still have some--moving right along--

AD: Now we go to the 5th house, alright, and that's where we started, that's the Idea we're talking about.

[Note: See Idea of Man in Soul or Life in FIGURE 1981 0204a-2 for context for discussion below.]

AS: (assents) So because this is the 5th house, with relation to the 5th house, it seems to give us the notion of a human soul. In other words, interpreting the 5th house of the metaphysical chart in terms of the 5th Idea, we come up with the notion of the Unity of a human Soul or a Unit Soul. I'm trying to use this paradigm from over here. Or we could say the Intellection of that Human Soul represents its Unity, is its Unity.

AD: Alright, so you can think of the Sun [in Leo] as the Idea of Man embodied in Life. That's the universality of the Idea *in Life*. The distribution of the Essences (knocks on blackboard), into Saturn (AS interrupts) (gives us a) particular soul now. A particular soul and a celestial soul.

AS: Rhea. [cf. Astronoesis draft, One, p. 83 on 2nd quadrant Gods; Saturn in Leo is Rhea] So that will all be in this--

AD: The first part.

AS: The first quadrant of the next sector, the next threefold. And then the next one here, which in the metaphysical chart is the Six Forces of Nature, would have to represent the Power, or the Forces and the Power and the differentiation of that Soul's vision over here [1st quadrant of Idea of Man in Soul chart]. In terms of the Idea of Man it would have to be the way that that vision of any unit soul is going to be worked out, is going to be differentiated. For example, (inaudible; then drawing) I'm not trying to go back on that. Suppose you say that here this represents the Unity of the Intellection, this represents the Idea of Man itself, in Life, and the Intellection of that by a Human Soul. And that's like a unified vision, a unific vision, okay. So now next you have to speak about the differentiation of that vision; here [previous] the differentiation of the vision was these infinite potentialities or superessential essences, but here it would have to be in terms of the Essences which are in Soul. Or not the essences, but here it would have to be in terms of these Powers [6 Forces], which the soul has which are going to differentiate its unified vision over here. So the Six Forces of Nature with respect to a soul represent the way that that Soul's Intellectual Perception is going to be differentiated, and eventually played out in the other ones. So that-- on the one hand, the 6th house here will relate back to the differentiation of this Intellection here, on the other hand it will also be analogous to the second quadrant of the first little chart here. Because it's earth [element], also. This one is earth, this one is also earth. (student snickers) Or a reflection of it, anyway. (more student snickers)

AD: So you have the differentiation through the Powers of the Soul, of the integral and indivisible vision that the Soul has of the Idea of Man. This differentiation, so to speak, into a subjective and objective pole, is not in terms of anything manifest, it's prior to it, prior to anything even in Life yet.

CDA: Are we saying this is a differentiation of the subjective and objective poles?

AD: Division in the 5th house is a total.

CDA: Yes.

AD: It's like let's say you've been inspired and have conceived in its totality a melody alright, then you have to have the Power, so to speak, to break up, and put it into a certain form-- a content, a matter, and a form. The 6th house would represent the differentiation of that indivisible whole into a subjective and an objective pole, but prior to manifestation. One part of it will be inserted into Life-- I'm sorry--

CDA: (inaudible) It just bothered me a little bit that it seems to imply on this level that the Soul already has these Powers prior to the 6th house, but they're getting, they're empowered in the 5th house, that's like that act --

AD: Empowered? (inaudible)

CDA: It's like that act, that (inaudible) act-- is that correct? It's like the Saturn is as the Unity of the human soul has, Saturn has the Power, but in the 6th house--

AD: Yes. But you have to remember that in this realm all of these things are of a simultaneous order.

CDA: Yes I know, but when we're doing this--

AD: When we're doing this, you have to follow the order of the Ideas--

CDA: But it's not like there's something's sitting there in the 6th house and the soul -- (inaudible)--

AD: No, don't think of it in a temporal sequence-- don't think of it of it in a temporal sequence. You don't think of anything in a temporal sequence until you get into the fourth quadrant. Only there do you have temporality or perpetuity. You want to go into the next, Avery.

AS: This one's hard--

LCG: Avery, the other thing that's going to be in the 2nd quadrant of that 2nd ring, is that going to have something to do with the Six Powers?

AS: Yes.

LCG: Of that whole-- (AS: Right over here.) that each one of those is going to have something to do with the 6 powers?

AS: Right there, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven--

LC: Yes.

AS: We have 7 there. And 8, and then 9, 10, 11, and 12. The 7. So let's see, this is the differentiation of that unified vision through these Soul Powers. Now what does it mean to talk about the objectification of that in terms of soul. So have to apply the 24 tattvas which are going to be the basis for the-- um, how could we say-- the actual embodiment of -- If this differentiates that vision, is this the embodiment of those essences in Life? Or the embodiment of the differentiation of those essences in Life now? In other words, it's almost like you combine these two in some way, that Soul's Unified Vision with these 6 Powers that differentiate that vision, if you put those together you're going to get the embodiment of that Vision in Life now, or--

S: --the objectification of it?

AS: The objectification of it--but that's-- But in what way is it objectification here though? We're still -- real objectif-- we're still in the second third--

AD: That would be the insertion of the tattvas in Life itself.

AS: We're still in the second third--

AD: Inserting them into Life. If you think of Ahamkara, or Manas, or anything like that, any of the tattvas, if they're not in Life, they just as well might not be. So now you're getting the Essences embodied, in Life. One is going to be the objective, and the other is going to be the subjective pole. Again we're still prior to any manifestation but tending towards it.

S: (inaudible)

AS: Buddhi.

AD: The next one, what we refer to it, is the Cognitive Activity resulting from the insertion of Essences in Life, like the Saturn.

AS: Or the way that those essences are now in an Ideational form. Because that's the 8th house idea, metaphysically it's the [Idea of] the Subjective Conception in the Mind of God. Here it's the Ideational form of these Essences that are in the Soul. (silence, inaudible student question) Also, we said it was embodied in Thought, or in Ideation. This would also be the feltness-- we also had in this house like the feltness of those essences, the congealed feltness of that experience. Or if this is the levels of Being needed for the substantiation of this, this could also, seems to be the levels of subjectivity needed for the --

AD: The insertion of essences in Life.

AS: Or into Ideation or into life--

AD: You're taking certain essences, you're giving them one grade, the second order of essences a second grade--

AS: There seems to be some implication of Grades of Life here, he says every grade of every thought is a kind of life, or every grade of life is a kind of thought. [Note: See Plotinus, III.8.8.]

AD: If you took the highest, for instance, Buddhi would have a certain grade of Life, whereas the Indriyas would have a lower level of life.

AS: Like over here you have levels of Being, but here you'd have grades or levels of Life, in which these essences are going to be --well yes, they're embodied in life, yes. This is good-- (inaudible) And that completes this whole-- if we understood this, we'd understand the second zodiac, the zodiac that's in soul, or the 12fold the way it's in life. In Life, or also in the Soul.

AD: You have one more-- Mars and Venus, I mean Mars and the Sun, right?

AS: No that's it, no Mars and the Sun, no that's it. Mars and the Sun is here [Mars & Sun in Libra]-- Don't get it, one more? (AD: I'm sorry?) We just did the 8th.

AD: Okay, alright.

AS: That 8th is the fourth quadrant of this chart here. And that would be the Idea of Man in Life again. Okay, and then we'd have the Idea of Man the way it would be manifested by the Demiurge.

AD: That we did enough times. We did that enough times.

AS: Except I think we peculiarly emphasize its relationship to the Idea of Man here, which we didn't.

AD: In that third triad you put the whole cosmic circuitry. (AS assents) You put the 7 planets there, each one of them divided into fabricative and gnostic, alright, that's what we did with the third triad.

AS: Also-- those-- that would be the one we've done with the Demiurgic Intellect going around, in terms of the Liberated Order or Mundane Gods, whichever ones--

AD: Now we're looking at this as a 3-layer cake, alright. The first triad is the lowest level of the cake, the second triad is the (middle), and the third triad is the top layer. These three are in your chart. (drawing on blackboard sounds) Only you have to find them.

(student inaudible comments, questions)

AS: I try to understand them in terms of the Mundane Gods that we did. (inaudible) Jupiter Vesta Mercury, and so on [FIGURE AD_A027, circle in houses 9-12]. (more drawing sounds) Well-- I'm not sure what you mean-- they take on--

LCG: They take on a different meaning when you're talking about them in terms of the Idea of Man. When you're talking about them just as the Demiurge fabricating the universe-- I mean, the ideas--

AS: But even any manifested man is going to have a unity, he's going to have to have a material basis, you're going to have to have the vasanas which define him, and he's going to have to have an actual sensible manifestation. (LCG inaudible) This applies to, well it applies to the cosmos. (student laughter) It applies to the cosmos as a whole.

DR: Avery, I think I'm getting a question answered but I'm not sure yet. You drew that 5th through the 8th, and you start with the 5th house, and you're calling it Human Soul. You're calling that whole realm 5, 6, 7, and 8, the human soul, that we're starting off with an Idea of Man in Being.

AD: No, in soul! That's in soul.

DR: No, I'm sorry, the whole chart of the Idea of Man in Being.

AS (excited): That's great! The first third.

DR: The first third, okay. (AS: That's great.) Now we're doing the second third.

AS: (inaudible) Richard's question back before is similar to this too. The first two of those --if we actually did this little thing here, and we put in these three-- We say, the human soul doesn't come out until the 3rd house of that [Saturn in Leo]. Well, that's fine because remember analogous here, just as the first two here are really part of the Nous as a whole, similarly over here the Sun [in Leo] and the Essences [5 Empties in Leo] that are contained in it are in a sense are a part of Idea of Man in Life as a whole. It's only when you've reached the 3rd house of this here, that you really have the definition of a unit soul. This is where you get a Unit Soul, or an individual soul, as a *limit*, or a limitation of that.

DR: Are you talking right there about *a* human soul?

AD: Yes!

AS: A unit human soul.

AD: Yes.

AS: Each soul is permanently a unity. [Note: See Plotinus, IV.3.5, second to last para.]

DR: (inaudible) or principially or anything like that--

AD: He's talking about your Overself.

AS: Each soul is permanently a unity -- but it's only here [3rd house, Saturn in Leo] not in terms of the Sun or the Empties only [in Leo] but it has to be a human soul. It's just that the analogy would hold from the principles back here. The principles we lay out here [entire 12fold metaphysical chart or whole metachart?] also will apply to each one of the zodiacs principially.

DR: What do you mean by that?

AS: Well just what we said here. When we talked about Limit here, this is really the definition of the Idea of Man as distinct from all others would be here [first Idea of Man circle, Idea of Man in Being]. Here [second Idea of Man in Life circle, 3rd house] this is the definition of *a* man, a unit soul, a human soul.

AD: It's is a sensitive point in your chart, Saturn.

AS: As distinct from all others, that distinguishes you.

AD: I'd almost call it the personal Atma, or personal Overself-- despite the Buddhists.

AS: I thought you were getting to something like that--

DR: Well I think I am-- I'm still somewhat awestruck -- if you say, if we're talking about *a* human soul there, and we're starting off talking about the Idea of Man in Being (AS: yes), and in some ways-- (inaudible) in some ways this might be similar to Richard's question, I don't know, but in some ways the whole chart, the left-hand side, is the chart of the Idea of Man in Being, an ontological chart, alright--

AS: In Being, Life, and Intellect (knocking on blackboard).

DR: I don't care how you break it up--

AS: But here's the way in which-- Because that's important because when he says that the Idea of Man includes the sense particulars we'd better have them in here too.

DR: That's what I'm talking about.

AS: And we'd better have the way that the Idea of Man is in Soul included in the Idea of Man, and then we'd better have the way that the Idea of Man is in neither of those two but is principial to both.

DR: If you start backwards, that connects a man to the Idea of Man, it's somehow not as striking as when you start with the Idea of Man as--

AS: He's never separate from it--

DR: --and say that he has to see-- that in talking about, in delineating what the Idea of Man is--

AD: An eternal necessity that the Idea of Man in Being includes the Idea of Man in sense. By eternal necessity. You're speaking about eternal generation when you're speaking about the second third, don't think you're speaking about temporal generation. When Plato speaks about the generation of the soul, he's speaking about it as something eternally. So you can't think of it as a sequence, you can't think of it the way we've been doing it. Right? The whole thing is a fiat-- and I don't mean the car either. (student comments and laughter; AS [drove a yellow Fiat at this time]: They don't work too well. More laughter) Because (inaudible) from that 2nd third, that's the house structure, that's what's going to give meaning to the sensible realm, to you. You're coming from there when you try to understand what's happening in your life--in terms of situations, events, circumstances, relations, or anything.

Now if you REALLY want to know what's going on, you have to go to the first third. You have to have the knowledge from the Nous direct telling you this is what's going on. In other words, direct contact with the World-Mind. So when Plato says if the soul looks downward into generation, it gets obscured and lost in its ways; if it looks upward to the Nous, it knows, and knows correctly. [Note: See Plato, Republic, Book VI, 508d.]

Yes, I know it's a pretty big idea that we're working out, we're just factoring out this in the chart. 2,500 years of astrology and they haven't given us an analysis of what the chart implies. That doesn't mean we've got all the problems solved, we've got bigger ones as we go along. But the main outlines are there. (silence) Alright, come out with your questions. *Without* running ahead-- I'm going to be very tyrannical about this here-- you people can't play (chopsticks) and you want to play a Beethoven sonata. Speak to the questions immediately in front of your nose. (silence) Oh boy, if they're this quiet in meditation, they'd get a satori. (human snickers, inaudible comments)

AOC: Avery, why is the 8th house grades of life? (AS: What, why is?) Why is the 8th house 'grades of life'?

AS: Why is the 8th house--??

AOC: Is that what you said?

AS: Um, yeah. Well I was just suggesting-- (S inaudible) Let me see (inaudible)-- if these Essences are going to be inserted into Thought, or into Life, these would have to represent the various grades of life in which these various essences are going--

AD: Think of it in two ways. Think of the analysis of the -- the psychological analysis that Jung would give you for instance of the biological Eve, you know, Helen, and Sophia. And the other way is to think of-- take the 24 tattvas, and break them down into 4 groups, and you would have to have a different kind of consciousness attending-- I don't mean consciousness, I mean a qualitatively different kind of life attending--

AS: A feltness. Maybe you could say a qualitative level of feltness which would accompany those essences.

AD: So the kind of life, for instance, that the Buddhi, or the highest intuitive function needs, you know, is quite different than the type of life that the sensory functions need. If you operate intuitively, the kind of life you live has to be quite different than if you operated completely on a sensory level. They're two different kinds of feltness attending those functions. So if you take the 24 tattvas and you start with-- what was it-- Prakriti, Buddhi, Ahamkara, and you work all the way down, the lowest tattvas would require the grossest kind of life, the higher tattvas would require more refined delicate kind of life. Jung makes the analysis about the different kinds of anima-- and he speaks about the anima at the level of biology, he calls it Eve; the anima at the level of Helen the romantic; the anima at the level of--what was it, the Virgin Mary?--; and then the fourth he didn't even want to speak about, he sometimes referred to it as Sophia.

But there--there you'd get a kind of feeling of the life, the felt quality of life that has to tend those kinds of associations. So let's say a very highly evolved spiritual woman would look at Gandhi and say, Isn't he beautiful. And you're operating on a purely biological level and you'd say, Why he's toothless and horrid and bony and scrawny and all that, alright. And there's a different way of perceiving that's coming from that feltness. So that's what we're talking about when we speak about the qualitative distinctions that could be felt in the life-substance of each individual. I'm sorry if I'm asking you to recall so much of what you did in the past--we really shouldn't do that-- If you got no more questions, go home. (student laughter and comments)

S: I really don't understand Cancer in this diagram.

TS: If I could understand Cancer I think I could understand a lot more--

AD: We'll continue next week, we'll try to bring it down to the chart and maybe we get some (inaudible) on some of the other questions that we have.

[sounds like class is breaking up, shuffling around, noises, people talking all at once, etc, Anthony has left the room. A bit more is transcribed below.]

TS: That seems to be that-- I mean, that's a really-- a crucial point of the chart because the symmetry is very curious.

AS: Yes.

TS: In other words, if you take that Idea of Unity in the metaphysical chart, and you say that Idea of Unity is being apprehended by the Idea of Man in a 3fold way. The Unity is according to its Being, which is represented either by the first quadrant here, okay. If the Idea of Man apprehends Unity, the metaphysical idea of unity according to its individualization in soul, and that gives you this quadrant. And even more specifically in terms of its, there's a redundance in, there's like two levels of Unity, there's like the Unity in that first quadrant and then there's the Unity of that first sign, the 1st house as it were in terms of the Being of the Idea of Man, right. And the same thing, the second idea goes to the second quadrant, and to the 2nd house. And the third idea goes to the third quadrant, and to the 3rd house. And that applies all the way around. The first idea applies to the first quadrant, the second to the second quadrant, and the third to the third quadrant. Okay, and it seems also the first idea applies to the first third, the 2nd idea to the second third, and the third idea to the third third. Now when (inaudible)--

AS: In Cancer.

S: Okay I follow that, okay.

TS: Now when you hit Cancer, a weird thing happens. Because you go from a perspective of a triad to a quadrad (that's in) (inaudible). In other words, that 4th idea doesn't match. You know, where does it go?

AS: Like the Saturn [in Aries] (inaudible). The Saturn, you go the other way, Mars Sun Venus, where does Saturn go? The Saturn doesn't have a place to go either. (TS inaudible) But I'm saying it seems (they're) analogous. The relation of Cancer to Aries in some way is the relation of Saturn to the Mars.

TS: Well, I'm not sure that I would believe that but--

AS: Saturn--

TS: You're talking about the Mars in Aries or-- yes, alright. Okay, yes, no. Not to the Venus but to the Mars.

AS: No to Mars, yes.

TS: I would believe that.

TS: Do you see what I'm trying to understand? In other words, let's go through these, okay. Why don't we do it reverse, that you say you have the Idea of Man as a whole, that to understand the Idea of Man as a whole it has to-- it means, the Idea of Man means apprehending each metaphysical idea in a 3fold way--according to its being, according to its Soul (inaudible) (AS assents) in the individual, and according-- Now, you've got to understand each metaphysical idea in a threefold way.

AS: Yes. You can do that in a couple of-- one way is (inaudible) (TS: I mean then you got to do that twice.) is do it this way.

TS: Right. Then you got to do it twice, you got to do it that way and you got to do it this way.

AS: (inaudible) this way.

TS: Right, now that-- and it seems like you should have it thrice. You're really doing it three ways: one two three, one two three, one two three. Now--

AS: There's three levels and--

TS: Okay, there's three levels.

AS: I understand.

TS: Okay? Now--

AS: Now let's take the 4th Idea.

TS: Now see, see but that's the question, why? The 4th idea does a strange thing.

S: Yes.

AS: It always starts off.

TS: I know, but--

AS: I mean it comes back to the thing about-- Well a lot of these, you know, like three initial Hypostases, and then the 4th (TS: 4th.) (inaudible).

S: I know. I know because your fourth one does pretty good, (it's/its) first level of the four gives you this.

AS: Right, okay.

S: And then it also gives you this quadrant.

AS: Saturn, okay. Then--

S: Then it gives you--

AS: What does it give you?

TS: (inaudible) Virgo, probably. The idea of Virgo? No, I--

S: (inaudible)

TS: No I-- Okay, supposing you say that (inaudible).

AS: I'm almost thinking at that fourth level of the whole business it's like-- almost like the manifestation that actually goes on within, almost like a reflective consciousness, if you could put it that way. I mean if you got to have a fourth circle, you know, as it were within this (fifth) that's not a-- it doesn't have a separate ontological reality-- these are ontological realities.

[Note: AS/TS discussion continues for a few more minutes to end of audio file but is not transcribed. You can sometimes hear Anthony talking in the background, his comments seem interesting, but I (jf) can't hear over TS/AS.]

[Audio File 1981 0204b (formerly 1981 0204c) Ends]