Saturday, July 17th, 1982

SEMINAR at Wisdom's Goldenrod, Hector, NY

with Anthony Damiani (AD)

July 17b, 1982

ASTROLOGY; THEORY

TOPIC: Astrology

SUBJECT: Theory

SUBSUBJECTS: Chaldeans, Trans-Saturnians

CONTENTS:

Wagner and Nietzsche: Wagner's personality a disgrace; Nietzsche broke with anyone who was anti-Semitic; everything we know about Nietzsche distorted because came from his anti-Semitic sister

Chaldeans and trans-Saturnians both in imaginal realm; what allows us to distinguish their function?

Time-cycle explanation: planets individualize or become embodied after their first complete cycle; trans-Saturnians and Chaldeans function collectively before this time

Discussion of collective vs. individual manifestations of various planets

For most people, the Chaldeans eventually make the circuit, the trans-Saturnians don't

Uranus as exception; Einstein example; became archetypal figure

Saturn's function before and after age 29

Rise of individuality in recent times parallels discovery of trans-Saturnians, points to their representation of individual soul

Egyptians knew about Uranus, Neptune; land of magic; many things purposely kept hidden

Chaldeans represent empirical individual; trans-Saturnians represent the higher as functioning through the lower

Seven Chaldeans encompassed by Uranus (higher knower); Uranus, Saturn, Jupiter myth seems to support this

Discussion of personal experiences with Uranus transits

Invisibility of trans-Saturnians from Earth; Uranus exception, partly visible, partly not

Non-inclusion of trans-Saturnians in perceptible world an indication that they're beyond our imagination

Blavatsky didn't include Neptune as part of our solar system, would probably also exclude Pluto

As soon as a creature functions with instruments, his framework is altered; now as though functioning with psychical senses

Importance of operating within a framework; danger of framework becoming prematurely relativized; relativity not relative

Once something is brought into our perceptible world, it becomes included in the imaginal essence we operate with; stars not part of our world, just pinpoints of light

PB quote: only now after seven thousand years could we have complete doctrine

Three trans-Saturnians being brought into the realm of (subtle) perception the astronomical equivalent of this; our understanding extending deeper into subtle realm

BOOKS READ FROM OR REFERENCED:

• Paul Brunton, The Wisdom of the Overself

• Paul Brunton, The Notebooks

• Manly P. Hall, The Secret Teachings of All Ages

DIAGRAMS referred to (not with this transcript version) [Transcriber note: [diagram] means the speaker is referencing a diagram as he or she is speaking. If someone is drawing or writing, with audible sounds of chalk on a blackboard, I indicate this by [drawing] or [writing].]

NOTES:

• This is 1982 07/17b, a Seminar on Astrology Theory, and the second entry associated with this date. 1982 07/17a = Astrology; Theory Seminar.

• This roughly 46 minute fragment is the middle part of a seminar on Astrology Theory and was originally found on Audio File 1982 0717b following WG Seminar 1982 0717a Astrology; Theory. It is the only known audio for this class to date. It's clearly a 1982 class and it's quite possible that it is a second seminar that took place that day. However, as of January 2023, the actual date has not been ascertained.

TRANSCRIBED Verbatim by IT 2023. In 2025, IT updates prefatory matter and audio file markers to match new REP audio. Archival verbatim transcript – V11a.

AUDIO FILES: 1982 0717c (formerly 1982 0717b). [Note 1: We only have an audio file for the middle part of the class, we are missing the rest. Note 2: In 2024, REP Studio separates off Audio File 1982 0717c from Audio File 1982 0717b and improves sound quality.]

1982 07/17b SEMINAR at Wisdom's Goldenrod

Astrology; Theory

[Audio File 1982 0717c (formerly 1982 0717b) Begins]

AD: Remember that fellow I told you to read, Houston Stewart Chamberlain?

AS (simultaneously): Houston-- yeah, (Stewart Chamberlain).

TS: Yeah.

S (faint): Yeah.

AD: He married-- [S simultaneously: He's a very old man.] he married Wagner's daughter.

S: Oh.

S: Oh.

S: Really?

AD (simultaneously): He went over to Cosima Wagner and asked for her hand and he gave-- he went there and he stayed in Germany and he became a good Nazi. As a matter of fact, he wrote the Nazi bible. [student assents] He was a very expert, skillful anti-Semite. [student assents, faint] Don't kid yourself, Wagner's personality was a disgrace to humanity.

S: Ok.

TS: Ok.

AD: I could love his music, I don't have to like him.

TS: And that's what Verdi said too. (TS laughs a bit)

S (simultaneously): Yeah.

AD: Yeah, he loved his music but-- but the--

LR (simultaneously): That's what anybody would say, you don't have to-- you don't have to look real deep into his life--

AD (simultaneously): No but he had-- (TS laughs a bit) well, look at-- look at the-- look at what-- why did Nietzsche break from him? Precisely for that reason, because, as much as the Nazis say about Nietzsche, Nietzsche couldn't stand anybody who was an anti-Semite.

LR: Who was?

AD: Who was not!

LR: Oh who was not?

RG: That's right.

AD: If you were an anti-Semite, he'd break relations with you, he wanted nothing to do with you.

LR: Who wasn't?

S (simultaneously, faint): Yeah.

AD: Yeah, Nietzsche. [student assents] And yet they make him the pro-- (some laughter) What's the matter with you (people)? (laughter) Nietzsche was [LR simultaneously: I didn't hear the (one word inaudible)] not an anti-Semite.

S: I understand [couple words inaudible]

S (simultaneously): No.

AS (simultaneously): And he didn't like anybody that was.

S: Right.

TS: Yeah.

AD: And that's why he broke with Wagner, that was one of the main reasons and also he was trying to make [one word inaudible] into cultural Germany which he thought was stupid. I don't like Nietzsche but I have to respect Nietzsche because he called a spade a spade right away when he saw it. And, who was, his sister was married to-- what was that guy's name? [S simultaneously: Uh-hm, right, yeah.] Förster? [student assents, very faint] Yeah and they started a German-- new Germany in Paraguay. And they-- they put into practice the principles of anti-Semitism. And Nietzsche could never stand his sister. He made enough remarks about her. And yet everything we know about Nietzsche came from his sister and distorted everything about Nietzsche. [student assents] Yeah, the whole thing is such a mess. It's unbelievable, German romanticism. The biggest loony house.

TS: Contradiction in terms.

LR (simultaneously): Don't they call it the self-indulgent--

AD: It's hard to believe. But-- but anyway, to get back to-- how can we distinguish between the trans-Saturnian?

DB: Well, is it-- is it possible that--

AD: Do you understand the problem?

DB: I think so.

S: I don't know.

TS: I don't know.

S (very faint): What'd he say?

DB: Well, here we go.

AD: Ontically they're on the same s-- at the same level, I mean when you look at a chart, alright, you got Saturn and Uranus, same ontic level. Now, how do we distinguish the Chaldean planets from the trans-Saturnian planets, I mean just because you say trans-Saturnian doesn't show us that there is a hiatus, that these are the knowers and the others are the categories of the imagination through which they work. See where I'm aiming?

RG: Uh-hm.

AD: Now how could we do that? Let's put--

AH (simultaneously): A little while ago, a little while ago you were willing to put the gnostic and fabricative under the category of the higher knowledge.

AD: No, the category of the imagination we said are the seven Chaldean planets and they represent the powers of the soul and what they're doing. But then the next thing, the thing that we have in the back of the mind is that the trans-Saturnian planets-- but, let's say when they're operating through a gnostic planet, they seem to be delivering knowledge or at least tra-- it's being transmitted through those planets, it's much more available. But the point is, they're also in the imaginal realm too.

AH: The trans-Saturnians.

AD: Yeah. I mean when you look up there, there's Uranus. Where you see Saturn you see Uranus. They're both in the imaginal realm. But we're making these distinctions on paper, alright, that one is beyond.

S: Right.

BS: Well within the [TS simultaneously: The fact that they're not visible doesn't mean that (three words inaudible)] ima-- within the imagination you could imagine something that is possibly existing outside the imagination.

AD: Yeah, I know that, that's the question.

BS: Well that's what we're doing all the time.

AD (simultaneously): What is the criteria?

BS: Excuse me?

AD: What is the criteria for doing that? [student assents] How can we justify it?

AS: That Saturn-- you could say that of any of them, I mean there's no distinction.

BS (simultaneously): I know. [AS simultaneously: So why--] We do it with everything that goes on.

AD: The fact that they're visible or invisible-- if you take a telescope they're both visible.

AS: And Uranus is visible half the year.

AD (simultaneously): And Uranus is visible half the-- half the year. Not for me.

AS: So it's half visible. But then you do the Saturn and the Jupiter degree.

DB: Could-- could I--

AD: So? What do you think? David had a suggestion, [DB simultaneously: Yeah.] let me hear it Dave.

DB: Well it-- it basically goes back to that distinction that PB makes in the Wisdom about the two kinds of karma. It seems that the way the trans-Saturnians seem to function is to insist on a development of the individual, you know, along the lines of the-- well, along with the lines of the law of the general law of karma. I mean, does it insist on a kind of higher point of view being brought in most of the time when you have a transit by one of those planets? They insist on it. You could be developing along very happily within your own psychological matrix and--

AD: I think what you're saying, Dave, is good but I don't think it's to the point.

AS: Does it justify it.

AD: You're not giving us the criteria.

DB: Well, see I don't--

AS: [few words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): Well basically what-- what he-- what you're saying is the trans-Saturnians seem to be involved in individual karma.

AS: I-- I understand [DB simultaneously: The tran--] what you mean.

BS: You said [S simultaneously: Yeah.] collective?

S (faint): Yeah.

DB: In individual?

BS (simultaneously): General.

S: Yeah.

AD: Well what were the two laws? [DB: Well there's the--] One was general karma [DB simultaneously: General.] and the other was individual karma. [DB: Right.] As individuals you've gotta become self-responsible.

DB: Right.

AD: And the general law of karma was that each entity accrues certain results from its activities, go ahead.

DB (simultaneously): Yes, right, that's-- right that was the distinction we've come to.

AD (simultaneously): So, it would seem, it would seem that [few inaudible AS words simultaneous with AD] the trans-Saturnian planets are involved in the individual karma.

DB: Right, but not on-- individual but not personal. I mean it's--

AD: Well--

DB: It-- is that-- is that right?

AD: We really couldn't [couple words inaudible] [AS simultaneously: Wait.] in both.

AS: I've got-- I think I've got a criteria, an actual-- [AD simultaneously, faint: Yeah.] a genuine, you know, empirical criteria.

AD: Go ahead!!!

AS: Ok, listen. When would you say-- do-- what did you-- what would you say happens at a Saturn birthday?

AD: Saturn birthday?

AS: Yeah, would you say that something of-- there's really a change--

AD (simultaneously): (Sun square Neptune?)

AS: No, no, no, but not-- (bit of laughter) but they often say-- no, I'm really being serious, I think this is important. That in-- when a Saturn birthday comes around, the Saturn comes to its place, there seems to be something-- that Saturn function actually seems to come in to the individual as an individualized function. When the Jupiter comes around, I think you can say the same thing. The Mars, any one of them. Maybe the thing is that the tran-- I mean, there's gotta be some objective criterion. [AD simultaneously: Yeah (couple words inaudible)] Maybe the thing is that the Uranus just takes 84 years and that the planet only becomes individualized or brought-- incorporated in the individual or comes out in its individual manifestation when it's gone around one whole time. And that that would mean essentially that Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are functioning the way that the-- those Chaldeans would before they've gone around one time.

RG: Yeah but the way they function before they go around one time is not very [AS: Oh yeah but it's strange.] transcendent at all.

AS: Well what-- in what way though?

AD: I think one of you is saying is that that transcends the lifespan of an individual.

AS/S(?): Yeah.

LR: Not being a personal function.

AS (simultaneously): The-- I mean, there's gotta be-- I'm just looking for some actual-- I mean we can make all those theoretical distinctions which may be valid but the fact is that those planets, astronomically as it were, in the solar-- how can you distinguish between Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, Saturn? There's no criteria in that way. The only criterion seems to be in terms of the time-cycle. [RC assents] That there really-- something distinct happens when the planet first-- the first planet comes back to its natal position. Like the Moon comes back real quickly, one time. It's like something-- some kind of vasana [one word inaudible] have been lived out and now that function comes in. There's definite-- I mean you take the Jupiter return, there's a tremen-- like the whole of the instinctual libido, the whole of puberty usually happens then.

AD: But-- but I still don't see the criteria for the trans-Saturnian. I mean you're positing these distinction of the time element. Uranus could be 84 years?

RC: Yeah.

AD: Saturn, 28, 29 years. Now, [S, very faint: Well--] what are you trying to get at?

RC: I think he's saying it doesn't actually descend into the body.

AS: Yeah.

AD: What?

AS (simultaneously): That-- that's (what I would) say.

RC (simultaneously): That doesn't actually descend into the body.

RG: Yeah, but the functioning of the planets is very different even if both of them (help/held) [RC simultaneously: (Venus) contributes (to that).] [couple words inaudible] its return.

S: But that's a--

RG: Why-- but why--

AS: That's what Randy said I think.

RG (simultaneously): Right I know. But why is that a criteria of a difference in their functioning?

LR: Because the--

AS (simultaneously): Because I'm saying-- what I'm saying basically is-- now this may be wrong but, maybe if you look at Saturn functioning before its twe-- the guy is 28 they do have some similarity to the Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto function.

RC: No.

RC/S(?): Uh-hm.

AS: Of course a different function because it's Saturn, it's not Uranus, it's not Neptune, not Pluto but it has some kind of-- there must be some similar characteristic, I mean if it's [couple words inaudible] There's some similar characteristic to the way Saturn functions before it comes around once and the way Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto function.

TS: It certainly seems that--

S: You know that may be [one word inaudible]

TS (simultaneously): Well the-- a--

AS: I mean it's like collective. [TS simultaneously: That--] Would you-- Tim wouldn't you say your Saturn would be-- in a way is-- it could be possibly this way, that Saturn would be empirically collective before you're 28. [student assents, faint] Just as Uran-- I'm-- this-- no this is empir-- you know, just in terms Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are collective. His Saturn-- Saturn's collective before you're 28. Jupiter, the instinctual function, is collective before you're 28.

S: Before you're 12.

AS (simultaneously): Before you're-- before you're 12. I think-- I mean empirically--

RG: And all the others are collective before you're 1 or 2?

AS: Yeah, in a sense, yeah. [LR simultaneously: (couple words inaudible) a hero.] The Moon function, the Sun function.

LR: The Mars.

RG (simultaneously): No I'm saying [few inaudible AS words simultaneous with RG] I think they're much-- I think they're much more collective after the Mars (trip). Ok.

AD (simultaneously): I think, I think what you both said seems to be meaningful.

S (simultaneously): Uh-hm.

AS: In other words, Uranus (get--)

AD (simultaneously): Uranus doesn't get embodied.

AS: I'm-- or another way I was trying to express it. Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are collective. Let's use the gen-- you know, that astrolo-- they're collective. Because they never come around. Saturn in a way is collective for you until you're 28. The Jupiter function in a way is collective until it gets embodied or individualized when you're 12, the instinctual libido, the whole puberty will generally occur then.

TS: I would have to disagree.

AS: Ok.

AD: Well, why?

TS (simultaneously): Uh-hm, yeah. I don't find them to be collective, I would [AS simultaneously: Ok, yeah.] say I find them to be projected but not necessarily collective.

AS (simultaneously): Ok.

AD: You find them to be projected, you mean they get embodied?

TS: Well that when for-- when-- alright. Someone let's say younger than 12, if the Jupiter function-- you want to find out what Jupiter is doing you generally have to look to one of the parents.

AS: Exact-- that's exactly what I meant Tim.

TS: But it's a-- ok.

AS: That it's not as an-- it's not been e-- it's not been embo-- I mean, the way Randy said it was probably--

TS: Well, it's not embodied, it's not assimilated to within himself.

AS: To within his own psychic-- projected on one--

TS (simultaneously): It's not functioning as a-- the-- it's not functioning any--

AD: Yeah, puberty was always in almost any society a very important time, (uh-hm).

TS: See, I've noticed a--

AD (simultaneously): It's when he embodies the racial soul now.

TS: That when-- before a person is 12, Jupiter functions in a sense as the malefic in the chart and that it's the problem planet. Jupiter transits, a Jupiter square [couple words inaudible] a person--

AD: (Yeah it/Again), never becomes a malefic internalized.

TS: Well whatever, but it's-- not-- no, but that when once the Jupiter returns between the time you're 12 and 29, Saturn is the problem. Saturn seems to bring the lessons in life, I mean in a way which is-- lessons in life [S simultaneously, faint: That's your--] which are imposed through circumstances on the person. They're not-- they're not internalized. They're-- they have to be somewhat involved in--

AD (simultaneously): Look, look, then this is the only criterion we have so far I think that they mention, and that was that the Saturn planets down all circuit-- all make the circuit, and they cover all the reason-principles, sooner or later. [students assent] The trans-Saturnians do not.

RG: No Uranus-- well--

AS: That would be interesting, when-- look at people-- we have to find-- well one example, [RG simultaneously: You have Verdi.] people who do live past the first [S: 84.] Uranus return. The Uranus function would speculatively, theoretic-- would-- should be quite different in a-- in a similar way to the way that Saturn and Jupiter and so on.

TS (simultaneously): Well, the people I've noticed-- I worked that out once and the people that-- that seemed to do that that are individuals, it seems to me what happens is they become typal figures. For example you get somebody like Einstein who one-- after [S simultaneously: (Right.)] the time he-- no. After the time he was 84, he was very popular, though he himself wasn't really contributing anything as an individual to the development of physics, [student assents] but he was re-- became representative, a certain archetype.

AS (simultaneously): He'd become an archetypal figure.

TS (simultaneously): Yeah Eins-- you know, and--

AD: He stopped more than forty years.

TS: What? No, no, I know but in terms of-- he became-- well between the time that he-- his theories stopped, which was about really--

AB: He was 12. (bit of laughter)

TS: No, 30, in his early 20's or late 20's, mid 20's I think he-- he got his ideas, but then, I noticed that there was a shift in terms of his relationship to the public in a sense that your-- the idea of himself as being some kind of typal figure of the scientist, I mean there's this idea of a-- that the mad scientist or whatever, and he showed up. And I've noticed that with people who live past 84, that--

JA (simultaneously): Well that can be just--

TS: What?

JA (faint): That gives him the longest time.

S (simultaneously, faint): [couple words inaudible]

AD: That's alright, they don't count yet [TS: Oh yeah?] [one word inaudible] like me.

TS: But they seem to be-- they seem to have that-- that Uranus seems to be assimilated and the Neptune as the-- the-- well, to use a simple definition, a collective-- the social order of things, social obligations or whatever, it seems like that Neptune is the next one out, that that's-- the person never becomes a social order, but they may become representative in a certain role.

AS (simultaneously): Did anybody ever [couple/three words inaudible]

S (faint): Yeah.

S (faint): Sure.

TS: And they're-- and they're admired for that.

S (simultaneously, faint): And they never--

RG: Yeah, (in some) [one word inaudible] profession. But you know, [couple inaudible student words simultaneous with RG] Avery, all-- I mean, certainly you can't disagree that at each cycle, that there's a cyclic thing that happens when each planet transits its natal place. [student assents, faint] I mean that seems to be pretty clear. The question is how do you distinguish-- why do you use that to distinguish the nature of the three trans-Saturnians to the Chaldeans and their operation.

AS: I don't think-- what I guess my speculation is that essentially they really aren't different in that way.

BS: Do you know (what--)

RG (simultaneously): Yeah but I-- yeah.

AD: Look I--

RG (simultaneously): For pragmatic-- I have to agree with Tim, practically I mean I've never seen it in a chart where the Saturn before you're 29 really functions the way, in a real enlightening way, I mean it seems to [AS simultaneously: No (couple words inaudible)] function a lot more enlightening after you're 28 or 29.

LR (simultaneously): We're not talking about that aspect of it, Dickie.

AS: Yeah.

RG: No, no, you are--

AS (simultaneously): Because Uranus-- no we're-- because-- see Uranus, Nep--

RG (simultaneously): You are in Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto.

AS (simultaneously): No I'm not. And I guess I would-- I would say then, the Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto-- You're talking now about the way in which Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are distinct from Saturn or the Sun. Saturn transits and Sun transits [few words inaudible]

RG (simultaneously): Any totaling of them, all the other transits.

LR (simultaneously): Wait.

AS (simultaneously): They're all different [couple words inaudible] that (we) made--

RG (simultaneously): Any ones that we started with.

AS: No, no, no, you didn't-- you-- [RG simultaneously: Go ahead.] that wasn't what I saying. I was saying that every planet is distinct from every other one.

RG: Right.

AS: Sun transits are obviously [RG assents] much different from Saturn or different from Uranus. I think you're picking up on the aspect in which they are intrinsically different.

RG: Ok.

LR: He's speaking about their inherent quality, [student assents] and that's not what I was speaking.

RG: No, no. But we make a-- the distinction, the theoretical distinction was that Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto represent the knower. And that's what we were trying to come to, right, and the other seven are the vehicle.

AS (simultaneously): Are (methodical). Fine but that-- maybe that characterization of them as representing the knower--

S (very faint): (Could mean) anything.

AS: I'm trying to think.

RG: Or that they're bringing in some hi-- some content within the soul.

LR (simultaneously): But they don't operate from within-- they don't have to (belong to) psychosomatic organism.

TS: They're not inside the psychosomatic organ.

LR (simultaneously): They're not within the psychosomatic organism.

RG: Right, and they seem to deliver knowledge of contents within the soul. Right?

LR (faint): And Avery's making the point that, until you have your Saturn birthday, Saturn operates similarly.

RG: Right and I disagree. I don't think Saturn brings in contents from within the soul before you're 28 or 29.

AS (simultaneously): Well maybe it does in a way, maybe in this way, maybe-- is it possible to say that before you're 29, you're living out a lot of the previous ego's ac-- in other words, suppose we pick the Sa-- pick the Saturn out of the psychosomatic and say the soul comes into-- into incarnation now. And it has with it traces of its previous-- the previous functioning of these powers. [RG: Yeah.] Now maybe you could characterize it as before 29, it's still working off the previous ego structure in some way a lot. [RG: Yeah.] And at 29 now that ego functioning actually becomes individualized, [student assents] like the instinctual one, you know, (the--) I mean in that way, you would say that they are really transmitting something from outside of the imagination, it just happens that the Saturn function, the Jupiter, those ones aren't peculiarly-- don't peculiarly function as-- well--

DB: It seems to me that the functioning--

RG (simultaneously): Ok, but not outside the individual soul.

DB: It seems like--

RG: Isn't the claim that the Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto in some sense bring in contents that are not from within the indi-- individual soul?

AS: No I thought the re-- the most recent discussion was that they actually represented the individual soul.

RC (faint): Not the empirical personality.

AS: Not the empirical personality but the individual-- the three aspects [AD simultaneously, faint: Yeah.] of-- in fact the unit soul.

TS: See I thought that-- that all that-- that business of the cycles indicated was that-- and also the fact that they have been missing from Western astrology until fairly recently indicated that that individual soul is not assimilated to the imagination or to the-- well-- yeah, that there weren't a lot of tropes around for that--

AD: Oh no?

TS: What? Tropes of the individual soul itself, that the tropes are of the soul powers and their development but that the individual soul itself was not something which was involved in-- well-- especially in the Western-- in the Western--

AD (simultaneously): No, it is strange, you know, the trans-Saturnians, how recent in comparison to the others, yes. And there were-- it would also seem that the rise of individuality has been accentuated some way in recent times.

JC: And also the fact that the East doesn't use the trans-Saturnians, they haven't, and their cultures tend to be more collective.

AD: Yeah.

TS: Even though they knew about at least Uranus and Neptune (at times).

AD: They knew about Neptune?

TS: I think-- in Manly Hall he has an indica-- he has in his Secret Teachings, [Note: Manly P. Hall, The Secret Teachings of All Ages.] there was a thing of-- on Egypt where he talks about them knowing about Neptune as well as Uranus.

AD: Well no, leaving Egypt out. You don't know-- Egypt is a land of magic. And a lot of things they know they may have-- [couple inaudible student words] they may have purposely kept hidden.

BS: Are you suggesting (reason/recent)--

RG (simultaneously): I-- I-- go ahead.

BS: Are you suggesting there's something incomplete about just considering the seven Chaldeans, that there's something complete to the individual when you bring in the eighth planet?

AD: No. To me the Chaldeans would represent the empirical individual, seven souls.

RG: And the trans-Saturnians represent the--

DB: That--

TS/S(?): The higher.

RG: The what?

DB: --would seem-- the higher soul.

RG: The higher individual soul.

AD: The functioning of the higher. [student assents, faint] But as it must manifest through that lowest, [RG: Right.] within that lower.

JC: See, [few inaudible RG words simultaneous with JC] it's like the way it interfaces with the empirical personality.

AD: I'm sorry?

JC: So like the way that the individual soul is going to interface with the-- [AD: I--] [AS drawing] the em-- categories of the imagination in order to-- the mind's functioning, the psychosomatic organism, [short pause while AS draws] the-- what is it that's--

BS: So it's like you have the sev-- well I'm just going off now, so if you have the seven powers of the soul constituted let's say by Uranus in its own mode--

AD: Constituted?

BS: Contained within Uranus in its own mode. That would give the-- that would allow for the presence of a higher individuality rather than the empirical subject or whatever you want to call the empirical.

S (faint): Uh-hm.

AD: You're saying that the seven Chaldeans are encompassed by Uranus.

BS: Yeah. And that-- that's what I meant by inclusion.

AD (simultaneously): And therefore included--

BS: I'm sorry?

AD: And therefore included in Uranus as it's the vehicle of the trans-Saturnians.

BS: Yeah, and if we say Uranus is--

AD: The trans-Saturnians.

BS: Yeah. Is actually the knower or representative of the knowing of the Nous, then it would some way establish the individual soul in the Nous.

S: Uh-hm.

S (very faint, possibly part of background): [few words inaudible]

RG (simultaneously): The myth certainly goes along with that I think.

BS: What was that--

RG: The myth, the Uranus, Saturn, Jupiter myth certainly seems to go along with that idea where Uranus just swallows Saturn and Saturn has to break out of the individual [AD: Uh-huh.] and-- and manifest itself and Uranus is trying to keep it in himself [couple/three words inaudible]

AD: And then Jupiter had to--

RG: Do the same thing as Saturn. And Venus is created through the action of Saturn. And they're all related there in that myth in that way. Yeah, to support this.

AH: All these things seem in a sense like that interface point between the individual-- the individual's trans-Saturnians. Haven't we spoken of that some other time as being the Earth, I mean in terms of the actual astrological symbols for the chart, you know. Where-- my question is, where-- what part does the Earth play in the distinction between trans-Saturnians and the Chaldeans? Is-- is that a significant issue? [short pause] (Earlier) the chart (when) the chart [couple words inaudible] is (unfolded).

RG: Yeah.

AH: It's real confusing to talk about this distinction. We're not talking about it from the point of view of the Earth in terms of the actual symbol.

RG: Well, that's the locus where it all takes place but it doesn't seem to be needed to discuss the distinction between (them).

DB: No but, I thought at one point the distinction-- I might be wrong but I thought at one point the distinction was made between fact that the trans-Saturnians dealt with the reason-principles at the level of the inerratic sphere where the Chaldeans dealt with the tropes within the tropical zodiac. Now I might-- I might have that upside down and backwards.

S (simultaneously, faint): [few words inaudible] what'd you say?

AS: Yeah. And that--

DB (simultaneously): I think that was said once, right?

AS: That would be-- that's ok, that's fine, I-- it just seems though that astrono-- again, astronomically and I'm sure when you look and you see you got these seven planets. Now there's nothing, I mean-- Every-- every other fact of, you know, whatever we're going to find is going to be reflected in the cosmos.

RG: Gnostic-- no that's not true, I mean--

AS: Not everything, sorry.

RG (simultaneously): I mean, dignities and non-dignities you don't see reflected particularly in the cosmos.

AS: But that's a non-essential.

S: You're right, that's non-essential.

AS: But on the other hand--

DB: See, I mean just looking at it from my own-- my own point of view I've never-- never thought of my own-- as being identified with any one of those principles. I mean it's real, you know, well, I've got Uranus here and Neptune here and Pluto here. It never occurred to me to think of that as any kind of an identification. It's always like an opportunity for something outside the matrix that I live in to-- to come in.

S: Avery, what were you doing up on the board there?

AS: Yeah and I just [one word inaudible] like I draw a picture or [one word inaudible] what we were trying to say [couple words inaudible]

S (simultaneously): Well then tell us about it.

S: True.

RC: David, is it true what you've said? You mean really?

DB: You mean personally?

RC: Yeah.

DB: Yeah I don't feel identified with any one of those guys. I always-- I always look forward to their transits because they're-- they're generally good for something but, I don't-- I never like say, "Oh well, I feel like Uranus today. Or Jupiter."

RC (simultaneously): Would you-- Like when you had certain Uranus aspects, is it possible that you might have felt, during the period of that conjunction, more like what you really were than you were before or after? You might actually have felt that you were operating in conjunction with--

DB: No. No the only time I remember anything specifically was when I had Uranus on Mars, I said, "Oh right, now I remember. This is what Mars is all about." But it didn't have anything to do with Uranus. I mean, I didn't feel like-- I didn't feel like that.

AH (faint): But you can't say that you're entirely divorced from that either.

DB: No.

AH (faint): Uranus may br-- may have its influence total nature on your psychosomatic vehicle. It might-- it might not be [one/two words inaudible] bound to the ego-structure-- that, I mean-- It is your Uranus situated on your Mars.

S (simultaneously): Uh-hm.

RC: No, whenever I've had Uranus conjunction, I've really-- that time it was going on felt like, this is what I want to be able to operate like. This is much more like me than the other guy.

BS: This [couple inaudible student words simultaneous with BS] through the Chaldean?

RC: Well I don't know who was talking then but I know that during the period of the transit, the overall-- [TS simultaneously: Nothing like (couple words inaudible)] the overall picture looked more like what I wanted to look like than the--

S (faint): Yeah, the overall picture.

TS: But when you speak-- I don't quite understand why you've-- Anthony, you don't think there's anything to if their-- their perception or non-perceptible quality. I--

AD: I don't know, I don't know what you mean.

TS: Well, that the-- we've talked of-- I thought of the planets, like the Chaldean planets, as being the statues of the Gods, and there was-- that from the point of view of our consciousness, that certainly bodies of the Gods are visible or perceivable part of our field of perception. But other-- I imagine that there's others that are never going to be from the Earth-- Earth's point-- (I mean/and), perceivable or appear to be embodied. Seemed like when we say that a planet is not embodied or not perceivable, we're saying also that it's not embodied or it doesn't have a body from the point of view of Earth consciousness, terrestrial consciousness. And if we lived in some other planet in the solar system perhaps it would be perceivable but that it seemed that these three planets or two and a half planets by their not being altogether embodied is also one of the indi-- as-- to me as much of an indication of their distinction from the--

AD: Well it is for me too, the fact that they're invisible.

TS: I mean I think that, you know--

AS: No I would think-- and isn't that funny, just the very one, the Uranus which is partly visible, partly not, is exactly the one where sometimes it completes its cycle and sometimes it doesn't, the same fact shows up [TS simultaneously: Well and al-- yeah.] in terms of space or in terms of time.

RG: Uh-hm.

TS: It's curious also that every one we've chosen so far to do lived his Uranus cycle out.

RG: Uh-hm.

AD: Not Puccini.

AS: No, not Puccini.

S: Not Puccini.

AS (simultaneously): Not-- not-- not--

AD (simultaneously): 66.

TS: 66, he's the only one that-- ok but--

AS (simultaneously): No, there's somebody else.

AD: Wagner? He didn't live that long, did he?

AS: Wagner didn't.

TS: Pretty close to it, 78, 9.

AS: He didn't finish it (though).

AD: Yeah, he left-- he left it hanging.

S: (Faith is the prayer.)

S (simultaneously): But look--

AD: [few words inaudible] (laughter)

RG (simultaneously): But, why do you need a physical-- [S simultaneously: Come on, Tim.] physical-- physical manifestation of [few words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): No I think-- I think the point (is) making is-- being made here is important. That insofar that Neptune and Pluto and-- and Uranus for a great part is not included in the perceptible world, alright, it's-- that in itself is an indication that these seem to be trans-- [student assents] you know, beyond the imaginal realm as far as we're concerned.

RG: Yeah, I agree.

TS: Yeah that-- yeah that's what I'm trying to say.

AD (simultaneously): (On) another planet of course I might--

RG: Yeah I agree.

TS: (No) and it seems like, for example I was thinking that-- well this is crazy but that like, what Avery's drawn, that what's within the Dragon, that the functions which are actually immanent in that Dragon, the organs of that Dragon as it were, would be the Chaldean planets plus sometimes Uranus to some extent. But the other two entirely and Uranus to some extent also, would be outside of that function, it would function on it perhaps and transform it or pull one out of it or whatever but they would not be actual organs within it, that they'll still-- representative of modes of the soul's-- modes of the-- of the individual soul. And it seems that-- curious on-- one looks at other planets, for example, Jupiter has nine moons I think. [student assents] So that from its point of view all the-- there's a moon for every planet in the solar system, you know, that there seems to be a-- in other words, it itself is its own solar system, it with its moons around it is-- it's a solar system that-- a reproduction of the entire solar system as one would-- well-- (bit of laughter)

S: Yeah.

RG: Right so Avery's revealing through time what you're saying-- I mean you could [couple words inaudible]

AS (simultaneously): Yeah [few words inaudible] (it seems to) totally.

TS (simultaneously): But it's a para-- it's a curious parallel.

RG: Yeah, sure, it is a-- yeah, definitely.

AS: Space-- and space and time I mean is exactly the-- [TS simultaneously: (one/two words inaudible) but--] well not exactly but it seems to be a big point.

TS: And prepa-- it shows up-- I mean (is) [one word inaudible] with screwing things-- Uranus' poles which-- Uranus' poles are perpendicular to the Sun, are-- no, parallel, that the point-- Uranus' North pole points directly at the Sun, it's not-- not at right angles to it. I mean, and that's the only planet that does that. [student assents] You know, a very strange planet, (you know).

AD: Well I know Blavatsky for instance didn't include Neptune in our solar system and I imagine she'd leave out Pluto, she would exclude that too. They're not part of our solar system.

TS: And now Neptune's outside of Pluto.

RG/S(?) (faint): Uh-hm. Neptune is out--

TS (simultaneously): Yeah.

S (very faint): (That's true?)

TS: Astronomically Neptune is the furthest planet from its-- from the Sun. [RG assents] And then Pluto's inside it.

AS: I think all are significant.

RG: Sure they're all significant [couple words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): Yeah but what-- what do they signify?

RG: Yeah, ok, but then-- you're never going to get it from that part.

TS (simultaneously): [couple words inaudible] well they signify--

RG: You're going to have to go back to your [couple inaudible AS words simultaneous with RG] theoretical distinctions.

AS: Well yeah, well now the-- that's why I was try-- in term-- is there some way to distinguish in terms of [one word inaudible] and are you saying that-- seems (that when) it gets to the point of saying that the Chaldean planets do have-- in other words that these are really these soul powers outside, that they do have a vehicle to work through, there is some kind of imagined psychosomatic structure or an imaginal construction. 'Cause they can't operate in the psyche. They can't directly operate in the psyche unless they have an organ to work through. I mean that seems to be one of the criteria at least in Plotinus, that the soul power can't-- or the soul can't work in the individual unless it's got a medium to work in. Now I don't know, are you saying that the seven Chaldeans seem to have a medium that they work in? Yeah?

JC: Why would that [AS simultaneously: (Yeah.)] make Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto the knower just because it doesn't have a medium to work in? And what's the qualitative difference in those three from the seven Chaldeans?

TS: Well maybe it's that they're-- in that they're functioning in the productive imagination but not in the reproductive imagination, that the quality of them as knower is more evident, or the quality of them as-- as peculiar to the individual soul is more evident as they become, you know-- they're freed from or not-- not en-- not entirely obscured by the reproductive imagination.

RC: And necessarily (they would lose) consciousness.

TS: What?

RC: Maybe they would necessarily be components of the Witness consciousness because it can't [couple words inaudible]

TS: They're not in the psychosomatic system or they're only, I mean--

DB (faint): Which would bring about the dignities because they're not functioning through the elements. They don't function [few words inaudible] They don't need the elements as their medium but-- and--

AD (faint): Well, (good answer, good answer). Yeah.

S (faint): I'm pretty sure you could put it there.

S (very faint): But then [few words inaudible]

S (very faint): Yeah.

DB (faint): If it's so, they don't follow [one/two words inaudible]

AH (faint): [couple words inaudible] are we in, do you know?

S (faint): [couple words inaudible]

DB: My personal theory--

AS (faint): They must use the individual kind of function.

AD: Well one thing, one thing seems obvious. They're not perceptible. In other words, they're not in our imagination.

TS/S(?): Yeah, right.

S: That they're what?

AD: That they're not in our imagination.

DB (faint): Right.

TS: It seems only insofar as the imagination is altered to hold some idea of individuality that they became available at all. In other words, with the dawn of the eighteenth [AD simultaneously, faint: Well--] century and then it began to creep in, you know. [students assent, very faint] And--

DB (faint): Well to me (you have to say by the) aspects of the knowledge outside of the imagination.

AS: No but I think that the-- now I-- this is really going and interpreting.

BS (simultaneously): And we really have to stretch to do that.

AD: It's alright, [AS simultaneously: But--] we're drowning anyway.

AS: Ok. But now--

AD (simultaneously): Keep going, (AD laughs a bit) you can jump.

AS: How would you-- how do you get to know by-- Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto? You need a-- you need a telescope. Now, I think this is saying that--

AD: Or very good eyes.

AS: Or very good eyes. In other words, that-- again what you're saying that these aren't in the imagination, that the imaginal functions can't directly get at them and like you're given-- it's almost like you have to develop a certain extra-imaginal--

JC: Seeing.

AD: Well as soon as you develop instruments, [AS, faint: And what does that mean?] that gives you the opportunity to peer into the subtle.

LR: And now that is within your imagination.

AD: No, no, it's not in the imagination.

S (faint): In the senses.

LR: Insofar as you can see them whether it's with a telescope or not it's like the imagination's gone (around).

AD: No, if I take-- if I take the-- the compound creature as a criterion, soon as I give him a telescope I've already altered his framework. I'm not talking about that creature anymore. [student assents, faint] I'm talking about him as though he's functioning with psychical senses.

S (faint): Uh-hm, yeah.

TS: And it's true too that he-- all of those planets were--

BS (simultaneously): [couple words inaudible] sure.

TS: All of the planets were observed and recorded as astronomical phenomenon for-- in some cases decades before they were recognized as planets. And they were-- they were observed, seen through the telescope or whatever. Pluto--

AD (simultaneously, faint): Well, yes, it was.

LR: I think [TS simultaneously: So that--] the imagination-- the scope of the imagination's been (enlarged). And I don't see why you don't say [few words inaudible]

TS: Well, in that-- well I thought he was saying because they're using the nor-- a mechanical or an artificial mode that--

S (faint): Uh-hm.

LR: That what?

AS: No but, there's a bigger-- there's a really a bigger question here which her-- which her question really is asking. Are these other three-- are all of these-- all ten really soul powers? Right? Right Linda, that's-- that's what-- that's what you were saying. That the-- the implication of what you're saying is that all ten of these are sort of on an equal status as soul powers. And the other-- and the other-- the other point of view is that the three-- that three of them are really have a different status.

LR (faint): No I wasn't saying that.

AD: Maybe you weren't saying that?

AS: No but that's the implication.

AD (simultaneously, faint): Yeah.

S (faint): I see.

AS: I think that is.

RG (simultaneously): Well, yeah.

AS: That's exactly the implication because if the imagination is getting bigger to include Uranus then to include Neptune then to include Pluto--

LR: It doesn't make them an equal-- on equal status.

AS: No, no the-- look, the implication of that is simply I think that they will-- that they eventually are soul powers that are going to get incorporated.

LR: Yeah, ok, I'd agree with that, I just wouldn't put-- say that therefore they're all on the same sta-- they all have the same status.

TS: Mostly that (it wouldn't be) [few words inaudible]

AS (simultaneously): No but by status I mean the same ontological-- they have-- they-- [TS: You start all over again.] same ontological basis. [BS: But one is--] And the other view is that the Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are on a different status.

TS (faint): [few words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): You see, if we take-- if we take the sensible world as I cro-- as our criteria, alright, then that-- that means we don't see those planets. Now you say let's bring in-- let's bring in a telescope. Ok. When-- when I am looking at something and I can't see, let's say I use the microscope, now, wouldn't you say I'm changing frameworks, that I can't operate [LR: Yeah.] with the two frameworks simultaneously? In other words, I can't import--

LR: Yeah, I agreed to that.

AD: Alright.

LR: I'm just saying that when you see Uranus or Neptune or Pluto through a telescope, I'm not saying it's not of a different framework, in fact I would say yes, it is of a different framework that I would s-- maintain that now when you see it through that telescope, [AD, very faint: Uh-hm.] it is with the real imagination, right there and then in that perception.

RC (faint): You still see the gross body, not subtle.

AH (faint): In other words, (he) hopes that there--

LR (simultaneously): That-- that you've now, you know, you-- exactly that, that you have changed frameworks and that you haven't separated from the-- the (Earth).

AD (simultaneously): But then what-- but then what is it that you've brought into the imagination [LR simultaneously: Yeah.] through the use of the telescope?

LR: That's the point. That's the point.

BS: What's the point?

LR: That-- that you've brought something of a different nature or framework into the scope of the imagination.

AD: Yeah. And I would be more inclined to say that you're bringing in the teaching or the doctrine. [student assents, faint] Because, I mean that seems to be appropriate.

RC (simultaneously): So if you-- if you took our solar system, that you really mean the natural limits of our imagination.

AD (very faint): Yeah.

RC: Then the vasanas that surrounded [couple words inaudible]

S (very faint): Uh-hm.

AH: The Pope's (going to get on later) [few words inaudible]

AD: That was the learned doctrines. The Pope would be too stupid to say that.

AH (faint): There was a tremendous collective reaction to that very instrument (and a material) fight, the resistance that--

AD: You know how long they tortured that guy to make him recant? Doesn't get you anything. Eight years. They threw him in a dungeon, and he wouldn't recant. He tried to modify them in the beginning but after that he says, "Nope, this is the way it is, whether you like it or not." Finally burnt him at the stake. And a choir of angelic fellows singing while he was burning.

LR: Who was this?

AD: Bruno. Who I think had more of an influence on Spinoza than Wilson is willing to grant. What am [LR simultaneously: I agree.] I talking about? (laughter)

S (amidst laughter): Exactly.

LR: I would have to agree.

AD: Bruno was quite an extraordinary man too. But you see, if you-- if you start doing that, I made the point before that you introduce the relativity-- the immense relativities of all time and space, you will-- you will get caught in a quagmire. You've got to keep the framework you're operating with and explain everything in terms of that framework. [RC assents] You can't bring in another framework. I know [LR simultaneously, faint: I understand that too.] people today are so dominated by the relativism of our age that they actually think they're-- they're smarter than they were. And they're not. Because the most obvious thing about relativity is that it's not relative.

RC: Would you say though that, like when you view them through the telescope are they the gross body that we see? And even though it's--

AD: You've brought something into view with your imagination. Yeah. [couple inaudible RC words simultaneous with AD] But our imagination doesn't guarantee the existence of these things. They're there. But once-- once they become part of our perceptible world, alright, then they become let's say included in the imaginal essence we're operating with. [RC assents] But if they're outside of that imaginal essence then they're not part of our world. I don't consider this-- the stars as part of our world. They're just pinpoints of light.

S (very faint): Uh-hm.

LR: Holes in the sky.

AD: Huh?

LR: Holes in the sky.

AD: Holes in the sky.

S: But is that to say that the Earth's imagination [one word inaudible] to a certain point to be able to include that because historically at certain times then [one word inaudible]

AD: The Earth's-- the-- the Earth's evolution.

S (faint): The Earth, yeah.

AD: Well, the only-- the only thing I can see here is and it seems to be appropriate, is that quote that we used from PB: only now after 7,000 years [RC assent] could we have a complete doctrine. [Note: See Paul Brunton, The Notebooks, V13, 12:2.186.] Those three planets seem to be almost the astronomical equivalents of that statement, [student assents] when I say now the whole doctrine is being brought in once these are brought in through the realm of perception, but in this case it has to be subtle perception. It's that our understanding is extending deeper into the subtle realm.

TS: So instead of functioning in terms of the sevenfold which would be something of the ring soul [diagram], it's almost like an entire quadrant, that you have Hypostases becoming the active-- the Soul Hypostasis is a tenfold [diagram], and it'd be then the actualizing (meaning/mean).

AD: The soul is tenfold?

TS: Well (then though) these three planets, the completion of the doctrine with these three planets coming in, I was thinking that this through-- a long time ago we noticed that, whether it's the ten Sephira or the ten dignities in each quadrant, that each of the Hypostases each requires ten Intelligibles to manifest it or actualize it. And so there seems to be something of the nature of a-- of the-- of the individual-- of human experience here which is now a full image of, you know, System of Nature and that--

[Audio File 1982 0717c (formerly 1982 0717b) ends abruptly. We are missing all other audio files for this class.]