Wednesday, January 4th, 1984

CLASS at Wisdom's Goldenrod, Hector, NY

with Anthony Damiani (AD)

January 4a, 1984

PB PARAS; PHILOSOPHY

TOPIC: PB Paras

SUBJECT: Philosophy

SUBSUBJECTS: World-Idea, Faculty of Understanding, Non-duality

CONTENTS:

STAGES OF PROGRESS: MYSTICISM, METAPHYSICS, PHILOSOPHY

PREREQUISITES TO ENTER THE SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY

WORLD-MIND IS THE TEACHER

PHILOSOPHY AS THE WISDOM FUNCTIONING OF THE UNDIVIDED MIND; THE MANIFESTED WORLD AS THE PRODUCT OF WISDOM

A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF KNOWLEDGE IS RELEASED AT CERTAIN PERIODS IN HISTORY

THE NEED TO FORGE A NEW PRESENTATION OF THE TEACHINGS

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MYSTIC AND THE PHILOSOPHER

THE MIND IS BECOMING THE UNIVERSE; ALL WISDOM IS WITHIN YOUR MIND

WHEN LIFE CAN TRULY ARTICULATE ITSELF, YOU'RE A PHILOSOPHER

BOOKS READ FROM OR REFERENCED:

• Paul Brunton, Notebooks. 16 vols; Vol. 1 entitled Perspectives [Persp.].

• Paul Brunton, The Hidden Teaching Beyond Yoga

• Paul Brunton, The Wisdom of the Overself

NOTES:

• This is 1984 01/04a, PB Paras; Philosophy Class, and the first entry associated with this date. 1984 01/04b = Buddhism Seminar, for which we have no audio, just JF notes.

• Earlier transcript versions exist.

TRANSCRIBED from Audio Cassette Tapes (and also using the original Pat Campbell 1983 transcript as a basis) by HP, et al. in 1993 as part of the set for Living Wisdom. V11 version 2018. Reformatted from V11 version by JRM & JF 2019-2020, with Subheads and Table of Contents added by JRM. In 2024, IT updates prefatory matter and footer, replaces tape markers with audio file markers, adds Subsubjects, alters Subheads to make more accurate, completes Book List, corrects typos/errors, reformats to accord with new conventions. Readable edited transcript – V14.1r.

AUDIO FILES: 1984 0104a, 1984 0104b. [Note: "Tape" and "Side" refer to original audio cassette tapes that were later digitized into .MP3 Audio Files.]

1984 01/04a at Wisdom's Goldenrod

PB Paras; Philosophy

Readable Edited Transcript

STAGES OF PROGRESS: MYSTICISM, METAPHYSICS, PHILOSOPHY

[Audio File 1984 0104a Begins]

PB: "In the first stage of progress we learn to stand aside from the world and to still our thoughts about it. This is the mystical stage. Next, we recognize the world as being but a series of ideas within the mind; this is the mentalist-metaphysical stage. Finally, we return to the world's activity without reacting mentally to its suggestions, working disinterestedly, and knowing always that all is One. This is the philosophical stage." (Persp. p. 257) (this para also Dec. 21, 1983)

ME/JB/LD/DB/LH?/LdS (7 min.)/AH/pause/RC/PB: "…we return to the world's activity…all is One."

BS: Knowing that all is one would seem to be a result of the second stage, that the world is a series of thoughts in the mind. So all the thoughts are essentially one, because the mind would be one. To return to the world's ACTIVITY working disinterestedly might be to return to the many knowing that each, or all, is one; and in accordance with the World-Idea would be disinterestedly--

AD: The mind knows itself without ideas, with ideas, and then the same indifferently in either case.

PB: "Science suppresses the subject of experience and studies the object. Mysticism suppresses the object of experience and studies the subject. Philosophy suppresses nothing, studies both subject and object; indeed it embraces the study of all experience." (Persp. p. 258 and V13, 20.1.21)

DR: Excuse me a minute. Anthony, I didn't hear the last part. Mind knows itself without thoughts?

AD: Yes.

DR: And the mind knows itself with thoughts?

AD: Yes.

DR: And the last?

AD: And then knows itself the same, identically in either situation, with or without (thoughts). (pause)

PD: That seems to imply that a sage's mind doesn't function through vehicles, or faculties of knowledge.

AD: When it knows the world as idea, it also knows the faculty of understanding which brings about the World-Idea. It knows THAT to be mind, too. The third one simply clenches the non-dual position: With or without ideas, mind remains itself. (pause)

DR: So in this way of speaking the world is essentially the idea that you're speaking about.

AD: Yes. You have to think of this happening to one mind in order to receive the dramatic impact he's trying to make. Conceive of your mind, so to speak, stripped bare, without any thought, without the World-Idea. Again, conceive of your mind, so to speak, the ideas present to it, the World-Idea is present to it, and it recognizes the World-Idea as idea. And then the third phase is where one and--still this same mind--recognizes or is identical, whether it thinks of itself with ideas or without ideas. (pause)

PREREQUISITES TO ENTER THE SCHOOL OF PHILOSOPHY

PB: "Philosophy is faced with the problem of educating each individual seeker who aspires to understand it. There is no such thing as mass education in philosophy." (Persp. p. 259 and V13, 20.2.289)

(above para reread, pause)

PB: "Although philosophy propounds statements of universal laws and eternal truths, nevertheless each man draws from its study highly personal application and gains from its practices markedly individual fulfilment. Although it is the only Idea which can ever bring men together in harmony and unity, nevertheless it becomes unique for every fresh adherent. And although it transcends all limitations imposed by intellect emotion form and egoism, nevertheless it inspires the poet, teaches the thinker, gives vistas to the artist, guides the executive, and solaces the labourer." (Persp. p. 258 and V13, 20.1.150)

PD: (It seems) a real mystery, what philosophy is.

RC: The title of this section is "What is Philosophy?".

("Although" para reread)

PB: "The theory of philosophy is suited and available to everyone who has the intelligence to grasp it, the faith to accept it, the intuition to recognize its supreme pre-eminence. The practice of philosophy is more restricted, being for those who have been sufficiently prepared by previous inner growth and outer experience to be willing to impose its higher ethical standards, mental training, and emotional discipline upon themselves. To come unprepared for the individual effort demanded, unfit for the intellectual and meditational exertions needed, unready for the teacher or the teaching, is to find bewilderment and to leave disappointed. A premature attempt to enter the school of philosophy will meet with the painful revelation of the dismaying shortcomings within oneself, which must be remedied before the attempt can be successful." (Persp. p. 259 and V13, 20.2.120)

AH: The quote says the theory is available to everyone.

AD: With minor qualification: if he's intelligent enough!

PB: " . . . the intelligence to grasp it, the faith to accept it, and the intuition to recognize its supreme pre-eminence."

AH: What is the theory as opposed to the practice?

LR: Are you serious, Andrew?

AH: Yes. Quite serious, actually.

HS: We took a vote. We think that's a good question.

AD: I didn't hear the question. You both seem to be short of breath.

AH: . . . I'm not clear on the distinction between theory and practice. The prerequisites for theory are what I have thought of as prerequisites to the practice.

(First sentence of the quote is reread.)

AD: So the theoretical aspects of philosophy, in order to be grasped, you have to have a certain intelligence, faith, and intuition. Fine. There's nothing hard about that. The next step is a little harder. (Rereads second sentence) Now you have to draw on experiences that you yourself have had in the past. and is there sufficient experience in the past that would encourage you to apply these principles that you've learned? What we refer to as RIPENESS? Are you sufficiently RIPE to see the need to apply the system of ethics, for instance, that it imposes? Are you willing to apply that?

AH: It's possible, then, to understand the theory of ethics.

AD: Yes, and be absolutely incapable of applying it. (pause) That's the acid test, isn't it? Go on, Randy.

(Rereads: "To come unprepared . . . successful.")

(DB/LD/DB/AD: I don't understand your question, David./DB/= 3 min.)

AD: Yes, but I don't see your question.

DB: What's a mature--how is any entrance other than the premature one--

AD: After you fulfill those requirements--all those shortcomings and limitations that you're working with, have to be corrected. Then you talk about getting into the school of philosophy.

DB: . . . It almost sounds like the discussion we've had previously where one develops the faculties of willing, knowing, and feeling to the utmost, and at that point insight comes in. Is that what he means there?

AD: Well, if you're trying to use an analogy, in the sense of saying that the person has to make himself fit--a fit candidate in order to enter the school of philosophy--yes, that's what he's saying. That you're not automatically fit to (be) involved with the school of philosophy, that he's speaking of.

You have to develop the powers of concentration and meditation; you have to APPLY ethics, your own system; you have to learn each of the lessons that is being brought home to you by life itself. These are things that QUALIFY you or FIT you as a student of philosophy. Only after they're done, can you properly apply to be a student of philosophy.

DB: How is it that we are to understand the student of philosophy is being defined at this point? Not someone who's trying to improve oneself, but one who's improved oneself to the point where it's not necessary any longer.

AD: I'm afraid it's always necessary, but I don't get your question.

DB: What is the transition point when one becomes a student, when you know you've passed the tests?…

AD: It seems that you're asking, "When do I know that I am now capable of becoming a student of philosophy?"

DB: Right.

AD: You'll know.

(inaudible/students)

LrD: David, it seems like something that grows like a flower, it develops slowly. And after a while you just know.

AD: You'll know if you could concentrate and meditate. You'll know through the experiences that life has brought you what your values really are. You'll really know. Don't worry. By that time, you would have been put through it. It won't be in your head, either.

Instead of reading forward, let's read backward.

RC reads: "Successful be can attempt." (laughter)

AD: I think about three quotations ago there was silence and then the next quotation there was silence. Let's go back to the ones where there was silence. You know, the ones that are greeted with silence. Let's reread them.

(RC/AD clarification on which quote to read)

WORLD-MIND IS THE TEACHER

PB: "Philosophy is faced with the problem of educating each individual seeker who aspires to understand it. There is no such thing as mass education in philosophy." (Persp. p. 259 and V13, 20.2.289) (repeat)

AD: Isn't that a nice one! Everyone that's interested in philosophy gets very special consideration. He goes through a very private course, private experiences. No Ph.D.s are handed out, no ceremonies necessary. Let's read it.

(AD & RC on which quote to read/quote above repeated)

ME: (inaudible) metaphysics (inaudible)

AD: (inaudible) metaphysical (inaudible). Yes, that's possible.

In what way would philosophy see to it that you're getting this very special education that's required?

LR: You're born.

AD: You're born. Very good. That's a beginning, fine.

VM?: You suffer.

AD: Yes, but you suffer in a very peculiar way.

LrD?: It's because your own individual Soul is the teacher, not some collective situation.

AD: Wouldn't you say that the World-Idea is the teacher? Isn't the World-Idea teaching you all these things?

LrD?: Yes, but isn't it true that the specific way that the individual would learn from the World-Idea as through one's own Soul?

AD: No. The World-Idea is what's teaching the Soul; it's educating the Soul. And it does so in a very precise and exact way, by the kinds of experiences that are going to come to you and the way you're going to respond to those experiences; whether you're going to apply what you've learned or whether you're going to revert to an atavistic procedure. Because it is the World-Mind, the World-Idea--if we take ourselves as inhabitants of this planet, then it would be the planetary Overmind and the individual mind together, that we're talking about. And we're speaking about the way the planetary Mind has provided for the individual very unique experiences that are his own and no one else's, no matter how similar they may seem to someone else's experiences.

And it is very specific instructions that come, because I think you're familiar enough with the fact that each person's chart shows the specificity and the chronological arrangement of the experiences that he's going to go through. What he gets out of them, of course, shows to what extent he's a philosophic student. To the extent that he grasps the meanings that are inherent in the experiences that he's going through and doesn't have to repeat them, to that extent, of course, he's a student. Don't you see that very clearly in the specificity of the experiences you go through? And they are very very specific. No two people have the same experiences, no matter how it looks on the surface. So it is not a mass type of education, it's a very specific kind of education that each and every one who is, let's say, aiming to be a philosopher is going to be put through: the teachers he will meet, those people who will influence him--all these things are very, very carefully arranged. And sometimes when you think back on some of the things that may have happened to you, you could see a second--a split second in timing would have prevented an important meeting, would have prevented this or that or the other thing. And how often a person has certain experiences, and according to his interpretation of those experiences, he acts on that interpretation, which right or wrong is not the point; but he's acting on his understanding of those experiences, and based on that there's certain consequences which will deliver their lesson to him. So it's not a mass education. It's a very highly selected, specific kind of experiences that each and every one is going through, is going to go through, who's on the quest.

And furthermore, there's even times when the World-Mind will bring in experiences that are not even destined for you in terms of your karma, but are just brought in, ad hoc! Just out of curiosity, you know: "Let's see what you're going to do with this one!" (laughter)

LrD: Wait a minute!

AD: Ultimately I think you'll see that the World-Mind is teaching you; you know, the willing, feeling, and knowing is a process that's being superimposed on you. You'll learn to think correctly, whether you like it or not, sooner or later, usually later, you'll learn to feel properly; you'll learn all these things. But it's the World-Mind that's always teaching you, imposing. So if you read that, you'll see it: You get the greatest education that can be conceived of, and you're not even grateful for it. Let's read the next one, Randy.

(RG/AD question clarification)

RG: Would you go over again why it's the World-Idea and not the individual Soul that gives you the experiences?

AD: Where do your experiences come from?

RG: I thought they came from your own Overself.

AD: Yes, they come from your own Overself: now you're thinking of the Overself as providing--or you're identifying it as the Undivided mind. Back again: WHERE AND WHAT IS YOUR EXPERIENCE OF? Whether you study the minutiae of biological science, the formation of the embryo, or any of these things, what is it that you are studying? Isn't it the manifestation of an infinite intelligence revealing itself in that manifestation? Who's teaching you? The Soul is what's learning, not teaching. If we're speaking about the Soul's developing the faculty of understanding, then it's the World-Idea that's going to develop that faculty of understanding in the Soul. And that means it has to provide it with a cosmos within which this takes place.

RG: But it also seems that if the World-Idea is presenting the experience, and out of that experience the Soul garners certain lessons or reacts to that presentation in a certain way, then it's also within the individual Soul that that reaction is being developed.

AD: Well, yes, that's true. It wouldn't deny the mutual reciprocity that's taking place. Dickie, is that what you're getting at?

RG: Sure.

AD: Yes.

RG: . . . Insofar that each individual reacts to experience in a certain way, the higher aspect of the Soul teaches the lower aspect.

AD: Insofar that each individual Soul acts according to its own way--what you mean there is according to its own past, the historical development of its own past. In other words, I react differently than you do, because historicity that went into my being is a little different than yours, so that goes into the present reactions that I have. But then again, that was provided for you by the experiences you have received in the world context.

I don't think it takes much effort to recognize that the World-Idea, or the World-Mind, is the source, the origin, so to speak, the mother of all our learning. Even willing knowing and feeling is being delivered into the core of our consciousness by the idea of justice which reigns in the master plan of the universe.

(JB/LR/PD?/ = 1 min.)

EC: When you receive an answer to your prayers, that's the World-Idea's response?

(EC/AD question clarification)

AD: Basically it would be the--it's a sympathy which is enkindled within the All, within the World-Idea. (pause) That's what magic is based on; prayer--all these things--are based on the fact that sympathy reigns throughout the one organism which we refer to as the World-Idea.

I think the point that has to be delivered home is to recognize that the World-Idea--to recognize its grandeur, its almost motherly way of attending to the needs of the Soul's development. Because the Soul in itself, as was pointed out, in its initial integrity, in other words, like in nirvikalpa samadhi, where the Soul is self-cognizant of itself and is not concerned with the external, there you could speak about a kind of self-sufficiency. Now I'm only playing with words, but when we speak about the Soul's need to manifest or get manifested through the World-Idea and evolve its faculty of understanding, then the World-Idea, the master plan of the universe, is the absolute prerequisite in which that development is going to take place. And it is guided in a very particular and very specific way from incarnation to incarnation, and even within one individual life one could see a guiding hand. You could call it your Soul, sure, why not? What would be the distinction you'd be making there?

RG: In that understanding, all the individual Souls are contained within the World-Idea.

(RG/AD question clarification)

AD: Yes, if you keep in mind that the word 'contained' here--I'm going to put quotation marks around it, it doesn't mean anything to me.

RG: Well, how would you say it?

AD: I can't. I'm not criticizing, I'm just saying that it's one of those things where we really won't find appropriate language, to say that the World-Idea contains Soul or Soul contains the World-Idea or manifests the World-Idea. I think we'd have sufficient difficulty trying to make that clear. The point that has to be grasped is that it is only through the World-Idea that the Soul comes to self-recognition.

(Side 1 of original cassette tape digitized as 1984 0104a Ends; Side 2 Begins)

PHILOSOPHY AS THE WISDOM FUNCTIONING OF THE UNDIVIDED MIND; THE MANIFESTED WORLD AS THE PRODUCT OF WISDOM

PB: "Although philosophy propounds statements of universal laws and eternal truths, nevertheless each man draws from its study highly personal application and gains from its practices markedly individual fulfilment. Although it is the only Idea which can ever bring men together in harmony and unity, nevertheless it becomes unique for every fresh adherent. And although it transcends all limitations imposed by intellect emotion form and egoism, nevertheless it inspires the poet, teaches the thinker, gives vistas to the artist, guides the executive, and solaces the labourer." (Persp. p. 258 and V13, 20.1.150) (read earlier in class without AD comment)

LDm: It almost seems that philosophy there would be the way you were speaking about the World-Idea.

AD: Of course. In a way, sure. Philosophy almost seems to coincide with the wisdom function of the Undivided Mind. That would be philosophy, yes. It is not to be equated with human ideation, human opinions. That's not philosophy.

LDm: In the last two quotes, it seems like the emphasis of philosophy, and self-recognition, all these things, is on the emphasis of the "WHAT," of contents, and not the pure consciousness itself. Not the "who," it's always the "what," the "what is philosophy," the "what is the teacher," but maybe that's an artificial way of looking at it.

AD: Right now the emphasis seems to be on the "what," but there'll be times when he'll emphasize the "who." And I think of the one quote we read where he said philosophy suppresses neither the subject nor the object but examines or goes into both of them. That is the integral approach of philosophy. That's why he regards the scientist as shortsighted as well as the mystic.

I think that after a while you'll begin to see his conception of philosophy is really quite beautiful. I think we've mentioned that at times in classes when we spoke about the firmament themselves--the starry heavens themselves--are like coeval with the foundation of wisdom. The world that is manifested is the product of wisdom. It's a master idea; it's the justice which is going to govern that master idea. And it is inconceivable that wisdom should come from anywhere else except from that World-Idea manifesting itself; in other words, the intelligence of the World-Mind manifesting itself through that very manifestation. That's why it's so ridiculous for anyone to deny or think of the world as illusory. I mean, to speak about God's intelligence as illusory is I think one of the biggest jokes I've ever come across.

LDm: . . .

AD: I didn't care what they call it. If that doesn't humble you, when you look up at the starry skies, then nothing is going to do it except the next time a rock falls on your head--probably sent by the starry skies! (laughter)

I mean this very specifically, because including the scientists, as well as some philosophers, the disrespect for which they speak of universal manifestation is really frightening.

And after all, what is more symbolic for existence than a rock garden? (pause) Shall we try another one?

A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF KNOWLEDGE IS RELEASED AT CERTAIN PERIODS IN HISTORY

PB: "It is the business of philosophy to cast out error and establish truth. This takes it away from the popular conceptions of religion. Philosophy by its very nature must be unpopular; hence it does not ordinarily go out of its way to spread its ideas in the world. Only at special periods, like our own, when history and evolution have prepared enough individuals to make a modest audience, does philosophy promulgate such of its tenets as are best suited to the mind of that period." (Persp. p. 259 and V13, 20.2.7) (repeated)

(LR/RC/LR/AD: What was your question? (=paraphrase)/)

LR: . . . What does it mean when he says philosophy at certain special periods puts forth its tenets?

AD: Well, in all probability, that there's certain periods in history when it is appropriate that a certain amount of knowledge is released, because there are recipients for that (found). Or, similarly, the appearance of an avatar takes place because the conditions of knowledge that have prevailed in the psyche of humanity at that time require that such a precipitation take place. (inaudible)

(7 min. student comments)

HS: What characterizes THESE times?

AD: You want a letter? (pause)

HS: Some people want me to say "yes." (laughter) Because we're at the edge of destruction? Isn't also there a tremendous availability of the teachings? . . .

AD: You're not very well acquainted with history if you're not aware that this is a crisis going on.

HS: It does seem quite unique, the amount . . .

AD: It never occurred before. (pause) Let's continue. Let's go on a little more.

PB: "Such a teaching . . ." (Persp. p. 259 & V13, 20.2.290)

AD: Continue, Randy, another one.

THE NEED TO FORGE A NEW PRESENTATION OF THE TEACHINGS

PB: "The spiritual seekers who followed René Guénon and the poets who followed T.S. Eliot fell into the same trap as their leaders. For in protesting, and rightly, against the anarchy of undisciplined and unlimited freedom, both Guénon and Eliot retreated backwards into formal tradition and fixed myth. Both had served their historic purpose and were being left behind. Both men were brilliant intellectuals and naturally attracted a corresponding type of reader. Their influence is understandable. But it is not on the coming wave of the Aquarian Age. New forms will be needed to satisfy the new knowledge, the new outlook, the new feelings. The classical may be respected, even admired; but the creative will be followed." (Persp. p. 259 and V13, 20.2.66)

(Approx. 7 min. student comments)

LR: I wonder what constitutes new forms? Are they put forth, given as a gift, by the World-Idea? (=paraphrase)

AD: Yes, but it would need an individual mind, or individual minds, through which it could get manifested.

LR: But are those forms contained in the World-Idea?

AD: Yes, that's all included in that superior knowledge. But the individual mind is the burning focus in which the ideas get manifested and reveal the world given to it. Without that individual mind that does it, it just is not available.

I think in a general way that PB is pointing out that in our times--and his book The Wisdom is an example of exactly that--that in our times there's a need for a RE-presentation of these teachings, but in terms of our own understanding and in terms of our own background, and that the need is really an imperative need. How many of us, when we think back to younger days, and we imagine ourselves as kneeling monks in front of a church window and in the quiet of a courtyard; and there we were going to get an illumination and everything was peaceful and quiet: and he's saying those days are gone. They're over. There's a whole new civilization coming out, and we're in the throes of its birth. And in that agony and in that turmoil we're going to have to forge a philosophy which is going to be representative of US and not of some people who lived 5,000 years ago.

I often found amusing to read some of these people. It's almost like--in reading Guenon or Schuon or any of them--I almost get the feeling like they wanted to say, "Well, let's turn the clock back to the 12th century and make out the past 700 years never happened." That's wishful thinking. It's such a childish naiveté. This is what it is today, and especially the past 80 years; anyone who's blind to what has gone on for the past 80 years is just like an ostrich who's got his head in the sand. And these new forms will develop. And PB says he's only a pioneer. Others will come, will follow him. And then they will lay out more and more of this ground plan. Let's try another one, Randy.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MYSTIC AND THE PHILOSOPHER

PB: "Philosophy clears away all the unnecessary mystery from mysticism, while preserving a proper attitude of awe and reverence to whatever is worthy of it." (V13, 20.4.1)

AD: Let's try another, Randy.

PB: "Philosophy offers the same meditational experience as mysticism, but it carries this experience to a wider and deeper level and at the same time integrates it with moral social and rational elements." (V13, 20.4.52) (repeated)

(4 min. student comments on the "wider and deeper level" and "integrates it.")

DB: Is philosophic mysticism tied more into the World-Idea than the regular mystic who's just retreating from the whole process?

AD: Isn't that exactly the point, David? Vivekananda wanted to enjoy nirvikalpa samadhi for days without end. He just wanted to sit and bask in it. And Ramakrishna says, "You've got to be a fool. There's something better than that." So look what happened. So they started that organization, right--the Ramakrishna/Vivekananda Society, which is a very philosophic approach of using the understanding and applying it to the needs of the world, instead of sitting in nirvikalpa samadhi for the next three months. The mystic would be satisfied with sitting in a corner and enjoying a samadhi; the philosopher would say, "No, I have to put it to use in the world." It's got to help evolve the World-Idea. I don't see your problem.

DB: . . . It seems that the philosophic mystic is able to go deeper and farther into nirvikalpa than the ordinary mystic.

AD: You're reading into it that interpretation, that the philosophic mystic or the mystic per se could deepen nirvikalpa samadhi. I don't know what you mean. That's something you're reading into the text. Whether you're a philosophic mystic or whether you're an ordinary religious mystic, nirvikalpa is nirvikalpa, period. You're not going to deepen it; you're not going to broaden it; you're not going to heighten it. That's all nonsense.

DB: That's why I'm confused.

AD: That's why I said--you answered your question and then you remained perplexed.

(5 min. student comments)

AD: Let's go on--a couple more.

[Audio File 1984 0104a Ends]

[Audio File 1984 0104b Begins]

THE MIND IS BECOMING THE UNIVERSE; ALL WISDOM IS WITHIN YOUR MIND

PB: "Philosophy will show a man how to find his better self, will lead him to cultivate intuition, will guide him to acquire sounder values and stronger will, will train him in right thinking and wise reflection, and, lastly, will give him correct standards of ethical rightness or wrongness. If its theoretical pursuit is so satisfying that it can be an end and a reward in itself, its practical application to current living is immeasurably useful, valuable, and helpful." (V13, 20.1.337)

(KD/AD question clarification)

KD: . . . I was wondering where the theory comes in. I was wondering if the practical application part was what you were calling the wisdom of the World-Idea, that immediacy--?

AD: The practical application would be the living of your life according to those principles that you understand theoretically as embodied in the World-Idea. Unless one applies the theory, then he's not living a philosophic life, although theory in itself has its value. You have the same division in ancient Greece, what they call practical and theoretical philosophy. Theoretical philosophy was required to begin with in order to understand what it is that you're doing. But without the practice and the application of these ideas, then you have not verified the theory in your own life. And until it is verified in your own life, it is not yet wisdom. It's still theory.

KD: . . . The way you just described it sounds really different from what you were describing before as the wisdom unfolded in your life.

AD: Well, that statement is made from the point of view of practical application. The statement can't be made unless a person has experienced, to some extent, the application of this theoretical knowledge, to actually see it in operation and to live it. You can't make too much of a sharp distinction between theory and practice. We make some; we have to.

KD: I thought what was so important about the description of philosophy as coeval with the wisdom of the World-Idea was the availability of that wisdom in our own life . . .

AD: You could think of it this way, this might help: think of wisdom in the sense that, if the mind is becoming--that let's say the mind is destined to become the universe. If you think of wisdom as the recognition of that, and the application of that. Your mind is becoming the universe, gradually, little by little, it's becoming the universe. And as it's doing so, it's beginning to understand the various laws that govern manifestation. When it begins to understand this, and it applies it to itself, then this is wisdom.

(4 min. student comments = RC/AH/)

AD: Let me change your example a little bit and maybe elaborate a little bit more for you. We say that the mind becomes the world that you experience. And in the process of the mind becoming the world, it assimilates a certain wisdom which is inherent in the world that it is going to manifest. In that process of assimilating the World-Idea and consequently assimilating the wisdom which is inherent in that, you can see that the mind, in becoming the world, is also, unconsciously, let's say, incarnating that wisdom. You follow that?

AH: Yes, I follow.

KD: It incarnates it because of--it gets to--in order to manifest it, it has to become it, to a certain extent. The identity with that world leads . . .

AD: Yes, now this will leave in the mind traces of that assimilation, as the mind assimilates that, traces of the World-Idea. If we say that the World-Idea is an ordered, intelligent whole, which is manifesting according to wisdom principles, and we say that the individual mind makes or transforms itself or metamorphosizes itself into the World Image, in that very process, it is assimilating these reason-principles. They are inherent as traces in the mind's functioning. They are deposited in the mind as an inherent wisdom within it. To apply wisdom means to draw on that reserve, to apply wisdom means to draw on that reserve, which, we just said, is inherent in or deposited in the mind.

Now 'theoretical' and 'practical' are only words. It's going on all the time. The mind is actually metamorphosizing itself into this idea of the world which is ordered by intelligence, and at the same time, learning from that what the meaning of it is all about, even though it may take a long time to come to that recognition.

KD: . . . Those are the reason-principles that you're talking about?

AD: Isn't that enough?

KD: It's tremendous! I can't believe what you're saying!

AD: Similarly, for instance, at night you have a dream, and in the dream, you're brought into realization of what fear is. Let's say a boa constrictor is wrapped around you, so that the mind has actually not only on the one hand metamorphosized itself into this dream and produced the fear, but experiences the fear and the fear is left behind as traces in the mind of its ACT, that is, of its metamorphosis into that. And this is constantly going on all the time, consciously or unconsciously.

KD: And that's the wisdom, the faculty of understanding? . . .

AD: All I'm simply trying to say is if the world is the product of wisdom, and your mind is constantly manifesting the world, then willy nilly it's going to get acquainted with wisdom, and become wisdom--

KD: --whether it likes it or not.

AD: Whether it likes it or not. But that follows from the premises, if we say that the mind is becoming the universe. The mind itself is becoming the world. That's inherent. If those are the premises, then the consequences of the mind's assimilation of those wisdom principles necessarily follow.

KD: When you say that the mind becomes the universe, you're saying that that point of identity, between the individual mind and the Cosmos . . . is what will leave you with this wisdom?

AD: Yes, so when you say that the individual mind receives the World-Idea, portrays that World-Idea, then inhabits part of the World-Idea and experiences it in a sensible way, you're saying the same thing. It's like when you say your mind is where the cloud is, because the whiteness of the cloud belongs to the mind and is a manifestation of a sensation that belongs to the mind. And obviously, your mind is learning how clouds are being formed. That's why they keep telling you: all wisdom is within you. It's within your mind.

KD: That's such a radical view of wisdom. I know you've been saying it for fifteen years, but . . .

AD: Some people have it down as being said a few times, yes.

KD: But . . . you said PB would write one quote when Jupiter was opposite the Moon and another-- there'd be a different idea expressed four minutes later. And the habit of my mind, my mind, is to think that PB, because of the extreme development, because he was a sage and because of his extreme experience in the world, and he'd met sages and all the books that he had read, he would sit down one night and just distill it from his memory, this wisdom. And this approach is radically different. In other words, the wisdom, the philosophy that we all want, that we think we have to do something to attain is--you keep saying that it's present immediately, now, in the life we're living. It isn't accomplished because we're going to ten more classes or because we're going to meditate twice as hard . . . (continues a bit)

AD: (Joking) You want to come to class, is that what you're saying?

KD: There's an impatience and sometimes even a denial of the importance of the life you're living in favor of a concept you have about what philosophy is. And his description of what philosophy is, even suggests a stance towards life that eliminates concepts, eliminates the workings of the lower intellect.

AD: Kathleen, as long as we are prisoners of our past, our memories, our thoughts--we will never have a bright, happy, new thought. It will always be a rehashing of the same thing.

KD: Like we said, the sage is immediate.

AD: Yes, but he doesn't think.

KD: . . . My mind is always looking ahead or looking back, saying, "I need this, I've got to have that." There's a denial (of) and impatience with the immediacy. I'm talking about an elimination of past and future.

AD: If you DO cancel out expectation, anticipation, the past and the future, then you become a receptacle, or there will spontaneously come to you thoughts which aren't yours, which are bright, happy intuitions, and they actually do tell you something NEW. That's what he represents, that's what PB represents.

KD: If you could control your mind to eliminate all those thoughts of the future and the past, you could somehow be a receptacle for the World-Idea. You WOULD be a channel.

AD: Yes, but the ego won't give you that opportunity. The ego will always say, "What will we have for dinner tomorrow?" or "What did you forget yesterday?" It will always be preoccupied with past or future.

KD: The habit of mind is so--

AD: Well, PB made that very clear. The wrong patterns or habits of thought must be broken if we are to approach this wisdom. You can't really approach this wisdom as long as you are a prisoner or a pensioner of your past.

AH: . . . If this mind is busily about the business of becoming the universe, at some point it's going to be impossible to speak of an individual, egotistical point of view.

AD: Yes, that's the ultimate aim of the World-Idea.

AH: Is that transition from personal to impersonal a gradual one also?

AD: Yes. It takes a long time. Alright, Randy, let's try another one.

PB: "It demanded no less than hundreds of interviews with different teachers and hermits, thousands of miles of travel to reach them, and at least a hundred thousand pages of the most abstruse reading in the world before I could bring my course of personal study in the hidden philosophy to a final close. Today I have not got the time to take others through such a long and arduous course and they have probably not got the patience to endure it." (Persp. p. 144 and V8, 12.3.103) (last sentence not read by Randy on the tape)

RC: I would say that that's a process that is included in the mind becoming the universe--his books and teachers and hermits and travels--they're not something other than the mind unfolding . . . We'd get a very different intuition, sitting in front of a TV or sitting in front of . . . the Hidden Teaching.

PD?: A computer? (laughter)

VM: . . . get cable . . .

AH: . . . I would like to know why it would make a difference? (TV or study)

RC: . . .

St: What if the World-Mind puts you in front of a television? (laughter)

AH: I don't understand how we could speak, at once, of the unfolding of wisdom--the way it's been described tonight--and, in the same breath, speak about the petty kinds of personal choices that we have to make . . .

KD: . . . That's the suggestion, that what we consider petty choices aren't petty at all . . . That's what's so radical. The importance of the life we're living is there in these so called petty choices . . .

AH: They're not petty even if they're prompted by egotism?

KD: That's different--that's part of the problem . . .

AD: That's part of what you have to understand when you make a choice.

KD: Karma teaches you, you made an egotistical choice, you made a mistake, and then hopefully you learn from that.

AH: . . .

LD: (Go) watch "Magnum".

HS: What do you mean when you say you become the World-Idea? Are you saying one's mind becomes the World-Idea? What do you mean by that?

AD: Just what I said.

HS: Is that how someone understands, by becoming the World-Idea? When someone has become more of the World-Idea, would we say he understands (that there's a/the) the World-Idea? Is that how you understand things?

AD: Yes.

HS: Is it a process always from the personal outward? The faculties develop and become larger and wider and more universal?

AD: Yes. Universalization of your mind is taking place.

LR: . . . The planets, aspects . . . that constitutes your mind. (hard to hear) . . . Let's say it's your responsibility, but really they're vehicles fabricated by the World-Idea and they're part of that World-Idea.

HS: It's a self-conscious assumption of the responsibility, with the knowledge of the fact that they are the ideational unfoldment of the World-Idea . . . The World-Mind fabricates your vehicle when you're born. . . They take charge of you, and at some point, perhaps, you're given the responsibility to take charge of them.

LR: . . . So wouldn't you say you've got that choice all the time . . .?

HS: I don't know. (1 min. student discussion) So the becoming of the World-Idea is in terms of assimilation, in terms of knowledge and growth and development and living-- Like, a planet's on a degree and in that you assimilate what the function is--

LR: You're allowing more and more of that idea to come through.

(HS/KD/AH/KD/AH/LdS/AH/KD/AH/RG/ETC = 5 min.)

LdS: . . . planetary spheres.

AD: All that's unnecessary, all that's unnecessary. YOU ARE that which is getting metamorphosized into the world that you experience. And in that process you imbibe the wisdom that's inherent in the World-Idea. There's no "me," no "I," nothing. YOU. The only you that's there. The only you that I'm speaking to. If there is another, let me know, by letter. Well, we don't want to weary the brain too much. Let's have one more.

PA/KZ?: How do we know when we are acting appropriately for this development to take place?

AD: You have to wait until that time comes. That's no theoretical question. When the time comes, the question will come up in the specifics that the circumstances of life itself provide you with. You cannot conceptualize that question. You can't imagine it. Very often, when I think back on some of the things I say, like if I say the "lower self" and the "higher self," and this, that, the other thing, and then I realize--my God--if you're in a state without thought there is no lower self, no higher self, any kind of self. These people are going to come back and say, "You're a lot of malarkey, you don't know what you're talking about." They're only an expediency, these words, anyway. But it's not a concept that's available yet, to say that the individual mind is universalizing itself. Potentially it's becoming universalized, because it's the very World-Idea, is becoming the very World-Idea, and through that process becoming universalized, is assimilating wisdom. This is not something to talk about, it's something you got to go home and think for a long, long time. At any rate, let's have one more.

WHEN LIFE CAN TRULY ARTICULATE ITSELF, YOU'RE A PHILOSOPHER

PB: "Not to escape life, but to articulate it, is philosophy's practical goal. Not to take the aspirant out of circulation, but to give him something worth doing is philosophy's sensible ideal." (Persp. p. 261 and V13, 20.1.340)

AD: That first part, Randy.

PB: "Not to escape life, but to articulate it . . ."

AD: Yes. (inaudible)

PB: ". . . is philosophy's practical goal."

AD: He's said everything when he says that. When life can truly articulate itself, you're a philosopher. In the meantime, you're a dodo bird! Thank you, Randy. (rings bell)

[Audio File 1984 0104b Ends]