Monday, January 30th, 1984

CLASS at Wisdom's Goldenrod, Hector, NY

with Anthony Damiani (AD)

January 30, 1984

ASTROLOGY; THEORY; SIX PSYCHIC FUNCTIONS

TOPIC: Astrology

SUBJECT: Theory

SUBSUBJECT: Six Psychic Functions, Planets

CONTENTS:

Psychic functions

Sun: a life

Venus: form-u-later, form-giving function, unites the appropriate form with a given matter, evaluative function, aesthetic perception, sense-perception

Venus as soul power translates intelligible into perception

Psychic functions more automatic than breathing, not reflective

Jupiter: guru of the chart, determines interrelationship of psychic functions, limits of growth or expansion that an entity can reach, functioning of entity as a whole, unfolding of sequence of archetypes, dharma/adharma, rightness or wrongness of instinctual functioning

Gurukola as grace of Jupiter

Don't have presuppositions as to how a chart is going to be, could be an organized conflict

The interrelationship of psychic functions predetermines the circumstances you will experience

Sun as principle of individuation

Mars: work done, energy expended, desire nature, shadow

Shadow as resistance to any transformation of libido from its habitual mode of functioning

Every planet (psychic function) has its shadow

Mercury: articulation of thought, communication, naming, classification of memories, symbolific activity, intellect, trickster, conjecture, logic of the sensible

Intellect is not the reason

Concept formation draws on reason

Mercurial function is evolving a language in which it can reflect itself

Mercury splits primal image into many pieces

Moon: apperception, body-thought as organ through which experience of sensible takes place and is brought back into oneself, assimilation, body-thought as organization of vasanas unfolding themselves, matrix from which memories, dreams, reflections flow out

Evolution of generic mentality

Astrology is a deific language, its symbolism is polyvalent; we are not comprehensive enough to grasp it

Each planet participates in all the others

Saturn: self-sensitivity

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].]

PAPER associated with this class:

• "The Six Psychic Functions as Elaborations of the Sun". This paper is undated.

NOTES:

• OLDER PARTIAL TRANSCRIPTS exist. Earlier fairly good partial of 55 pages done by Mark S. in 1986, which mostly, including ending, matches transcript below by IT. Per AS, who looked at scan of 1986 version, apparently nothing missing. However, see Saturn-paragraph APPENDED to this transcript.

• Excerpts from this transcript adapted and published in Astronoesis Endnote 54, "Planets as Rational and Instinctual Functions," p. 351ff, and also appear in "Editor's Epilogue".

• This was a regular Monday night Astrology class.

TRANSCRIBED Verbatim by IT prior to 2018 (V11a). This is V12a (2023) and has: updated prefatory matter, footer, and audio file name; Book List and TOC completed; new notes within transcript; new formatting to accord with new conventions. In 2025, IT updates audio file markers to match new REP audio. Archival verbatim transcript – V12a.

AUDIO FILES: 1984 0130a, 1984 0130b. [Note 1: "Tape" and "Side" refer to original audio cassette tapes that were later digitized into .MP3 Audio Files. Note 2 (from IT): We are possibly missing the last audio file for this class because the class cuts off abruptly while AD is talking. Note 3 (from jf): Nothing appears to be missing, per AS – however, see notes above. As of 1991 only two audio cassette tapes were to be found, which later got digitized. Note 4: In 2025, REP Studio cuts dead air from file b and improves its sound quality.]

1984 01/30 at Wisdom's Goldenrod

Astrology; Theory; Six Psychic Functions

[Audio File 1984 0130a Begins]

TS: --definitely the whole chart.

AD: That's not different than what we've done the, you know-- Basically this terminology is altered a little bit to accommodate the both of us but it's still the same basic idea.

[short pause]

TS (faint): I guess in our discussions of interpreting the chart that-- came out that we really should (start) from the beginning, figure out-- inter-- what are the [one word inaudible] that we're interpreting. So we began looking at-- at, oh man, what is the entity, the psychosomatic entity in order to function. We tried to list or work out what those functions would be and then see if we could then come up with planets, um--

LR (very faint): [one/two words inaudible]

TS (faint): Go ahead.

LR (very faint): I don't see any chair.

TS (faint): Uh-hm. We could-- well we could try to see if this--

CDA: Sounds like some mumbling.

AD: That's his ascendant. [Note: Sagittarius 14, "A vast panorama of sand and time is unfolding; the pyramids and the sphinx in their glory rise before the eye."]

AS (simultaneously): How can you tell so quick-- so clearly? (bit of laughter)

S (very faint): That's Tim.

CDA: It's his ascendant?

AD (simultaneously): It's-- that's his ascendant, yeah.

CDA (simultaneously): That's his ascendant.

AD (faint): Yeah.

[few students at once, few inaudible student words]

AD: Well, alright, very simply, what we did Tim, was I meet you out in the street or you meet me or let's say I come to your office or you come to mine. (bit of laughter, student words) And, we have a confrontation, we look at each other, and I try to figure out, "Well, what makes this guy tick, you know?" and you're probably asking the same question, "What makes him tick?" So, being that we're both human beings-- alright well, just an assumption. (laughter) [few inaudible words amidst laughter]

AS: One of us at least is human.

AD: Now, we know that we participate in the same sort of activities, that is, that there is some commonality between human beings as a whole. They-- they all engage in reflection, they all engage in some kind of activity, some kind of creativity, some kind of communication, alright, some kind of sexuality, even if you're a hermaphrodite. Ok? So we know, well, these are the main divisions that you're making in your mind, main categories as to how to try to understand this person who's in front of you, alright. Now, most of us unconsciously have this in the back of our mind, you know. "What makes this man tick," you know, "what is he really after?" You try to figure it out, get-- try to get to the main idea, alright. So, the first thing we have to encounter is the fact that we participate in certain functions which we all share in common, and this gives us a meeting ground, this we can talk about, alright. So, once-- once we've decided or agreed on, are these the basic categories or the basic functions that a human being participates in, then we can go on to the next subject. But immediately we have to straighten out that this is what we mean by the main functions that we participate in. So, why don't you pick it up from there?

S (faint): Ok.

LR: Well, and also didn't we distinguish between bodily functions-- merely bodily functions and psychic-- sort of psychological functions? So, we weren't talking about functions like appetite and excretion, but some-- but some functions-- [aside: yeah you better go]-- even if they could be correlated to psychic function(s), that some psychic functions seem to participate in bodily functions as well, that namely the planet you got was the psychic functions.

TS: Yeah, I understood that as being a kind of-- we talked about habitual processes within the psyche itself or the individual psyche, and only those would be reflected in-- in that part of the psyche which is inevitably bonded to the somatic substrate, most immediate psychosomatic functions that we're talking about. And we listed six or seven of them. We talked about-- of course, we said that, you know, if you're going to talk about an individual, first of all he's gotta be alive, so we talked about the life of the individual. We can correlate that with the Sun in the chart [TS indicates on board]. We're saying that that life was-- in-- unique in that it was circumscribed, it has a beginning and an end and so there's a kind of a determination within that life, and it in itself wouldn't be one of these instincts or processes but would be like the foundation or fundament from which all the other six would-- the way I was thinking of it was sort of, they evolve that life-force and they also evolve in that life-force, that is, they return back to it, hopefully, and so the-- we can see the other functions as-- as elaborating that life energy in itself. But it's a determined, somewhat defined life principle, it's not perpetual as it's seen in the psyche. We're talking about that mind. Then we listed out these six guys [TS indicates on board] who are underneath that. [short pause] Evaluation, communication. Turns out that we could list them pretty easy but when we tried talking about what they meant things got interesting.

S: Is that--

TS: This reflection [diagram]. Energy [diagram].

S (very faint): What are you putting activity?

TS: This activity [diagram].

[TS writing]

S (faint): That's it?

TS: And organization [diagram]. [short pause while writing] And we sort of tentatively put some planets alongside here.

AS/S(?): Well--

[23½ second pause]

TS: I don't know, I thought that for my own (sake) maybe we can put together again some of the things that were said today because there's a lot of interesting things came out about what these things really mean. We talk about evaluation or reproduction or sexuality as a kind of attractive-repulsive function in (the/an) individual. I mean there's a kind of way in which the individual forms his perceptions or forms the shape of things that are perceived, that they would be involved with the-- it would be one of the function(s) within the psyche. I think the thing we said at the end of that, that doesn't help me to say that there's a way in which the mind itself combines ideas in order to produce an image for itself, takes-- it selects out different ideas and by the particular creative combination of them it gives a form to things. So it organize or-- organizes different, say, ideas in an individual, vasanas or whatever, and it gives it-- gives forth a kind of a [short pause] specific content out of that cr-- and we could see that as having a certain kind of creativity to it. [short pause] What else did (we/he) say about that (function)?

MC: Is it the life?

TS: What?

MC: When you're talking about death, that function of the life in a [couple words inaudible] particular planet Earth.

TS: Well I was-- yeah, Venus, the evaluative function or the instinct towards trying to coordinate or combine these various elements together (mind/mine) in order to-- to give a form to its perceptions.

JC/S(?): Do you have an example of that?

[short pause]

LR: Well, he-- Tim just gave you a formulate-- the final formulation. A couple of the things that would lead to that formulation or-- One idea was that these had to do with actually-- actual form [one/two words inaudible] That anything you perceived as form would be created by the function of Venus. And that would be distinguished from the-- from the form that Mercury would give to this [one word inaudible] you know, a more conceptual form, taking idea or thought and making it into (a/uh) defining thought. The Venus would be more in the realm of sense-perception, we were talking about the role of being described-- Atmananda's Venus as capacity for sense-perception and what that might mean, what the capacity for sense-perception might mean. And-- and trying to correlate the-- the idea of a capacity for sense- perception with the idea of making form out of a certain undifferentiated substance. So that what kind of form somebody would be able to perceive in sense-experience would be made by-- would be determined by the kind of Venus operative. And that's really what evaluation would be like, because evaluation is a selectivity process, an attachment process, and-- And, then I think we also came to the idea that the-- what attaches you to experience will be found in the Venus, right, because then you get to the more common definitions of what Venus is. 'Cause if you don't see what kind of experience you've already gone through-- not in terms of desire or any of the other instincts but what in experience-- they would want to unite the form. [few words inaudible] But, that's kind of a background for some people who weren't here.

TS (simultaneously): Yeah. But I think an example of at least-- maybe not a full illustration but-- the way I was understanding it is if you take-- if I'm trying to understand someone else's point of view about an idea, you know, I'm going to be in a process of working with that individual, trying to bring-- applying thoughts that I have had about that subject and thoughts that other people have had about that subject together with what they're presenting in terms of their cohesive and their point of view or their idea, at a certain point a sense of satisfaction would arrive. You see and you feel a certain integrity, that yeah, there's a certain [one word inaudible] or that makes sense (for that). Ok and when that comes because there's a coming together of the ideas, there's a feeling of a kind of an integration or a sense of significance or meaning (is/there's)--

JC (simultaneously): Interrelatedness?

TS: Well yeah, interrelatedness of course, and then, you know, that between oneself and an object would be a certain kind of bond or unity, the unification of oneself and the object. Or one would see certain of those ideas carry outward an inward subjectivity and find out that it's in the object, then there would be a natural kind of attraction or evaluation, that in that object one felt a certain importance or significance because it was drawn out of oneself. And I could see it being utterly projected into the object as a-- as a whole, (seeing/saying) that this object had in itself a certain unique way of bringing together different ideas, whether that would be an aesthetic object like an opera or something, you'd see in that opera the way in which these things were brought together and was behind it. A certain creative inspiration is unifying core (of/or) that thing, philosophy or whatever. Well, myself as an individual is you see that an individual carries within himself a certain kind of understanding and has a-- a kind of a unifying inspiration which is breathing through all the way-- the ideas. I guess that's the way I understand this way of putting the Venus is that, you know, that it's the kind of beauty or harmony within-- within the individual from which the sense of beauty or value or significance of different facets or parts would be assessed.

JC: Could you say like the way you evaluate things or the pattern of values that you operate with will determine the way the sensible world gets related to, formulated, in terms of those values. And is that the kind of bringing form to--

IF: It's a little bit more what [one word inaudible] says because what the last thing which Tim just pointed out, it's like an inner form of beauty which you have within yourself [JC assents] and it's not that mu-- it's projected outside on the object or anything which you look for just because you (investigate) that inner form of beauty. [JC assents] But, like we used the word "form-u-late". It's like form, and you already relate to that form because the form really stays inside of you. Whatever you thought outside, that is only a part of that inner form of beauty which you have.

JC: Ok. So you're saying the inner form of beauty determines the way you will project it or perceive it in the world.

IF (simultaneously): The way you will perceive it, yes. Then our evaluation of it is already a partiality of that inner form.

JC: Uh-hm, alright.

TS: So in a sense it would actually directly affect one's sense-perceptions in that like if you have-- if there's no value in say the ideas of some specific object you won't perceive the object. At a later date you may be interested in acquiring those ideas [one/two words inaudible]

JC (simultaneously): By ideas you mean essences now, in other words.

TS (simultaneously): Yeah.

JC: Ok.

TS: Yeah. The essences (as/are) being known through meanings that are inherent in the (Venus/music) itself. So one actually perceives it differently, it do-- it sounds different, I mean-- You come here and the same record sounds totally different than [couple/three words inaudible]

RG: That seems secondarily in the sense that it's [three/few words inaudible]

TS: Well--

RG: I don't know, because there could be Venuses that are structured as the-- negate, try to negate (senses) in a sense. I think there might be Venuses like that [one/two words inaudible] I mean-- Seems the value--

TS (simultaneously): But it's still related to sensation.

RG: Well how do you-- how do you coordinate value and sensation? I don't get it [one word inaudible]

LR: Because, what you'll be able to experience in any given situation is very much a product of selection, you know, you're-- and value. [RG assents] You'll only be able to take in certain things, other things will escape you. You'll only be able to give form to certain-- So isn't it connected by that?

RG: It is. Yeah, I would say everything's connected and-- just in terms of what you say, you value a certain part of the given as a presentation, [student assents, faint] but I don't think it primarily--

LR: Well, ok. All these in some way are going to limit the whole given perception, all the planets will do that, right, because they're all determinations or parts within it. So they're all in some way going to limit the-- different functions, that they'll all in some way present you with a particular mind's view of a situation, [RG assents, faint] certain way of thinking or operating, yeah. [RG assents, faint] So you could actually approach all the planets from what-- what they delimit in the given. So speaking of it in that way, you know, I thought we were saying that Venus determines what forms can be-- be perceived or what is actually (attractive/attracted) to (in experience). Now, you say, well, maybe the Venus isn't prone to be good at sense-experience or-- but I don't know if you want to call that (sick) Venus.

RG: No, no, that's-- I just wanted, I mean--

S (very faint): [few words inaudible]

TS: See, what I think would for me-- yeah, because we're talking about them right now as a-- in a very-- very limited sense and a very immediate sense of them as being psychosomatic functions and not in an epistemic sense as [RG assents] the-- presenting the or fabricating the actual sensations. So, if that's-- [short pause] The way we're approaching it, they're going to have to all superimpose or interfere with the whole thing, evolve themselves or [few words inaudible] perception, and that-- I don't know, but this-- this one certainly remains a puzzle to me.

AS: Tim, how about that example we once gave like, you have the manifold of sense is given, I think well Richard brought it up, you-- you were saying, and you-- there's a-- you know, like Anthony's bird in the tree. [student assents, faint] You see, you-- it's there, it's part of the manifold of sensation, Venus doesn't make that sensation, but because of the peculiar way you have of picking out form, you see it. Somebody else comes by and doesn't see it. It would-- he's-- would you say like Venus is what pulls that out of that manifold, focuses on it (as it were). And in that sense it's giving a form to that manifold it's put together because otherwise there's no particular thing in there valued. You won't really perceive any-- you won't perceive any forms in there unless the Venus pulled from-- focuses on some (form).

TS (simultaneously): Particular, yeah.

RG: Yeah, yeah.

AP: But, isn't that the Mars that seeks out(--/?)

AS (simultaneously): And in that sense it leads the perception.

AD (very faint): The what?

LR: Mars that would what?

AP: Mars that seeks out what you're going to experience.

TS: Well we can sort out--

AS (simultaneously): It might be but-- but I mean I thought you were saying the Venus is what-- what did that function.

LR: Would Mars determine the form though Anna?

AP: No, no, but wouldn't it-- isn't it Mars that makes us experience certain things and not others within the world-image?

AD: Let's use another example, alright? Bird in a tree is [AS simultaneously: That wasn't a good--] hard-- hard to see.

AS: Was it-- but was that a va-- is that a-- is that not a valid--

AD (simultaneously): Suppose I took the example, suppose we took an example like this. You're a composer--Brahms specifically. You get a certain-- you're given something, alright. That's different from, you know, the creative thinking that a musician does when he could resolve technical problems. That's different than that kind. A-- an inspiration is given to you, ok? So then Brahms started scratching his head, he started saying, "Well, should I put it in a rondo form, a fugue, sonata?" What determines or decides that?

AS: You're saying that's the Venus, that would be the Venus [AD simultaneously: Yeah.] function. So, that's the sense--

AD: Because it isn't a question of, you know, manipulating concepts. [AS simultaneously: Right. No, I understand, perceptions.] It's a question of saying what form-- yeah.

RG(?) (very faint): What form [couple words inaudible]

AS (simultaneously): It's the actual perceptual form. It's giving a perceptual form to a matter. So like-- it's like the inspiration is like the substance or matter of the thing.

AD (simultaneously): Of-- that's given, yeah.

AS (simultaneously): And that's what they mean by uniting a form with a given substance or matter.

AD (simultaneously): Form with the matter, yeah.

S: But do--

AD (simultaneously): And that's what Irena and I were trying to come to, a common definition of what form given is, and Venus represents this to us, that is, that basically it's form-u-later. [AS: Later.] Form-u-later. Form is what it gives. (RG laughs)

AS: The form of the Earth. Because without that form it isn't perceivable.

AD (simultaneously): Without-- yeah.

AS: That's why it's so critical and you could-- you couldn't see the inspiration, it wouldn't have a perceptual form [one/two words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): And that was actually the case with Brahms. Like for instance he would put a thing in a variety of different forms if he couldn't come to any conclusion, because he was thinking about it, but as soon as he stopped thinking about it and let the-- the aesthetic perception take over he knew immediately what form to give it. You can't substitute a conceptual thing for that.

AS: Uh-hm. That would be his Mercury.

AD (simultaneously): Now-- yeah, so now if we go a little further and deeper, in other words, when an inspiration is given, alright, if we say that something intelligible is given, alright, and then we say that there's a part of the human being that transposes that or translates that into a perception, what is it that does that? Please.

RG: I mean I couldn't say it's just Venus [AD simultaneously: No?] that does that. (some laughter, AD laughs, student words)

AD: What else would it be?

RG: Translates an idea into a perception?

AD: An intelligible or given matter, it translates it into a perception.

RG: Jupiter is involved, the Moon's involved, I mean, they're all involved in giving-- in granting perception I think. I don't think you can have a perception without talking about the Moon. I don't-- I don't think you can talk about the-- [IF simultaneously: Well (one/two words inaudible)] the image of the whole perception without bringing in Jupiter, I mean I don't-- I don't believe--

TS: But that's not what he said.

S (faint): Right.

RG: (Her choice) there.

IF (simultaneously): Ju-- just like-- just like perception (or/and) fact is as (accessible/acceptable) as form, that's the part of perception.

TS: Maybe what is it that takes inspiration or an intelligible and manifesting perception, not what is the whole of perception or what (is a) body perception. And (maybe--) Or let me ask it another way. Could you conceive of there being one function which, whether-- (it was never) a matter of finding how many or-- or what planets it is, is there one function that could be conceived as translating inspiration into-- into manifestation, the act of translating the intelligible?

[student assents, very faint]

S (very faint): Isn't that what the Mercury also did [one/two words inaudible]

RG(?) (simultaneously): Yeah, the (Jupiter/Demiurge) can.

LR: I--

HS(?): [couple/three words inaudible]

[student assents, very faint]

TS: Well, but that's-- ok.

LR: I mean I think a specific example is more helpful than the general text.

[student assents, very faint]

S (very faint): Yeah. But it's still complicated.

AS: Yeah but-- but the general example might be the-- (AS laughs a bit) the point of what Anthony's doing, whether we accept it or not, I mean--

LR (simultaneously): Well if it is I would agree with Dickie that just to say one planet is responsible for transforming body into thought-form--

[student(s) assenting, faint]

AD (simultaneously): Well maybe we could try another example Richard. Suppose you're an author and you're writing a book, alright, and even(--) you have in mind a certain character. [RG assents] And, you have to put together all the different features, traits, characteristics of this person that you want to portray. Again, I would ask you, what function in you ultimately decides, you know, how to give this entity some sort of character? Now, when we say, when we say that Venus gives it the form, doesn't exclude the fact that, let's say, there's certain memory traces or attachments to certain types of experiences which are not of a Venusian type. But nonetheless it is Venus that determines ultimately "This vasana would be meaningless to tack onto this person because it'll bring out that aspect of the person that I want brought out, the other will not." Now basically the important thing here is that it's evaluative. It'll take an image that bears the traces or nuances of certain types of feelings and will say, "This will do it better than that," not in a cognitive way but in a feeling way.

AS (simultaneously): Yeah. Well there's the word "felt significance".

AD: Felt significance, sure. I mean I-- As long as you don't bring the conceptual element. Not that they necessarily have to disagree, because you could arrive at that sometimes conceptually. But this is really getting to a basic-- what I conceive of to be basic about these functions that every human being participates in. [22 ½ second pause] If we took a little-- if we exaggerate that example, like you wanted to bring in something about this person, in the novel, alright, that isn't admirable, as a matter of fact you even dislike this trait about the person, alright. I would say it's still the Venus function that's going to say, this peculiar, you know, disliked or hostile or, you know, ugly trait in that personality, alright, I say it's still Venus that's determining "This is the proper form to give it."

[students assent, faint]

LR: Ok. But you're making it into a very reflective function in the example.

AD: Oh.

LR: But this is--

S (simultaneously, very faint): Well that would be--

AD: It's about as automatic a-- it's more automatic than breathing.

LR (simultaneously): Wait, let me just-- (yeah/wait). The example--

AD (simultaneously): You're the one that's being reflective about this.

LR (simultaneously): No, your example of choosing a character--

AD: Now look, let me try.

LR (simultaneously): Wait. No, let me finish my sentence.

AD (simultaneously): Go ahead, go ahead. (laughter, AD laughs)

LR: Your example of writing a certain character into a novel is a very reflective process. But I was going to agree and say that that kind of selection has to be going on every second, reflective or non-reflective, that it's not the reflective part of it that is-- that you're trying to emphasize. I mean that selectivity is actually happening unconsciously all the time. So I think I was agreeing with you.

AD: Well all I wanted to do was deepen just a little bit. And that is if you take into consideration the fact that the psychosomatic entity, as it's been evolving through eons of time, has been constantly doing this, in other words, always making representations of its environment and through those representations deciding whether to move towards it or away from it or stand still, alright. If you consider that whole development that it's gone through, it is the most-- one of the most intimate functions that the mind operates with and that is to make for itself a presentation, an immediate presentation, of what confronts it. So it isn't a-- a reflective activity. It's so automatic and so instinctual, so immediate, that you're not aware that the mind is doing this, gathering up all the necessary traces or vasanas, let's say attachments to the memory of past experiences, and grouping them together to give you a presentation. Now, at one time, this process mu-- must have been very slow, but through the development of the entity, it's become now almost [AD snaps fingers] an instantaneous process. That's the way I'm thinking of the evaluative function. It's not the simple naïve thing, "I like" and "I dislike". It's a very complex affair but the s-- the end result is "I like and dislike".

RG: You're saying it's the organization of the person's vasanas that decide and choose what his experience is going to be (there/then).

AD: No, the vasanas are the material that the Venus uses to portray the object that's there.

RG (very faint): Right. (And--)

AD: So you ha-- you have a variety of vasanas, good, bad, you know, likeable, dislikeable, ok, and it's the Venus function that's going to have to take even the unlikable vasanas and include them in the presentation. I'm not looking at these functions in a personalistic sense, believe me.

RG (simultaneously, faint): No, I didn't-- right, just that's what I (retain).

[short pause]

CDA: What-- you mean by personalistic available to the ego or, I mean, available to me.

AD (simultaneously): Yeah, they're not available to the ego. And that's why I say, the reflective processes are not included in that. Maybe a few lifetimes later on they might be, but now they're not included in it because it operates too quickly. Haven't you ever watched the way your dreams are formed?

S: So Anthony are you-- when you talk about the way an artist gives form to an inspiration, are you using that prior to the ego as well, that's the pre--

AD (simultaneously): Try again.

S: Are you speaking-- when you talk about the way that an artist gives form to an inspiration, are you speaking about a process that is prior to the ego there as well?

AD: Prior to the ego?

S: In other words, something arises in the artist's mind which tells him what form to give to that?

AD: Yeah, I'll put it that way.

S: Yeah?

AS: I-- I have a kind of-- this is probably off the point but (I'll explain it). Would you s-- would-- could you also relate this to the function whereby the soul actually chooses because of its essence what life it's going to live? In other words, would it extend even up to the level of that function in the soul which says, "This is-- this is the chart, this is the life I need. This is the certain organization I need to portray what's s-- what ideas are within."?

AD: Ah, but now you're speaking about the soul's aesthetic perception.

AS: Yeah, right. And al-- and that that-- it's that evaluative function that decides, "This is the set of characteristics, this is the chart I need to portray my-- my own inner being."

AD (simultaneously): Yeah, and that's re-- that's reflected-- [AS simultaneously: And that's--] that's reflected at the lower level by--

AS (simultaneously): Yeah. And I was going to say that that's not reflective, I mean he said that's like a-- by-- like an act of its essence. It doesn't [AD simultaneously: Uh-hm.] reflect, it just tends--

[students assent, very faint]

[short pause]

AD: Well anyway, that's what I th-- I think the (Lenny--) the agreement was that Venus was basically a form-giving function, [RG assents] basically evaluative function. The form that you give a thing immediately reveals the evaluation. [short pause] Well let's move right along Tim, otherwise we'll be [TS simultaneously: Ok. (couple words inaudible)] on this all night, I do want to get to--

TS: The rest are obvious. (laughter, student words)

AS: Come on Smith! (bit more laughter) Show us how obvious [S simultaneously: Not quite that bad.] the next one is. Show us how obvious (is--)

RG: (Timothy), it seems that with Jupiter I think-- I mean, (if (we/you) could do--)

AD: Well, let's do Jupiter next then.

TS: Ok. [student assents, faint] Well, having understood all the ones in between, Jupiter is that which organizes (some laughter) [S, faint: (All of them.)] [AS simultaneous with S: All the other ones.] all the other ones.

RG: Good. (bit of laughter)

TS: So, I mean it's--

S (faint): What, did you have to go in order?

TS: Well--

LR: No. No, there is no [TS simultaneously: Ok.] order, we just--

TS: I think there is actually.

LR: Well there might be but we didn't--

TS (simultaneously): Well, in it-- in terms of understanding them Jupiter is-- is really the sense, if you take all of the instincts and conceive of them as-- as trying to evolve this idea of the Sun or devolve it or whatever, that there's some kind of involvement with the-- that purpose of the life, it seems like Jupiter's function is that of ordering and org-- one of Jupiter's functions is to order and organize all those various other instincts such that a thing doesn't fall apart on its way to its goal, that the-- the evolution and growth of the various parts of the entity are kept in a-- an organic unity. So if you will, the Mercury function or the-- the intuitive function and the energy level and so forth [one word inaudible] are kept in some kind of homeostasis, in some kind of-- well I guess an organic wholeness. So in-- in that sense, it's-- it has a similar sense of relating that Venus does but-- and it seems like here what's being related or brought together and held together are the functions themselves rather than say getting a form to perception or bringing together certain ideas to give a form to perception. That's one function, and then you take the Mars, say, as the energy with which that's done. There's a Mars Jupiter-- Mars Venus aspect, Jupiter's going to be the-- what do you call it, arbitrator, to keep them in balance (or they) emphasize one over the other. And we talked-- I mean (we/he) talked a lot about it in terms of-- some very interesting things got said today (Ju--) That as that organizing process we talked about as dharma and adharma, the fitness or unfitness of things. And that in order to come to a sense of the appropriateness of oneself that-- You know, we could oftentimes see Jupiter involved in relationship charts because the-- the sense of growth or taking in new ideas would come through that Jupiter function. And--

AS: Well I wou-- Tim, are you specifically relating them to growth?

TS: Yeah.

AS/S(?) (faint): [few words inaudible]

TS: Yes. In that we're talking in this particular way especially that it's-- it's the growth of the whole entity and looks over the well-being of the whole entity, you know.

[short pause]

RG: So, ti-- while Venus is giving a form and translating the ideas into perception, Jupiter is forming the-- is organizing the functions into a form, I mean [one word inaudible]

TS (simultaneously): Organizing the functions into a whole or keeping a certain kind of specific growth, allowing for a growth which would hopefully be conducive to the kind of vitality that the Sun was providing for the entity. In other words, you say this entity as a whole is growing but that has to have a certain kind of unity within it. If the different parts grow at different rates, at [student assents] necessarily different rates but in a way which is antithetical to the purposiveness of the life, then you've got problems, you--

IF (simultaneously): How about this, Dickie. (What/If) Tim was trying say that it's also as utmost of the possibilities that you have. (But, it's) that-- the (furthest/further) of a possibility which you're ever going to reach was the argument of Jupiter.

LR: When you said if the attempt-- what-- what we meant by expansion was the attempt by the entity to grasp its own limit.

IF: Yes.

AD: The limits of growth that an entity can reach is determined by the Jupiter.

IF (simultaneously]): But (that's how/that sound)-- and somehow the growth right now (as though you would) imagine it is somehow more-- looked like just a-- a growth in sense of a development but it's really growth in terms of a life, any kind of experience which is a process of the entity and within-- within its own life.

AS: Yeah. So-- so when you say fitness, this-- this again sounds like that quote, when he talked about the fitness determines how much-- what the limits are of his participation in that World-Idea Anna. Does it-- does this have to do with that function?

AD: Yeah.

AS: Fitness(?/.) [AD, faint: Well--] This is something like-- like dharma, adharma somehow, because of this--

LR (simultaneously): What does that mean? Is that what [AS simultaneously: (But/The)--] dharma, adharma mean?

AS: Right-- rightness and wrongness of a--

[students assents, faint]

LR: The fit-- well, say again Avery, how you see it.

AS (simultaneously): I was just thinking about when we-- the other day we were talking about the fitness of the soul determines its rank or, you know, how much of that World-Idea it can assimilate or what are the limits of its growth as it were, its limits of participation. It seems like the Jupiter is partly having to do with that or [LR simultaneously: Now--] maybe that's one-- 'cause Tim mentioned fitness.

TS: Yeah.

LR: Now when you say-- when we say in other situations that Jupiter describes the organization of instincts, is-- is that organization of instincts what determines the fitness of the individual?

S (faint): Well [one word inaudible]

AD: Well--

AS: If you [TS simultaneously: Yeah.] say the organization of instincts is determining how much he can participate in, how big his world-view or whatever, or how appropriate or complete or whole, I mean, so, seems that would delimit it.

AD: In other words, the interrelationship of the psychic functions for better or for worse is what Jupiter is indicating. [student assents] That's why they refer to it as the-- the guru of the chart. And even the word ku-- guruloka comes from Jupiter, the grace of Jupiter.

S: You mean gurukola?

AD: Hm?

[student assents, faint]

S (simultaneously): Gurukola? Is that what you mean?

AD: Yeah, gurukola, yes. That means the grace of Jupiter and that comes from Jupiter. Now that may not seem important but if you consider very carefully the way psychic functions are related to each other, you-- you're speaking about basically the functioning of the entity as a whole.

CDA: When you say [RG/S(?) simultaneously, faint: So then the (one/two words inaudible)] related to each other--

AD: How does your mentality, alright, relate to your feeling?

CDA: Oh, is-- [RG simultaneously, faint: But wouldn't you look at the Mercury (couple words inaudible)] but is that going to involve the aspects in some way, that [AD simultaneously: Well--] kind of relatedness?

AD: Yeah. They're rela-- they ha-- if-- if they're related, there's an aspect, alright?

CDA: So Jupiter would somehow know-- know and be able to be the functioning unity of all the aspects in the chart?

AD: The functioning unity?

CDA (simultaneously): Does that make sense?

AD: Alright, you can put it that way.

CDA: I mean does-- is that sort of the idea that you--

AD (simultaneously): Well, yes, you can put it in those words.

CDA: I was--

[student(s) assenting, very faint]

[short pause]

TS: But we-- the way I've understood you in this is that, you said that in one case the-- this organization and the relationship of the instincts might be for the sake of the emphasis of one of them over all the others, that the purpose of a life might be to develop an extraordinary will power. In another case it might be to establish a balance or harmony between all of the instincts. And if that purpose was to establish a balance or harmony between the different instincts, and Jupiter or growth were to accelerate one function, you'd have a lot of problems.

LR/S(?): (Sit tight.)

RG (faint): Not that you haven't thought of it, just the discovery of one of them(--/.)

LR (simultaneously): I didn't follow you (Tim/there).

RG (very faint): Yeah.

TS: You read in the degree of the Sun, says the purpose of this life is to become fanatical, and the pur-- (laughter) and you read in the-- in the Jupiter degree that the purpose of this life is to become [AS simultaneously: Get balanced.] a nice guy. Boy have you got problems, ok. (bit of laughter)

AS: So that's [few words inaudible]

CDA (simultaneously): Well so you might be a nice fanatic, I was [couple words inaudible] (laughter, student words)

TS (amidst laughter): Yeah right, so that's that Jupiter square or something [couple words inaudible, possibly another student]

S (simultaneously): Yeah.

TS: So, you know, you'd see that the--

S (simultaneously, faint): I think [S simultaneously, faint: (You'd/He'd) be a nice guy.] he'd be a nice fanatic.

LR: If it [few words inaudible]

S: No.

LR/S(?): If it is-- wait.

RG (simultaneously): It does if you have a square, I mean if you have a type [couple/few words inaudible]

S (simultaneously): Problem is [couple words inaudible] the--

LR (simultaneously): From the-- from what you said about--

TS (simultaneously): I'll try to get something which didn't get--

S: Tim, it's not bad [one/two words inaudible] it's--

LR (simultaneously): So you're saying the chart doesn't necessarily have to be put together in any kind of-- I mean you can't actually have an image of this.

AD (simultaneously): No, don't have no presuppositions as to how the chart is going to be.

RG: It may be organized according to conflict between-- (AD laughs)

AD: You've noticed that in a few instances? (RG laughs) That the life is an organized conflict? (laughter, student words)

LR: No, no, if you say that-- that all the functions are part-- are in some way playing out the Sun degree, which we've also said, I mean that was the [one/two words inaudible] we start with the Sun and all these functions are going to define the Sun in some way.

TS: But they're also going to define themselves at the same time is what we were saying today, alright, that they both-- their intent is to evolve that Sun degree but they also must become functions in their own right, and it may be that as they become functions in their own right that they do not directly relate to that Sun degree or directly relate to the idea behind the Sun. It would seem to me that it would be Jupiter which would be the one which would assure a person that in fact all the other functions were devoted to the accomplishment of that Sun degree, or perhaps not, that there would be-- that some functions would be developed with no reference to the general purpose of the person's life.

RG: Or that the Sun degree, even if it was a (big) purpose, the development that Jupiter would represent would be the way that that evolution had to go for whatever reason. (Go ahead.)

LR: And that-- I'm sorry.

RG: So that the Sun is the, you know, the pur-- central purpose of the life and all the other complex you could think of as subsidiary to achieving that goal of the Sun and that Jupiter organizes this organized conflict in an effort to bring a person to a deeper consciousness of the Sun. I mean, it can be in conflict.

LR: Ok, I-- so say--

AS (simultaneously): But you don't think it would ever be organized to defeat the purpose of the Sun?

TS: Yes.

AS: (Well--)

RG (simultaneously): Well, it's possible.

AS (very faint): I don't see-- I don't see it but--

IF (simultaneously): I think we should (spin) that until we get [AS assents] into the big Jupi-- the study, and outside instead of [few words inaudible]

LR (simultaneously): You know, you're right. [AS assents, faint] But, when you say that Jupiter-- the Jupiter degree would be (trying (to/the)) fitness for-- well no, that the Jupiter degree will describe it in some way, how the instincts are organized to assimilate the World-Idea, how much the World-Idea-- how much the entity is-- how fit or unfit the entity is to grasp that World-Idea.

[student assents]

RG: See I don't-- I don't know. Fit or unfit is pretty pejorative.

LR (simultaneously): Ask Anthony. Anthony, are we like dharma and adharma [three/few words inaudible]

S (simultaneously): [couple/few words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously with LR and S): Yeah but it wasn't the World-Idea that I was speaking about. The primary function of the Jupiter was the interaction and relationship of the psychic functions. The grasping of the World-Idea follows upon that.

RG: So would you say reason--

LR (simultaneously): The fitness for what? The fitness for what? Dharma and adharma.

AS (faint): There wasn't (anyone) [one/two words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): Well after-- I'm using different words. The way the psychic functions are organized, alright, they could be for better or for worse from a moral point of view but if you leave out any moral point of view, alright, and just think of the way the psychic functions could be organized. The variety of course would be indefinite. It could even conflict with let's say what the basic purpose of a man's life is. But the point-- the point is that-- that--

(Side 1 of original cassette tape digitized as 1984 0130a Ends; Side 2 Begins)

LDS: You're saying when you look at the Jupiter you're looking at it for this purpose, you're looking at it to see something about the rest of the psychic functions. If you look at someone's Jupiter it will tell you something about the organization of the-- the rest of the psychic functions or how they're going to relate. I'm not really sure what-- Like when you look at a person's Jupiter, what is it telling you?

AS: I-- Tim, I-- I thought we had a-- I thought what you were saying to Linda was a nice reply.

TS (faint, possibly part of background): Oh ok, no.

LDS: I didn't--

RG: (Put--)

AS: What?

LR (faint): Yeah.

AD: Tim, let me ask you this, to answer Louis's question. You ever see a chart with a afflicted Jupiter? (AS laughing)

S: [few words inaudible]

TS: Why certainly I have.

LR (simultaneously): I have. (TS laughs)

AS: So what h-- describe it Tim.

S: Do.

AD: Uh--

S (very faint): (Yeah Tim.)

AD: Would you say that you call it afflicted because of the malfunctioning that's going on in terms of all the psychic functions?

TS: Promises, promises. (bit of laughter, student words) Yeah. That [RG simultaneously, faint: I don't know what (you mean).] is-- well, let me see if I can put my own words to that and say that-- I would say an afflicted Jupiter is one wherein that sen-- the ability within the individual to know when something is going-- is functioning rightly or wrongly for themselves is obscure. They don't know when they're doing the right thing or the wrong thing for themselves, and not necessarily in the moral sense even but [AD simultaneously: Uh-hm.] like the-- this is the right time to fight my fate, this is the right time to resign myself to my fate, and to me that would be a Jupiter function and a person who's Jupiter is very highly evolved would know, "Yep, this is one I have to resign myself to," and it is the one he should resign himself to. A person who's Jupiter is afflicted will be constantly, you know, battling windmills at the wrong time.

AD: Yeah.

TS: And in that sense it's a sense of fitness--"Well, I must evolve my Venus function, my feeling function now." Well that may be, you know, as you-- there's times when that-- when it's obviously fit to do so and other times when it's not, within the framework of that one individual. So, to me [possibly one/two words inaudible]

LR (simultaneously): I understand that--

LDS (simultaneously): I-- ok, I s-- I see what you're saying.

RG (simultaneously): (Uh-hm.) That is [couple words inaudible]

LR (simultaneously): I understand that perfectly as Jupiter.

RG: Uh-hm.

LR: So if that's what you're saying that's fine, but I don't see that that has anything to do with the organization of all the psychic functions to--

LDS: But Linda, if the Jupiter was working--

LR: But that-- that explanation's fine but I'm not--

[student assents]

TS: (Me neither.)

LDS (simultaneously): If the Jupiter works harmoniously, if I follow what--

TS (simultaneously): It's the same thing. I'm sorry.

LDS: Yeah, I think if I follow what Tim's saying about an afflicted Jupiter, reverse it now, if the Jupiter's not afflicted and is working somewhat harmoniously, then that's going to allow the rest of the psychic functions to be fit and be lawful according to the being of that person. [LR assents] That's-- I mean if I follow Tim's explanation--

RG (simultaneously): You might think a person could have a strong Jupiter, know what the right thing to do is and the rest of his chart is totally antagonistic to that.

LR (simultaneously): Won't allow him to do it, like if it's opposite Mars. (bit of laughter)

S: No. (laughter) [couple words inaudible] what's this? (laughter)

S: But, are you--

S (simultaneously): But Mars says, "No, I won't." (laughter)

S: Are you coming from the degree or from the aspects to the Jupiter?

AD: No, I'm speaking about the Jupiter function.

[few faint inaudible TS words in background, bit of laughter]

CDA: No she-- I think she means how are you determining [S simultaneously: Right, that's it's both.] not that it's afflicted or not--

S: Whether it's from the degree symbol itself or from the way it's aspected or wholistic perception of the picture of the whole chart.

AD (simultaneously): The who-- the wholistic, yeah. But we're speaking basically now of a psychic function, alright. We were trying to equate psychic functions with the planets, say this planet symbolizes a psychic function and that the other psychic function, but we haven't gone further than that because we had to evolve a common language. So instead of calling him the Hierophant, because Irena probably didn't know what I meant by the Hierophant, so we have to evolve a [IF simultaneously: I do.] terminology we can both work with. To me they're just words. As long as [S simultaneously: That's alright then.] I got the meaning somewhere by the tail, I don't care what word I use.

IF: Correct. But the-- in the same moment that's the organization which we're talking about which is, as the wholistic function, chooses our experiences as a whole.

AD: Chooses what, uh--

IF: All our experience as the whole. The organization of all of those functions, yeah?

AD: Uh-hm.

IF: Which is predisposition to the-- to the wholeness of our experience.

AD: Well, that's-- that's almost redundant, and I don't mean to be critical here.

IF (simultaneously): No, I understand.

AD: Once the psychic functions have been organized in a set of relationships, the next necessarily follows. In other words, once [IF simultaneously: Correct but--] the psychic function has got to work this way, then the kind of events that happen are already determined by that function.

IF: Yeah, right, I'm just only trying to put it in juxtaposition of the Venus which we just talked about, because if the form of experience is within the Venus that is-- was described, what would be in front of us, that what kind of experiences the whole are going to have would be determined by Jupiter.

AD: Uh-hm. Yeah, and [IF simultaneously: Is that--] I'm not disagreeing with that, I'm saying, I'm simply saying that's a-- already-- that's already determined [IF assents] once you set up the way the psychic is going to function.

IF: Yeah, fine, yeah.

AD: So all the experiences must follow that. In other words, if a person keeps thinking in an irritating matter, it's already determined he's going to get a peptic ulcer.

IF: Yeah.

AD: It's-- it's a-- the psychic function has already determined the circumstances he's going to experience, period. So all those experience, alright, are determined because the Jupiter has organized a relationship of all these psychic functions to one another.

LDS: And it will guarantee--

AD (simultaneously): [few words inaudible] I mean, if you got observations on how Jupiter functions, I'd like you to throw them in, I--

RG: It's just hard, i-- I mean I understand your meaning of Jupiter, it's just hard conceptually to get it that Jupiter is one of the psychic functions and yet organizes all of them. I mean, it's a [CDA simultaneously: But that's its functioning.] hard idea.

LR (simultaneously): It's supposed to be what's going on with every one of these planets here because [RG: Yeah.] Venus is going to organize all the instincts [RG(?) simultaneously: In terms of the form.] in terms of producing form, it-- [RG simultaneously: Jupiter or-- right, right.] that's going to happen all the way down the line, they're all going to involve the others in some way.

RG: Right, and Jupiter organizes them as according to what, all of them?

TS: According to the fitness of them, [CDA(?) simultaneously: Growth.] according to his own [one word inaudible] how they're going to grow with respect to each other and how that growth is going-- how the parts in their-- [couple faint inaudible LR words simultaneous with TS] their differentiated way are going to elaborate the integral idea of the Sun. How do [JA simultaneously: You see--] you know when you're on the right track?

JA: It--

AS: Why do you also [one word inaudible]

JA (simultaneously): It seemed when you were speaking about each function having the-- its, you know-- it's going to evolve itself, is that without the Jupiter you would have some anarchic [one/two words inaudible] functioning.

TS: Yeah. And it would be the Jupiter that would bring them back to the Sun as it were or--

JA: Yeah. At-- well, I mean, subordinate say the evolution of one function at a certain time for the sake of-- you know, in terms of an overall.

S: Could we use a growth analogy, something like, you know, when a body unfolds as--

AD: When what?

S: Like-- as somebody grows up, you know, there's a timing inherent in the body and it seems Jupiter does provide it with the growth so it's almost like knowing the when and the how for the-- the bones to do certain things and the-- the person to grow in a certain way and you're saying like an afflicted Jupiter would prohibit in some way or have a malfunctioning, things wouldn't unfold in a proper sequence.

TS: Uh-hm.

S: That's what you were trying to get at, the notion of growth and the proper unfoldment of experience.

TS: Well, yeah, it is either (an improper/in a proper) sequence or-- or that there's an improper, you know, allocation of energy to one thing over another, prolongation of something. Something isn't let go of so, you know-- in terms of the way I'm thinking of (the/them) [possibly one word inaudible] being afflicted.

JC: What about thinking of it as it regulates the functions for the good of the whole organism? It's like--

AD (simultaneously): Yeah but-- That's-- that's good. Sometimes though the organism has to be a criminal.

JC: Yeah but that-- but still, for the good of the organism.

AD: Yeah. But, you see, you bring in the word "good" and immediately there's a moral significance that's going to follow.

JC: Well, yeah, I mean--

AD: I'm co-- I'm trying to conceive [JC simultaneously: Yeah I understand what you--] of these things in a very impersonal way.

CDA: Would you say to-- to fulfill the karma?

AD: Well, everything is to fulfill karma.

CDA (simultaneously): I know but-- but rather than say for the good of the organism, for the karma to--

AD (simultaneously): No, I-- [CDA simultaneously: No? Ok.] I don't like to use the word 'karma'.

TS: How about with respect [AP simultaneously: Could you--] to the whole (organism)?

AD: In a sense what Gretchen said is meaningful, alright, the unfolding and the sequence of-- the unfolding of the sequence of the archetypes is something that Jupiter determines.

RG: Uh-hm.

AD: If the archetypes aren't unfolded in the ordered sequence, alright, havoc.

TS (faint): Yeah.

AP: Would you say that Jupiter works with wholeness as its--

AD: With what?

AP: With wholeness or unity as its prime motive or prime guiding force, that it is behind the work of Jup-- Jupiter more than the other planets?

AD: Yeah. [aside: (Come up.)] Now I think, I think what we're getting to is an understanding of that simple term that is used in the mundane astrology when they say Jupiter represents expansion, alright. Because that's-- that's like short-hand, you know. What do you mean, "controls expansion"? So you have to go into some detail of what Jupiter's doing. And that means that we'd have to understand that if we say that the relationship-- the interrelationship of the psychic functions to each other, if it's a fitting kind of relationship, you have the expansion of the in-- individual, alright, and Irena wanted to add that "to the limits of possible growth," that's exactly what Jupiter represents, this-- this fullest possible expansion of the entity, alright. And so what we're getting to, that underneath those words what the meaning is, is that there's this fitness in the way the psychic functions are related to each other so that there's a meaningful growth taking place, whereas without it there wouldn't be.

[short pause]

AP: Is this word similar to what Jung means by individuation?

AD: No, what Jung means by individuation, and he always says the Sun is the principle of individuation, alright. Now, that means that we have to look at the Sun as life, alright, just life. But no one lives just a life, I mean just life, he lives a life, when-- as soon as you put in the word "a", "a life", you're speaking about an idea that dominates that individual life. And so he always refers to the Sun as the principle of individuation. In other words, it is this idea which is dominating that life, alright, and which, so to speak, must be expressed in and through that life, all the functions are going to express it, assuming that things go-- go that way, because you may get functions that are not going to express it, they're going to disagree.

AP: So you would--

AD: So I would say the principle of individuation is the Sun, not the Jupiter.

JC: But could you say that it's the Jupiter that directs the growth of the person to fulfill that degree, keeps all the functions in line that will meaningfully unfold that Sun degree. You don't?

AD: Oh yes, I [JC simultaneously: Oh ok.] do, sure.

JC: An afflicted Jupiter might be one [AD simultaneously: Might go against that, yeah.] that leads to excess or-- excess in one function over another beyond what is healthy for the [AD simultaneously: Yeah.] direction that the organism is taking. Expansion can also be excess, you know.

AD: Now remember, when we use a definition or when we try to understand what one of these function means, you have to remember it's the very nature of our explanations that it cannot exclude, alright, bits and pieces of the other function in that too. It can't, I mean, our language isn't organi-- made that way. It doesn't fence off associations and implications, etc., it doesn't. They're still there. Let's go after the others, come on, [TS simultaneously: Ok.] quick.

TS: Well, now that we've got ourselves together and [S simultaneously: Well--] intelligible-- (bit of laughter)

LS: Let's take Mars in Cancer.

TS: Yeah, let's take-- (laughter) We get through Mars, the others would-- will be [one/two words inaudible] (bit of laughter) If we could say that-- that the-- that throughout the entity there's a kind of activity that-- there-- well, there's lot of activities that the individual's involved in and that kind of underlying all those activities would be the quality or nature of the energy with which the individual operates, you know, we're talking about Mars as this kind of basic energy that the individual would have to put into these diff-- the other different functions, ok, so the energy with which the individual organizes things which he communicates, establishes reflection and so forth.

LC (faint): Is that different from the vitality?

TS: If-- well, the way I was un-- would understand the vitality that's in the Sun is that it's a-- it's a finite and determined kind of life essence that-- that really isn't-- [short pause] it's a foundation that the other things operate on and in itself isn't amenable to that much change. Whereas in the energy of the psyche there's a-- there's a relative in-- intensification or dissipation (in/of) the energy focus, the way the energy is distributed, the way in which it's-- in one person (that are) highly energetic but [one word inaudible] they're very dispersed, the other person could be very low energy but very, you know, single and intent in-- and those again would be ways in which that life was lived, you know, but I could see it is-- I see it as different than life itself.

[short pause]

S (faint): (It's hard/Still have) to describe the difference, don't you?

S: Yeah.

JC: One could think of Mars as the way that-- the sign, degree, position and so on is the way you will-- the quality by-- or way by which I focus the willpower to actualize any of the other functions.

IF: But it's just always will power. You know, energy of a Mars is much more directed where vitality of a Sun is much more enam-- emanating.

JC: Animating.

S (faint): Emanate.

IF (simultaneously): No, emanation, [JC simultaneously: Emanating?] emanating. It just what the (thoroughly/truly) vitality of a Sun, it's how much you hold within and emanate through living life, and it could be very [JC simultaneously: Yes, right, right.] concentrated and inward and it could be very exuberant; [JC simultaneously: But the point is--] where energy of the Mars is always directed to something, it--

JC (simultaneously): Directionalized. That's what I mean, focused will.

IF (simultaneously): Yeah, yes. Well, you see you add that will and [JC simultaneously, faint: Well-- but that's what I mean by will.] I would not always say that-- that Mars necessarily had to connect it with will, depending on what sign it would be and where it's lo-- located. That's why I'm saying that the direction it always would be there, but will or not it's already another question.

JC: Alright. [couple faint inaudible student words simultaneous with JC] Well directionalization of energy is fine.

AD: How do you like this for Mars: Work done.

LR: Work done?

AD: Done.

LR (very faint): I don't get it.

S: At the [one word inaudible]

[few seconds of faint student talking in background followed by slight pause]

S: But the--

AD: You must have an opinion. Yeah, no, what do we think [couple/three words inaudible]

CDA (simultaneously): It sounds like past tense, I mean--

AD: Yeah, you got [CDA simultaneously: (You think) that you wouldn't do it.] the point. (some laughter, student words) You got the point. (bit of laughter)

TS/S(?): [few words inaudible]

AS (simultaneously): This would be a good--

LR/S(?): I don't understand.

AD: At the end of the day, 5 o'clock, you punch the clock, right? You did eight hours work, work done!! Energy expended.

LS: You mean Mars is the one that does the work?

AD: Well who else?

KD: Unless you're a woman. (KD laughing)

LR/S(?): Shut up Kathleen. (laughter)

KD (amidst laughter): Is that after 5 o'clock? (laughter, student words) It's not over at 5 o'clock. (laughter)

AD (simultaneously, amidst laughter): I knew-- I knew a woman was gonna--

S (amidst laughter, faint): (Beyond work was concise?)

S: [couple/three inaudible words]

KD (simultaneously): Work never done. (laughter)

AS (amidst laughter): [couple words inaudible] gonna be the new Mars. (laughter, student words)

LR: What you're saying is if you want to look at-- if you want to clearly see the Mars in somebody's chart, and you-- you're not-- you're talking about the (effective--) you want to see the Mars just look at the work that's done and you'll get a really good description of what that Mars is doing in a chart.

AD (simultaneously): Uh-hm.

LR: That's-- it's-- I mean that's-- that doesn't [S simultaneously: So to say.] describe the energy. That's coming at it [AD simultaneously: No?] from a different--

S (simultaneously, very faint): Different function.

S: What if it does it [few words inaudible]

LR (simultaneously): No, that's not describing the psychic function of Mars, to look at the work you've done.

[student assents, very faint]

S (very faint): Why not?

DR: [one/two words inaudible]

LR: David, I'm [few inaudible student words simultaneous with LR] not denying what he's saying, I'm just-- it's not a-- it's not enough [couple words inaudible]

TS: Energy actualized, do you like that better?

AD: Well, yeah, [S simultaneously, very faint: I do.] she might like that. (some laughter) Energy actualized.

S (simultaneously): Do you like the words? (some laughter)

LR: I like "work done," I-- that's totally fine.

AD: That's really the obverse side of "work done". (AD laughing)

S (faint): No.

S (simultaneously): Yeah, right. They're the same.

AP: What makes you elated to do the work?

IF: Well you might as well finish it then, it's built, of your-- what you've been doing on, it's the (burden on) which you've been making, doing the work on.

[short pause]

LR: What happened to the desire nature?

S: And the shadow.

S: Without desire the sha-- [couple inaudible student words simultaneous with S] desire nature [few words inaudible]

LR (simultaneously): Actually Anthony said something interesting about the shadow. That if you look at a guy's shadow you'll actually get an idea of what vision he's working. Didn't you say that?

AD: Uh-hm. [LR simultaneously: Is that what you said?] I don't remember. (AD laughing a bit, bit of laughter)

LR: Well I [few inaudible student words simultaneous with LR] shouldn't deny it after you said it anyway. (Well/No) you said very often the shadow is concealing a grand vision, the--

AD: Well it may not be so grand. (laughter, AD laughing)

LR (amidst laughter): Well that's where we're (trying hard).

AS: Well, no, that was [LR simultaneously: But that's--] that idea that wherever the shadow is gives you some idea of where his resistance to that-- to that idea was. [LR simultaneously: Yeah I (one/two words inaudible)] Wasn't that the point of-- [TS assents] the sense?

LR (simultaneously): He said, anybody who's actually gonna accomplish anything will have to overcome that resistance.

AS: Yeah.

AD: Oh, or learn how to work with it, yeah.

LR (simultaneously): And then stop that energy.

AD (faint): Uh-hm.

AS (faint): Yeah. Yeah that was--

LR: So--

AS (possible aside, faint): (No thanks.)

JC: But I think the resistance comes from a different part of the psyche, you know.

LR (simultaneously): Yeah, Louis does--

JC: Like the Saturn function is I think [LR simultaneously: Yeah no the--] the slow motion figure in the psyche as far as changing something. To change your basic attitude or-- either in yourself or in the world, to push your Mars against that for a while, now that's where you'd feel the resistance.

RG: Where in the Saturn?

JC: I would say so.

RG: Or the Moon?

S (faint): Right.

RG: Plotinus says right there will [couple words inaudible]

JC (simultaneously): But insofar as Saturn defines the ego-complex, it must also indicate--

LR: What do you mean by resistant?

AS: And what do you mean by ego-complex?

S (very faint): [couple words inaudible]

TS (simultaneously, faint): Yeah.

S (very faint): Right.

JC: The basic [S simultaneously: What do you mean though?] attitudes of the person, the-- of the ego, of the individual. You know, if you're a Republican you would shoot anybody that's a Democrat, you-- you know. You believe-- you don't believe in a welfare state and if somebody mentions it your hair stands on end. That's, you know, the basic attitude of your nature. Not that you do Avery. (bit of laughter)

LS: You think that's hard--

LR (simultaneously): That's what you mean by resistance?

LS: You think that's hard to [JC simultaneously: No, no, no. But to (few words inaudible)] overcome, just imagine trying to overcome this kind of resistance though. You think you're an astrologer and a metaphysician or-- or a la-di-da and you get up and every morning and you're a goddamn computer programmer. Try to overcome that. (laughter)

S (amidst laughter): Alright, great.

LS: You think that's Saturn you're talking (about/of) [one/two words inaudible] (laughter, student words)

JC (amidst laughter): Saturn is simply what you-- what you are, the reality of-- (bit more laughter, AD laughing) At least as interpreted-- wait-- (laughter) Lenny at least from the father's side of you. It may be what you've inherited from the father.

LS: You might inherit it from the father, it has nothing to do with it. (some laughter)

LR: You're saying that's Mars, Lenny?

LS: If you're talking about the work I get done, I-- there's no other planet that could stand in its place. (AD and AS laughing)

LR: The energy of being that computer programmer is done by the Mars?

LS: Well Jung calls the shadow that which you didn't want to be. (AD laughing, laughter)

AS (faint): It happens-- thinks otherwise, that's what does otherwise.

LS: That which you didn't want to be, [LR simultaneously: Yeah well if that (couple words inaudible)] (ok), and in-- and in parentheses, "and find yourself [RG: Right.] that you are."

[student assents, very faint]

TS (faint): And of-- yeah, you notice he put [couple/three words inaudible]

AD: That's a perfect definition for me. (AD laughs)

S: Huh?

LR: That [one/two words inaudible]

LS (simultaneously): That which you didn't want to be?

TS: Yeah.

AD: All the way through, my whole career. (laughter, AD laughing)

LS: And it's also that that you're best at.

AD: It's what?

LS: It's also the thing you're best at.

AD: Well, there's no glory in that. (AD laughs, bit of laughter)

S: Oh ok.

S (possibly same S as above): Perfect.

AS(?): That's (good).

TS (simultaneously): I thought you meant a more-- the basic resistance that's [S simultaneously, faint: It's probably (one word inaudible) to ego.] in the very act of if-- in-- in the mode-- way in which the energy itself actualizes itself is [half/one word inaudible] must be a kind of resistance in-- and overcoming one's resistance in itself. And if you say that that energy-- thing that Jeffrey was saying, the beginning, it has directionalized energy. If that directionalized energy-- in that it is a focused kind of energy it's going where it's going regardless, you know, and then that's the sense of resistance against the purpose of the Sun and the sense of values or whatever else(,) it's doing.

S: Yeah, you're talking about a Mars in Virgo, right Lenny?

AS: No, but that's something [one word inaudible]

JC (simultaneously): Let's say you-- it could go against the purpose of the Sun but let's say it's working with the purpose of the Sun. The person's trying to actualize himself in his work and I'd say that what he butts up against is the in-- the existing order, our collective values or attitudes that the individual-- it'll (scrunch) the individuality of the Sun unless that Mars is strong enough to manifest it.

S (faint): (Right.)

RG: No.

S: Let's just say that you back him up.

TS (simultaneously): But see, I would say that you're using the Mars to over-- excuse me.

JC/S(?) (faint): No, go ahead.

TS: (I would/Um) sa-- This is the best part about Mars discussions. (laughter)

S (amidst laughter): He comes down and joins you. (laughter)

RG: I'm going to tell you what he's like [couple words inaudible] (some laughter)

S (amidst laughter): Well, I'm sure (ego so I'm just--)

S: You got it then.

RG: I'll wait. (laughter)

TS: Wait 'til the smaller people are [couple words inaudible] (laughter) That it's-- The use of energy to overcome the resistance in any other function is nothing compared to the-- the cul-de-sac one finds in trying to overcome the resistance in the direction the energy itself was going.

LR: Whoa. (some laughter)

S (amidst laughter, faint): What happened?

AS: Could you repeat that please? (AS laughing)

LR: That's the glassmen blowing the glass blower degree. [Note: Leo 9, "In a scene of weird display and brilliant colors glass blowers pro-duce one by one the marvels of their craft."]

RG/S(?): Right. (RG laughs)

JC: I don't have a Mercury Neptune [LR(?) simultaneously: Artful.] conjunction, you have to say it again. (bit of laughter)

[student(s) assenting]

TS: The use of the energy to o-- I can only state it again [couple/three words inaudible] (bit of laughter) [RG assents] The use of the energy in Mars to overcome the resistance of another function is not nearly as primordial a challenge as the use of the energy to overcome the resistance in itself, the way in which the obstacles-- In other words, if you have a way of overcoming the resistance in the other functions by just pushing ahead regardless, that may not be in-- useful for the kind of life that is to be achieved and one has to go about changing that energy to be staying more balanced or whatever. Then drag-- what tool does one use other than the will itself to change the will itself? And in that sense I think the Mars carries within itself the kind of purest form of resistance [one/two words inaudible]

JC (simultaneously): You mean like you're driving a Mack truck and you need a bicycle, you mean-- is that what you're trying to say? [TS simultaneously: Yeah. Flow on its own.] The energies-- it goes a certain way and that-- that may in itself be a problem, the way [TS simultaneously: Right.] it's going.

TS: If it-- if the object is to subtle-- is to refine the feelings and you're going to do it with a-- in an impetuous rush of the-- of-- you know, just the intensification of energy, the intensification may not help in terms of making the feelings or the morals more refined.

JC (simultaneously): No I could see what you-- I could see what side you're on.

TS: And so what are you going to use? Well you say well I have this very intense Mars, you know, and I'm going to have to make it refined. What are you going to use, the intense Mars on itself?

JC: But, to me the resistance is more like to overcome the lassitude of the psychic or physical functions in terms of accomplishing a goal. And the Mars is trying to accomplish that goal and maybe it-- you-- you know, you're driving a truck when you should have a bicycle, that, you know, getting out of bed or going to work or doing your job or, you know, just anything, you have to overcome a certain amount of psychic resistance and [TS simultaneously: Wait--] (you/we) use the Mars to do that.

RG(?) (faint): [couple words inaudible]

TS (simultaneously): But I think in-- going back to what Len was saying, that in the very way in which one overcomes the resistance, you-- you see that there's certain obstacles in the day and you set about overcoming those obstacles, and somehow when the day is done the things that you got done weren't exactly those things which were on the other side of the obstacles. But in the very way in which one goes about overcoming them it modifies the activity that one actually accomplishes and that's its-- I think that's where Len was speaking about, you know, it seems that the work done is that which you did not want to be.

JC: You mean you didn't accomplish the goal you set out to do?

TS: Yeah, you say well there's this goal and there's this obstacle there. You overcome the go-- the obstacle and you don't end up at the goal, you end up somewhere else having overcome the obstacle. You know, and again there's a kind of a divergence that can-- can reside in the Mars in itself.

JC: Yeah, I mean that much I can see what you're (saying).

TS: You know, and that-- I was going back to what-- I was trying to follow through what Anthony was saying about work done as the-- the actual way-- the way in which the energy actualizes itself predisposes a certain kind of innate selectivity, you know, an innate-- and in that sense I was thinking back to Mars as the desire nature and that it choo-- the way in which it chooses to overcome the obstacle or even recognize there's certain obstacles is "Well, I gotta get these three things done regardless." Those might not be the things, you know, that really--

JC: Yeah, except I don't know if Mars chooses because it's the val-- [LS simultaneously: Well if--] the value priority is outside [few words inaudible]

LS (simultaneously): The point is if you get a big enough Mars after a while you've realized you don't know anything about what you really want and you have to wait until your Mars develops an idea to find out. So the whole question of goals will get thrown out and you get familiar with it.

JC: What do you mean you don't know what you want if you have a big enough Mars?

[students assent]

LS: I mean that the energy is what you want and the only way you can find out what you want is by following the energy where it's going. And your own conceptions about it are irrelevant.

JC: Ok, then you would think that it was a necessarily predetermined reflective hierarchy of values but it could be, as you're saying, the wa-- the way the energy's going would probably be more-- might be more trustworthy unless you don't know which function's motivating that energy. I mean it could be a desire for ice cream cones or something.

LS: As Emerson said, if I'm the [few words inaudible] (bit of laughter)

JC/S(?): Alright.

S: Ok.

AH: I've been feeling [AD simultaneously, faint: Don't go away.] really confused about the last few minutes of the discussion, I would (laughter) really like to ask a question concerning it. It seems that in a fundamental way you could talk about Mars as being some-- some disposable libido.

S: Well Andrew--

S (simultaneously, faint): Disposable?

S: Disposable?

AS: Yeah, it disposes you.

AH: Uh--

S: Yeah, yeah, you can use it, go ahead.

LR (simultaneously): Waste it.

TS: Go ahead.

AH: Yeah.

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

AH: Like, you have a choice about what you do with that to some extent. Now are you saying that Mars does the choosing?

LR: No, no.

TS: Well I would.

LR: You would?

TS: Yeah.

AH: That's the part I didn't understand, because it seems that-- well you know-- well we're using Jung as an example tonight but he describes this process, the channelization of libido and the various ways of directing it. Well, it doesn't seem that that would be a function of the libido. I--

TS (simultaneously): No. Yes it is, in a sense-- I mean I could think of person-- perhaps a useful illustration, you think of in a process of building something where certain obstacles will come up. Now the very way in which one habitually realizes that this is an obstacle and solves that obstacle, there's-- one finds out in reflection that there was a-- that there was already pre-existent choices involved within one's own intelligence as to how one is going to overcome it, and what a-- ends up getting done is implied in the way in which one overcomes that obstacle or resistance. [students assent] Ok, and you see afterwards that there was a certain kind of-- that the energy was going to go where it was going to go and that one's concepts of what was going to get done were blown out of the water along the way. And so that-- that in that Mars in itself there is a channelization or intelligence or meaning that it has of its own. It may not-- it's not conscious and it's not articulate necessarily or objective. It's innate in the very act itself. What gets done tells you what your Mars is. You say, "Oh, this is what I was--" you know, "This isn't what I thought I was going to do but this is what was meant to be done" and (on of) like more instinctual psychic level one sees that this is what was to be done.

AH: My life doesn't work that way. [short pause] When it do-- when it does (bit of laughter) I don't get anything done. It-- but is--

IF: Andrew--

AH: (What?)

IF: What if-- to kind of play with the same thing which Timothy said this way, that we keep on doing thinking that's what we have to do just (to limit) we don't want to do what we are doing. Does that fit you now?

AH: Yeah, that makes sense but I don't understand the idea that one-- one starts out with an amorphous concept of a goal--

IF: No, no, it's just like making a list, you know, we making all list, like "I want to do this, I want to go to school, I want to do this and that," now [couple/few words inaudible] in the morning what-- with what you do during the day and it's only that gets accomplished what our Mars is capable of. And the same thing with the whole life. It's not always what is on the list that's going to be checked out or [couple words inaudible]

AH: Yeah, my list gets checked off.

IF: Yeah they're checked off but after that do you like what you've done or not, you know, you have to do it, you know, it's not that you're not that [one word inaudible] you go to school, you come here, you do all of those things, but then underneath that, the energy which defines really what you're after is really Mars. We do it by-- by going through the whole performances, learning about our energy by the-- through-- through the performances of our Mars.

AH (faint): Yes.

IF: I mean, you know, you go to school until you're late, yeah? Do you like it? You're going to shout from you-- from your backyard tomorrow how you don't go to school anymore, yeah.

LC/S(?) (possibly part of background): Hey Jeff?

AH (faint): You're going to be screaming about it.

IF: Yes.

AH (faint): Well that's ok it's hard to do, I just--

S (faint, possibly part of background): You mean--

IF: No I mean, it seems like that's what it was in terms of a resistance, that we do-- we go through all that, you know-- like especially with your Mars, you know, you go through all of those incredible amount of-- of martial activity just to know what-- where you want to-- how you want to channelize all that enormous ener-- energy underneath. So it's not like on top it came up like the accomplishment through that Mars, but what that power is within that directed energy which you [one word inaudible]

AH (simultaneously): Don't you experience like-- let's say that you want to do something that you're not particularly interested in doing like let's say, [IF: Yes.] in my case frequently its like to study something [IF simultaneously: Yes, yes.] or understand something. If I make the effort persistently for a few hours or a few days, the libido goes there.

IF: There will be what?

AH: The libido will go there.

IF: Yeah.

AH: And I can keep it there.

IF: Uh-hm.

AH: But then when I put it some place else I have to do that process over again, take it out, reattach it to another object, attend to it for a day or two, then--

IF (simultaneously): Yeah, but it is with the energy which (was/would) finally accomplish something and didn't-- not what, you know, you've been doing studying and you've been doing building. [couple inaudible student words simultaneous with IF] That's not the Mars. But the energy which is really to your disposal to do anything it's really Mars but we're learning about energy only by accomplishment of something. And, um, you know, e-- even-- even at our disposal that we always put-- put it to some kind of incredible creativity. Instead we just running around.

TS: Yeah I think that-- I mean, I really don't think it's all that complex or subtle, I mean you-- you say you sit down in the evening, you decide you're going to study and you find yourself nodding out. Another evening you sit down and you decide you're going to watch a television show, you don't nod out. Well, the Mars is going to go the same place, the energy has in itself a certain intent or focus. [student assents] Now to pull it out of one place and put it in another takes a lot of work. And what tool do you have? You have that Mars itself to do it with. That's all I think is being said about it.

AH (faint): I see, ok.

TS: Ok?

S (faint): Good (going).

TS: Well we only got three more to go and fifteen-- five minutes a shot (then we're done).

LR: This is totally on a different level than (Venus), it's interesting because each one of these discussions has been of-- sort of the quality of the--

TS: Well-- Let's do communication next then. (laughter, student words)

S: (Can I ask) a question about the Mars?

TS: If you want to get on-- I-- can we get off? I mean, I think [student assents] we should try to at least just do them all.

LR (very faint): You're crazy. (some laughter)

TS: [few words inaudible] What is this?!

LR (simultaneously, faint): [couple words inaudible] a question.

AS: Then I guess we're still on Mars.

RG(?) (simultaneously): Stop being contentious Linda, will ya?

LR (faint): [few words inaudible] let's ask a question.

RG: Go ahead.

S: Well, [LR simultaneously: Ask a question Peter.] ok, it might keep it going for a while. I don't understand from the discussion we just had how the Mars is referred to as the shadow. Is the shadow the resistance that's inherent in the intention to accomplish something?

RG: It could be. It could be. I don't think it's definitively that but it certainly could be if what you intend to accomplish is not on the-- on the gradient of that energy. Like what Tim says, the gradient of that energy is going to watch television and you want to watch television, then it's not resistance. But if-- but if you want to meditate and the gradient of the energy is to watch television, then the Mars is going to give you a lot of resistance, it seem(s).

S: Yeah but we do-- we have referred to Mars as the shadow.

RG: Right.

S: And I'm thinking of Jung's definition of the shadow as the parts of the psyche which you don't recognize as your own and you project it.

RG: Right but so then-- yeah, it's what you don't want to be. Yeah.

S (faint): (Yeah/Go ahead).

LC (simultaneously, faint): I-- seems like-- (go ahead).

RG: Go ahead, finish.

S (faint): Oh, finish.

S: I guess I just don't quite grasp it yet, how it--

RG: Ok, but from what point of view is a way-- what-- the shadow? I mean is it from Mars' point of view, is it-- or is it from Saturn's point of view or the Sun's point of view. I mean it seems that the view--

S (simultaneously): I guess it would be from the Mars point of view in the sense that what you-- what's appears to stand in the way of your desires is regarded as the shadow, could you say that?

RG: See, I think that's the way Jeff was coming at the shadow with Saturn almost, the resistance. But if you're coming from the point of view of Mars--

LR (simultaneously): Right, yeah, what appears to block the desires isn't--

TS: No?

RG: Isn't desire.

LR (simultaneously): No because the sh-- the-- it seemed the shadow-- think what you're calling the shadow is of the nature of desire. The way we've spoken about Mars is the desires of the beast.

IF: We know [couple words inaudible] (laughter)

S: [one/two words inaudible]

LR: The animal [IF simultaneously: Could--] nature as desire.

IF (simultaneously): Well could you-- you know, instead of animal nature Peter, could you-- could you imagine Mars as that-- you know, with-- within the Mars energy shadow is that which wastes your energy.

S: That which wastes your energy. [student assents] So--

LC: I (thought it might) work with that, it's like this-- if the soul can take the unconscious part of the-- the parts that haven't been assimilated by the soul, the life-- I mean in one sense the life is that which is unconscious to the-- to the soul, and the vi-- the life-- the-- that energy that is in the life, I mean I-- looking at the shadow in a different sense, you know, almost as a-- like a broader sense, extending that-- I mean the shadow coming down from the level of the soul down into the life, you know life is what's unconscious, what hasn't been assimilated by the soul.

[student assents, very faint]

S: Everything which [S simultaneously: Could--] is lived out. (Remember that) [one word inaudible]

LC: It seems to me that what-- what the life-- the manifestation of the life is what hasn't been taken in by the soul and in that sense it's like the shadow, it's like the life needs a-- the shadow, you know.

S: What [one inaudible student word simultaneous with S] are you saying?

LC (very faint): Think I'm saying, you know, kind of leaving the shadow [couple/three words inaudible]

AP: Couldn't you say that in the nature of Mars is the single bo-- it's just (a/to) concentrated focus on one detail or aspect and in doing that it must ignore the rest and because of that there's always this tension charge up in the Mars function in that it's always-- behind it is always this-- the rest that's pressing on. In order for it to function it has to be focused on-- on-- on a detail or something. Could you say that? That that's why it is the shadow or why it is connected with the shadow, because of this?

[short pause]

S (faint, possibly part of background): (How would you--)

LR: I mean, it-- along that line if the Mars Venus or all these things opposite and you said Venus is what unified the form of experience, Mars would have to be the opposite and I think that's what you said.

AP: Uh-hm.

LR: What destroys the unity.

AH: So Mars is the shadow, [IF simultaneously: Look at the--] and-- and the shadow represents that part of the libido that's unconscious. Is that right?

IF: Well it's a shadow, it's a-- [LR/S(?) simultaneously: Animal.] it's one of the words which is the hardest for me to see only in Mars because it seem that every planet has its own shadow. And for that very reason we have to really be kind of conscious of which of the shadows we talk about, you know, and that when I said that it's that which wastes your energy like-- Look, you can, let's say if you're really into study, you study for seven hours and you're not tired, yeah, and then you go to chop your wood and you don't want to do it and that suddenly you-- you are tired. I mean it doesn't matter, it could be other way around, yeah. But question is, is that which is really not together with intentionality of the energy which you-- you e-- you as energy have will be always the shadow of the Mars. That's why called it as a that which wastes your-- your energy. And we-- if we looked our Mars we could spend most of a life of spending energy of the Mars rather than using, or waste it.

S (faint): Yeah.

S: [couple words inaudible]

[student assents, very faint]

S: [one word inaudible]

LS (simultaneously): (Is it not to be seen?)

IF: Yeah but I mean-- [AH simultaneously: Is--] well while we're going [one/two words inaudible]

AH (simultaneously): Is Mars also the energy that takes care of the biological functions in the body, the unconscious processes, the glands and the digestion? Is it energy in that way, libido in that way, or is it only a psychic-- are you describing it only as a psychic kind of energy? Seems that Mars would be the energy in the body as well.

AD: Well, we're discussing the psychic functions right now, and if I could follow up what Irena just said, ok. Every planet has its shadow you said. Alright? Now, if you take any one of the psychic functions and you think of the-- the way it functions or the way it has functioned in the past, and that this is the intentionality of that energy. Ok? That's exactly what you mean by Mars as the shadow. The attachment or the conservative and habitual nature of energy to operate according to past performance. (bit of laughter) Now every planet would have that tendency and that's what we mean when we say that it represents the shadow. So your aesthetic perception for instance could have a shadow, alright, or your reflective function could have a shadow. Insofar that we're referring to the energy of any of these psychic functions as attached to a past mode of operating and unwilling to alter that, that's the shadow.

[student assents, very faint]

AS: If-- if you go one step further than that, if you speak about these as real soul functions, then the traces they actually leave behind of their activity, we spoke about the light of the soul shining in gives off a shadow or this-- this whole habitual structure, the traces of all the functioning of these soul powers is like the shadow of each one of those planets. It's almost like each of those functions casts a shadow in its activity, in its very activity, and that what it leaves behind becomes rigid. [student assents] [short pause] I'm just wondering if--

AD: Yeah, I see [AS simultaneously: (Do you have--)] what you-- I see what you're talking about but that's going to confuse, (ok), I think for most people the delineation of what we mean by shadow.

[Audio File 1984 0130a Ends]

[Audio File 1984 0130b Begins]

AD: --to that as the shadow.

[student assents, faint]

LDS: Or the principle of inertia?

AS: But that's funny because PB has this quote where he says, where Jung-- Jung defined the shadow as the complement to the ego, you know, it's dark side, he says he should have gone further [few inaudible student words simultaneous with AS] and seen that the shadow was the ego.

AD: Yeah, you can call the ego-complex the shadow, sure, but if we're speaking--

AS (simultaneously): Just in terms of that inertia.

[student assents]

AD: Uh-hm. Anyway, you get a feeling of what the shadow is?

AH: It's a habit of the energy and-- and in order to change it you have to go through (first--)

AD (simultaneously): Its resistance.

AH: Actually, Jung uses the example in primitive societies the great great difficulty of changing that, [AD: Uh-huh.] and that ritual(--/.)

AD: Yeah. In other words, this energy is grooved. It keeps flowing in that direction. You say, "Well I want to alter it a little bit." [AS simultaneously, faint: Groovy energy.] Then you'll find out what the shadow is. Whether you're talking about aesthetic perception, reflection, or any of the other functions, you'll see that that lower aspect, that aspect of the energy which has already been directionalized for a long time, it refuses to make the change. Good, let's go to the next one. [short pause] I hope that makes you feel better now that you've realized you got seven shadows. (laughter) And you all can't escape.

AS/S(?) (simultaneously): [few words inaudible] (some laughter)

S: But just one more question on that then. When you speak, you know, in this colloquial way that we do about you have a shadow on another person let's say, would that be 'cause that person represents-- well let's see, how could I-- they represent-- your energy is identified with a certain direction and they represent the opposite of that? Is that why-- that you would be talking about that?

S (very faint): That's good.

AD: Well, I think the way that-- the use of the term there was you project a shadow-- let's say (like) I project a shadow onto another teacher or a Sage or something, alright.

CDA: The Traditionalists.

AD: Huh? The Traditionalists, no that's no shadow. (laughter, student words) Well you got no idea how carefully the calculations go into that. But like another teacher, alright, who has succeeded, alright. I project a shadow onto him, that simply is jealousy. I can't do what he's done.

S: That in other words, something which represents where you would want your energy to go but it hasn't gone there because of your own innate resistance, [AD: Uh-hm.] that's the shadow.

AD: Yeah. And now this man has done it, alright.

S: Ok. But now wouldn't you also--

LDS: That's only one example.

S: Yeah, that's one example. There-- wouldn't there also be a shadow in cases where you--

AD: But don't you see, don't you see what you're doing? That's trivia, all that's trivia, the illustration. What is basic here is to recognize the fact that any transformation of libido from its habitual modes of operating is the shadow. The refusal on the part of this energy, alright, to be altered. [S, faint: Ok.] Everything else is secondary. So you-- you sit down and you say "I'm going to study." And your energies who have been playing baseball for the past ten incarnations say, "Like hell we will." (laughter)

AS: Start batting around. (AS laughs a bit, bit of laughter) That's--

S: [couple words inaudible]

S (very faint): Yeah, 'cause I'm sick of it. (bit of laughter, students assent)

AD: You ever tell yourself "I'm going to stop looking at those pretty girls?"

[students assent, faint]

JC: Next time.

AD: See how easy it is to change the direction of the energy? (bit of laughter)

CDA: Next time you'll be one of them. (laughter, student words)

LDS: There mu-- there must be a ritual for--

AD: There probably is a ritual, sure. Who was it, Origen? He--

LDS: Oh no, that--

AD: What did he do?

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

LDS: Castrated himself.

AD: Castrated himself.

LR: Origen did?

S (faint): Yeah.

AD: Yeah, one of the [S simultaneously, faint: Of course.] early Church fathers. But I don't know if we find that acceptable, let's go on [possibly couple words inaudible] (laughter, student words)

KD: Just don't eat celery, (you know)?

S (simultaneously): What-- I just want to-- (I--) (laughter)

KD (amidst laughter): [possibly another student: No celery!] Celery is the root of all evil. (laughter) You could be really evolved. Now it's celery and gold. (laughter)

AD (amidst laughter): Now it's what?

AS: Celery.

S (simultaneously): Celery. (laughter)

AD: Celery--

KD: Is the root of all evil, the root of all lust. (laughter)

AD: Listen, salt is a worse [CDA simultaneously: This is on tape Kathy.] aphrodisiac, don't give me that. (laughter)

AS (faint): Salt?

S (faint): Yeah.

AS/S(?) (faint): Salt?

[few faint inaudible student words in background]

KD: The celery did it.

AD: No, the salt did it. (laughter, student talking) Don't cook with salt!

S (faint): I'm not going to.

S (faint): We know.

AD: What was it?

S (faint): Go ahead.

LC/S(?) (simultaneously): Yeah.

LC (faint): No more salt [AD simultaneously: Can we go on?] for me forever after.

AH: Yeah.

AD: Alright.

TS (faint): Yeah I got the Moon. That was next Monday I figured we could--

AS: How about the Moon, Tim?

TS(?) (very faint): [few words inaudible]

[9¾ second pause with faint background student talking/whispering]

AD: Communication seems to be a basic problem. (laughter)

TS (faint): Should I proceed with that one?

[short pause with very faint student talking in background]

S (very faint): It's the (easiest) one.

[student assents, very faint]

TS (faint): Yeah but I didn't get to (see) what that one meant. We could just work with communication.

AD: Tim-- (laughter)

AS: Didn't get through yet. (AS laughing)

S: Right. (laughter)

[short pause]

S: We get a lot [one/two words inaudible]

AS (simultaneously): Well one thing, if you [couple faint TS words simultaneous with AS] spoke about leaving out the conceptual side in the Venus it seems it would come in the Mercury. You know when you said that the Venus organizes the form of that inspiration or whatever or the given, it-- it's par-- it's perceptual-- perceptual thing. Seems the Mercury would deal with the conceptual form or the concepts (that are manifested).

AD: Yeah well, something like that. What did we say? It articulates.

LR (simultaneously): Articulation, the kind of form that a thought would take in terms concep-- you know, we did distinguish it from the Venus in a way I mean, Mercury is formulation also, but it's a different kind of form. Then we have to figure out what the difference in form is. [student assents, faint] You know, like language is definitely conceptual.

S (faint): How do you [couple words inaudible]

AS: Language and what?

LR (faint): Well it didn't have to do with the actual experience, the thing with-- which unites you to experience at all (the way I thought). I mean, you wouldn't look to Mercury to find out how somebody actually experiences his life. But you would look to Mercury to find out how somebody formulates a point of view about that life, articulates his reflection about it, (you know), or even his, you know-- you know refle-- the way in-- instincts are articulated or-- Anything that requires that kind of articulation would have to-- I mean I think it really describes a point of view in that sense.

S (faint): More reflective than Venus?

[couple students at once, few words inaudible]

JC: Why not say conceptual?

LR: I did.

JC: Ok. I mean [LR simultaneously: I--] not more, it is.

IF: Yeah but you see, the difficulty with that, the problem with that language we talked about, it's not only the language of a concept, say the words within a lang-- I mean they're within any particular language, but how we pass the message from-- you know, like for example they talk body language and so on, you know, but the way people transmute what is in sight which is not always within the world-- words itself.

JC: How about a symbolific function? [one/two words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): Yeah, if we know what we mean by that.

IF: Yeah, that's a little bit [one/two words inaudible]

JC: Mercury [one/two words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): For instance if we say that insofar, insofar that there is bodily modifications and these are memorized, they're stored, they're classified, alright, duly registered, noted, and then the intellect combines the variety necessary to produce, let's say, or articulate or express a certain thought. That would be the communication or the symbolific activity.

AP: Could you go over it again?

AD: What we're saying is that insofar that the organism or the-- the psychic function that we're referring to, is that there are bodily modifications, in other words, appearances, to the organism. These appearances are organized, classified, stored in a data bank, you know, and registered. Now the intellect is what could combine the variety of these, let's say, different stored memories, organize them-- organize them so that it could make a thought of them. If a language is available then it will express that with language. If language is not available, it will try to express it through bodily gestures or things of that nature. But basically what we're saying is that this is the function that organizes the interiority of the experienced modifications that the being goes through and then use that as a basis to communicate or articulate itself to either others or relate to the environment with them. So it's an articulation of thought. And later on of course it becomes concept, it builds up concepts that way. But the concept is going to be more difficult because the concept is going to draw in a higher faculty. In other words, if I see-- if I see a hundred men and I notice they all have two legs and two arms, alright, it's going to take a judgment on the part of the soul to say, "That's a man," alright. Now you're bringing in an idea which is not within the data given to it.

AS: So-- so it is-- so the Mercury is like what PB calls the intellect.

AD: Yeah, yeah.

[student assents, faint]

AS: Or logic [AD simultaneously: Yeah, the intellect.] versus reason, as opposed to what you're saying, the higher faculty would be the reason.

AD: So, so if-- if this man has seen a hundred different kinds of pots and circles and fences that were circular and all that, alright, that's-- in order to come up with a concept of a circle, you're going to have draw on reason. But that's not what we're talking about. The intellect is not the reason. The intellect is this way of organizing the experiences and retaining them so that they can be used.

S: So would you say it's the logic of the sensible?

AD: Yeah, yeah, that's what I call the logic of the sensible and if you bring that to bear on trying to understand the soul, you'll never get there, never make it…because there's nothing in that material that can give you the feeling of what essence, soul essence is. I mean it's inevitable because in that experience you've never come across it and you never will.

S: So here it's--

LC (simultaneously, faint): Does it also bring then in something of the relationship between being or internal and external aspects of a person's experience [couple words inaudible]

AD: Yes, it tries to do that, sure. Even an animal, for instance, because of past experience and the remembrance of that, will-- will remember that, alright, to judge his conduct, in other words, to guide his conduct in the future. So every time a dog comes by you and you smack it, the dog remembers that, alright, and he articulates to himself a thought, although you may not think he thinks but there's an articulation going on saying, "I stay away from you, I go this way." (some laughter, students assent) It's-- it's life understanding itself at that level. [13¾ second pause] But basically I would think that's what communication is. What else can you communicate?

LC (faint): I'm just trying to understand Mercury as communication within-- within the person's own psyche internally or necessarily including the experience of the external world order, objective world order.

AD (simultaneously): But, but, honey that's already included in what we said(.) (W/w)hen we say that there's a bodily modification going on, alright, which is memorized and recorded, classified. In other words, what we're saying is, every time I see this-- a big rock, alright, there's a modification of my bodil-- bodily sense-organs taking place. The intellect is what notes that, recognizes it, and organize it for future use. Later on when I pass here I'll pick up this rock to throw at that dog. Alright, that's what the intellect basically is. It is basically orientated for the survival of the animal. Intellect, in this sense (in a) term. It doesn't mean like when Plotinus uses the word Intellect.

LC (faint): Right, but as with the other functions we didn't ne-- like with Venus or some of the others we didn't necessarily bring in any relationship-- relationship with input from the world that--

AD: But we did, we did. In the case of Venus we said it takes cognizance of the material it has at hand, in other words, the stored nuances of memories, feelings, and all that, and then it creates an image. That is included as the material that it has to work with. In other words, to make a form, the form of this particular man for instance, alright, all that material has to be included automatically.

TS: [couple/three words inaudible]

LC (simultaneously): Ok, then-- then I get confused between the difference between Mercury and Venus when you-- when you speak it that way because you're talking again about some--

AD: In the case of Venus the form that is given is basically a form in terms of feeling. In the case of Mercury it's in terms of the intellect, it's in terms of idea. In other words, Mercury is more cognitive. Venus is not cognitive. In other words, if I were to ask Brahms, "Now why did you choose this over that?" he can give me equally important and good reasons why he should and why he shouldn't. It's not going to be the conceptual that's going to tell him, "Choose this form over that form." It's going to be a feeling-tone that's going to tell him which one to use.

[short pause]

TS: So would you call that Mercury re-cognitive in a sense?

AD: Re-cognitive, yeah.

TS: In the sense that it would know what that form was that Venus had produced, or know what that energy was that Mars was intending? But in a sense it recognize [couple/three words inaudible] by-- through the organization of the ideas or learned experiences, it appears to know. It's not a knowing in a sense that it's a [one word inaudible] done.

AD: Yeah.

TS: [couple words inaudible] would call it the soul. But it's the efficient grouping of learned experience to-- [AD simultaneously: Uh-hm.] directed towards one of these other functions [AD: Uh-hm.] and in that sense it's different from the Venus, because I was having the same trouble Lauren did, being sure I understood it different from Venus. Would you say that--

LC (faint): Aren't you bringing in a quality of the function there [TS: Well--] when you're saying re-- (re-cognitive), and its (symbolism) would be--

TS (simultaneously): Yeah. Yeah recognize, to recognize, to recognize the [one word inaudible] that you-- you know.

LR: To articulate something you'd have to re-cognize.

RG (faint): Yeah you'd have to.

AS: There's a-- (something) that's when you reflect it just means relate the thing to a previous name.

TS: Or you know it.

RG: Yeah.

TS: Yeah.

AS (faint): Yeah I--

RG (simultaneously): (That doesn't disagree with that.)

AS (faint): --necessarily [couple words inaudible]

LR: Right, finding the name for the thing is a-- is a re-cognition.

RG: Even though there should be a way also to understand Mercury as-- when it looks upward it can [one/two words inaudible] articulate some kind of reason. I mean when-- not that it itself is reason.

AD: Yeah that's true, that-- that's not being denied in this. [LR simultaneously, faint: Yeah but (wouldn't the--)] It's being left out just to try to more clearly delineate communication. [RG assents, faint] But like I say, it's going to be infused from above, alright, and then you could say this person whose intellect is like more spiritual than that person or less, [possibly student: yeah].

LR: But when it does that doesn't it in a sense reverse its action, doesn't it let go of the definition? Doesn't it let go of the form that it's articulating? I mean isn't that the process that's going--

RG (simultaneously): But it picks up a new form. I mean it seems to depend-- be able to articulate more rational forms rather than sensible form.

AD: Uh-hm.

LR: Yeah.

AD: Alright Tim? [sounds like TS assenting, very faint] Actually these two functions don't need any explanation. If you can't tell the difference between, you know, an evaluative function and the communicative function, go back to Cornell and start again. (You) take another forty years.

[few seconds of background student talking, laughter]

AH: But, could you say once again what the-- what the restriction of Mercury is because I heard it described in two ways. You would say the-- you look at a round fence and a pot and a number of other objects that are round and you evolve the concept "circle", you said that was not Mercury.

AD: No, that wasn't Mercury. Mercury would be noticing the fact that that's a wagon wheel, not that it's a circle. Circle is a concept, it comes from a higher realm, but the wagon wheel is not a concept, it's an object. Alright, then he sees a flower pot, he doesn't see a circle there, he sees a flower pot. To see the circle in the flower pot means that the higher reason's infusing into the intellect.

AH(?) (faint): Yeah. (But--)

AS (simultaneously): Like Proclus says he-- that-- that it can name what the thing is but it can't give you the reason of it or why.

AH: So Mercury-- Mercury doesn't have access to concepts?

AD: It does have access to concepts, we're not saying that. We're looking at the meaning of Mercury at this most primitive level as a psychic function.

RG: I mean maybe when it aspects Saturn you could say a concept or, you know, a rational form, reflective form might come in but, you know, depends on [few words inaudible]

S (simultaneously): Is-- is assimilation a word you'd use for Mercury?

AD: No.

S (faint): [couple words inaudible]

TS (faint): [few words inaudible] (bit of laughter)

AD: Don't you people ever sit down and have a soliloquy with your shadow?

AH: At the most fundamental level then it's tied to the senses, (mainly/namely) bound to the senses. When it's not bound to the senses and it has autonomy to develop concepts that's a different situation, we're not describing--

AD: Well, not that it has autonomy but like we said, that the light of reason infuses or is more-- becomes more penetrative. The intellect is let's say now receptive to it and listens to the guidance that is offered to it. So it says, "Look, you notice, that's flower pot, you notice the wagon wheel, you notice that-- you know, the Moon, Sun. Is there something common they all have?" And the intellect scratches its head [one/two words inaudible] "No! That's a flower pot, that's the Sun." (laughter, student words) Then the reason comes again, "But look, look, do you see a form common to all of them?" Now the reason is coming into the intellect. The intellect says, "Ah. Circle, circle, circle, circle," right. That's reason coming into the intellect, and that could get more and more pronounced. But we're-- we're thinking of just plain communication at the lowest level, you know, the psyche is functioning, this is one of its functions, alright. That's the way we're looking at it.

AP: Anthony? May I ask how Mercury-- before you connect it with the Trickster archetype, maybe-- (AD laughs) No? Could you explain [one/two words inaudible]

AD: Tim could do that.

TS: Once upon a time--

S (simultaneously): Is that [couple/three words inaudible] (laughter)

[couple students, few very faint inaudible words]

AD: Instead of saying Trickster, use the word "conjecture".

CDA: That the ego-- that the intellect could--

AD: Come up with anything.

CDA: Could justify any position.

AD: Come up with anything, yeah.

TS: Yeah, when this (fool) could recognize a totally familiar se-- rationalization for something, and it's-- all the steps seemed perfectly contiguous, you know, (and/then) a conjecture remains as [one word inaudible] as it is-- as it did the first time. But I guess if (we/you)--

LS (simultaneously): Isn't Mercury also the function that's looking at that crap and calling it "crap," telling it to go away and trying to listen for a-- a better thought? Isn't it the function that's discriminating among the thoughts and-- and looking for the ones that are the true name Trickster?

S: But I have [three words inaudible]

IF (simultaneously): [couple/three words inaudible] that Mercury sort of objectify your understanding, you know, it-- and from that point of view let's say if you take a car to some kind of a tribe society that never seen the car, the object will be still there and let's say you came with that car and it have a name "car" but they can call it anything what you wa-- what they will, you know, a-- a horse with wheel or whatever [couple/few words inaudible] But the same thing-- within Trickster within us that's the same thing with the [one/two words inaudible] difficult concept which comes towards us. I mean we're still trying to process it, you know, any-- anything which communicated to us but we objectify only within the Mercury function which we are capable of. We objectify in our understanding, whatever (it would be a believe in) or-- or anything which communicates a thought. Isn't that-- I'm-- isn't that [TS: Yeah, I think--] [three/few words inaudible]

TS: I mean I think-- [S simultaneously, faint: That I can see.] yeah.

AD: I'd say the first part, I'd agree with the first part. Mercury is naming.

LS: Naming, [AD simultaneously: Yeah.] discriminating of--

AD: Naming, yeah.

LS: But naming not only horses and cars but feeling states.

AD: Yeah, sure, it's naming them.

TS (simultaneously, faint): Right [few words inaudible]

LS: And objectifying subjective states and discriminating what's the self and what isn't the self.

AD (simultaneously): Yeah. [student assents] But then when you say now it wants to understand something more, that's a little different. There I think something higher is coming into it, uh--

LS: Something we wouldn't call Mercury anymore.

AD: (Yeah/No).

TS: It would seem also that Mercury--

AD (simultaneously): But all-- the strange thing that happens is when it infuses that Mercury, alright, that Mercury is going to appropriate it and say, "This is me too." In other words if some spirituality or some light comes into it, and is capable of showing it how to relate concepts to produce greater understanding, that Mercury is going to appropriate it and say "This is still me talking." It will not recognize that higher that came into it. If we want to keep to the name 'intellect'. But you see the difficulty is we never find intellect in its pure form. It's always mixed with the higher. There's always some--

LS (simultaneously): That other function you'd call it Uranus (instead) of Mercury?

AD: Huh?

LS: (Is) the other function that you're speaking of a higher function, you'd call it Uranus rather than Mercury?

AD: Ok. Higher cognition. [short pause] You see in a sense then what we're saying is, in Uranus there is cognition. In Mercury, there's naming.

TS (faint): So it would be a [couple words inaudible] and the naming the thought it meant.

RG: Yeah.

AD: And you [TS simultaneously, faint: (It could see--)] have to, you know, always keep in mind that name-- you remember the story of Rumpelstiltskin. [student assents] People feel that they have magic, you know, when they could name something and in a sense it is true. Because look at the marvelous things that happen from it. Someone born in Lower Slobbovia, you know, and someone born in England, one is evolving through that Mercurial function English, the other one is evolving Etruscan or whatever. (some laughter) That Mercurial function is evolving a language in which it can reflect itself. Although--

LS (simultaneously): And it's also capable of recognizing that it's own naming is just a process of objectifying the subjective states and letting go of the name as soon as they've had their function.

AD: Would you repeat that?

LS: It's also capable of recognizing that it's own naming is the process of objectifying subjective states, and of letting go of the naming, not clinging to the naming as being the name of an object but looking at the function of naming.

AD: Yeah, yeah--

LS (simultaneously): Allowing-- allowing itself to work with the function [couple words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): Alright, I grant you-- I'll grant you that if you grant that you imported something of Saturn into that. [student assents, faint] That reflectiveness.

TS (simultaneously, faint): Even though [couple/three words inaudible]

LS: Imported something of Saturn doing what [one word inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): Reflecting.

S: Yeah.

LS: Reflecting?

S: (Sort of)(--/.)

AD: Saying "This is just a name, wait a minute."

KD: Does that naming have anything to do with separating-- I always think of Mercury as it's-- is separating [AD simultaneously: Yeah, I--] and relating. And the naming-- like somebody that's got, you know, a strong Mercury, they're always dividing experience into millions of little pieces and then they're bringing it back together.

AD (simultaneously): Well that's what I think-- I-- that's what I think Lenny meant when he said it's discriminating all the time.

KD (simultaneously): Ok. Like it separates the [AD: Yeah.] wholeness of experience and divides it, and then it tries to relate them back together again.

AD: [faint, possibly a student: Uh-hm.] So, in a sense you could see how that's taking the primal image and tearing it apart.

KD: And see language would have something to do with that because like Lower Slobbovian language would divide experience in a very different way. Like they may not have the same kind of noun. The very sentence structure itself--

AD (simultaneously): Yeah. And there of course you get involved in what are the influences of geography and climate, etc., on the formation of that language and other-- But by the way, I don't think they've ever come to any conclusions as to the origin of language. I-- I think that's just beyond the research that's been done, up to date as far as I know. They just [couple inaudible student words simultaneous with AD] can't figure it out.

KD: [three/few words inaudible] (laughter)

AD: It's nice to know. Let's try another one, Tim.

[12¾ second pause]

S (very faint): Try another one.

TS (faint): Saturn? Saturn and the [one word inaudible]

[students assent, faint]

[10¾ second pause with some very faint student and AD talking in background]

AD: [aside] No, no, no. [short pause] How about the Moon?

TS: Yeah. We're going to need it before we do Saturn. What we said about the Moon is we talked about the Moon as [faint AD talking in background simultaneous with TS] some kind of process of activity, talk about it as a kind of flow of the samskaras, the flow of the thought, the memories, dreams, reflections, as sort of an unbroken apparent continuity to experience. [AD assents, faint] And one way I was thinking about it-- there's two ways. Irena and I were talking about it today that, on the one hand you just think of the Moon as a kind of a matrix of all-- the totality of all those memories and images and so forth in which--

AD: From which they flow out.

TS: From which they flow out. And then there's also the kind of apparent kind of continuity that is provided from day to day or moment to moment, that in the immediacy of a mood or a thought or an activity there's an apparent connection to what went before and what is coming next, you know. Reflection may show otherwise but there's always a sense that that-- that there's an identity with what one is doing now and what one has been doing previously, and that iden-- that sense of sort of supported apparent connection seems to be made by one's thoughts, ideas, emotions, memories. [10¾ second pause] We talked about the Moon also as the kind of the-- the s-- the determinate-- [short pause] the con-- the con-- congelation of the vasanas or predispositions [one/two words inaudible] within the individual through which they see the world. So it's the kind of function of embodiment and in that sense also assimilation. I mean it assimilates itself to its experience.

S: [few words inaudible]

LC (simultaneously): (Say) that again?

LR/LC(?) (faint): Say again, Tim?

[9 second pause]

LC (faint): I mean it assimilates itself to an experience?

TS: That's the way I try to understand. In other words, that there's a kind of a-- [9¼ second pause] I think about the body as more the specific [one word inaudible] of perception through which determine what it sees, ok. And I was thinking that gradually there's a kind of a-- a burning up of those predispositions by virtue of the content that (it's experiencing). That the presuppositions, the predeterminations are somewhat altered, ok, by the content that it-- it's passing through it. In other words you-- you undertake a certain activity and you have certain expectations that are-- or through which you're viewing the reason for doing that activity. Gradually those expectations may be altered by virtue of the activity itself. But you're understanding that activity in light of how it verifies or denies or alters those-- those original expectations. If you had none at all, then what would (identify or) determine that experience? [9½ second pause] If you had no expectations about a specific activity, then it would be hard to speak about that-- it-- that specific activity in isolation from any others. You'd have a kind of general flow of your life, life circumstance.

KD (faint): You're talking about the Moon [TS: Yeah.] as a--

TS: Try.

KD: As-- no, as an organ of perception of how you [one word inaudible] It ties up the other perception(s)? Is that what--

TS: No that-- no, that it is that which is all of the different perceptive modes, see, I wasn't meaning it to be one of them. The determination of the modes-- modalities of perception. Like [one/two inaudible KD words simultaneous with TS] not just the eyes but the eyes ear and nose.

KD: So it's that which [one/two words inaudible] ties all these other--

LDS: Provides a sense of continuity.

TS (simultaneously): Compartmentalizes them.

KD: Provides the continuity?

LDS: Doesn't-- you say continuity?

TS (simultaneously): Yeah. And also provides the continuity. In other words you would have something-- an object which is capable of being experienced through several different senses, (you know), when you-- and it seems to have a certain continuity to it, you know. But some-- some illusions there's, you know--

(Side 1 of original cassette tape digitized as 1984 0130b Ends; Side 2 Begins)

S: [one word inaudible]

LDS(?): Well--

[couple students at once, few words inaudible]

LC/S(?) (simultaneously): But the apple [one word inaudible]

LC (faint): You-- you see the apple falling here who's name [couple/three words inaudible] you know you smell the atmosphere and all that.

TS: You put all those [LR(?) simultaneously, faint: That--] back together.

RG: But then it's [LR(?) simultaneously, faint: But that-- that--] organized in one-- in that.

TS: So you don't just see the red, you see the red and the [student assents] [one/two words inaudible] as a thing which is compartmentalized out, you know, starts, you know, you can select that object out.

LC (faint): That's why it's used as the brain because we talk about the brain as being [couple words inaudible] of the (perception/perceptive), all the senses.

RG: Uh-hm.

LDS: And there's something about the immediacy, that you mentioned something about the sense of immediacy or the tie into the immediate the Moon provides. But it seems too you're bringing in the notion of-- or suggesting the notion of temporality. Our sense of temporality seems to be especially tied to-- tied to the Moon. Does that-- you know, in the sense of the continuity that you spoke about, that it provides-- it seems too then it would-- it would provide a sense of time.

TS: Well that may be, I was almost thinking about it as this illusory sense of perpetuity or eternity that-- [short pause] In other words a [couple words inaudible]

LS (simultaneously): It bends itself to the motion of the moment?

TS: Yeah. In that sense the motion is taken as absolute, you know, whereas in the Jupiter there seems to be this conception of sequence, you know, one thing and then another, ok. But, you know when you're-- when you're in one state, the reality of that state or authenticity seems to carry with it a certain kind of fixity or sense of isness that, "Thus has it been and thus shall it always be." Ok are you-- the viability of a certain memory trace in the past appli-- applying to the present is again a certain kind of perpetuality to it.

LDS: But there's that [S simultaneously: The feeling--] sense of motion though. There--

TS: Well yes, there is [LDS simultaneously: When you say that--] motion, there is activity, it's an endless activity [LDS: Yeah.] and it's that endless activity that gives an apparent continuity or significance, you know, and there's this-- there's a peculiar dichotomy between the endless activity, the vasanas firing out or these emotions are(--) ideas firing out one after another, and their habituality, that they're [LDS simultaneously: Yeah.] the same ones, ok. And it seems like the Moon carries both of those things. And it's not out-- you know, I don't understand exactly how it is we can say it's both, but it seems to do that.

[student assents]

JA (simultaneously, faint): (Why) Are you applying it to all the functions, to the Venuses-- what-- why the sort of predispositions and structure of each function is the function? Apply it to all in that sense?

TS (simultaneously): I guess we would have to. Yeah. [couple/three words inaudible]

LC (faint): But I didn't understand the question, how you're (thinking/speaking) of it.

JA (faint): That the-- that the-- in a way that the Jupiter was related to all the functions in a certain way as the organi-- organization of them, the Moon would be like the-- what supplies the continuity of each of the functions and it symbolized what gets represented out. There has been an attempt to see-- to see the functions in terms of being attached to each of the functions in a particular way [one/two words inaudible]

AS (simultaneously): Oh but I see Tim, could you say-- are you saying it's like the continuity of discrete moments? [TS simultaneously: Yeah.] It's like a line, you know like a line is-- in one sense it's a continuous, but on the other hand it's discre-- it's these discrete moments. You re-- I mean you look at it one way it's a discrete moment, if you look at it the other way each local thing looks like [LR simultaneously: Well--] the whole-- looks like it's a-- like it's a continuity.

LR (simultaneously): Well, that's-- that's one way we were talking about it was that in that sense it's what prevents you from the spontaneity of every instant.

AS: Yeah, it prevents you from the spontaneity, it gives you a false sense.

LR (simultaneously): Because it provides a veneer of continuity between discrete moments of perception. I mean if the world-image is changing, I mean, [AS simultaneously, faint: Like the cat.] in that instant, the Moon would prevent the direct perception of that because of it-- of all the samskaras, the bodily samskaras. It represents the organization of them, they're the habitual functioning which provides this sense of continuity.

RG: Right.

LR (faint): It's a veneer of continuity.

LDS: It's almost like--

AS (simultaneously): Yeah, like [LR/S(?) simultaneously, faint: (Sounds like.)] the caterpillar or [students assent] you twirl the light and [LR simultaneously, faint: Yeah that's--] it's really distinct points but it looks like the circle [one word inaudible] your experience [one/two words inaudible]

LDS (simultaneously): It just sounds like that function you'd want to shut down in meditation actually.

LC (faint): (Well I don't), it just really ties in with those--

KD: Lauren.

LC (faint): I keep a-- I keep flipping on the cosmological symbol of the Moon and where-- what its-- where it is in the whole scheme, trip-- you know, going around the Earth. It's very particularly always tied in to this-- the images of the Earth and of the body.

AS (faint): Uh-hm. I don't know.

S: [couple words inaudible]

TS (simultaneously): The (Dragon) [one/two words inaudible]

AS (simultaneously): Tim, your sense of the time thing seems really important, I don't know-- I don't think it's the whole thing but activity in terms-- kind of like expectation and-- and memory. I mean both-- the re-- [TS simultaneously, faint: Yeah, and that's--] the referring both ways from that present, which is what ties you to that [couple words inaudible]

LDS (simultaneously): You know, I think it-- it's what provides with you a sense of time.

RG: Yeah [student assents] and it's al-- it's also space.

AS: Then, yeah.

KD: And it's also the brain, you know.

RG (simultaneously): I mean if it represents brain consciousness, the unfoldment of the-- of the Moon represents the organization of our space-time consciousness, [AS assents] which creates the illusion of continuity, [LR assents] but-- and doesn't allow you to distinguish discrete [AS/S(?) simultaneously: (No.)] momentariness.

S: (That's good.)

LDS (simultaneously): How would it provide the space, like give me--

IF: Because each of that-- well we said was more or less what Richard (says/said), you know, previously during the seminar that if a-- if the Moon represents the thought-body as an organ of perception. It's not only we sitting here and through your Moon you have a perception but let's say when you see a dream you still do it-- do it through your Moon. You provide the space and everybody who is acting within the space of your dream. It still will be from that Moon and activity which goes on within a dream still going to be from your Moon also.

RG: Wait a minute, [few inaudible student words simultaneous with RG] I mean you can't separate space and time, [LDS simultaneously: No I guess you can't so--] you have those two concepts continually and therefore-- and the brain is what projects the space-time form [one/two inaudible LDS words simultaneous with RG] of-- of anybody's experience, and in that sense I think you'd look to the Moon to see the quality of the actual spatio-temporal perception, [LDS: Ok.] of how you perceive the world.

LDS: So the Moon I guess we've associated with the brain consciousness [one/two words inaudible] anyway.

CDA/S(?): Could you--

JA (simultaneously): But-- oh.

CDA (simultaneously, very faint): (Well) it's alright, [S simultaneously: (Look.)] go ahead.

JA/S(?) (very faint): Go ahead.

CDA: Did I interrupt you?

LDS: No, go ahead.

CDA: You know, you say the quality of your spatial-temporal world and I just-- I don't know what you mean by that.

[student assents, faint]

RG: You don't?

CDA: (Well--)

LR (simultaneously): How about the instant-to-instant consciousness?

CDA: That-- that [one inaudible LR word simultaneous with CDA] makes sense, now that makes perfect sense.

AD (simultaneously): You-- you-- but you don't experience instant-to-instant consciousness.

LR: Well if I-- and no matter what's--

CDA (simultaneously): Body-based.

RG: Yeah, I mean [LR: (Totally.)] your bodily perception has a space-- [LR simultaneously: I don't mean--] a particular space and time quality.

CDA: One event following another, I mean it's not that-- [short pause] One perception follows another.

LDS (simultaneously): I think Linda said it before. The Moon blocks your-- your perception of the actual instants. She said it's-- it provides you with a veneer of continuity, [student assents, faint] and-- [CDA simultaneously: I-- I heard that.] which helps you to miss [CDA simultaneously: Yeah.] or prevents you from--

CDA (simultaneously): Yeah because-- because (you're/your) locate-- because it identifies you with this body which [LR: Which deals in (one word inaudible)] puts you in a space-time [LDS: The psychosomatic--] relationship to the world. But, is that--

RG: Yeah. I mean, I was trying to get a little more particular, that-- that if you looked at the Moon position you could actually try-- maybe see the quality of what that spatio-temporal--

CDA: The quality when you bring in the degree, (uh-hm).

RG (simultaneously): The degree, the sign, the-- yeah.

CDA: But in-- in itself as an instinct you wouldn't speak of quality. You would [RG simultaneously: Right as function.] just say that--

RG: As the function. I don't know.

JA: But you know, the way you speak, the kind of des-- the description that you (make/made), I mean you're speaking as if [S: But we all do.] instants are reality and the Moon gives you the illusion of continuity. You know-- you know, rather than to put it that way or would you say the Moon maybe gives you the experience of continuity without judging whether it's illusory or whether not real or--

RG: Well actually I was talking about PB's quote that thought provides us-- thought ((includes/gives us) our sense of) time.

LR (very faint): I don't know, maybe.

RG/S(?): [one/two words inaudible]

AS (simultaneously): I don't know Richard, [few faint inaudible LR words simultaneous with AS] why wouldn't you say it's more like the psychological space that he lives in? I mean it's-- you could say that's where he lives as-- as a psychic e-- as an entity, like [RG/S(?) simultaneously: Uh-hm. I wouldn't--] that-- that's the space he lives in rather than the-- I don't-- [RG: I wouldn't--] I don't know why you would say it provides the actual epistemological space-time.

RG (simultaneously): Not the-- I-- the qual-- I didn't say epistemological space.

AS (simultaneously): Just the qual-- ok, just the quality where he lives, just-- I mean--

LDS: You mean the gross space or the cor--

RG (simultaneously): [one/two words inaudible] I mean, you perceive--

AS (simultaneously): The psychic space, yeah.

RG: I mean everyone perceives their body and the world they're in in a v-- in a very different way. And that quality I think is very associated with the Moon. Particularly of your body, I mean your body-consciousness.

TS (faint): It would make sense to say sort of like this [few words inaudible] yourself and Jimmy Connor, distance between your body and a tennis ball would be variously defined as near or far? (laughter)

LDS: That's really helpful, yeah.

TS: Well, [CDA simultaneously: That helps a lot, yeah, right.] you know what I'm saying, (I'm/just) saying that there's a (bit of laughter) physical distance that something is in a truly epistemic way and I was just trying to think about body types. [student assents] And if you talk about the attitude one has of the evolution of the body as in himself, that that sense of nearness or far could be radically different, [student assents] although physically it's not any different, ok, it may be, you know, fourteen inches away, (you--) you know, but for one person it could be far, for another person it could be real near, ok. [RG assents] And I was trying to see it as sort of a psychological re-construction of the space-time of the perceived world according to the limitations that are built into its own body structure, [RG assents] you know. Something is experienced as heavy or light according to one's own body structure, but it's-- one could know that in itself it's not as-- particularly as heavy as one experiences [one word inaudible] and-- and so I was wondering if that would be part of this-- the lunar consciousness.

LS: I (generally) am not [one/two words inaudible] I mean I just-- I fear-- I feel a hardening at the level of the discussion. For example, Jones' book on the progressions he was talking about Abraham Lincoln, he says-- he identifies Lincoln's Moon with the law and he says that the Moon in his-- in his chart as with many charts is often that which sustains a person's life. And in Lincoln's chart you'd look at the Moon. [students assent] And I've always thought in my life there's a certain facility with arithmetic that kept sustaining my life and kept pointing me in some way in which-- in which my life kept-kept getting supported.

TS: Yeah, so it would be providing-- it would be that function of providing continuity. [possibly another student: What would--]

[student assents]

LS: But not just continuity [AS simultaneously: Yeah but (one/two words inaudible)] in this dream-- dre-- dream state sort of way but continuity in a much larger (context).

KD: Lenny what-- what-- so what's the relation between the Moon and arithmetic, what, you know--

LS: That's where I-- you know, you're free to ignore this. I'm just trying to--

KD: No I'm curious, no it doesn't make sense to me.

LS (simultaneously): I'm just trying to-- to put it out this way, that-- that I got to make a living at something, and I don't have precious few talents in terms of the modern world since I hardly live in it, but I have this facility for arithmetic which keeps turning up a job.

[student assents, very faint]

AS: But that's-- I guess maybe that's what I kind of meant, Len, by saying that's where you can live-- you can live in that type of-- in the space of that arithmetic, you know, [LS simultaneously: Yeah, well I can live in it--] because it's more of a function there.

LS: But again, not just in terms of-- I was getting the feeling that you were talking about some kind of-- just sort of floating in some-- [AS/S(?): No.] [AS simultaneously: No, no, not at all.] some sense of space but I-- but I'm thinking of actually living in terms of the way my organism is organized in with the organism of the world and that [AS simultaneously: Yeah, I know.] when arithmetic disowns me, that's it for me. You know, I mean, the other things can disown me or not but when arithmetic disowns me that's it.

CDA: Can you see that in the degree though?

LS: No.

CDA: No?

LS: Maybe you can, I can't, I--

[student assents, faint]

RG: Well Lenny I think that's what we meant by saying that it re-- what I was trying to get to when it reveals the quality of a space-time world, it is the way we participate in the world directly related to our body and it is the contact we have of the World-Idea at a very basic level.

LR (faint): Yeah, another way of saying that would be [couple words inaudible] is that all the planets, [S simultaneously, faint: Well, yeah (couple words inaudible)] everything-- yeah, are reflected in the Moon as in the body. The bodily entity is the one that has to do all this stuff, at least apparently. I mean all the functions have to be organized [couple/few words inaudible] So to say that it's the organization of samskaras is also to say all samskaras of all the other functions as well as reflected in a-- the psychic lunar (function/process).

KD: Why is the word "activity", do you know?

S (faint): That means particular(--/.)

LR (faint): Anthony said the constant activity of the samskaras, the constant manifestation of the samskara(s) is what's meant by assimilation.

AD: Is what? (laughter, student words)

CDA (faint): What is meant by assimilation.

AD: Oh.

LR (faint): Did you say that today?

AD: Yeah.

LR/S(?) (simultaneously, faint): That manifestation--

AD: So, how are you taking the Moon then, as a psychic function?

S (very faint): Apperception [one/two words inaudible]

AD: Apperception?

RG (faint): (What's) apperception(./?) Every day? Does that make sense?

AD: Yeah, I think apperception's a good word. [short pause] I was also, you know, thinking of the-- the thought of the body as the organ through which the experience of the sensible becomes available, [students assent] and that's the same as apperception.

RG (simultaneously): That's apperception, right, yeah. Yeah.

AD: And remember, the thought of the body, not the body, [RG simultaneously: Right, (student assents) not the body.] because we're speaking about it as a psychic function.

RG: Right. The way we take in the-- the world back into ourselves as a bodily experience.

AD: Uh-huh. In other words, we have to posit the existence of the body within the primal image [student assents] and there we thinking of it as part of that primal image, so that means we're thinking of the body really as a thought, as part of that huge thought, that big thought, alright. When this is brought to function of course then there's going to manifest the sensible world which we have to take back into ourselves and the whole process of apperception is brought into play. [RG assents] And again--

RG (simultaneously): And that would get a little [couple/three words inaudible]

AD: Again, that-- that would have to include the notion that the body is the organization of all these vasanas, alright, unfolding themselves, and in that very process the soul is assimilating through the Moon the vasanas.

RG: Yeah. [short pause] It's al-- it's like your immediate response to any experiences, you know, comes through the Moon.

AD: Yeah. Because it is the very organ through which, you know, that experience can come to you.

[student assents, faint]

AP: So when you speak of the body as a thought, it is the body as a thought as part of the primal image, [AD: Yeah.] you know, before or-- I mean if you can speak of before or after trying-- trying to [one word inaudible] again on perception.

AD: Yeah, what he called-- that's why he used the term 'apperception'.

AP: Why?

AD: You remember like when PB says the seeds go to the heart center, [AP: Yeah.] and there-- Now, the seeds go to what heart center? To that body which [AS simultaneously: Subtle.] is part of the primal image.

AS: The su-- the subtle.

AD: Or the subtle body, alright. That's the body as a thought. In other words, before it, you know is exfoliated and then becomes the perceived world and then you have to take that perceived world back-- back into yourself and assimilate it back.

AP: Then how-- how do you call that apperception, that thought?

AD: Well, we said the seed-thoughts go in-- into the heart center, [AP: Yeah.] reach the brain, right, exfoliate, now there is a perceived world, alright. Now the-- now the world is perceived. There is a subject and an object. The subject perceives the object, makes an images of that object. That's apperception, it's taken that image back to itself, into itself.

AP: So first is like if you say--

AD (simultaneously): What does apperception-- what does apperception mean?

AP: Yeah.

AD: In other words, [AP simultaneously: Let's say--] could-- could I apperceive something of which I had no knowledge at all?

AP (faint): No you couldn't.

AD: No.

AP: The recognition.

AD: Yeah. Re-recognition would be another way of putting it.

AP: So you're calling-- to relate apperception to that primal body-thought or-- because it is leading back to the thought?

AD: I'm sorry Anna, I didn't follow you.

AP: Well, you said the Moon represents that thought, the body-thought in the primal image, and then called it apperception because-- on this level because here we assimilate the sense experience and try to bring it out [couple words inaudible]

AD (simultaneously): You're assimilating the primal image.

AP: Yeah.

AD: In other words, the world that I see, alright, [AP: Yeah.] which is brought into being, alright, by my mind, alright, or by the functioning of the body here, ok, then this has to be brought back into me. If it's not brought back into me, I am not assimilating the World-Idea. At the same time, also, that World-Image is going to correct your misconception. It may take time.

AP: So this function of the Moon is twofold?

AD: Well, it's really one, I think of it as one uninterrupted process. As an organ through which the body-- the thought of the body is an organ through which the perception of the sensible world could take place so that it could be brought back into the person, and that process he called apperception. I think apperception sums it all up but we have-- we better say-- make a sentence out of it. [short pause] Now, [AP: But--] when he was saying there that the body is what immediately responds, alright, it's like saying within the primal image, the interaction that is taking place is within the primal image, ok. So the body is the-- that which reacts without any-- without any concepts or thinking about it, the body would react automatically, alright. That you would call going with the-- flowing with the thought of-- the primal thought. Ok? But once that process becomes reflective, then concepts interfere with the body's reaction to it.

LDS: Anthony would that-- would that be like the generic mentality that's built up for each organism, his reservoir of images? (It/If)--

AD: No, I don't think so Louis. The generic mentality is really a very difficult concept. It's the way we spoke about it before. Think of a(n) organism that is evolved throughout eons of time, alright. This evolution required that every time it reacts to a certain situation, that reaction, alright, is stored in its memory content, [LDS assents] alright. In the beginning we can imagine a very slow process where image after image is taken in, stored up, in the organism. Then the process speeds up as the animal-- as it evolves into the higher grades of life, alright, that process is speeded up. Things that are-- at one time were disjointed, like you felt something, you know, touch, alright, and you saw something, alright, but these two were not connected at a lower level of life. At a higher level of life these two were brought into contact [LDS assents] or into relationship with-- with each other, and at a still higher level of life it becomes one unified image. That's the genetic mentality, the evolution of the genetic mentality. That's why I consider that such an important contribution on the part of the Sautrantikas.

LDS: Now you wouldn't associate that with the Moon. You're saying the Moon is-- is not-- See I was asking if that was aligned with the way you were speaking of--

AD: No. [couple faint inaudible student words] I mean you could bring anything in association with anything else.

LDS: No but-- I thought there was a specific--

RG (simultaneously): The Moon-- the Moon-- the Moon-- the Moon's part of it but I think An-- [LDS simultaneously: He's saying it's more profound.] [few words inaudible] more in it than [LDS simultaneously: Yeah.] this particular concept.

LDS: Probably all the functions would be involved with building that up, it's not specified by the Moon. Ok Anthony, go ahead, I--

AD: Well, then basically these are the-- the basic concepts (for/or) the symbols that represent to us the psychic functions. Now again you have to keep in mind every one of these symbols is multivalent, multi-- you know, it has many meanings, it's-- astrology is a symbol-- is a deific language. That is, it doesn't have one meaning. You can't say the Moon has one meaning or Saturn, ok. They have a variety of meanings. I don't think we are com-- comprehensive enough to grasp that. And you know, you very often find yourself discussing what this means, what this particular function means, and you'll hear someone say something and you'll agree and then you have an idea about it which seems to be different from it, but it really isn't. It's looking at the same thing from various aspects and they have to be brought together in a meaningful way. And that's why like the example before with Irena when I pointed out, and she saw, that every planet has a shadow, and you immediately say well, that's the conservative-- the energy of each function which is conservative to its core. Well yes, that's what we mean by the shadow. Good, every planet has that, fine. That doesn't mean that we're going to call-- we're going to call Venus the shadow and Mercury the shadow. No. One-- one planet is going to stand for all seven planets having that same pa-- they all participate in that same conservation of energy and that retention of a habit, alright. So that after a while, in a way, she's justified in saying each planet has got like seven planets, it's like seven planets, alright. But we can't work that way, we're going to have to say this planet means this and that planet means that. And, if we don't work that way I think we'll find ourselves in utter chaos. So, we know every planet has a shadow. We're calling that Mars. We know that every planet has also perception, giving a form to a matter, but we're calling that Venus, alright. We know that every planet in a way is reflective, we're calling that Saturn. You see what we're doing? And that's pretty difficult because that means that nothing here is fixed.

[students assent, faint]

S (very faint): [few words inaudible]

RG/S(?): Yeah.

LC: We're going to [couple words inaudible]

S: Yeah.

AD: And it's going to be very difficult, sometimes you characterize a person-- one person will characterize him by Mars, another one will characterize him by Venus. And they may both be right, alright, because one person is characterizing it as Mars, the shadow, another person is characterizing it as the shadow of Venus but thinking of the Venus. Do you follow all this? Good for you, I can't. (laughter) I got lost long ago. (AD laughing, bit of laughter)

LS: Are you going to do Saturn?

[short pause]

S: Thank God for Saturn.

LS: [few words inaudible]

S (faint): Sure.

S (faint): Jupiter.

S (very faint): Yeah.

AD: So now if you take one of these planets and apply it to [one/two words inaudible] (some laughter)

CDA: It's 7:30 here.

RG/S(?) (simultaneously): We didn't do Saturn.

LDS (simultaneously with CDA and RG/S(?)): Oh ok, yeah.

AD: Oh Saturn we left out? Oh, good old Saturn! (laughter)

AS: He's always last.

AD: Why, that's because he's got an inferiority complex, he's so sensitive about everything. (laughter, student words) Go ahead Tim, give it. Oh we didn't do it.

TS (faint): Well, what do you mean?

AD: Well what did we do on it?

TS: We really didn't do much on it but it seemed though-- one point that I thought that was interesting that came out in respect of the Moon was that we said that the Moon is the uninterrupted flow of these-these thoughts or of these-- all these different activities within the psyche. To introduce reflective awareness into them is to stop them. That there is a certain kind of alteration or inhibition of these processes which that reflective awareness brings.

AD: Yeah, but we didn't work out the meaning.

TS: I mean it's the first time I've really seen how the idea of nirodha and the idea of reflective awareness fit together. That by being aware of the thing it actually alters it by bringing this reflective [one word inaudible] reflective and [one/two words inaudible] defined self-consciousness. And that in itself is an altering of the other functions. It alters Jupiter by limiting it. It alters the Moon simply by being aware of it. [9¼ second pause] And that it would demand a certain split in the stream of energy of Mars I guess we all could-- could re-form Mars or-- yeah, re-form Mars.

S (faint, possibly part of background): That's what you think.

LDS: You mean in the moral sense. (LDS chuckles) No, I know what you mean.

[short pause]

LR (faint): It's constantly pointing out the limitations inherent in itself. But that it does by (being a structure of--)

[students assent, faint]

LDS: Or [TS simultaneously: Yeah.] provides limitation.

TS: Yeah, or provides the limitations of form and generates a reflective awareness of the form at the same time. Seems those two interre-- [8 second tape break] [student assents, faint] yeah, and--

S (simultaneously): Well--

[students assent, very faint]

RG/S(?): [one/two words inaudible]

RG (faint): On the other hand, the other hand, limited-- limits can-- could be essential (in raising) it as well, in raising it from its limits of free sensibilities to more of its essential nature (than its own limited--)

TS: Well defining it, (and) I think it gives it great definition and that definition-- and you-- would you say that by [one word inaudible] that it brings the essential-- the essence of these functions into reflective awareness and by-- through creating a limitation on a function or a definition of the function?

RG (faint): Uh-hm.

LR: Well only through limit could you become aware of something.

RG (faint): Yes, yes [one/two words inaudible]

LR (simultaneously): It has to be limited.

RG: Uh-huh. But that limit could be extracting the meaning of the function which previously was experienced on a sensible level, which is a much greater limit than we're now calling the limit of reflection.

LR: [couple/three words inaudible]

[short pause]

RG: I don't know.

S (faint): [couple words inaudible]

JA: Well I thought that what Tim was talking about (was) in a sense of stopping. But it does seem that it-- yes, it does alter it, some subjective function-- functioning into a sort of object, not quite a transformation, and his-- you know, a stop is in one nature and you'd have to pick on another nature, you know, it's quite different.

TS: Yeah, it's stopped at a deep part of the psyche (that that take(s)) place.

[short pause]

LR: If Lauren--

LC: Yeah?

LR: If you have Saturn quincunx the Sun, it will at least slow down that functioning and in so doing will objectify it. You'll actually see, you'll actually perceive what that functioning is. It will-- it will begin-- it will operate mindfully [couple words inaudible] [few very faint inaudible student words, possibly part of background] So it's limiting (Avery). [couple words inaudible]

TS (faint): It's a determination? [student assents, faint] Uh-hm. Linda, you gave the example this afternoon, if you say well I'm going to become-- I'm going to be-- try to become conscious of my breathing, ok. Now as soon as you become conscious of your breathing it's no longer your natural breathing, you've already altered it and, you know, it-- it takes a lot of work to come to a point of being reflectively aware of the activ-- the natural activity of breathing. Just in-- just in (even) speaking about it or directing attention there, it alters [few faint inaudible LR words simultaneous with TS] the breathing itself, ok. "Wow, I ought to breath in more."

[laughter followed by pause, 21 seconds]

LR: And I think that's what Jeanne meant too by objectifying, right?

JA: Yeah. I mean it wouldn't doubt that(--/.) The problem is that if it is itself a limit then the limit is(--) (its/it's) definition of the-- you'd call it self-limitation?

TS: Hm.

LR: Where there's something you're not (going to need)?

JA: Yeah.

[18¾ second pause]

JC: Somehow Saturn strikes me as being the collective or let's say the-- the storehouse of reason embodied. You know, the way you experience reason-principles as embodied.

AD: You're thinking of the gnostic functions.

JC: You mean Saturn as a gnostic function?

AD: Yeah, of course, all of these have gnostic functions. Right now we're not thinking-- we're concerned with psychic function. We'll have to get to that, yes, but think of it as a psychic function primarily. I don't know if this might help. I think of Saturn as, who is it, Jones refers to it as (the/a) point of sensitivity in a chart. But, I'm only using his words, I don't think we even have the common ground to talk, alright. The way I think of it is that any living being, insofar--

[Audio File 1984 0130b Ends]

FOLLOWING APPENDED FROM P. 355, Astronoesis: Saturn excerpt from old version of this transcript; not found in Verbatim transcript above -- apparently from another, older version. [typed by jf March 2018]

Every living being is a mass of sentiency. It is a reflection of the principle that wherever you are, you are self-aware, self-sensitive, a reflection of the principle of the soul's omnipresence in the psyche. (Anthony Damiani, transcript, 1/30/84)