Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
by Joel A. Wendt
introduction
This is a collection of my works on the art and craft of thinking in a
sacramental way. I knew instinctively how to do this from the
beginning. But in our scientific age, the instinctive has to become fully
conscious. This took many decades to learn how to do.
All the same, as early as 1986 I described my then practice as follows:
In what follows are only the barest indications. The reader very much
needs to experience their own activity and its consequences, forming
their own conclusions as to which objectives and what processes are
most suitable for them.
a) Preparation: these are exercises, such as those practices in control of
thoughts, developing inner quiet (meditation practice plays a role here)
and so forth. Its like the stretching one must do before beginning serious
physical
exercise.
b) Sacrifice of thoughts: letting go preconceptions; overcoming habitual
patterns. Nothing will prevent new thoughts from arising, as easily as
already
believing
one
knows
the
answer.
c) Refining the question: the moral atmosphere, why do we want to
know; fact gathering and picture forming. It is an artistic activity. What
moral color do I paint my soul, what factual materials do I gather as I
prepare to form an image - i.e. think in all that that act can imply.
d) Offering the question: acknowledging Presence, and not needing an
answer. Tomberg urges us to learn to think on our knees.
e) Thinking as a spiritual Eucharist: receiving and grace. We do not
think alone. It thinks in and with me (Steiner).
f) Attitude: sobriety and play.
2
contents
1) Cowboy Bebop - and the physics of thought as moral art. (page 4)
2) The IDEA of the thought-world. (page 24)
3) Speaking Truth to Power, Inwardly in the realm of mind also known
as: soul and spirit. (page 49)
4) The Meaning of Earth Existence in the Age of the Consciousness
Soul. (page 55)
5) In Joyous Celebration of the Soul Art and Music of Discipleship.
(page 69)
6) The Idea of Mind: a Christian meditator considers the problem of
consciousness. (page 103)
7) pragmatic moral psychology. (page 129)
*
3
Cowboy Bebop
and the physics* of thought as moral art
[*The term physics is here meant to suggest a set of general rules and
processes that in part can be labeled: The Way of Thought and
Thinking. That thought and thinking are also moral and artistic then too
becomes part of a true physics of thought. This means that the three
science, art, and religion cannot actually be separated, as they form in the
soul an organic whole.]
*
Cowboy Bebop (1) was a Japanese anime television show that was also
made into a movie. It was short lived (1998-99), and critically
acclaimed. The main character was a bounty hunter working from Mars
in the year 2071. Many sequences in this very original animation were
accompanied by music often dominated by a jazz and blues
background. From the beginning this anime was a fusion of American
cultural influences and modern Japanese artistic sensibilities.
In a certain way this work of art carried both instinctive esoteric
Christian and instinctive Zen components, which to elaborate might take
a whole book, and therefore will not be attempted here. The Cowboy
motif fits in with the fact that the Western is the main mythical archetype
of the American Soul (2), and the use of jazz and blues rests the musical
themes within the creative heart/roots of American music, fostered
mostly out of the culture New Orleans. In fact, many of the sequences or
scenes in the show are basically spontaneous dance. Feet and limbs
often move to the underlying jazz and blues bebop of the music.
The visual artistic style is very modern in a Japanese sense, as are the
ideas which positive criticism has come to recognize, such as:
philosophical
concepts
including
existentialism, existential
ennui, loneliness, and the pasts influence (1, again). The main
characters morality is very much of the Western cowboy type - the
lone stranger doing good while entirely uncertain as to his own meaning
in the great schemes of existence. The dialog is clever, philosophical and
4
pointed, in the same fashion as the American film-noir movies that were
common in the late 1930s and on into the early 1950s. (3)
These undercurrents within the American Soul influence the path of
thought-creation in Americans. These undercurrents arise from the whole
world in a way - each emigrating culture adding its distinct influence to
the whole. In America is being born the People of Peoples. Cowboy
Bebop is a good modern expression of certain undercurrents that have
greatly influenced the American Soul, beginning with the Western in
the 1920s, and then later in the 1950s when Zen was brought to our
shores in California by Alan Watts (4). California then became a kind of
stew pot of soul-themes, such that West and East met at that edge of the
North American continent and had cultural intercourse.
If we want to look for evidence of this subterranean influence of
cultures, we need go no further than the writings of the modern crime
novelists: Robert Parker and Elmore Leonard. Their dialogue is crisp and
spare, zen-like in wisdom. Their characters are the stranger-other - the
Cowboy archetype who rescues damsels in distress and lays down
his/her life to do the right thing.
That the heroes themselves are flawed, even criminal, really only points
to the fact that in America the soul also can take a path near and through
the Underworld - the ancient world of Faerie, and dark and dangerous
impulses. America is the worlds most earthly culture, and this density of
fallen striving and suffering should not really surprise anyone paying
attention to social phenomena in America.
Not all Paths of development wander among the stars and the
clouds. The American Soul gave birth, with the aid of Christ and the
Holy Mother, to the Twelve Steps of Alcoholics Anonymous in 1933,
which is the most practical spiritual path for dealing with the threefold
double complex or the shadow in the soul. (5) Addictions and their kin
are not the only issues human beings may solve in the company of others
with similar flaws. The hungers for wealth and power can be addictions.
So can be lying - how many of us know the individual whose every word
is an exaggerated tale told to advance their image, and impress their
acquaintances.
The point of the immediately above is to set a tone for what is to follow,
for it will be useful and practical to understand from what well of
wisdom do such writers as Parker and Leonard draw their art.
Let us examine this carefully
Thought exists. Everyone knows this. Ordinary mind also is often
naturally virtuous, and the below is what can be understood if one makes
a study of ordinary mind, in a scientific and empirical fashion.
The brain scientist, never actually examining the intimacy of his own
mind, does not understand the art of how to come to an empirical
knowledge of thought. To know thought, through thinking, we must
investigate the own mind. But this journey is rooted in the challenges of
the moral. It requires the encountering of life-trials. There is no
substitute for this is very personal investigation, which is often costly in
terms of suffering.
We are dark and light, which fact makes any exploration of the basics of
the life of the own thought dependent upon an excruciatingly moral
self-honesty.
Not everyone needs to do this on purpose. The modern biography,
particularly in America which is at the cutting edge of the evolution of
consciousness, is itself a spiritual developmental Path. (6) The life-trials
of the biography lead to a natural spiritual development. The main
difficulty is an absence of the needed language to describe this fact of
existence. Anthroposophy can provide to modern culture this language of
the Consciousness Soul era if we tease apart the traditional reliance on
the dead thoughts of Rudolf Steiner, entombed in books and in the tragic
overuse of Steiner said (note the use of the past tense of that verb).
Steiner is well worth quoting, but to rely on him as an authority is to
violate his own stated wishes.
Anthroposophists must discover how to think for themselves, outside the
past utterances of Rudolf Steiner.
That religious and moral metaphors might be practical could be denied
by many seeking an operating manual of the mind. The truth is
otherwise, however, for the journey begins here with the washing of the
6
The same process of development also arises because the family and
community matrix too is falling apart. Elsewhere in the world what
Steiner called the group-soul tends to rule, and the individual bows to
those social forces that define group behavior as against individual and
independent of family and community life choices. Growing up in
America takes away our cultural and language past, strips us of the
normative rules governing families, and spits us out into the modern
world forced to stand on our own. Natural here does not mean painless.
This is not an easy course of life, and once freed of the past of our
ancestors the washing the feet trial is only the beginning. Ultimately we
will travel all of the Seven Stages of the Passion of Christ: washing the
feet; the scourging; the crowning with thorns; the carrying of the Cross;
the crucifixion; the entombment; and finally, the resurrection. Each of
these is an exact metaphorical archetype of the various arts of thinking in
the fullness of soul and spirit, and their related trials in life.
Christ warned us: Matthew 10:34-40:
Dont think I came to cause peace across the land. I didnt
come to cause peace, I came to wield a sword, because I came
to divide a man against his father and a daughter against her
mother and a bride against her mother-in-law, and to make a
mans servants his enemies. Whoever prefers father or mother
over me is not worthy of me; and whoever prefers son or
daughter over me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not
take his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. Whoever
found his life will lose it, and the one who lost his life because of
me will find it. Whoever receives you receives me, and whoever
receives me, receives my Sender.
Not only that, but these trials do not confine themselves to linear
time - that is, they do not follow one after the other in sequence. In the
same way a plant lives in an ecology, the life of soul and spirit - in the
biography - lives in a psychological and mental ecology of social
existence, in which various events (trials) arise and become the center of
our lives. The social, with respect to the biography, provides both inertia
and momentum. Life resists us, while at the same time certain impulses
and actions propel us onward.
8
For example, to become a mother or a father places before the soul the
trial of the washing of the feet in a quite natural fashion. Parenthood
creates a necessity, and the I in responding to this necessity can begin
to learn to put the other - the Thou - before self. In the same
biography, family conflicts exist over life choices and meaning - do we
do what our parents want us to do, or do we follow our own star - the
unfolding of this trial of individuation in our family life will
evoke scourging and crowning with thorns. Details will be described
below.
These stages then do not always appear in sequence. Different life
experiences draw them out, although over time, the general pattern
produces a transformation of the artistic skill level of thinking, which
starts as a natural skill, then (usually with maturation) becomes craft, and
then finally wisdom or art. Maturation, by the way, is not a given. Many
there are who never develop past late (early 20s) adolescence. When
such a person becomes a political or corporate leader, disasters happen.
The mystery of thinking is then trained by the moral struggles in life not just the successes but the failures as well. All experience can be
turned to developmental nourishment when the I reflects on its
actions. The intention behind thought determines the nature of the realm
of the thought-world in which we travel. This intention is instinctive
(natural) in the beginning, becoming more and more conscious over
time. The path, which we in anthrposophical circles conceive of as a
path of development, for the American (and others all over the world at
this same leading edge of the Consciousness Soul) occures in the
biography. We do not have to go to the Swiss Alps to engage it. We just
live our life, for it is - through Divine Intention - the very best School
possible.
*
Recently I was saying some related words to my girl friend, and she
wanted me to take the time for a more careful and somewhat formal
illumination of the nature of thought. What follows next is based in large
part on her notes to that conversation, which mostly consisted of me
making an attempt at an skeleton-like organized presentation, which on
occasion was inspired by questions she asked me during this verbal
9
intercourse. These notes give order to what follows next ... and flesh has
been added to the observations of structure alone.
The plane or arena of matter is bound to space and time. You cant put
your hand through matter. Thats how we know its exists. Two cars crash
into each other on a highway, and the violence is so powerful it crushes
steel and human flesh, perhaps bringing death in its train of causes and
effects.
We live in a physical body and act in a material world. We also act in the
non-material world of thought and thinking. This non-material life
survives death.
Above the plane of matter is the plane of soul, or consciousness. This
astral plane (to use a more ancient form of expression) is bound to
space, but not to time. It is also the plane of perishable or mutable
spirit. We know this realm when we use picture thinking or the
imagination. The imagination needs space in order to appear before
our minds eye. It is, we should note, not three-dimensional, but
plane-like, or two dimensional. We can move around its surfaces and
sometimes right through it, but it remains in essence an arena of organic
(living) thought that longs to be investigated and known directly.
For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I
know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
In the final episode of Season One of the television show Joan of
Arcadia, the God character there says: You have to trust the world
behind your eyes, and, learn to see in the dark
Our biographies do not take place, in general, when we are alone
(although a prisoner and a monk or a nun, often live lives of virtual
isolation). We live as members of a community. As we grow into the
truthful possibilities of our thinking, we may often find ourselves
needing to speak truth in circumstances where others do not like it. In
order to avoid what this truth has to mean to them, they will deflect, or
act angry or many other forms of finding a way to ignore what we have
said or done (based on what we thought, independent of the cultural or
social norms).
10
13
In life, when we do this, it is best called: carrying the Cross. The weight
of the true and the good, as it is born in naturally developing thinking, to
become realized in speaking and doing, - this moral weight is a
burden. At the same time we are not alone. Matthew 11: 28-30: Come
unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you
rest. Take my yoke upon, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in
heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my
burden is light.
In our ordinary thinking we experience all of this. We just dont notice
it, because our thinking usually has as its object some important (or
playful) aspect of our day to day existence. Thinking serves our
existence, as does thought. It is just that we do not attend to it, or know
yet how to practice our intention in full consciousness.
Thats why Steiner wanted us to turn around in our consciousness
(soul life) and wake up through the path or Way of an empirical and
scientific study of our own minds, following the map he created through
The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, whose subtitle was: some results
of introspection following the methods of natural science, and whose
last sentence of the original preface said: One must be able to confront
an idea and experience it, otherwise one will fall into its bondage.
Here is what Steiner said about cognition, from the preface to Truth
and Knowledge, his doctoral dissertation:
The object of knowledge is not to repeat in conceptual form
something which already exists, but rather to create a
completely new sphere, which when combined with the world
given to our senses constitutes complete reality. Thus mans
highest activity, his spiritual creativeness, is an organic part of
the universal world-process. The world-process should not be
considered a complete, enclosed totality without this
activity. Man is not a passive onlooker in relation to
evolution, merely repeating in mental pictures cosmic events
taking place without his participation; he is the active
co-creator of the world-process, and cognition is the most
perfect link in the organism of the universe.
14
15
16
Thinking as Perception:
This is not a commentary on the nature of sense perception, but only on
the characteristics of thinking as perception - as seeing. (10)
In a crisis situation thinking is aided by the adrenaline to focus and
concentrate. We can ourselves learn to focus and concentrate without this
chemical (astral) support. Through either process we can wake up in the
realm of the uncreated and the formless. We will then see with the
thinking. To consciously experience this, and to also act in the world on
the basis of this seeing is the experience of the resurrection at the level of
our inner life. The social world often compels our seeing.
The Zen master sees the situation of his student. The mother, when
thinking selflessly, sees what to do in a moment of crisis with her
child. The soldier, or first responder, sees with their thinking what the
right action is. An athlete calls this: being in the zone.
The mind in this condition, which is generally completely
spontaneous, is free - no longer in bondage to its old thoughts and mental
habits.
This, when sustained while in contact with the world of pure
spirit, Steiner called: Intuition. In our ordinary life we call it
likewise: intuition, without the capital letter. We are united with the Idea
in either case, although Steiners Intuition means a fully aware
experience of the Divine Being, free of our own body - or sense free
(body free) thinking. In the more ordinary types of consciousness, where
our self-consciousness is seeing/perceiving, we have taken to having our
ordinary language talk about a bright idea, or in a cartoon we have
someone with a light-bulb going off over their head. The concentrated
action in thinking lights up the mind.
More light! said Goethe on his death bed.
In spontaneous action we have what MacCoun describes as
see, do. Perceiving and acting are united. Because our attention is
focused on the needed action, we dont notice the inner activity of
seeing/perceiving because we are too committed to the outer world
17
action to notice the inner world lighting up. In the East, if this state of
pure intuitive experience is constant, it is called: enlightenment.
I had the following personal experience one day. I was in my kitchen
with a friend, and also with my youngest daughter, who was about 3 and
one half years old at that time. My daughter was skipping around the
room, tripped over her own feet, and fell forward with her chin striking
the corner of the clothes dryer which was also in that room.
I immediately picked her up, and sat her on the dryer, looking at her
carefully to see her condition. She had not yet started to cry, something
one ordinarily expects to happen very soon. I next immediately recalled
that there was a bottle of Arnica in a nearby cabinet. I quickly took the
bottle out, unstoppered it and placed some on a finger tip, which I then
placed under her nose for her to smell. I next took another bit on a finger
tip, and rubbed up between her eyebrows over the astral/ethereal
doorway to the pineal gland. Only after these actions did I look at her
chin, notice there was no open wound, and applied the Arnica there.
I had never before thought about any of these actions, other than the last
one. All the same, I saw/I did. She did not cry at all, and was soon very
calm, and sat in my lap for a while before returning to play.
My visiting friend, who was also a curative eurythmist, said to my
daughter: Your father is very wise. Perhaps. What I did know was how
to think - how to be empty or poor in spirit. I didnt need a content of
knowledge already existing, stored somewhere in memory - I only
needed to know how to think. I do not mean here to denigrate experience
and memory, but only to point to the capacities of the purely intuitive
mind.
I trusted the world behind my eyes, and saw in the dark.
This Pure Thinking is pure in three ways: It is pure in the sense that
the attention of our I is oriented fully away from sense experience (we
dont actually have to leave the body to do this). It is also pure in a
consciously intended moral sense - that is our thinking is fully
other-directed. We have no egoistic stake in the outcome of the thinking
activity, for we do it for others not for ourselves. The third way such
18
thinking is pure is that it is only of concepts and ideas - that is the object
of thought is the thought-world itself.
Rudolf Steiner described this kind of inner moral activity in The
Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, as moral imagination, moral
intuition, and moral technique. This activity can be applied both in the
outer world of our social environment, and in the world of contemplative
thought alone. To apply it contemplatively, or while in a state of reverie
or meditation, means to turn around and enter into the thought-world on
purpose - as a place in itself.
The deeper (higher) we go, the more consciously we become able to
wake up in the realm of the uncreated and formless, where moral thought
arises out of our own creative activity. When we live the true and the
good from out of this realm of experience, then we are truly free - no
bondage to the idea. Weve become a spirit-thought-creator, and then we
are seen. Again, as pointed out by Steiner in Truth and Knowledge:
Man is not a passive onlooker in relation to evolution, merely repeating
in mental pictures cosmic events taking place without his participation;
he is the active co-creator of the world-process, and cognition is the
most perfect link in the organism of the universe.
Ordinary consciousness, as it faces the social-trials of the biography, is
the naturally arising expression of the Seven Stages of the Passion of
Christ. This then is the science or physics of the life of thought as
religious or moral art.
For the American Soul, we now have cowboys and cowgirls, as women
more and more claim their rightful places society. Again, following the
mythical archetype of the Western as regards the American Soul, and
remembering that this Soul is the leading edge of changes in
consciousness occurring on a world-wide scale, those who think their
way to the true and the good, or live in what Steiner called the
Consciousness Soul, burn with a kind of fire for the true and the good
that involves them becoming Christ-like in their biographical
environments, however small and intimate.
As such fore-runners they then are destined to live the Seven Stages of
the Passion of Christ in their individual biographical niche. This can be
19
This Fall goes ever more deeper into matter, and the life of the Ur-Plant,
on a planetary scale, experiences the resistance of matter to its generative
powers as scourging, crowning with thorns, carrying the cross,
crucifixion, entombment and then resurrrection in the masterful creation
of the new seed. This life is yet without consciousness or
self-consciousness. It is pure life-process, without even instinct.
The animal kingdom and the human kingdom too suffer the Fall into
materiality - and in overcoming the density of matter in order to express
their true spirit, they too go through this Passion. And the human
kingdom, in forgetting its own true nature, adds to the suffering of the
life (plant) process, and the instinctive consciousness pain of the animal
kingdom - by our efforts to manipulate what we do not understand (the
fundamental sin or error we commit by our efforts to genetically
modify organisms - including ourselves). Not appreciating matter, we
also harm spirit, including the spirit of life itself (In it - the Word - was
Life and the Life was the Light of the world).
The Light of the Sun does the same thing (see note 11, again). In
photosythensis It dies into Matter to become food (energy) for the human
being (take and eat for this is my body), only to return/become the inner
sun-light of thought and the mind. The deeds and sufferings of light also
mirror the Seven Stages of the Passion. Everything is part and parcel of
everything else. Those people who vex us, and scourge us and help us be
socially entombed - thats just us wearing a different face in a different
aspect of the Eternal Now (13). Our biographical Time is not their
biographical Time, which is one of the reasons Christ encourages us not
to Judge, for it is ourselves we judge. The other - the Thou - is us
wearing a different face and experiencing a different time-oriented
biography. We only appear to share the same Time.
When asked what is the most important commandment, Christ spoke this
way: Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your spirit
and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And
the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself. All the Law and
the Prophets hang on these two commandments.
God is everything, everything is god (14). We are all Cowboy Bebops stranger others - dancing and singing throughout all Eternity; and,
22
seeking the true and the good is just one Chapter of many in our own
eternal dying and becoming.
Notes
(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowboy_Bebop
(2)
Learning
to
Perceive
the
American
Soul
http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/learning.html
(3) See the movie Payback starring Mel Gibson, for an updated film-noir
representation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payback_(1999_film)
(4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Watts
(5) The Mystery of Evil in the Light of the Sermon on the
Mount http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/
mysteryofevil.html
(6)
The
Art
of
God: an
actual
theory
of
Everything: http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/artofgod.html
(7) see Zen Anthroposophy: http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/ZenA.html
(8)
The
IDEA
of
the
thought-world: http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/thoughtworld.html
(9) The Idea of Mind: a Christian meditator considers the problem of
consciousness: http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/tidom.htm
(10) Carl Stegmann, in his book: The Other America: the West in the
Light
of
Spiritual
Science
called
this
new
thinking: clair-thinking: http://www.amazon.com/The-Other-America-Ca
rl-Stegmann/dp/0945803281
(11) Electicity and the Spirit in Nature .. - a tale of certain considerations
of the present state of science, in the light of a modern practical
understanding
of
the
nature
of
mind
http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/electricityandthespiritinnature.html
(12) The Gift of the Word (a poem - meant to be read aloud):
http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/giftoftheword.html
(13) See the Beatles I am the Walrus: http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=42luHhrsNhg
(14) also: All You Need is Love http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=ydfH7iuLR0I
*
23
real-world meaning at all. Same with such terms as black, white, Latin,
female and so forth - they are superficial generalities and when used in
speech (or in thinking) they actually stand in the way of true knowledge.
In an unfortunately too real sense, the use of the terms liberal and
conservative in modern political speech is often a cover for what has to
be understood as a kind of political bigotry. That conservatives (or
liberals) automatically decide to dislike and criticize their imagined
opposites is really just a kind of political racism, encouraged by political
consultants and their use of divisive simplistic issues such as abortion.
The linguistic scientist George Lakoff views the matter a little bit more
accurately, applying the principles of cognitive science to define
conservatives as holding a strong father model of government, and
liberals as holding to a nurturant parent model (1), but this still makes
the error of believing the general class has any real world meaning, as
against the individual thinker and speaker. Lakoff finds common
categories in the uses of language (what he calls frames), but fails to
properly emphasize that it is the political consultants efforts to
determine political language itself that fails to provide the citizen with
an adequate complexity of discourse. Stuffing people in Lakoffs Moral
Politics categories also oversimplifies. As well we need note that a
sufficient educational training in Civics has disappeared from our
schools - no one really knows anymore how our government is supposed
to work at all - even many politicians. The professionals in politics have
no use for an electorate that cant be manipulated, and have had years to
misdirect public thinking and train us to believe their lies.
What is worse, as regards Lakoff, is that he is a member of a scientific
community that believes it knows things about the mind/brain
relationship that are not true. For example, I just walked you, as a reader,
through a very simple philosophical investigation of the meaning of
words, in this case the word class generalizations. Lakoff would have
us think that we are beholden to brain structures for how we think, rather
than have the capacity to increase our thinking sophistication in many
alternative ways, including just being taught the basics of an
epistemological way of seeing the world.
Here is Lakoff in a recent article (2) about the problems with the terms
fiscal cliff, trying to explain why people cant be taught how to think
more clearly, and can only think within the limits of our brains:
25
kinds of reason that they not only do not possess, but avoid confronting
in all cases. Where someone reaches toward their errant and foolish
thinking with logical questions, these two retreat into deflections and
other means (such as jokes) of avoiding following out their own
assumptions to their natural and logical conclusions - which
conclusions would be so ridiculous as to prove beyond any doubt that
their thinking was off-course right from the beginning.
The root of this actually exists in our systems of education. We mostly
dont train people in the how of thinking very well at all. We can teach
them what to think (as in a point of view, such as evolutionary theory),
but very often not how to think critically and logically (for a good
example of such critical and logical thinking concerning the theory of
evolution, read Ron Bradys Dogma and Doubt (4) ). Most political
speech suffers from the assumption of the speaker or writer that all is
opinion, and facts and logical thought do not matter. It is my opinion
(belief), and I have a right to it, we frequently assert.
There is not a lot of truth in political speech, in large part because people
work from an ideological point of view (5), and are not really interested
in how the social-political world actually works. When an ideology is
imposed, such as in politics, it frequently fails precisely because the
ideology never asks how the real world works, it only asks: how can I
make (as in force) the world to work the way I want it to. Sort of as if
physicists were trying to get into space by demanding the laws of gravity
have to change and then obey their fantasies, not the real laws of material
existence.
Examples of failed political ideological points of view abound and here
are a few of the the most obvious: the War on Poverty; the War on Drugs;
and the War on Terror. The social-political world has a lot of momentum
and inertia, and if we try to change it into something it really cant
change into, we cause a lot of harm. The ideological view may be
wonderful in its fantasy of in what way the world could be nicer, but as
everyone in the recovery movement knows, you cant fix an addict - only
they can fix themselves. The deep nature of our social life is rooted in
human psychology, and while it is possible to manipulate that on
occasion, grand changes only come infrequently, as was noticed in the
Declaration of Independence: Prudence, indeed, will dictate that
Governments long established should not be changed for light and
27
transient causes; and accordingly all experience has shown, that human
beings are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to
right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
We could say, with some confidence, that most of us are addicted to our
favorite political ideology, and resist changing that point of view at all,
because it is a kind of belief system. The seeming conflict between
modern science and religion bears the stamp of that identical very human
problem; with one of main difficulties being that many believers in
science refuse to recognize it too is a belief system. See the discussion of
the ideology or philosophy of scientism at note (6).
Understanding the Thought-World may help some overcome these
deficits in their own thinking, and as well understand what goes on in the
real social-political world as a consequence of the rules of this
Thought-World, and our relationship as human beings toward our own
thoughts and thinking. In a way, if we change how we educate, we
change how people think, and as people think more consciously they will
themselves change our social-political life. It is, as Saul Bellow points
out below, as regards the writings of Owen Barfield: a question of inner
freedom.
For example, we have in English these three terms: beliefs,
understandings and knowledge. An empirical approach to thinking (see
below for details) reveals that each individual swims in a sea of
self-generated vain beliefs, genuine ways of understanding reality, and
actual knowledge of the world. Everyone.
Beliefs are vain because we hold to them in-spite of all evidence to the
contrary - the folk wisdom being: dont confuse me with facts, my mind
is already made up. Most of us cant do a job, or even a simple task,
without understandings - ways of appreciating that often are learned the
hard way, such as what happens when a child touches something hot.
Postmen understand why dogs are chained up. If I am really good at
something, what we try to describe with the word expertise, it is because
I not only understand why the car engine sounds funny, I also know how
to fix it.
In modern political discourse, few politicians or pundits or talking heads
on TV actually know the basics, for example, of the science of
28
This often raises a very peculiar question regarding what is "real". For
example, why does the collection of molecules and atoms that
supposedly make up the tree look to our consciousness or brains like a
tree. These are not simple questions, see: The Idea of Mind: a
Christian meditator considers the problem of consciousness (11). The
English writer Owen Barfield (12) wrote extensively on consciousness,
perception and thinking, as well as the limits of modern science to
appreciate the relevant nuances.
Saul Bellow, the Nobel-Prize winning novelist, wrote: We are well
supplied with interesting writers, but Owen Barfield is not content to be
merely interesting. His ambition is to set us free. Free from what? From
the prison we have made for ourselves by our ways of knowing, our
limited and false habits of thought, our common sense.
Parts of this complicated "riddle" of existence is discussed in many fields
and in many different ways (13). Simply to provide fully adequate
footnotes for the above commentary could take up dozens of pages. In
order to avoid getting lost in that vast jungle of words, sentences,
meanings, fields of knowledge and so forth, let me just guide the reader's
thinking-attention to what exists right in front of them.
I have written some words on a page, and the reader is reading them.
The words on the page, given our general assumptions, would not exist if
someone didn't write them - so we have the terms: the "author" and the
"reader". Or, perhaps, one brain doing something involving the modern
tool of a laptop computer and another brain doing something with a
similar device.
The writing consists of "signs" - letters. These are essentially "code".
These marks on a page have no meaning in themselves. One could take
this page, and using a translation program get these letters changed into
Chinese ideograms. The signs can be changed, and the question does
exist that if we did that, would the meaning of the signs also be changed?
Of course, certain trends in philosophy in the 20th Century suggested
there might not exist any meaning that could be transferred from an
author to a reader - the "subjective" aspects being too insurmountable
(14). In spite of that school of thought - mostly only of interest in certain
circles of academia, people still read and write and we still teach our
30
children to read and write. And, you dear reader are in fact reading this,
so at the least your brain is doing something that might well not be a
complete waste of time, - maybe.
In order to write, and read, as all of us subjective brains can at least
fantasize, requires the existence of a language - in this case: English.
Convention gives us dictionaries, and many thousands of books and
schools of thought* on writing and grammar and logic and so forth.
What the existence of these books might suggest is that there is perhaps a
reality to language, otherwise why bother.
*[a small technical aside, regarding the geography of the
Thought-World, we might note that various complex features of this
world could be called schools of thought, or systems of belief, or
ideological points of view.]
Since we (you and I) - two brains (?) - are collectively bothering, is
there anything else we can notice.
Well, - we could turn away from the page for a moment and reflect observe inwardly - that our selves, or our brains - (at this point take your
pick), are engaged in some kind of inner activity, which someone
watching us can not see. These watchers might see me typing and they
might see you looking at a page and on occasion scrolling down, perhaps
sipping some coffee and cleaning your glasses - perhaps even breathing,
sniffing or coughing. What these observers will not see is either of us
"thinking".
If we were to self-observe what the observers cannot see, we might
notice that during this "thinking" there is something we could call:
"sub-vocalizing". Another way to put words to this is: "discursive
thinking." Even when you are not reading, you sometimes think,
perhaps having a moment of reverie where you imagine being on a date
and engaging in a conversation that successfully leads to sex.
During the course of a day we do a lot of this "discursive thinking" - this
inner dialog, which when we engage in the act of reading also can appear
with the phenomena we called above: "sub-vocalizing". Our brain, given
modern views of the mind, seems to be talking to itself in order to
think.
31
One part of whatever we are "speaks" and another part "hears". Who or
what speaks and who or what hears?
If we were asked to answer that question, most of us would say "I" speak
and "I" hear. Now, given the idea of some that there is no self, my
question is: If the brain is capable of creating language, music, poetry,
science and all the glories of human cultures, how is it that this same
"brain", while so obviously and wondrously clever, is also so stupid as to
create a false belief in an imaginary self? Does it really make any sense
at all to hold that a physical instrument so otherwise assumed capable of
maybe leading us to the "singularity" (15), can at the same time be so
dense? What in the brain makes us stupid in some cases and smart in
another ?
While you'll have to decide that for your "self", let us note in passing the
mode of thought just applied, which can be called: comparative
thinking. The category/word stupid also implies its opposite - smart.
Liberal is often used as the opposite of conservative. Most parts of
grammar called prepositions include their opposite in their natural
meaning: in/out; up/down; although grammarians can make this overly
complicated. (16).
The mode of thinking being labeled here as comparative is basically
where we form an idea* that involves comparing or valuing one object of
thought in relationship to another object of thought. This woman is more
beautiful than that woman. This politician is less honest than that
politician. This profound mode of comparative thinking has deep and
rich meaning when applied in some spiritual disciplines. See this and
that (17), an article of the Four Noble Truths of the Buddha.
*[another, a bit more complicated, technical aside: We can get confused
if we mix up such terms and words as: terms, words, concepts and ideas.
On the page is the term or word. In discursive thinking (where we
speak to ourselves, we still have the word, just sub-vocalized. One is
visible (on the page) the other is not visible to others, although clearly
there to our own experience, since we put it there.
Each term or word can have, inwardly, a corresponding mental picture,
generalized concept, pure concept or idea. For purposes of clarity: we
32
If we didn't find, as an experience - and collectively as human beings that speech and writing were important and valuable, we'd simply stop
doing them -wouldnt we?
Where are we when we do this "thinking" thing, that manifests everyday
in reading and writing?
When we are in the visible world that appears to our senses, such as well
- walking in the woods, or riding in a bus, that fact is fairly obvious.
When we are in this "brain" thing, but not attending to the physical world
- that is only "thinking" or reflecting, or analyzing or whatever - we are
in a place where our language conventions (from centuries of
"self"-knowledge) create such terms as "INsight", "INspiration",
"INtelligence" and so forth.
Now this INterior world is vast and complicated. There are large
disciplines that have sought to penetrate its secrets, most recently
(beginning in the 19th Century) such as psychiatry and psychology,
although these faded away in the late 20th Century into such as cognitive
science (18), neuroscience (19), and their relatives. Each of those
somewhat older (19th Century) disciplines began with the root-term
"psyche", which was generally meant to refer to the "soul". Keep in
mind that "soul" usually is taken to mean something so immaterial that
religions believed it would survive the death of the physical body.
There is a story that when Freud's works were translated into English, the
German words "seele" for soul, and "geistes" for spirit - which he used
when he "wrote" down his thoughts, were simply translated as "mind".
Subsequently, as this "mind" thingy became more an object of scientific
study during the 20th Century (especially among the English logical
positivists (20) ), the concept/term mind was eventually replaced with
the concept/term "brain". Mind, as something originally thought of as
being ephemeral (psyche or soul and spirit), becomes, over the last 100
years, a physical object - the wet-ware organ the brain.
...it has long been recognized that mind does not exist somehow apart
from brain... (The Mind, Richard M. Restak M.D. pp ll, Bantam Books,
1988);
34
35
are a weird accident that amidst most biological life on the planet Earth
is like an out of control deadly virus given the effects of our civilization
on the rest of the living world (25).
Now before the reader of this gets too disquiet, and wanting all kinds of
quotes for these views expressed above, these views were not really the
main point. What I have been doing here is demonstrating to the
reader certain observable aspects of the Thought-World. I wrote, you
read, and together we went some "place" in this Thought-World which is
not visible to the physical eye, but only to the mind's eye, or better yet:
thinkings spiritual eye.
The conceptual world we traveled together is seemingly existentially the
same "place" as is the conceptual world of the brain scientists, such as
Sam Harris. In each particular individual instance the landscape is
assumed to be different - that is the conceptual content of all our minds is
believed to be different, but any thinker can think these thoughts - that is
go to that region in the Thought-World where meaning exists. How do
we do that? By reading what is written by others.
Let us repeat this for it is such a common experience that we hardly give
it the import it deserves. You read several paragraphs that I wrote.
During this reading, sentence by sentence, you constructed in your own
mind what you think I meant. In in very real sense, the mind creates
meaning from the code on a page at near the speed of light. At this point
in our discussions it makes no different whether you actually got what I
meant, for I am pointing not to that, but rather to your direct (but mostly
sub-conscious) experience as a reader. You cant make meaning
(find/create the Idea connected to what I wrote), while reading, without
taking the coded words and terms on the page, join them to mental
pictures, generalized concepts and pure concepts via your skills as a
thinker/reader.
If you found yourself arguing with what I wrote, you were at the same
time engaged in light-speed comparative thinking, whereby you made
near instant judgments comparing what I was suggesting as an over all
Idea to those Ideas of which you yourself have experience (and/or
believe, understand or know). In every act of reading and writing a
37
Could we then all have the ability to drawn down - download - ideas
from this possibly shared world of pure conceptions? If that is the case,
from what source are these ideas uploaded into the Thought-World in the
first place?
It appears that only small portions of the totality of concepts are
distributed among individual biological based memories (no one knows
everything), and physically large arrays are needed for the storage of this
totality, which require immense material libraries and many terabytes of
hard drive space to hold. Again, not one of us knows everything, most of
us know only a relative little as compared to that totality, and much of
that tends to be very personal.
Yet, we know this huge content is there, but where did this content
originally come from? By this I mean to focus now mostly on the
problem of creativity. From what do concepts originate?
If our explanation is a physical brain, then at the least we have to explain
how they got "there". Now some would say they come into our own
consciousness and memories from processes (34) of reading and study that is we share them somehow, one to the other, c.f. the theory of memes
. That's fine, until we get to what has to be called a "new" idea - an
"idea" or "concept" never before thought. Where did that come from?
If the "brain" is completely a physical organ, it seems unlikely that it can
create something new. Think this through thoroughly. We can agree the
brain is complex. But still, how does something new and original arise
from what we conceive of as an essentially closed system. A closed
system ought only be able to repeat what is already there. The same
question exists in evolutionary biology - how does something essentially
fixed produce something new. The theoretical answer is by accident,
which is a very curious formulation.
If we put random numbers or operations in mathematical proofs, would
that accident not do anything more than foul the works?
Let us for the moment give credence to random chance? Perhaps, but
then you have to explain as random chance the whole history of natural
science, the industrial revolution and then the computer revolution,
40
which are so full of new ideas that some kind of accidental random
process seems to hardly have had enough time.
People have argued that the idea of physical evolution requires the
magic of a tornado going through a junkyard and creating a 747. The
counter to that is the argument suggesting that evolution has had billions
of years to produce by chance all the needed biological variations. Okay,
... but the Age of Science, in terms of producing new concepts, clearly
didn't have that amount of time. Too much organized change happening
too rapidly. To base it on random chance is to make a very silly and
completely disingenuous bad joke.
There is a field which posits what are called: Laws of Thought (35). We
have the terms logic and reason, and develop all kinds of systems of
thought around these processes, but did not factually find these processes
in nature. We only found them in our own minds. It is we who reason.
The Idea of random chance is that it can organize itself - for there is no
operator that can do the organizing. In fact, if Nature cannot reason or be
logical, having no consciousness or capacity for intention and purpose,
where do we get such capacities that are so very obviously there. How
does random nature, which cannot reason or show purpose, produce an
organism that does reason and show purpose?
We also make assumptions, believing we have arrived at knowledge. Yet,
the fact is that in the practice of science difficult assumptions are often
created, ignored and then converted into beliefs. See again Ron Bradys
Dogma and Doubt (see again note 4) for a description of the confusion
caused in biology by this unconscious, mostly ignored and very human,
mental process (converting assumptions into beliefs).
Some might offer that the computer itself reveals the needed analogous
process to explain how creativity arises in the brain (sort of a combined
up by your bootstraps and cart before the horse argument). That might
be theoretically okay, except for the law of GIGO - garbage in, garbage
out. Physical computers don't create, and don't think. The writers of
"software" think and create - all the computer does is calculate very very
very fast, and get smaller and smaller and smaller. (36)
The computer doesn't even use "concepts". It can't dream, or fall in love
or experience reverie. It can't pray or meditate. While software writers
41
42
All of these operating systems of the mind have points of view about
what it means to have ideas, or not. What the I is, or is not. What
separates them from modern brain/consciousness studies is that the
practitioner of these skills, crafts and arts, goes inward, not outward. The
modern scientist looks outward - at others with instruments. The spiritual
seeker looks at his own consciousness directly, as it appears to him.
Rudolf Steiner, who taught Anthroposophy, and called himself a
spiritual scientist had this to say about a Thought-World:
The path that leads to sense-free thinking by way of the
communications of spiritual science is thoroughly reliable and sure.
There is however another that is even more sure, and above all more
exact [emphasis added, ed.]; at the same time, it is for many people
more difficult. The path in question is set forth in my books The Theory
of Knowledge Implicit in Goethes World-Conception and The
Philosophy of Spiritual Activity. These books tell what mans thinking
can achieve when directed not to impressions that come from the outer
world of the physical sense but solely upon itself. When this is so, we
have within us no longer the kind of thinking that concerns itself merely
with memories of the things of the sense; we have instead pure thinking
which is like a being that has life within itself. In the above mentioned
books you will find nothing at all that is derived from the
communications of spiritual science. They testify to the fact that pure
thinking, working within itself alone, can throw light on the great
questions of life - questions concerning the universe and man. The books
thus occupy a significant intermediate position between knowledge of the
sense-world and knowledge of the spiritual world. What they offer is
what thinking can attain when it rises above sense-observation, yet still
holds back from entering upon the spiritual, supersensible research. One
who wholeheartedly pursues the train of thought indicated in these
books is already in the spiritual world; only it makes itself known to him
as a thought-world [emphasis added, ed.]. Whoever feels ready to enter
upon this intermediate path of development will be taking a safe and
sure road, and it will leave with him a feeling in regard to the higher
world that will bear rich fruit in all time to come.
Every human being, unless prevented by some physical defect, has
access to the Thought-World. No machine can do that, because only the
human being has a spiritual invisible aspect that is able to enter into a
non-physical world. This spiritual invisible aspect we call the: "I".
43
The brain is not the "I". The brain is a physical interface which enables
the non-physical spirit - the "I" - to interact within the physical world,
which actually makes it even more of a remarkable organ then currently
believed even by brain scientists. Let me repeat that. The brain is
physical/material organ, so rich in its complexity, that it enables a
non-physical invisible spirit (the I) to interact in the physical world for spirit to interact with matter. Now that is amazing!
Personal investigation, made by more than a few, reveals that this
thought-world is an invisible place, which can also be called: the
spiritual world. While modern convention tries to teach that there is only
matter, and never spirit, we cannot think a thought without being a spirit
among spirits. To think in a fully awake fashion is to be in the
thought-world
What I just wrote is - to the reader - a concept or an idea, possibly
unfamiliar and something I do not expect the reader to believe. Although,
the reader could seek to know these matters directly through their own
scientific and empirical investigations of their own minds. Let me finish
out this seemingly "theoretical" idea, by borrowing from a recent film:
Avatar.
In that movie, the "I" consciousness of a human being is transferred into
a biological organism of an alien nature. All the means for doing this is
imagined first in the minds of the creators of this movie - that is the
whole conceptual structure is created by the "I"s of those who made this
movie. How the characters in the movie even built or replicated a copy
of the alien organism is assumed possible in the movie, but not
explained. It is imagined artistically by the movie's creators.
We human beings leave our bodies at night when we sleep, and during
sleep we wake up in the world of spirit. When we re-enter our bodies on
awakening, we forget our night-work, but are - like the characters in
Avatar - having a physical world experience because our spirit is
integrated with a physical body, via the nervous system - most especially
the brain. For our spirits, our physical bodies are our avatars, just like
the creators of imaginative fiction and computer virtual worlds have
thought possible. Physical evolution provides the bodies, but a
corresponding spiritual evolution provides the self-conscious I. We just
44
live in an Age where the main unproven assumption is that: all is matter,
there is no spirit.
Art, something a computer will never do, is able to go places science, too
tightly today bound up with reason, cannot go. A computer cannot
imagine.
Yet, if we read the INtrospective ruminations of scientists, such as
Einstein, we are made aware of how much creativity arises precisely in
the imagination. From this non-physical picture-thinking has come all
that science has produced that is original. The transistor revolution that
created Silicon Valley came from the imagination of human beings. It
was first thought into existence by a few minds (spirits) that did not limit
themselves in what they were willing to conceive. No physical organ,
such as a "brain", can do this - make something out of what is otherwise
a fixed thing - the material brain.
Once more, Rudolf Steiner: from the Preface to his doctoral dissertation:
Truth and Knowledge [published in 1892]: The object of knowledge is
not to repeat in conceptual form something which already exists, but
rather to create a completely new sphere, which when combined with the
world given to our senses constitutes complete reality. Thus mans
highest activity, his spiritual creativeness, is an organic part of the
universal world-process. The world-process should not be considered a
complete, enclosed totality without this activity. Man is not a passive
onlooker in relation to evolution, merely repeating in mental pictures
cosmic events taking place without his participation; he is the active
co-creator of the world-process, and cognition is the most perfect link in
the organism of the universe.
Whatever else we believe, it is clear that the picture the brain scientist
has of this completely material organ is that it is a mechanism, however
complicated and biological. It is a really silly self-satisfied fantasy, on
the part of the brain scientist, to hold to the view that the completely
non-material imaginative inner life of the human being can arise from a
tinker-toy structure, however complicated. (38)
A "brain" only appears to be able to do this because hyper-rational
scientific thinking is afraid of the spiritual, the mystical, the sacred, the
imaginative, and the artistic. This is a fear-driven irrational limit placed
45
Perhaps. / Sometimes.
Voice. / Speech reveals the unspoken. / Anger, fear, pride,
arrogance, true humility.
The ear of the heart hears what is hidden in voice.
Posture, gesture. / Speech is more than sound. / The eye hears
things the ear cannot, just as the ear sees things the eye cannot.
One mind. / Two minds. / Speech, a bridge of woven light
between two minds, and sometimes, although rarely, / between
two hearts.
Speech, rich and full of flavor, / a light bridge, / joining two
separate beings.
Speech denatured, / No sound, no gesture, no posture, no voice.
Speech reduced to lines of dark on light. / Written. / A treasure
map in code spilled across a page
Words, letters, ideas, thoughts, sounds, / reduced to marks upon
a parchment. / Speech dying.
Yet, / even in death, murdered by pen or pencil mark, / some
essence of Speech still.
Meaning embalmed. Understanding buried. / Until read.
Reading. / Words, sounds, letters, thoughts, ideas, meaning,
purposes, intentions,
Speech resurrected in the silence of another mind.
Speech. / Light bridge dying into print, / reborn when read in the
inner quiet of another soul.
Speech, / The Spoken Word. / Writing, / The Word entombed. /
Writing read, / The Word resurrected.
That this is so, / that human beings live in such an exalted state
having Speech, this is Grace.
The spoken word, the written word. / Things so ordinary, so
taken for granted, so pregnant with possibility.
The emptiness between two souls is always / chaste, virgin, pure,
/ waiting for Grace, for the bridge of light, / for Speech.
47
(24) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Harris
(25) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Smith
(26) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Smith
(27) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradigms
(28) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platonism
(29) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose
(30)http://www.nytimes.com/1988/08/16/science/the-benzene-ring-drea
m-analysis.html
(31)http://en.wikipedia.org/wikiApple_Computer,_Inc._v._Microsoft_Co
rporation
(32)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz
%E2%80%93Newton_calculus_controversy
(33) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundredth_Monkey
(34) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme
(35) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_Thought
(36)http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/24/science/scientists-see-advances
-in-deep-learning-a-part-of-artificial-intelligence.html?hp&_r=0
(37) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test
(38)http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/opinion/sunday/neuroscience-u
nder-attack.html?hp
(39)
The chief clue was this last sentence of the original preface: "One must
be able to confront an idea, and experience it, otherwise one will fall into
its bondage".
We only directly experience the Idea in the spiritual (inner) realm/temple
of Thought. If all we do is "feel", as in all manner of kinds of mysticism
whether Christian or otherwise, we are asleep and only dreaming. Only
consciously willed thinking shines the light of precise and elegant clarity
on Ideas.
When we experience an Idea in the sense world it already is clothed in its
material being. Whatever the Idea of a squirrel is for example, we only
know it in the sense world as the actual squirrel we perceive - what
Steiner called: the Percept. When we experience the Idea in the social
world it is already clothed in those processes which govern the social
world, such as we begin to examine when we ask: what is a family
history or story? In the concrete a family is a collection of specific
indivduals, but in the social world, collectively, "family" is only known
via the mental pictures created by consciously evolved abstract thinking.
We can know both sense world and social world objects, as their Idea,
only through thinking. To distinguish the Idea from the Percept, he
spoke also of the Concept, for to naive consciousness the first pure
thinking experience of the Idea is as an individual concept, or as Steiner
advised in A Theory of Knowledge Implicit in Goethe's World
Conception: An Idea is a complex of concepts.
For example, we have in Ron Brady's wonderful essay: Dogma and
Doubt, the reference to the Theories of natural science as always
containing many individual concepts, even though the Idea, for example
of natural selection, can be simply stated. If we actually examine that
Idea we will see it has many conceptual parts, and each part must
individually be subjected to the logical processes by which we evaluate
the usefulness of any theory.
Human Beings also are psychological beings - beings with a profound
and complicated (and invisible to the senses) interior life. We have
thoughts, and feelings and impulses of the will. These three soul powers
have complicated inter-relationships. In The Philosophy of Spiritual
Activity Steiner speaks of this inner complex nature of the human being
as our: characterlogical disposition. If, for example, our characterlogical
50
makes you, as individual, fit into that name and that description? How
did you become that name and description? There is no right answer, by
the way - just your answer. Its your path. If you find yourself having
fallen into bondage in some inward fashion, you are the only one that can
create for yourself the freedom with respect to this, for which Steiner
drew maps with words.
Suppose you say: I am an anthroposophist, or a spiritual scientist, or a
Waldorf teacher, or a Catholic, or a Republican, or a mother and so
forth. Several of these would mean some acquaintance with the
ideas/concepts of Rudolf Steiner. A question you could ask: Am I in
bondage to any Ideas I have acquired from Rudolf Steiner, or Ideas from
my Church, or Ideas from my Political Party? How would I know that,
and so forth.
This world of point of view, or of world-view, is a real world. It is not
just a weird accidental product of the material brain. The brain scientist
leaves out studying his own mind, and therefore uses a tool he does not
understand at all, which then severely limits his ability to realize what he
sees in his studies. To then deal with, and have knowledge of this
Thought-World, what do we do? How do we come to knowledge of our
inner world of mind, - or soul and spirit.
In a way, it is by ruling without ruling (intention), and seeing without
looking (attention). Ruling without ruling concerns the influence of our
moral heart on thinking, while seeing without looking concerns the
effects of our choices of objects of thought-activity. Details can be found
here: Living Thinking in Action.
In the Cultural East one is encouraged to give up mind for being, which
is an ancient tradition and point of view that is no longer valid. Both
mind and being have evolved over the millenia since the time of the
creation of these great and ancient Eastern traditions. At the same time
the West is more modern, in a certain way, by thousands of years, so in
the deep spiritual processes of the modern and scientific Cultural West
we have learned to give up being for mind. Rudolf Steiner put it this
way in: West and East: contrasting worlds (Vienna, 1-12 June, 1922)
The will of the West must give power to the thought of the East; the
thought of the West must release the will of the East.
52
How do we do this?
Instead of the intention of the will resting on breath, as in the East is
mostly taught these days, the will in the West finds its reality in thinking:
- in intention and attention, or why and what. We eventually find
ourselves embracing living thinking, which in the Acts of the Apostles is
called, interestingly enough: Holy Breath. We wake up in thinking, so
that why we think - that is, what is our intention - is entirely clear to us.
And, as well, what we think about, or is our object of thought-creation
process - that also is consciously willed. So the thought of the East can
become the questions we in the West ask. Rather than accept Eastern
thought as doctrine and truth, we turn it into questions, and by that act
our scientific cognition gives that thought-creation process new power
or life. (c.f. the early attempts to do this: The Tao of Physics by F. Capra,
and The Dancing Wu Li Masters, by G. Zukav; as well as a more
sophistcated attempt by E. Lehrs - a student of Steiner's - in Man or
Matter.)
Yet, in the thought-culture of the West lies science, which ought to be
neither doctrine and tradition (but being young and human, too often is).
Science is a method, a how. What the East gives to its traditional
inclinations, as in its love of its great and cosmic Ideas, then through the
imitation of the West, via the need for scientific scrutiny, the will of the
East is freed. If there ever was a culture in bondage to Ideas it is the
East. Religion there must become science. (For more details here: West
and East: or Wendts critique of Oshos critique of Rudolf Steiner Osho's critique was recently reprinted in the Southern Cross Review)
And in the West the reverse is true. In the West Science must become
religious, by our taking up the great ideas of the East as valid questions.
In the West an overly intellectual scientific materialism (all is matter,
there is no spirit) has replaced the search for truth with a set of
unquestioned dogmas (such as in evolutionary biology, and big-bang
physics). Only when Science is religious in its higher sense, can the
dogmatic nature of present day science, as pointed out by Brady above,
be overcome. The bridge between Science and Religion is Art. The
self-conscious thinker that desires to bridge the two needs to work out of
his aesthetic feelings - his sense of Beauty. Science gives us Truth, and
Religion gives us Goodness, but only Art gives us Beauty.
53
biography, such that it more and more takes on the pattern, described in
the John Gospel, as the Seven Stages of the Passion of Christ (the
washing of the feet; the scourging; the crowning with thorns; the
carrying of the cross; the crucifixion; the entombment and the
resurrection) (for a careful exposition of these Seven Stages, see Valentin
Tomberg's [anthroposophical] book: Inner Development).
Whereas Christ lived this in an apparently mostly physical way, those,
who truly follow In His Steps [the name of Sheldon's book, as well as a
critical phrase** in Ben-Aharon's The Spiritual Event of the Twentieth
Century - a profound Imagination of the True Second Coming], will in
the main feel these trials in their souls, as aspects of the joy and suffering
in the human biography.
These trials may seem difficult, but the truth is they are merely human. It
was Christ becoming human that went to the Cross, for how could He
place an example before us we could not do out of our own humanity
(just as Sheldon wrote in In His Steps). [something written by a
Shepherd (a pastor) in America, at the same time Steiner (a King) was
writing his The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity (Freedom)] It is the
human in Christ that asks in the Garden of Gethsemane that the cup be
taken from him, but if not, He accepts the Father's will. While later it is
the even deeper human in Christ that says on the Cross: "My God, my
God, why did you abandon me?". Who among us, in the trials and
sufferings of life, has not uttered these same thoughts? [That Steiner
teaches an esoteric meaning for the end of life statements of Christ, in no
way contradicts their exoteric meanings, which are also true.]
**["Now when they identified themselves with the situation of earthly
humanity, the souls who remained true to [Archangel] Michael
prefigured, in their planetary Earthly-Sun life, the great Sacrifice of
Christ. They walked again in His steps [emphasis added] as they did in
former earthly lives, only now the order of following was reversed. They
went before Him, showing Him the way, acting out of free and
self-conscious human decision, and He followed in their steps [emphasis
added] only after they fully united themselves with the divided karma of
Earth and humanity. Only then could He offer His sacrifice as the
answer to the new, future question of human existence: the question
concerning the mission and fate of evil." Jesaiah Ben-Aharon, The
Spiritual Event of the Twentieth Century.]
57
***[The word sin does not appear in the original Greek, from which the
Gospels were translated into the other languages. The Greek word
hamartia, misused to indicate sin, actually means "missing the mark" (it
is a term from archery). See in this regard the Unvarnished Gospels by
Andy Gaus.]
Is this foolish? Of course, but we need not fear this Way of the Fool, for
our Faith in Christ's Promises will always be fulfilled, as we ourselves
can learn to become the fulfillment of the law and the prophets. Yes, this
Way is full of trials, but whoever has lived life, and reflected upon their
experience, knows that in the meeting of our biography's trials with
courage we discover what it truly means to be human: to struggle, to fall,
to get up and to learn - and, through this process, gently and humbly,
begin to take up along side and with Him, Christ's kind and light, Yoke
of Love.
Having said all this, it becomes necessary to make one last picture for the
reader, for clearly, in that we read the news and hear of the horrors of
man's continuing inhumanity to man, we ourselves face a terrible trial.
How are we to understand a world seemingly so filled with Evil?
Picture, for a moment, the surface of the Earth. Below dense matter and
fiery substance, while above, airless space. Humanity lives out its Earth
Existence only in this narrow spherical band of Life, whose diameter is
just under 8,000 miles (and whose height is just three to four miles,
because above 15,000 feet above sea level, the atmosphere starts to not
contain enough oxygen to support our breathing). The total surface area
of the Earth is 196 million square miles, and the habitable land area 43
million square miles Six billion plus human beings must find all that they
physically need, which when we consider actual available arable land
(land that could be cultivated for food, and other necessary resources),
means that each individual only has a square 161 feet on a side from
which to grow what they need. This then is the physical spacial aspect of
the social organism of the whole world.
Yet, we know that this spherical space is itself often unwisely distributed,
for human social arrangements, whether rooted in dominance and
selfishness (dominion over) or generosity and sharing (communion
with), these social arrangements seem to determine this social order. This
58
is not appreciated is that the Christ is far wiser than even the deepest
believers imagine. Every evil is eventually turned to good, and next we
will explore the prime example for our time.
Recall what has been pointed out many times now, that the individual
biography is the central reality of life on the Earth. What happens inside
us as we experience life is much more important and enduring than the
outer events which surround us. That Stage Setting (all the world's a
stage....) is but epiphenomena to the reality of the life of the soul. To help
us appreciate this then, let us explore these matters from the point of
view of the individual biography.
In this time, there are over six billion plus of these biographies woven
into the tapestry of the social organism of the whole world. Six billion
lives held delicately and exactly within the Love and Divine Justice of
the Mystery. Within these biographies, all the individual i-AMs
experience that precise and personal instruction that hopes to lead them
to the realization of their own divinity and immortality of spirit. [The
epoch (rite of passage) of the Consciousness Soul is 2100 years long,
going from the time of the beginning of the on-looker separation (and the
creation of Natural Philosophy - Science) in the 1400's, until the years
around 3500 AD.]
To understand this we need to think it from the inside out, and not from
the outside in. The Culture of Media only provides context, never
essence. True, life is hard, even harsh, even terrible. The naive
consciousness wants to turn away from this suffering, and cannot
understand how God (the Divine Mystery) could allow such things as
torture, child abuse and the genocidal acts which are dumbed down by
the terms: ethnic cleansing.
The reality is that what the Divine Mystery does is to allow for freedom.
This most precious gift is essential to the immortal spirit during its Rites
of Passage we are calling: Earth Existence. Moreover, the Mystery also
makes certain there is a true Justice through the post-death passages of
kamaloka and lower and higher devachan, in a manner no human social
structure can provide. Christ has told us this in the Sermon on the Mount:
"to what sentence you sentence others, you will be sentenced". All this
should be kept in mind as we proceed.
60
As a single ego, I wake in the morning. From the night I bring the
remainder of yesterday, perhaps worked over. Surrounding me, as I live
the day, are the lives of those with whom I have a karma of wounds with whom I have a debt of meaning to creatively work over. This we
carry together, each bearing a part, each bearing their own wounds.
These are wounds from the past, from the present and from the future.
To observe the world of today, as we walk the walk of our lives, is to
observe trials of fire and suffering - rites of wounding and being
wounded. But not just this, for also there is healing. Where we let love
thrive, wounds become healed.
Thus flow all our days, often too fast to even notice the beauty and
wonder of the sea of personal relationships and shared trials. Yes, there is
misfortune, and evil deeds. But do we really imagine Christ and the
Divine Mother lets this evil happen without recourse or justice? We may
not know this directly through Gnosis, but we also can have Faith.
Gnosis without Faith is empty of Life; and, Faith without Gnosis is
empty of the Truth. Only when we join them together, do we get: the
Way (the Mystery of living the Good), the Truth (the Mystery of
knowing the Good) and the Life (the Mystery of union with the Good).
This then is the wonder of the outer and inner biography, for often the
wounds are not visible. Yes, sometimes the wounds are visible to our eye
or ear for we see people too fat, too thin, too lamed in body, too poor, too
physically or mentally deficient. Often, however, so many of us suffer in
silence that we really do not know the nature and personal meaning of
their wounds - only our own are visible to the eye of our heart, unless we
first learn to exercise and unfold certain powers of soul and spirit.
Amidst all this visible and silent suffering, we find ourselves woven into
the Culture of Media. Images and sounds flow around us, pictures of a
world on the verge of chaos and madness. Yes, we have the intimacy of
our personal biography, but through the Culture of Media we are drawn
into the painted backdrop of the whole world - a backdrop we all share.
War in Iraq. Global warming. Governments out of control. Pandemics
waiting in the wings. Local economic recession, and even world-wide
depression.
61
What lives in this painted backdrop - in this Stage Setting - in the wise
relationship of the Culture of Media to the unfolding of our personal
biographies?
The answer is this: the mirror of our own inner darkness and light...
Inside us the double-complex - our feelings of judgment, our
temptations, our addictions and our sense of failure. Inside us the
darkness that belongs personally to us, and outside us, carried to us by
the Culture of Media, the mirror of that darkness. But also inside us the
Good that we would author.
Think on it. Do we not experience the images and sounds brought to us
by the Culture of Media as something that is filled with what we like and
we dislike? We live our biographies and the Culture of Media confounds
our souls with pictures of dark and light to which we all respond
individually. The great masses of humanity do not make the News. The
great masses of humanity experience the News.
What is News? News is exactly what the reporters and television
personalities call it: stories. The Culture of Media provides us stories
(tales) of the world, which are often presented as if these stories are true,
something most of us have come to know they are not. News stories
reflect all kinds of bias, and in some cases the bias is deliberate.
Moreover, news stories reflect conditions of commerce living in the
agency reporting them.
For example, it is well understood that in the last third of the 20th
Century in American television the news divisions of the major networks
disappeared, and the entertainment divisions took over the responsibility
for the news. The opportunity to inform and educate the receivers of
news stories became secondary to the need to keep them interested so as
to be able to sell commercial time and make a profit. In addition, the
stories are mostly about dire and tragic events, and little is investigated
or reported that is about the positive and the creative.
We are right then to wonder sometimes about the News, about its harsh
nature and artless excessive attention to the dark deeds of many.
Humanity in general bears within it the beam that is not seen, while the
mote is exaggerated. But the world itself is not this beam, is not this
62
darkness. The greater part of darkness is inside us - in our own souls, and
from there projected onto the world. The Culture of Media exaggerates
this darkness further, at the same time it gives us much that also arouses
our own unredeemed antipathies and sympathies.
Once more for emphasis...
The world in its reality is not this Media generated excess of darkness
(so out of balance with the light that is also everywhere present), which
we all project from within the soul - the beam. Yet, in the Culture of
Media this whole processes of dark projection is exaggerated so that the
mirroring nature of the social world itself begins to bother us. This logos
order of the social world is complex and rich, and worth a deep study.
Pictures of a distorted and untrue meaning of the world abound, and
while we share these pictures, we make personal and individual our
reactions. Just as the intimate events of our biographies have a personal
meaning, so does the shared stage setting have a personal meaning. In a
more general sense, for example, many Christians today are confronted,
via the Culture of Media, with pictures of individuals whose actions as
self-proclaimed Christians either inspire us to imitation or cause us to
turn away in shame. The same is true in Islam. The terrorist who
frightens us in the West, also causes many ordinary Muslims to turn
away in horror. Everywhere fundamentalism rises, to continue the
example, the great mass of humanity, that are not so tied to such arid
rigidity, shrink away in antipathy. Do we not assert quietly, inwardly to
ourselves: this is not me, I am not that - I will not be that!
In our biographies then, we are confronted in the intimacy of our
personal relationships with what are sympathetic and antipathetic
reactions to that which we would choose to admire and imitate, and that
which we would shun and refuse to be like. Via the Culture of Media, we
are met with that which approaches us in the same way, yet on a larger
scale. Just as we as individuals have a Shadow (a double-complex), so
nations, religions and peoples have a Shadow, and the Culture of Media
puts in our faces these pictures and meanings with which we can identify
or from which we can turn away, often in shame.
Christ has arranged, in this particular moment in time (the cusp of the
20th to 21st Centuries, which is also the Dawn of the Third Millennium)
63
64
Nothing in the world is not touched by the Art of Christ, who as Lord of
Karma - Lord of the Satisfaction of Moral Debt and healer of karmic
wounds, arranges in majestic harmony all the biographies so that even
from the smallest detail to the grandest historical event, meaning is put to
the service of our development - the leaving behind of our spiritual
childhood followed by our birth into spiritual adulthood.
The world historical crises of this time are a complex and rich Stage
Setting, against which 6 billion plus souls live out the dramas of their
individual biographies.
Thus, in this birth from spiritual childhood to spiritual adulthood, the
Time - the Age of the Consciousness Soul - is a Rite of Mystery, a
Baptismal Mass for all of humanity, just as was told to us by John the
Baptist. [in Matthew 3:11] "Now I bathe you in the water to change
hearts, but the one coming after me is stronger than me: I'm not big
enough to carry his shoes. He will bathe you in holy breath and fire."
(emphasis added)
Consider now more closely what happens inside us as we experience the
intimacy of our biographies, and the shared pictures that come via the
Culture of Media.
Choice confronts us. Do I be like that, or like this? From what place
inside do I choose? In a time so filled with chaos that rules no longer
apply, I discover that I can rely only on myself. Out of myself I must
author the Good in response to the world of meaning that surrounds and
confronts me. So powerful, in its personal immediacy, are these
experiences, images and meanings, that we cannot turn away from them.
It is as if the World itself is on Fire, wanting to burn and burn and burn
until we run from it in terror, or stand up to it and give the fullest of our
participation to its moderation and its healing.
Yet by Grace, I contain the means to know the Good that my biography
and membership in the shared fate of humanity draws out of me. What I
source becomes a part of the world, and I know that this is so. I know my
freedom to enact the moral grace that my heart comprehends in its
deepest places. Deep inside my soul my very own heart hungers to sing:
Love will I give. Love will I create. Love will I author.
65
So now we think away the physical - the maya of the sense world, and let
our picture thinking gaze only upon this inner, invisible to the physical
eye, moral act. An act more and more emerging everywhere, for while in
America, and the Cultural West, the Consciousness Soul is first widely
appearing, it will and must appear everywhere that human beings let the
world touch their wounds, while they seek to share with others the trials
by fire of their biographies.
Invited by the Love and Art of Divine Circumstance to look within and
to reach into the depths of our own being in order to source and author
that Good which we know to be right, we touch something spiritual and
are Touched by something Spiritual. In this time of the True Second
Coming, in the inwardness of our souls and invisible to all outer seeing,
a Second Eucharist is being enacted - the Good offers Itself - Its own
Being - to us (Moral Grace). For the Good we know is not just known in
the soul as what we tend to think of as a mere thought, but if we attend
most carefully, it is true Spirit, just as the John Gospel writer told us that
Christ spoke: [John 3:6-8] "What's born of the flesh is flesh, and what's
born of the breath is breath. Don't be amazed because I told you you
have to be born again. The wind blows where it will and you hear the
sound of it, but you don't know where it comes from or where it goes; its
the same with everyone born of the breath."
[The existence of a Second Eucharist, to accompany the Second Coming,
in no way means to diminish or change the Original Eucharist. On the
contrary, we will find that via the Second Eucharist our understanding of
the meaning of the Original Eucharist (the transubstantiation of matter)
will deepen. See in this regard, the small pamphlet: Radiant matter:
Decay and Consecration, by Georg Blattmann. From the
transubstantiation of matter we are being led onward to learning how to
participate also in a transubstantiation of thought.]
Thus we are being truly and continuously born again today (each act of
moral grace is another Second Ethereal Eucharist and birth), from out of
our spiritual childhood and into our spiritual adulthood, baptized
outwardly by the fires of the times in our biographies, and by holy breath
within - a Second Eucharist where Christ gives of His own Substance
that biblical knowing of the Good - His own Being. For us to truly know
the Good, requires we join our own soul to the Good. Our yearning to
author the Good out of ourselves is how we participate in the Baptism of
66
being truly born again, and how we participate in the sacrament of the
Second Eucharist. Christ also participates by giving to us, out of
Himself, this very Good - this Moral Grace. When having received
within ourselves this sacrament of the Second Eucharist, an act that only
arises because we seek it and form its actual application, we remain free
- we create moral law - we author the fulfillment of the law and the
prophets. Given to us within by Christ as a capacity, we then author its
incarnate nature and pass it on to the world of our biographies, - from out
of us thence into the outer world (or into the inner world), do we then
ourselves author this Good: love engendered free moral grace.
But how does Christ do this? Is this Good offered to us in this Second
Sacrament as if it was a thing, passed by hand from one to another?
No. Christ as holy breath breathes upon the slumbering burning embers
of our own good nature, just as we breath upon a tiny fire in order to
increase its power. He sacrifices His Being into this breath, which gives
Life to the tiny ember-like fire of our moral heart. The holy breath
becomes within the soul of each human being who asks, seeks and
knocks a gift of Living Warmth that enlivens our own free fire of moral
will.
The Narrow Gate opens both ways, making possible thereby the intimate
dialog and conversation of moral deeds and thoughts that is woven
between the i-AM, the Thou and the Christ (wherever two or more are
gathered...), which intimate conversation leads ultimately to the
consecration - the character development - of the soul.
In this way our thinking can now behold the Meaning of Earth Existence
in the Age of the Consciousness Soul: A macro-cosmic Rite, a Second
Ethereal Eucharist, in which we give birth out of ourselves in the most
intimate way possible, knowledge of the Good, not as mere thought, but
as Life filled moral will, breathed into greater power by the sacrifice of
the true ethereal substance of Christ's Being in the form of holy breath.
The outer world is but a seeming, and what is brought by the Culture of
Media mere pictures of the Stage Setting for the World Temple that is
home to our biographies. When we think away this outer seeming - this
logos formed and maya based sense world, and concentrate only on the
Idea of the moral grace (Life filled holy breath) we receive and then
67
enact out of the wind warmed fire of individual moral will - as individual
law givers, as the fulfillment of the law and the prophets - we create this
Meaning of Earth Existence. Every act of moral grace, given greater Life
within in the deepest intimacy of our life of soul, is an ethereal
communion with Christ, even though we may only experience it as what
to us is a mere thought of what is the Good at some moment of need in
the biography.
Christ gives us this Gift, by Grace, freely out of Love, and with no need
that we see Him as its Author. We hunger inwardly to know what the
right thing to do is, and when this hungering is authentic, we receive
Christ's Holy Breath. This does not come so much as a thought-picture of
the Good in response to our questing spirit, but rather as the contentless
breathing substance of Christ's Being. We are touched (inspired) by
Love, and at this touch we shape that Breath into the thought that we
then know. The nature of its application and form in which we incarnate
this thought is entirely our own. We shape the thought completely out of
our own freedom - our own moral fire of will, for only we can apply it
accurately in the individual circumstances of our lives.
As the Age of the Consciousness Soul unfolds accompanied by this
Second Eucharist, the Social World of human relationships begins to
light and warm from within. For each free act of moral grace rests upon
this Gift of Christ's Being to us - an ethereal substance received in the
communion within the Temple of the own Soul, freely given in Love
whenever we genuinely: ask, seek and knock during our search for the
Good. Our participation in this Rite, this trial by Fire leavened by Holy
Breath, leads us to the co-creation of new light and new warmth - the
delicate budding and growing point of co-participated moral deeds out of
which the New Jerusalem is slowly being born.
This co-creation is entirely inward, a slowly dawning Sun within the
macro Invisible World of Spirit. Moreover, we do it collectively (as
humanity). While each of us contributes our part, it is our collective
conscious celebration of the Second Ethereal Eucharist (creating the
Good) that begins the transubstantiation of the collective (presently
materialized and fallen) thought-world of humanity into the New
Jerusalem.
68
that for the American Soul much of what is described below is already
instinctively present. This instinctive relationship to the art and music of
discipleship appears first in the American Soul in the dominant tendency
to be directed outwardly toward the world, fully engaged in social reality,
and sometimes (often more frequently than appears on the Evening
News) seeking to heal the social world's wounds. Part of the hidden
mystery of this Soul is that it is possible to take what is so present
instinctively, and awaken it by gradual degrees into full consciousness.
This task may turn out to be far easier for the American Soul, than has so
far been imagined within Anthroposophical circles.
To fully inaugurate this gradual awakening, however, does require
turning from the outer world and its worries and wonders for a bit, and to
look within - to practice introspection. When looking within becomes a
normal part of soul life, American anthroposophists should not be
surprised to find that they already live instinctively in their wills in ways
with considerable kinship with the path of discipleship - the path of
moral action in the world through renunciation and love. With the
addition of this introspective looking within, we add to the thinking we
already do about the field of outer-world social moral action, a
complementary and much needed thinking about the soul-field of inner
moral action. Outer world thinking and action are enhanced by
everything we learn from the practice of looking, thinking and acting
within.
By the way, it is not the point of this essay to encourage any divisive
distinction, such as might be assumed because of the emphasis on
matters American. Nor is it being suggested here, for example, that
Americans are any better at Anthroposophy in any way. On the contrary,
we are just different. Each Soul gesture in the Threefold World has
unique gifts to offer, and this essay means to serve the potential freeing
of those yet untapped American gifts from a kind of child-like imitation
of things European. This tendency, to model our soul practices on a kind
of European anthroposophical idealism of the soul, was a natural impulse
connected to our admiration of the work of our European brothers and
sisters. It is time to grow past this however, to discover our far more
earthly and pragmatic way to the Spirit. And, to do this not only for the
benefit of the American Soul Itself, but also for the benefit of the
Anthroposophical Movement world-wide.
71
There are then two themes, which while related are also quite separate.
The relationship of the Alchemical stream and the Discipleship stream is
one theme, and the relationship of the American Soul to the wider world
is another. The point of intersection, between the Discipleship stream and
the instinctive capacities of the American Soul, shows only that the
Rosicrucian and Manichean streams of the Old World, and their
connection to Initiation, does not quite have the same meaning for the
American Soul as does the natural Christ Impulse inspired in Americans,
and revealed by their relationship to the outer world of social need (in
part a consequence of the fact, that due to its rampant individualism, the
Consciousness Soul is developing faster here - See Ben-Aharon's
"America's Global Responsibility: individualism, initiation and
threefolding").
The Alchemical stream is a stream of studied spiritual knowledge and of
initiation. It is more of the Kings and of Gnosis than of the Shepherds
and of Faith. The Discipleship stream is more related to that moral work
in life that comes from following the Teachings of Christ, and thus is
more of the Shepherds than of the Kings. The disciples, who were meant
to be fishers and shepherds of human beings, were not (in general) of the
old mystery streams as were the Kings. The Shepherds belong to what
was being newly created - to the future Mysteries that are to arise from
the social commons. These future Mysteries are not to flow out of the
old, now impotent and dysfunctional hierarchically organized Mystery
Centers, but from finely and homeopathically distributed Branches and
Discussion Groups - that is the New Mysteries are to be born out of and
in ordinary social life where groups of individuals draw together
(wherever two or more are gathered...).
At the same time, while the America Soul is more naturally of the
Shepherd stream, - of the discipleship stream, because of its orientation
to outer world moral action, it can by turning inward and seeking a
pragmatic introspective life, begin to draw from the wisdom-well of
renewed European spiritual life. Rudolf Steiner, in his works on
objective philosophical introspection ("A Theory of Knowledge Implicit
In Goethe's World Conception"; "Truth and Knowledge"; and "The
Philosophy of Spiritual Activity") gives us a quite useful generalized
map to this introspectively investigated inner territory - a territory that
for the American Soul has many different and unique characteristics.
With Emerson, we get a similar map, not as exact and scientifically
72
rigorous, but one which nonetheless is more in harmony with the actual
landscape of the American Soul.
We can then read Steiner to initiate us into our introspective soul
voyages, in the most objective and scientific fashion; and, read Emerson
for that travelogue, which is more attuned to the unique scenic beauty to
be actually found there, given that the American Soul, like the other
soul-gestures of the Threefold world, is differently oriented in its
fundamental nature.
I have tried here to distinguish two problems that ought not to be
confused. This article is not saying that the American Soul and the
Discipleship stream are identical, only that there is a definite kinship.
What is also being said is that for those in this discipleship stream (of
which there are no doubt many - Americans and otherwise - within the
Society and Movement, and for whom this article also aims to provide
greater self-understanding), they will tend to be less attracted to
exercises aimed at spiritual development, and more called to moral
action in life, which incidental to its true deeds, produces the after effect
called: character development.
"For every one step in spiritual development, there must be three steps in
character development". Rudolf Steiner: "Knowledge of Higher Worlds
and How to Attain It".
[Keep in mind, when thinking about character development, this
question: To what aspect of character development do we relate a good
sense of humor, laughter, foolishness and dance? Please also note that at
one time the word silly meant to be possessed by the sacred.]
This is not to suggest that specific spiritual developmental exercises are
unimportant, but rather just to point out that if the moral (character)
development lags behind, it more and more becomes a danger that
spiritual experience will come toward us in a one-sided way. Further, we
need to understand that true heart thinking is almost entirely a
consequence of the extent to which the will to do the Good (that is to be
moral) is the foundation for all feeling and thinking activities.
To make some of this a little more concrete, we might notice that it
would not be uncommon for those drawn to the Discipleship stream to
73
know the core of what you need to know. A text, even this text, can at
best be a word-map describing a territory you'll only really know by
direct experience, however many other books you ever read. The reality
of matters spiritual is, however, not found in reading, but only in action.
We can acquire a lot of concepts by reading, but we need experience (the
consequences of action) more.]
We should keep in mind as we begin, that what is described below is
essentially very human and very ordinary. It is one possible descriptive
word-map, as it were, of the soul engaged in the dynamics of inner
awakening via the path of discipleship. As a map, it will be somewhat
abstract and defined. The actual territory is something else altogether human, messy, inconstant, prone to emotional ups and downs - that is all
the wonders of ordinary consciousness. All a word-map tries to do is to
point out various significant features. Look out for these mountains,
notice those valleys. Here is a pure spring, there is a hard and dangerous
rock wall. It is my hope that the reader will find below some guidelines
which will help them to chart their own path through the pristine forests
and dark swamplands of the soul. Keep in mind it takes courage to
explore there, but at the same time there is no other adventure quite like
it.
Recall then what Dennis Klocek gave in his lecture to the 2005 AGM,
and then published shortly thereafter in the News for Members (or if you
didn't hear or read it, try to find a copy as soon as you can): On the
blackboard a mandala: a circle, expressing a series of alchemical
relationships: earth (freedom); water (phenomenology); air (silent
practice) and fire (dialog). The circle form suggests a return to earth
(freedom) at some new or higher kind of level. But before considering
that, first some deep background.
If, from a certain point of view, we think of the above four elements in
Dennis Klocek's lecture as notes in a rising scale, we could also find that
in between each note is an interval. While the note is in itself more of a
step in spiritual development supported by spiritual exercises, the use in
life (the interval) of the acquired spiritual skill/capacity is more of a
moral act - an aspect of the process of character development. The soul is
fallen - it is an out of tune instrument, yet we hunger to return, to rise up
and to experience reintegration, and to give voice to the joy of coming
76
Home, which the Story of the Return of the Prodigal Son tells us leads to
celebration and feasting.
Because the spiritual development exercises are so well known, and so
completely covered elsewhere in Steiner's basic books, as well as Dennis
Klocek's books, I will not be discussing them here. This essay assumes a
general knowledge of that work, and some practice in their use. Here we
are looking at the development of the Soul solely with regard to its
struggles with the so very messy, personal and human moral questions of
the biography.
In case there is some confusion here, in Steiner's Knowledge of Higher
Worlds, the moral is approached mostly through a series of admonitions,
encouraging the student to orient him or her self in life in certain ideal
ways. Only in The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, with the discussions
of moral imagination, moral intuition and moral technique, did Steiner
confront the moral problem directly and exactly.
The details that follow I have derived from my own (naturally messy and
human, stupid and silly, and when I really get serious - pretentious)
introspective investigations of the moral dimensions of the soul, but it
should be kept in mind that while it is prudent to describe these phases
and Trials as if separated in time in the soul, they are much more likely
to be layered over each other - and often simultaneous in a variety of
ways. It also needs to be clear that what is to follow wishes only to add
another dimension - another view from a different direction - to what
Dennis Klocek gave, and not to contradict it in any way whatsoever.
It is particularly crucial to note here that we are mostly discussing those
moral acts that take place in the Soul, not those in the outer biography.
There is a relationship to be sure, but it will help to understand that we
are moral in both worlds: the outer world of our biographies, and the
inner world of Soul practice and art.
I emphasize the word Trial to add another quality to our understanding.
Moral development takes place in the biography through Trials. These
challenges to the life of soul and spirit are meant to be difficult. We
become deeply engaged in our karma of wounds with others in these
Trials. Moreover, these are called Trials precisely because there is great
pain, suffering and effort (as well as not enough fun) connected to them,
77
and because the Shadow plays such an important and often decisive role.
Furthermore, various aspects of the Seven Stages of the Passion of Christ
(as described in the John Gospel) are enacted in the Soul via these
biographical Trials: the Washing of the Feet, the Scourging, the
Crowning with Thorns, the Carrying of the Cross, the Crucifixion, the
Entombment, and the Resurrection. There is nothing abstract about these
difficult processes of soul transformation, and this should be kept in
mind as we go forward, namely that: every time I use the word Trial I am
speaking of quite human, difficult and sometimes years long life-crises.
There is, in this regard, something of a kind of spiritual law involved.
Just as the world of the senses has its laws of gravity and color, so the
soul world has its laws. The ones to keep in mind here are the karma of
wounds in the outer biography, as well as the outer and inner moral
Trials to be faced there, which bear an exact and direct interrelationship.
To face a challenge in life, to face a Trial, means to engage in just that
personal teaching which belongs specifically to our individually and is
that which is most needed for the development of our personal character.
Consider a marriage for example, or the children to be raised there.
These relationships are not trivial distractions to any spiritual
development, but rather are precisely those riddles and mysteries of life
belonging particularly to our own ego's character developmental needs.
One can read all kinds of spiritual books, practice all manner of spiritual
exercises, and still not advance because the biographical tasks are
ignored. To begin to awaken within, and to appreciate that we are
surrounded in our biography with just those moral tasks and Trials we
individually need, is to recognize just how precisely and miraculously
has Christ, as the Artist of our karma of wounds, woven us into the world
of personal relationships. So when Christ advises that unless we become
again as little children, we cannot enter the kingdom of heaven, He is,
among other matters, telling us precisely who our deepest spiritual
teachers in life often are.
This world of personal relationships, and their corresponding moral
Trials, whether of family or work, or even wider world challenges, is
also very elastic in a sense. We are quite free in it, and it has a quality
that can respond rather exactly to only those tasks which we choose to
take up. Part of true Faith is to accept what comes to us as challenges,
yet at the same time to recognize that our freedom also allows us to
78
choose at every juncture, which way to turn, what burden to carry and
when to laugh at ourselves.
For example, the interval from earth (freedom) to water
(phenomenology) involves the skill: thinking-about. This skill we receive
as a natural aspect of living in this age, in that we are inwardly free to
decide what to think; and, in accord with the Age of the Consciousness
Soul, we are also becoming more and more able to form individual free
moral ideas as well.
The Consciousness Soul really just means that if we inwardly wish to
know the Good, in any particular moment of moral demand, crisis or
need, we can in fact know what the Good is. Yet, in order to have this
knowledge, we first have to ask, seek and knock. We have to inwardly
form the question, and struggle there to let ourselves answer from the
higher nature of our ego. The Good is what we make it to be, and as this
essay proceeds, we will get deeper and deeper into this Mystery. This is
why
my
book
(found
for
free
on
line
at
http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/twotf.html or which can be purchased at
www.lulu.com) "the Way of the Fool" calls this capacity to know the
Good: Moral Grace.
[As an aside, for those more familiar with Steiner's terminology, you
should keep in mind that by necessity he was required to cognitively
form his research and understanding into the language of the Intellectual
Soul, as that was the condition of his audiences. In this book we are
writing out of the language of the Consciousness Soul itself (something
toward which American's are instinctively gifted). So, for example, when
in the opening lecture of the book The Challenge of the Times Steiner
speaks of the need for people to work out of an experience of the
threshold, he is using Intellectual Soul terminology. In the essay above,
where I have elaborated carefully on the Second Ethereal Eucharist
experience, this has been a quite concrete and exact picture of human
intercourse across the threshold in the language of the Consciousness
Soul. I also mean to suggest here that it is quite possible to take many of
Steiner's works and translate them from Intellectual Soul language into
Consciousness Soul language. The attentive reader of this text, who takes
to heart the suggested practices, will in fact eventually find themselves
able to do this translation process themselves. Once able to do this, the
reader will be able to confirm not only their own experience, but all that
79
In order to progress properly through the life passages that comprise the
Water Trial, we have to learn to renounce the unredeemed antipathy and
sympathy. This is the central moral act that makes possible the
transformation via the Water Trial from thinking-about to thinking-with.
We enter the Water Trial knowing how to think about, and we can leave
the Water Trial knowing how to think with. The essential moral nature of
this Trial is outlined in the Gospels in the Sermon on the Mount, in the
teaching concerning the mote and the beam. In the biography, when we
learn to struggle with the covering over (or painting in thought via the
unconscious Shadow driven creation of mental pictures) of the persons
that we meet with our individual unredeemed antipathies and
sympathies, we are learning about the beam in our own eye. We see not
the person, but our own soul as that lives in our projected sympathies and
antipathies. To learn to see past the beam, to meet the true phenomena of
the other, to learn to think with them rather than about them, this is the
moral craft to be discovered during the Water Trial.
The biography gives us just those experiences that challenge this
learning. The spouse, the child, the co-worker, the boss, the neighbor, the
relative, or the stranger-other, all will evoke the beam, the unredeemed
mental pictures. We must learn how not to paint our experience with this
already unconsciously given thought-content, and instead learn to let the
experience itself speak into the soul, and to become consciously active as
a creator of the free thought in relationship to the experience.
Again, one way to banish the Shadow influence here (when we discover
our thinking to be possessed by the beam) is to laugh at ourselves - to see
the essential silliness of our dark inner depictions of others, as well as
those depictions which are too sympathetic (that is where we raise
another up to the level of a kind of minor deity, such as how too many
view Rudolf Steiner - and others - out of a soul mood of ungrounded and
unrealistic admiration).
Sobriety, for all its virtues, must be balanced with play, otherwise the
soul becomes an arid desert.
So, for example, when we look at another person and recognize that they
are, in themselves, not just that which we observe in the moment, but
rather that they are their whole history - their whole biography (in fact a
81
own eye and then you can see about getting the splinter out of your
brother's eye.
Again, one of the best ways to eliminate the log is to learn to laugh at it.
The log arises from the Shadow side of soul life, and in the light and
warmth of our learning to laugh at ourselves, the Shadow's hold
dissolves.
In Steiner's The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity, we are taught the
importance of the moral basis for our actions, whether outwardly in the
sense world, or inwardly in the soul. Only that action, which is preceded
by a self-determined moral reason (intention), is truly free. Even so, no
one should be surprised to discover that they are already trying to do
these activities in some fashion or another. Emerson said this: In self
trust all virtues are comprehended. The purpose of this essay - this
word-map - is to help us raise out of the realm of instinct, step by step
into full consciousness, our already existing natural goodness.
[Another brief biographical note: As I shared previously, I underwent a
kind of spontaneous awakening at age 31, and one of the by-products of
this inner infusion of light, was that I became hyper-aware of judging
people. I could see myself putting them into various boxes and
categories, and being now awake to this beam in my own eye, I could
also see that this was not right - it violated conscience, so that I struggled
to learn how to not do it. That said, learning how not to do it, does not
mean that we always apply this newly learned moral craft. On the
contrary, I often fell back into old ways many times over the years,
although there did slowly dawn a kind of sensitivity, that let me see that I
had been again in thrall of the beam. Stepping outside the prison of the
beam does not become automatic - a habit, but must always be applied,
in the moment, consciously, with intention and attention (the
will-in-thinking).]
After we have learned to renounce (consciously and for specific and
individually freely chosen moral reasons) our soul gestures of yet
unredeemed antipathy and sympathy, in order to learn how to think with
that object of thinking which we are learning to love, do we then move
out of the Water Trial, via more necessity, to the life passages of the Air
Trial. This movement from water (phenomenology) to air (silent
practice), which before (at the entrance to the Water Trial) began with
84
i-AM in relationship to others; all the while learning to love ever more
deeply the objects of our perception (beholding) and thinking.
[From this point onward, I will be often using the term beholding instead
of perception (in certain cases) and for this nuance I am grateful to
Clifford Monks, who provided this in a recent conversation between the
two of us.]
Now before us stand new objects of inward beholding. The world of
Imaginations is faced with this new freedom, but it stands inwardly over
there, as it were, such that once more we have something which we think
about, only this time it is not a sense object but a spiritual object.
Moreover, the perceptual element of an Imagination has required our
co-participation; and, the thought content produced by our cognitive
capacity, during the experience of the supersensible, arises
simultaneously with the experience. Contrary to a sense object, which
has as an aspect of its nature what Steiner called the necessary given, a
spiritual Imagination as an object of clairvoyant beholding does not exist
independently of our own will-on-fire in thinking. We have authored and
sourced (for this language, grateful thanks to Harvey Bornfield) it in
cooperation with spiritual beings.
Our new thinking about has participated in the creation of the
Imagination. We experience the Imagination in infinite internal space
(ethereal and peripheral space) as an object, whose existence comes
about because our own activity is coupled with the by Grace activity of
higher beings. The intention and attention are involved in a Parsifal
question* to which the Imagination is an answer (producing a kind of
wordless knowledge). Subsequent in time to this wordless knowing
experience (which includes a conceptual element), cognition then
produces the word forms, either written or spoken, in which the living
Imagination dies into a crystallized word-picture, such as what is given
to us in many of Steiner's lectures and writings. When we actively (not
passively) read these word-pictures, recreating them in our own
picture-thinking, the soul harmonizes with the Imaginative aspect of the
world of spirit, creating out of this harmony a rudimentary chalice in
which later spiritual experiences can arise.
[*A Parsifal question is a question that if we didn't ask it when we could
have, we may have to wait a long time to later receive an answer.]
91
So we begin then to repeat at a higher level the previous Trials, but this
time facing experiences we have never before had. We travel once more
around the mandala of the circling spiral of soul metamorphosis, learning
in new ways to think about (Imaginations), then on to new thinking-with
(Inspirations) and finally to new thinking-within (Intuitions). [There
would seem to be here a great mystery, about which I have not (yet) any
experience, but at the same time a great curiosity: do angels etc. tell
jokes or laugh and dance?]
This full new thinking, however, is itself at a higher stage. It is thinking
transformed into willed creative and participatory beholding. The normal
thought content, which we know as an aspect of our original state of
consciousness (earth and freedom, in discursive thinking about), only
arises in the soul after the clairvoyant thinking perceiving / beholding.
This thought content falls out, as it were, during the period of time the
spiritual experience is fading away. The spiritual experience does not
continue in earthly memory, but at the same time, the thought content
produced (that is, how the experience was initially cognized as it fades
away) does remain in earthly memory.
Let us now return to a deeper appreciation of the life passages we are
calling: the Fire Trial.
All the work we do, through the various Trials and passages of our
biography, more and more purifies the soul, making it ready for
clairvoyant spiritual perception. At the same time, there is constant
spiritual music in the soul - the song of the wind and of the breath - even
as far back as when we are only being newly born out of the first Trial of
earth and freedom.
Ordinary consciousness is already full of spirit. Our problem is how do
we pick the gold out of the dark shadowy and leaden dross of the soul,
normal to its given fallen state of earth and freedom. Two factors are
clues. These are discovered during the early stages of introspection in the
idea of needs and the idea of choices. The wind - the breath - the living
river of thought - blows through the soul constantly, but always in accord
with need and most often in accord with other-need, that is the needs not
of the Self, but of the Thou. To live into this Grace given always present
intuition-like breath, we need to choose. When we do choose service to
92
other-need, then true, good and beautiful intuitions flow on the wind of
Grace into the soul, even in its ordinary and fallen state of consciousness.
How else are we to understand the natural and harmonious state of grace
always potential in such relationships as: mother and child, comrades at
arms and lovers.
Other-need also helps keep our ambitions in check. One of the
temptations that the Shadow offers to us is to let us believe we can, for
example, out of reading a Steiner text speak with authority about matters
concerning which we have had no other experience than the text. Absent
the real experience - the percept - true thought (the concept) cannot arise.
Only in conjunction with actual clairvoyant experience can we, in full
conscience, speak of such matters with the same confidence as did our
Teacher, Rudolf Steiner. Yet, in the face of other-need, and our choice to
devote ourselves to this need, spiritual contact (experience) does appear
in the soul. The spiritual percept (experience) arises within the soul as a
response to the Parsifal question which our intention and attention have
created out of our relationship to other-need; and, the modest nature of
our choice to serve this need makes our soul a suitable chalice to receive
that thought content which then serves this need.
For example, we have no need (besides a vain curiosity) to know who
was the 20th Century Bodhisattva incarnation of the future Maitreya
Buddha. Yet, on the other hand, there is a deep need to know how to love
those intimate others in our biography, so that we can learn to heal our
shared karma of wounds.
With this in mind (and also keep in mind the layered nature of soul
development, as against the one-sided idea that it is a mere linear
progression) let us look at the Fire Trial, which Dennis Klocek has
described also as: dialog; and which he related to meeting with the dead,
who come to us through our encounters with others. From the standpoint
of the Discipleship stream, this is once more perceived a bit differently,
yet again in a complementary fashion.
Having passed through the previous Trials, our will-in-thinking now
possesses certain capacities, certain inner arts, the essence of which are
moral in nature. The self development spiritual exercises are secondary
to, but supportive of, the character (moral) developments. We have
93
meaning. {2012 update: this became, in 2010, the book The Art of God:
an actual theory of Everything}This was my Parsifal question in its
broadest form, and the wind would come at anytime It choose as I lived
out these experiences, so that I had to learn to be sensitive to this wind,
and to serve It, even by pulling off the road when driving and taking
notes, or getting up from bed at night and writing when called. The
success of this inner work also made me on more than one occasion, an
obnoxious moral nut case, filled with excessive moments of grand hubris
- my own Shadow intoxicated and inflamed. Fortunately, the Trials
would knock me down whenever I got too drunk with the seriousness of
any luciferic fantasies of having a mission.]
The moral art of thought not only comes to the truth of the object of
thinking, but also knows its goodness and its beauty. In intimate
relationships, where we learn to love the will of the other - the Thou, and
to see the beauty, not of their physical appearance, but of their deeds - in
this selfless perception we then start to live in their true Fullness and
Presence.
Thinking-within, as it traverses the Fire Trial, begins to experience the
spiritual world as a thought world, via a pure thinking, which is a
cooperative art - Grace will be present. This purity is three-fold. It is pure
in the sense that it is only thought - that is it is sense free. The attention is
so focused only on thought, that the outer sense world recedes far into
the background of consciousness. That is one aspect. The second kind of
purity is moral in nature. The soul is pure in its intention and attention.
The intention and attention are chaste, as it were. Modest, or moderate.
Without ambition of any kind. Not even seeking initiation or
enlightenment. Insight increases in the soul, but each time as a surprise as a wonder.
The third kind of purity is as regards the thought - the concept itself. It is
only pure concept or idea and in this it is thought as Being, as Presence
and Fullness. Our earthy grasping of the thought, which in the beginning
tends to render it into mere mental pictures or generalized concepts, has
been gone beyond. We have sensed thought unconsciously in this
beginning, and caused it to fall into our earthly and darkened
consciousness from out of its original living environment. When we
learn how to return thought to its true realm and nature, then our
95
sense-free thinking, and the purity of our intention and attention now lets
the pure nature of the Being of the Thought think in us (dialog).
At the same time, this conversation has what seems at first blush an odd
quality to it, in the sense of our freedom. As discussed in the essay
above, on The Meaning of Earth Existence in the Age of the
Consciousness Soul, just as Christ gives his Being to our need for
knowledge of the Good as an act of Grace in such a way that the thought
of the Good is entirely ours to shape, so also that which thinks in us does
not answer our knock with any authority whatsoever. This Holy Spirit
(the wind in the soul spends - exhausts - Its will into us in a way). Its
participation with our i-AM in the nature of the thought's form is such
that, while the Holy Spirit elevates our perception of truth, we remain the
final author and source. The Holy Spirit's participation is also a gift and
becomes the wind to the wings of our soul. Borne on this wind we see
from whatever height, depth or breadth that must be there for other-need.
We serve the Thou and the Holy Spirit serves us both.
The soul is now grateful for whatever wills to dialog with it, and has no
need for anything other than the occasional, but profoundly nourishing,
experiences of Grace, all of which it had already begun to know, even
coming in the beginning in the wonderful mystery of ordinary
consciousness, and in accord with other-need and choice.
Yet, in this same beginning, the karma of wounds, and the unredeemed
aspects of the astral or desire body move us forward in life, and we are
guided by the Shadow into and toward our necessary biographical
experiences. In the processes of the Fire Trial, we learn to let go these
drives, to move with and within the stream of Providence in Life. The
soul now tends to want only to be content and at rest, no longer driven.
We love the necessity that Providence brings us, and devote ourselves to
that task, recognizing that the Great Whole of Life is in Other and far
more competent Hands (Christ's Love).
There can be, by the way, either (or both) an outer necessity and an inner
necessity. Self observation, with an evocation of conscience applied to
the question of whether we are being truthful to ourselves, will reveal
whether an inner necessity is to have the same weight as an outer one.
This essay, in fact, was very much produced out of an inner necessity in
connection with the delicate and subtle presence of Fullness and fullness
96
but Christ in me - the Not I part. We burn away the I concepts, which by
their very nature are limiting and mark us as not-free and are a beam in
our own eye-inside, directed at ourselves.
We don't have to think of ourselves as a father or mother, for example,
since the necessity of the biography places those tasks before us already.
The inner biography too, with its ambitions, hopes, dreams and wishes,
pulls us forward as well.
There is as yet no traditional clairvoyant spiritual perception - the astral
body is still being purified during the Fire Trial. What was the lower ego,
or that which begins its path accompanied by the Shadow or threefold
double-complex, has more and more merged and identified itself with the
higher ego - the self-participated aspect of conscience.
When we live purely in Parsifal questions (that is, poor in spirit), in the
artistic mastery of our antipathies and sympathies, having set aside
self-importance and attending to the object of thinking with the intention
to love, then thinking is meet with other-presence, as needed. This is the
quite definite inner experience of the delicate and subtle presence of
Fullness and fullness of Presence, which is described in the John Gospel
as follows: What's born of the flesh is flesh, and what's born of the
breath is breath. Don't be amazed because I told you you have to be born
again. The wind blows where it will and you hear the sound of it, but you
don't know where it comes from or where it goes; it's the same with
everyone born of the breath John 3: 6-8
This Fire Trial is all the more painful, because we have become exposed
via the previous layers (stages) of spiritual and character development, to
a much deeper introspective understanding of our own desire body - our
own astral body. We can now not only think within the other - the Thou,
but also we can now think much deeper within our own soul - we are
naked before our own introspective clarity of perception. That which
remains unredeemed, and still yet outside the full and completed Fire
Trial of purification, lies inwardly exposed to us. The descending
conscience (like the descent of the dove in the Gospels) meets the rising
lower ego, both seeking union and marriage; and this light from above, a
kind of deep moral Grace, illuminates and warms all that is yet shadow
in the soul. Emerson has put the bare bones of it like this in his lecture,
The American Scholar: "For the instinct is sure, that prompts him to tell
98
his brother what he thinks. He then learns that in going down into the
secrets of his own mind he has descended into the secrets of all minds..."
*
Just as we learned to think about, with and within the other - the Thou, so
we learn to think about, with and within ones own soul. Each skill, craft
and art of thinking emerges from its corresponding Trial. The Earth Trial
is a given, it is where most of us start. The Water Trial requires our first
struggles with renunciation and the beginning, and delicate, expressions
of love. The Air Trial takes us even further, to the abandonment of our
favorite thoughts. Then we also renounce our excessive sense of Self, in
the process of facing the Fire Trial. There we are also most exposed to
our own other-Self, - the Shadow - which is now fully illuminated - no
secrets whatsoever.
Let us consider, briefly, some hints on the encounter with the Shadow,
from the point of view of the Discipleship stream. Recall from above:
"{addendum in 2012: concerning later experiences not had at the time
this essay was originally written, read: a brief description of meeting the
Lessor and Greater Guardians in the new way, and as well a description
of the meaning of, and new manner of, the Second Pentecost in the
Ethereal http://ipwebdev.com/hermit/threshold.html }"
When Valentin Tomberg was writing as an anthroposophist, he described
in his book "Inner Development", three aspects to the Shadow: a
luciferic double, an ahrimanic double and a human double. Later, in his
profoundly Christian "Meditations on the Tarot: a Journey into Christian
Hermeticism" he wrote of the tempter, the prosecutor and of egregores that is of self-created psychic parasites in the soul (Steiner called these
latter creatures, in Man as Symphony of the Creative Word: cancers or
tumors of the soul).
When we think discursively - talk inwardly to ourselves, the unconscious
works into the soul. That is, both the higher and the lower unconscious
are present. No true thought, for example, can arise in the soul except for
its having come to us via the living stream of thought (see Kuhlewind
here). But, because in ordinary and fallen soul consciousness, we are
bound (intentionally by the Gods so as to give us true freedom on the
earth) into an inner darkness of spirit, we only can know thought as it
falls out and down into the soul from its original living element. In
discursive thought the living element has died.
99
The purified will (an appropriately moral intention and attention) creates
heart warmth in the soul-soil of feeling, out of which the light and
life-filled flower of thought is born. And, because we are first born into
this process out of the Earth Trial of freedom, our whole passage in these
Life Trials goes forward in freedom. It all evolves out of our choices.
Recall Emerson: In self trust all virtues are comprehended.[emphasis
added]
Nothing renounced has disappeared, but rather the soul becomes an
instrument, which the i-AM in freedom learns to play. The notes and
intervals become primal dynamic expressions of soul forces and
capacities, many generated out of spiritual exercises. Just as we must
practice the use of a material musical instrument, so we must practice the
capacities of the soul. At the same time, many forces and capacities (if
not more) have a quality that comes only from the moral tone of the soul.
We purify the instrument of the soul as much as we learn how to use it.
Both are needed, both are necessary. The spiritual exercises, that is the
how as in technique, has more kinship with the teachings of the true
Alchemists - the stream of the Kings, while the moral purity of the soul
has more kinship with the teachings of Christ - the stream of the
Shepherds.
Steiner's The Philosophy of Spiritual Activity is the modern
transformation of the Christ-in-me moral essence of the John Gospel,
while Knowledge of Higher Worlds is the modern transformation of the
Rosicrucian Ideals of spiritual developmental exercises. While the latter
has more kinship with the soul nature of Central Europe - the seeking to
incarnate the Ideal, the former has more kinship with the soul nature of
the American - the need to act morally in the world. Both are present
everywhere in the world, it is just the mix and their proportions that vary
from one soul gesture to another, in the wonder and mystery of the
Threefold World.
Let us now seek to make a whole.
We become more and more inwardly free as we renounce and transform
sympathies and antipathies, then as well the very thought content itself,
until finally we sacrifice our own importance. Each act of renunciation is
accompanied by a corresponding and deeper capacity to love. Each act of
101
love, beginning with the most simple appreciation of the other - the
Thou, creates inner purity: inner light and warmth. We are in the process
of learning to make of the soul a temple, and to fill it with created and
cultivated feelings of reverence and wonder at not only the world of
nature, but also the world of social community - the stream of karmic
wounds and free destiny meetings with our companions in life.
Ultimately, this inner and outer moral work leads us to becoming fully
inwardly naked to ourselves in the Fire Trial (where there is no longer
the possibility of escaping the Shadow), and as well fully and
consciously naked to the other-Presence (the kingdom of heaven is
within you). But even in the face of the other-Presence we are
nevertheless completely free. The nature of the breath (the
other-Presence) is to bring not only a new depth of comprehension, but
ever more freedom, for we never stop being the principle willful agent of
the thought-content that arises in the soul. Overtime we become even
freer and more creative - a true artist in thought.
The creation of a human thought content is the sole province of the 10th
Hierarchy. Only in us, and through our love, does the Cosmos know
Itself in the beauty of human thought. We were told this as long ago as
Genesis 2:19-20, with the symbolic picture that unto Adam is given the
power of naming every living creature. We name the world, give it its
human meaning, with every thought we source and author.
Here we can now come to understand more deeply the truth, beauty and
goodness hidden in Christ's comments in response to the question of
what is the most important commandment: He said to them, "You are to
love your lord God with all your heart and all your spirit and all your
mind. That is the important and first commandment. [love
other-Presence] The second one is similar: You are to love those close to
you as you love yourself. [love the Thou, the companions in life] All the
law and the prophets hang from these two commands" . Matthew 22:
37-40.
What we really learn is to participate sacramentally in the arrival of the
thought-content in the soul, which becomes then ever new each time we
truly think. We are, in this, inwardly born again and again and again.
This living thinking is a perpetual rebirth of thought, which comes into
being and dies away - a constant dying and becoming. We learn to unite
102
with this living stream of thought, the living stream of breath within. We
give ourselves over to it, in a participatory Rite - an artistic soul dance of
sacred-heart thinking, and then discover the true secret of the Fire Trial,
which has been hidden out in the open in the Gospels, just in this: Now I
bathe you in the water to change hearts, but the one coming after me is
stronger than me: I'm not big enough to carry his shoes. He will bathe
you in holy breath and fire. John the Baptist: Matthew 3:11
leading us, through His Grace (holy breath within)
and His Love (as Artistic arranger of the Karma
of the Fire of Trials in our biographies), to:
Not I, but Christ in me.
********
[As I was going through a final revision of the whole text of this book
(American Anthroposophy), the following statement appeared in an
essay, by Michael Howard, in the News for Members:
"This brings us to see another primary reason why Rudolf Steiner gave
such emphasis to the role of the arts. In Rudolf Steiner's view, the
fundamental discipline for each art has to do with learning to perceive
the moral qualities inherent in each artistic medium. The same discipline
can be surmised from Rudolf Steiner's view of spiritual development as
serving the transformation of the human astral body into Spirit Self. Here
too is an avenue for cultivating another dimension of the art of the spirit,
what we might call the Art of the Spirit Self. This Art of the Spirit Self
precedes all others because the art of building community, the Social Art,
and the art of balancing and harmonizing all dimensions of the living
earth, the Ecological Art, depend on the art of self-metamorphosis.
"The Anthroposophical Society will find new life and purpose insofar as
it fosters not only the Science of the Spirit, but also the Art of the Spirit
and its different dimensions: the Art of the Spirit Self, the Social Art, and
the Ecological Art.
"For the Art of the Spirit is the Art of the New Mysteries."
103
It is my hope that this essay, In Joyous Celebration of the Soul Art and
Music of Discipleship, has made a contribution to this vision.]
explain and support other speculations, and will no doubt continue for
some time to be one of the main beliefs we have of the world. Its truth is
not proven, however. The known facts do not support it.
In this regard, when speaking of natural selection, or "Darwinism", I am
basically referring to the general idea which modern humanity is taught,
namely that the human being developed through millions of years as a
result of accidental processes leading from a mineral ocean, through a
biological soup, to single celled organisms, then to invertebrates,
vertebrates, mammals and man. It is this general picture which is not
sustainable in the face of the actual facts, and the genuine pursuit of the
truth.
The fossil record reveals that between when a geological age begins and
when it ends the plants and animals have remained the same. The
paleontologist calls this "stasis" - over the whole of a geological age
there is no observable evolutionary change, particularly no evidence
whatsoever of one species being transmuted into another. Whatever
change does occur, appears to happen in the interval between ages,
which for unknown reasons remaining quite mysterious, and leaves no
trace of its processes.
This is an objective instance where the theoretical speculations of
science have not stood the test of time, yet our ideas of the world, once
captured by this speculative conception, are unable to disentangle
themselves. Natural selection is such a strongly held article of faith, both
within and without the scientific community, that it will continue to be a
dominant idea for many many years. In human psychology it has more
kinship with myth then it does with truth.
It is this myth making capacity of scientifically authored speculations
that concerns us. It is such a powerful force on the ideas we hold about
the world, that we can fully expect, for example, that many readers will
not believe what has been said here about natural selection. Dozens of
books and articles supporting what is said could be cited, yet most
people would rather dismiss these statements as the prejudices of perhaps
a "creationist", then risk their own belief system and actually look into
what is being discussed in those circles where this question is genuinely
being considered. (See for example: Evolution: a Theory in Crisis,
105
Michael Denton, (Adler & Adler, 1986); and Dogma and Doubt, by
Ronald H. Brady.
In a most recent popular critical examination of evolutionary biology,
Darwin On Trial, Phillip E. Johnson, (1991, Regnery Gateway), the
whole problem is carefully examined with an eye to aiding the layman in
understanding the difficulties that "Darwinism" represents. The standard,
however, is not to test modern evolutionary biology against some kind of
competing theory, but rather to see whether it is good science. It is this
which "Darwinism" fails at. It is simply bad science, and as a
consequence results in two very serious and dangerous results.
The first is that it holds still the advancement of the biological sciences
in that these might discover important facts upon which a more realistic
theory could be advanced. As long as "Darwinism" is held to, biology is
blind when it looks to the past, trapped in an illusion of its own creation.
The second danger is that this untestable theory is used to support other
kinds of speculations in other realms, most significantly for our
purposes, the investigation of human consciousness. Important questions,
which otherwise would suggest alternative ways of thinking about
consciousness, cannot be asked because "Darwinism" is already
presumed to answer them. At various places, as we proceed with the text,
we will encounter this danger. When this occurs, when we run into this
speculative and myth creating impulse, I will endeavor to point it out.
Recent advances in neurophysiology, in computer science, and in
cognitive science and related disciplines, have produced numerous
books, as well as major television series, on the workings of the mind.
For the most part, when I read these books I find my morality, my
heart-felt concerns, my idealism, my life of prayer, of meditation and
contemplation - all these most precious, most subtle inner experiences increasingly explained as mere electro-chemical phenomena, as products
of brain activity in the most material sense, and nothing else. Here is the
speculative myth making power of science in action. In saying this it
should be noted that it is not so much that I am against science, but rather
that science has only asked one-half of the essential question, namely
what is consciousness viewed from the outside. The other half of the
question is: What is consciousness viewed from the inside.
106
The views put forward by the vast majority of workers in these fields are
materialistic, deterministic, and ultimately anti-religious, although often
not consciously so. These questions of the ultimate truth of human
nature, in so far as the mind sciences consider them, are being decided
without really debating them in a forum in which the broader
implications are considered. Neurophysiology, for example, really only
asks certain limited kinds of questions (chemical happenings in brain
cells, or how cells cooperate to apparently accomplish computation), yet
appears to assume that inner states of consciousness are produced
exclusively by these cell processes.
"It is old hat to say that the brain is responsible for mental activity. Such
a claim may annoy the likes of Jerry Falwell or the Ayatollah, but it is
more or less the common assumption of educated people in the twentieth
century. Ever since the scientific revolution, the guiding view of most
scientists has been that knowledge about the brain, its cells and its
chemistry will explain mental states. However, believing that the brain
supports behavior is the easy part: explaining how is quite another."
(Mind Matters: How the Mind and Brain interact to Create Our
Conscious Lives, Michael S. Grazzanica Ph.D. pp 1, Houghton Mifflin,
Boston 1988).
We should perhaps note two things about the above quotation. First the
words "common assumption" and "believing", by which Grazanica
tacitly admits that we are not here dealing with proven facts, but rather
with the "belief system" held in common by some unknown portion of
the scientific community. Secondly, he clearly admits that moving from
facts about brain chemistry and related phenomena to an explanation of
consciousness, free will, morality etc. is a gigantic undertaking.
In that portion of the scientific community supportive of Grazzanica's
"common assumption", brain and mind are considered a single
phenomenon, and one popular science writer even goes so far as to say
that the recent advances in neurosciences establish conclusively that
there is no human spirit, and that all states of consciousness are caused
electro-chemically. "There will of course be a certain sadness as the
"human spirit" joins the flat earth, papal infallibility and creationism on
the list of widely held but obviously erroneous convictions." (Molecules
of the Mind, Jon Franklin, p 202, Atheneum, New York, 1987).
107
other way for a while, to reintroduce the study of the soul, from the
inside, as it appears to direct human experience.
This can, I am certain, be done with due regard for the demand of
science for reproducibility. I recognize this is not the usual approach by
religious thinkers, yet in this case our mutual respect for the truth seems
to require it. This ethical demand of science for reproducibility, namely
that whatever is asserted here concerning mind (soul/spirit) be
discoverable by another who is willing to follow the procedures, the
experimental protocols, as it were; this demand I believe is perfectly
justified.
In "new age" circles one hears frequently about mind, body and spirit,
meaning, I suppose, that these are three distinguishable human
characteristics. In modern mind sciences we hear of mind and brain. Are
these differing perspectives talking about the same things at all? It will
be useful to note in passing that when Freud's works were translated
from German into English the words "geistes" (spirit) and "seele" (soul)
were both translated as mind (c. Bruno Bettelheim's Freud and man's
soul, A.A.Knopf, 1983), even though English did have the correct
dictionary terms. This really only shows that for the English
consciousness the inner life was already thought of as mind even though
Europe had had a long tradition of referring to inner life in terms of soul
and spirit (Freud thought and wrote out of that tradition).
Modern American English still uses these terms as in: soul power, soul
brother, soul music, or in noting the distinction between the spirit and the
letter of the law.Yet such usage's are more metaphorical, more
imaginative, than the exact language usage which science demands, in
fact depends upon. Even so, while brain has a very concrete physical
existence, mind does not; it is much more ephemeral. It can't be touched,
nor can consciousness, or inner life, or feeling, or even idea. Yet, these
apparently non - sense perceptible - phenomena are all recognized
intuitively. We accept loss of consciousness in sleep and in certain
conditions of trauma or illness. We moderns are in love with feelings and
their expression, about which have recently been written more books
than one can read. The practice of science would get nowhere without
ideas and in fact the principle foundation of science's logical rigor is
mathematics, which has no sense perceptible existence at all, and is
nowhere observable in nature, even with instruments.
110
111
Even so, such a response has not really appreciated the problem as I have
been trying to state it. All the ideas of science are first and foremost
mental phenomena.They appear in mind as a product of mind, not in
sensible nature. I don't see gravity or even light. I see falling objects and
colors. I infer the law of gravity and the existence of light from these
experiences and, if I am a scientist, I make rigorous my observations
through experimentation and precise instrumentation. But natural
selection and the big bang are in each case mental creations, they
proceed from the act of thinking, not from sense perceptible nature.
What this means to me is that if I am going to prefer one kind of mental
phenomena over another (e.g. the idea of accident in the creation of life
versus the idea of God) then I'd better be clear as to why I have such a
preference. Yet, before I can make such choices, I need to understand
mind, to understand the act which makes such a choice. But to
understand mind don't I first need to understand understanding, to think
about thinking?
To the philosophically sophisticated reader this may seem to be running
backward in time. Modern academic philosophy (linguistic analysis),
from Quine to Ayer to Wittgenstein is no longer thinking about thinking,
at least in the way someone such as Frichte or some other 19th century
German philosopher approached the problem. For the lay person the
question might be put this way. How can I look to current work in
linguistic analysis, in neurophysiology, in cognitive psychology, in order
to build up my idea of mind, when these systems are already products of
mind? Is not the cart before the horse? Don't I first have to have clearly
before me what thinking is to my own experience of it, before I apply it
in practice? I have mind directly before me. What might I understand if I
investigate the nature of my own experience first?
This is a crucial point. If we were to examine each of these disciplines
we would find some idea of mind, either being assumed or derived from
the particular work. In some cases very explicit statements are being
made about what thinking is, how it is caused, how it proceeds, what its
potential is and so forth. Yet, it is thinking which is producing these
ideas. How might such investigations evolve if first it was clearly before
the thinker, just what thinking was to his own experience?
112
There are other reasons for making such a question the foundational step.
Earlier in this century, the physicist/novelist C.P. Snow pointed out the
existence of two cultures, the cultures of science and of literature (or the
humanities). These cultures did not speak the same language and did not
consider the same problems. Moreover the scientists seemed to believe
that only their method produced objective truth, and that the humanities
only produced subjective truths. Alan Bloom (in his The Closing of the
American Mind) recently observed how the distribution of assets in the
university reveals the domination of the sciences today, at least to
governments and businesses, who provide most of the funds for research.
When was the last time a President convened a panel of poets to help
him define a problem? (This is not to say that this is a bad idea by the
way. I suspect in many instances our poets and troubadours would give
much wiser advice). My own view is that Snow did not go far enough,
although his being a scientist/novelist makes this limitation
understandable. There are, I believe, three cultures (or three constituent
spheres to Culture): a culture of science or Reason, a culture of
humanities or Imagination and a culture of religion or Devotion. Reason,
Imagination and Devotion are related to the older ideas of Truth, Beauty
and Goodness, in that the former are human capacities of the soul and the
latter are the outer expressions of those capacities. Reason engenders
truth, Imagination engenders beauty, and Devotion engenders goodness.
In reality this is a complex relationship. On a certain level, or from a
particular viewpoint, these soul capacities are also capable of being
called powers. The romantic poet S.T. Coleridge called imagination the
"esemplastic power" and felt it was not just an aspect of human
consciousness, but was a force of Nature as well. Reason, for example,
could be called Truth, as that appears in the soul as a hunger first, then a
question, and finally an answer. Reason is then a dynamic process which
is intimately connect to Truth. In a way they are a mirror of each other.
The difficulty for both Snow and Bloom is that they have no practical
experience at devotion; they didn't really understand it or appreciate its
role in their own soul, or in the world. Most Christian contemplatives are
cloistered and are not encouraged to either prove their claims (in fact
they make no "claims") or to exhibit works. Certainly no science
curriculum, and few humanities curriculums teach the works of St. John
of the Cross, or St. Teresa of Avila. Our secular age is filled with writings
and teachers who believe religion is superstition, but who have never
113
tested it on its own terms. When Christ Jesus says "No one comes to the
Father except by me." it doesn't seem to occur to people that knowledge
of God might depend upon method just as much as science does. Perhaps
the reason the scientist doesn't find God behind creation is because he
looked in the wrong place. God being ephemeral (spiritual), perhaps God
can only be observed (known) by the ephemeral in man. Perhaps only to
mind in a pure state is the supra-sensible, the Invisible, apparent.
I have written briefly here of reason, imagination and devotion because I
wanted us to remember that mind (soul/spirit) produces much else
besides technical wonders. So that when we think about thinking we will
remember all the kinds of things which flow from mind and appreciate
that skill and effort are as much involved in the discovery of truth as in
the creation of beauty or in traveling on the stony path to goodness.
Moreover, there seems to be evidence that our greatest geniuses are often
active in such a way that combines these qualities. Are not the true
scientists and artists devoted to their calling? Einstein was mathematical,
musical and faithful. Michael Faraday, who was the founding
theoretician of electrical and magnetic phenomena, was a man of special
religious devotion. Teilhard de Chardin is a very obvious case in point,
and so is Goethe, whose scientific work was impeccable, although today
much under appreciated. Here is what Roger Penrose, a major thinker on
the problem of mind and science, had to say in his The Emperor's New
Mind, pp. 421, Oxford University Press, 1989:
"It seems clear to me that the importance of aesthetic criteria applies not
only to the instantaneous judgments of inspiration, but also to the much
more frequent judgments we make all the time in mathematical (or
scientific work) Rigorous argument is usually the last step! Before that,
one has to make many guesses, and for these, aesthetic convictions are
enormously important..."
And here is Karl Popper, whose work on scientific method sets the
standard (for many at least), in his Realism and the Aim of Science, pp.
8, Rowan and Littlefield, 1956:
"...I think that there is only one way to science - or to philosophy, for that
matter: to meet a problem, to see its beauty and to fall in love with it;...".
114
the nature of mind. I don't expect to answer this question here in the way
it must ultimately be answered. No written work ever convinces, even
scientific papers. The reader must make his own investigation and draw
his own conclusions. This is fundamentally what truly constitutes proof,
even in science. My obligation to reason is to state clearly my
conclusions and observations and to explain adequately my methodology
in order that another can test my results. My reader's obligation is to
honestly carry out the instructions, otherwise there can be no scientific
validation or invalidation. This will not be easy, and few will even try for
the truth is that years of effort have gone into the understanding I
presently have of mind. In fact it is not the point of this essay to establish
or prove the idea of mind that might be held by a Christian
contemplative, but rather to expose it, to make it known, and to do so in
a way which accepts as authentic and justifiable the scientific
requirement for reproducibility. That the effort at replication may well be
beyond the will power of those who agree or disagree is a situation over
which I have no control.
This is not a cop out, by the way. That it takes years of study and
development to be able to understand "Hilbert space", in no way lessens
its mathematical truth. Likewise, do we have to be able to paint the
Mona Lisa in order to appreciate its beauty? So, as well, we can marvel
at the goodness of the idea of mind as a moral/spiritual act, even though
we may lack the ability to completely engender a full understanding of
such a condition ourselves.
On the other hand, and if we are willing, we can learn fundamental
mathematical and scientific truths, without just having faith in the
scientist's teachings. We can, as well, take up artistic activity and
discover our own creative potential; and certainly we might devote
ourselves to prayer and contemplative thinking in order that we learn to
encounter the threshold between the visible and moral (invisible) worlds.
For my own purposes I now want to put aside (for the most part) the
word mind and use instead just the terms soul and spirit. These two
words are to mean no more and no less than what the reader experiences
in his own inner life. Such a process is called introspection or looking
within. It is a most ancient discipline; the meaning of the Greek
admonition: "Know thyself ". This does not mean, by the way, to know
one's subjective individual character traits as is often thought, but rather
116
to discover the universals of human nature as they appear inside our own
being.
Earlier in this century there was briefly a psychological "school" which
sought to discover truths about the psyche (soul) through introspection,
but this work did not make much headway, did not seem to contribute
scientifically. and was abandoned. Its flaw was to pretend there was no
tradition, no previous exploration of inner life, of psyche (soul) which
might offer some experienced insight into the problems involved. The
pretense is understandable in that invariably those disciplines which
actually know something practical about inner life are spiritual
disciplines and the general trend of scientific thought has been to view
spiritual ideas about the Earth, Cosmos and Man, as mere superstition. It
is no wonder then that, when science seeks to investigate inner life, its
anti-spiritual assumptions and preconceptions become an impediment to
the discovery of just those facts sought after.
Every human being experiences consciousness, which includes sense
experience (sight, hearing, touch, taste and smell), varying degrees of
well being (health, vitality and illness), thoughts, dreams, feelings,
impulses of will, desires, sympathies, antipathies, and so forth. Our
language is full of a variety of words for different inner experiences, or
states of consciousness, and these usages can often be very instructive.
For example, why do we call someone "bright" or speak of "flashes of
insight" or draw cartoons in which having a "bright idea" is depicted by a
light bulb going on over someone's head? We do this because we
instinctively know that certain kinds of thought activity (intuitions) are
accompanied by phenomena of inner light. This is not light as seen by
the physical eye, but light experienced by the "mind's eye", the
individual human spirit.
In our ordinary state of soul (consciousness) this experience is not paid
attention to because we are focused outwardly on the problem, whose
solution the "flash of insight" represents. Moreover, the activity by which
we produce the "in-sight", lies below the level of consciousness. It is
unconscious. Now the fact is that within many spiritual disciplines exists
the knowledge by which this unconscious can be made conscious, the
inner eye strengthened and intuitions can be produced more or less at
will. Even so, not all spiritual disciplines are the same, have the same
world view, or the same purposes. It becomes necessary then to say a few
words about this, in particular the differences between Buddhist and
117
concept, but our conscious awareness is only of the words which fall out,
as it were, like autumn leaves blown free of the living tree of our mind.
As with mathematics, so with music. Consider the poetic intuition out of
the imagination of the writer Kim Stanley Robinson in his novel: The
Memory of Whiteness:
"A music leads the mind through the starry night and the brain must
expand to contain the flight like a tree growing branches at the speed of
light."
Thinking cannot only focus on the single concept, it may also suspend
itself just before the act which produces the awareness of the concept.
Thinking can take up a question, but not proceed all the way to an
answer. We can live in the question, in a condition of heightened
anticipation. A great deal can be learned from appreciating the qualitative
difference of the "I"'s activities of "focus" and "question".
Up to now little has been said here of the Christian nature of such
practices. Consider then that the Christian contemplative's practice is to
think in a concentrated and focused way ever and ever again on the
Being of God. If Penrose has begun to suspect that mathematics is
derived from an experience of something that is "there already", are we
to be surprised when the contemplative finds God as an experience in his
consciousness (soul) and as a consequence (in part, we will have to avoid
complicating things with the problem of Grace) of the activity of his
thinking (spirit)? Prayer is another form of question, and by combining
question and focus, or prayer and contemplation, the contemplative
proceeds in an exact, disciplined and rigorous fashion.
The summa of my own investigations (which is not by any means to be
considered more than the work of a beginner) is the discipline of
sacrifice of thoughts. I have found it especially important to learn to give
up any tendency to fixed ideas. Always it is necessary to approach the
situation ignorant, to sacrifice all previous ideas. "Blessed are the poor in
spirit. " is the Beatitude. Only in a condition of humility, of not knowing,
can I come to the more subtle, more intimate inner experiences. One of
my favorite teachers calls sacrifice of thoughts: "...learning to think on
your knees...".
123
building inference upon inference. The fact that the majority of scientists
believe this to be the case is of no moment whatsoever. We don't vote
facts into existence, and at the very least the history of science itself
reveals, not an unbroken advance, but rather a series of "beliefs", a series
of substitutions of ideas often quite at odds with each other (c.f. T. Khun,
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions).
Is there any reason for inferring the opposite? Is there something which
suggests mind preceded matter? As a matter of fact there is. The
discipline of philology, the study of language as developed by the mind
(soul/spirit) of Owen Barfield reveals that what we call thinking was
experienced by certain ancient peoples as outside them. The whole way
they used language, their references to muses and to genii, shows that
they experienced thoughts as coming into them from the outside. (c.
Owen Barfield's Speaker's Meaning, also his Poetic Diction, History in
English Words, and Saving the Appearances: a Study in Idolatry).
Barfield's investigations, which represent deeply profound and scientific
studies of the history of meaning and the meaning of history, suggest
unequivocally that modern assumptions regarding the nature of
consciousness, both historical and prehistorical, must certainly be
rethought; and if that is done, the inferred idea of matter proceeding
mind in evolution will be replaced with its opposite, that mind is prior.
Moreover, this philological research shows that mind (soul/spirit) has
over the course of history (that is the period of man's evolution for which
we have records) only just finished a long period of contraction;
thinking, having first been outside the human entelechy, is now inside.
This is not the place in which to give a full recapitulation of the relevant
trains of thought (arguments) which Barfield makes, nor to go into the
supporting evidence that can be found in the field of art history (c.f. Art
and Human Consciousness, Gottfried Richter, Anthroposophic Press,
1985). Rather I wanted to point out the question and as well to point to
work which finds a satisfactory answer. Where is the "there" where one
finds ideas already? It is in the great field of Mind (Soul/Spirit) which
encompasses all of Nature (sense perceptible as well as supra-sensible),
to which our individuality, our "I", has access through its own disciplined
inner activity. Just as it is quite unreasonable to expect the imperfect to
conceive the perfect (the material brain to imagine the immaterial and
elegant truths of projective geometry), so it is non-reason to assume that
mind (soul/spirit) is not born out of its own likeness. Matter cannot have
127
In the hospital where I worked for over seven years, powerful drugs are
routinely administered to individuals, without sufficient consideration for
these individuals spiritual nature or needs. That their "depression" might
instead by caused by a life crisis with moral and self definitional
(spiritual meaning) dynamics, is not really considered. At the same time,
just down the hall, in the chemical dependency units, where the
alcoholics anonymous model is practiced, meetings frequently end with
the Lord's Prayer, and spiritual self transformation is considered an
absolute necessity in order to deal with the relevant problems.
What a picture this gives us of the deep inconsistencies that exist in our
culture!
We can do no better than to begin to end our considerations of this theme
with these remarks by a spirit (individual) in whom reason, imagination
and devotion were maintained in the soul in a remarkable balance. From
Emerson's essay Nature: "Nature is the incarnation of a thought, and
turns to a thought again, as ice becomes water and gas. The world is
mind precipitated, and the volatile essence is forever escaping again into
the state of free thought. "
Here, with remarkable intuitive powers, Emerson sees to the heart of
what we have been attempting to suggest. Contrary to the assumptions of
the scientific age, namely, that there is no correlation between human
thought and the world, the world itself is a product of Thought, and the
human being, in that he or she thinks, has directly before him, in the
experience of his own mind, the like, but rudimentary, capacity. We were
Thought into being, and we also can think.
In the preceding, I attempted to show how one could begin that
exploration which will validate, in a scientifically acceptable way, the
proposition that human consciousness and the act of thinking are not the
product of material happenings in a physical brain, but the products of
acts of soul and spirit. Whether critics of such an idea will be willing to
struggle with the difficult work of replication, I cannot say. At the same
time I will insist that, without such an effort, any argument to the
contrary need not be listened to or heeded.
129
For those who will wish to take this challenge seriously, I recommend
the following two books: The Philosophy of Freedom, Rudolf Steiner,
Anthroposophical Press; and Meditations on the Tarot: a journey into
Christian Hemeticism, author anonymous, Amity House.
*
132
Matthew 7: 3-5: Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what
judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged; and with what measure ye mete, it
shall be measured to you again. And why beholdest thou the mote that is
in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own
eye?Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of
thine eye; and, behold a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first
cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to
cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
The pragmatic psychological realities I have so far discovered in this
teaching are as follows:
When we meet, or interact, with another person there may arise, within
our own soul life, antipathies, feelings of disliking. Perhaps we will not
like how they look, their class, the nature of the ideas they present to us
or the values they express. Maybe they are of another race or culture, or
believe in abortion, or believe in choice, or have a selfish political
agenda, or a thousand other categories by which we may define them or
weigh their moral or spiritual qualities.
In each and every instance where we experience an antipathetic
judgment (or sympathetic for that matter), we do not perceive the
individual before us, but rather only that classification or label by which
we have identified them. This is so even though it is someone we know
well. In fact, those in our most intimate circles are more likely to be the
object of judgments we have made and continue to make, yet sleep
through. These last have become ingrained habits of thought, a (perhaps
too rigid) soul lens through which we view the world of our daily
relationships.
We also apply this judgment to ourselves. Just consider how much we do
not like about ourselves. It will even be possible to turn the material in
this essay into another reason for unwarrented self-judgment.
This judgment is the "beam in our own eye". By it we become then
blind, confusing our judgment for the "mote" in their eye, the character
fault we believe we have identified.
Should it actually be possible that we could help them, the existence of
our "beam" nevertheless disables us. We lack the objectivity (which is
133
previously tended to pull us, can now become an ever growing arena of
spiritual freedom.
One of the mysteries of our inner life that this work, the refining of the
judgment, uncovers, is that we are often captured - enslaved - by these
repeated thought-judgments. Once having made them, our continued
repetition of them, or habitual use of them, becomes then a point of view,
a kind of judgmental colored glass through which we view the world. To
refine the judgment in the manner being described in this essay, is to no
longer by possessed by it - to be inwardly, spiritually, free.
These pragmatic understandings have applications in other areas as well.
The reader, who works patiently with these soul-lawful realities, will
discover other possible uses for the skills developed.
We can in fact be glad of those personalities who irk us so, who bring out
of us these strong and unredeemed feelings. Their lives are a great gift to
us and we appear to have sought out these relationships just so they
could awaken us. Here is good cause for a prayer of thanks during the
review.
Sympathies represent a similar problem to antipathies. How often does
life teach the tragedy of those who fall so in love that the excessive
sympathies and its resulting (love is) blindness leads eventually to
confusion and terrible pain, when clarity finally returns.
To raise another up in excessive praise is also a "beam" of great
proportions. Whenever we do this, we are just as blind to an other's real
humanity as when we live in antipathies. Our judgment is not a source of
true understanding when it is derived from unconscious and unredeemed
feeling-perceptions.
In the case where we are turning this unredeemed judgment upon
ourselves, this can become another aspect of our search for spiritual
freedom. In our inner life, once we become awake there, the voice of the
conscience and the voice of the judgment are not the same. Conscience
"hurts" because it expresses the truth, and we "wince" inwardly in this
perception. The judgment dislikes, or excessively likes, but it is not
expressing the truth. Learning to distinguish between these - between
truth and dislike - can be very helpful.
135
While this does not begin to exhaust all that could be said about the
"beam" and the mote", nonetheless, let us take up another thread.
John 8:5-9: Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be
stoned; but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they
might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger
wrote on the ground as though he heard them not. So when they
continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them. He that is
without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. And again he
stooped down and wrote on the ground. And they which heard it, being
convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one...
We all know this story, but we don't "stone" people anymore; or do we ?
Obviously physical violence, retribution, against "criminals" continues.
We understand these issues, to a degree. Is there then some more subtle
meaning? This is what I have found to be true in practice.
When an unredeemed judgment is spoken, that is, when it passes from
the inner life into the social world, through speech, it becomes a "stone".
The flesh is not wounded by this stone, but the soul surely is. Our
ordinary language in its natural genius recognizes this, for don't we speak
of "hurt feelings"?
Yet our ordinary personal life is full of just these acts of "stone"
throwing. Tired and upset we throw them at our children and our
partners. Believing too much in our own righteousness we will throw
them at work, or at play.
The pragmatic teaching it this. Be silent. Remember, Jesus' response in
this story is first to say nothing: "But Jesus stooped down and with his
finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not". Examine our
own thoughts more rigorously than that of others. Not every thought
must be spoken. An ancient middle-eastern aphorism goes this way.
There are three gates to speech: Is it true? Is it necessary? Is it kind? Any
thought that cannot pass all three gates should not be spoken. And there
may be even other reasons for not speaking those thoughts which
otherwise could pass.
136
Further questions are these. What is the moral purpose for our speech?
Why have we said what we have said? What is the objective? Do we
speak to be self important? Or do we have the possible benefit for others
as our purpose? How do we know it will be a benefit, rather than an
interference in their freedom or a hurt? Do we believe we know the truth,
that our knowledge is superior to others? Hidden here are all the
judgments, the consequences of the "beam".
Are we so sure of ourselves, that all our thoughts are worthy of being
spoken? Silence is golden is the clich. In truth, outer silence is just the
beginning.
Matthew 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit; for theirs is the kingdom of
heaven.
If my mind is not quiet, empty, poor in spirit, what can enter there? Inner
silence has two valuable moral consequences.
The first benefit of inner silence is that it is essential to listening to
someone else speak. If we cannot quiet our own mind when we are
listening, if our whole concentration is instead on our anticipated
response or on what we think, then our attention is not focused at all on
the other person or what they are saying.
In some lectures published under the title: The Inner Aspect of the Social
Question, Rudolf Steiner suggests the practice of seeking to hear the
presence, of what he calls "the Christ Impulse", in the other's thinking.
This is very difficult. It is not just listening, but a feeling-imagining of
the heart felt purposes living in the speaker. What brings them to speak
so? What life path has brought them to this place? Even if they are
throwing "stones" at us, we must still "actively" listen; otherwise, there
will be no understanding of their humanity.
There is a wonderful experience possible here, when we have won past
our antipathetic judgment and actually have begun to hear what lives in
the other speaker. Each of us has learned in life some wisdom, and these
little jewels lie every where around us, often in the most improbable
places, the most unsuspected souls. These treasures are often hidden only
by the darkness we cast over the world through our unredeemed
thought-judgments.
137
The second benefit is this. Unless I am silent, and empty, that is poor in
spirit, how will it be possible for the Mystery to touch me?
John 3:8 The wind blows where it wills, and you hear the sound of it, but
you do not know whence it comes or whither it goes; so it is with every
one who is born of the Spirit
The Mystery goes where it wills. If we are not listening outwardly, we
well may miss it when it appears through others. An inflated sense of self
righteousness will certainly interfere. How much have we missed in life
because we did not listen to what was being offered? Even a piece of an
overheard passing conversation on a bus, which seems to jump into our
silent waiting, may have an import just for us. And inwardly? The
Mystery is silence itself, quiet, like an angel's beating wings. How much
has been offered to us just there as well, a barely audible whispering that
our own internal rambling dialogue has covered over in its insistent and
restless commentary.
"It thinks in me" spoke Rudolf Steiner. The Mystery has its own will. "It"
comes like a gentle wind, when "it" wills, and we prepare the way by
"learning to think on our knees", as Valentin Tomberg, another
passionate seeker I find very helpful, has advised. Two acts, only one our
own.
Matthew 11: 28-30: Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon, and learn of me; for
I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For
my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.
Two acts, only one our own. Something comes to meet us and does not
bring weight, but rather eases our burdens.
Pragmatic moral psychology is not meant to be heavy labor. We are
working together with the world of Mystery. We make an offering of
what lives within; we offer it up. In the Celebration of the Mass, the
Offertory precedes the Eucharist.
The soul makes the same rite of gesture, when the unconsciously created
judgment is perceived and then let go, after which the empathic
138
understanding is yearned for. When this has been done we are then met
by grace, by the work of others. Moreover, this grace is so quiet, so
silent, we may not be able to distinguish it from our own yearning
thinking.
Since the Mystery seeks no gratitude for its acts, we should not mind
when it has invisibly carried us to subtle heights, breadths and depths. To
expect this, is faith. However alone we may sometimes feel, we are, in
fact, never alone.
*
Let us review and synthesize, perhaps adding a few new thoughts.
We are born into a culture and a language, a family and a destiny. In our
youth we draw into ourselves a way of seeing the world, consistent with
those who raise us, and, without which we would have become incapable
of being a member of society.
Each of us has an inborn faculty of judgment which finds its center in the
feeling life, but which leaves its most conscious traces in the life of
thought. We do not want to eliminate this faculty, but it does need to be
refined if we are to evolve it into a capacity for perceiving the true, the
beautiful and the good. As the poet Goethe pointed out, particularly in
his scientific works, it is not the senses which deceive, but rather the
judgment.
The fundamental quality, latent in judgment and from which its evolution
may proceed, is our moral nature, our moral will. Let us consider this in
a more practical way.
What do I do with antipathies (or with excessive sympathies for that
matter)? Something enters my consciousness and my "reaction" is to not
like it. The first thing (borrowing a term from more recent popular
psychology) is to own it. It is my reaction, it arises in my soul, and it is
not (in any obvious way) in the object to which the reaction attaches.
There does seem to be something, a seed perhaps, that does exist in the
judgment and that does belong to the object of the judgment, but this
seed only comes to flower through processes like those outlined below.
139
We adorn the world, and the individuals which inhabit it, with
self-created significance. The difference is that this new
meaning-significance is neither arbitrary or capricious. The world means
what we choose it to mean. In this act, however, it makes a great deal of
difference whenever we have invited the cooperation of the invisible
world.
With regard to this problem of meaning - the creation of new meaning there is much more yet to say, as this is one of the principle ways for
crafting the resurrection of a new civilization from the decay and debris
of the old and dying culture.
Unto the reader then, I place these gifts of twenty-five years of practice,
with all their flaws, for whatever service they may give.
141