going over my notes for Friday's Theo meeting, I want to quote and comment on something that
E.P. said:
"It takes "Art" to create a language that's common." E.P. then attempted to "create" a common
language for us to use, and
then posed a question which we were to discuss in this "Common Language".
E.P.'s attempt was partly successful, but it FAILED to go beyond the common intellectual/emotional/aesthetic experience of most people. This
was due to the inherent limitation of trying to create a common language - it has breadth, but little depth.
E.P's approach is fine if we limit our discussion to the personal (like W's preference for the
primacy of "feelings") or to the aesthetic (Q's music, for example), but when we try to go
beyond these things, the language fails.
The question is: Do all languages FAIL, or are some languages capable of taking one FURTHER
than the merely aesthetic or personal intellect/emotion?
Of course ULTIMATELY, all language does fail, because the ultimate experience is beyond
words. Yet is there an intermediate step, between the merely personal on the one end, and the Transpersonal on the other?
It is my hypothesis that such languages do exist. The problem with a group like E.P.'s is that
few know these "languages", and even if they did,
they are unable to translate it into a "form that will allow everyone to participate at a deep (non-superficial) level.
This is one of the major reasons that I am disinclined to frequently attend general discussion
type groups. When I do attend, I use the situation as a receptive meditation. I use the meeting
as an opportunity to APPLY my language and teachings (as a means of verifying it and
understanding it) without trying to explain it to others.
My goal is to use ONE Language to go as far as I can go. The more I can understand this One
Language and use it to Awaken, the easier I will be able to translate for others when necessary.
The goal for me cannot be to create a "common" language. The Goal
is to understand and use the One Sacred Language in order to awaken, so that I may be of service to the ONE.
So given my hypothesis that it is necessary to understand and apply a sacred language, what
requirements would this "Sacred" language need
to meet?
To me, it seems that one requirement would be that this language be an accurate (as possible)
representation of the way things truly ARE, both here on the physical plane, and also on the
higher planes of existence. In other words, this language would have to be "accurate on all
planes" - physical/mental/emotional/psychic/spiritual . If the language was not
accurate on all planes then there would be no way to verify or put the language to use in any sort of practical
way for the purpose of awakening to those higher planes.
This is KEY, because the only way out of just picking another "belief system" is that there has to
be a way of VERIFYING it in one's own experience. Otherwise one is just left with "blind faith".
So if the language is accurate of the way things truly are across all planes of existence, and if it is Verifiable in one's own experience, then
this language provides a LADDER that helps the aspirant expand their awareness and make those changes necessary in order to awaken,
achieve union with the inner teacher, and be of service to the ALL.
To do this, changes must be made to the aspirant's physical environment, their physical body,
their mental body, their emotional body, so that their spiritual body can express itself in an unhindered way.
So K, we don't need a common language. What we need is a Common Spiritual Language
(CSL).
In order to do this, it would be necessary for people to study this CSL in depth and apply it so
that the language could become part of their habitual thinking.
So, are you feeling up to trying to create a Common Spiritual Language (CSL) so that we can all interact on a deeper level?
Here's my specification for such a CSL:
1) Accurate across all planes (except perhaps on the ultimate plane of God -the ring-pass-not, the
ain-suph-aur)
2) Verifiable in one's own experience.
3) Complete (doesn't leave anything important out)
4) Can be comprehended (with some effort).
Of course the catch-22 comes in when one tries to verify that a candidate CSL actually is one.
The actual process is one of:
a) selecting a CSL which claims to meet all the criteria, then
b) verifying it for oneself to see if it actually does work.
I know that in our past conversations you have expressed a certain degree of criticism for any
"Ladder" or purported CSLs. This may be due in
part to one interpretation of the Course-In-Miracles' non-dualistic viewpoint towards the Divine Paradox.
And so I am curious what your comments are concerning the practical matter of how one gets
from one side of the Divine Paradox to the other side. OR is there anything to do? Perhaps
we're already there in reality? Even if we are, there still remains the practical matter of
awakening to the realization that we already are, is there not?
So no matter which side of the Divine Paradox we would "like" to
identify with, there still remains the fact that while there is a part of us that
IS, there is also a part of us that is NOT, and it is the part that IS NOT, that we have to work with.
To deny the part of us that IS NOT is to remain in presumptuous denial.
It is the part of us that seemingly IS NOT (one with the ALL) , that needs language, and that
needs to make the journey in order to awaken from the dream of separation.
your comments?
jc
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 96 09:49:41 EST
Jm,
Fascinating commentary on language as a representational system.
You wrote:
". . . individuals can be made to suffer intense pain when the
world appears different than expected, as can be the case when individuals
"play" with their reflections."
What is a "reflection", and how does an individual "play"
with it? Are you talking about a person taking a different point of view when
interpreting the world around him/her, or are you referring to something more
drastic? Since you refer to "intense pain", I'm assuming you mean some
sort of drastic paradigm shift that causes much confusion and misunderstanding.
You wrote: "My point here is that these maps (the Tarot being one
and an unusually self-referential one at that) are maps of culture, they are not
describing nature."
It is my understanding that the Tarot is a map of "Consciousness",
both UNIVERSAL and personal. Your statement leaves the impression that the tarot
is merely an arbitrary construct of language having meaning only for a specific
cultural group. If this is your assertion, then I have to disagree with you.
In the Beginning was the WORD. God created the universe with language. Where
is this language today? It is written on the face of NATURE. It is my
understanding that the tarot was invented using universal symbolism (Symbolism
is NOT arbitrary, while signs are arbitrary), to help us become aware of the
true face of nature (Cosmic LAW), and to assimilate its lessons to ourselves and
thus accelerate our evolution.
Other cultures of course have their own ways of doing this, since the face of
Nature is there for all to see, and they've developed methods that are
appropriate to their temperament, and level of development. Now, if a particular
culture choose a system of SIGNS to represent their observations of the face of
nature, then you could make a case for calling their system
"self-referential" and "not describing nature", since their
language would be arbitrary, particular to themselves, and not universal.
However, if a culture choose to employ Symbolism (which by definition IS
Universal) then the culture's methods would be innately understandable by the
subconscious mind of anyone who meditated on it. The use of symbolism is what
makes the Tarot universal.
The reason such a thing as "Universal Symbolism" can exist is that
"In the Beginning was the Word". God created the universe with
language. Therefore, true language is not some arbitrary system of signs, but
instead it is the principles by which the universe operates (Cosmic Law). What
symbolism does is to give the true language "clothes" by which we can
understand and assimilate it to ourselves. The style of clothing may change from
culture to culture, and from era to era, but the basic garments remain the same.
This topic also bears a relationship to that age old question:
"Do we create our own reality?"
I recall reading somewhere that the meaning we give to events has a great
suggestive influence on us. We subjectively experience the world in
accordance with our own inner world view. Yet since we are also living in
an objective world, happiness or misery is in direct correlation to how well our
private world-view conforms to this objective reality.
JC
Jm,
So many big words! Let me see if I can understand what you're saying and put
it into "Pictures". My simple mind needs pictures to understand.
Hypothesis: (paraphrasing your words) "Time is a construct that is
created/initiated when we defer animal need for human desire."
From Tarot Key 0 (The Fool) Time (like space) is a form of limitation taken
on when we incarnate. It is the belt/girdle that the Fool wears. The Fool
carries a white rose signifying purified desire. When we incarnate we move from
K0 to K1. The Magician (Key 1) focuses on the things he desires, and thus the
white rose is turned to Red. He channels the super-conscious power with the wand
in his right hand. This wand signifies the ability to control the libido. Thus
the Magician focuses by controlling the libido and focusing on that which is
"desired". Concentration is a result of our ability to LIMIT our
consciousness.
Ok, so deferring animal need (controlling the libido) is necessary in order
to focus the life-power into the field of attention, and this concentration is a
form of limitation. Time also is a form of limitation. So by exercising the
Self-Conscious power (what you called " our ability to fabricate a
difference (between nature and us) in our imagination") we create a
space-time arena within which we can experience the pairs of opposites and begin
to develop discrimination (Key 6).
Later You state:
"We sacrifice our direct sensuous animal participation in nature to
participate in a nonsensuous similarity created by language. Language is our
environment and the location where we do our "work". We are so good at
mimicking nature linguistically, that we are sometimes deceived and confused by
our constructions."
I agree. We create "names" for our experiences. We "name"
that which we experience. If these names are accurate, we prosper. If
inaccurate, we suffer.
Tarot Key 4 (The Emperor) is the Constituting Intelligence: The namer of our
experience.
In addition, the Tarot key that I associate with language, words, speech,
thought, is Tarot Key 7 (The Chariot). The Charioteer is the Reconciler of
Paradox who is able to handle the pairs of opposites through the instrument of
the personality, and thus brings opposing forces to rest, establishing equilibrium.
As a fence defines and establishes boundaries, a word endows and idea with
specific concrete meaning. The function of speech (both audible speech and inner
thoughts) are attributed to the Chariot. Our habits of speech reveal the degree
of WILL development.
ACCURACY in the use of words, care in selecting them, so that they express
true meanings, choice of positive, strong, courageous words -- these are among
the most important requirements for the unfoldment of Will-Power.
So to summarize your hypothesis and fill in some gaps:
1. Experience in the Space-Time arena begins when we voluntarily take on
limitation (be it through incarnation or concentration).
2. What makes us different from the rest of Nature is our Self-Conscious
ability to Limit ourselves.
3. In order to aid in the Great Work (and thus aid nature, since "Nature
unaided fails") we must use our ability to Limit our consciousness and use
our imagination to develop the awareness and control thus allowing the
Will-Power to flow freely through our personalities and leading to true and
accurate use of language. (How we "use" our imagination is shown in
K13, which is the "Imaginative Intelligence". We use our imagination
to create and then dissolve forms/relationships ,from which we reap wisdom and
understanding and develop discrimination).
Thus the basic ideas behind your hypothesis are the ideas of Keys 0-7 and the
process of spiritual unfoldment.
0: Superconsciousness - Perfect Freedom
1: Self-Consciousness - Concentration - Voluntary Limitation
2: Sub-Consciousness
3: Imagination
4: Reason
5: Intuition
6: Discrimination
7: Will - The One Will flowing through the vehicle of personality.
I hope that I've been successful in accurately translating your hypothesis
into the Picture Language of the Tarot.
