Home » Articles posted by Randolph Harris II International Institute (Page 164)
Author Archives: Randolph Harris II International Institute
In the Great Boarding-House of Nature, the Cakes and the Butter and the Syrup Seldom Come Out so Even and Leave the Plates so Clean!
Well, what human souls see of this is a fragment. I saw the whole. I roamed extensively and fearlessly and regardless of Time, or out of it, though Time always continues to pass, of course, and I went where I chose. There were many, many mansions, to use the Scriptural words. Souls believing in like faiths had come together in desperation and sought to reinforce each other’s beliefs and still each other’s fears. However, the light of Earth was too dim to warm anyone here! And the Light of Heaven simply did not penetrate at all. The first thing I did was listen: I listened to the song of any soul who would sing to me, that is, speak, in my language; I caught up any coherent declaration or question or supposition that struck my ears. What did these souls know? What had become of them? Good beings would have us to believe failure to act in the right way, a failure to do the good one should have done is a sin. If this were sin, a less aggressive and less ugly terms, such as human weakness, could be applied. However, that is just what sin is not. And those of us who have experienced demonic powers within and around ourselves find such a description ludicrous. So we turn to Paul, and perhaps to Anne Rice’s Lestat to the conversation between God, the Memnoch Jesus and Lestat in Memnoch the Devil. #RandolphHarris 1 of 16
From the legends and myths, we learn what sin is. And perhaps we may learn in through Picasso’s picture of that small Basque village, Guernica, which was destroyed in an unimaginably horrible way by the demonic powers of tyranny and oppression. And perhaps we learn it through the disrupting sounds in music that does not bring us restful emotions, but the feeling of being torn and split. Perhaps we learn the meaning of sin from the images of evil and guilt that fill our theatres, or through the revelations of unconscious motives so abundant in our novels. It is noteworthy that today, in order to know the meaning of sin, we have to look outside our churches and their average preaching to the artists and writers and ask them. However, perhaps there is still another place where we can learn what sin is, and that is our own heart. Paul seldom speaks of sins, but he often spears of Sin—Sin in the singular with a capital “S,” Sin as a power that controls World and mind, persons and nations. Have you ever thought of Sin in this image? It is the Biblical image. However, how many Christians or non-Christians have seen it? Most of us remember that at home, in school and at church, we were taught that there were many things that one would like to do that one should not. And if one did them, one committed a sin. #RandolphHarris 2 of 16
We had lists of prohibitions and catalogues of commands; if we did not follow the, we committed sins. Naturally, we did commit one or more sins every day, although we tried to diminish their number seriously and with good will. This was, and perhaps still is, our image of sin—a poor, petty, distorted image, and the reason for the disrepute into which the word has fallen. The first step to an understanding of the Christian message that is called “good news” is to dispel the image of sin that implies a catalogue of sins. Those who are bound to this image are also those who find it most difficult to receive the message of acceptance of the unacceptable, the good news of Christianity. Their half-sinfulness and half-righteousness makes them insensitive to a message that states the presence of total sinfulness and total righteousness in the same being at the same moment. They never find the courage to make a total judgement against themselves, and therefore, they can never find the courage to believe in a total acceptance of themselves. Those, however, who have experienced in their hearts that sin is more than the trespassing of a list of rues know that all sins are manifestations of Sin, of the power of estrangement and inner conflict. Sin dwells in us, it controls us, and makes us do what we do not want to do. #RandolphHarris 3 of 16
Sin produces a split in us that makes us lose identity with ourselves. Paul writes of this split twice: “If I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me.” Those who have suffered this split know how unexpected and terrifying it can be. Thoughts entered our mind, words poured from our mouth, something was enacted by us suddenly and without warning. And if we look at what happened, we feel—“It could not have been I who acted like this. I cannot find myself in it. Something came upon me, something I hardly noticed. However, there it was and here am I. It is I who did it, but a strange I. It is not my real, my innermost self. It is as though I were possessed by a power scarcely knew. However, now I know that it not only can reach me, but that it dwells in me.” Is this something we really know? Or do we, after a moment of shock, repress such knowledge? Do we still rely on our comparatively well ordered life, avoiding situations of moral danger, determined by the rules of family, school and society? For those who are satisfied with such a life, the words of Paul are written in vain. They refuse to face their human predicament. However, something further may happen to them: God Himself may throw them into more sin in order to make them aware of what they really are. This is a bold way of speaking, but it is the way people of the profoundest religious experiences have spoken. #RandolphHarris 4 of 16
By God throwing them into more sin, they have felt the awakening hand of God. And awakened, they have seen themselves in the mirror from which they had always turned away. No longer able to hide from themselves, they have asked the question, from the depth of their self-rejection, to which the Christian message is the answer—the power of acceptance that can overcome the despair of self-rejection. In this sense, more sin can be the divine way of making us aware of ourselves. Then maybe people will feel love, maybe they will see love, feel the Love of Men and Women and for one another and for their Children, and understand the willingness to sacrifice for one another, and to grieve for those who are dead, and to seek for their souls in the hereafter, and to think of our Lord, of a hereafter where they might be reconciled with those souls again. It is out of this love and the family, it is out of this rare and unprecedented bloom—so Creative of our Lord, that is seems in His Image of his Creations—that the souls of these beings remain alive after death! What else in Nature can do this? All gives back to the Earth what it has taken. God’s Wisdom is Manifested throughout; and all those that suffer and die beneath the canopy of God’s Heavens are mercifully bathed in brutal ignorance of the scheme which ultimately involved their own deaths. #RandolphHarris 5 of 16
Then, we ask with Paul—what is it within us that makes a dwelling place for this power? He answers that is it our members in which sin hides. He also calls this place “flesh,” and sometimes he speaks of “our body of death.” However, there are also forces within us that resist the power—our innermost self, our mind, our spirit. With these words, Paul wrestles with the deep mystery of human nature just as we do today. And it is no easier to understand him than our present scholarly language about beings. However, one this is certain: Paul, and with him, the whole Bible, never made our body responsible for our estrangement from God, from our World and from our own self. Body, flesh, members—these are not the only sinful parts of us, while the innermost self, mind and spirit, comprises the other, sinless part. Our whole being, every cell of our body, and every movement of our mind is both flesh and spirit, subjected to the power of sin and resisting its power. The fact that we accuse ourselves shows that we cannot acknowledge our estrangement from out true nature. The fact that we are ashamed shows that we still know what we ought to be. And in their hearts, loving one another as they do, mate with mate, and family with family, they have imagined Heaven. #RandolphHarris 6 of 16
Beings have imagined it; the time of the reunion of souls when their kind will be restored to them and to each other, and all will sing in bliss! They have imagined eternity because their love demands it. They have conceived of these ideas as they conceive of fleshly children! There is no part of beings that is bad in itself, as there is no part o beings that is good in itself. Any Christian teaching that has forgotten this has fallen short of the height of Christian insight. And here all Christian churches must share the grave guilt of destroying human beings by casting them into despair over their own guilt where there should be no guilt. In pulpits, schools and families, Christians have called the natural strivings of the living, growing and self-propagating body sinful. They concentrate in an inordinate and purely pagan way on the pleases of the flesh differentiation of all life and its possible distortions. Certainly, these distortions are as real as the distortions of our spiritual life—as, for example, pride and indifference. However, to see the power of sin in the power of the pleasures of the flesh of life as such is itself a distortion. Such preaching completely misses the image of sin as Paul depicts it. What is worse, it produces distorted feelings of guilt in countless personalities, that drive them from doubt to anxiety, from anxiety to despair, from despair to escape into mental disease, and thence the desire to destroy themselves altogether. #RandolphHarris 7 of 16
And still other consequences of this preaching about sin become apparent. Paul points to the perversions of desires for pleasures of the flesh as an extreme expression of sin’s control of humankind. Have we as Christians ever asked ourselves whether or not, in our defamation of the natural as sin, or at least as a reason for shame, we have perhaps contributed most potently to this state of affairs? For all this results from that petty image of sin, that contradicts reality as much as it contradicts the Biblical understanding of a being’s predicament. It is dangerous to preach about sin, because it may induce us to brood over our sinfulness. Perhaps one should not preach about it at all. I myself have hesitated for many years. However, sometimes it must be risked in order to remove the distortions which increase sin, if, by the persistence of wrong thoughts, wrong ways of living are inevitable. I believer it possible to conquer the dangers implied in the concentration of sin, if we look at it indirectly, in the light of that which enables us to resist it—reunion overcoming estrangement. Sin is our act of turning away from participation in the divine Ground from which we come and to which we go. Sin is the turning towards ourselves, and making ourselves the center of our World and of ourselves. Sin is the drive in everyone, even those who exercise the most self-restraint, to draw as much as possible of the World into oneself #RandolphHarris 8 of 16
However, if we have found a certain level of life above ourselves, we can be fully aware that we should not try to draw too much of the World into ourselves. After one has lost oneself, whoever has found oneself knows how deep one’s loss of self was. If we look at our estrangement from the point of reunion, we are no longer in danger of brooding over our estrangement. We can speak of Sin, because its power over us is broken. It is certainly not broken by ourselves. The attempt to break the power of sin by the power of good will has been described by Paul as the attempt to fulfill the law, the law in our mind, in our innermost self that is the law of God. The result of this attempt is failure, guilt and despair. The law, with its commands and prohibitions, despite its function in revealing and restricting evil, provokes resistance against itself. In a language both poetic and profoundly psychological, Paul says that the sin that dwells in our members is asleep until the moment in which it is awakened by the “thou shalt not.” Sin uses the commandments in order to become alive. Prohibition awakens sleeping desire. It arouses the power and consciousness of sin, but cannot break its power. Only if we accept with our whole being the message that it is broken, is it also broke in us. #RandolphHarris 9 of 16
This picture of sin is a picture full of ugliness, suffering and shame, and at the same time, drama and passion. It is the picture of us as the battleground of powers greater than we. It does not divide beings into categories of black and white, or good and evil. It does not appear as the threatening finger of an authority urging us—do not sin! However, it is the vision of something infinitely important, that happens on this small planet in, our bodies and minds. It raises humankind to a level in the Universe where decisive things happen in every moment, decisive for the ultimate meaning of all existence. In each of us such decisions occur, in us, and through us. This is our burden. This is our despair. This is our greatness. Moral questions immediately present themselves as questions whose solution cannot wait for sensible proof. A moral question is a question not what sensibly exists, but of what is good, or would be good if it did not exist. Science can tell us what exists; but to compare with worths, both of what exists and of what does not exist, we must consult not science, but our heart. Science herself consults her heart when she lays it down that the infinite ascertainment of fact and correction of false belief are the supreme goods for beings. Challenge the statement, and science can only repeat it oracularly, or else prove it by showing that such ascertainment and correction brings beings all sorts of other goods which a being’s heart in turn declares. #RandolphHarris 10 of 16
The question of having moral beliefs at all or not having them is decided by our will. Are our moral preferences true or false, or are they only odd biological phenomena, making things good or bad for us, but in themselves indifferent? How can your pure intellect decide? If your heart does not want a World of moral reality, your head will assuredly never makes you believe in one. Mephistophelian skepticism, indeed, will satisfy the head’s play-instincts much better than any rigorous idealism can. Some beings (even at the student age) are so naturally cool-hearted that the moralistic hypothesis never has for them any pungent life, and in their supercilious presence the hot young moralist always feels strangely ill at ease. The appearance of knowingness is on their side, of naivete and gullibility on one’s. Yet, in the inarticulate heart of one, one clings to it that one is not a dupe, and that there is a realm in which all their with and intellectual superiority is no better than the cunning of a fox. Moral skepticism can no more be refuted or proved by logic than intellectual skepticism can. When we stick to it that there is truth (be it of either kind), we do so with our whole nature, and resolve to stand or fall by the results. The sceptic with one’s whole nature adopts the doubting attitude; but which of us is the wiser, Omniscience only knows. #RandolphHarris 11 of 16
Turn now from these wide questions of good to a certain class of questions of fact, questions concerning personal relations, states of mind between one being and another. Do you like me or not?—for example. Whether you do or not depends, in countless instances, on whether I meet you half-way, am willing to assume that you must like me, and show you trust and expectation. The previous faith on my part in your liking’s existence is in such cases previous what makes your liking come. However, if I stand aloof, and refuse to budge an inch until I have objective evidence, until you shall have done something apt, as the absolutist say, ad extorquendum assensum meum, ten to one your liking never comes. How many women’s hearts are vanquished by the mere sanguine insistence of some being that they must love one! one will not consent to the hypothesis that they cannot. The desire for a certain kind of truth here beings about that special truth’s existence; and so it is in innumerable cases of other sorts. Who gains promotions, boons, appointments, but the being in whose life they are seen to play the part of live hypotheses, who discounts them, sacrifices other things for their sake before they have come, and takes risks for them in advance? One’s faith acts on the powers above one as a claim, and creates its own verification. #RandolphHarris 12 of 16
A social organism of any sort whatever, large or small, is what it is because each member proceeds to one’s own duty with a trust that the other members will simultaneously do theirs. Wherever a desired result is achieved by the co-operation of many independent persons, its existence as a fact is pure consequence of the precursive faith in one another of those immediately concerned. A government, an army, a commercial system, a ship, a college, an athletic team, all exist on this condition, without which not only is nothing achieved, but nothing is even attempted. A whole train of passengers (individual brave enough) will be looted by a few highwaymen, simply because the latter can count on one another, while each passenger fears that if one makes a movement of resistance, one will be shot before any one else backs one up. If we believed that the whole car-full would rise at once with us, we should each severally rise, and train-robbing would never even be attempted. There are, then, cases where a fact cannot come at all unless a preliminary faith exists in its coming. And where faith in a fact can help create the fact, that would be an insane logic which should say that faith running ahead of scientific evidence is the lowest kind of immorality into which a thinking being can fall. Yet such is the logic by which our scientific absolutists pretend to regulate our lives! #RandolphHarris 13 of 16
Social betterment is a good thing but it is not a substitute for self-betterment. Love of one’s neighbour is an excellent virtue but it cannot displace the best of all virtues, love of the divine soul. The being who is discontented with the World as one finds it and sets out to improve it, must begin with oneself. There is authority for this statement in the life-giving ideas of Jesus as well as in the light-giving Plato. One has enough to do with the discovery and correction of one’s own deficiencies or weaknesses, not to meddle in criticism of other people’s. One can best use one’s critical faculties by turning them on oneself rather than on others. Progress in self-evolvement on the Quest must be due to the individual’s own efforts. It can be encouraged or fostered only in proportion to the same individual’s wishes and needs. Other people, who are not interested in an inner search, are, at present, fulfilling their own karmic need for a particular variety of experience; it is neither advisable nor feasible to urge them to follow this path. It is a worthwhile cause, this, and does not require us to interfere with others, to propagandize them or to reform them. Rather does it as us to do these things to ourselves. #RandolphHarris 14 of 16
Few know where really to look for the truth. Most go for it to other beings, to books, or to churches. However, the few who know the proper direction turn around and look in that place where the truth is not only a living dynamic thing but is their own. And this is deep, deep within themselves. It is logical to assert if every individual in a group is made better, the group of which one is a part will be made better. And what is human society but such a group? The best way to help it is to start with the individual who is under one’s actual control—oneself—and better one. Do that, and it will then be possible to apply oneself to the task of bettering the other members of society, not only more easily but with less failure. The Holy Land, flowing with milk and honey, is within us but the wilderness that we have to cross before reaching it, is within us too. The great sources of wisdom and truth, of virtue and serenity, are still within ourselves as they have ever been. Mysticism is simply the art of turning inwards in order to find them. Will, thought, and feeling are withdrawn from their habitual extroverted activities and directed inwards in this subtle search. One understands then what it means to do nothing of oneself, for one feels clearly that the higher power is doing though one whatever has to be done, is doing it rightly, while one oneself is merely watching what is happening. #RandolphHarris 15 of 16
The experience of enlightenment brings a tremendous feeling of well-being. It is in one’s attitude toward oneself particularly that we see the immense advance one has made beyond ordinary beings. Just as the Illumined State does not prevent one from receiving physical impressions from the World around one, so it does not prevent one from receiving psychic impressions from the people around one. However, one does not cling to any of these impressions, nor does one let one’s emotions get entwined with them. For one there is no split between the spiritual and secular, nothing done that is not done in holy meditation. The serenity of one’s life is a hidden one. It does not depend on fortune’s halting course. The feeling nature of one who attains enlightenment opens itself to purely impersonal reactions. It is a state of tranquil feeling, not of emotional feeling. Both opposites find their place in existence for the unenlightened, the masses, the narrow-horizoned. The tension between them contributes toward development, the conciliation of extremes broadens views. With enlightenment comes equilibrium, harmony, balance, the larger outlook, piercing insight. “And behold, the people did rejoice and glorify God, and the whole face of the land was filled with rejoicing,” reports Helaman 11.18. #RandolphHarris 16 of 16

The Eternal River Breeze is Cooling Me and Soothing Me and Making Me Feel that the Earth itself is Filled with Irrepressible Beauty!
Your Master knew these things. He knew. But he was of a pagan time, obdurate and angry, and fusing ever the grace of God. In you, he saw God’s grace, because your soul is pure. You are young and tender and open like the moonflower to take the light of night. You hate of now, but you will come to see the dance today is degenerated survival of an ancient group language, a language which was meant to be a medium of solidarity, of self-expression and release. In our times it is an empty form at best, when it does not serve other ulterior ends. One feels little doubt that the regular patron of the dance hall is bored. Large numbers admit without hesitation that they are bored, but say that as nothing else in the way of amusement is to be found easily, they come to the dance hall. The taxi dance hall represents a logical and therefore not unexpected stage in the history of the dance. Here commercialization is complete and the beginnings of production are apparent. The very forms of dance practiced in the taxi dance halls appears that the form of dance is rhythmic, overtly seductive, and an expressive pastime for thousands of solitary men and a spurious source of income for hundreds of woman, many of whom get cash tips for this work. “I know I may come off quiet, I may come off shy, but I feel like talking, feel like dancing when I see this guy. What’s practical is logical, what the heck, who care? All I know is I’m so happy when you’re dancing there,” (Lyrics from I’m a Slave 4 U by Britney Spears). #RandolphHarris 1 of 20
It is significant to note that the more regular patron is seldom a member of a gang. The institution serves chiefly the distraught, the individualized and the egocentric. There is a little conversation. The patron may sit for hours beside others of his gender while conversing with them. The women, likewise, when not dancing stand for long periods beside each other while talking. At best these recreations are harmless play-forms of the parlor game type or they are ceremonious, socialite show in both of which the dance is merely an optional activity of individuals and not a communal ritual of all those present. Furthermore, on these occasions, the competitive features of social life dominate over the cooperative communal ones: physical attractiveness, wealthy and rank, achievements of many kinds and so on are assessed, compared and approval or rejection registered often through the very media of dance etiquette. The history of the choral dance shows a continuous decline which runs parallel with the long-drawn-out process of desocialization. The choral dance is not merely a symptom of group integration but also a uniquely ancient sustainer of biosocial group life. The decline of the choral dance is a cause and an indication of social development. The choral dance, communal dances, demand a compact social order: they require an association in the dance which is something more than the current execution of a series of figures and moments. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20
The breaking up of rural communities by the Industrial Revolution and the rise of individualism stopped the choral dances and surrendered the floor, or the village green, to Shmoney Dance, Wobble, Twerkin’, Harlem Shake, and many others. Some are saying the suppression of the Choral dance has given birth to a new culture to go along with the new music. Critics are saying this is a manifestation of the declining culture, but that is heavily laden with value judgments. On the other had we should stress that the perpetuation and further growth of desocializing culture involves the inevitability of its own eventual destruction. Desocialization is decay which affects the entire social-cultural life of human communities; this decay has been speed up during the last few centuries and contemporary culture is pregnant with catastrophe. The thesis here expounded comprises a claim that this process of desocialization is simultaneous with the process of cultural development; in other words, it seems to be suggested that whilst there is culture there will always be frustrations imposed on being’s biosocial needs. Hence it should be reaffirmed that this prognosis was suggested only if the cultures of chance and of misrepresentation continue. It is necessary to state that culture is not incompatible with a biosocially balanced life provided it comprises an awareness of biological sociality and the institutions through which this awareness can be expressed. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20
Taking the whole era of cultures as a phase of human’s phylogenetic history we may say, in the light of the foregoing, that desocialization is, in the first place, a phylogenetic process. We selected the choral dance for the purpose of illustrating this phylogenetic development. Naturally, the choral dance was by no means the only medium of biosocial contact in pre-cultural human society. Yet it was chosen because it is the only known non-economic social form which, having existed preculturally, continues throughout the historically charted centuries. Even if its evidence is not decisive, it is at least the most suggestive indicator of phylogenetic changes in the realm of the social. Recent developments in affective and physiological neuroscience research are beginning to reveal observable interconnections between the body and the functioning of the mind. The brain is the organ that orchestrates our interactions with the World around us. It is responsible for taking in massive amounts of simultaneous sensory information, sorting out and interpreting what we are experiencing based on past associations, and then coordinating our response. This dynamic interchange between body and brain is ongoing, even in stillness, and the functioning of the mind is communicated and experienced through the body. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20
Dance/movement therapy actively engages the brain through the body with interventions that impact both physical and psychological functioning. Dance/movement therapy is at the frontier of current trends in psychotherapy, which is just beginning to grasp the significance of the body’s role in the perceptual process. Dance/movement therapy interventions that emphasize proprioception and encourage internal focus on body and sensory awareness may have beneficial effects on the neurophysiological regulation systems. Body awareness approaches initiate a down-regulation of the nervous system, engaging the vagus nerve (the vagus nerve is one of the cranial nerves that connect the brain to the body). Body awareness activities help to create a subjectively beneficial experience in the body, helping the patient to feel relaxed, held, and safe. These interventions provide a foundation for patients to gauge their own experiences and manage their levels of arousal through self-regulation of their own bodies. Over time, through tracking emotion evoked in the moment, the patient/mover can learn to sense feelings and feel safe in the process using integrative body-based approaches. This provides an essential foundation for developing an increased capacity to tolerate more complex emotional states. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20
Philosophic discipline relates at every point to the act for living. For once insight has been unfolded, as in body awareness, the philosopher is continuously aware of the oneness of the stuff of the World existence—which includes one’s own existence, too. How does the illuminate react to one’s own karma? After knowledge of the self has been awakened, one who has this higher consciousness permanently will see and experience the outer World like other beings, but one will understand the relation between what one sees and the Real World which is behind it. In the same way, anyone can understand the relation between one’s body and its shadows; but whereas unenlightened beings see the shadow alone, the enlightened one sees both. As beings grow in true understanding, one moves from mere existence to authentic essence. When the wall between one’s little ego and the infinite Being collapses, one is said to have joined one’s soul with God. This disclosure that the whole Universe exists in the mind comes with Reality’s revelation. This is the spiritual climax of one’s life, this dramatic moment when consciousness comes to recognize and understand itself. One will be conscious that inwardly one has been born utterly and unmistakably anew, that not only has the old self passed away but also the belief in the existence and reality of self has passed with it. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20
What does it give to the dignity of being? It provides a rare link with the Absolute, an answer to What am I? and a touch of the Untouch. It is the gift of an inner security, the blessing of a peace which comes to stay. The Overself will overshadow one. It will take possession of one’s body. There will be a mystical union of its mind with one’s body. The ego will become entirely subordinate to it. Whoever attains this inner liberation rarely finds it reflected in the outer World of human societies. Only by going to the lonely places of nature, to forests and fields, deserted shores and unbuilt-on hills can one match the freedom felt. If one ventures into an ashram—however reputed—the sense of entering a cage is produces. It could be that this is partly caused by the mental pressures of its authorities or inmates, by the smug if unexpressed exclusiveness. If one enters a church, one is at ease only if one is the only worshipper; otherwise sectarian pressure comes to awareness. From the time that this great shift of consciousness has taken place, the event itself as well as its tremendous effects ought to be wrapped in secrecy and revealed only under authentic higher guidance. If one has become enlightened, a discerning eye may note the fact by one’s body and one’s actions, by one’s silences and one’s utterances. However, an ignorant eye may note nothing at all. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20
The effects of enlightenment include: an imperturbably detachment from outer possessions, rank, honours, and persons; and overwhelming certainty about truth; a carefree, Heavenly peace above all disturbances and vicissitudes; an acceptance of the general rightness of the universal situation, with each entity and each event playing its role; and impeccable sincerity which says what it means, means what it says. One cannot dwell in that magical state without transforming one’s experience in the World so that in some way or other it serves God’s purpose, thus turning even outer defeats to inner victory. I know history, I read it as others read their Bibles, and I will not be satisfied until I have unearthed all stories that are written and knowable, and cracked the codes of all cultures that have left me any tantalizing evidence that I might pry loose from Earth or stone or papyrus or clay. Christ is a personality, a human, a presence that I felt I knew. And He was the Lord God Father Almighty and He was the maker of the Universe and the whole World. And He was the Saviour or the Redeemer for sins inscribed on my soul before I was born. He was the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, and he was the Theologian expounding from the Holy Mount. Christ was also my brother, and the symbol of all brothers. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20
Christ is the Lord, and that is why His core is simply love. Many fail to grasp the complexity of what Christ is. People who call themselves Christians—parents, teachers, preachers—tell us that we should be “good” and obey the will of God. For many of them the will of God is not very different from the will of those socially correct people whose conventions they ask us to accept. If we only willed such goodness, they say, we could achieve it, and would be rewarded in time and eternity—but first of all, in time. One can thank God that such preaching has become more and more suspect, for it does not strike at the real human situation. How can any institution, whether it be the family or the government or the church, be better character than the persons who comprise it, and certainly those who rule or lead it? To expect a Spiritual Master to repeat oneself in the institution, organization, or order which gathers around one, is to expect what history tells us never happens. Shelley, Michelangelo, and Phidias did not found organization to produce further Shelleys, Michelangelos, and Phidias. New persons must arise to express their own inspirations. Why then found strangling institutions at all, why gather followers together into exclusive sects, why create still more monasteries and lamaseries, why make leader worship a substitute for Spirit-and-truth worship? #RandolphHarris 9 of 20
Attachment to the group surrounding a master sheds a kind of prestige on them, and gives each one a borrowed light or strength, which may be real or false. No association of spiritually minded persons can as such rise higher than the Personality who has inspired it, and in whose superior power and knowledge it has rested its roots. An institution is the lengthened shadow of one being. Europe and America, for instance, are dotted with groups working along routes of mental and semi-spiritual development, but in every such group you will find that it draws its real life from it Founder or from its Head. The point in development reached by the Head marks the limitation to which one can bring one’s followers, and one can take them no further. In earlier centuries, the illumined being left one’s spiritual legacy in the hearts and minds of those who had felt one’s power, or been guided by one’s light, or known one’s peace. The institutions and organziations were usually the creation of disciples who lived later. However, today there may be a legacy of printed books, recorded tapes, televised film. The foundation of every effort to better human life is not an organized movement but the being who inspires it. The eyes of many serious people in our time have been opened to an awareness of their predicament as beings. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20
If in the end we have to walk this Earth on our own feet, why not begin to do so now? When we could cultivate our strength, why continue to cultivate our weakness? Where there is no attempt at self-improvement there is inevitable deterioration. Nature does not let us stand still. We have to be careful not to be driven by some power to act against our good will. For who amongst us is not full of good will? However, perhaps is we come to know ourselves better, we may begin to suspect that some of this good will is not so good after all, and that we are driven by forces of which we might not even be aware of. It is not necessary to described those who embody good will and work towards just the opposite on a level hidden beneath their goodness. Psychologist and others have done this so fully that it needs no repetition. Despite what critics have to say of our time, one of the great things to have come out of it is the difficulty of anyone’s being able to hide permanently from oneself and from others the motives for one’s actions. Whatever we may think about the methods employed to reach this insight, the insight itself is infinitely precious. It has also become difficult for a being who works with dedication and success at one’s business or profession to feel assured about the goodness of what one is doing. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20
One cannot from oneself that one’s commitment to one’s work may also be a way of escaping genuine human commitments and, above all, a way of escaping oneself. And it has become difficult for a mother who loves her children passionately to be sure that she feels only love for them. She can no longer conceal from herself that her anxiety concerning their well-being may be an expression of her will to dominate them or a form of guilt for a heavily veiled hostility that desires to get rid of them. And we cannot applaud every act of moral self-restraint, knowing that it cause may be cowardice preventing a revolution against inherited, though already questioned, rules of behavior. Nor can we praise every act of daring non-conformism, knowing that its reason may be the inability of an individual to resist the persuasive irresponsibility of a group of nonconformists. In these and countless other cases, we experience a power that dwells in us and directs our will against itself. The name of this power is sin. Nothing is more precarious today than the mention of this word among Christians, as well as among non-Christians, for in everyone there is a tremendous resistance to it. It is a word that has fallen into disrepute. To some of us it sounds almost ridiculous and is apt to provoke laughter rather than serious consideration. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20
To others, who take the word sin more seriously, it implies an attack on their human dignity. And again, to others—those who have suffered from it—it means the threatening countenance of the disciplinarian, who forbids them to do what they would like and demands of them what they hate. Therefore, even Christian teachers, including myself shy away from the use of the word sin. We know how many distorted images it can produce. We try to avoid it, or to substitute another word for it. However, it has a strange quality. It always returns. We cannot escape it. It is as insistent as it is ugly. And so it would be more honest—and this I say to myself—to face sin and ask what it really is. The application of these ideals is hard, but let no one deceive oneself into thinking that their nonapplication is much easier. Those who live without such life-purposes are subject to troubles that could have been avoided and to afflictions of their own making. It is easy to drift, as so many others do, through a life of self-indulgence. It is hard to try continually to practice a life of self-control. Yet the deferred penalties of the first course are painful, the consequent rewards of the second course are satisfying. The gaining of such flashes has been accidental. It should stimulate us to know that is we want to make it deliberate, there is a detailed technique, ready at hand for the purposes. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20
Intellectuals who know how and why these flashes come have formulated the technique for the benefit of those who want to elevate themselves. From the first day that one began to tread this path, one automatically assumed the responsibility of growth. Henceforth there had to be continuity of effort, an ever-extending line of self-improvement. The prize will not be sent to you. You win it. No one except the being oneself can develop the needed qualities and practise them. Similar operations can be perceived at the level of societies. Societies that stress protectionism and moral strictness, for example, can be correlated with a pervasive dread of life. The subtler problems of overspecialization, social malaise, and complacency are also relevant there. Conversely, societies that indulge in national and cultural chauvinism or, to a lesser extent, myriad forms of hero worship can be associated with a global revulsion for death. At the same time that we fear separation and attachment, however, we also desire them to some degree. By the same token, most of us seek a modicum of dependency, safety, and order in our lives. The question becomes one of negotiating between these desires and fears. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20
We must find some kind of balance within which to live. In our quest for vital experience, we must honor both our capacity for greatness and our (cosmic) eagerness. It is important to be here and now, and allow the actual conditions of life to flow. Address your (separation/attachment) concerns more focally, and mobilize your resources for growth. If one wishes to enter the portal of philosophy one will most likely begin with others, with what philosophers have thought and taught; but in the end one must make a second beginning—with one’s self. One will have to have to reexamine one’s own psyche, one’s own personality, but from a detached position, standing far to one side. One will have to decide each hour of each day how to apply the truth, gathered from books and teachers, to the events, duties, occasion, and thoughts of that day. Effort at self-improvement and self-development, consciously and deliberately made, is an indispensable requirement. All talk of dispensing with it because one has surrendered to a master is self-deceiving. All avoideance of its is self-disappointing in the end. One cannot shift the burden of responsibility from off one’s shoulders so easily as that. It remains inalienably one’s own by virtue of one’s membership in the human race. One must begin to cease living at second hand, to help one’s self, to try one’s own powers, or one will never grow. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20
Only as a matter of fact do we find our passional nature influencing us in our opinions, but there are some options between opinions in which this influence must be regarded both as an inevitable and as a lawful determinant of our choice. I fear here that some of you my hearers will begin to scent danger, and lend an inhospitable ear. Two first steps of passion you have indeed had to admit as necessary,–we must think so as to avoid dupery, and we must think so as to gain truth; but the surest path to those ideal consummations, you will probably consider, is from now onwards to take no further passional step. Well, of course, I agree as far as the fact will allow. Wherever the option between losing truth and gaining it is not momentous, we can throw the chance of gaining truth away, and at any rate save ourselves from any chance of believing falsehood, by not making up our minds at all till objective evidence has come. In scientific questions, this is almost always the case; and even in human affairs in general, the need of acting is seldom so urgent that a false belief to act on is better than no belief at all. The responsibility for one’s spiritual development is possessed squarely upon one’s own shoulders. In trying to evade it, either by getting a master to carry it or by making a Short Path leap into enlightenment, one indulges in an illusion. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20
Law courts, indeed, have to decide on the best evidence attainable for the moment, because a judge’s duty is to make law as well as to ascertain it, and (as a learned judge once said to me) few cases are worth spending much time over: the great thing is to have them decided on any acceptable principle, and got out of the way. The truth cannot be had by muttering a mantram ad infinitum although that may yield a curious kind of transient relief from thoughts which case one another. Nor may it be had by paying one week’s income to a guru. If a being is determined to succeed in this enterprise and optimistically believes that one will succeed, one’s efforts will increase and be strengthened, chances will be taken from which one would otherwise shrink; and even if one falls short of one’s hopes, the going is likely to be farther. This is the surest way to disable oneself, this burdening of one’s mind with the fear of failure and the thoughts of one’s failings. The greatest error of a being is to think that one is weak by nature. One can and must conquer. This is the ideal, but to translate it into the actual, to asset it in the midst and against the opposition of a grossly materialistic environment, calls for firmness and determination. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20
Let one not be satisfied with the amount of true knowledge one has got, nor with the quality of personal character which one has developed. Let one press forward to the more and better. In our dealings with objective nature we obviously are recorders, not makers, of the truth; and decisions for the mere sake of deciding promptly and getting on to the next business would be wholly out of place. Throughout the breadth of physical nature facts are what they are quite independently of us, and seldom is there any such hurry about them that the risks of being duped by believing a premature theory need be faced. The questions here are always trivial options, the hypotheses are hardly living (at any rate not living for us spectators), the choice between believing truth or falsehood is seldom forced. The attitude of sceptical balance is therefore the absolutely wise one if we would escape mistakes. What difference, indeed, does it makes to most of us whether we have or have not a theory of the Rontgen rays, whether we believe or not in mind stuff, or have a conviction about the causality of conscious states? In makes no difference. Such options are not forced on us. On every account it is better not to make them, but still keep weighing reasons pro et contra with an indifferent hand. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20
I speak, of course, here of the purely judging mind. For purposes of discovery such indifference is to be less highly recommended, and science would be far less advance than she is if the passionate desires of individuals to get their own faiths confirmed had been kept out of the same. See for example the sagacity which Spencer and Weismann now display. On the other hand, if you want an absolute duffer in an investigation, you must, after all, take the being who has no interest whatever in its results: one is the warranted incapable, the absolute fool. The most useful investigator, because the most sensitive observer, is always one whose eager interest in one side of the question is balanced by an equally keen nervousness lest one become deceived. Science has organized this nervousness into a regular technique, her so-called method of verification; and she has fallen so deeply in love with the method that one may even say she has ceased to care for truth by itself at all. It is only truth as technically verified that interests her. The truth of truths might come in merely affirmative form, and she would decline to touch it. Such truth as that would be stolen in defiance of her duty to humankind. Human passions, however, are stronger than technical rules. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20
Le coeur a ses raisons que la raison ne connait pas; and however indifferent to all but the bare rules of the game the umpire, the abstract intellect, may be, the concrete players who furnish one the materials to judge of are usually, each one of them, in love with some pet live hypothesis of one’s own. Let us agree, however, that wherever there is no forced option, the dispassionately judicial intellect with no pet hypothesis, saving us, as it does, from dupery at any rate, ought to be our ideal. Yet, are there not somewhere forced options in our speculative questions, and can we (as beings who may be interested at least as much in absolutely gaining truth as in merely escaping dupery) always wait with impunity till the coercive evidence shall have arrived? It seems a priori improbable that the truth should be so nicely adjusted to our needs and powers as that. In the great boarding-house of nature, the cakes and the butter and the syrup seldom come out so even and leave the plates so clean. Indeed, if they did, we should view them with scientific suspicion. “These are they that are redeemed of the Lord; yea, these are they that are taken out, that are delivered from that endless night of darkness; and thus they stand or fall; for behold, they are their own judges, whether to do good or evil,” reports Alma 4.7. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20
Cresleigh Homes
Live in the highly-acclaimed school district of #Rocklin! The kiddos will have a ball. 🏈️⚽️⚾️ Take advantage of the last fully furnished home available over at #RocklinTrails! 👉🏡
.
#CresleighHomes
https://cresleigh.com/new-homes-in-rocklin-california-rocklin-trails/
This was a Wholly New Concept and Yet I Realized that I Had Been Flinging Accusation at God All Along
Oh, how innocent he sounded, how it came from his heart, ancient and childlike, a heart so preternaturally strong that it had taken hundreds of years to render it safe to beat in the company of mortal hearts. In order to evaluate the role played in neuroses by the various attempts at protection against the basic anxiety it is necessary to realize their potential intensity. They are prompted not by a wish to satisfy a desire for pleasures or happiness, but by a need for reassurance. This does not mean, however, that they are in any way less powerful or less imperative than instinctual drives. Experience shows us that the impact of a striving for ambition, for instance, may be equally as strong as or even stronger than an impulse for pleasures of the flesh. Any one of the four devices which include securing affection, submissiveness, power, or withdrawal, pursued exclusively or predominantly, can be effective in bringing the reassurance wanted, if the life situation allows its pursuit without incurring conflicts—even though such a one-sided pursuit is usually paid for with an impoverishment of the personality as a whole. For example, a woman following the path of submissiveness may find a great deal of secondary satisfaction in a culture which requires from a woman obedience to family or husband and compliance with the traditional forms. #RandolphHarris 1 of 19
If it is a monarch who develops a restless striving for power and possession, the result again may be reassurance and a successful life. As a matter of fact, however, a straightforward pursuit of one goal will often fail to fulfill its purpose because the demands set up are so excessive or so inconsiderate that they involve conflicts with the surroundings. More frequently reassurance from a great underlying anxiety is sought not in one way only, but in several ways which, moreover, are incompatible with one another. Thus the neurotic persona many at the same time be driven imperatively toward dominating everyone and wanting to be loved by everyone, toward complying with others and imposing one’s will on them, toward detachment from people and a craving for their affection. It is these utterly unsoluble conflicts which are most often the dynamic center of neuroses. The two attempts which most frequently clash are the striving for affection and the striving for power. Yet, the clash between individual desires and social requirements does not necessarily bring about neuroses, but may just as well lead to factual restrictions in life, that is, to the simple suppression ore repression of desires or, in most general terms, to factual suffering. A neurosis is brought about only if this conflict generates anxiety and if the attempts to allay anxiety lead in turn to defensive tendencies which, although equally imperative, are nevertheless incompatible with one another. #RandolphHarris 2 of 19
Our drift toward violence and nuclear war is not only due to biological factors beyond our control. Rather, if one opens one’s eyes, it is clear that these unfortunate circumstances are also caused by social, political, and economic circumstances of our own making. Human aggressiveness is an instinct fed by an ever-flowing fountain of energy, and not necessarily the result of a reaction to outer stimuli. That energy is specific for an instinctive act and accumulates continuously in the neural centers related to that behavior pattern, and if enough energy has been accumulated an explosion is likely to occur even without the presence of a stimulus. However, the animal and humans beings usually find stimuli which release the dammed-up energy of the drive; they do not have to wait passively until the proper stimulus appears. They search for, and even produce stimuli. This is called appetitive behavior. Humans say they create political parties being the cause of aggression. However, in cases where no outside stimulus can be found or produced, the energy of the dammed-up aggressive drive is so great that it will explode, as it were, and be acted out in vacuo, i.e., without demonstrable external stimulation, the vacuum activity performed without an object—exhibits truly photographic similarity to normal performance of the motor actions involved. This demonstrates that the motor coordination patterns of the instinctive behavior pattern are hereditarily determined down to the finest detail. #RandolphHarris 3 of 19
Therefore, aggression is primarily not a reaction to outside stimuli, but a built-in inner excitation that seeks for release and will find expression regardless of how adequate the outer stimulus: It is the spontaneity of the instinct that makes it so dangerous. It is a hydraulic model, in analogy to the pressure exercised by dammed-up water or steam in a closed container. This hydraulic concept of aggression is, as it were, one pillar which refers to the mechanism through which aggression is produced. The other pillar is the idea that aggression is in the service of life, that it serves the survival of the individual and of the species. Broadly speaking, intraspecific aggression (aggression among members of the same species) has the function of furthering the survival of the species. Aggression fulfills this function by the spacing out of individuals of one species over the available habitat; by selection of the better being, relevant in conjunction with the defense of the female, and by establishing a social rank order. Aggression can have this preservative function all the more effectively because in the process of evolution deadly aggression has been transformed into behavior consisting of symbolic and ritual threats which fulfil the same function without harming the species. The instinct that served the animal’s survival has become grotesquely exaggerated and has gone wild in humans. Aggression has been transformed into a threat rather than a help to survival. #RandolphHarris 4 of 19
Above all, it is more than probably that the destructive intensity of the aggressive drive, still a hereditary evil of humankind, is the consequence of a process of intra-specific selection which worked on our forefathers for roughly forty thousand years, that is, throughout the Early Stone Age. When humans had reached a stage of having weapons, clothing, and social organization, so overcoming the dangers of starving, freezing, and being eaten by wild animals, and these dangers ceased to be the essential factors influencing selection, an evil intra-specific selection must have set in. The factor influencing selection was now the wars waged between hostile neighboring tribes. These must have evolved in an extreme form of all those so-called warrior virtues which unfortunately many people still regard as desirable ideals. This picture of the constant war among the savage hunters-food-gatherers since the full emergence of modern beings around 40,000 or 50,000 B.C. is a widely accepted idea. The assumption of forty thousand years of organized warfare is basically saying that war is the natural state of humans, and is presented as an argument to prove the innateness of human aggressiveness. The logic is that humans are aggressive because their ancestors were aggressive. However, this opens a question about genetic reasoning. If a certain trait is to have a selective advantage this must be based on the increased production of fertile offspring of the carriers of that trait. #RandolphHarris 5 of 19
However, in view of the likelihood of a higher loss of the aggressive individuals in wars, it is doubtful whether selection could account for the maintenance of a high incidence of this trait. In fact, if one considers such a loss as negative selection, the gene frequency should diminish. Actually, the population density in that age was extremely low, and for many of the human tribes after the full emergence of Homo sapiens there was little need to compete and to fight each other for food or space. Humans are among the thousands of species of animals that fights their own species. However, on the other hand, they are among the thousand of species that fight, the only one in which fighting is disruptive. Humans are the only species that is a mass murderer, the only misfit in one’s own society. Why should this be so? By a number of complicated and often questionable constructions, defensive aggression is supposed to be transformed in humans into a spontaneously flowing and self-increasing drive that seeks to create circumstances which facilitate the expression of aggression, or that even explodes when no stimuli can be found or created. Hence even in a society that is organized from a socioeconomic viewpoint in such a way that major aggression could find no proper stimuli, the very demand of the aggressive instinct would force its members to change it or, if they would not, aggression would explode even without any stimulus. Love itself is a product of the aggressive instinct. #RandolphHarris 6 of 19
The failure to express aggression in action is unhealthy. Repression of sexuality can lead to mental illness. Present day civilized beings suffer from insufficient discharges of their aggressive drive. Aggressive-destructive energy is continuously produced, and very difficult, if not impossible in the long run, to control. The so-called evil in animals becomes a real evil in humans, even though its roots are not evil. The ego hates, abhors and pursues with intent to destroy all objects which are the source of pain. Aggression is primarily against one’s self—I am the one who ultimately dies—and it must be turned against others and external objects to avoid this self-destruction. The death instinct is a metaphor which is by no means the whole truth, but it is an important part of the truth that cannot be neglected. Depression is often the return of the repressed, namely the indirect expression of unconfronted aggressive tendencies. Aggression is always the result of frustration, and wherever there is frustration there will be aggression. The theoretical flaw, however, is that it tacitly assumes that all aggression is negative, and implies that when we some day construct a society without frustration in it, there will be no aggression. However, most important of all, the theory fails to take seriously the cruel realities of life, such as impoverished communities or oppression, abuse, and corruption. How can aggression in the prisons, where men and women are fighting for their loves as human beings, be encompassed in the term frustration? #RandolphHarris 7 of 19
It is possible that aggression is will to power in human life. People, like Napoleon, the democratic party, and the fake news media, develop a compensatory striving for power. Civilization itself arises out of a being’s need to increase one’s power vis-à-vis nature. They are striving for superiority. Humans create symbols and bases their culture upon them; the flag and patriotism are examples, as are status, religion, and language. The capacity to create and deal with symbols, actually a superb achievement, also accounts for the fact that we are the cruelest species on the planet. We skill not out of necessity but out of allegiance to such symbols as the flag and fatherland; we kill on principle. Thus our aggression occurs on a different level from that of animals, and not much can be learned from animals about this distinctively human form of aggression. Therefore, to say that people are behaving like animals insults animals for most animals seems to be well behaved. As ritual is an organization for life, it has to be carried out according to a particular theory of prosperity—that is, how exactly to get nature to give more life to the tribe. The most striking thing to us about the primitive theory of prosperity is how elemental it was—or organic, as we would say today. Primitive beings observed nature and tried to discern in it what made the dance of life—where the power came from, how things became fecund. #RandolphHarris 8 of 19
If you are going to generate life, you have to determine its principles and imitate the things that embody them. Organisms respond naturally to the Sun, which gives heat and light, and find their richness in the Earth, which produces food out of noting—or rather out of its mysterious bowels. The Australian aborigines have an expression about the Sun’s rays having intercourse with the Earth. Very early humans seems to have isolated the principles of fecundity and fertilization and tried to promote them by impersonating them. And so beings identified with sky or the Heavens, and the Earth, and divided themselves into Heavenly people and Earthly ones. In cosmic rites the whole World is involved, but in two parts, Sky and Earth, because all prosperity is conceived to be due to the orderly interaction of the Sky and Earth. They sky alone cannot create, nor the Earth alone bring forth. Therefore in the ritual that regulates the World there must be two principles and they must be male and female, for the interplay of the Earth and Sky is analogous to the intercourse of the genders. The World was divided not only into Sky and Earth but also into right and left, light and darkness, power and weakness—and even life and death. The point is that reality in the round has to be represented in order for it to be controlled. The primitive knew that death was an important part of creation, and so one embodied death in order to control it. #RandolphHarris 9 of 19
There are two ways of looking at our duty in the matter of opinion,–ways entirely different, and yet ways about whose difference the theory of knowledge seems hitherto to have shown very little concern. We must know the truth; and we must avoid error,–these are our first and great commandments as would-be knowers; but they are not two ways of stating an identical commandment, they are two separable laws. Although it may indeed happen that when we believe the truth A, we escape as an incidental consequence from believing the falsehood B, it hardly ever happens that by merely disbelieving B we necessarily believe A. We may in escaping B fall into believing other falsehoods, C or D, just as bad as B; or we may escape B by not believing anything at all, not even A. Believe truth! Shun error!—these, we see, are two materially different laws; and by choosing between them we may end by coloring differently out whole intellectual life. We may regard the chase for truth as paramount, and the avoidance of error as secondary; or we may, on the other hand, treat the avoidance of error as more imperative, and let truth take its chance. It may be best to believe nothing, keep your mind in suspense forever, rather than by closing it on insufficient evidence incur the awful risk of believing lies. You, on the other hand, may think that the risk of being in error is a very small matter when compared with the blessing of real knowledge, and be ready to be duped many times in your investigation rather than to postpone indefinitely the chance of guessing true. #RandolphHarris 10 of 19
Some find it impossible to doubt everything. We must remember that these feelings of our duty about either truth or error are in any case only expressions of our passional life. Biologically considered, our minds are as ready to grind out falsehood as veracity, and one who says, “Better go without belief forever than believer a lie!” merely shows one’s own preponderant private horror of becoming a dupe. One may be critical of many of one’s desires and fears, but this fear one slavishly obeys. One cannot imagine any one questioning its binding force. For my own part, I have also a horror of being duped; but I can believe that worse things than being duped may happen to a being in this World. Some believe fantastically they rather doubt everything. It is like a general informing his or her soldiers that it is better to keep out of battle forever than to risk a single wound. Not so are victories either over enemies or over nature gained. Our errors are surely not such awfully solemn things. In a World where we are so certain to incur them in spite of all our caution, a certain lightness of hearty seems healthier than this excessive nervousness on their behalf. At any rate, it seems the fittest thing for the empiricist philosopher. Unwise people think that in the World of essence there should be no bloom of flowers and no fall of leaves. The Master here shows that in the mind of the enlightened being the external World appears as for the ordinary being and remains a mere mentation for the mentalist. #RandolphHarris 11 of 19
The permanence which ordinary normal people seem to find in merely living does not exist for one. One finds only transience. This affects both the bright and dark sides of existence, the good fortune and ill fortune. All is unstable and subject to change. The enlightened being has the same kind of body and the same five sense as unenlightened beings have. One’s experience of the World must be the same, too. However—and this is a vast difference—one experiences it along with the Overself. For incarnate beings the cosmic dream is always going on. This is also the case for the sage. However, one has the knowledge of what is happening and the power to intromit it one step further back. We are all in this dream which is itself the product of, and hidden within, a greater dream. Is God, the Dreamer, then asleep? This is the mystery: that one is both awake and asleep at the same time. How can being’s tiny mind understand such a thing? Of course not. Let one be still and seek not to carry one’s profane curiosity into the Holy of Holies. In the end it shall be as if one were never existent, but this cannot be the same as death. For the dream—of which one is a part—goes back into the Dreamer, into the Living God. If the illuminate detaches oneself from the World because of its immediate transiency, one re-attaches oneself to it again because of its ultimate unity with one’s own innermost being. #RandolphHarris 12 of 19
One lives in the knowledge of the World-Idea—not in its fullness of detail but in its general outline—which is fulfilling itself in the whole Universe and wit which one tries to co-operate according to one’s knowledge. This it is which supports one’s inner being, counters one’s everyday experience of human weakness and evil, and transfigures one when leaving the hour of communion to resume that experience. “For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me,” reports Romans 7.19-20. Do these words of Paul correctly describe our nature? Is the split between willing the good and achieving it as radical as they would indicate? Or do we resist the indictment by insisting that we often do good that we want and avoid the evil that we do not want? Is not Paul perhaps grossly exaggerating the evil in beings in order to emphasize the brightness of grace by depicting it against a very dark background? These are questions that every critic of Christianity asks. However, are they not also the questions that we ask—we, who call ourselves Christians, or at least who desire to be what the Christian message will us to be? Actually, none of us believes that one always does the evil one would like not to do. #RandolphHarris 13 of 19
We know that we sometimes do achieve the good that we want—when, for example, we perform an act of love towards a person with whom we do not sympathize, or an act of self-discipline for the sake of our work, or an act of courageous non-conformity in a situation where it may endanger us. Our moral balance sheet is not as bad as it would be without these acts! And have we ever really known a preacher of what is called the total depravity of beings who did not show, in one’s own behavior, reliance on a positive moral balance sheet? Perhaps even Paul did. At least, one tries to tell us so when one boasts about one’s sufferings and activities in a letter to the Corinthians. Certainly, one calls one’s boasting foolishness. However, do we not also insist that our boasting is foolish? Yet we do not stop boasting. Are not perhaps those who believe, in the surface, that they have noting to boast about, being sick, disintegrated, and without self-esteem? They may even be proud of the depth of despair in which they visualize themselves. For without a vestige of self-esteem no one can live, not even one who bases one’s self-esteem on despairing of oneself. However, why then do we not simply dismiss Paul’s words? Why do we react positively to his statement that “I do not do the good that I want?” It is because we feel that it is not a matter of balance sheets between good and evil that the words express, but rather a matter of our whole being, or our situation as beings, of our standing in the face of the eternal—the source, aim and judge of our being. #RandolphHarris 14 of 19
It is our human predicament that a power takes hold of us, that does not comes from us but is in us, a power that we hate and at the same time gladly accept. We are fascinated by it; we play with it; we obey it. However, we know that it will destroy us if we are not grasped by another power that will resist and control it. We are fascinated by what can destroy us, and in moments even feel a hidden desire to be destroyed by it. This is how Paul saw himself, and how a great many of us see ourselves. The belief that a fully illumined master or religious prophet can be succeeded generation after generation by a chain of equally illuminated leaders following the same tradition, is delusive. One cannot bequeath the fullness of one’s attainment to anyone, one can only give others an impetus toward it. One one’s self is irreplaceable. If churches and ashrams would only admit that they are led by faulty fallible people, liable to weaknesses and error, they would render better spiritual service than by continuing to maintain the partial imposture that they are not so led. If there were such public acknowledgement that their authority and inspiration were very limited, religious and mystical institutions would be more preoccupied with helping others than with themselves. #RandolphHarris 15 of 19
Something else that occurred in the breakthrough of this insight is that everything around me became suddenly vivid. I can remember that on the particular street down which I walked that houses were painted an ugly shade or orange that I would normally prefer to forget immediately. However, by virtue of the vividness of this experience, the colors all around were sharpened and were imbedded in my experience, and that ugly orange still exists in my memory. The moment the insight broke through, there was a special translucence that enveloped the World, and my vision was given a special clarity. I am convinced that this is the usual accompaniment of the breakthrough of unconscious experience into consciousness. Here is again part of the reason the experience scares us so much: the World, both inwardly and outwardly, takes on an intensity that may be momentarily overwhelming. This is one aspect of what is called ecstasy—the uniting of unconscious experience wit consciousness, a union that is not in abstracto, but a dynamic, immediate fusion. I want to emphasize that I did not get my insight as though I were dreaming, with the World and myself opaque and cloudy. It is a popular misconception tat perception is dull when one is experiencing this state of insight. I believe that perception is actually sharper. #RandolphHarris 16 of 19
True, one aspect of it resembles a dream in that self and World may become kaleidoscopic; but another aspect of the experience is a sharpened perception, a vividness, a translucence of relationship to the things around us. The World becomes vivid and unforgettable. Thus the breakthrough our material from unconscious dimensions involves a heightening of sensory experience. We could, indeed, define the whole experience that we are talking about as a state of heightened consciousness. Unconsciousness is the depth dimension of consciousness, and when it surges up into consciousness in this kind of polar struggle the result is an intensification of consciousness. It heightens not only the capacity to think, but also the sensory processes; and it certainly intensifies memory. There is another thing we observe when such insights occur—that is, the insight never comes hit or miss, but in accordance with a pattern of which one essential element is our own commitment. The breakthrough does not come by just taking it easy, by letting the unconscious do it. The insight, rather, is born from unconscious levels exactly in the areas in which we are most intensively consciously committed. The insight came to me on that problem to which, up till the moment I put my books and papers away in the little office that I occupied, I had devoted my best and most energetic conscious of thought. #RandolphHarris 17 of 19
The idea, the new form which suddenly becomes present, came in order to complete an incomplete Gestalt with which I was struggling in conscious awareness. One can quite accurately speak of this incomplete Gestalt, this unfinished pattern, this unformed form, as constituting the call that was answered by the unconscious. Another characteristic of this experience is that the insight comes at a moment of transition between work and relaxation. It comes at a break in periods of voluntary effort. My breakthrough came when I had put away my books and was walking toward the subway, my mind far away from the problem. It is as though intense application to the problem—thinking about it, struggling with it—starts and keeps the work process going; but some part of the pattern that is different from what I am trying to work out is struggling to be born. Hence the tensions that ins involved in creative activity. If we are too rigid, strict, or bound to previous conclusions, we will, of course, never let this new element come into our consciousness; we will never let ourselves be aware of the knowledge that exists on another level within us. However, the insight often cannot be born until the conscious tensions, the conscious application, is relaxed. Hence the well-known phenomenon that the unconscious breakthrough requires the alternation of intense, conscious work and relaxation, with the unconscious insight often occurring, as in my case, at the moment of the shift. #RandolphHarris 18 of 19
Albert Einstein once asked a friend of mine in Princeton, “Why is it I get my best ideas on the morning while I am shaving?” My friend answered, as I have been trying to say here, that often the mind needs the relaxation of inner controls—needs to be freed in reverie or day dreaming—for the unaccustomed ideas to emerge. Human consciousness is driven by two basic concerns—fear of life and fear of death. The fear of life is concerned about separating (from others), venturing forth or standing out on one’s own. Put another way, it is fear of becoming free. The fear of death, on the other hand, is a concern about attaching (to others), retreating back to the womb, or returning to a state of matter. It is a fear, in other words, of becoming limited. These fears can be the cause of a variety of psychological dysfunctions. Depression and dependency, for example, can be traced to a dire fear of life (separation anxiety); narcissism and mania can be linked to a pronounced fear of death (attachment anxiety). The greater one’s life or death fear, moreover, the greater one’s tendency to swing in the opposite direction. “Nevertheless, Alma labored much in the spirit, wrestling with God in mighty prayer, that he would pour out his Spirit upon the people who were in the city; that be would also grant that he might baptize them unto repentance,” reports Alma 8.10. #RandolphHarris 19 of 19
One Possesses a Largeness of Heart at All Times, an Immense Tolerance Towards the Frailty of Faulty Men and Women
I mean you no harm. I came from Heaven. I came to learn about you and to love you. And I wish you only all good things under God! The gateway is open to Heaven for all those who gain Understanding and Acceptance of the Harmony of Creation and the Goodness of God while on Earth. Though let me assure you such aged and wounded individuals still have souls, which will at some point cease to be dependent upon their crippled brains. I live, to be sure, by the practical faith that we must go on experiencing and thinking over our experience, for only thus can our opinions grow more true; but to hold any one of them—I absolutely do not care which—as if it never could be reinterpretabled or corrigible, I believe to be a tremendously mistaken attitude, and I think that the whole history of philosophy will bear me out. There is but one indefectibly certain truth, and that is the truth that pyrrhonistic skepticism itself leaves standing,–the truth that the present phenomenon of consciousness exists. That, however, is the bare starting-point of knowledge, the mere admission of a stuff to be philosophized about. No concrete test of what is really true has ever been agreed upon. Some make the criterion external to the moment of perception, putting it either in revelation, the consensus gentium, the instincts of the heart, or systematized experience of the race. #RandolphHarris 1 of 18
The World is rational through and through,–its existence is an ultimate brute fact; there is a personal God,–a personal God is inconceivable; there is an extra-mental physical World immediately known,–the mind can only know its own ideas; a moral imperative exists,–obligation is only the resultant desires; a permanent spiritual principle is in every one,–there are only shifting states of mind; there is an endless chain of causes,–there is an absolute first cause; and eternal necessity,–a freedom; a purpose,–no purpose; a primal One,–a primal Many; a universal continuity,–and essential discontinuity in things; an infinity,–no infinity. There is this,–there is that; there is indeed nothing which some one has not thought absolutely true, while one’s neighbor deemed it absolutely false; and not an absolutist among them seems ever to have considered that the trouble may all the time be essential, and that the intellect, even with truth directly in its grasp, may have no infallible signal for knowing whether it be truth or no. When, indeed, one remembers that the most striking practical application to life of the doctrine of objective certitude has been the conscientious labors of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, one feels less tempted than ever to lend the doctrine a respectful ear. #RandolphHarris 2 of 18
However, please observe, now, that when as empiricists we give up the doctrine of objective certitude, we do not thereby give up the quest or hope of truth itself. We still pin our faith on its existence, and still believe that we gain an ever better position towards it by systematically continuing to roll up experiences and think. Our great difference from the scholastic lies in the way we face. The strength of one’s system is possessed in the principles, the origin, the terminus a quo of one’s thought; for us the strength is in the outcome, the upshot, the terminus ad quem. Not where it comes from but what it leads to is to decide. It matter not to an empiricist from what quarter an hypothesis may come to one: one may have acquired it by fair means or by foul; passions may have whispered or accident suggested it; but if the total drift of thinking continues to confirm it, that is what one means by its being true. Primitive life was basically a rich and playful dramatization of life; primitive beings acted out one’s significance as a living creature and as a lord over other creatures. It seems to me like genius, this remarkable intuition of what beings need and want; and primitive beings not only had this uncanny intuition but actually acted on it, set up one’s social life to give oneself what one needed and wanted. #RandolphHarris 3 of 18
We may know what we lack in modern life, and we brood on it, but twist and sweat as we may we can never seem to bring it off. Perhaps things were simpler and more manageable in prehistoric times and had not gotten out of hand, and so being could act on what one knew. Primitive beings set up society as a stage, surrounded oneself with actors to play different roles, invented gods to address the performance to, and then ran off one ritual drama after the other, raising oneself to the stars and bringing the stars down into the affairs of beings. One staged the dance of life, with oneself at the center. Over and above the satisfaction of these biosocial needs and the individual therapeutic benefits there were other reasons, concessions by the Principium Individuationis, which made beings seek for and submit to absolute collective loyalties. Individual survival as much as group survival dictated close cohesion: the small groups of beings were surrounded by a hostile nature and by an often hostile rivalry of neighboring groups. When the tribes had been welded into states and empires and the preservation of security was no longer a daily anxiety, collective loyalties too on a more diffuse, anemic character or thickened only occasionally in emergencies. Consequently a ritual of communal solidarity was no longer a routine practice. #RandolphHarris 4 of 18
At the lower level of local groups it lingered on for a while as a rare festivity to be held on a few specified occasions. It is for this reason that the choral dance reached its final form in the prehistoric era and has not changed its basic pattern ever since. Strange as it may sound—since the Stone Age, the dance has taken on as little in the way of new forms as of new content. The history of the creative dance takes place in prehistory. The choral dance as the cultural form of a pre-cultural, biosocial practice survived for a long time. We find chiral dances widely practiced as late as the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. These are, however, no longer the comprehensive experiences their pre-cultural predecessors used to be. Even so they continued to fulfill an integrative function in rural communities which were isolated and enslaved by feudal bondage. If there were real peasant communities under feudal lordship these were made possible by integrative practices issuing from the community itself and not by the strictures imposed on the community by feudal rule. The latter could have created only compounds of serfs and not village communities. Towards the end of the feudal era the choral dance began to decline. For some time after the sixteenth century choral dances and couple dances persisted together. #RandolphHarris 5 of 18
At the beginning of the nineteenth century the spread of the waltz, the polka, the Bostin finally ended the popularity of the choral dances. During the intervening centuries there were numerous pointers suggesting the presence of some kind of a transition in this process. The group is broken up into independent couples: the minuet, allemande, passepied, bourrée, gigue are mixed dances with a strong choral framework; the cotillion-quadrille type of so-called square dances represent the link between the choral and couple dances. This later transition is already a historical and not a phylogenetic process; it is not our task to sketch the history of an art form but to examine whether it continues to answer the requirements of a biosocial need. It may be of some advantage, perhaps for the sake of brining a contrast into high relief, to analyze the contemporary function of the dance. This contrast is presented to show the biosocial impoverishment of our species and complete our outline of the phylogenetic process. Today the dance is hardly ever the function of the group as a whole. Going to a dance very often means going out, that is outside the group, preferably in twos. In the age of the tango (1900), the shimmy (1920) or the jitterbug (1950s), or this new fan dance usually women preform with their rear ends, the dance has been reduced to the role of being a medium of courtship, of sexual titillation, and of motor frenzy. #RandolphHarris 6 of 18
The modern dance may serve sexual and matrimonial purposes well, but these purposes can hardly be described as communal. The couple arrive en deux and rarely join others among the dancers. The big city dance halls, and the dance floors of restaurants, night clubs and so on are removed from the community, are outside the community, and it is perhaps this character of such places which makes them eminently suitable for the purposes of present-day dancing. Apart from the popular couple dances, we have spectacular stage dancing, ballet, etc.; but these belong to the split World of performers and audiences, and with these we are not concerned here. After all, the hypertrophy of audiences is just another symptom of desocialization, a symptom which calls for specific study. Today the commercialization of dance activities has largely stabilized the hegemony of the isolate couple dance. The dance has ceased to be an opportunity when participation inertia can be overcome and when an ease in intimate contact can be developed. It is no longer an important formalizer of social skill, of manners, and it has become arid, businesslike or downright erotic, and non-social. The dance palaces hug the central portion of the city where recreational business concentrates and neighborhood relations are almost absent…there is little or no pretence of social control or of intent to regard personal or group relations: there is merely a recognition of a want for a dance place with or without food and drink, and a commercial answer for that want. #RandolphHarris 7 of 18
And to think that when Western beings first crashed uninvited into these spectacular dramas, one was scornful of what one saw. That is because Western beings were already a fallen creature who had forgotten how to play, how to impart to a life high style and significance. Western beings wee being given a brief glimpse of the creations of human genius, and like a petulant imbecile bully who feels discomfort at what one does not understand, one proceeded to smash everything in sight. Many people have scoffed at the everyday modern rituals of face-work and status forcing; they have argued that these types of petty self-promotion might be true of modern organization beings hopelessly set adrift in bureaucratic society but these kinds of shallow one-upmanship behaviors could not possibly be true of beings everywhere. Consequently, these critics say, we are definitely not talking about human nature. However, these critics are very wrong, and that is because it is more in context with primitive society. When you set up society to do creation rituals, then you obviously increase geometrically the magnitude of importance that organisms can impart to one another. It is only in modern society that the mutual imparting of self-importance has trickled down to the simple maneuvering of face-work; there is hardly any way to get a sense of value expect from the boss, the company dinner, or the random social encounters in the elevator or on the way to the executive toilet. #RandolphHarris 8 of 18
It is pretty demeaning, but it is playing out of the historical decadence ritual. Primitive society was a formal organization for the apotheosis of beings. Our own everyday rituals seems shallow precisely because they lack the cosmic connection. Instead of only using one’s fellow being as a mirror to make one’s face shine, the primitive used the work cosmos. I think it is safe to say that primitive organization for ritual was nothing other than in-depth face-work; it related the person to the mysterious forces of the cosmos, gave one an intimate share in them. This is why the primitive seems multidimensional to many present-day anthropologists who are critical of modern mass society. The word aggression crops up in our day-to-day speech in an endless variety of ways. We speak of an aggressive business deal, used as a compliment and meaning a deal that risks a lot to make a lot more money. On the stock market it is the aggressive broker and aggressive way of handling stocks that usually pay off. “We follow an aggressive policy” is generally welcomed in the business World as an indication that these fellows are on their toes and plan to get come place. It is good to have an aggressive lawyer pleading your case because he or she knows how to put your legal opponent at a disadvantage. In the business World the positive use of aggression is widely accepted. #RandolphHarris 9 of 18
Most aggression is indirect, masked, taking the form of subtle put-downs of the other person. This shows itself in psychotherapy under the guise of civil, friendly cooperation. A patient will say one has to be “honest” and will then let loose with a stream of fault-findings, covering everything from the therapist’s way of working to one’s family and one’s office. When the therapist says something that does not strike the patient as true, the latter finds one negation not enough, but has to say, “No, no, no, no” as though one is surprised that anyone could suggest such an uneducated thing. These techniques of upmanship go on in daily conversation between people of all sorts, especially between married couples. They take the form of an interminable superiority-inferiority struggle, in ways generally not picked up by the “victim” but obvious to everyone else. This indirect kind of aggression is almost always destructive, and I can see no good in whatever. There is another kind of aggression—that within the self or, as it is generally experienced by the person, against the self. I sit down early in the morning to work on this essay. Up till now I have been relaxed, relatively happy, even a bit placid. However, as I sit here thinking of the subject of aggression, I summon up my rambling thoughts, I open my mind to whatever insights may come, I contemplate the topic. #RandolphHarris 10 of 18
I summon the rebellious parts of myself; inwardly I look for a “fight,” aware that creative power and vision come out of such a struggle. I summon the daimonic—so far as it can be summoned. If I were describing it mythologically, I would say that a swarm of dwarfs, elves, and trolls become embroiled in my mind and refuse to do my bidding. The melee that results until some clear ideas and insights emerge is actually my own self, tearing down conventional ideas and ways of seeing in order to grasp anew being’s life and problems. It is the daimonic in full force. All art must be aggressive in some sense. Artists are not necessarily belligerent people as a group; they are generally the ones who fight their most important battles within themselves and on canvases, typewriters, or some other medium of art. No one can look at Hans Hofmann’s paintings, with their bright colors clashing and half the edges free to form their own boundaries or mixing with other colors, without being aware that one is seeing in action this very daimonic, this plastic aggression before one’s eyes. Robert Motherwell and Franz Kline, as they seek to paint the tension and restlessness of our time, splash a black form across a canvas and leave it hanging in air with the rough edges, as though some great object was bodily torn apart right there on the canvas. #RandolphHarris 11 of 18
The power in conflicting forms is, in these paintings, strained to the breaking point. However, how can we, today, create in any authentic sense without such straining and, indeed, without such aggression? Norman Mailer’s passion is boxing, and Ernest Hemingway not only climbed into the ring whenever he could but described getting ready to write a novel as being similar to getting in shape for a fight. Both of these writer have had a need to assert their power’ and out of this need also springs, at least in part, their ability as writers. And now we must take another step in our attempt to penetrate the riddle of inequality by asking—why do some of us use and increase what was given to us, while other do not and thus lose what was given to them? Why does God say to the prophet in the Old Testament that the ears and eyes of a nation are made insensitive to the divine message? Is it sufficient to answer—because some use their freedom responsibility and do wat they ought to do, while others fail through their own guilt? This answer, which seems so obvious, is sufficient only when we apply it to ourselves. Each one of us must consider the increase or loss of what was given as a matter for one’s own responsibility. Our conscience tells us that we cannot blame anybody or anything other than ourselves for our losses. #RandolphHarris 12 of 18
However, when we consider the plight of others, this answer is not sufficient. We cannot tell somebody who comes to us in great distress about oneself—“Make use of what was given to you,” for one may have come to us precisely because one is unable to do so! And we cannot tell those in despair because of what they are—“Be something else,” for the inability to get rid of oneself is the exact meaning of despair. We cannot tell those who failed to conquer the destructive influences of their surroundings and thence were driven into crime and misery—“You should have been stronger,” for it was just this strength of which they were deprived by heritage or environment. Certainly they are all beings, and freedom is given to them all. However, they are also all subject to destiny. It is not for us to condemn others because they were free, as it is also not for us to excuse them because of the burden of their destiny. We cannot judge them. And when we judge ourselves, we must keep in mind that even this judgment has no finality, because we, like them, stand under an ultimate judgment. In it the riddle of inequality is eternally answered. However, the answer is not ours. It is our predicament that we must ask the question, and we ask with an uneasy conscience—why are they in such misery? Why not we? Thinking of those near to us, we ask—are we partly responsible? #RandolphHarris 13 of 18
However, even though we are, the riddle of inequality is not solved. The uneasy conscience asks also about those most distant from us—why they, why not we? Why did my child, or any one of the millions of children, die before he had the chance to grow out of infancy? Why was my child, or any child born, born with spina bifida when I took my folic acid, and was totally sober and went to prenatal visits? Why has my friend or relative, or anyone’s friend or relative, disintegrated in one’s mind, and thus lost both his or her freedom and his or her destiny? Why has my son or daughter, gifted as they were with many talents, wasted them and been deprived of them? Why do such things happen to any parent at all? And why have the creative powers of this boy or that girl been broken by a tyrannical father or a possessive mother? None of these questions concern our own misery. At present, we are not asking—why did this happen to me? It is not Job’s question that God answered by humiliating one and then elevating one into communion with Him. It is not the old and urgent question—where is divine justice, where is divine love, for me? It is almost an opposite question—why did this not happen to me, while it did happen to another, to innumerable other ones, to whom not even Job’s power to accept the divine answer was given? Why, Jesus asks also, are many called but few elected? #RandolphHarris 14 of 18
Jesus does not answer the question, but states simply that this is the human predicament. Shall we therefore cease to ask, and humbly accept a divine judgment that would hurl most human beings out of community with the divine and condemn them to despair and self-destruction? Can we accept the eternal victory of judgment over love? We can not, nor can any human being, though he may preach and threaten in such terms. As long as one is able to visualize oneself with absolute certainty as eternally rejected, one preaching and threats are self-deceptive. For who can see oneself eternally rejected? However, if this is not the solution of the riddle of inequality at its deepest level, may we go outside the boundaries of Christian tradition to listen to those who would tell us that this life does not determine our eternal destiny? There will be other lives, they would say, predicted, like our present life, on previous ones and what we wasted or achieved in them. This is a serious doctrine and not completely strange to Christianity. However, since we do not know and never shall know what each of us was in a previous existence, or will be in a future one, it is not really our destiny developing from life to life, but in each life, the destiny of someone else. Therefore, this doctrine also fails to solve the riddle. #RandolphHarris 15 of 18
Actually, there is no answer at all to our question concerning the temporal and eternal destiny of a single being separated from the destiny of the whole. Only in the unity of all beings in time and eternity can there be a humanly possible answer to the riddle of inequality. “Humanly possible” does not mean an answer that removes the riddle of inequality, but one with which we can live. There is an ultimate unity in all beings, rooted in the divine life from which they emerge and to which they return. All beings, non-human as well as human, participate in it. And therefore, they all participate in each other. And we participate in each other’s having and in each other’s not having. When we become aware of this unity of all beings, something happens to us. The fact that others do not have changed the character of our having: it undercuts our security and drives us beyond ourselves, to understand, to give, to share, to help. The fact that others fall into sin, crime and misery alters the character of the grace that is given us: it makes us recognize our own hidden guilt; it shows us that those who suffer for their sin and crime suffer also for us, for we are guilty of their guilt and ought to suffer as they suffer. Our becoming aware of the fact that others who could have developed into full human beings did not, changes our state of fully humanity. #RandolphHarris 16 of 18
Their early death, their early or late disintegration, brings to our own personal life and healthy a continuous risk, a dying that is not yet death, a disintegration that is not yet destruction. In every death we encounter, something of us dies, and in every disease, something of us tends towards disintegration. Can we live with this answer? We can to the degree to which we are liberated from oneself unless one is grasped by that power which is present in everyone and everything—the eternal, from which we come and to which we go, and which gives us to ourselves and liberates us from ourselves. It is the greatness and heart of the Christian message that God, as manifest in the Christ on the Cross, totally participates in the dying of a child, in the condemnation of the criminal, in the disintegration of a mind, in starvation and famine, and even in the human rejection of Himself. There is no human condition into which the divine presence does not penetrate. This is what the Cross, the most extreme of all human conditions, tells us. The riddle of inequality cannot be solved on the level of our separation from each other. It is eternally solved through the divine participation in the life of all of us and every being. The certainty of the divine participation gives us the courage to endure the riddle of inequality, although our finite minds cannot solve it. #RandolphHarris 17 of 18
Why should anyone who has come to show beings the interior way proceed to delude them by pointing out an exterior one? In other words, if the Kingdom of Heaven is within us, what use will it be to set up an institution without us? The primary task of a being sent from God is not to found a church which will keep them still looking outward, and hence in the wrong direction, but to shed invisible grace. If one or one’s closer disciples do organize such a church, it is not only as a secondary task and as a concession to human weakness. The only schools worth finding are the schools without disciples. The ordinary beings are aware of one’s surroundings, first, by naming and labelling them; second, by linking them with past memory of them; and third, by relating them to one’s own personal self. The illumined egoless being is simply aware of them, without any of these other added activities. We have to have a certitude which follows being freed from all doubt. Why then should one be afraid of acknowledging one’s personal-impersonal existence in, and awareness of, the World? “How long shall we suffer these great afflictions, O Lord? O Lord, give us strength according to our faith which is in Christ, even unto deliverance,” reports Alma 14.26. My thoughts behave like circles on water. A little stone makes a dot, from which thoughts spread ever outward until they creak on the shores of the unthinkable. #RandolphHarris 18 of 18
Cresleigh Homes
KA-BOOM! BRAM! KA-POW! We’ve got some exciting news. ⚡️The last and final home for sale over at #RocklinTrails happens to be a fully furnished model home! 😱Surely, the kiddos will be just as excited as you. 😉Now, blast off on over to our bio and give us a call to learn more.
.
#CresleighHomes
https://cresleigh.com/new-homes-in-rocklin-california-rocklin-trails/
My First Act of Free Will Shall be to Believe in Free Will
My courtyard banana trees had not been touched by a heatwave this Summer, and grew thick and drowsing as ever against the stucco walls. The wild impatients and lantana were glowing in the overgrown beds, and the fountain, the fountain with its cherub, was making its crystalline music as the water splashed from the cherub’s horn into the basin. And the flowers introduced a profusion of colors which had never been before in nature, expect in the rainbow! Colors we had known in Heaven and thought to be purely celestial and now we saw they were in this beautiful community. Trees rose in their mature fullness; rain came in whispering gusts, full of fragrance. They sky warmed and colors everywhere expanded or deepened. These souls took the invisible fabric of Heaven, whatever it is—energy, essence, the light of God, the Creative Power of God—and in a twinkling surrounded us all with wonderous constructions representing their curiosity, their concepts of beauty and their desires! What was going on at the moment when this breakthrough occurred? Taking this experience of mine as a start, we noticed, first of all, that the insight broke into my conscious mind against what I had been really trying to think rationally. #RandolphHarris 1 of 15
I had a good, sound thesis and I had been working very hard trying to prove it. The unconscious, so to speak, broke through in opposition to the conscious belief to which I was clinging. There is a polarity, a kind of opposition, between unconscious experience and consciousness. The relationship is compensatory: consciousness controls the wild, illogical vagaries of the unconscious, while the unconscious keeps consciousness from drying up in banal, empty, arid rationality. The compensation also works on specific problems: if I consciously bend too far one way on some issues, my unconscious will lean the other way. This is, of course, the reason why the more we are unconsciously smitten with doubt about an idea, the more strict and rigidly we fight for it in our conscious argument. This is also why persons as different as Saint Paul on the Damascus road and the alcoholic in the Bowery go through such radical conversions—the repressed unconscious side of the dialectic erupts and takes over the personality. The unconscious seems to take delight (if I may so express it) in breaking through—and breaking up—exactly what we cling to most rigidly in our conscious thinking. #RandolphHarris 2 of 15
What occurs in this breakthrough is not simply growth; it is much more dynamic. It is not a mere expansion of awareness; it is rather a kind of battle. A dynamic struggle goes on within a person between what one consciously thinks on the one hand and, on the other, some insight, some perspective that is struggling to be born. The insight is then born with anxiety, guilt, and the joy and gratification that is inseparable from the actualizing of a new idea or vision. The guilt that is present when this breakthrough occurs has its source in the fact that the insight must destroy something. My insight destroyed my other hypothesis and would destroy what a number of my professors believed, a fact that caused me some concern. Whenever there is a breakthrough of a significant idea in science or a significant new form in art, the new idea will destroy what a lot of people believe is essential to the survival of their intellectual and spiritual World. This is the source of guilt in genuine creative work. As Picasso remarked, “Every act of creation is first of all an action of destruction.” The breakthrough carried with it also an element of anxiety. For it not only broke down my previous hypothesis, it shook my self-World relationship. #RandolphHarris 3 of 15
At such a time I find myself having to seek a new foundation, the existence of which I as yet do not know. This is the source of the anxious feeling that comes at the moment of the breakthrough; it is not possible that there be a genuinely new idea without this shake up occurring to some degree. However, beyond guilt and anxiety, as I said above, the main feeling that comes with the breakthrough is one of gratification. We have seen something new. We have the joy of participating in what the physicists and other natural scientists call an experience of elegance. When the Universe itself runs down and disintegrates given enough time, how can this little and limited being of a person hope to preserve one’s personal consciousness, one’s personality, one’s character just as it is today? Any belief fostered by any kind of authority—religious or metaphysical or any other—which fosters this illusion is a false one. However, this said, let it be counted by that other truth which is needed to complete the thought. If the individualized being must one day part with its limited consciousness, this is only in order to return to its origin in the universal consciousness, for consciousness cannot come out of nothing. It came from and goes back to the universal mind. #RandolphHarris 4 of 15
Therefore, if a being loses the little and temporary immortality of the ego, it will only be to gain the greater and true immortality of that mind. The higher individuality is preserved, but the lower personality, with its miserable limitations, is not. The difference between the individual and the universal self persists throughout the incarnations and no mystical emotionalism or metaphysical jugglery can end it. It will end indeed not by the individual transforming oneself into the greater being but by one’s merging oneself into it, that is, by the disappearance of one’s separate consciousness in the pure essence of all consciousness. However, it need not so end unless one wants it. Even if we should surrender it to God, there is no reason why we should not preserve own individuality. When the higher self encloses and absorbs the ego, the goal is achieved. Through one has been caught up into something immensely great than oneself, one still remains an individual—albeit a loosely held one. One’s further life will be a record of discovery rather than speculation, of insights rather than intellections. What will happen to one’s environment after illumination? Nothing. It will not be miraculously transformed so that one sees auras, ghost, and atoms mixed up with its ordinary appearance. It will still look as it did before. The grass will have the same shapes and colour. #RandolphHarris 5 of 15
However, the question of inequality has not yet been answered. For now we must ask—why do some of us receive more than others in the very beginning, before using or wasting our talents is even possible? Why does the one servant receive five talents, and the second, two, and the third, one? Why is one person born to desperate less affluence, and another to affluence? To reply that much will be demanded of those to whom much is given, and little of those to whom little is given, is not adequate. For it is just this original inequality, internal and external, that gives rise to the question. Why is the power to gain so much more out of one’s being human given to one human being rather than to another? Why is so much given to one that much can be asked of one, while little can be asked of another, because little was given one? If we consider this problem in relation not only to individual beings, but also to classes, races, and nations, the question of political inequality also arises, and with it the many ways in which beings have tried to abolish inequality. In every revolution and way, the will to solve the riddle of inequality is a driving force. However, neither war nor revolution can answer it. #RandolphHarris 6 of 15
And even though we may imagine that most social inequalities will be conquered in the future, there remain three realities: the inequality of talents in body and mind, the inequality created by freedom and destiny, and the inequality of justice deriving from the fact that all generations before the time of such equality would by nature be excluded from its blessings. This last would be the greatest inequality possible! No! In the face of one of the deepest and most tormenting problems of life, we cannot permit ourselves to be so shallow or foolish as to try to escae into a social dreamland. We have to live now. We have to live this life. We must face the riddle of inequality today. Let us not confuse the riddle of inequality with the fact that each of us is a unique and incomparable self. Our being individual certainly belongs to our dignity as beings. This being was given to us, and must be made use of an intensified, not drowned in the gray waters of conformity that threaten us so much today. One should defend every individuality and the uniqueness of every human self. However, one should not be deluded into believing that this is a solution to the riddle of inequality. #RandolphHarris 7 of 15
Unfortunately, there are social and political reactionaries who exploit this confusion social and political reactionaries who exploit this confusion in order to justify social injustice. They are at least as foolish as those who dream of the future abolition of inequality. One who has witnessed hospitals for the ill and insane, prisons, sweat shops, battlefields, people starving, family tragedies, or moral aberrations should be cured of any confusion of the gift of individuality with the riddle of inequality. One should be cured of any sense of easy consolation. If any teacher or organization asks you to swear ceremoniously that you will not reveal to others what you are taught, be sure that you will receive inferior occultism, not philosophic truth. For the truth hides itself from the unready: it does not have to be hidden from them. Do not confuse the necessary secrecy of philosophic presentation with the portentous secrecy of charlatanic cults. It is not necessary to call meetings or to organize societies in order to propagate truth. There is no crowd salvation, no communal redemption. The monasteries and ashrams, the organizations and societies, the institutions and temples have their place and use. However, the one is very elementary and the other is very limited. Whatever is most worthwhile to, and in, a being must come forth from one’s own individual endeavour. #RandolphHarris 8 of 15
Society improves only as, and when, its members improve. This is strikingly shown by the moral failure of some states with dictatorships, and by the half-failure of established religions. Most institutions and organizations have developed in time the fault of an egocentrism which cases them to lose sight of their original higher purpose, and so they join the list of additions to societies which have a mixed selfish and idealistic character. Too many spiritual organizations exist mainly to serve those who create or staff them. When those who direct the affairs of an institution become more concerned about the state of its revenue than about its state of spirituality, when they are more affected by its increasing financial returns than about its increasing materiality, it is time to pick up one’s hat and stick and bid it farewell. Starting from speculations on the beginning of life and from biological parallels I drew the conclusion that, besides the instinct to preserve living substances, there must exist another, contrary instinct seeking to dissolve those units and to bring them back to their primaeval, inorganic state. That is to say, as well as Eros there was an instinct of death. #RandolphHarris 9 of 15
The death instinct is directed against the organism itself and this is a self-destructive drive, or it is directed outward, and in this case tends to destroy others rather than oneself. When blended with sexuality, the death instinct is transformed into more harmless impulses expressed in sadism or masochism. Even though Dr. Freud suggested at various times that the power of the death instinct can be reduced, the basic assumption remained: beings were under the sway of an impulse to destroy either oneself or others, and one could do little to escape this tragic alternative. It follows that, from the position of the death instinct, aggression was not essentially a reaction to stimuli but a constantly following impulse rooted in the constitution of the human organism. The death instinct is a biological force in all living organisms: this should mean that animals, too, express their death instinct either against themselves or against others. Hence one should find more illness or early death in less outwardly aggressive animals and vice versa; but, of course, there are no data supporting this idea. Yet, there is a dualistic concept in which two basic forces are opposed to each other. This dichotomy was at first that between self-preservation and libido, and later that between life and death instincts. #RandolphHarris 10 of 15
There is a vastness and the precariousness of existing fully and the courage required to preserve in the face of ill health and depression. The organism has a great stake in blowing itself up in size, importance, and durability. Because only if we understand how natural this motive is can we understand how it is only in society tat beings can get the symbolic measures for the degrees of one’s importance, one’s qualification for extradurability. And it is only by contrasting and comparing oneself to like organism, to one’s fellow being, that one can judge if one has some extra claim to importance. Obviously it is not very convincing about one’s ultimate worth to be better than a lobster, or even a fox; but to outshine that fellow sitting over there, the one with the black eyes—now that is something that carries the conviction of ultimacy. The faces beings carry the highest meaning to other beings. Once we understand this, we can see further why the moiety organization is such a stroke of primitive genius: it sets up society as a continuing contest for the forcing of self-feeling, provides ready-made props for self-aggrandizement, a daily script that includes straight men for joking relationships and talented rivals with whom to contend for social honor in games, feats of strength, hunting and warfare. #RandolphHarris 11 of 15
Sociologist have very nicely described the dynamics of status forcing and similar types of behavior, in which people try to come out of social encounters a little bigger than they went in, by playing intricate games of one-upmanship. However, you cannot force your status vis-à-vis someone else unless there is a someone else and there are rules for status and verbal conventions for playing around with status, for coming out of social groups with increases self-inflation. Society almost everywhere provides codes for such self-aggrandizement, for the ability to boast, to humiliate, or just simply to outshine in quiet ways—like displaying one’s superior achievements, even if it is only skill in hunting that feeds everyone’s stomach. A being cannot impart life to oneself but must get it via ritual from one’s fellow being, then we can say even further that beings cannot impart importance to oneself; and importance, we now see, is just as deep a problem in securing life: importance equals durability equals life. However, I do not want to seem to be making out that primitive society organized itself merely as a stage for competitive self-aggrandizement, or that beings can only expand their sense of self at the expense of others. #RandolphHarris 12 of 15
This would not be true, even though it is a large and evidently natural part of human motivation. Primitive society also expressed its genius by giving to people much less invidious and competitive forms of self-expansion. People impart to one another the daily sense of importance that each needs, not with rivalry and boasting, but rather with elaborate rules for protecting their insides against social damage and deflation. People do this in their interpersonal encounters by using verbal formulas that express proper courtesies, permit gentle handling, save the other’s face with the proper subtleties when self-esteem is in danger, and so on. Social life is interwoven with salutations foe greeting and taking leave, for acknowledging others with short, standardized conversations which reinforce the sense of well-being of all the members. Beings in society manage to give each other what they need in terms of good organismic self-feeling in two major ways: on one hand, by codes that allow people to compare their achievements and virtues so as to outside rivals; on the other hand, by codes that support and protect tender human feelings that prevent the undermining and deflation that can result from the clash of organismic ambitions. #RandolphHarris 13 of 15
However, now to see how the technique for the ritual renewal of nature worked—how well it served the actors who played the parts. We can really only get inside primitive societies by seeing them as religious priesthoods with each person having a role to pay in the generative rituals. We have so long been stripped of a ritual role to play in creation that we have to force ourselves to try to understand this, to get this into perspective. We do not know what it means to contribute a dance, a chant, or a spell in a community dramatization of the forces of nature—unless we belong to an active religious community. Nr can we feel the immense sense of achievement that follows from such a ritual contribution: the ritualist has done nothing less than enable life to continue; one has contributed to sustaining and renewing the Universe. If rituals generate and redistribute life power, then each person is a generator of life. That is how important a person could feel, within the ritualist view of nature, by occupying a ritual place in a community. Even the humblest person was a cosmic creator. We may not think that the ritual generation of brown kangaroos is a valid casual affair, but the primitive feels the effect of one’s ability to generate life, one is ennobled by it, even though it may be an illusion. #RandolphHarris 14 of 15
We may console ourselves about our historical demotion from the status of cosmic heroism by saying that at least we know what true religion is, whereas these cosmic creators lived according to immature magic. I will admit that our historical disenchantment is a burden that gives us a certain sober Worldliness, but there is no valid difference between religion and magic, no matter how many books are written to support the distinction. Magic is religion we do not believe in, and religion is magic we believe in. Voila tout. A school should exist not only to teach but also to investigate, not to formulate prematurely a finalized system but to remain creative, to go on testing theories by applying them and validating ideas by experience. The formation of a society of seekers may have a social value but it has little instructional value, for it merely pools their common ignorance. The justification of a society educationally is its possession of a competent teacher—competent because one’s instruction possess intellectual clarity and one’s knowledge possesses justifiable certitude. “I will not show unto the wicked of my strength, to one more than the other, save it be unto those who repent of their sins, and hearken unto my words,” reports Helaman 7.23. The mind passes through a stage, when seeking after truth, it finds out that the World is other than it seems to be. #RandolphHarris 15 of 15
Cresleigh Homes
It’s time to make your move! #RocklinTrails only has 1 home left and it happens to be a beautiful fully-furnished, model home! ❤️️At Rocklin Trails you’ll find a lifestyle inspired by walkability. Our paseo-fronting homes create beautiful green-space entries and an open environment, all without compromising privacy. Learn what else makes this community special by following the link in our bio!
.
#CresleighHomes
https://cresleigh.com/new-homes-in-rocklin-california-rocklin-trails/
The Master Will Teach with Love What the Student Must Learn with Reverence!
In the following months, I learned more than I can ever recount here. I studied vigorously, and paid attention even to the government of the city, which I thought basically as tiresome as any government, and read voraciously the great Christian scholars, completing my time with Abelard, Duns, Scouts and other thinkers. Whether the ostensible purpose of these primitive dances we learned about are animistic-religious or magical-material, one constant feature in them is that they are group performances and not solo or couple acts. The main crises of human life are dramatized, couched in movement and shared by all who participate in the dace, thus alleviating the inflictions which inevitably follow from human existence, and enriching and ornamenting the joys which are incidental to life. The choral dace is the physical manifestation of groupward drives. Whatever vital experience the primitive group has to face, its sharing by every member is made possible by the translation of that experience into rhythmic muscular movements simultaneously executed by all. The speechless eloquence of posture and gesture supplemented the primitive vocabulary of prehistoric humanity and became a powerful medium of social intercourse. #RandolphHarris 1 of 14
The choral dance was not merely instrumental in securing group unity for ulterior purposes like a good harvest or the propitiation of evil demons. The groupward drives, the yearning for a tangible, physically manifested unity exist on their own account and suffuse the dance ritual whatever its ostensible purpose. In the choral dance an inarticulate consensus and an absolute fraternity are reaffirmed from time to time, thus tightening up group cohesion and conserving solidarity. In it the individual member finds a reassurance that one is not alone. The Australian aborigines—who were living in the Stone Age—seemed the most paradoxical of all, with their luxuriant systems of kinship classification and their complex divisions of their tribe into half and half and then half again. This passion for splitting things into two polar opposites that were complementary was a most striking and widespread feature of primitive being’s social organization. (The Chinese Yin and Yang is a survival of this phenomenon.) A person belonged either to one half or the other, traced one’s descent from a common ancestor, often identified with a particular animal totem representing one’s half, usually married someone in the other half, and had rigorously specified types of relationship with people in the other half, including the duty to bury them and mourn for them. #RandolphHarris 2 of 14
One of the main things that took place between the halves was something Homo sapiens seem to thrive on: contest of skill and excellence. It is believed that the teasing and mocking behaviors which anthropologists call “joking relationships” may have had their origin there. In fact, it is possible that all team games arose out of the dual organization. The primitive mind was just as intelligent as ours, just as intent on them. Primitive beings fed into their cerebral computer all the important natural facts of this World as one observed and understood them, and tried to relate them intimately to one’s life just we try to relate the mechanical laws of the Universe to our own. Did we wonder at the complexity of primitive symbolism and social organization? Well, it was because primitive beings tried to organize their society to reflect their theory of nature. Anthropology has shown with increasing clarity how social life in the archaic period normally rests on the antagonistic and antithetical structure of the community itself, and how the whole mental World of such a community responds to this profound dualism. The human mind has a natural tendency to split things into contrasts and complementarities, which is called binary opposites. #RandolphHarris 3 of 14
Binary opposites is a term that has given a great boost to the computer freaks, this binary tendency of the primitive mind, because it seems to show that beings function naturally just like the computer—and so the computer can be championed as the logical fulfillment of basic human nature, and the mystery of mind and symbolism might well be traceable down to simple neural circuits and so forth. People divine themselves into two groups in order that they may impart life to one another, that they may intermarry, compete with one another, make offerings to one another, and do to one another whatever is required by their theory of prosperity. The reason for the dual organization is so foreign to us that we may not at first see it: it was necessary for ritual. The fundamental imperative of all ritual is that one cannot do it alone; beings cannot impart life to oneself but must get if from their fellow beings. If ritual is a technique for generating life, then ritual organization is a necessary cooperation in order to make that technique work. In some early civilizations this potential of the choral dance was recognized, for instance, the training of the Greek soldier included the performance of marital dances. The dance was a means of giving soldiers carriage, agility and health, and cultivating esprit de corps. #RandolphHarris 4 of 14
War dances not only constitute a popular form of entertainment but serve at the same time to crystallize group solidarity. Dance was originally nothing but a vehicle of religious mysticism, to us it appears that it was a medium of a paradigmatic experience which at its core was strictly and social or communal. The experience of a union, however, is not merely a gratification of social hunger, of the instinct of gregariousness, that is, of biosocial need. The satisfaction of this propensity is often accompanied by an auto-intoxication comparable only to ecstasy involved in pleasures of the flesh which results in a temporary draining of the will from stubborn self-regard and in the gathering of reckless sacrificial emotions. Under these conditions individual separateness disappears and phylic unity is complete; and it is under these conditions that the group’s reality is supreme and exclusive. Through the choral dance primitive beings successfully achieved two objectives: the effective sharing of the burdens of one’s conflicts and tensions, a sharing which reaffirmed and deepened the bonds of fellow-feeling; a catharsis through the rhythmic communal rapture which renewed and strengthened the individual. #RandolphHarris 5 of 14
The choral dance, therefore, was not only a socio-political vehicle of group solidarity but also a primitive method of group psychotherapy. Repressed powers are loosed and seek expression; an innate sense of rhythm orders them into lively harmony. Harmony deadens and dissipates the will, the dancer gives oneself over to the supreme delights of play prescribed by custom, gives oneself over to the exhilaration which carries one away from the monotony of everyday life, from palpable reality, from the sober facts of experience. Inn the ecstasy of the dancer, beings bridge the chasm between this and the other World. Captivated and entranced one bursts one’s Earthly chain and trembling feelings oneself in tune with all the World. The “chasm” here referred to is that which exists between one solitary individual and another. The transcending of solitariness has always appeared to mystics, poets, and philosophers as a communion with the Godhead, a surrender to the essential beauty of nature or an acceptance of the Universe. Whilst all that they experienced was a spiritualized, symbolical expression of their biosocial life. #RandolphHarris 6 of 14
The deeper level of explanation for the dual organization is so simple we may not see it: it is phenomenological. Beings need to work their magic with the materials of this World, and human beings are the primary materials for the magic wrought by social life. One of the main motives of organismic life was the urge to self-feeling, to the heightened sense of self that comes with success in overcoming obstacles and incorporating other organisms. The expansion of the self-feeling in nature can come about in many different ways, especially when we get to the human level of complexity. Beings can expand their self-feeling not only by physical incorporation but by any kind of triumph or demonstration of one’s own excellence. One expands one’s organization in complexity by games, puzzles, riddles, mental tricks of all types by boasting about their achievements, taunting and humiliating one’s adversaries, or torturing and killing them. Anything that reduces the other organisms and adds to one’s own size and importance is a direct way to gain self-feeling; it is a natural development out of the simple incorporation and fighting behavior of lower organisms. #RandolphHarris 7 of 14
By the time we get to beings we find that one is in an almost constant struggle against not to be diminished in one’s organismic importance. However, as one is also and especially a symbolic organism, this struggle against being diminished is carried on on he most minute levels of symbolic complexity. To be outshone by another is to be attacked at some basic level of organism durability. To lose, to be second rate, to fail to keep up with the best and the highest sends a message to the nerve center of the organism’s anxiety: “I am overshadowed, inadequate; hence I do not qualify for continued durability, for life, for eternity; hence I will die.” However, is not the attitude of basic anxiety and hostility toward people, described as an essential constituent of neuroses, a normal attitude which secretly all of us have, though perhaps in a lesser degree? When considering this question one has to distinguish two points of view. If “normal” is used in the sense of a general human attitude, one could say that the basic anxiety has indeed a normal corollary in what German philosophical and religious language has termed the Angst der Kreatur. All of us are helpless toward forces more powerful than ourselves, such as death, illness, old age, catastrophes of nature, political events, accidents. The first time we recognize this is in the helplessness of childhood, but the knowledge remains with us for our entire life. #RandolphHarris 8 of 14
This anxiety of the Kreatur has in common with basic anxiety the element of the helplessness toward greater powers, but it does not connote hostility on the part of those powers. If “normal” is used, however, in the sense of normal for our culture, one could say this much: in general experience will lead a person in our culture, provided one’s life is not too sheltered, to become more reserved toward people as one reaches maturity, to be more cautious in trusting them, more familiar wit the fact that often people’s actions are not straightforward but are determined by cowardice and expediency. If one is an honest person one will include oneself; if not one will see all of this more clearly in others. In short one develops an attitude which is definitely akin to the basic anxiety. There are these differences, however: the healthy mature person does not feel helpless toward these human failings and there is in one none of the indiscriminateness that is found in the basic neurotic attitude. One retains the capacity of bestowing a god deal of genuine friendliness and confidence on some people. Perhaps the differences are to be accounted for by the fact that the healthy person made the bulk of one’s unfortunate experiences at an age when one could integrate them, while the neurotic person made them at an age when one could not master them, and as a consequence of one’s helplessness reacted to them with anxiety. #RandolphHarris 9 of 14
Failure, then failure! So the World stamps us at every turn. We strew it with our blunders, our misdeeds, our lost opportunities, with all the memorials of our inadequacy to our vocation. And with what a damning emphasis does it then blot us out! The subtlest forms of suffering known to beings are connected with the poisonous humiliations incidental to these results. And they are pivotal human experiences. A process so ubiquitous and everlasting is evidently an integral part of life. We just say way: because it is connected to the fundamental motive of organismic appetite: to endure, to continue experiencing, and to know that one can continue because one possesses some special excellence that makes one immune to diminution and death. This explains too the ubiquitousness of envy. Envy is the signal of danger that the organism sends to itself when a shadow is being cast over it, when it is threatened with being diminished. Fear of being reduced almost seems to have a life of its own inside one’s being. The basic anxiety has a definite implications for the person’s attitude toward oneself and others. It means emotional isolation, all the harder to bear as it concurs with a feeling of intrinsic weakness of the self. It means a weakening of the very foundation of self-confidence. #RandolphHarris 10 of 14
The implications of basic anxiety carries the germ for a potential conflict between the desire to rely on others, and the impossibility to do so because of deep distrust of and hostility toward them. It means that because of intrinsic weakness the person feels a desire to put all responsibility upon others, to be protected and taken care of, whereas because of the basic hostility there is much too much distrust to carry out this desire. And invariably the consequences is that one has to put the greatest part of one’s energies into securing reassurance. The more unbearable the anxiety the more thorough the protective means have to be. There are in our culture four principal ways in which a person tries to protect oneself against the basic anxiety: affection, submissiveness, power, withdrawal. First, securing affection in any form may serve as a powerful protection against anxiety. The motto is: If you love me you will not hurt me. Second, submissiveness can be roughly subdivided according to whether or not it concerns definite persons or institutions. There is such a definite focus, for example, in submission to standardize traditional views, to the rites of some religious or to the demands of some powerful person. #RandolphHarris 11 of 14
To obey these rules or comply with these demands will be the determining motive for all behavior. This attitude may take the form of having to be good, although the connotation of good varies with the demands or the rules that are complied with. When the attitude of compliance is not attached to any institution or person it takes the more generalized form of compliance with the potential wishes of all persons and avoidance of everything that might arouse resentment. In such cases the individual represses all demands of one’s own, represses criticism of others, is willing to let oneself be abused without defending oneself and is ready to be indiscriminately helpful to others. Occasionally people are away of the fact that anxiety underlies their actions, but usually they are not at all aware of this fact and firmly believe they act as they do because of an ideal of unselfishness or self-sacrifice which goes so far as a renunciation of their own wishes. In both the definite and the general forms of submissiveness the motto is: If I give in, I shall not be hurt. The submissive attitude may also serve the purpose of securing reassurance by affection. If affection is so important to a person that one’s feeling of security in life depends on it, the one is willing to pay any price for it, and in the main this means complying with the wishes of others. #RandolphHarris 12 of 14
Frequently, however, a person is unable to believe in any affection, and then one’s complying attitude is directed not toward winning affection but toward winning protection. There are persons who can feel secure only by rigid submission. In them the anxiety is so great and the disbelief in affection so complete that the possibility of affection does not enter after all. A third attempt at protection against the basic anxiety is through power—trying to achieve security by gaining factual power or success, or possession, or admiration, or intellectual superiority. In this attempt at protection the motto is: If I have power, no one can hurt me. The fourth means of protection is withdrawal. The preceding groups of protective devices have in common a willingness to contend with the World, to cope with it in one way or another. Protection can also be found, however, by withdrawing from the World. This does not mean going into a desert or into complete seclusion; it means achieving independence of others as they affect either one’s external or one’s internal needs. Independence in regard to external needs may be achieved, for example, by piling up possession. This motivation for possession is entirely different from the motivation for the sake of power or influence, and the use made of the possession is likewise different. #RandolphHarris 13 of 14
Where possessions are amassed for the sake of independence there is usually too much anxiety to enjoy them, and they are guarded with an attitude of parsimony because the only objective is to be safeguarded against all eventualities. Another means that serves the same purpose of becoming externally independent of others is a restriction of one’s needs to a minimum. Independence in regard to internal needs maybe found, for example, by an attempt to become emotionally detached from people so that nothing will hurt or disappoint one. It means choking off one’s emotional needs. One expression of such detachment is the attitude of not taking anything seriously, including one’s self, an attitude often found in intellectual circles. Not taking one’s self seriously is not to be confounded with not thinking one’s self important. In fact these attitudes may be mutually contradictory. These devices of withdrawal have a similarity with the devices of submissiveness or compliance, inasmuch as both involve a renunciation of one’s own wishes. However, while in the latter group renunciation is the service of being good or of complying with the desires of others in order to feel safe, in the former group the idea of being good plays no role at all, and the object of renunciations is attaining independence of others. Here the motto is: If I withdraw, nothing can hurt me. #RandolphHarris 14 of 14
Cresleigh Homes
Take a seat and let us tell you about your dream home! There is only ONE HOME LEFT at #RocklinTrails! Will you be the one to snag it? 🏡🙋♂️🙋
.
You can’t get a better deal than this fully-furnished model home! Stop by today to learn more!
.
#CresleighHomes
https://cresleigh.com/new-homes-in-rocklin-california-rocklin-trails/
Many People Remember a Time When the Desire to Solve the Riddles of the Universe and to Find Truth was the Driving Force in their Lives
I cannot live without this beauty. I cannot endure without it. Oh, God, you have shown me Hell and it lies behind me, surely in the land where I was born. If Christ is the Lord, if Christ is the Lord, then what a beautiful miracle it is, this Christian mystery—that the Lord himself should come to Earth and clothe himself in flesh the better to know us and to comprehend us. Oh, what God, ever made in the image of Man by His fancy, was ever better than one who would become flesh? However, absolute unity, in spire of brilliant dashes in its direction, still remains undiscovered, still remains a Grenzbegriff. “Ever not quite.” After all that reason can do has been done, there still remains the opacity of the finite fact as merely given, with most of their peculiarities mutually unmediated and unexplained. To the very last, there are the various points of view which the philosopher must distinguish in discussing the World; and what is inwardly clear from one point remains a bare externality and datum to the other. The negative, the alogical, is never wholly banished. Something—call it fate, chance, freedom, spontaneity, the devil, what you will—is still wrong and other and outside and unincluded, from your point of view, even though you be the greatest of philosophers. #RandolphHaris 1 of 14
Reason is but one item in the mystery of the Universe; and behind the proudest consciousness that ever reigned, reason and wonder blushed face to face. Real possibilities, real indeterminations, real beginnings, real ends, real evil, real crises, catastrophes, and escapes, a real God, and a real more life, just as common-sense conceives these things, may remain in empiricism as conceptions which that philosophy gives up the attempt either to overcome or to reinterpret in monistic form. The Last Days! Christianity is a religion based on the notion that we are living in the Last Days! It is a religion fueled by the ability of beings to forget all the blunders of the past, and get dressed once more for the Last Days. Here in this room, we all of us believe in molecules and the conservation of energy, in democracy and necessary progress, in Protestant Christianity and the duty of fighting for the immortal life. Our reason is quite satisfied, in nine hundred and ninety-nice cases out of every thousand f us, if it can find a few arguments that will do to recite in case or credulity is criticized by some one else. Our faith is faith in someone else’s faith, and in the greatest matters this is most the case. Our belief in truth itself, for instance, that there is a truth, and that our minds and it are made for each other,–what is it but a passionate affirmation of desire, in which our social system backs us up? #RandolphHarris 2 of 14
We want to have a truth; we want to believe that our experiments and studies and discussions must put us in a continually better and better position towards it; and on this line we agree to fight out our thinking lives. Why do few scientists even look at the evidence for telepathy, so called? Because they think, as a leading biologist, now dead, once said to me, that even if such a thing were true, scientists ought to band together to keep it suppressed and concealed. It would undo the uniformity of Nature and all sorts of other things without which scientists cannot carry on their pursuits. However, if this very being had been shown something which as a scientist one might do with telepathy, one might not only have examined the evidence, but even have found it good enough. This very law which the logicians would impose upon us—if I may give the name of the logicians to those who would rule out our willing nature here—is based on nothing but their own natural wish to exclude all elements for which they, in their professional quality of logicians, can find no use. Still, there is a truth, and it is the destiny of our minds to attain it, we are deliberately resolving to make, though the sceptic will not make it. The faith that truth exits, and that our minds can find it, may be held in two ways. #RandolphHarris 3 of 14
We may talk of the empiricist way and of the absolutist way of believing in truth. The absolutions in this matter say that we not only can attain to knowing truth, but we can know when we have attained to knowing it; while the empiricists think that although we may attain it, we cannot infallibly know when. To know is one thing, and to know for certain that we know is another. One may hold on to the first being possible without the second; hence the empiricists and the absolutists, although neither of them is a sceptic in the usual philosophic sense of the term, show very different degrees of strict and rigid doctrines in their lives. What one ha to do in the World as a human being is henceforth to be done not really by one’s ordinary personal self but by the Presence which, shapeless and silent though it be, is the vital living essence of what connect one with God. If this seems to deprive one of the attributes which make a being a being, I can reply only that we are here back with the Sphinx. Yes, the enigma is great; but the realized understanding and experience is immeasurably greater in its blessedness. One’s life becomes a lengthened awareness of this Presence. One is never lovely because one is never encased in the belittling thought that this narrow personal self-consciousness is the totality of one’s “I.” #RandolphHarris 4 of 14
One lives every moment in the awareness of one’s higher self. Yet this does not oppose nor interfere with the awareness of one’s lower one. Everything one then does is done by the ordinary personal self alone, out of and in harmony with the Overself, or one’s higher individuality. In thus working together, the divine presence supports the ego’s presence, but the ego is put in its place and kept in harmony with the higher individuality. If this is what people mean by killing out the ego (which is really killing our its tyranny), there could be no objection to the statement. However, to asset that it is not functioning at all is silly. If the claim of complete merger is valid, if the individual self really disappears in the attainment of Divine Consciousness, of whom then was this same self away in the experience of attainment? No—it is only the lower personal self that is transcended; the higher spiritual individuality is not. One day a learned colleague called me up and cried angrily, “There is a saying in the New Testament which I consider to be one of the most immoral and unjust statements ever made!” And he began to quote our text—“To him who has will more be given,” his anger increasing as he continued, “and from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.” I believe that most of us cannot but feel equally offended. #RandolphHarris 5 of 14
And we cannot easily excuse the passage by suggesting what this colleague suggested—that the words may be due to a misunderstanding on the part of the disciples. No, they appear at least four times in the gospels with great emphasis. And furthermore, it is clear that the writers of the gospels feel exactly as we do. For them, the statement is a stumbling block, and they tried to interpret it in different ways. Probably none of the explanations satisfied them fully, for this particular saying of Jesus confronts us immediately with the greatest and perhaps most painful riddle of life—the inequality of all beings. We certainly cannot hope to solve it. Neither the Bible nor any of the great religions and philosophies was able to do so. However, this we can do: we can explore the breadth and dept of the riddle of inequality; and we can try to find a way to live with it, unsolved as it may remain. When we consider the words, “to him who has will more be given,” we ask ourselves—what do we have? And we may discover that much has been given us in terms of external goods, of friends, of intellectual gifts, and even of a comparatively high morality on which to base our actions. So we can expect that even more will accrue to us, while, at the same time, those who are lacking in all these attributes will lose the little they already have. #RandolphHarris 6 of 14
Even further, according to Jesus’ parable, the one poor talent they possess shall be handed over to those who have five or ten talents. We shall be richer because they will be poorer. And cry out as we may against such an injustice, we cannot deny that life abounds in it. We cannot deny it, but we might well ask—do we really have what we believe we have, so that it cannot be taken from us? It is a question full of anxiety, intensified by Luke’s version of our text: “From one who has not, even what one thinks that one has will be taken away.” Perhaps our having of those many things is not the kind of having that can be increased. Perhaps the having of a few things on the part of the poor is the kind of having that makes them grow. Jesus confirms this thought it the parable of the talents. The talents that are used, at the risk of their being lost, are the talents that we really have. Those that we try to preserve, without risking their use for growth, are those that we do not really have, and that will therefore be taken from us. They begin to disappear, until suddenly we feel that we have lost them, perhaps forever. Of some things we feel that we are certain: we know, and we know that we do know. There is something that gives a click inside of us, a bell that strikes twelve, when the hands of our mental clock have swept the dial and meet over the meridian hour. #RandolphHarris 7 of 14
The greatest empiricist among us are only empiricists on reflection: when left to their instincts, they dogmatize like infallible popes. When the Cliffords tell us how sinful it is to be Christian on such insufficient evidence, insufficiency is really the last thing they have in mind. For them the evidence is absolutely sufficient, only it makes the other way. They believe so completely in an anti-Christian order of the Universe that there is no living option: Christianity is a dead hypothesis from the start. However, as pragmatism explains, the criteria for the validity of knowledge are the consequences that are produced by the (given) knowledge. This approach provides useful implications for understanding human beings (for instance, thoughts or behaviors that give people pleasure or help them meet basic needs). The consequences, of course, as that our fields of experience have no more definite boundaries than have our fields of view. More that continuously develops, and that continuously supersedes them as a life process validates not only sense perception, but also affectional, intuitive, imaginal, and spiritual states of experience. It purports that usefulness need not be confined to discrete, overt, or measurable behaviors, but may encompass any experience that a person finds subjectively or objectively for help. #RandolphHarris 8 of 14
For example, it has been found by experts such as William James that so-called mystical experiences are useful for people. A sense of the divine gives beings a powerful ally for their own ideals. Spiritual life is more richly satisfying tan that of the conventional (logical-positivist) perspective. In the memory of all of us, there are many things that we seemed to have, but that we really did not have, and that were therefore taken away from us. Some of them were lost because of the tragic limitations of life. They had to be sacrificed so that other things might grow. We are all given youthful innocence, but innocence cannot be used and increased. The growth of our lives is made possible only by the sacrifice of the original gift of innocence. Sometimes, nevertheless, a melancholy longing arises in us for a purity that has been taken from us. We were all given youthful enthusiasm for many things and goals. However, all this enthusiasm also cannot be used and increased. Most of the objects of our early enthusiasm must be sacrificed for a few, and those few approached soberly. No maturity is possible without this sacrifice. Yet often a deep yearning for the lost possibilities and that enthusiasm takes hold of us. Innocence and youthful enthusiasm: we had them, and we did not have them. Life itself demanded that they be taken from us. #RandolphHarris 9 of 14
However, there are other things that we had and that were taken from us because we were guilty of taking them too much for granted. Some of us were deeply sensitive to the wonder of life as it is revealed in nature. Slowly, under the pressure of work and social life and the lure of cheap pleasures, we lost the wonder of our earlier years—the intense joy and sense of the mystery of life in the freshness of the young day or the glory of the dying afternoon, the splendor of the mountains and the infinite of the sea, or in the perfection of the movements of a young animal or of a flower breaking through the soil. We try perhaps to evoke such feelings again, but we find ourselves empty and do not succeed. We had that sensitivity and we did not have it, and it was taken from us. Others of us have has the same experiences with respect to music, poetry, great literature and the drama. We desired to devour all of these; we lived in them, and through them created for ourselves a life beyond our daily life. We had this experience and we did not have it. We did not allow it to grow. Our love for it was not strong enough, and so it was taken from us. Many people remember a time when the desire to solve the riddles of the Universe and to find truth was the driving force in their lives. #RandolphHarris 10 of 14
These beings could not rest satisfied with the littleness that see nothing beyond its own greed and desire. One was haunted by higher ideals than the ordinary; one wanted to be finer, cleaner, better and nobler human material than the common one. They entered college and the university not in order to gain access to the upper middle classes or the preconditions for social and economic success, but because they felt driven by their thirst for knowledge. They had something to which, seemingly, more could be added. However, their desire was not strong enough. They failed to nurture it, and so it was taken from them. Expediency and indifference towards truth took the place of genuine academic interest. Because their love for the truth was let go, they sometimes feel sick at heart; they realize that what they have lost may never be returned to them. We all know that any deep relationship to another human being requires watchfulness and nourishment; otherwise, it is taken from us. And we cannot recapture it. This is a form having and not having that is the root of innumerable human tragedies. We are all familiar with them. An outward organization may be useful to those who are still on the religious and mystical levels but for the purpose of philosophic advancement it is unnecessary. #RandolphHarris 11 of 14
Public societies are mere babels of strict and rigid opinions and lead in the end to confusion. The correct history of many spiritual organizations is not an edifying one. No formal association or institution is of any real worth here. Every student must work hard on and for oneself. Outside of that one may catch inspiration and receive help from an expert guide. The few who are able to walk together with one on this path will come along with time; the others would only be a drag. However, if one wants to join wit other really interested persons in studying the books together in an informal way, with no external bond, one may try it. And there is the most fundamental kind of having and not having—our having and losing God. Perhaps in our youth and innocence, and even beyond it, our experience of God was rich. We may remember the moments in which we felt God’s presence intensely. We may remember our praying with an overflowing heart, our encounter with the holy in words and music and holy places. We communicated with God; but this communication was taken from us, because we had it and did not have it. We failed to let it grow, and therefore, it slowly disappeared, leaving only an empty space. We became unconcerned, cynical and indifferent, not because we doubted our religious traditions—such doubt belongs to a life rich in God—but because we turned away from what once concerned us infinitely. #RandolphHarris 12 of 14
Such thoughts mark the first step in approaching the riddle of inequality. Those who have, receive more if they really have what they have, if they use it and cause it to grow. And those who have not, lose what they seem to have, because they really do not have it. The seeker after Reality will be suspicious of professional spirituality, although the seeker after religion will be attracted by it. It is not necessary to advertise inner attainment. One who would be a true philosopher must turn to the only source of true philosophy—the front within oneself. That is, one must turn inward, not outward to a group. Institutions tend to deaden inspirations. Of all things Truth is the freest. So, if a being is to find it in all its genuineness, and not in its distortions, caricatures, or fragmentation, not in any substitute for it, then one must preserve one’s own freedom to search for it. However, this is just what one cannot do so easily if one joins a sect. As I see it, the history of humankind divides into two great periods: the first one existed from time immemorial until roughly the Renaissance or Enlightenment, and it was characterized by the ritualist view of nature. The second period began with the efflorescence of the modern machine age and the domination of the scientific method and World view. In both periods beings wanted to control life and death, but in the first period they had to rely on a nonmachine technology to do it. #RandolphHarris 13 of 14
Primitive ritual manufacture of life may not have actually controlled the Universe, but at least it was never in any danger of destroying it. We control it up to a point—the point at which we seem to be destroying it. Besides, our belief in the efficacy of the machines control of nature has in itself elements of magic and ritual trust. Machines are supposed to work, and to work infallibly, since we have to put all our trust in them. And so when they fail to work our whole World view begins to crumble—just as the primitives’’ World view did when they found their rituals were not working in the face of New World culture and weaponry. I am thinking of how anxious we are to find the exact cause of an airplane crash, or how eager we are to attribute the crash to human error and not machine failure. Or even more, how certain authorities hush up their air crashes: how can machines fail in machine paradise? The fact is that beings in the New World did not know what was going on because they were faced with a technics so alien to their ways of thought probably explains our long puzzlement over the organization of primitive society. “Awake, and hear the words which I shall tell thee; for behold, I am come to declare unto you the glad tidings of great joy. For the Lord hath heard thy prayers, and hath judged of thy righteousness, and hath sent me to declare unto thee that thou mayest rejoice; and that thou mayest declare unto thy people, that they may also be filled with joy,” reports Mosiah 3.3-4. #RandolphHarris 14 of 14
The Struggle itself Toward the Heights is Enough to Fill a Being’s Heart—One Must Imagine Beings Happy!
And think of all the things you did, waking that ancient one Akasha and almost loosing her on humanity. As if we do not have enough monsters created by evolution. And then your adventure with the Body Thief. Coming into the flesh again, having that chance, and rejecting it for what you were before. You know your friend Gretchen is a stain in the jungles, do you not? Well, do not believe what you have read in the papers. Gretchen lost her mind; she is fixed in a state of hysteria and you believe it is your fault. I did not place judgement upon the incident. If we can go back to what I was saying. I was saying that you did everything but ask me to come! You challenged every form of authority; you sought every experience. You have buried yourself alive twice, and once tried to rise into the very Sun to make yourself a cinder. In simple situation neuroses the basic anxiety is lacking. Individuals are constituted by neurotic reactions to actual conflict situations on the part of people whose personal relations are undisturbed. The following may serve as another example of these cases as they frequently occur in a psychotherapeutic practice. A woman of twenty-five complained about heart pounding and anxiety states at night, with profuse perspiration. There were no organic findings, and all the evidence suggested that she was a healthy person. #RandolphHarris 1 of 18
The impression she gave was a warmhearted and straight forward woman. Five years before, for reasons which lay not so much in herself as in the situation, she had married a man twenty-five years older tan she. She had been very happy with him, had been satisfied in the pleasures of the flesh, had three children who had developed exceptionally well. She had been diligent and capable in housekeeping. In the past two or three years her husband had become somewhat cranky and less able to engage in pleasures of the flesh, but she had endured this without any neurotic reaction. The trouble had started seven months before, when a likable, marriageable man of her own age had begun to pay her personal attention. What had happened was that she had developed a resentment against her older husband but had entirely repressed this feeling for reasons that were very strong in view of her whole mental and social background and the basically good married relationship. With a little help in a few interviews she was able to face the conflict situation squarely and thereby rid herself of her anxiety. Nothing can better indicate the importance of basic anxiety than a comparison of individual reactions in cases of character neurosis with those in cases, like the one just cited, which belong to the group of simple situation neuroses. #RandolphHarris 2 of 18
The latter cases of neurosis are found in healthy persons who for understandable reasons are incapable of solving a conflict situation consciously, that is, they are unable to face the existence and the nature of the conflict and hence are incapable of making a clear decision. One of the outstanding differences between the two types of neuroses is the great facility of therapeutic results in the situation neurosis. In character neuroses therapeutic treatment has to proceed under great difficulties and consequently extends over a long period for the patient to wait to be cured; but the situation neurosis is comparatively easily solved. An understanding discussion of the situation is often not only a symptomatic but also a causal therapy. In other cases the causal therapy is the removal of the difficulty by changing the environment. Thus while in the situation neuroses we have the impression of an adequate relation between conflict situation and neurotic reaction, this relation seems to be missing in character neuroses. Because of the existing basic anxiety, the slightest provocation may elicit the most intense reaction, as well shall see later in more detail. #RandolphHarris 3 of 18
Although the range of manifest forms of anxiety, or the protection against it, is infinite and varies with each individual, the basic anxiety is more or less the same everywhere, varying only in extent and intensity. It may be roughly described as a feeling of being small, insignificant, helpless, deserted, endangered, in a World that is out to abuse, cheat, attack, humiliate, betray, envy. One patient of mine expressed this feeling in a picture she drew spontaneously, in which she was sitting in the midst of a scene as a tiny, helpless, undressed baby, surrounded by all sorts of menacing monsters, human and animal, ready to attack her. In psychoses one will often find a rather high degree of awareness of the existence of such an anxiety. In paranoid patients this anxiety is restricted to one or several definite persons; in schizophrenic patients there is often a keen awareness of the potential hostility of the World are them, so much so that they are inclined to take even a kindness shown to them as implying potential hostility. In neuroses, however, there is rarely an awareness of the existence of the basic anxiety, or of the basic hostility, as least not of the weight and significance it has for the entire life. #RandolphHarris 4 of 18
A patient of mine who saw herself in a dream as a small bird that had to hide in the cabinet in order not to be stepped upon—and thereby gave an absolutely true picture of how she acted in life—had not the remotest idea that factually she was frightened of everyone, and told me she did not know what anxiety was. A basic distrust toward everyone may be covered up by a superficial conviction that people in general are quite likable, and it may coexist with perfunctorily good relations with others; an existing deep contempt for everyone may be camouflaged by a readiness to admire. Although the basic anxiety concerns people it may be entirely divested of its personal character and transformed into a feeling of being endangered by thunderstorms, political events, germs, accidents, canned food, or to a feeling of being doomed by fate. It is not difficult for the trained observer to recognize the basis of these attitudes, but it always requires intense psychoanalytic work before the neurotic person oneself recognizes that one’s anxiety does not really concern germs and the like, but people, and that one’s irritation against people is not, or is not only, an adequate and justified reaction to some actual provocation, but that one has become basically hostile toward others, distrustful of them. #RandolphHarris 5 of 18
So long as a being, whether one be Duchess Meghan Markle or Tee Grizzly, one had to walk, eat, and work, one must use one’s individuality. What is lost by the scholar is one’s attachment to individuality with desires, hates, angers, and passions. Artistic expressions, even when dilettante, is one of the most satisfactory forms of objectifying and thus projecting inner tensions. The dance is undoubtedly the most ancient form of artistic expression; its unique position among the arts is guaranteed by more than mere seniority: as we have seen, the dance is essentially a cooperative art, an art of the isolated examples of solo and couple dances among ancient peoples, they are not truly solo or couple performances; they presuppose the presence of singing and rhythmically tapping audiences who open the dance or who join in it later. In pre-cultural human society dance must have been a universal form of expressing strong emotions collectively. Admittedly, there have been reports of some danceless peoples, yet so long as we accept testimonies from observers on animal-dances—for instance Dr Kohler’s reports that his apes had danced too—we cannot be far wrong in concluding that the dance was a universal play-form in pre-cultural communities. #RandolphHarris 6 of 18
Ancient people dance for every occasion—birth, initiation, marriage, death, war and so on. Sometimes the motive force appears to be an overflow of vitality and joy, at other times it seems to issue from a craving for the dissolution of the self, or it may be linked with magical practices, for instance, rain-making dances, hunting dances or war dancing. Dr. Oesterley believed that “all dancing was originally religious and was performed for religious purposes.” He insisted that the dance was sacred in origin and that every other type of dance was derived from this original religious dance. Dr. Oesterley sensed that in the dance the individual exerted oneself to reach beyond one’s limited selfhood and merge with a reality larger than one’s self. From the biological point of view this larger reality is the totality of the species, and not much can be gained by saying that a communion wit the community is merely a symbolization of a more significant and higher union, a union with God or with the essential principle of the Universe. A social communion is complete and there is nothing in it which transcends the species. It is, of course, true that a religious symbolization and dramatization of phylic communion can substantially assist the latter when the communal principle of the situation is stressed, but this does not alter the biosocial character of the experience. #RandolphHarris 7 of 18
Psychologically, the normal mind is synonymous with the mystical mind. In our unconsciousness we deny the collateral immediacy of our social inclusiveness and for this reason we project the lineal image of indefinite extension composing a being’s dream of a personal life eternal. Denying our organic unity of compass, we compensate in a fanciful unity of duration. What or who is using the body and mind of a self-realized person? Is it God or the being who acts, works, speaks, or writes then? It is true that the ego is kept but subordinated by God? Or does it vanish altogether and only seem present to the outer observer? We do not accept that interpretation of mystic experience which proclaims it to be an extinction of human personality in God’s being. The differences between human beings still remain after illumination. The variations which make each one a unique specimen and the individual that one is, still continue to exist. However, the Oneness behind human beings powerfully counterbalances. Still, the line of demarcation between beings and the World-Mind can be attenuated but not obliterated. It is perfectly possible to become impersonal in attitude and yet remain individual in consciousness. The winning of the one condition does not mean losing of the other. #RandolphHarris 8 of 18
We beings recoil from the bleak picture of an impersonality without feeling, a life without passion, or survival without ego. Yet it seems bleak because it is rarely known or seen in experience, and also because it is unfamiliar and unrealized. Freed at last from this ever-whirling wheel of birth and death to which one was tied by one’s own desire-nature, what happens to one can only be as opening up to a new better indescribable state, and it is so. One as one was vanishes, not into complete annihilation and certainly not into the Heaven of a perpetuated ego, but into a higher kind of life shrouded in mystery. They must face this dilemma in their thinking, that if their absolutist realization is a fixed and finished state there is no room for an ego in it, however sublimated, refined, and purged the ego may be. The end, then, can only be a merger, a dissolution into self-actualization and a total disappearance of the conscious reality of lack and limitation. This is a kind of death. However, there is another kind of salvation, a living one where unfoldment and growth still continue, albeit on higher levels than any which we now know. The gap between the finite human mind and the infinite World-Mind is absolute. A union between them is not possible unless the first merges and disappears into the second. #RandolphHarris 9 of 18
Will he have to surrender all conscious life and get in return the problematical advantage of a merger indistinguishable from complete annihilation? True, the possibility of further suffering will then be entirely eliminated. However, so will the possibility of further joy. It is a fallacy to think that this displacement of the lower self brings about its complete substitution by the infinite and absolute Deity. This fallacy is an ancient and common one in mystical circles and leads to fantastic declarations of self-deification. If the lower self is displaced, it is not destroyed. It lives on but in strict subordination to the higher one, the Overself, the divine soul of a being; and it is this latter, not the divine World-principle, which is the true displacing element. One is untied with, but not absorbed by, the infinite Overself. One is a part of it, but only individually so. This is one’s highest condition while still in the flesh. There is some kind of a distinction between one’s higher individual and the Universal Infinite out of which it is rayed. And this distinction remains in one’s higher mystical state, which is not one of total absorption and utter destruction of this individuality but the mergence of its own will in the universal will, the closet intimacy of its own being with the universal being. #RandolphHarris 10 of 18
One does not discover the absurd without being tempted to write a manual of happiness. What! By such narrow ways? There is but one World, however. Happiness and the absurd are sons of the same Earth. They are inseparable. It would be a mistake to say that happiness necessarily springs from the absurd discovery. It happens as well that the feeling of the absurd springs from happiness. The Overself is one with the World-Mind without however being lost in it. There is no final absorption; the individual continues to exist somehow in the Supreme. The fact that one can pass away into it at will and yet remain again, proves this. Something is there, something must take the place of the absent ego to perform its function and do in the World what needs to be done. The unit of mind is differentiated out and undergoes its long evolution through numerous changes of state, not to merge so utterly in its source again as to be virtually annihilated, but to be consciously harmonized with the source whilst yet retaining its individuality. If on the other hand one is conscious of oneself in the divine being, on the other one is conscious of oneself in the human ego. The two can coexist, and at this stage of advance, do. However, the ego must knit itself to the higher self until they become like a single entity. #RandolphHarris 11 of 18
When one’s mind is immovably fixed in this state, one’s personal will permanently directed by the higher one, one is said to have attained the true mystical life. All is not, has not been, exhausted. It drives out of this World a God who had comes into it with dissatisfaction and preference for futile sufferings. It makes of fate a human matter, which must be settled among beings. Silent joy is contained therein. One’s fate belongs to one. One’s soul is one’s thing. In the Universe suddenly restored to its silence, the myriad wondering little voices of the Earth rise up. Unconscious, secret calls, invitations from all the faces, they are the necessary reverse and price of victory. There is no Sun without shadow, and it is essential to know the night. The absurd being says yes and one’s effort will henceforth be unceasing. If there is a personal fate, there is no higher destiny, or at least there is but one which one concludes is inevitable and despicable. For the rest, one knows oneself to be the master of one’s days. At that subtle moment when beings glance backward over their life, in that slight pivoting one contemplates that series of unrelated actions which becomes one’s fate, created by one, combined under one’s memory’s eye and soon sealed by one’s death. #RandolphHarris 12 of 18
Thus, convinced of the wholly human origin of all that is human, a vision impaired being eager to see who knows that the night has no end, one is still on the go. The rock is still rolling. We are left at the foot of Heaven. One always finds one’s burden again. However, it is the higher fidelity that negates God and raises rocks. All is well. This Universe henceforth without a master seems to neither be sterile nor futile. Each atom of that stone, each mineral flake of that night-filled mountain, in itself forms a World. The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a being’s heart. One must imagine others happy. The belief that any institution or organization is divine has led to much superstition and unnecessary strife: the true belief that all such things are strictly human, and therefore fallible, as history repeatedly confirms, would have saved humankind much suffering. All observation and experience suggests that when the things of the spirit are brought into organized forms, such as societies and sects, the harm done to members counterbalances the good. Do not look for any group formation created by a philosopher, for you will find none. One is sponsored by no church, no sect, no cult, no organization of any kind, for one needs none. One’s credentials come from within, not from any outside source. #RandolphHarris 13 of 18
One requires no one to flatter one’s personal importance. We are also reminded that someday we shall be forgotten. Since we cannot endure the thought we repress it. The literature of humankind is full of stories in which kings as well as beggars are reminded of their having to die. Beings cannot stand the anticipation of death, and so they repress it. In the Vampire Armand by Anne Rice, when Armand is dying he says, “It is not my time. I know it. And such a statement cannot be undone by a mere handful of hours. Smash the ticking clock. They meant, by a soul’s incarnate life, it was not time. Some destiny carved in my infant had will not be so soon fulfilled or easily defeated.” We cannot smash the clock, we cannot ignore fate. The repression does not remove one’s ever present anxiety, and there are moments in life of everyone when such repression is not even slightly effective. Then, we ask ourselves—will there be a time when I shall be forgotten, forever? The meaning of the anxiety of having to die is the anxiety that one will be forgotten both now and eternity. “Ah, but what if there are many lands?” says Armand. “What if on the second fall, I find myself on yet another shore, and sulfur rises from the boiling Earth and not the beauty first revealed to me. I hurt. These tears are scalding. So much is lost. I cannot remember. It seems I say those same word so much. I cannot remember.” #RandolphHarris 14 of 18
Every living being resists being pushed into the past without a new presence. A powerful symbol of this state of being forgotten is being buried. Armand goes on to express his feelings about the subject, while he is on his death bed. “These events involved all the other souls whom I never touched; I saw now the hurts I had inflicted, and the words of mine which had brought solace, and I saw the result of the most casual and unimportant things I had done. I saw the banquet hall of the Florentines, and in the midst of them, I saw the blundering loneliness with which they stumbled into death. I saw the isolation and the sadness of their souls as they had fought to stay alive.” Burial means being removed from the realm of awareness, a removal from the surface of the Earth. The meaning of Jesus’ resurrection is intensified by the words in the Creed that he was buried. A rather superficial view of the anxiety of death states that this anxiety is the fear of the actual process of dying, which of course may be agonizing, but which can also be very easy. No, in the depth of the anxiety of having to die is the anxiety of being eternally forgotten. Beings have never been able to bear this thought. An expression of one’s utter resistance is the way the Greeks spoke of glory as the conquest of being forgotten. Today, the same thing is called historical significance. #RandolphHarris 15 of 18
If one can, one builds castles, mansions, memorial halls or creates memorial foundations. It is consoling to think that we might be remembered for a certain time beyond death not only by those who loved us or hated us or admired us, but also by those who never knew us expect now by name. Some names are remembered for centuries. Hope is expressed in the poet’s proud assertion that the traces of one’s Earthly days cannot vanish in eons. However, these traces, which unquestionably exist in the physical Word, are not we ourselves, and they do not bear our name. They do not keep us from being forgotten. Is there anything that can keep us from being forgotten? That we were known from eternity and will be remembered in eternity is the only certainty that can save us from the horror of being forgotten forever. We cannot be forgotten because we are known eternally, beyond past and future. However, although we cannot be forgotten, we can forget ourselves—namely, our true being, that of us that is eternally known and eternally remembered. And whether or not we forget or remember most of those things we experience every hour is not ultimately important. However, it is infinitely important that we not forget ourselves, this individual being, not to be repeated, unique, eternally precious, and delivered into our hands. #RandolphHarris 16 of 18
Unfortunately, it may then be mistreated, overlooked, and imprisoned. Yet, if we remember it, and become aware of its infinite significance, we realize that we have been known in the past and that we will not be forgotten in the future. For the truth of our own being I rooted in the ground of being, from which it comes and to which it returns. Nothing truly real is forgotten eternally, because everything real comes from eternity and goes to eternity. And I speak now of all individual beings and not solely of humans. Nothing in the Universe is unknown, nothing real is ultimately forgotten. The atom that moves in an immeasurable path today and the atom that moved in an immeasurable path billions of years ago are rooted in the eternal ground. There is no absolute, no completely forgotten past, because the past, like the future, is rooted in the divine life. Nothing is completely pushed into the past. Nothing real is absolutely lost and forgotten. We are together with everything real in the divine life. Only the unreal, in us around us, is pushed into the past forever. This is what last judgment means—to separate in us, as in everything, what has true and final being from what is merely transitory and empty of true being. We are never forgotten, but much in us that we liked and for which we longed may be forgotten forever. #RandolphHarris 17 of 18
Such judgment goes on in every moment of our lives, but the process is hidden in time and manifest only in eternity. Therefore, let us push into the past and forget what should be forgotten forever, and let us go forward to that which expresses our true being and cannot be lost in eternity. “But behold, this is not all; for ye ought to know as I do know, that inasmuch as ye shall keep to commandments of God ye shall prosper in the land; and ye ought to know also, that inasmuch as ye will not keep the commandments of God ye shall be cut off from his presence. Now this is according to his word,” reports Alma 36.30. A person who seeks God and wants to pursue this quest of truth will have to become a different being—different from what one was in past because the old innate tendencies have to be replaced by new ones, and different from other beings because one must refuse to be led unresistingly into the thoughtlessness, the irreverence, and the coarseness which pervade them. It is not only a moral change that is called for but also a mental one, not only a physical but also a metaphysical one. There is no need to let go of one’s humanness in order to find one’s divine essence, but only of its littleness, its satisfaction with trivial aims. #RandolphHarris 18 of 18
This is the Price that Must be Paid for the Passions of this Earth thus I Have Given the Recipe for the Absurd Victory!
Making sense of the senseless and finding the freedom in a capricious, perilous World is our primary philosophical concern. We must help each other live with and even benefit from the unfathomable conditions of life. When meaning or traditions dissolve, the legend of Christ becomes relevant. Mourners understand it; so do unemployed factory workers. Victims of war, crime, and brutality also know it, as do passionless couples. Why do they (or we) get up in the morning? How do they/we face the futility of our lives? We all have limits and destinies to play out, and we are all used for mysterious ends. The questions are, What are we going to make of out limits and destinies? How are we going to respond to them? Are we going to accept them passively—as many who are depressed and dependent do—or are we going to deny them—as do many who boast? Finally, are we going to engage them, try to fashion something of value from them, and surrender to them only when nothing is left? That is what therapy must inquire. We live facing he curve of the gulf, the sparking sea, and the smiles of the Earth. A decree of God is necessary. We must not let anyone snatch us from our joys, leading us forcibly back to the underworld, where our rock is ready for us. Many of us are abused heroes. We are as, as much through our passions and through our torture. #RandolphHarris 1 of 20
Our scorn of God, our hatred of death, and our passions for life wins us that unspeakable penalty in which the whole being is exerted toward accomplishing noting. This is the price that must be paid for the passions of this Earth. Legends are made for the imagination to breathe life into them. As for this one, one sees merely the whole effort of a body straining to raise the stone, which represents our would, to roll it and push it up a slope a hundred times over; one see the face screwed up, the cheek tight against the stone, the shoulder bracing the clay-covered mass, the foot wedging it, the fresh start with arms outstretched, the wholly human security of two Earth-clotted hands. At the very end of this long effort measures by skyless space and times without depth, the purpose is achieved. We watch our soul rush down in a few moments toward that lower World whence we will have to push it up again toward the summit (Heaven). We go back down to the plain. We do not have a chip on our shoulder, but a mighty and serious tasks that could cost us our blessing of eternal life. Sometimes we go back down with a heavy measure stepping toward the torment of which we will never know the end. The lucidity that is to constitute our torture at the same time crowns our victory. There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn. If the descent is thus sometime performed in sorrow, it can also take place in joy. This word is not too much. #RandolphHarris 2 of 20
Ancient wisdom confirms modern heroism. Yes, you can, you have made images before for mortals. You know you can. You have wrapped them in spells. You are as strong as we are. You have achieved a very interesting stage in your development. I knew I was right about you all along. I am in awe of you. Human’s aggressive behavior has manifested in war, crime, personal quarrels, and all kinds of destructive and sadistic behavior and it is due to a phylogenetically programmed, innate instinct which seeks for discharge and waits for the proper occasion to be expressed. Nothing short of an analysis in depth of our social system can disclose the reasons for the increase in destructiveness, or suggest ways and means of reducing it. The instinctivistic theory offers to relieve us of the hard task of making such an analysis. It implies that, even if we all must perish, we can at least do so with the conviction that our nature forced this fate upon us, and that we understand why everything had to happen as it did. In contemporary industrial society, beings are cerebrally oriented, feel little, and consider emotions a useless ballast—those of the psychologists as well as those of their subjects. Defensive aggression is, indeed, part of human nature, even though not an innate instinct, as it used to be classified. #RandolphHarris 3 of 20
All human aggression, including the passion to kill and to torture is an outcome of biologically given aggression, transformed from a beneficial to a destructive force because of a number of factors. However, human groups differ so fundamentally in the respective degree of destructiveness that the fact can hardly be explained by the assumption that destructiveness are cruelty are innate; various degrees of destructiveness can also be correlated to other psychical factors and to differences in respective social structures, and the degree of destructiveness increases with the increased development of civilization, rather than the opposite. Human beings are the only primates that kills and tortures members of their own species without any reason, either biological or economic, and who feels satisfaction in doing so. Humans can be driven by love or by the passion to destroy; in each case one satisfies one of one’s existential needs: the need to effect, or to move something, to make a dent. Whether human’s dominant passion is love or whether it is destructiveness depends largely on social circumstances; these circumstances, however, operate in references to human’s biologically given existential situation and the needs springing from it and not to an infinitely malleable, undifferentiated psyche, as environmentalist theory assumes. #RandolphHarris 4 of 20
All instincts spring from this psychophysical constitution and noninstinctual character-rooted passions, too, are the outcome of one’s biological constitution. This theoretical basis opens up the possibility for a detailed discussion of the various forms of character-rooted, malignant aggression, especially of sadism—the passion for unrestricted power over another sentient being—and of necrophilia—the passion to destroy life and the attraction to all that is dead, decaying, and purely mechanical. These impulses can be conscious, but more often they are unconscious. They are, most of the time, integrated in a relatively stable character structure. The realm of human passions consists of love, hate, ambition, greed, jealousy, envy. By investigating these aspects of reality, we are able to research human’s soul in its most secret and subtle manifestations. Life instinct and death instinct give human destructiveness its dignity as one of two fundamental passions in humans. It frees such passions as the strivings to love, to be free, as well as the drive to destroy, to torture, to control, and to submit, from their forced married to instincts. Instincts are a purely natural category, while the character-rooted passions are a sociobiological, historical category. #RandolphHarris 5 of 20
Although not directly serving physical survival passions are as strong—and often even stronger—that instincts. They form the basis for being’s interest in life, one’s enthusiasm, one’s excitement; they are the stuff from which not only one’s dreams are made but art, religion, myth, drama—all that makes life worth living. Beings cannot live as nothing but an object, as dice thrown out of a cup one; suffers severely when one is reduced to the level of a feeding or propagating machine, even if one has all the security one wants. Beings seek for drama and excitement; when one cannot get satisfaction on a higher level, one created for oneself the drama of destruction. The contemporary climate of thought encourages the axiom that a motive can be intense only when it serves an organic need—for instance, that only instincts have intense motivating power. If one discards this mechanistic, reductionist viewpoint and starts from a holistic premise, one beings to realize that being’s drives must be seen in terms of their function for the life process of the whole organism. Their intensity is not due to specific physiological needs, but to the need of the whole organism to survive—to grow both physically and mentally. #RandolphHarris 6 of 20
These passions do not become powerful only after the more elementary ones have been satisfied. They are at the very root of human existence, and not a kind of luxury which can afford after the normal, lower needs have been satisfied. People have experienced death by suicide because of their failure to realize their passions for love, power, fame, revenge. Causes of death by suicide because of a lack of satisfaction in pleasures of the flesh are virtually nonexistent. These noninstinctual passions excite beings, fire one on, make life worth living. Un homme sans passions et desires cesserait d’etre un homme (a being without passion or desires would cease to be a being). This statement is of course to be understood in the context of the philosophical thinking of the Old World. People from the Old World have an entirely different concept of passions. In order to appreciate the difference between Old World and New World passions, we have to understand the distinction between irrational passions, such as ambition and greed, and rational passions, such as love and care for all sentient beings. What is relevant, however, is not this difference, but the idea that life concerned mainly with its own maintenance is inhuman. When the images of Earth cling too tightly to memory, when the call for happiness becomes too insistent, it happens that melancholy rises in a being’s heart. #RandolphHarris 7 of 20
When I speak of passions, I refer to all energy-charged impulses as distinct from those which have their origin in the need for the physiological maintenance of the body. Love and no-greed are, I believe, the highest form of manifestation of human energy. The human passions transform beings from a mere thing into a hero, into a being that in spite of tremendous limitations tries to make sense of life. One wants to be one’s own creator, to transform one’s state of being unfinished into one with some goal and some purpose, allowing one to achieve some degree of integration. Being’s passions are not banal psychological complexes that can be adequately explained as caused by childhood traumata. They can be understood only if one goes beyond the realm of reductionist psychology and recognizes them for what they are: being’s attempt to make sense out of life and to experience the optimum of intensity and strength one can (or believes one can) achieve under the given circumstances. They are one’s religion, one’s cult, one’s ritual, which one as to hide (even from oneself) in so far as they are disapproved by one’s group. To be sure, by bribery and extortion, for instance, by skillful conditioning, one can be persuaded to relinquish one’s religion and to be concerted to the general cult of the no-self, the automaton. Crushing truths perish from being acknowledged. Thus we obey faith without know it. #RandolphHarris 8 of 20
However, this psychic cure deprives one of the best one has, of being a human and not as a thing. The truth is that all human passions, both the good and the evil, can be understood only as a person’s attempt to make sense of one’s life. Change is possible only if one is able to convert oneself to a new way of making sense of life by mobilizing one’s life-furthering passions and thus experiencing a superior sense of vitality and integration to the one one had before. Unless this happens one can be domesticated, but one cannot be cured. However, even though the life-furthering passions are conducive to a greater sense of strength, joy, integration, and vitality than destructiveness and cruelty, the latter are as much an answer to the problem of human existence as the former. Even the most sadistic and destructive being is human, as human as the saint. One can be called a warped and sick being who has failed to achieve a better answer to the challenge of having been born human, and this is true; one can also be called a human who took the wrong way in search of one’s salvation. Salvation comes from the Latin root sal, “salt” (in Spanish salud, “health”). The meaning stems from the fact that salt protects meat from decomposition; “salvations” is the protection of beings from decomposition (to protect one’s health and well-being). In this sense each being needs “salvation” (in a nonetheologial sense). #RandolphHarris 9 of 20
These considerations by no means imply, however, that destructiveness and cruelty are not vicious; they only imply that vice is human. They are indeed destructive of life, of body and spirit, destructive not only of the victim but of the destroyer oneself. They constitute a paradox: they express life turning against itself in the striving to make sense of it. They are the only true perversion. Understanding them does not mean condoning them. However, unless we understand the, we have no way to recognize how they may be reduced, and what factors tend to increase them. Such understanding is of particular importance today, when sensitivity toward destructiveness—cruelty is rapidly diminishing, and necrophilia, the attraction to what is dead, decaying, lifeless, and purely mechanical, is increasing throughout our cybernetic industrial society. The spirit of necrophilia was expressed in literary form by F.T. Marinetti in his Futurist Manifesto of 1909. The same tendency can be seen in much of the art and literature of the last decades that exhibits a particular fascination with all that is decayed, unalive, destructive, and mechanical. The Falangist motto, Long life death, threatens to become the secret principle of a society in which the conquest of nature by the machine constitutes the very meaning of progress, and where the living person becomes an appendix to the machine. #RandolphHarris 10 of 20
According to Memnoch in Memnoch The Devil “First, to be worthy of Heaven—to have a ghost of a chance with God, I could say—the Soul had to understand life and death in the simplest sense. I found many souls who did. Next there had to be in this understanding an appreciation of the Beauty of God’s work, the harmony of Creation from God’s point of view, a vision of Nature wrapped in endless and overlapping cycles of survival and reproduction and evolution and growth. Many souls had come to understand this. Many had. But many who thought life was beautiful, felt that death was sad and endless and terrible and they would have chosen never to have been born, had they been given the choice!” And when God decides to come down to Earth as Jesus, he response by saying, “I am God Incarnate.” How could I have a human soul? What is important is that I will remain in this body as it is tortured and slain; and my death will be evidence of my Love for those whom I have created and allowed to suffer so much. I will share their pain and know the pain. My resurrection will confirm the eternal return of the spring after winter. It will confirm that Nature all things have evolved have their place.” This study tries to clarify the nature of this necrophilous passion and the social conditions that tend to foster it. #RandolphHarris 11 of 20
The conclusion will be that help in any broad sense can come only through radical changes in our social and political structure that would reinstate beings to their supreme role in society. The call for “law and order” (rather than for life and structure) and for stricter punishment of criminals, as well as the obsession with violence and destruction among some “revolutionaries,” are only further instances of the powerful attraction of necrophilia in the contemporary World. We need to create the conditions that would make the growth of beings, this unfinished and uncompleted being—unique in nature—the supreme goal of all social arrangements. Genuine freedom and independence and the end of all forms of exploitative control are the conditions for mobilizing the love of life, which is the only force that can defeat the love for the dead. We have considered forgetting as a way in which life drives towards its own renewal. What and how do we forget? What did Saint Paul forget, when he strained forward to what lay ahead? Obviously, he longed to forget his past as a pharisee and a persecutor of Christianity. However, every word of his letters proves that he never forgot. There seem to be different kinds of forgetting. There is the natural forgetting of yesterday and most of the things that happened in it. If reminded, we might still remember some of them; but slowly, even they tend to disappear. #RandolphHarris 12 of 20
The whole day disappears, and only what was really significant in it is remembered. So most of the days of our lives vanish in forgetfulness. This natural process of forgetting operates without our cooperation, like the circulation of our blood. However, there is another aspect of forgetting that is familiar to us all. Something in us prevents us from remembering, when remembering proves to be too difficult and painful. We forget benefits, because of the burden of gratitude is too heavy for us. We forget former loves, because the burden of obligations implied by them surpasses our strength. We forget former hates, because the task of nourishing them would disrupt our mind. We forget former pain, because it is still too painful. We forget former guilt, because we cannot endure its sting. Such forgetting is not the natural, daily form of forgetting. It demands our cooperation. We repress what we cannot stand. We forget it by entombing it within us. Ordinary forgetting liberates us from innumerable small things in a natural process. Forgetting by repression does not liberate us, but seems to cut us off from what makes us suffer. We are not entirely successful, however, because the memory is buried within us, and influences every moment of our growth. And sometimes it breaks through its prison and strikes at us directly and painfully. #RandolphHarris 13 of 20
Then there is a forgetting, to which Saint Paul witnesses, that liberates us not from the memory of past guilt but from the pain it brings. The grand old name for this kind of forgetting is repentance. Today, repentance is associated with a half-painful, half-voluptuous emotional concentration on one’s guilt, and not with a liberating forgetfulness. However, originally it meant a turning around, leaving behind the wrong way and turning towards the right. It means pushing the consciousness and pain of guilt into the past, not by repressing it, but by acknowledging it, and receiving the word of acceptance in spite of it. If we are able to repent, we are able to forget, not because the forgotten act was unimportant, and not because we repress what we cannot endure, but because we have acknowledged our guilt and can now live with it. For it is eternally forgotten. This was how Saint Paul forgot what lay behind him, although it always remained with him. This kind of forgetting is decisive for our personal relationships. None of them is possible without a silent act of forgiving, repeated again and again. Forgiving presupposes remembering. And it creates a forgetting not in the natural way we forget yesterday’s weather, but in the way of the great in spite of that says: I forget although I remember. Without this kind of forgetting no human relations could endure healthily. #RandolphHarris 14 of 20
I do not refer to a solemn act of asking for and offering forgiveness. Such rituals as sometimes occur between parents and children, or friends, or man and wife, are often acts of moral arrogance on the one part and enforced humiliation on the other. However, I speak of the lasting willingness to accept one who has hurt us. Such forgiveness is the highest form of forgetting, although it is not forgetfulness. The stumbling block of having violated another is pushed into the past, and there is the possibility of something new in the relationship. Forgetting in spite of remembering is forgiveness. We can live only because our guilt is forgiven and thus eternally forgotten. And we can love only because we forgive and are forgiven. The techniques of ritual beings imagined that they took firm control of the material World, and at the same time transcended that World by fashioning their own invisible projects which made them supernatural, raised them over and over above material decay and death. In the World of ritual there are not even any accidents, and accidents, as we know, are the things that make life most precarious and meaningless. Our knees grow weak when we think of a young lady of awesome beauty who dies in a plane crash simply because she was working to make an honest living; if life can be so subject to chance, it must not have too much meaning. #RandolphHarris 15 of 20
However, how can that be that life has no meaning, since we are alive and since creatures are so marvelous? Primitive beings take care of this problem by imagining that one’s control over nature is fairly complete, and that in any case nothing ever happens unless somebody wants it to happen. So a person dies in a plane crash because some powerful dead spirit is jealous of that living, or some witch is secretly working her ritual against that person. In psychoanalysis, working through all the different individual forms of anxiety, one gradually recognizes the fact that the basic anxiety underlies all relationships to people. While the individual anxieties may be stimulated by actual cause, the basic anxiety continues to exist even though there is no particular stimulus in the actual situation. If the whole neurotic picture were compared to a state of political unrest in a nation, the basic anxiety and basic hostility would be similar to the underlying dissatisfactions with and protests against the regime. Surface manifestations may be entirely missing in either case, or they may appear in diversified forms. In the state they may appear as riots, strikes, assemblies, demonstrations; in the psychological sphere, too, the forms of anxiety may manifest themselves in symptoms of all sorts. Regardless of the particular provocation, all manifestations of the anxiety emanate from one common background. #RandolphHarris 16 of 20
All too soon an institution becomes a restricted, or even closed, system. Its ideas get frozen into strict and rigid doctrines, its members begin to suffer from intellectual paralysis, and its methods begin to savour of totalitarianism or tyranny. The being who is captured by a particular religion, sect, group, or organization frequently builds a wall around it, sets up a barrier between oneself and non-members, excludes every approach to God other than one’s own. The independent seeker, who affiliates oneself with no sectarian group, no fanatic organization, no narrowing cult, avoids the tensions and discards the prejudices which such affiliation usually brings with it. For those who are affiliated, contact with other denominations creates the need of defending the selfish interests and the given strict and rigid doctrines of their own, either directly or obliquely by attacking the others. In this way the tensions and prejudices arise and subsist. They cannot come to an end until this exclusiveness itself comes to an end. How many evils, hatreds, fights, and injustices come from it! How many unjust malignments of character does it lead to! How much blind bigotry does it cause, a bigotry which refuses to allow, and is unable to see, the good in cults other than its own! As soon as they begin to organize a movement, the other things begin also to emerge—the narrow fanaticism, the limiting sectarianism, the intolerant attitude. #RandolphHarris 17 of 20
Every organization which perpetuates strict and rigid doctrines dares not admit new ideas which correct the error of those strict and rigid doctrines, for such ideas would affront the beliefs of its followers! In all matters spiritual, mystical, and religious, humanity is bewitched both by spell of the past and the prestige of the institution. There are several systems, methods, groups, and organizations, but of acceptable ones there are only few. Too often the clinging to a particular teacher, the membership of a particular groups, leads at best to a naïve faith in the self-sufficiency of the tenets advocated, at worst to a new sectarianism. Sectarianism, zealotry, and bigotry develop by stages in the minds of followers. Typically, the bigger an organization becomes, the more likely are dissentions and quarrels to arise within it, despite all its professions of special sanctity or proclamations of fellowship and love. The essential things get gradually lost, the accidental are made more of and treasured up. The Spirit is squeezed out, the superfluities brought in. One may be said to have entered and settled in the fourth state of consciousness when one is aware of its purity egolessness and freedom at all times, and even during the torpor of sleep or the activity of work. When this awareness is so stabilized that it maintains itself at all times awake or asleep, one is at the end of the quest. #RandolphHarris 18 of 20
The divine presence does not leave the enlightened being when one goes to sleep and return to one when one awakes, nor does it leave one when enters the state of dream and return to one when one leaves it; it is in truth something which is ever present. If one enters the sleeping state, one enters it while in the light of knowledge, and the same applies if one enters the dream state. The enlightened persons does not retire at night in the darkness, the ignorance of ordinary sleep, but in the light of the Consciousness, the ever-unbroken Transcendence. One’s sleep is a suspended state, with one’s awareness never fully lost but retracted into a pin-point. There are no breaks in the awareness of one’s higher nature. There is no loss of continuity in the consciousness of one’s immortal spirit. Therefore one is not illuminated at some hour of the day and unillumined at another hour, nor illumined while one is awake and unillumined while one is asleep. That alone is the final attainment which can remain with one through all the three states—waking, dream, and deep sleep—and though all the day’s activities. “And I know, O Lord, that thou hast all power, and can do whatsoever thou wilt for the benefit of beings; therefore touch these stones, O Lord, with thy finger, and prepare them that they may shine forth in darkness; and they shall shine forth unto us in the vessels which we have prepared, that we may have light while we shall cross the sea,” reports Ether 3.4. #RandolphHarris 19 of 20
The distinction between one’s lower self and higher self will slowly become clear to one through inner experience and reflection thereon. As I listened, rapt, to all details both large and small, he told me the provenance of the pearls sewn into my tunic, of how they had come from the oysters of the sea. Boys had dived into the depths to bring these precious round white treasures up to the surface, carrying them in their very mouths. Emeralds came from mines within the Earth. Men killed for them. And diamonds, as, look at these diamonds. He took a ring from his finger and put it on mine, his fingertips stroking my finger gently as he made sure of the fit. Diamonds are the white light of God, he said. Diamonds are pure. What, in a general way, is missing in one’s development as a human being moving on from animality to higher Awareness must be supplied. By prayer and study the mind returns, like a circle, upon itself, with the result that when this movement is successfully completed, it knows itself in its deepest divinest phase. That which appears as the spiritual seeker engaged on a Quest is itself the spiritual self that being sought. We have not to become divine for we are divine. We have, however, to think and do what is divine. “Behold, O Lord, thou canst do this. We know that thou art able to show forth great power, which looks small unto the understanding of beings,” reports Ether 3.5. Despites many ordeals, my advanced age and the nobility of my soul make me conclude that all is well. #RandolphHarris 20 of 20
The Course of Each Quester is Not Necessarily Invariable Nor are One’s Experiences Always Inevitable
He had lost his hold of the magnetic chain of humanity. He was no longer a brother-man, opening the chambers of the dungeons of our common nature by the key of holy sympathy, which gave him a right to share in all its secrets; he was now a cold observer, looking on humankind as the subject of his experiment, and, at length, converting man and woman to be his puppets, and pulling the wires that moved them to such degrees of crimes as were demanded for his study. Aggression emerges on the spectrum at that point where overt conflict also emerges. Although conflict may be faintly detected in self-affirmation and may be even slightly more noticeable in self-assertion, on those levels it is typically directed inward. There is a conflict within me, for example, when I get m nerve up to assert myself before a large audience to ask a question of the speaker; the conflict may then be invisible to the outside World. However, in aggression there is no question about the overt conflict. There occurs a pitting of interest against interest, and the aggressive act is an endeavor to come to some resolution in this conflict. A Pandora’s box of moral maladies is opened if, following the habit in America, we condemn aggression as evil as soon as it shows its head. #RandolphHarris 1 of 14
To that kind of thinking, the power of the status quo is automatically beneficent and God-given, whether it be the state troopers going in to slaughter at Garlic Festival or the police quelling a Sacramento riot; just as automatically the rebel is seen as evil. Thus we have the tendency to label one act as aggressive and, therefore, to be condemned when performed by those out of power, and to label the exact same act as good when performed by those in power (or vice versa). The reason aggression terrifies people so much is that it involves the potentiality of force. The force in aggression can take away our lives in the physical, intellectual, or spiritual sense. Physical force is understood well enough. Intellectual aggression may have the same compelling quality, as in abrasive argument—especially argumentum ad hominem. Or the coercion may be spiritual, as in the threat of ostracism or excommunication. That is last can be a great threat is shown by the phenomenon known as “voodoo death.” A condemned person who is “cut dead” in primitive society, as a punishment, say, for breaking one of the taboos, falls to the ground; one’s pulse becomes thready; one pants and breathes hard; and in a few hours one dies. Even in advanced societies “cutting one dead” is an aggressive act that is both psychological and spiritual and produces potent results. #RandolphHarris 2 of 14
The Janus-faced nature of aggression can be seen in that word’s Latin root aggredi, which means “to go forward, to approach.” Primarily, this means to “approach someone for counsel or advice.” Second, it means “to move against” or “to move with intent to hurt.” In other words, aggression in origin is pure conjecture, a reaching out, a making contact either for friendly affirmation of yourself and another or for hostile purposes the way a bear hug is part f a puglist’s technique. The opposite of aggression is not loving peace or consideration or friendship, but isolation, the state of no contact at all. This is actually the state of the person—the understanding of whom may be obtained by looking within one’s self and not necessarily observing in a mental hospital—who can brook no rebuke of what one does or thinks; soon one can accept no correction; and, finally, no comment at all. One becomes totally isolated from other persons. As so often happens in psychotherapy, when the patient expresses some negation—“I feel you are attacking me. I cannot stand that…”—or when the therapist says: “What you are saying makes me angry; let us see why,” both together can explore what sensitive spot was hit. #RandolphHarris 3 of 14
When these aspects of aggression are worked though, there is not only a clearing of the air but both arrive at a new and deeper understanding of the other and, generally—since we love people for their faults as well as their virtues—a greater affection for the other too. The constructive forms of aggression include cutting through barriers to initiate a relationship; confronting another without intent to hurt but wit the intent to penetrate into one’s consciousness; waring off powers that threaten one’s integrity; actualizing one’s own self and one’s own ideas in hostile environments; overcoming the barriers to healing. Love-making and fighting are very similar neurophysiologically in human beings. Lovers’ quarrels often end up in pleasures of the flesh. There is a strange relationship between the fighter and the lover: the knight rescuing the maiden from the dragon and enjoying pleasures of the flesh with are part of the same fable. In fighting there is a vivid intimacy, a closeness that partakes of both hate and love, an intimacy held off by hatred but an intimacy nevertheless, and it can blossom into affection or love. An example of this is seen in Armand the Vampire by Anne Rice when Armand has a one night encounter of the pleasures of the flesh with Lord Harlech. Lord Harlech tries to kill him, but Armand escapes. Only for Lord Harlech to track him down, break into his house, and kill two of the boys. Armand is so upset that he refuses to hide and goes after Lord Harlech to take his life. #RandolphHarris 4 of 14
The two of them get into a fight and Lord Harlech cuts Armand, then Armand slashes his throat, but he did not die. As the battle continues, Lord Harlech expresses his feelings. “You horrid damnable little devil,” he said. “You made me adore you so you could draw and quarter me at your pleasure. You promised me you would come back!” The Armand says that, Lord Harlech “kept up this sort of verbal barrage the entire time we fought. He seemed to need it, rather like a goading battle drum and fife.” “Come on, you despicable little Angel, I will tear your wings off!” Lord Harlech said. This battle proves that there is a strange relationship between fighting and love. Because Lord Harlech could not get the love he wanted and had an obsession, he fighting Armand was the only way he could get close to him, but it blossom into affection, as Armand and Riccardo ended Lord Harlech’s life, and Lord Harlech poisoned Armand. So I guess it pays to be careful who you fight with. The negative side of aggression is what is normally referred to in our society and thus does not require much definition here. It consists essentially of contact with another with intent to injure or give pain, taking power from the other for one’s self-protection or simply to increase one’s own power. #RandolphHarris 5 of 14
Why has the beneficial side of aggression been so consistently repressed and the negative side so emphasized? One obvious reason is that we have been terrified of aggression, and we assume—delusion though it is—that we can better control it if we center all our attention on its destructive aspects as though that is all there is. This identification of a word with only its negative meanings (such as expletives and devil) is one of the oldest misuses of the diamonic. In so doing we proscribe the whole area by labeling it off limits, so that anyone who talks about the devil is already under his power. Another reason we tend to emphasize only the negative side of aggression is that it carries with it anxiety and guilt. We think we can better avoid that anxiety and guilt if we call Prometheus a fanciful legend and posit ourselves as saved from anxiety and guilt by the second Adam, Christ. When this is done through rigid and strict doctrines, as it is by many fundamentalists, it does give the individual a certain amount of control. However, the system of control is shaky at best. Its value is grossly outweighed by the harm it does in truncating consciousness and blocking off sensitivity and understanding of others. The truth is that practically everything we do is a mixture of positive and negative forms of aggression. #RandolphHarris 6 of 14
Before I give a lecture, I find myself getting in the mod of “If anyone foes to sleep, my voice and ideas will be so importunate that I will wake him up” (which is positive aggression). Sometimes I defiantly feel: “If anyone tries to interrupt me by heckling, I will shut one up by making one look silly” (which is negative aggression). There is a hypothesis that people have a predisposition toward anxiety to the degree which they had been rejected by their mothers. However, it is only true 50 percent of the time because people who are forced out of their houses by their mothers, many of them simply make their friends among other youngsters on the street. Hence, there was not the predisposition to anxiety we would have expected according to what we know in psychology. How could this be? Had the rejected young women who had not experienced anxiety become hardened, apathetic, so that they did not feel rejection? The answer to that seemed clearly no. Were they psychopathic or sociopathic types, who also do not experience anxiety? Again, no. I felt myself caught by an insoluble problem. Late one day, putting aside my books and papers in the little office I used in that shelter house, I walked down the street toward the subway. #RandolphHarris 7 of 14
I was tired. I tried to put the whole troublesome business out of my mind. About fifty feet away from the entrance to the Brighton Station, it suddenly struck me out of the blue, as the not-unfitting expression goes, that those young women who did not fit my hypothesis were all from the proletarian class. And as quickly as that idea struck me, other ideas poured out. I think I had not taken another step on the sidewalk when a whole new hypothesis broke loose in my mind. I realized my entire theory would have to be changed. I saw at that instant that it is not rejection by the mother that is the original trauma which is the source of anxiety; it is rather rejection that is lied about. The proletarian mothers rejected their children, but they never made any bones about it. The children knew they were rejected; they went out on the streets and found other companions. There was never any subterfuge about their situation. They knew their World—bad or good—and they could orient themselves to it. However, the middle-class young women were always lied to in their families. They were rejected by mothers who pretended they loved them. This was really the source of their anxiety, not the sheer rejection. I saw, in that instantaneous way that characterizes insights from these deeper sources, that anxiety comes from not being able to know the World you are in, not being able to orient yourself in your own existence. #RandolphHarris 8 of 14
I was convinced there, on the street—and later thought and experienced only convinced me the more—that this is a better, ore accurate, and more elegant theory, than my first. The helplessness of a child is often considered merely as a biological fact. Though the child is for long years factually dependent on its environment for the fulfillment of its needs—having less physical strength and less experience than the grown-ups—there is nevertheless too much emphasis on the biological aspects of the question. After the first two or three years of life there is a decided change from the prevailingly biological dependence to a kind of dependence that includes mental, intellectual and spiritual life of the child. This continues until the child matures into early adulthood and is able to take life into its own hands. There are great individual differences, though, in the degree to which children remined dependent on their parents. It all depends on what the parents try to achieve in the education of their offspring: whether the tendency is to make a child strong, courageous, independent, capable of dealing with all sorts of situations, or whether the main tendency is to shelter the child, to make it obedient, to keep it ignorant of life as it is, or in short to infantilize it up to twenty years of age or longer. #RandolphHarris 9 of 14
In children growing up under adverse conditions helplessness is usually artificially reinforced by intimidation, by babying or by bringing and keeping the child in a stage of emotional dependence. The more helpless a child is made the less will it dare t feel or show opposition, and the longer will such opposition be delayed. In this situation the underlying feeling—or what we may call the motto—is I have to repress my hostility because I need you. Fear may be aroused directly by threats, prohibitions and punishments, and by outbreaks of temper or violent scenes witnessed by a child; it may be aroused also by indirect intimidation, such as impressing this child with the great dangers of life—germs, street cares, strangers, uneducated children, climbing trees. The more apprehensive a child is made the less will it dare to show or even to feel hostility. Here the motto is: I have to repress my hostility because I am afraid of you. Love may be another reason for repressing hostility. When genuine affection is absent there is often a great verbal emphasis on how much the parents love the child and how they would sacrifice for one up to the last drop of their blood. A child, particularly if otherwise intimidated, may cling to this substitute for love and fear to be rebellious lest it lose the reward for being docile. In such situations the motto is: I have to repress hostility for fear of losing love. #RandolphHarris 10 of 14
Thus far we have discussed situations in which a child represses his hostility against the parents because he is afraid that any expression of it would spoil his relations to the parents. He is motivated by plain fear that these powerful giants would desert him, withdraw their reassuring benevolence or turn against him. In addition, in our culture a child is usually made to feel guilty for any feelings or expressions of hostility or opposition; that is, he is made to feel unworthy or contemptible in his own eyes if he breaks the rules set up by them. These two reasons for feelings of guilt are closely interrelated. The more a child is made to feel guilty about trespassing on forbidden territory the less will be dare to feel spiteful or accusatory toward the parents. In our culture the sphere of pleasures of the flesh is the one in which guilt feelings are most frequently stimulated. Whether prohibitions are expressed by audible silence or by open threats and punishment, a child frequently comes to feel not only that pleasures of the flesh and curiosity about pleasures of the flesh are activities that are forbidden and they feel they are dirty and despicable if they indulge in them. If there are any fantasies and wishes concerning pleasures of the flesh, they are to remain unexpressed as a result of the forbidding attitude toward sexuality in general, and of course it makes a youth feel guilty. In this situation the motto is: I have to repress hostility because I would be a bad child if I felt hostile. #RandolphHarris 11 of 14
In various combinations any of the factors mentioned may bring a child to repress one’s hostility and eventually produce anxiety. However, does every infantile anxiety necessarily lead ultimately to a neurosis? Our knowledge is not advanced enough to answer this question adequately. My belief is that infantile anxiety is a necessary factor but not a sufficient causes for the development of a neurosis. It seems that favorable circumstances, such as an early change of surroundings or counteracting influences of any sort, may forestall a definite neurotic development. If, however, as frequently happens, living conditions are not of a kind to diminish the anxiety, then not only may this anxiety persist, but—as we shall see later—it is bound gradually to increase and to set in motion all the processes which constitute a neurosis. Among the factors that may influence the further development of infantile anxiety there is one that I want to consider especially. It makes a great difference whether the reaction of hostility and anxiety is restricted to the surroundings which forced the child into it, or whether it develops into an attitude of hostility and anxiety toward people in general. #RandolphHarris 12 of 14
If a child is fortunate enough to have, for example, a loving grandmother, an understanding teacher, some good friends, one’s experience with them may prevent one from expecting nothing but bad from everybody. However, the more difficult are one’s experiences in the family, the more will a child be inclined to develop not only a reaction of hatred toward the parents and other children but a distrustful or spiteful attitude toward everyone. The more a child is isolated and deterred from making other experiences of one’s own, the more such a development will be fostered. And finally, the more a child covers up one’s grudge against one’s own family, as for instance by conforming with one’s parents’ attitudes, the more one projects one’s anxiety to the outside World and thus becomes convinced that the World in general is dangerous and frightening. The general anxiety concerning the World may also develop or increase gradually. A child who has grown up in this kind of atmosphere described will not dare in one’s own contacts with others to be as enterprising or pugnacious as they. One will have lost the blissful certainty of being wanted and will take even a harmless teasing as a cruel rejection. One will be wounded and hurt more easily than others and will be less capable of defending oneself. #RandolphHarris 13 of 14
The condition that is fostered or brought about by the factors I have mentioned, or by similar factors, is an insidiously increasing, all-pervading feeling of being lonely and helpless in a hostile World. The acute individual reactions to individual provocations crystallize into a character attitude. This attitude as such does not constitute a neurosis but it is the nutritive soil out of which a definite neurosis may develop at any time. Because of the fundamental role this attitude plays in neuroses I have given it a special designation: the basic anxiety; it is inseparably interwoven with a basic hostility. The answer to those who defend group work by quoting Jesus’ single statement, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I, in the midst of them,” is that it contradicts his repeated statement, “The Kingdom of Heaven is within you,” and is more likely to be interpolated than authentic. Within the exclusivity of a sect one’s power to think forcefully, creatively, and originally is lost. One is forced into a narrow area, deprived of the stimulating results of World-search. There is neither the wish nor the will to step outside the imposed borders of one’s own sect and measure other ideas, test other ideals, and benefit by other insights. There is a pathetic acceptance of mental captivity. No organized church likes individual revelations to supplant its own authority. One may work toward enlightenment and inner freedom, to the aspiration which draws one most. #RandolphHarris 14 of 14