Category Archives: Inner universe

Language operates as a screening device.

Language enables us to communicate certain data while effectively blocking out other kinds.

When we speak a sentence we do not stop to consider all of the rules of grammar. We do not mentally diagram the sentence ahead of time. We simply speak more or less automatically. This involves the utmost precision, both mentally and physically. When we experience an event, we do not usually stop either to examine the rules of perception or to wonder what these are. We simply experience or perceive.

screebg

Those experienced events, however, are also the result of a screening process. They attain their focus, brilliance, and physical validity because they rise into prominence on the backs of other seemingly unperceived events. In dream state we work intimately with the “inner grammar” of events. In dreams we find the unspoken sentence and the physically unexperienced act. The skeletons of the inner workings of events are there more obvious. Actions are not yet fully fleshed out. The mechanics of our waking psychological behavior are brilliantly delineated. That state can be explored and utilized far more fully than it is, and should be. Yet there will always be a veil between the waking and sleeping consciousness, for while we are physical, the waking mind can only deal with so much information. It would simply forget what it cannot hold.

Our dreams affect our cellular reality, even as that reality is also largely responsible for the fact that we dream, in our terms, at all. Dreams are a natural “product” of cellularly tuned consciousness. As fire gives off light, cellularly tuned consciousness gives off dreams.

r79lr9l

Such a consciousness is at a state of being in which its reality generates more energy and power than it can physically express in its brilliant intersection with physical reality. The “sparks” generated by each instant of its existence cause additional experiences, perceptions, that will not fit in the known moment of the present — for by then in our terms that present has already vanished into the past. These events and responses continue to operate, however, particularly in the dream state where they do not interact directly with full physical experience, as waking events do. All of these parallel or alternate experiences are then used to construct the physical events that we recognize. We speak a sentence truly so that the end of it comes smoothly, though when we begin it we may not have known consciously what we were going to say. Some part of us knew the sentence’s beginning and end at once, however.

sooouk

In dreams we know the beginning and end of events in the same fashion. Any one action in our life is taken in context with all of the other events from our birth to our death. Now it seems to us that because we speak one sentence at any given time, rather than ten other possible versions of it, the sentence as spoken is the “correct” one. Its probable variations in grammar or tense or inflection escape us entirely. Yet unconsciously we may have tried out and discarded all of those, even though we have no memory of such experiences. So even in forming sentences we deal with probabilities, and to some extent that might be involved with each unspoken sentence.

Even as we speak our sentence with such fine conscious nonchalance, inner choices are still being made, as we unconsciously check our communications against events occurring outside us as we speak.

scre

So, while each action of our life is taken in context with all other actions of our life until our death, this does not mean that our death is predestined to occur at any given time. As we might change our sentence in the middle from one version to another without even being consciously aware of it, so as we live our life we also work with probabilities. We are the self who speaks the sentence, and we are the self who lives the life. We are larger than the sentence that we speak, and larger than the life we live.

TEGERGB

We cannot remember all of the sentences we spoke today. We may have a general idea of what we said. It certainly seems to us that we said one thing at any given time rather than something else. It also seems that witnesses would back us up. It certainly seems that waking events are more steady and dependable than dream events.

Information flows, at such a rate and in such quantities that we could not possibly process any but a small portion.

Our physical senses, act almost like a biological alphabet, allowing us to organize and perceive certain kinds of information from which we form the events of our world and the contours of our reality.

uno;

Our conscious knowledge rests upon an invisible, unspoken, psychological and physical language that provides the inner support for the communications and recognized happenings of conscious life. These inner languages are built up as cords, and cords are psychic organizational units from which, then, all alphabets are born. Alphabets imply cords, but cannot contain then , any more than English can contain Russian, French, Chinese, Tagalog, or any combination. If we try to speak English we cannot speak Chinese at the same time. One precludes the other, even while one implies the existence of the other, for to the degree all languages have some common roots.

uuirt

In a way events are like the spoken components of language, yet voiced in a living form — and not for example only sounded. These are based upon the sensual alphabet, which itself emerges from non-sensual cords. A sentence is built up as words, parts of speech, verbs, and adjectives, subjects and predicates, vowels and syllables, and underneath there is the entire structure that allows us to speak or read to begin with. To some extent, events are built up in the same fashion. We form and organize sentences, yet we speak on faith, with out actually knowing the methods involved in our speaking. So we only recognize the surface of that activity.

u6u

In the same way we form events, often without being aware that we do so. It seems that events happen as it seems words are spoken. We were taught how to construct sentences in school, and we learned how to speak from our elders. We were involved with event-making before the time of our birth. The psyche forms events in the same way that the ocean forms waves — except that the ocean’s waves are confined to its surface or to its basin, while the psyche’s events are instantly translated, and splash out into mass psychological reality. In waking life we meet the complete event, so to speak. We encounter events in the arena of waking consciousness. In the dream state, and at other levels of consciousness, we deal more directly with the formation of events. We are usually as unaware of this process as we are in normal practice of the ways in which we form our sentences, which seem to flow from us so automatically.

The psyche, as it is turned toward physical reality, is a creator of events, and through them it experiences its own reality as through our own speech we hear our voice.

uniy

In dreams, then, we are involved in the inner process by which physical events are formed. We deal with the psychological components of actions which we will, awake, form into the consecutive corporal “language” that results in the action of our days.

The events that we recognize as official have a unitary nature in time that precludes those probable versions of them, from which they arose — versions that appeared to one extent or another in the dream state. Again, if we speak the English sentence “I am here,” you cannot speak the Chinese version at the same time. In that regard, in our framework of action we choose to “speak” one event rather than another. Our formulation of events, however, does not simply reside in our unique psychological properties, of course, but is possible because of the corporal alphabet of the flesh.

utr65

Now as it is possible for any one human being to speak more than one language, it is also possible for us to put physical data together in other ways than those usually used. The body is capable then of putting together different languages of reality. In usual terms, for example, our body can only be in one place at one time, and our experience of events is determined in large measure by our body’s position. Yet there are biological mechanisms that allow us to send versions or patterns of our body outside of its prime position, and to perceive from those locations. In sleep and dream states we do this often, correlating the newly perceived data with usual sense information, and organizing it all without a qualm. For that matter, the preciseness of our flexibility, which gives us a broad base from which to form our secure focus.

Events emerge like spoken words, then, into our awareness. We speak, yet who speaks, and in our briefest phrase, what happen? The atoms and molecule within our vocal cords, and lungs and lips, do not understand one word of the language they allow us to speak so liquidly. Without their cooperation and awareness, however, not a word would be spoken.

unioo

Yet each of those nameless atoms and molecules cooperates in a vast venture, incomprehensible to us, that makes our speech possible, and our reality of events is built up from a “cord” of activity in which each spoken word has a history that stretches further back into the annals of time than the most ancient of fossils could remember. I am speaking in our terms of experience, for in each word spoken in our present, we evoke that past time, or we stimulate it into existence so that its reality and ours are coexistent.

In dreams even the past is in present tense. Events are everywhere forming. We make and remake the past as well as the future. We choose from those experiences certain ones as events in normal waking reality.

uu77-

While we can only speak one sentence at a time, and in but one language, and while that sentence must be sounded one vowel or syllable at a time, still it is the result of a kind of circular knowledge or experience in which the sentence’s beginning and end is known simultaneously. If the end of it were not known, the beginning could not be started so expertly.

uu97lfd

In the  same way the experienced event occurring in time is dependent upon a circular happening, in which beginning and end are entwined, not one occurring before the other, but coexistent.

The body reacts to information about the environment.

Information which we are not consciously concerned. That same information is highly important to the body’s integrity, however, and therefore to our own mental stance.

On cellular levels the body has a picture not only of its own present condition, but of all those aspects of the physical environment that affect its own condition. In its own codified fashion it is not only aware of local weather conditions, for example, but of all those world patterns of weather upon which the local area is dependent. It then prepares itself ahead of time to meet whatever challenges of adjustment will be necessary. It weighs probabilities; it reacts to pressures of various kinds.

bohu

We are aware of pressure through touch, but in another version of that sense entirely, the cells react to air pressure. The body knows to the most precise degree the measurements involving radiation of all kinds. At one level, the body itself has a picture of reality of its own, upon which our conscious reality must be based — and yet the body’s terms of recognition or knowledge exist in terms so alien to our conscious ones as to be incomprehensible. Our conscious order, therefore, rides upon this greater circular kind of knowledge.

Generally speaking, the psyche has the same kind of instant overall comprehension of psychological events and environments as our body has of physical ones. It is then aware of our overall psychological climate; locally, as it involves us personally, and in world terms.

borfikyu

Our actions take place with such seeming smoothness that we do not realize the order involved. A volcanic eruption in one corner of the world will ultimately affect the entire earth in varying degrees. An emotional eruption will do the same thing on another level, altering the local area primarily but also sending out its ripples into the mass psychological environment. The psyche’s picture of reality, then, would be equally incomprehensible to the conscious mind because of the intense focus upon singularity that our usual consciousness requires.

Our dreams often give us glimpses, however, of the psyche’s picture of reality in that regard.

bofydtu

We become aware of probabilities, as actions sometimes that seem to have no connection with our own, but which are still related to them in that greater scheme of interaction that ordinarily we do not comprehend.

When we grow from a baby to an adult we do not just grow tall: we grow all about oneself, adding weight and thickness as well. To some extent events “grow” in the same fashion, and from the inside out, as we do. In a dream we are closer to those stages in which events are born. In our terms they emerge from the future and from the past, and are given vitality because of creative tension that exists between what we think of as our birth and our death. We make sentences out of alphabet of our language. We speak these or write them, and use them to communicate. Events can be considered in the same fashion, as psychological sentences put together from the alphabet of the senses — experience sentences that are lived instead of written, formed into perceived history instead of just being penned, for example, into a book about history.

bodhut65du

Our language to some extent programs our experience. There is a language of the senses, however, that gives us biological perception, experience, and communication. It forms the nature of the events that we can perceive. It puts experience together so that it is physically felt. All of our written or verbal languages have to be based upon this biological “alphabet.” There is far greater leeway here than there is in any of our spoken or written languages.

bofik

I use the word “cord” to express the source out of which such languages spring. There are many correlations of course between our language and our body. Our spoken language is dependent upon our breath, and even written language is dependent upon the rapidity with which messages can leap the nerve endings. Biological cords then must be the source for physical languages, but the cords themselves arise from the psyche’s greater knowledge as it forms the physical mechanism to begin with.

derw4

Dreams are a language of the psyche, in which man’s and woman’s nature merges in time and out of it. Man and woman have sense experiences. He/she runs, though he or she lies in bed. He/she shouts though no word is spoken. He/she still has the language of the flesh, and yet that language is only opaquely connected with the body’s mechanisms. He/she deals with events, yet they do not happen in his or her bedroom, or necessarily in any place that he or she can find upon awakening.

We manage our subjective lives in a circular fashion

Pretend that the present moment is like a wheel, with our concentration at the hub. To maintain what we think of as time momentum, the hub is connected by spokes to the exterior circular framework. Otherwise the hub alone would get us nowhere, and our “moment” would not even give us a bumpy ride.

Our journey through time, however, seems to go smoothly: The wheel rolls ever forward. It can roll backward as well, but in our intentness we have a forward direction in mind, and to go backward would seem to divert us from our purpose.

cccfgnf

The forward motion brings us into the future, out of the past from which it seems we are emerging. So we plot a straight course, it seems, through time, never realizing in our analogy that the wheel’s circular motion allows us to transverse this ongoing road. The hub of the present, therefore, is held together by “spokes.” These have nothing to do with our ideas of cause and effect at all. Instead they refer to the circular motion of our own psyche as it seems to progress in time. Each present moment of our experience is dependent upon the future as well as the past, our death as well as our birth. Our birth and our death are built in, so to speak, together, one implied in the other.

We could not die unless we were the kind of creature who was born, nor could we have a present moment as we consider it. Our body is aware of the fact of its death at birth, and of its birth at its death, for all of its possibilities for action take place in the area between, Death is therefore as creative as birth, and as necessary for action and consciousness, in our terms.

ceec

It is not quite that simple, however, for we live in the midst of multitudinous small deaths and births all of the time, that are registered by the body and the psyche. Consciously we are usually unaware of them. Logical thought, using usual definitions, deals with cause and effect, and depends upon a straight sequence of time for its framework. It builds step upon step. It is woven into our language. According to logical thought and language we may say: “I am going to a party today because I was invited last week, and said I would attend.” That makes sense. We cannot say: “I am going to a party today because I am going to meet an individual there who will be very important to my life five years from now.” That does not make sense in terms of logical thought or language, for in the last example cause and effect would exist simultaneously — or worse, the effect would exist before the cause.

cirhr

On all other-than-normally conscious levels, however, we deal very effectively with probabilities. The cells maintain their integrity by choosing one probability above the others. The present hub of the wheel, therefore, is but one prominent present, operationally valid. Cause and effect as we think of them appear only because of the motion, the relative motion, of the wheel in our analogy.

cirth

When our eyes are on the road of time, therefore, we forget the circular motion of our being. When we dream or sleep, however, the world of cause and effect either vanishes or appears confused and chaotic. Normal night-time images are mixed and matched, so that combinations are formed quite different from those seen in the daylight. The known rules that govern the behavior of creatures and objects in dreams seem no longer to apply. Past, present, and future merge in a seemingly bizarre alliance in which, were we waking, we would lose all mental footing. The circular nature of the psyche to some extent makes its known. When we think of dreams we usually consider those aspects of it only, commenting on perhaps upon the strange activities, the odd juxtapositions and the strange character of dream life itself. Few are struck by the fact of their dream’s own order, or impressed by the ultimate restrain that allows such sometimes-spectacular events to occur in such a relatively restricted physical framework.

cccrr

For example, in a dream of 20 minutes, events that would ordinarily take years can be experienced. The body ages it’s 20 minutes of time, and that is all. In dreams, experience is peripheral, in that it dips into our time and touches it, leaving ripples; but the dream events themselves exist largely out of time. Dream experience is ordered in a circular fashion. Sometimes it never touches the hub of our present moment at all, as we think of it, as far as our memory is concerned; yet the dream is, and it is registered at all other levels of our existence, including the cellular.

drre34

We always translate experience into terms we can understand. Of course the translation is real. The dream as we recall it is already a translation, then, but an experienced one. As a language that we know is, dependent upon other languages, and implied pauses and silences, so the dream that we experience and recall is also one statement of the psyche, coming into prominence; but it is also dependent upon other events that we do not recall, and that our consciousness, as it now operates, must automatically translate into its own terms.
 

We have been taught dreams, are imaginary events.

In larger terms it is futile to question whether or not dreams are true, for they simply are. We do consider a dream true, however, if its events later occur in fact.

In the life of psyche a dream is no more or less “true,” whether or not it is duplicated in waking life. Dream events happen in a different context — one, we might say, of the imagination. Here we experience a valid reality that exists on its own, so to speak; one in which the psyche’s own language is given greater freedom.

derfwe4rf4

Some of us may try to remember our dreams, but none of us have to relate to dream reality as we must to physical life.

To some extent, however, we form physical events while we are dreaming. Then, freed from waking limitations, we process our experience, weigh it according to our own intents and purposes, correlate it with information so vast we could not be consciously aware of it. In most dreams we do not simply think of a situation. We imaginatively become part of it. It is real in every fashion except that of physical fact.

dreqa

When we meet with any fact, we encounter the tail end of a certain kind of creativity. The psyche, however, is responsible for bringing facts into existence. In that reality a so-called fact is equally true or equally false. The dream that we remember is already a translation of a deeper experience.

It is cast for us so that it bridges self. Dreams serve as dramas, transferring experience from one level of the psyche to another. In certain portions of sleep, our experience reaches into areas of being so vast that the dream is used to translate it for us.

drewww

The power to dream springs from that source. Dreaming is not a passive activity. It demands a peculiar and distinctive mixture of various kinds of consciousness, and the transformation of “nonphysical perception” into symbols and codes that will be sensually understood, though not directly experienced as in waking experienced as in waking experience.

We take dreaming for granted, yet it is the result of a characteristic ability that is responsible for the very subjective feeling that we call conscious life. Without it our normal consciousness would not be possible.

ddewefw

A spoken language is, again, dependent upon other languages that could possibly be spoken, and thus its sounds rise into prominence and order because of the silences and pauses between them; so our waking consciousness is dependent upon what we think of as sleeping or dreaming consciousness. It rises into prominence in somewhat the same fashion, riding upon other possible versions of itself; alert only because — in our terms — of hidden pauses within its alertness.

The ability to dream presupposes the existence of experience that is not defined as physical fact. It presupposes a far greater freedom in which objects appear or are dismissed with equal ease, a subjective framework in which the individual freely expresses what he or she will in the most direct of fashions, yet without physical contact in usual terms.

drweferf

The reality represents our origin, and is the natural environment in which the psyche resides. Our beliefs, cultural background, and to some extent our languages, set up barriers so that this dream dimension seems unreal to us. Even when we catch ourselves in the most vivid of dream adventures, or find ourselves traveling outside of our bodies while dreaming, we still do not give such experiences equal validity with waking ones.

Subjectively speaking, we are everywhere surrounded by our own greater reality, but we do not look in the right places. We have been taught not to trust our feelings, our dreams, or our imagination precisely because these do not often fit the accepted reality of facts.

deqwefr

They are the creators of facts, however. In no way do I mean to demean the intellect. It is here, however, that the tyranny of the fact world holds greatest sway. The intellect has been denied its wings. Its field of activity has been limited because we have given it only facts to go on.

Biologically, we are quite capable of dealing with dreaming and waking reality both, and of forming a far more effective synthesis in that regard. All of our creative impulses arise from that hidden dimension — the very impulses that formed our greatest cities, our technology, and the physical cement that binds our culturally organized world.

dwr3r

The creative impulses are behind our languages, yet often we use the languages to silence rather than free inner communication. There have always been rhythms in consciousness that are not historically obvious. At certain times some behavior has been primarily expressed in the waking state, and sometimes in the dream state. The emphasis is never static, but ever-changing. In some periods, then, the normal behavior was “more dreamlike,” while more specific developments occurred in the dream state, which was then the more clear or specified of the two. Men went to sleep to do their work, in other words, and the realm of dreams was considered more real than waking reality. Now the opposite is true.

Daily language deals with separations, divisions, and distinctions

To some extent our language organizes our feelings and emotions. The language of the psyche, however, has at its command many more symbols that can be combined in many more ways, say, than mere letters of an alphabet.

lljhgf

In daily language, objects have certain names. Obviously the names are not the objects, but symbols for them. Even these symbols, however, divide us as the perceiver from the rest of the world, which becomes objectified. We can ourselves understand far more about the nature of the psyche, for example, than we think we can. To do this, however, we must leave our daily language behind at least momentarily, and pay attention to our own feelings and imagination. Our language tells us that certain things are true, or facts, and that certain things are not. Many of our most vivid and moving feelings do not fit the facts of our language, so we disregard them.

laghth

These emotional experiences, however, often express the language of the psyche. It is not that an understanding of our psyche is beyond us: It is usually that we try to understand or experience it in one of the most difficult ways — Through the use of daily language.

The imagination belongs to the language of the psyche. For this reason it often gives experiences that conflict with the basic assumptions upon which daily language is based. Therefore the imagination is often considered suspect.

langyy

We might stand alone in our doorway, or in a field — or even on a street, surrounded by many people in a large city — look upward, suddenly struck by the great sweeping clouds above, and feel oneself a part of them. We might momentarily experience a great yearning or feel our own emotions suddenly filled with that same moving majesty, so that for an instant we and the sky seem to be one.

Mundane language tells us, as we think with its patterns, that our imagination is running away with us, for obviously we are one thing and the sky is another. Us and the sky do not equate — or as friend Spock would say: “It is not logical.” The feeling swiftly fades after bemusing us briefly. We might be spiritually refreshed, yet as a rule we would not consider the feeling to be a statement of any legitimate reality, or a representation of our psyche’s existence.

llagg

The emotions and the imagination, however, give us our closest contact with other portions of our own reality. They also liberate our intellect so that its powers are not limited by concepts it has been taught are true. Instead, such concepts are relatively true — operationally true. For example, the example, the physical laws that we are familiar with operate where we are. They are true, relatively speaking. In those terms we are one person physically objectified, staring upward in the scene just mentioned at an objectified sky. We weigh so many pounds, tilt our head at such-and-such an angle to peer upward at the skyscape, and physically speaking, we can be categorized.

In those terms the clouds could be physically measured, and shown to be so far above us — composed of, say, winds of a certain velocity, ready to pour down a precise amount of rain or whatever. Physically speaking then, obviously, we are separate from the clouds, and so in those terms our momentary experience of uniting with them would seem to be a lie — at least not factual, or “the product of our imagination.”

languuu

Instead, such an event is a direct expression of the psyche’s knowledge. It senses its quite legitimate identification with nature, exercises its mobility, and feel its own emotional power leap. Our emotions in such a case would be momentarily magnified — raised, say, to a higher power. There are multitudinous such examples that could be given, as in each day our psyche presents evidence of its own greater being — evidence that we are taught to overlook, or to dismiss because it is factual.

What is imaginary is not true: We are taught this as children. The imagination, however, brings us into connection with a different kind of truth, or a different framework in which experience can be legitimately perceived. The larger truths of the psyche exist in that dimension.

tuou7

From it we choose physical facts. Thoughts are real. Only some thoughts turn into physical actions, of course. Despite distorted versions of that last statement, however, there is still obviously a distant difference, say, between the though of adultery and its physical expression.

thoujt

We cannot treat thoughts and imagination in such a literal manner, nor in a large respect should we try to “guard our thoughts” as if they were herds of animals that we wanted to keep purely bred. Our thoughts do form our reality. If we do not fear them, however, they create their own balances. The psyche dwells in a reality so different from the world we usually recognize that there good and evil, as we think of them, are also seen to be as operationally or relatively true as the difference between the perceiver and the object perceived.

The language of the atoms and molecules in our own private way.

We mark the universe. We impress it, or “stamp” it, or imprint it with our own identity. Henceforth it always recognizes us as us and no other. We are known.

In larger terms, while we speak our own language, the universe also speaks “our” language as it constantly translates itself into our private perception. We live in our psyche somewhat in the same way that physically we dwell in the world.

atom

That world has many languages. Physically we are like one country within our psyche, with a language of our own. People are always searching for master language, or for one in particular out of which all others emerged. In a way, Latin is a master language. In the same manner people search for gods, or a God, out of which all psyche emerged. Here we are searching for the implied source, the unspoken, invisible “pause,” the inner organization that gives language or the self a vehicle of expression. Language finally become archaic. Some words are entirely forgotten in one language, but spring up in altered form in another. All of the earth’s languages, however, are united because of characteristic pauses and hesitations upon which the different sounds ride.

at4tt

Even the alterations of obvious pauses between languages make sense only because of an implied, unstated inner rhythm. The historic gods become equally archaic. Their differences are often obvious. When we are learning a language, great mystery seems involved. When we are learning about the nature of the psyche, an even greater aura of the unknown exists. The unknown portions of the psyche and its greater psyches out of which the self emerged — as for example Latin is a source for the Romance Languages.

atommewe

Using language, we speak with our fellows. We write histories and communications. Many books are meant to be read and never to be spoken aloud. Through written language, then, communication is vastly extended. In direct contact, however, we encounter not only the spoken language of another, but we are presented with the communicator’s person as well. Spoken language is embellished with smiles, frowns, or other gestures, and these add to the meaning of the spoken word.

Often when we read a book we silently mouth the words, as if to reinforce their symbolic content with a more emotional immediacy. The language of the psyche, however, is far richer and more varied. Its “words” spring alive. Its “verbs” really move, and do not simply signify, or stand for, motion.

aaaath

Its “nouns” become what they signify. Its declensions are multi-dimensional. It verbs and nouns can become interchangeable. In a way, the psyche is its own language. “At any given time,” all of its tenses are present tense. In other words, it has multitudinous tenses, all in the present, or it has multitudinous present tenses. Within it no “word” dies or becomes archaic. This language is experience. Psychically, then, we can and we cannot say that there is a source. The very fact that we question: “Is there a God, or a Source?” shows that we misunderstand the issues.

ati24t

In the same manner, when we ask: “Is there a master language?” it is apparent that we do not understand what language itself is. Otherwise we would know that language is dependent upon other implied ones; and that the two, or all of them, are themselves and yet inseparable, so closely connected that it is impossible to separate them even though our focus may be upon one language alone.

Awwewee2e

So the psyche and its source, or the individual and the God, are so inseparable and interconnected that an attempt to find one apart from the other automatically confuses the issue.

The existence of one person implies the existence of all others who have lived or will live.

Our own existence is implied therefore in everyone else’s and theirs is implied in us.

eeexggh

Languages gain their meaning largely from the pauses and hesitations between sounds. They obviously gain their meaning also because of the sounds not used, so that any one language also implies the existence of all others. To that extent, all other languages reside silently within any given spoken language. The same applies to language written upon a page. The written characters make sense because of their arrangement, and precisely because they are chosen over other characters that do not appear. In the same kind of manner, our focused existence is dependent upon all other existences that are not us presently. We are a part of them. We ride upon their existences, though we are primarily us and no other.

eexxy6yy6

The same applies, however, to every other person. Each of them becomes a primarily focus or identity within which all others are implied. In Ordinary terms, we do not “make ourselves.” We are like a living language spoken by someone who did not originate it — the language was there for us to use. The language in this case is a molecular one that speaks our physical being. The components of that language or the earth elements that form the body were already created when we were born, as the alphabet of our particular language was waiting to be used.

exyrh45

Our very physical life, then, implies a “source,” a life out of which the physical one emerges, — the implied, unspoken, immaterialized, unsounded vitality that supplied the ingredients for the physical, bodily, molecular “alphabet.” Our physical life therefore implies a non-physical one. We take our particular “language” so for granted, and use it so effortlessly, that we give no thought at all to the fact that it implies other languages also, or that it gains its meaning because of inner assumptions that are never spoken, or by the use of pauses in which no sounds are made. We live our lives in the same fashion.

ee

There are many languages, though most people speak one, or two, or three at most. Languages also have accents, each somewhat different while still maintaining the original integrity of any given language. To some extent we can learn to speak oneself with an accent, so to speak, in which case, still being oneself, we allow ourselves to take on some of the attributes of another “language.”

We can read the world in a different way, while still maintaining our own identity, or we can move into a different country of oneself that speaks our native language but with a different slant. We do this to some extent or another whenever we tune in to broadcasts to which we usually pay no attention. The news is slightly foreign, while it is still interpreted through the language that we know. We are getting a translation of reality.

exsssu

The psyche, always in a state of becoming, obviously has no precise boundaries. The existence of one, implies the existence of all, and so any one given psyche comes into prominence also because of the existence of the others upon which its reality rides. One television station exists in the same manner, for if one could not be tuned into, theoretically speaking, none could.

These inner communications, reach outward in all directions. Each identity has eternal validity within the psyche’s greater reality. At one level, any person contacting his or her own psyche can theoretically contact any other psyche. Life implies death, and death implies life — that is, in the terms of our world. In those terms life is a spoken element, while death is the unspoken but still-present element “beneath,” upon which life rides. Both are equally present.

exas2

To obtain knowledge consciously other than usually available, we pay attention to the pauses, to the implied elements in language, to any felt or sensed quality upon which the recognizable experiences of life reside. There are all kind of information available to us, but it must be perceived through our own focus or identity.

eeexxawd

All events occur at once — a difficult statement to understand. All identities occur at once also. Each event changes every other. Present ones alter past ones. Any one event implies the existence of probable events which do not “emerge,” which are not “spoken.” Physical world events therefore rest upon the existence of implied probable events. Different languages use sounds in their own peculiar manners, with their own rhythms, one emphasizing what another ignores. Other probabilities, therefore, emphasize events that are only implied in our reality, so that our physical events become the implied probable ones upon which other worlds reside.

We are part of the world, and yet we are oneself.

This does not confuse us, and we follow our own sense of identity without difficulty, even though we are everywhere surrounded by other individuals.

human

Using this as an analogy, we are a part of our psyche or our soul, dwelling within it, easily following our own sense of identity even though that psyche also contains other identities beside the one that we think of as our own. We draw sustenance from the world, and grow through its medium. We contribute our abilities and experience, helping to form the world’s civilization and culture. To some strong degree we bear the same kind of relationship to our own psyche.

Through ordinary methods of communication we are able to tell what is going on in other countries beside our own, even without traveling to them. News telecasts acquaint us with conditions around the world.

humtmt

Now there are also inner “broadcasts” going on constantly — to which, however, we are not consciously attuned. These keep us in constant touch with the other portions of our own psyche. We are so a part of the world that our slightest action contributes to its reality. Our breath changes the atmosphere. Our encounters with others alter the fabrics of their lives, and the lives of those who come in contact with them.

hu5

It is easy for us to see how the cells of the body form it — that is, we understand at least the cooperative nature of the cell’s activities. An alteration on the part of one cell immediately causes changes in the others, and brings about a difference in body behavior. It is somewhat more difficult for us to understand the ways in which our own actions and those of others combine to bring about world events. On the other hand, each individual alive on the planet at any given “time.” It may seem that the individual has little power. On the other hand, each individual alive is a necessary one. It is, each of our actions is so important, contributing to the experience of others whom we do not know, that each individual is like a center about which the world revolves.

If we did not do what we did today, for example, the entire world would be in some way different.

huiik7

Our acts ripple outward in ways that we do not understand, interacting with the experience of others, and hence forming world events. The most famous and the most anonymous person are connected through such a fabric, and an action seemingly small and innocuous can end up changing history as we understand it. In metaphysical terms, we have our being in our psyche or soul in somewhat the same manner. Identities are obviously psychic environments, primarily, rather than physical ones. Physical objects cannot move through each other, as a table cannot move through a chair. Mental events behave differently. They can mix and merge, move through each other while still maintaining their own focus. they can interact on psychic levels in the way that events do on physical levels, but without physical restrictions. Though we are a portion if our psyche, then, our identity is still inviolate. It will not be submerged or annihilated in a greater self. It carries a stamp — a divine mark — or its own integrity. It follows its own focus, and knows itself as itself, even while its own existence as itself may be but a portion of another “identity.”

suool7u

Moreover, there is nothing to stop it from exploring this other greater identity, or moving into it, so to speak. When this happens both identities are changed. In greater terms, the psyche or soul nowhere exists as a finished product or entity. On the other hand it is always becoming, and that becoming happens on the part of each of its own portions.

soul

Our very physical stance and existence are dependent upon portions of our psyche’s reality, or our soul’s existence, of which we are normally unaware. Those portions are also dependent upon our existence, however.

hummmstyj

We take our breathing, our moving, for granted, though they are unconsciously produced. In certain terms, however, “at one time” we had to learn how to do these things that we are not consciously concerned with. At still other levels of reality, activities that we now consciously claim as our own have — in those same terms and from another viewpoint — become unconscious, providing a psychic history from which other identities emerge, as it seems that our own identities emerge from unconscious bodily activity.

Almost any question that we can ask of God, can be asked of the Psyche as well.

It seems to us that we know ourselves, but that we take the existence of our psyche on faith. At best, it often seems that we are all that we know of our psyche, and we will complain that we do not know oneself to begin with. When we say: “I want to find myself,” we usually take it for granted that there is a completed, done, finished version of oneself that we have mislaid somewhere. When we think of finding God, we often think in the same terms.

We are “around ourselves” all the time. We are ever becoming oneself. In a manner of speaking we are “composed” of those patterns of oneself that are everywhere coming together. We cannot help but be oneself. Biologically, mentally, and spiritually we are marked as apart from all others, and no cloak of conventionally can ever hide that unutterable uniqueness. We cannot help but be ourselves.

ffffffm

In a way, physically we are a molecular language that communicates to others, but a language with its own peculiarities, as if speaking an accepted tongue we spoke with a biological accent that carried its own flavor and meaning.

When we ask: “What is my psyche, or my soul, or who am I?” we are seeking of course for our own meaning as apart from what we already know about oneself. In that context, God and the psyche are constantly expanding– unutterable, and always becoming.

ffwf

We will question, most likely, “Becoming what?” for to us it usually seems that all motion tends toward a stat of completion of one kind or another. We think, therefore, in terms of becoming perfect, or becoming free. The word “becoming” by itself seems to leave us up in the air, so to speak, suspended without definitions. If I say: “You are becoming what you already are,” then my remark sounds meaningless, for if you already are, how can you become what is already accomplished? In larger terms, however, what we are is always vaster than our knowledge of oneself, for in physical life we cannot keep up with our own psychological and psychic activity.

In a way our bodies speak a biological language, but in those terms we are bilingual, to say the least. We deal with certain kinds of organizations. They can be equated with biological verbs, adjectives and nouns. These result in certain time sequences that can be compared to sentences, written and read from one side, say, to the other.

sfgwe

Pretend that our life’s experience is a page of a book that we write, read, and experience from top to bottom, left to right, sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph. That is the you that you know– the wold view that we understand. But other quite as legitimate “yous” may write, read, and experience the same page backwards, or read each letter downward and back up again, as we would a column of figures. Or others might mix and match the letters in entirely different fashions altogether, forming entirely different sentences. Still another, vaster you might be aware of all the different methods of experiencing that particular page, which is our life as we understand it.

We think that our own consciousness is the only logical culmination of our body’s reality. We read oneself in a certain accepted fashion. In the “entire book of life,” however, just physically speaking, there are interrelationships on adjacent levels that we do not perceive, as other portions of our own biological consciousness or biological language relate to the entire living fabric of the world. In physical terms we are alive because of substructures — psychic, spiritual, and biological — of which we have hardly any comprehension at all.

TEGERGB

These are implied, however, in the nature of our own consciousness, which could not exist otherwise as we know it. As language gains and attains its meaning not only by what is included in it, but also by what is excluded, so our consciousness attains its stability also by exclusions.

What we are is implied in the nature of what we are not. By the same token, we are what we are because of the existence of what we are not.

trgggg3

We read ourselves from the top of the page to the bottom, or from what we think of as the beginning to the end. Our greater reality, however, is read in terms of intensities, so that the psyche puts us together in a different way. The psyche does not mark time. To it the intense experiences of our life exist simultaneously. In our terms they would be the psyche’s present. The psyche deals with probable events, however, so some events– perhaps some that we dreamed of but did not materialize — are quite real to the psyche. They are far more real to it than most innocuous but definite physical events, as for example yesterday morning’s breakfast.

God and psyche

The inner events of the psyche compose the greater experience from which physical events arrive. They cast an aura that almost magically make our life our own. Even as two people encountered precisely the same events in their lives at precisely the same time, their experiences of reality would still hardly be approximately connected.

Before the birth of images and words, the world existed in different terms.

Images as we consider them had not taken the form that we recognize. It seems to us that visually, for example, the natural world must be put together or perceived in a certain fashion.

boyp

Whatever our language, we perceive trees, ,mountains, people, oceans. We never see a man merge with a tree, for example. This would be considered an hallucinatory image. Our visual data are learned and interpreted so that they appear as the only possible results of those data. Inner vision can confound us, because in our mind we often see images quite clearly that we would dismiss if our eyes were open. In the terms of which we are speaking, however, the young species utilized what I have called the “inner senses” to a far greater degree than we do. Visually, early man did not perceive the physical world in the way that seems natural to us.

When a man’s and woman’s consciousness, for example, blended with that of a tree, those data, became “visual” for others to perceive. When a man’s/woman’s consciousness merged with an animal’s that blending became visual data also.

dddrw3

In a manner of speaking, the brain put visual information together so that the visual contents of the world were not as stationary as they are now. We have learned to be highly specific in our physical sight and interpretations. Our mental vision holds hints as to data that could be, but are not visually, physically perceived. We have trained ourselves to react to certain visual cues which trigger our mental interpretations, and to ignore other variations.

These later can be described as too subtle. Yet actually they are no more subtle than those cues we acknowledge.

bori

Data, we say, are stored in the chromosomes, strung together in a certain fashion. Now biologically that is direct cognition. The inner senses perceive directly in the same fashion. To us, language means words. Words are always symbols for emotions or feelings, intents or desires. Direct cognition did not need the symbols. The first language, the initial language, did not involve images or words, but dealt with a free flow of directly cognitive material.

A man or woman, wondering what a tree was like, became one, and let his or her own consciousness flow into the tree. Man’s/woman’s consciousness mixed and merged with other kinds of consciousness with the great curiosity of love. A child did not simply look at an animal, but let its consciousness merge with the animal’s and so to some extent the animal looked out through the child’s eyes.

ddffse

In ways most difficult to explain, man and woman “absorbed” an animal’s spirit before he/she killed it, so that the spirit of the animal merged with his or her own. In using the animal’s flesh, then, the hunter believed that he or she was giving the animal a new focus of existence. He/she could draw on the animal’s strength, and therefore were one.

Our own kind of focus emerged from such a background, so that within ourselves we contain myriad consciousnesses of which we are unaware. Through our own particular focus, the consciousnesses of the natural world merged to form a synthesis in which, for example, symphonies can emerge. We act not only for ourselves, but also for other kinds of consciousness that we have purposefully forgotten. In following our own purposes, which are ours, we also serve the purposes of others we have forgotten.

dirr

In thinking our own private thoughts, we also add to a larger psychic and mental reality of which we are part. Our language program our perceptions, and limit our communications in certain terms, as much as they facilitate it.

A musician writing a symphony, however, does not use all of the notes that are available to him. He or she chooses and discriminates. His/her discrimination is based upon his/her knowledge of the information available, however. In the same way, our languages are based upon an inner knowledge of larger available communications. The “secrets” of language are not to be found, then, in the available sounds, accents, root words or syllables, but in the rhythms between the words; the pauses and hesitations; the flow with which the words are put together, and the unsaid inferences that connect verbal and visual data.

6690

As a species “We” sought certain kinds of experience. Individually, and as tribes or nations, we follow certain “progressions” — and yet in so doing we act also on the part of the whole of nature. We take into our bodies in transmuted form the consciousness of all the things we consume.

The consciousness then merge to perceive the world in a fashion we call our own. Through our eyes the beasts, vegetables, birds, and dust perceive the dawn and sunlight as we do — as us, and yet on the other hand our experience is our own.

tlt879

To some extent it is true to say that languages emerged as we began to lose direct communication with our own experience, and with that of others. Language is therefore a substitute for direct communication. The symbols of the words stand for our own or someone else’s experience, while protecting us or them from it at the same time.

y90y

Visual data as we perceive them amount to visual language; the images perceived are like visual words. An object is presented to our visual perception so that we can safely perceive it from the outside. Objects as we see them are also symbols.