A small and rather obvious (now, that is) insight on Introception.
Hakuin Suso
Nature of Ponderable Matter” led me to a small realization that
prompted my joining this Discussion Group. I wish to share that
realization without making any claim it is new.
Knowledge Through Identity is a different way of knowing than
knowledge through sensations or perceptions, knowledge through
feelings, or knowledge through concepts. It is through the body,
senses and cognitive functions that we know the latter. It is through
the “fifth psychological function” of Introception (p. 104,
Transformations in Consciousness) that we have Knowledge Through
Identity.
In most people introception is latent, meaning it is dormant or
undeveloped but able to develop normally under suitable conditions.
The result of this is that people generally end up knowing things
through their senses, feelings and cognitive ability to think and
reason. Naturally, when told of a new way of knowing people try to
grasp this through their active psychological functions. They try to
sense it, feel it or think it. The result of this grasping is more
knowledge of the perceptual or cognitive type.
When reading Diane Clayton’s post it suddenly became clear that I’ve
been looking for a way of knowing that is not perceptual or
cognitive! Therefore, and this is what really struck home, any
perceptual or cognitive process is completely useless in trying to
awaken to Knowledge Through Identity!
I realized introception is neither cognitive nor perceptual so the
introceptive function is like a new organ through which knowledge can
be gained, but because organ denotes a kind of senor apparatus the
only way to really talk of it is simply to say it’s a new way of
knowing.
For the past 75 years FMW has been saying introception is
consciousness turning upon itself and moving towards its source. It’s
not me becoming aware of some subtle sensation. Not me becoming aware
of some elevated form of bliss. Not me becoming aware of some
rarified concept. It’s simply awareness; the common element in these
three statements, looking upon itself.
It then occurred to me what was meant when FMW said on p. 19 of
Pathways (1976 printing) that when he isolated the subjective moment
and focused on it, that what to the relative mind would be Darkness
and Emptiness, was actually “Absolute Light and Fullness and that I
was That”.
In the most obvious of ways FMW meant that we are blind to It through
perception and cognition. But to the introceptive function it is
knowable and when known must be seen as a brand new world opening up
that was really there all along. Perhaps the best parallel that the
cognitive mind can grasp is found in Helen Keller’s work, which I
quote from p.123-4 of Albert Low’s book, “The Iron Cow of Zen”.
“Someone was drawing water and my teacher placed my hand under the
spout. As the cool stream gushed over my hand she spelled into the
other the word, w-a-t-e-r, first slowly, and then rapidly. I stood
still, my whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers.
Suddenly I felt a misty consciousness as of something forgotten,… and
somehow the mystery of language was revealed to me. I knew then that
w-a-t-e-r meant the wonderful cool something that was flowing over my
hand. That living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, set it
free.”
To those meeting at Lone Pine this coming week I send my hopes for
small realizations and great ones.
Diane Clayton
My sincerest apologies for not replying to your emails as of yet. It
has been a difficult month for me and then preparations for attending
the conference have taken almost every other moment of my time.
I deeply appreciate this message of yours. It reiterates what I
understand to be the core of FMW's work, thanks in significant part to
all of the wonderful insights from this group.
My physicist friend Andre has seemingly come to the limits of what he
is capable of accepting in terms of postulates or premises for then
considering these ideas. I've hesitated in passing along the responses
that came after the initial round because every time he brings up his
initial concerns or his response to the various responses, he says
nothing new, and seems not to see how he misunderstood the overall
gist of FMW's point in the first place. For me it feels like hitting a
tennis ball against a concrete wall rather than an opponent. He was so
damaged by his extreme dogmatic catholic upbringing, and found his own
personal salvation in physics and the scientific method, that as much
as he values me and my interests, I grow tired of what seems like the
selfishness of me wishing he might understand these ideas, even though
I still feel like they may hold incredible value for him. But it's not
my place to project my wants for him onto him. We hung out earlier
this evening for a few rounds of cribbage and a couple of pints of
Guinness, and he said he'd begun a more philosophical response to that
chapter and all of your incredible writings. If he allows it, I will
pass it along when he sends it to me.
I'm not sure how to feel about what I did passing along his concerns
without fully considering how he might not be interested in following
it through after you all expended such time and energy into your
responses, and then me both being disappointed in the superficiality
of his replies as well as not having the ability to respond to you all
for him, let alone find a way to phrase things to him that would
bridge the gap that now seems nigh unbridgeable.
All I can really say is how grateful I am that I've found a group who
is past need of convincing of the possibility of pure nondualism, and
who is extremely capable of discussing it in a way that resonates with
me. Now that that need in me is being filled by those who have it too,
I feel like I should give Andre a break and take some time to study
something HE is interested in for a change. I think we've honed in on
general relativity, lord help me. I was a total special relativity
junky, but like I mentioned in a prior email, general relativity
required of me that heightened concentration that was utterly
exhausting. Still, he's worth it. I mean, this is a guy who'll make me
French brown sauce from scratch in 12 hours for some filet mignons
that I want to do up for an out-of-towner friend simply because I ask.
Heck, I'm mainly raw vegan and I still make an exception for his brown
sauce! Sorry, a bit off topic...
> Helen Keller’s work, which I
> quote from p.123-4 of Albert Low’s book, “The Iron Cow of Zen”.
>
> “Someone was drawing water and my teacher placed my hand under the
> spout. As the cool stream gushed over my hand she spelled into the
> other the word, w-a-t-e-r, first slowly, and then rapidly. I stood
> still, my whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers.
> Suddenly I felt a misty consciousness as of something forgotten,… and
> somehow the mystery of language was revealed to me. I knew then that
> w-a-t-e-r meant the wonderful cool something that was flowing over my
> hand. That living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, set it
> free.”
One of the ways I come to know anything of value for me is through
finding it repeated in varied language in seemingly disparate sources.
I've of course heard and learned of Helen Keller as part of a standard
Western education, but I'd never pursued her writings specifically,
and this does indeed seem to contain adumbrations of that other way of
Knowing outside of the perceptual and cognitive. Thank you very kindly
for bringing this to light here!
> To those meeting at Lone Pine this coming week I send my hopes for
> small realizations and great ones.
Thank you. Hopefully one day you'll be there too.
All best wishes,
Diane
Hakuin Suso
it is said,
“On the journey, at a place where they spent the night, the Lord came
upon Moses and would have killed him. But Sepphora took a piece of
flint and cut off her son’s foreskin and, touching his feet, she said,
‘you are a spouse of blood to me.’ Then God let Moses go.”
The meaning of these verses is obscure to biblical scholars. I think,
though, that the Lord coming to kill Moses could be likened to FMW’s
Pathways' chapter XVII which speaks of it being difficult “to assert
the will to live” while in the grip of the Fire, and his other
statements of how the world weary man may choose to rest in Nirvana
rather than make the return to the world. If so, Sepphora’s
circumcision of her son is an act that symbolizes the need for Moses
to return to the world to help his people.
Also, in Pathways, chapter IV, FMW writes that Sherifa urged him to
write “of a little incident that (he) would have let pass as many,
many have already passed.” He then goes on to describe a cat playing
in an “enveloping matrix of meaning” that “sublimated the ordinary so
that it became joyous.” “It was as though a tiny melody from out of
the Grand Symphony had trilled joyously into my mind—a little sketch
born forth from the Grand Harmony.” How different this description is
from the usual keeping of the Record of his Realization that is mainly
that of unfolding thought.
It would be easy to cite gender differences as the cause of your
frustrations with trying to connect with Andre on the writings of
FMW. But if we want to put it into a context consistent with FMW’s
writings I suggest you consider that Andre’s physicist’s mind lacks a
higher matrix of meaning in which to put his thoughts. That he, like
most physicists, aren’t aware of the philosophy that emerges from
their discoveries or how it could enrich their lives and the lives of
others.
In FMW’s record it is woman that has him unveil Joyousness in a Matrix
of Meaning and in Exodus it is woman that calls Moses back to his
people thus enabling him to give meaning and form to his work, i.e.,
call from God.
As a woman, your communications on the meaning of FMW’s writings is
undoubtedly clothed in more than just the intellectualism Andre is
familiar with. Like Sepphora your message of FMW could “touch his
feet”, i.e., ground his thinking in a matrix of meaning. Or, like
Sherifa, reveal the joy of creation. All you can do, though, is offer
this ground of meaning for his work. It is his choice whether or not
to walk the path that lies upon that ground.
mt
Identity.� Can I assume here then that Absolute Identity means Pure
Awareness? If so then from this the rest follows:
The Bible in Genesis suggests two ways of knowing: that of The Tree of Good
and Evil, and the other tree, The Tree of Life. The Tree of Knowledge of
Good and Evil is that of duality, knowing by contrast and concept. However,
the Tree of Life is Knowing directly, non-dual, Things as They Are, What Is.
The exclusive adherence to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is
fundamentally an identity grounded in concept, the SELF-CONCEPT, the IDEA of
who you THINK you are. The fusion with this way of knowing is ultimately
death (for there is no Life or Spirit, nor the True, Good, Beautiful or
Real). But the absolute fusion of identity by a deluded self in this way, is
difficult to do in itself because the vessel of conceptual knowledge, as
identity, leaks. And all leaks in this sense are essentially those moments
when the fruit of the Tree of Life can enter (usually when the self is
asleep or not walled off by consciousness fused to the conceptual identity).
And here we have all those discoveries through history that advance the
consciousness of mankind toward What Is (and this is, at least one way, how
the non-dual-beyond-concept Knowing pertains to scientific discovery).
Those self-concept identities who begin to see through (usually at first,
accidently) the mega trance generated by a fusion with The Tree of Knowledge
of Good and Evil (note that most are not even aware that this form of
identity-fusion IS their life), may begin a more conscious path toward the
Light at the end of the self-conceptual cave (Plato�s Cave). But I must add
here, this in no way means to devalue the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
or this way of knowing which can be the mistake made here. There is here
only the attempt to suggest that the IDENTITY of self does not really belong
to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (which has its place, however, in
the evolution of things) but to the Tree of Life, which is the Great Chain
of Being.
While all methods to awaken the being are essentially constructed (but not
necessarily discovered) by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (duality �
and therefore limited as you say Hakiun), the art of a genuine methodology
is to bring a motivated self-concept identity close enough to its, as I call
it, STILL POINT (�0�, Void, death/rebirth, cross, dark night, etc.,etc.) to
then See the new Identity waiting to be Discovered, which happens of Itself.
So the awakening is really a shift in consciousness (identity) from one Tree
to the Other...but not by belief, which is of the conceptual-emotional order
of things, but from knowledge to Knowledge in terms of moving toward
Awareness or Pure Consciousness as the Ground of Being, directly. Religious
belief may be some very early attempt (usually on the unconscious path) to
move in that direction, but while the religious structure (usually a
conceptual order of some kind) may give some order, it usually becomes a
barrier to the direct Knowing, except within the more esoteric or mystical
aspects, where most do not tread.
mt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hakuin Suso" <hakui...@gmail.com>
To: "Franklin Merrell-Wolff - Consciousness Without An Object Discussion
Group" <fm...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:48 PM
Subject: [fm-w], {Franklin Merrell-Wolff Fel Re: , {Franklin Merrell-Wolff
Fel A small and rather obvious (now, that is) insight on Introception.
In Exodus, Chapter 4, verse 24 � 26, when Moses was returning to Egypt
it is said,
�On the journey, at a place where they spent the night, the Lord came
upon Moses and would have killed him. But Sepphora took a piece of
flint and cut off her son�s foreskin and, touching his feet, she said,
�you are a spouse of blood to me.� Then God let Moses go.�
The meaning of these verses is obscure to biblical scholars. I think,
though, that the Lord coming to kill Moses could be likened to FMW�s
Pathways' chapter XVII which speaks of it being difficult �to assert
the will to live� while in the grip of the Fire, and his other
statements of how the world weary man may choose to rest in Nirvana
rather than make the return to the world. If so, Sepphora�s
circumcision of her son is an act that symbolizes the need for Moses
to return to the world to help his people.
Also, in Pathways, chapter IV, FMW writes that Sherifa urged him to
write �of a little incident that (he) would have let pass as many,
many have already passed.� He then goes on to describe a cat playing
in an �enveloping matrix of meaning� that �sublimated the ordinary so
that it became joyous.� �It was as though a tiny melody from out of
the Grand Symphony had trilled joyously into my mind�a little sketch
born forth from the Grand Harmony.� How different this description is
from the usual keeping of the Record of his Realization that is mainly
that of unfolding thought.
It would be easy to cite gender differences as the cause of your
frustrations with trying to connect with Andre on the writings of
FMW. But if we want to put it into a context consistent with FMW�s
writings I suggest you consider that Andre�s physicist�s mind lacks a
higher matrix of meaning in which to put his thoughts. That he, like
most physicists, aren�t aware of the philosophy that emerges from
their discoveries or how it could enrich their lives and the lives of
others.
In FMW�s record it is woman that has him unveil Joyousness in a Matrix
of Meaning and in Exodus it is woman that calls Moses back to his
people thus enabling him to give meaning and form to his work, i.e.,
call from God.
As a woman, your communications on the meaning of FMW�s writings is
undoubtedly clothed in more than just the intellectualism Andre is
familiar with. Like Sepphora your message of FMW could �touch his
feet�, i.e., ground his thinking in a matrix of meaning. Or, like
> > Helen Keller�s work, which I
> > quote from p.123-4 of Albert Low�s book, �The Iron Cow of Zen�.
>
> > �Someone was drawing water and my teacher placed my hand under the
> > spout. As the cool stream gushed over my hand she spelled into the
> > other the word, w-a-t-e-r, first slowly, and then rapidly. I stood
> > still, my whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers.
> > Suddenly I felt a misty consciousness as of something forgotten,� and
> > somehow the mystery of language was revealed to me. I knew then that
> > w-a-t-e-r meant the wonderful cool something that was flowing over my
> > hand. That living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, set it
> > free.�
>
> One of the ways I come to know anything of value for me is through
> finding it repeated in varied language in seemingly disparate sources.
> I've of course heard and learned of Helen Keller as part of a standard
> Western education, but I'd never pursued her writings specifically,
> and this does indeed seem to contain adumbrations of that other way of
> Knowing outside of the perceptual and cognitive. Thank you very kindly
> for bringing this to light here!
>
> > To those meeting at Lone Pine this coming week I send my hopes for
> > small realizations and great ones.
>
> Thank you. Hopefully one day you'll be there too.
>
> All best wishes,
>
> Diane
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Franklin Merrell-Wolff - Consciousness Without An Object Discussion Group"
group.
To post to this group, send email to fm...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
fm-w+uns...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fm-w?hl=en.
Hakuin Suso
generate different avenues of thought.
My posts in this particular stream were, however, simply to show my
appreciation to Diane Clayton through who’s July 3rd post I found
myself firmly anchored in seeing that Knowledge through Identity is
non-conceptual, non-perceptive, non-sensation and non-feeling. Using
these functions of consciousness in meditation does not lend to
turning one’s awareness upon itself.
The second post refers to the male tendency to devalue the feminine
element which in its higher expressions gives beauty, form and meaning
to life. One wonders if FMW’s philosophy would have been written at
all if not for the feminine aspect or, if it had, whether it would
have been so elegantly stated.
On Aug 4, 7:55 am, "mt" <m...@znet.com> wrote:
> Thanks Hakuin for sharing your thoughts on the ideas of Knowledge Through
> Identity. Can I assume here then that Absolute Identity means Pure
>
> The Bible in Genesis suggests two ways of knowing: that of The Tree of Good
> and Evil, and the other tree, The Tree of Life. The Tree of Knowledge of
> Good and Evil is that of duality, knowing by contrast and concept. However,
> the Tree of Life is Knowing directly, non-dual, Things as They Are, What Is.
> The exclusive adherence to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is
> fundamentally an identity grounded in concept, the SELF-CONCEPT, the IDEA of
> who you THINK you are. The fusion with this way of knowing is ultimately
> death (for there is no Life or Spirit, nor the True, Good, Beautiful or
> Real). But the absolute fusion of identity by a deluded self in this way, is
> difficult to do in itself because the vessel of conceptual knowledge, as
> identity, leaks. And all leaks in this sense are essentially those moments
> when the fruit of the Tree of Life can enter (usually when the self is
> asleep or not walled off by consciousness fused to the conceptual identity).
> And here we have all those discoveries through history that advance the
> consciousness of mankind toward What Is (and this is, at least one way, how
> the non-dual-beyond-concept Knowing pertains to scientific discovery).
>
> Those self-concept identities who begin to see through (usually at first,
> accidently) the mega trance generated by a fusion with The Tree of Knowledge
> of Good and Evil (note that most are not even aware that this form of
> identity-fusion IS their life), may begin a more conscious path toward the
> or this way of knowing which can be the mistake made here. There is here
> only the attempt to suggest that the IDENTITY of self does not really belong
> to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (which has its place, however, in
> the evolution of things) but to the Tree of Life, which is the Great Chain
> of Being.
>
> While all methods to awaken the being are essentially constructed (but not
> necessarily discovered) by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (duality
> is to bring a motivated self-concept identity close enough to its, as I call
>
> So the awakening is really a shift in consciousness (identity) from one Tree
> to the Other...but not by belief, which is of the conceptual-emotional order
> of things, but from knowledge to Knowledge in terms of moving toward
> Awareness or Pure Consciousness as the Ground of Being, directly. Religious
> belief may be some very early attempt (usually on the unconscious path) to
> move in that direction, but while the religious structure (usually a
> conceptual order of some kind) may give some order, it usually becomes a
> barrier to the direct Knowing, except within the more esoteric or mystical
> aspects, where most do not tread.
>
> mt
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Hakuin Suso" <hakuin.s...@gmail.com>
> To: "Franklin Merrell-Wolff - Consciousness Without An Object Discussion
>
> Group" <fm...@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:48 PM
> Subject: [fm-w], {Franklin Merrell-Wolff Fel Re: , {Franklin Merrell-Wolff
> Fel A small and rather obvious (now, that is) insight on Introception.
>
> it is said,
>
> upon Moses and would have killed him. But Sepphora took a piece of
>
> Pathways' chapter XVII which speaks of it being difficult to assert
> the will to live while in the grip of the Fire, and his other
> to return to the world to help his people.
>
> Also, in Pathways, chapter IV, FMW writes that Sherifa urged him to
> many have already passed. He then goes on to describe a cat playing
> in an enveloping matrix of meaning that sublimated the ordinary so
> that it became joyous. It was as though a tiny melody from out of
> the Grand Symphony had trilled joyously into my mind a little sketch
> born forth from the Grand Harmony. How different this description is
> that of unfolding thought.
>
> It would be easy to cite gender differences as the cause of your
> frustrations with trying to connect with Andre on the writings of
> writings I suggest you consider that Andre s physicist s mind lacks a
> others.
>
> people thus enabling him to give meaning and form to his work, i.e.,
> call from God.
>
> feet , i.e., ground his thinking in a matrix of meaning. Or, like
>
> > > spout. As the cool stream gushed over my hand she spelled into the
> > > other the word, w-a-t-e-r, first slowly, and then rapidly. I stood
> > > still, my whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers.
>
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
doro...@cox.net
---- mt <m...@znet.com> wrote:
Thanks Hakuin for sharing your thoughts on the ideas of “Knowledge Through
Identity.” Can I assume here then that Absolute Identity means Pure
Awareness? If so then from this the rest follows:
The Bible in Genesis suggests two ways of knowing: that of The Tree of Good
and Evil, and the other tree, The Tree of Life. The Tree of Knowledge of
Good and Evil is that of duality, knowing by contrast and concept. However,
the Tree of Life is Knowing directly, non-dual, Things as They Are, What Is.
The exclusive adherence to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil is
fundamentally an identity grounded in concept, the SELF-CONCEPT, the IDEA of
who you THINK you are. The fusion with this way of knowing is ultimately
death (for there is no Life or Spirit, nor the True, Good, Beautiful or
Real). But the absolute fusion of identity by a deluded self in this way, is
difficult to do in itself because the vessel of conceptual knowledge, as
identity, leaks. And all leaks in this sense are essentially those moments
when the fruit of the Tree of Life can enter (usually when the self is
asleep or not walled off by consciousness fused to the conceptual identity).
And here we have all those discoveries through history that advance the
consciousness of mankind toward What Is (and this is, at least one way, how
the non-dual-beyond-concept Knowing pertains to scientific discovery).
Those self-concept identities who begin to see through (usually at first,
accidently) the mega trance generated by a fusion with The Tree of Knowledge
of Good and Evil (note that most are not even aware that this form of
identity-fusion IS their life), may begin a more conscious path toward the
Light at the end of the self-conceptual cave (Plato’s Cave). But I must add
here, this in no way means to devalue the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
or this way of knowing which can be the mistake made here. There is here
only the attempt to suggest that the IDENTITY of self does not really belong
to the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (which has its place, however, in
the evolution of things) but to the Tree of Life, which is the Great Chain
of Being.
While all methods to awaken the being are essentially constructed (but not
necessarily discovered) by the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (duality –
and therefore limited as you say Hakiun), the art of a genuine methodology
is to bring a motivated self-concept identity close enough to its, as I call
it, STILL POINT (“0”, Void, death/rebirth, cross, dark night, etc.,etc.) to
then See the new Identity waiting to be Discovered, which happens of Itself.
So the awakening is really a shift in consciousness (identity) from one Tree
to the Other...but not by belief, which is of the conceptual-emotional order
of things, but from knowledge to Knowledge in terms of moving toward
Awareness or Pure Consciousness as the Ground of Being, directly. Religious
belief may be some very early attempt (usually on the unconscious path) to
move in that direction, but while the religious structure (usually a
conceptual order of some kind) may give some order, it usually becomes a
barrier to the direct Knowing, except within the more esoteric or mystical
aspects, where most do not tread.
mt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hakuin Suso" <hakui...@gmail.com>
To: "Franklin Merrell-Wolff - Consciousness Without An Object Discussion
Group" <fm...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:48 PM
Subject: [fm-w], {Franklin Merrell-Wolff Fel Re: , {Franklin Merrell-Wolff
Fel A small and rather obvious (now, that is) insight on Introception.
In Exodus, Chapter 4, verse 24 – 26, when Moses was returning to Egypt
it is said,
“On the journey, at a place where they spent the night, the Lord came
upon Moses and would have killed him. But Sepphora took a piece of
flint and cut off her son’s foreskin and, touching his feet, she said,
‘you are a spouse of blood to me.’ Then God let Moses go.”
The meaning of these verses is obscure to biblical scholars. I think,
though, that the Lord coming to kill Moses could be likened to FMW’s
Pathways' chapter XVII which speaks of it being difficult “to assert
the will to live” while in the grip of the Fire, and his other
statements of how the world weary man may choose to rest in Nirvana
rather than make the return to the world. If so, Sepphora’s
circumcision of her son is an act that symbolizes the need for Moses
to return to the world to help his people.
Also, in Pathways, chapter IV, FMW writes that Sherifa urged him to
write “of a little incident that (he) would have let pass as many,
many have already passed.” He then goes on to describe a cat playing
in an “enveloping matrix of meaning” that “sublimated the ordinary so
that it became joyous.” “It was as though a tiny melody from out of
the Grand Symphony had trilled joyously into my mind—a little sketch
born forth from the Grand Harmony.” How different this description is
from the usual keeping of the Record of his Realization that is mainly
that of unfolding thought.
It would be easy to cite gender differences as the cause of your
frustrations with trying to connect with Andre on the writings of
FMW. But if we want to put it into a context consistent with FMW’s
writings I suggest you consider that Andre’s physicist’s mind lacks a
higher matrix of meaning in which to put his thoughts. That he, like
most physicists, aren’t aware of the philosophy that emerges from
their discoveries or how it could enrich their lives and the lives of
others.
In FMW’s record it is woman that has him unveil Joyousness in a Matrix
of Meaning and in Exodus it is woman that calls Moses back to his
people thus enabling him to give meaning and form to his work, i.e.,
call from God.
As a woman, your communications on the meaning of FMW’s writings is
undoubtedly clothed in more than just the intellectualism Andre is
familiar with. Like Sepphora your message of FMW could “touch his
feet”, i.e., ground his thinking in a matrix of meaning. Or, like
> > Helen Keller’s work, which I
> > quote from p.123-4 of Albert Low’s book, “The Iron Cow of Zen”.
>
> > “Someone was drawing water and my teacher placed my hand under the
> > spout. As the cool stream gushed over my hand she spelled into the
> > other the word, w-a-t-e-r, first slowly, and then rapidly. I stood
> > still, my whole attention fixed upon the motion of her fingers.
> > Suddenly I felt a misty consciousness as of something forgotten,… and
> > somehow the mystery of language was revealed to me. I knew then that
> > w-a-t-e-r meant the wonderful cool something that was flowing over my
> > hand. That living word awakened my soul, gave it light, hope, set it
> > free.”
--
Doroethy
doro...@cox.net
to life. One wonders if FMW’s philosophy would have been written at
all if not for the feminine aspect or, if it had, whether it would
have been so elegantly stated.
Thank you! I find this so insightful. Of course, as Marion Woodman reminds us, feminine is not a gender, and
you note this.
Regarding Sherifa's influence. Through knowledge of Jung, she did encourage Franklin's connection to the feminine.
She was, of course, the outer representation. She was loving and caring (many were in their group because of her), but
she was also articulate. She lectured as early as 1911, and continued to do so in Los Angeles much later!. She was also a warrior! I recall a small Aurobindo book called The Mother in which he wrote the four main aspects of femininity, and indicated
there were more. I certainly thought of Sherifa, my grandmother, as exhibiting all four. Franklin acknowledged her in an issue
of their then newsletter The Bulletin. But of course, his writing of her in Pathways was lovely and
also again indicates, at least to me, that he was in touch with his own feminine as well as hers.
--