CONTINUING OUR study of
man, we must now speak with more detail about the different states of
consciousness.
As I have already said,
there are four states of consciousness possible for man: Sleep, 'waking
consciousness,' self-consciousness and 'objective consciousness'; but he lives
only in two: partly in sleep and partly in what is sometimes called 'waking
consciousness.' It is as though he had a four-storied house, but lived only in
the two lower stories.
The first, or the lowest
state of consciousness, is sleep. This is a purely subjective and passive
state. Man is surrounded by dreams. All his psychic functions work without any
direction. There is no logic, no sequence, no cause and no result in dreams.
Purely subjective pictures—either reflections of former experiences or
reflections of vague perceptions of the moment, such as sounds reaching the
sleeping man, sensations coming from body, slight pains, sensations of muscular
tension— fly through the mind, leaving only a very slight trace on the memory
and more often, leaving no trace at all.
The second degree of
consciousness comes when man awakes. This second state, the state in which we
are now, that is, in which we work, talk, imagine ourselves conscious beings,
and so forth, we often call 'waking consciousness' or 'clear consciousness' but
really it should be called 'waking sleep' or 'relative consciousness that is,
sleep, does not disappear when the second state arrives, that is, when man
awakes. Sleep remains there, with all its dreams and impressions, only a more
critical attitude towards one's own impressions, more connected thoughts, more
disciplined actions become added to it, and because of the vividness of sense
impressions, desires and feelings— particularly the feeling of contradiction or
impossibility, which is entirely absent in sleep—dreams become invisible
exactly as the stars and moon become invisible in the glare of the sun. But
they are all there, and they often influence all our thoughts, feelings and
actions—sometimes even more than the actual perceptions of the moment.
In connection with this I
must say at once that I do not mean what is called in modern psychology 'the
subconscious' or the 'subconscious mind.' These are simply wrong expressions,
wrong terms, which mean nothing and do not refer to any real facts. There is
nothing permanently subconscious in us because there is nothing permanently
conscious; and there is no 'subconscious mind' for the very simple reason that
there is no 'conscious mind.' Later you will see how this mistake occurred and
how this wrong terminology came into being, and became almost generally
accepted.
But let us return to the
states of consciousness which really exist. The first is sleep. The second is
'waking sleep' or 'relative consciousness.'
The first, as I have said,
is a purely subjective state. The second is less subjective; man already
distinguishes 'I' and 'not I' in the sense of his body and objects different
from his body, and he can, to a qualities. But it cannot be said that man is
awake in this state, because he is very strongly influenced by dreams, and
really lives more in dreams than in fact. All the absurdities and all the
contradictions of people, and of human life in general, become explained when
we realize that people live in sleep, do everything in sleep, and do not know
that they are asleep.
It is useful to remember
that this is the inner meaning of many ancient doctrines. The best known to us
is Christianity, or the Gospel teaching, in which, the idea that men live in
sleep and must first of all awake, is the basis of all the explanations of
human life, although it is very rarely understood as it should be understood,
in this case literally.
But the question is, how can
a man awake?
The Gospel teaching
demands awakening, but does not say how to awaken.
But the psychological
study of consciousness shows that only when a man realizes that he is asleep,
is it possible to say that he is on the way to awakening. He never can awaken
without first realizing his sleep.
These two states, sleep
and waking sleep, are the only two states of consciousness in which man lives.
Besides them there are two states of consciousness possible for man, but they
become accessible to a man only after a hard and prolonged struggle.
These two higher states of
consciousness are called 'self-consciousness' and 'objective consciousness.'
We generally think that we
possess self-consciousness, that is, that we are conscious of ourselves, or in
any case that we can be conscious of ourselves, at any moment we wish, but in
truth 'self-consciousness' is a state which we ascribe to ourselves without any
right. 'Objective consciousness' is a state about which we know nothing.
Self consciousness is a
state in which man becomes objective towards himself, and objective
consciousness is a state in which he comes into contact with the real, or
objective world from which he is now shut off by the senses, dreams and
subjective states of consciousness.
Another definition of the
four states of consciousness can be made from the point of view of the possible
cognition of truth.
In the first state of
consciousness, that is, in sleep, we cannot know anything of the truth. Even if
some real perceptions or feelings come to us, they become mixed with dreams,
and in the state of sleep we cannot distinguish between dreams and reality.
In the second state of
consciousness, that is, in waking sleep, we can only know relative truth, and
from this comes the term relative consciousness.
In the third state of
consciousness, that is, the state of self-consciousness, we can know the full
truth about ourselves.
In the fourth state of
consciousness, that is, in the state of objective consciousness, we are
supposed to be able to know the full truth about everything: we can study
'things in themselves,' 'the world as it is.'
This is so far from us
that we cannot even think about it in the right way, and we must try to
understand that even glimpses of objective consciousness can only come in the
fully developed state of self-consciousness.
In the state of sleep we
can have glimpses of relative consciousness. In the state of relative
consciousness we can have glimpses of self-consciousness. But if we want to
have more by themselves, they need will action. This means that frequency and
duration of moments of self-consciousness depend on the command one has over
oneself. So it means that consciousness and will are almost one and the same
thing, or, in any case aspects of the same thing.
At this point, it must be
understood that the first obstacle in the way of the development of
self-consciousness in man, is his conviction that he already possesses
self-consciousness or at any rate, that he can have it at any time he likes. It
is very difficult to persuade a man that he is not conscious and cannot be
conscious at will. It is particularly difficult because here nature plays a
very funny trick.
If you ask a man if he is
conscious or if you say to him that he is not conscious, he will answer that he
is conscious and that it is absurd to say that he is not, because he hears and
understands you.
And he will be quite
right, although at the same time quite wrong. This is nature's trick. He will
be right because your question or your remark has made him vaguely conscious
for a moment. Next moment consciousness will disappear. But he will remember
what you said and what he answered, and he will certainly consider himself
conscious.
In reality, acquiring
self-consciousness means long and hard work. How can a man agree to this work
if he thinks he already possesses the very thing which is promised him as the
result of long and hard work? Naturally a man will not begin this work and will
not consider it necessary until he becomes convinced that he possesses neither self-consciousness
nor all that is connected with it, that is, unity or individuality, permanent
'I' and will.
the development of self-consciousness,
unity, permanent 'I' and will, can be given only by special schools. That must
be clearly understood. Men on the level of relative consciousness cannot find
these methods by themselves; and these methods cannot be described in books or
taught in ordinary schools for the very simple reason that they are different
for different people, and there is no universal method equally applicable to
all.
In other words, this means
that men who want to change their state of consciousness need a school. But
first, they must realise their need. As long as they think they can do
something by themselves they will not be able to make any use of a school, even
if they find it. Schools exist only for those who need them, and who know that
they need them.
The idea of schools—the
study of the kinds of schools that may exist, the study of school principles
and school methods— occupies a very important place in the study of that
psychology which is connected with the idea of evolution; because without a
school there can be no evolution. One cannot even start, because one does not
know how to start: still less can one continue or attain anything.
This means that having got
rid of the first illusion, that one already has everything one can have, one
must get rid of the second illusion that one can get anything by oneself;
because by oneself one can get nothing.
These lectures are not a
school—not even the beginning of a school. A school requires a much higher
pressure of work. But in these lectures I can give to those who wish to listen,
some ideas as I gave before two definitions of psychology.
First, I said that
psychology is the study of the possible evolution of man, and second, that
psychology is the study of oneself.
I meant that only a
psychology which investigates the evolution of man is worth studying, and that
a psychology which is occupied with only one phase of man, without knowing
anything about his other phases, is obviously not complete, and cannot have any
value, even in a purely scientific sense, that is, from the point of view of
experiment and observation. For the present phase, as studied by ordinary
psychology, in reality does not exist as something separate and consists of
many sub-divisions which lead from lower phases to higher phases. Moreover, the
same experi-ment and observation show that one cannot study psychology as one
can study any other science not directly connected with oneself. One has to
begin the study of psychology with oneself.
Putting together, first
what we may know about the next phase in the evolution of man, that is, that it
will mean acquiring consciousness, inner unity, permanent ego and will, and
second, certain material that we can get by self-observation, that is,
realisation of the absence in us of many powers and faculties which we ascribe
to ourselves, we come to a new difficulty in understanding the meaning of
psychology, and to the necessity for a new definition.
The two definitions given
in the previous lectures are not sufficient because man by himself does not
know what evolution is possible for him, does not see where he stands at
present and ascribes to himself features belonging to higher phases of
evolution. In fact, he cannot study himself, being unable to distinguish
between the imaginary and the real in himself.
What is lying?
As it is understood in
ordinary language, lying means distorting or in some cases, hiding the truth,
or what people believe to be the truth. This lying plays a very important part
in life, but there are much worse forms of lying, when people do not know that
they lie. I said in the last lecture that we cannot know the truth in our
present state, and can only know the truth in the state of objective
consciousness. How then can we lie? There seems to be a contradiction here, but
in reality there is none. We cannot know the truth but we can pretend that we
know. And this is lying. Lying fills all our life. People pretend that they
know all sorts of things: about God, about the future life, about the universe,
about the origin of man, about evolution, about everything; but in reality they
do not know anything, even about themselves. And every time they speak about
something they do not know as though they knew it, they lie. Consequently the
study of lying becomes of the first importance in psychology.
And it may lead even to
the third definition of psychology which is: the study of lying.
Psychology is particularly
concerned with the lies a man says and thinks about himself. These lies make
the study of man very difficult. Man, as he is, is not a genuine article. He is
an imitation of something, and a very bad imitation.
Imagine a scientist on
some remote planet who has received from the earth specimens of artificial
flowers, without knowing anything about real flowers. It will be extremely
difficult for him to define them— to explain their shape, their colour, the
material from which they are made, that is, wire, cotton-wool and coloured
paper—and to classify them in any way.
Psychology stands in a
very similar position in relation to man. It has to study an artificial man,
without knowing the real man.
Obviously, it cannot be
easy to study a being such as man, who does not himself know what is real and
what is imaginary in him. So psychology must begin with a division between the
real and the imaginary in man.
It is impossible to study
man as a whole, because man is divided into two parts: one part which, in some
cases, can be almost all real, and the other part which, in some cases, can be
almost all imaginary. In the majority of ordinary men these two parts are
intermixed, and cannot be easily distinguished, although they are both there,
and both have their own particular meaning and effect.
In the system we are
studying, these two parts are called essence and personality.
Essence is what is born in
man.
Personality is what is acquired.
Essence is what is his own. Personality is what is not his own. Essence cannot
be lost, cannot be changed or injured as easily as personality. Personality can
be changed almost completely with the change of circumstances; it can be lost
or easily injured.
If I try to describe what
essence is, I must, first of all, say that it make-up. For instance, one man is
naturally what is called a good sailor, another is a bad sailor, one has a
musical ear, another has not, one has a capacity for languages, another has
not. This is essence.
Personality is all that is
learned in one or another way, in ordinary language, 'consciously' or
'unconsciously.' In most cases 'unconsciously' means by imitation which, as a
matter of fact, plays a very important part in the building of personality.
Even in instinctive functions, which naturally should be free from personality,
there are usually many so-called 'acquired tastes,' that is, all sorts of
artificial likes and dislikes, all of which are acquired by imitation and
imagination. These artificial likes and dislikes play a very important and very
disastrous part in man's life. By nature, man should like what is good for him
and dislike what is bad for him. But this is so, only as long as essence
dominates personality, as it should dominate it, in other words, when a man is
healthy and normal. When personality begins to dominate essence and when man
becomes less healthy, he begins to like what is bad for him and to dislike what
is good for him.
This is connected with the
chief thing that can be wrong in the mutual relations of essence and
personality.
Normally, essence must
dominate personality and then personality can be quite useful. But if
personality dominates essence, this produces wrong results of many kinds.
It must be understood that
personality is also necessary for man; one cannot live without personality and
only with essence. But essence and personality must grow parallel, and the one
must not outgrow the other.
uneducated people. These
so-called simple people may be very good, and even clever, but they are
incapable of development in the same way as people with more developed
personality.
Cases of personality
outgrowing essence are often to be found among more cultured people, and in
such cases, essence remains in a half-grown or half-developed state.
This means that with a
quick and early growth of personality, growth of essence can practically stop
at a very early age, and as a result we see men and women externally quite
grown-up, but whose essence remains at the age of ten or twelve.
There are many conditions
in modern life which greatly favour this under-development of essence. For
instance, the infatuation with sport, particularly with games, can very effectively
stop the development of essence, and sometimes at such an early age that
essence is never fully able to recover later.
This shows that essence
cannot be regarded as connected only with the physical constitution, in the
simple meaning of the idea. In order to explain more clearly what essence
means, I must again return to the study of functions.
I said in the last lecture
that the study of man begins with the study of four functions: intellectual,
emotional, moving and instinctive. From ordinary psychology, and from ordinary
thinking, we know that the intellectual functions, thoughts, and so on, are
controlled or produced by a certain centre which we call ' mind' or
'intellect,' or 'the brain.' And this is quite right. Only, to be fully right,
we must understand that other functions are also controlled each by its own
mind or centre. Thus, from the point of view of the system, there are four minds
or centres which control our ordinary actions: intellectual mind, emotional
mind, moving mind and instinctive mind. In further references to them we shall
call them centres. Each centre is quite independent of the others, has its own
sphere of action, its own powers, and its own ways of development.
Centres, that is, their
structure, capacities, strong sides and defects, belong to essence. Their contents,
that is, all that a centre acquires, belong to personality. The contents of
centres will be explained later.
As I have already said,
personality is as equally necessary for the development of man as is essence,
only it must stand in its right place. This is hardly possible, because
personality is full of wrong ideas about itself. It does not wish to stand in
its right place, because its right place is secondary and subordinate; and it
does not wish to know the truth about itself, for to know the truth will mean
abandoning its falsely dominant position, and occupying the inferior position
which rightly belongs to it.
The wrong relative
positions of essence and personality determine the present disharmonious state
of man. And the only way to get out of this disharmonious state is by
self-knowledge.
To know oneself—this was
the first principle and the first demand of old psychological schools.
No comments:
Post a Comment