2024-12-09 Language

In Search of the Miraculous

“…[In] the circle of mechanical humanity to which we belong and which alone we know…there is not and there cannot be a common understanding… This circle is sometimes called the circle of the ‘confusion of tongues,’ that is, the circle in which each one speaks in his own particular language, where no one understands another and takes no trouble to be understood… —Chapter 15

“…People do not clearly realize to what a degree their language is subjective, that is, what different things each of them says while using the same words… Two men can say the same thing with profound conviction but call it by different names…without suspecting that they are thinking exactly the same. Or…two men can…imagine that they agree with, and understand one another, whereas they are actually saying absolutely different things, and do not understand one another in the least… —Chapter 4

Views From the Real World

…Every man who pronounces any word always attaches this or that shade of meaning to it by his imagination, exaggerates or…designat[es] by this word not all the attributes, but those chance external ones which first spring to his notice. Another man speaking with the first…takes this word in another sense, which is often exactly the opposite… And men speaking in this way think that they can understand each other… —New York, February 1924

The Reality of Being

All the manifestations of life in man are expressed in forms by movements and attitudes, that is, postures… A thought has a movement and a form that is proper to it. A feeling has a movement and a form proper to it. For an action it is the same. Our entire education consists precisely in learning a whole repertoire of attitudes of thinking and feeling, and attitudes of moving. This repertoire constitutes our automatism. But we do not know it. And there is a language here that we do not understand. —57. A double aim

Views From the Real World

Man consists of three men; each has a different character, different nature and suffers from lack of correspondence with the others. Our aim must be to organize them so as to make them correspond… They are not acquainted with one another. Not only do they not listen to one another, but if one of them begs the other very hard to do something, and knows how it should be done, the other either cannot or will not do it. —Paris, August 1922

Maybe you remember it being said that man is like a rig consisting of passenger, driver, horse and carriage. Except there can be no question of the passenger, for he is not there, so we can only speak of the driver. Our mind is the driver.

…[T]he horse does not understand the language of the driver, nor the carriage that of the horse… The horse understands the language of the reins… The…carriage…has its own structure… So the driver should know the…characteristics, of the carriage. Only then can he drive it in the direction he wishes. But if he merely sits on his box and says in his own language “go right” or “go left,” the team will not budge even if he shouts for a year…

…[T]here is no common language between one part and another. This is why it is so difficult…to establish a connection between them, and…to force our parts to change their way of living. This is why we are obliged to make them communicate… —Prieuré, January 19, 1923

In Search of the Miraculous

“Work on oneself must begin with the driver. The driver is the mind… Then, it may prove that the master speaks a language that the driver does not understand. The driver must learn this language. When he has learned it, he will understand the master. But…what would be the use of his understanding the master if he is not in a position to do anything?… The mind must learn to control the emotions. The emotions always pull the body after them… But…work on…the driver, the horse, and the carriage, is one thing. And work on the ‘connections’—that is, on the ‘driver’s understanding,’ which unites him to the master; on the ‘reins,’ which connect him with the horse; and on the ‘shafts’ and the ‘harness,’ which connect the horse with the carriage—is quite another thing… —Chapter 5

Views From the Real World

In order to be understood by another man, it is not only necessary for the speaker to know how to speak, but for the listener to know how to listen…

…[It is] possible only with the wish and cooperation of the listener, when the listener ceases to listen passively and begins to do, that is, when he moves into an active state. —Essentuki, About 1918

If you wish to hear new things in a new way, you must listen in a new way… [W]hen thought is already there, try to feel. When you feel something, try to direct your thoughts on your feeling. Up to now, thought and feeling have been separated.

Begin to watch your mind: feel what you think… Speaking generally, you will never understand what I wish to convey if you merely listen. —New York, February 24, 1924

The Reality of Being

…[I]f I am in the position of listener, a change is needed in my state. If I am searching for a more active attention, freer to listen, freer from associations and reactions, there can be a greater possibility… If my attention is more actively engaged, there can be a participation that permits the exchange to flow in two directions and activates the “hearer” in both questioner and listener. —54. I need to speak

Inside a Question, Henriette Lannes

…To listen in a different way to different parts of myself…the emotions…the head, even the instinct… I could try to listen with two parts of myself, as if my sensation listens. From this we begin to study. —A Way to Listen, London 1960