|Recorded date||August, 1985|
|Number of tapes||First 3 cassettes (6 mp3 files) out of the 6 for Esoteric Librrary|
|Other recorders audible?|
|Alternate versions exist?||This is the edited version of 1985-08-August-Intensive-uncut|
|No. of MP3 files||SH convert to 6 mp3 on 1/22/2014: 46 min, 41 min, 45 min, 45 min, 45 min, 44 min|
|Total time||264 minutes = 4 hrs, 24 min.|
|Transcription status||Augie M. made notes for the uncut version|
|Link to distribution copy||http://distribution.direct-mind.org/|
|Link to PDF||http://distribution.direct-mind.org/ Or try http://selfdefinition.org/rose/|
|Published in what book?|
|Published on which website?|
|Remarks||Mike Fitzpatrick did the tape editing. This is Vol 1, 2, 3. Vol 4 and 5 are he 1983 June Chautauqua. Vol 6 is yet unidentified|
|URL at direct-mind.org||https://www.direct-mind.org/index.php?title=1985-08-August-Intensive-edited|
|For access, send email to: email@example.com|
This talk appears in files 1 thru 6 of “Esoteric Library (vol. 1-3) This is the edited version of “1985-08-August-Intensive-uncut” Three volumes (cassettes) = 6 files: Mike Fitzpatrick edited the tapes to remove questions, etc. [possibly go to uncut version to get the start of this]
Total time 45:12
[possibly go to uncut version to get the start of this]
Is the purpose of life death? Is the purpose of death really life? Is there such a thing as life or death without the other? Should we ask, what is the purpose of death? What is preventing you from getting the goal you set? What is beauty? What is power? Who possesses? What is meaning?
In other words, we discuss things; we never stop to think, you know, “Are we meaningful?” What is meaning?
What is the meaning of the word communicate? Can words communicate an idea exactly? Do people often get a opposite idea to the idea you intended to communicate?
I find that possibly ninety percent of the people who hear me lecture do not get the idea that I’m trying to communicate. And sometimes they communicate [this] to me: they say, “You’re a fatheaded bastard.”
Is meaning conveyed by words?
Talleyrand said, you know, “Words were invented to conceal meaning.” That I think was the smartest thing that was said in that hundred years [in which] he lived. If he’s correct, who can we trust to convey facts? I mean everything – you get the guy, we were talking about the guy quoting the Bible: He quotes the Bible to back up what he wants to believe. I used to know some of these fellows. They’re following a narrow, doctrinal path, and they quote stuff to back up that doctrinal path.
How can we convey abstract conceptions?
If we have to do so, we have to have a necessary understanding of each person we’re communicating with, their associations and conditioning
And of course, I think there are a lot of people who try it. [?]
Is it easier to convey ideas to a person who loves you, or to a person whom you love?
It’s an emotional medium. ?? ?? love is being trying to accept too quickly. [?]
Do we reject ideas from repulsive people?
I learned to transmit from a Zen teacher. And I would have liked to punch him. And he said quite a few people would like to punch him. But what it is – you don’t like somebody sticking their finger in your eye, and saying, “You’re not being honest with yourself. You’re not facing facts, you’re still living according to wishful thinking.”
What is the difference between truth arrived at by scientific methods (such as chemical analysis) and truth arrived at by philosophic deductions?
In other words, the only way you’re going to arrive at truth – we’re talking about – philosophic deduction is the only way you can handle abstract things. You can’t – you know – you can have somebody perform miracles, and this used to be the basis for following a certain religion; the guy who could raise the dead, or he could heal the sick. And the guy that he raised from the dead may have been an epileptiic.
What must truth constitute?
Is there only one type of truth?
We’ll get back to the rest of these later; let’s seeif we can explore some of them
Are there gradations of truth?
in other words, I use the terminology small-T and capital-T.
What is the truth about claims to immortality?
How can we study that> We want to make a study of it.
Should we pursue for proof of immortality even though evidence for pre-defined immortality does not give us much hope?
The statistical or mathematical percentages, if you doped them out with a computer or slide rule, the number of people who have spent their lives searching for the truth – and by their own testimony didn’t come up with very good answers, even to themselves – it kind of puts the chill on it.
What are some indirect facts or phenomena that point toward immortality? Is there anything that points, you know – there must be something: where there’s smoke there’s fire. Where there’s desire there must be some answer to that desire.
The witnessing for instance of entities; these are phenomena. There’s such a thing as an entity – maybe of another dimension. We’re going to presume they’re not here because we can’t catch them in a butterfly net.
We were talking about this earlier. I went down to Ephrata, Pennsylvania years ago to see some entities. There was a materializing medium down there. I ran all over the country to physically be able to see some of this
[Does] such evidence of other dimensions qualifies life as being not limited to this material planet or cosmos?
Whatever you want to call it – they might – in other words, I say the word planet because that’s a material, part of the material universe. But these things may actually live between – between here and someplace else; between here and oblivion. There may be, as Christ said, in his house there’s many rooms or, I forget exactly what he said, but I remember there was some quotation where he implied that there were other mansions or other rooms.
What is the value of spiritual systems?
We’ve got to take this into account. You can’t – you’ve only got so many years in your life. This is what I
Total time 40:32
Total time 44:54
Total time 45:00