We can now see what is the true goal
of education for a child. It is the full and
harmonious development of the four primary modes of
consciousness, always with regard to the individual
nature of the child.
The goal is not ideal.
The aim is not mental consciousness. We
want effectual human beings, not conscious ones.
The final aim is not to know, but to be.
There never was a more risky motto than that:
Know thyself. You’ve got to know
yourself as far as possible. But not just for
the sake of knowing. You’ve got to know
yourself so that you can at last be yourself.
“Be yourself” is the last motto.
The whole field of dynamic and effectual
consciousness is always pre-mental, non-mental.
Not even the most knowing man that ever lived would
know how he would be feeling next week; whether some
new and utterly shattering impulse would have arisen
in him and laid his nicely-conceived self in ruins.
It is the impulse we have to live by, not the ideals
or the idea. But we have to know ourselves pretty
thoroughly before we can break the automatism of ideals
and conventions. The savage in a state of nature
is one of the most conventional of creatures.
So is a child. Only through fine delicate knowledge
can we recognize and release our impulses. Now
our whole aim has been to force each individual to
a maximum of mental control, and mental consciousness.
Our poor little plans of children are put into horrible
forcing-beds, called schools, and the young idea is
there forced to shoot. It shoots, poor thing,
like a potato in a warm cellar. One mass of pallid
sickly ideas and ideals. And no root, no life.
The ideas shoot, hard enough, in our sad offspring,
but they shoot at the expense of life itself.
Never was such a mistake. Mental consciousness
is a purely individual affair. Some men are born
to be highly and delicately conscious. But for
the vast majority, much mental consciousness is simply
a catastrophe, a blight. It just stops their
living.
Our business, at the present, is to
prevent at all cost the young idea from shooting.
The ideal mind, the brain, has become the vampire of
modern life, sucking up the blood and the life.
There is hardly an original thought or original utterance
possible to us. All is sickly repetition of stale,
stale ideas.
Let all schools be closed at once.
Keep only a few technical training establishments,
nothing more. Let humanity lie fallow, for two
generations at least. Let no child learn to read,
unless it learns by itself, out of its own individual
persistent desire.
That is my serious admonition, gentle
reader. But I am not so flighty as to imagine
you will pay any heed. But if I thought you would,
I should feel my hope surge up. And if you don’t
pay any heed, calamity will at length shut your schools
for you, sure enough.
The process of transfer from the primary
consciousness to recognized mental consciousness is
a mystery like every other transfer. Yet it follows
its own laws. And here we begin to approach the
confines of orthodox psychology, upon which we have
no desire to trespass. But this we can
say. The degree of transfer from primary to mental
consciousness varies with every individual. But
in most individuals the natural degree is very low.
The process of transfer from primary
consciousness is called sublimation, the sublimating
of the potential body of knowledge with the definite
reality of the idea. And with this process we
have identified all education. The very derivation
of the Latin word education shows us.
Of course it should mean the leading forth of each
nature to its fullness. But with us, fools that
we are, it is the leading forth of the primary consciousness,
the potential or dynamic consciousness, into mental
consciousness, which is finite and static. Now
before we set out so gayly to lead our children en
bloc out of the dynamic into the static way of
consciousness, let us consider a moment what we are
doing.
A child in the womb can have no idea
of the mother. I think orthodox psychology will
allow us so much. And yet the child in the womb
must be dynamically conscious of the mother.
Otherwise how could it maintain a definite and progressively
developing relation to her?
This consciousness, however, is utterly
non-ideal, non-mental, purely dynamic, a matter of
dynamic polarized intercourse of vital vibrations,
as an exchange of wireless messages which are never
translated from the pulse-rhythm into speech, because
they have no need to be. It is a dynamic polarized
intercourse between the great primary nuclei in the
foetus and the corresponding nuclei in the dynamic
maternal psyche.
This form of consciousness is established
at conception, and continues long after birth.
Nay, it continues all life long. But the particular
interchange of dynamic consciousness between mother
and child suffers no interruption at birth. It
continues almost the same. The child has no conception
whatsoever of the mother. It cannot see her, for
its eye has no focus. It can hear her, because
hearing needs no transmission into concept, but it
has no oral notion of sounds. It knows her.
But only by a form of vital dynamic correspondence,
a sort of magnetic interchange. The idea does
not intervene at all.
Gradually, however, the dark shadow
of our object begins to loom in the formless mind
of the infant. The idea of the mother is, as it
were, gradually photographed on the cerebral plasm.
It begins with the faintest shadow but
the figure is gradually developed through years of
experience. It is never quite completed.
How does the figure of the mother
gradually develop as a conception in the child
mind? It develops as the result of the positive
and negative reaction from the primary centers of
consciousness. From the first great center of
sympathy the child is drawn to a lovely oneing with
the mother. From the first great center of will
comes the independent self-assertion which locates
the mother as something outside, something objective.
And as a result of this twofold notion, a twofold
increase in the child. First, the dynamic establishment
of the individual consciousness in the infant:
and then the first shadow of a mental conception of
the mother, in the infant brain. The development
of the original mind in every child and every
man always and only follows from the dual fulfillment
in the dynamic consciousness.
But mark further. Each time,
after the fourfold interchange between two dynamic
polarized lives, there results a development in the
individuality and a sublimation into consciousness,
both simultaneously in each party: and this
dual development causes at once a diminution in the
dynamic polarity between the two parties.
That is, as its individuality and its mental concept
of the mother develop in the child, there is a corresponding
waning of the dynamic relation between the
child and the mother. And this is the natural
progression of all love. As we have said before,
the accomplishment of individuality never finally
exhausts the dynamic flow between parents and child.
In the same way, a child can never have a finite conception
of either of its parents. It can have a very much
more finite, finished conception of its aunts or its
friends. The portrait of the parent can never
be quite completed in the mind of the son or daughter.
As long as time lasts it must be left unfinished.
Nevertheless, the inevitable photography
of time upon the mental plasm does print at last a
very substantial portrait of the parent, a very well-filled
concept in the child mind. And the nearer a conception
comes towards finality, the nearer does the dynamic
relation, out of which this concept has arisen, draw
to a close. To know, is to lose. When I
have a finished mental concept of a beloved, or a friend,
then the love and the friendship is dead. It
falls to the level of an acquaintance. As soon
as I have a finished mental conception, a full idea
even of myself, then dynamically I am dead. To
know is to die.
But knowledge and death are part of
our natural development. Only, of course, most
things can never be known by us in full. Which
means we do never absolutely die, even to our parents.
So that Jesus’ question to His mother, “Woman,
what have I to do with thee!” while
expressing a major truth, still has an exaggerated
sound, which comes from its denial of the minor truth.
This progression from dynamic relationship
towards a finished individuality and a finished mental
concept is carried on from the four great primary
centers through the correspondence medium of all the
senses and sensibilities. First of all, the child
knows the mother only through touch perfect
and immediate contact. And yet, from the moment
of conception, the egg-cell repudiated complete adhesion
and even communication, and asserted its individual
integrity. The child in the womb, perfect a contact
though it may have with the mother, is all the time
also dynamically polarized against this contact.
From the first moment, this relation in touch has
a dual polarity, and, no doubt, a dual mode.
It is a fourfold interchange of consciousness, the
moment the egg-cell has made its two spontaneous divisions.
As soon as the child is born, there
is a real severance. The contact of touch is
interrupted, it now becomes occasional only. True,
the dynamic flow between mother and child is not severed
when simple physical contact is missing. Though
mother and child may not touch, still the dynamic
flow continues between them. The mother knows
her child, feels her bowels and her breast drawn to
it, even if it be a hundred miles away. But if
the severance continue long, the dynamic flow begins
to die, both in mother and child. It wanes fairly
quickly and perhaps can never be fully revived.
The dynamic relation between parent and child may
fairly easily fall into quiescence, a static condition.
For a full dynamic relationship it
is necessary that there be actual contact. The
nerves run from the four primary dynamos, and end with
live ends all over the body. And it is necessary
to bring the live ends of the nerves of the child
into contact with the live ends of corresponding nerves
in the mother, so that a pure circuit is established.
Wherever a pure circuit is established, there occurs
a pure development in the individual creation, and
this is inevitably accompanied by sensation; and sensation
is the first term of mental knowledge.
So, from the field of the breast and
arms, the upper circuit, and from the field of the
knees and feet and belly, the lower circuit.
And then, the moment a child is born,
the face is alive. And the face communicates
direct with both planes of primary consciousness.
The moment a child is born, it begins to grope for
the breast. And suddenly a new great circuit
is established, the four poles all working at once,
as the child sucks. There is the profound desirousness
of the lower center of sympathy, and the superior avidity
of the center of will, and at the same time, the cleaving
yearning to the nipple, and the tiny curiosity of
lips and gums. The nipple of the mother’s
breast is one of the great gates of the body, hence
of the living psyche. In the nipple terminate
vivid nerves which flash their very powerful vibrations
through the mouth of the child and deep into its four
great poles of being and knowing. Even the nipples
of the man are gateways to the great dynamic flow:
still gateways.
Touch, taste, and smell are now active
in the baby. And these senses, so-called, are
strictly sensations. They are the first term of
the child’s mental knowledge. And on these
three cerebral reactions the foundation of
the future mind is laid.
The moment there is a perfect polarized
circuit between the first four poles of dynamic consciousness,
at that moment does the mind, the terminal station,
flash into cognition. The first cognition is merely
sensation: sensation and the remembrance of sensation
being the first element in all knowing and in all
conception.
The circuit of touch, taste, and smell
must be well established, before the eyes begin actually
to see. All mental knowledge is built up of sensation
and of memory. It is the continually recurring
sensation of the touch of the mother which forms the
basis of the first conception of the mother.
After that, the gradually discriminated taste of the
mother, and scent of the mother. Till gradually
sight and hearing develop and largely usurp the first
three senses, as medium of correspondence and of knowledge.
And while, of course, the sensational
knowledge is being secreted in the brain, in
some much more mysterious way the living individuality
of the child is being developed in the four first nuclei,
the four great nerve-centers of the primary field
of consciousness and being.
As time goes on, the child learns
to see the mother. At first he sees her face
as a blur, and though he knows her, knows her by a
direct glow of communication, as if her face were
a warm glowing life-lamp which rejoiced him.
But gradually, as the circuit of touch, taste, and
smell become powerfully established; gradually, as
the individual develops in the child, and so retreats
towards isolation; gradually, as the child stands
more immune from the mother, the circuit of correspondence
extends, and the eyes now communicate across space,
the ears begin to discriminate sounds. Last of
all develops discriminate hearing.
Now gradually the picture of the mother
is transferred to the child’s mind, and the
sound of the first baby-words is imprinted. And
as the child learns to discriminate visually, objectively,
between the mother and the nurse, he learns to choose,
and becomes individually free. And still, the
dynamic correspondence is not finished. It only
changes its circuit.
While the brain is registering sensations,
the four dynamic centers are coming into perfect relation.
Or rather, as we see, the reverse is the case.
As the dynamic centers come into perfect relation,
the mind registers and remembers sensations, and begins
consciously to know. But the great field of activity
is still and always the dynamic field. When a
child learns to walk, it learns almost entirely from
the solar plexus and the lumbar ganglion, the cardiac
plexus and the thoracic ganglion balancing the upper
body.
There is a perfected circuit of polarity.
The two lower centers are the positive, the two upper
the negative poles. And so the child strikes
out with his feet for the earth, presses, and strikes
away again from the earth, the two upper centers meanwhile
corresponding implicitly in the balance of the upper
body. It is a chain of spontaneous activity in
the four primary centers, establishing a circuit through
the whole body. But the positive poles are the
lower centers. And the brain has probably nothing
at all to do with it. Even the desire
to walk is not born in the brain, but in the primary
nuclei.
The same with the use of the hands
and arms. It means the establishment of a pure
circuit between the four centers, the two upper poles
now being the positive, the lower the negative poles,
and the hands the live end of the wire. Again
the brain is not concerned. Probably, even in
the first deliberate grasping of an object, the brain
is not concerned. Not until there is an element
of recognition and sensation-memory.
All our primal activity originates
and circulates purely in the four great nerve centers.
All our active desire, our genuine impulse, our love,
our hope, our yearning, everything originates mysteriously
at these four great centers or well-heads of our existence:
everything vital and dynamic. The mind can only
register that which results from the emanation of
the dynamic impulse and the collision or communion
of this impulse with its object.
So now we see that we can never know
ourselves. Knowledge is to consciousness what
the signpost is to the traveler: just an indication
of the way which has been traveled before. Knowledge
is not even in direct proportion to being. There
may be great knowledge of chemistry in a man who is
a rather poor being: and those who know,
even in wisdom like Solomon, are often at the end
of the matter of living, not at the beginning.
As a matter of fact, David did the living, the dynamic
achievement. To Solomon was left the consummation
and the finish, and the dying down.
Yet we must know, if only in
order to learn not to know. The supreme lesson
of human consciousness is to learn how not to know.
That is, how not to interfere. That is,
how to live dynamically, from the great Source, and
not statically, like machines driven by ideas and
principles from the head, or automatically, from one
fixed desire. At last, knowledge must be put
into its true place in the living activity of man.
And we must know deeply, in order even to do that.
So a new conception of the meaning of education.
Education means leading out the individual
nature in each man and woman to its true fullness.
You can’t do that by stimulating the mind.
To pump education into the mind is fatal. That
which sublimates from the dynamic consciousness into
the mental consciousness has alone any value.
This, in most individuals, is very little indeed.
So that most individuals, under a wise government,
would be most carefully protected from all vicious
attempts to inject extraneous ideas into them.
Every extraneous idea, which has no inherent root in
the dynamic consciousness, is as dangerous as a nail
driven into a young tree. For the mass of people,
knowledge must be symbolical, mythical, dynamic.
This means, you must have a higher, responsible, conscious
class: and then in varying degrees the lower
classes, varying in their degree of consciousness.
Symbols must be true from top to bottom. But the
interpretation of the symbols must rest, degree after
degree, in the higher, responsible, conscious classes.
To those who cannot divest themselves again
of mental consciousness and definite ideas, mentality
and ideas are death, nails through their hands and
feet.