{ } = word or expression can't be understood
{word} = hard to understand, might be this

...came to my college in peace. And my colleague -- and he called himself a philosopher, and one day he was president of the American Philosophical Society. That's, so to speak, the highest rank among the idiots. And literally there was on his -- on his -- on his assignment board, there were the following items. And on it went. I have seen it with my own eyes. And he meant really that out of his own textbook, which he had composed, every -- for every meeting, you had to read three pages.

Now gentlemen, you cannot read a book like that. And he defied of course his {own} -- he just showed that he has no right to write books. Because, you see, a book, if it is a book, has to be written -- read whole. And then one book is like one sentence, you see. And to cut it up means that it is no book. That's no -- not deserves reading. But most of you do this. You -- treat books as though you could split them into three pages {for a beer}. My dear people, every book is a breath of God, of the spirit. And you will never understand speech, language, literature, history, politics, religion, what- --art--if you do not know that a book is nothing but one sentence, in a more artificial way, you see. And then you can read the book for the second time and analyze it. But first you have to read it through. No -- not one of you does this, except with obscene novels. You really think that -- and of course, these textbooks fall in with this, and they are written in this -- in this butcher-like fashion. But here, I want to bring you back to the normal -- experience that --. As we begin -- originally, you see, one sentence in the old tribe was -- one chant was a whole book. That was as big as the Bible, or The Iliad, because it was all the tribe had to be said about the hero who had to be celebrated.

So if you say -- take grammar, we -- you treat grammar as though it was, you see, elementary. I assure you that in the sentences and in our forms of grammar, all the problems of poetry are hidden, you see. That is, every one sentence is already a whole book.

If you treat -- if you -- and if you only would do this with your own experience, you would again begin to write poetry and {to sing}. But my boys tell me in my college--I always was despondent--that after 12, they don't write poetry. That is, they become cynic, stupid.

The whole is earlier than its parts: this is the first fact of history, and the Bible is written around this probl- -- topic. And I come back, I mean, here to the Bible. The miracle of the Bible is that it has such a breath, that over a thousand years, it's one book. And we have to try to find out how this is possible. This is

my -- my problem with you, you see. And I have tried to show you that over the last 70 years, the approach has been just the other way around. One sentence, and then 10 sentences, then a chapter. And -- if you read Mr. Shotwell, or if you read the Encyclopaedia Britannica, the Book of Samuel consists of -- of seven or six strands, and it's patched together by some idiot, as -- as a textbook today is glued together with the scissors.

But that -- why wou- -- should we read such a stupid book? But -- inexplicable that to this day, -- it is still mentioned. I mean, do you think that these textbooks will be mentioned as long as -- as soon as the superintendent of schools does not -- does not get a discount? That's today just a question of -- of graft, how -- your textbook business. The greatest racket in the United States. It's a purely financial proposition.

And -- so everything is now judged from your experiences with textbooks. And of course, if my colleague, Professor {Wright}, if he could afford to -- to -- to say to a student, "You can read a book by -- by -- reading three pages every day," you see, cer- -- first of all you should know that such a book doesn't deserve to be read. Second, of course, it was never finished, you see; and never did anybody know why it was written or what was in it. But it was good for an examination. To spit it back, I mean, to vomit it.

-- And you should be ashamed. Don't read a book -- read the -- even if you read the end first, I prefer it -- as -- though you're just -- looking at the book, and see the title page and read the review, and then say you have read it. I mean, most people help themselves today by reading just the review and then saying they have read the book. Isn't that true? Because a -- review at least pretends that the -- that the critic has read the whole book. Don't believe it. They don't. I mean, criticism in the -- in the mod- -- western world is perhaps the most prurient, and the most putrid profession that there is, I mean. I have great contempt for -- for the sick state of the reviewing trade. And -- but here it is -- connected with the publisher, the big writer, too. You are in, every book that the publisher publishes is praised; if you are not in, you can't do anything.

But you ought to know these things, that the -- Bible is written to pre- -- to preserve, to -- so to speak, to train every generation in its power to judge books. Because the -- criterion of a book is: is it one sentence?

We have a famous philosopher in -- in Europe, Mr. Schopenhauer--you may have heard his name--the great pessimist who first introduced Buddha -- Buddhism in -- in Europe. Now when Schopenhauer published his system of philosophy, he said, "Dear public, I'm very sorry, but you will have to read the whole book first, and then begin to read it a second time. -- And if you have any

difficulties in reading it the first time, go on! Go on! For heaven's sake, don't give up," you see, "because it's one thought I have tried to express in this whole volume. And I'm" -- of course it was a stroke of genius.

Now genius means fresh, means creation. And how can you stop --. You -- you cannot -- first look at the little finger of the "Piet…" of Michelangelo, and then afterwards look at the head. Who -- that would be very funny. Any picture you embrace, and any -- and any piece of music. But with books, you are so corrupt by specs- -- book -- the textbook, which is the opposite from a book, which should never exist--and you, as seniors, should not read textbooks. You are too good for this. You should read the -- the highest and best literature. Instead of learning common textbook, What to Think about Shakespeare, isn't it much better that you read Hamlet instead? But you don't. You all read this chlorine faucet water. That's what you drink instead of going to a real spring. You never receive the first things first, and the second things as second things, because you -- in your way there stand always this second-hand literature. Dictionaries, and grammars, and textbooks, and examination papers, and assignments. And therefore it is very hard to talk to you about anything that real men really think, and really write, and really do.

Now I have tried to build up the under- -- an understanding of the Bible by beginning in the middle, where the Jews were forced to begin to write. They had lived 300 years after their flight from Egypt, obviously, in -- in -- in an oral society, in protest against the sacred -- writings on -- in Egypt. If you've ever seen a -- seen a -- a temple of Egypt, a pyramid, you know it is scribbled and covered with sacred signs. And the cosmos is -- is magically bewitched.

So the -- Moses, seeing the horrors of this astrological prison, take -- went out of it and founded this nation under God. Just as we Americans think they are a nation under God, that was the same idea of freedom, that no outer form--neither Communism, nor capitalism, or any other form of system--could be identified with -- with the life of a people.

And you are in great danger at this moment of backsliding into Egyptian darkness, because I hear more and more people say that capitalism is identical with the American way of life. It isn't at all. Americans are free to adopt any way of life, and to have many ways of life. And as soon as you think that capitalism has anything to do with America, I can only tell you that you are back to the sorcerers of pharaoh. And we have every moment -- at this moment, from 1910 to 1945 or--in brackets, to the next election--because it always only shows 50 years later--you have a definite attempt on the part of the American intelligentsia to forsake the freedom of the children of God, and to backslide into Egypt. You have psychoanalysis, which is exactly what the sorcerers of pharaoh did--inter-

pret dreams, and predict, and tell people, you see, that they're just pieces that can be put -- taken apart and put together. It's again this building up out of elements the person; whereas the person is first, and the elements, you see, come later.

The word "analysis" tells us this -- you see, this heresy. And a machine you can build up out of parts, you see, but not without the vision of the inventor how the whole machine works. So it isn't even true that in an -- in an elementary way that machinery can be built meaningfully out of parts. You have first to know how the whole thing is going to function.

Now obviously the same is true about the human character. Your life, your 70 years, you see, are God's melody which He tries to compose. You are His poem. You are His piece of music. You aren't yet ready. I mean, the poetry you have -- can --. The movement -- the movement is at this moment perhaps vivace, or allegro, you see; and the adagio is still to come.

But you are in the midst of it. You have to hear carefully whether this composition will come off. You can break it off.

Now you are told that you consist of the parts that have already gone before, you see. -- This is exactly the Egyptian darkness against which the Bible is written. The Bible is written around the simple fact that man experiences himself as divinely complete. If you -- if the meaning -- image of God has any meaning, then must mean that men -- God and men begin with the whole, because you cannot subdivide God. If you can, you have superstition. You get the Greek gods, or you get the Hindu gods. God is one, indivisible.

Now man is of course, too. You hear today "Peace is indivisible." How can anybody believe that who believes that man is divisible, can be analyzed, you see?

I warn you against one word that has played in this country a tremendous role. That's the word "synthesis." It has comforted all these analytical magicians, and sorcerers, and -- and witchcraft doctors, and devil -- devils. Whether they are in politics, or whether they are in -- or gradually develop { }. Huh? What went on?

(Um, I was helping out a friend.)

What?

(I was helping out a friend. I was helping out a friend. I was applying -- yesterday's lecture.)

What was yesterday's lecture?

(Ah { }.)

Nice.

Now, the -- Bible is not a synthetic, glued-together thing, as people make it today, you see. It's the same through the ages. It's one spirit moving through the ages. If it isn't, then it isn't the Bible. And it doesn't deserve to be listened to or read. You can reject it. But don't help yourself by saying, "It's an interesting synthesis."

What do we call "synthesis," gentlemen? You have A, B, C, D, uranium, and thorium, and plutonium, and -- and -- and all the metals. I mean, gold and silver, and then you syntheticize something. That's the idea of "synthesis," that is, that the parts are older than the whole. Now what all -- we all do in our science--what any engineer, by the way does, Mr. Feringer--is something quite different. We live and we are a stream of life, so to speak, like the Colorado River, on this earth hu- -- the human stream. And we have this vitality to bring into the bed of the common life all the dead materials, by getting -- coal, and electricity, and -- and -- water, and what-not working with us. We -- in this sense, there is synthesis. We bring them back. We add them to the -- stream of life which we ourselves constitute, but we cannot make life. Synthesis is a bringing-in, an endowment of our mainstream of life which we here constitute in our naked bodies, and our living bodies, and our living souls. We syntheticize indeed--if -- you would give a new notion to the word "synthesis," you see--to add to, to join with. That's what it -- you can mean, also, and then it's a good thing, you see. We make deader things join the march of life, the march of time.

So the word "synthesis" is to me the great divide between the heresy today which tries to con- -- construe life out of death; and the other, which says that the deader parts--like a machine, you see, like the metals, you see, like the -- bridge which you build--is an attempt to join, to incorporate dead -- dead -- dead things into the living substance of our existence. And that's the true meaning of engineering, you see, and having the genius of expanding man's life into the outer world, because -- engineering has to do with genius. And it means "to create," and to in- -- generate. And we generate. We bring up high voltage in electricity, or whatever we do. That is, something that is less vital, you see, can be joined into the -- into our own existence.

And therefore, I invite you to -- to redefine this word "synthesis." It's very popular still today in the modern American analysis, history, and --. For example, historians think that they syntheticize their filing index, their card index, and

they write the whole book. That isn't true. They must have had {firtis-} -- a sympathetic -- experience of the whole they want to write, you see. And they must join this experience. And then they can subdivide it, and articulate it. And the word "articulation" shows you what we really do in thinking and in studying, you see. "To articulate" means to have a whole; to hold onto it; but to subdivide it; to give it limbs, members, you see. This is articulation. And all we do in the humanities is to become articulate. And "artus" in Latin--articulation--means "limb." That's all it means. But it's very important, you see. If you stick to your guns and say, "The humanities make us articulate," then you can never forget that the whole is older than the parts. Because you can only articulate if this whole experience is with you.

-- Take any person. If he has really something to say, he's embarrassed, and he's shy, and he is ashamed, and he blushes. And then under the pressure of this embarrassed feeling, he begins to articulate, you see, because articulation frees us from this embarrassment. You are overwhelmed by a great experience. You are in love. Well, if you can write this poem, you see, you articulate; and then you can say it. But you can't take a sledgehammer -- and kill your sweetheart, because that -- of course you are so overwhelmed. You have to become articulate in order to be expressive, because the subdivision, the articulation, the -- the -- means that this whole ceases to be a terror, and ceases to be something that you cannot, so to speak, live down or survive.

Articulation is our way of dealing with the future. And I come back to the Bible, you see, because the Bible is written so that man shouldn't be terror-stricken, but should be able to articulate what God has done to him. And otherwise he would be so awe-stricken, and would just fall down -- in -- in embarrassment, or exhaustion, or terror, or panic. All these words are -- as you know, are the -- the real experiences of a child, and of a --. If you are honest with yourself, you have to appreciate your panic, your inner terror, your horrors, your fears, your anxieties.

Mr. Rollo May here gave this lecture the other day--have you heard him? did you go?--in which he admitted very nicely as a -- as a revolutionary analyst said, "Anxieties and guilt were necessary things for life," that you couldn't amputate them, because that's the way we -- we have something to articulate, and to conquer. And a -- a man who has no guilt feeling, and has no anxiety certainly is just an impudent pig. That's all he is. Because we are all guilty, and I, too, everybody is guilty for having sinned, and everybody has -- is anxious not to make good. And all the people who tell me that they aren't, I just think that they are very impudent. And shamelessness is the end of life. -- You can distinguish in any society its future. If the -- it's impudent, and shameless, and -- and naked, it has no future. Because what is shame? It's the power to grow, to take time. That's

all it is. It's the -- the cover under -- over a -- the growing plant. Like the -- I mean, around the -- around the flower -- the bud, you have this -- this sleeve which covers it. And it can only go after the -- the thing has taken place.

Now articulation, gentlemen, therefore is embarrassing. While you haven't {articulate}, you are trembling. As you know, Kierkegaard could know -- called this "with fear and trembling." But as any poet who is writing his poem is trembling that he may not be able to articulate, you see, he has this tremendous shock, this experience, this blow on his head; and before he has articulated it, he's sweating, and he's trembling, and he's fearful.

And it is very strange that in -- in -- in your age, where you are fed on creative arts, and -- and -- what -- and museums, and concerts, that the -- the process by which anything is created--that is, being ashamed--is pooh-poohed and ridiculed. And people say, "You don't have to be ashamed." Well, a person who isn't ashamed doesn't grow anymore. The only way in which you grow is through shame.

But we have reached -- I have myself published a -- a -- a record, "Make Bold to be Ashamed." And I had a terrible experience in a women's college in the East. All the foreign students wanted to hear this--girl's college, it was--wanted to hear this disc. And no American girl. "Oh no. 'Make Bold to be Ashamed,' that's dangerous." It is. It changes your life, if you know that the -- the secrets of your life are gradually to be articulated. But then you begin to live.

Now the word "synthesis," you see, is therefore quite foreign from the 24 books of the Old Testament. The -- Bible is not a synthesis in your sense of the word, of 24 individual books. But it is an attempt to say 24 times the same thing, in better articulation, more fully, more completely.

I tried to show you that the -- the Bible has this terrific task, to put this little man -- here, this -- this -- this little Jewish mother of Israel in the midst of all the people's history on earth. That is quite a -- quite a task. We -- I -- showed you in Genesis 10 the -- all the people, and in it the Hebrews a very little, little something. And then the sons and -- and descendants of Eber even more divided. And so who are these Israelites? Just nobodies. Just as today, I mean. A very small minority. And in this minority, a despised woman who is taken to be a drunkard, producing the salvation of Israel: Samuel.

So -- how -- how come, you see? This is the problem of the Bible. How can--within a context that is the whole of creation--how can you and I play any role? Now it is the opposite from all pagan history, who begin and say, "We are very important," and "the rest of the world didn't exist; we are the real McCoys.

I'm from Missouri. And Missouri is the real country. And everybody who is not from Missouri, so to speak, is -- is in- -- is it's -- doesn't matter -- doesn't count."

The Bible says, "No, I know the world is terribly large. And there are millions of people, and there are 10,000 nations. And yet obviously, in this little spark of my own heart, I am exemplary. I am also the whole. I am the image -- the image of God. I'm not God," you see. This is the problem of the Bible. Ja?

(I think maybe I should mention -- you wanted me to look up -- you wanted me to look up the square miles of Arabia, compared to Texas and California, and so we could put it in dimension, now. Arabia 1 -- is 1 million square miles. California 158,693 and Texas 267,000.)

{ }. So you saw these people of antiquity were faced with this Arabia, you see, as something impenetrable. You can imagine -- four times Texas. Don't tell the Texans. And it is to this day impenetrated. I mean, there are no railroads going through. I mean, it's still desert. And therefore it is -- has -- I -- I think we underrate the constant awareness of antiquity that Arabia was the block, the one impenetrable thing. Of Africa, one didn't know much'; one hadn't sailed around it, and one didn't -- one had only penetrated to the Morocco -- to the Atlas Mountains. But Arabia was there, because there was the -- the mouth of the Euphrates and Tigris on the one-hand side; and there was the Red Sea, you see, on the other. So Egypt, Abyssinia, Mesopotamia, Assyria, the -- Sumer -- Sumerians -- everyth- -- -body knew of Arabia, you see. And it was in the midst of everybody, and you couldn't get into it. I mean, you couldn't get through it.

So it -- is a strange situation that the -- from the point of view of the ancient people, Arabia was the center, the impenetrable center--we look at Arabia as an appendix, somewhere, you see. And just as appendixes go, they can be operated -- away, you see, and -- and you can have an appendectomy. But -- and we think that the Fertile Crescent, you see, for the ancient people, must have been the center of the universe. This is not true. But it is just -- do you have a map there, by the way? I mean, if you think there -- there, Zion is located, you see -- and you get Egypt here, you see, and you get Mesopotamia here--{Shinar}, as it is called in our -- in the text we have read, you see--then you get Arabia, the -- the situation is very eccentric, you see, is very strange. The -- the -- Arabia is this impenetrable something which God created, too.

And from it, all antiquity, you see, has gotten this spur. The great -- one of the great declamations of the -- of Zi- -- of the Bible, which I may mention in this context right away, is that the desert is as much God's country as the fruitland. For the Egyptians, and for the Romans, and for the Greeks, and for the Sumerians, and for Babylonians, this wasn't true. The desert was just a stumbling block.

It was something to be forgotten. It was not there, so to speak. It wasn't -- didn't rank with the real -- the real land.

And the Greeks, the--for example, and Romans and we, too--they had two words for "land." Land meant the cultivable, the arable land; and "bush," and "prairie," and "desert" were terms that meant the -- the -- the land -- the -- the soils who -- the --how would you say?--the ground over which you have to move, because it doesn't -- cannot contain you, you see. Just a stumbling block, an impediment. The whole -- all ancient people till the coming of Christ divided God's world into two quite different layers of land: the cultivated land, you see; and the non-cultivable land. And -- the great outcry of the Bible is that Arabia, the desert, the bush, the whole -- all the land is God's, and not just Egypt, and not just Rome, and not just Greece. So they created a new terminology, so to speak, you see, that "bush" and "land" was the same.

And in this connection you may understand -- the monk -- our -- the stories of the monk a little better. The Christian monks went into the Egyptian desert in order to prove that the Egyptian desert was just as high-rating in God's eye as the fruitland around the river, you see, that this -- that the two layers out of which the -- the earth seems to -- seemed to -- to consist for all primitive people, or for ancient people, all pagan people wasn't so. So they -- the famous story, the monk of the old Christian Coptic Church in the 3rd century was asked why he -- didn't come a little nearer to the Nile for his water supply, and why he had to stay in the desert.

"Yes," he said. "It takes me the whole day to go to the river and bring back the water. But I, with my long life, have to prove that God created the earth, and did not create just the Nile River valley."

And that was the only way of getting rid of the superstitions of an American god, or a god of California. And of course, if you live in Southern California, you are again exposed to this strange superstition that it is -- that you can pick and choose your climate, and that there is one region which you dec- -- a man should live, and others which they shouldn't live. Obviously, we have to live everywhere. And -- so you live in this rainy -- on this rainy peninsula, don't you?

(Yes.)

And I live in a -- in a region where we have six weeks in a row, subzero weather. And it's really hard to believe that one lives here. But the -- you take this equality, you see, of man on the whole surface of the globe for granted. And this isn't -- anything you can take for granted. It hasn't existed for a long time. And the first word of the Bible is written around this experience of the whole of

creation, that in the beginning, "God created heaven and earth." That is no exception to -- here, to this stumbling block of the center of -- the experience of the man of -- of the antiquity.

Let's now read these -- these chapters of Samuel. What's the -- in this -- this -- these first six chapters? Hm? { }.

(Well, Samuel was born after what we talked about last meeting. And { } Eli { } got given a bad { }. And { } he { } Eli. And he falls over dead. And one of the sons' wife also dies; and there is a { }, because of the glory God has left to { }.)

Would you -- would you show me what is it?

(Ichabod.)

(The glory of God { }.)

(There is no glory.)

(Oh.)

Wie?

(The glory is departed from Israel. { }.)

Does -- does anybody know what role the word "Ichabod" -- plays in American history?

(Ichabod Crane, I think, is about as close as { }.)

{ }.

(It's --it's an old -- myth -- American myth.)

What? { } there are no myths possible. What is it? What's an old American myth?

(I was thinking of Ichabod Crane.)

What is Ichabod Crane?

(Oh, well, I repeat. It's an old American myth or folk tale.)

So tell us.

(Well, it -- there apparently at one time was -- it's a fantasy, there was a village, supposedly isolated. And Ichabod Crane, who comes from a questionable area in -- somewhere in New England --.)

There are no questionable areas in New England.

(It's a fantasy { } individual; it could be placed anywhere, is a -- a schoolteacher of small children. And he comes into this area. He's a very--oh, how shall I say?--superstitious individual. And as the story goes, he falls in love with the -- the town belle, who has a rather roguish admirer, who -- and he plays upon Ichabod's superstitions to get Ichabod to leave the country, so that he will have a clear chance at this girl who loves him, anyway. And was only messing around with Ichabod so that she can make him jealous. And that is the story of Ichabod Crane, the American myth.)

I mean, it's a typical, true story. I mean, it happens every day. No, but this is something more important. Does nobody know what the poem "Ichabod" means?

(A poem?)

Has nobody read it?

(Is that Daniel Webster and -- and { }, when he -- before him --?)

{Proviso}. In 1850. Who wrote the poem? Wie? Ben‚t lives today. It comes from 1850. That's hundred years earlier.

(Are we talking about The Devil and Daniel Webster?)

Oh no, that's Ben‚t.

(Oh -- um.)

It's an important poem in the -- you see, I think that 1850 is -- and 1851, the year in which Melville wrote his -- wrote his -- Moby-Dick, is the great divide in American history. And so "Ichabod," since it is a biblical name, may help you to -- to understand this. When people in 1850, Melville, when he wrote Pierre, and -- and -- and Whittier -- Greenleaf Whittier -- John Greenleaf Whittier, when he wrote "Ichabod," thought that the light had departed from Israel. It was the falling from grace of the United States of America. And therefore, this is a very

actual verse in the Bible, you see. People in 1850 felt that the -- the same thing had happened. "The glory has departed from Israel." And I asked you all to read Greenleaf's -- Whittier's poem "Ichabod," because it's a biblical poem.

And you cannot understand American literature if you do not understand this relationship, that the -- the whole -- all your ancestors thought in the -- understood history in the light of the Old Testament. And you don't understand history because you have no -- absolutely no criterion when the light has -- has gone out of a country and when it is shining. You think prosperity is the light of Israel. This would -- the Bible would call the worshiping of the gods of Canaan, and of the idolaters. And where is your { }?

(Where? The one on Israel?)

"The glory is departed from Israel." And when Ichabod was given as the name to Daniel Webster, it meant we had lost him. And it's perhaps the last moment in American history in which this identification with the -- with the biblical situation, you see, got hold of a whole people. We have one -- no, we have one later, that's the "Battle Hymn of the Republic," by Julia Howe. That's the same feeling that here now, in the Civil War, the same situation, you see, is reached, that the Bible tries to describe in the hearts of man. And I assure you the greatness of the United States people, in the eyes of the rest of the world, depends on this relationship. Nothing else is interesting. Yo- -- {bastards} aren't interesting for the rest of the world, you see. But this power to say "The glory has departed," or -- how does the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" begin?

(Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.")

Now, you can see the relationship, you see. It has been -- you see, the two go together. And here you have a typical--that's why I'm mentioning these things--here you have something of the relation of the books of the Bible. Here is a -- a lady -- poetess; -- and -- and here is a man, Whittier, you see--absolutely different background. And one writes in 1850, and the other writes in 1864, I think, the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" is written. And they jibe, they dovetail. And it is the same vision. One is, you see, "I have seen the coming of the Lord," and the other is, you see, "The glory has departed from Israel." And you have to stri- -- string the two together in -- to understand American history.

That's how people felt, that after 15 years, they -- I don't know if they know -- knew each other. Certainly Mrs. Howe must have known Mr. -- known the poem by Whittier. This I would suggest. But the main thing is, of course -- is quite a spontaneous creation, the "Battle Hymn," and she didn't read "Ichabod" for the purpose, you see. But this is how the -- the people of New England at the

time illuminated the march of events, you see, in the light of this knowledge that at every one moment, every s- -- little mortal could either keep the covenant, or could break it. And I feel the "Battle Hymn of the Republic," and the -- "Ichabod," they -- you bring the text next time, every one of you, and you copy it for your own purposes. And put it together. And you will be surprised, because that's the beginning of an American bible. This is how you should compose your American history gradually. You should see that all these events can be suddenly made to -- to -- to fit, if they are seen in this simple story of man's heart, and man's humility, and man's pride, and man's fall. This is nothing -- for 5,000 years old.

You are exactly in the same mol- -- mold today. If you get married, you have to know -- do you marry under God's heaven? Or do you marry for the candle lights on the table, and your dowry? Or do you marry because the -- the boy has a sex appeal? I mean, you can all marry on these different levels. And on one -- in one case, the light has departed from Israel; and the other, you have seen the coming of the Lord. Is -- is this any -- the -- the level on which we move is at any moment at stake. You can always do it on the -- on the lowest common denominator, and on the highest common denominator.

You just have to think of Helen Keller, where there's a poor creature, you see, destitute, and she represents the whole of the human race in her striving and in her struggle, by the support of these -- these wonderful people whom -- who believed, you see, in this piece of creation, that God created this little brat, too, with all its impediments. And there you have a glorious story today. I mean, I would -- I would suggest that Helen Keller constitutes exactly such an example. And -- and the American worship of her is a good case in point. It's -- that's again unique. You wouldn't find this in Russia or in any other country, or you wouldn't find it that Franklin D. Roosevelt could have become president after he had polio, you see. It's a unique story in this country. It's still a biblical story: that the physical handicap, you see, is not held against him. And you should be proud of this. That -- that all comes from the Bible. It's absolutely un-Greek, you see; it's -- or Roman. You couldn't have -- a Roman -- a pagan could never have, you see, be advanced, if he -- a man who couldn't walk. Impossible, you see.

So please, "Ichabod" and the "Battle Hymn." You bring your text, and I think you will not find it ridiculous if I really request that you write it down in longhand--you may type-- typewrite it, if you prefer this--for your own sake, into your notebook, because it explains the whole story. And -- you will find that it is very strange. One is looking backward, you see, that's the past; and the other is the coming. And there you have the full notion of a history which is still incomplete, marching on.

And in order to recover your sense of historical proportion, you must get

this period into your vein, the tragic period, you see, from 1850 to 1865, beca- -- this -- when the spirit leads the country, you see, and falls really among the thieves, and then -- has to be redeemed by this terrible, bloody harvest, you see, of which the Second Inaugural of -- of Lincoln speaks, you see. That's why I think the Second Inaugural of Lincoln is greater than his Gettysburg Address, because it is, you see, connected with this "Ichabod," with this fall of man. And his -- his rising again. You -- you know what he -- he says in the Second Inaugural?

Well, then this is Number 3 you have to read for the next time. So we go on from here. Please.

After the -- light has departed from Israel, you see, the -- where are we?

(We were here, where Ichabod -- was born.)

She of course, can only see the dynasty of Eli, this poor wife. This has ended, you see. Now the spirit has to come from quite a different corner. And you may take this down, gentlemen. The -- this is already of course the -- the great example of the sentence of the New Testament that the spirit listeth where it --?

(Bloweth where it listeth.)

Bloweth where it listeth, you see. You see, here this -- the Eli story is at an end. And it is -- and the wom- -- she says so, you see. "The light has departed from us," and where can it come from now? And, you see, the biblical story is of course radically -- exactly the same theology as the -- in the Old, as in the New Testament: the spirit of God moves freely, and no flesh and blood has a privilege to say, "We are the anointed. We," you see, "we -- we are -- we have it," you see, "guaranteed." In ever one moment where a man says, "Oh well, God will -- cannot fail me," you see, he's already gone. Down and out. Because the fear and trembling, the embarrassment, the power to articulate leaves him at this very moment, you see. He repeats, you see.

Any -- any one of you, you see --. I've seen doctors and quacks. Most doctors, you see, for example, you -- you -- you have the flu. Most doctors -- to give you an example of what the Bible means by this departure of the light. Most people who have a routine job -- you are a teacher. Well, you go to a school of education, and you take your degrees; and nothing can really happen, because you know how to handle these ruffians. And you -- you hand out papers, and -- and they are answered, and nothing ever happens. However, you can have a direct relation in this classroom at this moment to this child, you see; and you can

feel that this child, for example, needs nothing more but not to be asked to write a paper. And if you have the power, and the glory of God is shining upon you and -- hallo? -- you -- you will treat this child not according to rule, but against the rule.

The same is true of a doctor. I have -- had one case where I saw a doctor act as a genius. -- Our minister fell sick -- our minister's wife fell sick with puerperal fever. And I -- ran to a friend, a Jewish doctor who was a specialist on poison, on the effects of poison, and -- a great authority on this. And usually he didn't practice much.

And so I persuaded him to take on this case, because here was a family, you see, and there were children. And it would have been just -- unthinkable that this -- this good wi- -- mother, you see, and her child shouldn't pull through. And he went to bat, and he took death, so to speak, as his personal enemy. And he fought it day and night. And she did pull through. She's still alive to this day. And that's 30 years ago.

And I have seen that this doctor treated this illness as his personal destination, so to speak. This was not something from the books, you see. He said -- didn't say, "In this case, take aspirin," you see. But he -- he just couldn't sleep. I mean, here was an acute battlefield and, like any general, you see, like Stonewall Jackson, this was a unique situation, and not from the book.

And -- the same with a lawyer. I read, when I became a professor of law, I felt -- "Well," I said to myself, "I must know how it feels to have a lawyer, and -- and how the laity feels about being served by lawyers. So I have to be -- get a lawyer and lose a case." And I did. I didn't pay my book bill, you see, with the bookseller, and he sued me. And I went to a lawyer. And I have never seen such a miserable performance. He didn't listen to my arguments. He knew all -- everything better. And I felt just as a bird in a cage. And most lawyers say to you, I mean, "Let me do this," you see. "I know how to handle it." And so of course the client never gets real justice, but the case is handled as one of 500 cases. That's how you are treated in the hospital when you have the influenza or so, I mean. You are Number 374.

But my friend, this minister's wife, would have never been -- have pulled through if I hadn't found this man who -- who took this out of the ordinary and said, "This has never happened before, and will never happen again. This is my case." And I always hold that our penal laws will not be improved unless we say that every case has to be judged by a judge who then has to live with this case for the rest of his life, so that every judge will only decide one case in his whole life--like my doctor, you see--which is {solved}. Then we would -- justice could

be done. But you can't do justice if you mete out six months, two years, five years, life sentences, you just -- you see, on a -- a conveyor belt, I mean. This -- that isn't justice. That's just mechanics.

We take all this for granted, but we can't go on for long like that. If you see -- looked -- at our children, they aren't served with this kind of justice. You have to find people who take it upon themselves to say, "This is a unique case," you see. "And I'm in this unique position that it has fallen to my lot to live with this case."

And this is the biblical attempt to show that there is no such law and routine, you see, but that every event has to be built up into a complete, unique lightning and thunder from Heaven and has never happened before and will never happen again.

And all of our professions are sick from this. And if you go into a factory, a good -- a well-instituted factory, you will find that if there is still any spirit left, they'll take every campaign, every product as a unique thing and then go on to the next campaign. And you should think of a good factory as consisting of campaigns, you see.

And Mr. Henry Ford once said, "I made a great mistake in going on with the Model T for too long. It ruined my factory, because the people," you see, "over the years went to sleep, of course. They produced the same machine all the time." That's not a factory, he said. A factory is an institution by which you can cope with the new, with the new commodity, you see, with the new thing every day. If we don't, you -- we die, because it's repetitive.

And Henry Ford had -- had, of course, this immense capacity to see in every moment something that hadn't happened yet before. That's -- but that's what we call "genius." And so you can see that a child has genius, and our whole school system is -- is an attempt to abolish genius. Because the higher up you come, the more you are told, "Don't get excited," you see. "We know all about it." Isn't that true? But in -- at your age, you must be told, "We don't know -- nothing about you," you see. "You have never happened before."

That's -- perhaps you now begin to understand why these modern situation is -- is so dangerous, because everything you learn about man today is a generalization, you see. That is, it's toning you down, is -- is minimizing your uniqueness. And then God is not one. Then you have -- there you have -- everybody in this country is polytheistic. You believe in science; you believe in sports; you believe in arts; you believe in sex; you believe in nerves; you believe in anything--only not in God. Because God is the -- the -- in coming. "I have seen

the coming of the Lord." And the Lord of course thinks it's very funny that you think because you took a doctor's degree in medicine that you are now allowed to practice medicine. That's not enough, you see. If you do not treat this sick man, you see, at this moment, you see, as a complete surprise, you will never be a real doctor.

I have a good example. I got a paper from a medical student in Cleveland, Ohio, at this moment. A few days ago it came. And it's an old friend of ours. And she wrote that she had to -- to watch the -- the child's behavior in the first year. And as you know, the great event in a -- baby's life is that it smiles. And when it can smile, it suddenly can communicate. And she -- she writes about these psychologists who observe smiling as a physical reaction, you see, probably coming from the gas inside of the baby, or something. And ob- -- observe it. And she's very furious about this, having studied with me long enough, and -- and writes to her professor, you see, that -- it was a scandal that this observer did not understand that he was meant to respond to this smile, you see. That the child didn't smile in vain -- wa- -- didn't want to smile in vain, but it was an invitation. And it was, you see, forcing the other person to come around and do something to this baby. That's why a baby smiles. It's the first language of mankind, you see. The -- smile -- the -- child doesn't smile in the abstract. But it smiles because another human face suddenly seems, you see, to come under its power. And that's why it a child smiles. And this -- and this disregard for its creative capacity, that this child suddenly can speak to you, shows you just how even smile -- the -- the -- the great spirit of -- of -- of -- that wave that weaves us together can be just made an observation of this naked kind of -- of dead thing.

It was very -- a very eloquent plea on her part that the psychologist should at this moment, you see, be himself under the spell of this smile, instead of having the effrontery of treating this child as -- as a baby, and not as an ensouled being that has a right to make itself heard, and cannot be omitted.

Now you -- you, of course I -- I may -- may -- I cannot explain the meaning of the Bible unless you allow me to use these present-day examples. I'm sorry, but that's what it's written about. The point, however, being is that the legal, routine succession is defied by the Bible. Eli has no offspring. His wife despairs.

And now the -- the pedigree of the human race, in the eyes of the Bible -- it is constantly in this way, you see, that it somewhere peters out. Here, that's then the last twig, you see, the shoot. And you have to go back to the center to bring forth a new branch and a new twig. So the whole Bible is written about the withering of those twigs and shoots that go too far out on a limb. And the Bible is written about the varieties of human -- the human race, and its center. And therefore it has, of course, a tremendous racial ideology, you may say, you see,

because it defends the power of man to return to the growing point, you see.

And -- I had a Jewish friend, a very famous Orthodox Jew, who always said, "Jew -- Jew- -- the Jews are here above the ground." How do you call this in botany? The -- we call it the "heart" of a plant -- or of a tree. Have you such an expression?

(Stem?)

Wie?

(Stem?)

No, inside the stem, there is one living center, you see, from which everything -- you -- you -- you see, you see, the branches only spread above this, you see, and not below it. And it's -- higher than the roots, you see. It's in -- it's therefore not the whole stem. But it is this side of the -- of the branching out, of the diversification.

(It's called a heart of a tree.)

It is. So -- then he says, "Israel is the heart of the human tree, and all the nations, you see, the proud nations go out on a limb." And it is of course -- therefore, anti-Semitism is very natural, because everybody who is out on a limb--all the aborigines, all the variations, all the races of course--are terrified of being reminded that they are out on a limb, that they are specialists, that they have specialized. The Ger- -- Americans with mechanics, or with -- with the gadgets, or with money -- dollars, you see; and the French with ideas; and the Germans with scholarship; and the English with -- with mission, or -- or a navy, or the commonwealth; and you can -- any -- you can characterize any nation for its specialty. And Israel is the reminder, that's a -- very nice, these specialties, but beware: you have to be able to -- to bury the sons of Eli, and to write "Ichabod," and have to start again.

Exactly what happened in American history between 1850 and 1865, that the Webster era, and the -- nicety about South and North definitely came to an end in 1850. And then God kept His breath, so to speak, and the spirit of God didn't move in this country until Fort Sumter. And then it had to be done by -- by violence, and blood; because if the spirit doesn't move, then God's judgments work in another way.

And we are all -- the history of man is the -- the phyllogenetic history of man is not in zoology; but the history of man is this constantly being called back

from our specializations into the mainstream of life. What I told you about synthesis for coal and electricity of course is true about our human specialty, too, you see. Just as the raw materials on this earth by technology, you see, are brought back to serve, you see, to -- to join, so of course, the races of man have to -- brought back into the mainstream. And Israel is this very inconspicuous, and even ugly -- heart. -- The heart of a tree is very inconspicuous. It has no- -- not the great buds of civilization.

And that makes the books like Spengler or Toynbee so very funny, that these people describe only the specialties, and never ask how they are re-organized from the center. That's why they are very poor books in -- to my estimation, you see. What is -- what do we care for 23 civilizations, you see? I'm interested in the heart of the matter. How -- the people, in all these civilizations were human beings. Isn't that true? What do I care whether they were Chinese, or Egyptians, or Romans? I mean, it's a -- I think it's an unbelievable book, this book of -- by Toynbee, for this reason. It's an anti-historical book.

The problem of mankind obviously is: how do we remain men, despite the fact that we have water to- -- toilets, and -- and bathtubs, and all the specialties, and orange juice, you see? And -- and can afford all these things? -- Obviously, if we afford them too much, and become just Southern Californians, we are wiped out. The Southern Californians have to keep identity with the Russians, or we have a Third World War. Isn't that obvious?

I missed this, yesterday. I think the president made a very good speech, but he didn't include in any way the inhabitants of -- of the Eastern bloc into his concern. I think that's -- the time has passed when he can afford this, so to speak. He had to attack Khrushchev, so to speak, in the name of his -- Mr. Khrushchev's {subjects}, you see, because obviously if we cannot find some- -- something we have in common with the people who -- who live in -- under Khrushchev's yoke, you see, we cannot make peace. It's impo- -- impossible. Then we are just two blocs, then we -- we must hammer away at each other.

But that isn't true, I mean. Below the surface of being Americans and being Russians, obviously, we have still to belong to the heart of the tree. That's why Genesis 10 -- was written. Can't you see this? This is the meaning of this 10th chapter of -- of Genesis. But it doesn't help you to boast that you are Hebrews or that you are Assyrians. It doesn't. Very little { }.

So I -- I recommend this to you. If you want to have it -- today we have to use obviously biological terms to be understood. The Bible is not a -- has no- -- nothing to do with morality; it has nothing to do with the- -- philosophy. It has very much to do with -- with biology. It is an attempt to show under what condi-

tions do the members of any body politic retain the plasticity--you can put this down; it's a good biological term--retain the plasticity of representing the whole human race.

[tape interruption]

...can--and now comes my fulmination, so to speak, or my high point--if they can bury their dead and say that an era is at an end, because if they cannot say, "The light of the Lord has parted from the -- Israel," they cannot rise again. They cannot declare, you see, with "the light of Israel has departed," the sons of Eli were out on a limb. They were corrupt. Therefore, the -- the li- -- the life of Israel has to start somewhere else.

And in this sense, gentlemen, the Bible is written around man's power to end and begin periods, to end epochs, you see, and say, "This is over." The -- humanity is distinguished from the animal in the simple fact that we bury our dead. No animal dies in the face, if it can help it, of any other animal. They all run into isolation. The animal has its life to itself. It is finished. It is enclosed between birth and death. And that's its life.

You and I, however, you see, by the fact that you bury your parents--in a normal situation, you see, I mean, when you are old -- outlive -- outlive them--have to say to yourself, "All the functions of my parents now have fallen upon me." They are no longer, you see. So you become aware of the functions of other people, you see, and inherit them. And this constant in- -- heritage -- or inheritance of heredity is the real problem of humanity, and not the heredity of the -- of the genes of the biologist, you see. Our problem is that if we cannot say to yourself, "Now my childhood is over; I'm no longer the son of my parents. I'm now on my own, or I'm -- have even to substitute for them," you see, "and their function in society," or "for the older generation," you can say, you see, for the Enlightenment, or for the 19th century, or for the -- the -- the Reformation, or whatever you choose as having done its -- you see, having seen its day--you would think that you are no longer Puritan, for example, you see. Most of you are, of course, without knowing it. And -- because you do not know how important and eternal the function of Puritanism is in America. So I would advise you perhaps to ask yourself, if you really want to bury Puritanism, -- if it wouldn't be a good thing if you would represent the first Puritan again after The Last Puritan has been written.

You don't know your heredity, and therefore you are not in history. Only a man who has, like -- like this wife of Eli, at one time said, "The life has departed from Israel"--that's exactly what it means, you see--would know that the prophecy in Israel, the function of the cent- -- at the center of Shiloh has now to be built

up in another way. The sons cannot inherit the spirit.

It is in this very little feature that you are able to say, "The light has departed from Israel," you see, by which we believe in resurrection. This is the whole meaning of resurrection. The power to say, "This is over," you see, "therefore, the same spirit that has shone," you see, "has now to start once more. It has to be created in a different form." That's how the Church came about, when Christ has -- had departed from this earth, you see. And the Old Testament--only to show you this--is -- believes in resurrection in -- in this -- in this Book of Samuel, already, you see, that man has to say, "This is over." "The light has departed from Israel."

And all his- -- today, you see--it's the same problem with the two world wars--you have not had the power -- this whole country, this mighty country has not had the power to face the issue, to deal with the two world wars, you see, as one great crisis. And yesterday the poor president had to defend against this country mu- -- mutual aid. And he had to say that five soldiers of the -- of the Allies, you see, against one soldier in this {country}. So perhaps you better -- did something.

And I read these -- these resolutions now of the taxpayer of the United States who say that 3 -- $4 billion is too much for the defense of the United States, when -- when 5 million soldiers, you see, of other nations defend us against 1 million soldiers of this country. And we are the richest country in the world. We have one-half of the wealth of the whole world. And -- and we -- and nobody would dare to reduce any other budget by 50 percent. And these people dare to reduce these -- just this mutual aid program, you see, because it's -- they still think it's the foreign aid program. And that shows you the complete irresponsibility of the American citizen at this moment, because you can of course reduce any budget by 10 percent or 5 percent. You cannot whittle down 50 percent. And it will be done. The Democrats will do it. And I -- I think they are traitors.

Because it's just cheap. The real situation of these two world wars wa- -- was that they were fought with all the Allies in common, with the English and the French, you cannot deny this. Even with the Russians. Now we -- after 40 years of this experience, we treat these people as foreigners, as outside our history. And I would say this is a -- the light would have -- would depart then from Israel, because it would mean that we -- the lesson of these 40 years isn't learned. And you will see. If -- if the Congress cuts even one cent out of this budget, the United States are in a bad way. They are dishonest. They do not face up to what already has happened, that we depend for our survival on the identity with the Allies. And most of you don't feel like that. You are all good Democrats, and are all for Mr. {Engel}, and -- or Brown, or whoever it is, and -- and think that -- that

you can be demagogues, and just play domestic politics.

So the -- this danger is always there. And there will always be the hatred of the people who are inconspicuous in the heart, and do not specialize. Whether they are Quakers, or whether they are Jews, or whether they are the Parsees in -- in -- India who play the role of the Jews more or less in the Eastern world -- community do -- always have to have an inconspicuous group that cannot afford to write a Greek philosophy, or great pieces of art, or -- like the Roman senators conquering the world, but who simply teach this humility of the inconspicuous, you see; who can hear that at this moment this little baby has to be treated as a unique -- unique being. That this illness is -- is a challenge, not to the routine performance of a hospital ward, you see, but to -- that this here -- somebody -- hasn't happened before. Who has been in a hospital?

Well, then you know -- probably know what I'm talking about, Sir. We are treated in a hospital. I've been there. And I felt I was treated like printed matter. Business papers, at reduced rate, yes, but --.

No, I mean -- like the smile, I mean. I was observed. But I'm -- you see, but I'm not included in this machinery there. I'm passing through it.

Well, we have a break now? Ten minutes.

[tape interruption]

...Now I would like to have an opinion here on -- from this group and --. You can imagine there's plenty more to be said about the historical meaning of the Bible. On the other hand, I'm perfectly willing to go over to other things, other texts. And you could finish this today or perhaps next time. And what's the feeling of the sentiment here? May I hear your opinions on the matter? You can imagine that if I went on like -- as I have, unfortunately, then I'm always carried away with the -- this, because nobody seems to know the simple thing about the Bible. It has been completely buried under Greek, academic, I mean, distortion, and -- and so on.

Today I wasn't prepared to dwell so long on this -- on this story. But I -- and I think I would cheat you out of your -- the real truth if I wouldn't talk about it. So I would like to hear somebody. Are -- are you anxious to -- to move out of this? Or are you anxious to stay in this? Honest opinion required.

(I personally would like to stay { }.)

Well, wha- -- what's the feeling of -- who -- who would side with him?

({ } in the Bible -- going to the other texts in the Bible, other books in the Bible, or to other { }?)

Oh -- we would go over to -- to secular -- to other history books. I mean, that's perfectly -- we are after all quite free to do what we decide here to do. And so what do you think?

(Oh, well, I've been talking to the gentleman here, and I think that perhaps stay -- stay with { } the Bible also but bring in Thucydides, which we talked about earlier, and draw comparisons like we -- just like we intended to, bring history and the Bible to them.)

Have I already -- ja, here is this assignment. Well, I feel too that perhaps it is wiser at least to step over into the other fields. One -- perhaps we come back to this, and -- in comparison. Ja?

(In other words, Sir, what I was going to -- wondering whether it wouldn't be wise to go on, and perhaps allude back occasionally in order to --.)

Ja, I'm quite open to doubt. I mean, I have no principle in this matter. You see, I've never -- this is a new thing I do myself. And only in going along, I am -- of course I've written on this--books, and so on--but seeing your need for -- I don't know what is the more urgent need, I mean.

So why don't we -- I get however these two texts written out by you. Pardon me for being pedantic about it, because I do feel that -- for example, "Ichabod" is of considerable length and it's very eloquent. And as you know, Whittier was a Quaker. And so I think it's the -- one of the finest and most important documents of American history, this -- this "Ichabod." And there has been much discussion about it. I mean, Webster of course suffered terribly under it, and his -- Webster's friend argued the case with Whittier; and Whittier, who was a very -- tender-hearted man in later years, was quite willing to concede that it was very severe. But I have found that the later judgment is always the worst judgment in such historical creation. And I call it the "philosophy of the ashcan." That is, the -- the -- the id- -- the story because later a man says, "I shouldn't have done this," doesn't mean he shouldn't have done it. It doesn't mean it at all. And most of you think this way.

I have a friend who is now high up in the state department. He was professor of philosophy when the Second World War broke out. And -- quite a man in his own right. He was a full professor at a university, married, and 40 years of age. And when the war broke out in 1941, he volunteered as a private. Then he took his corps examination with the highest standing of the -- in the corps area,

although he was 40. So they are hard on him, being a corporal. And in due course, ended, the -- the war, as a captain.

And then he came back in '45; he came to our house and complained bitterly that he was such a fool to -- to do this. If he had a -- gotten a commission as a colonel in the first place, right away, he would now be influential and highranking in politic- -- a policy-maker in the United States. But a captain, that was just nothing.

And I said to him, "I'm very glad, because thanks to you, we won the war. And thanks to the corn colonels, the so-called, we nearly lost it. And I call this the philosophy of the ashcan, your motivation now. Now you think that you weren't clever. But for heaven's sake if, at the outbreak of a war, people are clever, you just can't win a war. And that's hard doctrine for you, but that's how life is."

I mean, it's much more important that this friend of mine did volunteer -- you see, as a private, than that he should have gotten a commission as a colonel. That would be of no interest whatsoever; and it would have -- not have helped the war effort. But it would have satisfied his ego, you see. And that -- he would have then -- would have been a profiteer, you see; and that's the worst kind of man who, in an emergency of his country, tries to aggrandize himself. I mean, such a man deserves our contempt. Nothing else. Contemptible.

I have a neighbor who is such a colonel, and I wonder that we won the war.

And this you have to decide, I mean. The -- historians -- if you ever go into the telling of a story to your children, or to your class, you will have to beware from this seemingly cleverness and sagacity, that because later on the thing looked different, it was stupid in the first place. Any sacrifice looks stupid in the first place, because you later -- because you can only make sacrifices at one moment in your life, and you usually aren't up to par. We are usually, of course, living on a -- in suspended animation, and in -- at 35 degree -- degree of -- of Fahrenheit, we just don't act like great souls, but like very cheap poodles. And -- and so then to judge the great heart and the magnanimity of a man from this -- your poodle situation is just ridiculous. But that's what most students try to do. You sit back, and you are -- indifferent, and you are clever, and you are -- see all the sights { }, "How could he? How could he? What a fool he was!" Then you call such a man an idealist, which I take as a curse, I mean, is a -- is a -- I'm not an idealist, gentlemen. I don't think -- I -- I have tried hard not to be. Idealist? This is stupid, is illusion.

But a man has to do what a situation demands. That's "must." That's not

idealism. Where there is a necessity, has it anything to do with idealism? It has to be. The human race demands this. The future of the human -- humankind, and if you have any love in your heart left for your neighbor, then you have to do it. Do you -- you -- you lo- -- save a child from a fire -- from a house on fire from idealism?

Don't misuse this word "idealism," because you bury all higher duties under this strange word of "idealism." Idea -- idealist is a man who doesn't know what life costs. He thinks he can get away, you see, and do wonderful things without investing his future, and without -- that's the idealism, you see. Cheap. But if he -- but everything costs its price in life. If you go -- jump into this building, you can be burned. And if you do it, just the same, then you are -- act right. If you are an idealist, you think, "Oh, it won't matter." And that's not -- you see, that's nothing -- nothing worthwhile. I'm neither materialist, nor an idealist. I think both are as stupid as pessimism and optimism. We are in this life here, and -- and -- and -- and are responsible for this growth of the tree of hu- -- the humankind. And whatever is demanded -- you are not an idealist if you bring up your child -- children right. You love them, that's all. Not idealism. You understand, Sir.

And of course the other is equally stupid. How can a man be a materialist, or how can he be a realist? All these -- -isms to me are useless for any decision you have to make in life.

But -- if the United States were to survive, people like my friend had to exist, who came forward and forgot themselves in the -- you see. And had no illusions that they might lose their lives, and -- might be ruined. He could have come back a cripple, couldn't he? That's the worst result of a war, you see. It's a -- much more -- much more easy to stip- -- {harden} yourself to be killed on the battlefield, than to come back a -- a burden on -- on everybody for the rest of your life.

Well, this is -- only to show you -- to tell you that the -- the -- the philosophy of the ashcan is not for you as historians. You are responsible for re-living the -- the moment in which -- the decisions have been made. And your rationalizing later is worth nothing. If an historian thinks that he should sit in -- judgment and say, "How stupid for Mr. Lincoln. Shouldn't have come to the theater. Then he wouldn't have been assassinated," you see, then -- then you are just as -- an ape.

And most historians and -- modern historians, these debunkers to me are just monkeys. They monkey around with something that's just beyond their comprehension. And they call this "science." I call it ashcan philosophy, you see.

Half of what is called today "historical science" is analysis in trying to dispute the high { }, you see, duties and decisions of the man. And it is -- and the historian says, "I would have never volunteered." "I wouldn't have been Abolitionist." "I wouldn't have --." Of course, if you look at these historians, you wonder why there isn't yet slavery in the United States. If you read Charles Beard, you just cannot understand that anything has ever moved, because everybody is a liar, and everybody is just dictated to by -- private interests. And how any soldier ever went to war for the abolition of slavery is absolutely un-understandable.

-- You see, the modern historian, by -- straddling the fence of science and history and calling himself a scientist, has really just moved into the situation of a cynic, and -- of a skeptic, and has nothing to do with science. But it is lowgrade intelligence. And the modern American intellige- -- intellectual is a despicable individual, because he takes stock of the human events from his easy chair, or whatever it is, and -- and -- and -- and judges these people af- -- before he has done anything himself. What has he done, that he has a right to distinguish between a -- between great moments and low moments in history?

And since he doesn't recognize Thomas Paine's sentence, "These are the times that try men's souls," you see, then he doesn't even know that there are times which try men's souls. He has no right to write history, because history is the chain of events which have tried men's souls. That's all history is. By definition. Other events do not have to be mentioned, you see. You don't have to be -- mention when blacktop was introduced into Los Angeles, and all these niceties that they tell in your book -- textbooks now. But the -- the -- the -- the times that try -- which -- men's souls, that have had -- these are the times with which you have to become identified so that you may not fail, and your grandchildren may not miss them out; I mean -- these decisions.

And that's why "Ichabod" is such a simple story, you see. "The light has departed from Israel." The whole content of the Bible, then to use the -- exploit this one seminar -- hour which we still have, is written about the discerning of the spirits, the discerning of the spirits. That's a rare expression, and I offer it to you, because it hasn't been talked down, so to speak, and it is not commonplace. And so perhaps you -- it makes you sit up. It's in one place -- in the New Testament it is mentioned, you see, that we have to discern the spirits.

And so you haven't discerned the spirit of this -- debunker, and of the skeptic, and of the philosopher of the ashcan, you see, and the spirit of a man who is ready to listen, to obey the orders of the day, for example. And so Eli's wife has to -- has to discern the spirit, you see. The whole Bible is written around the discernment of the spirit. Can you understand this?

You look so desperate. Wie? It's really very encouraging, once you know this, you see, because the Bible is written around the question: what's leading to death and what's to destruction? And what's leading to life?

And you all should know these stock phrases: "the more abundant life," and all this, "everlasting life." Well, these are translation -- petrified translations; and I warned you against all these -- these terms, because they don't convey to you something you have to decide yourself. What do we know of life everlasting? What do we know of -- of the more abundant life, you see? Then we think of the farmer's market. That's the more abundant life. But that isn't. The meaning of a -- of the Bible is very simple. The things that lead to withering on the stem, to the petering out, you see, and the problem of the central stream of life --.

All races, according to the Bible, are variations. And according to the Gentiles, they -- they -- they do not believe in one origin of the human race, because they do not see that the races are all deviations, and all in danger to deviate too much. And they have to be called back all the time into the mainstream of life.

But as I told you, whether you take "synthesis" for the things of -- the world, or -- you take regeneration for the races, it is always the same thing: to be watchful where the light goes, where life marches on, you see, where the mainstream of life is to be expected.

For example, in the last 15 years, I have seen many graduate students rush into service of the state department. Because they feel -- still thought that's elegant, that's fashionable, that's the future, you -- foreign service, you see. They all, of course, find out how disappointing it is, and come back very, very quick; because obviously the state has no future. There may be no wars, and therefore statehood is very -- very ridiculous. It's obsolete, you see.

And in the 16th century, as you well know, I mean, the -- the -- quite the contrary. The secular nations became important. And so out of monks came the humanists. Erasmus ceased to be a monk and became a -- a humanist and a philosopher, you see. Out of theology then at that time sprung the natural sciences and the philosophers. Now today, obviously, if a man wants to make good, he has to go into society, he has to go into a factory, has to go into a colony, he has to -- cultivate international relations. But he has to avoid all mere state, government things. But government pays at this moment very well. It's a great temptation on the lower level of keeping your { }, you see; you'd better go to civil service. But if you are an adventurer of the future of the human race, I think there is nothing to be had out of becoming a second Mr. Eisenhower. If you offer it me, I certainly wouldn't try to become president of the United States, or foreign

office, you see. He can't tell the truth to his people, to nobody; he's in diplomacy. Poor man. I mean, there's nothing creative about it.

But for the last 400 years, it was the dream of every secular man to become king: "Every man a king," you see. And I would suggest that this time -- these times are coming -- are drawing to a close, and this is the discerning of the spirit, you see.

That what was great in 1800, where the greatest minds of this country, you see, rushed into politics, might not be too -- I'm not, by the way, saying that I'm an authority. It's my own judgment that this is -- may be so. But I invite you to test me by discerning the spirit yourself. The "spirit" means the amount of futu- -- futurity; that is, on one -- in -- on one road, the amount of futurity of unsolved, you see, un- -- unformed things, the plasticity that's demanded. Genius is plastic. And where the life is not yet articulate, or formulated--you can also use instead of "articulation," "formulation,"--there of course is the futurity. And I would think that the relations of the human races and the human family -- inside the human family today are the crucial questions. And I think that a -- that a man settling in Georgia certainly is more courageous than a man running for the American senate.

He would -- will be probably killed there by the { } gang. And in -- the American senate, he would just be paid for his relatives.

Yes, politicians have to be -- come in. I think -- if you will -- only move into a third era of human society, if the politicians, or if the -- state becomes an automat- -- -matic thing, negligible, I mean--that you have post offices, and postmasters. It's all right, I mean. They are very nice people. But it isn't -- of the -- of primary -- the primary decision, you see. After all, when Herman Melville became an -- an inspector of customs in the harbor of New York, and that was his -- the end of his life. That was his tragedy; that was a catastrophe. Before, he has been the greatest living American. And nobody knew it. And that was his tragedy.

So this is the discerning of the spirits, that you know the amount of vitality, or the mind of -- I think the word "futurity" is in order, you see, that is on the path of your life, that which has yet to be created. And the less articulate it is, the more is it in the whole. You see, the more the things become specialized--a doctor today, you see, is such a specialist. In 1940, gentlemen, 90 percent of the doctors of this country were general practitioners. As of today, you know how many general practitioners we have left?

(One percent.)

Twenty. Twenty percent. That is, medicine has ceased to be interesting and exciting, because specialization is rou- -- is -- you see, is much less creative. You see, it doesn't represent the whole. You are in great danger today. You go to a hospital to fall into the hands of a dozen specialists, you see, so you are nowhere. You aren't treated anymore as a -- your parts are treated. And {there -- here}, the mighty have fallen.

Now medicine, in the book abou- -- of Arrowsmith, by -- by our friend Sinclair Lewis, is still holding the center, you see, of attention as the great thing. And -- the most wonderful profession. And I always say that the only aristocracy in this country we have is -- are the doctors. And -- and the only priesthood. We have no priesthood in this country. The ministers are low-grade. But the medicine -- the medicine man in this country is a medicine man. That is, he is a -- he bewitches the people. He is an authority. Doctors here are consecrated and --. But underneath, they have lost the reason for which they are consecrated, because they have become specialists. That is, they are so subdivided, you see, that -- that the individual doctor, he -- even tells you that he no longer is treating you in the old sense in which my doctor { }, you see. I have told you the story. He was still a doctor, although he was a specialist.

But -- today, we have -- are so organized, that he -- he is -- not one of them can speak up, so to speak, because the other nine have to be listened to, too. I don't know where the -- journey in this country goes into --. We -- we have -- we have at this -- from 1910 to 1945, I think this country has lost its direction. It's moving in vicious circles. And you -- it is your generation that has to provide the -- the courage for the older people and it will be very difficult. But that's what you have to do: to open again a belief in this country, a faith in the real future of America. At this moment, everybody is left on the defensive. And this for the next year until you have a -- a recession. Well, let's -- is this important, whether you sell twice as many automobiles as the last year? I mean, is this the future of this country? This has nothing to do with the future of America. It's perfectly -- it's minor. But everyth- -- -body is talked into -- the mass media into the belief that this is terribly important. But why should we? We -- we are glutted -- gutted with automobiles. So if one year you have to sell fewer, well, it is not very important, you see. It can be one way or the other. But to make you believe that this is important, is -- is just to me ridiculous.

In the -- when we were in {Greenfield} together here, Mr. Chamberlain and I, there were two men, father and son from New York -- businessmen. And we wanted to start an adult education forum. And these men said nothing doi- -- was -- it made no sense to do this. We had a war anyway now on our hands. This was in 1953.

And we looked at him -- askance, and the two men said, "Well, everybody on -- Wall Street tells us that without a war, we cannot keep our economy going."

This is only five years ago -- six years. Now they would deny it, of course. Every American denies the foolishnesses he said the day before. But here -- they said this, and they didn't -- were not chased out of town; they didn't commit suicide; they -- didn't feel dishonored. Now if -- two people in their sound mind, of different ages--father and son--can come from New York and tell us that you have to have a war in order to survive, then you'd better smash the Constitution of this country, because it is an abomination.

And this is -- allegedly a peace-loving country. This is one of the biggest lies in this country, that we are peace-loving. The most aggressive country in the world. It always has been. Americans -- are aggressive people. I don't -- I have nothing against it, but you should confess it. But you have this wonderful arrangement that here you sit, you see, and are all pacifists. And tomorrow you conquer the world. And there's no relation -- connection between the two -- situations of yours.

And -- and this I despise, because that's no discerning of the spirits. Do you think the -- the -- the United States at this moment owns half of the globe, and half of the riches of the world, because it's a peace-loving country?

Why not admit it? This is a great task. Somebody has to govern the world. And I think it has fallen to the -- to the Americans because of their debonair attitude that -- it's probably -- I prefer to be governed by the American government than by the Russian government. But somebody has obviously to govern all these countries. Do you think Cuba is a sovereign state? Or Puerto Rico is a sovereign state? And Nicaragua is?

The discerning of the spirit. Now, this can only be done in strict empirical fashion, because the spirit moves in sundry places. And now, I -- what I wanted to per- -- perform today before we leave it, is to draw your attention to the attempt of the Old Testament to transpose man's own experience, how difficult it for {instance} to get to this -- this courage to say, "This is over, and this begins," you see. The light has departed from Israel. We have to start on another track. We have to admit that we have failed, that this is dead -- a dead-end street, you see, this getting out of the dead-end streets, that this is the constant endeavor of -- from the first word to the last word of the Bible. In -- biology, you would always admit that the -- take the -- the pedigree of the monkey and men. As you know, the latest doctrine there is that man is in the central stream, and that the apes do constitute side branches of this mainstream of development, that we do not directly spring from the gorilla or chimpanzee, you see, but that they are out

on a limb, whereas we kept going in the middle. And -- but I think that's sound doctrine; that's biblical doctrine.

The Bible tries to say that all the deviations, you see, have to be called, as I might say, to order. That every deviation that goes too far has to be paid for, because it's proved a dead-end street. And if you take shells on the sea, and if you take the -- the sauriae, the -- great big -- big animals, they all have proved that after a while they became so big, and so specialized, and so -- you see, so varied that they died out. All paleontology is -- is simply the story of the Bible, played backward. That if you go -- become too big--a dreadnought today, as you know, has been abolished in the navy, because it's far too complicated a vessel. The smaller the vessel today is, and more human it is, as you and I are, babies, you see, we are plastic. So in every generation we can take a new shape. Man is -- the weaker he is, the more powerful he is, because he can then take the necessary steps for adjusting himself to this moment.

{ } -- now I come to this fact that this is called in the Bible "history." History is the step out of nature by which an individual -- centers not on the shape with which it enters the world, but the shapelessness, so that it can obey orders as of today. Any animal is born under orders of yesterday. And any human being is born under the orders of today. And if he is a -- a creative leader of man, and -- a, so to speak, an aristocrat, a priest, he is born under the orders from tomorrow. If you become a postmaster, you obey the orders of today. If you become a social scientist, you may be obedient to the orders of tomorrow.

So in the human race, there is a division between people from tomorrow, and people from today. And in nature, the natural beast in us is the man of yesterday, as we have been. And every one of us is under this discernment of the spirits. You have to know of yourself: how far you are of yesterday, and of today, or of tomorrow.

Every human being is a trinitarian. The Trin- -- Trinity of the New Testament is not an invention of some clever, subtle spirit. It's an experience. You and I all live under the divinity of the past, under the divinity of today, and under the divinity of tomorrow. The spirit we call -- that which beckons us from tomorrow, that God created the world long ago--it's a good world--and why shouldn't be comply with -- with what it is? That's yesterday, you see. And then we have the customs of our society as of today, so that this epoch, this century, that's -- as of our era; that's as of today. You can become a doctor, you can become a professor, you can become all this, you see; that's as of today. Because today is where you remember that at one time it hasn't yet been, you see, and where you know that it won't be always. This I would call "today," you see. But that you have to breathe, this has always been, you see; so that is yesterday. So the physical man

in us, the natural man is of yesterday. The historical man is of today. And the Bible now calls the man of tomorrow the "prophetic."

And there I feel I have to -- can't -- stop, so to speak, about the Bible before I have explained to you why the Bible is a prophetic book. Not just the prophets in the Bible are prophetic. The whole book of the Bible is written around the fact that the future is as real as the past, and that a prophet is a man who judges -- today from the point of the ends of time. Prophets are not predictors, gentlemen. The great -- today a great confusion at -- the New York stock exchange because they think that to -- it is -- means -- is to prophesy, if you predict the business cycle, or the stock exchange, or the investment trends. That has not- -- prediction has nothing to do with prophecy. Prediction concludes from yesterday and today what's going to happen tomorrow. That is -- that is, you see, mere causality. That is deduction. But prophecy says, "This can't go on anymore," and all prophecy judges today from the viewpoint of the whole history of mankind, from his -- our destiny. Prophets are judging today and say, "Therefore all prophecy includes disaster." That is, there is no true prophet who doesn't say that between today and the end of time there will be some disaster that will have to overtake the fools of today, the excesses of today.

Any prophet can be recognized if he has the courage, you see, to say, "I do not predict wonderful days, but the price for these wonderful days is that you give up certain things that at this moment obstruct the future."

And so prophecy and prediction in this country are strangely confused and mixed. The secular mind has only this thinking. Here, Mr. -- a physicist can predict that if he puts so many things -- you see, so many substances in a -- in a crucible, and then he will have a nice explosion, you see -- or whatever it is. What he calls a synthesis or some -- some damn thing.

So this is the view of time in the physics laboratory. Because we dominate nature, nature is as of yesterday, and it is always the same. And the conditions of the natural processes therefore all belong yesterday, even if they happen tomorrow. You see, this is still yesterday. Can't you understand? The creation has not been changed, but you and I are quite different. We can see that if this -- this bubble of our stock exchange doesn't burst, we'll have an inflation. And therefore, if we were real citizens of this country and thought of the -- of the middle class, and the poor, and our children, we would forgo this bubble, you see, and have no inflation. And a prophet can say that if you go on with this inflation, you will undermine the authority of your government. Because the -- a government that cannot borrow money anymore, you see, that is no government.

And Mr. {Anderson}, as you may know, the -- our head of the Treasury,

got a -- really panicky. Last summer -- he fou- -- he was a soft money man. He was quite willing to play along after {Humphrey} had left, you see, with the soft mo- -- the inflation people. But when he saw that the credit of the United States was impaired, you see, and he hadn't heard of this, you see, just -- you see; that if you have soft money, you -- then you -- the state cannot -- borrow money, because you have to pay it back, you see, in the same currency, and the public won't do it if they know that they only get 80 percent of their money later on, you see, paid out.

And so, he -- he had to learn it the hard way. Why such fools can be made secretary of the treasury, I don't know.

It's remarkable. You see, in this country, the whole future is mortgaged by the present. William James wrote in 1910 that no country and no era had -- had wasted the future so much in favor of a -- the present, as our generation, our time -- does. That's what we call installment {buying}. That's just a similar way of mortgaging the future. You can see this.

Now the prophet is the man who understands that "future" means plastic, freedom. That if you mortgage your future for the next 30 years, you have to pay off your house, obviously you have that much less liberty with regard to your decision. And on it goes. And the more you do this, the less you can be footloose, and can start all over again.

For example, in -- in Ameri- -- the -- the workers cannot go -- strike, you see. It's very wonderful for the association of manufacturers, if they live by the installment plan, because the wife says, "We can't afford this," you see. "We -- we lose our property. We have to make these payments, and the strike fund isn't big enough to -- to keep our payments up." So if you have enough installment buying, you assure -- the -- that -- the strikes cannot happen. But that means that the freedom of the worker is impaired.

So prophets, gentlemen, are connected with the present by their inclusion of a catastrophe, of a minus, of something, you see, that -- the present does not end in the future, as in physics, but the present stands condemned, to a certain extent. The outgrowth, the excrescences, the abuses, the -- the mistakes of the present, you see, prevent the -- the true future to happen. That's what the prophet tells us, you see. That's why the prophecy, you must understand, comes from the end of time into the present. A prophet is not a man who lives in its spirit today. But you look at -- today in the light of the end. He's already with God, and looks back.

And if I may say this, gentlemen, if you are beside yourself, you can

prophesy. Anybody who has to defend his own home, and his own interest is not able to be a prophet. But I have been able to prophesy. I have fore- -- foretold Hit- -- at the end of the First World War, I was in such a -- so beside myself, that is, I was so sacrificial I didn't care for my- -- myself, my wife, and my belongings. I sold my library. I gave up my position. I lost my fortune, I -- and everything. And even my dearest predilections--the Church, and scholarship, and state. And so I was able to prophesy. So I said in 1918 all about Hitler. It is printed. You can read it. And the prophecy came true. And so I know what prophesying means.

Prophesying means to judge the present in the light of the future, you see. But it is very expensive with regard to the personal happiness, or emoluments, or advancement of the person who does prophesy.

And -- since people no longer believe that there is prophecy, I want to witness to you that I have prophesied in 1918. But when I came to this country and had to fight for my survival here, I did not prophesy the Second World War. My -- my prophetic qualities were -- were renounced, so to speak. The -- I was given to the fight for survival, to the struggle. So the same man--I myself--know that you can be a prophet, and that leaves you again, the spirit. And you become an earth- -- you see, earthenware, and -- and then you live on this {ground}. That's a good life, too. Then I live as of today. And I -- it is -- God doesn't mean -- want us all the time to be on one side of the fence.

But you ought to -- only to -- one person has to testify to you that to be a prophet is just as much a reality as to be a businessman. And if a man is only a businessman, he is just a -- a very -- a poor, very limited, very restricted. And if he's a playboy, he's just of yesterday, because he only plays with things that are already there, you see. "To play" means to be young, you see. "To be in business" means to fight as of today. And "to be prophetic" means to belong to the future. Can you see this?

And so in any i- -- decent society, you have to have the three branches of the human race represented. There has to be -- art has to be prophetic; teaching has to be prophetic; politics have to be prophetic, you see; the Church has to be prophetic. These are the priestly elements, you see. And then there are the fighting elements: a soldier, and the engineer, and the -- and the explorer, and the inventor, and the scientist, they -- they are as of today, and the workers. And the children, and the sportsmen, and the artists, they are as of nature. They are genius. They are born as they are. They are good -- and so they play with the -- with the world, you see. And that's why you can be an artistic genius, you see, at the age of 20. But pope you cannot be at the age of 20, you see. The -- this present pope is 76. That's not accidental, you see, because back -- all the prophetic offices go with renunciation of the physical life, you see, of your own life. That's -- you

can -- it can happen that you are young. But it's an exception, I mean. And usually the -- your governors are people who no longer are self-seeking. You cannot have a fighting man as a president. Then he would just seek his self-aggrandizement. You expect from a president that he is regardless of {seltin-} -- selfishness, you see. So you have -- I hope you won't -- elect a president who wants to get rich on this, or who wants to have his family enriched by it.

Now how can you if -- if -- according to American definition, I mean, everybody is out for himself. Then you couldn't have a president, because the president must be a man who's not out for himself. Or why elect him otherwise?

And this is so terrible, you see. You have been taught that the one office of the president may be perhaps an unselfish office. But you don't believe in priesthood; you don't believe in prophets; you don't believe in teaching; you don't believe in priests. Teaching to you is a technique. And -- and priesthood is a routine. And that's dogmatic. And you have managed to -- and prophet- -- prophets of course are just illusionists, and they are idealists. And you have therefore made this tremendous realm of magistrates, and officeholders who date from the future of the human race, who represent your destiny. You have made them -- shrunk into this one tiny office of the president. All the others are selfseeking, fighting people, {Theotis}, you see, with elbows, in your imagination.

That's why { }. Most people think everybody is out for himself. Gentlemen, if you think I am out for myself here, why do you listen to me? Go home. -- Isn't it absolutely ridiculous that I should be considered here a self-seeking individual who just wants to become famous and waste your time? You believe quite indi- -- instinctively that I'm representative of the future. And I have ap- -- been -- am appointed to point out to you the discerning of the spirits. What in the light of the future belongs to human history, and what is just, you see, the -- the fall of man? The earthly -- earthly nature, his -- his -- his fear, his panic, his cowardice, his ignominy.

You all -- you wouldn't sit here, otherwise. But if I -- if you analyze your own picture of the world, the prophets are not included. You think that prophets, gentlemen, are fools. They happen once in a -- in a lifetime, perhaps, or in a century. There's Isaiah, you say, and Jeremiah. "Oh, well, strange. How they ever occurred nobody knows."

Now I can only tell you that prophets are just as immortal, you see, as plumbers. And in -- there is a great poetess in Germany, Ricarda Huch, was her name, who wrote a very beautiful book. And in it, she simply says, "At bottom, every human being is prophetic." Just as he is a genius. Every child is born a genius, and every child is born knowing something about the destiny of man.

And he knows very well, if he's not corrupted, and a wife knows very well, when her -- husband has fallen on evil da- -- way -- in evil ways, and has wrong company, and when he's out for his real destiny. You -- you trust her, that -- she can warn him and tell him, "If you go on like that, you miss, you see, your destination." Don't you believe this? How can she know this? Because she's prophetic. That's not -- deduced from his small beginnings as a boy in the village, but because she has, you see, a complete intonation what man lives for, in what direction we should go.

So please. Would you kindly -- the Bible holds that rulers, teachers--you can also say "judges," I mean; they are all included--priests, and sages, or dying men--that they are -- all belong to the prophetic bracket.

So I want you to enlarge the word "prophet" in the Old Testament. Moses is a prophet, of course, because the destiny of man is his problem, you see. The books of the Prophet are only specialized, you see, books. But the Book of Kings is just as prophetic. Kings in the Old Testament, it isn't said "ruler," but it means "kings," of course -- kings, and prophets, and teachers are all part of the -- of the prophetic kingdom, or the prophetic branch of government, you see, of man. And so you have all the people: the young who play, the old -- or the grown- -- adults, you -- I would say, who fight; and the old. And the word "priest," gentlemen, is the Greek word for "old." A presbyter, you see; that's the full {term} of "priest," is an older man. Older; that is, he belongs to a third generation.

And what you -- you cannot understand the Bible if you do not understand that the -- five books of Moses, the book of Kings, which we are reading, and Samuel; the prophets--Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and so; and the books of wisdom are all four branches of the prophetic office. That's what nobody seems to know today. Nobody. Terrible.

But the Jews say -- the book -- if you read the five -- who has read the five books of Moses? May I ask indiscrete question? Who has? You haven't? You haven't? Well, you will see it's the last will of Moses. That is, I, in my sociology have now published a scheme, you see, of offices. And I have given to the -- exactly as I said here, four offices to the priestly age, of -- from 60 to 90, so to speak, physically speaking. The ruler, the teacher, the priest. Now comes the strangest man, you see; the man who makes his will. The greatest act of course of a man is to be able to create a successor, to be succeeded. In -- in Philosophy 59 it was, I think, I choose to call it the -- you see, to be succeeded, to appoint to a successor. But you can call it physically to make a will, to find somebody who will continue.

Marc Aurelius, for example, is a pagan emperor and is considered the best

emperor. And he fell down on the job because he was a pagan, because although being a good emperor, he allowed his physical son to follow him, -- and all his -- he himself had been appointed as an adopted son. And because he hadn't the moral guts to prevent this rascal of Commodus--his son, you see, his physical son, his carnal son--to follow him, you see, he didn't make his will. And he let -- or he -- he fell down on his -- on his priestly office, you see, on his prophetic office.

And the tragedy of Marc Aurel is that only Christians can know that he is a tragedy. The pagan spirit to this day, the humanists, praise him to the sky. "Marc Aurelius, the philosopher on the throne." And to me he's effete, and a complete weakling, because he couldn't -- his wife and his son intimidated him such a degree, you see, that he allowed--knowing that Commodus was a scoundrel, you see--to follow him. And the whole example of a whole century of emperors had been that you could only continue the Roman Empire by adoption. Because that was a selective process, you see. You could see who shouldn't be.

And there you have the difference between -- Bible and paganism. The Bible demands a prophetic spirit. And E- -- the sons of Eli cannot follow the father, you see. And that's what happened here. All in this little book of Samuel. But Moses is the man who makes his will. If you read Deuteronomy, the whole story there is--and these modern critics do not understand it at all--the whole story is how Moses was able to bequeath his vision to these obstinate Jews who -- so he had to herd them together for 40 years in the wilderness so that all the older generation could die off, because they wouldn't understand, you see. The whole story of Moses is the patience that he knew he could be successful. He wasn't allowed to see the promised land, you see. He only could make his will.

If you want to have a man in modern times who had exactly the same fate, you know who that is? Cardinal Newman, you see. In his day, the successful Catholic in Britain was Cardinal Manning. He was the man responsible for the infallibility dogma. In -- in Rome in 1870, he was made--he's a convert also from the Anglican Church--and he was made cardinal very rece- -- young age, and was made archbishop of Westminster in London, and he was a successful man as of the day. And nobody thinks of Cardinal Manning to this -- today. He is completely forgotten.

But in every -- university of this country, there's a Newman club. And the -- Cardinal Newman had to be 90. He was made a cardinal at 78. And he only had to live, so to speak, out these 12 years when he was already very old and broken, so that it could sink in, that this man, who had challenged both churches--the Anglican as well as the Roman Church--was a better Christian than the

pope and the archbishop of Canterbury. And today everybody admits it that he has done more for the reunion of the Christian churches than anybody else. But he was out of favor with anybody in his time. He couldn't even become a little bishop. And if you look at the American bishops, you know it takes very little to become one. And this is Cardinal Newman.

And in Cardinal Newman, you have the problem of Moses, that all his contemporaries had to die before he could come to fruition, you see, before -- before people could listen to him. All his contemporaries said, "Oh, Newman? That's just Father Newman." He was called "Father Newman" till he was 78. He had no title in the Catholic Church. -- You know, in a Catholic Church, when you are just a father, you are just nobody. And you aren't even monsignor. You are nobody. Nobody. You cannot imagine how despised he was, and how out of -- everything failed him, everything. And -- but now the only man who is interesting in the history of the Catholic Church in the 19th century, I assure you, is Cardinal Newman. And the rest is absolutely unimportant, because he left a legacy, and this is the prophetic office.

And so -- we -- for a man who makes his will, we have the word "testator," in Latin. Would you understand what I mean, to make a testament? I want to use a word that is not -- that is not dead. And so allow me to put in this word "testator." It's the hardest of all these four offices.

Now the Old Testament consists of four types of books. The first is that of the testament -- that's why it's called the Old Testament, you see, of Moses. And now perhaps you begin to wake up and see that the word "testament" is quite a good term for the Bible, you see. In -- in the five books of Moses, Moses makes this testament. Then in the next books, the -- Chronicles, in Kings, and Samuel, the people are ruled. That is, they are, through the -- through the { } there are people who -- who rule unselfishly in the light of the prophetic destiny of Israel. Then you get the books of wisdom, which are teaching--Proverbs, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, and how all these words are -- books are called. You -- since you haven't read the Bible, it may interest you that there is a constant, a cor- -- whole Greek quarter of the Bible, you see, which is teaching, you see, wisdom teaching. But it is not Greek teaching, but it is wisdom, which isn't the same as philosophy. And the last, of course, the -- is the prophetics, where the prophets -- there are priests besides, I mean, some of the prophets of course were priests in their own right. The true priest is a prophet. And they are the prophetic books, properly called.

So I have only tried to -- to leave behind with you the simplicity of the Bible. It is the unfolding of the prophetic office into its vier -- four department of king, priest, teacher, and testator. This -- very strange. In this country, everybody

endows universities and makes wills of the most complex character. And yet you have never -- it has never dawned on you that it is a specific feature of humanity, you see. We are burdened with many meaningless wills. Think of all the family trusts, you see, where people are bound to the third generation, you see. Don't you see that this is the concentrated effort of reaching the future, you see, of -- of determining the future? And the true man, of course, determines the present from the future, and not the future from the present. And ...

[tape interruption; end]