EDITORS' NOTE. The following lectures were brought in unlabeled boxes to the lecture project in August 1988 by Leon Martel. The type of audio tape used was the same as that used to record the Universal History-1955 lectures. Leon Martel, trying to guess the date of the lectures and also guessing that they might have been a part of Universal History-1955, suggested that they might have been the final lectures, and accordingly dated them as Tuesday, May 17, 1955, and Thursday, May 19, 1955. He enclosed handwritten notes to this effect with the tape reels.

Upon consideration of the content of the lectures in these unlabeled tape boxes, we believe instead that they are the final lectures of Comparative Religion-1954. At the start of the first lecture, both student questions and Rosenstock-Huessy's answers make it clear that he is answering questions about Philosophy 58 (Universal History) as a forthcoming course, different from the one he is in the process of concluding. He also refers to Philosophy 9 (Cross of Reality) in a way that makes it clear that this is not that class.

Positively, however, he goes on to refer to "spheres" of the intensity of life as subject matter referred to in this lecture series. The only series in which he uses "spheres" is Comparative Religion-1954. He also speaks of "religion" as having been the content of the course here. As far as we are aware, the only course he taught with religion as the primary subject was Comparative Religion-1954, which was not one of his regular courses, and which he taught for only one semester. He also refers to the feared spread of Communism from Vietnam to Thailand, which--given the way he tended to pick illustrations from current events to drive home certain points--indicates that Vietnam was in the news. Dienbenphu had fallen May 7, 1954, after dominating the news for months beforehand. A final note about content: the last labeled Comparative Religion lecture, 25, is obviously not the final lecture in the course. There is no reference to its being the last lecture, and Rosenstock-Huessy makes no attempt to summarize the course. These lectures appear to fill that gap.

Moreover, Leon Martel recorded both the Comparative Religion-1954 course, which ended in January 1955, as well as Universal History-1955, which started in February. It would not be surprising if the tape stock used to record the first labeled Universal History-1955 lecture on February 4 had already been in use to record the last lectures of Comparative Religion in January. So we are assigning this group of lectures to the Comparative Religion-1954 series, and believe that they are the final lectures in that series.

________________________

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

First let us say a few more words on the specific problems of the "settlement civilizations," as we will call them. That what Mr. Toynbee today calls "civilization" is always connected such settlement. And that's what it -- makes it so arbitrary. I think the tribal order was just as high, but it wasn't civilized in the sense of a city, you see, having citizens. But I don't see why the Iroqui- -- -quois, or the Iroqu- -- you say the "Iroquois" or how do you say it?

(Iroquois.)

-- Iroquois or Navajo are not very fine people. They just had another faith, and another way of life. So I feel about -- Mr. Toynbee is very arbitrary, because tribalism, nomadism, and residential civilizations are still competing.

One little item, I thought, I should -- give you about the Mexican and Majan -- Mayan calender religion: they had these 52 years in which the calendar came to a new beginning. And the reason is, if you have -- they had a very strange period of 260 days. We are not sure what this means. Perhaps it's a -- period of the vegetarian growth on -- in the fields; the fruits, you see, from the seed to the harvest. But whatever the reason is, it isn't quite clear today what it is. If you multiply this by 52, you come again to a calendar year. I have -- I have now forgotten my computation, but perhaps you put this down. If you say 260 times -- if you would -- would somebody be good enough to multiply? And also multiply 260 by 18. I would like to know that result, too.

Only to show you how strange the first discoveries of the harmony in the heavens went. Man -- the -- we -- have only the fruit today as a mechanized year of 365 days. This was far from the first problems these men had to solve.

The whole -- if you read on -- in ancient calendars--it's all now in the hands of mathematicians. We have a very fine man in -- in -- in Philadelphia, Mr. Neubau -- Neubauer, who is quite famous for his knowledge of the ancient calendar. But he is a mathematician and an astronomer, and he despises all mythology and all religion in this. And he's only interested in this one question: how far were these people scientific? This is not your and my question, you see. Our question is: what made these people move according to the stars? Which is quite a different problem, you see. They had no interest in -- in any objective looking at the stars. Because--if you would kindly take this down--the interest, the real interest--and therefore also the history of this calendar--is bound up with the problem: how should we move, because the stars move? That's the problem. I've tried to tell you that the word "telescope" should be reapplied, and we

should think of all these celestial bodies making us move, as through a -- generating -- as a generating force. We look at the stars. That was far from the ancient peoples' mind. If you have a horoscope -- you see, this modern superstition or application of the ancient belief made out for you--you are born 6 o'clock in the morning, you see, on November 11th--that means: how shall I move so that no -- less mischief, you see, misfortune -- be- -- befalls me on the next day?

So you can see that the stars make us behave. It's a behavioristic faith in which the source of our behavior is found far away in the harmony of movement in the stars. They make us move. And we only -- as in modern astronomy do -- nothing to the -- with the stars except looking at them. That is not the idea of a religious man. He says, "Why are these stars there?" Just as -- a bear suggests to them: oh, we may scrap the -- the mountains as the bear. You know, the famous -- caves in Spain and southern France give us some interesting instructions in how people learn from the bear. Because the bear with his -- paws makes certain regular strokes. So people think they can prove now that man first imitated the strokes of the bear and from there learned how to do better, you see. It has also been suggested that the famous story of the serpent and Eve -- suggested this to the ancients, that the -- the serpent was eating fruit from the field and from that trees, and man learned that he might do, too, without dying, you see. That -- he learns from the animals.

In my course on -- in Philosophy 8- -- 58, I go to great lengths to show you how people learned from the animals; the -- the ways, the roads through the jungle were opened by these big animals. For example, on the rivers of course, they saw the fishes, and the otter, and the beaver. And so in the same way, the stars made people behave, made people act.

And this was what they wanted to know. And so in Egypt, I told you that there was this period of 1460 -- be -- for -- four times of a quarter of a day times 1460 -- I mean, brought about a ye- -- the correct year of 365 and-a-quarter day, as against their calendar of only 365 days. And how little, gentlemen, these people thought in terms of science and how much they tried in terms of behavior you can see from the very simple solution the Egyptians fel- -- found for this irregular number of 365. They simply decreed that they had three seasons of 120 days each, and then they had five days in which all started all over, the five great days of the five gods, their main gods: Osiris, Isis, Horus, Set, and -- and Nephthys. And on these five days then, there was -- so to speak, the world started all over again, every year.

So far -- far was -- was from these first pioneers in good living, you may say, in cosmic living any idea that there should be this pedan- -- pedantry, you see, of 365 and-a-quarter. They weren't out after figures. They were after be-

havior. And so they discovered that the year could be divided--I should put here just a 5 -- 5 plus 360 days. This they divided in 120 days, and this again they divided in: four times 30 days, and you came -- come to the 30-day month of -- from which we still suffer, you see, 30 days, 31 days, 28. And it never -- dawned on them that the months should be -- have anything to do with the moon. The solar -- the calendar of the -- of the Egyptian year has nothing to do with the moon. The moon never lasts 30 days. And if you look at our calendar, you always hear that the month comes from the moon, and the whole year comes from the solar revolution. It's just not true. The month is a subdivision of 360, you see.

(So the calendar is based on the lunar -- came from the lunar system, where the month is the phases of the moon.)

But it isn't, because the moon only happens to last 28 days.

(Well, the Jewish calendar has 28 days.)

Wie?

(The Jewish calendar has a 28-day month.)

I haven't spoken of Jewish calendar. That's -- comes later. That's already an attempt to free us from Egyptian darkness, from astrology. You see, Moses was a professor of Egyptian -- egyptology, and was deadly against it, you see, just as I am against our modern science.

Because it has led -- led people into slavery -- into slave- --. But first we must see the greatness of these people, you see, before we can condemn them. So the Jewish calendar is even an attempt to have no priest, no astrology. It has to be observed. As you may know, the -- the -- new lu- -- moon in Jerusalem had to be actually observed, and then was, you see, proclaimed, because the -- Moses said, "No science of the stars," you see. That's already a -- an annihilation of the old Egyptian calendar system. That's what kept the Jews, you see, alive, or -- on their own, you see, that he -- when he declined to fall for this calendar. The Jews had therefore still in 500 of our era -- or 3- -- yes, 500 of our era, no -- no era, no concept. They just said, "God has the moon and the sun today, and we have to see what happens. And we must not have any preconception of it, you see. We must not build pyramids; and we must not build temples."

And the Sol- -- Solomon's temple, as you know, was built very late. And what did Solomon say when he opened it? You know? He made a great speech. Has anybody read the speech in which Solomon said -- opened the temple? Very important. The first word he said, "I know you are not more in this temple than

you are in the rest of the earth," which means, you see, "I -- I apologize. It's a superstition to build a temple." See. Because the temple means: "I can look -- locate the gods," you see. And the Jewish temple meant, as long as it was rightly understood, that we cannot.

So that's -- you are quite right. The Jews threw out all premeditated calendars, you see. And they said, "As we go along, we will see if actually this time God has not made a new," so to speak, "creation," you see, "for -- that really the new moon is a new moon." It's -- you see, based on immediate observation of today, and no tradition whatsoever on this. You find no archive in -- in Judaism, you see, about the structure of the years. That -- you find it in Babylon, and in Egypt, and in Yucatan, and in the Maya civilization. But gentlemen, I told you, they had 3,113, you see, in counting backwards. Imagine what this means. Quite foreign from the Jews, you see. Nothing is based in the -- whole Bible on any -- on any such figuring of years, you see.

It's a -- they -- they observed that God perhaps worked rhythmically. If you open the New Testament, the first chapter of Matthew, there is a strange observation: every 14 generations, God makes a great spiritual revolution. It's the famous list of the "begats," which nobody seems to -- to appreciate today. I do. It's a great first philosophy of history, because it said, every 14 generations man has -- becomes so dead to the divine will that something terribly -- breaks. The people are led to Babylon, into captivity; or -- and now the Messiah is born, you see. And the other day, they -- they left Egypt. But this is pure observation after the fact, you see. Never computation before it has happened, you see. So there is no prediction. And there is no man, you see, no emperor who says, "On October 1st, harvest."

But in China, the New Year Day was very similar as -- in Egypt. Down till 1911, when the -- last Chinese emperor went, the meaning of China was: that the sun of Heaven, the emperor, who was called the sun of this cosmic universe, of the stars, proclaimed to these hund- -- hundreds of millions of Chinese, how the stars would make them work, would make them move -- would move them, so that he could proclaim for every year the calendar. And perhaps you take this down, gentlemen. The original work -- meaning of the word "calendar" is the list of operations to be performed during one year. It is not a s- -- what you think a calendar is, a picture book with -- with dates, you see. But it is a list of operations which, as a citizen of this community, you had to perform.

On January 21st, the sap in the trees begins to rise again. Therefore, on January 2- -- 19th, the wood -- lumbering in the woods should be finished, because it's easier to have the -- trees chopped down while the sap is not rising. Isn't that -- you see. And so on. This goes through the whole year. Of course, in

Vermont, everything comes now three months later, so that the trees are always chopped down when they shouldn't be chopped down. And our roads, as you know, are always repaired in -- in August, because they can't get around to it, instead of repairing them in April. We are not calendric-minded anymore, you see. Very little -- very little.

But what I mean to say: the -- the New Year Day, gentlemen, is the reauthorization of the religious authority to organize work of the settled community. And therefore, it is always more than one day. You still have the rem- -- reminiscence of this in Twelfth Night period, from the -- December 24th to January 6th, where the earth, so to speak, stands still; and the New Year is real- -- actually a period of 12 days. And those of you who have read my paper on time-bettering days, you remember how these days were treated as a symbol of the whole year. These 12 days were, you see, the whole year, as a New Year event, you see. You anticipated in these 12 days between December 24 and January 6 the whole 12 months -- in a -- in the liturgy of the celebration. And that's why Shakespeare wrote his Twelfth Night, you see.

We just are through with Epiphany. But in this country, you see, with this -- all has lost its meaning. They let the Christmas trees stand over -- January 6th. At Easter you can still find the Christmas illumination around your houses. It has lost all meaning. That's what we call "commercial." It's all commercialized, because it only means that you spend money, but you don't know -- no longer live with this tree's fate. If the tree isn't taken down on January 6th, then it has been no Christmas, because the whole meaning of it is missed. It's just, I mean, a gesture of -- and a way of spending money. It is very difficult for me to imagine that this country will ever respect again the meaning of any of these celebrations, you see, because if you don't take these things down at the right moment, you also cannot -- you have the feeling that you put them up at the right moment. It's just the feeling of -- it's all arbitrary. You just do it whenever you please. And -- it's very strange that this spirit has completely been abandoned here, and --.

The leaving, the going, gentlemen, of a gift of Heaven--like the sunlight, the warmth, the sunshine, the summer, the spring--is as much for a religious man -- a dictation, a command, as the giving. When you go to Mass in a Catholic Church, you may be surprised as an onlooker, an unbeliever, that the priest has to wash out the dishes. The dishwashing, gentlemen, for a religious person is a part of our connection with life. It is not something that has to be -- can be done backstage, as in a theater. Therefore the ablution of the chalice is an element of the divine worship itself, because it means that man is immersed into this mortal flesh and into these earthly dealings. And any act, from shitting and urinating to eating is equally sanctified. It must be equally, decently done. You -- we have divided--you in your mentality--the visible and the invisible, the -- the -- that

what you turn to, and that what you would like to forget. And so, if you have a meal, a festivity in the fraternity, a cocktail party, the dishwashing is not part of the ceremony. But somebody has to do it, as you well know, in every ho- -- private home. And it's a good idea that the guests go out -- with you into the kitchen and help washing the dishes, because it rounds out the whole picture that they really share your life, and not share the good thing of eating. Can you see the difference?

And there you have always the difference between the secular, gentlemen, and the religious attitude of man. "Secular" means to cut into tid- -- little bits. "Secular" means -- comes from "secare," the same word as "sex." As l- -- far as you are a sexual being, you are cut into one-half of the race. When you are married, or in love, you are restored to your full complexion. Therefore, if you speak of "sex," you mean -- you speak of -- of a -- a cutting in your mid- -- full nature, you see. It's only one-half of us that is -- is meant when we speak of this. The same word with "saeculum." I think it's very useful for you to know that the secular can always be caught -- what is meant by "secular"? It's a difficult word for you because you are secularized. The secular is that which tries to single out one stage of life, and to isolate it from all the inherent other stages. Whereas the religious attitude is always an attempt to see the whole -- all the implications. And that is why in -- at Mass the priest still washes the dishes. And that is why the leaving-off of the sun, the eclipse of the sun, was a great religious experience in antiquity. It's nothing to be laughed about, because those who do not include death into life have not studied life. Those who do not sacrifice for the death of an animal in a hunt, have not really realized that they -- that the animal is a part of the life on this earth.

A friend of mine who is a minister in New Hampshire, preached a sermon to his boys and girls in church on his suddenly getting -- becoming fearful: had he the right to cut down this nice tree which he had singled out for his Christmas at home, for his own family? And he described very vividly in the sermon, a few days ago, I mean, before Christmas--no, he only preached at Epiphany--he told me yesterday about it, so he preached it a -- a few days before--that he made them all tremble, because they've suddenly realized his own feelings that -- this was a wonderful tree; in 15 years, it would be large tree in the woods. Should he cut it down? For what purpose? This -- his little child is really very small, and -- nearly below the understanding needed, so to speak, for a -- for such a tree, for the celebration. You think nothing; you buy this tree. That's secular. He, by going out into the woods and performing the work of the man from whom you buy the tree in the city, you see, was reminded of this first uprooting move, to get the tree out of his environ- -- its environment, you see, and to uproot it, and to cut it, therefore stifle its growth, kill it, really. And in -- for a fortnight, this tree is on the dungheap, is burned on -- 12 days after it has been used.

So you can see that even today this feeling, that we should be aware of the taking of life as much of the giving of life, is still available to all of us. But we hide oursel- -- our own eyes from this. We talked about this such -- most people do not witness death.

I had a letter from a boy a few days ago--graduated last year--describing his experience in -- in--I -- perhaps I mentioned it in class, nursing his father to his death in September and October--and how he had, all of a sudden, realized his great honor in really entering the cycle of life and death by this affectionate service, and how he then knew that he now had a right to start from -- afresh, because he had buried his father, and the father hadn't just disappeared. But he had entered -- into this cycle of his father's life so fully now, as no child usually does, you see. The young child looks at the father as always being there. But when the day comes that you are grown up and your father and -- or your mother need your care, you can once, at least in this moment, realize their whole life. And that's why all decent people must bury their dead, because they must, at least in the last moment, once so much deeply enter the meaning of the life of this other person, you see, that they may dismiss it. Before you haven't completely identified yourself with another person, sh- -- he -- the other person hasn't received your understanding, your participation in their life.

This I meant -- brought up in connection, gentlemen, with the New Year. The New Year in ancient times is the catastrophe, the deep feeling: what happens, unless we know the movement of the stars. So perhaps you -- state this in your -- in your own notes. The meaning of the New Year in antiquity, and of any holiday, is the realization: if this order wouldn't -- if we hadn't discovered this cosmic order, where would we be?

So on the New Year's Day, so to speak, Egypt, or China, or the Romans move back to the moment before they know of the year, and are once more, you see, faced with this primeval situation of ignorance, of darkness, of not knowing. And then they emerge and say, "Glory to God, we now know. For at least 365 days, perhaps for 1460 days, we know what is going to come." This is their great -- their great shout, so to speak; this millions of years, you see, is this emergence on New Year's Day from the ignorance, from knowing nothing about the stars, before. That's why any such sign, gentlemen, of a new order, always has in itself some reminiscence of what was before. That's why we have to cele- -- celebrate 4th of July in America. Because without the 4th of July, you would live in a mythology as though the United States of America had always existed. By saying, "July 4th, 1776," you still have the death of the old order, and you still have the power to imagine, you see, if it hadn't happened.

And that always means, gentlemen--and this is a great discovery which

you -- I would like you to repeat; I think I have made it before--the religious man bases his own life on a death that has preceded it, on a non-existence, on a nihil, on an -- on something that is not before. Your secular thinking says, "Life and -- is followed by death. Here we live; one day I am going to die. What do I care?" you see.

The religious man says, "An old order has died and I have, out of it, created a new one." That is, death begets life.

The acceptance of the destructive forces in the universe--in the hunting tribe, the death of the animal; in the calendar, the disappearance of the sun--gives rise to this great elation of conquering death, of triumphing over some order that has not understood how to win life out of death, out of nothingness. That's a constant, of course. You can also -- for a definition of the secular, say that it always has the -- serious -- serie- -- the order: life, death; life, death. All religious order has the order: death, life.

Well, ha- -- has anybody been good enough to finish this computation? What is it?

(Well, the first one, I have 52 succession of 260 days is {13,520} -- 13,520.)

-- 13,520. Would you try to divide this by 365? How does this work? This would be only 3- -- 995, is it? Wie? Is it? And that would be 357, { }. Wie? What? What?

(795.)

Oh, I'm --. Sure. So what's -- then what -- what is -- remains? Seven, five, two. Does this work? Is this a -- can you divide this in 365? I'm trying to find the period after which, you see, 2- -- years of -- periods of 260 will harmonize with a cycle of years of 365 days, you see. That's the problem. Well, then it may be that it is after 18 years. We only know that every 20 years, they would establish a new stile, a new cil- -- pillar, as a stone, a chained -- so to speak, a ring in the chain of -- of time. And we also know that every 52 years, they started a small chronology again, inside the large chronology. So you find in the -- the books on Mexico always mentioning of these two chronologies: the short and the long. The long is very clumsy, of course, figuring these thousands of years, you see, and -- for the daily practice of the individual town and city, the -- the -- the priestly reckoning wasn't used, but only this small fraction of it, the 52-year period.

This is quite important, because all the periods of antiquity--the Olympic tetrad, for example--is an imitation of this idea. The Great Year of Egypt had 1460

years. The Greeks said, "Ah ha, four years symbolize the Great Year," you see, because what you have here is four times 365 years. So they made it four times 365 days. And so they came to 1460 days, you see, and called the Olympic -- Olympia their unit, the four-year period. You are Greeks, you see; we still have the four-year presidential election. And we have the Olympic Games. And that's of course a very recent imitation. But the -- the period of the -- of the secular little cities of -- Greece, they were -- they would- -- they didn't want to have too much priesthood, and too much astrology; and they couldn't afford the priestly archives of Egypt or of Babylon. And so the Athenians and Spartans were satisfied with four-year periods, and said, "Our symbol is a year," you see, "of 14- -- a period of four times 365 days." But this is an imitation of the Egyptian idea of the cycle.

(From this calendar, it works with 260 days...)

Ja?

(...when -- how they made up -- they never made up the time, in other words; they called that one year?)

What we -- what people have suggested -- I haven't lived there, and I don't know the vegetat- -- -tation in -- in Central America, and -- people have suggested that it is a period lasting from the early spring, you see, when the first dew is -- when -- things begin to grow, to the last moment when the sun hasn't parched everything. It's a tropical region, you see. And so that out of 365 days, 260 would be growing season, so to speak, and the other would be the -- you see, the -- the -- not counted, because it was death, it was lying fallow or what-not. But I'm not sure -- I cannot tell you that this is true. This is what the -- in the books I find, you see. One would have to live there to -- to understand the 260 days, and also would know when they come inside this period.

Ja?

(Well, so what do the 52 and the 18 signify?)

Well, that's the so-called {catun} period, {catuna} period. If -- if you live not as a priest but as a layman in Mexico, you would tell your neighbor, "This is Year 27." And after 52 years, you would say, "This is Year 1." Every one of these -- 52 years had the name of a plant or an animal. One, it was called ye- -- if you read a date, Reed 1, then it would be the Year of the Reed, within the cycle of 52.

So -- I should have said this. Every one of the 52 years had a special name. And so these 52 years--as we say, "Wednesday," and "Monday," and

"Friday"--they could say of these 52 years, you see, "Monday," "Tuesday," "Wednesday," but it would go on for 50 times -- 52 names, and not just seven.

(The New Year occurred every 260 days or just when the growing season { }?)

Well, the -- in the priestly calendar--you must distinguish--the Maya civilization had one great, priestly capital-- {Toquine} I think is the name, and -- I'm not sure of this. -- {Cobing} -- {Copin}--and there everything has been so elaborate, and it must have -- kept the archives and the real figuring been done. The same is true in Babylon, that in Ur, and later in -- now, wait a minute. Not in Babylon, but another city--what's the other city? The archi- -- the -- the -- the priest -- the hi- -- highest priesthood was kept, whereas the secular government, you see, the power of the army, and of a king, you see, could be located in any one part of this Mesopotamian country, because they made war against each other, and one overcame the other. But they had to have this uni- -- unified computation. And for this they had to have a bureaucracy, and a whole staff of people, I mean, working in -- in -- in secrecy, as today our nuclear physicists only work.

And so they had a calendar of di- -- so to speak, tremendous dimensions, very carefully. But the laity in Mexico would go by the 260 days for their own gre- -- orientation, for their works, you see, and would depend on the -- only on the reunification of these 260 days, with the real constellations in the heavens, you see, on the proclamation of the priesthood.

So you would always have a secular -- what we call a civil calendar. And a -- and another. It's very interesting, gentlemen, that from the very first of mankind's history, there is always both: religious style and secular style. You go to the Amaz“nas River, and you find that certain styles of the -- of the gourd drum, which they -- which they -- with which they make the noise, is carved with very {hieraratic} signs. And these same people, in their private use to play with their children makes sec- -- toys in a -- quite a different style, which is not sacred, but which is just playlike, I mean. Toys. And we always think that religion has worn off, and we are secular, and the ancients were still religious. This isn't true. From the very first, you find the two styles. You find therefore a secular calendar, which is marked in our civilization by January 1st, and Sylvester, you see, and Carnival. And you find a religious calendar which is marked by Christmas. And they compete. And this is from the very -- first -- beginning.

Now these 260-days calendar seems to have been -- from what I understand -- you see, I have tried to understand--it's -- as I said, you have to live there before you understand the agriculture of these people, you see--was what every-

body needed to get by with his neighbors. And the 52-year period, too. And the long chronology, you see, with the real years, was for the illuminated ones, you see, who -- just as you would not have invented Christmas, and wouldn't know what to celebrate there, you see, but you would still need some feeling for spring and summer on your own. For you, it's skiing season, beginning of college, and such things, you see. That would be your private calendar, would it not?

In this sense, you must accept this fact that from the very beginning, gentlemen, man has this tremendous problem that one law is in the sky, and the other law is on this earth, and your own body, and in your own members. It never coincides.

This is man's problem, and tragedy, or--if you may say also, his greatness--that he never can live by one calendar. That's what I tried to tell you in this paper. You remember. Have you read it?

(Partly.)

Wie?

(Partly.)

I'm sorry. It's such a good paper.

You see, this is the -- this is our necessity today to understand: no man can live by any one calendar. It's not the truth.

But net now -- let me go on from here, gentlemen. And let me draw certain conclusions. As I said, the -- the larger impact, how -- what a society gains by the worship of the stars, I have now to -- to formulate, gentlemen. This devotion to the most remote eternity has furnished people with one great power. The power to settle, the power to reside. The very word "settlement," "residence"--I now put down all the names we owe to this cosmic religion--"house," "orientation," "temple," "throne" -- well, I told you already, "consideration," "architecture," "gold," "metal work"--they go all back to the -- these are the fruits of star-worship. This is all very positive. The fruits of star-worship, they are all based on the assumption that man can forgo his own movement, that the stars move in a cyclical way and don't force him to migrate. The abolition of migration, gentlemen, is: that in as far as you are a Dartmouth man for the rest of your life, you still live on this cosmic order; that at Dartmouth, you have been touched by the spirit sufficiently so that this is now your spiritual home for the rest of your life.

The war minister of England, in the First World War, lost his job as min-

ister of war, Lord Hal- -- Haldane, in the midst of the War. Why? Because he had the guts to stand up--he had studied in Germany, in G”ttingen, and when he asked for the -- for compulsory service, his nation, which never had -- had had this, as you know, the English--he began with the famous words, "Although Germany always has been my spiritual home..." And he -- the people were angry in those war days, and shouted him down, and he had to li- -- resign. He had the courage of his conviction, you see, as the man who would have studied in Heidelberg, from America, over the last 150 years, would never have denied that his spiritual home had become Heidelberg. Or as the Roman Catholic will say that his spiritual home is Rome, or as the Jew -- a pious Jew will say that his home is in Jerusalem.

And this we owe to the -- to the stone pillars and calendar-makers or -- who told us that from far away, God made us mo- -- the gods made us move and behave. It took away the terrible restlessness of all the tribes who had to keep moving, lest they be lost somewhere in a place which they could not master in its -- in its operations. Hunters, gentlemen, gatherers of -- of berries or fruits, hoe- -- people who just have little garden cultures -- what is called hoe- -- the hoeing culture, have to keep moving. If you look at the American tribes, these 9,847 tribes in Africa, they have to keep moving, because they are never sure where they really should live. They have not discovered any such command of order. The only order a tribesman knows: that his ancestor told him what to do, and the -- and the animals tell him, you see, where to hunt. And so they have to follow where the -- life draws them.

Life is therefore, gentlemen, unsettled. But dead things are settled. The stars are there forever. But life is never the same.

So the fruits, gentlemen, of the cosmic calendar-makers is your participation in final settlement. Even if you leave the United States, gentlemen, you still want them to be there in Washington. And when you want to come home, you want to find the capitol in Washington, and the Congress --. You see, you want to have the White house there. And you rely on the fact that -- will always be there. As long as you live, at least. This is a strange thing, that you rely on the rest of your fellow countrymen living in Washington. I wouldn't live there for anything. It's a madhouse. But they do. They even {let} me there. I prefer not to be there, gentlemen. But I know what I owe them for this sacrifice, that they have settled finally in -- in Washington for good, you see. You owe -- all owe them a load of gratitude. You may go to the Antarctic, and you mo- -- go to Europe, and you mo- -- may travel through the Mo- -- {Mogaves} Desert, but there is some part of your life which is settled, you see. And that part of your life had once to be created. And it was strangely created by man's surrendering part of his will to the order of the universe, as explaining the climate, the agriculture,

the growth, the changes in your part of the world, and saying, "This is enough. This explains to you your existence. Stay. Surrender. Give in."

And so, gentlemen, every pyramid built, every basalt stone, and every porphyry brought over mi- -- thousands of miles to one place expresses this great discovery, this shouting: "Millions of years, we still can be here," you see.

If I now go on from this, to a comparison, gentlemen, of the two orders which we have so far described--it would be in this manner--the tribes discovered the possibility of life everywhere on this globe, everywhere they migrate. And the empire-builders--because that's what they are, these calendar-makers--the priestly -- civilizations discover the all-the-time order. So you have -- the ubiquitousness of a divine life is discovered by the animists. And the everywhere -- the ever-ness, so to speak--that's better than "eternity" at this -- in this connection--the ever-ness of an order -- was discovered, and cultivated, and inculcated, and preached by the priests.

So you see that in antiquity, the ancient faith of -- which still is in you and in me, in many things we do, is a partial faith. "God is everywhere," the tribesman says. "We can find some way of receiving life and giving life back, everywhere."

And the calendar-makers say, "There is an order in the same place, always." Can you see this?

Now this is to this day the problem of men, gentlemen, to cope with ever and all -- and everywhere. Or it is ubiquitous; it is eternal, we say. But that's dead matter if you do not see that the divine powers are everywhere, and the divine powers are always, in the plural. The lion, and the bear, and the mammoth, and the fish -- today we are setting out to discover the deep sea. You read all these books on diving, don't you? Going below the surface of the water for two miles or so.

Well, gentlemen, obviously there is a way out for the human race to discover some other place of the planet, you see, to add to our livelihood. This is always expressed materially. But the first people who dive, gentlemen, don't eat the fish they bring up from the surface. They risk their lives. Obviously that's a religious task. You can't -- risk such a thing just for the fun of it. It isn't fun. Some of these people never come back. The same with the North Pole. But since the North Pole, and the South Pole, and the -- Mount Everest have been climbed and discovered, people now begin to dive into the depths of the sea. That's still -- a last stage of migration, the last stage of animism, you see: to meet life where it hasn't been found before. To try out certain new conditions, you see, under

which a group of men might draw resources, you see, from a part of the -- space which is -- given to us, which is entrusted to us. And I foresee that in 200 years, half of our foodstuff probably will come out of the deep sea. But it would imply a real, religious relation to this deep sea at first, because we must find all -- all -- any number of people who will say, "This is { }." They will not bring up any food. They lose their lives in the process. Can you see this?

So gentlemen, spaces and times have to be added by our faith all the time to our existence. And this may be the point, gentlemen, to explain a strange cleavage today between people. You find many people who call themselves -- who say, "Everything is divine." And you say -- take the Jews, or take the -- the Orthodox, the fundamentalists who say that only -- Jews -- is -- only -- "God is unique, and He's unworldly, and He's out of this world," as we say. Both -- I think situ- -- tenets are irreligious. They are not tenable. We know of God only because He is represented in this world. Your and my life is divine. Otherwise we have no reason to speak of divinity. And if Moses brings the -- Ten Commandments from the Sinai, and God -- says to him, "Take this down to the -- to this -- stubborn people, and make them into a people under these commandments, that there must be some group that recognizes the unity of all life on this earth, that there is one God for all spaces, for all calendar -- you see, parts of the globe"--that's the Jewish discovery, you see: there is one God, despite the different climates, you see, and despite the different calendars--then you can see that there is a very thin line which divides superstition, gentlemen, or mere conceptualism, mere cleverness from real faith.

Why can we not say, "Everything is divine"? Why can't we be pantheists? And why is it wrong -- on the other hand to say that God is here, and the world is there? Why can be -- can't be God simply outside the world? You see, these are the two -- problems of your -- of your head, of your brain, which at this moment I think we might be able to bring to a clearer -- at least to a clearer statement. Every one of -- you is tempted to say at one time, "Nature is good," which would mean the nature is the only divinity that we know: things as they are. Everything is alive, everything is moving, everything is in a wonderful shape. Why -- here are the stars, and here are the -- here is -- are the animals. That's all we know. Here you are, and I, and -- you see, and we are all the divinity we know of, you see. And the other hand, the other temptation is to stress the -- the narrowness of all our existence. You are mortal; I am mortal; we are sick; we are insane; we are stupid; we are limited. The -- all the forces of nature go to their destruction; you will have to die; you will go to a mental asylum, et cetera--and I hope you will not--and -- .

So what is man, that God should be mindful of him? God is beyond all this disorder, this anarchy, and this stupidity, and this sin- -- sinful state. And

really, gentlemen, this is the abiding question for any treatment of religion we must not -- leave sight of, that these are the two temptations: to make -- God -- think of a -- of God without the world, and to think of the world without God.

I think we can see this now a little better. Man -- we said, by -- the power of religion is reinstating himself in his full reality, in all the spheres into which he is fated, and not just in the accidental one which is implicating him at this moment. He can move freely through these spheres by his prayer. And prayer is his way of -- actualizing, of carrying out this process by which he conquers his reality, his --. Now any one of the spheres which wrap us up, our family relations, our local relations, our -- the -- the season which burns on our head or -- or freezes our toes in wintertime--all these are obviously transient. They are transient. Man is out to find his permanency, what he is always, you see, and everywhere.

So religion is that process of reinstating man into his always and his everywhere-ness. And that would be his divinity. And his humanity is that he has to be somewhere, and he has to be now. That is, you have to admit that we are transient, and that we are localized; we are spotty. So in this spottiness, that we are only now at -- in this moment in this classroom, we have to be -- remain aware that this classroom cannot contain you and me. We must feel free every moment--and you see it immediately, if I would lock this door and say, "You are prisoners," you would suddenly -- your face would fall, and you would treat this whole building as your enemy, and you would try to escape. Whereas I promised you that at 2:45 I shall stop speaking; so you are quite happy, and you put up with it. That's the whole difference. I mean, the same room can become your prison, you see, and can become the anti-Christ. It can become your persecution -- your persecutor. I can turn the key and say, "This is forever."

Then you would say, "This room is transient, but I'm forever," compared --.

Your eternity will always transcend the eternity of any one room. That doesn't mean that you are really eternal. We know very little about real eternity, you see. But your eternity means that you at least can survive two spaces. And your eternity also means that you at least can survive two times.

Therefore that's the reason, gentlemen, that we have today in our mod- -- modern man cannot begin with the last eternity. The Egyptians went into superstition because they wanted to run their Chinese, or Mayan civilization, or Egyptian civilization the same way for thousands of years in their great fear of etern- -- "Lose eternity," you see. You can see this fear. Once you discover the forever, you want to keep it. We, however--you and I, gentlemen--have to combine two

things: the yearning for eternity, for lasting, and the freedom to change. That is, you must dismiss this year and say, "The next year we'll live differently," in a different manner. Your calendar is not binding, yet you cannot ignore it. You'd better take wool stockings in Vermont in winter, you see, and -- bikinis in Florida.

So gentlemen, you and I, as sons of our own -- free age, freed by -- from all these specialties, still have to give due to these people, that they were after the divine in us, which is not transient, which is always able to get beyond this room, and say, "You in this room, that's not the whole you." You would also be -- in a -- behave very well in another place. You could live in the Orient, you could live at the North Pole; you would still be men, you see. I cannot identify yourself with the Ozarks; I cannot identify your- -- say, with the Pennsylvania Dutch, because you can cease to be in Pennsylvania. And all we today do, when we pin down a man of being an Italian, or a Pole, or a German, is trying to make him into a pagan, make him in -- give him only part of his full life, you see. Because before his death, he -- it isn't over with him. He can cease to be a Pennsylvania Dutch. He can even cease to be an American, as Mr. {Field} tries to do, you see. You can stop being an American. You can have just gone too far with it.

And the -- the great problem, gentlemen, of religion is that you and I must claim in your inner language, which you hold your dialogue, which you hold within your -- inside yourself, that you are more than anything which has as yet appeared. Would you -- perhaps say this, gentlemen? Man is always more than has as yet appeared in his domicile, and in his calendar. That you have been a Dartmouth student cannot be the end of your stigmatization. You cannot be stigmatized for the rest of your life by having had this -- bad fortune of taking Philosophy 40. You must -- can be able to get over the -- with this one day, you see. Well, that's not just ridiculous. I mean that every one phase of your experience, gentlemen, is not the whole of your existence. And every one place of your existence must not color your existence in the eyes of other men.

We learn now a big thing, gentlemen: the times that have passed color your self-consciousness. The spaces in which you have been, color the consciousness of the others about you. You look where you are to others. And you look who -- what you have been to yourself.

So gentlemen, the calendar that goes back through time is a -- dangerous for yourself, trying to tell you that you have always done this, do it again. If you have taught a child certain superstitions, or that 13 is a bad number, and for the first 20 years it has never been allowed to sit on a table with 13 people, it will take a tremendous effort for this child in the -- at his 21st birthday to say, "From now on, I will only have parties of 13." You see. Because the time has colored your

self-consciousness. Now you have lived for 20 years in your hometown, gentlemen, and from now on, all people will say, "Oh, I have gone to school with this guy; he isn't worth much. I must know him." And your whole worth may have accrued to you much later and you'll resent this fellow who always says, "We -- I went to school with him."

You will say, "What of it? Bad enough that I went to this poor school so long. From now on, I forget this school. I deny it." And you can change, can you not?

So gentlemen, the rest -- this is your double -- double -- the double-beating any mortal man takes. His own conscience reminds him of what he has done before, or what has been done before, and he tries to keep his routines. And the rest of the world says, "I know where he belongs," and he never gets out of that.

Think of Mr. {Labiensky} and the -- the {Witt} letter. That's a typical attempt of {Witt} to say that Mr. {Labiensky} has lived in Russia; for this reason he can be no good," you see. The funny thing is that Mr. {Witt} cannot be -- no good, because he also has lived in Russia. You see, and it rebounds -- of course -- on this gentleman. And he -- we find that he isn't a gentleman. You read the story? It's a very typical story, gentlemen.

But fe- -- people have lost you in your -- in your sneering at your idea even that you yourself could be superstitious. You have to learn that the religious man is first out to discover his own superstitions. And he -- there is a twofold superstition. Your superstition about yourself is that you are what you have been. And the superstition or -- about -- of -- you entertain about all your neighbors is that they are where they have been, that they are the way the people in your community used to live. You would always think of the place, Westchester County, or whatever this witches' Sabbath place is, that this is as -- how people live in Westchester County.

I tell -- give you a funny story. I have a very conservative friend at home in Germany. And a confirmed bachelor, and a very bitter, and a -- man who had a father of 50 when he was born. So -- the father was very old; and they had four brothers -- older brothers. The -- the youngest of these four older brothers was 18 years older than he himself. So he had five fathers, the poor man. And that had made him into an immovable, fixed star. He has always seen himself as these five older people have seen him. They have always corrected him. He always was a small boy. When I went to his wedding--he was 48 when he finally married--there was still his older brother living, you see, and he always spoke of the little -- little brother. At 4- -- he was 45. And he never got over this.

So, I came to this country, and I took up -- here, a little bit of outdoor life. And I had ridden before in -- in the army, in Germany, many years. But not while I was his colleague at the university at which I taught. It was a big city. There was just no chance of riding. And I had very -- had three -- three different jobs at that time. I was a professor, and I ran the work camps of Germany, and I did a big job in international adult education. So I was really torn to pieces, and certainly no time--except for skiing--for any other sport. And -- yes, that was my vacation. I went away when everybody else taught in February, and skied.

And -- well, the -- to make a long story short, this man, after 20 years, meets a friend -- a mutual friend who has visited us in this country. And she has seen that I have four horses on my place, and I'm riding, and I'm raising horses; I'm teaching horseback riding, and breaking horses, and so on. And she reports back to this man that she has seen this; with her own eyes, she has seen it. And her husband, too. And, "Yes, that's what he is really devoting himself to, to raising horses. Because he thinks he cannot teach boys, anyway." And -- you see, it's much easier to teach horses.

And -- what's the answer of this man? It's -- I think it's classic, and I think it is -- is an anecdote that is far more than a personal story. This is a professor of history, and a very important figure in the public eye in -- in Germany, at this moment. He just gave a -- delivered a lecture on the -- 10th anniversary of the 20th of Jul- -- July, on the Resistance. I got the lecture yesterday.

Well, the only answer he had for this story, how we lived here, was, "But he cannot do this."

And my friend looked at him, and said, "But why? I have seen him. He does it."

"But he cannot do this!"

And she said, "Will you kindly explain?"

He said, "He has never done it before. He has never done it before. He did not do it when -- while we lived -- were living together." That was his r- -- assumption. You see, that's an historian. He cannot see that something new ever -- can happen. I think this has actually happened. You wouldn't believe it, you see. Here comes somebody reporting how we live, and the report is denied and not acceptable, because we haven't done it before.

Now -- you loo- -- you may say this is a fool, gentlemen. We all are the same way. When you hear something about some country where you have trav-

eled, you actually think that these people must behave this way.

I give you one example of the great tragedy at this moment between America and Europe. Because the -- the Italians have the pope in their midst, you -- we all think--I am inclined to--to think that Italy is a Catholic country. Now there are millions of Italians who resent that, and say, "The United States are not called a Catholic country, although you have your Cardinal Spellman. And why should we be Catholic because we have the pope?"

It's no difference to the Italians, but to you it is. Because you have heard about Italy in connection with the papacy, have you not? That's your whole introduction to Italy. Therefore you say, "The Italians are Catholic."

I have an Italian friend, a very famous man, Gaetano Salvemeni--perhaps I mentioned this before in class, did I? Wie? Have I talked about it here before?

-- He came to me--he -- taught at Harvard for -- when he was -- under Mussolini, he was exiled; he's now in Florence again; a wonderful man--and he said, "What can we do? This total misunderstanding about Italian affairs in America is ruinous to our policy. You -- support the pope." Of course, they hate the Americans, because by Mrs. -- sending Mrs. Clare Luce to Italy, who is a convert, and who tells the pope that Catholicism is wonderful thing, you--you know this story?--you -- you make yourself hated in Italy. You take sides. What's the story? Why -- how -- isn't it terrible that the Italians are forced to choose between the pope and Communism?

Now nine-tenths of the Italians are neither pap- -- popish nor Communists, gentlemen. But if you hear an American talk, it is as though you had to elect the pope, or you have to elect the -- Malenkov. It's terrible. Can you see the havoc that is done? And only because you say, "In Italy, all people are this way," you see.

And so, gentlemen, all wars come from this, and all misunderstandings, all religious persecutions, from our not mastering the everywhere for others, and the always for ourselves.

This is -- very -- very important, because it shows you that space and time, gentlemen, are part of man's consciousness. The description of consciousness in our psychology and philosophy books are all wrong. Who is majoring in philosophy? Gentlemen, take this -- note down. That's why people now discover the time problem. It isn't true that you think about yourself in terms of space. And it isn't true that you think about the rest of the world in terms of time. But you have to do both. And the whole religious issue is, you see: if you want to rein-

state yourself into all the spheres, you must be able to admit to all living beings, you see, a change in time as well as in space -- which is very hard to accept, you see. I meet you, and you take all your prejudices together and say, "This man comes from Germany; he's a college professor. Two and 2, just minus."

So gentlemen, I offer you this--all the people in philos- -- interested in philosophy--as the great task of the next hundred years -- or 200 years, to see that when we say "consciousness," when we say "reason," when we say "thinking," when we say "science," we mean two absolutely different things, different directions of thought. One, the thought about yourself; and one, the thinking about others. When we think about others, we base them in ti- -- in space, in localities. He's there, and I'm here, you see, outside each other. We see into each other. So we say, "He's still" -- you know very well that you wouldn't like to be identified with the school to which you went, you see, the grade school. You will say, "Well, that's long ago," you see. But unfortunately, it sticks in the other person's mind, what sweater -- kind of sweater you wore at that time in school, you see. And you are the man -- the boy with the funny sweater. That's all they'll remember of -- you. Isn't that true? He remembers you from the outside in, and you remember yourself from the inside out. Now to remember something from the inside out meint- -- -s you remember time. And to remember something from the outside in means to remember through space, first. Can you see -- begin to see this?

Now gentlemen, I think this is really a great discovery, that what we call "consciousness" is divided, partially conquering the -- our appearance and phenomena in space, and partly conquering the phenomena through time. You are the same man here in Hanover, and in New York--where is your home town?

({ }.)

Wonderful. And you do not think that you this -- this is sticking to you, the mud of New York is sticking to your -- to your heel. What?

({ }. You were looking at me from the outside in, and called it.)

So. Can you now begin to see that these two first great orders of religious faith, the -- the -- the migrating tribes with their -- zes- -- quest of life, of enough life to keep going, were after -- treating the whole rest of the world inside out -- from the inside out? They were -- the animals were their ancestors, the totem, you see. And their own ancestors. And everything was a part of past experience, wherever it would happen. So they could { } all over the globe, and have still a memory, you see, of the -- of how life and death could be reciprocated, could be connected by sacrifice, by -- by dealing with these living beings in the proper

way. And how in the sa- -- in the opposite manner the cosmic -- discoverers of the cosmos tried to fix man into a space of eternity that would have no change in time, but would localize him, and to give him all the appearances of the climate and the place, which the gods willed here to make him survive.

And -- so these people have a -- had a -- so to speak, took sides in their consciousness. The -- the -- the -- the calendar-makers tried to make man feel that he was looked at as a particle in space and had to move inside this space. And the animistic people--to whom I feel a closer connection at this moment, so to speak, for our own survival--had this deep feeling of continuity, that wherever I had been, I had still been the same, so I can -- could identify myself with the spirit of my great-grandfather and I could identify myself with the spirit of my greatgrandson, you see, wherever this could -- would be. We would still be the same.

And I offer you this as the re- -- real issue of all philosophy, if there shall be any amount of thinking. Perhaps in this country it will not be done. They split too many atoms. But -- formerly they split hairs. Now they split atoms. It is both not a very useful occupation. And they do not study, gentlemen, the strange split of our divinity into either space-consciousness or time-consciousness. What we call "God," gentlemen, is the identity of what is through all times, and the identity of what is everywhere. And in this sense, I told you that the ancient religion--as far as they survive today, the same--are incomplete. They take sides with either space problems or time problems. They try the -- the heavenly powers try to fix you into one locality, and guarantee you that there will be no change necessary. You can always move through this cycle of 1460 years, and you will still be, you see, livable, so to speak. You can make a living there. And that's the famous fleshpots of Egypt, which the Jews, you see, warred against. The fleshpots of Egypt are guarantees of security, and living, you see, enough to eat--high standard of living--under one condition: that you comply with this order of things as is -- it is, forever. Ever-ness. The tribes said, "No guarantee for -- for -- for the same locality. You may have to move, but your spirit will be the same. The Great Spirit will support you," wherever the migrating tribe goes, from the Bering Strait, from Alaska, down to the -- Mid- -- through Middle America, to South America, all these tribes struggled, you see, and still speak the same language, which is -- in proof that they had one spirit through all the times, but no -- no place of identification, no room.

So I thought I should bring out, gentlemen, the fruits of religion. The -- the -- these -- these worshipers of these two spheres have to this day gifted you and me with speech, which goes through all ages, regardless where it is spoken. You can speak Irish even in Boston.

Well, imagine what this means! And you can speak the -- the language,

you see, all the time. And you can reside and till the same field, and have property--that's another term that comes from the calender- -- calendar wisdom. All property, gentlemen, is in space. All speech is in time. This is going back to the rudiments, so to speak, of your and my equipment. And we owe these people part of our divinity, gentlemen. Because by property, in one space, you are relatively free. If a man -- nobody had property in the United States, we'd all be slaves of the legislature, and chief executive, because you would starve tomorrow if you had no property, you see. You -- we would be under tyranny. You can see this. Property defends your liberty against an encroachment by somebody else, you see. Speech defends your continuity, your identity. You recognize yourself wherever you go, because inside yourself you have still one language with which you can talk to {yourself}, that the same man who was Johnny in the beginning, you see, is a John in the end.

So what do we then call Joh- -- divine, gentlemen? I think we must -- today end with the definition once more of divin- -- divinity. And I tell you, in the Year of the Lord 1955, as we write it now, we will have to tackle the problem of God from the lower end, and not from the highest. The ancient people tried to -- or even our -- your forefathers and mine--spoke of "God almighty," and "Creator of Heaven and earth." Let this stand for a moment, gentlemen, but let's dig into our experience for which you and I can vouchsafe. We know nothing of God in -- as a creator of Heaven and earth, ourselves, as poor selves. We know -- it's too far away. But we do know, gentlemen, that every one of us wants to be able to reach another place, and that he wants to reach another time. And I tell you: wherever any human being wants to be identified with another time than his own of this moment, and wherever he wants to be identified, or have power over property -- that is, over a space over which at this moment we do not walk--the property may be far away, you see--you take the step into being more than what your five senses allow you to be at this moment, you see. You cover more ground either in space or in time. And this is your divinity. And this is the divinity you must grant your neighbors. You must recognize in -- a lion to whom you grant the jungle, and the redwood to whom you grant enough earth so that it can put down -- its roots in California, you grant him space and time.

And wherever you do this, gentlemen, especially where you do it beyond your own birth, backward in time; and beyond your own grave, forward in time; and whenever you allow it beyond the power of your muscles and your legs, and even your motor car, you yourself, or your -- others, you -- we cannot say that man is just man. There is then something second in him. And the great secret, gentlemen, of religion then is: that we can never speak of God without speaking of man, and we can never speak of man without speaking of God. There is now way of speaking of God, per se. That's the mistake of all theology. And it is the same -- mistake of all anthropology, and all humanists, and all psychology, that

they try to speak of man without { } {gods}. Because every man has to be judged by what he himself yearns to be con- -- identified with. Therefore, your ancestors for -- whom you have buried, and whom you have -- {appreciated}, and your children, are just as much yourself as the self which the psychologist tries to get under his microscope. You deny that this is all you are, what he can see. He sees too little, because he doesn't divi- -- . And so -- you see, I make small gods out of us in order to prepare you for knowing what the ancient people talked when they talked of the gods. We -- the God of all times and of all spaces, it seems to me--I may misjudge you, gentlemen--is too much to -- for you a matter of speculation, so to speak, and not of experience. But you all can experience that element of the divine that comes from your demand, and your willingness with regard to others to grant them a second chance; that is to say that there is a secret which is not yet revealed.

You cannot know what this man is going to do tomorrow, so -- you pardon him, and you don't send him to the electric chair. What else is this, as that you assume that the man can do something different from what he has done before--which is against all causation, you see. It's against all laws of human reason. It is simply an act of faith. In this country, you always believe that you can give a man a second chance, fortunately, because you still --.

If -- I know many cynics in this country who say, "There is no God." But if I see them treat other people, I know that they always believe that the other people have a god, have a divine -- spirit in themselves. And that's for me the saving grace of these so-called atheists, gentlemen. You can have an atheist who says, "I do not know anything of God." If he treats his other fellow as being divine, you see, he has a religion, you see, in this one chapter. And this is -- I'm afraid, as you know, the great distribution between the orthodox and the children of the world, that the children of the world are very often very kind to their neighbors, and allow -- for their divinity, you see. And the orthodox say that the others can't go to Heaven.

And so the division between the religionists and the atheists is a very queer one. Both have also half of the right religion, you see. Because one allows the others to be under the divine inspiration, and the others say, "We have the divine inspiration." I don't know what is better.

But have I made my point clear, gentlemen, that between space aspect and time aspect in your own consciousness, there is a constant fight? For others, we use the space concept to understand them. For yourself, you use the time as the -- as the power of identification, you see. You never think -- you can only see -- also see that you at 5 and you of now have physically nothing in common. You look differently. At 5, you had no spectacles, I'm sure. You shouldn't have any

now. And forbid all your girls to wear these glasses, gentlemen. You can live without these glasses. That's just a very bad tattoo of -- of your tribalism in this country. Everybody wants to show that he can pay 16 or 5- -- 25 dollars for glasses.

I have swindled myself through life without glasses. Every doctor has told me that I should wear glasses. I haven't, you see, and that's why I can still read without glasses to this day. And you will have to wear glasses all your life. No good.

So gentlemen -- but, I mean, you are the same person with and without glasses, are you not? To me, of course, you are just the fellow with the glasses.

If you stick to this -- this definition may help you, gentlemen: never can you speak of man without speaking of God; never can you speak of God without speaking of man. And the -- smallest unit, so to speak, of the divine, is not the creator of Heaven and earth, you see, and of the universe, but is already he who unites and identifies two opposite spaces: seasons, for example, you see, winter and summer; and two different periods, your ances- -- your grandfather and your grandchildren.

Thank you.