1939 · CLOSE READING
Eight Lectures on Yoga
Eight Lectures on Yoga (1939), PDF p. 48
Original page
Enlarge ↗
Highlights use the original PDF text layer. OCR-only matches may not be visible on the scan.
Transcription
Download text ↓raw extractionoriginal embedded textReview: unreviewed
YOGA FOR YELLOWBELLIES.
SECOND LECTURE.
Mr. Chairman, Your Royal Highness, Your Grace, my lords, ladies and
gentlemen.
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
In my last lecture I led you into the quag of delusion; I smothered you
in the mire of delusion; I brought you to thirst in the desert of delusion; I
left you wandering in the jungle of delusion, a prey to all the monsters
which are thoughts. It came into my mind that it was up to me to do
something about it.
We have constantly been discussing mysterious entities as if we knew
something about them, and this (on examination) always turned out not
to be the case.
2. Knowledge itself is impossible, because if we take the simplest
proposition of knowledge, S is P, we must attach some meaning to S and
P, if our statement is to be intelligible. (I say nothing as to whether it is
true!) And this involves definition. Now the original proposition of identity,
A = A, tells us nothing at all, unless the second A gives us further
information about the first A. We shall therefore say that A is BC. Instead
of one unknown we have two unknowns; we have to define B as DE, C as
FG. Now we have four unknowns, and very soon we have used up the
alphabet. When we come to define Z, we have to go back and use one of
the other letters, so that all our arguments are arguments in a circle.
3. Any statement which we make is demonstrably meaningless. And
yet we do mean something when we say that a cat has four legs. And we
all know what we mean when we say so. We give our assent to, or
withhold it from, the proposition on the grounds of our experience. But
that experience is not intellectual, as above demonstrated. It is a matter
of immediate intuition. We cannot have any warrant for that intuition, but
at the same time any intellectual argument which upsets it does not in
the faintest degree shake our conviction.
4. The conclusion to be drawn from this is that the instrument of mind
is not intellectual, not rational. Logic is merely destructive, a self-
destructive toy. The toy, however, is in some ways also instructive, even
though the results of its use will not bear examination. So we make a by-
law that the particular sorites which annihilate logic are out of bounds,
and we go on reasoning within arbitrarily appointed limits. It is subject to
these conditions that we may proceed to examine the nature of our
fundamental ideas; and this is necessary, because since we began to
Page provenance & review flags
Stable page ID: 11ea06f5df920a5b4a5d7e16:p00048
Line breaks are preserved. Reading order and OCR accuracy may need review.
Printed page label has not been verified.
- No automated review flags. This does not establish transcription accuracy.