86
and more convincing if the meditation is directed to an
object which in itself is apparently unimportant.
One does
not want the mind to be excited in any way, even by adoration.
See
the three meditative methods in Liber HHH (Equinox VI).1 At the
same time, one would not like to deny positively that it is very much
easier to take some idea towards which the mind would
naturally
flow.
The Hindus assert that the nature of the object determines the
Samadhi; that is, the nature of those lower Samadhis which confer so—
called “magic
powers.”
For example, there are the Yogapravritti.
Meditating on the tip of the nose, one obtains what may be called the
“ideal smell”; that is, a smell which is not any particular smell, but is
the archetypal smell, of which all actual smells are modifications. It is
“the smell which is no! a smell.”
This is the only reasonable descrip—
tion ; for the experience being contrary to reason, it is only reasonable
that the words describing it should be contrary to reason too.2
Similarly, concentration on the tip of the tongue gives the “ideal
taste ”; on the dorsum of the tongue, “ideal contact.” “ Every atom of
1 These are the complements of the three methods of Enthusiasm (A. '. A. '. instruc-
tion not yet issued up to March 1912).
2 Hence the Athanasian Creed.
Compare the precise parallel in the Zohar: “ The
Head which is above all heads; the Head which is not a Head.’