[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

nonverbal language; involution

Sep 13, 1994 00:19 AM
by Eldon B. Tucker

This is by Brenda Tucker.

(Spirit and stone will have to wait again.)

Dear Nancy and Frank:

I'm enjoying your discussion of verbal and nonverbal brain areas.
The experiment which Frank referred to is in his post dated 9/5/94.

> ....patients with the connective tissue between brain hemispheres
> severed, subjects were given an experimental task in which
> information was fed to only one brain hemisphere Subjects were
> then asked to indicate *nonverbally* which was the correct choice
> from a series of objects exposed to the *nonverbal* brain
> hemisphere.  They were able to point to the correct one; but when
> they were then asked to explain their choice, the poor verbal
> hemisphere was presented with a dilemma, as it had no idea why
> the hand controlled by the nonverbal hemisphere pointed to the
> target object.  So what did the verbal hemisphere do to explain
> the choice? It *made up* a reason that was completely unrelated
> to the actual basis for the choice.  This effect was consistently
> demonstrated across subjects.

>IOW, the little verbal/conscious part of the brain has access to
>only a fraction of the brain's activity and, even in normals,
>often does not have a clue as to what the real state of affairs
>is.  It responds to this dilemma by simply making up something
>that has logical consistency and sounds good.  And it thinks that
>it is actively, consciously, purposely, and logically
>constructing these explanations.  We do this all the time every
>day of our lives.  This is the purpose of our little "word
>machine" (Robert Ornstein's term), to insure consistency.  Not
>accuracy or validity---merely consistency so that we think our
>minds are working in a nice logical linear fashion.

So then people remarked on how much this is really lying by their
definition of the word.

May I refer you to THE SECRET DOCTRINE, Vol 1, Part II,
I-Symbolism and Ideographs, p.  308-9, where H.P.B.  quotes J.
THE SOURCE OF MEASURES.  Skinner speaks of an ancient language
which is lost today.

"The peculiarity of this language was that it could be contained
in another, concealed and not to be perceived, save through the
help of special instruction...  the designed scope of which could
be determinatively helped out by parables; while also it could be
set forth separately, independently, and variously, by

To clear up an ambiguity as to the term language: Primarily the
word means the expression of ideas by human speech; but,
secondarily, it may mean the expression of ideas by any other
instrumentality.  This old language is so composed in the Hebrew
text, that by the use of the written characters, which uttered
shall be the language first-defined, a distinctly separated
series of ideas may be intentionally communicated, other than
those ideas expressed by the reading of the sound-signs."

It sounds to me as if the Hebrew text can be read in two ways,
verbally and pictorially.  He adds that the secondary, ancient
language "sets forth under a veil, series of ideas" both sensible
things in pictures AND things real, though without sensible
existence.  For example, the number 9 or a revolution of the moon
(apart from the moon itself) though these things have no

"This idea-language may consist of symbols restricted to
arbitrary terms and signs, having a very limited range of
conceptions, and quite valueless, or it may be a reading of
nature in some of her manifestations of a value almost
immeasurable, as regards human civilization.  A picture of
something natural may give rise to ideas of co-ordinating subject
matter, radiating out in various and even opposing directions,
like the spokes of a wheel, and producing natural realities in
departments very foreign to the apparent tendency of the reading
of the first or starting picture.  Notion may give rise to
connected notion, but if it does, then, however apparently
incongruous, all resulting ideas must spring from the original
picture and be harmonically connected, or related the one with
the other.  Thus with a pictured idea radical enough, the
imagination of the cosmos itself, even in its details of
construction, might result."

He finishes by suggesting " the history of the human race
there happened, from causes which at present at any rate we
cannot trace, a lapse or loss from an original perfect language
and a perfect system of science-shall we say perfect because they
were of divine origin and importation?"

My suggestion is that there isn't anyone trying to decipher the
verbal language as we now have it, because our language is not a
pictorial one.  Hebrew may have been dually formed however and
did or does allow for a radial expansion of meaning.

H.P.B.  really expresses pleasure with this work and connects it
to one of the keys to the universal mystery-lanugage.  She also
says that Volume Two is an attempt to explain the chief symbols
and emblems and that here may lie a key to the past, embedded in
the prehistoric language of symbolism.


I may have jokingly in the past referred to the three elemental
kingdoms as three stages of childhood and been speaking
offhandedly about these life forms.  I am being completely
speculative in discovering their impact on man and would like to
apologize for the lack of any real knowledge of the subject.  I
really have only questions and am trying to expand my knowledge
by analogy, etc.

Our study group is now reading HIERARCHIES AND THE DOCTRINE OF
EMANATIONS by G.  de Purucker and Purucker connects emanation to
evolution, without including any real reference to involution.
In terms of what is written in THE KABALA, emanations and
evolution both encompass life from the mineral kingdom to the
human kingdom.  I suppose this is the sensible thing to do as the
elementals still lie beyond our realm of consciousness but may be
of distinct value in describing the UNCONSCIOUS.

I am still keenly interested in involution and would like to try
to convey the subject as we studied it yesterday.

Evolution is the exertion of an inner life, spirit or soul, upon
matter.  Minerals, plants, animals, and human beings are said to
evolve while in physical existence because they are learning to
respond to the soul energy within.  Elementals however have no
physical plane existence as we know it and are not being
influenced to develop according to an inner guiding principle.
Instead elementals are drawing energy around them through some
form of magnetic attraction.  Until they are able to complexify
enough to maintain a physical form their directed influence is
from without, even if we are speaking of their without as being
an influence generated by the other four kingdoms of nature or
perhaps higher beings of which we are largely unaware.

It is curious that Purucker states that mankind also goes through
a stage of involution when he dies.  Instead of the soul
influencing what man does on earth, the soul attracts to it the
various experiences and capacities, as well as whatever can be
said to make up the various parts of man's terrestrial nature.
The soul receives these energies in a transmuted form and dwells
for a time in a restful state surrounded by new as well as old

If this is true, it really cannot be said that children are
involving and I really never meant to convey this idea except
rather jokingly.  For are they drawing to them and around them
denser and denser matter.  No, it would be rarer and rarer matter
if at all.  Are they under an influence of the soul? Yes, they
are for they are developing characteristics, both those which
they have had in the past and those which they are newly
attempting to acquire.

I do feel like I'm studying this topic alone, so if I make
mistakes I should have to correct them myself and apologize for
erroneous thinking.  It is a dark area, but a little light may go
a long way.

Secondly, I know I was speaking of thoughts as pressuring man in
a sense as well as being pressured by him.  What I don't
understand is why both good and bad thoughts materialize.  What
is the law concerning a thought's readiness to be drawn into
material existence through mankind's actions? Shouldn't a thought
have to fulfill certain basic characteristics before it is
allowed expression physically? Shouldn't it have to be beautiful,
useful, even perfect? If thoughts do go through a refining
process in each being is there a point when it has become more
than potential, but actual? Does this point differ depending on
the level of soul development which you have attained?

First there is the action of the thought upon the physical man.
Second there is the action of the thought on its own plane,
changes to itself and to the thoughts surrounding it, which may
be entirely stimulated from without (the other kingdoms,
especially or exclusively man).  Simply by making a thought
manifest we may be helping it to attain its goal in evolution,
but shouldn't we be more careful judges of when a thought is
qualified to be expressed through our physical actions and not
allow any ugly or sinful actions to result just for their
benefit? Doesn't theosophy help us to do this?

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application