1939 · CLOSE READING
Eight Lectures on Yoga
Eight Lectures on Yoga (1939), PDF p. 67
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
replace my magical apparatus. I would take the table by my bed, or
stones roughly piled, for my altar. My candle or my Alpine Lantern was
my light. My ice-axe for the wand, my drinking flask for the chalice, my
machete for the sword, and a chapati or a sachet of salt for the pantacle
of art! Habit soon familiarised these rough and ready succedanea. But I
suspect that it may have been the isolation and the physical hardship
itself that helped, that more and more my magical operation became
implicit in my own body and mind, when a few months later I found
myself performing in full operations involving the Formula of the
Neophyte (for which see my treatise Magick) without any external
apparatus at all.
10. A pox on all these formalistic Aryan sages! Unless one wants to be
very pedantic, it is rather absurd to contend that this form of ritual forced
upon me, first by external and next by internal circumstances, was
anything else but a new form of Asana, Pranayama, Mantra-Yoga, and
Pratyahara in something very near perfection; and it is therefore not
surprising that the Magical exaltation resulting from such ceremonies was
in all essential respects the equivalent of Samyama.
On the other hand, the Yoga training was an admirable aid to that
final concentration of the Will which operates the magical ecstasy.
11. This then is reality: direct experience. How does it differ from the
commonplace every-day experience of sensory impressions which are so
readily shaken by the first breath of the wind of intellectual analysis?
Well, to answer first of all in a common-sense way, the difference is
simply that the impression is deeper, is less to be shaken. Men of sense
and education are always ready to admit that they may have been
mistaken in the quality of their observation of any phenomenon, and men
a little more advanced are almost certain to attain to a placid kind of
speculation as to whether the objects of sense are not mere shadows on a
screen.
I take off my glasses. Now I cannot read my manuscript. I had two
sets of lenses, one natural, one artificial. If I had been looking through a
telescope of the old pattern I should have had three sets of lenses, two
artificial. If I go and put on somebody else's glasses I shall get another
kind of blur. As the lenses of my eyes change in the course of my life,
what my sight tells me is different. The point is that we are quite unable
to judge what is the truth of the vision. Why then do I put on my glasses
to read? Only because the particular type of illusion produced by wearing
them is one which enables me to interpret a prearranged system of
hieroglyphics in a particular sense which I happen to imagine I want. It
tells me nothing whatever about the object of my visionwhat I call the
paper and the ink. Which is the dream? The clear legible type or the
indecipherable blur?
12. But in any case any man who is sane at all does make a distinction
between the experience of daily life and the experience of dream. It is
true that sometimes dreams are so vivid, and their character so
persistently uniform that men are actually deceived into believing that
Page provenance & review flags
Stable page ID: 11ea06f5df920a5b4a5d7e16:p00067
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.