Research reports, articles and reviews on HUNA and related studies, with emphasis on the practical use of the HUNA system, for members of Huna Research Associates.
July – September, 1975
|Huna Research Associates
Dr. E. Otha Wingo, Editor
126 Camellia Drive Cape Girardeau, MO 63701
|The Max Freedom Long Library
Dolly Ware, Curator
1501 Thomas Place Fort Worth, TX 76107
Dear Huna Research Associates:
Put on your Thinking Caps! The featured article in this issue is a philosophical one, correlating the philosophy of Huna with the ancient Greek philosophy of Plato. Space does not allow complete descriptions of the examples and ideas, as well as terms employed, but some notes have been added to the original article in order to help you follow the train of thought, without having to read Plato or refer to a dictionary too often. Of course, if you wish to read the actual allegories referred to, in some translation of Plato’s writings, the discussion here would be all the more meaningful.
The other article may start you thinking in another direction, and hopefully even experimenting by a rather unique method of color therapy which ties in beautifully with Huna concepts.
HUNA PHILOSOPHY AS DIANOIA-DIALECTIC
by James F. Marsfelder (Troy, New York)
(EDITOR’S ROTE: The author of this article was once my student in Greek. He graduated with distinction in philosophy and was particularly interested in Greek philosophy. Recent correspondence with Jim brought Huna to his attention and this set him to thinking about possible correlations between Huna and Platonic philosophy. Here is the result — and maybe it will set you to thinking. — E.O.W.)
In your article entitled “The Three Selves in the Greek New Testament” [Huna Vistas Newsletter #3, Summer, 1972], I was quite impressed with your categorization of the Greek word holocleron into the components spirit, soul, and body. Basically, as I view the world, I tend to agree with your thesis, except for one item. I prefer to translate the word psychikos as mind rather than soul. As you may recall, the word may be translated as “of the soul or life,” or as “mental, opposite to bodily.” I hope to clarify the reasoning behind my preference.
What most captivated my attention were your quotations from MFL’s Recovering the Ancient Magic (1936), viz.: a “knowledge of Oneness;” “The Absolute;” and (most impressive) “God the Absolute is the one Substance to be realized — not described or known. The sign of True Knowledge or Realization is cessation of doubt and therefore of all philosophical discussion.” All these tended to pique my Platonic palate. I could not resist the temptation to attempt a study of the possibility of the appropriateness of the application of HUNA philosophy to Plato’s imagery of the Allegory of the Divided Line (and the related Allegory of the Cave).
The imagery of the Allegory of the Divided Line (and the related Allegory of the Cave) is centered around the relative effects of light and darkness on visibility, as discussed earlier in the Allegory of the Sun. (These myths or allegories are found in Plato’s Republic, 508a-509d; 514f.;506f., Cornford edition. Plato used all three to explain his theory of forms or ideas. The Greek idea is more accurately translated “form” or “pattern” than “idea.” The Divided Line speaks of two levels of thinking, of which the higher is the blueprint or pattern and the lower only a copy. The Sun Allegory presents the sun as a shadow or copy of the real Light (or Good). And in the Cave Allegory, illustrates the fact that what we observe with the five senses is not the “real” world, but only a shadow of form, which is the original pattern on a higher level. EOW.)
The lower part of the Divided Line (an arbitrary line indicating the division of the lower from higher Mind) is illumined for sensible visibility, but the power of a higher source of illumination — the illumination of intelligibility — casts many shadows, immersing the lower part of the line in a kind of darkness. This indicates that at this level, the level of sensibility, things cannot be known as they really are. We can only have a belief, or conjecture, about them, because they are constantly fleeting in and out among the shadows (i.e., they are changing). Thus we have the Physical World of Appearance and the World of Forms, or Reality. The lower level contains images (shadows, reflections) and things or objects (actually copies of the “real” form in the upper level). The upper level of forms is more real than the lower and contains the original pattern. Imagining and belief belong to the lower, thinking and intelligence to the higher.
(The above diagram will help to clarify what is presented in the text. EOW.)
In Aristotelian terminology, the contrast is between the sensible (doxa) and the intelligible (episteme). The word doxa (“to view with the senses”) is an awareness that things happen in a certain way, but not a knowledge of why they happen. The upper part of the line, illumined by the source of intelligibility, is precisely a knowledge of why things happen the way they do. That is episteme (“to know”). It is a knowledge of things as they really are, i.e., in terms of the forms (or laws) of which they are instances.
Doxa is related to the world of senses, where things are continually happening. Episteme is related to what is intelligible, to the “changeless” elements of knowledge.
The question arises, is the intelligible related to the sensible, and if so, in what way? DIALECTIC (Plato’s term for the higher type of thought) is not usually presented in a way which would make such a relation possible. It is pointed out that it is directed toward the source of intelligibility, a moving away from the mere sensible experiencing of the world to “the beginning or principle that transcends assumption… relying on ideas only and progressing through ideas.”
Plato explains that dialectic progresses to its goal through the expansion of hypotheses and might be described as the process of asking better and better questions, dianoia (Plato’s term for lower mentation, which we may assign to the Middle Self), on the other hand, while beginning with the assumption as dialectic does, does not treat the assumption as an hypothesis to be examined and elaborated; rather, it accepts the assumption as a postulate, or starting point, and works out the implications of this postulate into a consistent system of sub-postulates, corollaries and conclusions. Unlike dialectic, dianoia does not move away from the world, but it is in some way related to the world of experience (although the relation itself is an “intelligible” relationship). This gives it a unique position in human knowledge.
The pre-Platonic tradition came to place Reason wholly above (or outside of) the Cosmos. Anaxagoras is supposed to have said: “All other things have a portion of everything, but Mind is infinite and self-ruled, and is mixed with nothing but is alone by itself” (Fragment 12). This is basically a Parmenidean position, which certainly influenced Plato’s notion of the intelligible, i.e., that it must be changeless, necessary and immutable, dialectic is man’s progressive striving after this ideal of intelligibility, i.e., an attempt to come to know what is, in itself, changeless, necessary and immutable. Dianoia, however, although partaking of these qualities of the intelligible in its own way, is intrinsically related to the (in itself) non-intelligible world of experience.
How then are we to view these two precepts — DIANOIA and dialectic? As regards HUNA philosophy, do they have a viable reference point? To answer these questions, consider the construction of two linear progressions. The first shall be termed the Alpha or A progression. In it, the ultimate is the achievement of an “idea” of a concept. It is in this realm that the senses and the Body play major roles. A distinction is made between Body and Mind. The Body is relegated to a lower level. The Body determines whether a perception is valid, but the Mind makes the final judgment.
The A progression is divided into four levels, each contributing to its ascending counterpart until the ultimate is achieved. At the first level, the perceptual material is positioned. The perceptual material is anything which is present in “our world.” The senses receive and relay these perceptions to the Body. At the second level, the Body has received the perceptions and formulates a correct opinion. The perceptions, in order to arrive at a correct opinion, must be first hand and not received “hearsay” via language. (Plato, Ep.vn, 343. See also MFL’s Recovering the Ancient Magic: “There has been as yet in this world no created being who has been able to express by word of mouth the nature of the Absolute.” Language is a very inexact tool for determining judgments and True Knowledge. Language, per se, is abundant with inconsistencies.)
We now advance to level three, or investigation. At this level the individual assimilates all the information he has received up to this point. It is here that he will be most prone to errors. If the Body has received a perception through hearsay, then it is most likely that the investigation will lead to a false judgment.
At level four we arrive at the decision or judgment. This judgment may be true or false. If it be true, the ultimate of the A progression has been accomplished. This ultimate is not the ultimate which is striven for in the Beta or B progression. Instead, it is the “idea” of the ultimate (that is, knowledge).
The juxtaposition of A progression upon B progression is achieved when the idea of the ultimate is achieved. Upon this achievement we advance to the lowest level of B progression.
The lowest level on the B progression is that of material and Body. These two aspects are ineradicable, i.e., one and the same. On this level, on the material side, perception occurs; however, there is a change. Whereas there were two separate levels (1 & 2) in A progression, now they are combined, with Body handling the recognition aspect.
Material and Body combine to form level two — BEING. The individual becomes aware of the Being (i.e., the Mind). The Ideas achieved in the A progression are now refined and honed to perfection. It is at this point that the possibly false judgment is discerned and rejected. The individual no longer relies upon his physical senses. Instead, the Mind is now the predominant factor.
On realization that the Mind is predominant, the person is now prepared to enter level three — thought. This is the level at which “Pure Thought” prevails. The Mind investigates every aspect of the ideas. Perhaps this illustrates Aristotle’s concept of “Mind thinking itself.” Everything is considered and revealed. As the Mind becomes more accustomed to the brilliance of the “Ultimate,” more and more is revealed and investigated.
From level three we advance to level four — THE absolute. This “Absolute” is present in all judgments and it is both being and becoming. At this level, the Mind arrives at its conclusions and formulates its decisions. The decisions concern knowledge; here it is grasped and understood. The Ultimate — True Knowledge — is achieved.
Here then we have dianoia explained in terms of the Alpha progression and dialectic in terms of the Beta progression. In the scheme of the Divided Line, dianoia is to dialectic as Doxa is to Episteme. That is, just as Doxa is, in a sense, a shadow or reflection of Episteme, so dianoia is a reflection or shadow of dialectic. Insofar as the objects which dianoia constructs for itself are universal and changeless, such as the square, or in astronomy, the motion of a heavenly body, dianoia is intellectual knowledge, because it partakes of the absoluteness which characterizes intellectual knowledge. But properly speaking, this absoluteness is artificial, because (although the starting points of any kind of dianoia are considered as absolute) they are in fact only assumptions created by the Body. If the assumptions were ever shown to be false (as they well might be in the continuing process of dialectic), the whole dianoetic system, which had been constructed from them, would also be false (although, in terms of self-consistency the whole system would still be “valid”). This is how dianoia, of its very nature, is only a shadow of true dialectic. The aim of dialectic is to work back to the ultimate, absolute principles of reality in terms of which the whole of the reality, which they underlie, could be understood as it really is. If this ideal were ever attained, then dianoia would become useless, because it is merely an expediency created by man to fill the gaps of a still advancing dialectic. As such, it is relatively necessary to the advance of dialectic, both as a propaedeutic (since it compels man to order his experience of reality as much as he possibly can) and as a spur (since man becomes aware that through dianoia he establishes order in reality, but does not discover the absolute order which is operative in reality).
Returning to the vital question, is HUNA philosophy dianoia and dialectic? I feel compelled to answer in the affirmative. Throughout the writings one discovers the compulsion to attain the Absolute. Returning to a quotation from MFL’s Recovering the Ancient Magic: “Sri Ramakrishna explains that from the conscious state one passes to a superconscious state in which the pattern verities of creation are contacted by the ego… The process of becoming consciously aware of the super-physical pattern-idea realities is one of blending with the pattern ideas… The result of the foregoing position is that the Higher Self alone knows the Higher Self… all facts of the universe — every object, every phenomenon — that comes under creation, preservation and destruction.”
Can there be stronger evidence than the above for an affirmative reply to the question? I think not.
Man has long known that the color of his surroundings affects his attitude, but most of our knowledge about the use of color for healing has been discovered accidentally. Animals instinctively know when to bask in the sun. Plants lean toward the sun as if soaking up as much sunlight as possible. Our bodies too require this same sunlight to maintain health.
As the sun’s rays cut through the earth’s atmosphere, some are blocked out. Those managing to get through make up what we call sunlight. If this sunlight is broken down according to wavelength, the length of the ray determining the color, we have what is called the spectrum. Each color of the spectrum regulates one or more functions of the body. When an organ becomes deficient in a specific color, the balance is disturbed and we become ill. If that color is supplied to the body or organ, we can regain the needed balance and recover. (For more information on the healing effects of sunlight, see John Ott’s book, Health & Light, and my review in Huna Vistas Newsletter No. 13, Jan-Mar 1975.)
In the past, colored light was always beamed directly on the afflicted part of the body. In the last H.V. Newsletter, in a review of MFL’s Psychometric Analysis and the use of the pendulum, I spoke of the aka cord connecting the person with his signature, photograph, etc., called a “sample.” By placing colored light directly on the sample, the aka cord is activated and thus color can be used in absent treatment. The pendulum may also be used for finding the correct color suited for the subject. Using Psychometric Analysis as a basis, HRAs Elizabeth and Bill Finch have experimented with this type of color therapy and are having remarkable results. A report of their methods, experiments, and some of the results will be found in their book, Photo-Chromotherapy (Esoteric Publications, P.0. Box 1529, Sedona, Arizona 86336; 52 pp., paperback, $2.00), available from HRA (add 25¢ for shipping). It is a good place to start the study of color and has practical suggestions for experimentation.
One of the most prominent nutrition writers of our time, Linda Clark, has a new book out entitled The Ancient Art of COLOR THERAPY (Devin-Adair Co., Old Greenwich, Conn., 1975), x + 140 pp. + 5 p. bibliography, $6.95. (Not available from HRA.) As a thorough investigator of natural healing methods, she has surveyed and reviewed the most valuable sources on color, gems and auras, listing those sources so that the reader may also do in-depth study. One method of color therapy she discusses that will interest HRAs is breathing color. Just as we generate mana and build our desired thought-forms, she takes a few deep breaths, visualizes the necessary color around the body and creates the desired results.
Color therapy is a wide field, and an ancient method of healing. It requires more research and experimentation in controlled conditions. Huna has something to offer on the question of how it works. Our own experiments indicate the method has much potential and promise of success in healing.