{ } = word or expression can't be understood
{word} = hard to understand, might be this

...just such a very tragic case. And I think we shouldn't overlook the fact that it is, for many of you, unthinkable. But I think for students in a -- of any serious social order or life, it is something not to be omitted. You cannot just put it at the periphery and say, "Only weaklings or fools commit suicide." It's -- in the heart of our existence as people who can change. And of course change, which we decide to make in our existence, can miscarry.

Mr. Margulies?

(Yes?)

I have -- still have a paper of yours. { }

[tape interruption]

...we dealt with this problem of shame and you may have heard that we have edited, and recorded these lectures, and you may have them now. Mr. Keep has organized a kind of -- of gramophone business on behalf of this. And in the process once more, when we prepare this for publication, these records, you see, of these lectures, we again ran into the fact that there is nowhere in modern thinking a place for shame. That is, it is considered either -- as connected with guilt, so it was something {sicklish}, you see, or it dismissed as something that is a superstition, and ridiculous; or it's explained by anthropological ideas, again, through habits, customs, folklore. Yet everybody practices every day. I mean, every one of you is ashamed, and blushes when you -- I suddenly tell you, "You are a thief" in front of the class, I guess you would blush, which means that you would feel ashamed that I would suppose that you are a thief. Isn't that true?

Now it is very funny that this should nowhere exist today as a topic of serious investigation: where people, in order to live in society, have to be -- is -- ashamed. But we come from this scientific era, as I told you then, and I wish to repeat it -- when everything -- is -- science means to turn everything inside out, make it visible. That's why you have these -- these wonderful papers, Look and See. And -- I don't -- I wonder that they don't have one, Goggles, because you want to see very carefully all that the lady doesn't wear. I yesterday just saw the last -- the last title page of See.

So the -- perhaps it interests you, and I thought I owe you this today, that two quite different -- in two quite different documents, I have found mentioning of shame in -- not at all related to sex, but as a very healthy, necessary thing. And

as you will see, it leads us right into what we are -- have to cope with in the next lessons, because they will put us inder -- under a kind of embarrassment. We cannot speak about real faith and religion without shame. And I cannot cope with this if you do not understand that it is embarrassing to talk in a classroom about secrets. It isn't easy. And perhaps it miscarries.

One is a sermon from St. Augustine, and -- who at this moment in this country is -- is treated as a man with an Oedipus complex. He was a giant, and many of his ideas are still far ahead of our own times. And he has this to say in a sermon on the invasion of the barbarians:

"Try to get in by the narrow door, because your fathers too have entered through this door. And this door -- and now we blush today, and he probably did, too -- of the wound of Christ, of the converted robber has entered, the Jew when he was -- did penitence, and every pagan who is converted. He enters through this narrow door. Out of it, only those leave who are heretics. But the members of the body of Christ serve in unity and integrity under one -- under one tunica -- under one shirt."

And now comes the strange sentence, why I'm reading it:

"Blush, blush, O heretic."

So you see, for St. Augustine, the membership -- and it -- in your club, too, or the -- the belonging to an army -- the man who leaves the membership doesn't do so for reasons. It is not a logical process, as you think most things are in this world, you see. But the one is -- can't do it, because it would make him blush. And the heretic has the effrontery to say, "I do not care for the whole church," you see. "I have my heresy, and that's more important than the membership of the whole."

{Erubesce -- erubesce haeretic). In connection with this, you may be interested that there are even places in St. Augustine where he speaks of God's blushing. God blushes over our ways, because we, after all, are a part of His own life. We are divine. And so when one part of Him leaves Him, He blushes for the whole. Just as He feels wrath or mercy, He also feels that He has to blush. Now that's on the part of the unity of all mankind.

And now comes the very opposite pole, gentlemen, in my other quotation, or opposite quotation. It comes from Edmond Rostand, the author of Cyrano de Bergerac. Who knows Cyrano de Bergerac? Well, I'm delighted. That's the majority. And -- Cyrano, as you know, is the great hero of solitude. His soliloquy is his power. The world doesn't recognize him. He is alone. He is under an incognito.

His wit and genius is stolen from him by MoliŠre and by others. And there he is with his heroic soul, all by himself. And you may say that in the case of Cyrano, you have the masterpiece of modern poetry. It was written in 1898, I think, or 1896 in a time just before the two world wars in which liberalism and the ideas of 1789 said that the ego is the Church. You see, what you have inherited is only an abbreviated ego. The -- the real pride of 19th-century man was that he contained all the elements of life inside himself, so that any one man had the capacities, you see, of being savior, and saint, and prophet, and poet, and artist, and king, and every- -- every man a king, every man a priest, you see. This universality within one man.

Now Edmond Rostand, because he had written this play on -- on Cyrano, entered the academy of Paris, the great academy of the 40 immortals, you know -- and he, of course, as every man who is -- enters this unit -- this place, ha- -- had to give a speech. And in his speech, he said, "There is something beyond the selfconsciousness of the heroic man." That's his...

[tape interruption]

...bends over him, his sweetheart whom he has loved all these years.

(It's translated as "white plume.")

Well, that's all right. Now, it's very good. But she expects him to say, "My...

[tape interruption]

...{{ } de la victoire, et de la domination, parlez { } pardon, pour la { }}.

[tape interruption]

...where you have the Bob Hopes and these -- all these candidates for office in the -- in a democracy, saying, "I am the man..."

[tape interruption]

...Well, {peri-} { }, how would you call it? This -- crown...

[tape interruption]

...to the demand of his heart at this moment. Man is inside all these tis-

sues, all these textures. He is in the context of all the social groups. You can never look at any of these social structures, you see, and say, "This should be dealt with in this way," because at any one moment, you yourself may be forced to change the boundaries between Church and state, for example. The day may come where Americans say, "Our children have to be taught the Bible in school." As long as you know what you're doing, that's all right. But today the discussion is so sterile, because it just means they are two different, you see, visible buildings. But the conflict goes through every ch- -- parent's heart. Obviously, it's a new situation. Formerly, the parents used to belong to a church, you see, and begrudge the state that he got hold of their children. Now the parents belong nowhere. They belong to Mr. John Lewis' union or to the Republican Party, and therefore, what do they offer their children? It's all a dream that they belong to a church. I mean, they may, but their children never real- -- realize it. The -- they -- if they go to -- we -- if I go to a church supper, my child certainly can never understand what it means to be in a church. The church suppers are just idiotic. I mean, these -- this is the last remnants of -- of membership in a church, that you go to a church supper, as you know. And all these -- these -- these rigmaroles, which the -- rif- -- how will you say? -- these raffles we have put -- built around these institutions. Our -- our children no longer know what it means to be in the church from us. We send them to Sunday school. They know -- we are -- they are dumped there so that the ch- -- the parents can go fishing.

So gentlemen, every generation has to re-experience church, state, society, and people all afresh. There are no fixed rules. I cannot tell you anything about how you have to re-create these four institutions, because that depends on what you actually experience about the functioning of these four. If one of them doesn't function, you see, you will have to put the emphasis on re-creating them. But to -- make you believe that there is a church, or there is a society, there are the people, and there is a state -- that's blasphemy, because that excludes your own experience. And many people think they haven't experienced state and Church. But you all have, by the helter-kelter way in which you have lived already, your very great prejudices in this matter. I hope you have. And what I invite you to do, is just make use of this. What time, please?

({ }.)

Now this, this is Number 1, gentlemen, that the family is transparent, and is always more to it than the four people involved, you see. It is always more meaningful, because gentlemen, members of the family represent -- represent, that is, they make present the whole history and the whole expanse of human possibilities. Can you take down then -- very -- take very seriously this word "represent." Since people in the family no longer know it, they -- you don't understand what representative government is. Your government in Washing-

ton represents you. For this reason, you cannot ask him to count -- a thousand letters which he receives from his constituency -- the ma- -- through the mail. This shows the complete degradation of democracy today, that the mail is counted. Because if he represents you with his whole soul and personality, you have delegated the power through your trust that he makes the decision on the spot, because you aren't there. How can you know?

So today, as you know, people don't understand what representative government is anymore. They really think he's the mailman, this poor man there in Washington. He is not. Just as a mother, when she sends her daughter to an aunt to visit in the country, she feels that her daughter must represent the family. That's too late then to reeducate her. And if she writes letters, "Behave, behave," do you think that the daughter will enjoy this? She has to trust this daughter that she will make -- make a good impression. And it's far too late to do anything on the spot and say, "Now, do you go to bed in time?" and -- and so on, by letter. I mean, doesn't help. She's there.

(What does the family represent as a whole?)

Good question. Can't be answered. What does it represent, gentlemen? It represents the embodiment of the whole of creation in one space and one time. It points -- the mother connects you with Adam and Eve, with the first day of creation. The daughter connects this family with the last judgment day, with the whole selection of the human race. What is -- should the grandchild look like? It depends on her choice, on Dorothy Q. The father represents the whole expanse of space as far as it should be fought off and resisted. That is, the deserts, and the oceans, and the flood, and the fire, and the earthquake, the dangers. And the sons, the sense of conquest, of the pioneer, of the spirit of -- by our ideas, we unify, we -- and conquer, we take advantage, we exploit the whole cosmos. We study it.

So, gentlemen, space and time, as given to man, are represented in the family as realized, as fulfilled at this very moment. The state, the Church, the people, and the society are the ways in which this strange race on this earth after all -- makes this earth, you see, his own -- its own, appropriates it, and fulfills in every one moment that demand, the command of creation which is due today.

Therefore the family represents the cosmic order, that what is man -- man is for. Now what is man? Man is not for to live. Man is not for to die -- there to die. But man is this strange, one being that by perpetual change can continue. All the other races, because they want only to stay pu- -- stand put, an a- -- horse is a horse, an ox is an ox, a rose is a rose. They all go to pot. Man never is what he is, because he is people and Church. And the Church is this strange revolutionary

institution which has the greatest transformer of mankind in the center of its altar, and therefore tells everybody, "You cannot just live as a member of the Church. You have to refound the Church, as Jesus did."

The -- you see, the Ch- -- we have today a world order in which every member of these various things -- society, state, people, and Church -- is not as in pagan times, asked to state what he is. But he has a model before him as a church has in the case of her own founder, you see, who challenges every mere churchgoer on Sunday to do a little better, you see. You cannot be a Christian by just going Sundays to church, because the model which is put there before you, the inviter, so to speak, your host, you see, is a man who did not simply go to the temple in Jerusalem, but stepped abo- -- beyond it, you see. Broke it down and rebuilt it in three days -- as the New Testament expresses it. But that's only saying that anyone who belongs to any one of these four orders today, you see, cannot leave them as he finds them. The daughter must not -- write poetry like Emily Dickinson. She must marry, which is a big order nowadays, you see. The -- as you know, they don't marry; they just get divorced.

You can miss out on all these points, very much so. But the tremendous world in which we live, gentlemen, that's what we call our era -- that's why we are civilized people, that's -- we speak of Western man, that's why we have the "white man's burden," that's why there's real progress in the world -- is that these four forms are all conceived by us as constantly changing. Every one of us -- be it son or daughter, father or mother, isn't quite to the end of day. How did I define a father? A father is a man who can change his mind -- from love to his children.

So down to his last day, the poor man, you see, has to stay on the beat, you see, and he has to change. This is of course not pagan, you see. That is something very specific. But we know enough of biology to know that this is the problem of living, of keeping alive. The -- who asked the question about representing?

So gentlemen, the two axes of space and time are represented in every one family. And there is a great competition that any one family tries to encompass that point of coordinates -- the system of coordinates which at this very moment binds together all the times and binds together all the localities. The more you can do this, you see -- if you can invite an Australian, and a -- and a Bolshevik at the same time to your house, you see, here, with hospitality, your -- your house is spiritually functioning, for example, you see. And if you can keep to the oldest prayers of the human race, the Psalms, you see, and at the same time allow novelty and fashion to enter your home, you have represented the secret of life in the midst of your home. And if you overstress any one aspect of it, the whole --

the unit explodes, you see.

Any one of these features is not interesting. They are only in agreement, you see, of any fruit. If you have just fashion in this house, it's not a home, it's not a family. That's just fashion. If you have just bigotry, and superstition in the house, and 10 masses a day, you see, said by the priest, you have just the Church, but not the family, you see.

The family must be able to reach out in space and time. And now we come to this, gentlemen. All we -- you -- here today, this is -- never has -- of course never been under- -- had to be -- never undertaken that we built the truth of the world, the philosophy, the theology around the family. Today we must. For the last thousand years, for the last 5,000 years, gentlemen, people have treated the problem of father and son in philosophy, and the problem of son -- daughter and mother in religion. That is, if you wanted to -- to go to a theological course, the people talked to you about original sin. That's the beginning of time, about the creation of the world. And they s- -- talked to you about the last judgment, and about the -- the Hell and -- and purgatory. That is the end of time.

That is, all women -- and everything built so to speak, up for women as religion to this day has been con- -- interested only in the time span from the beginning to the end. And people have, you see, threatened us and said, "Think of original sin. Think of Adam's fall. Think of Christ's crucifixion. And think of the hell -- brim -- hell and brimstone, and where you do go in your afterlife."

That is, the -- if you don't make the family representative of the whole of life, you get two hostile groups. You get the religionists, who talk to you about this expanse, here. Beginning and end. That's the content of theology. Here on this axis, you get theology. And then you talk, father and son, you talk science. You talk philosophy.

And so we have a department of religion, and a department of philosophy, and they have nothing to say to each other. They just cope with things that nowhere meet. I can't stand that anymore. When I was young, I found this state of affairs all over the world, you see. One group talking philosophy; that is, talking about cosmic problems, you see, about gravity, about causation, about physics, about chemistry, about mathematics. These are all things in space. These are all things -- new ideas of sons, and old ideas of economists. This is always what I have, and what I should get out of the world. Atom fission, for example. Property. All these things.

And then the -- I went -- go to the priests, and I go to the clergymen, and they tell me about my bad conscience, and they tell me that -- everything will be

visited, that I have to confess my sins, and that there will be a judgment day, and that we all are sinners, you see, and must become saints, and that's again to the exclusion of all geography, and all politics, and every -- piece struck of genius or invention. And I'm again hungry because I -- that's very nice for my inner man, but I think -- and I don't know what I have to do in this world when I go to these ministers, you see, and obviously, they don't know.

So gentlemen, the separation of theology and philosophy can fall to the ground if you would begin to understand that the family contains both. We must have some experience in which the unity of philosophy and theology, the unity of time and space is experienced. When people be- -- came to the schools, you see, down to 1890, or 1900, or 1930, people would tell them in the -- here and -- the professors, "You have to become professionals. You now have to become men." So they talked to them philosophy. At home, they had been, however, spellbound by prayers, and religion. The expectation of the second coming of Christ, the Latter-day Saints, the Seven-Days' Adventists, you see. The Sabbath of the Jews, the prophecy, everything is in time, you see, before and after. And so you get this idea of the life hereafter in all these things.

And they -- so you have this cleavage between the secular knowledge, which is for the men -- man, in their professions, their undertakings. Then you get the -- the knowledge of the soul, of the women's part in all of us, you see, by which we try to solve this great riddle of what we are for in this world, really, and what are we dying for, and what are we living for.

Now gentlemen, you have now perhaps the power to understand what I have done in this course. I have put you in the middle of this quandary from the very beginning. I have tried to show you that whether you play, or whether you study, or whether you work, or whether you are -- go to war, or whether you make love, you are always admitting this paradox of the four potentials of every human being. Can you see this? They only make sense if they are together. Nobody can just hold onto the past. Nobody can only defend, you see, and -- or aggress. And nobody can just be revolutionary, and fashionable, and fanciful, and sensational.

If you have the four { } of the normal family, it must be a unity of theology and philosophy. And if you have the four d- -- orgies of devotion, you get superstition, you get sensation, you get plague, and you get war. And these are the four diseases of the human race. If you have religion only, you live by -- by superstition and sensation, revivals, for example, or miracles, you see. You can also put "miracles," here. It's the same thing. "Sensation" is just the secular word for "miracle."

If you get only the men, like the old Frenchmen now who must always have war, because they -- the only thing they -- say will be "no," you see. "No. No. I want to have what I have," you see. And if you get the sons, you would always have play, because they never -- he'll never have -- as far as we are boyish, we never account for the course. We always spend more than we -- than we really can spend. That is, we play. We always think we have a surplus of time, a surplus of means, you see. And we waste.

So this is then my -- today -- for today is enough, gentlemen. I have built up to you -- brought you down to this fact that if you include your sisters, and your mothers, and your daughters into your thinking, and I think the time has come where you have to do this, you mustn't be ashamed of this -- that's your -- our great honor, after all, that we do think as though the woman which we meet and the sister whom we have can be in some way treated as the same human being, with the same power of a -- of a soul of our own.

As soon as you encompass the other sex and the other age group into your thinking, you must know that the division of theology and philosophy is nonsense. Women and men cannot cope with each other without religion. And men cannot work together without science. And to say one is right is just utter nonsense. You can only desist as a soldier in Germany from raping a girl because you believe that she -- and your sister have something in common. Otherwise you would just treat her as a -- as a tool of your own lust. You have to respect in her something eternal which you have learned to respect because you have grown up in a family where the other sex and the other generation were just as human as you are. You have to learn that. We don't know this by nature, Sir, gentle- -- you see. This has to be brought home to us, very carefully. And as you know, in wartime it is very often forgotten.

The fact that it is forgotten -- but can I over look this? Here in this nice place of Dartmouth, all these great things of raping, for example, are never taken seriously. But gentlemen, this is very serious. You cannot rape a girl, because as soon as you have ever experienced a cousin, or a sister, or a coed, that is, a girl whom you have met, you see, in the peace of some family atmosphere, then you know that she has to say "yes." You cannot violate her faith in meeting you as a human being. Isn't that true? You don't take this so easily for granted. Because as you know, there have been hundred thousands of cases in Europe where -- and in Japan, and in Korea, where this was -- has not functioned. Two days ago it was again, that there were several American soldiers now indicted by the Japanese courts, you see, because they had raped girls. How can it happen? Well, it can very simply happen, when you go on with having only the science and philosophy as your guides. They don't tell you anything about not raping. They would recommend it.