In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. May the Spirit of the Lord Jesus enlighten the eyes of our heart and strengthen us in his love. Amen. So this will be our last talk this evening. And I thought I'd speak to you about a very fundamental orientation of monastic life. It has to do with transformation. The monastic spirituality from its inception has been conceived as a process of transformation. As a result, it's very dynamic in character, which is not the way it looks to people on the outside. I remember when I thought of becoming a monk, I thought the biggest trial I would have would be the routine and boredom, you know, after a couple of years.

[01:09]

But it doesn't work that way. That's too static a way of viewing the monastic enterprise. the opposite is the case, in fact. It's very dynamic in character because of their concern for a true and full involvement of the whole person in the process of being transformed so as to become conformed to Christ. Many of the influential mystics and thinkers of the early church concern themselves with understanding as fully as possible the workings of the interior life. They developed an anthropology on which to base their teachings on the spiritual life. Only a few of these, with great refinement of observation, came to appreciate that among the faculties of the soul that assume an increasingly significant function as one advances in the way of the spirit are the spiritual senses.

[02:18]

The earliest of these writers and the most creative would seem to have been, again, Origen. While he was not himself a monk, few thinkers have been more influential on the impact of their writings on monastic spirituality. He lived before St. Anthony and before there was monasticism the way we think of it in terms of separation from the world. Besides, he was probably the equivalent of a dean of a big college president of a catechetical institute, something like that, the Institut Catholique Paris, because Alexandre was analogous to Paris in those days. He was the first to articulate a formal doctrine of the whole of the five spiritual senses as such.

[03:24]

In a recently rediscovered work, he elaborated a very broad theory of the correspondences between the inner and the outer man that prepared the ground for his views on the inner senses. He bases himself on the Pauline doctrine of the two men. Here's how he puts it. Well, first of all, Paul had said this. In Colossians, Paul writes, no longer lie to one another, putting off the old man with his acts and putting on the new. The man who is renewed in the knowledge according to the image of him who created him. So that's St. Paul. And Origen concludes from this passage that each of us consists of two men. each having a correspondence with the other. Here's his comment. For just as the exterior man corresponds to the interior man as like named, so is the case with its members.

[04:33]

We can assert that each member of the exterior man is found under the same name in the interior man. The exterior man has eyes. The interior man also is said to have eyes, and so on. He goes through the senses that way. And observing the divine precepts, we acquire, in the order of the spirit, a more penetrating vision. The eyes of the interior man are more penetrating than our physical eyes. This thought is elaborated in considerable detail for each of the bodily senses, hearing, taste, touch, But in addition, for other bodily parts, it's kind of quaint at times, the way he says, they're bones of the spiritual man, as well as eyes and ears. When Jeremiah cries out that his intestines are in pain, he refers to the intestines of the heart, which we also feel when the church suffers in childbirth, he says.

[05:42]

When Isaiah refers to those who have lost their heart, he doesn't mean their physical heart, obviously. He refers to the spiritual heart, not the bodily. Karl Rahner considered this doctrine of origin, insofar as it dealt with the spiritual senses, to be of considerable importance for the spiritual life and for a fuller understanding of the history of spirituality. In fact, his first major publication in 1932, he was still a student, was precisely on this topic, on Origin's Doctrine of the Five Spiritual Senses. It's found in Revue d'Essai Tique et Mystique. The runner introduces his essay with some helpful observations concerning the expression, spiritual senses, which has persisted in use into modern times. First, he observes that there is a necessity for anyone who attempts to describe spiritual experience to make use of similes based upon spiritual experience.

[06:53]

There's no other source from which to derive the kind of language requisite for communication with human persons, he says. And in fact, throughout the centuries of the Christian era, Spiritual authors have spoken of their inner life in terms of sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell. This mode of the five spiritual senses and origin is derived from both the New and the Old Testaments. It's interesting that he saw Proverbs 2.5 as an explicit affirmation of their existence. The Greek text that he cites, however, is not, doesn't exist today. And it's not in the Hebrew. But it's probably, he was really the first great textual critic. So he probably had found a version of the Greek translation that had this

[08:00]

text, which it says, you discover the divine sense of perception. So as often happened, he took those words very seriously. What is this divine sense of perception? This sense, however, unfolds, he writes, in various individual faculties, site for the contemplation of immaterial forms. This sense for the divine was discovered by the prophets." So that's his comment on that interesting text, the divine sense of perception. The New Testament text, he cites, is taken from the epistle of the Hebrews. It's often stimulated discussion by preachers and exegetes. Hebrews 5, 14, solid food is for the perfect.

[09:02]

Those who have by habit trained their senses for the discernment of good and evil. So it's possible to train interior senses to discern distinguished between good and evil. Origen's interpretation of this text differs from other commentators who see in these words a reference to the faculty of moral discernment, quite distinct from the spiritual sense of taste. Few perhaps will agree with Arjun that this text serves as a solid demonstration of the validity of his theory of spiritual senses, but it seems to me that there is a real basis for it. There's an analogy here, as I see it, with the functioning of our bodily senses, which is of considerable interest for the life of prayer and of ministry.

[10:05]

The external senses function with comparative rudeness and those persons who have not disciplined them in the course of mastering some skill are applied art. You see this in many different forms, whether it's analyzing a literary text, a painting, that a painter, a well-trained painter can see things in a painting that's lost on most of us, can tell things from the brush stroke as well as the colors and so on, and different people For example, musicians can be trained to distinguish notes that are lost on the majority of us. I remember when, back in the old days at Gethsemane, we had people like Dame de Broquet and one or two of the others from Salem come over and teach.

[11:12]

And one of them, it wasn't De Roquet, it was one of the great experts in the chant, was listening to some singing there on records with De Roquet and some others, and he stopped them. He said, they're singing flat. And the others, who were also experts, missed it. But he had heard that, and so they replayed it, and they saw he was right. Mozart did that. He was traveling once, Dresden or someplace, and he knew they were going to play one of his symphonies. and were practicing for it in the afternoon, so he dropped in, they didn't know who it was. He was a very unprepossessing gentleman. And he's sitting there listening to them, and all of a sudden he jumps up and shouts, why did you play a D flat instead of D sharp? So our senses can be trained to perceive things that are lost

[12:22]

on others who haven't trained them, even physically. And one of the most remarkable cases I know of was a German eye surgeon in the 30s who devised a new operation, whether it was a retinal operation, I forget what it was, so that he was able to operate, I think it was a series of about eight people who had never seen in their life And so after the first one, he opens up the bandages, and he thought the person would see the way he saw. But what he found was that although the person could see, he couldn't discriminate any objects. Everything was a blur until he was taught of what was out there, and then he could see it.

[13:26]

And this came as a surprise to him, and it surprised me too. I always thought you just see it, it's there, but our very sight is learned by training, by putting words on things, and colors too. It was sort of a gray blur is all they could describe at first. So it's interesting how, in a way, sight seems to be the most objective of the senses, but in fact, a great deal goes on when we see and name, recognize any object. And of course, emotion, affection, attitudes, influence, what we see, how we perceive different situations. There's a famous course that's studied in law school called Evidence. I read a book on it once, very interesting.

[14:30]

And what is admissible as evidence? There are rules of evidence that every judge has to know. But this professor who was teaching evidence arranged one day for this experiment. All of a sudden, in the middle of his class, seven people burst into the room, shouting. And one had a book, another had a rock. They all did something different. There were four men and three women in this group, and 19 students. So after about two minutes of doing this, running around the room, shouting, doing different things, it was all pre-planned, they ran out. And then he told them, this was planned. And so your homework, or your test, is to write up what happened.

[15:35]

And he got 19 different versions. that some thought there were five men and two women, others five women and two men. Some thought that, you know, the one who had the stone threw it on the desk and the book was on the floor. It was rather sobering when you consider how easily that is. And I just ran into that the other day with someone who had such a different version of some event than somebody else who told me about it, that it was perplexing. But that's going on all the time. Even as you listen to me and I perceive you, our basic attitudes enter into our experience. They're learned. It's not just a, what I call, the objective functioning. Well, that's true even much more of our interior senses, obviously.

[16:41]

Psychiatry, in a way, is built on that, at least the best kind of the most useful kind of depth psychology, where you can hear people saying that they don't realize they're communicating. If you listen with what they call the third ear, And I've been able to do that sometimes, not often enough. And it's very convincing when you can. You can hear people conveying messages. They might be saying something quite different, but what they really mean is, I resent the fact that you don't do more for me. They might be thanking you. you know, thanks for trying or something. Or that I want you to show more affection for me, or you're awfully cold.

[17:43]

Whereas what they're talking about might be something very different, but that's what they're really feeling and communicating, but they don't realize it. But if you know how to listen, you can pick that up and then use it for their advantage. Why not? This is what's eating you. You get resentful if people don't give you enough attention. I just dealt with a superior last week who consulted me about one of her nuns, and she felt that the problem came from Her problem with this nun came from the fact that the nun wanted more attention than this peer could give her. But she never told her that, but that's what she communicated without stating it. So the senses then can be trained, and the ascetic life is really honored

[18:49]

When it's undertaken well, it seems to me, that's why I'm talking about it, it's honored to this training and cultivating and bringing to its active potential, I might say, developing its potential, of our capacity to experience spiritual realities. St. Augustine spoke about this in his confessions. What is it that I love when I love you? It's not the beauty of a body. nor the fittingness of time, nor the brilliance of light, so welcome to these eyes, nor the sweet melodies of all kinds of songs, nor the aromas of flowers, ointments and perfumes, not sweet cakes and honey, nor lovely limbs to be embraced.

[19:53]

It is not these I love when I love you, O God, and yet I love a certain light, and a certain voice, and a certain odor, and a certain food, and a certain embrace when I love my God. It is the light, the voice, the sweet odor, the food, and the embrace of my interior man, where light shines on my soul, which has no place, and where there is a sound that time does not snatch away, and where there is a sweet odor which the breeze does not scatter, and where there is a savor that eating does not diminish." Beautiful passage. In the course of the centuries, this doctrine was often referred to in connection with spiritual experience by authors dealing with prayer and the interior life, only in passing, however, without any intent to give a further development to it.

[20:58]

The Cistercians of the 12th century often referred to the spiritual senses with conviction. A particularly moving passage is found of William St. Terry's Commentary on the Canticle, where he writes, Illuminating grace is the virtue of all virtues, and the light of good works, without which even virtues are without effect, and good works have no good fruit, or if on occasion they should seem to have some, yet they are without vigor. they give no cheer, they lack the oil of joy, they teach no unction, they have no flavor of divine sweetness, no odor of eternity, no efficacious experience of the spiritual senses. In earlier work, William had developed a more elaborate doctrine of the spiritual senses, as such a considerable length, becoming the first author since the origin. to evolve a consistent and rather complete system.

[22:02]

So from the third century to the twelfth, the system of the spiritual senses, not the individual senses, but as a system was sort of in abeyance, sort of overlooked. But here's what William wrote in, I think it's the Enigma of Faith. For just as the body has its five senses, by which it's joined to the soul, with life mediating the union, so also the soul has its five senses, by which it is joined to God, with charity mediating this union. So it is that the apostle says, do not be conformed to this world, but be reformed. in the newness of your sense." Again, he too quotes Saint Paul. That you might prove that the will of God is good and pleasing and perfect.

[23:08]

Here he shows that through the bodily senses we grow old and are conformed to this world, but through the senses of the mind, William continues, we are renewed in the knowledge of God, in newness of life, according to the will and good pleasure of God. He then goes on to describe in particular, and with considerable ingenuity, each of those spiritual senses. He has about, I think it's about five pages on it, and its relation to various loves, dwelling extensively on sight, which he associates with divine love. Here are his words. Divine love is compared to vision, for vision is the principal sense. Just as among all the affections, divine love has the chief place. From the sight of the eyes, all the other senses are said to see, whereas only vision actually does so. For we say, feel and see, taste and see, and so on for the other senses.

[24:15]

Try this and see what you think of it. put this on and see how it fits. As he developed his teaching further in the course of time, William describes the manner in which the functioning of the spiritual senses is experienced by the contemplative in the course of higher stages of the monastic search for union with God, and gives an explanation of the experience that is at once psychologically and theologically satisfying, I think. The bride was sitting, cast back on herself, waiting for the return of the spouse, she writes, having a pledge of the spirit that he will soon return, weeping, desiring that he should return. And suddenly she seems to herself to hear first what she does not see, and to sense with her interior sense what she does not understand. the presence of the divinity.

[25:17]

And thus she exclaims, the voice of my beloved, all the senses of the faithful soul grow cheerful. She eagerly goes to meet him as he comes leaping to her, that is, hastening, seeing him coming to her, she recollects herself so as to receive him, sensing him, drawing near and standing behind the wall. So there are a whole series of people after William, and that same period, the 12th century, who speak similarly of these senses. Bernard is one. He treated at some length the way in which the various kinds of love are related specifically to the five spiritual senses. He makes the following observation in the course of an interesting sermon that has been little remarked upon. There is therefore life, truth, sense, and charity of the soul.

[26:20]

There is, if you observe carefully to be found, a variegated love that is perhaps divided into five kinds corresponding to the five senses of the body. Like William, Berner, too, analyzes the various senses and relates them to the distinct love relationships, thus indicating the fittingness of considering one type of love more suited to its particular sense. William's discussion of this teaching is by far the more developed, though. It's characteristically detailed and analytical, giving every indication that it is the more original, and irate in many of the details. The two friends may well have discussed those matters among themselves prior to their writing about them for their many points of contact between the two accounts. Baldwin and Ford, in England, who is also a Cistercian abbot in the 12th century, is another of the very few who dealt formally with a rather extensive treatment of the doctrine of the five senses.

[27:27]

He very probably was familiar with the passage from Augustine cited above and was influenced by it. All the Cistercians seem to have studied Augustine very carefully, as well as correctly the Great and Origen. Surprising, how many manuscripts of origin were found in Cistercian monasteries in the 12th century. Baldwin also may have known William's work, or more likely St. Bernard's treatment of the same topic. Here's what he has to say about it. When it is wonderfully united to God by the love of obedience, the soul lives and senses in him and by him. And it draws a sort of analogy with the things it knows through the bodily senses. Thus, by the grace of a most inward inspiration, it senses God within itself and touches Him spiritually by faith, smells Him by hope, tastes Him by charity, hears Him by obedience, and sees Him by contemplation.

[28:43]

The next time we find this theme taken up and integrated into a spirituality is in the first half of the 13th century in the Lowlands. A Beguine, Hedevich, who wrote in Medieval Dutch, had read this section on the spiritual senses in a book by William of St. Thierry. There's an article in Monts Haesterlijk that preached this. The Jesuits studied medieval Dutch mystics and published on it. They were strongly influenced by the Cistercians, by the way. She was a Beguine. And so in the book on the nature and dignity of love, where William wrote on the spiritual senses rather than on any faith. She had read William and followed her closely as she elaborates her own teaching on the mutual influence of reason and love.

[30:00]

She puts this in a letter of hers. The power of sight, she writes, that is created as natural to the soul is charity. This power of sight has two eyes, love and reason. Reason cannot see God except in what he is not. Love rests not except in what he is. Reason has its secure paths by which it proceeds. Love experiences failure, but failure advances it more than reason. Reason instructs love, and love enlightens reason." You can tell she has quite a wit. Put things together that way. This utilization of Williams' work has been demonstrated quite conclusively and indicates that his own views on the matter, though not widely influential, were appreciated by another great mystic and gifted poet.

[31:07]

Dutch language even, although almost totally unknown in America. In fact, even in Dutch literature, she was pretty well unknown until some recent discoveries of some manuscripts. So another original treatment of this theme was provided a little later in the Byzantine world by Nicolaus Gabasillus, a lay theologian, 14th century. He relates his doctrine of the spiritual senses to the sacraments, which are the source of the operations of the spiritual senses. He was a great liturgist. Yes, you probably are familiar with his writings on the liturgy and the life of Christ. I think they're his two main works. He teaches that only those who cultivate their spiritual senses will be received into the light that is life.

[32:18]

So it's an important basic theme in his view. Whether people talk about it or not, cultivating the senses is extremely important. essential," he says. He views this world as a workshop in which we train our senses to perceive the divine realities and prepare the wedding garment which we shall wear at the banquet of the spouse. There's a lot more to be said about it. I don't want to be too long tonight. And I think it is fruitful to give a good deal of reflection to it, but you don't see a lot written on it. Rauner is the one who's done most. He later wrote an article dealing with Saint Bonaventure and the spiritual senses, because Bonaventure, after William of St.

[33:19]

Thierry, although Rauner didn't realize it, William had also written on it. Bonaventure is one of the few who had developed the doctrine of the five spiritual senses. And Rahner published that in his Theological Investigations. He has that article, and the one, too, on origin was revised and sort of summarized also in his theological investigations. St. Edward, without referring to the spiritual senses explicitly, tells of the usefulness, even the necessity, of a knowledge of self at the level of relationships, as well as of their roots in the psyche,

[34:19]

in his extensive analysis of the various kinds of love. He had become very conscious of the need for a very concrete and detailed self-knowledge and wrote of it quite deliberately. He introduces his lengthy thorough study of the various sources of love and its kinds with the following comment. Now I want first of all to explore the hidden recesses of my own conscience so that this attachment may not trick me. if I happen to be ignorant of its cause and origin. And that same principle is why it's helpful to study the spiritual senses. The more we understand them, the less likely we are to be led astray by them, and the more effectively we can develop. In our own time, Merton appreciated very much the importance of this doctrine.

[35:24]

His whole spirituality was like that of these fathers, a very dynamic one. What that means is that it's not enough to adapt to monastic life, so that I think it's important to give out this doctrine also in a visit. and I have spoken about this to the novices recently, so that they understand there's more to monastic life and formation than adapting to what amounts to the subculture of our usages in liturgy and so on. That's essential, but it's only a beginning. And what's more important is this inner transformation. Merton rediscovered the fundamental role of this dynamic concept of monastic life and became its most prominent spokesman in our time.

[36:32]

Repeatedly, he emphasized the need to preserve and stress those practices which the tradition has always considered essential for the attainment of this goal of recovering the likeness to Christ through transformation. Metamorpholo is the word that St. Paul uses. To cite one instance of many in his diary entry for September 6, 1948, Merton describes his sense of restlessness and inner conflict. arising largely from the consequences of the prominence that his recently published autobiography had brought him. There was a pain in the neck after a while. His reflections on this situation are an attempt to clarify his interior vision of his vocation as a monk, because he says there he was sort of confused.

[37:33]

by the whole business, getting so much attention and so on. So he wrote, to make a rule, the whole meaning of my existence is not enough. To make an order, a spiritual tradition, the center of my life, is not enough. Contemplation is not enough. By itself, it's not enough of an ideal. The complete gift of myself to Christ, transformation, total simplicity and poverty, these are some of the things that I need." And he really meant that. And that was the tone of his teaching, I would say. It's important that we remember that love supplies the energy that brings about the transformations which are required for the fashioning of the new man in his maturity.

[38:39]

Again, it's in Saint Paul that we find this point made. He states in his epistle to the Ephesians that he makes it clear that while in baptism we're created anew in Christ, yet achieving the full stature of mature manhood in Christ is the work of an ongoing movement, a growth in the spirit of Jesus. And that growth takes place under the energy generated by charity. Here's what he says, Ephesians chapter 4, And he gave some to be apostles, others prophets, others evangelists, others pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints in view of the work of service, for the building up of the body of Christ, so that we might no longer be children tossed about and carried away by every wind of teaching and the craftiness of men,

[39:47]

and their malicious deceitfulness of error. Rather, we are to practice the truth in charity, so as to grow up in all ways in Him who is the head Christ." So, it seems to me that understanding monastic life in this perspective from the beginning as the ideal, but at least at as early a stage of our monastic life as possible, puts us in a position to go about using the usages, the practices, and the various teachings found in the traditions in a more efficacious and more useful way, rather than than imposing things on ourselves exteriorly, cultivating this discretion and discernment that comes from seeing into the mystery of Christ with greater insight with the eyes of the Spirit.

[41:05]

And that's what Saint Benedict calls on us to do, to seek to know God's truth in the deifying light which is possible only to the eyes of the Spirit. So I consider this particular doctrine one of the important perspectives to create as far as possible in our monastic communities. And to do that, emphasizing the cultivation of the interior senses is certainly a major contribution. So we'll leave it at that. That's not wrong or right.

[42:16]

Right. Yeah, that's of course it could have gone about the wrong way, but the The importance of discernment is stressed in this. Actually, I have a whole series. I'm giving a seminar this June in Lilienfeld in Austria on discernment, and this is part of it. I didn't stress that here, but what you say is a very important point. And discerning what is the The most useful thing for me to work on in the spiritual life at this time is one of the reasons why we should get familiar with our own feelings, our own inner structures, our own deeper attitudes, so that we don't get off the track, get isolated or solipsistic.

[43:32]

come hard to live with, or harder than is inevitable. Sometimes it does seem that people whom God calls to a more full interior life do have to pass through periods when they are difficult to live with. I certainly was, although I don't know that I'm called to all that deep a life. I knew that I was being difficult and felt there was nothing I could do about it. But for a time, I've worked on it since. Now I'm afraid I'm getting too soft. I think, yes, this one would be right. I gave that at Genesee. Because as I say, and recently I talked to a novice about it, because I think just being aware that there's more to monastic life than adapting or following the rules and so on is essential.

[44:49]

And Merton was very good at communicating that. He had a strong sense for the importance of living from the depths of the heart, and what's good at being concrete about that. Yes, that quote I gave from him, it's in a summary, see there's seven volumes of the diary, but then Jonathan Mondaldo and brother Patrick Hart went through it and did an excellent job on creating a single volume, you know, by selecting, I think you've got it here in your bookstore. Yeah. Oh yes.

[45:50]

Well that's, if you get just one volume, that's the one to get. I've got the reference here. need my glasses to find it. But that is certainly an important, the most important of his journals, I would say, because it goes through the whole of his life. Where did I put that? Oh yeah, I think I've seen this one. Yeah, it's called The Intimate Merchant. Are you okay? That is published, oh, I don't have that here. I think it's in San Francisco. It's published in San Francisco.

[46:54]

It's published by the same The company that published all of his diaries, yeah. But it's entitled The Internet Murder. It's a very good selection. Now we have time for a little cookies and a little spirit. Do you want some cookies? Yeah, she certainly was kind of the outstanding... Anyway, I had a great difficulty with her. I thought that was very hard. It was awful. learn a journey for someone to go through. He didn't have voters on his side. Knowing him, he allowed himself to build his family and people like that.

[47:58]

And realize that he seemed to be complaining all the time. But then I only realized later that that he cut it of a certain one guy, that he went 360 degrees and came back with himself and found the fault in himself. Well, he told me once that that book needs to be rewritten, he said, but it no longer belongs to me, which I think is true. There's still many people who are converted by it or who become religious because of it. I don't know, I've met him all over the world. Actually, oh he did, yeah. He had a brilliant memory in mind. But that book, the manuscript, the original manuscript, I think was like 750 pages. And that exists.

[49:03]

I think there's a copy of Boston College and one in Columbia. Sister Madeleva had it. I think that's her name. She acted as the secretary. But certain things, he was too bold. You know, the censors with Madeleva, our editors thought that it was you know, imprudent. Probably one was that he had a natural son. That he had a natural son. That was probably in the original. There are reasons to think that, but it was never admitted. He was probably told not to. In those days, you know, that would have been a reason not to accept him as a real... That's probably... The Franciscans turned him down, I think, yeah.

[50:03]

But that probably, I suspect that that was in the original manuscripts. Oh, he was very... Oh, he was. Oh, he was. And even before others. Yes. Oh yeah, he had a lot of kind of courage. He told me once, too, I think that same conversation when he said that Seven Story Mountain, he said, it doesn't belong to me anymore, but it really should be rewritten. But I don't think so. I think it's by far his best work. Oh yeah, yeah, as literature. But it is, it's not the most balanced, but that, oh it's not the most balanced, but I, for some reason, I don't take it where he's, you know, where he's too narrow-minded. That's just part of what he was in that time.

[51:05]

That never affected him. You know, I think that people with experience, it would affect young people probably. But he himself was critical of it. But he felt, as he said, it didn't belong to him. He had said in one of his writings what he thought of all of his works. Oh yes, yeah. That's right, about God and religious life. Yeah. Yes. And he thought his worst two were, what are these wounds? Yeah, there were two he said terrible, you know, awful or something. Yeah, he has a scale. None of them was really, real good.

[52:06]

I say none was real good. If you look, the first column, the first column is empty. you know, very good. But then he has some that were his favorites that I disagree with him. I think things like the geography of Le Graire, which some people think, you know, is outstanding. I don't think anybody's going to read it after another 10 years or so. No, certainly not after a hundred. Whereas the sign of Jonas and the seven story mountain and the New Siege contemplation. I think they'll be permanently read. That's my opinion. He says in his preface to New Siege why he rewrote it. He didn't rewrite it so much as he added to it. It's not what he says that's not good. It's what he doesn't say.

[53:09]

that led him to write the New Seeds. But the New Seeds, I think, is because of... Oh, yes. Yeah. And it's called that. And he has some very high literary quality to certain of those practices, especially the ones to the Japanese edition of Seven Story Mountain. Yeah. So the Lord be with you. And also with you.

[53:38]

@Transcribed_v004
@Text_v004
@Score_JJ