Now in all of our spiritual traditions, nearly all of them, we have the idea of denial. Evolutions problem is this, to wean us away from our identity with lower evolutionary structures and instead use those as the foundation to move on in higher evolutionary structures. It's just that simple. That's what it's been for a long time, we've intuitively known that for a long time. What then have we tried to do in the past?
At root of nearly every great spiritual system, and this isn't to denigrate them, they're all mind boggling and vastly beyond me, but at root of them as they form into strict religious structures, the concept of denial comes in. How are we going to wean ourselves away from these lower structures? Well we try to deny them. We try to cut ourselves off from them. In periods of great religious frenzy back in Greece, the young men used to run out and emasculate themselves on behalf of the goddess. Why? To try to cut themselves off in effect from all aspects of the lower structures. And of course this is tremendously self-destructive.
This isn't what evolution is about at all. Eckhart caught on when he said "when the higher incorporates the lower into its structure, it changes the lower into the nature of the higher". And it was George Leonard who caught onto that about sexuality. This is something I claimed in my fourth/fifth book, "Magical Child Matures". That actually in this intense peak of emotion of adolescent love that that could in itself be a way by which we could enter in to this whole realm of the spirit, but something happens you see, something happens and instead it ends up generally for us a disaster.
This is part of what the adolescent period is all about. This longing for completion. Now I made a serious error in my book "Magical Child Matures", and I perpetuated that error in evolutions end. I saw this longing in the adolescence to be the open, longing for the opening of another development period. I was exactly right with that. There's no question. There are a lot of books coming out now about post-operational thinking, what should happen after 15. Some brilliant work is being done.
At 15 instead of a closure there should be a brain growth spurt. There is no way around that. And, then the regular 3 1/2 to 4 year cycles, we should go through a series of developments precisely as we did in the first 15 years. There's no question about it. And these should be the discovery of what we could call the wave form aspect of the particle world that we have created and come into dominion over. We just simply, the ability to move up into higher and higher echelons or realms of the whole creative process. This is being recognized little by little and it makes perfectly good clear sense.
The only problem is to assume that this the great inner venture of the spirit on the part of that adolescent won't work, it won't fit the adolescent. Adolescents just don't fit that pattern. Why? They are completely locked into their hormonal life, into their life in this body, the great delight in the body and the desperate need to move out into the social world and prove themselves. All of which is a critical part of nature's plan. But, as they go out to explore the world and all that it offers, exactly as they should, becoming a part of society and becoming the parents and all of that at that period, at the same time all of that should be preparing them for the final maturation which is the movement into the realm of the unknown or the true spiritual realm that evolution is pushing us toward.
So I think from probably about 15 to 30 we're simply going through a developmental period to lay the ground work, the bridging between, the localized experience here in the world and the totally non-localized experience of what we generally lump under the heading of the spirit. What we need is a new lexicon of the spirit. We need a completely new vocabulary to cover this, why, I think we've ruined all the other old words concerning it. They're tarnished. They've been overloaded with such nonsense that they're no longer much worth to us.
Carl Ume once said, "when a symbol loses it's power, you simply have to let it go" and most of our great symbols have lost their power and I think it's because of the mis-use of those symbols and now we need kind of a new symbology of the spirit. IN this period which I would call the transition period from our complete embeddedment in this marvelous, and what should be a very joyful life of the body, toward the joyful life of the body of the spirit because it's always the body. We're always the body. There's no doubt of that, even when we move into a hypothetical pure spiritual would still be the body. In that transition stage, that is adolescence you see and during that time we lay all the ground work for this final stage to unfold which should occupy our entire mature years and certainly you would find a different ballgame than we have today, and the great despair we have in our older people and so on.
There was a woman who wrote a book called "Passages" which was really similar to some of the young improvisations and others, had something to be said for it. I thought maybe some profound errors, there's no need to go into that, but if it's really looking at these stages through the eyes of the world, a folly, that is the disasters that befall us, and you won't really get a clear image that way. You have to look at it through the eyes of your greatest beings we've ever had if you want to get a clear idea of what this is all about.
The new lexicon of the spirit, and I think post-operational thinking is a very good term for this intermediate period that we see the adolescent moving into. We would then find the overall cycle of our life falling beautifully into this cycle of competence pattern. Our first 15 years we've roughed in the whole ballgame right. We've roughed it all in. The second 15 years we need to fill in the details by getting out there and doing it, becoming it, taking it on ourselves to be that great figure, the adult, the parent and the society and so on. And then comes what? The period of practice and variation? Yes, in a way, and moving into the realm beyond our identity or being locked into the identity with these lower structures.
Am I making any sense? This is that anguish of adolescence. That's why if you come along to the adolescent who's totally hormonal on the one hand and in this anguish of longing on the other and you talk to him about misplaced libido and so on and so forth, and you must discipline and give us this and give up that and the other if you want to know the spirit, something is wrong. You see, something is wrong. So I look at most of our great disciplines which have depended on what, denial, which is at vase a trade-off and how much greater, how much more it fits the evolutionary pattern to think of incorporation of the lower into the higher and transformation. Transcends, moving beyond, but as you move beyond everything goes with it. Everything goes with it or it's not a whole movement. So that's what is involved in adolescence and that's evolutions intent. They're getting ready for the opening and the focus on those frontal lobes but the frontal lobes aren't even complete in the adolescence, they're not complete until early maturity.
Now you say frontal lobes, what could that possibly have to do with anything? I ask you to recall again what all current scientific evidence strongly points toward, that our universe organizes itself within the neurons of our brain and presents itself to us that way. We interpret it as an external event which it is as the result of this operation. This isn't to deny the reality of the outer world, it's simply to say our perception of the outer world is an interior construction by the brain's system. And in the brain system, with its hundreds of billions and trillions of neuro connections and possibilities can translate into our experience of perception of the whole universal scheme of things. If it can do that, than these great frontal lobes which represent a huge chunk of it, it's estimated that only about 10% of the neocortex is actually developed. It might all be involved, if the integrated circuitry it is, but we don't develop a great deal of it. There's a difference between development and usage, you use it out of default because it's going to respond. But in lack of development it responds very weakly. Does that make any sense?
I've used the analogy of usage as opposed to development because this will take care of all the arguments in the scientific people if they would just look at it. In regard to muscles, as I say my warranties running out, times getting late, but I'm very active, I use every muscle in my body every day I'm sure. But I should show you the sad strings hanging about my limbs, which I will spare you, you would see a striking, an unbelievable difference between those sad strings and the huge durgeable, the blimps, the great big enormous balloons on the arms and chests of our muscle men who push weights, and muscle women who push weights you see. That is, both of us use our muscles but one of us develops our muscle. Just which on you see. The difference is astonishing.
Now, we all use everything in the brain, but how much of it do we develop, that's the whole issue. We use it by default, we have nothing to do with it. There is the possibility of developing it.