If a single cube be taken and moved about, it will be found that there are twenty-four positions in which it can be put by turning it, keeping one point fixed, and letting each turning be a twist of a right angle. The whole block had to be turned into each of these positions and learnt in each. Thus the block of cubes seemed to be thoroughly known. At any rate, up and down was cast out. And we can now attach a definite meaning to the expression “casting out the self.” One’s own particular relation to any object, or group of objects, presents itself to us as qualities affecting those objects—influencing our feeling with regard to them, and making us perceive something in them which is not really there. Thus up and down is not really in the set of cubes. Now these qualities or apparent facts of the objects can be got rid of one at a time. To cast out the self is to get rid of them altogether. As soon as I had got rid of Up and Down out of the set of cubes I was struck by a curious fact. If in building up the block of cubes one _goes_ to the left instead of to the right, keeping all other directions the same, a new cube is built up having a curious relation to the old cube. It is like the looking-glass image of the old cube. Every cube in the new block corresponds to every cube in the old block, but in the new figure it is as much to the left as before it was to the right. And any set of names in the block so put up gives a shape which is like the shape denoted by the same set of names in the old block, but which cannot be made to coincide with it, however turned about. It is the looking-glass image of the old shape. The one block was just like the other block, except that right was changed into left. Now, was it necessary to cast out right and left as had been done with up and down? or was right and left, as giving distinctions in the block and in shapes formed of cubes, to remain? It seemed as if right and left belonged more to me than to the set of cubes. And yet the right-handed set of cubes could not be made by moving about to coincide with the left-handed set of cubes. And this power of coincidence was the test which had convinced me of the self nature of “Up and Down.” Let Diagram I. represent a small block of cubes. It is itself in the form of a cube, and it contains 27 cubes. For purposes of reference we will give a number to each cube, and the number will denote the cube where it is. In the front slice are cubes numbered from 1 up to 9, in the second slice are cubes numbered from 10 to 18, and so on. Thus behind 1 is the cube 10. This cube and the cube 11 are hidden, but the cube 12 is shown in the perspective. Now in this block of cubes there is a part which is known and a part which is unknown. The part which is known is how they come or the arrangement of them. The part that is unknown is the cube itself, repetitions of which in different positions forms the block.