Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00182)

ELDON <The mind, I'd agree, is far more capable of creating
delusion than the external senses. But on the other hand, it is
when we "explore with the mind" that we more swiftly approach
the truth, rather than "exploring with the senses," even be
they superphysical.>

How does one "explore with the mind?" If you mean
by studying, reading, and thinking about doctrinal ideas, then
I have to disagree completely. I also am not sure what you
mean by "exploring with the senses," and I have the uneasy
feeling that you don't really know what you are talking about
here (I am sure that you do, but it just isn't coming through
to me). Exactly what do you think the psychic senses are?
I would love for anyone to tell me the difference between
"psychic senses" and "exploring with the mind" because the
last time I looked, the word psychic was equivalent to
mental. What "senses" do we use in yogic meditation? I
always thought that the whole goal of "astral traveling"
(which is a very misleading name) was to direct consciousness
entirely outside of the human mind, which is limited to
the third cosmic plane. Inner senses, like the ones
we have in dreams, for example, are limited to the second
plane. The human mind itself is limited to the direct
observation of only one cosmic plane. But consciousness can
"explore" all seven cosmic planes.

JRC:<., but I also think that if it is possible, *direct
experience* is fully co-equal with theory as a tool of both
personal development and service. >

Yes. In fact, Buddhism encourages it. However,
when your own "direct experiences" differ from others, or
from the "core teachings" then you may want to review your
findings before going public. I just read an article by
H.H. The Dali Lama (Tricyle Magazine) in which he comes
right out and says that if science discovers that one of our
teachings is wrong or impossible, then we need to change our
teaching to bring it into line with science." This is
exactly my own feeling. Theosophy should work closely with
science, and where science shows a teacher/writer to be
wrong (as in the case of Mars being inhabited) then we
should change the teaching (which, I believe, is exactly what
Adyar has been doing).

Eldon:< The deep study comes from a self-actualized process
that transforms the inner and outer man, a process that reaches
from the external senses to the inner spirit, and changes him
throughout.>

I wish you would expound on this in more detail. I
am an "at large" member in both Pasadena and Wheaton, and
honestly have no idea what you mean by "deep study." All
of my own deep studying has been outside of the TS.

< 3. To investigate unexplained laws of nature and the powers
latent in man.>

The TSs are in kind of a bind here. They have an
objective, but at the same time, HPB clearly stated that the
TS should not be a training camp for psychics. Is it
possible to "investigate" psychism and the "powers latent in
man" (which to me clearly suggests kundalini, whose latency
is symbolized by a coiled snake) without advocating techniques?
It would probably involve treading a very fine line. But I
agree with JRC that at the very least, psychics should be
accepted as such, and not asked to ignore or supress their
abilities.

JRC:< the discussion up to now has related to whether or not
there is even room for the exercise of abilities within the
Theosophical fold. >

 From my own experiences, I would say no, there is
no room. We can discuss them and "investigate" them, but
we cannot exercise them. This, at least, would satisfy both
the 3rd Objective, and HPB's request to keep "training"
out of the TS.

JRC:< From where in current Theosophy will the next generation
of Doras and Geoffreys come from ... if any exercise of such
abilities has now become institutionally frowned upon? Are the
difficulties inherent in their exercise so insurmountable and
dangerous that the risk exceeds the enormous possible benefits?>

You ask a very interesting question. I suspect that
Pasadena and Point Loma would both say good riddance (:-)

The difficulties and dangers are up to those few
individuals who Dare to Try, and not up to the TSs. As I
see it, the TSs' job is to make available the "core teachings,"
which form much of the theoretical end of the psychic milieu.
Those individuals with psychic abilities, or those who want
them, can find lots of books and/or "gurus" outside of the
TSs, while using the "core teachings" as their theoretical
background. It works for me.

Rich:
> Can ANYONE ON THIS BOARD distinguish psychic from noetic?
> Does no one understand how Purucker can be in contact with
> the Masters noetically and not psychically? Please, read
> HPB' article, "Psychic and Noetic Action."

There is a technical difference, but it is very
hard to describe, and basically the results are the same -
both are subject to error and misreading. This might have
been what Eldon what getting at with his "exploring with the
mind." basically, noetic allows us to communicate with
"higher" intelligences than psychic. As far as I am concerned,
both fall under the category of "channeling" which itself is
a rather broad umbrella term.

Liesel:< If going into a criminal's inner self made you sick,
there's a way of doing it that won't affect you, but I don't
know it.>

Its called compassion. And it really does work.

Eldon:< We're left, in the final analysis, to seek out our own
paths, our own approaches, and must brave them despite the
criticism we may arose in those who disapprove.>

Agreed.

 Jerry S.