Theos-Talk Archives (October 1995 Message tl00468)

Eldon:

<Welcome back to the list. (You've posted a few messages in the past week,
and now seem to be getting active again.)>

Thanks, but this is still all quite intermittant. Until I graduate, my ability
to get back to the email thing will be slow.

<In fact, many of us may be scientists
and not know it! Most technical jobs require an understanding and application
of science.>

This is a very good point Eldon. I would amplify this by saying that we all use
technology everyday, such as cars, TV sets, computers, toothpaste and kool-aid,
all of which are products of science, albeit indirectly. It is a ubiquitous
force in our lives.

<Science represents the common, public heritage of knowledge, as opposed to the
*hidden heritage* preserved by the Masters. As the world changes, over time,
these bodies of knowledge need to adapt as well.>

Are you saying here that the hidden knowledge also needs to adapt?

My hope is that as time moves forward, the hidden and the public knowledge will
converge. Of course, we all here on the list share the general opinion that
this is a cyclic phenomena.

<Philosophy is not exactly science.>

Don't get me wrong here! I am definately not saying science and philosophy are
identical, not by any means.

<Both philosophy and science are useful for their respective purposes, but
I would be careful to not make it seem as though philosophy was but a form
of inaccurte science.>

Again, this is not my intention at all.

The point I was making is that, at any given moment in history, there is a
philosophical "envelope" that surrounds the scientific knowledge of the day.
These are the broader interpretations and significance that people give to
scientific knowledge. These philosophical opinions change much more readily
than the scientific ideas they are based upon. As one simple example, consider
the Darwinian view of evolution. Early in this century, it was given the
philosophical overtones of Social Darwanism. Nowadays, social Darwanism doesn't
exist. However, the facts of biological evolution have not changed since the
1920s. More facts have been added but these have not contradicted those that
existed back in the '20s. So, the philosophies change, but the science doesn't,
or at least not in the same way. Philosophies come and go whereas science
grows.

<We have tried-and-proven techniques to arrive at scientific knowledge.
Likewise, we learn from reading "The Mahatma Letters", that the Masters
have their methods of learning and teaching, and for *their kind of knowledge*
we must adopt their ways.>

I am suggesting, Eldon, that there are tried and proven methods of obtaining
spiritual knoweldge as well. The methods of yoga have remained unchanged for
over 2000 years because they work. I am saying we should apply the same
rigorous tests of validity to spiritual knowledge just as we do to physical
knowledge. The actual tests are of course different, but the intention is not.
And the intention is to validate our beliefs through experience and not just
mindlessly say things or promulgate beliefs that do nothing for people
spiritually.

<You cannot measure non-physical activities with physical
instruments. To explore experiences that transcend the ordinary, either those
of other planes or of higher states of consciousness, you keed suitable
subjects. I don't expect either Chelas or Masters to offer themselves as
subjects, because they've had a long-standing policy of *not* releasing
occult knowledge in the west. Our best subjects may be little more advanced
than the common man.>

You are exactly right that you cannot measure the nonphysical with physical
devices. What this means is we must be creative and devise new methods for
observing nonphysical realities. However, this situation is not cut and dry
because, if the planes really do interact with each other, then we should
observe physical events that correspond to nonphysical events. And indeed these
do exist. If, for example, we want to interpret dream experiences as
perceptions of the astral plane, well, its widely known that dreams occur during
REM sleep. And REM sleep is measured by EEG machines which measure the
elctricity coming from the brain. Thus, this is a physical event that
corresponds to a nonphysical event.

So, as I learn more, it becomes apparent to me that none of this is simple or
cut and dry, and the possibilities will not be captured with simple minded
ideas. The important thing is to keep our minds open and to refine our ideas
because, as Pastuer is attributed with saying: "luck favors the prepared mind".

<If the senses are basically astral, and the physical body is an external
form that we use for sensory input, I'd expect the same with the brain:
thought is in the mind and the brain is the physical organ for the experience
of thought. But that only applies while we're in the physical body, and
not separate in the Linga Sharira or mind-created Mayavi-Rupa.>

These kinds of statements, Eldon, can be taken as starting hypotheses to
investigate the connection between physical and nonphysical things. The
braodest possible hypothesis is that nonphysical things exist. In the early
1980s, Stephen LaBerge has set up a situation in which it is now basically
impossible to conclude that nonphysical things do not exist (as long as we use
nonphysical in a theosophical sense).

LaBerge has extensively studied the phenomena of lucid dreams. Sometimes within
lucid dreams, two living people can communicate with each other *within* the
lucid dream. That is to say, both people are having lucid dreams, and they meet
and communicate in their lucid dreams. LaBerge has proposed experiments to test
whether these people actually meet or if their communication is telepathic in
some sense. Either way you go with such an experiment, you are forced to
conclude that either 1: there exists some world that is not the physical world
where the two lucid dreamers met and communciated, or 2. the two lucid dreamers
communicated by telepathy. In either case, conventional ideas are obliterated.

Thus, the state of science today is much different than it was at the turn of
the century. This idea that occult facts cannot be proven is no longer
relevant. Scientists (mainly psychologists) have stumbled into this arena
already. My point for getting on John Algeo about his attitude is that the TS
could play a constructive role and help guide scientists as they begin to
explore these regions of consciousness. Whether the TS wants to do this
"officially" or not really doesn't matter. People such as myself, who are in
both worlds (occultism and science) are taking it upon ourselfs to draw the
connections and make sure that scientists without occult training are aware that
they are not the first people to have discovered these realities.

<The physical brain is the key to our future faculties of perception,
while existing as fully-embodied people on Globe D.>

I agree with this as well. The way I like to say it is that the brain has
latent properties that are not widely appreciated by brain scientists.

<If this happens, we may end up with a subrace with additional psychical
powers, but not as developed, I'd think, as back in Atlantean times.
Is that a good thing? How does that affect our *spiritual* evolution?>

This is a very big historical question, one we can speculate about, but I doubt
that sure answers are not forthcoming. I think gradually over time Humanity as
a whole will increase the general level of psychic abilities. It will begin in
the investigation of dreams and grow from there. It will be a slow evolution
and I do not foresee a seperate subrace forming as a result.

<The criticism of
reductionism is against going too far with it, with the fact that it's
subject to abuse, and not, at least for me, with it's usefulness as
a tool, when applied with common sense and intelligence.>

Again, I fully agree. Reductionism in and of itself is not bad. Only when it is
taken too far does it become a problem. Again, the key here is balance in our
thinking.

<And apart from the evolution of these external systems, we're free, as
individuals, to directly persue the Path, and *go beyond*.>

This, to me, is the bottom line. Humanity is at some "average" level of
evolution, but this does not stop some indivduals from going far ahead of this
average.

<Knowledge is power, though, and
I hope that if you uncover some truths of occultism that are otherwise kept
secret, that you carefully consider their impact on the world before rushing
into publication. There may be other forces, besides nuclear power, that are
better kept unknown, until the general moral and ethic development of humanity
advances far beyond its present sorry state.>

This is a truism as it goes, but the thing about true occult knowledge is that
it has built in safe guards. The general scepticism of our society towards
occult knowledge is a manifestation of such a safeguard. Until a person is
intellectually, emotionally and morally developed enough, occult knowledge
appears to them as absurd. Thus, clearly, our society as a whole is not mature
enough to deal with the deeper occult secrets of knowledge. Personally, Eldon, I
don't worry about it. People only see what they are capable of seeing no matter
what one says or does. And , if a "monkey see monkey do" situation comes about,
then the dumb monkeys will burn themselves and perhaps learn. This is exactly
the case with the nuclear weapons.

<It might be useful to discuss what views are out-of-date, and why you
think so..>

When I have more time I will indeed take up this question.

I will close here.

Best!

Don