Theos-Talk Archives (December 1995 Message tl00285)

ET

>The first kind of idea may need some theosophical validation. The second
>kind of idea deals with things that could be considered as scientific
>knowledge and not need some special insight before they can be believed.
>I would put the idea of the Masters in the second category as real
>living beings and not as an arbitrary mystical insight dealing with
>something that is basically unknowable.
>
>I don't need an ego identifiction with the idea that there's a country
>called "France" in order to believe that it exists. I can take the word
>of geographers and map makers.

RI
It's pretty obvious that "France" is not nearly as closed or private of a
belief since it can be validated by most people who are willing to follow
the directions of the map makers and go there. This is the first time I have
heard anybody say that the existence of Masters is the kind of idea which
"could be considered as scientific knowledge"; I suppose however you
simply mean it in the same sense as the "Abominable Snowman"--that is if
they ever find it they will be able to see it etc.

Also allow me get rid of *arbitrary* and change the wording a little so we
can agree on our "first category of ideas." Thus: *Mystical insights
dealing with things basically unknowable any other way*. --I am never one
for biting the theosophical hand that feeds us all . . . .

Best wishes

Richard Ihle