Eugene I wrote: ↑Mon May 03, 2021 6:16 pm
But that tradition also goes much further to specify more ideal relations (not necessarily "all there is to reality") in addition to the simple fact that Mind exists and can know Itself
Right, studying those relations is definitely a good part of the Western contribution. Yet, even that knowledge is slightly distorted because of the lacking component of experience, and based on that, investing to much value and emphasis to the relations and ideas only (because according to its view, knowing ideas is knowing everything to be known about reality). In a way, it's lacking a balance. I'll quote myself here with this analogy again:
It's like you always looked below the horizon paying all your attention only to all the variety of life that happens on the ground and all the mechanics and relations of that, and you thought that the life on the ground is all there is to life and to the world. And suddenly you raised your eyes and for the first time see the luminous and indivisible sky. There may be a temptation to forget the ground and get stoned just looking at the sky, but I don't think it's a good choice either. Instead, it is better to enhance you view and see the whole picture at once all the time - both the sky and the ground, and keep walking on the ground while enjoying the wholeness of the landscape. This is where we can find the perfect balance between being too much lost and focused in the details of what happens on the ground, or being stoned and focused on the sky only.
So the world of ideas and relations in such all-encompassing view becomes only one of the aspects of reality, still an essential one, but not exhaustive or complete in itself.
Eugene, I don't know if you make this on purpose or you really haven't grasped it. Almost every post where I need to get to the epistemological foundations I speak of
perceptions and ideas. Scott and Ashvin have also done that. The only reason you see ideas as lacking balance is because you insist on viewing them only when they are experienced as abstract thoughts. If we speak of the abstract intellect and its concepts this is understandable. But all attempts have been made to explain that ideas find their unity only when they become united with the corresponding perceptions. We can speak about string theory as being lost in ideal relations but it's not justified to say the same for botany, for example. When I describe the number of petals, the shape of the leaves, etc. I connect ideas with perceptions, I'm not floating in the sky, it's precisely the balance you speak of. I made an attempt to explain how spiritual science continues in the same way - we have supersensible perceptions to which the intellect can unite corresponding concepts.
What you call
direct experiences correspond to
perceptions in the above terminology. I hope it's clear that perceptions don't include only the physical senses. In the most general sense,
a perception is anything that can become the object of thinking. So let's synchronize the terminology - what you call direct experiences are perceptions because, I hope you would agree, it's possible to
think about these experiences.
The reason that you try to distinguish direct experiences from intellectual ideas is justified. But it's untrue that Western esoterism doesn't understand this - it is precisely the opposite because Occidental Wisdom recognizes the different gradations of ideas, of which intellectual concepts are only one. Perceiving without intellectual thoughts, which you call direct experiences, has something to do with the highest stage of cognition called Intuitive knowledge. I've tried to give a rudimentary sketch on the connection between the evolutionary iterations and the degrees of cognition, in the Deep M@L essay (the slides). This can be experienced very nicely in meditation. I'll do some first-person descriptions in vivo.
I stop any thought activity and simply observe the objects in front of me in inner silence. In this state it can be said that my spiritual activity can be best described as focusing of attention on perceptions. For example, now I contemplate my cup of tea on the desk with no thought activity (obviously I take breaks in order to type). There's complete inner tranquility, all my activity is simply supporting my visual focus on the cup. There are no thoughts, words, relations, yet
I'm perfectly aware of what I'm seeing. I don't think it, there are no moving forms, yet I experience certain meaning as I'm focused at the cup. I don't feel confusion, vagueness, I simply
know what I'm seeing. It's very interesting to do this exercise while remaining in the same tranquil and thoughtless mode while shifting the focus of my vision. All I experience is how I move and nail my gaze at different objects one at a time. Now I see an Arduino board, now my soldering station, now the keyboard and so on. Again - there's absolutely no vibration of thought activity, only movement and fixation of attention in perfect stillness of the inner waters. Yet it's very interesting to experience how the meaning of what I experience changes as I shift my gaze. Even though there are no words, there's perfect clarity of what I see - I
know what I see. Now I return to the cup. From this state I can very slowly produce the verbal thought 'cup' and observe the experience. It feels like the thought lifts like a perturbated form from the sea of tranquility. This is a new element within my consciousness - it's a different perception, it's a verbal perception, I practically hear a word (although I literally see it as it forms in my larynx soul organ). But when I observe very closely (that's why it helps to form the thought very slowly) I see that the meaningful content of my tranquil thoughtless observation doesn't really change. In fact the verbal thought becomes only
a symbol for the meaning. It's like saying: "Now I make a gesture with my larynx soul organ, I inwardly see and hear this gesture and for me this gesture will from now on remind me of the meaning that I experience when I thoughtlessly observe the cup." Now I turn my gaze away, assume the tranquil state again and make the same gesture with my larynx - that is, I slowly produce the verbal thought 'cup'. Even though I no longer have the visual impression of a cup, I experience a reverberation of the same meaning.
These are very pleasant and valuable exercises. Since you are experienced with meditation I think it won't be a problem to try them out. If you do, I think we'll be able to come to terms about what is called idea in the fundamental sense. If you are able to discern the meaning implicit in the tranquil contemplation of an object, even though there are no thoughts produced through the larynx, you'll know what is meant by idea in the widest sense. By the way the larynx soul organ produces not only verbal but
any thought forms. A very handy analogy is
cymatics. Of course here it's not physical sound which creates the forms but spiritual activity that is being shaped within the larynx organ and produces the forms within the astral substance, which to varying degrees imprints in the etheric. Normally this impression occurs most readily in the etheric brain, that's why most people experience their thoughts roughly in that area. But I have no problem in this moment to produce forms in any part of the body and even outside the body. The latter gives us the experience of what is called the
aura in popular language. Anyway, I digress. My point is that the thoughtless mode already points to what is called Intuitive consciousness and which is actually the highest form of cognition achievable, allowing to explore the most ancient eon of evolution.
If the above is understood correctly it'll be reckoned that spiritual science doesn't deal with abstractly chaining concepts together but seeks the direct experiences that you speak of. In non-dual traditions one also attains to the tranquil thoughtless state but the focus is on the wholeness. In this sense I can now continue my exercise and expand my visual field, include also all other senses and feelings. I do this with eyes open and I behold the totality of awareness without any movement of the larynx organ. If I close my eyes the state becomes what most non-dualists seek. I experience a total unified meaning of this state, similarly to the way I experience a more specific meaning of the cup when I'm focused on it. It is at this point where Occidental esoterism continues further. I simply need to make an observation - even though I'm in thoughtless state with no inner perturbations, yet I'm still in the body. Even though I'm in perfect stillness, I know what I experience - I experience the tranquil state of my head organ (the two-leaf lotus), unperturbed by movements of the larynx. At this moment I talk about the soul organs intuitively, similarly to the way I would find my way to the bathroom in pitch-black night - I can do it because I've done it countless times and I know where the wall is, where the door is, etc. Yet if I want to really encompass the picture I need to leave the body. Not in the naïve way that OBEs describe as going flying somewhere but by simply becoming free of the physical processes that otherwise restrict my activity. The physical body is within and outside me, but now I experience how my loosened astral body interacts with it. Now the soul organs become almost as hubs of potential where I can see not only what I can otherwise think inside the body thought by thought but how the rays of the organs interfere and create a panorama of possibilities. Right now the heart organ interferes lovingly with the living presence of all of you, friends. Something wants to flow out, it passes through the larynx, clothes itself in a form out of the panorama of possibilities that harmonize with the heart impulse, takes concrete shape in the head and flows through the hands all the way to the fingertips and the keys.
...
I didn't intend the above paragraph but with the cup exercises I entered deeper meditative state and Imaginations started to flow so I decided to simply describe them as an on-air example of the kinds of experiences that spiritual science describes. As it can be seen it's all perceptions with corresponding meaning and they are all related. But it has nothing to do with relating floating abstract ideas in the head. The expressed ideas are related through the perceptions and not through random and mechanical connections between concepts. In a similar way the botanist can describe the relations between the stem, leaves, buds, flowers and so on. These are not free floating ideas that we fantasize in some made up relation - we
read out the relations directly from the perceptions. In this sense spiritual investigation is really about reaching reliably certain states (which themselves are unique constellations of the bodies and the soul organs) where the supersensible perceptions and their relations can be described.