Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:43 pmI don't know about how 'rare' these indelible events are, given the countless shared examples one can spend endless hours hearing and reading about. Who knows, maybe that too is accelerating now toward some critical mass. To be sure, it is fascinating to see how starting from two seemingly very different motivating factors, and I suppose cultural backgrounds, the same 'knowing' can be embraced. Such apparent beings do find a way to convey, however fleeting, or long, or meandering, or multifarious these incarnational expressions may be.AshvinP wrote: ↑Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:19 pmI see where the disconnect is here. Let's go back to QM example - it is a fact that quantum entanglement of 'particles' occurs. But would we expect anyone to simply accept that fact without reasoning it through for themselves? The same applies to 'facts' of spiritual science. If you ask Cleric or myself direct questions about what spiritual science claims to know, we will give you direct answers. But we are clearly leaving out most of the reasoning which leads to those answers (actually Cleric tends to include most of it, as I am sure you notice), and that is what each individual should seek out for themselves. We can provide links, summaries, helpful hints, etc. whenever possible, but we can't recreate the entire reasoning process in each post which deals with these questions. All of this is said in the context of your original question of how to distinguish between justified knowledge and mere 'beliefs' when confronted by various spiritual claims. To summarize, we need to recognize what we are doing when confronted by any claim in the various domains of life, so that we can learn to trust that our own spiritual activity is a reliable source. For me personally, I did not have any sense of "aha, now I have had the indelible experience which makes me ready to seriously ask these questions and investigate them". Perhaps that happens to some, but I suspect it is rare and most people would share my experience of, "well, I can either sit here and put off any investigation indefinitely because I am not sure exactly where to start or how to proceed, OR I can start somewhere (like within observation of my own thinking activity) and let the Spirit subtly guide me, through my own reasoning process, and see how the rest unfolds from there".
I mean rare in the context of whenever we decide, "hey, I want to know more about this particular field of inquiry, this hypothesis, this theory, etc." I don't think most people sit around saying, "I can't know more about anything until I have the indelible experience which indicates to me I am ready to proceed." We just start observing, reading, watching, etc. and reason through it as we build ideal constellations which make sense of the phenomena we are considering. In the case of spiritual science, the phenomena is really us - all our sensory perceptions, desires, feelings, and thoughts, as they manifest in our immanent experience. So it's actually much easier to make the ideal connections than it is with purely abstract fields of inquiry which may relate to something we have never consciously experienced before.