Theos-Talk Archives (May 2000 Message tt00112)

In a message dated 4/27/00 2:15:01 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
ecarpent@co.la.ca.us writes:

<< Hi,
 
I've enjoyed reading ya'll stuff on theos-talk, and I'm on the lookout for
anything concerning finding truth through deduction and buddhic-intuition 
with deduction beginning and ending with the self-evident truth.
 
Love,
Eugene  >>

Dear Eugene,

If you are looking to "find truth through deduction," especially "beginning 
and ending with the self-evident truth," & in the words of the immortal John 
Lennon (as informed by Yoko):  "Rots-a-rock!"

Deduction is a tool of the analytical mind.  The analytical mind is wonderful 
for doing anything having to do with things mechanical (building bridges, 
composing computer programs, finding one's way in traffic).  But it is 
ludicrously out of its depth, when it comes to things that matter to humans 
(such as ethics, religious experience, aesthetic experience, & such).  Since 
theosophy is about things that matter to humans, deduction has no ESSENTIAL 
place in it.

Yes, deduction has a place in our understanding of theosophy.  The DEDUCTIVE 
ARGUMENT used in the previous paragraph is an example of how we use deduction 
all the time, whenever we speak or think.  So whenever we SPEAK or THINK of 
things theosophical, we'll be FORCED to use deduction.  But such speaking is 
truly THEOSOPHICAL if, and only if, it comes from THEOSOPHICAL STATES OF 
AWARENESS.  In such states, the analytical mind (including its deductive 
elements) has absolutely NO PLACE.  "The Mind is the Great Slayer of the 
Real.  Let the Disciple Slay the Slayer."  Slaying is a strong word.  It 
means:  There must be ABSOLUTELY NO ANALYTICAL MIND, in any genuine inquiry 
into THAT WHICH IS.
It is from DEDUCTION that any and all SYSTEMS come from.  But systems ALWAYS 
imply the preservation and promotion of THE ME.  And so long as there is 
self-centeredness, there cannot be any inquiry worthy of the name into THAT 
WHICH IS.
A system always preserves & promotes the me, since a KNOWER is required in 
order to have a system of any sort.  Such a knower is, almost by definition, 
separate from the thing it knows.  So a system IMPLIES that there MUST BE a 
fragmentation between an observer, and that which she observes.  But such an 
observer is ALWAYS the result of the way she thinks.  That is, the observer, 
the analyzer, is always a result of never-questioned expectations, based on 
conditioning.
So DEDUCTION, far from getting anyone any closer to understanding anything 
about THAT WHICH IS, is an excellent tool for making it IMPOSSIBLE to even 
look at THAT WHICH IS, let alone for getting close to it.
A totally different human component must be relied on, in this process of 
theosophical investigation.  According to the ancient wisdom, such sources 
are to be found in insight-compassion, in whose states of awareness, as such, 
there is no analysis -- & so no deductions.
This is intended only as part of an on-going dialogue on "the Great 
Conversation."  It is not meant as a "final word" on this subject, by any 
means.  What do ya'll think?
With affection,
Aryel

-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.