Theos-Talk Archives (January 2002 Message tt00189)

Folks--

A thought occurred to me driving to work this morning. We have seen 
plenty of references to the superiority of the "heart doctrine" to 
the "eye doctrine." Well, we have one heart and two eyes so the 
implication of monism vs. dualism is implicit. But I would suggest 
that what we really should follow is the Third Eye doctrine. The eye 
doctrine is that of analytical, comparative, discursive consciousness.
Consciousness that tries to explain everything in dualistic either/or 
terms. But the heart doctrine is all too often cited as superior by 
people who really mean "I'm gonna believe whatever I feel like 
believing, whatever makes me feel good, and moreover interpret this 
as spiritual superiority over those analytical intellectuals." 
Higher than either of these approaches would be a Third Eye 
approach. An approach that looks inward, not outward, is unitary, 
not dualistic, and resonates not with what I emotionally want to 
believe but what truth is inwardly accessible to everyone if we rise 
above our desires and prejudices.

There is going to be eternal back-and-forth here between the eye 
doctrine and the heart doctrine, but perhaps that can be transcended--
by some of us some of the time at least-- by an approach that is 
more subtle and inward than either of those.

PJ