Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00330)

According to Arthur Paul Patterson:
>
> Art: What precisely is this Eye center. Is it a chakra point or a metaphor
> for perceiving?

Both, in a way. It is called the brow chakra, located slightly
above the bridge of the nose. But it symbolizes illumined
perception of spiritual reality.
> listening to this vibration.
>
> Art: This sound current sounds beyond the actual vocalisation of the name
> itself. If so there is a clue there I think. You are in the South and as
> you say the name that is in the air is Jesus.

The current you are supposed to hear is a ringing radiance,
devoid of words or musical form. So it's sort of a comedown to
fall into hearing "stuff" instead of the pure shabd (voice).
>
> Art: I am presuming that this is not a recent phenomena brought on by the
> current discussion? I hope not. But the emergence of the Christ archetype
> in your unconsciousness may, as you say, be related to the collective
> unconsciousness of the area. At least, you are not crushing out the
> emergence of the themes because of the negative connotations that the
> uncreative unconsciousness of the southern fundamentalist collect is
> involved in. I admire your spiritual courage and openness.

There's a fair amount of ambivalence about it, although I never
bought into HPB's anti-Christianity to the extent that some
Theosophists do. However, had I gone through Rich's experience
of divinity school, it might well have produced a lifelong
distaste for all things Christian.
>
> Art: Right now I am discussing that with one of my tutorial students. He is
> asking it in reference to Blake's non-analytical approach. Too much
> structure crushes direct religious experience. No critical or analytic
> perspective can lead to being taken over by the contents of the collective
> unconsciousness. I tend to think that both approaches must be viewed in
> tandem. To experience and withhold analysis momentarily is the best bet as
> long as you are not drawing conclusions about what you are experiencing. I
> like to see life as metaphor and capable of change so I see whatever I
> experience as true mythically but not immune from analytical critique. Go
> with the flow, trusting in the Source to guide you, and then use your
> analytical perspectives to form hypothesis concerning what you experience.
Thank you and Jerry. I think this aspect of your counsel
blends well with his; that is, try to alternate between
immersion and detachment, learning something from the
juxtaposition.
> is produced? How are you altered? This to me is very important. I don't
> like the spiritual hedonism of the New Age idea that you just ride the
> experiential roller coaster and never subject your experience to any
> principle of self critique.
That's perhaps a swing of the pendulum to the opposite extreme
of formalized, fossilized religion that isn't open to
experience outside a narrow range of approved ones. Ideally,
we are headed to a balance point at which the raw experience
can be cooked by analysis without losing its flavor.

Namaste