(BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE{1}[continued(16)])[5th April 1987]

[Redbook3:131][19870405:1057p](BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE{1}[continued(16)])[5th April 1987]

19870405.1057

(Sunday)

[continued]

Validation of indirect knowledge comes from direct knowledge, inner or outer, i.e. evidence. A system such as the Circles, inspired by the search for God, is validated by the absolutely true inner qualities which arise in conformity with it* and by the subjectively true external experiences which occur in conformity with it (and, of course, by the non-arising and non-occurrence of qualities and experiences which contradict it).** It is hard, but vital, to remember that the inspiration of the search for (and awareness of) God does not validate such a system. This is because of the transcendent(?) nature of God outside all systems of proof, and because of the distorting effect of Human frailty and separation. Systems claiming validation by divine inspiration – i.e. Inner Indirect Knowledge – should, I say again***, be viewed with grave suspicion.

*{But what if the Inner Qualities were the result of 'suggestion' by the System of Circles? {as above}. While still absolutely true, the Qualities could not then validate the System – which is perhaps to re-inforce the point that such systems always remain provisional.} [<890930> probably]

**and by its own inner logic, or 'fit'. See [Vol.] ?VI. <890930>

***ref. p. 123 [[Redbook3:122-123][19870405:1057e](BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE{1}[continued(5)])[5th April 1987] antepenult. Para.].

{But see p184. [[Redbook3:184][19870414:1003](BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE{2})[14th April 1987]].}

[And see [Redbook3:132][19870406:1710](MORBIDITY))[6th April 1987] (next entry).]

[PostedBlogger26022016]