(BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE (2) [continued(5)])[14th April 1987])

[Redbook3:187-188][19870414:1003e](BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE (2) [continued(5)])[14th April 1987]

19870414:1003

[continued]

Statement (B)*, on the other hand, is of a different order (if neither mendacious nor misunderstood by the hearer). It is not only absolutely true as a statement, it also refers to something for which there is no other form of reference, i.e. [no] one [or more forms of (direct) reference] in the outside World. Even if (an unlikely event) I were to meet xP in the flesh, the quality of her presence would still be something that I felt (if I felt it) within me, with an inner sense, associated with the information of my outer senses**. (The inner perception of such qualities*** is generally heightened by the quality of Love – which is, of course, the starting point of the Inner Circle****). If there is no other reference or possibility of experiencing a Quality except in an Inner Sense, we are forced (not reluctantly) to the conclusion that the full and complete reality of the Quality must be definable by and through the Inner Sense.

Nevertheless, and irrespective of statements, such Qualities are in every sense real: not only do they have the (inner) Quality of Reality itself;# they are the experience of many separate Individuals external to one[self] [sic]. Although pedantically we can never be certain that we are using the same name for the same Quality as are other people, we can be as certain as we are about any other common experience simply by virtue of the many descriptions, poetic and otherwise, to which those Qualities have given rise.#*

In this context, the distinction of 'subjective' and 'objective' becomes meaningless, or at least extremely strained. There is a practical barrier between our understanding of what we perceive#** and our understanding of what others perceive#**, arising from the nature of our Separation from each other, and we have to work within its constraints. But #***experiences common to several people, and validated in the ways in which they can be validated (i.e. 'on their own terms'), are commonly accepted as having objective reality. (For example, if three Catholic peasants report a vision of the Virgin Mary accompanied by a strong feeling of Love; then, if we believe them to be truthful, we may doubt#**** that the Virgin Mary was actually present as they described her, while accepting the shared reality of the Love## that they felt 'flow' from or with the vision they perceived.) And objective existence of a phenomenon can only be validated by the test appropriate to the nature or class of the phenomenon.

*[(B) ' “If I say that as I write I feel the quality of xP's presence, or ... the intense, dynamic innocence of xS ... with an inner sense: then this will be absolutely true” as a statement concerning independent (or objective) reality.' (See last two previous entries.)]

**But is it due to external sense data, for its content (not just its timing) (in which case it would also arise by analogy when no external data appeared)? I cannot find any consistency of connection of Quality with analysed content of external information.

***in association with external sense information.

****{–}{and presumably by the death of self, i.e. detachment.}

#(Hmmm!)

#*{(External reference?!}[--indirect, i.e. via the external world, not direct i.e. in the external world. <30042016>]

#**(whether Inner or Outer)

#***(Inner?) <870817> [or Outer, presumably. <20160430>]

#****[=? (cf. [Redbook3:189-190][19870414:1003g](BELIEF AND KNOWLEDGE (2) [continued(7)])[14th April 1987], fn3)]

##?But 'Each love is particular, to the two Spirits within it' ([2]) – I think this describes the external relationship in its circumstances, not the pure inner Quality of Love itself, uncompromised.

{cf. 135[[Redbook3:135-136][19870406:2300c](SEX AND GENDER [continued(3)]: {True Love and the Death of the Self})[6th April 1987] presumably 1^st para; cf. also last previous entry before that?]}

[continues]

[PostedBlogger02052016]