I would say that "true" is indeed a question of subjectivity, so it's difficult to agree when such a word becomes an adjective ... rather than a noun. When we speak of THE True, however, either one has experience - to a certain degree - or one does not. Then it's just shades of gray, although I much prefer the idea [mental model] of the spectrum of visible Light ... for then we can at least begin to enter the realm of objectivity, and pretty soon the Idea of the Seven Spirits is not so very far off!
When it comes to dreams, either these are largely meaningless for us, and get described [as a friend put it to me today over lunch] as not much more than the brain trying to make sense of stuff ... hence they are largely confusing, difficult to interpret and quite likely of little value to us. Or I think they can be quite insightful, revealing much to us about our Inner Life - the life of the Soul ... and what goes on within the spiritual world(s).
Mostly, however, it's a little bit of both, and in between. We may be getting good, genuine `information' [ranging from Insight, direct recall of out-of-body experiences, conversations with our Teachers and fellow students on the path] ... yet all of that has to be filtered through our concrete, rational mind, through the coloring, skewing distortions of the emotional field (astral body), and finally, IF we are lucky, some small hint of our nightly sojourn may reach the etheric-physical brain. Even here, however, we are cautioned *not to strain*!
So when it comes to the *gift(s) of sight* or clear-hearing, clear-sentience, I would say it takes years, and lifetimes of training ... before we are truly [there's that word again] in a position to rightly interpret what the Soul, working via our own subconscious - which exists within the realm of the Jungian, collective unconscious - might have to tell us. And this, even despite the necessary utilization of universal themes and ancient motifs, becomes a personal message for each of us, despite the objectivity of the worlds we visit when out of the body.
Getting back to science, yes, I realize we have reached a certain point along the scale of progress at present. I don't think this means we must necessarily accept the same limitations as the laboratory researcher in his or her white coat, however, working with a scanning electron microscope, and confining him or herself to the five physical senses that most of us have unfolded.
Just because I am not a clairvoyant, and just because I am not a prophet, does not mean I am unable to access, investigate, discuss and hypothesize regarding the Inner Worlds - via the innate, unfolding powers of Reason, plus Intuition. When we shut ourselves off from these aspects of our being, or when we deny that they even exist (something which really makes me smile sometimes, and other times just plain disappoints me) ... we hurt ourselves, mostly. But we also shut down conversations, and potential conversations, with those who do have access to, and utilization of, such faculties.
Remember, science does not exist in a bubble. The scientific method, as we have come to understand it, is rather flawed ... not innately, but in the way we have tried to separate ourselves from the `laboratory environment' in which observations supposedly and theoretically take place. For the same reason that the armchair philosopher's brown study can only be so productive, ignorance regarding the future of the scientific method - and its applications - still clouds our minds.
I believe we have demonstrated aptly by now, that the ACT OF OBSERVATION influences that which is being observed. Hmmmm.
Likewise, even when all we're doing is sitting here, THINKING about something, someone, some idea, etc. ... lo and behold! Sure enough, we have changed that thing, person, idea, etc..
Until scientists, philosophers, theologians, economists, statesmen, artists [who are ahead of the pack, in this respect] and everyone under the sun has come to such a realization ... we will continue to partly-at-least dwell within the worlds of illusion, maya and glamour - wherein bubble-realities seem to trump webs of connectivity, for even WEBS must undergo a gradual evolution whereby lines of neutral or `dark' influence are replaced by Lighted strands of Loving energy.
If this is too abstract, too touchy-feely ... and hence, too un-scientific for some, then you're better off just chatting with CitizenZen, bob_x and the like. For they admire science in ways that I cannot, and in their atheism [at least one of these is an atheist, I think], I assert that they have tossed away the baby with the bathwater.
When you can dissect the baby and FIND GOD, that's when we will believe, they affirm. And I tell you, the homonculous will NEVER give up his secret ... for he has already told you, many times over, WHERE he lives - even within the mortal, physical frame - and yet they are blinded.
What more is there to do?
But wait.
Anyway, I love science. Religion was getting out of hand. The DARK AGES had practically delivered Humanity to the very deepest, darkest depths of ignorance and corruption that were possible during the preceding cycle. The Powers that Be moved through our local Heavens, They steered the greatest minds of the day and made appeal, sweeping Souls into incarnation ... and the Scientific Revolution was born. Had this not occurred, we might have seen darkness and destruction, madness and mayhem enough to make the Spanish Inquisition look like that Monty Python sketch of the same name or subject.
The same Master [Nirmanakaya] steering certain [tremendous, Great] progress in Science from spiritual levels is said to have influenced [essentially begun, or seeded] the Spiritualistic Movement. John Edward even has a fairly uncanny physical resemblance to Him, imho. This begins to sound a bit subjective, however, and is pretty much irrelevant. I wanted to point out, though, that when it comes to modern science, I do not mean to be totally irreverent, since I see it as *literally* ... Divinely Inspired.
Namaskar
