Daily Archives: January 6, 2019

The Soul of Things: Connecting Science and Spirituality

Jelena Momcilov

Jelena Momcilov “Magnet Girl”

MANY scientists like to think that science already understands the ways of the natural world.

For them the fundamental questions are answered, leaving only the details to be filled in.

The numerous impressive achievements of modern science seem to support this confident attitude.

But in recent research, including his own studies, rebel biologist Rupert Sheldrake believes otherwise.

His experiments reveal jaw-dropping problems at the heart of physics, cosmology, biology, medicine, and psychology. Similar to H. P. Blavatsky’s complaints about 19th century modern science.  Not much has changed since then, it would appear. Science still refuses to acknowledge “the soul of things.”

Resolutely dismissive of paranormal findings or brain-free consciousness, traditional model science still asserts that matter is the gold standard. But even great authorities, especially in science, may be found to err, and scientific dicta are frequently influenced more by personal prejudice than rigorous research.

“We hold to Hermes and his ‘Wisdom’ — in its universal character; they [hold] to Aristotle as against intuition and the experience of the ages, fancying that Truth is the exclusive property of the Western world. Hence the disagreement. As

Hermes says, ‘Knowledge differs much from sense; for sense is of things that surmount it, but Knowledge (gyi) is the end of sense’ — i.e., of the illusion of our physical brain and its intellect.

An honest, impartial science would always weigh “the laboriously acquired knowledge of the senses with the intuitive omniscience of the Spiritual divine Soul,” H. P. Blavatsky wrote.

The Secret Doctrine — Vol. 1, p. 269
Perspectives

Different Perspectives

“The Theosophists, therefore, are the first to recognize the intrinsic value of science. But when its high priests resolve consciousness into a secretion from the grey matter of the brain, and everything else in nature into a mode of motion, we protest against the doctrine as being

unphilosophical, self-contradictory, and simply absurd — from a scientific point of view, as much and even more than from the occult aspect of the esoteric knowledge.

Continue reading