September 28, 2019

Focus on Truth

The Principle:

“Put your attention on finding that which is true rather than that which is in error.”

Many people seek to prove a thing true by looking for errors and flaws. The idea is that if they find no error then only the truth is left. Why is this approach not reliable? Why is it easier to find truth by looking for truth?

Perhaps we could ask it this way. Is it better to look for red flags or the light that reveals?

Keith writes:

“You get what you look for — if you concentrate on errors you get exactly that. It’s like the weatherman telling you that it’s a 30% chance of rain — why doesn’t he tell you it’s a 70% chance of sunshine? Your mind can only concentrate on one thing at a time — if it looks for error it will find error and maybe miss the truth.”

JJ: Great answer.

Another reader makes this point:

“I think that one has to follow what seems good: why would I follow a guy that I think is deluded? Except to overcome a major blind spot of mine.”

So what should we do when we meet one who is obviously deluded? Shall we still look for truth in his illusions? And in placing our attention on that which is true, are we more likely to be deceived than one who looks for red flags?

To this I ask another question:

By expecting a meal to taste delicious are you likely to be deceived by a rotten egg that you happen to taste? Of course not. Your attention on what is good does not take away your discernment in sorting out the bad.

On the other hand, if your attention and expectation is on the idea that the meal may taste bad, or perhaps you are suspicious that someone has cooked you rotten meat, will this interfere with the pleasure of your dinner?

Yes, it certainly will. We have all met picky eaters that can’t seem to let themselves enjoy a fine meal because of some fear that it has not been prepared or seasoned properly.

Researchers did an experiment with color and food. They cooked some delicious steaks and fed then to group one and they all enjoyed them immensely. But then for group II they cooked the same meal but had them eat under a green light – thus the whole meal had a greenish tint to it.

Even though group two had the same meal the greenish tint caused the second group to focus on the fact that something may be wrong with it and few were able to enjoy it and some got sick.

Truth is like the steak. Do not focus on the greenish light (or what may be wrong) but on what may be right with it. Only by doing this can one enjoy all the truth and flavor that is in the steak (or presentation).

Question: Can one put his prime attention on that which is true and yet still use the process of elimination as an aid in discovery?

A definite yes on this one. As my food analogy illustrated one is not oblivious to bad food when he is expecting a good meal.

When one looks for the good as a primary focus of discovery he will in the process come across a number of items which stand out as obviously false.. When a real falsehood is discovered then the seeker can use this fact as one of the items in his process of elimination.

In looking for truth you may discover that 1+1 = 2 and in the process realize that the guy claiming that 1+1=3 is not correct. Now that you have proven this to yourself you can eliminate consideration of this falsehood unless some new light come to view.

How does the lack of understanding of this principle of looking for truth instead of error cause mainstream religious people to not see any truth in the world of metaphysics?

This is an extremely important principle in the search for the truth. In some ways it may be THE most important of all.

Why?

Because, in this world there lies before us at all times two paths. Path one leads to truth and the real world. Path two leads to illusion and deception. Each decision that we make takes us in the direction of one of these paths.

Visualize yourself on a path that divides. The left hand path leads to deception and the right hand leads to truth. Where are you likely to find the most truth? Taking the left hand path and discovering everything that is false, or taking the right hand path and discovering truth after truth. Which path leads to the greater progress?

The answer should be obvious.

When one puts his attention on seeing that which is true he is taking the inner right hand path. His attention on that which is true moves him in the direction of this path and moves him forward on it to truth after truth, greater light after greater light.

When one puts his attention on looking for error this attention on error moves him toward the left hand path, and as he moves along this path he sees error after error and rarely has any observation of new truth to report.

Take me as a teacher as an example. Many have come to this forum with a focus on finding truth and despite my weakness in presentation and limited grasp of higher realities, these individuals have discovered truth after truth for themselves. There have been times that members have found truth in my words that I did not realize was there.

Then there are others who join that just seem to have the feeling that something is wrong somewhere. Some feel I am in this for the money, the ego or just sincere, but deluded. Instead, then of looking for truth in my words, they look for wrong motive, ego or deceit. The problem is that we usually find evidence to prove that of which we have a preconceived notion to believe.

If, therefore, one suspects I am motivated by ego and decides to look for evidence of that conclusion he will find his evidence. The evidence may be a reflection of his own ego, but he will find it nevertheless..

Take the life of Jesus for example. He was an innocent and virtuous man, yet the Jewish leaders immediately suspected that he was in league with the devil since his teachings did not agree with their preconceived notions. Therefore, when they looked upon his words and acts what did they look for? Did they look for truth or error?

Of course, we all know that they looked for error.

And what did they find?

The amazing thing is that even with a holy man such as Jesus these individuals found only error. And thus they saw the face of the devil in the face of Christ.

If looking for error caused them of old to see the face of the devil in the face of Christ, then ought we not learn a lesson from their mistake? For if we ourselves make the same mistake of letting our prime focus be the discovery of error then would we not also see the face of evil in Christ if he were to walk among us again?

Can you think of a worse fate for yourself than to die an enemy to Christ while thinking you were fighting evil?

The interesting thing is that many who make this mistake of looking for evil are fairly decent people sincere in their search for truth. But as they progress along this left hand path the time will come that their mistake becomes obvious and when this time of reckoning does come the pilgrim must then retrace his steps and tread the higher path. If he refuses because of pride, selfishness or ego then he becomes a willing accomplice in treading the path of deception and taking others along with him.

I therefore admonish all true seekers who read these words to walk the path of light by seeking the light and looking for the light.

The apostle Paul spoke wisely here:

“Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.” Phil 4:8

Notice that Paul advises: “think on these things.”

Yes, my friends, “think on” and see the good, the beautiful and the true and you shall become a magnet for these things and shall draw truth, pure as the driven snow into your life experience and the light that is in you will be great so no darkness or deception can there abide.

Question: H. P. Blavatsky and Alice A. Bailey were two controversial teachers who many believe to be in league with the devil. Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that half of what they teach is not true. If this were the case would it not be better to look for the error so you will not be deceived? OR – is there still an advantage to look for truth as the prime point of focus? If the latter question is true – why is it true?

July 14, 2000

Index for Older Archives

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

Alice A. Bailey on Authority

My friends. The writings of Alice A. Bailey say some interesting things about correct use of authority. Below is one of the best quotes.

When the glamour of authority transfers itself into the spiritual consciousness of man, we have such a state of affairs as the period of the Inquisition in its worst forms, of Church authority, with the emphasis upon organisation, government and penalties, or the unquestioned rule of some teacher. In its highest forms we have the recognition of the right of the solar Angel, of the soul or ego, to rule. Between these two extremes, which express the infancy of the race and the freedom which comes when mankind achieves its majority and the freedom of the soul, lie all the many types and kinds of intermediate reactions. In illustration of our point, and thus emphasising the glamour aspect as it affects the disciple and the problem which he faces, what do we find? The disciple has freed himself somewhat from the imposed control of an orthodox teaching and from the rule of a teacher. He stands (as far as he can tell) free from such control. Knowing however his essential weakness and the lure of the personality, he is on guard against himself, and against the ancient rules of control and learns steadily to stand on his own feet, to come to his own decisions, to distinguish truth for himself. He learns to choose his way. But, like all persons who have not taken some of the higher initiations, he can (in due time) become enamoured of his freedom, and automatically then swing into the glamour of his ideal of freedom, an ideal which he has created. He becomes the prisoner of freedom. He rejects all rule except that which he calls the “rule of his own soul,” forgetting that his contact with his soul is still intermittent. He demands the right to stand alone. He revels in his new found freedom. He forgets that, having given up the authority of a teaching and of a teacher, he has to learn to accept the authority of the soul and of the group of souls with which he is affiliated through his karma, his ray type, his choice, and the inevitability of the effects of the at-one-ment. Having relinquished the guidance of another person upon the Path, and having his eyes partially opened, he now seeks to tread that Path to the goal, forgetting however that he treads the Path in unison with others, and that there are certain “Rules of the Road” which he must master, and which he must master in unison with others. He has exchanged the individual law for the group law, but does not yet know that group law as it should be known. He marches on as best he can alone, glorying in the freedom from authority which he has succeeded in achieving. He promises himself that he will brook no authority or guidance.

Those of us who are considering him and looking on at him from the clearer heights of attainment see him gradually becoming obscured by wisps of fog and by a glamour which is gradually growing up around him as he becomes a “prisoner of the fog of freedom” and revels in what he deems the fact of his independence. When his sight has cleared, and when his mental aspect is more developed and unfolded, he will know that the Law of the Group must, and will, impose itself upon him, and that the rule of the lower nature has only to be exchanged for the rule of the soul. This is group rule and works under the law of the group. He has struggled out of the mass of seekers of the Road on to the Road itself. He is, therefore, ahead of the masses but he is not alone, even if he thinks that he is. He will discover many others who are travelling the same way with him, and their numbers will steadily increase as he progresses. The rule of interplay, of travel, and of group recognition and work and service will impose themselves upon him until he finds that he is a member of the New Group of World Servers, working under the conditions which are the rules governing their activities. As he learns to travel with them upon the Road, their governing incentives and the techniques of their chosen service will penetrate his consciousness, and automatically and naturally he will begin to obey the higher rhythm and give his assent to the laws which control group life and group consciousness. Finally, he will find himself entering into the silent places where the Masters of the Wisdom dwell, and will work in group rhythm with Them, obeying thus the laws of the spiritual realm, which are the subjective laws of God.

Time and again, along the Road, he will revolt from control and will fall back into the glamour of his supposed freedom. There is freedom from the control of the personality. There is freedom from the control of personalities. But there is never any freedom from the Law of Service, and from the constant interplay between man and man, and soul and soul. To stand really free is to stand in the clear unimpeded light of the soul, which is basically and intrinsically group consciousness.

From Glamour a World Problem, Pages 46-48