principles taught. He may ask for more information, but solely for the
purpose of bringing out some point which he has not grasped; but he avoids
as a pestilence any question seeming to indicate argument, doubt of what
is being taught him, or of the nature of a demand for proof or evidence.

The Western student, on the other hand, is accustomed to maintaining the
skeptical attitude of mind--the scientific attitude of doubt and demand
for proof--and the teacher so understands it. Both are accustomed to
illustrations bringing out the principles involved, but these
illustrations must not be fanciful or figurative--they must be actual
cases, well authenticated and vouched for as evidence. In short, the
Western teacher is expected to actually "prove" to his students his
principles and methods, before he may expect them to be accepted. This, of
course, not from any real doubt or suspicion of the veracity or ability of
the teacher, but merely because the Western mind expects to question, and
be questioned, in this way in the process of teaching and learning.

Consequently, in this series of lessons, I have sought to follow the
Western method rather than the Hindu. So far as is possible, I have
avoided the flat positive statement of principles and methods, and have
sought to prove each step of the teaching. Of course, I have been
compelled to assume the existence of certain fundamental principles, in
order to avoid long and technical metaphysical and philosophical
discussions. I have also had to content myself with the positive flat
assertion of the existence of the Astral Plane, Akashic Records, Prana,
etc., which are fundamental postulates of Hindu philosophy and occult
science--for these are established solely by the experience of those who
are able to function on the higher planes themselves. But, beyond this I
have sought to prove by direct and positive evidence (adapted to the
Western mind) every step of my teaching and methods.