Theos-Talk Archives (December 1997 Message tt00137)

Dec 30th 1997

Dallas writes:

Interesting points of view.  ?  Are there two "Egos" in Man, or is there
one Consciousness with two or three, or maybe several more "points of view
?"

Theosophy does point out {SD I 181} that there are 3 lines of evolution
intermingled in humankind.

1.	The "spiritual" or MONADIC (Atma-Buddhi) -- which presumably is wise
with the collective wisdom of TIME and EXPERIENCE, if it is granted that it
is an immortal.


2.	The "Intellectual" -- which HPB in the KEY (p. 175-6) divides into 3
aspects.  [ 1. Spiritual divine EGO -- BUDDHI-MANAS;   2. Inner or Higher
Ego -- MANAS --permanent Individuality or the Reincarnating Ego;  AND,
3.  The Lower or PERSONAL ego --  KAMA-MANAS

I think that Theosophy provides us with a vocabulary as well as a reasoned
basis from which to perceive the potentiality of several different mental
and sensory states beyond (different from) the average condition of being
"alive and awake in our body and using the brain." It certainly seems to be
an extension on psychology, and there is evidence that the growing tips of
psychological research in the Academies is giving the theosophical view
point a greater basis of demonstrable evidence since the time of 1888.

[ This, the PERSONAL MIND of the kama-manasic condition, is the "mind"
which is active when we are awake and using the brain in our daily life.
Most of our thinking seems to emanate from this center, but with the
occasional glimpses that we secure of something "higher" we may apprehend
the possibility of the other higher positions, including that of the
brotherhood implied by the companionship of immortals.

So that duty, a knowledge of LAW, and self-sacrifice are natural to such a
point of view -- while being apparently unnatural to the isolated point of
view of the "brain-mind," which is our usual state.  And it is precisely in
this state of mind that we argue the most fiercely against there being
anything of greater worth or more permanency.

But, Theosophy claims that this is active and valid for only this one
"life" of which we are so far aware, because of the unifying thread of
memory that ties us to our earliest sensations in this physical form.  If
we were to deny that our own particular "thread of memory," or that the
"thread of memory" of others was accurate or factual we would have to fall
back on the condition that afflicts amnesiacs namely, our only
consciousness memory back to the point where it first awoke and was no
longer conscious of name or life-history, and had to begin again.

Another question or so:  What is it that bridges the gap of sleep ?  What
is it that Dreams ?  What is trance ?  What is the consciousness that
bridges the gap of induced unconsciousness as when anaesthetized during an
operation ? ]

Now as to THE VOICE OF THE SILENCE.  HPB states that the STANZAS OF THE
BOOK OF DZYAN are contemporaneous to it.  She also states [SD I 23] that
there is apparently extant a Sanskrit or Tibetan version of these.

My question is":  even if an old MSS were found, would that give them
increased authenticity ?

Is there not inherent in these a sense of their value ?  If this cannot be
apprehended, then what is the use of even looking for physical evidence ?

But the whole philosophy of Theosophy will not shake or tumble just because
one cannot secure physical evidence of such antique verses or even of the
SENZAR language.  [ From which the ZEND, the AVESTA, the GATHAS of the
ancient Zarathustras was derived as a sister language and system of
philosophy to the Sanskrit and the Tibetan. ]

I do not see that it is a "hating of one's own personality" that is at
stake in the theosophical philosophy, but rather assisting that same
"personality" in its own educative process.

Everyone agrees that the past is past and cannot be undone, but that the
actor then, is living now, and can redirect his/her energies to something
that is an improvement over the old.

It would be valuable, it seems to me for any individual to examine into his
acts, thoughts and motives of the past with a view to seeing if they can be
presently improved on morally and ethically.  And what basis for morals or
ethics is superior to brotherhood ?  What religion is superior to a pursuit
of truth and wisdom ?  In these endeavors we all share and can, if we will
assist others.  And that I believe to be the essence of Theosophical
teaching.  At least that is my opinion on this.

But, as usual, there will be some who disagree, and they hae their right to
do so, but the logic needs to be made evident, as that is where we can all
contribute, if we will.

With best wishes,					Dallas


		Dallas TenBroeck

dalval@nwc.net                        (818) 222-8024
                   23145 Park Contessa,
            Calabasas, Ca., 91302, USA.

> From: "Mark Kusek" <mark@withoutwalls.com>
> Subject: Re:Theos-Talk : Selfishness
> Date: Tuesday, December 30, 1997 12:30 AM
>
> >> Mark wrote :
> >>
> >> I want to stress the fact that I believe it is
> >> psychologically healthier to understand the cause of "selfishness" and
> >> "ego," (theosophically speaking) etc., than to react with fear
> >> and self-loathing against it.
>
> > Sophia TenBroeck wrote:
> >
> > The following quotation may be of some help.
> >
> > "Voice of the Silence"  p. 12-14
>

>