Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00201)

>From: "Dallas TenBroeck" <dalval@nwc.net>
>Date: Sunday, January 18, 1998 8:47 AM
>Subject: Re:Re: Brenda on Ego


>Dear Keith:
>
>No question that each incarnation is "ego" centered.  But how did it get to
>be that way ?  There seem to be enough unusual things in any life time --
>accidents, problems, ... -- which ought to have some cause to explain their
>occurrence.  Why do we have (or not have) certain talents -- as a for
>instance ?
>
>I keep on asking Who and What am I ?  To think, to Feel, to Be.  What is
>that?  Here I am in a body, and yet I know that the body is only a tool, as
>are the feelings the urges, the mind ... I use and perceive through all
>these either simultaneously or separately.  So somewhere I am the
>Perceiver, the Controller, the Chooser, the Willer -- and so on.
>
>Now if I am offered as an example the idea of Egoic immortality, I begin to
>see that possibly the "ego" of this life-time with its memories and quirks
>is only a kind of construct.  It is not the real me.  it is the active
>agent of Me, the Real Self.  It is given the body and its environment to
>live in.  It is a kind of image or reflection.  It is very real to me as I
>live, feel and think now.  But in essence it is not the Real ME.
>
>I have found the ideas of Theosophy (particularly as expressed in HPB's THE
>KEY TO THEOSOPHY and Mr. Judges's THE OCEAN OF THEOSOPHY) to bring together
>the scattered ideas that place a meaning. purpose, design to my being here,
>and involved in my present.
>
>I like the idea that the 'ego' of this life time is related to past 'egos'
>and strung on the thread of immortality that extends to it from the Real,
>Permanent Ego.  It is like Father/son relationships.  The Ego (real) is an
>immortal which is tutoring the 'ego; and trying to get it to improve its
>life, trying to get it to learn.  There is far more to this than "schools
>and texts," and it involves the life-time work of everyone -- as I think.
>
>maybe these are ideas to also chew on. Dallas
>
>
> Dallas TenBroeck
>
>dalval@nwc.net                        (818) 222-8024
>                   23145 Park Contessa,
>            Calabasas, Ca., 91302, USA.
>
>----------
>> From: "Keith Price" <email.msn.com>
>> Subject: Re: Brenda on Ego
>> Date: Saturday, January 17, 1998 9:17 AM
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: "Brenda S Tucker" <brenda@theosophy.com>
>> Date: Sunday, January 11, 1998 9:44 PM
>> Subject: Re:Fractals
>>
>>
>> >
>> >>Yes, but she also taught that "permanent" and "eternal" only refers
>> >>to this manvantara. Thus the Ego is long-lasting, but not truly
>eternal.
>> >>This is also the Buddhist view.
>> > SNIP <<
>


Keith:  Words, words, words!   They seem to be all we have and what do they
really refer to???

These seems to be my struggle right now as my comments on several posts
intimate.  Abstract concepts allow us to refer to "things" on higher planes
than the physical, but some see a snake, a rope, a tree and so on when
refering to the proverbial "elephant" of the fable.

What Judge said or HPB is gourmet food for thought, but no substitute for a
really good meal of the real thing.  Some say:  "taste and see that the
Creator is good!".

Perhaps HPB and Judge did I can never know by logical analysis, but only by
going and tasting for myself the repast they were giving recipes for.  I
have to get the ingredients and cook it for myself, in this incarnation or
the next until I am united with all this VOCABULARY>

But since we got these words as a gift of sort, I think there are various
levels of exotericism to esotericsim to ISIS UNVEILED.  In other words
Judege and HPB cloaked their ideas in the vocabulary of the time.  Ego to us
tend to mean the selfish gratifying will of FREUD which they do not mention.
Ego to the Buddhist has more in common with Jung's idea of the Self with a
capital letter.  Ego to the Greek meant I am, but I get the drift.

Does this thing (Ding-ein-sich? I can't remember Hegel's or Kant's spelling
in German_ we call ego have an essense or only an existence as the
exitentialists would say.  All that exist passes away and only the essence
remains unltimely, doesn't it?  We are all aspects on one Ego: the I AM THAT
I AM.

Namaste
Keith Price