Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tt00309)

April 16th 1998

Dear Bjorn:

officially or not ! What you say is exactly as I also visualize
it. I guess my words somehow provided a different opinion.

I confirm it is the "many" in the ONE. The "I" the HIGHER SELF
of each of us , is actually one with the ABSOLUTE.

If "the purpose of life is to learn, and it is all made up of
learning," then is not the embodied "I" the pupil which is under
training ? It is a problem for each of us to grasp this idea. I
think that Theosophy tries to provide us with a starting point
and a tools to do this.

 Dallas

>From: "Bjorn Roxendal" <roxendal@usa.net>
>Date: Tuesday, April 14, 1998 8:39 PM
>Subject: Re:Re:

>W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote:
>>
>>
>> Metaphysically, as I understand, when the ONE SPIRIT
subdivides
>> into manifestation (under KARMA) there appear two polar
>> opposites, named SPIRIT and MATTER.
>>
>> But, as these have been in manifestation before, and have
>> interacted there, of necessity arose the intermediary
principle
>> of consciousness -- a sense of "I"-ness or "Ahamkara"
>> (Sanskrit) -- In us, it seems to translate as: the "sense of
>> separateness." Hence I used the word "egotism" -- meaning the
>> selfish self or sense of "I" as different from "others." I am
>> sure you know this concept.
>
>Then I understood you correctly and can disagree officially.
What you say is contrary to my perceptions of what we are. The
sense of I-ness does not make the sense of separateness
necessary. We have individuality but are also one with the all.
The all has the ability to manifest as countless "Is" without
losing or compromising its oneness. "Egotism" is only the
perverted form of I-ness. Only when I consider myself
separate from the all does it appear. It is a free will
>choice to descend into the veils of duality.
>
>Bjorn
>
theos-talk@theosophy.com
>
consisting of
theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.
>