Re:The "Eternal Present: and KARMA
Apr 17, 1998 03:28 PM
by Dallas TenBroeck
April 17th 1998
Possibly over idolizing H.P.B. ?
Yes, "idolatry" without understanding or study is a curse -- the
curse of seeking for authority outside of one's self. In other
words, and to be rude, perhaps, seeking to blame someone else for
one's actions which are always self-devised, self-willed , and
also, self-executed. We all stand on our own feet.
But, what I fear is that HPB always seems to emphasize the moral
effect of all choices. The moral plane or position is one on
which most feel uncomfortable. [ Is it 'preachy?' Is it getting
too far below the surface of another's motives ? Is it right and
correct to pry into another's reasons for action or statements ?
etc... A sensitive area.? Agreed. -- But, being myself an
animated "question mark," I proceed to ask (myself) why this is.
What is it, what aspect of myself, is shy of being exposed ? Are
my motives clear even to me ? Are they the best, are they ideal,
so that anyone else could adopt them without being uncomfortable
? Do they truly assist others in a way which we could all feel
grateful for ? Am I expecting praise ? Do I expect to be
"raised up in the esteem of others ? etc., .... I find that the
range of inquiry covers a wide panorama from the very 'personal'
to the quite 'impersonal.' This is an area of psychology on which
I do not find that there is very much available. Yet, I also
think that it is an aspect of the study of Karma, and a key to
one's own inner motives and self-growth, when one compares the
present with our past, as memory.]
Perhaps one does not like the karmic consequences. Or, one
becomes aware of the "Voice of Conscience" speaking and saying:
"You are going to have to pay for this."
Then, in fear one seeks (as personal lower self and "embodied
mind") for an escape hatch. Yet, in one's own Self, one is
always aware that THERE IS NO ESCAPE. Why is this so ?
Is this not why, historically Constantine, trusting Eusebius,
became "Christian" at a time when he was faced with his own
death -- in the hope that the doctrine of the "remission of
sins," and "vicarious atonement" were actual facts, and that the
Catholic priest could cajole God into making an exception in his
case (of murdering systematically most of his family) ? He was
apparently very much afraid of what would happen to himself in
his subjective "after-life." Both the pagan idea of Hades, and
the "fiery abyss," as the concept of an eternal burning Hell, (or
if one was Scandinavian, an icy one !) was scary !
In any case we do owe to HPB a systematic exposing of what the
Esoteric Philosophy has to say. I find in several places in the
S D she states that the Secret Doctrine teaches history. She
says this in Vol. I, 267 4th line from the top, and again, on the
same theme: SDI I 272-3,
269 4-6 II 437 795 -- which is interesting as she does not claim
to "reveal" anything that is "new." Now, to me "history" is not
too bad a basis to look at.
She then proceeds from the beginning to expose what history has
to say about the ancient source of our world, and its relation to
the Universe. This requires a review of the metaphysics that
every great "religion" adopts as its "beginnings." And she then
shows them to be quite in agreement.
The SD provides us also with a review of the history of the
development of Kosmos, from an amorphous mass into organized
planets -- "School-rooms" for milliards of intelligent and
immortal "life-atoms (Monads) who wend their slow way through
enormous periods of time, as a student goes through days at
school, so as to emerge eventually as wise Minds.
Still history. But the history of the development of Mind -- as
a capability for viewing any aspect of Nature in any of its
departments. [ In other words, a portion of the Universal Self -
a 'ray' - which is temporarily and apparently "separate," but
which tends to reunite itself to the ONE, through active sympathy
with its fellows -- just as we do in this 'talk-group,' seeking
for points of agreement and of joint experience as a basis for
confirming our own observations or surmises. ] The interesting
part of this expose that HPB offers in the SD is that it brings
all of our science and psychology as well as speculations
hypotheses and theories) up to the period of the last 1/4 of the
But it does not stop there, it offers ideas for future
development, which, when seized upon, will be the growing points
of development for the 20th and succeeding centuries. And
retrospectively, we can see this actually happening.
I do not think that using her "name" is valuable, unless one
gives reasons for its use, and is able to quote sources from
which other students can verify the basis one is using. If we
are going to learn together, then a sharing of these sources is
It is not CWL that is being blasted, it is the development of his
ideas which were not in line with the facts as given in the
comprehensive and coherent doctrines of theosophy when treated as
history. How many of his pronouncements have proved to be
inaccurate and have since ben contradicted ? If one turns to HPB
how many of hers are in that field of reversal or contradiction ?
I can only speak from the point of view of comparison, but, one
must be familiar with both to decide.
And familiarity takes time and effort -----
I think this is enough for the moment - I blather. Dal
>From: "Bjorn Roxendal" <email@example.com>
>Date: Thursday, April 16, 1998 9:39 AM
>Subject: Re:The "Eternal Present: and KARMA
>W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote:
>> -- well, if the Spirit is immortal and HPB is as close to
>> Adept as we can think of short of the Masters, why would we
>> suppose that she ever left ?
>I think there is a lot of idolatry of HPB going on (*not*
>addressing Dallas here). This, of course is a personal matter,
but I think that
>this idolatrous sense is an obstacle on our path (again, I am
only using Dallas
>comments as an excuse to take off on this). Their is this
>personalities that's been the curse of the TS and many other
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application