Theos-Talk Archives (April 1998 Message tt00420)

Radical - Recognition - Purity -

Maybe you are a "gentler" soul because you insist on Purity of the Heart,
but not of the body. Our "difficult" lives have two purposes, to recognize
our human nature and get it under control and to convey that "human" is not
satisfactory in others.

I think you are more satisfied because you have achieved success, but many
of us do not find success to the point that we can say strong tactics are
unnecessary. We want to annihilate crime, poverty, ignorance, and these
goals are not unreasonable ones. Just because we stand on the side of
"good" and virtue happening in our world, that stand in life doesn't create
the disintegration of all evil. Where if we do both, nourish the good and
annihilate the wrongdoing we encounter, this is more indicative of success.

When the day comes that we include our "adept brethern" in the scenario, we
are bowing out, so to speak, of the mainstream of cause and effect, and
asking their participation to the point that we are here to serve as their
focus of power. Even when we insist on purity of conditions in physical
life, it is for their purpose in finding ease in their feelings and release
of power through us. It is not because we enjoy it. It is to thank them
for ennobling us to accomplishment of great feats and not to take that
credit upon our lowly selves.

Maybe you have found just the right discipline for yourself in Cayce, but
there is still a big world out there with influences that speak of
direction beyond what Cayce has done.

>One of the most valuable and distinctive elements
>of the Cayce readings is how much they emphasize balance and
>integration of physical, mental and spiritual rather than warfare
>and annihilation internally.

Yes, I would agree that balance is necessary when we call for an end to
wrongdoing we also must replace wrongdoing with what is right. If you
haven't achieved balance everywhere it is probably because we so much want
to claim our good work as something we have done and not see it as
progressing through us and from an exterior source (even though the
exterior source may exist at an inner level). Balance is always an
achievement so great I must pass it on to the "greater" lives around us and
though you speak of warfare in terms of what you have read, realistically,
calls for peace and the annihilation of war are more to my liking. Don't
take yourself so seriously. Annihilate wrong in all cases and not anything
you deem useful.

Brenda

At 09:53 AM 4/21/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>Mark's comments about the unfortunate prevalence of an internal
>"holier than thou" split in Theosophical consciousnesses strike
>me as right on the mark. I won't argue that a contemptuous
>attitude toward the "lower personality" can be found in the
>source literature, since I know that it can. But a more nuanced

>approach can also be found, e.g. in the second fragment of the
>Voice of the Silence.
>
>The bottom line, for me, is the evident results of disdain for
>personality. It can manifest as monasticism, actual or virtual,
>a rejection of all pleasures of the flesh, a stern
>otherworldliness. We see this in various ES restrictions that
>are imposed on TS membership when on the grounds of TS
>facilities: no smoking, no drinking, no sharing of rooms by
>unmarried couples, no meat/chicken/fish, etc. We see it in
>language that is violent in tone: references to
>"annihilation" of the personality or to "warfare" between the
>lower and higher principles. ("If thine eye offend thee pluck it
>out" is a prototype of this sentiment.)
>
>I've definitely "been there, done that" having started my
>theosophical career with a fairly strong commitment to celibacy,
>teetotaling, vegetarianism. And have eventually abandoned those
>things because I concluded that the results were unhealthy-- a
>sense of isolation from the rest of humanity rather than
>engagement, a spiritual elitism that looks down on "average
>people," a reduced effectiveness in connecting with the people
>around me. No regrets at having reverted to all the ES no-nos,
>sex, alcohol, non-veggie diet, etc., since despite or because of
>all that my life is filled with spiritual joy that was not so
>intense or constant when I was mortifying the personality.
>
>Seems to me that most people who disdain the personality have
>personality disorders that they had better work on, and fix the
>problem rather than trying to "rise above it." There's something
>really creepy-feeling about most of those "above it all" types
>I've met, whether they're Theosophists or Baha'is or whatever.
>It's as if the stronger they deny the personality the more
>evident it is that they are totally in the grips of a personality
>with definite blind spots, complexes, avoidances, etc.
>
>I'll conclude by saying that one time when I felt that I was really
>mistreateed by an eminent Theosophist, and complained to him about all the
>ways in which he'd violated my trust and common ethical
>principles, he loftily replied that these matters were all
>"personality issues." Meaning, to me, that those who disdain the
>personality can treat you like merde and deny personal
>responsibility for it, since they are "above the personality"
>and make their decisions based on "higher factors" that allow
>them an ends-justifies-the-means "out" to justify any
>mistreatment of individuals they may commit.

>
>In People of the Lie, M. Scott Peck defines human evil as the
>pattern of destructive, scapegoating behavior with total denial
>of personal responsibility for one's actions. I've seen a lot
>more such evil among "true believers" in various cults that
>disdain the personality than among average folks who have no such
>inclinations.
>
>Cheers,
>KPJ
>
>