Theos-Talk Archives (June 1998 Message tt00051)

June 3rd.

Dallas offers:

Dear Kym:

If we apply the Theosophical 7-fold division of Principles, the
highest is THE UNIVERSAL SPIRIT  (Yes, I am "shouting," but this
is only apparent, owing to the limits of this Internet connection
that does not allow for italics or bold type--I use capitals for
emphasis only.) -- in this we all ultimately share and therefore
the idea of universal Brotherhood emerges.

Consider with me that the mind is the active agent in each of
us -- it is "Me, myself."   But we have lived a long time and
have stored in memory the epitome of the experiences of our life
its ups and downs, its fine results and its snubs.  Does this not
jump to mind when we mentally propose (to ourselves and the inner
"review board") an action to be done, or a word to be uttered ?
Such consideration can be almost instantaneous.

Theosophy says that between the Mind and the ALL-SPIRIT (of which
we have a resident "Ray" within/above/around us) there is a
"principle" named of old: "Buddhi," or "wisdom."  This is
distinct from both mind and Spirit, and bridges the gulf.

If Spirit gives us immortality in essence, then the Buddhi serves
as the memory bank (it accesses the "Akasa") and is the eternal
repository of all the results of our immemorial actions, etc..
for many, many lives.  Its purpose then is admonitory and it
speaks as the "Voice of Conscience" -- the voice of past
experience, warning us of danger and potential pain and suffering
if we implement an action, or say something that will only hurt
us in the long run.  The Mind hearing this, either pays
attention, or disregards it.   [ Buddhi has no power whatever to
compel the Mind to do or, not do what it decides.] .  I hope this
is clear, and gives the Theosophical explanation accurately.  It
also shows that in reality we have 2 Egos in each human -- the
"Higher" and the "lower."  Their relation is as Mother/daughter,
or Father/son.

So from one point of view the "Master"  (which is ATMA-BUDDHI
conjoined, interior to each of us -- the inner "Christ" if you
please )
is with us all the time.  It represents to us the whole Universe
to which we are conjoined, and its Wisdom.  Mind [Manas] allied
to our passions, desires and "personality" gives us our freedom,
or independence.  It is the base for our sense of personal ego.
In effect it is the "pupil" that we really are, in the universal
school of living -- that involves far more that ourselves as a
personal being.  Theosophy claims that we cannot really isolate
ourselves.  We depend for our personal life (food, water, air) on
Nature around us, and in turn we always contribute something to
that same surrounding nature -- (our bodies are said my medical
science to change to the extent of 98 % every year -- so
physically we look the same, but the components have been
replaced AND WE ARE NOT AWARE OF THE CONTINUOUS TRANSITION -- how
is it possible that we are unable to monitor all that goes on
within ?  We are in effect, tenants in a self-running and very
efficient and utterly intelligent (on its own level) living
machine-shop.  I rather like the idea that when it dies from long
use, or abuse, it is replaced, and, that my "mind/egoity" finds
another dwelling to continue living in.  Reincarnation very much
appeals to me as a valuable concept.  Why then, should I not try
to make for my future "house" as good a place as I would desire
to be living in ?  I also happen to like the (to me reasonable)
idea of Karma -- of being personally responsible for my actions
and thoughts -- I can't just shove them away and say to myself --
its someone else's problem.  Not. It is mine !

So the "Master: is inescapably within (according to this
reasoning of mine).   If we can see that, even as a potentially
accurate situation, then we can bend our attention on the
Personal being that we are and ask ourselves, candidly and
honestly, if we are the best that we can be.  Such questioning
and answering can only be done in private, and the answer, if we
dare to know, leads us to see what potentials are truly ours to
aspire to, and to apply for, if we so determine.  Each is on his
own in this matter.

So that is why Mr. Judge used the term and phrase, as I
understand it.

I hope this is of help.            Dallas

> Date: Wednesday, June 03, 1998 3:53 AM
> From: "Kym Smith" <kymsmith@micron.net>
> Subject: Holy folk on a mountain

>To those of you who agree with Judge in saying we should
"imitate" (emulate,
>says Dallas) the Masters - I am still curious on just what that
means.
>
>For example, from all the texts and writings and discussion
about who and
>what the Masters are, how would we 'emulate' them in everyday
situations?
>What would a Master (based on the available information) do
or/and say to
>someone who was poised on a bridge ready to jump to his/her
death?  What
>would a Master do or/and say (based on the available
information) to a
>homeless family?  What would a Master do/say if someone said
"You're ugly
>and your mother's so low she plays handball against the curb?"
>
>
>
>Kym
>
>
>
>