Theos-Talk Archives (July 1998 Message tt00130)

July 7th

Dallas offers:

Well !  if "E.O." stands for "Eminent Occultist,"  someone is
either making or accepting claims.  Who can tell ?  And why
should such a thing be allowed ?  I wonder why, if a thing be
true, then why does it need any kind of "back-up" from anyone.
Sounds like someone is making claims of "authority."  The use of
a "name" does not automatically make a statement true.  A lot may
have happened since a statement was first used.  If this seems to
be a slow and plodding course, it is for all of us who are
beginners in the study of Nature's hidden ways.  As we gain
proficiency the process  of reasoning speeds up.  We have all
seen this happen in our own school days.

To me this use of, say:  "E.O." is evidence of a desire for
haste.  How can anyone be sure unless one is given the logic of
any statement ?
It is symptomatic of our times that we tend to credit erudition
with selfless wisdom.  It is not always so, for the basis from
which the erudite teach may be a mistaken basis.  Look at the
changes in biology, electronics, astronomy, physics and
astro-physics in the past 75 years as an instance.  Much of what
we were taught in school has been changed and new Laws discovered
for general application.

Perhaps it is for this reason that I sometimes seem to be
over-long in explanations.  I desire that the basis I use be
clear.  Then the thought derivations, so that all who might read
may then question my accuracy and add to the string of thought,
or take issue if they are not clear or reasonable.  Mainly in
theosophy, we seem to be dealing with a new way of looking at the
human psyche.  It is really not new, as the ancients taught it.
But compared to modern psychology it seem new and strange.  But
is it so ?  Is modern psychology neglected in theosophical
psychology ?  I would say not, even though the terminology is
different, and one has to learn how to convert one set of
word-ideas to another.

Theosophy claims to be an expression of facts in Nature, and it
is for us to examine what is said in a universal and impersonal
light. Applying Theosophical ideas, can be not look on things as
follows:

What are the basics ?

Evolution -- we are in it.

Law -- the whole universe runs by it and we trust it with our
living.  Universality -- we cannot escape the concept of
UNIVERSAL AND UNDEFINED SPACE.  {Called the ABSOLUTE. or the ONE
SPIRIT -UNIVERSAL. ]  [ see S D  I  pp 14 - 18 ]

What follows:  The nature of Man:

Man is said in Theosophy to be a 7-fold being made up of powers
and principles centered around an immortal Pilgrim, an eternal
"ray" of the ONE SPIRIT.

Man lives in a 7-fold Universe of which our Earth is a part.  So
we have Spirit-consciousness;  Matter-form;  and,
Intelligence--mind and feeling, as three basic areas of harmony
and concordance. [ see S D  I  p. 181 ]

The important fact is that we can study these ideas and see them
in operation in us.  This would indicate that the Mind is a
powerful and unique Agent.  Yet it is only a "tool" in the
"hands" of the Real Inner and Invisible Man -- that Eternal
Pilgrim (above).  From It we derive our sense of "I-ness."

Our own sense of Self flows from Spirit.  Our sense of
personality flows from the knowledge that we (the consciousness)
live in a form-body.

Our Mind-intelligence knows that it can think remember and
anticipate.  [ Past, present and future.]   It is also aware of
the emotions, moods and desires which at times seem to flood and
overwhelm it, even at times working against its "better
judgment."  It has the power to pause and examine those.  They
too, are tools and the remnants of past thoughts and actions.

It also has the power to accept wholly or partially any
suggestions offered to it.  It has the absolute Veto power to
cancel any suggestion that it does not approve of.

Its independence as a Thinking entity is absolute for itself. It
can however let its vigilance falter and turn into passivity.  In
such a case it becomes the victim of its likes and dislikes;  and
partially or wholly looses control (for a longer or shorter time)
over its volition, or power to choose.  The determination of the
"motive" for any thought or act is the primary basis and cause of
our existence as human (mind)  beings.

If we distort or violate the laws of brotherhood and harmony in
our world we set up distortions in the material of which our
"matter-form" is composed.  It is like the blunting or careless
use of a very fine tool.  Such a tool when called upon to assist
later, will bear the marks of how it was used by us.  This is
"bad" KARMA  in operation.  Similarly, if we use our "tools"
well, we refine and improve them.  This is "good" Karma.

Karma is the way in which Nature (which is entirely sentient and
formed of indestructible "life-atoms" ["monads"] ) reacts to our
motives and choices.  In effect we are united to nature and to
all elements of "matter-form" whether we like th idea or not.

Reincarnation is the on-going process whereby we learn from
incarnation to incarnation.  The Spirit linked to the Soul-mind,
like a pupil at school, goes day after day (incarnation after
incarnation) in the great School of Earth-life.

What is the goal of living ?  Is it not to become wise ?  And,
what is Wisdom?  How about "all-knowingness ?  To some this has
an immediate appeal, while to others it is overwhelming as a
concept.  And why should this be so ?

Perhaps a deep examination into our own powers, faculties,
abilities and problems is indicated at this point.  Is this not
the beginning of all knowledge ?  -- to know who and what we are,
and what our potentials are ?  No one can do this for ourselves.
It is only self-effort that brings results.  [ If we look back
over our years spent in school we will notice that many kinds of
motives and qualities were present as exampled in our friends and
co-students.  Some were anxious to learn, and others reluctant.
Some were active and others moderate, and some almost totally
passive.  A review of our own life since then will show us
whether we have followed some particular path -- and we can trace
the nature of our own kind of effort in that. ]

These are a few ideas that emerged in my mind from this
definition.
Are they reasonable ?

Best wishes,            Dallas

==================================