Theos-Talk Archives (July 1998 Message tt00160)

Kym,

I have a really nice explanation for suffering which I'd like to share with
you. First, I'll just give a simplified explanation which serves as filler,
but relates to some of your comments. It is possible that life around us,
illusory life to a degree, is not similar to human life because humans have
egoic energies while animals COULD be conscious: physically, emotionally,
and mentally, but without a higher constitution which comes into play.  So
perhaps it is unfair to relate what happens with plants and animals and
compare this to our own condition.

Secondly, I'm recalling an old paper that I once wrote here on theos-talk
regarding why it is we suffer and it is very conveniently related to "egoic
energies" and their play through the lower constitution.  The book (and my
paper based on the book) relate that while the egos energies are pouring
forth into the lower triad, there is pleasure. Likewise the vehicles begin
to associate themselves (mistakenly) with the energy and a consciousness of
"I am" the emotions or "I am" the thoughts begins to occur.  This is an
error on our part, since "we are" more truthfully the higher self - an
existence that lasts beyond one lfie.  Next, thing that happens is that the
egoic energy becomes laden with contact (or fruit) which tells it is time
to return.  When egoic energy begins its return to the ego, pain is felt in
the lower triad because a separation is occurring.  This type of suffering
MIGHT be peculiarly human and it might be present regardless of whether a
person is fed, injured, or abandoned, etc.  Suffering can be defined to be
the egoic energies departure from the mind, emotions, or physical body and
does not convey the truth of reality which when man resides in his ego is
"a consciousness beyond what we can experience in the lower three worlds."

I'm going to find that old message and attach it here.  Uh, instead of
attaching.  I'm just sending them as reposts.  They are labelled "karma"


>First, my simplest reason:  Animals.  I have a dog who has never suffered -
>now she may think she has suffered because I delayed four minutes one time
>giving her a treat - but in the context of suffering we are talking about
>here, she has never known anguish.  Yet, she is the most gentle and loving
>being I know.  Gentle with all creatures, young and old.  She responds to my
>joy with her own joy and she responds to my sadness with her own sadness.

>Why should a creature such as she have to incarnate into humandom?  Many
>will respond immediately with the answer: Consciousness.  I believe she has
>consciousness, but for sake of argument here I will accept she does not -
>(again, though, I do believe she does have it).
>
>Which brings me to my next reason why I wonder about the value of suffering:
>What difference does consciousness make?  Theosophy says "All are One."
>That our evolution has to do with recognizing our relationship to the
>Divine.  Each of us look forward to the time when it is said "It is
>finished" and we then turn to help others who are still in progress.  Ok,
>fine.  But, again, what is the point?
>Say, for example's sake, that "Adam and Eve" had never eaten of the "Tree of
>Knowledge."  What would have been the horror if it had not happened?  We
>would be in the "Garden" - happy and content.  "Adam and Eve" at that time
>had never "suffered," yet, they seemed to live well enough in harmony.  Ok,
>again, I know that people will balk and say - "but they were no better than
>automatons."  This may or may not be true.  But would "Adam and Eve" ever
>really have wished for or missed the 'consciousness' we now seek?  There
>would be no pain - perhaps there would be no happiness, either.  But is
>happiness - or consciousness itself - so worthy of the price one must "pay"
>to know it?  For those who say "Yes" - I ask, what tells you that?  What
>makes you believe that?  Why the journey to return from whence we came - why
>not just have remained there?
>
>And, for those who say that we would have never even been "Adam and Eve" -
>simply "sparks" - again, I wonder, so what?  If one (spark or monad) does
>not know anything one will not know that they do not know anything.
>
>What does it mean to say "It is finished?"  What is this "glory" we are
>supposed to experience after the journey?  I freely admit, from a human
>point of view, this "glory" is hard for the mind to grasp.  Yet, the "glory"
>itself sounds awfully repetitious - for we are to turn around and help
>others so they can turn around and help others so they can turn around and
>help others.
>
>I am NOT saying that we should just live self-centeredly and all that
>garbage for those concepts are concepts that arise after human incarnation -
>what I am asking is, "In the Beginning" we came from the "One" where I
>assume no violence, pain, anguish, and all that other jazz existed and we
>were already united in harmony - why the break-up?  What is the value in

>recognizing we are living in harmony?
>
>Until I can be assured that recognizing my relationship with the "Divine"
>and the "glory" which is supposed to accompany that is really worth this
>journey and the pain it entails, I find myself forced to rebel against the
>"need for suffering" - for me and others.
>
>
>Kym
>
>
>
>
Visit my webpage at http://www.webspawner.com/users/ascension