Theos-Talk Archives (August 1998 Message tt00389)

Aug 21st 1998

Dear Murray:

Enjoyed your comments on mine on "meeting Adepts."

Personally, the reason why I refer to the core or original texts is because
they convey so much.  We may think a lot of things but is our thought "on
line?"

Having found out how valuable Theosophy is I frequently revisit old friends
and review what I have learned in terms of what I looked at earlier -- a
kind of consolidation.  Is it still true ?

As to the Bridge building.  I agree that it is from both sides.  But it is
important to grasp that the potentials are not only inside us, primarily,
but also in every other being (mankind included) which seem so "outside" to
our usual "personal" view.

Best wishes,

Dallas

> Date: Wednesday, August 19, 1998 3:48 PM
> From: "Murray Stentiford" <mas.jag@iprolink.co.nz>
> Subject: Re: Approaching the Adepts

>Dallas
>
>This reply is so long in the coming that most could be forgiven for having
>forgotten what the relevant thread of discussion was all about. As usual,
>time pressures and computer problems ... Anyway:
>
>Thanks for your thoughtful reply on approaching the Adepts. There was much
>that I agreed with or found expressed in a fresh and significant way.
>
>I particularly liked the way you saw this as a work of carving a bridge
>that leads to the ineffable which is Within. A great metaphor for a great
>reality.
>
>As to how, as you ask - perhaps it could be put that the Bridge is built
>from both sides at once in subtle tendrils that gradually turn into strong
>beams. The higher reaching to the lower, the lower reaching to the higher,
>until a grand synthesis or integration has appeared.
>
>And, curiously, while it is essential to seek knowledge and be clear in
>mind, there is a need for a deep trust (not talking about blind belief in a
>dogma, sort of thing) in one way or another, at the tendril-building stage,

>while the centre of gravity of consciousness is shifting to a very
>different basis from what it has been accustomed to. Whether this is in a
>teacher, or a heart-sensed spiritual reality, we all envision it in our own
>ways. I could go on, but will leave the rest to others' imaginations.
>
>Oh, I have The Key to Theosophy - it's a few decades now since I first met
>it. For me, on my particular path of growth and service, it is important to
>try to put timeless verities in fresh language, because of the human
>propensity to crystallize forms around them, and because there is always
>another slant that we may not have already seen. While greatly respecting
>and appreciating the pioneering forms of those who have gone before.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Murray
>
>
>>Aug 12th 1998
>>
>>Dear Murray:
>>
>>I have never found a quick answer to your question as to how to draw close
>>to the Masters.  But wiser ones than I have said that it should be our aim
>>to do that.
>>
>>1.    The proximity of "Masters" is not a physical but a psychological
>>distance, as you seem to intuit (and as I would estimate it).
>>
>>It you take into account the 7-fold divisions of Man and Kosmos you will
see
>>that ATMA  (Spirit) and BUDDHI (Wisdom) are common -- How does the
embodied
>>consciousness (you and me as we now are)  or Kama-Manas approach to
>>Atma-Buddhi ?  How does the personal self, involved in the "1000 chords of
>>desire" separate itself from those, and become One-centered on learning
the
>>TRUTH of all things ?
>>
>>The "bridge" is the HIGHER MANAS.  HPB defines this in the KEY rather well
>>and thoroughly.  I suppose you have that book for reference ?
>>
>>For Kama-Manas ( or Lower manas) to contact the Master ( Atma-Buddhi) it
has
>>to fist grasp the idea that that Master is interior.  It has been called
the
>>HIGHER SELF.  Next, as I see it, it has to embody as practice in daily
life,
>>the ethics and rules of the life of a Manasic being.  Briefly described,
>>this is harmlessness, compassion and brotherhood.
>>
>>In other words it carves for itself out of its own material the bridge
that
>>lads it to the ineffable which is WITHIN.
>>
>>The Great Adepts whom we call Mahatmas, or Masters of Wisdom are Those who
>>have successfully done this work.  They are named variously as Adepts,
>>Brothers, Mahatmas, Masters, Bodhisattvas, Arhats, Buddhas, Dhyan Chohans,
>>etc... names that indicate their powers and functions -- and with which we
>>are not directly concerned, as our present field of work is our own
>>personality, which we need to study, understand and learn how to control.
>>
>>We are the beginners.  Part of our progress on this great and uniform path
>>is learning what we are, who we are and what we can do with the potential
>>and actual powers we already possess.  In other words a large portion of
the
>>work is self-initiation.
>>
>>Consider the vast mass of HPB's writings.  How many of us have set to work
>>to actually, in this incarnation, acquire a superficial working knowledge
of
>>what she wrote on behalf of the Adepts.  Why did she do it ?  What had the
>>Adepts to profit from that arduous work ?  What is our benefit?  and, what
>>is our responsibility ?  How do we change "superficial" interest into
>>convinced practice ?
>>
>>These and many more ideas I derive from my studies.  I can only offer some
>>of these and they should only be taken as the opinions of one person and
>>subject to faults and therefore carefully scrutinized.
>>
>>Hope this is of some help,
>>
>>Dallas
>
>
>
>
>