Theos-Talk Archives (August 1998 Message tt00501)

Aug 31st '98

Dear Bart:

2nd look -- I believe that the Bhagavad Gita sets out the main
considerations for a person to look at and then lets him make his own
decisions.   Arjuna's questions are increasingly probing (as the dialog
unfolds) and elicit from Krishna certain optimum considerations.

But none of those are set out as matters of belief or of imposed discipline.
Arjuna is always left free to choose for himself, although Krishna does
expose for his consideration what a "Wise" man might do, and what a "Wise"
man might think of, or consider, etc...

Krishna speaks of Karma, of reincarnation, of the struggle between "good"
and "evil," then he describes the Universe and all beings in it as partaking
of the mixture of the 3 "qualities" or "Gunas," -- the Sattva (truth,
spiritual), the Rajas (active, volitional), and Tamas (inertia, laziness,
inactivity).

The Individual is said to be a small replica of the Universal, and Spirit is
said to pervade all things without any exceptions.  Mankind chooses because
of innate freedom of perception.  Perception emanates from the Spiritual
(Sattva) quality which is inherent.  Choice is activity, or free-will -- a
Rajasic element.  Tamas is the condition of the great mass of inactive
matter (matter in which the germ of independence and progression has not yet
been stirred into action by the impact of mental energy).  While the "field
of battle" is the Personality the opposing (yet closely related opponents)
are the forces of the Mind and those of the emotional and feeling nature --
Kama.   The "killing" of the congeries of lives that give Kama a form,
permits at the same time, those individual elements to access the
independently active Mind, and this is then stirred into action.  And this
is an outline of the great struggle for Existence represented by the
processes of manifestation and evolution along the three lines of Spirit
(Monadic), Intellectual (Manasic) and Physical
(life-forms and forces).  [  as in SD I 181 ]

The Buddha in his many discourses does the same -- and so too do all the
great Teachers of humanity that we have any accurate record of.

I would think that we are all teaching ourselves to find out what is the
best "thing" to be done, and we are given plenty of latitude and
information.  Our vacillation, uncertainty and choosing indicates to me that
while thee may be indecision, there is a Power, and entitative "something"
in each of us, which is able to discern the "Needs" from the "wants" -- as
Maslow might put it.

Consider the question of Theosophy and its principles and doctrines.  If we
are not thoroughly familiar with them, we put ourselves at a disadvantage.
What, and where, are we going to secure as a sound base from which to
proceed ?

Theosophy does try to expose for consideration the hidden basis for many of
the physical occurrences and situations we hear of or are involved in.  And
it speaks of much more in the way of information than our present
educational curricula expose.  But we see that the horizons of academic
study and the recording of advances proceeds and there is far more that is
now clear to those "halls" today, than when HPB wrote, and the interesting
thing is that Theosophy receives corroboration increasingly.  I would hope
that during the next 100 years there will be greater progress and
recognition of what HPB did.

But, it, as always, remains with us to choose what we will study and where
we will take ourselves.

Best wishes,        Dallas

> Date: Saturday, August 29, 1998 3:05 PM
> From: "Bart Lidofsky" <bartl@sprynet.com>
> Subject: Re: Re: KARMA -- Its operation -- Universal as reaction following choice.

>W. Dallas TenBroeck wrote:
>
>> In regard specifically to the question of our ability or inability to
chose
>> the right thing, or to choose "between two evils" implies that we,
>> interiorly, know what the RIGHT THING IS.  Or, we would not have a sense
of
>> a "bad" thing
>>
>> Now I may be in error in offering this, and some aspects of karmic action
>> and reaction are not considered here -- as for instance the effect on our
>> "skandhas" (or little lives) when we make bad decisions -- and how they
>> become the "carriers" of our "bad" karma.
>>
>> But there is food for much consideration here, I think.
>
> First of all, thank you for understanding the point I have been trying
>to bring out.
>
> Now to the point: For whatever reason, we can end up in a situation
>where all the possible choices, including inaction, are the "wrong
>thing". The major lesson of the Bhagavad Gita is that, even if all
>actions involve doing the "wrong thing", inaction is also a choice, and
>may be one of the worst ones.
>
> Bart Lidofsky
>
>
>