Theos-Talk Archives (September 1998 Message tt00057)

Sept 5th 1998

Dear Martin and friends:

I'll try and put my $ 0.02 in here and there if you don't mind

Dal

> From: Martin Leiderman
> Sent:	Saturday, September 05, 1998 1:05 AM
> Subject: Re: Study Theosophy On-line

Tony wrote: about the quote:  "transfer our consciousness into
the
region of noumena..."
> Are we sure it is possible to do it personaly? -- If it is
Manas gravitating
> more upwards to *Buddhi,* the Spiritual *Ego.*"  The good, the
true, the
* beautiful of the personality?
*
============================================================

First thought in my mind is how to identify our CONSCIOUSNESS.
How do we know what it is, what are its powers, and how is it to
be controlled.  WHAT AM I ?

Consciousness is perception.  So there is a Perceiver.
Presumably the Perceiver is unitary but has several planes or
ranges of perception.  It is possible when in a plane it
identifies itself with its perceptions of that plane.  Then it is
hard to get that level and restriction of the one Consciousness
to remember that it is NOT the limitations.

I think that so far as our present condition is, we are in such a
situation..  And so HPB writes as she does to jog those who are
very thoughtful out of their built-in and accepted limits imposed
by education, and the general attitude of people around us.
=======================================================

Tony I think you are into something good:
Quoting again (Dallas, where are you?) the SD p. 644
" This state will last till man's spiritual intuitions are fully
opened,
which will not happen before we fairly cast off our thick coats
of
matter ..."
What follows that quote is the ethical conditions of the living
Adept:
" ... untill we begin acting from within . . .  Until then the
only
palliative to the evils of life is union and harmony -a
Brotherhood in
actu, ..."


So where are we going to find both the spiritual and ethical
conditions of the Adept?

We are given various tables of "virtues."  Some we know well, and
others we know poorly.

There are corresponding tables of "vices."  We are told that a
vice is an exaggerated "virtue."

It is also said that we already have the capacity to identify
these pairs of opposites, but that this is usually distasteful
job for the "personality.  Therefore few ever sit down to do this
systematically.  We do many things because we derive pleasure
from them, and few of the things because they are necessary,
pleasant or not.  It is for the self-regardant a commentary on
their own condition (in their Personality) .

When in theosophy BROTHERHOOD is said to be the first "Object,"
what is meant ?  Why is this posited ?  Is it a fact, or just
"wishful thinking ?"  What would a study of "brotherhood" reveal
?  Does it lead to esotericism and occultism, or does it not ?

I have asked myself these questions for years and noticed that
some answers come in different ways to different persons.  So
where and how do we establish norms ?

What are ethics, morals, virtues, vices, and are they will-full
applications of certain disciplines, the most characteristic of
which would be moderation, self-restraint, emotional balance,
etc...

Why do they impact the principle of "Kama" - desires, passions,
virtues and vices?

Are we  presently, as members of Humanity, in a position where
having become aware of the balance between desire and mind, we
have to decide what we are going to do with our future ?  why is
this so critical for us now ?  What is this cycle ?   Apparently
we are no longer "children," but have to learn to play the part
of "grown-us."

What is it in us that perceives this field and asks these
questions ?  How can answers be made that would be practical and
useful in our lives ?  What dimension does Theosophy suggest that
is additional to those areas of research in which psychologists
are already engaged ?  Are they not largely engaged in trying to
understand the 'psychic' nature and reconcile it with the deep,
innate sense of justice that wells up so inexplicably in our
consciousness ?  What is the "Voice of Conscience ?"  What does
it indicate ?  How should we use it ?

Why did the Buddha start with the statement:  "Sorrow is."  He
then followed that with the implied query:  "What is the CAUSE OF
SORROW ?"

He then followed that up with a statement:  "Sorrow's ceasing."
And, in recommendations concerning this last aspect he suggested
the "Noble Eight-fold Path that leads to Sorrow's Ceasing."
 "Sorrow," being moral unease. ]

Generally, in the West, comparatively few people know of Buddhism
(not the exoteric Buddhism of temples and monks, etc...)
Buddhism is looked on as a "religion" in usual opposition to
Christianity.  But the teachings of the Buddha are primarily
practical theosophy or PHILOSOPHY.  They are not "religious," in
the sense of being divisive.  [  HPB speaks in the 2nd Vol. of
ISIS of the way in which the early Christian clergy adopted from
Buddhism most of their rituals, and rites - in fact, historically
the outward ceremonies and rules of church Christianity are
Buddhistic in origin. ]

If we take it for granted that the Adepts are of no special
religion and that they represent the wisdom of the World which is
impartial, and universal, then we can understand why Theosophy
offers first metaphysics as a firm foundation and then
philosophical liberalism, so that any student desiring to find
the truth of things may find it without the trappings of any
special group or creed.

The missing key we need to investigate in practical morality and
ethics, which are universal and completely non-creedal.

For this reason Theosophy starts with the "Three Fundamentals"
 S D  I  14 -18 ) and describes Nature ( the Universe) and Man as
of a seven-fold quality.

It makes no special difference as to whether there are principles
numbered one way or the other so long as we keep firmly in mind
that the ONE CONSCIOUSNESS is divided into innumerable "rays" and
each of these finds lodgment in the tiniest speck of "matter."
 S D  I 570-575)	This is the SPIRIT of the 1st Fundamental that
is universally present - and also as its counterpart is
"primordial matter," or the CAUSE of what we call matter here and
now.

This may all sound like moon-shine, but in a fully integrated and
harmonious system ruled by Law, how otherwise could it be ?  This
is what we lack in our investigations of Nature.  We are
prospectors chipping away here and there in search of ore - gold,
oil - whatnot - and we want it for our own personal selfish use -
and most everyone has this as a primary motive.

Nature, the Universe being wholly sensitive to this attitude
reluctantly yields some few crumbs and makes us all pay dearly
for her being disturbed.  This idea will not please many, but if
you use the information concerning the Monads, the Skandhas, and
the "little-lives" that we share with the rest of nature - as
visiting molecules and atoms - which make up our physical forms,
and presumably, our inner forms as well, you can surmise that all
these being "immortals" and potential men (eventually) are
sensitive to our attitude.

If Theosophy is correct we, each one of us, have an enormous
responsibility - and this can be taken as an esoteric or occult
point of view, plainly exposed when one correlates much of the
information that we are given in the "Original Literature."

You must understand that these are solely my own surmises.

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

This is why, in my opinion, the TS was formed, with its  3
objects as
they evolved in todays words are meant to form a union of people,
in
harmony,  sharing the highest knowledge (Wisdom-Religion), and
this is
Brotherhood. An Ideal and Idea  of the future humanity, in a
small
degree,  in the TS.  Is it possible to do while we have this coat
of
matter, or as Tony asks:  "Are we sure it is possible to do it
personaly?"

We are all in our present condition because we share in the
general progress.  If we have under our personal Karma been
attracted to some aspect or other of Theosophy, then we have the
opportunity of making a more complete use of it.

This has nothing to do with the THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY - which was
established as a "doorway" - a kind of introductory base for
people to meet others who are interested in Theosophical
doctrines, and desire to investigate or test them in each-others'
minds.  Our interchange over INTERNET does the same in a way.

Best wishes,

Dallas

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

I hope Ramadoss is right and the internet nay bring people
together.
Even though I still prefer looking to the eyes of my fellows.

Any thoughts?