Theos-Talk Archives (November 1998 Message tt00435)

Nov 24th 1998

    From: Jerry Schueler
    Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 6:00 AM
 Subject: Responses to Dallas on Karma

    >IMMORTALITY -- of course this cannot be proved objectively, only by
thinking hard about it.  It is neither Hindu nor Buddhist.>

    The problem is that most people think of immortality as time ticking on
forever[DALLAS ]  and that is wishful thinking.

    >Theosophy embraces not only these two but also all the rst of the great
world religions and philosophies -- makes them impersonal and shows that
they all originate from one source.>

    Theosophy, as I and those other religions are concerned, embraces
nothing.
    It simply picks out those things it likes best from all the world's
religions and discards
    what it doesn't like (much the same as I do myself). Why do you suppose
the
    world's religions have yet to embrace Theosophy?

    DALLAS:  I believe you misconceive.  Theosophy is not a mosaic of
selected doctrines but the Adepts claim that it is the basis of all the
world religions and philosophies and that they are derived from it.  It is
esoteric and all-inclusive.  The various religions in the world are the
exoteric modifications made by priestcraft and disciples of various levels
of proficiency -- hence the many differences of opinion and wording.  Dal.


    >UNCERTAINTY -- UNCERTAINTY  I agree that they are a pair.   On the
other hand we cannot read our own future, but we seem to muddle through
those daily problems pretty well.>

    The future is a realm of possibilities or probabilities that can be read
    only statistically. "Muddle" is a pretty good way of putting it.


    >JUDGMENTS    -- Those concerning myself are agreeably subjective.  But
I would not try to attempt or make the judging of another a practice.  The
surface of all living is limited.  Only each person knows in his/her
heart-of-heart what their motives are.>

    Glad to hear you say this.

    > THE INNER SELF --    each has to do this for themselves.  If we
consider that all Theosphy offers are the propositions we might use if we
want to, and, in addition lends the weight of testimony in regard to their
application then we may find value in theosophy.  But we are all free to go
and take up either our own way of thinking or to study and apply any other
system.  >

    Well, I certainly can't argue with any of this. Good. But what you
    say here kinda conflicts with your past use of "genuine Theosophy"
    or "original Theosophy" which implies a more dogmatic approach.

    >The only reason that I read and contribute to these talks is that I
have found something in Theosophy that  is useful for me.  I share it in the
hope tha others like you will respond and so we will all learn more
together.  Of course my interpretation of what HPB says is my own, but I try
also to impesonalize it and universalize it so that it is not too heavily
charged with my opinions.>

    I hope that we are all doing this.

    KARMA  --  My view is that every physical action (thought, feeling,
etc.) has its moral (ethical) and everlasting effect. And that these effects
return to those who generate them in time.  I would say that by wronging
anyone I would wrong myself as well as the rest of mankind -- in the long
run.
    [DALLAS ]


    Please think about what you are saying here. I know that this is
    the Theosophical exoteric "party line" but it is really a terrible
notion.
    Any rational thought on this idea will conclude that the Wheel of
    Life will turn forever and that there is no escape. If every act must
    be repaid in kind, then we will always and forever have to return.
    This is NOT the message of Buddhism, nor the message of
    Vedanta, nor of Taoism (and I thought Theosophy embraced these
    religions?).  Buddhism, Hinduism, and Taoism all teach the
    possibility of ending karma and of transcending the Wheel of
    Life. This is really the "Good News" of the East -- not the doctrine
    of karma and reincarnation which are almost viewed as sin. For
    reasons best known to herself, HPB emphasized Karma and
    Reincarnation as doctrines and de-emphasized their transcendence.
    Anyway, in order for transcendence to be possible at all, the awful
    notion that every act must be repaid in kind can't be true. It may
    seem to be true sometimes, but logically it can't be. There is a
    logical flaw in the eye-for-an-eye teaching. I believe that Jesus
    saw through this flaw and emphasized compassion and forgiveness
    as the way of transcendence. How? Because compassion and
    forgiveness are powerful enough, if sincere, to actually sever
    karmic ties.


    [DALLAS ]   OK Jerry:  you are right that most visualize eternity as
"time ticking away."  But as we know that "time" is relative to the
perceiver, there is somewhere an ultimate reality.  I do not know where that
is or how it is measured.  So, being ignorant, I set the equation unsolved
in my mental note-book, and let it rest there, while seeking for an answer.

    In one place I read that Karma can be perceived in action only by Those
who know the "ultimate divisions of time."  I puzzled over this phrase for
long and have reached no conclusion.  But since the claim is made there
seems to be a reason for it.

    Is it that there are Those who in this set of conditions have indeed
transcended our notions of time and its divisions ?

    Another thing that troubles me is the concept that some of us want to
"stop the World, I want to get off."  Personally I cannot conceive that such
a step would make for any great happiness or benefit.

    I know that the Buddha said that by doing that one secured relief from
"Sorrow."  That is quite true, as I understand his reasons.  But that falls
in with the idea of Karma -- and the idea that we can secure a release from
"sorrow," by canceling or balancing any causes that we may have generated so
as to cause OUR sorrow.

    If we are able to do that we can go into "Atyantika Pralaya" as
described by HPB in SD I p. 371 top.  The Jivanmukta or Nirvanee enters a
personal state that is oblivion for an enormous period until the next Maha
manvantara requires its re-emergence into manifestation.  I ask my self what
is gained by such isolation and I then think of the description of the
PRATYEKHA BUDDHA given at the end of the "TWO PATHS"  -- "VOICE OF THE
SILENCE" p. 47 fn (in my book) and, the description of the DHARMAKAYA  (p.
77-8 footnote in VOICE ).

    Does this in any way explain what I am thinking of and considering ?

    Dallas