Theos-Talk Archives (November 1998 Message tt00514)

Jerry S wrote:
>
>Yes, but the "bad" and "false" and "ugly" lie waiting for us to return.
>So that part "lives" on as well.

Are the skandhas really to be seen as "bad" and "false" and "ugly"?
>
>> In the Introductory they are a nosegay of FACTS, and there is
>>no suggestion of "liking" or "preference."  "the string that ties" may well
>>be seen as discrimination.
>
>Of source it is discrimination, and this implies liking and preference.
>Whenever anyone says that this is true while that is false, they are
>subjectively discriminating; picking and choosing. One would hope
>that Adepts could do this better than us ordinary folks, but it is
>still picking and choosing nonetheless. And it is very obvious
>from studying occult texts that different schools pick and choose
>different flowers to string together.

Do you mean of Cource or of Source?  A part of you getting the better of you?

Is it so obvious?  Seemingly obvious things can often act as blinkers.

The source of discrimination is Buddhi, a constant stream, and when seeing
it from this point of view it is hard to see how picking and choosing,
liking (and disliking) and preference come in to it.

Theosophy: "wisdom of the gods," the source of discrimination.  As you say,
it is very obvious that "different" schools pick and choose.  Buy why go to
"different" schools?  They would pick and choose wouldn't they?

Theosophy is unique in that it offers a way to the source, and
discriminates, i.e., it doesn't pick and choose.

Tony